Evidence, SCOTUS, Sarbanes-Oxley

Court Decides Sarbanes-Oxley Is Intended for a Different Kettle of Fish The Fish Tale and the U.S. Supreme Court: Part II

Holland & Knight LLP on 3/31/2015

By a surprisingly narrow margin, the U.S. Supreme Court recently spared future fishermen from facing up to 20 years in prison for destroying their catch. The case, Yates v. United States of America, involved the curious tale...more

Supreme Court Limits Scope of SOX Anti-Shredding Provision

Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP on 3/11/2015

The US Supreme Court recently reversed the conviction of a commercial fisherman, John L. Yates, accused of violating 18 U.S.C. § 1519, also known as the anti-shredding provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX), holding that...more

SCOTUS Narrows SOX Obstruction Statute

McGuireWoods LLP on 3/10/2015

In its recent ruling in Yates v. United States, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed a conviction under Sarbanes-Oxley’s “anti-shredding” statute, holding that it covers documents, records and only “tangible objects” similar to...more

Yates v. United States: Supreme Court Reins in Sarbanes-Oxley Act’s “Anti-Shredding” Provision

Blank Rome LLP on 3/6/2015

Action Item: The Supreme Court’s decision in Yates v. United States will significantly impact how in-house counsel, outside counsel, and compliance officers alike should advise their clients with respect to evidence...more

SOX, the Destruction of Evidence And Dr. Seuss: Is a Fish A Tangible Object?

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on 3/5/2015

Section 1519 was passed as part of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in the wake of Enron’s massive accounting fraud. The section was designed to fill a gap in the law by preventing corporate document-shredding to conceal evidence of...more

High Court Divided: Is A Fish A Tangible Object?

Burr & Forman on 2/27/2015

Gulf fisherman John Yates was cited by a federally-deputized Florida Fish & Wildlife officer for having caught a few red grouper that were about an inch under the 20” minimum limit at the time (they’d have been legal under...more

Supreme Court Rejects the Government’s “Fishy” Interpretation of Sarbanes-Oxley Obstruction Statute

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP on 2/27/2015

On February 25, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision in Yates v. United States.1 This case involved the interpretation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1519, a statute that was added as part of the...more

Supreme Court Interprets Sarbanes-Oxley Evidence Destruction Provisions

Stinson - Corporate & Securities Law Blog on 2/26/2015

We now know that Sarbanes-Oxley does not apply to fish . . . While conducting an offshore inspection of a commercial fishing vessel in the Gulf of Mexico, a federal agent found that the ship’s catch contained...more

The Fish Tale and the Supreme Court: How Applying Sarbanes-Oxley to Missing Grouper Has Raised Questions of Overcriminalization

Holland & Knight LLP on 11/14/2014

The Issues - On November 5, 2014, the Supreme Court heard arguments in Yates v. United States of America. In layman's terms, the issue is whether an Enron-era antishredding provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act was...more

Evidence › Supreme Court of the United States › Sarbanes-Oxley

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"