Closing Arguments: Focus and Organization
Closing Argument: Opportunity and Challenge
How to Make Clear, Quick and Effective Objections
More on Cross-Examination: Building a Case Brick by Brick
Podcast - Cross-Examination: Don't Ask One Question Too Many
Podcast - The Ten Commandments of Cross-Examination
Podcast - Refresh vs. Impeach: Know the Difference
The Justice Insiders Podcast: Jarkesy’s Implications for the Administrative State
Podcast - Cross-Examination of Expert Witnesses
Cross-Examination: The Three C’s of Impeachment
Cross-Examination: How to Effectively Impeach with a Prior Inconsistent Statement
Cross-Examination: Finding Control
DE Under 3: OFCCP Must Shut Down its Administrative Court Prosecutions as a Result of SCOTUS’ SEC Jury Trial Case Decision
Podcast - Cross-Examination: Don't Argue - Elicit Facts
Cross-Examination: Asking the Right Leading Questions
Podcast - Cross-Examination: The Importance of Organization
Understanding When to Cross-Examine
Podcast - Cross-Examination: Basic Approaches
The "Why" of Cross-Examination
Basic Points to Consider in Redirect Examination
Suppose that your nemesis has a legal beef with you, and you learn that the law allows him to appoint one of his employees to judge the case. Shocked? You should be. Yet federal agency adjudication works the same way. How...more
On June 27, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued a much-anticipated decision in Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy, holding that parties subject to an enforcement action brought by the U.S. Securities and...more
On June 27, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision in SEC v. Jarkesy, holding that the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) must prosecute securities fraud before a federal court whenever it...more
On Thursday, June 27, the Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision, held that the Seventh Amendment entitles a defendant to a jury trial in instances where the SEC seeks civil penalties against that defendant for alleged securities...more
In SEC v. Jarkesy, the Supreme Court held that the Seventh Amendment entitles a defendant to a jury trial when the SEC seeks civil penalties for securities fraud. The decision limits the SEC’s authority to seek civil...more
On June 27, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that when the SEC seeks civil penalties against a defendant for securities fraud, the Seventh Amendment entitles the defendant to a jury trial. In a 6–3 decision, Chief Justice...more
On June 27, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court decided SEC v. Jarkesy, No. No. 22-859, holding that the Seventh Amendment entitles a defendant to a jury trial when the Securities and Exchange Commission seeks civil penalties for...more
The U.S. Supreme Court began its new term this week and is taking cases government enforcement practitioners will want to follow. Specifically, the Court will address issues concerning: the interplay between SEC...more
The United States Supreme Court recently granted Certiorari in a closely watched case that could have significant consequences for the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and certain other federal administrative...more
It is often hot in Georgia this time of year. In one particular Georgia federal court, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has been feeling some of that heat on an issue of significant interest to subjects of...more
A recurring question under the federal whistleblower laws is whether plaintiffs suing their employers for retaliation have the right to a jury trial. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act1 appears...more
In an apparent case of first impression, a federal district judge in Atlanta has ruled that whistleblowers claiming retaliation under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Financial Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 are not...more
On November 12, 2013, a Georgia district court ruled that Dodd-Frank whistleblowers are not entitled to a jury trial or punitive damages. Pruett v. BlueLinx Holdings, Inc., No. 13-cv-02607 (N.D. Ga., Nov. 12, 2013). This is a...more
In Pruett v BlueLinx Holdings, Inc., decided by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia (1:13-cv-02607), the court held that a whistleblower suing under Dodd-Frank’s non-retaliation provisions...more