Crypto & Politics: Insights from Former Congressman David McIntosh
Mail and Wire Fraud Claims - RICO Report Podcast
Wire Fraud Scams: What You Need to Know - The Consumer Finance Podcast
Anatomy of a Successful Motion to Dismiss in RICO Case
Phishing: Cybersecurity’s Biggest Threat
Law Brief®: The Theranos Trial
Digging Deeper, Episode 1: The Con Queen of Hollywood
In Kousisis v. United States, 605 U.S. ___ (2025), the Supreme Court resolved a Circuit split addressing the scope of the federal wire fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1343. Without dissent, the Court held that the government did...more
In a recent decision upholding the expansive reach of the federal wire fraud statute (18 U.S.C. §1343), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Kousisis v. United States, No. 23-909 (May 22, 2025) that a defendant can be convicted of...more
Overview - On May 22, 2025, the US Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Kousisis v. United States, providing clarity on the scope of the federal wire fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1343. In a opinion authored by...more
If a defendant uses material misrepresentations to induce a party to enter a contract, but does not economically harm the induced party, has the defendant committed fraud? The Supreme Court has decided: Yes. On May 22, 2025,...more
On May 22, 2025, the Supreme Court published its opinion in Kousisis v. United States, No. 23-909, 605 U.S. __ (2025), holding that one who induces a victim to enter into a transaction under materially false pretenses may be...more
On May 22, 2025, the Supreme Court held that a defendant could be convicted of federal wire fraud pursuant to 18 USC § 1343 even when the fraud did not result in any economic loss for the victim. This holding expands the...more
For the last decade and more, the federal courts have grappled with the precise parameters of the federal wire fraud statute (and analogous criminal statutes). Among other things, there has been a Circuit split for some...more
The US Supreme Court’s ruling on May 22, 2025 expands the scope of federal wire fraud to include convictions based on fraudulent inducement even without economic harm. This development raises the stakes for entities involved...more
The vast majority of federal white-collar fraud enforcement actions are prosecuted under the wire, mail, or bank fraud statutes. 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341, 1343, and 1344. The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Thompson v. United...more
In a unanimous decision issued on March 21, 2025, the Supreme Court in Thompson v. U.S. heightened the burden of proof for “false” statements under 18 U.S.C. § 1014, excluding “misleading” but true statements from liability...more
In United States v. Aiello, the Second Circuit (Raggi, Chin, Sullivan) remanded the cases of Steven Aiello, Joseph Gerardi, Louis Ciminelli, and Alain Kaloyeros (collectively, the “defendant-appellants”) for retrial on their...more
The materiality standard in fraud cases may soon shift dramatically if the comments of Supreme Court justices during a recent oral argument are any indication. A rollback of the materiality standard would be the latest in a...more
On December 9, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States heard oral argument in Kousisis v. United States. The case squarely assesses the validity of the “fraudulent inducement” theory of mail and wire fraud under federal...more
On May 11, 2023, in Percoco v. United States, 598 U.S. ___ (2023), the U.S. Supreme Court once again reined in an expansive public corruption prosecution brought by the Department of Justice by overturning a wire fraud...more
Kelly v. United States, No. 18-1059: When the mayor of Fort Lee, New Jersey refused to back then-Governor Chris Christie’s reelection campaign, the Governor’s Deputy Chief of Staff, Bridget Anne Kelly, and others punished the...more
On May 29, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Lagos v. United States and held that legal fees and other costs associated with a victim company’s independent investigation of misconduct ultimately resulting in criminal...more
On May 29, 2018, the United States Supreme Court decided Lagos v. United States, narrowly interpreting the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act of 1996 (“MVRA”) to bar crime victims from recovering the costs of their private...more
In Lagos v. United States, decided on May 29, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that restitution orders under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act (MVRA) are limited to fees and expenses incurred during...more