BlS 4-5 - Arthur Anderson LLP V United States Cause of...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Arthur Anderson LLP. V. United States Cause of Action – Withholding / Destroy Documents Material Facts – During the fall of Enron, Arthur Andersen instructed employees to destroy documents relating to Enron, after learning that the SEC would be doing an investigation . The key concern was Enron’s use of “raptors” which reflected positive returns, violating Generally Accepted Accounting principles. Lower Court Decisions – Andersen was indicted in federal court in Texas in March 2002. The indictment alleged that, between October 10 and November 9, 2001, Andersen did knowingly, intentionally and corruptly persuade” its employees to destroy documents so that the documents would not be available for use in an “official proceeding”. Jury trial followed, with the jury returning a verdict of guilty. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed. Plaintiff’s Contention – Believed that instructions given to the jury were improper Defendant’s Contention – Issues of Law - Whether or not the jury had been properly communicated the law which Andersen was charged with violating. Application of the Rules to the Case - The instructions allowed the jury to convict Andersen without proving that the firm knew it had broken the law or that there had been a link to any official proceeding that prohibited the destruction of documents. "The jury instructions at issue simply failed to convey the requisite consciousness of wrongdoing, Cedric Kushner Promotions Ltd. V. King
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Cause of Action – Racketeering Material Facts - Cedric Kushner Promotions, Ltd., a corporate promoter of boxing matches, sued Don King, the president and sole shareholder of a rival corporation, alleging that King had conducted his corporation's affairs in violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). RICO makes it "unlawful for any person employed by or associated with any enterprise. conduct or participate. the conduct of such enterprise's affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity." The District Court dismissed the complaint. Lower Court Decision - In affirming, the Court of Appeals held that RICO applies only where a plaintiff shows the existence of two separate entities, a "person" and a distinct "enterprise," the affairs of which that "person" improperly conducts. The court concluded that King was part of the corporation, not a "person," distinct from the "enterprise," who allegedly improperly conducted the "enterprise's affairs." Plaintiff Contention - Kushner claims that Don King had conducted the corporation’s affairs in violation
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 08/27/2008 for the course BLS 111 taught by Professor Steflik during the Fall '07 term at Binghamton.

Page1 / 7

BlS 4-5 - Arthur Anderson LLP V United States Cause of...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online