Data Driven Compliance: The Failure to Prevent Fraud Offense: Insights for US General Counsels with Mike DeBernardis
The State of Healthcare Enforcement
Daily Compliance News: August 21, 2025, The Fabricated Evidence Edition
Data Driven Compliance – James Tillen on the Importance of Cross-Functional Collaboration in Complying with the FTPF Offense
2 Gurus Talk Compliance: Episode 57 — The Tom on His Highhorse Edition
Data Driven Compliance: Understanding the ECCTA and Its Impact with Jonathan Armstrong
10 For 10: Top Compliance Stories For the Week Ending, August 2, 2025
Data Driven Compliance: Understanding the ECCTA and Its Impact on Fraud Prevention with Vince Walden
Everything Compliance: Episode 158, The No to Corruption in Ukraine Edition
Daily Compliance News: July 31, 2025. The Forgotten Generation Edition
Understanding BBB Ratings: Building Trust and Mitigating Risks — Regulatory Oversight Podcast
Episode 379 -- Update on False Claims Act and Customs Evasion Liability
Data Driven Compliance: Understanding the UK’s New Failure to Prevent Fraud Offense with Sam Tate
Everything Compliance: Episode 157, The Q2 2025 Great Women in Compliance Edition
Daily Compliance News: July 22, 2025, The I-9 Hell Edition
Compliance Tip of the Day: Avoiding CCO Liability
2 Gurus Talk Compliance: Episode 55 – The From Worse to Worser Edition
Daily Compliance News: July 17, 2025, The COSO Yanked Edition
Wire Fraud Litigants Beware: Fourth Circuit Ruling Protects the Banks — The Consumer Finance Podcast
Compliance into the Weeds: Agentic Misalignment and AI Ethics: Analyzing AI Behavior Under Pressure
In today’s fraud notes, we examine two cases: K.M. v. Ursuline School of New Rochelle, 2025 N.Y. Slip Op. 04643 (2d Dept. Aug. 13, 2025) (here), and Three C, LLC v. City Settlement Serv., Inc., 2025 N.Y. Slip Op. 04678 (Aug....more
On December 15, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the pleading-stage dismissal, as time-barred, of a case against Bank of New York Mellon by defrauded investors in the Allen Stanford Ponzi scheme....more
Earlier today, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that a victim of childhood sexual abuse must exercise due diligence to discover whether an institutional or corporate principal of the abuser is also a cause of their...more
In May et al v. Succession of Mayo Romero et al a Louisiana court of appeal denied the plaintiff’s efforts to suspend the running of liberative prescription in the face of peremptory exceptions. The discovery rule is one...more
The Situation: The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA") allows plaintiffs to sue over abusive debt-collection practices within one year of "the date on which the violation occurs." 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(d). The U.S. Court...more
In Rotkiske v. Klemm, the Supreme Court has the opportunity to do what many plaintiffs’ attorneys have dreamed of for years: effectively expand the FDCPA’s one-year statute of limitations by applying the “discovery rule” to...more
In Wakefield v. Bank of Am., N.A., a borrower stopped paying on her mortgage because she felt she was assisting in a fraud. No. 14-16-00580-CV, 2018 Tex. App. LEXIS 545 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] January 18, 2018, no...more
It’s rare that a party to a contract can breach it but not be liable for a remedy. Yet that’s precisely what happened last week in Southern Financial Group, LLC v. McFarland State Bank, No. 13-3378 (7th Cir. Aug. 15, 2014), a...more
In ENI Holdings, LLC v. KBR Group Holdings, LLC, the Delaware Court of Chancery ruled that parties to a stock purchase agreement may shorten the limitations period for contractual recovery by way of a clause providing for the...more
Fraud likes to hide. Which is why, since the 18th century, courts have held that a statute of limitations for fraud does not begin to run until the victim discovers the fraud. In Gabelli v. Securities and Exchange Commission,...more
In Gabelli v. Securities & Exchange Commission, No. 11-1274, 2013 WL 691002 (U.S. Feb. 27, 2013), the United States Supreme Court, in a unanimous opinion by Chief Justice Roberts, held that the five-year statute of...more
On February 27, 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision in Gabelli v. SEC, holding that, in an action by the government for civil penalties, the five-year statute of limitations provided by 28 U.S.C....more
The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Gabelli v. Securities Exchange Commission (Feb. 27, 2013) rejects an attempt by the Securities and Exchange Commission to extend a statute of limitations by invoking a “discovery...more
The United States Supreme Court has taken a keen interest in the securities arena this current term, agreeing to hear at least three cases (of only approximately 70 in total). This week, the Supreme Court announced decisions...more
On February 27, 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States in Gabelli v. SEC unanimously disapproved of the so-called discovery rule for postponing the running of a statute of limitations when a federal government agency...more
In an important decision, the Supreme Court held that the SEC has five years from when a fraud occurred to file an action to seek civil penalties. Although the ruling was limited to civil penalties, the decision might prompt...more
On January 8, the Supreme Court of the United States heard oral arguments in Gabelli v. S.E.C., 133 S. Ct. 97 (2012) on the question: By when must the government initiate an action to enforce a civil fine, penalty, or...more
In This Issue: - Death and Taxes? Recent Supreme Court Arguments in Gabelli v. SEC Concerning a General Statute of Limitations for Civil Fines May Also Affect How Long the IRS Has to Assess Penalties - Avoiding...more