The Legal Framework: Stacking Federal Charges

For the legal and compliance community, the conviction of Jared Solomon provides a clear roadmap of the statutes the Department of Justice (DOJ) prioritizes when prosecuting white-collar crime.

This case serves as a stark reminder of the critical importance of internal controls and the severe federal consequences of occupational fraud; it is a textbook study in how trust, when left unverified, can be exploited to the tune of millions.

For the legal and compliance community, the conviction of Jared Solomon provides a clear roadmap of the statutes the Department of Justice (DOJ) prioritizes when prosecuting white-collar crime.

The Legal Framework: Stacking Federal Charges

The prosecution utilized three primary federal statutes to secure this conviction, each serving a specific role in the sentencing architecture:

Wire Fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1343): This was the vehicle for the primary scheme; by using electronic communications to submit fake invoices and receive $9.5 million in payments, the defendant triggered a statute that carries a 20-year maximum sentence.

Bank Fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1344): The DOJ pursued this specifically regarding the $850,000 mortgage obtained via doctored statements; this charge is particularly potent because it carries a 30-year maximum and a statute of limitations that is often longer than standard fraud.

Aggravated Identity Theft (18 U.S.C. § 1028A): This is the "sentencing hammer." In federal court, if you use a real person’s name or signature to facilitate a felony, you face a mandatory two-year sentence that must run consecutively to any other time served. It cannot be served concurrently.

A Failure of Internal Controls

The evaluation of this case reveals a decade-long "perfect storm" of oversight failures at Vornado Realty Trust that any compliance professional should study:

The "Authority" Gap: The defendant held the title of Vice President; in many organizations, high-ranking officials are granted "override" capabilities or are exempt from the standard vendor verification processes that a junior employee would face.

Shell Company Proliferation: The scheme relied on the creation of sham brokerages. A robust compliance program should include a "Know Your Vendor" (KYV) protocol, requiring independent verification of a business's physical existence, tax ID, and professional licensure before any disbursement is issued.

Signature Verification: The use of forged signatures on multi-million dollar agreements highlights the need for digital signature platforms with audit trails (such as DocuSign or Adobe Sign), which are much harder to manipulate than physical or scanned paper signatures.

The High Cost of Discovery

The consequences of these crimes extend beyond the statutory maximums. Under federal law, the court will also focus on:

Asset Forfeiture: The government has already identified a $4.5 million home, an Upper East Side apartment, and luxury vehicles; these will likely be seized and sold to satisfy the fraud debt.

Restitution: Beyond prison time, the defendant will likely be ordered to pay back the full $9.5 million to the victim organization, a debt that is generally non-dischargeable in bankruptcy.

Compliance Takeaway for Paralegals

As paralegals, we are often the first line of defense in reviewing corporate documents and managing the "paper trail." This conviction underscores that "trust" is not a substitute for a "control." Whether you are drafting leasing agreements or reviewing vendor contracts, the presence of a signature or a formal-looking invoice should always be backed by independent, verifiable data.

The Solomon case is a warning: the federal government is increasingly adept at following the digital "breadcrumbs" of lifestyle creep and bank inconsistencies to dismantle even the most long-running corporate deceptions.

This post is part of our ongoing series on White-Collar Compliance and Corporate Governance. For more legal analysis, follow the NYPB News updates.