New York Paralegal Blog

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 pa...

Credit Suisse, a major Swiss bank, has been caught in a web of financial deceit. The bank's subsidiary, Credit Suisse Services AG, recently pleaded guilty to conspiring with employees and customers to help hide over $4 billion in undeclared offshore accounts. This scheme allowed wealthy U.S. clients to evade taxes and reporting requirements, a serious crime. The guilty plea and a separate non-prosecution agreement were filed in court on or around May 5, 2025, marking a significant step in a years-long investigation. The Deal: Plea Agreement vs. Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) This case is unique because it involves two separate legal agreements. Guilty Plea: Credit Suisse Services AG pleaded guilty to hiding the $4 billion in offshore accounts. This is a formal admission of guilt for the conspiracy. Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA): In addition to the guilty plea, the bank entered into an NPA for its separate misconduct in Singapore. An NPA is a legal deal between the go...

  In a Long Island nursing home, a certified nurse aide (CNA) we'll call "Sue" was fired after a serious patient injury. While this might seem like a straightforward case of a worker being held accountable, it actually reveals a disturbing, systemic issue: the nursing home's own policies were being routinely ignored, and management was aware of it. The Unspoken Rule The nursing home had a clear, written policy for using the Hoyer lift, a mechanical device designed to safely move patients with limited mobility. The policy, a standard practice in healthcare, required two staff members to be present for every patient transfer using the lift. This rule exists for a crucial reason: it prevents falls and injuries to both the patient and the staff member. However, the blog's scenario explains that Sue, along with other CNAs, would routinely use the lift by themselves. This wasn't a secret. The staff was under pressure to work quickly, and management, awar...

We've all been there: faced with a rule that seems a bit silly or tedious, tempting us to take a shortcut. "What's the harm?" we might think. But a story from my past working at a New York City bank taught me a powerful lesson about the hidden importance of compliance. I worked with a head teller named Sara (not her real name). She was a ray of sunshine—professional, kind, and excellent at her job. Then, one day, a storm rolled in. After she counted the cash in the bank’s ATMs, she came up $5,000 short. Panic ensued. Even after recounts by supervisors, the money was still missing. The bank launched an investigation, and within a couple of days, Sara was let go. It was a shocking and swift termination for an employee everyone loved. But the story took another turn. A day or two later, the $5,000 was found! It had simply been misplaced. Our branch manager, Pete, was overjoyed and immediately called Human Resources, certain they would rehire Sara. To his dism...

The recent news that TD Bank pleaded guilty to serious violations of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) and conspiracy to commit money laundering sent ripples across the financial world. With penalties totaling over $1.8 billion to the Department of Justice alone – part of a larger $3.09 billion resolution – this case stands as a stark reminder of the critical importance of robust compliance programs. What Went Wrong? A Failure of Vigilance At the heart of TD Bank's troubles was a "pervasive and systemic failure" in its Anti-Money Laundering (AML) program. Shockingly, between 2018 and 2024, an estimated $18.3 trillion in transactions were not properly monitored by their automated systems. This enormous blind spot allowed sophisticated money laundering networks, sometimes aided by bank employees, to funnel over $670 million in illicit funds through TD Bank accounts. The issues weren't just oversights; the bank intentionally excluded certain transaction types, like ...

Hello everyone, and welcome back to the Compliance Paralegal Series! Today, we're diving into a serious case that highlights the critical importance of strong compliance and ethical conduct, especially when dealing with government contracts. Recently, the Department of Justice announced that four men, including a USAID contracting officer and three corporate executives, pleaded guilty to a decade-long bribery scheme. This wasn't small potatoes – we're talking about over $550 million in U.S. taxpayer-funded contracts being influenced by illicit payments and hidden deals. Who's Involved and What Did They Do? Here's a breakdown of the key players and their roles in this alarming scheme: Roderick Watson (USAID Contracting Officer): The man at the center, Watson pleaded guilty to bribery. He abused his position of trust, using his influence to steer contracts to favored companies in exchange for personal gain. Walter Barnes (Owner/President of Vistant): Barne...

Hey everyone! As a compliance paralegal, I spend a lot of time thinking about how companies can stay on the right side of the law. And one fascinating legal idea that often comes up is the "Collective Knowledge Doctrine." It might sound a bit technical, but it’s actually a pretty common-sense concept with big implications for businesses. Think of it this way: Imagine a puzzle. Each employee in a company has a piece of that puzzle. Individually, one piece might not tell you much. But when you put all the pieces together, a clear picture emerges. The Collective Knowledge Doctrine basically says that a company can't claim ignorance if different employees have different pieces of information that, when combined, would reveal something important – especially if that "something" is wrongdoing. In simpler terms, if employee A knows one fact, and employee B knows another, and bringing those facts together would show the company was breaking a rule or doing s...

In today's interconnected world, businesses often operate across borders, creating incredible opportunities – and significant responsibilities. One of the most critical of these responsibilities, particularly for U.S. companies, is adhering to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). You might be wondering, "What does this mean for a company, and who helps them navigate this complex legal landscape?" That's where a Compliance Paralegal comes in. What is the FCPA, in a Nutshell? The FCPA, a U.S. federal law, was enacted to prevent American companies and individuals from bribing foreign government officials to gain or retain business. It's built on two main pillars: Anti-bribery provisions: These prohibit making, offering, or authorizing corrupt payments or "anything of value" to foreign officials. The definition of "anything of value" is broad and can include gifts, travel, entertainment, or even charitable donations if made with co...

Ever wondered what happens when a company gets into legal trouble but doesn't face a full-blown criminal trial? Often, it's the result of a carefully negotiated agreement with the government. In my recent introduction to Compliance and Ethics class, I learned about two powerful tools that prosecutors use to address corporate misconduct: the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) and the Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA). These agreements are essentially settlements that allow a company to avoid a criminal conviction, but they come with significant strings attached. Let's break them down. What is a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA)? Imagine a company discovers misconduct within its ranks. It proactively reports the issue to the authorities, cooperates fully with the investigation, and takes significant steps to fix the problem. In such a scenario, the government might offer a Non-Prosecution Agreement. With an NPA, the prosecutor agrees not to file criminal charges against the c...

The world of corporate compliance is a fascinating and ever-evolving field. As a student pursuing an advanced paralegal credential in compliance, I've recently had my eyes opened to the intricate legal frameworks that govern the corporate world, and I'm excited to share a glimpse into what I've learned. My journey began with an "Introduction to Compliance" course, a requirement for my 15-credit certificate program at a regionally accredited college. This course was more than just an academic requirement; it was an intellectually stimulating exploration of corporate crime and the justice system designed to hold corporate entities accountable. One of the most compelling aspects of the course was learning about the legal doctrines that form the bedrock of corporate criminal liability. These principles are crucial for understanding how a company, which is a legal entity and not a person, can be held responsible for wrongdoing. Here are three key doctrines that stood ...

WASHINGTON – The United States has intervened and filed a complaint in a whistleblower suit pending under the False Claims Act against Education Management Corp. (EDMC) and several affiliated entities, the Justice Department announced today. In its complaint, the government alleges that EDMC falsely certified compliance with provisions of federal law that prohibit a university from paying incentive-based compensation to its admissions recruiters that is tied to the number of students they recruit.

WASHINGTON - The Justice Department today announced that on Aug. 26, 2008, it will monitor elections in the towns of Bayou La Batre and Marion, Ala., as well as in Seminole County, Fla., to ensure compliance with the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA). The VRA authorizes the Justice Department to ask the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to send federal observers to areas that are specially covered in the statute or by a federal court order. Federal observers will be assigned to monitor polling place activities in Marion, Ala., based on the special coverage provisions. More...