Classifieds
 • Jobs
 • Real Estate
 • Experts

Featured Sponsors

PRACTICE COLUMNS

Eastern District Practice

Practical Advice Regarding Grand Jury Subpoenas

Thursday, November 5, 2009

This article offers practical advice for professional people (lawyers included) and business executives who are served with a federal grand jury subpoena.

SPONSOR SPOTLIGHT

Professor G. Rowland Zigwhy on the Economy and the Law

The Legal Intelligencer

Tuesday, May 12, 2009

In these chaotic times, I have been fortunate to obtain the views of the noted expert and commentator professor G. Rowland Zigwhy, whose wise commentary has appeared in this paper in the past.

A Business Lawyer's Response to a Search Warrant for Company Premises

The Legal Intelligencer

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

You are a business lawyer sitting in your law office and get a telephone call from a client. He tells you there are several federal agents at his company premises with a search warrant for documents and computers, and they are proceeding to open file drawers and are downloading information from computers. Twenty-five years ago, when agents only executed search warrants on bookmaker joints, fencing operations or warehouses containing stolen goods, this call to a business lawyer would have been unlikely. Times have changed with the nature of white-collar crime, and federal prosecutors routinely obtain search warrants for what lawyers would call legitimate businesses. This is advice to the business lawyer with commercial clients who gets such a call. (This article is confined to federal search warrants. Search warrants by state authorities are similar, but space considerations limit this article to federal search warrants.)

A Study of Complex Mediation in a Fraud Case

The Legal Intelligencer

Tuesday, January 13, 2009

Most litigators are familiar with the traditional mediation process, where all parties present their positions to the mediator, and the mediator gives his or her view of a likely outcome and the reasonable value of the case.

Punitive Damages in Federal Court After Exxon Decision

The Legal Intelligencer

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

The Supreme Court case of Exxon Shipping, et al. v. Baker concerned the grounding of the Exxon Valdez super tanker in Alaska in 1989, and the oil spill damages resulting from that event. The Supreme Court reduced the punitive damages awarded by the jury based upon the application of federal maritime law, utilizing a one-to-one ratio to actual damages.

A New Procedure for Appointing Interim Appellate Judges

The Legal Intelligencer

Tuesday, September 9, 2008

Last month The Legal Intelligencer published an editorial criticizing the Pennsylvania procedure of installing judges and justices to fill interim vacancies on the appellate courts. In view of the importance and timeliness of this issue, the regular federal subject matter of this column will be replaced with a discussion of this process.

Questions from Jurors Slowly Gaining Acceptance

The Legal Intelligencer

Tuesday, July 8, 2008

Permitting jurors to ask questions during trial is a procedure that is slowly gaining acceptance in both state and federal courts, albeit with some significant opposition.

When Do Local Officials Become Subjects of Federal Investigations?

The Legal Intelligencer

Tuesday, May 13, 2008

The public and the bar are familiar with federal prosecutions of local and state officials like the indictment of state Sen. Vincent Fumo and the convictions of former Philadelphia Treasurer Corey Kemp and former Councilman Rick Mariano. U.S. attorneys across the country are involved in similar prosecutions.

Practice Tips: An Interview With Consultant G. Rowland Zigwhy

The Legal Intelligencer

Tuesday, January 8, 2008

Occasionally I have been fortunate to engage the services of G. Rowland Zigwhy, law firm consultant, who specializes in solving problems for those engaged in the practice of law.

Grand Jury Witness Granted Limited Review of Prior Testimony

The Legal Intelligencer

Tuesday, September 11, 2007

A federal grand jury witness, recalled to testify before the grand jury, should have a right to examine the transcript of his or her prior testimony.

advertisement