LOS ANGELES — A federal appeals panel hearing oral arguments in the government’s criminal case against attorney Pierce O’Donnell drilled lawyers on both sides about “muddy” points they made about the intent and scope of a federal law governing campaign contributions.
In what Judge Raymond Fischer of the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals called an “interesting and important case,” U.S. v. O’Donnell has attracted amicus briefs from the U.S. Federal Election Commission and several outside legal groups, including Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
