ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal News Blogs -> Law Blog - WSJ.com

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Legal News

: Law Blog - WSJ.com

Prosecutors Pressuring Buffett to Oust General Re Chief

By Dan Slater

ADVERTISEMENTS

AIGSurely, most executives would prefer replacing a top executive to finding their company indicted. But, as we were reading Law Blog colleague Amir Efrati and Karen Richardson’s WSJ story this morning about federal prosecutors pressuring Warren Buffett to replace the CEO of General Re, the reinsurance unit of Berkshire Hathaway, we thought, why does it have to be one or the other?

A bit of background: In February, four former executives of General Re were found guilty by a Connecticut jury for fraud for allegedly using reinsurance deals to inflate the reserves of AIG, General Re’s biggest client, by $500 million, thereby artificially boosting its stock price.

In 2005 General Re’s current CEO, Joseph P. Brandon, received notice from securities regulators that they were looking into whether he violated securities laws, but neither the SEC nor prosecutors have charged Brandon with any wrongdoing. However, at the trial of the four convicted General Re execs, prosecutors identified Brandon as an unindicted alleged co-conspirator. And after the trial, according to the report, prosecutors said they would “work up the ladder” in a continued effort to ferret out wrongdoing. Now they’re pressuring Buffett, Berkshire’s legendary chairman, to remove Brandon. Neither Buffet nor Brandon nor the DOJ commented for the story.

As it becomes more common for companies to avoid prosecution by striking deals with the government, the practice of prosecutors suggesting personnel changes as part of a settlement is becoming more common, say defense lawyers. Still, the practice of prosecutors’ trying to influence corporate management is controversial. “It’s not the business of prosecutors to dictate who runs a company when they don’t have sufficient evidence to bring a case against the executive,” said Jim DeVita, a Bryan Cave partner who used to be a federal prosecutor in New York.

LB Readers, what do you think? Is it proper for prosecutors to pressure personnel changes without bringing charges?

Full post as published by Law Blog - WSJ.com on April 07, 2008 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0203 secs (new cache)