Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Corporate Governance Blogs -> The Harvard Law School Corporate Governance Blog

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

Corporate Governance

: The Harvard Law School Corporate Governance Blog

Supreme Court Limits Federal “Honest Services” Fraud Statute

By Harvard Law School Program on Corporate Governance

ADVERTISEMENTS

Editor?s Note: Edward Greene is a partner at Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP focusing on corporate law matters. This post is based on a Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo and relates to the U.S., Supreme Court decisions in Skilling v. United States and Black v. United States, which are available here and here.

Since the enactment of the ?honest services? fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1346, which defines the scope of the federal mail and wire fraud statutes to include the use of interstate means of communication to effect a ?scheme or artifice to defraud ? another of the intangible right of honest services,? federal prosecutors have used the provision in numerous cases to combat public and private corruption, and alleged corporate wrongdoing ? even in situations where the defendant does not directly obtain money or property from the alleged victims of the fraud. Today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two opinions that significantly restrict the scope of this statute. Skilling v. United States, 561 U.S, No. 08-1394 (June 24, 2010); Black v. United States, 561 U.S., No. 08-876 (June 24, 2010).

Click here to read the complete post...

Full post as published by The Harvard Law School Corporate Governance Blog on July 01, 2010 (boomark / email).