ABA Publishes Stacey Mitchell, Amanda Kane Article on Parallel Proceedings
Contact:
“Parallel proceedings or piling on?,” an article by Akin Gump environment and natural resources partner Stacey Mitchell and litigation counsel Amanda Kane, has been published by Trends, a publication of the ABA Section of Environment, Energy, and Resources.
The article lays out common causes for parallel proceedings, which the authors define as “the simultaneous or successive investigations by criminal, civil, administrative, and, potentially, even congressional authorities arising out of the same set of overlapping facts.” Setting the discussion in the context of environmental enforcement, the authors then offer tips for defense counsel representing clients at risk of a parallel proceeding:
- “[C]ounsel responding to what appears to be only a civil investigation or action should not have a false sense of security about a lack of criminal inquiry. Indeed, it is prudent to assume that there will be a parallel proceeding under the conditions set out above until proven otherwise.”
- “[C]ounsel should not rest easy on the assumption that the promised information-sharing between the civil and criminal programs will occur—or occur to the benefit of the client—without monitoring and intervention.”
- “[C]ounsel should keep up to date on the latest agency policies on parallel proceedings, particularly with the latest DOJ shift in policy, which may provide some relief in the face of future and ongoing parallel proceedings.”
- “[C]ounsel engaged in parallel proceedings may want to consider pursuing a global resolution for their clients, which may provide the client benefits of both a legal and nonlegal nature, including folding all “bad news” into one day rather than multiple DOJ press announcements and coverage related to resolution of the matter.”
To read the full article, please click here.
