Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Oeconomicus who wrote (2382)	12/11/2003 1:10:22 PM
From: mph	of 90947

You're correct that a lawyer cannot threaten criminal prosecution to obtain a benefit in a civil matter. The question is under what statutes/regs etc. Spitzer is proposing prosecution. There are many statutes that provide for penalties and fines which might be categorized as "civil." A good example is California Business & Professions Code Section 17200, dealing with unfair competition. When the State AG sues under that statute, he has a lot of clout. It's a civil matter, though. See: leginfo.ca.gov If Spitzer is trying to settle the prospective criminal or civil charges, I would imagine that there are a number of ways in which that could be accomplished. I'm not sure that the analogy is exactly that Spitzer is trying to use the threat of criminal prosecution to succeed in a civil matter. But as I say, I have not followed this closely enough to comment with any great authority. As I recall, the AG's of a number of states were involved in the tobacco litigation. Frankly, I can't recall the details of how those matters were prosecuted. The reality is that deals were struck which would not have been likely had the matters proceeded through litigation to judgment.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next