The COVID dispute between the School District and the Oakland teachers. I heard on the news this morning that the Oakland teachers want weekly testing, to be provided N95 or best available masks, and a plan or procedures on how to deal with what happens when a teacher/teachers go out sick with COVID exposure or infection.

I have to comment: on this type of dispute, it’s like, come on folks, get this resolved and settled. You can’t even resolve this between the two parties? Its bad optics, and the students suffer.

What do the teachers want – the actual detail?

What is the School District’s response, and what are the issues from the District’s viewpoint – the actual detail?

Work together, negotiate, get real and reasonable, and get this resolved. There are other issues that are more difficult or challenging to resolve and settle – this shouldn’t be one of them.

Dave Tate, Esq. (and inactive CPA) – litigation and disputes, governance, mediator/mediation, and investigations.

* * * * * * *

Best to you. David Tate, Esq. (and inactive CPA)

Remember, every case and situation is different. It is important to obtain and evaluate all of the evidence that is available, and to apply that evidence to the applicable standards and laws. You do need to consult with an attorney and other professionals about your particular situation. This post is not a solicitation for legal or other services inside of or outside of California, and, of course, this post only is a summary of information that changes from time to time, and does not apply to any particular situation or to your specific situation. So . . . you cannot rely on this post for your situation or as legal or other professional advice or representation.

Thank you for reading this post. I ask that you also pass it along to other people who would be interested as it is through collaboration that great things and success occur more quickly. And please also subscribe to this blog and my other blog (see below), and connect with me on LinkedIn and Twitter.

My two other blogs are:

Business, D&O, audit committee, governance, compliance, etc. http://auditcommitteeupdate.com

Trust, estate, conservatorship, elder and elder abuse, etc. litigation and contentious administrations http://californiaestatetrust.com

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive California CPA) – practicing in California only.

⁃  Litigation, disputes and trials (primarily in the following areas):

Commercial and business, and business owner, investor, shareholder, D&O, officer, director, governance, accountings, lost income, profits and royalties, and business-related;

Trust, estate, elder abuse, POA, conservatorship, contentious administrations, ethics, etc.;

Workplace and employment, and real property; and

Various other cases and areas (environmental contamination, accidents, insurance, etc.).

⁃  Boards and committees including audit and governance committees, investigations, independence, conflicts, governance, diligence, risk management, ESG, etc. – representation and advising re conduct, authority, duties and responsibilities, rights, and liability.

⁃  Services as a mediator, and dispute resolution.

I have attached a copy (on which I have also provided comments) of California Assembly Constitutional Amendment (ACA) No. 11 (Kalra), January 5, 2022, which is “A resolution to propose to the people of the State of California an amendment to the Constitution of the State” to “impose an excise tax, payroll taxes, and a State Personal Income CalCare Tax . . . to fund comprehensive universal single-payer health care coverage and a health care cost control system for the benefit of every resident of the state, as well as reserves deemed necessary to ensure payment, to be established in statute. The measure would [also] authorize the Legislature, upon an economic analysis determining insufficient amounts to fund these purposes, to increase any or all of these tax rates by a statute passed by majority vote of both houses of the Legislature.”

Obviously, health care, health care coverage (what care is provided and covered, or not), health care access, and health care costs are issues and can cause personal, financial, health, life and death, and quality of life uncertainties, concerns and problems for a lot of people (i.e., perhaps for most people). And these are issues that have been in the news and politics or politicized for years, and will continue to be so. Improvements are needed. I’m all ears if someone has solutions or improvements, and provides the details for evaluation. A risk management approach is needed, in my view. I have attached a copy of ACA No. 11 (Kalra) with some of my initial comments which are from a risk management approach – responses and answers from the Legislators would be helpful and constructive for dialogue and evaluation. Below I have also provided a link to a useful article in the L.A. Times, which discusses some of the issues and problems, and what else needs to happen. And, I have also provided a link to California AB-1400, which is the legislation that contains some of the information about what the proposed health care system might and might not provide and cover, and how it might or might not work.

See also the blog post with my risk management process slide – https://ihaveadifferentview.com/2021/09/10/updated-simple-risk-management-and-related-decision-making-process-slide/

Here is the link to the L. A. Times article – it’s a useful article and provides additional information – https://www.yahoo.com/news/california-democrats-trying-again-universal-130011668.html

The following is a link to California AB-1400 Guaranteed Health Care for All – this is the legislation that contains the detail about what the health care would cover, or not, and how it would be run and operated, or not. However, even that information is broad and general, and lacks specifics. In other words, neither the elected legislator representatives who are voting on this and related legislation, or anyone else, know what will or will not be covered, what it will cost (and those costs are guaranteed to rise), or how it will be run and be operated. Note, for example, Chapter 4 (copied and pasted below) provides the detail about what benefits are covered – for my preference, this is way too general and lacking in detail. Again, I’m all ears for improvements – but let’s get the detail resolved instead of doing legislature as normal. Or, have each legislator tell us what she or he believes, in detail, will be covered and what it will cost now and in the future years.

Here is the link to California AB-1400 – https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB1400

Here is a copy and paste of AB-1400, Chapter 4, re benefits and coverage, or not, including section 100627(d) at the very end discussing “Coverage decision” and “Disputed health care item or service” definitions and situations:

CHAPTER  4. Benefits

100625. (a) Individuals enrolled for benefits under CalCare are entitled to have payment made by CalCare to a participating provider for the health care items and services in subdivision (c), if medically necessary or appropriate for the maintenance of health or for the prevention, diagnosis, treatment, or rehabilitation of a health condition.

(b) The determination of medical necessity or appropriateness shall be made by the member’s treating physician or by a health care professional who is treating that individual and is authorized to make that determination in accordance with the scope of practice, licensing, the program standards established in Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 100650) and by the board, and other laws of the state.

(c) Covered health care benefits for members include all of the following categories of health care items and services:

(1) Inpatient and outpatient medical and health facility services, including hospital services and 24-hour-a-day emergency services.

(2) Inpatient and outpatient health care professional services and other ambulatory patient services.

(3) Primary and preventive services, including chronic disease management.

(4) Prescription drugs and biological products.

(5) Medical devices, equipment, appliances, and assistive technology.

(6) Mental health and substance abuse treatment services, including inpatient and outpatient care.

(7) Diagnostic imaging, laboratory services, and other diagnostic and evaluative services.

(8) Comprehensive reproductive, maternity, and newborn care.

(9) Pediatrics.

(10) Oral health, audiology, and vision services.

(11) Rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices, including inpatient and outpatient care.

(12) Emergency services and transportation.

(13) Early and periodic screening, diagnostic, and treatment services as defined in Section 1396d(r) of Title 42 of the United States Code.

(14) Necessary transportation for health care items and services for persons with disabilities or who may qualify as low income.

(15) Long-term services and supports described in Section 100626, including long-term services and supports covered under Medi-Cal (Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 14000) of Part 3 of Division 9 of the Welfare and Institutions Code) or the federal Children’s Health Insurance Program (Title XXI of the federal Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. Sec. 1397aa et seq.))

(16) Any additional health care items and services the board authorizes to be added to CalCare benefits.

(d) The categories of covered health care items and services under subdivision (c) include all the following:

(1) Prosthetics, eyeglasses, and hearing aids and the repair, technical support, and customization needed for their use by an individual.

(2) Child and adult immunizations.

(3) Hospice care.

(4) Care in a skilled nursing facility.

(5) Home health care, including health care provided in an assisted living facility.

(6) Prenatal and postnatal care.

(7) Podiatric care.

(8) Blood and blood products.

(9) Dialysis.

(10) Community-based adult services as defined under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 14000) of Part 3 of Division 9 of the Welfare and Institutions Code as of January 1, 2021.

(11) Dietary and nutritional therapies determined appropriate by the board.

(12) Therapies that are shown by the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health in the National Institutes of Health to be safe and effective, including chiropractic care and acupuncture.

(13) Health care items and services previously covered by county integrated health and human services programs pursuant to Chapter 12.96 (commencing with Section 18990) and Chapter 12.991 (commencing with Section 18991) of Part 6 of Division 9 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.

(14) Health care items and services previously covered by a regional center for persons with developmental disabilities pursuant to Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 4620) of Division 4.5 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.

(15) Language interpretation and translation for health care items and services, including sign language and braille or other services needed for individuals with communication barriers.

(e) Covered health care items and services under CalCare include all health care items and services required to be covered under the following provisions, without regard to whether the member would be eligible for or covered by the source referred to:

(1) The federal Children’s Health Insurance Program (Title XXI of the federal Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. Sec. 1397aa et seq.)).

(2) Medi-Cal (Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 14000) of Part 3 of Division 9 of the Welfare and Institutions Code).

(3) The federal Medicare program pursuant to Title XVIII of the federal Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. Sec. 1395 et seq.).

(4) Health care service plans pursuant to the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975 (Chapter 2.2 (commencing with Section 1340) of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code).

(5) Health insurers, as defined in Section 106 of the Insurance Code, pursuant to Part 2 (commencing with Section 10110) of Division 2 of the Insurance Code.

(6) All essential health benefits mandated by the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act as of January 1, 2017.

(f) Health care items and services covered under CalCare shall not be subject to prior authorization or a limitation applied through the use of step therapy protocols.

100626. (a) Subject to the other provisions of this title, individuals enrolled for benefits under CalCare are entitled to have payment made by CalCare to an eligible provider for long-term services and supports, in accordance with the standards established in this title, for care, services, diagnosis, treatment, rehabilitation, or maintenance of health related to a medically determinable condition, whether physical or mental, of health, injury, or age, that either:

(1) Causes a functional limitation in performing one or more activities of daily living or in instrumental activities of daily living.

(2) Is a disability, as defined in Section 12102(1)(A) of Title 42 of the United States Code, that substantially limits one or more of the member’s major life activities.

(b) The board shall adopt regulations that provide for the following:

(1) The determination of individual eligibility for long-term services and supports under this section.

(2) The assessment of the long-term services and supports needed for an eligible individual.

(3) The automatic entitlement of an individual who receives or is approved to receive disability benefits from the federal Social Security Administration under the federal Social Security Disability Insurance program established in Title II or Title XVI of the federal Social Security Act to the long-term services and supports under this section.

(c) Long-term services and supports provided pursuant to this section shall do all of the following:

(1) Include long-term nursing services for a member, whether provided in an institution or in a home- and community-based setting.

(2) Provide coverage for a broad spectrum of long-term services and supports, including home- and community-based services, other care provided through noninstitutional settings, and respite care.

(3) Provide coverage that meets the physical, mental, and social needs of a member while allowing the member the member’s maximum possible autonomy and the member’s maximum possible civic, social, and economic participation.

(4) Prioritize delivery of long-term services and supports through home- and community-based services over institutionalization.

(5) Unless a member chooses otherwise, ensure that the member receives home- and community-based long-term services and supports regardless of the recipient’s type or level of disability, service need, or age.

(6) Have the goal of enabling persons with disabilities to receive services in the least restrictive and most integrated setting appropriate to the member’s needs.

(7) Be provided in a manner that allows persons with disabilities to maintain their independence, self-determination, and dignity.

(8) Provide long-term services and supports that are of equal quality and equitably accessible across geographic regions.

(9) Ensure that long-term services and supports provide recipients the option of self-direction of service, including under the Self-Directed Services Program described in Division 4.5 (commencing with Section 4500) of the Welfare and Institutions Code, from either the recipient or care coordinators of the recipient’s choosing.

(d) In developing regulations to implement this section, the board shall consult the advisory commission established pursuant to Section 100614.

100627.

(a) (1) The board shall, on a regular basis and at least annually, evaluate whether the benefits under CalCare should be expanded or adjusted to promote the health of members and California residents, account for changes in medical practice or new information from medical research, or respond to other relevant developments in health science.

(2) In implementing this section, the board shall not remove or eliminate covered health care items and services under CalCare that are listed in this chapter.

(b) The board shall establish a process by which health care professionals, other clinicians, and members may petition the board to add or expand benefits to CalCare.

(c) The board shall establish a process by which individuals may bring a disputed health care item or service or a coverage decision for review to the Independent Medical Review System established in the Department of Managed Health Care pursuant to Article 5.55 (commencing with Section 1374.30) of Chapter 2.2 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code.

(d) For the purposes of this chapter:

(1) “Coverage decision” means the approval or denial of health care items or services by a participating provider or a health care professional who is employed by or otherwise receives compensation or payment for items and services furnished under CalCare from a participating provider, substantially based on a finding that the provision of a particular service is included or excluded as a covered item or service under CalCare. A “coverage decision” does not encompass a decision regarding a disputed health care item or service.

(2) “Disputed health care item or service” means a health care item or service eligible for coverage and payment under CalCare that has been denied, modified, or delayed by a decision of a participating provider or a health care professional who is employed by or otherwise receives compensation or payment for health care items and services furnished under CalCare from a participating provider, in whole or in part, due to a finding that the service is not medically necessary or appropriate. A decision regarding a disputed health care item or service relates to the practice of medicine, including early discharge from an institutional provider, and is not a coverage decision.

* * * * * * *

Best to you. David Tate, Esq. (and inactive CPA)

Remember, every case and situation is different. It is important to obtain and evaluate all of the evidence that is available, and to apply that evidence to the applicable standards and laws. You do need to consult with an attorney and other professionals about your particular situation. This post is not a solicitation for legal or other services inside of or outside of California, and, of course, this post only is a summary of information that changes from time to time, and does not apply to any particular situation or to your specific situation. So . . . you cannot rely on this post for your situation or as legal or other professional advice or representation.

Thank you for reading this post. I ask that you also pass it along to other people who would be interested as it is through collaboration that great things and success occur more quickly. And please also subscribe to this blog and my other blog (see below), and connect with me on LinkedIn and Twitter.

My two other blogs are:

Business, D&O, audit committee, governance, compliance, etc. http://auditcommitteeupdate.com

Trust, estate, conservatorship, elder and elder abuse, etc. litigation and contentious administrations http://californiaestatetrust.com

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive California CPA) – practicing in California only.

⁃  Litigation, disputes and trials (primarily in the following areas):

Commercial and business, and business owner, investor, shareholder, D&O, officer, director, governance, accountings, lost income, profits and royalties, and business-related;

Trust, estate, elder abuse, POA, conservatorship, contentious administrations, ethics, etc.;

Workplace and employment, and real property; and

Various other cases and areas (environmental contamination, accidents, insurance, etc.).

⁃  Boards and committees including audit and governance committees, investigations, independence, conflicts, governance, diligence, risk management, ESG, etc. – representation and advising re conduct, authority, duties and responsibilities, rights, and liability.

⁃  Services as a mediator, and dispute resolution.

Below I have copied and pasted new California Penal Code section 487m, which makes the intentional theft (deprivation) of wages in an amount greater than $950 for any one employee, or $2,350 for two or more employees, may be punished as grand theft. “Employee” includes an independent contractor. And, the employee also has the right to commence a civil action.

Tate comments: the triggering amounts, $950 and $2,350, are very small amounts – i.e., not much needs to be in dispute for someone to argue or allege that someone has violated or breached section 487m. Additionally, the definition of the term “intentional” (i.e., the Legislature’s intent as to what conduct constitutes “intentional”), and whether the alleged wrongdoing is “intentional” will be heavily litigated. For example, is simply not paying an amount that is alleged due considered theft or intentional deprivation of wages? A review of the legislative history might or might not shed some light depending on whether the Legislature gave these issues consideration. In any event, the courts will be called upon to decide.  

(a) Notwithstanding Sections 215 and 216 of the Labor Code, the intentional theft of wages in an amount greater than nine hundred fifty dollars ($950) from any one employee, or two thousand three hundred fifty dollars ($2,350) in the aggregate from two or more employees, by an employer in any consecutive 12-month period may be punished as grand theft.

(b) For purposes of this section, “theft of wages” is the intentional deprivation of wages, as defined in Section 200 of the Labor Code, gratuities, as defined in Section 350 of the Labor Code, benefits, or other compensation, by unlawful means, with the knowledge that the wages, gratuities, benefits, or other compensation is due to the employee under the law.

(c) For purposes of this section, “employee” includes an independent contractor and “employer” includes the hiring entity of an independent contractor.

(d) Wages, gratuities, benefits, or other compensation that are the subject of a prosecution under this section may be recovered as restitution in accordance with Sections 1202.4 and 1203.1. This section does not prohibit the employee or the Labor Commissioner from commencing a civil action to seek remedies provided for under the Labor Code for acts prosecuted under this section.

(e) This section does not constitute a change in, and does not expand or limit the scope of conduct prohibited by, Section 487.

(Added by Stats. 2021, Ch. 325, Sec. 1. (AB 1003) Effective January 1, 2022.)

* * * * * * *

Best to you. David Tate, Esq. (and inactive CPA)

Remember, every case and situation is different. It is important to obtain and evaluate all of the evidence that is available, and to apply that evidence to the applicable standards and laws. You do need to consult with an attorney and other professionals about your particular situation. This post is not a solicitation for legal or other services inside of or outside of California, and, of course, this post only is a summary of information that changes from time to time, and does not apply to any particular situation or to your specific situation. So . . . you cannot rely on this post for your situation or as legal or other professional advice or representation.

Thank you for reading this post. I ask that you also pass it along to other people who would be interested as it is through collaboration that great things and success occur more quickly. And please also subscribe to this blog and my other blog (see below), and connect with me on LinkedIn and Twitter.

My two other blogs are:

Business, D&O, audit committee, governance, compliance, etc. http://auditcommitteeupdate.com

Trust, estate, conservatorship, elder and elder abuse, etc. litigation and contentious administrations http://californiaestatetrust.com

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive California CPA) – practicing in California only.

⁃  Litigation, disputes and trials (primarily in the following areas):

Commercial and business, and business owner, investor, shareholder, D&O, officer, director, governance, accountings, lost income, profits and royalties, and business-related;

Trust, estate, elder abuse, POA, conservatorship, contentious administrations, ethics, etc.;

Workplace and employment, and real property; and

Various other cases and areas (environmental contamination, accidents, insurance, etc.).

⁃  Boards and committees including audit and governance committees, investigations, independence, conflicts, governance, diligence, risk management, ESG, etc. – representation and advising re conduct, authority, duties and responsibilities, rights, and liability.

⁃  Services as a mediator, and dispute resolution.

If you are following some of the Government’s trial against Elizabeth Holmes, as with any allegation or trial of wrongdoing or liability you start first with the standard of care or duty that is alleged to have been breached or violated, and the facts. In the circumstance of a trial, the facts are the evidence that is admissible and presented to the trier of fact in the trial (i.e., the jury or the judge in a court trial).

With that preface, Elizabeth Holmes is charged with nine counts of wire fraud 18 USC §1343, plus two counts of conspiracy to commit wire fraud 18 USC §1349.

18 USC §1343 states as follows (from law.cornell.edu/uscode):

“Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, transmits or causes to be transmitted by means of wire, radio, or television communication in interstate or foreign commerce, any writings, signs, signals, pictures, or sounds for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. If the violation occurs in relation to, or involving any benefit authorized, transported, transmitted, transferred, disbursed, or paid in connection with, a presidentially declared major disaster or emergency (as those terms are defined in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance (42 U.S.C. 5122)), or affects a financial institution, such person shall be fined not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both.”

And here is some additional discussion about 18 USC §1343 from the US Department of Justice website (https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-941-18-usc-1343-elements-wire-fraud):

941. 18 U.S.C. 1343—ELEMENTS OF WIRE FRAUD

The elements of wire fraud under Section 1343 directly parallel those of the mail fraud statute, but require the use of an interstate telephone call or electronic communication made in furtherance of the scheme. United States v. Briscoe, 65 F.3d 576, 583 (7th Cir. 1995) (citing United States v. Ames Sintering Co., 927 F.2d 232, 234 (6th Cir. 1990) (per curiam)); United States v. Frey, 42 F.3d 795, 797 (3d Cir. 1994) (wire fraud is identical to mail fraud statute except that it speaks of communications transmitted by wire); see also, e.g., United States v. Profit, 49 F.3d 404, 406 n. 1 (8th Cir.) (the four essential elements of the crime of wire fraud are: (1) that the defendant voluntarily and intentionally devised or participated in a scheme to defraud another out of money; (2) that the defendant did so with the intent to defraud; (3) that it was reasonably foreseeable that interstate wire communications would be used; and (4) that interstate wire communications were in fact used) (citing Manual of Model Criminal Jury Instructions for the District Courts of the Eighth Circuit 6.18.1341 (West 1994)), cert. denied, 115 S.Ct. 2289 (1995); United States v. Hanson, 41 F.3d 580, 583 (10th Cir. 1994) (two elements comprise the crime of wire fraud: (1) a scheme or artifice to defraud; and (2) use of interstate wire communication to facilitate that scheme); United States v. Faulkner, 17 F.3d 745, 771 (5th Cir. 1994) (essential elements of wire fraud are: (1) a scheme to defraud and (2) the use of, or causing the use of, interstate wire communications to execute the scheme), cert. denied, 115 S.Ct. 193 (1995); United States v. Cassiere, 4 F.3d 1006 (1st Cir. 1993) (to prove wire fraud government must show (1) scheme to defraud by means of false pretenses, (2) defendant’s knowing and willful participation in scheme with intent to defraud, and (3) use of interstate wire communications in furtherance of scheme); United States v. Maxwell, 920 F.2d 1028, 1035 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (“Wire fraud requires proof of (1) a scheme to defraud; and (2) the use of an interstate wire communication to further the scheme.”).

[cited in JM 9-43.100]

18 USC §1349 states as follows (from law.cornell.edu/uscode):

“Any person who attempts or conspires to commit any offense under this chapter shall be subject to the same penalties as those prescribed for the offense, the commission of which was the object of the attempt or conspiracy.”

Thus, you can understand the Holmes defense focus, some of which includes: no false or untrue statements, representations, promises or pretenses were made; and there was no voluntary and intentional scheme, act or action to make a false or untrue (e.g., known untrue or perhaps not based on a reasonable belief) statement, representation, promise or pretense with the intent to defraud.

As you might be aware, Ms. Holmes did not have to testify at trial. The Government/prosecution could not compel her to testify. And the Government/prosecution had the burden of proof – i.e., as Ms. Holmes is presumed to be innocent of the claims that are alleged against her, the Government/prosecution has the burden to sufficiently establish and prove to the required degree, measure or standard at least one of the claims that the Government/prosecution alleged against Ms. Holmes. However, if Ms. Holmes decided to testify herself, she then would be required to allow the Government/prosecution to cross-examine her – i.e., to try to pick apart her testimony, actions and defenses.

Ms. Holmes and her attorneys decided that she would testify – presumably that decision was made based on a perception and calculation of the risk and concern that the evidence that the Government/prosecution presented to the jury might be sufficient to result in a finding of guilt on one or more of the claims that had been alleged. Of course, this is a judgment call, the answer to which we will probably never know.

Ms. Holmes also isn’t your standard witness. She prepares well and fully for her testimony, she speaks and presents herself well, and she tends to stand up well against cross-examination. On the stand/in public she appears to be fairly unflappable, even on occasions when she acknowledged that in hindsight, she might have said something differently. On the other hand, the effect is unknown of the evidence that was presented about the coaching or training that Ms. Holmes underwent to hone her presentation skills and her appearance of being a CEO who is knowledgeable, confident, correct in her statements, and in control.

Advantage to Holmes:

The Government/prosecution has the burden of proving its case.

She needs to find only one juror who isn’t sufficiently convinced by the Government/prosecution.

Ms. Holmes also isn’t your standard witness.

Advantage to the Government/prosecution:

In a sense, the Government/prosecution has unlimited, or not so limited, resources.

Apparently, the risk or concern as viewed by the defense is sufficiently strong that the jury might find guilt if Ms. Holmes did not testify.  

Ms. Holmes has to defend against each of the Government/prosecution’s claims.

The conspiracy to commit wire fraud charges  (18 USC §1349) might offer the Government/prosecution a fallback charge or position.

Uncertainties and contingencies:

Well . . . there are many, however, for sure:

The persuasiveness, believability, likeability and optics of Ms. Holmes’ testimony and demeanor;

How well the competing attorneys do in their closing arguments;

The judge’s instructions to the jury;

Whether and to what extent each juror holds the Government/prosecution to its burden; and

The individual jurors and their personalities.

* * * * * * *

Best to you. David Tate, Esq. (and inactive CPA)

Remember, every case and situation is different. It is important to obtain and evaluate all of the evidence that is available, and to apply that evidence to the applicable standards and laws. You do need to consult with an attorney and other professionals about your particular situation. This post is not a solicitation for legal or other services inside of or outside of California, and, of course, this post only is a summary of information that changes from time to time, and does not apply to any particular situation or to your specific situation. So . . . you cannot rely on this post for your situation or as legal or other professional advice or representation.

Thank you for reading this post. I ask that you also pass it along to other people who would be interested as it is through collaboration that great things and success occur more quickly. And please also subscribe to this blog and my other blog (see below), and connect with me on LinkedIn and Twitter.

My two other blogs are:

Business, D&O, audit committee, governance, compliance, etc. http://auditcommitteeupdate.com

Trust, estate, conservatorship, elder and elder abuse, etc. litigation and contentious administrations http://californiaestatetrust.com

David Tate, Esq. (and inactive California CPA) – practicing in California only.

⁃  Litigation, disputes and trials (primarily in the following areas):

Commercial and business, and business owner, investor, shareholder, D&O, officer, director, governance, accountings, lost income, profits and royalties, and business-related;

Trust, estate, elder abuse, POA, conservatorship, contentious administrations, ethics, etc.;

Workplace and employment, and real property; and

Various other cases and areas (environmental contamination, accidents, insurance, etc.).

⁃  Boards and committees including audit and governance committees, investigations, independence, conflicts, governance, diligence, risk management, ESG, etc. – representation and advising re conduct, authority, duties and responsibilities, rights, and liability.

⁃  Services as a mediator, and dispute resolution.

I have slightly revised and updated my definition of the term governance slide, which is provided below. There isn’t a single, accepted definition of the term governance, but in my view this definition covers most of the aspects, and why it is important that we discuss this topic. Governance isn’t limited to corporate governance – “governance” applies to a great number of decision makers and people. I hope that you find this slide helpful, at least to give consideration to governance as it applies to you and to your actions and activities, and as it applies to people who impact your life and activities and the lives and activities of others.

Best to you, Dave Tate, Esq.

Best to you. David Tate, Esq. (and inactive CPA)

——————————————————————–

Remember, every case and situation is different. It is important to obtain and evaluate all of the evidence that is available, and to apply that evidence to the applicable standards and laws. You do need to consult with an attorney and other professionals about your particular situation. This post is not a solicitation for legal or other services inside of or outside of California, and, of course, this post only is a summary of information that changes from time to time, and does not apply to any particular situation or to your specific situation. So . . . you cannot rely on this post for your situation or as legal or other professional advice or representation.

Thank you for reading this post. I ask that you also pass it along to other people who would be interested as it is through collaboration that great things and success occur more quickly. And please also subscribe to this blog and my other blog (see below), and connect with me on LinkedIn and Twitter.

My two other blogs are:

Business, D&O, audit committee, governance, compliance, etc. http://auditcommitteeupdate.com

Trust, estate, conservatorship, elder and elder abuse, etc. litigation and contentious administrations http://californiaestatetrust.com

Best to you, David Tate, Esq. (and inactive California CPA) – practicing in California only.

⁃  Litigation, disputes and trials (primarily in the following areas):

Commercial and business, and business owner, investor, shareholder, D&O, officer, director, governance, accountings, lost income, profits and royalties, and business-related;

Trust, estate, elder abuse, POA, conservatorship, contentious administrations, ethics, etc.;

Workplace and employment, and real property; and

Various other cases and areas (environmental contamination, accidents, insurance, etc.).

⁃  Boards and committees including audit and governance committees, investigations, independence, conflicts, governance, diligence, risk management, ESG, etc. – representation and advising re conduct, authority, duties and responsibilities, rights, and liability.

⁃  Services as a mediator, and dispute resolution.

I have slightly revised and updated my simple risk management and decision-making process slide, which is provided below. The process was a ten-step process; however, I have split one of those processes into two processes, resulting in an eleven-step process. And I have also revised some of the wording to be more appropriately descriptive, and to better match real world situations and events. Enjoy. Use the process and pass it along. I hope that you find the process helpful, at least to give consideration and direction to your risk management process.

Best to you, Dave Tate, Esq.

• 

Best to you. David Tate, Esq. (and inactive CPA)

——————————————————————–

Remember, every case and situation is different. It is important to obtain and evaluate all of the evidence that is available, and to apply that evidence to the applicable standards and laws. You do need to consult with an attorney and other professionals about your particular situation. This post is not a solicitation for legal or other services inside of or outside of California, and, of course, this post only is a summary of information that changes from time to time, and does not apply to any particular situation or to your specific situation. So . . . you cannot rely on this post for your situation or as legal or other professional advice or representation.

Thank you for reading this post. I ask that you also pass it along to other people who would be interested as it is through collaboration that great things and success occur more quickly. And please also subscribe to this blog and my other blog (see below), and connect with me on LinkedIn and Twitter.

My two other blogs are:

Business, D&O, audit committee, governance, compliance, etc. http://auditcommitteeupdate.com

Trust, estate, conservatorship, elder and elder abuse, etc. litigation and contentious administrations http://californiaestatetrust.com

Best to you, David Tate, Esq. (and inactive California CPA) – practicing in California only.

⁃  Litigation, disputes and trials (primarily in the following areas):

Commercial and business, and business owner, investor, shareholder, D&O, officer, director, governance, accountings, lost income, profits and royalties, and business-related;

Trust, estate, elder abuse, POA, conservatorship, contentious administrations, ethics, etc.;

Workplace and employment, and real property; and

Various other cases and areas (environmental contamination, accidents, insurance, etc.).

⁃  Boards and committees including audit and governance committees, investigations, independence, conflicts, governance, diligence, risk management, ESG, etc. – representation and advising re conduct, authority, duties and responsibilities, rights, and liability.

⁃  Services as a mediator, and dispute resolution.

This is a test post.