Go Back   LawTalkers

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 93
0 members and 93 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 4,499, 10-26-2015 at 07:55 AM.
Thread: SOX (not socks)
View Single Post
Old 08-14-2003, 11:56 AM   #6
purse junkie
She Said, Let's Go!
purse junkie's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: hollerin' for Heras
Posts: 1,781

Originally posted by baltassoc
What worries me is that civil penalties are impose directly on the attorney for failing to comply, and such investigations are always done with perfect hindsight. If I make a decision as to whether something is okay that the SEC disagrees with, does anyone think the SEC is going to admit my position was nonetheless reasonable?
Speaking of which, any word on the insurance implications--will existing companies' (or outside counsel firms' ) policies cover these problems if they arise, will companies start making standard Sarbox exclusions and then charge insanely for coverage, or is every counsel seriously in danger of personally getting jacked?
but you'll look sweet/upon the seat/of a bicycle built for two
purse junkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:09 PM.