Re: on corporations and subpoenas

[attila <attila@primenet.com>]

** Reply to note from sameer@c2.org 04/15/96 11:00am -0700


= To: cypherpunks@toad.com
= Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 11:00:19 -0700 (PDT)
= 
= 	Suppose a corporation has multiple subsidiaries.
= 
= 	Would a subpoena served on the parent corp be binding on the
= subsidiaries?
= 
	yes, but not the other way around. (shit flows downhill!)  
    However, that's on face value also as a judge can order a parent 
    corporation (and its assets) to be subject to the order granted 
    against the subsidiary --e.g. the same principle would be sustained 
    until appeal --in other words, produce the "evidence" to convict 
    yourself and argue about it on appeal.  

	If that does not work, they will go for conspiracy charges, 
    which generally carry the same penalty as commiting the crime!

= 	Or would the better way to handle this be to create spinoff
= corporations rather than subsidiaries?
= 
	depends. if it is collection of S-corps, they are all lumped 
    together for tax purposes and the Fed goes right past the corporate 
    veil.  If they are C-corps, the Fed ignores the fine line print on 
    corporate protection, etc.

	secondly, prosecuters have a tendency to subpoena *individuals* 
    to produce records --easy to identify in small businesses, 
    subsidiary or "clustered."  Even so, they can effectively take the 
    shotgun approach by naming the individual --i.e. whether the target 
    has the files at home, or company A-Z, it does not matter:  produce 
    'em.  I don't know about today, but 20 years ago I told them rather 
    obscenely which part of the anatomy they could use for their head 
    (and the horse they rode in on).

	WARNING: I am not licensed to practice law in the State of 
	California, so take it for what it's worth.


-- 
 Obscenity  is a crutch  for inarticulate motherfuckers.
 Fuck the CDA!

cc: Cypherpunks <cypherpunks@toad.com>