Plaintiff Wadler brought action against his former employer for wrongful termination, as he was allegedly a whistle blower as his former employer was committing potential violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act in China.
Defendant introduced an expert witness to state that there was no FCPA violation. Plaintiff produced a rebuttal expert witness opinion. Defendant then claimed that plaintiff's expert opinion was not a rebuttal, but a new expert opinion that was improperly introduced. The court found a portion of the plaintiff's expert opinion as a proper rebuttal, but struck the rest as improper introduction of new expert opinion.
An FCPA case! Admittedly, this case's connection to FCPA is somewhat oblique, but it is a small miracle whenever there is any visibility to an FCPA case. Although FCPA is a major concern for Asia-based businesses or businesses operating in Asia, actual cases are few and far between because few companies dare to fight the government in an open court.
Post a Comment