FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1531420773> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1531420773 startingPage "551" @default.
• W1531420773 abstract "ABSTRACT Heightened pleading standards and limits on discovery in private securities fraud actions make confidential informants crucial in many cases. While courts have widely recognized the importance of confidential informants and the need to protect them from retaliation, they have not applied consistent standards as to how informants must be identified in pleadings, and have failed to take into account substantial bodies of relevant case law when deciding whether to require the disclosure of informants' names in discovery. This article offers a framework for deciding when and how confidential informants should be identified, taking into account the competing interests in anonymity and disclosure. It offers a refined standard for identifying informants at the pleading stage that focuses on how the employee came to have the information pleaded, rather than on the employee's job title or duties. It also proposes use of in camera review of witness statements. At the discovery stage, this article criticizes the use of the attorney work product doctrine as a basis for protecting informant identities. It argues that courts should perform a balancing analysis that directly weighs public policy and privacy interests in favor of informant anonymity against defendants' legitimate needs for disclosure. This approach is supported by numerous cases protecting the identities of informants and other types of witnesses under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c), and also finds support in the many cases construing the formal applicable to government informants. Finally, this article encourages plaintiffs to seek protective orders for informants early in litigation and briefly discusses protection for witness interview notes. INTRODUCTION Confidential informants are crucial to detecting and prosecuting corporate wrongdoing.1 Threats of retaliation and harm to reputation serve, however, as strong disincentives to corporate employees who consider stepping forward.2 While individuals who report misconduct to the government can generally rely on the privilege to preserve their anonymity if they do not testify, no similar shields the identities of informants who speak to private plaintiffs or their counsel. As plaintiffs' law firms-particularly in securities cases subject to heightened pleading standards-have hired professional investigators and significantly expanded their pre- and post-filing investigations, the proper treatment of such private confidential informants has become increasingly important. Striking the proper balance between protecting informants' identities and fair disclosure to defendants now has significant consequences for plaintiffs, defendants, private litigation as a means of enforcing the nation's laws, the legal system's commitment to broad discovery, and informants' ability to perform their civic duty without professional martyrdom. The competing interests in shielding and disclosing informants' identities arise at three distinct stages of civil litigation: (1) At the pleading stage, when informants' statements are used to establish the legal sufficiency of a claim and defend against a motion to dismiss, particularly in securities cases subject to the heightened pleading standards imposed by the Private securities Litigation Reform Act of 19953 (PSLRA) and Rule 9(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedures.4 (2) During discovery, when defendants' interrogatories often specifically request disclosure of plaintiffs' confidential informants. (3) On a motion for summary judgment or at trial, when an informant's testimony is proffered to a judge or jury for use in determining the merits of the controversy. This article analyzes courts' treatment of confidential informants at each of these three stages. Part I evaluates confidential informants' value in enforcement actions and informants' need for anonymity. Parts H-IV address the pleading, summary judgment/trial, and discovery stages, respectively. …" @default.
• W1531420773 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1531420773 creator A5030622930 @default.
• W1531420773 date "2007-05-01" @default.
• W1531420773 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W1531420773 title "Confidential Informants in Private Litigation: Balancing Interests in Anonymity and Disclosure" @default.
• W1531420773 hasPublicationYear "2007" @default.
• W1531420773 type Work @default.
• W1531420773 sameAs 1531420773 @default.
• W1531420773 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W1531420773 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1531420773 hasAuthorship W1531420773A5030622930 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConcept C178005623 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConcept C2776515129 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConcept C2776900844 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConcept C2778137410 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConcept C2778272461 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConcept C2780858371 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConcept C2780928512 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConcept C39549134 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConcept C71745522 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConcept C80114427 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConcept C97460637 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConceptScore W1531420773C138885662 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConceptScore W1531420773C144024400 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConceptScore W1531420773C144133560 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConceptScore W1531420773C17744445 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConceptScore W1531420773C178005623 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConceptScore W1531420773C199539241 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConceptScore W1531420773C2776515129 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConceptScore W1531420773C2776900844 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConceptScore W1531420773C2778137410 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConceptScore W1531420773C2778272461 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConceptScore W1531420773C2780858371 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConceptScore W1531420773C2780928512 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConceptScore W1531420773C39549134 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConceptScore W1531420773C41895202 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConceptScore W1531420773C71745522 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConceptScore W1531420773C80114427 @default.
• W1531420773 hasConceptScore W1531420773C97460637 @default.
• W1531420773 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W1531420773 hasLocation W15314207731 @default.
• W1531420773 hasOpenAccess W1531420773 @default.
• W1531420773 hasPrimaryLocation W15314207731 @default.
• W1531420773 hasRelatedWork W1486997595 @default.
• W1531420773 hasRelatedWork W1530526326 @default.
• W1531420773 hasRelatedWork W2055195909 @default.
• W1531420773 hasRelatedWork W2125109657 @default.
• W1531420773 hasRelatedWork W215223613 @default.
• W1531420773 hasRelatedWork W2196375521 @default.
• W1531420773 hasRelatedWork W2213909881 @default.
• W1531420773 hasRelatedWork W2415482227 @default.
• W1531420773 hasRelatedWork W247029751 @default.
• W1531420773 hasRelatedWork W25690807 @default.
• W1531420773 hasRelatedWork W2610863000 @default.
• W1531420773 hasRelatedWork W273466717 @default.
• W1531420773 hasRelatedWork W27716285 @default.
• W1531420773 hasRelatedWork W2972727836 @default.
• W1531420773 hasRelatedWork W3121275189 @default.
• W1531420773 hasRelatedWork W3123942876 @default.
• W1531420773 hasRelatedWork W3162817122 @default.
• W1531420773 hasRelatedWork W3211844796 @default.
• W1531420773 hasRelatedWork W958912022 @default.
• W1531420773 hasRelatedWork W3125570498 @default.
• W1531420773 hasVolume "12" @default.
• W1531420773 isParatext "false" @default.
• W1531420773 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W1531420773 magId "1531420773" @default.
• W1531420773 workType "article" @default.