** 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>