Business and Professions Code, Section 17200. It was not required to disgorge all moneys acquired by its practices which were not viewed as against the laws governing commercial speech.
Question 5. In the case of Arthur Anderson LLP v. U.S., 125 S. Ct. 2129 (U.S. Sup. Ct. 2005), the issue was whether or not the trial judge's instructions to the jury on controlling principles of law properly conveyed the meaning of "corruptly persuades" for purposes of the relevant statute. Attention was focused on whether or not Arthur Anderson behaved in a manner that was meant to obstruct justice.
The Court held that jury instructions in the Anderson case were flawed and Anderson's conviction could not stand. The instructions were infirm because they led the jury to believe that it did not have to find any nexus between the persuasion to destroy documents and any particular proceeding, and on the meaning of corruption.
While this apparently let Anderson "off the hook" for its actions, the Court's decision was based upon inappropriate or inadequate j
...