log in
Print | Back

Lowenstein Sandler LLP

Michelle L. Goldman

Michelle L. Goldman



  • Litigation

WSG Practice Industries


Lowenstein Sandler LLP
New Jersey, U.S.A.


Michelle is an associate in the firm’s Litigation Department.

After receiving her J.D. from Brooklyn Law School, she clerked for both the Hon. Stanley R. Chesler of the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey and the Hon. Stuart A. Minkowitz, Assignment Judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, Morris/Sussex Vicinages. During law school, she served as a judicial intern for the Hon. Jack B. Weinstein of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

Michelle’s experience also includes internships with the legal privacy group at the Nielsen Company, where she analyzed the implications of privacy regulations for Nielsen-related technologies and company employment policies, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York, Criminal Division.

She is proficient in Russian.

Bar Admissions

    New York
    New Jersey
    U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey
    U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
    U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York


Brooklyn Law School (J.D. 2017), cum laude; associate managing editor, Brooklyn Journal of International Law; Dean’s Merit Scholarship 
Stony Brook University (B.A. 2012), summa cum laude; Dean’s List

Last year, Assistant Attorney General Brian A. Benczkowski issued a memorandum to all Department of Justice (DOJ) Criminal Division personnel providing new guidance for the selection of corporate monitors. The Benczkowski Memo sets forth, among other things, considerations for determining whether a monitor is needed in a particular case, which include whether the misconduct involved exploitation of inadequate internal controls, whether the misconduct was pervasive across the business organization, whether the company has made significant improvements to its compliance programs and internal controls, and whether those improvements have been tested to demonstrate effective deterrence for similar misconduct in the future. The Memo also instructs that DOJ should take into consideration “whether the changes in corporate culture and/or leadership are adequate to safeguard against a recurrence of misconduct,” as well as whether adequate remedial measures were taken to address the misconduct.

There has been much discussion following the Benczkowski Memo about the extent to which DOJ still views monitorships as a helpful and worthwhile compliance tool. Earlier this year, DOJ provided an affirmative answer to that question, imposing a two-year monitorship on Walmart as part of a non-prosecution agreement.

That non-prosecution agreement resolved a multi-year inquiry surrounding alleged violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act by Walmart subsidiaries in Mexico, Brazil, China and India. The approach taken by DOJ offers several important lessons for companies, their counsel, and compliance personnel regarding corporate monitorships.


Capital Markets Litigation
Lowenstein Sandler LLP 

Litigation News for the Global Financial Community

WSG's members are independent firms and are not affiliated in the joint practice of professional services. Each member exercises its own individual judgments on all client matters.

HOME | SITE MAP | GLANCE | PRIVACY POLICY | DISCLAIMER |  © World Services Group, 2020