Experience translated into practical decisions.
Stephen M. Grant leads cybersecurity, data-privacy and digital-evidence matters. He previously supervised federal cybercrime and electronic-evidence work and now advises boards, financial institutions, fintechs, crypto businesses, charities and technology companies during incidents and regulatory review. His practice connects technical findings to legal decisions without turning uncertain forensic indicators into settled conclusions.
Stephen establishes a privileged incident structure, defines forensic questions, identifies affected systems and data, and creates a decision calendar for containment, restoration, notification and government engagement. He works closely with technical teams but maintains legal independence around facts, communications and obligations. Outside an incident, he helps clients build data inventories, access governance, retention, vendor controls, tabletop exercises and board reporting that can be operated and tested.
During a cyber incident, speed matters—but disciplined facts, privilege and evidence handling determine whether fast decisions remain defensible.
How Stephen works
Every engagement begins with a defined scope, conflicts clearance and a communication protocol. The team identifies urgent deadlines, relevant authorities, decision-makers, systems, custodians and jurisdictions. Confirmed facts are separated from reasonable inferences and unresolved questions. That discipline is maintained in board materials, government submissions, transaction documents and litigation positions.
Stephen works with the firm’s financial-crime, sanctions, litigation, cybersecurity, transaction and government-affairs lawyers when the matter crosses disciplines. A single transaction may be viewed differently under a contract, sanctions authority, the Bank Secrecy Act, an export rule or a court standard. Workstreams are coordinated without blurring privilege, local-law responsibility or the distinct decisions required in each forum.
Focus areas
- Privileged incident response
- Ransomware and extortion strategy
- Data breach and notification analysis
- Digital evidence and forensic scope
- Cyber and privacy investigations
- Data governance, retention and vendor risk
Representative experience
Representative experience includes urgent response to government or counterparty action, privileged reconstruction of transactions and communications, preparation of witnesses and senior decision-makers, and development of precise written submissions. Client confidentiality is maintained throughout every engagement, and prior experience does not guarantee a future result.
A matter may begin when a client receives simultaneous questions from a government authority, financial institution and business partner. Stephen organizes the request set, preserves the evidence, identifies the governing standards and sequences responses so one explanation does not compromise another forum. Where forensic, accounting, technical or foreign-law expertise is required, the expert question and reporting line are defined before work begins.
A related assignment may begin when diligence or an internal alert identifies a control or ownership issue before a transaction closes. The team determines what is known, what must be tested, which conditions can address the concern and which risks alter the business decision. The result is documented in language that boards, operators and counsel can use.
Education and professional background
Education: University of Virginia School of Law, J.D. Prior public service: DOJ cybercrime and digital-evidence supervisor. Professional focus: Cyber incident response, privacy investigations, digital evidence and data governance.
Use the firm’s central confidential intake page for engagement inquiries. Individual phone numbers are not published. Do not send classified information, suspicious activity reports, identity documents or privileged files until the firm confirms an engagement and provides secure transfer instructions.
