Category SIPC

INITIAL REPLY BRIEF OF THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, APPELLANT

By Michael L. Post In its opening brief, the Securities and Exchange Commission established that the district court erred both in incorrectly applying a preponderance standard of proof in this preliminary, summary proceeding and in applying an unduly narrow construction of the statutory term “customer” to preclude the possibility of coverage under the Securities Investor […]

SEC Can’t Force Help For Stanford Victims, DC Circ. Told

By Counsel for Appellee SIPC The Securities Investor Protection Corp. asked the D.C. Circuit on Monday to affirm a landmark district court ruling declaring it doesn’t owe compensation to victims of Robert Allen Stanford’s $7 billion Ponzi scheme, suggesting the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission succumbed to political pressure in bringing the suit. The SIPC […]

SIPC: $5.44 BILLION NOW DISTRIBUTED TO MADOFF VICTIMS

By Ailis Aaron Wolf Madoff Trustee’s Third Distribution Sends Approximately $506.2 Million to Customers With Allowed Claims. With the distribution of approximately $506.2 million to victims in the liquidation of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC (BLMIS), a total of $5.44 billion will now have been distributed to BLMIS customers with allowed claims. The Securities […]

Cassidy, Deutch Introduce Improving SIPC Act of 2013

By Dr. Bill Cassidy WASHINGTON, D.C. – This week, Congressman Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-LA) and Congressman Ted Deutch (D-FL) re-introduced the Improving Security for Investors and Providing Closure Act, or Improving SIPC Act of 2013. The legislation would provide victims of Ponzi schemes a quicker path to financial restitution, including those harmed by R. Allen […]

THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION APPEAL AGAINST SIPC

By SEC The Commission has shown that SIPC should be required to file an application for a protective decree as to Stanford Group Company in the District Court for the Northern District of Texas. In denying the Commission’s application, the district court made two reversible errors: First, it incorrectly applied a heightened preponderance standard of […]

SEC MOTION TO INTERVENE AND TO SUSPEND THE MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF JULY 3, 2012

By Matthew T. Martens Applicant U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”) respectfully submits this memorandum of law in response to Robert Cheatham’s Motion To Intervene and To Suspend the Memorandum Opinion and Order of July 3, 2012 (“Motion To Intervene”). Mr. Cheatham contends that he may intervene as of right in this proceeding […]

Motion To Intervene and To Suspend the Memorandum Opinion and Order of July, 3, 2012

By Richard R. Cheatham Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 24 Richard R. Cheatham moves to intervene in this action in order to protect his interest in the subject of the action and pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 59 to suspend the Court’s Memorandum Opinion and Order of July, 3, 2012 pending reconsideration in […]