Fort Lauderdale, Boca Raton, Delray Beach, Lantana, West Palm Beach and Stuart, Florida Microcap and Penny Stock Fraud and Misrepresentation Litigation, FINRA Arbitration and Elder Abuse Attorney:
SEC Announces Charges in Scheme to Secretly Enable Lawbreakers to Run Microcap Company
The Securities and Exchange Commission recently announced fraud charges against four individuals and a microcap company for concealing from investors that two lawbreakers ran the company.
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Bernard H. Butts, Jr., Fotios Geivelis, Jr., also known as Frank Anastasio, Worldwide Funding III Limited LLC, Douglas J. Anisky, Sidney Banner, Express Commercial Capital LLC, James Baggs (Defendants), Bernard H. Butts, Jr. PA, Butts Holding Corporation, Margaret A. Hering, Global Worldwide Funding Ventures, Inc., and PW Consulting Group LLC (Relief Defendants), Civil Action No. 13-23115-CIV-MARTINEZ-MCALILEY (Southern District of Florida)
Florida-Based Attorney Ordered to Pay Nearly $4 Million in Court Judgment of Prime Bank Investment Scheme Case
Miami, Hollywood, Fort Lauderdale and Boca Raton, Florida False and Misleading Research Report FINRA Arbitration and Litigation Attorney:
The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (FINRA) is a self-regulatory authority assigned the responsibility, by the Securities and Exchange Commission, to license, regulate and discipline securities broker/dealers and their employees, including account executives. In the event that FINRA elects to institute an enforcement action, firms and licensed individuals have the responsibility to reflect such action on their U-4 and/or U-5 filings, which can be viewed on the FINRA website under the broker-check section of the site or by viewing the monthly disciplinary information also provided on the FINRA site.
The monthly disciplinary information is referenced on the FINRA site generally in alphabetical order. This post relates to the following company or individuals. If the reader would like to review the entire FINRA release or the broker-check information concerning this matter, you can follow these highlighted links:
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Robert Hurd, Your Best Memories International Inc. and Kenneth Gross, Civil Action No. 13-CV-04464-RGK (JCGx) (C.D. Cal. June 20, 2013)
Court Orders California Company and Its President to Pay Over $1.9 Million in Investment Scheme Involving Purported Alzheimer’s Treatment
Securities and Exchange Commission v. World Capital Market Inc., et al., Civil Action No. CV14-2334-CAS (MRWx)
South Florida Pyramid Scheme, Ponzi Scheme and Affinity Fraud Litigation and Arbitration Attorney:
SEC Halts Los Angeles- and Hong Kong-Based Pyramid Scheme Targeting Asian and Latino Communities
Oil and Gas Limited Partnerships and Oil and Gas Offering Fraud, Misrepresentation and Mismanagement – South Florida, including Fort Lauderdale, Pompano Beach, Deerfiled Beach, Boca Raton, Boynton Beach, Delray Beach, Lake Worth and West Palm Beach, Litigation and Arbitration Attorney
An oil and gas limited partnership is legally set up using the same format as any type of limited partnership. It is created by filing articles of limited partnership or its equivalent in the state of its domicile. For example, Florida Statute, Chapter 620 governs the legal requirements that must be followed in the formation, operation and dissolution of the limited partnership, whether it is engaged in the oil and gas business or not. This post is limited to a general discussion of an oil and gas limited partnership.
An oil and gas limited partnership is made up of one or more general partners and one or more limited partners. Generally, it is structured to find, extract, and market commercial quantities of oil and natural gas. These types of investments are usually offered by prospectus, in the case of a public offering, and by a private offering memorandum, in the case of a private offering of securities. In either offering document, it is important to consider, among other things, who is making the offering, which brings to the forefront such items as experience, prior success and financial stability. The next important section of the document relates to the “risk” factor section of the document. Usually, in bold type there is a phrase such as “this offering involves a high degree of risk and should be considered only by those investors who can stand to lose their entire investment.”
Nonpublic Information Florida Securities and Investment Fraud, Misrepresentation and Omission FINRA Arbitration and Litigation Attorney:
Nonpublic information is information about a company, either positive or negative, that will have a material effect on the stock or bond price when it is released to the public. Insiders, such as corporate officers, members of the board of directors, and third parties associated with the company, including public relation firms, certified public accountants and attorneys are not allowed to trade on material nonpublic information until it has been released to the public, since they would have an unfair advantage over unsuspecting investors.
Please keep in mind that the above information is being provided for educational purposes only. It is not designed to be complete in all material respects. Thus, it should not be relied upon as legal or investment advice. If you have any questions about the contents of this post, you should contact a qualified professional.
Florida Investment Advisor and Broker/Dealer False and Misleading Offering and Promotional Materials Fraud and Misrepresentation FINRA Arbitration and Litigation Attorney:
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Patrick G. Rooney and Solaris Management, LLC, Civil Action No. 11-8264 (N.D. IL)
SEC Obtains Order of Permanent Injunctions Against Chicago-Area Investment Adviser and Its Owners for Fraud
Offer and sale of securities sold in violation of the registration provisions of Section 5 of the Securities Act of 1933 – South Florida Unregistered Sale of Securities Litigation and Arbitration Attorney:
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Dawn Wright-Olivares and Daniel Olivares, Civil Action No. 3:13-CV-700
SEC Charges Woman and Stepson for Involvment in Zeekrewards Pyramid and Ponzi Scheme; Parallel Criminal Charges and Plea Agreements Also Announced:
The Securities and Exchange Commission recently announced an emergency asset freeze to halt a Ponzi scheme involving U.S. and New Zealand-based companies peddling sham investment opportunities ranging from a bank trading program to kidney dialysis clinics.
The SEC alleges that Christopher A.T. Pedras, who has residences in Turlock, Calif., and New Zealand, misled his initial investors into believing they were investing in a profitable trading platform in which his company served as an intermediary between global banks. When Pedras and his companies encountered difficulty paying the promised 4 to 8 percent monthly returns, they began steering investors to a different investment program to purportedly increase the value of their investment by 80 percent by funding kidney dialysis clinics in New Zealand. Pedras’s business partner Sylvester M. Gray II and lead sales representative Alicia Bryan helped him solicit investors for both programs, and the money was never invested as promised. Earlier investors were paid supposed returns with funds received from newer investors, and Pedras stole more than $2 million and spent another $1.2 million on sales agents.
According to the SEC’s complaint unsealed late Friday in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Pedras raised more than $5.6 million from at least 50 investors in the U.S. since July 2010 by selling securities in two phases. Pedras, Gray, and Bryan first solicited investors for their Maxum Gold Small Cap Trade Program in which Pedras’s company Maxum Gold purportedly serves as the intermediary between banks that can’t legally trade with each other directly, so they use Maxum Gold’s trade platform to do so indirectly. Maxum Gold purports to share portions of the trading profits with investors.
South Florida Arbitration & Litigation Lawyer Blog