UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
LITIGATION RELEASE NO. 15420 / July 24, 1997
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION v. STUART GREGORY SMITH AND
CAPITAL
INVESTMENT MANAGERS, INC.
497-CV 545-A, USDC, ND/TX (Fort Worth Division)
The Securities and Exchange Commission ("Commission") announced
that
on July 7, 1997, it filed a complaint in United States District Court
in
Fort Worth, Texas, seeking a permanent injunction against Stuart
Gregory
Smith and Capital Investment Managers, Inc. ("CIMI"), a broker-dealer
registered with the Commission. In its complaint, the Commission
alleges
that, from July 1992 through October 1993, defendants caused twenty
six
separate CIMI customer accounts to purchase approximately $7.5 million
of
privately-placed Water Point Systems, Inc. ("Water Point"), debt
securities
and that defendants subsequently exchanged some of these securities
for
other Water Point securities with less favorable terms. The
Commission
further alleges that defendants executed many of these transactions
without
the knowledge or consent of the CIMI customers and by forging, or
causing
to be forged, customer signatures. Water Point, a Fort Worth, Texas
company, marketed and distributed home and office water purification
equipment. Defendant Smith served as a Water Point director from
November
1992 through March 1995 and, together with his wife, beneficially
owned
12.5 percent of Water Point's outstanding common stock. On March 10,
1995,
Water Point filed a Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition, which was later
converted to a Chapter 7 liquidation. Water Point investors holding
common
SNIPPETS:
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
The Securities and Exchange Commission announced that on July 7, 1997, it filed a complaint
Smith and Capital Investment Managers, Inc., a broker-dealer registered with the Commission.
In its complaint, the Commission alleges that, from July 1992 through October 1993,
The Commission further alleges that defendants executed many of these transactions without
Water Point, a Fort Worth, Texas company, marketed and distributed home and office water
Water Point investors holding common stock and unsecured notes lost their entire investment,
1934 ("Exchange Act") and Rules 10b-5, 15c1-2, 15c1-5 and 17a-4 thereunder.
The complaint further alleges that Smith violated the anti-fraud provisions and aided and
Although the complaint sought civil penalties against Smith, the proposed final judgment does
|