UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Before the
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
Release No. 42602 / March 31, 2000
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING
File No. 3-10125
___________________________________
In the Matter of
ORDER MAKING FINDINGS AND
BRAD HADDY, IMPOSING SANCTIONS BY DEFAULT
and RONALD D. SPENCER AGAINST RONALD D. SPENCER
___________________________________
The Securities and Exchange Commission (Commission) instituted this
proceeding, pursuant to Sections 15(b) and 19(h) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act), on December 27, 1999, with an
Order Instituting Proceedings (OIP). Respondent Spencer was served
with the OIP on January 26, 2000. By the terms of the OIP and Rule
220(b) of the Commission's Rules of Practice, 17 C.F.R. § 201.220(b),
Spencer's Answer was due in twenty days, that is, February 15. The
Commission did not receive an Answer or any other correspondence from
him. Nor did he appear at the March 22 prehearing conference, of which
he had been notified by my February 8 Order Postponing Hearing and
Scheduling Prehearing Conference.
On March 15 the Division of Enforcement (Division) filed, pursuant to
Rule 155(a), a Motion for Entry of a Default Order as to Spencer. The
Division requests that Spencer be barred from association with any
broker or dealer, or member of any national securities exchange or
registered securities association. Spencer did not respond to the
Division's Motion.
Pursuant to Rules 155(a)(1) and (2) and 220(f), a respondent who fails
to file an Answer to the OIP, to appear at a prehearing conference of
which he has been notified, to respond to a dispositive motion, or
otherwise to defend the proceeding may be deemed to be in default. The
administrative law judge may determine the proceeding against him upon
consideration of the record, including the OIP, the allegations of
which may be deemed to be true. On March 22 I ordered Spencer to show
cause, by March 29, why he should not be held in default and why I
should not impose the sanction requested by the Division on him. No
Answer, correspondence, or any other pleading was received from
Spencer.
SNIPPETS:
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING
The Securities and Exchange Commission instituted this proceeding, pursuant to Sections 15and
Respondent Spencer was served with the OIP on January 26,
Nor did he appear at the March 22 prehearing conference, of which he had been notified by my
On March 15 the Division of Enforcement filed, pursuant to Rule 155, a Motion for Entry of a
The Division requests that Spencer be barred from association with any broker or dealer, or
The administrative law judge may determine the proceeding against him upon consideration of
Respondent Spencer is in default within the meaning of Rule 155.
He failed to answer the OIP, appear at the prehearing conference, respond to a dispositive
Spencer was associated as a trader with Sheffield Securities, Inc. from September 1986 to
On April 20, 1990, in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey,
The Criminal Information to which Spencer pleaded guilty charged, among other things, that
The scheme was designed to artificially raise the prices of various securities, including
|
