LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

SEC v JOHN E. BRINKER, JR., GARY J. BENTZ, et al Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: LR-17152, CourtName: IN FEBRUARY 2001, HON. DAVID F. HAMILTON OF THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT IN, Defendant: John E. Brinker, Jr., Gary J. Bentz, et al., Plaintiff: SEC, State: IN Indiana, UniqueCaseRef: SEC>LR-17152, Bentz, Securities, Exchange Commission, Civil Contempt, Motion, Injunction Order, Freeze, Violation, Act, Complaint, Alleges, Allegations, Assets, Spent, Funds, Fraud, Misconduct, Thereunder, Ponzi Scheme, Investors, Prime Bank, Trading Program, Admitting, Denying, Injunction Proceedings, Froze, Mortgage Loans , ContentID: 120246591

Case Documents
1 2001-09-26 SEC LITIGATION RELEASE
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 116057
1 pages
TXT
Total Documents: 1 document , 1 page.    CAUTION.    PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS IS A ONE PAGE CASE.
Price: $ 19.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . SEC LITIGATION RELEASE

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
SECURITIES
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
CIVIL CONTEMPT
MOTION
DEFENDANTS
INJUNCTION ORDER
FREEZE
LITIGATION
COURT
VIOLATION
ACT
COMPLAINT
ALLEGES
ALLEGATIONS
ASSETS
SPENT
FUNDS
FRAUD
MISCONDUCT
THEREUNDER
PONZI SCHEME
INVESTORS
PRIME BANK
TRADING PROGRAM
ADMITTING
DENYING
INJUNCTION PROCEEDINGS
FROZE
MORTGAGE LOANS
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Litigation Release No. 17152 / September 26, 2001.

SEC v. John E. Brinker, Jr., Gary J. Bentz, et al., Civil Action No.
IP01-0259 C-H/G (S.D. Ind.).

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission ("Commission") announced today
that it filed a motion seeking to have Gary J. Bentz ("Bentz") held in civil
contempt.

   In February 2001, Hon. David F. Hamilton of the U.S. District Court in
   Indianapolis entered an order permanently enjoining Bentz and other
   defendants from engaging in fraud and other misconduct in violation of
   Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, Sections
   10(b), 15(a), and 15(c) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and
   Rules 10b-5 and 15c1-2 thereunder. The Commission's complaint alleges
   that Bentz and others operated a Ponzi scheme which raised
   approximately $7.1 million from hundreds of investors in a "prime
   bank" trading program. Bentz and the other defendants consented to the
   injunction order without admitting or denying the allegations in the
   complaint. (For more detail on the Commission's allegations and the
   injunction proceedings, see Litigation Release No.16915.)

   The injunction order also froze the assets of Bentz and the other
   defendants. In its current motion, the Commission alleges that shortly
   before the asset freeze, Bentz obtained approximately $72,000 through
   mortgage loans, and after the freeze, he spent those funds in
   violation of the freeze. Accordingly, the motion asks the court to
   hold Bentz in civil contempt and order him to replace the spent funds.

     _________________________________________________________________

Modified 09/26/2001
SNIPPETS:
  • Litigation Release No. 17152 / September 26,
  • The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission announced today that it filed a motion seeking to
  • David F. Hamilton of the U.S. District Court in Indianapolis entered an order permanently
  • The Commission's complaint alleges that Bentz and others operated a Ponzi scheme which raised
  • Bentz and the other defendants consented to the injunction order without admitting or denying
  • (For more detail on the Commission's allegations and the injunction proceedings,
  • The injunction order also froze the assets of Bentz and the other defendants.
  • In its current motion, the Commission alleges that shortly before the asset freeze, Bentz
  • the motion asks the court to hold Bentz in civil contempt and order him to replace the spent
  •    |