LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

SEC v RICHARD D. CHEMA Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: 34-40719, Defendant: Richard D. Chema, Plaintiff: SEC, State: WA Washington, UniqueCaseRef: SEC>34-40719, Chema, Broumas, Securities, Violations, Exchange Act, Wash Trades, Jml, Accounts, Broker, Jml Stock, Price, Commission, Manipulating, Broker-dealer, Registered Representatives, Transactions, Appearance, Purchases, Committing, Law Judge, Margin Accounts, Fraudulent, Relevant Period, Investors, Closing Price, Remedial Action, Enforcement, Amex, Respondent , ContentID: 120247202

Case Documents
1 1998-11-30 SEC COMMISSION OPINION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 117352
12 pages
TXT
Total Documents: 1 document , 12 pages
Price: $ 19.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . SEC COMMISSION OPINION

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
BROUMAS
SECURITIES
VIOLATIONS
EXCHANGE ACT
WASH TRADES
LAW
JML
ACCOUNTS
BROKER
JML STOCK
PRICE
COMMISSION
MANIPULATING
BROKER-DEALER
REGISTERED REPRESENTATIVES
TRANSACTIONS
APPEARANCE
PURCHASES
COMMITTING
LAW JUDGE
MARGIN ACCOUNTS
FRAUDULENT
RELEVANT PERIOD
INVESTORS
CLOSING PRICE
REMEDIAL ACTION
ENFORCEMENT
AMEX
RESPONDENT
                          SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                                   Washington, D.C.



          SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
          Rel. No. 40719 / November 30, 1998

          Admin. Proc. File No. 3-8508


                                                :
                     In the Matter of           :
                                                :
                     RICHARD D. CHEMA           :
                   7302 Pilothouse Road         :
                     Burke, Virginia            :
                                                :


          OPINION OF THE COMMISSION

               BROKER-DEALER PROCEEDINGS

                    Grounds for Remedial Action

                         Aiding, Abetting, and Causing Fraudulent and
                         Manipulative Conduct

               Salesman for registered broker-dealer aided, abetted, and
               caused customer's fraudulent and manipulative conduct.
               Held, it is in the public interest to suspend salesman from
               association with any broker or dealer for one year and to
               order him to cease and desist from committing or causing
               further violations.

          APPEARANCES:

               Richard D. Chema, pro se.

               David S. Horowitz and Merri Jo Gillette, for the Division of
          Enforcement.

          Appeal filed:  September 14, 1995
          Briefing completed:  December 6, 1995


                                          I.

SNIPPETS:
  • SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
  • BROKER-DEALER PROCEEDINGS
  • Grounds for Remedial Action
  • caused customer's fraudulent and manipulative conduct.
  • Richard D. Chema, pro se.
  • The law judge found that Chema aided, abetted, and caused violations of anti-manipulative and
  • The law judge concluded that Chema should be suspended from association with any broker or
  • Our Division of Enforcement appeals both with respect to the length of Chema's exclusion from
  • Broumas owned about 190,000 shares of JML Class A common stock ("JML stock") which was listed
  • His stock was held in about 25 margin accounts that Broumas controlled at 14 different
  • He instructed registered representatives at the firms on each side of the trades to contact
  • Since the stock was held in margin accounts, he could obtain the proceeds from his sales one
  • Broumas claimed that he effected wash trades rather than outright sales of JML because he
  • During the relevant period, he effected 203 sets of wash trades involving 420 transactions.
  • In addition to his wash trades, Broumas engaged in the practice of "marking the close" by
  • Brokerage firms use the closing price of a security in determining whether they will extend
  • He asserts that, in order to find such a violation, it must be shown that the respondent
  • Chema was concerned that Broumas might be manipulating JML stock.
  •    |