LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

SEC v L.C. WEGARD & CO., INC Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: 34-40046, Defendant: L.C. Wegard & Co., Inc., Plaintiff: SEC, State: WA Washington, UniqueCaseRef: SEC>34-40046, Wegard, Securities, Greer, Respondents, Manipulation, Market, Firm, Exchange Act, Stock, Security, Price, Profit, Wolf, Exchange Commission, Participating, Offering, President, Law Judge, Broker-dealer, Enforcement, Retail Customers, Brokerage Firms, Common Stock, Accumulating, Limit Price, Market Maker, Remedial Action, Registered Broker-dealer, Disgorgement , ContentID: 120247230

Case Documents
1 1998-05-29 SEC COMMISSION OPINION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 117380
20 pages
TXT
Total Documents: 1 document , 20 pages
Price: $ 19.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . SEC COMMISSION OPINION

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
SECURITIES
GREER
RESPONDENTS
MANIPULATION
MARKET
FIRM
EXCHANGE ACT
STOCK
COUNSEL
SECURITY
PRICE
PROFIT
WOLF
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
PARTICIPATING
OFFERING
PRESIDENT
LAW JUDGE
BROKER-DEALER
ENFORCEMENT
RETAIL CUSTOMERS
BROKERAGE FIRMS
COMMON STOCK
ACCUMULATING
LIMIT PRICE
MARKET MAKER
REMEDIAL ACTION
REGISTERED BROKER-DEALER
DISGORGEMENT






                          SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                                   Washington, D.C.

     SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
     Rel. No.  40046 / May 29, 1998

     Admin. Proc. File No. 3-8533

                                           :
                In the Matter of           :
                                           :
             L.C. WEGARD & CO., INC.       :
               17 Battery Place            :
              New York, New York           :
                                           :
               LEONARD B. GREER            :
                                           :

     OPINION OF THE COMMISSION

          BROKER-DEALER PROCEEDINGS

               Ground for Remedial Action

                    Manipulation

               Registered broker-dealer and its president participated with
two
               other brokerage firms in manipulation of market for a
security.
               Held, it is in the public interest to revoke broker-dealer's
               registration, suspend president from association with any
broker-
               dealer for one year and bar him from participation in any
penny
               stock offering, order firm to disgorge profits, fine
respondents,
               and issue a cease and desist order.

     APPEARANCES:

          Jerome M. Selvers and Chad N. Cagan, of Sonnenblick, Parker &
SNIPPETS:
  • SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
  • L.C. WEGARD & CO., INC.:
  • Ground for Remedial Action
  • Registered broker-dealer and its president participated with two
  • other brokerage firms in manipulation of market for a security.
  • Greer, its president and sole owner, appeal from the decision of an administrative law judge.
  • The law judge found that, in November and December 1993, respondents acted in concert with
  • 10and 15of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 10b-5 and 15c1-2 thereunder.
  • The law judge concluded that Wegard's registration should be revoked, and Greer both
  • He further concluded that Wegard should disgorge $158,375 plus prejudgment interest, and that
  • Of Counsel common stock, and that respondents violated
  • Leeds and F. Wolf agreed that Wolf Co. should not participate because F. Wolf's wife and
  • Wolf Co. became a market maker and consistently raised its NASDAQ bid for Of Counsel units
  • 8, 1993, Wolf Co. caused the price of Of Counsel units to rise by constantly matching or
  • Between December 9 and December 31, 1993, Wolf Co. sold 690,135 shares of Of Counsel common
  • 30,000 units of Of Counsel with a limit price of $4.50, the
  • Greer stated that he decided to use Bear, Stearns as his agent in accumulating an inventory
  • the law judge gave respondents additional preparation time by granting their alternative
  • Respondents argue that the law judge's order of disgorgement with respect to Wegard is
  •    |