LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

SEC v STEVE MADDEN Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: LR-16600, CourtCode: DIS, CourtName: ON JUNE 20, 2000 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN, Defendant: Steve Madden, Plaintiff: SEC, State: NY New York, UniqueCaseRef: SEC>LR-16600, Stratton, Monroe, Stock, Securities, Ipo, Commission, Belfort, Agreements, Manipulations, Shoo, District, Exchange, Trading, York, Profits, Aftermarket, Prices, Secret Agreements, Officer, Prospectuses, Bridge Units, Madden Sold, Flippers, Participating, Commission Alleges, Eastern District, United States, Bocap, Shares, Lock-up Agreements , ContentID: 120254660

Case Documents
1 2000-06-20 SEC LITIGATION RELEASE
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 131669
2 pages
HTML
Total Documents: 1 document , 2 pages
Price: $ 19.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . SEC LITIGATION RELEASE

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
MONROE
STOCK
SECURITIES
IPO
COMMISSION
BELFORT
AGREEMENTS
MANIPULATIONS
SHOO
DISTRICT
EXCHANGE
TRADING
YORK
PROFITS
AFTERMARKET
PRICES
SECRET AGREEMENTS
OFFICER
PROSPECTUSES
BRIDGE UNITS
MADDEN SOLD
FLIPPERS
PARTICIPATING
COMMISSION ALLEGES
EASTERN DISTRICT
UNITED STATES
BOCAP
SHARES
LOCK-UP AGREEMENTS
   SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

   LITIGATION RELEASE NO. 16600 / June 20, 2000

   SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION V. STEVE MADDEN, CV 00 3632
   E.D.N.Y.)

   The Securities and Exchange Commission filed a civil injunctive action
   on June 20, 2000 in the United States District Court for the Eastern
   District of New York against Steve Madden, President and Chief
   Executive Officer of Steve Madden, Ltd. (SHOO), a footwear company.
   The Commission alleged that Madden violated the federal securities
   laws by participating in the manipulation of twenty-two initial public
   offerings (IPOs) underwritten by Stratton Oakmont, Inc. (Stratton),
   and Monroe Parker Securities, Inc. (Monroe), a Stratton spin-off, over
   a six-year period. Madden's own company, SHOO, was among the IPOs
   manipulated by Madden and Stratton. Also on June 20, 2000, the United
   States Attorney's Offices for the Eastern District of New York and the
   Southern District of New York announced related criminal charges
   against Madden.

   The Commission's Complaint alleges as follows

   From 1991 through 1997, Madden was a key participant in a series of
   manipulations orchestrated by Stratton and Monroe. Both firms were
   quintessential "boiler rooms" and the manipulations followed a
   standard formula. Stratton and Monroe gained control over the float of
   each stock by issuing allocations of IPO stock to persons with whom
   Stratton and Monroe had entered into secret agreements to serve as
   "flippers." The flippers received their stock with the understanding
   that they would sell the stock back to Stratton or Monroe at
   pre-arranged, below-market prices once trading had commenced in the
   aftermarket. Stratton and Monroe would then earn huge profits by
   selling the stock to their own customers at artificially inflated
   prices created by the use of high-pressure sales tactics. In each of
   the twenty-two manipulations, Madden sold his stock back to Stratton
   and Monroe and retained an agreed- upon profit for the transaction. In
   certain cases, the stock price moved up too quickly in aftermarket
   trading and Madden's profits were larger than the negotiated amount.
   In those cases, Madden returned his excess profits to Stratton and
   Monroe by executing pre-arranged "losing" transactions in his
   brokerage accounts that would benefit the trading account of either
   Stratton or Monroe.

   In certain cases, Madden received bridge units in exchange for bridge
   loans made to certain issuers. According to the prospectuses filed by
   these issuers, the bridge units were subject to lock-up agreements
   prohibiting Madden from selling the units for thirteen months after
SNIPPETS:
  • SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION V. STEVE MADDEN,
  • The Securities and Exchange Commission filed a civil injunctive action on June 20, 2000 in
  • The Commission alleged that Madden violated the federal securities laws by participating in
  • Madden's own company, SHOO, was among the IPOs manipulated by Madden and Stratton.
  • Also on June 20, 2000, the United States Attorney's Offices for the Eastern District of New
  • Madden was a key participant in a series of manipulations orchestrated by Stratton and Monroe.
  • Stratton and Monroe gained control over the float of each stock by issuing allocations of IPO
  • The flippers received their stock with the understanding that they would sell the stock back
  • Stratton and Monroe would then earn huge profits by selling the stock to their own customers
  • According to the prospectuses filed by these issuers, the bridge units were subject to
  • Madden entered into secret agreements with Stratton or Monroe to be released from the lock-up
  • Contrary to representations that were made in the prospectuses for these IPOs, Madden sold
  • In addition to the use of flippers, Madden and Stratton misled investors in SHOO by
  • To evade this requirement, Madden and Belfort entered into a sham agreement in which Belfort
  • As a result of this conduct, the Commission alleges that Madden violated Section 17of the
  • The Commission seeks an order barring Madden from serving as an officer or director of a
  •    |