U.S. SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Litigation Release No. 17963 / February 3, 2003 Securities and Exchange
Commission v. Leonard L. Zanello, Sr., Ihor A."Gary" Humesky, Steven B.
Rodd, and Robert F. Broege, Jr., Civil Action Number 1 02-CV-3308 (N.D. Ga.)
THREE FLORIDA SALESMEN CONSENT TO PERMANENT INJUNCTIONS
The Securities and Exchange Commission (Commission) announced that on
January 28, 2003, the Honorable Willis B. Hunt, Jr., United States
District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, entered orders of
permanent injunctions (Orders) against three of the four defendants in
the above referenced litigation, Ihor A."Gary" Humesky (Humesky),
Steven B. Rodd (Rodd), and Robert F. Broege, Jr. (Broege). The Orders
restrained and enjoined the defendants from violating Sections 5(a),
5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 10(b) and
15(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5
thereunder. The Court ordered each defendant to pay disgorgement,
prejudgment interest and civil penalties, which amounts will be
decided upon subsequent motion by the Commission. Litigation is still
pending against defendant Leonard L. Zanello, Sr.
Humesky, Rodd and Broege consented to the entry of the Orders without
admitting or denying the allegations set forth in the Commission's
complaint, filed on December 10, 2002. The litigation relates to the
investments that the defendants sold on behalf of LinkTel
Communications, Inc. (LinkTel), an Atlanta, Georgia company that sold
and operated pay telephones. The complaint alleged that Humesky, Rodd,
and Broege made material misrepresentations and omissions while
selling investments in pay telephones. Humesky, Rodd, and Broege
represented to potential investors that they had investigated LinkTel
and that it was a profitable company. The complaint further alleged
that LinkTel was, in fact, an insolvent ponzi scheme and that
defendants did not reasonably investigate LinkTel's financial status.
The defendants also distributed sales materials that misrepresented
that their commissions would be 15%. In fact, defendants received
commissions ranging between 20% and 22%. Defendants further
represented that LinkTel was a safe investment because the investment
was fully insured. To the contrary, investors' money was not fully
insured because investors stood to receive no more than 15% of their
investments if LinkTel collapsed.
See also (December 10, 2002)
_________________________________________________________________
Modified 02/04/2003
SNIPPETS:
U.S. SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Litigation Release No. 17963 / February 3, 2003 Securities and Exchange Commission v. Leonard
THREE FLORIDA SALESMEN CONSENT TO PERMANENT INJUNCTIONS
The Orders restrained and enjoined the defendants from violating Sections 5, 5, and 17of the
The Court ordered each defendant to pay disgorgement, prejudgment interest and civil
Litigation is still pending against defendant Leonard L. Zanello,
Humesky, Rodd and Broege consented to the entry of the Orders without admitting or denying
The litigation relates to the investments that the defendants sold on behalf of LinkTel
The complaint alleged that Humesky, Rodd, and Broege made material misrepresentations and
The defendants also distributed sales materials that misrepresented that their commissions
defendants received commissions ranging between 20% and 22%.
Defendants further represented that LinkTel was a safe investment because the investment was
investors' money was not fully insured because investors stood to receive no more than 15% of
|
