Corporate Law : Securities Fraud – Disgorgement

Listen to this article

(1)Where the manager of a hedge fund appealed a judgment entered on jury verdicts finding securities fraud from his investments in what turned out to be a Ponzi scheme, the defendant did not show that the verdicts were internally inconsistent, and a claim that the evidence was not sufficient to support a verdict against the finance company was not raised on appeal and thus was forfeited, and the judgment is affirmed over the defendant’s challenges to the verdict and to the accuracy of jury instructions.

(2)Where a defendant in a securities fraud case challenged the district court’s order of disgorgement, the award was a permissible equitable remedy, which the court had authority to order, so the judgment is affirmed.

Judgment is affirmed; remanded.

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Quan (MLW No. 68950/Case No. 14-3707 – 16 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8^th Circuit, Riley, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota, Montgomery, J. (Christopher Thomas Casamassima, Los Angeles, argued for appellant; Laura Schwalbe and Bruce E. Coolidge appeared on the brief) (Jacob Loshin, Washington, D.C., argued for appellee; Benjamin Lawrence Schiffrin appeared on the brief).

Read the full text of this opinion. (PDF)