InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 51
Posts 5236
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 07/30/2007

Re: None

Tuesday, 02/06/2024 8:10:51 PM

Tuesday, February 06, 2024 8:10:51 PM

Post# of 22656
Hamilton watching ...
https://www.securitieslawyer101.com/2024/sec-consent-judgments-speak-now-or-forever-hold-your-peace/

This is a long (boring) article of legal-speak, but one of the underlying issues is the SEC's power to strong-arm defendants into settlements (in the SEC's favor) that contain the 'neither admit or deny' guilt language (found in the revocation order for WCVC)

Hamilton summarizes a case brought by the SEC against Citigroup Global Markets that came before a judge in 2011. The SEC had already gotten Citigroup to agree to a sizeable disgorgement, but the judge (Rakoff) refused to sign off on the deal because of the 'neither admit or deny' language. He wrote that from a legal standpoint, there was no basis for a legal conclusion since there was only an unproven allegation before him.

The case was appealed to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals who ruled in favor of the SEC and forced the judge to sign off in it, but the original judge's ruling caught the attention of a few critics of how the SEC continues to win against defendants when there is no actual litigation of the underlying issues.

Jumping to the end, Hamilton's last paragraph reads (emphasis added):


If only one bewildered defendant is persuaded to waive those rights by an SEC attorney who wants a win, and a defense lawyer who just wants to close what won’t be a very profitable case, it will be one too many. Perhaps we should be on the watch for new cases and for new legal analyses of the issues involved.



What this suggests to me is that Hamilton is either seeking a case to use to re-litigate this issue (in a different federal circuit), or maybe she already has one that we should now "watch the news" for.

Not that she can't handle multiple cases at once ... but if this is her next career target -- one that is FAR bigger that WCVC -- maybe she's just about finished with WCVC, hopefully in a way that benefits WCVC shareholders.

If this is so, Go Brenda! But don't forget to leave WCVC in a good place before you go.

-- edit --
I certainly hope that Brenda has a more important case than WCVC in mind, especially since Nixon really was guilty of not filing his financials (although it still bugs me that he was sent to the Expert Market for that sin, which was supposed to allow WCVC to remain unrevoked, albeit virtually untradable).

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.