Securities and Exchange Commission v. Braslau et al
| Securities and Exchange Commission |
| Samuel Braslau, Rand J Chortkoff and Stuart E. Rawitt |
| 2:2014cv01290 |
| February 20, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Audrey B. Collins |
| Andrew J. Wistrich |
| Securities/Commodities |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
93
JUDGMENT by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, andDECREED as follows: Rand J. Chortkoff is liable for the SEC's claims of fraud and acting as an unregistered broker-dealer; The Estate of Rand J. Chortkoff shall disgorge t he amount of One Hundred Fifty-Three Thousand, Four Hundred Dollars ($153,400) to Plaintiff SEC, representing Chortkoff's ill-gotten gains; and The Estate of Rand J. Chortkoff shall pay Plaintiff SEC prejudgmentinterest in the amount of Twelve Thousand, Six Hundred and Fifteen Dollars($12,615). IT IS SO ORDERED. (jy)
|
|
Filing
89
ORDER VACATING ORDER TAKING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT UNDER SUBMISSION 88 AND ALLOWING A CONTINUANCE FOR BRIEFING AND HEARING DATE by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment 85 set for February 13, 2017 1:30 PM; Chortkoff Opposition Due: January 23, 2017; Plaintiff Reply Due: January 30, 2017 (lc). Modified on 11/3/2016. (lc).
|
|
Filing
84
JUDGMENT OF PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND OTHER RELIEF AGAINST DEFENDANTSAMUEL BRASLAU filed by Judge Otis D. Wright, II. (SEE DOCUMENT FOR FURTHER DETAILS) (vv)
|
|
Filing
78
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE EXECUTOR 70 by Judge Otis D. Wright, II. For the reasons discussed above, the executor's Motion to Set Aside Order Granting Motion to Substitute Executor is DENIED. (lom)
|
|
Filing
67
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT SAMUEL BRASLAU'S MOTION TO STAY THE CASE 59 by Judge Otis D. Wright, II., the Court concludes that a stay is neither necessary nor appropriate. Accordingly, the Court DENIES Braslau's Motion to Stay the present cas e. (ECF No. 59.) In recognition of Braslaus assertion that he did not receive the SEC's Motion for Summary Judgment, the Court extends the deadline for filing an opposition to January 7, 2015. The SEC must then file any reply papers by January 1 4, 2016. According to the SEC, it again served the Motion for Summary Judgment on Braslau, using the address indicated in Braslau's Motion to Stay. The Court orders the SEC to promptly serve this Order on Braslau at 3705 West Farm Road, Lompoc, CA 93436. (jp)
|
|
Filing
54
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 39 by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: As of the date of this Order, Braslau has not filed an Opposition to the SECs Motion. Braslau is therefore ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE, in writing, no later than Friday, November 20, 2015, why the Court should not grant the SECs Motion for Summary Judgment. Specifically, Braslau should focus his attention on why the Court should not grant the permanent injunction requested by the SEC.No hearing will be held. (lc)
|
|
Filing
45
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE. SETTLEMENT by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: In light of the criminal conviction of Samuel Braslau and guilty plea of Stuart E. Rawitt, as well as the death of Rand J. Chortkoff, the Court hereby ORDERS the Plaintiff TO SHOW CAUSE, in writing, no later than Friday, August 21, 2015, why this case has not been closed. No hearing will be held. The Court will discharge this Order upon the filing of a dismissal. (lc)
|
|
Filing
39
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AGAINST DEFENDANT STUART E. RAWITT 36 by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: Rawitt be permanently enjoined from future violations of: (i) Section 17(a) of the Securities Act; (ii) Section 10(b) of the Ex change Act and Rule 10b-5; (iii) Section 15(a)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act; and (iv) Section 15(b)(6)(B)(i) of the Securities Exchange Act. The Court also ORDERS that Rawitt pay disgorgement, prejudgment interest and a civil penalty in amounts to be determined at a later date upon noticed motion. (lc).Modified on 11/18/2014 .(lc).
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
