Securities and Exchange Commission v. Norstra Energy Inc. et al
| Securities and Exchange Commission |
| Norstra Energy Inc., Glen Landry and Eric Dany |
| 1:2015cv04751 |
| June 18, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| New York |
| Robert W. Sweet |
| Securities/Commodities/Exchanges |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 78 |
| None |
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
86
OPINION & ORDER re: 61 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment filed by Securities and Exchange Commission, 65 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Eric Dany. Eric Dany's motion for summary judgment is denied. The SEC's motion for partial summary judgment is granted. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the motions pending at ECF Nos. 61 and 65. (As further set forth in this Opinion & Order.) (Signed by Judge William H. Pauley, III on 8/17/2016) (mro)
|
|
Filing
34
OPINION & ORDER re: 103 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings filed by Verdmont Capital, S.A. As the "statutory guardian" of the nation's financial markets, the SEC is imbued with enormous powers to protect the investing public. It ca n halt securities trades and seek to freeze-through its representations to a court-the assets of any institution. However, the SEC's canon of ethics cautions: "The power to investigate carries with it the power to defame and destroy." 17 C.F.R. § 200.66. Judges rely on the SEC to deploy those powers conscientiously and provide accurate assessments regarding the evidence collected in their investigations. In that way, the integrity of the regulatory regime is preserved. This c ase reveals the dire consequences that flow when the SEC fails to live up to its mandate and litigants yield to the Government's onslaught. During an ex parte proceeding to freeze assets, where the adversary process is not in play, the SEC has a n obligation to timely alert the court to foreseeable collateral damage. By overstating its case, the SEC can do great harm and undermine the public's confidence in the administration of justice. And that damage can be compounded when financial institutions, anxious to appease a regulator, submit to unconscionable terms and permit their depositors' assets to be held hostage without seeking immediate relief from a court. As this case demonstrates, these concerns are not hypothetical. Th is lesson aside, the pleadings are not conclusive on Verdmont's involvement with the unlawful distributions alleged here. Moreover, it is in the public interest for the SEC-exercising its power fairly and its resources efficiently-to follow wher e its plausible allegations lead. Verdmont's motion for judgment on the pleadings is denied. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motion pending at ECF Nos. 89 and 103 and docket a copy of this Opinion and Order in SEC v. Norstra Energy Inc., No. 15-cv-04751 (S.D.N.Y. filed June 18, 2015). The stay of discovery against Verdmont, ordered at ECF No. 131, is lifted. (As further set forth in this Opinion & Order.) (Signed by Judge William H. Pauley, III on 11/10/2015) (mro)
|
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 New York Southern 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.
