M.D. Florida· 4/1/2011

Securities & Exchange Commission v. Kramer

Citations

778 F. Supp. 2d 1320
2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38968
2011 WL 1230808

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

concluding that an introduction alone was not enough to qualify defendant as a broker under Section 15(a)
stating that the factors to be given the most weight are “those factors typically associated with broker activity”
identifying the factors listed in Hansen as the most frequently cited for determining whether a person qualifies as a broker
listing \working as a consultant rather than an employee of the issuer\ as a fact supporting the determination that a party acted as an unregistered broker
finding the argument that a deposition would intrude on the work product of SEC attorneys because the SEC lacked independent knowledge of the facts to lack merit
identifying factors that courts have relied upon, articulated in both scholarly literature and judicial precedent, to determine whether someone meets the statutory broker definition under the Exchange Act

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Steven D. Merryday

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

17 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

23 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.