Securities & Exchange Commission v. Razmilovic

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that the SEC may not recover prejudgment interest on assets that were frozen pursuant to a Court order
• explaining that “lack of ‘good faith’ in this context has been held to be equivalent to a finding of frivolity”
• observing that a “complaint’s well-pleaded allegations” as to defaulting defendant are deemed admitted for purposes of liability
• finding that “recusal is not warranted where the only challenged conduct consists of judicial rulings, routine trial administration efforts, and ordinary admonishments”
• stating that recusal is appropriate under § 455(a) only where “an objective and disinterested observer, knowing and understanding all of the facts and circumstances, could reasonably question the court’s impartiality”
• explaining that courts have “broad equitable power to fashion appropriate remedies” and that “the actual amount of the penalty” up to the statutory maximum is “up to the discretion of the district court” (internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).