From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Securities Exchange Commission v. Rose

United States District Court, S.D. Texas, Houston Division
Sep 28, 2005
Civil Action No. H-04-2799 (S.D. Tex. Sep. 28, 2005)

Summary

In SEC v. Carl R. Rose, H-04-CV-2799 (S.D.Tex.), on February 22, 2006, the Court entered an amended judgment by default against Ballow finding that he violated, inter alia, the anti-fraud provisions of the federal securities laws, permanently enjoining him from violating those provisions, and ordering him to pay $14,304,973 in disgorgement and an equal amount as a third-tier civil penalty.

Summary of this case from Securities Exchange Comm. v. Aimsi Technologies

Opinion

Civil Action No. H-04-2799.

September 28, 2005


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER


This is an action for securities fraud arising from Defendants' alleged manipulation of the stock prices of two publicly held companies. Defendants George J. Cannan, Sr. and George J. Cannan, Jr. ("the Cannans") have filed a motion to compel Plaintiff to submit expanded answers to the Cannans' interrogatories. The motion was not properly served upon the Cannans' codefendant, Harris D. Ballow. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 5(a) (requiring a party to serve all other parties with copies of all written motions other than ex parte motions). The certificate of service attached to the motion reflects that the Cannans did not even attempt to serve the motion upon Ballow. The motion, Docket No. 90, is therefore DENIED without prejudice to refiling.

While the Court declines to decide the merits of the motion before proper service is effected on all parties, it should be noted that allegations of inadequate pleading are more properly raised in a motion to dismiss than in a motion to compel responses to interrogatories. In addition, should the Cannans decide to refile the motion to compel after effecting proper service, the new motion should address Plaintiff's supplemental responses to the interrogatories, supplied after the original motion was filed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Securities Exchange Commission v. Rose

United States District Court, S.D. Texas, Houston Division
Sep 28, 2005
Civil Action No. H-04-2799 (S.D. Tex. Sep. 28, 2005)

In SEC v. Carl R. Rose, H-04-CV-2799 (S.D.Tex.), on February 22, 2006, the Court entered an amended judgment by default against Ballow finding that he violated, inter alia, the anti-fraud provisions of the federal securities laws, permanently enjoining him from violating those provisions, and ordering him to pay $14,304,973 in disgorgement and an equal amount as a third-tier civil penalty.

Summary of this case from Securities Exchange Comm. v. Aimsi Technologies
Case details for

Securities Exchange Commission v. Rose

Case Details

Full title:Securities and Exchange Commission, Plaintiff, v. Carl R. Rose, Marvin M…

Court:United States District Court, S.D. Texas, Houston Division

Date published: Sep 28, 2005

Citations

Civil Action No. H-04-2799 (S.D. Tex. Sep. 28, 2005)

Citing Cases

Securities Exchange Comm. v. Aimsi Technologies

In SEC v. Harris Dempsey Ballow, H-01-CV-2579 (S.D.Tex.), on November 30, 2003, the court entered a judgment…