Ex-Shkreli Lawyer Suspended From SEC Following Fraud Conspiracy Conviction
While Even Greebel serves out his sentence, the SEC and a court have suspended Greebel.
January 31, 2019 at 05:43 PM
4 minute read
Evan Greebel, a former Katten Muchin Rosenman partner convicted of conspiring to commit fraud with pharmaceutical executive Martin Shkreli, has lost his ability to appear before the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
The order follows a New York court's decision in early January to suspend Greebel from practicing law.
In an order Thursday, the SEC suspended Greebel, 45, from appearing or practicing before the commission. The suspension was automatically set off by Greebel's December 2017 conviction on charges of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and conspiracy to commit securities fraud.
The SEC's order cites the conviction and an 18-month prison sentence handed down in August against Greebel. Prosecutors accused the lawyer of helping former Retrophin Inc. CEO Martin Shkreli improperly use company assets to pay off debts owed to investors in a pair of hedge funds that Shkreli started.
Greebel's work for Retrophin took place when he was at Katten. By the time of his arrest in December 2015, however, he was practicing law at Kaye Scholer, from which he resigned soon after. In addition to the prison term, Greebel was ordered to pay more than $10.4 million in restitution to Retrophin.
Before Greebel's conviction in Brooklyn federal court, a separate fraud trial against Shkreli ended with a guilty verdict, and the former pharmaceutical executive received a seven-year prison sentence.
While Thursday's SEC order suspends Greebel from appearing before the commission, he is allowed under the regulator's rules to later apply for reinstatement. If he manages to overturn his criminal conviction with an appeal, the SEC would automatically reinstate Greebel.
Contacted for comment Thursday, Reed Brodsky of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, who defended Greebel in the criminal trial, noted that the former Katten partner is challenging his conviction at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
“We believe in Evan's appeal and hope that the Second Circuit will recognize the jury instructions holding outside lawyers for a public company liable for the CEO's deceit were flawed and his conviction should be vacated,” Brodsky said in an email.
John Williams of Williams & Connolly is leading Greebel's appeal.
Although he's challenging the conviction, Greebel declined to seek bail pending his appeal and agreed to self-report to begin his prison term. In an Aug. 24 letter, his lawyers explained that Greebel made that decision so he could start and finish any prison time as early as possible, and return to life with his wife and three young children.
In the appeal, Greebel's lawyers have argued that his conviction came after jurors were given a faulty set of instructions and the trial court judge excluded key expert witness testimony.
“The overbroad and unclear instructions given in this case invited the jury to convict Mr. Greebel for conduct that was not a crime,” Greebel's appellate lawyers wrote to the Second Circuit in a Dec. 21 brief.
Greebel's jury instruction argument recently received some support from a group of legal ethics and professional responsibility experts who filed an amicus brief Monday.
Without taking a position on Greebel's guilt or innocence, they argued that the trial court judge was not specific enough when describing the lawyer's fiduciary duty to disclose information under the attorney-client relationship. The ethics experts wrote that the relevant jury instructions “did not identify to whom the lawyer owes the duty to disclose and did not identify the scope of any such disclosure.”
Greebel has been suspended from practicing law in New York. Issuing the interim suspension Jan. 3, a panel of the Appellate Division, Second Department, wrote that Greebel's disciplinary proceeding would be put on hold while he serves out his prison term and directs Greebel to inform the court once he's released.
The order was signed by Justices Alan Scheinkman, William Mastro, Reinaldo Rivera, Mark Dillon and John Leventhal.
|Read More:
Ex-Big Law Partner Gets 18 Months in Prison for Stock Fraud Scheme
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllA&O Shearman, Hogan Lovells and the Stories That Shaped Africa This Year
4 minute readBottoming Out or Merging Up? Law Firms That Shuttered in 2024
Trending Stories
- 1'Largest Retail Data Breach in History'? Hot Topic and Affiliated Brands Sued for Alleged Failure to Prevent Data Breach Linked to Snowflake Software
- 2Former President of New York State Bar, and the New York Bar Foundation, Dies As He Entered 70th Year as Attorney
- 3Legal Advocates in Uproar Upon Release of Footage Showing CO's Beat Black Inmate Before His Death
- 4Longtime Baker & Hostetler Partner, Former White House Counsel David Rivkin Dies at 68
- 5Court System Seeks Public Comment on E-Filing for Annual Report
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250