When a U.S. District Court judge criticizes the SEC for its “overreaching, self-serving interpretation” of evidence and reliance on evidence that the judge called “implausible,” it’s fair to assume that the defendant’s case was solid and his lawyer expert enough to annihilate the other side’s case.
Ross A. Albert, a partner in Morris, Manning & Martin’s corporate and commercial litigation practice who led the defense, said that “while it’s unusual to have a bench trial rather than a jury trial, what was rare was the 44-page written opinion that carefully considered and rejected every factual contention put forth by the SEC.”
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
