A U.S. federal appeals court Friday broadly defined the term “for compensation” for purposes of determining whether a defendant who defrauded clients should be judged an investment advisor under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940.
In its Friday decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit found that Everett C. Miller of Carr Miller Capital in New Jersey sold investors more than $41 million “in phony promissory notes and then squandered their money” and was indeed an advisor when he did so.
This content has been archived.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]
