15 U.S.C. § 78fff

General provisions of a liquidation proceeding

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 15 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) PurposesThe purposes of a liquidation proceeding under this chapter shall be—(1) as promptly as possible after the appointment of a trustee in such liquidation proceeding, and in accordance with the provisions of this chapter—(A) to deliver customer name securities to or on behalf of the customers of the debtor entitled thereto as provided in section 78fff–2(c)(2) of this title; and(B) to distribute customer property and (in advance thereof or concurrently therewith) otherwise satisfy net equity claims of customers to the extent provided in this section;(2) to sell or transfer offices and other productive units of the business of the debtor;(3) to enforce rights of subrogation as provided in this chapter; and(4) to liquidate the business of the debtor.(b) Application of title 11

To the extent consistent with the provisions of this chapter, a liquidation proceeding shall be conducted in accordance with, and as though it were being conducted under chapters 1, 3, and 5 and subchapters I and II of chapter 7 of title 11. For the purposes of applying such title in carrying out this section, a reference in such title to the date of the filing of the petition shall be deemed to be a reference to the filing date under this chapter.

In a liquidation proceeding under this chapter, whenever a person has acted with respect to cash or securities with the debtor after the filing date and in a manner which would have given him the status of a customer with respect to such cash or securities had the action occurred prior to the filing date, and the trustee is satisfied that such action was taken by the customer in good faith and prior to the appointment of the trustee, the date on which such action was taken shall be deemed to be the filing date for purposes of determining the net equity of such customer with respect to such cash or securities.

(d) Apportionment

In a liquidation proceeding under this chapter, any cash or securities remaining after the liquidation of a lien or pledge made by a debtor shall be apportioned between his general estate and customer property in the proportion in which the general property of the debtor and the cash and securities of the customers of such debtor contributed to such lien or pledge. Securities apportioned to the general estate under this subsection shall be subject to the provisions of section 78lll(5)(A) of this title.

(e) Costs and expenses of administration

All costs and expenses of administration of the estate of the debtor and of the liquidation proceeding shall be borne by the general estate of the debtor to the extent it is sufficient therefor, and the priorities of distribution from the general estate shall be as provided in section 726 of title 11. Costs and expenses of administration shall include payments pursuant to section 78fff–2(e) of this title and section 78fff–3(c)(1) of this title (to the extent such payments recovered securities which were apportioned to the general estate pursuant to subsection (d)) and costs and expenses of SIPC employees utilized by the trustee pursuant to section 78fff–1(a)(2) of this title. All funds advanced by SIPC to a trustee for such costs and expenses of administration shall be recouped from the general estate under section 507(a)(2) of title 11.

(Pub. L. 91–598, § 6, Dec. 30, 1970, 84 Stat. 1646; Pub. L. 95–283, § 8, May 21, 1978, 92 Stat. 259; Pub. L. 95–598, title III, § 308(g), (h), Nov. 6, 1978, 92 Stat. 2675; Pub. L. 109–8, title XV, § 1502(b), Apr. 20, 2005, 119 Stat. 217.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

This chapter, referred to in subsecs. (a)(1), (3), (b), (c), and (d), was in the original “this Act”, meaning Pub. L. 91–598, Dec. 30, 1970, 84 Stat. 1636. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Tables.

Amendments

2005—Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 109–8 substituted “507(a)(2)” for “507(a)(1)”.

1978—Pub. L. 95–283 substituted “General provisions of a liquidation proceeding” for “Liquidation proceedings” in section catchline.

Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 95–283 in heading substituted “Purposes” for “General purposes of liquidation proceeding”, in introductory text substituted provisions relating to purposes of liquidation proceedings under this chapter, for provisions relating to purposes of any proceeding in which a trustee has been appointed under section 78eee(b)(3) of this title, in par. (1) substituted provisions requiring execution of authorities to deliver customer name securities and distribute customer property in accordance with this chapter, for provisions requiring execution of authorities to return specifically identifiable property and distribute the single and separate fund in accordance with this section, and in par. (2) substituted provisions authorizing sale, etc., of productive units of the debtor, for provisions authorizing operation of the business of the debtor.

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 95–598, § 308(g), in heading substituted “title 11” for “Bankruptcy Act” and in text “under chapters 1, 3, and 5 and subchapters I and II of chapter 7 of title 11. For the purposes of applying such title in carrying out this section, a reference in such title to the date of the filing of the petition shall be deemed to be a reference to the filing date under this chapter.” for “under, the Bankruptcy Act. For purposes of applying the Bankruptcy Act to this chapter, any reference in the Bankruptcy Act to the date of commencement of proceedings under the Bankruptcy Act shall be deemed to be a reference to the filing date under this chapter.”

Pub. L. 95–283 in heading substituted “Application of Bankruptcy Act” for “Powers and Duties of Trustee”, and in text substituted provisions relating to applicability of Bankruptcy Act to liquidation proceedings, for provisions relating to the powers and duties of trustees. See section 78fff–1 of this title.

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 95–283 in heading substituted “Determination of customer status” for “Application of Bankruptcy Act”, and in text substituted provisions relating to determination of status of a customer with respect to cash or securities, for provisions setting forth general and special provisions of the Bankruptcy Act applicable to liquidation proceedings, and defining terms for purposes of such applicability and the provisions of this section. See subsec. (b) of this section and section 78fff–2(c) of this title.

Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 95–283 in heading substituted “Apportionment” for “Completion of open contractual commitments”, and in text substituted provisions relating to apportionment of cash or securities remaining after the liquidation of a lien or pledge made by a debtor, for provisions relating to completion by the trustee of open contractual commitments, which were made in the ordinary course of the debtor’s business and which were outstanding on the filing date. See section 78fff–2(e) of this title.

Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 95–598, § 308(h), substituted in first sentence “section 726 of title 11” for “the Bankruptcy Act” and in last sentence “under section 507(a)(1) of title 11” for “as a first priority under the Bankruptcy Act”.

Pub. L. 95–283 in heading substituted “Costs and expense of administration” for “Notice”, and in text substituted provisions relating to costs and expenses of administration of the estate of the debtor and of the liquidation proceeding, for provisions relating to notice requirements for the trustee subsequent to appointment as trustee. See section 78fff–2(a)(l) of this title.

Subsec. (f). Pub. L. 95–283 struck out subsec. (f) requiring advances by the SIPC to the trustee for customers’ claims and completion of open contractual commitments, and authorizing discretionary advances to the trustee for compensation of personnel deemed necessary for the liquidation proceeding. See section 78fff–3 of this title.

Subsec. (g). Pub. L. 95–283 struck out subsec. (g) setting forth provisions relating to payments to customers by the trustee, and provisions respecting the quantum of proof of claim required for such payment. See section 78fff–2(a)(2) and (b) of this title.

Subsec. (h). Pub. L. 95–283 struck out subsec. (h) relating to nonapplicability of provisions to proof of claim by associates and others connected in some way with the debtor. See section 78fff–2(a)(2) of this title.

Subsec. (i). Pub. L. 95–283 struck out subsec. (i) setting forth provisions relating to reports by the trustee to the court. See section 78fff–1(c) of this title.

Subsec. (j). Pub. L. 95–283 struck out subsec. (j) which related to nonapplicability of provisions to rights of persons to establish by formal proof such claims as they may have to payment or delivery of specific securities. See section 78fff–2(a)(4) of this title.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 2005 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 109–8 effective 180 days after Apr. 20, 2005, and not applicable with respect to cases commenced under Title 11, Bankruptcy, before such effective date, except as otherwise provided, see section 1501 of Pub. L. 109–8, set out as a note under section 101 of Title 11.

Effective Date of 1978 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 95–598 effective Oct. 1, 1979, see section 402(a) of Pub. L. 95–598, set out as an Effective Date note preceding section 101 of Title 11, Bankruptcy.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 185 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1972–2024 · leading case: Picard v. Taylor (In Re Park South Sec., LLC), 326 B.R. 505 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2005).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Picard v. Taylor (In Re Park South Sec., LLC), 326 B.R. 505 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2005). · cites it 6× “Granted, 15 U.S.C. § 78fff — 2(b) authorizes a SIPA trustee to obtain assignments from customers whose claims he satisfies, 7 and granted, further, that the Trustee has alleged that the relevant customers, in return for the Trustee’s payments to them of SIPC funds, assigned…”

In Re: Bernard L. Madoff Inv. Sec. LLC, 976 F.3d 184 (2d Cir. 2020). · cites it 5× “15 U.S.C. § 78fff–2(c)(3). However, the provisions of the Bankruptcy Code apply only to the extent that they are consistent with SIPA.”

Holmes v. Sec. Inv. Prot. Corp., 503 U.S. 258 (1992). · cites it 3× “SIPC assumes that SIPA provides for subrogation to the customers' claims against the failed broker-dealers, see 15 U. S. C. §§ 78fff3(a), 78fff4(c); see also § 78fff2(c)(1)(C); see generally Mishkin v.”

Touche Ross & Co. v. Redington, 442 U.S. 560 (1979). · cites it 2× “15 U. S. C. § 78fff (f). [7] Approximately one year prior to institution of this action in federal court, SIPC and the Trustee commenced a nearly identical suit against Touche Ross in New York state court.”

Ravis v. Day (In Re Investors Sec. Corp.), 6 B.R. 420 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 1980). · cites it 14× “The trustee determined that Day was not a “customer” of Investor Security Corporation (the Debtor), as defined in SIPA § 6(c)(2)(A)(ii), 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(c)(2)(A)(ii). I. Introduction Upon application of the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC), United States…”

Picard Ex Rel. Liquidation of Bernard L. Madoff Inv. Sec. LLC v. Madoff (In Re Bernard L. Madoff Inv. Sec. LLC), 458 B.R. 87 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2011). · cites it 3× “SIPA section 78£ff — 2(c)(3) states, in relevant part: “whenever customer property is not sufficient to pay in full the claims set forth in subparagraphs (A) through (D) of paragraph (1), the trustee may recover any property transferred by the debtor which, except for such…”

Jackson v. Mishkin (In Re Adler, Coleman Clearing Corp.), 263 B.R. 406 (S.D.N.Y. 2001). · cites it 3× “See 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(b). Second, Appellants’ argument invokes Rules 300.”

Sec. Inv. Prot. Corp. v. Bernard L. Madoff Inv. Sec. LLC, 476 B.R. 715 (S.D.N.Y. 2012). · cites it 4× “” See 15 U.S.C. § 78fff — 2(c)(1) (allowing customers to participate in the distribution of the general estate if customer property does not satisfy their net equity claims).”

Krusi v. Bear, Stearns & Co., 144 Cal. App. 3d 664 (Cal. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 6× “(15 U.S.C. § 78fff(f).) The parties have divergent views of the significance of this statutory scheme.”

Spv Osus Ltd. v. Ubs Ag, 882 F.3d 333 (2d Cir. 2018). “§ 704 (a)(5) (trustee charged with “examining] proofs of claims and objecting] to the allowance of any claim that is improper”); 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(e) (“[a]ll costs and expenses of administration of the estate of the debtor .”

Mishkin Ex Rel. Parr Sec. Corp. v. Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co., 744 F. Supp. 531 (S.D.N.Y. 1990). · cites it 6× “15 U.S.C. § 78fff. 14 *556 As one means of expediting the recoveries of customers of bankrupt brokers, Congress gave SIPC the power to make advances of SIPC money for customers’ net equity claims: (a) Advances for Customer Claims.”

Sec. Inv. Prot. Corp. v. Bernard L. Madoff Inv. Sec. LLC, 499 B.R. 416 (S.D.N.Y. 2013). · cites it 5× “” 15 U.S.C.A. § 78fff — 2(c)(1). Conversely, if any customer property remains “after allocation in accordance with” SIPA’s statutory priorities, those assets “become part of the general estate of the debtor.”

Show all 185 citing cases →

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(3)(a)(l) — 1 case

Picard v. Taylor (In Re Park South Sec., LLC), 326 B.R. 505 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2005). “Granted, 15 U.S.C. § 78fff — 2(b) authorizes a SIPA trustee to obtain assignments from customers whose claims he satisfies, 7 and granted, further, that the Trustee has alleged that the relevant customers, in return for the Trustee’s payments to them of SIPC funds, assigned…”

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(a) — 21 cases

Trefny v. Bear Stearns Sec. Corp., 243 B.R. 300 (S.D. Tex. 1999).

Thielmann v. MF Global Holdings Ltd. (In re MF Global Holdings Ltd.), 481 B.R. 268 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2012).

In Re Hanover Square Sec., 55 B.R. 235 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1985).

In Re MV Sec., Inc., 48 B.R. 156 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1985).

Sec. Inv. Prot. Corp. v. Stratton Oakmont, Inc., 229 B.R. 273 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1999).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(a)(1) — 3 cases

Sec. & Exch. Com'n v. Schreiber Bosse & Co., Inc., 368 F. Supp. 24 (N.D. Ohio 1973).

In re G.V. Lewellyn & Co., 140 B.R. 502 (N.D. Iowa 1992).

In Re Bernard L. Madoff Inv. SEC. LLC (2d Cir. 2021).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(a)(1)(B) — 3 cases

Sec. Inv. Prot. Corp. v. Bernard L. Madoff Inv. Sec. LLC, 513 B.R. 437 (S.D.N.Y. 2014).

Horwitz v. Sheldon (In Re Donald Sheldon & Co.), 148 B.R. 385 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1992).

In re Bell & Beckwith, 144 B.R. 978 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 1992).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(a)(3) — 2 cases

Mishkin Ex Rel. Parr Sec. Corp. v. Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co., 744 F. Supp. 531 (S.D.N.Y. 1990). “15 U.S.C. § 78fff. 14 *556 As one means of expediting the recoveries of customers of bankrupt brokers, Congress gave SIPC the power to make advances of SIPC money for customers’ net equity claims: (a) Advances for Customer Claims.”

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(a)(l) — 6 cases

Picard v. HSBC Bank Plc, 454 B.R. 25 (S.D.N.Y. 2011).

Sec. Inv. Prot. Corp. v. Bernard L. Madoff Inv. Sec. LLC, 513 B.R. 437 (S.D.N.Y. 2014).

In Re Adler Coleman Clearing Corp., 195 B.R. 266 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1996).

In Re Thomson McKinnon Sec. Inc., 125 B.R. 88 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1991).

Redington v. Touche Ross & Co., 592 F.2d 617 (2d Cir. 1978).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(a)(l)(A) — 1 case

In re New Times Sec. Servs., Inc., 371 F.3d 68 (2d Cir. 2004).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(a)(l)(B) — 2 cases

Barclays Capital Inc. v. Giddens (In re Lehman Bros.), 478 B.R. 570 (S.D.N.Y. 2012).

In Re Lehman Bros. Holdings Inc., 445 B.R. 143 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2011).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(b) — 71 cases

Jackson v. Mishkin (In Re Adler, Coleman Clearing Corp.), 263 B.R. 406 (S.D.N.Y. 2001). “See 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(b). Second, Appellants’ argument invokes Rules 300.”

Picard Ex Rel. Liquidation of Bernard L. Madoff Inv. Sec. LLC v. Madoff (In Re Bernard L. Madoff Inv. Sec. LLC), 458 B.R. 87 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2011). “SIPA section 78£ff — 2(c)(3) states, in relevant part: “whenever customer property is not sufficient to pay in full the claims set forth in subparagraphs (A) through (D) of paragraph (1), the trustee may recover any property transferred by the debtor which, except for such…”

Picard v. JPMorgan Chase & Co. (In Re Bernard L. Madoff Inv. Sec. LLC), 721 F.3d 54 (2d Cir. 2013).

Sec. Inv. Prot. Corp. v. Bernard L. Madoff Inv. Sec. LLC, 513 B.R. 437 (S.D.N.Y. 2014).

Ferris, Baker Watts, Inc. v. Stephenson (In Re MJK Clearing, Inc.), 286 B.R. 109 (Bankr. D. Minn. 2002).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(b)(1) — 2 cases

Redington v. Touche Ross & Co., 592 F.2d 617 (2d Cir. 1978).

Sec. Inv. Prot. Corp. v. Charisma Sec. Corp., 371 F. Supp. 894 (S.D.N.Y. 1974).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(b)(1)(A) — 2 cases

Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. G. M. Stanley & Co., 424 F. Supp. 1352 (S.D.N.Y. 1976).

Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Sec. Nw., Inc., 573 F.2d 622 (9th Cir. 1978).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(b)(2) — 1 case

Sec. & Exch. Com'n v. Schreiber Bosse & Co., Inc., 368 F. Supp. 24 (N.D. Ohio 1973).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(b)(l) — 1 case

Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Albert & Maguire Sec. Co., 560 F.2d 569 (3rd Cir. 1977).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(c) — 8 cases

Sec. & Exch. Com'n v. SJ Salmon & Co., Inc., 375 F. Supp. 867 (S.D.N.Y. 1974).

Handelman v. Weiss, 368 F. Supp. 258 (S.D.N.Y. 1973).

New York Stock Exch., Inc. v. Sloan, 394 F. Supp. 1303 (S.D.N.Y. 1975).

Sec. Inv. Prot. Corp. v. Charisma Sec. Corp., 352 F. Supp. 302 (S.D.N.Y. 1972).

In Re Buttonwood Sec., Inc., 349 F. Supp. 273 (S.D. Cal. 1972).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(c)(1) — 6 cases

Klein v. Tabatchnick, 610 F.2d 1043 (2d Cir. 1979).

Sec. & Exch. Com'n v. Packer, Wilbur & Co., Inc., 362 F. Supp. 510 (S.D.N.Y. 1973).

Indus. Valley Bank & Trust Co. v. Collins, 419 F. Supp. 1171 (E.D. Pa. 1976).

Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Alan F. Hughes, Inc., 481 F.2d 401 (2d Cir. 1973).

Sec. & Exch. Com'n v. Schreiber Bosse & Co., Inc., 368 F. Supp. 24 (N.D. Ohio 1973).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(c)(2)(A) — 1 case

Ravis v. Labriola (In re Investors Sec. Corp.), 6 B.R. 415 (W.D. Pa. 1980).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(c)(2)(A)(ii) — 15 cases

Sec. Inv. Prot. Corp. v. Exec. Sec. Corp., 423 F. Supp. 94 (S.D.N.Y. 1976).

Ravis v. Day (In Re Investors Sec. Corp.), 6 B.R. 420 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 1980). “The trustee determined that Day was not a “customer” of Investor Security Corporation (the Debtor), as defined in SIPA § 6(c)(2)(A)(ii), 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(c)(2)(A)(ii). I. Introduction Upon application of the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC), United States…”

In Re Hanover Square Sec., 55 B.R. 235 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1985).

Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 95,822 in Re Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. White & Co., Inc. Morris Shenker v. Hugh S. Hauck, Tr., 546 F.2d 789 (8th Cir. 1976).

Matter of Atkeison, 446 F. Supp. 844 (M.D. Tenn. 1977).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(c)(2)(A)(iv) — 4 cases

Sec. Inv. Prot. Corp. v. Associated Underwriters, Inc., 423 F. Supp. 168 (D. Utah 1975).

Ravis v. Labriola (In re Investors Sec. Corp.), 6 B.R. 415 (W.D. Pa. 1980).

Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Aberdeen Sec. Co., 371 F. Supp. 1343 (D. Del. 1974).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(c)(2)(AXii) — 1 case

Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Ambassador Church Fin./Dev. Grp., Inc., 679 F.2d 608 (6th Cir. 1982).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(c)(2)(B) — 12 cases

Picard v. J. Ezra Merkin, Gabriel Capital, L.P. (In re Bernard L. Madoff Inv. Sec. LLC), 515 B.R. 117 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2014).

First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n of Lincoln v. Bevill, Bresler & Schulman, Inc. (In Re Bevill, Bresler & Schulman, Inc.), 59 B.R. 353 (D.N.J. 1986).

Sec. Inv. Prot. Corp. v. Associated Underwriters, Inc., 423 F. Supp. 168 (D. Utah 1975).

In Re First Interregional Equity Corp., 290 B.R. 265 (Bankr. D.N.J. 2003).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(c)(2)(B)(i) — 1 case

Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Sec. Nw., Inc., 573 F.2d 622 (9th Cir. 1978).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(c)(2)(C) — 4 cases

First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n of Lincoln v. Bevill, Bresler & Schulman, Inc. (In Re Bevill, Bresler & Schulman, Inc.), 59 B.R. 353 (D.N.J. 1986).

Sec. Inv. Prot. Corp. v. Associated Underwriters, Inc., 423 F. Supp. 168 (D. Utah 1975).

Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Investors Sec. Corp., 415 F. Supp. 745 (W.D. Pa. 1976).

Matter of Weis Sec., Inc., 411 F. Supp. 195 (S.D.N.Y. 1976).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(c)(2)(C)(ii) — 1 case

Ravis v. Labriola (In re Investors Sec. Corp.), 6 B.R. 415 (W.D. Pa. 1980).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(c)(2Xii) — 1 case

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(c)(l) — 6 cases

Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Aberdeen Sec. Co., 526 F.2d 603 (3rd Cir. 1975).

Redington v. Touche Ross & Co., 428 F. Supp. 483 (S.D.N.Y. 1977).

Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Kenneth Bove & Co., 451 F. Supp. 355 (S.D.N.Y. 1978).

Redington v. Touche Ross & Co., 612 F.2d 68 (2d Cir. 1979).

Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Albert & Maguire Sec. Co., 560 F.2d 569 (3rd Cir. 1977).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(d) — 11 cases

Picard v. J. Ezra Merkin, Gabriel Capital, L.P. (In re Bernard L. Madoff Inv. Sec. LLC), 515 B.R. 117 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2014).

Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Kelly, Andrews & Bradley, Inc., 385 F. Supp. 948 (S.D.N.Y. 1974).

Sec. Inv. Prot. Corp. v. Associated Underwriters, Inc., 423 F. Supp. 168 (D. Utah 1975).

Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. E.P. Seggos & Co., 416 F. Supp. 280 (S.D.N.Y. 1976).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(d)(2) — 1 case

Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Packer, Wilbur & Co., 498 F.2d 978 (2d Cir. 1974).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(d)(6) — 1 case

Murray v. McGraw (In re Bell & Beckwith), 47 B.R. 528 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 1985).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(d)(6)(d) — 1 case

Murray v. McGraw (In re Bell & Beckwith), 47 B.R. 528 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 1985).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(e) — 16 cases

In Re OTC Net, Inc., 34 B.R. 658 (Bankr.D. Colo. 1983).

First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n of Lincoln v. Bevill, Bresler & Schulman, Inc. (In Re Bevill, Bresler & Schulman, Inc.), 59 B.R. 353 (D.N.J. 1986).

Miller v. Austin (In Re John Muir & Co.), 72 B.R. 893 (S.D.N.Y. 1987).

In Re Lloyd Sec., Inc., 163 B.R. 242 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1994).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(f) — 11 cases

Krusi v. Bear, Stearns & Co., 144 Cal. App. 3d 664 (Cal. Ct. App. 1983). “(15 U.S.C. § 78fff(f).) The parties have divergent views of the significance of this statutory scheme.”

Sec. & Exch. Com'n v. SJ Salmon & Co., Inc., 375 F. Supp. 867 (S.D.N.Y. 1974).

Matter of SSIW Corp., 7 B.R. 735 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1980).

Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 94,878 Sec. Inv. Prot. Corp. v. Charisma Sec. Corp., Edwin L. Gasperini, Gasperini & Savage, 506 F.2d 1191 (2d Cir. 1974).

Matter of Atkeison, 446 F. Supp. 844 (M.D. Tenn. 1977).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(f)(1) — 2 cases

Sec. Inv. Prot. Corp. v. Charisma Sec. Corp., 352 F. Supp. 302 (S.D.N.Y. 1972).

Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. G. M. Stanley & Co., 424 F. Supp. 1352 (S.D.N.Y. 1976).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(f)(1)(C) — 1 case

Matter of Atkeison, 446 F. Supp. 844 (M.D. Tenn. 1977).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(f)(2) — 1 case

Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Aberdeen Sec. Co., Inc., Et Al. Appeal of Sherwin Seligsohn Et Al., 480 F.2d 1121 (3rd Cir. 1973).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(f)(l) — 2 cases

Redington v. Touche Ross & Co., 592 F.2d 617 (2d Cir. 1978).

Sec. Inv. Prot. Corp. v. Morgan, Kennedy & Co., 533 F.2d 1314 (2d Cir. 1976).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(f)(l)(A) — 4 cases

Ravis v. Caretti (In Re Investors Sec. Corp.), 30 B.R. 214 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 1983).

Ravis v. Labriola (In re Investors Sec. Corp.), 6 B.R. 415 (W.D. Pa. 1980).

Sec. Inv. Prot. Corp. v. Morgan, Kennedy & Co., 533 F.2d 1314 (2d Cir. 1976).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(f)(l)(B) — 1 case

Ravis v. Labriola (In re Investors Sec. Corp.), 6 B.R. 415 (W.D. Pa. 1980).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(f)(l)(C) — 1 case

Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Ambassador Church Fin./Dev. Grp., Inc., 446 F. Supp. 844 (M.D. Tenn. 1977).

— 15 U.S.C. § 78fff(g) — 4 cases

Sec. Inv. Prot. Corp. v. Associated Underwriters, Inc., 423 F. Supp. 168 (D. Utah 1975).

Sec. & Exch. Com'n v. Kenneth Bove & Co., Inc., 353 F. Supp. 496 (S.D.N.Y. 1973).

Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Albert & Maguire Sec. Co., 560 F.2d 569 (3rd Cir. 1977).

Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Aberdeen Sec. Co., 371 F. Supp. 1343 (D. Del. 1974).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.