Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Buy This Entire Record For
SEC v. COLLEGE BOUND
March 30, 1994
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff,
COLLEGE BOUND, INC., GEORGE RONKIN, and JANET RONKIN, Defendants.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: ROYCE C. LAMBERTH
This case comes before the court on defendants' motion requesting this court to vacate certain provisions of its April 28, 1992 order ("Motion"). Defendants suggest that the defendants should not be compelled to provide a "sworn accounting.
This action was filed on April 22, 1992, alleging the preparation and dissemination of materially false and misleading financial statements of College Bound, Inc. On April 28, 1992, Judge Charles Richey signed an order freezing the defendants' personal assets and directing them to provide an accounting. The Order stated:
(a) all securities, funds, real estate, and other assets of each Defendant, held in Defendant's name, or in which Defendant has had any direct or indirect beneficial interest, from January 1, 1989 to the present, stating the location and disposition of each of the assets;
(b) each account with any financial institution or brokerage firm maintained in the name of any Defendant or its subsidiaries, or in which Defendant has or has had any direct or indirect beneficial interest, from January 1, 1989 to the present;
(c) every transaction from January 1, 1989 to the present in which any funds or other assets of any kind were transferred from any Defendant to any other Defendant in this action; and
(d) every transaction from January 1, 1989 to the present in which any funds or other assets of any kind were transferred from and Defendant to any relatives of said Defendant or to any entity in which said defendant or relative or said defendant has any ownership interest.
SEC v. College Bound, Inc., et al., Civ. No. 92-979 (D.D.C. Apr. 30, 1992) (order freezing assets of individual defendants).
The Ronkins failed to comply with Judge Richey's order. They did not provide an accounting within three business days. Moreover, they never requested an extension of time within which to provide an accounting.
At a June 8, 1992 status conference, Judge Stanley Sporkin expressed his approval for an accounting as an efficient means to proceed toward the resolution of this matter. Then Judge Sporkin inquired whether the SEC would move for contempt against the Ronkins' for failure to provide the accounting. Before the SEC could file any such contempt motion, the Ronkins filed this June 9, 1992 motion to vacate Judge Richey's order for an accounting.
Defendants proffer a couple of reasons for vacating the provisions of this order. First, defendants contend that there is no legal basis for this court to order the defendants to provide an accounting since the original freeze order was based upon misinformation regarding defendants removal of funds from defendant College Bound. Second, defendants argue that forcing them to provide an ...
Buy This Entire Record For