Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Corporate & Securities Law Blogs -> FinancialCounsel
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Corporate & Securities Law
: FinancialCounselSEC Charges Attorneys And Others In Connection With Issuing Bogus Rule 144 Opinion Letters As Part Of A Legal Opinion Mill
By James Eccleston
The Securities and Exchange Commission has charged attorneys for fraudulent legal opinions used by promoters in Pump-and-Dump scheme:
The SEC alleges that attorneys Albert Rasch, Jr. and Kathleen Novinger together with Sandra Masino and her company 144 Opinions, Inc. drafted and executed at least 24 legal opinion letters that fraudulently induced the removal of restrictive legends on unregistered shares of Mobile Ready Entertainment Corp. As a result, certificates representing more than 22 million shares of Mobile Ready were sold to the public in violation of Rule 144, which governs the conversion of restricted stock that otherwise cannot be sold to the public. The SEC previously charged Mobile Ready and two of its officers in connection with the fraudulent pump-and-dump scheme that was made possible, in part, by the bogus opinion letters.
"The market relies on lawyers to act as gatekeepers who exercise their function in good faith," said Katherine Addleman, Regional Director of the SEC's Atlanta Regional Office. "As alleged in our complaint, these defendants disregarded the investing public by operating a legal opinion mill of fraudulent letters that misrepresented critical facts and cited to non-existent documents."
The SEC's complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, alleges that after the fraudulent letters were prepared and issued, Masino and 144 Opinions made further false statements to a transfer agent to induce the removal of the restrictive legends on the respective shares of Mobile Ready. The fraudulent legal opinion letters contained false and misleading statements about the origin of the securities at issue, the existence of adequate public information concerning Mobile Ready, the existence of agreements between Mobile Ready and the relevant shareholders, and the applicability of Rule 144 promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933 to the restricted shares identified in each of the Mobile Ready Legal Opinions.
Source: SEC Press Release 2009-103
Full post as published by FinancialCounsel on May 11, 2009 (boomark / email).
Pre-paid Leagal Services
What are Prepaid Legal Benefit Plans
Copyright Lawsuits: Critical Issues Before Filing Copyright
Federa Rule 11(b) Considerations
Legal Forms
Business and Commercial Legal Forms
Best Law Movies
Greatest Legal Movies selected by ABA Journal
Law & Order Depicts Police Procedures and Criminal Justice
Accuracy of Criminal Justice Depiction on Television
Becker County
Faces Civil Rights Class Action by Inmates and their Attorneys
Legal Malpractice
legal malpractice lawsuits.
AT&T International Roaming Charges, AT&T lawsuit
AT&T Faces International Roaming Charges Lawsuit
Jury Awards $1.8 Million in Legal Malpractice Suit
Jury Awards $1.8 Million in Legal Malpractice Suit
Alabama Restaurant Association Hires Legal Council to Help Members Damaged by BP Oil Spill
Alabama Restaurant Association Hires Legal Council to Help Members Damaged by BP Oil Spill>
Third Party Mobile Content Charges Settlement
Third Party Mobile Content Charges Class Action Settlement

SEC Settles Fraud Charges Against Attorney for Role in Pump and Dump Scheme
Lawyers as Gatekeepers - SEC Goes Against Two Attorneys for Their Opinion Letters
SEC Charges Attorneys with Running a "Rule 144 Legal Opinion Mill"
Ruling in Qualcomm-Broadcom Fight Brings Back Opinion Letters for Patent Cases
Tafas v. Doll (Fed. Cir. 2009)
Anticipation of March 31st and No EGTRRA Opinion/Advisory Letters








