| |
| | SEC v W. DAVID EAST, JR - Legal Case Documents |
 | | In the alternative, the law judge concluded that an order to cease and desist or to disgorge funds would constitute a penalty against East and that the proceeding should be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. On April 4, 1997, we granted the Division's petition for review. |
 | | On appeal, East argued that Day did not violate the antifraud provisions, that East did not act with scienter, and that he did not provide substantial assistance to Day. |
 | | East and the Division further disagreed on whether, under the circumstances presented, a cease-and-desist order or an order to disgorge ill-gotten gains would constitute a penalty. |
| www.legalcasedocs.com /120/244/163.html (499 words) |
|