Legal Opinion
United States v. Badger
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided March 25, 2016No. 14-4110, 14-4119PublishedCited by 34 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HARTZ, Circuit Judge.
In 2004 the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) entered into a stipulated judgment with George. Badger enjoining him from various activities and requiring him to pay .$19.2 million (the Consent Judgment). . The government hag .recovered only $6,548. It seeks a declaration, that American Resources and Development, Inc. (ARDCO), Springfield Finance and Mortgage Company, LLC (Springfield), SB Trust, and ARDCO Leasing & Investment, LLC (ARDCO Leasing) (collectively, Defendants) are Badger’s alter egos so that their assets can be pursued to satisfy the Consent Judgment,…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Gee v. PachecoCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2010
- Hewitt v. HelmsSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Porter v. Warner Holding Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Koch v. Koch Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2000
- Securities & Exchange Commission v. RossCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- Chieftain Royalty Co. v. Enervest Energy Institutional Fund XIII-A, L.P.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2017
- Jarkesy v. SECCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2022
- Sky Cable, LLC v. DirecTV, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2018
- Church Joint Venture, L.P. v. Earl BlasingameCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2020
- McKay v. LongmanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2019
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.