Legal Opinion
Peter W. Schellenbach v. Securities and Exchange Commission
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Decided March 17, 1993No. 92-1254PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CUMMINGS, Circuit Judge.
Peter W. Schellenbach does not dispute a finding of the Securities and Exchange Commission that he wrote bad checks and falsified reports to create the illusion that his Chicago securities firm, Brook Investments, Inc. (“Brook”), was solvent. However, Schellenbach contends that his punishment — including a $50,000 fine, censure, and lifetime ban on his acting in any principal, supervisory or managerial capacity with any member-firm of the National Association of Securities Dealers (“NASD”)— is too severe. He also suggests that he wouldn’t have been prosecuted in the…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Butz v. EconomouSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Bordenkircher v. HayesSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Wayte v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- United States v. BatchelderSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- United States v. GoodwinSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Securities & Exchange Commission v. TamboneCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2010
- Graham v. Securities & Exchange CommissionCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2000
- Securities & Exchange Commission v. TamboneCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2008
- Alpine Securities Corporation v. Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2024
- McCann v. Hy-Vee, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2011
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.