SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : Investment Chat Board Lawsuits -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Arcane Lore who wrote (123)2/11/2000 7:24:00 PM
From: Arcane Lore  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 12465
 
In connection with the previous message the following consent agreement which appeared in today's SEC Digest may be of interest. As with most such consent agreements, Morris neither admitted nor denied the SEC allegations. Itex sued up to 100 John Doe message board defendants and was countersued in turn( see #reply-5675699 and #reply-11110478 ).

SEC OBTAINS PERMANENT FRAUD INJUNCTION, OFFICER AND DIRECTOR BAR, AND ACCOUNTING PRACTICE BAR AGAINST JOSEPH MORRIS

The Commission announced that on January 24, 2000, the United States District Court for the District of Oregon permanently enjoined Joseph M. Morris from committing securities fraud. In the complaint, the Commission alleged that, among other things, as chief financial officer of Itex Corporation, Morris knowingly or recklessly participated in the material overstatement of Itex's assets, revenues and earnings in its financial statements, and failed to disclose numerous suspect and in many cases sham barter deals between Itex and various related parties. The complaint also alleged that Morris also sold Itex stock at times when he knew orwas reckless in not knowing that Itex's publicly disclosed financial information was materially false or misleading. The complaint alleged that Morris's conduct was part of a larger scheme in which defendant Terry Neal, Itex's founder and control person,orchestrated and implemented a broad-ranging fraudulent scheme to make materially false and misleading disclosures about the company's business and to conceal numerous suspect and in many cases sham barter deals between Itex and various mysterious offshore entities related to and/or controlled by Neal.

Morris consented, without admitting or denying the Commission's allegations, to the entry of a final judgment permanently enjoining him from violating the antifraud, books and records, internal controls, and false statements to auditors provisions (Section 17(a)of the Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 10(b) and 13(b)(5) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 10b-5, 13b2-1 and 13b2-2thereunder). The final judgment further bars Morris for five years from acting as an officer or director of a public company. Thejudgment requires Morris to disgorge $45,380 and prejudgment interest thereon, but waives payment based on Morris's demonstrated inability to pay.

Based on the injunction, the Commission entered an administrative order barring Morris from practicing before the Commission as an accountant, with a right to reapply after five years.

Morris had previously been sued by the Commission in a securities fraud action in the District of Colorado relating to the issuer Scientific Software-Intercomp, Inc. (SSI). SEC v. Ronald Hottovy,Jimmy Duckworth, Joseph M. Morris and Eugene A. Breitenbach, Civil Action NO. 98-S-1636 (D. Col.), Litigation Release No. 15824 (July30, 1998). As part of Morris's settlement with the Commission, the pending SSI complaint against him was dismissed.
The Commission is continuing its litigation against the remaining defendants in the Itex litigation (see Litigation Release No.16305), and against the remaining defendant in the SSI litigation(see Litigation Release Nos. 15824, 16351). [SEC v. Itex Corporation, Terry L. Neal, Michael T. Baer, Graham H. Norris, Cynthia Pfaltzgraff and Joseph M. Morris, CV 99-1361 BR, D. Ore](LR-16430; AAE Rel. 1224); In the Matter of Joseph M. Morris, CPA -Rel. 34-42410; AAE Rel. 1223; File No. 3-10144)


sec.gov

See also:
sec.gov
lesfrench.com



To: Arcane Lore who wrote (123)2/22/2000 8:28:00 PM
From: Arcane Lore  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 12465
 
[...]
3. If the company does have a large short interest and the CEO has waged a public war against the shorts and the company's critics, sharpen your pencil. This is almost always a sign of desperation. [...]
Herb Greenberg, senior columnist at TheStreet.com - see #reply-12850195

A case in point: Sabratech

8/3/99: Sabratek Files $90M Suit Vs Online Critic, Publisher --
#reply-10809921
=====
8/13/99: Uh-oh: Sabratek Announces Delay of Second-Quarter Results
#reply-10936063
=====
8/23/99: Sabratek trading halted - #reply-11037316
=====
8/23/99: Shan and Levitas respectively resign from CEO/Chairman and Vice Chairman/Secretary positions - #reply-11040998 See also: chicagotribune.com
=====
8/23/99: Ticker symbol changed to: SBTKE per Yahoo quotes - #reply-11045128
=====
8/24/99: Sabratek Corp. (Nasdaq: SBTK) and one of
its senior officers have been named in a securities lawsuit filed on
August 24, 1999 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois.
#reply-11056992
=====
10/7/99: Sabratek to delay 10-Q again, may be delisted #reply-11475621
=====
10/18/99: Sabratek misses debt interest payment #reply-11624320
=====
10/22/99: Two more directors resign, and they sell off that mystery SRS company they bought back at the end of June #reply-11680292
=====
11/3/99: Sabratek Trading on National Quotation Bureau
Electronic Quotation Service
(AKA Pink Sheets) #reply-11837780
=====
12/3/99: WASHINGTON, Dec 3 (Reuters) - Sabratek Corp. (NasdaqSC:SBTK - news) said on Friday that KPMG LLC, its independent auditor, has informed the medical technology firm that its financial statements for the last three fiscal years could no longer be relied upon. #reply-12183992 (per that post Sabratek was trading on the Pink Sheets, not the NASDAQ)
=====
12/17/99: WILMINGTON, Del., Dec 17 (Reuters) - Medical technology company Sabratek Corp. filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in U.S. Bankruptcy Court here Friday. #reply-12324482