Securities and Exchange Commission v. Braslau et al

Filing 93

JUDGMENT by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, andDECREED as follows: Rand J. Chortkoff is liable for the SEC's claims of fraud and acting as an unregistered broker-dealer; The Estate of Rand J. Chortkoff shall disgorge t he amount of One Hundred Fifty-Three Thousand, Four Hundred Dollars ($153,400) to Plaintiff SEC, representing Chortkoff's ill-gotten gains; and The Estate of Rand J. Chortkoff shall pay Plaintiff SEC prejudgmentinterest in the amount of Twelve Thousand, Six Hundred and Fifteen Dollars($12,615). IT IS SO ORDERED. (jy)

Download PDF
JS-6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 United States District Court Central District of California 8 9 10 11 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, 12 13 14 15 Plaintiff, Case No. 2:14-cv-01290-ODW (AJWx) JUDGMENT v. SAMUEL BRASLAU; RAND J. CHORTKOFF; and STUART E. RAWITT, 16 Defendants. 17 18 19 Plaintiff Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) moved for summary 20 judgment against the Estate of Rand J. Chortkoff, the one remaining defendant in this 21 case, and Chortkoff’s estate did not oppose. (See ECF Nos. 85; 90.) On March 3, 22 2017, this Court granted the SEC’s motion. 23 24 25 26 27 28 In accordance with that Order, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED as follows: 1. Rand J. Chortkoff is liable for the SEC’s claims of fraud and acting as an unregistered broker-dealer; 2. The Estate of Rand J. Chortkoff shall disgorge the amount of One Hundred Fifty-Three Thousand, Four Hundred Dollars ($153,400) to Plaintiff SEC, 1 2 representing Chortkoff’s ill-gotten gains; and 3. The Estate of Rand J. Chortkoff shall pay Plaintiff SEC prejudgment 3 interest in the amount of Twelve Thousand, Six Hundred and Fifteen Dollars 4 ($12,615). 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 8 March 6, 2017 9 10 11 ____________________________________ OTIS D. WRIGHT, II UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?