Unpublished Disposition, 927 F.2d 609 (9th Cir. 1991)

MEMORANDUM^* 

Appellant Michael G. Godfree appeals, pro se, the district court's order awarding the assets of American National Cellular, Inc. (ANC) to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) following termination of a receivership. The district court imposed the receivership in the FTC's action against Godfree and ANC for violations of the Federal Trade Commission Act Secs. 5(a) and 13(b), 15 U.S.C. §§ 45(a) and 53(b).

We have previously affirmed the order appointing the receiver. See F.T.C. v. American Nat. Cellular, Inc., 810 F.2d 1511 (1987). Upon appointment and qualification of the receiver, the property passes into the receiver's control. Atlantic Trust Co. v. Chapman, 208 U.S. 360, 370 (1908); Richman v. Tidwell, 234 F.2d 361, 364 (9th Cir. 1956), cert. denied, 352 U.S. 1002 (1957).

The district court has the authority to grant complete equitable relief in this situation. See FTC v. H.N. Singer, Inc., 668 F.2d 1107, 1112 (9th Cir. 1982); see also 15 U.S.C. § 53(b). Moreover, when the public interest is involved in a proceeding of this nature, "those equitable powers assume an even broader and more flexible character than when only a private controversy is at stake." Singer, 668 F.2d at 1112 (quoting Virginian R. Co. v. System Fed'n, 300 U.S. 515, 522 (1937)).

Godfree relies on SEC v. Spence & Green, 612 F.2d 896 (5th Cir. 1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1082 (1981), to support his argument that the property should be returned to him. However, the facts in Spence are quite different from the facts in this case. In Spence, there were no outstanding judgments to be satisfied and circumstances were such that the probability of future securities laws violations had been greatly reduced. Id. at 904. Thus, the assets were returned to the original owners.

Here, the district court ordered that the remaining property in the hands of the receiver be turned over to the FTC based on two primary considerations. First, the court found the remaining property to be subject to the $22 million judgment in favor of the FTC against Godfree. Therefore, the court decided that the property should remain in the hands of the FTC as partial satisfaction of the judgment. Next, the court found that even if the judgment had already been satisfied, such an award was justified by equitable considerations. ANC was not included in the Consent Decree as part of the property that should be returned to Godfree. Also, the court stated that "Godfree should not have possession of property which may enable him to disobey the injunction against him."

Equity power of district courts is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. United States v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of L.A., 575 F.2d 222, 230 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 959 (1978). This decision of the district court was justified in light of the circumstances of this case and there was no abuse of discretion.

AFFIRMED.