Securities and Exchange Comm. v. Duckson, No. 15-1072 (8th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseThe SEC filed a civil law enforcement action against Todd Duckson, the Fund, and related individuals and entities. A jury found Duckson liable for violating the antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws and for aiding and abetting the Fund's violations.The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by declining to admit the complete versions of the appraisals at issue under Federal Rule of Evidence 104 and 403. Further, Duckson cannot show that he was prejudiced by the district court's rulings. The court also concluded that the district court did not abuse its discretion by rejecting Duckson's proposal to set forth separately in the verdict form each alleged misstatement or omission where Duckson has not shown how the district court's factual findings conflict with the jury's findings; the jury was instructed on the relevant time period at issue; and the district court's verdict form did not deprive Duckson of a meaningful right to appellate review of the remedies determination or the liability finding. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Smith, Author, with Riley, Chief Judge, and Shepherd, Circuit Judge] Civil case - SEC Civil Enforcement Action. The court made individualized determinations regarding the admissibility of certain property appraisals Duckson wished to enter in to evidence and did not abuse its discretion by declining to admit the complete versions of the appraisal on foundation and Rule 403 grounds; in any event, Duckson abandoned his attempt to introduce the appraisals and cannot show any prejudice from the court's rulings; no error in using a general verdict form regarding violation of the Act as the purported purpose of the special verdicts - guiding the court in imposing remedies - was not relevant given the court's equitable authority and discretion in determining the appropriate remedy for the violations; nor did the use of a general verdict deprive Duckson of meaningful appellate review.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.