Pharaon, Ghaith R. v. FRS, No. 97-1114 (D.C. Cir. 1998)
Annotate this CaseThis opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on February 10, 1998.
United States Court of Appeals for the district of columbia circuit
No. 97-1114 September Term, 1997
Ghaith R. Pharaon Petitioner v.
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Respondent
Before: Ginsburg, Henderson, and Tatel, Circuit Judges.
O R D E R
It is Ordered, by the Court, that the opinion filed February 10, 1998 is amended, as follows:
At page 13, lines 8-13
Delete: "Thirty-seven million dollars reflects the approximate amount the Board found BCCI invested in Independence, as well as approximating the magnitude of the gains sought and the potential harm posed by Pharaon's facilitation of BCCI's secret takeover of a bank worth several hundred million dollars."
At page 15, lines 21-24
Delete: "Indeed, BCCI's unrecoverable investment in the now-defunct Independence represents adequate 'financial loss or other damage' for purposes of the prohibition order."
PER CURIAM FOR THE COURT: Mark J. Langer, Clerk
Filed on April 17, 1998
No. 97-1114 September Term, 1997
Ghaith R. Pharaon Petitioner v.
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Respondent
Before: Ginsburg, Henderson, and Tatel, Circuit Judges.
O R D E R
It is Ordered, by the Court, that the opinion filed February 10, 1998 is amended, as follows:
At page 13, lines 8-13
Delete: "Thirty-seven million dollars reflects the approximate amount the Board found BCCI invested in Independence, as well as approximating the magnitude of the gains sought and the potential harm posed by Pharaon's facilitation of BCCI's secret takeover of a bank worth several hundred million dollars."
At page 15, lines 21-24
Delete: "Indeed, BCCI's unrecoverable investment in the now-defunct Independence represents adequate 'financial loss or other damage' for purposes of the prohibition order."
PER CURIAM FOR THE COURT: Mark J. Langer, Clerk
Filed on April 17, 1998
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.
