S.E.C. v. Credit Bancorp, Ltd., et al, No. 1:1999cv11395 - Document 1178 (S.D.N.Y. 2010)

Court Description: OPINION: #98641 that based on the authorities and conclusions set forth herein, the defendant's motions are denied. The SEC's motion for summary judgment will be heard on submission, without oral argument, on April 14, 2010. (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 3/4/10) (dle) Modified on 3/10/2010 (ajc).

Download PDF

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, 99 Civ. 11395 -against- OPINION CREDIT BANCORP LTD, et al, Defendants. ...................................... A P P E A R A N C E S : Attorney for Plaintiff SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 50 South Main Suite 500 Salt Lake City, UT 84144 By: Thomas M. Melton, Esq. Attorney for Defendant THOMAS M. RITTWEGER Pro Se FCI Fort Dix-Camp P.O. Box 2000 Fort Dix, NJ 08640 Attorney for Receiver MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 1290 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10104 By: Carl H. Loewenson, Jr., Esq. S w e e t , D.J., D e f e n d a n t Thomas R i t t w e g e r ( " R i t t w e g e r " o r t h e "Defendant") h a s moved t o u n f r e e z e a s s e t s a n d release f u n d s t o which h e l a y s claim s o t h a t h e may h i r e a n a t t o r n e y t o d e f e n d a g a i n s t t h e a c c u s a t i o n s o f s e c u r i t i e s f r a u d by t h e S e c u r i t i e s a n d Exchange Commission ( t h e "SEC") . S p e c i f i c a l l y he s e e k s t h e r e l e a s e o f $200,000 t o h i r e c o u n s e l , a n d $ 3 . 4 m i l l i o n p a i d o n h i s b e h a l f by i n s u r e r s o f h i s former employer, C r e d i t Bancorp, (the "Insurers") to C a r l H . Loewenson, J r . , t h e c o u r t - a p p o i n t e d r e c e i v e r f o r C r e d i t Bancorp a n d a l l i t s s u b s i d i a r i e s ("Loewenson" o r t h e "Receiver") a s p a r t of a proposed b u t u n f i n a l i z e d s e t t l e m e n t a g r e e m e n t b e t w e e n R i t t w e g e r a n d t h e SEC, t o h i r e c o u n s e l and defend a g a i n s t t h e a c c u s a t i o n s . He a l s o r e q u e s t s t h a t t h e SEC p r o v i d e a copy o f t h e i r c a s e f i l e i n t h e u n d e r l y i n g c a s e , SEC v . C r e d i t B a n c o r p , No. 99 C i v . 11395 (RWS), s o t h a t h e may p r o p e r l y p r e p a r e h i s r e s p o n s e t o t h e p e n d i n g m o t i o n f o r summary judgment a n d b e g i n preparing f o r t r i a l . F i n a l l y he asks t h a t t h e Receiver p r o v i d e a d e t a i l e d b i l l i n g of h i s s e r v i c e s f o r t h e complete term o f h i s s e r v i c e . For t h e r e a s o n s set f o r t h below, h i s motions a r e denied. FACTS AND PRIOR PROCEEDINGS

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.