FMC Corporation and Subsidiaries - Page 11




                                       - 11 -                                         
          use of insider information.  FMC Corp. v. Boesky, 727 F. Supp.              
          1182 (N.D. Ill. 1989).  The court also dismissed, without                   
          prejudice, Goldman, Shearson, and Drexel from two of the three              
          RICO counts.  The court denied the defendants' motion to dismiss            
          the remaining claims, all of which were made against the                    
          individual defendants and the Boesky entities, or concerned                 
          petitioner’s pendant State law claims.  Id. at 1185, 1201.                  
               On April 11, 1990, the Judicial Panel on Multi-District                
          Litigation transferred the case of FMC Corp. v. Boesky, supra, to           
          Senior District Judge Milton Pollack (Judge Pollack) of the                 
          U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York to                
          coordinate or consolidate pretrial proceedings in In re Ivan F.             
          Boesky Sec. Litig., MDL No. 732.  All of the defendants, except             
          for Goldman, ultimately settled with petitioner.  Boesky and his            
          entity, CX Partners, agreed to pay petitioner $3 million plus               
          interest from amounts that CX Partners received from Boesky’s               
          disgorgement fund, and Shearson agreed to pay petitioner                    
          $540,000.  Brown, Levine, Sokolow, and the other defendants were            
          insolvent, but agreed to cooperate with petitioner.  On                     
          December 10, 1992, upon motion by the SEC, the U.S. District                
          Court for the Southern District of New York approved payment of             
          $6,742,685 from Boesky’s disgorgement fund to CX Partners, of               
          which $3 million plus interest was to be paid to petitioner in              
          satisfaction of the settlement agreement.  On December 30, 1996,            






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011