- 29 -
interest in Plymouth. Greene knew that Bachmann had no education
or work experience in plastics or plastics recycling. Greene's
review of the offering memorandum was fairly perfunctory. When
asked at trial if he had read it, Greene replied, "I did read it,
[but] I can't say that I read it cover-to-cover." Greene
testified that although he did not discuss valuation with
Bachmann, he did read and rely upon the reports by Ulanoff and
Burstein. However, Greene only glanced at the section relating
potential conflicts of interest, and he could not recall at trial
that Burstein was a business associate and legal client of
Miller's.
Greene did not check any of the underlying assumptions or
figures set out in the offering memorandum. He did not prepare
any kind of report or analysis for Brodie. He sought no
independent verifications of the representations in the offering
memorandum, even though Bachmann, Schwartz had clients who were
in the plastics business. He relied exclusively on Bachmann.
Greene reluctantly admitted that he received a commission as a
result of Brodie's investment and that the amount of the
commission paid could have been 10 percent.
Greene purportedly explained to Brodie the environmental and
economic benefits of the Plastics Recycling transaction as well
as the tax benefits. Brodie understood that the tax benefits
exceeded the amount of his investment, and that they were
generated by the purported value of the recyclers. However, he
did nothing to verify the purported value of the Sentinel EPE
Page: Previous 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011