U.S. Sec. & Exch. Comm. v. Lines Overseas Mgmt., Ltd.

2007 WL 581909 (2007)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

U.S. Sec. & Exch. Comm. v. Lines Overseas Mgmt., Ltd.

United States District Court for the District of Columbia
2007 WL 581909 (2007)

Facts

Lines Overseas Management, Ltd. (LOM) (defendant) was a financial-services corporation in Bermuda that conducted business with United States securities markets. LOM had no United States offices, but it maintained brokerage accounts with United States brokerage firms, placing trades with the firms and providing other functions related to those trades. Scott Lines (defendant), a Bermuda citizen and resident, was an LOM officer. The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) (plaintiff) issued administrative investigative subpoenas to produce documents and submit to depositions in connection with securities violations by LOM and Lines. The SEC served the subpoenas personally on Lines while he was at an airport in Miami traveling back to Bermuda after seeking medical care in Boston. Neither LOM nor Lines complied with the subpoenas, and in federal court in the District of Columbia, the SEC filed an application for an order to show cause and an order requiring obedience. In support, the SEC submitted many records of Lines’s and LOM’s telephone, email, and mail contacts with individuals and entities in the United States making representations regarding securities and buying and selling thousands of United States securities, which was the conduct that formed the grounds for the SEC’s investigation. Lines and LOM argued that because they did not have any minimum physical contacts with the District of Columbia, the court did not have personal jurisdiction over them. Lines made a blanket denial of conducting business in the United States or maintaining purposeful contacts with the United States. After holding a hearing and reviewing the evidence, the magistrate ordered Lines and LOM to comply with the subpoenas. Lines and LOM objected.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Roberts, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 815,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership