Αποτελέσματα Αναζήτησης
The Securities and Exchange Commission instituted this action to restrain the respondents from using the mails and instrumentalities of interstate commerce in the offer and sale of unregistered and nonexempt securities in violation of 5 (a) of the Act, 15 U.S.C.A. 77e (a).
Securities and Exchange Commission v. W. J. Howey Co., 328 U.S. 293 (1946), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the offer of a land sales and service contract was an "investment contract" within the meaning of the Securities Act of 1933 ( 15 U.S.C. § 77b) and that the use of the mails and interstate commerce in ...
In SEC. v. W.J. Howey Co., 328 U.S. 293 (1946), the Supreme Court established a test for when a financial instrument qualifies as an "investment contract" and, therefore, a "security" under the 1934 Act.
26 Ιουν 2011 · Securities and Exchange Commission v. W. J. Howey Co., 328 U.S. 293 (1946), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the offer of a land sales and service contract was an “investment contract” within the meaning of the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U.S.C. 77b, and that the use of the mails and interstate commerce in ...
This Supreme Court case involved whether an offering of units in a citrus grove development coupled with a contract for cultivating and marketing the crops constituted an "investment contract" under the Securities Act of 1933, thus requiring registration.
The respondents, W. J. Howey Company and Howey-in-the-Hills Service, Inc., are Florida corporations under direct common control and management. The Howey Company owns large tracts of citrus acreage in Lake County, Florida.
v. W.J. Howey Co., 328 U.S. 293, 298-299 (1946). The Colorado Supreme Court recently modified the definition of “investment contract” in Colorado: We now clarify that an investment contract is a contract, transaction, or scheme whereby people invest their money in a common enterprise and are led to expect
