3 ms·
In the Madoff case his company was put under receivership, not seized: http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2008/2008-293-order.pdf http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2008/
by roguecoder 15y ago
In the Madoff case his company was put under receivership, not seized: http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2008/2008-293-order.pdf http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2008/2008-293-order.pdf
And ownership wasn't transfered of anything: he was enjoyed from transferring or disposing of value.
- JumpCrisscross 15y agoThe seizures are analogous. Per the document linked to Madoff's estate was put under an "order freezing assets" [1]. Dotcom's property is described as being "seized and restrained" [2], not confiscated or forfeited. [1] http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2008/2008-293-order.pdf http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2008/2008-293-order.pdf [2] http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10792862 http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5...