Securities and Exchange Commission v. Court

Charles T. Lawrence was ordered by a U.S. district court to show cause why he should not be held in civil contempt for failing to comply with an SEC subpoena demanding document production and testimony in a securities investigation, with non-compliance risking sanctions without further hearing.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) obtained an Order to Show Cause against Charles T. Lawrence for failing to comply with a subpoena issued on October 23, 2013, seeking documents and testimony related to a securities investigation. Lawrence was ordered to produce all non-privileged documents by November 15, 2013, and appear for testimony on November 20, 2013, at the SEC’s New York office, with failure to comply triggering a prima facie case of civil contempt and potential sanctions without additional hearing. The court found the SEC’s application sufficiently supported, required service via overnight delivery, and set a November 12, 2013 deadline for Lawrence’s response, though no specific fraud allegations or dollar amounts were disclosed in the order.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) applied for and received an Order to Show Cause from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York targeting Charles T. Lawrence for non-compliance with a subpoena issued on October 23, 2013. The subpoena demanded production of all non-privileged documents in Lawrence’s possession, custody, or control by November 15, 2013, and his appearance for testimony beginning at 10:00 a.m. on November 20, 2013, at the SEC’s New York Regional Office. The court found the SEC’s application sufficiently supported and warned that failure to comply would establish a prima facie case of civil contempt, allowing for sanctions without further notice or hearing. Lawrence was required to file any opposition by November 12, 2013, and service of the order and supporting documents was mandated to be completed via overnight delivery by November 11, 2013. The SEC was granted until November 19, 2013, to file reply papers, underscoring the procedural urgency. While the order reflects the SEC’s enforcement posture and the seriousness of non-compliance, it does not specify the nature of the alleged securities violations or any associated dollar amounts. This proceeding was procedural in nature—initiating a show-cause hearing rather than issuing a final ruling or penalty.