New Jersey Securities Fraud Defense Lawyers

Aggressive Securities Fraud Lawyers Fight to Protect Clients’ Rights in Essex County, Union County, Morris County, Middlesex County, Bergen County and Somerset County, NJ

The economic downturn of 2008 threatened the future financial stability and livelihood of millions of Americans who saw their investment portfolios depleted as scandal after scandal emerged. Because of this, the laws governing securities regulation are now tougher, further reaching and more strictly enforced than ever before. Any number of complex situations can give rise to a claim for securities fraud against brokers, dealers, investment managers and even accounting professionals—all of which can carry substantial jail time, monetary penalties, restitution requirements and, in the end, lead to professional ruin upon conviction.

At Zegas Law, we understand how securities fraud investigations progress and have the knowledge necessary to formulate strong and effective defenses against securities fraud charges. Regardless of the statute under which you are charged, securities fraud cases can sometimes involve both civil and criminal prosecution—but in many cases, a civil investigation will lead the Department of Justice or state prosecutor to file criminal charges. Our skilled North Jersey securities fraud defense lawyers collectively have decades worth of experience successfully handling the complexities that securities fraud cases can present. Whether your case involves allegations of a far-reaching scheme or isolated event, we are here to ensure you receive the strongest defense possible in your case.

Federal Securities Legislation Governs Many Securities Fraud Cases in New Jersey

A complex body of law governs potential claims for securities fraud in the United States, and many securities fraud cases are prosecuted at the federal level. We handle all types of securities fraud cases, whether brought under:

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Sarbanes-Oxley created the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board and also created new enhanced disclosure requirements with an emphasis on corporate responsibility
The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. Dodd-Frank was enacted in response to the financial crisis of 2008, and emphasizes the need for transparency in financial transactions, imposes trading restrictions and also regulates certain financial products, with an emphasis on consumer protection measures
The Securities Exchange Act of 1934. This Act gives the SEC broad authority in regulating large public companies, which must file periodic reports disclosing certain financial information. The 1934 Act also prohibits certain activities, including insider trading, and imposes strict regulatory requirements over large corporate transactions
The Securities Act of 1933. The 1933 Act also imposes reporting requirements on certain companies and generally prohibits misrepresentations and fraud in securities sales
The Investment Company Act of 1940. The 1940 Act imposes regulatory requirements, including disclosure obligations, on certain companies that deal in securities trading, including mutual funds and other companies, when the potential for conflicts of interest exists
The Trust Indenture Act of 1939. The Trust Indenture Act imposes certain requirements when securities are publicly offered for sale, including a bond requirement

Seasoned Defense Lawyers at Zegas Law Have a Nuanced Understanding of the Complexities Presented in Securities Fraud Cases

Although regulatory bodies have a vast array of regulatory sources to look to when charging a person with securities fraud, most securities fraud cases center on the accusation that the defendant (or defendants) made some type of material misrepresentation, fraudulent statement or omission upon which investors relied, and were therefore harmed financially. Securities fraud cases can involve allegations of:

Insider trading
Pump and dump schemes
Churning
Making unauthorized trades
Engaging in trades or making investments that are unsuitable for the client
Short selling
Ponzi schemes
Fraudulently inducing investors into a declining fund without full disclosure
Selling stock at inflated prices
Backdating stock options
Market manipulation
False or misleading financial statements
Failure to file required disclosure documents
Accounting fraud
Investment fraud
And more

Regardless of the specific facts surrounding your securities fraud case, retaining a knowledgeable lawyer is critical to poking holes in the prosecution’s evidence against you and minimizing the potentially serious criminal consequences of a securities fraud conviction.

Contact Our Experienced North Jersey Securities Fraud Defense Lawyers to Discuss Your Case Today

Securities fraud cases generally require in-depth and ongoing investigation by the SEC, FINRA, the DOJ and other regulatory bodies before criminal charges are levied. If you even suspect that you are under investigation for committing securities fraud, it is crucial that you contact an experienced lawyer early in the game to ensure the best possible outcome in your case. At Zegas Law, our experienced North Jersey securities fraud defense lawyers have the nuanced understanding of the law necessary to tackle even the most complex of securities fraud cases, so call or contact our offices today to discuss options in your specific case.

Frequently Asked Questions About Securities Fraud Claims

FAQ: What are some of the penalties that can apply if convicted of securities fraud?

The penalties that can apply in a securities fraud case are extremely wide-ranging and often depend upon the dollar value of the harm caused and the number of people impacted by the fraudulent activities. A securities fraud conviction can result in upwards of 25 years in prison in more serious cases. Even a relatively minor securities fraud case can cause you to lose your license permanently and will obviously scar your professional reputation. The government may freeze your assets and order payment of restitution to the victims of the fraud alleged, and can also impose significant monetary fines in addition to restitution.

FAQ: Investing in securities naturally involves a degree of risk. Can I be accused of securities fraud because an investment was unsuccessful?

Generally, no. Securities fraud cases turn on some type of misrepresentation. Perhaps an investment option carried risks, and you failed to adequately disclose those risks to potential investors. Also, to gain a conviction for securities fraud, the prosecution will be required to establish some sort of intent on your part—in other words, that you made a representation with the intent to defraud. Because of the often fact-intensive nature of these cases, our experienced securities fraud defense lawyers can challenge the intent element or even whether you misrepresented the facts to begin with.

Fearless
“Alan Zegas represented me in a high-profile criminal case. He has a brilliant mind, with strong institutional knowledge and an extraordinary command of the law. He was detail oriented, an enormously strategic thinker, fearless, compassionate, personally accessible on a 24/7 basis, and was all in for me. He was always well prepared and often could see things that others did not. Most importantly, he provided an honest and straightforward assessment of the facts. Alan acted entirely in my best interest, without regard to running up billable hours or moving my case into an unwinnable position. He was always kind, but never hesitant to be blunt and forthcoming. He exuded competence and professionalism at every moment throughout the process.”
Extremely Thorough
“Alan is a master of the art of law, is extremely thorough and meticulous to every detail. He speaks softly but carries a big stick. It is obvious that he is given a great deal of respect in the court room. I knew I was in the best of hands from the get go. For such matters, you need the very best. Alan earned my complete trust. There are a great deal of firms out there with many partners, and associates. Alan is a solo guy, so you know your case is getting his personal attention. As an example, he was always accessible by phone or text. I am grateful for everything he did for me.”

1 / 2