SEC facing court battle with Mulholland's wife

2016-04-28 10:37 ET - Street Wire

Also Street Wire (U-*SEC) U S Securities and Exchange Commission

by Mike Caswell

Delia Mulholland, the wife of alleged securities violator Gregg Mulholland, has gone to court to protest efforts by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to secure title to her $5-million West Vancouver home. She says that ownership of the property ultimately rests with a company she controls, and not with her husband. She is living in the home and using it to raise the couple's two young daughters.

Mrs. Mulholland is responding to a lawsuit that the SEC filed in the Supreme Court of British Columbia on July 21, 2015. The regulator said that Mr. Mulholland had an unpaid $2.4-million (U.S.) order against him for the pump-and-dump of an OTC Bulletin Board listing called Rudy Nutrition. (He and others boosted the stock with false claims about a sports drink, according to the regulator.) Instead of paying, Mr. Mulholland placed his assets out of reach, the SEC claimed.

ERICCHRISTIANSEN.COM

The Mulholland Residence

© 2024 Canjex Publishing Ltd. All rights reserved.

Reader Comments - Comments are open to paying subscribers of Stockwatch and unmoderated, although libelous remarks, obscene language and impersonations may be deleted. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of Stockwatch.
For information regarding Canadian libel law, please view the University of Ottawa's FAQ regarding Defamation and SLAPPs.

Paying sales proceeds into court may indeed be best for both the SEC and the seemingly incarcerated Mr. Mulholland.

If he has been residing at MDC Brooklyn and other US-based detention centers since June, 2015 (almost a year ago), then shouldn't he also have the opportunity to personally argue his rights to the BC properties to the Supreme Court of BC?

Should Mr. Mulholland be granted bail on the latest allegations, then perhaps those properties (or the in-court, after-sale proceeds) might be required to guarantee the bail amount.

Might it not be hard to comply with "And the law of England has so particular and tender a regard to the immunity of a man's house, that it stiles it his castle, and will never suffer it to be violated with" if those homes were deemed, without personal representation, to be no longer his?