Mt. Lebanon native Cuban not guilty in insider trading case
DALLAS — Mark Cuban won a years-long fight with the federal government on Wednesday as jurors decided that the billionaire basketball team owner did not commit insider trading when he sold his stake in an Internet company in 2004.
The jury in federal district court in Dallas said that the Securities and Exchange Commission failed to prove the key elements of its case, including the claim that Cuban agreed to keep certain information confidential and not trade on it.
The nine-member jury deliberated only a few hours before reaching the verdict that ended a three-week trial and an SEC lawsuit filed in 2008.
Cuban, 55, hugged his lawyers after the verdict, then called family members. During an impromptu news conference outside the courthouse, he angrily denounced the SEC and its lead trial attorney, Jan Folena, saying that they lied about the evidence and targeted him because of his fame. He said that defendants of lesser wealth could have been bullied.
“Hopefully people will start paying attention to how the SEC does business,” Cuban, a Mt. Lebanon native, said. “I'm the luckiest guy in the world. I'm glad this happened to me. I'm glad I'm able to be the person who can afford to stand up to them.”
Folena, who left the courthouse minutes before Cuban, said, “We believe we did the best we could in this case, and things turn out the way they turn out.”
The SEC accused Cuban of using inside information to sell $7.9 million of stock in Mamma.com Inc. after learning of a stock offering that would depress the price of shares in the search engine company. The agency wanted Cuban to repay $750,000 in losses that he avoided, plus pay a penalty. It was a civil lawsuit, so the Dallas Mavericks owner and regular on the ABC reality show “Shark Tank” didn't face criminal charges.
The company's CEO testified by video that Cuban, the largest shareholder, agreed during an eight-minute phone call that he wouldn't disclose what the CEO told him about the stock offering or sell his shares on the news. He sold them a few hours later, however, before the company announced the stock offering to the public. Cuban disputed the CEO's claims.
“This was a credibility contest, and Cuban won,” said John Coffee, a law professor at Columbia University. Cuban's lawyers attacked the credibility of the CEO, Guy Faure, and Coffee said the SEC failed to produce evidence to support Faure's account of the phone call, which was not recorded. The verdict, he said, “tells the SEC to stay away from he-said, she-said cases.”
Jeffrey Ansley, a former SEC enforcement lawyer now in private practice in Dallas, said the jury's fast verdict was a condemnation of the SEC's case.
“The SEC lost every place where they could have lost, and because of that, this has to impact how the SEC staff decides which cases to bring,” Ansley said. He said the agency may become gun-shy about challenging people with the means to mount an aggressive defense, as Cuban did.
SEC spokesman John Nester said the verdict “will not deter us from bringing and trying cases where we believe defendants have violated the federal securities laws.”
The SEC sued Cuban in 2008. U.S. District Judge Sidney Fitzwater dismissed the lawsuit in 2009, but his ruling was overturned by an appeals court, which sent the case back to Fitzwater for the trial that ended on Wednesday.
Forbes magazine estimates Cuban's wealth at $2.5 billion. If the jury had ruled for the SEC, Cuban could have faced from $2 million to $3 million in fines and penalties. Cuban said he spent much more than that on the lawyers who delivered him a victory in the courtroom.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- New York City mayor boosts city’s living wage to $13.13
- Feds say $100M in data hacked
- Pentagon review puts Gitmo transfers on ice
- Medical marijuana use to get court test in Colo.
- Dallas hospital confirms 1st Ebola case in U.S.
- Panel says Wis. lawmaker likely broke House rules by advocating for companies in which he owned stock
- FCC backs end to NFL broadcast blackouts
- California becomes 1st state to ban plastic bags
- Secret Service chief endures blistering glare of Congress’ questions over White House breach
- NSA relies on 1981 executive order signed by Reagan
- Test cheating scheme in Atlanta goes to trial