Page 1 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

CEA CASES 

NAME: MAURICE J. LEGARDEUR 

CITATION: 3 Agric. Dec. 467 

DOCKET NUMBER: 33 

DATE: JUNE 9, 1944 

DOCUMENT TYPE: DECISION AND ORDER 

AGRICULTURE DECISIONS

(A. D. 662) 

 

In re MAURICE J. LEGARDEUR. CEA Doc. No. 33. Decided June 9, 1944. 

Taking Other Side of Customers' Trades -- Suspension of Registration as Floor 

Broker

A registered floor broker having admitted taking the other side of his 

customers orders for cotton futures contracts on a contract market without their 

consent, and having consented to an order of suspension, a consent order is 

entered suspending his registration for ten days. 

 

Mr. Howard Rooney for complainant. Messrs. Rosen, Kammer, Wolff, Hopkins & 

Burke, of New Orleans, Louisiana, for respondent. Mr. Charles W. Bucy, Referee. 

Decision by Thomas J. Flavin, Assistant to the War Food Administrator.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

This is a disciplinary proceeding under the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 

Chapter 1), instituted by a complaint issued on February 10, 1944, by Ashley 

Sellers, Assistant War Food Administrator. The respondent, Maurice J. 

LeGardeur, a registered floor broker, was charged with taking the other side of 

customers' trades on the New Orleans Cotton Exchange in two instances in 

November 1943, and a hearing was set for March 15, 1944, in Washington, D. C. 

Respondent answered on March 1 and requested that the hearing be held in New 

Orleans, Louisiana. He admitted the transactions but denied that he had made 

them willfully, knowingly, and without the prior consent of his customers, in 

violation of the act. He said he sold one futures contract to a customer to 

rectify his mistake in failing to execute the customer's order during market 

fluctuations, and bought a contract from another customer to discharge the 

obligation he had incurred by selling the first contract. On March 8 the 

referee wrote respondent that the hearing would be adjourned to a time and place 

of which he would be notified, and that consideration would be given to holding 

it in New Orleans. 

On April 29 respondent filed a document stipulating that the allegations 

against him were true and consenting to a suspension of his registration for ten 

days. On June 1 the Office of Distribution filed a statement that its 

investigation had revealed that the violations were isolated instances, that 

respondent had a good reputation, and that a ten-day suspension, which it 

recommended, seemed commensurate with the violations. Thereafter the record was 

sent to this office, where this order has been prepared. 

 

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. At all times material herein respondent was a member of the New Orleans 

Cotton Exchange, a contract market. He was registered under the act as a floor 

broker for the year 1943 and is so registered for the year 1944. 
Page 2 

2. Contracts for future delivery of cotton on the New Orleans Cotton Exchange 

may be used for hedging and for fixing the price basis of transactions in cotton 

in interstate commerce. 

3. On November 1, 1943, Beer & Company, a registered futures commission 

merchant, gave respondent an open order to purchase one May cotton futures 

contract on the New Orleans Cotton Exchange at at 19.44 cents per pound, and on 

November 3, 1943, it gave respondent an order including an order to sell one May 

cotton futures contract on the New Orleans Cotton Exchange at the market. Beer 

& Company had received these orders from two different customers. 

4. Respondent filled these orders on November 3, 1943, by becoming the 

seller, for his own account, of one contract at 19.44 cents per pound, and the 

buyer, for his own account, of one contract at 19.34 cents per pound. 

5. Respondent so filled these orders willfully and knowingly and without the 

prior consent of his customer, Beer & Company, or of either of its customers. 

CONCLUSIONS

Taking the other side of customers' trades constituted violations of section 

4b(D) of the act. Secretary v. Nelson, 1 Agric. Dec. 362, 371 (1 A.D. 362, 371) 

(1942). In view of respondent's admissions and the recommendation of the Office 

of Distribution, it is not necessary to deny respondent trading privileges on 

contract markets, and a suspension of registration for ten days should be 

entered as a consent order under the rules of practice (17 CFR, Cum. Supp., 

0.4). 

ORDER

Respondent's registration as a floor broker for 1944 is suspended for ten 

days, beginning on the twentieth day after the date of this order. 

Copies hereof shall be served on respondent by registered mail or in person, 

and on the Office of Distribution. 

 

LOAD-DATE: March 12, 2008 
Page 3