Page 1 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

CEA CASES 

NAME: HARRY BREECKER AND SAMUEL ALAMA 

DOCKET NUMBER: 233; 75-12 

DATE: AUGUST 8, 1974 

DOCUMENT TYPE: COMPLAINT 

NOTE: LATER BECAME CFTC DOCKET # 75-12 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

BEFORE THE SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE 

In re: Harry Breecker and Samuel Alama, Respondents 

CEA Docket No. 233 

Complaint and Notice of Hearing Under The Commodity Exchange Act 

There is reason to believe that the respondents Harry Breecker and Samuel 

Alama have violated the Commodity Exchange Act, "the Act", (7 U.S.C. §§ 1-17), 

and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder, (17 CFR Chapter 1). In 

accordance with the provisions of sections 6(b) and 6(c) of the Act (7 U.S.C. §§ 

9, 13b, and 15), this Complaint and Notice of Hearing is issued stating the 

charges in that respect as follows: 

I 

(a) Respondent Harry Breecker, an individual, resides at 401 Atkinson Drive, 

Apartment 315, Honolulu, Hawaii. 

(b) Respondent Samuel Alama, an individual, resides at 564 Ulumu Street, 

Kailua, Oahu, Hawaii. 

II 

The transactions in commodities for future delivery referred to herein, if 

executed, could have been used for (a) hedging transactions in interstate 

commerce in such commodities or the products or byproducts thereof, or (b) 

determining the price basis of transactions in interstate 

commerce in such commodities, or (c) delivering any such commodity sold, shipped 

or received in interstate commerce for the fulfillment of such futures 

contracts. 

III 

From on or about February 1, 1968, through on or about October 13, 1972, 

respondent Breecker was an account executive with the firm of Walston & Co., 

Inc., "Walston", [As of June 1973 duPont, Walston, Inc.; In January of 1974 

Payne, Webber, Jackson and Curtis, Inc., purchased the branch offices and 

customer accounts of duPont Walston, Inc.]. 

IV 

On or about April 7, 1970, the respondents entered into an agreement, whereby 

respondent Alama would place all of his commodity orders, including the orders 

of his (Alama's) customers, as detailed below, with respondent Breecker. Mr. 

Breecker was to place these orders through his (Breecker's) personal account at 

Walston. All commodity futures transactions by respondent Alama during the 
Page 2 

period April 7, 1970, through September 15, 1970, were placed through respondent 

Breecker pursuant to this agreement. 

V 

On or about February 24, 1972, respondent Alama accepted $ 900.00 (cashier's 

check number 01-1778686 drawn on the Aikahi Branch, Bank of Hawaii) from Edward 

J. Wyland in order to establish a commodity futures account, with Walston, in 

Mr. Wyland's name. Mr. Alama was to have discretionary authority with regard to 

all trading decisions made for this 

account. This check was endorsed over to respondent Breecker, who, on February 

25, 1972, negotiated it to his personal account (No. 05-203171-06) at the City 

Bank of Honolulu. 

VI 

On or about March 16, 1972, respondent Alama accepted $ 2,200.00 (cashier's 

check number 01-2109320 drawn on the Keneohe Branch, Bank of Hawaii), from 

Edward J. Wyland as an additional deposit to his (Wyland's) account. On or 

about March 16, 1972, respondent Alama negotiated this check to his personal 

account (No. 27-60200-2) at the City Bank of Honolulu. The money accepted by 

Mr. Alama as described in paragraphs V and VI was to be used to margin, 

guarantee, or secure Mr. Wyland's open-end order for the purchase or sale of 

commodity futures subject to the Commodity Exchange Act. Mr. Alama accepted 

this money without having registered as a futures commission merchant under the 

Act. 

VII 

On or about March 20, 1972, respondent Alama, acting as a futures commission 

merchant, solicited orders from Robert C. Ruegomer, and in connection with such 

solicitation accepted $ 2,000.00 (cashier's check number 24258 drawn on the 

Montgomery Federal Savings and Loan Association, Baltimore, Maryland), to be 

used to margin, guarantee, or secure such orders for the purchase or sale of 

commodity futures subject to the Commodity Exchange Act, without having 

registered as a futures commission merchant under the Act. On April 17, 1972, 

respondent Alama negotiated this check to his personal account (No. 27-60200-2) 

at the City Branch, Bank of Honolulu. 

VIII 

At all times material, respondent Alama failed to separately account for and 

segregate the monies received by him as detailed in paragraphs V, VI and VII. 

IX 

From April 7, 1970, through September 15, 1972, respondent Alama placed 176 

orders with respondent Breecker for the purchase or sale of "frozen pork 

bellies", all but two of which were bucketed by respondent Breecker. Respondent 

Breecker then reported to respondent Alama that the orders had been executed. 

By reason of such acts, respondent Breecker bucketed orders for the sale of 

commodity futures on or subject to the rules of one or more contract markets, 

and knowingly and without the prior consent of respondent Alama became the 

seller with respect to the buying orders and buyer with respect to the selling 

orders, in wilfull violation of section 4b(D) of the Act (7 U.S.C. § 6b(D)); 

respondent Breecker wilfully caused false records to be made in connection with 

the execution of such orders, wilfully deceived respondent Alama, and cheated 

and defrauded respondent Alama, in wilful violation of sections 4b(A), 4b(B), 

and 4b(C) of the Act (7 U.S.C. 6b(A), 6b(B), and 6b(C)). 

X 
Page 3 

From on or about April 7, 1970, through on or about August 17, 1972, 

respondent Breecker accepted $ 6,623.00 from respondent Alama, which represented 

deposits by respondent Alama, Edward J. Wyland, and 

Robert C. Ruegomer (as detailed in paragraphs V, VI, and VII), which was to be 

used in whole or in part to margin, guarantee or secure orders for the purchase 

or sale of commodity futures subject to the Commodity Exchange Act, without 

having registered as a futures commission merchant under the Commodity Exchange 

Act. During this period Mr. Breecker returned $ 4,350.00 to Mr. Alama, 

converting the balance to his own use, and failed to hold in separate account 

the money received by him as detailed in paragraphs V and X. 

XI 

By reason of the facts alleged in this complaint, respondent Samuel Alama 

wilfully violated section 4d of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. § 6d), and 

sections 1.7, 1.20, 1.27 and 1.32 of the regulations issued thereunder (17 CFR 

§§ 1.7, 1.20, 1.27 and 1.32) and respondent Harry Breecker wilfully violated 

sections 4b, 4c and 4d of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. §§ 6b, 6c and 

6d), and sections 1.7, 1.20 and 1.21 of the regulations issued thereunder (17 

CFR §§ 1.7, 1.20 and 1.21). 

WHEREFORE, it is hereby ordered that this Complaint and Notice of Hearing be 

served upon the respondents, and this proceeding shall be governed by sections 

0.1, 0.2, 0.4(b), 0.5 through 0.22 and 0.28 of the Rules of Practice under the 

Commodity Exchange Act (17 CFR §§ 0.1, 0.2, 0.4(b), 0.5 through 0.22 and 0.28). 

The respondents have twenty-five (25) days after receipt of this complaint in 

which to file with the Hearing Clerk, United States Department of Agriculture, 

Washington, 

D. C. 20250, an answer, fully and completely stating the nature of the defense 

and admitting or denying, specifically and in detail, each allegation of this 

complaint. Allegations not answered will be deemed admitted for the purpose of 

this proceeding. Failure to file an answer will constitute an admission of all 

the allegations in this complaint and a waiver of hearing. The filing of an 

answer in which all of the material allegations of fact contained in this 

complaint are admitted, likewise shall constitute a waiver of hearing unless a 

hearing is requested. The respondents are hereby notified that unless hearing 

is waived, a hearing will be held in Honolulu, Hawaii, at a place therein and a 

date to be specified later, before an Administrative Law Judge designated to 

conduct such hearing. At such hearing respondents will have the right to appear 

and show cause, if any there be, why an appropriate order should not be issued 

in accordance with the Commodity Exchange Act, (1) prohibiting the respondents 

from trading on or subject to the rules of any contract market, and directing 

all contract markets refuse trading privileges to respondents for such period of 

time as may be determined, and (2) directing that the respondents shall cease 

and desist from violating the Act and regulations in the manner alleged herein. 

August 8, 1974 

Done at Washington, D. C. 

[SEE SIGNATURE IN ORIGINAL] 

RICHARD L FELTNER 

Assistant Secretary for Marketing and Consumer Services 

LOAD-DATE: August 6, 2008 
Page 4