Skip to main content

Securities and Wire Fraud Conspiracy?

Michael Wayne Sulfridge, a resident of Union Grove, Ala., and former vice president of corporate finance at Image Entry, Inc. (Image Entry), pleaded guilty today to fraud and tax evasion charges stemming from the company’s 2001 acquisition by Sourcecorp, Inc. (Sourcecorp).

Sulfridge, 44, pleaded guilty to a two-count criminal information charging him with conspiracy to commit wire fraud and securities fraud, as well as tax evasion.

According to the plea agreement and evidence presented during the plea hearing, Image Entry, of London, Ky., is a data processing company that operated nearly a dozen facilities located in the Southeastern and Midwestern United States. Sourcecorp is a consulting and information management corporation located in Dallas that purchased Image Entry in March 2001.

According to the plea agreement and evidence presented during the plea hearing, the terms of the purchase agreement provided that in addition to the $33 million paid at closing, an additional sum of approximately $11 million would be held back and paid during the three succeeding years if Image Entry met its earnings targets. The purchase agreement also provided for additional incentive payments of up to $25 million during the three years that would be calculated based on the amount by which those earnings targets were exceeded.

According to the plea agreement and evidence presented during the plea hearing, Sulfridge and others conspired to fraudulently inflate Image Entry earnings in order to fraudulently increase those annual incentive payments by Sourcecorp. The total cost of the acquisition by Sourcecorp amounted to approximately $68 million, including the incentive payments.

Also according to the plea agreement and evidence presented at today’s hearing, Sulfridge allegedly caused a tax loss of $190,111 when he acted to evade income taxes due on approximately $592,393 in bonus compensation he was paid based on the fraudulently inflated earnings. According to the information, Sulfridge failed to report that income on the annual joint individual income tax returns he filed with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for tax years 2001, 2002 and 2004, and in May 2005 Sulfridge allegedly submitted a materially false income tax return to the IRS for tax year 2003.

At sentencing, Sulfridge faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison on the conspiracy count and five years on the tax evasion count. Sulfridge also faces a maximum fine of $250,000 on the conspiracy count and a maximum fine of $100,000 on the tax evasion count. A sentencing date has not yet been scheduled.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...