All it takes is a little patience. F. Scott Yeager, a former Enron executive, got some good news from the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, which ruled that it wouldn't revisit his case. So, he no longer has criminal charges related to financial fraud hanging over him. Yeager has been acquitted on all counts. This follows a June ruling by the Supreme Court, which tossed a previous 5th Circuit Court ruling that could have resulted in a new trial.

The ruling said, "Today, ... it is clear under our initial ... analysis the jury made a finding in acquitting Yeager that precludes prosecution on insider trading and money laundering." Samuel Buffone, who was one of Yeager's attorneys, stated that his client shouldn't have been indicted to begin with and didn't do anything wrong. It has taken them seven years to get to this point.

Yeager landed in hot water because he sold stock in Enron for more than $54 million before it began the plunge that would ultimately end with its bankruptcy in 2001. He faced 125 counts, was acquitted of five (four for wire fraud and one for conspiracy to commit wire and securities fraud) and wound up with a hung jury for the remaining 120, which included insider trading and money laundering. He was later indicted again on 13 counts of insider trading and money laundering.

This post is part of a series on some of the most memorable companies that have disappeared.

"When E.F. Hutton talks, people listen," claimed the well-known slogan from the respected broker's ubiquitous ads in the 1970s and 1980s. Well, it seems people stopped listening when E.F. Hutton & Co. was caught check kiting and money laundering.

The American firm was founded in 1904 by Edward Francis Hutton. It grew to become one of the most respected U.S. financial firms, and for many years was the second-largest brokerage in the United States. Edward Hutton held the reins at the company until his death in 1962.

But in 1980 some Hutton branches began shifting funds from one account to another, effectively giving itself interest-free loans until the checks cleared. Of course the scheme eventually came to light, and in 1985 Hutton pleaded guilty to 2,000 counts of mail and wire fraud. However, the SEC uncharacteristically allowed Hutton to stay in business.

An internal investigation in 1987 uncovered that a Providence, Rhode Island, branch was laundering money for a crime family. Hutton voluntarily brought this matter to the SEC, but all signs suggested Hutton couldn't count on leniency a second time. However, this happened just before the stock market crash of 1987. With that, along with all the bad press, the firm's deep debt going back to 1985, and its star performers defecting to other firms, Hutton was on the verge of collapse by the end of the year, and so agreed to be acquired by Shearson Lehman Brothers.

The Feds are looking into whether drug money was laundered by Wachovia (NYSE: WB). The investigation is "part of a broad probe of alleged laundering of drug proceeds by Mexican and Colombian money-transfer companies," according to The Wall Street Journal (subscription required).

Several companies with accounts that have been seized claim to be legitimate businesses and that if they cannot get at their funds, they may go out of business.

The open question is whether Wachovia employees knew about the transactions.

It is hard to imagine a well-run bank like Wachovia would be involved in such blatant aid to drug operations from outside the U.S. Perhaps that is why its shares are down almost 50% this year.

Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 247wallst.com.

What's up with those folks over at Wachovia (NYSE: WB)? It seems like they may have lost hold of the wheel. They've accidentally given up customers account balances to crooks. They have offered refuge to questionable funds. Now, it seems they've been sucked, with seven other banks, into a Federal investigation regarding the rigging of bids for government investment purchases. What has happened to the conservative Wachovia I used to know?

On May 20, Charles Duhigg had in The New York Times an excellent exposé regarding another nasty round of cyber crime. Wachovia was in no way at fault for the release of information leading to the account attacks, but its institution was one of many that apparently surrendered funds to criminals. I had always considered Wachovia to be an iron-clad safe institution. Someone must have missed a turn.