Ponzi Perspectives

Latest from Ponzi Perspectives - Page 3

Notable litigation filed during April 2023 includes: (1) SEC v. French, et al., (2) Gary Kennedy v. Ghap, LLC, et al., (3) Abanda v. OurBloc LLC, et al., (4) Sunrise NPL, LLC v. Easy Financial, LLC, et al., and (5) Joseph v. General Conference Corporation of Seventh Day Adventist et al.

Notable litigation filed during March 2023 includes: (1) SEC v. Woodard; (2) SEC v. Kaplan; (3) James Bay Resources Limited, et al. v. Lockett & Horwitz, et al.; (4) Miklos v. McNamara, et al.; and (5) Scura, et al. v. Heppner, et al.

SEC v. Woodard, Civ. No. 1:23-cv-00112 (D. HI.).

The SEC filed suit

McGuireWoods’ Ponzi Litigation team launched its Ponzi Perspectives blog in early 2021. Since that time, we’ve posted detailed case alerts of Ponzi-related complaints filed throughout the country and posted key decisions that have the potential to influence controlling law on Ponzi-related issues involving financial institutions. This 2022 year-end round up summarizes the cases and opinions analyzed

Notable litigation filed during January 2023 includes: (1) SEC v. Engel; (2) Firestone, et al. v. Residential Properties Resources Fund II, LLC, et al.; (3) Ellusionist Cash Balance Plan and Trust, et al. v. Spiegel Accountancy Corp., et al.; and (4) SEC v. Ellison-Meade.

SEC v. Engel, Civ. No. 2:23-cv-00213-PA-JPR (C.D. Cal.).

The Securities Exchange

Notable litigation for October includes: (1) Karvounides, et al. v. Antonas, et al.; (2) Capital Providers of Cambridge Sarano, LLC, et al. v. Robl, et al.; (3) Investors in Friends of Production Capital LLC v. Friends of Production Capital LLC; and (4) Orrico, et al. v. ABC Capital Investments, LLC.

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Lam, et al. was filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California on September 22, 2022, claiming Defendants Brian Lam (“Lam”), Nathan Nguyen (“Nguyen”), NineSquare Capital Partners LLC (“NineSquare Capital”), and Nguyen Group LLC (“NGL”) (collectively, “Defendants”) violated several provisions of the Securities Act and