 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
1. Current casses Current cases: Young, et al. v. FirstMerit In May, 2006, our firm filed a class-action lawsuit against First Merit Bank, N.A. Our clients are six individuals who bought promissory-notes from Joanne Schneider's $60 million "Mortgage Escrow" ponzi -scheme. We claim that First Merit Bank ignored obvious warning signs that its customer, Joanne Schneider, was using her First Merit account to facilitate her illegal scheme. If out class is certified, we will demand that First Merit reimburse all eligible promissory noteholders for their losses, plus interest. The case is pending in the Federal District Court, in Cleveland. Lau v. PFS Investments In this case, our client invested his retirement savings in a Ponzi scheme that was recommended to him by his stock broker as a safe and profitable investment. The Ponzi scheme was the "Universal Lease" scam perpetrated by Michael E. Kelly under the names of Resort Holdings International, Yucatan Resorts, and Avalon Resorts. We filed claims on behalf of our client against the broker-dealer who employed the registered agent, claiming that the broker-dealer breached its duty to supervise the agent and prevent him from selling unregistered securities to his customer. The case is currently pending in California in a NASD/FINRA arbitration tribunal. Graff, et al. v. Capital Securities Investments Corp.This case also arose out of Michael E. Kelly's "Universal Lease" pyramid scheme, perpetrated under the "Resort Holding International" name. We filed claims on behalf of several investors, including retirees, who purchased Universal Leases at the recommendation of their investment advisor. We are alleging that the investment advisor's employer, a broker-dealer, failed to properly supervise him and prevent him from promoting fraudulent investments to customers. The case is currently pending in Illinois in a NASD/FINRA arbitration tribunal. Fisher et al. v. Gunnallen Financial, Inc. et al. This case arose out of the E-M Management Ponzi scheme organized by Ed May in Michigan. With the help of a registered investment representative, this scheme was promoted to the investing public as a safe way to diversify their retirement savings in a safe and profitable way. We filed claims on behalf of many aggrieved investors against the broker-dealers who employed the registered representative. We are claiming the broker-dealers breached their duty to adequately supervise their agents and prevent them from promoting the unregistered investment to the public. The case is currently pending in Michigan in a NASD/FINRA arbitration tribunal. Bergey v. Mutual Service Corporation In this case, which arose out of the fraudulent Ponzi scheme perpetrated by Wesley Snyder in Pennsylvania, our clients claim that Respondent, a broker-dealer, failed to properly supervise Wesley Snyder and prevent him from selling fraudulent investments to the public. Snyder, a registered investment adviser, urged his customers to take home equity loans and invest the money with him, in the "Image Masters" and "Wrap-around" programs. In fact, these programs were pyramid schemes that collapsed when he failed to attract new investors. The case is currently pending in Pennsylvania, in a NASD/FINRA arbitration tribunal. Brauner v. Mutual Service CorporationThis case also arose out of two of Wesley Snyder's pyramid schemes, "Mortgage Participation" and "Wrap-around" programs. Snyder, a registered representative, encouraged his customers, including senior citizens, to invest their savings with him, and promised profitable, safe returns. Our clients are alleging that Snyder's employer, a broker-dealer, failed to adequately supervise him and prevent him from selling unregistered securities to the public. The case is currently pending in Pennsylvania, in NASD/FINRA arbitration. Englehart v. Mutual Service Corporation This case also arose out of Wesley Snyder's pyramid schemes, and we made claims on behalf of our clients against Respondent, a broker-dealer, for failure to supervise their registered stock broker. The case is currently pending in Pennsylvania, in NASD/FINRA arbitration. Fansler v. Mutual Service Corporation This case also arose out of Wesley Snyder's pyramid schemes, and we made claims on behalf of our clients against Respondent, a broker-dealer, for failure to supervise their registered stock broker. The case is currently pending in Pennsylvania, in NASD/FINRA arbitration. Smith v. Mutual Service CorporationThis case also arose out of Wesley Snyder's pyramid schemes, and we made claims on behalf of our clients against Respondent, a broker-dealer, for failure to supervise their registered stock broker. The case is currently pending in Pennsylvania, in NASD/FINRA arbitration. Weaver v. Mutual Service Corporation This case also arose out of Wesley Snyder's pyramid schemes, and we made claims on behalf of our clients against Respondent, a broker-dealer, for failure to supervise their registered stock broker. The case is currently pending in Pennsylvania, in NASD/FINRA arbitration. Recent successes: Brewer, et al. v. Aura Financial Services, et al. In this NASD arbitration, we successfully represented a group of North and South Carolina residents, many of them senior citizens, who invested in the Waterstone's "internet kiosk " investment scheme. We claimed that Respondent, Aura Financial, of Birmingham, Alabama, failed to properly supervise the activities of its registered representatives who were marketing and selling the fraudulent and illegal Waterstone securities. We successfully settled the case on behalf of our clients. In this case, we filed claims on behalf of investors, many of them elderly, who were victimized in the ETS Ponzi scheme. In that case, investors relied on the advice of a registered representative and invested their savings, IRA and 401k funds in a payphone scam. We alleged that Respondent, a broker-dealer, failed in its duty to properly supervise its registered representative who promoted the payphone scam to the investing public. We successfully the case on behalf of our clients. Miller, et al. v. Walnut Street Securities, Inc. This was a case arising out of the same pyramid scheme - ETS Payphones. We alleged that Respondent, a broker-dealer, failed in its duty to properly supervise its registered representative who promoted the payphone scam to the investing public. We successfully the case on behalf of our clients. Gwirtz, et al. v. National Planning Corp, et al. In this case, several Ohio residents invested in a fraudulent real estate scheme. The perpetrator of the scheme promised returns as high as 16 percent annually, but in reality the payments were made to earlier investors by using later investors' money. A registered representative recommended this real estate scam to his customers a solid investment. We filed claims on behalf of investors, including retirees, who bought into this pyramid scheme, against the broker-dealer who was supposed to supervise its registered agent and prevent him from selling unregistered investments to his customers. We successfully the case on behalf of our clients. Harrison v. Creviston In this case we assisted our client in recovering damages from his investment representative who mishandled the client's funds. The investment representative fraudulently represented to the client that the client's investments are performing significantly above average, when in fact the client's money had not been invested, but deposited in the investment representative's personal bank account. We successfully recovered damages on behalf of our client. [Construction company] v. [Prominent law firm] In this case, we filed claims on behalf of a construction company that relied on its attorneys advice to accept a worthless promissory note from a developer who was perpetrating a pyramid scheme and was under investigation by the Ohio Division of Securities. We alleged that the attorneys knew of the pyramid scheme but failed to alert the construction company. We successfully the case on behalf of our clients. |