News & Analysis as of

Stanford Ponzi Scheme Fraud

Winstead PC

Federal Court Denies Defendant Banks’ Motion For Summary Judgment On Plaintiffs’ Knowing Participation In Breach Of Fiduciary Duty...

Winstead PC on

In Rotstain v. Trustmark Nat’l Bank, plaintiffs sued banks for assisting Stanford and his entities regarding a Ponzi scheme. No. 3:09-CV-2384-N, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10332 (N.D. Tex. January 20, 2022). ...more

Dechert LLP

No Futility Exception: Where Transferee is on “Inquiry Notice,” No Good Faith Defense to Fraudulent Transfer Clawback Absent...

Dechert LLP on

Answering “no” to a certified question from the Fifth Circuit, the Supreme Court of Texas held that a transferee on inquiry notice of fraud cannot shield itself from clawback without diligently investigating its initial...more

Ervin Cohen & Jessup LLP

Fore! Ponzi Scheme Lands The Golf Channel In The Rough

Receivers handling Ponzi schemes and fraud cases are familiar with the concept of suing the “winners” in the scheme to recover transfers made to them in excess of their investment. Such suits are based on the theory that the...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

SEC Efforts To Compel SIPIC Coverage For Stanford Victims Rejected

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

The D.C. Circuit rejected efforts by the SEC to compel the Securities Investor Protection Corporation to liquidate a broker-dealer that was part of the Stanford Ponzi scheme empire. The investors had purchased CDs from an...more

4 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide