Since 2021, McGuireWoods’ Ponzi Litigation team has been tracking and posting case alerts on Ponzi-related complaints filed in federal and state courts throughout the country and analyzed key decisions that have the potential to influence controlling law on Ponzi-related issues. The blog also posts practical considerations like effective defenses to dismiss Ponzi litigation and common
Ponzi Perspectives: 2022 Year-End Roundup
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 – December 2022
Notable litigation filed during December 2022 includes: (1) Eichler v. Vbit Technol. Corp;. (2) SEC v. Fernandez, et al.; (3) Vincent v. Barber, et al.; (4) O’Dowd v. Barber, et al.; (5) Nguyen v. Barber, et al.; (6) M. Manni v. Barber, et al.; (7) J. Manni v. Barber, et al.; and (8) Ames, et al. v. Nelson, et al.Continue Reading Notable Litigation – December 2022
Ponzi Perspectives: 2022 Midyear Roundup
McGuireWoods’ Ponzi Litigation team launched its Ponzi Perspectives blog in early 2021. Since that time, our focus is to track key cases and decisions that have the potential to influence controlling law on Ponzi-related issues. The blog also offers analysis on practical considerations when defending Ponzi litigation. This 2022 mid-year round up summarizes the new
New Complaint – SEC v. Boron Capital, LLC, et. al.
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Boron Capital, LLC et al. was filed in the Northern District Court of Texas, Lubbock Division on June 14, 2022, claiming violations of several provisions of the Securities Act and Securities Exchange Act. Specifically, the SEC seeks permanent injunctive relief against all Defendants to prevent future violations of the federal securities laws, disgorgement of any ill-gotten gains, and civil penalties.
The SEC brought this action against Boron Capital, LLC (“Boron”), BC Holdings 2017, LLC (“BC Holdings”), United BNB Fund 2018, LLC (“United”), and Blake Robert Templeton (“Templeton”) (collectively, “Defendants”).
Templeton founded Boron, a Nevada limited liability company, in order to operate a real estate business, and Templeton serves as its CEO and managing member. Templeton also controls Defendants United and BC Holdings. United is a Texas limited liability company formed by Templeton that operates as an investment fund managed by Boron. BC Holdings is a Wyoming limited liability company wholly owned by Templeton through which he offered and sold promissory notes in connection with his real estate business. Templeton offered and sold securities to investors in three forms: (1) promissory notes issued by Defendant Boron; (2) investment units in Defendant United; and (3) promissory notes issued by Defendant BC Holdings.Continue Reading New Complaint – SEC v. Boron Capital, LLC, et. al.
New Complaint – Schwartz v. McGregor
Schwartz v. McGregor was filed in the District Court of Denver County, Colorado on January 10, 2022, seeking relief under Colorado’s Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act, C.R.S. § 38-8-101-112 (“CUFTA”), including a turnover and accounting and damages for actual and constructive fraud.
Plaintiff Gary Schwartz is a court-appointed Receiver (“Receiver”) on behalf of a multi-million-dollar fraudulent investment scheme perpetrated by Mark Ray (“Ray”). The Receiver was appointed over Mark Ray, Custom Consulting & Product Services, LLC, MR Cattle Production Services, LLC, Universal Herbs, LLC, DBC Limited, LLC, RM Farm & Livestock, LLC, Sunshine Enterprises (the “Estate entities”). Defendant Eric McGregor (“Defendant”) was an investor in the Ponzi scheme who allegedly received numerous avoidable transfers from the Estate entities.Continue Reading New Complaint – Schwartz v. McGregor
New Complaint – Marfleet v. Hardin, et al.
Marfleet v. Hardin, et al. was filed in the Western District of Tennessee on October 20, 2021. The complaint alleges Defendants operated a nationwide real estate Ponzi scheme that defrauded investors by falsely promising “secured” real estate investments and above-market rates of return in exchange for capital.
Plaintiff Barry Marfleet (“Plaintiff”) is an individual investor. Defendants are James Hardin and his two companies, Defendant Hardin Enterprises Inc. and Defendant MRH Holdings, LLC, (collectively “Defendants”).Continue Reading New Complaint – Marfleet v. Hardin, et al.