New Complaints

Subscribe to New Complaints

Wiand v. ATC Brokers Ltd, et al. was filed in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, on May 28, 2021.  The complaint was filed by a Receiver appointed in an action brought by the Commodity Futures Trade Commission (the “CFTC”) alleging the operation a Ponzi scheme.  The alleges (1) aiding and abetting fraud, (2) aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duties, (3) gross negligence, and (4) simple negligence.  In addition, the complaint seeks to avoid alleged fraudulent transfers received by ATC Brokers Ltd.

Plaintiff is the court appointed Receiver over Oasis International Group, Limited, Oasis Management LLC, and Satellite Holdings Company (the “Oasis Entities”) in an action filed by the CFTC, titled Commodity Futures Trade Commission v. Oasis International Group, Limited, et al., Case No. 8:19-cv-00886-VMC-SPF (M.D. Fla. Apr. 15, 2019).  Defendants include: (1) ATC Brokers Ltd., the exchange firm the Ponzi scheme operators used to carry out the scheme; (2) Spotex LLC, the entity that provided the software used to carry out the Ponzi scheme; and (3) an owner of both entity Defendants.

…
Continue Reading New Complaint – Wiand as Receiver for Oasis International Group, Limited, et al. v. ATC Brokers Ltd, et al.

Whitmore v. Horwitz was filed in the Central District of California on April 20, 2021, seeking class certification and unspecified civil damages. The complaint alleges fraud by omission, aiding and abetting fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty.

Plaintiffs are a group of investors seeking to represent a class of those who invested in Horwitz’s company, 1inMM Capital, LLC (“1inMM”). The defendants are Zachary Horwitz, 1inMM, and City National Bank (“City National”), the bank that Horwitz and 1inMM used.

…
Continue Reading New Complaint – Whitmore v. Horwitz

IMG Memorial Fund 1 was filed in the Southern District of New York on April 14, 2021, alleging that various defendants, including individuals and investment funds, violated federal securities laws and the common law through their use of a proprietary trading platform.  Specifically, the complaint alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Act, along with common law claims for breach of fiduciary duty and negligent misrepresentation.

Plaintiff IMG Memorial Fund 1 is a family investment fund.  Defendant Jeffrey Spotts is the principal individual who created various investment funds, including the Prophecy Special Opportunities Fund and Prophecy Special Ops GP LLC (collectively, “Prophecy”).  Defendant Vantage Consulting Group is an investment advisor with an ownership interest in defendant investment fund First Landing Fund LLC, which is co-controlled by individual defendants, Mark Finn and David Schippers (collectively, “First Landing”).

…
Continue Reading New Complaint – IMG Memorial Fund 1, LLC v. First Landing Fund, LLC, et al.

The SEC filed SEC v. Silver in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York on April 13, 2021, claiming Defendant Silver orchestrated and carried out a string of frauds to cover up tens of millions of dollars in losses on bad bets to keep his investment advisory business afloat. Specifically, the complaint alleges violations of Sections 206(1) and 206(2) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933.

Defendant Silver was the co-founder, managing partner, and chief operating officer of his business, International Investment Group LLC (“IIG”), which specialized in advising clients in investments in emerging market economies. IIG formed three private funds with stated strategies of investing trade finance loans marketed to qualified institutional investors.

…
Continue Reading New Complaint – SEC v. Silver

The SEC filed SEC v. Horwitz in the Central District of California on April 5, 2021, alleging that Defendant Horowitz violated federal securities laws in connection with fraudulent promissory notes issued by Horwitz’s company. Specifically, the complaint alleges violations of Sections 17(a) of the Securities Act, 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act, and 10b-5 of the Exchange Act Rules.

Defendant Horwitz was the owner and operator of Defendant 1inMM, which purported to be a company in the business of obtaining distribution rights to certain movies in order to license those rights to media companies like Netflix and HBO.

…
Continue Reading New Complaint – SEC v. Horwitz

Plaintiff Surefire Dividend Capital, LP (“Plaintiff”) filed Surefire Dividend Capital, LP v. Industrial and Commercial Bank of China Financial Services LLC in the Supreme Court of New York for the County of New York on April 15, 2021, claiming at least $46,598,676.84 in money damages, along with its costs and attorneys’ fees.  Specifically, the complaint alleges claims for aiding and abetting fraud and aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty against Defendant Industrial and Commercial Bank of China Financial Services LLC (“ICBC”).

Plaintiff is an entity investor in Broad Reach Capital, LP (“Broad Reach”)—a purported hedge fund allegedly turned Ponzi-scheme ran by Brenda Smith (“Smith”).  The defendant served as the clearing broker for Broad Reach, maintained several accounts on behalf of Broad Reach, and allowed many transfers from the Broad Reach accounts to other accounts controlled by Smith, both internally and externally.

…
Continue Reading New Complaint – Surefire Dividend Capital, LP v. Industrial and Commercial Bank of China Financial Services LLC

Elghossain v. Bank of Audi, et al. was filed in the Southern District of New York on March 11, 2021, claiming that Plaintiffs were victims of a Ponzi scheme within the Lebanese banking system.

Plaintiffs are a married couple—both citizens and residents of the United States.  The defendants are two Lebanese banks, Bank Audi and Banque Du Liban.

…
Continue Reading New Complaint – Elghossain v. Bank of Audi, et al.

Peters v. Gallun, et al. was filed in the Central District of California on February 18, 2021, claiming civil damages for violations of securities law, breach of contract, and conversion.

Plaintiff is an individual working as a movie producer in California (“Peters”).  The defendants are an individual acting as a business manager and equine sales agent (“Gallun”) and Gallun’s limited liability company.

…
Continue Reading New Complaint – Peters v. Gallun, et al.