Aiding and Abetting

Subscribe to Aiding and Abetting via RSS

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…

Continue Reading… Ponzi Perspectives: 2022 Year-End Roundup

With a new decision settling the issue, businesses run the risk of being held liable for the conduct of their customers with the potential for increased Ponzi scheme related litigation following the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s approval of a cause of action for aiding and abetting fraud. 

Continue Reading… Pennsylvania Supreme Court Recognizes a New Cause of Action Against Those Who Aid and Abet Fraud

On August 31, 2022, Plaintiff Melanie E. Damian, in her capacity as the Court-Appointed Receiver for Today’s Growth Consultant, Inc. d/b/a The Income Store (“TGC”) (the “Receiver”) filed a complaint against Defendant Core Financial Outsourcing of Chicago (“Core Financial”) in the Northern District of Illinois (“Damian II”) seeking damages, injunctive relief, interest, and attorneys’ fees and costs. The complaint alleges five claims for professional negligence, aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, and two violations of the Illinois Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act.

This action stems from a prior enforcement action seeking civil penalties and injunctive relief filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) against TGC and its founder, Kenneth D. Courtright, III (“Courtright”), based upon TGC and Courtright’s alleged violation of federal securities laws and operation of a website services Ponzi scheme.

We previously wrote about PLB Investments LLC et al v. Heartland Bank and Trust Co. et al., a related case initiated by various defrauded investors of TGC against two bank defendants that
Continue Reading… New Complaint – Damian as Receiver of Today’s Growth Consultant, Inc. v. Core Financial Outsourcing of Chicago, LLC

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…
Continue Reading… Ponzi Perspectives: 2022 Midyear Roundup

On May 27, 2022, Plaintiff Melanie E. Damian, in her capacity as the Court-Appointed Receiver for Today’s Growth Consultant, Inc. d/b/a The Income Store (“TGC”) (the “Receiver”) filed a complaint against Defendant SmithAmundsen, LLC (“Defendant”) in the Northern District of Illinois seeking damages, restitution, interest, and costs.  Specifically, the complaint alleges two claims for legal malpractice and aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty.

This action stems from a prior action filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) against TGC and its founder, Kenneth D. Courtright, III (“Courtright”), wherein the SEC alleged TGC and Courtright violated federal securities laws and sought civil penalties and injunctive relief to halt their wrongful activity.

We previously wrote about PLB Investments LLC et al v. Heartland Bank and Trust Co. et al., a related case initiated by various defrauded investors of TGC against two bank defendants concerning TGC’s website services Ponzi scheme.

Continue Reading… New Complaint – Damian, as Receiver of Today’s Growth Consultant, Inc. v. SmithAmundsen, LLC

Oregon JV LLC v. Advanced Investment et al. was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Oregon on March 2, 2022. Plaintiff asserts claims sounding in fraud and requests compensatory and equitable relief against a construction lender and other individuals and entities that funded various loans to a homebuilder with a history of fraud and embezzlement.

Plaintiff is a company that managed a construction loan pool for non-party Joseph Russi.  Defendant Advanced Investment Corp (“AIC”) is an Oregon-based corporation that previously managed the loan pool at issue. The remaining Defendants consist of trustees of various trusts, Oregon-based financial institutions, and several Oregon residents, all of which were investors in the subject loan pool (the “Defendant Lenders”).

Continue Reading… New Complaint – Oregon JV LLC v. Advanced Investment et al.