Update on Receiver’s Lawsuit Against Former Stanford Financial Advisors

In March 2017, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals confirmed that the Receiver is not required to arbitrate his claims to recover payments to former Stanford financial advisors and other Stanford employees of proceeds generated from the sale of Stanford International Bank CDs. Following entry of judgment by the Court of Appeals, the Receiver returned to the District Court to pursue those claims. On June 15, 2017, the Receiver filed an amended complaint, consolidating several previously-filed complaints and identifying newly-discovered payments received by the defendants.

As amended, the Receiver’s complaint now seeks to recover more than $289 million from 313 former financial advisors and other Stanford employees. The Receiver alleges that the payments the defendants received were fraudulent transfers; that the defendants failed to provide reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the payments; and that the defendants did not take the payments in good faith. The Receiver also alleges that the defendants were unjustly enriched by the payments, at the expense of Stanford investors. The lawsuit seeks return of the payments, together with prejudgment interest and attorneys’ fees.

The District Court has set the Receiver’s claims for trial beginning in July 2018.

To view a copy of the amended complaint, and a copy of the Court’s scheduling order setting the Receiver’s claims for trial, click here:

For a full and open debate on the Stanford receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group – SIVG official Forum http://sivg.org.ag/



Advertisements

Proskauer, Chadbourne Can’t Invoke Americold, Investors Say

Investors who accuse Chadbourne & Parke LLP and Proskauer Rose LLP of facilitating Robert Allen Stanford’s $7 billion Ponzi scheme told a Texas federal court Monday that a U.S. Supreme Court ruling on jurisdiction for nebulous legal entities can’t help the firms escape the suit.

The law firms claim the court lacks jurisdiction since most of the investors were foreign and because the firms were stateless for legal purposes, and say the Supreme Court’s March 7 holding in ConAgra Foods et al. v. Americold Logistics et……..

To view the full article, click Here.

For a full and open debate on the Stanford receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group – SIVG official Forum http://sivg.org.ag/



Joint Comments by the U.S. Receiver, the Examiner and the Official Stanford Investors Committee Concerning the Liquidators’ Efforts to Recover Preference Payments

Joint Comments by the U.S. Receiver, the Examiner and the Official Stanford Investors Committee Concerning the Liquidators’ Efforts to Recover Preference Payments – The U.S. Receiver, the Examiner, and the Official Stanford Investors Committee understand that certain SIBL CD investors have received letters or emails from Marcus Wide and Hugh Dickson, the Joint Liquidators appointed by the Antiguan courts to oversee the Antiguan liquidation of SIBL, through which the Joint Liquidators seek to recover from the investors certain amounts (referred to as “preference payments”) that the investors had withdrawn or otherwise received from SIBL during the 6 months’ prior to the failure of SIBL. We also understand that these letters and/or emails are causing considerable distress and concern among SIBL CD investors. We wish to clarify the following matters:

1.The U.S. Receiver, the Examiner, and the Official Stanford Investors Committee have no involvement in the Joint Liquidators’ effort to recover these “preference payments.” The Joint Liquidators are proceeding pursuant to Antiguan law and with the approval of the Antiguan courts. Similarly, the U.S. District Court overseeing the Stanford Receivership has no role in or jurisdiction over the Joint Liquidators’ efforts to recover these “preference payments.”

2.The Antiguan Joint Liquidators have posted a set of Frequently Asked Questions concerning their effort to recover “preference payments” on their website. You can review those Frequently Asked Questions at http://www.sibliquidation.com

3.We understand that the Antiguan court has established a process for objecting to the Joint Liquidators’ effort to recover these “preference payments.” In the first instance, any objections must be directed to the Joint Liquidators at Stanford.enquiries@uk.gt.com. Objections must be filed within 120 days after the investor receives the letter or email asserting the Joint Liquidators’ claim for these “preference payments.”

4.At present, the Joint Liquidators are not permitted to bring lawsuits in the United States to recover these “preference payments,” nor for any other purpose.

To join the debate click here.

For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group – SIVG official forum http://sivg.org.ag/