Madoff Help News & Assistance
The source of news, information and community - your one-stop shop for everything Madoff.
** ANNOUNCING NIAP - NETWORK FOR INVESTOR ACTION & PROTECTION ** Click Here For More Information on NIAP and How To Join
|LATEST MADOFF NEWS||
This brings the total number of co-sponsors to date to 45. (Click here for a list of current co-sponsors).
A New York state judge dismissed a class action against BNY Mellon on Tuesday, saying the plaintiffs had failed to prove the investment bank showed gross negligence in ignoring key warning signs in Bernard Madoff’s notorious $65 billion Ponzi scheme that caused investors massive losses. New York Supreme Court Judge Marcy Friedman granted BNY Mellon’s motion to toss the case, saying lead plaintiffs Entwistle & Cappucci LLP, Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP and Bernstein Liebhard LLP — all of which represented Madoff investors known as the Rye Funds — had not accused the bank of any extraordinary negligence or misconduct, which would be required in order to pursue damages. “It does not allege that defendants breached, let alone recklessly disregarded, any contractual duty. … The law also does not impose any additional tort duty, or duty independent of contract, to exercise reasonable care,” the decision said. More on Law360 here.
A group of investors burned by Bernard Madoff’s Ponzi scheme were given a green light Monday to add state-law claims to their class action in New York federal court, marking one of the first applications of a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision that clarified when such suits aren’t barred under the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act. U.S. District Judge Thomas P. Griesa also raised the possibility that accounting firm KPMG LLP could be reinstated as a defendant in the longstanding suit against Tremont Group Holdings Inc. The investors’ suit, which is part of a multidistrict litigation by alleged Ponzi scheme victims, accuses the Rye, N.Y., hedge fund of misrepresenting how and to what extent it was placing investor funds into Madoff’s hands. The bulk of Judge Griesa’s 10-page opinion was keyed off of the Supreme Court’s February ruling in Chadbourne & Parke LLP v. Troice, which exposed law firms to claims made by victims of convicted Ponzi schemer R. Allan Stanford. More on Law360 here.
Securities regulators are expected to unveil plans to step up checks on stockbrokers’ records, after investigations by The Wall Street Journal revealed flaws in the information available to investors. The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, a Wall Street watchdog, is set to propose rule changes on Wednesday that would require brokerage firms for the first time to do formal background checks on new employees, including brokers hired from other firms, according to a person familiar with the proposals. More in the Wall Street Journal here.
One of five people found guilty last month of aiding Bernard Madoff’s $17.5 billion Ponzi scheme asked the judge in the case for an acquittal or a new trial, citing a lack of evidence and flawed jury deliberations. The jury, which deliberated for a total of about three days after a trial that lasted more than five months, wasn’t thorough or objective, and was swayed by a prosecutor’s “inflammatory and improper remarks” during questioning of witnesses, Jerome O’Hara, 51, a former computer programmer for Madoff’s securities firm, said in a filing today in Manhattan federal court. More on Bloomberg BusinessWeek here.
Victims of a $7 billion Ponzi scheme failed to show that federal regulators dropped the ball in not catching R. Allen Stanford earlier, the 5th Circuit ruled. Investors in the Stanford International Bank Ltd. sued the Securities and Exchange Commission two years ago in Baton Rouge, La., under the Federal Tort Claims Act. More on Court House News Service here.
Brought to you by the good folks at Good Harvest Financial Group - www.goodharv.com
ACCESS TO THIS WEB SITE IS PROVIDED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY AND WITHOUT ANY WARRANTIES, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, REGARDING THE ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS, TIMELINESS, OR RESULTS OBTAINED FROM ANY INFORMATION POSTED ON THIS WEB SITE OR ANY THIRD PARTY WEB SITE LINKED TO THIS WEB SITE. GOOD HARVEST FINANCIAL GROUP DOES NOT MAKE ANY REPRESENTATIONS AS TO THE ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, SUITABILITY, COMPLETENESS, OR RELEVANCE OF ANY INFORMATION POSTED BY ANY UNAFFILIATED THIRD PARTY, WHETHER LINKED TO THIS SITE OR INCORPORATED HEREIN, AND TAKES NO RESPONSIBILITY THEREFORE. ALL SUCH INFORMATION IS PROVIDED SOLELY FOR CONVENIENCE PURPOSESONLY AND ALL USERS THEREOF SHOULD BE GUIDED ACCORDINGLY.Copyright © 2014 - All Rights Reserved
Powered by WordPress · Atahualpa Theme by BytesForAll