Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 07/22/2009 (Other)

Filing Date: December 26, 2008

The complaint alleges that during all times material to this action, the Defendants solicited investments from Plaintiffs and others both individually and through Concept$, Consortium, and various "investment clubs" to promote and perpetuate the Ponzi scheme.

In violation of federal securities laws and the common law, Defendants all knowingly, or with reckless disregard, made material misrepresentations and, more significantly, failed to disclose material information to Plaintiffs, including the primary omissions that form the heart of the claims herein, namely the Defendants' failure to inform Plaintiffs that: (a) any and all investment returns depended on the contribution of moneys from new investors; and (b) that Defendants intended simply to steal Plaintiffs' moneys pursuant to an illegal Ponzi scheme.

On July 22, 2009, an order granting plaintiffs’ motion to stay and order of administrative close-out was entered into the Court’s record. This proceeding shall be stayed pending resolution of the parallel civil proceeding. This order was entered without prejudice for the plaintiffs to seek dissolution of the stay and re-opening of this case upon notice to all parties and good cause shown.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Financial
Industry: Investment Services
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol:
Company Market: Privately Traded
Market Status: Privately Held

About the Company & Securities Data


"Company" information provides the industry and sector classification and headquarters state for the primary company-defendant in the litigation. In general, "Securities" information provides the ticker symbol, market, and market status for the underlying securities at issue in the litigation.

In most cases, the primary company-defendant actually issued the securities that are the subject of the litigation, and the securities information and company information relate to the same entity. In a small subset of cases, however, the primary company-defendant is not the issuer (for example, cases against third party brokers/dealers), and the securities information and company information do not relate to the same entity.
COURT: S.D. Florida
DOCKET #: 08-CV-81560
JUDGE: Hon. Kenneth L. Ryskamp
DATE FILED: 12/26/2008
CLASS PERIOD START: 01/01/2007
CLASS PERIOD END: 12/26/2008
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Dimond Kaplan & Rothstein, P.A. (West Palm Beach)
    525 South Flagler Drive, Suite 200, Dimond Kaplan & Rothstein, P.A. (West Palm Beach), FL 33401
    561.671.1920 561.671.1920 ·
No Document Title Filing Date