Connect with us

Fake Documents

The Millionaire Beach Bum Series: Two Rogue Lawyers $3 Million Dollar Investor Scam

A law partnership collapses around a combined six million dollar+ embezzlement. Yet only one lawyer is being held accountable.

Published

on

THE MILLIONAIRE BEACH BUM SERIES

ALPEZ’s FOUNDER SURVIVED AUSCHWITZ, YET HIS COMPANY WOULD BE DEFRAUDED OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS BY HIS OWN.

Two Florida lawyers created a law partnership. They would conspire to steal millions of investors dollars by duping a trusted connection, Alex Alevy of Alpez, Chile, who knew Jordan’s wife, Natalie Goldstein.

Those two lawyers are Jordan Weinkle and Brian Abergel who abused their status as lawyers to defraud and steal over $3 million dollars from Alpez. Later, in a separate incident, Jordan Weinkle would be suspended and then disbarred by the Florida Bar for stealing more money.

However, Brian Abergel has tried to wash his hands of any wrongdoing and moved quietly to a new law firm, Beachside Legal Services. Currently, Abergel is ‘in good standing’ with the Bar, despite the missing millions.

Questionably, neither is facing criminal prosecution – well, none that we are aware of…

As such, LIF decided to investigate the two lawyers. We begin with the lawsuit filed by Alpez, which goes into great detail about the dastardly scheme and resulting theft of millions of dollars, relying upon personal meetings and assurances given by these two rogue lawyers.

THE MILLIONAIRE BEACH BUM SERIES

LIF Reached Out to Florida Lawyer Brian Abergel at his Work Email. No Response Has Been Received.

Wed., 23 Feb., 2022 at 11.04 am CST.

To: babergel@beachsidelegal.com

ALPEZ AND PLANARIA LITIGATION

Top of the morn’ to you.

We’re a non-profit which focuses on highlighting legal corruption.

Your name, Brian J. Abergel, bounced off the page after we reviewed your co-conspirator Jordan G. Weinkle and former law partner’s surrender of his law license (per Florida Bar’s disciplinary list).

We were rather surprised, after our own detailed investigation to note that you have managed to avoid a similar fate.

As such, we thought we would ask for your comments, if any, before we publish our article on lawsinflorida.com as to why we strongly believe the allegations and evidence supports the fact you should be disbarred and also criminally indicted.

This would be in relation to;

  • The $3.4 million dollars+ judgment that Alex Alevy of Alpez is currently and unsuccessfully trying to collect on,
  • The $3 million dollars (excl. the $5.1m mortgage) which disappeared from the firm’s trust account after the $5m wire from Planaria for the two condemned and dangerous commercial properties securing the loan(s), e.g. the Bay Harbor properties which you defended while under foreclosure.

Certainly, we understand that the Alpez judgment by Judge Hanzman names only Weinkle as liable, but we see that as err. WA law firm was a joint enterprise and you should be held accountable.

“Alex’s belief was based on Weinkle’s oral representations in their phone conferences, the written representations of Weinkle and Abergel in their emails, and the Fake Closing Documents provided to Alex by Weinkle.”

“On May 11, 2020, the Law Firm, still serving as the escrow agent for the Planaria Loan and presumably still in possession of the $3,000,000.00 in escrow funds as part of the Planaria Loan, suddenly filed for voluntary dissolution. To initiate this voluntary dissolution, the members of the Law Firm – Weinkle and Abergel – unanimously voted to do so.” – Alpez complaint.

Alex Alevy of Alpez’s complaint states and restates many times that you and Weinkle were co-conspirators. The fact your friend and business partner is perhaps willing to throw himself onto the sword is not availing, as that is not how the law should operate.

Please note, we are based in Texas and not familiar with the Miami social scene, but we’ve taken a keen interest in the close knit community from which y’all operate and perceive that maybe part of the underlying reason for the suppression of publicity surrounding this case to date by the judiciary, the Florida Bar and local media. Fortunately, as independent journalists, we are not curtailed by any such limitations.

If you wish to rebut or comment on any of the facts we allege here – based on the incriminating evidence before us –  please reply to this email by return.

ALPEZ SPA, A FOREIGN CORPORATION ET AL VS JORDAN GARRETT WEINKLE ET AL

A Duped Chilean Investor

Filed Oct. 29, 2020 – Judgment entered , Default Sum $3.4M  by Judge Hanzman, entered Nov. 3, 2021.

Alpez is a family business officially established by Elie Alevy in 1973. Its foundations date back to the 1950’s when Elie founded his first company, the Swiss embroidery factory RONIS.
Alpez has specialized in the development, construction, marketing and leasing of real estate assets both in Chile and in Barcelona, Spain.
Pioneers in the construction of large commercial areas, the family has become a relevant player in the Chilean real estate industry.
In 2015 and after a generational change, Alpez became the Alevy’s family investment arm and Family Office, diversifying its investment portfolio and began to work with a new strategy but following the historic philosophy of its founder.

JURISDICTION AND THE PARTIES

1. This is an action for money damages in excess of $30,000.00, exclusive of attorneys’ fees, interest, and costs.

2. Alex is a Chilean national and resident who entered into multiple real estate transactions with the Defendants, which are the subject of this action.

3. Alpez is a foreign real estate investment company that exists under the laws of Chile, whose address and principal place of business is Av. Las Condes 7700 Oficina 403, Las Condes, Santiago, Chile 7560380 CL. At all times relevant to this action, Alex acted as the authorized representative of Alpez with respect to the allegations in this Complaint.

4. Weinkle is a Florida resident and an attorney admitted to practice under the Florida Bar.

As reported to the Florida Bar, Weinkle currently practices at the law firm of Weinkle Legal Group PLLC, with an address at 1688 Meridian Ave, Suite 440, Miami Beach, Florida 33139.

Weinkle previously practiced and was one of two partners at the Law Firm.

5. Abergel is a Florida resident and an attorney admitted to practice under the Florida Bar.

As reported to the Florida Bar, Abergel currently practices at the law firm of Abergel Law Group, PLLC, with an address at 100 SE 2nd St., Suite 2000, Miami, Florida 33131.

Abergel previously practiced and was one of two partners at the Law Firm.

6. The Law Firm existed as a professional limited liability company under the laws of the State of Florida, located at 605 Lincoln Road, Suite 250, Miami Beach, Florida 33139.

Weinkle and Abergel founded the Law Firm on or about May 24, 2017.

Per the records of the Florida Secretary of State, Weinkle and Abergel both served as co-Managers and co-Registered Agents of the Law Firm at all times relevant to this action.

7. Venue is proper in Miami-Dade County in that all of the subject real estate transactions took place in Miami-Dade County, Florida, all of the individual defendants reside in Miami-Dade County, Florida, and all of the wrongful acts of Defendants occurred, and the causes of action alleged herein accrued, in Miami-Dade County, Florida.

8. All conditions precedent to the institution of this action have been performed, have occurred, are satisfied, or have otherwise been waived.

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

9. This case involves standing members of the Florida Bar, Weinkle and Abergel, abusing their status and privileges as attorneys to induce Alpez as their client, via multiple negligent and fraudulent misrepresentations, into providing them with almost $3 million to invest in real estate transactions under false pretenses in which Weinkle and Abergel were also investors.

10. During the course of their legal representation of Alpez, Weinkle, Abergel and the Law Firm utterly failed to meet the minimum standard of care reasonably expected from Florida lawyers in representing a client in a Florida real estate investment.

In addition, Weinkle, Abergel and the Law Firm failed to comply with Rule 4-1.8 of the Florida Rules of Professional Conduct by failing to make the required disclosures under the rule to Alpez and by failing to obtain informed written consent from Alpez prior to entering into a real estate investment with Alpez.

11. Before, during and after the real estate transactions, Weinkle and Abergel made multiple knowing and intentional misrepresentations to Alex regarding the funding and structure of Alpez’s real estate investment, its status, the preservation and status of the underlying real estate, and the ability and likelihood of Alpez to receive a return on its investment.

12. Further, after Alpez refused to stop requesting information and documentation regarding its almost $3 million investment, Weinkle and Abergel ultimately cut off their client completely, refused to provide any accurate updates on the status of their client’s sizable investment, and ultimately abandoned their client without explanation or returning any of the investment funds they had illicitly coaxed out of their client.

A. Weinkle First Meets Alex and Gains His Trust

13. The client at the center of Weinkle and Abergel’s scheme was Alpez SpA (“Alpez”), as represented by Alex. Alex is a Chilean national and real estate investor, who makes real estate investments for himself and on behalf of his family and their investment company, Alpez.

14. Alex first came to know Weinkle in 2008, via Weinkle’s girlfriend at the time, Natalie Goldstein, who was a school friend of Alex’s. Weinkle eventually married Miss Goldstein, and Alex was also acquainted with Weinkle’s father-in-law, Daniel Goldstein (“Goldstein”).

In Alex’s initial discussions with Weinkle, Weinkle represented himself to Alex as a Florida attorney with his own law practice who could easily direct and complete lucrative real estate investment transactions for him in South Florida.

15. In April, 2018, Weinkle met with Alex and relayed to Alex that he was working on a series of real estate investments that Alex might be interested in participating in.

16. After this April 2018 discussion, Weinkle reached out to Alex via email on May 15, 2018, seeking Alpez’s participation as an investor in a real estate purchase that Weinkle was putting together (the “Tamarind Investment”). The Tamarind Investment involved the purchase of a multifamily property located in West Palm Beach, Florida. Weinkle requested that Alpez provide him with $161,000.00 in order to participate as an investor in the transaction.

17. It was Alex’s understanding, based on Weinkle’s representations, that Weinkle would also serve as Alpez’s attorney in connection with the Tamarind Investment (in addition to Weinkle’s status as the manager of the investment). In fact, in the email between Alex and Weinkle after May 15, 2018, Weinkle provided Alex with detailed legal guidance regarding the best structure for the transaction and Alpez’s investment therein, as well as the tax consequences to Alpez of the potential investment.

Natalie Goldstein Weinkle was a school friend of Alex Alevy, the investor.

18. On May 24, 2018, based upon Weinkle’s specific representations about the investment deal and Weinkle’s status as Alpez’s attorney, Alex ultimately agreed that Alpez would participate in the Tamarind Investment and provided the $161,000.00 to Weinkle.

19. Importantly, from May 2018 forward, Alex reasonably considered Weinkle and the Law Firm to be acting as his and Alpez’s attorney, with all of the duties, obligations and protections that come with an attorney-client relationship.

20. Alpez’s involvement in the Tamarind Investment was completed on or about August 24, 2018, when Weinkle wired Alpez $319,000.00, a sum that translated into a 100% return on Alpez’s original $161,000.00 investment.

B. Weinkle and Abergel Present Alex with Bay Harbor Properties Investment “Opportunity”

21. Having earned Alex’s trust through the Tamarind Investment, Weinkle and Abergel now conspired to induce Alpez into investing a significantly larger sum with them in connection with another real estate transaction.

In fact, in an August 2018 email, Weinkle described this new opportunity with Alex, to which Alex responded that Alpez could not invest further with Weinkle until Alpez received a return of the Tamarind Investment.

Shortly thereafter, Weinkle liquidated the Tamarind Investment and paid Alpez its initial investment and a sizable profit.

22. Towards the end of August, 2018, Weinkle informed Alex about a potentially profitable real estate investment opportunity in connection with two properties in Bay Harbor Islands, Florida (the “Bay Harbor Properties”).

Weinkle represented to Alex that they could purchase one of the Bay Harbor Properties for $5.8 million, that Weinkle would invest $3,000,000.00 of his own money if Alex contributed a minimum of $1,000,000.00 through Alpez.

23. As a result of Weinkle’s representations about a potential investment opportunity with the Bay Harbor Properties, Alex traveled from Chile to Miami, Florida in October 2018.

The purpose of the trip was to meet with Weinkle, learn more about Weinkle’s real estate investment operations, and meet Weinkle’s partner, Abergel.

24. During this trip, Weinkle introduced Alex to Abergel and provided Alex with further information regarding the Law Firm’s operations and real estate investment activities. Weinkle also took Alex to visit the Bay Harbor Properties, which consisted of two residential, multi-family apartment complexes.

C. Weinkle and Abergel’s False and Fraudulent Representations to Alex Concerning the Bay Harbor One Investment

25. On October 2, 2018, Weinkle emailed to Alex a formal prospectus for the purchase and acquisition of one of the Bay Harbor Properties (“Bay Harbor One”), and proposed that Alpez participate as an investor in the transaction.

Bay Harbor One is located at 1080 93rd Street, Bay Harbor Islands, FL 33154, and contains 24 apartment units.

In the October 2nd email, Weinkle proposed to Alex that Alpez and Weinkle purchase Bay Harbor One, along with Abergel, hold the property for a year while they remodeled the building and units, and thereafter take out a refinance loan on the property that would be used to pay back Alex’s initial investment.

26. Weinkle followed up the October 2nd email with another email to Alex on October 16, 2018, copying Abergel, in which Weinkle represented to Alex that Weinkle and Abergel had secured an oral acceptance for their offer to purchase Bay Harbor One from Bay Harbor One’s owner.

Weinkle represented to Alex that the orally-agreed price for Bay Harbor One was $5,400,000.00 and that the closing for the acquisition would be before November 1, 2018.

Marrisa Carvajal was part of the social scene and would become part of the WA team, including a questionable notary public stamp with her signature on one of the exhibits in this complaint.

27. On October 22, 2018, Weinkle represented to Alex via email that the confirmed purchase price for Bay Harbor One was $5,300,000, and that the total acquisition cost would be $5,700,000.

28. In this October 22nd email, Weinkle also proposed to Alex that Bay Harbor One would be purchased according to the following funding breakdown:

• 60% of the acquisition cost to be paid by A-Frame Investments LLC (“A-Frame”), an entity ultimately owned by Weinkle and Abergel as equal 50% partners;

• 40% of the acquisition cost to be paid by Alpez;

• 10% of the acquisition cost to be paid by MYD Investments, an entity owned by Yoni Ramras (“Ramras”), an associate of Weinkle.

From Weinkle’s representations, Alex understood that the above-described funding percentages would also reflect the breakdown of ownership interests in Bay Harbor One after it was acquired

– i.e. Alpez would have a 40% direct ownership interest in Bay Harbor One after the acquisition.

29. Weinkle also represented to Alex in the October 22nd email that the management of Bay Harbor One after the acquisition would be performed by Weinkle himself, through a management company called Tavor Management (“Tavor”), which was formed by Weinkle and Abergel on October 11, 2018.

At all relevant times, the Law Firm was the listed registered agent for Tavor.

30. Lastly, Weinkle represented to Alex in the October 22nd email that Weinkle and the Law Firm would serve as Alpez’s lawyer in setting up a U.S. corporate entity through which Alpez would participate in, and hold its interest in, the Bay Harbor One investment deal – i.e. drafting the necessary corporate documentation to create and set up an affiliate of Alpez in the United States.

31. On October 27, 2018, Weinkle represented to Alex that the final acquisition cost for Bay Harbor One was $5,751,780.54, and that Alpez’s funding share was $2,300,721.22.

Weinkle also told Alex that Bay Harbor One would need an additional $250,000.00 for the remodel, and that Alpez’s share of that amount was $100,000 – for a total required investment by Alpez of $2,400,721.22.

Importantly, in this October 27th email, Weinkle represented to Alex that Weinkle, Abergel and Ramras had already funded their portions of the total acquisition cost.

As such, Weinkle represented to Alex that the investment in Bay Harbor One would result in the acquisition of Bay Harbor One on an unencumbered basis, with all of the investors fully funding their respective shares without the need for any outside financing or assumption of existing secured debt to acquire the property.

32. In the October 27, 2018 email, Weinkle also confirmed that Weinkle and Abergel – as lawyers for Alpez – had drafted the necessary documents and completed the required registration for Alpez Holdings, LLC (“Alpez Holdings”), the U.S. entity through which Alpez could participate in the Bay Harbor One transaction.

That was false.

The truth is that Alpez Holdings was not registered with the Florida Secretary of State by Weinkle until November 6, 2018.

33. Lastly, Weinkle reported to Alex in the October 27th email that Weinkle and Abergel had also drafted the corporate documentation for the entity that would actually purchase and acquire title to Bay Harbor One, The Forum Residences, LLC (“Forum”).

34. In reliance on the multiple representations by Weinkle and Abergel regarding the funding, structure and outcome of the Bay Harbor One transaction, especially the fact that Alpez would be acquiring a 40% ownership interest in the unencumbered Bay Harbor One property, Alex agreed to provide Weinkle with the $2,400,721.22 necessary for Alpez’s acquisition of a 40% interest in Bay Harbor One.

35. On October 30, 2018, Alpez wired $320,721.22 to the Trust Account of the Law Firm, and then on November 5, 2018, Alpez wire transferred another $2,080,000.00 to the same trust account..

36. On November 6, 2018, Weinkle confirmed receipt of Alpez’s $2,400,721.22 wire transfer via email. In this same November 6th email, Weinkle provided Alex with the Articles of Incorporation for Alpez Holdings that were drafted by Weinkle and Abergel, as well as a screenshot for the bank account and Operating Agreement of Forum – the formal name of which had been changed by Weinkle to The Forum At Bay Harbor, LLC.

These two were not great at selecting investments, the two condo’s subject to this lawsuit would be condemned and closed down after the collapse of a nearby condo, killing many residents.

D. The Fake Closing Documents

37. On November 17, 2018, Weinkle provided Alex with what he falsely purported to be the final closing documents for the purchase of Bay Harbor One via email, reflecting a final purchase price of $5,300,000.00 and confirming that the purchase had taken place on November 7, 2018 (the “Fake Closing Documents”).

A true and correct copy of the Fake Closing Documents are attached hereto as Composite Exhibit A.

The Fake Closing Documents also stated that the Law Firm had served as the Settlement Agent for the transaction.

38. The Fake Closing Documents provided by Weinkle and Abergel to Alex included a purported Settlement Statement reflecting that the seller of Bay Harbor One was an entity by the name of Bal Harbor Investments LLC (“BHI”), represented by a managing member named Jack Saljanin (“Saljanin”).

The Settlement Statement also reflected that the purchaser of Bay Harbor One was Forum, represented by Weinkle.

39. The Fake Closing Documents also included a purported Warranty Deed granted from BHI to Forum, attesting that BHI fully warranted the title to Bay Harbor One that was being conveyed to Forum. To date, upon information and belief, this Warranty Deed has not been recorded in the public records.

40. Lastly, the Fake Closing Documents included a representation that Old Republic National Title Insurance Company would be issuing an owner’s title insurance policy on the Bay Harbor One property, which upon information and belief was not issued.

41. Accordingly, as of November 17, 2018, Alex believed that Alpez owned a 40% interest in The Forum At Bay Harbor, LLC, which in turn owned Bay Harbor One on an unencumbered basis.

Alex’s belief was based on Weinkle’s oral representations in their phone conferences, the written representations of Weinkle and Abergel in their emails, and the Fake Closing Documents provided to Alex by Weinkle.

E. The Truth About the Bay Harbor One Investment

42. Almost all of what Weinkle and Abergel had represented to Alex regarding the Bay Harbor One investment and purchase transaction was knowingly and intentionally false – including all of the documents in the Fake Closing Documents package.

43. Unknown to Alex and Alpez, Weinkle first approached the owners of both the Bal Harbor Properties, Nua Shala (“Shala”) and Jack Saljanin (“Saljanin”) in November 2018, offering to provide Shala and Saljanin with a $500,000 refinance loan – not an offer to purchase Bay Harbor One outright as Weinkle and Abergel had falsely represented to Alex.

Shala and Saljanin owned the Bay Harbor Properties via their holding entity Bal Harbor Investments LLC (“BHI”).

44. Upon information and belief, Shala and Saljanin sought to refinance an existing loan to be secured by a second mortgage on Bay Harbor One, in order to raise funds to pay off a delinquent mortgage that was on a family property in New York owned by Shala and Saljanin.

45. Shala and Saljanin accepted Weinkle’s loan offer, and Weinkle wired the $500,000.00 in loan funds to Shala and Saljanin in early December, 2018.

Upon information and belief, this $500,000.00 came from Alpez’s $2,400,721.22 investment, a fact Weinkle did not disclose to Alex. After wiring the $500,000.00 in loan funds, Weinkle and/or Abergel drafted and prepared a Second Note, Mortgage and Loan Agreement that was presented to Shala and Saljanin.

46. However, Weinkle did not actually just want to provide a refinance loan to Shala and Saljanin.

Weinkle also presented them with a Master Lease Agreement, under which Weinkle would lease and manage both of the Bay Harbor Properties, as well as extend a credit line of $100,000.00 at 8% interest.

In exchange, Weinkle proposed that he would lease the Bay Harbor Properties via Forum, at a rate of $25,000.00 per month for ten (10) years with 5% yearly increases to the rent.

47. Again, Weinkle and Abergel never told Alex anything about a lease transaction with respect to Bay Harbor One.

In fact, as previously described, Weinkle and Abergel had fraudulently misrepresented to Alex that Alpez Holdings was already an indirect 40% owner of Bay Harbor One, when instead at the same time Weinkle was in the process of negotiating with Shala and Saljanin to lease Bay Harbor One from BHI.

48. On December 12, 2018, almost a month after Weinkle and Abergel had provided the Fake Closing Documents to Alex and represented that Alpez Holdings now indirectly owned 40% of Bay Harbor One, Weinkle induced Shala and Saljanin to execute the Master Lease Agreement that Weinkle had prepared.

Simultaneously on December 12, 2018, Shala and Saljanin executed and delivered a Second Note and Mortgage to Weinkle via Tavor – the management company that Weinkle had represented to Alex was formed in order to manage Bay Harbor One after its acquisition by Alpez, Weinkle, Abergel and Ramras.

True and correct copies of the Master Lease Agreement and Second Note and Mortgage are attached hereto as Composite Exhibit B.

49. One of the documents signed by Shala and Saljanin on December 18, 2019 was a Purchase Membership Agreement – which transferred 100% of the ownership of BHI to Forum, allowing Weinkle to remove Shala and Saljanin as members and managers of BHI.

In effect, Shala and Saljanin sold their ownership interests in BHI – the entity which owned the Bay Harbor Properties – to Weinkle.

A true and correct copy of the Purchase Membership Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit C.

50. Most importantly for Alex and Alpez, Shala and Saljanin, as the owners of BHI, did not close on the sale of the Bay Harbor Properties or execute any deeds of sale relating to either of the Bay Harbor Properties.

They never signed any of the sale documents that were presented to Alex and Alpez as part of the Fake Closing Documents package.

51. The final outcome of Weinkle’s fraudulent conduct was that Alpez ended up owning a 40% interest in the sole member of BHI – instead of a 40% direct interest in an entity owning an unencumbered Bay Harbor One.

F. Weinkle and Abergel’s False and Fraudulent Representations to Alex Concerning the Bay Harbor Two Investment

52. On January 2, 2019, Weinkle requested via email that Alex join a conference call to discuss the fact that the seller of Bay Harbor One had now approached Weinkle with the opportunity to purchase the second of the Bay Harbor Properties (“Bay Harbor Two”).

Bay Harbor Two is located at 1060 95th Street, Bay Harbor Islands, Florida 33154, and contains 8 apartment units.

All of these representations by Weinkle were knowingly and intentionally false, as Alpez, Weinkle and Abergel already effectively owned Bay Harbor Two via their indirect ownership of BHI at the time of this email – due to Weinkle’s previously-described transaction with Shala and Saljanin.

53. During the subsequent conference call with Alex, Weinkle represented that everything necessary for the purchase of Bay Harbor Two had been completed, that Weinkle’s father was going to finance the purchase of Bay Harbor Two by putting up $1,000,000.00 as a loan that would be used by Weinkle, Abergel and Alpez Holdings to purchase Bay Harbor Two, and that Weinkle, Abergel and Alpez Holdings would then pay back the loan from Weinkle’s father.

Again, none of these representations by Weinkle were true.

54. On February 23, 2019, Weinkle sent an email to Alex regarding an update on Bay Harbor One, stating that the current plan was to renovate Bay Harbor One by converting its 1- bedroom apartments into 2-bedroom apartments and its 2-bedroom apartments into 3-bedroom apartments.

Weinkle intentionally misrepresented to Alex that Weinkle would be taking out a loan on Bay Harbor One in order to pay for these re-modeling efforts.

Importantly, Weinkle misrepresented to Alex that Bay Harbor One was an unencumbered property at the time Weinkle would be taking out this loan for remodeling efforts.

The two condo investment properties in Bay Harbor, Miami, Florida would be shut down and tenants removed within a day of each other.

55. In actuality, Weinkle was never pursuing construction financing for remodeling work on Bay Harbor One.

Instead, at the time of his misrepresentations to Alex regarding Weinkle’s efforts to close a loan on Bay Harbor One for remodeling work, Weinkle was actually trying to secure a loan on Bay Harbor One that would pay off the existing debt on both of the Bay Harbor Properties – existing debt that Weinkle had purposely hidden from Alex.

56. In his February 23rd email, Weinkle also advised Alex that the way to acquire Bay Harbor Two would not be to purchase it outright, but instead to purchase the company that currently owned Bay Harbor Two – BHI (the same company that Alex believed had sold Bay Harbor One to Alpez Holdings, Weinkle, Abergel and Ramras, and which was in truth already owned by Weinkle, Alpez Holdings, Ramras and Abergel at the time of this misrepresentation).

57. On February 26, 2019, Weinkle took out a $5.1 million refinance loan from Avatar Capital Finance, LLC, secured by the Bay Harbor Properties, with BHI as the borrower (the “Avatar Loan”).

As previously described, Alex was lead to believe by Weinkle that Weinkle was working on getting a loan on Bay Harbor One for remodeling work.

Instead, the Avatar Loan was a refinancing loan used to pay off the existing secured debt on both the Bay Harbor Properties that had been intentionally hidden from Alex by Weinkle.

58. On February 27, 2019, Weinkle told Alex via email that Alex’s portion of the total acquisition cost for Bay Harbor Two was $540,400.00.

Shortly thereafter, also on February 27, 2019, Abergel sent an email to Alex with the details necessary to facilitate the wire transfer of the requested $540,400.00 into the trust account of the Law Firm.

All of these representations by Weinkle were intentional and knowing falsehoods, as evidenced by the previously-described transaction by Weinkle with Shala and Saljanin.

59. Based upon the oral and written representations of Weinkle and Abergel regarding the purchase, funding and structure of Bay Harbor Two, specifically that Alpez Holdings would be acquiring an indirect ownership interest in Bay Harbor Two through its $540,400.00 investment, Alex caused Alpez to wire transfer the requested funds to Weinkle, Abergel and the Law Firm.

60. On March 6, 2019, Alpez wired $540,400.00 to the trust account of the Law Firm (per the instructions of Weinkle and Abergel), purportedly to purchase Alpez Holdings’ respective ownership interest in Bay Harbor Two.

Accordingly, as of March 6, 2019, Alex believed Alpez Holdings had now acquired a 40% ownership interest in Bay Harbor Two, also on an unencumbered basis.

61. As previously established, this was an entirely fraudulent transaction.

In actuality, Alpez Holdings already owned a 40% interest in Bay Harbor Two at the time of this wire transfer due to its indirect ownership interest in BHI.

Upon information and belief, and without Alex’s knowledge, Weinkle used the $540,400.00 from Alpez to pay the borrower’s closing costs associated with the Avatar Loan.

62. Together with its initial investment for Bay Harbor One of $2,400,721.22, Alpez had now funded and paid Weinkle and Abergel a total of $2,941,121.22 for its investment in the Bay Harbor Properties (the “Alpez Investment Funds”).

G. Weinkle and Abergel’s False and Fraudulent Representations to Alex Regarding a Buy-Out of his Interest in the Bay Harbor Properties and the Shala Lawsuit

63. On June 26, 2019, Alex received an email from Weinkle in which Weinkle represented that Weinkle and Abergel had started receiving offers to purchase both of the Bay Harbor Properties.

This email had been preceded by updates from Weinkle to Alex, both written and oral, regarding the purported ongoing renovation projects at the Bay Harbor Properties.

Upon information and belief, these were intentional and knowing misrepresentations by Weinkle, in order to prevent Alex from discovering the truth about how the Alpez Investment Funds had been used and to keep Alex from learning that in actuality Alpez’s investment in the Bay Harbor Properties was highly leveraged and at risk of foreclosure by the secured lender.

64. On August 17, 2019, Weinkle sent an email to Alex updating him regarding various legal and tax issues that Weinkle had been handling as the lawyer for Alpez and Alpez Holdings.

However, Weinkle failed to provide Alex with any detailed updates on the Bay Harbor Properties or the Alpez Investment Funds.

65. At this point in time, Alex began to be suspicious about the status of the Bay Harbor Properties, and the inability of Weinkle and Abergel to provide him with direct answers to basic questions regarding the status of the renovations, the timeline for the sale of the properties, or the future strategy regarding a return on the Alpez Investment Funds.

To-date, attorney’s Brian J. Abergel and Jordan G. Weinkle have not been criminally charged in this $3 million dollar fraud, nor the ‘double or quits’ second $3 million dollar fraud against Canadian hard money lender Planaria Holdings.

66. On November 11, 2019, unbeknownst to Alex, Shala and Saljanin filed a lawsuit in Miami-Dade County Circuit Court against Weinkle, Tavor and Forum (the “Shala Lawsuit”).

The Shala Lawsuit seeks damages against Weinkle, Tavor and Forum under fraud and unjust enrichment claims relating to Weinkle’s conduct with regard to his acquisition of BHI from Shala and Saljanin as previously described.

The Shala Lawsuit also seeks injunctive relief for the court to return control of BHI back to Shala and Saljanin.

67. As a result of Weinkle and Abergel’s failure to provide him with adequate answers to his questions about the Bay Harbor Properties investments, Alex traveled to Miami in December, 2019, in order to have his questions answered by Abergel and Weinkle in person.

During the visit, Weinkle told Alex that Weinkle and Abergel were upset with all of the complicated questions that Alex was asking, that the questions were overwhelming, and that due to this and other unspecified reasons, Weinkle and Abergel wanted to purchase Alpez Holdings’ ownership interest in the Bay Harbor Properties.

In order to acquire Alpez Holdings’ interests, Weinkle and Abergel proposed to pay Alpez back the total amount of the Alpez Investment Funds, plus 8% annual interest. Weinkle and Abergel also proposed to complete the transaction within a few months, namely in March 2020, and stated that Goldstein would be the individual purchasing Alpez Holdings’ interests in the Bay Harbor Properties.

68. The truth is that everything Weinkle and Abergel represented to Alex regarding the proposed purchase of Alpez Holdings’ interest in the Bay Harbor Properties was false, only calculated to further delay Alex from finding out the truth about Alpez’s investments with Weinkle and Abergel.

69. A few days after his return from Miami, largely due to Weinkle and Abergel’s failure to answer his questions and the sudden overall lack of transparency regarding the Bay Harbor Properties, Alex informed Weinkle and Abergel that Alpez Holdings would sell its investment interest in the Bay Harbor Properties in accordance with the terms discussed in Miami.

70. However, after this communication, Alex heard nothing further from Weinkle or Abergel. In fact, all throughout February and March 2020, Alex sent repeated email and text messages to Weinkle and Abergel, inquiring as to when the purchase would occur. Alex did not hear back from either Weinkle or Abergel.

71. After weeks of silence from Weinkle and Abergel, Alex reached out to Goldstein in a desperate attempt to find out what was going on with the Bay Harbor Properties investments.

Goldstein responded by informing Alex that Weinkle and Goldstein’s daughter were getting a divorce, and that Goldstein had no knowledge regarding the Bay Harbor Properties – even though Weinkle had previously represented to Alex that it was Goldstein who would purchase Alpez Holdings’ interest in the Bay Harbor Properties.

72. Shortly after speaking with Goldstein, Alex was finally able to get in touch with Abergel.

Abergel represented to Alex that the purchase was still on and that it would actually be Goldstein’s partner that would be purchasing Alpez Holdings’ interests in the Bay Harbor Properties.

73. Despite repeated attempts by Alex to reach him via email and text message, Alex did not hear from Weinkle again until April 23, 2020.

H. Weinkle and Abergel’s Misconduct with Respect to the Planaria Loan

74. In February 2020, while Weinkle and Abergel were fraudulently promising to buy out Alpez Holdings’ interest in the Bay Harbor Properties, Weinkle and Abergel were simultaneously secretly engineering an assignment and purchase of the Avatar Loan to another lender, Planaria Holdings, Inc. (“Planaria”).

Upon information and belief, the Avatar Loan was in default and Weinkle and Abergel were looking to refinance the debt to avoid losing the Bay Harbor Properties in a foreclosure.

75. Specifically, on February 12, 2020, Planaria executed an Assignment of Mortgage and Note between Avatar and Planaria. Importantly, as part of Planaria’s assumption of the Avatar Loan, the principal loan amount was increased from its original amount of $5,100,000.00 to $8,000,000.00 (the “Planaria Loan”).

As with the original Avatar Loan, the $8,000,000.00 Planaria Loan was made to BHI as borrower and secured by the Bay Harbor Properties.

76. As part of the Planaria Loan documents, Planaria agreed to deposit $3,000,000.00 (representing the increase in the original principal amount of the Avatar Loan) into an escrow account maintained by the Law Firm.

Per the terms of the relevant Escrow Agreement, the Law Firm was named as the Escrow Agent and was not to disburse the $3,000,000.00 to BHI until it received written approval from the Vice President of Planaria.

77. Weinkle and Abergel did not disclose any information regarding the Planaria Loan to Alex – even though Alpez Holdings owned a 40% indirect interest in the borrower, BHI.

In fact, as previously stated, Weinkle and Abergel continued to intentionally misrepresent to Alex during this time period that they were going to buy Alpez Holdings’ interest in the Bay Harbor Properties.

I. Weinkle and Abergel’s Lies and Fraudulent Misrepresentations Begin to Fall Apart

78. After months of silence, Alex finally heard back from Weinkle on April 23, 2020.

On that date, Weinkle sent Alex a long email confirming the total amount of the Alpez Investment Funds that were previously provided and confirming that Alpez Holdings owned 40% of Forum – the entity that Weinkle originally represented was created to directly purchase Bay Harbor One.

For the first time, however, Weinkle also informed Alex that Forum did not actually own the Bay Harbor Properties in its name.

In fact, Weinkle disclosed to Alex for the first time that Forum owned 100% of BHI, and that BHI was the entity that owned the Bay Harbor Properties.

79. This information ran directly counter to all of Weinkle’s prior representations to Alex concerning BHI – namely, that BHI only owned Bay Harbor Two, and that the acquisition of BHI was the only way to acquire an indirect ownership interest in Bay Harbor Two.

80. In his April 23, 2020 email, Weinkle also informed Alex for the first time that the remodeling of the Bay Harbor Properties was ongoing and that Weinkle had taken out an $8,000,000.00 mortgage loan secured by multiple properties, including both of the Bay Harbor Properties.

Weinkle represented to Alex that the Bay Harbor Properties constituted only 50% of the security for the $8,000,000.00 loan.

This was also a complete and intentional misrepresentation to Alex as the $8,000,000.00 Planaria Loan was only secured by the Bay Harbor Properties.

81. Lastly, in this April 23rd email, Weinkle advised Alex for the first time of the Shala lawsuit.

Weinkle did not provide Alex with the details of the lawsuit, and only told Alex that it was being brought by the sellers of the Bay Harbor Properties, was a frivolous lawsuit, and that Weinkle was easily dealing with it.

Notably Weinkle did not provide Alex with any information about the previously-promised buy-out or return of Alpez’s investment.

82. Two days later, on April 25, 2020, Abergel sent an email to Alex requesting that Alex provide a time that worked for Alex to have a telephone conference with Weinkle, to clarify any questions or concerns Alex might have regarding the Bay Harbor Properties.

83. On April 28, 2020, Weinkle advised Alex via email that Weinkle had bought out Abergel’s interests in the Bay Harbor Properties, and that Weinkle now owned 60% of Forum via Weinkle’s company Weinkle Investments, LLC – with the other 40% still owned by Alpez Holdings.

In this email, Weinkle again confirmed that all of Alpez’s funds were used to purchase the Bay Harbor Properties and that the valuation of Alpez’s indirect interest in the Bay Harbor Properties was approximately $2,940,000.00.

84. Attached to the April 28th email from Weinkle was a Notice of Interest prepared and filed by Weinkle, which attested to the breakdown of ownership interests in Forum, and respectively the Bay Harbor Properties.

A true and correct copy of the Notice of Interest is attached hereto as Exhibit D.

Jordan Weinkle Files for Bankruptcy (Ch. 7, June 15, 2021), which would be dismissed for failure to provide supporting documentation. Curiously, he only listed The Forum Residences, LLC and Tavor Management, LLC on the filing paperwork.

85. On the same day, April 28, 2020, Alex also received an email from Abergel.

Abergel advised Alex in this communication that Abergel was no longer engaging in real estate investments with Weinkle, but would continue practicing law with him at the Law Firm.

86. On April 29, 2020, Weinkle provided Alex with an Amended Operating Agreement for the Forum, updated to show Abergel’s exit from the entity and the new ownership interest breakdown.

J. Alex Demands the Return of the Alpez Investment Funds With No Response From Weinkle or Abergel

87. After this new round of sudden disclosures and drastic changes to the structure of the original investment deal, Alex demanded that Weinkle return his original investment funds and fully disclose all matters and details relating to the structure and ongoing remodeling efforts at the Bay Harbor Properties.

88. Weinkle failed to respond to these demands by Alex, or to return the Alpez Investment Funds.

Instead, on May 8, 2020, Weinkle simply provided Alex with a response to the lawsuit filed against him by Shala and Saljanin, which was purportedly prepared by Weinkle’s attorney.

89. Throughout May, June, July August and September, 2020, Alex continued to demand the return of the Alpez Investment Funds from Weinkle, as well as information regarding the details and status of the Bay Harbor Properties transactions.

Weinkle failed to respond to any of these demands.

90. On May 11, 2020, the Law Firm, still serving as the escrow agent for the Planaria Loan and presumably still in possession of the $3,000,000.00 in escrow funds as part of the Planaria Loan, suddenly filed for voluntary dissolution.

To initiate this voluntary dissolution, the members of the Law Firm – Weinkle and Abergel – unanimously voted to do so.

91. On September 30, 2020, Planaria filed a lawsuit in Miami-Dade County Circuit Court against Weinkle, Abergel and the Law Firm (the “Planaria Lawsuit”).

The Planaria Lawsuit seeks damages against Weinkle, Abergel and the Law Firm for their unlawful refusal to return the $3,000,000.00 in escrow funds from the Planaria Loan back to Planaria, following the voluntary dissolution of the Law Firm.

92. As of the filing date of this action, Weinkle and Abergel have still failed to return any of the Alpez Investment Funds, or to even provide Alex with adequate assurances and documentation confirming Alpez’s investment, much less the status of the Bay Harbor Properties themselves.

WA Legal Group has it’s own dedicated Social Media Accounts, which clearly show it is a joint venture between Weinkle and Abergal (“WA”) and the new swanky offices were most likely paid for by their finchin’ of investor and lender funds, not intended for personal use.

COUNT I – LEGAL MALPRACTICE AS TO DEFENDANTS

93. Plaintiffs re-allege and reincorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 92 above.

94. Defendants Weinkle and Abergel, through the Weinkle Abergel Law Firm, were engaged by Alex and Alpez as legal counsel, and acted on behalf of Alex and Alpez as their legal counsel with respect to Alpez’s real estate investments.

95. As a result of the attorney-client relationship between Alex and Alpez and the Defendants, the Defendants owed a duty of care and skill to their clients, including a duty to fully, fairly, and competently represent their clients in connection with Alpez’s real estate investments.

96. Defendants also owed duties to their clients to, among other things, act with candor and perform their duties with the care, skill, loyalty and diligence that is ordinarily used by attorneys in the profession.

97. Defendants failed to use the care that a reasonably careful attorney would use under the circumstances in their representation of Alex and Alpez.

98. Weinkle and Abergel neglected their reasonable duty as counsel for Alex and Alpez by, among other acts:

a. Intentionally making material misrepresentations, and material omissions, in communications with Alex and Alpez regarding the purchase, acquisition and operation of the Bay Harbor Properties;

b. Fabricating the Fake Closing Documents, in order to facilitate fraudulent misrepresentations to Alex and Alpez regarding the Alpez Investment Funds and the Bay Harbor Properties;

c. Negligently documenting, and failing to account for, the approximately $3,000,000.00 in Alpez Investment Funds that were wired to the Law Firm;

d. Failing to properly inform Alex and Alpez of the risks associated with the Bay Harbor Properties investments;

e. Failing to make the mandated disclosures and transmitted writings to Alex and Alpez regarding the Bay Harbor Properties investments, as required by Rule 4-1.8(a) of the Florida Bar Rules of Professional Conduct.

f. Failing to seek or obtain any informed written consent from Alex or Alpez with regard to the essential terms of the Bay Harbor Properties investments or the respective roles of Alex, Weinkle and Abergel in the investments.

99. Alex and Alpez reasonably relied on the advice and representations of Defendants.

100. Weinkle and Abergel’s intentional conduct and negligence resulted in, and was the proximate cause, of damages to Alex and Alpez.

WHEREFORE, Alex and Alpez demand judgment in their favor and against Defendants, for compensatory damages in an amount exceeding Thirty Thousand Dollars ($30,000.00), together with interest, costs, and for such other relief as this Court may deem just and proper.

COUNT II – BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY AS TO DEFENDANTS

101. Plaintiffs re-allege and reincorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 92 above.

102. The elements of a cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty are:

(1) the existence of a fiduciary duty;

(2) its breach;

and

(3) damages proximately caused by the breach.

See Reed v. Long, 111 So. 3d 237, 239-240 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013).

103. Defendants owed fiduciary duties of loyalty and care to Alex and Alpez, by virtue of Defendants’ status as lawyers for Alex and Alpez.

104. Defendants held themselves out as, and acted as, counsel for Alex and Alpez at all times relevant to this action, beginning in May, 2018. Specifically, Defendants acted as counsel for Alex and Alpez with respect to multiple real estate transactions and investments, including the Bay Harbor Properties investments.

105. As explained in more detail above, Defendants engaged in various acts of disloyalty and intentional mismanagement against Alex and Alpez relating to the Bay Harbor Properties investments and the Alpez Investment Funds wired to the Law Firm, including, but not limited to the following:

a. Making material misrepresentations, and material omissions, in communications with Alex and Alpez regarding the purchase, acquisition and operation of the Bay Harbor Properties;

b. Fabricating the Fake Closing Documents, in order to facilitate fraudulent misrepresentations to Alex and Alpez regarding the Alpez Investment Funds and the Bay Harbor Properties;

c. Negligently documenting, and failing to account for, the approximately $3,000,000.00 in Alpez Investment Funds that were wired to the Weinkle Abergel Law Firm;

d. Failing to properly inform Alex and Alpez of the risks associated with the Bay Harbor Properties investments;

106. Defendants’ self-dealing, other disloyal acts, and gross and intentional mismanagement of the Alpez Investment Funds, as set forth above, constitute breaches of the fiduciary duties Defendants owed to Alex and Alpez.

107. Defendants committed the disloyal acts, as set forth above, for their own personal gain and interest, at the expense of Alex and Alpez.

108. Defendants’ breaches of their fiduciary duties and self-dealing proximately caused, and continue to proximately cause, injuries and damage to Alex and Alpez, because Alex and Alpez have been deprived of the entire $3,000,000.00 amount of the Alpez Investment Funds, as well as an unencumbered ownership interest in the Bay Harbor Properties.

WHEREFORE, Alex and Alpez respectfully request judgment against Defendants for compensatory damages in an amount exceeding Thirty Thousand Dollars ($30,000.00) together with interest, costs, attorneys’ fees, restitution, and for such other relief as this Court may deem just and proper.

COUNT III – FRAUDULENT MISREPRESENTATION AS TO WEINKLE

109. Plaintiffs re-allege and reincorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 92 above.

110. As set forth with particularity above, Weinkle intentionally misrepresented and/or omitted to inform Plaintiffs of the following material facts:

a. Beginning in or around 2018 and up through approximately the Fall of 2020, that Weinkle repeatedly misrepresented to Alex and Alpez, during in-person meetings and in emails and telephone conferences, all of the details and structure of how the Alpez Investment Funds were being utilized, the ownership structure of the Bay Harbor Properties, and the encumbered nature of the Bay Harbor Properties;

b. That Weinkle fabricated the Fake Closing Documents to facilitate the fraudulent use of the Alpez Investment Funds provided to him by Alex and Alpez, and to keep Alex and Alpez deliberately uninformed about how the Alpez Investment Funds were being utilized;

c. That the Fake Closing Documents were fabricated to give the appearance that Alex and Alpez had purchased Bay Harbor One as an unencumbered property, when in fact, it was a tool to facilitate Weinkle’s securement of the Avatar Loan and to perpetuate fraud against Alex and Alpez;

d. That the $540,000.00 wired to Weinkle by Alex and Alpez was not actually used to purchase an ownership interest in Bay Harbor Two as Weinkle had misrepresented, but was actually utilized to facilitate Weinkle’s securement of the Planaria Loan;

e. That Weinkle never enlisted Goldstein to purchase Alex and Alpez’s ownership interests in the Bay Harbor Properties, as Weinkle had misrepresented, or took any affirmative steps to accomplish such a buy-out transaction;

f. That Weinkle was intentionally withholding vital information regarding the legal and financial troubles surrounding the Bay Harbor Properties; and

g. That Weinkle was deliberately omitting to inform Alex and Alpez about the Shala Lawsuit or the Planaria Lawsuit in a timely manner.

111. Plaintiffs justifiably relied on Weinkle’s misrepresentations and omissions, to their detriment.

112. Plaintiffs have suffered damages as a result of their reliance on Weinkle’s omissions, as set forth above.

WHEREFORE, Alex and Alpez respectfully request judgment against Weinkle for compensatory damages in an amount exceeding Thirty Thousand Dollars ($30,000.00) together

with interest, costs, attorneys’ fees, restitution, and for such other relief as this Court may deem just and proper.

COUNT IV – MONEY HAD AND RECEIVED AS TO DEFENDANTS

113. Plaintiffs re-allege and reincorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 92 above.

114. This is a claim for money had and received against Weinkle, Abergel and the Law Firm.

115. Defendants received $2,941,121.22 of Plaintiffs’ money (the Alpez Investment Funds) at the direction of Weinkle and Abergel, with the understanding that the monies would be used to purchase 40% direct ownership interests in the two unencumbered Bay Harbor Properties. This did not occur, and Plaintiffs have demanded return of their money.

116. As previously described, the circumstances are such that Defendants should, in all fairness, be required to return and repay such monies to Plaintiffs. These circumstances include, but are not limited to the following:

a. Defendants repeatedly misrepresented to Alex and Alpez, during in-person meetings and in emails and telephone conferences, all of the details and structure of how the Alpez Investment Funds were being utilized, the ownership structure of the Bay Harbor Properties, and the encumbered nature of the Bay Harbor Properties;

b. Defendants fabricated the Fake Closing Documents to facilitate the fraudulent use of the Alpez Investment Funds provided to them by Alex and Alpez, and to keep Alex and Alpez deliberately uninformed about how the Alpez Investment Funds were being utilized;

c. The Fake Closing Documents were fabricated to give the appearance that Alex and Alpez had purchased Bay Harbor One as an unencumbered property, when in fact, it was a tool to facilitate Weinkle’s securement of the Avatar Loan and to perpetuate fraud against Alex and Alpez;

d. The $540,000.00 wired to Weinkle by Alex and Alpez was not actually used to purchase an ownership interest in Bay Harbor Two as Weinkle had misrepresented, but was actually utilized to facilitate Weinkle’s securement of the Planaria Loan;

117. Plaintiffs have been damaged as a result of Defendants’ failure to return and repay the $2,941,121.22 they received from Plaintiffs.

WHEREFORE, Alex and Alpez respectfully request that the Court enter judgment against Defendants for compensatory damages in an amount exceeding Thirty Thousand Dollars ($30,000.00) together with interest and for such other relief as this Court may deem just and proper.

COUNT V – CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUD AS TO WEINKLE AND ABERGEL

118. Plaintiffs re-allege and reincorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 92 above.

119. Weinkle and Abergel owed fiduciary duties of loyalty and care to Alex and Alpez, by virtue of Defendants’ status as lawyers for Alex and Alpez.

120. The trust and confidence that Alex and Alpez placed in Weinkle and Abergel by virtue of these fiduciary roles has been abused. In fact, Weinkle and Abergel have taken unconscionable advantage of Alex and Alpez by:

a. Misrepresenting the true nature, funding and structure of the Bay Harbor Properties investments to Alex and Alpez;

b. Failing to invest the Alpez Investment Funds as promised to Alex and Alpez;

c. Fabricating the Fake Closing Documents to facilitate a fraudulent representation to Alex and Alpez that Alex and Alpez had purchased a 40% ownership interest in unencumbered Bay Harbor One via Alpez Holdings;

d. Misrepresenting to Alex and Alpez that Bay Harbor Two was for sale by its owners, in order to facilitate their fraudulent transfer and use of $540,400.00 from Alex and Alpez;

e. Continually misrepresenting and failing to provide accurate information to Alex and Alpez regarding the Alpez Investment Funds and the Bay Harbor Properties over the course of multiple months, in order to facilitate their fraudulent activity with respect to Alex and Alpez.

121. The concealment by Weinkle and Abergel of each of these acts further underscores the unconscionable advantage they have taken of Alex and Alpez.

122. Alex and Alpez have suffered s substantial injury, in an amount to be proven at trial, as a result of the constructive fraud of Weinkle and Abergel.

WHEREFORE, Alex and Alpez respectfully request that the Court enter judgment against Defendants for compensatory damages in an amount exceeding Thirty Thousand Dollars ($30,000.00) together with interest and for such other relief as this Court may deem just and proper.

Dated: October 29, 2020

Respectfully submitted,

HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
701 Brickell Avenue, Suite 3300
Miami, Florida 33131
Tel: (305) 789-7713
Fax: (305) 789-7799

By: /s/Jose A. Casal

Jose A. Casal
Florida Bar No.: 767522
Email: jose.casal@hklaw.com

Daniel P. Hanlon
Florida Bar No.: 105219
Email: daniel.hanlon@hklaw.com

Complaint with Exhibits

YOUR DONATION(S) WILL HELP US:

• Continue to provide this website, content, resources, community and help center for free to the many homeowners, residents, Texans and as we’ve expanded, people nationwide who need access without a paywall or subscription.

• Help us promote our campaign through marketing, pr, advertising and reaching out to government, law firms and anyone that will listen and can assist.

Thank you for your trust, belief and support in our conviction to help Floridian residents and citizens nationwide take back their freedom. Your Donations and your Voice are so important.



A foreclosure lawsuit against a pair of apartment buildings in Bay Harbor Islands has been resolved.

Avatar Capital Finance filed a foreclosure lawsuit Jan. 13 against Bal Harbour Investments LLC, along with loan guarantors Yoni Ramras, Nula Shala and Jack Saljanin. It concerned a $5.1 million mortgage on the apartment buildings at 1080 93rd St. and 1060 95th St.

County records show the lawsuit was voluntarily dismissed Feb. 18, so the property is no longer in foreclosure.

Attorney Brian J. Abergel, who represents Bal Harbour Investments in the case, noted the dismissal, but did not comment further.

Attorney Jill Nexon Berman, who represents the lender in the lawsuit, said the property has been sold.

The deed has yet to appear in county records.

The four-story apartment building at 1080 93rd St. totals 30,017 square feet and features 24 units. It was built on the 22,500-square-foot site in 1965 and last traded for $4.1 million in 2008.

The two-story apartment building at 1060 95th St. totals 6,260 square feet and has nine units. It was built on the 11,250-square-foot lot in 1948. Bal Harbour Investments bought it for $925,000 in 2008.

Bay Harbor Islands is located along the Broad Causeway between Bal Harbour on the coast and North Miami on the mainland. Most of its buildings are over 50 years old, but it has seen a recent uptick of boutique condo development.

 

Finding the right company to partner with in any kind of business relationship is a monumental endeavor.

Integrated Property Management and Development Group, LLC (IPMDG), will provide the professional and courteous service you require and deserve.

Timely preparation of property reports, award-winning customer service, outstanding maintenance and grounds keeping, competitive pricing are just some of the personalized advantages we provide. We pride ourselves as “Leading the industry one property at a time”.

All properties, regardless of property size and/or location will receive the utmost superior service and attention to detail that you have been missing from our competitors. If you seek personalized professional assistance, IPMDG is here for you.

We have taken long strides in achieving both ethical and superior service for both our clients and the residents we service.

With over 40 years in combined experience in property management and construction development; from multi-family housing, HOA, residential, acquisitions, ROI, investor partnerships, to commercial properties as well as development projects, IPMDG will only provide you with excellence… all you need to do is sign on the dotted line and let IPMDG handle all of your real estate needs.

Founder & CEO
Integrated Property MGMNT & Development Group, LLC

Aug 2015 – Present6 years 7 months

7777 Glades Road | 100 | Boca Raton, FL

www.IPMDG.com

Global Assets Realty Graphic
Licensed Realtor
Global Assets Realty

Oct 2021 – Present
5 months

Boca Raton, Florida, United States
Tavor Management Group, LLC Graphic
Asset Manager
Tavor Management Group, LLC

Dec 2018 – Sep 202
12 years 10 months

1688 Meridian Avenue | 440 | Miami, FL

Ashkenazy Acquisition Corp. Graphic
Director Of Operations
Ashkenazy Acquisition Corp.

May 2004 – Jul 2015
11 years 3 months

New York
GDC Properties, LLC Graphic
Regional Manager
GDC Properties, LLC

Nov 2001 – Apr 20042 years 6 months

Boca Raton, Florida
Altman Management Company Inc. Graphic
Property Manager
Altman Management Company Inc.

Jul 1998 – Nov 20013 years 5 months

Boca Raton, Florida

Education

Syracuse University
Syracuse University Graphic
Syracuse University
Bachelor’s degreeBusiness, Management, Marketing, and Related Support Services

1993 – 1997

Licenses & Certifications

Licensed Realtor Graphic
Licensed Realtor
Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation
Issued Sep 2021

U.S. Bankruptcy Court
Southern District of Florida (Miami)
Bankruptcy Petition #: 17-15106-LMI

Assigned to: Laurel M Isicoff
Chapter 7
Voluntary
Asset

 

Debtor disposition:  Standard Discharge

Date filed:   04/25/2017
Date terminated:   03/09/2021
Debtor discharged:   05/03/2018
341 meeting:   10/03/2017
Deadline for objecting to discharge:   12/04/2017

 

Debtor
Barney N. Weinkle
10066 Bay Harbor Terrace
Unit 10070
Miami Beach, FL 33154
MIAMI-DADE-FL
SSN / ITIN: xxx-xx-0433
represented by Gary M Murphree
7385 SW 87 Ave # 100
Miami, FL 33173
305-441-9530
Email: gmm@amlaw-miami.com
Trustee
Barry E Mukamal
PO Box 14183
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33302
786-517-5760
represented by Scott N Brown, Esq
1 S.E. 3rd Avenue – #1400
Miami, FL 33131
305-379-7904
Email: sbrown@bastamron.comZakarij N Laux
BAST AMRON LLP
One Southeast Third Avenue
Suite 1400
Miami, FL 33131
305-379-7904
Email: zlaux@bastamron.comBarry E Mukamal
1 SE 3 Avenue Ste 2150
Box 158
Miami, FL 33131
786-517-5760
Fax : 786-517-5772
Email: bemtrustee@kapilamukamal.com
U.S. Trustee
Office of the US Trustee
51 S.W. 1st Ave.
Suite 1204
Miami, FL 33130
(305) 536-7285

 

Filing Date # Docket Text
04/25/2017 1
(7 pgs)
Chapter 7 Voluntary Petition . [Fee Amount $335] (Murphree, Gary) (Entered: 04/25/2017)
04/25/2017 2
(1 pg)
Certification of Budget and Credit Counseling Course by Debtor Filed by Debtor Barney Weinkle. (Murphree, Gary) (Entered: 04/25/2017)
04/25/2017 3
(2 pgs)
Meeting of Creditors to be held on 05/31/2017 at 02:00 PM at 51 SW First Ave Room 102, Miami. Objections to Discharge/Dischargeability due by 07/31/2017. (Murphree, Gary) (Entered: 04/25/2017)
04/26/2017 4
(2 pgs)
Notice of Incomplete Filings Due. [Deficiency Must be Cured by 5/3/2017].Statement of Social Security Number Due 5/3/2017. Summary of Your Assets and Liabilities and Certain Statistical Information due 5/9/2017. Schedules A-J due 5/9/2017.Statement of Financial Affairs Due 5/9/2017.Declaration Concerning Debtors Schedules Due: 5/9/2017. Chapter 7 Statement of Your Current Monthly Income Form 122A-1 Due: 5/9/2017. Payment Advices due for Debtor 5/9/2017. [Incomplete Filings due by 5/9/2017]. (Valencia, Yamileth) (Entered: 04/26/2017)
04/26/2017 5 Meeting of Creditors Notice Withheld From Mailing Due to Deficiency in Social Security Number.. (Re: 3 Meeting of Creditors to be held on 05/31/2017 at 02:00 PM at 51 SW First Ave Room 102, Miami. Objections to Discharge/Dischargeability due by 07/31/2017.) (Valencia, Yamileth) (Entered: 04/26/2017)
04/26/2017 6 Statement of Debtor(s) Social Security Number(s) [Document Image Available ONLY to Court Users] Filed by Debtor Barney N. Weinkle. (Murphree, Gary) (Entered: 04/26/2017)
04/28/2017 7
(3 pgs)
BNC Certificate of Mailing (Re: 4 Notice of Incomplete Filings Due. [Deficiency Must be Cured by 5/3/2017].Statement of Social Security Number Due 5/3/2017. Summary of Your Assets and Liabilities and Certain Statistical Information due 5/9/2017. Schedules A-J due 5/9/2017.Statement of Financial Affairs Due 5/9/2017.Declaration Concerning Debtors Schedules Due: 5/9/2017. Chapter 7 Statement of Your Current Monthly Income Form 122A-1 Due: 5/9/2017. Payment Advices due for Debtor 5/9/2017. [Incomplete Filings due by 5/9/2017].) Notice Date 04/28/2017. (Admin.) (Entered: 04/29/2017)
04/29/2017 8
(4 pgs)
BNC Certificate of Mailing (Re: 3 Meeting of Creditors to be held on 05/31/2017 at 02:00 PM at 51 SW First Ave Room 102, Miami. Objections to Discharge/Dischargeability due by 07/31/2017.) Notice Date 04/29/2017. (Admin.) (Entered: 04/30/2017)
05/01/2017 9
(1 pg)
Request for Notice Filed by Creditor BMW Financial Services NA, LLC. (Ascension Capital Group (ZWelch)) (Entered: 05/01/2017)
05/01/2017 10
(1 pg)
Request for Notice Filed by Creditor BMW Financial Services NA, LLC. (Ascension Capital Group (ZWelch)) (Entered: 05/01/2017)
05/01/2017 11
(1 pg)
Request for Notice Filed by Creditor BMW Financial Services NA, LLC. (Ascension Capital Group (ZWelch)) (Entered: 05/01/2017)
05/01/2017 12
(1 pg)
Request for Notice Filed by Creditor BMW Financial Services NA, LLC. (Ascension Capital Group (ZWelch)) (Entered: 05/01/2017)
05/09/2017 13
(44 pgs; 2 docs)
Initial Schedules Filed: [Summary of Your Assets/Liabilities,Schedules A-J,Statement of Financial Affairs,Declaration re Schedules,] [Fee Amount $31] Filed by Debtor Barney N. Weinkle. (Attachments: # 1 Local Form 4) (Murphree, Gary) (Entered: 05/09/2017)
05/09/2017 14
(1 pg)
Disclosure of Compensation by Attorney Gary M Murphree. (Murphree, Gary) (Entered: 05/09/2017)
05/10/2017 15
(2 pgs)
Payment Advices by Debtor Filed by Debtor Barney N. Weinkle. (Murphree, Gary) (Entered: 05/10/2017)
05/15/2017 16
(2 pgs)
Order Dismissing Case with 180 Days Prejudice for Failure to File Chapter 7 Statement of Your Current Monthly Income, [Filing Fee Balance Due: $0.00] . (Valencia, Yamileth) (Entered: 05/15/2017)
05/16/2017 17
(2 pgs)
Chapter 7 Statement of Current Monthly Income Form 122A-1 Filed by Debtor Barney N. Weinkle. (Murphree, Gary) (Entered: 05/16/2017)
05/16/2017 18
(2 pgs)
Motion to Reinstate Case Filed by Debtor Barney N. Weinkle. (Murphree, Gary) (Entered: 05/16/2017)
05/16/2017 19
(1 pg)
Notice of Hearing (Re: 18 Motion to Reinstate Case Filed by Debtor Barney N. Weinkle.) Hearing scheduled for 06/05/2017 at 01:30 PM at C. Clyde Atkins U.S. Courthouse, 301 N Miami Ave Courtroom 8 (LMI), Miami, FL 33128. (Sanabria, Noemi) (Entered: 05/16/2017)
05/16/2017 20
(3 pgs)
Certificate of Service Filed by Debtor Barney N. Weinkle (Re: 18 Motion to Reinstate Case filed by Debtor Barney N. Weinkle, 19 Notice of Hearing). (Murphree, Gary) (Entered: 05/16/2017)
05/18/2017 21
(4 pgs)
BNC Certificate of Mailing – Order Dismissing Case (Re: 16 Order Dismissing Case with 180 Days Prejudice for Failure to File Chapter 7 Statement of Your Current Monthly Income, [Filing Fee Balance Due: $0.00] .) Notice Date 05/18/2017. (Admin.) (Entered: 05/19/2017)
06/16/2017 22
(2 pgs)
Order Granting Motion To Reinstate Case (Re: # 18) (Valencia, Yamileth) (Entered: 06/16/2017)
06/18/2017 23
(4 pgs)
BNC Certificate of Mailing – PDF Document (Re: 22 Order Granting Motion To Reinstate Case (Re: 18)) Notice Date 06/18/2017. (Admin.) (Entered: 06/19/2017)
06/19/2017 24
(3 pgs)
Certificate of Service Filed by Debtor Barney N. Weinkle (Re: 22 Order on Motion to Reinstate Case). (Murphree, Gary) (Entered: 06/19/2017)
06/23/2017 25
(2 pgs)
Meeting of Creditors to be Held on 8/1/2017 at 04:00 PM at 51 SW First Ave Room 102, Miami. Last Day to Oppose Discharge or Dischargeability is 10/2/2017. (Cohen, Diana) (Entered: 06/23/2017)
06/25/2017 26
(4 pgs)
BNC Certificate of Mailing (Re: 25 Meeting of Creditors to be Held on 8/1/2017 at 04:00 PM at 51 SW First Ave Room 102, Miami. Last Day to Oppose Discharge or Dischargeability is 10/2/2017.) Notice Date 06/25/2017. (Admin.) (Entered: 06/26/2017)
06/26/2017 27
(1 pg)
Notice of Requirement to File Financial Management Course Certificate (admin) (Entered: 06/26/2017)
06/28/2017 28
(2 pgs)
BNC Certificate of Mailing (Re: 27 Notice of Requirement to File Financial Management Course Certificate (admin)) Notice Date 06/28/2017. (Admin.) (Entered: 06/29/2017)
06/29/2017 29
(1 pg)
Declaration Concerning Schedules Conforming to Official Bankruptcy Form 106 or 202 Filed by Debtor Barney N. Weinkle. (Murphree, Gary) (Entered: 06/29/2017)
07/25/2017 30
(2 pgs)
Certification of Completion of Instructional Course Concerning Personal Financial Management by Debtor ONLY Filed by Debtor Barney N. Weinkle. (Murphree, Gary) (Entered: 07/25/2017)
07/28/2017 31
(6 pgs)
Ex Parte Application to Employ Scott N. Brown, Esquire and Bast Amron LLP as Attorneys for the Trustee Nunc Pro Tunc to July 26, 2017 [Affidavit Attached] Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal. (Brown, Scott) (Entered: 07/28/2017)
07/31/2017 32 Notice is given that the Trustee in this case anticipates that funds will become available shortly to produce a distribution to creditors. In order to expedite the administration of this case and make a prompt distribution to creditors, Trustee requests that a claims bar date be set and noticed. Future reports will be made to the Office of the United States Trustee and summarized on the Interim Report which will be made available upon request Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal. (Mukamal, Barry) (Entered: 07/31/2017)
07/31/2017 33
(1 pg)
Notice of Deadline to File Claims. Proofs of Claim due by 10/31/2017 (admin) (Entered: 07/31/2017)
07/31/2017 34
(6 pgs)
Notice of Appearance and Request for Service by Angelo M Castaldi Filed by Creditor Villa Pizza, LLC. (Castaldi, Angelo) (Entered: 07/31/2017)
08/01/2017 35
(30 pgs; 2 docs)
Amended Schedules Filed: [Schedule C,Schedule E/F,Statement of Financial Affairs,] [Fee Amount $31] Filed by Debtor Barney N. Weinkle. (Attachments: # 1 Local Form 4) (Murphree, Gary) (Entered: 08/01/2017)
08/02/2017 36
(2 pgs)
Order Granting Application to Employ Attorney for the Trustee Scott N. Brown, Nunc Pro Tunc to July 26, 2017. (Re: # 31) (Oriol-Bennett, Alexandra) (Entered: 08/02/2017)
08/02/2017 37 Statement Adjourning Meeting of Creditors. Section 341(a) Meeting Continued on 8/21/2017 at 04:30 PM at 51 SW First Ave Room 102, Miami. Debtor appeared. (Mukamal, Barry) (Entered: 08/02/2017)
08/02/2017 38
(3 pgs)
BNC Certificate of Mailing (Re: 33 Notice of Deadline to File Claims. Proofs of Claim due by 10/31/2017 (admin)) Notice Date 08/02/2017. (Admin.) (Entered: 08/03/2017)
08/03/2017 39
(3 pgs)
Certificate of Service by Attorney Zakarij N Laux (Re: 36 Order on Application to Employ). (Laux, Zakarij) (Entered: 08/03/2017)
08/23/2017 40 Statement Adjourning Meeting of Creditors. Section 341(a) Meeting Continued on 9/13/2017 at 04:30 PM at 51 SW First Ave Room 102, Miami. Debtor appeared. (Mukamal, Barry) (Entered: 08/23/2017)
09/06/2017 41
(10 pgs)
Motion to Compel Debtor to Turn Over Documents to Trustee Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal. (Brown, Scott) (Entered: 09/06/2017)
09/06/2017 42
(1 pg)
Notice of Hearing by Filer (Re: 41 Motion to Compel Debtor to Turn Over Documents to Trustee Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal.). Hearing scheduled for 10/04/2017 at 09:30 AM at C. Clyde Atkins U.S. Courthouse, 301 N Miami Ave Courtroom 8 (LMI), Miami, FL 33128. (Brown, Scott) (Entered: 09/06/2017)
09/06/2017 43
(1 pg)
Certificate of Service by Attorney Scott N Brown Esq (Re: 42 Notice of Hearing by Filer filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal). (Brown, Scott) (Entered: 09/06/2017)
09/21/2017 44
(3 pgs)
Amended Meeting of Creditors to be Held on 10/3/2017 at 04:30 PM at 51 SW First Ave Room 102, Miami. Last Day to Oppose Discharge or Dischargeability is 12/4/2017. *RESCHEDULED DUE TO COURT CLOSURE AS A RESULT OF HURRICANE IRMA (Lebron, Lorraine) (Entered: 09/21/2017)
09/23/2017 45
(5 pgs)
BNC Certificate of Mailing (Re: 44 Amended Meeting of Creditors to be Held on 10/3/2017 at 04:30 PM at 51 SW First Ave Room 102, Miami. Last Day to Oppose Discharge or Dischargeability is 12/4/2017. *RESCHEDULED DUE TO COURT CLOSURE AS A RESULT OF HURRICANE IRMA) Notice Date 09/23/2017. (Admin.) (Entered: 09/24/2017)
10/04/2017 46 Meeting of Creditors Held and Concluded. . (Mukamal, Barry) (Entered: 10/04/2017)
10/05/2017 47
(2 pgs)
Agreed Order Granting Motion To Compel Debtor to Turnover Documents to Trustee (Re: # 41) (Oriol-Bennett, Alexandra) (Entered: 10/05/2017)
10/06/2017 48
(1 pg)
Certificate of Service by Attorney Zakarij N Laux (Re: 47 Order on Motion to Compel). (Laux, Zakarij) (Entered: 10/06/2017)
10/20/2017 49 The information required by 11 U.S.C. Sec. 521(a)(1) as provided by the debtor(s) in this case is complete to the satisfaction of the trustee. No creditor or other party in interest has filed a request for an order of dismissal pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Sec. 521(i)(2) and the trustee does not believe that this case is subject to automatic dismissal pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Sec. 521(i). (Mukamal, Barry) (Entered: 10/20/2017)
10/23/2017 50
(2 pgs)
Order Determining Debtor’s Compliance with Filing Requirements of Section 521(a)(1). Deadline for any creditor or other party in interest to contest the court’s finding shall file an objection not later 21 days from the date of entry of this order (admin) (Entered: 10/23/2017)
10/25/2017 51
(4 pgs)
BNC Certificate of Mailing (Re: 50 Order Determining Debtor’s Compliance with Filing Requirements of Section 521(a)(1). Deadline for any creditor or other party in interest to contest the court’s finding shall file an objection not later 21 days from the date of entry of this order (admin)) Notice Date 10/25/2017. (Admin.) (Entered: 10/26/2017)
11/02/2017 52
(3 pgs)
Motion to Extend Time to File Objections to Debtor’s Claimed Exemptions, in addition to Motion to Extend Time to File Section 727 Complaint Objecting to Discharge of Debtor(s) Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal. (Laux, Zakarij) (Entered: 11/02/2017)
11/02/2017 53
(1 pg)
Notice of Hearing by Filer (Re: 52 Motion to Extend Time to File Objections to Debtor’s Claimed Exemptions, in addition to Motion to Extend Time to File Section 727 Complaint Objecting to Discharge of Debtor(s) Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal.). Hearing scheduled for 12/13/2017 at 10:30 AM at C. Clyde Atkins U.S. Courthouse, 301 N Miami Ave Courtroom 8 (LMI), Miami, FL 33128. (Laux, Zakarij) (Entered: 11/02/2017)
11/02/2017 54
(2 pgs)
Certificate of Service by Attorney Zakarij N Laux (Re: 53 Notice of Hearing by Filer filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal). (Laux, Zakarij) (Entered: 11/02/2017)
12/07/2017 55
(2 pgs)
Agreed Order Granting Motion to Extend Time to File Objections to Claimed Exemptions (Re: # 52), Granting Motion to Extend Time to File Section 727 Complaint Objecting to Discharge of Debtor(s) (Re: #52) Deadline Extended to 2/1/2018 (Oriol-Bennett, Alexandra) (Entered: 12/07/2017)
12/08/2017 56
(1 pg)
Certificate of Service by Attorney Zakarij N Laux (Re: 55 Order on Motion to Extend Time, Order on Motion to Extend Time to File Section 727 Complaint). (Laux, Zakarij) (Entered: 12/08/2017)
12/19/2017 57
(9 pgs)
Notice of Filing Notice of Subpoena Duces Tecum, Filed by Creditor Villa Pizza, LLC. (Castaldi, Angelo) (Entered: 12/19/2017)
12/29/2017 58
(15 pgs)
Notice of Taking Rule 2004 Examination Duces Tecum of Barney N. Weinkle on January 17, 2018 at 10:00 a.m, EST Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal. (Laux, Zakarij) (Entered: 12/29/2017)
01/17/2018 59
(47 pgs; 2 docs)
Amended Schedules Filed: [Summary of Your Assets/Liabilities,Schedule A/B,Schedule C,Schedule D,Schedule E/F,Schedule I,Schedule J,Declaration re Schedules,] [Fee Amount $31] Filed by Debtor Barney N. Weinkle. (Attachments: # 1 Local Form 4) (Murphree, Gary) (Entered: 01/17/2018)
02/01/2018 60
(4 pgs)
Second Agreed Ex Parte Motion to Extend Time to File Objections to Debtor’s Claimed Exemptions, in addition to Second Agreed Ex Parte Motion to Extend Time to File Section 727 Complaint Objecting to Discharge of Debtor(s) Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal. (Laux, Zakarij) (Entered: 02/01/2018)
02/02/2018 61
(2 pgs)
Order Granting Motion to Extend Time to File Objections to Claimed Exemptions (Re: # 60), Granting Motion to Extend Time to File Section 727 Complaint Objecting to Discharge of Debtor(s) (Re: #60) Deadline Extended to 4/2/2018 (Oriol-Bennett, Alexandra) (Entered: 02/02/2018)
02/05/2018 62
(1 pg)
Certificate of Service by Attorney Zakarij N Laux (Re: 61 Order on Motion to Extend Time, Order on Motion to Extend Time to File Section 727 Complaint). (Laux, Zakarij) (Entered: 02/05/2018)
04/02/2018 63
(18 pgs)
Motion to Compromise Controversy with Debtor Regarding (A) Valuation and Repurchase of Debtor’s Interest in Pending Personal Injury Claims and (B) Potential Avoidance Claims [Negative Notice] Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal. (Laux, Zakarij) (Entered: 04/02/2018)
04/02/2018 64
(4 pgs)
Third Agreed Ex Parte Motion to Extend Time to File Objections to Debtor’s Claimed Exemptions, in addition to Third Agreed Ex Parte Motion to Extend Time to File Section 727 Complaint Objecting to Discharge of Debtor(s) Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal. (Laux, Zakarij) (Entered: 04/02/2018)
04/03/2018 65
(1 pg)
Notice of Hearing (Re: 64 Third Agreed Ex Parte Motion to Extend Time to File Objections to Debtor’s Claimed Exemptions, in addition to Third Agreed Ex Parte Motion to Extend Time to File Section 727 Complaint Objecting to Discharge of Debtor(s) Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal.) Hearing scheduled for 04/30/2018 at 09:30 AM at C. Clyde Atkins U.S. Courthouse, 301 N Miami Ave Courtroom 8 (LMI), Miami, FL 33128. (Shuler, Pamela) (Entered: 04/03/2018)
04/03/2018 66
(1 pg)
Certificate of Service by Attorney Zakarij N Laux (Re: 65 Notice of Hearing). (Laux, Zakarij) (Entered: 04/03/2018)
04/04/2018 67 Clerk’s Notice of Cancellation of Hearing (Re: 64 Third Agreed Ex Parte Motion to Extend Time to File Objections to Debtor’s Claimed Exemptions, in addition to Third Agreed Ex Parte Motion to Extend Time to File Section 727 Complaint Objecting to Discharge of Debtor(s) Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal., 65 Notice of Hearing (Re: 64 Third Agreed Ex Parte Motion to Extend Time to File Objections to Debtor’s Claimed Exemptions, in addition to Third Agreed Ex Parte Motion to Extend Time to File Section 727 Complaint Objecting to Discharge of Debtor(s) Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal.) Hearing scheduled for 04/30/2018 at 09:30 AM at C. Clyde Atkins U.S. Courthouse, 301 N Miami Ave Courtroom 8 (LMI), Miami, FL 33128.) (Sanabria, Noemi) (Entered: 04/04/2018)
04/11/2018 68
(2 pgs)
Order Granting Motion to Extend Time to File Objections to Claimed Exemptions (Re: # 64), Granting Motion to Extend Time to File Section 727 Complaint Objecting to Discharge of Debtor(s) (Re: #64) Deadline Extended to 5/2/2018 (Oriol-Bennett, Alexandra) (Entered: 04/11/2018)
04/13/2018 69
(1 pg)
Certificate of Service by Attorney Zakarij N Laux (Re: 68 Order on Motion to Extend Time, Order on Motion to Extend Time to File Section 727 Complaint). (Laux, Zakarij) (Entered: 04/13/2018)
05/01/2018 70
(3 pgs)
Order Granting Motion To Compromise Controversy (Re: # 63) (Oriol-Bennett, Alexandra) (Entered: 05/01/2018)
05/01/2018 71
(3 pgs)
Certificate of Service by Attorney Zakarij N Laux (Re: 70 Order on Motion to Compromise Controversy). (Laux, Zakarij) (Entered: 05/01/2018)
05/03/2018 72
(2 pgs)
Order Discharging Debtor (Re: 44 Amended Meeting of Creditors Chapter 7 (No Asset)). (Oriol-Bennett, Alexandra) (Entered: 05/03/2018)
05/05/2018 73
(4 pgs)
BNC Certificate of Mailing – Order of Discharge (Re: 72 Order Discharging Debtor (Re: 44 Amended Meeting of Creditors Chapter 7 (No Asset)).) Notice Date 05/05/2018. (Admin.) (Entered: 05/06/2018)
06/28/2018 74
(3 pgs)
Trustee’s Notice of Intent to Abandon Real Property located at: 10066 Bay Harbor Terrace, Unit 10070, Miami Beach, FL 33154; 2014 Mercedes 350 GLK; 9 MM Beretta and 25 cal Beretta [Negative Notice] Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal. (Mukamal, Barry) (Entered: 06/28/2018)
07/13/2018 75
(3 pgs)
Motion to Add Additional Creditors to Creditor Matrix and Obtain Discharge Filed by Debtor Barney N. Weinkle. (Murphree, Gary) **Modified on 7/16/2018 to Correct Verbiage** (Oriol-Bennett, Alexandra). (Entered: 07/13/2018)
07/13/2018 76
(1 pg)
Notice of Hearing (Re: 75 Motion Motion to Add Additional Creditors to Creditor Matrix and Obtain Discharge Filed by Debtor Barney N. Weinkle.) Hearing scheduled for 08/08/2018 at 09:30 AM at C. Clyde Atkins U.S. Courthouse, 301 N Miami Ave Courtroom 8 (LMI), Miami, FL 33128. (Sanabria, Noemi) (Entered: 07/13/2018)
07/19/2018 77
(4 pgs)
Trustee’s Interim Report. The trustee has submitted to the Office of the United States Trustee an interim report for the period ending 6/30/2018. The interim report provides information concerning asset administration and an accounting of the financial activity in the case. (Mukamal, Barry) Modified on 7/19/2018 to Correct Period Ending Date (Catala, Nilda). (Entered: 07/19/2018)
07/20/2018 78
(1 pg)
Certificate of Service Filed by Debtor Barney N. Weinkle (Re: 75 Motion Motion to Add Additional Creditors to Creditor Matrix and Obtain Discharge filed by Debtor Barney N. Weinkle, 76 Notice of Hearing). (Murphree, Gary) (Entered: 07/20/2018)
08/01/2018 79
(22 pgs; 2 docs)
Amended Schedules Filed: [Summary of Your Assets/Liabilities,Schedule E/F,] [Fee Amount $31] Filed by Debtor Barney N. Weinkle. (Attachments: # 1 Local Form 4) (Murphree, Gary) (Entered: 08/01/2018)
08/01/2018 80
(1 pg)
Declaration Concerning Schedules Conforming to Official Bankruptcy Form 106 or 202 Filed by Debtor Barney N. Weinkle. (Murphree, Gary) (Entered: 08/01/2018)
08/07/2018 81
(1 pg)
Notice of Change of Address Filed by Creditor BMW Financial Services NA, LLC. (AIS Data Services (Parmar)) (Entered: 08/07/2018)
08/07/2018 82
(1 pg)
Notice of Change of Address Filed by Creditor BMW Financial Services NA, LLC. (AIS Data Services (Parmar)) (Entered: 08/07/2018)
08/07/2018 83
(1 pg)
Notice of Change of Address Filed by Creditor BMW Financial Services NA, LLC. (AIS Data Services (Parmar)) (Entered: 08/07/2018)
08/07/2018 84
(1 pg)
Notice of Change of Address Filed by Creditor BMW Financial Services NA, LLC. (AIS Data Services (Parmar)) (Entered: 08/07/2018)
08/07/2018 85
(2 pgs)
Certificate of Service AMENDED Filed by Debtor Barney N. Weinkle (Re: 75 Motion Motion to Add Additional Creditors to Creditor Matrix and Obtain Discharge filed by Debtor Barney N. Weinkle, 76 Notice of Hearing, 78 Certificate of Service filed by Debtor Barney N. Weinkle). (Murphree, Gary) (Entered: 08/07/2018)
08/14/2018 86
(2 pgs)
Order Granting in part Denying in part Debtor’s Motion to Add Additional Creditors to Creditor Matrix and Setting Deadline for Added Creditors to File a Proof of Claim and Complaint Objecting to Discharge or Dischargeability Re: # 75 (Oriol-Bennett, Alexandra) (Entered: 08/14/2018)
08/22/2018 87
(2 pgs)
Certificate of Service Filed by Debtor Barney N. Weinkle (Re: 86 Order on Miscellaneous Motion). (Murphree, Gary) (Entered: 08/22/2018)
09/05/2018 88
(15 pgs)
Final Application for Compensation for Scott N Brown Esq, Attorney-Trustee, Period: 7/26/2017 to 8/7/2018, Fee: $3,750.00, Expenses: $456.47. Filed by Attorney Scott N Brown Esq. (Brown, Scott) (Entered: 09/05/2018)
03/14/2019 89
(4 pgs)
Objection to Claim of Branch Banking & Trust Company, Bankruptcy [# 2], Branch Banking & Trust Company, Bankruptcy [# 3], Branch Banking & Trust Company, Bankruptcy [# 4] [Negative Notice] Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal. (Mukamal, Barry) (Entered: 03/14/2019)
03/14/2019 90
(3 pgs)
Objection to Claim of Vend Lease Company, Inc. [# 5], [Negative Notice] Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal. (Mukamal, Barry) (Entered: 03/14/2019)
03/14/2019 91
(3 pgs)
Objection to Claim of Villa Pizza, LLC. [# 11], [Negative Notice] Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal. (Mukamal, Barry) (Entered: 03/14/2019)
03/14/2019 92
(3 pgs)
Objection to Claim of Nextwave Enterprises, LLC. [# 13], Nextwave Enterprises, LLC. [# 14], [Negative Notice] Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal. (Mukamal, Barry) (Entered: 03/14/2019)
05/22/2019 93
(2 pgs)
Order Sustaining Objection to Claim No. 5. (Re: # 90) (Valencia, Yamileth) (Entered: 05/22/2019)
05/23/2019 94
(1 pg)
Certificate of Service Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal (Re: 93 Order on Objection to Claims). (Mukamal, Barry) (Entered: 05/23/2019)
05/24/2019 95
(2 pgs)
Order Sustaining Objection to Claim No. 11 (Re: # 91) (Valencia, Yamileth) (Entered: 05/24/2019)
05/24/2019 96
(2 pgs)
Order Sustaining Objection to Claim(s) No. 13 and No. 14. (Re: # 92) (Valencia, Yamileth) (Entered: 05/24/2019)
06/03/2019 97
(1 pg)
Certificate of Service Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal (Re: 96 Order on Objection to Claims). (Mukamal, Barry) (Entered: 06/03/2019)
06/03/2019 98
(1 pg)
Certificate of Service Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal (Re: 95 Order on Objection to Claims). (Mukamal, Barry) (Entered: 06/03/2019)
07/31/2019 99
(5 pgs)
Trustee’s Interim Report. The trustee has submitted to the Office of the United States Trustee an interim report for the period ending 06/30/2019. The interim report provides information concerning asset administration and an accounting of the financial activity in the case. (Mukamal, Barry) (Entered: 07/31/2019)
08/07/2019 100
(2 pgs)
Notice to Withdraw Document Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal (Re: 89 Objection to Claim). (Mukamal, Barry) (Entered: 08/07/2019)
08/07/2019 101
(4 pgs)
Objection to Claim of Branch Banking & Trust Company [# 2], Branch Banking & Trust Company [# 3], Branch Banking & Trust Company [# 4] [Negative Notice] Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal (Mukamal, Barry) (Entered: 08/07/2019)
10/18/2019 102
(2 pgs)
Order Sustaining Objection to Claim(s) (Re: # 101) (Valencia, Yamileth) (Entered: 10/18/2019)
10/31/2019 103
(1 pg)
Certificate of Service Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal (Re: 102 Order on Objection to Claims). (Mukamal, Barry) (Entered: 10/31/2019)
10/31/2019 104
(1 pg)
Notice of Compliance Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal (Re: 70 Order on Motion to Compromise Controversy). (Mukamal, Barry) (Entered: 10/31/2019)
02/18/2020 105
(3 pgs)
Objection to Claim of William Aguirre [# 16], [Negative Notice] Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal (Mukamal, Barry) (Entered: 02/18/2020)
03/23/2020 106
(2 pgs)
Order Sustaining Objection to Claim#16 of William Aguirre (Re: # 105) (Rodriguez, Olga) (Entered: 03/23/2020)
03/23/2020 107
(1 pg)
Certificate of Service Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal (Re: 106 Order on Objection to Claims). (Mukamal, Barry) (Entered: 03/23/2020)
03/30/2020 108
(2 pgs)
Application for Final Compensation for Barry E Mukamal, Trustee Chapter 7, Period: 4/25/2017 to 3/30/2020, Fee: $1,750.00, Expenses: $114.12. Filed by Attorney Barry E Mukamal (Mukamal, Barry) (Entered: 03/30/2020)
04/03/2020 109
(14 pgs)
Chapter 7 Trustee’s Final Report, Application for Compensation and Application(s) for Compensation of Professionals filed on behalf of the Chapter 7 Trustee. The United States Trustee has reviewed the Chapter 7 Trustee’s Final Report. Filed by U.S. Trustee Office of the US Trustee. (^UST17, SE) (Entered: 04/03/2020)
04/07/2020 110
(10 pgs; 4 docs)
Notice of Trustee’s Final Report and Applications for Compensation. Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal. Objection Deadline: 04/28/2020. (Attachments: # 1 Trustee’s Summary of Requested Fees and Expenses # 2 Certificate of Service # 3 Matrix)(Mukamal, Barry) (Entered: 04/07/2020)
05/05/2020 111
(2 pgs)
Order Granting Application For Compensation (Re: # 88) for Scott N Brown, fees awarded: $3750.00, expenses awarded: $456.47, Granting Application For Compensation (Re: # 108) for Barry E Mukamal, fees awarded: $1750.00, expenses awarded: $114.12 (Valencia, Yamileth) (Entered: 05/05/2020)
05/05/2020 112
(1 pg)
Certificate of Service Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal (Re: 111 Order on Application for Compensation, Order on Application for Compensation). (Mukamal, Barry) (Entered: 05/05/2020)
05/07/2020 113
(4 pgs)
Trustee’s Notice of Final Dividends to Creditors. Filed by Trustee Barry E Mukamal. (Mukamal, Barry) (Entered: 05/07/2020)
12/11/2020 114
(2 pgs)
Notice of Deposit of Unclaimed Funds in the Total Amount of [$ 6.49] with the Clerk, United States Bankruptcy Court for William Aguirre c/o Saenz & Anderson, PLLC 20900 NE 30th Avenue, Suite 800 Aventura, Florida 33180 in the amount of $ 6.49; (Mukamal, Barry) (Entered: 12/11/2020)
02/01/2021 115
(13 pgs)
Chapter 7 Trustee’s Final Account, Certification that the Estate has been Fully Administered and Application of Trustee to be Discharged filed on behalf of the Chapter 7 Trustee. The United States Trustee has reviewed the Final Account, Certification that the Estate has been Fully Administered and Application of Trustee to be Discharged. The United States Trustee does not object to the relief requested. Filed by U.S. Trustee Office of the US Trustee. Objection Deadline: 03/3/2021. (^UST8, HLB) (Entered: 02/01/2021)
03/09/2021 116
(1 pg)
Final Decree and Bankruptcy Case Closed. (Cohen, Diana) (Entered: 03/09/2021)

Editors Choice

Where Is He Now? Fraudster Francis Santa Was Sentenced to 88 Months for Conspiracy

Now Frank’s Out After Snitchin’ to Obtain a Lighter Sentence from Judge Kenneth Marra for Financial Institution Fraud, He’s Been In Touch with LIT.

Published

on

United States v. Santa

(9:11-cr-80007)

District Court, S.D. Florida

JAN 11, 2011 | REPUBLISHED BY LIT: APR 22, 2022

Factual Proffer

On August 10, 2011, movant entered into the following factual proffer with the government used to support his guilty plea, which he thereafter acknowledged as correct during his change of plea hearing:

If this case had proceeded to trial, the Government would have established beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant FRANCIS SANTA did knowingly and willfully conspire with others to execute and cause the execution of a scheme and artifice to defraud financial institutions through the submission of fraudulent line of credit applications and related financial documents on behalf of unqualified borrowers.

In approximately 2003, FRANCIS SANTA began operating Palm Beach Business Consultant, Inc. (PBBC), a Florida corporation located in Boca Raton, Florida.

PBBC was in the business of preparing fraudulent loan package for individuals who lacked the income, credit scores and/or collateral to qualify for legitimate loans and/or lines of credit.

To induce clients to use PBBC’s services, SANTA represented that he had arrangements with numerous bankers who would push through fraudulent loans and/or lines of credit for PBBC clients. Indeed, SANTA claimed that he could get clients up to $300,000 in loans and/or lines of credit from these bankers.

He further represented that he had employees who were skilled at creating fraudulent loan and/or line of credit packages so that the PBBC clients would appear to be qualified, when in fact they were not.

To take advantage of SANTA’S services, the clients were required to pay SANTA fees ranging from $12,500 to $25,000.

The fees were paid up- front or after the loan and/or line of credit was funded by the bank.

SANTA hired several employees who were responsible for preparing the fraudulent loan and/or line of credit application packages for PBBC clients.

These co-conspirators, including Rodney Kahane and Daniel Paine and the non-law enforcement loan applicants, prepared fraudulent loan and line of credit applications in which they falsely reported the applicant’s income, and in many instances, included false and fraudulent financial documents, including false tax returns, false balance sheets and false income statements.

SANTA worked with numerous local bank officers who would facilitate the processing of the fraudulent loan applications in return for a kickback – typically cash, an American Express gift card or other means of remuneration.

In most instances, the fraudulent line of credit applications were approved by the banks. The applicants would take possession of the line of credit proceeds and withdraw funds against the lines of credit.

In almost all instances, the applicants were not able to repay the lines of credit, which resulted in substantial losses to the banks.

Between at least as early as September 13, 2005, through at least May 28, 2009, SANTA actively prepared and submitted loan documents based upon fictitious facts for at least thirty-two individual loans.

These loans were submitted on behalf of clients of PBBC utilizing false documents which were prepared by co-conspirators Kahane and Paine. These loans were submitted through bank officers at Wachovia Bank, Bank of America, Fifth Third Bank, Regions Bank, Suntrust Bank, Commerce Bank, and National City Bank, through co-defendant bank officers CHRISTOPHER BROORKS, DAVID MCGUIRE, and others.

A listing of the fraudulently applied for loans, including the date, the amount, the bank and banker involved and whether the loan was funded is attached hereto and made a part of this factual stipulation supporting the factual basis for the entry of the plea of guilty.

SANTA admits that the amount of the loans sought through his criminal activities was $2,658,000.00 and that the banks suffered an actual loss of $1,502,465.04 as a result of these fraudulently obtained loans.

The charge to which defendant SANTA is pleading guilty is conspiracy to commit fraud on financial institutions.

Santa is ‘Representing Mr. and Mrs Esposito’ in a ‘Removal Request’ via his Business, operating online at BusinessImageLift.com for an alleged article identified by his email, on a sister site at LawsInTexas.com. Note: Mrs. Esposito was formally indicted as Melissa Ringel, not Esposito, and both Esposito and Ringel have criminal cases pending in NY Supreme Court, before Justice Rodney.

Sentencing Guidelines

Prior to the sentencing hearing, the probation officer prepared a PSI wherein, movant was assessed a base offense level of
7.

(PSI§139).

Notwithstanding the probation officer’s initial calculations, because the loss was more than $2,500,000, but not more than $7,000,000, the offense level was increased by 18 levels.

(PSI§140).

Likewise, because the offense involved sophisticated means and since movant was determined to be an organizer or leader of the criminal activity that involved five or more participants, the offense level was increased by an additional six levels.

(PSI§§141,143).

Movant’s adjusted offense level was 31. (

PSI§145).

However, because movant demonstrated acceptance of responsibility, his offense level was reduced by three levels, ultimately setting his total offense level at 28.

(PSI§§147-149).

The probation officer further determined movant had a total of 8 criminal history points and a criminal history category of IV.

(PSI§§155-157).

Based on a total offense level of 28 and a criminal history category of IV, movant’s guideline imprisonment range was
110 to 137 months.

(PSI§193).

Francis ‘Frank’ Santa’s New Defense Counsel became a Criminal Judge (The Honorable Scott Suskauer)

On the same day objections to the PSI were filed, defense counsel also filed a motion for downward variance and/or downward departure based upon the 18 U.S.C. §3553(a) factors and movant’s extensive cooperation with the government.

(Cr-DE#315).

A few days later, defense counsel Richard L. Rosenbaum moved to withdraw from the case, which was granted and a notice of appearance was filed by Scott Ira Suskauer.

(Cr-DEs#317,323,324).

Attorney Suskauer filed amended objections, adopting prior counsel’s objections to the PSI, and further argued movant should only be held responsible for the actual loss amount and that the intended loss should not be calculated as part of the determination of the proper sentencing guideline.

(Cr-DE#322).

In response, the government opposed movant’s request for a downward variance/departure.

(Cr-DE#335).

Although the government admitted movant’s cooperation resulted in the arrest and prosecution of the co-defendants charged in the information in the underlying criminal proceedings, it nonetheless argued movant had committed unauthorized criminal acts while working with the FBI, which were discovered without the assistance of the movant, in violation of the cooperation agreement.

(Id.).

The government also opposed the movant’s objections to the PSI arguing that movant should be held responsible for the intended loss amount and not solely the actual loss.

(Cr-DE#334).

Then, on November 29, 2011, defense counsel filed a memorandum in aid of sentencing wherein movant’s good character was highlighted, and further reminded the Court of movant’s acceptance of responsibility, along with his extensive cooperation efforts with the government.

(Cr-DE#337).

Specifically, movant argued that his cooperation outweighs anything he may have done to offset the benefit that the government had already received and would continue to receive.

(Id.).

We get it though, Frank must be upset reading LIF when he sees Lawyers thievin’ millions, more than his amount and they are operating like nothing happened, livin’ the millionaire beach bum lifestyle in Florida.

Sentencing

Following defense counsel’s sentencing memorandum, on December 1, 2011, movant appeared for sentencing.

(Cr-DE#339).

During the hearing, defense counsel argued the intended loss was not the actual loss amount, therefore, movant was inappropriately assessed 18 levels instead of 16 levels.

(Cr-DE#351:3).

Following argument by both parties on this matter, the Court overruled the objection.

(Id.:19).

Next, defense counsel objected to movant’s role assessment arguing movant’s role was only that of manager to two individuals; however, the Court also overruled this objection.

(Id.:19-21).

Counsel then proceeded with his argument on his motion for downward variance or departure.

(Id.:21).

In doing so, counsel focused on movant’s extraordinary efforts with cooperation and noted that as a result of movant’s cooperation, 27 individuals had been convicted with others under investigation at that time.

(Id.:23-29).

In response, the government argued that based on three instances, it could not file a 5K1 motion because movant had committed wrongful acts in violation of his obligations to cooperate.

(Id.:33).

The government did not dispute that movant had provided extraordinary assistance; however, based on the specific requirements of the cooperation agreement, which encompassed movant not doing anything illegal again, he could not be a beneficiary of a 5K1 motion.

(Id.:33-37).

Following further argument from the government and closing remarks from defense counsel, the Court, after having considered the statements of all the parties, the PSI, as well as statutory factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. §3553(a)(1) through (7),

based on his cooperation, sentenced movant below the guideline range and imposed a sentence of 88 months, restitution totaling $1,502,465.04, followed by five years of supervised release. (Id.:37-45).

The Clerk entered judgment on December 2, 2011.

LIF COMMENT; BASED ON AN 88 MONTH SENTENCE, THIS WOULD MEAN AN ANTICIPATED FEDERAL PRISON RELEASE DATE OF:  Tuesday, April 2, 2019 AND FRANCIS SANTA’S PROBATION WOULD END, IF COMPLETED WITHOUT INCIDENT, 60 MONTHS THEREAFTER; Tuesday, April 2, 2024 – SO FRANK’s STILL ON PROBATION AT THIS TIME AND THERE’S NOTHING ON THE COURT RECORDS WE COULD FIND INDICATING HOW MUCH OF THE $1.5M RESTITUTION HE HAS REPAID.

(Cr-DE#340).

No direct appeal ensued.

The judgment of conviction in the underlying criminal case became final at the latest on December 16, 2011, fourteen days after the entry of the judgment, when time expired for filing a notice of appeal.1

1Where, as here, a defendant does not pursue a direct appeal, his conviction becomes final when the time for filing a direct appeal expires. Adams v. United States, 173 F.3d 1339, 1342 n.2 (11th Cir. 1999). In 2009, the time for filing a direct appeal was increased from 10 to 14 days days after the judgment or order being appealed is entered. Fed.R.App.P. 4(b)(1)(A)(i). The judgment is “entered” when it is entered on the docket by the Clerk of Court. Fed.R.App.P. 4(b)(6). Moreover, now every day, including intermediate Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays are included in the computation. See Fed.R.App.P. 26(a)(1).

Conclusion

It is therefore recommended that this motion to vacate be denied; that a certificate of appealability be denied; and, the case closed.

Objections to this report may be filed with the District Judge within fourteen days of receipt of a copy of the report.

Signed this 2nd day of October, 2013.

MAGISTRATE JUDGE PATRICK A. WHITE

After performing some more research, the old adage that federal prisons do not offer ‘early release’, apparently that is a misnomer. LIF discovered Francis Santa was released on April 13, 2017 – so his 5 year post release probation would end conveniently right before he emailed LIT via his new business. So rather than 88 months, he served considerably less time and on review of the docket he was in prison since indictment so that means he served approximately 75 months.

U.S. District Court
Southern District of Florida (West Palm Beach)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 9:12-cv-81369-KAM

Santa v. USA
Assigned to: Judge Kenneth A. Marra

Case in other court:  USDC Southern FL, 11-CR-80007-KAM
13-11788-C

Cause: 28:2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence

Date Filed: 12/17/2012
Date Terminated: 12/09/2014
Jury Demand: None
Nature of Suit: 510 Prisoner: Vacate Sentence
Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Defendant
Plaintiff
Francis Santa represented by Francis Santa
48312-054
Terminal Island
Federal Correctional Institution
Inmate Mail/Parcels
Post Office Box 3007
San Pedro, CA 90731-0207
PRO SEAnna Laniado
Laniado Law PL
40 NW 3rd Street
Suite 200
Miami, FL 33128
7862089565
Email: alaniado@laniadolaw.net
TERMINATED: 01/08/2013
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
V.
Defendant
USA represented by Anne Ruth Schultz
United States Attorney’s Office
99 NE 4 Street
Miami, FL 33132
305-961-9117
Fax: 530-7941
Email: anne.schultz@usdoj.gov
TERMINATED: 01/03/2013
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICEDEllen L Cohen
United States Attorney’s Office
500 South Australian Avenue
Suite 400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
561-209-1046
Fax: 659-4526
Email: Ellen.Cohen@usdoj.gov
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

 

Date Filed # Docket Text
12/17/2012 1 MOTION (Complaint) to Vacate Sentence (2255) . NOTE: All further docketing is to be done in the civil case. (Criminal Case # 11-80007), filed by Francis Santa. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix Addendum to Claim One, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet)(Laniado, Anna) (Entered: 12/17/2012)
12/17/2012 2 Judge Assignment to Judge Kenneth A. Marra (tpl) (Entered: 12/18/2012)
12/18/2012 3 Clerks Notice to Filer re: Electronic Case. Incorrect case opening information. The Filer selected the incorrect Jurisdiction when filing. The correction was made. It is not necessary to re-file this document. (tpl) (Entered: 12/18/2012)
12/18/2012 4 Clerks Notice to Filer re: Electronic Case. Incorrect case opening information. The Filer selected the incorrect Nature of Suit when filing. The correction was made. It is not necessary to re-file this document. (tpl) (Entered: 12/18/2012)
12/20/2012 5 ORDER re 1 Motion (Complaint) to Vacate/Set Aside/Correct Sentence (2255) filed by Francis Santa. Show Cause Response due by 1/14/2013. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 12/20/2012. (ir) (Entered: 12/20/2012)
01/03/2013 6 Notice of Reassignment of Assistant U.S. Attorney by Ellen L Cohen on behalf of USA Attorney Anne Ruth Schultz terminated. (Cohen, Ellen) (Entered: 01/03/2013)
01/04/2013 7 First MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 5 Order, Set/Reset Deadlines to March 5, 2013 by USA. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Cohen, Ellen) (Entered: 01/04/2013)
01/04/2013 8 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney by Anna Laniado. by Francis Santa. Responses due by 1/22/2013 (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Laniado, Anna) (Entered: 01/04/2013)
01/05/2013 9 RESPONSE to Motion re 8 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney by Anna Laniado. filed by USA. Replies due by 1/17/2013. (Cohen, Ellen) (Entered: 01/05/2013)
01/08/2013 10 ENDORSED ORDER granting 7 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply 5 Order to respond to March 5, 2013. Responses due by 3/15/2013. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 1/8/2013. (ir) (Entered: 01/08/2013)
01/08/2013 11 MOTION to Terminate Counsel by Francis Santa. (lbc) (Entered: 01/08/2013)
01/08/2013 12 MOTION to Supplement the Record by Francis Santa. (lbc) (Entered: 01/08/2013)
01/08/2013 13 ORDER granting 8 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney. Attorney Anna Laniado terminated ; granting 11 Motion to proceed pro se. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 1/8/2013. (ir) (Entered: 01/08/2013)
01/08/2013 14 ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Patrick A. White for Pretrial Proceedings. Motions referred to Patrick A. White Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 1/8/2013. (lbc) (Entered: 01/08/2013)
01/10/2013 15 NOTICE of filing receipt of correspondence by Francis Santa. (ir) (Entered: 01/10/2013)
01/11/2013 16 INITIAL ORDER OF INSTRUCTIONS TO PRO SE LITIGANT. Signed by Magistrate Judge Patrick A. White on 1/10/2013. (br) (Entered: 01/11/2013)
01/11/2013 17 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE that on or before forty-five days from the date of this order, the respondent shall file a memorandum of fact and law to show cause why this motion should not be granted. Signed by Magistrate Judge Patrick A. White on 1/10/2013. (br) (Entered: 01/11/2013)
02/15/2013 18 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 17 Order to Show Cause, by USA. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Cohen, Ellen) (Entered: 02/15/2013)
02/19/2013 19 ORDER granting 12 Motion ; granting 18 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply re 12 MOTION to Supplement the Record subject to any and all applicable procedural bars., 18 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 17 Order to Show Cause, ( Responses due by 4/25/2013) Signed by Magistrate Judge Patrick A. White on 2/19/2013. (cz) (Entered: 02/19/2013)
02/25/2013 20 Petitioner’s MOTION in Opposition to the Government’s Request for 18 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 17 Order to Show Cause, by Francis Santa. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(yar) (Entered: 02/26/2013)
02/27/2013 21 MEMORANDUM Brief in Support of re 1 MOTION to Vacate Sentence (2255), With Points and Authorities by Francis Santa. (yar) (Entered: 02/27/2013)
02/27/2013 22 ORDER denying 20 Motion in opposition to government’s motion for extension of time. Signed by Magistrate Judge Patrick A. White on 2/27/2013. (cz) (Entered: 02/27/2013)
03/25/2013 23 MOTION for Production of Documents/Plea Colloquy, Sentencing Transcripts, Pursuant to Petitioner’s Motion Under 28 USC 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody by Francis Santa. (yha) (Entered: 03/25/2013)
03/26/2013 24 ORDER deferring ruling on 23 Motion to Produce, the government shall respond to this motion with its response to the order to show cause. Signed by Magistrate Judge Patrick A. White on 3/26/2013. (cz) (Entered: 03/26/2013)
03/28/2013 25 MOTION for Production of Documents/Plea Colloquy, Sentencing Transcripts Pursuant to Petitioner’s Motion Under 28 U.S.C. 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody by Francis Santa. (yar) (Entered: 03/28/2013)
04/01/2013 26 ORDER deferring ruling on 25 Motion to Produce, the government shall respond to the two motions for production of documents forthwith. Signed by Magistrate Judge Patrick A. White on 4/1/2013. (cz) (Entered: 04/01/2013)
04/01/2013 27 RESPONSE to Motion re 25 MOTION to Produce, 23 MOTION to Produce transcripts of plea and sentening hearings and corresponding orders filed by USA. Replies due by 4/11/2013. (Attachments: # 1 Transcripts Plea colloquy, # 2 Transcripts Sentencing hearing)(Cohen, Ellen) (Entered: 04/01/2013)
04/03/2013 28 ORDER granting 23 Motion to Produce; granting 25 Motion to Produce, see government’s response (DE#27). Signed by Magistrate Judge Patrick A. White on 4/3/2013. (cz) (Entered: 04/03/2013)
04/08/2013 29 MOTION for Bail Pending 28 U.S.C. 2255 Motion, Pursuant to FRAP Rule 23 and the Bail Reform Act 18 U.S.C. 1341 by Francis Santa. Responses due by 4/25/2013 (yar) (Entered: 04/08/2013)
04/09/2013 30 ORDER denying 29 Motion for Bond. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 4/9/2013. (ir) (Entered: 04/09/2013)
04/15/2013 31 MOTION to Expand the Record Pursuant to Rule 7 Governing 2255 Proceedings by Francis Santa. (yar) (Main Document 31 replaced on 5/15/2013) (ail). (Entered: 04/15/2013)
04/16/2013 32 ORDER granting 31 Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages to include plea transcript. Signed by Magistrate Judge Patrick A. White on 4/15/2013. (cz) (Entered: 04/16/2013)
04/17/2013 33 RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE re 5 Order, Set/Reset Deadlines by USA. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4)(Cohen, Ellen) (Entered: 04/17/2013)
04/23/2013 34 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal by Francis Santa re 30 Order on Motion for Bond. Filing fee $(NOT PAID). Within fourteen days of the filing date of a Notice of Appeal, the appellant must complete the Eleventh Circuit Transcript Order Form regardless of whether transcripts are being ordered [Pursuant to FRAP 10(b)]. For information go to our FLSD website under Transcript Information. (mc) (Entered: 04/24/2013)
04/23/2013 35 MOTION for Certificate of Appealability construed from 34 Notice of Appeal by Francis Santa. Responses due by 5/10/2013 (mc) (Entered: 04/24/2013)
04/29/2013 36 Acknowledgment of Receipt of NOA from USCA re 34 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal, filed by Francis Santa. Date received by USCA: 4/24/13. USCA Case Number: 13-11788-C. (hh) (Entered: 04/29/2013)
05/03/2013 37 TRANSCRIPT INFORMATION FORM by Francis Santa re 34 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal. No Transcript Requested. (mc) (Entered: 05/07/2013)
05/15/2013 38 Clerks Notice of Docket Correction re 31 MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages. Correction: Image replaced with complete image; see attached for viewing. (ail) (Entered: 05/15/2013)
05/17/2013 39 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis on appeal with Inmate Account Statement attached by Francis Santa. (mc) (Entered: 05/17/2013)
05/20/2013 40 NOTICE of Traverse Reply by Francis Santa re 33 Response to Order to Show Cause (lbc) (Entered: 05/20/2013)
05/20/2013 41 MOTION to Supplement the Record Pursuant to Rule 15 by Francis Santa. (lbc) (Entered: 05/20/2013)
05/21/2013 42 ENDORSED ORDER granting 39 Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis on Appeal. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 5/21/2013. (ir) (Entered: 05/21/2013)
05/21/2013 43 ORDER granting 41 Motion motion to supplement the record, the government shall respond in thirty days to additional issues and may apply any and all applicable procedural bars. Signed by Magistrate Judge Patrick A. White on 5/21/2013. (cz) (Entered: 05/21/2013)
05/28/2013 44 RESPONSE/REPLY to 41 MOTION to Supplement the Record Pursuant to Rule 15, 43 Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief by USA. (Cohen, Ellen) (Entered: 05/28/2013)
05/29/2013 45 *Endorsed Order tHE GOVERNMENT’S mOTION TO WITHDRAW ORDER de#43 AS DUPLICATIVE OF de#19 IS GRANTED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Patrick A. White on 5/29/2013. (cz) (Entered: 05/29/2013)
06/05/2013 46 ORDER denying 35 Motion for Certificate of Appealability Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 6/4/2013. (amb) (Entered: 06/05/2013)
06/07/2013 47 MOTION for the District Court to Take Judicial Notice – For The Petitioner’s 1 Motion to Vacate/Set Aside/Correct Sentence (2255),, MOTION for an Evidentiary Hearing by Francis Santa. (yar) (Additional attachment(s) added on 6/10/2013: # 1 Exhibit) (yar). (Entered: 06/10/2013)
06/21/2013 48 ORDER granting 47 Motion to take judicial notice of 2255 filed ; denying 47 Motion for Hearing, if a hearing is required one will be set at a later date. Signed by Magistrate Judge Patrick A. White on 6/21/2013. (cz) (Entered: 06/21/2013)
09/03/2013 49 ORDER of Dismissal from USCA, denying Appellant’s motion for a certificate of appealability because Santa’s has failed to make the requisite showing as to 34 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal, filed by Francis Santa, USCA # 13-11788-C (hh) (Entered: 09/03/2013)
10/02/2013 50 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS on 28 USC 2255 case re 1 Motion (Complaint) to Vacate/Set Aside/Correct Sentence (2255), filed by Francis Santa. Recommending that this motion to vacate be denied; that a certificate of appealability be denied; and, the case closed. Objections to R&R due by 10/21/2013 Signed by Magistrate Judge Patrick A. White on 10/2/2013. (tw) (Entered: 10/02/2013)
10/21/2013 51 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Opposition to Report of Magistrate; Attached Declaration of Francis Santana 50 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS on 28 USC 2255 case re 1 Motion (Complaint) to Vacate/Set Aside/Correct Sentence (2255), filed by Francis Santa Recommending that this motion to vacate be denied; that a certificate of appealability be denied; and, the… by Francis Santa. (yar) Modified text on 10/21/2013 (yar). (Entered: 10/21/2013)
10/22/2013 52 ENDORSED ORDER granting 51 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply re 50 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS on 28 USC 2255 case re 1 Motion (Complaint) to Vacate/Set Aside/Correct Sentence (2255), filed by Francis Santa Recommending that this motion to vacate be denied. Objections to R&R due by 10/31/2013. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 10/22/2013. (ir) (Entered: 10/22/2013)
10/31/2013 53 Petitioner’s OBJECTION to Report of Magistrate Judge 50 Report and Recommendations by Francis Santa. (yar) (Entered: 11/01/2013)
12/09/2014 54 FINAL JUDGMENT ORDER ADOPTING 50 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS denying 1 petition to vacate pursuant to 2255. Certificate of Appealability: DENIED. This case is CLOSED. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 12/8/2014. (ir)NOTICE: If there are sealed documents in this case, they may be unsealed after 1 year or as directed by Court Order, unless they have been designated to be permanently sealed. See Local Rule 5.4 and Administrative Order 2014-69. Modified on 12/9/2014 (ir). (Entered: 12/09/2014)
12/10/2014 55 Case No Longer Referred to Magistrate Judge Patrick A. White/Case Closed by the District Judge. Signed by Magistrate Judge Patrick A. White on 12/10/2014. (br) (Entered: 12/10/2014)
And here’s another lawyer not reported for mortgage fraud. A bit of a cliche when you see Judge Marra turned a blind eye to it as well and then is sentencing Santa…

LONG-TERM FBI UNDERCOVER OPERATION NABS A TOTAL OF 24 DEFENDANTS

Charges include Conspiracy, Bank Fraud, Money Laundering and Identity Theft

JAN 12, 2011 | REPUBLISHED BY LIT: APR 22, 2022

Wifredo A. Ferrer, United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, and John V. Gillies, Special Agent in Charge, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Miami Field Office, announce the filing of charges against fifteen defendants on charges of conspiracy to commit bank fraud, bank fraud, bribery, money laundering, and identity theft.

The defendants, including a loan broker, seven bank officers, and seven customers,are charged in separate Informations for their participation in a four-year scheme to defraud ten area banks out of more than $10 million through the submission of fraudulent small business loans and lines of credit applications.

Previously, another nine defendants were charged in connection with this undercover operation – seven were charged for their participation in a separate identity theft ring and two were charged with bank fraud and money laundering.

U.S. Attorney Wifredo Ferrer stated,

“South Florida ranks first in the nation in home mortgage loan origination fraud, through which false documents are created and submitted to banks to obtain home mortgage loans.

Today, we see a new twist on that scheme. Instead of home mortgages, this ring of defendants, with the help of corrupt bankers, used the same tactics to fraudulently obtain small business loans and lines of credit.

To date, this undercover operation has resulted in charges against a total of 24 defendants, putting them out of the fraud business and potentially into jail cells.”

FBI Special Agent in Charge John V. Gillies stated,

“Today’s case highlights a growing and disturbing trend of the illegal use of small business lines of credit to further criminal activity.

As a result of individual corruption, today’s defendants cost taxpayers, banks and the federal government millions of dollars.

While today’s case marks a significant first step toward combating these crimes, the FBI remains vigilant in its pursuit of this new breed of financial and corporate greed.”

And here’s a recent 11th Circuit decision agreeing with pro se litigants that Judge Kenneth Marra did in fact abuse his powers, but his admitted perjury by written orders confirming the same is not enough to remove him from the lower court case, despite a plethora of case law rejecting that conclusion.

The Information filed today charges loan broker Frank Santa, 51, of Boca Raton, the owner and operator of Palm Beach Business Consultants (PBBC), a loan brokerage business specializing in obtaining fraudulent business loans for clients with poor credit histories.

Also charged were the following seven bankers:

Daniel Agudelo, 34, of Royal Palm Beach, a Small Business Banker at Fifth Third Bank;

Christopher Brooks, 34, of Tamarac, an Assistant Vice President at Bank of America;

Macario Deguzman, 30, of Miramar, a Vice President at Regions Bank and Am Trust Bank;

William Hebert, 36, of Lake Worth, a Vice President at HSBC Bank;

David Mcguire, 39, of Boca Raton, a Regional Private Banker at Wachovia Bank;

David Ramoy, 33, of Lighthouse Point, a bank officer at Floridian Community Bank;

and

Alexander Reyes, 25, of Boynton Beach, a Small Business Banker at Fifth Third Bank.

The Francis Santa Foundation

 Boca Raton, FL, United States

February 25, 2022

Francis Santa, a philanthropist from Boca Raton, Florida is launching the Francis Santa Foundation. He has created a website for his foundation which can be found at https://francissantafoundation.com.

  Credit: GLOBE NEWSWIRE/YAHOO!

LIF are non-lawyers, but we would suggest that operating a ‘foundation’*as a convicted felon – is probably not allowed, and whether Santa has disclosed this to his Probation Officer is questionable (it was advertised before his estimated probation ended).

Certainly, LIT searched the IRS for his foundation but found no match.

Finally, considering he has a restitution order of over $1.5 Million dollars, the only foundation he should be giving to is the fund to repay his victims.

*What Is a Private Foundation?

A private foundation is a nonprofit charitable entity that is generally created by a single benefactor, usually an individual or a business. Using this initial seed donation, known as an endowment, an investment is made to generate income, which is then dispersed in the form of grants to individuals or other charities in accordance with the foundation’s charitable purpose.

Credit: Investopedia

Boca man pleads guilty to conspiring to bribe bankers and fake financial documents

AUG 9, 2011 | REPUBLISHED BY LIT: APR 22, 2022

WEST PALM BEACH — The owner of a Boca Raton company pleaded guilty Wednesday to conspiring to bribe local bankers and falsify financial documents to secure more than $1.5 million in fraudulent small business loans and lines of credit.

Francis Santa admitted orchestrating what federal prosecutors have described as an unique form of fraud: enlisting corrupt bankers to approve business loans for clients with poor credit histories. Santa and his employees at Palm Beach Business Consultants attempted to push through more than $10 million in bogus loans and lines of credit since the firm opened in 2003, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

After federal authorities caught on to Santa’s scheme, he began working with them and agreed to introduce an undercover FBI agent to the bankers. The sting culminated in January with the arrests of 15 people, including Santa, a Broward Schools assistant principal, a former Broward Sheriff’s investigative aide and seven Broward and Palm Beach bankers.

Fourteen of the defendants have entered into plea agreements. Thomas Correa, an assistant principal at the Lanier-James Education Center in Hallandale Beach, is still fighting charges he signed false tax returns to receive $300,000 in bank loans.

Santa, 52, agreed to plead guilty to a single count of conspiracy to commit fraud on a financial institution, a charge that could carry up to 30 years in federal prison. He likely faces far less time behind bars when U.S. District Judge Kenneth Marra sentences him on Oct. 21.

Santa’s attorney, Richard Rosenbaum, said his client cooperated extensively with federal authorities and will likely be called to testify if Correa goes to trial.

When Santa left the federal courthouse on Wednesday, he told a photographer, “You’re not getting my picture,” and began running. In a white dress shirt and tan slacks, Santa sprinted about three blocks, stopped to catch his breath, then started running again.

As part of the FBI sting, five of the seven bankers agreed to help the undercover agent launder hundreds of thousands of dollars in purported drug money, according to court records. Three of the seven bankers have received prison terms of up to 50 months, while the remaining four are awaiting sentencing.

And here’s another lawyer not reported for financial fraud by taking advantage of former NFL Players in Florida by stealing, in many instances, their life savings and retirement funds.

The other people arrested were Palm Beach Business Consultants clients seeking to get loans or lines of credit. Among them were Correa, who had been a longtime reserve Broward Sheriff’s deputy, and Jeanne Ward, who had been an investigative aide with the Broward Sheriff’s Office for 13 years.

Ward and her ex-husband Terrance Ward have pleaded guilty to fraud and identity theft charges, admitting she illegally used a law enforcement database to pilfer people’s identities to get lines of credit. Both are scheduled to be sentenced on Sept. 9.

YOUR DONATION(S) WILL HELP US:

• Continue to provide this website, content, resources, community and help center for free to the many homeowners, residents, Texans and as we’ve expanded, people nationwide who need access without a paywall or subscription.

• Help us promote our campaign through marketing, pr, advertising and reaching out to government, law firms and anyone that will listen and can assist.

Thank you for your trust, belief and support in our conviction to help Floridian residents and citizens nationwide take back their freedom. Your Donations and your Voice are so important.



Continue Reading

Appellate Judges

April 2022 Foreclosure Stay Raises Serious Questions as to ‘Divorce Status’ Of Tim and Jennifer Howard

We suggested our doubts in our first article and our suspicions are only further endorsed by the foreclosure of their former marital home.

Published

on

TOWD POINT MORTGAGE TRUST 2016 1 US BANK NATIONAL vs HOWARD, PHILLIP TIMOTHY & JENNIFER CROUSE, ET AL.

MAY 13, 2021 | REPUBLISHED BY LIT: APR 17, 2022

THE SEC NEEDS TO TAKE JUDICIAL NOTICE

Note: This is only one property, there is the beach home, etc.

Considering the history of the lawyer Phillip Tim Howard and his deception, along with our review of the court documents, including the ongoing SEC investigation and complaint, we’re pretty sure based on our audit, this divorce is a sham, but it’s up to the government and related authorities to review and prosecute as necessary.

This con man and ‘the wife’ should be behind bars, not selling assets and avoiding forfeiture of funds recovered. Any net proceeds of their ‘extravagant lifestyle’ should be returned to duped investors – and according to court records, many victims lost their entire life savings.

Motion to Stay While Loss Mitigation is Pending with Lender and Order Granting Stay

(The original complaint is also included, which details the facts.).

Federal Judge Winsor in a related case and recent opinion stated;

“To avoid confusing the two Howards, this order will refer to Jennifer Howard as “the wife,” despite the fact that they are no longer married.”

The Certificate of Service Sends the Mail to the Same Address for both Tim and Jennifer Howard in Jacksonville, Fl.

The Certificate of Service confirms JOINT Counsel for the Howards’ is an admitted foreclosure defense firm.

The Residential Home is Currently On the Market for Sale and the Court filings show this Realtor as the Listing Agent

SALES ASSOCIATE

Joana is a native of Kentucky (Go Wildcats!) but has lived in the Tallahassee area over 20 years. Prior to becoming a licensed real estate agent, she was a legal assistant and then a stay at home mom for many years. She is the mother of four wonderful children who keep her on her toes! She enjoys the outdoors, traveling and spending time with friends and family.

Meeting new people and helping clients whether they are buying or selling a home is Joana’s passion. Her client dedication and love of helping others are what motivate her most. A focused listener, Joana is known for her intuition and diligence while employing genuine concern and honesty as she creates a positive experience for both sides in any real estate transaction.

Her business approach is simply this: she listens to the client’s needs and matches them to the right property, then assures a smooth and efficient transaction. Her bubbly and outgoing personality and her ability to “talk to anyone” contribute to her success when negotiating deals for her clients.

850-544-2120

joanavrealty@gmail.com

The Home is Shown as ‘Under Contract’ as at 4/17/2022 for $1,098,000.

Let’s hope the buyer has a good real estate lawyer to check out the liens, loans and why the HOA is a defendant in the foreclosure proceedings.

YOUR DONATION(S) WILL HELP US:

• Continue to provide this website, content, resources, community and help center for free to the many homeowners, residents, Texans and as we’ve expanded, people nationwide who need access without a paywall or subscription.

• Help us promote our campaign through marketing, pr, advertising and reaching out to government, law firms and anyone that will listen and can assist.

Thank you for your trust, belief and support in our conviction to help Floridian residents and citizens nationwide take back their freedom. Your Donations and your Voice are so important.



Continue Reading

Appellate Judges

Federal Judge Winsor Baulks Dismissal With Prejudice in Disbarred Lawyers Alleged Perjured Complaint

This is a LIT Series on Tim Howard’s shady past and present (not the American goalkeeper) but the Lawyer accused of finchin’ millions from retired NFL players.

Published

on

HOWARD v. GDB CAPITAL GROUP LLC

(4:19-cv-00049)

District Court, N.D. Florida

JAN 23, 2019 | REPUBLISHED BY LIT: APR 11, 2022

ORDER GRANTING DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND AWARDING FEES

Phillip Howard sued GDB Capital and others, alleging federal and state claims.

The claims relate to real estate transactions that Howard claims were actually usurious loans.1

Howard has acted improperly and dishonestly throughout this litigation, and I issued an order requiring him to show cause why he should not be sanctioned.

ECF No. 54.

At a hearing on the issue, I determined that sanctions were appropriate.

1 There is no operative complaint.

I will refer to various iterations of the complaint by their given titles, though not all of them are correctly styled. Howard titled his first repleading as a “Second Amended Complaint.”

ECF No. 29.

After that was dismissed, he filed a “Third Amended Complaint,”

ECF No. 38,

followed by a “Verified Third Amended Complaint” (filed without leave),

ECF No. 39.

Because the “Verified Third Amended Complaint” was filed improperly, it was stricken.

ECF No. 56 at 6.

Howard missed the filing deadline for his “Fourth Amended Complaint,”

see ECF Nos. 56 at 7, 60 at 1,

so it never became operative.

Compare with 11th Circuit Opinion re Shotgun Pleading dismissed with prejudice and Judge ‘Glossing’ Tjoflat’s detailed concurring opinion, including pleading a complaint concisely – a warning to lawyers.

Here, Howard’s entire lack of a complaint, combined with a review of the federal docket and in conjuction with the related state court dockets and filings, clearly shows Howards’ complaint(s) commanded dismissal WITH prejudice, sanctions or not.

Now, Howard asks that his case be dismissed without prejudice.

ECF No. 72 at 5, 7.

The defendants agree that the case should be dismissed, but they want it with prejudice.

ECF Nos. 71, 73.

Having carefully considered the parties’ arguments, I find that dismissal without prejudice is sufficient.

This order also imposes sanctions on Howard, as announced at the hearing.

BACKGROUND

Howard (then a licensed attorney2) initially sued on behalf of himself and his then-wife, Jennifer Howard.

(To avoid confusing the two Howards, this order will refer to Jennifer Howard as “the wife,” despite the fact that they are no longer married.)

Throughout the case, Howard consistently failed to comply with the court’s orders, resulting in four show-cause orders.

See ECF Nos. 5, 10, 54, 59.

The third show-cause order3 came after the wife (his one-time purported co-plaintiff) filed notice through her attorney that the case was filed without her knowledge or authorization.

See ECF No. 48 ¶ 1; ECF No. 54.

Howard’s response to the order was equivocal and did not say directly whether the wife authorized the suit.

See generally ECF No. 55.

It addressed ancillary issues, claiming Howard and the wife had met

2 Recently, the Florida Supreme Court disbarred him.

See Fla. Bar v. Phillip Timothy Howard, 2022 WL 872176, at *1 (Fla. Mar. 24, 2022).

3 The first and second show-cause orders addressed Howard’s failure to timely serve defendants.

See ECF Nos. 5, 10.

The fourth addressed his untimely filing of the Fourth Amended Complaint.

See ECF No. 59.

As Judge Winsor confirms himself (see footnote 4 above), if you  review the attached motion for attorney fees in the related state court case, specifically page 7, which was filed in June of 2020…Jennifer C. Howard claimed she did not sign said closing documents in defiance of evidence to the contrary, including a notary public claiming she witnessed her signing the papers.

So how is she any more credible than Mr. Howard, especially when she was never cross examined by Judge Winsor?

Who’s making ‘conclusory’ judgments now about a parties integrity when they are not present in the courtroom?

with the U.S. Attorney’s office to discuss the allegedly usurious transactions, that the wife knew about the litigation, that the lawsuit was in her interest, and that he would (apparently gratuitously) give her litigation proceeds.

See generally id.

I held a hearing to address the sanctions issue and other matters.

See ECF No. 56.

When Howard testified under oath at the hearing, he continued to offer vague and evasive answers about whether the wife authorized a lawsuit in her name.

See ECF No. 69 at 19-22.

For example, when I asked Howard how the wife had manifested consent to the filing, he responded that she knew about the case and stood to benefit from it.

Id. at 22:4-5.

Only after I pointed out that awareness is not the same thing as consent did he unequivocally claim that he had asked her directly if he could file the lawsuit and that she said yes.

Id. at 22:16-17.

Because the latter statement would have directly answered the court’s questions (and the earlier show-cause order) but was offered only after repeated questioning, and based on Howard’s overall manner of testimony, I found him not credible.4

ECF No. 69 at 45:21-23.

My finding is that the wife never authorized Howard to sue on her behalf.

4 Howard’s other testimony further undermined his credibility.

For example, Howard gave shifting and inconsistent explanations for why the wife’s purported signature was on the notarized deed to property in dispute,

see ECF No. 60 at 42.

His (improperly filed) “Fourth Amended Complaint” claimed that only he had signed the deed,

ECF No. 60 ¶ 15,

despite her apparent signature and despite earlier filings claiming that both he and the wife had transferred the property,

ECF Nos. 23¶ 9; 38 ¶ 15; 39 ¶ 15.

At the hearing, Howard explained away this inconsistency by saying the wife had “authorized” the signature purporting to be hers but had not physically signed the deed,

ECF No. 69 at 34:1-5,

contradicting the notary’s attestation that the wife had appeared personally to sign the deed,

ECF No. 60 at 42.

Overall, Howard was simply not credible.

Mrs. Jennifer Howard did not show up for the State Court Trial on Aug. 16, 2019 as she was too distraught over the potential loss of her beloved beach house

(and not for the millions of dollars her husband stole from mentally impaired victims).

No live testimony or cross examination could occur as a result, because the trial proceeded in her absence.

– see page 3 of attached attorney fee motion.

DISMISSAL

The defendants seek dismissal with prejudice.

ECF Nos. 70, 71.

Howard instead seeks dismissal without prejudice under Rule 41(a)(2), so that the matter can be resolved in a related state court proceeding.

ECF No. 72 ¶¶ 14, 18.5

To dismiss with prejudice, I would have to “specifically find[] that lesser sanctions would not suffice.”

Betty K. Agencies, Ltd. v. M/V MONADA, 432 F.3d 1333, 1338 (11th Cir. 2005).

Although I must keep the defendants’ interest in mind when ruling on a Rule 41(a)(2) motion for voluntary dismissal without prejudice,

see Fisher v. Puerto Rico Marine Mgmt., Inc., 940 F.2d 1502, 1503 (11th Cir. 1991)

(explaining that “Rule 41(a)(2) exists chiefly for protection of the defendants”),

I find that dismissal without prejudice is warranted here.

5 I will treat Howard’s response to the post-hearing order (ECF No. 72) as a motion for voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(2).

Ordinarily, a plaintiff may voluntarily dismiss without a court order “before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment.”

Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i).

“But if the plaintiff previously dismissed any federal or state-court action based on or including the same claim, a notice of dismissal operates as an adjudication on the merits.”

Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(B).

The court takes judicial notice that Howard appears to have previously dismissed similar claims in state court.

See ECF No. 60

¶¶ 23, 59; id. at 50; Howard v. GDB Capital Grp., Case No. 2018-CA-68 (Fla. 2d Cir. Ct. Mar. 16, 2018).

After the trial, Jennifer Crouse Howard filed for divorce on Sept. 4, 2019.

– see page 3 of attached attorney fee motion.

Notably, the SEC case was filed only a few days before her divorce petition, namely August 29, 2019.

LIF suggests, and it is based on a limited audit and review of the cases and supporting documents, the divorce appears to be engineered. From an outsider peering inwards, it certainly could be assumed that Mrs. Howard was concerned regarding her own personal knowledge and conduct prior to the SEC investigation and she is desperately trying to separate herself from any civil or criminal liability.

After all, she had personally benefited from the fraud – as indicated in court filings and could fall under the co-conspirator category. In short, she enjoyed a lavish lifestyle as a result of the theft of her then-husband’s client investments/retirement funds.

The defendants will suffer little harm, if any, from dismissal without prejudice.

They have all been made parties to the state-court proceeding.

See ECF No. 74 at 3.

Chapman argues that he would be prejudiced because he “would be required to start over in his defense of these claims in a new case.”

ECF No. 73 at 3.

But this is not sufficient legal prejudice under the Rule.

See McCants v. Ford Motor Co., 781 F.2d 855, 856-57 (11th Cir. 1986).6

Nor do the other defendants identify special circumstances to justify dismissal with prejudice.

I find that the sanctions announced below are likely sufficient. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(c)(4)

(“A sanction imposed under this rule must be limited to what suffices to deter repetition of the conduct or comparable conduct by others similarly situated.”).

Accordingly, I will grant Howard’s request for dismissal without prejudice.

SANCTIONS

This does not resolve the sanctions issue.

See Absolute Activist Value Master Fund Ltd. v. Devine, 998 F.3d 1258, 1266 (11th Cir. 2021)

(explaining that “even when a voluntary dismissal disposes of an entire action, district courts retain jurisdiction” to consider sanctions).

I find that awarding attorney’s fees is appropriate here.

6 Chapman also argues that he is not a party to the state court proceeding, but he has since been named as a party.

See ECF No. 74 at 3.

SEC CASE AGAINST PHILLIP ‘TIM’ HOWARD, et al

(IN THE SAME FEDERAL COURTHOUSE, N.D. Fl.)

Howard represented National Football League (“NFL”) players who suffered concussion-related brain injuries during their NFL careers in connection with a class action lawsuit against the NFL (the “NFL Concussion Lawsuit”).

Howard has acknowledged that these players’ “brain function is not there, their body has been beat up from the NFL, they don’t have employment capacity, they don’t have credit, and they don’t have capital anymore.”

Nonetheless, Howard and Reinhard solicited these players to invest in the Funds.

As a result, the majority of the Funds’ investors are former NFL More than half of them used their retirement accounts in order to make the investments happen.

To lure investors, the Defendants knowingly or recklessly materially misrepresented the Funds’ investment focus, how the Funds would use investor money, and Reinhard’s background and experience in the securities industry.”

Because the fourth show-cause order placed Howard on notice of potential sanctions, Rule 11 permits the court to award “part or all of the reasonable attorney’s fees and other expenses directly resulting from” his Rule 11 violations.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(c)(4); 11(c)(5)(B).

In the Eleventh Circuit, a lawyer may be subject to Rule 11 sanctions when he “files a pleading that has no reasonable factual basis” or “files a pleading in bad faith for an improper purpose.”

Didie v. Howes, 988 F.2d 1097, 1104 (11th Cir. 1993).

Howard filed his first three complaints for an improper purpose by joining his wife as a plaintiff without her authorization.

See Rule 11(b)(1);

see also Albritton v. Cagle’s, Inc., 508 F.3d 1012, 1017 (11th Cir. 2007)

(“An attorney may not file lawsuits without authorization of the plaintiffs on whose behalf the lawsuit is purportedly filed.”).

And there was no reasonable basis to assert claims on her behalf.

As discussed above, I do not believe that dismissal with prejudice is the only sanction sufficient to capture the gravity of Howard’s conduct or deter similar conduct in the future.

Instead, I will direct Howard to pay defendants’ attorney’s fees incurred responding to his Third Amended Complaint (ECF No. 38), “corrected” Third Amended Complaint, (ECF No. 39), and Fourth Amended Complaint (ECF No. 60).

Those fees were incurred because Howard’s filings joined a plaintiff he had no authority to join.

I will also award attorney’s fees that defendants incurred in connection with this sanctions matter, including fees incurred in preparation for the and the memoranda that defendants filed with respect to the sanctions issue, because defendants also incurred those costs on account of Howard’s sanctionable misconduct under Rule 11.

Mrs. Howard is facing civil cases regarding her mounting credit card debt, this law suit is the AMEX line of credit which is being pursued in Florida court; amount payable: $134k.

CONCLUSION

1. Howard must pay the attorney’s fees and costs incurred by the remaining defendants in preparing and filing ECF Nos. 40, 41, 58, 67, 70, 71, and 73.

2. The parties must confer regarding the amount of fees to be awarded and file a joint notice no later than April 8, 2022 indicating whether they have agreed as to the amount.

If the parties cannot agree, the court will refer the matter to the magistrate judge to make a recommendation regarding a reasonable amount.

3. Howard’s request to dismiss without prejudice (ECF No. 72) is GRANTED.

The clerk will enter a judgment that says,

“This case is dismissed without prejudice under Rule 41(a)(2).”

Defendant’s motions to dismiss with prejudice (ECF Nos. 58, 71) are DENIED.

4. The court will retain jurisdiction to enter judgment on the Rule 11 and 28 U.S.C. § 1927 sanctions.

5. The clerk will administratively close the file.

SO ORDERED on March 30, 2022.

s/ Allen Winsor
United States District Judge

YOUR DONATION(S) WILL HELP US:

• Continue to provide this website, content, resources, community and help center for free to the many homeowners, residents, Texans and as we’ve expanded, people nationwide who need access without a paywall or subscription.

• Help us promote our campaign through marketing, pr, advertising and reaching out to government, law firms and anyone that will listen and can assist.

Thank you for your trust, belief and support in our conviction to help Floridian residents and citizens nationwide take back their freedom. Your Donations and your Voice are so important.



District of Florida (Tallahassee)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 4:19-cv-00049-AW-MAF

HOWARD et al v. GDB CAPITAL GROUP LLC et al
Assigned to: JUDGE ALLEN C WINSOR
Referred to: MAGISTRATE JUDGE MARTIN A FITZPATRICK
Demand: $1,500,000
Cause: 18:1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Date Filed: 01/23/2019
Date Terminated: 03/30/2022
Jury Demand: Plaintiff
Nature of Suit: 370 Other Fraud
Jurisdiction: Diversity
Plaintiff
PHILLIP TIMOTHY HOWARD represented by PHILLIP TIMOTHY HOWARD
HOWARD & ASSOCIATES PA – TALLAHASSEE FL
2120 KILLARNEY WAY
STE 125
TALLAHASSEE, FL 32309
850-298-4455
Fax: 850-216-2537
Email: tim@howardjustice.com
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Plaintiff
JENNIFER HOWARD represented by PHILLIP TIMOTHY HOWARD
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICEDJERRY LEWIS RUMPH , JR
SWEETING & RUMPH PA – TALLAHASSEE FL
864 EAST PARK AVENUE
TALLAHASSEE, FL 32301
850-681-1010
Email: jerry@sweetingrumph.com
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
V.
Defendant
GDB CAPITAL GROUP LLC represented by ROBERT SCOTT GERSHMAN
GERSHMAN & GERSHMAN PA – DELRAY BEACH FL
2160 W ATLANTIC AVENUE
2ND FLOOR
DELRAY BEACH, FL 33445
561-684-8898
Email: robert@rglawfirm.us
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Defendant
JEFFREY STUART GALLOWAY
TERMINATED: 12/03/2019
Defendant
JEFF GALLOWAY REAL ESTATE INC
TERMINATED: 12/03/2019
Defendant
DOUGLAS JOHN DEHAAN
TERMINATED: 12/03/2019
Defendant
GAYLE H DEHAAN
TERMINATED: 12/03/2019
Defendant
GARY BROTHERTON, JR represented by ROBERT SCOTT GERSHMAN
(See above for address)
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Defendant
ADDYS THEDRICK WALKER
TERMINATED: 12/03/2019
Defendant
LINDA BEDELL
TERMINATED: 12/03/2019
Defendant
PROVIDENCE CAPITAL HOLDINGS LLC
TERMINATED: 12/03/2019
Defendant
NEW EDGE MANAGEMENT LLC
TERMINATED: 12/03/2019
Defendant
BARRY RYAN CHAPMAN represented by CHRISTOPHER KEITH RITCHIE
GALLOWAY LAW FIRM – PENSACOLA FL
118 E GARDEN STREET
PENSACOLA, FL 32502
850-436-7000
Fax: 850-436-7099
Email: critchie@gallowaylawfirm.com
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICEDJOHN MICHAEL GRIMLEY , JR
GALLOWAY LAW FIRM – PENSACOLA FL
118 E GARDEN STREET
PENSACOLA, FL 32502
850/436-7000
Fax: 850/436-7099
Email: mgrimley@gjtbs.com
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Defendant
JEFF KAHN
TERMINATED: 12/03/2019
Defendant
INNOVATIVE RETURNS INC
TERMINATED: 12/03/2019
Defendant
GORHAM INVESTMENTS INC
TERMINATED: 12/03/2019
Defendant
ANTONIO CORTEZ HENDERSON
TERMINATED: 12/03/2019
Defendant
SHEILA HENDERSON
TERMINATED: 12/03/2019
Defendant
GULF COAST REALTY OF ST GEORGE ISLAND INC
TERMINATED: 12/03/2019
Defendant
KAHN ADVISORS
TERMINATED: 12/03/2019
V.
Intervenor Defendant
DOUGLAS JOHN DEHAAN represented by CECILY MARIE PARKER
BEGGS & LANE RLLP – PENSACOLA FL
501 COMMENDENCIA ST
PENSACOLA, FL 32502
850-432-2451
Fax: 850-469-3331
Email: cmp@beggslane.com
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Intervenor Defendant
GAYLE H DEHAAN represented by CECILY MARIE PARKER
(See above for address)
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

 

Date Filed # Docket Text
01/23/2019 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number AFLNDC-4384882.), filed by PHILLIP TIMOTHY HOWARD. (HOWARD, PHILLIP) (Entered: 01/23/2019)
01/24/2019 2 DOCKET ANNOTATION BY COURT: To ATTORNEY PHILLIP HOWARD re: 1 Complaint. Party names (including aliases) are to be added using all caps and no punctuation. (See “Style Guide for Electronic Case Filing,” available on Clerk’s website.) The party names will be corrected by the clerk. Further, counsel is advised by this entry, that a Civil Cover Sheet must be filed as a separate entry using the event selection “Civil Cover Sheet” which is found under “Other Filings” under “Other Documents”. PLEASE FILE THE CIVIL COVER SHEET. (cle) (Entered: 01/24/2019)
03/27/2019 3 CIVIL COVER SHEET. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet) (HOWARD, PHILLIP) (Entered: 03/27/2019)
06/28/2019 4 ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to JUDGE ALLEN C WINSOR for all further proceedings. CHIEF JUDGE MARK E WALKER no longer assigned to case. Signed by CHIEF JUDGE MARK E WALKER on 6/28/19. **Please use the new judge’s initials for all future filings: 4:19cv49-AW/CAS. (pll) (Entered: 06/28/2019)
07/15/2019 5 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED – Plaintiffs initiated this case by filing a complaint on January 23, 2019. ECF No. 1 . Since then, there has been no activity in the case. Plaintiffs are directed to show cause no later than 7/29/2019 why this case should not be dismissed. Signed by JUDGE ALLEN C WINSOR on 7/15/2019. (cle) (Entered: 07/15/2019)
07/26/2019 6 NOTICE Summons – Addys Walker by PHILLIP TIMOTHY HOWARD (HOWARD, PHILLIP) (Entered: 07/26/2019)
07/26/2019 7 NOTICE Summons – Defendants by PHILLIP TIMOTHY HOWARD (Attachments: # 1 Gary Brotherton, # 2 GDB Capital, # 3 Gulf Coast Realty, # 4 Galloway Real Estate, # 5 Jeff Galloway, # 6 Jeff Kahn, # 7 Kahn Advisors, # 8 Linda Bedell, # 9 New Edge Mgmt, # 10 Provident) (HOWARD, PHILLIP) (Entered: 07/26/2019)
07/29/2019 8 RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by PHILLIP TIMOTHY HOWARD. (HOWARD, PHILLIP) (Entered: 07/29/2019)
07/30/2019 9 Summons Issued as to LINDA BEDELL, GARY BROTHERTON, JR, JEFFREY STUART GALLOWAY, GDB CAPITAL GROUP LLC, GULF COAST REALTY OF ST GEORGE ISLAND INC, JEFF GALLOWAY REAL ESTATE INC, JEFF KAHN, KAHN ADVISORS, NEW EDGE MANAGEMENT LLC, PROVIDENCE CAPITAL HOLDINGS LLC, and ADDYS THEDRICK WALKER. (Attachments: # 1 SUMMONS, # 2 SUMMONS, # 3 SUMMONS, # 4 SUMMONS, # 5 SUMMONS, # 6 SUMMONS, # 7 SUMMONS, # 8 SUMMONS, # 9 SUMMONS, # 10 SUMMONS) (cle) (Entered: 07/30/2019)
11/08/2019 10 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED – The 90-day time limit for service has expired with no proof of service having been filed. Accordingly, Plaintiffs shall show cause, if any, no later than seven days from the date of this Order, why this case should not be dismissed for failure to effect service within the specified time limit. Show Cause Response due by 11/15/2019. Signed by JUDGE ALLEN C WINSOR on 11/8/2019. (cle) (Entered: 11/08/2019)
11/15/2019 11 RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by PHILLIP TIMOTHY HOWARD. (HOWARD, PHILLIP) (Entered: 11/15/2019)
11/22/2019 12 ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SERVICE Executed as to 10 Order,, Set Deadlines, 11 Response to Order to Show Cause Phillip Timothy Howard Acknowledgment filed by PHILLIP TIMOTHY HOWARD. (HOWARD, PHILLIP) (Entered: 11/22/2019)
11/25/2019 13 NOTICE of Appearance by ROBERT SCOTT GERSHMAN on behalf of GARY BROTHERTON, JR (GERSHMAN, ROBERT) (Entered: 11/25/2019)
11/26/2019 14 First MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 1 Complaint Unopposed by GARY BROTHERTON, JR. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order Granting Motion) (GERSHMAN, ROBERT) (Entered: 11/26/2019)
11/27/2019 15 ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT – re: 14 First MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response. The motion is GRANTED. Moving Defendants’ deadline to respond to the complaint (ECF No. 1 ) is extended to 1/14/2020. Signed by JUDGE ALLEN C WINSOR on 11/27/2019. (cle) (Entered: 11/27/2019)
12/02/2019 16 ORDER DISMISSING CLAIMS AGAINST UNSERVED DEFENDANTS – re: 1 Complaint. This matter is dismissed without prejudice as to all Defendants other than Barry Ryan Chapman, Barry Ryan Chapman Law Firm, GDB Capital Group, LLC, and Gary Donald Brotherton, Jr. Signed by JUDGE ALLEN C WINSOR on 12/2/2019. (cle) (Entered: 12/03/2019)
12/04/2019 17 INITIAL SCHEDULING ORDER – Fed.R.Civ.P. 7.1 Corporate Disclosure Statement Deadline set for 12/18/2019. Rule 26 Meeting Report due by 1/17/2020. Discovery due by 3/31/2020. Signed by JUDGE ALLEN C WINSOR on 12/4/2019. (cle) (Entered: 12/05/2019)
12/10/2019 18 Corporate Disclosure Statement/Certificate of Interested Persons by GDB CAPITAL GROUP LLC. (GERSHMAN, ROBERT) (Entered: 12/10/2019)
12/30/2019 19 First MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply by BARRY RYAN CHAPMAN. (GRIMLEY, JOHN) (Entered: 12/30/2019)
12/31/2019 20 ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT. Defendant Barry Ryan Chapman has filed a motion for an extension. ECF No. 19 . The motion is GRANTED. Mr. Chapman’s deadline to respond to the complaint (ECF No. 1) is extended to 1/14/2020). Signed by JUDGE ALLEN C WINSOR on 12/31/19. (blb) (Entered: 12/31/2019)
01/10/2020 21 MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT by BARRY RYAN CHAPMAN. (GRIMLEY, JOHN) (Internal deadline for referral to judge if response not filed earlier: 1/24/2020).) Modified on 1/13/2020 to amend title of document. (cle) (Entered: 01/10/2020)
01/14/2020 22 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM To Dismiss Complaint by GDB CAPITAL GROUP LLC. (GERSHMAN, ROBERT) (Entered: 01/14/2020)
01/17/2020 23 Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting Report (docketed as RULE 26 Disclosures) by PHILLIP TIMOTHY HOWARD. (HOWARD, PHILLIP) Modified on 1/21/2020 (tss). (Entered: 01/17/2020)
01/22/2020 24 RULE 26 Disclosures by GARY BROTHERTON, JR, GDB CAPITAL GROUP LLC. (GERSHMAN, ROBERT) (Entered: 01/22/2020)
01/24/2020 25 SCHEDULING AND MEDIATION ORDER signed by JUDGE ALLEN C WINSOR on 1/24/20. Discovery due by 7/22/2020. Dispositive Motions to be filed by 8/12/2020. Mediation Report due by 9/2/2020. Jury Trial set for 12/16/2020 at 08:30 AM in U.S. Courthouse Tallahassee before JUDGE ALLEN C WINSOR. Case referred to mediation. (tss) (Entered: 01/24/2020)
01/28/2020 26 MOTION to Amend/Correct by PHILLIP TIMOTHY HOWARD. (HOWARD, PHILLIP) (Entered: 01/28/2020)
01/29/2020 27 RESPONSE to Motion re 22 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM To Dismiss Complaint21 MOTION for Disbursement of Funds MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint filed by PHILLIP TIMOTHY HOWARD. (HOWARD, PHILLIP) (Entered: 01/29/2020)
01/29/2020 28 ORDER DENYING AS MOOT MOTION TO AMEND – re: 26 MOTION to Amend. A party may file a first amended complaint without leave if they do so within 21 days after service. Because the amended complaint was filed within that time, no motion was needed. So the motion to amend is denied as moot. Plaintiffs should have filed the amended complaint as a standalone document, not as an attachment to the motion. Plaintiffs shall refile the amended complaint as a standalone document within two days of the date of this order, 1/31/2020. Defendants’ motions to dismiss the original complaint (ECF Nos. 21 and 22 ) are denied as moot. Defendants shall respond to the amended complaint within 14 days after Plaintiffs refile their amended complaint as a standalone document, 2/14/2020. Signed by JUDGE ALLEN C WINSOR on 1/29/2020. (cle) (Entered: 01/29/2020)
01/31/2020 29 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT against GARY BROTHERTON, JR, BARRY RYAN CHAPMAN, GDB CAPITAL GROUP LLC, filed by PHILLIP TIMOTHY HOWARD. (HOWARD, PHILLIP) (Entered: 01/31/2020)
02/07/2020 30 MOTION to Dismiss 29 Amended Complaint by BARRY RYAN CHAPMAN. (Internal deadline for referral to judge if response not filed earlier: 2/21/2020). (GRIMLEY, JOHN) (Entered: 02/07/2020)
02/11/2020 31 MOTION to Dismiss by GDB CAPITAL GROUP LLC. (Internal deadline for referral to judge if response not filed earlier: 2/25/2020). (GERSHMAN, ROBERT) (Entered: 02/11/2020)
02/14/2020 32 RULE 26 Disclosures by BARRY RYAN CHAPMAN. (GRIMLEY, JOHN) (Entered: 02/14/2020)
02/24/2020 33 RESPONSE in Opposition re 30 MOTION to Dismiss Amended Complaint filed by PHILLIP TIMOTHY HOWARD. (HOWARD, PHILLIP) (Entered: 02/24/2020)
02/26/2020 34 RESPONSE to Motion re 31 MOTION to Dismiss filed by PHILLIP TIMOTHY HOWARD. (HOWARD, PHILLIP) (Entered: 02/26/2020)
04/03/2020 35 ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to MAGISTRATE JUDGE MARTIN A FITZPATRICK for all further proceedings. MAGISTRATE JUDGE CHARLES A STAMPELOS no longer assigned to case. Signed by CHIEF JUDGE MARK E WALKER on 4/3/2020. (erl)**Please use the new judge’s initials for all future filings: 4:19cv49-AW/MAF. (Entered: 04/06/2020)
05/26/2020 36 NOTICE of Appearance by JERRY LEWIS RUMPH, JR on behalf of JENNIFER HOWARD (RUMPH, JERRY) (Entered: 05/26/2020)
06/19/2020 37 ORDER GRANTING MOTIONS TO DISMISS – The motions to dismiss, ECF Nos. 30 , 31 , are GRANTED. Plaintiffs may file a third amended complaint within 14 days. (7/3/2020). Signed by JUDGE ALLEN C WINSOR on 6/19/2020. (cle) (Entered: 06/19/2020)
07/01/2020 38 THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT against GARY BROTHERTON, JR, BARRY RYAN CHAPMAN, GDB CAPITAL GROUP LLC, filed by PHILLIP TIMOTHY HOWARD. (HOWARD, PHILLIP) (Entered: 07/01/2020)
07/02/2020 39 Corrected THIRD – Verified AMENDED COMPLAINT against GARY BROTHERTON, JR, BARRY RYAN CHAPMAN, GDB CAPITAL GROUP LLC, filed by PHILLIP TIMOTHY HOWARD. (HOWARD, PHILLIP) (Entered: 07/02/2020)
07/21/2020 40 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Third Amended Complaint by BARRY RYAN CHAPMAN. (Internal deadline for referral to judge if response not filed earlier: 8/4/2020). (GRIMLEY, JOHN) (Entered: 07/21/2020)
07/24/2020 41 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by GARY BROTHERTON, JR, GDB CAPITAL GROUP LLC. (GERSHMAN, ROBERT) (Entered: 07/24/2020)
08/06/2020 42 RESPONSE in Opposition re 21 MOTION for Disbursement of Funds MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint filed by PHILLIP TIMOTHY HOWARD. (HOWARD, PHILLIP) (Entered: 08/06/2020)
08/11/2020 43 MOTION to Compel by GARY BROTHERTON, JR. (GERSHMAN, ROBERT) (Entered: 08/11/2020)
08/12/2020 44 MOTION to Compel Discovery by GARY BROTHERTON, JR. (GERSHMAN, ROBERT) (Entered: 08/12/2020)
08/12/2020 45 RESPONSE to Motion re 43 MOTION to Compel 44 MOTION to Compel Discovery filed by PHILLIP TIMOTHY HOWARD. (HOWARD, PHILLIP) (Entered: 08/12/2020)
08/25/2020 46 MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery by PHILLIP TIMOTHY HOWARD. (HOWARD, PHILLIP) (Entered: 08/25/2020)
08/25/2020 47 ORDER REGARDING DISCOVERY MOTIONS signed by JUDGE ALLEN C WINSOR on 8/24/20. The parties must promptly confer in person, by phone, or by videoconference (i.e., not merely in writing) on any outstanding discovery issues, including the fee request. No later than 8/31/2020, movants must file a notice indicating what, if any, issues remain. The clerk will set a telephonic hearing for September 2 or later. The clerk will also terminate 43 MOTION to Compel which the later filing 44 MOTION to Compel is deemed to have superseded. (tss) (Entered: 08/25/2020)
08/25/2020 48 NOTICE by JENNIFER HOWARD re 1 Complaint (RUMPH, JERRY) (Entered: 08/25/2020)
08/31/2020 49 STATUS REPORT by PHILLIP TIMOTHY HOWARD. (HOWARD, PHILLIP) (Entered: 08/31/2020)
09/01/2020 50 NOTICE of Proposal for Settlement – Mediation Dates by PHILLIP TIMOTHY HOWARD (HOWARD, PHILLIP) (Entered: 09/01/2020)
09/14/2020 51 NOTICE of Filing Answers to Discovery by PHILLIP TIMOTHY HOWARD (HOWARD, PHILLIP) (Entered: 09/14/2020)
10/05/2020 52 NOTICE of Appearance by CECILY MARIE PARKER on behalf of DOUGLAS JOHN DEHAAN, GAYLE H DEHAAN (PARKER, CECILY) (Entered: 10/05/2020)
10/05/2020 53 MOTION to Intervene by DOUGLAS JOHN DEHAAN, GAYLE H DEHAAN. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit DeHaan Answer to Complaint, Counterclaim, and Crossclaim) (PARKER, CECILY) (Entered: 10/05/2020)
12/02/2020 54 ORDER REMOVING CASE FROM TRIAL CALENDAR AND ORDERING PHILLIP HOWARD TO SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED signed by JUDGE ALLEN C WINSOR on 12/2/20. Show Cause Response due by 12/12/2020. Mr. Howard is ordered to show cause as to why the case should not be dismissed or why some other sanction should not be imposedfor violating Rule 11. He must file his response within 10 days (12/12/2020) of the date of this order. The case is removed from the trial calendar. The trial will be reset later if necessary. (tss) (Entered: 12/02/2020)
12/11/2020 55 RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by PHILLIP TIMOTHY HOWARD. (HOWARD, PHILLIP) (Entered: 12/11/2020)
03/29/2021 56 OMNIBUS ORDER signed by JUDGE ALLEN C WINSOR on 3/29/21. The issue of sanctions is DEFERRED. The 38 Third Amended Complaint and the 39 Corrected Third Amended Complaint are STRICKEN. 40 and 41 Motions to Dismiss are DENIED as moot. The 53 motion to intervene is DENIED without prejudice. The 46 motion to amend the litigation schedule is DENIED without prejudice. The 44 motion to compel is DENIED without prejudice. Plaintiff may file a Fourth Amended Complaint no later than 4/12/2021. The clerk will set this matter for a hearing at the United States Courthouse in Tallahassee for May 17, 2021 at 8:30 a.m. (tss) (Entered: 03/30/2021)
03/30/2021 57 NOTICE OF HEARINGScheduling Conference, Motion and Sanctions Hearing set for 5/17/2021 at 08:30 AM in U.S. Courthouse Tallahassee before JUDGE ALLEN C WINSOR.Per Administrative Order, to protect the health and safety of all occupants, all persons who enter any courthouse within the Northern District of Florida are required to practice social distancing measures and to wear face masks or other face coverings that cover the person’s nose and mouth while in any public or common area within the facility.Face masks are required in the Courtroom.Note: If you or any party, witness or attorney in this matter has a disability that requires special accommodations, such as a hearing impairment that requires a sign-language interpreter or a wheelchair restriction that requires ramp access, please contact the Clerk’s Office at least one week prior to the hearing (or as soon as possible) so arrangements can be made.
s/TiAnn Stark
Courtroom Deputy Clerk to the Honorable Allen Winsor (tss) (Entered: 03/30/2021)
04/13/2021 58 MOTION to Dismiss by GARY BROTHERTON, JR. (Internal deadline for referral to judge if response not filed earlier: 4/27/2021). (GERSHMAN, ROBERT) (Entered: 04/13/2021)
04/21/2021 59 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE – re: 56 OMNIBUS ORDER. The court will dismiss this case without prejudice for failure to prosecute unless, by 4/27/2021, Plaintiff Phillip Howard shows cause why the court should not. Signed by JUDGE ALLEN C WINSOR on 4/21/2021. (cle) (Entered: 04/21/2021)
04/27/2021 60 VERIFIED FOURTH AMENDED COMPLAINT (HOWARD, PHILLIP) Modified to edit title on 4/28/2021 (rcb). (Entered: 04/27/2021)
04/27/2021 61 RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. (HOWARD, PHILLIP) Modified to edit title on 4/28/2021 (rcb). (Entered: 04/27/2021)
05/04/2021 62 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply Unopposed by GARY BROTHERTON, JR. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order) (GERSHMAN, ROBERT) (Entered: 05/04/2021)
05/07/2021 63 Second MOTION to Intervene by DOUGLAS JOHN DEHAAN, GAYLE H DEHAAN. (PARKER, CECILY) (Entered: 05/07/2021)
05/10/2021 64 NOTICE OF RESCHEDULED HEARINGScheduling Conference, Motion and Sanctions Hearing reset for 6/28/2021 at 01:00 PM in U.S. Courthouse Tallahassee before JUDGE ALLEN C WINSOR.Per Administrative Order, face masks must be worn in any public or common area within the courthouse.Note: If you or any party, witness or attorney in this matter has a disability that requires special accommodations, such as a hearing impairment that requires a sign-language interpreter or a wheelchair restriction that requires ramp access, please contact the Clerk’s Office at least one week prior to the hearing (or as soon as possible) so arrangements can be made.
s/TiAnn Stark
Courtroom Deputy Clerk to the Honorable Allen Winsor (tss) (Entered: 05/10/2021)
05/10/2021 65 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re 60 Amended Complaint by BARRY RYAN CHAPMAN. (GRIMLEY, JOHN) (Entered: 05/10/2021)
05/11/2021 66 ORDER REGARDING 60 COMPLAINT. The motions for extensions of time to respond (ECF Nos 62 , 65 ) are DENIED as moot. Signed by JUDGE ALLEN C WINSOR on 05/11/2021. (rcb) (Entered: 05/11/2021)
06/28/2021 67 Minute Entry for proceedings held before JUDGE ALLEN C WINSOR:Status Conference and Motion Hearing held on 6/28/2021 – written order to follow (Court Reporter Lisa Snyder (USDC-Tallahassee)) (tss) (Entered: 06/28/2021)
07/06/2021 68 ORDER. Defendants have until 7/23/2021 to file additional memoranda or materials relating to the sanctions issue. If they do so, Howard will have 14 days (8/6/2021) to respond. The motion to intervene (ECF No. 63 ) is DENIED as moot. Signed by JUDGE ALLEN C WINSOR on 07/06/2021. (rcb) (Entered: 07/06/2021)
07/10/2021 69 NOTICE OF FILING OF OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT of Scheduling and Motion Hearing held on 6/28/2021, before Judge Allen Winsor. Court Reporter/Transcriber Lisa Snyder, Telephone number 8505671374. Tape Number: lisasnydercr@gmail.com.

Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER.

 

Redaction Request due 7/19/2021. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 10/15/2021. (ls) (Entered: 07/10/2021)

07/22/2021 70 MEMORANDUM in Support re 21 MOTION for Disbursement of Funds MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint filed by BARRY RYAN CHAPMAN. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E) (GRIMLEY, JOHN) (Entered: 07/22/2021)
07/22/2021 71 MOTION for Sanctions and Submission of Supporting Materials by Defendants GDB Capital Group, LLC and Gary Donald Brotherton, Jr. by GARY BROTHERTON, JR. (GERSHMAN, ROBERT) (Entered: 07/22/2021)
08/06/2021 72 RESPONSE TO 68 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by PHILLIP TIMOTHY HOWARD. (HOWARD, PHILLIP) Modified on 8/10/2021 to link to the Order. (kjw) (Entered: 08/06/2021)
08/09/2021 73 RESPONSE in Opposition re 71 MOTION for Sanctions and Submission of Supporting Materials by Defendants GDB Capital Group, LLC and Gary Donald Brotherton, Jr. filed by BARRY RYAN CHAPMAN. (GRIMLEY, JOHN) (Entered: 08/09/2021)
08/13/2021 74 NOTICE by PHILLIP TIMOTHY HOWARD (HOWARD, PHILLIP) (Entered: 08/13/2021)
11/02/2021 75 NOTICE of Filing Affidavit by PHILLIP TIMOTHY HOWARD (HOWARD, PHILLIP) (Entered: 11/02/2021)
03/30/2022 76 ORDER GRANTING 72 DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND AWARDING FEES. Howard must pay the attorney’s fees and costs incurred by the remaining defendants in preparing and filing, ECF Nos. [40, 41, 58, 67, 70, 71, and 73]. The parties must confer regarding the amount of fees to be awarded and file a joint notice no later than April 8, 2022 indicating whether they have agreed as to the amount. The clerk will enter a judgment that says, “This case is dismissed without prejudice under Rule 41(a)(2).” Defendant’s motions to dismiss with prejudice, ECF Nos. 58 , 71 are DENIED. The court will retain jurisdiction to enter judgment on the Rule 11 and 28 U.S.C. § 1927 sanctions. The clerk will administratively close the file. Signed by JUDGE ALLEN C WINSOR on 3/30/2022. (atm) Modified on 4/1/2022 (bkp). (Entered: 03/30/2022)
03/30/2022 77 CLERK’S JUDGMENT re 76 ORDER GRANTING DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND AWARDING FEES (atm) (Entered: 03/30/2022)
04/07/2022 78 Joint MOTION for Sanctions Notice of Agreement on the Amount of Sanctions Awardable Against Plaintiff to Defendants by GARY BROTHERTON, JR. (GERSHMAN, ROBERT) (Entered: 04/07/2022)
04/08/2022 79 ORDER CONFIRMING FEE AWARD re 78 Joint MOTION for Sanctions Notice of Agreement on the Amount of Sanctions Awardable Against Plaintiff to Defendants filed by GARY BROTHERTON, JR. The fee amount appropriate in light of the courts order awarding fees (ECF No. 76 ). Howard must pay $17,000 to Defendants GDB Capital Group, LLC and Gary Donald Brotherton and $6,900 to Barry Ryan Chapman within 30 days. Any party may file a notice of complianceor noncompliancewith this order signed by JUDGE ALLEN C WINSOR on 4/8/22. (bkp) (Entered: 04/08/2022)
Continue Reading

Most Read

Copyright © 2022 LawsInFlorida.com is an online brand name which is wholly owned by Blogger Inc., a nonprofit 501(c)(3) registered in Delaware | Caricatures by DonkeyHotey