ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal Commentary Blogs -> Prawfs

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Legal Commentary

: Prawfs

Recovering Money from Madoff's Investors

By Dan Markel, Ethan Leib, Rick Garnett, Matt Bodie, Paul Horwitz , Steve Vladeck, and Orly Lobel

ADVERTISEMENTS

Whereas lots of attention has been paid to recovery from Madoff (and his wife), another source of funds may be from investors who redeemed shares before the Ponzi scheme fell apart.  (Although the investors would have to return money, presumably they would eventually get their pro-rata share.)  These investors may have an uphill battle.  

First, "good faith" is an affirmative defense to a fraudulent conveyance claim, but it doesn't necessarily have the same meaning as in other areas of the law.  As Bankruptcy Judge Hardin described "good faith" in In re Bayou:

"The test [for good faith] is whether the defendant requested redemption after learning of a 'red flag' which, under an 'objective' standard, should have put the defendant on 'inquiry notice' of some infirmity in Bayou or the integrity of its management.  The rule does not require that the 'red flag' be of such specificity as to put the recipient on 'inquiry notice' of the actual fraud, or embezzlement, or looting, or whatever ultimately proves to be the cause of loss.  It is sufficient if the red flag puts the investor on notice of some potential infirmity in the investment such that a reasonable investor would recognize the need to conduct some investigation."

And presumably (reasonably and without what we usually think of as "bad faith") to consider redemption....

Second, hat tip to Edward Hynes (Cardozo '10 and summer law clerk to Judge Hardin), who describes another fact that may support clawback in the Madoff cases:

"Bernard Madoff's admission in his plea allocution that he operated a Ponzi scheme is bad news for those who redeemed investments from his fund. Courts have found that criminal admissions of a fraudulent scheme to defraud investors made in plea allocutions are admissible as direct evidence of "actual intent" to defraud creditors. This is significant because under Section 548(a)(1)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code, a trustee may clawback the principal and fictitious profits of any redemption that was made with 'actual intent' to defraud creditors.

Madoff's allocution details how he operated the fraud. This will be good evidence for any forensic accounting expert to track down how accounts were fraudulently calculated and specific assets transferred. In the recent Bayou hedge fund case, Judge Adlai S. Hardin used the plea allocutions of the hedge fund officers to decide that investor redemptions were fraudulent and, therefore, subject to clawback."

Full post as published by Prawfs on March 18, 2009 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0161 secs (new cache)