Securities and Exchange Commission v. Champion-Cain et al

Filing 481

ORDER Granting Receiver's Motion for Approval of Sale of 4829 Bella Pacific Row Property. Signed by Magistrate Judge Allison H. Goddard on 10/16/2020. (jdt)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION,

15

ORDER GRANTING RECEIVER’S
MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF
SALE OF 4829 BELLA PACIFIC
ROW PROPERTY

Plaintiff,

13
14

Case No.: 3:19-cv-1628-LAB-AHG

v.
GINA CHAMPION-CAIN AND ANI
DEVELOPMENT, LLC,

16

Defendants, and

[ECF No. 421]

17
18
19

AMERICAN NATIONAL
INVESTMENTS, INC.,

20

Relief Defendant.

21
22
23

I.

BACKGROUND

24

As described in prior orders, see, e.g., ECF Nos. 54, 162, 163, this is an action

25

brought by the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) against Defendants ANI

26

Development, LLC (“ANI Development”) and Gina Champion-Cain and Relief Defendant

27

American National Investments, Inc. (“ANI Inc.”), alleging violations of federal securities

28

laws based on a purportedly fraudulent liquor license loan scheme. ECF No. 1.
1
3:19-cv-1628-LAB-AHG

1

On September 3, 2019, the Court established an equitable receivership and appointed

2

Krista L. Freitag (“Receiver”) as a permanent receiver of ANI Development and ANI Inc.,

3

authorizing her to take control over all funds and assets owned, managed, or in the

4

possession or control of the receivership entities. See ECF No. 6 at 14-16. In that role, the

5

Receiver acts under the control and direction of the Court to facilitate the “orderly and

6

efficient administration of the estate . . . for the benefit of creditors.” SEC v. Hardy, 803

7

F.2d 1034, 1038 (9th Cir. 1986). See also Atl. Tr. Co. v. Chapman, 208 U.S. 360, 370

8

(1908) (explaining that a motion to appoint a receiver to take charge of property is “to the

9

end that the property might be cared for and preserved for all who had or might have an

10

interest in the proceeds of its sale. . . . Immediately upon such appointment and after the

11

qualification of the receiver, the property passed into the custody of the law, and

12

thenceforward its administration was wholly under the control of the court by its officer [],

13

the receiver.”). On December 11, 2019, the presiding judge in this action, Chief Judge

14

Burns, granted the parties’ Joint Motion (ECF No. 156) to give limited consent to the

15

undersigned to hear and directly decide all motions filed in this action to approve sales of

16

receivership assets. ECF No. 160. See also 28 U.S.C. § 636(c); CivLR 72.1(g). All property

17

sale motions are set before the undersigned pursuant to that grant of consent.

18

On August 11, 2020, the Receiver filed the present Motion for Approval of Sale of

19

4829 Bella Pacific Row Property (the “Bella Pacific Motion”). ECF No. 421. The motion

20

concerns one of the residential real properties within the receivership estate, a single-family

21

residence located at 4829 Bella Pacific Row, Unit 215, San Diego, California (the “Bella

22

Pacific Property”). See ECF No. 421-1 at 5; ECF No. 76-2 at 6 (listing the Bella Pacific

23

Property in the Preliminary Real Estate and Liquor License Asset Schedule filed on

24

October 3, 2019).

25

On August 11, 2020, the Court entered an order setting a briefing schedule and a

26

September 18, 2020 hearing on the Bella Pacific Motion. ECF No. 423. The Court set a

27

deadline of August 25, 2020 for responses in opposition to the motion and noted that “[i]f

28

the motion is unopposed and the overbid submission deadline has passed with no overbids,
2
3:19-cv-1628-LAB-AHG

1

the Court may take the motion under submission without oral argument.” Id. at 2. No

2

opposition was filed. Further, bid qualifications from prospective bidders seeking to submit

3

overbids pursuant to the notice and auction process set forth in 28 U.S.C. §§ 2001 and 2002

4

(described in more detail below) were due by September 7, 2020. See ECF No.

5

421-1 at 11; ECF No. 423 at 2. The Receiver filed a Notice of Non-Receipt of Qualified

6

Overbids regarding the Bella Pacific Motion on September 9, 2020. ECF No. 450.

7

Accordingly, the Court took the motion under submission on the papers on

8

September 14, 2020. ECF No. 455.

9

For the reasons explained more fully below, the Court GRANTS the Bella Pacific

10

Motion.

11

II.

LEGAL STANDARD

12

“[I]t is a recognized principle of law that the district court has broad powers and

13

wide discretion to determine the appropriate relief in an equity receivership.” SEC v.

14

Lincoln Thrift Ass’n, 577 F.2d 600, 606 (9th Cir. 1978). Where a district court sits in equity,

15

“[u]nless a statute in so many words, or by a necessary and inescapable inference, restricts

16

the court’s jurisdiction in equity, the full scope of that jurisdiction is to be recognized and

17

applied. ‘The great principles of equity, securing complete justice, should not be yielded

18

to light inferences, or doubtful construction.’” Porter v. Warner Holding Co., 328 U.S.

19

395, 398 (1946).

20

“[A] district court’s power to supervise an equity receivership and to determine the

21

appropriate action to be taken in the administration of the receivership is extremely broad.”

22

Hardy, 803 F.2d at 1037. As part of this broad discretion, the district court sitting in equity

23

and having custody and control of property “has power to order a sale of the same in its

24

discretion. The power of sale necessarily follows the power to take control of and to

25

preserve property[.]” SEC v. Am. Capital Investments, Inc., 98 F.3d 1133, 1144 (9th Cir.

26

1996), abrogated on other grounds by Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Env’t, 523 U.S. 83,

27

93-94 (1998) (quoting 2 Ralph E. Clark, Treatise on Law & Practice of Receivers § 482

28

(3d ed. 1992)). If the court approves an equitable receiver’s proposed property sale, the
3
3:19-cv-1628-LAB-AHG

1

sale “does not . . . purport to convey ‘legal’ title, but rather ‘good,’ equitable title enforced

2

by an injunction against suit.” Id. (citing 2 Clark, Treatise on Law & Practice of Receivers,

3

§§ 342, 344, 482(a), 487, 489, 491).

4

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2001(a), realty in the possession of an appointed receiver is

5

subject to a public sale process, “upon such terms and conditions as the court directs.”

6

28 U.S.C. § 2002 further requires that notice be published once a week for at least four

7

weeks prior to the sale in at least one newspaper regularly issued and of general circulation

8

in the county, state, or judicial district where the realty is located. 1 These safeguards of

9

notice and opportunity to submit overbids help to ensure that the sale is able to fetch the

10

best price possible, which is consistent with the principle that “a primary purpose of equity

11

receiverships is to promote orderly and efficient administration of the estate by the district

12

court for the benefit of creditors.” Hardy, 803 F.2d at 1038. See also United States v.

13

Grable, 25 F.3d 298, 303 (6th Cir. 1994) (noting that “the intent of” the requirement in 28

14

U.S.C. § 2001 that property be sold in the county in which the land is situated is “to bring

15

a better price at the sale”).

16

III.

DISCUSSION

17

A. Background of the Property and Proposed Sale

18

The Bella Pacific Property was purchased on April 5, 2019, by 2466 1st Avenue

19

LLC, an affiliated receivership entity, for $475,000. ECF No. 421-1 at 5; see also ECF No.

20

6 at 4 (the Court’s Appointment Order, listing 2466 1st Avenue LLC as an entity subject

21

to the equitable receivership).

22

Following her appointment, the Receiver and her staff analyzed the value of the

23

Bella Pacific Property by reviewing automated valuation scores and a survey of market-

24

comparable properties. ECF No. 421-2 ¶ 3. The Receiver consulted with multiple licensed

25
26
27
28

1

28 U.S.C. § 2001 also provides for a private sale process under subsection (b), but the
requirements of that subsection are more stringent. The Receiver does not propose a private
sale here.
4
3:19-cv-1628-LAB-AHG

1

brokers and ultimately selected Resonate Real Estate (“Broker”)2 and listed the property

2

for sale at a listing price of $495,000. Id.

3

Beginning in January 2020, Broker marketed the Bella Pacific Property by listing it

4

on the local MLS and its website. Id. ¶ 4. Because of the Covid-19 epidemic, Broker used

5

3D marketing and socially distant property tours in compliance with guidance from the

6

California Association of Realtors. Id. ¶ 4. Broker received two offers—one that was

7

cancelled during due diligence and the current offer. Id. The Receiver negotiated terms

8

with the offeror, Shawn Reed (“Buyer”), and following negotiations, the Bella Pacific

9

Property went into escrow on July 9, 2020 with a purchase price of $490,000. Id.; see also

10

ECF No. 421-1 at 6. Buyer undertook the expense of getting the condominium project

11

approved for financing by the Veteran’s Administration and received such approval on July

12

28, 2020. Id. The Receiver and Buyer executed a California Residential Purchase

13

Agreement and Joint Escrow Instructions (“Purchase Agreement”), along with an

14

Addendum making court approval of the sale a condition of closing and providing for the

15

overbid and auction process required by 28 U.S.C. §§ 2001 and 2002. ECF No. 421-3,

16

Freitag Decl. Ex. A. Buyer agreed that the sale would be as-is, removed all contingencies

17

other than Court approval, and deposited $7,500 into escrow. Id. at 3.

18

B. Proposed Procedures and Distribution

19

In the motion seeking approval of the sale, the Receiver proposed compliance with

20

the overbid and auction process mandated by 28 U.S.C. §§ 2001 and 2002 by publishing

21

the following notice in the San Diego Union-Tribune once a week for four weeks:

22

In the action pending in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
California, Case No. 19-CV-01628-LAB-AHG, Securities and Exchange
Commission v. Gina Champion-Cain, et al., notice is hereby given that the
court-appointed receiver will conduct a public auction for the real property
located at 4829 Bella Pacific Row in San Diego County, California. Sale is

23
24
25
26
27
28

2

The Receiver also enlisted the services of Resonate Real Estate in conjunction with the
sale of a single-family residence located at 3548 Tennyson Street, San Diego, California,
92106. ECF No. 280.
5
3:19-cv-1628-LAB-AHG

1

subject to Court confirmation after the auction is held. Minimum bid price is
at least $500,000. The auction will take place on September 10, 2020 at 1:30
p.m. in front of the entrance to the United States Courthouse, 221 W.
Broadway, San Diego, California or as otherwise determined by the Court. To
be allowed to participate in the auction, prospective purchasers must meet
certain bid qualification requirements, including submitted a signed purchase
and sale agreement, an earnest money deposit of $8,250, and proof of funds.
All bidders must be qualified by 5:00 p.m. PT on September 7, 2020, by
submitting the required materials to the receiver at 501 West Broadway, Suite
290, San Diego, California, 92101.

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

ECF No. 421-1 at 11. For those interested in qualifying as bidders, the notice also provided
a phone number and email address for the relevant point of contact. Id.

11

As previously noted, the Receiver filed a Notice of Non-Receipt of Qualified

12

Overbids Regarding the Bella Pacific Motion on September 9, 2020. ECF No. 450. In the

13

Notice, the Receiver informs the Court that, after filing the Bella Pacific Motion, and in

14

addition to publishing the above notice in the San Diego Union-Tribune as proposed, she

15

posted notice of the Motion on the receivership website (anireceivership.com) and

16

continued to market the property through Broker and notify potential purchasers about the

17

opportunity to submit an overbid by September 7, 2020. Id. at 2. No overbids were

18

submitted by the deadline. Id. Therefore, Shawn Reed remains the intended Buyer.

19

The Bella Pacific Property is one of four properties in the receivership estate

20

encumbered by a deed of trust in favor of Seattle Funding Group (the “SFG loan”). ECF

21

No. 421-1 at 6. The estimated principal balance outstanding for the interest-only SFG loan

22

(prior to the sale of the Bella Pacific Property) is $1.1 million.3 ECF No. 421-2 ¶ 5. The

23

documents governing the loan provide for partial release prices to facilitate the sale of

24
25
26
27
28

According to the Receiver’s calculations, “the remaining three receivership assets
encumbered by this loan have estimated market values exceeding $1 million in the
aggregate.” ECF No. 421-2 ¶ 5.
3

6
3:19-cv-1628-LAB-AHG

1

separate properties. See ECF No. 421-1 at 6. Assuming a September 2020 closing with the

2

September 2020 loan payment having been made in the ordinary course, the Receiver’s

3

estimate of the release price for the 4829 Bella Pacific is $411,000.00 to $414,000. 4 Id.

4

Turning to the proposed distribution of the $490,000, the Receiver intends to use the

5

proceeds of the sale of the Bella Pacific Property to pay the release price. Id. The Receiver

6

estimates that the receivership estate will pay property tax in the range of $1,400 to $1,800,

7

depending on when the sale closes (but again, assuming a September 2020 closing). ECF

8

No. 421-2 ¶ 5. The Receiver also estimates that costs of sale including escrow, title, and

9

recording fees will be approximately $4,900. Id. Broker’s commission pursuant to the

10

listing agreement is $19,600 (4% of the sales price) and will be split with Buyer’s broker

11

Id. Additionally, Receiver has agreed to give the buyer a $10,000 credit towards recurring

12

and non-recurring closing costs. Id. Based on these estimates, the Receiver anticipates that

13

the net sale proceeds for the receivership estate will be in the range of $40,000 to $43,000.

14

Id.

15

C. Court Approval of Procedures and Proposed Sale

16

The Court has reviewed the documents submitted by the Receiver in support of the

17

Bella Pacific Motion, including the Purchase Agreement, and finds the purchase price of

18

$490,000 to be fair and reasonable. This price exceeds the April 2019 purchase price of the

19

property by $15,000. Although the sale price of $490,000 falls short of the listing price of

20

$495,000 and the Receiver had to give the buyer a $10,000 credit, the Receiver obtained

21

other valuable concessions, such as sale of the property “as is with all faults,” removal of

22

all contingencies except Court approval, and making the sale subject to the requisite public

23

notice and auction process of 28 U.S.C. §§ 2001 and 2002. See ECF No. 421-3 at 16-21.

24

Additionally, the proposed total commission of 4% of the gross sales price, to be split by

25

Broker and the broker for the Buyer, is within the lower range of industry standards. The

26
27
4

28

The Court anticipates a slight adjustment to this figure and the following estimates as the
sale likely will not close until October 2020.
7
3:19-cv-1628-LAB-AHG

1

Court further finds the Receiver has demonstrated that Broker adequately marketed and

2

advertised the property—having shown the property for seven months despite the

3

additional challenges presented by the Covid-19 pandemic—to be sure to fetch fair market

4

value for the property. See ECF No. 421-1 at 10; ECF No. 421-2 ¶ 4. And, importantly, the

5

sale of the Bella Pacific Property brings the receivership estate closer to paying off the SFG

6

loan—with a remaining principal balance of approximately $692,000—in full, which will

7

reduce the ongoing monthly expenses of the receivership estate and thus aid the Receiver

8

in ultimately creating a better return for all creditors.

9

As for the procedures followed, the Court finds that all of its uniform property sale

10

procedures have been satisfied. See ECF No. 219. The Receiver’s publication of notice

11

seeking qualified overbids in the San Diego Union-Tribune, in addition to the solicitation

12

of overbids through the receivership website and continued efforts to market the property,

13

establish that the Receiver satisfied the public sale and auction procedures set forth in

14

28 U.S.C. §§ 2001 and 2002, which are designed to ensure that the best purchase price for

15

realty within the receivership is obtained. Upon review of the factual history and the

16

Purchase Agreement itself, the Court finds the Purchase Agreement was negotiated at

17

arm’s-length and, further, that the Receiver implemented sufficient safeguards by way of

18

the notice and overbid process to garner the highest possible price for the property. The

19

Court is thus satisfied that the intent of the statutory scheme—to ensure that the best and

20

highest possible price is paid for property within the receivership estate—has been fulfilled.

21

Based on these considerations, and noting in particular the lack of any opposition to

22

the Bella Pacific Motion, the Court finds the Receiver has sufficiently established that the

23

proposed sale of the Bella Pacific Property and proposed distribution of the sale proceeds

24

are consistent with principles of equity and the goal of a receivership to ensure the orderly

25

and efficient administration of the estate for the benefit of creditors. See Hardy, 803 F.2d

26

at 1038.

27

///

28

///
8
3:19-cv-1628-LAB-AHG

1

IV.

CONCLUSION

2

Having considered the Receiver’s Motion for Approval of Sale of 4829 Bella Pacific

3

Row Property (ECF No. 421) on its merits and noting that there is no opposition thereto,

4

the Court GRANTS the Motion, and APPROVES the proposed sale of the single-family

5

residence located at 4829 Bella Pacific Row, Unit 215, San Diego, California to Buyer

6

Shawn Reed, as described in the Purchase Agreement attached as Exhibit A to the

7

Declaration of the Receiver (ECF No. 421-3). The purchase price of $490,000 for the Bella

8

Pacific Row Property is confirmed and approved.

9
10

The Court further ORDERS the proceeds of the sale to be distributed from escrow
at the close of sale as follows:

11

(1)

The Receiver shall pay lender Seattle Funding Group the amount necessary to

12

have the Deed of Trust on the Property in favor of Seattle Funding Group reconveyed and

13

released from the Property, which amount is estimated to be approximately $411,000 to

14

414,000;

15

(2)

The Receiver shall pay broker Resonate Real Estate a commission of $19,600,

16

which amount will be split with Buyer’s broker in a fashion consistent with the listing

17

agreement and the description in the Bella Pacific Motion;

18
19

(3)

The Receiver shall pay the seller’s share of the costs of sale, including escrow,

title, and recording fees, which are anticipated to be approximately $4,900; and

20

(4)

The Receiver is immediately authorized to complete the sale transaction,

21

including executing any and all documents as may be necessary and appropriate to do so,

22

with the remaining sale proceeds, after the above-referenced payments have been made

23

from escrow, going to the receivership estate.

24

///

25

///

26

///

27

///

28

///
9
3:19-cv-1628-LAB-AHG

1

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that after closing, the Receiver shall provide a full

2

accounting of sale costs, property tax credits received and/or property taxes paid, the

3

precise release price paid to Seattle Funding Group, and the amount ultimately returned to

4

the receivership estate from the sale proceeds.

5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 16, 2020

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
10
3:19-cv-1628-LAB-AHG