Securities and Exchange Commission v. Nadel et al
MOTION to Approve Settlement re: Robert Beale and Virginia Beale by Burton W. Wiand. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Executed Settlement Agreement re the Beale's)(Nelson, Carl)
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Nadel et al
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION,
Case No. 8:09-cv-87-T-26TBM
ARTHUR NADEL, SCOOP CAPITAL, LLC, SCOOP MANAGEMENT, INC.
SCOOP REAL ESTATE, L.P. VALHALLA INVESTMENT PARTNERS, L.P., VALHALLA MANAGEMENT, INC. VICTORY IRA FUND, LTD, VICTORY FUND, LTD, VIKING IRA FUND, LLC, VIKING FUND, LLC, AND VIKING MANAGEMENT,
RECEIVER'S MOTION TO APPROVE SETTLEMENT
Burton W. Wiand, as Receiver, moves the Court for an order approving settlement of
a claim against Robert Beale and Virginia Beale ("the Beales") for recovery of sums received
from one or more Receivership Entities in excess of investment ("false profits") on the basis
ofthe Settlement Agreement attached as Exhibit A.
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT
The Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Commission" or "SEC") instituted
this action to "halt (an) ongoing fraud, maintain the status quo, and preserve investor assets. .
. ." (Dkt. I, Compl., ir 7.) Burton W. Wiand was appointed by this Court as the Receiver for
Defendants and Relief Defendants and Venice Jet Center, LLC; Tradewind, LLC; Laurel
Mountain Preserve, LLC; Laurel Preserve, LLC; the Marguerite J. Nadel Revocable Trust
UAD 8/2/07; the Laurel Mountain Preserve Homeowners Association, Inc.; The Guy-Nadel
Foundation, Inc.; Lime Avenue Enterprises, LLC; and A Victorian Garden Florist, LLC
(collectively, the "Receivership Entities"). (See Order Reappointing Receiver (Dkt. 140).)
Burton W. Wiand was appointed by this Court as the Receiver for Home Front Homes, LLC
Pursuant to the Order Reappointing Receiver (Dkt. 140), the Receiver has the duty
and authority to:
2. Investigate the manner in which the affairs of the Receivership
Entities were conducted and institute such actions and legal proceedings, for the benefit and on behalf of the Receivership Entities and their investors and
other creditors as the Receiver deems necessary. . . against any transfers of
money or other proceeds directly or indirectly traceable from investors in the Receivership Entities; provided such actions may include, but not be limited to, seeking imposition of constructive trusts, disgorgement or profits, recovery andlor avoidance of fraudulent transfers under Florida Statute § 726.101, et. seq. or otherwise, rescission and restitution, the collection of debts, and such orders from this Court as may be necessary to enforce this Order.
Dkt. 140 at ir 2.
The Receiver's investigation has revealed a number of investors who received "false
profits" (returns greater than their investments) ("profiteers") to the detriment of those
investors who lost money as a result of their investment. The Receiver began recovery
efforts by mailng letters to eighty-one (81) domestic and three (3) foreign profiteers,
inquiring whether they agreed with the Receiver's calculated amount of false profits and
whether they would return the transfers voluntarily to expedite the process and to avoid
litigation. The Receiver, with the approval of the Commission, believes it is appropriate to
accept 90% of the amount claimed in consideration of payment before the commencement of
litigation to recover the false profits.
One of the letters was sent to The Beales seeking recovery of $32,590.47 in false
profits. As shown by the attached Settlement Agreement, The Beales, subject to the approval
of this Court, agreed to pay 90% ($29,331.42), which has been tendered to and is being held
by the Receiver pending approval of this settlement. By this motion, the Receiver seeks
approval of this settlement.
The settlement reflected by the Settlement Agreement is in the best interests of the
Receivership, the investors in the Receivership Entities, and The Beales, because resolution
of the claim avoids protracted litigation, conserving Receivership assets and judicial
resources, and avoids the cost of litigation to The Beales.
WHEREFORE, the Receiver moves the Court to approve the settlement reflected by
the attached Settement Agreement.
LOCAL RULE 3.01(2) CERTIFICATE OF COUNSEL
The undersigned counsel for the Receiver is authorized to represent to the Court that
the SEC has no objection to the Court's granting this motion. The undersigned counsel is
unable to contact Arthur Nadel, who is incarcerated in New York and is not represented by
counsel in this action.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on November 3, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing
with the Clerk of the Court by using the CMIECF system. I further certify that I mailed the
foregoing document and the notice of electronic filing by first-class mail to the following
Arthur G. Nadel Register No. 50690-018 York MCC New Metropolitan Correctional Center 150 Park Row New York, NY 10007
sl Carl R. Nelson Carl R. Nelson, FBN 0280186 Email: cnelson(ifowlerwhite.com Gianluca Morello, FBN 034997 Email: gianluca.morello(ifowlerwhite.com
Maya M. Lockwood, FBN 0175481
Email: mlockwood(ifowlerwhite.com Ashley Bruce Trehan, FBN 0043411 Email: atrehan(ifowlerwhite.com FOWLER WHITE BOGGS P.A. P.O. Box 1438
Tampa, FL 33601
Tel: (813) 228-7411 Fax: (813) 229-8313
Attorneys for the Receiver, Burton W. Wiand
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?