Securities and Exchange Commission v. Nadel et al
MOTION to Approve Settlement re Tracy Becker by Burton W. Wiand. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Tracy Becker Settlement Agreement)(Lamont, Michael)
UNITED S T A T E S D I S T R I C T C O U R T
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
SCOOP CAPITAL, LLC,
SCOOP MANAGEMENT, INC.
SCOOP REAL ESTATE, L.P.
V A L H A L L A INVESTMENT PARTNERS, L.P.,
V A L H A L L A MANAGEMENT, INC.
VICTORY IRA FUND, LTD,
VICTORY FUND, LTD,
VIKING IRA FUND, LLC,
VIKING FUND, LLC, AND
R E C E I V E R ' S MOTION TO APPROVE S E T T L E M E N T
Burton W. Wiand, as Receiver, moves the Court for an order approving settlement of
Burton W. Wiand, as Receiver v. Tracy Becker, et al. Case No.: 8:10-cv-076-T-17MAP
(M.D. Fla.) (the "Becker Action") on the basis of the Settlement Agreement attached as
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT
The Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Commission" or "SEC") instituted
this action to "hah [an] ongoing fraud, maintain the status quo, and preserve investor assets . .
. ." (Dkt. 1, Compl., ^ 7.) Burton W. Wiand was appointed by this Court as the Receiver for
Defendants other than Arthur Nadel and for Relief Defendants. (See Order Reappointing
Receiver (Dkt. 493).) Additionally, the Receivership was expanded to include Venice Jet
Center, LLC and Tradewind, LLC (Dkt. 17); Laurel Mountain Preserve, LLC, Laurel
Preserve, LLC, the Marguerite J. Nadel Revocable Trust UAD 8/2/07, and the Laurel
Mountain Preserve Homeowners Association, Inc. (Dkt. 44); The Guy-Nadel Foundation,
Inc. (Dkt. 68); Lime Avenue Enteiprises, LLC, and A Victorian Garden Florist, LLC (Dkt.
79); Viking Oil & Gas, LLC (Dkt. 153); Home Front Homes, LLC (Dkt. 172); and Traders
Investment Club (Dkt. 454). A l l of the entities in receivership are collectively identified
herein as the Receivership Entities.
Pursuant to the Order Reappointing Receiver (Diet. 493), the Receiver has the duty
and authority to:
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 limhed
to, seeking imposition of constructive trusts, disgorgement or profits, recovery
and/or 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.
Further, the Order Reappointing Receiver (at paragraph 6) authorizes the Receiver to
"[djefend, compromise or settle legal actions . . . in which the Receivership Entities or the
Receiver is a party . . . with authorization of this Court . . . ."
By a Complaint filed January 12, 2010, the Receiver sued Gerald Becker to recover
sums received from the Receivership Entities with a view to marshaling assets for an
eventual distribution to investors with verifiable claims in an equitable and appropriate
Specifically, the Receiver sought recovery of "false profits" (as defined in the
Complaint) of $30,3 81.49.
Later, the Receiver discovered that Mr. Becker was deceased and that his four
children were among those who inherited the false profits sought in the Complaint.
Accordingly, on June 7, 2010, the Receiver amended his Complaint to name Mr. Becker's
children, Tracy Becker, Sharon Reisdorf, Cynthia Baschmann,
and Scott Becker
(collectively, the "Defendants"), as subsequent transferees who are liable for the false profits
initially received by Mr. Becker.
As shown by the attached Settlement Agreement, the Receiver and the Defendants,
subject to the approval of this Court, have agreed to settle the Becker Action for $25,000.00
in full settlement of the claims. In reaching this agreement, the Receiver considered the risks
and expense of litigation, and the risk associated with collecting on any eventual judgment.
The settlement reflected by the Settlement Agreement is in the best interests of the
Receivership, the investors in the Receivership Entities, and Defendants, because resolution
of the claim avoids protracted litigation, conserving Receivership assets and judicial
resources, and avoids the cost of litigation to Defendants.
WHEREFORE, the Receiver moves the Court to approve the settlement reflected by
the attached Settlement Agreement.
L O C A L R U L E 3.01(g) C E R T I F I C A T E O F C O U N S E L
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.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on April 26, 2011,1 electronically filed the foregoing with
the Clerk of the Court by using the CM/ECF system. I further certify that I mailed the
foregoing document and the notice of electronic filing by first-class mail to the following
Register No. 50690-018
Federal Correctional Institution
P.O. Box 999
s/ Michael S. Lament
Gianluca Morello, FBN 034997
Michael S. Lamont FBN 0527122
Wiand Guerra King PL
3000 Bayport Drive
Tampa, FL 33607
Tel: (813) 347-5100
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?