Orso v. Purio

Filing 10

AMENDED ORDER. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Nationwide's motion for substitution (ECF No. 8 ) is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is kindly directed to substitute Plaintiff Matthew E. Orso with Nationwide Judgment Recovery, Inc. Signed by Magistrate Judge Daniel J. Albregts on 5/3/2024. Matthew E. Orso terminated. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - RJDG)

Download PDF
1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4 *** 5 Matthew E. Orso in his capacity as Courtappointed receiver for Rex Venture Group, LLC dba ZeekRewards.com, 6 7 Plaintiff, 8 Case No. 2:23-cv-01603-CDS-DJA Amended Order 1 v. 9 Todd Disner and Vincent Purio, 10 Defendants. 11 Before the Court is Nationwide Judgment Recovery, Inc.’s motion for substitution of 12 13 plaintiff. (ECF No. 8). Nationwide explains that Defendant Purio was a beneficiary of a massive 14 Ponzi scheme called ZeekRewards. The Securities and Exchange Commission shut the scheme 15 down in 2012 and appointed a receiver, Kenneth Bell, to reclaim ill gotten funds obtained by “net 16 winners” of the scheme like Defendant. Bell filed a class action case in the Western District of 17 North Carolina and ultimately obtained final judgments against thousands of net winners. In 2019, Matthew Orso was appointed as successor receiver. In that role, he sold 18 19 thousands of final judgments to Nationwide in July of 2019, including the judgment against 20 Defendant. Nationwide asserts that the transfer of interest in the judgments was completed on 21 December 16, 2019. 2 Afterwards, the Western District of North Carolina amended the caption of 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 This order is amended only to include language requiring the Clerk’s Office to substitute Matthew Orso with Nationwide Judgment Recovery, Inc. on the docket. 2 Nationwide asserts that the documents supporting these transfers are attached as exhibits to its motion. However, Nationwide did not attach these exhibits. Nonetheless, by signing the motion, attorney Whitney Wilcher, Esq. has certified that the factual contentions about the transfer of interest and the subsequent amendment of the Western District of North Carolina’s caption has evidentiary support. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 11. Additionally, the Court has reviewed the docket in the Western District of North Carolina, including the assignment of judgment Nationwide filed in that case and the order granting Nationwide’s motion to amend the caption. See Orso et al. v. 1 the final judgment to replace Orso with Nationwide and many courts in the Middle District of 2 Florida have ruled on Nationwide’s substitution motions—like the motion here—and granted 3 them. 3 Federal and Nevada Rules of Civil Procedure 25(c) provide for substitution of parties 4 5 where a transfer of interest has occurred during litigation. Whether to transfer is within the 6 discretion of the Court. In re Bernal, 207 F.3d 595, 598 (9th Cir. 2000); Nationstar Mortgage 7 LLC v. Fiesta Del Norte Homeowners Assoc., Case No. 2:16-cv-00497-APG-BNW, 2020 WL 8 10787496, at *1 (D. Nev. 2020). However, “[t]he most significant feature of Rule 25(c) is that it 9 does not require that anything be done after an interest has been transferred ... the judgment will 10 be binding on his successor in interest even though he is not named.” In re Bernal, 207 F.3d at 11 598 (citation omitted). The Court finds substitution appropriate. Although not controlling, the numerous federal 12 13 courts in Florida that have granted Nationwide’s substitution requests are persuasive here. The 14 Court also finds that where the assignee wishes to enforce the judgment and have the Court enter 15 writs of garnishment, substitution is appropriate and necessary for enforcement of the judgment. 16 The Court thus grants Nationwide’s motion. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Disner et al., Case No. 3:14-cv-91, at ECF Nos. 1506-1, 1581. The Court thus accepts these representations. 3 Nationwide refers to Bell v. Woods, Case No. 5:20-mc-10-JSM-PRL (M.D. Fla. 2022); Bell v. Samuels, Case No. 6:21-mc-122-RBD-EJK (M.D. Fla. 2022); Orso v. Gentile, Case No. 6:21-mc154-LHP (M.D. Fla. 2022); Orso v. Forbes-King, Case No. 6:21-mc-00083-WWB-LHP (M.D. Fla. 2022); Orso v. Lettsome, Case No. 6:21-mc-12-PGB-LHP (M.D. Fla. 2022); Orso v. Pateau, Case No. 6:21-mc-80-CEM-EJK (M.D. Fla. June 21, 2022); Orso v. Nagabina, Case No. 8:21mc-131-KKM-JSS (M.D. Fla. June 15, 2022); Orso v. Lewis, Case No. 6:21-mc-104-RBD-GJK (M.D. Fla April 7, 2022); Orso v. Angervil, Case No. 6:21-mc-00146-CEM-DCI (M.D. Fla. August 10, 2022); Bell v. Zhang, Case No. 6:21-mc-00017-WWB-DCI (M.D. Fla. August 10, 2022); Matthew E. Orso v. Alba Moreno, Case No. 8:21-mc-00025-MSS-AEP (M.D. Fla. September 7, 2022); Matthew E. Orso v. Dawn Morrow, Case No. 8:21-mc-00070-TPB-JSS (M.D. Fla. September 7, 2022); Matthew E. Orso v. Americo Vargas, Case No. 8:21-mc-8-MSSAEP (M.D. Fla. September 7, 2022); Matthew E. Orso v. Antonio G. Germain, Case No. 6:21mc-00084-PGB-DCl (M.D. Fla. September 15, 2022); Matthew E. Orso v. Xia Mel, Case No. 6:21-mc-24-PGB-DCI (M.D. Fla. September 15, 2022); Kenneth D. Bell and Nationwide Judgment Recovery, Inc. v. Nathaniel Woods, Case No. 5:20-mc10-JSM-PRL (September 23, 2022). Page 2 of 3 1 2 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Nationwide’s motion for substitution (ECF No. 8) 3 is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is kindly directed to substitute Plaintiff Matthew E. Orso with 4 Nationwide Judgment Recovery, Inc. 5 6 DATED: May 3, 2024 7 8 9 DANIEL J. ALBREGTS UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Page 3 of 3

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?