United Community Bank v. Campbell et al
ORDER REQUIRING RECEIVER TO PAY OVER FUNDS TO JUDGMENT CREDITOR OF OLANREWAJE WUSU PURSUANT TO N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-360. Signed by District Judge Martin Reidinger on 07/01/2015. (klb)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
Civil Case No. 1:10-cv-00079-MR-DLH
UNITED COMMUNITY BANK,
LILLIE CAMPBELL, ROBERT A.
WEISER JR., SILVIA M. WEISER,
and OLANREWAJU WUSU,
ORDER REQUIRING RECEIVER TO PAY OVER FUNDS TO JUDGMENT
CREDITOR OF OLANREWAJE WUSU PURSUANT TO
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-360
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Verified Statement (the
“Statement”) of Joseph W. Grier, III, Receiver for Peerless Real Estate
Services, Inc. et al. regarding the judgment debtor Olanrewaju Wusu
(“Wusu”) [Doc. 21], which was filed in response to the verified motion (the
“Motions”) of United Community Bank (“UCB”) for orders pursuant to N.C.
Gen. Stat. §1-360 compelling Joseph W. Grier, in his capacity as receiver
(the “Receiver”), to appear and give testimony concerning the funds he has
in his possession that may belong to Wusu.
Having considered the pleadings, the Motions and the Statement, the
Court hereby FINDS as follows:
1. On March 1, 2011, the Court entered a default judgment (the
“Judgment”) against Wusu and in favor of UCB in the amount of $314,261.08
2. As of the date of this order, Wusu has paid no amounts to UCB in
full or partial satisfaction of the Judgment.
3. On or about June 6, 2007, the State of North Carolina, ex rel. through
Roy Cooper, Attorney General, filed a lawsuit in the Superior Court, Wake
County, North Carolina (the “Receivership Court”), against Peerless Real
Estate Services, Inc., Village of Penland, LLC, MFSL Landholdings, LLC,
Communities of Penland, LLC, COP Land Holdings, LLC, PG Capital
Holdings, LLC and West Side Development, LLC (the “Receivership
Entities”), Case No. 07-CVS-9006, pursuant to authority granted in Chapters
75 and 114 of the General Statutes of North Carolina and for the purpose,
among others, of seeking restitution for consumers pursuant to G.S. § 75-1.1
(the “Receivership Case”). The allegations in the Receivership Case were
generally that the Receivership Entities were created to develop a real estate
project called “The Village of Penland” in Mitchell County, North Carolina,
individual investors would “invest” in the development by obtaining loans from
banks secured with particular real estate lots, the individuals were told that
after development, their lots would be sold, the bank loans paid off and a
profit would be made by the investors. In actuality, the funds received from
investors and their lenders were not all used for the real estate development,
the lots were worth a fraction of the amount the investors and banks believed,
and when the developers ran out of funds the investors were left with bank
loans secured by virtually worthless property. Many banks, including United
Community Bank (“UCB”), were not fully paid on loans secured by property
in the Village of Penland and sought judgments against their borrowers, who
were the “investors” in the Village of Penland scheme.
4. On June 6, 2007, this court appointed Joseph W. Grier, III as
Receiver (the “Receiver”) pursuant to the provisions of N.C.G.S. § 1-502(5),
which provides for the appointment of a receiver “[i]n cases wherein
restitution is sought for violations of G.S. 75-1.1,” by Order Appointing
Receiver For Defendants Peerless Real Estate Services, Inc., Village of
Penland, LLC, MFSL Landholdings, LLC, Communities of Penland, LLC,
COP Land Holdings, LLC, PG Capital Holdings, LLC and West Side
Development, LLC (the “Receivership Order”) to serve as receiver for the
Receivership Entities and to preserve assets to be used for restitution to
consumers who invested in the Village of Penland.
5. Assets of the Receivership Entities have been liquidated,
administrative expenses approved to date have been paid and at this time
the Receiver is holding approximately $225,847.68 in funds for the benefit of
6. On August 28, 2013, the Receivership Court entered its Order
Allowing Reimbursement to Banks for Investigation Expenses, Denying
Certain Consumer Claims, Approving Consumer Claim Verification Form
and Approving Notice setting forth a process for making claims in the
Receivership among other terms. Thereafter, the Receiver conducted the
claims process for the purpose of establishing allowable claims as to the
7. On October 6, 2014, the Receivership Court entered its Order
Approving Report of Claims, Allowed Claim Amounts and Distribution
Method which held that each claimant who made a timely claim would have
a claim in the Receivership equal to that claimant’s original loan amounts.
The distribution method of funds in the Receivership Estate is such that the
Receiver shall pay Allowed Claimants a pro-rata calculation based upon the
Allowed Claim Amounts after payment of all administrative fees and
8. The Receiver received a timely claim from Wusu. Wusu’s Allowed
Claim Amount is $448,000.00 (the “Wusu Claim”). The distribution on the
Wusu Claim will be the pro-rata share of net Receivership Estate funds, after
payment of administrative fees and expenses of the Receivership. The total
of all of the Allowed Claims is $14,035,000.00.
9. The Receiver is in the process of winding down the Receivership
and cannot at this time project the specific amount of funds in his possession
which will be available for distribution to Allowed Claimants including the
amount to be paid on the Wusu Claim. Further, any distribution of the
Receivership Estate is subject to the approval of the Receivership Court. It
is expected that the distribution to Wusu will be well over ten dollars ($10).
The proposed distribution to Wusu is expected to be
approximately $5,588.85, which amount is less than the outstanding amount
of the Judgment, $314,26.08 plus any accrued interest.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED as follows:
1. That when the distribution amounts are finalized, the Receiver shall
pay to UCB all amounts that would otherwise be distributed to Wusu
to the extent that said distribution does not exceed the outstanding
amount owed UCB pursuant to the Judgment; and
2. To the extent the distribution exceeds the amount owed to UCB
pursuant to the Judgment, the Receiver shall pay the excess funds
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed: July 1, 2015
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?