Transamerica Life Insurance Company v. Caramadre et al

Filing 146

RESPONSE in Opposition re (109 in 1:09-cv-00564-S-DLM) MOTION to Amend/Correct with Supporting Memo filed by Joseph Caramadre, Estate Planning Resources, Inc., Raymour Radhakrishnan, Joseph A. Caramadre, Harrison Condit. Associated Cases: 1:09-cv-00470-S-DLM et al.(Ramos, Adam)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND
____________________________________
)
WESTERN RESERVE LIFE ASSURANCE )
CO. OF OHIO,
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
C.A. No. 09-470-S
JOSEPH CARAMADRE, RAYMOUR
)
RADHAKRISHNAN, ESTATE PLANNING )
RESOURCES, INC., HARRISON CONDIT, )
and FORTUNE FINANCIAL SERVICES,
)
INC.,
)
Defendants;
)
____________________________________ )
)
TRANSAMERICA LIFE INSURANCE
)
COMPANY,
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
C.A. No. 09-471-S
JOSEPH CARAMADRE, RAYMOUR
)
RADHAKRISHNAN, ESTATE PLANNING )
RESOURCES, INC., ESTELA
)
RODRIGUES, EDWARD MAGGIACOMO, )
JR., LIFEMARK SECURITIES CORP., and )
PATRICK GARVEY,
)
Defendants;
)
____________________________________ )
)
WESTERN RESERVE LIFE ASSURANCE )
CO. OF OHIO,
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
C.A. No. 09-472-S
)
JOSEPH CARAMADRE, RAYMOUR
)
RADHAKRISHNAN, ESTATE PLANNING )
RESOURCES, INC., ADM ASSOCIATES, )
LLC, EDWARD HANRAHAN, THE
)
LEADERS GROUP, INC., and CHARLES )
BUCKMAN,
)
Defendants;
)

____________________________________
)
WESTERN RESERVE LIFE ASSURANCE )
CO. OF OHIO,
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
JOSEPH CARAMADRE, RAYMOUR
)
RADHAKRISHNAN, ESTATE PLANNING )
RESOURCES, INC., DK LLC, EDWARD
)
HANRAHAN, THE LEADERS GROUP,
)
INC., and JASON VEVEIROS,
)
Defendants;
)
)
)
WESTERN RESERVE LIFE ASSURANCE )
CO. OF OHIO,
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
JOSEPH CARAMADRE, RAYMOUR
)
RADHAKRISHNAN, ESTATE PLANNING )
RESOURCES, INC., NATCO PRODUCTS )
CORP., EDWARD HANRAHAN, and THE )
LEADERS GROUP, INC.,
)
Defendants;
)
)
)
TRANSAMERICA LIFE INSURANCE
)
COMPANY,
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
LIFEMARK SECURITIES CORP., JOSEPH )
CARAMADRE, RAYMOUR
)
RADHAKRISHNAN, ESTATE PLANNING )
RESOURCES, INC. and EDWARD
)
MAGGIACOMO, JR.,
)
Defendants; and
)
)

Doc. No. 50720065 

C.A. No. 09-473-S

C.A. No. 09-502-S

C.A. No. 09-549-S

2

____________________________________
WESTERN RESERVE LIFE ASSURANCE )
CO. OF OHIO,
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
JOSEPH CARAMADRE, RAYMOUR
)
RADHAKRISHNAN, ESTATE PLANNING )
RESOURCES, INC., HARRISON CONDIT, )
and FORTUNE FINANCIAL SERVICES,
)
INC.,
)
Defendants.
)
)

C.A. No. 09-564-S

DEFENDANTS JOSEPH CARAMADRE, RAYMOUR RADHAKRISHNAN,
ESTATE PLANNING RESOURCES, INC., AND HARRISON CONDIT’S
OBJECTION TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO AMEND COMPLAINTS
Defendants Joseph Caramadre, Raymour Radhakrishnan, Estate Planning Resources, Inc.
(“EPR”) and Harrison Condit (the “Objecting Defendants”) object to Plaintiff Western Reserve
Life Assurance Co. of Ohio’s (“Western Reserve”) Motion to Amend Complaints (the
“Motion”). The Objecting Defendants’ reasons why this Court should deny the Motion are set
forth in the accompanying memorandum of law.

Doc. No. 50720065 

3

Dated: Providence, Rhode Island
May 25, 2012
JOSEPH CARAMADRE, RAYMOUR
RADHAKRISHNAN, ESTATE PLANNING
RESOURCES, INC., and HARRISON CONDIT,
By their Attorneys,

/s/ Adam M. Ramos____________
Robert G. Flanders, Jr. (# 1785)
Adam M. Ramos (#7591)
HINCKLEY, ALLEN & SNYDER LLP
50 Kennedy Plaza, Suite 1500
Providence, RI 02903
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
[e-mail]

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on May 25, 2012, a copy of the foregoing was filed electronically
and served by mail on anyone unable to accept electronic filing. Notice of this filing will be sent
by e-mail to all parties by operation of the court’s electronic filing as indicated on the Notice of
Electronic Filing. Parties may access this filing through the court’s CM/ECF system.

/s/ Adam M. Ramos

Doc. No. 50720065 

4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND
____________________________________
)
WESTERN RESERVE LIFE ASSURANCE )
CO. OF OHIO,
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
C.A. No. 09-470-S
JOSEPH CARAMADRE, RAYMOUR
)
RADHAKRISHNAN, ESTATE PLANNING )
RESOURCES, INC., HARRISON CONDIT, )
and FORTUNE FINANCIAL SERVICES,
)
INC.,
)
Defendants;
)
____________________________________ )
)
TRANSAMERICA LIFE INSURANCE
)
COMPANY,
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
C.A. No. 09-471-S
JOSEPH CARAMADRE, RAYMOUR
)
RADHAKRISHNAN, ESTATE PLANNING )
RESOURCES, INC., ESTELA
)
RODRIGUES, EDWARD MAGGIACOMO, )
JR., LIFEMARK SECURITIES CORP., and )
PATRICK GARVEY,
)
Defendants;
)
____________________________________ )
)
WESTERN RESERVE LIFE ASSURANCE )
CO. OF OHIO,
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
C.A. No. 09-472-S
)
JOSEPH CARAMADRE, RAYMOUR
)
RADHAKRISHNAN, ESTATE PLANNING )
RESOURCES, INC., ADM ASSOCIATES, )
LLC, EDWARD HANRAHAN, THE
)
LEADERS GROUP, INC., and CHARLES )
BUCKMAN,
)
Defendants;
)

____________________________________
)
WESTERN RESERVE LIFE ASSURANCE )
CO. OF OHIO,
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
JOSEPH CARAMADRE, RAYMOUR
)
RADHAKRISHNAN, ESTATE PLANNING )
RESOURCES, INC., DK LLC, EDWARD
)
HANRAHAN, THE LEADERS GROUP,
)
INC., and JASON VEVEIROS,
)
Defendants;
)
)
)
WESTERN RESERVE LIFE ASSURANCE )
CO. OF OHIO,
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
JOSEPH CARAMADRE, RAYMOUR
)
RADHAKRISHNAN, ESTATE PLANNING )
RESOURCES, INC., NATCO PRODUCTS )
CORP., EDWARD HANRAHAN, and THE )
LEADERS GROUP, INC.,
)
Defendants;
)
)
)
TRANSAMERICA LIFE INSURANCE
)
COMPANY,
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
LIFEMARK SECURITIES CORP., JOSEPH )
CARAMADRE, RAYMOUR
)
RADHAKRISHNAN, ESTATE PLANNING )
RESOURCES, INC. and EDWARD
)
MAGGIACOMO, JR.,
)
Defendants; and
)
)

Doc. No. 50720065 

C.A. No. 09-473-S

C.A. No. 09-502-S

C.A. No. 09-549-S

2

____________________________________
WESTERN RESERVE LIFE ASSURANCE )
CO. OF OHIO,
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
JOSEPH CARAMADRE, RAYMOUR
)
RADHAKRISHNAN, ESTATE PLANNING )
RESOURCES, INC., HARRISON CONDIT, )
and FORTUNE FINANCIAL SERVICES,
)
INC.,
)
Defendants.
)
)

C.A. No. 09-564-S

MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF
DEFENDANTS JOSEPH CARAMADRE, RAYMOUR RADHAKRISHNAN,
ESTATE PLANNING RESOURCES, INC., AND HARRISON CONDIT’S
OBJECTION TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO AMEND COMPLAINTS
Defendants Joseph Caramadre, Raymour Radhakrishnan, Estate Planning Resources, Inc.
(“EPR”) and Harrison Condit (the “Objecting Defendants”) submit this memorandum of law in
support of their objection to Plaintiff Western Reserve Life Assurance Co. of Ohio’s (“Western
Reserve”) Motion to Amend Complaints (the “Motion”).
Western Reserve seeks in the Motion to take a fifth bite at the apple in its futile attempt to
craft a complaint in this matter that can withstand a motion to dismiss. Twice this Court
dismissed claims that Western Reserve seeks to revive in this motion. Even the liberal standards
of Rule 15 regarding amendments to complaints do not permit plaintiffs to treat complaints as a
trial and error process allowing a amendment after amendment to try to correct the fatal flaws
that led to dismissal in previous versions. The Court, however, need not even reach the question
of whether the amendments Western Reserve now poses are admissible to deny the motion at
this time because the Motion is barred by the stay order entered by this Court.

Doc. No. 50720065 

3

This Court stayed these cases on March 2, 2012 pursuant to a Stay Order. See ECF No.
134 in C.A. No. 09-470. That Stay Order explicitly states that “With the exceptions noted in this
Order, these cases (C.A. Nos. 09-470, 09-471, 09-472, 09-473, 09-502, 09-549 and 09-564) are
stayed pending the resolution of the criminal matter, United States v. Caramadre, et al., Cr. No.
11-186[.]” The limited exceptions are only: (1) limited document discovery, (2) motions for
entry of final judgment, (3) appeals from any entries of final judgment, (4) a motion by EPR to
reconsider a prior decision by the magistrate judge regarding its obligation to respond to certain
interrogatories, and (5) an additional motion to stay by any defendant if the plaintiffs (Western
Reserve or Transamerica Life Assurance Co.) attempted any litigation activity not permitted by
the Stay Order. In fact, the Court specifically contemplated that there would be little activity in
these civil matters during the stay when it decided to find the motions to withdraw filed by the
Objecting Defendants attorneys moot.
The Motion clearly is not permitted under the Stay Order. The Stay Order entered a
blanket stay with certain enumerated exceptions. Motions to amend the complaints are not
among the enumerated exceptions. Moreover, this Motion, which seeks to revive claims
previously dismissed by the Court and to reintroduce claims against parties who successfully
eliminated all claims against them in C.A. No 09-470 directly contravenes one of the central
purposes of the Stay Order – to eliminate all but certain minimal activity in the civil cases until
the resolution of the criminal case. First, this Motion, if the Court was to consider it on the
merits, invites substantial briefing and arguments as to whether the Court should permit the
proposed amendments in the first instance – on both procedural and substantive grounds.
Second, if the Court allowed the amendments, a third round of motions to dismiss (and the

Doc. No. 50720065 

4

accompanying briefing and argument) would ensue. Consideration of the Motion on the merits
would render the stay meaningless.
For these reasons, this Court should deny the Motion because it violates the Stay Order.
If the Court elects to consider the Motion on the merits, the Objecting Defendants respectfully
request that the Court allow them fourteen days from the date of such decision to provide
supplemental briefing on the reasons why the Motion should be denied in the merits as
procedurally faulty and substantively insufficient.1 Not only should this Court deny the Motion
because it violates the Stay Order, but also because it is an abuse of the amendment process and,
in any event, futile.
Dated: Providence, Rhode Island
May 25, 2012
JOSEPH CARAMADRE, RAYMOUR
RADHAKRISHNAN, ESTATE PLANNING
RESOURCES, INC., and HARRISON CONDIT,
By their Attorneys,

/s/ Adam M. Ramos____________
Robert G. Flanders, Jr. (# 1785)
Adam M. Ramos (#7591)
HINCKLEY, ALLEN & SNYDER LLP
50 Kennedy Plaza, Suite 1500
Providence, RI 02903
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
1

One of the substantive issues to be raised, if necessary, is the undisputed fact that Western Reserve suffered zero
losses from the transaction at issue in C.A. No. 09-470. Western Reserve actually profited from that transaction.
The account value was at $2,163,090.71 as of September 21, 2009 (which is the approximate date Western Reserve
unilaterally and wrongfully liquidated the subject account pre-litigation). The total investment deposited in this
policy approximately eight months earlier was $2,000,000.00. Western Reserve liquidated the account and sent the
investor a check in the amount of $2,000,000.00 which the investor eventually cashed. Western reserve retained the
$163,090.71appreciation of value. Western Reserve will likely retort that it paid $140,000.00 in commissions to the
broker dealer. Even after crediting Plaintiff the amount of the commission pay-out, Western Reserve still enjoyed a
net profit of $23,090.71. Moreover, Western Reserve collected management fees from the account over the course
of the investment. Those fees likely ranged in the vicinity of $50,000.00 to $70,000.00 leaving a total net profit for
Western Reserve of $73,090.71 to $93,090.71. There are no losses, only profits, with respect to this transaction.
For this reason alone, any amendment would be futile.

Doc. No. 50720065 

5

[e-mail]

Doc. No. 50720065 

6

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on May 25, 2012, a copy of the foregoing was filed electronically
and served by mail on anyone unable to accept electronic filing. Notice of this filing will be sent
by e-mail to all parties by operation of the court’s electronic filing as indicated on the Notice of
Electronic Filing. Parties may access this filing through the court’s CM/ECF system.

/s/ Adam M. Ramos

Doc. No. 50720065 

7