Law Commons^™

Overcoming Administrative, Procedural And Evidentiary Hurdles In Ponzi Scheme Litigation, Sharon Z. Weiss, Natalie B. Daghbandan

Golden Gate University Law Review

The unfortunate reality that comes with a Ponzi scheme case in bankruptcy is a mass of deceived unsecured creditors clamoring for their money back, and few, if any, present assets within the bankruptcy estate with which to pay them. The sheer size of most Ponzi schemes cases necessarily presents unique evidentiary, procedural and administrative challenges to professionals seeking to sort out the failed Ponzi enterprise. Ponzi scheme cases are riddled with litigation, which generally falls into four categories: (1) litigation against the Ponzi scheme operator(s), (2) litigation against parties who enabled the scheme to continue (such as professionals), (3) litigation …

The Collapse Of Financial Fraud: Measuring Bankruptcy Avoidance Action, Jessica D. Gabel, Isaac Asher, Mary Beth Byington

Golden Gate University Law Review

Ponzi schemes lay their foundation on fraud. Once the con is exposed, the culprits are usually stripped of their pilfered millions and sent off to jail. Unfortunately for the victims, the process of recovering any portion of the money they lost in the scam is, to put it mildly, complicated. The challenge rests, in part, in differences between federal forfeiture statutes and Bankruptcy Code principles in determining what assets can be recovered and who is entitled to a portion of the Ponzi pie. What is a Ponzi scheme (as defined by the courts rather than the media)? The Second Circuit …

Friction In Reconciling Criminal Forfeiture And Bankruptcy: The Criminal Forfeiture Part, Sarah N. Welling, Jane Lyle Hord

Golden Gate University Law Review

The federal government uses two general types of asset forfeiture, criminal and civil. This Article addresses criminal forfeiture, which allows the government to take property from defendants when they are convicted of crimes. It is “an aspect of punishment imposed following conviction of a substantive criminal offense.” The goal of this Article is to give an overview of the forfeiture process, specifically in relation to claims victims and creditors might assert as third-party claimants.

Cite as 42 Golden Gate U. L. Rev. 551 (2012).

Back To The Future With Chapter 13: A Response To Professor Scarberry, Adam J. Levitin

Pepperdine Law Review

Professor Mark Scarberry has put forth a formidable critique of my empirical study of mortgage market sensitivity to bankruptcy modification risk. As this response shows, however, his critique does not hold up under scrutiny. Professor Scarberry argues that my study design is invalid because, as he reads the current state of the law, cramdown is virtually impossible. Therefore, he contends, we should not expect markets to exhibit sensitivity to cramdown risk, so no policy conclusions can be derived from my finding of market insensitivity. Regrettably, Professor Scarberry overreads the state of the law. The law is in fact unsettled, and …

A Critique Of Congressional Proposals To Permit Modification Of Home Mortgages In Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, Mark S. Scarberry

Pepperdine Law Review

Proposed amendments to the Bankruptcy Code permitting strip down of under secured home mortgages to the court-determined value of the homes and other modifications of home mortgages in Chapter 13 would substantially alter the risk characteristics of home mortgages, with likely substantial effects on future mortgage interest rates and future mortgage availability. Thus, the future societal cost of such a change in the law likely would be large. This article explains and supports that thesis, primarily on the ground that the proposed changes would leave mortgage holders with all of the future downside risk in the real property market while …