SDNY Judge Clears Way for Class Action Alleging Trump Corporation Pushed Bad Investments
The ruling, from a district judge in the Southern District of New York, jettisoned federal racketeering claims from the suit.
July 24, 2019 at 05:44 PM
4 minute read
A Manhattan federal judge ruled Wednesday that the Trump Corp. will have to defend claims in a proposed class action that it had illegally profited from knowingly promoting doomed products and services to unsophisticated investors across the country.
The ruling, from U.S. Judge Lorna G. Schofield of the Southern District of New York, jettisoned federal racketeering claims from the suit, which alleged that members of President Donald Trump's family for years had operated a multilevel marketing scheme that cost consumers millions of dollars in investments.
The court, however, did have jurisdiction over state claims for negligent misrepresentations, common law fraud and unfair and deceptive trade practices, Schofield said in the 26-page order.
The case is captioned Jane Doe v. Trump Corp. Named as defendants in the case were Donald Trump, his children, Donald Trump Jr., Ivanka and Eric Trump, and the Trump Corp., one of their business entities.
In October, the four unnamed plaintiffs in the suit claimed that Donald Trump and his three children oversaw a racketeering operation through both aligned outside businesses and Trump-branded ventures.
According to the complaint, Donald Trump lent his name to promote the businesses, knowing that there was little to no chance that the money unsavvy investors and others paid to participate in seminars and training opportunities would ever be recouped.
At the center of the allegations was Donald Trump's relationship with the multilevel marketing company ACN Inc. Prior media reports on Donald Trump's involvement of the company highlighted his endorsement of ACN, which included appearances on his former reality television program. The complaint claimed that working-class investors relied on statements he made in promotional material created by ACN in deciding to sign up with the company.
According to the complaint, Donald Trump claimed to have prior experience with the products ACN was pushing on investors, having done substantial research, and that he wasn't being paid for his endorsement.
“Not a word of this was true,” the complaint alleged.
On Wednesday, Schofield said the connection between Donald Trump's alleged misconduct and that injury asserted in the lawsuit was not strong enough to support civil claims under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.
According to the ruling, the plaintiff's lack of success in the program could have simply been the result of the inherent challenges that come along with multilevel marketing, their own limitations as salespeople or the local markets for ACN's products.
“The complaint fails to plead proximate causation because it does not allege a direct relation between defendants' conduct and plaintiffs' losses,” Schofield wrote.
As to the rest of the suit, however, Schofield said the plaintiffs had established a “reasonable probability” that the case met the minimum standards to confer federal jurisdiction over class actions alleging state law claims.
Specifically, she said, the suit claimed that the proposed class contained at least 100 members; that minimal diversity existed between the parties, and that the amount in controversy exceeded $500 million. The Trumps, on the other hand, had not demonstrated “to a legal certainty” that the plaintiffs would be not be able to recover the amount they sought.
Roberta Kaplan, who represents the plaintiffs, said in a statement that she was “pleased” the state law claims had survived the motion to dismiss.
“We now look forward to proceeding expeditiously with the case on the merits in order to obtain justice for the plaintiffs, and thousands of other working Americans just like them, who each lost hundreds or thousands of dollars as a result of the defendants' fraudulent scheme,” said Kaplan, founding partner of Kaplan Hecker & Fink.
Counsel for the Trump Corp. and other defendants, meanwhile, claimed victory with regard to the racketeering allegations. In a statement, Joanna C. Hendon, a partner with Spears & Imes, said the RICO claims were “baseless and should never have been brought” in the first place.
“We look forward to dispensing with the rest of the suit,” she said.
Read More:
New Class Suit Claims Trump Lured Investors, Whose Loss Was His Gain
9th Circuit Approves $25M Trump University Settlement
This is a developing story.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrump Counsel Again Asks Second Circuit to Remove NY State Case to Federal Court
Hunter Biden Sues Fox, Ex-Chief Legal Officer Over Mock Trial Series
Vince McMahon's Accuser Pursues Records Amid Sexual Assault, Trafficking Claims
4 minute readFreshfields Lures Willkie Partner to Lead NY Private Equity Practice
Trending Stories
- 1The Law Firm Disrupted: Playing the Talent Game to Win
- 2GlaxoSmithKline Settles Most Zantac Lawsuits for $2.2B
- 3Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
- 4BD Settles Thousands of Bard Hernia Mesh Lawsuits
- 5Partner Cuts: The Grim Reality of Post-Merger Integration
Who Got The Work
Davis Polk & Wardwell partners Mari Grace and Edmund Polubinski III have entered appearances for Australia-based Bitcoin-mining company Iris Energy and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Eastern District Court by the Rosen Law Firm, contends that the defendants concealed the inadequacy of the company's site in Childress County, Texas, including it being 'ill-equipped' and unable to operate the company's proprietary design. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Peggy Kuo, is 1:24-cv-07046, Williams-Israel v. Iris Energy Limited et al.
Who Got The Work
Ryan S. Stippich of Reinhart Boerner Van Deuren has entered an appearance for biopharmaceutical company Veru Inc. and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Sept. 30 in Wisconsin Western District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of June Ovadias, accuses the defendant of failing to disclose that small sample sizes and other issues rendered it unlikely that the FDA would grant Emergency Use Authorization for the cancer drug candidate sabizabulin as a potential treatment for COVID-19. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge William M. Conley, is 3:24-cv-00676, Ovadias, June v. Steiner, Mitchell et al.
Who Got The Work
Holland & Knight partners Cynthia A. Gierhart and Thomas Willcox Brooke have entered appearances for Pakistani American Political Action Committee and Rao Kamran Ali in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The action, filed Sept. 24 in District of Columbia District Court by Jackson Walker on behalf of Pakistani American Public Affairs Committee, accuses the defendants of using a mark that's confusingly similar to the plaintiff's 'Pak-Pac' marks without authorization. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Randolph D. Moss, is 1:24-cv-02727, Pakistani American Public Affairs Committee v. Pakistani American Political Action Committee et al.
Who Got The Work
Lauren M. Rosenberg and Yonatan Even of Cravath, Swaine & Moore have stepped in to represent Israel-based Oddity Tech Ltd. in a pending securities class action. The case, filed Aug. 30 in New York Southern District Court by Pomerantz LLP and Holzer & Holzer, contends that the defendant made materially misleading statements regarding the capability of Oddity's AI technology and ongoing civil litigation, resulting in the artifical inflation of the market price of Oddity's securities. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Margaret M. Garnett, is 1:24-cv-06571, Hoare v. Oddity Tech Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Eleanor M. Lackman of Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp has entered an appearance for Canon, the Japanese camera maker, and the Brooklyn Nets in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed Sept. 16 in California Central District Court by T-Rex Law on behalf of technology company Phinge Corporation, pursues claims against the defendants for their ongoing use of the 'Netaverse' mark. The suit contends that the defendants' use of the mark in connection with a virtual reality platform will likely create consumer confusion. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Consuelo B. Marshall, is 2:24-cv-07917, Phinge Corporation v. Yankees Entertainment and Sports Network, LLC et al.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250