Kublanovsky Law successfully secured a $137,541 judgment for a client who was a victim of a Ponzi scheme. The Hon. Madeline Cox Arleo, of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, in the case Birdsall v. Rivera, et al., found Defendants liable for promoting and selling a fraudulent investment product to the Plaintiff. Defendants’ marketed their “investment” strategy, called Robbins Lane, as a lucrative and secure investment in Pennsylvania which was focused on developing commercial and other real estate properties. Defendants targeted mostly older and elderly clients and induced many of them to invest in Robbins Lane, representing it as a legitimate and secure investment strategy and promising significant returns. However, as described in an SEC complaint filed in March 2016 against several of the same Defendants, Robbins Lane was a quintessential Ponzi scheme developed to fleece unsuspecting investors. As alleged in the SEC complaint, Defendants Daniel Rivera and Matthew Rivera “engaged in a fraudulent Ponzi scheme, where Daniel Rivera falsely promised investors they would share in the profits of Robbins Lane, a real estate venture that bought, redeveloped and sold properties. In fact, Robbins Lane, which was owned by Matthew Rivera, was a sham. Daniel Rivera and Matthew Rivera misappropriated investor funds for their personal benefit.” The SEC complaint further alleged that “Daniel Rivera preyed on a number of elderly, unsophisticated investors, at times recommending that they liquidate other holdings, including retirement assets, to invest in Robbins Lane.” The SEC complaint concluded that ““Robbins Lane never had any employees and engaged in no operations. Robbins Lane never ‘redeveloped’ any real estate, nor did it pursue any real estate investment activities designed to generate returns for its investors. During the entire time that Daniel Rivera was raising money from investors, Robbins Lane never sold or even attempted to sell any real estate. Robbins Lane was instead used as a vehicle to defraud primarily elderly investors in order to enrich Daniel Rivera, Matthew Rivera, as well as their family and associates.” Shortly after the SEC filed its complaint, Defendants consented to a final judgment being entered against them in the SEC action. Kublanovsky Law subsequently commenced a civil lawsuit against Defendants for their role in fleecing the Plaintiff of his retirement savings.
