The post Ayala Secures Major Win in Wire Fraud Arbitration Case first appeared on Ayala Law PA.

Ayala is proud to announce that it has obtained a final judgment for $2,100,000 against several defendants in a case involving a 2-million-dollar Personal Protective Equipment scam. Part of the judgment also awards Ayala’s client $150,000.00 in attorney’s fees.

The case stemmed from a scheme whereby the defendants conspired to induce Plaintiffs to invest two million dollars in a PPE scam.

The case was filed in the US Southern District of Florida, case # 1:21-cv-20975. Honorable judge Beth Bloom is the judge on the case.

Also, on December 12, 2022, the court held a bench trial to address the damages against the remaining individual pro se defendants who failed to appear. It is anticipated that they will remain jointly and severally liable for the same amount.

As stated by Attorney Eduardo A. Maura: “this is a step in the right direction. We look forward to sparing no resource in collecting this judgment for our client.”

For more information about commercial disputes, contact an experienced commercial litigation attorney at Ayala at 305-570-2208.

You can also schedule a consultation online at https://www.lawayala.com/consultation/.

You can also email directly trial lawyer Eduardo A. Maura at eduardo@ayalalawpa.com

The post Ayala Obtains $2,100,000 Final Judgment Against Several Defendants in Personal Protective Equipment Scam Case first appeared on Ayala Law PA.

As you already know FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF), a 30-year-old Californian, was arrested a few days ago in the Bahamas, where he resided. But what was he arrested for, and what are the charges? We break it down here in this blog.

The first count of the formerly sealed indictment alleges that “from at least in or about 2019, up to and including in or about November 2022, . . . [SBF] … willfully and knowingly [] combine, conspire, confederate, and agree . . . to commit wire fraud, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343.”

Section 1343 of the US Code states that

Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, transmits or causes to be transmitted by means of wire, radio, or television communication in interstate or foreign commerce, any writings, signs, signals, pictures, or sounds for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

18 USC § 1343.

SBF violated section 1343, alleges the indictment, by “misappropriating [] customers’ deposits and using those deposits to pay expenses and debts of Alameda Research, [SBF]’s proprietary crypto hedge fund…”

This commingling FTX/Alameda of customer funds is really the core of the indictment. Based on that he’s charged with actual fraud on Count II, Conspiracy to Commit Wire Fraud on Lenders on Count III, Wire Fraud on Lenders on Count IV, Conspiracy and Securities Fraud on Count V and VI.

As it is not unusual in our system, when a defendant is charged with wire fraud, he’s also charged with money laundering violations (in this case Count VII).

Finally, in Count VIII, he’s charged with violating Campaign Finances Laws for contributions exceeding $25,000 to candidates for federal offices.

As seen above, the violation of Section 1343 alone can carry a penalty of more than 20-years in prison. SBF is clearly in serious trouble.

To keep up with the legal aspects of this high profile case, register to receive our newsletter at https://www.lawayala.com/. Scroll down to the “Subscribe to Our Newsletter” section in the home page and enter your email address.

You can find the indictment here: [Indictment]. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/press-release/file/1557571/download

For more information about cases involving fraud, email experienced litigation attorney Eduardo A. Maura at eduardo@ayalalawpa.com or call 305-570-2208.

You can also schedule your case evaluation online at: https://www.lawayala.com/consultation/

The post What is in Disgraced FTX Founder Sam Bankman-Fried’s Indictment? Read to Find Out first appeared on Ayala Law PA.

If you live in South Florida, chances are you have been, at a minimum, exposed to a scam. Hopefully, you didn’t fall for it. Here are three simple things we recommend to avoid falling for a scam:

First. Look up who you are doing business with. If the person offering you a product or a business does not have a physical location, a decent website, social media presence, or registration in sunbiz.org (the Florida Department of corporations), you should not be giving that person any money. You want to make sure that the person you are doing business with has some sort of physical presence. Physical presence is key because people with an open shop are less likely to flee or hide. People that are trying to do business from a remote, undisclosed location, will be very hard to find if they cheated you and you need to sue them.

Second. If it is too good to be true, don’t do it. If someone is offering you an amazing deal, something where you’ll obtain a 40% or more return on your money, then that is probably too good to be true. Most normal businesses or investments give between 3% to 20% on the high end. Returns on investment of 40% or higher are rare, and you have to be skeptical of it because it is either not true, or it is, perhaps of doubtful legality.

Third. If you are unsure, start small. If someone is asking to do business with you and for that, you need to invest $10,000, don’t start with $10,000. Start with $2,000. If the person seems legitimate in your judgment and you think you may be being over skeptical, tell that person that you want to invest small first. If the person is real, they won’t mind. Scammers, usually care about scamming you on the $10,000. They will not be able to control their greed if they know you actually have the $10,000. They’ll push and try to persuade you that the business can only be done with $10,000 and that you are missing on the opportunity of your life.

Finally, if you have any doubts about the person you are dealing with, and are about to invest with that person, it may be worth paying an experienced fraud attorney for a consultation so the fraud attorney can vet that person or entity for you. At Ayala, we have extensive experience dealing with fraud and fraudsters, and we will be able to tell you with a high degree of certainty, and fast, whether or not you are the target of a scam.

For more information about consumer rights issues, you can contact attorney Eduardo A. Maura at Eduardo@ayalalawpa.com or call 305-570-2208.

The post Consumer Protection — Three Simple Things You Can Do To Protect Yourself Against Scammers first appeared on Ayala Law PA.

Ayala filed a lawsuit against American Airlines (“AA”) and Allianz Insurance for their role in the sale of what they label as “travel insurance” or “travel protection” product.

As stated in the Class Action Complaint (“Complaint”): “[A] reasonable consumer would get the net impression that Allianz’s insurance provides broad, no-fault insurance protection and coverage, and that should one choose to purchase this insurance, one would not be “responsible for all cancellation fees and expenses.” Complaint at ¶26.

The Complaint also states that “a reasonable person, faced with Allianz’s offer of insurance protection and coverage, would not think that the insurance he was purchasing was, in essence, extremely limited, applicable only to specific and unlikely named perils, such as medical emergencies, illness, or catastrophic events.” Complaint at ¶28.

The complaint alleges also that “if [a consumer were] told that the insurance covers mainly medical emergencies or catastrophic events, [consumers probably] would not purchase travel insurance in the context of already expensive flight tickets.” Complaint at ¶29.

The complaint alleges further that “It would be easy for Allianz, a Fortune 500 corporation, to fix its offer to say: “this is a medical emergency, illness, or catastrophic event insurance,” and thus truthfully reveal to consumers the essence, nature, and substance of what it is selling to them.” Complaint at ¶40. According to Ayala, Allianz does not disclose this because it knows that if it does, almost no one would purchase their rarely used “insurance.”

The complaint goes on to describe American Airlines’ role in the Allianz insurance scheme and states: “The convenience of its powerful platform, the carefully-crafted placement of the offer, the prohibitively-expensive nature of “refundable” tickets, and the complex and burdensome process of obtaining a refund or “credit” for flights consumers cannot make, contributes and prompts consumers to buy “travel insurance protection” which is, at the same time, carefully crafted to portray a broad range of non-existent protections, at a convenient price, where consumers are buying an empty policy that they did not mean to buy, while AA and Allianz enrich themselves.” Complaint at ¶53.

If you have purchased “travel Insurance” from American Airlines or Allianz, or any other carrier, contacts us at 305-570-2208 or email attorney Eduardo A. Maura at eayala@ayalalawpa.com

The post Ayala Files Class Action Against American Airlines and Allianz Alleging They Misrepresent The Contents of the Travel Insurance They Sell first appeared on Ayala Law PA.

In the case, Ayala’s client claims that the defendant, wrongfully terminated its contract with it, under bogus allegations of violations of the law, in an effort to transfer Ayala’s client’s patients to other friend-centers of (or in association with) the Defendant.

As stated by attorney Eduardo A. Maura, “we are happy that a jury will finally hear our side of the story and we are confident that when they hear the defense’s inconsistent positions, the jury will side with us.”

Ayala has a growing trial practice that is producing continuous positive and efficient results for its clients.

For more information on our commercial and real estate litigation practice call 305-570-2208 or email at eayala@ayalalawpa.com.

The post Ayala’s Client Case Against Simply Healthcare Plans Inc., Set For Jury Trial in August 2019 first appeared on Ayala Law PA.

Ayala represented the plaintiff, a Venezuelan immigrant investor, who under the promise of a phony development deal paid for the purchase price of a land contiguous to land already own by the defendant. In reliance of the promise to build warehouses in the newly acquired land (and a portion of the land already owned by the defendant) the plaintiff allowed the defendant to be in the title of the land. Soon after closing the defendant knocked down the fence separating both lands, did nothing to build any warehouse, and effectively enlarged its existing land and business.

After a 5 day Jury Trial, the jury awarded Ayala’s client the land (valued conservatively at $517,000) and $84,000 in back rent for the time the Defendants used the land.

The Daily Business Review news article can be accessed here: https://www.law.com/dailybusinessreview/2018/10/25/bad-neighbor-miami-dade-jury-sides-with-venezuelan-investor-in-land-dispute/

For more information about Ayala’s commercial and real estate litigation practice call 305-570-2208 or email at eayala@ayalalawpa.com

The post Daily Business Review Features Ayala’s Client Jury Verdict Win In Land Dispute first appeared on Ayala Law PA.

After two years of contentious litigation, Ayala’s case on behalf of its Venezuelan client is set for jury trial in October-2018. In the case, Ayala’s client claims that the defendant, through lies and deceit, induced him to invest $250,000 on a land under the promise of a phony business enterprise. The defendant has since held the land hostage, and has received extensive benefit using it for its contiguous heavy machinery business.

Article continues after image…

By Eoin Coveney – https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/inside-the-irish-jury-1.1643701

As stated by attorney Eduardo A. Maura, “we are happy that a jury will finally hear our side of the story and we are confident that when they hear the defense’s inconsistent statements, the jury will side with us.”

Ayala has an growing litigation practice that is producing continuous positive and efficient results for its clients. For more information on or commercial and real estate litigation practice call 305-570-2208 or email at eayala@ayalalawpa.com.

The post Ayala Lawsuit on Behalf of South American Investor Set for Jury trial in October first appeared on Ayala Law PA.

The elements of unjust enrichment are: (1) plaintiff conferred a benefit upon the defendant, who has knowledge of that benefit; (2) defendant accepts and retains the conferred benefit; and (3) under the circumstances, it would be inequitable for the defendant to retain the benefit without paying for it. Fito v. Attorneys’ Title Ins. Fund, Inc., 83 So. 3d 755, 758 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011).

Article continues after image…

Unjust enrichment principles are applicable in real estate cases. For example, a party is unjustly enriched in cases where the benefit conferred is real property purchased by another, but titled under the party’s name. See Saporta v. Saporta, 766 So. 2d 379, 380 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000). In Saporta, an unmarried couple purchased a house using solely the cash the wife had inherited. Id. However, the home was titled in the husband’s name. Id. The couple married almost three years after the purchase and the wife filed for dissolution approximately two years after that. Id. The Third District Court of Appeals reversed the lower court’s order declining to impose a constructive trust in favor of the wife. Id. at 382. In pertinent part, the Court held that “failure to impose a constructive trust would result in a windfall to the husband amounting to unjust enrichment.” Id. at 381. The court further said that Saporta was “a classic case where the imposition of a constructive trust is necessary to do justice and ‘prevent the unjust enrichment of one person at the expense of the other.’” Id. at 382 (quoting Geiser v. Geiser, 693 So. 2d 59, 60 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 699 So. 2d 1373 (Fla. 1997)). In other words, by remaining a title record holder to property purchased with funds entirely supplied by the wife, the husband would be unjustly enriched, but for the imposition of constructive trust. Id. at 380-81.

While the property in Saporta was only titled to one person, unjust enrichment is also applicable in cases where the property was “jointly owned.” Hegel v. Hegel, 248 So. 2d 212 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971). In Hegel, a married couple purchased and built several real properties and titled those properties in their joint names. “The trial court concluded that appellee [wife] furnished the entire consideration for the purchase of all of the jointly owned property and that appellant’s [husband’s] record interest therein was held by him as trustee of a constructive trust for the benefit of appellee.” Id. at 214.

If you are involved in a real estate dispute and think the theory of unjust enrichment can help you, email us at eayala@ayalalawpa.com or call 305-570-2208.

The post Unjust Enrichment in Real Estate Cases—an Overview. first appeared on Ayala Law PA.

As stated in the Complaint, “[Defendants] . . . held themselves out to be experienced real estate investors and investment advisers able to purchase foreclosures properties at auction, and sell them at large profits.” Under the guise of being experienced investment advisors, the Defendants persuaded the Plaintiffs, an inexperienced Uruguayan woman, to wire funds that they then “knowingly obtained or used . . . with felonious intent, to either temporarily or permanently deprive Plaintiff of her right to or benefit from the property or appropriate the property to Defendants’ own use or the use of any person not entitled to the property.” (Complaint, ¶ 110)

Plaintiff reached out to Ayala lawyers who, after evaluation of the case, decided to represent someone who, in this process, lost her life savings.

For more information about our litigation practice or if you have been the victim of fraud contact us at 305-570-2208 or email us at eayala@ayalalawpa.com.

The post Ayala files civil theft action against self-declared investment advisor. first appeared on Ayala Law PA.