"I'm Bernie. Trust me."
Posted on 12/26/2009 1:47:59 PM PST by Liz
Big-shot real-estate lawyer Steven Simkin sued to redo his 2006 divorce deal. He had bought out his ex's share of a $5.4M Madoff fund that turned out to be worthless. He sued so she could shoulder "her share." A Manhattan judge said a deal's a deal, and threw the suit out.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
I have VERY little sympathy for ambulance chasers.
"I'm Bernie. Trust me."
For some reason, I don’t find myself feeling sorry for this guy. I’m sure he had a good reason to go after half of the fund, but if he hadn’t, he’d be $2M to the plus right now.
How got the house? That is probably underwater by about 50%...
We could conclude by the decision that it was his bright idea to “invest” w/ Madoff.
Looked like a good idea at the time.......... what with the golden opportunity to evade taxes, and all (/snic).
LOL……….if she got the underwater house…..probably shopping, and getting her hair and nails done, are quaint memories of the past.
I love a happy ending!
I bet a lot more people than we know have been hurt by guys like him and our government.
And if it had made money I am sure he would have willingly given her half of the profits——NOT
KARMA, sometimes it’s instant and it’s gonna get you.
Don’t you just love it when a greedy lawyer gets screwed and tattooed by his own greed.
The lawyer looks good with that broke off in him.
Real estate lawyers aren't making the kind of $ that they were in 2006. Too bad, so sad.
Madoff Investor Sues Ex-Wife for $2.7 Million Divorce Payment - BL, 2009 February 05, by Patricia Hurtado Steven Simkin, a partner at Paul Weiss Rifkind Wharton & Garrison LLP, sued his former wife, Laura Blank, seeking the return of the funds he paid her in 2006 when the couple divided assets as part of their uncontested divorce. Simkin said he and his wife, who were wed in 1973, both mistakenly believed the account at Madoff’s investment firm was worth $5.4 million. He said he now knows the Madoff account is “worthless, literally not worth the paper on which the parties’ valuation rested.” Simkin alleges that his former wife was unjustly enriched and asks a court to order her to pay restitution or “reform” the distribution of marital assets. “The agreement was unfair, unreasonable, and unconscionable, because it resulted in Laura receiving a far larger portion of the parties’ marital assets,” Simkin said in a complaint filed Feb. 3 in New York State Supreme Court in Manhattan. “Laura has been unjustly enriched, having received millions of dollars based on an illusory and exaggerated value attributed to the ‘Account,’” Simkin said in the complaint. $6.6 Million in Assets Simkin said he paid his wife more than $6.6 million as part of their equitable distribution of property and assets, including their home in Scarsdale, New York, his law partnership and Blank’s Manhattan apartment. ..... A lawyer who said he had $5.4 million invested with Bernard Madoff sued his ex-wife for the $2.7 million he paid her in cash for the value of the account in a divorce settlement.
Madoff Victim Can’t Redo $2.7 Million Divorce Deal, Court Rules - BL, 2009 December 25, by Linda Sandler and Patricia Hurtado Steven Simkin, chairman of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP’s real estate department, sued his former wife, Laura Blank, in February after Madoff’s fraud was exposed, saying she was unjustly enriched by the 2006 settlement. He lost in a Dec. 22 decision in state Supreme Court in Manhattan. Simkin is stuck with his decision to keep the account instead of withdrawing his money before the December 2008 collapse of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC, acting Justice Saralee Evans wrote. Other divorced couples may have had similar experiences, said Blank’s lawyer, Sarah Netburn of Emery Celli Brinckerhoff & Abady LLP in New York. “In New York City I’m sure there are dozens if not hundreds who got divorced in the relevant time period, and had this account, and made distributions,” she said. Their situation is dramatized in the HBO show, “Curb Your Enthusiasm,” where “Seinfeld” stars make appearances, she said. In the show, the character George divorces his wife Amanda, then tries to remarry her after losing all his money to Madoff, according to HBO’s Web site. ..... A New York real estate lawyer who paid his ex-wife $2.7 million of the supposed value of his account with Bernard Madoff can’t revise the agreement because he lost money in the Ponzi scheme, a New York judge ruled.
And this schmuck is a chairman of their real-estate department?
Musta been a "friendly" divorce (/snic).
Wonder if this had anything to do with his owing taxes?
To be frank, I’m all broke about it, myself (sob).
What if the wife was the investor in the fund and she had suspicions?
Many of Madoff’s investors apparently had a good idea there was fraud involved. That is why everyone in the higher levels of a ponzi scheme can be sued for recovery.
This is sloppy reporting here.
I suspect the judge does not want to set a precident because this will create work for them. (some [or most] judges are not too smart.) If you want to see a judicially unqualified judge then look no farther than Sotomayor.
Reporters as aways ingnored the law and reporting the blood.
real estate law is not securities law.
There has to be more to this story. Who valued the assets? Who did the due dilligence?
In divorce settlements, concealing assets is a major no no. In fact passing a questionable asset as worth more is a super major no no. Perhaps he should be looking to the liability insurance of the divorce lawyers.
(remember the wife who divorced her husband but did not disclose she had a winning lottery ticket? She did not “lie” but the judge still awared the husband a 80-90% split over a year later when the husband found out and went back to court)
You got that right. Recovery comes under the legal principle of "fraudulent conveyance"---meaning one cannot profit from a fraud.
Also take into consideration that Madoff was running simultaneous scams-----(1) a Ponzi fraud, (2) money laundering, (3) IRS fraud facilitation, and, (2) a protection racket (shielding certain investors from scrutiny).
The court appointed trustee looking into Madoff's assets unearthed a labyrinth of interrelated international funds, institutions and entities of almost unparalleled complexity and breadth...... and assets and businesses in 11 places overseas.
No question, tax evasion and money laundering was the name of the game for the wealthiest Madoffians-----businessmen who were funneling income to Madoff to avoid US taxes, who were posing as "philanthropists."
FOR EXAMPLE The tax-exempt Picower Foundation took out an astounding 950% profit......depositing $1.6 billion with Madoff, and withdrawing more than $6.7 billion, for a net profit of $5.1 billion. Picower had arranged the rate of return beforehand.
Jeffry Picower was a seldom-seen philanthropist, investor and confidant of Madoff. Now a lawyer representing 100 Madoff victims suggests it was no accident that Picower was one of the few Madoff customers who made a substantial profit.
While coverage of Picower has been scant, on various occasions, The St. Petersburg Times, Forbes, and, most recently, Pro Publica, have raised the question of whether Picower used his tax-exempt "charities" to mine information—especially about the medical developments-----that he then used in chasing deals. For example, Picower was the biggest shareholder in Alaris Medical Systems and collected more than $1 billion when it was bought by Cardinal Health in 2004. (snip) http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-06-25/did-bernie-madoff-get-a-billion-dollar-kickback/full/
Authorities should go after The Florida-based Picower Foundation, worth $1 billion AND a major backer of the abortion industry.
Barbara and Jeffrey Picower
The Picower Foundation
1410 South Ocean Blvd
Palm Beach, Fla 33480
Tele 561-835-1332
Geographic Focus: Florida; New York;
SOURCE http://www.tgci.com/funding/fdnresultnew.asp?thisID=19499
-------------------------------------
REFERENCE The number of tax-exempt "foundations and charities" attached to Madoff's scam is VERY fishy. NOTE: the IRS has targeted tax-exempt "foundations and charities" as the locus classicus for money laundering and tax evasion. The BIGGEST fraud is one charity writing checks to another charity---the way these "altruistic philanthropists" siphon off funds for themselves--all tax-free.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.