MLK said: "Injustice Anywhere is a Threat to Justice Everywhere"

End Corruption in the Courts!

Court employee, judge or citizen - Report Corruption in any Court Today !! As of June 15, 2016, we've received over 142,500 tips...KEEP THEM COMING !! Email: CorruptCourts@gmail.com

Tuesday, January 5, 2010

Federal Judge Helps Screw Madoff Vitctims, Again

Class Action Denied In Madoff-Related Litigation
The Connecticut Law Tribune by DOUGLAS S. MALAN - January 5, 2010

People who invested with imprisoned swindler Bernard Madoff through Westport National Bank will have to work a little harder to get back lost investment money. A federal court judge in New Haven has ruled that the victimized investors cannot file a class action lawsuit against the bank. Judge Peter C. Dorsey also denied the bank’s motion to dismiss. The 26 plaintiffs in Backus v. Connecticut Community Bank were suing for part of $60 million lost from accounts the bank invested with Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities. All together, more than 200 investors could have been part of the class. Dorsey remanded the case to Superior Court. Plaintiffs’ attorney David Golub has a total of 44 clients in suit against Connecticut Community Bank in Backus and in Sklar v. Connecticut Community Bank. Golub expects the two cases to be consolidated on the complex litigation docket in Stamford later this month. Connecticut Community Bank owns Westport National Bank. Dorsey’s ruling “doesn’t make it harder to litigate; it’s the same litigation whether it’s 50 people or 200 people,” Golub said. But the ruling forces people to take affirmative actions toward filing a lawsuit, Golub said, rather than automatically becoming part of a class. “My concern is it’s a strong case, and I want to make sure everyone [among the potential plaintiffs] is protected,” Golub said. The plaintiffs argue that the bank breached its contractual duty to serve as custodian of the accounts, a role designed to prevent fraudulent investment activity. Dorsey determined that the plaintiffs’ complaints about the bank’s activities were “within the bounds” of the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998. That federal law limits to 50 the number of plaintiffs filing a securities-related lawsuit in state court.

3 comments:

madoff victim, screwed again said...

The Judge is doing what he's supposed to do: protect the banks. That's who he answers to, not the constitution, not the law and surely not decency. This decision is yet another example why federal judges SHOULD NOT be appointed for life. The must be answerable.

Emmanuel Goldstein said...

A crooked lazy judge who doesn't know 200 is larger than 50. "The Ministry of Truth" media wants you have faith in our court system. "War is Peace." "Our lifetime appointed judges are just" "Your ignorance is the court's strength."

Message from the Enemy of our Courts and of our INFLATED BIG JUDGES.

Not Surprised said...

Remember people that this Judge is a lawyer and his ruling keeps the ball in play in that his fellow lawyers will have their meters running and everyone except us get money. The law means nothing it all a big racket.

Blog Archive

See Video of Senator John L. Sampson's 1st Hearing on Court 'Ethics' Corruption

The first hearing, held in Albany on June 8, 2009 hearing is on two videos:


               Video of 1st Hearing on Court 'Ethics' Corruption
               The June 8, 2009 hearing is on two videos:
         
               CLICK HERE TO SEE Part 1
               CLICK HERE TO SEE Part 2