Civil Mortgage Fraud Suit against (Former?) Tribal Business Partners

Here is the complaint in United States v. Rainy Day Holdings LLC (E.D. N.Y.):

Complaint

An excerpt:

129. HAUVER previously worked on funneling down payment assistance to borrowers through the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe. In June 2009. HAUVER began reaching out to Indian tribes, and also e-mailed an American Indian financial consultant for assistance in selling up a deal with an Indian tribe. After failing to strike deals With Indian tribes in Mississippi and the Dakotas. DMS and its principals, including LUDLOW, HAUVEK and NAILLON, began a business relationship with the Ely Shoshone tribe of Ely, Nevada.
130. DMS’ mission statement stated that “(financial assistance is provided through the Ely Shoshone Tribe’s Housing Authority.”
131. DMS was RDF’s successor both in activities and employees. LUDLOW wrote a mortgage lender client that while he still did work on behalf of RDF, despite the fact that “when I began working with the tribe, our attorney told me to separate myself from Rainy Day,” LUDLOW farther wrote that NAILLON, who also worked at the ostensibly separate DMS, “works for Rainy Day as well.”
132. Oilier RAINY DAY employees also took positions at DMS. as well as at the Ely Shoshone Housing Authority, which they renamed the “Ely Shoshone Finance Authority.” RDF employees began using new e-mail addresses at DMS, In addition, some RDF employees, such as HAUVER, also began using Ely Shoshone Finance Authority e-mail addresses.
133. The Ely Shoshone Finance Authority also began to use an office address used previously or concurrently by RDF, DMS and “Positive Alternatives.” yet another company owned by LUDLOW.
134. SCHWEDLAND, his company Dynaconnex, and his employees further assisted in the transformation of RAINY DAY into DMS. From mid-2009 forward. SCHWEDLAND assisted in presenting DMS to correspondent mortgage lenders. Beginning in the early summer of 2009, SCHWEDLAND began a concerted effort to market DMS’s services to new Direct Endorsement lenders. In June 2009, SCHWEDLAND helped brainstorm names for the “new” services to be provided by DMS – in reality, the same services that had been provided by RDF. On June 12, 2009. SCHWEDLAND circulated three versions of an “Ely Shoshone Tribe Seal” (subsequently used on DMS marketing materials) to CLUTE, LUDLOW, DEL SONTRO, HAUVER and others. Later that summer, SCHWEDLAND worked on the Ely Shoshone Housing Authority’s public website.
135. LUDLOW. NAILLON, HAUVER, DMS and RDF continued funneling money from Eastern District or New York-based mortgage lenders Lend America. FRANKLIN FIRST. Mortgage Source and Somerset to the current Secondary Purchasers by the Ely Shoshone Finance Authority.
136. The RAINY DAY DEFENDANTS continued their fraud by contracting through DMS to “administer” a “grants” program for the Ely Shoshone Housing Finance Authority.
137. In a description of the RDF/DMS enterprise, CLUTE wrote that the Financial Payment Assistance” provided by DMS consisted of “[t]ransferring money from Lender to Buyer (by Indian Finance Authority).”
138. Direct Endorsement lenders, including FRANKLIN’ FIRST. Lend America, Somerset. Mortgage Source and Intercontinental Capital Group wire transferred funds to a DMS bank account, DMS then transferred the funds to an Ely Shoshone Mousing or Finance Authority account at the same hank. Ely Shoshone Finance Authority employees then called servicing mortgage holders, and used the funds to pay mortgages by “check by phone” transactions, as directed by LUDLOW and others at DMS. The Ely Shoshone tribe received a per transaction fee for each such phone call.
139. None of the defaulting mortgages concealed by DMS were for mortgages owed by members of the Ely Shoshone tribe.Moreover, none of these mortgages were on property situated on any Indian tribe’s land, the real estate was located on decidedly non-tribal lands, such as Brooklyn. New York.
140. By late June 2009, SCHWEDLAND and LUDLOW were tracking the loans on which the Ely Shoshone Housing Authority tunneled the Direct Endorsement lenders’ money. By late July 2009, SCHWEDLAND was assisting LUDLOW and where in getting information TO potential DMS clients on how the scheme worked. At the same time. HAUVER was selling up the electronic database to track information on the loans for which DMS and the Ely Shoshone tribe were founding the Direct Endorsemeni lenders” payments.
141. In August 2009, LUDLOW e-mailed a mortgage lender about “a service we began shortly after Rainy Day Foundation severed its relationship” with several of RDF’s clients. LUDLOW wrote that DMS was “spun off” from the services that RDF had used 10 reduce default ratios and eliminate Early and First Payment Defaults.”’
142. In mid-to-late August 2009. NAILLON e-mailed a number of Direct Endorsement lenders to describe DMS’ services. For example, on August 12, 2009, NAILLON, in an-email sent to multiple potential clients, wrote that DMS “‘was created to assist lenders in eliminating first and early payment default penalties” providing financial assistance to borrowers that will miss their payments. “[I]f they will cause an EPD penalty or FPD (first payment default) penalty, DMS will arrange for them to receive financial assistance. Financial assistance is provided through the Ely Shoshone Tribe’s Housing Authority. The reason it is provided by a housing authority is because as a governmental entity, the assistance they provide is a non-tax event for the borrower.” NAILLON added that the “goal of the program is to be a ‘quick fix” to a high default ratio which will enable a company to maintain its ability to originate in all its branches…”
143. NAILLON’s e-mail neatly lays out the two sets of frauds RDF/DMS and their clients perpetrated; the first against HUD, which had its ability to track mortgage defaults destroyed by RDF and DMS’s illicit suppression of comparative default ratios, and the second against the Secondary Purchasers, who had Early Payment Defaults and “First Payment Defaults” (defaults on the first mortgage payment due after the mortgage was sold to a Secondary Purchaser) concealed from them.

Materials in PACT Act & CCTA Claim in New York

Here are the materials in State of New York v. King Mountain Tobacco Co. (E.D. N.Y.):

142-5 Delbert Wheeler Motion to Dismiss

143 New York Response

147 New York Response

149 Delbert Wheeler Reply

151 DCT Order

Materials in New York v. Grand River Enterprises Six Nations & Native Wholesale Supply

Here:

45 GRE Six Nations Motion to Dismiss

48 NWS Motion to Dismiss

49 New York Opposition

Federal Court Orders Individual Defendant to Pay $475K Civil Penalty in City of New York v. Golden Feather

Here is the order:

DCT Order on Civil Penalty

Prior materials here, here, and here.

 

Effort to Remove State Fishing Controversy Involving Shinnecock Member to Federal Court Fails

Here are the materials in People v. Smith (E.D. N.Y.):

DCT Order Granting Remand

Smith Notice of Removal

NY Motion for Remand

Smith Response

Corrected Opinion in City of New York v. Golden Feather

Here:

Corrected DCT Order

Prior post here.

Federal Court Finds Unkechauge Reservation Smoke Shops Liable for Violations of Federal Law in City of New York v. Golden Feather Smoke Shop

Here are the materials:

DCT Memorandum & Order

NYC Motion

Remaining Defendants’ Cross-Motion

An excerpt:

For the reasons below, the Court grants the City summary judgment as to defendants’ liability under the CCTA and the CMSA. With respect to relief, the Court (1) grants the requested permanent injunction against defendants’ “purchase, receipt, possession, sale, distribution, offer and advertisement of unstamped cigarettes-even to tribe members for personal use”; (2) awards damages as against the Peace Pipe and TDM defendants; (3) awards civil penalties as against the Red Dot defendants, the amount of which will be determined at a later hearing; and (4) awards the City attorney’s fees, the amount of which will be determined in the first instance by Magistrate Judge Vera Scanlon by report and recommendation.

And the bad news (liability):

For the reasons stated, the Court concludes the following: As to defendant Phillips, the City is directed to clarify whether it is still seeking monetary relief against him, and if so, to submit further damages briefing that identifies the amounts the City is seeking against Phillips only. As to the Peace Pipe, TDM, and Red Dot defendants, the Court finds that the City is entitled to summary judgment on (1) defendants’ liability under the CCTA and the CMSA, and (2) its requested permanent injunction against defendants’ “purchase, receipt, possession, sale, distribution, offer and advertisement of unstamped cigarettes-even to tribe members for personal use.” In addition, the Court awards to the City (1) damages in the amount of $10,041,075 as against the Peace Pipe defendants and $450,000 as against the TDM defendants; (2) civil penalties as against the Red Dot defendants, the amount of which will be determined at a later hearing; and (3) attorney’s fees, the amount of which will be determined in the first instance by Magistrate Judge Scanlon by report and recommendation.

Prior posts here and here.

 

Shinnecock Cigarette Trader’s Demand for Return of Confiscated Smokes Rejected

Here are the materials in Smith v. Fredrico (E.D. N.Y.):

DCT Order Adopting R&R

Smith Motion for PI

Suffolk County Opposition

Smith Reply

MJ R&R Recommending Denial of Motion

Smith Objection to R&R

Suffolk County Response to Objection

Federal Court Denies Motions to Dismiss Indictment for Drug Smuggling in Akwesasne

Here is the order in United States v. Cournoyer (E.D. N.Y.):

DCT Order Denying Cournoyer Motions to Dismiss

Cherokee/Choctaw Man’s Suit against Employer for Withholding Federal Taxes Dismissed

Here are the materials in Bey v. UPS (E.D. N.Y.):

UPS Motion to Dismiss

DCT Order Granting Motion to Dismiss