Supreme Court Refuses to Hear Appeal From Madoff Victims

$9.82 Billion Recovered Out of Estimated $17.5 Billion Lost

Getty Images

By Reuters

Published June 30, 2014.
  • Print
  • Share Share

Victims of the Ponzi schemes of Bernard Madoff and Allen Stanford, two of the largest in U.S. history, suffered setbacks on Monday as the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear appeals in two cases seeking to recoup more money for them.

In the Madoff case, the court rejected a request by Irving Picard, the trustee liquidating Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC, to review the dismissal of his claims against banks he accused of enabling Madoff’s fraud.

Separately, the court rejected a request by Ralph Janvey, a receiver unwinding Stanford’s businesses, to review a ruling that blocked him from pursuing claims against Stanford employees on behalf of the receivership’s creditors, not the businesses themselves.

In both cases, lower courts concluded that Picard and Janvey lacked standing to bring their respective claims.

The Supreme Court did not give reasons for its decisions, which leave intact a June 2013 ruling in the Madoff case by the federal appeals court in New York, and an August 2013 ruling in the Stanford case by the federal appeals court in New Orleans.

Amanda Remus, a spokeswoman for Picard, said the trustee respected the decision in the Madoff case, and will still pursue $3.5 billion of bankruptcy claims against international banks such as Switzerland’s UBS AG and Britain’s HSBC Holdings Plc.

Kevin Sadler, a lawyer for Janvey, said the receiver is disappointed with the decision in the Stanford case, and will continue to press claims on behalf of more than 18,000 victims against those who profited from or aided Stanford’s fraud.

A Ponzi scheme is where early investors are usually paid with money from later investors.

Picard has recovered about $9.82 billion for former Madoff customers, who he has estimated lost $17.5 billion of principal in a decades-long fraud uncovered in December 2008.

The trustee has also sued banks including JPMorgan Chase & Co, which was Madoff’s main bank, and Italy’s UniCredit SpA over their dealings with the swindler.

JPMorgan was dropped from the case after reaching a $325 million settlement with Picard in January, part of a $2.6 billion global resolution of federal and private claims.

Stanford’s estimated $7.2 billion fraud was based on the sale of bogus certificates of deposit issued by Antigua-based Stanford International Bank to customers who thought the CDs were safe. The Ponzi scheme was uncovered in February 2009.

Janvey won court approval for an initial $55 million distribution to CD investors in April 2013.

Madoff, 76, is serving a 150-year prison term after pleading guilty in March 2009. Stanford, 64, is serving a 110-year term following his jury conviction in March 2012.

The cases are Picard v. JPMorgan Chase & Co et al, U.S. Supreme Court, No. 13-448; and Janvey v. Alguire et al, U.S. Supreme Court, No. 13-913.


The Jewish Daily Forward welcomes reader comments in order to promote thoughtful discussion on issues of importance to the Jewish community. In the interest of maintaining a civil forum, The Jewish Daily Forwardrequires that all commenters be appropriately respectful toward our writers, other commenters and the subjects of the articles. Vigorous debate and reasoned critique are welcome; name-calling and personal invective are not. While we generally do not seek to edit or actively moderate comments, our spam filter prevents most links and certain key words from being posted and The Jewish Daily Forward reserves the right to remove comments for any reason.





Find us on Facebook!
  • "She said that Ruven Barkan, a Conservative rabbi, came into her classroom, closed the door and turned out the lights. He asked the class of fourth graders to lie on the floor and relax their bodies. Then, he asked them to pray for abused children." Read Paul Berger's compelling story about a #Savannah community in turmoil:
  • “Everything around me turns orange, then a second of silence, then a bomb goes off!" First installment of Walid Abuzaid’s account of the war in #Gaza:
  • Is boredom un-Jewish?
  • Let's face it: there's really only one Katz's Delicatessen.
  • "Dear Diaspora Jews, I’m sorry to break it to you, but you can’t have it both ways. You can’t insist that every Jew is intrinsically part of the Israeli state and that Jews are also intrinsically separate from, and therefore not responsible for, the actions of the Israeli state." Do you agree?
  • Are Michelangelo's paintings anti-Semitic? Meet the Jews of the Sistine Chapel: http://jd.fo/i4UDl
  • What does the Israel-Hamas war look like through Haredi eyes?
  • Was Israel really shocked to find there are networks of tunnels under Gaza?
  • “Going to Berlin, I had a sense of something waiting there for me. I was searching for something and felt I could unlock it by walking the streets where my grandfather walked and where my father grew up.”
  • How can 3 contradictory theories of Yiddish co-exist? Share this with Yiddish lovers!
  • "We must answer truthfully: Has a drop of all this bloodshed really helped bring us to a better place?”
  • "There are two roads. We have repeatedly taken the one more traveled, and that has made all the difference." Dahlia Scheindlin looks at the roots of Israel's conflict with Gaza.
  • Shalom, Cooperstown! Cooperstown Jewish mayor Jeff Katz and Jeff Idelson, director of the National Baseball Hall of Fame, work together to oversee induction weekend.
  • A boost for morale, if not morals.
  • Mixed marriages in Israel are tough in times of peace. So, how do you maintain a family bubble in the midst of war? http://jd.fo/f4VeG
  • from-cache

Would you like to receive updates about new stories?




















We will not share your e-mail address or other personal information.

Already subscribed? Manage your subscription.