Donahoo, founder of Donahoo & Associates, one of the lawyers representing Ms.
“This case is about aiding and abetting,” said Richard E.
Its spokesman said theĬompany did not comment on continuing litigation. The company added that it did not “take or receive anything from” Ms. Licensed through an unaffiliated broker-dealer. In theĬase of Christine Ramirez, who invested $279,769 in the fund, MetLife also said it was not legally obligated to supervise the broker who made the sale to Ms. MetLife has argued in court documents that it “had no relationship with D.L.G.” and “did not sell, or materially assist in the sale” of the D.L.G. investment pitched to them by sales representatives, some of whom were affiliated with MetLife and some of whom were independent contractors approved to sell its products. offer, but the current batch of lawsuits involves people who did not buy MetLife insurance. MetLife has settled some cases with its own customers who were duped by the D.L.G. He had operated a Ponzi scheme and defrauded hundreds of investors of more than $200 million, according to court documents.
When Diversified Lending Group crashed in 2008, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Bruce Friedman, the man who ran it, accusing him of misappropriating millions of dollars in investor funds. The legalīattle has raised questions about how far a company’s liability should go. Say that the insurer ignored or failed to notice signs that agents and brokers were peddling the financing program, HOW FAR DOES CORPORATE LIABILITY EXTEND? | MetLife is being sued by people who lost their money through a Ponzi scheme and
0 kommentar(er)
