Conn. Town Can't Sue Fairfield Greenwich

Aug 12 2011 | 11:05am ET

Another Connecticut judge has put the brakes on a Connecticut town's effort to recoup some of its losses from the Bernard Madoff Ponzi scheme from the arch-fraudster's brother and primary feeder fund.

The Connecticut Appellate Court this week upheld a lower court's dismissal of the Town of Fairfield's lawsuit against Peter Madoff and the Fairfield Greenwich Group. The two were among 18 defendants sued by the town two years ago in an effort to get its $42 million back.

The only problem, according to the appellate judges, is that Fairfield had no direct relationship with either Peter Madoff, who has not been accused of any wrongdoing, or its namesake hedge fund. Instead, the court ruled, Fairfield will have to settle for suing the Maxam Absolute Return Fund, which invested the town's money with Fairfield Greenwich and, in turn, with Madoff.

"Although the plaintiff's complaint is rich with allegations that the Fairfield Greenwich defendants acted in concert with Madoff or in furtherance of Madoff's fraudulent plan, it is devoid of any allegation that the Fairfield Greenwich defendants played any role in inducing the plaintiffs to invest in the Maxam Fund or in any other feeder fund, or with Madoff directly," Judge Thomas Bishop wrote in the court' decision.


In Depth

Steinbrugge: Top 10 Hedge Fund Industry Trends for 2017

Jan 3 2017 | 9:03pm ET

Each year, Agecroft Partners' Don Steinbrugge predicts the top hedge fund industry...

Lifestyle

'Tis the Season: Wall Street Holiday Parties Back In Fashion

Dec 22 2016 | 9:23pm ET

Spending on Wall Street holiday parties has largely returned to pre-2008 levels...

Guest Contributor

DarcMatter: The Top Trends in Alternative Investments for 2017

Jan 13 2017 | 8:22pm ET

The $7 trillion alternative investments industry is poised for continued growth...

 

From the current issue of

Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Mary Jo White will step down as chair of the nation’s Wall Street overseer in January, setting the stage for a potential conservative shift in the regulator’s leadership under the incoming Donald Trump administration.