Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Janvey v Toms

Janvey v Toms

Ratings: (0)|Views: 557 |Likes:
Published by Robert Wilonsky

More info:

Published by: Robert Wilonsky on Jan 05, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

01/05/2011

pdf

text

original

 
O
RIGINAL
C
OMPLAINT
A
GAINST
D
AVID
W
AYNE
T
OMS AND
D
AVID
T
OMS
G
OLF
,LLC 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXASDALLAS DIVISION
RALPH S. JANVEY, IN HIS CAPACITY ASCOURT-APPOINTED RECEIVER FOR THESTANFORD INTERNATIONAL BANK, LTD.,ET AL. and the OFFICIAL STANFORDINVESTORS COMMITTEE,Plaintiffs,v.DAVID WAYNE TOMS and DAVID TOMS GOLF,LLC,Defendants.§§§§§§§§§§§§Case No. ____________  ________________________________________________________________________ 
ORIGINAL COMPLAINT AGAINSTDAVID WAYNE TOMS AND DAVID TOMS GOLF, LLC
 ________________________________________________________________________ 
SUMMARY
1.The Court has ordered Receiver Ralph S. Janvey (“Receiver”) to take control of all assets of the Receivership Estate in order to make an equitable distribution to claimantsinjured by a massive fraud orchestrated by R. Allen Stanford, James Davis, and others.2.The Receiver’s investigation to date reveals that revenue from the sale ofraudulent certificates of deposit (“CD Proceeds”) generated substantially all of the income for the Stanford Defendants and the many related Stanford Entities (collectively, the “StanfordParties”).3.David Wayne Toms is a professional golfer who previously entered into asponsorship and endorsement relationship with the Stanford Parties. Mr. Toms is the owner,manager, and registered agent for his company David Toms Golf, LLC. The Receiver has
 
Case No. 3:11-cv-00018
Case 3:11-cv-00018-O Document 1 Filed 01/04/11 Page 1 of 19 PageID 1
 
O
RIGINAL
C
OMPLAINT
A
GAINST
D
AVID
W
AYNE
T
OMS AND
D
AVID
T
OMS
G
OLF
,LLC 2
identified payments of CD Proceeds totaling at least $905,087.44 from the Stanford Parties toDavid Wayne Toms and David Toms Golf, LLC (collectively, the “Toms Defendants”).4.Through this lawsuit, the Receiver and the Official Stanford Investors Committee(the “Committee,” and collectively with the Receiver, the “Plaintiffs”) seek the return of the CDProceeds received directly or indirectly by the Toms Defendants in order to make an equitabledistribution to claimants.
1
The Receiver’s investigation is continuing, and should more paymentsof CD Proceeds to the Toms Defendants be discovered, the Plaintiffs will amend this Complaintto assert claims regarding such additional payments.5.The Toms Defendants either performed no services for the CD Proceeds theyreceived; performed services that did not constitute reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the CD Proceeds they received; or performed only services that were in furtherance of the Ponzischeme, which cannot be reasonably equivalent value as a matter of law. The Toms Defendants,further, cannot establish that they are good-faith transferees.6.At all times relevant to this complaint, the Stanford Parties were insolvent, andDefendant R. Allen Stanford operated the Stanford entities in furtherance of his fraudulentscheme. Each payment of CD Proceeds from the Stanford Parties to the Toms Defendants wasmade with actual intent to hinder, delay, and defraud the Stanford Parties’ creditors.7.The Receiver was only able to discover the fraudulent nature of theabove-referenced transfers after R. Allen Stanford and his accomplices were removed fromcontrol of the Stanford entities and after a time-consuming and extensive review of thousandsupon thousands of paper and electronic documents relating to the Stanford entities.
1
The Plaintiffs’ claims in this Complaint are related to claims on file in Case No. 03:09-CV-0724-N beforethis Court. Pursuant to Local Rule 3.3(a), the Plaintiffs have filed a notice of related case concurrently with thisComplaint.
Case 3:11-cv-00018-O Document 1 Filed 01/04/11 Page 2 of 19 PageID 2
 
O
RIGINAL
C
OMPLAINT
A
GAINST
D
AVID
W
AYNE
T
OMS AND
D
AVID
T
OMS
G
OLF
,LLC 3
8.The Plaintiffs seek an order that: (a) CD Proceeds received directly or indirectly by the Toms Defendants were fraudulent transfers under applicable law or, in the alternative,unjustly enriched the Toms Defendants; (b) CD Proceeds received directly or indirectly by theToms Defendants are property of the Receivership Estate held pursuant to a constructive trust for the benefit of the Receivership Estate; (c) the Toms Defendants are liable to the Plaintiffs for anamount equaling the amount of CD Proceeds they directly or indirectly received; and (d) awardsattorneys’ fees, costs, and interest to the Plaintiffs.
JURISDICTION & VENUE
9.This Court has jurisdiction over this action, and venue is proper, under Section22(a) of the Securities Act (15 U.S.C. § 77v(a)), Section 27 of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C.§ 78aa), and under Chapter 49 of Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure (28 U.S.C. § 754).10.Further, as the Court that appointed the Receiver, this Court has jurisdiction oveany claim brought by the Receiver to execute his Receivership duties.11.Further, within 10 days of the entry of the Order and Amended Orders AppointingReceiver, the Receiver filed the original SEC Complaint and the Order Appointing Receiver inthe United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana pursuant to28 U.S.C. § 754, giving this Court
in rem
and
in personam
jurisdiction in that district and everyother district where the Complaint and Order have been filed.12.This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Toms Defendants pursuant to F
ED
.R.C
IV
. P. 4(k)(1)(C) and 15 U.S.C. §§ 754 and 1692.
THE PARTIES
13.Plaintiff Ralph S. Janvey has been appointed by this Court as the Receiver for theassets, monies, securities, properties, real and personal, tangible and intangible, of whatever kind
Case 3:11-cv-00018-O Document 1 Filed 01/04/11 Page 3 of 19 PageID 3

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->