preview

Jp Morgan Chase & Cormie Madoff Case Summary

Better Essays

Bernard L. Madoff was the perpetrator of Ponzi scheme, and he was finally arrested in December 2008. MLSMK Investment Company (MLSMK) is a Florida partnership, which invested $12.8 million in Madoff's investment company between October and December 2008. On April 23, 2009, MLSMK filed a complaint in the District Court for asserting five claims against JP Morgan Chase & Co. (JPMC) and JP Morgan Chase Bank (Chase Bank). They were accused to conspired with Madoff to trick the victims.
Facts
Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities (BMIS) provided market-making services, investment-advisory services, and proprietary trading for clients. Madoff promised their clients to invest in its investment-advisory entity, so the investors would earn returns …show more content…

The plaintiff asserted that the defendants- JPMC and Chase Bank were liable for conspiracy by aiding and abetting Madoff's breach of commercial bad faith, fiduciary duty, and negligence, and these actions violated RICO. There are several factors which claimed in the complaint.
Firstly, MLSMK stated that JPMC was a trading partner for BMIS's market-making business, and JPMC developed a derivative product which was used with Madoff-related investments. But, BMIS's investment-advisory business was fictional, and this business was the central of this Ponzi scheme.
Secondly, the derivative product which developed by JPMC was offered primarily to European investors, and the company guaranteed a return as three times the earnings of fund. The fund known as the "Sentry Fund which provided by the Fairfield Greenwich Group. According to the complaint, JPMC deposited three times the face amount of the fund which was about $250 million into Madoff ‘s Sentry Fund account in the summer of 2008, and this action was inconsistent with the potential risk assumed by its derivative. Furthermore, the financial markets were crumbling and unstable in summer and early fall of 2008, BMIS still showed the gains of five percent returns of the fund. MLSMK stated that the strong returns were due to the liquidated investment from the Madoff-related fund by …show more content…

The face of the check needs to show the investors’ account number, and Chase Bank knew that the money was belonged to the victims rather than BMIS. However, BMIS received the money as a fiduciary.
Moreover, MLSMK claimed that the defendants both knew that BMIS was a sham, but they still had the business relationship with Madoff. The reason why they still maintained the business relationship was that Chase bank could earn the fees from the large cash balances in the account from Madoff. Rather than protect victims form the Madoff’s fraud, Chase Bank chose to help Madoff and provided the bank services. On June 5, 2009, the defendants dismissed the complaint. The district court granted the defendants' motion and dismissed the complaint on July 14, 2010. The court stated that the plaintiff failed to have adequately pled scienter. Then, MLSMK appealed. In this Second Circuit, the cout was also dismissed the complaint due to the rule Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (PSLRA), 18 U.S.C.

Get Access