SELECT REPRESENTATIVE CASES
SEC District Court Experience
SEC v. Shumake, et al., Case No. 2:21-cv-12193
In this matter, which is the first ever crowdfunding based enforcement action, the SEC alleges three people defrauded investors of more than $1.9 million. The SEC has already obtained harsh fines against co-defendants. PULLP continues to
defend Mr. Shumake in this action.
SEC v. Punch TV Studios Inc. et al / CV21-07787
In this matter, the SEC is prosecuting claims against Santa Fe Springs, Calif.-based Punch TV Studios, Inc. and its founder and chief executive officer, Joseph Collins, alleging that they raised more than $1.2 million from nearly 700 investors through unregistered offerings of Punch TV's common stock. PULLP continues to defend this action.
SEC v. Southridge Capital Management, LLC. et al / 10-cv-01685-RNC
In this matter, PULLP was substituted in as counsel after the SEC had already obtained final judgments against a hedge fund manager and his investment advisory businesses. The federal court in Connecticut had ordered the defendants
to pay around $14.5 million in disgorgement and penalties, since the court had previously determined that the defendants had illegally diverted investor money for use by other hedge funds that were illiquid and in need of cash. The SEC was
seeking a contempt order against the hedge fund manager and his spouse. PULLP successfully obtained a very positive settlement for our clients.
SEC Administrative Proceeding/Trial Experience
In the Matter of Eldaher, AP File No. 3-16326 (Chief Judge Murray)
In this matter, the SEC prosecuted a claim against a registered representative, and refused to settle unless the registered representative agreed to be barred from the industry for life. Forced to go to trial with very bad facts, the judgment
was a mere six month suspension for our client.
Microcap Litigation – Public Company Side
Tangiers Global, LLC v. E-Sports/ VGambling, Inc, 20-cv-01520-RAM
In this microcap litigation, we defended a microcap public company that has successfully uplisted to NASDAQ against a convertible note debt lender. After first successfully transferring venue to the District of Puerto Rico, we obtained a very
positive and early settlement for our clients.
U S Bank National Association v. Event Promotion Supply Inc et al., Case Number: 2021CV030303
In this microcap litigation, we defended a microcap public company that has successfully uplisted to NASDAQ against a vendor that sought to use a force majeure clause to back out of a contract. Through motion practice, we successfully obtained a dismissal of all claims against our client.
Home Revolution, LLC et al v. Jerrick Media Holdings, Inc., Index No 20-cv-07775.
In this microcap litigation, we defended a microcap public company that has successfully uplisted to NASDAQ against a seller of an acquisition previously acquired. The matter involved a promissory note with extraordinary interest rates,
among other matters. Through extensive motion practice, we defeated Plaintiffs’ Order to Show Cause and caused the Court to sanction opposing counsel, eventually leading to our client prevailing in a successful settlement.
Brylan Lee Whatley v. Esports Gambling Group, Inc. f/k/a VGambling, Inc., Index No. 655901/2020.
In this microcap litigation, we defended a microcap public company that has successfully uplisted to NASDAQ against a “consultant.” Through extensive motion practice, we successfully obtained the withdrawal of all claims.
LG Capital Funding, LLC v. PositiveID Corporation, 17 cv 1297 (EDNY - NGG)
In this microcap litigation, we defended a microcap public company against a convertible note debt lender. The convertible note debt lender filed an Order to Show Cause seeking an injunction forcing the public company to convert shares at a criminally usurious discount, but fortunately we successfully defeated that application.
Power Up Lending Group, LTD. v. Proto Script Pharmaceutical Corp, 17-cv-4083 (EDNY - ADS)
In this litigation, a convertible note debt lender sued a microcap public company for breach of a Note and Stock Purchase Agreement due to missed public filing dates. This meant the lender could not have conversion notices honored. We prepared and briefed a series of motions to keep the lender from going on the offensive, while working together with our client to develop a cost-effective negotiated exit strategy.
Microcap Litigation – Fund Side
GHS Investments v Gawk, 652951/2019
In this microcap litigation, we represented a fund seeking to collect against a microcap public company that failed to make required payments to the lender/fund. We prevailed on summary judgment and settled one additional Note
on positive terms for our client.
GHS Investments v. Icon Media Holdings Inc et al., Case Number: 614510/2018
In this microcap litigation, we represented a fund seeking to collect against a microcap public company that failed to make required payments to the lender/fund. The Court eventually Ordered a judgment in full for our client, leading
to a positive transaction.
FINRA Enforcement Experience
In re Michael Joseph Muratore, Matter No. 2019063662701
In this FINRA Enforcement matter, we represented a registered representative accused of various violations of securities laws and FINRA rules. We successfully obtained a very positive and early settlement for our client.
SEC Enforcement 15a Fund Experience
The SEC has, in recent years, begun a series of widespread investigations into the various funds that provide financing for the microcap industry, largely based on the trader exception to Rule 15a. PULLP represents a number of funds (of various types) in SEC Enforcement investigations into this type of financing.
Class Action/Securities Litigation Experience
Behrendsen v. Yangtze River Port and Logistics Limited, et al 19-cv-24 (EDNY -DLI)
In this class action securities litigation, we represented the public company itself along with the officers and directors accused with various violations of securities laws. We successfully obtained the withdrawal of all claims.
Calfo v. Messina, 15 Civ. 4010 (SDNY - LGS)
In this class action securities litigation, we represented an officer and director of a public company accused with various violations of securities laws. We prevailed on a motion to dismiss. We then subsequently worked with the insurance carrier to negotiate a favorable global settlement in a related bankruptcy adversary proceeding.
Class-Action Defense (Non-Securities) Experience
Ramales v. Justin Timberlake, et al, 08-cv-9890 (SDNY – DAB)
In this class action lawsuit against a high profile singer/entertainer and his partners in a series of restaurants, we obtained a very positive and early settlement for our clients.
Shareholder Derivative Suit Litigation Experience
Solak v. Meller, et al C.A. No. 2019-0178-SG
In this shareholder derivative action, we represented the nominal public company itself along with the officers and directors. We obtained a very positive and early settlement for our clients.
FINRA Arbitration Experience
FINRA Case ID: 15-00862
FINRA Case ID: 15-01162
In each of these arbitration proceedings, we represented a registered representative affiliated with a large wirehouse/bank who was accused of various violations of securities laws by elderly and unhealthy clients. The cases were complicated further by claimants’ counsel’s website, which, in an attempt to find more clients for himself, defamed our client. Pending enforcement proceedings made the cases more complex. Both cases were settled successfully and cost-effectively through the use of mediation well before the arbitration hearing.
Bankruptcy and Adversary Proceedings Experience
In re TS Employment Inc.: 15-10243-mg (Chapter 11-SDNY)
In re Corporate Resource Services, Inc.: 15-12329-mg (Chapter 11-SDNY)
In these two related cases, we represent an officer and director of a public company in his dealings with the Chapter 11 Trustee and creditors of the companies.
Wallace et al v. BSC Properties, Inc.: 10-08381-rdd (Chapter 11-SDNY)
In this adversary proceeding brought pursuant to a Chapter 11 bankruptcy, we were appointed as Special Litigation Counsel for the Debtors by Judge Drain, resulting in a reduction of claims asserted as against the Debtor of over $29,000,000.
George Lindemann v. Blue Star Jets, LLC: Case No. 07-23315CA24 (Miami Dade, Florida)
In this case, our private jet charter brokerage client was sued for civil theft when it charged Mr. Lindemann’s credit card after he had cancelled his flight at the last minute. The entire cost of the flight was only $13,000, but when Mr. Lindemann
refused take his money back in settlement, we were forced to trial before a jury. The jury decided in our favor, and also assessed attorney’s fees against the Plaintiff. We then successfully defended the result of the jury trial on appeal to
Florida’s Third District Court of Appeals.
Real Estate and Zoning Experience
104 Lewis Street, Southampton
Successfully argued before the Village of Southampton Board of Architectural Review and Historic Preservation (ARB) that the house should not be considered a landmark; the Board granted the Certificate of Appropriateness allowing for the demolition and building of new construction.
42 Old Town Crossing, Southampton
Successfully argued before the Village of Southampton ARB that the house should not be considered a landmark; the Board granted the Certificate of Appropriateness allowing for the demolition and building of new construction.
104 Lewis Street, Southampton
Successfully argued before the Village of Sagaponack ZBA for area variances to enable enlargement of an existing residence to include a front yard setback of 63.4 feet where 80 feet is required and to include a rear yard setback of 20 feet where 100 feet is required; the Board granted the application in all respects.
41 Crescent Street, Noyac (Sag Harbor)
Successfully argued before the Town of Southampton ZBA for relief from the provision of Town Code Section 330-84D (pyramid height) for a proposed encroachment in the amount of 1,154 cubic feet for a proposed two-story dwelling; the Board granted the requested relief.