General Law and Lawsuits

[RTH10260]

DOJ Sues RealPage for Algorithmic Pricing Scheme that Harms Millions of American Renters

The Justice Department
23 Aug 2024

The Justice Department filed a civil antitrust lawsuit against RealPage Inc. for its unlawful scheme to decrease competition among landlords in apartment pricing and to monopolize the market for commercial revenue management software that landlords use to price apartments. RealPage’s alleged conduct deprives renters of the benefits of competition on apartment leasing terms and harms millions of Americans. Attorney General Merrick B. Garland, Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco, Acting Associate Attorney General Benjamin C. Mizer, and Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Kanter of the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division held a press conference to make the announcement.

[Rolodex]

I've been following this for a while. It's fascinating. Telles was the public administrator for Clark County, and apparently had a short temper and appeared to be somewhat of a control freak. He stressed out his whole staff, who contacted a Review Journal investigative reporter and asked him to report on the situation (which included an affair with a subordinate who then allegedly got preferential treatment). The reporter, Jeff German, wrote a series of articles which likely led to Telles losing the election for another term. The reporter was then killed. There is a plethora of evidence against Telles. But that's the beauty part of a "There's a conspiracy against me" defense. You can explain away all the physical evidence, including your DNA under the victim's fingernails. I highly recommend watching the cross examination of Telles.

The only thing that has me concerned is that the jury submitted one question after Telles's testimony. They asked if his wife knew about the affair before the killing, and he said yes.

Bonus - the judge is the same one who presided over Kim Blandino's trial.

The first I've seen of this trial was during the cross examination. At that time, I didn't know much about him or the case at all. Just watching Telles on the stand told me volumes about him. I knew he'd probably been insufferable to work for. Very high opinion of himself and everyone else is not nearly as smart as he is. He thinks he's charming. I got all that from about 15 minutes of just watching and listening to him. The funny part is how transparent these types of folks are. What they say, how they say it, body language. SCREAMING what they really are.

I read up on the background of the case after that. The cross exam is where I started watching and the DA certainly had his work cut out for him, trying to get this guy to answer.

So I had to look up Kim Blandino. OMG what a piece of work. That poor judge.

[RTH10260]

earlier this year

Texas Judge Finds Pump & Dump Not Wire Fraud

By Benjamin P. Edwards
Thursday, March 21, 2024

A recent decision from Judge Andrew S. Hanen of the Southern District of Texas found that a pump and dump scheme could not be prosecuted as wire fraud.

I'm trying to wrap my head around it and struggling. It seems to find that the government could not prosecute a pump and dump scheme because the defendants only wanted to make money and did not want to deprive any specific people of money or property. The mere fact that the pump and dump scheme occurred through a market and not in direct personal transactions seems to have driven the decision.

Bloomberg's Matt Levine has covered it. It also made CNN.

Notably, the indictment even includes statements that the Defendants said things like "we’re robbing … idiots of their money."



https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/busin ... fraud.html

from https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/did-t ... t-2399919/

Yesterday, Judge Andrew Hanen of the Southern District of Texas dismissed the superseding indictment in full. The Court’s opinion reflects a stunning expansion of the Supreme Court’s Ciminelli v. U.S., 598 U.S. 306 (2023) ruling and a potentially devasting blow to federal securities law enforcement.

In Ciminelli, the Supreme Court rejected the right-to-control theory in wire fraud cases. Ciminelli held that the government cannot premise wire fraud on schemes to merely “deprive a victim of potentially valuable economic information necessary to make discretionary economic decisions.” Rather, money or property must be the object of a wire fraud scheme.

Judge Hanen was tasked with determining whether Ciminelli applies to securities fraud charges under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1348 and 1349, and, if so, how. Judge Hanen reasoned that Ciminelli’s teachings apply to all federal fraud statutes and so Ciminelli must govern securities fraud charges. He then held that because the alleged victims did not purchase their shares directly from the defendants, the defendants could not have engaged in a scheme to deprive them of property or money:

Unlike a traditional fraud cause, in which the victim directly surrenders their property to the defendant (or an entity in the defendant’s control), the investors here surrendered their property to the stock market at market prices, and in return, received the benefit of the bargain in the form of securities.

[RTH10260]

[RTH10260]

How to buy a car with a bonus - specific to Michigan state consumer rules

RAW DEAL Dealership repossessed my car after they filed for a loan using my info – I sued, and now I’m owed $350k
The dealership called the fine "excessive," but a federal judge disagreed

Kristen Brown, Motors Reporter
Published: 18:14 ET, Aug 27 2024Updated: 9:26 ET, Aug 29 2024

A WOMAN's car was repossessed after a dealership filed a loan application using her information - they didn't have permission.

An Ann Arbor dealership was found guilty of violating trade and state laws after applying to a third lender with a customer's information without permission

Four years ago, Tina McPherson bought a 2017 Dodge Durango from Suburban Chevrolet Cadillac of Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Before driving it home, she'd applied to two lenders for a loan to finance the rest of the vehicle after making a $2,000 down payment.

She was approved by both lenders and drove the Durango home.

A week after she drove her car home, she received an adverse action warning from a third lender.

McPherson never applied to a third lender and discovered the dealership had used her information to apply to the lender with different terms without her permission.

She refused to sign the new financing documents and return the title.

As a result, the dealership hired a towing company to repossess her car three months later, along with a message from the finance manager that they'd keep $900 of her down payment to cover towing expenses.

McPherson hastily sued the dealership for a spot delivery wrongful repossession.



https://www.the-sun.com/motors/12305828 ... ossession/