Robert Allen Stanford, Federal prison inmate and mastermind behind a Ponzi scheme which allegedly cost Southeast Louisiana investors several billion dollars as part of an overall estimated loss of $7 billion to all investors in the scheme. On July 23, 2024, sixteen (16) years after the scheme collapsed, the class action lawsuit of his victims against the Louisiana Office of Financial Institutions (OFI) commenced.
In today’s Sound Off Louisiana feature, founder Robert Burns provides an overview of August 5, 2024 proceedings of Lillie et. al. vs. Louisiana Office of Financial Insertions (OFI):
Highlights of August 5, 2024 proceedings of Lillie et. al. vs. OFI.
Here are the links for the Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) and Code of Evidence (CE) referenced by either Mr. Preis or Mr. Blunt in posing their arguments:
Preis’ arguments entailing CE 609.
Art. 609. Attacking credibility by evidence of conviction of crime in civil cases
B: Time limit. Evidence of a conviction under this Article is not admissible if a period of more than ten years has elapsed since the date of the conviction.
Blunt’s courter-argument entailing CE 804. and his contention that he is NOT attacking any witnesses’ character.
(B)(3): Statement against interest. A statement which was at the time of its making so far contrary to the declarant’s pecuniary or proprietary interest, or so far tended to subject him to civil or criminal liability, or to render invalid a claim by him against another, that a reasonable man in his position would not have made the statement unless he believed it to be true. A statement tending to expose the declarant to criminal liability and offered to exculpate the accused is not admissible unless corroborating circumstances clearly indicate the trustworthiness of the statement.
Blunt’s arguments entailing CCP Art 14:25 entailing why Preis is not entitled to a Daubert Hearing entailing OFI’s two proposed expert witnesses.
(F) (1) and (2): Any party may file a motion for a pretrial hearing to determine whether a witness qualifies as an expert or whether the methodologies employed by such witness are reliable under Articles 702 through 705 of the Louisiana Code of Evidence. The motion shall be filed not later than sixty days prior to trial and shall set forth sufficient allegations showing the necessity for these determinations by the court. The court shall hold a contradictory hearing and shall rule on the motion not later than thirty days prior to the trial.
We’ll see what tomorrow holds!
Links for attorney arguing their clients case (so far):
Plaintiffs: Phil Preis and his daughter, Caroline Graham.
Defendant: Dennis Blunt, Nena Eddy, and Michael Victorian.