Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Date: 11-15-2024
Case Style:
Jonathan O. Hafen v. Gretchen A. Howell
Case Number: 2:19-CV-813
Judge: TC
Court: United States District Court for the District of Utah (Salt Lake City)
Plaintiff's Attorney:
Defendant's Attorney: Matthew M. Boley
Description:
Salt Lake City, Utah fruad claim lawyer represented the Plaintiff seeking to recover money invested in a Ponzi scheme.
Lured by the promise of a secure and exclusive investment opportunity,
Les and Gretchen Howell made substantial investments in the Silver Pool, a
silver-trading scheme operated by Gaylen Rust through his business, Rust Rare
Coin. Though Gretchen was about $75,000 short of recovering her investment
when the government shut down the scheme, Les did far better. After about ten
years of investing, he profited about $3.2 million above his roughly $1.2
million investment. He took his distributions and bought land in Kingman,
Arizona. There, he built a house where he lives with Gretchen. Though we are
uncertain when he did so, Les made Gretchen a joint tenant with himself,
gifting her a one-half share in the property.
About a decade after Les began investing, the Silver Pool and Rust Rare
Coin were exposed as a Ponzi scheme. The Commodity Futures Trading
Commission (“CFTC”) brought an enforcement action against the operator of
the scheme, Gaylen Rust, and the district court appointed Jonathan O. Hafen as
receiver to recover assets fraudulently transferred through the scheme.
As the receiver, Hafen brought this ancillary action against Les and
Gretchen under Utah’s Uniform Voidable Transactions Act (“UVTA”), seeking
to recover the $3.2 million in profit that Les made from the scheme, by
asserting claims of fraudulent transfer and unjust enrichment. The district court
granted Hafen summary judgment against Les and Gretchen on the fraudulent-
transfer claims. It declined to reach the unjust-enrichment claims because the
fraudulent-transfer ruling gave Hafen complete relief. The district court entered
a judgment against Les and Gretchen for Les’s profit. The judgment noted that
it included the funds Les transferred to Gretchen by giving her joint title in the
Kingman property.
Outcome: Affirmed in part and reversed in part.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments: