By Kenneth Dante Murena and Jonathan E. Groth In accordance with Section 1367(a) of Title 28 of the United States Code, a U.S. District Court..
![](https://i0.wp.com/www.receiversreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/ReceiverRepoprt_Image1.jpg?resize=507%2C338&ssl=1)
By Kenneth Dante Murena and Zachary Hyman As more businesses struggle to continue operations and meet financial obligations, mortgage defaults are likely to surge resulting..
![](https://i0.wp.com/www.receiversreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/ReceiverRepoprt_Image3.jpeg?resize=670%2C447&ssl=1)
Fifth Circuit Defends Prior Rulings that Ponzi Scheme Trade Creditors Do Not Provide Value Under Bankruptcy Code and Fraudulent Transfer Law Beyond Texas, After Texas..
![](https://i0.wp.com/www.receiversreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/ReceiverRepoprt_Image2.jpeg?resize=600%2C750&ssl=1)
Ponzi Scheme Trustee Has Standing to Pursue Recovery Claims, and Is Not Barred by in Pari Delicto Doctrine, in Sixth Circuit, Which Joins Third, Eighth and..
![](https://i0.wp.com/www.receiversreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/ReceiverRepoprt_Image4.png?resize=600%2C650&ssl=1)
Adverse Domination Doctrine Under the adverse domination doctrine, the statute of limitations for bringing an action against the corporate wrongdoers is tolled when those wrongdoers..
![](https://i0.wp.com/www.receiversreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/ReceiversRepoprt_Imag8-scaled.jpeg?resize=800%2C500&ssl=1)
As set forth in Scholes v. Lehmann and adopted by courts across the country, a Receiver has standing to pursue fraudulent transfer claims because the receivership..
![](https://i0.wp.com/www.receiversreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/ReceiversRepoprt_Imag9.jpeg?resize=600%2C394&ssl=1)
Most court have adopted the traditional view that a receiver stands in the shoes of the entity that has been placed in receivership such that..
![](https://i0.wp.com/www.receiversreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/ReceiverReport_Image13.jpeg?resize=600%2C512&ssl=1)
A growing list of federal and state courts have determined that fraudulent transfer claims brought by an equity receiver are not barred by the doctrine..