IBJNews

Fair Finance investors object to Brizzi settlement

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A group of Fair Finance Co. investors are objecting to a settlement the company’s bankruptcy trustee reached with former Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi, arguing that the deal might extricate Brizzi from lawsuits they’ve filed against him.

Under the deal filed Nov. 21 in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Akron, Ohio, Brizzi agreed to pay the trustee $195,881—by far the largest settlement with a politician who received campaign contributions from Fair Finance’s CEO, indicted Indianapolis financier Tim Durham.

But an attorney for the investors on Thursday filed an objection to the settlement, charging that Trustee Brian Bash’s proposed compromise with Brizzi, a former director of Fair Finance, could prevent them from “having their day in court.”

To recover their lost investments, the group has filed claims against Fair Finance and its affiliated entities, as well as various officers and directors, including Brizzi, for violations of Ohio securities laws.

The trustee since early 2010 has been trying to recover money for Fair Finance’s investors—Ohio residents who purchased unsecured certificates with interest rates as high as 9.5 percent. Bash alleges Durham “utterly looted” Akron-based Fair after buying it in 2002, stripping the business of the financial wherewithal to repay more than 5,000 investors who are owed more than $200 million.

The lawsuits the investors have filed against Brizzi are separate from the settlement agreement, a point their lawyer emphasizes in the objection in which the investors are referred to as the “Wayne County litigants.”

“The broad language in [Bash’s] proposed settlement agreement could be construed to release [Brizzi] from all claims, including the Wayne County litigants’ claims,” their lawyer wrote in the objection. “This would prevent the Wayne County litigants from having their day in court with respect to their claims against Brizzi for his role in the sale of the Fair Finance investment certificates and his role as a director of Fair Finance.”

The investors argue that Bash lacks the authority to release Brizzi from pending litigation and that doing so would be unfair because the proposed settlement does not require Brizzi to compensate any investors for his alleged liability as a director of Fair Finance.

Bash’s settlement with Brizzi calls for the Brizzi for Prosecutor Committee to repay all $170,881 donated by Durham, Fair Finance and affiliated companies.

In addition, Bash alleged that Fair Finance and Durham provided Brizzi with personal loans and financial assistance totaling $55,735 for trips and miscellaneous expenses. Brizzi disputed the amount, according to the settlement, but agreed to pay $25,000.

Brizzi didn’t seek re-election in 2010 following criticism over his ties to Durham, a friend who served as his 2006 campaign finance chairman. Brizzi now is in private law practice.

Durham and two business partners, James Cochran and Rick Snow, were arrested in March after being indicted on 12 felony counts, including conspiracy to commit wire and securities fraud. They deny wrongdoing.

More of IBJ's coverage of Durham and Fair Finance can be found here.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Who Is The Crook?
    Who is the Crook- or are they All Crooks?
    Wearing a Tie (or Not)- these guys all stink like a four-day old dead fish.
  • Shame
    Carl Brizzi is a thug, that's right "thug" the only difference is he wears a suit and tie. He and Charlie White should both be serving time with Plowman.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I am not by any means judging whether this is a good or bad project. It's pretty simple, the developers are not showing a hardship or need for this economic incentive. It is a vacant field, the easiest for development, and the developer already has the money to invest $26 million for construction. If they can afford that, they can afford to pay property taxes just like the rest of the residents do. As well, an average of $15/hour is an absolute joke in terms of economic development. Get in high paying jobs and maybe there's a different story. But that's the problem with this ask, it is speculative and users are just not known.

  2. Shouldn't this be a museum

  3. I don't have a problem with higher taxes, since it is obvious that our city is not adequately funded. And Ballard doesn't want to admit it, but he has increased taxes indirectly by 1) selling assets and spending the money, 2) letting now private entities increase user fees which were previously capped, 3) by spending reserves, and 4) by heavy dependence on TIFs. At the end, these are all indirect tax increases since someone will eventually have to pay for them. It's mathematics. You put property tax caps ("tax cut"), but you don't cut expenditures (justifiably so), so you increase taxes indirectly.

  4. Marijuana is the safest natural drug grown. Addiction is never physical. Marijuana health benefits are far more reaching then synthesized drugs. Abbott, Lilly, and the thousands of others create poisons and label them as medication. There is no current manufactured drug on the market that does not pose immediate and long term threat to the human anatomy. Certainly the potency of marijuana has increased by hybrids and growing techniques. However, Alcohol has been proven to destroy more families, relationships, cause more deaths and injuries in addition to the damage done to the body. Many confrontations such as domestic violence and other crimes can be attributed to alcohol. The criminal activities and injustices that surround marijuana exists because it is illegal in much of the world. If legalized throughout the world you would see a dramatic decrease in such activities and a savings to many countries for legal prosecutions, incarceration etc in regards to marijuana. It indeed can create wealth for the government by collecting taxes, creating jobs, etc.... I personally do not partake. I do hope it is legalized throughout the world.

  5. Build the resevoir. If built this will provide jobs and a reason to visit Anderson. The city needs to do something to differentiate itself from other cities in the area. Kudos to people with vision that are backing this project.

ADVERTISEMENT