Former CEO guilty in 'Ponzi' scheme
Headline Legal News
The former CEO of an Austin-based investment firm was found guilty on Wednesday on federal charges that he schemed and defrauded investors out of millions of dollars.
Triton Financial CEO Kurt Branham Barton was named in a 39-count indictment alleging he used former NFL stars and church contacts to raise $50 million fraudulently from investors.
The counts against Kurt Branham Barton included money laundering, wire fraud and securities fraud. He is accused of using the money raised from investors "to support an expanding Ponzi scheme" and to enrich himself and the chief financial officer of his Triton Financial firm.
“It is regrettable that selfish, greedy individuals devise schemes to make themselves rich by victimizing honest and innocent people, often depriving the victims of their life savings," U.S. Attorney John E. Murphy said. "These con artists are usually very accomplished salesmen taking advantage of trusting investors, who unfortunately will never be made whole again."
Evidence presented during the eight-day trial showed that from December 2005 and December 2009, Barton devised a scheme to obtain money from investors under false pretenses.
Related listings
-
Man found guilty in Atlanta of killing boxer
Headline Legal News 08/18/2011A Fulton County jury has found DeMario Ware guilty of felony murder and other charges in the shooting of former world champion boxer Vernon Forrest. The jury acquitted Ware on a malice murder charge. The 22-year-old Ware did not fire the gun that kil...
-
EPA settles with owners of Mass. chemical plant
Headline Legal News 08/17/2011The owners of a suburban Massachusetts chemical plant that exploded in 2006, destroying dozens of homes, have agreed to pay the federal government an estimated $1.3 million to help cover the cost of cleaning up the hazardous waste that was left behin...
-
2 enter guilty pleas in GOP corruption case
Headline Legal News 08/16/2011Two people who worked for former House Speaker John Perzel have pleaded guilty to charges stemming from a public corruption investigation of the House Republican Caucus. Samuel Stokes, a former House employee and brother-in-law to Perzel, pleaded gui...
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0096f/0096fc8e9a6fca7cdd0ea81063fccc031be46cea" alt=""
Workers’ Compensation Subrogation of Administrative Fees and Costs
When a worker covered by workers’ compensation makes a claim against a third party, the workers’ compensation insurance retains the right to subrogate against any recovery from that third party for all benefits paid to or on behalf of a claimant injured at work. When subrogating for more than basic medical and indemnity benefits, the Texas workers’ compensation subrogation statute provides that “the net amount recovered by a claimant in a third‑party action shall be used to reimburse the carrier for benefits, including medical benefits that have been paid for the compensable injury.” TX Labor Code § 417.002.
In fact, all 50 states provide for similar subrogation. However, none of them precisely outlines which payments or costs paid by a compensation carrier constitute “compensation” and can be recovered. The result is industry-wide confusion and an ongoing debate and argument with claimants’ attorneys over what can and can’t be included in a carrier’s lien for recovery purposes.
In addition to medical expenses, death benefits, funeral costs and/or indemnity benefits for lost wages and loss of earning capacity resulting from a compensable injury, workers’ compensation insurance carriers also expend considerable dollars for case management costs, medical bill audit fees, rehabilitation benefits, nurse case worker fees, and other similar fees. They also incur other expenses in conjunction with the handling and adjusting of workers’ compensation claims. Workers’ compensation carriers typically assert, of course, that, they are entitled to reimbursement for such expenditures when it recovers its workers’ compensation lien. Injured workers and their attorneys disagree.