Demanda Montelli Original

Case 3:13-cv-00660-SRU Document 80 Filed 07/10/15 Page 1 of 27
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
_________________________________
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
PIERO ENRIQUE MONTELLI TORRES, )
INVERPLUS SOCIEDAD DE
)
CORRETAJE DE
)
TITULOS VALORES, C.A.,
)
IVP OVERSEAS LTD.,
)
ROMEO MIKAEL MOUAWAD,
)
MOUAWAD, JESPA MAWAD DE
)
MOUAWAD, TANIA MOUAWAD
)
MAWAD, MIGUEL ANTONIO
)
MOUAWAD MAWAD,
)
HORION INVESTMENT
)
LTD., GRIMSEL GROUP LTD., and
)
M. HOLDING S.A.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
_________________________________)
JOHN J. CARNEY, in his capacity as
Court-Appointed Receiver for Michael
Kenwood Group, LLC, et al.,
CIVIL ACTION NO
03:13-cv-00660 (SRU)
JULY 10, 2015
DEFENDANT MIGUEL ANTONIO MOUAWAD

MAWADS ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
Defendant Miguel Antonio Mouawad Mawad, by and through his undersigned attorneys,
without consenting to jurisdiction, hereby files this Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiff
John J. Carneys First Amended Complaint (the Complaint) and denies each and every
allegation not expressly admitted.
1
1200 Four Seasons Tower 1441 Brickell Avenue Miami Florida 33131
Phone: (305) 350-5100
SUMMARY OF CLAIMS1
1.
Paragraph 1 is part of a summary of Plaintiffs claims that does not call for an
admission or denial, but to the extent any allegations pertain to Plaintiffs claims against
Defendant, Defendant denies them.
2.
Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to
the allegations made in paragraph 2, and therefore, denies the same.

3.
Denied.
4.
Denied.
THE DEFENDANTS
THE MONTELLI DEFENDANTS

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.
Defendant admits that Inverplus was incorporated in Venezuela and had a
business address in Caracas, but is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief
as to the allegations made in the remainder of paragraph 9, and therefore, denies the same.
For ease of reference, Defendant includes the headings as stated in the Complaint. However, by doing so,
Defendant does not admit or concede the truthfulness of any the headings or of any matter.
2
Phone: (305) 350-5100
10.
Defendant admits the first sentence of paragraph 10, but is without knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief as to the remainder of the allegations made in paragraph
10, and therefore denies the same.
11.
12.
Defendant admits that Romeo Mikael Mouawad Mouawad is a Venezuelan
citizen, but denies the remainder of paragraph 12.

13.
Denied.
14.
Defendant admits the first sentence of paragraph 14, but denies the remainder of
paragraph 14.
15.
Denied.
16.
Defendant admits the first sentence of paragraph 16 and that he maintained a
residence in Miami Beach, Florida, but denies the remainder of paragraph 16.
17.
Defendant admits that he maintains an active Florida motor vehicle registration
and used to own a condominium in New York City, but denies the remainder of paragraph 17.
18.
Denied.
19.
Defendant admits that Tania Mouawad Mawad is Romeo Mouawads daughter,
but denies the remainder of paragraph 19.

20.
Defendant admits that each of the four members of the Mouawad family received
a power of attorney over Horion, but is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a
belief as to the remaining allegations made in the first three sentences of paragraph 20, and
therefore, denies the same. Defendant denies the remainder of paragraph 20.
3
Phone: (305) 350-5100
21.
Defendant admits the first sentence of paragraph 21, but is without knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief as to the allegations made in the second sentence of
paragraph 21, and therefore, denies the same. Defendant denies the remainder of paragraph 21.
22.
Defendant admits the first two sentences of paragraph 22, and advises that
Defendant ceased being a shareholder of M. Holding S.A. on May 10, 2011, years before
Plaintiffs purported service upon the entity. Defendant denies the remainder of paragraph 22.
23.
Denied.
NON-DEFENDANTS BCT BANK INTERNATIONAL AND PERAFITA CORP.

24.
25.
RELEVANT RECEIVERSHIP ENTITIES
26.
27.
28.
29.
4
Phone: (305) 350-5100
JURISDICTION AND VENUE

30.
Denied.
31.
Denied.
32.
Denied.
RECEIVERS STANDING
33.
Admitted.
34.
Admitted.
35.
Admitted.
36.
Admitted.
37.
The allegations of paragraph 37 state legal conclusions to which no response is
required and are, therefore, denied.

38.

39.
40.

41.

42.
43.
5
Phone: (305) 350-5100
44.
45.
46.
47.
THE FRAUDULENT SCHEME
ILLARRAMENDIS NETWORK OF ENTITIES AND FUNDS
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
6
Phone: (305) 350-5100
54.
THE GENESIS OF THE FRAUD
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
7
Phone: (305) 350-5100
OFF THE BOOKS BANK ACCOUNTS

64.
65.
66.
67.
MONTELLI KNOWINGLY PARTICIPATED IN
AND FURTHERED THE FRAUDULENT SCHEME
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
8
Phone: (305) 350-5100
MONTELLI FALSIFIED RECORDS TO ENABLE THE FRAUDULENT SCHEME

74.
the allegations regarding Francisco Illarramendi and Piero Montelli Torres (Montelli) made in
paragraph 74, and therefore denies the same. Defendant denies the allegations made regarding
the Mouawad Defendants in paragraph 74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
9
Phone: (305) 350-5100
MONTELLI PROFITED FROM THE FRAUDULENT SCHEME

83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
THE MOUAWAD DEFENDANTS BENEFITED FROM THE FRAUDULENT SCHEME
88.
Denied.
89.
Denied.
THE SWITZERLAND AND ANDORRA TRANSACTIONS

90.
1.
91.
The Failed Andorra Transfers
92.
10
Phone: (305) 350-5100
93.
94.
95.
96.
97.
2.
98.
Transfers to Horion in Switzerland
99.
100.
the allegations made in the first sentence of paragraph 100, and therefore, denies the same.
Defendant admits the second sentence of paragraph 100.
101.
102.
the allegations made in the remainder of paragraph 102, and therefore, denies the same.
103.
Denied.
11
Phone: (305) 350-5100
104.
105.
106.
107.
108.
THE INDIRECT TRANSFERS TO THE MOUAWAD DEFENDANTS
109.
110.
111.
112.
113.
114.
12
Phone: (305) 350-5100
115.
the allegations made in the first and second sentences of paragraph 115, and therefore, denies the
same. Defendant denies the remainder of paragraph 115.
116.
the allegations made in the first sentence of paragraph 116, and therefore, denies the same.
Defendant denies the remainder of paragraph 116.
117.
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.
123.
124.
13
Phone: (305) 350-5100
125.
126.
the allegations made with respect to Grimsel in the first sentence and the allegations made in the
second sentence of paragraph 126, and therefore, denies the same.
Defendant denies the
allegations made regarding Defendant M. Holding S.A. in paragraph 126.

127.
Denied.
THE NATURE OF THE CAUSES OF ACTION AGAINST DEFENDANTS
128.
129.
Paragraph 129 summarizes Plaintiffs claims and does not call for an admission or
denial, but to the extent any allegations pertain to Plaintiffs claims against Defendant,
Defendant denies them.
130.
Denied.
131.
132.

133.
Paragraph 145 summarizes Plaintiffs claims and does not call for an admission
or denial, but to the extent any allegations pertain to Plaintiffs claims against Defendant,
Defendant denies that the Receiver has the right to amend or revise
Exhibit A and reserves all rights with respect to any proposed amendment or revision.
14
Phone: (305) 350-5100
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

CUFTA SECTION 52-552e(a)(1) (ACTUAL FRAUD)
All Defendants
134.
Defendant realleges and incorporates herein by reference his responses to all of
the forgoing paragraphs of Plaintiffs Complaint.

135.
136.

137.
138.

139.
Denied.
140.
Denied.
141.
Denied.
142.

143.
15
Phone: (305) 350-5100
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

CUFTA SECTION 52-522e(a)(2) (CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUD)
All Defendants
144.

145.
146.

147.
148.

149.
Denied.
150.
Denied.
151.
The allegations of Paragraph 151 state legal conclusions to which no response is

152.
153.
Denied.
154.
16
Phone: (305) 350-5100
155.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
CUFTA SECTION 52-552f(a) (CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUD)
All Defendants
156.

157.
158.

159.
160.

161.
Denied.
162.
Denied.
163.

164.
17
Phone: (305) 350-5100
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

COMMON LAW FRAUDULENT TRANSFER
All Defendants
Defendant is not required to answer Plaintiffs Fourth Cause of Action because it has
been dismissed, see ECF No. 74 at 21. Nonetheless, Defendant denies paragraphs 166 through
175.
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
UNJUST ENRICHMENT
All Defendants
176.

177.
Denied.
178.
Denied.
179.
Denied.
180.

181.

182.
18
Phone: (305) 350-5100
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION

CONVERSION
All Defendants
Defendant is not required to respond to Plaintiffs Sixth Cause of Action because it has
been dismissed, see ECF No. 74 at 21. Nonetheless, Defendant denies paragraphs 183 through
189.
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
PARTICIPATION IN AND AIDING AND
ABETTING BRACH OF FIDUCARY DUTY
Against Montelli
Defendant is not required to respond Plaintiffs Seventh Cause of Action because he is
not named in the claim. Nonetheless, Defendant denies paragraphs 190 through 200.
EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION
CONSPIRACY TO BREACH FIDUCARY DUTY
Against Montelli
Defendant is not required to respond Plaintiffs Eighth Cause of Action because he is not
named in the claim. Nonetheless, Defendant denies paragraphs 201 through 209.
NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION
MONEY HAD AND RECEIVED
All Defendants
210.

211.
Denied.
212.
Denied.
213.

19
Phone: (305) 350-5100
214.
Denied.
215.
Denied.
216.

217.

TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
ACCOUNTING
All Defendants
218.

219.

220.

221.

Defendant denies all of Plaintiffs requests for relief in the Complaint.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
Without admitting or conceding any matter, Defendant alleges and asserts the following
defenses in response to the remaining counts of the Complaint, undertaking the burden of proof
only as to those defenses deemed affirmative defenses by law, and does not assume the burden of
proof where substantive law provides otherwise, regardless of how such defenses are
denominated herein. Defendant will rely on all defenses available to him at the time of trial of
20
Phone: (305) 350-5100
this matter and reserves the right to amend his Answer and Affirmative Defenses.
By
designating his Affirmative Defenses, Defendant does not in any way waive or limit any
defenses which are or may be raised by his denials and averments. Defendants Affirmative
Defenses are pled in the alternative. For his affirmative defenses, Defendant alleges as follows,
without assuming the burden of proof where the burden is otherwise on Plaintiff:
FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Failure to State a Cause of Action
Plaintiffs claims are barred, in whole, or in part, because they fail to state a cause of
action against Defendant.
SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Personal Jurisdiction
The Court lacks personal jurisdiction over the Defendant.
THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Statute of Limitations & Laches
Plaintiffs claims are barred, in whole or in part, by the applicable statutes of limitation,
statutes of repose, or the doctrine of laches.
FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Standing CUFTA
Plaintiff lacks standing to bring this action because he is not a creditor of the
Receivership Entities and/or because no claim arose before the transfers alleged.
21
Phone: (305) 350-5100
FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Standing Wagoner Rule
The plaintiff lacks standing to bring this action pursuant to the Second Circuits Wagoner
Rule, which provides that when a bankrupt corporation has joined with a third party in
defrauding its creditors, the trustee cannot recover against the third party for the damage to the
creditors. Shearson Lehman Hutton, Inc. v. Wagoner, 944 F.2d 114, 118 (2d Cir. 1991).
SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Joint & Several Liability
Each Defendant is not legally responsible for the acts or omissions of other named
Defendants, and as such, they should not and cannot be subject to joint and several liability.
SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Estoppel
Plaintiff is estopped from asserting any claims for relief and therefore from recovering
any damages in this action by virtue of the Plaintiffs own action or conduct, including, among
other things, Plaintiffs execution of a settlement agreement with and dismissing all claims
against Defendants Inverplus Sociedad de Corretaje de Titulous Valores, C.A. (Inverplus) and
Piero Enrique Montelli Torres (Montelli) as well as other related, third parties because the
alleged transfers were the result of an agency agreement with Inverplus and its principals.
EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Waiver
Plaintiff has waived any claims for relief and therefore from recovering any damages
from Defendant due to Plaintiffs settlement agreement with Defendants Inverplus and Montelli
and other, related third parties.
22
Phone: (305) 350-5100
NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Release
Plaintiff has released any claims for relief and therefore from recovering any damages
from Defendant by virtue of the Plaintiffs settlement agreement with Defendants Inverplus and
Montelli and other, related third parties.
TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Good Faith & Fair Value
Plaintiffs claims are barred because the alleged transfers were received in good faith and
for a reasonably equivalent value.
ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Antecedent Debt
Plaintiffs claims are barred because the alleged transfers satisfied an antecedent debt.
TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Present Value
Plaintiffs claims are barred because the transfers were made for present value.
THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
New Value Given
Plaintiffs claims are barred because the alleged transfers gave new value to or were
made for the benefit of the debtor after the transfers were made.
23
Phone: (305) 350-5100
FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Ordinary Course of Business
Plaintiffs claims are barred because any alleged transfers or payments were on account
of debt or debts occurred in the ordinary course of business or financial affairs and were made in
the ordinarily course of business.
FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Good Faith
Plaintiffs claims are barred because any alleged transfers were made in good faith to
rehabilitate the debtor and the transfer secured present value given for that purpose. Moreover,
Defendant acted in good faith at all times.
SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Set-Off / Reduction
Defendant is entitled to a set-off or reduction against the amount of any recovery Plaintiff
may otherwise have against Defendant in the amount provided by any other Defendant or third
party involved with the alleged transactions in order to settle Plaintiffs claims.
SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Adequate Remedy at Law
Plaintiffs equitable claims are barred because Plaintiff has adequate remedies at law.
24
Phone: (305) 350-5100
EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Conn. Gen. Stat. 552i(b)(1)
Plaintiffs claims against Defendant under CUFTA are barred because Defendant was not
a first transferee of any of the challenged transfers or the person for whose benefit such transfer
was made.
NINETEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Conn. Gen. Stat. 552i(b)(2)
Plaintiffs claims against Defendant under CUFTA are barred because Defendant was not
a subsequent transferee of any of the challenged transfers other than a good-faith transferee who
took for value.
DEFENDANT MIGUEL ANTONIO

MOUAWAD MAWAD
By:
/s/Adam L. Schwartz
Luis E. Delgado (phv06224)
Kevin Jacobs (phv06227)
Adam L. Schwartz (phv06225)
Homer Bonner Jacobs
1200 Four Seasons Tower
1441 Brickell Avenue
Miami Florida 33131
Phone: (305) 350-5130
Fax: (305) 982-0085
Email: ldelgado@homerbonner.com
Email: kjacobs@homerbonner.com
Email:aschwartz@homerbonner.com
Daniel E. Wenner (ct27852)
Thomas D. Goldberg (ct04386)
Day Pitney LLP
242 Trumbull Street
Hartford, CT 06103
Phone: (860) 275-0100
Fax: (860) 275-0343
Email: dwenner@daypitney.com
25
Phone: (305) 350-5100
Email: tgoldberg@daypitney.com
Attorneys for Miguel Antonio
Mouawad Mawad
26
Phone: (305) 350-5100
CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on July 10, 2015, a copy of the foregoing was filed electronically and served
by mail on anyone unable to accept electronic filing. Notice of this filing will be sent by email to
all parties by operation of the Courts electronic filing system or by mail to anyone unable to
accept electronic filing as indicated on the Notice of Electronic Filing. Parties may access this
filing through the Courts CM/ECF System.
/s/Adam L. Schwartz
Adam L. Schwartz, Esq
27
Phone: (305) 350-5100

Demanda Montelli Original

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Demanda Montelli Original

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 3:13-cv-00660-SRU Document 80 Filed 07/10/15 Page 1 of 27

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

JULY 10, 2015

DEFENDANT MIGUEL ANTONIO MOUAWAD

Case 3:13-cv-00660-SRU Document 80 Filed 07/10/15 Page 2 of 27

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

the allegations made in paragraph 2, and therefore, denies the same.

THE MONTELLI DEFENDANTS

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

the allegations made in paragraph 5, and therefore, denies the same.

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

the allegations made in paragraph 6, and therefore, denies the same.

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

the allegations made in paragraph 7, and therefore, denies the same.

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

the allegations made in paragraph 8, and therefore, denies the same.

Defendant admits that Inverplus was incorporated in Venezuela and had a

Case 3:13-cv-00660-SRU Document 80 Filed 07/10/15 Page 3 of 27

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

Defendant admits that Romeo Mikael Mouawad Mouawad is a Venezuelan

citizen, but denies the remainder of paragraph 12.

Defendant admits the first sentence of paragraph 16 and that he maintained a

Defendant admits that he maintains an active Florida motor vehicle registration

Defendant admits that Tania Mouawad Mawad is Romeo Mouawads daughter,

but denies the remainder of paragraph 19.

Case 3:13-cv-00660-SRU Document 80 Filed 07/10/15 Page 4 of 27

NON-DEFENDANTS BCT BANK INTERNATIONAL AND PERAFITA CORP.

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

Case 3:13-cv-00660-SRU Document 80 Filed 07/10/15 Page 5 of 27

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

The allegations of paragraph 37 state legal conclusions to which no response is

required and are, therefore, denied.

The allegations of paragraph 38 state legal conclusions to which no response is

required and are, therefore, denied.

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

The allegations of paragraph 40 state legal conclusions to which no response is

required and are, therefore, denied.

The allegations of paragraph 41 state legal conclusions to which no response is

required and are, therefore, denied.

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

Case 3:13-cv-00660-SRU Document 80 Filed 07/10/15 Page 6 of 27

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

Case 3:13-cv-00660-SRU Document 80 Filed 07/10/15 Page 7 of 27

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to