Jury Verdicts & Settlements

$685K Verdict in Connecticut Real Estate Fraud Case

After a multi-year legal battle in the Hartford Superior Court, a jury delivered a significant $685,050.00 verdict in favor of Randall Paquette. The dispute originated in 2012 when Paquette entered into an agreement with Gary Thompson to manage and fund various real estate holdings, including several LLCs and a residence in Rocky Hill. Paquette alleged that despite his years of labor and a $50,000 contribution toward Thompson’s home, Thompson refused to transfer the titles as promised. While the defense argued the claims were time-barred and that payments were merely for rent, the jury found Thompson’s actions constituted unjust enrichment. Crucially, the jury also determined that the transfer of a Rocky Hill property was fraudulent, leaving the final equitable remedy to the Court's discretion.

Jury Rules on Mentor Loan Dispute and Race Car Profits

What began as a supportive mentorship in a semi-professional football program ended in a high-stakes legal battle over a 1993 Mustang race car. Charles Johnson, acting as a mentor, provided $14,000 to Bryson Baker to purchase the vehicle, expecting repayment in monthly installments. However, Baker later claimed the money was a gift from the football program intended to sponsor his racing career. The dispute intensified when Baker traded the car for a profit without repaying Johnson. After reviewing conflicting testimonies regarding cash repayments and the nature of the funds, a Jackson County jury determined that a contract existed and had been breached, ordering Baker to pay $12,000 in economic damages.

Acton v. Davis: $1M Florida Property Partnership Dispute

A Broward County jury recently settled a long-standing legal battle between Dr. Michael Padraig Acton and Marty E. Davis over a series of high-end real estate investments in Fort Lauderdale. Dr. Acton claimed the pair had a verbal agreement to split profits from house-flipping ventures, seeking over $1 million in damages after the relationship soured. However, Marty Davis maintained that no partnership ever existed and that Dr. Acton was merely a guest who owed him for years of free housing. In a "wash" verdict, the jury found that there was no oral contract, awarding Dr. Acton nothing, while simultaneously denying Mr. Davis's request for reimbursement of living expenses.

Arango Wins $481K Verdict in Urbanac Contract Dispute

A Broward County jury issued a decisive ruling in favor of Plaintiff Yezid Arango in his contract dispute against Carlos Cifuentes and Urbanac Construction LLC SAS. The case arose from a failed housing development project in Colombia and a promissory note through which Arango had lent the Defendants more than $364,000. Despite multiple payment deadlines, the Defendants made no repayments and denied owing the debt. During trial, Arango presented evidence showing repeated fund transfers, a written promissory note, and a subsequent acknowledgment of additional debt. The Defendants argued that the funds were part of a separate Colombian transaction and that the Florida court lacked jurisdiction. The jury rejected these defenses and awarded Arango the principal balance plus accrued interest totaling $481,307.35. The verdict ended an 18-month legal battle and confirmed that the Defendants were contractually liable for the unpaid loan.

New Haven Wins $450K in Basanite Upstate Contract Battle

This commercial dispute had arisen from a failed equipment-manufacturing agreement between Basanite Industries and Upstate Custom Products. Each side had accused the other of breaking core contractual duties. A third party, New Haven, had joined after claiming losses tied to its own agreement with Upstate. The jury had reviewed competing claims of breached obligations, delayed performance, and disputed payments. It ultimately had rejected all of Basanite’s claims. The panel had concluded that Basanite had failed to meet essential contractual duties and that no circumstance had excused the non-performance. Upstate had also prevailed on its defense, though its counterclaim produced no award. New Haven had succeeded on its breach-of-contract and unjust-enrichment claims. The jury had awarded $450,000 in damages plus post-judgment interest, marking the only monetary recovery in this multi-party litigation.

Jury Affirms 50/50 Ownership in Miami Family Property Feud

In a victory for the Plaintiffs, an Eleventh Circuit jury in Miami-Dade County delivered a verdict on November 14, 2024, confirming Oscar and Shirley Manzanares’ equitable claim to a family property against Oscar Simeon Exposito and Carmen Cuellar. The case, which centered on a family agreement to jointly purchase a home, concluded with the jury assigning 50% ownership to the Plaintiffs and the remaining 50% to the Defendants. The Plaintiffs had argued that while the deed was only in the Defendants’ names due to credit concerns, they had significantly funded the mortgage and improvements under the promise of co-ownership. The jury agreed with the Plaintiffs, finding that the Defendants committed fraudulent inducement and were unjustly enriched by the Plaintiffs’ investments. Although the jury awarded only nominal damages of $1.00 for the monetary claims, the primary significance of the verdict was the judicial recognition and formal establishment of the Plaintiffs’ half-ownership interest in the property, effectively resolving the long-standing dispute.

Jury rejects Usury Claim, Award $351K for Unjust Enrichment

A Miami-Dade County jury returned a verdict in a complex financial dispute involving claims of usury, fraud, civil conspiracy, and unjust enrichment. Plaintiff Manuel A. Bastardo Hernandez and Counter-Defendant Global Trading and Foods Corp. sued Defendant Jose Alberto Olortegui Quispe over an alleged predatory loan. The jury found against the Plaintiff on the primary Usury claim. However, the jury sided with Counter-Plaintiff Olortegui, awarding him $351,000 for Unjust Enrichment against both Bastardo and Global Trading. The verdict ultimately rejected the more severe allegations of fraud and civil conspiracy made by both sides, focusing the recovery on the equitable claim. The judgment was officially entered on March 26, 2025, closing the case against all parties.

Jeremy Ryan’s NFT Lawsuit Against X Corp.