Central District of California | Grand Jury Charges Disbarred Plaintiffs’ Lawyer Tom Girardi with Wire Fraud for Allegedly Embezzling Over $15 Million in Client Money

Central District of California | Grand Jury Charges Disbarred Plaintiffs’ Lawyer Tom Girardi with Wire Fraud for Allegedly Embezzling Over  Million in Client Money

LOS ANGELES – Previous plaintiffs’ personal injuries attorney Thomas Vincent Girardi has been indicted by a federal grand jury for allegedly embezzling more than $15 million from numerous of his legal shoppers, the Justice Division introduced these days.

Girardi, 83, of Seal Seaside, who owned the downtown Los Angeles-dependent Girardi Keese regulation agency, is billed with five counts of wire fraud, a criminal offense that carries a statutory optimum sentence of 20 a long time in federal prison.

Girardi, a after-potent figure in California’s legal local community right until lenders pressured his law business into personal bankruptcy in December 2020, is envisioned to show up on Monday, February 6 at the United States District Court for arraignment. The State Bar of California disbarred Girardi in July 2022.

Also billed in the indictment unsealed currently is Christopher Kazuo Kamon, 49, formerly of Encino and Palos Verdes and who was residing in The Bahamas at the time of his November 2022 arrest on a federal criminal grievance. He stays in federal custody.

Kamon was the controller and main financial officer of Girardi Keese from 2004 right up until December 2020. In this role, Kamon oversaw the regulation firm’s money affairs, supervised its accounting division, and oversaw having to pay the firm’s bills.

The indictment alleges that, from 2010 to December 2020, Girardi and Kamon fraudulently received extra than $15 million that belonged to Girardi Keese purchasers.

“Mr. Girardi and Mr. Kamon stand accused of participating in a common scheme to steal from their consumers and lie to them to go over up the fraud,” said United States Attorney Martin Estrada. “In performing so, they allegedly preyed on the incredibly persons who trusted and relied on them the most—their clients. Actions like the kinds alleged in the indictment carry disrepute upon the lawful career and will not be tolerated by my office.” 

“Mr. Girardi and Mr. Kamon allegedly developed a mirage over several years in order to disguise the reality that they have been robbing Girardi Keese clientele of substantial sums of money” reported Amir Ehsaei, the Acting Assistant Director in Demand of the FBI’s Los Angeles Subject Business. “The defendants exploited the hardships endured by their customers and took benefit of their unfamiliarity with the authorized system though they denied victims what was rightfully owing to them in buy to fund their lavish existence.” 

“Thomas Vincent Girardi ought to have been a pillar to our neighborhood. In its place, he is accused of making an elaborate scheme to mislead his consumers, victimizing them for a second time,” reported Distinctive Agent in Charge Tyler Hatcher of the IRS Prison Investigation’s Los Angeles Discipline Business office. “Attorneys are set in a placement of have confidence in when they symbolize us all through some of our most complicated occasions. Distrust in the lawful job grows when purchasers just cannot believe in their lawyers to fork out them the settlements intended to make them entire. IRS Felony Investigation, along with federal prosecutors and our regulation enforcement companions, will keep on to request to preserve the authorized profession straightforward.”

In furtherance of their alleged plan to defraud, Girardi negotiated settlements on behalf of clients, but then allegedly hid the settlement’s correct conditions and lied about the disposition of the settlement proceeds.

Girardi and Kamon would allegedly lead to the settlement proceeds to be deposited in or transferred to lawyer rely on accounts to which the two men had entry. Girardi and Kamon then embezzled and misappropriated settlement resources from these accounts for improper functions, together with shelling out other Girardi Keese clients whose settlement funds had beforehand been misappropriated and paying out Girardi Keese’s payroll and other charges. These supplemental fees included credit card expenses for Girardi and Kamon’s individual expenditures.

To conceal the theft and misappropriation of consumer settlement cash, Girardi and Kamon allegedly lied to purchasers, stating falsely, among other factors, that the settlement cash experienced not been paid out. Girardi also allegedly falsely advised clientele that settlement proceeds could not be disbursed until finally sure purported prerequisites had been fulfilled, this sort of as getting rid of purported tax obligations, obtaining supposedly essential authorizations from judges, and satisfying medical liens and other debts.

Girardi and Kamon allegedly also sent lulling payments to shoppers, falsely representing that the payments were “advances” on purportedly nevertheless-to-be-received settlement proceeds that, in truth, experienced previously been deposited in Girardi Keese accounts, or were “interest payments” on the settlement income that purportedly could not be compensated to the customers until finally the fabricated demands were being satisfied.

For instance, in July 2019, Girardi negotiated a $17.5 million settlement of a lawsuit associated to accidents sustained in a car or truck accident by two shoppers and their boy or girl, who was paralyzed in the crash. The settlement settlement specified that the child’s part of the settlement funds would be positioned in a belief and an annuity to be managed by a 3rd party, neither of which could be accessed by Girardi and Kamon.

The 1st installment of the settlement payment – $4 million – was transferred to a financial institution account that Girardi and Kamon managed. Prior to that deposit, Girardi and Kamon allegedly transferred $1.45 million as a purported “advance” from the clients’ settlement cash. The indictment alleges that, in simple fact, this was cash that came from distinctive Girardi Keese consumers. Girardi and Kamon then allegedly applied the resources to fork out for the legislation firm’s working costs unrelated to the vehicle accident litigation.

On July 1, 2019, Girardi and Kamon allegedly triggered a $2.5 million check out that mostly was comprised of the automobile incident clients’ settlement funds to be issued to a distinctive client more than half of whose $53 million settlement Girardi and Kamon experienced misappropriated years before.

In August 2019, a additional payment of roughly $5,119,449 was deposited into a Girardi-controlled bank account. To lull the victim shoppers and prevent them from discovering that their settlement money experienced been misappropriated, Girardi and Kamon allegedly provided incremental lulling payments that comprised only a portion of what the shoppers were owed.

Girardi also allegedly lied to the clients, telling them that the remaining settlement resources could only be paid right after healthcare liens had been contented, court docket proceedings had concluded and Girardi had flown to Washington, D.C., to satisfy with govt officials to take out the settlement’s tax legal responsibility. In reality, all of this info was bogus and Girardi had embezzled their settlement funds, the indictment alleges.

In a individual subject, on January 19, Kamon was charged by using information and facts with wire fraud for allegedly embezzling resources in Girardi Keese’s custody and manage and working with them for his personalized charges, including for renovations on Kamon’s private residences in Palos Verdes and Encino, travel, procuring and escort providers. Demo in that matter is scheduled for March 14.

An indictment has allegations that a defendant has fully commited a criminal offense. Just about every defendant is presumed innocent right until and unless tested responsible further than a affordable doubt.

IRS Criminal Investigation and the FBI are investigating this make any difference. The Business office of the United States Trustee is supplying aid.

Assistant United States Lawyers Scott Paetty and Ali Moghaddas of the Big Frauds Segment are prosecuting this circumstance.

Jury Verdict for 33-Year-Old Tom Bosworth is Largest for Youngest Attorney in Medical Malpractice for a Living Client in Pennsylvania History

Jury Verdict for 33-Year-Old Tom Bosworth is Largest for Youngest Attorney in Medical Malpractice for a Living Client in Pennsylvania History

PHILADELPHIA, PA / ACCESSWIRE / December 14, 2022 / In a history-placing jury verdict in September, Tom Bosworth became the youngest lawyer in Pennsylvania historical past as guide counsel to obtain a $10M+ jury verdict for a dwelling consumer in a healthcare malpractice lawsuit. The total verdict amount was in excess of $19 million. With other 7 and 8-determine wins less than his belt, it may possibly really well be that Tom epitomizes the which means of Philadelphia lawyer, a expression popularized as far again as 1788 describing an extremely knowledgeable law firm, not just in Philadelphia but across the nation. The actuality of the matter is, while preparing this tale for publication, The Countrywide Demo Legal professionals announced Tom was chosen as a member of its Prime 40 under 40, an exclusive invitation-only difference honoring the nation’s incredibly most effective young trial attorneys.

Tom Bosworth at table

His choose-no-prisoner strategy to litigating cases is among several of his approaches, but his enthusiasm for justice is the driving power that delivers the best effects for Tom. As a pivotal determine in Tom’s daily life, and an individual who served raise him, his grandmother’s untimely health care-linked loss of life when he was only 18 experienced a deep effects on him. What was primarily upsetting about the predicament was the reality that no lawyer would just take on the scenario, in spite of a consensus that medical malpractice had occurred.

“What received me fired up about receiving into this subject was the actuality that no one would just take her scenario…no attorney would look at it,” Tom explained. “But what occurred to her was truly mistaken. And no one disagreed with that.”

Having observed the impression healthcare malpractice can have on someone’s existence initially-hand, Tom was decided to assistance be certain other health care malpractice victims and their family members have anyone fighting for them. He went on to concentration on healthcare malpractice legislation (for victims only) and not too long ago founded Bosworth Legislation after owning been in apply for the final 6 years. His firm focuses on representing catastrophically injured clientele and the households of beloved types who have died due to clinical carelessness, corporate wrongdoing, and unsafe merchandise.

“I am not concerned to go to demo irrespective of the scenario,” mentioned Tom. “This is not a settlement-only legislation organization this is a trial organization.”

That just isn’t just an empty sentiment either.

Melendez v. Mo

In his very noteworthy case this earlier September, Tom became the youngest attorney in Pennsylvania record to acquire an 8-determine jury verdict as lead counsel in a clinical malpractice circumstance for a dwelling shopper. In the situation, a Philadelphia jury awarded a $19.7 million verdict to a clinical malpractice target, for a failure to diagnose. In accordance to the go well with, the target, a lady who had been viewing the very same key care medical professional for decades, regularly experienced her grievances about back discomfort she was dealing with, along with other symptoms, dismissed. It wasn’t till she last but not least went to a neurologist on her own, that a mass was discovered on her backbone, which had by now led to all sorts of problems, these types of as incontinence, pain, and the inability to stroll commonly. In the end, this left her partly paralyzed and not able to function.

“Her lifetime experienced been ruined and the care by the medical professional was seriously reprehensible,” Tom claimed, “And the sum of money they have been supplying ahead of demo seriously didn’t appear near to what she would want.”

By heading to trial and successful, Tom proved that no phase was way too massive for him when it will come to standing up for those who have been irreparably harmed owing to negligence or wrongdoing. In this case, he took on Penn Medication, one particular of the greatest healthcare institutions in the state – and won.

In spite of extensive quantities of prosperity in this place, Tom feels there are still “genuinely lousy results in numerous means,” when it comes to health care. He’s passionate about pushing again versus a program that has develop into overrun by company passions. As these, his business is dedicated to using strong businesses to endeavor for placing earnings right before people today – which, in numerous circumstances, ends up destroying the lives of innocent folks and their family members in the system.

Tom Bosworth at desk.

“Consider Like a No Prisoner Mentality”

“I acquire like a ‘no prisoners’ mentality to company greed and corporate misconduct,” mentioned Tom. “As a person who signifies the men and women who are forever harmed in a very critical way, I you should not have any tolerance for that. In reality, I consider it personally.”

As Tom describes it, not each individual situation goes to trial, nor really should they. Having said that, it is really vital that corporate entities know they will be held accountable, really should it occur to that. “The simple fact is that defendants and insurance plan companies are most scared of attorneys who they know can go into the courtroom and punch them in the mouth and get a verdict,” claimed Tom.

There’s yet another quite significant issue to acquiring a jury verdict, according to Tom, and that’s the nearly cathartic vindication that his shoppers experience when it happens. Which is substantially distinctive than a settlement, which might appear with a financial obtain, but won’t necessarily enable the client shift forward emotionally. Generally in these varieties of circumstances, an individual has been mistreated, gaslit, or fed some style of an alternate truth for so long that when they listen to a jury say they have been wronged, it can be a big relief. As Tom points out, “A good deal of occasions the verdict is significant for them, to bear witness to real accountability developing.”

To Tom, it is critically critical to not just attain monetary compensation, but also to effectuate real alter. A excellent illustration of this is a different scenario before in 2022 in which, as guide trial counsel, he represented a mom whose severely mentally disabled son wrongfully died in a group household, in accordance to the match.

Tom had been suggested to not just take the scenario by every single attorney he ran it by. To Tom, this was not acceptable due to the fact not getting the scenario intended that it would basically become a case that would slip via the cracks and there would be no accountability.

Tom was established to see the scenario through. He consulted with several authorities, which includes an expert forensic healthcare examiner, who verified the cause of dying could only have been the consequence of significant trauma. In the close, Tom took the case to trial and received a $7 million settlement on behalf of the mom several weeks into the demo. Something substantially a lot more critical than the financial award, even so, arrived from this case.

“She was 81 and she definitely could treatment fewer about the revenue,” Tom explained. “She desired to make positive that the hiring practices were being revamped, that the qualifications check system was revamped.”

In the end, the defendant agreed to a variety of non-financial phrases as very well, which Tom retains as a person of his finest successes. He comprehended that the cash was not heading to provide her son again. But the changes he was in a position to make in how the home operates could potentially help save an individual else’s everyday living.

This type of ending could have only been accomplished via Tom Bosworth’s motivation to justice, and his willingness to go up versus larger and much more highly effective entities. In the finish, Tom is not only decided to carry justice to those who have been wronged but also operates tirelessly to make confident that individuals in electricity are held accountable.

Tom Bosworth sitting on desk in office

Entry to Justice

Tom’s supreme aim is to make guaranteed that victims of healthcare malpractice, dangerous goods, and harmful health-related gadgets have accessibility to justice. He doesn’t have a retainer and does not monthly bill by the hour. When a situation goes to trial, he pays for all the expenses out of pocket. And if he were being to eliminate a circumstance that goes to trial, a customer does not pay out that back.

“It can be crucial to me that my clientele are on an equivalent actively playing industry with the most important and most potent corporations and establishments out there,” explained Thomas. “That is what a courtroom of law is all about.”

Law Firm Logo

Tom can be attained at (267) 212-4177 and [email protected].

His website is www.tombosworthlaw.com.

His social media include things like:

Fb: www.facebook.com/tom.bosworth.5

Instagram: www.instagram.com/lawyertombosworth

LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/lawyer-tom-bosworth-765a0864

TikTok: www.tiktok.com/@tommythelawyer

YouTube: www.youtube.com/@thomasbosworth6675

Supply: Bosworth Regulation

Tom Brady pushed FTX, then the crypto firm failed. Should he pay up?

Tom Brady pushed FTX, then the crypto firm failed. Should he pay up?

Comment

When Michael Livieratos saw quarterback Tom Brady in a commercial for the cryptocurrency trading platform FTX, he knew exactly where he wanted to put his $30,000 crypto investment.

“As a New England Patriots fan my entire life, you can imagine the influence that Tom Brady would have,” said Livieratos, a 56-year-old legal clerk who lives in Connecticut. He soon moved nearly all his money from another crypto exchange to FTX.

Then FTX filed for bankruptcy in a spectacular collapse that vaporized at least $10 billion in assets, according to bankruptcy filings, including all the money Livieratos had on the platform. Now he is a plaintiff in a proposed class-action lawsuit that seeks to hold Brady, his supermodel ex-wife, Gisele Bündchen, and nine other celebrity endorsers of FTX financially responsible for luring him into a very bad deal.

FTX CEO John J. Ray III, who is guiding the collapsed crypto company through bankruptcy, testified before the House Committee on Financial Services on Dec. 13. (Video: Joy Yi/The Washington Post, Photo: Al Drago/Bloomberg/The Washington Post)

Until its collapse, FTX had been one of the world’s largest cryptocurrency exchanges — and one of the most aggressive at marketing digital currencies to the masses. The company had partnerships with National Basketball Association teams, patches on Major League Baseball umpire uniforms and the naming rights to the Miami Heat arena. It ran splashy TV ads during NBA and National Football League games, including last year’s Super Bowl, in which celebrities portrayed FTX as an exciting but safe place to invest money.

On Tuesday, the U.S. government brought both criminal charges and civil actions against Sam Bankman-Fried, the 30-year-old founder of FTX, accusing him of orchestrating one of the biggest financial frauds in U.S. history. But the odds of restitution for FTX customers like Livieratos are slim. “We’re not going to be able to recover all the losses here,” FTX’s new chief executive John J. Ray III told a House committee.

So Livieratos and his fellow plaintiffs are trying a different approach. Working with Coral Gables, Fla., lawyer Adam Moskowitz, their lawsuit seeks to shift the focus from FTX executives to what Moskowitz sees as a larger circle of complicity that includes some of the world’s most celebrated actors and athletes.

Bankman-Fried gave $40 million in political donations. Here’s who benefited.

Moskowitz argues that FTX’s interest-bearing accounts were a security, which would require Brady and other promoters to reveal the details of their payments from FTX. The complaint claims “they have never disclosed the nature, scope, and amount of compensation they personally received in exchange for the promotion.” Instead, they appeared in ads featuring such moments as an enthusiastic Brady dialing up everyone in his contact list to pitch crypto trading on FTX, asking again and again: “You in?”

“You have very rich people we all love telling us that they checked this out, and it was okay,” Moskowitz said in an interview. “Why shouldn’t they be held responsible?”

In part, Moskowitz’s lawsuit reflects the reality that wealthy celebrities are likely to have large amounts of money left — perhaps unlike Bankman-Fried, who has said he has $100,000 in the bank and only one working credit card. Celebrities also may be inclined to settle quickly to avoid the bad publicity of a protracted court proceeding.

But there are significant legal hurdles to holding promoters accountable. Just this month, a federal judge in California dismissed a lawsuit from investors accusing reality-TV star Kim Kardashian, boxer Floyd Mayweather Jr. and others of touting an obscure crypto token known as EMAX as part of a plan to artificially inflate the coin’s value. Though the celebrities agreed to pay millions in fines to the Securities and Exchange Commission for failing to disclose that they had been paid to promote the token, Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald said investors are partly responsible for what happens to their money.

While the case “raises legitimate concerns over celebrities’ ability to readily persuade millions of undiscerning followers to buy snake oil with unprecedented ease and reach,” Fitzgerald wrote, investors should “act reasonably before basing their bets on the zeitgeist of the moment.”

Post Reports: The downfall of FTX

Moskowitz, who specializes in class-action lawsuits, didn’t set out to become a crypto watchdog. But as Miami has become a hub of crypto investment — and as case referrals came to him from consumers who’d lost money from various digital-currency scams — he started scrutinizing the industry.

“It seemed like a lot of investors were getting hurt and no one was really looking out for them,” said Moskowitz, who has also brought prominent lawyer David Boies onto his lawsuit.

If FTX’s accounts are ruled to be securities, Moskowitz argues that the celebrities could be responsible for investor losses under many states’ strict “blue sky” laws that ban the promotion of unregistered securities — and hold promoters liable even if they didn’t understand what they were endorsing.

FTX and most of the crypto industry has maintained that digital assets are not securities. But citing a standard that emerged from a 1946 Supreme Court case, Moskowitz’s complaint argues that they are, saying they fit the definition of a public investment in which the investor benefits from the efforts of others.

Demonstrating that the interest-bearing accounts FTX offered were in fact unregistered securities won’t be simple, given how contentious and unresolved the issue remains among regulators. Moskowitz has separately filed a state class action in Florida against Brady and two others and asked the judge, Michael Hanzman, to rule on that question.

Even if the judge rules FTX interest-bearing accounts were not securities, Moskowitz says, he will argue that celebrities should be liable under a strict Florida consumer protection law, which bans “unconscionable, deceptive, or unfair acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce.”

All of the defendants in Moskowitz’s federal class action — including tennis champion Naomi Osaka,NBA star Stephen Curry and entrepreneur Kevin “Mr. Wonderful” O’Leary from the business reality show “Shark Tank” — hyped the brand. In a video posted to his website less than a month before FTX filed for bankruptcy, O’Leary said he had total confidence in the exchange. “If there’s ever a place I could be that I’m not gonna get in trouble, it’s going to be at FTX,” O’Leary said.

Moskowitz argues that such comments make his case extremely persuasive — especially coming from someone like O’Leary, who is regarded as a savvy businessman.

“O’Leary is someone people trust because he’s on ‘Shark Tank,’ ” Moskowitz said. “Who doesn’t love ‘Shark Tank’?”

Spokespeople for Brady, Bündchen, Osaka, Curry and O’Leary did not reply to requests for comment. A lawyer for Brady did not provide a comment for this story.

Is crypto a house of cards?

Sunil Kavuri, a 42-year-old crypto investor from Britain and a plaintiff in the case, said O’Leary’s endorsement was the reason he put a seven-figure sum into an FTX account, including funds he intended to use for his 2-year-old son’s education. All that money is now gone, Kavuri said, stuck with the funds of so many others in FTX bankruptcy proceedings. Kavuri said he thought that, since O’Leary ran a successful investment fund that’s regulated by the SEC, he would be familiar with the legal limits of undue promotion.

In an interview last week on CNBC’s “Squawk Box,” O’Leary said he was paid just under $15 million to be a spokesman for FTX, much of which is gone. (He says he put the bulk of the money into crypto through the exchange, and prices have since plummeted. About $4 million went to taxes and his agent’s fees, and $1 million went to equity in FTX, which is now worthless.)

Asked about an August 2021 statement that FTX met his “own rigorous standards of compliance,” O’Leary said he and other institutional investors “relied on each other’s due diligence.”

Now, “we all look like idiots,” he said.

In testimony before the Senate Banking Committee on Wednesday, O’Leary said he plans to use his own funds to conduct a forensic audit of what happened at the company. “The truth of this situation will be discovered by following the transaction trail after obtaining the records,” he said. He applied for membership on the FTX creditors’ committee in connection with the bankruptcy proceedings, because he feels “obligated to pursue the facts on behalf of all stakeholders.”

Moskowitz’s pursuit of A-listers actually began with a separate case against Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban, O’Leary’s co-star on “Shark Tank,” who promoted Voyager, a now-bankrupt cryptocurrency lender.

In October 2021, Cuban held a news conference with Voyager co-founder Steve Ehrlich announcing a five-year partnership with the Mavericks that would, as Cuban put it, “come up with new ways to introduce Mavs fans to cryptocurrency and help them understand it.”

In a widely circulated YouTube video, Cuban offered $100 in bitcoin to anyone who downloaded the Voyager app and made a trade worth at least $100. “I think Voyager is going to be a leader among sports fans and crypto fans around the country,” Cuban said. American Airlines Center, where the Mavericks play, soon displayed Voyager ads.

FTX’s Bankman-Fried donated about $40M this political cycle. Here’s who benefited.

But then crypto prices collapsed and Voyager filed for bankruptcy, leaving many customers unable to access money they thought they could easily reclaim. In August, Moskowitz and Boies filed a proposed class-action lawsuit in federal court in Miami, arguing that Cuban’s endorsement was a big factor in creating that false sense of security.

Litigants are waiting for the judge to rule on Cuban’s motion to dismiss, with experts divided on the odds of it being granted. In the meantime, Moskowitz is gathering depositions from several NBA veterans, including former Mavericks general manager Donnie Nelson, in a bid to show Cuban’s deep involvement with Voyager.

In a brief email to The Washington Post, Cuban said that as a sponsor of the Mavericks, Voyager was “supported by the team as we would any sponsor.” A lawyer for Cuban and the Mavericks, Stephen A. Best, said Moskowitz has not demonstrated that Cuban’s statements prompted anyone to do business with Voyager.

“Mark Cuban and any comments that he made were part of an announcement of a sponsorship whereby Voyager became an official sponsor of Dallas Mavericks,” Best said, adding: “You’ll find that … there’s a question as to whether any comments were relied upon by the named plaintiffs in this case.”

The FTX case makes similar claims against defendants including basketball stars Shaquille O’Neal and Udonis Haslem, quarterback Trevor Lawrence, baseball players David Ortiz and Shohei Ohtani, and comedian Larry David. A representative for Ortiz declined to comment. Representatives for O’Neal, Haslem, Lawrence, Ohtani and David did not respond to requests for comment.

There is precedent for celebrities paying up after pushing failed investment schemes. In 1990, the actor Lloyd Bridges settled a case for an undisclosed sum after he made a commercial touting A.J. Obie & Associates, a Detroit-based company whose executive was sentenced to jail in a mortgage scam.

Jeff Greenbaum, a New York advertising attorney, said celebrity endorsers can be held liable in false-advertising claims, but the Federal Trade Commission has typically been the main enforcer. It’s far less common for a private plaintiff to bring legal action against an endorser, he said, adding that courts have generally been hesitant to hold spokespeople responsible when investments go bad.

In the FTX case, “what we’re all going to be watching really closely is: What standards are the courts going to apply?” Greenbaum said. “In other words, what level of involvement does the celebrity need to have? What level of knowledge does the celebrity need to have” to be found responsible.

To be found liable under Florida’s consumer protection law, Moskowitz will have to offer evidence that the celebrities knew FTX may have been deceiving investors, said Florida attorney Daniel Lustig, which is tough to prove. He said that it’s likely no one, including Brady, expected FTX to collapse.

Moskowitz acknowledges the case’s difficulties. But he notes that the celebrities neglected their responsibility to their fans, who lost large sums of money. They lost other things, too.

After the FTX bankruptcy, Livieratos took down a photo of Brady that had hung on his wall for years.

“I can’t look at it anymore,” he said.

correction

An earlier version of this article incorrectly identified Donnie Nelson as the Dallas Mavericks’ general manager. He’s the Mavericks’ former general manager. The article has been corrected.