Structured Settlements 4Real® Blog: Structured Settlements | Settlement Planning News and John Darer Reviews

Sovereign Funding Group Summary Judgment Motion is Denied by Maryland Judge

by Structured Settlement Watchdog

The Woodbridge Structured Funding litigation against Sovereign Funding Group and its CEO David Springer is headed for trial, as the Defendants' motion for summary judgment was denied in all aspects by Maryland District Judge Marvin Garbis, on November 22, 2013 in Baltimore, MD.

Defendants have now failed twice, with two separate law firms, in their efforts to obtain a summary judgment in this case.

In its motion for summary judgment Sovereign Funding Group and David Springer sought relief from the Court attacking 4 elements of Plaintiffs' claims, that stem from the so-called "WeBuyPayments redirect scheme":

• False Advertisement
• Unfair Competition and False Designation of Origin Claim
• Common Law Trade Libel and Product Disparagement
• Common Law Defamation
• Trademark Infringement

In its November 28, 2011 complaint, Woodbridge Structured Funding alleged that David Springer, Sovereign Funding Group and persons acting with them have engaged and continue to engage in infringing, wrongful, deceptive, defamatory and unfair conduct with respect to Woodbridge and others (such as Novation Capital, Stone Street Capital, and 123 Lump Sum) and sought to cover up their conduct and to mislead people investigating the company's practices.

Defendants' efforts to convince the court that there was a lack of admissible evidence failed.

Trial will be during the first fortnight in May 2014, according to the court's revised scheduling order issued November 22, 2013.

The Woodbridge case carries a degree of importance for both the primary and secondary market.  in addition to direct competitors of Sovereign Funding Group, companies in the primary market were also affected by the "webuypayments redirect scheme", which ran during 2011 (and another scheme** "freedom1stfunding" that ran in 2012), including MetLife, Pacific Life, AIG and Liberty Mutual

For further information about Woodbridge Structured Funding, LLC v Sovereign  Funding et al. Civil action No. MJG-11-3421 please refer to www.pacer.gov

** see Freedom1stFunding Re-Direct Scheme Victimizes Bronx Judge Among Others  June 7, 2012

 

 

 

 

MD Federal Judge Rules Discovery Proceeds Against David Springer and Sovereign Funding

by Structured Settlement Watchdog®

David Springer and Sovereign Funding Group's alleged methods of unfair competition employed by structured settlement factoring operative will indeed be subject to scrutiny through the legal discovery process.

David Springer and Sovereign Funding Group are Defendants in a lawsuit pending in Maryland Federal Court and on June 21 2012,  in a Memorandum and Order, Judge Marvin J. Garbis ruled against the Defendants' motion for summary judgment in favor of Woodbridge Structured Funding, LLC, and issued a scheduling order requiring all fact discovery be completed by December 31,2012*.

In its complaint Woodbridge alleges:

 Count 1 

Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act)

Count 2

– False Advertisement (Lanham Act)

Count 3

– Unfair Competition and False Designation of origin (Lanham Act)

Count 4

– Common Law Trade Libel and Product Disparagement

Count 5

– Common Law Defamation

The Woodbridge lawsuit is the second of a series of lawsuits by competitors against Springer, a Mount Airy, Maryland resident. 

Another lawsuit filed by J.G. Wentworth in Maryland state court in October 2011 was settled in March 2012, It appeared that J.G. Wentworth raised many of the same issues with David Springer and Sovereign Funding in its complaint as Woodbridge. Upon information and belief other legal action over allegations of unfair business practices of David Springer is imminent.

In the opinion of this author, the Woodbridge lawsuit and the allegations against Springer have significance to both the primary and secondary structured settlement industry and even a Bronx New York Supreme Court judge. Taken together with the now settled J.G. Wentworth action against the same Defendant(s), there is more than one entity which has alleged, based on its own independent research, a responsible party (parties) for the webuypayments.net redirect scheme.

For further information about Woodbridge Structured Funding, LLC v Sovereign Funding et al. Civil action No. MJG-11-3421 please refer to www.pacer.gov

*Postscript

After a 4 day trial in August 2014,  in April 2015 Judge Marvin Garbis issued a findings of fact against David Springer and awarded monetary damages to Woodbridge.

 

 

 

 

Woodbridge Structured Funding v Sovereign Funding Group and David Springer Update

by Structured Settlement Watchdog®

One of the lawsuits seeking justice over the parasitic webuypayments(dot)net re-direct scheme that plagued structured settlement search results last year swings back into action this week. This is a notable litigation for structured settlement industry stakeholders in the primary and secondary market, as many were affected by the re-direct scheme and are currently affected by a similar re-direct scheme that surfaced in February 2012.

Woodbridge alleged in its November 28, 2011 complaint that Sovereign Funding has not been content with simply using its own name and webuypayments.net to promote its services. Instead, upon information and belief, Sovereign Funding embarked on a campaign and scheme to both misappropriate the marks of and malign its competitors through a re-direct scheme that drove traffic to webuypayments(dot)net (i.e. Sovereign Funding).

According to the civil complaint filed against David Springer and Sovereign Funding in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, Defendants David Springer and Sovereign Funding are alleged to have committed:

1. Trademark Infringement
2. False Advertisement
3. Unfair Competition and False Designation of Origin
4. Common Law Trade Libel
5. Product Disparagement
6. Common Law Defamation

The other lawsuit was filed against the same Defendants by JG Wentworth in Maryland State Court in October 2011. The parties to that lawsuit executed a Joint Stipulaton of Dismissal With Prejudice on March 2, 2012.

Woodbridge alleged that David Springer, Sovereign Funding and persons acting with them have engaged and continue to engage in infringing, wrongful, deceptive, defamatory and unfair conduct with respct to Woodbridge and others (such as Novation Capital, Stone Street Capital) and sought to cover up his conduct and to mislead people investigating the company's practices.

If the lawsuit moves to the next stage, the Battle Royal on discovery should be interesting. If you have a PACER account the case documents can be accessed easily. See www.pacer.gov

The legal departments of companies such as Pacific Life and MetLife and many other structured settlement stakeholders  who were affected by the webuypayments re-direct scheme (and are affected by the freedom1stfunding.com re-direct scheme) will find the legal documents interesting.

Kathryn Sias. the person who is behind the Sovereign Funding commercials and SEO was apparently fired yesterday according to a notification I received.

The thing is that the webuypayments(dot)net re-direct scheme appears have begun prior to the hiring of the Tampa area SEO Kathryn Sias and o-Assist.

 

 

Sovereign Funding/ Springer Held In On Woodbridge Lawsuit: Judge Denies Dismissal

by John Darer

After jousting over service of process, the Maryland Federal Court has denied the motion of Defendants Sovereign Funding and its CEO David Springer, to dismiss over improper service. The Court concurrently dismissed the Woodbridge Motion for Default against the same Defendants, In its Order dated February 24, 2012, the Maryland District Court stated

1. Defendants shall promptly provide Plaintiff with information that, Defendants' contend, will demonstrate that Plaintiff has not sued the correct Defendants.

2. If Plaintiff agrees, it may dismiss the case altogether or file an Amended Complaint naming substitute Defendants.

3. If claims against them are not dismissed, Defendants shall file a motion seeking dismissal or an Answer by March 30.

4. Should there be a dismissal motion filed, the parties may proceed with formal discovery thereafter pending resolution of the motion and a Scheduling Order shall be issued after resolution of the motion

5. Should there be no dismissal motion filed, a Scheduling Order shall be issued on or about April 6.

Source: PACER.gov   Woodbridge Structured Funding, LLC Plaintiff v Sovereign Funding et al., Defendants (MD Civil Action MJG-11-3421) Copy of complaint ---->http://structuredsettlements.typepad.com/files/woodbridge-complaint-v-sovereign.pdf

Springer and Sovereign Funding contend in Court documents that Woodbridge has filed a sham lawsuit and that they too are victims. Stay tuned.

Meanwhile on the JG Wentworth lawsuit v Springer and Sovereign, a typically low budget "celebratory" podcast appeared in late January. It featured frequent Sovereign Funding spokesperson "Tricia Cooper", who recently sported fake balloon breasts replete with erect nipples in a Sovereign Funding commercial (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9KGVuRMQvw&feature=related  removed following our criticism) in which she squealed "here are two great reasons to sell your payments to Sovereign Funding". 

The "celebrations" appear premature as it does not appear that the J.G. Wentworth lawsuit against Sovereign Funding and David Springer was dismissed, merely that J.G. Wentworth's motions for preliminary injunction and expedited discovery were denied on December 21, 2011. Some like me, might also find it suspect that a Scribd account bearing the name of jgwentworth appears to be used to Google bomb "J. G. Wentworth Scam". J.G Wentworth denied to this author that it posted the pleadings or any court documents on Scribd.

 

Sovereign Funding and David Springer Sued by JG Wentworth and Woodbridge Over SEO Tactics

by Structured Settlement Watchdog

 

In a lawsuit filed in Maryland Federal Court November 28, 2011 Woodbridge Structured Funding LLC opened up a second front in a war against Sovereign Funding led by certain members of the secondary market which could , if successful, provide an ancillary benefit to members of the primary market.

In the complaint for the civil action styled Woodbridge Structured Funding , LLC v Sovereign Funding d/b/s We Buy Payments, and David Springer, United States District Court, Maryland 1:11-cv-03421-MJG., Woodbridge accuses competitor Sovereign Funding and its CEO David Springer of:

"registering Internet domains which have been used to redirect consumers to Sovereign Funding. Woodbridge alleges that "in particular,and upon information and belief. with the assistance of a outside search engine optimization vendor has used a fraudulent and deceptive search engine optimization ("SEO") technique, under which Sovereign Funding, either directly or working with various vendors under its control and direction, have created landing sites and search results which misdirect customers when a search is made using the term "Woodbridge" both alone or in combination with other words."

On October 5, 2011 attorneys for Woodbridge sent a cease and desist letter to David Springer (page 24 of 27 of Woodbridge pleadings Download Woodbridge Structure Funding LLC Complaint v Sovereign Funding) that any searches, that include the word "Woodbridge" to any websites owned or operated by Springer had to be completed no later than the close of business on October 7, 2011.

The very same day, October 7, 2011, many of the sites were redirected to our website (See Fly Trap Search Results: It's War Apparently!) where I discovered them on what proved to be a very tense Friday night in Phoenix, and where they remained for about 2 weeks, until they were redirected yet again, this time to Wikipedia and subsequently, to a blank error page.

 

Some victims affected by the SEO strategy include primary market structured annuity issuers MetLife and Pacific Life. The search results for several other members of the primary and secondary market also appear have been choked off or affected by the alleged SEO operation during the relevant times. The search results for some are affected even today, pages and pages deep.

As previously posted, many of the rogue landing sites were registered anonymously through Go Daddy's Domains By Proxy service, a well intentioned concept to help domain owners avoid email spam (similar services are offered by other registrars), that has instead, in my opinion, fomented the growth of sites in which individuals or entities can snipe, libel, and/or pilfer copyrighted material in reckless abandon, without retribution unless the affected person or entity is willing to go to considerable legal expense.

 

On December 20, 2011 the Circuit Court denied JG Wentworth's Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Emergency Request for Expedited Discovery.

 

Post Script:

The lawsuit against David Springer, a resident of Mt Airy Maryland, went to trial in August 2014, which notably featured a video exhibit of Springer being promoted as a lawyer despite not being a lawyer Springer,  acting as his own lawyer, "weeping" when cross examining a witness

Springer went through 2 other high priced law firms.  In his March 2015 decision and April 2015 Memorandum of Law and Findings of Fact,  Maryland Federal Judge Marvin Garbis ruled against David Springer and cited his questionable business practices running a purported company. Among Springer's deceptive business practices was using multiple aliases which endorsed each other on social media. 

 

Background

Sovereign Funding IS behind We BuyPayments.Net: Here's The Work Order October 3, 2011

Victims of Sovereign Funding Dodgy Marketing Program? September 10, 2011

Who Owns WeBuyPayments.Net? July 25, 2011

Stay tuned.