As part of our continued coverage of Zeek Reward’s top thieves being steamrolled in court and having their legal arguments demolished, today we bring you news that the Receiver’s request for Class Certification has been granted.

Before we get into what that means, let’s take a look at the request itself.

At the heart of the matter is the allegation from the Receiver that

because ZeekRewards’ Net Winners “won” money in an unlawful combined Ponzi and pyramid scheme, the Net Winners are not permitted to keep their winnings and must return the fraudulently transferred winnings to the Receiver for distribution to ZeekRewards’ victims.

Naturally the net-winners, those who profited the most from the Ponzi scheme, disagree. And to that end we’ve seen a mountain of litigation filed and all sorts of attempts to delay proceedings to that effect.

Regardless, we’re slowly getting there and this request for Class Certification brings us one step closer to seeing net-winners forced to pay back the funds they stole.

The pros of Class Certification being awarded are that it’s much simpler than individually litigating against the 9400 investors in the US who stole more than $1000 from Zeek’s victims.

As per the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the 9400 net-winner investors in Zeek (the clawback litigation ignores those who made less than $1000), ‘
meets the numerosity requirement
‘ required for Class Certification.

Arguments have been raised against Class Certification by Zeek’s top net-winners however.

Zeek’s net-winners argue a lack of commonality between themselves and the rest of Zeek’s net-winners, and also that they ‘
simply cannot afford to represent the Net Winner Class
‘.

The issues at play here relate to the designation of Zeek’s top net-winners as Class Representatives, representing the rest of the 9400 net-winner defendants in the clawback litigation.

Primary factors that have to be met are that there is a commonality between the Class Representatives and the rest of the net-winners, both in situation and in their ultimate objectives. There also can be no conflict of interest between the Representatives and the rest of the net-winner class.

On the broad topic of commonality, the court found that:

The “commonality” factor examines whether there are “questions of law or fact common to the class.”

Here, the common questions are whether ZeekRewards operated as a Ponzi and/or pyramid scheme and whether net winnings received by the Defendants should be returned to the Receiver.

The proposed class members in this action are likewise linked by a common set of facts, which includes whether ZeeksRewards’ operation was a Ponzi and/or pyramid scheme.

All class members had or controlled usernames and accounts with ZeekRewards through which they received funds from RVG. Further, each class member received more money from RVG than they paid into RVG (their “net winnings”) during the course of their participation as affiliates in the ZeekRewards progr

🤖 Quick Answer

What is the significance of the Class Certification granted in the Zeek Rewards case?

The Class Certification allows the Receiver to proceed with a class action lawsuit against Zeek Rewards' net-winners. This legal determination enables the consolidated claim that profits obtained from the unlawful Ponzi and pyramid scheme must be returned to the Receiver for distribution among defrauded victims, rather than retained by individual winners.

Why are net-winners challenging the Receiver's claims?

Net-winners dispute the Receiver's assertion that their profits are illegally obtained and therefore must be forfeited. These individuals argue they should retain their winnings despite the scheme's fraudulent nature, leading to significant litigation and legal opposition against restitution requirements.

What does the Receiver seek to accomplish through this certification?

The Receiver aims to recover all fraudulently transferred funds from net-winners and redistribute them to legitimate victims

🔗 Related Articles

- Chen fighting SEC on monetary relief (USFIA)
- Howard Kaplan denied Receiver deposition, trial date set (Zeek Rewards)
- Receiver decides Traffic Monsoon victims will not file written claims (updates)
- TelexFree’s 13th appeal denied in Supreme Court
- Eddie Alexandre cops $243 mill judgment in CFTC’s EminiFX case