After suing tax attorney Howard Kaplan for
legal negligence
back in June, the Receivership received a Motion in Opposition a few weeks back.

In it, Kaplan trotted out the familiar “I knew nothing and therefore can’t reasonably be expected to bear any responsibility” argument we’ve come to expect from lawyers in the industry.

Prior to the Zeek Reward’s Receivership’s targeting of legal insiders in the $850M Ponzi case, MLM attorneys have seemingly operated under the assumption that they are untouchable.

Kaplan argues that despite his wrongful conduct he is effectively immune from liability because the court appointed Receiver for the company cannot bring claims against him.

Ignore the fact that even the
most basic of due diligence
would reveal the company in question to be fraudulent, provide whatever legal services are requested, collect your fees and then get out.

Scheme goes down for being one of the largest MLM Ponzi schemes in history?

Play dumb.

Not having a bar of it though is the Zeek Rewards Receivership. And in his response to Kaplan’s opposition, the Receivership bluntly calls out Kaplan on his professionalism.

Or perhaps more accurately, the lack thereof.

Howard Kaplan is an attorney who was hired by RVG to provide accurate legal advice to RVG concerning tax matters.

Instead of fulfilling this important fiduciary duty, he gave RVG bad legal advice and actively participated in promoting a Ponzi and pyramid scheme that caused RVG enormous harm.

…and that’s just the opening paragraph.

One thing I’ve come to admire about Kennth Bell is his “no bullshit” approach to handling the Zeek Rewards case and its various characters.

In contrast to the TelexFree saga playing out, the direction of which is akin to navigating a minefield of uncertainty and lack of communication to the general public, Bell’s court-filed papers cut through rhetoric with succinct clarity.

One of the arguments Kaplan raised in his defense was that of “
in pari delicto
“.

In pari delicto, Latin for “in equal fault (better is the condition of the possessor)” is a legal term used to indicate that two persons or entities are equally at fault, whether the malfeasance in question is a crime or tort.

The phrase is most commonly used by courts when relief is being denied to both parties in a civil action because of wrongdoing by both parties.

The phrase means, in essence, that since both parties are equally at fault, the court will not involve itself in resolving one side’s claim over the other, and whoever possesses whatever is in dispute may continue to do so in the absence of a superior claim.

With Zeek Rewards being an $850M Ponzi scheme, Kaplan (right) essentially argues that any fault of his own is matched by Zeek Rewards itself, and therefore he cannot be sued for their alleged crimes.

Here’s the Receivership’s counter:

Kaplan’s claimed defense of “in pari delicto” does not bar a federal equity Receiver from asserting claims on behalf of the company

🤖 Quick Answer

Who is Howard Kaplan and what legal issues does he face?
Howard Kaplan is a tax attorney sued by the Receivership of an $850 million Ponzi scheme for alleged legal negligence. He filed a Motion in Opposition arguing immunity from liability, claiming the court-appointed Receiver cannot bring claims against him despite allegations of wrongful conduct and inadequate due diligence.

What argument did Kaplan present in his Motion in Opposition?
Kaplan argued he bears no responsibility for his actions, claiming lack of knowledge and asserting immunity from liability. He contended that the court-appointed Receiver lacks authority to bring claims against him, despite evidence suggesting basic due diligence would have revealed the fraudulent nature of the company.

What broader pattern does this case reflect in the MLM legal industry?
The case illustrates how MLM attorneys historically operated under assumptions of legal immunity from liability. Prior to the

🔗 Related Articles

- Howard Kaplan denied Receiver deposition, trial date set (Zeek Rewards)
- Members Choice Ponzi cycler collapses, promises “reborn” reboot
- Howard Kaplan folds, settles with Zeek Rewards Receiver for $392,500
- Zeek Receiver sues Kevin Grimes for “legal malpractice”
- Paul Burks files criminal trial brief