Carmen and members of his firm have represented both plaintiffs and defendants in fraud matters. Their fraud experience includes federal court litigation under RICO (the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) and the federal securities laws, and state law claims under state franchising acts, state consumer fraud and deceptive business practices act claims, and common law claims.

Among the successful fraud matters handled by Carmen and his team are:

  • Recovery under RICO and the federal securities laws for 30 investors induced by their dentist to invest in oil wells.
  • Served as “settlement counsel” in advising multiple federal court plaintiffs on the strengths and weaknesses of their fraud claims against their former business partner and their former attorney, assisting these parties in reaching a global settlement.
  • Defense of a debtor in bankruptcy (a lawyer and real estate developer) in a dischargeability hearing in which the creditor alleged that the debtor had procured a loan by fraud.
  • Defense of company executives against RICO allegations arising from alleged interference with a creditor’s bankruptcy proceedings.
  • Defense of a telemarketing firm accused of selling knock-off golf clubs.
  • Defense of a telemarketing firm accused by the California Attorney General of selling fraudulent timeshare investments.
  • Not guilty verdict in a federal court jury trial on RICO and securities fraud claim brought by a restaurant investor against the restaurant developer.
  • Guilty verdict against a dentist accused of fraud in the sale of his practice by reporting revenue achieved by upcoding dental services rendered to his patients.

Carmen’s extensive experience in litigation matters often involves knowledge of several areas of practice. He invoked the use of the North Carolina Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act in an employment litigation matter alleging that a law firm engaged in a deceptive practice by misleading the public and job applicants into believing that the law firm was committed to diversity and inclusion, when the facts proved otherwise. See Employment Litigation description for more detail.