Real Estate Fraud

The City of Miami brought a Petition in Eminent Domain against South River Warehouse, LLC, to acquire a property designated as Parcel No. 101. Filed in December 2021, the case concerned the City’s constitutional right to take private land for public use, provided it paid "Full Compensation." The legal battle was not about the City's right to take the land, which the court had already confirmed, but about the property's fair market value. Throughout the trial, the City's legal team presented evidence supporting a lower valuation, while counsel for the property owner argued that the land's unique location on the Miami River made it significantly more valuable. After hearing the competing testimonies of real estate experts, the Miami-Dade jury ultimately sided with the property owner. On December 13, 2024, the jury returned a verdict finding that the Full Compensation due for the acquired property was $10,780,000.00. This amount was substantially higher than the City's initial valuation and concluded the high-stakes property dispute.

In a victory for the Plaintiffs, an Eleventh Circuit jury in Miami-Dade County delivered a verdict on November 14, 2024, confirming Oscar and Shirley Manzanares’ equitable claim to a family property against Oscar Simeon Exposito and Carmen Cuellar. The case, which centered on a family agreement to jointly purchase a home, concluded with the jury assigning 50% ownership to the Plaintiffs and the remaining 50% to the Defendants. The Plaintiffs had argued that while the deed was only in the Defendants’ names due to credit concerns, they had significantly funded the mortgage and improvements under the promise of co-ownership. The jury agreed with the Plaintiffs, finding that the Defendants committed fraudulent inducement and were unjustly enriched by the Plaintiffs’ investments. Although the jury awarded only nominal damages of $1.00 for the monetary claims, the primary significance of the verdict was the judicial recognition and formal establishment of the Plaintiffs’ half-ownership interest in the property, effectively resolving the long-standing dispute.

Plaintiff Michael LaBoy sued Defendants Charles J. Diven, Jr., a disbarred attorney, and Anna M. Diven. The Verified Supplemental Amended Complaint alleged a fraudulent scheme. The Plaintiff claimed the Defendants scammed him out of over $244,000 in cash deposits. These deposits were intended for the purchase of a property and construction repairs. Plaintiff alleged Mr. Diven falsely promised to hold the money in escrow. Instead, the funds were allegedly used outside of escrow for incomplete or fraudulent construction work. The Plaintiff sought damages, treble damages, attorneys' fees, and restoration of possession. Defendants denied the allegations and asserted counterclaims. The jury found in favor of the Plaintiff, Michael LaBoy.