Talisman Capital Alternative Investments Fund, Ltd. v. Mouttet (In re Mouttet), 493 B.R. 640

Background

Private funding source disputes with a Jamaica casino venture over three deals: two unpaid loans and one equity element not obtained.
Plaintiffs EGE and Talisman sue numerous defendants, including the Debtor Mouttet, alleging Federal and Florida RICO, conspiracy, and related Florida state-law claims.
Key loan history: a 29.5 million loan to SVL secured by SVL marketing-fee liens, with SVL owned by Levy, Hoo, and Stewart; Atlantic Marketing Services Limited (owned in part by the Debtor) funded the loan via a 29.5M loan and related agreements.
2005 modification, lien release, and partial repayments culminated in a remaining unpaid balance on the 29.5M loan; 2007 personal guarantees by the Debtor and a separate 13.6M loan guaranteed by the Debtor also remained unpaid.
Jamaican judgment and later litigation: Jamaican court ruled against EGE on stock ownership; EGE pending appeal; in Florida, District Court severed Core Counts from Severed Counts and reduced subject-matter jurisdiction over the RICO claims.
Relief Defendants and comity: the court addressed constructive trusts against relief defendants and gave comity to the Jamaican judgment, significantly affecting claims related to SVL stock.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Severed Counts are within subject-matter jurisdiction	Plaintiffs contend District Court referred severed counts for related-to jurisdiction.	Court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over the Severed Counts.	Severed Counts dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
Whether the Foreign and Relief Defendants can be subjected to personal jurisdiction in Florida	Plaintiffs rely on conspiracy/enterprise allegations to assert jurisdiction.	Personal jurisdiction not adequately pleaded; relief defendants lack basis for claims.	Motions to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction granted; relief-defendant claims dismissed with prejudice.
Talisman’s standing to pursue Florida and Federal RICO and conspiracy claims	Talisman has standing to pursue alleged RICO/conspiracy claims as assignee.	Talisman lacks proper standing due to failure to allege valid assignment of RICO claims.	Counts III, IV, XIII (and I, II as to Talisman) dismissed for lack of standing.
Are the RICO and related claims pleading-compliant and extraterritoriality-valid	Complaint asserts RICO claims and conspiracies with some Florida connections.	Claims fail Rule 8/9/12 pleading standards and lack sufficient extraterritorial nexus.	Federal/Florida RICO pleadings dismissed for failure to plead pattern, enterprise, and predicate acts; extraterritoriality and related state-law claims largely dismissed.
Relief Defendants and constructive trusts	Plaintiffs seek constructive trusts on Relief Defendants’ assets and SVL stock.	Constructive trusts are inappropriate and comity bars some relief; no basis to attach Relief Defendants’ assets.	Counts XVII-XVIII and all relief-defendant claims dismissed with prejudice; constructive trusts not available.

Key Cases Cited

Hilton v. Guyot, 159 U.S. 113 (U.S. 1895) (comity framework for foreign judgments)
American Dental Ass’n v. Cigna Corp., 605 F.3d 1283 (11th Cir. 2010) (pleading standards and plausibility under Twombly/Iqbal)
Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (S. Ct. 2007) (pleading plausibility standard; two-pronged approach)
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (S. Ct. 2009) (elaborates on plausibility and Rule 8 standard)
Rogers v. Nacchio, 241 F. App’x 602 (11th Cir. 2007) (RICO conspiracy pleading requires additional allegations)
In re Toledo, 170 F.3d 1340 (11th Cir. 1999) (arising under vs arising in bankruptcy; related-to scope)
Ungaro-Benages v. Dresdner Bank AG, 379 F.3d 1227 (11th Cir. 2004) (comity factors for foreign judgments)
Bender v. CenTrust Mortgage Corp., 51 F.3d 1027 (11th Cir. 1995) (constructive trust limitations and remedies)
New Hampshire v. Maine, 532 U.S. 742 (U.S. 2001) (judicial estoppel framework and equitable considerations)
Grogan v. Garner, 498 U.S. 279 (U.S. 1991) (standard for dischargeability objections)