Bankruptcy Court Rules Against Lawyer-Felon Over Title to Real Property
Post 5046
Posted on April 11, 2025 by Barry Zalma
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/disbarred-criminal-lawyer-unable-fool-bankruptcy-zalma-esq-cfe-9pn7c, see the full video at https://rumble.com/v6rwykj-disbarred-criminal-lawyer-was-unable-to-fool-bankruptcy-court.html and at https://youtu.be/VuKOHkdXRQI and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5000 posts.
The litigation in the US Bankruptcy Court involved a dispute over the ownership of a property located at 1999 Deerfield Road, Watermill, New York. The Plaintiffs claim that a 2015 deed transferring the property to the Debtor was fraudulent and seek to have it declared void. The Defendants argued that the Plaintiffs’ claims are barred under various legal theories, including judicial estoppel, res judicata, laches, unclean hands, and adverse possession.
In In re: RJT Food & Restaurant, LLC, Debtor, 2027 Deerfield Ltd And George Guldi Family Trust Of April 19, 2000 v. RJT Food & Restaurant, LLC, Richard Bivona, Danmik Investors LLC, Estate Of Robert Voto And Pensco Trust Company, F/B/O Edith K. Spiegel, IRA, No. 23-70447 (REG), Adv. Pro. No. No. 24-08007 (REG), United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. New York (April 4, 2025) found that the Plaintiffs’ claims are barred by judicial estoppel and res judicata, but denied summary judgment based on tax estoppel, equitable estoppel, laches, unclean hands, adverse possession, and ratification of the 2015 deed.
FACTS
George Guldi’s Criminal History
On March 25, 2009, the Suffolk County District Attorney indicted Guldi, an attorney, for his participation in a mortgage fraud scheme. Later that year, Guldi was indicted in Suffolk County for theft of insurance funds. Guldi pled guilty in the 2009 Mortgage Fraud Case, and after a trial was convicted in the 2009 Insurance Fraud Case. Guldi was sentenced to a prison term of three to six years for grand larceny, and one to three years for insurance fraud. Guldi remained incarcerated from February 2011 until July 2017 when his conviction in the 2009 Insurance Fraud Case was overturned on appeal based on a finding of reversible error resulting from the trial court’s denial of Guldi’s challenge to one of the jurors.
In 2019, Guldi was indicted again, this time by the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York for offenses committed during his prior incarceration. Guldi was convicted of wire and bank fraud in the 2019 Bank Fraud Case.
In August 2023, he was sentenced to three years in prison and directed to pay $358,556 in restitution. Guldi was re-incarcerated in March 2024 and is currently in prison serving his sentence.
DISCUSSION
The Trustee moved for summary judgment arguing that the Plaintiffs’ claims should be dismissed based on judicial estoppel, tax estoppel, equitable estoppel, res judicata, and laches. The Trustee also sought summary judgment on his second counterclaim, for adverse possession
Judicial Estoppel
The Defendants argued that the Plaintiffs should be judicially estopped from asserting any interest in the Property in this case because Guldi, in connection with his criminal matters, repeatedly failed to disclose any interest in, direct or indirect, or any claim to, the Property and/or any income generated by the Property.
Judicial estoppel generally requires that the party to be estopped and the party who took an inconsistent position in a prior proceeding, be the same.
Having determined that judicial estoppel is applicable to the facts of this case, the Court found that the necessary elements of that doctrine have been satisfied.
CONCLUSION
The Court granted the Defendants’ motions for summary judgment, in part, and dismissed Plaintiffs’ claims for declaratory judgment and quiet title with prejudice. The Plaintiffs’ cross-motion for summary judgment was denied.
Although for purposes of summary judgment this Court resolved ambiguities and drew factual inferences in favor of the Plaintiffs, the Court finds it beyond reason that Guldi, a businessman and former lawyer with experience in real estate matters, and also a person with severe financial troubles, could be unaware of the 2015 Deed, the Quiet Title Action or any of Bivona’s actions with respect to the Property, a house in Watermill, NY worth over $3 million.
The tangled web created by Guldi to, in the Court’s view, hide assets from creditors was in part predicated on the assumption that Bivona and other parties could be trusted to fulfill their role in the plan. In the end this appears to be Guldi’s fatal mistake.
ZALMA OPINION
Mr. Guldi proved that a lawyer, although knowledgeable on the law, makes an incompetent fraudster and explains why he is still imprisoned. His claim to title to the real property was barred by judicial estoppel and res judicata. The property stayed in the bankruptcy estate and Guldi’s latest attempt at fraud lost.
(c) 2025 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.
Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos.
Subscribe to my substack at https://barryzalma.substack.com/subscribe
Go to X @bzalma; Go to Newsbreak.com https://www.newsbreak.com/@c/1653419?s=01; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/account/content?type=all; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg
Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk
Arsonist Tried To Represent Himself, Failed, and Sought Habeas Relief
Post number 5357
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/he-who-acts-his-own-lawyer-has-idiot-client-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-d4bwc, See the full video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog.
Karacson’s Arson for Profit Attempt Required Skill & Experience to Succeed
In Steve Ellis Karacson v. David Shaver, Warden, No. 25-1089, United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit (May 20, 2026) Steve Karacson was convicted in Michigan state court of arson and insurance fraud after evidence showed he burned his own insured home. Investigators found multiple points of origin, gasoline odor, and evidence tying him to the scene, including cell-phone location data and a receipt showing he had purchased a gas can and gloves shortly before the fire.
FACTS
Karacson initially had appointed counsel, but his relationships with both appointed attorneys ...
Foolish to Repeatedly Disobey Court Orders
All That Remains For Trial Is Plaintiff’s Damages On Each Of These Claims And Establishing Proximate Causation Of Those Damages.
Post number 5348
See the full video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus 5300 posts.
In Linh Wang v. Esurance Insurance Company, No. C24-0447-JCC, United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle (May 1, 2026) John C. Coughenour, United States District Judge, found that throughout this case, culminating with its briefing on Plaintiff’s renewed motion and that Defendant has subjected Plaintiff to unnecessary motion practice for clearly discoverable information and made dubious representations (including to the Court).
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
This case involves an underinsured/uninsured motorist insurance bad faith claim arising from a 2017 motor vehicle collision. The plaintiff, Linh Wang, alleges that Esurance Insurance ...
The Right to Negotiate with Insurer is Not an Assignment of Claims
Post number 5347
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/ambiguous-contract-repair-assignment-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-2xppc, see the full video at https://rumble.com/v79is1s-ambiguous-contract-to-repair-not-an-assignment.html and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5300 posts.
Nebraska Requires an Actual Assignment to Allow Contractor to Sue Insurer
In Millard Gutter Company, a corporation doing business as Millard Roofing and Gutter v. Farmers Mutual Insurance Company of Nebraska, also known as Farmers Mutual Insurance, also known as Farmers Mutual, No. A-24-818, Court of Appeals of Nebraska (May 5, 2026) Millard sued Farmers as an assignee of Jane Anzalone who had hired Millard Gutter to repair the roof of her home and agreed to allow Millard Gutter to coordinate with her insurer, Farmers Mutual, concerning reimbursement for repairs authorized under her insurance policy.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
In ...
Qui Tam Case Without Evidence to Prove Fraud Fails
Post number 5369
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/qui-tam-insurer-contended-defrauded-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-pgfgc and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5550 posts.
In People Of The State Of California Ex Rel. Heath & Yuen, APC v. Silver Bird Auto Leasing, LLC et al., B342847, California Court of Appeals, Second District, Eighth Division (June 5, 2026) Heath & Yuen, APC defended parties in an automobile collision case involving a McLaren and a tour van. After that case settled for $25,000, the firm filed a qui tam action under California’s Insurance Frauds Prevention Act (IFPA) against Silver Bird Auto Leasing, LLC, X-Law Group, PC, and Filippo Marchino. The firm alleged three fraudulent acts in the underlying litigation:
1. the complaint falsely stated the McLaren was making a “legal turn,”
2. respondents produced a fraudulent repair bill/estimate, and
3. respondents failed to disclose Marchino’s GEICO insurance and its payment for repairs....
Full Faith and Credit Act Controlled
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/evHXiiFE and at https://zalma.com/blog.
Posted on June 9, 2026 by Barry Zalma
Post number 5368
Posted on June 9, 2026 by Barry Zalma
In Prime Insurance Company, Inc. v. Medicab Transportation, LLC, Jason Rhodes, and Dale Johnson v. Prime Insurance Company, Inc and Prime Property & Casualty Insurance, Inc. No. 2:24-cv-421-SPC-KRH, United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Fort Myers Division (June 3, 2026) Medicab, a paratransit company, bought two policies in 2021: a Business Auto Policy from PPCI and a Commercial Liability Policy from Prime. Both policies, as originally written, appeared to cover injuries arising from loading and unloading patients from Medicab vans.
After a patient, Margaret St. Aubin, fell while being unloaded from a van and suffered injuries, her Estate made a $1 million demand. Prime and its claims administrator concluded that the Commercial Policy’s loading/unloading language had been included by mutual mistake, because...
Full Faith and Credit Act Controlled
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/evHXiiFE and at https://zalma.com/blog.
Posted on June 9, 2026 by Barry Zalma
Post number 5368
Posted on June 9, 2026 by Barry Zalma
In Prime Insurance Company, Inc. v. Medicab Transportation, LLC, Jason Rhodes, and Dale Johnson v. Prime Insurance Company, Inc and Prime Property & Casualty Insurance, Inc. No. 2:24-cv-421-SPC-KRH, United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Fort Myers Division (June 3, 2026) Medicab, a paratransit company, bought two policies in 2021: a Business Auto Policy from PPCI and a Commercial Liability Policy from Prime. Both policies, as originally written, appeared to cover injuries arising from loading and unloading patients from Medicab vans.
After a patient, Margaret St. Aubin, fell while being unloaded from a van and suffered injuries, her Estate made a $1 million demand. Prime and its claims administrator concluded that the Commercial Policy’s loading/unloading language had been included by mutual mistake, because...
