Case Results

Vandalism: Probation Accused of Damaging Public Property

A vandalism charge in New York can carry serious criminal consequences, particularly when the damage involves city-owned structures or infrastructure.These cases often escalate quickly, and even first-time offenders may face aggressive prosecution if the state believes the conduct was reckless or created a public safety risk.Our firm was retained by a client who unintentionally caused damage to public property during a momentary lapse in judgment and then left the scene out of fear and confusion.Although alcohol consumption was involved, the heart of the legal case centered on the property damage itself and the client’s responsibility for the financial loss.This case study explains how our attorneys reframed the incident, emphasized full restitution, and secured a probationary outcome, allowing the client to avoid incarceration and move forward.

Investment Fraud Attorney | Recovered a Full Losses Scam

When a person becomes the victim of a deceptive investment scheme, the financial and emotional impact can be devastating.In New York, complex frauds involving art-tech companies, resale guarantees, and promised returns are increasingly common.In this case, our Investment Fraud Attorney assisted a client who was misled by a trusted acquaintance into investing a substantial sum in an art-based Ponzi like scheme.The client had been promised steady monthly profits and full repurchase of artwork at the end of a contract term.However, when payments stopped and the company refused to honor the repurchase obligation, the Investment Fraud Attorney initiated civil action to recover the full investment.This case illustrates how strategic litigation and fraud analysis can lead to a complete recovery of losses.

Examples of Fraud Cases Investment No Indictment

In Washington D.C., examples of fraud cases often involve disputes where business transactions collapse and one party alleges that the other acted with fraudulent intent. This case study examines a complex investment dispute in which a business owner faced criminal allegations involving more than $2.5 million, yet ultimately obtained a “no papering” / no charge decision at the police investigation stage. Because D.C. law requires proof of intentional deceit at the time funds were obtained, the case highlights how the absence of fraudulent intent can turn a seemingly large-scale debt controversy into a civil matter rather than a prosecutable offense. Through a detailed analysis of evidence, financial conduct, and the parties’ history, this example demonstrates how examples of fraud cases are evaluated under District standards.

Embezzlement Case Defense Prosecution Declined

In this embezzlement case, a corporate employee in Washington D.C. faced allegations of embezzlement and breach of fiduciary duty following his resignation from a logistics company, prompting a criminal investigation that carried significant professional and personal consequences. As the investigative agencies evaluated potential charges under D.C. theft and fraud statutes, the defense focused on demonstrating the absence of unlawful intent, the presence of established workplace practices, and a lack of personal benefit that would otherwise substantiate an embezzlement case. Through a structured and evidencedriven approach, counsel successfully illustrated that the irregularities alleged by the employer arose from internal reporting habits rather than criminal conduct, leading authorities to conclude that the matter should not proceed to prosecution.