Family Endowment Partners LP and its owner, Lee Dana Weiss—Fraud Charges

Ponzi scheme attorneysFamily Endowment Partners LP and Its Owner, Lee Dana Weiss, Allegedly Engaged in Self-dealing and Failed to Disclose Material Facts to Clients Regarding Conflicts of Interest; Allegedly Urged Clients to Invest More than $40 million in Illiquid Securities

Family Endowment Partners LP (FEP) and Its Owner, Lee Dana Weiss, allegedly engaged in self-dealing and failed to disclose material facts to clients regarding conflicts of interest, according to SEC Document currently under review by attorneys Alan Rosca and Joe Peiffer.

FEP and its owner, Lee Dana Weiss, of Newton, Massachusetts, allegedly urged their clients to invest more than $40 million in illiquid securities issued by several related companies without purportedly disclosing that Weiss had an ownership interest in the parent company of these entities and received payments from these entities, the SEC also notes.

Peiffer Rosca Wolf securities lawyers are currently investigating Family Endowment Partners LP and its owner, Lee Dana Weiss’s alleged self-dealing and failure to disclose material facts to clients regarding conflicts of interest.

FEP and Its Owner, Lee Dana Weiss Allegedly Recommended Their Clients Invest in Entities that Weiss Owned and Controlled without Disclosing that the Investments Would Be Used Primarily to Benefit FEP

FEP and Its Owner, Lee Dana Weiss allegedly recommended their clients invest in entities that Weiss owned and controlled without disclosing that the investments would be used primarily to benefit FEP, according to SEC documents currently under review by attorneys Alan Rosca and Joe Peiffer.

FEP and Weiss also allegedly advised clients to invest in a consumer loan portfolio while concealing that Weiss himself would secretly pocket half of the clients’ profits from these investments, the SEC notes.

Between 2010 and 2012, FEP and Weiss, between 2010 and 2012, allegedly advised 11 FEP clients to invest more than $40 million in securities issued by subsidiaries of a French company that purportedly had designed methods to reduce the harmful effects of tobacco smoking, according to the SEC. The SEC also notes that Weiss allegedly had a financial stake in the French company.

Securities Lawyers Investigating

The Peiffer Rosca Wolf securities lawyers often represent investors who lose money as a result of alleged self-dealing and failure to disclose material facts to clients regarding conflicts of interest. They are currently investigating FEP and its owner, Lee Dana’s alleged failure to disclose material facts to clients regarding conflicts of interest. They take most cases of this type on a contingency fee basis and advance the case costs, and only get paid for their fees and costs out of money they recover for their clients.

Investors who believe they lost money as a result of FEP and Lee Dana’s alleged failure to disclose material facts to clients regarding conflicts of interest may contact the securities lawyers at Peiffer Rosca Wolf, Alan Rosca or Joe Peiffer, for a free no-obligation evaluation of their recovery options, at 888-998-0520.

Alan Rosca (1157 Posts)

Alan is a securities lawyer. He also teaches Securities Regulation at the Cleveland-Marshall College of Law. He focuses his legal practice on complex commercial and financial litigation and arbitration, particularly in the areas of securities and investment fraud. His office is in Cleveland, Ohio.


In our legal system, every person is innocent until and unless found guilty by a court of law or a tribunal. Whenever we reference “allegations” or charges that are “alleged,” such allegations or charges have not been proven, and are merely accusations, not findings of fault, as of the date of the blog. We do not have, nor do we undertake, a duty to continue to monitor or follow cases about which we report, and/or to publish subsequent blogs regarding various developments that may occur in such cases. Readers are encouraged to conduct their own research regarding any such cases and any developments that may or may not have occurred in such cases.