J. Michael Casas — Material Misrepresentations

New Orleans investment fraud attorneyJ. Michael Casas Allegedly Made Material Misrepresentations to Coax Two Individuals to Invest $83,000 of “Seed Capital” to Help Fund an Unconsummated Development and with the Execution of a Planned Reverse Merger Transaction

J. Michael Casas allegedly made material misrepresentations in order to purportedly coax two persons to invest a total of $83,000 as so-called “seed capital”, according to a Complaint from FINRA’s Department of Enforcement currently under review by attorneys Alan Rosca and James Booker.

Said action was done in order to allegedly help fund the development and execution of a planned reverse merger transaction which was ultimately never consummated, according to the aforementioned Complaint.

Several Peiffer Rosca Wolf securities practice lawyers are investigating investment recovery options on behalf of investors in J. Michael Casas’s alleged material misrepresentations.

Investors who believe they may have lost money over J. Michael Casas’s alleged material misrepresentations are encouraged to contact attorneys Alan Rosca or James Booker with any useful information or for a free, no obligation discussion about their options.

Casas also allegedly misappropriated more than $48k of the invested funds and converted them to his own personal use, using these funds to pay his own personal expenses, the Complaint states.

Casas has allegedly never repaid the misappropriated funds, the Complaint reports.

The Peiffer Rosca Wolf securities lawyers are investigating J. Michael Casas’s alleged material misrepresentations.

J. Michael Casas Barred and Ordered Restitution of $50,000 by FINRA; Casas Allegedly Misrepresented that the intended purpose of the funds was for accounting fees, legal fees, and operational expenses of MCB Capital Partners, LLC

Casas allegedly represented that the intended purpose of the aforementioned funds was for accounting fees, legal fees, and for operational expenses of MCB Capital Partners, LLC, which was formed in October 2010 to provide investment banking advisory services, according to the aforementioned Complaint from FINRA’s Department of Enforcement presently being examined by attorneys Alan Rosca and James Booker.

Allegedly only two individuals invested in MCB, the Complaint notes, but, as one of the investors hired Casas to work for him and purportedly refused to testify at the hearing, the Hearing Panel was unable to determine if the individual recouped any of his losses when negotiating Casas’s salary before employing him, said Complaint notes.

The other investor allegedly filed for arbitration in 2012 and the dispute is purportedly pending, the Complaint states.

Based on the aforementioned behavior, Casas allegedly violates FINRA Rules and therefore has been borrowed and ordered restitution of $50,000, the Complaint reports.

Securities Lawyers Investigating

The Peiffer Rosca Wolf securities lawyers often represent investors who lose money as a result of investment fraud and are currently investigating J. Michael Casas’s alleged material misrepresentations. 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 J. Michael Casas’s alleged material misrepresentations may contact the securities lawyers at Peiffer Rosca Wolf, Alan Rosca or James Booker, for a free no-obligation evaluation of their recovery options, at 888-998-0520 or via e-mail at arosca@prwlegal.com or jbooker@prwlegal.com.

Alan Rosca (1225 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.