JS«CISONY REV:-'1J2008,

CV 10230

m;; 1 6200g~

.,. -p' -

rh~ J$-4~ ~!o;" C>OI.@r' ~~0@\ _ Ih~ K11<,"",.llIm oon'~ined lI~f~i'l !I!lilh!)r rljp!;t1\>1 "'II" '~up,pJ~lfilOillll'!e IlllnD-.md $~rv!!C~ 01 ~itJirllJ~ ~r oilier iJ;iI,lI'o!ld'$ M reqli!~·bl':·IB". !I~"1i!1II$ pro· •• d".d by 11>1;31 t'il1tlI! of' ~oon 'TIJ~ 'f'omt, .",,'D"eo~ II)' 'U;;; .JOIdi~i!!1 C .. "i ... ~~~. ol1t1~ Un~~d 1I!.iLei!tl ~ S";pll!ilrtl!)er 1~N,;R r'!Io!ll!ilf't4:r.;,. I'$>~ "fllt ... ,clerk 01 C~!lfi W tll'~ ~",!!o~~I"'.Ilo~i,;~

1I't~ ·~i'<'il dai'tel ~6'e'I' . .

PWNT!FFS

PB~t:r ida Cdben

ATTORNEYS (F.IRM NAME, A_CrJRF-'SS. AND TELE:FHONE NUMBER) ATTORNEyS (IF' KNOWN~

Paul ,B8:ti:sta, P.C.

:'~:w~t~~t~;~:ws~'~;k 16884 (2121.98.0,-.0'070 .

-Action under i8 u. s • C. Be,t'tion 1964 fer damagaa

CA.USE Of ACTIONIClrE. THE. u.s. GIIIIL,STt\TlJlE:'UrfOER WHiC!'I '(OU ARlO nl,.INt; AtiD 'NRIU;A BRIIi1F'!ij,rATEMi:l'N

. . . (Do'!lm CITE JUR ISO IC'TlOtoiL.·.S'!:ATLITE I> !.IN~"ES':S OivEF.lSITV·! . .

NATURE OF SUIT

t ] t1~ [ 11~~' Ll'L~ t J 1oW1

[ 1 >Si I'alSONJ4.IRllIR'r' • [] '$"I~ ~ w..L..~E- ~l!'i2Q r J 3B5PER5OOAL ~Jl!R'i(

. . PI'IODlJCT LI-'rt t 18'2$ IJ.~ ~'OS'p~ ~~L,IR'I'F~C"

!MiIIl1J1"¥'

.M;;Ii!ICI.!i.TI,J~ mH~RFCQD"

~::::~~E.LATEi'l

!EZUIiiIE OF' 'PAO~TY ~H):>C~1

[ I ~ LIQ~W'll,'; -. n Mlj. IlR&, TRt.I..~

~~= ~:'A~

SA~IH5IiLlI-I

I W,Kl OTHER

rl'l~

[ ]151 1]15.2'

~ilROKlm' [ 1 mo O"I:1~I'II'(WjD

[-.I':rrt Tl'I. Ifoi.l-E:t.I~G

ttm. PEFtSOkAl

m'~R'I't~£ [ i ~ p;t~f'( o,;,w.,G ~..oo!JCT iJA9!Lm'

I ,~«1 'rI'OlIING

I rm Er.WLO'I''MEN'J II 4u HOUSlt«l'! .

AC~[Jt,H~:;; n.U4, WELFARE

I 1 -«~ MlERilCAHS wmt P!:s,td!!l-I~. 9oI1'1l.O'\"MBiT ll~ AM~SWrrH

j;)1~IIE;S..tmim []oU'D b'rH:eF!I;lIll~R~JS

~R~E,I!~TIT_1i 115JO ~mT19~ro l,IACATE·.::lEffTDICIG 211'l}SC 'Z255

1 1 ~Il. _EAS OORPuS ! J 535, CR:J\ilt ~ rr.

I I !>til _DNiAUs &. OIlieR I $S!l i;i\IlL RfGiffS

1 I~ i>RllSQH,cQI\I~

[ )<lGl [ .1·41>5,

ru.-ruRAl..lZA~ ,~Ic .• :r~· . IW!IOAS CCRPlJ5!. Al..1Et4oa~~· OiHeR·!!o!M!!ilI'Yl.'t~ ACTlO~.

112tO Hm 11130

1 12~D 11:20115

j'12l!1O!

lJIKIl OOI'lDElMoiATloti iro~Cl.osIJilill;; FlEI'U !.u..~i!i, ·eJ~JT 'HlitrS 'k! LA"ID TORT PR,WI,'CT IJAEIIIJT't' :~U..OI~R

R!Ii:AL AAQfSTlt'

[ 1 ,~22 ""p;;,q_

2.'6 !JSC105$

. l H~ il'l'IYI:I!tif;llW/Al. .2i8~157

PROHFtl'f ~Gtl,!,~'

[ 1 8<oi) OOMtG!1iS· E J ~ PI. rein' il~ TRA~~,

(I,THEA ST;,;nJT~ []-'IOD :iTAii

~QRm~ENr I' 1,4!IQ ~rfillST

. r j4M ~U,i!~'ii!INCl [j~~O~..C'.E

[ ]!I_6Q c~~M'!0t4

t H,m Ri"~INi'LJJ-·

, :~~~~

(~1C'Ol:

[ j ~ IXlt.QIj;j£J.l.~eOIT

t1~:~~~

li~ ~iMflES' ~M'l'ODIT!E.s!

T.1~ e_iiW' AL~JlOfolACl'

~ 11195 ffieJ;CP!t.Hlf IHFOIllWi.TlON ACT

I ] goo APPEAt QF FEe 1)i;'fEF!P4NA,nttl ~I'lB'tE~ I<!XESS TO JlJSlliCE

r 1 ~o OOtI$Tlr~o~rn" , .' OF ,$1,11."" GTATltTe~'

'In,o FPAR~ !lTA~f'iCT II'~O~ ,RELi.:TlOHS· .

117~O~

REI'OFtTIiIG' l ~ TAX'

111~Q ,~~~:rAGr I J an'o,·r1t..1l:e.$~1J..a

I.I~ OT~I..A!8DI'!·" . . O~niI;W~

UTlG~TIOi'i ,_ r 1 B7; I.~'THIIID 'r>I!.!Wi"

[ i ~. E~~ET!fiC U usc 16lle

. -SEC!J;iJ.TOiCT .

.. CIMt!:k.lJ'OOf!'!lJflitlM Ifl. qpmpIilinL:

n CHECK !F nilS, lS A -CLASS .A.cmON DO YOU CUlM rurs Y. ASE J5 'R.I;I./I. Tel? TO A CIVIL CA.st.· 'E.' ' _ .• iW PENDI NG IIiS.po.N,Y ?

-- - UNDER F_Re.?, 23 IF SO. STATE: .

DEMAND ',-" OTHER .. N_l-A_-, __ JUDGE DOCK " .. NUMBCRi- _

C\l'I8ck. 'YeS bnlylf dtl!rmdsd iJJ. CXN1'~fainl JUFW oeMAN1J~'~ YES, U NO

UNITED STATES OISTRICT COURT. 0' .. '"_'.1 9.- ...•• '

SOUTHERN DIS-TRIor OF"NEW YORl{ .

" .:

P]:amtifK

09'Civ.

. ...,.

JURy 'TRIAL DEMAN-DED

srnVEN A. COHEN, S.A.C. TRAtliINCl CORP.~ S~.A.C a . eMIT AL I\4A.NAGEldENT~ INC;.; S.-.A,.C., CAPITAL·MAN~:GE.ME~T~

LP S·· A· C c ~'A' P·I'TA· L 1lI,i{' Ii. l!:IA' G'" E·' "" AIU'io.'r"i"

~. -_ ~'''.' .... _~ •. "'~ : : ~', ":., . ·lV,.!.itu..",-:, -- rlVm.l~.l"

LLC~ S;A~C" CAPrI AL ADVJSORS,~l.LC~ S.t,\,C. CM.ITAL ASSOCIATES} LLC, . SiGlVlA CAP1TAt MANAGEMBNT., LLC. and DONALD T. COHEN~

-----,-,-,-------------~.--------.~------.--,---

OOMPLA·INT UNUiER

- -

TH.E RAC~TEER]NftU~NC.ED

AND.·cClRRUPT ORGANIZATIONS' ACT

P~aiiltiffPatrida Cohen.~h'andthrough her'attorney~, Paul Batista~P'.C'11 for'

.' -

her Complaifita,gainst defendants respoctfuUy alleges as. follows: ,

L

This.Is an, ,action arisingj)om de:fen.dan:ts~ vi9-latlof'l Qr ,the RatkiCleer

• . . I

and. wire fraud -in violatloll. of .18- U.S.C. §§ 1341' and 1343~ Doth of which are: predi.cate

2. . :M.o:roover.;, defendant Cohe.n 'has: cendneted the affaIrs.. cf .an

.enterprise iden~it1~d in this: ComptaiJu as the; i'S,AC E]]terprH;e~'l thtough.,. :apatt.:e:m. of

. .

.cohen. - and from the Supreine .Court of the: state ·of New York - ·'dur.m.gthei.·oourse of

transactions mid other faets that· shouldbavebeen~ 'bti~ were not, disclosed.to her and to

the Supreme Court ef the State of New Y orkin ru:i~ ma.de by defendant Cohen or on

.4. Defendant Oehen's fraudld.em coneealment of hiS activities-from

~. Coh~u w,!!s·'·coosistent ·with· '.11. pattern. (If highly secretive conduct 'iliat has long chara~eti~ bis business and personal affairs. A~ :reeen:tly. as. Deeembee 4" 2UQ9~

2

.'

.J u r:isdiction ,a lid. VeO.D.e

. .

S. This Court has' j~rioo~c;tion over the' su~ject -rm;Jtter of this action

pUfS:ua;ot 'to. 18 llIS.C, §l196J 6t seq ... ~,.28U.-~tC. §:133J, 2S U~S.G .. §133} .mi~ 28 U.S.C. g1367.

6:.Per~nal jurisdiction and venue in.' this Distrh;:I. ~re.·propetpursl!,a;nt to

eVt:1lts .~vil1lg rtse to the·da.i1ns_ for relik:f took place in this District Parties.

7,P],ainti_-ffis a citizen of-til.e· State of New York.

to. Defendant S.A.C. ·Capital ~Mana,gemetlt~.lri.c. tSAC' Capital Inc, ul"is

a co:rpQrati~m ':or~anjzed Oil or about "IHU.,. 28~: 19'92 und,er the laws ofth,e StaJe Of

Delaware·.

---------- - _.- _.-

---_ .. _-----------------

1.1 .. , Defendant ELA.:C~ Capita,l· Managemeat, LP r'SAC Capital LPi!~) is

an entITY organ~d l,mder the laws .afdis· State. of Delaware on or ·about May 22~ l·992 with all Qffice lo(ated. at' 12,Ctlmm.lngs .Pomt Road, Stamf~rd~ Coooectic1l:c 06902.

lil. Def~nd~nt ,S·.i.\:C. bapit,a,] M.anagelll.~nr" LLC ('·SAc;.: l;LG~'~) 'isan

or~~ed underthe laws: ofthe State of Delaware.

t5~ ~fenrlmt Dnrrald T. Cdilen. ("n. CQh:en~l" theJuClther ofdefenda:ll~ Cohen, is a eenified .PubUc Accou;ntnntwi~ M. office :fit 2500 North .Military Tm:U #283~

(i) Tb.o Ma.~tiage or PlalntitT an,d.DefeDtiaDt'

4

. .

WbmtoA Sehool, was associated with a, D\lJnber of fiml~ . in the securities indJ.]Stry asa

• - , , •• I • ".

18 ..

rlches(':persurI .in.the· United' States - 'enj oyed. stgniflc-ani financia~ success Jromth.e (juf:Bet of his career, Durin~.19.80, the. firstmU year of his 'marriag~ to Ms, Cohen. defendant

C ohe d, <_ ·d···.. than $i:fiifi' ooo

v; e·n I~,!!mle ... more .. .. . v,:,v, .

. name ,only ail Grunral &- Co, f~'Grunta1 ~~)based on b.i's· rltpr-eseumtion· "chat . the· ·aJ?P~ximatelr $9.o0~OOO would :yield a. l~,n of.50% jo l~h If he tradedwitl. .. the margh:1 arut" ~everage allotted to him by Gruntalbeeause.cf his nelationship with. Gmn.tal.

21. .Ms. Cohen. placed full Ie~~ance 011: defendant Cohen's

. .

.repre~ta,tions. .Af.Rong l~ther. thm,~ deteluiant; Cohen;'tti!d,Ms," CQben~ that .$he could not

22. Defendant Cob,en also 'a,d,vi:Self Ms .. Cohen' that it 'was his goa] to

establish his.own investment fund, and that be required as much eapitalas be could secure to ,advanc¢that gOal ~ bl. order 'to assist defendant Cohen, MS. Cohen never questioned his

claims that only lie could' have access to the trad,iDg account at Gruntal.

Ft')' .\U

DB'ffmda~DtC.ohe.n·'l Insider T.r,adhll Activity

'.23. In late 1985,. defendant Cohen advised Ms. Cohen 'that he had

received iaside informarion in advance of the purchase of RCA Corporation ("ReAl') by

General Electric Company (~E'). Although.'She did nor have a college degree and had

])0 [raining In finance or la:w, .Ms;, Coheaquestioned de~ll,dRnt Cohen about nt~ legality

.. . .

of trading on inside infonnatlon in .genend and with respect tothe RCA~GE transaction in

. . .

wasa ~lhartOli classmate of Cohen) he had not received the infonnatiml directly from tl,e .h1S;id.er· but from a, mutual frie:nd. Accordingto defend.ani: Cohen, this' meant 'thai he

'was not invol ved In' illegal insider 'trading,

24. .Soen ,after Ms. Cohen's discussions with defendant Cohen about

insider trading, the takeover of'RCA by ~GE was announced. Upon information and belief

_, the sources of which. are statements made hy him to pJ.uintiff - defendant Cohen traded

on the inside infbrmation' he had received and realized. slibslantialproflts in late 1985 8:Ild

early 1986 from insiderttad~g generated by the, RCA~G~ transaction. Cohen assured

Ms. Cohea that" insider trading was 0nly a -civilmaner, not a' criminal one ..

6

(iii) The S'EE 'Investigation ,and, COben' s Inveea thl'h. of-His:' Fiftb A:m.end.menllPrivU.ege,

25. The Securities and. ExchangeComm:i~sioR (the "~SEe'), i.llY(;stigat.ed

Cohen:t~Lro.le in the RCA .. GE transaction. ID.·COMfCt10U wit~ that investigatien, C0h.ep

Act~llest

26. At the e:xamination~ de'fclldant Cohen refused to. produce· any

: documMts~ IOjiin~. D.iS . privilege ag~ins1. self- i:m::;rim~natw:on uader the Fiftb Amendment', tit

:Cohen] prlor tolbe publiC: anaouncement tilaJ RCA. wuuld be Ellvoived in. a lll.ergu With

General. Eleetsie;" .and Oii) wbether Cohen "had .any agreement ·to share'profits and/or

name or lh . e name of any o:the.r ·person.or·entity..~"

7

f8. Allhe SEC examinatlon, defendant· Cohen also invoked his Fifth

Amendment Privilege and did not testifY in response to the question, k[D]O you have' a

securities brokerage account at any foreign financial insttl:utiQu 1"

29. Upon. information lind belief the events associated with the RC:A~

subsequent acts rev.ea.ling an on-going, long-term panernin the conduct of business by

defendant Cohen '.and 'the multiple, SAC and related entities he contto,lg·. As· recently as

November 6,2009~ The Wall Street Jouma! reported 'that a former employee of one .or

and was expected 1.0 ceoperate with them in a criminal fuvesti~atiQn ofthe 'SAC' entities.

f" .t..~ • "d: . di

. or nOSShille, ,ffiS,l ·:er tra . :mg.

,I" ,

·D. The Divo:rc.e Proeeedi:D2$

(0 Defenda:nt Coh.e.D.'s .Fi.Qan;ciaJ Statement

30. Defendant Gohen filed a -Jury 1, 1988 Statement of Fjnancial

CQ,nQ,ition (dIe ~(198~'.Statement'·) in. conn¢ct.iQu w.th a divorceaetton wvolving himself and. Ms. COhen in -.the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York.

The I 98.8 Statement was~ upon infbrmation "and belief; sent through toe United States

P-ostsi Service, 'as wellas by wire transmission, and was also filed in the Supreme Court

of the State· of New Y ork

31. The 1'988 'Slatement was materially false and . misit;-a.d,ing as a,

consequence of the scheme to defraud MSr Cohen, and to conceal tb.el:hlUd,inw.hich

defendants Cohen .and D. Cohen participated.with the assistance of others.

8

·and D~. Cohen uti.llzed the 'Pan AmerIc1$m1 Account - the existence of whfeh was not

,ll. In 'adiljti~n~ the l ~g8 S'tatement failed to di~tcto\S~ that SAC Tradi.n:g Was. an . (}ctive ,e!ll,tily ,ppe'rating from a I,p,ca.tlon at ,8'5.25 S'lV-.Igili .Avenue, Coeper City~

.Statement,

.14. Moreover, 'dle J988· Statetnemf :faiJed. to '-d:isolose the existence ot

pum!ive ent!tl.es 'various_ly iuentified by defendants Cohen and D.Cohen as '~~CPA l:ledgefimd. CQ~~ Ltd/'and '~PA Hedge C-O.;' UpooinfoonaNon: andltteIiet, CPA

HedgefundCo.~ Ltd.md CPA· Hedge Co, were;". ficdtiQus eDtit:~e1=l- ,througb which. defenda_uts Cohen an4 D. Cohen concealed multlplere1l,! . estate ·rmj]}s~atio[fsftom·M·s,.

( .....

. il:,

Defent"bmt, Cohe'D,'sMav 1, 1.991 Affidavit -,

35. On May 1, 1991.~ deren'd~t Conen. l~an affid.avi.t flied in the

SlJ:Pfeme _Court of the Stat~ of- New York (flle "May 1 Affidavif1~ repeated tbe false claiirrn, made in-the 1:988 Statement Cohen. te~'tifieda:s follows. in the mfidavit:

Prior to e.ntering Into [the December 1.5 ~ I. 9l{~l S'eparatioD .Agre~meT:10, defendant [Ms:. CohiCQ]~a$ ~rhl.ed. with 1j. ClOpy of a. stetement of OP.1' financia;l condition as ',of July '1.

1'988 This statement indicated a net worth of

- - -." . - .

.$16~93n,537, $,8;745~ 169 of whi~h was. represented by a

H· . ·'1 state d· . a]" ithBrett L " ~~ ( .. r. . c .. ' rts ,., ), '. d I.h·

rea .. esta e e wnn. ~.!>.iLL· nne I. coop rna, gages. an ".' 113,

was SQ indicated on the.statement, The Brett Lurie deal IS -presently mvolved in bankrupt~y proceedings, Even thenI suspected that. this would ha,ppen because the general partner was in default, I am writi~g it off as totally worthless. ,Su:btr.tJding d~e "WJ,iueofBrett-Lurie'fr-om my net assets at '~hilt' time means that my net" worth ~aS $8.1'85.368, [See Aftidavitdated May l, 1991 at, ,16; emphasis suppl,ied.·1

3C5.Defendant CqheJi's·.May 1. ,Affidavit-:w'as sent "on orabout -M:ay l,

199.I.thr-ough the United States Postal service and by wire transmission.

mate-dally false: and misleading. Among other things, defendant Cohen never "wrot] el

off" Od.) the so-called Breit-Lurie deal as ~~tomny worthless. i' In addition.,: '!he affida*it [ailed to. disclose, either to Ms. Cohen or tome Court to whic~the a:ffidavilwas.

submitted, a complex set 'of transaetions (~Be 49-52~ infra) reJadng to til_e' so-called Breu Lurie "deal' orchestrated b)1 delenda.J,lt Cohen~. defendant D. Cohen, and albers

through which Ms.. Cohen was defrauded. Moreover, the .M~,y ] Affida:vit~ hke the 1.988

Hedgefund Co., Ltd," entities and the transactions in w h.ichthey~ defendarit Cohen and. defendantD. Cohen engaged,

"(iii) Defendant CQbe-n '5 May 16. 1991-Affida,vit

3;8·. 'On May 16. 1991; defen.dant Cohen. filed an affidavit (the ~~May 16

A.ffida:vit~) in the Supreme Court of the State of New York .. Upon information and

10

~ . .~. ..

ulCSnTIlje teansrmssson,

39. the 'May 16 Atfi:davit was 8:S" false and. mldead~n, as the 1988 'S~rement ~an.d th.e May L Affidavit. Among. other things, 'defendant eob~n in his May liD Affidav~~ass¢rted. tbat "1 .am me.n:l:)' ._, ~m,plq.yee of Gdurta~ &. GQ/' TtJ,at i.lss,e~iQ:Jl was.

and to coneeal frou] berthe 'Substantial financial activity, d,e'fundantB. Cohen and D.. Goben bad lnitia:t€d .. as esrlyas 19S6tbrough defenda.nm 'SAC Trading,and,tne so-called &~CPA

c. !lflfIlD,ants' Fc.udu.ene COb.ce.abol!!m

40. In Matti] 2mJ:6.tfte ·CBS program.liO ·.}Vfmute~ broadcast a '~ptu1 on

defendant Cohen mid "one of the largest hedge fiEnds in the wQrld. caUed SAC.~~Ms.

Cohen watched. the ·progr:;Im.

_ _

oorop;Ml¥ -accn8~ allc)th~~~,ge: C9mpaJty- o_f de1ib;ra~ely :tryiilg.:t<o dri,V!\r d~wn ltss!pck

_ _

ptice[O,. matern.nlley. Ifthe aUega~ions are tme~ res Uke fixin,g agame, ~,!, The~'~g$De

. _' . '. -. _.

ehtjties.

11

42", The . broadcastrevelves around. claims fhat~~SAC,~' described. in the

CorpQration ("Bi.o:vajr') in an elrod arlj,fieiaHy' to drive down. the price of~'-io:vail shares.

. ..

SAC. He IivegaU but. ~I:udOO, on 3; sprawling Gteenwich~ Conn.rodent 'estate., Hissaiary .last year' was reporte.dly $ 500 mi lllon,"

44. Oh!;:en. 'the nega.tIve" critkal treatment of defendant (~ohen'rn ",llie tiD

- --

Minutef)' broadeaa, Ms .. 'Cohen became eoncemed for t:h,c' ,first: time that 'information

." ' . ._ - . ' ... _-" .

'"LRVQ";t..oI..,,, I,:A' .. ,C"nh', """ believ ... a -;Ie ... """"u14- oftlie «.'0. ~~~'~'t09" b r;,..a'~""';"t'~b.at such cond net , " _ ~~lL:U"',WlJ~ J:VL')'~ , 'U' ,~"'Jj, ,~" _, ,.~_ ".g~ 'w; .J.'!Ip!~.,.",.'-'. _ _' 'U'" It'.U'iI'''''''''~L,,=,''-'' 'V"'Y_~"".1i!! Ql . ~y,~ ,WV.l . .l1 .~~_

could be directed at her 'as' weEL

.Ieamed as a res;uh of investlg3tlons after the ~Marcb '.2006 broadcast of ,60 Mift:tde~~ defendant Cahen. with the active assistaece of 0'. Cohen and ,other def'endMts~

State' of New York ~1US pe.rpetua;tedby a.efelidants ~ fraudulent ··OOnceafmelWt of the.

,. .

.Ms. Cohen to furtber i:nves.ngation .dr defendmn .. Cehen's activities and their imp,act 00 her. Amo.ng 9thcr th~ngs~ Ms. Cohen, em .~.llly 8~ i008~ mterv'ie:we~a 'former:ltigh,,:~]di1g ~eeU~jve of Gruntal As ·pr.evious~yd.eSQr1b¢., i(J,efen;dant Oohenhad ·.fQr years; advised

Ms. Cohen learned that .defendant Cehen haunevet in fact been . an. ,employee of Gmatal,

as he had repeatedly claimedto her and in papers "filed in theSu.preme. Conn: of the. State ofNew ·Y6rk. b:mte-ad. the former executive described Cohen as both a~ independent

~r""~.J·· "

_~utultlg.· ,

, .

13.

49~ Als,o. as part o.r :her i~vestiga.tion initiated.. ~tfter, the 60 Minules

'~roljldcast~~ . .cohen.. ~oc.ate~l and. obtained the filings'made: in.$ Hlilga,tioll eDUt1~d S~vfln i_(:. CoMn .aridSAC Trdding Corp.. v. .. Brett K. Lurie ahd. Conve1:sion Fu,pding-CQ_rp. (l.he ~~turie IJtiption~') flIed' in 1987 in the Supreme Court oiftlie: State ofNew'YoIt~ Comity ofNew-Yorli.

50". Before IGQs:tin~ 'diefiles in. the Lurie Li'tig;ation. (which were ill

slora~e};., Ms .. Cohen 'had. never been advised ·of the existence of the case, 1n fact,. defendan't Cohen Jm:d concealed the exisrence of tile LUFleLitigation mid. had told .MS .. t_oill?r.i Jn orabeur, 1987 thar fiiil1g. an, 3;C1JOil aa;a:inst Lurie. pvet· ~lege.dr,e~. estate 10S$eg wa.spoint1e~ and'wollldOot'be gpne ..

5.1.. . A:tlid,3;vl.Es, and .. other maf.enal filed in tb.~· Luri~, Litigation d-isolo:$ed

{h,e fpliow'lHg factSI1.e.verreverued. ,by' Cohen. or hi:s n:;:pr,eiientatives to -, Ms. Cohen or the Court in whith·th:~'d~voreeac.ti.o,n between Ms .. Cohen and.defendani·Coben W3~1 filed:

• Before t 9 SCi! defendant Cohen and LU.lrie Invested

toge1h~r' in eight o-oc-upied apar!:m~ts.

" On Jaaaary W~ 1986,. Cohen advanced $290~OOO to Lurl~.to··enahl.e·lA,]rie' t.o. :putchase a.-building in. QUeens,'and 'to C0:HV·ert, the ~parlln.e:llts in. that .baUding i.ntocoop¢ra.tive· .~attm:ents.

• The $290~OOO advancefronl deten.dat1fCohen - whe, lipon ··infommUon and belief in part utilized Ms, Cohe.n~s ftm.:ds;' inmate fu.ea:dvat;lce without: dJscloslng that to., her -

1.4

was .,provIded. ~ti·tb 110 '\mtten agreement ef any :I;:ind bet»,le¢tl Lurie' and defendant Cohen and with:· merely a. verbal und.er8tandiltg, that I.:uriemJght at soma p,cdnt repay Cohen or'

. enter some-other arrangement.

LJ.i' ·f': • . ,,. .... ' ·~·1· ,'n' 'M.·· e,"~fi' fu··..-Ito d ' .. ~. ue er, mpan U"llZl ,g .. S .. JO~""_ snug. ... _080.

-vand-as Ms .. Cohen ~ltilnately learned ill 10'08 ·a·tter securing the 'Court .min0:S in the 'Lurie Litigation - defe.nd·am Cohen told Lurie '1hat 'ibe advance of '$1 ~21J,)~OO{) came' from ·an BAC'

. .

•. In . or . about .. F~nlary· i .986.~ detendanl D. Cohen

etriplo~ee .of SAC Trading iUOlder to obtain: tax advaRtllge~, for defentimn Cohen, presumably' to enable. Cohen to take a. 1.5

deduction for-the sums advanced. to Lurie in connection with die Queens; real estate transactio!ll.

:~~emp.h)y,eer ' of SA€: Trading, defelld.ant D,. (~.!O'hen~ at the: direction of defendant CQhOO, on 'Ma~hh ti;, 19-86, Se11lta, 'ch:etk;, in the amount of$I,~,996,997 to Lurie .

., The check was a~mpan~¢d,~y a fr,audulent letter l4ated· 'Marco 6.~ 1 ;9:8:6 ,adtiitJ~sed to Lurie and s,tati'nglhat thc< cheek W:3S i~JOuitirst sal8,ry' Qh€C'k~' from. ·~~S.A.C. 'frad:itng Corpb:ra;tio"rt."

• Appraicimateiy one week after the first ~~salary check/, SAC tradingissu.ed an,olu:r bo·g[ls~'s.alaryc;heck,'h ro Lurie.

fo~ $500,.000,.

• ByM~c~h 13" 19,86~· def~dant CCihenj wjth the active :a;ss,iStance of defe·l1Jf.fani D. Coh¢n. 'and SAC Tradj~ had pt'Ovided .. Lurie with: $5A96~997.

,!It The $S,4~i6',9'97 pro:vi.ded 'by- defendam CoheR ,and' SAC Ttad~ng was not ~-ured by any mor;gage 'or note: oontmry to r~tations made by de:fendantCoh~ '~n his ~.91tS State',olen:t'anrd" !ii~ May ] Affidavit.

16

• In AuguS;tl"9;8"6 -again without ·disdosingtoMs. Coh.en toot he was doing so - ·.d.efendant Cohen jnveS'red'~m ~ddJtjlJnai $2~750~O:OQ on an. ungecuredb~is with Lurie .and Conversion Fundin.g CPI'ft e~Canv.e:tg:ilYn·FUIldili~~f), aJ;l,entity Gontroned by Lurle,

• Also in AU,s:u:st 1986" defendmt Coben: aSked Lurie t'O return to .defenClan,l CQhe~n appr9:x:onately $4:14~OOO that defendant Cpben. had Qrnly~.((.eD:Uy .pr-ovided·w Lurie, l;Uld LUii.e cOJ:Bplie.d witht~a.re:qYe$t; by sending ~.cheek iil" that ~Olulf with a. letter from Lurie ill which be: ,emphasized ~Uiat :t1;ie '.money should he ·;treated:aS bioomero defendant t~Ohe'n ..

• On or about JStovember5." 1'9816:~ defen.dants Cohen md D. Cobell met with Lutiefpr the .p.m:pos::e pf :creafing a. bog,p$ wri:ttett emp](Jy.m~nt ,agreem.e~lI~ between SAC Trading. ~d Luri~ In order to en,a:15I~ d~fen;d~nt Coben and 'SAC Trading to ohtain' illewjthnate :tax deductions by ,characrierI:Z;in;g tbe $5 )'4·:96~997 in ~yments to Lurie as. salary.

• As, a ccnsequence of' that m~]ng~ de'-fendant Coh-en ag"re:edtQ.pay l;llrie -a "salary~~ of$2~ 750~OOO peryear rot e~h of 193,6, 19:87 and 198:S'~ or' an aggregate .of$$"~,250~OOO.;. under the scheme: develbped by defendants Co.hen. 'and .D. Cohefi~ the 'firSt two 'years ,ofthis aggregate of $8.,25 o~ooo in

17

-.LUFIYU.itil

have been-paid in. the earlier: advanc.es of$5A9i6'.J)91.

'. In January· 1987, Lurie, thrOiugl1 h~i~ loontroli:ed

$2~3 3.5 ~699. lij.tb· fi;2~OOfJ:QOO.

• On Deoomher'2.51, 1986; Lurie reeeived anoth~ dle'dk

, , .

~.~ 1. 1 -f'L·· ~- - "=-1 - -~ •.. - - "·$-·2-· ('i!\Ji:'t\ t:l .... J"i ,&:' '19- g'6-

'tu~ua Wlce 0 _ une -s StU.an" 01 '-,'1 .HJ~'U'UlI.~' IQr· . . d .. ,

. ~. :. . ..,.. - -.

th.e~ad:vances ..

• Likewise, JB, early 192.7, SAC TracHng . provided.

•. In late 19.86 and ea_rly 199.,:~ defen:da_ilt Cohen, and

Lusie agreed: 'i:ha4' as. repayment of the: $:2~QOO~OOO loan to 'l~,

Conversion

Funding,

SAC

T-d· .

M,mg

would. receive

approxlmarely $l.Z~QOO,{lOO from th~ proceeds :receivec,l··from

the conversion or the propertles to cooperatives when and' if

those' conversions - occurred.

. ' .'. -

I. On. or about JuneU, 1987~. de-fendant Cohen and. Lurie

¢1tteted into :~i" settlement agreemem under whic.h. Lurie ··and

Convep;;,iQn Funding executed a note in. the mnoull,t of

January "2. 1990 .

.52., As '(1 'consequence of the, events identified in ~S 1, 3upra~the 50-,

Called : "Bren.Lurie deal" was net ';''\-vol1bles~~~ as defendan:t Cohen asserted in the 1988

Statemeu! and the .l991 affidavits.

Upon information and belief. Cohen's

·mLs·r.epresentations regarding the "Breu Lurie deal" enabled him to falsely. understate his net worth.by apPloximately $,] million,

l.eMocd ,in lOT about December 2008 that defend,ant Cohen; with the active participation of

·transactions Ift:m~, her and from 'the Supreme Court offue State of New York in. defendant

Cohe.n ~ S . 1988 Sta:["(:m'cnl~ in his May 1. Affidavit and .ln his Ma;J{ 16 Am davit:

(0 The- August 10, 198:7 mortgage 'between Melody

Brown. and "Donald T. Cohen; Trustee" in the run.OUlit of $60~OOO;

19

(U) the August 13, 1987 asslgnment. to "Donald T. Cohea,

Trustee" ofan'Augnst 13., 1987 moTtgag~ between George Balls and American Univer.;al Mortgage Banking, Ltd, m. the :amount of'

$125000'

" ~

(in) The August 25,. 1.987 assignment to "Donald T~ Cohen,

Trustee» of a. 'May 29. 198Tmortgage between Liberty Funding and

Trustee" of -a mortgage between Liberty Funding, 3Dd Frat;lcis J.

Lemieux inthe amount 'of $32,000.

-

(v J The December ?:, ~,987 assig;n:ment. t~. "DQnald T.

Cohen, CPA~ as Trustee" -of'a December 9-, 19871Tiottgage between

American Universal Mortgage Banldng, Inc. and Regis Arthur.

(vi) 'IheJuly .30~ 1.987 mortg1t'ge 'between Ozzie Accosea, Inc, and ~iDonaJd r. Cohen, Trustee" for $1.15-,000;

(yH) The February 26, 19,88 assignment to'iDonald T.

Cohen, as Trustee" of a. February 26~ 1988 mortgage between

20.

(viii) :t~e December- •. 5~ 198'8 mortgage between "Donald T.

Cohen, Trustee" and C&.S Management Corp. in the amount' of $21~OOO~

(ix) The December 14~ .19(88 mortgage between ~~Oon8]d 1'.

Cohen, Ttustee" .and Contractor Consulting. Camp'any!; Inc. in the amount of $2;67 ~500,;,

(x] The December 14, 1988 agreement 'between Eagle

S~A. Funding Co. and "~Donaid T. Cohen, T~~" relating to. property ;al476Timpson Place, Bronx, New Yotkinthe amount of $267. 500;.

(xi) The December ~ ~ 1987 mortgage; Detvf¢eh Naolwe:

Realty Corp. and. "Donald T. Cob.e.n~ as Trustee" in the amount of $200~OOO;

(xii) The December 28~.. 1988 mortgage between C&S' Management Corp. .and ~PA Hedgefund, A Limited. Pm1nership[,]. Donald T. .. Cohen, Trustee" inthe amount of $35,,0(10; and:

(xIii) The July 3~ 1991 mortgage between ~. SAC Trading Corp .. ~~ 'and d.efettdam Cohm as assignor with ian i~dd~ss' at L0590 N.W. 2th Street, Miami;FIQrlda, and "CPA. Hedgefund" and de.fendan.t D. Cohen as, assignee with-an address .. at the same- locution.' as ~'S-AC Trading. Corp,'

21

54.. Ea:ch of th,e documents identified in 53, supra; was sent by the

United States. Postal' Service 'Or transmitted ,by wire on OIr .about the dates they Were each

executed,

.Countl

(Violation Or18 U.S.C,.§1962(dl

55. Plaintiff realleges each and every allegation of 1-54~ supra.

56., Each defendant Is a "~'pefson ~~ within the 111,eauing of 1'8 U.S,.t.

faet "enterprise" (tfle :'~SAC Eaterprise") within the.m~nin:g of 1'$ U.S.C. §19(il(4). The

pred]c·~te acts. The 'SAC Enterprise!' was operated, managed andeontrelled principally by (iefendaBt Cohea with· the assistance of other persons, iDcludin,g defendant D. Cehen,

58-. Each, use-of a wire- communication or maTting identified in this

Complalnt' in. connection 'With the overal! scheme and artifice to defraud ·Mr. Cohen

constitutes 3-. separate and. distinct violation of the. federal mail frand 'and Wire fraud

statutes. 18 UJi.C. §U4t.and §1343.

5.9. The acts and the overall scheme and artifice .identit1ed in 'this

60.. Defendants Cohenand D. Cohen conducted, or participated In the.

conduct" of th;e SAC Enterprise th~ugh a. pattern. of racketeering. activ i ty within the

m.e.aning of 18 us.e. :§196 l(S) mviolation 0[18 U$.C. §1962(c). 22

61. Defendants Cohen and D.' Cohen committed acts of racketeering

activity - specifically ~ violations of themaii fraud· statute ana the wire fraud ~tatute" t8, U. S:. C .. § :1.34 j, and I 343 ~ as alleged in thiS' ·Complaint.

, '

62. By reason _of defendants' violation of 18 U.S.C. §1962(c), plaintiff

Patrlei.a Cohen bas. beep damag,ed. man, amount to be determined at trial but believed to

• . - I _

exceed $100 minion, to be trebled pursuant to Ul:U.S·.C. §l964.·

CO'JlDtIl ,

(VlD.latigu of 18 U.S.C~ §1962(d.U

163: Plaintiff repeats. a_nel realleges each and every aUegation ofW 1-62"

.s,upra;

defendant Colien~ defendant. D., Cohen and 'defendants SAC Trading; SAC Capital Ine., SAC Capital LP~ SAC LLC. SAC Advisors, and Sigma, knowingly agreed to facilitate the

scheme and artlfice to defraud rvIs. Cohen ~y managing, 'operating, condu,cting. .and

panicip\atina: in. the conduct of'ilie affairs of the SAC Enterprise and conspired. to do so through a pattern ofracketeer.ing:,activit)r within. the meaning of l81,tS. C §19Q2(d). 65.In.furtheranc~of the conspirecy and to advance the obje~ts. of the

conspiracy, including the fraudulent concealment ofthe scheme and artifice to: defraud,

defendants committed the overt acts identified in this 'Complaint, including-thei' tmn.'imitW~,

. .

.and. fiUng. of the 1 '988 Stuement~ the M~ay"1 AffJ,davit" and the. May 16 A.ffida,vH.,

13

166. By reason of d,efel1d~ts~ violation of IS··U.S.C. §1962(d), plaintiff

'exceed $"1 OO.million,IQ betrebledin .accordance with 18 U.8.C. '§.1964 ..

WHEREFORE-,plaintiffP'atri'cia, Cohen demands judgment. as follows:

-Witb respect to Count I, damages in an amount: to 'be

detennjn~ a1 trial but believedto exceed $1 00 million, to bee

trebled in. accordance with 18 U$.C. §1964'

• With respect ID Count H~ damages in an. amount to be

determined at trial 'but believed· to exceed $100 million, to be

. .

trebled-in accordance with. 18 U.S.C. §1964; and

I. Such a:the-rand further rehef" as ~~e Court deems just and

proper ..

Dated: New York, New York December 9. 2009

P~~·C.Bl·

BY~.···~ ~/'

Paul Batista (pB,81'17) Attorney tor Plaintiff

Patricia Cobell

2t? Broadway, Suite i 900 'New Y ork, New Yo$ lOOO4; (ii2) 98JJ-0010'(T)

(21.2) 344-7677 (F) Bat~sta:007@adl.com

24