Receiver Says Moviemaker Defrauded Bayou Hedge Fund
Litigation Reports
Kroll Inc., the court-appointed receiver for the defunct Bayou Hedge Fund, sued movie producer Steven Brown, claiming he used more than $3 million that should have gone to repay Bayou's investment in a new movie. Kroll also sued the attorney who helped Bayou invest in Brown's movies after the lawyer jumped over to Brown's side and allegedly stalled negotiations to help Brown avoid repayment.
Kroll has been in charge of recovering Bayou assets since 2006, after Samuel Israel III and former Bayou CFO Daniel Marino were convicted of stealing $450 million from investors. Israel led police on a goose chase in June after faking his suicide to try to avoid prison.
According to this Superior Court complaint, in 2005 Bayou created various companies to invest in three of Brown's movies. Bayou subsidiary Paid Movie I invested $2.7 million in "Yellow." In exchange for financing "Yellow," Brown promised to repay Bayou's investment within 6 months, plus a 15 percent fee. Bayou would also get half of "Yellow's" revenue. Though "Yellow" garnered good reviews at the New York International Latino Film Festival and the Los Angeles Latino International Film Festival, Brown never repaid Bayou's original investment and failed to make good on either the 15 percent fee or the additional 50 percent share of revenue, the complaint states.
Paid Movie II, another Bayou subsidiary, allegedly wired Brown $250,000 to finance the movie, "Just Play Dead." The Paid Movie II contract held that Brown would share revenue from "Just Play Dead" and send the company weekly accounting explanations - and repay the loan. Brown did none of that, according to the complaint.
Bayou allegedly loaned Brown $200,000 to finance a third movie, "Affairs of State." Again, Kroll says, Brown failed to repay the loan.
In 2006, when Kroll took over Bayou's attempts to get Brown to cough up the money, Kroll says, former Bayou attorney Barry Reiss hopped over to Brown's side. Reiss had represented Bayou and Paid Movie I, II and III during negotiations with Brown, but jumped ship when Kroll took over, according to the complaint.
Reiss kept Kroll from suing Brown by claiming that the movies would soon make enough money to repay the loans, Kroll says. Reiss represented Brown during negotiations of a new repayment schedule. Kroll says it would never have given Reiss permission to represent Brown and would not have excused Reiss' conflict of interest, had Reiss asked it to.
Instead of complying with the new repayment agreement, Kroll says, Brown used the money he owed to make another movie, "Adrift in Manhattan," starring Heather Graham and William Baldwin.
Kroll wants Brown to repay the loans, plus the 15 and 50 percent fees it promised, and damages. Kroll is represented by Richard Fond with Simke, Chodos & Sasaki.
Related listings
-
Appeals court ends a decades-old school desegregation order in Louisiana
Litigation Reports 07/15/2026A federal appeals court on Tuesday ended more than 60 years of federal oversight of a Louisiana school system that had been ordered to eradicate segregation.The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals lifted a decades-old desegregation mandate for the Conc...
-
Supreme Court rejects Meta's appeal in Vermont social media addiction case
Litigation Reports 05/29/2026The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected a push to avoid a lawsuit alleging that Facebook and Instagram harmed young users, a decision that comes as social media companies increasingly face legal scrutiny.Parent company Meta Platforms Inc. appealed afte...
-
US families contest Italian law restricting citizenship by descent in court
Litigation Reports 04/16/2026Two U.S. families went to Italy's highest court Tuesday to challenge the scope of a year-old law passed by Giorgia Meloni's government limiting citizenship claims to Italian descendants removed by more than two generations.Their lawyer, Marco Mellone...
Is Now the Time to Really Call a Special Education Lawyer?
IDEA, FAPE, CHILD FIND and IEPs: The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) guarantees all children with disabilities to a free appropriate public education (FAPE). FAPE starts with a school’s responsibility to identify that a child has a disability (Child Find) and create an Individualized Education Program (IEP) to suit the needs of the child. Parents need to be persistent, dedicated and above all else aware of the many services and accommodations that their child is entitled to under the law. As early as this point within your child’s special education, many parents will often find themselves in the situation asking, “is now the time to really call a special education lawyer.” Here are a few things to consider when asking yourself that question.
