U.S News

NEW YORK (Reuters) – The determine overseeing the execution of physiologist Madoff's assets concern on Tuesday unloved requests by banks to ready secret the obloquy of underway and past employees mentioned in lawsuits hunt to better questionable improper profits equal to the imprisoned Ponzi schemer.

The open revealing of obloquy of workers related with business institutions including Citigroup Inc, JPMorgan Chase & Co and UBS AG was sequential by U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Burton Lifland.

These obloquy were used in lawsuits filed by author Picard, the fiduciary liquidating physiologist L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC, to better money for past Madoff investors, but the obloquy were redacted from publically diffuse versions of the lawsuits. Picard has filed more than 1,000 lawsuits hunt to better roughly $100 billion.

News media including New royalty Times Co and Comcast Corp's NBC News, CNBC and WNBC-TV had requested that the obloquy be revealed.

Banks countered that revealing was unnecessary, and could stigmatize the employees or suggest misconduct.

"The open has a qualified First Amendment correct to admittance certain righteousness documents," and the federal insolvency code "creates a brawny presumption that suite records in insolvency proceedings are accessible to the public," Lifland wrote.

"At bottom," the determine added, "the defendants hit not adequately established some alteration beyond merely difficult or prejudicial connexion with these Ponzi scheme proceedings."

Lifland did earmark JPMorgan to ready low accolade information concerning its "know-your-customer" and anti-money laundering procedures.

The fiduciary is suing JPMorgan, Madoff's main bank, to better $6.4 billion.

Representatives of Citigroup, JPMorgan and UBS did not directly return calls hunt comment.

Picard himself had opposed a broad-based judgement to ready obloquy secret.

"Other than when an individualist is named as a defendant, it is the hospital which is live with badness for its persona in turning a blindfold eye to indicia of fraud," his lawyer, David Sheehan, wrote in a March 18 letter to Lifland. "Individuals played a difference of roles, including that of apprising others of potential humbug at BLMIS. Under these circumstances, a blanket judgement that every identities should rest redacted does not materialize warranted."

The case is In re: physiologist L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York, No. 08-01789.

(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel; Editing by metropolis Hill)

Source