ILNews

Grand jury indicts 2 attorneys, real estate broker

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A grand jury in South Bend has returned a 14-count criminal indictment against two attorneys and a real estate broker from central Indiana over a state lease deal in Elkhart.  

The deal was first revealed as part of an Indianapolis Business Journal investigation. The IBJ is a sister publication of Indiana Lawyer.

The complaint alleges real estate broker John M. Bales, his partner and general counsel William E. Spencer and Indianapolis developer and attorney Paul J. Page defrauded the state and an unnamed bank. The charges, brought by the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Indiana, allege each man committed eight counts of wire fraud, three counts of mail fraud, one count of bank fraud and one count of conspiracy to defraud. Page also faces a charge of making false statements to influence the actions of a bank insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

The state hired Venture Real Estate Services in 2006 to handle leasing for state agencies in a contract that explicitly banned Venture and its partners and employees from “any ownership interest” or any “attempt to acquire” properties to be leased by the state.

But as IBJ reported last year, the politically connected real estate broker over the years has acted as a developer for several public-sector tenants he represents — putting government agencies into buildings he owns or those owned by his friends and associates.

The indictment points to one transaction in particular that prosecutors allege ran afoul of Bales' agreement with the state: A lease deal in Elkhart for the state's Department of Child Services in a building jointly owned by Page and former Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi. The government has not charged Brizzi.

According to the indictment, Page bought the office building through a company called L&BAB LLC, then leased it to the state's Department of Child Services. Page paid no money to buy the building, but put up $361,000 in cash for the property, which had been wired from Bales' account under an entity called BAB Equity.

"Page promised to repay BAB Equity and to give it 25 percent of the profits when the Elkhart building was resold, even though Bales and Spencer could not have any sort of ownership interest in the building and even though Venture told the state that it would only be compensated through commissions," U.S. Attorney David Capp said in a statement.

The indictment alleges that Page also used $531,000 from a bank without noting the details of his arrangement with BAB Equity.

Venture was paid an $88,400 commission on the lease deal, then took more than a year to rebate $22,100 to the state as required under its deal. The firm also received a $28,875 broker's fee and a $22,700 development fee, the indictment alleges.

The charges follow an FBI investigation that lasted more than a year. The U.S. Attorney's Office anticipates that the defendants' initial appearance will be at 2 p.m. Thursday in the South Bend Federal Courthouse.

According to the Indiana Roll of Attorneys, Page, who was admitted to the bar in 1990, has been disciplined in the past, but currently is active in good standing. Spencer was admitted in 2002 and has no disciplinary history. He is also active in good standing.

This story originally ran on IBJ.com Dec. 14, 2011.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The number one way to reduce suffering would be to ban the breeding of fighting dogs. Fighting dogs maim and kill victim dogs Fighting dogs are the most essential piece of dog fighting Dog fighting will continue as long as fighting dogs are struggling to reach each other and maul another fih.longaphernalia

  2. Oh, and you fail to mention that you deprived the father of far FAR more time than he ever did you, even requiring officers to escort the children back into his care. Please, can you see that you had a huge part in "starting the war?" Patricia, i can't understand how painfully heartbreak ithis ordeal must have been for you. I read the appellate case and was surprised to see both sides of the story because your actions were harmful to your child; more so than the fathers. The evidence wasn't re weighed. It was properly reviewed for abuse of discretion as the trial court didn't consider whether a change of circumstance occurred or follow and define the statutes that led to their decision. Allowing a child to call a boyfriend "daddy" and the father by his first name is unacceptable. The first time custody was reversed to father was for very good reason. Self reflection in how you ultimately lost primary custody is the only way you will be able heal and move forward. Forgiveness of yourself comes after recognition and I truly hope you can get past the hurt and pain to allow your child the stability and care you recognized yourself that the father provides.

  3. Patricia, i can't understand how painfully heartbreak ithis ordeal must have been for you. I read the appellate case and was surprised to see both sides of the story because your actions were harmful to your child; more so than the fathers. The evidence wasn't re weighed. It was properly reviewed for abuse of discretion as the trial court didn't consider whether a change of circumstance occurred or follow and define the statutes that led to their decision. Allowing a child to call a boyfriend "daddy" and the father by his first name is unacceptable. The first time custody was reversed to father was for very good reason. Self reflection in how you ultimately lost primary custody is the only way you will be able heal and move forward. Forgiveness of yourself comes after recognition and I truly hope you can get past the hurt and pain to allow your child the stability and care you recognized yourself that the father provides.

  4. He TIL team,please zap this comment too since it was merely marking a scammer and not reflecting on the story. Thanks, happy Monday, keep up the fine work.

  5. You just need my social security number sent to your Gmail account to process then loan, right? Beware scammers indeed.

ADVERTISEMENT