WARNING
David Lawver’s actions constitute serious financial fraud and potentially criminal behavior due to their intentional and premeditated deceit. He has extracted millions of dollars from friends, family, and other investors. Lawver operates similarly to a Ponzi scheme—collecting investor money for long-term projects promising returns after 3-5 years. Initially, he makes small interest payments, but inevitably cites unforeseen challenges as an excuse when repayment of the principal becomes due.
Lawver has betrayed those closest to him, including his own roommate, in a fraudulent hemp investment scam, a fake company that existed only to collect investor money to pay off previous personal debts. This is a new case and the details are documented here: Roommate Fraud Case.
Lawver exploited an elderly man, defrauding him of $275,000. His ex-partner has a restraining order against him, real winner this guy.
In an attempt to silence this page, Lawver unsuccessfully initiated a domain dispute, detailed here: Domain Dispute.
We won’t get into the details of his personal life at this time, but let’s just say its not pretty. We did find a random post on X in the screenshot below.
If you have been victimized by David Lawver, please reach out immediately at: [email protected].
Our email contact has been up for less than 48 hours and just like that already we’ve received 6 messages at time of writing. You’re not alone.
Background of David Lawver
David Lawver has long portrayed himself as a successful investor and entrepreneur, involved in various real estate and business ventures across the United States. He has cultivated an image of experience and success, attracting unsuspecting individuals and investors into his web of deceit. However, beneath this carefully constructed facade lies a history of immoral and unethical conduct. Lawver has repeatedly used his position to manipulate and defraud those who trust him, leaving a trail of financial devastation in his wake.
Detailed Case Summaries
CASE No. 1
1. Boris Iofis vs. David Lawver et al
Case Details: Santa Clara County, California, Case No. 23CV427370
Filing Date: December 5, 2023
This case is one of the most detailed and egregious examples of alleged misconduct by David Lawver. It centers on an elderly investor, Boris Iofis, who trusted Lawver with a significant portion of his life savings. The allegations in this case include financial elder abuse, david lawver fraud, and breach of contract.
Key Allegations:
- Targeting a Vulnerable Investor: Lawver allegedly targeted Iofis, an elderly individual, under the guise of providing a safe and profitable investment opportunity. Using his reputation as an experienced entrepreneur, Lawver gained Iofis’s trust and encouraged him to invest substantial sums.
- False Representations: Iofis was reportedly assured that his investments would be used for specific ventures with guaranteed returns. However, these representations were allegedly false, and the ventures either did not exist or were in financial ruin.
- Financial Elder Abuse: This case is particularly alarming as it includes allegations of financial elder abuse—a charge that underscores the moral and legal gravity of exploiting a senior citizen’s financial resources.
- Diversion of Funds: Instead of using the funds as promised, Lawver allegedly diverted them for personal gain, leaving Iofis with significant financial losses.
Implications:
This case highlights Lawver’s alleged willingness to exploit vulnerable individuals, including the elderly, for personal financial gain. It sets a troubling precedent of deception and moral disregard, making it crucial for the public to be aware of these allegations before engaging in any dealings with him.
CASE No. 2
2. Mark Harris vs. David Lawver et al
Case Details: Santa Clara County, California, Case No. 24CV442194
Filing Date: July 1, 2024
Mark Harris’s case provides further insight into the alleged methods used by Lawver to manipulate and exploit individuals who trusted him.
Key Allegations:
- Unpaid Labor and Investments: Harris claims that he was induced to work hundreds of hours and contribute financially to projects based on promises of payment and equity ownership. None of these promises were fulfilled.
- Misrepresentation of Ventures: The complaint alleges that Lawver misrepresented the profitability and legitimacy of his ventures, using these false assurances to extract unpaid labor and financial contributions.
- Breach of Contract and Wage Theft: Lawver is accused of failing to compensate Harris for his labor and investment, leaving him in a financially and emotionally draining situation.
Implications:
This case illustrates a pattern of extracting value from individuals under false pretenses and then abandoning contractual obligations. The allegations show a repeated disregard for the financial and personal well-being of those who work with him.
CASE No. 3
3. James Martinez et al vs. David Lawver et al
Case Details: Santa Clara County, California, Case No. 23CV412310
Filing Date: February 22, 2023
James Martinez and Kimberly Tucker-Brown were allegedly deceived into investing in real estate projects managed by Lawver, which turned out to be fronts for financial misconduct.
Key Allegations:
- Real Estate Investment Fraud: Martinez and Tucker-Brown claim that they were persuaded to invest in lucrative-sounding real estate ventures managed through entities like Evans 18 LLC and Larkin LLC. The projects were marketed as secure and profitable.
- Misuse of Investor Funds: Once the investments were secured, the complaint alleges that Lawver used the funds for personal expenses rather than the intended real estate projects.
- Failure to Repay Investments: Despite promises of returns and repayments, the plaintiffs claim they received neither, leading to significant financial losses.
- Securities Fraud: The lawsuit also includes allegations of securities fraud, underscoring the severity of the alleged misconduct.
Implications:
This case exemplifies a calculated approach to using legitimate-sounding business ventures to secure investments, only to misuse the funds for personal purposes. The repeated use of business entities to create an illusion of legitimacy is a key factor in Lawver’s alleged behavior.
CASE No. 4
4. Guangjie He vs. David Lawver et al
Case Details: Santa Clara County, California, Case No. 21CV379616
Filing Date: March 8, 2021
Guangjie He’s case reveals another instance of alleged fraud within Lawver’s real estate dealings.
Key Allegations:
- Misrepresentation of Business Opportunities: Lawver reportedly misled He into investing in real estate projects with promises of high returns and secure investments.
- Diversion of Funds: Similar to other cases, the complaint alleges that the funds were diverted for personal use, leaving the projects unfinished and the investor uncompensated.
- Corporate Evasion: The lawsuit claims that Lawver used entities like Evans 18 LLC and Palladium Development LLC as fronts to obscure his actions and evade personal liability.
Implications:
This case further demonstrates a pattern of using corporate entities as shields for personal gain while leaving investors to bear the financial losses. It underscores the systematic nature of the alleged misconduct.
CASE No. 5
5. Residential Finance Corporation v. David Lawver
Case Details: United States District Court, Southern District of Ohio, Case No. 2:13-cv-1145
Filing Date: May 19, 2014
The Residential Finance Corporation case highlights issues of financial mismanagement at a corporate level.
Key Allegations:
- Receivership: The court-appointed a receiver to manage the company’s finances due to severe instability allegedly caused by Lawver’s actions.
- Financial Irregularities: The case includes allegations of mismanagement and potential misuse of corporate funds, leading to significant financial losses.
Implications:
This case demonstrates the broader impact of Lawver’s actions, extending beyond individuals to affect corporate entities and stakeholders.
CASE No. 6
6. Pahl & McCay vs. David Lawver et al
Case Details: Santa Clara County, California, Case No. 23CV419882
Filing Date: July 27, 2023
Even Lawver’s legal representatives have not been spared from his alleged failure to fulfill financial obligations.
Key Allegations:
- Unpaid Legal Fees: The law firm Pahl & McCay claims Lawver failed to pay $40,255.10 for legal services rendered over several years.
- Breach of Contract: The lawsuit seeks damages for unpaid fees, service charges, and related legal costs.
Implications:
This case highlights Lawver’s disregard for contractual obligations, even when dealing with professional service providers.
Pattern of Fraudulent Behavior: A Consistent and Immoral Practice
Throughout all these cases, a clear and consistent pattern of fraudulent behavior emerges. David Lawver has repeatedly shown himself to be a manipulative and immoral individual, willing to deceive and exploit anyone who crosses his path.
- Financial Elder Abuse: The case of Boris Iofis is particularly egregious, as it reveals Lawver’s willingness to exploit the vulnerabilities of elderly individuals, taking advantage of their trust and financial dependence.
- Exploitation of Trust: Across multiple cases, Lawver has shown a consistent pattern of exploiting the trust of those who invest their time, money, and resources in his ventures. He uses his charm and fabricated business acumen to lure individuals into believing that they are making sound financial decisions, only to betray that trust for his own personal gain.
- Misrepresentation and Deception: Lawver’s ability to present convincing, yet entirely false, business opportunities is a recurring theme in all the cases. He has repeatedly fabricated financial statements, business plans, and other documentation to create the illusion of legitimacy. This deception is not just unethical; it is illegal, leading to multiple charges of fraud and misrepresentation.
- Misuse of Funds: A central aspect of Lawver’s fraudulent schemes is his consistent misuse of invested funds. Rather than using the money for the intended business purposes, he diverts it for personal luxuries, leaving investors with nothing but broken promises and financial losses. This misuse of funds is a hallmark of his unethical behavior, demonstrating a complete disregard for the financial well-being of others.
- Breach of Trust and Legal Obligations: Whether it’s failing to pay his own legal counsel or abandoning his contractual obligations to investors, Lawver shows a clear pattern of breaching trust. His actions have led to numerous lawsuits, all of which paint a picture of a man who sees contracts and legal agreements as mere formalities to be ignored whenever it suits him.
- Use of Corporate Entities to Evade Responsibility: Lawver frequently uses a web of corporate entities to shield himself from personal liability. By hiding behind these entities, he makes it difficult for victims to recover their losses, even when legal action is taken. This strategy of legal evasion is a critical component of his fraudulent operations, allowing him to continue defrauding others with relative impunity.
Impact on Victims
The impact of David Lawver’s fraudulent activities on his victims is both profound and far-reaching. The financial losses suffered by those who trusted him are significant, often involving life savings, retirement funds, or substantial loans. Beyond the financial devastation, there is also a deep emotional toll. Victims often experience stress, anxiety, and a sense of betrayal, particularly when they realize that they have been deceived by someone they trusted. For elderly victims like Boris Iofis, the consequences are even more severe, as they may lack the time or resources to recover from such losses.
Public Warning
The documented allegations against David Lawver highlight a troubling and consistent pattern of behavior that has resulted in financial losses and legal battles for numerous individuals and entities. Anyone considering doing business with Lawver or his associated entities is strongly encouraged to exercise caution and seek independent verification before proceeding.
By sharing this information, we aim to protect potential investors and ensure transparency in the interest of the public good.
References
For those interested in further details, the full legal documents from the cases mentioned above are available for review. These documents provide additional context and evidence of the fraudulent actions detailed on this site.