UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 20-CV-81205-RAR

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION,

Plaintiff,

v. 

COMPLETE BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 

GROUP, INC. d/b/a PAR FUNDING, et al.,

Defendants.

______________________________________/ 

ORDER LIFTING STAY AND REIMPOSING ORDER 

AUTHORIZING RECEIVER’S SALE OF REAL PROPERTY 

LOCATED AT 568 FERNDALE LANE, HAVERFORD, PA 19041 

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Defendants Joseph LaForte and Lisa 

McElhone’s Motion to Vacate or Stay the Court’s Order Authorizing the Receiver’s Sale of the 

Defendants’ Haverford Home [ECF No. 1610] (“Motion”), filed on June 21, 2023. The Court 

granted in part Defendants’ Motion and imposed a temporary stay of its Order Authorizing 

Receiver’s Sale of Real Property Located at 568 Ferndale Lane, Haverford, PA 19041, [ECF No. 

1604], to give Defendants an opportunity to file a response in opposition to the Motion. See [ECF 

No. 1611]. Defendants filed their Response on June 23, 2023, [ECF No. 1612], and the Receiver 

filed a Reply on June 26, 2023, [ECF No. 1614]. 

After carefully reviewing Defendants’ Response and the Receiver’s Reply, it is clear that 

Defendants are simply restating prior arguments that this Court has repeatedly rejected—namely, 

the pendency of an appeal in this matter and the adequacy of other assets purportedly available to 

satisfy the judgments against them. See, e.g., [ECF No. 1540]. As this Court has repeatedly held, 

Case 9:20-cv-81205-RAR Document 1618 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/26/2023 Page 1 of 3
Page 2 of 3

the Receiver has the sole authority to manage assets within the Receivership Estate, and 

Defendants may not intervene to second-guess the Receiver’s sound business judgment. Here, 

such speculative second-guessing is especially apparent, as the Haverford Home is being sold by 

the Receiver for an amount greater than its appraised value and list price—thereby rebutting any 

notion that it has somehow been “undervalued” as a Receivership asset. See Reply at 3-4. The 

Court will not countenance repeated efforts by Defendants to question the timing and sale price of 

properties within the ambit of the Receivership Estate, which undoubtedly impacts the Receiver’s 

ability to maximize resources for the benefit of investors. Id.

Further, Defendants attempt to characterize the Receiver’s actions here as “punitive,” but 

the Court reminds Defendants that they repeatedly failed to make required rent and residential 

expense payments on the Haverford Home. See [ECF No. 1484]. Their delinquency forced the 

Receiver to use receivership funds to cover those amounts in violation of their rental agreement, 

thus diminishing the potential payouts to investors. See [ECF No. 1501] at 8-9. This issue has 

already been extensively litigated, and Defendants squandered multiple opportunities to abide by 

the Haverford Home rental agreements and ultimately prevent the property’s sale. Additionally, 

the Receiver is fully authorized to waive the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 2001 with respect to the 

sale of the Haverford Home given the Receiver’s sole legal authority over Blue Valley Holdings, 

LLC, the entity that owns the property. See Reply at 3. 

In sum, Defendants have failed to advance any arguments in their Response sufficient to 

prolong the stay of this Court’s prior Order authorizing the Receiver’s sale of the Haverford Home. 

Accordingly, the Court having carefully reviewed the record and being otherwise fully advised, it 

is hereby

Case 9:20-cv-81205-RAR Document 1618 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/26/2023 Page 2 of 3
Page 3 of 3

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the stay of the Order Authorizing Receiver’s Sale of 

Real Property Located at 568 Ferndale Lane, Haverford, PA 19041, [ECF No. 1604], is LIFTED. 

DONE AND ORDERED in Miami, Florida, this 26th day of June, 2023.

________________________________

RODOLFO A. RUIZ II

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 9:20-cv-81205-RAR Document 1618 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/26/2023 Page 3 of 3