United Development Funding Announces Supreme Court of Texas Denies Kyle Bass Review
March 18, 2020 | James Sprow | Blue Vault
In an article posted on Blue Vault’s website in December 2017, entitled “How An Attack on a Nontraded REIT Sponsor Made a Hedge Fund Manager $60 Million,” we referred readers to a lawsuit filed by United Development Funding LP (“UDF”) and its related companies accusing hedge fund manager J. Kyle Bass and his closely held company Hayman Capital Management, L.P., of perpetrating a “short-and-distort” scheme by spreading false and damaging information about UDF in order to drive down the company’s stock price and profit by covering their short positions by buying shorted shares at much lower prices.
United Development Funding IV was previously a nontraded REIT that listed its shares on the NASDAQ in 2014.
On March 13, 2020, the Supreme Court of Texas denied Bass and Hayman their request for a review of an Appeals Court’s denial of the dismissal of the lawsuit.
The following is a press release from United Development Funding reporting on the Supreme Court of Texas decision:
GRAPEVINE, Texas, March 16, 2020 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — United Development Funding (“UDF,” as described below) announced today the Supreme Court of Texas (the “Supreme Court”) denied Kyle Bass (“Bass”) and Hayman Capital’s (“Hayman,” as described below, and together with Bass, “Bass/Hayman”) petition to review the matter of J. Kyle Bass, et. al. versus United Development Funding, L.P., et. al.
On June 12, 2018, the Dallas County Court (the “Court”), after allowing limited discovery, ruled that UDF had set forth a prima facie case of intentional business disparagement and tortious interference by Bass/Hayman, denying Bass/Hayman’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit under the Texas Citizen’s Participation Act (TCPA). On June 29, 2018, Bass/Hayman filed a notice of accelerated appeal with the Texas Judicial Branch Fifth Court of Appeals (the “Appeals Court”). UDF filed its Appellate brief on November 15, 2018, opposing Bass/Hayman’s appeal and presented its oral argument to the Appeals Court on May 2, 2019. On August 19, 2019, the Appeals Court affirmed the earlier decision by the Court to deny Bass/Hayman’s bid to dismiss the lawsuit under the TCPA. The Appeals Court reviewed over 2,000 pages of pleadings, affidavits, and evidence, concluding “UDF’s pleadings and affidavits explain how and why Hayman’s statements were false” and “Illustrate and describe how and why Hayman made the false statements knowingly or recklessly, and chronicle the economic and business damages and losses UDF sustained as a direct result of Hayman’s false statements.”
On November 6, 2019, Bass/Hayman filed a Petition for Review with the Supreme Court. On January 22, 2020, UDF filed its Response to Bass/Hayman’s petition and on February 20, 2020, Bass/Hayman filed their reply. UDF expects the Supreme Court to remand the case to the trial court for further proceedings in 30-40 days. Upon remand, full discovery and trial will follow. No assurances can be given that UDF will receive any damages as a result of the lawsuit, nor can any assurances be given regarding a timeframe for a resolution of the lawsuit.
The UDF plaintiffs are represented by Ellen A. Cirangle, Jonathan E. Sommer, and Kyle A. Withers with Lubin Olson & Niewiadomski LLP, who have extensive experience successfully litigating market manipulation claims against hedge funds; Judge Scott A. Brister of Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP, who has previously provided 20 years of judicial service at all levels of the Texas Court system including the Texas Supreme Court; and Rodney Smolla, Dean of the Delaware Law School of Widener University and a nationally-recognized expert in First Amendment law.
Public documents filed with the Supreme Court can be found at the Supreme Court of Texas website (www.search.txcourts.gov), using the Case No. 19-0874. Public documents filed with the court, including discovery and UDF’s filings, can be found at www.udfonline.com/litigation. A complete history of all the court filings related to this case can be found at the Court’s website (https://courtsportal.dallascounty.org/DALLASPROD), using the Case No. CC-17-06253-C.
“UDF” refers to plaintiffs United Development Funding, L.P., United Development Funding II, L.P., United Development Funding III, L.P., United Development Funding IV, United Development Funding Income Fund V, United Mortgage Trust, United Development Funding Land Opportunity Fund, L.P., and United Development Funding Land Opportunity Fund Investors, L.L.C.
“Hayman” refers to defendants Hayman Capital Management, L.P., Hayman Offshore Management, Inc., Hayman Capital Master Fund, L.P., Hayman Capital Partners, L.P., Hayman Capital Offshore Partners, LP and Hayman Investments, LLC.
About United Development Funding IV
United Development Funding IV is a public Maryland real estate investment trust. UDF IV was formed primarily to generate current interest income by investing in secured loans and producing profits from investments in residential real estate. Additional information about UDF IV can be found on its website at www.udfiv.com. UDF IV may disseminate important information regarding its operations, including financial information, through social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn.
