Skip to main content

Coakley’s Office announced the guilty plea of a former Somerville real estate attorney

WOBURN – Attorney General Martha Coakley’s Office announced the guilty plea of a former Somerville real estate attorney yesterday in connection with making false statements on mortgage applications and associated documents and using the funds secured from the loans for his own purposes, rather than paying off existing loans as directed by the new lenders. Kevin Carey, age 49, of Middleboro, pled guilty in Middlesex Superior Court to the charges of Larceny over $250 (8 counts) and Willfully Making a False Statement Regarding Financial Condition or Assets (7 counts). Carey is scheduled to be sentenced on November 6, 2009, in Bristol Superior Court.

While practicing as a real estate lawyer in Somerville and Medford, Carey engaged in a scheme called “mortgage stacking” on four residential properties he or his family members owned. The scheme involved serially refinancing the loans on these properties, without paying off the existing loans. Carey was also the agent for a New England title insurance company which allowed him to issue title insurance policies on mortgage transactions he processed. Title insurance policies protect lenders in the event that there are defects in the title of the property.

On various occasions between April 2002 through September 2004, Carey performed the functions of closing attorney on mortgage loans on each of the properties involved. Carey “stacked” three mortgages on a home in Medford, two mortgages each on two different properties in Everett, and one mortgage on his personal residence in Medford. Carey also falsified information on mortgage loan applications by omitting certain mortgages on the various properties, and also signed a family member’s name on false mortgage applications and closing documents he created. When he received the proceeds of the loans, Carey did not pay off the existing mortgages on these properties, but rather used the funds for his own benefit. Carey issued title insurance policies or commitments in connection with the transactions, and the lenders were therefore protected, but ultimately the title insurance company suffered the financial loss. As a result of this scheme Carey stole over $2 million.

The lenders remained unaware of the problem because Carey continued to make monthly payments on all of the loans. In November 2005, a database search by Fannie Mae flagged the multiple mortgages on one of the properties, triggering a notification to one of the lenders. The lender then notified the title insurance company of the problem. Lawyers for the title insurance company then referred the matter to the Attorney General’s Office in March 2006.

A Middlesex Grand Jury returned indictments against Carey on August 21, 2008. On September 12, 2008, Carey was arraigned in Middlesex Superior Court at which time he entered a plea of not guilty and was released on personal recognizance. Carey entered a change of plea to guilty in Middlesex Superior Court yesterday. Superior Court Judge D. Lloyd MacDonald presided over the plea.

This case was prosecuted by Assistant Attorney General Margaret Parks of Attorney General Martha Coakley’s Corruption and Fraud Division, and was investigated by State Police assigned to the Attorney General’s Office and Investigator Carl Mullen of Attorney General Martha Coakley’s Financial Investigations Division. Postal Inspector Daniel Bonda of the United States Postal Inspection Service also assisted in the case.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...