Are we seeing a step-up in the backlash against Irving Picard, the court-appointed trustee for the Bernard Madoff estate? A judge has dealt him a major loss in his efforts to recover funds on behalf of the estate, restricting his ability to pursue massive legal claims against JPMorgan Chase and UBS. Recall that Picard had accused them of abetting the Madoff Ponzi scheme and had sought $20 billion. A previous ruling had similarly prevented the trustee from going after HSBC. Picard has signaled his intention to contest the decisions. Still, Picard's critics are likely to see this as confirmation that he has been somewhat overzealous in his representation of the estate, which has allowed him to rack up massive fees. The New York Times notes that the judges have taken the view that as trustee for the Madoff estate he is standing "in the shoes of Mr. Madoff, the Ponzi schemer, not in the shoes of Mr. Madoff's victims. Therefore, he could sue only if the defendants had harmed Mr. Madoff, which they clearly had not done, since their banking services facilitated the flow of cash into his fraud from around the world. Therefore, only Mr. Madoff's creditors - his victims - have legal standing to sue the various bank defendants for damages." The ruling severely limits the amount of money Picard can recover from the banks. In some situations, Picard has argued that such thinking will result in the Madoff family keeping more money. For example, one ruling would result in the family keeping up to $82 million, Picard argues. 

For more:
- here's the article