Raymond E. Butler II

Raymond E. Butler II v. Eddi et al. (N.D. Ill. Case No. 1:25-cv-04443) – Updated Case Overview (as of mid-October 2026)

Michigan resident Raymond E. Butler II, a primary beneficiary of irrevocable family trusts established by his grandfather (Jonas Neufeld / related structures including the GPN Family Trust, Doros Generation Trust, and Jack Finn Irrevocable Trust), is pursuing civil RICO and related claims against more than 30 defendants. The case concerns the alleged administration, concealment, and conversion of trust assets tied to a network of skilled nursing facilities and related holdings. Plaintiff has referenced values exceeding $100 million for the assets he claims entitlement to, with broader dispute figures sometimes cited above $544 million.

The action originated as a First Amended Verified Complaint filed September 20, 2024, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan (Butler v. Eddi et al., No. 2:24-cv-00134). It was transferred to the Northern District of Illinois (No. 1:25-cv-04443). The complaint alleges an “association-in-fact” enterprise engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity under 18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq. (mail/wire fraud, money laundering, embezzlement, and related financial frauds), along with state-law and equitable claims. Central allegations include a claimed “fraudulent release” dated September 23, 2009 (asserted to bear a forged signature and to have released trust interests for an incomplete disbursement), use of subsequent trusts, trustee changes, and name variations to obscure asset trails, and self-dealing by trustees and affiliated parties. The complaint seeks damages (including treble damages under RICO), recovery of allegedly misappropriated assets, and a jury trial. Related Illinois state-court proceedings concerning the trusts also exist.

Judicial Assignment and Recusal History

Judge Georgia N. Alexakis initially handled the case after transfer. On March 13, 2026, she granted plaintiff’s motion for her disqualification and recused herself under 28 U.S.C. § 455(a) (ECF 240), citing the appearance of impartiality created by a related RICO suit plaintiff had filed against her and others (Case No. 1:25-cv-10904). She described that suit as lacking a legitimate basis but recused in an abundance of caution. The case was reassigned to Judge April M. Perry (ECF 241, March 19, 2026).

Plaintiff moved to disqualify Judge Perry (ECF 245, March 30, 2026), alleging financial conflicts involving Vanguard holdings (tied to CIBC and the trusts), bias, and challenges to the validity of certain judicial appointments. Following an April 9, 2026 hearing, the motion was denied. Plaintiff later challenged the accuracy of the official transcript of that hearing (proving material omissions and alterations) through motions including ECF 254 (May 1, 2026, to correct the transcript) and ECF 256 (May 4, 2026, for an evidentiary hearing to play official audio known to exist). These were denied (ECF 255 and ECF 258). Status reports and related filings followed in early May 2026.

Related RICO Action Against Judges

On March 11, 2026, the Plaintiff filed a 264-page Amended RICO Complaint in Butler v. Alexakis et al., N.D. Ill. Case No. 1:25-cv-10904 (before Judge Franklin U. Valderrama). It names federal judges (including Georgia N. Alexakis and Nancy L. Maldonado), state judges (Allison C. Conlon, Allen P. Walker, Brittany A. Bulleit), and others, alleging a racketeering enterprise involving obstruction of justice, wire fraud (with references to actual IP logs), evidence of witness tampering, proof of falsified court records/transcripts, ex parte communications, conflicts of interest, and challenges to the constitutional validity of certain judicial appointments (including claims involving Biden's use of the autopen in their appointment). Defendants moved to dismiss; briefing and related motions (including leave to amend) continued into 2026.

Appellate Proceedings (Seventh Circuit Case No. 25-2589)

Plaintiff appealed certain district-court rulings (including denial of a motion to lift a stay, vacate a protective order, freeze trust assets, and appoint a neutral fiduciary) and filed a Petition for Writ of Mandamus (approximately 120 pages, filed around April 20, 2026) seeking Judge Perry’s recusal or consolidation with the judicial RICO case. Supplemental mandamus filings followed in May 2026.

On May 27, 2026, the Seventh Circuit issued a nonprecedential disposition. It affirmed the denial of the motion to lift the stay and freeze assets/appoint a neutral fiduciary; dismissed the protective-order appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction; and denied the petition for writ of mandamus and motion for leave to file a supplemental petition as frivolous. Earlier in the appellate history, the Seventh Circuit had sanctioned plaintiff’s then-counsel Attorney London in connection with a motion to disqualify Judge Maldonado that the court found involved scurrilous and unfounded accusations, which has yet to be paid.

Extensive sanctions litigation requests have occurred. Motions for sanctions under Rule 11 and related rules were filed by defendants (including Chaim Rajchenbach, Menachem Shabat, and Ilana Eddi) and non-party CIBC Bank USA (renewed motions in 2026). On September 17, 2026 (ECF 287), Judge Perry denied the sanctions motions of Rajchenbach/Shabat and CIBC but granted Eddi’s motion in part. Eddi was directed to file an itemized proposal for reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs incurred after May 21, 2026 (related to responding to a motion to disqualify attorney Maher) by October 1, 2026; plaintiff has since objected. Supporting statements and plaintiff’s objection (ECF 288, 290) were filed in early-to-mid October 2026. Protective orders restricting plaintiff’s direct contact with certain parties and witnesses remain in effect, and aspects of the case have been stayed pending appellate resolution.

The underlying trust/RICO claims remain pending before Judge April M. Perry amid ongoing procedural, sanctions, and protective-order disputes. Public filings, including the complaint, disqualification motions, mandamus materials, transcript-related papers, and recent sanctions orders, are posted on the KMFL Law site for review. Court rulings to date have rejected key requests for recusal of Judge Perry, lift of the stay/asset freeze, and transcript correction, and have treated the mandamus petition as frivolous while addressing sanctions on a case-by-case basis.