THURSDAY JANUARY 9, 201450 CENTSDetails on C863780 70050'AEA legal cases work way through courtsBY JOYCE LOBECK@YSJ0YCEL0BECKNearly two years after a jury found a former business loan officer for AEA Federal Credit Union guilty of 54 counts of fraud against the financial institution, related cases continue to work their way through the court system.The cases arose out of the economic failure of AEA due in part to the fraudulent lending practices of William Liddle while he was employed by the credit union as vice president of business servicOne defendant files lawsuit against credit union’s boardes from 2004 to 2009. On Dec. 17, 2010, the National Credit Union Administration placed AEA under conservatorship, where it still remains as it works toward financial recovery NCUA has since been pursuing a number of cases through the U.S. District Court in an effort to recover some of the projected $25 million that AEA lost. To date, the courts have issued judgments in favor of AEA totaling millions of dollars.Meanwhile, one defendant is suing the credit union’s former president and board of directors, alleging neglect in overseeing Liddle’s loan activity and lack of internal controls to identify and stop his illegal activity.The lawsuit was brought by Shelby Carl, a former business partner with Liddle’s coconspirator, Frank Ruiz. Last month, Carl was found liable for $6 million of the debt incurred by Ruiz and their jointly heldcompany through the fraudulent activities.That also happens to be the amount of money Ruiz was ordered by U.S. District Judge .Susan Bolton in 2012 to repay AEA in restitution even though he had filed for bankruptcy.In a recent development, Bolton issued a judgment filed Nov. 19 against Frank and Jacqueline Ruiz’s community property interests in the amount of $1.3 million. Jacqueline Ruiz is the separatedwife of Frank Ruiz.The court also ordered that all claims against Jacqueline Ruiz and her counterclaim be dismissed with prejudice. That means she can’t refile her counterclaim in which she alleged she was harmed by the criminal fraud perpetrated by Liddle that led to the downfall of her husband’s business and her own involvement in the lawsuit. The court dismissed her counterclaim because of the statute of limitations.SEE AEA/A5