United States Attorney Danny C. Williams, Sr., announced today that three criminal Informations were filed today in the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma charging John M. Merritt, 74, a former Oklahoma City attorney, with numerous fraud related offenses. According to documents filed in the cases, Merritt devised fraud schemes that resulted in losses totaling more than $3 Million.
Danny C. Williams, Sr., United States Attorney for the Northern District of Oklahoma, was appointed by the Office of the Deputy Attorney General following the recusal of the United States Attorney's Office for the Western District of Oklahoma to investigate and prosecute any offenses that Merritt is believed to have committed. Merritt was indicted on April 17, 2012, in a twelve count indictment charging he used forged federal and state court orders to steal over $450,000 of settlement funds of lawsuits involving car accidents from children who were his clients.
The new fraud charges include allegations that: in 2007, Merritt defrauded Advocate Capital, Inc., of Nashville, Tennessee, using false financial statements and income tax returns to fraudulently obtain a line of credit totaling more than $1,750,000; from 2007 through 2011, Merritt defrauded Quail Creek Bank of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, by providing false financial statements and income tax returns to obtain a line of credit totaling $800,000; and in 2011, Merritt forged the signature of another attorney on two settlement checks totaling $500,000 which he deposited into a Quail Creek Bank account and thereafter withdrew the fraudulently obtained funds.
The charges result from a joint investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Internal Revenue Service - Criminal Investigation. The prosecutions of the cases are being handled by Special Attorneys Charles M. McLoughlin and Kevin C. Leitch. A criminal Information is one method of charging a defendant with alleged violations of Federal law, which must be proven in a court of law beyond a reasonable doubt to overcome the defendant’s presumption of innocence.