The judgment
On May 5, 2021, Judge William F. Jung of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida entered judgment in favor of the plaintiff and against Sokona Diallo, PIMAP LLC, and 1738 Lounge LLC, jointly and severally, in the amount of $325,149.75, on a claim of unjust enrichment. Diallo's motion for a new trial, filed roughly a month later, was denied; the plaintiff had opposed it, telling the court it was an attempt to buy time to move assets out of the country.
Trying to collect
The plaintiff initiated proceedings supplementary — a Florida post-judgment procedure for identifying and reaching a debtor's assets — in August 2021. A Writ of Garnishment served on Bank of America in November 2021 came back showing insufficient funds in Diallo's accounts to satisfy the judgment. According to the plaintiff's filings, Diallo did not respond to his attempts to schedule a debtor's examination and communicate about repayment.
In December 2021, the plaintiff moved to implead several third parties into the collection proceedings, including a Houston restaurant group and its principal, and a Nigerian businessman named Okechukwu Chibuzo Onuoha, whom the plaintiff's filings describe as a business partner of Diallo's in a nightclub venture called Jupiter Lounge LLC. The plaintiff's theory, as stated in that motion, was that these entities and individuals were alter egos holding assets that should be reached by the judgment. The plaintiff has said he is separately obtaining the court files related to this collection effort and a possible related claim; this site will be updated as that record is confirmed.
The bankruptcy filing
In November 2022, Diallo filed a voluntary petition for Chapter 13 bankruptcy in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, later converting the case to Chapter 7 in January 2023. Court records list the plaintiff among more than a dozen scheduled creditors, alongside American Express, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, the Internal Revenue Service, her own apartment landlord, and others — a list suggesting financial obligations extending well beyond this one case.
The fight over dischargeability
Because debts obtained through fraud are not automatically eliminated by bankruptcy, the plaintiff filed a separate adversary proceeding — Wane v. Diallo, Adversary No. 23-03115 — seeking to except his judgment from discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A). That provision keeps debts arising from actual fraud alive even after a bankruptcy discharge.
The case proceeded through discovery and scheduling over the latter half of 2023 and went to trial on January 22, 2024, before Bankruptcy Judge Marvin Isgur in Houston. The plaintiff, representing himself, was unable to travel from Florida to appear in person; the court declined to permit him to testify by telephone. The court's order that day states simply that the plaintiff's "claim is not excepted from discharge."
That ruling resolved the narrow legal question of dischargeability against the plaintiff — in significant part, by his account, because of the in-person testimony requirement rather than a rejection of the fraud allegations on their merits. The underlying Chapter 7 bankruptcy case remains open.
Where things stand
As of this writing, the $325,149.75 civil judgment remains on the books. Whether any portion of it will ultimately be collected — through the bankruptcy estate, the proceedings supplementary, or otherwise — is not resolved in the record reviewed for this site.