A Connecticut investment company has sued a former business partner and several Greenwich-based real estate entities, alleging a fraud scheme that it says cost it its ownership stake in a planned apartment development near the University of Connecticut.
Already a Subscriber? Log in
Get Instant Access to This Article
Subscribe to Hartford Business Journal and get immediate access to all of our subscriber-only content and much more.
- Critical Hartford and Connecticut business news updated daily.
- Immediate access to all subscriber-only content on our website.
- Bi-weekly print or digital editions of our award-winning publication.
- Special bonus issues like the Hartford Book of Lists.
- Exclusive ticket prize draws for our in-person events.
Click here to purchase a paywall bypass link for this article.
A Connecticut investment company has sued a former business partner and several Greenwich-based real estate entities, alleging a fraud scheme that it says cost it its ownership stake in a planned apartment development near the University of Connecticut.
JZ Investments Inc. filed the complaint April 24 in Superior Court in Stamford, alleging that Chen Ji, who managed the joint venture behind the project, misappropriated funds from a federal immigrant investor program and then used a sham settlement agreement to eliminate the company’s interest in the venture without its knowledge or consent.
The developer is Belpointe Prep, also known as Belpointe OZ, a publicly traded Qualified Opportunity Fund that focuses on redeveloping properties.
The company has proposed a 262-unit housing development on roughly 60 acres at 497-501 Middle Turnpike in Mansfield, which is adjacent to UConn’s main campus and is located in an Opportunity Zone.
Chen Ji and JZ Investments were early investors in the project through CMC Storrs SPV LLC, the entity that owns the land, but the lawsuit alleges Chen’s yearslong fraud and an unauthorized 2023 settlement agreement resulted in JZ being stripped of its nearly 30% stake without compensation, leaving Belpointe as the sole owner.
The dispute has left the project in legal limbo and the land remains vacant.
The lawsuit names Chen alongside CMC Storrs SPV LLC and three Belpointe-affiliated entities — Belpointe Prep LLC, Belpointe Prep OC LLC and BPOZ Storrs Holding LLC — as defendants.
JZ says it has invested about $1.6 million in the project.
The lawsuit claims Chen controlled the project’s management and provided falsified financial records covering 2020 through 2022 to conceal alleged misconduct.
JZ says those issues were referenced in a March 24, 2023, settlement agreement that transferred control of the project to Belpointe-linked entities. The agreement was signed by Belpointe Prep CEO Brandon Lacoff and Chen, who purported to act on behalf of JZ and its affiliate.
JZ contends Chen lacked authority to bind the company and that the agreement improperly forced its exit from the project.
According to the complaint, a 2023 SEC filing by Belpointe Prep said the company acquired a 70.2% stake in CMC Storrs in June 2022 and later obtained full ownership after a partner forfeited its interest on the same date as the settlement.
JZ says it did not learn of the alleged fraud or the settlement until about 2025, accusing Chen of concealing his conduct to delay legal action.
The suit is part of broader litigation involving Chen and JZ Investments, including a 2025 derivative case that was dismissed in February 2026 and another related case that remains pending.
In the new filing, JZ seeks damages, restoration of its ownership interest and a constructive trust over the project. It also seeks to void the settlement under Connecticut fraudulent transfer law.
Against Chen, it alleges fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and forgery. Against the Belpointe entities, it alleges negligence, unjust enrichment and unfair trade practices.
Belpointe Prep is listed on NYSE American under the ticker OZ. The complaint says its asset management arm oversees more than $6 billion.
Joseph Pastore, an attorney for the Belpointe defendants, said his clients “deny the allegations against them, are not responsible for the conduct of Chen Ji, and have brought separate claims against Chen Ji.”
Chen has not yet filed an appearance in the case.
