Case Background
Stella Ferreira Fróes, a Brazilian-born immigrant and owner of Pikanhas Restaurant Group, LLC, operated a Brazilian steakhouse in Contra Costa County. In July 2019, she closed her restaurant temporarily for water damage repairs, which caused a significant financial strain. Seeking relief, she responded to an offer from ROC Funding Group, LLC, for a "loan consolidation" that promised to save her 30 percent on existing payments.
The resulting agreement turned out to be far different from what she expected. Instead of a simple consolidation, ROC provided a series of weekly advances and set up daily withdrawals from her bank account. The contract, which ROC described as a "factoring agreement" to avoid usury laws, actually carried a staggering interest rate of 69.9%.
Cause
The legal conflict ignited when ROC stopped sending promised loan advances but continued to take daily payments from Fróes’s account. Despite Fróes remaining in full compliance with the payment schedule, ROC entered a "Judgment by Confession" against her in a New York Court without any prior notice. ROC used this secret judgment to freeze her bank accounts and seize her business funds.
Injury
ROC’s aggressive tactics devastated Fróes both financially and personally. The company froze her bank accounts and issued notices to her credit card and payroll processors, falsely claiming she was in default. These actions prevented her from paying staff and led to employees quitting. Personally, the stress triggered a severe decline in her health, leading to depression, significant weight loss, and uncontrolled crying.
Damages Sought
Fróes filed her lawsuit seeking compensation for her financial losses, including lost revenue, bank fees, and the costs of switching business service providers. She also sought non-economic damages for the emotional distress caused by ROC's harassment and the "screw up your business" threats made by its representatives. Finally, she requested punitive damages to punish the company for its malicious and fraudulent behavior.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
Legal Representation
Plaintiff(s): Stella Ferreira Fróes
· Counsel for Plaintiff(s): David M. Furbush | Blaine I. Green | Malcolm A. Brudigam | John Steger
Defendant(s): ROC Funding Group, LLC
· Counsel for Defendant(s): Jon O. Blanda | Angela A. Velen
Key Arguments or Remarks by Counsel
Claims
The legal team for Fróes argued that ROC operated as a predatory lender that intentionally targeted unsophisticated small business owners. They contended that the loan agreement was unconscionable and usurious under California law. Furthermore, they argued ROC committed "Abuse of Process" by using a New York confession of judgment—a process the California Supreme Court previously found unconstitutional—to bypass Fróes's due process rights and seize her assets. They highlighted a phone call where an unidentified ROC representative used profanities and explicitly threatened to "screw up" her business as evidence of the company’s malicious intent.
Defense
ROC Funding Group denied all allegations of wrongdoing. The company maintained that the agreement was a valid "factoring agreement" rather than a loan, which would exempt it from usury limits. They initially claimed Fróes breached the agreement by failing to make payments, though they later changed their argument to claim she had changed her bank account passwords to block their access. ROC asserted that Fróes had not suffered any compensable injury or damage because of its actions.
Jury Verdict
After hearing the evidence, the jury reached a verdict on October 6, 2025, siding overwhelmingly with Stella Ferreira Fróes. The jury found ROC Funding Group, LLC liable for both usury and abuse of process. In its decision, the jury awarded Fróes $78,581 in economic damages and $307,400 in non-economic damages for the emotional distress caused by the abuse of process. Furthermore, the jury determined by clear and convincing evidence that ROC had acted with malice, oppression, or fraud, leading them to award an additional $1,125,000 in punitive damages on October 7, 2025. This brought the total recovery to $1,510,981, with the Court also granting $16,487.62 in legal costs and ordering post-judgment interest to accrue at a rate of 10 percent per year until the balance is paid.
