President BaracBernard Madoff's brother, sons and a niece used the family finance business like a "piggy bank," a court-appointed trustee charged Friday as he demanded in a lawsuit that they return almost $200 million in money to be distributed to cheated investors.

The trustee, Irving Picard, sought $198.7 million from Madoff's brother, Peter, who had worked at Madoff's Manhattan investment company since 1965, and sons, Mark and Andrew.

Also sued was Shana D. Madoff, Bernard Madoff's niece and Peter Madoff's daughter.

Lawyers for the Madoff's brother and sons did not immediately return a phone call for comment. A message for comment left at Shana Madoff's East Hampton home was not immediately returned.

Lawyers for Picard said in papers filed in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Manhattan that Madoff's family-run business "was operated as if it were the family piggy bank."

They said each of the family members withdrew huge sums of money to fund personal business ventures and to pay for expenses ranging from multimillion dollar homes, cars and boats to monthly credit card charges for restaurants, vacations and clothing.

The lawyers said $141 million identified as fraudulent proceeds were received by the family members in the six years before Madoff surrendered and revealed his plot last December while at least $58 million was received in the last two years.

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A U.S. federal judge in Manhattan has dismissedthree Parmalat SpA fraud lawsuits against Bank of America Corp and theauditing firm Grant Thornton LLP over their roles in the Italian dairycompany's 2003 collapse.

Friday's ruling by U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan is a setback forParmalat and its chief executive Enrico Bondi, who has filed dozens oflawsuits against banks and auditors, including Citigroup Inc and theauditor Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, for helping prior management loot thecompany.

Parmalat said in a statement that it believed the decision was erroneous, and that it intends to appeal.

Burdened by about 14 billion euros ($20.6 billion) of debt, Parmalatfiled for insolvency protection in Italy in December 2003. It collapsedafter uncovering a 4 billion euro ($5.9 billion) hole in its balancesheet. Parmalat was restructured and relisted on the Milan bourse in2005, and Italian prosecutors filed criminal charges against variousexecutives.

In the current cases, Bondi and the unit Parmalat Capital FinanceLtd each sued Grant Thornton, accusing it of helping set up faketransactions to help insiders steal from the company.

Parmalat Capital made similar claims in a separate lawsuit againstBank of America, over transactions it said also generated more than$800 million for the Italian company.

The defendants argued, however, that they should prevail under alegal doctrine that prevents a company from recovering for its ownfraud.

In his 45-page opinion, Kaplan said Parmalat and Parmalat Capitalofficers had been acting within the scope of their employment when theyengaged in a "massive fraud" that ended with the company's collapse.

He rejected the plaintiffs' argument that the officers' "looting andsquandering even a small portion of corporate assets" would create anexception to the rule, and allow the new Parmalat to recover for theold Parmalat's wrongdoing.