Famed Litigator Pleads Guilty to Conspiracy to Bribe Judge
New York Lawyer - March 14, 2008
By Emily Wagster Pettus - The Associated Press
JACKSON, Miss. (AP) _ Richard "Dickie" Scruggs, the legendary trial lawyer who made Big Business tremble every time he set foot in court, pleaded guilty Friday to conspiring to bribe a judge — a case that will send him to prison and could spell the end of his storied legal career.
Prosecutors are asking for five years behind bars for the 61-year-old Scruggs, a multimillionaire who combined a shrewd legal mind and the aw-shucks charm of a Southern country lawyer to extract billion-dollar settlements from the tobacco and asbestos industries, among others. The giant of the plaintiffs' bar could lose his license to practice law.
Scruggs and co-defendant Sidney Backstrom both pleaded guilty to conspiracy to defraud the United States for conspiring to bribe a Mississippi judge for a favorable ruling in a legal-fees dispute from a Hurricane Katrina insurance lawsuit.
Scruggs' law partner and son, Zach, also is charged in the case but did not enter a plea and is expected to go to trial. Prosecutors said they would also recommend 2-1/2 years for Backstrom. No sentencing date was set. U.S. District Judge Neal Biggers said he expected to set a date after he receives a pre-sentence report, which would take 30-45 days.
Court documents show prosecutors will drop the several other counts against Scruggs when he is sentenced, including mail fraud. Scruggs was indicted along with his son and three associates in November.
They were accused of conspiring to pay a Lafayette County Circuit Court judge $50,000 for a favorable ruling in a dispute over $26.5 million in legal fees from a mass settlement of Hurricane Katrina cases.
Judge Henry L. Lackey reported a bribe overture to the FBI and worked undercover. Two of the men who were indicted, attorney Timothy Balducci and former Mississippi State Auditor Steve Patterson, pleaded guilty and began working with the prosecution. Balducci admitted to the FBI that he paid Lackey $50,000 in cash and says he did so at the behest of the Scruggses and Backstrom. However, Backstom and the Scruggses had said Balducci acted on his own.
Scruggs — a hard-charging former Navy pilot — is the brother-in-law of former U.S. Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., but was a major donor to Mississippi Democrats, including the current and former state attorneys general.
Scruggs is only the most recent big-name Mississippi plaintiffs' attorney brought down in judicial bribery schemes since March 2007, when Paul Minor — one of Scruggs' longtime friends — was convicted of charges ranging from racketeering to bribery for providing financial favors to two coastal judges. The two judges were convicted with Minor, and all three are in federal prison.
University of Mississippi law professor George Cochran said Friday that the Scruggs case is a tragedy. "Keep in mind this is an isolated incident," Cochran said. "It's not part of a pattern of practice of the bar, but even isolated incidents can result in very bad consequences not only to Mr. Scruggs in particular but to the bar in general."
Scruggs, a Pascagoula, Miss., native, helped negotiate the multibillion-dollar tobacco settlement in the 1990s, working with whistleblower Jeffrey Wigand, a former tobacco company scientist. The actor Colm Feore played Scruggs in the 1999 movie about the case, "The Insider," starring Al Pacino and Russell Crowe.
After Katrina struck in 2005, Scruggs insurance companies on behalf of hundreds of homeowners whose claims were denied. Lott was one of his clients.
Scruggs lives in Oxford and has flown to and from legal engagements around the South in his personal jet. Scruggs is unapologetic for his wealth, saying the money lets him match corporate opponents in ways few other lawyers could afford.
A graduate of the University of Mississippi, he is one of the school's largest donors. The music department building at Ole Miss bears his name. He is also is a player in national politics. Bill Clinton was headed to Scruggs' home for a Dec. 15 fundraiser for Hillary Clinton, but the event was canceled after the indictment.
Scruggs has also made plenty of enemies. One is Mississippi Insurance Commissioner George Dale, who lost an re-election bid last year after 32 years in office. Scruggs accused Dale of being too cozy with insurers after Katrina, and took out a newspaper ad depicting Dale as a pig covered with pink lipstick by State Farm Insurance Cos. executives. The caption: "Lipstick on a Pig."
Dale suggested Scruggs' indictment resulted from the same bare-knuckle tactics he used to "get rid of me as commissioner of insurance." State Farm spokesman Phil Supple on Friday declined to comment on Scruggs' guilty plea because the matter did not directly involve the company.
Saturday, March 15, 2008
Friday, March 14, 2008
Judge Claims "Diminished Capacity" in Judicial Ethics Probe
Judge Claims "Diminished Capacity" in Judicial Ethics Probe
New York Lawyer - March 13, 2008
GROVE HILL, Ala. (AP) - A Clarke County judge accused in a wide-ranging judicial ethics complaint claims he suffered from "diminished capacity" that affected his ability to make rational decisions.
Circuit Judge Stuart DuBose, who serves Washington, Clarke and Choctaw counties, could be ousted from office if convicted by the Court of the Judiciary.
The Judicial Inquiry Commission made 60 separate allegations against DuBose in January, covering his conduct on the bench and as a private lawyer before he took office in January 2007. They included claims that he told lawyers at a party after he won the Democratic nomination for circuit judge in September 2006 that they would have a "homefield advantage."
DuBose filed his formal response to the allegations Wednesday. He has been on paid leave since the complaint was filed. It's unclear when the commission will rule on the case.
John Wilkerson, the secretary of the Court of the Judiciary, told the Press-Register he can recall only one similar case in the last 30 years. In that case, a Talladega County judge resigned amid allegations of impropriety and requested disability payments because of diminished capacity, Wilkerson said.
DuBose's lawyers denied the charges and claimed he was suffering from an unspecified diminished capacity during the time covered by the allegations and the investigation of them.
Farley Moody of Calera, a lawyer representing DuBose, declined to provide details about his client's condition. DuBose's filing states that his "treatment and evaluation concerning his health, both mental and physical, is ongoing."
Among other allegations in the judicial ethics complaint, DuBose is accused of drafting a will as a private attorney for a wealthy, dying man, giving the entire estate to a caregiver seeking the will, without ever meeting the dying man. He also is accused of making threatening remarks to a group of lawyers in an apparent attempt to keep them from cooperating with the judicial inquiry commission's investigation.
New York Lawyer - March 13, 2008
GROVE HILL, Ala. (AP) - A Clarke County judge accused in a wide-ranging judicial ethics complaint claims he suffered from "diminished capacity" that affected his ability to make rational decisions.
Circuit Judge Stuart DuBose, who serves Washington, Clarke and Choctaw counties, could be ousted from office if convicted by the Court of the Judiciary.
The Judicial Inquiry Commission made 60 separate allegations against DuBose in January, covering his conduct on the bench and as a private lawyer before he took office in January 2007. They included claims that he told lawyers at a party after he won the Democratic nomination for circuit judge in September 2006 that they would have a "homefield advantage."
DuBose filed his formal response to the allegations Wednesday. He has been on paid leave since the complaint was filed. It's unclear when the commission will rule on the case.
John Wilkerson, the secretary of the Court of the Judiciary, told the Press-Register he can recall only one similar case in the last 30 years. In that case, a Talladega County judge resigned amid allegations of impropriety and requested disability payments because of diminished capacity, Wilkerson said.
DuBose's lawyers denied the charges and claimed he was suffering from an unspecified diminished capacity during the time covered by the allegations and the investigation of them.
Farley Moody of Calera, a lawyer representing DuBose, declined to provide details about his client's condition. DuBose's filing states that his "treatment and evaluation concerning his health, both mental and physical, is ongoing."
Among other allegations in the judicial ethics complaint, DuBose is accused of drafting a will as a private attorney for a wealthy, dying man, giving the entire estate to a caregiver seeking the will, without ever meeting the dying man. He also is accused of making threatening remarks to a group of lawyers in an apparent attempt to keep them from cooperating with the judicial inquiry commission's investigation.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Push for Right to Counsel in NY Civil Cases (MORE, CLICK HERE)
NY State Bar Promotes Right to Counsel in Civil Cases
The New York Law Journal by Vesselin Mitev - March 11, 2008
Low-income New Yorkers should have a right to counsel not only in criminal proceedings but also as civil litigants, Kathryn G. Madigan, president of the New York State Bar Association, told a packed auditorium at Touro Law Center in Central Islip last week.
Ms. Madigan made her remarks at a conference designed to raise awareness of the need for more attorneys who can represent disadvantaged clients in civil matters. Under the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the right to counsel is only guaranteed in a criminal prosecution.
But in an interview last week, Ms. Madigan compared a possible unfavorable outcome of a criminal prosecution, loss of liberty, to that of a civil litigation, which, she said, could be equally as devastating. "If you are a poor person facing a fundamental forfeiture like the loss of health care or the loss of a home, there is no guaranteed right [to counsel]," she said. "It is a similar forfeiture to the loss of liberty when you lose your health and home and your safety. These are really basic human needs."
A common misperception is that such a right already exists, said Ms. Madigan, making it even harder to convince policy makers that more public dollars should be spent on funding pro bono or reduced-fee counsel programs. "We have to come up with a strategic plan to go back to the governor and the Legislature with," she said. "New York is only one of seven states that does not have stable funding for civil legal services," she added, noting that statistic could change only through awareness. "Social change is never easy."
According to Governor Eliot Spitzer's budget office, for the fiscal year ending March 31, $29.6 million of the $118.3 billion budget was allocated to civil legal services. The governor's proposal for 2008-2009 includes $71 million for civil legal services in a $124 billion budget.
The conference, "An Obvious Truth: Creating a Blueprint for a Civil Right to Counsel in New York," attracted more than 100 people to a series of panel discussions and small-group workshops, and presentations by speakers, including Wade Henderson, president of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, Andrew Scherer, president of Legal Services for New York City, and Juanita Bing Newton, deputy chief administrative judge for justice initiatives.
Conference participants were referred to an August 2006 American Bar Association resolution that urged federal and state governments to provide legal counsel as a matter of right in those categories of adversarial proceedings where basic human needs are at stake, such as shelter, health and child custody.
According to a state bar committee report, only around 20 percent of low-income New Yorkers are able to obtain counsel to represent them in civil matters, a number that has stayed relatively constant since a 1990 study. Councilwoman Rosie Mendez of Manhattan, who sat on a panel, said a bill she sponsored, Int. No. 648, would allocate approximately $10 million annually to provide free legal counsel to low-income senior citizens facing eviction or foreclosures. The bill, which is awaiting a public hearing, is backed by 35 other council-members, rendering it "veto-proof," according to Greg Geller, legislative director for Ms. Mendez.
"We have seen this problem where low-income seniors come in too late in the game and they don't know their legal rights," said Mr. Geller. The bill would cover New Yorkers over 62 who have an annual household income of less than $27,000. New York courts also have the ability to appoint counsel for civil litigants who seek assistance as a poor person. But Judge Newton said more can be done. "I think this issue is both an obvious truth and an inconvenient one, how dramatically the lives of poor people are punctuated with legal issues," she told the crowd.
Judge Newton illustrated her point with an example of a man who had contacted her office recently seeking help with a "housing problem, a surrogates' problem, a civil courts problem and potential criminal court issues." Citing informal surveys by court personnel, a 2005 Office of Court Administration report estimated that approximately 75 percent of litigants in New York City Family Court and 90 percent in Housing Court appear without an attorney for critical kinds of cases: evictions, domestic violence, child custody, guardianship, visitation, support and paternity.
Two-thirds of the pro se litigants surveyed by OCA said that they could not afford an attorney. Eighty-three percent earned less than $31,000. The judge's office operates a Web site designed to help financially disadvantaged litigants, listing a glossary of legal terms as well as guides on how to litigate a case pro se and how to navigate through different courts (www.nycourthelp.gov). Judge Newton echoed Ms. Madigan's concern that general misperceptions and apathy may be the biggest obstacles toward a comprehensive solution.
"People just don't understand the issue," she said. Once policy makers recognize the problem, "the difficulty is you have to get them to care about what they understand." More lawyers would help state courts avoid an image problem that paints them as biased against poor and minority litigants, said the judge, as well as the eroding of public trust and the eventual loss of the courts' "moral authority." The state found in its survey that 48 percent of the self-represented litigants were black and 31 percent Hispanic.
"Lawyers really do matter in these cases," said the judge, adding that the challenge is "to develop an instrument that clearly demonstrates in practical terms" how litigants and society would benefit from more lawyers representing disadvantaged clients.
Monetary Solution
The ultimate solution would allocate more money to fund the venture and correct the "80 percent justice gap," said Ms. Madigan. One method is tapping into funds involving the cy pres doctrine. If the individual plaintiffs in class actions or tort cases cannot be identified or payment of the funds is impractical, then counsel and the court can recommend that the funds be directed to legal service programs.
Ms. Madigan pointed to last year's $1.9 million settlement paid by a national company that sold Housing Court data about tenants to landlords, as an example of the cy pres doctrine in action. About $1.2 million of the settlement, if approved by Southern District Court Judge Lewis A. Kaplan, is expected to be distributed to organizations that educate tenants about their rights, said Ms. Madigan. The organizations include the Legal Aid Society of New York and the Neighborhood Economic Development Advocacy Project.
But cy pres is "not a predictable source of funding," said Ms. Madigan. To provide a more dependable source of funding, the state bar supports a permanent $50 million-minimum legal justice fund maintained by taxpayers, created by 2010.
The New York Law Journal by Vesselin Mitev - March 11, 2008
Low-income New Yorkers should have a right to counsel not only in criminal proceedings but also as civil litigants, Kathryn G. Madigan, president of the New York State Bar Association, told a packed auditorium at Touro Law Center in Central Islip last week.
Ms. Madigan made her remarks at a conference designed to raise awareness of the need for more attorneys who can represent disadvantaged clients in civil matters. Under the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the right to counsel is only guaranteed in a criminal prosecution.
But in an interview last week, Ms. Madigan compared a possible unfavorable outcome of a criminal prosecution, loss of liberty, to that of a civil litigation, which, she said, could be equally as devastating. "If you are a poor person facing a fundamental forfeiture like the loss of health care or the loss of a home, there is no guaranteed right [to counsel]," she said. "It is a similar forfeiture to the loss of liberty when you lose your health and home and your safety. These are really basic human needs."
A common misperception is that such a right already exists, said Ms. Madigan, making it even harder to convince policy makers that more public dollars should be spent on funding pro bono or reduced-fee counsel programs. "We have to come up with a strategic plan to go back to the governor and the Legislature with," she said. "New York is only one of seven states that does not have stable funding for civil legal services," she added, noting that statistic could change only through awareness. "Social change is never easy."
According to Governor Eliot Spitzer's budget office, for the fiscal year ending March 31, $29.6 million of the $118.3 billion budget was allocated to civil legal services. The governor's proposal for 2008-2009 includes $71 million for civil legal services in a $124 billion budget.
The conference, "An Obvious Truth: Creating a Blueprint for a Civil Right to Counsel in New York," attracted more than 100 people to a series of panel discussions and small-group workshops, and presentations by speakers, including Wade Henderson, president of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, Andrew Scherer, president of Legal Services for New York City, and Juanita Bing Newton, deputy chief administrative judge for justice initiatives.
Conference participants were referred to an August 2006 American Bar Association resolution that urged federal and state governments to provide legal counsel as a matter of right in those categories of adversarial proceedings where basic human needs are at stake, such as shelter, health and child custody.
According to a state bar committee report, only around 20 percent of low-income New Yorkers are able to obtain counsel to represent them in civil matters, a number that has stayed relatively constant since a 1990 study. Councilwoman Rosie Mendez of Manhattan, who sat on a panel, said a bill she sponsored, Int. No. 648, would allocate approximately $10 million annually to provide free legal counsel to low-income senior citizens facing eviction or foreclosures. The bill, which is awaiting a public hearing, is backed by 35 other council-members, rendering it "veto-proof," according to Greg Geller, legislative director for Ms. Mendez.
"We have seen this problem where low-income seniors come in too late in the game and they don't know their legal rights," said Mr. Geller. The bill would cover New Yorkers over 62 who have an annual household income of less than $27,000. New York courts also have the ability to appoint counsel for civil litigants who seek assistance as a poor person. But Judge Newton said more can be done. "I think this issue is both an obvious truth and an inconvenient one, how dramatically the lives of poor people are punctuated with legal issues," she told the crowd.
Judge Newton illustrated her point with an example of a man who had contacted her office recently seeking help with a "housing problem, a surrogates' problem, a civil courts problem and potential criminal court issues." Citing informal surveys by court personnel, a 2005 Office of Court Administration report estimated that approximately 75 percent of litigants in New York City Family Court and 90 percent in Housing Court appear without an attorney for critical kinds of cases: evictions, domestic violence, child custody, guardianship, visitation, support and paternity.
Two-thirds of the pro se litigants surveyed by OCA said that they could not afford an attorney. Eighty-three percent earned less than $31,000. The judge's office operates a Web site designed to help financially disadvantaged litigants, listing a glossary of legal terms as well as guides on how to litigate a case pro se and how to navigate through different courts (www.nycourthelp.gov). Judge Newton echoed Ms. Madigan's concern that general misperceptions and apathy may be the biggest obstacles toward a comprehensive solution.
"People just don't understand the issue," she said. Once policy makers recognize the problem, "the difficulty is you have to get them to care about what they understand." More lawyers would help state courts avoid an image problem that paints them as biased against poor and minority litigants, said the judge, as well as the eroding of public trust and the eventual loss of the courts' "moral authority." The state found in its survey that 48 percent of the self-represented litigants were black and 31 percent Hispanic.
"Lawyers really do matter in these cases," said the judge, adding that the challenge is "to develop an instrument that clearly demonstrates in practical terms" how litigants and society would benefit from more lawyers representing disadvantaged clients.
Monetary Solution
The ultimate solution would allocate more money to fund the venture and correct the "80 percent justice gap," said Ms. Madigan. One method is tapping into funds involving the cy pres doctrine. If the individual plaintiffs in class actions or tort cases cannot be identified or payment of the funds is impractical, then counsel and the court can recommend that the funds be directed to legal service programs.
Ms. Madigan pointed to last year's $1.9 million settlement paid by a national company that sold Housing Court data about tenants to landlords, as an example of the cy pres doctrine in action. About $1.2 million of the settlement, if approved by Southern District Court Judge Lewis A. Kaplan, is expected to be distributed to organizations that educate tenants about their rights, said Ms. Madigan. The organizations include the Legal Aid Society of New York and the Neighborhood Economic Development Advocacy Project.
But cy pres is "not a predictable source of funding," said Ms. Madigan. To provide a more dependable source of funding, the state bar supports a permanent $50 million-minimum legal justice fund maintained by taxpayers, created by 2010.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Complaint Filed to Yank Spitzer's Law License (MORE, CLICK HERE)
Conservative Lawyer Seeks Spitzer's Suspension From NY Bar
New York Lawyer - March 12, 2008 - By The Associated Press
ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) — A Florida attorney is urging Gov. Eliot Spitzer's immediate suspension as a lawyer in New York following reports he patronized a high-priced prostitution ring.
Jack Thompson, a conservative Republican from Coral Gables, says the Disciplinary Committee for the Appellate Division's First Department should stop Spitzer from practicing law until the matter is resolved.
Alan Friedberg, the committee's chief counsel, declined to comment. Calls to Spitzer's office and his lawyer were not immediately returned. Thompson, who says he filed an early disbarment complaint against former President Bill Clinton in Arkansas, notes that Spitzer didn't claim innocence in his apology Monday.
See related story, "Man Pleads to federal felony, Gets NY Law license back"
New York Lawyer - March 12, 2008 - By The Associated Press
ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) — A Florida attorney is urging Gov. Eliot Spitzer's immediate suspension as a lawyer in New York following reports he patronized a high-priced prostitution ring.
Jack Thompson, a conservative Republican from Coral Gables, says the Disciplinary Committee for the Appellate Division's First Department should stop Spitzer from practicing law until the matter is resolved.
Alan Friedberg, the committee's chief counsel, declined to comment. Calls to Spitzer's office and his lawyer were not immediately returned. Thompson, who says he filed an early disbarment complaint against former President Bill Clinton in Arkansas, notes that Spitzer didn't claim innocence in his apology Monday.
See related story, "Man Pleads to federal felony, Gets NY Law license back"
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Former NY Judge Resigns Amid FBI Prostitution Probe (MORE, CLICK HERE)
Former Judge Tills resigns amid FBI prostitution investigation
By Dan Herbeck and Aaron Besecker - The Buffalo News Staff Reporters
March 9, 2008
A retired State Supreme Court justice resigned his post as a hearing officer as federal agents investigate his alleged role in taking a local massage parlor worker across state lines for purposes of prostitution.
FBI and U.S. Border Patrol agents are investigating allegations that retired Judge Ronald H. Tills, his former law clerk and a retired police captain took the female massage parlor employee in a motor home to a gathering of members of a nationwide group called the Royal Order of Jesters.
At the Jesters event, law enforcement officials said, the woman allegedly was paid to perform sexual favors. Police said the men who took her to the event could face federal criminal charges for transporting her over state lines for the purposes of prostitution. The probe recently led to the resignations of Tills, a retired state judge who had been working as a judicial hearing officer, and Michael Stebick, a part-time law clerk in the state courts in Buffalo.
Both men resigned Thursday, according to Andrew B. Isenberg, district executive for the 8th Judicial District of the state court system. “We’re aware of the investigation. My client was first contacted by the FBI about a month ago,” said Stebick’s attorney, Andrew C. LoTempio. “[Stebick] resigned from his job to save his family and the court system from embarrassment.” LoTempio declined to comment further about the allegations.
Tills’ attorney, Terrence M. Connors, said he, too, is aware of the probe. He declined to say whether Tills has spoken to federal agents or whether he admits going on the trip. He also declined to comment on Tills’ resignation.
“I really can’t respond to rumors and unnamed sources. If the accusations become formal, then we’ll respond,” Connors said. “I’ve asked for a meeting with the government attorneys to discuss these rumors.” Authorities declined to give details about the date and location of the event where the woman was taken, except to say it was outside New York State and occurred more than a year ago.
Spinoff of other probe
The investigation is a spinoff of a case involving prostitution at local massage parlors. Court papers filed by federal prosecutors after a December crackdown on those local massage parlors referred to a “judge” and a “police captain” as being frequent customers of some of the parlors.
Six sources who are familiar with the investigation said Stebick, the owner of the motor home used on the trip, Tills and retired Lockport Police Capt. John Trowbridge went on the road trip, accompanied by the woman from the massage parlor and as many as nine other local men associated with the Jesters. The News has made repeated efforts to reach Trowbridge, 60, for comment, but has been unable to contact him.
Authorities said they became aware of the road trip because the woman had worked at one of four area massage parlors that were raided and shut down in December in connection with the prostitution and human trafficking case. Under the federal Mann Act, it is illegal to transport a woman over state lines for the purposes of prostitution.
Since learning about the alleged road trip, agents from the FBI and U.S. Border Patrol have been investigating the local Jesters chapter, which is known as the Jesters Buffalo Court No. 22. Police also are investigating whether there were other incidents of prostitutes transported across state lines so they could attend Jesters conventions in other cities.
Tills, who retired as a state judge in 2005, was previously a member of the Assembly. Until resigning Thursday, he worked part time as a $300-a-day judicial hearing officer in the state courts. Stebick, Tills’ former law clerk, is a former criminal prosecutor with the Erie County district attorney’s office. In recent years, he has worked for the state courts part time, evaluating pistol permit applications, Isenberg said.
According to the Congressional Record, Rep. Thomas M. Reynolds, R-Clarence, mentioned Tills’ work with the Jesters while making congratulatory remarks about the judge’s retirement during a session of Congress on Dec. 5, 2005.
While attending college, Reynolds worked in Tills’ Assembly office in the early 1970s. Speaking before Congress, he called Tills his “valued mentor” and spoke of his service to community organizations, including his work as director of “Buffalo Court 22 of Jesters.”
The Jesters is a not-for-profit fraternal organization associated with the Masons, with 191 chapters, called subordinate courts, in the United States, Canada, Mexico and Panama, said Alex Rogers, business manager at the organization’s Indianapolis headquarters.
“Mirth ... merriment” “Mirth is king” is the fun-loving group’s motto, according to its Web site. There are about 23,500 members in all, and each must already be a member of the Shrine of North America and the Masons, Rogers said. “Our purpose is to spread the gospel of mirth and merriment,” Rogers said.
Officials in the group’s headquarters said they were not aware of the investigation in Buffalo and have not been contacted about it by police. To hear of the investigation from a reporter was “unnerving and shocking,” Rogers said. “We certainly don’t stand for any of that stuff,” he said.
Since each Jester is already a Shriner, the group supports the 22 Shriners Hospitals for Children in the United States, Canada and Mexico, Rogers said. “Most of our work is charitable in nature, and that’s why I just can’t believe the nature of this investigation,” he said.
However, allegations of prostitution activity at Jesters conventions have surfaced publicly at least once before — during a federal court case in Milwaukee, Wis., in February 1990, according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. According to the newspaper’s account, a woman admitted to a federal judge that she ran an interstate prostitution business and was hired to provide prostitutes for Jesters conventions in New Orleans, Houston, Chicago and other locations, including some in other countries.
The newspaper reported that the woman, speaking at her sentencing, told the judge that “well-to-do businessmen, mayors and aldermen” were among the Jesters’ members, and that uniformed police officers sometimes provided security at the events. The Jesters try to take the “highest caliber Shriners we can get” who distinguish themselves in the community, Rogers said. “We try to keep the cream of the crop,” he said.
Rogers had no information about Tills, or whether he still holds a leadership post in the Buffalo Jesters group. Tills’ attorney, Connors, declined to comment on Tills’ role with the group. The national Jesters office identified James Kirst as secretary of the Buffalo chapter, but Kirst hung up the telephone when a reporter asked him about the FBI investigation.
Four massage parlors in Niagara Falls, Wheatfield, Lockport and the Town of Tonawanda were raided Dec. 10, after a 15-month investigation into prostitution allegations. Four people were arrested, and police said they “rescued” nine women who worked in the parlors.
Buffalo FBI spokesman Paul M. Moskal said he could not comment when asked whether Tills was the judge and Trowbridge was the police captain discussed in the court documents. “There are ongoing aspects to this investigation that are being followed up by our agents and the Border Patrol, but I can’t comment on any of the specifics,” Moskal said.
U.S. Attorney Terrance P. Flynn and his chief of criminal prosecutions, James P. Kennedy, both said they had no comment when asked about the Jesters.
dherbeck@buffnews.com and abesecker@buffnews.com
www.buffalonews.com
By Dan Herbeck and Aaron Besecker - The Buffalo News Staff Reporters
March 9, 2008
A retired State Supreme Court justice resigned his post as a hearing officer as federal agents investigate his alleged role in taking a local massage parlor worker across state lines for purposes of prostitution.
FBI and U.S. Border Patrol agents are investigating allegations that retired Judge Ronald H. Tills, his former law clerk and a retired police captain took the female massage parlor employee in a motor home to a gathering of members of a nationwide group called the Royal Order of Jesters.
At the Jesters event, law enforcement officials said, the woman allegedly was paid to perform sexual favors. Police said the men who took her to the event could face federal criminal charges for transporting her over state lines for the purposes of prostitution. The probe recently led to the resignations of Tills, a retired state judge who had been working as a judicial hearing officer, and Michael Stebick, a part-time law clerk in the state courts in Buffalo.
Both men resigned Thursday, according to Andrew B. Isenberg, district executive for the 8th Judicial District of the state court system. “We’re aware of the investigation. My client was first contacted by the FBI about a month ago,” said Stebick’s attorney, Andrew C. LoTempio. “[Stebick] resigned from his job to save his family and the court system from embarrassment.” LoTempio declined to comment further about the allegations.
Tills’ attorney, Terrence M. Connors, said he, too, is aware of the probe. He declined to say whether Tills has spoken to federal agents or whether he admits going on the trip. He also declined to comment on Tills’ resignation.
“I really can’t respond to rumors and unnamed sources. If the accusations become formal, then we’ll respond,” Connors said. “I’ve asked for a meeting with the government attorneys to discuss these rumors.” Authorities declined to give details about the date and location of the event where the woman was taken, except to say it was outside New York State and occurred more than a year ago.
Spinoff of other probe
The investigation is a spinoff of a case involving prostitution at local massage parlors. Court papers filed by federal prosecutors after a December crackdown on those local massage parlors referred to a “judge” and a “police captain” as being frequent customers of some of the parlors.
Six sources who are familiar with the investigation said Stebick, the owner of the motor home used on the trip, Tills and retired Lockport Police Capt. John Trowbridge went on the road trip, accompanied by the woman from the massage parlor and as many as nine other local men associated with the Jesters. The News has made repeated efforts to reach Trowbridge, 60, for comment, but has been unable to contact him.
Authorities said they became aware of the road trip because the woman had worked at one of four area massage parlors that were raided and shut down in December in connection with the prostitution and human trafficking case. Under the federal Mann Act, it is illegal to transport a woman over state lines for the purposes of prostitution.
Since learning about the alleged road trip, agents from the FBI and U.S. Border Patrol have been investigating the local Jesters chapter, which is known as the Jesters Buffalo Court No. 22. Police also are investigating whether there were other incidents of prostitutes transported across state lines so they could attend Jesters conventions in other cities.
Tills, who retired as a state judge in 2005, was previously a member of the Assembly. Until resigning Thursday, he worked part time as a $300-a-day judicial hearing officer in the state courts. Stebick, Tills’ former law clerk, is a former criminal prosecutor with the Erie County district attorney’s office. In recent years, he has worked for the state courts part time, evaluating pistol permit applications, Isenberg said.
According to the Congressional Record, Rep. Thomas M. Reynolds, R-Clarence, mentioned Tills’ work with the Jesters while making congratulatory remarks about the judge’s retirement during a session of Congress on Dec. 5, 2005.
While attending college, Reynolds worked in Tills’ Assembly office in the early 1970s. Speaking before Congress, he called Tills his “valued mentor” and spoke of his service to community organizations, including his work as director of “Buffalo Court 22 of Jesters.”
The Jesters is a not-for-profit fraternal organization associated with the Masons, with 191 chapters, called subordinate courts, in the United States, Canada, Mexico and Panama, said Alex Rogers, business manager at the organization’s Indianapolis headquarters.
“Mirth ... merriment” “Mirth is king” is the fun-loving group’s motto, according to its Web site. There are about 23,500 members in all, and each must already be a member of the Shrine of North America and the Masons, Rogers said. “Our purpose is to spread the gospel of mirth and merriment,” Rogers said.
Officials in the group’s headquarters said they were not aware of the investigation in Buffalo and have not been contacted about it by police. To hear of the investigation from a reporter was “unnerving and shocking,” Rogers said. “We certainly don’t stand for any of that stuff,” he said.
Since each Jester is already a Shriner, the group supports the 22 Shriners Hospitals for Children in the United States, Canada and Mexico, Rogers said. “Most of our work is charitable in nature, and that’s why I just can’t believe the nature of this investigation,” he said.
However, allegations of prostitution activity at Jesters conventions have surfaced publicly at least once before — during a federal court case in Milwaukee, Wis., in February 1990, according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. According to the newspaper’s account, a woman admitted to a federal judge that she ran an interstate prostitution business and was hired to provide prostitutes for Jesters conventions in New Orleans, Houston, Chicago and other locations, including some in other countries.
The newspaper reported that the woman, speaking at her sentencing, told the judge that “well-to-do businessmen, mayors and aldermen” were among the Jesters’ members, and that uniformed police officers sometimes provided security at the events. The Jesters try to take the “highest caliber Shriners we can get” who distinguish themselves in the community, Rogers said. “We try to keep the cream of the crop,” he said.
Rogers had no information about Tills, or whether he still holds a leadership post in the Buffalo Jesters group. Tills’ attorney, Connors, declined to comment on Tills’ role with the group. The national Jesters office identified James Kirst as secretary of the Buffalo chapter, but Kirst hung up the telephone when a reporter asked him about the FBI investigation.
Four massage parlors in Niagara Falls, Wheatfield, Lockport and the Town of Tonawanda were raided Dec. 10, after a 15-month investigation into prostitution allegations. Four people were arrested, and police said they “rescued” nine women who worked in the parlors.
Buffalo FBI spokesman Paul M. Moskal said he could not comment when asked whether Tills was the judge and Trowbridge was the police captain discussed in the court documents. “There are ongoing aspects to this investigation that are being followed up by our agents and the Border Patrol, but I can’t comment on any of the specifics,” Moskal said.
U.S. Attorney Terrance P. Flynn and his chief of criminal prosecutions, James P. Kennedy, both said they had no comment when asked about the Jesters.
dherbeck@buffnews.com and abesecker@buffnews.com
www.buffalonews.com
Tammany Hall II Bangs NY Gov (MORE, CLICK HERE)
GOV NAILED IN HOOKER SHOCK
New York Post by MURRAY WEISS, TOM LIDDY and CHUCK BENNETT
March 11, 2008 -- Gov. Spitzer, who crafted a national reputation as a crusader against corruption, was exposed yesterday as the penny-pinching client of a $1,000-an-hour hooker.
The bombshell allegations against Spitzer - referred to as Client-9 in an explosive criminal complaint against the operators of the prostitute's ring - triggered a series of fast-moving events from Albany to Wall Street to Capitol Hill.
After a brief news conference in which Spitzer - his pale, grim-faced wife standing stunned at his side - offered little more than a vague apology, speculation swirled that he'd resign after working out a deal with law-enforcement authorities. A spokesman said the governor had retained the Manhattan law firm of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind Wharton & Garrison,
"I apologize first and most importantly to my family," said the governor - who had run a campaign ad urging voters to "bring some passion back to Albany" - at his brief press conference. "I apologize to the public, who I promised better. I don't believe politics in the long run is about individuals. It is about ideas and the public good and doing what is best for the state of New York."
Spitzer had vowed things in Albany would change from "Day One." But the biggest changes came on Day 435 of his troubled governorship, with an extraordinary series of events and revelations:
* An irregularity in one of Spitzer's bank accounts - from which he allegedly paid the prostitute - triggered the federal probe of the hooker ring.
* Wall Street traders cheered the public fall of a man who had taken special delight in bringing down financial titans.
* Wiretaps revealed Spitzer haggling over the price of a hookup that took place at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC, on the eve of Valentine's Day.
* The hooker, identified in the complaint as a pretty, petite brunette named Kristen, said she didn't find "Client-9" very "difficult" - the word a madam had used to describe him.
* Spitzer paid for Room 871 at the Mayflower under the name George Fox - a friend and political donor.
* The wiretaps indicated Spitzer was a previous client of the alleged ring - Emperors Club VIP -and kept a "balance on account."
* Lt. Gov. David Paterson, who would succeed Spitzer, reached out to state and city leaders.
In his apology, Spitzer, the 48-year-old father of three teenage daughters, said, "I have disappointed and failed to live up to the standard I expected of myself. I must now dedicate some time to regain the trust of my family." The governor has not been arrested - and it was unclear last night what charges he might face. Johns are not usually arrested, but the federal Mann Act makes it a crime to bring someone across state lines for the purposes of prostitution.
Still, sources said it's more likely Spitzer's legal liability lies with his financial shenanigans - money from the account allegedly hid both the source and the real purpose of the payments. The IRS first noticed some irregularities in a nonpersonal bank account that appeared to have some political or governmental link, according to the sources.
IRS agents then called in the FBI, whose investigators quickly determined the account was owned, operated and signed by Spitzer, according to the sources. The investigators at first speculated they might find evidence of campaign-law violation and were as surprised as anyone to learn they had stumbled into a prostitution probe.
The investigation determined that several thousands of dollars from the account were winding up at QAT - an alleged shell company of Emperors Club VIP, the sources said. A prostitute who was a confidential source in a previous case - and who once worked for Emperors - told investigators how the shell company worked, according to the complaint and sources.
The complaint said Spitzer was a regular client of Emperors, an upscale escort service that offered well-heeled johns "expensive fashion models, pageant winners and exquisite students" for up to $5,500 an hour. The women were ranked on a three- to seven-diamond scale based on brains, beauty and education.
The governor was caught on an FBI wiretap making arrangements to have a "very pretty brunette" delivered to his Washington hotel room in the late evening of Feb. 13. His official reason for being in Washington was to testify the next day before a congressional subcommittee.
Reaction was swift. "This is a guy who is so self-righteous, and so unforgiving . . . He has to step down. No one will stand with him," declared Rep. Peter King, a Republican from Long Island.
Spitzer, who is slated to be a superdelegate at the Democratic National Convention, did receive some sympathy from political ally Hillary Rodham Clinton. "I obviously am sending best wishes and thoughts to the governor and to his family . . . Let's wait and see what comes out of the next days. Right now, I don't have any comment. I think it's appropriate to wish his family well and see how things develop," she said.
Paterson made a slew of emergency phones calls to Mayor Bloomberg, City Council Speaker Christine Quinn and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver shortly after the scandal broke. Just last year, when Spitzer promised to be the reformer of Albany, he was being talked about as the nation's first Jewish president, with a shot at the 2012 election.
Last Thursday, Emperors Club - which was based out of an apartment in Cliffside Park, NJ, and allegedly made a profit of at least $1 million over four years - was busted by federal agents. Both the governor's and the prostitutes' cellphone calls with the managers of the call-girl ring were caught on federal wiretaps. Details of the tryst were outlined in a federal complaint filed last week against the principals of the club.
On Jan. 28, investigators recorded a conversation between Temeka Rachelle Lewis, one of the ring's "bookers" and Cecil "Katie" Suwal, the No. 2 of the organization, about arranging a date for Client-9 at the Mayflower. Kristen, "an American, petite, very pretty brunette, 5 feet 5 inches, and 105 pounds" according to the complaint, was to meet Client-9 at a hotel in Washington, DC, for a four-hour date that was discussed in subsequent phone calls.
Suwal told Kirsten that Client-9 "would ask you to do things that, like, you might not think were safe - you know . . . I mean that . . . very basic things." But, Kirsten said she could handle him and said she actually liked him. "I have a way of dealing with that . . . I'd be like, 'Listen, dude, you really want the sex?' " she said.
Client-9 also had more demands than typical clients, according to the complaint. He couldn't pay the fee through the wire transfers and mailed a deposit to Emperors Club that didn't arrive on time, causing an extended back-and-forth between the ring and Client-9. At the same time, he insisted he had a $400 credit from a previous transaction with the flesh peddlers. He also balked at leaving a key for the prostitute with the hotel concierge because he didn't want her to say his name at the front desk.
Eventually, he decided to just leave his hotel room, which was booked under Fox's name. He left the door slightly ajar so Kristen could come to the room directly, according to the complaint. "Client-9 would be paying for everything - train tickets, cab fare from the hotel and back, mini bar or room service, travel time, and hotel," the complaint said. In all, he paid $4,300 for the encounter, which included "credit" for future dates.
Additional reporting by Gemma Jones and Tom Topousis murray.weiss@nypost.com
New York Post by MURRAY WEISS, TOM LIDDY and CHUCK BENNETT
March 11, 2008 -- Gov. Spitzer, who crafted a national reputation as a crusader against corruption, was exposed yesterday as the penny-pinching client of a $1,000-an-hour hooker.
The bombshell allegations against Spitzer - referred to as Client-9 in an explosive criminal complaint against the operators of the prostitute's ring - triggered a series of fast-moving events from Albany to Wall Street to Capitol Hill.
After a brief news conference in which Spitzer - his pale, grim-faced wife standing stunned at his side - offered little more than a vague apology, speculation swirled that he'd resign after working out a deal with law-enforcement authorities. A spokesman said the governor had retained the Manhattan law firm of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind Wharton & Garrison,
"I apologize first and most importantly to my family," said the governor - who had run a campaign ad urging voters to "bring some passion back to Albany" - at his brief press conference. "I apologize to the public, who I promised better. I don't believe politics in the long run is about individuals. It is about ideas and the public good and doing what is best for the state of New York."
Spitzer had vowed things in Albany would change from "Day One." But the biggest changes came on Day 435 of his troubled governorship, with an extraordinary series of events and revelations:
* An irregularity in one of Spitzer's bank accounts - from which he allegedly paid the prostitute - triggered the federal probe of the hooker ring.
* Wall Street traders cheered the public fall of a man who had taken special delight in bringing down financial titans.
* Wiretaps revealed Spitzer haggling over the price of a hookup that took place at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC, on the eve of Valentine's Day.
* The hooker, identified in the complaint as a pretty, petite brunette named Kristen, said she didn't find "Client-9" very "difficult" - the word a madam had used to describe him.
* Spitzer paid for Room 871 at the Mayflower under the name George Fox - a friend and political donor.
* The wiretaps indicated Spitzer was a previous client of the alleged ring - Emperors Club VIP -and kept a "balance on account."
* Lt. Gov. David Paterson, who would succeed Spitzer, reached out to state and city leaders.
In his apology, Spitzer, the 48-year-old father of three teenage daughters, said, "I have disappointed and failed to live up to the standard I expected of myself. I must now dedicate some time to regain the trust of my family." The governor has not been arrested - and it was unclear last night what charges he might face. Johns are not usually arrested, but the federal Mann Act makes it a crime to bring someone across state lines for the purposes of prostitution.
Still, sources said it's more likely Spitzer's legal liability lies with his financial shenanigans - money from the account allegedly hid both the source and the real purpose of the payments. The IRS first noticed some irregularities in a nonpersonal bank account that appeared to have some political or governmental link, according to the sources.
IRS agents then called in the FBI, whose investigators quickly determined the account was owned, operated and signed by Spitzer, according to the sources. The investigators at first speculated they might find evidence of campaign-law violation and were as surprised as anyone to learn they had stumbled into a prostitution probe.
The investigation determined that several thousands of dollars from the account were winding up at QAT - an alleged shell company of Emperors Club VIP, the sources said. A prostitute who was a confidential source in a previous case - and who once worked for Emperors - told investigators how the shell company worked, according to the complaint and sources.
The complaint said Spitzer was a regular client of Emperors, an upscale escort service that offered well-heeled johns "expensive fashion models, pageant winners and exquisite students" for up to $5,500 an hour. The women were ranked on a three- to seven-diamond scale based on brains, beauty and education.
The governor was caught on an FBI wiretap making arrangements to have a "very pretty brunette" delivered to his Washington hotel room in the late evening of Feb. 13. His official reason for being in Washington was to testify the next day before a congressional subcommittee.
Reaction was swift. "This is a guy who is so self-righteous, and so unforgiving . . . He has to step down. No one will stand with him," declared Rep. Peter King, a Republican from Long Island.
Spitzer, who is slated to be a superdelegate at the Democratic National Convention, did receive some sympathy from political ally Hillary Rodham Clinton. "I obviously am sending best wishes and thoughts to the governor and to his family . . . Let's wait and see what comes out of the next days. Right now, I don't have any comment. I think it's appropriate to wish his family well and see how things develop," she said.
Paterson made a slew of emergency phones calls to Mayor Bloomberg, City Council Speaker Christine Quinn and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver shortly after the scandal broke. Just last year, when Spitzer promised to be the reformer of Albany, he was being talked about as the nation's first Jewish president, with a shot at the 2012 election.
Last Thursday, Emperors Club - which was based out of an apartment in Cliffside Park, NJ, and allegedly made a profit of at least $1 million over four years - was busted by federal agents. Both the governor's and the prostitutes' cellphone calls with the managers of the call-girl ring were caught on federal wiretaps. Details of the tryst were outlined in a federal complaint filed last week against the principals of the club.
On Jan. 28, investigators recorded a conversation between Temeka Rachelle Lewis, one of the ring's "bookers" and Cecil "Katie" Suwal, the No. 2 of the organization, about arranging a date for Client-9 at the Mayflower. Kristen, "an American, petite, very pretty brunette, 5 feet 5 inches, and 105 pounds" according to the complaint, was to meet Client-9 at a hotel in Washington, DC, for a four-hour date that was discussed in subsequent phone calls.
Suwal told Kirsten that Client-9 "would ask you to do things that, like, you might not think were safe - you know . . . I mean that . . . very basic things." But, Kirsten said she could handle him and said she actually liked him. "I have a way of dealing with that . . . I'd be like, 'Listen, dude, you really want the sex?' " she said.
Client-9 also had more demands than typical clients, according to the complaint. He couldn't pay the fee through the wire transfers and mailed a deposit to Emperors Club that didn't arrive on time, causing an extended back-and-forth between the ring and Client-9. At the same time, he insisted he had a $400 credit from a previous transaction with the flesh peddlers. He also balked at leaving a key for the prostitute with the hotel concierge because he didn't want her to say his name at the front desk.
Eventually, he decided to just leave his hotel room, which was booked under Fox's name. He left the door slightly ajar so Kristen could come to the room directly, according to the complaint. "Client-9 would be paying for everything - train tickets, cab fare from the hotel and back, mini bar or room service, travel time, and hotel," the complaint said. In all, he paid $4,300 for the encounter, which included "credit" for future dates.
Additional reporting by Gemma Jones and Tom Topousis murray.weiss@nypost.com
Monday, March 10, 2008
NY POST: "COURTS CORRUPT: SNITCH" (MORE, CLICK HERE)
COURTS CORRUPT: SNITCH
By ALEX GINSBERG and C.J. SULLIVAN
PAUL SIMINOVSKY: Freed from prison.
March 10, 2008 -- His testimony helped nail crooked Judge Gerald Garson, and he paid for his own misdeeds with eight months in jail - but disgraced matrimonial lawyer Paul Siminovsky says there are still rotten eggs in Brooklyn. "There are three judges in Brooklyn that slammed me in the press," Siminovsky told The Post. "When I was taking them out to lunch or contributing to their election campaigns, they never said no to me. When I did that, I was all right, a good guy."
Siminovsky declined to say who else he had wined and dined other than Garson. But in his first public comments since walking out of jail last month, he hinted that Garson, his former mentor, was just part of the problem. "I heard that when I testified, a lot of court workers had some bad things to say about me," he said. "When I was taking them out to lunch and being Mr. Nice Guy, no one had anything bad to say about me."
Siminovsky, 49, was caught accepting money from litigants seeking to bribe Garson, but quickly worked out a deal for himself. Working with prosecutors, he wore a wire and got the judge to accept gifts, including a box of cigars, in exchange for favors and advice in his matrimonial courtroom. The George Washington University Law School graduate said he believed that Garson's high-profile trial would root out some of the more obvious and inappropriate schmoozing between judges and attorneys.
"The minor-league problem will always go on," he said, referring to small-time corruption. "Favors still get done, but I think it is cleaner in the sense that people are being more careful. I think people want to believe it is better." Siminovsky got four months off his sentence for good behavior. alex.ginsberg@nypost.com
By ALEX GINSBERG and C.J. SULLIVAN
PAUL SIMINOVSKY: Freed from prison.
March 10, 2008 -- His testimony helped nail crooked Judge Gerald Garson, and he paid for his own misdeeds with eight months in jail - but disgraced matrimonial lawyer Paul Siminovsky says there are still rotten eggs in Brooklyn. "There are three judges in Brooklyn that slammed me in the press," Siminovsky told The Post. "When I was taking them out to lunch or contributing to their election campaigns, they never said no to me. When I did that, I was all right, a good guy."
Siminovsky declined to say who else he had wined and dined other than Garson. But in his first public comments since walking out of jail last month, he hinted that Garson, his former mentor, was just part of the problem. "I heard that when I testified, a lot of court workers had some bad things to say about me," he said. "When I was taking them out to lunch and being Mr. Nice Guy, no one had anything bad to say about me."
Siminovsky, 49, was caught accepting money from litigants seeking to bribe Garson, but quickly worked out a deal for himself. Working with prosecutors, he wore a wire and got the judge to accept gifts, including a box of cigars, in exchange for favors and advice in his matrimonial courtroom. The George Washington University Law School graduate said he believed that Garson's high-profile trial would root out some of the more obvious and inappropriate schmoozing between judges and attorneys.
"The minor-league problem will always go on," he said, referring to small-time corruption. "Favors still get done, but I think it is cleaner in the sense that people are being more careful. I think people want to believe it is better." Siminovsky got four months off his sentence for good behavior. alex.ginsberg@nypost.com
Sunday, March 9, 2008
URGENT NOTICE TO ALL ATTORNEY ETHICS COMPLAINANTS (MORE, CLICK HERE)
URGENT NOTICE TO ALL ATTORNEY ETHICS COMPLAINANTS
Many people who have tried to file disciplinary complaints with the first Department Disciplinary Committee, and other New York State grievance committees, have been stymied by the response that the committee complained to “does not”, “can not” or “declines to” consider the complaint because the complaint involves parties and counsel that are in the midst of litigation.
This response is in direct contradiction to the Rules of the Uniform Courts regarding this matter.
According to the Rules of the Uniform Court, the Committee “need not” defer consideration of “allegations which are substantially similar to the material allegations of pending criminal or civil litigation need not be deferred pending determination of such litigation.”
The term “Need Not” means that the litigation status of the matters at issue is not a sufficient or necessary basis for deferring the complaint. Unless further justification is provided for deferment of a complaint, the committee is simply saying you that it is deferring the complaint for no particular reason.
The real reason for deferring a complaint is generally to protect the lawyers who are being complained about.
If anyone has had their complaint deferred solely due to its litigation status, they should file a complaint stating that this explanation is insufficient and demanding a valid reason for the deferment.
§ 605.9 Abatement of Investigation
Matters Involving Related Pending Civil Litigation or Criminal Matters.
General Rule. The processing of complaints involving material allegations which are substantially similar to the material allegations of pending criminal or civil litigation need not be deferred pending determination of such litigation.
SEE: http://www.courts.state.ny.us/courts/ad1/part605.shtml
(submitted by a concerned viewer, and not intended to be legal advice)
Many people who have tried to file disciplinary complaints with the first Department Disciplinary Committee, and other New York State grievance committees, have been stymied by the response that the committee complained to “does not”, “can not” or “declines to” consider the complaint because the complaint involves parties and counsel that are in the midst of litigation.
This response is in direct contradiction to the Rules of the Uniform Courts regarding this matter.
According to the Rules of the Uniform Court, the Committee “need not” defer consideration of “allegations which are substantially similar to the material allegations of pending criminal or civil litigation need not be deferred pending determination of such litigation.”
The term “Need Not” means that the litigation status of the matters at issue is not a sufficient or necessary basis for deferring the complaint. Unless further justification is provided for deferment of a complaint, the committee is simply saying you that it is deferring the complaint for no particular reason.
The real reason for deferring a complaint is generally to protect the lawyers who are being complained about.
If anyone has had their complaint deferred solely due to its litigation status, they should file a complaint stating that this explanation is insufficient and demanding a valid reason for the deferment.
§ 605.9 Abatement of Investigation
Matters Involving Related Pending Civil Litigation or Criminal Matters.
General Rule. The processing of complaints involving material allegations which are substantially similar to the material allegations of pending criminal or civil litigation need not be deferred pending determination of such litigation.
SEE: http://www.courts.state.ny.us/courts/ad1/part605.shtml
(submitted by a concerned viewer, and not intended to be legal advice)
Saturday, March 8, 2008
Judge Slams Law Firm's Frivolous Action (MORE, CLICK HERE)
Judge Faults NY Firm's "Frivolous" Pursuit Of Case
The New York Law Journal by Vesselin Mitev
A personal injury firm maintained a "frivolous" action against a psychologist "long after the record establishe[d]" it had no case, a Nassau County judge has ruled.
In awarding costs and fees to Ethel Cwibeker, Supreme Court Justice Karen V. Murphy found in Dunn v. Khan, 5494/05, that there was "no basis to hold [Ms. Cwibeker] at fault for any part of the plaintiff's cause of action" arising out of a suicide and, thus, sanctions under CPLR §8303-a were appropriate.
The decision will be published Wednesday.
On Sept. 28, 2007, Justice Murphy dismissed the complaint of Mitchell Dunn, brought on behalf of his deceased wife, Pauline, against Ms. Cwibeker, ruling that the psychologist had "submitted ample proof . . . that no doctor-patient relationship had ever been formed" between her and Ms. Dunn.
Albert B. Aquila, who represents Mr. Dunn, continued to allege in an interview yesterday that Ms. Dunn was a patient of Ms. Cwibeker. He said Ms. Cwibeker saw Ms. Dunn twice before her Aug. 25, 2003, death. Ms. Dunn is believed to have taken her own life after being hospitalized. Ms. Cwibeker "saw her in the hospital for a session and she saw her the day before she committed suicide," said Mr. Aquila of Sullivan, Papain, Block, McGrath & Cannavo in Mineola.
Mr. Aquila said his firm would appeal the sanctions decision, which "goes against case law." And, although the judge noted that Mr. Dunn did not oppose the summary judgment motion, Mr. Aquila said he has appealed the dismissal of claims against the psychologist.
According to the decision, on Feb. 18, 2005, Mr. Aquila requested copies of Ms. Cwibeker's office records relating to her treatment of Ms. Dunn. The psychologist wrote back that she was not a medical doctor and had only seen Ms. Dunn twice prior to her death. Another letter seeking copies of Ms. Cwibeker's "psychotherapy and counseling notes" followed on March 7, 2005, to which the psychologist responded in a similar vein.
The initial action commenced on April 26, 2005, with Mr. Dunn alleging that Ms. Cwibeker had rendered "medical and/or psychological care and services to the decedent, Pauline Dunn, from on or about October 2002 continuously up through and including August 25, 2003." An additional action, making the same allegations of medical and psychiatric malpractice against Ms. Cwibeker was commenced on Feb. 10, 2006. In reply to a discovery request seeking evidence that Ms. Cwibeker had rendered medical or psychological care to Ms. Dunn during the time claimed by Mr. Dunn, "plaintiff stated that there are no such records."
According to the decision, Mr. Dunn admitted at a deposition conducted on July 25 and Aug. 4, 2006, that "he and his wife, Pauline, met the defendant, Ms. Cwibeker for the first time on August 15, 2003" concerning their child's suicide attempt. That admission was fatal to Mr. Dunn's case, said Rachel Yosevitz Weisman, who represented Ms. Cwibeker.
Ms. Cwibeker "was not the doctor and the deceased was not her patient - there were no records [Ms. Dunn] had ever been a patient," Ms. Weisman, of the Weisman Law Group in Cedarhurst, said in an interview.
Justice Murphy acknowledged that under some circumstances, Mr. Aquila did not have to "unconditionally accept Ms. Cwibeker's blanket denials" of any doctor-patient relationship with Ms. Dunn. But in this case, "absent a scintilla of evidence to the contrary," Mr. Aquila was obligated to accept her denials as true.
"Plaintiff had no evidence to support his allegations that the defendant was the decedent's therapist or that defendant had met and rendered 'medical or psychological care and services to the decedent . . . from on or about October 2002 continuously up through and including August 25, 2003,'" wrote the judge.
Even if the action had been commenced in good faith, it should have been withdrawn after "it became clear that there was no basis to hold [Ms. Cwibeker] at fault for any part of the plaintiff's cause of action," Justice Murphy wrote.
The judge said Mr. Dunn's action should have been unconditionally withdrawn and discontinued against Ms. Cwibeker. Thus, she concluded that its continuation had been frivolous, a finding that mandated the granting of costs, sanctions and reasonable attorney's fees. Ms. Weisman said the fees could amount to around $75,000.
A hearing will be held on March 25 to determine the amount of the sanctions and whether the fees will be paid by Mr. Aquila's firm or by Mr. Dunn.
The New York Law Journal by Vesselin Mitev
A personal injury firm maintained a "frivolous" action against a psychologist "long after the record establishe[d]" it had no case, a Nassau County judge has ruled.
In awarding costs and fees to Ethel Cwibeker, Supreme Court Justice Karen V. Murphy found in Dunn v. Khan, 5494/05, that there was "no basis to hold [Ms. Cwibeker] at fault for any part of the plaintiff's cause of action" arising out of a suicide and, thus, sanctions under CPLR §8303-a were appropriate.
The decision will be published Wednesday.
On Sept. 28, 2007, Justice Murphy dismissed the complaint of Mitchell Dunn, brought on behalf of his deceased wife, Pauline, against Ms. Cwibeker, ruling that the psychologist had "submitted ample proof . . . that no doctor-patient relationship had ever been formed" between her and Ms. Dunn.
Albert B. Aquila, who represents Mr. Dunn, continued to allege in an interview yesterday that Ms. Dunn was a patient of Ms. Cwibeker. He said Ms. Cwibeker saw Ms. Dunn twice before her Aug. 25, 2003, death. Ms. Dunn is believed to have taken her own life after being hospitalized. Ms. Cwibeker "saw her in the hospital for a session and she saw her the day before she committed suicide," said Mr. Aquila of Sullivan, Papain, Block, McGrath & Cannavo in Mineola.
Mr. Aquila said his firm would appeal the sanctions decision, which "goes against case law." And, although the judge noted that Mr. Dunn did not oppose the summary judgment motion, Mr. Aquila said he has appealed the dismissal of claims against the psychologist.
According to the decision, on Feb. 18, 2005, Mr. Aquila requested copies of Ms. Cwibeker's office records relating to her treatment of Ms. Dunn. The psychologist wrote back that she was not a medical doctor and had only seen Ms. Dunn twice prior to her death. Another letter seeking copies of Ms. Cwibeker's "psychotherapy and counseling notes" followed on March 7, 2005, to which the psychologist responded in a similar vein.
The initial action commenced on April 26, 2005, with Mr. Dunn alleging that Ms. Cwibeker had rendered "medical and/or psychological care and services to the decedent, Pauline Dunn, from on or about October 2002 continuously up through and including August 25, 2003." An additional action, making the same allegations of medical and psychiatric malpractice against Ms. Cwibeker was commenced on Feb. 10, 2006. In reply to a discovery request seeking evidence that Ms. Cwibeker had rendered medical or psychological care to Ms. Dunn during the time claimed by Mr. Dunn, "plaintiff stated that there are no such records."
According to the decision, Mr. Dunn admitted at a deposition conducted on July 25 and Aug. 4, 2006, that "he and his wife, Pauline, met the defendant, Ms. Cwibeker for the first time on August 15, 2003" concerning their child's suicide attempt. That admission was fatal to Mr. Dunn's case, said Rachel Yosevitz Weisman, who represented Ms. Cwibeker.
Ms. Cwibeker "was not the doctor and the deceased was not her patient - there were no records [Ms. Dunn] had ever been a patient," Ms. Weisman, of the Weisman Law Group in Cedarhurst, said in an interview.
Justice Murphy acknowledged that under some circumstances, Mr. Aquila did not have to "unconditionally accept Ms. Cwibeker's blanket denials" of any doctor-patient relationship with Ms. Dunn. But in this case, "absent a scintilla of evidence to the contrary," Mr. Aquila was obligated to accept her denials as true.
"Plaintiff had no evidence to support his allegations that the defendant was the decedent's therapist or that defendant had met and rendered 'medical or psychological care and services to the decedent . . . from on or about October 2002 continuously up through and including August 25, 2003,'" wrote the judge.
Even if the action had been commenced in good faith, it should have been withdrawn after "it became clear that there was no basis to hold [Ms. Cwibeker] at fault for any part of the plaintiff's cause of action," Justice Murphy wrote.
The judge said Mr. Dunn's action should have been unconditionally withdrawn and discontinued against Ms. Cwibeker. Thus, she concluded that its continuation had been frivolous, a finding that mandated the granting of costs, sanctions and reasonable attorney's fees. Ms. Weisman said the fees could amount to around $75,000.
A hearing will be held on March 25 to determine the amount of the sanctions and whether the fees will be paid by Mr. Aquila's firm or by Mr. Dunn.
Friday, March 7, 2008
Cuomo Going After Corrupt Lawyers (MORE, CLICK HERE)
Cuomo Expands Probe of NY Lawyers' Ties School Districts
New York Lawyer - March 6, 2008
By The Associated Press
Attorney General Andrew Cuomo is seeking data from every school district in the state since he found evidence some may have inappropriately extended pension benefits to part-time lawyers, consultants, professionals and others.
The letter to more than 700 districts explains when these professionals and other officials should not be classified as employees. Only employees under federal and state law qualify for the pension.
The statewide investigation follows Mr. Cuomo's recent probes into the arrangements in Westchester County and Long Island districts.
He said there is evidence some districts have wrongly classified lawyers and others paid by fees or contracts. He said he will seek to recoup any misspent public dollars.
New York Lawyer - March 6, 2008
By The Associated Press
Attorney General Andrew Cuomo is seeking data from every school district in the state since he found evidence some may have inappropriately extended pension benefits to part-time lawyers, consultants, professionals and others.
The letter to more than 700 districts explains when these professionals and other officials should not be classified as employees. Only employees under federal and state law qualify for the pension.
The statewide investigation follows Mr. Cuomo's recent probes into the arrangements in Westchester County and Long Island districts.
He said there is evidence some districts have wrongly classified lawyers and others paid by fees or contracts. He said he will seek to recoup any misspent public dollars.
Judge Tells Disbarred Lawyer to Get a Shovel (MORE, CLICK HERE)
<Judge Tells Disbarred Lawyer to Get a Shovel, Get to Work
New York Lawyer -March 6, 2008
AUBURN, Maine (AP) _ A former Skowhegan lawyer convicted of stealing from clients has been told by a judge to get a job, even if it means shoveling snow off roofs.
John Frankenfield appeared before a judge in Auburn after being accused of violating a condition of probation. The judge told him to report back next month with a plan for paying back $219,000 in court-ordered restitution. So far, Frankenfield has paid back just $50. Justice Thomas Delahanty II took Frankenfield to task Wednesday. Delahanty told him to get a job and noted "there are a lot of roofs out there to be shoveled."
Frankenfield served about two years in prison after being convicted of skimming assets from his grandfather's estate. He also pleaded guilty to stealing $55,000 from clients.
New York Lawyer -March 6, 2008
AUBURN, Maine (AP) _ A former Skowhegan lawyer convicted of stealing from clients has been told by a judge to get a job, even if it means shoveling snow off roofs.
John Frankenfield appeared before a judge in Auburn after being accused of violating a condition of probation. The judge told him to report back next month with a plan for paying back $219,000 in court-ordered restitution. So far, Frankenfield has paid back just $50. Justice Thomas Delahanty II took Frankenfield to task Wednesday. Delahanty told him to get a job and noted "there are a lot of roofs out there to be shoveled."
Frankenfield served about two years in prison after being convicted of skimming assets from his grandfather's estate. He also pleaded guilty to stealing $55,000 from clients.
Thursday, March 6, 2008
FBI Taps Judge's Phones (MORE, CLICK HERE)
FBI Taps Judge's Phones
The Daily Report by Janet L. Conley - March 3, 2008
ATLANTA - Alapaha Judicial Circuit Chief Judge Brooks E. Blitch III has been the target of FBI wiretaps and electronic surveillance, according to information revealed at a hearing in Lowndes County Superior Court last week.
The hearing in Valdosta involved a motion to compel testimony from the circuit's district attorney, and is just one more event in the increasingly complex series of inquiries that have rocked the tightly woven legal community in this five-county South Georgia circuit near Valdosta, where most of the legal business is handled by fewer than 40 attorneys and two Superior Court judges.
Blitch, who remains on the bench, has been at the center of inquiries that have resulted in former Clinch County Clerk of Court Danny Leccese pleading guilty to mail fraud, former Clinch County Associate Magistrate Judge Linda Peterson's suspension from the bench and indictment for perjury and an ongoing Judicial Qualifications Commission proceeding against Alapaha Judicial Circuit Juvenile Judge and Clinch County Chief State Court Judge Berrien L. Sutton.
In addition to the FBI investigation, Blitch also is the subject of a separate JQC proceeding initiated in November. The JQC has accused him of numerous instances of misconduct, including illegally imposing court fees, using his influence in cases involving his son and friends and improperly reducing the sentences of state prisoners.
Last week's hearing, held Feb. 27, was the latest salvo in the JQC's action against Blitch, and provided a rare point of intersection between its inquiries and those of the FBI in the circuit, which includes Atkinson, Berrien, Clinch, Cook and Lanier counties.
At issue in the hearing was an attempt by the JQC and Blitch's attorneys to depose Alapaha Judicial Circuit District Attorney Catherine Harris Helms about her conversations with the FBI regarding Blitch.
At one point in the deposition, held Feb. 19, one of Blitch's attorneys, Robert S. Willis of Willis, Ferebee & Hutton in Jacksonville, Fla., asked Helms about her discussions with the FBI in the context of a particular case. Willis, in a multipart question, asked if the FBI had sought information about the contents of files and about people in Helms' office who might have worked on those files. Then, before she had answered any portion of the question, he said, according to the deposition transcript, "[W]hat was the scope of their request to you?"
"I think you're getting to where we didn't want ... to respond to questions," Helms said, according to the transcript.
Her attorney, Richard A. Malone, executive director of the Prosecuting Attorneys' Council of Georgia, then said his client would respond to questions about specific cases, "But as far as her conversations with the FBI, we're crossing into ... the alleged criminal investigation."
Malone acknowledged in the deposition that his client was not claiming that privilege prevented her from answering the question. Rather, he said, a response to Willis' broad question about the scope of her discussions with the FBI would only yield information that "is not relevant or material" to the JQC's allegations.
"Well, let me tell you how it's relevant," John F. Salter Jr. of the Barnes Law Group, another of Blitch's attorneys, shot back, according to the transcript. "There is no privilege whatsoever. And this proceeding is governed by a broad scope of discovery. It is not defined strictly by how y'all want to define relevance according to the four corners of this. We've asked y'all about what her knowledge is ... in regards to a file that has not only been queried and charged in this proceeding by the JQC against my client but ... there has apparently been interest expressed by the FBI."
At an earlier point in the deposition, according to the transcript, Helms testified that she had been contacted numerous times by the FBI. "It's probably more than a dozen," she said. "It's probably less than 100."
Salter then engaged in a verbal skirmish with Malone over whether Helms should answer the question about her conversations with the FBI. He argued that if a witness has been "communicating actively between 12 and 100 times about perhaps my client, then that is interesting in terms of a bias point of view. And we're entitled to uncover that, and it's absolutely relevant to this case."
With that, he called off the deposition, saying he wanted to take the matter before a judge.
That's exactly what happened last week. In addition to arguments by attorneys for Blitch, the JQC and Helms, there was a cameo appearance by Leah E. McEwen, an assistant U.S. attorney for the Middle District of Georgia. That's according to Malone and T. Joshua R. Archer of Balch & Bingham, one of the JQC's attorneys. Malone and Archer said that McEwen revealed something that had not previously been public record, and about which Helms had not testified: that the FBI had electronically surveilled Blitch, and that at the FBI's request, she had listened to some of those tapes and had been asked to identify some of the individuals speaking on the tapes.
Neither McEwen nor the public information officer for the Middle District of Georgia's U.S. attorney's office responded to requests for comment about the hearing.
Archer said McEwen told the court that "Ms. Helms had listened to perhaps 2 percent of the tape recordings, and that there was an actual listening device in the judge's chambers or in his offices."
According to Richard Hyde, a Balch & Bingham employee who also is the JQC's chief investigator, for about a month last year, the FBI had wiretaps on two telephones in Blitch's offices or chambers, and one electronic listening device for in-person conversations in the same area.
As is common in FBI investigations, Archer said, Middle District Chief Judge Hugh Lawson had sealed the wiretap transcripts.
Until McEwen revealed their existence, Malone said, even he as Helms' attorney could not mention them.
After hearing arguments and evidence in the case, Southern Judicial Circuit Superior Court Judge Harry J. Altman II ruled from the bench, Malone and Archer said. They said they expected a written order to issue sometime this week.
The motion was heard in the Southern circuit not because the Alapaha circuit's other judge, Carson Dane Perkins, recused, but because of JQC rules. Archer said that JQC rules specify that when a witness refuses to comply with a subpoena, as Helms did, the JQC may put the matter before a judge in the circuit where the witness lives. If the witness lives in the same circuit as the person about whom she is testifying—as Helms does—then the hearing is to be held in an adjacent county.
In essence, they said, Altman ruled that Helms must testify from her personal knowledge of matters relating to Blitch, but may not testify about what she heard on the FBI tapes absent that personal knowledge.
One of Blitch's attorneys, former Gov. Roy E. Barnes of the Barnes Law Group, put it this way: "If she learned it from the FBI tapes, you can't ask her about it. If she had knowledge that was outside the FBI tapes, you could"—even if the information was also on the tapes.
Barnes said he wished the judge had not placed any restrictions on the questions that could be asked of Helms, but said he was pleased the judge's ruling from the bench went as far as it did.
Malone and Archer both said they were pleased with Altman's ruling, as did Cheryl Fisher Custer, executive director of the JQC. Custer acknowledged that she was subpoenaed by the FBI last fall, on Sept. 24. The FBI asked for "everything," she said. "They wanted the entire file regarding Brooks E. Blitch III and Berrien Sutton."
"We provided them some information, and some information we thought was not discoverable under the rules of the JQC," Custer said. She added that the FBI had not challenged her refusal to provide them with certain information.
After the written order in the Helms matter issues, Archer said, the district attorney will be deposed again. Her initial deposition, though truncated, offers insight into the inner workings of the small circuit.
Helms testified, according to the deposition transcript, that she first met Blitch in the 1980s, while she was in law school at the University of Georgia. Blitch was coaching students in preparation for a mock trial competition in which Helms was involved, she said, and introduced himself to her because he knew she was dating a fellow law student, Jack J. "Jeff" Helms, whom she later married. Blitch knew Jeff Helms because they were from the same area in South Georgia.
"Did you have any kind of a social relationship with [Blitch] thereafter?" Willis asked in the deposition.
"Well, Homerville's a small community," Cathy Helms responded. She went on, "We go to the same church. I know his children. I know his wife."
Jeff Helms told the Daily Report that he initially represented Blitch in the JQC matter, but withdrew in June. Helms said he could not recall whether he withdrew before or after his wife received a grand jury subpoena in the FBI investigation.
Helms said he has not appeared before Blitch since the JQC instituted its proceeding against the judge in November. However, as the circuit's district attorney, his wife has appeared before the judge.
In her deposition, Cathy Helms said that her office, which has four assistant district attorneys, "very regularly" appears before Blitch. She testified that she had a trial scheduled before him the morning of the day the deposition was held, but the trial was cancelled when the defendant entered a plea.
The FBI and JQC actions have affected the small, interconnected nature of the South Georgia legal community, Jeff Helms said. "We see each other nearly every day and have practiced together and been against each other in court and on the same sides and eat lunch together," he said. "It's been stressful for the whole circuit."
The Daily Report by Janet L. Conley - March 3, 2008
ATLANTA - Alapaha Judicial Circuit Chief Judge Brooks E. Blitch III has been the target of FBI wiretaps and electronic surveillance, according to information revealed at a hearing in Lowndes County Superior Court last week.
The hearing in Valdosta involved a motion to compel testimony from the circuit's district attorney, and is just one more event in the increasingly complex series of inquiries that have rocked the tightly woven legal community in this five-county South Georgia circuit near Valdosta, where most of the legal business is handled by fewer than 40 attorneys and two Superior Court judges.
Blitch, who remains on the bench, has been at the center of inquiries that have resulted in former Clinch County Clerk of Court Danny Leccese pleading guilty to mail fraud, former Clinch County Associate Magistrate Judge Linda Peterson's suspension from the bench and indictment for perjury and an ongoing Judicial Qualifications Commission proceeding against Alapaha Judicial Circuit Juvenile Judge and Clinch County Chief State Court Judge Berrien L. Sutton.
In addition to the FBI investigation, Blitch also is the subject of a separate JQC proceeding initiated in November. The JQC has accused him of numerous instances of misconduct, including illegally imposing court fees, using his influence in cases involving his son and friends and improperly reducing the sentences of state prisoners.
Last week's hearing, held Feb. 27, was the latest salvo in the JQC's action against Blitch, and provided a rare point of intersection between its inquiries and those of the FBI in the circuit, which includes Atkinson, Berrien, Clinch, Cook and Lanier counties.
At issue in the hearing was an attempt by the JQC and Blitch's attorneys to depose Alapaha Judicial Circuit District Attorney Catherine Harris Helms about her conversations with the FBI regarding Blitch.
At one point in the deposition, held Feb. 19, one of Blitch's attorneys, Robert S. Willis of Willis, Ferebee & Hutton in Jacksonville, Fla., asked Helms about her discussions with the FBI in the context of a particular case. Willis, in a multipart question, asked if the FBI had sought information about the contents of files and about people in Helms' office who might have worked on those files. Then, before she had answered any portion of the question, he said, according to the deposition transcript, "[W]hat was the scope of their request to you?"
"I think you're getting to where we didn't want ... to respond to questions," Helms said, according to the transcript.
Her attorney, Richard A. Malone, executive director of the Prosecuting Attorneys' Council of Georgia, then said his client would respond to questions about specific cases, "But as far as her conversations with the FBI, we're crossing into ... the alleged criminal investigation."
Malone acknowledged in the deposition that his client was not claiming that privilege prevented her from answering the question. Rather, he said, a response to Willis' broad question about the scope of her discussions with the FBI would only yield information that "is not relevant or material" to the JQC's allegations.
"Well, let me tell you how it's relevant," John F. Salter Jr. of the Barnes Law Group, another of Blitch's attorneys, shot back, according to the transcript. "There is no privilege whatsoever. And this proceeding is governed by a broad scope of discovery. It is not defined strictly by how y'all want to define relevance according to the four corners of this. We've asked y'all about what her knowledge is ... in regards to a file that has not only been queried and charged in this proceeding by the JQC against my client but ... there has apparently been interest expressed by the FBI."
At an earlier point in the deposition, according to the transcript, Helms testified that she had been contacted numerous times by the FBI. "It's probably more than a dozen," she said. "It's probably less than 100."
Salter then engaged in a verbal skirmish with Malone over whether Helms should answer the question about her conversations with the FBI. He argued that if a witness has been "communicating actively between 12 and 100 times about perhaps my client, then that is interesting in terms of a bias point of view. And we're entitled to uncover that, and it's absolutely relevant to this case."
With that, he called off the deposition, saying he wanted to take the matter before a judge.
That's exactly what happened last week. In addition to arguments by attorneys for Blitch, the JQC and Helms, there was a cameo appearance by Leah E. McEwen, an assistant U.S. attorney for the Middle District of Georgia. That's according to Malone and T. Joshua R. Archer of Balch & Bingham, one of the JQC's attorneys. Malone and Archer said that McEwen revealed something that had not previously been public record, and about which Helms had not testified: that the FBI had electronically surveilled Blitch, and that at the FBI's request, she had listened to some of those tapes and had been asked to identify some of the individuals speaking on the tapes.
Neither McEwen nor the public information officer for the Middle District of Georgia's U.S. attorney's office responded to requests for comment about the hearing.
Archer said McEwen told the court that "Ms. Helms had listened to perhaps 2 percent of the tape recordings, and that there was an actual listening device in the judge's chambers or in his offices."
According to Richard Hyde, a Balch & Bingham employee who also is the JQC's chief investigator, for about a month last year, the FBI had wiretaps on two telephones in Blitch's offices or chambers, and one electronic listening device for in-person conversations in the same area.
As is common in FBI investigations, Archer said, Middle District Chief Judge Hugh Lawson had sealed the wiretap transcripts.
Until McEwen revealed their existence, Malone said, even he as Helms' attorney could not mention them.
After hearing arguments and evidence in the case, Southern Judicial Circuit Superior Court Judge Harry J. Altman II ruled from the bench, Malone and Archer said. They said they expected a written order to issue sometime this week.
The motion was heard in the Southern circuit not because the Alapaha circuit's other judge, Carson Dane Perkins, recused, but because of JQC rules. Archer said that JQC rules specify that when a witness refuses to comply with a subpoena, as Helms did, the JQC may put the matter before a judge in the circuit where the witness lives. If the witness lives in the same circuit as the person about whom she is testifying—as Helms does—then the hearing is to be held in an adjacent county.
In essence, they said, Altman ruled that Helms must testify from her personal knowledge of matters relating to Blitch, but may not testify about what she heard on the FBI tapes absent that personal knowledge.
One of Blitch's attorneys, former Gov. Roy E. Barnes of the Barnes Law Group, put it this way: "If she learned it from the FBI tapes, you can't ask her about it. If she had knowledge that was outside the FBI tapes, you could"—even if the information was also on the tapes.
Barnes said he wished the judge had not placed any restrictions on the questions that could be asked of Helms, but said he was pleased the judge's ruling from the bench went as far as it did.
Malone and Archer both said they were pleased with Altman's ruling, as did Cheryl Fisher Custer, executive director of the JQC. Custer acknowledged that she was subpoenaed by the FBI last fall, on Sept. 24. The FBI asked for "everything," she said. "They wanted the entire file regarding Brooks E. Blitch III and Berrien Sutton."
"We provided them some information, and some information we thought was not discoverable under the rules of the JQC," Custer said. She added that the FBI had not challenged her refusal to provide them with certain information.
After the written order in the Helms matter issues, Archer said, the district attorney will be deposed again. Her initial deposition, though truncated, offers insight into the inner workings of the small circuit.
Helms testified, according to the deposition transcript, that she first met Blitch in the 1980s, while she was in law school at the University of Georgia. Blitch was coaching students in preparation for a mock trial competition in which Helms was involved, she said, and introduced himself to her because he knew she was dating a fellow law student, Jack J. "Jeff" Helms, whom she later married. Blitch knew Jeff Helms because they were from the same area in South Georgia.
"Did you have any kind of a social relationship with [Blitch] thereafter?" Willis asked in the deposition.
"Well, Homerville's a small community," Cathy Helms responded. She went on, "We go to the same church. I know his children. I know his wife."
Jeff Helms told the Daily Report that he initially represented Blitch in the JQC matter, but withdrew in June. Helms said he could not recall whether he withdrew before or after his wife received a grand jury subpoena in the FBI investigation.
Helms said he has not appeared before Blitch since the JQC instituted its proceeding against the judge in November. However, as the circuit's district attorney, his wife has appeared before the judge.
In her deposition, Cathy Helms said that her office, which has four assistant district attorneys, "very regularly" appears before Blitch. She testified that she had a trial scheduled before him the morning of the day the deposition was held, but the trial was cancelled when the defendant entered a plea.
The FBI and JQC actions have affected the small, interconnected nature of the South Georgia legal community, Jeff Helms said. "We see each other nearly every day and have practiced together and been against each other in court and on the same sides and eat lunch together," he said. "It's been stressful for the whole circuit."
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
Go Get Those Bad "Officers of the Court," Judith Regan ! (MORE, CLICK HERE)
NY Firm Sues Judith Regan, the Woman Behind OJ's "If I Did It," for Legal Fees
The Associated Press by Samuel Maull - March 4, 2008
Judith Regan, the publisher fired amid the controversy of releasing O.J. Simpson's hypothetical confession "If I Did It," was sued for legal fees Monday by the firm that prepared her lawsuit against HarperCollins LLC. In court papers, Dreier says Regan reneged on a retainer agreement she signed and then fired the law firm "in a transparent and calculated effort to avoid paying petitioners the agreed-upon fee."
After Dreier prepared and filed the lawsuit, court papers say, Regan hired Los Angeles lawyer Bertram Fields of Greenberg Glusker Fields Claman & Machtinger to negotiate a settlement with HarperCollins, which had fired her. The terms were not disclosed. After the settlement was final, Regan fired Dreier and refused to pay the firm, court papers say. The lawsuit names Fields as a defendant and accuses him of interference with the business relationship between Dreier and Regan.
Fields said he had not seen Dreier's complaint but the claims were "utter hogwash" and had "absolutely no truth in them whatsoever." "I was called in to help settle the case, and I helped get it settled," Fields said. "I did not replace them as litigation counsel. I had nothing to do with their being fired." Regan's current lawyer, Joseph Cotchett, did not return a telephone call seeking comment Monday.
Regan, 54, sued HarperCollins (owned by News Corp.) in November for $100 million for defamation, claiming the publishing company's employees falsely accused her of anti-Semitism. She said that was one of the company's bogus excuses for firing her. Regan, who worked for HarperCollins for 12 years and was known for provocative best-sellers such as Jose Canseco's "Juiced" and Jenna Jameson's "How to Make Love Like a Porn Star," and the company settled in January with Fields as her lawyer.
Dreier's lawsuit says Regan and the firm agreed in August 2007 that if she and HarperCollins settled before the company replied in court, Dreier would get $125,000 plus 20 percent of any amount she got over $6.5 million. However, court papers say, the retainer agreement also stated that if Regan and the publisher settled after the defendants responded, then Dreier would get 25 percent of Regan's recovery, plus reimbursement for costs of preparing the case.
Dreier agreed to give a second law firm, Redniss & Associates, an agreed-upon percentage of whatever Dreier earned in the case. Redniss is named with Dreier as a plaintiff in the lawsuit. Regan, who never signed the August agreement, sent Dreier a check dated Jan. 30, 2008, for $125,000, "which Regan mischaracterized as legal fees paid in full," court papers say. The firm returned Regan's check, they say.
The Associated Press by Samuel Maull - March 4, 2008
Judith Regan, the publisher fired amid the controversy of releasing O.J. Simpson's hypothetical confession "If I Did It," was sued for legal fees Monday by the firm that prepared her lawsuit against HarperCollins LLC. In court papers, Dreier says Regan reneged on a retainer agreement she signed and then fired the law firm "in a transparent and calculated effort to avoid paying petitioners the agreed-upon fee."
After Dreier prepared and filed the lawsuit, court papers say, Regan hired Los Angeles lawyer Bertram Fields of Greenberg Glusker Fields Claman & Machtinger to negotiate a settlement with HarperCollins, which had fired her. The terms were not disclosed. After the settlement was final, Regan fired Dreier and refused to pay the firm, court papers say. The lawsuit names Fields as a defendant and accuses him of interference with the business relationship between Dreier and Regan.
Fields said he had not seen Dreier's complaint but the claims were "utter hogwash" and had "absolutely no truth in them whatsoever." "I was called in to help settle the case, and I helped get it settled," Fields said. "I did not replace them as litigation counsel. I had nothing to do with their being fired." Regan's current lawyer, Joseph Cotchett, did not return a telephone call seeking comment Monday.
Regan, 54, sued HarperCollins (owned by News Corp.) in November for $100 million for defamation, claiming the publishing company's employees falsely accused her of anti-Semitism. She said that was one of the company's bogus excuses for firing her. Regan, who worked for HarperCollins for 12 years and was known for provocative best-sellers such as Jose Canseco's "Juiced" and Jenna Jameson's "How to Make Love Like a Porn Star," and the company settled in January with Fields as her lawyer.
Dreier's lawsuit says Regan and the firm agreed in August 2007 that if she and HarperCollins settled before the company replied in court, Dreier would get $125,000 plus 20 percent of any amount she got over $6.5 million. However, court papers say, the retainer agreement also stated that if Regan and the publisher settled after the defendants responded, then Dreier would get 25 percent of Regan's recovery, plus reimbursement for costs of preparing the case.
Dreier agreed to give a second law firm, Redniss & Associates, an agreed-upon percentage of whatever Dreier earned in the case. Redniss is named with Dreier as a plaintiff in the lawsuit. Regan, who never signed the August agreement, sent Dreier a check dated Jan. 30, 2008, for $125,000, "which Regan mischaracterized as legal fees paid in full," court papers say. The firm returned Regan's check, they say.
UPDATE on Jailed $1 Billion Scam Lawyer (MORE, CLICK HERE)
Jailed Lawyer Faces More Heat From SEC in $1 Billion Scam
Daily Business Review by John Pacenti - March 4, 2008
FORT LAUDERDALE - Last year attorney Stephen Ziegler got sentenced to five years and had his law license suspended by the Florida Bar for his role in a $1 billion viaticals fraud through the now-defunct Mutual Benefits Corp.
Federal authorities are not done with him yet, though.
The Securities and Exchange Commission filed a complaint Feb. 15 against Ziegler and two other convicted Mutual Benefits officials: Raquel Kohler, the company's chief financial officer, and Ameer Khan, former president and nominee shareholder of related company, Viatical Services.
The complaints aim to bar the individuals from participating in any type of securities fraud in the future or face the possibility of criminal contempt of federal court. "We only have so many tools in our quiver and we felt this was an important complement to the criminal convictions," said Teresa Verges, assistant regional director in the SEC office in Miami. The way viatical settlements work is that life insurance policies for the dying and elderly are sold at a discount. Investors collect on the difference between the insurance payout at death and the purchase price.
Mutual Benefits started failing when people started living longer than the company projected.
In the end, the company became nothing but a shell for a Ponzi scheme, according to SEC investigators, with top company officials living in luxury while paying off early investors with money that arrived from later customers who were lured with promises of big returns. From 1994 to 2004, the company bilked more than 30,000 investors worldwide of $956 million.
Last year, President Peter J. Lombardi was sentenced to 20 years in prison. Ziegler, Kohler and Khan each are serving five-year prison sentences. Lombardi agreed to pay $1.5 million to the receiver and a $6 million penalty to the SEC. "Ziegler was a substantial participant in the MBC offering fraud," the complaint reads. "He served as a primary securities regulator counsel for MBC." Ziegler falsified documentation in connection with the purchase and assignment of group insurance polices, according to the complaint. He then filed false reports with the state regulators.
Kohler, according to the complaint, helped conceal the fraud and wired investor funds to accounts controlled by MBC's principals. "Kohler also participated in the preparation and filing of false and misleading information with state of Florida regulators to conceal the fact that a convicted felon with a disciplinary history was a controlling principal of MBC," the complaint reads. Khan tracked policies and performed post-investment services for MBC and "was well aware of MBC's misuse of investor funds and helped conceal the fraud," according to his complaint. The SEC has said the company really was run by Leslie and Joel Steinger, whom the SEC permanently barred from violating securities laws in 1998. According to the SEC, the Steingers and their relatives were paid $26 million in consulting fees from MBC.
Now that is what is happening to Ziegler, Kohler and Khan. Both Kohler and Khan have agreed to terms with the SEC but Ziegler has yet to consent to judgment. The SEC is not seeking monetary relief because the defendants have been ordered to pay millions in restitution by the U.S. District Court.
"It's an important message to send given the roles," said the SEC's Verges. "If they ever violated securities law again, we can immediately apply to court for contempt and additional penalties. A judge can refer the matter to criminal contempt. "The complaint isn't good news for Ziegler if he ever wants to practice law again."
Ziegler may reapply to practice law after his prison sentence is up, said Francine Walker, spokeswoman for the Florida Bar. "The process is fairly lengthy where the applicant has to prove rehabilitation under suspension," she said. "It's a process and not automatic."
Walker said the new SEC complaint will find its way into Ziegler's disciplinary file. She said investigators will determine if additional action is required against the attorney.
Daily Business Review by John Pacenti - March 4, 2008
FORT LAUDERDALE - Last year attorney Stephen Ziegler got sentenced to five years and had his law license suspended by the Florida Bar for his role in a $1 billion viaticals fraud through the now-defunct Mutual Benefits Corp.
Federal authorities are not done with him yet, though.
The Securities and Exchange Commission filed a complaint Feb. 15 against Ziegler and two other convicted Mutual Benefits officials: Raquel Kohler, the company's chief financial officer, and Ameer Khan, former president and nominee shareholder of related company, Viatical Services.
The complaints aim to bar the individuals from participating in any type of securities fraud in the future or face the possibility of criminal contempt of federal court. "We only have so many tools in our quiver and we felt this was an important complement to the criminal convictions," said Teresa Verges, assistant regional director in the SEC office in Miami. The way viatical settlements work is that life insurance policies for the dying and elderly are sold at a discount. Investors collect on the difference between the insurance payout at death and the purchase price.
Mutual Benefits started failing when people started living longer than the company projected.
In the end, the company became nothing but a shell for a Ponzi scheme, according to SEC investigators, with top company officials living in luxury while paying off early investors with money that arrived from later customers who were lured with promises of big returns. From 1994 to 2004, the company bilked more than 30,000 investors worldwide of $956 million.
Last year, President Peter J. Lombardi was sentenced to 20 years in prison. Ziegler, Kohler and Khan each are serving five-year prison sentences. Lombardi agreed to pay $1.5 million to the receiver and a $6 million penalty to the SEC. "Ziegler was a substantial participant in the MBC offering fraud," the complaint reads. "He served as a primary securities regulator counsel for MBC." Ziegler falsified documentation in connection with the purchase and assignment of group insurance polices, according to the complaint. He then filed false reports with the state regulators.
Kohler, according to the complaint, helped conceal the fraud and wired investor funds to accounts controlled by MBC's principals. "Kohler also participated in the preparation and filing of false and misleading information with state of Florida regulators to conceal the fact that a convicted felon with a disciplinary history was a controlling principal of MBC," the complaint reads. Khan tracked policies and performed post-investment services for MBC and "was well aware of MBC's misuse of investor funds and helped conceal the fraud," according to his complaint. The SEC has said the company really was run by Leslie and Joel Steinger, whom the SEC permanently barred from violating securities laws in 1998. According to the SEC, the Steingers and their relatives were paid $26 million in consulting fees from MBC.
Now that is what is happening to Ziegler, Kohler and Khan. Both Kohler and Khan have agreed to terms with the SEC but Ziegler has yet to consent to judgment. The SEC is not seeking monetary relief because the defendants have been ordered to pay millions in restitution by the U.S. District Court.
"It's an important message to send given the roles," said the SEC's Verges. "If they ever violated securities law again, we can immediately apply to court for contempt and additional penalties. A judge can refer the matter to criminal contempt. "The complaint isn't good news for Ziegler if he ever wants to practice law again."
Ziegler may reapply to practice law after his prison sentence is up, said Francine Walker, spokeswoman for the Florida Bar. "The process is fairly lengthy where the applicant has to prove rehabilitation under suspension," she said. "It's a process and not automatic."
Walker said the new SEC complaint will find its way into Ziegler's disciplinary file. She said investigators will determine if additional action is required against the attorney.
UPDATE on Client who KO'd Lawyer in Court (MORE, CLICK HERE)
Client Who KO'd His Lawyer in Court Goes Down for Six Months
New York Lawyer - March 4, 2008
GEORGETOWN, Ky. (AP) — A man who punched his lawyer in a Kentucky courtroom last month has been sentenced to six months in jail. Peter Hafer also has a new lawyer. Mark Bubenzer said his client is sorry and didn't mean to disrespect the court.
But Scott County Circuit Judge Rob Johnson reprimanded Hafer as he sentenced him for contempt of court Monday. The judge said courts would be in chaos if every defendant behaved that way. Attorney Doug Crickmer got two black eyes when Hafer hit him Feb. 4. Crickmer said he thought his client was just frustrated about being in jail.
The 30-year-old Hafer was initially in court for a burglary charge. That case is still pending.
New York Lawyer - March 4, 2008
GEORGETOWN, Ky. (AP) — A man who punched his lawyer in a Kentucky courtroom last month has been sentenced to six months in jail. Peter Hafer also has a new lawyer. Mark Bubenzer said his client is sorry and didn't mean to disrespect the court.
But Scott County Circuit Judge Rob Johnson reprimanded Hafer as he sentenced him for contempt of court Monday. The judge said courts would be in chaos if every defendant behaved that way. Attorney Doug Crickmer got two black eyes when Hafer hit him Feb. 4. Crickmer said he thought his client was just frustrated about being in jail.
The 30-year-old Hafer was initially in court for a burglary charge. That case is still pending.
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Federal Judge Slams Old NY Trick of Suppressing Information (MORE, CLICK HERE)
Federal judge finds Yonkers violated weekly newspaper's First Amendment rights
THE JOURNAL NEWS by Len Maniace - MARCH 3, 2008
In a decision sharply critical of the city, a federal judge ruled today that the city of Yonkers violated the First Amendment rights of a free weekly newspaper when it swept the Westchester Guardian's news racks from streets and stopped its employees from handing out the paper.
U.S. District Justice Charles L. Brieant found that the city singled out the Guardian and that the action was taken on the basis of the newspaper's content: a series of articles that were highly critical of Mayor Phil Amicone.
Brieant also ruled that the city unconstitutionally applied regulations governing "advertising and bill distribution" to the newspaper. "After 80 years of First Amendment case precedent, this Court would be astonished to find that Defendants do not believe that in-hand distribution of printed material on public City sidewalks is a Constitutionally protected activity," Brieant wrote. Reach Len Maniace at lmaniace@lohud.com or 914-694-5163.
THIS STORY HAS BEEN UPDATED, SEE MARCH 4, 2008:
Judge: Yonkers' news rack sweep illegal
The Journal News by Len Maniace - March 4, 2008
In a decision sharply critical of the city of Yonkers, a federal judge ruled yesterday that the city violated the First Amendment rights of a free weekly newspaper when it swept the Westchester Guardian's news racks from city streets and stopped its employees from handing it out.
U.S. District Justice Charles L. Brieant found that the city singled out the Guardian and that the action was taken on the basis of the newspaper's content: a series of articles that were highly critical of Mayor Phil Amicone. Brieant also ruled that the city unconstitutionally applied regulations governing "advertising and bill distribution" to the newspaper.
"After 80 years of First Amendment case precedent, this Court would be astonished to find that Defendants do not believe that in-hand distribution of printed material on public City sidewalks is a Constitutionally protected activity," Brieant wrote in his 46-page ruling.
The ruling is the first in a series of lawsuits brought by the Guardian and its publisher, Sam Zherka, against Yonkers and its officials, including Amicone. While this case did not seek damages, the others seek more than $50 million in damages against the city. In yesterday's ruling, Brieant made permanent a preliminary injunction that stopped the city from interfering with the newspaper's distribution. He also awarded the Guardian "reasonable attorney fees."
"This is the first round of a nine-round fight. They've been knocked down once and we predict they are going to (get) knocked down and knocked out in every one of these rounds," said Zherka, whose Guardian was first published Aug. 10, 2006. Zherka is also a landlord who owns several thousand apartments, several shopping centers and an upscale topless bar in Manhattan called VIP. City Hall's top lawyer, Corporation Counsel Frank Rubino said the city would not appeal the decision.
"The city will continue its current practice of allowing the Westchester Guardian to distribute its publication in a manner consistent with the city code except for that part of the code found unconsitutional by the court," Rubino said.
As for the remaining cases, a class action lawsuit on behalf of the Guardian's readers, Rubino said: "I don't think they can prove or sustain any type of monetary injuries and I'm certainly not concerned that the city is going to have to weather some damages other than nominal damages."
Though the ruling is not binding on the other cases, Zherka's attorney, Jonathan Lovett, said the case has made it clear that the city cannot defend itself against the charge that its actions constituted a First Amendment violation, issues also raised in the other cases. "Even if we get $50 in damages per person that amounts to several million dollars," Lovett said.
Brieant wrote in his decision that the contention that the city's action was based on the newspaper's content was substantially buttressed by remarks made by Amicone spokesman David Simpson to The Journal News and Cablevision's News 12, including that the Guardian "is not a newspaper," but rather a "propaganda" outlet.
Brieant cited testimony by several police officers who said they had never previously issued summonses for distributing newspapers until July 2007 when they presented Guardian employees with tickets.
As for news racks, Brieant wrote that those belonging to the Guardian "were selectively removed while other news boxes of other papers in the same and similar locations were not affected." (www.lohud.com)
THE JOURNAL NEWS by Len Maniace - MARCH 3, 2008
In a decision sharply critical of the city, a federal judge ruled today that the city of Yonkers violated the First Amendment rights of a free weekly newspaper when it swept the Westchester Guardian's news racks from streets and stopped its employees from handing out the paper.
U.S. District Justice Charles L. Brieant found that the city singled out the Guardian and that the action was taken on the basis of the newspaper's content: a series of articles that were highly critical of Mayor Phil Amicone.
Brieant also ruled that the city unconstitutionally applied regulations governing "advertising and bill distribution" to the newspaper. "After 80 years of First Amendment case precedent, this Court would be astonished to find that Defendants do not believe that in-hand distribution of printed material on public City sidewalks is a Constitutionally protected activity," Brieant wrote. Reach Len Maniace at lmaniace@lohud.com or 914-694-5163.
THIS STORY HAS BEEN UPDATED, SEE MARCH 4, 2008:
Judge: Yonkers' news rack sweep illegal
The Journal News by Len Maniace - March 4, 2008
In a decision sharply critical of the city of Yonkers, a federal judge ruled yesterday that the city violated the First Amendment rights of a free weekly newspaper when it swept the Westchester Guardian's news racks from city streets and stopped its employees from handing it out.
U.S. District Justice Charles L. Brieant found that the city singled out the Guardian and that the action was taken on the basis of the newspaper's content: a series of articles that were highly critical of Mayor Phil Amicone. Brieant also ruled that the city unconstitutionally applied regulations governing "advertising and bill distribution" to the newspaper.
"After 80 years of First Amendment case precedent, this Court would be astonished to find that Defendants do not believe that in-hand distribution of printed material on public City sidewalks is a Constitutionally protected activity," Brieant wrote in his 46-page ruling.
The ruling is the first in a series of lawsuits brought by the Guardian and its publisher, Sam Zherka, against Yonkers and its officials, including Amicone. While this case did not seek damages, the others seek more than $50 million in damages against the city. In yesterday's ruling, Brieant made permanent a preliminary injunction that stopped the city from interfering with the newspaper's distribution. He also awarded the Guardian "reasonable attorney fees."
"This is the first round of a nine-round fight. They've been knocked down once and we predict they are going to (get) knocked down and knocked out in every one of these rounds," said Zherka, whose Guardian was first published Aug. 10, 2006. Zherka is also a landlord who owns several thousand apartments, several shopping centers and an upscale topless bar in Manhattan called VIP. City Hall's top lawyer, Corporation Counsel Frank Rubino said the city would not appeal the decision.
"The city will continue its current practice of allowing the Westchester Guardian to distribute its publication in a manner consistent with the city code except for that part of the code found unconsitutional by the court," Rubino said.
As for the remaining cases, a class action lawsuit on behalf of the Guardian's readers, Rubino said: "I don't think they can prove or sustain any type of monetary injuries and I'm certainly not concerned that the city is going to have to weather some damages other than nominal damages."
Though the ruling is not binding on the other cases, Zherka's attorney, Jonathan Lovett, said the case has made it clear that the city cannot defend itself against the charge that its actions constituted a First Amendment violation, issues also raised in the other cases. "Even if we get $50 in damages per person that amounts to several million dollars," Lovett said.
Brieant wrote in his decision that the contention that the city's action was based on the newspaper's content was substantially buttressed by remarks made by Amicone spokesman David Simpson to The Journal News and Cablevision's News 12, including that the Guardian "is not a newspaper," but rather a "propaganda" outlet.
Brieant cited testimony by several police officers who said they had never previously issued summonses for distributing newspapers until July 2007 when they presented Guardian employees with tickets.
As for news racks, Brieant wrote that those belonging to the Guardian "were selectively removed while other news boxes of other papers in the same and similar locations were not affected." (www.lohud.com)
Monday, March 3, 2008
Violating the Public Trust; New Jersey-style (MORE, CLICK HERE)
Lawyers plan dueling versions in James's corruption trial
The Newark Star-Ledger - March 03, 2008
The long-awaited corruption trial of former Newark Mayor Sharpe James is scheduled to begin in federal court today, with attorneys delivering dueling versions of the legendary politician's actions.
With James' legacy on the line, prosecutors will outline the charges against the onetime powerbroker, saying he arranged for the sale of city land at bargain prices to a female travel companion who quickly resold the property for nearly $700,000 in profit. Defense attorneys for James and the woman -- his co-defendent, Tamika Riley -- will counter with their side of the case.
Today's opening arguments will be heard by a jury of seven men and five women seated Friday. After four days of weeding through a pool of 247 people, U.S. District Judge William Martini selected the panel, which includes school teachers, a clerk, a computer programmer, a social worker and a postal employee, plus seven alternates. The trial is expected to last as long as three months.
At stake is the reputation of the seemingly invincible James, who spent two decades at the helm of New Jersey's largest city. James, 72, a Democrat who is also a former state senator, is accused of rigging Newark land deals for Riley, a 38-year-old publicist with no development experience who allegedly told authorities she had an "intimate relationship" with the married mayor. Both have pleaded not guilty to the charges, which could send James to prison for more than seven years.
James' attorneys have argued that the mayor couldn't have misused his office because only the city council had the authority to approve land sales. They say the deals with Riley weren't unusual during a time when the rebuilding city was trying to accelerate development, and have not publicly addressed James' relationship with her. The five-term mayor will be in Martini's Newark courtroom today for the opening arguments.
The Newark Star-Ledger - March 03, 2008
The long-awaited corruption trial of former Newark Mayor Sharpe James is scheduled to begin in federal court today, with attorneys delivering dueling versions of the legendary politician's actions.
With James' legacy on the line, prosecutors will outline the charges against the onetime powerbroker, saying he arranged for the sale of city land at bargain prices to a female travel companion who quickly resold the property for nearly $700,000 in profit. Defense attorneys for James and the woman -- his co-defendent, Tamika Riley -- will counter with their side of the case.
Today's opening arguments will be heard by a jury of seven men and five women seated Friday. After four days of weeding through a pool of 247 people, U.S. District Judge William Martini selected the panel, which includes school teachers, a clerk, a computer programmer, a social worker and a postal employee, plus seven alternates. The trial is expected to last as long as three months.
At stake is the reputation of the seemingly invincible James, who spent two decades at the helm of New Jersey's largest city. James, 72, a Democrat who is also a former state senator, is accused of rigging Newark land deals for Riley, a 38-year-old publicist with no development experience who allegedly told authorities she had an "intimate relationship" with the married mayor. Both have pleaded not guilty to the charges, which could send James to prison for more than seven years.
James' attorneys have argued that the mayor couldn't have misused his office because only the city council had the authority to approve land sales. They say the deals with Riley weren't unusual during a time when the rebuilding city was trying to accelerate development, and have not publicly addressed James' relationship with her. The five-term mayor will be in Martini's Newark courtroom today for the opening arguments.
Sunday, March 2, 2008
New York Bombshells, They Are a Comin' (MORE, CLICK HERE)
Joe Bruno worries over federal probe
BY JOE MAHONEY - The New York Daily News
DAILY NEWS ALBANY BUREAU CHIEF - Sunday, March 2, 2008
State senate GOP Leader Joe Bruno worries he could have "inadvertently" done something that might land him in the feds' frying pan as a result of the probe he insists was requested by Gov. Spitzer, he tells New York magazine. "Who the hell knows if, inadvertently, there's something there - that they uncovered, that they want to accuse you of," Bruno said of the investigation into his outside business dealings.
"That's on my mind," he said. "I think, 'What the hell could they get somebody to say that I said or did?' I know that's what they try and do. They tried like hell to intimidate a couple of people." Since making the bombshell disclosure in December 2006 that he was under FBI investigation, Bruno, 78, has avoided the topic at press conferences, other than to routinely assert he has done nothing wrong. He broke that silence with New York magazine, however, saying he thinks Spitzer put the FBI on his tail when Spitzer was state attorney general.
"I told the FBI: 'I've got a lot of political enemies that would love to get at me, you gotta understand,'" Bruno recalled. "They said, 'We do, but we have an inquiry from someone with a lot of credibility, and we can't ignore it.'" Spitzer spokeswoman Christine Anderson told the magazine, "There is no truth to this story whatsoever."
Discussing his recently ended role as a paid consultant for a Connecticut firm that handles large investment portfolios for some unions with business before the Legislature, Bruno insisted he did not cash in on his role as majority leader. "I provided the entree," Bruno told the mag in describing how he arranged meetings between Wright Investors' Service managers and union officials interested in investing pension money. "My pitch to them was, 'If you like what they have to say, take it to the next level. If you don't, say goodbye."
Bruno said he did no special favors for the clients he sent to Wright Investors' Service, and some ended up losing money.
"My biggest account invested over $120 million," he said. "They lost the whole thing. Why? Poor performance." A law enforcement source told the Daily News the FBI probe of Bruno is continuing. jmahoney@nydailynews.com
BY JOE MAHONEY - The New York Daily News
DAILY NEWS ALBANY BUREAU CHIEF - Sunday, March 2, 2008
State senate GOP Leader Joe Bruno worries he could have "inadvertently" done something that might land him in the feds' frying pan as a result of the probe he insists was requested by Gov. Spitzer, he tells New York magazine. "Who the hell knows if, inadvertently, there's something there - that they uncovered, that they want to accuse you of," Bruno said of the investigation into his outside business dealings.
"That's on my mind," he said. "I think, 'What the hell could they get somebody to say that I said or did?' I know that's what they try and do. They tried like hell to intimidate a couple of people." Since making the bombshell disclosure in December 2006 that he was under FBI investigation, Bruno, 78, has avoided the topic at press conferences, other than to routinely assert he has done nothing wrong. He broke that silence with New York magazine, however, saying he thinks Spitzer put the FBI on his tail when Spitzer was state attorney general.
"I told the FBI: 'I've got a lot of political enemies that would love to get at me, you gotta understand,'" Bruno recalled. "They said, 'We do, but we have an inquiry from someone with a lot of credibility, and we can't ignore it.'" Spitzer spokeswoman Christine Anderson told the magazine, "There is no truth to this story whatsoever."
Discussing his recently ended role as a paid consultant for a Connecticut firm that handles large investment portfolios for some unions with business before the Legislature, Bruno insisted he did not cash in on his role as majority leader. "I provided the entree," Bruno told the mag in describing how he arranged meetings between Wright Investors' Service managers and union officials interested in investing pension money. "My pitch to them was, 'If you like what they have to say, take it to the next level. If you don't, say goodbye."
Bruno said he did no special favors for the clients he sent to Wright Investors' Service, and some ended up losing money.
"My biggest account invested over $120 million," he said. "They lost the whole thing. Why? Poor performance." A law enforcement source told the Daily News the FBI probe of Bruno is continuing. jmahoney@nydailynews.com
Saturday, March 1, 2008
Famous Lawyer Smacked Down in Bribery Case (MORE, CLICK HERE)
Famous Lawyer Shutout in Key Motions in Bribery Case
The National Law Journal by Julie Kay - February 28, 2008
In a huge blow to the defense of Mississippi plaintiff attorney Richard "Dickie" Scruggs, the judge overseeing his bribery case denied a slew of defense motions Monday, including change of venue and motion to suppress wiretaps.
In one of the motions, U.S. District Judge Neal B. Biggers Jr. even went so far as to characterize a Scruggs' co-defendant's actions as corruption.
In a case that has rocked Mississippi legal circles, Scruggs, along with four co-defendants, is being charged with conspiring to bribe a judge to rule his way in a $26 million fee dispute on Hurricane Katrina cases. Two co-defendants have plead guilty and agreed to cooperate against Scruggs, his son, Zack, and their co-counsel Sidney Backstrom. The trial is set for March 31.
In their motion to suppress the wiretaps, Scruggs' lawyers had argued that the defendants did not discuss offering a monetary amount to Judge Henry Lackey. However, Biggers said because defendant Balducci offered Lackey a job as "of counsel" at Balducci's law firm after he retired, that constitutes "a clear and gross violation of all known code of ethics applicable to attorneys and judicial officers." "Indeed, when an act such as this occurs, perceived by the judge possibly to be an attempt to corrupt or bribe, it is incumbent on the judge to report the matter to appropriate authorities, which is what Judge Lackey did," stated the order.
He also stated that the mere fact of Timothy Balducci not an attorney of record in the case visiting Lackey when the opposing counsel has no notice of the visit "amounts to an effort to corrupt the judge." Biggers also denied a motion by the Scruggs team to block jurors from hearing evidence on a related bribery case playing out in Hinds County, Miss., involving famed Judge Bobby DeLaughter. Lastly, he flatly denied Scruggs' motion for a change of venue without explanation.
Still left for Biggers to rule on is a request by the government to have jurors sequestered and anonymous. The prosecution insinuated in its motion that it wanted the jury anonymous to prevent jury tampering by the defense.
Scruggs' attorneys filed a motion objecting to the request, saying "the government has failed to show that the publicity here poses any threat to the security or safety of the jury. Under these circumstances, there is no reason whatsoever to utilize an anonymous jury in this case."
The National Law Journal by Julie Kay - February 28, 2008
In a huge blow to the defense of Mississippi plaintiff attorney Richard "Dickie" Scruggs, the judge overseeing his bribery case denied a slew of defense motions Monday, including change of venue and motion to suppress wiretaps.
In one of the motions, U.S. District Judge Neal B. Biggers Jr. even went so far as to characterize a Scruggs' co-defendant's actions as corruption.
In a case that has rocked Mississippi legal circles, Scruggs, along with four co-defendants, is being charged with conspiring to bribe a judge to rule his way in a $26 million fee dispute on Hurricane Katrina cases. Two co-defendants have plead guilty and agreed to cooperate against Scruggs, his son, Zack, and their co-counsel Sidney Backstrom. The trial is set for March 31.
In their motion to suppress the wiretaps, Scruggs' lawyers had argued that the defendants did not discuss offering a monetary amount to Judge Henry Lackey. However, Biggers said because defendant Balducci offered Lackey a job as "of counsel" at Balducci's law firm after he retired, that constitutes "a clear and gross violation of all known code of ethics applicable to attorneys and judicial officers." "Indeed, when an act such as this occurs, perceived by the judge possibly to be an attempt to corrupt or bribe, it is incumbent on the judge to report the matter to appropriate authorities, which is what Judge Lackey did," stated the order.
He also stated that the mere fact of Timothy Balducci not an attorney of record in the case visiting Lackey when the opposing counsel has no notice of the visit "amounts to an effort to corrupt the judge." Biggers also denied a motion by the Scruggs team to block jurors from hearing evidence on a related bribery case playing out in Hinds County, Miss., involving famed Judge Bobby DeLaughter. Lastly, he flatly denied Scruggs' motion for a change of venue without explanation.
Still left for Biggers to rule on is a request by the government to have jurors sequestered and anonymous. The prosecution insinuated in its motion that it wanted the jury anonymous to prevent jury tampering by the defense.
Scruggs' attorneys filed a motion objecting to the request, saying "the government has failed to show that the publicity here poses any threat to the security or safety of the jury. Under these circumstances, there is no reason whatsoever to utilize an anonymous jury in this case."
NY Firm Battting .200 in Kickback Case (MORE, CLICK HERE)
NY Firm Bats .200 in Keeping Itself Out of Court on Kickback Charges
The National Law Journal by Amanda Bronstad - February 28, 2008
LOS ANGELES — A federal judge in Los Angeles has refused to grant four out of the five dismissal motions filed by Milberg Weiss in the federal government's kickback case.
Prosecutors allege that Milberg Weiss and seven of its partners, including its founding partner, Melvyn Weiss, generated $250 million in attorney fees by paying illegal kickbacks to name plaintiffs.
In January, Milberg Weiss filed motions to dismiss several of those claims, refuting charges that the firm committed mail fraud in failing to provide "honest services," obstructed justice by not turning over documents during a grand jury subpoena or violated New York's commercial bribery statutes. The firm also filed a motion challenging the government's depiction of a vast conspiracy, arguing that the indictment details separate schemes involving different plaintiffs. Weiss joined in those motions.
U.S. District Judge John Walter for the Central District of California refused to grant the four motions earlier this week, according to Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard Robinson, a prosecutor in the case. Robinson declined to comment on the judge's decision.
Walter did not rule on a fifth motion to dismiss a money laundering count, which he set for a hearing on March 31. Marina Ein, a spokeswoman for Milberg Weiss, declined to comment. Benjamin Brafman of Brafman & Associates in New York, who represents Weiss, did not return a call for comment.
The National Law Journal by Amanda Bronstad - February 28, 2008
LOS ANGELES — A federal judge in Los Angeles has refused to grant four out of the five dismissal motions filed by Milberg Weiss in the federal government's kickback case.
Prosecutors allege that Milberg Weiss and seven of its partners, including its founding partner, Melvyn Weiss, generated $250 million in attorney fees by paying illegal kickbacks to name plaintiffs.
In January, Milberg Weiss filed motions to dismiss several of those claims, refuting charges that the firm committed mail fraud in failing to provide "honest services," obstructed justice by not turning over documents during a grand jury subpoena or violated New York's commercial bribery statutes. The firm also filed a motion challenging the government's depiction of a vast conspiracy, arguing that the indictment details separate schemes involving different plaintiffs. Weiss joined in those motions.
U.S. District Judge John Walter for the Central District of California refused to grant the four motions earlier this week, according to Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard Robinson, a prosecutor in the case. Robinson declined to comment on the judge's decision.
Walter did not rule on a fifth motion to dismiss a money laundering count, which he set for a hearing on March 31. Marina Ein, a spokeswoman for Milberg Weiss, declined to comment. Benjamin Brafman of Brafman & Associates in New York, who represents Weiss, did not return a call for comment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
