Rothstein said his law firm maintained a condo across the street from his downtown Fort Lauderdale law firm.
"That's where Russ and Stu and me and Boden, we would send a girl up there, and then we'd go up there and do our business and come back to work," he said.
Jesus -- were they going to the restroom or making love?
If true, it seems impossible to believe no one had any idea what was going on at this firm.
(Especially with the alleged heightened sensibilities of many of the workers, it would seem this type of routine partner activity would be pretty hard to miss.)
The court, in a 4-3 opinion, approved a petition for emergency suspension filed by The Florida Bar Dec. 22. The suspension means that Alters cannot accept new clients, must cease representing his current clients after 30 days and must freeze his trust accounts. The Supreme Court also appointed Joel Brown, chief judge of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit, to referee Alters' disciplinary case and trial.
But Alters says it is not his fault -- it is the fault of his ex-partners:
In responses filed with The Bar on Dec. 22 and Dec. 27, Berman states that Sullivan's allegations are "demonstrably false," however he acknowledges issues with the firm's trust account. In a 100-page response to The Bar, he lays out his explanations, which include detailed financial records, canceled checks, a CPA's report and a polygraph report.
Alters turned over management of the firm to a former partner, Kimberly Boldt, in July 2009 because he was overwhelmed handling litigation and with personal problems related to his mother becoming ill and his 12-year marriage falling apart. He also blames another former partner, Thomas Culmo, for failing to deliver a $1 million fee, throwing accounts into disarray.
Neither Boldt nor Culmo returned calls for comment. Both have sued Alters, claiming he owes them money.
In other happy holiday news, Rothstein says his ex-partners were "willing puppets":
In the seven days of testimony for which transcripts have been made public to date, Rothstein painted former law partners Stuart Rosenfeldt and Russell Adler as his willing puppets. When Rosenfeldt once asked about the firm's finances, Rothstein said he stopped his law partner's questioning by asking: "Are you happy with the amount of money you're making?" As for Adler, he "wasn't the sharpest pencil in the box," Rothstein said, but added that Adler allegedly helped persuade several outside attorneys to meet with investors and lie to them about having referred big-dollar cases to Rothstein's firm.
Attorneys for Rosenfeldt and Adler flatly rejected Rothstein's claims, calling him a desperate imprisoned felon willing to say anything to reduce his punishment.
Having ex-partners -- the gift that keeps on giving.
Stuart Rosenfeldt, Ponzi schemer Scott Rothstein's former partner and the second "R" in RRA, has been informed by the federal government that he will be indicted on criminal charges, says his attorney.
Rosenfeldt played a public role in representing the crumbling law firm in the aftermath of the implosion of Rothstein's billion-dollar Ponzi scheme. He is one of many former Rothstein law partners and business associates expected to be arrested by the feds prior to December 12, when Rothstein is scheduled to begin a grueling string of civil depositions that are expected to take 10 days to finish.
Several sources say that Russell Adler, the third named partner in the defunct Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler firm, is among those expected to be charged. Adler's attorney, Fred Haddad, didn't dispel that idea, saying he expects more indictments soon and that the the filing of criminal charges Thursday against two Rothstein associates -- Marybeth Feiss and William Boockvor -- indicated "which way the wind was blowing."
Rosenfeldt's attorney, Bruce Lehr, said federal officials informed him a few months ago that his client was going to be charged criminally. Lehr said he has been given no time frame and has no information on what exactly Rosenfeldt will be charged with.
Russell S. Adler is a civil trial lawyer with a passion for the Court Room. This is where justice is dispensed for his clients. This is where all cases end up if they don't settle. Russell is passionate about his clients and their cases. He is dedicated to your cause. Russell focuses on personal injury, wrongful death, car accident, motorcycle accident, sexual abuse, medical malpractice, class action, qui tam whitsleblower, elderly abuse and product defect cases. He also handles commercial litigation and employment law matters. Visit our Case Types area for more information and video clips. We do a better job on your case using cutting edge technology. View your paperless case files online, and use our collaboration tools to stay informed.
Those are some mighty bad-arse photos Russ has scattered along his site.
I recently had the great pleasure of rewatching Jimmy Caan's best film, Thief, where he plays a Chicago freelance diamond thief dreaming of a better life who gets sucked into working for a local mob kingpin for what Caan thinks is one final heist.
Of course the mobster, brilliantly played by Robert Prosky, has other, longer term plans for the profitable crook.
Naturally we are in a very different context, yet for whatever reason I'm reminded of this superb story line when I read the curious settlement terms reached by receiver Herb Stettin and Russ Adler in the Rothstein bankruptcy, which involves Russ handing over a portion of his settlements or judgments should he be successful in future cases:
The settlement stipulates Adler will pay off the settlement by liquidating a $90,000 IRA and by providing liens on any attorney fee recoveries. The lien is 50 percent on lawsuits Adler prosecuted while at RRA and 15 percent afterward.
So now they're in business together? And Russ is now working to pay off the settlement by trying to settle cases he either has in the hopper or may one day have in the hopper.
This is allegedly due to his current financial situation:
Critical to determining settlement was a detailed analysis of the Adlers’ current financial condition, which based upon mediation related financial disclosures revealed that the Adlers have no existing bank, securities or other accounts upon which to execute, no equity in their home, leased vehicles and no other liquid non-exempt assets that could be used to satisfy any potential judgment. Further, it appears as if the Adlers may be subject to an IRS notice of lien or other action in an approximate amount of $234,000 and Mr. Adler could be facing other types of exposure in potential Florida Bar or criminal proceedings. Thus, the Trustee could have spent a significant amount of money to prepare for and conduct a lengthy trial which he believes would have resulted in a favorable jury verdict, but the likelihood of a successful collection on any such judgment would have proven difficult.
So who's the winner here -- is this a brilliant move by Adler, a smart move by the trustee, or something else entirely?
The Intrepid One™ reports on Russ Adler's deposition, which went off about as smoothly as everything else in Rothstein-world:
Lichtman and Adler’s lawyer, Fred Haddad of Fort Lauderdale, stood and yelled at each other several times in the highly charged session. After Lichtman sarcastically questioned Adler’s assertions that he was a “premiere” lawyer in Broward County, Haddad threatened to have Adler leave the deposition if Lichtman did not treat Adler with respect. Later, Lichtman threatened to stop the deposition and get a protective order to force Adler to answer his questions.
“You’ve been argumentative with me all day,” Lichtman said. “I don’t want your speeches.”
At times, Adler lashed out at Lichtman, accusing him of trying to trap him with "memory games" and telling the bankruptcy attorney: "I don't trust you. I don't believe you."
Adding a side element to the deposition was Adler's wife, Katie Adler, who repeatedly spoke up, much to the chagrin of Adler's attorney, Fred Haddad, who threatened to kick her out of the room.
Katie, I appreciate the sentiment, but let your man handle this, ok?
The suit concerns Sanchez’s representation of Rivero, who pleaded guilty in 2008 to misusing $700,000 out of $3 million he was paid by the Miami-Dade Housing Agency to build affordable housing for senior citizens. Rivero admitted diverting public money to build himself a dream house in South Miami and was sentenced to more than a year in prison. He was recently released. The primary allegation in the civil suit is that Sanchez and her law firm aided Rivero in a scheme to switch copies of a property deed, one that was witnessed and one that was invalid because it was not witnessed. The in-laws claim Rivero promised the deed in exchange for $1 million, but they received the worthless version. Among the more explosive charges alluded to in the suit are that Sanchez had an affair with Rivero when he was married and he was paying her personal bills, which was “inappropriate to the attorney-client relationship.” Hall represented Rivero’s ex-wife in their divorce.
The law firm and Sanchez “acted professionally in full compliance with their ethical and legal obligations. It is unfortunate that a lawyer with a long-standing impeccable reputation must now litigate what has already been admitted by Mr. Aleman under oath in deposition testimony in the other cases: that Fowler White Burnett and Ms. Sanchez were never involved in the preparation of any improper deed or transaction.”
Oh well, that's what they have courts (arbitrators?) for I guess.
Then we have Big Stu, who according to this pleading had a rather unorthodox compensation plan at RRA:
26. The payments made to Rosenfeldt for salary, bonus or other distributions are collectively referred to below as the “Compensation Payments.” The Trustee challenges the reasonableness of these Compensation Payments for each of these years, based upon various factors related to the operation and profitability of law firms and attorney compensation structure. The amounts challenged as being overpayments of compensation for the 4-year period subject to this lawsuit were unreasonable and improper.
27. The fact that significant amounts of alleged bonus or other payments to Rosenfeldt are not related to actual earned compensation ties to the timing of when Rosenfeldt received certain of such payments, and how he thereafter paid out similar amounts of money as political contributions. For example, and demonstrating it was part of a scheme to funnel cash out of RRA to use for political contributions and not to pay legitimate earned income, on May 19, 2008, Rosenfeldt, Russell Adler (“Adler”) and Steven Lippman (“Lippman”) each received an alleged bonus of $140,000 from RRA. On May 28, 2008 Rosenfeldt made a donation of $140,000 to the John McCain presidential campaign. Also on May 28, 2008, Lippman and his wife Marcy, made payments to the same campaign of $65,000 and $60,000 respectively. On June 12, 2008, Adler contributed $80,000 to the McCain campaign and his wife Katie likewise contributed $39,200. Thereafter, and through the balance of 2008 and much of 2009, Rosenfeldt, Adler and Lippman each received periodic alleged compensation payments from RRA and they (and/or their wives) then made a series of political contributions that trace close to receipt of the monies (which was received both before and after the contributions) with similar, if not identical payments then being made to the same candidates or political parties, including the McCain campaign, the Florida Republican Party, the Ohio Republican Party, the Pennsylvania Republican Party, the Missouri Republican Party, the Michigan Republican Party and Governor Charlie Crist. The bonus or other compensation payments that were used to pay for political contributions provided no consideration to RRA and thus, RRA received less than a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for these payments.
28. The second set of payments the Trustee seeks to recover includes reimbursements for personal expenses that improperly benefited both Rosenfeldt and Suzanne Rosenfeldt. During the years 2006 through 2009, on a monthly basis, Rosenfeldt had unfettered personal use of the RRA American Express card. During this time, for his and his wife’s benefit, Rosenfeldt improperly charged to RRA over $1 million in purely personal expenses, including $439,337.45 just from December 3, 2008 through June 18, 2009. Examples of Rosenfeldt’s personal expenses paid by RRA that personally benefitted Rosenfeldt and Suzanne Rosenfeldt include: 72 pieces of jewelry purchased from J.R. Dunn Jewelers, numerous local hotel room charges, furniture for their home, vacations and personal travel, exotic reptiles, home repairs, athletic club charges, men’s and women’s clothing, groceries, charitable contributions, personal meals, general household items and other items (“Personal Expense Payments”). RRA received less than reasonably equivalent value in exchange for these expense reimbursements.
29. The third set of payments the Trustee seeks to recover includes reimbursements for payments made by RRA to Rosenfeldt which were classified in RRA’s financial records as “loans” and are referred to below as the “Rosenfeldt Loans.” These payments were reflected by numerous checks written by RRA to Rosenfeldt from the RRA operating account, often in random dollar amounts. The loan checks were sometimes issued on the same day with a loan check in numbered sequence to another RRA partner, Steven Lippman (“Lippman”). Typically, Rosenfeldt would deposit each check into his personal bank account, then shortly after the deposit by Rosenfeldt of the RRA check, he would write a check out that personal account payable to RRA in an amount less than the check RRA had given him. The Rosenfeldt Loans totaled $8,960,310.75.
30. In some instances, after Rosenfeldt received a check from RRA, and rather than repaying RRA, he wrote the return check to third parties including: (a) at least one check to Kendall Sports Bar on June 19, 2006 in the amount of $61,500, (b) numerous checks to Russell Adler in amounts of $1000 to $5000 referencing “loan.”
Exotic reptiles?
Oy.
Putting aside questions of knowledge etc, what kind of farcockta law firm operates like this?
There's not enough Xanax in South Florida for me to be able to deal with these kinds of crazy allegations.
Finally amid all the crazy Rothstein pleadings we have what appears to be a straightforward professional malpractice suit.
There are no blockbuster allegations here, no inflammatory rhetoric, just a simple suit sounding in malpractice, negligent supervision, and breach of fiduciary duty.
The Morses claim that Rothstein and former RRA partners Stuart Rosenfelt, Russ Adler, Howard Kusnick, Steve Osber, and Les Stracher all screwed up in various ways in their handling and/or supervision of four separate Morse matters.
The first one was an interior designer services matter that appears to be unrelated to the forged Judge Marra order.
According to the complaint, Steve Osber had day-to-day responsibility for this file:
Plaintiffs are informed and reasonably believe that counsel representing them in the Jan Jones case have failed to meaningfully communicate with Morse, failed to advise them of scheduled depositions, negotiated a purported settlement on behalf of Plaintiffs without their knowledge and consent, and have consented to sanction orders arising from Plaintiffs’ failure to sign a Settlement Agreement that was never presented to, or agreed as to terms, by Plaintiffs.
The second involved the defense of a Palm Beach County suit by Builders Services. Osber again allegedly had day-to-day responsibility for the file:
After a Default Final Judgment was entered against Morse in December, 2007, Defendant Osber finally filed a Motion to Set Aside the Default Judgment and for Extension of Time on or about January 7, 2008, which motion was denied by the Court on or about January 31, 2008.
16.Osber and Rothstein proceeded to file a Notice of Appeal in an attempt to challenge the denial of their Motion to Set Aside the Judgment, but the appellate court ruled that the appeal seeks review of a “non-final order”, and ultimately the Appeal was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction in June 2008. Ultimately the Morses failed to have their rights and defenses properly litigated in the case as a result of the failure of Plaintiffs’ lawyers to properly file pleadings on their behalf.
The third involved a suit the Morses had brought against Mizner Lake Estates in Palm Beach state court:
In the Mizner Lake case, Rothstein and Osber represented Plaintiffs, and through their failure to communicate with Morse the Defendant had filed several Motions to Compel seeking to enforce the parties’ “interim agreement,” and seeking to have the Court enter an Order to Show Cause why the Morses Should Not be Held in Contempt of Court.
19.The Morses were not notified that they might be held in contempt of Court, or that they were required to sign any documents for which opposing counsel was attempting to hold them in contempt. In fact the Morses signed a Settlement Agreement, which was apparently not turned over to Defendants for reasons unknown to Plaintiffs.
20.Ultimately, in or about December 2008, Defendants Osber and Rothstein stipulated to the entry of an “Agreed Order on Motion to Show Cause re Plaintiffs’ Failure to Execute Settlement Agreement”, and dismissed the case after a hearing on Defendant’s Motion for Settlement.
21.Plaintiffs are informed and reasonably believe that the Mizner Lake case was dismissed with the knowledge and consent of Plaintiffs’ lawyers, including Defendants Osber and Rothstein, even though it does not appear that Plaintiffs’ claims were properly litigated and presented to the Court on behalf of the Morses, or that Plaintiffs actually received anything from their purported settlement.
Finally, the fourth matter involved an allegedly improper HVAC system at the Morses' Maine estate that they hired RRA to sue over:
Rothstein and Osber purported to work with Plaintiffs, and to engage co-counsel in Maine, due to an alleged “conflict” involving the adverse party W.H. Demmons a/k/a Maine A/C.
24.Plaintiffs are informed and reasonably believe that Rothstein and Osber sent co-counsel the content of a back-dated settlement letter; however as of the present time there has been no action filed, no actual settlement, and the Morses still have an overpriced and improper HVAC system in their Maine house.
25.As a result, once again, Plaintiffs are informed and reasonably believe that their lawyers at RRA, including Osber and Rothstein, failed to protect them and failed to reasonably act with due diligence to protect their clients’ rights
26.In each of the foregoing legal matters, Defendant Stracher, due to his relationship with the Morse family, has held himself out to Ed and Carol Morse as a trusted advisor who would supervise the various matters being handled by RRA lawyers on behalf of Morse, to make sure that their interests were protected.
RRA supposedly only has a $10 million dollar policy, so collecting on these claims will be extraordinarily difficult.
