Complaint against waxman in oct 2009


Published on

Published in: Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Complaint against waxman in oct 2009

  1. 1. October 7, 2009Board of Overseers of the Bar97 Winthrop StreetAugust MaineDear Overseers Board;On May 18, 2009 I filed a request for an investigation into Michael Waxman’s behavior asopposing counsel in my case including: • His personal involvement in the case and a clear attitude of a personal vendetta against me, for reasons unknown to me. • His threat to use improper influence; to use "the very substantial resources of my family” against me. • His constant action of improper legal action with the intent to harass and maliciously injure both me and my daughter. • His systematic harassment and intimidation of all my care-givers in a clear effort to render it impossible for me to maintain employment because I am left with no childcare.I am grateful to hear that both the Bar Counsel and Grievance Panel has recommended action betaken against Mr. Waxman for what he has done to me and my daughter. However, I understandthat this will only consider all actions taken prior to August 14th. His behavior since August 14thhas been even more out of control and destructive than anything he did prior to August 14th. Iwas told by the Overseers that in order to consider new behavior I must file a new complaint—which is what this letter serves as.Mr. Waxman has sent emails to my new lawyer Bill Harwood comparing me to Charles Manson,claiming that I should be deemed a client of “mental diminished capacity” and my child shouldbe taken from me. Please see attached.I have a third lawyer because no one, wants to deal with Mr. Waxman. As I reported to theOverseers before, when Jamie Wagner was considering becoming my lawyer—Mr. Waxman leftso many voice mails on Jamie’s home phone and sent so many emails, calling me a “despicablehuman being” that Jamie’s wife said there is no way you are going to take this case. Mr.Harwood has already informed me he also has no intention of letting Mr. Waxman ruin hispersonal or professional life and he also plans to withdraw from the case.Mr. Waxman has been filing a motion against me almost every day. He, apparently, has noother legal practice and spends all day every day, working to destroy me and my daughter. He isusing his bar license as a weapon. He is completely out of control and his legal practice andtactics are purposefully malicious and destructive. 1
  2. 2. I originally said that based on what Mr. Waxman has done to me he should be forbidden frompracticing family law in Maine. Now, I believe he should have his bar license revoked entirely.He is misusing, in the worst manner, his professional license to practice law.We have attempted, again and again and again to settle. We have offered everything possible fora settlement. Mr. Waxman will accept no settlement. He is obsessed with this case and withdestroying me and my daughter. He has said the only settlement he will accept is sole custodyfor his client with me on supervised visits only.He is, with purpose, driving me and my daughter into poverty and bankruptcy. He is using hislaw license to do this. He must be held accountable. I am requesting that he be ordered to paymy entire legal costs, which run well over $200,000. My legal bills have drained my savings,retirement, my daughter’s college fund. None of his money has even gone to his client, IgorMalenko. All of it has gone to all the other lawyers I have been forced to hire to defend myselfagainst Mr. Waxman.Mr. Waxman has embarked on a campaign to scare and intimate my friends and care givers inSorrento, as he did in South Portland, continuing to try, very successfully, to isolate me and Milafrom everyone. Please see an email he sent when I had gone to Ellsworth for one hour and leftMila with a close friend of mine for over a decade and a wonderful mother. She made themistake of answering the phone, a normal activity in any other home—but not in mine anymore—and Mr. Waxman was calling. Please note what he said to her.Mr. Waxman has employed a private detective who is trailing me and my friends in Sorrento—taking photos of me and my daughter when we were kayaking and watching my home.The Overseers can check with lawyer Sophie Spurr in Blue Hill who attempted to settle with Mr.Waxman and Bill Harwood at Verrill Dana. Sophie Spurr was shocked at Mr. Waxman’sobsessive drive to control and destroy me.Sincerely,Lori Handrahan, Ph.D.S. Portland Maine207-221-7706 2
  3. 3. From: []Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2009 5:59 PMTo: Norton, Leslie; Harwood, WilliamCc:; Igor-Malenko@idexx.comSubject: Re: HandrahanLeslie and Bill:I am enclosing my response to your Motion to Consolidate, as well as a copy of the Motion toDissolve that Igor "filed" the other day. I put the word in quotations because the Ellsworth PFAfile had not yet been received down here. Thus, I do not know when the PFA hearing will bescheduled, but very likely it will be sometime next week.Once again, I implore you to persuade your client to voluntarily dismiss the PFA and restartvisitations BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT IS BEST FOR THIS CHILD!!! Also, she should cureher contempt by moving back here immediately. These things are also in your clients bestinterest, since it is likely, in my very humble view, that Moskowitz is going to be outraged at herbehavior and throw the book at her.Bill has tried to argue with me that this is just a tough case with clients who tell different stories,and the fact finder must figure it out. That is not an accurate characterization. Ms. Handrahansuffers from serious mental illness and has problems perceiving events and statementsaccurately. Judge Moskowitz became keenly aware of this in the divorce trial. Frankly, youcould easily make an argument that she is a client with Diminished Mental Capacity and thusyou are authorized under the Bar Rules to take steps, including involving family members andothers and including disclosing client confidences in order to protect her interests. See MaineBar Rule 3.6(j).In any case, unless you are able to corral Ms. Handrahan and persuade her to behave in a mannerthat shows she actually understands and cares about what is best for Mila, my prediction is thatshe will soon be stripped of all rights to this child. That would be very sad for Mila.MichaelFrom: []Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 7:23 PMTo: Harwood, WilliamSubject: HandrahanBill:Im sorry our efforts fell flat today. I thought I owed you an explanation.You told me that Ms. Handrahan fervently believes that Igor molested Mila, in the face of theDHHS investigation that unsubstantiated the claims and his taking and passing the lie detectortest. So, we discussed how she might agree to allow Igor SOME contact with Mila in the shortrun while we try and figure out how to assuage or mollify her fears. There is no way that willever happen. 3
  4. 4. At first, she was CONVINCED that Igor suffered from mental illness. She dragged him to over10 different mental health providers in search of a diagnosis that would assuage or mollify herconcerns. Not one expert agreed with her heartfelt beliefs that he suffered any mental illness.Indeed, several suggested that it was SHE, not Igor who needed psychiatric intervention. Sheignored those opinions and/or attacked those who had the audacity to suggest this. She filedgrievances against Dr. Sean McLoy and his pyschiatric nurse.When that tack did not seem to work with either the guardian, Liz Stout, or the forensicpsychologist, Dr. Kabacoff, she changed her approach. All of a sudden in August 2008, after theguardian recommended that Igor enjoy unsupervised visitation, she contacted Leslie Devoe andasked her to look at this case "through a domestic abuse paradigm." Thats like asking a roofer tocome look at your house to determine whether it needs any maintenance or improvements. Nosurprise that the roofer will tell you you need a new roof!! So, domestic violence became hernext crusade, and she started to make up one story after another (I assure you that she createdtale after tale at trial, which she had never shared with Liz or Dr. Kabacoff.).That did not work either, and the judge found her to be less than credible. So, her new approachis this lie that Igor sexually abused Mila. Most parents are elated when DHHS concludes that thechild was not abused. Not Lori. Nope. Lori will not rest until someone agrees with her "heartfeltbeliefs."Bill, Charles Manson may have had heartfelt beliefs that murdering those people was the rightthing to do. BUT HE WAS MENTALLY ILL!!! So is Lori!!So, I do not care what she believes. She is mentally ill, has no empathy for her child, and will door say whatever she likes to destroy their bond.There is no mollifying or assuaging her fears. And she will never stop as long as she has anyparental rights to Mila. At some point, she will lose those. No court will permit this kind ofconduct. It is harming her daughter and she could care less. I wont try and convince you anymore. Each time a new person gets involved in this case I try that. It is a waste of my energy.I like you. I think you ought to get the heck out of this case because it will consume you, andyou are not helping Lori or Mila. Lori needs help, but you are not qualified to give it. She needspsychiatric help.There it is. Sorry to be so long winded. Thanks for trying. You are not magic, however, so youcant make this case right. Be sure to tell her that I am not going anywhere, and I shall not restuntil justice is done and that beautiful child is in a healthy, loving environment.Michael__________________________________________________________________From: []Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2009 9:43 AMTo: Harwood, William 4
  5. 5. Cc:; Igor-Malenko@idexx.comSubject: MalenkoBill:We need to get this to a hearing ASAP. I am going to file a Motion for Contempt squarelybringing the issue of whether Lori has relocated before the judge and asking him to order her toreturn. Will you accept service of process or must I go through the hassle and expense of servingher in Hancock County, knowing of course that I shall ask the judge to order reimbursement forthat unnecessary expense?Lori has no right to move Mila to Sorrento. She can move there herself, certainly, just give Milato Igor. But she cannot take this unilateral action without the blessing of the Court, which shehas not even requested. You did what you could at the hearing, but I think you made incorrectassumptions and representations about Lori. She is not "just traveling back and forth to hervacation home now and then." She has enrolled Mila in day care up there, and she isestablishing other roots as well. She intends to remain in Sorrento as her residence.What I would really like to do is get a date certain to have a day-long hearing on all Motions toModify. And I want that date soon. Can we do this by agreement, or must I proceed with theMotion for Contempt and any other Motions I can think of? If Lori wants to use/manipulate youto delay this case, then I promise you I shall file motion after motion after motion and you willexpend a prodigious amount of time on this case that is unnecessary.If a GAL were in this case, we both know that she would be screaming at the Court to hold ahearing ASAP and give this case and this child some closure and certainty. It is NOT in thislittle girls best interest to have her world constantly shifting because your client decides fromone day to the next that she will move, un-enroll her in an excellent day care and re-enroll her ina different one, then move again once the house presently on the market sells.I look forward to hearing from you.Michael__________________________ 5
  6. 6. From: []Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 2:53 PMTo: lorihandrahan5@gmail.comCc:;;;;; Francis.R.Sweeney@Maine.govSubject: ContemptLori:I just got off the phone with "Liza" at your Sorrento home. Apparently, you are off "in town"and have left Mila in the care of a woman named Liza about whom you have shared noinformation regarding her qualifications to take care of Mila.Clearly, you have unilaterally decided to prevent Igor from enjoying his visitation today withMila, and you have elected to ignore the three previous emails that I sent to you today regardingthe visitation. For the record, those emails were sent at 8:50, 11:08 and 12:27. I saw the emailstream between you and the former GAL, Liz Stout, today, so I am aware that you were onlineand emailing Liz at 7:10. This conduct comprises a clear and intentional violation of themandates of a Court Order. Although you might be able to argue that Mondays visit which youfailed to bring Mila for could be excused since you claimed to have an automotive emergency,you have not even tried to explain to us why you have kept Mila away from her visit with herfather today. In the absence of a valid explanation that tells us why you were unable to make thisvisit happen (you were in South Portland yesterday morning, and have apparently driven up toSorrento either yesterday or first thing this morning), this is unacceptable.I shall file a Contempt action on Monday.For Milas sake, I would simply ask you to try and understand that she loves her father verymuch, he loves her back, and it is absolutely in her best interest to have her father in her life.Keeping Mila away from her father is hurting her, and I wish you would try and understand thatproposition.Michael J. Waxman, Esq.One Monument Way, Ste. 206P.O. Box 375Portland, Maine 04112-0375(207) 772-9558 phone(207) 772-9567 faxP.S. I digitally recorded the entire conversation with Liza, in case there was any doubt aboutwhat we discussed or the manner or tone that was used. Ill be happy to make this available toyou at your convenience._______________________________________ 6
  7. 7. From: []Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 4:24 PMTo: lorihandrahan5@gmail.comCc:;;;;;;; estout@stoutlawmaine.comSubject: Motion to DismissMs. Handrahan:Here is an electronic copy of the Motion that is going out in the mail today. If you would like toreceive paper copies while you are unrepresented, please give me your mailing address. I havedetermined that I do not wish to speak with you under any circumstances other than cross-examination before a judge with court security present. Thanks.Michael J. Waxman, Esq.One Monument Way, Ste. 206P.O. Box 375Portland, Maine 04112-0375_______________________________________ 7