1. Draft 12/11/05.
I. Intro….My own work …no lawyer…just family.
Little knowledge of legal things.
No knowledge of how ( legal way ) to critique legal expenses and the
competence of a lawyer find defense of their client.
II Why we came to RP. If you remember, we came to you in April 2003 at the
Strong recommendation of John Taylor…..”When I am in a tough situation,
there is no-one I would want by my side than Michael Baum”. We were most
grateful you took us on. Jeffrey Cowan’s law form was terminating us, and the
Gaggero/Chatfield axis was running circles around us. We gave a
……………….of $10,000, sold my share in a restaurant for $60,000, so had $70,000
to protect us.
III 2003. What happened in 2003? Other than going to court to win the lien
Appeal, and a mediation meeting, we can think of nothing constructive
We were certainly not ready to go to trial in September 2003. As I have said
to you before, Geraldine had never been de-briefed. She had a mountain of
information which only Mauren and myself uncovered when we prepared
those 2 volumes which we gave to you in late 2004. You could, and should
have uncovered this information far quicker than our inexperienced methods.
2. IV Andrew Jablon.
Not being wise in the ways of the legal business, we did not expect or want most
of the work being done by an associate rather than yourself. It may make sense
from a cost point of view, but it certainly disconcerted us. We thought we were
getting John Taylor’s man, but instead got Andre Jablon.
V Gaggero reputation.
At the September 19, 2005 hearing, at the break, you made a pertinent comment
To the effect that if I had known more about Gaggero earlier, I would have
forced a settlement……but Andrew received numerous letters and reports from
me, spelling out the true character of Gaggero in 2003. In retrospect, I strongly
believe that in 2003 Andrew was content to keep things rolling along.
to bother the boss.
VI Bankruptcy.
In 2003, I wrot to you and asked if you provided a bankruptcy service. You said
no. It was left to me…an inexperienced litigant,…to learn the hard way.
Fortunately, I found Steve Stanley, who guided us through the 2 bankruptcies.
VII November/December 2003.
I think this was a bad time for relations between RP and ourselves. We were
not ready to go to court in September 2003 or January 2004, but you never
sat us down and said this is what you need to do and pay to go in this direction.
I strongly believe you were more interested in getting our bills paid, than
guiding us through a difficult period. Andrew phoning me and telling me that
RP would only go though the Gaggero deposition if I brought a cashier’s check
3. over immediately, I found incredibly insulting. Your effort to substitute out
of the case was proably a good business decision from your point of view, but
the way it was done was poor public relations.
VIII 2004.
Steven Stanley safely guided us through May 2004. This gave us time to re-
group and find the money that you requested. But what happened between
May until October 2005? We know what we were doing. We spent 6 months
Breaking down the 2002 year and what had happened between Gaggero and
Geraldine. We thought what we presented to you in the 2 volumes was solid
and important. Your reception of this information was lukewarm at best. I
believe it was consigned to the back of a cupboard in quick order. We could
tell this by the questions Andres asked the 3 of us in November and December
2004.
Back to the prior question in this section,,,,Why was there strategic activity in
the May to October 2004 period?
IX Trial Preparation.
You and I are in correspondence on this , and I will not elaborate. I made it
clear that we had $50,000 to go to trial ( $25,000 for the pre-trial, and $25,000
for the trial ). ( the retainer and my executor fee ). If that was not adequate, we
should have been told, and not had the horror of a $42,000 pre-trial expense.
Once again, I feel it was your responsibility to advise us that it was not
adequate. If this had happened, we might have gone to the June,2005 decision
and saved all the pre-trial money.
4. Andrew appeared ( his work ethic is admirable ) to spend money like a drunken
sailor, with you not monitoring him closely enough.
X September 19,2005 hearing.
I cannot fault you for an admirable performance, which we believe destroyed
Chatfield’s credibility. However, it was noticeable that your grasp of the detail
was often tenuous.
