Former Defense Attorney,Todd Macaluso *Merged*

[sarah7855]

Wow. Is there anyone on this girl's defense team that is not a total loser?

Everything and everyone that this case touches...pure evil, I'm telling you!

 

[MiraclesHappen]

I guess my question would still be why on several occasions checks bounced, if the client money was sitting in the trust account where it belongs and nothing else was done with it. Money for clients comes into trust account, and either sits there or is disbursed to clients.

If it is still pending, wonder why he didn't disclose it to the court in Florida? That seems unwise.

Yeah, really!
It's a poorly thought out risk, at best. So much for the high-profile grandeur deemed to be:takeabow:sooooo intimidating!


Macaluso has filed another motion to follow up the original. :deal: I thought I'd put it in the news thread, but realized it should also go in here, too, for clarity.

He is my legal analysis:

WHAT THE BLANKETTY BLANK WAS THIS GUY THINKING? :shakehead:

Now he's gonna be "the lawyer who lied on the motion." Whether he is responsible for the alleged acts or not, it's not the most prudent way to treat these motions. It's viewed as a showing of disrespect for the "host" state. Judges have good memories. :gavel:

Link For Macaluso's Verified Amended Motion To Appear Pro Hac Vice:

:wolf:http://www.cfnews13.com/uploadedFiles/Amended%20Verified%20Motion%20for%20Admission%20to%20Appear%20Pro%20Hac%20Vice.pdf:wolf:​

Humble-Opinion:wolf:

 

[Muzikman]

Yeah, really!
It's a poorly thought out risk, at best. So much for the high-profile grandeur deemed to be:takeabow:sooooo intimidating!


Macaluso has filed another motion to follow up the original. :deal: I thought I'd put it in the news thread, but realized it should also go in here, too, for clarity.

He is my legal analysis:

WHAT THE BLANKETTY BLANK WAS THIS GUY THINKING? :shakehead:

Now he's gonna be "the lawyer who lied on the motion." Whether he is responsible for the alleged acts or not, it's not the most prudent way to treat these motions. It's viewed as a showing of disrespect for the "host" state. Judges have good memories. :gavel:

Link For Macaluso's Verified Amended Motion To Appear Pro Hac Vice:

:wolf:http://www.cfnews13.com/uploadedFiles/Amended%20Verified%20Motion%20for%20Admission%20to%20Appear%20Pro%20Hac%20Vice.pdf:wolf:​

Humble-Opinion:wolf:

Thanks MH. Have you seen his original motion? I'm wondering how he "forgot" to mention this pending action, and why it wasn't remembered until WFTV reported on it?

Would the judge take this into account in deciding whether or not to allow him to participate?

 

[SoCalSleuth]

Will your state's Bar investigate his alleged misrepresentation on his motion in Florida or just leave it to the state where the motion was filed? How far-reaching are they? Doesn't that take it over the top? What's the innocent story on that one? I have not heard how he is justifying that little slip up.

humble-opinion :wolf:

The CA State Bar will not investigate the motion to appear pro hac vice unless someone files a complaint with them about it. Then they will call him first to see what his response is. My guess is that he would say it was an oversight that was corrected. If it was corrected that will be the end of it as far as the state bar is concerned.

 

[Muzikman]

The CA State Bar will not investigate the motion to appear pro hac vice unless someone files a complaint with them about it. Then they will call him first to see what his response is. My guess is that he would say it was an oversight that was corrected. If it was corrected that will be the end of it as far as the state bar is concerned.

I'm betting that *someone* will file a complaint. heh

 

[cleo612]

The CA State Bar will not investigate the motion to appear pro hac vice unless someone files a complaint with them about it. Then they will call him first to see what his response is. My guess is that he would say it was an oversight that was corrected. If it was corrected that will be the end of it as far as the state bar is concerned.

I certainly hope that someone reports it to the State Bar of Cali simply to make sure that there is proper notation made to his record. If no one reports it, and he tries to pull this again, there will be no record of him having tried this stunt in Florida.

That is how stuff like this gets swept under the rug--when people who are in a position to do something become complacent and do nothing.

 

[SoCalSleuth]

I guess my question would still be why on several occasions checks bounced, if the client money was sitting in the trust account where it belongs and nothing else was done with it. Money for clients comes into trust account, and either sits there or is disbursed to clients.

If it is still pending, wonder why he didn't disclose it to the court in Florida? That seems unwise.

Yes I know, I was aghast that it happened several times and the amount of money that was involved. However, the State Bar's primary concern in these matters is whether the money was stolen by him because he needed it or otherwise. I'm familiar with him and I know he does not need the money so it is doubtful he intentionally misappropriated it for his own gain. My guess is he is telling the truth and that he gave his staff access to his CTA and they screwed up. Perhaps they paid one client with another's funds before the first client's funds cleared; perhaps they paid litigation expenses out of it instead of from the business account; perhaps there was client money deposited for court costs and they went over the amount that was deposited. I don't know the actual specifics of how it all happened. But unless he intentionally took the money knowing it belonged to his clients the worse they will do to him is a public reproval. Most likely he will go to ethics school and have to retake the professional responsibility exam.

 

[MiraclesHappen]

The CA State Bar will not investigate the motion to appear pro hac vice unless someone files a complaint with them about it. Then they will call him first to see what his response is. My guess is that he would say it was an oversight that was corrected. If it was corrected that will be the end of it as far as the state bar is concerned.

Considering the potential perjury aspect, I think he will retain counsel if there is a complaint on this thing. Anyway, he should.
I did not see any language to explain what happened to cause the misrepresentation, in his Follow Up Motion. I found that odd.
Humble-Opinion:wolf:

 

[Secretsolver]

On WFTV's 11 PM newscast, story is not up on their site yet.

Under investigation for writing bad checks for money he owed to clients - one check was for $108,000!

Their legal analyst said that it could prevent him from practicing in FL.

Kathy Belich hit him with it after court today, he said "the matter is being resolved."

An interesting, not so good day for the ahem "Dream Team."

I saw that story on the news as well. Interesting that he wrote that 108,000 check with only 1800 in the bank at the time!
Maybe he feels his check writing skills give him something in common with Casey....

 

[Secretsolver]

OMG! ROTFLMAO!! :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh:

Where does Baez find these people?
Seriously, have they not learned yet, that whoever enters this case will be sleuthed up one side and down the other........sheeeeesh

Maybe that is why he is always taking that laptop when he visits Casey in the big house. The two of them are cruising Craigs List together!

 

[MiraclesHappen]

Thanks MH. Have you seen his original motion? I'm wondering how he "forgot" to mention this pending action, and why it wasn't remembered until WFTV reported on it?

Would the judge take this into account in deciding whether or not to allow him to participate?

Thank YOU, Muzikman, for all you do for us!!! In my gut sorry but just could not resist, I feel that if wftv had not uncovered this bad "OOPSIE" as you so correctly deemed it, he never would have "fessed up" and would have just proceeded merrily along. As we discussed before, it is the squeaky clean credentials of the applying lawyer which are scrutinized, not so much the sponsoring local guy.


This is a serious form which as was pointed out, is contained in a template, for the Judicial Administration Handbook for Florida.

I cannot see how the issue of his failure to reveal the truth until the news station did it for him can be avoided. Even if it isn't mentioned, it's a looming black cloud.

I doubt the Judiciary wants to send a message that Material Misrepresentations are no big deal on these motions, or that it's Okay to forget things about yourself. There is plenty of precedent for revoking the temporary admission to engage in the practice of law, when this motion is not treated with utmost respect & honesty. Little things grow in proportion when they are omitted for convenience sake, or omitted to push this motion thru the system. Not saying that will happen, that permission will be revoked, just that it's been done in Florida.:gavel:

Humble-Opinion rendered from floor, as this whole thing knocked me off the couch; I guess this is what he meant:wink::wolf:

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

If you want to read the actual state bar charges and his response go to www.calsb.org--upper right hand corner of screen click "Attorney Search"-then plug in his last then first name. Scroll down and there are pdf files of the charges and his response. Diane Karpman who is THE State Bar charges defense counsel is his attorney. One of the courses I teach to CA attorneys is "Client Trust Accounts: A Primer" so I'm pretty familiar with all of the cases in which this happened. Yes, it is one of the most serious things an attorney can be accused of doing. When a check bounces in your client trust account the bank is required to notify the state bar. Appears that is what happened here on several occasions. His defense is that his 44 year old brother suddenly died of a heart attack and he had to take care of his mother as a result--plus the ordinary grief that goes with it so he wasn't minding the store so to speak and allowed his staff to manage his CTA. Problem with this is that an attorney is not permitted to delegate handling of his CTA to anyone ever. That said, he has no prior record of discipline, is cooperating with the state bar investigation, the money was immediately sent to the clients, the clients did not complain to the state bar and he claims he did not steal the money. If it is true he didn't steal the money, my guess is that he will only have to attend state bar ethics school on handling CTA and nothing more will happen to him. The same thing happened to my former partner when her brother was dying of cancer and her secretary stole her client trust funds. It would be different if he actually stole the money then he would be suspended.

Bolding mine. Is this charge by the state bar in reference to the Bechler case? (Your link wouldn't work for me.)

If so, the Bechlers may have innocently failed to notify the state bar because the following link showing they're suing for over $5 million makes it sound like they're trying to complain to someone.

http://dockets.justia.com/docket/court-ordce/case_no-1:2008cv03059/case_id-88549/

Or am I mixing up two different cases?

 

[lawlady84]

Why were all the links removed from these posts??

 

[Muzikman]

Thank YOU, Muzikman, for all you do for us!!! In my gut sorry but just could not resist, I feel that if wftv had not uncovered this bad "OOPSIE" as you so correctly deemed it, he never would have "fessed up" and would have just proceeded merrily along. As we discussed before, it is the squeaky clean credentials of the applying lawyer which are scrutinized, not so much the sponsoring local guy.

This is a serious form which as was pointed out, is contained in a template, for the Judicial Administration Handbook for Florida.

I cannot see how the issue of his failure to reveal the truth until the news station did it for him can be avoided. Even if it isn't mentioned, it's a looming black cloud.

I doubt the Judiciary wants to send a message that Material Misrepresentations are no big deal on these motions, or that it's Okay to forget things about yourself. There is plenty of precedent for revoking the temporary admission to engage in the practice of law, when this motion is not treated with utmost respect & honesty. Little things grow in proportion when they are omitted for convenience sake, or omitted to push this motion thru the system. Not saying that will happen, that permission will be revoked, just that it's been done in Florida.:gavel:

Humble-Opinion rendered from floor, as this whole thing knocked me off the couch; I guess this is what he meant:wink::wolf:

Yer welcome. On Local 6 noon newscast they said that Baez had been given some more discovery - pictures, some 3-D imaging or something. Have to find out what all this is!

As for Macaluso, it seems he should be bounced, if for nothing else to show Casey that there are consequences to lying.

 

[lawlady84]

Also, in my experience, I don't think stealing this amount of money can be blamed on an "underling" - how many associates/staff have access to law firm money? In my experience everything is charged to the firm, and the firm deals with the client's money.

If it was just a "misunderstanding," why is there a bar complaint? Wouldn't the client just complain to HIM and he would correct the mistake and hand over the money? I doubt a client would report him for an honest clerical mistake that was resolved.

 

[SuziQ]

Also, in my experience, I don't think stealing this amount of money can be blamed on an "underling" - how many associates/staff have access to law firm money? In my experience everything is charged to the firm, and the firm deals with the client's money.

If it was just a "misunderstanding," why is there a bar complaint? Wouldn't the client just complain to HIM and he would correct the mistake and hand over the money? I doubt a client would report him for an honest clerical mistake that was resolved.

What gets me is the appearance that he used trust funds as his personal loan company. It appears he did this more than once. Bechler's case smells of either hiding money from his clients or outright spending it on himself.

I know it appears he makes alot of money. But I bet he spends it quickly. Here is an example. He has that plane, which WFTV showed is part of what those escrow funds paid for. Planes are expensive to maintain and put it the air! What an ego he has. He can't fly Southwest like most other attorney's do? Big sign he blows as much money as he makes. And then you have today's economy. People who used to be millionaire's are now having to move back home to live with mom and dad.

It wouldn't shock me to find out this guys finances are a mess and that's the reason for dipping into clients funds.

 

[amethyst221]

Yes I know, I was aghast that it happened several times and the amount of money that was involved. However, the State Bar's primary concern in these matters is whether the money was stolen by him because he needed it or otherwise. I'm familiar with him and I know he does not need the money so it is doubtful he intentionally misappropriated it for his own gain. My guess is he is telling the truth and that he gave his staff access to his CTA and they screwed up. Perhaps they paid one client with another's funds before the first client's funds cleared; perhaps they paid litigation expenses out of it instead of from the business account; perhaps there was client money deposited for court costs and they went over the amount that was deposited. I don't know the actual specifics of how it all happened. But unless he intentionally took the money knowing it belonged to his clients the worse they will do to him is a public reproval. Most likely he will go to ethics school and have to retake the professional responsibility exam.

I won't comment on him and his need for money, if you know him. But it wouldn't be unheard of for someone who appeared to have plenty of money to raid client funds to cover up. Some people feel entitled. I read the CA bar complaint and the response. There are several incidents of bounced checks, and the complaint at least alleges that money was taken for his personal use, giving 2 examples. One amount is pretty large. It doesn't appear that any of these incidents is the same as the Bechler matter. I haven't read anything about the merits of that, but the blurb did say it was a declaratory judgment action. Maybe they are disputing who is entitled to funds. ??

As to blaming the underlings, I thought rules about escrow and trust accounts were specifically set up to take that defense away from lawyers, or they'd use it every time they got caught. Even if money was taken for a time without client awareness, was taken for any personal use, and then returned, there might be some serious consequences for that. Anyway, glad it's his problem and not mine. Also wonder how it could slip his mind that he had a disciplinary action pending when he has a status conference scheduled in only a couple of weeks. He must have to consult his calendar to see whn he can be in Florida for TV time.

 

[lawlady84]

What gets me is the appearance that he used trust funds as his personal loan company. It appears he did this more than once. Bechler's case smells of either hiding money from his clients or outright spending it on himself.

I know it appears he makes alot of money. But I bet he spends it quickly. Here is an example. He has that plane, which WFTV showed is part of what those escrow funds paid for. Planes are expensive to maintain and put it the air! What an ego he has. He can't fly Southwest like most other attorney's do? Big sign he blows as much money as he makes. And then you have today's economy. People who used to be millionaire's are now having to move back home to live with mom and dad.

It wouldn't shock me to find out this guys finances are a mess and that's the reason for dipping into clients funds.

That makes sense- the only reason I could think of for him to have a plane is if he routinely flies into random places to reconstruct plane crashes? But on second thought he could just take a flight to the nearest airport and drive over like everyone else.

I don't know any law firms that have planes- most just have a "relationship" to get discount tickets with delta or continental. I think you're right on with this - we should take bets on a Macaluso ponzi scheme ha

 

[cjm11]

I'm not defending this guy, just re-posting the link and giving a bit of info mentioned for those that can't get the link to work.

http://www.cfnews13.com/uploadedFil...tion for Admission to Appear Pro Hac Vice.pdf

In December, 2005 his only brother passed away. He was away from the office for approximately one year and three months consoling his family. During that time 2 checks were drafted that were returned by the bank due to an accounting error by office staff. The accounting error was immediately and swiftly corrected. No client complaint was ever filed to the State Bar. The only reason the matter was reported to the Bar was because the bank reports automatically by state law.

ETA: Only stating a bit of what is in the report. My own opinion is that if it happened "innocently" once, why weren't safeguards put in place so it wouldn't happen a second time.

 

[lawlady84]

I won't comment on him and his need for money, if you know him. But it wouldn't be unheard of for someone who appeared to have plenty of money to raid client funds to cover up. Some people feel entitled. I read the CA bar complaint and the response. There are several incidents of bounced checks, and the complaint at least alleges that money was taken for his personal use, giving 2 examples. One amount is pretty large. It doesn't appear that any of these incidents is the same as the Bechler matter. I haven't read anything about the merits of that, but the blurb did say it was a declaratory judgment action. Maybe they are disputing who is entitled to funds. ??

As to blaming the underlings, I thought rules about escrow and trust accounts were specifically set up to take that defense away from lawyers, or they'd use it every time they got caught. Even if money was taken for a time without client awareness, was taken for any personal use, and then returned, there might be some serious consequences for that. Anyway, glad it's his problem and not mine. Also wonder how it could slip his mind that he had a disciplinary action pending when he has a status conference scheduled in only a couple of weeks. He must have to consult his calendar to see whn he can be in Florida for TV time.

And I mean, you don't have to be in need of money to steal it- Bernie Madoff had millions on his own, but for some people its just too hard to not take what's in front of you. Not saying that happened here, I don't know this guy at all, but recent news makes it seem people who need money are sometimes the last ones to ever steal anything!