Former Defense Attorney,Todd Macaluso *Merged*

[Hell's Belle]

Since I can't look at the case, I have no idea whether the Bechler declaratory judgement action has been resolved yet. Did he previously pursue a wrongful death claim for the family and also some sort of class action about the supplement with Ephedra? Are those concluded? Could this involve fees relating to those matters?

The discovery cutoff in Bechler was extended by agreed court order on 1/23/2009. I see no judgments for sanctions and such on the docket.

Now what's interesting about the amended complaint in Bechler is that it alleges that Macaluso did a lot of stuff (sending letters, asserting attorney's liens) during 2006, exactly the time frame when he swore to the Florida court that he was "away from [his] office." E.g.,

"On March 1, 2006, after obtaining information that a settlement had been reached with regard to the wrongful death action filed by Kylie Bechler under the global and comprehensive settlement agreement, Defendant Macaluso wrote to the attorneys for the debtor Nutraquest, Inc. and other defendants in Kylie Bechler’s wrongful death action, and improperly asserted an attorney lien on the recoveries in this wrongful death action under the settlement. Defendant Macaluso further wrongfully demanded in this letter that a settlement check be disbursed directly to the Plaintiffs and his law firm out of the In re Nutraquest, Inc. bankruptcy case."

(page 33 of amended complaint). Harumph.

Also, there is a letter attached to the complaint indicating that he bounced a check from his trust fund to them in the amount of $299,520.78 on 1/23/2007. This is NOT addressed in the current CA bar charges (possibly because it is wrapped up in a fee dispute). Wow.

I don't seem to have the ability to make attachments. Not enough posts yet? So I can't post a copy of the complaint. Harumph again.

Oh, and he admits in his answer and counterclaim to doing a bunch of stuff in April 2006.

In response to paragraph 33 of the Amended Complaint, defendants admit that they sent a letter to Mr. Carton on or about March 1, 2006. The correspondence speaks for itself, and defendants deny plaintiffs’ summary and conclusions relating to it. The remaining allegations of paragraph 33 are legal arguments and conclusions and therefore defendants deny them.
<snip>
35. In response to paragraph 35 of the Amended Complaint, defendants admit that they corresponded with Mr. Carton in March and April 2006. Defendants also admit Mr. Carton and his firm agreed to directly disburse plaintiffs’ share of settlement proceeds.
<snip>
36. In response to paragraph 36 of the Amended Complaint, defendants admit that in late April 2006, Ms. King wrote to plaintiffs, provided authorizations, and that plaintiffs signed authorizations allowing a disbursement of settlement proceeds, and that in early May 2006 those authorizations were forwarded to Mr. Carton and his firm. The remaining
allegations of paragraph 36 are legal arguments and conclusions and therefore defendants deny them.

Here's what Macaluso's answer and counterclaim says about that bounced check:

"In response to paragraph 38 of the Amended Complaint, defendants admit that on or about February 12, 2007, a check in the amount of $299,520.78 was issued and mailed to plaintiffs. Defendants are without sufficient information or belief to admit or deny what actions plaintiffs took in response and, therefore, deny allegations relating to the same. Defendants state that shortly after defendants learned the check was not processed, they arranged to have that money wired to plaintiffs on February 22, 2007."

 

[amethyst221]

Without reading the cases, I couldn't guess exactly how all the litigation went. From that blurb, it does sound as if the Bechler case maybe became part of a larger class action, ands that class action was maybe settled. Sounds like there is a fund of money and there is a dispute about to whom it should be paid. ???

 

[SuziQ]

Hell's Belle, Does the below mean that Macaluso included himself and his clients in a settlement that did not involve him or his clients? It sounds like they attempted to or did take money that was never intended for anyone other than Kylie Bechler, her husband's estate and his child. Did Macaluso have to drop that or give the money back to her and that is why Kylie's in-laws are now suing Macaluso?

On March 1, 2006, after obtaining information that a settlement had been reached with regard to the wrongful death action filed by Kylie Bechler under the global and comprehensive settlement agreement, Defendant Macaluso wrote to the attorneys for the debtor Nutraquest, Inc. and other defendants in Kylie Bechler&#8217;s wrongful death action, and improperly asserted an attorney lien on the recoveries in this wrongful death action under the settlement. Defendant Macaluso further wrongfully demanded in this letter that a settlement check be disbursed directly to the Plaintiffs and his law firm out of the In re Nutraquest, Inc. bankruptcy case."

 

[SuziQ]

This is where I am still confused. Macaluso won the rather high-profile case for the Bechler's, then they turn around and file against him.

I am not saying to is related, only that I wish I had a membership to WestLaw as there was more detail there on the Bechler filing that I couldn't get to. I'm just further curious as to what that issue is about, and the current standing.

Thanks to all who have added so much knowledge to this thread.

ETA: editing this post because I had it completely wrong. Thanks for the help Hell's Belle!

 

[Hell's Belle]

Hell's Belle, Does the below mean that Macaluso included himself and his clients in a settlement that did not involve him or his clients? It sounds like they attempted to or did take money that was never intended for anyone other than Kylie Bechler, her husband's estate and his child. Did Macaluso have to drop that or give the money back to her and that is why Kylie's in-laws are now suing Macaluso?

On March 1, 2006, after obtaining information that a settlement had been reached with regard to the wrongful death action filed by Kylie Bechler under the global and comprehensive settlement agreement, Defendant Macaluso wrote to the attorneys for the debtor Nutraquest, Inc. and other defendants in Kylie Bechler’s wrongful death action, and improperly asserted an attorney lien on the recoveries in this wrongful death action under the settlement. Defendant Macaluso further wrongfully demanded in this letter that a settlement check be disbursed directly to the Plaintiffs and his law firm out of the In re Nutraquest, Inc. bankruptcy case."

I wish I had the ability to post attachments. To oversimplify, the Bechlers are saying that Macaluso wanted the settlement check made out to him as well as his own clients so he could take his cut first out of their recovery, and they objected to that (they say elsewhere that after getting plaintiff's settlement check, Macaluso withheld more than he was entitled to from their settlement (he paid them $299K and kept $525K--and bounced their settlement check to boot).

 

[Hell's Belle]

While their daughter in law and her attorney won their case, I don't see anything about the parent's and Macaluso winning theirs. However, it looks like Macaluso attempted to extort money from a settlement by using the lien process. In other words, he doesn't release the lien unless he sees some money. IMO, I don't think the parent's had much of a case to begin with since Kylie and her child are the immediate heirs. I kinda went through the same thing with my inlaws.

Do I have this straight in my head or do I have this completely wrong.

Macaluso negotiated a settlement on behalf of the parents and the brother of Bechler in the about of about $824K, of which the parents and brother got $299K. It's pretty byzantine but the settlement was with Scott's estate and Kylie.

 

[SuziQ]

I wish I had the ability to post attachments. To oversimplify, the Bechlers are saying that Macaluso wanted the settlement check made out to him as well as his own clients so he could take his cut first out of their recovery, and they objected to that (they say elsewhere that after getting plaintiff's settlement check, Macaluso withheld more than he was entitled to from their settlement (he paid them $299K and kept $525K--and bounced their settlement check to boot).

Ahhh, ok. I had it completely wrong. I thought it sounded like Macaluso wrongfully collected funds out of Kylie's settlement. Gotcha.

 

[SuziQ]

Macaluso negotiated a settlement on behalf of the parents and the brother of Bechler in the about of about $824K, of which the parents and brother got $299K. It's pretty byzantine but the settlement was with Scott's estate and Kylie.

So to keep it straight in my head....Scott's family sued Scott's estate and Kylie? I know there is no love loss between them....but wow.

 

[miabellamoure]

Sounds like KC's Dream Team just acquired a "bottom feeder"...good luck to her case!

 

[Hell's Belle]

So to keep it straight in my head....Scott's family sued Scott's estate and Kylie? I know there is no love loss between them....but wow.

No suit was ever filed by the Bechlers against Kylie or Scott's estate. There was a settlement reached based on the fact that the Bechlers might be beneficiaries of Scott's estate (perhaps there was a will). One of the issues in the Bechlers' suit against Macaluso is that he charged them 40% of the recovery for his fees, which he was entitled to do if he had to file suit, although no suit was ever filed, so by the terms of the contract he was only entitled to 33.3%.

And then he bounced his trust account check to them. In light of what's going on with the CA bar, that's the part that gets me.

 

[SoCalSleuth]

Just checked out TM's website and it states that his Legal Assistant is also his bookkeeper? Whaaaat? hmmmm, why doesn't he have a regular bookkeeper like most attorneys have? Interesting.

 

[amethyst221]

Okay, I was missing something here but now I get it. I wasn't that aware of the original suit for wrongful death. I thought since the decedent was young, that his next of kin were his parents, and that TM sued on their behalf. I didn't realize there was a spouse.

 

[watcher9]

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.

Statement #3 says that he was retained personally by KC to provide legal representation to her....
Is that normal legal talk or does that mean she is the only one that would be responsible for paying him? And, if she doesn't have any money herself and she is unable to sell or collect on the photos herself, would be the State be liable to pay his fees?

 

[MD MOMMY]

Maybe they are just using him to make KC not look AS bad. She didn't steal nearly the amount of money he did:woohoo:

 

[dax]

Statement #3 says that he was retained personally by KC to provide legal representation to her....
Is that normal legal talk or does that mean she is the only one that would be responsible for paying him? And, if she doesn't have any money herself and she is unable to sell or collect on the photos herself, would be the State be liable to pay his fees?

bolded by me...

No, not in a million years! If he bills her and she doesn't pay then too bad Todd...

 

[SuziQ]

Maybe they are just using him to make KC not look AS bad. She didn't steal nearly the amount of money he did:woohoo:

You make a good point.

 

[SoCalSleuth]

Okay, now I've looked at all the docs being discussed, the county assessor records, the amended motion for pro hac vice, etc. and all I can say is that I am flabbergasted. IMO, clearly he knew what he was doing with the first motion phv. In the amended motion he writes something to the effect of "It has come to the attention of the undersigned .." that there is a disciplinary proceeding. Then he attaches his response to those charges that were filed one month before. So how did it just come to his attention--which he definitely tried to imply in the amended motion? Then he doesn't mention the charges re paying his personal expenses with client funds. (As a prior poster pointed out) That made me look back at the charges and his response. He generally denied those charges on information and belief. ie he didn't specifically explain them as he did the bounced check charges. Why not? Then in his mitigating circumstances section of his response he claims that if he committed misconduct any actions he took were an aberration. So now I'm sitting here thinking he very well may have knowingly paid his personal expenses with client funds. The thought of it is making me ill. He's supposed to be one of the good guys fighting for truth, justice, the American Way and all that jazz. (Yeah I know you think he's scum because he's representing KC...but I'll tell you, he is an exceptional lawyer who has worked extremely hard helping people, helping victims of corporate greed, etc.)

 

[Hell's Belle]

Okay, now I've looked at all the docs being discussed, the county assessor records, the amended motion for pro hac vice, etc. and all I can say is that I am flabbergasted. IMO, clearly he knew what he was doing with the first motion phv. In the amended motion he writes something to the effect of &quot;It has come to the attention of the undersigned ..&quot; that there is a disciplinary proceeding. Then he attaches his response to those charges that were filed one month before. So how did it just come to his attention--which he definitely tried to imply in the amended motion? Then he doesn't mention the charges re paying his personal expenses with client funds. (As a prior poster pointed out) That made me look back at the charges and his response. He generally denied those charges on information and belief. ie he didn't specifically explain them as he did the bounced check charges. Why not? Then in his mitigating circumstances section of his response he claims that if he committed misconduct any actions he took were an aberration. So now I'm sitting here thinking he very well may have knowingly paid his personal expenses with client funds. The thought of it is making me ill. He's supposed to be one of the good guys fighting for truth, justice, the American Way and all that jazz. (Yeah I know you think he's scum because he's representing KC...but I'll tell you, he is an exceptional lawyer who has worked extremely hard helping people, helping victims of corporate greed, etc.)

I'm actually relieved that it reads the same way to you as it did to me. I was stunned at what I found when I started researching this. If you have access to PACER it is worthwhile to spend the money to look at the amended complaint in Bechler and Macaluso's counterclaim because he admits to bouncing an ADDITIONAL $299K check that isn't even included in this set of charges (and it still bounced even though he had just put over $800K into his trust account--horrifying). I can see very easily how this might have happened, but...why would he step into the spotlight in this case now? Did he think people wouldn't figure this out?

 

[chefmom]

I'd love to hear what the people who were working in his office at the time this was happening have to say! I mean, he is blaming everything on her/him/them, so wouldn't you just like to hear their side of all of this?

 

[TURBOTHINK]

J. Baez --- Delusional (and under investigation)
L. K. Baden --- Disgraceful (and rude) Needs someone to buy her a hairbrush
T. Macaluso --- Dishonest (and under investigation)
H. Lee --- Discredited (kicked off Spector trial)

How is this a "Dream" Team?

Scheme team or Nightmare, maybe.