Photographed unloading things from the Princess Kimberly yacht.

In other Rothstein news, you can read about Scott's new digs here.

Oh yeah -- I went back in the Wayback machine to RRA's old website -- for research of course.

It's a fun timekiller.

Wish me luck in court, kidzzzzzzz!

Stet Tin Report

So I was interested in seeing Judge Stettin's latest filing in bankruptcy court that details the finances at RRA.

You know, it's been a while since I've had a bankruptcy matter but I had completely forgotten how antiquated the CM/ECF system is over there.

It's like you're in a time warp and it's 1997 all over again.

Anyway, on page 5 the good Judge sets forth the salary structure at RRA for 2008 and through October 09, which the Sun-Sentinel also summarizes here:

Rothstein, chairman and CEO, pulled in $35.7 million in 2008 and $10.5 million up to Oct. 31 of this year.

Rosenfeldt, president and 50 percent partner, received more than $6 million in 2008 and $847,599 in the first 10 months of this year.

Russell Adler, vice president and name partner, was paid $888,318 last year and $853,666 through Oct. 31 this year.

Grant Smith, assistant managing shareholder, received $335,210 last year and $331,712 through October.

David Boden, general counsel, received compensation of $637,874 last year and $380,404 this year.

Given the current state of the firm’s books and records, Stettin wrote that it was impossible to establish the firm’s gross income.

Question -- Stu earned $6+ million in 08 as a fifty/fifty partner with Scott, who the same year earned nearly $36 million.

Huh? What did Stu think the revenues of the firm were? What did he think his earnings were based on -- or Scott's for that matter?

Adler, also a named partner but with no equity, took in around $800k both years, which is about all Stu had been earning for 09 thus far.

None of this makes any sense to me at all.

BTW, at 5 p.m. today the bankruptcy court will make an effort to join the 21st Century by migrating to new(er) CM/ECF system hardware.

In other words, Ervin is already getting results!

Actually, since our report yesterday Ervin has created a genuine Twitter account, though his tweets are protected -- just like he'll protect all of us when he becomes our next Bar President.

Glad we could be of service.

So I see from this Notice of Appearance that Stuart Rosenfeldt and Shawn L. Birken have formed a new form:

ROSENFELDT & BIRKEN, P.A.
1220 Riverland Road
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33312
Direct Dial: 954-990-4459
Fax: 954-990-4469

Congrats gentlemen!

Who else came with you? Details please.

This part of John Pacenti's DBR article this morning was interesting:

The government confirmed through its filing that RRA employees accepted large work-related bonuses shortly after being instructed to make large campaign contributions to political candidates.

“Such conduct was designed to conceal the true sources of the contribution and to illegally circumvent campaign finance laws,” according to the filing signed by Sloman and three assistant U.S. attorneys.

When asked about that yesterday, Stu (who still hasn't learned to keep his pupik shut) said the following:

Rothstein law partner Stuart Rosenfeldt gave $150,000 to political committees to support Republican Broward Sheriff Al Lamberti and Democratic challenger Scott Israel last year. On Tuesday, Rosenfeldt said that came from his money, but he declined to say whether Rothstein directed him to make the contributions.

``I'm not going to comment on that stuff,'' Rosenfeldt said. ``Scott ran the place like a rooster. I don't think it's prudent to answer. It was my money.''

Stu, if it's "not prudent to answer" than why are you talking to the press?

Also, why then answer with two potentially contradictory things -- Scott "ran the place like a rooster" but "[i]t was my money."

It's not hard to find out more about political contributions on these here tubes.

Here are Kim's 2008 federally-reported contributions (about $100k), and here are Russell Adler's contributions.

Hmm, Russ donated $124k to the McCain-Palin Victory 2008 (barf) on October 21, 2008, whereas Stu donated $57k to the McCain-Palin Victory 2008 a whole six days later, on October 28, 2008.

Earlier, Russ donated $80k to the McCain-Palin Victory 2008 on June 12, 2008, whereas Stu donated $140k to the McCain-Palin Victory 2008 a whole two weeks before that, on May 28, 2008.

(For those keeping a scorecard, big bad Scottie donated $37.5k to the McCain-Palin Victory 2008 on October 14, 2008, and another $70k back on May 2, 2008.)

It's nice when partners share the same political interests, right?

BTW, in the prior Presidential campaign cycle, back in 2004, Stu donated a sum total of $5k to all candidates and campaign committees (oy with this Friends of Connie Mack).

By comparison, Scott donated a whopping $7.5k back in 2004.

What a difference four years make.

So I took a look at this motion for sanctions filed against Whitney and Rothstein in the MD FL, which makes reference to this other Whitney case we talked about yesterday.

It's a fairly compelling document, laying out a long list of discovery hijinks allegedly perpetrated by Whitney and RRA in several cases filed by Whitney against various critics and detractors.

This part seems somewhat prescient:

48. If this Court does not take drastic measures, it is clear that Whitney and WIN, with the help of the Rothstein Firm, are going to continue to use the court system in bad faith to simply harass anyone who has the temerity to criticize Whitney or WIN. They will continue to repeat the pattern of causing their opponents to expend needless money on litigation, despite the fact that Whitney, WIN, and the Rothstein firm ultimately know that they have no plan to engage in discovery, and specifically no plan to allow Whitney’s deposition to take place.

49. In order to drive home the point – made a number of times before, but apparently never fully absorbed – that, if they want to sue someone, WIN and Whitney will have to engage in meaningful discovery, this Court should strike WIN and Whitney’s pleadings, dismiss the complaint filed by WIN and Whitney, and reserve jurisdiction to award attorney’s fees and costs.

50. Additionally, it seems clear at this point that the Rothstein Firm knows or should know that WIN and Whitney have no intent to engage in meaningful discovery in any case in which Whitney is subject to deposition. In addition to sanctioning WIN and Whitney, this Court should sanction the Rothstein Firm based on their pattern of badfaith conduct in furtherance of WIN ane Whitney’s untenable actions. As noted above, and as demonstrated by the voluminous exhibits to this motion, the Rothstein Firm has been just as responsible for problems conducting discovery as WIN and Whitney themselves. In at least three other cases, depositions appear to have been cancelled at the last minute without regard to procedure. At least two other attorneys and one pro se defendant have complained that the Rothstein Firm appeared to be operating in bad faith. The Rothstein Firm is acting as a mere extension of its client without regard for the law or the ethical constraints of practice. It is therefore appropriate that the Rothstein Firm or its successor entities be held jointly and severally liable for any sanctions ordered against WIN and Whitney.

Unfortunately, too often judges take it easy on litigants or their attorneys in federal court, reluctant to ruffle feathers or get in the weeds on questions of attorney misconduct in discovery matters. Or, if they do decide some sanction is appropriate, it rarely is directed at the attorney for a host of reasons.

In this case, Magistrate Judge Sheri Polster Chappell granted the motion in part, compelling the delayed depositions, but denied as to sanctions against Rothstein or his client, even though she agreed that there was "some dilatory conduct, but not conduct sufficient to rise to the level of bad faith."

Don't worry -- plenty of that came later.

Magistrate Judge Rosenbaum jailed him.

Bob Norman as usual is ahead of everybody else and has a story that refers to Scott's delay tactics in a suit Rothstein brought on behalf of infomercial king Russ Whitney.

From what I can tell, it appears that Scott was filing SLAPP suits on behalf of Whitney against various critics and naysayers, including pro se defendant John Reed.

Scott went after Reed in a few suits filed in federal court here in Miami (Judge Seitz transferred the latter-filed one to Judge Marra, who sent them both up to the Middle District where a suit against Reed was already pending).

The Middle District docket is a hoot. The number of delays sought by Whitney -- often on an emergency basis -- is staggering, as are the reasons proffered.

My favorite is this emergency motion seeking to put off depositions of the defendant yet again because Scott was once sick, but now is well, and simply has to go on a European cruise with 18 of his closest friends, depos be damned:

3. On June 15, 2005, lead counsel, Scott Rothstein was undergoing medical procedures and was unable to be available for the conference. As this Court has been previously informed, Mr. Rothstein was suffering from a potentially significant health condition necessitating immediate medical intervention.

4. The depositions are currently set for July 5, 7 and 8, 2005, by agreement.

5. Mr. Rothstein was not medically cleared to travel until Monday, June 27, 2005.

6. Over a year ago, Mr. Rothstein purchased non-refundable tickets for a cruise which departs from Rome on July 1, 2005, for which he was scheduled to leave the country on July 29, 2005 at 3:00 PM, that will keep him out of the country until July 14, 2005. Mr. Rothstein was not going to travel because of his medical condition, but is now cleared to travel. Mr. Rothstein has not taken a vacation for more than a few days in over three years and it would be in his best interest healthwise to travel on the trip.

7. Additionally, Mr. Rothstein would be traveling with eighteen (18) of his friends with whom this special vacation was planned, and Mr. Rothstein was the person that principally coordinated the vacation, and the activities at each of the destinations, and will be acting as host on board the ship for all of his guests.

8. Upon learning of the conflict, the remaining attorneys working on the above styled action were preparing to cover the depositions in Mr. Rothstein’s absence.

9. Plaintiff, Whitney, was out of the country until this week and was not reachable until June 27, 2005. Upon returning, without waiving any attorney/client privilege, Mr. Whitney demanded that Mr. Rothstein represent him, stating that he was hired to represent him and that he would not allow anyone else from the undersigned firm to appear on his behalf at something so important as these depositions. This has placed Mr. Rothstein between a rock and a hard place. If the brief continuance is not granted, Mr. Rothstein will either appear at the depositions or lose an important client damaging his law firm. If he appears, he will lose all of the money for the trip, flights and hotels.

10. Mr. Rothstein is the CEO and senior shareholder of undersigned’s law firm, and has earned an excellent reputation as a trial attorney. Thus, Mr. Whitney hired Mr. Rothstein specifically with the understanding that it would be Mr. Rothstein that handled the most important portions of this litigation.

Can you believe this was actually submitted to a federal judge? On an emergency basis?

Reed's pro se response to an earlier but equally ridiculous "emergency" motion for a postponement of an evidentiary hearing, which lays out the improbable series of delays throughout the litigation due to illness, travel, and just about everything else, is here.

BTW, Judge Frazier denied Scott's illness/cruise emergency motion (D.E. 128):

The Court has continued matters in this case twice before at the request of Plaintiffs' counsel and will not continue these matters a third time. The request to continue depositions was untimely. The depositions currently set for July 5, 7, and 8, 2005 will go forward.

The parties settled on confidential terms shortly thereafter.

Maybe the best part of this story is that Rothstein was apparently counsel for the cruise line and presumably could have changed the date if he really needed to?

I don't know about you, but it feels pretty good to go a whole day without any significant developments in the Scott Rothstein saga.

Best I can tell, all that happened today is Scott was officially disbarred, and the feds amended their forfeiture petition to add a few more properties. And a few days ago the Palm Beach Post questioned Scott's enablers.

Weird that I have not heard of more announcements of where former RRA attorneys are landing. Anyone with info please feel free to email me directly.

Sheesh it feels quiet around town today. Where is everybody?

There was an amended complaint filed a short while ago in the Rothstein forfeiture proceedings, you can see the Sun-Sentinel article here.

The docket is here and the amended complaint is here.

It's a pretty amazing list of crap if you take the time to absorb it all. Aside from the cars, houses, boats etc., there's also a 10 to 20 grand "guitar collection,"16 DuPont lighters, tens of thousands of AMEX gift cards, and a partridge in a pear tree.

Paragraph 14 is instructive:

In one year, prosecutors wrote, the Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler law firm brought in just $8 million but salaries for the workforce were $18 million. "The additional $10 million for salaries, as well as the other expenses for operation of the law firm, came from the operation of, and the funds generated , by the 'Ponzi' scheme," according to documents filed by Assistant U.S. Attorney Alison Lehr and Taryn Guariglia, an IRS special agent.

So folks at the firm were paid from allegedly stolen funds?

Also, how is it possible a seventy-lawyer firm could only bring in $8 million in revenues? What kind of business model is that?

Hi kids, it's a short week and we have lots to do so let's see what is going on in the world:

Rothstein may have had extraordinarily bad taste but his partner in crime is worse:

The other was the late Stuart Rado, a consumer watchdog who died of cancer before the Classic Motor Carriages sentencing in 1999.

Rado’s estate attorney said in a statement that GGL’s tactics included “silencing” its critics and filing two lawsuits against Rado, even though the company knew Rado was dying of cancer.

Nice. Who was the lawyer who did what George Levin asked and sued a dying man for attorney's fees?

My favorite comment from the weekend was this Sarah Palin fan waiting in line at a book signing, who said this about President Obama:

“He isn’t governing, he’s still campaigning,” said Joe Miller, a lab technician who had taken a vacation day to wait in line Thursday at a Meijer superstore in Fort Wayne.

Joe, you realize that the person you have been waiting all day for actually quit governing in order to make a lot of money, go on a megabook tour, and campaign for 2012?

Sigh -- my head hurts.

What else -- the BigLaw biz sucks:

Among the top 75 law firms, 15 had reductions of more than 100 lawyers. Of the top 50, seven cut more than 200 attorneys. The firm with the largest percentage decrease was No. 95 Fried Frank Harris Shriver & Jacobson, which declined by 26.4 percent to 468 attorneys from 636 in 2008. Last year, the firm held the No. 58 slot in the rankings.

I've heard more unconfirmed reports, so anyone with more information please drop me a line.

Do you care that Judge Marra ruled on a motion to dismiss or that the 11th affirmed Judge Altonaga? No, you just want more and more Rothstein.

What about the fact that Stu Rosenfeldt, under investigation by the Florida Bar, was just named one of Broward's "leaders of the year":

Rosenfeldt formed a new firm with attorney Shawn Birken. He said he’d like to avoid being dragged into the legal morass his law partner created, but to some extent he knows he will be.

“I didn’t plan it this way,’’ he said. “ … I guess you just have to follow the path that life leads you. … God has a plan. Hopefully He’ll show it to me.’’

Oh boy.

I think I liked "Clueless Stu" better.

To paraphrase Mark Harris, it seems that Scott Rothstein continues to rule our world.

Here's the latest:

1. Bill Scherer sues the firm he used to retain for collection matters.

Marc Nurik's reaction -- "This is the first I'm hearing of it."

(Check out the email Bob Norman dredged up).

2. Judge Stettin says October was a banner month for the firm, with hundreds of millions moving through RRA accounts.

3. RRA is down from 167 employees to 14.

Who are the lucky ones, those that are gone or those that are still there?

(I hope Brianne Strohsahl has found a nice new home).

4. Romina Sifuentes has not yet "friended" me on Facebook.

Is that any way to start a relationship?

But that's ok.

I've decided to employ these dating tips from 'Mad Men' (note, I am not making this up):

Keep heavy (borderline uncomfortable) eye contact. Speak when only there is little alternative. Learn to say things that are vague. Answer a woman’s question with a question. Make every action deliberate and noticeable, almost in slow motion. Talk in short sentences. Don’t say too much. Don’t give away too much.

Right -- there's no better way to a woman's heart than to act like a brooding, moody psychotic.

Cigar lovers, take note -- Tatuaje, a brand rolled here in Miami and named the hottest cigar in America, has settled its trademark suit with the makers of Montecristo over its use of the fleur-de-lis.

The suit was pending before Judge Moreno and you can read the complaint here.

Speaking of which, another day another $300 million South Florida tobacco verdict.

Well kids, it's that time again and I have some afternoon windsurfing ahead of me to kickstart my weekend.

Remember kids to put a little alcohol on your lips, keep your mishpucha away from this Rabbi, and if you are collecting disability benefits stay the hail off of TV.

Money never sleeps KIDZZZZ

Remember that post from Friday which detailed efforts by RRA lawyers Steve Lippman and Riley Cirulnick to get an emergency enlargement of upcoming deadlines in a matter pending before Judge Cooke?

If you'll recall, Matthew S. Nelles at Ruden McClosky opposed the requested enlargement, basically arguing that the discovery deadlines date back to April and the RRA lawyers were dilatory in a number of respects and should have completed the discovery well before the whole Scott Rothstein stuff broke.

(Matt, if I missed something please feel free to chime in).

Well here comes the reply, filed Monday, which provides further insight into the difficulties faced by the RRA lawyers still at that firm trying to service clients:

GFM is accurate that ACE/Mr. Bennett/Ebway's counsel was "incommunicado" for the period their firm was undergoing this upheaval. Response at p.1. This is precisely why the extensions sought are appropriate. A receiver was appointed and questions about what counsel could and could not do had to be addressed. The computers were down; no email, no word processing, no research capability. Counsel are looking for new homes and making arrangements to move there. The short extensions sought under these circumstances are more than justified.

In a footnote these lawyers also note that Monday, the day of this filing, RRA's "entire computer system (including emails and phone) were disabled for approximately 2-3 hours."

Incidentally, it looks from the certificate of service that Steve and Riley landed or are landing over at Arthur Rice's firm.

Good luck fellas.

Oh, I almost forgot -- I managed to unearth a rare photograph of me taken with Scott and Kim Rothstein at an event we all attended last year.

Enjoy!

UPDATE -- Judge Cooke granted and denied the motion in part. She granted the enlargement as to the summary judgment deadline, but agreed with Matt as to the discovery deadlines, finding no causal relationship between the Scott Rothstein fiasco and failing to complete discovery within the court-ordered deadlines.

Happy Monday campers.

Sad news as retired Judge Leonard Rivkind passed away Saturday. I think it's fair to say everyone has a Judge Rivkind story, and they are all positive. He touched many of us by being a smart, caring, compassionate judge, who will be dearly missed. Services will be at 11 a.m this morning at Riverside on Alton.

It was interesting to see the architect of RRA's crisis management team, Charles Jones, hold forth on the media strategy he crafted (in today's SFBJ but for some reason I can't find a link):

The team opened "constant communications" between Rosenfeldt and the media -- from influential bloggers to The Wall Street Journal -- promising exclusives to no one, and saying nothing "off the record," Jones said. The goal was to nip rumors, and "present an atmosphere of transparency."

I previously described Stu's approach as one of transparency, but wasn't very sure it was working well.

Indeed, it appears it was Jones' idea to give the grand tour of Scott's lair:

"Many people asked how is it possible that the attorneys didn't know about Mr. Rothstein's alleged activities?'' said spokesman Charles Jones. "We attempted to describe how Mr. Rothstein walled himself off from the firm. We believed the only way to get that message through was to show the layout of the office and the security system.''

Many people -- including myself -- questioned this approach.

It's interesting that after Stu's muddled comments back on November 5, he has been quiet in terms of the media, and it appears the "transparency" strategy has been retired in favor of a "lawyer up and stay silent" approach.

And let me say this -- if I start writing emails like this or start behaving like this, you have full authority to remove me from any positions of authority:

His sartorial choices, for starters, drew attention: alligator shoes; hand-painted ties, including one that resembled a pepperoni pizza, and dyed-orange Ostrich-skinned boots, colleagues say.

Ronald Cacciatore, who used to work for Mr. Rothstein as a private investigator, says he bumped into the attorney this year wearing a dark suit "with bright gold pinstripes as thick as my pinkie." The attorney, he says, was flocked by a driver and security guards. "He grabbed me and kissed me on both cheeks," Mr. Cacciatore says.

The stocky, 5-foot-6-inch lawyer was routinely spotted at his Fort Lauderdale haunts such as Ultimate Cigars, where he smoked $40 Padron Aniversario Nicaraguan cigars, according to the shop's owner. He would pull up in anything from a Bentley to a Rolls Royce to a blue Bugatti Veyron, which retails for more than $1.5 million.

Colleagues say they alternately recoiled from and reveled in Mr. Rothstein's exploits. The attorney was often the life of the party, picking up the tab for elaborate bashes, and playing piano and singing for his guests, according to partygoers. At one party, Mr. Rothstein set up a 20-foot long ice bar at his house, with a giant ice sculpture of the law firm's "RRA" slogan, embedded with purple lighting, says Mr. Sharp, the former attorney at the firm. "Waiters were walking around with shrimp as big as your head," he says.

Depends on the head, right?

Well it's been an eventful week in the South Florida law biz, and those of you who do not yet have "Rothstein fatigue" soon will before this is all done.

If you've wondered what it must be like to be a lawyer trying to service clients in that s*@tstorm, take a look at this emergency motion for enlargement filed by Steve Lippman and Riley Cirulnick in the case I covered earlier (in which lead counsel is none other than Scott W. Rothstein).

These poor schnooks have all kinds of deadlines coming up, and basically just throw themselves on the mercy of Judge Cooke:

3. On November 3, 2009, a receiver was appointed for Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler (“RRA”), counsel for plaintiffs and third-party defendant, due to its dire financial condition. Additionally, a search by law enforcement shut down RRA’s computers for 3 days last week. RRA’s account with Westlaw has been suspended, thus making any legal research a difficult task. Numerous personnel have already left RRA and it is anticipated that additional employees will depart in the near future.

4. Despite these obstacles, the undersigned attorneys remain working and have continued to diligently attempt to represent their clients, including the plaintiffs and Ebway in this action, to the best of their ability despite these incredible unforeseen circumstances. It is anticipated that counsel will have to relocate their practice in the immediate future on an expedited basis. In light of these factors, it is simply impractical to comply with the present deadlines. The depositions which remain to be completed require travel to Michigan. Plaintiffs and third-party defendant have sought to schedule the depositions they desire to take within the existing discovery deadline but GFM refuses to schedule those depositions because GFM personnel are out of town on a business trip during the days requested (which are the only days left before the deadline to do so). Alternatively, plaintiffs and third party defendant have proposed a schedule (also taking into account the upcoming Thanksgiving holiday) to complete the remaining depositions that all of the parties desire to take and to provide additional information requested in GFM Corporation’s Motion to Strike Expert Witness for Failure to Comply With Disclosure Requirements [D.E. 140]. GFM’s counsel has expressed a willingness to accept this proposed schedule, but to do so would require an extension of the discovery deadline until December 4, 2009. For these reasons, it is respectfully requested (with humility and a plea for compassion) that this Court enlarge the time through and including November 23, 2009, to response to the Motion for Summary Judgment and until December 4, 2009, to complete discovery.

It's pretty incredible that under these circumstances opposing counsel did not readily agree to this request or something like it.

Kids, your assignment this weekend is to be kind to others, try not to lie through your teeth, and don't be such an ostentatious jackarse if you can avoid it.

Me I'm heading out early to windsurf and thank my blessings.

And my interview request is pending (flirtatious emails are always a nice way to start btw).

As usual I'm excited by new technology, plan to make lots of eye contact, and am thrilled that curves are finally in.

And remember -- there are right and wrong ways to give back and if your way involves a huge oversized check and some blowout party at Bova Prime you probably ought to reconsider.

Have a great weekend everybody!

Mike's an excellent photographer and we wish him well and hope he lands on his feet.

That's just wrong wrong wrong.

You know, I've been trying to stay away from Rothstein for a least a post or two, and had every intention to do a 3d DCA Watch now that the opinions are up, but these allegedly fake orders in the Ted Morse lawsuit are just too delicious to pass up.

Brittany Wallman of the Sun-Sentinel has the story here:

The Sun Sentinel Wednesday obtained copies of the fake court orders Morse says he was given, allegedly by Rothstein. They bear the forged signatures of two federal judges, U.S. District Judge Kenneth Marra, and U.S. Appellate Court Judge Susan H. Black. One of the documents threatened Morse into silence with a "strict" confidentiality order, even as he grew increasingly suspicious.

The documents Rothstein gave Morse bear no case numbers, and are instead marked "Under Seal.''

The first, with a fake Marra signature, said the kitchen designer was liable to Morse for "punitive damages for fraud,'' and owed Morse $23 million. It said the designer had illegally moved millions to the Cayman Islands, but that Rothstein "has facilitated the contact between the relative governments,'' and that the money would be returned to the U.S.

The faked order demanded that Morse "deposit to their attorney's trust account the sum of $15 million no later than 10:00 a.m. tomorrow morning, the 20th day of March, 2009'' as a bond to secure the funds. "If such funds are not so posted,'' it went on, "this order shall be null and void. …''

The order said that Morse would have his $15 million returned, and also would be reimbursed payments he'd made to Rothstein of $15 million, $4.1 million and $18.5 million. That totals $52.6 million, but Pozzuoli said "it appears [Morse] posted $57 million total.''

Along with the faked Marra order came a 15-page confidentiality order, which Morse and others with knowledge of the case were told to sign. It warned that if anyone talked about the case, ever, they'd face "severe consequences … including … civil and criminal penalties'' and that Morse could only discuss the case with Rothstein. Breaches would be punished by "damages of $1 million per each incident of disclosure'' as well as possible additional damages and criminal charges, it said.

In the subsequent few months, Morse got some of his money back, the lawyers say, though they wouldn't say how much.

Let's look closely at the purported Judge Marra order.

1. There's no case number.
2. An interior decorating dispute yet Rothstein allegedly obtains a $2 million judgment.
3. "Punitive damages for fraud" to the tune of $21 million.
4. Rothstein allegedly gilds the lily with repeated references to how "clear and convincing" his evidence and presentation was.
5. A "contempt of counsel" award and Rule 11 sanctions too (where's the 28 USC Section 1927 award as well??)
6. Jones somehow waived her right of appeal "based on the doctrine of fraud in the inducement" and "unclean hands"?
7. This is friggin' loony tunes.

Jordana Mishory lays out the forfeiture complaint filed against Scott Rothstein in today's DBR:

Prosecutors said they had probable cause to believe the properties “were acquired in connection with a Ponzi scheme conducted by attorney Scott Rothstein ... and others,” the complaint said. It was filed at the end of a day after federal agents seized Rothstein’s yacht, cars and other possessions.

In the first court document laying out the direction prosecutors are heading, the complaint said Rothstein solicited investors for falsified structured settlements. The civil complaint lays out federal authority by alleging wire transfers crossed state lines and the investment vehicles were offered nationally.

Reading the complaint, it seems implausible Rothstein could generate false wire transfer receipts and other documents all by himself:

"Further, as a fraudulent inducement to investors, Rothstein and co-conspirators falsified documents which were present to investors as proof that certain some of money were contained in those bank accounts when, in fact, the bank accounts did not contain the funds."

Indeed, at several times the complaint makes reference to Rothstein "and others" who executed the alleged Ponzi scheme. Notably, the complaint alleges that the victims were instructed to wire monies to the RRA trust account.

The complaint seems at odds with Marc's comments to the SFBJ yesterday, where he asserted that the seizures were just a routine effort to preserve assets:

He said seizures of Rothstein’s cars and boats were only done to preserve the assets, and do not mean the government has a strong case.

The Herald story David links to is not even a Ponzi scheme, it's just a straight-out alleged lawyer fraud, again difficult in my mind to execute without assistance:

Ed and Carol Morse -- who were family friends with Rothstein -- sued Boca Raton decorator Jan Jones in 2006 claiming he botched their job. Rothstein told the Morses earlier this year that they had won the breach-of-contract case and that the decorator owed them $23 million, sources said.

It wasn't true. In fact, the Morses lost the case.

Rothstein also produced purported federal court orders signed by a judge, saying the Morses could claim the judgment by seizing a Cayman Islands bank account belonging to the decorator, sources said.

There were no such court orders, nor any fat bank account, court records show.

To confiscate the money, the Fort Lauderdale lawyer allegedly told the Morses they had to post a bond 2 ½ times larger than the judgment, or $57 million, the sources said. The large amount was required as a guarantee in case bank officials confiscated the judgment from the wrong account, Rothstein told them.

So the couple wired the $57 million to Rothstein in installments earlier this year, the sources said. It is not clear whether Rothstein paid any of that money back.

Forged federal court orders? Is Scott that good with Wordperfect?

On top of everything else, after allegedly taking $57 million from the Morses, Rothstein apparently settled the suit and obligated the Morses to pay the decorator $800k(!), which naturally has not yet been satisfied either.

You know, by my count Scott has already given three interviews -- to the Herald, to Bob Norman, and to WSVN. He also briefly spoke with the DBR.

So I feel it's my turn.

Scott, if you are reading this, I'd like to conduct an interview.

Huh? Don't be such a narcissist.

It doesn't have to be an interview with you.

UPDATE: Bob Norman is reporting that -- solely according to Scott -- Judge Zloch's brother Chuck is one of Scott's three "best friends."

Not sure if that is good or bad (Ted Morse was another one).

So Marc Nurik agrees to a Herald interview of his client Scott Rothstein.

Scott says "I am sitting here smoking cigars with Marc.'' Rothstein says he's "doing pretty good."

Although Rothstein is allegedly cooperating with authorities, Marc denies over Rothstein's background laughter that Scott is talking to them:

Rothstein said Sunday he could not disclose his whereabouts because otherwise ``Marc will break my head.'' Rothstein then handed the telephone to his lawyer, Nurik, who said that, in fact, they had not been smoking cigars.

``He is under a lot of pressure,'' said Nurik, who had worked at Rothstein's law firm but stepped down to represent him. ``I don't want anybody to think he is having a good time.''

During the brief interview with Nurik, Rothstein could be heard heartily laughing in the background.

Nurik would not disclose Rothstein's whereabouts -- a Florida location that Nurik said he -- not federal authorities -- chose.

``I have him hidden,'' Nurik said. ``I'm not going to tell anybody where, including the government. I don't know where people are coming up with this stuff. I have been discussing his case with the government as any defense counsel would under these circumstances.

``I have been in contact with the government,'' Nurik said. ``My client is at an undisclosed location of my choosing and he is talking to no one but me. He hasn't even met with his family.''

Nurik declined to discuss the case, but added that Rothstein wanted to say goodbye.

``I'm doing really good,'' Rothstein said. ``Marc is a great lawyer, a great friend. We will speak when the time is right.''

Who thinks this interview helps?

Good thing Rothstein's Rabbi says everything is going to be ok.

But who is Scott's real Rabbi?