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!

Now way, and there's a perfectly good explanation:

"Despite disclosures by the bankruptcy trustee, at no time did my client make anywhere near $6 million,'' Lehr said.

Lehr declined to specify the exact salary, but said it's likely closer to the figure the court record cited for this year.

"When Rosenfeldt questionned earnings on his tax statements, he was told by Rothstein that this was phantom income through profits the firm was making buying and selling businesses with a hedge fund,'' Lehr said. "It is my understanding that all taxes were paid.''

Let me make sure I have this right -- "phantom income through profits that the firm was making buying and selling businesses with a hedge fund."

Dear lawyers of South Florida, many of whom are equity partners in a law practice -- WTF???

Can someone explain that or is the Ambien kicking in again?

Wow, what a weekend.

Lots of quotes to chew on:

"I don't know."

That's prosecutor Richard Scruggs, under questioning before Judge Butchko on his handling of the Pastor Smith case we wrote about last week. (The Judge suppressed two tape recordings, ruled that the conduct was "unprofessional" and even referenced Bill Clinton!)

“I don’t think he made us all look bad. I think he made lawyers wearing $5,000 suits and driving $500,000 cars look bad,” said David Markus, a Miami criminal defense attorney.

Ouch. Inestimable blogger extraordinare David Markus on you know who.

"People are going to do what they're going to do.''

Stu Rosenfeldt on the impending civil suits.

"Guess what? I'd like to make that."

Marc Nurik, on his client's alleged 2008 compensation of $35 million.

The house it leaks it needs a new top
When it rains it wets everything we got
The chimney fell down just the other day
But we're still a livin' so everything's okay.

Hank Williams Sr. as Luke the Drifter.

Welcome to Monday!

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?

Well I hope everyone had a warm, loving, and peaceful Thanksgiving, and is now fighting over deals at Walmart -- that HDTV screen will only be on sale for two more hours!

I wonder if any meaning can be derived by looking at who is representing who in the Rothstein saga.

We know Scottie has loyal Marc Nurik, who recently has been cracking jokes and alternately acting as Scott's public psychologist:

"He did something that, when you think about it, is kind of extraordinary. He goes away to a country that has no extradition treaty with the U.S., reportedly, allegedly has a lot of money at his disposal, and chooses to come back and deal with this … I think because beneath it all, and not withstanding all the things that have been said about him, I believe that he is truly a decent human being, not withstanding flaws. I really do believe he did it out of, a true decent emotion to try to deal with this.''

Again, I have no problem with a public rehabilitation strategy. I just think, in the absence of other positive facts, this strategy is way too premature.

Marc would have you believe at the same time he is denying that Scott is cooperating with the feds and singing like a bird, Rothstein nonetheless has returned to "make everything right." How does that square up?

Rothstein's bankruptcy lawyer is Hinshaw's Michael D. Seese.

I agree with Bob Norman that Bill Scherer's amended complaint is an interesting read but a bit of a mess.

It is 289 pages long and asserts 245 counts. To be honest it reads like a placeholder, an effort to "occupy the field" and get in front of the other civil suits coming down the pike. Somebody at some point definitely needs to edit that thing.

Let's see -- Bob Josefsberg is representing Banyon COO Frank J. Preve -- what could that mean?

Bruce Lehr is representing Big Stu, Fred Haddad has Russ Adler's back, and Neal Sonnett is representing Grant Smith.

Russ even recently appeared in court on behalf of former Judge Seidlin.

It's a small town, huh?

Well kids, it's that time again to give our thanks and blessings for another year.

I thought it pretty interesting that in years past Thanksgiving had both a "fasting" and "feasting" component.

Indeed, what does it say about us that everyone abandoned the "fast" part:

In the nearly 400 years since the first Thanksgiving, the holiday has come to mirror our transformation into a nation of gross overconsumption, but the New England colonists never intended for Thanksgiving to be a day of gluttony. They dished up restraint along with gratitude as a shared main course. What mattered most was not the feast itself, but the gathering together in thanks and praise for life’s most humble gifts. Perhaps this holiday season we could benefit from restoring a proper Thanksgiving balance between forbearance and indulgence.

Ben Kuehne has something to be thankful for, and so do we all. This is tremendous news, and what great timing!

David has more, including a statement from Ben, and you can see the order of dismissal here.

I hope some or all of you are giving something back this Thanksgiving, in a meaningful way.

And don't forget the powerful words of Johnny Carson:

Thanksgiving is an emotional holiday. People travel thousands of miles to be with people they only see once a year. And then discover once a year is way too often.

Enjoy the photographs, the bird and family, and have a peaceful and loving holiday weekend.

Ever wonder how Scott did in court?

You'll need a PACER account but it'll be worth it I promise ya kidzzzz:

Renato Watches:

Scott filed a few cases on behalf of his buddy, Ovadia "Ovi" Levy, Scott's partner in Renato Watches.

One was a trademark case involving the "public face" of Renato Watches on ShopNBC, "Daniel Mink."

Another was a suit against a critic of Renato Watches, Howard Bernstein.

That complaint is here and is a fun read. God those watches seem dreadful (please don't sue!).

Both cases were voluntarily dismissed shortly after filing, indicating they either settled quickly or were "strike suits" and dropped after having (or not having) their intended effect.

Ultimate Cigars:

Scott represented Ultimate Cigars in a cybersquatting case that similarly ended quickly.

That, of course, was before Scott allegedly tried to trap his former client, according to what Bob Norman is reporting here.

Where are all those hush-hush sexual harassment and whistleblower cases that were bringing in all the big bucks?

Must be on Judge Marra's "secret" docket.

In other news, Richard Sharpstein drops a bombshell on Judge Stettin, you can read it (again) over at Bob Norman's blog here.

What the hail is going on in the world?

That's Scotty talking to the press again:

I had a couple of brief exchanges with Scott Rothstein today. Most of it I'll have to bleep out.

Suffice to say Rothstein had some ideas on what we could do in our spare time, rather than trying to interview his family members.

He was objecting to questions about his wife, Kimberly Ann Wendell Rothstein. She's been silent throughout this ordeal. Her bodyguard, Joe "Meatballs'' Alu (I got the nickname from his voice message), said she's a very private person, and doesn't want to talk. She is reportedly still living in the house on Isla Bahia, but federal authorities took the yacht, most of the cars, and even her jewelry, in the wake of accusations her husband was running a Ponzi scheme.

This part is intriguing:

“You’re in a town full of thieves, and at the end of the day, everyone will see. I’ll leave it at that.’’

Meanwhile, lobbyist-turned-Senator LeMieux just doesn't understand how Scotty made all that money he kept donating to the GOP:

"I’ve talked to him and know him," LeMieux, who ran a competing law firm, said last week. "I never understood how he was so successful, but I wasn’t the kind of person to try to pull down others. I just hope for the best and was always optimistic about him as I am about everybody and thought there must be some other way he is making his money."

I agree with the Senator -- case closed!

Kinda weird how Scotty got invited to the Senator's swearing-in ceremony. Some people are lucky I guess.

You want to see where some of the money went, take a look at Kim's $100k in political donations for 2008 (made under her maiden name) -- McCain/Palin, Senator Martinez, Rudy Giuliani....hey, what's Bill Richardson doing in there?

So I briefly nodded off as I was monitoring a deposition by phone this afternoon. That in and of itself is not unusual; what was strange was what happened next.

I found myself in the Moroccan desert, something out of The Sheltering Sky, except instead of Port and Kit Moresby or even John Malkovich and Debra Winger there was Scott and Kim and they looked really really weird and were with some old dude and they were trying to sell me bad acid.

That's the last time I have Ethiopian for lunch.

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

Ok, let's get Rothstein out of the way:

John Pacenti and the Herald report on how Scott allegedly bilked this investor just weeks before he took off for Morocco.

The purported "investment opportunity" is insultingly stupid:

The deal offered a return of eight percent per month for the following four months. It involved a purported lawsuit against California-based Dole, which Faulkner said had settled for $500 million in the face of accusations that it had overstated the percentage of pineapple in juices it sold to school districts.

So this is a secret whistleblower action -- possibly unfiled -- in which Dole forks over a half billion over mislabeling the content of its pineapple juice? And for some reason Dole wants to pay this half billion out over time?

In what imaginary world do cases like this exist?

But you know, the kids still got some juice and that's the important thing.

Oy what a goyisher kup.

But Scottie says he doesn't know this particular investor and I for one believe him:

"I keep seeing names on the Internet who were alleged investors of me and I have no idea who they are,'' Rothstein told The Herald on Thursday. "There are sublayers of people doing very, very bad things to people in my name, so we shall see.''

"Not that I didn't do something wrong, and I'm back here to fix it,'' he said. "I made a decision to come back from Morocco and do the right thing. I know people are laughing and saying he can't repay these people, and they are wrong.''

Marc, why is your client still giving interviews to the Herald?

Also Scott, people are not laughing over whether you can repay the investors -- there's plenty of other things about this fiasco to laugh about, believe me.

Alright, let's move on.

So two lawyers at Mayer Brown recently wrote about County of Nassau v. Hotels.com, where the 2d Circuit raised the issue of CAFA jurisdiction nostra sponte (take that, Latin nerds!) and remanded the case to the district court "to determine whether class certification is appropriate" in order to determine whether CAFA jurisdiction exists.

Sure we have Scott Rothstein and his lovely Tom James clothier Romina Sifuentes, but Louisiana has ED LA judge G. Thomas Porteous Jr.:

A federal judge from Louisiana who had run up big gambling debts routinely solicited money and gifts from lawyers with cases before his court, Congressional investigators said Tuesday as the House opened impeachment hearings in the judge’s case.

The judge, G. Thomas Porteous Jr. of Federal District Court, had more than $150,000 in credit card debt by 2000, mostly for cash advances spent in casinos, investigators said. Judge Porteous’s requests for cash became so frequent that one New Orleans lawyer said he started trying to dodge the judge.

“He began to use excuses that he needed it for tuition, he needed it for living expenses,” the lawyer, Robert Creely, told a House Judiciary Committee task force. “I would avoid him until I couldn’t avoid him anymore.”

Mr. Creely said he and his law partner, Jacob Amato, gave Judge Porteous an estimated $20,000 over about 10 years starting in the 1980s, usually in cash. That includes $2,000 stuffed in an envelope just before the judge decided a major civil case that earned their firm $500,000 to $1 million.

Can you imagine?

I love this comment by the judge's attorney:

The judge’s lawyer, Richard Westling, acknowledged that some of his client’s decisions “in the light of day, looking backward, might have been handled differently.”

“I think what you’ll find is that there has never been an argument that what happened in Judge Porteous’ courtroom was anything but fair,” Mr. Westling said.

In other words -- corrupt, but fair.

The Judge has an interesting argument on immunized testimony you can read about here.

Ok, let's get back to Romina, whose Facebook page is (currently) here.

You know, I buy suits from Tom James on occasion, yet my sales guy looks nothing like Romina.

Then again, my suits don't look anything like what Scott used to wear either.