In the wake of the scandalous $1.7 billion

Transcription

1 page 5: Young Lawyer T H E O L D E S T L A W J O U R N A L I N T H E U N I T E D S T A T E S philadelphia, THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011 Attorney Hit With $100K in Sanctions By shannon p. duffy U.S. Courthouse Correspondent A federal judge has imposed sanctions of more than $100,000 on attorney Wayne A. Schaible of McCann Schaible & Wall for causing a mistrial in February 2010 that derailed a multiweek trial of a wrongful death suit. McLaughlin U.S. District Judge Mary A. McLaughlin had ordered the sanctions in a May 2010 opinion in Ferguson v. Valero Energy Corp. that included no dollar figure, but instructed the defense team to submit its bills. Sanctions continues on 10 By shannon p. duffy U.S. Courthouse Correspondent In the wake of the scandalous $1.7 billion collapse of Diagnostic Ventures Inc., investors have won the right to pursue class action fraud claims against the firm s auditors at Deloitte & Touche, but lost their bid to bring class claims against lawyers from Clifford Chance. The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that the auditors were properly sued under a fraud-on-the-market theory for allegedly issuing clean audit reports that hid DVI s improper accounting practices. But the appellate court held that the same theory could not be used to sue the Clifford Chance lawyers for allegedly advising DVI to omit negative information from its public filings with the Securities & Exchange Commission because investors had no knowledge of the law firm s VOL 243 NO. 62 $5.00 Panel Rejects Class Action Against Clifford Chance alleged role in the fraud. Because plaintiffs do not contend Clifford Chance s alleged role in masterminding the fraudulent 10-Q was disclosed to the public, they cannot scirica invoke the presumption of reliance necessary to bring a fraud-on-the-market claim, Chief U.S. Circuit Judge Anthony J. Scirica wrote in his 58-page opinion in In re DVI Inc. Securities Litigation. The decision upholds the class certification rulings of U.S. District Judge Legrome D. Davis that had sparked appeals from both the plaintiffs and the auditors. Legally, the decision is significant because it promises to limit the potential liability of law firms in securities litigation by holding that a lawyer s advice to a corporation cannot be the basis of a class action fraud claim by investors who were never aware of the advice. Scirica, who was joined by 3rd Circuit Judge Thomas L. Ambro and visiting U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III of the Middle District of Pennsylvania, adopted the reasoning of the 2nd Circuit in rejecting similar claims against lawyers from Mayer Brown. In Pacific Investment Management Co. v. Refco, the 2nd Circuit held that Mayer Brown could not be sued by a class of investors for allegedly participating in the drafting and disseminating of Refco s fraudulent public filings. The 2nd Circuit panel held that the plaintiffs were asking for too broad a reading of the U.S. Supreme Court s 2008 decision in Stoneridge Investment Partners v. Scientific-Atlanta Inc. because nothing Class Action continues on 9 SEPTA Settles Trademark Infringement Suit Against Law Firm By Gina Passarella Of the Legal Staff SEPTA has settled its trademark infringement suit against personal injury firm Mednick Mezyk & Kredo over the firm s use of a SEPTA bus on its website, and the firm s phone number, 888-SEPTA-LAW. As part of the settlement, which is still awaiting signatures though the terms have been agreed upon, Mednick Mezyk will take down the website and change its phone number, the firm s attorney, Benjamin Leace of Ratner Prestia, said. In their place, the firm will create a new website, com, and use a new phone number, 855-BUSLAW1. The defendants believe they had the ability to keep using the website but felt that it was in the best interest of their business to get back to their business, Leace said. SEPTA has agreed to a transition period in which Mednick Mezyk can change over the website and phone number, he said. Jeffrey S. Pollack of Duane Morris represented SEPTA in the case and said his client s goals for the litigation were met. The settlement was good for our client, he said. It basically resolved the case on the terms we were seeking. They won t use the [Stylized S ] mark and the website comes down, so I think that our client is pleased with the result. As part of SEPTA s suit, the transit authority argued Mednick Mezyk had advertised in local papers using SEPTA s colors and trademarks. Pollack said the settlement also includes an agreement that the firm will no longer use any of SEPTA s trademarks, such as the SEPTA logo or stylized S. He said the agreement is finalized and is just awaiting signatures. Leace said there were no damages at issue in the settlement and no money SEPTA continues on 9 INSIDE THE LEGAL Experts & Services Classified Public Notices 13 Legal Listings 15 Postal ID on Page 8

2 2 THE LEGAL INTELLIGENCER THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011 VOL P PEOPLE IN THE NEWS Members of event sponsor Deeb Petrakis Blum & Murphy of Philadelphia gathered in front of the Dreams of Freedom exhibit at the National Museum of American Jewish History for the Arts and Business Council of Greater Philadelphia s private Business Backstage event March 10. Museum president and CEO Michael Rosenzweig welcomed guests and council volunteers before they enjoyed guided tours of the interactive exhibit on Independence Mall. Pictured, from left, are Arthur Armstrong and Frank Murphy of Deeb Patrakis; Rosenzweig; Karen Davis of the Arts and Business Council; and Stephen Frishberg, Inez Markovich, Joseph Blum and Colin Knisely of Deeb Petrakis. addition Teresa Gavigan has joined Blank Rome as of counsel in the employment, benefits and labor group and will be based in the Philadelphia office. Gavigan has more than 30 years experience in labor and employment law and human resources administration. She joins the firm from Sunoco where she most recently served as vice-president, human resources and administration for Sunoco Logistics. speakers Robert M. Cavalier, managing partner of Lucas & Cavalier, led a roundtable discussion titled Trends in Lawyers Professional Liability Due to a Deteriorating Economy. The presentation was made at the cavalier Council for Litigation Management s annual conference in New Orleans March 24. Daniel F. Ryan III, partner at O Brien & Ryan, recently spoke on the medical and legal issues of documentation at a seminar for health care professionals in Philadelphia. The presentation titled The Importance of Proper Documentation was addressed to residents, fellows and interns of multiple specialties from the Philadelphia area. Ryan discussed preventable causes for legal disputes involving the medical record and proactive steps to consider in order to avoid being drawn into litigation. announcements Levy Baldante has moved its New Jersey offices to 89 Haddon Ave., Suite D, Haddonfield, N.J. It has retained its phone number from its previous location. Each year, Community Legal Services of Philadelphia publishes a case law outline of Disability Under the Social Security Act, with emphasis on the 3rd District. For more information, call Richard Weishaupt at or rweishaupt@clsphila.org. All potential items for People in the News should be addressed to Stephanie Baum at The Legal Intelligencer, 1617 JFK Boulevard, Suite 1750, Phila., PA Fax: , sbaum@alm.com

3 VOL P THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011 THE LEGAL INTELLIGENCER 3 regional News N.J. Justices Asked: Can a Judge Change His Mind? By Michael Booth New Jersey Law Journal It s said that intelligence allows for a change of mind, but a judge who rethought and reversed his own summary judgment ruling after hearing new evidence has caused consternation enough to demand the state Supreme Court s intervention. At issue, in Lombardi v. Masso, argued Monday, is whether Burlington County, N.J., Judge Michael Hogan acted properly in dismissing claims against all but one defendant and then after a proof hearing on damages hauling them back into court a year later, saying the case was more complicated than he had thought. The Appellate Division held the law-ofthe-case doctrine didn t apply, since once the judge lost confidence in his own ruling, regardless of how he came to that epiphany, the overarching goal of the court rules the fair and efficient administration of justice warranted his acting on that uneasiness. At the court on Monday, that was some justices initial reaction, too. Why is that such a bad thing? asked Justice Roberto Rivera-Soto. The judge says, I think I made a mistake. I m going to reconsider. Andrew Luca, the attorney representing two of the dismissed defendants, said Hogan had other opportunities to reconsider his first decision and the dismissed defendants had rivera-soto albin rabner long since thought they were out of the case. Justice Barry Albin suggested the court was merely being asked to determine whether Hogan s initial grant of summary judgment was appropriate. Luca argued that the court should consider itself bound by the record that Hogan had before him when he first made his decision and not include evidence that came in later. Albin said the rulings below made it difficult to determine what record Hogan had and when he had it. Chief Justice Stuart Rabner asked what was unreliable about the information causing Hogan s change of mind. Luca said that at the damages hearing, he erroneously read transcripts of the remaining defendant s deposition testimony to reach Photos by Carmen Natale the conclusion that the dismissed defendants should be brought back into the case. Then we should disregard the extraneous material and give no deference to his ruling? Albin asked. That s correct, Luca replied. Albin asked why it was improper for Hogan to revisit his first decision. Because, Luca said, there was nothing that gave the judge pause when he first decided to grant summary judgment. There was not one item. Then he heard evidence that was never presented to him before when the dismissed defendants were not around, said Luca, of Mount Laurel, N.J. s Reger Rizzo & Darnall. In the suit, Debra Ann Lombardi, a buyer N.J. High Court continues on 8 3rd Circuit Privilege Ruling Worries Defense Attorneys By Sue Reisinger Corporate Counsel Corporate executives may need to be more careful about what they say to outside counsel during internal company probes. And they ll want to make sure that the lawyers they talk to are representing them personally, and not just their company. That s the implication of a 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling last week in the case of Ian Norris, one-time CEO of the Morgan Crucible Co. in the United Kingdom. At trial in federal district court in Philadelphia last July federal prosecutors were able to use the company s outside counsel as a witness against Norris. The company was accused of price-fixing, and Norris was convicted of obstruction of justice in trying to cover it up. Norris had argued that he believed the outside counsel, Sutton Keany, was representing him as well as the company. But the government insisted that Keany s client was only the company, which had waived privilege. The district court had applied a five-part test to determine that Keany was not representing Norris at the time of their discussions. The appeals court quickly dismissed 3rd Circuit continues on 8 PARTNERS, SENIOR ATTORNEYS AND PRACTICE GROUPS WHAT CAN YOU OFFER A SUBURBAN FIRM? WHAT CAN THEY OFFER YOU? MORGAN WENTWORTH, LLC. IS ACTIVELY WORKING TO ASSIST THE MAJOR SUBURBAN LAW FIRMS IN MAINTAINING AND GROWING THEIR FIRMS. YOU CAN JOIN THE EXCITEMENT WHILE REALIZING THE SAME GROWTH AND ADVANCEMENT FOR YOUR CAREER GOALS AND YOUR VALUED CLIENTS IMMEDIATELY SOUGHT ARE PARTNERS IN THE AREAS OF: TAX. TRANSACTIONAL and CORPORATE ELDER LAW HEALTH CARE ESTATE PLANNING ENVIRONMENTAL COMMERCIAL LITIGATION INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OTHER AREAS OF LAW WILL BE CONSIDERED AS SYNERGIES EXIST CALL PATRICIA IN STRICTEST CONFIDENCE TO DISCUSS YOUR NEXT STEP PATMOSESSO@MORGANWENTWORTH.COM

4 4 THE LEGAL INTELLIGENCER THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011 VOL P NATIONAL NEWS Sting Operation Focus of Dismissal Motions By Mike Scarcella The National Law Journal Criminal defense lawyers representing a group of weapons dealers in a foreign bribery prosecution in Washington want a federal judge to throw out the case over allegations the government crafted and closely scripted a conspiracy just to prosecute it. Attorneys in the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) case this month filed court papers urging Judge Richard Leon of Washington s federal trial court to dismiss charges that stem from a government undercover sting set up around the sale of $15 million in military and law enforcement equipment to Gabon. Leon is set to hear the defense motions, which also include claims of entrapment, on April 4 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The sting, which played out for more than two years, nabbed 22 executives in the arms industry last year. The U.S. Department of Justice s large-scale use of undercover techniques that are typically seen in drug investigations generated considerable attention in the white-collar criminal defense bar. Justice Department prosecutors allege that executives, agents and employees in the arms industry participated in a conspiracy to bribe a fictitious Gabonese official through an agent. Defense lawyers in the case contend most of the defendants didn t know each other and that the government manufactured a crime, intentionally obfuscating the terms of a transaction that appeared legitimate. The essence of a sting is you should make it crystal clear that it s an illegal deal, said Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe partner Michael Madigan in Washington, who represents a lawyer, John Godsey of Atlanta, who was Court Upholds Closed-Captioning During Redskins Games By Leigh Jones The National Law Journal Music blasted over the public address system during Washington Redskins games is part of the entertainment experience, and deaf fans should have access to the lyrics of those songs, a federal appeals court has ruled. The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Americans with Disabilities Act requires the team and the operators of FedEx Field to provide song lyrics and additional aural content of games for deaf fans. The March 25 decision upheld a lower court that granted summary judgment to the plaintiffs. At the same time, the court concluded that access to play-by-play coverage provided in the stadium concourse via the team s radio station, Red Zebra, was not required. The National Association of the Deaf sued in 2006 on behalf of three deaf or hearingimpaired fans. Shane Feldman, one of the plaintiffs, in 2003 requested that the operators provide captioning on the stadium Jumbotron for announcements made over Photo by Diego M. Radzinschi Madigan indicted in the sting. You have to make it clear that this is an illegal transaction and you can make some money in it. The government does exactly the opposite. Madigan and other defense attorneys in the case who joined various motions challenging the evidence said informant Richard Bistrong and his FBI handlers misled the arms dealers, saying time and again the deal was legal, including statements about State Department approval of the transaction. One of the defendants, Saul Mishkin, ran the deal by a lawyer, who advised the proposed sale could violate the FCPA, in addition to money laundering statutes. Bistrong, court papers show, was upset when Mishkin announced he was backing out of the deal and said he planned to tell others to abandon their involvement in the sale. Todd Foster, a Tampa, Fla.-based lawyer for a defendant named John Benson Wier III, said in court papers filed on March 7 that through a combination of threats, inducements and misrepresentations Bistrong persuaded Mishkin to abandon his plan to notify other suppliers about the illegality of the Gabon deal. OK, if you wanna go ahead and try to make this deal that I know is a good deal and that is a righteous deal, if you re gonna go ahead and try to infect that for me that s wrong, Bistrong told Mishkin on a recorded call that is evidence in the case. Bistrong said, according to court papers, that he had a severe problem with Mishkin and that you and I can get really sideways with each other and I don t wanna do that the public address system. According to the appeals court decision, the defendants balked because doing so would take up too much room on the screen. After the lawsuit was filed, the stadium operators began captioning much of the content on light-emitting ribbon boards. The defendants argued that because they had begun providing captioning, the issue was moot. But the appellate court agreed with the district court that even though the stadium had provided an accommodation, the dispute remained live because the defendants could readily stop providing the service. The court also agreed that song lyrics were an important part of the football experience, even though the plaintiffs had waited to raise that argument until filing summary judgment papers. By having access to the lyrics, plaintiffs have the opportunity to participate in the communal entertainment experience, the court said in a 2-1 decision. Without access to lyrics played, for example, during cheerleader dance routines and the halftime show, plaintiffs would not fully and equally experience the planned and synchronized given how much we work with each [other]. Foster, a name partner at Cohen Foster & Romine, said Bistrong inserted himself between Mishkin and his attorneys, lied to Mishkin and threatened him, all in a successful effort to preclude the other defendants from learning the truth. AN ACTUAL FOREIGN OFFICIAL Drinker Biddle & Reath partner Charles Leeper, in his own filing of March 9, said the FCPA prohibits an offer or payment made to an actual foreign official to obtain a business advantage. The history of the FCPA reinforces the common-sense conclusion that in order to know that money will be passed through an intermediary to a foreign official, an actual foreign official must be shown to have been involved, Leeper said. The FCPA, Leeper said in urging Leon to dismiss the case, does not criminalize attempts to bribe foreign officials. A Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment about the litigation. But Justice attorneys, including Laura Perkins of the fraud section and Assistant U.S. Attorney Matthew Solomon, said in court papers filed on March 17 that the arms dealers readily agreed to participate in the corrupt deal. The defendants did not question the payment to the government official, decline to participate because the deal involved a corrupt payment or otherwise balk at the terms of the deal, DOJ lawyers said. Nor did they register hesitation or express surprise. The executives and employees, prosecutors alleged, produced price quotations and invoices containing a hidden commission for a person who was splitting part of the fee with the fictitious Gabonese official. The evidence of an illegal deal, prosecutors Sting continues on 8 promotional entertainment that large stadiums like FedEx Field provide. Washington Redskins General Counsel Dave Donovan said that his clients and the stadium owners already were complying with the decision. He said that they were providing, through s, typed lyrics to songs performed by the cheerleaders. Truth be told, this has only been about attorney s fees. For years the plaintiffs firms managed to keep it alive, Donovan said. Joseph Espo, who represented the plaintiffs, said that his clients had tried to settle the case many times and that the attorney fees, which were in the low six figures, were a result of the defendants unwillingess to settle. It completely distorts reality to say that we are the ones who drove the fees, Espo said. The decision is a great day for deaf sports fans and reaffirms the obligation of the owners and operators of sports venues to make sure their product is accessible to all of their customers. Leigh Jones is a reporter for The National Law Journal, a Legal affiliate based in New York. Job Discrimination Hits Low-Income Women Hardest, Study Shows By Karen Sloan The National Law Journal Discrimination lawsuits brought by working professionals tend to draw public attention, but it s low-wage workers who suffer the harshest consequences in those circumstances, according to a report by the Center for WorkLife Law at University of California Hastings College of the Law. The report, titled Poor, Pregnant, and Fired: Caregiver Discrimination Against Low-Wage Workers, analyzes 50 workplace discrimination lawsuits most resolved during the past five years brought by low-wage workers. It highlights ways in which employers violate workers rights. Author Stephanie Bornstein, deputy director of the center, said that low-wage breadwinners often face more caregiver demands from children and older family members, but often have less social support in part, because they are more likely to be single parents. Caregiver discrimination lawsuits brought by low-wage workers document clearly that work-family conflict is not just a professional women s problem, Bornstein said. In fact, it s most acute and extreme for low-income families. To help move families out of poverty, we can t just focus on fixing the worker. We also need to look at how caregiver discrimination in low-wage jobs undercuts economic stability. The report concludes that women transitioning out of the welfare system into the workforce often are caught in a cycle of entry-level employment because they lose jobs as a result of family responsibilities. This underscores the fact that we need to look at the jobs themselves, not just the job-readiness of those coming out of the welfare system, Bornstein said. Among the problems low-wage workers face is that their jobs often come with too few hours, leading them to juggle multiple jobs. Those jobs can come with unpredictable or inflexible schedules. Not only that, low-income families are less likely to have access to paid sick days or unpaid family or medical leave, the report concludes. Private employers are not required to provide sick days or vacations, except in San Francisco, Milwaukee and Washington. Companies put themselves at financial risk when they maintain policies that violate workplace laws, the report warns. Caregiver discrimination lawsuits have a higher success rate than overall employment discrimination suits, and the average verdict awarded among cases the center analyzed was $500,000. Those cases included that of a worker at an aerospace parts company who received a $761,279 settlement after he was fired as a result of absences to care for his son, who has AIDS. A housekeeper was Discrimination continues on 8

5 VOL P THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011 THE LEGAL INTELLIGENCER 5 By Maurice Zilber The Recorder Are Young Teaching the Practical Business Aspects of the Legal Profession Maurice Zilber is an adjunct professor at Golden Gate University School of Law and a fulltime arbitrator and mediator, as well as managing director of Maurice L. Zilber & Associates, a management consultancy for professional firms. He may be contacted at mlzee@earthlink.net or through your students using anything that you taught them? This not-so-innocent question from a reporter set me wondering. I had no good answer for her. I had heard from time to time from a few students asking for references, and I occasionally saw a student from the year before in the halls, but I really didn t have a clue whether the 16 weeks we had spent together had any real impact on their professional lives. After a successful career as a business lawyer and a commercial arbitrator, I decided to give back to the profession by bringing my experience and wisdom to the classroom to prepare the next generation of lawyers for the business challenges they would face as they entered practice. I began my career as an adjunct professor eight years ago, co-teaching a course on business planning at Golden Gate University School of Law with a tenured professor who was an arbitrator colleague. While the students, particularly the night students, were bright and interested, there was a very low likelihood that they would begin practice in one of the large firms in town; those firms tended to look to UC-Berkeley, Stanford, Hastings, Harvard and other socalled tier one schools for their associates. What these students could use was a course that taught them about going solo or forming a small partnership with friends. Even if they did join a firm, their knowledge of the business aspects of practice would give them a leg up. So, six years ago, with the blessing of the dean and the curriculum committee, I started a course titled The Business of the Practice of Law. Much of what I taught was based on my more than 20 years in the management of my old firm in Boston, seven of them as managing partner. Students are divided into teams of two to four, depending on the number in the class in any given year. Half of their grade is based on team projects and half on individual effort. Students, among other things, individually, keep time sheets and a journal, and prepare a resume and life plan. As a team, they select an entity in which to practice, outline the provisions of a partnership agreement or shareholders agreement, and prepare a Lawyer client representation letter and a three-year business plan. Most students are third-year day or fourthyear evening students, but I have had some graduate students, as well as second-year day and third-year night students. All have had courses in professional responsibility and business organizations, but we cover many topics in professional responsibility as they naturally arise. In different years, I have had guest lecturers on marketing, space planning and technology, and most recently, I have had a life coach come at the beginning and end of the course to discuss values and life balance. To answer the reporter s question, I recently surveyed the students who have completed the course. Some students did not intend to practice law and are engaged in what they talked about in their life plan: government civil service, money management, human resources and political consulting. One entered a Master of Laws program after having been a contract attorney for an Am Law 100 firm. Two are assistant U.S. Students said the course gave them the confidence to go into practice, particularly the business plan exercise. y o u n g l a w y e r o n l i n e.co m attorneys, who expect to go into private practice in the future. One is in the Honors Program at the Justice Department. Two opened independent paralegal practices while waiting for bar passage; one of them is in a bankruptcy support firm, too busy at the moment to go into law practice. Three are working in medium and large firms in California and eight are in solo or two-person practices either by design or necessity. In addition, two students who did not respond to the survey have informed the school that one is in solo practice and one is with a large firm. Regardless of what they are doing, all said the course gave them the confidence to go into practice, particularly the business plan exercise. Many who are in practice say they consider most valuable the teaching about billing, retainers and when not to accept a client. Most kept their course books, and some have even referred to them. (I use Jay Foonberg s excellent book, How to Start and Build a Law Practice, Fifth Edition (ABA 2004), and the California Young Lawyer continues on 10 Third Annual In-House Counsel Conference The Doubletree Hotel 237 South Broad Street, Philadelphia, PA April 7, :30 am - 5 pm Followed by a Cocktail Reception Contact Chris Stewart, DELVACCA Administrator at delvacca@acc.com or The Third Annual In-House Conference features cutting-edge CLE programming exclusively designed by legal experts for in-house counsel. 10 Morning Break-Out Sessions 10 Afternoon Break-Out Sessions Breakfast/Lunch/Cocktail Reception Included Earn Up to 6 CLE Credits (PA, NJ and DE approved), including up to 4.5 Ethics Credits. New Member Orientation Members free Not a member? $295 includes 1 year membership to DELVACCA (and admission to conference) Outside Counsel: $1,000 For more information, please visit:

6 6 THE LEGAL INTELLIGENCER THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011 VOL P. 2158

7 VOL P THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011 THE LEGAL INTELLIGENCER 7 litigation Effective Client Reporting: A Lawyer s Best Friend Editor s note: This article describes hypothetical scenarios. By Seth L. Laver and Matthew G. Laver Special to the Legal Keeping your clients informed through effective reporting is the Golden Rule of malpractice risk management. Clients do not like bad results, but their willingness to live with a bad result, without suing you over it, is a product of their expectations. Effective reporting is your single best means of managing your clients expectations, and hence, your exposure to malpractice claims. Disappointing jury verdicts and failed transactions are not exclusively caused by attorney error. The uninformed client, however, may not see it that way. Malpractice often results from a client s uncontrolled expectations. While experienced lawyers are aware of the risks and uncertainty of the judicial process, the uninformed client is not. Absent timely and clear communication between lawyer and client, the client is left to create his own reality, which may never be achieved. All too often, a client suffers from apparent amnesia after lengthy conversations. All too often, something is lost in translation between client and attorney. It is this uninformed, detached client who is more likely to turn on his lawyer when something goes awry because he was not aware of the risks. Effective written communication between attorney and client is the safety net to avoid dire consequences. CASE STUDIES The following case studies reflect those instances that are seemingly benign, but resulted in legal malpractice lawsuits due to an attorney s failure to properly communicate with his client. The Initial Report You are retained to defend the interests of the president of a small investment company in a suit sounding in breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and conspiracy. Your client orchestrated the removal of a junior board member because of a perceived poor work performance. The ousted shareholder now alleges in his suit against his former employer and president that the termination was a violation of the company s corporate bylaws and was done in bad faith. After evaluating the underlying facts and allegations, you conclude that the tort claims should be dismissed under the gist of the action doctrine. You are so confident that this theory will result in the dismissal of these claims that you do not address the potential consequences and damages that could result from the tort claims in your initial written report to your client. One year later, the court has denied your client s preliminary objections and subsequently your client s motion for summary judgment. As a result, the tort counts remain at the time of trial. Following trial, Seth L. laver Matthew G. laver Seth L. Laver is a senior associate in the Philadelphia offices of Goldberg Segalla. He focuses his practice within business litigation on employment and labor law and professional liability defense, including the representation of lawyers, architects and particularly accountants. He can be reached at or slaver@goldbergsegalla.com. Matthew G. Laver is an associate with Weber Gallagher Simpson Stapleton Fires & Newby. He represents clients in general liability and professional liability matters. He can be reached at or mlaver@wglaw.com. a jury finds that your client breached his fiduciary duty and awards considerable damages. Your enraged client claims that he was never properly informed of the potential risks posed by the tort claims. Moreover, he suggests that you failed to take appropriate steps to defend these claims. According to your client, had he been informed of the possibility that the tort claims could eventually be in the hands of the jury, he would have negotiated a settlement months earlier. A malpractice suit follows. Analysis: In all likelihood, a well-developed, detailed initial report would have helped to prevent a malpractice suit. Good practice calls for an initial report discussing all pending counts and defenses, the relevant law, and an analysis of potential damages against your client. Despite confidence in a gist of the action defense, the lawyer should have addressed all possible scenarios so the client was in a position to make educated decisions regarding case strategy. Documenting Conversations with Clients, 1.0 You have been retained by a longtime client, a banking institution, to document a loan transaction between the bank and a local hardware store seeking to expand by opening a new store. At the request of the bank, you draft and circulate to all parties the loan documents, which include standard personal guaranties to be executed by the owners of the hardware store. You learn from the prospective borrowers, however, that they refuse to execute any personal guaranties. After some negotiations between the parties, it is your understanding that the personal guaranties are to be removed from the loan documents and you prepare a revised set of materials for execution. Months later the hardware store expansion proves to be a bust and the store defaults on the loan. In a declaratory judgment action initiated by the bank, the court determines that the individual owners of the store cannot be held personally liable to the bank because the executed loan documents lack personal guaranties. Next, your longtime client claims that it was not aware that the personal guaranties had been omitted from the loan documents and sues you for malpractice. Analysis: In this scenario a writing from lawyer to client, whether by or formal report, confirming that the loan documents had been altered could have avoided this outcome. It would appear that the lawyer assumed that his client was in the loop, when in fact the client was unaware of the legal ramifications of the revised loan documents. Although the client had an opportunity to read the loan documents prior to execution, it is the lawyer on the line because he did not take the precaution of confirming his understanding in writing to the client. Documenting Conversations with Clients, 2.0 You represent a plaintiff who files suit against his former father-in-law alleging breach of a partnership agreement. In the suit, your client alleges that he and the father of his exwife entered into an agreement to equally split any profit derived from flipping real estate. Your client located and managed the real estate while his former father-in-law provided the capital. When your client engaged in an extramarital affair and the marriage fell apart, his former father-in-law refused to provide him with the profits associated with several flipped properties. At a bench trial, you assert one legal theory: breach of a partnership agreement. You consider and discuss with your client potential avenues of recovery, including equitable principles, but opt to exclusively pursue the breach claim for strategic reasons, namely to simplify the claim. The court holds that no formal agreement was in place and that the business relationship was contingent upon your client s faithfulness, and hence marriage, to his daughter. In a published opinion, the court suggests that a claim of quantum meruit may have dramatically affected the outcome. In preparation for the defense of your legal malpractice case, you recall several conversations with your former client in which you discussed alternate legal theories including quantum meruit but chose, with client s agreement, to simplify the issues. Additionally, you recall lengthy conversations in which you discussed this very topic with your client but cannot locate a single document, even an , evidencing this conversation. Analysis: Understandably, some attorneys are reluctant to pepper their client with letters that serve for little other purpose than confirming earlier conversations. However, discussions involving case strategy or big picture developments should always garner some follow-up to confirm that the lawyer and client are in agreement. In the above scenario, a brief confirming that the lawyer was authorized to proceed exclusively with a partnership theory could mean the difference between victory and defeat in a malpractice action. The Botched Settlement It is important to maintain a comfortable balance between zero communication and such constant reporting that the client is overwhelmed. You represent the wife in a contentious divorce action. After months of discovery and emotional testimony, your client expresses her interest in reaching a resolution and moving on with her life. Your client provides authorization to negotiate settlement, and instructs you that her first priority is ownership of the vacation home. At the bargaining table, with the goal of retaining the vacation home for your client, you make certain concessions including relinquishing all rights to alimony. Upon learning that the vacation home is hers, your client eagerly signs all paperwork effectively settling the divorce proceedings. Only later, however, does your client learn that she is no longer entitled to alimony and files suit against you for failure to advise her of material settlement terms before reaching an agreement. Analysis: It would appear that the client in this example was so blinded by the prospect of securing the vacation home that she did not sufficiently contemplate the remaining terms of the settlement agreement. Here, it is the lawyer s responsibility to review the settlement terms with client prior to execution. Perhaps the most effective means to review settlement terms is through a brief report identifying the material terms of the agreement and the potential affect on your client. This strategy will protect both attorney and client. LESSONS LEARNED Each of the foregoing examples resulted in well-intentioned, respected attorneys finding themselves as defendants in legal malpractice suits. Of course, the common thread between each of these scenarios is the attorney s failure to properly document conversations or report important aspects of the case or transaction. Clearly some blame can be attributed to the clients, who arguably failed to exercise common sense. In the foregoing case studies, it would be reasonable to expect different outcomes had the client or the court behaved differently. It would be fair to assume: Litigation continues on 9

8 8 THE LEGAL INTELLIGENCER THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011 VOL P Sting continued from 4 said, was un mistakable. Prosecutors said the defendants are under a misimpression that agents must use explicit, prescribed words such as bribe during an undercover sting. DOJ lawyers said false pretenses and deception are inherent and permissible in undercover operations. The investigation of corruption, both domestic and foreign, is complex and difficult and necessitates the use of undercover techniques to combat these crimes effectively, prosecutors said. Accepting the defendant s position regarding impossibility would undermine 3rd Circuit continued from 3 the privilege claim in one paragraph. The unpublished ruling, which is not precedential, states, The district court in this case held an evidentiary hearing and ultimately determined that Norris failed to meet his burden in asserting his privilege... [and the trial] court did not legally err in applying this test. Keany, 68, was with Winthrop Stimson Putnam & Roberts at the time of the incident. He is now of counsel at Berger & Webb in Manhattan. He has declined comment on the case. The case creates deeply troubling N.J. High Court continued from 3 of a Medford Lakes, N.J., home, claimed contractor James Githens failed to fix problems before she moved in and reneged on an agreement to do so afterward. She also sued broker Prudential Fox & Roach Realtors, and its agent, Jennifer Lynch, represented by Luca, and sellers Christopher Masso, John Torrence and MTG Properties LLC, represented by Jeffrey Resnick, of Moorestown, N.J. s Sherman Silverstein Kohl Rose & Podolsky. The plaintiff had buyer s remorse. That s all this case is about, Resnick told the court. The judge said the case was more complicated than he originally thought, said Justice Virginia Long. The judge heard ex parte evidence, Resnick countered. Lombardi s lawyer, Daury Lamarche, said Hogan was acting within his authority when he decided to reverse his earlier decision. In this case, defendants were merely brought back into a case that they should not have been dismissed from to begin with, said Lamarche, of the Audubon, N.J., law offices of Walter Wolf. Discrimination continued from 4 awarded more than $2.5 million later reduced to $1 million when she was the effectiveness of law enforcement in the detection of public corruption crimes. Prosecutors are expected to get help from at least two of the defendants. Earlier this month, an equipment company president, Daniel Alvirez of Arkansas, represented by Mayer Brown, pleaded guilty to conspiracy and promised to cooperate with prosecutors. At least one other defendant, Haim Geri, has agreed to plead guilty, Kobre & Kim partner Eric Bruce said last week. Several white-collar defense lawyers who are following the FCPA sting prosecution said the aggressive defense in the case will add to law in the foreign bribery arena, where historically very few individuals have gone to trial. Kirkland & Ellis white-collar defense partner Samuel Williamson in Washing ton, implications for the attorney-client privilege in the corporate setting, said William Sullivan Jr., a partner at Winston & Strawn in Washington, D.C. Sullivan, who was not involved in the Norris case, is a former federal prosecutor who has testified before Congress urging protection for privilege from the Department of Justice s growing efforts to pierce it. Sullivan believes the trial court didn t do enough. He said, It should have undertaken an inquiry of Mr. Norris and what he understood. He added that it didn t matter whom Keany thought he was representing. It only matters what Norris thought was going on. He thought he had an attorney-client relationship, Sullivan explained. One attorney who agrees with Sullivan is Ira Ralphaelson, a GC at a public company Rivera-Soto asked Lamarche whether Hogan made his decision to revoke the summary judgment ruling based only on the information he had before him at the original hearing. Correct, Lamarche replied. But as Albin had observed earlier in the argument session, the record below doesn t necessarily make that clear. Hogan granted summary judgment in December 2006 dismissing the claims against the sellers and brokers and denied Lombardi s motion for reconsideration on Aug. 3, But on that same day after lawyers for the dismissed defendants had left the courtroom, feeling no need to stick around Hogan held a damages proof hearing for the remaining defendant, Githens, who had defaulted. After the hearing, Hogan wrote to the brokers and sellers lawyers, saying the summary judgment motion should be reargued. Reargument took place on Nov. 16, 2007, and Hogan vacated the summary judgment that same day. On the first of three trips to the Appellate Division, the court remanded so that Hogan could explain himself. He complied on Feb. 4, 2008, and the defendants once more appealed. Judges Dorothea Wefing, Lorraine Parker and Joseph Yannotti reversed, saying it was unauthorized and unwarranted for fired for not returning from maternity leave prior to an agreed-upon date. A delivery driver was awarded more than $2.3 million when she was fired after announcing that she was pregnant, which led her to consider undergoing an abortion. According to the report, the most whose practice includes FCPA counseling, said even if the evidence does not support entrapment, jurors may find the government conduct distasteful and latch onto that. Whether or not the defense lawyers are successful in their motions perhaps may not matter for the government. Jenner & Block New York partner Andrew Weissmann, co-chairman of the firm s whitecollar defense and investigations practice, said the DOJ has already achieved the effect it wanted, as criminal defense lawyers now advise clients about the sting prosecution. Summing up the DOJ s intent, Weissmann said: Keep your nose clean because you could be talking to a government agent. Mike Scarcella is a reporter for The National Law Journal, a Legal affiliate based in New York. in New York. (He asked not to name his company because it is not involved in the case.) Raphaelson called the trial court s ruling a frightening example of a court not enforcing rules of fundamental fairness... in fairness, lawyers need to know who the client is, and the person who is talking needs to know who his lawyer is. The appeals court also denied Norris two other challenges and affirmed his conviction. His attorneys at White & Case didn t immediately respond to messages. Norris remains in prison, where he was sentenced for 18 months for directing and concocting an elaborate scheme to mislead and obstruct [the price-fixing] investigation. Sue Reisinger is a reporter for Corporate Counsel, a Legal affiliate based in New York. Hogan to vacate [his] earlier decision on the basis of evidence presented against another party in a later hearing. On remand, Lombardi asked again for reconsideration. Hogan denied the motion and, on July 13, 2009, awarded Lombardi damages against the defaulting contractor only. Lombardi, armed with a final judgment, asked a second appellate panel to overturn Hogan s denial of reconsideration, telling Judges Clarkson Fisher Jr., Paulette Sapp- Peterson and Marianne Espinosa they were not bound by the prior decision disapproving Hogan s switch on summary judgment. They agreed, ruling that the law-of-thecase doctrine does not prevent judges from second guessing themselves because it operates as a discretionary rule of practice and not one of law. When the court agreed to accept the case last year, the question certified was whether one appellate panel may overturn or ignore a ruling from another panel in the same case. But that issue was only briefly addressed on Monday. Luca said that to allow a second panel to essentially override the first would give unhappy litigants free reign to forum shop. It would erode the finality of any previously litigated matter, he said. Michael Booth is a reporter for the New Jersey Law Journal, a Legal affiliate. common employment discrimination suits brought by low-wage plaintiffs involved pregnancy discrimination. Bornstein wrote that it is far too common that low-wage women are fired on the spot after reporting to an employer that they are pregnant. Discrimination continues on 9 Copyright ALM Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Further duplication without permission is prohibited U.S.P.O. No Published daily, except Saturdays, Sundays and holidays JFK Blvd., Suite 1750 Philadelphia, PA Phone: Fax: customercare@alm.com hgrezlak@alm.com Publisher Hal M. Cohen Associate Publisher & Editor-in-Chief Hank Grezlak Managing Editor Michael A. Riccardi, Esq. Associate Editor Jeremy Barker Night Editor Stephanie Baum Magazine & Supplements Editor Jaime Bochet Digest Editor Leslie Greenfield, Esq. Senior Staff Reporter Gina Passarella Staff Reporters Elizabeth Bennett Amaris Elliott-Engel Zack Needles Leo Strupczewski U.S. Courthouse Correspondent Shannon P. Duffy Chief Financial Officer Thomas H. Fiegel Advertising Director Donald Chalphin Account Manager Jayne Overturf Law Firm Account Manager Lana J. Ehrlich Account Manager Matt Hartman Classified Advertising Manager Shawn Phillips Classified Account Manager Margaret Walker Legal Notices Coordinator Stephanie Murray Legal Listings Supervisor Paulette Fields Assistant Listings Editor Diane DeAngelo Director of Production David Umfer Art Director Karen Leddy Graphic Designers Victor Bunn Louis Bartella Bunne Baum Mike Jackson Director of Marketing Teri Reagan Circulation/Marketing Supervisor Tracy Footes Key Account Manager Joel Rubin (212) Broadway, New York, NY ALM Senior Management President/CEO William L. Pollak Senior Vice President/Legal Division Jack Berkowitz Senior Vice President/Legal Division George M. Dillehay Senior Vice President/Chief Legal Officer Allison C. Hoffman Senior Vice President/ Chief Financial Officer Eric F. Lundberg Senior Vice President/Legal Division Kevin J. Vermeulen Senior Vice President/Chief Technology Officer Jeffrey K. Whittle Vice President/Real Estate Group Vice President/Substantive Law Michael Desiato Sara Diamond Newsroom: Display advertising: Classified advertising: Legal listings: Legal notice advertising: Trial listings: Subscriptions/billing/delivery: Site Licenses: The Legal Intelligencer has been designated by the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, the Philadelphia Municipal Court, the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, and the Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania as the official newspaper for the publication of all notices in Philadelphia County. For authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use, please contact Copyright Clearance Center at or at For customized reprints and any additional questions, please contact Kyle Hayman at or khayman@alm.com. The Legal Intelligencer assumes no responsibility for failure to report any matter inadvertently omitted or withheld from it. Member of Pennsylvania Newspapers Association and American Court and Commercial Newspapers. Hand-delivery customers must notify the circulation department of non-delivery before 10 a.m. to guarantee same-day delivery. Periodicals postage paid at Philadelphia, PA. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Legal Intelligencer, 4 Metrotech Center, Brooklyn, NY Subscription Rates One Year $625. Six Months $397. Three Months $297. Single Copy $5. Call to subscribe. customercare@alm.com

9 VOL P THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011 THE LEGAL INTELLIGENCER 9 Discrimination continued from 8 Additionally, pregnant women are sometimes banned from certain positions while pregnant, regardless of their capabilities, particularly in the restaurant industry. Some employers refuse to make even small adjustments for pregnant workers. Some of the things that these employees needed I m thinking of a case where an employer refused to allow a retail worker to carry a water bottle with her while she suffered bladder and urinary tract infections during her pregnancy cost employers virtually nothing. It s surprising how inflexible these employers can be, Bornstein said. She professed shock that employers encouraged pregnant low-wage workers to obtain an abortion to keep their jobs. In many cases, low-wage workers don t know or understand the protections afforded caregivers under state and federal family and medical leave laws. That is one reason caregiver discrimination is often seen as a particular burden on professional women, Bornstein said higher-paid workers are more likely to have access to human resources departments and union representatives to which they can take grievances. Low-wage workers don t have those intermediaries providing them with information about their rights, she said. Karen Sloan is a reporter for The National Law Journal, a Legal affiliate based in New York. Class Action continued from 1 the Mayer Brown defendants did made it necessary or inevitable for Refco to record the transactions as it did. Scirica found that the same logic applied to Clifford Chance. No alleged act by Clifford Chance made it necessary for DVI to file the misleading 10-Q. Even assuming Clifford Chance developed the workaround to avoid disclosure of DVI s material weaknesses, and DVI would have issued a truthful 10-Q if the law firm did not present this alternative, it was still DVI, not Clifford Chance, that filed it, Scirica wrote. According to court papers, DVI was a health care finance company that extended loans to medical providers to facilitate the purchase of diagnostic medical equipment and leasehold improvements, and offered lines of credit for working capital secured by health care receivables. Founded in 1986, DVI was a publicly traded company with reported assets of $1.7 billion in In August 2003, DVI filed for bankruptcy due to the public disclosure of alleged misrepresentations about the amount and nature of collateral pledged to lenders. Ultimately, the company s chief financial officer, Steven Garfinkel, pleaded guilty to fraud, the bankruptcy trustee and multiple lenders filed lawsuits, and the company dissolved. Investors took aim at the auditors and lawyers. The suits said Deloitte committed securities fraud by wrongfully issuing unqualified, or clean, audit reports for fiscal years 1999 to 2002, hiding DVI s improper accounting practices, and declining to force the company to disclose its fraudulent acts. The claims against Clifford Chance focused on events in late 2002 when Deloitte told DVI that it was required to disclose, in its SEC filings, certain weaknesses in DVI s internal controls for monitoring non-performing assets and assessing impaired loans. According to the suits, disclosing the information would have forced DVI to write down millions of dollars of assets and reverse income accrued on impaired loans. Although DVI initially prepared a truthful Form 10-Q, the suits alleged that attorney John Healy, a partner at Clifford Chance, directed the company not to release it, and instead devised a workaround scheme to avoid having to disclose the weaknesses. But Davis ruled that the investors could not pursue claims against Clifford Chance as a class because the law firm s conduct was not publicly disclosed and it owed no duty of disclosure to DVI s investors. As a result, Davis found there could be no presumption of reliance and that individual issues predominated over common issues. Now the 3rd Circuit has ruled that Davis was right to deny certification of the Clifford Chance claims. In order for a plaintiff to invoke the fraud-on-the-market presumption of reliance against a secondary actor in a scheme liability action under Section 10(b), the plaintiff must show the deceptive conduct was publicly attributed to that secondary actor, Scirica wrote. It is insufficient to show only that the deceptive conduct was publicly disclosed through other statements or conduct; the public must be made aware of the defendant s acts, Scirica wrote. Succinctly stating the court s holding, Scirica said: A plaintiff cannot invoke the fraud-on-the-market presumption of reliance in a private action under Rule 10b- 5(a) and (c) unless the deceptive conduct has been publicly disclosed and attributed to the actor. Applying that holding, Scirica said that because plaintiffs do not contend Clifford Chance s alleged role in masterminding the fraudulent 10-Q was disclosed to the public, they cannot invoke the presumption. Accordingly, their claim against the law firm cannot be certified as a class action because individual issues of reliance predominate. Clifford Chance was represented in the appeal by Celia G. Barenholtz of the New York office of Cooley. Attorney David L. Comerford of the Philadelphia office of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld argued the appeal for Deloitte. Lead plaintiffs attorney Clinton A. Krislov of Krislov & Associates in Chicago could not be reached for comment on the ruling. (Copies of the 58-page opinion in In re DVI Inc. Securities Litigation, PICS No , are available from The Legal Intelligencer. Please call the Pennsylvania Instant Case Service at PICS to order or for information. Some cases are not available until 1 p.m.) SEPTA continued from 1 will change hands. A court clerk for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania entered an order Tuesday dismissing the matter with prejudice after being informed the parties reached a settlement. In SEPTA v. Mednick Mezyk & Kredo, SEPTA sued the firm and name partner Michael S. Mednick for its use of both the SEPTA logo and the red and blue stylized S mark that SEPTA has registered as trademarks. In its response to the suit, Mednick Mezyk, and Mednick individually, said their alleged use of the trademarks constitutes a nominative fair use and/or a fair use under the law. Leace had said at the time of the response that people wouldn t confuse personal injury attorneys representing victims hurt on SEPTA property with SEPTA lawyers. The website links to Mednick Mezyk s firm website and displays an image of a bus bearing the SEPTA trademarks. SEPTA argued it was virtually identical to an image of an actual SEPTA bus. The website urges viewers to contact the lawyers at MySeptaLawyer.com if they have been injured in a SEPTA bus or SEPTA trolley accident, according to the complaint. The website goes on to state: Although based in Philadelphia, SEPTA is considered a state agency and therefore, claims involving SEPTA involve more complex issues than most accident cases. This is because SEPTA is afforded certain immunities under the law, the same that apply to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. At the bottom of the www. MySeptaLawyer.com website, viewers are directed to call 888-SEPTA-LAW to speak to a Philadelphia SEPTA injury lawyer. The law firm had previously advertised in the Philadelphia edition of the Metro newspaper, which is distributed in public transportation facilities, including SEPTA s facilities. Those advertisements also featured SEPTA s branded blue and red colors, the company alleged in the complaint. Defendants use of the SEPTA trademarks is identical, or nearly identical, to SEPTA s own use of the SEPTA trademarks, SEPTA had argued. Indeed, the domain name, the website, vanity phone number and the term SEPTA Injury Lawyers incorporate and use the SEPTA trade name and service mark in their entirety. On March 15, 2010, SEPTA wrote a cease and desist letter to Mednick Mezyk. In response, the firm denied infringement and continued to use the site, phone number and slogan, according to SEPTA s complaint. SEPTA said the continued use constituted bad faith and continued and willful infringement. In the answer to the complaint, Mednick Mezyk admitted sending the letter denying infringement. Defendants use of the SEPTA trademarks has (or is likely to have) caused confusion, mistake, and deception in the minds of consumers and prospective customers as to the origin of defendants services or as to the affiliation, connection or association of defendants with SEPTA, SEPTA said in the complaint. SEPTA claimed one count of trademark infringement, one of common law trademark infringement, one count of unfair competition and false advertising and designation or origin, one count of dilution and one count of common law unfair competition. The transit company said the law firm s actions are causing damages to SEPTA, its goodwill and reputation. Litigation continued from 7 That the president of an investment company is aware of the risks and uncertainty of trial. A banking institution reads and understands its loan documents before execution. A contract would be deemed void because of an extra-marital affair. That a soon-to-be divorcee would only execute a settlement agreement if she was comfortable with its terms. But the careful lawyer must not assume and cannot take anything for granted. In each case, the client or the court did not behave as their lawyer expected. The well-drafted, timely report is the lawyers defense to the unexpected. Lawyers, in a sense, pilot clients to their selected destination. We select the equipment, chart the course, and even decide if it is safe for takeoff. However, unlike general air-travel, the client has every right and expectation to be actively involved in all of these decisions. Most clients are happy to leave major decisions to the professionals so long as they are aware of each option and understand that any decision was made after evaluating all of the available alternatives. Accordingly, when there is some turbulence along the way, and there always is, the properly informed client will have difficulty pointing the finger at counsel. It is important to maintain a comfortable balance between zero communication and such constant reporting that the client is overwhelmed. The risk imposed by constant reporting is that the client ignores all written communication and remains uninformed. To strike that balance, consider routine quarterly reporting or reporting key developments to keep the client informed. After a period of relative inactivity in a matter, let the client know that there is little, or even nothing, to report. Follow up important telephone or in-person conversations in writing, usually is fine. These simple reporting techniques will instill in the client confidence and trust and may be your key to avoiding or, at the very least, defending a legal malpractice lawsuit.

10 10 THE LEGAL INTELLIGENCER THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011 VOL P Sanctions continued from 1 Now McLaughlin has held Schaible and his firm jointly responsible to pay $100, within 30 days. Schaible s lawyer, John J. Leonard of Leonard Sciolla Hutchison Leonard & Tinari, said in an interview that he intends to appeal the ruling and that he believes the issue of the sanctions was resolved when the case settled on confidential terms. In her May 2010 ruling, McLaughlin said Schaible should reimburse the defense team from Ballard Spahr s Voorhees, N.J., office, and Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld in Washington, D.C., for the time they had wasted on the three-day aborted trial. This case has to be retried, and all of the expenses of the first attempt to hold a trial have been wasted, McLaughlin wrote. She cited Schaible for making repeated references to prohibited topics during his opening statement and in his questioning of the first few witnesses. When the defense team filed its petition for fees and costs, it sought more than $106,000, noting that the five-lawyer team was billing at rates of $265 to $645 per hour and logged more than 100 hours working on the canceled trial. Akin Gump attorney Michele A. Roberts billed at $645 per hour and her partner, Michael C. Starr, billed at $500 per hour, but the Ballard Spahr lawyers were considerably cheaper, with John B. Kearney billing at $ per hour and Paul F. Jenkins and David M. Stauss each billing at $ per hour. When all five lawyers were on the clock, along with a paralegal billing at $171 per hour, the combined hourly rate was more than $2,200. The suit was filed on behalf of John Jerry Ferguson Jr., a 29-year-old boilermaker who died in a November 2005 refinery accident in Delaware City, Del., when he was trapped in an area that was flooded with nitrogen and suffered asphyxiation. As the case was nearing its trial date, McLaughlin ruled that the plaintiffs team was barred from making any mention of their claim that Valero s interest in pursuing corporate profits after hurricanes Katrina and Rita contributed to the death of Ferguson. The pretrial orders also prohibited the introduction of evidence of personnel shortages as a possible contributing factor in the death, and prohibited any evidence of prior nitrogen incidents at Valero refineries. But as the trial got under way, defense lawyers argued that Schaible seemed to ignore the rulings, forcing the defense team to lodge 30 objections during Schaible s opening statement that were sustained by the judge. McLaughlin found that Schaible assured her he would stop violating her orders, but that he continued to do so during the questioning of the first two witnesses. As a result, McLaughlin declared a mistrial on the morning of the third day of a trial that had been scheduled to last four weeks. In her order imposing sanctions, McLaughlin ruled that Schaible s conduct was the sole cause of the mistrial and that he should be sanctioned because he acted in bad faith. The court finds that Mr. Schaible did multiply proceedings, in an unreasonable and vexatious manner, thereby increasing the cost of the proceedings. The court finds that Mr. Schaible did so in bad faith and by intentional misconduct, McLaughlin wrote. Schaible declined the court s offer to hold a sanctions hearing, and instead filed an affidavit that said he did not intend to violate the court s orders or to show disrespect to the court and that he believed that his opening remarks and questions were in accordance with the court s rulings. McLaughlin said she gave little weight to the affidavit because it strains credulity to think that a lawyer of Mr. Schaible s experience could so fundamentally misunderstand or misinterpret the court s orders. Now, in an eight-page order that announced the amount of the sanctions, McLaughlin has rejected Schaible s argument that the defense team asked for too much, and that sanctions under Section 1927 should be limited to excess costs that are strictly defined under federal law. That argument, McLaughlin said, ignored the fact that the court had also invoked its inherent power to discipline attorneys who appear before it. The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, McLaughlin said, has explained that when the rules or statute are not up to the task of adequately curing prejudice from a lawyer s bad faith conduct, a court may rely on its inherent power. Finding that Schaible s conduct was egregious and caused the mistrial, McLaughlin concluded that granting only excess costs to the defendants would not cure the prejudice to the defendants from Mr. Schaible s bad faith conduct. McLaughlin also rejected Schaible s argument that the defense fee petitions were deficient because they failed to demonstrate the necessity of each item sought for reimbursement. The purpose of sanctions is adequately to compensate the innocent party for the prejudice it has suffered as a result of the misconduct of the other party or lawyer. It would undermine that objective to require the innocent party to show the necessity of each item requested, McLaughlin wrote. McLaughlin did trim a few items from the defense bill, finding it would not be reasonable to order Schaible to pay for either the travel expenses of the defendants insurance adjuster or the fees, travel or hotel costs of the defendants jury consultant. But she rejected the rest of Schaible s complaints about the bills, including the hourly rates of the lawyers, the number of lawyers, their hotel costs and their travel expenses. The plaintiffs counsel s contention that the defendants should have only had one trial attorney has no merit. This was a very complex trial. In their pretrial memorandum, the plaintiffs listed 101 fact witnesses and another 46 records custodians. The plaintiffs themselves had three attorneys present each day of trial, McLaughlin wrote. Young Lawyer continued from 5 Guide to Opening and Maintaining a Law Office, an excellent book recently released by the California Bar Association.) Nearly all said the course should be mandatory to prepare students for the real world of law practice. Which brings me to the American Bar Association. Last year, the Standards Review Committee of the ABA s Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar adopted changes to a number of the ABA s standards to shift the emphasis for law schools from input measures (e.g., faculty size, budget, physical plant) to output measures (e.g., bar passage rates and what students take away from their education experience). Standard 301(a) states: A law school shall maintain an education program that prepares its students for admission to the bar, and effective and responsible participation in the legal profession. The present interpretations for that standard provide that a law school shall maintain an education program that prepares its students to address current and anticipated legal problems (Interpretation 301-1) and that such education program may be designed to emphasize certain aspects of the law or the legal profession (Interpretation 301-2). However, judging from the other interpretations of the standard, it seems that the major emphasis is on bar passage rates. (See Interpretations and ) While Interpretation may be read to include instruction in the business aspects of the profession, the overall emphasis is on knowledge of substantive law and professional responsibility, both clearly important and necessary for both bar passage and responsible participation. However, I would maintain that an understanding of the business of practice is equally important for responsible participation in the profession. Standard 302(a) provides in part that a law school shall require that each student receive substantial instruction in: (1) the substantive law...; (2) legal analysis and reasoning, legal research, problem solving, and oral communication; (3) writing in a legal context...; (4) other professional skills generally regarded as necessary for effective and responsible participation in the legal profession...; Interpretation provides: Each law school is encouraged to be creative in developing programs of instruction in professional skills related to various responsibilities which lawyers are called upon to meet, using the strengths and resources available to the school. Trial and appellate advocacy, alternative methods of dispute resolution, counseling, interviewing, negotiating, problem solving, factual investigation, organization and management of legal work, and drafting are among the areas of instruction in professional skills that fulfill Standard 302(a)(4). All of the items listed in Interpretation are indeed necessary skills. But they are not sufficient for a lawyer going out on his or her own. There is nothing here about budgeting, accounting, taxes, fee collection, marketing, personnel, space, technology, insurance and trust accounts among the myriad of other issues involved in running an efficient, effective, profitable professional practice. Furthermore, it ignores the pressures on young associates of larger firms to be more than just good workers if they are to make partner, without giving them a clue of what more that may entail, including business development and billing concerns. Given the seismic disruptions in the profession in the past few years, I would hope that when future revisions to the standards are considered, they would reflect the need for instruction of some of these practical business aspects of the profession. This article first appeared in The Recorder, a Legal affiliate based in San Francisco. Is your firm missing out? With a Site License to The Legal Intelligencer Website, benefits that begin with substantial savings just keep coming. It is the most convenient and affordable way for everyone in the firm to access the full content of both The Legal Intelligencer and Pennsylvania Law Weekly. Contact your Key Account Manager, Joel Rubin, to get started TODAY! jrubin@alm.com The Legal Intelligencer 1617 JFK Blvd., Suite 1750, Philadelphia, PA

11 VOL P THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011 THE LEGAL INTELLIGENCER 11 DIRECTORY OF EXPERTS & SERVICES Call The Legal Intelligencer today to reserve your listing: ADVERTISING SERVICES WILLIAM J. MANSFIELD, INC. Suite Old Eagle School Road Wayne, PA Legal Advertising since 1935 Corporations Fictitious Names Estates Name Changes Quiet Titles, etc. (610) Fax: (610) JEWELRY APPRAISAL REUBEN LANDSBERG AND SONS ~ ESTABLISHED 1901 ~... Gems & Jewelry Appraisals for Obtaining Insurance, Estates, Marital Dissolution... Fredric Landsberg, President 740 Sansom Street, Suite 305 Philadelphia, PA ~ LandsbergF@aol.com HANDWRITING EXPERTS Certified J. WRIGHT LEONARD, CDE Federal, State & Local Courts Center City Philadelphia Location EXPERT PLAINTIFF NEGOTIATOR Have a cash flow problem in your personal injury office? Have the cases, but find settlements harder to come by? Unsettled cases piling up, along with costs? The answer is your own personal injury EXPERT negotiator. 25 years experience working for the largest United States insurance carrier as well as New York & Philadelphia plaintiff practices. Rescue cases in limbo, derive the highest monetary value per settlement. Call or usjustice19@yahoo.com and turn that open case to CASE CLOSED! TRANSLATION / INTERPRETATION Legal Korean Interpreter > Deposition > Pretrial conference > Doc. review & translation > and more Connect Korean Interpreter (215) FORENSIC CONSULTANTS AUTOPSIES & EXHUMATIONS Jonathan A. Briskin, J.D., M.D. Consultation & Testimony Forensic Pathology & Forensic Medicine Causation Medical Principles & Illustration Daubert Type PHONE: (610) FAX: (610) FORENSIC ACCOUNTING Francine Del Ciello, CPA Litigation Support & Forensic Accounting Services Accounting, Tax and Consulting Services E. Street Rd., Suite 1, 2nd Floor, Feasterville, PA RECRUITMENT / PLACEMENT Connecting Top Attorneys to Top Law firms in the Philadelphia area since We ve got the pulse on the Philadelphia legal market! Partners- Associates- Paralegals- Legal Support Alevistar has been ranked as one of the top Executive Search firms by the Philadelphia Business Journal since E. Hector Street; Suite 391 Conshohocken, PA Jason Mandel Dir. of Legal Recruitment Jason@alevisar.com Brian Levinson Managing Partner Brian@alevistar.com RECRUITMENT / PLACEMENT Providing recruiting solutions through personalized attention, integrity and confidentiality. This approach, combined with our extensive experience, selectivity, long-term relationships and progressive recruiting strategies, provides the basis for our continued success today. Attorneys Paralegals Legal Secretaries KM & Librarian Law Firm Administration & Management Human Resources Information Technology Accounting Marketing 1818 Market Street, Suite 3510, Philadelphia, PA P: F: JEWELRY APPRAISER RECRUITING DRIVER / CHAUFFEUR MARKETING VIDEO SERVICES Your hiring partner To place an ad or to find out more, call AVAILABLE NOW Seeking full time, long term employment as a professional driver for Attorney/ Law Firm or Business Person. Fifteen years work experience as a professional driver. Prior experience in the legal community. Please contact me today at: prochauffeur1@aol.com or call FREE MARKETING PLAN Over 50 years experience American Adv. Services 29 Bala Ave., Suite 114 Bala Cynwyd, PA adcomtimes@aol.com Video for Business 30 Seconds to 30 Minutes One-Stop Complete Job, or Required Segments Casting Creative Production 29 Bala Ave., Suite 114 Bala Cynwyd, PA T F adcomtimes@aol.com

12 12 THE LEGAL INTELLIGENCER THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011 VOL P Classifieds To Place Your Ad Today Please Call EMPLOYMENT OFFICE SPACE REAL ESTATE PER DIEM POSITIONS WANTED AND MORE Shawn Phillips Ext: 2342 Margaret Walker Ext: 2391 Fax: Attorneys REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL LEGAL SERVICES The Philadelphia Corporation for Aging (PCA) is seeking creative proposals for the provision of legal services to Philadelphia County older adults during the period covering July 1, 2011 to June 30, The maximum amount of funds anticipated to be available for this service is $393,700 for the twelve-month period. It is PCA's intent to renew the contract(s) with satisfactory service provider(s) annually, within a four-year cycle (FY ), subject to negotiation of the contract. All proposals submitted must be based on official Request for Proposal (RFP) guidelines, which will be available on Thursday,April 7, A question and answer session to allow for clarification of the process being employed, timetable requirements and the service specifications will be held on April 27, 2011 at 2:00 p.m. at PCA, 642 N. Broad St., Philadelphia, PA The RFP may be obtained by contacting Denis O'Connor, Program Manager at , ext or doconnor@pcaphl.org ASSOCIATE ATTORNEY Prominent Delaware County law firm. Complex civil litigation and transactional practice in pleasant but energized environment. Requirements include five plus years civil litigation experience; and substantial employment law experience. Generous incentives for business development. Send cover letter, resume and salary requirements to mas@dioriosereni.com or fax (610) The Legal Intelligencer Renew Your Subscription TODAY! CLASSIFIED DEADLINES & INFORMATION The Legal Intelligencer is published Monday through Friday. Classified ads must be submitted by 12:00 noon the day before you want your ad to appear. All employment ads appear on To place an ad or find out more, call or classadspa@alm.com. We happily provide hassle-free, no obligation ad quotes. For a quick reply, please include your phone number and address. CORRECTIONS Please check your advertisement on the first day it appears as the publisher cannot be liable for any errors after the first publication, and limits credit for the cost of that first incorrect ad only. CANCELLATION POLICY NO CANCELLATIONS AFTER THE FIRST TIME YOUR AD APPEARS. In-House Mortgage Attorneys Financial Services firm has openings for mortgage litigation, bankruptcy, foreclosure and servicing attorneys and paralegals. Ideal candidate will have 5-10 years of experience. Contact bross@heidrick.com LABOR & EMPLOYMENT Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney PC has an opening in its Philadelphia. office for a L&E associate with 2-3 years of employment litigation exp. Excellent academic credentials and large law firm exp required. Must be admitted in PA. resume and transcript to donna. nolan@bipc.com EOE For the full online version of The Legal Intelligencer CLASSIFIEDS MEDMAL ASSOCIATE Well established Plaintiff s PI firm in Montco seeks Med- Mal Assoc to work w/ partner w/ 1yr min exp. PA & NJ Bars req. Ability to draft complaints & handle motions & P.O.s a must. Benefits, sal commen w/ exp. Send resumes to: ALM, Box 26735, 1617 JFK Blvd., Suite 1750, Phila., PA PHILADELPHIA LATERAL PARTNERS Full Service firm seeking Partners with at least $250K in portables. Inquiries or partners interested in speaking about career objectives Jennifer at jrumain@ juristaff.com Attention Job Seekers! Post your resume on Lawjobs.com for FREE. Make your qualifications known to Top Firms looking for legal professionals like you. Need help? Call To place a classified ad in The Legal Intelligencer, please call Margaret Walker at CREDIT POLICY New advertisers and anyone with past credit problems must prepay. Situations Wanted, Merchandise for Sale and Associations Desired ads must also be paid in advance. We will not run advertising for any customer with an account past due 60 days. We accept Visa, MasterCard and American Express. TO RESPOND TO A BLIND BOX AD Address your resume to: Box#,The Legal Intelligencer, 1617 JFK Boulevard, Suite 1750, Philadelphia, PA If you do not want your resume to be sent to a specific firm, please follow these directions: 1. Place response in envelope with Box # on front. 2. Attach note to resume, listing firms where your resume should not be sent. 3. Place envelope and note in an 8 1/2 x 11 envelope addressed to Box Reply Coordinator at the above address. You will not be told any information about the firm placing a blind box ad. 4. Responses with incorrect addresses will not be forwarded. Paralegal PARALEGAL/SECTY Partner at a 5 atty Center City civil lit firm seeks an organized & motivated paralegal w/ at least 5yrs exp. Forward res w/sal req to: tlynam@vll-law.com Offices For Rent 2000 MARKET STREET Small Plaintiff's PI firm has 2 additional offices with a great view available for rent. Fully furnished, newly renovated with state of the art appliances, high-tech office equipment and fun, friendly staff. Contact Dianne at for more information & pricing CHESTNUT STREET Looking for collegial environment? Individual or multiple offices within boutique law firm, in newly renovated, attractive building. Conference rooms and other amenities included. Contact Heather Myers (215) ext CENTER CITY - PHILADELPHIA $425/mo. Center City office with receptionist. Available now. Call (215) OFFICE FOR RENT DOYLESTOWN HISTORIC DISTRICT 43 E. Oakland Avenue Ideal locale two blocks from the courthouse, walk to everything! 1,400 square feet, 1800s Victorian Bldg., cozy covered front porch, A/C, Brick Fireplace, beamed ceilings, deep alcove windows. One parking space. Landlord pays heat, taxes, water and trash. Call or please ntaylor@ntaylorlaw.com. PROFESSIONAL OFFICE Business law firm seeks association with or rental to lawyer(s) with a practice for Horsham location. Flexible arrangements. Contact: hchernow@ chernowkap.com. Office Misc. Equip. & Furn.-Sale/Rent LEGAL BOOKS FOR SALE Available now: Library of Pennsylvania Personal Injury Forms 2011 Pennsylvania Tax Handbook Please call to order. Advertise your merchandise in The Legal Intelligencer & sell your stuff. - Law Books - Office Furniture - Office Equipment - Computers / Accessories - File cabinets Please call Shawn at for more info or to place your ad today. Class #Reserved Classfieds 1 xshare 6.38 in. Your Expertise! Tell PA s legal community about your expertise (and availability). Advertise in The Legal Intelligencer Expert & Services directory.reach legal professionals who make expert decisions everyday. For more information call classadspa@alm.com Want To Publish a name change? Call Stephanie Murray at

13 VOL P THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011 THE LEGAL INTELLIGENCER 13 Public Notices NOTICE TO COUNSEL Your attention is directed to Section 3162 of the Probate, Estates and Fiduciaries Code of June 30, 1972 (Act No. 164) which requires advertisement of grant of letters to contain the name and address of the personal representatives. ORPHANS COURT OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY Letters have been granted on the Estate of each of the following decedents to the representatives named, who request all persons having claims against the Estate to present them in writing and all persons indebted to the Estate to make payment to them (unless otherwise noted all addresses being in Philadelphia): CIESLA, MARIANNE C., (also known as MARIANNE CIESLA) -- Marian E. Wiley, Executor, 821 Green Ridge Circle, Langhorne, PA 19053; Reno John Ciccotta, Attorney, Maniaci, Ciccotta & Schweizer, 6720 Frankford Avenue, Philadelphia, PA * CLENDENIN, MALCOLM MI- CHAEL, (also known as MAL- COLM M. CLENDENIN and MALCOLM CLENDENIN) -- Cynthia J.T. Clendenin, Administratrix, c/o Paul C. Heintz, Esquire, 1617 JFK Boulevard, 19th Fl., Philadelphia, PA ; Paul C. Heintz, Attorney, Obermayer Rebmann Maxwell & Hippel LLP, 1617 JFK Boul evard, 19th Fl., Philadelphia, PA ECKSTEIN, RALPH R. -- Howard M. Eckstein, Executor, c/o Warren J. Kauffman, Esquire, 1800 One Liberty Place, Philadelphia, PA 19103; Warren J. Kauffman, Attorney, White and Williams LLP, 1800 One Liberty Place, Philadelphia, PA FOLEY, GERALD A., (also known as GERALD FOLEY) -- Cherene M. Baker, Administratrix, c/o Adam S. Bernick, Esquire, 2047 Locust Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103; Adam S. Bernick, Attorney, 2047 Locust Street, Philadelphia, PA GIBSON, JOSEPH R., (also known as JOSEPH GIBSON) -- Mario D'Adamo, Executor, c/o Arthur S. Cavaliere, Esquire, 6808 Ridge Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19128; Arthur S. Cavaliere, Attorney, 6808 Ridge Avenue, Philadelphia, PA GREENBERG, ELLEN R. -- Joshua Greenberg and Sandra Greenberg, Co-Administrators, 4408 Saybrook Lane, Harrisburg, PA 17110; Bruce J. Warshawsky, Attorney, Cunningham & Chernicoff, P.C., 2320 North Second Street, Harrisburg, PA * Estate Notices HABERSKI, GENOWEFA -- Katarzyna Gertner, Executrix, c/o Maureen T. Gatto, Esquire, 2410 Bristol Road, Bensalem, PA 19020; Maureen T. Gatto, Attorney, Dorian, Goldstien, Wisniewski & Orchinik, P. C., 2410 Bristol Road, Bensalem, PA HARRIS, DORIS, (also known as DOTTY HARRIS) -- Bernard Steele, Executor, c/o Joseph W. Bullen, III, Esquire, P.O. Box 217, Lansdowne, PA ; Joseph W. Bullen, III, Attorney, Hennessy & Bullen, P.O. Box 217, Lansdowne, PA IRVIN, HERBERT -- Gordan M. Wase, Executor, 123 S. Broad Street, Suite 2170, Philadelphia, PA 19109; Gordan M. Wase, Attorney, Wase and Wase, 123 S. Broad Street, Suite 2170, Philadelphia, PA KEARNEY, ELLIS D., (also known as ELLIS DAVID KEAR- NEY) -- John Leroy Kearney, Executor, 50 North 46th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19139; Alan S. Forman, Attorney, 2601 Pennsylvania Avenue, Unit 112, Philadelphia, PA KELLY, JOHN -- James A. Thomas, Executor, 1708 Wynsam Street, Philadelphia, PA * LONGSDORF, MARIE C., (also known as MARIE LONGSDORF) -- Susan L. Russo and Carole A. Light, Executrices, 228 Harding Road, Southampton, PA MARTIN, JOHN W., JR. -- Theodore D. Martin, Administrator, c/o Kathleen A. Maloles, Esquire, 1701 Walnut Street, 6th Fl., Philadelphia, PA 19103; Kathleen A. Maloles, Attorney, Law Ofices of Peter L. Klenk, 1701 Walnut Street, 6th Fl., Philadelphia, PA MC ALLISTER, LAWRENCE W. -- David J. Moloznik, Executor, 100 S. Broad Street, Suite 2230, Philadelphia, PA 19110; David J. Moloznik, Attorney, Fell & Spalding, 100 S. Broad Street, Suite 2230, Philadelphia, PA SCHLESS, GUY LACY, (also known as GUY SCHLESS) -- Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. and George Scott Stewart, III, Executors, c/o Lewis L. Neilson, Jr., Esquire, 7926 Queen Street, Ste. 207, Wyndmoor, PA 19038; Lewis L. Neilson, Jr., Attorney, Stewart & Neilson, 7926 Queen Street, Ste. 207, Wyndmoor, PA SMYRSKI, JOHN C., (also known as JOHN SMYRSKI) -- Carl Smyrski, Executor, c/o Leon A. Mankowski, Esquire, 2624 E. Allegheny Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19134; Leon A. Mankowski, Attorney, 2624 E. Allegheny Avenue, Philadelphia, PA STEVENSON, ELAINE M. -- James G. Stevenson, Executor, c/o Salvatore Paparone, Esquire, 331 E. Street Road, Trevose, PA 19053; Salvatore Paparone, Attorney, 331 E. Street Road, Trevose, PA Suspension Notices NOTICE OF SUSPENSION Notice is hereby given that on March 24, 2011, pursuant to Rule 214(d)(2), Pa.R.D.E., the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania ordered that MAURICE L. WHITE, JR. be place on Temporary Suspension until further definitive action by the Supreme Court, to be effective April 23, Elaine M. Bixler Secretary of the Board The Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania * Need to Place a Public Notice? The Legal Intelligencer is designated as the official newspaper for the publication of all notices in Philadelphia County. For more information or to place a public notice, please contact Stephanie Murray at or smurray@alm.com. Intent To Foreclose In The Court of Common Pleas Philadelphia County Civil Action - Law No Notice of Action in Mortgage Foreclosure Reverse Mortgage Solutions, Inc., Plaintiff vs. The Unknown Heirs of Betty Earline Andrews, Deceased, ANTOINETTE ANDREWS, Solely in Her Capacity as Heir of Betty Earline Andrews, Deceased, JAC- QUELINE ANDREWS, Solely in Her Capacity as Heir of Betty Earline Andrews, Deceased, LYNN ANDREWS, Solely in Her Capacity as Heir of Betty Earline Andrews, Deceased, ULYSSES ANDREWS, Solely in His Capacity as Heir of Betty Earline Andrews, Deceased & VIVIAN HARRIS, Solely in Her Capacity as Heir of Betty Earline Andrews, Deceased, Mortgagors and Real Owners, Defendants To: The Unknown Heirs of Betty Earline Andrews, Deceased,, JAC- QUELINE ANDREWS, Solely in Her Capacity as Heir of Betty Earline Andrews, Deceased, LYNN ANDREWS, Solely in Her Capacity as Heir of Betty Earline Andrews, Deceased, & VIVIAN HARRIS, Solely in Her Capacity as Heir of Betty Earline Andrews, Deceased, MORT- GAGOR AND REAL OWNER, Defendants, whose last known address is 5763 Woodcrest Ave Philadelphia, PA This firm is a debt collector and we are attempting to collect a debt owed to our client. Any information obtained from you will be used for the purposed of collecting the debt. You are hereby notified that Plaintiff, Reverse Mortgage Solutions, Inc., has filed a Mortgage Foreclosure Complaint endorsed with a notice to defend against you in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania, docketed to No wherein Plaintiff seeks to foreclose on the mortgage secured on your property located, 5763 Woodcrest Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19131, whereupon your property will be sold by the Sheriff of Philadelphia County. NOTICE You have been sued in court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after the Complaint and notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the Court without further notice for any money claim in the Complaint of for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW. THIS OFFICE CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT HIRING A LAWYER. IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO HIRE A LAWYER, THIS OFFICE MAY BE ABLE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT AGENCIES THAT MAY OFFER LEGAL SERVICES TO ELIGIBLE PERSONS AT A REDUCED FEE OR NO FEE. COMMUNITY LEGAL SERVICES, INC. Law Center North Central 3638 N. Broad St., Phila., PA or Philadelphia Bar Association One Reading Center, Phila., PA Michael T. McKeever, Atty. for Plaintiff Goldbeck McCafferty & McKeever, P.C. 701 Market St., Ste Phila., PA When Time is Important, Choose... call today (800)-276-PICS PICS Pennsylvania Instant Case Service Get the full-text case you need instantly! PICS is Pennsylvania s only instant full-text case service developed by ALM, publisher of The Legal Intelligencer and Pennsylvania Law Weekly.

14 14 THE LEGAL INTELLIGENCER THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011 VOL P Public Notices Complaints COURT OF COMMON PLEAS PHILADELPHIA COUNTY, PA JANUARY TERM, 2010 Don t Start Your Day Without It! AMERICAN GENERAL CON- SUMER DISCOUNT COMPA- NY, 61 W. Cheltenham Avenue, Store L, Cheltenham, PA vs. UNKNOWN HEIRS, SUCCES- SORS, ASSIGNS AND ALL PER- SONS, FIRMS OR ASSOCIA- TION CLAIMING RIGHT, TI- TLE OR INTEREST FROM OR UNDER SAKE JWILI, DE- CEASED, et al., 189 East Fariston Drive, Philadelphia, PA CIVIL ACTION COMPLAINT - MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE NOTICE TO DEFEND To: UNKNOWN HEIRS, SUC- CESSORS, ASSIGNS AND ALL PERSONS, FIRMS, OR ASSO- CIATIONS CLAIMING RIGHT, TITLE OR INTEREST FROM OR UNDER SAKE JWILI, DE- CEASED, ET AL. You have been sued in Court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint and Notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by an attorney and filing in writing with the Court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so, the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the Court without further notice for any money claimed for any other claim or relief requested by the plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AF- FORD ONE, GO TO OR TELE- PHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET HELP. THIS OFFICE CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT HIRING A LAWYER. IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO HIRE A LAWYER, THIS OF- FICE MAY BE ABLE TO PRO- VIDE YOU WITH INFORMA- TION ABOUT AGENCIES THAT MAY OFFER LEGAL SERVICES TO ELIGIBLE PER- SONS AT A REDUCED FEE OR NO FEE. Philadelphia Bar Association Lawyer Referral and Information Service 1101 Market Street, 11th Floor Philadelphia, PA (215) * Post your job on For more information please call or sphillips@alm.com Meeting the needs of practicing attorneys for more than 160 years Stay informed with the most trusted and respected source of legal news and information on the local and state level Keep up to date on the latest legal industry trends & developments with our in-depth editorial coverage as well as news on court decisions, verdicts and practice issues Improve your practice and career with 30+ columns focusing on topics such as IP, Securities, Law Firm Management and Professional Development In addition to your daily subscription you ll also get: PaLaw, our yearly magazine featuring the PaLaw 100 as well as the most detailed information on the state of the legal profession in Pennsylvania Over 20 supplemental issues on topics including Litigation, Labor & Employment, Intellectual Property and Real Estate Your subscription also includes access to thelegalintelligencer.com Searchable Archives Breaking local, regional and national legal news as it happens Headline news alerts Exclusive web-only content Easy access to blogs devoted to law and politics Court central judicial profile PDF of paper And much more! Subscribe Today! Online: Phone:

15 VOL P THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011 THE LEGAL INTELLIGENCER 15 l e g a l l i s t i n g s COURT NOTICES IN RE: PER CURIAM IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA ORDER REVISING THE COMMENTS TO RULES 121 AND 904 OF THE PENNSYLVANIA RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE : : : : : : : ORDER NO. 401 CRIMINAL PROCEDURAL RULES DOCKET AND NOW, this 29 th day of March, 2011, upon the recommendation of the Criminal Procedural Rules Committee; the proposal having been submitted without publication pursuant to Pa.R.J.A. No. 103(a)(3) in the interests of justice and efficient administration, and a Final Report to be published with this ORDER: IT IS ORDERED pursuant to Article V, Section 10 of the Constitution of Pennsylvania that the revisions of the Comments to Pennsylvania Rules of Criminal Procedure 121 and 904 are approved in the attached form. This ORDER shall be processed in accordance with Pa.R.J.A. No. 103(b), and shall be effective May 1, Additions to the rule are shown in bold and are underlined. Deletions from the rule are shown in bold and brackets. Revisions of the Comments to Pa.Rs.Crim.P. 121 and 904 FINAL REPORT 1 QUALIFIED RIGHT TO PROCEED PRO SE; FORFEITURE OF RIGHT TO COUNSEL; TIMELINESS OF REQUEST TO PROCEED PRO SE counsel, despite having the opportunity and financial wherewithal to do so, a determination that the defendant be required to proceed pro se is mandated because that defendant forfeited the right to counsel. The Court further held that Rule 121 and its colloquy requirements do not apply to situations where forfeiture is found. Id. at 195, 971 A.2d at In Commonwealth v. El, 602 Pa. 126, 977 A.2d 1158 (2009), the Court, in determining whether a defendant s request to proceed pro se was timely, clarifies what is meant by meaningful trial proceedings in the context of the timeliness of a request to proceed pro se. The Court explains While this Court s holding in Dowling is not controlling, its rationale is persuasive. The Dowling Court held that in the context of the right to a trial by jury, trial commences when a court has begun to hear motions which have been reserved for time of trial; when oral arguments have commenced; or when some other such substantive first step in the trial has begun. Dowling, 959 A.2d at 915. We hold that these same events constitute the beginning of meaningful trial proceedings in the context of the right to self-representation. Just as this Court observed in Dowling we likewise observe that meaningful trial proceedings should be marked by a substantive, rather than a pro forma, event. Id. at 139, 977 A.2d at Rule 121 sets forth the criteria for waiver of counsel and for proceeding pro se. Both Edwards and Lucarelli apply substantive procedures that are new to Pennsylvania law. These decisions impact defendants rights to counsel and right to waive counsel by (1) permitting a judge to deny a defendant s request to waive counsel when the judge determines the defendant is not competent to do so, and (2) permitting a judge to find that a defendant has forfeited his or her right to appointed counsel by his or her behavior. In view of this, the Committee agreed that these two cases should be cited in the Rule 121 Comment to alert to the bench and bar to the application of the new substantive procedures. The El Court is clarifying the time for making a request to waive counsel, not making new law per se. However, the Committee reasoned that because the time for making a waiver request has been the subject of confusion in the case law, this case also should be cited in the Rule 121 Comment to alert the bench and bar to this clarification. A reference to the Edwards case also has been added to the Rule 904 Comment. Rule 904(H) (1)(a) allows a judge to permit a defendant to proceed pro se if the judge finds the defendant competent and the waiver of counsel is voluntary, knowing, and intelligent. Although Rule 904 is not a waiver of counsel rule, because this paragraph addresses waiver of counsel in death penalty cases in the context of the PCRA, the Committee agreed the Edwards cross-reference is important for the bench and bar. On March 29, 2011, effective May 1, 2011, upon the recommendation of the Criminal Procedural Rules Committee, the Court approved the revision of the Comments to Rules of Criminal Procedure 121 (Waiver of Counsel) and 904 (Entry of Appearance and Appointment of Counsel; In Forma Pauperis). The revisions add citations to recent case law that address the defendant s right to proceed pro se, defendant s forfeiture of the right to appointed counsel by his or her behavior, and the timeliness of a defendant s request to proceed pro se. In Indiana v. Edwards, 128 S.Ct. 2379, 2388 (2008), the United States Supreme Court held that the Constitution permits judges to take realistic account of the particular defendant s mental capacities by asking whether a defendant who seeks to conduct his own defense at trial is mentally competent to do so. That is to say, the Constitution permits States to insist upon representation by counsel for those competent enough to stand trial under Dusky 2 but who still suffer from severe mental illness to the point where they are not competent to conduct trial proceedings by themselves. In Commonwealth v. Lucarelli, 601 Pa. 185, 971 A.2d 1173 (2009), the Court held that where a defendant s course of conduct demonstrates his or her intention not to seek representation by private 1 The Committee s Final Reports should not be confused with the official Committee Comments to the rules. Also note that the Supreme Court does not adopt the Committee s Comments or the contents of the Committee s explanatory Final Reports. RULE 121. WAIVER OF COUNSEL. (A) GENERALLY. (1) The defendant may waive the right to be represented by counsel. (2) To ensure that the defendant s waiver of the right to counsel is knowing, voluntary, and intelligent, the judge or issuing authority, at a minimum, shall elicit the following information from the defendant: (a) that the defendant understands that he or she has the right to be represented by counsel, and the right to have free counsel appointed if the defendant is indigent; (b) that the defendant understands the nature of the charges against the defendant and the elements of each of those charges; (c) that the defendant is aware of the permissible range of sentences and/or fines for the offenses charged; (d) that the defendant understands that if he or she waives the right to counsel, the defendant will still be bound by all the normal rules of procedure and that counsel would be familiar with these rules; (e) that the defendant understands that there are possible defenses to these charges that counsel might be aware of, and if these defenses are not raised at trial, they 2 Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (1960). March 31 & april 1 Pennsylvania Bar Institute 5th Annual Intellectual Property Law Institute. Held at the CLE Conference Center, Wanamaker Building, 10th Floor, Suite THURS: 8:30 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.; check-in begins at 8:00; FRI; 8:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.; check-in begins at 8:00 a.m.; cost for THURS: $319/$219 Members; Non-members $339; cost for FRI; $199/$179 Members; Non-members $219; Cost for both days $449/$419 Members; Non-members $479; 9 CLE credits**. **Worshop choices will determine whether credits are substantive law, practice and procedure or ethics professionalism or substance abuse. Pre-registration recommended. For more information contact PBI Customer Service at PBI or go to april 2 Widener University School of Law Court Interpreter Workshop. What It Takes to be a Court Interpreter in the Haitian Creole Language. Presented by Widener Law Center Legal Education Institute. Spoken language one-day workshop for the beginner and intermediate level interpreters. Held in room 380 of Philadelphia City Hall, Broad & Market Streets; 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Cost: $90 and includes continental breakfast and workshop materials. Certificate of Completion given at the end of the day. Register by March 22 with Peggy O Neill at moneill@widener.edu Penn State Abington Bridge the Gap. CLE credit: 5 Ethis. Held at Penn State Abington in room 108 Lares Building, 1600 Woodland Road, Abington, PA Time: 9:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.; Cost: $95, includes bonus lunch and lunchtime program. The Gift of Stress, for COMING EVENTS which you will earn an additional Ethics credit at no charge. Certificate of Attendance given at the end of the program. Register by calling Theresa Bloom at april 4 Pennsylvania Bar Institute Franchising. Held at the CLE Conference Center, Wanamaker Building, 10th Floor, Suite :00 a.m. to 1:15 p.m.; check-in begins at 8:30 a.m.; cost: $199/$179 Members; Non-members $219; 3 Substantive/1 Ethics credits. Pre-registration recommended. For more information contact PBI Customer Service at PBI or go to Pennsylvania Bar Institute Video - Ethics Potpourri-Strategic Approaches for Stress, Substance Abuse and Depression. Held at the CLE Conference Center, Wanamaker Building, 10th Floor, Suite :30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.; check-in begins at 10:00 a.m.; cost: $49/$49 Members; Non-members $49; 1 Ethics credit. Pre-registration recommended. For more information contact PBI Customer Service at PBI or go to Pennsylvania Bar Institute Challenges, Strategies and Pitfalls When Litigating Against the Pro Se Litigants. Held at the CLE Conference Center, Wanamaker Building, 10th Floor, Suite :00 p.m. to 3:15 p.m.; check-n begins at 11:30 a.m.; cost: $199/$179 Members; Nonmembers $219; 2 Substantive/1 Ethics* credit. *Must attend entire program to receive ethics credit. Pre-registration recommended. For more information contact PBI Customer Service at PBI or go to april 5 Pennsylvania Bar Institute Understanding the Basics of Elder Law. Held at the CLE Conference Center, Wanamaker Building, 10th Floor, Suite :30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m.; check-in begins at 8:00 a.m.; cost: $229/$209 Members; Non-members $249; 5 Substantive/1 Ethics* credits. *Must attend entire program to receive ethics credit. Pre-registration recommended. For more information contact PBI Customer Service at PBI or go to Department Of Records As of March 4, 2011, all instruments left for record to February 22, 2011 are ready for delivery. 15 Coming Events 19 Common Pleas Court 23 Civil Trial List 20 Criminal Trial List 16 Federal Court 22 Municipal Court i n s i d e Court Notices continues on Register Of Wills 24 Superior Court 24 Supreme Court 24 U.S. Bankruptcy Court 24 U.S. Court of Appeals 24 U.S. District Court

16 16 THE LEGAL INTELLIGENCER THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011 VOL P DISTRICT COURT NOTICE 1. Counsel shall promptly notify the deputy clerk to each judge before whom he/she has a case listed upon becoming attached for trial in another court. To be accorded recognition, a busy slip, using the designated form, MUST be filed in Room 2609 before 1 p.m. on the day after counsel becomes attached. 2. Cases in the trial pools do not necessarily appear in the order in which they will be called. Counsel should therefore be ready to begin trial upon receiving telephone call notice, subject to the following: (a) Counsel whose cases are in the pools will be given 48 hours notice, if feasible, but not less than 24 hours notice to ready for trial with witnesses. (b) It is counsel s responsibility to check with each judge s deputy clerk on the status and movement of criminal and civil cases in that judge s pool. (c) Counsel will not be required to commence trial less than 24 hours after completing trial of another case. HARVEY BARTLE III Chief Judge H. BARTLE, III, C.J. Courtroom 16A Deputy Clerk: Katherine Gallagher Phone: THU., MARCH 31, 2011 CR J. Pavlock USA v.baylon P. Hetznecker; S. Ellison MON., APRIL 11, 2011 CR L. Tsao USA v.castro W. Brennan; B. McMonagle; H. Schober TUE., APRIL 26, M. Schultz GREER v.arsenal P. Brady S. DALZELL, J. Courtroom 15B Deputy Clerk: Eileen Adler Phone: THU., MARCH 31, B. M. Saul; L. M. Rosenfeld Belinda Andrews-Ray v.save-a-lot Store #215 R. A. Lerman; T. B. Sponaugle; J. C. Porter; M. P. Williams MON., APRIL 18, 2011 CR K. Grigsby United States of America v.isreal Ramos R. I. Rivera MON., APRIL 25, 2011 CR D. Wolf United States of America v.jose Tomas Rivera S. Lin WED., APRIL 27, 2011 CR M. Dubnoff United States of America v.marius Laurentiu Chelaru T. Henry; E. C. Lentz MON., MAY 2, 2011 CR A. Fisk United States of America v.steven Catlett N. Spizer MON., MAY 16, J. P. Hoyle; S. L. Smith Patricia Krug v.the Brinkman Corporation E. A. Weiss MON., JULY 11, 2011 CR A. Schell United States of America v.felix Peralta P. C. Bowers MON., JANUARY 9, 2012 CR N. Winter; V. Gauri United States of America v.moussa Ali Hamdan J. M. Lindy J. C. JOYNER, J. Courtroom 17A Chambers: Room Deputy Clerk: Sharon Carter Phone: MON., APRIL 18, J. A. Greenberg; T. A. Masterson Jr. Joseph Cherion v.swift Transportation, Inc. A. Ziadat; R. P. Corbin MON., APRIL 25, 2011 CR D. J. Ignall U.S.A. v.james Fulton J. F. Renner 10:30 A.M G. J. Hannon Randy K. Brenner v.consolidated Rail Corp. T. H. Lyda MON., MAY 9, 2011 CR J. Natali U.S.A. v.kevin M. Wellman N. C. Spizer 10:30 A.M. CR D. L. Axelrod; S. M. Cullen U.S.A. v.andres Castro R. D. Thompson; L. T. Savino Jr.; D. L. Dolfman MON., MAY 16, 2011 CR A. D. Fisk U.S.A. v.shawn Lowe 10:30 A.M. CR M. K. Costello U.S.A. v.regina Mort L. T. Savino Jr. 11:00 A.M P. Se John L. Twyman v.nco Financial Systems, Inc. D. Israel; E. F. Blanco E. C. ROBRENO, J. Courtroom 11A Deputy Clerk: Ronald Vance Phone: M. A. MCLAUGHLIN, J. Courtroom 13A Secretary/Civil Deputy:Cheryl Stormes Phone: Courtroom Deputy: Dennis Hartman Phone: P. B. TUCKER, J. Courtroom Deputy: Lisa Ross Phone: B. SCHILLER, J. Scheduling/Deputy Clerk: Jean Pennie Phone: ESR-Courtroom Deputy: Chris Campoli Phone: L. DAVIS, J. Courtroom 6A Secretary/Deputy Civil: Carol L.. Sampson Phone: (267) Courtroom Deputy Criminal; Donna Croce Phone: (267) C.M. RUFE, J. Scheduling/Deputy Clerk: Velma T. White Phone: (267) Fax: (267) ESR/Courtroom Deputy: Erica Pratt Phone (267) MON., APRIL 4, 2011 CR S. Stephan, AUSA United States of America v.casey Williams, et al C. Henry, Esq.; W. Honig, Esq. MON., APRIL 11, 2011 Hearing Sentencing 2:00 P.M. CR R. Kornylak, AUSA United States of America v.gerald Radomski R. Malmed, Esq. CR R. Kornylak, AUSA United States of America v.bari Lynn Berger E. Toplin, Esq. MON., APRIL 18, 2011 Hearing Sentencing CR J. Arteaga, AUSA United States of America v.donnie Cruz F. Perri, Jr. Esq. 2:00 P.M. CR K. Newton, AUSA United States of America v.donald Flowers J. Feinberg, Esq. TUE., APRIL 19, 2011 Hearing Sentencing 11:30 A.M. CR R. Kornylak, AUSA United States of America v.jerrod Abney C. Henry, Esq. WED., APRIL 20, 2011 Hearing Motion Hearing 11:00 A.M. CR D. Ignall, AUSA United States of America v.jonathan Battles L. Wescott, Esq. MON., APRIL 25, 2011 Hearing Sentencing CR K. Newton, AUSA United States of America v.troy Robinson M. Gottlieb, Esq. 2:00 P.M. CR K. Newton, AUSA United States of America v.ava Martin M. Fanning, Esq. TUE., APRIL 26, 2011 CR M. Carrillo, AUSA United States of America v.hyman Garcia C. Henry, Esq.; E. Toplin, Esq. CR K. Newton, AUSA United States of America v.anthony Myers M. Rickles, Esq. MON., MAY 2, 2011 Hearing Sentencing CR A. Wzorek, AUSA United States of America v.lamar Palmero R. Thompson, Esq. TUE., MAY 3, 2011 Hearing Sentencing CR T. Stevens, AUSA United States of America v.anthony Taylor W. Spade, Jr., Esq. 2:00 P.M. CR T. Stevens, AUSA United States of America v.ronald Bell L. Weaver, III, Esq. TUE., MAY 10, 2011 CR A. Fisk, AUSA United States of America v.donald Meadows F. Sarner, Esq. FRI., MAY 13, 2011 Hearing Sentencing 3:00 P.M. CR N. Leverett, III AUSA United States of America v.norbet Estevez C. Laguzzi, Esq. MON., MAY 16, 2011 CR K. Newton, AUSA United States of America v.hajar Muhammad D. Boyle, Esq.; J. Neblett, Esq. MON., MAY 23, 2011 CR D. Axelrod, AUSA United States of America v.robert Chatelain A. Dixon, Esq. TUE., MAY 31, 2011 CR D. Axelrod, AUSA United States of America v.mark Benzenhafer, et al A. Sagot, Esq.; A. Peruto, Jr. Esq.; C. Laguzzi, Esq.; B. Hoof, Esq.; N. Pinto, Esq. TUE., JUNE 7, R. Surkin Esq. Dana L. Tarquini v.david J. Goldberg, Esq. B. O Connell FRI., JUNE 17, 2011 Hearing Sentencing CR D. Axelrod, AUSA United States of America v.zachary Davis F. Perri, Jr., Esq. 2:00 P.M. CR D. Axelrod, AUSA United States of America v.kenneth Cimato L. Savino, Jr., Esq. WED., JUNE 29, 2011 Hearing Sentencing CR K. Newton, AUSA United States of America v.khouri McKenzie L. Singer, Esq. M. BAYLSON, J. Secretary / Courtroom Deputy: Lynn Meyer Phone: (267) Courtroom Deputy Criminal: Joanne Bryson Phone: (267) THU., MARCH 31, 2011 CR K. Marson USA v.mcghee E. Tinari MON., APRIL 11, 2011 CR M. Miller USA v.perez-samboy A. Jalon CR A. Lunkenheimer; A. Lunkenheimer USA v.lindsey B. Siegel; P. Hetznecker MON., APRIL 18, 2011 CR T. Swanton USA v.burton W. Cannon MON., APRIL 25, 2011 CR J. Labrum III USA v.cintron S. DiClaudio MON., MAY 9, 2011 CR T. Zaleski USA v.brunson R. Jarvis MON., MAY 23, 2011 CR A. Lunkenheimer USA v.madison E. Toplin TUE., MAY 31, 2011 CR A. Freind USA v.corbin C. Warren; L. Bozzelli MON., JUNE 6, 2011 CR A. Schell USA v.baird N. Spizer MON., JUNE 13, 2011 CR S. Miller USA v.shelow M. Cedrone MON., JUNE 20, 2011 CR J. Goldstein USA v.gil-polanco T. Mella MON., JULY 18, 2011 CR P. Shapiro USA v.johnson M. Kramer MON., JULY 25, 2011 CR J. LaBarr USA v.shannon D. Kozlow MON., AUGUST 15, 2011 CR D. Axelrod USA v.stinson S. Patchen MON., SEPT. 12, 2011 CR K. Grigsby USA v.demarco, III C. Warren; P. Sarmousakis; M. Engle; A. Schneider T. J. SAVAGE, J. Courtroom 9A Courtroom Deputy: Harry E. Grace Jr. Phone: Judicial Secretary: Roseann Giangiordano Phone THU., APRIL 7, :00 A.M. CR W. H. Weiland United States of America v.sean Waters D. Kozlow CR M. McCartney; S. P. Tulante United States of America v.anthony Thomas T. Borum MON., APRIL 18, :00 A.M. CR J. R. Arteaga United States of America v.terrance Downing M. G. Paul; R. C. Cipparone Jr.; J. J. McHugh Jr. TUE., APRIL 26, :00 A.M A. R. Karpf Karen Haley-Miller v.lloyd Industries J. M. Armstrong THU., MAY 5, :00 A.M. CR S. L. Grieb United States of America v.yeuris Alexander Vasquez-Flores L. T. Jr. WED., JUNE 1, :00 A.M. CR K. S. Marston United States of America v.kemo Vaughn C. C. Henry J.K. GARDNER, J. Courtroom 4B Edward Cahn U.S. Courthouse Suite West Hamilton Street Allentown, PA Jennifer Fitzko Phone : (610) MON., APRIL 11, J. R. Vivian Jr. Mark Chmielewski v.upper Mount Bethel Township K. Lynch; R. S. Davis; J. S. Taylor K. C. Allen Ivy Jo Eckman v.police Officer Damon Greathouse R. G. Hanna; J. D. Young D. J. Deluca Jeffrey Dershem v.barbour International, Inc. W. K. McWilliams CR J. A. LaBar USA v.david Mendez J. A. Disantis CR J. W. Jenkins USA v.paul Sean Jones G. L. Clark CR S. Weber USA v.valerijs Nickolaevich Belvos B. B. Cooper CR J. P. Bologna USA v.lori Graziola C. G. Furlong MON., MAY 23, M. J. Vargo; H. Gershman; G. N. Asteak Extreme-Scape and Excavating, Inc.

17 VOL P THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011 THE LEGAL INTELLIGENCER 17 v.edward G. Martin H. S. Stevens; R. A. Alpert CR D. J. Ignall USA v.kenneth G. Reiidenbach S. C. Stretton; E. Toplin CR M. S. Miller USA v.christopher Jay London M. S. Fisher CR M. B. Wilmoth USA v.leonard Destine B. B. Cooper CR S. A. Stephan USA v.anthony Terranova, Jr. B. B. Cooper TUE., JULY 5, 2011 Non-Jury Trial G. R. Lewis; D. M. Schwadron Jeffrey Tull v.united States of America A. F. Givhan D. M. Schwadron; G. R. Lewis Blossom Jones v.united States of America A. F. Givhan MON., JULY 11, 2011 Non-Jury Trial A. C. Gershenson; A. M. Rosen Town & Country Leasing, LLC v.espaillat Medical Services LLC MON., AUGUST 15, A. R. Sherr Brian White v.jack Brommer C. P. Gerber; E. M. Brown; S. L. DiGiacomo Non-Jury Trial C. V. Curley; K. A. Kilgarriff Samantha M. Mimlitsch v.innovative Control Systems, Inc. J. E. Patterson; L. L. Speziale; R. W. Mauriello Jr. CR A. J. Schell USA v.alfredo Sierra Landis J. M. Polyak; G. L. Clark; L. L. Cohen; R. C. Patterson; J. F. Brose; P. F. McKinney; P. J. Hetznecker; S. J. Pupo D. E. Boyle; E. M. Bell; J. A. Conrad; J. M. Autry; L. G. Brown Robert Zimmerman v.norfolk Southern Corporation R. K. Hohn MON., AUGUST 22, J. S. Harrison Joanne Weller v.nextgen Healthcare Information Systems, Inc. A. Lafiura; R. E. Grimaldi A. W. Cormier; D. P. Russo Kim L.Eckhart v.air Products, Inc. E. Flores; W. J. Delany G.E.K. PRATTER, J. Secretary/Civil Deputy: Rose A. Barber Phone: (267) Courtroom/Criminal Deputy: Mike Coyle Phone: (267) MON., APRIL 18, M. D. HOMANS; E. D. BRAMBLE SUSAN DEANGELO v.dentalez, INC. T. C. DELORENZO FRI., MAY 20, D. L. FRIEDMAN WILLIAM J. FULLER, JR v.timothy E. GEITHNER E. D. GILL MON., JUNE 13, 2011 CR K. T. Newton USA v.miguel Bell L. Busico MON., JULY 18, C. D. MILLS; D. A. SCHUMACHER; D. W. MYERS AMERISOURCEBERGEN DRUG CORPORATION v.kohll J. B. MAYERS; J. A. ANASTASIA L. F. STENGEL, J. Courtroom 3B Secretary / Courtroom Deputy: Patricia Cardella Phone: (267) Courtroom Deputy: Laura Buenzle Phone: (267) MON., APRIL 4, 2011 CR A. J. Schell USA v.alberto Figueroa J. H. Ibrahim; B. J. Collins; H. S. Hilles, III; P. A. Levin MON., APRIL 11, D. R. Dautrich Sr Sonia Pagan v.aaron Ogden M. J. Connell MON., APRIL 18, 2011 CR M. T. Aspinwall USA v.jamal Musa T. F. Burke; J. H. Feinberg; D. M. Koslow; G. Z. Levin; M. D. Mungello MON., MAY 9, D. B. Sherman; G. I. Spivack Douglas Gollick v.jc Penney Company B. P. Werley MON., MAY 16, 2011 CR M. B. Wilmoth USA v.johnnie Market Carter M. Brumbach M. B. Weisberg Ricardo Henry v.city of Philadelphia M. M. Fenerty MON., JUNE 6, H. W. Fenton Charles Anton v.james Zimmerman C. E. Munion MON., JUNE 20, M. E. Adler Integrity Carpet Cleaning, Inc. v.the Bullen Companies D. L. Marcus; M. G. Bradley; D. S. Doyle MON., JUNE 27, J. F. Roda; D. M. Nast; D. E. Gustafson In Re: Wellbutrin Antitrust Litigation D. P. Gersch MON., JUNE 20, 2011 Trial Pool E. F. Jarrell III Joseph Elassaad v.independence Air, Inc. J. M. Stern; T. D. Waldmann P.S. DIAMOND, J. Secretary/Courtroom Deputy: Carol James Phone: (267) ESR/Courtroom Deputy: Marion Scarengelli Phone: (267) FRI., APRIL 15, 2011 CR R. Zack United States v.naselsky R. Welsh; T. Ostrander FRI., MAY 13, 2011 CR T. Marinari U.S. v.basile R. E. Goldman FRI., MAY 27, 2011 CR S. Astolfi United States v.bentley L. Biddison TUE., MAY 31, 2011 CR A. Lunkenheimer U.S. v.rodriguez, et al. L. Narcisi; T. McCallum; M. McDermott; J. Ongay THU., JUNE 16, 2011 CR K. Brenner U.S. v.espino-solorzano W. Cannon; C. Laguzzi TUE., JULY 12, 2011 CR V. Walker U.S. v.mclaughlin D. Chavar FRI., JULY 15, 2011 CR C. Bonesch United States v.glover P. McKinney TUE., AUGUST 16, 2011 CR J. LaBar; J. Kurland United States v.phelps N. Spizer; C. Henry TUE., SEPT. 13, 2011 CR D. Velez U.S. v.botsvynyuk, J. Briskin; H. Popper J.R. SANCHEZ, J. Scheduling Courtroom Deputy: Nancy DeLisle Phone: (267) ESR/Courtroom Deputy: Adrienne Mann Phone: (267) THU., MARCH 31, 2011 Non-Jury Trial D. A. Scheffel; E. B. Epstein; E. Schnabel WMC Mortgage, LLC v.sarah E. Baker D. E. Searles; M. D. Donovan MON., MAY 9, :00 A.M. CR D. Veleez; D. Velez UNITED STATES v.allie SPEIGHT A. Joseph; N. Tinari; J. Sobel; G. Pagano MON., MAY 16, :00 A.M. CR K. Marston UNITED STATES v.lateef RIDDICK T. Frederick MON., JULY 11, :00 A.M. CR D. Axelrod; D. Axelrod; D. Axelrod; D. Axelrod; D. Axelrod UNITED STATES v.alexander RIVERA S. Adamo; P. McKinney; R. Jarvis; C. Laguzzi TUE., JULY 26, :00 A.M. CR J. Burnes UNITED STATES v.richard KAUFMAN S. Patchen MON., OCTOBER 3, :00 A.M. CR P. Shapiro UNITED STATES v.abdur RAZZAK TAI V. Martinez Trial Pool D. A. Bailey Roger Snyder v.charles M. Kraus, III C. P. Gerber D. A. Jensen; H. A. Yampolsky Marie Funk v.county of Bucks F. A. Chernak; T. P. Hunt SLOMSKY, J. Courtroom Deputy: Margaret Gallagher Phone: THU., MARCH 31, A. Royal Alexander Royal v.john E. Potter D. A. Degnan WED., APRIL 6, 2011 CR J. Natali United States of America v.christopher R. Banks N. V. Tinari MON., APRIL 11, J. R. Radmore Deborah Reichert v.state Farm Insurance Company L. C. Miller; E. C. Merrigan WED., APRIL 13, 2011 CR J. E. Burnes United States of America v.tarik DePass J. C. Santaguida; D. Chavar THU., APRIL 21, T. D. Pecsenye; J. L. Dion Colur World, LLC v.smarthealth, Inc. J. J. Kutz; J. W. Dornberger; A. C. Schlinsog, Jr.; C. E. Fielkow THU., APRIL 28, 2011 CR T. N. Stevens United States of America v.nestor Luis Merced-Calderon A. J. Petrone C. D. JONES II, J. Secretary/ Civil Deputy: Betty Harper Phone: Courtroom/Criminal Deputy: A ishah L. El-Shabazz Phone: THU., MARCH 31, 2011 CR A. Eve United States v.powell J. Brose CR L. Ouziel U.S.A. v.o M. Zullo TUE., APRIL 5, Dalie v.voss WED., APRIL 13, 2011 CR S. Weber United States of America v.condosta D. Danser WED., APRIL 20, 2011 CR A. Schell United States v.white G. Sciolla; B. Toplin WED., APRIL 27, 2011 CR D. Axelrod United States of America v.laracuenta G. Pagano; G. Sciolla; A. Petrone; D. Moser; G. Campbell; P. Levin; K. Aita; T. Borum TUE., JUNE 21, 2011 CR M. Wilmoth United States pf America v.watters J. Smarro; A. Sagot; L. Stapleton; K. Moynihan; L. Weaver; S. Adamo; C. Laguzzi; M. Paul; T. Borum; A. Schneider; W. Spade; M. Brunnabend M. S. GOLDBERG, J. Secretary/ Courtroom Deputy; Carole Ludwig Phone: Courtroom Deputy: Steve Sonnie Phone: TUE., APRIL 12, 2011 CR N. Winter United States of America v.jennifer Torres, et al. T. Archie CR A. Lunkenheimer United States of America v.rodney Frierson, et al. J. McHugh THU., APRIL 21, 2011 CR M. Fischer United States of America v.keith Canyon J. Lindy TUE., MAY 3, 2011 CR M. Carrillo United States of America v.willie Suber, IV K. Scott TUE., MAY 17, 2011 CR J. Arteaga United States of America v.juan Hermilo Pizarro-Gaytan, et al. C. Laguzzi TUE., MAY 24, 2011 CR T. Casey United States of America v.gary Norman T. Frederick TUE., JUNE 7, 2011 CR M. Morgan-Kelly United States of America v.taison Devore P. Hetznecker CR P. Foa United States of America v.kerri Bizzell E. Toplin TUE., JUNE 21, 2011 CR J. Labrum United States of America v.christopher Martin R. Thompson FULLAM, J. Courtroom 15A Deputy Clerk: Rosalind Burton-Hoop Phone: MON., APRIL 11, A. C. Lease Esquire; T. M. Kolman Esquire Rosalind Feldsher v.davita, Inc. L. E. Halber Esquire MON., APRIL 18, E. D. Raynor, Jr., Esquire Asteria Vives v.frank Rodriguez, Miguelina Rodriguez D. C. Onorato Esquire; G. W. Fox Esquire; M. Yanoff Esquire MON., APRIL 25, 2011 Non-Jury Trial A. Farley Esquire; A. M. Brown Esquire; S. J. McConnell Esquire Bernard Scott v.officer Chris Manigault, Officer Justin Rios G. Franklin Esquire; M. K. Hubbard Esquire; A. C. Shoffel Esquire MON., JUNE 20, R. J. Heleniak Esq. Maria Iacono v.cw II Holdings, Inc., Devon Hill Motors, Inc. G. A. Hurwitz Esq. J.W. DITTER, J. Courtroom Deputy: Stephen J. Iannacone Phone: L. H. POLLAK, S.J. Courtroom 16B Deputy Clerk: Donna M. Bozzelli Phone: THU., MARCH 31, 2011 CR V. Gibson USA v.tony Villaneuva D. Chavar S. R. KLINGES GREGORY P. DIPAOLO v.black &

18 18 THE LEGAL INTELLIGENCER THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011 VOL P DECKER, (US), INC. W. C. STUBITS N. L. SHAPIRO, S.J. Courtroom 10A Deputy Clerk: Madeline F. Ward Phone: THU., MARCH 31, 2011 Hearing R. Ray; F. Samuels; A. Gaines O v.assorted Music, Inc. P. Asbury; H. McCrary FRI., JUNE 3, 2011 Non-Jury Trial Benson v.delaware County Intermediate Unit K. H. Meehan; L. Geren T. N. O NEILL, JR., S.J. Courtroom 4-A Deputy Clerk: Charles J. Ervin Phone: E. V. LUDWIG, S.J. Courtroom 12A Deputy Clerk: Kathryne M. Crispell Phone: R. F. KELLY, S.J. Courtroom 11B Deputy Clerk: Thomas Garrity Phone: MON., APRIL 4, 2011 CR V. Gouri USA v.ng & Lau E. Kauffman; C. Laguzzi MON., APRIL 11, F. Crowley; L. Kozloff Engle v.matrix Golf, et al. W. Fleischer; M. Ertle MON., JUNE 6, 2011 CR T. Moschang, AUSA USA v.dupree D. Chavar MON., JUNE 27, 2011 CR K. Marston, AUSA USA v.ramirez & Tanom R. Lynch; C. Henry L. A. REED JR., S.J. Deputy Clerk: Sharon A. Hall J. E. DUBOIS, S.J. Courtroom 12B Courtroom Deputy: George V. Wylesol Phone: MON., MAY 16, 2011 CR T. Stevens AUSA USA v.kareem Jonson R. Cipparone Esq. MON., MAY 23, 2011 CR E. Abrams AUSA USA v.sonjan Frederick R. Gamburg Esq. MON., JUNE 6, 2011 CR M. Cox AUSA USA v.david Vocht S. Lin Esq. CR D. Ignall AUSA USA v.duran-garcia M. Wilson Esq. MON., JULY 11, 2011 CR R. Kornylak AUSA USA v.lopez S. Lin Esq. MON., JULY 18, 2011 CR J. Davison AUSA USA v.abdul-almuid D. Kozlow Esq.; F. Sarner Esq. MON., AUGUST 1, 2011 CR J. Romero AUSA USA v.camacho J. McMahon Esq.; E. Cherniack Esq. TUE., SEPT. 27, 2011 CR F. Costello AUSA USA v.lee Davis S. Lin Esq. Trial Pool G. E. James Esq.; J. Edelson Esq.; R. M. Manies Esq. Lynchburg Steel, Inc. v.o A. D. Bono Esq.; R. E. Borneman Esq. Misc T. Gallogly Esq. Kaliner v.mdc Systems Corp. D. Concannon Esq.; J. Cohen Esq.; M. Charles Esq R. L. BUCKWALTER, S.J. Courtroom 14A Deputy Clerk: Matthew J. Higgins Phone: W. H. YOHN, JR., S.J. Courtroom 14B Deputy Clerk Civil: Rita Polkowski Phone: Deputy Clerk Criminal: Thomas McCann Phone: MON., APRIL 18, 2011 Non-Jury Trial W. B. Jameson AAMCO Transmissions, Inc. v.robert A. DeVries MON., MAY 2, 2011 Non-Jury Trial G. S. BERKOWITZ GABRIEL F. NAGY v.harris M. DEWESE A. ROTH; A. A. CIARDI III; H. SMITH; J. E. CRANSTON; N. M. NIGRELLI; W. E. MAHONEY JR.; J. R. DUTILL; W. T. MANDIA MON., MAY 16, F. MOONEY III FRANCIS MOONEY III v.newtown TOWNSHIP POLICE DEPARTMENT C. P. BOYLE MON., MAY 23, P. J. GIORDANO BAYVIEW LOAN SERVICING, LLC v.law FIRM OF RICHARD M. SQUIRE & ASSOCIATES, LLC J. B. McCARRON; K. M. CARSON MON., JUNE 6, 2011 CR M. MORGAN-KELLY UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v.ivan TKACH A. FALCIONE; M. S. GREENBERG; M. ROSSMAN; D. C. MALONEY J. S. DiGIORGIO LEROY STERLING v.redevelopment AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF PHILA. P. N. SANDLER; S. H. BRANDT; R. H. DICKMAN; R. D. AVERSA J.R. PADOVA, S.J. Courtroom 17B Room 6614 Deputy Clerk: Gerrie Keanne Phone: MON., APRIL 18, 2011 CR D. Axelrod; S. Cullen United States v.julio Colon A. Silverstein WED., MAY 18, 2011 CR N. Leverett United States v.william Jones S. Johnson TUE., MAY 24, 2011 Non-Jury Trial T. Masterson Flakewood Tucker v.united States V. Powell MON., SEPT. 19, F. Tecce; G. Lyons; J. Wallace; K. Anderson; P. Keenan; T. Duffy Cross Atlantic Capital Partners v.facebook, Inc. D. McCooe; A. Zaher; M. Weinstein; J. Dion A. B. BRODY, J. Courtroom 7B Scheduling/Deputy Clerk: Marie O Donnell Phone: ESR-Courtroom Deputy: Jim Scheidt Phone: R. SURRICK, J. Deputy Clerk - Michael Finney Phone: THU., MARCH 31, J. Gosselin; E. McLachlan; J. Shaw; M. Farrell; R. Haggerty, Jr. Carol Sullivan v.warminister Township C. Boyle; J. Santarone, Jr. MON., MAY 9, 2011 CR T. Zaleski United States v.braheem Hinton L. Skipper MON., MAY 16, 2011 CR L. Wright United States v.dante Tucker P. George MON., MAY 23, 2011 CR T. Stevens United States v.eric Ponder N. Tinari; L. Savino MON., JULY 11, 2011 CR E. Abrams United States v.erick Green G. Stein Trial Pool S. Console; L. C. Mattiacci; A. C. Mackerer; S. M. Saint-Antoine Thomas Burlington v.fox Television Station T. Johnson; L. Eisenstadt; J. Hoffman L. Rogers Sky Motor v.auto Sport Design G. Silver T. J. RUETER, CH. M.J. Courtroom 3C Deputy Clerk: Lisa Tipping Phone: FRI., MAY 6, B. Stein Treadways, LLC v.the Travelers Indemnity Co. C. Sheridan Celia C. S. WELLS, M.J. Courtroom 3F Deputy Clerk: Edward Andrews Phone: THU., MAY 12, :00 P.M A. C. Milstein; M. A. Tucker BDB & Sons Moving, Inc. v.transguard Insurance Co. M. F. Ullom; S. Di Valerio TUE., JULY 12, :00 A.M R. P. Weiner David Tharp v.hess Corp. M. T. Droogan Jr. FRI., AUGUST 5, :00 A.M J. M. Miller Julio Luis DeJesus v.city of Philadelphia N. L. Blackwell FRI., OCTOBER 14, :00 P.M W. E. Gericke Federal Insurance Co. v.kehoe Electrical Construction, Inc. D. J. Rucket J. P. HART, M.J. Courtroom 3D Chambers 3006 U.S. Courthouse Philadelphia, Pa. Court Deputy: Deborah Stevenson Phone: FRI., APRIL 1, D. F. Johnson Monarch Life Insurance Company v.the Estate of Robert Tarone, III D. Magee; C. H. Nugent Jr THU., MAY 19, V. P. Wilson JONATHAN GARCIA v.officer BISHOP & THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILA D. B. Sher FRI., JUNE 10, R. K. Hohn; S. A. Scheuerle Robert P. Barker v.starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc. T. A. Kuznick; M. F. Metzger FRI., JULY 1, J. J. Aversa Dontaye Martin v.city of Philadelphia M. M. Fenerty MON., NOVEMBER 14, 2011 Non-Jury Trial D. R. Layser; G. G. Spencer Assiah Phinesee v.united States of America D. A. Degnan; S. R. Becker L.K. CARACAPPA, M.J. Courtroom 5A Deputy Clerk: Ian Broderick Phone: T.R. RICE, M.J. Deputy Clerk: Chavela Settles Phone: (267) Courtroom 5A Criminal Duty Matters MON., MAY 23, 2011 through FRI., MAY 27, :30 P.M. Arraignments THU., MAY 26, :30 P.M. MON., MAY 9, J. F. MINNI; J. A. STOUT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v.$39, IN UNITED STATES CURRENCY D. F. MANNO TUE., JUNE 14, S. A. QUINN; J. B. SOLOMON WILLIAM LAWSON v.city OF PHILADELPHIA M. M. FENERTY TUE., JUNE 21, R. C. ALLEN ALLEN BOWSER v.city OF PHILADELPHIA B. ATKINS MON., JULY 11, J. CHAIKEN ALICIA ENGLISH v.greyhound LINES, INC. P. C. TROY; D. C. BELFIE JR MON., AUGUST 1, W. A. RIBACK ARISTOTLE TARBORO v.northampton COUNTY G. J. GEIGER MON., AUGUST 8, B. HENNESSY; S. L. GOLD YOLAND L. MACK v.sam K. L. GREEN; P. J. MCDONNELL; S. M. SPLETZER MON., NOVEMBER 7, 2011 Non-Jury Trial Z. E. MOORE JAMES MAYO v.mercy PHILADELPHIA HOSPITAL A. J. JOHNSTON; D. M. CREASY MON., NOVEMBER 14, A. R. KARPF DONNA WHITTAKER v.delaware VALLEY COLLEGE N. J. HAMBURG; C. J. ETEZADY D.R. STRAWBRIDGE, M.J. Courtroom 3H Deputy Clerk: Lori K. DiSanti Phone: (267) MON., AUGUST 15, W. A. ELY; D. J. COHEN DAAIYAH GOLDSTEIN v.the CHILDRENS HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA N. J. HAMBURG; T. B. ROBERTS RESTREPO, M.J. Courtroom 3-1 Deputy Clerk: Juanita Davis Phone: FRI., APRIL 1, M. M. Post Esq. GE Zhang v.children N. J. Hamburg Esq; C. Etezady Esq. THU., MAY 19, B. M. Puricelli Esq. Reginald Roberts v.risa Ferman C. P. Boyle Esq.; J. J. Santarone Esq. TUE., JUNE 21, R. K. Washington Esq. Joseph Morris v.thomas A. Greene G. M. MacNeil Esq.; J. A. Wescoe Esq. TUE., JULY 26, B. Mildenberg Esq Sergeant Randy Davis v.city of Philadelphia R. R. Chokshi Esq; T. R. Howard Esq MON., AUGUST 22, J. R. Padova Esq Mohamed Ellaisy v.fung Wong P. J. Hermesmann Esq.; S. M. Russ Esq. FRI., SEPT. 9, A. Zafferes Esq.; B. M. Puricelli Esq. Christina Williams v.daniel McGarrey D. A. Loebell Esq. H.S. PERKIN, M.J. Courtroom 4A 504 Hamilton St. Room 4401 Allentown, PA Deputy Clerk: Helen A. Nicholas Phone: (610) THU., MARCH 31, N. B. SHAPIRO MS. ARCADIO ROSARIO, JR. v.j.d. ECKMAN. INC. K. L. WOLGEMUTH MR.; E. M. NAPIERKOWSKI MR. TUE., APRIL 26, A. D. MESHKOV

19 VOL P THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011 THE LEGAL INTELLIGENCER 19 MICHAEL OTERO v.infinity SECURITY COMPANY, LLC J. S. STEWART MON., MAY 16, H. I. GOODMAN LATOYA MONROE v.easton AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT J. E. FREUND, III TUE., JUNE 7, 2011 Non-Jury Trial 1:30 P.M T. M. Kolman Mr.; E. Abouelseoud Mr.; W. A. Ely Mr. LISA CONTE v.lehigh VALLEY HOSPITAL, INC. A. J. Johnston Mr.; D. M. Creasy Mr.; G. Guanowsky Mr. MON., JUNE 20, G. J. WILLIAMS MR. JAY STRAUSS v.county OF BERKS T. C. GALLAGHER MR. MON., JULY 11, MARCELINO RUIZ v.nissin FOODS (USA) COMPANY, INC. MON., AUGUST 1, JAMES AYRES v.berks COUNTY SHERIFF MON., SEPT. 19, D. P. RUSSO MR.; A. W. CORMIER MR. ROBERT REILLY v.lehigh VALLEY HOSPITAL A. J. JOHNSTON MR.; D. M. CREASY MR.; G. GUANOWSKY MR. TUE., OCTOBER 11, L. V. DEVITO, JR. MR. RC LONESTAR, INC. v.general ELECTRIC COMPANY F. A. BAKER, III MR.; K. D. WILKINSON MS. MON., OCTOBER 24, R. L. ORLOSKI MR. PEDRO REYES v.mark DILUZIO D. J. MACMAIN MR.; T. J. KEPNER MR. MON., NOVEMBER 14, M. B. WEISBERG ESQ. BRENDON BONDACH v.reading POLICE DEPT. D. J. MACMAIN ESQ.; J. E. FULTON ESQ. MON., DECEMBER 5, D. M. BAILEY ESQ. RODNEY SMOTT v.great AMERICAN INSURANCE GROUP A. W. HANKIN ESQ.; D. L. STACKHOUSE ESQ. MON., FEBRUARY 6, G. S. KOUNOUPIS ESQ. CHARLES J. QUINN v.worldwide COMMUNICATIONS, INC. T. P. RUF, JR. ESQ. MON., FEBRUARY 27, M. B. WEISBERG ESQ JOSE MENDOZA v.city OF READING D. J. MACMAIN ESQ.; J. E. FULTON ESQ. MON., MARCH 12, J. D. HAGELGANS ESQ. KENNETH EPPINETTE v.arleen MERRILL S. J. WIENER ESQ. E.T. HEY, M.J. Courtroom Deputy-Secretary: Lara L. Karlson (267) L.A. SITARSKI, M.J. Deputy Clerk: Regina M. Zarnowski Phone: Courtroom 5A Criminal Duty Matters THU., MARCH 31, 2011 through FRI., APRIL 1, :30 P.M. Arraignments THU., MARCH 31, :30 A.M. FRI., APRIL 15, L. G. Taglianetti Jr. Alvin Weston v.city of Philadelphia M. Maguire MON., APRIL 25, P. M. Newman Alice J. Neuen v.primecare Medical, Inc. T. E. Brenner MON., MAY 23, F. N. Dimeo Jr. Craig Melton v.foot Locker, Inc. P. Baxter FRI., JUNE 3, T. M. Holland Bernadette Waites v.kirkbride Center J. F. O Riordan A. C. RAPOPORT, M.J. U.S. Courthouse & Federal Building 504 W. Hamilton St. Allentown, PA Deputy Clerk: Carlene Jones M. F. ANGELL, M. J. Courtroom 7 Robert N.C. Nix Building 900 Market Street Suite 211 Phila., PA Law Clerks: Judith J. Kiesel, Esq.; Leslie L. Stott, Esq. Deputy Clerk: Shelli L. MacElderry Phone Courtroom 5B Criminal Duty Matters MON., APRIL 4, 2011 through FRI., APRIL 8, :30 P.M. Arraignments THU., APRIL 7, :30 A.M. Common Pleas Court Day Forward List Case Management Program Room 613 City Hall Any questions regarding the Day Forward Case Management Program should be directed to Barbara Koch, Civil Case Management Center, 613 City Hall, THU., MARCH 31, A.M B. J. Nearey; M. T. McKeever Duong et al. v.kim et al. E. N. Halberstadt; K. A. Kilgarriff; S. M. Rothman G. P. Egan Plummer v.pelzer G. M. Scamby-Stowe Jam East Falls Development, Lp v.the Bison Group, M. Faranda-Diedrich Jones et al. v.giant Shopping Food Ctr. Inc. et al. A. G. Marzano; M. G. Perri; M. J. Zamites; M. S. Takacs; W. D. Longo M. A. Defino Bowers v.c&c Truck And Trailer Repair et al V. Anastasio Lloyd v.office of The Sheriff, City And County of J. C. Vandermark; J. J. Zwolak J. B. Solomon Brett v.mealey s Furniture Holding Inc. et al. B. A. Kronthal L. K. Hill Nembhard v.school District of Philadelphia M. Proffitt Osborne 10 A.M L. McGrier Savage v.williams S. A. Elia Manufacturers And Traders Trust Co. v.richard G L. J. Arnold Johnson v.chester Garden Apartments et al. M. B. Zingarini E. Rayz Dukler et al. v.woodlake Management Inc. et al. M. B. Zingarini; M. E. Rosenberg; S. Kirby R. Major-Trunfio Gonzalez et al. v.southeastern Pennsylvania Transpo A. L. Scaricamazza M. A. Spigler Bolotin et al. v.smith C. N. Harrington; S. Harrington A. J. Schneider Joseph v.southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation S. A. Lytle M. S. Rosenberg Matache v.wawa Inc. C. N. Walto; J. H. McCarthy 11 A.M P. T. Devlieger; R. M. Dunn Smith v.strother et al B. H. Kane Hankin v.chelbourne Plaza Assoc. et al. E. R. Devine A. Cammisa Santana v.herbert et al. T. C. Armstrong M. S. Rosenberg Satmary et al. v.national Railroad Passenger Corpor D. J. Gillin; J. A. Bosakowski; T. P. Wagner; Y. J. Brunetti B. H. Kane Coq v.william Lublin, Ind. & D/B/A Century 21 et al. J. H. Riches; L. Falcone B. H. Kane Ruise v.southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation S. E. Vedro N. Hoffman Rapoport et al. v.benjamin S. A. Elia Manufacturers And Traders Trust Co. v.integrated E. F. Koschineg; K. Scheese; D. A. Kuestner; H. I. Langsam 2 P.M G. S. Barry Orellana v.southeastern Pennsylvania Transportati J. R. Deitch; L. H. Rosenau N. V. Tinari France v.wachovia, A Wells Fargo Company X. P. Hayden Giles v.kahn et al. S. E. Pratt; T. M. Schaer; J. W. Remphrey E. B. Landau Marshall v.hightower et al. J. M. Alexander M. D. Seltzer Williams et al. v.posey et al R. G. Mangold Gordon v.battaglini et al. K. G. Gomer T. R. Lawn Moore et al. v.phila Housing Authority et al. A. C. Ostrow; S. Randazzo S. E. Diamond Geiger v.russell et al. 3 P.M J. E. Crossen III Esq Maely v.johnson Horse Transportation Inc A. C. Gagliano, III Kerbis v.borek et al. D. C. Dean M. I. Simon Huynh v.giordano J. T. Moughan; M. B. Bailkin A. J. Aigeldinger, III Ray v.general Asphalt Paving Company et al. R. J. Siegel J. M. Cohen Hurley v.la Mirage Hair & Day Spa Inc. et al J. F. Cordisco Coburn v.abrams et al. D. C. Dean G. S. Dion Jones v.city of Philadelphia A. C. Ostrow J. M. Cohen Hurley v.scanny THU., APRIL 7, A.M J. A. Gembala Estate of Alexander C. Doman, Sr. et al. v.cuthbert M. S. Dicroce N. Hoffman Oygenblik v.worth Gniewek et al. v.zimmer Holdings Inc. et al. H. E. Hansen; J. P. Lavelle; P. M. Williams I. M. McLafferty McCool v.landmark Americana et al. M. E. McGuire M. T. Sacchetta Walton et al. v.nayak D. B. Sherman Soto-Lawson, et al. v.valentino et al. M. Proffitt Osborne E. J. Swan Warner et al. v.enterprise Rent-A-Car et al D. E. Sternberg McCann v.acme Markets E. A. Chalik B. M. Gross Baron v.minster L. J. Turchi; R. D. Billet; C. N. Harrington; S. Harrington 10 A.M L. Kalman Pennypack Woods Home Ownership Association v.palm A. J. Rushie R. A. Scarpato Mazzo et al. v.brase M. F. MacDonald B. W. Sawtelle Vist Bank F/K/A Madison Bank, A Division of Leespo v.brase K. B. Quinn D. Tuchinsky Breytman et al. v.lassiter et al Samara v.samara et al A. J. Falcione Price v.fitzgerald et al. S. J. Negro R. A. Cataldi Dennison et al. v.soto et al. T. T. Schweikert L. Solomon Martin v.davis et al. E. M. Siciliano B. A. Wall Gajewski v.mcelroy et al. T. C. Armstrong B. A. Berman Bardonaro v.22 Front Street, L.P. D. R. Utain 11 A.M B. P. McVan Williams v.wes Health Systems Inc B. J. Kredo Perez v.hansen B. M. Ginsburg Silverman v.liberty Place Retail Assoc. L.P. C. J. Comeau S. J. MacDougall Selective Insurance Company of America et al. v.whi J. J. Holden; M. C. Schwartz Young et al. v.samuel et al. B. J. Atkins S. J. Pace Robinson v.victory Christian Ctr. of Philadelph G. Bruderle; R. W. Yost; T. R. Chapin J. A. Zenstein Dublin Hardware et al. v.the Employers Fire Insuran 2 P.M A. Minato; J. Blank Ningbo, Llc v.stanford A. Minato; J. Blank Ningbo, Llc v.katz R. S. Miller Powers v.yang B. H. Kane Clifton et al. v.fligelman et al. C. Goldberg K. L. Martin Hartford Cas. Ins. Co. A/S/O Pa. Oral & Maxillofac v.fligelman et al. B. J. Vance L. B. Zoftis Segalow v.uptown Entertainment Inc. A/K/A D/B/a A. J. Dion S. P. Katowitz Burns et al. v.elbana et al. C. Goldberg; L. H. Rosenau 3 P.M A. J. Pantano; L. E. Bendesky; R. W. Zimmerman Rogers et al. v.archdiocese of Philadelphia et al. A. E. Sparrow; J. McHale V. A. Defino Costobile et al. v.jackson Equities, Llc et al D. J. Caputo; R. S. Safier; S. Specter Zheng v.shree Krishna Hosp.ity, L.P. et al. A. O. Pappas; F. J. Deasey T. W. Harrity Homesite Insurance Company A/S/O Elaine Cerezo v.shree Krishna Hosp.ity, L.P. et al A. R. Duffy; R. J. Mongeluzzi Krail v.arcpa Properties Inc. et al. J. E. Salmon; L. R. Berger III; P. J. Hughes,Esq; S. F. Bernstein L. K. Hill Bligen v.septa S. A. Lytle M. E. Ellery Mitchell et al. v.paramore et al. C. J. Cosgrove S. P. Mirarchi Commonwealth of Pa. Ag s Bureau of Consumer Protec v.paramore et al. T. F. Grady Rules Returnable THU., APRIL 7, A.M V. A. Booker Lopez v.southeastern Pennsylvania Transit Authori M. J. Dolan; K. R. Plouffe; R. M. Stroh; J. P. Curry; W. G. Brown FAMILY COURT DIVISION MARCH 28, 2011 ADMINISTRATION AND MISCELLANEOUS Courtroom 314, 1801 VINE ST. DOUGHERTY, A.J. JUVENILE BRANCH FAMILY COURT BUILDING 1801 VINE ST. Youth Study Center YSC MASTER Courtroom--A DOUGHERTY, A.J. (M) MASTER RODGERS (T,W) COURT ROOM DOWN (W,F) Courtroom--B GORDON, J. Courtroom--C REBSTOCK, J. (ex Th) Courtroom--D REYNOLDS, J. Courtroom--E MASTER CARSON (M,Th) MASTER ADAIR (T,W,F) Courtroom--F COOPERMAN, J. (ex F) Courtroom--G WOLF, J. Courtroom--H DUBOW, J. (ex F) Courtroom--I MASTER CARSON (T) MASTER GREENBLATT (W) MASTER ADAIR (Th) COURT ROOM DOWN (M,F) Courtroom--J MASTER WAHL, J. Courtroom--K BUTCHART, J. (M,T) DOUGHERTY, A.J. (W) COURT ROOM DOWN (Th,F) Courtroom--L MASTER CAULEY (M,W) Courtroom--M WOELPPER, J. (ex M) Courtroom--O OLSZEWSKI, J.

20 20 THE LEGAL INTELLIGENCER THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011 VOL P Courtroom--S DUMAS, J. YSC-MASTER MASCIANTONIO DOMESTIC RELATIONS/ FAMILY COURT BUILDING 34 S. 11TH ST. Courtroom--One MURPHY, S.J. Courtroom--Two FORD, J. Courtroom--Three CHEN, J. Courtroom--Four ROCA, J. Courtroom--Five JACKSON, J. Courtroom--Six THOMPSON, J. Courtroom--Seven JOHNSON, J. Courtroom--Eight WRIGHT PADILLA, J. (out) Courtroom--Nine SUMMERS, J. Courtroom--Ten JOSEPH, J. (out) Courtroom--Eleven SHIRDAN-HARRIS, J. Courtroom--Twelve PECHKUROW, J. Courtroom--Fourteen MATTHEWS, J. (out) FAMILY COURT Trial DIVISION THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011 Room B,1801 VINE STREET DIBONA, J. Allen-davis, Tehron (Def. Assoc.) Alomar, Hector (Def. Assoc.) Beckett, George (Yacoubian, George Setrag Jr.) Brunson, Adrian Earl E. (Def. Assoc.) Campbell, Keisha (Def. Assoc.) Chappell, Kelly A A. (Def. Assoc.) Dejesus, Roberto (Alva, Daniel Paul) Epps, Dane (Def. Assoc.) Fischer, Louis (Def. Assoc.) Ford, Dennis (Def. Assoc.) Frazier, Rapheal (Tarpey, Timothy J.) Fryer, Devon (Def. Assoc.) Graheem, Tyree (Def. Assoc.) Greene, Jasmine Hanna, Nathanile (Def. Assoc.) Jones, Marcus (Def. Assoc.) Mak, Andrea (Solar, Jeffrey Robert) Mansurov, Alisher (Def. Assoc.) Mcqueen, James Arthur A. (Def. Assoc.) Moseley, Shaheed (Def. Assoc.) Olivio, Susana (Def. Assoc.) Powell, Alonzo (Stein, Gerald A.) Rasuk, Ruizdaeel (Def. Assoc.) Small-carson, Rodney (Def. Assoc.) Thomas, Joseph (Def. Assoc.) Thompson, Stephanie (Nitti, Danielle G.) White, Rahshe (Def. Assoc.) THURSDAY, APRIL 7, 2011 Room B, 1801 VINE STREET DIBONA, J. Clark, Isaiah J (Def. Assoc.) Coleman, Robert (Def. Assoc.) Cuthbertson, Jonathan (Def. Assoc.) Davis, Dalton E. (Gray, Edward E.) Deapreau, Joseph (Def. Assoc.) Dyke, Mark A. (Def. Assoc.) Gallashaw, Chris (Def. Assoc.) Glenn, Lamar (Def. Assoc.) Harper, Tamika (Def. Assoc.) Hernandez, Alexander Hudson, Latavia (Def. Assoc.) Laurio, Steven (Savino, Louis Theodore Jr.) Law, Mark S. (Def. Assoc.) Leon, Jesus (Mandell, Lee) Leon, Martin (Def. Assoc.) Malseed, Edmond Martinez, Angelica (Def. Assoc.) Mccune, Jason (Def. Assoc.) Obrien, Christopher (Maran, Mary Therese) Respes, Franklin Rowe, Timothy (Goldman, Randolph L.) Singletary, Quinton Small, Shoba (Jefferson, Ricardo Ray) Velasquez, Eve (Def. Assoc.) Wilson, Kalief (Def. Assoc.) CRIMINAL TRIAL DIVISION THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011 Room 306 Allen, Clarence (Def. Assoc.) Baylor, Kevin (Def. Assoc.) Black, Denise (Def. Assoc.) Brown, Danny (Def. Assoc.) Browner, Kenyatta (Def. Assoc.) Butler, Shanette (Giusini, Vincent John) Clinkscales, Leroy (Def. Assoc.) Cooper, Khalil C C. (Def. Assoc.) Cooper, Rasheed (Def. Assoc.) Craig, Regina (Def. Assoc.) Crutchfield, Ryheim (Def. Assoc.) Davis, Michael (Valvo, Joseph J.) Devoue, Anthony M. (Seay, Geoffrey Vincent) Etienne, Wesner (Def. Assoc.) Giel, John D. Jr. (Def. Assoc.) Gilmore, Michael Halterman, Raymond Sergio (Def. Assoc.) Harris, Percelle R. Hill, Felicia (Def. Assoc.) Hill, Kevin Jennings, Thomas (Def. Assoc.) Johnson, Anthony (Def. Assoc.) Johnson, Joe (Def. Assoc.) Kane, Clarence (Def. Assoc.) Lane, Richard (Def. Assoc.) Lewis, Franklin D (Def. Assoc.) Lloyd, Shawn D. (Def. Assoc.) Lyons, John (Def. Assoc.) Maddox, Tyshiem E. (Madden, Waverley Lillieth) Marable, Kareema (Def. Assoc.) Marion, Joseph C. (Def. Assoc.) Mccleary, Sean (Def. Assoc.) Mercan, Angel (Def. Assoc.) Murphy, Joseph (Def. Assoc.) Nusca, Sergio O Brien, Sean (Def. Assoc.) Palmer, Gary (Feinschil, Jay Martin) Patton, Bernard (Meehan, Edward C. Jr.) Porter, Kevin (Def. Assoc.) Ramos, Carmen D. (Def. Assoc.) Reynolds, Renee (Def. Assoc.) Rhodes, Bennie (Def. Assoc.) Rivera, Jose Smallwood, Christina (Def. Assoc.) Soto, Marisol (Def. Assoc.) Soto, Raul (Def. Assoc.) Suber, Herbert (Def. Assoc.) Tasker, Jason P P. (Def. Assoc.) Wali, Imani Welch, Robert (Def. Assoc.) Whetstone, Edwin (Def. Assoc.) Williams, Troy L. (Def. Assoc.) Room 501 CUNINGHAM, J. Carambot-gimenez, Bernardo (Def. Assoc.) Colon, Roberto (Conner, John Kelvin) Desalis, Anthony (Def. Assoc.) Johnson, Emanuel (Sobel, Jonathan J.) Johnson, Sulton R. (Maran, Mary Therese) Wilson, Christopher (Def. Assoc.) Room 504 PALUMBO, J. Bradley, Isaiah Burris, Kevin T T. (Goldman, Randolph L.) Butler, Monique E Campbell, Wanda Champion National Security Coates, Curtis (Bowers, Peter C.) Green, Roy Hennigar, Douglas (Kelly, Joseph Kevin) Ingersoll, Jason Montgomery, Christopher D. Ricciuti, Jules Iii Smith, Anthony Spurell, Andre (Humble, Brian Francis) Ziegler, Albert (Def. Assoc.) Room 505 WOODS SKIPPER, S.J. Carvin, Dean (Def. Assoc.) Clary, Miles (Def. Assoc.) Cohen, Dennis (Def. Assoc.) Deloach, Gregory (Def. Assoc.) Fortiz, Ramon J (Def. Assoc.) Fortiz, Ramon J J (Def. Assoc.) Getti-hycynth, Amdadia (Def. Assoc.) Greene, Tyrone (Def. Assoc.) Griffin, Zachary (Def. Assoc.) Hightower, Sylvester (O Hanlon, Stephen Thomas) Howard, Nehemiah (Def. Assoc.) Mills, Stephen (Rainey, Debra Denise) Self, Derrick (Def. Assoc.) Simmons, Sean (Dixon, Robert) Stallworth, Nathaniel (Def. Assoc.) Williams, Rose (McLaughlin, Brian Edward) Room 601 BERRY, J. Brooks, Tirek (Def. Assoc.) Hayes, Charles E. (Tinari, Nino V.) Ludwig, George (Azzarano, Jeffrey) Nottingham, Darryl (Def. Assoc.) Price, James (Shuttleworth, Brad Victor) Rivera, Dexter (Madden, Robert Emmett) Rodriguez, Ivan (Desiderio, David Ernest) Zaborowski, Brandon (Def. Assoc.) Room 602 BRONSON, J. Everette, Wanda (Alva, Daniel Paul) Ortiz, Francisco (Clarke, Andrea Whilby) Roche, Carmen J. (Stosic, Michael Elias) Velez, Primitivo (Def. Assoc.) Williams, Johnny (Dobrosky, Holly C.) Room 604 BELOFF, J. Arguelles, Jose (Maynard, Wayne R.) Diaz, Jose (Dolfman, Murray B.) Easter, Tyrone (Def. Assoc.) Griffin, Dawn (Def. Assoc.) Grimes, Tyrone (Raynor, Earl DuBois Jr.) Hanson, Sebastian P P. (Gamburg, Robert Marc) Harris, Yusuf (Finestone, Aaron Charles) Jackson, William T. (Gay, Andrew G. Jr.) Jimenez, Jose (Desiderio, David Ernest) Johnson, Darwin (Def. Assoc.) Jones, Dwayne (Def. Assoc.) Lopez, Juan (Dolfman, Douglas Lee) Mendez, Robert (Egan, James Frances) Modina, Luis (Def. Assoc.) Nevarez, Maria (Def. Assoc.) Polanco, Reynaldo (McDermott, Michael I.) Rivera, Alexander (Def. Assoc.) Rodriguez, Joel (Rivera, Edwin R.) Rodriguez, Rony (Patton, Richard E.) Sampson, Bernard (Desiderio, David Ernest) Santiago, Hector (Def. Assoc.) Torres, Michael (Def. Assoc.) Vega, Rashan (Def. Assoc.) Williams, Donte (Stosic, Michael Elias) Room 605 SHREEVES JOHNS, J. Alamo, Eric (Isicrate, Paul Vincent) Bosques, Hiriam (Coker, Derrick W.) Clark, Terrance Fredrick (Phillips, Christopher Peter) Cruz, Calvin (Sciolla, Guy R. II) Dale, Maliek (Graves, Michael John Jr.) Dudley, George (Silver, Gary Scott) Franco, Christian (Stosic, Michael Elias) Garcia, Angel (Charamella, Philip A.) Griffin, Kevin (Bowers, Peter C.) Hawkins, Kwan (Moore, Richard B.) Irizarry, Jorge (Peters, Paul S. III) Lewis, Alan M. (Genovese, Francis John) Manuel, Jose (Mincarelli, Louis Anthony) Marlro, Jose (Giuliani, Richard J.) Martinez, Lizmayra (Johnson, Carl Reginald) Mcphail, Lamar (Miller, Robert E. Hamilton) Medina, Janise (Johnson, Carl Reginald) Murphy, Jason H. (Borum, Trevan) Negron, Pedro (Savino, Louis Theodore Jr.) Ortiz, Perfecto (Gay, Andrew G. Jr.) Paris, Renaldo (Mincarelli, Louis Anthony) Peralta, Oscar (LaTour, Pierre III) Perez, Alejandro Reddick, Hafis (Elmore, Berto M.) Reyes, Jose (Fitzpatrick, Thomas Odell) Reyes, Ozem D. (Rivera, Raul I.) Rhoads, Samuel S. (Dolfman, Douglas Lee) Rivera, Randy (Bowers, Peter C.) Robinson, Brenda (Russeck, Tobi Ann) Scott, Nigel (Charamella, Philip A.) Thomas, Richard Jr (de Marco, Perry Paul Jr.) Turnipseed, Christopher (Jarrett, Stephen Bruce) Velasquez, Jose (McMahon, John J. Jr.) Velez, Angel (Rivera, Edwin R.) Room 607 ROBINS NEW, J. Mitchell, Leslie R (Cherniack, Emily Beth) Zimmerman, Matthew (Sturm, Cheryl J.) Room 608 SCHULMAN, J. Brown, Karl J (Rainey, Debra Denise) Cabrera, Armando (Def. Assoc.) Carrero, Amando (Def. Assoc.) Carroe, Amando (Def. Assoc.) Craft, Tracy (Elmore, Berto M.) Rivera, Luis A (Conner, Daniel) Williams, Alvin (Rodrigues, Sondra R.) Room 701 CEISLER, J. Collins, Larry (Mischak, David B.) Darden, Rodney (Def. Assoc.) Delmoral, Dajon (Def. Assoc.) Fidelibus, Antonio (Pagano, Gregory Joseph) Hall, Ali (Dixon, Robert J.) Johnson, Paul (Stein, Gerald A.) Jones, Jeffery (Birley, Kevin Thomas) Lane, Vinson (Meehan, Edward C. Jr.) Moye, Robert (Def. Assoc.) Phillip, Kevin (DiClaudio, Scott) Room 702 DJERASSI, J. (OUT) Bryant, Terrell (Def. Assoc.) Rivera, Alberto (Spade, William R. Jr.) Room 705 MEANS, J. Bailey, Pashun V V. (Def. Assoc.) Baker, Latoya T. (Gamburg, Robert Marc) Blango, Justin (Tinari, Eugene P.) Bonuli, Mark Anthony (Def. Assoc.) Bonuli, Mark M (Def. Assoc.) Brawley, Stephanie (Montoya, William Christopher) Brown, Tyriek K. (Def. Assoc.) Chase, Douglas (Major-Trunfio, Rania Maria) Chase, Douglas J. (Major-Trunfio, Rania Maria) Crawford, Malik (Savino, Louis Theodore Jr.) Cruz, Jose (Azzarano, Jeffrey) Cruz, Jose J. (Def. Assoc.) Dicks, Akreem (Def. Assoc.) Durham, Kenyetta Gilliard, Tamika (Brandeis-Roman, Tracy) Gonzalez, Christopher (Savino, Louis Theodore Jr.) Greene, Brien Hardrick, Harold (Walker, Wallace L.) Hatch, Devin Henry, Siddeeq (Ivory, Thomas Henry) Hill, Chandra (Def. Assoc.) Holden, Christopher (Reuben, Marc Welt) Holder, Andrew (Def. Assoc.) Holder, Andrew M. (Def. Assoc.) Holmes, Willie (Raynor, Earl DuBois Jr.) Johns, Herbert (Def. Assoc.) Johnson, Phillip (McGuigan, Brendan Thomas) Jordan, Johnnie (Diamondstein, Michael Jay) Keys, Tyree Omar (Stefanski, Anthony E.) Larry, Jamar A. (Johnston, Peter Luke) Lee, Jamelyn (Def. Assoc.) Lopez, Jesse (O Hanlon, Stephen Thomas) Lopez, Luis (Def. Assoc.) Martin, Toussant (Pinto, Nicholas V.) Mcmillan, Edward L. (Def. Assoc.) Mcneil, Darrell (Sanita, Amato T.) Mcsorley, William (Def. Assoc.) Melendez, Louis (Def. Assoc.) Morales, Raymond S (Bowers, Peter C.) Nicholson, Steven (Def. Assoc.) Nieves, David (Meade, Alston B. Jr.) Parker, Dominque (Capuano, Gina A.) Pena, Carlos (Def. Assoc.) Perales, Giovany (Perri, Fortunato N. Jr.) Porter, Olivia (Scheuerman, Christian M.) Ramos, Silvio (Bozzelli, Lawrence J.) Randolph, Leon (Cross, David Patrick) Ransom, Darrell (Burke, Thomas F.) Reed, Andre Reyes, Oscar (Def. Assoc.) Riley, Kenneth (Dougherty, Erin Colleen) Robinson, Monterray (Montoya, William Christopher) Robinson, Shameka (Feldman, Gary Mark) Rodgers, Leonard (Martin, Kathleen E.) Rojas, Jose (Def. Assoc.) Sammons, Leonard (Perri, Fortunato N. Jr.) Shelton, Julian (Def. Assoc.) Simmons, Quawanda (Montoya, William Christopher) Smalley, Gregory (Fegan, Deborah Ann) Smith, Kaman N. (Krasner, Lawrence Samuel) Smythe, Kemal (Perlman, Jeffrey L.) Spratley, Michael (Def. Assoc.) Thomas, Charisma (Clemente, Christian Hamilton) To, Dara (Def. Assoc.) Turner, Raheem (Brown, Richard T. Jr.) Voiro, William Lee (Def. Assoc.) Wideman, Carl (Marsh, James T.) Williams, James (Def. Assoc.) Williams, Jammie (Lento, Joseph D.) Woods, Mackie Lee Jr (Seidel, Stephen A.) Young, Dekyle (Def. Assoc.) Room 707 GEROFF, J Wilkerson, Robert (Def. Assoc.) Room 708 Blakly, Samiya (Taylor-Smith, E. Natasha) Carr, George (Borum, Trevan) Davis, Ernest (Def. Assoc.) Ellis, Wanda (McMonagle, Brian J.) Pennycooke, Steven (Cameron, Angelo LeRoy) Rhodan, Ronald (Clemente, Nicholas A.) Sample, James Watson, Rasheed (Savino, Louis Theodore Jr.) Room 801 O GRADY, J. Graham, Fred (Auspitz, Charles) Jones, Brenda (Abdul-Rahman, Qawi) Pierce, Hasain (LaTour, Pierre III) Santiago, Maria (Hamilton, Warren R.) Thomas, Ruffitom R. (Ivory, Thomas Henry) Room 804 COVINGTON, J. Benedict, Stanley (Conner, Daniel) Calhoun, Gilbert (Def. Assoc.) Cossom, Robert (Def. Assoc.) Hall, Ali K. (Def. Assoc.) Hampton, Fernando (Alva, Daniel Paul) Irby, Alvin (Def. Assoc.) Jones, Kieth (Def. Assoc.) Lovelace, Saheem T. (Newman, George Henry) Parker, Lynda A. (Def. Assoc.) Perry, Charles (Def. Assoc.) Peterson, Corbin (Def. Assoc.) Smith, John (Def. Assoc.) Room 807 BRIGHT, J. Chapman, Joseph (Def. Assoc.) Daniels, Troy (Newman, George Henry) Grant, Tyrone (Mungello, Mark D.) Haynes, Arius M (Def. Assoc.) Mas, Alex (Def. Assoc.) Newsome, Darnell (Def. Assoc.) Page, Tyrone (Arrigo, Marc Antony) Smallwood, Christopher (Def. Assoc.) Room 808 COLINS, J. Bickerstaff, John (Savino, Louis Theodore Jr.) Headen, Keith (Gottlieb, Jay Samuel) Marks, Floyd (Def. Assoc.) Room 901 CARPENTER, J. Bryant, Rommel (Henry, Todd Edward) Bryant, Steve (Cross, David Patrick) Buckley, Alexander (Perri, Fortunato N. Jr.) Clowney, James (Tinari, Eugene P.) George, Waynes (Glanzberg, David Seth) Hardy, Robert (Montoya, William Christopher) Hardy, Robert M. (Montoya, William Christopher) Jones, Jennifer (Gay, Andrew G. Jr.) Knowles, Scott (Def. Assoc.) Kruszewski, John (Gamburg, Robert Marc) Mccray, Larry (Raynor, Earl DuBois Jr.) Mcintyre, Rahiim (Nasuti, Carmen Charles III) Parker, David W (Raynor, Earl DuBois Jr.) Perkins, Gary (Def. Assoc.) Ribot, Angel (Def. Assoc.) Rufus, Oliver Iii (Bryn, Elayne) Santiago, Josue (Sagot, Allan Jeffrey) Smith, Calvin (Sagot, Allan Jeffrey) Torres, Jose (Def. Assoc.) Woodson, Gerald (Def. Assoc.) Room 904 ANDERS, J. Collins, Antwine (Def. Assoc.) Cooper, Charles (Feldman, Gary Mark) Ford, Troy Delano (Medway, F. Michael) Garvin, David (Def. Assoc.) Harris, Hyreeam (Def. Assoc.) Roache, Gary (Sagot, Allan Jeffrey) Smith, Willie (Def. Assoc.) Trainer, Robert (Driscoll, Raymond C.) Wade, John A. (Def. Assoc.) Walker, Charles (Def. Assoc.) White, Wesley (Def. Assoc.) Williams, Helen (Savino, Louis Theodore Jr.) Williams, Shawn (Martin, Kathleen E.) Room 905 KANE, J. Allen, Deshone R. (Def. Assoc.) Baker, Andrew (Def. Assoc.) Bell, Daquana (Def. Assoc.) Bell, Roosevelt (Belmont, David) Bufford, Gregory (Def. Assoc.) Carter, Michael C (Def. Assoc.) Carter`, Angel S (Def. Assoc.) Clague, Tammy B (Def. Assoc.) Davis, Keecha Deshields, Marcqual (Def. Assoc.) Devine, Keith (Def. Assoc.) Dorsey, Donna (Def. Assoc.) Duncan, Marvin (Def. Assoc.) Edmunds, Maurice (Def. Assoc.) Glenn, John L (Def. Assoc.) Golden, James R. (Def. Assoc.) Haynes, David Jim J. (MCMAHON, JACK) Hill, Larry (Def. Assoc.) Jaminson, Randy (Def. Assoc.) Janofsky, Daniel Jones, Naimah Kelly, Doris (Kramer, Max Gerson) Kennedy, Marquita J. (D Onofrio, Louis Francis) Kershaw, Dysaun (Hall, Clayton) Kevin, Nowlin L. (Smith, Ronald Allan) Keys, Hakeem (Def. Assoc.) Lassiter, Martiah R R. (Goldman, Randolph L.) Mcfarland, Marvin (Def. Assoc.) Mclaughlin, Gordon (Def. Assoc.) Miller, Kevin (Def. Assoc.) Noel, Abel (Diamond, Harold) Palmer, Tyron (McPherson, Shevelle) Propst, Raymond (Def. Assoc.) Satchmei, Mohammad (Alva, Jeremy-Evan) Scott, Leonard (Coker, Derrick W.) Scott, Sachim (Def. Assoc.) Sloan, Milton S (Def. Assoc.) Smith, Calvin W. (Sagot, Allan Jeffrey) Stevens, Deavron (Def. Assoc.) Walker, Hakeem Saleem (Greene, Daniel H.) Wimes, Troy (Hughes, Evan T. L.) Room 907 MINEHART, J. Alwyn, Almir (Joseph, Arnold C.) Colon, Eddy Heralcio (Sciolla, Guy R. II) Trice, Brian (Giampietro, Michael F.) Room 908 HILL, J. Hansbury, Timothy (Martucci, John Joseph Jr.) Ray, Christophe (Def. Assoc.) Rodriquez, Ricardo (Def. Assoc.) Thompson, Michael K. (Def. Assoc.) Tucker, Darryl (Def. Assoc.) White, Kenneth (Meehan, Edward C. Jr.) Wilkerson, Michael (Def. Assoc.) Wilson, Cecelia (Harrison, W. Fred Jr.) Room 1002 TRENT, J. Fulton, Anthony (Reilly, William J.) Hamiter, Uhuru (Cohen, Elliot Marc) Haynes, Eric (Mozenter, Robert B.) Hernandez, Jose R (Rivera, Raul I.) House, Andrew (Tauber, Alan J.) Kane, Robert (Scheuerman, Christian M.) Whartnaby, Joseph (Def. Assoc.) Wright, Mark Anthony (Def. Assoc.) Wright, Mark Anthony A. (Rossman, Mariana) Room 1004 GORDON, J. Angell, Christopher (Def. Assoc.) Barriner, Billy (Sernovitz, Harvey A.) Canty, Steven Jaquell (Def. Assoc.) Ellis, Bernice (Reynolds, Coley OBrien) Glumson, George (McGuigan, Brendan Thomas) Hawryliw, Michael (Def. Assoc.) Mascio, Lawrence J Jr (Def. Assoc.) Pham, Minh Shamsid-deen, Anwar (Def. Assoc.) Smith, Steven (Tinari, Nino V.) Tufano, Rosario (Def. Assoc.) Room 1005 RANSOM, J. (OUT) Ballard, Yanna M. (Def. Assoc.) Baskerville, Wade (Def. Assoc.) Bates, Joseph (Gamburg, Robert Marc) Bolden, Joseph P. (Def. Assoc.) Davis, Darius S (Def. Assoc.) Fagan, William (Mischak, David B.) Garrick, Kerium (Jalon, Andres) Hines, Andre (Wainstein, Arnold L.) Holland, Paris (Fishman, Brian M.) Kershaw, Antonio (Russeck, Tobi Ann) Law, Randolph (Gamburg, Robert Marc) Maldonado, Angel Mann, Robert T (Def. Assoc.) Muldor, James (Def. Assoc.) Purefoey, Naim (Maran, Mary Therese) Stanley, Christina (Evarts, Christopher J.) Sweeting, Maurice D (Def. Assoc.) Thompson, Brahiem (Cevallos, Daniel Louis) Williams, Tiffany D (McMonagle, Brian J.) Worley, Anthony L. (Joseph, Arnold C.) Room 1007 HUGHES, J. Conaway, Corey C (McGill, Thomas L. Jr.) Daniely, Allen R (Gelb, Jeremy C.) Gamble, Tyre (Arrigo, Marc Antony) Kelly, Aaron (Gelman, Norris E.) Narcisse, Edward (Gelb, Jeremy C.) Trivigno, Philip (Bruno, James S.) Room 1008 WOGAN, J. Andrews, Daniel (Walker, Jeremy Marcus) Crump, Garland (Def. Assoc.) Ford, Albert A (Darmopray, Walter T.) Harris, Aaron (Kramer, Max Gerson) Neris, Andre (Geary, Raymond C.) Perez, John (Savino, Louis Theodore Jr.) Pizarro, Harold (Def. Assoc.) Roman, Pedro (Def. Assoc.) Smith, Mileah (Def. Assoc.) Taylor, Timothy A (Tinari, Nino V.) Room 1101 ARRAIGNMENTS TC Andrews, Reginald Armstead, Darrin (Stosic, Michael Elias) Armstrong, John (Gambone, Alfonso) Arrington, James Aviles, Eugene (Def. Assoc.) Battle, Jamilah (Greenblatt, Ronald) Beavers, David (Def. Assoc.) Belton, Faheem (Def. Assoc.) Benjamin, Khalik (Def. Assoc.) Boseman, Clifford Brooks, Kevin Brown, Keith Quinton (Def. Assoc.)