The name does have a clean, daisy-fresh smell to it, like a good laundry. In this case the laundering being done was of settlement money in the Kentucky fen-phen scandal. (WSJ law blog, Louisville Courier-Journal, Lexington Herald-Leader, Krauss @ PoL).
Search Results for ‘kentucky fen-phen’
More Chesley follies with Judge Bamberger in Kentucky?
Prominent Cincinnati attorney Stan Chesley said he wanted to file the Diocese of Covington priest-abuse case in Boone County because “we have a real friendly judge there,” a lawyer testified this week.
“He winked at me” and said “we need to file this in Boone County,” testified Covington lawyer Barbara Bonar, who is suing Chesley in a dispute over attorneys fees in the $84.5 million case.
“He said we already have hired a trial consultant, and he is real friendly with the judge,” Bonar said, describing a conversation she claimed to have had with Chesley in January 2003. “And he winked at me again.”
Chesley denies the allegations, but the fact remains that the Boone Circuit judge, Joseph Bamberger, of Kentucky fen-phen scandal fame, made an unprecedented ruling certifying a class action over priest abuse that forced the diocese into a $84.5 million settlement given that the church could not hope to defend itself against anonymous unnamed class members.
Bonar, who was briefly co-counsel for the class in the priest-abuse case, testified that Chesley’s partner Robert Steinberg told her in August 2003 that the Chesley firm had to turn down an early $3 million settlement offer from the diocese because it already had paid $400,000 in expenses to Modlin as a fee “to get the class certified.”
The diocese had sought Bamberger’s recusal. Modlin was also hired as a $2 million “trial consultant” in the fen-phen case, and went on to buy a house in Florida with Judge Bamberger. Chesley denies paying Modlin $400,000, and Bonar has her own motivation to fib, as she’s suing for a share of the Chesley fees from the class action, and claims she left the case only because of her fear of being involved in a fraud on the court. Bonar has already earned $2 million in fees out of the $4.7 million she settled for in individual cases outside the class action. Somewhere in here, a crime has been committed, whether it be bribery or perjury, but there’s work for a grand jury to be done. (Andrew Wolfson, “Lawyers clash in dispute over fees”, Louisville Courier-Journal, May 10; see also Jeanne Houck, “Claims tangle diocese lawsuit”, Kentucky Post, Nov. 26, 2003).
Update: the Kentucky Bar Association is investigating. (Paul A. Long, “Bar: Probe attorneys’ conduct”, Cincinnati Post, May 10.)
“Fen-Phen Zen”
Hey, I just write the American.com column about the Kentucky fen-phen fraud, not the headlines. Earlier on Overlawyered: Mar. 26 and links therein. (Cross-posted at Point of Law.)
More fen-phen fun
We’ve recently discussed the Kentucky fen-phen scandal, in which the plaintiffs’ lawyers are accused of stealing tens of millions of dollars from their clients; there’s another brewing scandal involving fen-phen lawyers in New York.
Napoli Kaiser Bern (now known as Napoli Bern) represented more than 5,000 plaintiffs who had opted out of the larger class action suit against manufacturer AHP; a whistleblower, or disgruntled ex-employee (take your pick) alleged that Napoli Bern manipulated the amounts of the settlement to be paid to each plaintiff — giving more to its own direct clients — so that Napoli could maximize its own profits at the expense of other law firms.
More important is the allegation that Napoli Bern lied to its clients (and to its own expert witness on ethics) in making them think that the amounts allocated to each plaintiff had been determined by AHP and reviewed by a special master appointed by the court; in fact, it appears that Napoli Bern may have decided unilaterally how much to offer each plaintiff. Yesterday, a New York state judge ruled that the allegations had sufficient merit to reopen the settlement and send the allegations against Napoli Bern to trial.
The stakes are high here; the total amount of this settlement — confidential, but reportedly at least a billion dollars — is not at issue, but the distribution of that money among the lawyers and plaintiffs is. As the judge noted, in theory the penalty could be as severe as requiring Napoli Bern to forfeit all fees earned in the case. (Isn’t mass tort litigation fun? Billions of dollars of Other People’s Money floating around, waiting for lawyers to figure out how to distribute it.)
NY Times on Ky. fen-phen scandal
We’ve been beating the drums on this one for a while (Mar. 6 and Aug. 25, 2006, Jan. 24, Feb. 14, Feb. 21, Mar. 19, 2007; Point of Law May 10, 2005) and it’s nice to see the Times’s Adam Liptak with a front-pager this weekend on the affair. The story begins by telling the story of what happened when W.L. Carter, one of the clients in the 440-member batch, went to pick up his check from the fen-phen settlement:
The check was, for starters, much smaller than he had expected. And his own lawyers threatened to retaliate against him if he ever told anyone, including his family, how much he had been paid. “You will be fined $100,000, you will go to jail and you will be sued,” Mr. Carter recalled them saying.
Liptak writes: “Legal experts said the fraud might be one of the biggest and most brazen in legal history.” Or at least one of the biggest and most brazen that’s come to light: batch settlements in mass tort cases are frequently so secretive in their details, and so carefully drawn up to repel inquiries from outsiders or from clients themselves about who got what, that we can at best speculate about whether the Kentucky scandal is an outlier. (“Fraud Inquiry Looks at Lawyers in Diet-Drug Case”, Mar. 22).
P.S. As Ted notes above, today’s Louisville Courier-Journal adds some new information about the alleged role played by Stanley Chesley’s Cincinnati law firm (Andrew Wolfson, “Court filing ties lawyer into diet- drug pay scheme”, Mar. 26; Lattman, Mar. 26).
Grand jury looking at Ky. fen-phen scandal
A grand jury is expected to hear testimony this week about the role of three Lexington lawyers in the now-infamous Kentucky fen-phen settlement (Feb. 14, etc.). “Frank Bentley IV, a lawyer representing [Cincinnati’s Stanley] Chesley, said he is not a target of the criminal investigation.” (Andrew Wolfson, “Grand jury to look at diet-drug attorneys”, Louisville Courier-Journal, Mar. 15). Last month one of the lawyers caught up in the scandal, William Gallion, said “that he did nothing wrong and that a lawsuit filed against him and others in the case is simply the result of ‘a cottage industry of lawyers who attack class-action settlements.'” (Andrew Wolfson, “Attorney denies wrongdoing”, Courier-Journal, Feb. 11).
Judge resigns in Ky. fen-phen scandal
Last May 10 we reported on the questions that were being asked about a sealed settlement of Kentucky fen-phen claims which had included (along with vast sums in legal fees) the quiet diversion of $20 million into a mysterious new charitable entity called the Kentucky Fund for Healthy Living. Now the mystery has turned to scandal: the judge who approved the settlement, Joseph F. (“Jay”) Bamberger has resigned after allegations surfaced that he was serving as a director of the fund, receiving $5,000 a month (three of the plaintiff’s lawyers were also paid directors). The state’s Judicial Conduct Commission said Bamberger’s actions “shock the conscience” and he faced possible removal had he not resigned. Particular attention is being focused on Bamberger’s close ties to Mark Modlin, a trial consultant in the fen-phen case who has had co-investments with the judge. The alleged closeness between Bamberger and Modlin had led to protests from litigants in a number of earlier cases, including a high-profile priest-abuse case against the Catholic Diocese of Covington.
The commission’s reprimand (PDF) revealed a startling fact. “The attorney fees approved were at least $86 million and perhaps as much as $104 million” — well exceeding the $74 million that was split among the 431 claimants in settlement. A lawsuit continues on behalf of some allegedly victimized clients against four plaintiff’s lawyers involved in the settlement, including big-league Cincinnati operator Stanley Chesley. (Beth Musgrave, “Fen-phen lawsuit judge resigns”, Lexington Herald-Leader, Feb. 28; Jim Hannah, “Judge quits amid allegations”, Cincinnati Enquirer, Feb. 28; “Investigation of Bamberger warranted” (editorial), Cincinnati Enquirer, Mar. 1; “A blistering rebuke” (editorial), Cincinnati Post, Mar. 1; Peter Bronson, “Hold this judge in contempt”, Cincinnati Enquirer, Mar. 2)(cross-posted from Point of Law).
A “pattern of misuse of the judicial process…to obstruct collection efforts.”
Update on the long-running Kentucky fen-phen fee scandal: one-time “King of Torts” Stan Chesley has maneuvered for years “to avoid paying a multimillion-dollar judgment to hundreds of former clients. The Enquirer has found that Chesley’s legal maneuverings have led to more than $162,000 in sanctions against Chesley and his attorneys….The Ohio Supreme Court in an October ruling – one of two during the prolonged legal battle – said Chesley has engaged in a ‘pattern of misuse of the judicial process…to obstruct collection efforts.'” [Kevin Grasha, Cincinnati Enquirer, more]
Twilight of Stan Chesley
A judge has issued an arrest warrant for disgraced and disbarred Stan Chesley, once “Master of Disaster” of tort cases and a key figure in the Kentucky fen-phen scandal [Cincinnati Business Journal, Cincinnati Enquirer]
Stanley Chesley: the sequel
Disbarred in Kentucky, disgraced in the eyes of many onetime admirers, the veteran mass tort lawyer does not seem to have been disgraced in the eyes of the Cincinnati city council: it just unanimously appointed him to the city’s Human Relations Commission. [WCPO, earlier, background and on Kentucky fen-phen scandal).