Silicon Valley Tycoon Convinces Court His Wife’s Scam is Designed to Avoid Pre-Nup

10950859361151CDPClyde Berg and his brother Carl Berg are two very wealthy men. They developed and built huge campuses for a number of successful Silicon Valley businesses, and sold their firm for $1.3 billion. But the old adage that money does not buy happiness is clearly illustrated in the divorce proceedings between Clyde, age 75, and his estranged wife, Ellena Berg, age 38. The first obvious comment is why a man in his 70’s thought he could sustain a relationship with a woman more than thirty years younger than him.

After ten years of marriage and an iron-clad prenup, Ms. Berg accused her husband of vicious abuse, including outfitting her with a spiked dog collar, tying her to a bed, and sexually assaulting her with a golf putter while she was nine months pregnant, an attack where she testified she was restrained for two days before freeing herself. But the presiding judge wasn’t buying what Ellena was selling and determined that she fabricated the entire incident. In dismissing the charges at a preliminary hearing Judge Ron M. Del Pozzo said Ms. Berg’s evidence “was not worthy of belief” and queried whether it was “flat-out-lying” or the product of being mentally ill.

Judge Del Pozzo rejected Ms. Berg’s absurd suggestion that while tied down she dialed 911 with her tongue borrowing a quip from Johnny Cochrane in the OJ Simpson trial: “If the tongue can’t dial, there’s not going to be a trial.”

As for Ms. Berg and her lawyers they retaliated by suggesting to the Judge that the District Attorney’s office was bowing to the “political and economic power” of her husband, a charge that was vigorously denied by the Crown who said: “We make prosecutorial decisions based on the evidence in the case, and not the money in the defendant’s bank account.” Of their client’s testimony, which consisted of ” I can’t remember” said forty-four times in ninety minutes, they argued that she suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder because of her husband’s abuse of her and ill-treatment from the prosecutor’s office.

Meanwhile, Mr. Berg registered his displeasure with the Crown office saying they should have dropped the charges against him and not proceeded with the weeklong hearing, contending he was the victim of his wife’s scam designed to circumvent the pre-nuptial agreement signed by her.

The pre-nup signed by the parties provided Ms. Berg with $2 million dollars if their marriage ended. She earned $200,000 a year for her trouble. Mr. Berg spent nine days in jail and later spent months with an electronic ankle bracelet, and was ousted from his home following his wife’s report to the police. But he was most distressed about the removal of his beloved Weimaraner dog who was taken away from him as his wife also accused him of beating the dog.

Lawdiva aka Georgialee Lang

Enraged Husband Attacks Wife in Court After Child Support Order Pronounced

_DSC4851Catherine Gonzalez, age 23, was forced to go to court to get an order that her husband pay child support, an application that is brought routinely in family law courts across North America, when a parent refuses to pay support voluntarily.

Her husband Paul Gonzalez Jr., a former Marine, was enraged when Judge Geoffrey Cohen made the order and stormed out of the Judge’s chambers. But he returned, and attacked his wife, in front of Judge Cohen and her lawyer, pummeling his wife with his fists. Ms. Gonzalez suffered significant injuries including a broken nose, a broken jaw, a torn lip, a concussion, and severe bruises to her face and eyes.

The beating ended with the intervention of Ms. Gonzalez’s lawyer and court bailiffs who confronted Mr. Gonzalez with a stun gun.

The Court threw the book at Mr. Gonzalez, sentencing him to 15 years in prison for the brutal assault on his wife, despite testimony from the a psychologist that he suffered from bi-polar disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder.

Judge Cohen was particularly incensed by Mr. Gonzalez’s attack in a court of law, where participants had every right to feel safe. The sentence he imposed was more than three times Florida’s maximum sentence for aggravated battery.

Earlier, Ms. Gonzalez had sought a restraining order against her husband but couldn’t persuade a judge to make that order.

In courts in British Columbia where counsel are concerned that one of the parties may become violent, a special request is made to ensure that a sheriff is in the courtroom during the hearing.

It is a shame that Ms. Gonzalez’s fear of her husband’s threatening behavior was not taken seriously, by anyone

Lawdiva aka Georgialee Lang

Why Family Law Lawyers Will Always Bill By the Hour

GEO CASUALI read a piece in the Huffington Post this week written by Jim Halfens of Divorce Hotel, who argued that it was about time that divorce lawyers charged a fixed fee for the legal work they perform, instead of sticking to the “old way” of hourly billing.

It will never happen and for good reason! If Mr. Halfen knew the frailties of the family court system and the opportunities for abuse and delay, he would understand. But let me paint you a picture of regular occurrences in the practice of family law;

A client asks you to draw up a comprehensive separation agreement or prenuptial agreement, which without complications will cost in the range of $3,000. The problem is that often clients will request the agreement, expend the funds, all without having any idea whether their spouse will agree or sign the agreement.

Of course, it is an utter waste of time to present an agreement to your spouse, the terms of which have never been discussed with him or her. My practice is to warn clients that they may be wasting money, if they haven’t bothered to determine if their spouse is “on side”.

Once the client believes their spouse will cooperate, it is a “go” for the agreement and usually clients want to know exactly how much it will cost and want you to guarantee that fee estimate.

But it can’t be done….because every agreement and spouse is different and you can never rely on a client’s advice that their situation is straight forward. For example, it is commonplace to ask your client to provide you with a list of all their assets, their estimated values, and also their debts and the amounts owing. You also need the same information from their partner.

Of course, you can’t forget to request their recent personal and corporate tax returns, and in the case of companies, the financial statements as well. While the client may imagine their financial situation is simple, usually it is not, particularly where there are more sophisticated assets, like trusts, annuities and off-shore assets. But you don’t know any of that until you receive all the documents and my experience is that you never get everything you need or it trickles in over a lengthy period of time.

Lawyers bill for their expertise and the time it takes them to complete a task for their client. In this agreement scenario, it would be foolish to quote a fixed fee for ten hours of time, when it may take you twenty hours, or more. Another difficulty is that once the agreement is complete, your client’s partner will take it to her or his lawyer to review and negotiate. That could take two hours or ten hours, because initially you don’t often know who your client’s spouse will retain. One thing lawyers know is the negotiation styles of their colleagues, some lawyers are known to be reasonable, but others are not.

However, the agreement scenario is a piece of cake compared to the living nightmare if you must enter the family justice system, once negotiation and mediation have failed.(Unless of course, you are smart enough to agree to a private arbitration, but that’s another article) If you thought your lawyer was expensive before, this calamity will cost you not only heaps of money but also your emotional and psychological sanity. Where to begin?

After all the negotiations and mediations are at an end, the first thing you’ll have to do is attend a mandatory mediation with a judge, who may or may not be capable of facilitating a settlement. But it’s not like you haven’t already been there, done that. This first step will cost you several thousand dollars and it is not optional in most cases.

Once that has been a complete bust, you enter the nightmare called family law litigation, an experience that frightens even those who are courtroom addicts. The first shock is that you must produce every single piece of paper that has anything to do with the issues in your case, and I mean everything: your kid’s report cards, your kid’s medical records, all paper that is related to your assets and debts, including statements for long-lost bank accounts, credit card statements for the past five years, business records and financial statements, tax returns, and all the damning emails your spouse has sent to you, but that’s just the beginning.

Speaking of emails, most lawyers spend a lot of time reading lengthy email missives from their clients, and also multiple strings of nasty emails between client and his or her spouse, many of which will be producible for court. Hard to predict in advance whether you’ll need to read a hundred emails or several thousand. And don’t forget your lawyer will regularly scour the internet for damaging posts and pictures.

You’ll need to hire appraisers: lots of them, to value your home, your summer cottage, your cars, your boat and trailer, your wine collection, art collection, antique furniture, and your pension. But none of those appraisals will be definitive because your partner will do the same, and if you have a business, you need to set aside $30,000 or more to pay a business valuator. Welcome to the battle of the experts!

Worse than all of that is that when you finally prepare to go to court, you’ll get there and sit in a courtroom all day, only to learn that you have to come back another day, because the judge ran out of time. More delay and more costs because all that work your lawyer did to prepare, must be redone to prepare again, after all, your lawyer has dozens of clients and with even a delay of one week will not remember all the details without another review. You finally get a judge and you learn that you won’t get a decision for weeks, even months.

Tell me honestly, how do you provide your client with an infallible estimate of what it all will cost? That’s right, you don’t, because you can’t.

Lawdiva aka Georgialee Lang

Lawyer Botches Adoption, Sued for Dead Infant

DSC01152_2 (2)_2Rachel and Heidi McFarland were thrilled with their little baby boy, who they adopted as a newborn from the infant’s 15-year-old mother. They loved him and cared for him for two months, but then received advice from their lawyer, Jason Rieper, that their son, named Gabriel, needed to be returned to his mother, Markeya Atkins.

Lawyer Rieper told the Des Moines couple that if they wanted to continue with the adoption he would need more than $10,000, but he didn’t explain to them why the money was needed. Rachel and Heidi were devastated, writing Mr. Rieper a letter indicating their desire to continue with the process. Mr. Rieper responded with a letter outlining Ms. Atkins “troubled youth” and her abuse of drugs. A few days later, Mr. Rieper showed up at the McFarland home, told them they had a slim chance of a successful adoption, and took the child to his birth mother. He advised them that a judge would likely side with the birth mother in any court proceeding.

Within five weeks of Gabriel’s return, he was dead and the child’s father, 17-year-old Drew James Weehler-Smith was charged with first degree murder. What the McFarland’s discovered was that their lawyer had failed to obtain the mother’s signature releasing the baby to the McFarlands, a fact he hid from his clients. They are suing for negligence and also arguing that Mr. Rieper had a legal obligation to advise child protection authorities of the danger of the infant’s return.

Poor little Gabriel, another victim of child abuse.

Lawdiva aka Georgialee Lang

MORE CELEBRITY DIVORCE RUMOURS

BarristerBeing a celebrity is not always an enviable status. Yes, when they are at the top of the heap, they get paid millions of dollars, have designers clamouring for them to wear their fashions, and get the best seats in the house, whether it’s a basketball game, tickets to the Oscars, or a front-row table at Wolfgang Puck’s.

But it can’t be any fun to read the constant speculation from the gossip mags that you’re heading for divorce. Recently, there’s a lot of dirt being dished about a whole bunch of Hollywood celebrities, apparently on the brink of separation and divorce.

In random order, Star, Us, People, TMZ, Buzzfeed, and so many more are telling divorce tales about the following couples:

-Sheri Shepard, late of TV’s “The View” and her husband are on the rocks, and to tantalize the public, Ms. Shepard has been sewered for allegedly walking away from their child who was recently hatched via a surrogate mother;

- Jay-Z and Beyoncé grabbed the headlines when Beyoncé’s sister, Solange, was observed assaulting Jay-Z in an elevator, ostensibly because he had done Beyoncé wrong. Some are saying that Rhianna is involved. Columnists are rabidly predicting that at the end of their $100 million dollar world tour, they will pack in their marriage. However, New York divorce guru, Raoul Felder, says that the rampant publicity is a boon for their tour and may be nothing more than “good business” for the pair;

-Mariah Carey and Nick Cannon are also rumoured to be heading towards Splitsville. The speculation is that the breakup is because of someone cheating, while others in the know say it’s because of Mariah’s diva-like behavior.

-Melanie Griffiths and Antonio Banderas separated a few months ago and now the paparazzi are following Melanie around Los Angeles, taking photos of her arm tattoo which is Antonio’s name in a heart, all the time wondering out loud when she will have it removed by laser.

-Barbara Streisand and James Brolin are another celebrity couple with rumours floating around. A recent article described Babs as very upset when she caught her 74-year-old husband ogling Kim Kardashian at an A List party in the Hamptons and we know he wasn’t looking at her eyes.

-Kim Kardashian and Kanye West are allegedly squabbling over when to have another baby and the stress has caused her to gain 20 lbs. She is apparently also in a panic because her dream marriage is a nightmare as Kanye keeps her on a tight leash with a GPS on her telephone so he can monitor her whenever he wishes.

Yes, there’s more: Ellen DeGeneres, Portia De Rossi, Michael Moore, Faith Hill, Tim McGraw, Kendra Wilkinson, David Duchovny, Tea Leoni, Robin Thicke, Paula Patton, Cuba Gooding Jr., Trace Adkin. Whew! It doesn’t end!

Lawdiva aka Georgialee Lang

DISBARRED THE SERIES: GARTH DRABINSKY

GEO_edited-1How far the mighty fall….Garth Drabinsky was an entertainment mogul in the world of theatre, whose productions including Phantom of the Opera, Showboat, Sunset Boulevard, and Kiss of the Spider Woman, garnered nineteen Tony awards for Drabinsky’s production company Livent. Prior to his foray into live theatrical production, he was an independent film producer, and later with a partner co-founded Cineplex Theatres in Canada in 1979, eventually acquiring Odeon Theatres to establish Cineplex Odeon, a venture he was forced out of in 1989 after accumulating unmanageable debt.

Born in Toronto, he obtained a law degree from the University of Toronto in 1973 and was called to the Ontario bar in 1975, working briefly as an entertainment lawyer, but his legal credentials paled in comparison to his success in show business. He became a Broadway darling, said to be responsible for 25% of North America’s live theatre revenues. Along the way he received a Queen’s Counsel designation, the prestigious Order of Canada, took Livent public, and appeared to be at the top of his game.

But things aren’t always as they seem. The reality was that Drabinsky was awash in financial problems due to excessive production costs, along with millions of dollars expended to build or renovate venues for his productions. To the surprise of many, in 1998 Livent received a $20 million dollar injection from Michael Ovitz, co-founder of Creative Artists Agency, the world’s largest talent agency and later President of Walt Disney Corporation.

With new money Drabinsky was on a roll, that is until forensic auditors hired by Michael Ovitz discovered that Drabinsky and his partner Myron Gottlieb were “cooking” the books in order to hide their massive financial losses. In this case, they created two sets of books, one that painted a rosy picture and the second that revealed the stark reality of their nearly bankrupt company.

These events saw the dismissal of Drabinsky and Gottlieb from Livent in August of 1998 and the commencement of a $225 million dollar civil lawsuit against them. But worse things were down the pike.

In 1999 authorities in New York indicted Grabinsky and Gottleib accusing them of misappropriating $4.6 million dollars from Livent. Meanwhile the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and securities regulators in the United States and Canada began investigating.

Finally, in 2002 four Livent executives, including Drabinsky and Gottlieb, were charged with fraud and accounting irregularities between 1989 and 1998. The allegations were ugly: forged financial statements, Livent purchasing large blocks of theatre tickets to falsely create an “uber-successful” production, and enticing investors to inject over $500 million dollars into the company based on fake documents.

After years of delay, said to arise from Garth Drabinsky’s lawyer, Eddie Greenspan, being fully occupied by the Lord Conrad Black fraud case in Chicago, Drabinsky finally faced justice. After a 65 day trial, Drabinsky was found guilty and sentenced to a seven-year prison term, which ultimately after appeal, was reduced to five years.

Recently steps were taken by the Canadian government to rescind his Order of Canada, and last week the Law Society of Upper Canada disbarred him, despite glowing reference letters from former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and former Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, Frank Iacobucci.

Has Garth Drabinsky taken responsibility for his crimes? Sort of, but he still says that the fraud was a result of computer software that he didn’t understand.

Lawdiva aka Georgialee Lang

Convicted Murderer Teaches Himself the Law, Obtains a New Trial and Acquittal

DSC00275_1Rodell Sanders is yet another victim of a corrupt criminal justice system in America. In 1993 he was a member of a gang called the Gangster Disciples in Chicago, Illinois. In December 1993 a carjacking took place resulting in a robbery and the murder of Philip Atkins, the male driver of the vehicle. His female companion, Stacy Armstrong, was also gunned down and left for dead, but she gained consciousness and managed to drag herself to a neighbor who called 911.

Stacy Armstrong was shown a photo line-up of possible suspects, one of whom was Rodell Sanders. Despite Ms. Armstrong’s description of her attacker as a 6 foot tall, slender, medium-skinned black man, she identified Rodell Sanders as her attacker. He was a hefty 180 pounds and 5 feet 8 inches. The Chicago police arrested Mr. Sanders and another gang associate of his, Germaine Haslett.

Haslett was persuaded by the police to finger Sanders as the guiding mind in the robbery, murder and attempted murder in exchange for a five year sentence. The police knew that Haslett was fully involved in the crimes but were anxious to turn Rodell Sanders into a gang informant with the threat of a lengthy jail term. Sanders refused their plea bargain of 23 years imprisonment and plead not guilty at trial.

Rodell Sanders knew he was being set up as he had a confirmed alibi supported by affidavits of associates who were with him at a party the night of the crimes. He hired a private detective to interview Haslett to determine why Haslett was lying about him. The detective taped a conversation where Haslett admitted that Sanders was not involved at all but that he was pressured by the police to testify against Sanders.

One of the questions put to Haslett by the private eye was “whether the police had urged him to lie on Rodell Sanders and place him at the scene of the crime?” Haslett answered in the affirmative.

Unfortunately, Sander’s lawyer did not call the private detective to testify and did not cross-examine Haslett about his lies. With the eye witness testimony of Ms. Armstrong and Haslett’s corroborative testimony, Sanders was convicted and sentenced to 80 years in prison. His appeal of the convictions also failed.

But he knew he was innocent and dedicated himself to learning the law, asking his family to save up some money so he could purchase the legal textbooks he needed to turn his case around. Rather than hanging out with his fellow inmates, he spent eight hours a day, seven days a week pouring over the law. He said he did it for his wife and children and because he did not want to die an innocent man in jail.

By 2003 Rodell Sanders was in a position to file a petition to the court alleging incompetent trial counsel in his bid for a new trial. He was successful in a 2006 hearing and a new trial was ordered, but not before the State filed an appeal, losing it, but delaying a new trial until 2010.

At his new trial, the jurors voted 11 to 1 for a guilty verdict, however, without unanimity it was a hung jury. He had a second trial this week where the jury deliberated for only five hours before acquitting him of all charges. He left prison last week, age 49, after serving twenty years on trumped-up charges.

Mr. Sanders has launched a civil suit against police and the justice authorities for their role in the nightmare he has endured.

As always, I wonder how the State, once in possession of the facts involving a rogue police officer, recanted testimony, and bogus eye witness identification, can be so arrogant as to appeal every court decision favourable to Mr. Sanders. Truly disgusting!

Lawdiva aka Georgialee Lang