There are lots of Munro stories. My favorite relates to her supposed oversight of Stamford attorney Gary Cohen's "community service." Cohen had been grieved by a former client for extorting $300,000 for himself and another $300,000 for the client's ex wife's lawyer. Miraculously, the grievance panel found that Cohen had engaged in unethical conduct.
See: http://www.jud.ct.gov/SGC/decisions/060020.pdf. (For a good laugh, note the discussion of Cohen's expert, fellow divorce lawyer Gaetano Ferro, who found Cohen's behavior ethical.)
This case represents, to my knowledge, the only time any member of the Connecticut divorce bar has been sanctioned for any behavior whatsoever.
Cohen was then required to perform something like 200 hours of "community service" pursuant to a subsequent settlement with the Statewide Grievance Committee. Munro was assigned to "oversee" Cohen's community service. However, Cohen wasn't up doing the required hours of community service. So Munro then gave Cohen credit for community service performed on his behalf by one of his associates, whom Cohen presumably paid. Thus, Munro unilaterally eliminated the Statewide Grievance Counsel's community service penalty.
Munro subsequently retired from the bench and is now a partner at Pullman & Comley which just happened to be the law firm that represented Cohen in the grievance matter.
To summarize: Cohen is actually found to have engaged in unethical conduct, Munro unilaterally commutes his community service sentence, and then Cohen's law firm pays back Munro by making her partner.
Just another day at the office for corruption in Connecticut's family courts . . . .
The joke in Stamford is that you don't want to be Gary Cohen's associate because when he gets sentenced to jail, you will have to serve his time.
ReplyDeleteMaybe that's why all of his associates left his firm.
DeleteCohen's website suggests he still has one associate.
DeleteThere is another Munro story....she allowed Campbell Barrett to reopen a case after final decision based on alleged post judgement actions (not allowable). She ruled that such post Judgement actions grievously harmed the defendant and substantially changed the financial orders without proof. Then she jumped off the bench -- into Pullman Comley's arms. Conflicted?
DeleteHere is my favorite Munro story: The psychologists that were big into the "custody study" business realized that it if they actually had to write a custody study, someone might actually read it and realize that there was no scientific, psychological or other basis for anything in the report. So Horowitz & Krieger perfected the art of delaying, deferring, demanding "feedback sessions" and other dirty tricks to avoid ever having to issue the report. Of course, they still got paid for their work but they'd try to make the case settle without having to write anything for which they could be held accountable. The other psychologists started to copy their methods. Then the game became how to bill the greatest number of hours and make life as difficult as possible for the parents to force the family to settle (or just let the crazy people kill each other or the kids) and never have to issue a report. However, in some rare cases, they actually had to write a report, which some logical litigant might actually read. What to do? Answer: get the judge to order that the parents not be permitted to read the report. You make up some reason like the parents might release the report to the public in a manner that would hurt the kids. (Remember, in family court fantasyland, the PARENTS are bad for the kids, while the DIVORCE INDUSTRY is good for the kids.) Thus, in a Stamford matter, Munro ordered the parents to take the kids to (I think) Horowitz, pay him whatever he asked for, then Munro ordered that the parents not be permitted to read the Custody Evaluation, and then she started issuing orders based on the Custody Evaluation that she had forbade the parents from even reading. At this point, the ultimate goal has been realized: the parents role has been reduced to simply writing checks to the divorce industry. True story. This is due process in Connecticut family court. You get to write the check, or you will lose custody of your kids and be incarcerated.
ReplyDeleteGary Cohen's go-to law firm for average malpractice suits, of which he has had many, and also a number of successful plaintiff settlements against him, is Updike, Kelly & Spellacy. Probably because through them his hefty premium malpractice insurance funnels through. That is also why he charges exorbitant hourly rates - to cover those huge premiums - the likes of which a far better NYC based attorney with likely far better results, is due. Note to high income Wall St readers who got married in NY and then moved to bucolic Greenwich: check whether you can successfully meet the statutory criteria to sue for divorce in NY and skip CT, particularly Stamford, altogether, or make it happen. There are more attorneys in NYC than in all of the state of Corrupticut. Furthermore you have a better appellate system, and, if your spouse is a well-heeled Wall ST guy who's hidden tons of money, or engaged in Wall St oriented criminal financial frauds, you have the Southern District to engage as well. Why pay Gary's prices when you can get far better in Manhattan at same price? The Wall Street Journal is replete with great stories about Wall St cocaine sniffing, call girl soliciting, run-a-muck Bankers who may be raising their children in Greenwich, New Canaan, and Darien, but the Divorce Family money flows through Manhattan complicitous and duplicitious financial institutions. Gary Cohen LOVES these cases and he will shake you down big-time, whether husband... or preferrably wife, who's been unsuspecting defrauded 'cause she's doing her motherly/wifely/career duty raising the kids and juggling a schedule that would make her Wall St husband faint dead away (she will come to hope this if high conflict). And even better if your blonde and buxom in Gary's eyes cause that pays 'dividends' as well.
ReplyDeleteGary's other professional defense attorneys include Bai Pollack. Usually when the heat gets turned up a bit. But when it comes to Superior Court Statewide Bar "Presentments" - a hugely serious matter, usually resulting in more than just a hand-slap (think deserved suspension) - his professional defense attorney firm of choice is the higher gun - hired gun - firm of Silver, Golub & Teitell. Which firm, not Pullman & Comly, represented Gary Cohen in the resulting truly pathetic State Bar 'settlement' which your Anonymous poster summarized correctly was designed by all - internally as well amongst the collective back-scratchers in Stamford Matrimonial Court chambers - as so many "pro-bono" hours towards those who couldn't possibly afford his $650+ hourly rate. And correctly again, courtesy of the gratefully gone Judge Munro, would get "performed" by his long time water-carrying associates. Usually, or once, Marci Finkelstein...who came by him courtesy of working under Norm Roberts Sr, the head in the clerk's office. And who himself once worked for this Stamford Court's Golden Boy, Gary Cohen. Oh what a nasty web we weave...
No one could possibly make this stuff up - even in fiction.
Has anyone using Gary Cohen ever been 'instructed' to go to Yale University's Child Study Center? He did for me the good mom...so they could twist my arm to drop a very merited, well documented sole custody application. All the way from way downstate referral. Funny coincidence, Gary grew up in New Haven, was given a scholarship to Yale undergrad, huge connections there still. Must have been a nice kick-back arrangement for him.
ReplyDeleteI vividly recall Gary being called a "motherf_cker" in open court by the husband of a foreign woman whom he was busy working. Does anyone have a better adjective for this pillar of society?
ReplyDeleteProud to say I was the one who "motherfucked" Gary Cohen - though in truth it was an exclamation muttered under my breath rather than being aimed at him. The inimitable Judge Emmons first claimed it was directed toward my wife, and in my next appearance, claimed it was Gary. Regardless, I know wear that honor proudly after being soaked for a fortune.
ReplyDeleteYes, he is a nasty criminal!!!!
ReplyDelete