WEAR V. CATALANO ADV CATALANO V. WEAR

Scene: Modern day Miami. 

Dramatis Personae: Maritza Alvarez-Shapiro, Nancy Wear, Michael Catalano. 

FACDL LISTSERV, Saturday, August 23, 2014. 

The story you are about to read is true. The names have not been changed, because it's just too damn fun and juicy. 

Like the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand, an unlikely event that started the first world war, the War between Michael Catalano and Nancy Wear started with an innocent comment, by Maritza Alvarez-Shapiro, politely asking people to vote for Oscar Rodriguez-Fonts. Oscar is a good guy, an REGJB regular. For what's it worth, we're going to vote for him.  He will make a foin foin judge (It's an Irish sort of day for us.) 

Enter Nancy Wear. Bon Vivant. Raconteur.  FACDL LISTSERVE gadfly. Scourge of condo boards. Enemy, apparently, of one Michael Catalano- DUI maven, defender of disgraced judges, no fan of Ms Wear. 

Wear fired the first shot. In response to Ms. Alvarez-Shapiro's endorsement of ORF, gladly seconded by Jackie Woodward,  Nancy Wear wrote this:

Nancy Wear
to Jackie, facdl-miami, Maritza

What?  Michael Catalano has not landed on both of you for expressing your thoughtful opinions?  Wow! I guess it is only me he publicly attacks!!

Well, you knew Michael Catalano was not going to take that shot across his bow lying down. He fired back. And what we love the most is that after he warned Nancy Wear to keep the email private, she immediately forwarded it to the FACDL, claiming she did so without reading the email. 

Bravo! It's a move that would make Benjamin Netanyahu proud. Never negotiate a threat. Call the large bet. Be Doyle Brunson, move your chips all in.  

Nancy Wear

Unread.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Michael A Catalano <mcatalanolaw@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 4:34 PM
Subject: FW: FACDL-Miami Oscar Rodriguez-Fonts for Circuit Court Judge
To: Nancy Wear <ncwear@gmail.com>

Nancy, this is JUST FOR YOU. Do not forward it. If you do, you do so at your own peril.

Everyone is sick of your crap. If you slander me one more time, I am going to do something about it.

I put up with your posts about Public Defenders being over paid and underwored. Boy was everyone wondering what planet you came from when you did that one....

I put up with your stupid insults to me during the Trauth/Llamas litigation when you told me I should have hired you to handle it and you would have gotten attorney's fees on the first round at the 3rd DCA. Nancy, I made that decision NOT to seek fees to make sure we won.... and we did. I ran that by some real appellate lawyers who agreed with my decision.  I did that for the sake of everyone's clients. Thousands of clients got their DL's back as a  result of my litigation.  I made the decision on purpose and you told me I was stupid for not knowing that I had to ask for fees separately at the DCA. I was really pissed about that dumb and rude comment but, I said nothing.

I put up with you demanding to be a speaker on seminars where you are don't even practice that kind of law.  You demanded to be on an ethics panel for the Masters of DUI seminar and you said your expertise was having handled ONE ethics complaint.  We pick speakers who are experts. You don't even do DUI cases and you still demanded and complained when we did not take you up on your offer to be a speaker.

I put up with you bitching and complaining that CLE's don't have enough women speakers and causing the volunteer organizers all kinds of aggravation.  You did that on the Federal Criminal Law seminar.  You even wrote to the Bar newspaper complaining. Do you have any idea how rude that was to the people involved?

I put up with you telling everyone how smart you are because you beat your condo association... as if we care.

Now, I am not putting up with your crap anymore.

Your recent stupid attempt to impress FACDL with your opinion on the candidates could have resulted in Rachel getting an ethics and JQC complaint if anyone thought she endorsed or approved of YOU sending out her campaign stuff with your discussion about other candidates. I sent my note to FACDL before I spoke with Rachel so that she can show that she didn't have anything to do with what you sent. Do you have any idea how many candidates and their friends get ethics complaints during elections?  Thanks to you, she may have had to spend lots of money defending your stupid mistake.  Thanks to me, she has a defense. It's called the Nancy Wear is stupid defense.

So, do us all a favor and stop posting on FACDL.

As for me, shut up and stop talking about me. I am really sick of it.

This is your only warning.

Mike Catalano

There you have it. A hot, boring Saturday afternoon turned on its head. Arch Duke Ferdinand was killed on a warm Sunday in Saraevjo, June 28, 1914. 

See You In Court. 

ENOUGH

UPDATE: Ok. Not quite enough on Catalano & Hirsch. We've received multiple reports of an FACDL (Motto: Pay your dues and don't bother us) Meeting last night :

Anonymous said...

Very funny because last night at the FACDL board meeting, Milt used words that had to be looked up. It got a few laughs.

By the way, he sat right next to Mike C and they had no problems with each other.

Thursday, February 18, 2010 8:06:00 AM

Rumpole says: This is welcome news. Both of these men are two of our finest members of the criminal defense bar in Miami.

We've had quite enough of Messrs. Catalano and Hirsch for a while.

Time to move on.

PD Sisselman reports that Lourdes Simon has been tapped by Governor Quisp to be our newest County Court Judge. Congratulations.

Boy has this week been tough.

From the comments:

Anonymous said...

most people who comment on this blog do so with reason and with respect for their fellow man. then there are some of you who just know how to throw insults. In all my time reading this blog, I have never seen Rump insult anyone, just state his point of view. It is really sad that as attorneys some of you just can't express yourself without the low blow insults.

Wednesday, February 17, 2010 9:27:00 AM

Rumpole said...

9:27 Am- I am fairly certain I have insulted some Judges along the way.

I know I've tried.

Wednesday, February 17, 2010 5:12:00 PM.

IN PRAISE OF MICHAEL CATALANO

Michael Catalano, much discussed on these pages in the last few days, does not need anyone to defend him. He is quite capable of doing that himself. We however, do feel compelled to praise him.

The facts of this mess are contained in the previous post and the link to the Herald article. In brief, Mr Catalano refused to take part in an attempted fraud upon the court that would have benefited his client. Beyond refusing to participate in the fraud, Mr. Catalano reported the crime and cooperated with the investigation, making controlled phone calls and wearing a wire at one point.

The first thing Mr. Catalano needs to be praised for is his agreement to assist the public defender on a pro bono basis in this extraordinarily difficult case. As pro bono clients go, this is as difficult assignment as one could find- causing the death of three innocent children.

The second thing is that what most commentators on this blog have seem to forgotten (and what Mr. Catalano did not forget) is that we as criminal defense attorneys do not have any special immunity that allows us to not report a crime or not to assist authorities when we witness a crime. (Outside of the unusual circumstance of the attorney learning of a crime through the attorney/client relationship.)

Mr. Catalano (if he is to be believed) was solicited to commit a crime. And not just any crime, but perjury in the form of an affidavit that would perpetrate a fraud on the civil court system. This was a serious crime that strikes at the heart of our legal system.

The easy thing to do would have to been to ignore the solicitation and avoid this mess.

The hard thing to do- and the right thing to do- was to report the crime, which Mr. Catalano did.

For that Mr. Catalano deserves praise on these pages, and elsewhere. Mr. Catalano did the right thing. His payment thus far has been negative publicity and headaches that have not and will not soon end.

For doing the right thing in the face of adversity, Mr. Catalano deserves our praise.

And now a brief word about Milt Hirsch.

Mr. Hirsch, superb defense attorney, and current candidate for Circuit Court judge, was quoted in the Herald as disparaging Mr. Catalano's actions. Mr. Hirsch's words implied that as a defense attorney, Mr. Catalano should have known better than to report a crime and cooperate with authorities. Mr. Hirsch's words implied that Mr. Catalano had somehow violated some oath and requirement of confidentiality.

Nonsense. And Mr. Hirsch should know better. If and when he becomes a Circuit Judge, Mr. Hirsch will be responsible for judging those who are accused of violating the laws of our State. Attorneys have an affirmative duty as officers of the court to not just avoid perpetrating frauds upon the court, but to report such behavior upon learning of it.

Would Judge Milton Hirsch disparage an attorney for outing an attempted fraud upon the court?

Attorney Milton Hirsch can defend his client to the very best of his considerable abilities without disparaging an attorney who has done the right thing. And shame upon Mr. Hirsch for doing otherwise.

This case is a mess. Mr. Catalano didn't create it. He volunteered to represent a client who needed help when no one else would stand with him. Mr. Catalano has acted in the very best traditions of our profession. And along the way Mr. Catalano has been dragged into a mess he didn't create and surely wishes had never occurred.

There was an easy way out for Mr. Catalano, but he didn't take it.

How many of us would have taken the easy way out?

See you in court. Sometimes this job is a lot harder than it seems.

CATALANO WEARS A WIRE

Update: As soon as this never ending day ends, I will be posting the definitive Rumpolian view on the Catalano contretemps. Stay tuned. You may be surprised.

Update: Catalano's wardrobe criticized by the civil lawyers below.

About a year ago a very tragic case occurred: Gabriel Delrisco was driving a car that hit a mini van and killed three children, ages 10, 7, and 4.

Michael Catalano is a the defense attorney for Derisco.

Catalano complained that civil attorneys for Delrisco offered him a proposition: Have Delrisco say he was drinking at a specific bar in Homestead just before the accident, allowing them to file a lawsuit against the bar, and the family would agree to a lighter sentence.

Catalano went to the SAO, and wore a wire in a least one meeting with Delrisco's attorneys, who are represented by Milt Hirsch. Never at a loss for words, Uncle Miltie had this say:

`Setting aside the unattractive prospect of a criminal defense attorney posing as an undercover informer for the police,'' Hirsch said, ``I have not heard anything from the state attorney's office to suggest there are law enforcement concerns about criminal misconduct on the part of Ariel Furst or [co-counsel] Luis Stabinski.'

Catalano had this to say:

Catalano said he took the unusual step of approaching prosecutors because he wants to ensure that Delrisco, if convicted, gets a fair sentence.

``It's my client, I have to give him my best,'' Catalano said.

Rumpole says: Memo to Catalano: your client is a "he" not an "it", We should all try to humanize our client, especially before juries and in the Herald.

The title to the post links to the Herald story.

The civil lawyer's view of this mess, and a critique of Catalano's sartorial choices in his undercover role is here on the South Florida Lawyer's Blog.