Bankruptcy by the Numbers

A helpful tipster sent us the link to a report put out by "722 Redemption Funding, Inc.," a company that does redemptions under Section 722 of the bankruptcy code. You know, Section 722? (We have no idea.)

Anyhoo ... the report, which listed attorneys by state and number of cases filed, included some interesting information about our local BK superstars. Let's not get too excited about that economic turnaround just yet, here are the top 5 bankruptcy attorneys in Nevada in terms of the number of Chapter 7 bankruptcies filed from January 2010 through March 2010:

1. Anthony Deluca (498 cases)
2. Frank Sorrentino (302 cases)
3. Lisa Garofalo (260 cases)
4. Randolph Goldberg (236 cases)
5. Christine Stokes (174 cases)

It looks like Deluca is having no trouble filling the tank of that Lamborghini, and old man Sorrentino still has it. And lookie there, Mr. Rule 11 came in at number 4 ... ethical violations be damned.

On a side note, are those numbers positively terrifying to anyone else?

(722 Redemption Report - Scroll down to page 108 for NV)

Bad Goldberg

Our old friend Randolph Goldberg is back in hot water; he's being sanctioned, yet again, by U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Bruce A. Markell.

This time the allegation is that Goldberg (or a member of his staff) impersonated clients and completed an online credit counseling program on their behalf. Goldberg then filed a Chapter 13 petition for the clients, attaching the "forged" certificates as proof of their completion of the program.

BAM did not take kindly to these antics; the judge has referred Goldberg's case to the U.S. attorney for possible criminal prosecution for forgery, and to the State Bar for a stern talking to and the possibility of wrist-slappery.

The State Bar has ten complaints currently pending against Randy G. His response to JAM's request for comment appears to be consistent with his level of legal prowess:

Asked for comment for this column, Goldberg, in five rambling e-mails, wrote he might appeal Markell's ruling, calling it "biased and with no fact but his gut and hatred for me."

(LVRJ - Jane Ann Morrison; Thanks Tipsters!)

Randolph Goldberg v. Frank Sorrentino (Round 1 of the Tournament of Billboard/Television Vegas Law Firms

The Round One match ups continue. Today's offering: Randolph Goldberg v. Frank Sorrentino (Voting will be open until 5 p.m. on Tues., 6/30).

Let's meet the contenders:

Randolph Goldberg

Randy recently got into a bit of a pickle with bankruptcy judge Bruce A. Markell, getting himself sanctioned. One such sanction forced Goldberg to provide clients with copies of BAM's opinion about his ethical shortcomings.

There is no doubt, however, that Goldberg is a "commercial personality." Any television viewer sans Tivo can attest to that. What is more fascinating about Goldberg is the fact that he doesn't have a website, instead choosing to have his firm listed on various "Yellow Page" type websites (see here here here) where readers and past clients can leave comments about his quality of service. Even better, Goldberg responds to the comments personally. Here's one of our favorites:

Response from this business:

LIAR Posted at: 06/26/09
MS. [REDACTED] IS A LIAR AND SHE IS SLANDERING ME. I HAVE HER SIGNATURES AND SHE KNEW EXACTLY ALL FEES. SHE HAS A GAMBLING PROBLEM AND DOESNT WANNA PY BACK HER DEBTS DESPITE HER EXCESSIVE INCOME. SHE IS A CROOK WHO DOESN'T PAY HER BILLS

Now THAT'S how to treat a client! The original comment posted by the client would actually be libel, not slander, but he's a bankruptcy attorney so we'll give him a pass. Goldberg is certainly feisty, but will it be enough to overcome the man who never ages ...

Frank Sorrentino

Anyone who has lived in Vegas for a while is familiar with the name "Attorney Frank Sorrentino." Not because of his reputation for being a good attorney, but because of his reputation for producing the most god-awful commercial to ever run on local television.

Sorrentino's "forever 1985" style advertisement has been going strong since, well, the 1980's. The commercial itself has remained unchanged.

We've been meaning to pay his office a visit to see what he actually looks like 20 years later. We just can't seem to find a recent photograph of the man (besides the screen-capture from his commercial that he posts on his website). Maybe he can't be photographed ... like a vampire!

We're not real familiar with his reputation in legal circles, so you readers will have to enlighten us in the comments. We would be very interested in hearing any background information regarding those commercials. Did he pay so much for them that he is still recouping his costs? Does he not know they look dated? Was he hideously disfigured in the early 1990's? Inquiring minds want to know!

So there you have it, feistiness vs. experience. What do you think, readers?

BAM! Down ... Goes ... Goldberg!

[We apologize to our original tipster who emailed us a copy of this opinion quite a while back. We were recently reminded about the story by another tipster.]

As we have previously noted on WWL, bankruptcy judge Bruce A. Markell does not take kindly to the antics of attorneys. There is, perhaps, no better illustration of this than BAM's (fairly) recent sanctioning of local bankruptcy pin-up boy, Randolph H. Goldberg (whose website strangely links to his DEX yellow pages ad, and if you click on his advertisement in the bottom corner you get the bonus of a 1990's era Glamour Shot photo of him).

BankruptcyProfBlog has a decent summary of the opinion, and it's quite a doozy. The facts are a bit convoluted, but apparently Goldberg was being a naughty boy and filed multiple Chapter 13 petitions for a single debtor (hey, extra fees, who can blame him?).

BAM, however, had none of it. He dropped the hammer on Goldberg and handed down the following sanctions:

• Goldberg received a public reprimand for his conduct in the form of the publication of the opinion of these cases in the West Reporter system, and in any other reporter system generally publishing bankruptcy court opinions.
• Goldberg had to return all fees charged to his client.
• Goldberg was directed to submit a copy of the opinion of this case with every fee application he submits in this district for work done during the two-year period following the date of entry of this opinion. During such period, he was also directed to deliver a copy of the opinion to each client that he files a bankruptcy petition for, once his aggregate billings for that client, for any one case or related matters, exceed $5,000.
• For the two-year period following the date of entry of the opinion of this case, should Goldberg be served with a motion or an order to show cause that seeks, as relief, sanctions for his conduct in a case or proceeding in this court, or in any other state or federal court in Nevada, he shall deliver a copy of the opinion to the person or entity serving him with such motion or order, and shall include a copy of such opinion in any response to such motion or order that is filed with the court.
• To the extent that the client still desired his discharge, Goldberg should pay all costs and expenses, including attorneys' fees, as may be necessary for the client to obtain his discharge.
  

Ouch! We're curious to know if Goldberg is actually abiding by these sanctions. Does anyone know if he is handing out copies of this opinion to clients, or has his maximum charge for any client changed to $4,999.99?

(BankruptcyProfBlog; Thanks Tipsters!)