CONNECTICUT D’ATTILO V. KOSKOFF ET AL CASE UPDATE: DEFENDANTS GETTING TESTY AS THEIR CRIMES ARE CLARIFIED AS LITIGATION PROCEEDS
As the major Connecticut lawsuit D’Attilo v. Koskoff Koskoff & Bieder et all at the New Haven courthouse concerning whether a leading Connecticut corporate law firm will be able to elude accountability for what has come to be seen in court papers filed by the plaintiffs’ lawyer Howard Altshuler as self-evident criminal, conspiratorial activity of significant scale and demonstrably considerable and lasting injurious impact (no victimless crime here), the defendants as reflected in court papers filed by their lawyers are becoming increasingly testy. Nothing like calling a tie-wearing, suit-dressed, bespoke criminal a criminal to arouse their self-righteous ire.
I’m waiting to see if they attack the individual at the heart of this case, namely, Danny D’Attilo born with severe birth defects leaving him with irreversible brain damage caused by the delivering doctor’s negligence as determined by a jury. The D’Attilo’s were once clients of the defendants the Koskoff Koskoff & Bieder law firm (Bridgeport) and Day Pitney law firm (New Haven) and seven lawyers at these firms — that is until the D’Attilos started to sense the lawyers at the two supposedly top law firms were conspiratorially and viciously swindling them of more than $5 million from the settlement of $25 million arrived at after a jury award of more than $50 million. In earlier reports, I’ve called the case a civil RICO case although the plaintiffs’ lawyer Altshuler is not considering it in this way.
I’m waiting to see how and when the defendants are going to start attacking and defaming the plaintiffs Danny D’Attilo and his parents. It’s going to be a little tricky imputing that Danny D’Attilo is a sexual predator, drug dealer, or social deviant as lawyers at the Pullman and Comley law firm painted me with Connecticut state’s attorneys, judges, and politicians falling in line to target me for threats entailing witness intimidation, menacing, and defamation as I exposed criminal activity (e. g., theft, false statement, witness tampering, perjury) at this law firm with offices in Bridgeport, Hartford, and elsewhere. James T. Shearin, the discredited, disgruntled chairman at Pullman and Comley with a reputation as a thief and liar, is the lead defense lawyer for the Day Pitney defendants.
You get the picture. As to the defendants rising testiness, in an April 9, 2015 filing titled “KK&B’s Objection to the Plaintiff’s Motion…” (rest of long title omitted), the Koskoff Koskoff & Bieder defense lawyer Anthony Nuzzo writes in the second paragraph, “The plaintiffs ask the court to lift the stay to allow them to file a prejudgment remedy application. The plaintiff’s counsel’s written advocacy demolishes the bounds of civility. (1) His statements, based on unproven and fictional claims, made in an effort to sensationalize his cause, do not justify the court’s granting the plaintiff’s motion….” The note (1) is, “The plaintiff’s attorney goes so far as to allege that KK&B will use their ‘legal powerhouses…to move, manipulate, or hide their assets’ (3/17/15 brief, p. 12).”
The “unproven and fictional claims” the defendants’ lawyer refers to are based on hundreds of pages of documents, the overwhelming number created by the defendants themselves, outlining their scheme and conspiracy. These documents organized and submitted by Altshuler speak for themselves, and nearly all would be allowed as evidence proving clearly and decisively to a jury almost unimaginable and undeniably injurious — and yes, sensational — crimes. No wonder the defendant law firms and lawyers seek to have the case handled largely out of the public eye by arbitration. Reading certain of Althulser’s court filings, especially the amended complaint (1/27/15), and reviewing the exhibits he’s filed, I see the case as one involving astonishing crimes for their magnitude, perdurance, number of individuals involved, and effects. No doubt, the defendants lawyers would see me as being overly emotional, similarly to how James T. Shearin and his accomplices at his Pullman and Comley law firm and others throughout the Connecticut legal and political systems saw me as crazed, malignant, and slanderous as I have been exposing their crimes based on incontestable evidence.
In his April 10, 2015 filing titled “Day Pitney Defendants’ Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Reconsideration or Reargument,” their lawyer Shearin writes, “Plaintiffs’ latest tome seeking, yet again, to avoid the arbitration to which they agreed, presents nothing but a re-hash of their prior Memorandum….”
Generally in their arguments in their court filings to date, the defendants are trying to make the point that the D’Attilo’s agreed to be swindled of more than $5 million by the defendants. The defendants base this outlandish, ludicrous position on the arbitration clause of the D’Attilo’s 2003 contract with the Koskoff Koskoff & Bieder law firm for representation in the medical malpractice case — whereas most persons outside of the demented mind of lawyer criminals working determinedly in concert to pull off a massive swindle and of the zany, comical world of Connecticut courts when it comes to holding corporate lawyers and their law firms accountable will see the swindle was successful and only much later (after about two years) recognized and exposed because the D’Attilos were trusting and cooperative clients, the sort of clients the Koskoff Koskoff & Bieder and the Day Pitney law firms and their lawyers desire, seek, and encourage; as do all other law firms and lawyers. Trusting and cooperative, the D’Attilos were not able to conceive the beginnings, the unfolding, the duplicity, or the magnitude of the treachery about to be worked on them once lawyers at the Koskoff Koskoff & Bieder law firm got their hands on the multimillion dollar medical malpractice settlement and soon sought co-conspirators at the Day Pitney firm to effect the swindle.
In this case D’Attilo v. Koskoff et al, we see that what is inconceivable to ordinary persons because it is unconscionable comes readily both as conceivable and as accomplishable to lawyers untroubled by treachery.