EDITORIAL,
Jun 12 (VNN) — Got books? Got money? Got anything?
June 12, 2003 VNN8128
After ripping off $100,000 from me personally, and sweeping away the settlement
money and kicking us off the licensee board, you sneer at Hansadutta and us,
calling us poor losers, "Sour
Grapes Sampradaya." I suppose we should be grateful to have met you, and
to have been cheated by you.
There are certain professional ethics governing attorney conduct, particularly
in relationship to a client, and even in the case of an ex-client. It does not
become an attorney to heap public scorn on a client or ex-client. But then,
it also does not become an attorney to defraud his clients, as you have done.
You have made a joke of your profession. Will anyone with any sense hire an
attorney who has shown himself to be so unscrupulous?
In December, 1998, when we met in Sacramento to discuss the formation of the
licensee Krishna Books, Hansadutta insisted that the directors should take up
their work in the spirit of pure devotional service, without accepting salary
or any other remuneration, but you protested, "We've got million-dollar investors
lined up. We'll be making millions, so what is wrong if we make something?"
To me you said, "If KBI makes 10 million [dollars], I don't see anything wrong
with the directors making a few million. There'll be more than enough." You
also said, "It's out of the question that the directors will not get salary."
Now you say that Hansadutta "unreasonably demanded overarching control of everything",
but from the get-go, you were in high-gear takeover mode. You are the one who
directed BBTI to pay the settlement money into an account offshore in the Bahamas.
You are the one who went there and registered KB, Inc. and a trust. You advised
us that the best arrangement was to register the licensee as a corporation registered
in the Bahamas, held by a trust.
Then you turned around and incorporated your own Krishna Books, Inc. in California
and claimed in court that it was the legal licensee, and that there was no other,
that the Bahamas trust was not valid, that it could never qualify. In the meantime,
you helped yourself to the settlement money in the Bahamas. You did so without
our knowledge, not even a week after the first board meeting in Sacramento,
where it was agreed that the settlement money would be used as start-up funds
for Krishna Books. You failed in your first application to the court to ratify
that the settlement money was for your fees. Judge Shook ruled that there was
nothing in the settlement agreement that specifically indicated that the settlement
money was for your fees.
Then you went and got an affidavit from ISKCON and BBTI (something funny going
on there?) to say that the settlement money was to pay your fees. Even then,
the court DID NOT allow that you were entitled to the settlement money for your
fees; the court directed that it should be left to arbitration to decide that
matter. And what did the arbitration panel determine? The Findings and Reward
found that you were NOT ENTITLED to the $644,000 you claimed in legal fees from
me, and further directed you to pay me personally $100,000 from the settlement
money you told them was held in a regular corporate account in the Bahamas.
They decided that you could pay yourself $92,000 from the settlement money also,
and the balance settlement money in that account was to be paid out to your
clients who had signed the Settlement Agreement--NOT YOU. The Arbitration Panel's
Decision and Award is legally binding. I understand there is a court order to
that effect. (Public record, not under seal.)
You have not paid me back my $100,000, nor have you paid out any of the settlement
money as directed, nor have you co-operated to direct BBTI-ISKCON to pay out
the balance $50,000 they withheld from the settlement money (which was to pay
PYMC's legal fees for the Singapore court case), nor have you paid your share
of the arbitration fees ($2,500.00), which you owe me personally, in spite of
repeated requests. But I digress.
If Hansadutta was so ambitious to take full control of the license, how did
you come onboard as a director of the licensee? You insisted to be brought onboard,
and he reluctantly agreed. When you returned from the Bahamas, we saw you had
put yourself as sole bank signator, director of KB Inc, and as a trustee of
the Publishing trust. When we became suspicious and asked you to remove yourself,
you refused. You even tried to keep from handing over a copy of the trust document.
The BBT court case was settled in November, 1998, you grabbed all the money,
grabbed complete control of the license, calling yourself "guardian of the license"
and took deliberate steps to block Hansadutta's and our participation by "stacking
the board" (your own words), and ultimately kicked us out.
Hansadutta was your primary client, and having entered into a legally binding
agreement to act in your professional capacity for Hansadutta as his lawyer,
you should have advocated and safeguarded his interests, but you positioned
yourself in direct conflict of interest with your client, first of all keeping
from him and us the fact that you had eaten up the $125,000 investment principle,
secondly leading him unawares to accept a monetary settlement from which you
stood to gain at our expense, and finally, you took deliberate steps to ensure
that he did not derive any benefit at all from the settlement agreement. Piggy-backing
your way into position on the merits of his case, you took everything away from
him. Now, in one breath you twist around and call him "covetous" and "in rage
over lost control and stature". In the next, you try to assume the posture of
a devotee, and call for co-operation. But on the pretext of championing a spiritual
cause you have broken all agreements and violated our legal rights. If anything
is "at odds with right and reason", this certainly is. Your actions are totally
incongruous with the ethics of your profession which define the attorney-client
relationship.
You allege that Hansadutta had to be prevented from having sole control, but
in fact it was you who repeatedly took unilateral actions in defiance of board
resolutions, not to mention your conflict of interest, breach of agreements,
bad legal advice, embezzlement of funds, refusal to give accounting and lies.
It was as a lawyer that you were engaged to act for Hansadutta, and by misuse
of legal process, you have deprived him and ourselves of any benefit from the
settlement, and then tried to stick me with a demand for $644,000. What kind
of lawyering is that? And who is the control freak?
You boasted repeatedly of "million-dollar investors" waiting in the wings.
It has been nearly five years. Where are the books? What happened to the money?
Where are the million-dollar investors? Got books? Got money? Got million-dollar
investors? Got Krishna? Got Prabhupada? Got anything-- besides hot air? What
do you have? A bad reputation, and maybe less than that after everything will
be said said and done.
The conclusion is that you never did anything as a service for Srila Prabhupada
in this matter, and what you did in the capacity of an attorney was self serving
from beginning to end. The facts have been presented to the State Bar in our
complaint. They obviously have taken the matter very seriously. Trial date has
been set for September 2nd, 3rd and 4th, 2003.
The 3rd of September is the appearance day of Radharani. It's going to be an
auspicious day for someone.
This story URL: http://www.vnn.org/editorials/ET0306/ET12-8128.html