Connecticut family law attorney Edward Nusbaum has filed a contempt motion against his client, Karen Riordan, to compel her to pay for arbitration in a case where he is accused of fraudulently overbilling her.
Nusbaum had billed Riordan $98,000 for series of emails and phone calls made over four months in 2020 in connection to a custody case. Evidence suggests he made only one-third of the calls and about half the emails he billed Riordan while representing her.
At the center of the dispute is $64,000 held in Nusbaum’s escrow account.
Nusbaum is suing Riordan, asserting that in addition to the $98,000 she already paid, he earned an additional $64,000 through his services, billed at $750 per hour. Riordan has refused to sign off on the funds and demanded a jury trial to show that Nusbaum fraudulently billed her.
Her evidence, shared with the publication, includes Nusbuam’s invoices for several court hearings that were never on the docket, and dozens of phone calls and emails to the guardian ad litem (GAL), Jocelyn Hurwitz,. Her invoices reveal that they did not speak on most occasions when Nusbaum billed Riordan for his time.
Hurwitz’s billing records, billed at increments of 1/10th of an hour show no time spent on dozens of Nussbaum-billed calls to Riordan – which indicated fruad.
Nusbaum, refusing to adjudicate the dispute in open court, has demanded Riordan resolve the matter in arbitration, which he claims is his right based on the original retainer agreement Riordan signed in 2020.
The proposed arbitrator, Antonio Robaina, charges $600 per hour. He declined to take the case after Riordan’s attorney, Tricia Lindsey, stated, “My client is indigent and unemployed. She cannot pay.”
Nusbaum then filed a motion with the Connecticut Superior Court, requesting that Riordan be held in willful contempt and ordered to pay both her share of the arbitration costs and Nusbaum’s fees. He seeks jail time for Riordan if his demands are not met.
Nusbaum had represented Riordan in 2020. In additon to fruadulent billing, Riordan says Nusbaum was disloyal and self servimng.
She claims that during a phone status conference with Judge Jane Grossman, which Riordan said she was not made aware of, Nusbaum agreed to stipulation agreements without Riordan’s consent.
One of these stipulated that Riordan, who had just agreed to sell the family home, would assign her proceeds to Nusbaum for his fees. Riordan had already liquidated her 401k to pay Nusbaum’s initial retainer of $100,000. As is standard in real estate transactions, the sale included a 72-hour cancellation clause, which Riordan invoked after discovering that the proceeds of the sale were meant for Nusbaum and not her and her children.
She rescinded her signature on the purchase offer within twenty-four hours. However, the judge – utilizing Nusbaum’s stipulation filed with the court without her consent, ordered the sale. After it closed, the money was held in Nusbaum’s escrow account – leaving it up to the attorney and client to work out their fee dispute.
Additionally, there was “Agreement #202,” which involved supervised visitation. The court never acted on this agreement, and there was no hearing. There is Nusbaum’s signature. Riordan had previously told Nusbaum that she would not agree to supervised visitation, but Nusbaum signed it regardless. Later, Judge Gerard Adelman attributed the absence of Riordan’s signature to a clerical oversight.
Lindsay has objected to Nusbaum’s contempt motion, labeling it retaliatory and filed in bad faith. She argues that there is no evidence of contempt, no willful violation, and that Nusbaum has not met the “clear and convincing” standard required by law for a finding of contempt. The contempt hearing is on Monday.
To be continued.
The post Connecticut Family Law Attorney Ed Nusbaum Files Contempt Motion Against Impoverished Client Over Alleged Overbilling appeared first on Frank Report.