As a resident and citizen of Northampton County, I submit this request for an investigation into the Office of the District Attorney for the County of Northampton (“Office of the District Attorney”), Pennsylvania, specifically, into the actions of the District Attorney, Terrance P. Houck (“Mr. Houck” or the “District Attorney”) and his First Assistant District Attorney, Richard H. Pepper, Esquire (“Mr. Pepper”).
I. Background
In 1996, Northampton County converted the position of District Attorney, which Mr. Houck currently occupies, from a part-time to a full-time position whose duties and responsibilities are defined at Section 1401, Title 16 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes. Section 1401(2)(k) directs that a full-time district attorney is not permitted to accept any civil or criminal cases and is also subject to the Rules of Professional Conduct and the Canons of Ethics as applied to judges in the Courts of Common Pleas for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Further, Section 1401(2) (o), instructs that the Judicial Rules and the Canons of Ethics are specifically applicable to the district attorney’s salary, full-time duties, and conflicts of interest.
On February 16, 2006, Northampton County Council adopted Resolution 21-06, converting the position of part-time First Assistant District Attorney to a full-time position, Group VI Career Exempt Scale. Resolution 21-06 did not provide any authority or permission for a full-time First Assistant District Attorney to run, manage, or direct a separate, private legal practice.
All Northampton County Assistant District Attorneys are full-time county employees. Further, like the prohibition against the District Attorney himself, all full-time Assistant District Attorneys are prohibited from engaging in the private practice of law. This prohibition had been rigorously enforced by our previous District Attorney, John Morganelli, who is currently a Judge with the Court of Common Pleas for Northampton County.
II. Concerns Raised
The position of full-time First Assistant District Attorney is occupied by Mr. Pepper. Mr. Pepper has been so employed for the last three years. Mr. Pepper is the second highest salaried the employee in Northampton County, earning approximately $130,000 per year. Mr. Pepper’s salary is only exceeded by Mr. Houck. When Mr. Pepper was hired by Mr. Houck as his First Assistant, Mr. Houck quietly and without the knowledge and approval of County Council, and in violation of the rules governing the full-time staff of the Office of District Attorney, permitted Mr. Pepper to maintain his robust private practice of law in both Northampton County and Lehigh County, Pennsylvania, representing civil clients in general legal disputes and family matters.
During business hours when Mr. Houck’s office is in full operation, Mr. Pepper can be frequently seen walking back and forth from the Office of the District Attorney to his private legal office located 717 Washington Street, Easton, Pennsylvania, apparently to conduct his private practice. In addition, Mr. Pepper can frequently be found in the halls of both the Northampton and Lehigh County Courthouses conducting legal business on behalf of his private clients.
Mr. Pepper’s private office is located within a legal office owned by a high-profile criminal defense attorney. Mr. Pepper rents office space or is provided office space within the office of the defense attorney. Thus, when the criminal defense attorney’s clients walk into that building, these clients learn that the First Assistant District Attorney of Northampton County, Pennsylvania has a business relationship with their criminal defense lawyer. This is a clear conflict of interest for Mr. Houck. However, what should be of even greater concern is that Mr. Houck’s has delegated to Mr. Pepper the authority to negotiate plea bargains with defense counsel, including the authority to overrule the staff attorneys working under Mr. Pepper. Further, even if one were to assume that Mr. Houck was operating under a misguided interpretation of the law addressing this legal conflict and he assumed that the conflict could be somehow avoided, Mr. Houck failed to implement a written office policy constructing the proverbial “Chinese Wall” to prohibit Mr. Pepper from negotiating his landlord’s cases. Mr. Houck merely turned a blind eye to the self-created conflict of interest and allowed Mr. Pepper to conduct the District Attorney’s business without concern.
To make this conflict even more unsettling, in 2020, Mr. Pepper represented a husband who was charged by the Freemansburg Police Department of Harassment (by physical contact) - a summary offense. Wife was the alleged victim. Husband was found guilty of Harassment by a Magisterial District Judge. Husband appealed his conviction. This domestic violence case was finally resolved by a guilty plea before Judge Paula Roscioli in Summary Appeals Court on July 12, 2021. During the pendency of that summary criminal case, the female victim apparently wrote a letter to Mr. Houck complaining about the clear conflict of interest created by Mr. Pepper’s representation of her husband. However, Mr. Houck failed to take any action on the complaint. Eventually, a request was made to Mr. Houck seeking a copy of the letter sent by wife complaining about Mr. Pepper under Pennsylvania’s Right to Know Law (RTKL). The requestor was husband’s new attorney. Mr. Houck refused to release the letter citing his claim that the letter should remain confidential because the letter was part of an ongoing criminal investigation. The refusal to release the letter was appealed under the Right to Know Law and heard before Judge John Morganelli. During the June 8, 2022 hearing, Mr. Houck continued to claim that under the RTKL wife’s complaint letter could not be released due to an ongoing investigation; however, the guilty plea the year before concluded the case long before the Right to Know Hearing. I suggest that a review of the transcript of the hearing will establish: (1) Mr. Houck was fully aware of Mr. Pepper’s private practice of law; (2) Husband’s new attorney recognized the conflict created by Mr. Pepper’s representation of husband and the District Attorney offered no objection to that characterization; and, (3) The criminal case was finally resolved by a guilty plea by husband, therefore there was no ongoing investigation and by logical extension the claim of an existing investigation calls into question Mr. Houck’s candor to both the court and the citizen requestor seeking the letter under the RTKL.
In conclusion, I ask: How can the District Attorney allow the second highest salaried employee in Northampton County to maintain a private practice (a second job during work hours) where no other employee working for the District Attorney, or, for that matter, any full-time employee working for the County Executive of Northampton County, is permitted to do the same? This appears to be a flagrant violation of not only the statutory intent of Section 1401, Title 16 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, but also the policies of County Council and the County Executive of Northampton County, as they relate to the prohibition against county employees “moonlighting” during work hours.
I am requesting that Northampton County Council, the Northampton County Solicitor’s Office, and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s Attorney Discipline Board investigate this matter and take whatever action is necessary to vindicate the interests of the citizens of Northampton County. The actions and inactions of Mr. Houck are not appropriate and present unacceptable conflicts of interest to the citizens/taxpayers of Northampton County and to victims of crimes, who Mr. Houck is entrusted to protect.
In support of the concerns noted herein, I have enclosed the following exhibits:
1. A copy of 16 P.S. 1401;
2. A copy of Northampton Council Resolution No. 21-06;
Copies of eleven (11) docket sheets recent/active civil cases in which Mr. Pepper is representing civil litigants in Northampton County, while employed as the First Assistant;
4. The transcript of the Right to Know Law Hearing in which the District Attorney’s Office acknowledged that Mr. Houck received the Complaint involving Mr. Pepper’s alleged conflict and the fact that Mr. Houck refused to make that letter available to the public; and
5. The docket sheet of the summary appeal guilty plea noted herein.
Should you have any questions, you may contact me via email at [redacted]. Thank you for your kind assistance. I look forward to hearing from you.
Houck's Response
"This is a desperate attempt by a desperate man to impugn the reputation of a guy who has been working in this office since 1980," responded Houck. "He should at least have some facts."
Houck's First Assistant DA, Richard Huntington Pepper, is a 1973 grad of The University of Pittsburgh School of Law. According to the Pa. Disciplinary Board, he's never been sanctioned.
Houck, as a full-time District Attorney, is statutorily barred from accepting compensation from any other source or engaging in the private practice of law. "The district attorney while in office, shall not derive any other income. ... [T]he district attorney shall not engage in any private practice ...." There's no allegation that Houck has violated this proscription. But there's nothing in state law that prohibits full-time Assistant DAs from accepting compensation from other sources or practicing law in a part-time private capacity.
Except for those days when he was a beat cop on the streets of Philadelphia, Houck himself has always been a full-time prosecutor who worked in Bucks, Lehigh and Northampton County. But he tells me that when he was in Bucks County, full-time assistant DAs were not only permitted, but encouraged to practice some civil law so long as there was no conflict of interest. This resulted in more well-rounded and experienced assistant DAs.
Before he tapped Pepper as his First Assistant, Houck and Pepper discussed and agreed Pepper would continue to represent civil clients on a part-time basis. "I'm proud to have him," Houck said, noting that Pepper's typical work week is 50-60 hours. Moreover, in the event that Pepper is required to attend a hearing for a civil client during regular business hours, Houck notes that Pepper uses his vacation and personal time.
As Baratta observes in his memorandum, a County Council resolution adopted in 2006 reclassified the First Assistant DA from part-time to full-time. But unlike the state statute that applies to District Attorneys, nothing in that resolution bars the full-time First Assistant from accepting compensation from other sources or practicing civil law on a part-time basis. If that was County Council's intention, it should have said so.
In other matters, it has. In 2013, then Controller Steve Barron was taken to task when it was discovered (by this very blog) that he was a part-time adjunct professor of political science who conducted three classes on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays during regular business hours. He was in direct violation of the Home Rule Charter, which specifically provided that "[d]uring his term of office the County Controller shall devote full time to the office, and shall not actively engage in any other business or occupation,"
Unlike the then ban on outside employment by the County Controller (since dropped) or the DA, nothing prevents the First Assistant DA from part-time employment.
Baratta goes on to complain that Pepper practices law out of the office of a prominent criminal defense lawyer, which gives incoming clients the impression that they have an "in." Moreover, Pepper signs off on all plea agreements involving that lawyer.
Not so, says Houck. He noted that Pepper is a tenant, has no sign and has no involvement in the approval of plea agreements involving his landlord.
Finally, Baratta alleges or implies that Pepper represented a criminal defendant accused of harassment at the magisterial level. But his own attachment makes abundantly clear that Pepper had no involvement at all in the criminal matter. Pepper did represent this defendant in a civil matter, but once he learned that there was a criminal case, he withdrew completely. The defendant ultimately entered a guilty plea. "Where's the conflict?" asks Houck.
"Instead of taking information and distorting it, maybe [Baratta] should check his facts first," said Houck. "This is so very sad and reeks of political ambition. Had he believed one sentence of what he wrote, or had one sentence been true, he would have been in violation of his judicial ethics by not reporting it when he sat."
Blogger's Observation: The state statute banning full-time DAs from engaging in private practice or accepting compensation from any other source is very clear. It expressly rules out any form of outside employment. The same is true of the former Home Rule Charter ban on any outside employment by the Controller. But it's ridiculous to assert that a resolution establishing a full-time county position necessarily rules out any part-time employment elsewhere. If that were so, a large plurality of county workers who have second jobs to help make ends meet would have to quit their part-time positions. County clerks would have to give up their jobs at Walmart and Target.
Baratta's request for an "investigation" is something he could have done when he was still perched in the judicial heavens. His failure to do so tells me this is pure politics. This ham-handed approach sounds exactly like something coming from the John Morganelli playbook. As a judge, Morganelli must stay out of politics. But it's obvious he and Baratta have been laying the groundwork for Baratta to run for DA for some time.
They must have been doing it part time.
Morganelli was also behind the push to Nuria DiLuzio to run against Houck. We all know how that ended.
41 comments:
What a disgrace. Baratta and Morganelli. Shame on them. If this was such a problem, why did Little Napoleon and Baratta allow this to happen under their watch. Why didn't they do something about it sooner? Why didn't Baratta and Morganelli do something about this when it first came to light. Disgusting political tirades by two Judges for political reasons only.
Sounds like it’s only become an issues once the judge wants his job. Also why didn’t morganelli recuse himself since he was Mr. Peppers former boss?
Sounds fishy
As the kids say, there is a lot to unpack here. Wow. I read this twice and am still dumbfounded, though I had some suspicions of my own. I’m going to take a “don’t shoot the messenger” approach on this one and appreciate light being shed on this situation. Mr. Pepper will, more than likely, be the sacrificial lamb and resign so that Houck looks credible. Houck, though, seems to be surrounded by controversy (basing that opinion largely on this blog since there is no other media oversight) and disharmony. Morganelli surprises me. While I have no strong opinion one way or another about him, I question why he is, based on your opinion, targeting his former second in command.
From your blogs and the responses of others, it seems like Mr. Houck has created a terrible environment with his office, but it also sounds like the judges are a bunch of middle school brats who need to grow up and earn the esteem they want.
Sad to think that these people have such power.
If Morganelli wanted to remain in politics, why didn't he stay as District Attorney? I think there is a polecat in the woodpile. This is really going to get interesting, I'm eager to see where the Bar Association Members are going to go with this one. Also, now that there is a vacancy on the Courts, is an appointment in order? if the vacancy stays for one year, do we really need this extra Judge? Time for the Administration to step up and Council should join in to see if the extra Judge is really needed.
At best Baratta is right and there is an ethics violation for Pepper, and possibly Houck for failing to know that Pepper was involved in cases with his landlord, Minotti.
At worse, Baratta gets a story that makes it appear Houck is covering up something in his office.
This race will further divide the judges, as they have already silently picked sides.
Bernie, I thought Morganelli supported Houck as his former boss? Was I wrong? If so, why did Morganelli support DiLuzio and now Baratta over Houck?
Houck doesn't have the temperament to be DA. I've seen him pop off at people, completely unprofessional I'm a Democrat and I supported him 4 years ago against DiLuzio but I will support Baratta this go-around.
Holy Batman. This is better than watching The House of Representatives shit show.
Got my popcorn ready, Go Baratta GO!!
has anyone noticed that for the majority of 2023 the courts are using Senior Judges for motions court/bail court, when we have 9 other judges who are available. this is waste of taxpayer money
"Houck doesn't have the temperament to be DA. I've seen him pop off at people, completely unprofessional I'm a Democrat and I supported him 4 years ago against DiLuzio but I will support Baratta this go-around."
Um, compared to Baratta, Terry is quite mild mannered. If this is a battle of temperaments, Baratta loses. He's a good man and I like him bc he's real. But he has a very short fuse.
Your "Republicans will love this" comment would be true and insightful if the Northampton County Republicans actually had a viable candidate. I don't think they have anyone. We will find out in the coming weeks . . . .
" I thought Morganelli supported Houck as his former boss? Was I wrong? If so, why did Morganelli support DiLuzio and now Baratta over Houck?"
Morganelli went to lunch daily for years with Terry. You'd think he'd support his first assistant and friend. But John is the most political person I know. All judges are highly political, but hide it.
When it came to Terry's first run, Morganelli was terrified that Zito was going to run for DA on the R side. He believed Nuria DiLuzio would be far easier to elect (and control). That's why, at her announcement, the room was packed with all of Morganelli's supporters, including Bob Donchez. Its why McClure kept praising her every chance he could e3ven though he promised Terry he'd stay neutral. But everything blew up in everyone's face when uit was learned that she was a rabid Treump supporter. It was then learned that there was an ethics opinion claiming the DA could have a conflict in Bethlehem cases bc she was married to the Chief of Police.
Now Morganelli is propping up Baratta. He'll deny it, but this ham-handed approach comes right from his playbook. Why? Because John can't help it. It's in his nature to be this way, and he still loves Terry. It's just the way John has always been. If there's intrigue within the county Dems, you do not need to peel many layers before you find John, lol.
"has anyone noticed that for the majority of 2023 the courts are using Senior Judges for motions court/bail court, when we have 9 other judges who are available. this is waste of taxpayer money"
We don't have 9 judges. We have 8 bc Baratta stepped down and created a vacuum.
"now that there is a vacancy on the Courts, is an appointment in order? if the vacancy stays for one year, do we really need this extra Judge? Time for the Administration to step up and Council should join in to see if the extra Judge is really needed."
Given the population growth, it probably is. It is not the county that decides these things, but the state legislature. There will be no appointment. Baratta's replacement will be elected. Brian Panella has announced.
"Republicans will love this."
I guess they will to the extent Ds are engaged in an entertaining, circular firing squad. But Rs haven't been much of a factor in county DA races, except that their support of Morganelli made him untouchable.
It is how they act as to why they want such power.
Bernie, is the complaint available to the public?
I included his complaint in the body of my post. I did not include the attachments.
First one to make a deal with Rs, wins. When the home team is acting stupid, the visitors can direct some things. No R is going to win the general. Might as well get something from a D. Caution though: statewide chances are finished for the D who acts conservative and does this, as Morgy learned again and again and again. He's still in Easton after all that whoring and schlepping. Lol.
I can't believe what I just read. Does becoming a Judge affect your brain? This is not a good representation of what a Judge should be and casts the Judiciary in a very negative light. What the District Attorney did was okay up till now, but it's not okay now because I'm a candidate running against him. guess who won't be getting my vote
All of this democratic infighting could result in…and you heard it here first. DA Tom Carroll.
I’m seriously worried about that scenario.
Tom Carroll is just sitting here watching the democrat party destroy itself and laughing. It’s all part of his ultimate plan. Trust me, these MAGA folks are playing the long game.
No question this has JM's fingerprints all over it. His political reputation is well known. Steve is one of his padawans much like McClure. The mantra of the philosophy is I will burn the village to the ground to defeat my foe. In political terms you have to admire the will to ruthlessly destroy your opponent regardless of the cost or collateral damage, yet you sure don't want to be the target or anywhere in the area.
I have been told Pepper is a very good attorney and a decent guy. He apparently is the sacrificial lamb in this affair. But these are honorable men.
Isn't Pepper a friend of yours, Bernie?
So Morganelli is willing to strain a twenty-year old friendship in Houck, with everything that they’ve been through in courts, to play politics in an unimportant local race.
Y’all white people are brutal. No loyalty whatsoever.
All politicians suck both republicans and democrats they are making this country a 3rd world nation --China will overtake us in every way possible.
"I have been told Pepper is a very good attorney and a decent guy. He apparently is the sacrificial lamb in this affair. But these are honorable men.
Isn't Pepper a friend of yours, Bernie?"
Pepper is indeed a very good attorney and a very good person. Yes, he is an honorable man. It therefore necessarily follows that he can in no way be a friend of mine. I have standards.
I understand why Steve Baratta would make this a campaign issue. It's good politics. Now he can send mailers announcing, "DA Under Investigation!" But legally, this goes nowhere.
Who vacates a cushy 212K a year judgship to run for a job that pays the same but has triple the headaches? Someone with an ax to grind. This smells like a vindictive move by Baratta after some meetings in smoke filled back rooms LOL. I think Houck has done a good job. I wonder who he pissed off.
Soros has directed a lot of money at key DA and AG races for Democrats. Is there any of it in NorCo, part of the third largest metro area in PA? Who's funding Baratta? Same group as Phila's Krasner, et al? Something really weird is going on here.
Don’t give us your conspiracy bullshit when George Santos, a complete FRAUD, who lied about everything, EVERY FUCKING ITEM on his resume is A LIE, and he’s still allowed to walk around capital hill. Let me take out your dirty laundry first before you offer your looney and unsubstantiated conspiracy theories.
Hypocrite!
True, Berni. Just like Houck can say “Ex Judge under investigation for Judicial Misconduct” and “ Ex Judge involved in Libel suit” both of which are no doubt currently in the works, being Houck already mentioned it to you.
Houck made no such representation to me. It would be difficult to maintain a libel suit. Houck is a public figure. As First Assistant DA, Pepper is likely a public figure as well. They would have to prove that Baratta's misstatements were made with actual malice. The most egregious accusation is that "Mr. Pepper represented a husband who was charged by the Freemansburg Police Department of Harassment (by physical contact) - a summary offense. Wife was the alleged victim." This does create the implication that Pepper represented his client in the criminal case, which is patently false. In fact, the moment Pepper became aware of the criminal case, he withdrew as an attorney for this defendant in a civil matter. Moreover, Baratta's own attachments show that Pepper never represented this person in the criminal case. The statement made by Baratta is demonstrably false and places Pepper in a false light. Baratta did make clear to me that he never meant to suggest that Pepper represents criminal defendants. I believe his sentence was at best inartful and at worse defamatory. But libel is very difficulty to prove. I know Pepper is angry and, based on what I know, he should be angry. But he's also a fairly even-tempered guy. Whether he takes legal action is something I have not discussed with him. Doing so runs the risk of drawing more attention to the defamation.
Mr. Pepper is angry? Good for him! I am outraged, but nobody gives a damn about that. If Mr. Pepper is such a skilled attorney, he must have known that maintaining a private practice was wrong and against whatever code previously mentioned. The fact that he was moonlighting (allegedly on County time) is a disgrace and proves that the two law enforcement officers in the County are hypocrites. I don’t like this type of “gotcha” move, but I have met Messers. Baratta and Houck and I will support the former judge if given the opportunity.
During the last year, Bernie’s posts have shed a light on the nursery school that is Northampton County Courthouse. It is time for the County Executive and/or Council to step in and put an end to this mess. The grown-ups need to return to the Courthouse and other areas of life.
"If Mr. Pepper is such a skilled attorney, he must have known that maintaining a private practice was wrong and against whatever code previously mentioned"
There is no county or state law prohibiting him from part-time work. Your allegation to the contrary is a lie and just adds more credence to any claim of libel.
I am the 5:50 pm person who posted and am legitimately confused. I thought I read in your post that “All full-time Northampton County ADAs are prohibited from engaging in the private practice of law.” I am truly asking you to explain this to me because I am honestly not understanding where I am crossing the libel line. Thanks!
Then you should read mu post again. If you think that full-time employment makes it impossible to work part-time, then about 35% of the county workforce should be fired.
Bucks prosecutor demoted for moonlighting during work hours - later resigns
https://www.wfmz.com/news/area/southeastern-pa/bucks-prosecutor-demoted-for-moonlighting-during-work-hours/article_3c274308-881d-11eb-8245-77dfcc0b403a.html
DOYLESTOWN, Pa. — The second-in-command in the Bucks County district attorney's office was demoted after staff learned he was moonlighting as a DoorDash food delivery driver during work hours.
Gregg Shore, who had been first assistant district attorney, will now take on the role of a deputy district attorney, according to a news release from the DA's office.
Jennifer M. Schorn, a 22-year veteran of the office, was promoted to first assistant district attorney.
The office's attorney staff learned recently that Shore "demonstrated very poor judgment" by working a side job delivering food for DoorDash and did so, at times, during normal business hours, District Attorney Matt Weintraub said.
Using his accrued vacation time, Shore has repaid the county the money he earned working that extra job while on duty, according to the DA's office.
"Nevertheless, his actions were thoughtless and demonstrated a lack of leadership," Weintraub said. "He also violated the trust that I, the other members of the District Attorney's Office, and the people of Bucks County place in each of us. I have a duty to hold those who violate that trust accountable. No exceptions."
Weintraub said Shore will remain with the office as a deputy district attorney and "have the opportunity to earn back the trust and confidence of myself, this Office, and the Bucks County community."
"While he has no excuse for his conduct, I also note that as an attorney who is always 'on call,' even during nonworking hours as the job dictates, that there was never a lapse in Gregg's availability to us when called upon," Weintraub said.
Shore served with the Bucks County district attorney's office from 1996 until 2000 and then returned in 2015. During his time at the DA's office, Shore started the Insurance Fraud Unit and prosecuted Cosmo DiNardo and Sean Kratz for the 2017 murders of four young men. Prior to his return to the DA's office in 2015, Shore also worked at the Lehigh County district attorney's office and the Pennsylvania attorney general's office.
Schorn graduated from Widener University School of Law before joining the office in 1999. Weintraub said Schorn has prosecuted numerous sexual offenders responsible for victimizing children in Bucks County.
What happened ion Montgomery has exactly zero application here. The county Council imposed no ban on assistant prosecutors working part-time. There also is no statutory prohibition on an assistant prosecutor representing clients in civil matters. In Pepper's case, he always took vacation or personal time if he had a civil matter, and puts in 50-60 hour weeks. So you analogy is wrong. Sorry.
Pepper should take whatever actions he can. This vile personal reputation attack is wrong. The problem is the "boys" just don't care. Someone needs to call foul. Maybe a judicial review panel or lawyer ethic review. JM needs to stop the politicking or get off the bench.
Pepper broke no County rules or laws. This tells me that Barratta is just another scumbag politician with robes on. My question is why? What’s his problem with Houck? The DA seems to be doing his job. Maybe some of the staff don’t like him? Boo hoo go find another job then. There’s more to this Bernie. To step down from a judgeship to oust a DA from your own party? It’s really crazy given there have been no performance issues or outlandish accusations of misconduct or malfeasance.
Bernie, just a heads up, Pepper became the attorney of record representing that husband in the divorce proceedings against the wife a month AFTER the filing of criminal charges against the husband. This civil representation began while Pepper was the acting First Assistant. Pepper than remained the attorney of record for a half-year in the divorce proceeding. That is all public record on the court dockets. Are you just taking Pepper at his word or are we missing something here??
No need for any heads up. I spoke with Baratta, Pepper and the husband's new attorney about this, and in detail. Pepper was completely unaware of any criminal case until a RTK was filed, at which point he got out of the civil case entirely. In other words, he acted ethically. The only person I haven't spoken to is Missy Rudas, who represents wife. Iwould do so, but Baratta wants her to conduct an "investigation".
Post a Comment