The River Reporter, July 27, 1995

Taxpayers to pay Friedland's lawyer

By TOM RUE
MONTICELLO - Village board members voted to pay mayor Robert Friedland's legal bills in defense against a removal proceeding filed by the candidate he beat in last year's election. Republican Shirley Feldberg filed a petition this month to oust Friedland as a result of a phone call he made to police chief Michael Brennan last February demanding a job for his son.

Legal wrangling dominated the July 19 village board meeting. Village attorney Martin Miller and deputy attorney Richard Stoloff each agreed that Friedland is covered by a local law passed in 1986 guaranteeing legal representation to municipal employees accused of wrongdoing in office.

While Friedland contends he was advocating for his son as a private citizen and father, the fact that Feldberg is suing him as mayor makes him eligible for coverage.

Feldberg's attorney, Mark Schulman of Wurtsboro, threatened to sue board members individually if they voted for the measure. Friedland pointed out that if Schulman followed through with this threat, trustees would enjoy the same protection as he under.

"You're probably sitting in a Catch-22 position," Stoloff told the board, pointing out that if Friedland sued the village for legal fees, he would probably prevail. Attorney Gary Greenwald of Goshen was present but kept his comments brief.

Greenwald estimated his fee as being "up to $3500" to prepare and submit a response to the Appellate Division. Fees could go higher if the initial motion to dismiss is rejected by the court, he said. "I don't believe that this matter can be summarily decided on the papers. It will involve a fact-finding," said Stoloff, raising the possibility of protracted and costly litigation.

Greenwald claimed he is charging less than his usual rate because he objects to the style of Monticello's politics. "I was a mayor and I don't like frivolous nonsense," he asserted.

Greenwald served as mayor of Wurtsboro in the early eighties for at least two terms, according to Friedland.

All the lawyers in the room except Schulman advised the board that Friedland has a right to a lawyer of his choice, in light of conflicts of interest admitted by both Miller and Stoloff.

"In this case I don't think it would be appropriate for the board -- since each of you may be called as witnesses -- to choose the attorney for the mayor," said Stoloff. "You do have the obligation, under these circumstances, to provide a defense," he said, adding that Friedland has a right to be represented "only and solely" by an attorney who has no ties to the village.

Trustees Gary Somers and Gloria Cahalan each voted no, with Evelyn Vandermark providing a "reluctant" swing vote. Friedland and Michael Levinson voted yes.


Above text is copyright by the author. Duplication without permission is prohibited.
Fight censorship