Powerful WPB law firm ordered to pay $2.2 million to retired partner

Sept. 19--The Ciklin Lubitz Martens & O'Connell law firm owes founding partner Patrick Casey$2.2 million for failing to pay him his share when he retired in 2012, a judged ruled earlier this month. But Palm Beach County Circuit Court Judge Lucy Chernow-Brown's judgment didn't just talk money.

Chernow-Brown also slammed Alan Ciklin, a prominent attorney and managing partner of the West Palm Beach law firm. "The court finds Mr. Ciklin's testimony and credibility to be questionable," Brown wrote in her scathing, 12-page ruling, which came on Sept. 8, after a five-day trial in late July and early August.

"Mr. Ciklin, a licensed Florida attorney for 43 years, and managing partner of the defendant law firm for 24 years" testified he was not familiar with Florida partnership law, Chernow-Brown wrote, in finding that the firm didn't follow the law.

"I testified to nothing but the truth," Ciklin responded last week. "That was her opinion."

Chernow-Brown's decision was a victory for Casey, who helped found the firm in 1985. It was previously known as Boose Casey Ciklin. It then became Casey Ciklin, after once-powerful lawyer William Boose retired in 2006 and went to federal prison after admitting he helped a former county commissioner hide profits from a land deal.

"We always wanted to amicably settle this, but failing that, we were going to enforce the contract," said North Palm Beach lawyer Eric Hewko, Casey's attorney.

"The facts, the law and frankly, common sense indicated this result," Hewko said. "There's not much appealable in this order."

But Ciklin Lubitz is going to do it anyway.

Ciklin said the firm plans to appeal. "We wholeheartedly disagree with (the judge's) decision," Ciklin said.

In addition to the firm, the judgment also is against the individual professional associations of each firm partner.

They are Ciklin, Richard Martens, Phil O'Connell, Robert Crane, Bruce G. Alexander, Brian Joslyn, John Boykin, Jerald Beer, Charles Lubitz and Dean Vegosen.

Casey retired from the firm on Oct. 31, 2012. By December he had filed the lawsuit against his firm, alleging it violated a partnership agreement when it did not pay Casey a $511,200 guaranteed payment when he retired.

In the lawsuit, which alleged breach of contract, Casey also sought his share of the firm.

In court documents, the firm countered Casey's claims, saying that subsequent partnership agreements nullified earlier agreements with Casey.

The trial was held after months of drawn-out efforts to obtain law firm documents.

Evidence obtained during the case provided an inside look into the inner workings of one of Palm Beach County's most influential real estate, land use and commercial litigation firms.

Chernow-Brown noted the evidence presented at trial showed the firm maintained at least two separate balance sheets, both dated Oct. 31, 2012. Accounts receivable listed on one were omitted on the other, Chernow-Brown wrote.

"Importantly, unbilled time, life insurance proceeds receivables and over $1 million in cash value of life insurance policies were completely missing from both balance sheets," Chernow-Brown wrote.

She concluded the firm was obligated to keep books for all the property of the firm, under the firm's partnership agreement.

Furthermore, Martens submitted a letter to the firm on Jan. 3, 2012, announcing his retirement.

Martens' lawyer subsequently filed a document in his divorce case to reduce his alimony based on his resignation.

Martin didn't retire but continued working at the firm, receiving big money while there, Chernow-Brown wrote.

At trial, Ciklin said the firm did not accept the retirement when Martens submitted it. But Chernow-Brown concluded that did not change the fact of his voluntary withdrawal as an equity partner, according to Florida partnership law.

She added: "The evidence on this factual issue raises a real possibility of a charade being played out in order to manipulate a matter pending in the Family Division of this Court."

Since Chernow-Brown determined Martens no longer was an equity partner, Brown awarded Casey a greater share of the firm's assets and income, because there was one less partner with which to share the bounty.

Casey also was awarded the $511,200 after Chernow-Brown found the firm was in breach of its obligation to pay Casey the money.

As for Martens, on Aug. 28, he filed a new petition in his divorce filing, which dates to 1996.

In it, he asked for a modification or elimination of alimony, stating his income has declined and he is planning to retire in either late 2014 or 2015, according to court documents.

The planned retirement was news to Ciklin.

"He's not retiring, as far as I know," Ciklin said.

Curtis Witters, attorney for Marten's ex-wife, Dianne Martens of Jupiter, said his client continues to need the alimony and opposes any changes.

Witters said his client is aware of the Casey judgment and is "concerned" about its effect on the firm.

The judgment is not covered by insurance, Ciklin said.

Neither Richard Martens nor his divorce lawyer could be reached for comment.

Alexandra Clough writes about the economy, real estate and the law.

___

(c)2014 The Palm Beach Post (West Palm Beach, Fla.)

Visit The Palm Beach Post (West Palm Beach, Fla.) at www.palmbeachpost.com

Distributed by MCT Information Services