State ethics board finds probable cause that local attorney Siskind broke state law

The Florida Commission on Ethics voted unanimously to find probable cause that beleaguered Wellington attorney Jeffrey Siskind violated state law in filing an inaccurate financial disclosure form when he ran for state attorney general in 2018.

Siskind, who is battling separate civil charges of fraud in a corporate bankruptcy lawsuit, has the option to come to a financial settlement with the board, or go to a hearing where he can plead his case, a commission spokeswoman said.

If found in violation of state law, Siskind could face penalties including public censure, reprimand or a fine up to $10,000.

The board's Oct. 25 vote was the result of a state investigation into Siskind's financial form after an October 2018 complaint from Robert Gibson, Siskind's former paralegal-turned-rival. The pair are sparring in several court cases, with each saying the other is lying and defrauding clients.

In his complaint, Gibson claimed Siskind "knowingly and grossly misstated his financial assets" by claiming on a June 2018 filing $5.6 million in assets he didn't have.

Siskind, husband of Wellington Councilwoman Tanya Siskind, filed the disclosure form as he ran with no party affiliation for state attorney general. He received less than 2 percent of the vote, with Republican Ashley Moody winning.

On the form, required for all candidates, he claimed assets of $5.6 million and liabilities of more than $3 million.

The $5.6 million came primarily from a holding with the Western Credit Resolution Trust.

But the trust actually has no value, the commission's advocate, an assistant state attorney general, said.

Siskind argued to the commission that he would have been in violation had he not attempted to place a value on the trust.

"Still, based on the incomplete information that the Commission had on hand, I guess they guessed that their guess might be better than what they interpreted might be my best guess as to my net worth," he wrote to The Palm Beach Post.

He said he sent the commission an updated financial disclosure form and has no intention of settling.

The trust was formed 11 days before Siskind filed his financial disclosure form, and Gibson in his complaint said the price tag on the trust is based on Siskind's valuation of his investment in CannaMED Pharmaceuticals LLC, and the possibility that the company would get a license to grow marijuana in Maryland.

But records show that the Maryland Medical Cannabis Commission denied CannaMED's license application in May 2016. CannaMED, with Siskind as its attorney, sued the commission in August 2017, but that lawsuit was dismissed in February 2018.

CannaMED appealed. The court dismissed the appeal in January and denied CannaMED's motion for reconsideration.

"Respondent is asking the public to believe that an entity to which he does not own the name nor has a license to do business could be sold for $14,000,000 and thus his percentage via the trust is worth over $5,000,000," the advocate wrote. "There is sufficient evidence to show that the Trust's value disclosed by Respondent is inaccurate which consequently means the net worth is inaccurate as well."

Siskind said he missed the Oct. 25 ethics hearing because of a client emergency. In his July written response, he told the commission that he is waiting for the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration to award a medical-marijuana growing license to CannaMED.

While federal records show CannaMED Pharmaceuticals did apply in 2016 for a federal growing license, the business name was forfeited in October 2017 and taken up by another person, Maryland records confirm. Siskind in September "revived" CannaMED in Maryland without the original name, instead creating a new company dubbed NuCanna Pharmaceuticals LLC, records show.

It's unclear how or if the name change could affect the DEA application. Details about the approval process for each application are confidential, an agency spokeswoman said.

Siskind in his response to the ethics commission said "the operating business" of CannaMED would be worth millions if the application is approved. He told The Post he still expects approval.

Siskind argued the investigation is "fatally deficient" because it does not disclose Siskind's basis for how he valued CannaMED, even though he says he provided that information to the investigator.

He wrote that the complaint also is deficient because there is no basis "whatsoever" for Gibson's valuation, which should be "deemed to be pure speculation."

Instead, Siskind wrote, had he failed to include his interest in the trust and a "reasonable valuation thereof," then he would have been in violation of financial disclosure rules.

[email protected]

@kristinawebb

___

(c)2019 The Palm Beach Post (West Palm Beach, Fla.)

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

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.