• FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education
  • FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education
  • FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education

Latest News Articles

The Estate of Henry Goldentuler v Crosbie et al, 2016 ONSC 5071 (CanLII)

 
[21]           Edward testified that in the spring of 2007, a paralegal by the name of Roland Spiegel called Henry and requested his help. He said that he knew another paralegal by the name of Robert Crosbie, who was subject to a cease and desist order by the Financial Services Commission of Ontario (FSCO) and was unable to work as a paralegal without supervision by a lawyer. Mr. Spiegel told Henry that Mr. Crosbie had a lot of good personal injury files and that it may be beneficial to both of them to have Mr. Crosbie work under Henry and Edward’s direct supervision.

[22]           Edward testified that he and his brother met with Mr. Crosbie in their office, but that he was not in favour of any involvement with Mr. Crosbie. His evidence was that he did not like Mr. Crosbie’s look or attitude. However, ultimately, the Goldentulers were convinced to take on Mr. Crosbie because he was good friends with another personal injury lawyer known to them, namely, Mark Elkin. Mr. Elkin vouched for Mr. Crosbie and told them that the Financial Services Commission order was a technicality. The Goldentulers met with Mr. Elkin and relied on his recommendation. According to Edward, he told them that Mr. Crosbie regularly had access to million dollar files and that he was both honest and helpful. This recommendation was ultimately what persuaded the Goldentulers to give Mr. Crosbie a chance.

[23]           Susequently, Crosbie and the Goldentulers came to an arrangement. Crosbie would bring his files to the Goldentuler law office and his clients would sign an authorization for Henry to act on the files. Mr. Crosbie would receive a corner office as well as an office for an assistant and another for his common law spouse, Leyenson, who also worked as a paralegal. Henry agreed to cover the overhead and provide a receptionist. The agreement was that Crosbie and Leyenson would work the files and any settlement on an accident benefits file would be split 50/50 between Crosbie and the Goldentulers. If the file was a complicated tort claim, the Goldentulers would handle the litigation and Crosbie would get a 30 percent referral fee.

[24]           This arrangement began in September 2005 and ended in February of 2007. Edward’s evidence was that the FSCO was trying to make the cease and desist order permanent as against Mr. Crosbie, but the Divisional Court declined to allow it. Shortly after the FSCO order expired and Mr. Crosbie was able to work on his own again, his files and equipment were surreptitiously removed from the Goldentuler office. Mr. Edward Goldentuler testified that he requested building surveillance showing Mr. Crosbie and his assistant removing boxes of files during the night. Those photographs were contained at tab 5 of Exhibit 1.

[25]           Edward testified that approximately 120 files were removed from the premises. Within a few days of the files being removed, he received directions and authorizations signed by clients to forward any documents remaining in his office relating to those files to KLC. Edward learned that that company was owned by Mark Koskie. Mark Koskie was a lawyer who had worked in the Goldentuler firm for approximately three months before he had been fired for incompetence. Edward later learned that Crosbie, Leyenson and Yattavong were involved in KLC. Edward wrote to Crosbie demanding the return of the files. Mr. Crosbie wrote back on March 12, 2007, indicating that he did not take anything that belonged to Goldentuler and Associates, as the files were the clients’ property and had been returned to the clients. The letter is located at tab 9 of Exhibit 1. There is nothing in the letter indicating why Mr. Crosbie left or explaining how the relationship had broken down.

[26]           Edward later found out that between September 2005 and February 2007, very few of Crosbie’s files were settled. However, his firm was obliged to do corrective work on many of them. Edward later surmised that Crosbie and his team were simply waiting for the files to ripen and then would wait to leave and settle them on their own or divert them to Mr. Elkin.

[27]           It was also discovered during Ms. Leyenson’s cross-examination that, despite the cease and desist order, files were settled during this period under the name of Lightning Paralegal. A bank statement marked as Exhibit 2 is directed to Lightning Paralegal at 1000 Finch Avenue West, Fourth Floor, and shows a large deposit of $37,550 on February 13, 2007. This is the only bank statement Edward was able to obtain. He suggested that the $37,550 must have been a settlement. He was concerned about how many other settlements had been directed to Lightning Paralegal.

[28]           Edward also testified that when Crosbie and his team took the original files and retainers, they tried to wipe out the computer system.

Comments are closed.