Post from the past...

Board of Bar Overseer Complaint Against Kopelman and Paige

Prior to stating my complaint I was told by Ms. Podolski to report that as my capacity as a Templeton Sewer Commissioner I made a complaint concerning this matter to this office in 2005-2006.  At that time it is believed the complaint focused on malpractice.  There was no action taken at that time.  As more information became available it is believed I will be better able to define my complaint. I would like to thank Attorney Scott Graves of Gardner whose legal work brought more definition to the problem.  

    

 Complaint: It is alleged that the law firm of Kopelman and Paige and specifically William Hewig III and Mark Reich III acted in a fraudulent manner by allowing some members of the Templeton Board of Selectmen acting in a unilateral manner to interfere in the rightful prosecution of another board’s lawsuit.  That other board being the Templeton Sewer Commission and the lawsuit being case 02-2424C heard before Judge Cornetta of the Worcester Superior Court on or around April or May of 2005. It is alleged the K&P attorneys who represented the Sewer Commissioners allowed this interference to cover up their inaction and poor legal advice/fraud involving the wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) contract transfer in March of 1991.  As town attorneys K&P sat idly by as both responsible parties were left off the Assignee and Assumption Agreement in 1991. The Town of Templeton and Erving Paper Mills are believed to have been the responsible parties to this contract transfer in 1991. To compound the matter and hide what they had done (misuse of Federal Funds/fraud?) K&P allowed the BOS to interfere in case 02-2424C by omitting evidence from the Federal portion of the case that showed Gorton/Swartwoods legal decision regarding the legal right of the Board of Sewer Commissioners to legally prosecute the case. It is also believed that the vote taken on 4/8/96 was held back from the BOS by K&P.       

    

Should K&P have recused themselves from this case due to conflict of interest due to their inaction/fraud in 1991?

    

 Should K&P been allowed to broker a settlement based on fraud? 

      

Why did K&P leave out the Federal portion of the lawsuit showing the Sewer Commissioners right to prosecute?

      

Why did K&P omit the testimony of former Selectmen Dana Putnam the only living signatore to the March 4 1974 contract? 

    

 Why did K&P ignore the prosecuting body (Sewer Commissioners) almost as soon as K&P were brought on board in late 2004? 

     

 Why did K&P omit the January 26 1974 town meeting vote authorizing the BOS to enter into an agreement with Erving Paper Mill and Baldwinville Products in the discovery phase of case 02-2424C? 

     

 Why did K&P allow the BOS to interfere in another boards right to prosecute?   

    

 It is believed that the 4/8/96 vote taken by the Board of Selectmen authorized the Sewer Commissioners to prosecute this matter as opined by Federal Judge Nathaniel Gorton and Judge Swartwood in case U.S. District Court, Civil Action No. 96-40140.  Judge Fox of the Gardner District Court in regards to Graves Law Office P.C. Plaintiff vs. Town of Templeton, Templeton Board of Sewer Commissioners Defendants Docket No. 0863 CV53 on page four opined in a similar manner.      

  

 Background:  On January 26 1974 Special Town Meeting vote authorized the Board of Selectmen (BOS) to enter into a contractual agreement with Erving Paper Mills and Baldwinville Products.

    

 On March 4 1974 the Board of Selectmen signed the agreement with Baldwinville Products a subsidiary of Erving Paper Mills. The Selectmen at that time did not realize the mistake of omitting Erving Paper Mills from the signatory page.  It was not the Selectmen’s intention to do this (see Putnam’s affidavit). It is believed that town attorney Thomas McLaughlin of Athol who it is believed was not in attendance was not a healthy man and died a few months later.  

   

  In 1987 Erving began looking to sell Baldwinville Products. Kopelman and Paige were the Town of Templeton’s attorneys at that time. John Giorgio of that firm handled the affair. In 1991 American Tissue Mills of Ma. took over the responsibilities of the WWTP contract by signing the Assignee and Assumption Agreement that later was ruled null and void by Judge Cornetta in case 02-2424C. This contract transfer between Northeast Waste Services and Baldwinville Products bound to empty shells. 

     

After taking control of the operation and maintenance of the WWTP American Tissue Mill began abusing the town.

  

  EPA coordinator Mark Malone notified the town that their User Charge Regulations were not in compliance in 1995.  Anthony DePalma and Sharon Wells of that agency opined on the matter.

  

  On 4/8/96 the BOS voted to allow the Sewer Commission to handle all legal actions involving the WWTP contract.  This vote has not been rescinded.

      

Differences between American Tissues and the town led to Civil Action No. 96-40140NMG in 1996.  The Templeton Sewer Commissioners hired the law firm of Mirick, O’Connell, Demallie & Lougee, LLP (MODL) after the 4/8/96 BOS vote. Attorney Joseph Hamilton led the prosecution for MODL. 

    

 After six years the case was sent to the state courts. At this time the Sewer Commissioners changed counsel to Brown Rudnick Berlack and  Israels (BRBI) LLP as money was becoming an issue.   The Sewer Commissioners appealed the decision of Judge Gorton to send the case to the lower court.  The Appeal went to the United States Court of Appeals for the first Circuit No. 03-1134.  The appeal was denied. It was the opinion of the Sewer Commissioners at that time that Attorney Leonard who was handling the prosecution for BRBI would soon run the sewer department out of money with nothing to show.  The commissioners opted for the law firm of Kopelman and Paige (who also happened to be town attorneys) on or around October of 2004.

    

 It was not known by the Sewer Commission or disclosed by K&P at the time of hire that K&P had been involved with the Assignee and Assumption Agreement in 1991. Mr. Putnam would have known this but he was dead according to Mr. Hewig.  

    

 In October of 2004 even though it was believed by the Sewer Commissioners that they were in charge of prosecuting the case circumstances show otherwise. Selectmen (Skelton, Columbus and Quartrochochi) and town coordinator Carol Skelton selectmen Gerald Skelton’s wife would undermine the sewer commissioners efforts to hold Erving Paper Mills accountable for damages associated with the WWTP contract.  These actions are shown in William Hewig III deposition. 

Hewig’s deposition was taken in regards to having star witness former selectmen Dana Putnam’s affidavit used as evidence in a failed attempt by K&P to get this evidence added to the case after the Judge’s decision.   

    

 On or around May of 2005 Judge Cornetta gave his decision on four items brought before him for Summary Judgment. After learning of the Judge’s decision and reading our briefs I called Mr. Hewig and asked him why he didn’t use any of our evidence.  Mr. Hewig felt that none of it mattered because Erving had not signed the March 4 1974 contract. When asked about star witness (for case 02-2424C) former Selectmen Dana Putnam I was told by Mr Hewig that he was dead.  I was talking to the dead Mr. Putnam in ten minutes. Once again I felt by way of conversation with Mr. Hewig that our money was not being spent wisely. Mr. Putnam’s testimony was never taken and he knew all the details.    

    

 Two of the judgments given by Judge Cornetta in case 02-2424C contradicted facts from Federal Judge Gorton. Those decisions concerned Erving being a party to the contract and the length of the contract.  It is believed because the Federal case facts had been omitted from State case 02-2424C, Judge Cornetta had nothing to reference and somehow reached a different conclusion.  The third no brainer judgment concerned the legality of the Assignee and Assumption Agreement of 1991 it was null and void. Why it took nine years and three sets of lawyers to reach this conclusion is a mystery to me.    

      

After reading William Hewig III deposition it became apparent what had happened. All the evidence had been left out of the case.  And that is about the time I contacted the Board of Bar Overseers. Nothing was done at that time.  I then contacted every other agency I could think at the State and Federal level with little luck.  Most believed I should go back to your office but having already been there it was my belief nothing would be done. The Sewer Commissioners were denied use of legal counsel by the BOS and K&P refused to answer questions saying it was a conflict of interest.  It was our belief however that the 4/8/96 vote and the Federal Judges decision on our authority were still good so we hired Attorney Graves on our own.    

    

 After hiring Attorney Scott Graves on or around June of 2007 he opened the commissions eyes to the possibility that the Selectmen may have interfered in the rightful prosecution of case 02-2424C. His research involving the lawsuit brought forth many questions regarding the Judges decision.  After being told of the possible interference by the Selectmen’s office I reread William Hewig III deposition this time looking for instances of interference.  Readers of Mr. Hewig’s deposition can find interference by the selectmen’s office in many places but especially on pages 23-24, 46-47,and pages 58-59.

     

 In conclusion even though K&P were town attorneys at the time of the interference by the BOS it is believed that the rulings of both Judge Fox of the Gardner District Court and Judge Gorton and Swartwood of the U.S. District Court clearly showed that the vote taken on 4/8/96 gave the Sewer Commissioners clear prosecution rights up to the settlement and perhaps beyond.  William Hewig III deposition among other things shows that the BOS interfered in case 02-2424C.  K&P’s inaction in regards to allowing the selectmen to interfere in case 02-2424C mirror K&P’s inaction involving the contract transfer in 1991.  This allegedly fraudulent behavior is epic and has cost the Town of Templeton millions of dollars in damages associated with the town’s WWTP. By allowing interference in a case involving the Grant Conditions that accompanied the Federal monies to build the town’s WWTP it is believed that K&P along with some members of the BOS acting in a unilateral manner have misused Federal Funds and abused the rules and regulations that accompanied this money. K&P actions in 1991 may be evidence of a misuse of Federal Funds.

     

 PL92-500 was not legislated to shift the expenses of cleaning our countries waterways away from corporate industrial users. Shifting expenses in this way may be a form of Corporatism.   

Pete Farrell Templeton Sewer Commissioner

Documents enclosed:

1.)William Hewig III 6/27/05 deposition

2.)Judge Foxes decision on case 0863CV53

3.)Court Decision case 02-2424C Judge Cornetta

4.)EPA David Chin User Charge Regs.

5.)April 22, 1996 letter BOS on 4/8/96 vote authorizing Sewer Comm.

6.)1991 Assignee and Assumption Agreement

7.)1987 Letter from town to K&P asking for help with WWTP contract.

8.)9/4/90 Letter from Erving Paper Mill pres. Charles Housen

9.)Carol Skelton memo in regards to John Giorgio question on contract.

Please advise on documents needed. 

     Federal case 40140NMG has been placed on discs by Brown Rudnick Berlap and Isreal, Town Clerk has asked for a copy.  The case includes over twenty thousand pages of documents. Hard copy can be found at the BOS office.

     Case 02-2424C contains about four boxes of documents at BOS.