1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Former Girardi Keese CFO ordered to pay over…

Criminal Justice

Former Girardi Keese CFO ordered to pay over $8.9M in restitution, serve prison time for embezzlement

By Debra Cassens Weiss

April 15, 2025, 11:32 am CDT

The former chief financial officer for the now-defunct law firm Girardi Keese was sentenced Friday to 121 months in federal prison for embezzling money from the firm and its clients.

Christopher Kazuo Kamon, 51, was also ordered to pay more than $8.9 million in restitution, according to a April 11 press release. He had pleaded guilty in October 2024 to two counts of wire fraud in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

U.S. District Judge Josephine L. Staton of the Central District of California said during the sentencing hearing that Kamon helped build a “web of deceit and manipulation.” Kamon had worked closely with former name partner Tom Girardi, who was convicted in August 2024 on four counts of wire fraud for or stealing $15 million from four clients over the course of a decade.

Girardi, who has been disbarred, was famous for his legal team’s portrayal in the film Erin Brockovich and for his marriage to Erika Girardi, who has appeared on The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills reality TV show.

Law360, Law.com and Reuters are among the publications with coverage of Kamon’s sentence.

During the hearing, Staton described the relationship between Kamon and Girardi as “symbiotic,” according to Law.com.

According to Law.com, “Staton’s voice shook slightly as she described, in detail, the disastrous financial situations of two of Girardi’s injured clients: a family who, as a result of Girardi’s main fraud scheme, was unable to purchase a house large enough to house the equipment necessary to care for their quadriplegic child and a widowed client who—after being assured by the firm that her embezzled settlement would pay off her house—was later forced to take out a home equity loan and sell it.”

Kamon is also facing federal charges in Illinois for allegedly stealing money from relatives of air crash victims. Kamon’s lawyer, Michael Severo, told Law360 that a nearly finalized plea deal would allow Kamon to serve his sentence in the Illinois case concurrently with the California sentence.

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Former lawyer gets prison time after posing…

Criminal Justice

Former lawyer gets prison time after posing as BigLaw alum, former football player in quest for jobs

By Debra Cassens Weiss

March 13, 2025, 9:00 am CDT

Updated: An Ohio lawyer has been sentenced to 37 months in prison for Social Security fraud after using fake identities in a quest for law firm jobs.

Richard Louis Crosby III, 37, of Mason, Ohio, was sentenced Monday, according to Reuters and a March 10 press release. In addition to serving time in prison, Crosby will have to pay $171,000 in restitution to defrauded firms.

Crosby had used the name Richard Williams while applying to firms and claimed at various times to be a former Marine, a former University of Michigan football player and a Kirkland & Ellis lawyer, according to the press release.

He used fake identities to get job offers with at least seven firms that often offered six-figure salaries and, in some cases, signing bonuses, the press release said. One California firm hired Crosby at an annual salary of $250,000 the month before his federal indictment.

Crosby pleaded guilty to three federal counts of Social Security fraud in July 2024. He had used identifying information for his elderly father, his girlfriend, a dead man and others, federal prosecutors said.

Crosby used the fake identities beginning in June 2021, after he indicated that he intended to resign from the practice of law. Crosby was indicted in the state on theft charges in June 2021 and November 2021, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Ohio. “After his indictments, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio entered an order disbarring Crosby,” the news release states. However, he applied at a second firm in June 2022.

The Supreme Court of Ohio’s directory still lists Crosby as “Resigned-Discipline Pending,” and an employee in the clerk’s office confirmed that he has not been disbarred by the Supreme Court of Ohio.

He pleaded guilty in the Ohio theft cases in May 2023 and was sentenced to probation the next month.

Updated on March 14 to note that while the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Ohio refers to him as disbarred, the Supreme Court Of Ohio Attorney Directory refers to him as resigned with discipline pending.

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Lawyer accused of helping client defraud…

Criminal Justice

Lawyer accused of helping client defraud creditors is acquitted a second time

By Debra Cassens Weiss

February 19, 2025, 8:52 am CST

A former Freeborn & Peters lawyer in Illinois has been acquitted of wire fraud a second time in a case stemming from his representation of a neighbor, the owner of a Chicago business that eventually filed for bankruptcy.

Federal jurors acquitted lawyer Edward Lee Filer in a retrial after deliberating a little more than one hour, Law360 reports.

Filer’s lawyer, Ronald Safer, told Law360 that the verdict “is a hard-fought testament to the integrity of Mr. Filer, who was unjustly accused in a case that should never have been brought against him.”

Prosecutors had alleged that Filer schemed to defraud creditors of the business, the Barsanti Woodwork Corp., in two ways, according to an appellate ruling in the case and a Jan. 14 pretrial ruling by a federal judge overseeing the retrial.

First, Filer was accused of helping the Barsanti Woodwork Corp.’s owner obtain control of the company’s secured bank debt at a discount through a nominal purchaser. Second, Filer was accused of engaging in transactions that transferred the Barsanti Woodwork Corp.’s assets to a new company secretly controlled by the company’s owner. The Barsanti Woodwork Corp. then filed for bankruptcy.

In Filer’s first trial, jurors convicted Filer of wire fraud but now-deceased U.S. District Judge Harry Leinenweber of the Northern District of Illinois granted a judgment of acquittal or, in the alternative, a new trial.

The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at Chicago reversed that first acquittal in December 2022. The appeals court held that prosecutors had presented sufficient evidence to support a wire fraud conviction, even though Filer did not profit, and some of his actions were inconsistent with an intent to defraud.

The 7th Circuit said the case should be reassigned to a new judge on remand.

Before the retrial, U.S. District Judge Steven C. Seeger of the Northern District of Illinois found that the government violated Filer’s attorney-client privilege when it obtained information about Filer’s confidential communications with the former general counsel at Freeborn & Peters. The government obtained the information while prepping the former general counsel for testimony, according to a Jan. 31 docket entry.

As a sanction, Seeger barred the former general counsel from testifying and barred evidence about documents withheld from the bankruptcy trustee, according to a Feb. 7 docket entry.

Freeborn & Peters merged with Smith, Gambrell & Russell in 2023. The merged law firm kept the Smith Gambrell name.

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Judge resigns for second time after he’s…

Judiciary

Judge resigns for second time after he’s accused of staging fake proceeding

By Debra Cassens Weiss

February 6, 2025, 11:23 am CST

A New York judge has resigned for a second time for allegedly staging a sham proceeding, but this time, he won’t be returning to the bench.

Judge Louis P. Violanti of the Lackawanna City Court in Erie County, New York, resigned Jan. 23 and agreed never to return, according to a Feb. 5 press release and documents noted by the Legal Profession Blog.

Violanti first resigned in March 2013 but made no promises that he wouldn’t return, according to the press release, a Jan. 2 stipulation and an August 2024 ethics complaint. He resigned the first time after learning that he was under investigation for allegedly staging a sham proceeding in January 2013 to dismiss a traffic charge for an acquaintance.

No prosecutor was present for the proceeding, and a police officer posed as the traffic defendant, according to the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct.

“Following the sham proceeding, and on the basis of fictitious evidence,” Violanti dismissed the charge, the ethics complaint said. The acquaintance had been accused of driving with a suspended vehicle registration.

The sham-proceedings allegation led to a two-year suspension of Violanti’s law license. The suspension decision by the Appellate Division’s Fourth Judicial Department of the New York Supreme Court said mitigating factors included Violanti’s “longtime and substantial community involvement,” his sincere expression of remorse, and his advice that all parties cooperate in the ethics investigation.

Violanti was reinstated to practice in March 2016. The mayor of Lackawanna, New York, appointed Violanti to a six-year term on the city court in March 2024. Five months later, the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct filed a new ethics complaint based on the same 2013 proceeding.

Robert H. Tembeckjian, the commission’s administrator, said in the press release Violanti “would have been removed in 2013,” making him “constitutionally ineligible to return” to the bench if the commission had not been constrained by time limits in the law.

“A decade later, he came back” to the bench, Tembeckjian said, “only to face discipline and agree to the inevitable: permanent departure from the bench.”

Violanti commented in a statement forwarded to the ABA Journal by his lawyer, Rodney O. Personius of Personius Melber.

“While now over a dozen years old” Violanti said of the proceeding, “I once again acknowledge my poor exercise of judgment in resolving a traffic citation for a close friend that arose from a mistake made by his auto insurance carrier. The disposition of the citation was not the issue, as recognized by the district attorney at the time.

“Whether I required the defendant to come to court or not, the underlying charge was subject to dismissal due to the insurance company’s error. At the time, I took full responsibility for my improper handling of this matter, which included voluntarily resigning from my judicial post and accepting without opposition the two-year sanction imposed by the appellate division.

“I understood the matter ended at that point, and therefore accepted the reappointment to the bench that was offered to me almost 12 months ago. I have since served the Lackawanna community honorably and competently as its associate judge. When this old matter resurfaced and my timeliness objection was denied, I decided the public, particularly our community, would be best served if I simply stepped aside. I am forever grateful for having had this additional opportunity, however brief, to again contribute to the good of our city.”

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. SCOTUS will decide whether schools can require…

U.S. Supreme Court

SCOTUS will decide whether schools can require LGBTQ-themed books at story time with no opt-outs

By Debra Cassens Weiss

January 21, 2025, 10:27 am CST

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday agreed to decide whether schools can require teachers to read storybooks to elementary-age children with LGBTQ characters and themes over parents’ objections.

At issue is whether the required instruction with no possibility of opting out violates parents’ First Amendment right to free exercise of religion.

SCOTUSblog, the Washington Post, the New York Times, Reuters and the Volokh Conspiracy are among the publications with coverage of the cert grant in Mahmoud V. Taylor.

The SCOTUSblog case page is here.

One of the books, Pride Puppy, is about a puppy that gets lost during a gay pride parade, according to SCOTUSblog. Another, My Rainbow, is about a mother who makes a colorful wig for her transgender daughter.

Both books were removed from the curriculum after the lawsuit was filed, the Washington Post reported in October.

Other books remain, including Love, Violet, which is about a young girl trying to make a valentine for a female classmate.

The Richmond, Virginia-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled 2-1 against the parents in May, holding that the parents weren’t entitled to a preliminary injunction because they had not shown that they or their children were forced to change their religious beliefs or conduct.

According to the cert petition, five circuits now hold that Supreme Court precedent “essentially provides parents no protection once they place their children in the public system.” Only one circuit has found that forced instruction burdens parents’ free exercise rights under the precedent, the 1972 Supreme Court case Wisconsin v. Yoder, the petitioners say.

The defendants in the case are the Montgomery County, Maryland, superintendent of public schools, the school board and its members. They argue that there is no circuit split on the issue.

“Every single court of appeals that has considered the question has held that mere exposure to controversial issues in a public school curriculum does not burden the free religious exercise of parents or students,” their brief says.

The parents who challenged the policy are represented by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, a nonprofit public interest law firm, which issued a Jan. 17 press release here.

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

For far too long, legal departments have been considered the slow-moving arm of the business. This presumption is true for many reasons—chief among them the fact that the legal department’s primary role is to balance risk with opportunity. Such responsibility often requires endless hours spent analyzing massive amounts of contract data to forecast potential gains and minimize losses.

But with the advent of generative AI, many processes that slowed down the legal arm of the business can be rapidly accelerated, especially when it comes to an organization’s contract data analysis and management systems. In fact, now that our industry has a much clearer vision of what generative AI can do—and how it can improve contract management workflows—tedious routine tasks that previously took up an exorbitant amount of time can be completed in a matter of minutes. These advancements have major implications for the legal department and its impact on the rest of the organization.

As we begin 2025, three emerging trends point to a future where legal teams will have the insights they need to play an integral role in their organization’s revenue goals. Here’s a look at how these shifts will transform legal work, freeing legal leaders from redundant, time-consuming tasks to focus on big-picture strategies.

1. Modern-day legal teams will be more agile, allowing them to move at the new speed of business

Generative AI has ushered in a new era of contract management strategies. With the right solutions in place, legal teams can become more agile and effective, supercharging productivity in ways that were unimaginable less than two years ago. But before legal teams can take advantage of generative AI solutions that are actually useful versus just being cool, business leaders must be more thoughtful about their AI investments and implementations.

It’s imperative businesses understand and lean into effective data grounding efforts to avoid “garbage in, garbage out” scenarios often associated with the large language models powering today’s more popular generative AI platforms. Data grounding will be a key factor in generative AI’s ability to deliver accurate and high-value outputs within contract management programs. Once teams are able to prioritize their data grounding efforts, tasks that took months to accomplish will be completed in minutes. Generating first drafts, writing clauses based on playbook analysis, searching endlessly for contracts that are often kept in disparate systems—these are just a few use cases where generative AI will drive productivity across legal workflows and processes.

2. Contract data will be recognized as a business-critical asset, unlocking unrealized revenue gains and new levels of growth

Contract data is not only the key to unlocking cost-saving opportunities, it is also one of the largest sources of untapped revenue for organizations that haven’t optimized their contract management programs. From identifying revenue leakage and overspending on vendors to developing more profitable contract provisions and renewal terms, there are a multitude of ways that contract data can drive massive revenue gains. Unfortunately, most CLM platforms fail to provide high-value insights that can move the needle on their organization’s most important goals.

But the tides are turning. Effective enterprise-grade contract AI solutions are changing the game when it comes to how legal teams leverage their contract data. With full visibility into their contracts—along with tools that can automate complex data analysis—forward-thinking legal teams will be able to realize the organization’s contracts as the business-critical asset they are.

Before legal teams can maximize the value of their contract data, it’s imperative that their contract management solutions come equipped with a contract-AI knowledge engine to avoid the “garbage-in, garbage-out” challenges often associated with generative AI tools. It is also important that CLM software includes an AI-powered repository that enables legal teams to expertly organize their contracts and extract key insights from a centralized—and searchable—database. Another key component of an effective contract management platform is ensuring it is not only intuitive, but accessible to stakeholders outside of the legal department, including sales leaders, finance teams, and the procurement department.

3. Enterprise-grade contract AI will allow legal leaders to achieve outcomes that go far beyond the legal department

The introduction of enterprise-grade contract AI technology makes it possible to extend the value of contract data well beyond the legal department. With the right platforms in place, sales, procurement and finance teams will gain access to previously unavailable contract insights that get them closer to their most important goals. Legal teams can turn contract data into revenue drivers, while procurement teams can better manage vendor relationships. Sales can optimize renewal terms within customer contracts and close deals faster, while finance leaders can rely on contract data to identify cost saving opportunities, as well as find—and stop!—revenue leakage.

The reality is now that legal leaders have a more realistic view of generative AI’s capabilities and limitations, they are better positioned to implement processes that maximize the value of their contract data.

One key benefit of the modern-day legal departments will be the ability to create self-service contract management solutions that can be used by business leaders outside of the legal department, including the CFO and head of sales. And that’s the real promise of enterprise-grade contract AI: delivering unhindered access to valuable contract data to the people who can activate it and drive measurable revenue growth.

There’s no question that the future of legal work is undergoing massive shifts. Legal leaders are reconsidering how work gets done and being more intentional about how they integrate generative AI solutions into their workflows. For the teams that are able to capitalize on these shifts—finally able to take full advantage of their contract data—the sky is the limit.

---

Justin Schweisberger leads sales, marketing and strategic partnerships for Pramata, a leading end-to-end contract management platform. In this role, Schweisberger sets the company’s global market positioning and forges Pramata’s relationships with some of the world’s top brands.

---

Mind Your Business is a series of columns written by lawyers, legal professionals and others within the legal industry. The purpose of these columns is to offer practical guidance for attorneys on how to run their practices, provide information about the latest trends in legal technology and how it can help lawyers work more efficiently, and strategies for building a thriving business.

---

Interested in contributing a column? Send a query to [email protected].

---

This column reflects the opinions of the author and not necessarily the views of the ABA Journal—or the American Bar Association.

A U.S. Navy veteran and Oath Keeper who rioted on Jan. 6 at the U.S. Capitol in a Depends adult diaper was sentenced to time served this week.

Thomas Caldwell, 70, learned that he will avoid any further time in custody at his sentencing hearing on Friday in front of U.S. District Court Judge Amit Mehta, a Barack Obama appointee, court documents said. He served 53 days of incarceration at the Central Regional Jail in Virginia after his 2021 arrest.

I’m mad as hell, and I’m not waiting any longer! Those were the sentiments expressed by a lawyer colleague of mine, Franklin, after his doctor kept him waiting for over two hours. “I should send him a bill for my wasted time,” he said.

I’m sure many of us have heard this one before. But I doubt anyone has ever sent a bill to a physician for time lost sitting around the waiting room. What would happen if, say, a lawyer tried it? Why not? The law is no stranger to landmark iconic cases, such as Miranda rights upon arrest or Donoghue v. Stevenson, the iconic negligence icebreaker case where a manufacturer of ginger beer was held liable to a pub customer who found a decomposed snail in her opaque beverage. The British courts awarded her damages in addition to just saying “Yech!”

I think we would all like to see a lawyer bringing forth a lawsuit against a doctor, with the judge’s decision looking something like this:

Impatient J.:

This is an action for damages by Melvin Alvin, lawyer, against Dr. Arthur Coopersmith, dermatologist. The plaintiff alleges that he visited the offices of the good doctor to deal with a boil which sprung up on his neck. He says the appointment was scheduled for 10:30 a.m. on the 23rd of June last, but that he was not seen by the doctor until 12:45 p.m. He notes that the defendant doctor met him for about five minutes, during which he prescribed some ointment. The plaintiff pleads that he should not have been kept waiting more than two hours, for him “time is money,” and accordingly, the next day he sent the doctor a bill for $1,000 representing two hours of his billable time.

I will note that at the commencement of this trial, the defendant asked that I recuse myself from hearing this case if I had ever been kept waiting by a doctor and did not like it. I denied the motion on the basis that although doctors have consistently wasted hours of my life keeping me waiting unnecessarily like an idiot in their crowded unpleasant waiting rooms, overcrowded with patients obsessed with their cellphones, it never really bothered me. After all, I am a judge of the law. I am totally objective. Yes.

FACTS:

The good lawyer plaintiff Alvin, to whom I shall refer as Melvin, testified that he intended to spend the morning in question preparing for a divorce trial. He expected to be seen as scheduled at 10:30 by the defendant doctor Coopersmith, to whom I shall refer as the defendant. Melvin notes that he even called the defendant’s office before arriving to assess any possible waiting time and spoke to the receptionist, one Gladys, who said, “The doctor is busy seeing many patients. He will see you this morning. Ha ha! Most important, don’t forget your health insurance information …”

ANALYSIS

Melvin argues several points of law justifying his claim. His first point is that the defendant is liable for forcible confinement. True, the good lawyer could have picked up and left, but that boil on his neck was too irritating and he had no choice but to hang in there in that overcrowded unpleasant waiting room until he was seen by the defendant, who was totally inconsiderate of his patients’ time. I find there was a clear case of forcible confinement here.

Melvin also argues that the defendant is liable for intentionally causing alarm and distress. He testified that around 10:54 he was getting agitated waiting, and he asked Gladys to ask the defendant how much longer he would have to wait before being seen. He notes that Gladys replied, in the style of Charles Dickens’ Madame Defarge, “Nobody interrupts the doctor. Ha ha.” She then went back to her knitting.

In addition, the poor plaintiff Melvin pleads liability in negligence. He claims that there was a duty of care owing by the defendant doctor to his patients to make them feel good, not traumatized. He refers to some well-established case law noting that physicians have for centuries systemically kept patients waiting. He cites the iconic keep-waiting case going back to the days of Chaucer, The Man of Law v. the Doctor, 31 C.C.C. (Court of Crazy Cases) p 113. This was an action started by a lawyer, one William of Yorke, who during a pilgrimage to Canterbury came down with a fever. He consulted his fellow pilgrim the doctor, and he was kept waiting for five hours before being seen. The trial judge, one Lord Gerald, noted, “Five hours? That’s way too long to be seen and treated with leeches. The good lawyer should not have had to wait more than minutes before seeing a leach. A plague on the defendant.”

Another case cited was Robin of Loxley v. Sherwood Forest and Associates, 29 N.N.R. (Not Nottingham Reports) p 311, where the plaintiff successfully sued a group of physicians for showing up three hours late when making a house call to Robin Hood and his merry men. The judge, Little Arnold J., awarded Robin Hood a sum of 280 shillings, representing what he could have earned during this down time, stealing from the rich and giving to the poor.

This court finds Melvin had made out a case against the defendant on all of his arguments.

DAMAGES

The evidence was that his claim for damages for time lost was clearly foreseeable. After waiting about 15 minutes, the plaintiff Melvin told Gladys, “Hey, my billable time is $500 per hour … just letting you know. I’ll be back in a couple of minutes after I get a cup of coffee from Starbucks. My meter is running.”

I find this evidence credible and foreseeable.

DISPOSITION

There will be judgment for the plaintiff as claimed, including legal costs. This award is to be paid forthwith. No waiting.

I can’t say we shall see a court decision like this for a while. We may have to wait a bit.

---

Marcel Strigberger, after 40-plus years of practicing civil litigation in the Toronto area, closed his law office and decided to continue his humor writing and speaking passions. His latest book is First, Let’s Kill the Lawyer Jokes: An Attorney’s Irreverent Serious Look at the Legal Universe. Visit MarcelsHumour.com and follow him at @MarcelsHumour on X, formerly known as Twitter.

---

This column reflects the opinions of the author and not necessarily the views of the ABA Journal—or the American Bar Association.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Former Moody’s GC gets prison time for tax-filing…

Criminal Justice

Former Moody’s GC gets prison time for tax-filing failure on $54M income while life ‘all fell apart’

By Debra Cassens Weiss

October 29, 2024, 9:06 am CDT

Updated: The former general counsel at the Moody’s Corp., a financial services company, was sentenced to eight months in prison last week for failing to file tax returns while earning $54 million.

Former general counsel John Goggins, 63, of Chatham, New Jersey, was sentenced Oct. 24 after pleading guilty to willfully failing to pay tax returns during a four-year period. He has already paid court-ordered restitution of $3.11 million and faces an additional fine of $40,000, according to an Oct. 24 press release from the Department of Justice.

Law360 had coverage of the sentencing hearing before U.S. Magistrate Judge Andre M. Espinosa of the District of New Jersey.

Trial attorney Kenneth Vert of the DOJ’s Tax Division argued that Goggins deserved 22 months in prison, according to Law360. Vert said Goggins “only filed returns where the tax authority caught him for not filing,” and his behavior amounted to “deliberate defiance of the tax law.”

The lawyer for Goggins, Sharon L. McCarthy, sought probation for her client, Law360 reported. She acknowledged that the case was “puzzling.” Goggins was able to perform well in his job while his personal life “all fell apart,” she said.

His problems included failing to renew his law license and failing to make car payments, resulting in the vehicle being repossessed twice.

Goggins was stressed by a difficult marriage, memory impairment and the 2015 death of his daughter, according to courtroom remarks cited by Law360. He is now getting mental health treatment.

Goggins “regrets and accepts full responsibility” for failing to file tax returns, according to a statement provided to Law.com and Law.360.

“He is grateful to the court for considering the comprehensive measures of accountability and restitution he has taken in connection with his misdemeanor offenses,” the statement said. “He looks forward to putting this matter behind him and will be timely filing all tax returns going forward.”

Updated Oct. 29 at 2:05 p.m. to correct the amount of the fine and a misattribution.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Ex-BigLaw partner hit with prison time, $4.2M…

Criminal Justice

Ex-BigLaw partner hit with prison time, $4.2M restitution order in tax case

By Debra Cassens Weiss

October 18, 2024, 9:35 am CDT

A former partner at Husch Blackwell and Dykema Gossett has been sentenced to 16 months in federal prison after pleading guilty to two misdemeanors for failing to pay $2.46 million in taxes.

Eric E. Lenzen, 44, was sentenced to prison Tuesday and ordered to pay total restitution of $4.2 million to the Internal Revenue Service, according to an Oct. 16 judgment. The amount represents unpaid taxes plus penalties and interest.

U.S. Magistrate Judge William E. Duffin of the Eastern District of Wisconsin said during sentencing Lenzen’s conduct was “exceptionally aggravated,” and he tried to “thwart the government’s attempts to recover” the money, according to an Oct. 16 press release from the U.S. Department of Justice.

Reuters, Law360 and Bloomberg Law have coverage.

An Oct. 8 government sentencing memorandum said Lenzen was “a high-powered, highly compensated attorney” who “made a choice not to pay his taxes.” Despite being given years to pay up, Lenzen “made a multitude of false representations and took significant actions to avoid paying his taxes,” the memo said.

While refusing to pay his taxes, Lenzen spent nearly $1.5 million on a “lavish lifestyle” that included private planes, jewelry, home remodeling and golf club memberships, the government said. While making promises to pay, Lenzen transferred hundreds of thousands of dollars between accounts or to third parties, the memo asserted.

Lenzen’s crimes “were motivated by greed, not need,” the memo said.