A state appellate court has ruled that two attorneys representing former Guttenberg Mayor Nicholas Cicco and former Councilman Vincent Tabbachino on federal corruption charges more than 10 years ago were not entitled to payment of their fees by the township.
According to the ruling handed down last month by State Appellate Court Judges James Petrella, Richard Newman and Dennis Braithwaite, attorneys Anthony Kress and John Bruno were not able to receive $750,000 in legal bills dating back to 1989. According to the ruling, Kress and Bruno’s requests to have the bills paid were denied because they never had a written contract from the town to do the work.
The court ruled that the township was not required to pay the substantial legal fees, since there was a non-contractual agreement between the attorneys and their clients. The non-contractual agreement could, however, have counted if the lawyers were acting in defense of public officials who act in good faith and were currently still serving the township that elected them.
But in its 18-page decision, the court ruled that Cicco, who served as mayor from 1985 to 1989, “did not act in good faith executing the duties imposed or authorized by law” due to certain actions in office.
Cicco and Tabbachino’s troubles began in January, 1989, when Michael Postorino and Francisco Marrero were denied re-appointment as special police officers. Both Postorino and Marrero had been hired under emergency circumstances, but were not re-appointed. They charged that this was because they refused to actively campaign for Cicco and Tabbachino, who were seeking re-election in November, 1988.
In May of that year, a federal grand jury indicted both Cicco and Tabbachino for “corrupt solicitation of political services to influence the distribution of municipal jobs.” Cicco and Tabbachino eventually beat the charges. In August, 1989, both Kress, of Hackensack, and Bruno, who practices in Rutherford, advised the Guttenberg Township Council, apparently in writing, that they were being retained to represent the two indicted politicians. Bruno was retained to represent Cicco, with Kress handling Tabbachino’s matters.
At the time, the lawyers stated that they expected to be reimbursed for representing the elected township officials. However, the township never responded to the letters that were sent from the attorneys. Kress and Bruno insist that they were both told that they would not receive payment only if the officials were convicted of the charges.
In 1990, Cicco and Tabbachino were initially found guilty of the charges, but the convictions were reversed upon appeal in 1993. When Kress and Bruno then requested payment for their services after the reversal, the township refused the request.
The case had been tied up in litigation ever since. Kress and Bruno both filed suits against the two mayors that followed Cicco into office, William O’Donnell and Peter LaVilla, for failure to pay the legal bills, which totaled $785,768.
Attorney Barry Sarkisian, who represented Guttenberg in the suit and ongoing litigation, believed all along that Guttenberg reserved the right to refuse payment, that the men should have retained representation out of their own private funds and not the taxpayers.
Both O’Donnell and LaVilla retained attorneys to represent them in the suit. O’Donnell’s attorney, Michael Dermody, thought that the suit was bizarre, considering that O’Donnell inherited the situation when he took office.
Pleased with ruling
LaVilla’s lawyer, William Aranguren, said last week that he was pleased with the court’s ruling.
“We felt that the plaintiffs had no legal feet to stand on, because there was no resolution passed by the Town Council to pay for the legal fees,” Aranguren said. “You can’t create a contract out of an alleged conversation or a letter. The rule of law has to be followed and there was no contract. Otherwise, you would be spending the taxpayers’ money illegally.”
However, the case is far from over. Representatives from Bruno’s firm have already contacted the New Jersey Supreme Court to examine the case, saying a verbal agreement does constitute a contract.
Livingston-based attorney Jeffrey Bronster, representing Bruno, has already filed an appeal to the Supreme Court.
“We feel that the Appellate Court made a mistake when it decided that the Local Public Contracts Law applied this case,” Bronster said. “What the judges feel should be a contract for service, we say should be just an agreement to indemnify officials for any legal fees they incur.”
If Guttenberg was forced to pay nearly $800,000 in back legal fees, it would have severely damaged a township already under strict financial guidelines. So the State Appellate Court’s ruling was a blessing to a township battling financial woes.