Court: Morris judge mishandled sour grapes lawsuit

In a case that could literally be about sour grapes, a state appeals court ruled that an attorney’s misconduct should not be held against her client.

The appellate panel concluded that Superior Court Judge Donald S. Coburn, who sits as a part-time recall judge hearing civil matters in Morristown, unfairly used the mistakes and “confusion” of an attorney against her client. The panel reversed the judge’s decision and reinstated the case for trial.

“We are additionally guided by the principle that an attorney's mistaken conduct...should not be visited upon an innocent client,” the appellate court said in its written decision.

The appellate court also said: “Because, among other things, the trial judge abused his discretion by requiring defendant to bear the brunt of counsel's apparent confusion or neglect....”

The appellate panel was not asked to consider the merits of the lawsuit captioned Porto Pavino LLC vs. Giuliano S.R.L. Instead, the panel ruled in favor of an appeal by Giuliano’s new attorney, Vincent Verdiramo, of decisions that Coburn made in 2014 to end the lawsuit by ordering that Giuliano pay Porto Pavino $41,376 -- a sum awarded through non-binding arbitration.

Verdiramo handled the appeal, and was not the original lawyer handling Giuliano’s defense. That attorney, Patricia Rosenblatt, could not be reached Thursday and Verdiramo said he believes she may have retired from practicing law.

Rosenblatt, who maintained a practice in New York in 2014, was described in the appellate decision as a “septuagenarian” - a person in his or her seventies. While the case was ongoing, Rosenblatt was the subject of a letter that Coburn -- who himself is 76 -- described in a letter to the state Office of Attorney Ethics as suffering from “age-related mental problems.”

Coburn was not identified by name in the decision but he handled the case last year in Morris County, according to orders in the court file. Coburn is currently on part-time recall duty as a judge because he had to retire, by law, from full-time judicial work when he turned 70.

Coburn served as a trial-level Superior Court judge from 1981 to 1996, when he was assigned to the appellate division where he served until 2008. He started recall duty in 2009.

The lawsuit states that Porto Pavino, a Chatham Township-based importer of fresh fruit, entered into a contract with Giuliano, a grower and seller of grapes, for the purchase of 2,324 cartons of fresh Italian grapes. The grapes were transported in a refrigerated container from Italy to the United States by an ocean carrier but when they arrived, Porto Pavino alleged the grapes were inedible, with freezer burn because of improper refrigeration.

As required by law, attorneys for both sides had to attend non-binding arbitration, scheduled in Morristown for March 27, 2014. Patricia Rosenblatt, who represented Giuliano at the time, did not show up for the arbitration.

Opposing attorneys waited several hours with the arbiter, who decided to hold a hearing and rendered an award of $41,376 in Porto Pavino’s favor.

Soon after, Rosenblatt petitioned the court to vacate the arbitration award, claiming her wallet was stolen from her purse on March 26, 2014 -- the day before the hearing -- and that she didn’t have her license or enough cash to travel to Morristown, according to court records.

“I certainly did not fake my wallet being stolen while I was walking home from the garage in which I park,” Rosenblatt said in court papers.

Coburn last year heard Rosenblatt’s motion and ruled against her, reaffirming his decision not to vacate the arbitration order. But he said he would reconsider his ruling if Rosenblatt brought in a copy of the police report about the theft of her wallet in New York.

The appellate division noted that Coburn at a hearing in May 2014 “rigorously questioned” Rosenblatt about “the legitimacy and accuracy” of her reasons for not attending the arbitration hearing. He found her description “implausible” but agreed to reconsider the case if a police report were provided, the appellate decision said.

A second hearing was held on June 20, 2014, but the judge found inconsistencies between the police report and Rosenblatt’s version of events.

“Notwithstanding the judge's skepticism, the police report supported the contention that something happened to counsel the night before the arbitration and that the reasons offered for failing to appear were not entirely cut from whole cloth, as the judge seemed to conclude,” the appeals court said.

The appellate court said the judge could have found another way to handle the attorney, perhaps through a sanction reimbursing the plaintiff’s attorney for her time.

“Final judgment by default was extreme and constitutes an abuse of discretion,” the court found.

Staff Writer Peggy Wright: 973-267-1142; pwright@GannettNJ.com.