Former prosecutors and academics—including Bruce Green, director of the Louis Stein Center for Law and Ethics—told Law360 that they are doubtful two of New Jersey’s most politically connected attorneys can convince a judge that the racketeering case against them will have a chilling effect on lawyering.
Former prosecutors and academics are doubtful two of New Jersey’s most politically connected attorneys can convince a judge that the racketeering case against them will have a chilling effect on lawyering, given that prosecutors only have to show they knew the end game of the notorious Democratic power broker they’re accused of helping.
The defense by William Tambussi of Brown & Connery LLP and Philip A. Norcross of Parker McCay PA that everyday legal services don’t rise to criminal behavior comes in response to a sweeping indictment charging the latter’s brother, George E. Norcross III, with extorting his way into a lucrative Delaware River waterfront property portfolio in the economically-struggling city of Camden.
“It’s sort of an overstatement to say you can’t prosecute routine legal work or things that look like routine legal work,” said Bruce Green, director of the Louis Stein Center for Law and Ethics at Fordham University‘s School of Law. “It depends on what the intention of doing the work is.”
…
Prosecutors alleged George Norcross, with the help of his brother Philip, used their power and influence to help craft legislation to make it easier for projects in Camden to receive tax credits and then threatened a Philadelphia developer into giving up development rights to waterfront properties to reap the benefits of the tax credits.
Tambussi is George Norcross’ longtime personal attorney, prosecutors said, and represented the Camden Redevelopment Agency. He researched the filing of a condemnation action against the developer on behalf of the CRA, without the agency’s knowledge, that he knew would fail to pressure the developer and did so to benefit George Norcross, prosecutors alleged. He asserts the state knew this was a false statement to the grand jury.
If Tambussi and Philip Norcross’ intention were not to further legal objectives but to aid the alleged criminal objectives of George Norcross, that could be a crime, Green said. With that, it is unlikely the charges against the two attorneys will have a “chilling effect,” as they suggested in their briefs.
“New Jersey lawyers are going to go about doing routine legal work because it’s rare for them to know that the client’s reason for the legal work is to do something criminal. But if they do know that, then they shouldn’t be doing the legal work,” Green said.
Read “Experts Cool On ‘Chill’ Defense In NJ RICO Case” on Law360.