‘Blind’ driving attorney loses sanctions fight

By NEIL HARTNELL

Tribune Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

A Supreme Court judge has refused to give an attorney “a second bite at the cherry” and appeal sanctions related to his management of a $30m estate on the basis he is “legally blind”.

Justice Indra Charles, in a February 5, 2021, ruling found that there were multiple “inconsistencies and omissions” in new evidence submitted by Gregory Cottis in a bid to justify being granted leave to appeal penalties imposed for “13 breaches” of Supreme Court orders.

While not making any “factual findings”, Justice Charles recorded in her judgment that substantial evidence had been provided to challenge Mr Cottis’ assertion that he had been unable to comply because he had been “incapacitated by blindness” since December 2019 - including him being spotted driving his vehicle numerous times by multiple persons in 2020.

She added that Mr Cottis had also attended meetings in 2020 with attorneys from Lennox Paton, who are representing a beneficiary of the $30m estate, and participated in two real estate transactions where he represented the purchaser on both occasions.

Tribune Business previously reported how Mr Cottis had failed to persuade the Supreme Court to overturn sanctions that were imposed after he failed to comply with Orders requiring him to turn over all records relating to the late Raymond Adams’ estate to the court-appointed judicial trustee.

Attorneys for Robert Adams, Mr Adams’ son and one of the estate’s beneficiaries, have accused Mr Cottis of deliberately “obstructing” the successor trustee, Ernst & Young (EY) accountant, Igal Wizman, in a bid to cover-up his “incompetence.... and hold the estate hostage to his own illegitimate attempts to recover more than his legally-entitled compensation”.

However, undeterred by Justice Charles’ initial ruling, Mr Cottis and his attorney, Damian Gomez QC, former minister of state for legal affairs, sought her permission to appeal that decision on the basis that the non-compliance resulted because he was “incapacitated by blindness from December 3, 2019”.

Mr Cottis sought to provide new evidence that was not presented at earlier Supreme Court hearings, but Justice Charles said these only revealed “inconsistencies and omissions”. She noted that his assertion of blindness from December 3, 2019, was contradicted by a March 18, 2020, doctor’s letter which said the attorney was only having issues with his right eye.

And while Mr Cottis, in his latest affidavit, alleged that no one else was able to oversee his law firm while he was absent from The Bahamas undergoing eye surgery in Florida, Justice Charles suggested this, too, was contradicted by evidence supplied by Mr Adams and Lennox Paton.

“Mr Cottis has at least two employees/associates assisting him at his office, including his wife, Olivia Cottis, who has worked extensively on the estate, and attended a meeting with the Judicial Trustee’s team alone in June 2019 to discuss Mr Cottis’ obligations with the Order of May 24, 2019,” the judgment recorded.

“In paragraph four of his affidavit, Mr Cottis also states that he is a sole practitioner and the only lawyer in his office, and has no one in his employ or otherwise familiar with the estate documents who could identity and locate them and deliver them to his attorneys.

“In respect of this assertion..... again, Mr Cottis fails to mention that his wife, Olivia Cottis, is familiar with the estate, having attended meetings on her own in relation to the matter, and having been involved in the estate for many years. It is not credible that neither Mrs Cottis nor Ms Bethel at his office knows the whereabouts of the files relating to this estate.”

Turning to the evidence provided by Mr Adams, Justice Charles noted the allegations that Mr Cottis had met Lennox Paton’s Christopher Jenkins and Sebastian Masnyk to discuss the estate on March 9, 2020. And “an unaided Mr Cottis” subsequently attended a December 2020 meeting at Deltec Bank & Trust where Lennox Paton partner David Johnstone was also present.

“Mr Cottis has been witnessed driving his vehicle at various points during 2020 by multiple persons,” the judgment added. “Mr Cottis worked on at least two conveyancing transactions between July and November 2020, with attorneys Simon Lowe from King & Co and Alastair Chisnall from Graham Thompson & Co representing the sellers in those transactions, and Mr Cottis representing the purchasers.

“Mr Cottis was sending detailed correspondence with the judicial trustee’s attorneys, Delaney Partners, in June and July 2020 in relation to a matter related to the estate relating to a company called Bellwood, which he remained a director of after his resignation in May 2019.”

Declining to give a verdict on the new evidence before her, Justice Charles wrote: “Mr Cottis now seeks a ‘second bite at the cherry’. Permitting Mr Cottis to argue new ground or to make a new case is not permissible.

“Litigants cannot be allowed unlimited bites at the cherry or else there will be no finality in litigation. In addition, if such new grounds were to be entertained, this could well open the floodgates to numerous applications of this nature which the Court cannot countenance.”

She added: “In my judgment, it is Mr Adams who is being robbed of his right to a fair trial within a reasonable time of his case by reason of the failure of Mr Cottis to even provide discovery and begin the process of case management.

“Mr Cottis has breached a plethora of orders of this Court; in all 13 breaches...... Ultimately, Mr Cottis is the architect of his own misfortune.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.