Attorneys in a Fierce Battle Over Drug-Suspect Business

Even in the rough and tumble part of the legal world that revolves around defending accused cocaine dealers, the high-stakes clash between upstart Beverly Hills attorney Ralph Server and eight veteran criminal defense lawyers has become unusually bitter.

The fierce litigation and public relations war has transformed Server, until two years ago an obscure attorney, into one of the most controversial figures in local legal circles.

His enemies have operated a cartel, says Server, designed to freeze him out of the lucrative trade in representing drug dealers. He claims that a key element of their operation has been paying inmates at the Metropolitan Detention Center, the federal prison in downtown Los Angeles, to refer cases to them. He has filed two lawsuits against his adversaries.

The lawyers have denied committing antitrust and racketeering violations.

“There’s absolutely no basis in fact for his allegations against me or against anyone,” said Anthony Brooklier, son of a former Mafia chieftain and high-profile Los Angeles criminal lawyer. “He’s attacked the integrity of some of the best lawyers I know, people whose entire lives are spent trying to do the best and appropriate things for their clients.”

In reality, the lawyers say, Server and Anant K. Tripati, a paralegal who is working with him, have waged a lengthy campaign designed to harass them, smear their reputations, drive away their clients and perhaps endanger their lives in hope of garnering more business for themselves.

Server’s adversaries also point out that he is facing charges more serious than those he has leveled at them. The State Bar has charged him with nine instances of misconduct--misappropriating clients’ funds, charging unconscionable fees, failing to properly perform his duties, not honoring promises he made to clients in civil cases, and falsely asserting to a State Bar investigator that he had persuaded a federal prosecutor to reduce the charges against one of his clients. A trial on the Bar’s charges is to begin March 23.

And a few weeks ago, in a rare move, a Los Angeles federal judge accused Server of perjury and referred the attorney to a special disciplinary committee that could bar him from practicing in federal court here. That would be a good idea, say the lawyers Server has sued.

Server denies the Bar’s allegations, although he did say that he charges high fees. “I am expensive,” he said, adding that he told one potential client--a major drug defendant--that he would charge $1 million. The man hired another lawyer.

The clash between Server and the other lawyers has significance beyond the immediate case, according to several lawyers.

“If someone can get away with making unfounded allegations like Server has leveled without being sanctioned, it could undermine the integrity of the judicial system,” said veteran Los Angeles criminal lawyer Gregory Nicolaysen.

Besides Brooklier, the lawyers Server has accused include Donald Re of Westwood, who successfully defended car mogul John Z. DeLorean on drug charges; Alvin Michaelson, a veteran Century City criminal defense lawyer who once represented Brooklier’s father, and Janet I. Levine, Michaelson’s partner who recently secured an acquittal for a lawyer accused of manipulating insurance cases.

Also included are Oscar Goodman of Las Vegas, who has represented organized crime figures and was profiled on the CBS show “60 Minutes”; David Chesnoff, Goodman’s partner, who has handled several major drug cases; David Kenner of Encino, defense counsel for swindler Barry Minkow, and Michael S. Meza of Fountain Valley, who represented a defendant in the 1990 trial stemming from the murder of Drug Enforcement Administration Agent Enrique Camarena in Mexico.

The sued lawyers also contend that Server and his paralegal are responsible for disseminating a leaflet in several federal prisons that falsely accuses them of selling out their clients and giving prosecutors confidential information.

“These allegations are untrue, there is no basis in fact for them,” said Levine. But she and some of the other attorneys said they fear that they could be harmed by friends of inmates they represented who think they got a raw deal.

The nondescript-looking Server, who graduated from the now defunct Golden West College of Law in 1981, has won no major trials. But he describes himself as a good trial attorney. “Some people think I’m brilliant,” he said.

“I can create a case where some think one doesn’t exist,” Server said. He called himself “a triple threat--articulate, presentable and bilingual.”

Server’s face-off with his colleagues began with a major drug- and money-laundering case in 1988 when the government charged Mario Ernesto Villabona Alvarado and several other men with drug distribution, money-laundering and other crimes.

Server wanted to represent Villabona. But, he contends, Kenner impersonated him in a phone call to the DEA and offered to testify against Villabona. He said this conversation was reported on an official agency report called a DEA-6, and that his name was on a prosecution witness list, giving rise to the implication that he was working for the DEA.

He also charged that Re, who wound up representing Villabona, and Kenner, who represented the other lead defendant in the case--Bo Bennett--made copies of the report and gave it to their clients, who circulated it throughout the Metropolitan Detention Center where they were incarcerated.

Court records reveal that there was a DEA-6 report with Server’s name on it, but its contents are different than what he alleges. The report says that he called DEA Agent John S. Comer, told him that Villabona had asked him to represent Maria Cecilia Barona, a co-defendant, and asked where he could find Barona.

Server denies making the call. Villabona denies asking him to represent Barona. At a hearing, Server stood up in court and said he was there to represent Barona. She said he was not and she retained another lawyer.

Kenner and Re deny that they told their clients or anyone that Server was working with the DEA. They said they did show the DEA report to their clients because it contained allegations that could be used by prosecutors to show that Villabona was the head of a drug ring who was masterminding a legal defense strategy.

Server also has alleged that he lost another potential client--Salvador Andrade Larios--because Michaelson told the man’s family that he was a DEA agent. Michaelson denies telling anyone that Server was a DEA agent.

Last year, Server dismissed one of his suits against the attorneys. The other case is pending. The defense lawyers have asked U.S. District Judge Terry J. Hatter Jr. to dismiss the suit and sanction Server for filing it.

In their papers, the defense lawyers accuse Server of perjury, illegal recruiting of clients, soliciting false statements and numerous bad acts.

They expressed confidence about prevailing in the suit. However, they say they are considerably more vexed about the mysterious leaflet accusing them of betraying clients, which has circulated in several federal prisons.

Michaelson said that although the claims are “ludicrous,” he could imagine some former clients believing them because they are isolated in prison, cynical and unable to investigate such charges.

The flyer urges inmates to seek to have convictions overturned on the grounds that their lawyers ineffectively represented them. The flyer plays up a recent case in which veteran Los Angeles criminal defense lawyer Ronald Minkin was ruled to have been a “government informant” against his client. The flyer attempts to capitalize on the fear generated by the publicity that case attracted.

Server denies any involvement with the leaflet. But the other lawyers are quick to note that amid three pages of vitriolic allegations about attorneys selling their clients down the river, Server is the only lawyer who is praised.

Federal authorities are investigating how the leaflets got into the prisons.

Tripati, the paralegal whose office is in the same building as Server’s, has denied circulating the leaflet. But Tripati, who was convicted of wire fraud, making false statements and other charges in Wyoming federal court in 1984, also filed this declaration:

“Based on the way these lawyers have been treating defendants, taking large sums of monies in exchange for large prison sentences, it is not surprising that someone generated the . . . letter. They should be lucky that it is only a letter and not some irate client of theirs who they ripped off and sent to prison ready to take revenge upon release.”

Meanwhile, a few weeks ago, U.S. District Judge Robert M. Takasugi accused Server of perjury. The charge emanated from Server’s handling of a recently concluded drug trial in which Server’s client received a 15-year sentence.

In that case, Server alleged that DEA agents had planted drugs on defendants and engaged in a conspiracy to set up people. After Assistant U.S. Atty. Julie Werner-Simon challenged the charges, Server had to recant them in writing, admitting that the allegations were made “in anger” and lacked any “foundation in fact.”

“It’s quite an extraordinary confession of improper conduct,” said James P. Walsh Jr., who heads the U.S. attorney’s office’s organized crime unit in Los Angeles.

Takasugi also said Server had made “malicious, inaccurate, unsupported, and inflammatory allegations against Werner-Simon.” The judge “strongly condemned Mr. Server’s abuse of the judicial process,” in an order he issued last month and asked the federal court’s disciplinary committee to take action. An investigation is pending. Server said he was “shocked” by Takasugi’s allegations. Werner-Simon declined comment.

In at least two other instances, Los Angeles federal judges--James M. Ideman and Stephen V. Wilson--have ordered that new attorneys be appointed in place of Server for criminal defendants after becoming concerned about Server’s conduct.

One of the most provocative allegations about Server is that he has tried to lure away the clients of other lawyers by promising to get them good deals only he can obtain because of close relationships he allegedly has with key prosecutors. In particular, according to sworn statements by inmates, Server has told potential clients that he had strong ties with Walsh, who for several years headed the major narcotics unit of the U.S. attorney’s office here.

Walsh stated emphatically that he has no special relationship with Server and expressed dismay when informed of reports about Server’s statements. He said that he had contact with Server on only one case and had not done anything unusual for the client.

“The professional relationship was standard and correct, nothing special about it,” said Walsh. “The fact that I was civil to him--he may have misconstrued. I know other persons didn’t treat him with kindness.”