Opinion ID: 2743436
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Prior civil suit

Text: 4 As to money laundering conspiracy (Count 2), which stemmed from the above facts, the government alleged that Paling signed Blanch’s name to wire transfers and checks that distributed the excess loan proceeds to Capital Investment Strategies. The government set forth evidence showing that Verdia and Miller divided these proceeds, and sent some of them back to Paling via her own shell company. 5 Years before Paling was indicted, a man named John Velardi sued Paling, Blanch, Ferrazzano, and Monarch in connection with the sale of Velardi’s property to Ferrazzano. A former client of Blanch’s law firm, Velardi alleged that the defendants engaged in fraud and malpractice during the real estate closing for that property. Attorney Eric Hughes, who represented both Paling and Blanch, took Velardi’s deposition in 2007 in the course of civil discovery in that lawsuit. The deposition was fairly extensive, consisting of over 300 pages of transcript. Velardi died prior to Paling’s criminal trial. Before trial, the government filed a motion seeking to admit excerpts from Velardi’s deposition and to have his testimony read to the jury. Specifically, the government sought to introduce testimony explaining Paling’s conduct at the closing. The District Court granted the government’s motion, finding that (1) Velardi was indisputably unavailable to testify at trial, and (2) Hughes had cross-examined Velardi at deposition. Thus, the District Court concluded, the requirements for the admission of former testimony of an unavailable witness had been satisfied in conformance with Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004). Appx. II at 69-72.