Controversial Fil-Am Newspaper Lawyer sued by his own newspaper staff

Atty. Joel Bander (in photo) is still under a three-year probation in the first State Bar case when he stipulated on another round of disciplinary action with the State Bar after more complaints were filed against him by several homeowners. Now, he will also have to deal with his own newspaper staff who claimed were not paid by him. 

Atty. Joel Bander is accused of not paying two editors and a reporter

Controversial lawyer Joel Bander, who just last month was going to be tried by the State Bar, faces another legal tussle after his own newspaper staff at Pinoywatchdog.com on Tuesday filed a small claims complaint against him at the Los Angeles Superior Court.

In the cases filed last April 30, managing editor Rene Villaroman, editor Alfonso Aquino and reporter Dionesio Grava claimed that Bander owed them $6,000 each for a total of $18,000, which they said was equivalent to six months of unpaid compensation.

In their complaint, each of the three gave similar reasons: “Unpaid services as (their position) of defendant’s newspaper Pinoywatchdog.” All of them also claimed to have worked for Pinowatchdog for a year at a rate of $1,000 a month, which was already low compared to the average salary of editors in Los Angeles which is around $60,000 annually. However, unlike most newspapers in Los Angeles, Pinoywatchdog is a fortnightly tabloid that comes out every other week.

The complaint came amid what many considered internal conflicts in the newspaper outfit when Aquino was headlined as having resigned as executive editor in one of their recent issues. Aside from being its executive editor, Aquino served as president of the newspaper under the Tanod Bayan Inc., a Nevada corporation which listed “Joel R Bander” as the registered agent and the lone corporate officer and director.

Aquino was replaced as president by Bernie Cortes-Kimmerle, who is also the newspaper’s entertainment editor. After taking over Aquino’s post, she  wrote in a front page  message that as “PWD President…we seek the truth as we are independent.” She also wrote that “Fellow ‘Pinoys’ that have no guilt or shame or anything to hide love PWD.” 

After that, however, a new newspaper came out with Aquino as president and executive director written in the staff box, while Villaroman and Grava were named as managing editor and associate editor respectively. Even Larry Pelayo’s name was in the same staff box as editorial ombudsman. Pelayo is also Pinoywatchdog’s ombudsman.

In its maiden issue, The Filipino Advocate editorial lambasted Bander calling the attorney as behaving like a “spoiled brat and a privileged publisher, sometimes demanding perks from prospective advertisers and would-be supporters, and eventually eroding their respect for the core missions of PinoyWatchDog.com.” The same editorial also said that the “financier-owner…started behaving like he owned not only that publication but also the views that its writers and editors espoused.”

In addition, the editorial made it appear that Bander may have had some unsettled financial obligations with the staff when the newspaper wrote that “Never mind that our columnists were not accorded pay for their efforts. But when Mr. Bander reneged on the agreement to compensate the writers and editors for their labor, we put our collective feet down. Enough was enough.” The editorial, however, didn’t mention who wrote the piece, but it was believed to have been written by Aquino.

In an email to Weekend Balita, Aquino said that “when Bander offered me the job of president and as executive editor, I made my position clear and they were as follows:

1. I write as I please and I won’t take dictation or correction from him, except issues that are defamatory against the subject concerned;

2. That I have no role as far as financing the undertaking was concerned, including the salaries of staff members and payment of contributed articles;

3. That I received no emolument of any kind in the meantime until the paper is financially viable; and

4. That I do no marketing.”

Aquino reiterated that his resignation was caused by policy differences with Bander, “who seemed to have gotten swollen in the head after savoring the sweet smell of the perceived success of the paper to the extent that he considered such as his personal achievement.”

Also according to Aquino, he is the registered owner of the newspaper’s name, Pinoywatchdog.com. “I am  the registered owner of Pinoywatchdog with the Secretary of State, California, and still the registered owner of the dba (doing business as) of pinoywatchdog.com.”

He said that “if I don’t get paid I will sue him for infringement against my property right, as I am the legal and rightful owner of the paper as my last resort to get this man out of circulation in the Filipino community.

Thru Facebook, Villaroman – who was the co-founder of Pinoywatchdog – had only these to say: “Thanks for giving me the courtesy of airing my side on this story. But I would rather not make any comment or address your inquiries for personal reasons at this time.” Grava also said that “at this time I am not issuing any statement nor answer questions from the media in that regard. Thanks”

For his part, Bander said that he has yet to see any of the lawsuits. Despite that, however, he said, “I love Al, Rene and Mr. Grava! The lawsuit is silly though. That is my comment for now."

Bander is currently facing a State Bar complaint involving a loan litigation program his firm launched back in 2008. The complaint by the State Bar is currently on “Hearing Stipulation” stage, which means that Bander may have settled the case and agreed on another round of disciplinary action after serving a three-month suspension last year. In the first State Bar complaint which was filed on behalf of several homeowners who signed up in the failed “Save Your Home, Sue the Banks” mortgage litigation scheme, Bander allegedly failed to perform the legal services that he was supposed to do for his clients. 

According to State Bar, that first case against Bander cost them more than $20,000 in court fees, including investigation and hearing expenses, all of which may have to be paid by Bander. More fees are expected to be incurred by the ongoing second State Bar complaint that would've forced Bander to face 35 witnesses, including his former lawyers at the now bankrupt Bander Law Firm, in the already scuttled five-day trial.

Article via http://rhonylaigo.blogspot.com