Catherine Kassenoff announced her assisted suicide on May 27, blaming her husband Allan Kassenoff. The subsequent publicity fallout – beginning on the Frank Report – caused Allan to take a “voluntary leave of absence” from his law firm, Greenberg Traurig [GT] on June 2, according to the firm’s website.

Allan specialized in patent infringement lawsuits and was/is a shareholder, which is GT’s term for a partner in the firm.

Until yesterday, GT kept Kassenoff’s page with his photo and biography on their website, stating he took a leave of absence.

GT has since removed his photo and biography from their website.

GT’s professional page for Kassenoff now reads: “Page Not Found. The page you requested on the Greenberg Traurig website could not be found. Please visit our main site.”

When one searches for Allan Kassenoff and Greenberg Traaurig one still sees the first lines of the old web  page.

On June 2 on Facebook, GT defended Kassenoff’s conduct during the pendency of his four-year-old divorce and custody matter.

In a statement, GT refers to “lengthy trials,” but that may be an error since the trial has yet to occur, and if Catherine is deceased, will not occur.

GT said in a statement: “… After lengthy trials and reviewing all the facts, including some videos, none of the 4 judges who presided over the trials or the 2 court-appointed neutral forensic evaluators found [Allan] to have committed wrongdoing or abuse as to his children or the contended domestic violence, and instead awarded him sole legal and physical custody of their three children.”

GT adds, “the firm will be conducting its own investigation to determine his status with the firm.”

Was scrubbing Allan’s name, bio, and photo the result of GT’s investigation, or just a logical move to avoid the scrutiny that Kassenoff and GT, by association, are getting from an outraged public, including many victims of family court, some of whom see Catherine’s death as galvanizing for its potential for family court reform akin to George Floyd’s death and police reform?

If the analogy is apt, Allan Kassanoff is Derek Chauvin.

But a scandal like this could hurt GT if the law firm is seen as condoning abuse and manipulation of the legal system.

As we reported yesterday, Allan Kassenoff Tops Martindale-Hubbell with #1 Profile Visibility Among 2.1 Million Lawyers.

GT Has Something to Lose?

According to the National Law Journal’s 2022 NLJ 500 ranking of firms based on size, GT has 2209 attorneys and is ranked 9th in the United States.

With $2.17 billion in gross revenue in 2022, the firm placed 14th on The American Lawyer’s 2023 Am Law 200 ranking. On the 2022 Global 200 survey, GT ranked as the 21st highest-grossing law firm in the world.

Larry J. Hoffman, Mel Greenberg, and Robert H. Traurig established the firm in 1967.

GT has experienced controversies, such as its association with lobbyist Jack Abramoff and legal issues involving specific individuals associated with the firm. In May 2018, the firm severed ties with Rudy Giuliani due to his allegations and statements regarding hush money payments.

And in June 2023, Allan Kassenoff, one of the premier patent infringement attorneys in the USA, was scrubbed from the website.

Allan Kassenoff appears in a series of unflattering videos published by Catherine. 

The future is coming fast for Allan. His alleged efforts to alienate his children from their mother, to manipulate the system using paid experts to destroy his wife while claiming he did it all to protect the children from a dangerously insane mother, and her purported public announcement of death – is a story growing like an avalanche.

Mainstream media will almost certainly pick this up.

Will it make him unemployable? Is his future as a lawyer doomed? He used his skill as a lawyer so well that Catherine, also a lawyer did not stand a chance. She was outgunned and outspent.

Would anybody trust him now with their legal case? Will his old clients – Samsung, Pfizer, General Mills, Garmin, Alcoa, Amazon.com etc, want to associate with him?

Will authorities investigate criminal collusion between Allan and the “neutral” experts in the case?

Attorneys Gus Dimopolous, Carol Most, Christine Paska, psychologists Dr. Marc Abrams, Dr. Kathleen Mckay, Dr. Susan Adler, Dr. Carolyn McGuffog, and of course Judge Lewis J. Lubell will all almost certainly experience increasing scrutiny.

All of them served Kassanoff – including the purportedly neutral custody evaluators, therapists, and attorneys for the children – served Allan as if they were on his payroll.

Actually, all of them were on his payroll, with the possible exception of Judge Lubell.

Judge Lewis J. Lubell

Of course, there remains the big question – soon to be answered – is Catherine Kassenoff deceased?

Time will answer all our questions and more.

Artwork

From time to time, Frank Report will accept art from various artists and have one of our art critics give readers insight into the themes presented.

“Collusion” by Elena Montclair.

Art review by Maxwell Sinclair

In this thought-provoking painting, Elena Montclair explores the complex interplay between power, friendship, and personal gain. The composition centers around Dr. Marc Abrams, prominently depicted holding his reward for his role in the sale of three children.

In the background are his companions, Gus Dimopoulus [seated on steps] and at the top of the steps to the right are the good Judge Lewis Lubell, his lady lawyer Carol Most and the founder of plenty Allan Kassenoff.

The artist skillfully captures the facial expressions and body language of the subjects, hinting at their roles within the broader context of the piece. Marc Abrams, with a subtle smirk and confident pose, exudes a sense of triumph and satisfaction, suggesting his attainment of some significant reward. Meanwhile, the distant yet watchful gazes of Lubell and Kassenoff create an air of intrigue, leaving viewers to ponder the nature of their involvement.

The use of color in this painting deserves attention. A subdued palette of brown, greys and neutrals dominates the scene, evoking a sense of secrecy and ambiguity. The artist’s deliberate choice to limit the color range further enhances the tension and mystery surrounding the subjects and their actions. The play of light and shadow adds a touch of drama, emphasizing the clandestine nature of the depicted scene, despite the actors being right at the steps of the courthouse, where their deeds are done.

Symbolism is at play as well. The presence of money in Abrams’ hand represents material gain and the potential corruption that can arise from it. The artist cleverly juxtaposes this element with the blurred figures of Lubell, Most and Kassenoff, perhaps suggesting their blurred moral boundaries or their figurative role as enablers or bystanders within the narrative.