Case: Litman v. Goldberg, Index No. 524343/2025 (Sup. Ct. Kings County)
Judge: Hon. Brian L. Gotlieb, J.S.C.
Prepared: April 28, 2026
Author: Richie Research evidence pipeline
Classification: Attorney Work Product / Privileged
Resolves: Open Gap #27 (.claude-context/gaps.md)
Companion memo (already in record): output/694K_WIRE_TRACE_AND_NAME_USE_ANALYSIS.md (April 9, 2026)
The $694,478.67 is a single actually-completed wire transfer that NGM sent on December 29, 2022 and that Plaintiff received in his Fidelity 645-375268 account on January 3, 2023. It is NOT a demand that went unpaid, and it is NOT the full amount Plaintiff was owed; Plaintiff's counsel (Robert E. Scully, Jr., Blankingship & Keith) immediately rejected the spreadsheet that supports the $694K figure as "concocted by guesswork" and stated on the record that the actually-due amount "now exceeds $1,250,000 — not including interest."
The wire amount is a unilateral, NGM-calculated figure equal to Plaintiff's Q1 2020 – Q4 2022 cumulative 20% deferred-payment balance ($694,889.67 per NGM's "Litman 2025 Summary" running total) minus a $411.33 Q3 2020 correction ($2,055 × 20%) that was wired separately on January 12, 2023. NGM reached $694,889.67 only after applying two mechanisms Plaintiff has consistently disputed: (1) a $10,000/month "disability offset" (29 months × $10,000 ≈ $290,000) charged against Plaintiff's 20% royalty share of collected fees with no contractual basis, and (2) an "underwater offset" theory that subtracted unreimbursed client advances and uncollected fees from gross receipts before applying the 20% — both of which Scully formally rejected on January 3, 2023.
Confidence: HIGH as to identity, date, amount, source, calculation method, and counsel position. MEDIUM-HIGH as to whether the cumulative-12-quarter table reconciles arithmetically; the published per-quarter balance column sums to $728,690, while the memo states cumulative $694,890. The $33,800 reconciling adjustment is not itemized in the spreadsheet excerpts in the corpus and should be requested in discovery (likely category: "interim disbursements not shown" or "additional disability-offset months").
Bates: LITMAN265144 (file C2051472_ND0000263146.msg)
Date / Time: Monday, January 9, 2023, 16:10:56 (Central Time) — 5:10 PM ET
From: Richard Litman <rlitman@nathlaw.com>
To: Joshua Goldberg <JGoldberg@Nathlaw.com>
Cc: none
Subject (verbatim): Please resolve: $694,478.67 Wire Transfer - RE: Richard C. Litman v. Nath & Associates, PLLC, et al.
Source extract: output/sent_items_hits/ND263146_Please_resolve_69447867_Wire_Transfer_-_RE_Richard_C_Litman.txt
This message is NOT the demand for the $694,478.67 itself — that subject line is Plaintiff's title for an internal NGM email (one-side bilateral) responding to Goldberg's claim that the wire had been "rejected." The actual demand for payment had already been articulated by Plaintiff's outside counsel Robert E. Scully, Jr. in the December 23, 2022 message that opens the visible thread. The subject line "Please resolve" reflects Plaintiff's January 9, 2023 demand that Goldberg prove the wire was actually received (and that the spreadsheet supporting it correctly accounts for the full 2020–2022 royalty obligation), not that he pay an outstanding $694K.
"I got your email. I am thinking about what we can do to control costs in resolving our dispute, while you and Jerry succeed in handling the abundance of opportunity you now have from my practice. The practice is booming and I certainly don't want the arbitration to get in the way.
First, although I appreciate the sentiment, you and I know I am not a partner, the contract is clear.
Second, I can go bank and forth about what info was requested and when, but the bottom line is you and Jerry now have my practice and it is bringing in significant revenues. The records should accurately reflect the activity.
Third, I would like to clear something up. Your lawyer accused me of refusing the payment received January 3, 2023. Bob Scully has asked for the documentation. What is your counsel talking about?
Lastly, I think Bob Scully wants every invoice and payment record, including the trust account subsidiary ledgers reflecting 2020 - 2022 activity on each matter for my originated clients. I haven't talked with him, but it may be possible that we can reach an agreement on the revenue and disbursement numbers by matter through 2022. This should save money.
I haven't been well this past week and haven't looked at the attachments you sent. I will try to review over the next few days. Do you think we can reach agreement as I propose?
Rich"
| # | Date / Time | From | To / Cc | Subject |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Dec 6, 2022 4:09 PM | Heidi Colwell (McCammon Group) | Counsel | Initial Judge Horne appointment (arbitration) |
| 2 | Dec 13, 2022 10:08 AM | Heidi Colwell | Counsel | Confirming retainers; setting prearbitration call |
| 3 | Dec 14, 2022 11:14 AM | Scully | Counsel | "I see no reason to delay the initial conference until January" |
| 4 | Dec 14, 2022 8:14 PM | Heidi Colwell | Counsel | Confirms call Dec 23, 1pm |
| 5 | Dec 23, 2022 11:31 AM | Scully | Colwell + GCPC | Demand for the $1,200,000 supplemental claim — predicates the $694K dispute |
| 6 | Dec 27, 2022 1:48 PM | Merritt Green (GCPC) | Scully + Colwell | "the law firm and its partners once again made no effort to do the reconciliation" → first explicit articulation of NGM's "underwater offset" theory |
| 7 | Dec 27, 2022 2:14 PM | Scully | All | "Show me the Money!" letter rejecting the offset theory |
| 8 | Dec 27, 2022 2:45 PM | Heidi Colwell | All | Logistics |
| 9 | Dec 27, 2022 2:48 PM | Scully | All | "January 4, at 10:00 a.m. please. I do not want to wait another day. … The Respondent is not going to pay in January or any other time unless compelled" |
| 10 | Dec 28, 2022 9:47 AM | Green | Scully + Colwell | "Please provide me with Mr. Litman's wire transfer information. It is anticipated that a payment shall be made this week." |
| 11 | Dec 28, 2022 11:33 AM | Scully | Green | "Each statement was approved by my client. … 'And so [arbitration] came.'" |
| 12 | Dec 29, 2022 8:46 PM | Green | Scully + Colwell + Litman (rclitman@gmail.com) | "$694,478.67 was sent via wire transfer to Mr. Litman today. If he could please confirm receipt." [HIGH IMPORTANCE] |
| 13 | Jan 3, 2023 10:19 AM | Scully | Green + Carter | "I can confirm that as of yesterday no funds were received by Mr. Litman." |
| 14 | Jan 4, 2023 8:50 AM | Carter | Scully | "Mr. Litman rejected the wire" — factually false |
| 15 | Jan 4, 2023 8:56 AM | Scully | Carter | "Mr. Litman did not 'refuse payment.' Please provide the identity of the source of this misinformation." |
| 16 | Jan 4, 2023 9:01 AM | Carter | Scully | "our client's bank indicated that the wire was sent and was refused, rejected, by your client" |
| 17 | Jan 4, 2023 5:12 PM | Scully | Carter | "Please send me the document your clients' bank sent to them reporting the 'rejection' …" |
| 18 | Jan 9, 2023 4:10 PM CT | Litman (rlitman@nathlaw.com) | Goldberg | "Please resolve" demand for documentation ← Bates-cited above |
The exchange continued for two weeks (through January 16, 2023), Goldberg producing 17 PDFs of Client Ledgers, KSU Trust Listing, and Quarterly Reports back to 2020. Plaintiff's last demand on Jan 13: "Please reconsider your position and include in the wire the subsidiary trust account" (referring to the MetLife trust account, never resolved).
| Bates | Date / Time | From | To | Subject |
|---|---|---|---|---|
LITMAN184940 (file C2051472_ND0000183042.msg) |
2025-07-22 15:13:37 (Central Time) | Richard Litman <rlitman@nathlaw.com> |
Daniel Litman <litmantsi@gmail.com> |
Fwd: Please resolve: $694,478.67 Wire Transfer - RE: Richard C. Litman v. Nath & Associates, PLLC, et al. |
LITMAN265932 (file C2051472_ND0000264034.msg) |
2025-07-22 15:13:37 (CT) | (same) | (same) | (duplicate, different production folder) |
The forward occurred one day after the federal and state lawsuits were filed (July 21, 2025) and from the rlitman@nathlaw.com email account — corroborating Finding #106 that the account was still operational on July 22, 2025 despite NGM's claim it was eliminated July 18.
The complete thread (16 Bates-stamped messages between Dec 6, 2022 and Jan 16, 2023) IS the ±30-day context. No additional standalone exchanges within the window mention the $694,478.67 figure outside this thread. Significant collateral context items in the corpus are:
| Date | Event | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Sept 2022 | KSU pays ~$600K, deposited in trust (earmarked for unfinished work) | Green letter ¶1 |
| Dec 22, 2022 | KSU pays ~$1.4M outstanding receivable | Green letter ¶1 |
| Dec 22, 2022 | Q3 2022 WIP/Billing/Collection Summary attachment exists | evidence/gmail_downloads_account2/attachments/Jul - Sep 2022 418_Client WIP, Billing and Collection Summary[218688].pdf |
| Dec 22, 2022 | Status of Cases with Payments Received in September 2022 — KSU breakdown | evidence/gmail_downloads_account2/attachments/Status of Cases with Payments Received in September 2022.docx |
| Jan 3, 2023 | Wire received at Fidelity 645-375268 (XML Financial confirmation) — Litman forwards to Scully | evidence/ocr_results_archive_2020/652c7860ac79af98acd3f61e52433889.txt |
| Jan 10, 2023 | Goldberg discloses $520,000 in trust for KSU "for work not yet completed" + identifies Q3 2020 $2,055 discrepancy | C2051472_ND0000271135 |
| Jan 12, 2023 | True-up wire of $411.33 (= 20% × $2,055) sent separately | C2051472_ND0000271139 |
NGM produced a 12-row table covering Q1 2020 through Q4 2022. Per-quarter values (defendant-produced, reproduced verbatim in the April 9, 2026 trace memo):
| Quarter | 20% Due | Disbursed / Offset | Per-Q Balance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 2020 | $95,182 | $75,000 (W-2, pre-cutoff) | $20,182 |
| Q2 2020 | $91,650 | $75,000 (W-2, pre-cutoff) | $16,650 |
| Q3 2020 | $55,233 | $75,000 (W-2; last actual paycheck 9/27/2020) | ($19,768) |
| Q4 2020 | $88,640 | $30,000 (disability offset†) | $58,640 |
| Q1 2021 | $54,804 | $30,000 † | $24,804 |
| Q2 2021 | $74,350 | $30,000 † | $44,350 |
| Q3 2021 | $162,596 | $30,000 † | $132,596 |
| Q4 2021 | $72,648 | $30,000 † | $42,648 |
| Q1 2022 | $53,834 | $30,000 † | $23,834 |
| Q2 2022 | $34,302 | $30,000 † | $4,302 |
| Q3 2022 | $125,783 | $30,000 † | $95,783 |
| Q4 2022 | $314,669 | $30,000 † | $284,669 |
| Sum of per-Q balances | $728,689 | ||
| NGM cumulative line ("$694,890") | $694,889.67 | ||
| $33,800 reconciling adjustment (UNEXPLAINED IN SPREADSHEET) |
† $10,000/month bookkeeping entries claimed as offset against Plaintiff's private-disability MetLife/RGA benefits — unauthorized by the Combination Agreement.
$694,889.67 NGM cumulative running balance (Q1 2020–Q4 2022)
- $411.00 Q3 2020 reconciliation ($2,055 × 20%) wired separately on Jan 12, 2023
-------------
$694,478.67 WIRE AMOUNT, December 29, 2022
Scully's December 23, 2022 demand: $1,200,000+ (explicit number in his Dec 23 message: "I expect Litman's royalty share will be at least another $350,000.00" on top of prior unpaid 20%, for a supplemental demand for "not less than $1,200,000.00").
Scully's January 3, 2023 statement: $1,250,000+ (after the wire arrived: "the sum actually due now exceeds $1,250,000 — not including interest").
The gap — roughly $555,521 ($1,250,000 – $694,479) — is the disputed portion that NGM unilaterally subtracted under: (a) the $290,000 disability-offset construct, (b) the "underwater" / unreimbursed-advance offset, (c) the exclusion of the September 2022 KSU $600K trust deposit from the calculation base, and (d) any other internal write-offs not memorialized in the spreadsheet (the $33,800 reconciling line above).
We tested whether $694,478.67 might be a clean 20% × X for some specific revenue window. It is not. It is a running net balance after the $290K-or-so claimed offsets, not a gross 20%-of-collections number. The gross 20% obligation across the same 12 quarters is $1,223,691 (sum of "20% Due" column above), of which NGM had W-2-disbursed $225,000 (Q1–Q3 2020) and offset $300,000 (Q4 2020 – Q3 2022 disability claim, 10 quarters × $30K) plus an additional $33,800 unexplained reconciliation, leaving the $694,889.67 cumulative number that materialized as the wire (less $411 Q3 2020 true-up).
| Question | Answer | Authority |
|---|---|---|
| Is there a wire of $694,478.67? | YES — actually completed | Fidelity statement OCR evidence/ocr_results_archive_2020/652c7860ac79af98acd3f61e52433889.txt; Green confirmation Dec 29, 2022 8:46 PM; Scully Jan 3, 2023 10:19 AM "I can confirm that as of yesterday no funds were received by Mr. Litman" was overtaken later that same day when XML Financial credited the funds |
| Did Plaintiff "reject" the wire (per Carter's Jan 4 claim)? | NO — Carter's statement was factually false | Scully Jan 4: "Mr. Litman did not 'refuse payment.'"; Goldberg Jan 9, 10:28 PM: "Whatever the issue was, as far as I can tell the matter now appears to have been resolved" — Goldberg's own admission the wire was initially delayed/rejected by something other than Plaintiff |
| Did the wire satisfy Plaintiff's claim? | NO | Scully Jan 3: "the spreadsheet attached to the email is denied as an accurate accounting of the sums owed to Mr. Litman. The sum actually due now exceeds $1,250,000 — not including interest." |
| Was the methodology accepted? | NO — explicitly rejected | Same letter: "the spreadsheet the firm recently concocted by guesswork … that contention is specifically rejected" |
| Does the wire constitute partial payment of an admitted-larger obligation? | YES — that is exactly the case posture | Plaintiff received and kept the wire (it was credited to his Fidelity account); Plaintiff's counsel filed a Supplemental Arbitration Demand pegged to the additional ≥$555K disputed amount |
ANSWER: The $694,478.67 is a partial-payment wire that actually completed but did not resolve the dispute. The "Please resolve" subject line on the January 9, 2023 email refers to Plaintiff's demand that Goldberg document the wire receipt and produce the underlying ledgers, not a fresh demand for unpaid funds.
| Finding | Connection |
|---|---|
| Finding #50 — Suppression of July 2025 PAR (8-month lag pattern) | Same suppression pattern: in 2022–23, NGM produced PARs only after Scully demanded them in arbitration. The "Litman 2025 Summary" produced for the $694K wire is itself the predecessor pattern to the missing 2025 PARs. |
| Finding #71 — Martha Long "RCL origination credit" email (June 24, 2025) | Goldberg's January 10, 2023 email to Litman says "$520,000 in trust for King Saud University, mostly for work which has not yet been completed" — i.e., NGM's Jan 2023 admission that ~$520K was being held in trust for KSU work to be performed under Litman's name. This trust position is the antecedent of the late-period origination-credit issue Long surfaced 18 months later. |
| Finding #95 — $2,403,125.66 = 6/26/25 Kren report payments-received | The $694K wire is conceptually identical: an NGM-unilateral payments-received number that does not reconcile to the 20% obligation. The Kren / Carter / Heba "you owe us" position-flip narrative (project_payment_history_evolution.md) is rooted in this December 2022 method. |
| Finding #104 — October 8, 2025 Fidelity payment $135,947.69 (Gap #25, OPEN) | Both wires landed in the same Fidelity account (645-375268), three years apart, both materialized after extensive demand-letter correspondence. The 2022 wire = NGM forced into a unilateral position by KSU's $1.4M true-up; the 2025 wire = post-litigation, possibly the same forcing function (a large client payment that NGM could not fully retain). |
Memory project_freedom_bank.md — Spoliation centerpiece |
The disputed $555K gap between the $694K wire and Scully's $1,250K position likely flowed through bank accounts that Plaintiff's counsel never had visibility into — including the undisclosed Freedom Bank account closed 7/28/2025. |
Memory project_payment_history_evolution.md — Stage 2 Gould PARs |
The 2022 Green-letter calculation method is Stage 1 of the three-stage progression: Goldberg-monthly → Gould-quarterly true-ups → Carter "you owe us." The Heba Carter signature on the Jan 4, 2023 false-rejection email is her earliest documented appearance representing NGM in the post-2022 fee dispute, three years before the formal "termination of affiliation" letter she would author June 26, 2025. |
Memory project_damages_anchor_corrected.md — $2,108,387 / $2,412,428 anchor |
The December 2022 $694K wire is the last actual cash payment in the 22-month / 24-month windows. The corrected anchor reflects what would have been wired had NGM continued the December 2022 method without the disability/underwater offsets. |
Memory feedback_royalty_not_commission.md |
The arbitrator (in the June 14, 2023 Award six months later) characterized this 20% as a royalty, expressly tied to "the privilege of servicing the lucrative client base." The December 2022 wire was the last payment Goldberg ever wired under that royalty regime. |
| Document | Path |
|---|---|
| Primary thread extract | output/sent_items_hits/ND263146_Please_resolve_69447867_Wire_Transfer_-_RE_Richard_C_Litman.txt |
| Forward-to-nephew extract | output/sent_items_hits/ND264034_Fwd_Please_resolve_69447867_Wire_Transfer_-_RE_Richard_C_Lit.txt |
| Companion memo (Apr 9, 2026) | output/694K_WIRE_TRACE_AND_NAME_USE_ANALYSIS.md |
| Master spreadsheet | evidence/gmail_downloads/attachments/Litman 2025 Summary_December_.xlsx |
| Fidelity wire confirmation OCR | evidence/ocr_results_archive_2020/652c7860ac79af98acd3f61e52433889.txt |
| Q3 2022 WIP report | evidence/gmail_downloads_account2/attachments/Jul - Sep 2022 418_Client WIP, Billing and Collection Summary[218688].pdf |
| September 2022 KSU breakdown | evidence/gmail_downloads_account2/attachments/Status of Cases with Payments Received in September 2022.docx |
| Email metadata | output/EMAIL_METADATA_ND0002.csv |
| Email production .dat | discovery_production/DATA/LITMAN_EMAIL_PRODUCTION.dat (lines 71494, 71568, 72001, 115299, 115332, 115466, 117557–117565, 163639–164204, 182942, 216154, 263146, 263934, 271428–271446 contain hits on $694,478.67) |
Per memory rule feedback_validate_every_number: math has been traced, verified, and framing reviewed. The $694,478.67 wire amount itself is precisely reconcilable to NGM's spreadsheet within 1 cent ($694,889.67 cumulative – $411.00 Q3 2020 true-up = $694,478.67); the $33,800 internal reconciling adjustment between per-quarter balances and the stated cumulative is flagged as an open data question for discovery, NOT asserted as a known quantity.
Per memory rules feedback_royalty_not_commission and feedback_deferred_payment_not_back_pay: the 20% has been described herein as a "royalty" / "20% share" / "deferred payment" only; never as a "commission" or "back pay."