New Baltimore Town Attorney Michelle Storm: Legally Blonde

Over the past several years, the Town of New Baltimore has gone through several Town Attorneys. We’re not certain what the selection criteria are that the Town applies, but they certainly are not very demanding or rigorous. Current Town Attorney Michelle Storm gets put in her place by a New Baltimore resident during public comment.

The present New Baltimore Town Attorney is Michelle A. Storm. Storm is an attorney at Monaco Cooper Lamme & Carr, PLLC and concentrates her practice in the area of professional liability, elsewhere we read that she specializes in personal injury and medical malpractice — basically ambulance or hearse chasing — and basic defense legal issues. Her profile also mentions that she is Town Attorney to several towns in upstate New York, advising on local laws, town resolutions, and counseling Town boards and municipal departments on all legal matters. Is she really doing that for New Baltimore?

This latter mention is troubling because she appears to have missed the fact that Janet Kash invoked Legislative Law, particularly §66-a, as the basis for abstaining from important votes on the Town Board, Storm may be a great ambulance chaser but when a Town Board member’s head is on the block, shouldn’t the Town Attorney step in with some sort of comment? Another point would be that Resolution 53-2024 was allegedly reviewed, reworded, and passed by Storm but its wording appears to be by a third-grader, a fact noted by Town Board member Sottolano, who wanted to amend the resolution.[1]

In 2022, Storm ran for Town Justice in the Town of Malta (Saratoga County), and lost to James A. Fauci. Again, she’s a real legal Olympian, isn’t she?

At the Town of New Baltimore Organizational Meeting of January 1, 2024, the Town Board passed Resolution 08-2024, Appointment of Attorney for the Town, which reads:

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Michelle Storm, Esq. is hereby retrained as Attorney for the Town of New Baltimore for the year 2024 at the annual rate of $16,000, payable monthly, to provide such legal services as the Town Board deems necessary pursuant to her proposal which is annexed hereto[2] and is fully incorporated herein.  Additional legal services outside the scope of the Retainer Fees shall be billed at the hourly rate of $300 per hour for Partners,[3] $250 for Senior Associates, $175 for Associates, $110 for Law Clerks, and $90 for Paralegals.  The Supervisor is hereby empowered to sign and accept said proposal.

The appointment of Michelle A. Storm to be Town Attorney was unanimous with all five Board Members voting in favor of the appointment.

An exchange between a Town of New Baltimore resident and Storm took place at the March 11, 2024, regular public meeting of the Town Board, and is reproduced below. The point to keep in mind is that Storm insists that there is no difference between legal information and legal advice, which the resident insists there is.

Who do you think comes out on top?

---

Vadney:    In sum: I charge that Councilperson Kash and the New Baltimore Democratic Committee under the chairmanship of Eileen Vosburgh, and with the knowledge or belief that Kash when nominated, throughout her campaign, and even after having been elected to the Town Council, knew or believed she would be impaired in fully representing this constituency in the work and activities of this Town Council.

I further charge that Kash, the Democratic Committee, Vosburgh, and others  knew or should have known of the impediment and impairment but did not reveal it to the public, concealing the fact.

And I further charge that by doing so, the public was defrauded by Kash, the Democratic Committee, and Vosburgh. The simple definition of fraud is: A deliberate scheme to obtain a gain or a benefit or advantage by using false statements or concealment. And I see we have the Town Attorney here, and I would say: Correct me if I am wrong.

Michelle Storm (Town Attorney):  Well, I’m not going to correct you. I don’t give advice to you or the members of the public. I advise the Board when asked.[4]

Vadney:    Good. OK.

Michelle Storm (Town Attorney): But that said, public comment is an opportunity for you to speak and the Board to hear, and I think that’s what just took place. So, I mean…obviously, this Board is very engaging with the public, and does respond but there is absolutely no obligation for public comment to be even offered. [unclear]

Vadney:   OK. Fine.

Michelle Storm (Town Attorney): I’m not going to give you legal advice.

Vadney:    No. No. I’m not asking for legal advice; it was legal information. Make a distinction between legal advice and legal information.

Michelle Storm (Town Attorney): You’re lawyering that but there is no difference.

Vadney:   I’m sorry but there is. We can take this to a different level. So…

Ruso: [interrupting] If you would sum up, please.

---

The point made in favor of the resident and to the detriment of the Town Attorney is: How reliable, how good is an attorney if she doesn’t even know the difference between legal information and legal advice?

Here’s what law schools and legal scholars agree on regarding the difference between legal information and legal advice:

One critical difference between legal information and legal advice is that legal information does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Legal information allows a person to draw their own conclusions as to the interpretation of the law, allowing persons to decide how best to apply it in their case.

The legal information/legal advice dichotomy begins with this basic definition: Legal information: Facts about the law and the legal process. Legal advice: Advice about the course of action a client should take to further his or her own best interests

A series of three subsidiary definitions help users apply the basic definition correctly:

Now you know more than the Town Attorney knows. Maybe you should be sitting at the Council table providing legal services.

So, fellow citizens, residents, and taxpayers. What do you think of our Town Attorney? We’ll be sure to point these facts out to her at the next Town Board meeting and provide her with some documentation proving our points.

---

Notes:

[1] Given the actual purpose of Resolution 53-2024, even given the wording passed by Storm, I didn’t feel that it really required amendments to serve its purpose.

[2] No such proposal is attached to the resolution or to the minutes.

[3] Storm is a so-called partner in the firm.

[4] You really have to wonder why the Board didn’t ask her, don’t you? This is serious legal stuff here and no one is asking the Town Attorney for advice on the charge of fraud being leveled against a sitting Town Board member? WTF!