By Dick LaFontaine
On a fiery episode of The Unknown Podcast, co-host Richard Luthmann laid into New York State Supreme Court Justice Ronald Castorina, Jr., branding him the “Deadbeat Judge.” The discussion with co-host Michael Volpe centered on Castorina’s legal battle with Luthmann over unpaid campaign debts, which Luthmann is pursuing in Manhattan Supreme Court.
Luthmann mocked Castorina’s defense, which claimed that shutting down his campaign committee would absolve him of financial obligations.
“This guy thinks filing some paperwork makes all his debts disappear,” Luthmann said. “He’s either braindead or thinks we are.”
Volpe agreed, saying, “Castorina’s argument is like saying you can set your books on fire and not owe anyone a dime. It’s laughable.”
A “Mostly Dead” Debtor’s Defense
The dispute stems from a motion for default judgment filed by Luthmann against Castorina’s defunct campaign committee, Castorina for Assembly. Castorina, a former Assemblyman and Board of Elections Commissioner, argues that closing his campaign absolves it of debts.
Luthmann ridiculed this defense on the podcast and in court filings, referencing Billy Crystal’s “Miracle Max” character from The Princess Bride.
“Castorina wants the court to believe his campaign is ‘all dead,’ but it’s only ‘mostly dead,’” Luthmann said. “And New York law doesn’t let you bury your debts with a defunct Election law committee.”
Luthmann’s motion argues that campaign committees remain liable for obligations incurred while active, citing clear precedents under New York law.
“Castorina’s incompetence would be funny if it weren’t coming from a sitting Supreme Court Justice,” Luthmann said.
From Campaign Shenanigans to Judicial Controversy
The legal fight isn’t just about money. It’s also a spotlight on Castorina’s past controversies. On the podcast, Luthmann detailed how Castorina conspired with him to create fake Facebook pages targeting Janine Materna, his Republican primary opponent in 2016. While Luthmann served three years in prison for his role, he claims Castorina escaped charges by lying to a grand jury.
“Castorina perjured himself to save his skin,” Luthmann said. “He betrayed me, and then Michael McMahon rewarded him with a judgeship. Staten Island’s political swamp in action.”
The fake Facebook scandal casts a long shadow over Staten Island politics, and Luthmann isn’t letting Castorina off the hook.
“Ronnie’s behavior hasn’t changed,” Luthmann said. “He’s still dodging responsibility and making excuses.”
A "Deadbeat Judge" Takes the Heat
Luthmann’s nickname for Castorina—the “Deadbeat Judge”—has stuck, becoming a recurring theme on The Unknown Podcast. During the episode, Volpe pressed Luthmann on the broader implications of Castorina’s actions.
“What does this say about the judiciary?” Volpe asked. “Can we trust someone like Castorina to deliver fair rulings?”
Luthmann didn’t hold back.
“If this is how he handles his personal obligations, imagine how he handles the law,” he said. “But we don’t have to imagine. He’s a family court HACK. This man has no business being on the bench.”
Courtroom Showdown Looms
The case is before Justice Louis L. Nock in the Manhattan Supreme Court, where Luthmann seeks a default judgment. If granted, the motion could lead to an inquest into damages, potentially exposing further misconduct related to Castorina’s campaign finances.
In his filings, Luthmann alleges that Castorina deliberately shuttered his campaign committee to avoid paying debts.
“Fraud has no statute of limitations,” Luthmann said. “Especially when it involves public trust and taxpayer money.”
Legal experts agree the stakes are high.
“This case isn’t just about Castorina’s debts,” said a seasoned election lawyer speaking anonymously for fear of Castorina’s retribution. “It’s about accountability and the integrity of our political and judicial systems. Luthmann’s claims have merit.”
Requests For Comment
We reached out to Castorina through his counsel, Attorney Robert Brown. We received no response as of press time. Here is what we asked:
From: Dick LaFontaine, Investigative Journalist <RALafontaine@protonmail.com>
Date: On Monday, January 13th, 2025 at 7:54 PM
Subject: Press Inquiry Regarding Justice Ronald Castorina and His Legal and Ethical Conduct
To: rbrown@robertbrownlaw.com <rbrown@robertbrownlaw.com>
CC: mthomasnast@protonmail.com <mthomasnast@protonmail.com>, frank.morano@wabcradio.com <frank.morano@wabcradio.com>, frankiepressman@protonmail.com <frankiepressman@protonmail.com>, frankparlato@gmail.com <frankparlato@gmail.com>, RickLaRiviere@proton.me <RickLaRiviere@proton.me>, Richard Luthmann <richard.luthmann@protonmail.com>, mvolpe998@gmail.com <mvolpe998@gmail.com>
Dear Attorney Brown,We are reaching out in connection with recent public filings and widespread interest in the legal and financial matters involving your client, Justice Ronald Castorina, Jr., and his pending case with Richard Luthmann in Manhattan Supreme Court. We would appreciate your insights on several issues regarding his conduct, legal arguments, and judicial responsibilities.
Questions:
1. Campaign Finance and Legal Responsibility:
Justice Castorina has argued that closing the "Castorina for Assembly" campaign committee absolves him of financial or legal responsibility for its debts. Can you elaborate on the legal foundation for this position?
Does Justice Castorina believe that election law committees established under New York Election Law—designed to solicit regulated public contributions for positions of public trust—are analogous to for-profit entities governed by New York Business Corporation Law, where limited liability is recognized?
2. "Mostly Dead" Argument:
Richard Luthmann has humorously compared the situation to Miracle Max in The Princess Bride, suggesting that "Castorina for Assembly" is "mostly dead" rather than "all dead." How does Justice Castorina respond to this analogy?
Does he acknowledge that, under New York Election Law, a terminated campaign committee still has residual responsibilities, including settling outstanding financial obligations?
3. Judicial Integrity and Public Fairness:
Divorce and Family Court litigants appearing before Justice Castorina are expected to honor their financial obligations. How does Justice Castorina reconcile this expectation with his own alleged refusal to pay debts associated with his campaign committee?
Does Justice Castorina believe his current position as a sitting judge imposes additional ethical or moral obligations to resolve disputes arising from his previous roles as a public official and Assembly candidate?
4. Potential Reassignment or Disciplinary Actions:
Given the public attention on this case and the allegations surrounding Justice Castorina’s financial and legal conduct, has there been any discussion of his reassignment to different judicial duties, such as a "rubber room" or Traffic Court?
Is Justice Castorina prepared to address these concerns publicly to restore confidence in his role as a Supreme Court Justice?
5. Broader Implications:
What message does Justice Castorina believe his legal argument sends to the public, particularly about the accountability of individuals in positions of trust?
Does he have a response to critics who argue that this case undermines public trust in the judiciary and the ethical obligations of judges?
Additional Context:
These questions stem from public filings and recent commentary, including media discussions. The public perception of Justice Castorina's financial and legal obligations, particularly in light of his judicial responsibilities, has sparked significant interest and debate.
We plan to publish a story on this matter and would appreciate a response. If Justice Castorina or your office would like to provide a detailed statement, we would be happy to include it in our coverage.
Thank you for your time and attention to these questions. Please do not hesitate to contact us should you require further clarification or additional details.
If we publish before you have a chance to respond, we will prepare a follow up presenting your side of the story.
Regards,
Dick LaFontaine
Investigative Journalist
We also asked the New York State Office of Court Administration about Castorina’s future. They did not answer. They never do. Here is what we asked:
From: Dick LaFontaine, Investigative Journalist <RALafontaine@protonmail.com>
Date: On Monday, January 13th, 2025 at 7:15 PM
Subject: Press Inquiry Regarding Justice Ronald Castorina
To: ahackel@nycourts.gov <ahackel@nycourts.gov>, lchalfen <lchalfen@nycourts.gov>, publicinformation@nycourts.gov <publicinformation@nycourts.gov>
CC: frankiepressman@protonmail.com <frankiepressman@protonmail.com>, frankparlato@gmail.com <frankparlato@gmail.com>, frank.morano@wabcradio.com <frank.morano@wabcradio.com>, RickLaRiviere@proton.me <RickLaRiviere@proton.me>, mthomasnast@protonmail.com <mthomasnast@protonmail.com>, mvolpe998@gmail.com <mvolpe998@gmail.com>, veritastips <veritastips@protonmail.com>, Richard Luthmann <richard.luthmann@protonmail.com>
Dear OCA Public Information Office,We are writing to inquire about New York State Supreme Court Justice Ronald Castorina, Jr., following recent revelations and allegations raised in public filings and related media coverage. I hope you can provide clarity on several issues concerning Justice Castorina's conduct, judicial assignments, and public accountability.
Questions:
1. Campaign Finance Issues:
Justice Castorina is alleged to have used his former political campaign committee, Castorina for Assembly, to avoid financial obligations. Are there any internal investigations or reviews into his handling of campaign funds or the allegations of financial mismanagement tied to his committee?
Does the Office of Court Administration have a policy or procedure for addressing concerns about a judge’s prior political activities, particularly when those activities raise ethical or legal questions?
2. Judicial Integrity and Alleged Perjury:
Public filings allege that Justice Castorina perjured himself during Richard Luthmann’s grand jury proceedings in 2018. Has this allegation been brought to the attention of the Office of Court Administration or the Commission on Judicial Ethics?
Are there any pending or completed investigations into Justice Castorina’s role in the grand jury proceedings or related matters?
3. Judicial Assignments and Oversight:
Given the allegations of misconduct and financial impropriety, has the Office of Court Administration considered reassigning Justice Castorina to limited duties or a “rubber room” while these issues are investigated?
Are there specific guidelines or thresholds for when a judge’s conduct outside the courtroom necessitates reassignment or suspension?
4. Public Accountability:
What steps does the Office of Court Administration take to maintain public trust in the judiciary when a judge is implicated in controversies such as these?
Does the Office plan to issue a statement addressing the allegations against Justice Castorina, given the significant public interest in this matter?
5. General Judicial Conduct:
How does the Office of Court Administration ensure that judges comply with their ethical obligations both during and after their political careers?
Are there any recent updates to judicial conduct policies that may apply to cases like this?
Additional Information:
These questions arise from recent court filings and public commentary, including statements by Richard Luthmann and discussions in the media. The allegations suggest a troubling pattern of behavior that could undermine public confidence in the judiciary if left unaddressed.
We would appreciate your response as we plan to publish a story on this matter. If you require additional details or would like to provide a statement, we are happy to accommodate.
If we publish before you can respond, we will include your side of things in a follow-up.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Regards,
Dick LaFontaine
Investigative Journalist
What’s Next for Castorina?
As the court prepares to rule on Luthmann’s motion, the fallout from the case is already being felt in Staten Island’s political circles.
“Is this the kind of man we want on the Supreme Court bench?” one Richmond County Republican asked. “He should have resigned as Party Chair in 2016 when it came out he was attacking Janine Materna, another Republican. He has no shame because he’s really a RINO.”
For Luthmann, the fight is personal and symbolic.
“This isn’t just about money anymore,” he said. “It’s about exposing corruption and holding people like Castorina accountable. The people deserve better.”
The court’s decision is expected in the coming weeks. Until then, the “Deadbeat Judge” and his tarnished campaign committee remain under public scrutiny, with their credibility—and Castorina’s judicial future—hanging in the balance.
Share this post