Donate
Kevin Riford
A Judge with a History of Debt Collection Scandals
**all evidence is in PDF at bottom of page.**
Justice Rodney A. Giove of Wheatfield Town Court carries with him a troubling professional past that continues to cast a shadow over his judicial role. His history is not one of quiet impartiality, but of fraud allegations, racketeering claims, and abusive debt collection practices.
In 2009, then–Attorney General Andrew Cuomo filed a sweeping lawsuit against 35 law firms and affiliates accused of securing tens of thousands of fraudulent default judgments against unsuspecting New Yorkers. Among those identified were Rodney Giove and Jason Cafarella, both associated with debt collection outfits in Niagara County. These firms allegedly engaged in “sewer service” — a practice in which process servers fail to properly notify defendants of lawsuits, leading to automatic judgments. Cuomo’s office sought to vacate nearly 100,000 default judgments statewide, with more than 11,000 in Western New York alone. Giove’s name was tied to this scandal through his professional affiliations, cementing his reputation as part of a system that profited from consumer abuse.
Giove later surfaced as a named defendant in a federal RICO action, Lewis v. Legal Servicing, LLC, filed in the Southern District of New York. The complaint alleged that Giove and others directed fraudulent service of process and benefited from systemic misconduct in debt collection litigation. While the case involved multiple defendants, Giove’s inclusion underscored his entanglement in federal racketeering and fraud claims.
Source: Lewis v. Steward et al, No. 1:2019cv08085 – Document 109 (S.D.N.Y. 2021) :: Justia
Adding weight to these allegations, The Buffalo News published a special investigative report titled “Merchants of Debt”, which exposed abusive practices by Buffalo-area collection firms. The report linked Giove’s office to tactics that included threatening debtors with jail and coercing payments from individuals who did not even owe money. These revelations placed Giove among the debt collection attorneys whose practices helped give Western New York the dubious reputation as a hub for predatory legal collections.
Source: Buffalo News – view full PDF for article below
Business Deals with Jason Cafarella
Beyond his professional record, Giove’s financial dealings also raise red flags. In 2018, property records reveal that Giove and Jason Cafarella — an attorney who later served as Attorney for the Children in your sister Katie Riford’s Niagara County Family Court case — engaged in direct financial transactions. One instrument shows Giove as mortgagee on a $40,000 loan to Cafarella, while another deed reflects a property transfer between the two. These transactions show not only a professional alliance, but a financial relationship that creates the appearance of favoritism and conflict of interest when Cafarella appears in related court matters.
The Rashawn Salmon Connection
The concerns deepen with Giove’s unusual relationship with Rashawn Salmon, a Niagara Falls man under federal indictment for narcotics trafficking and fraud involving SBA pandemic loans. On June 9, 2025, while Salmon faced federal forfeiture proceedings, Giove executed a Power of Attorney on Salmon’s behalf, enabling him to engage in real estate and financial transactions.
This action is highly irregular for a sitting judge. Judicial ethics rules prohibit judges from engaging in business dealings that undermine public trust. The fact that Giove acted as Salmon’s legal agent, despite Salmon’s active federal charges, suggests complicity in helping shield assets from forfeiture.
Enter Santino Cafarella
The Power of Attorney executed by Giove on behalf of Salmon was notarized by Santino Cafarella, believed to be the brother of Jason Cafarella. Santino is not merely a casual figure — he is employed by Lipsitz Green Scime Cambria LLP, one of Buffalo’s most prominent law firms, known for handling high-profile federal cases.
This detail is significant. Santino’s notarization of the Salmon Power of Attorney ties together Giove, Jason Cafarella, and a major federal defense law firm through overlapping professional and familial relationships. In effect, Giove’s actions cannot be viewed in isolation — they form part of a network of attorneys and legal professionals with shared financial and professional interests, raising the specter of impropriety.
When combined, the Giove–Cafarella–Salmon connection looks less like coincidence and more like a pattern of conflicted relationships that compromise the independence and impartiality expected of a judge.
A Sitting Judge Who Claims to Be “Lame and Disabled”
Equally concerning is Judge Giove’s role as a plaintiff in ongoing personal injury litigation. In a civil suit filed in Erie County Supreme Court in 2025, Giove seeks damages for alleged injuries that he claims left him “lame and disabled,” caused “shock to his nerves and nervous system,” and rendered him “incapacitated from his usual activities and employment.”
While every litigant has the right to seek redress for injuries, for a sitting judge these claims raise troubling questions: if he is incapacitated from employment, how can he properly preside over cases that demand mental sharpness, impartial judgment, and resilience under pressure? At minimum, his dual role as both a judge and a damages-seeking plaintiff creates the appearance of conflicting personal and professional interests.
Moreover, by claiming disability in one courtroom while exercising judicial authority in another, Giove risks undermining public confidence in the judiciary’s credibility. Litigants may rightly wonder whether their cases are being heard by a judge who has placed his own capacity into legal dispute.
Questionable Campaign Contributions and Election Fraud Concerns
Further eroding public trust are allegations of election fraud in Giove’s campaign finances. In 2025, he made at least two political contributions — one to “Friends of Randy Brandt” and another to “Friends of Michael Filicetti.” Both were submitted under an address, 6741 Carli Court, that did not belong to him. Public records indicate that Giove actually resided at 7304 Berkshire Drive during that time. The Carli Court address was associated with David and Katelyn Hall.
By providing false address information on official campaign finance disclosures, Giove created the appearance of deliberately obscuring the origin of these contributions. For a sitting judge, this is no small matter. Judicial ethics rules demand absolute honesty and transparency, even in political activity. At worst, this conduct suggests an intentional effort to manipulate campaign filings — effectively a form of election fraud.
When combined with the fact that lawyers familiar with cases involving you later donated to his campaign, these misrepresentations raise deeper concerns about quid pro quo arrangements, donor favoritism, and hidden conflicts of interest.
source: SEE PDF Exhibits K through N
Why This Matters
Judges are supposed to embody impartiality, transparency, and public trust. Yet Judge Giove’s record shows repeated entanglement with fraud litigation, debt collection abuses, federal RICO claims, questionable property deals, and ties to attorneys with personal stakes in his cases.
From political campaign finance irregularities to ongoing personal litigation where Giove claims to be “lame and disabled,” his capacity to serve impartially is already under scrutiny. When viewed against his history of debt collection scandals and present-day dealings with federally charged individuals, the appearance of impropriety becomes impossible to ignore.
At minimum, these facts demand recusal in any case involving parties connected to the Cafarella family, debt collection practices, or matters where Giove’s impartiality could reasonably be questioned. At worst, they suggest a judge whose professional history is too entangled with fraud and conflicts of interest to continue presiding without undermining public confidence in the judiciary.