By Jessica Dye

NEW YORK, Jan 28 (Reuters) - A Brooklyn judge has shot down a woman's claim that she could not remember the circumstances surrounding a disputed retainer agreement with a law firm in part because she was raising five children.

Stacey Golia initially said her "memory was shot" when it came to recalling events in 2007, the year she allegedly entered into a $20,000 retainer agreement with law firm Reingold & Tucker.

Kings County Supreme Court Justice Arthur Schack said in a ruling Thursday that Golia's attempts to blame her memory lapses on raising five children were "beyond belief."

"House of Representatives Minority Leader and former Speaker Nancy Pelosi is the mother of five children, as well as former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, U.S. Representatives Michele Bachmann and former First Lady Barbara Bush," Schack wrote. "These women have never claimed memory lapses because they each have five children."

The judge ordered Golia to pay $27,603, -- the amount of the retainer plus fees for some additional legal work the firm performed -- and interest.

Golia was named as a defendant in three separate mortgage fraud lawsuits filed in Brooklyn federal court in 2006. She signed two $20,000 retainer agreements with law firm Reingold & Tucker to defend her in two of the cases, the ruling said.

The firm said she orally agreed to have it defend her in the third suit, but she allegedly found "numerous excuses" for not signing the agreement she received in 2007 and for not paying the third $20,000 retainer, the ruling said.

The firm helped negotiate successful dispositions for Golia in all three cases, the ruling said and, in 2008, sent her a bill for $27,603. Golia did not pay, and the firm filed a lawsuit in 2010 seeking the full amount, plus interest, the ruling said.

During a brief bench trial before Schack, Golia initially could not recall the details of the third case, saying she "(has) five children," so "my memory is pretty much shot," the ruling said.

When pressed by Schack, Golia said, "I have a lot of things on my mind, so I don't remember 2007." She eventually admitted she received a retainer agreement, but said she did not sign it or make any payments, the ruling said. Golia also said she was overbilled, due to the firm's "antiquated billing system."

Schack called the testimony "evasive and incredible."

"Defendant Golia cannot obtain a windfall -- free legal work -- by her willful failure to sign a retainer agreement in the (third) action," he wrote.

Abe Reingold, who represented his firm in the case, said he was pleased with the ruling. A lawyer for Golia did not return a request for comment.

The case is Reingold & Tucker v. Golia, New York State Supreme Court, Kings County, No. 21038/2010.

For Reingold & Tucker: Abe Reingold.

For Golia: Steven Herzberg of Char & Herzberg.

Follow us on Twitter  @ReutersLegal | Like us on Facebook