Since that time, in March of 2014 part of the claims were dismissed.
In November of 2014 the court where the case was still pending imposed an anti-filing injunction upon Mr. Neroni, on the court's own motion (by a different judge than the one presiding on the pending case) claiming the still pending Neroni v Zayas case was frivolous.
In June of 2015 the rest of the claims in Neroni v Zayas were dismissed, and the case is currently on an appeal by Mr. Neroni acting Pro Se.
Once again, the anti-filing injunction claimed that the lawsuit was frivolous.
Since the lawsuit was filed, two defendants changed their place of work, so to say:
- Disciplinary Committee attorney Stephen D. Zayas resigned amid a scandal and investigation that he allegedly filed false time sheets (while he was never prosecuted) ;
- Dean Skelos, the majority leader of NYS Senate, was indicted by the feds for corruption on May 28, 2015
3/ Since May of 2014 and to this day, and during the pendency of the anti-filing injunction proceedings against Mr. Neroni, New York Senator DeFrancisco was advocating for creation of a separate Commission to address prosecutorial misconduct.
Look up NY Senate Bill S24 that is seeking to amend Judiciary Law by including into it Article 15-A, Commission for prosecutorial misconduct. Such a separate Commission would not be needed if attorney disciplinary committees were doing their jobs and prosecuted prosecutors (including themselves).
So, the solution offered by a Senator Attorney DeFrancisco - while his Senate, through its attorney New York State Attorney General, fights Neroni v Zayas asserting the very same thing - is to add to taxpayers' burden and, in addition to the dysfunctional attorney disciplinary committees that do not do their jobs create yet another Commission, modeled after NYS Commission for Judicial Conduct - which also does not do its job, instead working as a shredder of complaints against judges.
So - if Mr. Neroni, a disbarred attorney, says it - it is frivolous and punishable.
If a New York State Senator - Judge - "Commission member" says it, even if that contradicts what that same Senator - Judge - Commission member - does in opposing those same challenges in Mr. Neroni's lawsuit - that is completely meritorious and even commendable.
It is insane, ladies and gentlemen, that the same idea is treated differently when it comes from people of different social statuses.
And such an attitude of the government, and especially of federal courts, clearly proves that
(1) the rule of law and equal protection of laws that judges are sworn to protect does not exist;
(2) judges are adamantly violating their own oath of office in practically every dismissed civil action;
(3) Mr. Neroni was correct when he was stating in his lawsuit that the system of attorney discipline, as it exists in New York, is designed to quash political dissent, and reduce credibility of dissenters.
After all, in every order of dismissal of Mr. Neroni's case (and, as I researched, cases of other suspended and disbarred attorneys making meritorious challenges to constitutionality of proceedings), on the very first pages, as a matter of policy, and contrary to the standard of review of motions to dismiss requiring courts to liberally construe pleadings in favor of the non-moving party, courts engaged in plaintiff-bashing by pointing out that plaintiff is a disbarred (suspended) attorney and his complaint is:
Remember the hypocrisy of the State of New York in trying to blow smoke screens into the public eyes by claiming they are trying to bring change through Commissions - while they are fighting tooth and claw, since 2013 to prevent that very same change to come through a court decision in Neroni v Zayas.