Delaware County (NY) District Attorney's Office: let's generate business off traffic tickets - together with non-lawyer judges

The local press in Delaware County (NY) recently reported how excited Delaware County DA Smith is about the growing revenue from the so-called traffic ticket diversion program.

I have just asked the New York State Police and the 3rd Department's Attorney Grievance Committee to look into this glorious program - from the point of view of ticket-fixing, public corruption, ethical violation and undermining judicial independence by the DA's Office - in order to generate revenue for the County and for the local townships.

You can read the full complaint here.  8 pages with full analysis of the "program" and statistical graphs.

Delaware County (NY) Public Defender's Office: harvesting confidential information from one set of clients to help the other set of clients - with the help of a New York State grant

That is what Delaware County Public Defender Joe Ermeti publicly announced he is intending to do - as reported by The Reporter (Walton NY):

I have filed a complaint with attorney disciplinary authorities against Ermeti and County Attorney Merklen for allowing this client information harvesting for future adverse use - using a state grant for it no less.

You can read the complaint here.

So now - ANY poor person in need of an attorney in Family Court in Delaware County (PD Office only handles indigent defendants) should consider publicly announced INTENTIONS of the PD Office in such representations.

Their representation are not what the court assigns them to be - not for the benefit of the client.

Their representation is to harvest information under the guise of a trusting attorney-client relationship in order to use it against the client in the future.

That is, effectively - undermining court orders of assignment, potential contempt of court, and exposing the County for multiple, multiple malpractice and civil rights lawsuits by such Family Court clients.

But we already know that Amy Merklen and her "officers" and employees breed litigation against the County, non-stop, at taxpayer expense, and this is just one new example of it.

The real face of NYS Supreme Court Justice Christopher P. Baker

Next time you decide whether to vote for this guy to re-elect him to judicial office:

 

have this image in your mind's eye:

This is blood.  Real blood.  Of a 78-year-old immobilized man, a litigant, who Justice Baker cannot stop retaliating against because (1) he bested Judge Baker in court when Judge Baker was an Assistant District Attorney in Chemung County; (2) we sued Judge Baker for misconduct.

My husband has fragile veins.  They ruptured twice in three days so far.  Judge Baker was notified, with a repeated request for a disability accommodation.  He turned a deaf ear.

Today, the vein ruptured again.  I came running to my husband's yelling for help to see the picture of a pool of blood around my husband's foot, with the blood squirting.

I (63 and 3-strokes' survivor and a long-COVID survivor, so I am not as agile as I was at 15) dropped on the floor and have spent 15 frantic minutes on the floor clamping upon the wound as much as I could while my husband was calling 911.

Coincidentally, we had a technician that came to work on our car waiting for me outside.  When I finally took the blood squirting under control and came out running to meet the ambulance, my arms were elbow-deep in blood.  

It is very apparent that my husband cannot travel - and that is on top of his complete inability to sit at all, or stand for prolonged periods of time - because it causes him hip-pain (fused joint) and ruptured veins.

I have been litigating in New York courts for many years as an attorney - and so was my husband.  The usual approach of judges is the immediate grant of requests to make motions on submitted basis on such circumstances - or to appear by phone.  Out of sheer humanity.

That is not the case here.

Judge Baker DELIBERATELY put several MUNDANE motions - "extend time" by defaulting defendants, motion to dismiss (on the pleadings).  These do not require evidentiary hearings.  Defaulting defendants are not entitled to hearings on motions to extend time to answer.

And nevertheless - NO, NO, NO and NO.  "Justice Baker" is completely deaf to our requests not to drag us 1,700 miles on a roundtrip that will require us to pay for medical transportation for my husband in order to oppose a motion to extend time by defaulting defendants.

That is a matter of principle for Judge Baker - to show us who is boss.  The law and humanity be damned.

Judge Baker declared a war on two invalids - my husband and myself - first, because my husband bested Judge Baker when he was a mere ADA in Chemung County's District Attorney's office, and, second, because we sued Judge Baker for manufacturing evidence for opponents.

And for that - all bets are off now.  Baker is bent on revenge, casting to the winds all tenets of human decency and all pledges he made to the public when running for the judicial office.

Notably, Baker ran for judicial office on self-advertisement of serving the disabled:

He serves the disabled all right after he got to become the King of the Hill.

My husband, with fragile veins, could just as well bleed to death - like he had a close call today - by being dragged 1700 miles roundtrip to the courthouse for mundane motions because Judge Baker is bent on revenge.

Justice Baker is currently ignoring any and all ADA accommodation requests to allow appearances on mundane motions (extend time by our governmental defaulting opponents) - requests that he routinely grants sua sponte without any disability to governmental counseled parties.

My question is - how much do law firms for those counseled parties donated to his election campaigns?  Who of his relatives do they employ? How many trips or wine-and-dine opportunities did they fund for this judge?

Once again - just think about WHAT "Justice" Baker is adamantly, stubbornly and insistently doing to a disabled individual.

That is Tennessee v Lane revisited.

That is the real face of Judge Baker - and of the NYS Judicial System who enables Judge Baker.

Remember that at your voting booth.

New York State Court system is adamantly ADA-non-compliant

Just 22 years ago, not that far away, already in this millenium and century, the U.S. Supreme Court had to decide a case - do States get to claim immunity for actions of their courts in violation of federal Americans with Disabilities Act?

Does the State of Tennessee get to be sued for money damages after its judge punished a paraplegic for refusal to crawl up the courthouse stairs in order to attend a court hearing?  The paraplegic George Lane was actually incarcerated for contempt of court for such a refusal.

Fast-forward to the State of New York system.

Here is my FOIL/1st Amendment request to the NYS Office of Court Administration and to the 6th Judicial District, made specifically for this blog.

And here is the court system's response to it.

The do not have ADA-compliant policies.

They do not have ADA-trained judges.

Furthermore, according to answers by the State's and 6th Judicial District's ADA Coordinators, they adamantly claim the system's entitlement to a dual system of appeals of denials of ADA accommodation requests: based on identity of the violator:

(1) if the violator is non-judicial - you get a free administrative appeal by email;

(2) if the violator is a judge - you must forfeit your privacy by splurging your medical information openly into the record, because the system claims that your only appellate path to contest denial to you of ADA accommodations is through costly, burdensome (and usually affirmed) appeals.

Note that the District Executive and ADA Co-ordinator directs me to send my ADA accommodation request either by regular mail - in a way not creating a record on appeal - or by email to non-judicial personnel, exposing my confidential medical information to unknown individuals without any guarantee of confidentiality of those medical records.

Note also that the District Executive hints at "ex parte communications", strongly implying that whatever I am filing with the judge as an ADA accommodation request - again, confidential medical records or information - will not be kept confidential, because the court system, by delegating the handling of the ADA accommodation requests to untrained judicial personnel, revamped not only the appellate process, but also stripped such requests of confidentiality required by federal law.  

Ex parte communications are not allowed - therefore, privacy required by federal law for such requests - is also not allowed in New York courts.

Look at further sermonizing on the same topic by the State ADA Co-ordinator - also an attorney, like the District ADA Co-ordinator.  

They did not even dig up a medical professional to handle medical issues here.

The State Co-Ordinator sings the same song as the District Executive: submit your private information to non-judicial personnel with no pledge of confidentiality or send it to the judge's chambers by regular mail without creating a record.  Or, as implied, just go ahead and file it in open access on NYSCEF, waiving privacy, so that your opposing counsel and parties would be able to mock and harass you some more - without any attempt by courts to control them.

Of course, this dual system is also adamantly non-compliant with the federal statute, The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) that pre-empts (makes unenforceable) inconsistent state law. 

But - who cares, right, NYS judges, when might is right?  

Or, rather, who cares until a disabled litigant sues the State of New York - like George Lane did Tennessee - and wins?

Know that you are not without recourse.

Know that you can sue and pursue your right against the State of New York in court.

Know that in Tennessee v Lane, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the States are not immune for lawsuits where state judges are discriminating against disabled litigants, barring or burdening their access to courts.

Challenge disability discrimination in the courtroom.

Sue for that.

And - most importantly, vote ADA-violating judges out of office and insist, through federal lawsuits if necessary, that NYS Court Administration comply with the ADA.

NYS 6th Judicial District, from the horse's own mouth - Chief Judge Eugene Faughnan refuses to remove from the case a presiding judge who is a defendant in the case

This is the NYSCEF page of a court case, of today.

The Assigned Judge is Christopher P. Baker.

 This is the Amended Complaint dated three (3) days earlier.

The judge is a named defendant in the case.

This is the e-mail of today of the Chief Administrative Judge of the 6th Judicial District Eugene Faughnan, refusing to remove Judge Baker off the case due to his legal disqualification and insultingly advising me to hire an attorney because it is "a legal issue".

And isn't assignment of judges to cases where they are named defendants a standing policy of your office, Judge Faughnan?

So - the policy of 6th Judicial District that it is up to the judge to step down or not to step down from presiding over a case where the judge is a NAMED DEFENDANT.

It DID surely become a legal issue, only for Judge Faughnan - as this "assignment policy" of assigning judges to cases where they are defendants (and not only in my cases) appears to be a standing, documented, unconstitutional policy of his office.

Notably, Judge Baker is not stepping down...  Interesting - isn't it?

Judge Faughnan can't claim he did not read it - I sent the link to this article to him, so he is on notice.

Doxxing a child to spite Dana Scuderi-Hunter is unlawful, Mr. Miller - and retaliation against a whistleblower (and whistleblower's family) of such doxxing is unlawful, too

On May 16, 2025 I published here an article about child rape victim blaming efforts on behalf of a school district by attorney Frank W. Miller, longtime litigation counsel for Delaware County, NY and longtime friend of Chairperson Tina Mole and County Attorney Amy Merklen.  You can read it here.

On May 25, 2025 I have turned attorney Miller into the Attorney Grievance Committee for a very, very bad thing, also involving a 5 year old child - for online doxxing a minor child online in obvious effort to spite Dana Scuderi-Hunter, DSS Commissioner Attorney Miller helped Amy Merklen oust - for Scuderi-Hunter's truthful testimony in Family Court that Miller claimed in writing as "insubordination" and "disloyalty" to Amy Merklen.  

The "insubordination" and "disloyalty" charges drafted by Miller against DSS Commissioner Dana Scuderi-Hunter have since been annulled by the 3rd Department - but Miller and Merklen are still in denial of it, continuing to claim in different forums, including to different courts, that they "prevailed", with an implication that they prevailed on all grounds, including the annulled one.

Since then, Hancock Estabrook, through Miller's former associate Facciponte, bred in harassment at the knee of the best, so to say,

pursued charges of disloyalty and insubordination (through private harassment that came out in a publication, through FOIL requests and in depositions that resulted in Hancock having to get rid of Facciponte - but not of Miller yet) against two elected County Supervisors, of the Town of Hamden (came through depositions in Decker Advertisement Inc. v. Delaware County, all depositions are published here) and of the Town of Delhi.

Imagine that Miller and Hancock Estabrook recently "graciously accepted" a request for representation of their own victim of harassment Marshfield to represent him in a case I brought against a County-entwined non-profit Watershed Agricultural Council for retaliative firing of my child for my protected activity, Neroni v Watershed Agricultural Council, EF2026-106 in Delaware County Supreme Court.

Unsurprisingly, Miller stepped into that representation only to seek fire and destruction against me - and against my husband who was not a party - for the filing of the grievance.

Miller, despite default of his client and without (initially) seeking leave of court, immediately sought sanctions against me and my non-party husband (for the 10th time in 10 months) and an anti-filing injunction.  

Mr. Miller falsely claimed to the court - I am suing him for that, among other things - contrary to the record (see who is listed as a contact person for WAC's property on Beacon)

that Marshfield was not involved with WAC - not at all, he is an innocent individual who would say anything if Hancock threatens him - as Hancock did Supervisor Boukai - with yanking of litigation insurance coverage.

Actually, in depositions of Marshfield it already came out that Marshfield was coached by Hancock and submitted false affidavits to derail a deposition.

I dropped both Marshfield and his harasser attorney from hell from the lawsuit, together with their motion, but evidence of retaliation remains on NYSCEF, Neron v Watershed, EF2026-106, Doc. 34.  In that Affirmation, Mr. Miller sought to protect his employee (Erika Masler's) father Judge Mark Masler - who was sued for barring my access as a court watcher to the hearing in my child's case, in violation of Judiciary Law 4 and the 1st Amendment.

Of course, no disclosure was made by Mr. Miller that Mark Masler IS his employee's father.

Mr. Miller also pointed out that the 4th Department (that refused to discipline him based on his political connections and familial connections of his law firm) deprived me of my profession as a civil rights, criminal defense, defense-against-CPS, and consumer protection attorney (without saying that much) for refusing to sleep with Judge Carl Becker and to divorce my husband as Becker required through his accomplices, in order to expose my husband's property held as tenants by the entirety in marriage to the ransacking by the local sons-of-judges, even at the threat of harm to my child.

I wrote about the sons-of-judges and their little intimate practices with the court system here, and elsewhere on this blog.

Coincidentally, Becker was former Delaware County Assistant County Attorney and DSS Attorney, Miller's longtime personal friend.

As soon as the 4th Department saw the witness list, it quickly rescinded the initial order of public hearing as soon as I presented a witness list of who I want to depose, 

sealed the proceeding, attempted to criminally charge me and lock me up for writing about it, cooked the transcripts, forbid me to invite the public to attend the hearings, and suspended me for 2 years in 2015 without a right for automatic reinstatement immediately after my publications derailed judicial election of Porter Kirkwood, a yet another Delaware County Attorney and now 6th Judicial District Executive appointing judges into my cases - not too crooked.  Word-search the name Porter Kirkwood on this blog, or look through blogs here, upper right corner, in September, October and November of 2015 about Porter Kirkwood. 

Mr. Miller - in full knowledge of the contents of my affidavit in Neroni v Mole - linked here, about what exactly Judge Becker did - cannot stop pointing his finger at my unlawful suspension - while t the same time being in full knowledge that the system is corrupt and that HE HIMSELF will never get even a slap on the wrist, even for spiteful doxxing of a child online, as he did for 5 years.

Since that grievance against Miller was filed on May 25, 2025, Attorney Grievance Committee for the 3rd Department notified me that it transferred the case to the 4th Department (where Miller's law firm is located), even though misconduct occurred within the 3rd Department.

Today, I checked the NYSCEF Document that was the subject of the grievance.  

Attorney Miller redacted the child's pre-adoptive and post-adoptive name, medical, mental and hospitalization information, heavily redacted, I must say.  

The redacted file is now viewable at Dana Scuderi-Hunter v Delaware County, EF2020-320, NYSCEF Doc. 27, page numbers 65-113.  

Clicking this link will take you, for free, to the official NYSCEF (New York State court system's e-filing archive), with the document opening and available for your review for free, just scroll down to pages 65-113.  

All of the blackouts on these pages were made after my grievance. 

 The unredacted file was forwarded to the Grievance Committee on May 25, 2025 as an attachment to the original grievance, and I still have it on file as my protection against Mr. Miller's retaliative accusation of untruthfulness, frivolousness etc.

After the initial grievance was filed, Mr. Miller went beserk and engaged in a retaliation spree, with the help of his powerful law firm, seeking sanctions against me and my husband at least 10 times from various courts in various cases.  

In a recent case, Mr. Miller sought sanctions against me specifically (among other things) for turning attorneys into grievance committees - without ever mentioning that what he is unhappy about is a DOCUMENTED grievance against himself that he had to act on, but was not - at least yet - publicly disciplined for, likely because of his firm's political and familial connections and, no doubt, monetary contributions of all kinds to the judiciary - including employment of judges' children.

I have copied Mr. Miller and his law firm with the new grievance I filed today so that next time he engages in a new round of retaliation he cannot disclaim knowledge of the grievance.

I am also publishing my full grievance about Mr. Miller online - the new and the old, without access to unredacted attachments, here.

ANY OTHER attorney, not representing the government, and not having political and familial connections that Mr. Miller's law firm h as, would have been disbarred for much less.

Just think about it - the child's private information was put online by Attorney Miller and remained online FOR 5 YEARS - before I pointed it out through the grievance committee complaint.

When you are filing on NYSCEF, before you hit "file", you have to affirmatively check a box - whether you redacted personal information from your filings.  Mr. Miller checked that box before filing, in full knowledge that he did not redact.

Spiting an adult - DSS Commissioner Scuderi-Hunter - by doxxing a child, this way, is unlawful.

It is in violation of a multitude of state and federal laws.

And yet, Attorney Miler's license remains intact and he has "no record of discipline".

WHY?  Because his law firm belongs to the brother of Chief Administrative Judge for upstate New York James Murphy?  Because the law firm buys enough favors of enough judges by employing their relatives and former law clerks?

Attorney licensing is supposed to PROTECT CONSUMERS, not - these kind of people.

And consumers - including minor children - sure need to be protected from Attorney Miller, or from the law firm that is covering him up and enabling him in his retaliation efforts against a whistleblower and her family (serial sanctions applications, loss of employment by my adult child, punitive taxation of our properties, conditioning court appearances on impossible 1,700 mile travel, seeking to physically destroy my husband and physically harm me - what's next?).

Today, I made a simple check on Google as to whether doxxing is legal in New York - and that's what Google AI spat out:

And yet - a confirmed - but politically connected - spiteful online doxxer of a minor child is not yet disbarred, but is actively supported by the court system and his law firm, familially connected to the top management of federal and state courts in his retaliation spree against the whistleblower and her family.

Once again - WHY?

Very interesting development - is Kelly Sanfilippo/Reynolds returning to the position of Chief Clerk of Delaware County Supreme Court?

 Looks like it to me.

Nicole Olvera, the Chief Clerk, suddenly moved to a lower position of a court assistant in Oneonta City Court, and now we only have an "Acting Chief Clerk" Michael McGovern - while Kelly Reynolds was spotted in the locality, after the supposed death of Sridhar Samudrala, her domestic partner of many years.

Reynolds left her position, in whatever way - the court system still stalls release of her time records to me despite repeated requests - in August of 2023 when Samudrala did not re-run for Delhi Village mayor and left the area.

Reynolds then ran around the world to evade service with Samudrala when I sued Samudrala and he was obviously tipped by Reynolds' personnel at court.

So - let's bet and see - was Nicole Olvera used only as a place holder for Reynolds while the court system stalled disclosure to me of Reynolds' time records?

Btw, Reynolds' signature appeared on court documents long after she left - I have those on file.