THE EVOLUTION OF JUDICIAL TYRANNY IN THE UNITED STATES:

"If the judges interpret the laws themselves, and suffer none else to interpret, they may easily make, of the laws, [a shredded] shipman's hose!" - King James I of England, around 1616.

“No class of the community ought to be allowed freer scope in the expression or publication of opinions as to the capacity, impartiality or integrity of judges than members of the bar. They have the best opportunities of observing and forming a correct judgment. They are in constant attendance on the courts. Hundreds of those who are called on to vote never enter a court-house, or if they do, it is only at intervals as jurors, witnesses or parties. To say that an attorney can only act or speak on this subject under liability to be called to account and to be deprived of his profession and livelihood by the very judge or judges whom he may consider it his duty to attack and expose, is a position too monstrous to be entertained for a moment under our present system,” Justice Sharwood in Ex Parte Steinman and Hensel, 95 Pa 220, 238-39 (1880).

“This case illustrates to me the serious consequences to the Bar itself of not affording the full protections of the First Amendment to its applicants for admission. For this record shows that [the rejected attorney candidate] has many of the qualities that are needed in the American Bar. It shows not only that [the rejected attorney candidate] has followed a high moral, ethical and patriotic course in all of the activities of his life, but also that he combines these more common virtues with the uncommon virtue of courage to stand by his principles at any cost.

It is such men as these who have most greatly honored the profession of the law. The legal profession will lose much of its nobility and its glory if it is not constantly replenished with lawyers like these. To force the Bar to become a group of thoroughly orthodox, time-serving, government-fearing individuals is to humiliate and degrade it.” In Re Anastaplo, 18 Ill. 2d 182, 163 N.E.2d 429 (1959), cert. granted, 362 U.S. 968 (1960), affirmed over strong dissent, 366 U.S. 82 (1961), Justice Black, Chief Justice Douglas and Justice Brennan, dissenting.

" I do not believe that the practice of law is a "privilege" which empowers Government to deny lawyers their constitutional rights. The mere fact that a lawyer has important responsibilities in society does not require or even permit the State to deprive him of those protections of freedom set out in the Bill of Rights for the precise purpose of insuring the independence of the individual against the Government and those acting for the Government”. Lathrop v Donohue, 367 US 820 (1961), Justice Black, dissenting.

"The legal profession must take great care not to emulate the many occupational groups that have managed to convert licensure from a sharp weapon of public defense into blunt instrument of self-enrichment". Walter Gellhorn, "The Abuse of Occupational Licensing", University of Chicago Law Review, Volume 44 Issue 1, September of 1976.

“Because the law requires that judges no matter how corrupt, who do not act in the clear absence of jurisdiction while performing a judicial act, are immune from suit, former Judge Ciavarella will escape liability for the vast majority of his conduct in this action. This is, to be sure, against the popular will, but it is the very oath which he is alleged to have so indecently, cavalierly, baselessly and willfully violated for personal gain that requires this Court to find him immune from suit”, District Judge A. Richard Caputo in H.T., et al, v. Ciavarella, Jr, et al, Case No. 3:09-cv-00286-ARC in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, Document 336, page 18, November 20, 2009. This is about judges who were sentencing kids to juvenile detention for kickbacks.


Wednesday, October 14, 2026

Familial contracts of the free press - THE TWO BROTHER RABBITS OF DELAWARE COUNTY A Very Serious Investigation into Public Service, Family Business, and the Remarkable Longevity of Municipal Carrots: An investigative fairy tale supported by sworn testimony, federal court records, and the rabbits' own newspaper.


I. The Extraordinary Career of Brother Wayne

Once upon a time, in the prosperous carrot fields of Delaware County, New York, there lived two brothers: Wayne Leonard Shepard and Randy Shepard.

Brother Wayne was a public servant.  Well - he is trying to become one again, now heading the Town of Hamden, NY - voters beware.

Brother Randy was and is a newspaper publisher.

Both brothers enjoyed remarkably enduring relationships with Delaware County government.

According to a January 22, 2013 biographical article, Wayne Shepard spent more than two decades working for the Delaware County Department of Public Health before becoming Director of the Delaware County Office for the Aging in 2011.

That places the beginning of his County employment before 1991.

Wayne retired in August 2019.

His retirement, however, proved temporary.

In April 2022, Delaware County personnel official Linda Pinner approached Wayne and asked him to return.  Wayne accepted.  He was subsequently reappointed Director of the Office for the Aging in June 2022.

According to The Reporter's June 28, 2022 publication, the position carried an annual salary of $76,539.

Wayne retired again on June 18, 2025.

Thus concluded more than three decades of County employment, interrupted by a brief retirement and followed by a second retirement.

A truly impressive record of public service.

But the rabbits had another story.

This story



II. Brother Randy and the Public Carrot Supply

Brother Randy and his wife Kim owned Decker Advertising Inc., publisher of The Reporter.

According to Randy Shepard's sworn declaration in Decker Advertising Inc. v. Delaware County, No. 3:23-cv-01531, Document 246-3, paragraph 2, Randy had served as publisher of The Reporter since January 2010.

For decades, The Reporter had been designated an official Delaware County newspaper, receiving County payments for publishing legal notices.

Randy's sworn declaration identifies $14,544.74 in legal-notice revenue during 2020 and 2021 combined.

But the family business had another source of County revenue.

For approximately twenty years, Decker Advertising also handled the layout, printing, and distribution of The Dispatch, a publication issued by the Delaware County Office for the Aging six times annually.

The reported value of this arrangement was approximately $30,000 per year.

And who directed the Office for the Aging?

Brother Wayne.

The same Wayne who had worked for the County for decades, retired, and been recruited back into public service.

One brother directed the government office. The other brother's company supplied its printing services.

The arrangement survived the first retirement.

It survived the second appointment.

It continued into 2025.

The durability of public-private cooperation in Delaware County deserves scholarly attention.

III. The Two Overlaps

The documentary chronology establishes two periods during which Wayne Shepard's County employment coincided with the County's business relationship with Decker Advertising.

First overlap: Before 1991 through August 2019.

Wayne Shepard worked for Delaware County throughout this period. Decker Advertising's approximately twenty-year Dispatch arrangement began during his first period of County employment.

Randy Shepard's documented tenure as publisher of The Reporter began in January 2010.  From then until Wayne's first retirement in August 2019, Wayne's County employment coincided with both The Reporter legal-notice relationship and The Dispatch printing arrangement.

Second overlap: April 2022 through June 18, 2025.

The County recruited Wayne back after his first retirement.

Although The Reporter's official-newspaper designation had been revoked on March 23, 2022, the separate Dispatch printing arrangement continued.

According to Randy Shepard's declaration, Decker Advertising first faced competitive bidding for The Dispatch work in late 2024, after approximately two decades of providing those services.

The two periods therefore raise questions about procurement, conflict disclosure, recusal, competitive bidding, and the role of County legal counsel.

The investigation has identified two County revenue relationships. It has not yet inventoried other possible County purchases from Decker Advertising.

There may be additional carrots.

IV. The County Recruits Its Own Conflict

Wayne Shepard's sworn testimony provides an unusually interesting account of his return to County employment.

At his May 14, 2025 deposition, page 15, he testified:

Q. And what led you to return?

A. I was approached to return. Asked to come back.

Q. By who?

A. Personnel.

Q. Can you give me a name?

A. It was Linda Pinner.

The County affirmatively recruited Wayne Shepard back into employment while his brother's business continued providing printing services to the Office for the Aging.

This was an institutional decision.

The relevant questions are straightforward.

Who reviewed the potential conflict before Wayne was recruited?

Who examined the existing Dispatch arrangement?

Was a written disclosure prepared?

Was an ethics opinion requested?

Were procurement and payment decisions insulated from the family relationship?

What advice did County Attorney Amy Merklen provide?

And what role, if any, did outside counsel Frank W. Miller play in reviewing the arrangement?

These are ordinary questions of municipal accountability.

The rabbits should have no difficulty answering them.

V. The Conflict Finally Appears in Sworn Testimony

At his May 14, 2025 deposition, page 75, Wayne Shepard acknowledged the familial relationship as a conflict affecting his participation in the Dispatch procurement process.

Q. Was this conflict of interest that you mentioned, was the conflict that you are the brother of Randy Shepard?

A. Yes.

Q. And because of that, you are not the one making decisions on this RFP; is that correct?

A. Correct.

This testimony establishes that the family relationship was recognized as a conflict in the later procurement process.

It also establishes an important investigative question concerning the preceding years.

How had the same relationship been handled during the approximately twenty years of Dispatch work?

Were disclosures and recusals documented?

Did the County Attorney examine the matter before the 2024 bidding process?

And how much did the County pay Decker Advertising over the full duration of the arrangement?

The public has an interest in the answers.

Especially the public that paid the bills.

VI. The Tragedy of the Disappearing Newspaper Carrots

On March 23, 2022, Delaware County revoked The Reporter's designation as an official County newspaper.

The County's stated justification concerned increased advertising costs and administrative workload.

The publishers considered the decision retaliatory.

In June 2023, The New York Times published Emily Flitter's article, How Local Officials Seek Revenge on Their Hometown Newspapers, featuring the controversy involving The Reporter.

The story concerned freedom of the press, public advertising expenditures, and retaliation against a local newspaper.

The article did not explore the publisher's familial relationship with a longtime Delaware County department head or the separate Dispatch printing arrangement.

Thus, a national audience learned the sorry story about the newspaper's loss of government advertising revenue without receiving the full picture of the family's longstanding carrot speedway with County government, from one brother rabbit to another.

The story was sufficiently significant to attract national attention - and legal GIANTS stepped in to defend FREEDOM OF SPEECH and the FIRST AMENDMENT - possibly, without having a clue that they were, very simply, DUPED by both brothers.

The contract brother-to-brother were fighting over did not have a right to exist in the first place, so - I am VERY VERY VERY SORRY TO SAY THAT AND AM SAYING THIS THROUGH SOBBING - Amy Merklen was RIGHTRIGHTRIGHTRIGHT in revoking designation of THA REPORTER - only for a different reason than she stated.

Because had she stated the true reason - the Rabbit Conflict - then too many questions would have arisen.

So it was easier for Merklen and litigation counsel Miller to simply plunge (poor) County taxpayers into years of litigation and, possibly, hundreds thousands of dollars of expense much needed elsewhere - only not to expose the "business as usual" over the carrot lane in Delaware County, brother to brother.

The family-business chronology deserves attention of its own.

VII. The First Amendment Comes to the Carrot Patch

On December 4, 2023, Decker Advertising commenced federal litigation against Delaware County and numerous County officials.

The complaint asserted First Amendment retaliation and restrictions on the newspaper's access to government information.

The plaintiff was represented by attorneys associated with Greenberg Traurig and Cornell Law School's First Amendment Clinic.

Three institutions had now entered the story:

The New York Times.

Greenberg Traurig.

Cornell Law School's First Amendment Clinic.

Each institution became involved in a controversy presented principally as a dispute over press freedom.

Meanwhile, the County's longstanding business relationship with the publisher's family remained a separate subject deserving scrutiny.

The question is whether any of these institutions investigated that relationship, what they learned, and how they evaluated its relevance.

The federal litigation concerned constitutional rights.

The family-business inquiry concerns municipal ethics and expenditure of public funds.

Both subjects deserve examination.

VIII. Twice the Service, Twice the Legacy - X-times the Carrots

On June 19, 2025, following Wayne Shepard's second retirement, The Reporter published a tribute entitled:

“Twice the Service, Twice the Legacy.”

A touching celebration of a long career in County government.

And who published the tribute?

THA Reporter.

Owned by Decker Advertising Inc.

Owned by Randy Shepard and his wife Kim.

Randy being Wayne's brother.

Wayne being the former Director of the County office that had purchased printing services from Decker Advertising for approximately twenty years.

One must admire the symmetry.

Brother Wayne served the County.

Brother Randy published the tribute.

And the taxpayers financed the government operations within which the family-business relationship had flourished.


IX. The Next Carrot Pasture

After his second retirement, Wayne Shepard appeared as a candidate for Town Supervisor of Hamden in the November 3, 2026 election.

The prospective transition from County administration to Town government opens another chapter in this very serious fairy tale.

Town government has its own budget.

Its own purchasing decisions.

Its own public notices.

Its own printing requirements.

And its own conflict-of-interest obligations.

The record of Wayne Shepard's candidacy does not establish any future contractual arrangement involving Decker Advertising. It does, however, make the history of the brothers' County business relationships a legitimate subject of public examination.

A new pasture.

A familiar rabbit.

An opportunity for public scrutiny.

X. The Taxpayer's Final Question

The central issue is not the existence of two brothers, one employed by government and the other engaged in business.

The central issue is that they used County taxpayers as their private pocketbook while running all along the ardent stories of independent journalism and, on both sides, service to the public.

Right.

The documentary record establishes a longstanding printing arrangement, an acknowledged familial conflict in the later procurement process, and a County decision to recruit Wayne Shepard back into employment while the arrangement continued.

The public is entitled to know the contractual history, the total payments, the procurement procedures, the disclosures, and the advice provided by taxpayer-funded legal counsel.

The author of this investigation is herself a Delaware County taxpayer.

The question is therefore personal as well as public:

HOW MANY CARROTS DID THE RABBITS RECEIVE, WHO AUTHORIZED THEM, AND WHO WAS SUPPOSED TO GUARD THE CARROT PATCH?

AND - how did they escape all those NYS audits?

AND THE ABSOLUTELY POSITIVE KICKER QUESTION IS:  


DO YOU THE PUBLIC WANT THE W BROTHER RABBIT TO NOW BE ELECTED TO HEAD THE TOWN OF HAMDEN AND EXPAND THE PASTURE TO THE R BROTHER RABBIT?


They will make you grow a lot of carrots for their thorough enjoyment - as they did with Delaware County taxpayers FOR DECADES.


🐰🥕🐰

THE END — OF CHAPTER ONE.

THE RABID TAIL CONTINUES.


Conley v Delco Jail: a WRONGFUL DEATH of a 22-year-old girl lawsuit for MEDICAL NEGLECT. A PREVENTABLE DEATH

This is a quick summary for you made by AI of the first lawsuit on my 33-lawsuit list of open lawsuits against Delaware County (NY) and its Board of Supervisors.   I am sick, Miller has hounded me to the point of high blood pressure, I cannot do any work.  So, I am laying down in bed and talking to AI.  And DOES she deliver!

As to this one - I can be a witness for the plaintiff.  I have personal knowledge of medical neglect of multiple people in Delaware County jail, when I was an attorney visiting them.  This is NOT an isolated episode.  I do not have to disclose names of clients or private details.  I may also testify about what I saw.


Case File 01.  Conley v. Delaware County et al.

No. 9:25-cv-01558-AMN-MJK — Northern District of New York

Based on the 43-page complaint (Dkt. 1) and PACER docket report through October 14, 2026 (Dkt. 43).

1. Nature of the action

This is a federal civil-rights, medical malpractice, and wrongful-death action arising from the death of Aliza M. Oliver, age 22, in the Delaware County Correctional Facility on November 5, 2024.

Her father, Garret C. Conley, brought the action as administrator of her estate on November 4, 2025.

The complaint alleges that Oliver died from severe dehydration following several days of vomiting and diarrhea associated with opioid withdrawal.  It alleges that correctional and medical personnel repeatedly ignored her requests for hospitalization, failed to provide appropriate medical treatment, and allowed her condition to deteriorate until she died.

The complaint seeks compensatory damages, punitive damages, attorney fees, interest, and a jury trial.  No specific dollar amount is demanded.

The case remains open. The available docket shows that the pleadings have been answered, Sheriff Craig S. DuMond has been dismissed by stipulation, discovery is underway, and the case has been referred to mandatory mediation.

2. Parties and legal representation

Party

Role

Garret C. Conley

Plaintiff, administrator of Oliver's estate

Delaware County

Municipal defendant

Craig S. DuMond

Sheriff; dismissed March 17, 2026

Gregg Kujawski, N.P.

Contracted medical provider

Ira Fyfe, R.N.

Head nurse

Rosemary Balcom, L.P.N.

Jail nurse

Bethany Brinkerhoff, R.N.

Jail nurse

Mario Blincoe

Corrections sergeant

Joanne Yager

Corrections corporal

Elizabeth Cherry

Correction officer

Makayla Hunter

Correction officer

Katie Baug

Correction officer

Phelicia Quigley

Correction officer

Does 1–10

Unidentified defendants

Plaintiff's attorneys: James C. Knox and Alishah E. Bhimani, Hacker Murphy LLP.

County's attorneys: Brian S. Sokoloff, Sokoloff Stern LLP, joined by Frank W. Miller, Hancock Estabrook LLP, on October 5, 2026.

Other defendants have separate representation, including attorneys from Burke, Scolamiero Law Firm; O'Connor, O'Connor, Bresee & First; and Cook, Kurtz & Murphy.

3. Events preceding Oliver's incarceration

According to Complaint ¶¶ 1–8 and 42–48:

Oliver had entered a guilty plea to a drug-possession felony to participate in Schoharie County Drug Court.  After relapsing, she missed a court appearance and a warrant was issued.

She contacted her father, who brought her to the Schoharie County Sheriff's Office to surrender.

The complaint places her initial custody around October 31–November 1, 2024.

Schoharie County Jail personnel screened her and identified opioid dependence and the risk of withdrawal.  The medical records reportedly emphasized the need to prevent dehydration.

Because Schoharie County Jail did not have a women's housing unit, Oliver was transferred to Delaware County Correctional Facility on November 1, 2024.

The transfer paperwork reportedly included warnings concerning her withdrawal symptoms and the importance of hydration.

4. November 1, 2024 — Arrival at Delaware County Jail

The complaint alleges that Oliver was placed in Housing Unit D, Cell 7, a medical housing unit requiring checks every 15 minutes.

At approximately 11 p.m., nurse Bethany Brinkerhoff evaluated her and documented opioid-use disorder.

Oliver requested participation in medication-assisted treatment.

The complaint alleges that detoxification protocols were not initiated immediately, despite the information accompanying her transfer.

Nurse practitioner Gregg Kujawski allegedly directed that she receive medical evaluation every 48 hours. According to the complaint, Kujawski never personally examined Oliver during her confinement.

5. November 2, 2024 — Symptoms worsen

By November 2, Oliver was reportedly experiencing persistent vomiting, diarrhea, weakness, and dehydration.

She submitted a written request for assistance with withdrawal from heroin, fentanyl, and benzodiazepines.

Other inmates observed that she appeared seriously ill. One helped her telephone her parents to obtain drinks through commissary purchases.

The complaint alleges that she repeatedly requested hospital treatment.

At approximately 10 p.m., nurse Rosemary Balcom evaluated her and contacted Kujawski. Withdrawal-treatment protocols were then ordered, approximately 24 hours after her arrival.

Oliver's cell had become contaminated with vomit and diarrhea. According to the complaint, correction officers initially refused to clean it, and neighboring inmates eventually assisted.

6. November 3, 2024 — Persistent vomiting and medical deterioration

The complaint describes repeated reports of vomiting, diarrhea, weakness, and inability to retain fluids.

At approximately 8 a.m., Balcom recorded Oliver's weakness and difficulty walking.

Kujawski reportedly ordered Gatorade.

By the afternoon and evening, Oliver's vomit was described as dark brown or resembling coffee grounds.

At approximately 6:15 p.m., Balcom contacted Kujawski concerning projectile vomiting.

Kujawski allegedly ordered that Oliver receive nothing by mouth for three hours, followed by attempts to administer Gatorade if vomiting stopped. The complaint alleges that these instructions were repeated despite continuing vomiting.

No emergency hospital transfer was ordered.

The complaint also describes neighboring inmates attempting to provide Oliver with fluids and requesting medical assistance on her behalf.

7. November 4, 2024 — Collapse and requests for hospitalization

This is one of the most significant portions of the complaint.

During the morning medication round, Head Nurse Ira Fyfe allegedly observed Oliver struggling to stand.

Oliver said she felt as though she would pass out and collapsed.

According to the complaint, Fyfe documented that she was pretending to be unresponsive and splashed water on her face.

Corporal Joanne Yager allegedly witnessed the incident.

The complaint states that Oliver was returned to her cell and did not receive another medical evaluation for approximately 14 hours.

During the day, she reportedly became so weak that she crawled on the floor. Her vomit had become black and reportedly smelled like feces.

At approximately 8 p.m., Brinkerhoff recorded Oliver's request for hospitalization and intravenous fluids.

The complaint quotes Oliver as warning:

“if I die its [sic] on you”

Complaint ¶ 133, p. 19.

Complaint.pdf

She was returned to her cell without hospitalization.

8. November 5, 2024 — Oliver's death

The complaint provides a detailed chronology of the final hours.

Time

Alleged event

7:14 a.m.

Oliver recorded as refusing breakfast

7:29–8:13 a.m.

Officers record her condition as satisfactory

Approximately 8 a.m.

Oliver repeatedly falls during attempted medical assessment

11:20 a.m.

Yager records another welfare check

11:25 a.m.

Yager reportedly kicks the cell door seeking a response

11:59 a.m.–12:14 p.m.

Blincoe records further checks describing Oliver as “ok”

1:15 p.m.

Oliver reportedly unresponsive

Approximately 1:25 p.m.

Balcom and Baug enter her cell

Approximately 1:27 p.m.

Code Blue called

1:33 p.m.

Emergency medical services called

1:45 p.m.

EMS arrives

2:07 p.m.

Oliver pronounced dead

According to the complaint, the autopsy identified complications of hypernatremic dehydration following days of vomiting and diarrhea as the cause of death.

The complaint also alleges that the New York Attorney General's investigation obtained statements from at least ten neighboring inmates who described Oliver's deteriorating condition and repeated requests for assistance.

Complaint.pdf

9. The ten causes of action

The complaint asserts ten causes of action:

No.

Cause of action

Defendants

1

§ 1983 — Deliberate indifference to serious medical needs

Medical and correctional personnel

2

§ 1983 — Municipal and supervisory liability under Monell

Delaware County, DuMond, Fyfe

3

§ 1983 — Failure to intervene

All individual defendants

4

Wrongful death — Medical malpractice

Kujawski, Fyfe, Balcom, Brinkerhoff

5

Negligence

All defendants

6

Gross negligence

All defendants

7

Wrongful death

Nonmedical defendants

8

Respondeat superior

County and specified supervisors

9

Conscious pain and suffering — EPTL § 11-3.2(b)

All defendants

10

Intentional infliction of emotional distress

All defendants

The most important municipal liability allegations appear in Complaint ¶¶ 209–237.

The plaintiff alleges that the County maintained policies or customs involving inadequate opioid-withdrawal treatment, deficient emergency-response procedures, failures to train staff, and inadequate documentation of inmate medical complaints.

The complaint identifies earlier incidents involving Jerry O'Dell, Chad Ostrander, William Polhamus, and Taylor Angell to support its allegations of a recurring pattern and prior notice to the County.

These are pleaded allegations; the uploaded docket does not contain findings adjudicating their truth.

10. Procedural history — November 2025 through October 2026

The following chronology is drawn from the uploaded PACER docket, which ends with Docket No. 43.

Date

Docket

Event

Nov. 4, 2025

1

Complaint and jury demand filed

Nov. 5, 2025

2–3

Summonses issued; initial scheduling order

Dec. 11–23, 2025

4–14

Affidavits of service filed for defendants

Jan. 5, 2026

15

Brian S. Sokoloff appears for Delaware County and DuMond

Jan. 23, 2026

—

Magistrate Judge Katz notes expiration of answer deadlines and directs a status report

Jan. 28, 2026

18–19

Plaintiff files status report; County and DuMond request an extension

Jan. 30, 2026

20

Court grants extension to February 13 and adjourns Rule 16 conference

Feb. 13, 2026

22

Several defendants request additional time

Feb. 17, 2026

23

Court extends answer deadline to February 20

Feb. 20, 2026

24–27

Answers filed; DuMond files motion to dismiss; Yager files answer and crossclaims

Feb. 26, 2026

28

Plaintiff requests Rule 16 scheduling

Mar. 2, 2026

29

Yager files amended answer

Mar. 10, 2026

30

Stipulation submitted dismissing DuMond

Mar. 17, 2026

31

Court enters stipulated dismissal of DuMond only

Apr. 17, 2026

32

Civil Case Management Plan filed

Apr. 24, 2026

33–34

Initial conference, scheduling order, and mandatory mediation referral

June 17, 2026

35

Parties select mediator Daniel Cavarello

June 18, 2026

36

Court approves mediator selection

July–Aug. 2026

37–42

Counsel substitutions and related orders

Oct. 5, 2026

43

Frank W. Miller appears for Delaware County

11. The answer deadlines and extensions

An unusual early procedural feature is the County's failure to respond within the original deadline.

On January 23, 2026, Magistrate Judge Katz observed that the answer deadlines for all defendants had expired and directed plaintiff's counsel to submit a status report.

On January 28, Brian S. Sokoloff requested additional time for Delaware County and DuMond to answer or otherwise respond.

On January 30, the court granted an extension through February 13, 2026.

Further extensions followed, and on February 17 the court extended the deadline for multiple defendants to February 20.

The County ultimately filed its answer on February 20, 2026, Docket No. 24.

The docket records extensions granted by the court. It does not show an entered default judgment against the County.

12. DuMond's motion to dismiss and stipulated dismissal

This is a particularly important procedural episode.

On February 20, 2026, Sheriff Craig S. DuMond filed Docket No. 26, a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6).

The motion was supported by a memorandum of law.

The docket originally set March 13, 2026 as the response deadline and March 20 as the reply deadline.

However, before that motion was adjudicated:

  • March 10, 2026 — Dkt. 30: Plaintiff submitted a stipulation dismissing DuMond only.
  • March 17, 2026 — Dkt. 31: Judge Nardacci signed the stipulation and order dismissing DuMond.

The docket identifies the dismissal as applying solely to DuMond. The other defendants, including Delaware County, remained in the litigation.

The docket does not disclose the terms of any negotiations leading to DuMond's dismissal, or whether any consideration was exchanged. Nor does it contain a judicial determination of the allegations against him.

13. Crossclaims among defendants

On February 20, 2026, Corporal Joanne Yager filed an answer asserting crossclaims against Rosemary Balcom, Bethany Brinkerhoff, Ira Fyfe, and Gregg Kujawski.

On March 2, Yager filed an amended answer.

At the April 24 Rule 16 conference, her counsel advised the court that the crossclaims were no longer being pursued.

The docket's party listing also records termination of the crossclaim parties as of March 2.

The precise allegations and grounds for withdrawal require examination of Yager's original and amended answers, Docket Nos. 27 and 29.

14. Discovery and mandatory mediation

On April 24, 2026, Magistrate Judge Katz held a Rule 16 initial conference.

The court recorded that the parties had exchanged mandatory disclosures, with certain defendants still completing theirs.

The court also referred the case to mandatory mediation.

The scheduling order established the following deadlines:

Event

Deadline

Plaintiff's expert disclosures

January 29, 2027

Defendants' expert disclosures

March 15, 2027

Rebuttal expert disclosures

March 31, 2027

Discovery cutoff

April 30, 2027

Non-dispositive motions

May 28, 2027

Dispositive motions

July 30, 2027

Mandatory mediation completion

February 26, 2027

The court estimated a trial lasting five to eight days, with Albany identified as the preferred trial location.

On June 17, the parties selected Daniel Cavarello as mediator. The court approved that selection on June 18.

No mediation outcome appears in the supplied docket.

15. Defense counsel and representation expenses

The docket identifies multiple law firms representing the County and individual defendants.

Law firm

Attorneys identified

Representation

Sokoloff Stern LLP

Brian S. Sokoloff

Delaware County; formerly DuMond

Hancock Estabrook LLP

Frank W. Miller

Delaware County, appearance October 5, 2026

Burke, Scolamiero Law Firm

Judith B. Aumand; Kevin P. Burke

Several medical defendants

O'Connor, O'Connor, Bresee & First

Aaron M. DePaolo; Emily Phillips

Ira Fyfe

Cook, Kurtz & Murphy, P.C.

Michael T. Cook

Joanne Yager

Hacker Murphy LLP

James C. Knox; Alishah E. Bhimani

Plaintiff

The PACER docket establishes Frank W. Miller's appearance as additional counsel for Delaware County on October 5, 2026, Docket No. 43.

It does not identify the source of payment for each defendant's representation, the insurance arrangements, or the amounts billed.

Those are important subjects for our County legal-expenditure investigation.

16. The significance of the earlier incidents

The Monell claim is broader than Oliver's individual death.

The complaint describes alleged misconduct involving four other inmates between 2022 and 2023 and attributes systemic responsibility to County policymakers.

The pleaded theory is that the County had notice of inadequate medical treatment, especially for inmates experiencing opioid withdrawal, and failed to correct its policies and practices.

The complaint specifically alleges:

  • Inadequate supervision of medical providers.
  • Failure to recognize and treat dehydration and withdrawal emergencies.
  • Failure to provide appropriate hospital transfers.
  • Deficient training of correctional personnel.
  • Improper medical documentation and alleged concealment of complaints.
  • Failure to investigate or correct previously reported problems.

The pleading thus seeks to establish municipal liability through a pattern of conduct, inadequate training and supervision, and deliberate indifference.


WAIT: WHAT????!!!!! The 33 OPEN - ONGOING federal lawsuits against Delaware County (NY) and its Board of Supervisors

Here we go.

I was checking out Pacer.gov for a completely different reason.  I needed a docket report of a certain single case.  In that case Delaware County (NY) is a party.  Usually I look by name of some individual - this time I looked by the name of Delaware County.


And MY GOD.

There are 33 OPEN LAWSUITS against Delaware County or its Board of Supervisors - and some only recently closed.

Voters MUST know what is going on.

And, of course, the RRRRRevolutionary local RRRReporter (owned by a longtime County officer) will not give you shit for fear of losing its precious carrots.

As I work myself through these cases - because they are EVIDENCE I MUST work through to verify what is it that drove County litigation counsel Frank Miller so much to have me QUASHED and DEMONIZED and GAGGED - so that I would not know and be a witness (and I can testify as a witness in a LOT of different things) - WHY?


So here we go:


Open Federal Lawsuits Involving Delaware County, New York

PACER Case Locator — October 14, 2026. Based on the supplied screenshots. Cases with a blank “Closed” column are included.

A. Cases Naming Delaware County

No.

Case name

Case number

1

Conley v. Delaware County et al.

9:25-cv-01558

2

LeTennier et al. v. Delaware County et al.

3:26-cv-00765

B. Cases Naming the Delaware County Board of Supervisors

No.

Case name

Case number

3

Doe v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01397

4

C.R. v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

6:26-cv-01409

5

S.H. v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01412

6

Saez v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01450

7

Van Arsdale v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01462

8

Barley v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01493

9

Cowan-Johnson v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

6:26-cv-01560

10

Valentine v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01563

11

Boza II v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01609

12

Bartolomeo v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01656

13

Lewis v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01655

14

Bruin v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01654

15

Haham v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01735

16

Dellinger v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01767

17

V.P. v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01777

18

J.K. v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01780

19

Bellows v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01784

20

Candito v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01817

21

Zobell v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01840

22

Frank v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01839

23

Caspouras v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01841

24

Sullivan v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01849

25

Nestor v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01856

26

Sullivan v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01842

27

M.P. v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01866

28

Kelly v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01867

29

Baldwin v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-02076

30

Tell v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-02087

31

Verbin v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-02095

32

Savinovich v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

1:26-cv-08085

THE CHRONICLES OF SIR McBRIDUS 📜💀😂 Part IV: 👻💀🐌 THE SLIME REMEMBERS 🟢🐌😱🤣 - A psychiatric emergency at 🏰🦇👹 Chenangus Slimery Castle 🐌🤢⚖️💥

 

Read Part I here, Part II here and Part III here.


The morning began disastrously.

Sir Marcus Josephus McBridus Snailius, Custos Slimi, Knight of the Perpetually Slippery Robe, was discovered beneath his judicial desk, attempting to bury a newspaper in seventeen gallons of freshly secreted slime.

“OUTRAGE!” he shrieked. “SCANDAL! JOURNALISM!”

His valet, a modest earthworm named Wrigglesworth, cautiously approached.

“Your Judicial Viscosity, perhaps another application of sanctions?”

“BWOMP-YA!”

A magnificent fountain of slime struck the ceiling.

“Summon Dr. Gaston Slug! IMMEDIATELY!”

I. A Medical Emergency

Dr. Gaston Slug, distinguished Director of the Institute of Molluscan Behavioral Therapy, arrived seventeen hours later, having traveled at maximum clinical speed.

He found his celebrated patient clinging upside down to a portrait of Lady Justice.

“Marcus! My finest therapeutic achievement! What has happened?”

“THEY FOUND OUT!”

“Found out what?”

“THAT I WAS A DISTRICT ATTORNEY!”

Dr. Slug blinked.

“Marcus, your previous employment was never classified.”

“BUT THEY ARE READING ABOUT IT!  THAT I WAS A DISTRICT ATTORNEY IN A CASE RELATED TO NERONI V MOLE AND NERONI V DELAWARE COUNTY!!!! WHERE I JUST SANCTIONED THEM SUA SPONTE EX PARTE FOR STATING..... STATING... STATING...  WHAT THEY NOW KNOW WAS TRUE - AND MORE!!!!!!  AND THEY KNOW I HAD TO DISCLOSE MY DA'S INVOLVEMENT! AND I DID NOT!!!”

“Ah,” murmured Dr. Slug. “A much more serious condition.”

He produced his diagnostic manual, The International Classification of Molluscan Disorders, and opened it to Chapter 13: Pathological Public Accountability.

“Tell me everything.”

“LAUGHMAN!”

“Bless you.”

“NERONI V. MOLÉ!”

“Gesundheit.”

“NERONI V. DELAWARE COUNTY!”

Dr. Slug dropped his lettuce.

“Good heavens, Marcus. Three consecutive exposures to the public record! How have you survived?”

“BY SANCTIONING PEOPLE!”

“Naturally. But apparently your dosage has become insufficient.”

II. The Terrible Discovery

Sir McBridus crawled down the portrait, leaving a translucent trail across Lady Justice's blindfold.

“They have been looking into the Laughman affair, Gaston!”

“Dreadful.”

“They have been examining what happened when I was District Attorney!”

“Barbaric.”

“They have been connecting it to the litigation!”

“Unscientific.”

“AND THEY ARE PUBLISHING IT!”

Dr. Slug gasped.

“Publishing? Without your permission?”

“WITHOUT EVEN ASKING ME WHETHER I CONSIDER IT FRIVOLOUS!”

The psychiatrist closed his eyes.

“This is worse than I feared.”

He began dictating his clinical observations.

Patient presents with acute historical exposure, accompanied by involuntary judicial secretions, catastrophic loss of narrative control, and recurrent attacks of BWOMP-YA.

“Marcus, when you became a judge, did you believe your prosecutorial history would cease to exist?”

“OF COURSE!”

“Why?”

“BECAUSE I AM A JUDGE!”

Dr. Slug smiled tenderly.

“Excellent. Your original treatment remains effective. Your cognitive defenses are intact.”

“THEN WHY AM I SUFFERING?”

“Because, Marcus, although we successfully removed your capacity to recognize inconvenient facts, we neglected to remove the facts themselves.”

There was a terrible silence.

Then:

“BWOOOOOMP-YAAAA!”

Three windows shattered. The court reporter drowned in metaphorical mucus.

III. The Forbidden Word

Dr. Slug decided to administer a psychological association test.

“Marcus, I shall say a word. You tell me the first thing that comes to mind.”

“Proceed.”

“Evidence.”

“FRIVOLOUS!”

“Newspaper.”

“SANCTIONS!”

“History.”

“DISMISSED!”

“Litigant.”

“VEXATIOUS!”

“Appeal.”

“MORE SANCTIONS!”

“Recusal.”

Sir McBridus turned pale green.

His eyestalks crossed.

His judicial foot contracted.

A thin stream of slime escaped beneath his robe.

“DOCTOR! YOU KNOW THAT WORD IS FORBIDDEN!”

Dr. Slug immediately administered two emergency lettuce leaves.

“Forgive me, Marcus. I momentarily forgot your constitutional intolerance to self-examination.”

IV. The Slime Defense

After forty minutes of intensive molluscan psychotherapy, Dr. Slug proposed a treatment.

“We shall construct a protective shell of judicial immunity.”

“ABSOLUTE?”

“Absolutely.”

“RETROACTIVE?”

“Psychologically, certainly.”

“WILL IT COVER MY DISTRICT ATTORNEY YEARS?”

Dr. Slug hesitated.

“Marcus, judicial immunity is a legal doctrine. It cannot change the chronology of your employment.”

“THEN CHANGE THE CHRONOLOGY!”

“How?”

“ISSUE AN ORDER!”

“Against time?”

“IF NECESSARY!”

The psychiatrist made another entry:

Patient exhibits advanced temporal jurisdictional grandiosity. Believes calendar subject to judicial discretion.

“Marcus, there are certain limitations to the power of an order.”

“NAME ONE!”

“Yesterday.”

Sir McBridus screamed.

V. The Fatal Complication

“Doctor,” whispered Sir McBridus, “suppose they continue investigating Laughman?”

Dr. Slug adjusted his spectacles.

“They might.”

“And the prosecutorial records?”

“They might examine those too.”

“And Neroni v. Molé?”

“Possibly.”

“And Neroni v. Delaware County?”

“Indeed.”

“And suppose they put everything together?”

The psychiatrist contemplated the question for a very long time.

“Marcus, I fear you are experiencing a condition never before documented in molluscan medicine.”

“WHAT CONDITION?”

“Continuity.”

“IS IT FATAL?”

“To certain narratives, yes.”

Sir McBridus collapsed into a puddle.

“BUT I HAVE ISSUED ORDERS!”

“Yes.”

“I HAVE IMPOSED SANCTIONS!”

“Yes.”

“I HAVE DECLARED PEOPLE FRIVOLOUS!”

“Repeatedly.”

“WHAT MORE COULD A SNAIL POSSIBLY DO?”

Dr. Slug sighed.

“You could answer the questions.”

Sir McBridus emitted a noise resembling a judicial opinion being sucked through a clogged drain.

VI. The Doctor's Final Report

That evening, Dr. Gaston Slug submitted his confidential psychiatric report to the Institute of Molluscan Behavioral Therapy.

Patient: Sir Marcus Josephus McBridus Snailius, Custos Slimi.

Diagnosis: Acute Public Record Exposure Syndrome, Stage IV, with recurrent sanctions reflex and severe chronological incompatibility.

Prognosis: Guarded. Patient remains capable of producing extraordinary quantities of slime. Unfortunately, the slime has demonstrated no capacity to dissolve public records, suppress independent journalism, or reverse the passage of time.

Recommended treatment: Complete isolation from newspapers, docket sheets, archival records, historical chronology, and persons capable of reading.

Contraindications: Facts. Questions. Dates. Documents. Journalists. Litigants. The First Amendment.

Emergency intervention: In the event of further exposure, patient should immediately retreat into his shell and repeat the therapeutic affirmation:

“I am the Court. I am the Court. I am the Court.”

Special warning: Under no circumstances should the patient be informed that the Court itself has a record.

EPILOGUE: THE UNFORTUNATE NEWSPAPER

At midnight, Wrigglesworth entered the consulting chamber.

“Your Judicial Viscosity, there is another article.”

Sir McBridus trembled.

“About whom?”

“You, sir.”

“WHAT DOES IT SAY?”

“That the public is entitled to know.”

Sir McBridus turned toward his psychiatrist.

“GASTON! WHAT IS THE MEDICAL TREATMENT FOR THE FIRST AMENDMENT?”

Dr. Slug slowly withdrew into his shell.

From deep within came his muffled professional opinion:

“Marcus, I am afraid it is incurable.”

And from Chenangus Slimery Castle rose the most magnificent judicial eruption ever recorded in the annals of molluscan psychiatry.

BWOOOOOOOOOMP-YAAAAAAAAAAAA!

The slime reached the chandelier.

The chandelier fell.

The newspaper remained perfectly legible.



TO BE CONTINUED...

Episode V: THE PEOPLE v. YESTERDAY — Sir McBridus Attempts to Sanction the Calendar.

The Chronicles of Sir McBridus is a work of political and judicial satire. Its molluscan characters, psychiatric diagnoses, dialogue, and supernatural judicial powers are fictional.