A second complaint has been filed against Judge Mary Work of Ulster County Surrogate's Court, for retaliation and harassment after the 1st complaint filed September 4, 2014

On December 30, 2014 I withdrew from two court cases in Ulster County where Judge Mary Work was and still is the presiding judge.

I did it on consent of my former client, by filing and serving notarized consents to change counsel in accordance with New York CPLR 321(b), as required by law.

No permission of the court is necessary when an attorney withdraws on consent of the client.  By operation of law I am no longer the attorney of record in those two cases from the moment my consents were filed with the court.  

Yet, today I received a phone call from Judge Work's clerk's office where Judge Work's employee, after acknowledging that I did file notarized consent to change attorney with Jduge Work's court, still claimed that Judge Work "did not relieve me" from the case, that there will be a conference about it,  that I need to accept a fax from the court about it or have the case read to me.

I indicated to Judge Work's employee that I am no longer attorney of record by operation of law, no matter what Judge Work says, pursuant to CPLR 321(b), and that I cannot appear in any further proceedings, as my client has relieved me.

Judge Work's employee continued to claim that Judge Work still issued some directives to me in a letter, which I, once again, refused to accept by fax or by having it read to me.

Judge Work must know the law, she is not a novice on the bench.  

She must know that a consent to change counsel filed with the court ends representation of an attorney, and the court has no power to bring a private attorney back in.  I was not assigned, I was retained, I was relieved, and that's the end of it.

My point is - why is Judge Work so desperate to have me, and not another attorney, or not my former client pro se, in this case, even after I left the case?

Combined with what Judge Work's said in the joint order of November 17, 2014 covering two proceedings which could not be merged or disclosed to one another's parties, I truly believe that Judge Work is retaliating against me and against my now former client for making the motions to recuse and especially for complaining against her to the Commission for Judicial Conduct.  

Since this appears to become a pattern in New York where New York judges engage in a course of retaliation if a motion to recuse is filed, no matter how well founded and supported the motion is, I felt it my obligation to file a 2nd complaint with the New York State Commission for Judicial Conduct about misconduct of Judge Work and requested to protect my now former client from Judge Work's retaliation.

By the way, this is not the first time when Judge Work manipulated with consents to change counsel specifically with me and this particular client.

In yet another court (the third court) Judge Work issued a decision ignoring my pleadings and claiming that I did not file a consent to change counsel to come into the case, while not only I filed and served such a consent, but I saw it in judge Work's Family Court's file, and the filing of that Consent to Change Counsel was the only reason why I was not only given access to the file, but was allowed into the back room in the Ulster County Family Court's office to make my own copies of the file.

It appears that Judge Work manipulates consents to change counsel, she ignores them when she does not want a certain attorney to be in a case or wants to ignore her pleadings, or, in my case, she wants to keep me in the case to keep retaliating against me and my former client, even though I left the case on my former client's consent.