As I said to the Appellate Court earlier (and they did not listen), the appointed referee cannot read, and that is a big problem

This is the court order of December 8, 2014 ordering the disciplinary referee in my case to:

(1) conduct hearings (hear testimony) within 60 days of the December 8, 2014 order, and
(2) to report findings of fact to the court, Appellate Division 4th Judicial Department.

To anybody who can read, especially to a referee who is supposedly a retired judge (and a licensed attorney still) what the order says and the RESTRICTED authority that it gives to the referee is abundantly clear - (1) to hear the testimony, and (2) after "final submissions by the parties, including proposed findings of fact, if any" are submitted to the referee by the parties "within 15 days following completion of the stenographic transcript of the minutes of the hearing:, "the Referee's report shall be submitted within 30 days" after parties submit their proposed findings of fact and final arguments, AFTER the hearings to be held on consecutive days within 60 days of December 8, 2014.

After December 8, 2014, the referee held NO hearings whatsoever.

Today was supposed to be a scheduling conference for such hearings.

I could not appear today due to the road conditions in Delaware County (out interaction about it with the referee is going to be published in a separate blog, not to confuse the issues).

Yet, today's appearance, once again was only announced to me as a "scheduling conference".

The only point of scheduling was - what the court ordered the referee to do on December 8, 2014 - conduct a hearing and report the findings of fact to the court.

Instead, the referee did the following:

(1) granted the prosecution's motion for a summary judgment on the issue of liability INSTEAD of holding a hearing that the court ordered him to hold, and

(2) attempted to schedule "proceedings in mitigation", while

     (a) denying me, without an explanation, a public hearing "on mitigation" in the area where I am practicing, in Delaware County, and

     (b) ordering me to announce to the prosecution in advance who my mitigation witnesses are (which would make it easy for the prosecution to intimidate my witnesses ahead of time).

Since I was not going to have any mitigation heard in front of THIS particular  referee, Steven Sirkin, who was obviously incompetent and biased, based on his disregard of the court order and usurping the court's authority to decide motions, I told Sirkin that if he does not recuse, and if he orders me to disclose my mitigation witnesses to the prosecution before the hearing, I would rather submit my affirmation for mitigation, so I will have no other hearings until the court makes its final determination.

Of course, I will be making motions.

To vacate the unlawful decision of Sirkin.

To recuse the court who:

(1) despite Sirkin's announcement in October of 2014 that he is going to rule on the motion instead of hearing the case, still kept Sirkin on as a referee;

(2) refused to give me reasoned decisions on my cross-motion and motion to vacate, renew and reargue the denial of my cross-motion with constitutional issues;

(3) imposed, without a notice or opportunity to be heard, an anti-filing injunction on me;

(4) refused to open proceedings to the public and the media at my request.

So, the fight goes on.