After I've heard from Referee Sirkin who "granted" prosecution's motion for a summary judgment on liability in my attorney disciplinary proceedings (which he did not have a right to do, but did anyway), I received a spectacular decision on my motion to vacate Judge Becker's sanction imposed upon me in Delaware County Family Court despite Judge Becker's undisclosed disqualification and after I sued him.
The decision is made by Judge Connerton of Binghamton against whom I complained for misconduct and bigotry, see here.
Judge Connerton earlier sent me a letter indicating that she was going to rely in her review of the motion on the transcript of the oral argument before a recused previous judge.
That was a due process violation, and I immediately (1) turned Judge Connerton into the New York State Commission for Judicial Conduct, and (2) made a motion to recuse.
It did not ring the bell with the judge.
I asked her for a new oral argument, since the previous oral argument, held before a recused judge, was void, yet she stubbornly relied upon that oral argument before the recused judge:
And, Judge Connerton said she can be "impartial", therefore she refused not recuse, refused to provide me a new oral argument, and refused my motion that was contained in a 4-inch folder, contained multiple documentary exhibits and raised multiple fundamental constitutional issues, in one short paragraph:
No review of issues, no legal analysis, no explanation why she rejects my reliance on multiple legal authorities, including precedents of the U.S. Supreme Court.
And, judging by the statement to me of a witness that Judge Connerton told attorneys and parties in my absence on October 2, 2014 that she gets a headache even thinking about reviewing my humungous motion, combined with the lack of any explanation as towhy the motion was denied other than "it had no basis in law or in fact", I have a funny feeling Judge Connerton did not subject herself to the headache of reading the motion at all.
Of course, I will not let it slide.
Of course, I will appeal.
Of course, I will turn Connerton into the New York State Judicial Conduct Commission yet again.
It is interesting that Judge Connerton indicated that I had an opportunity to be heard after reading the transcript where the now recused Judge Revoir insulted me, cut me off, did not allow me to put the legal argument on the record, and claimed that any "alternative" legal arguments in the Family Court are "lies".
And this is what Connerton used as a basis to state that I had an "opportunity to be heard".
A real unbiased judge, this one.
Hope the Judicial Conduct Commission finally gets its collective head out of the sand and starts disciplining judges who get headache from doing their work.
No comments:
Post a Comment