Andrew Ayers is the New York State Assistant Attorney General who was given months of adjournments by the state judges whom Andrew Ayers represented in federal court (and both him and judges were disqualified from cases where Ayers continued to stubbornly appear and the judges continued to stubbornly rule), when he simply neglected to do his job when he was preparing his private book for publishing.
Andrew Ayers is the one who claimed to the 2nd Circuit that I neglected two clients by not appearing at a deposition and by not answering a motion - two years after court documents were provided in the litigation that he was handling showing that at the time of deposition and motion I was not an attorney and could not possibly neglect clients as a lawyer at the claimed time.
Andrew Ayers is the one who obtained a dismissal of an appeal that challenged constitutionality of regulation of the legal profession (that Ayers acknowledges is in trouble and is crying for help) by filing an unsigned and unserved ex parte defective pleading claiming that the only reason my husband needs the page limit expanded is because his complaint (drafted by me) was "incoherent". That was on September 21, 2015.
Of course, 3 days later, on September 24, 2015 Andrew Ayers' clients filed a "Final Report and Recommendation" as members of the NYS Statewide Commission for Attorney Discipline freely adopting ideas that they just dismissed in the "incoherent" complaint as perfectly good and needed for reforming the system of attorney discipline.
And, Andrew Ayers and his colleague from the court below on the same case, NYS Attorney General Bruce Boivin, continue to file mutually inconsistent pleadings.
Boivin says that Mr. Neroni could raise all of his after-dismissal issues on appeal and asks to deny his Rule 60 motion to vacate because of that.
Ayers says that Mr. Neroni only needs to address the amended complaint and nothing else on appeal, and for this reason does not need an extension of page limit, without which Mr. Neroni would actually be unable to cover all issues on appeal, including what happened after dismissal.
I kept wondering, what is wrong with those two attorneys.
Are they habitually drunk when writing and e-filing what they write and e-file?
Are they habitually on drugs?
Do they not know their "duty of candor to the tribunal" - those same duties that they have to PROSECUTE in their positions of New York State Assistants Attorney General, not commit themselves?
As a taxpayer, I have a right to know how a public servant whose salary is paid by my tax dollars, is doing his job.
I've got my answers, at least somewhat, through Andrew Ayers' tweets.
When you see "pursuant to" in a brief, Mr. Ayers, please, look what it is pursuant to and do not fly into passion that somebody used a "lawyer-like" phrase. Because too often you don't pay attention.
But here is the absolute best of the best.
In his book published in September of 2014 (when Ayers was working on the book while arguing to the court, where judges were his own clients, instead of doing his work on a case), Ayers claimed the honor of working in NYC for Judge Sonya Sotomayor.
Now, his reminiscences changed obviously, and instead of the honor of working for a judge in NYC, he now remembers about NYC missing the "feelings of disgust and alarm, mixed so poignantly with 'Wow, I'm really impressed" - by a rat dragging a piece of pizza down the stairs.
I am really impressed, too.
By the intellectual potential of our public servants.
So, now I need to think when reading Ayers' pleadings whether he was reminiscing of a rat or dreaming of making his life vivid and entrancing by avoiding work - again.