Now that I am safely (for the court system) suspended and materials of my disciplinary proceedings became public in all senses and for all purposes, I am starting to publish them.
Before, when I published evidence of misconduct and fabrication of transcripts in my proceedings, I was charged with criminal contempt of court - for violating my own privacy (charges were dismissed sua sponte by the court, but not after putting stress on me for 4.5 months and driving me out of the State of New York to prevent further harassment).
Now that there is not a single reason not to consider the materials of my disciplinary proceedings public, but knowing that the court will not make it public even if the law says they are public (as the court already did before, on multiple occasions), I am staring to publish those materials (there are a lot of them) myself.
It is a lot of work, I have to scan a lot of documentary exhibits, misconduct of the judge upon whose sanctions my law license was ultimately suspended was legendary and spanned many years, many cases and was targeting many attorneys, not just myself.
Since Becker ultimately ran from the bench and was allowed to use "early retirement" to hide his misconduct and was not disciplined in any way, I think these materials must be published as a matter of public service, so that people know at least the small extent of his misconduct - in my case and in cases that I knew and complained about.
The public should also be able to see how New York courts squash criticism of judicial misconduct and misconduct of politically connected attorneys.
The motion I am publishing today was made in March of 2014 to the New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division 3rd Judicial Department.
The 3rd Department did not know what to do with it and transferred it, in an ex parte manner, as a hot potato, to the 4th Department.
The 4th Department did not know what to do with it either, and, probably, it was just too much to read for the lazy court, so the 4th Department did the following with this motion:
1) denied it without an explanation or reasoning in September of 2014 - I made a motion to vacate, renew and rehear, as allowed by law, and for a REASONED decision.
Enraged by that, the 4th Department then
2) denied the motion once again, once again without an explanation and reasoning (the motion was raising constitutional issues of public importance, but treaded too much, I guess, on protected turf that the court had a self-interest not to reach), but with an imposition of an anti-filing injunction (without notice or opportunity to be heard on that) and with a sealing order aimed against me, even though the sealing order was based on the statute that protects my privacy that I did not need,
then
3) the, one of the charges that I sought to dismiss and that the 4th Department denied to dismiss - twice, without an explanation or reasoning, but with an anti-filing injunction against me for asking for it - was withdrawn by the Committee and one other charge that I sought to dismiss, and the motion was denied twice without an explanation or reasoning, was ultimately granted.
No sense in all of that at all.
The charges that were sustained were clearly unsustainable, as my Affidavit/Memorandum of Law in support of this motion says.
There are over 100 documentary exhibits supporting the motion. They are referenced in the affidavit. It takes a lot of time to scan them, but I will do that.
At this time, I am publishing the Affidavit/Memorandum of Law only, so that it gives people an idea what exactly I was punished for by suspension of my law license for 2 years, and why the 4th Department and its attorney disciplinary Committee fought tooth and claw to deny me my right to an open public disciplinary proceeding.
Especially because my order of suspension mentions only that I was suspended because "a judge" sanctioned me "for frivolous conduct", but does not mention that the "frivolous conduct" was making motions to recuse that same judge for egregious misconduct - or that that judge, Carl F. Becker recused from one of my cases BEFORE he sanctioned me and AFTER he sanctioned me, and then quickly "retired" before his term was out under circumstances suggested that he ran from the bench before he was booted from there (the NYS Judicial Conduct Commission's annual report for 2015 mentioned that several judges went off the bench during investigation without making public that the reasons were disciplinary, and I there are reasons to believe that Becker was one of them).
The motion was scanned in 4 batches because of my scanner's limitations.
Here is the motion:
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Supporting documentary exhibits to this motion will be scanned and published at a later time, when I have time to do that (again, it is a lot of work), but I will do that.
My disciplinary case has startling similarities with the recent disciplinary case in Louisiana, also against a female attorney, Christine Mire, also because of motions to recuse a judge, see my blogs on the matter here and here.
I did not finish covering Christine Mire's case either, I will post some more analysis of some additional materials I was able to obtain in that case shortly.
Stay tuned.
No comments:
Post a Comment