THE EVOLUTION OF JUDICIAL TYRANNY IN THE UNITED STATES:

"If the judges interpret the laws themselves, and suffer none else to interpret, they may easily make, of the laws, [a shredded] shipman's hose!" - King James I of England, around 1616.

“No class of the community ought to be allowed freer scope in the expression or publication of opinions as to the capacity, impartiality or integrity of judges than members of the bar. They have the best opportunities of observing and forming a correct judgment. They are in constant attendance on the courts. Hundreds of those who are called on to vote never enter a court-house, or if they do, it is only at intervals as jurors, witnesses or parties. To say that an attorney can only act or speak on this subject under liability to be called to account and to be deprived of his profession and livelihood by the very judge or judges whom he may consider it his duty to attack and expose, is a position too monstrous to be entertained for a moment under our present system,” Justice Sharwood in Ex Parte Steinman and Hensel, 95 Pa 220, 238-39 (1880).

“This case illustrates to me the serious consequences to the Bar itself of not affording the full protections of the First Amendment to its applicants for admission. For this record shows that [the rejected attorney candidate] has many of the qualities that are needed in the American Bar. It shows not only that [the rejected attorney candidate] has followed a high moral, ethical and patriotic course in all of the activities of his life, but also that he combines these more common virtues with the uncommon virtue of courage to stand by his principles at any cost.

It is such men as these who have most greatly honored the profession of the law. The legal profession will lose much of its nobility and its glory if it is not constantly replenished with lawyers like these. To force the Bar to become a group of thoroughly orthodox, time-serving, government-fearing individuals is to humiliate and degrade it.” In Re Anastaplo, 18 Ill. 2d 182, 163 N.E.2d 429 (1959), cert. granted, 362 U.S. 968 (1960), affirmed over strong dissent, 366 U.S. 82 (1961), Justice Black, Chief Justice Douglas and Justice Brennan, dissenting.

" I do not believe that the practice of law is a "privilege" which empowers Government to deny lawyers their constitutional rights. The mere fact that a lawyer has important responsibilities in society does not require or even permit the State to deprive him of those protections of freedom set out in the Bill of Rights for the precise purpose of insuring the independence of the individual against the Government and those acting for the Government”. Lathrop v Donohue, 367 US 820 (1961), Justice Black, dissenting.

"The legal profession must take great care not to emulate the many occupational groups that have managed to convert licensure from a sharp weapon of public defense into blunt instrument of self-enrichment". Walter Gellhorn, "The Abuse of Occupational Licensing", University of Chicago Law Review, Volume 44 Issue 1, September of 1976.

“Because the law requires that judges no matter how corrupt, who do not act in the clear absence of jurisdiction while performing a judicial act, are immune from suit, former Judge Ciavarella will escape liability for the vast majority of his conduct in this action. This is, to be sure, against the popular will, but it is the very oath which he is alleged to have so indecently, cavalierly, baselessly and willfully violated for personal gain that requires this Court to find him immune from suit”, District Judge A. Richard Caputo in H.T., et al, v. Ciavarella, Jr, et al, Case No. 3:09-cv-00286-ARC in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, Document 336, page 18, November 20, 2009. This is about judges who were sentencing kids to juvenile detention for kickbacks.

Monday, February 23, 2026

On the kind of dead - or maybe not - Village of Delhi (NY) former mayor Samudrala

 Why kind of?

Did you see an obituary of that glorius person?  Who was also Village of Delhi Trustee and SUNY Delhi Professor - for years?

Nope.

Not from SUNY.

Not from the family, the usual way, in a local newspaper.

Not from Village of Delhi.

Instead, the Village of Delhi coughed up the following announcement:


Do you see the date of death?

Nope.

Do you see the place of death? 

Nope.

Do you know why?

I do - and I will happily enlighten you.

Because the Village of Delhi was in litigation with my husband and myself, where Samudrala was a defendant, the case was dismissed, possibly (we do not know and information is locked and unavailable) AFTER Samudrala either died or became legally incompetent before death (he was dying of terminal cancer, as the family reported, and was in the terminal stages for at least half a year before his death, which perfectly overlays the entire period of litigation.

Do you know how I learnt about Samudrala's death?

Did his litigation counsel - coincidentally, Village of Delhi's longtime lawyers - tell me as was their duty? Tell the court as was their duty?

Because at death of a purported client two things happen instantly, by operation of law, without intervention from any court:

(1) attorney's authority to represent that dead client (if such authority ever existed) stops dead - sorry for the pun; and

(2) the court's authority to continue to oversee litigation of the case also stops dead - until the estate of the dead person is substituted into the case, with the attorney the estate will hire.

So - did attorneys Courtney Heinel, Earl Redding and Roemer, Wallen, Gold and Mineux, toiling at the expense of my own and my taxpayer money for a decade (Heinel), two decades (Redding) and 3 decades (the law firm) - do their legal duty and tell me, and the court?

Nope.

A little bird from the village, a reader of my blog told me.

The reader said - Mrs. Neroni, DO YOU KNOW that while these attorneys are seeking COSTS AND SANCTIONS from you, representing to the court UNDER THE PENALTY OF PERJURY that Mr. Samudrala is alive, well and authorized such actions on his behalf, he is not only announced dead by the Village of Delhi since September, but a "celebration of life" party is going on BEHIND YOUR HOUSE IN DELHI, NY, MRS. NERONI (I live in South Carolina since 2015, so of course I do not know what is going on behind our property in Delhi, NY) at the Legion Field Hall?

What did I do after that?

Correct.

I (1) notified the court, and (2) sued the attorneys, you can read the complaint here and, after these attorneys double down and asked for sanctions because of that lawsuit not only against me, but also against my, once again, elderly and medically fragile NON-PARTY husband - I amended complaint and included that conduct into it, too, you can read it here.

And I have real luck with judges assigned by Porter Kirkwood - that Porter Kirkwood - to my cases:

Burns and Lambert - who I criticized in my blogs and my book for misconduct - so what did they do?  Correct.  They retaliated against my daughter.  Lambert so far as admitted to it by stating - after the fact that he simply thought my daughter was me - so that kind of justified retaliation and abuse of power.

Those guys recused, probably, 6-7 times already in 2023 to date from my cases - but Porter Kirkwood keeps assigning them, because - who knows, what if at some point the assignment will stick?

Then came Elizabeth Aherne, the judge who presided over my 1st Amendment retaliation case involving my blogs and book and litigation against CPS while at the same time having a PAID JOB TRAINING CPS PROSECUTORS!!!  She and her law clerk.

That job started my investigation and led me to find out that Aherne screws this way not only me - but anybody who dares to sue her employer the Cornell University.  17 cases in less than 3 years!!!

After I turned Aherne in for public corruption to New York State Police, she did what I described in a lawsuit against her here - because she would not get off my cases, and continued to preside, even when Delaware County, Village of Delhi and Town of Delhi, and Village of Delhi attorneys in a separate lawsuit, directly and completely illegally asked her to punish me FOR the crime tip against her to the New York State Police.

So, after Aherne finally got off my cases, you know who I got?

I really can't win.

A judge whose REVERSAL on appeal I was trying to enforce against Village of Delhi attorneys in my current motion for sanctions.

See my motion for sanctions here: memorandum, affirmation.

See now my instant motion to recuse Judge Baker (who remains on the case): affirmation, the overview of Judge Baker's horrible, horrible reversals - look what KIND of reversals, what KIND of mistakes this Supervising judge of the 6th Judicial District makes!!!

Village of Delhi attorneys consistently claimed that I am "judge-shopping".  Completely forgetting that anybody's right to impartial judicial review is not a gift, a grace or a favor from the state government - it is a PRE-EMPTIVE, FEDERAL, MANDATORY, FUNDAMENTAL, CONSTITUTIONAL right, and I have all the rights in the world to enforce it.

I have a right to a minimally competent and a minimally honest judge. 

Don't I?

Which so far - looks like - is consistently denied to me.  By Porter Kirkwood, now the 6th Judicial District Executive who boasted in an interview that he gets to assign judges to cases in his district.  Figure.


But - back to our Mr. Samudrala.

Is he dead?

Is he alive?

I do not know.

Because Village of Delhi attorneys - even when sued, even when they moved to dismiss the lawsuit "based on documentary evidence" - are tight-lipped and refused to disclose the date of death - or its place.

Why?

Because the date may have a capacity of turning the entirety of all vigorous litigation in Neroni v Mole case that they "won" against us in August of 2025 - into a 




and not as pretty pumpkin as this one.

I will continue to cover this case - and other cases of interest in the area.

Stay tuned.






Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)