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.


Wednesday, October 14, 2026

WAIT: WHAT????!!!!! The 33 OPEN - ONGOING federal lawsuits against Delaware County (NY) and its Board of Supervisors

Here we go.

I was checking out Pacer.gov for a completely different reason.  I needed a docket report of a certain single case.  In that case Delaware County (NY) is a party.  Usually I look by name of some individual - this time I looked by the name of Delaware County.


And MY GOD.

There are 33 OPEN LAWSUITS against Delaware County or its Board of Supervisors - and some only recently closed.

Voters MUST know what is going on.

And, of course, the RRRRRevolutionary local RRRReporter (owned by a longtime County officer) will not give you shit for fear of losing its precious carrots.

As I work myself through these cases - because they are EVIDENCE I MUST work through to verify what is it that drove County litigation counsel Frank Miller so much to have me QUASHED and DEMONIZED and GAGGED - so that I would not know and be a witness (and I can testify as a witness in a LOT of different things) - WHY?


So here we go:


Open Federal Lawsuits Involving Delaware County, New York

PACER Case Locator — October 14, 2026. Based on the supplied screenshots. Cases with a blank “Closed” column are included.

A. Cases Naming Delaware County

No.

Case name

Case number

1

Conley v. Delaware County et al.

9:25-cv-01558

2

LeTennier et al. v. Delaware County et al.

3:26-cv-00765

B. Cases Naming the Delaware County Board of Supervisors

No.

Case name

Case number

3

Doe v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01397

4

C.R. v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

6:26-cv-01409

5

S.H. v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01412

6

Saez v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01450

7

Van Arsdale v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01462

8

Barley v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01493

9

Cowan-Johnson v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

6:26-cv-01560

10

Valentine v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01563

11

Boza II v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01609

12

Bartolomeo v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01656

13

Lewis v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01655

14

Bruin v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01654

15

Haham v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01735

16

Dellinger v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01767

17

V.P. v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01777

18

J.K. v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01780

19

Bellows v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01784

20

Candito v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01817

21

Zobell v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01840

22

Frank v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01839

23

Caspouras v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01841

24

Sullivan v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01849

25

Nestor v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01856

26

Sullivan v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01842

27

M.P. v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01866

28

Kelly v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-01867

29

Baldwin v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-02076

30

Tell v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-02087

31

Verbin v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

3:26-cv-02095

32

Savinovich v. Education Plus Corporation et al.

1:26-cv-08085

No comments:

Post a Comment