The Delaware County, NY - the land of Jokers. The Tiska joke

Delaware County, New York, is the land of - well, jokers.

How else can one perceive what is going on in the case of People v Theodore Tiska?

Tiska is the former Sheriff's Deputy in Delaware County currently charged with attempted murder in Delaware County and prosecuted by people who knew him and, possibly, who have grudges against him.

Surely, as a matter of fairness, he should be investigated and held in jail not by his former employer.

Tiska's salary stops, as shown on seethroughny.net, stops in 2012, when he retired or resigned from Delaware County.

Tiska retired from Delaware County Sheriff's Department on August 17, 2012:

After Tiska retired - or forced to retire - things started to happen to him.

He was convicted for "criminal mischief" in 2014.

Now he is charged with attempted murder and is "about to lose his home".

And, the joker County has now placed Tiska into the jail where he previously worked - the County does realize it is a safety concern for Tiska and a lawsuit concern for the County taxpayers, but, the County decided they will "save money" that way.

While funneling money into different pet projects of local county officials - like Delaware Opportunities, Inc. or the recently ditched DS&S (ditched only because the patron county official former Social Services Commission William Moon was booted).

And the biggest joke is the "process" in the criminal proceedings.

John Hubbard, who knows Tiska personally, prosecutes him.

Judge Northrup, John Hubbard's former boss who never disclosed when he was himself the District Attorney that his Chief ADA John Hubbard was a law partner of Judge Northrup's predecessor County Judge Becker, and who also knows Tiska personally, presides.

And assigned attorney Andrew Puritz - who immediately signed a consent (waiver of 5th Amendment right to remain silent, yes, they say they won't use it in a trial if the plea negotiations fall through, but who is going to believe them?) for a pre-plea investigation - in an attempted murder case!

Investigation to be conducted by Tiska's prior (possibly, disgruntled) employer.

As I said, jokers abound in Delaware County.

DS&S elimination in Delaware County

No, don't hope that it is a DSS elimination - not yet.

Delaware County (NY) DSS Commissioner proudly announced recently the DS&S elimination - elimination of services of a tumor proprietary company of the former Commissioner, William Moon, that was "contracted" by DSS at the tune of nearly $200,000 a year to do clerical stuff and cleaning, while the same duties were available through employees in direct employment of the County.

The article does not raise the question that what Moon was doing was abuse of his office, personal enrichment, and was criminal.

I wonder what the feds will say about that.

It is also interesting that these issues about "DS&S" arise only after Moon was booted - and Spinney, and Becker, the entire trio.

And, since such issues arise only after a high-ranking public official is booted, the question arises - what other "DS&S"es are lurking out there sucking taxpayer money in a poor county?

Uncontrolled judicial misconduct: Judge Real, on the footsteps of Judges Free and Best

I wrote on this blog earlier about misconduct of judges Free and Best.  

Now comes another judge with a telling name involved in gross, systematic misconduct for decades - Judge Real.  Judge Manuel T. Real of the U.S. District Court for the District of California, to be exact.  Date of birth January 27, 1924.  Yes, Judge Real is 92 years of age.

What Judge Real was doing during his judicial career was absolutely unreal, what is also unreal is the fact that he is still allowed to be on the bench, and not behind bars.

In August of 2016, there was a blog indicating that Judge Manuel T. Real of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, at the age of 92, is "still abusing his power" - listing such "achievements" by the judge as:

1) interfering with defense's cross-examination in a criminal case, for which he was reversed, and conviction vacated;
2) being removed from cases by the appellate court at least 11 times for lack of objectivity - and that is, as of 2009, he was removed from a case at least one other time, yesterday;
3) having a reversal rate of 10 times "the average" for a federal judge, having been reversed completely 87 times plus 47 partial reversals - as of August 2016, and plus at least one more reversal yesterday;
4) having gone through an impeachment inquiry in the U.S. Conduct in 2006 for misconduct.

In 2015, according to calculations of Reuters reporter Alison Frankel, the then-91-year-old Judge Real was reversed 12 times out of 32 appeals, a rate of reversal of 37.5%, more than 1/3.

Since many cases do not get appealed for various reasons, not the least one of them being lack of funds for a filing fee and/or lawyer, nobody knows how many more cases Judge Real botched up that never came before the appellate court.

The question asked by a defense attorney Victor Sherman who was reportedly hounded by Judge Real for 40 years was whether it was in public interest "for Judge Real to preside over cases only to be reversed so often on appeal" and that it is a waste of public money.

Yet, justice, or lack thereof, does not measure in money only, and this is a judge presiding in a court handling death penalty cases, as well as civil rights cases.

To allow a judge on the bench who lacks competence, integrity and elementary civility because he is unreachable by discipline through immunity, because the Judicial Disability Act does not apply to misconduct during court proceedings, and because the U.S. Congress finally decided that all of the above did not rise to misconduct of "constitutional proportions" is despicable.

Now, Judge Real was removed from yet another case, the one he was stalling, to the detriment of plaintiffs, for 8 years.

Unreal.

The epic in-fight regarding bar prep education, complete with an embattled 92-year-old federal judge messing up with the "wrong" class action, and now removed from it

In 2008, a group of law students filed a lawsuit against West Publishing Corporation bar prep course BarBri claiming that BarBri monopolized the market of bar preparation, squashed competition and that, as a result, consumers (law graduates) preparing for the bar examination are deprived of bar-prep services of a higher quality at a competitive price.

You can see the entire complaint here.

It is 58 pages, and I encourage you to read it.

It alleges, in detail, how BarBri monopolized the market of bar preparation using:

• intimidation;
• unlawful market sharing agreements;
• unlawful price-fixing agreements;
• buying up copyright and then suppressing superior preparation materials, 
• buying up businesses of alternative bar prep courses,
• offering alternative bar-prep businesses lucrative "consulting" contracts as an incentive to oust them from the bar-prep market;
• attempting to destroy credibility of professionals supporting other courses;
• engaging law school professors to post mandatory law school assignments on the Westlaw pages, so that students would not avoid being bombarded by BarBri advertisements etc.

The complaint described one or more of the above tactics in describing interaction of BarBri with the following competitors in the bar prep market: 

1. BRC;
2. Becker;
3. PMBR;
4. Marino;
5. Pieper (New York);
6. West Bar Review;
7. Kaplan;
8. Louisiana;
9. Supreme Bar Review (Ohio);
10. DeVry;
11. Rigos;
12. Bar Secrets;
13. LexisNexis

Moreover, the complaint alleged that BarBri imposes anti-competitive conditions on its "faculty and staff"

And, remember, while teaching law school, "some" professor post their assignments on BarBri owner's website (Westlaw), so that law students must read those assignments on Westlaw and cannot avoid being bombarded with BarBri advertisements.

At this time, the following "award-winning" faculty members are advertised on BarBri's website (I will analyze the conflicts of interest of these professors in a separate blog).

The U.S. district judge Manuel T. Real (date of birth January 27, 1924) presided over the federal class action.  

In that action, Judge Real, who was 84 years of age at the beginning of litigation and 92 years old now:

1) dismissed the complaint in 2008 - in a 2-page decision without an opinion, explanation or reasoning;
2) disapproved the settlement in 2011 after the appellate court directed it and denied all attorney fees to Plaintiffs;
3) denied reconsideration of that disapproval and denial of fees, 

and then approved the settlement, but cut Plaintiffs' attorney fees from $1.9 mln to $585,000 - and the costs of such a class action, including investigation must have been enormous.

Yesterday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit made an epic decision not only reversing Judge Real, but directing the district court to reassign the case, after 8 years of litigation, to another judge, pointing out that Judge Real cannot rule fairly in that case.

Judge Real is on the federal bench since 1966 - for 40 years, he actually served as a Chief Judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of California from 1982 to 1993, for 11 years.

In 2006, Judge Real was subject to impeachment investigation as to how he handled a bankruptcy case, which was later dropped, Judge Real remained on the bench, and was given, possibly, a job to stall an antitrust class lawsuit of adamant law students against the omnipowerful bar-prep monopolist - a job he carried out superbly for 8 years.

The 9th Circuit apparently had to end this national embarrassment of a "court proceeding" by requiring reassignment of another judge to this case.

The 9th Circuit's decision is epic because it finally - after 8 years of litigation - recognizes the judge's bias.

I must note that no motions to recuse were filed during these 8 years - consider how intimidated attorneys were that reassignment to another judge had to be directed, obviously sua sponte, by the 9th Circuit.

I am saying "sua sponte" (on the 9th Circuit's own motion) because, since no motion to recuse was made in the court below, such issue could not be raised on appeal.

So, this case is about 

• epic antitrust activities in preparation of law graduates to take the bar - and thus prove to consumers that they are a "safe choice" in the market of legal services;
• epic bias of the federal judge who tried to dismiss or hurt plaintiffs and their attorneys for daring to bring such a lawsuit, dragging litigation for 8 years;  and

an epic question - how can this setup where education of law students is not only not superior, but where superior prep courses are bought up and suppressed, or their authors intimidated, discredited, bought up or drive out of business - how can this setup, this education obtained from an anticompetitive country-wide cartel, be considered a guarantee BY THE GOVERNMENT to the consumers of quality and integrity of the only providers that consumers can choose for court representation?

Does it make any sense to you?

Does not make any sense to me.

As to a separate blog about professors serving BarBri, and about the impeachment proceedings against Judge Real that somehow came to nothing, allowed him to remain on the bench and engage in further  misconduct, stay tuned.

The Town of Colchester (NY) votes to get a Pagillo dog a month after the Pagillo dog was picked up from Texas. The K-9 business appears profitable in Delaware County

On April 21, 2016 I reported on this blog that, according to my source, Rich Pagillo, a police officer son of judge Yvonne Pagillo of Hobart and Watlon Village courts, has been dispatched to Texas to get a new "K-9" "unit".

I remind my readers that Delaware County, NY recently acquired an imported untrained German Shepherd pup (1 year old) by the name of Neron for $7,000 (!) and is claiming that the dog exists on donations from the public, but refuses to release records of donations on FOIL requests.

Lo and behold, the local newspaper, Walton Reporter reported on yesterday, on May 11, 2016, that the Town Colchester approved the dog for Rich Pagillo (after much debates) only now, while he reportedly picked up the dog a month ago?

Was the Town of Colchester aware that the dog was already a done deal before it went to voting?

And, same as in Delhi, NY, it was claimed by Pagillo that the dog will exist on donations only, and that Pagillo HIMSELF (a police officer!) will be running fundraisers to support the dog.

In other words, the Town of Colchester purchased a perfect excuse for drug corruption within its jurisdiction - whoever supports the dog, is free from investigation and prosecution.

So, since the Tractor Supply in Delhi, NY is now supporting TWO police dogs - from Delaware County and from the Town of Colchester, it can run drugs run through its cash system, nobody will investigate it, and the same for SUNY Delhi with vet care.  Vet care routinely involves a narcotic inventory as painkillers.  So, there will be no investigation or prosecution of improper storage of handling of drugs by the SUNY Delhi vet care unit.

The interesting part is that, at the very least, it was disclosed that the donations for the dog's care will be channeled through a non-profit.

Of course, I will FOIL the Town of Colchester for the name of the non-profit and then the non-profit for the donations and handling the donations.

It may be an interesting discovery, so - stay tuned.

Will the lawsuit against the sexual predator in black robe, Arkansas judge Boeckman, be dismissed on judicial immunity grounds?

I wrote yesterday in this blog about a sexual predator, Judge Boeckman of Arkansas, who traded lenient sentences for sex with young boys, and for nude photos of these young boys and men.

There is a civil lawsuit reportedly filed against the judge alleging intentional infliction of emotional distress, abuse of process, assault and battery.

I wonder whether the lawsuit for this abominable conduct will also be dismissed on judicial immunity grounds.

Most likely, it will be.

My question is - for how long will the shameful concept of judicial immunity, protecting criminals on the bench, allowed by the citizens of this country to exist?

The quick-fix job by New York State Chief Judge Janet DiFiore for the employer of her husband - the woman has no shame

When Chief Judge Janet Difiore was "nominated" for the position of Chief Judge by her buddy Andrew Cuomo, I asked the New York State Senate permission to orally testify in opposition.

I was denied that opportunity.

I submitted written testimony anyway, asking to investigate and criminally prosecute DiFiore for corruption, specifically involving gaming industry and covering up Cuomo's connections with such industry when she was the Chief of Public Ethics Commission, and for her criminal behavior in the "nanny scandal".

DiFiore's shenannigans in how she did that coverup are described in a book, and I pointed out that the book's author for the New York State Senate, and witnesses identified in the book, press and blogs who could can help investigate DiFiore.

I also pointed out that, after DiFiore covered up for Andrew Cuomo, Andrew Cuomo returned the favor by 

(1) appointing DiFiore's husband Dennis Glazer to the casino-citing board,  
(2) opposing previous Chief Judge Lippman's stance to increase mandatory retirement age so that Cuomo would be able to nominate DiFiore once Lippman retires, and by
(3) nominating DiFiore for the position of Chief Judge - to fix cases for Cuomo further.

My written testimony was disregarded.  

DiFiore was confirmed as New York Chief Judge.

First, DiFiore put Cuomo next to herself among judges of the court and had her subordinate Judge Pigott call Cuomo "Judge Cuomo".

Then she dismissed my constitutional disciplinary appeal as of right, as if it was discretionary, in retaliation for testifying against her confirmation and asking to criminally investigate and prosecute herself and her husband for corruption.

Then she started to continue to fix cases for the gaming industry - the industry where her husband works and where her benefactor Cuomo has ties.

In yesterday's decision in Kent v Lefkowitz, where DiFiore authored the opinion, not only DiFiore did not reject the appeal "for lack of constitutional question" or on some such other grounds, but she accepted the appeal, even though Judge Pigott said at DiFiore's confirmation that the New York State Court of Appeals has a policy of choosing its own cases - even when it is mandated to review a case by the New York State Constitution and New York jurisdictional statutes. 

So, first of all, the New York Court of Appeals, under the guidance of DiFiore, somehow chose to "pick" a case where a decision adverse to a gaming and wagering board was made by the appellate court below.

Such use of "discretion" after DiFiore, with her own, her husband's and her benefactor Cuomo's ties to the gaming industry, was already suspect.

Then, DiFiore did not recuse from the decision where her participation obviously raised issues of "appearance of impropriety", in view, once again, of her husband's connections to the gaming industry, her benefactor Cuomo's connections to the same industry that she covered up as Chairperson of the Commission for Public Ethics.

DiFiore actually, on the opposite, made sure she presided over the case, authored the decision, and reversed the decision of the lower court adverse to the gaming industry.

The issue was that 

"[i]n January 1996, respondent New York State Racing and Wagering Board (the Racing Board) reduced per diem wages for its seasonal employees by 25%. 

In response, the Public Employees Federation, AFL-CIO (PEF) filed an improper practice charge, alleging that the reduction in wages violated Civil Service Law § 209-a (1) (d). "

 So, the issue was wage discrimination of seasonal workers in races whose pay as cut 1/4 - while DiFiore's own pay was raised this year, by the way, without budgetary allocations.

Imagine inflation growing, taxes growing, costs of living growing - and 1/4 of your wage being cut off. 

But, the rights of some low-life seasonal workers do not matter much where there is a chance to fix a case for her benefactor, Andrew Cuomo, and the gaming industry that DiFiore's husband and Cuomo are connected with.

The lower court decision unfavorable to the gaming industry was actually made on July 17, 2014 by the 3rd Department.  

Please, note the footnote (no pun intended) in the 3rd Department's July 17, 2014 decision indicating that 

"1. Effective February 1, 2013, the Board merged into a newly-created entity known as the New York State Gaming Commission (see Racing, Pari-Mutuel Wagering and Breeding Law § 102)."

Once again, the Respondent in the action is the New York State Gaming Commission.

Please, note also the decision of Respondent, the New York State Gaming Commission, made 10 days before the decision of the 3rd Department was made, on July 7, 2014:

Judge Leslie Stein dissented in the 3rd Department decision against the New York Gaming Board.

And was rewarded by Cuomo with a nomination to the New York State Court of Appeals - for her dissent and for ruling Cuomo's way within a week after her nomination in another case that was important for Cuomo, our DEC case that had the potential to reverse multiple civil and criminal sanctions against New York landowners on constitutional grounds.

Cuomo-driven NYS Gaming Commission, a party Respondent in a lawsuit, during the pendency of an appeal in the 3rd Department, appoints the husband of Cuomo's friend DiFiore, Dennis Glazer, to a lucrative position, the New York Gaming Facility Location Board.

After an appellate decision disfavorable to the Respondent Gaming Board, Cuomo appoints Gaming Board's nominee Dennis Glazer's wife Janet DiFiore to the position of the Chief Judge of the New York State Court of Appeals.

The wife immediately takes the bull by the horns, fixes the case for the Gaming Board, reverses the 3rd Department's decision and reinstates the unlawful 1/4 wage cut of seasonal workers.

I wonder what kind of tricks were additionally involved to have the case drag on for TWO YEARS since it was decided by the 3rd Department on July 17, 2014, so that Lippman would retire and DiFiore gets the wheel of the New York State Court of Appeals.

But, even the corrupt judge Fahey, apparently, could not swallow such an adamant bending of the truth, and dissented:

==

I respectfully dissent and would affirm the Appellate Division order. The side letter agreement (side letter) is the product of a negotiation between the New York State Public Employees Federation, AFL-CIO (PEF) and respondent New York State Governor's Office of Employee Relations. Both of those sophisticated entities are well schooled in the art of negotiation. To say that PEF implicitly agreed to a 25% wage reduction strains credulity.

...

 Said another way, in assessing the side letter we should not confuse quantity with specificity so as to conclude that the absent item is present. "

Imagine!

A judge is writing this about his boss, the Chief Judge, practically accusing her of fixing the case based on something she invented rather than on the record!

But, dissent or no dissent, the decision was made, and I wonder whether there were any constitutional questions raised in the process that would entitle further appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

What I also wonder about is this.

Here are the lawyers arguing the case in the New York State Court of Appeals:


David P. Quinn, for appellants Lefkowitz, et al.
Julie M. Sheridan, for appellants New York State Governor's Office of Employee Relations, et al.
Lisa M. King, for respondent.

Here are the lawyers arguing the case in the 3rd Department:

Lisa M. King, New York State Public Employees Federation, AFL-CIO, Albany (Steven M. Klein of counsel), for appellant.
David P. Quinn, New York State Public Employment Relations Board, Albany (Alicia L. McNally of counsel), for New York State Public Employment Relations Board and another, respondents.

My question is - if I found the connection and a disqualifying conflict of interest between DiFiore and the Respondent Gaming Board in two seconds, on the Internet, in public access, without leaving my arm-chair and laptop, why attorneys for the parties could not do the same, did not raise this issue and did not make a motion to recuse DiFiore?

They were too afraid of losing their law licenses?  To the point of selling out their clients?
  So now, dear seasonal workers, because of cowardice of your attorneys who did not make a motion to recuse a corrupt judge who was very clearly appointed to the court to fix this case for the gaming industry, you can kiss 1/4 of your wages goodbye.   

Sorry, folks, but DiFiore's benefactor, and his masters, needed their pet judge to do a job, even if you, your families and the law were to be collateral damage in that "job".

And she did it all right.

The seasonal workers' 1/4 wage cut is now reinstated.  

The gaming industry can now save a bunch of money - on the backs of seasonal workers.

I wonder if DiFiore will get her kickback in hard cash or "in kind" for her hard work.

Does she do hunting trips?