Civil rights appellants - be aware that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit manipulates its court docket in order to ignore your filings and to rule against you

I already wrote about the disgraceful and unlawful anti-filing injunction filed against Mr. Neroni by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York for filing 5 civil rights cases, two of them pending and counseled (with an attorney representing him) during the time the anti-filing injunction was made.

The attorney (me) was not notified of the parallel anti-filing proceedings based on the pending counseled cases, and the cases were pre-judged by the then-Chief Judge Sharpe as frivolous.

The Appellee, Chief Judge Suddaby, filed an Appellee Brief on December 2, 2015 and served it by overnight mail, which added 1 day of service before Mr. Neroni received the brief.  Mr. Neroni was not allowed to file electronically, and was thus not notified by the court instantly that the brief was filed.

Mr. Neroni had 14 days from the day of service (December 3, 2015) to file his Reply Brief, that was until Thursday, December 17, 2015.

Mr. Neroni filed that reply brief, together with a motion to recuse the court, by overnight mail, with a guaranteed delivery, the credit card transaction showing the delivery was paid for on December 15, 2015 for $53.80.  I am a witness to the fact that the brief was filed by overnight mail and that the delivery was guaranteed by the deadline, see part of the docket report showing the dates of filings.

Yet, the appellate court made a decision against Mr. Neroni on December 18, 2015 (Docket No. 68), once again on a summary order - authority for which was contested by Mr. Neroni in his Reply Brief and motion to recuse.

The order of December 18, 2015 was never served upon Mr. Neroni, and today is December 29, 2015, nearly two weeks after the decision was made.

The order was obviously made after the court received Mr. Neroni's motion to recuse and Reply Brief, but the court stalled prompt filing of those papers to give itself time to make a decision as if Mr. Neroni did not file timely (which he did, I am a witness to it).  

Apparently, the court engaged in manipulation of its own docket by (1) denying Mr. Neroni ability to file electronically and thus controlling the date of filing and then (2) using its own misconduct in the date of filing in disregarding Mr. Neroni's motion to recuse and Reply Brief.

Of course, Mr. Neroni has no power to physically be present in court and to physically force the clerks to file his papers when they receive them, if their administrators tell them to do otherwise.

How predictable.

I will post analysis of this anti-filing order, which all civil rights plaintiffs would be interested in, later on.  I only read it today through Pacer (once again, Mr. Neroni was never served with this secretly made order).

Yet, what remains is that a federal appellate court manipulated its docket in order to ignore a motion to recuse the court and in order to affirm an unlawful punishment of a civil rights plaintiff in retaliation for criticism of incestous relationships with politically connected attorneys by district court judges and by the 2nd Circuit judges, and in order to ignore criticism of unconstitutional policies in the 2nd Circuit directed at civil rights appellants.

Stay tuned.

Frederick J. Neroni's appeal of denial by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York of his challenge to constitutionality of attorney disciplinary proceedings in New York

For those who are interested in the law and facts pertaining to a challenge my husband has made to the constitutionality of New York attorney disciplinary system, here is my husband Frederick J. Neroni's pro se appellate brief in that case, his appeal is currently pending in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit.

I must note that Defendants NYS Chief Judge Lippman, NYS Attorney General Schneiderman, Chief Judge of the Appellate Division 3rd Department Peters, Chairman (at the time of filing of the lawsuit, and now Chief Attorney) of the Attorney Disciplinary Committee, Appellate Division 3rd Department Duffy and former attorney of the Committee Zayas (who was, since the lawsuit was filed, let go from the Committee among investigation into allegedly filing false time sheets, but never disciplined) - this illustrative group fought tooth and claw against this brief to be filed in the scope it was actually allowed by the court to be filed.

It is interesting to read this case together with my motion to vacate the order of suspension of my federal law license by NDNY, and with another case, which I am going to report on later today, too.

Stay tuned.

My motion to vacate automatic suspension of my law license in federal court

For those who are interested in the law and facts surrounding suspension of my federal law license, here is my motion to vacate the suspension of my federal law license by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York under suspicious circumstances and with suspicious timing.

My jurisdictional statement in appeal of suspension of my law license (state court)

For those who are interested in the law and the facts surrounding my suspension from the practice of law, here is my jurisdictional statement and motions to recuse and disqualify filed with the New York State Court of Appeals in the constitutional appeal of suspension of my law license.

Disciplinary attorney Mary Gasparini proves she is corrupt as she stalls disciplinary investigation of disbarring misconduct of politically connected attorneys Richard Harlem, Eric Jervis and James Hartmann

At the end of November, a disciplinary complaint was filed against politically connected and powerful attorneys:

1)  Richard Harlem, of Oneonta, NY, son of late Supreme Court Justice Robert Harlem, former Chief Administrative Judge of New York State 6th Judicial District;

2) Richard Harlem's law partner Eric Jervis, also of Oneonta, NY;

3) James Hartmann, of Delhi, NY, husband to attorney Nancy Deming, law clerk to judge-elect Gary Rosa of Delaware County Family Court.

The complaint was accompanied with an affidavit from a witness other than the complainant proving that the above three attorneys committed fraud and fraud upon the court that warrant their disbarment.

During a month that followed, no attempts were made by the disciplinary committee to call the complainant (not me) to investigate, or to verify the essence of the affidavit with its author.

Which brings me to the conclusion that attorney Mary Gasparini of the disciplinary committee who was the addressee of the complaint, is trying hard to earn her salary as a gatekeeper of discipline against powerful attorneys and as a fabricator of evidence to pull law licenses of critics of judicial misconduct.

And, according to my information, Richard Harlem is lying low and is refusing to engage in communication with the person who he has been claiming as a client for 8.5 years in proceedings in two courts, Delaware County Supreme Court and the Appellate Division 3rd Department.

Actually, in the Appellate Division 3rd Department Richard Harlem, his law firm Harlem & Jervis and, thus, his partner Eric Jervis, continue their fraud upon the court, as they continue to claim that they represent the person who already submitted an affidavit (which is the basis of the disciplinary complaint) that he never hired Harlem to represent him in the Mokay action.

Richard Harlem, Eric Jervis and James Hartmann did not even notify the Delaware County Supreme Court or the Appellate Division 3rd Department where Mr. Neroni's appeal is pending, that one of the alleged Mokay plaintiffs provided an affidavit that was submitted to the disciplinary committee claiming that the individal has never sued my husband Frederick J. Neroni, nor did that individual hire Richard Harlem or his law firms to sue him.

That is the height of "frivolous" and fraudulent conduct, and is a crime.

Yet, Mary Gasparini is not doing anything that an honest investigator and prosecutor would have done to verify the essence of the complaint.

Predictably so.

When a prosecutor is caught fabricating court transcript and lashes back at the person she prosecutes asking the court to put that person in jail for exposing her misconduct, one cannot expect that a dishonest prosecutor will suddenly develop a conscience and do her job honestly.

Will Delaware County be introduced to the modern word of public bidding on contracts?

Here is the interview report I received from the New York State Comptroller's Office of Delaware County Supervisor Wayne Marshfield who is also on the board of directors of the county's largest no-bid contractor Delaware Opportunities, Inc., see my blog about other Delaware County Supervisors on that board of directors here.

According to Mr. Marshfield, Delaware County includes no-bid contracts into its annual budgets, thus, in Mr. Marshfield's opinion, eliminating the need to bid out contracts and to separately make decisions on the choice of vendors for services.

And, contracts are not even discussed by the entire legislature of the County, only by "committees", so the County actually never does its job in approving contracts, with or without bidding!

A brilliant scheme, isn't it?

In home economics class, in middle school, they teach to form family budget this way:

(1) ascertain your needs,  
 (2) assess how much (approximately) your needs will cost (from a market survey of several different vendors) and 
(3) ascertain how much money you have, available and coming in in the immediate income or what can be obtained in loans.

Middle schoolers are not taught to first find a vendor you know who will give you the highest price and then build your needs and price your budget in accordance with the prices of that vendor.

You will not do that to your family, because for your family you would want the best service for the lowest available price.

Not so in Delaware County.

In Delaware County, "committees" of local government officials (who also sit on boards of vendors) determine the needs and put them into the budget of the County based on the prices quoted by the no-bid contractors that the County used for allegedly 30 years.

The problem is also that over 30 years, prices for goods and services changed dramatically, information technologies, such as Internet, made information about out-of-state goods and services readily available.

Therefore, the claim that Delaware County is a "large area with small population and few economic resources" which is touted by Delaware County officials as a justification of its 30-year practice of no-bid contracts, is not only a lie, but a stupid lie at that.

The Internet has made the entire world, including vendors from other counties, other states and other countries available for bidding on Delaware County contracts, and the price of submitting Delaware County contracts to bidding is the price of posting the bidding requirements on the existing Delaware County website - which is nothing, since it will have to be done by the already existing salaried employees.

Who knows, maybe it is cheaper to transport goods and services from China or deliver them electronically over the Internet to fit Delaware County needs for services, rather than to use taxpayer money to pay friends and relatives of members of the Delaware County government.

I understand that Delaware County needs to be introduced to the modern world, and it is a matter of time when an out of the area would-be vendor will sue the county for the opportunity to bid for its appropriation contracts. 

After all, New York State Comptroller, as of July of 2014, in his report on public contracts stated the following:

And:

Delaware County should take notice. 

I will continue to FOIL Delaware County as to its contracting practices and report it on this blog.  Stay tuned.

Delaware County taxes and property foreclosures feed its 30-year no-bid inflated contracts to family and friends of local government officials

Delaware County Supervisor Marjorie Miller told in the interview to New York State Comptroller's auditor that two contracts made by Delaware County may have been given to friends of the multi-year Chairman of the County Board of Supervisors Mr. Eisel, one, an overpriced contract to a coroner, and another, a contract for the lease of the Treadwell school building.

That is what I know from public records.

What I also know from the same set of documents received from the NYS Comptroller's office that for years, Delaware County employees were not asked to sign conflict of interest disclosures, while for over 30 years Delaware County engaged in a one vendor per service no-bid contracting "system", renewable automatically without public input and without input by the entire legislature, by the Board of Supervisors' "committees" alone.

Moreover, Marjorie Miller said in her interview that oftentimes she was requested to approve budgets without seeing them.

So, Marjorie Miller already spotted the overpriced contract of the County with the coroner (Dr. Ucci, I believe), who Marjorie Miller identified as a friend of the Delaware County Board of Supervisors Mr. Eisel.

Lack of competition in contracts and lack of disclosures of conflicts of interests for 30 years, in a county best characterized as "a land of kissing cousins", where no no-nepotism (prohibition on hiring relatives) policy in employment exists, must necessarily lead to overpriced public contracts.

Those public contracts are financed by you, ladies and gentlemen, taxpayers of Delaware County.

Each year for those 30 years while running those no-bid contracts, Delaware County foreclosed on delinquent county-tax taxpayers and took many homes from Delaware County property owners.

Recently, Delaware County Department of Social Services Commissioner William Moon was caught in buying up such a foreclosed property through his wife who has a different last name.  

I wonder how many more of those buy-ups existed over the years of no-bid contracts, but Mr. Moon, apparently relying on his connections in the government and, likely, on the contracts to influential people he distributed over the years, escaped criminal and civil liability for his misconduct.

He only very quickly resigned, as did Judge Carl Becker, who was the legal advisor of Commissioner Moon for many years while the no-bid contract system was in existence and knew his many secrets, if not participated in Moon's little "inside trading" in real estate foreclosed by the County and in doling out contracts to family and friends.

It is my firm belief that support by the well-known corrupt judge Becker derailed judicial election campaign of his student, colleague and subordinate, now County Attorney Porter Kirkwood in the past judicial elections to the Family Court seat this year.

I wonder if property owners whose properties were foreclosed over the period of 30 years will now start questioning propriety of foreclosures to feed the corrupt inflated budgets of Delaware County that was made to accommodate inflated contract prices to family and friends of Delaware County government officials - under the guise of "helping" Delaware County in foregoing public bidding, because Delaware County has "small population" and "lacks economic resources" to verify whether contracts for services paid for with taxpayers' money, are provided at the best available prices.