MLK said: "Injustice Anywhere is a Threat to Justice Everywhere"

End Corruption in the Courts!

Court employee, judge or citizen - Report Corruption in any Court Today !! As of January 12, 2014, we've received over 137,725 tips...KEEP THEM COMING !! Email: CorruptCourts@gmail.com

Sunday, March 9, 2008

URGENT NOTICE TO ALL ATTORNEY ETHICS COMPLAINANTS (MORE, CLICK HERE)

URGENT NOTICE TO ALL ATTORNEY ETHICS COMPLAINANTS

Many people who have tried to file disciplinary complaints with the first Department Disciplinary Committee, and other New York State grievance committees, have been stymied by the response that the committee complained to “does not”, “can not” or “declines to” consider the complaint because the complaint involves parties and counsel that are in the midst of litigation.

This response is in direct contradiction to the Rules of the Uniform Courts regarding this matter.

According to the Rules of the Uniform Court, the Committee “need not” defer consideration of “allegations which are substantially similar to the material allegations of pending criminal or civil litigation need not be deferred pending determination of such litigation.”

The term “Need Not” means that the litigation status of the matters at issue is not a sufficient or necessary basis for deferring the complaint. Unless further justification is provided for deferment of a complaint, the committee is simply saying you that it is deferring the complaint for no particular reason.

The real reason for deferring a complaint is generally to protect the lawyers who are being complained about.

If anyone has had their complaint deferred solely due to its litigation status, they should file a complaint stating that this explanation is insufficient and demanding a valid reason for the deferment.

§ 605.9 Abatement of Investigation
Matters Involving Related Pending Civil Litigation or
Criminal Matters.

General Rule. The processing of complaints involving material allegations which are substantially similar to the material allegations of pending criminal or civil litigation need not be deferred pending determination of such litigation.

SEE:  http://www.courts.state.ny.us/courts/ad1/part605.shtml
(submitted by a concerned viewer, and not intended to be legal advice)

11 comments:

Anonymous said...

This is classic OCA'S legal dept's psychotic logic! Screw anyone anytime they attempt to uncover unetical, unconstitutional or criminal behavior! They never give up the STUPID, JUVENILE AND UNINTELLIGENT LAWYER GAMES THAT ARE GOING TO DESTROY THEM...REAL SOON!

Anonymous said...

that is funny
they just used to say that whatver the lawyer did was okay
now they take no opinon
When they did that to me they then denied recieving the certified registered letter
that went on for months

Anonymous said...

OCA believes that the longer they stall, don't answer and ignore....the more memories "fade"! Yes this is what they say and believe, but....they never catch on that the longer they delay, the more incriminating events continue to come forward bashing them in the head. Wait till you hear what happened in WNY to a retired, but still working supreme court judge, his law clerk and a town police chief...taking a foreign prostitute across the border to a party for the boys...for the fun of abusing her sexually! Wow...do you think Administrative Judge Sharon Townsend knew nothing about this at all...it may have more court players! Keep the long hand of the clock ticking for another year.. OCA.... the poop continues to strike you in the puss!

Eliot Bernstein / Iviewit / Bat Out of Hell said...

A funny thing happened to me on the way to the United States Patent & Trademark - Office of Enrollment and Discipline, the federal patent bar for patent attorney's. The OED Director, Harry Moatz, asked what the First Department and Florida Bar were doing about the same evidence against some of the same attorneys he was investigating, shocked that they had the complaints for about a year. He asked that we have those investigators, Thomas Cahill and the Florida Bar give him a call to say whasup but they refused. Shocked we asked Cahill what whasup on the complaints and he sends a letter dated months earlier to the wrong address, that we never got, that said this very same conclusion.
We then showed Tommy the same regulation that showed that it was not sufficient and that the civil case had ended so start the ball rolling and call the patent guy. This is where Tommy became what appeared drunk and refused to take calls and became a first class pain in the butt.
So in reviewing the matters, we discovered that the former President of the New York Bar, Steven C. Krane, had been representing his Proskauer partners while a member of the First Department and while his bar position precluded him from representing anyone. Well that's when it all went downhill for these guys and most of you who know the Iviewit story know the rest, for you that don't www.iviewit.tv

Sincerly ~ Bat Out of Hell

Anonymous said...

Why doesn't this story surprise me.

activist said...

several years ago I sent a complaint to the 1st Dept. concerning two (2) lawyers, one of whom was a former Judge and never heard anything. I think I'm beginning to understand what happen. What apparently has been going on is unconscionable especially for a taxpayer supported entity. People should go to jail if this is true. I will consider renewing my complaint now and see if they even acknowledge it this time. Also, this time it will be sent Certified Mail.

Anonymous said...

Don't bother sending in complaints to this committee. Whitewasher Cahill was replace by a more experienced whitewasher, a guy name Freidburg who was co-chaired the whitewashing at the Committee on Judicial Conduct. Save the stamps, save the paper, save the environment. You should only file criminal complaints AGAINST everyone who works at the NYC attorney and judge ethics committees. Or, as this blog suggests, file a federal lawsuit.

Anonymous said...

This is a HUGE TAXPAYER ENTITY and i hear now that OCA is giving raises to a whole bunch of their employees...AKA...BUYING FEMALE EMPLOYEE'S SILENCE! IF THESE WOMEN ARE REAL SMART, THEY WOULD TAKE THE MONEY AND IN A LARGE GROUP FILE CHARGES OF ALL KINDS OF CORRUPTION AND HOSTILITY! OCA CANNOT FIRE EVERYONE WITHOUT BRINGING OUT THE DOGS OF THE MEDIA INTO THEIR PRECIOUS SLUSH FUNDS AND PROPERTY THEY HAVE STOLEN FROM THE PUBLIC! I SAY..GO GET THEM EMPLOYEES...YOU ARE THE ANSWER TO OR PROBLEM!

Esposito's Dear Friend said...

Yes, I agree with the above writer. The Esposito "SEX SCANDAL" complaint, was filed approximately two years ago against Attorney Allen H. Isaac.The DDC hearings finally began in April of 2007. What Ms. Esposito told me what she experienced during the hearings at the DDC against Mr. Isaac, were beyond unethical and severely flawed. Thus far, Mr. Isaac still continues to practice law.

Anonymous said...

The 10th Judicial District in Nassau County did the old 'litigation' routine with me when we filed a grievance against a lawyer who beat us out of $300.00.
Sued in Small claims court. Uh, oh, can't do that now, the Committee said. I told them this isn't a claim about recovering money, this is a claim where the attorney who held the escrow funds for the selller in a real estate deal improperly returned the money to his client before notifying the buyer (me) before doing so, and also knowing there was a claim of 300.00 that he approved of.

the litigation was ended when the bozo judge scribbled out a hand written decision dismissing the case. The Committee took the opportunity to avoid their job. The specific charge was the attorney improperly disbursed escrow money, before the real estate transaction was completed by withdrawing fees for permits and for his expenses, and then returned the money to the client knowing we had a claim against it.

Anonymous said...

I think it is ironic that there are ethics committees for attorneys? From my experience, there are great and honest lawyers, but a lot of these lawyers lie (without accountability) abuse power (without accountability), and extort money (without accountability). There is more honesty and integrity in professions that pay low wages, such as waitressing, public service, teaching, building, business that contribute to the well being of society and its people. I always thought the law was of that category, not now. It is a profession of greed and dishonesty. Having an ethics comittee for an unethical profession is in and of itself meaningless. The law should be redefined to the injustice system, where injustices are carried out and justice is blocked.

Blog Archive

See Video of Senator John L. Sampson's 1st Hearing on Court 'Ethics' Corruption

The first hearing, held in Albany on June 8, 2009 hearing is on two videos:


               Video of 1st Hearing on Court 'Ethics' Corruption
               The June 8, 2009 hearing is on two videos:
         
               CLICK HERE TO SEE Part 1
               CLICK HERE TO SEE Part 2