7th Case in Tammany Hall II

Federal Judge “…I’m not going to authorize service upon all of these defendants.”

On January 22, 2008, New York attorney Eleanor Capogrosso filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Capogrosso v New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct (08cv0526).

A transcript obtained from the publicly available court case file indicates that a hearing was held with the judge “in the robing room” at 5:20pm on February 15, 2008. The hearing was attended by the U.S. District Court Judge, the Hon. Thomas P. Griesa, New York State Attorney General Monica A. Connell, and the plaintiff-attorney, Eleanor Capogrosso.

Initially, the Court explained the purpose of the hearing, “The reason we’re having this conference, I have a new action – the plaintiff is acting pro se – and the action is against a number of state court judges, as well as the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct. And what I wanted to tell you is that the complaint appears to be without merit; we’ve reviewed it, and I am not going to authorize service upon all of these defendants…”

The Court then addresses Assistant Attorney General Monica Connell, who is appearing on behalf at least one of the defendants. “All right. Now, look, in situations like this there’s an orderly way to deal with the case which is fair to both sides. What I would like you to do is to consider what you believe should be done in response to this, and maybe you have already done so. But when there are many defendants, such as state court judges and so forth, there is no – nothing to be gained by having lot of people served, not that it’s a huge burden, but, you know, if the Marshals have to do it and so forth, why I don’t want to engage in that.”

The public record indicates that there are 11 defendants: The New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct, Raoul Felder, Hon. Fern Fisher Brandveen, Hon. Martin A. Shulman, Hon. Joan B. Carey, Hon. Carol R. Edmead, Hon. Eileen A. Rakower, Hon. Jeffrey K. Oing, Hon. Geoffrey D. Wright, Hon. Joan M. Kenney, and Sarah Jo Hamilton.

Ms. Connell advised the Court that she believed the case was baseless and frivolous, adding, “I know some of them [the defendants] have contacted me already to tell me that they have been served.” Her request to submit a letter motion was then denied by the Court, “No, don’t do a letter motion…it is not a lot of trouble to have a formal notice of motion and a brief memorandum.”

Various attorneys, and who have reviewed the publicly available complaint and exhibits, respectfully disagree that the action is without merit. A former federal prosecutor, who asked not to be named, believes that perhaps the matter does not belong in a federal civil court proceeding. “It is shockingly clear to me that certain state court judges violated the law. This belongs is federal court as a criminal case,” he says. “It’s public corruption.”

The underlying issue concerns attorney Capogrosso’s inability to perform her duties as an attorney shortly after the World Trade Center bombings. Since her law office was in the bombing frozen zone, she had no access to her computer or files. And at a court hearing just weeks after 9/11, a state court judge firmly opposed her request for an adjournment, even though then-governor Pataki, Chief Judge Kaye and then-Chief Administrative Judge Lippman had enacted emergency, and widely advertised, Orders dealing with, and staying, any limitations of time in court proceedings.

Not surprising is the fact that the underlying case was against an attorney for alleged wrongdoing. And that attorney, of course, is well connected to the First Department, Departmental Disciplinary Committee and the State Commission on Judicial Conduct.

More on this story soon…… And if you would like the court transcript or complaint emailed to you as a pdf file, let us know at corruptcourts@gmail.com. We’re living history. This is Tammany Hall II.