Local Judge’s Frustrated Outburst Creates Mistrial

Local Judge’s Frustrated Outburst Creates Mistrial
The Connecticut Law Tribune by Thomas B. Scheffey - August 17, 2009

In many professions, reaching quick conclusions based on minimal factual knowledge is a sign of expertise – even wisdom. But for a judge, it’s a serious danger. If it appears to be pre-judging – that’s the basic meaning of prejudice. An Appellate Court panel has ruled that Judge Trial Referee William Wollenberg may have at least given the appearance of pre-judging a case after he let loose a tirade at a father who was trying to maintain parental rights. The Appellate judges ordered a new trial, saying that Wollenberg, a Hartford juvenile judge who is also the chief administrative judge for Connecticut’s judge trial referees, gave the appearance of having “preconceived notions” about the father’s sincerity. In February of last year, Wollenberg was presiding in a termination of parental rights case in which the mother of 10-year-old Nathan B. was seeking to nullify her ex-husband’s legal fatherhood. The mother had remarried, and was hoping to clear the way for her new husband to adopt Nathan. The paternal father had spent nine of those 10 years in jail. That morning, he was agitated -- fidgeting and gesticulating to his court-appointed lawyer, Jonathan D. Chomick, of Plainville’s Mastrianni & Segulgic. Wethersfield lawyer Jonathan W. A. Ruhe was presenting the mother’s case for termination, and had already questioned two witnesses. Judge Wollenberg reprimanded the father for being uncontrolled and disruptive. The father asked to address the judge. “Your Honor, I apologize. It’s just that I’m not trying to in any way to make undue gestures or motions—I’m just concerned about the outcome of this and I’m very involved in this case and I’m . . . .” “Don’t get me going, please,” countered Wollenberg. “You’re here today, concerned about the outcome. The child is 10 years old. You were with him for one year. And you’re very concerned today? After nine years? Somebody who cared would not stick himself in jail and stay there so he couldn’t see his child.” Wollenberg added that he was “sick of these people who come in and say, `Oh, I really care. I haven’t seen him in nine years, judge, but I really care.’ Check with your attorney see what he has done in the last nine years with his family and how he has worked. Check with anybody here. They tended to their families.”

‘Difficult Decision’

Over lunch, Chomick, the attorney for the father, thought long and hard about the morning outburst, and what he should do. “It’s a tough motion to make, as an attorney. I’m in front of that judge a lot, and I have a good relationship with him,” Chomick said in an interview. “It’s always a difficult decision to make. I’ve been in front of Judge Wollenberg countless times. But if you have a client to take care of, I guess it’s an easy decision to make.” After the lunch recess, Chomick moved for a new trial. Wollenberg denied the motion, saying the father had initiated the exchange. In May, Wollenberg ruled that the father’s rights should be terminated. The father appealed, claiming the judge had violated a cardinal rule of judging. Chomick invoked the rule in the Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 3 (c) (3), which says a judge should disqualify himself in a proceeding “in which the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” Comparing the father’s parenting abilities to that of the attorneys in the courtroom, Chomick argued in his appellate brief, was “highly improper.” The father was characterized as part of a group of people whose concern for their children is artificial and disingenuous and “a waste of the court’s time,” Chomick contended. Ruhe, the mother’s attorney, conceded in his brief that Wollenberg “may have briefly lost [his] temper due to the father’s behavior in the courtroom,” but overall conducted a fair hearing, and was “quite indulgent” in allowing the father to present his case.

Not A ‘Robot’

The appeal was decided by Appellate Judges Robert E. Beach, Socrates H. Mihalakos and Richard A. Robinson. They cited the 1986 case of Keppel v. BaRoss Builders, which notes that a judge “is a human being, not the type of unfeeling robot some would expect the judge to be,” and that heated comments don’t necessarily rise to the level of disqualification for prejudice.
But, the panel wrote, the problem with Wollenberg’s statements was that they were made before the father even had a chance to testify. “Although isolated venting of frustration may not require reversal, a reasonable person hearing the court’s comments in the present case could interpret those remarks as expressions of a preconceived view of the credibility of the respondent, who had not yet testified,” the Appellate Court decision stated. In ordering a new trial, the panel emphasized that it was making no comment on Wollenberg’s actual lack of impartiality, which was not questioned, but “only with the appearance to an objective observer.” Ruhe said his client is mulling her option to seek Supreme Court review, and had made no decision. Ruhe said he wasn’t surprised that his opposing counsel filed an appeal after his client was “dressed down,” but that he was surprised by the Appellate Court decision. “It was very disappointing for my client to lose on something that had nothing to do with the actual facts or law of the case,” Ruhe said. Chomick, meanwhile, said he still has a lot of respect for Wollenberg. “As a trial referee, he hears hundreds of cases, and you’re bound to get frustrated,” Chomick said.

Judge Who Deflated Tire Resigns as Chief Court Administrator

Judge Who Deflated Tire Resigns as Chief Court Administrator
The Washington Post by Ruben Castaneda - August 14, 2009

A Charles County judge who acknowledged deflating a tire on a car parked near the courthouse in La Plata submitted a letter Thursday resigning as chief administrator of the Circuit Court. "I am at a stage of my career where I feel that I can be of more use to the judiciary as a judge in the trenches than as someone with budget, planning, personnel and other management responsibilities," Circuit Court Judge Robert C. Nalley wrote to Robert M. Bell, chief judge of the Maryland Court of Appeals. Nalley made no reference in the letter to this week's controversy over the tire deflation. He admitted to his supervisor and a Southern Maryland newspaper that he let the air out of the rear right tire of a 2004 Toyota Corolla parked outside the courthouse Monday. Reached in his chamber Thursday, Nalley said, "Thank you, sir. I really don't have anything to say." Nalley, 65, is not resigning from the bench.

La Plata Police Chief Cassin B. Gittings said Thursday that an investigation into the tire deflation was continuing. Two county sheriff's jail officers witnessed the incident, and one recorded it with his cellphone camera, said two sources familiar with the investigation who requested anonymity because the probe is ongoing. Bell could not be reached Thursday. William D. Missouri, chief administrative judge of Maryland's 7th Circuit, which includes Charles, said Nalley's resignation from his post as chief administrative judge won't be effective until Bell accepts it. "I suspect [Bell] will accept the resignation and make it effective immediately," Missouri said. As chief administrative judge, Nalley was responsible for assigning cases to judges and overseeing the Circuit Court's budget and personnel, and he largely decided which defendants were entitled to continuances on court dates. "The county administrative judge runs the court," Missouri said. The owner of the car, Jean Washington, 51, said that
a Charles sheriff's deputy told her Monday that Nalley was deflating her tire. Washington rushed out and moved her car to another parking area, where another deputy told her that the rear right tire was flat. Washington said she did not have a permit for the first parking spot. Staff researcher Meg Smith contributed to this story.

Corruption and the "Nepotism Pinata"

Sen. Pedro Espada to crack down on nepotism after son quits Senate job
The New York Daily News by Kenneth Lovett - August 15, 2009

Sen. Pedro Espada aims to crack down on nepotism in the State Senate
Voter discontent should be motivation for Albany change

ALBANY, NY - Days after his son quit his Senate job under pressure, an angry Sen. Pedro Espada warned other lawmakers he'll be keeping tabs on future hires. Espada (D-Bronx) told the Daily News he never has publicly raised the issue when the family and "girlfriends" of fellow lawmakers were on the state payroll. Upset at what he called the "pinata" treatment of his son, Pedro G. Espada, and the mostly anonymous quotes from lawmakers ripping the hiring, the senator warned all gloves are off. "I'm not going to be a vigilante, but I am going to be vigilant," Espada said. "I'm going to know why people are hired and what their job descriptions are."

He added that "everybody (will be) cutting out all the nonsense about relatives, girlfriends. It's over, it's over, it's over." The lawmaker refused to name names about hiring abuses. He said he appreciates the support he got from some Democrats, but "I will not forget some of the ugly things that some of the other so-called anonymous sources had to say. It's personal, damn right. I'd like to meet a father or mother who wouldn't be upset by this." Pedro G. Espada was recently hired as a $120,000-a-year Senate employee. He quit this week after aides in Attorney General Andrew Cuomo's office began looking into whether the senator was involved in the hiring, which would violate state law. Critics say the younger Espada was hired as payback after his father returned to the Democratic fold to end a Senate stalemate. The senator has vehemently denied playing a role or that there was a quid pro quo. Meanwhile, Sen. Reuben Diaz asked Cuomo to "determine the number of family members of state legislators, commissioners and department heads" on the Legislature's payroll. klovett@nydailynews.com

Lawyer/Prosecutor Afraid of Audio Recording Proof? Hmm, why?

ACLU Sues Prosecutor for Charging Kids With Recording Talk With Cops on Cell Phone
The Associated Press - August 14, 2009

PITTSBURGH, PA - The ACLU is suing the Allegheny County District Attorney's office, saying it wrongly charged a man with violating state wiretap law for recording police with a cell phone. The suit says Elijah Matheny, of Pittsburgh, and his friend had been looking for items discarded by University of Pittsburgh students leaving for the semester in April. School police asked Matheny's friend for identification as Matheny recorded the incident. An officer arrested Matheny for recording police without permission after checking with the prosecutor's office. A judge dismissed the charge in July. The ALCU says the First Amendment guarantees people a right to record police in public places. The suit was filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in Pittsburgh.

**********

ACLU says Pa. man wrongly charged in wiretap case
Philly.com / The Associated Press by Dan Nephin - August 13, 2009

PITTSBURGH, PA - The Allegheny County District Attorney's office wrongly charged a man with violating state wiretap law for recording police with a cell phone, the American Civil Liberties Union claimed in a federal lawsuit Thursday. The ACLU said law enforcement agents in Pennsylvania, Allegheny County in particular, have been misapplying the wiretap law.  "Unfortunately, many Pennsylvania law enforcement officers don't understand that the courts have said the state wiretapping law cannot be applied to punish people for recording police actions in public," Glen Downey, an attorney involved in the suit, said in a statement. The suit was filed on behalf of Elijah Matheny, of Pittsburgh, in U.S. District Court in Pittsburgh. It seeks unspecified damages, claiming police violated his civil rights.

According to the suit, Matheny and a friend were looking in a trash container for useable items thrown out by University of Pittsburgh students leaving for the semester in late April. A university property manager called police, who asked Matheny and his friend for identification. Matheny presented his, but when his friend said she didn't have any, police handcuffed her briefly while they checked her name. Matheny made an audio and video recording of the incident. An officer arrested Matheny for recording his voice without permission, the suit said. While Matheny was being held in a university holding cell, the officer checked with the district attorney's office, where an on-duty district attorney advised that Matheny had broken the wiretap law. In July, a judge dismissed all charges against Matheny, who also was charged with possessing an instrument of crime , the cell phone. Mike Manko, a district attorney's office spokesman, denied a claim in the suit that the office has a policy of advising officers to charge people who make audio recordings of police. But he said the office would have no further comment until it reviewed police reports from the case. Witold "Vic" Walczak, the ACLU's legal director in Pennsylvania, said the problem is surprisingly widespread, citing complaints in York, Philadelphia and suburban Pittsburgh. Walczak expects demonstrators at the Group of 20 global economic summit in Pittsburgh in September to use cell phones to record police. "Police have every right to arrest people if they destroy property or block passage, but police need to understand that they cannot arrest people simply for putting them on candid camera," he said.

Judge Admits Deflating Tire Over Parking Spot

Md. judge admits deflating tire over parking spot
The Associated Press - August 13, 2009 

LA PLATA, Md. (AP) - A Charles County judge has acknowledged deflating a tire of a car parked in a restricted area near the courthouse, but he isn't apologizing. Circuit Court Judge Robert C. Nalley tells Channel 9 that he let out the air because leaving notes for illegal parkers is not effective. The chief administrative judge for Maryland's 7th Circuit, which includes Charles, says Nalley acknowledged his actions to him. Judge William D. Missouri suggested to The Washington Post that Nalley might be sanctioned for the action he took Monday. La Plata police say they are investigating the incident. The owner of the car, Jean Washington, works part time at the courthouse as part of a cleaning crew. She says she didn't know she couldn't park in the area and never received any warnings.


***********

Judge Says Deflating Tire On Car Wasn't 'Big Deal'
Supervisor Says Jurist May Be Sanctioned
The Washington Post by Ruben Castaneda - August 13, 2009

A Charles County judge suspected of deflating a tire on a car parked near the courthouse admitted the action to his supervisor Wednesday and said he didn't think it was a "big deal," the supervisor said. Circuit Court Judge Robert C. Nalley made the statements in a conversation with William D. Missouri, chief administrative judge for Maryland's 7th Circuit, which includes Charles. Missouri said in an interview Wednesday that Nalley had apologized to him -- not for deflating the tire, but for not notifying him about the matter. Missouri said he learned about the incident from a newspaper account Wednesday. Missouri said he did not ask Nalley why he deflated the tire or press him for details.

La Plata police officers said Wednesday that they were investigating the incident. Regardless of whether the officers take action, Missouri suggested that Nalley, the Circuit Court's administrative judge for Charles, might be sanctioned. "As judges, all we have is the public's trust," Missouri said. "If we lose that trust, we have nothing. I can assure you, [trust] will be maintained." Nalley did not return phone calls from The Washington Post. But in an interview with the Maryland Independent newspaper published Wednesday, Nalley said that he had flattened the rear passenger-side tire of a 2004 Toyota Corolla that was parked near the courthouse in La Plata. Nalley told the Independent that someone had repeatedly parked in a restricted zone and that he had left notes for the driver. Letting the air out of a tire was less inconvenient to the driver than having the car towed, Nalley said. The owner of the Toyota, Jean Washington, said Wednesday that she had not received a note or a verbal warning to stay away from the parking area where she left her car Monday. "The only warning I got was when he flattened my tire," Washington said.

Washington, 51, works part time at the courthouse as part of an evening cleaning crew. Until Monday, she said, she had parked in the same area without any trouble. There is a sign notifying drivers that the area is a restricted parking zone and that motorists are required to have a permit between 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. There are no signs or markings indicating that spaces are reserved for Nalley or anyone else. Washington said that she parked at 3:30 p.m. Monday and was told by a sheriff's deputy about 15 minutes later that Nalley was deflating one of her tires. Washington said she did not have a permit to park in the area and would not have done so if she had been told she was not supposed to. Washington said she chose the spot because it is close to the courthouse and, because her work shift typically ends at 8:30 p.m., she doesn't like to walk to another parking lot in the dark. Washington said Nalley should have called police or had her car towed rather than deflate the tire. "If my car had been towed, that would have been my responsibility," Washington said. "If I had been ticketed, that would have been my responsibility."

Call for 1st NYS Judicial Impeachment in 137 years

BREAKING NEWS:

Call for 1st NYS Judicial Impeachment in 137 years

Impeachment Process Last Used in 1872

by Frank N. Brady

Integrity in the Courts today called on all members of the New York State Assembly to begin Articles of Impeachment against two New York State judges: Francis A. Nicholai and Anthony A. Scarpino, Jr.

CLICK HERE TO SEE "SORDID BACKGROUND" ON JUDGE NICHOLAI

CLICK HERE TO SEE "CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE" and JUDGE SCARPINO

The last Supreme Court Judge to be Impeached in New York was Justice George G. Barnard-- in 1872. At the time, The New York Times reported that the state Judiciary had "sustained the reign of misrule [and that the] corruption must be purged." The May 3, 1872 New York Times article continues, "The House of Assembly sits today as a great Grand Jury, and had it in their power to purify the judicial atmosphere for all time to come.... A judge sworn to see that justice was done is himself to be impeached for a total want of justice and for corrupt and maladministration of his office." (The May 3, 1872 New York Times article will be posted here on August 14, 2009)

The push for Impeachment proceedings follows the recent confirmation that the statewide judicial ethics committee, the Commission on Judicial Conduct (the "CJC"), was itself corrupt. The chief counsel of the CJC, Robert Tembeckjian, and his former deputy, Alan W. Friedberg, have become icons of the current statewide ethics scandal in New York-- known as Tammany Hall 2--- a systemic collection of whitewashing and cover-up. Tembeckjian's and Friedberg's recent testimony in Albany at the New York State Senate Judiciary hearings on June 8, 2009 stunned those who read the written transcript, or who had viewed the hearing videos. (CLICK HERE TO SEE THE HEARING VIDEOS)

CLICK HERE TO SEE THE MULTI-PART SERIES, "Tembeckjian's Crimes"

In New York State, "articles of impeachment" begin in the State Assembly and require a simple majority vote "to impeach" by members of the New York State Assembly. The impeachment process then moves to the Impeachment Court and the New York State Senate where a conviction, and removal, requires a two-thirds majority vote after a trial. The most famous trial by the New York Impeachment Court involved Governor "Plain Bill" William Sulzer in 1913. His troubled short reign as a Tammany Hall backed governor lasted less than 10 months. Sulzer is the only NY governor to have ever been impeached.

The "Court for the Trial of Impeachments and the Correction of Errors" was established by the New York State Constitution in 1777. The body considered improper acts of a political, moral or ethical nature, along "other subjective points of view". In 1846, the "Court for the Correction of Errors" was abolished as its jurisdiction was transferred to the New York State Court of Appeals. The existing New York "Court for the Trial of Impeachments" has also been called the "impeachment Court" and the "High Court of Impeachment". In New York, Article 6, Section 24, of the New York State Constitution applies:

Court for trial of impeachments; judgment

24. The assembly shall have the power of impeachment by a vote of a majority of all the members elected thereto. The court for the trial of impeachments shall be composed of the president of the senate, the senators, or the major part of them, and the judges of the court of appeals, or the major part of them. On the trial of an impeachment against the governor or lieutenant-governor, neither the lieutenant-governor nor the temporary president of the senate shall act as a member of the court. No judicial officer shall exercise his or her office after articles of impeachment against him or her shall been preferred to the senate, until he or she shall have been acquitted. Before the trial of an impeachment, the members of the court shall take an oath or affirmation truly and impartially to try the impeachment according to the evidence, and no person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of the members present. Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than removal from office, or removal from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any public office of honor, trust, or profit under this state; but the party impeached shall be liable to indictment and punishment according to law. (Amended by vote of the people November 6, 2001)

The written Impeachment request by Integrity in the Courts to all members of the New York State Assembly will be posted here at 9am on Monday, August 24, 2009.

Whistling Corruption: More New Yorkers Fed-Up

Waterfront corrupt: Probe finds execs wasted anti-terror cash, surfed for porn, misused boats
The New York Daily News by LARRY MCSHANE - August 12, 2009

The agency created to police New York's notorious waterfront was run by corrupt executives no better than head-cracking mobsters, a blistering state probe charged on Tuesday. The watchdog Waterfront Commission's top echelon misused Homeland Security money, kept a convicted crook in business and surfed the Internet for porn, the stunning 60-page report revealed. The misdeeds, while not exactly organized crime, were pervasive throughout the largest port on the East Coast. "This was a total agency breakdown," said Inspector General Joseph Fisch. "Instead of ridding the waterfront of corruption, this agency itself was corrupt." The report bore out many of the findings in a series of Daily News articles about corruption in New York Harbor, a haven for illegal activities predating the commission's 1953 creation. A year later, the Oscar-winning "On The Waterfront" brought the drama of the docks to the nation's movie screens. The report exposed a plethora of wrongdoing - from ordering cops to hold prime Manhattan parking spots for their bosses to providing police exam answers for a thickheaded would-be cop who twice failed the test. In one of the more stunning accusations, the commission failed to track $600,000 in Homeland Security funds - money directed to prevent another 9/11. Another $170,000 federal grant went to buy a patrol boat intended for "early detection of a waterborne attack." The craft was instead used to ferry VIPs during Fleet Week and other high-profile events, the report said. The findings led New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine to fire Commissioner Michael Madonna last week. The report cited five former commission bosses.  All are now gone; Madonna's New York counterpart, Michael Axelrod, was let go last year, when his three-year term expired. The investigation began in May 2007 after whistleblower complaints, including information from a pair of top commission cops - Brian Smith and Kevin McGowan. Investigators soon discovered the commission had botched one of its major responsibilities: auditing and licensing the 50-plus companies doing business in the harbor. The failure allowed all companies to operate on short-term temporary licenses, while in-depth reviews lagged as much as 14 years behind, the report found. Such mistakes flourished amid the agency's "climate of abuse and lack of accountability," the report said.

General Counsel Jon Deutsch reportedly helped convicted felon Frank Cardaci keep open his port business despite his criminal past. Cardaci used his wife's name to run a waterfront warehouse. Madonna reportedly provided the answers for a police exam to James Sutera, who failed the test twice - and then scored a 97.5 on his third try, the highest mark ever. Sutera is facing criminal charges from the Manhattan district attorney in the case. Additional prosecutions are possible, investigators said. They could include audit director Frank Nastasi, accused of running a private tax preparation business at work - in between surfing the Internet for porn. New York commissioner Axelrod provided official "police" parking placards to his wife and a wealthy pal - former Morton's steakhouse owner Allen J. Bernstein. Lawrence Lustberg, a lawyer for Deutsch, said his client voluntarily cooperated with the investigation.  "The report completely ignores his answers, and acts as if he never appeared," Lustberg said. "I think this was a witchhunt. I think they made up their minds ahead of time." Madonna did not answer a call to his New Jersey home. In the report, he blamed his boss, former Executive Director Thomas De Maria. lmcshane@nydailynews.com

See also, Tembeckjian's Crimes, Part 7 - Covering 3 Judges 9/11 Donation Fraud

More Good Fed News for NY: Robertson to Lead Buffalo FBI

Press Release  -  For Immediate Release  -  August 11, 2009
Washington D.C.  -  FBI National Press Office  -  (202) 324-3691

James H. Robertson Named Special Agent in Charge of Buffalo Division - James H. Robertson has been named special agent in charge (SAC) of the FBI’s Buffalo Division. FBI Director Robert S. Mueller, III appointed him to this position to replace SAC Laurie J. Bennett, who now serves as deputy assistant director of the Weapons of Mass Destruction Directorate at FBI Headquarters. Most recently, Mr. Robertson served as chief of the International Terrorism Operations Section II, FBI Counterterrorism Division.

Mr. Robertson entered on duty as an FBI special agent in May 1989. Upon completion of training at the FBI Academy in Quantico, Virginia, he was assigned to the Chicago Division. While there, he served on a joint FBI-Chicago Police Department Organized Crime Task Force targeting the Chicago Outfit. He also served as a primary sniper for the regional SWAT team. In January 1998, he was promoted to supervisory special agent in the Inspection Division at FBI Headquarters, responsible for evaluating the FBI’s Confidential Informant Program. In January 2000, Mr. Robertson was assigned to the Detroit Division as the supervisory senior resident agent of the Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo, and St. Joseph Resident Agencies. He served in that role until October 2004, when he was promoted to assistant special agent in charge (ASAC) of the Cincinnati Division’s National Security Branch. As ASAC, he had program management responsibilities for the Counterterrorism, Counterintelligence, Field Intelligence, and Cyber Crimes Programs. From October 2005 to April 2006, Mr. Robertson served as the Counterterrorism Division’s on-scene commander for the Iraqi Theater of Operations (ITO). He commanded all FBI operations in Iraq, and was responsible for liaison with Department of Defense elements and military commanders within the ITO. Mr. Robertson was promoted to section chief of the Counterterrorism Division’s International Terrorism Operations Section II in November 2007. In that role, he formulated and implemented the Counterterrorism Division’s overseas strategy and was responsible for the day-to-day management and oversight of international terrorism investigations and operations abroad. Mr. Robertson is married and has two daughters.

Madoff's Top Aide Pleads Guilty; Though Cooperating, Sent to Jail

Madoff's Top Aide Pleads Guilty; Though Cooperating, Sent to Jail
The New York Law Journal - August 11, 2009

Bernard L. Madoff's right-hand man pleaded guilty yesterday and is cooperating in the government's investigation into the largest Ponzi scheme in history. Frank DiPascali Jr. waived indictment and entered guilty pleas to 10 counts in a criminal information before Southern District Judge Richard J. Sullivan. Mr. DiPascali admitted he was part of a scheme that cost institutions, individual investors and charities billions of dollars. In spite of his cooperation with the government and over the objections of both his defense counsel and the prosecution, Judge Sullivan took the unusual step of ordering Mr. DiPascali be jailed immediately.  

Department of Justice Press Release

For Immediate Release
August 11, 2009 United States Attorney's Office
Southern District of New York
Contact: (212) 637-2600
Former Employee at Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC Pleads Guilty to Ten-Count Criminal Information

NEW YORK—Lev. Dassin, the Acting United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Joseph M. Demarest, Jr., the Assistant Director-in-Charge of the New York Field Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Alan D. Lebowitz, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the United States Department of Labor, Employee Benefits Security Administration (DOL-EBSA), and Patricia J. Haynes, the Special Agent-in-Charge of the New York Field Office of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), announced today that Frank DiPascali, Jr. pleaded guilty to ten felony counts contained in a criminal information. DiPascali, formerly an employee of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC, pleaded guilty in Manhattan federal court before United States District Judge Richard J. Sullivan to conspiracy, securities fraud, investment adviser fraud, falsifying records of a broker-dealer, falsifying records of an investment adviser, mail fraud, wire fraud, international money laundering, perjury and attempting to evade federal income taxes. DiPascali, 52, of New Jersey, faces a statutory maximum sentence of 125 years in prison. He is also subject to mandatory restitution and faces criminal fines up to twice the gross gain or loss derived from the offense. Additionally, the criminal information to which DiPascali pleaded guilty includes forfeiture allegations that would require DiPascali to forfeit the proceeds of the charged crimes, as well as all property involved in the money laundering offenses and all property traceable to such property. The statutory maximum sentences for each of the charged offenses are set forth in an attached chart. Judge Sullivan remanded DiPascali and set a sentencing control date for May 15, 2010. Mr. Dassin praised the investigative work of the FBI, DOL-EBSA, and the IRS and thanked the SEC for its assistance. Mr. Dassin added that the investigation is continuing.  Assistant United States Attorneys Marc Litt, Lisa A. Baroni, William J. Stellmach, Barbara A. Ward, and Sharon Frase are in charge of the prosecution.

... CLICK HERE FOR RELATED STORY, "Holocaust Survivor Ties Madoff and Dreier to New York Ethics Scandal."

Top Clowns in Judicial Branch of New York Circus

Court System Wins Bid To Expedite Pay Appeal
The New York Law Journal by Daniel Wise - NEWS IN BRIEF - August 11, 2009

The New York court system last week won a motion to expedite an appeal that had been filed by the other two branches of government focusing on the portion of Supreme Court Justice Edward H. Lehner's ruling that the failure to give the state's 1,300 judges a pay raise in 10 years violates the separation of powers doctrine (NYLJ, June 16).

In an unsigned order, a unanimous panel of the Appellate Division, First Department, directed that briefing be completed by Sept. 3. In Chief Judge v. Governor, 400763/08, the court system is seeking to appeal directly to the Court of Appeals the two theories rejected by Justice Lehner. A motion is pending before the Court. Meanwhile, the high court has agreed to hear two other pay-related suits, Larabee v. Governor, 2009 WL 1652845, and Maron v. Silver, 58 AD3d 102, and arguments are expected in November. In Larabee, a suit brought by four individual judges, the First Department affirmed a ruling by Justice Lehner that also ordered a pay raise, finding a separation-of-powers violation (NYLJ, June 3). In Maron, the Third Department rejected claims brought by three other judges (NYLJ, Nov. 14, 2008). — Daniel Wise

New Top Manhattan Fed, Preet Bharara, Ready to Rock

Bharara Confirmed As U.S. Attorney
The New York Law Journal by Mark Hamblett - News In Brief - August 11, 2009

Preetinder S. Bharara was confirmed Friday by the U.S. Senate as the next U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York. Mr. Bharara, 40, is a veteran of the Southern District who worked as chief counsel to U.S. Senator Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., and headed the Senate Judiciary Committee investigation into whether the firings of U.S. attorneys in several districts by the Bush administration were politically motivated. Mr. Bharara served as a prosecutor in the Southern District from 2000 to 2005, working in the general crimes, narcotics and organized crime/terrorism units. He follows in the footsteps of Michael L. Garcia, who served in the post from 2005 until Dec. 1, 2008, and veteran prosecutor Lev Dassin, who has served as acting U.S. attorney since December. The Senate went into recess last week without taking action on President Obama's nomination of Loretta Lynch, a partner at Hogan & Hartson, as the next U.S. attorney in the Eastern District, where she served as the district's top prosecutor from 1999 to 2001. — Mark Hamblett

Here's The New York Times on Bharara:

MAN IN THE NEWS | PREET BHARARA

For Manhattan’s Next U.S. Attorney, Politics and Prosecution Don’t Mix

The New York Times by BENJAMIN WEISER -  August 10, 2009

He worked for one of the most partisan Democratic senators in Washington, and a few years ago helped to uncover political maneuverings by the Justice Department in the administration of President George W. Bush. But perhaps the most telling aspect about Preet Bharara, the next United States attorney in Manhattan, may be how he managed to win the trust and respect of even those who might have been his natural opponents. Mr. Bharara, who served as the chief counsel to Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York, played a major role in the Senate Judiciary Committee’s investigation into the firings of United States attorneys around the country. As he took sworn testimony from witnesses, handled the issuance of subpoenas and negotiated with administration officials over the production of documents and other materials, he drew praise for his evenhanded approach. He even won over one fired prosecutor, David C. Iglesias of New Mexico, a Republican who said he had wavered over whether to testify voluntarily before the panel, fearing that it would degenerate into a “partisan circus.” But after their conversations, Mr. Iglesias said, he concluded that Mr. Bharara was approaching the investigation like a prosecutor, not a politician. “It gave me a lot of assurance," Mr. Iglesias said. “He completely understood what was at stake here.” A key factor, Mr. Iglesias added, was that Mr. Bharara had formerly worked as a prosecutor in the United States attorney’s office in Manhattan, an office with a reputation for independence and nonpartisanship.

Now, Mr. Bharara, 40, will be asked to carry on that tradition. On Friday, the Senate confirmed him to be the next United States attorney for the Southern District of New York. Although he declined to comment for this article, he spoke last year about his role in the Senate inquiry and his feelings that a line between federal prosecutors and politics had been crossed. “You’re talking about the Department of Justice,” he said, “that employs 100,000 people, that used to be led by Bobby Kennedy, that a lot of people in America look to.” IN his new post, Mr. Bharara will oversee more than 200 lawyers who handle some of the country’s most prominent cases, like the prosecution of Bernard L. Madoff for his multibillion-dollar Ponzi scheme.

As a naturalized American citizen from India, Mr. Bharara also brings a diversity of background to the post And while recent United States attorneys in Manhattan have come directly from prosecutors’ jobs, Mr. Bharara’s background on Capitol Hill will serve him well, said Daniel C. Richman, a law professor at Columbia University and a former Southern District prosecutor. “He contributes things that we’ve not seen before,” Professor Richman said. “He’s thought hard about what a U.S. attorney’s place should be within a broader federal enforcement system and the train wrecks that can develop when unthinking or ill-thinking bureaucrats tamper with that. Preetinder S. Bharara was born in Ferozepur, India, and he was an infant when his parents immigrated to the United States in 1970. He grew up in Monmouth County, N.J., and graduated from Harvard in 1990 and Columbia Law School in 1993. That summer, he worked for several weeks as a volunteer in Mark Green’s campaign for public advocate, occasionally driving the candidate to campaign events. He has reflected on his roots and the improbable journey his family took to get to this country. His father, a Sikh, and his mother, who was Hindu, were born in what is now Pakistan, before India and Pakistan were separate countries. In the violent migration that occurred after the 1947 partition, his father and mother both moved to the Indian side, with their families losing property and most of their possessions, Mr. Bharara has said.

His wife’s father, a Muslim, also moved, from the Indian side into Pakistan, also losing his home “and much, much more,” as Mr. Bharara put it. And his wife’s mother was born in Palestine, after her father, who was Jewish, escaped with his family from Nazi Germany. “Four different families, practicing four different faiths — all compelled to flee a half century ago because of their religion,” Mr. Bharara said in a speech to the South Asian Bar Association of New York in 2007. “It also means,” he joked, “that even when my wife fasts for Yom Kippur, and my father-in-law fasts for Ramadan, I get to stuff my face with samosas all day.” In 2000, after about six years in private practice, Mr. Bharara became a Southern District prosecutor, first under Mary Jo White, and later under James B. Comey. For five years, he prosecuted organized crime, narcotics and securities fraud, among other crimes. One major case, with dozens of defendants, involved Chinese organized crime. He was a hard worker who had a self-deprecating wit and stayed cool under pressure, according to former associates. “Preet was one of those guys in the office who everyone wanted to try a case with,” said Christopher P. Conniff, a prosecutor at the time.

IN 2005, Mr. Bharara became Senator Schumer’s chief counsel. Former colleagues described him as a skilled staff member in a political caldron where Democrats were often negotiating among themselves as much as they were with Republicans. “He does have an incredible manner and ability to work with others,” said the New Jersey attorney general, Anne Milgram, who in 2005 served as counsel to Jon S. Corzine, then a United States senator, and got to know Mr. Bharara through their work on judiciary issues. “He never carries himself like he’s the smartest guy in the room, even though he often is,” she added. Mr. Bharara said in a speech in 2007, “Party affiliation can’t tell you whether to indict a case, whether to plead it out, or how to try it. His approach has allowed him to remain close to people with whom he otherwise disagrees sharply. One friend from college, Viet D. Dinh, who served as an assistant attorney general in the George W. Bush administration and now teaches law at Georgetown University, said, “To this day I cannot find a single big political philosophical issue upon which Preet and I agree, but I can’t imagine two other people trusting each other implicitly the way Preet and I do.”

During the Judiciary Committee’s investigation into the prosecutor firings, Mr. Bharara was aided by his background as a federal prosecutor in Manhattan. “To the extent that Preet was the driving force of the investigation, it was conducted in a completely fair, thorough and professional manner,” said Michael M. Purpura, a former Southern District colleague who was a senior lawyer in the Bush Justice Department and later an associate White House counsel. The investigation, along with a separate inquiry by the House Judiciary Committee, culminated in the 2007 resignation of Attorney GeneralAlberto R. Gonzales.Mr. Bharara, in a bar association talk last year, said that the investigation’s focus had been not only on whether there had been violations of law, but also on whether “the great traditions of the department were violated. He added, “The more that was uncovered, the more it seemed clear that there was politicization,” not only in how United States attorneys were being fired or hired, but even at the lowest level — “the line level,” as he put it — “where there should never be any politics at all.”

Did you hear the one about 3 lawyers, $50 Million and the S&M Club?

Attorney to Plead Not Guilty To Grand Larceny Charges

The New York Law Journal - NEWS IN BRIEF - August 10, 2009

The investigation into a $50 million mortgage fraud scam involving three lawyers, a Manhattan dominatrix club, and dozens of East End, Long Island, properties is expected to grow larger today with additional charges and additional defendants, a spokesman for Suffolk County District Attorney Thomas J. Spota said. The operation allegedly recruited straw buyers at the dominatrix club Arena Studio to obtain fraudulent home mortgages and has snared attorney George O. Guldi, who was a Democratic Suffolk County legislator until 2003.

Here's a background New York Daily News article:

SoHo S&M club owners Donald MacPherson and Carrie Coakley tied to $50M mortgage ripoff

BY KERRY BURKE AND WILLIAM SHERMAN 
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITERS - March 26th 2009, 8:23 AM

Mortgage scammers used dominatrixes and the owners of a renowned SoHo S&M parlor to pull off a $50 million fraud scheme involving dozens of properties in the Hamptons and the city. Donald MacPherson, 65, and his wife, Carrie Coakley, 39, proprietors of the bondage den Arena Studios, were unmasked as two of the five people charged with ripping off banks in a seven-year spree. The duo, who sponsor the annual Black and Blue Ball for S&M aficionados, used dominatrixes at their Broome St. Club to recruit patrons to participate in the scheme, the Suffolk County district attorney's office said.

Former Suffolk County lawmaker George Guldi, 55; title company owner Ethan Ellner, 54, and lawyer Dustin Dente also were charged in the scam. Prosecutors said the ring used straw buyers with phony jobs and inflated incomes to "buy" the homes in Southampton, Water Mill and other locations, Suffolk County District Attorney Thomas Spota said. The straw buyers, who were not arrested, took out millions of dollars in mortgages from lenders, including Wachovia and Deutsche banks, and turned the money over to the five ringleaders, said Spota's spokesman, Robert Clifford. "Some of the straw buyers were patrons of the club and the dominatrixes approached them and asked if they wanted to make some easy money," Clifford said. The straw buyers, who were not identified, were paid about $20,000 each. It's unclear how much the dominatrixes were paid for their recruiting efforts. MacPherson, a former member of Community Board 2 in Manhattan, and Coakley, who live in Greenwich Village, could not be reached.

Prosecutors said the ringleaders created bogus documents saying the buyers earned up to $45,000 a month. The straw buyers' employers listed included MacPherson's S&M club and his Maximum Restraint Films, Ltd. which owns the SoHo Journal, an arts publication that advertises summer rentals in the Hamptons. Several of those homes were subject to the fraudulent mortgages, a criminal complaint says. "The economic damage these defendants single-handedly caused to the Suffolk County economy is simply appalling," Spota said. Homes on Inwood St. in Jamaica, Queens, and Glemore Ave. in Brooklyn also were encumbered with phony mortgages, some of which were $2 million or more on individual homes. The scheme involved a hustle called "mortgage stacking," in which bogus or "washed" title reports conceal outstanding mortgages. All five alleged ringleaders pleaded not guilty to grand larceny and mortgage fraud charges in their arraignment at Southampton Town Justice Court.

State to Study Unparalleled Kids for Cash Scandal

Pa. to study unparalleled juvie scandal
The Associated Press by MARK SCOLFORO - August 8, 2009

HARRISBURG, PA — A special commission was established Friday to study the juvenile-justice corruption scandal at a Northeastern Pennsylvania courthouse, an episode the state’s chief justice described as unparalleled in U.S. history. Gov. Ed Rendell signed legislation that created the 11-member Interbranch Commission on Juvenile Justice. It has until May to try to determine how the Luzerne County problems arose and recommend ways to prevent them from recurring. Two former county judges pleaded guilty in February to wire fraud and tax evasion in what prosecutors said was a scheme to improperly force juvenile defendants into privately run detention centers in exchange for kickbacks of $2.6 million. A judge threw out the former judges’ plea agreements last week, saying Mark Ciavarella and Michael Conahan had not adequately accepted responsibility for their actions. Those plea deals had called for sentences of 87 months. “I have never, not only in this state, never in the United States seen a bribery case of this magnitude, and the effect that it’s had on the children’s lives is astounding,” said Chief Justice Ronald Castille, who attended the bill-signing ceremony in the Capitol. The commission’s work will be separate from the review of about 6,000 juvenile convictions that the court system has undertaken, which has already resulted in the expungement of about 800 cases that involve relatively minor charges. Many of the children were locked up after appearing in court without lawyers.

Civil litigation over the judges’ actions also is under way, as about 400 individuals ranging from their teens to their early 20s have filed suit over the alleged violations of their constitutional rights. Castille called it a “system failure” in the county that also extended to court administration and lawyers. “It is possible ... that every record of every juvenile ever dealt with by Ciavarella in that county will be expunged,” Castille said. “But our court wants to make sure that this can never happen again.” Four members will be appointed by legislative leaders, three by Rendell and four by Castille, who said the chairman was likely to be Superior Court Judge John M. Cleland of McKean County. The commission will have subpoena power, and its members will serve without pay. House Majority Leader Todd Eachus, D-Butler Township, who sponsored the legislation, said the scandal had done “incalculable damage to the scales of justice” and described the commission’s work as “the beginning of the healing for the children of Luzerne County.” Ciavarella told a TV station earlier this week that he was sorry for what he did but had not taken cash to send kids to jail. “I didn’t do anything wrong relative to any juvenile. I never took a dime for sending a kid away,” Ciavarella said.

CLICK HERE TO SEE RELATED STORY, "Judges Accused of Jailing Kids for Cash."

CLICK HERE TO SEE RELATED STORY, "Despite Red Flags About Judges, a Kickback Scheme Flourished" 

Federal Judge Orders Disbarred NY Attorney To Explain Billing

Judge Orders Disbarred NY Attorney To Explain Billing Methods
The New York Law Journal by Mark Fass - August 10, 2009

A federal judge in Brooklyn has given Edward D. Fagan, a Manhattan attorney disbarred in December for failing to pay more than $350,000 in sanctions and fees, 21 days to explain his apparent double-billing for more than $186,000 in reimbursements in a lawsuit he filed on behalf of Holocaust survivors. In December 2002, Eastern District Judge Edward R. Korman awarded Mr. Fagan $222,312 in reimbursements for funds he spent in the so-called Holocaust Victim Assets Litigation. In an order to show cause issued on July 31, Judge Korman wrote that after reviewing another attorney's motion earlier this year for reimbursements in the same matter, the judge learned that Mr. Fagan had already received at least two contributions totaling $186,353 toward his expenses from other attorneys, which Mr. Fagan had never reported. In January, the judge advised Mr. Fagan that "had I known of [these funds] I would not have authorized the reimbursement without an explanation" from Mr. Fagan. Now, the judge has given Mr. Fagan until Aug. 21 to respond or a judgment of $186,353 will be entered against him. Mr. Fagan could not be reached for comment.

CLICK HERE TO SEE RELATED STORY, "NJ Ethics Counsel says NY Holocaust Lawyer Ed Fagan should be Disbarred."

Blank Rome Settles Malpractice Claim for $20 Million

Ouch! BigLaw Firm Settles Malpractice Claim for $20 Million
The Legal Intelligencer by Gina Passarella - August 10, 2009

PHILADELPHIA, PA - Blank Rome has entered into a $20 million agreement with the trustee of a former client that is now in bankruptcy to settle a complaint that alleged breach of fiduciary duty, professional malpractice and breach of contract claims against the firm. The settlement, reached in the Philadelphia Common Pleas Court case Miller v. Blank Rome, was approved by U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Mary F. Walrath for the District of Delaware on July 28. Walrath is overseeing the bankruptcy of American Business Financial Services, which is involved in a string of litigation in both state and federal court stemming from its bankruptcy and business dealings. Blank Rome does not admit any liability or wrongdoing in agreeing to the settlement, according to the agreement. "Blank Rome has expressly denied and continues to deny all allegations of any wrongdoing or liability against it whatsoever arising out of any of the conduct, statements, acts or omissions alleged, or that could have been alleged by the Trustee," the settlement agreement reads. "Nonetheless, Blank Rome has concluded that further conduct of the Blank Rome Litigation would be protracted, expensive and distracting and that it is desirable that the Blank Rome Litigation be settled. Blank Rome has also taken into account the uncertainty and risks inherent in any litigation, especially in complex cases such as the Blank Rome Litigation." Blank Rome represented ABFS in a variety of legal matters prior to the company's January 2005 Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing and acted as debtors' counsel in the Chapter 11 proceeding. The bankruptcy was converted to a Chapter 7 in May 2005 and George L. Miller was named trustee of the ABFS estate, according to the agreement.

Miller filed suit — Miller v. Santilli — in Philadelphia Common Pleas Court against former officers and directors of ABFS in July 2006 as well as a number of financial institutions. Those financial institutions joined accounting firm BDO Seidman.  Miller sued Blank Rome in February 2008 in Common Pleas Court under the caption Miller v. Blank Rome. He asserted breach of contract, professional malpractice and breach of fiduciary duty claims, according to the settlement agreement. Miller and Blank Rome held mediation sessions before Daniel Weinstein of JAMS in California over three days in early June 2009. A settlement was reached and it required approval by the bankruptcy court, according to the agreement. Carl M. Buchholz, managing partner of Blank Rome, signed the settlement agreement on behalf of the firm and Miller signed on behalf of the estate. John G. Harkins Jr. of Harkins Cunningham represented Blank Rome in the case. He said the trustee was seeking $700 million from the defendants and that was a big number for any defendant with the possibility of joint and several liability attaching. Blank Rome had represented ABFS since 1995 in a number of matters, Harkins said." And they were obviously involved in many of the matters with which ABFS was involved," Harkins said when asked why Blank Rome was brought into the suit. "Therefore I guess one says to themselves, in this day and age," that the attorneys and accountants should be included in these types of lawsuits.

Harkins said he thought it was fair to say that the firm had strong witnesses and experts. "They frankly wanted us out of the case," he said, "so they made an offer" and Blank Rome accepted.
Steven M. Coren of Kaufman Coren & Ress represented Miller along with attorneys from Obermayer Rebmann Maxwell & Hippel. They didn't immediately return calls for comment. Among several claims, Miller alleged that Blank Rome knowingly assisted ABFS officers in perpetrating a Ponzi scheme, misled the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission about the financial health of ABFS and assisting the officers in "perpetrating a fraud on the bankruptcy court" during the firm's representation of ABFS in its "short-lived" Chapter 11 filing. According to the complaint, Miller was seeking in excess of $750 million against Blank Rome in compensatory damages along with punitive damages and attorney fees and costs. In a lengthy response adamantly denying any liability-creating conduct, Blank Rome said Miller improperly imposed through the complaint obligations on the firm that weren't part of its engagement or counsel. "[A]nd, more specifically, [Miller] inappropriately tries to hold Blank Rome liable for accounting and financial services or advice and for business decisions for which it was not retained and which were not its responsibility or within its area of expertise," Blank Rome said in its answer to the complaint. Blank Rome argued that while it was the primary outside counsel to ABFS, it was not the only firm used during the period in question. It also said all decisions were made by ABFS representatives. The firm said the alleged misrepresented or omitted information came from ABFS and that is what Blank Rome relied upon in advising the company. As part of the settlement agreement, Blank Rome maintains its ability to collect on fees it was owed through its representation of ABFS. Those fees are now under the control of the bankruptcy proceedings. Through the settlement agreement, Blank Rome agreed to cut its claims to those fees by 40 percent and cut its deferred compensation portion of the fee claim by 40 percent, according to the agreement. The $20 million settlement will be paid to the trustee by Blank Rome's insurers 10 days after whichever of the following happens last; the execution of the agreement, the approval of the agreement or the receipt by Blank Rome insurers of payment instructions, according to the agreement. Miller settled with the ABFS defendants in June 2008, for what attorneys involved with the cases said was worth $16.7 million. A second settlement by the ABFS defendants for an equal amount was reached on behalf of a group of investors, the attorneys said. Harkins said those two settlements represent the splitting of just about all that was left in ABFS' insurance coverage.

CLICK HERE TO SEE RELATED STORY, "Wannabe Judge Attorney [from Blank Rome] Writed about Ethics Dilemmas SHE Failed to Report"

Surrogate Judge and Friends Holding Money From Cancer Victim in 19-Year Old Estate

Judge's Cronies Keep Money from Cancer Patient in Mother's 19-Year-Old Estate

Adrienne Marsh Lefkowitz found out she had cancer over two years ago. While most people know that stress is not good for cancer patients, perhaps someone needs to tell that to Westchester County Surrogate Judge Anthony A. Scarpino and The Bank of New York who continue to destroy the Bank’s cancer-victim opponent.

Lefkowitz, a retired New York State attorney is only too familiar with stress as a way of life, a horror involving her mother’s Westchester County estate that has been going on since Irene Marsh’s death 19 years ago. Westchester County Surrogate Court records indicate that Irene Marsh’s other distributees timely received their monies years ago. However, Ms. Lefkowitz and her daughter did not. (Incidentally, Ms. Lefkowitz’s father’s 21-year-old New York County estate is also still pending.)

For many years Ms. Lefkowitz’s estate distributions were often seized in secret by the estate executor, the Bank of New York. The Bank even refused to release her monies (almost $200,000.) after she made a special request related to her cancer diagnosis. And that medical request also didn’t matter much to Westchester County Surrogate Anthony A. Scarpino who not only denied the emergency medical request but failed to even mention the medical need in his decision. (Matter of Irene B. Marsh, New York Law Journal, October 20, 2006, page 28)

Though Lefkowitz provided evidence from her doctor concerning the cancer diagnosis, and her own affidavit seeking an “expedited resolution” to her request for the release of the undistributed funds withheld from her for years, the judge denied her request in a September 28, 2006 ruling. One attorney who reviewed the public file said, “It’s quite clear that Ms. Lefkowitz presented evidence to the court concerning her cancer diagnosis, and her urgent need for special care and treatment. I can’t understand or explain why the request was denied, and without the court even commenting on her need for monies for immediate cancer treatment.”

A review of the filed documents reveal that while rejecting the original grounds asserted by the bank-executor for withholding Lefkowitz’s distributions, the judge refused to release the funds to Lefkowitz because of the bank’s new argument of anticipated future litigation expenses, and a potential estate insolvency. The Bank of New York concealed from the court that it has refused to pay any more legal bills since January 2004.

“But only Lefkowitz, of the 5 beneficiaries was, in effect, being required to “post a bond” for future estate legal expenses,” says another legal expert after a review of the file. “The denial of monies to a cancer patient is reprehensible on its own, but given the bank’s admission to criminal activity, the Bank of New York is hardly a suitable fiduciary in any estate.” He added, “Under New York State Probate Laws, Article 7 of the SCPA, “dishonesty” is grounds for removal of The Bank of New York as it cuts directly to their ineligibility as a fiduciary. This estate should have been finalized years ago, and the denial of money for a cancer patient by the judge and the fiduciary are shocking- beyond words.” (Click her to see Related Story, "FBI Swamped with Bank of New York Violations")

Instead, the court has left The Bank of New York in place as the fiduciary of Lefkowitz’s mother’s estate, with the clear message that Lefkowitz would get no money for cancer treatment or care, or anything else, because of her plans to finally hold the bank accountable for its failings over the past 19 years, which include their dereliction in securing the Marsh family furnishings, art and jewelry. Lefkowitz is also opposing the huge attorney bills to the estate from McCarthy Fingar LLP. (The reader may recognize the McCarthy Fingar law firm from other stories on this forum, including the Thomas and Agnes Carvel estates) (click "JUDGE TO CANCER PATIENT..." icon on right to view the Court Decision and Lefkowitz's Affidavit),

The FBI has been investigating why over $300,000 of Lefkowitz’s daughter’s trust funds had been wrongfully retained in trust by the Bank of New York over 2 years after the termination date as set forth in the Marsh wills. The FBI probe follows the 2005 non-prosecution agreement where the Bank of New York agreed not to commit any more crimes, as reported in The New York Times on November 9, 2005. The bank’s non-prosecution agreement with the U.S. Attorneys’ Eastern and Southern Districts of New York involved criminal activities which implicated the bank’s corporate counsel’s office and high-level Bank of New York executives. Ms. Lefkowitz declined to comment on this story.

Lippman, Prudenti and Scheinkman on Notice of Mounting Allegations of Corrupt Surrogate

Here's the Letter to Chief Judge Lippman, 2nd Department Presiding Judge Prudenti and 9th Judicial District Administrative Judge Scheinkman:

M.L. DONOHUE,* SOLE LEGITIMATE TRUSTEE
CHRISTOPHER DONOHUE* - ELIZABETH PAGENDARM* - MICHAEL PAGENDARM* - PETER DONOHUE*  -- EQUAL SPOKESPERSONS ON BEHALF OF ALL OF THE NAMED BENEFICIARIES OF THE FRED F. GOETZ TRUST -  goetztrust@aol.com - (650)245-8555

July 24, 2009

TO: A. Gail Prudenti, Presiding Judge
Alan Scheinkman, Administrative Judge,

Jonathan Lippman, Chief Judge*
 
 
RE: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND VERIFIED PETITION AS TO THE DEMAND FOR THE IMMEDIATE DISQUALIFICATION OF ANTHONY SCARPINO DUE TO HIS CRIMINAL ACTS AND GROSS MISCONDUCT AS TO WESTCHESTER COUNTY SURROGATE’S COURT - FILE NO. 2235-1999 A&B
 
We, All Nineteen (19) of the Named Beneficiaries of the Fred F. Goetz Trust, are herewith demanding the IMMEDIATE DISQUALIFICATION of Anthony Scarpino as to any and all activity as to the Fred F. Goetz Trust and it's Litigation at the Westchester County Surrogate’s Court, File No. 2235-1999 A&B. As is clearly identified in our attached ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE and VERIFIED PETITION (and other additional Documentation), Anthony Scarpino’s latest scam as to the ongoing Extortion and Defrauding of our Fred F. Goetz Trust assets is the calendaring of an ILLEGAL ‘Trial’ to take place on August 10, 2009.
 
This is just another of the heinous and overt egregious acts as to the decimation of our Fred F. Goetz Trust funds into the unclean hands (and pocketbooks) of Anthony Scarpino and his handpicked crooked cohorts as he openly pilfers away OUR Fred F. Goetz Trust assets via a variety of criminal scams that violate New York State Law after Law, blatantly ignoring  not only New York State CPLR Rules but OUR Rights under the New York State Constitution and our RIGHTS as citizens of the United States as to full DUE PROCESS protection. We have had numerous high level Judges and Prosecutors, in both Federal and State capacities, in our primary home states of California and New Mexico, review what has been occurring at the Westchester County Surrogate’s Court and they are all aghast – stunned, actually, at the open and criminal violations as to our Case and that our Constitutional Rights are rapaciously trod upon unchecked with no oversights by or of Anthony Scarpino as he callously rapes our Fred F. Goetz Trust funds.
 
We are well aware, via the Internet, that we, the Nineteen (19) Named Beneficiaries of the Fred F. Goetz Trust, are just one of a legion of Estates and/or Trusts who Anthony Scarpino has brazen, repeatedly and uninhibitedly raped year by year in his term as 'Surrogate' under what others have labeled as "Anthony Scarpino's Criminal Enterprise". We are well aware that numerous Notifications of and Complaints about Anthony Scarpino have already been made to EACH of you as to the rampant CORRUPTION at Anthony Scarpino's Court and as to Anthony Scarpino's in-house Henchmen, his 'enforcers' in Fraud and Extortion - Charles Scott, Joseph Accetta, Robin Rodrigues,  et al, and the 'Guardian/Thugs' - Luke Charde and Mary Nitsch.

VIA OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS TO DO SO, WE ARE DEMANDING:

We are demanding not only the IMMEDIATE DISQUALIFICATION of Anthony Scarpino but that you remove our case from the Westchester County Surrogate’s Court to a local Court in New York State where the tentacles of Anthony Scarpino and his criminal underlings have no reach or effect. 

We are demanding that you assign a new Judge to this case.  A Judge who is Honest beyond refute. A Judge who is trained in the proper application of the Law and the application of Facts to a case, i.e. The Rule of Law. 

A Judge who has had NO complaints filed against him or her.
 
We are RIGHTFULLY DEMANDING that until as such time that our ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND VERIFIED PETITION TO DISQUALIFY ANTHONY SCARPINO is resolved, that all actions at the Westchester County Surrogate’s Court as to our Litigation are SUSPENDED and that not even an additional penny of OUR Fred F. Goetz Trust assets is touched.
 
Additionally, we are stating that RECUSAL by Anthony Scarpino is NOT an option.  The heinousness of his criminal acts is such that recusal would be as much of a MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE as to letting stand all of Anthony Scarpino's multitudinous Acts of Fraud on the Court and the denial to us of our right to a judge's Honest services.
 
M.L. Donohue
Sole Legitimate Trustee
Fred F. Goetz Trust, Christopher Donohue, Elizabeth Pagendarm, Michael Pagendarm, Peter Donohue - Equal Spokespersons of the Fred F. Goetz Trust

Here's the Order to Show Cause:

SURROGATE'S COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER

__________________________________________________X

                                                                                                               VERIFIED PETITION

                                                                                                              FILE NO. 2235-1999 A&B    

In the Matter of the Application of

M.L. Donohue as the named Trustee u/a f/b/o

of the Fred F. Goetz Trust

both Individually and on Behalf of

All of the Named Beneficiaries of

the Fred F. Goetz Trust

________________________________________________X

FOR A DECREE OF

IMMEDIATE DISQUALIFICATION OF

ANTHONY SCARPINO

 THIS VERIFIED PETITION of M.L. Donohue, being duly sworn, deposes and says as follows:

            1.            Petitioner is the Sole Legitimate Trustee of the Fred F. Goetz Trust.

            2.              This VERIFIED PETITION is submitted in support of the attached ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE as a result of the latest Violation of New York State Laws and Procedures as inflicted upon the Fred F. Goetz Trust by Anthony Scarpino.  The scheduling by Anthony Scarpino of an ILLEGAL 'Trial' is purported to take place at the Westchester County Surrogate’s Court on Monday, August 10, 2009 at 9:30 a.m.

            3.              This ILLEGAL 'Trial' is just the latest in a long history of overt Violations of New York State Laws and Procedures and the Violations of the Constitution of New York State and as to the total disregard by Anthony Scarpino for any kind of DUE PROCESS.

4.              That , I, M.L. Donohue, unequivocally state that at the Westchester County Surrogate’s Court under the unclean hands of Anthony Scarpino that the Fred F. Goetz Trust and its Assets have been repeatedly raped and victimized by Anthony Scarpino via various felony acts of overt Extortion, Fraud, Fraud on the Courts, Illegal Acts committed "under the Color of the Law', rampant 'Ex Parte' Violations, overt and intentional unequal application of the 'Law' in favor of Anthony Scarpino's handpicked and openly admitted as cronyism appointments – Two (2)’Thugs' as  guardians and the intentional bias for other favored lawyers at the clear expense of the Fred F. Goetz Trust and the clear disregard for an even hand of Justice as Anthony Scarpino is required under the Canon of Ethics to scrupulously follow.

DISQUALIFICATION IS UNEQUIVOCALLY

NECESSARY TO PRESERVE THE INTEGRITY OF

THE NEW YORK STATE COURTS

5.              Herewith, I, M.L. Donohue, the Named Trustee of the Fred F. Goetz Trust, submit that the DECISION as to the DISQUALIFICATION of Anthony Scarpino is deemed not to be a choice but required in that Anthony Scarpino's Acts in the Matter have been so egregious and heinous as to the Violations of DUE PROCESS, et al, as identified previously that there is no outcome that would meter out Justice under the New York State Constitution and all that it stands for as to preserve the Rights of the People.

6.              That A. Gail Prudenti and/or Alan Scheinkman and/or Jonathan Lippman, each in their respective judicial capacities, has the Authority to immediately Remove Anthony Scarpino through the process known as DISQUALIFCATION as it is unequivocal that this is the only venue available so that Justice as to this Matter will be served.

            7.              Presented herewith are the FACTS and the supporting documentation as to latest in a long line of Violations of New York State Laws and Procedures and Violations of Constitutional Rights and total disregard of DUE PROCESS as inflicted by Anthony Scarpino.

THE GREVIOUS VIOLATION BY ANTHONY SCARPINO

AS TO HIS ALLOWING A FAVORED LAWYER - DOMENICK PORCO -

TO RESPRESENT, SIMULTANEOUSLY,

BOTH THE PLAINTIFF AND THE DEFENDANTS

VIA THE MANIPULATED

'APPOINTMENT OF A DUMMY TRUSTEE’

8.            That on or about May 28, 2009 and May 29, 2009, that Anthony Scarpino, thru Charles Scott, noticed a select few of the Named Beneficiaries of the Fred F. Goetz Trust that a 'Trial' would be held on August 10, 2009 at the Westchester County Surrogate’s Court as to  'Accounting Citations' purported to have been filed by a false 'trustee’, one Timothy Bonci, who is, in actuality an Unnamed Co-Defendant in this Litigation, and who under New York State Law is forever barred from ever serving as a Trustee in this Matter as Timothy Bonci for the entirety of the Litigation has been represented by the same lawyer, Domenick Porco, as the Named Defendants.

9.            New York State Law is unequivocal that the Plaintiff and the Defendants in the same Litigation CANNOT be represent by the same counsel.

10.            It is a FACT of this Litigation that Timothy Bonci had been represented throughout by Domenick Porco as a part of the Defendant's Depositions and additionally represented by Domenick Porco in a separate Action brought by the Fred F. Goetz Trust against Timothy Bonci to the New York State Department of State as to Timothy Bonci’s Violations of the Rules of a Notary Public.

11.              It is a FACT of this Litigation that for upwards of Two (2) Years after Timothy Bonci was illegally appointed by Anthony Scarpino as a dummy 'trustee' that all communication from Anthony Scarpino continued to be posted to Domenick Porco for Timothy Bonci as 'trustee' (Plaintiff) and to Domenick Porco as the Attorney of Record for the Defendants who are Timothy Bonci's Mother-in-Law and Aunt-by-Marriage.

12.  It is a FACT of this Litigation that as to one James Scalise, a Domenick Porco crony, that James Scalise was used as just a facade, a false front, for Domenick Porco as the actual and real representation of Timothy Bonci was serviced by Domenick Porco so as to allow Domenick Porco the availability to be able to double bill the Fred F. Goetz Trust both simultaneously as counsel for the Defendants and as counsel for the Defendants, Timothy Bonci, Barbara Morris and Elizabeth Knudsen and as counsel for the Plaintiff, The Fred F. Goetz Trust.

INTENTIONAL VIOLATION OF THE RULE OF SERVICE 

AS TO THE ILLEGAL 'TRIAL' SET FOR AUGUST 10, 2009

13.             New York State Law is equally unequivocal that ALL parties to a Litigation are REQUIRED to be NOTICED as to ALL ACTIONS and there are very proscribed Rules of Notification and Service.

            14.              It is a FACT that these purported Timothy Bonci 'Accounting Citations' were NEVER served to several of the Fred F. Goetz Trust Named Beneficiaries.

            15.              It is a FACT that those purported Timothy Bonci' Accounting Citations' that were remitted to some of the Named Beneficiaries of the Fred F. Goetz Trust were in toto not properly served under the New York State SCPA and CPLR Rules of Service.

            16.            It is a FACT that the AFFIDAVIT’S OF MAILING that were filed with the Court by Timothy Bonci and/or his agents, Frances Pantaleo and/or James Scalise, are all intentionally Fraudulent and are Acts of Perjury. 

            17.              That FRAUDULENT SERVICE was attempted via the use of what the United States Postal Service calls "Law Firm Mail Fraud" meaning the offering of false instruments for Court Filings, i.e. non-United States Postal Service Certified Mail Return Receipts.

18.              Used were Counterfeit envelopes with what appears to be Certified Mail markings.   But since these are not United States Postal Service products, all of the Tracking Numbers are not valid meaning that there is no way to ever verify that any Return Receipts presented are actually a verifiable record that service has been made.

            19.              The Intentional Fraudulent use of counterfeit United States Postal Service envelopes by Timothy Bonci and his agents is now in the hands of the Criminal Investigation Division of the United States Postal Service.

            20.            It is a FACT that all of the notifications to Parties were done via these counterfeit United States Postal Service envelopes whereby New York State Law requires that New York State Residents are to be notified by Personal Service and Affidavit’s of that Personal Service is required to be filed at the Court.

21.            It is a FACT of this Litigation that numerous Notifications as to these Violations were made by the Fred F. Goetz Trust to Anthony Scarpino, Charles Scott, James Scalise, Frances Pantaleo, Timothy Bonci, et al. 

THE INTENTIONAL IGNORING BY ANTHONY SCARPINO

OF ALL OF THE VERIFIED OBJECTIONS

AS FILED BY THE FRED F. GOETZ TRUST BENEFICIARIES

 

22.            It is a FACT OF RECORD more than Six (6) of the Named Beneficiaries of the Fred F. Goetz Trust did file VERIFIED OBJECTIONS and that ALL of these were ignored.

INTENTIONAL RETALIATION BY ANTHONY SCARPINO

AS TO HIS SCHEDULING AN ‘ILLEGAL' TRIAL FOR AUGUST 10, 2009

AND VIOLATIONS OF THE 'EX PARTE' RULES

23.            It is herewith claimed that Anthony Scarpino has scheduled what we allege is an 'ILLEGAL' Trial to be held at the Westchester County Surrogate’s Court on August 10, 2009.

24.            We allege that this Trial is Illegal in that there are very specified Rules as per the SCPA and the CPLR that are to be followed in order to insure that Justice is served.

25.            That these ‘Trials' are purported to be based on the 'Accounting Citations A&B’ of the fraudulent installed 'dummy trustee' Timothy Bonci.

26.            It is a FACT that there has been no Notification whatsoever by either the Westchester County Surrogate’s Court or any party affiliated with the dummy 'trustee' Timothy Bonci to All of the Named Beneficiaries of the Fred F. Goetz Trust in toto.

27.            What we are clearly stating is that a Trial is to be held whereby the parties  INTENTIONALLY HAVE NOT BEEN NOTICED.

28.            It is a FACT that there has been NO Notification of this impending 'Trial' made individually to each and every one of the Named Beneficiaries of the Fred F. Goetz Trust.

29.            It is a FACT that there has been no Discovery prior to this purported 'Trial' as scheduled by Anthony Scarpino.

30.            It is a FACT that there has been no DEPOSITIONS prior to this purported 'Trial' as scheduled by Anthony Scarpino.

            31.            It is a FACT that all of the more than Half Dozen individual VERIFIED OBJECTIONS have been totally ignored by Anthony Scarpino.

            32.            It is a FACT that there has been no pre-Trial Settlement Conferences prior to this 'Trial' as scheduled by Anthony Scarpino.

33.            It is a FACT that Anthony Scarpino, without any Court Action or Notification, has arbitrarily reinstated Luke Charde as 'guardian' even though Luke Charde was fully discharged in 2007 upon the payment to Luke Charde by Timothy Bonci of $29,024.00 in fraudulent guardian fees.

34.            It is a FACT that as of a July 22, 2009 letter that Anthony Scarpino appears to have arbitrarily reinstalled Mary Nitsch as 'guardian'.  Once again, without the required Court Action that would allow parties to file Objections to this appointment.

35.            It is a FACT that Mary Nitsch was paid by Timothy Bonci $48,296.00 in fraudulent guardian fees in August of 2007 and was fully discharged from her 'guardian' duties at that time.

36.            It is a FACT that the Fred F. Goetz Trust did file Complaints against both Mary Nitsch and Luke Charde with numerous New York State Oversight Agencies and that the Fred F. Goetz Trust did also file Motions to Remove them as Guardians with Anthony Scarpino which Anthony Scarpino summarily denied.

37.            It is a FACT that since on or about the beginning of 2008 that Mary Nitsch had been forever removed from the Role of New York State Guardians.

VIOLATIONS OF THE EX PARTE RULES,  THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST RULES, 

AND THE REQUIREMENT OF THE EVEN HAND OF JUSTICE

38.            It is a FACT that in Anthony Scarpino's Letter of May 25, 2009 by Charles Scott that Anthony Scarpino instructs Luke Charde as to a submitted a 'Report' as to the approving of  the Timothy Bonci 'Accounting' for which there are no instructions that copies of this is required by New York State Law to go to All Beneficiaries and that those Beneficiaries have the right to Object.

39.            It is a FACT that if Luke Charde submits this Anthony Scarpino instructed 'Report' that Luke Charde will be in a position of being the party that 'approves' his own fraudulent guardian fees.  A clear and overt Violation of the CONFLICT OF INTEREST RULES.

40.            It is a FACT that during the entirety of the Litigation, neither Luke Charde nor Mary Nitsch, have even once contacted a single one of the Wards as to this Matter.  Yet, to date, Timothy Bonci, the dummy trustee, installed via the machination of Luke Charde and Mary Nitsch have been paid a total of $77,320.00 exclusively out of our Fred F. Goetz Trust funds.

41.            It is a FACT that by reinstalling both Luke Charde and Mary Nitsch as ‘purported' guardians to 'approve' of Timothy Bonci’s purported 'Accounting's that this means that essentially they are both 'rubber stamping' as to the $77,320.00 that Timothy Bonci had paid to them and those Extortion payments of $77,320.00 are identified in Timothy Bonci's Accounting Citations. 

42.            It is a FACT that it is a serious and grievous CONFLICT OF INTEREST for either Luke Charde or Mary Nitsch as to having any oversight or say at this junction as to the approval of their fees.

43.            We also have been appraised that Luke Charde and Mary Nitsch have been promised to be 'rewarded' by Anthony Scarpino with even more fraudulent 'fees' under a 'loophole' clause inserted in the Timothy Bonci  Accounting Citations whereby there would be no notification to the Beneficiaries at all, thus, making it impossible for any of the Beneficiaries to Object.

44.            It is a FACT of this Litigation that numerous Notifications of ALL of these preceding Violations of Laws and Procedures, Violations of New York State Constitutional Rights, Violations of DUE PROCESS were repeatedly brought to the attention of Anthony Scarpino, Charles Scott, Joseph Accetta, et al, and ALL were ignored. 

INTENTIONAL RETALIATION OF, HARRASSMENT OF,

AND OVERT HOSTILITY BY ANTHONY SCARPINO

AGAINST M.L. DONOHUE

45.            It has just come to our attention that Anthony Scarpino (Charles Scott) has instigated the act of harassment is to be inflicted upon M.L. Donohue to thwart her as to her Rights of Law to file appropriate and legitimate Complaints with various Oversight Agencies and as to her Duty to report to not only Anthony Scarpino, himself, but to corrective agencies to the gross Violations of New York State Laws and Procedures and the Gross Violations of New York State Constitutional Rights and ABSOLUTE DENIAL OF DUE PROCEES that has occurred in Anthony Scarpino's Court.

46.            That Anthony Scarpino (Charles Scott) has made false claims against

M.L. Donohue to the Office of Court Administration and it is alleged that Anthony Scarpino’s motivation for doing so is to block her, thru intimidation and threats, from appearing at the ILLEGAL Trial on August 10, 2009.  Where it is alleged that the next stage of the raping into the pockets of Domenick Porco, Luke Charde, Mary Nitsch, Frances Pantaleo, James Scalise and other Anthony Scarpino favored lawyers of whatever remains of our Fred F. Goetz Trust assets as that is the real agenda for that event. 

47.            It is a FACT that M.L. Donohue in her capacity as the Sole Legitimate Trustee of the Fred F. Goetz Trust and on behalf of All of the Named Beneficiaries has Notified numerous New York State and Federal Oversight Agencies as to the numerous Violations of Laws and Procedures and the overt Extortion of and Defrauding of the Fred F. Goetz Trust assets in favored lawyers hands that has occurred under Anthony Scarpino including, most recently, the participation by M.L. Donohue on behalf of the Fred F. Goetz Trust in the 'Ethics' Hearings in Albany, New York of New York State Senator John Sampson.

48.            M.L. Donohue has also filed Complaints as to the egregious violations of what is alleged to be Criminal Acts by Anthony Scarpino, Charles Scott, Joseph Accetta at the Westchester County Surrogate’s Court and Criminal Acts by Anthony Scarpino's handpicked Guardians, Luke Charde and Mary Nitsch, and Criminal Acts by Anthony Scarpino's favored lawyers, Domenick Porco, Frances Pantaleo, and James Scalise, among others with Federal Agencies such as the United States Department of Justice, United States Senate Judiciary Committee, and the United States Attorney's Office and with various New York State Agencies including, but not limited to, the Commission on Judicial Conduct and the Departmental Disciplinary Committee.

49.            M.L. Donohue did notice Anthony Scarpino (and Charles Scott) of her actions as to reporting his egregious violations of New York State Laws and Procedures with the hope that Anthony Scarpino would stop his illegal acts as to the Fred F. Goetz Trust.  He has not done so?

VIRTUAL IMPOSSIBILITY FOR THE

WESTCHESTER COUNTY SURROGATE’S COURT TO BE IMPARTIAL

50.            That, I, M.L. Donohue, unequivocally state that it is virtually IMPOSSIBLE and most likely humanly impossible for the Westchester County Surrogate’s Court and any of the parties who are employed at that Court and/or those who are Appointees of that Court to be impartial in these proceedings when I, M.L. Donohue, for the Fred F. Goetz Trust, have filed Departmental Disciplinary Committee Complaints, Commission on Judicial Conduct Complaints, Office of Court Administration Complaints, Attorney General Complaints, New York State Attorney General  Complaints, District Attorney Complaints (Manhattan,  Brooklyn and Westchester County) and Complaints with a number of United States Government Oversight Agencies.

51.            That I, M.L. Donohue, unequivocally state that the circumstances surrounding this Litigation are unique to it.  And, with that context, that it would be in the best interest of the judicial process for the Court, itself, and for Anthony Scarpino (and his underlings) to be forever DISQUALIFIED.

52.            That I, M.L. Donohue, unequivocally state that in order for the State of New York  to ensure that each and every party that Petition’s  the New York State Courts, at whatever level, that Justice is fully and unilaterally served, with complete equity, and that there is not even a hint of irregularity,  impropriety or impartiality.

53.            That I, M.L. Donohue, on behalf of All of the Named Beneficiaries of the Fred F. Goetz Trust, firmly BELIEVE that it is forever impossible for the Fred F. Goetz Trust to be treated in a fair and unbiased manner at the Westchester County Surrogate’s Court.

            54.            That I, M.L. Donohue, unequivocally state that there are no other remedies available under Law that could possibly substitute for this VERIFIED PETITION FOR DISQUALIFICATION in order for EQUITABLE JUSTICE to prevail.

WHEREFORE, Petitioner requests that a degree be granted DISQUALIFYING Surrogate Anthony Scarpino and that all pending Matters be referred to the Administrative Judge of the Ninth (9^th) Judicial District unless otherwise instructed by Justice Prudenti or Justice Lippman and/or such other and further relief that may be deemed just and proper.

M.L. Donohue, Trustee

Fred F. Goetz Trust

Individually and on Behalf of All Of the Named Beneficiaries of the Fred F. Goetz Trust