Senate Standing Committee On The Judiciary Notice of Public Hearing
Monday, June 8th, 2009, 10:00 am - 3:00 pm
SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
SUBJECT: The Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee, the grievance committees of the various Judicial Districts and the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct
PURPOSE: This hearing will review the mission, procedures and level of public satisfaction with the Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee, the grievance committees of the various Judicial Districts as well as the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct
Albany
Monday June 8, 2009
10 A.M.
Meeting Room 6 Empire State Plaza
Albany, NY 12247
ORAL TESTIMONY BY INVITATION ONLY
The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court is the entity that is legally responsible for enforcing the Rules of Professional Conduct governing the conduct of attorneys in New York State. The Appellate Division Departments have created grievance committees that are charged with the investigation of complaints against attorneys. Within the First Judicial Department the Departmental Disciplinary Committee of the Appellate Division investigates complaints against attorneys. The New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct was created by the State Constitution and is charged with investigating complaints against Judges and Justices of the Unified Court System.
According to the 2009 Report of the Commission on Judicial Conduct, there were 1,923 complaints filed in 2008. Yet of these complaints only 262 were investigated and of those, 173 were dismissed. This hearing will examine the processes and procedures that are followed by the various agencies charged with the responsibility of enforcing the rules and regulations that must be followed by the Judiciary and the Bar in the State of New York. It will also evaluate public satisfaction with the disciplinary process.
Twenty copies of any prepared testimony should be submitted at the hearing registration desk. The Committees would appreciate advance receipt of prepared statements.
In order to further publicize these hearings, please inform interested parties and organizations of the Committees' interest in considering testimony from all sources.
In order to meet the needs of those who may have a disability, the Senate, in accordance with its policy of non-discrimination on the basis of disability, as well as the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), has made its facilities and services available to all individuals with disabilities. For individuals with disabilities, accommodations will be provided, upon reasonable request, to afford such individuals access and admission to Senate facilities and activities.
Senator John Sampson, Chair
Senate Standing Committee on the Judiciary
Posts
25 comments:
does this public notice purport to invole ALL the attorney grievance Committees around the state??
in the Third Department, it is called the Committee on Professional Standards.
is this Committee's actions or inactions included within this hearing notice??
Again...you have the STATE reviewing the STATE placed and authorized agencies...I have no confidence in this process.
I contacted Sampson recently about serious, proof provided court corruption..and he ignored those contacts...what has changed in a few months?
All these STATE lawmakers want to do, is to shut down and destroy the confidence of those fighting the state's corruption, by giving them the appearance of an official concerned forum that allows them to vent formally. The hearing results will come back and state... that they find that the citizens mis-understand the level or the laws at which these agencies can prosecute, assess or determine unethical or illegal behavior. They will put it on the public's unreasonable perception of the power vested in these agencies to perform the way they should....in attempts to shut you down and hope you understand you must never make these allegations again, because you had your legal forum and lost!
I cannot see the STATE ever condemning the CJC for not taking complaints or taking them and dumping them...and for avoiding high level judges whose accusations do not make the news....which is my concern...thus DESIGNANTING any and all high level and administrative judges as above the LAW!
I truly hope I am wrong in all that I feel..but I know NY STATE and it's seedy politics...and I have 0 confidence in anything they spit from their mouths or conduct....OFFICIALLY!
Judicial Ethics?? Thats an oxymoron.
How will the Committee investigate something that isn't? that doesn't exist?
I will crawl to Albany if I have to. This group is going to hear what I have to say!! The New York state court system is completely corrupted by lawyers and judges doing favors ($$) for each other.
Isn't Sampson a former Proskauer Rose partner??? If so, since they are at the center of the first dept corruptions, do you think this is their man on the inside?
A Letter to Sen. Sampson. A pdf of the attachment was sent much earlier to this blog and may be available.
May 20, 2009
Sen. John L. Sampson
RE: Hearing 6/6/2009 on grievance committees of the various Judicial Districts
Hon. Sen. Sampson;
I know that a bar grievance committees in NY is corrupt. Attached is a copy of a complaint bar grievance against Ara Asadourain for gross criminal and unethical conduct (including sworn criminal complaint affidavits) which has been covered up by said committee. I’ m being criminally and unethically abused by this Asadourian.
I over 65 years and have severe heart problems and was defribrillated five times in the last year and have an ejection fraction below 30%, along with post stroke care and other extensive medical problems. The local DA, J. Garcia, has refused to prosecute, claiming the grievance committees must deal with crimes by attorneys.
I am ready to personally briefly address your Hearing and reveal the utter disgrace that allows this criminal to continue to practice law.
Sincerely yours,
Terence Finnan
CC: Exposecorruptcourts.blogspot.com
Sampson is a joke
this is a dog and pony show probably to get himself votes or more money from lawyers when he runs for office.
Ask Sampson to get an outside special prosecutor to investigate the DDC. Ask him to put in new non biased people to oversea the DDC.
Or ask him to ask the FBI to look into how complaints are handeled and the money trail at the DDC.
They can look for conflicts of interest.
I have to wonder how many disbarred attorneys have been contacted to attend and testify?
Smell the fix on this one. "Oral Testimony By Invitation Only" what are you kidding? This will give new meaning to the word "Oral." This is a Sham "Public Hearing." So, why is it in Albany? Are they afraid to hold it in the city? What too many real people will come and tell the truth?
No answer about whether this Public Notice is intended to specifically involved the Third Department Committee on Professional Standards.
Also, given the alarming volume of complaints at this blog alone, how could only 1 day from 10 am to 3 pm be designated as a Public Hearing?
Who is determining who gets to Testify in Person? Sampson and his staff only?
If.. the CJC were a legitimate agency, and if their Opinions carried the Force of Law...
Then my case would have been the easiest to determine and remedy..
The Judge in my case decided (on his own) to recuse himself.. There was no waiver of his recusal according to a Judicial Ethics Opinion. The Judge remained disqualified.. failed to disclose his recusal, and continued to Act without lawful authority.
For the CJC, it was a simple quick review.. and they failed miserably....
Eliot Bernstein: Sampson was a former "legal assistant" (a.k.a. pee-on) at Proskauer prior to law school.
I called Sampson's office today. ALL statewide grievance committees are included. They believe people from Watertown and other northern and western parts of the state will be at the Albany hearing.
And how did they notify those in the other parts of the state? I have not been notified and I filed complaints about OCA and CJC with both Paterson and Sampson, and live in upstate...are they sending A letter or calling me?
Anybody with contacts in the press: MAKE THEM BE THERE!!!!
Call The NY Times, Post, Journal, News etc...
TELL THEM TO BE THERE!!!
CALL WNYC radio!!!!
Local TV stations!!!
Let them know you want them to cover this this.
Lets give Sampson more then he's bargaining for!
To "disbarred attorney"
TELL ALL YOUR FELLOW VICTIMS TO ATTEND AND SPEAK. IF THEY SIGN UP THEY CANNOT BE DENIED!
RE: Anonymous Reply to Eliot Bernstein
--
If Sampson is former Proskauer Rose peon, not saying he was not, then he should have no problem investigating the Iviewit matters, AFTER signing a Conflict of Interest Disclosure PRIOR to handling these matters and adjudicating on them in any ways. Otherwise, perhaps he is looking for Partnership after Governorship.
We have seen the never ending conflicts pervert Justice, imagine Eliot Spitzer was above the law and did not get sentenced for his crimes that anyone else would have been prosecuted for. So the Guilty continue to interact in the disposition of Justice for the Guilty caught and crime pays in NY if your daddy is Eliot Spitzer's.
These hearings, either way, good v. evil, will be useful in showing either the continued denial of due process rights or the peeling of an onion that will make the world cry and then want Justice, not lip service. Like the old west, these public officials should be tried, fairly by non conflicted parties, sentenced, dragged outside the courthouse, marched up the steps of the gallow, hood for cowards (better have a lot of hoods), noose tied tight, I prefer the upright jerker and a lesson for the next official to replace left hangin in the wind. As always, Upright Jerkers free @ www.iviewit.tv
Eliot Bernstein
Mad Inventor
www.iviewit.tv
iviewit@iviewit.tv
----
PS - Note to all related cases, demand Conflict of Interest disclosures from all those act in these matters from this point forward. Someone should make a strong template document to accompany all submissions, etc.
to the disbarred attorney above, i agree with your comments. am in same position. these folks do not want to be confronted with the virtual murders ( not literal, but then again, who knows in ny? ) they have let go on while systematically eliminating other lawyers for far less serious matters. write to changecourtsnow@gmail.com. am from upstate.
"there is no crueler tyranny than that which is exercised under the color of law and with the colors of justice"
For all those who rights have consistently been violated, your ideas to help stop the abuse should be included in your grievances.
Shouldn't our Attorney Grievance Board be our Civilian Complaint Review Board, and the officials be elected..........
They should handle complaints against our police, laywer, judges and public officials.
They should direct our paths to sustain our rights and if there is corruption within our districts a pattern should start to emerge within one office.
Your travesties and thoughts to stop the abuse of power should be included in one complaint.
Will Sampson hold hearings in NYC?
As far as I know there is no justice in NYS family courts. The DA, Judges, Lawyers, and other agencies are just one big family and the ones that get condemened is the families and an honest lawyer (which is few and far between) Judges do what they want and lawyers do what the judge wants. Child guardian lawyers do not represent the child, but they represent the agency and the judge. And say and do what they want. Families and children have not rights. They are raped over and over again by the judges, lawyers and the agencies.
My wife, Barbara, a former corrections officers brutally raped by her work supervisor, has fought an incredible 13 year battle for justice against a corrupt New York government.
She had made secret tape recordings of her repentant rapist confessing to his brutal attacks on her. But her employers, the State Dept of Corrections (DOC), and the Division of Human Right (DHR) took her recordings and refused to give them up prior to the trial. We issued numerous subpoenas and federal court orders to get the tapes back. They gave us edited and censored copy tapes instead. But those copy tapes had been edited with all her rapist’s confessions taken out.
Despite the law mandating the court to rule against any party that destroys or tampers with key evidence, when this case came to trial a corrupt administrative law judge (ALJ Christine Kellett) ignored our protests and dismissed the case for lack of evidence. We were shocked by such blatant corruption. But we refused to quit and successfully won a Supreme Court judge’s order for an Article 78 order to show cause to force these (in)human rights weasels to explain their corrupt acts in a new hearing in front of the Appellate Division, Third Dept.
A few weeks before the Appellate Court trial the Division of (in)Human Rights reluctantly granted my wife a supervised inspection of the lower court records. There she found they had only four of her seven original tapes. So we quickly filed fresh motions charging the lower court and the defendants, DOC, to conspiring to ‘lose’ or destroy three of her seven tapes. Neither party answered our motions and therefore, under Article 78 rules, any such failure to deny becomes an admission of guilt entitling us to a summary judgment.
But we hadn’t banked on the Appellate Court justices being as corrupt as the rest of that sleazy rabble. They then just turned a blind eye to the fact the lower court and Dept of Corrections did not deny conspiring to deliberately destroy the evidence. Despite an open and shut case of a conspiracy to cover up rape, the Appellate Court denied our motions for summary judgment. They pretended the case was a regular appeal and not an Article 78 order to show cause requiring those sleaze balls to explain why they destroyed the tapes.
Indeed, if you look on the Appellate Division, Third Department website under ‘Bracci-v-State Division of Human Rights’, the phrase ‘Article 78’ is clearly absent from the fraudulent judgment.
Currently, we have motions before the court demanding they vacate this sham ruling. We are demanding either a reversal or leave to appeal the Court of Appeals. Naturally, we think these rats will carry on covering up for each other like they always do. Like a lot of other citizens in New York, we have learned that New York State doesn’t respect the people’s Fourteenth Amendment rights to due process or a fair hearing.
We are now planning to take our case to the federal courts away from the stench of Paterson and his shills. Such is America in 2009 - where judges and state agencies have no shame in becoming accessories to rape after the fact. God help our children.
Truly yours,
John O’Sullivan
PO Box 65, Delhi, NY 13753 email: john0sullivan@btinternet.com
As a practicing New York Attorney I welcome the Feds coming in to regulate this NYCLA Fee Dispute Committee which is nothing more than a "Political Economic Assassination Squad" which ignores the crimes of its friends/cronies while punishing and economically bankrupting those who dare to compete with a better product who are not fortunate enough to be born with the right "pedigree" or ethnic orientation, and are guilty of nothing else but being better lawyers and more successful. Its about time the Feds broke up this "backwoods Manhattan posse of 'good ole boys' from New York City."
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=nycla+ftc&aq=f&oq=&aqi=
I heard that Senator John Sampson "sold us all out" and took a high-powered (and well-paid) job offer at some humongous law firm in Manhattan, presumably offered to him to stop pursuing the Ethics and DDC criminals, and since then has not so much even looked at the Ethics Committee Hearings again - say it isn't so?
With regards to the NYCLA Fee Dispute Program, if you are a Jewish Attorney or from a Big Law Firm, you get to keep your fees earned. If not, or you are a Minority Attorney or from a Small Law Firm, you don't get to keep the money you earned through billing. It's the same problem with the Departmental Disciplinary Committee, First Department.
Hi, well be sensible, well-all described
Post a Comment