June 08, 2009 New York Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing On Public Office Corruption First Senator John Sampson

I.i:!:.
I
~ VVV.1.
V.L
08/01/2009 13:35 FAX
BEFORE THE NEW YORK STATE SENATE

STANDING COMMITTEE
COMMITTE~ ON JUDICIARY
---------------------.---------------------------
3~
---------------------.----.----------------------
Public Hearing on 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
Condu~t
5
6
77
----~--------------------------------------------~ - -" - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - -
Hearing Room 6
Empire State
state ,Plaza
Albany, NY
9
10
l1une 8, 2009
.rune
10:35 a.m.
10;35
11
12
PRESIDING:
PRESIDING;
Senator John Sampson

Chair
Senate Standing Committee on JUdiciary
13
14
1~
15
PRESENT:
16
Senator John A. DeFrancisco
17
17.
Senator Bill Perkins
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
(R)
....
~vv
~vv_
08/01/2009 13:35 FAX
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
STATEME!'JT
STATEMENT
Martin R. Gold
Alan W. Friedberg
First Department DDC
Christine C. Anderson,
Kevin McKeown
48-63
7
8
Han. Thomas A. Klonick

Robert H. Tembeckjian
Commission on Judicial Conduct
63-79
Justice Duane A. Hart
80-97
10
Pamela Carvel
98-109
11
Paul H. Altman
109-120
12
Luisa C. Esposito
120-128
13
William Galison
129-143
14
Eleanor capogrosso,
Capogrosso l Esq.
143-158
15
Robert ostertag
NYS Bar Association
158-169
John A. Aretakis,
169-182
9-34
Esq.
34-48
16
Esq.
Bsq.
17
Michael Kelly
182-185
19
Kathryn Grace Jordan

End Discrimination Now
165-191
185-191
20
James A. Montagnino,
192-203
21
Ruth M.
22
Kevin Patrick Brady
217-219
23
Carl Lanzisera
Americans for Legal Reform
219-225
18
24
Esq.
Pollack,
Pollack Esq.
l
204-216
141003
l4I003
101/2009
11/2009 13:36 FAX
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
get this hearing started.
for my tardiness.
First of all,
lid like to just

And I apologize
II want to welcome all
those who are attending this,hearing dealing
with the disciplinary process as it refers
to lawyers and also to judges in the Sta

te
State
B
e
of New York.
Sampson,
rI'
My name is Senator John
I'm from the 19th Senatorial
10
District.
District,
along with my colleague Senator
11
John DeFrancisco,
12
region.
who is from the Syracuse
13
Am I correct,
14
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO:
15
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
16
17
Senator?
That's
Thatls correct.
And we want to
welcome you all here this morning.

This is the first in a series of
18
~earings that will examine the disciplinary

hearings
19
process for lawyers and judges in the State
20
of New York.
21
disciplinary body,
22
being handled,
23
Complaint to decide what the process is,

complaint
24
what review m@chanisms are in plac@ to
When a complaint comes to a

we want to know how is it
how many people examine the
IgJ UU'!
UU4
If!d
8/01/2009 13:36 FAX
it
ensure that once the decision is reached i
t
is fair and according to the rules of law.
3~
These are just a few questions that
weIll be examining during the course of this
hearing.
great distances to be here today to observe
and to participate in today's hearing.
th~nk
would like to take this opportunity to thank
you all.
II
know many of you have traveled
II
Your participation and input on
10
the disciplinary process will help the
11
committee determine what if any measures

meaSures are
12
needed to improve or repair the system so
13
that the members of the public as well as
14
the lawyers and jUdges

judges are all treated
15
fairly and equitably by the disciplinary
16
system.
This hearing has generated a great deal
17
18
of interest from 'the public.
19
people want to speak today,
20
unfortunately the committee was not able to
21
accommodate them all due to the limited
22
time.
23
30 witnesses.
24
everybody to keep their comments within five
A lot of
but
We have about 30 witnesses,
close to
I'm going to try to ask

Ilm
14I 005
141005
08/01/2009 13:36 FAX
minutes.
can haver you know,
questions and answers.
We want to get to the point so we

the interchange between
And due to the number of responses we
received,
additional hearings in New York City as well
as in Western New York so that we can get a
better understanding of the total picture
across the state and accommodate those who
10
the committee will conduct
couldn't testify today.

As I indicated,
11
we have about 30
12
individuals who are going to testify,
13
do apologize for that.
14
try to be as swift as possible.
As I said,
15
and
to
But welre going to
this hearing will examine
16
the disciplinary process for the judges and
17
attorneys in the State of New York.
18
in our state are disciplined by the
19
Commission on Judicial Conduct.
20
commission acts pursuant to Article 6,
21
Section 22 of the New York State
22
Constitution.
23
1978,
1978/
24
with one voice that there needed to be a
Judges
The
This law was put in place ~n

~n
after the people of New York spoke
141006
141 006
08/01/2009 13:37 FAX
better system for judicial discipline.
The Legislature acted through the
Judiciary Law to
cod~fy
what. the people

what
asked for.
sets out the powers and duties of the
commission.
The commission consists of 11
individuals,
apppinted by the Governor,

four appointed
one by the Temporary President 0 the
Senate, one by the Minority Leader of the
Article 2.2 of the Judiciary Law
.-
10
Senate, one by the Speaker of the Assembly,
11
the, Assembly,
one by the Minority Leader of the
12
and three by the Chief Judge of the Court of
13
Appeals.
This commission is empowered to
14
admonish or remove judges from
15
censure,
16
office if necessary.
17
witnesses,
18
to them,
19
investigate written complaints about jUdges
20
or,
21
investigations concerning judges of the
22
United Court
court System.
They can subpoena
compel courts to release records
offer immunity to witnesses,
on their initiative,
conduct
23
There are approximately 3500 judges and
24
justices in the New York State Unified court

Court
~007
@007
08/01/2009
08/0112009 13:37 FAX
System.
complaints of judicial misconduct, and of
these the commission conducted 262
full-fledged investigations, along with 174
investigations that were pending from 2007.
Last year alone,
there were 1900
Dealing with attorney discipline in
New York is governed by the Appellate
Division of the State of New Yo~k

York
Court.
~he
The
Su~~eme
Su~reme
rules that govern attorney
10
conduct and discipline are found in rules of
11
profe~~ional
professional
12
those rules are subject to discipline:
13
discipline can take the form of a letter of
14
caution,
15
suspension or disbarment of the attorneys.
16
Only complaints that do result in formal
17
disciplinary action,
18
disbarment are available to the public.
19
conduct.
Lawyers who violate
This
an order of public censure,
Once again,
censure,
suspension or
ladies and gentlemen,
II
20
want to thank you very much for being here
21
today.
22
hea~ing as quickly as possible in an orderly

hearing
23
fashion.
24
we're going to try to conduct this
And I would like to introduce one of my
~008
141008
08/01/2009
8/01/2009 13:38 FAX
colleagues who just came,
from New York City,
Senator Perkins,
from Harlem.
But at this point in time I
would like
my colleague Senator DeFrancisco to say a
few words.
6
7
8
9
My words are
very few.
Everybody is handing in a,written
presentation.
Do me a favor,
because I've
10
gone through many,
many hearings in the last
11
17 years.
just for the sake of
12
argument t
argument,
13
that's a bad assumption on behalf of
14
officials in state government,
15
assume that we can read.
16
main points of your presentation.
17
Otherwise,
18
really on your mind and we get into a
19
reading contest,
contest t
20
any good,
21
l i s t will be here about 4 o'clock

end of the list
22
this afternoon waiting for their turn.
2~
23
24
Assume,
that we can read.
You know, maybe
but letts
let 1 s
And get to the
weill never get you. to say what's

we'll
which doesn't
doesnlt do anybody
and those who are here towards the
that t
So please do that,
and it will really
be helpful for all of us.
Thank you.
08/01/2009 13:38 FAX
~009
141009
99
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON~
SAMPSON:
1
22
perkins.
Perkins.
SENATOR PERKINS:
33
44
Senator Bill
I'm going to be
even briefer.
I of course echo the sentiments of my
my
55
66
colleague in terms of the fact that the
77
testimony has
has been written,
written, and aa brief
88
summari~~tion
summari~ation
explore your questions

questions and concerns more
more
10
10
that allows us
us to
to sort
sort of
of
would be
be helpful.
helpful.
And
And 1I just
just also
also want
want to
to compliment
compliment the
the
11
11
12
12
chairman
chairman for
for his
his vision
vision with
with re~pect
respect to
to this
this
13
13
committee,
committee, and
and particularly
particularly on
on this
this issue
issue
14
14
~hich
which
15
15
us.
us.
16
16
the
the good
good work.
work.
is
is of
of such
such great
great importance
importance to
to many
many of
of
And
And II just
just want
want to
to urge
urge him
him to
to keep
keep up
up
17
17
CHAIRMAN
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON;
SAMPSON:
18
18
much,
much, Senator
Senator Perkins.
Perkins.
19
19
Thank
Thank you
you very
very
Without
Without further
further ado,
ado, we're
we're going
going to
to get
get
The
The first
first witness
witness is
is Martin
Martin Gold,
Gold,
20
20
started.
started.
21
21
aa member
member of
of the
the First
First Department
Department
22
22
Departmental
Departmental Discipliriary
Discipliriary Committee,
Committee, and
and
23
23
also
also Alan
Alan Friedberg,
Friedberg, chief
chief counsel,
counsel, First
First
24
24
Department
Department Departmental
Departmental Disciplinary
Disciplinary
litI
010
141010
08/01/2009 13:38 FAX
10
1
Committee.
Welcome, gentlemen.
Good morning.
MR. GOLD:
Mr. Chairman, distinguished members of
Good morning.
Thank you.
the committee, my name is Ma~tin

Martin R. Gold.
am a lawyer in New York City and a partner
in Sonnenschein!
Sonnenschein, Nath &
~ Rosenthal, a large
8
B
national law firm.
of the Departmental Disciplinary Committee
I'm a volunteer member
10
for the First Judicial Department appointed
11
by the Appellate Division.
12
senior member of the policy committee of the
13
Disciplinary Committee.
14
I am also a
The chairman of the committee, Mr.
Roy
very much wanted to be here today
15
Reardon,
16
and to attend this hearing and participate,
17
but another commitment made that impossible.
18
And he asked me to attend in his place,
19
it's my pleasure to do so.
20
and
With me is our chief counsel, Alan
21
Friedberg.
Together we will provide you
22
with a description of the operation of the
23
disciplinary system in the First

attorney diseiplinary
24
Department and answer any questions you may
8/01/2009 13:39 FAX
!4I011
I4l 011
11
1
have concerning our operation.

The Departmental Disciplinary Committee
was established by the Appellate Division,
First Department,
role in disciplining attorneys in the First
Department,
counties.
Bronx Counties.
are all appointed by the Appellate Division.
They are all volunteers.
10
to assist in the court's
which consists of New York and

Members of the committee
80,000
There are approximately 80,000
11
attorneys in the First Department.
12
have indicated, Mr. Reardon is chairman of
13
the committee.
14
hands-on guidance
15
appointed by the Appellate Division from the
16
members of the committee.
17
Committee oversees the general

g~neral functioning
18
of the committee and the staff and also
19
provides direction on pending issues.
20
Now,
As I
The committee also receives

~rom
the Policy committee
The Policy
the Appellate Division has adopted
21
public rules and procedures governing the
22
Departmental Disciplinary Committee and
23
rules governing the conduct of attorneys.
24
These rules are available to the public,
08/01/2009 13:39 FAX

08/01/2009
141012
I4l 012
12
1
prOfessional
together with the rules of professional
2,2
conduct which govern attorney conduct,
the Departmental Disciplinary Committee
website,
Division website.
on
which is part of the Appellate
Also available on the website is
information
informa tion about th~.committee,
the' commi t tee I includin~
inc 1 uding
6B
information-concerning POW
how a complaint can
9~
be filed.
lnforrnation
Information about filing a
10
complaint is also available to members of
11
11
the public who call or visit the committee's
12
12
offices.
13
13
English,
Chinese.
English, Spanish, and Chinese.
14
14
Complaint forms
forms are available in
It
that the
to note
note that
the
important to
It is
is important
15
15
purpose
discipline is
is not
not to
to
attorney discipline
of attorney
purpose of
16
16
mediate
between attorneys
attorneys and
and
disputes between
mediate disputes
17
17
clients
of
rights of
vindicate the
the rights
clients or
or to
to vindicate
18
18
complainants.
complainants.
19
19
handled
handled by
by the
the court
court system.
system.
20
20
disputes,
disputes, issues
issues of
of legal
legal strategy,
strategy, and
and
21
21
single
single incidents
incidents of
of malpractice
malpractice that
that might
might
22
22
be
be addressed
addressed in
in aa civil
civil matter
matter do
do not
not
23
23
constitute
constitute misconduct.
misconduct.
24
24
Division
Division and
and the
the committee
committee must
must devote
devote its
its
Such
Such matters
matters can
can best
best be
be
Gen.erally fee
fee
Generally
The
The Appellate
Appellate
08/01/2009 13:39 FAX
141
!4J 013
13
1
limited resources to the limited remedial
22
options within its jurisdiction.
33
Pursuant to Sec~ion
Section 90, Subdivision 10,
as Senator Sampson mentioned, of the
55
Judiciary, Law, all materials concerning an
investigation or proceeding concerning an
77
attorney's
attorney's conduct are
are sealed until the
88
Appellate Division
Division issues
issuas a decision
99
sustaining
sustaining charges of misconduct concerning
10
10
an attorney.
11
11
issues such aa decision,

decision, the
the record
record of
of all
all of
of
12
12
the
the proceedings
proceedings becomes
becomes pUblic.
pUbli~.
13
13
When the Appellate

Appellate Division
Division
The
The Office
Office Of
Of tne
t~e Chief
Chief Counsel
Counsel of
of the
the
14
14
Disciplinary
Disciplinary Committee
committee is
is s~affed
staffed by
by 23
23
15
15
attorneys.
attorneys.
16
16
complaints,
complaints, investigate
investigate allegations
allegations of
of
17
17
misconduct
misconduct,J and
and prosecute
prosecute cases
cases at
at hearings.
hearings.
IB
18
As
As II have
have indicated,
indicated, Mr-.
Mr, Alan
Alan Friedberg
Friedberg is
is
19
19
the
the chief
chief counsel.
counsel.
20
20
The
The staff
staff attorneys
attorneys screen
screen
Here
Here is
is the
the process
process by
by which
which aa
21
21
complaint
complaint is
is handled.
handled.
when
When aa complaint
complaint is
is
22
22
received
received at
at the
the committee,
committee, it
it is
i6 immediately
immediately
23
23
assigned
assigned to
to aa staff
staff attorney
attorney to
to be
bB screened.
screened.
24
24
Investigations
Investigations may
may also
also be
be
commence~
commence~
by
by the
the
13:40 FAX
FAX
08/01/2009 13:40
I4J 014
141014
14
1
chief counsel on his own initiative,
2:2
the absence of a complaint from a third
party.
44
even in
offic@s
Since numerous attorneys have offices
in more than one location in the state,
address that an attorney lists in
registering with the Office of Court
Administration determines
body exercises jurisdiction over that
the
~hich disci~lipary
discipli~ary
~hich
Complaints against an attorney
10
attorney.
11
who is registered at an address in another
12
judicial department are referred to the

jUdicial
13
appropriate disciplinary body.
14
discipli~ary agency is able to

each regional discipliriary
15
keep a record of all complaints filed
16
against that attorney.
17
Accordingly,
Complaints against jUdges

judges are referred
18
to the Commission on Judicial Conduct; we
19
have no jurisdiction over them.
20
The staff attorney who screens the

The
21
complaint ~eviews the entire complaint,
22
including attachments,
23
interview the complainant,
24
documents,
and may choose to

obtain court
or obtain documents or
01/2009
01/2009 13:40
13:40 FAX
FAX
141
015
141015
15
15
11
information
information from
from the
the attorney
attorney who
who is
is the
the
22
subject
subject of
of the
the complaint.
complaint.
33
attorney believes
believes the
the allegations
allegations are
are likely
likely
44
to
to warrant
warrant formal
formal charges,
charges, he or
or she
she refers
refers
55
the
the matter
matter to
to the
the chief
chief counsel
counsel for
for
66
immediate
immediate assignment.
assignment.
77
If
If the
the
chie~.counsel
chie~counsel
If
If the
the staff
staff
concurs
concurs that
that the
the
88
allegations
allegations are
are likely
likely to
to warrant
warrant formal
formal
99
charges,
charges, the
the complain~
complainc is
is immediately
immediately
to
to aa staff
staff attorney
attorney for
for
10
10
~ssigned
assigned
11
11
investigation,
investigation, which
which may
may include
include obtaining
obtaining aa
12
written
writt~n -response
response from
from the
the respondent
respondent
13
13
attorney,
attorney, scheduling
scheduling testimony of
of the
14
14
resporident
resporident attorney
attorney or
or others,
others, and
and obtaining
obtaining
15
15
records,
records, including
including court
court records
records and
and bank
bank
16
16
records.
records.
117.
'7.
power
power to
to do
do that.
that.
18
18
All
All of
of them,
them, we
we have
have subpoena
subpoena
In
In cases
cases where
where there's
there's conclusive
conclusive
19
19
evidence
evidence of
of serious
serious misconduct
misconduct or
or failure
failure to
to
20
20
cooperate
cooperate with
with the
the committee,
committee, the
the committee
committee
21
21
is
is authorized
authorized to
to make
make an
an immediate
immediate motion
motion to
to
22
22
seek an attorney's
attorney's interim suspension
suspension during
23
23
the
the proceedings.
proceedings.
24
24
If
If the
the allegations
allegations appear
appear less
less serious,
serious,
08/01/2009 13:41 FAX
141016
16
1
the screening attorney may determine to seek
;2
2
the written response of the respondent
attorney.
to the complainant, who is requested to
reply to the attorney's response.
obtaining this information, the screening
staff attorney may
8B
dismissal or assignment of the matter to a
staff attorney for further investigation.
10
When that is obtained,
~ecommend,
it is sent
After
in writing,
Each recommendation is reviewed by the
11
chief counsel, who may determine to assign
12
the matter to a staff attorney for
13
investigation or recommend dismissal of the
14
complaint.
15
If the recommendation of the chief
16
counsel is to dismiss the complaint,
17
chief counsel signs the recommendation
18
memorandum and the entire file,
19
the memorandum,
20
members of the Departmental Disciplinary
21
21
committee
Committee who must approve the
22
the
including
is sent to one of the
55
di~missal.
di~missal.
If the complainant seeks
23
reconsideration,
the matter is sent to
24
another attorney committee member who must
8/01/2009
01/2009 13:41
13:41 FAX
FAX
I4J 017
017
17
17
11
also approve dismissal.
disagreement, we have procedures to
with that.
And if there's
d~al
The committee members are appointed by

by
i~clude
i~clude
55
the Appellate Division and
experienced practicing attorneys, former
prosecutors, and approximately one-third are
88
lay members.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
So this committee
10
that reviews it, they are appointed by
11
members of the disciplinary
12
MR. GOLD:
These are the members of
13
the committee, the disciplinary committee,
14
all Of
of whom were appointed by the court.
15
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
16
MR. GOLD:
1'7
17
that are dismissed
18
expressing general dissatisfaction with the
19
outcome of a case without an allegation of
20
specific misconduct by an attorney, a very
21
common kind of complaint.
22
side in every litigation.
23
24
Okay.
The types of complaints

incl~de
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
those complaints
Therels
There's a losing
We know that.
And, Mr .. Gold, we1re just trying to keep
8/01/2009 13:41 FAX
I4J 018
18
everything within five minutes, because we
:22
qUite a few
have quite
3
4
5
6
7
MR. GOLD:
Well,
1 11 m going to the
heart of what you're asking about

CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
Okay.
If you can,
that would be great.

MR. GOLD:
t~ings are
is how these things
reviewed internally and what are our
procedures.
10
The committee has discretion to refer
11
action concerning possible misconduct by an
12
attorney until litigation in the court
13
system is concluded.
14
discretion is done on a case-by-case basis~
lS
15
The exercise of that
If the staff attorney determines. that
16
the allegations do not constitute
17
misconduct,
18
recommend that the complaint be rejected
19
without seeking a response from the
20
respondent attorney.
21
s~reening
22
reviewed again by the chief counsel, who,
23
he agrees with the recommendation,
24
memorandum, and again the entire file is
the screening attorney may
In such a case the
attorney's written memorandum is

if
signs the
08/01/2009 13:42 FAX
I4J
019
[4]019
19
sent to a committee member who must approve
the rejection.
Following an investigation,
in~estigation, which may
include depositions
depositions, subpoenaed documents,
interviews, the attorney writes a memorandum
recommending action on the complaint.
memorandum again must be approved by chief
8e
counsel.
dismissal,
The
If the recommendation is for

the entire file again goes to a
10
committee member "for

for approval.
11
there's a procedure for reconsideration if
12
the complainant seeks such reconsideration.
13
And again
again,
l
If the recommendation is for a letter
14
of admonition or the filing of formal
15
charges
charges,l
16
attorney members of the Policy committee

Committee of
17
the committee, which is composed of nine
18
18
attorneys and three laypersons.
19
review a file:
file; if two members approve an
20
admonition, a confidential admonition is
~1
21
sent to the respondent attorney and the
~2
22
complainant is notified.
it must be approved by two separate
The members
23
An admonition, although private, is
24
considered discipline and may be used as

as
U~/U1/~UU9
U"/UI/ZUU~
13:42
FAX
IJ:4Z !"'AX.
I4J 020
I4l
20
1
aggravation if further charges are filed
:22
against the
members of the Policy. Committee,
-44
reviewing the file,
Appellate Division appoints a referee who
conducts a hearing, which is essentially a
trial.
two~att0rney
two~attcrney
after
approve charges,
the
The rules of evidence apply.
The referee's recommendation is then
8
9
If
attorn~y.
usu~lly of four members

usually
reviewed by a panel,
10
of the Disciplinary Committee,
11
recommendation to the Appellate Division as
12
who make a
to misconduct or possible action.

.to
SENATOR PERKINS:.
13
Excuse
me.
Maybe
;L4
14
we can get to the balance of what you1re

you 1 re
1?
going to share with some questions that I
16
think are coming up.
17
MR. GOLD:
Fine.
18
is
SENATOR PERKINS:
19
you don't mind,
20
sort of like for some statistical
21
information in
22
complaints --
MR. GOLD:
23
24
I'll
Mr.
For instance -- if
term~
Chair -- I'm looking
of how many
Ilm coming to that,

I'm
but
08/01/2009 13:43 FAX
141
021
141021
21
SENATOR PERKINS:
So I might as well
~et
ask the question so you can
3~
that way we can try and have a conversation.

Because, you know,
to it, and
one of the wonderful
is that this is such a
things! Mr. Chairman,
great turnout,
And itrs going to take a lot of time,

MR. GOLD:
8
9
there's a lot of folks here.
Well,
so --
let me just j~mp.to
the statistics that we have.
10
SENATOR PERKINS:
11
MR. GOLD:
Okay.
In 2008 the committee
12
received approximately 3300 complaints,
13
concerning attorneys.
14
twenty-five of these were dismissed

dismi~sed without
15
seeking responses from the respondent
16
attorney because these complaints did not
17
describe conduct that violated the rules
18
which the committee enforces.
19
367
367
20
disciplinary agencies,
21
complaint is made against an attorney in a
22
different department.
23
24
Five hundred
An additional
complaints were referred to other

such as when a
And also included in that number are

ag~inst nonattorneys,
complaints against
such as the
101/2009 13:43 FAX
14J022
f41022
22
1
unauthorized practice of law.
we refer to the district
Those things
attor~eyls
Of the remaining cases,
office.
responses are
sought and other forms of investigation are
commenced.
In 2008,
21 attorneys were disbarred
after
aft e r hearings,
he,a rings
Eight attorneys submitted disciplinary
resignations,
that's
that
I s
after
aft e r full
f u 11 hearings.
hear i n 9 s .
22 attorneys were suspended,
10
and two were pUblicly

publicly censured.
11
addition,
12
dismissed by the committee and 58 attorneys
13
received private admonitions.

admortitions.
14
Now,
In
approximately 1900 complaints were
I can say -- these are the 2008
15
statistics -- I've been a member of the
16
committee for quite some time,
17,
17.
say that this was a representakive year.
18
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
19
the -- that's the norm,
20
complaints,
or are there more
think this is
MR. GOLD:
22
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
23
MR,
GOLD:
MR. GOLD;
a year.
That's
That1s usually
less complaints?
21
24
and I would
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hrom.
typica~.
Typical~
Typical?
A typical kind of
UO/UIIlUUH
VOl 1).1.1 "UUl:I 1J:43
lJ: 4J FAX
j<'AX
[4J
I4J 023
023
23
23
11
CHAIRMAN
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
SAMPSON:
And
And when
when you
you were
were
22
talking about
about the issue,
issue, if
if there is aa
33
question where, say, the staff attorney is
44
uncertain whether this rises to the level of
an attorney being disoiplined,

disciplined, does he then
go speak to the chief counsel?

Each staff
staff
MR.
MR..
8a
attorney
to Alan Friedberg, because he handles the
10
11
GO!JD:
GO!..JD:
Absolutely.
-~
-~
now,
let me turn this 'one over
staff.
MR. FRIEDBERG:
FRIEDBERG.:
If there's
there'S any
12
question that there might be misconduct,
13
would proceed with it.
14
we
aut we get many complaints that are

But
15
just somebody who might have lost a criminal
16
or civil case and just said "I lost, and 1 11 m
17
blaming it on my lawyer."
18
misco~duct, then those are

grounds for miscotlduct,
19
rejected without seeking a response.
20
20
If there's
there 1 s no
cases we do seek the

But in most cases
21
21
response of the attorney,

attorney, and
and then
theft that
22
22
response, which we
we call
call an
an answer, is sent
response,
23
23
to the
the complainant
complainant for
for what
what we call aa reply.
to
24
24
And then
then when
when that
that comes
comes in,
in, we
we'make
And
make aa
8/01/2009
01/2009 13:44 FAX
I4J 024
14J024
24
determination 1n
in every case.
And thatls
that's 3300 to 3500 complaints a
:2
2
3
year,
a committee member must review it,
attorney committee member.
reconsideration is sought,
committee member must review it.
10
And for any dismissal,

an
And if
a second attorney
~harges or
For anything that may go to Gharges
I review them.
an admonition,
two attorney Policy Committee
members must review it and approve.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
11
And dealing with
12
the -- and, usually therels one staff
13
attorney who works on these complaints?
14
15
Or,
mean -MR.
FRIEDBERG:
Well,
almost all the
16
attorneys screen cases except for several of
17
the supervisors.
18
given out to the next attorney.
19
people just give it out
20
21
22
So i
it
t '1ss just randomly
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
Our intake
How many cases do
they normally handle?

MR.
FRIEDBERG;
Well,
they normally
23
SO cases for -- not for

have about so
24
screening,
for investigation.
And they
~!UIllUU9
O/U~/~UU~
13:44
~J:44 FAX
YAA
141025
25.
probably would screen 3300 complaints
divided by 21 or 20
screening,
assuming.
5
6
7
at~orneys
150 a year,
who are
three a week,
I'm
Most of our staff is very experienced.

Many are former prosecutors.
GOLD~
MR. GOLD:
Senator,
one thing.
thin'g.
or,
disagreement or.
let me just add
In cases where there's internal

say,
the chief counsel in
10
his own mind looks at a case and says "This
11
one is kind of close,
12
ought to do,
13
to Mr.
14
II
I don't know what we
he'll take it
i t to the chairman,
Reard.on.
Reardon.
sometimes when Mr.
Reardon looks at a
15
case, he says,
saysl
16
whole Policy Committee. IIII
17
IILet'
s bring
"Let's
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
this to the
gotcha.
18
there's a question such as that,
19
go.es to the entire policy Committee?

goes
GOLD~
GOLD:
20
MR.
21
CHAIRMAN
22
23
24
It could,
SAMPSON:
,so
if
So if
it then
yes.
How many members
of the Policy committee?

MR.
FRIEDBERG:
There'S 12.
There's
appointed by the Appellate Division.
All
08/01/2009 13:44 FAX
141026
~026
26
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
And out of those
12 members,
know,
and the other six say it ~ises

rises to a certain
level.
(5.
6,
8a
9
10
suppose you
h~ve
a split?
six say it doesn't rise to that level.

level,
MR.
what
What do we
we, do in those instances?
FRIEDBERG:
That's theoretical.
It never really happens.

CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
Never really
happens.
MR. FRIEDBERG:
If six people thought
11
it was misconduct,
12
potentially it could be misconduct,
13
proceed.
14
You
ltd
X'd have to say,
well,
and Iid
I'd
But generally itls

i t ' s fairly obvious.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON;
And most of the
15
cases that you see are usually mishandling
16
escrow or --
17
MR.
FRIEDBERG:
Well,
most of the
18
complaints we get are neglect from the
19
clients.
20
Most of the serious cases that result
21
in serious charges involve financial
22
matters,
23
escrow is not the biggest type of complaint,
24
i t ' s the biggest type of complaint

~omplaint that
particularly escrow.
Although
..... ""' ........... "
_VVQ
.LoJ.
":tv
r.t1.A
I4J 027
27
1
2
perhaps results in serious penalty.

MR. GOLD:
shou~d
bec~use
say that in the
First Department,
of the nature of
what goes on in the Island of Manhattan,
get
g~t an awful lot of very major complaints
involving complicated financial
SOmetimes -- we don't get too many of them,
but we do get some of these cases which are
very complex and involved.
we
issues.
Sometimes they
10
involve allegations of mishandling of funds
11
in connection with estates or trusts or
12
securities matters or things of that sort.
13
And we deal with. all of those kinds of
14
matters,
15
committee who are skilled and experienced in
16
mostly all of these areas.
17
Now,
and we have members of the Policy
by the way,
at the present time
18
one of the issues that's

thatls facing USI
US J
which is
19
very important to us,
20
We are very concerned that people who are
21
coming into the United States and are here
22
and are subject to the immigration
.::n
23
litigation system,
24
being inadequately represented by
is immigration-cases.
too many of them are

a~unsel.
c~unsel.
08/01/2009 13:45 FAX
141
028
141028
28
Now,
we just handle one little aspect
2:2
of that.
advantage of some of the vulnerable
population.
We're
concern~d
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
when lawyers take
I have seen
NO,
that.
seen that, especially with respect to my
8B
constituencies; these individuals have p~id
a considerable amount of money and it hasn't
10
And you're correct about that,
II have
gone anywhere.
MR.
11
FRIEDBERG:
FRIEDEERG:
Judge Katzman of the

pane~
12
Second circuit has established a
13
people from various fields who work in this,
14
and we're
weJre working very closely with that
15
panel.
16
people who take advantage of perhaps the
17
m.ost
m~st
19
And we are very concerned about
vulnerable people around.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
18
senator DeFrancisco?
Senator
21
22
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON;
24
Thank you very
much.
20
23
of
No,
thank you.
senator Perkins,
Senator
you had a question?

PERKINS;
SENATOR PERKINS:
Can you just give
/01/2009
101/2009 13:46 FAX
141
[4] 029
29
us -- you just mentioned two major sources,
I guess, of compla'int~.
complaints.
the escrow accounts and the other one sort
of neglect.
MR. GOLD:
GOLD~
6G
SENATOR PERKINS:
7'1
One has to do with
Yes.
Now,
what falls
into sort of the neglect category?
MR.
GOLD:
neglect case,
well,
a typical kind of
someone will write a letter
"I hired aa lawyer,
10
and say,
I paid him
11
X thousand dollars as a retainer, and then I
12
couldn't
couldn't- get him on the telephone and he
13
didn't do anything for me."

me.~
14
serious matter.
15
is important to the client.
16
supposed to neglect matters for clients.
Thatts a
That's
That X thousands of dollars
Lawyers are not
17
And generally
g~neral1y what we do with those is,
18
depending upon whether or not the client has
19
been adversely affected already by what's
20
happened -- I mean,
21
something like
limitations has run or sornethins
22
that
23
24
if the statute of
we treat those as serious matters.

In the absence of something serious
having already happened,
and certainly if
08/01/2009 13:46 FAX

08101/2009
I4J 030
141030
30
this is a first offense against that lawyer,
2
:2
it would normally
admonition.
largest single category of matters that we
have,
terms of the discipline.
r~9ult
in a letter of
Ao even though neglect is the
it's not often the most serious in
The mishandling of client funds,
client escrow account or maybe estate funds
or something like that,
is probably the most
10
serio~s and comes with the way the court

serious
11
deals with that --
12
Would
would you say most
SENA'1'OR PERKINS:
SENATOR
13
of your cases are in that area of the escrow
14
accounts?
15
MR. GOLD!
GOLD~
16
MR.
17
SENATOR PERKINS;
18
MR.
19
SENATOR PERKINS;
PERKINS:
20
No.
FRIEDBERG:
GOLD:
GOLD;
Not most,
but many.
But many.
Yes.
Most would
would. be in
the neglect categories?
GOLD;
Right.
21
MR.
22
SENATOR PERKINS:
23
quick other questions,
24
discussion.
Let me ask" two
just for the sake of
08/01/2009
8/01/2009 13:46 FAX
I4J 031
141031
31
Are these processes open,
any transparencies:
transpareneies~
closed doors,
MR.
Or are these behind
totally
total~y confidential?
~onfidential?
They're absolutely closed.
GOLD;
GOLD:
Becau~e of Section '90,

Because
JUdiciary Law,
Judiciary
sealed,
8
9
10
11
subdivision 10 of the
everything is confidential,
not subject to -- it's not available
,to anybody in the public at all.
SENATOR PERKINS:
The good news or
the bad news is it's

itls sealed;
MR.
GOLD;
GOLD:
right?
That's right.
~ppellate
unless and
Division orders public
12
until the
13
discipline against the lawyer.
14
be either a censure,
15
disbarment.
16
whole file is closed.
17
do they have
That would
suspension or
Until one of those happens,
So for example -- and by the way,
Itm
I'm
18
glad you asked that,
19
important in terms of what's before you,
20
get these complaints from complainants who
21
think that they've been injured,
22
with them fairly.
23
24
Senator,
the
because that's
and we deal
A complainant has a limited role in

terms of our proceedings.
We
He's not like a
8/01/2009 13:47 FAX
141032
32
plaintiff in a civil litigation whols

who's able
.2
to prosecute a cabe by himself.
like a complainant in a criminal matter who
refers things
t~ings to a district attorney and
then watches to see what the district
attorney is going to do.
Hels
He's more
And if we decide to dismiss a matter,
7
B
we'll advise the complainant,
our procedure
is to advise the complainant that we've done
10
that.
11
donlt
don1t tell them what we've discovered in our
12
investigation.
13
in our file to the complaint because we're
14
not permi t ted to. '
15
But we don't tell them why,

Eut
or we
We don't disclose anything
SAMPSON~
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
think that's
A lot of people need to
16
und~rstandable.
17
understand that you're not permitted to
18
provide that information unless the
19
Appellate Division,
.20
20
suspend or admonish an individual,
21
pClint in time.
22
if they choose to
at that
r think that this is a misunderstanding
.23
23
that some people have,
and I'm glad we were
24
i t up to a certain extent at
able to clear it
08/01/2009
08/0112009 13:47 FAX
I4J
141 033
33
this point in time.
MR. GOLD:
Appellate Division,
respect to that point, has the legal
authority under subdivision 10 to open the
file at any point with respect to any
particular matter.
Now, by the way,

I should add,
with
II think Senator
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
DeFrancisco has a question.

10
the
Just very
11
quickly to follow up on that.
12
was a great analogy,
13
complaints about these things are not open
14
to the public.
15
you are someone referring to an agency,
16
like a DA doesn't have to prosecute every
1'7
17
case if theY,don't
they. donlt think the evidence is
18
there or that the testimony is not
19
supportable by other facts that they learn.
20
And I
21
general public.
22
think that
because I've heard some
But you 1 re not a plaintiff,

just
think that's a big confusion in the
But one other question.
What happens
23
if there's a complaint by somebody against
24
an attorney that's found to be unfounded?
08/01/2009 13:47 FAX
141034
!4J034
34
Will that attorney at least get notice that
somebodY's-complaining
somebodY's-cornplaining about something under
those circumstances?
person is unhappy.
attorney at Borne point,
dismissed, be entitled to know what the
complaint was?
MR. GOLD:
Because no doubt that

And wouldn't the
Well,
after it's
it's
i t depends upon the
time within the matter and the stage of the
10
matter and also the nature of what's
11
occurred.
12
As I
indicated before,
v~ry
if a complaint
13
is filed and on its
~4
1.4
forth any disciplinary matter,
15
respondent may not even be notified of this.
16
The complaint is simply dismissed on its
17
face,
18
commission,
19
werre concerned,
we're
20
anybody complained about them because as far
21
as we're concerned,
22
about them.
23
about them with anything even close to
24
something.
administrativelYJ
administratively}
face it doesn't set
then the
internally at the
tne
and the attorney,
as fa~
far as
doesn't need to know that
they didn't complain
You know?
They didn't complain
08/01/2009
08/0112009 13:48 FAX
I4J 035
141035
35
It doesn't
doesn 1 t have to get to a very high
1
2
level before we'll

weIll send it to the respondent
and ask him for a response.
a substantial majority of cases.

FRIEDBERG~
MR. FRIEDBERG:
That happens in
Once the attorney
learns about it, obviously at the end of the
case we will notify them as to what
happened.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
10
Mr.
Friedberg,
11
for taking the time.
Mr.
Gold and
I want to thank you very"much
12
And the reason I let it extend over the
13
five minutes is because II really wanted them
14
to explain the procedures and the process
15
with respect to dealing with these
16
complaints.
17
Thank you very much.
18
MR. FRIEDBERG:
We stand ready
~o
19
cooperate with you ~nd

and answer any questions
20
today or any other day.
21
MR. GOLD:
And we plan to stay
~er~
22
for the day and be available to you in case
23
you have anything further you'd

you 1 d like to ask
24
us about.
/01/2009
)1/2009 13:48 FAX
[4J
036
141036
36
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
1
2
much, gentlemen.
gen.tlemen.
MR. FRIEDBERG:
Thank you very
Thank you for your
time.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
The next witness
is Christine C. Anderson,
who used to be a
former
form~r employee with the First Department
Disciplinary committee.
Committee.
(Applaus.e.
(Applal,lse. )
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
SAMPSON;
10
think we should
11
try to keep our -- no need for applause,
12
ladies and gentlemen.
3-3
keep an orderly process and just keep it
14
moving.
Ms. Anderson,
15
We're just trying to
thank you very much.
16
werre going to try to keep it under five

welre
17
minutes.
18
explain the process,
19
Okay?
to lay the groundwork.
ANDERSON:
MS. ANDERSON;
20
21
We allowed them to go over just to

we
So you
can just do
five?
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
22
Ande~son.
No problem,
23
Ms.
24
want to get to the -- we have your
We just
08/01/2009
08/0112009 13:49 FAX
I4J 037
37
statement, we1ve read it,
get to the heart.
askin~ you questions.

jumping in and asking
So we're going to be
MS. ANDERSON:
we just want to
Okay.
should also
start by saying that this statement is drawn
solely from allegations set forth in my
federal court complaint.
comprised solely of publicly available
information,
It is therefore
and it is fully in compliance
10
with the stipulation and order of
11
confidentiality
12
2006,
2008,
13
90.10.
e~tered
on February 20,
in my case and based on Judiciary Law
80
So basically we
CHAIRMAN
CHAIRMA~ SAMPSON:
14
15
want to make sure, presently you have a
16
case?
MS. ANDERSON:
17
18
21
22
23
24
sir.
Yes,
Senator.
I would be happy to take questions when
19
20
Yes,
hav@
hav~ counsel present.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
No
prob'lem.
But
just go ahead.
MS. ANDERSON:
okay.
It has been
perfect ethical
said that men can write perfe~t
I U
11 ~':UUl:l
U U ~ 1;S:
~ t''Ax.
U.lI
.lJ: 44~
l"''A.X.
I4J
I4J 038
038
38
systems, but nevertheless,they

nevertheless, they cannot stand
being
.iwatched when they go out at night.
being.iwatched
And I think that to a large ext.ent
that's the situation with the DDC.

DDe.
The DDC
DDe
is the Departmental Disciplinary Committee,
for which I used to work.
principal attorney there for six and a half
years.
I was a former
alleged that upon learning of the
10
DDC's pattern and practice of whitewashing
11
and routinely dismissing complaints leveled
12
against
13
DDC is
detriment of the public that the DDe
14
duty-bound to serve
15
wrongdoing pursuant to my rights under the
16
Pirst Amendment to the United States

First
17
constitution and,
Constitution
18
ethical obligations under the New York State
19
Code of Professional Responsibility.
20
ce~tain
select attorneys
In response,
II
to the
reported this
importantly,
however,
my own
rather than
21
attempting to address and rectify the
22
problem, my supervisors embarked upon a
23
campaign of abuse and harassment of myself,
24
24
including a physical assault on myself by
8/01/2009 13:49 FAX
I4J 039
141039
39
deputy, .Sherry Cohen.

the first deputy/Sherry
I'CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
"CHAIRMAN
22
Ms. Anderson, we
that; I can read from your

understand thati
fa.ctual statement.
factual
to the factual background and issues with
~respect to --
ANDERSON:
MS. ANDERSON;
example,
one example/
want to get down
Well,
to get to,
Thatls what I want

That's
some examples.
MS. ANDERSON:
11
rI can give you
sir.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
10
But
Yes.
conducted an
12
intensive investigation of a case.
13
caseload supervisor,
14
it,
lS
15
the chief counsel.
16
charges}
charges,
Judith Stein,
My
approved
and so did Thomas Cahill, who was then

It .was
was recommended for
and then suddenly

sUddenly it was dismissed.
17
called me -- he .'
The complainant called
18
happened to be an attorney -- and asked me
19
how could something like this happen.
20
requisitioned the file and found that it had
21
been completely gutted.
22
file which was almost 3 inches thick was
23
suddenly an inch, perhaps.
24
product was taken out, Verizon phone records
What had been a
All of my work
08/01/2009 13:50 FAX
141040
14J040
40
that I had subpoenaed were not there --
C~AIRMAN
case you worked on?
MS..
Senator.
This was an actual
Yes,
ANDERSON:
AH'DERSON:
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
were missing?
MS.
were missing.
10
SAMPSON:
sir.
And the documents
Yes,
ANI:)ERSON:
ANDERSON:
Yes,
the documents
Another such case which II refer to as
11
whitewashing was a case which was
12
intensively,
l3
13
again,
investigated -When you say
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
14
investigated," what do you mean

"intensively investigated."
15
by that?
16
MS. ANDERSON:
okay,
Okay,
I will bring in
17
once,
the complainant -- maybe once.
18
bring in witnesses,
19
deposition,
20
left no stone unturned.
21
as being thorough and conscientious.
22
twice -- I l' llll
I will have a
I will subpoena documents.
In that case,
I had a reputation
i t was recommended for an

it
23
admonition because we could not really prove
24
conversion.
facti
In fact,
this was a case that
UO/U~/~UU~
~J:DU
~AA
141041
41
many of my colleagues,
colleagues and II agreed that there probably
had been conversion
it.
admonition.
b~t
we couldn't prove
And so we had to just settle for an
Instead,
at least four of my
Sherry Cohen came into my
office holding the admonition in my hand ,;I.nd

and
saying,
go to the policy Committee because they may
"This is too h.arsh.
can't let .it

it
10
it
send i
t back for charges,
11
an attorney on a trial for six months."

And
12
replied,
and
can't tie up
"That happens all the
13
time.
14
rewrite this.
15
is
ethically and legally rewrite something to
l6
16
achieve a desired outcome.
17
something to achieve that outcome.
1I
And she said:.

1I
II
"No,
And I said,
18
Nevertheless,
19
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
SAMPSON~
I am going to
n
You
nyou
cannot
You cannot skew

II
she said six months

Was
was this just in
20
this one incident, or you discovered a
21
pattern?
22
MS. ANDERSON:
II
discovered a
and this is the second example I'm
23
pattern,
24
giving you.
08/01/2009
08101/2009 13:50 FAX
I4J 042
141042
42
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
MS. ANDERSON:
ANDERSON;
In any event,
rewrite it,
And
6G
whitewashed.
th~t
okay.
Okay?
she took nine months to
and it went by under the radar.
is what I mean when I say cases are
For example, another case that I had,
it was agreed by my caseload supervisor ~nd
by Cahill that there were three elements.
10
elemen~s was
And one of the elements
11
misrepresentation to us,
12
serious.
13
said:
earnestly and said;
14
what happens if they lie to us.
15
for charges.
16
here,
here
17
II
which is very
Sherry Cohen looked at me very

"Christine,
you know
They can go
I don't see misrepresentation
lien.~
only see failure to pay a lien.
1I
So she took the case from me and took
18
out the misrepresentation,
19
admonition purely for failing to pay a
20
medical lien.
21
and he got an
That is another example.
In any event,
I think that you have a
22
good idea of how they -- from the prior
23
gentlemen.
24
and --
However,
I have a recommendation
101/2009
101/2009 13:51
13:51 FAX
FAX
141043
141043
43
43
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO;
DeFRANCISCO:
11
22
~moment,
~moment,
Excuse
Excuse me
me one
one
before
before you
you give
give the
the recommendation.
recommendation.
33
YoU've
You've siven
given us
us several
several instances
instances in
in your
your
44
written
written remarks; you
you mention
mention two
two here.
here.
Over the
the six years
ye~rs that you were with
55
66
the
the organization, how many
many files
files did
did you
you
77
investigate?
aS
99
MS.
MS. ANDERSON:
ANDERSON:
difficult
difficult to
to tell
tell you.
10
10
11
11
14
14
Hundreds?
Tens?
'MS .. ANDERSON;
12
12
13
That
That would
would be
be
certainly
certainly hundreds,
hundreds,
yeah.
SENATOR
DeFRANCISCO:
And these
15
15
instances
instances that
that you state
state in your written
written
16
16
remarks and here, are those the

the only
17
17
instances where you and your supervisor
16
18
differed?
19
19
MS. ANDERSON:
ANDERSON:
No, there were others.
20
20
But those were some
2i
2i
quick,
quick, so II just chose those.
22
22
were others, for example --
23
23
24
24
you
you wanted me to
to be
be
But
But there
there
What I'm
Ilm trying
to determine here is
is obviously I think
08/01/2009
08101/2009 13:51 FAX
I4J
044
14J044
44
anybody disagrees with their supervisor from
ti~e
differende
difference between disagreement over a very
small percentage of the cases and
whitewashing and activities that are
improper that would justify recovery on a
lawsuit.
determine.
to time.
1
There
S a substantial
There's
And that's what lim

I'm trying to
MS. ANDERSON;
ANDERSON:
Well,
I think you make
10
aa very good point that you're not always
11
going to be in
12
should be handled.
13
right about that.
14
ag~eement
II
on a case or how it
think you're perfectly
And on certain occaeions,

occasions, rare
15
occasions,
I would say yes, you know,
16
part of it is not maybe strong enough.
17
example, there was one where lack of
18
competence -- there is a disciplinary rule
19
about that.
20
let that go.
21
I understand being a professional"

professional' and I
22
understand your question.
And I said, okay,
that
For
then, let's
SO
So that was -- in other words,
23
My one recommendation that I would like
24
to make, however, is on the last page, which
101/2009
01/2009 13:52 FAX
f4J 045
141045
45
is I
~e
is rife with conflict.
think that the Policy Committee should
disbanded,
for the simple reason that it
As the gentleman before said, he is
with a large law firm and that they serve
without pay.
one occasion at least,
partners' brother got into trouble,
was handled -- it was taken away from me and
It is not coincidental that

that on
when one of their
that it
10
handled very quickly and expedited to their
11
satisfaction.
12
think that the Policy Committee is
13
actually in violation of JUdiciary Law 90.10
1.4
because they are not -(Scattered applause.)
15
16
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
can1t -- please.
we can't
17
gentlemen,
18
1B
appla.use.
the applause.
19
Ladies and
SENATOR PERKINS.:
Can I
Just so lim
I'm clear,
Please hold
ask a
20
question?
21
you're saying that there's preferential
22
treatment in this decision-making,
in this
23
process,
because
24
of their stature or their connections,
because
that there are those who,
(a)
are
08/01/2009 13:52 FAX
141 046
!4J046
46
not prosecuted or investigated or whatever
:2
the appropriate terminology is?

is7
MS. ANDERSON:
PERKINS:
SENATOR PERKINS;
you Ire saying.

you're
Or handled lightly.
just want to be clear that that's what
MS. ANDERSON:
PERKINS:
SENATOR PERKINS;
Or handled lightly.
may,
Yes.
Number two,
if I.
you also say that you were employed at
...
10
the DDC
nne and you were subjected to various
11
acts of discrimination and harassment as a
12
result of your race.

So now are you saying that there's a
13
14
racial view in some of these cases as well,
15
or are you just saying that as it relates to
16
just your own particular relationship at the
17
a.gency?
agency?
My allegation is that
MS. ANDERSON:
18
19
there was a pattern and remains a pattern of
20
discrimination against m~norities

minorities at the
21
DOC.
22
23
24
(Scattered applause.)
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
gentlemen, please.
Ladies and
We don't need any
08/01/2009 13:52
13:52 FAX
141047
141 047
47
1
applause.
MS. ANDERSON:
example,
supervisor
supervisor,
competent.
although several of them were
Let me just finish the point,
however,
if you don't mind.

If you -are
~re not an employee of the
8
9
for
there was not one minority

J
6
7
For many years,
court,
you have no right under 90.10 to know
10
confidential information,
11
testified to.
12
Policy Committee are not employees of the
13
court.
14
they're outsiders.
15
lS
play,
16
90.10.
17
which waS just
And the~e
these members of the
They're not employed by the court,

And they have no part to
because it's a direct violation Of
SENATOR
PERKIN~:
PERKIN~:
So again,
you1re
you're
18
IB
just saying that they should be employees of
19
the court in order to be a part of that
20
committee?
Policy Committee?
21
there should be no committee?
22
trying to --
23
24
MS. ANDERSON:
latter.
Or are you suggesting

1
1I'M
m just
The latter.
The
don't need a policy Committee.

We donlt
08/01/2009 13:53 FAX
141048
48
The DAis office doesn't have a policy
.2
committee; it relies on its staff and the
DA.
they don't have a policy committee.
You look at the
p.S.
We e II am nolo
no longer
W
n ger
Attorney's office,
ll
"we
DDe
II we'l
- -- the DD
C
has its staff and the court.
need for Big Brother.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN
10
11
12
13
14
15
SAM~SON:
There is no
Hold the applause.
Senator DeFrancisco has a question to

Ol-sk
ask you.
sreNATOR DeFRANCISCO:
SgNATOR
Who appoints
the members of the poJicy Committee?

MS. ANDERSON:
They're appointed by
the court.
16
17
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
Thank you.
The majority of
18
therets 12-members,
when you say there's
19
there'S 12 members on the Policy
20
Committee --
21
MS. ANDERSON:
22
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
Twelve,
think
yes.
And the majority
23
of these 12 members come from big firms,
24
small firms?
08/01/2009 13:53 FAX
[4J 049
!4J
49
MS. ANDERSON:
ANDERSON;
1
2
Mostly large law
firms.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
:33
Large law firms.
What are they, partners in large law firms?
When ypu say large
MS. ANDERSON:
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
SENATOR PERKINS:
Large law firms.

Senator Perkins.
So why were you,
terminated?
MS.
10
ANDERSON:
~or
was terminated or
11
internal whistleblowing and harassed.
12
physically assaulted.
l.~
1.3
to the court,
14
from contact with Sherry Cohen,
lS
assailant.
16
her.
17
II
II
was
When I reported that
then asked to be removed

who was the
was refused to be removed from
I asked for an ethical wall -CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
But that is an
18
issue that's being taken in a separate
19
litigation; am II
20
litigation going against --
correct?
21
MS. ANDERSON:
22
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
23
SENATOR PERKINS:
24
You have your own
Oh
Oh,, yes.
Yes.
Senator Perkins.
Just one final --
what is the racial makeup of the committee?
101/2009 13:53 FAX
141
050
[4]050
50
Of the committee?
MS. ANDERSON:
ANDERSON~
2:2
SENATOR PERKINS:
Committee.
MS. ANDERSON:
4
5
And very frankly,
don't want to know.
!I
Okay.
Thank you
very much, Ms. Anderson.

MS.
I really donlt
don't know.
SAM~SON;
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON;
6
7
of the policy
Yeah,
you,
ANDERSON:
Thank you,
The next witness
11
is Kevin McKeown, on behalf of the Fred
12
Goetz- Tr,ust.
Tr-ust.
Mr. Goetz,
13
five minutes,
14
much .
... GO
GO right ahead.
15
MR. McKEOWN:
16
thank you very
First of all, Senator,
my name is --
Mr. McKeown,
I'm
Ilm
-- Kevin McKeown,
and
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
17
18
Thank
gentlemen.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
10
sir.
sorry.
Mr. McKeown.
MR. McKEOWN;
19
not reading a statement on behalf of the
20
lim
21
Fred Goetz Trust.
22
submitted at the subsequent hearing when

sUQmitted
23
those 13 people will fly in from around the
24
country to testify before your great
That is going to be
~VV.1.
08/01/2009 14:18 FAX
51
1
2
3
4
5
6
committee.
I am here to read a 3D-second statement

of my own and then -CHAIRMAN SAMPSON;
Perfect.
like
30 seconds.
MR. McKEOWN:
and then I will
torture you,
letter from a former judge of this state.
10
ahd then I will read a short
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON.
any testimony to us,
did you?
11
MR. McKEOWN;
12
cEAIRMAN SAMPSON:
13
14
You didn't submit
Yes,
I did.
Okay.
do have it somewhere here.

MR. McKEOWN:
Again,
I guess we
Okay.
my name is Kevin
15
McKeown.
16
organizations focusing on the restoration of
17
the trust the public should have in the
18
judicial branch of our government.
19
organizations include Integrity in the
20
Courts,
21
Brady Organization.
22
I'm the proud member of various
Expose Corrupt Courts,
The
and the Frank
I believe the statewide attorney and
23
judicial ethics oversight structure is
24
corrupt,
and I applaud this committee for
101/2009 14:18 FAX
52
.'
what can only be described as a heroic and
beginning step in returning a lost faith by
:3
the public in this state court system.
I will say one thing today as I defer
my own personal experience to the next
hearing to be held in New York City.
idea of having attorneys regulating
attorneys and attorney judges is laughable,
and today marks --
10
The
(Applause. )
This is the last
11
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
12
time I'm going to ask.
13
conduct an orderly, an orderly hearing here,
14
trying to get everybody'S testimony in.
15
this continues,
16
short and just end it.
17
MR. McKEOWN;
We're trying to
If
will definitely cut it

okay?
Senators,
Thank you.
today marks
18
the beginning of a process in which the
19
public, attorneys,
20
fact judges can have faith that the respect
21
that they should have in the integrity of
22
their courts will once again return to this
23
great state.
24
court employees and in
I'm going to now read a short letter
141 003
8/01/2009 14:18 FAX
53
that was prepared -- Judge Philip Rogers
could not be here today;
However,
judges of New Xork state that accompanied me
before a o.s. House SUbcommittee on the
Judiciary a few months ago as i t pertains to
the federal crimes we allege that are
ongoing within the New York State court
system.
10
Judge Rogers was one of three
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
11
paraphrase it?
12
paraphrase it.
14
. Could you
I mean not read it,
MR. McKEOWN:
13
he had broken ribs.
but
It's very short.
And
Senator,. if I may.
it's done to be read,
15
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON;
16
MR. McKEOWN:
Okay.
"Dear Senator sampson,
am a 70-year-old former attorney and
17
18
village justice who practiced law in the
19
State of New York from October 16, 1968,
20
until being unjustly disbarred on May 31,
21
1999.
22
II
I was the" victim of a secret and
23
corrupt grievance process that lacks the
24
most elementary due-process constraints and
~004
08/01/2009 14:19 FAX
54
safeguards and was used as part of a
:2
conspiracy by former business partners to
ruin me after our venture went bankrupt.
If
respectfully ask that this committee
propose legislation that will protect
victims such as myself from suffering the
loss of their law license and,
case, all of their life choices as a result
of the totally corrupt attorney disciplinary
as in my
10
process managed and controlled by money,
11
favoritism,
and cronyism.
12
"By way of background,
I practiced law
13
in my home village of Patchogue,
14
County,
15
life.
16
the Patchogue village justice.
17
elected to six
113
by substantial majorities
19
by the people who knew me best from my days
20
as a patchogue student.
21
chairman of the
22
Board Ethics Committee, president of the
23
Suffolk County Magistrates Association,
24
as a director of the Suffolk County
in Suffolk
for 30 years of my professional

I also served as
From 1970 to 1994,
cons~cutive
I was
four-year terms
in each election,
served as the
Pat~hogue-Medford
school
and
08/01/2009 14:19 FAX
141 005
55
1
2
Magistrates Association.
"In the end,
however,
my professional
standing was left in ,ruins and my status as
a member of the bar was taken from me by a
~orrupt,
system that places power in attorneys to
supervise their fellow lawyers.
believe that attorney supervision is too
complex,
secret, nontransparent disciplinary
Are we to
complicated or problematical to be
Only lawyers drafting
10
left to nonattorneys?
11
the laws and regulations could foster such a
12
ridiculous concept.
13
"What we have had for years now is a
14
fatally flawed system where no one truly
1.5
watches the watchers who,
16
testimony of former and current staff,
17
regularly abuse the process they are paid to
18
administer.
19
disciplinary committees must be replaced by
20
a new system,
21
fully familiar with ethical problem-solving
22
review and adjudicate complaints concerning
23
lawyer conduct.
24
according to
Clearly the lawyer-controlled
where nonattorneys who are
"No lawyer can or should be
pe~mitted
08/01/2009 14:19 FAX
~006
56
attor~ey.
to sit in judgment of a fellow
my case, people seeking to bring pressure on
me as a result of a failed business venture
sought to use the grievance process to
coerce a settlement payment from me and in
the end,
than one occasion,
as they themselves said on more
ruin me.
"My former pArtners and their
In
al~ies
achieved their goal by using political and
10
other connections to move my disarmament
11
proceedings from Patchogue to Brooklyn.
12
Once removed to this location,
13
evidence was ignored,
14
accepted as truer
15
protections were denied me,
16
fraudulent accusations became the foundation
17
af
18
exculp~tory
perjured testimony
W~8
basic due-process
and false and
the ruling against me.
"When my investigation was moved "to
19
Brooklyn,
20
and later events proved this to be true.
21
believe
22
community as an attorney had the ethics
23
process that was used against me simply been
24
more transparent.
I was warned that the fix was in,

I
would still be serying the legal
Instead,
a secretive and
8/01/2009 14:20 FAX
I4J 007
57
corrupted process intent on only ruining me
ended my life of public service.
:3
"Transparency would ha.ve provided me
the opportunity to reveal the perjurious
tegtimony allowed against me.
improper that my most basic right of due
process was denied,
vital testimony of various witnesses.
It was also
thus preventing the
lISenator Sampson,
commend you and
10
your committee for holding these important
11
hearings on the attorney grievance process.
1.2
Based' on' my personal knowledge of other
13
cases similar to mine,
14
elementary inquiry by this committee will
15
find that many others,
16
clients,
17
I know that the most
both attorneys and
have been wronged like me.
"I trust that these injustices will see
18
the light of day and permit the immediate
19
reinstatement af attorneys wrongly
20
disbarred.
21
changes will include systemwide
22
and the providing of due process
23
accused."
24
I am also hopefUl that needed
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
Mr.
transpar~ncy
to those
McKeown,
we
08/01/2009 14:20 FAX
141008
58
have the letter here,
only one paragraph left.
earlier from Mr. Gold and also
Mr.
have to be done in those certain
Friedberg,
and definitely there's

But as you heard
these processes under law
circumstances, you know.

MR. McKEOWN:
So,
I mean
If I may address that,
Senator Sampson,
I have the pleasure of
actually having personal interaction,
so I'm
10
waiving confidentiality.
11
interaction with Mr. Friedberg and with
12
Mr. Gold.
13
threatened by.Mr. Friedberg.
14
I presented
have personal
eviden~e
that I was
And although I was called in by the
15
U.S. AttorneY'sOffice and the FBI and the
16
referral in Washington,
17
States Justice Department, although they all
18
found it very interesting and are currently
19
looking at it, Mr.
20
and Mr.
21
summarily done,
22
Gol~
D.C.,
Friedbe~g
to the United
and Mr. Reardon
have done what they have

and that is get rid of it.
Senator sampson,
23
assert,
is there.
24
at your
rt~xt
the documentation,
And I will tell you that
hearing, as a member of the
01/2009 14:20 FAX
I4J 009
59
various organizations,
we will present to
:2
you at your New York City hearing over 100
documented cases of the most ludicrous and
slipshod investigations resulting in what we
believe is a gross pattern of misconduct by
the ethics committees themselves.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
mean,
that 1 s
something we're interested in.

Senator DeFrancisco has a couple of
questions for you.
Who do you
represent ?,
MR.
MCKEOWN:
organi~ations
that I
Myself.
And the three
mentioned.
When you1re
16
talking about the FBI and the U.S. Attorney
17
and all that,
18
pertaining to you or is it for this judge
19
that you read the letter for?
20
figure out
21
22
23
24
MR.
was that about a personal file
It m trying
--
McKEOWN:
Well,
actually,
that
judge had nothing to do with the FBI.

However,
I will tell you when I was
called into the FBI at 26 Federal Plaza,
to
8/01/2009 14:21 FAX
141 010
60
that we had become a lightning rod for
literally the worldwide collection of people
.3
that have been
ethics committees.
bring in my four outrageous cases, and I
went in there.
harm~d
the~e
by
ec~called
And they asked me to
Now, before, a group of us,
which
includes former federal prosecutors,
attorneys,
et cetera, we would go
th~ough
10
the evidence before we presented it to the
11
FBI.
12
whether it was a judge,
13
disbarred lawyer,
14
pull the case files and see for ourselves
15
what the doeumentaticn said.
16
We went out, pulled case studies

a
lawyer,
or a litigant,
Based on that,
we would
the FBI asked for four
17
specific -- the four worst cases.
lS
in other circumstances where the U.S.
19
Attorneys office, where certain information
20
has come to light where they have then said
21
we want to interview those people.
22
I
And then
am totally
just asked you the cases that
23
confused.
24
you went to the FBI about,
were those
08/01/2009 14:21 FAX
141 011
61
personal cases that you were called in on or
were they people that you were representing
that somehow got in the federal criminal
system.
MR. McKEOWN:
They were -- the
organizations that I'm a member of.
answer your question,
organization, we brought those cases when
asked to these federal entities.
10
to
as a member of that
All right,
so
11
you weren't brought into the FBI, you were
12
seeking the FBI to look into these.
13
what you.lre saying?
14
well,
MR. McKEOWN:
offi~e
15
Attorney's
16
instance we called them;
).7
they called us.
18
inquiry in another --
19
told us.
Is that
the U.S.
The FBI.
in one
in another instance
And actually there's a new
So this wasn1t
20
something that -- this is something you
21
wanted to have done to explain all this to
22
the federal investigators,
23
and the like; correct?
24
MR.
McKEOWN:
the U.S. Attorney
Absolutely.
08/01/2009 14:21 FAX
I4l 012
62
addition,
indicated that it
who are reviewing these particular cases,
~hould
would then make determinations concerning
fraud,
whatever it may be.
sho~ld
be laypeople.
think
In
last point -- I
Okay.
you had
not be attorneys
And the laypeople
concerning due process,
concerning
How would they gain the expertise in
10
those areas as to what the disciplinary
11
rules are and the like?
12
have any qualifications that you would
13
presume that attorneys would have?
14
lS
16
17
18
MR. McKEOWN:
good question.
Would they have to
Senator,
that's a very
And
That's why I
asked it.
MR. McKEOWN:
---of course they would
19
have to be guided by what the laws are,
20
the procedures are.
21
it
I ask you,
do we want bankers
22
self-regulating?
23
want wall Street self-regulating?
24
that doesn
what
work.
That doesn't work.
Do we
We know
08/01/2009 14:22 FAX
141 013
63
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
What you're saying
.2
is basically, you know,
regulate attorneys.
I mean,
lawyers can't
you have very reputable and
ethica~
positions to make that decision.
there might be an aberration here or there,
bu t
panel of -- having a panel of attorneys,
attorneys who we put in these
You know,
I don't see it' as a pro'bl em having a.
10
based upon their background and everything
11
else, making decisions such as that.
12
But if there is,
sayin~,
as you1re
when
13
you present cases to me where I
14
discrepancies and issues,
15
having this hearing,
16
bottom line of these things,
17
allegations and these conspiracy
18
want to get to the bottom line,
19
why we're asking for specific instances,
20
we can look for ourselves and,
21
those recommendations, make a determination.
22
MR. McKEOWN:
see
that's why we're
so we can get to the

all these
we
iss~e$.
and tnat 1 s
so
based upon
Absolutely,
Senator.
23
And again,
that is a very good point.
And
;24
obviously you need attorney input because
101/2009 14:22 FAX
I4J 014
64
attorneys are versed on the law.
:2
brings up the bigger issue of people
self-regulating.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
MR. McKEOWN:
But it
Understood.
If an attorney is named
John Doe and he has been convicted of a
federal crime and goes to federal prison and
does time,
That's a question.
will he get his law license back?
10
Of course we all know that there was a
11
chief judge of this state who was convicted
12
of a federal crime who went to federal
13
prison and got his law license back.
14
15
What this comeS down to,
Senator,
is
equality.
16
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
17.
MR. McKEOWN:
Understood.
And I
would much rather
18
handle a complaint that said the person's
19
name was John Doe rather than a certain
20
person who that name triggers favoritism and
21
unequal treatment.
22
down to.
That's what it all comes
23
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
24
SENATO~
PERKINS:
Senator Perkins.
So do you believe
U~!Ul!ZUUl:l
14:Zl FAX
I4J 015
65
that there is favoritism in the process,
was pointed out by the speaker before you?
DO you think that those who are big shots or
who have connections or some other such
credentials are getting treated with kid
gloves and favoritism?
MR. McKEOWN:
Yes,
Senator.
as
In fact,
1 1 11 go
in the four statewide grievance committees,
10
11
80
far as to say that it is
embedd~d
and I say under the four departments.

We have heard from state attorneys,
l2
judges,
attorneys,
retired judges from all
13
over the state.
14
you file a complaint with an ethics
15
committee,
16'
going to be handled properly.
17
you're a prisoner automatically puts you to
18
the bottom of the list at everyone of the
19
four ethics departments in this state.
20
There's the presumption that if you're in
21
jail, you could not have been wronged by an
22
attorney.
23
And,
24
totally wrong.
If youlre a prisoner and
don't you dare think that i t ' s
Senators,
Just because
that's wrong.
That is
And that's -- we can't wait
08/01/2009 14:23 FAX
141016
66
to get a stack of the 100 complaints that we
have from the beautiful people of Brooklyn,
Queens,
couldn't make it up here today.
Staten Island and Harlem alone who
So. Mr. McKeown,
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
5
6
welre looking forward to that.
very much for your testimony.
forward to getting those documentations in
at our next hearing.
10
MR.
11
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
12
McKEOWN:
Thank you t
Thank you
And we loo:)c
Senators.
Thank you very
much.
13
The next witness is Robert Tembeckjian,
14
counsel for the New York State Commission on
15
Judicial conduct,
16
Thomas Klonick,
17
Judicial Conduct.
18
and the Honorable Judge
chair of the commission on
Just to make a note of it,
we also have
19
representatives -- who are not going to
20
speak -- from the Second,
21
Department Disciplinary Committees.
22
23
24
Third and Fourth
Your Honor.
morning.
JUDGE KLONICK:
Good morning,
good
8/01/2009 14:23 FAX
I4J 017
67
Mr.
Committee.
Chairman, members of the JUdiciary

Thank you for this opportunity.
I am Thomas Klonick.
I'm an attorney
and a part-time town justice from Monroe
county.
Judicial Conduct.
Commission on Judicial Conduct to a
four-year term by Judge Judith Kaye"in 2005,
reappointed by Judge Jonathan Lippman just
10
11
1 1 m chair of the Commission on

I was appointed to the
earlier this year.

I am here today with the commission's
12
administrator, Robert Tembeckjian,
13
believe you already know.
14
whom I
The commission is pleased to
15
participate in this hearing,
which should
16
shed further light on our constitutional
17
mission and how we operate.
18
AS you stated earlier,
Senator, but I
19
will just briefly review,
the commission is
20
comprised of four judges,
five lawyers,
21
law people appointed by the Governor,
22
Chief Judge,
23
Legislature.
24
two
the
and the four leaders of the
The commission operates under a very
08/01/2009 14:23 FAX
I4J 018
68
rigorous system of internal checks and
balances that has been emulated by other
states to assure that all complaints are
treated seriously and fairly.
the commiesion members,
members view and act upon every complaint
that comes into the agency.
was a record number,
complaints every seven weeks.

While the
10
For example,
the 11 commission
1,923,
La"st year that

or more
ad~inistrative
th~n
275
staff conducts
11
the investigation,
12
to us
13
investigation.
14
investigation,
15
members of the 11 and the concurrence of six
16
commission members to serve a jUdge with
17
formal disciplinary
reg~larly
the administrator reports
on the progress Of each

At the
co~clusion
of
the
it requires a quorum of eight
~harges.
The administrative staff prosecutes a
18
19
ca~e;
20
hearing and files a report with the
21
commission.
22
its own law clerk,
23
subject to review Ultimately by the Court of
24
Appeals if requested by the disciplined
an impartial referee presides over the
The commission then,
aided by
adjudicates the matter,
UO/Ul/;;:UU~
14:~4
r'AX
141 019
69
1.
judge.
I believe you have the statement
:2
comm~ssion
submitted by the
the processes and procedures.
f~w
happy to answer any questions.

CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:,
much,
12
13
Your Honor.
. your name earlier.

MR.
11
you,
Thank you.
Thank you very

'I
Mr. Tembeckjian, I'm sorry
10
And after a
remarks by Mr. Tembeckjian, we will be
today outlining
butchered
I apologi ze.
TEMBEC~JIAN:
Thank you.
Thank
Senator.
You have a rathe+ extensive description
14
of our process and procedures.
1~
just highlight three points in these brief
16
remarks before we take your questions, three
17
very important features of the commission
18
system.
19
I'd like to
The first is the independence of the
;20
commission itself.
It1s created by the
21
State Constitution, various appointing
22
authorities,
23
majority of appointments.
24
commission elects its own chair and it hires
no one of whom controls a
And the
08/01/2009 14:24 FAX
I4J 020
70
its own administrator to manage,
chief
operations of the agency.
exe~utive
officer,
as the
the day-to-day
The balance of Judges,
lawyers, and
laypeople is something that assures that all
relevant representatives or features ot our
pluralistic society are represented in the
commission procesS.
talking
10
11
abou~
We are,
after all,
disciplining members of an
independent branch of government.

I happen to be only the second
~hief
12
executive officer that the commission has
13
had in over 30 years, which has provided an
14
extraordinary stability.
15
model is one that has not only been
16
by other states but I think
17
~orthy
18
entities throughout New York.
19
And the commission
is
emulat~d
one that is
of emulation by other state ethics
Secondly,
the 'commission really plays
20
two roles apart from its own structural
21
independenc'e.
22
for disciplining those judges who commit
23
ethical misconduct, but itrs also
24
responsible for protecting the independence
It's responsible,
obviously,
/01/2009 14:24 FAX
141021
71
1
of the jUdiciary so that Judges can decide
cases fairlyj
bear them,
And that's a very important dual role.
impartially,
without undue outside influences.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
as they see and
Let me ask you a
question,
Mr. Tembeckjian.
proceedings are private or open to the
pUblic?
MR. TEMBECKJIAN:
These
All commission
10
proceedings, under law,
11
It wasn't always that way.
12
changed.
13
investigations,
14
always confidential.
15
once the commission authorized formal
1.6
disciplinary charges against a
17
process then became open.
18
answer,
19
open
20
21
22
are confidential.
Prior to that,
In 1978
law
th~
once the -- all
as with a grand jury, were

But
prior to 1978
judge, the
The.charges,
the
the hearings and so forth were
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
formally charges,
Once they were
you said?
MR. TEMBECKJIAN:
Yes.
Once
23
reasonable cause has been found to go
24
forward with a formal disciplinary process.
08/01/2009 14:24 FAX
141022
72
so after the investigation is over,
the
commission concludes a reasonable basis that
discipline may be justified here,
of eight members,
required,
until 1978, that process then became public.
a quorum
the concurrence of six is
they vote formal charges.
Up
And the commission's position
consistently since then has been that it
should be made publio at that stage.
We
10
were opposed in
11
law.
12
Legislature has taken up the issue, but it
13
has never adopted,
14
same session,
15
16
17
'78 to the change in the
And since then,
on occasion,
the
in both houses in the
the open hearings provision.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON;
what would be your
position today?
MR. TEMBECKJIAN:
Oh,
the
18
commission's position has consistently been
19
that the law up till 1978 was appropriate
20
and that these hearings should be pUblic
21
once probable or reasonable cause 'has been
22
found.
23
24
And opening up that disciplinary

process to the public I think would go a
IU.l/'::UUl:l 14::0:0 l<A.X
141 023
73
long way to dispelling a lot of the
misconceptions about how
operates and how it makes its decisions.

CHAIRMAN
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
SAMPSON~
th~
eommission
That's a good
idea.
MR. TEMBECKJIAN:
senator perkins
looks like he's about to ask me a question.

SENATOR PERKINS:
Soyou think the
law should be changed?

MR. TEMBECKJIAN:
Yes.
The
08/01/2009 14:25 FAX
I4J 024
74
That's really the
commission's operation.
only agency that I'm comfortable speaking
for and about at these
really the only one that I'm authorized to.
SENATOR PERKINS:
~roceedings,
Okay.
and
Thank you,
Just wanted to check.

7
MR.
TEMBECKJIAN:
So that dual role
of disciplining those judges where it's
appropriate and protecting the independence
10
of the judiciary by absorbing a lot of the
11
unfounded criticism that may be reflected in
12
some of what you hear today and that I know
13
has been submitted to you on other
14
occasions -- and at other hearings that this
15
committee has held over the years -- is
16
really part of what we do.
17
But the suggestion that may,
I think,
18
mistakenly be left that the commission is
19
inactive by some of its critics is really
20
not borne out by the facts,
21
approximately 40,000 complaints in the last
22
30 yearsJ which is by far more than any
23
other state,
24
numbers of jUdges as New York.
We've handled
even those that have equivalent

The
UO/U.L/':UUl:I .L<l:;;:!) t'A!
I4J 025
75
commission has pUblicly disciplined
approximately 700 jUdges and confidentially
cautioned about 1200.
The vast majority of our complaints are
dismissed.
gets treated individually and gets seeri by
the full commission.
reviews and'inquiries,
year.
10
11
But every single one of them
We conduct preliminary
about 350 or more a
Full-fledged investigations,
year a near record number,

CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
last
26~.
Mr.
Tembeckjian,
12
when you talk about these investigations,
13
these are mostly complaint-driven?
14
times does the commission themselves,
15
I know
16
certain situations?
l7
th~y
have the authority to,
Or at
which
loOk into
The commission
MR. TEMBECKJIAl\J:
itself has the authority,
19
actively initiate inquiries on its own.
20
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
and it
doe~
18
How would you do
21
that -- you know,
like on your own,
22
determination,
23
what this judge is doing?
24
come about getting to that point?
well,
quite
you know,
make a
don't like
Or how do you
I4J 026
76
MR. TEMBECKJIAN:
It's never "I don't
like what this judge is doing,
not on the bench.
But,
for example,
II
certainly
if we read in the
newspaper about a Judge who has been
intemperate or whose conflict of interest
has been reported, the staff will bring that
article to the commission's attention and it
will ask the commission for an authorization
10
to investigate.
11
do that.
12
The full commission has to
That was literally what happened on a
13
case involving a jUdge in Niagara County
14
that you might recall who had incarcerated
15
over 40 people because a cellphone went off
16
in the courtroom and the jUdge couldn't
17
identify whose cellphone it was.
18
defendants were called up one by one,
19
each one denied that it was his phone,
20
were remanded.
21
about in the newspaper.
22
result of an individual complaint.
23
24
So 46
and as
they
That was something we read

It
was not the
We brought it to the commission's
attention,
they authorized
investig~tion,
we
01/2009 14:26 FAX
141027
77
1
reviewed the matter,
authorized,
the jUdge was removed by the
commission,
took it up to the Court of
Appeals,
decision.
charges were
which unanimously upheld that
So the process is quite sophisticated,
but where we get that information,
forward.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
10
that information,
11
commission?
MR.
12
we move
So once you get
it then goes to the
TEMBECKJIAN:
Yes.
Under the
13
law,
it's the commission that has the
14
authority to investigate or to discipline.
15
The staff can recommend,
16
actually makes the disposition.
but the commission
17
And so we are not screening out
18
material or information that complainants
19
send to us because we might have a
20
predisposition or we might dislike or we
21
might not c"redit the complainant.
22
analyze,
23
inquiries,
24
commission,
review,
We will
conduct some preliminary
forward it to the entire

which will then decide whether
I4J028
76
1
2
or not we should go forward.

CHAIRMAN SAMPSON;
And I know senator
DeFrancisco just noted that you were able to
get additional monies to help you clear up
some of the backlog that existed maybe a few
years ago.
MR. TEMBECKJIAN:
Yes,
thanks in huge
part to this committee and to Sepator
DeFrancisco's leadership.
10
For about 20 years we were grossly
11
underfunded.
12
were ,expanding, our staf f WaS reduced to as
13
few as
14
had l6st substantial resources.
15
committee two years ago held hearings on the
16
subject,
17
village court system, and one of the
18
beneficial results was that the Legislature
19
made a substantial increase that this
20
committee championed for the commission's
21
resources to meet the growing needs.
22
20
AS our complaints and workload
statewide, and in real dollars,
of the commission,
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
we
But this
of the town and
When you say
23
investigators, who does the investigating?
24
Do you have attorneys or do you have private
08/01/2009 14:27 FAX
I4J 029
79
1
2
people,
investigators?
we have attorneys
MR. TEMBECKJIAN:
and investigators on staff.
complaint that is going to be investigated
is actually aesigned to an attorney, and
that attorney works with an investigator to
interview witnesses,
to analyze court records,
the bottom of whether the allegation of
10
11
And every
to make field visits,

to try to get to
misconduct is actually established.

And then we will present progress
12
reports along the way,
13
report to the full commission,
14
Klonick indicated,
15
commission will decide whether to
16
confidentially caution the jUdge or
17
authorize formal charges or,
l8
complaint is unfounded,
19
and then a final

as JUdge
and then that full
if the
to dismiss.
And that's really where our role in
20
protecting the independence of the judiciary
21
comes in.
22
complaints and criticisms that judges might
23
otherwise get from complainants who are
24
essentially unhappy with the results of a
Because we absorb a
lot of the
141 030
80
case.
with having to answer to all of those,
preliminarily inquire, we deal directly with
the complainant,
to be founded,
And rather than inhibit the jUdiciary

we
and if it's determined not
we don1t go forward.
And we take a lot of the heat,
but that
goee with the territory of what it is that
we do.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
And if in fact
if
say, the
10
a judge is being elevated to,
11
Appellate Division,. court of Appeals,
12
whatever
13
those committees request from the commission
14
if there are any complaints,
15
against these judges?
16
with it?
17
i~
is,
does the commission -- do
anything lodged
Or do you come forth
How does that work?
MR. TEMBECKJIAN:
Yes.
If any judge
18
who is subject to Senate confirmation or
19
appointment by the Governor without Senate
20
confirmation or is running for election and
~1
is going before a screening committee,
22
are required to submit a waiver of
23
confidentiality so that the commiseion,
24
presented with that waiver,
they
when
will give to the
8/01/2009 14:27 FAX
14I 031
81
screening entity not only the record of
public action that's been taken but any
confidential cautions,
confidential dispositions against that
jUdge.
any adverse
So those committees have it,
without
mentioning names, when the Commission on
Judicial Nomination provides us with those
waivers,
when the Governor's screening
10
committee for Court of Claims or Appellate
11
Divisions provides us with those waivers,
12
provide not only the public record but also
13
any confidential adverse dispositions that
14
were made against the judge to that body.

CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
15
we
And does the
16
commission keep records in instances where,
17
you know,
18
dismissed but, you know,
19
of increased complaints with respect to
20
judges?
21
back?
22
dismissed,
23
opportunity to go back to look to see if
24
there's a pattern being created?
against judges- where it has been
you see a pattern
DO you have an opportunity to refer

Or do you just -- once i t 1 s
are they sealed or do you have an
8/01/2009 14:28 FAX
I4J 032
82
MR. TEMBECKJIAN:
We have an
opport uni t y togo back and look,.a t
pattern,
Procedures Act regarding the disposition of
records.
1-
subject to the State Administrative
But for example,
if a sUbsequent
complaint comes i,n alleging new information
or a new perspective on a previously
dismissed complaint that was not disposed of
10
on the merits after a hearing but was deemed
11
not to have shown sufficient merit on its
12
face to be investigated,
13
reexamine whether or not the appropriate
14
disposition was made in the first instance.
15
we can go back and
But I must say that that's very rare.
16
Because if a type of misconduct is part of a
17
pattern or practice"
18
up-front,
and we have the opportunity then
19
to go in,
for example,
20
to observe whether the judge is intemperate
21
on a frequent or an infrequent basis,
22
thatts the complaint that's been made.
23
24
it's usually alleged
sit in on the court
if
It1s very rare for someone to say the

judge is intemperate and not allege,
if it
08/01/2009 14:28 FAX
I4J 033
83
is in fact part of the pattern,
number of attorneys or litigants might be
able to verify that.
to litigants and lawyers to determine
whether or not these complaints are part of
a pattern or practice.
And we will reach out
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:.
Mr. Tembeckjian,
and,
Your Honor,
that any
Questions?
thank you very much
thank you very much for
10
giving us that outlay.
11
it.
12
MR.
TEMBECKJIAN:
13
JUDGE KLONICK:
14
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
We truly appreciate
Thank you.
At this point in
15
time we're going to have Judge Hart present
16
testimony.
17
Good morning,
18
JUSTICE HART:
19
Your Honor.
Good morning.
It's
good that Mr. Tembeckjian is staying here.
.20
My name is Duane Hart.
I'm a
sitting
21
Supreme court justice in Queens,
22
While I
23
long package,
24
few anecdotes of the type of attorney we1re
New York.
gave the members of the committee a

Ilm
just going to give you a
08/01/2009 14:28 FAX
I4J 034
84
dealing with with Mr. Tembeckjian.

Four or five years ago I was undergoing
:2
:J
treatment for cancer;
in fact,
Sloan Kettering being operated on for
cancer.
for it, Bob Tembeckjian wanted to see my
chart to make sure that I was being treated
for cancer and not just
committee.
was in
Instead of giving me an adjournment
dU~king
his
live been charged probably more than
10
11
most.
12
Commission on JUdicial Conduct.
13
three attorneys who offered testimony
14
against me or filed complaints against me,
15
all three -- well,
16
Goldweber,
17
thief by a federal jUdge.
live been censured twice by the

Of the
the first one was a Max
who was found to be a liar and a
18
The second was one was a Ms. Naidoo,
19
who one of my colleagues, Justice Cullen,
20
found she lied to him and to the Appellate
21
Division.
22
And the third one was being sued at the
23
time for running what appears to be a Ponzi
24
scheme to finance his cases.
And one of the
/01/2009 14:29 FAX
141035
85
reasons why he wouldn't try the case before
me was that had the case been disposed of,
he would have been responsible for paying
the people who financed this case anywhere
from $1 million to $3 million.

Those complaints are in the package
6
7
before you.
I'm not making them up; they're
recorded cas'es.
Of the first case against me,
think litigated in 2004,
which was
am still
10
11
waiting for the first bit of discovery.

-Of the second one, Mr. Tembeckj ian got
12
What he did,
13
a little cuter.
14
Mr.
15
some of them -- because as you found out,
16
believe,
17.
me,
18
is a habit they also like to do,
lSi
the tape recorder when there is positive
20
evidence against the judge that doesn't help
21
their case.
22
Friedberg did,
or what he and
they got my witnesses,

I
if they offered testimony to help
the tape recorder was turned off,
which
turn off
And
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
I know when you're

these proceedings,
23
saying a tape recording,
24,
there'S not a stenographer or it1s just a
08/01/2009 14:29 FAX
I4J 036
86
tape recorder?
JUSTICE HART:
WelT',' in the second
trial-against me the.re was a stenographer.
In the discovery and the trial before that,
there were tape recorders that Mr.
or one of his employees controlled.
Friedberg
In factt during the first proceeding,
which was an EET,
representing me,
my brother,
put a
who'was
statem~nt
on the
10
record.
11
said are nowhere in the transcript.
12
brother refused to sign the transcript.
13
The statement and the things he
At the first trial,
My
wherein it was a
14
tape recorder and the tape recording was
15
being controlled by an employee of the
16
commission,
l7
gestu~es
18
click-click.
19
are other witnesses who the committee might
20
have gotten in touch with who will verify
21
that that1s their conduct.
22
I saw Mr. Friedberg making hand
and I heard click-click,

Again.
And I believe there
I also went down during the first

since the Senate and the
23
proceeding,
24
Assembly give them money to
inv~stigate
I4J 037
87
these cases,
law secretary, and my court officer,
verified my story that the attorney who was
testifying against me wasn't
truth.
were not asked any questions.
investigatiort only stops at,
harmful tb, the judge.
will produce
10
I went down with my clerk,
my
who
~elling
the
They were not alloweq -- or they
t~ose
So their
gee,
what's
And if you want,
people if you have
hearings in New York city.

Also,
11
one of
~y
mr
other court officers
12
was asked
an attorney for the Commission
13
on Judicial Conduct to change his story
14
because, after all,
15
would you testify to help a jUdge.
16
don't take my word;
17
witnesses.
Let me see.
18
judges are scum and why

Again,
I could produce
What's interesting about
19
some of the commission rulings -- well,
20
first one,
21
the commission found that I
22
actually affirmed by the Second Department
23
both on the substantive law and the contempt
24
that
on the full record,
held the
~erson
the
even though
was wrong,
I was
who accosted me in
8/01/2009 14:29 FAX
I4J 038
88
parking lot was -- I mean did.
censured on the doctored records submitted
to the
of Appeals by Mr.
Cou~t
I was
Tembeckjian.
I think the best way to describe the
way Mr. Tembeckjian and Mr. Friedberg,
now at the First Department,
little shop was they marked the deck,
shaved the cards,
cheat.
who's
ran their
they
then they started to
(Laughter. )
10
You know,
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON;
11
I mean,
12
these allegations -- I'm just trying to get
13
an understanding.
14
marking the deck?
what do you mean by
JUSTICE HART:
15
You try cases before
;L6
them,
they pick the jUdge .- and I have
17
nothing against the retired judges who they
18
piCk.
19
lawyer pushing 30 years
They pick the jUdge.
20
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
21
commission picks the judge.
22
JUS~ICE
HART:
I've been a
You mean the
The commission picks
23
the jUdge.
You go in against them,
they
24
donlt give you discovery or they give you
08/01/2009 14:30 FAX
I4J 039
doctored discovery.
the first dealing
my brother Leon Paul was screaming with
Vicky Ma,
and he was questioning the credibility of
this Max Goldweber.
screaming back to him that credibility is
not an
of people they have.
10
You -- credibility -had with the commission,
who was one of their attorneys,
issu~.
And Ms.
And,
I mean,
Ma was
that's the type
You don't have to take my word for it.
11
I gave you recorded documents or case law
12
that shows Max Goldweber,
13
who accused me,
14
thief for running a scam to bilk his clients
15
by Judge Wexler.
16
the first person
was called a liar and a
I gave you a document that showed that

~riginally
17
in a case that was
started in
18
Eastern District of pennsylvania,
19
Flomenhaft,
20
accuse me,
21
appears to be a Ponzi scheme to finance the
22
case before me.
And when he refused to try
23
the case -- oh,
and he also tried to export
24
me by saying he would complain to the
Michael
who was the second person to

was being sued for running what
08/01/2009 14:30 FAX
141040
SlO
commission if I made him try the case.

And I produced a document wherein the
:2
~mploye~
attorneys who
the third attorney
who complained about me,
fired her for lying and stealing in that
case.
Ms. Naidoo,
they
These are the people who offered
7
8
complaints against me and that were found'to
be legitimate by Robert Tembeckjian.
10
CHAIRMAN
11
SENATOR PERKINS:
12
much.
13
one quick question.
14
15
16
Senator Perkins.
S~MPSON:
I have to run,
JUSTICE HART:
Yeah,
thank you so
but! just want to ask
po what's the solution?

Well,
firstly,
you
have to fire Tembeckjian and Friedberg.

I mean,
I've got to tell you,
live been
17
a trial attorney or a judge,
18
30 .years.
19
Tembeckjian,
20
sued -- isntt the sleaziest attorney lIve
21
ever met is because I!ve met Alan Friedberg.
22
again, pushing
The only reason tha t

in my opinion
~-
Robert
so I don't get
(Laughter. )
So now you've taken
23
SENATOR PERKINS:
24
care of the personalities.
What
abo~t
the
08/01/2009 14:30 FAX
[4J 041
91
system --
:2
JUSTICE HART:
the personalities.
system~c
JUSTICE HART:
SENATOR PERKINS:
It's -- it's -I heard that the
individuals -They don't do it
JUSTICE HART:
10
it's not just
opinion as well.
no,
I want to get a
SENATOR PERKINS:
4
5
No,
right.
SENATOR PERKINS:
11
Well,
let me ask a
12
question.
13
individuals.
14
issues or concerns that you might want to
15
add to that?
hear you talking about the

Are there any systemic process
JUSTICE HART:
16
Well,
firstly,
you've
).7
got to have some situation where they don't
18
pick the jUdges,
where jUdges aren't
19
beholden to them
to
be named again.
20
There has to be a limit on how long
21
people like" Mr. Tembeckjian can serve in
22
office so that he doesn't have some sort
23
of
24
SENATOR PERKINS;
Term limits.
Term
101/2009 14:31 FAX
I4J 042
92
limits.
JUSTICE HART:
You have to have some -- and,
Yeah,
term limits.
complained to everybody; no one has
jurisdiction over these people.
an ADA in Queens,
cFisch.
I mean,
When I was
I actually worked for Joe
Judge Fisch said he didn't have
jurisdiction.
the court of Appeals.
I complained to the clerk of

They said they didn't
10
have jurisdiction.
Only when
11
to senator sampson l
Senator Smith,
12
GOvernor Paterson did anything actually get
13
done.
14
r complained to
complained
and
the Attorney General.
15
I complained,
16
one of the senior attorney generals.
17
Nothing was investigated.
18
19
20
21
22
2:j
24
I had a long conversation with
SENATOR PRRKINS:
Let me ask you
08/01/2009 14:31 FAX
l4J 043
93
JUSTICE HART:
1
2
SENATOR PERKINS;
What would be a
better process?
JUSTICE HART:
well,
Therers got to be
some
special prosecutor to do some sort of
ac~ounting
people had no -- you know,
firstly,
you should appoint a
of what they've done.
"These
who was it that
10
said absolute power corrupts absolutely?
11
Well,
12
Mr.
13
do anything he wants.
14
In
fact
Nothing happened.
in the situation you have right now,
Tembeckjian has absolute power.
And l
I mean,
He can
hels investigated me -- he
15
has come before you saying that he only
16'
investigates matters that are serious.
17
There has got to be something more serious
18
in the State of New York than me going
1:1
through a court scanner with my 8l-year-old
20
mother to take care of my dying fatherts
21
business.
22
I was actually investigated for that.
:23
He got the rule wrong.
produced Jewel
24
Williams to say they got the rule wrong.
I4J 044
94
They still argued the wrong rule.

They have no control.
They argue
whatever they want when they want to argue
it.
this -- again,
word for it.
There is absolutely no control over
you don't have to take my

This is all documented.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
DeFrancisco has a question.

How many
10
Senator
complaints were investigated against you?

JUSTICE HART;
11
I ' l l give you -- I
there are two that they don't
12
think -- well,
13
know that I know about.
14
me
They investigated
15
16
JUSTICE HART:
17
How many?
think five or six.

okay.
And can
18
you give me just the general flavor of what
19
these investigations were about?
20
JUSTICE HART:
Okay,
going through a
21
court scanner with my mother,
22
judge's ID with a blue strip -- the
23
judges -- there are three IDs in the court
24
system/
red, yellow and blue.
showing my
judge has a
8/01/2009 14:32 FAX
I4J 045
9S
1
blue ID.
lieutenant,
could pass without
b~ing
can pass with me.
I was there with my
eo-plus-year-old mother.
85 in about three weeks.
JUSTICE HART:
stopped and anybody
She's going to be
What is that,
Yeah,
going through a
security area.
11
12
didn't knew my ID said that I
,going through a security area or what?
10
the newly minted
The lieutenant,
Okay.
Tha t ' s
one.
That's one.
13
JUSTICE HART:
14
Keeping a child in her home -- the
15
child reported to me that she had the .flu.
16
Actually,
17
evidently was going through her first period
18
and didn't want to tell.
19
came to throw her out of the house,
20
stopped it.
21
The rule is that people give basically six
22
months to be evicted trom a home.
23
two months.
24
it was a 12-year-old child who
When the sheriff
Chase complained I
stopped it.
I gave
They got me on that.
They censured me on
when I was
141046
96
accosted in the parking lot in the gated,
secured parking lot of the court in Jamaica,
:3
somebody came up to me,
fact that I
father.
Alzheimer's and cancer.
not the jury,
WaS
my father had the flu and I wae going to
10
was going to go visit my sick
My father eventually died of
going to get a tire fixed,
This is bizarre --
13
JUSTICE HART:
minute.
NO,
no,
wait a
You were stopped in a parking lot and

accosted?
JUSTICE HART:
20
Yes.
What you were
asked to do?
JUSTICE HART:
21
24
wait.
But your explanation is bizarre.
19
23
Wait,
This is bizarre.
17
21
but actually
That's the point.
15
18
I told the jury
I told the attorneys that I
12
16
like the
didnt~
go
11
14
he
I was -- he wanted me
to
Who is IIhe"?
141047
97
accosted me.
SENATOR DeFRANCI$CO:
3
4
So somebody in
the general public dccosted you
JUSTICE HART:
5
6
no,
The next day
no,
Mm-hmm.
excuse me,
accosting you for?
10
JUSTICE HART:
SO what
the litigant accosted me.
And what was'he
SENATOR DeFRANCISCOt
11
The person who
JUSTICE HART:
He wanted a longer
adjournment.
12
13
JUSTICE HART:
14
forget about it.
15
Goldweber,
16
forget about it.
The next day I said
His
said no,
attorn~y,
no,
no,
In the record that Mr.
17
Okay.
Max
don1t want to
Tembeckjian
18
d i dn
19
the Second Department that talked about the
20
meeting that we had.
21
to hold the guy in contempt,
22
to do is
23
that meeting never took place even though
24
the complaining lawyer said it took,place.
k now was a b r i e f t hat was
apologi~e.
f i 1e d
wit h
It said I didn't want
all held have
Mr. Tembeckjian said
I4J 048
;)8
But what court
proceedini was there that was being
complained Qf --
JUSTICE HART:
It was a contempt
procee9ing.
held him in contempt for accosting me.
8
'9
:LO
11
was doing the trial,
and I
So you held
somebody in contempt.
JUSTICE HART:
For accosting me.
For accosting
you outside of the courtroom.
12
JUSTICE HART:
That1S right.
13
I didn't
14
wasn't familiar with that rule.
15
contempt proceedings dealt with what happens
16
in the courtroom.
NO,
17
JUSTICE HART:
18
changed the law for me,
20
JUSTICE HART:
21
23
24
three.
thought
Well,
they
thank you.
19
22
no.
Oh,
okay
He came up to me
So that's
What are the other ones?
JUSTICE HART:
Let me see.
with my mom through the scanner.
Going
101/2009 14:33 FAX
I4J 049
1
:2
we
already heard that.

JUSTICE HART:
well,
case after
t~o
Making somebody try a
and a half years.
They also investigated me.
An attorney
named Darren Kerns was found by two federal
courts to have brought a poorly thought out
cause of action.
him.
They mentioned that to
I did the same thing.
Mr.
Tembeckjian
10
called the other attorneys to see what I did
11
wrong on that.
12
agreed with -- two federal courts agreed
13
with me.
14
But he was told that I
Ee stopped that.
And most recently they investigated me
15
for -- the attorney who represented me in
16
the last cause of action,
17
before me that 1 recused myself from about a
18
year and a half or two years earlier,
19
they still wanted proof that
20
myaelf.
21
they had an action
22
along those same lines l
2.3
are still pending?
24
JUSTICE HART;
but
had recused
Okay.
And
~ust
how many of those
None.
08/01/2009 14:33 FAX
I4J 050
100
1
2
JUSTICE HART:
But I was censured
twice.
Okay.
JUSTICE HART:
Like I said,
know -- I know Tembeckjian and --
Mr. Tembeckjian and Mr.
11
Thank
you.
10
so
they1re. allover at this point.
Okay,
I don't
Friedberg have to be
removed.
We don't
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
-- as
12
Senator Perkins said, I
13
interested in
14
just interested in recommendations,
15
that we can make the system,
16
seem more equitable and fair not only in the
17
eyes of the public but also those who.are
18
coming before that commission.
19
charact~r
JUSTICE HART:
think,
we're not
assassination,
WeIll
we're
if any,
as we've seen,
the system -- if
20
the system works properly,
it's fair.
21
anyone,
22
goodwill of the people who are running it
23
behind it is going to fail no matter what
24
you do.
But
any system that doesn't have the
08/01/2009 14:37 FAX
141 001
101
1
So while I agree with my friend Senator
Perkins that this isn't about character
assassination,
equitable system -- and frankly,
hands of people like Mr. Ternbeckjian and
Mr,
~ould
system however you want,
people in there who are fair,
10
it's about getting a fair,
F~iedberg,
in the
you'll never have it.
put whatever
You'
you could change the

you1ve got to have
who are
ethical.
!
11
I mean,
ag"ain, ,my -- Mr. Tembeckjian --
12
and again, . I bel ieve I
13
on an earlier day,
14
Mr. Tembeckjian that he had' to follow
15
certain a rule of ethics,
16
actually wrote back to my brother saying
17
that there are no ethics that he has to
18
follow.
19
20
when my brother told
Mr.
Tembeckjian
And -- am I correct?
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
I hear your point,
Your Honor.
21
Your Honor,
22
~USTICE
23
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
24
8ubmi t ted it to you
thank you very much for
HART:
Always a pleasure.
taking your
time out and speaking with us tOday.
141002
8/01/2009 14:37 FAX
102
1
JUSTICE HART:
CHAI~MAN
faster ..
Me.
You
Ms.
MS.
do all this in five minutes,
CARVEL:
I will rush,
I certainly
will.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
11
14
ca~
Carvel?
13
The next person is Pamela Carvel.
Carvel.
12
Thank you very
I'm going to try to move it a little
10
SAMPSON:
much.
Thank you.
.~
Thank you very
.;
much.
MS.
CARVEL:
You have the written
thing?
15
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
16
MS.
CARVEL:
Yes,
I do.
And the flow chart that
17
I've given you is the same as the one I
18
enlarged for you to see.
19
flew in from London becavse I wanted
20
to be part of this hearing that
21
very significant effort
22
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
think is a
can give you a
23
little bit longer than five minutes,
24
you flew in from London.
since
08/01/2009 14:38 FAX
141 003
103
1
MS.
CARVEL;
But I
think it's a
significant effort at preserving our
aspiring democracy,
Surrogate's Court,
connection to the Office of Court
Administration and the DDC and the other
disciplinary committees comes from,
nothing less than a criminal enterprise.
because whatls going on

which is where my
is
You don1t have to take my word for it,
10.
because one of the lawyers that I
11
actually wrote an article in the New York
12
Law Journal,
13
Eve Markewich, who I hired to help me
14
recover money stolen by the controlling
15
shareholders of Hudson valley Bank,
16
article in the New York Law Journal
17
detailing all of the gross violations of
18
ethics that went into railroading my aunt so
19
that in her whole lifetime she received
20
nothing
of
and lIve attached that for you.
wrote an
benefit after my uncle died.
In 1990 my uncle,
21
hired
22
died,
23
family.
24
back from China,
the week before he
said there was $250 million in the

He called me and asked me to come
where I
was acting as a
08/01/2009 14:38 FAX
[4J 004
104
1
fraud investigator,
discover where $100 million had gone
missing.
to be able to help him
On the Saturday before his death,
h~d
two employees,
that he felt were responsible.
dead on Sunday.
culprits,
he
told people that he was going fire the

a lawyer and his secretary,
~ound
He was
And on Monday morning the
who were agents of Hudson Valley
10
Bank that held the money and that has been
11
the recipient of all of the money since
12
1990,
13
they were in control of everything.

Just recently live discovered that my
14
uncle's death certificate was forged,
15
the information on it was falsified to avoid
16
an autopsy.
17
his body to see if he was murdered in order
18
to set in motion this criminal enterprise
19
that is a pattern in Surrogate's Court.
20
that
And I will be trying to exhume
No efforts to bring these things before
21
the Office of Court Administration have
22
worked in any of the cases that I've
23
investigated other than our own.
24
Hudson
Valley Bank paid surroga.te
08/01/2009 14:38 FAX
l4I005
105
1
scarpino $100,000 during his
prior to the trials in my uncle's estate,
they paid
alleged loan.
in my
Scarpino another $100,000.
And just prior to the trials
estate,
tney paid Surrogate
These issues,
MS. CARVEL:
Raised them with the
Office of Court Administration

CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
11
When you say the
12
Office of Court Administration,
13
Commission --
14
MS.
15
CARVEL:
I'm sorry,
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
this?
CARVEL:
discovered it in 2007,
20
.2007,
23
24
When did. you do
It was probably
19
22
the
When was this?

MS.
18
21
you mean the
16
17
did
yOu raise them with the
10
~unt's
Scarpino $200,000 as an
CHAIRMAN SAMPSOR:
Su~rogate
Just
eleciion.
so it was probably
2008.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
happe~ed
MS.
So what has
since then?
CARVEL:
They said they didn't
find a problem with scarpino not only
101/2009 14:39 FAX
~006
106
1
receiving money from Hudson Valley Bank but
. allowing Hudson Valley Bank's controlling
shareholder to receive all of the assets
from my uncle's estate, and to allow him to
appear before Scarpino as a witness without
ever disclosing that there were financial
arrangements between Hudson Valley Bank and
Judge Scarpino.
10
11
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
And you raised
this to the Commission on Judicial Conduct?

MS.
CARVEL:
Raised it to the
12
13
for documentation.
14
documentation.
15
nothing wrong with that.
16
I gave them full
They found absolutely
since
CHA!RMAN SAMPSON:
17
Mr. Tembeckjian is here,
18
over, we'll -- I will raise that
19
MS. CARVEL:
They aSked
before this is
All right.
iss~e.
I also,
20
the course of investigating,
21
the controlling shareholder of Hudson
22
Bank, William Griffin,
23
all of my aunt's real estate,
24
consisted -- part of it was 19 acres in
in
found out that

Va~ley
was given control of

which
8/01/2009 14:39 FAX
141 007
107
1
Ardsley,
area.
New York,
which is a very expensive
Griffin was allowed to flip that
3
4
property to himself through Hudson Valley
Bank,
partners
signed the property over and then the
property came back to Griffin as Hudson
Valley Bank.
through one of his former law

l
brothers.
In other words,
Griffin
And the whole proceeding took
10
place for $2 million on paper that never
11
changed hands,
12
$10 million or more.
13
and, the property is worth
I brought that to the attention of
14
Surrogate Scarpino,
15
again found there was no problem because of
16'
the dealing being done by William Griffin,
17
who was responsible for paying Surrogate
18
Scarpino at least $400,000.
19
and surrogate Scarpino
part of the problem with the whole
20
system of
by the way,
21
complaint against Eve Markewich for knowing
22
about all of these violations.
23
Markewich,
24
aunt1s estate, betrayed any representation
also filed a
Bve
who I hired on behalf of my
8/01/2009 14:40 FAX
141 008
108
1
for us on the promise that William Griffin
would pay her $4 million,
paid $4 million in legal fees
-- which she
has been paid,
And when I
filed the complaint with the, Commission on
JUdicial Conduct on her lack of
representation,
for whioh she was hired,
complete knowledge of ethical violations by
allow her to be
I understand.
her betrayal of the purposes

and also her
10
other attorneys,
11
only did she refuse. to tell me about them,
12
but she refused to take any action herself,
13
which was her duty as a lawyer.
14
that she refused -- not
It came back,
the decision came back
15
that her problems would be sorted out in the
16
legal lawsuit.
17
lawsuit pending between me and Eve
18
Markewich,
19
to be handled at all.
20
investigated or not,
21
in a response,
22
going to be handled in litigation.
23
there was no litigation.
24
Well,
there was no legal
and there was no venue for that

So whether they
I don't know.
She put
and her response was this is
There is --
Eut
8/01/2009 14:40 FAX
141009
109
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
you put, was that in the First
~hat
Department?
MS. CARVEL:
Manhattan.
I
That complaint
That was the
~-
for
It was the First Department.
put in a similar complaint with one
of Eve Markewich's fellow attorneys,
Streng, who didn't tell me that he was
employed by the judge.
Frank
He was also an
10
attorney of mine,
was supposed to represent
11
me.
12
dollars that
13
another million from the estate.
He converted approximately a million

I
paid him and then took
l4
Complaints were filed against him,
15
I was informed that he has a law partner --
16
one of his law partners is on the commission
17
in Westchester,
18
done.
And the same answer came back on that
19
thing,
that it would be handled in
20
litigation.
21
litigation in which Frank Streng's ethics
22
were part of the litigation.
23
no --
24
litigation involving Frank Streng at all.
and that nothing would be
But again,
actua~lYI
and
there was no
There was
at that time there was no
U~!U1!~009
14:40 FAX
[4]010
110
The whole system -- and I
call it a
criminal enterprise,
tactics being used are in the New York State
penal Code:
These are all beins operated out of the
court,
particular Westchester.
happening
Dutchess.
10
because the exact
coercion,
larceny,
conspiracy.
out Of the Surrogate's Court/
i~
Manhattan/
But I
and in
know i t ' s
itls happening in
And they're using a one-sided
system of favoritism.
My aunt and I,
11
as
fiduciaries,
should
12
have had equal access to indemnification as
13
all the other fiduciaries.
14
two fiduciaries denied indemnification
15
because we were the only two working with
16
law enforcement.
17
completely.
We were the only
All the others were paid
As long as my aunt lived,
18
she never
19
received a penny from my uncle's estate.
20
But Hudson Valley Bank controls $150 million
21
of carvel money that my aunt was the sole
22
beneficiary of.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
23
24
it?
They still control
UO/U.1/.<:UUl:l .14:41 t''A.!
141011
111
MS.
CARVEL:
It's all been given to
them.
Over the last 10 years,
by Surrogate
scarpino,
estate and in my auntls estate has been
p~ssed
notice to the named beneficiaries,
notice to the creditors.
approval,
were supposed to be in constructive trust.
all of the money in my unclers
over to Hudson Valley Bank.
Without
without
Without court
assets have been disposed of that
10
None of these things have fazed the judicial
11
commission.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
12
think,
since we
13
still have Mr. Tembeckjian here,
14
something,
15
to look a little further into something like
16
this.
I ' l l ask staff,
this is
maybe I may want
SO if you have time maybe before the
17
maybe we can just
~-
18
end of today,
19
just have a meeting with the members of the
20
commission to see what some of these issues
21
are.
22
MS.
23
r just wanted to point out one other
24
CARVEL:
my staff
I'd be glad to.
problem with the system.
Most times when
08/01/2009 14:41 FAX
141012
112
1
yOu complain about a decision or a jUdge's
.2
actions,
the avenue of appeal.
the judges either don't render decisions --
even
not render decisions for two years or more.
They do not hold trials.
trials -- Surrogate Emanuelli didn't
trial for 10 years.
they'll tell you:
~hough
Well,
you have
In Surrogate's Court,
there's a 6o-day rule,
they may
If they do hold
hol~
My aunt's issues were
10
not litigated at trial until five years'
11
after she was dead.
1.2
You're denied trial by jury or
13
decisions are rendered by transcript,
14
cannot be appealed, or theyrre rendered in
15
such a way that it's too late -- the issue,
16
the money,
17
hy the time the decision has been rendered.
18
which
everything has already been gone
This is a pattern,
and it's more 'than
19
one estate.
And I 'congratulate you for
20
recognizing there's a proDlem.
21
of the Bolution,
22
is'complete transparency and complete
23
anonymity.
24
case for 20 years.
I think part
if not the whole solution,
No jUdge should be given one
No one court should have
101/2009 14:41 FAX
141013
113
one case for 20 years.

If you have -- in our case,
I'm dealing
with Surrogate's Court.
numerous proceedings,
Supreme Court; dispose of the Surrogate's
Court.
If you have
let everything go into
Let everything be assigned by a blind
rotating calendar of' judges.
proceedings be separated so that each
Let
the
10
proceeding is going to get a different judge
11
and a different hearing.
12
. Andthere has to be something to ensure
13
that money is not passed tram one side to
14
the other or that one side alone is funded.
15
There has to be an enforcement of the
16
Constitution that all people have equal
17
rights before the law.
18
Thank you.
19
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
20
Ms.
Carvel,
thank
you very much.
21
The next witness -- and I'm going to
22
adhere to the five-minute rule -- is Paul
23
Altman.
24
Mr. Altman,
MR. ALTMAN:
are you here?

Yes,
senator.
08/01/2009 14:42 FAX
141 014
114
1
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
How are you doing,
Mr. Altman?
quite sure you can adhere to the five-minute
rule.
MR.
That's a very extensive --
Well,
A~TMAN:
what I
I'm
m going to
do is totally let you off the hook with all
those eXhibits, now that
works.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
Thank you.
I didn't come in to
MR. ALTMAN:
10
see how this
11
trash any personal,ities.
I've never met
12
anybody in the room before.
13
any group.
14
in Florida.
15
York.
I'm not part of
I am a 54-year-old guy who lives

I was a jazz musician in New
And I have run afoul of the system.

And my life has been turned into a
16
17
nightmare,
18
the
19
stood down and allowed an unethical attorney
20
to torment me.
21
to decide whether I'm just a disgruntled
22
litigant or
23
to say.
24
which I'm going to tell you in
hundred~second
version.
And the DDC has
And I will leave it to you
whethe~
I have something valid
Okay?
Here's my story in a nutshell.
This
101/2009 14:42 FAX
141015
l15
has been going on for eight years.
going to try to give you the 120-second
version,
that I have a child who's now 15.
there was Family Court issues;
attorney,
Gold.
with him,
about this.
10
senator.
What
happen~d
Richard L. Gold,
lim
to me is
In 2001/
I hired an
of Morelli &
You can imagine that Ilm not in love

or I wouldn't be here talking
But I ' l l spare you a
charact~r
assassination and try to stick to the facts.

In 2006,
11
after four years of Family
~elationship
12
Court, my
13
lowed him $20,000.
14
and I
15
in New York State,
16
allows for mandatory arbitration if the
17
client demands it.
18
did not want to go to trial.
19
Florida,
20
with him soured,
and
A fee dispute ensued,
took advantage of the Part 137 law

22 NYCRR 137 -- which
And I demanded it.
I live in
rim not an attorney.
The arbitrators hated Mr. Gold,
and
21
they told him not only to waive the $20,000
22
that I allegedly owed him,
23
to refund an additional $5,000.
24
Gold did not do so.
but they told him
called the
And Mr.
8/01/2009 14:43 FAX
141016
116
1
Disciplinary Committee, and I said,
man has my money."
Committee said,
please make a complaint."
"This
And the Disciplinary
"This is a concern for us,

And I did.
And at that time what happened is
5
6
that -- well,
I don't want to get into all
the details because it will be an hour,
lim
what happened in a nutshell is that
so
going to try to keep it to five minutes.
10
Mr. Gold's retainer said that should there
11
ever be a fee dispute and should Altman
12
choose arbitration as is his right pursuant
13
to New York law,
14
binding upon Altman and the firm.

Well,
lS
York.
that arbitration will be
Gold sued me in Supreme Court of

And I will quickly get to the
16
~ew
17
DDeis
18
leeway to tell the story,
19
me and.asked the Supreme Court to award him
20
$35,000.
21
motion to dismiss pre-answer and said,
22
Honor,
23
misuse of the supreme Court.
24
already been an arbitration,
role in this, but give me a little
I,
okay?
Gold sued
who am not a lawyer, made a

"Your
this is an illegal and unethical

There's
and here is
08/01/2009 14:43 FAX
I4J 017
117
Goldls retainer agreement,
says the arbitration is binding."
Well,
and it clearly
Gold made opposition to this;
he said,
yeah;
retainer
agreement~
of the word that meant "nonbinding."
the word "binding" was in the
but it was a special use
(Laughter. )
MR. ALTMAN:
8
9
and
now,
buy this, but on June 3D,
the judge did not

2008,
in a
10
landmark decision which is featured
11
front of the New York Law Journal,
12
judge's photograph,
13
Edmead ruled that although the word
14
lIbinding H is suggestive of binding,
15
Gold was free to vacate the $25,000 award
16
and start an entirely new trial and drag me
17
to New York.
the
with the
Justice Carol Robinson
that
I would never have hired him if I had
18
19
On
known that the retainer was a trick.

And she ruled that the reason for this
20
21
is because Gold himself had not used a
22
super-secret Boy Scout-password-encoded form
23
from the Office of Court Administration that
24
I,
as an unrepresented consumer,
could have
08/01/2009 14:43 FAX
141018
118
1
known nothing about.

Well,
the DDC stood down on thi s .
laid it all out to the DDC.
the exhibits, which I cannot drag you
through in five minutes, and I
mercifully not -CHAIRMAN
I've given you
will
But this wasa
SAM~SON~
guess was a jUdge's determination with
respect to -MR. ALTMAN:
10
It was a
judge's
11
determination after the DDe -- I'm telling
12
the five-minute version,
so lIm a little out
13
of sequence -- after
nnc stood down and
14
said there appears to be pending litigation
15
on this matter.
16
Well,
~he
I wrote back to the DDC and said:
17
Look,
18
That's part of my complaint.
19
unethical litigation.
20
the jurisdiction in the world to deal with
21
this here and now,
22
goes on.
23
24
know there's pending litigation.
This is an
And you guys have all
before the litigation
cannot quote you chapter and verse,
senator, but the DDC's rules say that they
08/01/2009 14:44 FAX
141019
119
1
can pursue issues even if there's pending
litigation,
the fact that there's pending litigation.
that they dre not hamstrung by
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
inve9t~gate
litigation?
because there was a pending
MR. ALTMAN:
So the DDC did not
,Correct.
down.
wrote to them and I said,
They closed
They closed the investigation.'
A~d.
With all due
10
respect,
11
investigation that has pending litigation
12
corresponding -- at the same time,
13
you1re doing is creating a rule so that
14
attorneys who are accused of an ethics
15
violation must bring lawsuit against the
16
client who accused them.
17
automatic the DDe will stand down.
18
if you close every ethics
what
Because that's the
And if the attorney is unethical enough
19
to keep playing th{s game in a
20
attrition and finally wear the client down,
21
as Richard Gold is trying to do to me,
22
then he wins.
23
be unethical.
24
Now,
law of
well,
The DDC does not find this to
the DDC's own rules forbid what
8101/2009 14:44 FAX
l4J 020
120
Gold did.
Gold,
as a matrimonial attorney,
is not allowed to have trick wording in a
retainer agreement !egarding fee
arrangements.
chapter and verse that attorneys cannot lie
to clients and they have a fiduciary
relationship.
The specific rules af the DDC say -- or the
ethics rules say that a matrimonial attorney
Now,
I'm not going to quote
Let 1 s put all that aside.
10
must set forth the fee arrangements in the
11
retainer agreement in plain language.

No~,
12
13
how on earth is "binding" meaning
"Donbinding u in plain lan~uage7

CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
14
15
took any action?
16
MR. ALTMAN:
17
So the DDC never
The DDe never took any
action.
So now I will try to give you the punch
18
only did it later turn out that the
19
line.
20
form was never even available,
21
that the form was supposedly on wasn't
22
available, but I made a reply to Goldls
23
opposition which was substantially the same
24
as what he made in court.
the website
He said,
noc
Yeah,
08/01/2009 14:44 FAX
I4J 021
121
1
2
binding, but it meant nonbinding.

So what I did is
said okay,
let him
have that.
What about the fact that he lied
in court?
he perjured himself.
transcripts.
puffed up the bill and then knocked i t down
with courtesy discounts and then went after
those courtesy discounts when he found out I
He took me into the wrong court,

Here are the
What about the fact that he
r could go
10
wasn't happy with his services?
11
on with two or
12
never submitted these allegations to GOld.
13
thr~e
more examples.
The DDC
So here's -- here are the four ways

sp~cifically
l4
that the DDC
15
whitewashed the case, which is supposedly
16
still pending.
17
still pending in front of Justice Edmead.
18
It has turned my life upside down.
19
stonewalled me and
My litigation in New York is
But to be precise,
the DDC,
the first
20
thing they did is they wrote me a letter
21
saying there's pending litigation'so we're
22
closing the case.
23
that does not follow their rules.
24
Second,
And as I
said earlier,
they did not tell me the case
/01/2009 14:45 FAX
14I022
l22
could be reconsidered.
that they notify me of this.

Third,
Their rules require
they said that there was pending
litigation in related matters.
true.
That was not
Okay?
And fourth l
to this day I have been 'in
touch with Sherry Cohen,
that the reconsideration is still pending,
and to this day they have never submitted
10
II
12
13
who has told me
the additional allegations to Attorney Gold.

AUDIENCE MEMBER:
Where are the other
two senators?
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
Basically,
the
14
other two senators had commitments.
15
is -- my colleagues come in and out because,
16
you know,
17
other committee meetings and everything else
18
going on.
19
This
this is during the day we have
So you have the chairperson here
20
whols -- I'm in charge of the committee.
21
as long as I don't leave,
22
MR. ALTMAN:
WeIll
So
you1re all right.

I want to take
23
second to apologize to the audience.
I am a
24
little heated, and I am trying as best as
8/01/2009 14:45 FAX
141 023
123
1
possible to knock an eight-year story down
to a few seconds.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
I understand it.
no,
And this is
no,
something,
pending and something like this can be
reconsidered,
follow up with you in the near future
respect to the complaint that you have filed
10
11
no,
Altman,
Mr.
since your litigation is still
so I will make sure that we
with the DDe.

MR. ALTMAN:
Senator,
again,
I won't
12
drag you through the exhibits,
13
exhibits you will see that the DDe has
14
written to me and said that there was
15
nothing legitimate
16
send to Gold.
17
but in the
nothing worthwhile to
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
Well,
that',s
18
something that maybe since we have the
19
members Of the DDC here/
20
Department,
21
can -- you know,
22
subsequent environment.
23
24
wit~
the First
that's something that maybe we

maybe I
can ask them in a
Just for complete disclosure;
I used to
work for Justice Edmead about 20 years ago.
08/01/2009 14:46 FAX
@024
124
1
MR. ALTMAN:
Well,
I don't agree with
her decision.
She knows that.
as saying eo in the New York Law Journal.
think this was a mistake,
with her,
motions and what have you.
she ends up agreeing with me,
ex~wife
things too.
respectfully,
I'm quoted
and I am dealing
in the court, with

And I hope that
and I hope my
ends up agreeing with me about a few
But I would like to just make one more
10
if I may,
11
comment,
12
comments you have or stand down.
13
come here with an ax to grind.
14
anybody here.
15
personally offended by Mr. Gold and
16
Mr. Friedberg.
17
them.
18
and then I will take any

I did not
I
don't know
But I was deeply offended,
walked in listening to
And I find it outrageous that these
19
people, who know the system better than
20
anybody else,
2],
the doubt and should not be the victims of
22
character assassination,
23
do not come forward and say to you:
24
Senator,
and deserve every benefit of
that these people
obviously, with the amount of power
U"/U11;!UU~
14:41:5 }<'AX
I4J025
125'
we have and the amount of opaqueness that
our agency has,
problem,
this is a perception
even though
~e
personally behave in
saintlike \<lay.
These should be the people who are
advising you on how to fix the problem.
the fact that they are not I find deeply
offensive, and I personally feel very
suspicious of them.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
10
Well,
I don't
11
think, Mr. Altman -- this is why we are
12
having these proceedings.
13
forward.
14
expressed your belief.
1.5
have these hearings,
16
bottom of this.
Thank you.
18
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
20
21
And this is why we
so we can get do the
MR. ALTMAN:
much,
They did come
They expreased -- now you
17
19
And
Thank you very
Mr. Altman.
The next witness is Luisa Esposito,
West Hempstead, New York.
22
MS. ESPOSITO:
23
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
24
MS. ESPOSITO;
Good afternoon.
Good afternoon.
My ndme is
LU~8a
of
I4J 026
126
1
Esposito,
matters that are being brought forth by the
public are of urgent importance and it begs
for your immediate attention and involvement
in
promote justice.
you~
and I believe these serious
honorable pursuit to defend and
On or about July 8,
2005,
and
September 16,
2005, Attorney Allen H.
while representing me on an auto accident
Is~ac,
10
case,
11
hand inside my bra and grabbing my nipple
12
and all.
13
in his office and wanted me to try clothing
14
on in front of him.
15
coercion to try to get me to fellate him.
16
And after hanging up on a phone call,
17
came from behind and grabbed both of my
18
breasts.
19
grabbed my buttocks.
20
two people.
21
sexually assaulted me by putting his
On September 16th,
Isaac locked me
He used extortion and
While leaving his office,
On Oct"ober 7,
Isaac
he
This was witnessed by
2005,
I was wired by a
22
private investigator,
and hence an
23
approximate 1 hour,
24
DVD tape was produced with Isaac admitting
49 minute audio-video
101/2009 14:47 FAX
141027
127
to his crimes.
I reported these crimes,
along with
irrefutable evidence and witnesses,
to the
New York County District Attorney's Office
Sex Crimes Unit, Manhattan Special victims
unit,
Office,
agencies,
Disciplinary Committee,
the New York State Attorney General's
and other various investigatory

including the First Departmental
in hopes of a
10
resolution towards justice.
11
was further victimized and treated as if I
12
were the criminal.
13
either dismissed or ignored.
14
But instead,
All of my pleas were
As a result of these flagrant abuses,
15
presently have a case pending in front of
16
the Second Circuit Court of Appeals,
17
c. Esposito v. The State of New York,
18
al., 08-4879-CV, as well as several others
19
which had been marked related to Christine
20
Anderson v.
21
07 civ.
22
shocking allegations regarding systemic
23
corruption within the New York State Ethics
24
Committee.
9599
The State of New York,

(Sj>..S).
Luis~
et
et al.,
These cases involve
08/01/2009 14:47 FAX
141028
128
1
I believe my complaints to the ethics
panel against my tormer attorney, Allen
Isaac/ Docket
whitewashed,
very same practices that are very similar to
several others.
No,
2005-3074/
ignored,
are being
and mishandled/
The First Department Departmental
Disciplinary committee,
malice and corruption at the First
DDC.
The level of
10
Department Departmental Disciplinary
11
Committee cannot pe overstated.
12
the
On or about October 2005/
filed a
l3
grievance complaint at the DDe pertaining to
14
serious allegations against my former
15
attorney, Allen Isaac.
16
regarded sexual abuse/ extortion, coercion/
17
and corrupt influence on jUdges.
18
complaint was forwarded for prosecution
19
approximately two years later, Ms. Naomi
20
Goldstein was the attorney selected by the
21
DDC to prosecute this,
22
The complaint
When my
Docket No.'2005-3014.
On or about April 2007,
the hearings
23
began against Mr.
24
by Michael Ross and Richard Godosky.
Isaac,
who was represented

I
I4J 029
129
1
asked the court and Ms. Goldstein if I
have my attorney present during the
:3
proceedings, and Ms. Goldstein and the court
told me I
present during the hearings. , Tllis was
clearly an abuse and violation of my rights.
could
wasn't allowed to have my attorney
It soon became obvious that
7
8
Ms. Goldstein was not representing my,
interests but rather protecting my
Mr. Isaac, by the most fraudulent
10
assailant
11
and despicable means.
12
MS.
13
evidence to the court instead of the
14
original transcript of the A/V DVD tape and
15
evidence that I
16
evidence is an approximate 1 hour,
17
videotape that records Mr.
18
demanding oral sex from me in return for his
19
legal services, admitting to his sexually
20
assaulting me,
21
command favors from various judges.
22
For example,
Goldstein presented altered and redacted
had given her.
This
49 minute
Isaac explicitly
and boasting that he could
The committee and Me., Goldstein used a
23
transcription of a copy of the videotape
24
that Herbert waichman of Parker & Waichman
8/01/2009 14:48 FAX
[4J 030
130
1
submitted to the committee.
not allow my original certified
COPYI
and transcript,
The version
of the DVD transcript Ms. Goldstein
presented was heavily altered and redacted,
and omitted the critical sections most
damning to Mr.
cherry-picked what she wanted to submit into
evidence.
10
The court would
into evidence.
Isaac.
Another example.
Ms.
tape
Goldstein
When Ms. Goldstein
11
asked me to testify under oath to my
12
certified copy of the A/V tapers accuracy,
13
she then handed it back to me and did not
14
submit it into evidence.
15
Goldstein submitted the copy of the tape
16
that Mr.
17
b a c kin 2 0 0 6 .
lB
me to listen to Mr. Waichman's copy of the
19
tape with the court,
20
instead the court listened to it in front of
21
the attorneys without my presence.
22
Instead, Ms.
waichman submitted to the committee
When I
Ms.
Go 1 d s t e in did no t
as promised,
,a II 0 w
but
tried to address these serious
23
and unethical and flawed matters to various
24
individuals within the committee and outside
08/01/2009 14:48 FAX
141031
131
1
of the committee, my pleas were immediately
dismissed and ignored.
result of their unethical practices,
became very ill and could no longer continue
to attend the hearings as a witness and
complainant.
Therefore,
as a
I
I will quote a part of the audio-video
7
8
DVC tape where Isaac is heard boasting about
a case that was in tront of the First
10
Department Appellate Division and how he had
11
influence on that appeal regarding the
12
$200 million fen-phen case;
13
was in the Appellate court First
14
Department -- not the Second Department.
15
The Second Department is tougher than the
16
First Department.
17
Department.
18
case was the last.
19
the client wanted me there because some of
20
the jUdges on the panel are very close to
21
me.
22
to know that Ilm really interested in that
23
case.
24
they saw me,
uYesterday I
I was in the First
There were 16 cases,

I wasn 1 t
So I wanted them t
and my
arguing it,
but
the appellate judges,
This is all bullshit politics.
And
so I wanted them to know that
I4J 032
132
1 ' m really interested in that case.
.2
case, you know,
this."
-4
5
That
is worth $200 million.
Not
To whom and where do you report this

kind of outrage on the citizens of New York?
Wherefore,
bring this before the
Senate Judiciary Committee and pray that you
have the courage to bring these
justice before they do irreparable harm to
10
11
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
question I
13
pending case before
1.5
16
MS.
Esposito,
~he
MS. ESPOSITO:
--
My case is still open
and pending four years later.

lId also like to mention that when I
reported the New York County District
18
Attorney,
19
Department Disciplinary Committee,
20
days that complaint was dismissed.
22
23
24
the
have is do you still have a
17
21
to
our society1s perception of the courts.
12
14
peopl~
Lisa Friel,
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
to the First
within 10
What complaint was
dismissed?
MS. ESPOSITO;
had filed a complaint
The ADA Lisa Friel.
08/01/2009 14:49 FAX
141033
133
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
1
2
A oriminal
complaint?
MS.
ESPOSITO:
NO,
a complaint
against her regarding -- well,
it 1 s criminal I really don't know.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
understand.
who?
MS.
mean,
if
I'm just trying to
You filed a complaint against
ESPOSITO:
filed a complaint
10
against the ADA at the New York County ,
11
District Attorney's Office.
12
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
13
14
Oh,
the ADA in
the
MS.
The New York County
ESPOSITO:
15
District Attorney's Office.
16
complaint against ADA Lisa Friel.
17
complaint,
18
Department Disciplinary Committee, was
19
immediately dismissed within 10 days.
20
then I refiled again;
21
from anybody.
22
when I
filed a
And that
filed it at the First
And
haven't heard back
I've written letters to Alan Friedberg,
23
I've written letters to Thomas Cahill,
24
written letters and --
I've
/01/2009 14:49 FAX
141 034
13~
are still here,
MS.
MS.
sO much.
8
9
we'll follow up with that,
Esposito.
since the parties
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
All right.
ESPOSITO:
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
Thank you
Thank you very
much for your testimony.

I have to take
Ladies and gentlemen,
about a five-minute break and resume in --
10
we'll resume in about 10 minutes,
11
just have to run somewhere.
12
and we'll resume the session again.
13
take a lO-minute break,
walk around,
14
of all your anxieties.
We're going to try
15
to get through this today.
16
19
Ten minutes,
So just
get rid
(Brief recess taken.),
17,
18
because I
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON;
is Mr.
Galison,
The next witness
william Qalison.
20
Mr. Galison, where are you?
21
MR. GALISON:
22
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
Here.
23
know the routine,
24
couple of hearings.
Mr.
Galison,
you
you've been with me a

~et's
get to the point,
08/01/2009 14:50 FAX
141 035
135
1
2
let'S move on.
Go ahead,
MR. GALISON:
Mr.
Galison.
l'd like to
Okay.
start by just touching on a point that
Senator
not here to respond or to hear this.
not a criticism,
DeFran~isco
made,
and I'm sorry he'S

It's
just a clarification.
He asked Ms. Anderson what the
percentage of cases were in whdch"she felt
there was some impropriety or favoritism,
10
and he suggested that possibly the small
11
number,
12
that maybe something was -- if I understood
13
correctly, was that things were not so bad
14
and there might be an acceptable sort of
15
random level of impropriety or ~alfeasance.
16-
the small percentage,
was indicative
The fact is that the vast majority of
17
cases prOVide no motivation for corruption.
18
By definition,
19
is a vested interest in the outcome.
20
policeman arrests 100 drug dealers and then
21
fails to arrest his younger brother(
22
corruption rate is not 1 percent,
23
hundred percent, because that's where he had
24
a motivation to be corrupt.
corruption occurs when there

If a
his
it's a
141036
136
1
And nobody is accusing Mr.
Tembeckjian
Friedberg of doing this for sport;
or Mr.
they do it because they have a vested
interest.
interests are is not known to us, but we can
only assume that they don't do it for sport.
What exactly those vested
Having said that
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
10
11
12
minutes.
Go ahead.
MR. GALISON:
Senator.
Now you have four
Sir,
thank you --
Give me a break.
Mr. G91d sets the rules of the
13
grievance committees -- I'm sorry, Mr. Gold
14
claims that the grievance committees are
15
governed by rules.
The problem is not that
16
there are no rules,
the problem is that the
17
rules are ignored,
18
twisted and perverted.
The New York state jUdiciary is so
19
dysfunctional and corrupt that their
20
so-called ethics committees routinely break
21
existing laws and capriciously create false
22
laws, without due process and with utter
23
impunity.
24
credibility of the courts,
By doing so,
they undermine the

which is clear to
8/01/2009 14:51 FAX
141037
137
1
everyone here.
Their corruption is so absolute and
flagrant that they don't even make an effort
at the appearance of propriety.
they spit in the face of citizens, the
Constitution, and the universal tenets of
justice.
both as a sword against their enemies and.a
shield to protect their friends.
Instead,
These committees use corruption
Complaints
10
against lawyers with connections are
11
brazenly whitewashed or ignored.
12
learn this from anybody else;
13
my experience.
14
Decent
lawye~s
didn't
this is from
are sanctioned or
15
disbarred with no legitimate reason,
16
because they dared to oppose the corrupt
17
power structure.
18
on Judicial Conduct routinely whitewashes
19
and dismisses complaints against judges
20
without any investigation or explanation,
21
and jUdges who dare to challenge the system
22
are punished.
23
24
Likewise J
simply
the Commission
TO compound the problem,
no attorney
will touch cases of corruption against
08/01/2009 14:51 FAX
141 038
138
crooked attorneys or judges because they
know this means professional suicide.

The corruption is not only deep and
3
4
wide,
it extends to the highest office Of
the judiciary.
State, Jonathan Lippman, who I
submit was shoehorned into office by a
faulty confirmation
implicated in at least a dozen lawsuits and
The Chief Judge of New York
proce~s,
respectfully
is personally
10
dozens more complaints regarding corruption,
11
and those are only the ones that I know
12
about.
This is the head of the snake.
We
13
can talk about the tailor the middle,
but
14
this is the head of the snake.
15
him,
And before
it was Judith Kaye.

In his prior role as presiding justice
16
17
of the First Appellate Division,
18
appointed Alan Friedberg to head the
19
Disciplinary Committee.
20
already earned his reputation as corrupt in
21
his former position as chief counsel to the
22
CJC.
23
24
Lippman
Alan Friedberg,
who
When Friedberg continued to run the DDC

as corruptly as his disgraced predecessor,
08/01/2009 14:51 FAX
141039
139
Thomas Cahill, Lippman received scores of
complaints about Friedberg's corruption and
incompetence.
Lippma~
did nothing.
And that is no surprise.
In his
previous position as administrative jUdge of
the OCA,
fired DDC Investigating Attorney Christine
Anderson for reporting systemic felonious
corruption at the DDC.
Jonathan Lippman hact personally
He fired her for
but thatls obviously a
10
insubordination,
11
mischaracterization.
12
No one can
d~ny
that DDC protects
13
guilty lawyers and attacks innocent ones.
14
But what I'd like to address is how they do
15
that,
16
And I think people will relate to many of
17
these.
18
what are the methods that they use.
I will be as brief as possible.
All problems with the DDC arise from
19
underlying conflicts.
Mine had to do with
20
a -- I'm a musician,
21
record that I made and a lawyer tried to
22
steal the rights from the record by writing
23
and claLming that I was not the copyright
24
owner.
it had to do with a
six months later,
he changed, his
08/01/2009 14:52 FAX
14J040
140
mind and said that I was the copyright
owner,
Now,
not get a record deal, and I was basically
being threatened with the federal crime of
copyright infringement.
upside down.
in the interceding six months,
Two streams of
admitted that in a sworn document.

I
could
Turned my life
system~c
and coordinated
official misconduct arose from my underlying
10
dispute.
One,
II'
disciplinary complaints against certain
12
lawyers have been illegally obstructed, by
13
multiple government agencies,
14
DnC,
lS
and others --
the DAiS office,
17
this dialog,
18
instances.
MR.
19
21
including the
the Attorney General,
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
16
20
my efforts to file
Stop.
We have had
and you talked about these
GALISON:
What would you like to
know?
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
Exactly.
I want
22
to "get to -- you talk about whitewashing.
23
What specifically was done that you consider
24
to be whitewashing,
those specific
08/01/2009 14:52 FAX
141 041
141
I
incidents?
:2
you have to improve the system?
MR.
editing,
GALISON:
I appreciate your.
as always,
Well,
And what recommendations would
Senator.
I ' l l make it very clear,
cases which are -- which I
crystal-clear.
talk about stuff
debatable facts.
I mean!
th~t~s
For example,
10
two
see as absolutely
I'm not going to

debatable with
this lawyer,
who wrote in
11
a letter to my record company that I was not
12
the
13
going to sue me for copyright infringement,
14
six months later admitted in a sworn
15
affidavit that I was the copyright owner.
16
By any definition of the word,
17.
lying.
18
~wner
of the record and that he was
the man was
And lying is against the rules.
It's
19
not against the lawi
r cannot sue him in
20
court for lying.
21
but not for lying.
22
infraction that is in the LCPR.
23
particular number,
24
or law firm shall not engage in conduct
Maybe for fraud,
possibly,
Lying is an ethical
it's DR 1.102.
It has a
A lawyer
08/01/2009 14:52 FAX
141042
142
1
involving dishonesty,
misrepresentation.
Now,
fraud,
deceit,
or
if you tell a record company that
1 1 m not the owner of the record and yoU .know
perfectly well and six months later you say,
yes,
I knew that he was the owner --
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON;
MR.
10
GALISON:
sure everybody
unde~stands
want to make
there was no
question,
What did theDDC,
12
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
14
.. Okay,
11
13
We got that point.
what did Mr.
Fried --
What did the DDC
do that was so -MR.
GALISON:
Okay,
what Mr.
Cahill
15
did was he asked for a response from the
16
lawyer.
17
employer and counsel at the time,
1a
Beldock.
19
20
21
The response came from the lawyer's

Myron
It should be noted that the

What did he do
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
that was questionable to you?

MR. GALISON:
okay,
I'm sorry,
yeah.
22
I was just going to note that Hal Lieberman,
23
who preceded Mr.
24
Beldock's office at that time.
cahill,
was working at
He went
UO/U1/;;:UU~
14:5J rA!
141043
143
directly from the one, which I
some insight as to how the revolving door
works here.
4
5
6
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
think gives
Your issue is that
that's a conflict issue that!s

MR. GALISON:
That's a conflict
issue.
some light on what's going on behind the
scene.
10
But that's an aside,
What happened,
just to shed
what Cahill did is he
11
got the response fr9m the lawyer, but the
12
lawyer
13
pages long,
14
because hels considering suing me,
15
may contain some information. II
16
this is after months of delay
17
18
19
sai~:
27
and it
By the way,
But don't they
send you a copy of his response

MR. GALISON:
supposed to.
21
letter,
22
a.nd sealed.
24
it
but Mr. Galison can't see it
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
20
23
IIHere' s my response,
Yeah,
But instead,
they were
they sent me the
which said the response is redacted
He said, We are attaching two versions

of the answer from Mr. Greenberg.
One is
8/01/2009 14:53 FAX
I4J 044
144
entirely deleted -- redacted.
3 to page 28 is redacted.
sealed envelope which neither you,
That is,
page
The other is in a
th@ DDC,
or Mr. Galison is allowed to view.

Now,
the DDC booklet and the rules say
that when and after a case is opened
by sending the thing,
investigation
or encouraged to respond to the answer.
And
10
I wrote to Mr.
how
11
can I
12
sealed envelope that I
they've opened the
the complainant is required
Cahill,
and
said,
SAMPSON:
can't even see?

I
mean,
14
very valid point which you make.
15
to the second incident.

MR. GALISON:
16
17
So in response,
19
report,
20
text,
22
23
24
that 1 s a
Let's go
Let me just say that he
said "Do the best you can."
18
21
Well,
respond to something that's in a
CHA!~MAN
13
and
I wrote a 40-page
fully documented --
40
pages of
hundreds of pages of exhibits -CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
happened to the case?

MR. GALISON:
I wrote and I
What actually
Was it dismissed?
It was dismissed.
And
said when you dismissed this,
8/01/2009 14:54 FAX
141 045
145
did you take into account the information
that was in the sealed envelope,
just decide that I
was lying?
And they said,
or did you
Oh, well,
maybe "we made
a mistake, we'll have it reconsidered.
one of the things they do.
months reviewing a case,
maybe we goafed,'Me'll
there'S another six months or a year.
They spend six
then they say,
re~onsider
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
10
It's
ii.
oh",
Then
want you to kind
11
of get -- because lIve got another minute
12
left,
I want you to
MR.
13
Please,
GALISON:
14
questions,
15
case.
I will tell you.
The other case,
16
just ask me the
This is one
there are five lawyers
17
and two jUdges.
I haven't gone to the CJC
18
yet.
19
mean a lawyer,
20
heard this story before,
21
Friedman,
22
Cahill, and Cahill said -- the very words he
23
wrote were IIThis attorney does not practice
24
in Manhattan or the Bronx and is therefore
The other case involved a

a guy named
judge --
which yOU've
a guy named
Leon Friedman, who I
complained to
[4]046
146
not under our jurisdiction."

I wrote him,
I said he does,
does.
letterhead, here's the picture of the plaque
over his door,
secretary saying
But he was fraudulently registered in the
lOth District. ". I 5i.1.id the fact that he r s
fraudulently registered in the 10th District
10
1 1 m not making. that up..
he just
Here's his
here's a recording of his

that'~
his 801e law
of~ice.
doesn't have any bearing.

Three years -- actually,
11
3 1/2 years
12
now I have been contesting with Mr.
13
Friedberg and his committee that 148 East
14
78th Street is in Manhattan and not in
1.;i
Suffolk County somewhere.
16
that it's in Suffolk County.
17
because by no account dos Mr.
18
a law office in SUffolk-County.
19
doesn't.
They maintain
So that is just nonsense.
20
And they -Friedman have

He just
mean,
you
21
know,
that's the stuff that I l m -- but what
22
happened was they sent my complaint to the
23
lOth District, where it was dismissed one
24
week after it was sent in April of 2p06.
It
08/01/2009 14:54 FAX
141047
147
1
2
was never sent to Mr.
Friedman.
And what was the rationale Lehind not

They said this is not a
investigating?
complaint about ethics,
compla~nt.
entire complaint was enumerated in the
precise language of the LCPR,
Code of Profess ianai Respon's ibi 1 i ty.
complaint was followed by a numerically -- a
this is a civil
Well, hold on a second.
The
the Lawyer's
' EV~ ry
10
numbered description of the exact law and
11
why my cases corresponded to those
12
particular ethical rules.
l~
not an
14
ethi~al
To say that i t ' s
complaint is just ludicrous.
But worse than that,
15
me any confirmation.
16
three years.
17
years,
18
Friedberg
19
answer the simple
20
Friedman was practicing in the First
21
Department
22
Department.
23
and I have a tape recording which I put on
24
YouTube of him sayirtg that he will not tell
they did not send
did not know for
During the time of that three
was communicating with Mr.

I
and he denied,
or
he would ref'use to
~uestion
of whether Mr.
the lOth District,

He -- I
the Second
sent him 15 letters,
08/01/2009 14:55 FAX
141048
148
me, he refuses to tell me whether the lawyer
is in his jurisdiction.
of utter
dis~egard
That i3 the level
for fairness and rules.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
we need to end it.
And I need you to

And I
think I
understand your point with the whole issue
of the transparency issue and just basically
the common
following up -GALISON:
MR.
10
dece~cy
and courtesy of just
No , no , no,
not --
11
decency and courtesy is way more than I
12
woul d demand_
13
behavior.
14
courteous to me.
15
finally --
I donlt care if hels decent or
He has to respond to my
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
16
17.
rIm talking about legal
The transparency
issue is what you

GALISON:
Yes.
18
MR.
19
transparency,
20
a list of the laws that Mr.

And I
21
well
not just
following the laws.
I've got
Friedberg broke.
just want to say -- end with one
I was recently speaking
~o
22
thing.
23
clerk of the Second Appellate Division,
24
Mr.
pelzer.
the chief
And I have him on a tape
08101/2009 14:55 FAX
141 049
149
recording saying the courts may dispense
with the rules, with their own rules.

That is not true.
The senators can't
dispense with their own rules,
cannot dispense with their own rules,
president cannot dispense with his own
rules.
Thank' ;you, sir.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
10
the
Thank you very
much.
The next witness is Eleanor Capogrosso.
11
12
How are you doing?
13
Mr.
14
minutes.
15
MS.
Please don't follow
Galison and take longer than five
CAPOGROSSO:
Senator,
gave you a great
16
deal of material,
17
just hit right to the points.
18
the citizens
so I ' l l try to
When you say hit
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
19
the points,
that's what I want the witnesses
20
to do.
21
that you have, and maybe any recommendations
22
that you may want to see.
Let's hit the points,
CAPOGROSSO:
the issues
Certainly.
23
MS.
24
Perhaps I could answer a question that
101/2009 14:55 FAX
I4J 050
150
you raised earlier that what can we do with
the SCJC.
And it's a very --
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
know what the SCJC is?

MS.
CAPOGROSSO:
Does everybody
State Commission on
Judicial Conduct.
The answer is very simple.
have to make it public.
to do so, and I l l l explain why.
You just
And you1re mandated

Article 6,
10
section 22 of the Constitution of the State
11
Of New York states:
12
on
13
agency constitutionally designated to review
14
complaints of judicial misconduct in New
15
York state.
16
Judicia~
The State Commission
conduct is the disciplinary
1I
The Legislature presently has abrogated
17
its constitutional responsibility by giving
18
the constitutional obligation to an
19
organization that is not subject to review
20
or oversight.
21
the Judiciary Law violates the equal
22
protection and due process clauses of the
23
United States constitution.
24
As a result,
section 44 of
That was the basis of my federal case
8/01/2009 21:01 FAX
[4J 001
151
that I
attempts of trying to file that case were
dismissed,
where I
because he coached the Attorney General what
(5
to do in order to get that case dismissed.
The second was Honorable Scheindlin,
case
was because it was sua sponte dismissed,
10
11
filed in the Southern District.
first by the Honorable Griesa,
couldn't even fi1@ a complaint
was~consolidated
where I
Both
with hers.
when my
That
al~o
couldn't file the complaint.
This is the issue,
this is the answer.
12
And the federal court does not want to
13
address it.
14
where I
15
and if you look at the transcript, which is
16
next to the materials I
17
which these are in Judge- Griesa's words
18
where he coaches the Attorney General on
19
what to do to get this thing dismissed,
20
the unusual ruling by federal Judge
21
soheindlin to sua sponte dismiss a
22
complaint,
23
second Circuit case law because it doesn't
24
even give an adversary the capability of
Based upon those dismissals
couldn't file a federal complaint
whic~ is
sent to you,
of
and
against prevailing
08/01/2009 21:01 FAX
141 002
152
1
opposing it.
This is the issue
th~y
don't want to
address, but this is what you can address.
This is what you can fix, this is what you
can cure.
And I
will tell you what the overall

By not making it
problew with this is.
public, what you're doing is allowing the
rigging of the election system in this

By the State Commission on Judicial
10
state.
11
Conduct not turning over these
12
the screening committees who screen the
13
judges, what you've done is rigged these
14
elections, nothing more complicated than
lS
that.
16
preserve.
17
so they can put the ,people into power that
18
they want to be put in power.
compla~nts
And this is what they're trying to
They want these elections rigged
And it's unconstitutional what they've
19
20
done,
21
do right now,
22
not want to address that this legislature
23
can do.
24
to
and that's a simple thing that you can
Secondly,
which two federal jUdges do
the uniform judicial question
08/01/2009 21:01 FAX
141 003
153
..
here is hidden under a veil of
confidentiality by the OCA.
Elections controls the election process with
any of the politicians in this state , but
not with the jUdges.
they keep it under a veil of secrecy.
by doing so,
capability of the public to look
at these responses,
you're
The Board of
They keep it secret,
no~
giving the
of these
11
they ' re making false statements.

Now,
carefull~
to look at the resumes
10
12
And
judges, to see whether or not
the reason why I bring this up and
13
it's a big issue is
14
right now is being judged.
15
on the judicial webpage of the Senate
16
JUdiciary Committee in Washington,
17
see her answers to judicial questionnaires.
18
You will also see her transcripts that when
19
she was nominated in the past, of what her
20
responses were.
21
ahead and view it.
22
deserve anything less?
23
24
NOW,
b~cause
Judge Sotomayor
And if you look
you'll
So that the public can go

Why should this state
the reason I mention all of this
is it's also very important to do it because
08/01/2009 21:02 FAX
[4J 004
154
Section 17-128 of the Election Law says that
.2
a public officer who
refuses or neglects to perform any of its
duties by hindering or delaying or
attemp~ing
performance is guilty of a felony.
wi~lfully
omits,
to hinder or delay the
So when you have administrative judges

screen~ng
who are not being 'truthful "to the
committees when they're asked are any
10
complaints being filed against these judges
11
who are seeking an elected post,
12
afoul of this.
13
done by an informal process where a screener
14
calls the jUdge up over the phone,
15
they can say anything or conceal anything.
16
It's not under oath, under the penalty of
17
perjury, with a court reporter in the room.
18
Because I have boxes of letters ihat I
they run
Because that questioni?g is
on which
19
had sent to the administrative judges
20
concerning missing court files,
21
violations ~nd contempts of executive orders
22
bythe Governor after September 11th that
23
were summarily dismissed by the State
24
clear
101/2009 21:02 FAX
I4J 005
155
1
Now,
dealing with the First Department
;2
Disciplinary Committee,
little story,
minute,
what the gist of this is.
I have to tell you a
if you wouldn't mind just a
and the perhaps you can understand
Many years ago I
hired an attorney to
represent me in a dispute,
charged me an excessive fee.
lawsuit to recover his fee,
and I believe he
He files a
and I hire
10
another attorney to represent me.
11
was Howard Benjamin.
12
go to' court,
13
default judgment against
14
requested Benjamin to vacate the default,
15
claimed he could not because he made a
16
statement to the court about having been on
17.
jury duty at the time of the court
18
appearance but he instead was in his office.
19
Benjamin informed me he was going to pay the
20
jUdgement to avoid the ramifications of
21
explaining it to the court.
22
and Mr.
Mr.
His name
Benjamin doesn't
Calabro obtains a
me.
When I
false
Years later, my credit was seriously
23
affected,
24
been paid,
since Calabro's judgment had not

unknowingly to me.
Neither
he
U~/U1/lU09
21:02 FAX
141006
156
Calabro nOr Benjamin was helpful in giving
me copies of the alleged checks that
Benjamin had paid Calabro which was damaging
my credit score.
a complaint with the First Department DOC,
since by law if Benjamin had paid Calabro,
then Calabro and Benjamin were required to
hold onto these checks for a period of seven
years.
Without recourse,
filed
The pirst Department DDC transferred
10
11
the case to the FQurth Department DnC,
1:2
Howard Benjamin was an attorney who formerly
13
worked there at the First Department DOC,
14
and his partner,
15
former chief counsel at the First Department
16
DDC.
17
Mike Gentile,
since
was the
At the Fourth Department DDC,
my,case
18
was closed without an investigation as to
19
the whereabouts of those checks and the
20
investigation of Benjamin's false statements
21
to the court.
22
the former presiding jvstice of the Fourth
23
Department DDe,
24
now sits on the Court of Appeals.
r brought the complaint to
the Honorable Piggott,
who
He did
IUl/~UU~
~l:UJ
FAX
141007
157
nothing.
He concealed it,
he let it go.
he covered it up,
r filed again in the First Department
to have Sherry"Cohen and Sarah Jo
DOC,
Hamilton tell me for years that they were
retrieving these checks from the bank,
which I've given you correspondence,
documents and all of that.
of"
Then I received a letter dated

2004,
three years after I
10
November 8,
11
requested those
12
Thomas Cahill,
13
states:
14
complaint, Mr. Benjamin provided the
15
committee with copies of the fronts of two
16
checks and a copy of the front and back of
17
another,
18
transmittal letter to Mr.
19
have those letters.
20
cop~es
of checks,
in which
chief counsel to the ODe,
"In fact,
after you filed your
as well as the corresponding

Calabro."
You
During this period of time where I
21
could not obtain copies of these checks,
22
wrote boxes of letters,
I mean boxes,
23
Honorable John Buckley,
who was the
24
presiding justice at the time,
to the
to the
8/01/2009 21:03 FAX
14J008
156
1
Honorable Judith Kaye,
Judge.
were supposed to deal with something;
did nothing.
covered up,
There is no administration of this court
system.
They were the administrators.
They concealed it,
they
they
That is what the problem is.

I
called up Chief
Judge Kayets office many a time and spoke to
lO
Mary Mane,
11
was;
12
not an administrative judge."
13
"Well, what dO you want me to do?
14
one that has this duty."
15
live up to her responsibilities.
16
the problem.
17
They
they did absolutely nothing.
And I can tell you,
who was the Chief
her counsel,
and her response
"The judge is a sitting Judge,

I
she
said,
She's the
But she refuses to
But to go back to the court,
That is
during the
18
time when I could not get these checks,
19
filed a complaint against Mr.
20
the Fair Credit Reporting Act,
21
to obtain copies from him.
22
calabro under
in an attempt
Honorable Joan Kenney publishes a
23
decision on the front
24
uournal in which she says I have 35 lawsuits
pag~
of the Law
08/01/2009 21:03 FAX
[4J 009
159
1
as a pro se litigant.
:2
another transcript,
decision in the other case a year ago
my own research, and she at that point
commenced in excess of 75 actions."
, First of all,
own research.
record.
was lying.
10
in
"When I rendered the

l
They cannot go
o~tside
the
she makes things up and
how did this judge get on this
11
bench?
12
she freely do it and be allowed to do it,
13
because I
14
Commission on Judicial Conduct,
15
summarily dismissed it.
16
did
a judge cannot do their
Number two,
NOw,
Then she says,
It's very interesting that how could
filed a complaint with the State

and they
My federal complaint was seen by
17
someone who is in this room who happened to
18
be a certified court examiner and was also
19
at the brunt end of the misconduct and
20
allegations by Joan Kenney.
21
ahead and obtained the curriculum vitae of
22
Joan Kenney when she ran for election.
23
24
And she went
She found material misrepresentation in

her campaign website.
The official site
08/01/2009 21:04 FAX
I4J 010
160
provided inaccurate and false information
:2
about the candidate's participation in law
school activities
candidate
and
professional experience.
.
.
as Law Review,
lie'ensure date,
investigation,
that if you want to question
this,
10
11
the
legal employment
have no personal knowledge of the
IS
su~h
but I brought her here so

~er
concerning
ahers sitting in this audience right
now.
But this would not have been allowed to
12
happen if that unified judicial
13
questionnaire would
14
public.
15
the bench freely going ahead and saying I
16
have 35 lawsuits,
17
she can come up with,
18
record.
19
b~
able to be made
That judge would not be sitting on
75 lawsuits,
and whatever
and going outside the
But this leads to an important point,
20
because based upon that decision,
21
Honorable Debra
22
because of some legal malpractice where I
23
hired an attorney to represent me;
24
I have -- has put protective order
J~me8,
the
in a case I brought
says that
08/01/2009 21:04 FAX
141 011
161
preventing me from initiating any further
litigation as a party plaintiff without
prior approval of the administrative judge
of the court.
the
that my frivolous or repetitive actions or
vexatious conduct
Kenneys decision; which she makes
f~ont
page of the Law Journal,
claiming
which is based on Judge
Ms.
CHAJRMAN SAMPSON;
10
This also gets published on
u~.
Capogrosso,
could you sum it up?

MS.
11
CAPOGROSSO:
We've got
If you want crimes,
I ' l l give
12
more,
13
you crimes right now,
14
to get a special prosecutor not only at the
15
DDC but at the state Commission on Judicial
16
conduct.
17
though.
Yes.
what's in that paper,
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
And I will -- i t ' s
18
in here,
19
But if you can wrap it up.
20
21
22
MS.
up in two
I will definitely follow it
CAPOGROSSOi
~-
OkaYt
up.
I ' l l wrap i t
about five more sentences.
I appealed the decision in the Kansas
23
case into the Appellate Division.
24
on the panel?
Judge Buckley.
Who sits
What does
101/2009 21:04 FAX
141012
162
Judge Buckley do?
He doesn't recuse
himself.
It's -- he refuses.
reargue,
ar~
Friedman,
and they agree that he doesn't have to
recuse himself.
I make a motion for his recusal.

Then I make a motion to
get a whole other five
sitting on the panel there.
jUdges that
Judge David
Tom, Acosta, and Helen Freedman,
So there is certainly a basis for his
10
recusal, because he has a vested interest in
11
the dismissal of that case because it has to
12
deal with the federal complaint which
13
in.
14
Further,
put
I have a judgment against me
15
for over a quarter of a million dollars that
16
was put on a landlord-tenant dispute.
17
terms of me trying to perfect the appeal,
18
which the case law was in my favor and the
19
judgment should not have occurred,
20
in the county clerk was completely
21
destroyed.
22
copy it for the purpose of getting the
23
record.
24
six files closed.
In
of
the file
I sent a secretary down there to
She was given initially five files,

The next two days,
she
08/01/2009 21:05 FAX
141013
163
was given five files.
be four' files.
couldn't even perfect the appeal concerning
that.
help me reconstruct the file;
Then it turned out to
To the point where I
I asked the Appellate Division to
You want retaliation?
they refused.
This is what
happens when an attorney opens their mouth
and complains about violations
orders, missing court files in a courthouse.
ofexecutiv~
10
If you want every attorney sitting in this
11
room and out the door,
12
thousands if you give them protection.
13
you need to do is give them a registration
14
with an anonymous number,
15
see misconduct,
16
anonymously report it and to be taken
17
seriously.
18
Eelieve me,
I can have you

What
and any time they
corruption by a jUdge,
to
the attorneys in this --
19
I'm probably one of the few attorneys here.
20
There would be many more if you would give
21
them that level of protection,
22
would stop.
23
would be well-served by finally get some
24
justice into this state.
and this
And the people of this state
01/2009 21:05 FAX
141 014
l64
1
2
CHAI~MAN
MS.
Ms.
CAPOGROSSO:
Oh,
Capogrosso
can I
make one
more point?
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
5
6
SAMPSON:
Ms.
Capogrosso
we
have to --
MS.
CAPOGROSSO:
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
MS.
We have to
No.
CAPOG:ROSSO:
10
30 seconds,
11
you can't let go of.
I promise you.
On November 22
12
One more point.
2008,
:t'll be
Because this one
I write a letter
13
to the DOC.
Alan Friedberg charges me
14
because
15
against me because a locksmith who repaired
1.6
some locks in my offic@,
17
and he filed a complaint against me.
18
bill.
19
other cases I know ofl
20
practicing law,
21
in New JerseYI
22
complaints.
23
24
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
he
chos~
to start an action
I disputed the bill
Not even attorney services.
~lso
A
While on
where lawyers are
unauthorized to practice law

he doesn't even the
have in there
Your 30 seconds
UO/U.l/.<::UUl:I
~1:U5
FAX
141015
165
are up.
, MS. CAPOGROSSO:
2
3
All right.
more
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
Ms.
Capogrosso,
thank you.
Thank you very much,
follow up.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
10
is Mr.
ostertag,
The next witness
former president of the New
York State Bar Association.
11
Mr. ostertag,
12
MR. OSTERTAG:
13
but we'll
There's
Mr.
how are you,
sir?
Good afternoon,
Ch~irman.
14
CHAIRMAN
IS
MR. OSTERTAG:
SAM~SON;
How are you doing?

I have a question,
16
I may,
17
rule,
18
the surreptitious videotaping of witnesses
19
who come voluntarily before this committee
20
to testify?
21
before you run the clock.
if
does this committee have a rule about
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
rule because,
23
is being videotaped.
MR.
We don't have a
if you notice,
22
24
Is there a
OSTERTAG:
the proceeding
I don't mean that one.
08/01/2009 21:05 FAX
141016
166
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
Right.
proceeding is being videotaped,
open to the public.

MR.
OSTE~TAG:
well,
videotaped by Mr. Galison,
(5
don't know where he is now.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
llv@ been
I think it is.
Well, you and me
both.
MR.
OSTERTAG:
He was sitting over
10
there,
11
was up against the wall,
12
over here,
13
he's up against the wall again.
then he was over there,
15
videotaped.
16
know.
and then he
and he was sitting
and then he was up front,
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
14
and now
At least you were
He tape-records it too, you
Watch what you say around him.

(La.ughter. ),
17
MR.
18
OSTERTAG:
Galison.
19
Mr.
20
of Mr.
21
don't know.
22
and this is
So, you know.
The
I don't know
He was videotaping the faces
Friedberg and Mr. Gold,
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON;
No,
23
understand that, Mr. ostertag.
24
proceedings are open to the --
who I also
I would
But the
1/2009 21:06 FAX
141017
167
Mr.
Galison,
could you cease the
videotaping to allow -- I
to- feel comfortable t.o testify.
very
want our witnesses

Thank you
much.
MR.
OSTERTAG:
Well,
I was going to
give him the finger,but I didn't think
quiCkly enough.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON.
MR.
OSTERTAG:
My name is Robert
10
Ostertag,
11
76,OOO-member New York State Bar
12
Association.
13
devoted to the concep.t of lawyers serving
14
their clients consistent with the highest
1.5
standards of professional integrity.
16
and
l'm glad.
am here on behalf of the
We are a voluntary association
I would like to get back to what I am
17
here for.
I have no complaints about
18
anybody,
19
make against anybody.
20
address is the question of when disciplinary
21
proceedings should be made known to the
22
public.
23
we need to take note of the legitimate
24
competing interests that are
I have no inquested accusations to

What l
want to
And in considering this question,
involve~.
08/01/2009 21:06 FAX
141018
168
For lawyers,
their competence and
reputation is what they offer to the public.
It affects how they are viewed by individual
clients,
The arguments and viewpoints of a lawyer
with a good reputation will be heard and
~arefully
clients,
appears, or in the general community.
10
judges, and the community at large.
considered, whether by his or her

lawye~
the court in which the
Lawyers spend years, a career,
trying
11
to earn a stellar reputation.
12
reputation cannot be bought or easily
13
gained.
14
lawyer's demonstrated actions and effoits on
15
behalf of clients over a period of time.
16
Gaining the type of reputation for which all
17
of us strive requires demonstrated skill and
18
expertise on a continuing basis.
1~
Unfortunately,
20
can be lost,
21
moment.
22
A good
It can be achieved only by a
however,
an earned reputation
and it can be lost in a mere
I've practiced law for 50 years.
23
reputation I think is beyond repute.
24
recognize
th~t
My
I
it can be lost in a mere
101/2009 21:06 FAX
I4J 019
169
moment.
For clients, they are entitled to know
2
3
that any lawyer they retain has integrity
and meets the standards of our profession.
When serious questions are raised about the
ethics,
competence,
lawyer,
the client is entitled to know.
Bar Association understands that we should
not have a disciplinary mechanism whereby
trustworthiness of a
The
10
clients are unknowingly represented by
11
lawyers who may not meet those professional
12
standards.
The problem, of course,
13
is that when a
14
complaint is filed against a lawyer with a
15
disciplinary committee, the complaint mayor
16
may not have merit.
17.
complaint is disclosed and it is later found
18
to have lacked merit,
19
reputation will have been affected,
20
obviously so.
If the fact of the
the lawyer's
Anyone who is in any way in public
21
22
life,
including lawyers -- and including
23
also legislators, as you know -- knows that
24
any initial story in the media about a
08/01/2009 21:07 FAX
141 020
170
1
complaint that has been filed overwhelms any
:2
f01low-up story reporting that the
complaint was of no merit and that the
individual did not engage in any wrongdoing.
In such a situation,
initi~l
disclosure of the
complaint will have caused reputational
damage that cannot be erased.
disclosure of complaints against
l~wyers
unfair to those who,
are found
Thus,
in the end,
10
to have done absolutely nothing that
11
supports discipline.
12
we
recognize,
however,
early
is
that there are
13
situations where the pUblic should be made
14
aware of the questionable conduct of a
15
lawyer without waiting for a final
16
determination of the disciplinary body.
17
Clients who retain a lawyer during the
18
pendency of a disciplinary proceeding or
19
continue to be represented by a lawyer
20
during this proceeding may be harmed in some
21
situations if they are unaware of- serious
22
charges that have been brought but have not
23
yet been finally determined.
24
The State Bar Association has
VO/V~/~VV~
~~;UJ
YAA
I4J 021
171
considered these issues on several
:2
occasions, with at least different
committees having examined the matter within
the last 15 years.
of attorneys,
members,
obligation to make certain that those
represented by attorneys are not harmed.
While,
as an association
we want to protect our
we recognize that we also have an
In light of all these considerations,
10
and the recognized competing interests,
11
State Bar Association has concluded that
12
where there is a need to safeguard the
13
pUblic, the Appellate Divisions,
14
in charge of lawyer disciplinary matters,
15
should exercise the authority they already
16
have in any appropriate disciplinary case
17
and consider interim suspension of the
18
subject lawyer pending the outcome of the
19
disciplinary process.
20
public disclosure.
21
the
which are
with suspension comes
This proposal achieves several
22
objectives.
First,
in those cases where
23
allegations have been made against an
24
attorney which are not serious or for which
08/01/2009 21:07 FAX
141022
172
there is not significant supportive
evidence,
her name will not be revealed unless and
until there is public discipline,
that disciplinary action beyond a private
letter has been addressed to the attorney.
the attorney is protected.
His or
meaning
Where public discipline is not
warranted,
the fact of allegations having.
been made and the results of the
10
disciplinary proceeding would not be
11
revealed.
i2
remain intact.
The attorney's reputation would
However,
13
to protect clients and the
14
public in those cases where serious charges
15
are brought and the initial evidence is
16
supportive of those charges,
17
would step in and make a jUdgment as -to
18
whether suspension and public disclosure is
19
warranted.
20
made by the judges of the Appellate
21
Divisions on a case-by-case basis.
22
would place the decision as to whether to
23
suspend and disclose exactly where it should
24
be,
the courts
This would be a determination
with judges,
This
whose fundamental role in
08/01/2009 21:08 FAX
I4J 023
173
our society is to examine individual cases
and make decisions based upon the facts
placed before them.
"l
I am aware that there have been general
calls for increased disclosure of
disciplinary proceedings.
believe that those who have called for such
disclosures'have done the careful analysis
that has been done by three Bar Association
However,
10
committees,
11
competing interests that need to be
12
reconciled as I have outlined them.
13
d6 not
nor have they acknowledged the
The law recognizes that certain
14
proceedings need to be confidential to
15
protect innocent parties from being tainted.
16
Grand jury proceedings are the best example.
17
They have been secret for centuries,
18
recognition of the need to protect innocent
19
parties.
20
Similarly,
in
while the courts are open to
21
the public,
certain cases,
such as many
22
Family Court cases,
23
Legislature has recognized that there are
24
situations in which the need for
are not public.
The
141024
174
1
confidentiality is superior to the desire to
have public disclosure in a democratic
society_
In conclusion,
the state Bar
~ssociation
necessary in certain circumstances.
clients and the public need to be protected,
we want the courts to use their power to
step in,
10
11
recognizes that disclosUre is
suspend an offending lawyer,
Where
and
disclose to the public.

However,
absent a finding by an
12
Appellate Division that there is a need for
13
immediate suspension and disclosure,
14
association urges that disciplinary
15
proceedings not be open and that disclosure
16
be made only where there is a finding that
17
pUblic discipline is warranted and that an
18
attorney has in fact done something wrong.
19
Innocent lawyers need protection as much as
20
other innocent parties,
21
offers both lawyers and the clients they
22
serve the protections to which they are
23
entitled.
24
Thank you,
sir.
your
and our proposal
08/01/2009 21:08 FAX
I4J 025
175
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
Mr.
Ostertag,
thank you very much.
interested that you at least and the
association recognizes there is some need I
guess
of all having the pUblic have faith in a
system like this.
deal with the perception but most
MR. OSTERTAG:
8
9
~o
And 1 1 m very
I understand
publi~
concern about the issue.

But at the sante
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
10
11
time,
12
done
13
complaints that 'should be dismissed or are
14
frivolous in its nature,
15
we're trying to do two competing concerns.
16
we have to -- those counsels who have

~ood
MR.
jobs,
just to be labeled for
OSTERTAG:
at the same time
do understand that.
17
And I also recognize the fact
18
complaints that are filed with --
19
involved in the
20
number of years.
21
disciplinary process for about 19,
22
off and on.
23
24
And I
gri~vance
that there are

Itv~
been
process for a
lIve been involved in the

20 years,
recognize that complaints are
filed and it's easy to make a complaint
101/2009 21:09 FAX
141026
176
about a political person or an attorney or a
political person who is an attorney,
particularly at election time or during the
proceedings that .predate Election Day -- in
other words, a campaign time.
very difficult time tor an attorney who is
running for political office.
S
9
And that's a
You need only look at the television

channels in the last few days,
last few
10
weeks,
11
a former United States Attorney who has
12
become the subject of a complaint of
13
pay-to-play.
14
done that or he hasn't done that.
15
hasn't done it,
16
badly besmirched.
17.
over and over and over again . .
18
about this man in New Jersey who waS
And I don't know whether he'S

But if he
his reputation has been
And it happens over and
'r recognize the need to protect the
19
pUblic.
20
the pUblic.
21
association nor I suffer wrongdoers
22
But I think there is a two-way street here.
23
24
I certainly would want to protect

I must tell you that neither my
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
much for your comments.
ligh~ly.
So thank you very
08/01/2009 21:09 FAX
~027
177
Thank you.
MR. OSTERTAG:
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
The next person is
John Aretakis.
MR. ARETAKIS:
Good afternoon
Senator.
My name is John Aretakis.
I'd
like to thank you,
for your overwhelming patience in this
ne~ring,
and I'd like to thank you
And 1 thank you also,
Mr. Spotts.
My focus is on the treatment and the
10
failure to follow procedure,
11
follow the law,
12
jurisdi~tion
13
Committee on Professional Standards,
14
otherwise known as COPS.
15
Department we've heard it's called the
16
Departmental Disciplinary Committee,
17
DDe.
18
it's called COPS.
19
the failure to
and acting in excess of the
by the Third Department
In the First
In the Third Department,
the
in Albany,
I was born and raised in Brooklyn,
and
20
for well over tbe last decade my only
21
practice for the practice of law has been in
22
Manhattan,
23
past 20 years,
24
have been in New York City.
in New York City.
And for the
80 to 90 percent of my
~A~es
But starting in
141028
178
1
the year
handful of lawyers handling a very,
controversial area of law involving
representation of children who were abused
by pedophiles -- that started in 2002.
Third Department committee on Professional
Standards has come down to New York City and
investigated me over 50 times,
a multiple of occasions,
200~,
when I became one of only a
5-0.
very
And on
the cases that they
10
investigate in New York City involve New
11
York city litigants,
12
New York
13
New York City attorney.
14
C~ty
The
New York City judges,
decisions,
and of course me,
Why is the committee on Professional
15
Standards up here in Albany going down the
16
Thruway 150 miles and investigating me?
17
Their only answer:
18
Law School in 1985.
19
them jurisdiction over me.
20
graduated from Albany
That supposedly gives
After law school,
senator Sampson,
21
went on to get a master's in law at
22
Georgetown University Law Center.
23
because I graduated from Albany Law 23 years
24
ago, Mr. Oehs, who's been sitting in the
And
08/01/2009 21:10 FAX
I4J 029
179
1
back of this room all day,

attack,
who I will not
says that they have jurisdiction to
investigate me.
Dsing vague and arbitrary
ethical statutes like conduct unbecoming of
an attorney and actions that are prejudicial
to the administration of justice.

I am hopeful that a review of my case
7
8
in a nutshell will help this honorable
committee more appropriately see that this
10
system is rife with abuse and it needs to be
11
remedied.
I heard the first speaker,
12
Mr. Gold.
13
And as I sat over there quietly,
14
fell O\lt of my chair.
15
address listed on the Department of OCA,
16
that determines which disciplinary committee
17
will investigate.
18
wholeheartedly.
I agree with that'
So where are you
listed?
MR. ARETAKIS:
21
m listed in New York
where lIve been for 15 or 20 years.
22
City,
23
am only listed there.
24
He said lIusing the
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
19
20
1I
I almost
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
Have you ever been
08/01/2009 21:10 FAX
14]030
180
1
listed in the Third Department?
MR.
:3
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
ARE'1'AKIS:
'Excuse me?
Have you ever been
listed in the Third Department?

MR. ARETAKIS:"
I graduated from
Albany Law in 185, and I briefly worked in
Albany in 1987 for less than one year.
then in 1988,
Manhattan, where I've been.
I moved my entire practice to
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON;
10
And
On your
do you register your Manhattan
11
registration,
12
address?
13
MR.
14
address.
15
in Manhattan,
16
jury service a few years ago in Manhattan.
17
18
ARETAKIS:
I
Only my Manhattan
pay taxes in Manhattan,
vote
I've done a month of grand
did civil jury
se~vice
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
in Manhattan.
I'd like to cut to
19
the chase.
20
them -- what is your basis for the Third
21
D~partment
22
Then what is your basis for
having jurisdiction
MR. ARETAKIS:
They don't have any
23
basis.
They've broken the law.
They've
24
violated their own brochure that they hand
08/01/2009 21:10 FAX
14]031
181
1
out at the Court of Appeals.
will investisate lawyers who have an office
for the practice of
of the Third Department in Albany.
l~w
They say,
We
in the jurisdiction
And I think Mr. Gold and Mr.
Friedberg
might be excellent witnesses on my behalf,
becAuse they were talking about lawyers- who
are outside of their jurisdiction who they
will not investigate.
10
I will also tell you this,
Your Honor.
11
Of those 50 complaints -- and I need to say
12
this very,
13
lawyers know that the. ones we owe our
14
ethical duties to are our clients.
15.
those 50 complaints are from clients.
16
It's overwhelming.
17
very carefully,
because we
None of
None.
Mr. Oche wakes up and reads the
18
newspaper at various
19
he likes to track my career and he likes to
20
follow me because I've been engaged in a
21
very controversial area,
22
investigation against me.
.23
20 sua sponte investigations and then,
24
sometimes because I am involved in removing
pa~ts
of the state,
and
and helll start an

He's started over
08/01/2009 21:10 FAX
141032
182
pedophiles from their job,
these pedophiles
file complaints against me,
takes it upon himself to investigate them.
and Mr.
Ochs
One time I was on a nationally
4
5
syndic~ted
employer for employing a pedophile,
woman who I'd never even heard of filed
complaint against me,
defend myself from the Third Department for
10
radio show criticizing an
and
was
and a
force~
t9
about a year.
So out of those 50
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
11
12
complaints, what happened to those
13
complaints?
MR. ARETAKIS:
14
Well,
15
first 49 were dismissed,
16
been.
49 of them,
the
as they should have
on December 11 of '08, six months ago,
17
18
Mr. Oehs merged some decisions on New 'York
19
City cases from 2005,
20
asked the Appellate Division up here in
21
Albany to suspend me.
22
for one year.
23
CHAIRMAN
24
on.
2006,
and 2007 and
And I was suspended
And as God is my witness -S~MPSON:
wait,
wait.
You were suspended for one year.
Hold
8/01/2009 21:11 FAX
141 033
183
MR. ARETAKIS;
1
2
By the Third
Department up here in Albany.
3
4
Yes.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON;
And why were you
suspended?
MR. ARETAKIS;
They suspended me for
conduct that is prejudicial to the
administration of justice -- I
what that means --
conduct unbecoming of an attorney
~hey
don't know
suspended me for
I
donlt
10
know what that means -- and they suspended
11
me primarily for making what they termed
12
rather aggressive motions for recuSals of
13
various judges.
r' have been forced to be very critical
14
15
of some judges because the work live bs@n
16
employed to do on behalf of 250 victims is
17.
-- I
18
employ some bad priests.
19
critical,
20
work.
21
of law.
22
for filing a frivolous lawsuit because a
23
client might have been molested 30 years
24
ago.
sue the Catholic Church because they

live been very
I've been very pUblic with my
It's been a very controversial area
And some jUdges have sanctioned.me
08/01/2009 21:11 FAX
141034
184
1
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
:2
have,
filing a frivolous lawsuit?
I guess,
How many times
judges admonished you for
MR. ARETAKIS:
Four times.
They
merged the four decisions; two cases were
exclusively New York City cases,
cases were from elsewhere.
8
9
However,
and two
Ethical Consideration 7.4 says
a lawyer may file a frivolous lawsuit if you
10
believe the law should be modified,
11
or extended,
12
to believe that if in 1975 a priest abused a
13
lO-year-old altar boy that they should be
14
able to sue right now.
15
laws that are pending right now before
16
~arious
1'7
or the law is wrong.
changed
I happen
I believe there are
committees that may modify the law.
And 1 1 m not here to speak on that issue
18
at this time,
I'm just saying that because I
19
have taken some controversial stances and my
20
matters have been extraordinarily made
21
pUblic allover the entire country,
22
been the subject of front-page articles in
23
the New York Times,
24
vanity Fair,
I've
the New York Post,
in the village Voice,
in
all kinds
I4J 035
l85
of publications.
Mr.
Oche wakes up and he
sees a complaint made by the church about my
aggressive tactics,
sponte complaint.
and he files a sua
And he sits back there, .and I cherish
the thought that he can come up here and
answer some of your questions or privately
find some answers to these questions.

They have a rule that says you need
10
seven members of the committee to vote for a
11
punishment,
12
and
13
admonished me with four members.
14
the four members was an attorney that I had
15
a pending aggressively hostile,
16
case with.
17
interest.
18
that's a quorum.
suspen~ed
And they acted
me and punished me and

And one of
adversarial
It's a clear conflict of
But what you have is you have the
19
Appellate Division that employs the
20
Committee on professional Standards, and
21
they rubber-stamp all their decisions.
22
I've looked at hundreds -- I don't want to
23
say thousands.
24
disciplinary matters are five-nothing.
And
All the decisions regarding
So
08/01/2009 21:12 FAX

@036
186
the attorney who's been disciplined has no
right to automatically to the Court of
:3
Appeals.
on.
You have nothing to hang your hat
I also would like to say this.
AS far
as procedural due process,
their rules in a plethora of ways.
not once on any of these 50 complaints have
r been allowed to give testimony.
10
fact,
However,
Matter of
they have started six new --
11
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
12
" of the 50, you won 49.

MR. ARETAKIS:
13
they violated
But you won -- out
Well,
thatlS right.
14
But I've asked to be allowed my
15
to give testimony,
16
disbarring me,
17
Because I
opportuni~y
especially when they were
when they were suspending me.

filed a l"awsuit against them
18
two months before they suspended me because
19
r was so positive that I knew the lay of the
20
land,
21
only a matter of course.
22
complaining to them and to the chief judges
23
for a number of years that they pursue me
24
willy-nilly, aggressively for no other
they were going to suspend me.
It was
I've been
01/2009 21:12 FAX
14J037
187
1
reason other than they do not like the
pOlitical position lIve taken adverse to the
Catholic Church.
And I may say this publicly,
However,
I love the
there are some
catholic Church.
bad people that have gotten into the
Catholic Church
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
MR. ARETAKIS:
10
However/ being
no,
no
and i t ' s not a
problem or a vendetta
11
No,
have.
G~eek
Orthodox and being
12
from Brooklyn and Manhattan,
think they've
13
taken upon themselves to say you don't come
14
to Albany like that,
15
like that:
16
courtroom,
Mr. Aretakis,
and act
The law is determined in our

with our standards.
And because a judge sanctions me or
17
18
admonishes me,
then Mr. Ochs thinks he has
19
unfettered authority to punish me.
20
spend hundreds of thousands of dollars of my
21
o~n
22
defend myself from all of these frivolous
23
ethical complaints that have come against
24
me.
And Ilve
time and my own attorneys in helping
These committees are prosecutors --.
08/01/2009 21:12 FAX

141038
188
1
2
so to sum i t up,
recommendations?
so, Mr. Aretakis,
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
what's your
MR. ARETAKIS:
Well,
would love
nothing more than either this committee take
it upon themselves or hand it off to the
State Commission on Investigations or to the
Inspector General's Office to take this
matter,
my matter and investigate it.
10
they do investigate it,
11
rotten from the core.
12
However,
If
you'll find it's
I would also ask in the
13
meantime,
14
ability to earn any type of living for my
l;i
family,
16
here in the Third Department has pending be
17
transferred to the First Department.
18
committed such egregious actions so as to be
19
an unethical lawyer who's not trustworthy,
20
what's wrong with these fine attorneys from
21
the First Department investigating me?
22
since they pave taken away my
that everything that Mr. Ochs up
If
The reason is they've gotten a few
23
dozen complaints against me as well,
and
24
what they've done is they wrinkle them up
08101/2009 21:13 FAX
141039
18~
and they throw them in the wastebasket,
because these are not clients of mine.
they've sent me one letter in
seven years that I've been engaged in clergy
abuse
complaint."
~aying
20
So
years --
in
"Please respond to this

And that was dismissed as well.
So there's no problems that I have --
and I also would like to just finish
this.
~it~
It's my understanding that 99.9
10
percent of all attorneys are suspended or
11
disbarred for stealing money,
12
funds,
13
or being charged in another jurisdiction
14
with a crime of moral turpitude and
15
therefore being given comity and being
16
suspended in this jurisdiction.
neglecting a case,
commingling
getting
arre~ted,
My crime is without precedent, making
17
18
accusations and allegations in court papers
19
against various jUdges and having frivolous
20
lawsuits -- if you look at this,
21
awful record, and I've again only touched
22
th~
23
24
there1s an
tip of the iceberg.

I appreciate the time you've given me.
101/2009 21:13 FAX
I4J 040
190
1
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
thank you very much,
look into it.
5
6
and we will definitely
MR. ARETAKIS;
Mr. Aretakis,
Thank you.
(Recording ends and resumes during

testimony of Michael Kelly.)
MR.
KELLY:
-- judge assigned to my
case.
And for the last three years,
because
I am trying to uncover forgeries outside of
10
Rockland County that
11
out of the Surrogate Court using deceased
12
peoplels names,
13
judges and district attorney's office in
14
Rockland County.
15
believe are coming
I am being targeted by the
The gentleman, Gary Casella,
says that
16
my complaint of my former defense attorney
17
being promoted to the district. attorney's
18
office in the middle of my case now being
19
district attorney,
20
attorney in the Rockland county District
21
Attorney's Office
22
he swore the oath of office,
23
defense attorney on my criminal matter in
24
the same court he is sworn to be a
a senior district
for four months after

he acted as my
08/01/2009 21:13 FAX
141041
191
prosecutor with.
I have a sworn oath of office in that
I have forgeries with naming a
package,
person, named forgeries out of Rockland
county with a handwriting analysis expert's
opinion on there on who forged those
documents.
There's more in that.
My daughter,
they kept me away from my
daughter with illegal court orders saying I
10
can't see my 17-year-old daughter where she
11
wrote letters to the court asking the judge
12
for unrestricted visitation with her
13
The judge ignored those.

I am being retaliated against in
14
15
Rockland County.
16
me,
17
harassment,
18
policeman,
19
fine.
20
The only thing on the docket
21
22
fath~r.
They recently incarcerated
as a first-time offender,
for
as a retired New York City

for 14 days in jail with a $250
No docket of that decision and order.

i~
that I paid
fine and I paid restitution.

Everything in Rockland County, when it
23
comes my case in that package,
24
fraudulent in nature,
sir,
is
to cover up for the
I4J 042
1~2
crimes that the lawyers and jUdges in that
county have committed.
retaliated against.
look at that package and hear what I'm
saying, you will find that it 1 s undisputable
evidence.
litigation in Rockland county Court with no
docket.
Like
And I'm being
And if somebody would
told you,
a three-year
I'm in a court right now
fo~
criminal
10
charges going back three years ago.
11
grand jury, no
12
for three years later they reduced the
13
charge to harassment and want to send me to
14
jail -- right on the brink of me coming to
15
this hearing because they want to stop me
16
from coming here.
indi~tment,
No
no anything.
well,
I mean,
And
I'm
17
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
18
glad you made it here,
19
that we go through this and get a response
20
back to you very quickly.

MR.
21
KELLY:
and I will make sure
I appreciate it.
And all
22
the committee letters where I'm -- they're
23
all
24
no problems.
rubber~stampB:
We see nothing,
we see
They always have like a catch
8/01/2009 21:14 FAX
141043
193
phrase:
jurisdiction, at cetera,
Your complaint doesn't fall in our
But based on -- following those
complaints is fact,
verify.
happening now.
people.
a
9
10
11
12
13
et cetera.
sir,
that you can
And there is corruption, and it's

And you can catch these
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
much, Mr. Kelly.
Illl
Thank you very
make sure we
definitely follow it up.
Thank you.
The next witness is Kathryn Grace
Jordan,
MS.
of New York.
JORDAN:
Good afternoon,
14
Honor.
15
Commission on Judicial conduct.
16
By way of background,
Your
I'm here to talk about the
though,
I do want
~f
17
to identify myself as the president
END,
18
End niscrimination Now,
19
I started in 2008 after i t became apparent
20
to me that our nation's and state's
21
antidiscrimination laws are not being
22
enforced by the judiciary and that many
23
activist jUdges are actually rewriting the
24
laws on a regular basis.
an organization that
141 044
194
I myself endured a 13-year litigation
1
2
on a disability discrimination case.
Ten
years of that litigation resulted in a jury
verdict in my favor which was reversed by
the First Department under Jonathan Lippman.

I believe I have stepped back --
6
7
because my training is as a management
consultant and Fortune 100 executive,
have done a thorough analysis of all the
and I
10
information that's available,
11
Tembeckjian's 2009 annual report and all the
12
data that's in it.

CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
13
14
including Mr.
What's your
analysis?
MS. JORDAN:
15
16
this.
17
proud of.
I will tell you
I don't think there's anything to be
First of all,
18
Well,
jUdicial misconduct is
19
up.
20
second here,
21
the page.
22
things are very bad when you have to refer
23
to 30 years worth of work and 69,000
24
complaints over 30 years.
And he talks about managing -- just one

one second.
I've got to flip
He talks about you know that
what he didn't
I4J 045
lSJS
focus on was the 1,923 new complaints that
:2
are up 12 percent from last year,
part of the evidence
rules of judicial conduct are not being
enforced,
appellate level,
complaints, because jUdges, as I
are not enforcing the laws.
jUdicial misconduct commission is not doing
10
their job in terms of reviewing the conduct
11
of these judges.
~hat
which is
shows that the
either in district court or at the

despite the increase in
just said,
And the
12
And they talked about the fact that
13
they have 22 commission attorneys and 12
14
commission members and the, fact that you
15.
gave them extra money -- I don't know what
16
they've been doing with it, but obviously
17
they haven't been doing it to thoroughly
18
review complaints and to make sure that
19
these jUdges are held accountable.
20
One of the most astounding statistics
21
is that there were 40 complaints against
22
appellate jUdges, and zero were
23
investigated.
24
If you take Mr.
Tembeckjian at
~is
I4J 046
196
word,
bang-up job and we have a bunch of
delusional litigants who are just populating
the system with meritless complaints.
dontt
what's going on is that we have a crisis of
leadership in the judiciary, and a culture of
corruption and cover-ups.
that the Commission on Judicial Conduct is
10
11
at its face value,
~elieve
they're doing a
that 1 s the case.
And.r
think
b~li~ve
part of that.
Mr. Tembeckjian,
r wanted to ask a
12
couple of questions to him when he was, in
13
the room before,
14
still have his cable television show where
15
he interviews judges and lawyers -- because
16
that's kind of a conflict of interest with
17
your current position -- and how he goes
18
about conducting investigations.
19
myself have filed s~veral complaints with
20
the jUdicial conduct commission, very,
21
meritorious' complaints where jUdges
22
expressly violated, either through ex parte
:23
conduct,
24
one of which is does he
Bec~use
acting -- making -- attacking
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
very
-~
Those complaints
101/2009 21:15 FAX
141 047
197
1
were dismissed and never followed up with?

MS. JORDAN:
They were dismissed
almost like within a month,
months,
a eouple of
no explanation.
The process is not transparent.
all secretive.
appeals,
benefit of the jUdges.
opinion,
It 1 s
And as far as appeals,
as he's just admitted,

It is
the
are for the
~-
in my
the jUdicial commission on
10
misconduct has numerous problems.
I'm going
11
to list them very quickly.
12
transpa~ency,
13
composition of the actualcommission itself.
LaCk of
conflicts of interest,
the
14
The investigators, who actually,
15
paper, many of which have -- seem to have
16
good qualifications,
17
an interesting question, which. is why can't
18
they resolve these investigations positively
19
and in a timely manner.
20
the complainant,
22
going on.
24
which kind of creates
There's actually no interaction with
21
23
on
so you have no idea whatts
The priorities seem to be on routing

the town and village errant judges while
08/01/2009 21:16 FAX
141048
1~8
letting the big fish swim away.

I don't know how they handle evidenc@j
know there's a huge issue about evidence
handling that has been spoken about by a
number of people in this room,
serious.
will know the lack of integrity that exists
in terms of files.
take a file out,
If you go to 60 Centre Street,
and therels nothing that
can be done about it.
11
proof, nothing.
12
files need to be digitized.
13
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
15
16
17
summing it up,
MS.
mean,
there's no
What has to happen is the
Ms.
JORDAN:
So basically
Jordan,
Yes.
just want to --
live talked faster
than anybody up here.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
That's correct.
18
And that's why -- because you seem to be
;1..9
very specific in what you want.

JORDAN:
Right.
20
.MS.
21
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON;
22
looking for,
23
changes that you
24
MS.
you
Anybody could' walk in,
10
14
and itls very
That's what Ilm
the recommendations,
JORDAN;
Yes.
the
think that a
08/01/2009 21:16 FAX
141049
199
task force should be formed to review
whether or not the Commission on JUdicial
Conduct is an effective body and
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
force,
Of this task force?
When you say task
who do you think should be comprised
MS.
JORDAN:
I am not going to make
specific recommendations here,
because I don't have enough time to do that.
10
11
Your Honor,
But I will get back to you with that.

I do believe,
though,
that we need a
12
multi-stak~holder
13
whether or not the Commission on JUdicial
14
Conduct is doing its job.
15
what kind of entity might replace it.
16
Because we definitely need to monitor the
17
judges and make sure that they are enforcing
18
the laws,
19
not doing it at the moment.
20
21
task force to investigdte
if i t ' s not,
because it appears that they're
CHAIRMAN
SAM~SON;
Ms.
Jordan,
thank
you very much.
22
MS.
23
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
24
And
JORDAN:
Thank you.
The next witness
is James -- how do you pronounce your last
141 050
08/01/2009 21:16 FAX
200
1
name, James?
MR. MONTAGNINO:
Montag-neeno,
Senator.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
Montagnino.
I object -- I
object, because I have personal knowledge of
his personal activities.

CHAIRM~N
8
9
10
SAMPSON:
objection right here.

Mr.
There's no
We1re going to let
Montagnino make his comments.

And if you have comments to make,
11
12
you',re on the list,
13
your oomments.
14
this is over and then we can follow up.
15
Okay?
17
Or you can talk to me after
Thank you.
Thank
you very much.

Thank you very
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
18
19
then we can listen to
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
16
if
much.
Go ahead.
20
MR. MONTAGNINO:
21
Thank you,
Senator.
just want to begin by saying that I
22
don't have an ax to grind,
1 1 m not here with
23
a specific gripe about anything in
24
particular with regard to myself.
l{&J UUl
08/02/2009 19:12 FAX
201
On a personal level,
I've been an
employee of the Unified Court System since
1995,
for the last 10 years.
legal career in the Bronx District
Attorney's Office.
the
Aid lawyer in Westchester.
law clerk to a county judge for five years
10
11
live been a court attorney/referee
started out in my
was a prosecutor in
Westchester DAI s office.
I
!
was a Legal
was principal
in Westchester.
The last three years,
I've been
12
attorney/referee here in the Capital
13
District.
And I
court
love my job.
14
And one thing I've learned in years in
15
the jUdiciary is that with every decision a
16
judge makes,
17
friend and one
18
something that really has to be considered
19
when weighing the probative value of
20
complaints that are made against judges over
21
the course of the years.
22
that jUdge makes one temporary

perm~nent
enemy.
And this is
can say with pride that my experience
23
in the capital District,
24
District,
the Third Judicial
has been wonderful over the last
08/02/2009 19:12 FAX
141002
202
1
three years,
I'm assigned to the chambers of various
judges on a rotating basis.
i've worked
with Supreme Court justices,
Court of Claims
judges, county judges, a Family Cotirt judge,
some City Court judges.
around the Third District.
8
9
And I
As a court attorney/referee
l've been all
can say cat.egorically that the
judges of this district do their jobs to the
10
best of their ability,
they are hardworking,
11
they are ethical people.
12
reasons,
one of the big reasons for that is
13
that the
administrati~e
14
district, George Ceresia,
15
highest moral and ethical caliber,
16
sets the tone for the way business is
17
conducted in this district.
18
Having said that,
And one of the
judge for this

is a man of the
And he
I'm here because in
19
the seven years that I worked as a court
20
attorney/referee assigned to the matrimonial
21
part in Westchester County,
22
condition did not apply to Westchester.
23
That for years in Westchester It
24
assigned to matrimonial cases,
that same
having been
saw on a
08/02/2009 19:12 FAX
141003
203
regular basis that the district
administrative judge entertained ex parte
c0mmunications from well-connected attorneys
and well-connected litigants, and those ex
parte 90mmunications often resulted in
transfers of cases from one judge to
another -- in one case,
decision that a jUdge had
sent out to the parties,
10
11
the change of a
~lready sig~ed.and
based upon ex parte
communications.
I
saw this for years and finally
12
decided that 1 had to take action,
13
brought an internal complaint to the various
14
chief administrative jUdges of the Office of
15
Court Administration, and the result of that
16
was retaliation against me.
17
by the target
18
Judge.
19
~-
and I
Not by OCA,
but
by the administrative
I'm going to cut through some of the
20
details and get to the point,
21
here today,
22
understand the Commission on Judicial
23
Conduct taking a jaundiced eye looking at a
24
complaint brought by a litigant who lost a
Senator.
what brings me
I can certainly
8/02/2009 19:13 FAX
I4J 004
204
case in court.
filed a complaint ultimately with the
commission on Judicial Conduct that was
detailed.
gave dates.
of dumpsters, dumpsters of court records
that were ordered destroyed.
files by law must be retained permanently.
They were destroyed.
10
In Westchester County,
It named names,
it gave cases,
it
Attached to it were photographs
Matrimonial
It would have been one thing i f I
11
been the only complainant,
12
retired acting justice of the Supreme Court,
13
Fred L. Shapiro,
14
the commission on Judicial Conduct against
15
the same administrative jUdge,
16
Nicolai,
17.
-- naming names,
18
information that he had personally obtained.
19
Senator.
had
But a
sent his own complaint to
Judge Francis
alleging the same kinds of abuses

giving dates,. giving
And it wasn1t just the two of us,
20
Senator.
There was a third individual,
21
principal law clerk to a Supreme Court
22
justice in the Ninth Judicial District,
23
Barry Skwiersky,
24
the Commission on Judicial Conduct,
the
sent his own complaint to

with his
08/02/2009 19:13 FAX
141005
.205
information on routine,
patterns of misconduct whereby Judge Nicolai
would steer cases.
regular,
consistent
When a lawyer who had the right
connections didn't like the way his
6"
matrimonial case was being handled,
go to Judge Nicolai --
opposing counsel having any idea of it
explain the fact that he had a problem with
without,
he could
of course,
10
the judge who was assigned to the case,
11
10 and behold,
12
to a more sympathetic judge.
13
and
the. case would be reassigned
There were written complaints.
A law
who was involved in a child custody
14
gua~dian
15
proceeding where the judicial hearing
16-
officer who was presiding over that case
17
ordered that the father have the right to
1B
see his children,
19
supervised conditions to protect everybody'S
20
safety.
21
JUdge Nicolai,
22
jUdicial hearing officer to change his
23
decision.
24
about it.
and made it so under
That litigant went ex parte to

and Judge Nicolai told that
He did that,
and then complained
U':I':UUl:l
l.l:l:l.J t'A.A.
141 006
206
The law guardian,
the attorney for the
children in that case,
herself to Judge Nicolai and said to him:
You can't do this,
the worst of ex parte communications.
what did that law guardian get for her
troubles?
B'
Judge Nicolai he forwarded on to the woman
who was in charge of the law guardian panel
wrote a leLser
this is improper,
this is
And
That letter that was sent to
10
with a cover letter saying IIFor whatever
11
action you deem
12
~he
app~opriate.t1
bottom line,
Senator,
is that
13
without a hearing,
without an investigation,
14
without any contact with any of the three
15
members of the court system and retired
16
member of the court system who brought the
17
complaints -- no contact with US
18
documents subpoenaed,
19
requested,
20
testimony taken,
21
-- the Commission on Judicial Conduct in one
22
sentence dismissed all three
23
against JUdge Nicolai,
24
of the matter.
no
no documents
no information requested,
no
no witnesses put under oath
complai~ts
and that was the end
With nO accountability,
no
08/02/2009 19:14 FAX
I4J 007
207
explanation, no transparency.
And so I
think,:Sen~tor,
that at the
very least Mr. Tembeckjian himself mentioned
it this morning,
after year in their annual report themselves
asked for it, open up the proceedings to the
public.
dre public officials.
trust.
and the 'commission has year
Why should this be secret?
Judges
They have a public
Many of our jUdges are elected
10
officials.
The public has a right to know
11
how complaints against jUdges are handled.

Ilm sensitive to the
12
concerns that many
13
judges have,
14
are either appointed or elected officials,
15
that abuses can occur,
16
complaints can be lodged for purposes of
17
political gain or,
18
often,
19
Mr. Tembeckjian will confirm -- most of the
20
complaints come from litigants who simply
21
lost.
22
because of the fact that they
that frivolous
as happens very,
very
most of the complaints -- I'm sure
I know from personal experience,
having
23
presided over contested matrimonial cases
24
for seven years,
every day of the week,
8/0212009 19:14 FAX
I4J 008
208
Monday to Friday, you know,
Senator,
ruling that says this parent will have
custody of the child and tte other parent
will not,
who loses goes home and says,
an unfit parent and that's why
That:s not the way it works;
it's human
you can imagine,

If I make a
na~ure.
how often do you think the parent

well,
I
lIm just
lost?
we know that.
So it's so common, particularly in
10
family cases/
11
cases,
12
will try to blame someone:
13
fault,
14
the judge's fault,. the judge did something
15
wrong.
16
so.
17
custody cases and matrimonial
the litigant who loses frequently

Itts my lawyer's
my lawyer did something wrong;
Most of the time we know
The problem is,
though/
it's
that~s
not
when you have
18
in with those thousands of complaints that
19
get dismissed without investigation where
20
you have a complaint that wasn't brought by
21
a .disgruntled litigant or a disgruntled
22
former employee, but brought by three people
23
on the inside of the court system who give
24
information with dates and names and places
08/02/2009 19:14 FAX
I4J 009
209
and photographs and copies of documents and
it's just tossed aside.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
But my question to
you is I'm assuming there was some sort of
retaliation because of these allegations
that you made;
correct?
Yes.
MR. MONTAGNINO:
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
10
And that resulted
into negative evaluations; is that correct?

No,
MR. MONTAGNINO:
Senator.
I've
11
never had a negative evaluation.
1;2
what happened,
13
question -- r didn't want to get into
14
personal things,
15
Judge Nicolai essentially opened his file of
16
every complaint that any litigant who wasn't
17
happy with the resuLt of their matrimonial
18
cases had with me.
19
the Inspector General for the Unified Court
20
System.
21
In fact,
since you asked the
but I'm glad to do that
And he gave that over
r went through about a month and a half
22
of hell having to answer for every decision
23
that anybody had a question about it:
24
did you rule this way?
Why did you say
Why
08/02/2009 19:15 FAX
141010
210
Did you say this?
this?
this
litigant~
litigant~
MR. MONTAGNINO:
e~d
Thatts a form of
Yeah.
And at the
of all that, at the end of all that -CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
8
9
I had to answer --
retaliation.
6
7
Did you not talk to this
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
Did you talk to
At the end, what
happened?
MR. MONTAGNINO:
10
At the end,
the head
11
of human relations said to me orally -- I
12
got nothing in writing --
13
you to know there
14
findings against you.
1?
file
16
personnel file,
17
reflect the fact that an investigation had
18
ever been taken against. you.
I. - -
ha~e
said,
III
want
been no negative
And your personnel
she gave me a full copy of the

she said,
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
19
sh~
I'it
will not even
II
And I
think being
20
that no -- if you have complaints of
21
individuals on the inside, you would
22
probably want to look at that a little bit
23
closer because of the positions that you
24
have.
08/02/2009 19:15 FAX

I41011
211
MR. MONTAGNINO:
new~~att~ched.
little bad
transferred.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
4
5
But there was a
transf~rred
got
You got
up to what?
I was ordered
Well,
MR. MONTAGNINO:
transferred to Bronx county.
a r r a;l gem e n t .
transferred where we have our second home,
s a"i d ,
II
L0
k' /
And
I
made an
d rat her 1;> e
10
up in Saratoga springs,
we love upstate'New
11
York.
12
voluntary.
13
then I'd consider that a retaliatory
14
employment act under the Whistleblower Law.
15
And,
16
would be something else.
If you can do that,
you know,
where it would go from there
18
accommodated the "request.
19
voluntarily
transf~rred
20
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
21
Yeah/
23
24
elsewh~re,
If I'm foroed to go
And they were kind enough,
17
22
it will be
they
And so r
up here.
Okay.
I got five minutes/
know,
know.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
lid like to know
what happened to my transcript where you --
II
8/02/2009 19:15 FAX
141 012
212
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
don't have
have the floor.
We're trying to be
Hello,
~ourteous
You don't
hello.
here.
I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
I'm
You don't have the
floor.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
10
Hello.
you
sorry.
excuse me.
--
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
5
6
--.th1~
Gentlemen,
children
my wife and my
--
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
11
Mr.
Montagnino,
12
thank you very much for your testimony here
13
today.
14
MR.
15
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
Thank you,
MONTAGNINO:
And if I
Senator.
could
16
just have a two-minute break,
17.
a quick phone call.
18
We're going to have the next witness -- I
19
guess the next witness could come upr Ruth
20
Pollack.
have to make
Two-minute break.
If I could just have a two-minute
21
22
break, make a phone ca11,
23
back.
24
and I ' l l be right
(Brief recess taken.)
08/02/2009 19:15 FAX
141013
213
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
1
2
get t ing ready. to
Ruth Pollack,
3
4
we1re
All right,
tart.
Ms.
Pollack,
go right
ahead.
MS. POLLACK:
Good afternoon,
6"
Senator, and thank you very much.
is Ruth
east end Of Long Island -- Riverhead,
York.
I'm an attorney in the
practiced 26,
I
10
Polla~k.
My name
New
going on 27 years.
love my career, and I have had a
11
wonderful career . . live practiced in just
12
about every court that you can practice in.
13
live tried cases in Surrogate's Court and
14
took a verdict at 2 o'clock in the morning
15
and won.
16
federal courts and agencies,
17
former prosecutor for the Nassau
18
26,
19
haven't seen and done.
20
part I love what I do,
21
any new attorney or judge that I meet.
22
I have been in the state and
27 years ago.
and I'm a
DA
about
There's not much I
I'm here today,
And for the most

and I
look forward to
however,
because of the
23
breakdown of the system and my brief
24
suggestions for what
think
as a member of
V":/":VVl:l .1l:l:.1t1
rAA
141014
214
the brothers and sisters in law in the
trenches, we
do to fix it.
c~~
T got ovarian cancer in June of 2003.
went through the full monty,
and
survived that.
even though I still suffer from lymphodema
in both my legs.
pounds of extra fluid in-my legs every day,
so lim partially physically disabled.
I'm now considered cured,
That means I carry 60
10
of course, as a survivor,
11
sympathy, we just
12
some accommodation.
13
here and happy to be alive.
14
But
w~nt
And
we donlt seek
understanding and
1
m just happy to be
tried a case in Eastern District
15
federal court against the US government,
16
many of my cases,
17
up against some big-league people.
18
against the federal government,
19
against banking institutions, many school
20
districts and so forth.
21
case involving a school district on Long
22
Island right now.
23
controversial, and lim not afraid to go
24
after anyone,
despite my 8tature,
My
and
go
I go up
live gone up
I have an asbestos
c~ses
are
including an attorney,
if the
08/0212009 19:16 FAX
141015
215
attorney is doing something that is
improper.
3
4
so to speak,
had against the federal government was,
partly on account of my disability,
dismissed in the middle of my direct
examination of
about eight to 10 witnesses at that point.
10
11
When I returned bACk into active duty,

as an attorney,
the case that I
I must have been through
And that was on June 5,
2007.
That led to a contempt hearing,
and
12
was held in contempt of court, and I l l l move
13
on from there.
14
The very next day I walked into an
15
ongoing Family Court case in Manhattan
16
Family Court,
17
representing a father and his infant son
18
or actually I
19
behalf of him and his son.
20
there many times before.
21
what I saw was tampering of witnesses by
2.2
Child Protective Services,
23
records,
24
and poorly run proceedings.
the Jubb case,
J-U-B-B,
represented the father on

And lid been
l'd objected to
the general poorly
tampering with
ru~
courtroom
08102/2009 19:16 FAX
141016
216
And at 9:30 in the morning,
in Family
Court at 60 Lafayette,
of
male court officer proceeded to come toward
me without provocation.
forward
able to sit down.
officers
when I
hearing before
and at the beginning
Judg~
Susan Knipps,
He placed me in a
in a front headlock before I'was
th~t
And the ten or so court
were already in the courtroom
walked in, of that group,
about five
10
of them came around me from behind and put
11
me in a full bodylock,
lifted me from the
12
floor,
crashed me against
13
the wall, and then threw me out into the
14
court lobby, physically, bodily.
15
dragged me out,
Everyone -- I have lay witnesses and I
16
have my client and other witnesses to this
17
oc currence.
18
judge and everyone,
19
I had done nothing.
20
the courtroom now," when 1 had simply said
21
to the court officer:
22
witnesses,
23
that's all I said.
24
Everyon.e in the courtroom I
denied that it happened.

The judge said,
III
"Clear
have two
they're not testifying."
As a result,
the
And
I suffered tremendous
I4J 017
217
I never
posttraumatic stress syndrome.
walked into a courtroom again feeling the
same safety and
years.
secur~ty
that
had for 26
I filed a case against the State of
5
6
New York which is pending with the Attorney
General's office.
hoping that the Attorney General will
investigate this.
I had hoped and I am
But then it continued.
10
Because
11
thereafter,
on September 28th of 2007,
12
I went back to that court to the financial
13
judicial hearing
14
portion of the case,
1;;
by the
16
desk against the wall and told me to get up,
17
and my client,
and get out.
18
surrounded us,
but theydidn't touch us.
19
took the badge numbers as well.
20
more internal terrorism,
offi~er
when
for the monetary
the record was shut off
JHO and the court officers slammed my
And they
I
So it was
so to speak.
I have never before been attacked by
21
22
anyone in my lifetime.
23
more of a message of some sort;
24
what.
So this was,
aSain,
I'm not sure
08/02/2009 19:17 FAX
I4J 018
218
since that time,
~ff~cers
I've been menaced by
court
district court in Hempstead in a criminal
case,
because I do a lot of criminal defense
work,
and that has caused me great
consternation.
occurrence as well -- I have witnesses.
8
9
on behalf of two judges in
I've had witnesses to that
1 1 m here because while
could gb on
and on about my long career -- and my
10
curriculum vitae is up there for you and for
11
the panel -- the system is breaking down.
12
We need to fix it.
13
You know,
14
Second World War,
15
today.
16
foremothers and forefathers that we l re here
17
tpday able to speak out about how we feel
18
about this country and our state.
19
It's worthy of that.
my father was a top gun in the

and I
still have him
And it's because of him and our
And 1 1 m here to be part of the
20
solution,
21
will do everything that I
22
the solution,
23
need of huge help.
24
not part of the problem.
And
can to be part of
which is a huge,
huge -- in
I personally am now -- Ilve been
8/02/2009 19:17 FAX
I4J 019
219
suspended for two years.
started out
:2
with's. 45-day suspension with a threat of
six months
45 days af suspension in the Eastern
District of New York because I disagreed
with a
court due to my legs.
courthouses in the Eastern District l
51
of which are
It
incarceration.
And
served my
judge and because I missed a day of

I went to two federal
ADA~compliant.
neither
I have
10
complained about it; nothing's been done.
11
So that my disabled clients -- who are also
12
whistleblowers
13
parking to get to those courthouses.
14
and I have difficulty
1 1 m moving rather rapidly because I
15
just want to hit on certain points that I
16
think people should know.
17
Since that time,
I have had -- since
18
the federal suspension which I
19
advised rather cryptically that they thought
20
that I had violated my 45-day suspension by
21
using my former law partner to
22
cases for me,
23
just sent me a letter saying,
24
responded in 20 days,
one case for me.
served,
cove~
I was
my
And so they
You haven1t
so we're going to
08/0212009 19:18 FAX
141 020
220
suspend you for two years now.
CH~IRMAN
MS.
Who is this?
SAMPSON:
POLLACK:
~hat
Only in Eastern
District.
that there is an Eastern District of New
York grievance committee,
seen any
10
They claim
have never
thing.
So you were
suspended from practicing in the Eastern

District?
MS.
11
POLLACK:
12
years.
13
are.
14
audience today,
15
but I
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
.8
9
su~h
was Judge Cogan.
Only.
For two more
That's where almost all of my cases

One of my clients is here in the
Again,
Mr. Kevin Chesney.
that was to put me out of
16-
business.
17
own appointed attorney told me to give up
18
all my cases in the Eastern District,
19
to urine tests or else I
20
And that would be the best thing,
21
she could do.
22
mentally ill,
23
24
That was to get rid of me.
My
submit
would go to jail.
you know,
She accused me of being

something I
am
clearl~
not.
So I was essentially put in a position

where they were going to have me suspended
I4J 021
221
to get me out of the Eastern District come
hell
today,
And that is a fight for another day.
O~
high water.
And that's where I am
fighting all the way to come back.
But the point is that now the Eastern
District has sent paperwork behind the
scenes, without my knowing what it is,
the 10th Judicial District where I
and Rita Adler,
to
reside,
who is the chief counsel
10
there,
11
letter after letter,after letter,
12
day after ~ay,
13
which! was held in contempt in 2007,
14
that she thinks I'm a criminal and I should
15
be treated as a criminal and I
16
allowed to practice and we should do
17,
something about this woman
18
has bombarded me with letter after
CHAIRMAN
day after
relating to that case in
SAMFSON~
saying
shouldn't be
I mean,
when you
19
say -- she didn't write you a letter to that
20
extent.
21
22
23
24
MS. POLLACK:
She wrote a letter to
Mr. Pelzer to that effect.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
criminal.
Not calling you a
08/02/2009 19:18 FAX
141022
222
MS.
POLtACK:
"What she did was
criminal" essentially is what she says in
her letter.
Basically saying,
criminal,
actually citing to sections of the Penal
Law.
former prosecutor,
with the Penal Law.
10
And that's part of my packet.

yeah,
her actions are
they're -- you know,
quite strong,
And as a criminal defense attorney and

I'm very well acquainted
So part of her approach,
if we may look
11
at how rules are to be followed,
12
pretended,
13
she couldn't reach me or serve me.
14
is she
as did a member of the 10th,
that
So an investigator came to my home,
15
left a business card in my door
16
could have floated off into the atmosphere.
17
My 86-year-old father saw that,
18
slipped under the door.
19
which
saw orders
And one day when I walked into my
20
office in 2008,
I was met with an order that
21
was taped to my door with red masking tape
22
-- I'm holding it up now -- which 1 took a
23
picture of and blew up so that you
24
the door of my office.
~ould
Everybody in my
see
08/02/2009 19:19 FAX
141 023
223
1
2
3
office building saw this,

~red
my suite with this
masking tape -- I don't know where you
get it -- taped to my door.

So again,
these terror tactics or
whatever you want to call them have been
used to intimidate me and to make me go
away_
east end, but I do not go away.
always fought for the underdog my whole
I may just be a country girl from the
10
life.
11
kid.
12
everybody.
13
person is about,
15
I've seen injustices since I was a

And I do discriminate;
I
represent
don't care who or what the
Mr. Kelly,
14
I have
I represent them all.

in Rockland,
is my newest
client.
I'm a new kid on the
lIm an outsider.
16
I've seen wnat he has described.
17
block.
18
~s
19
my life of any kind l
20
other than one incident with the grievance
21
committee back in the late
22
matrimonial which was clearly a political
23
way of getting a easel
24
case involving the Manuses, Morton Manus,
a fact.
It
I have never had any problems in

criminal or otherwise,
'90s involving a
a very interesting
a
vo/v.::/.::vv~
.l~:.l~
YAA
141024
224
away from me when it was going
matrimonial,
rather well and given to another attorney.
And because I
and I was in the middle of a retaining lien
hearing,
me.
9th District that dido.lt know me at all.
that was my first foray into the 9th.
had charges brought up against
But my case was transferred to the
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
10
stood up for my retaining lien
sum it up,
MS.
11
Ms.
So
So if you want to
Pollack.
POLLACK:
Yeah.
My summary is
12
that the solution to these many things that
13
you've heard today,
14
many things that we1ve heard as a group
15
here,
16
transparency must look like this.
without my repeating the
is that we need transparency,
and the
We need transparency in terms of jUdges
17
18
and all public officials that serve in our
19
system and on these committees should
20
disclose what insurance companies insure
21
them,
22
their pensions or finances in through the
23
system, what banks are involved
24
disability insurance companies are involved
what financial
institution~
they have
what
08/02/2009 19:19 FAX
141025
225
-- because when live sued these various
cypes of companies,
there was a conflict of interest between
those people that I was working in front of
as
was a conflict of interest.
jUd~es
live never known if
or against as litigants,
if there
So I highly, highly support full
disclosure of any and all
things on the docket,
o~
those
ty~es
,of
including all
10
committee members on all of the committees
11
we've discussed today.
12
they're from,
13
what their trainings are.
14
of it,
15
Who are the people on the committee, where
16
did they come from,
who they are,
where
all of their affiliations,

X can't find any
and l've looked allover the place.
et cetera.
17
And I don't think I need to go on,
18
think it's a point that's been taken. '

CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
19
20
MS.
POLLACK:
And I
just wanted to
thank you sincerely for your time.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
23
24
Thank you very
much.
21
22
much,
MS.
Pollack.
Thank yOU very
102/2009 19:20 FAX
141026
226
The next witness is Lawrence Grey.
l
2
Mr. Grey,
bere.
hi~
He submitted
testimony.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
Ken Jewell, Esquire.
Mr. Grey is not
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER:
4
5
are you here?
here?
Okay,
great.
Mr. Jewell, you
Mr. Jewell is not here.

Kevin Patrick Brady?
10
MR. BRADY:
11
Senator,
Yes.
r want you to remember me as
12
being. the one guy who used the least time as
13
possible to tell you my story and will move
14
on.
I haven't heard yet today my kind of a
15
l6
case.
17 ,
prosecuted criminally three times,
18
incarcerated, prosecuted in
19
prosecutions twice,
20
courts had jurisdiction.
21
I am a nonlawyer,
Now,
I have been
quasi~criminal
and not one of these
the assistant attorney general
22
managed to shove through a money judgment
23
against me that's not valid.
24
been petitioning courts for the last six
And
have
08/02/2009 19:20 FAX
I4J 027
227
years to recognize that these judgments are
void,
showed proof every time that the judgments
were void.
one thing about it.
they must be taken off my
And no court,
r~cord.
to date,
has done
I'm talking about the Fourth
NOW,
Department,
I'm talking about the First
Department and the Third Department.
The
petitions and appellate briefs that I
filed
10
enunciated these issues perfectly.
11
not be mistaken.
12
dumped them.
13
or they read it just far enough to hear me
14
complaining about corruption in the courts.
15
and that's all they needed to know.
16
It
could
.I believe they all just
They didn't read the petition
I have been,
like I
told you,
17
petitioning courts -- live got in excess of
18
30 trying to get those two or three issues
19
across.
20
jurisdi~tion.
21
And three,
22
has absolutely no authority to be
23
prose~uting
me under jUdiciary law for his
24
own fraud.
In all of those actions,
one,
the courts never had

Two,
the jUdgments are void.
the assistant attorney' general
not one
I4J 028
228
single issue has been adjudicated.

So I have given proof,
it's all there,
I've put them on
that the system is
CDs,
corrupted far beyond what anyone can really
imagine.
look at my proof because it's prima facie'.
okay?
really encourage ,you to take a
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
8
9
do that,
10
MR.
11
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
12
much, Mr.
Brady.
BRADY:
I give you my word.

Thank you.
~rady.
Mr. Lanzisera.
MR.
15
LANZISBRA:
16
you go in the sUbway,
17
says
18
Thank you very
The next witness is Carl Lanzisera,
13
14
Mr.
We will definitely
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
How you doing.
When
you see a sign that
just want to let
19
everybody know,
about 2:45 we're going to
20
take a break for another 15 minutes and then
21
Irll be back.
22
session.
23
Mr.
Lanzisera?
24
MR.
LANZISERA:
just want to check into
Okay?
Yes.
Carl.
8102/2009 19:20 FAX
I4J 029
229
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
1
2
All right,
got another eight minutes.

MR.
LANZISERA:
you see a sign:
~ubway,
something,
airports,
something."
IIIf you see something,
Let's go ahead.
If you go in the
you see
IIIf
If you go in the
say something. II
n
we've
If you see something,
say
If you go to a marina,
they say
say something."
If you go in the courts and you see
10
something and you say something,
11
worst day of your life.
12
here with that same complaint.
that's the
And everybody is
The first two speakers, Martin and
13
14
Alan -- or Alan and Martin -- they really
15
should have a Broadway skit,
16
two jokers.
Either they don't have --
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
17
no,
Lanzisera,
no,
you
know,
19
it. but everybody's
20
Everybody here is afforded the courtesy and
21
respect.
22
is a public hearing to get to the issues
23
because we want solutions.

MR.
Lanzisera
Mr.
18
24
Mr.
because they're
I understand
listen to me,
please.
NO character assassinations.
LANZISERA;
Well,
This
I was arrested
08/02/2009 19:21 FAX
/4]030
230
1
2
3
4
for telling jokes,
so --
CHA!RMAN SAMPSON:
arrest you,
MR.
We donlt want to
all right.
LANZISERA:
They had a grand jury
hearing and I told lawyer jokes.

But I'm in the investment business'
45 years.
In the investment business,
you have a complaint,
the NASD,
you go to now FINRA or
it's called,
or the SEC.
Can you
10
imagine it the SEC or FINRA was run by
11
stockbrokers,
12
40 years,
13
probably get six months in jail.
14
if
what would happen after
50 years?
Bernie Madoff would
The legal profession is run by lawyers
15
for a hundred years.
16
grievance committee did when they were
17
assigned to uphold the Constitution of the
18
united states,
19
judicial immunity.
20
have jUdicial immunity.
21
to us.
22
anyone.
23
24
The first thing the
was to give themselves

Even you have
don't
You have to answer
But they don't have to answer to
In the securities business,
if you have
a complaint against a stockbroker,
you go to
I4J 031
231
the NASD for a few dollars and you have a
public hearing before three. panelists.
panel,
where they eat,
they have.
of the three panelists if there's the
slightest inkling.
their complete, history is listed

where they sleep,
what cases
And you a right to eliminate any
With the grievance committee,
no idea who the commission is and what
10
11
The hearings are all public.

findings are more than 60
13
cases the public gets. an award.
1~
16
17
18
you
ha~e
they 1 re doing.
12
14
The
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
The
per~ent
of the
Which proceeding
is this?
MR. LANZISERA:
In NASD or FINRA,
in
mandatory arbitration.
And if there's a finding against you,
19
it 1 s made public,
20
you operate in but throughout the world.
21
Thirty-five years ago l
22
that I
23
and I had to give someone $250.
24
years later,
not only in the state that
there was a finding
didn't bUy a stock at the best price

Thirty-five
if you look up my Social
08/02/2009 19:21 FAX
141 032
232
1
.2
Security number, you will see it on my

record.
If there's a finding against me and
they ever took my license away,
throughout the United States.

I~
the legal profession,
it would be
if there's a
finding in New York State,
the lawyer can go
to New Jersey, get his license over there
and practice law ih New York.
they can't follow the lawyer and his past'
They claim
10
history.
That's a bunch of malarkey.
11
That's why I made the original comments that
12
I made.
13
and age you can't follow someone with a
14
Social Security number throughout the world.
There's no reason in today's
15
The findings are public,
16
are pUblic, you face your accuser,
17
defend yourself,
16
say.
19
~ay
the hearings
you
you know exactly what they
As a result of' my personal history,
20
started a group, Americans for Legal Reform.
21
If you look at it,
22
live been doing this for more than 20 years.
23
In there you see a list of lawyers and
24
judges that we have found that do things
that's our newsletter.
/02/2009 19:22 FAX
141 033
233
that we feel are questionable.

We can't say what they do,
because your
senator friend to your left from syracuse,
one of his lawyer friends in Syracuse sued
me for libel by innuendo.
maybe three cases in the world of libel by
innuendo,
defending myself because I put his name on
that list and h@ felt he was damaged.
There's only
and I had to spend $100,000
They're so afraid of their reputation.
10
11
Why are they any different than a
12
stockbroker or
13
Consumer Affairs and there are 500
14
complaints against a plumber,
15
them all and evaluate whether they're
16
frivolous or real.
17.
account with a stockbroker, you should check
18
with FINRA and find out his history.
plumber?
If I go to
can look at
If you want to open an
But if you're a lawyer,
19
as Jack
20
Solowitz, my divorce attorney,
21
divorce attorneys,
22
people.
23
48th;
24
and so on.
one of my
stole millions from 49
The 49th didn't know about the
the 48th didn't know about the 47th,

Eventually he did go to jail.
U~!U~/~UU9
19:~~
I4J 034
FAX
234
And when he comes out of jail, he could have

been a lawyer again.
It'S all secret,
it's the only

It's a bunch of
profession it's a secret.
malarkey about their reputation.
lawyers as a group are considered the most
criminal group in America,
in life is less than a New York City taxicab
driver.
Th@
Their position
And they're trying to,
by secrecy,
It's a good-ale-boy
10
protect themselves.
11
brotherhood that
12
if it's not stopped by people like you,
13
public is not going to take it forever.
Ladies and gentlemen,

15~minute
17
about a
18
in session.
19
these hearings.
23
24
the
Lanzisera,
break;
I have to take
I have to register
And I ' l l be back to conclude

(Proceedings adjourned at 2:45
20
22
And
thank you very much for that comment.
16
21
has to stop.
Mr.
CHAIRMAN SAMPSON:
14
lS
~omebody
p.
m. )

June 08, 2009 New York Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing On Public Office Corruption First Senator John Sampson

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

June 08, 2009 New York Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing On Public Office Corruption First Senator John Sampson

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

I.i:!:.

08/01/2009 13:35 FAX

BEFORE THE NEW YORK STATE SENATE

Public Hearing on the

Senator John Sampson

Senator John A. DeFrancisco

Senator Bill Perkins

08/01/2009 13:35 FAX

Han. Thomas A. Klonick

Justice Duane A. Hart

Kathryn Grace Jordan

Kevin Patrick Brady

get this hearing started.

lid like to just

II want to welcome all

those who are attending this,hearing dealing

with the disciplinary process as it refers

to lawyers and also to judges in the Sta

My name is Senator John

I'm from the 19th Senatorial

along with my colleague Senator

who is from the Syracuse

welcome you all here this morning.

~earings that will examine the disciplinary

process for lawyers and judges in the State

Complaint to decide what the process is,

what review m@chanisms are in plac@ to

When a complaint comes to a

how many people examine the

8/01/2009 13:36 FAX

is fair and according to the rules of law.

These are just a few questions that

weIll be examining during the course of this

great distances to be here today to observe

and to participate in today's hearing.

know many of you have traveled

Your participation and input on

the disciplinary process will help the

committee determine what if any measures

needed to improve or repair the system so

that the members of the public as well as

the lawyers and jUdges

fairly and equitably by the disciplinary

of interest from 'the public.

people want to speak today,

unfortunately the committee was not able to

accommodate them all due to the limited

everybody to keep their comments within five

We have about 30 witnesses,

I'm going to try to ask

08/01/2009 13:36 FAX

can haver you know,

questions and answers.

We want to get to the point so we

And due to the number of responses we

additional hearings in New York City as well

as in Western New York so that we can get a

better understanding of the total picture

across the state and accommodate those who

the committee will conduct

couldn't testify today.

individuals who are going to testify,

do apologize for that.