| Rent Wars (Rentwars) | Monday, May 20, 2002 - 03:00 am
The U.S. District Court Eastern District of New York covers Brooklyn, Queens, Staten Island and Long Island. It shares much of it's local rules with the Southern District. Due to never-ending construction the court is extremely short on space.
Clerks Office
The EDNY receives pro se papers in the same room as attorney papers and almost exactly the same way as attorney papers. When a pro se clerk is unavailable, a regular clerk will accept pro se papers. In the EDNY pro se litigants are not subjected to unnecessary delays. The EDNY clerks, both pro se and regular, are professional, efficient, and polite. Pro se papers are processed as speedily as attorney papers. Pro se clerks have been witnessed maintaining composure under difficult situations. Never have I witnessed an EDNY pro se clerk bullying or threatening a litigant.
The pro se attorneys of the EDNY have for many years been well versed in federal procedure and gifted with open minds.
Rating: 10 (note- some recent staff changes have been made which may effect the rating in the future.)
Court
In the EDNY, a pro se litigant is assigned a single judge for all of that litigant's pro se cases. Pre-filing motions are handled without delay, and comparably with attorney filed motions. Pro se litigants in the EDNY are afforded a measure of due process extinct in the SDNY.
Rating: 10
Facilities
The EDNY has no facilities available for pro se use except for the law library. However, that may change after construction.
Rating: 5
Judges
Rent Wars does not monitor federal judges due to the complexity and variety of legal issues that these judges handle. We do occasionally observe the federal courts in operation and in extreme cases criticize particular rulings or actions.
However, special mention must be made of the extreme conditions under which EDNY judges (and other court staff) have been forced to work for many years. They have had a continuing courtroom shortage and have to shuttle from room to room to try cases. The construction can be heard jackhammering throughout the courtrooms all day long. Sometimes it's as if musical chairs was blended with Chinese water torture. But through it all the EDNY judges managed to do the work of the court.
No rating.
Total rating: 10 |
| Rent Wars (Rentwars) | Monday, February 13, 2006 - 05:45 am
This section will be redone sometime in the near future to reflect the changes in the courthouse's facilities and new information. |
| Rent Wars (Rentwars) | Monday, February 13, 2006 - 05:47 am
A Sad Surrender to Senility
The incredible brilliance of a formerly WLOD judge is dimmed by the combined effects of age and prolonged exposure to Null-Intelligence.
Judge David Trager a/k/a The Magus
US District Court
Eastern District of New York
Formerly WLOD
Summary: Bad Judge, No Ethics (Formerly WLOD)
Date: 1/10/06* published 2/13/06 before final edit due to harassment by corrupt actors.
*Statements herein do not include analysis of recent actions, in particular with respect to Judge Gleeson’s Lopez Torres v. New York State Board of Elections decision which is still being analyzed and do yet inform statements regarding that judge.
This is a sad, very sad judicial review for me. Not sad as in S.A.D. (although there is some evidence of that), but sad in a “Flowers for Algernon” sense. Unlike other judges who have been criticized on these pages, Judge Trager and I have a long history. In fact, longer than even he may remember. For example, over seven years ago I lost a steady job because of Judge Trager. It is fair to say that he sent me to law school praising my academic accomplishments and pronouncing glowing evaluations of my prospects as a law school candidate. Judge Trager was deemed WLOD when he succeeded in exposing a new facet of the real life Master Am. Judge Trager designed incredible tests which I would repeatedly describe as brilliant and incorporate into The Magus character. Judge Trager gave me a legal victory over an incredibly wealthy and powerful foe. There’s more of course, but I’ll save it for later because that was the Trager of Old.
But the new Judge Trager is something very different from what he used to be. For years now I have heard complaints about this judge from various quarters. I would protest that he was WLOD. As a WLOD judge I would suspend Sliss analysis and try to find an Amish explanation for his actions. Sometimes I was successful, but always I would recommend patience. Wait and see what would happen. But for more than a year now I have directly addressed pro se cases before him. The Trager of Old used to address matters up close and personal, this new Judge Trager sulks in the shadows like Marlon Brando’s character in Apocalypse Now. At first, I chalked up the odd sua sponte acts of judicial fiat as though they were the unorthodox leeway granted the WLOD, but in no case did the passage of time provide the brilliant logic and manifestations of good faith that a WLOD decision must. Still, I was unwilling to accept what logic suggested. Perhaps the WLOD reasoning had some aspects I did not understand. Perhaps there was some logical explanation for his complete disregard for the adversary system? For his continuous abuse of pro se litigants? For his constant errors of fact and law? I admit to being uneasy with this, but WLOD is a rare and special status. One not lightly given, nor lightly taken away.
And then came Judge Trager’s November 1, 2005 memorandum and order dismissing a removal petition that had been filed only days earlier without affording the pro se litigant an opportunity to be heard. This order was so idiotic that I actually checked to see if it had been signed by Dimlit a/k/a Judge Gleeson. Unfortunately it was an authentic order signed by Judge Trager. What made this so bizarre was that the order considered section 1441 but the petition sought removal under section 1452. All this chatter about section 1441 and neither the judge nor his law clerks bothered to read the petition to find out which section it was brought under. Now when doing sua sponte acts a judge is expected to really be clear on what’s going on. To do a sua sponte act without reading the first page of a petition is inexcusable neglect.
To highlight the point the opposition counsel (from various dunce agencies) filed Judge Tragers order in court and trumpeted his order in no uncertain terms. To wit: “Judge Trager has ruled that [federal] law is not a federal issue.” This is almost an exact rip off of one of Judge Gleeson’s trademarked, medaling goofs. I don’t think I’ve seen duncekind this happy with a judge since Judge Gleeson.
Now, I had prepared this petition myself and had spoken with the court’s pro se attorney and had, with some effort, gotten an idea to stick in the clay of her mind. That this was not a section 1441 removal. So we can rule her out (and in any event it is the judge who is responsible for what they sign). But on an off chance I considered that maybe Dimlit’s Null Intelligence Field had blanked the mind of one of Trager’s law clerks or something. So I prepared a Order to Show Cause to reconsider (but apparently the EDNY has appointed the pro se attorneys the power to adjudicate all OSC’s and deny any they deem “not emergency”) on that very same day before the ink could dry on his order. In no uncertain terms we made it clear that the first order was pure, unadulterated idiocy and highlighted some of his other judicial fiat errors witnessed in the past year.
In response, thirteen days later, he issued an order claiming that the first order used the wrong section because he had deemed section 1452 inapplicable because it was filed in the wrong court. A fascinating assertion as the statute requires cases to be removed to the “district” court in the “district” in which the underlying case is pending. Judge Trager is unaware that he sits in the Eastern District of New York?? This also mirrors one of Judge Gleeson’s errors- the one where he thinks he’s a State Supreme Court Justice. More fascinating is that the first order mentioned no such consideration, making the second order facially dishonest. This all provided complete confirmation. With great sadness I closed my eyes and removed the rosy tint of WLOD analysis. When I opened my eyes there was one less WLOD judge. Only two judges have ever been given this status, the late Chief Judge Conrad Duberstein and Judge David Trager. I was greatly saddened for having only one WLOD judge left, the 90 year old legend Duberstein. And unbeknownst to me, he would fall to cancer only days after Judge Trager’s WLOD status was officially rescinded. There are now no WLOD judges to defend the concept of justice.
WLOD is not a license to abuse, it is a deference to wisdom and intelligence that transcends excellence. Idiocy and WLOD are mutually exclusive.
Reluctant to accept the truth, I decided to prepare one more simple test for the judge. One that the Trager of Old would never fail. Now, one of my tools, HUNCH, never works on the WLOD. Hunch informed me that there was a high probability of antics related to the appeal of the November 14, 2005 order. The real Judge Trager would never for a moment expect such cheap tricks to work on Ronin Amano, nor do I think he would feel the need for such nonsense. If Hunch proved correct, then I would have second confirmation.
We filed the Notice of Appeal in the after-hours drop box the very last day to do so, along with a courtesy copy for the judge. Simultaneously we filed a duplicate original with the Second Circuit. This is from FRAP 4(d), and I have never had to use it before in my life. Master Am himself taught it to me (“For when a scoundrel of a judge tries to escape righteous review”). I held my peace and waited hoping Hunch would prove wrong, but the District Court remained oblivious to the appeal filing for 4 long weeks until the Circuit sent its 4(d) letter transmitting it’s duplicate original Notice of Appeal to the District Court forcing action. Hunch was correct, the once WLOD judge had fallen. Second confirmation.
He has to be considered the exact same way Judge Gleeson is considered: expect hostility and errors, proceed to appeal without deference to judge's reasoning.
The canonical texts are clear. A WLOD judge is closest to a Master Jedi in Star Wars, or one of the Istari of Lord of the Rings. Master Jedi turned bad are considered irredeemable. So too with the Istari or mithrandir. At what point do you declare Saruman an enemy? Must you wait until he attacks Gandalf? Or is it when the orcs march from Isengard? The concept of someone in this status going bad is not new. True, it is not the ending I would have wanted for The Magus character, but perhaps it is for the best. While the canonical texts are quiet clear on those who fall to the dark side, they are silent on those that fall to the “dumb” side. Should they be treated the same? If so, then there is no hope for restoring this judge.
On the other hand, Judge Trager’s character template is not from canonical texts. The Magus is highly influenced by the Good Magician Humphrey (who always gives three tests) of a very non-canonical series. In one of the later stories he falls prey to magic that could be deemed “dumb” and is later restored to full capacity. So there is a possibility, but it seems remote.
So why senile? Well, if Judge Gleeson’s NIF was able to overpower a Judge as brilliant as the Trager that Was, then no judge of the Eastern District is safe and I’d have to consider the possibility that the entire district was dimmed. However, there is no evidence to support that at this point. On the other hand, without senility, then Judge Trager would appear more like an incompetent, demented, wanna-be Greek god toying with the mortals. Advancing age seems a more likely culprit and more of a mitigating factor than the others.
This is all so very sad as I said from the beginning. I will detail more of the errors witnessed, but first I want to address the Trager that Was and what made him WLOD to begin with, and to detail the brilliance before delving into the dark. It’s the least that can be done.
RA |
| Rent Wars (Rentwars) | Sunday, May 07, 2006 - 08:17 pm
Will the Real Judge Sludge Please Stand Up!
The same day I wrote the above, Judge Trager emerged from hiding with a vengeance. has left no doubt that the long shot based on GM Humphrey's exposure to reversing magic was not the case. He rather dramatically showed that he was not so senile as to be unaware of his action's impropriety. Nor did he leave any doubt as to his allegiance. It appears rather that for years he had been able to shrewdly act to manipulate corrupt judges and lawyers while posing as a hero.
He clearly stated that he did not weigh my prior victory on the merits, but rather with an eye for a payback. This is nothing compared to his rather clear statement, "I expected you to bring me some money!"+ Wow! Rest any lingering doubts after that one.
In Star Wars Episode 3 Palpatine becomes a ravening beast snarlingly effective except against Master Windu's Vorpal style. Similarly, Judge Trager's snarlingly desperate and disgraceful actions to avoid appellate review were not proof against my Sliss (although not without damage). So rather than the sad ending I was concerned about, Judge Trager has instead clarified a great many things and brought Rent Wars into alignment with the Star Wars motif.
One of the things that caused me a great deal of difficulty was "Judge Sludge" a/k/a Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein of the Southern District. He was so named, in part, for having "slandered" Judge Trager by associating him with involvement in unethical actions. But a constant problem was that in order for Judge Sludge to be responsible for corruption under the nose of a WLOD judge, he would have to be one of the most powerful forces in the universe. Is it possible that Judge Sludge, who had moderate unethical acts directly observed, was set up as a scape goat for EDNY sludge created by his "victim"??? A judge who has the resources of a Shyster Mill? A sinister mix of Palpatine, Saruman, the Grand Nagus, and Jabba the Hutt? A "Slime Palpatine" in the service of Rent War's own version of Sauron?
As originally planned I will proceed to talk of the Trager of Old, but now with the very real possibility that he was a carefully crafted illusion.
RA
*His attempts to shut down Rent Wars to hide my criticism of him were as poorly thought out as everything else from him lately. And I assure you, anything his master would have wanted destroyed was securely protected.
+I would love to hear the lame excuses for this one, but asking for bonuses from the bench seems to be a cherished New York tradition. |
| Rent Wars (Rentwars) | Tuesday, July 04, 2006 - 11:20 pm
The very impressive character, Master Am, a personification of all the good and noble traditions in law, is a composite character composed of three law professors to varying degrees. If I had to pick the one professor who most influences the fictional Master Am that would be the real life, curmudgeonly sourpuss Professor David Herwitz of the Harvard Law School. Now before people go accusing me of poaching more of Victor's law professors, let me make it clear that I have it on good authority that Victor never had Professor Herwitz as a professor. (The other two professors were my own professors of Civil Procedure and Legal Ethics from the law school I attended). Professor Herwitz was appointed to oversee the bankruptcy of my largest client, the megafirm, Gaston & Snow. So I did have an opportunity to work with Herwitz and I assure you that he is every bit as grouchy as Master Am. And some scenes from the animation were directly inspired by real life. For instance, I did actually put my feet on his desk. Still, I am almost certain that I didn't hear him utter, "By the slippery slope of Stare Decisis!" In many cases scenes from the animation are based on actual conversations from my own rocky interactions with Professor Herwitz. He and the other two professors are Am, avatars of the good traditions of law. Anything that helps shed light on these professors is greatly appreciated and of great value.
Judge Trager, managed to demonstrate that the old sourpuss Herwitz had done me a secret favor during an evidentiary hearing. Now there I was, represented by the megafirm White & Case and its senior partner Allan Gropper (now Judge Gropper of the Southern District), watching as the young associate assigned was overwhelmed by the details at issue. We were all, including Judge Trager, seated around the counsel's table in his courtroom (as is his preference). The other side claimed that charges on an account statement aided there argument, and I, relying on Professor Herwitz's promise to charge me for some Fedex packages that I had sent for my own urgent purposes using an account number under his control. Surely not an earth shaking issue, but if the charges where Fedex charges from Herwitz then they would not avail the opposition's position and would support mine.
Now the matter at issue was one considered pivotal to the whole case. This slight sub issue was viewed by all as an omen for the case as a whole. It was after all the consolation prize that the bankruptcy judge (the despicable former judge Francis Conrad) threw in there while ruling against me and a prize which if appealed could cost me a couple of thousand dollars if overturned (and FJ Conrad made the consolation ruling with the same reckless disregard for the facts and law he used for the main ruling against me- Conrad really sucked as a judge [it appears the circuit agreed with me- they didn't reappoint him but that could be because his brand of power mad judicial fiat disagreed with theirs]). It should be noted that Conrad's law clerk threatened White & Case that they shouldn't dare appeal his decision which they were kind enough to share before the trial but I digress, that is a story for another day.
So here we have a statement with an unnamed charge of about the right amount for either Fedex charges by Herwitz or charges by the opposition. And this one charge became the pivot point of these two balanced arguments. Everything came down to the nitty gritty facts of these few charges. The opposing attorneys presented no actual proof that the charges are theirs except that they would like them to be and claimed them to be. My young attorney sat looking rather puzzled by all of this so I informed him of Professor Herwitz's promised charges and assist him in arguing the issue. In short order the opposition has no answers to anything- after all, an unmarked charge on a statement is on its face invalid. But Judge Trager and his law clerk (who at that time looked and acted remarkably like a brunette Sorceress) continued to investigate the statement and other documents of that time and after some back and forth eventually convinces me that Professor Herwitz did not make those charges and then rules against me. So we lose.
My young attorney is whining something to the effect that the case was doomed, that losing this issue meant losing the case (which was not an unreasonable interpretation), and that he didn't understand why I was so impressed by Judge Trager after that ruling. I tried to explain to him how impressive, how excellent that bit of judging was. I tried to explain to him how such excellent attention to detail would help our appeal to the Second Circuit by getting the facts right so the Second Circuit could overturn yet another one of its really bad precedents. And yet all of these points went in one of his ears and directly out the other completely ungrasped. For all that the White & Case associate was competent, he was terribly pedestrian. Yes the loss sucked, but deep inside I knew that somewhere old Professor Herwitz was probably scowling in distress that I now knew he had let me get away with something without paying. More importantly Professor Herwitz had demonstrated how the Amish principle of fair balance (a charitable aspect of not kicking someone while they are down) trumped the Amish principle of keeping even so solemn a word as his own. Definitely worth the price of admission.
And on that day, Judge Trager was deemed and declared WLOD on the loss. Well done Judge Trager.
Or so I thought.
Now I believe the illusion of a WLOD Trager was a carefully crafted affair, and that my big "victory" was, in a way, a win for the opposition. I now believe that the reason the opinion was cast as a victory at all was because Judge Trager wanted to an opening to snare the newly minted Judge Gropper into the BLS web of corruption An opportunity to increase his stable of judicial whores. After all, what good is the world's greatest bribe laundering machine if you don't have enough judges signed up to partake of the "riches".
Worse than that, I now believe that the illusion, including the brilliant trio of tests, was not crafted by Trager at all, but by some other far superior intellect. It is abundantly clear that Trager did not. There are a few possibilities but most indicia point towards the opposition itself.
Judge Trager is a case study of the real depths of Brooklyn's judicial corruption scandal. In Judge Trager we have no less than two confirmed cases where the federal judge openly and intentionally used his office to cover up state court corruption. A tell-tale sign of judicial corruption is when the judge acts without jurisdiction. Judge Trager is the judge who directly covered up absolute proof of the misdeeds of the Judicial Corruption Poster Child, Judge Bailey-Schiffman, by actively blocking the Freedom of Information Act case showing that her acceptance of blatantly forged certified mail receipts was no "computer error". While it is clear from the Postal Service response that no such certified mail was sent, it is Judge Trager's intent and his success in keeping that clarity from manifesting in a judicial order.
Previously I had felt that the District Court judges were concerned about being overturned on appeal. Now I feel that the concern, at least in cases involving corruption or ethics, are not a fear of the circuit responding in horror at their misdeeds, but a fear that they will have to share their ill-gotten gain. At least that seems to be my read on Judge Trager, but then again he has access to the judicial equivalent of a self-filling cornucopia- a bribe laundry slash shyster mill.
The first federal judicial dunce encountered- Dimlet got his start at BLS. A federal trustee who mishandles pro se trust funds in a way designed to get funds into improper hands- BLS. The attorney who sabotages his clients housing cases against a landlord and then gets a sweetheart deal buying two houses from the same landlords- BLS. Corrupt carpet bagging professor stifles community opposition to BLS dorms and greedily grabs for a federal post to even more damage. And last but not least, the fat spider in the center of this web of corruption safe in his federal chambers and yet able to coordinate his web without any resistance- BLS. And it goes on and on. BLS is the pulsing heart of Brooklyn corruption. This sleaze factory even appears to be making inroads to directly participate in New York State Court's judicial corruption to complement their federal webs of ill influence.
Fortunately, not all area law schools share in this bribe laundering stench, one school that has taken an Amish position on the local corruption is the Cardozo Law School of Yeshiva University. Much like a BLS connection pops up at every corrupt act, Cardozo seems to pop up at the opposite end of the spectrum (one example is the Cardozo professor's recent report on Housing Court corruption and lack of ethics).
I am disgusted and humiliated by the fall of Judge Trager. It is as though I were a food critic who has raved about the fare at Chez Trager for years only to be shocked by published video of the chef crapping into food while its cooking. I am disgusted to have eaten there, and more disgusted to have sent others.
When I post more information about the brilliant tests the continuing influence and relationship of Trager and BLS will be plainly demonstrated.
Ronin
* No it is not a coincidence that this is posted on Independence Day.
**A recent Village Voice article by Nat Hentoff excoriated Judge Trager. I will post my Sliss analysis letter to the Voice soon (hopefully). It's not fascism for its own sake, it's merely consistent with the entire powermad pattern demonstrated by Trager. |