CAN STANDS 8 EASY
PIECES Due Process
Journalism ain't what it used to be
--A years late followup to some heated discussions about the future of journalism.
-- Which led to a process diagram sketched on the back of an envelope that was promptly ignored for years.
-- Then a media echo chamber of silliness effectively cauterized a Democratic leaning populace into a zombie-like apathy at the polls.
-- Not only must objective critical analysis occur (whether or not we call it journalism), that work needs to be given a fertile and sustainable soil from which to spring. The Growler is that soil. -- thegrowler.org
Also, unwinnable situation won by resetting the rules by Captain James T. Kirk - Star Trek: TOS (Kobayashi Maru).
-- help collect procedural tricks of the judicial trade in a place where the self represented can research before they get screwed.
-- help observe at key junctures to make self represented more manageable.
-- let the courts know you a have a functional brainstem.
... System Observers because : A watched court more likely to do its job.
--unwatched systems tend towards abuse, watched towards accountability-- JafoMaru.com
- Lender (Plaintiff) initiated a foreclosure against Lyceum.
- Based on the papers submitted by the Plaintiff, the first action in the case was fatally and facially tardy and jurisdictionally ineffective.
The judge, Donald Scott Kurtz, did, or failed to do the following:
--Failed to dismiss the case as abandoned as was required.
--Granted relief not requested in the moving papers.
--Granted relief not listed under the statute noticed.
--Premised decision on two non-existent documents.
- Defendant Richmond moved to dismiss the case as abandoned.
--Counsel for defendant admitted to the court on October 24, 2012, that Plaintiff had moved 6 months later than the abandonment statute allowed.
--After this admission, the Court gave Plaintiff extra time to come up with another answer.
--Plaintiff Counsel produced a sworn statement from former Plaintiff counsel admitting Plaintiff had regular and repeated interaction with counsel for Richmond and Lyceum PRIOR to October 26, 2009 motion.
--Plaintiff Counsel produced a sworn statement that Plaintiff counsel had admitted, in a hearing on October 24, 2012, that the initial motion was 6 months late.
--The Decision referenced documents that did not exist at the time of the October 26, 2009 Notice of Motion.
--The Decision does not address Plaintiff admission to moving 6 months after statutory abandonment.
- The judge then followed it up by granting a motion on no notice.
- Defendant Richmond appealed the refusal to dismiss the case as abandoned (APPEAL #1).
- The Lyceum moved to vacate the Order of Reference never served on the attorney for Richmond and the Lyceum, and the Judgment of Foreclosure with the facially statutorily insufficient notice, either of which would unwind the sale of the Brooklyn Lyceum.
- The Plaintiff, in opposition papers, admitted ...:
--Plaintiff failed to serve the October 26, 2009 Notice of Motion on the sworn to counsel for Richmond / Lyceum, David Blum, Esq.
--Plaintiff's March 17, 2011 Notice of Motion instructed those noticed to apear on April 18, 2001.
--Plantiff's ?? Notice of Entry of the Judgment of Foreclosure failed to accurately describe the Decision attached to the Notice of Entry.
- The court is required to address jursdictional arguments before it takes any action after they are raised.
- Judge Kurtz, rather than addressing the jurisdictional challenges, as required, refused to provide a required court reporter at the hearing on the motion and failed to acknowledge the hearing occurred (and that Richmond raised all three jurisdictional arguments orally) in a decision that said:
"If I were to address the motion, I would deny it"
- The Lyceum appealed the decision on whether the first action in the case was statutorily abandoned.
- Once the appeal was fully briefed, it took 2.5 years to get calendered for oral argument.
- At oral argumment on appeal, the Lyceum raised three jurisdictional challenges that, being jurisdictional, can be raised as late as oral argument on appeal:
--The Lower court had granted a Judgment of Foreclosure and Sale on no notice.
--The required notice of entry of the Judgment of Foreclosure and Sale was invalid as it did not truly descibe the document entered.
--The Plaintiff, having now sworn that the Lyceum had actually appeared, contrary to prior sworn statement, failed to serve the attorney for the Lyceum with whom they had repeated communicatuion, including extensions of time to answer.
- The Appellate Court ignored the jurisdictional arguments, and, in order to avoid ruling a case abandoned based on the record presented to the lower court:
--Made up a fact (finding October 19 comes after October 26)
--Found that the Plaintiff had timely moved in the first motion in the case.
---- an impossible finding from the record in the lower court at the time of the motion in question,
---- a finding that could only be possible if the court altered the lower docket to incorporate proof of Lyceum appearance, and appearance that triggered the three jurisdictional issues raised at oral argument.
- The Appellate Court denied a motion to reconsider whether 19 > 26 or whether the Appellate court went outside the record and altered the docket.
- The Appellate Court denied a motion to for leave to appeal whether 19 > 26 or whether the Appellate court went outside the record and altered the docket.
The COURT OF APPEALS:
--dismissed stating the court did not have jurisdiction over 19 > 26
--(but did not deny)
--a motion to for leave to appeal
--whether 19 > 26 or
--whether the Appellate court went outside the record and altered the docket.
We are sure that making mathmatically impossible findings is directly akin to jurisdictional issues
(the court has no authority to get 5th grade math wrong).
In the event that Court of Appeals fails to do its job, we will be back with writs to compel the courts to address the jurisdictional arguments and 5th grader math failure.
Judge Donald Scott Kurtz
“Some judges would have just read the papers and signed them,”
Judge Reinaldo Rivera
“we will get to the bottom of this”
“the 2nd department has an excellent reputation”
a look at intellectual dishonesty
blowback or demise of democracy MORE
Some brilliant people, with centuries of monarchial oppression to work from, wrote the United States Constitution.
That document set the stage of the rights of each citizen and the rules under which the Legislative (House/Senate), Executive (President) and Judicial branches must operate.
By way of that Constitution, "We the People" also set up a brilliantly simple, even childish system of checks and balances (think rock, paper, scissors, lizard, spock).
Every two years the People control the House, every six years the Senate and every four years the President.
The people even control the Constitution they wrote.
The House and Senate, Congress, if it really wants to, controls the President at any moment with regards to laws (legislation) and Presidential malfeasance (impeachment).
The House and Senate work together to create laws for Presidential review. If the President rejects (vetoes) a House/Senate passed proposed law, the House/Senate can override the veto with a 66% vote.
Thus, the ultimate power of law in this country belongs to first the People, then a body, the House and Senate, or Congress, and not an individual.
By that same Constitution, House is given the sole power to signal, by way of impeachment, if they think they see the smoke of Presidential malfeasance, so long as the body thinks there is smoke at > 50%.
Also by way of the Constitution, the Senate, being informed by the House of the perceived smoke of malfeasance, is given the sole power to remove the President if the body finds that there is substantial fire where the House found smoke so long as 66% of its members think so.
In addition, that now removed President can thereafter be prevented from holding any elected office by a 51% vote by the Senate.
So, in the end, the House and Senate, the Congress, has ultimate immediate authority over the Executive regarding malfeasance and the people every 4 years.
It is a nice cross of a large mass able to react quickly (there's smoke), the House, and a more staid, longer term institution (is there any fire that needs to be put out), the Senate, can triangulate on the actions and capabilities of the President, and, if those bodies fail to act, the People.
All quite elegant work by he founders.
Why we are here
Old-School Journalism is dead, long live the New School! MORE
THE GROWLER: a years late followup to some heated discussions about the future of journalism ...
which led to a process diagram sketched on the back of an envelope that was promptly ignored for years.
During the decade that followed, journalism went into a tailspin and is now, effectively, neutered at the traditional point of origin, Main Stream Media, who are now too beholding to the entities they should report on that even the pretense of speaking truth to power is gone.
Then a media echo chamber of silliness on all sides effectively cauterized a Democratic-leaning populace into a zombie-like apathy at the polls.
Since then things have only gotten worse as no side substantively interacts with the brainstems of the American populace.
Not only must objective critical analysis occur (whether or not we call it journalism), that work needs to be given a fertile and sustainable soil from which to spring.
The Growler is that soil.
Read on to see what we want to become.
Short descriptions of works in process
a little light of day helps make the world go round MORE
- Pro Se in the Boro of Brooklyn
- FIP - A cat tragedy
- Underneath the Transit covers
- Smarter than the Founding Fathers?
- Banks should fear BlockChain, not BitCoin
making waves everywhere MORE
We chose the name theGrowler from our remembrances of the our long-since left this mortal coil pet Alaskan Malamute, Attu, named after the western-most Aleutian island.
Attu took great pleasure in growling when she sensed danger.
That being said, here are some links to growlers and some discussion tabs.
into court for lyceum due process
tell us if you get it MORE
Quite plainly, any judge, after 20 years of being one, who does work this sloppy OR puts his thumb on scale for developers like this OR hides behind unnecessary formalities when the jurisdictional issues are raised by Defendants in a sworn statement and at oral argument and admitted in a sworn statement and not contested at oral argument by Plaintiff should not be elected, let alone re-elected, especially if the court refused to provide a court reporter for that hearing. To wit, Judge Donald Scott Kurtz, up for re-election November 5, 2019.
This from a judge who said, in 2009:
“When a case is before me, I try to give it my full attention,” Justice Kurtz said.
“Some judges would have just read the papers and signed them,” Kurtz said.
- Sent Notice of a Motion to a Defendant, not Defendant's attorney (failure to serve attorney did not invoke the power of the court),
- Noticed whomever that the motion would seek Judgement of Foreclosure under a law (CPLR 3215) that only allows something different, Judgment of Default(facial deficiency of paper cannot invoke the power of the court),
- Notice to whomever was premised upon a 10/26/2009 affidavit by an attorney when there is no such dated affidavit (facial deficiency of paper cannot invoke the power of the court),
- Affidavit actually attached, not dated 10/26/2009, says it is premised upon an already filed proof of service when there is no priorly filed proof of service (power of the court not invoked if premised on non-existent paper).
Decision (Judge Donald Scott Kurtz):
- premised on the same non-existent 10/26/2009 affidavit
- premised on non-existent previously filed proof of service referenced in motion.
- premised on a false instrument created by the court, an Request for Judicial Intervention Worksheet page.
- granted Judgment of Default, which was not requested (which is not legal), instead of Judgment of Foreclosure (not available under the statute)
Years later Plaintiff admits in affirmation (attorney affidavit) in support of a Plaintiff Cross-Motion:
- Plaintiff never served Notice of Motion on Defendant's attorney.
- Defendant Noticed another motion for parties to appear a decade in the past.
- Defendant failed to comply with the express terms of the order allowing sale of Property.
Years later Judge (Donald Scott Kurtz, up for re-election November 5, 2019):
- Grants Plaintiff Cross Motion while finding that the Motion the Cross-Motion responds to was not properly served and was of no effect.
- Fails to address jurisdictional non starter (admission Counsel for Defendant was never served Notice of Motion) in granting Plaintiff Cross Motion.
- Fails to address jurisdictional non starter (admission Counsel for defendant noticed all to appear a decade in the past for a hearing).
- Fails to do 5th grader math by failing to figure out that Defendants were noticed to appear a decade in the past.
- Failed to provide a court reporter (and, thereby, lost jurisdiction) when defendant invoked New York State Constitution Article VI right to a court reporter.
This cacophony of jurisdictional errors cannot stand if due process has any meaning whatsoever.
Thus, "Once More Unto the Breach" we go for due process.
When the system give you a lemon, return it!
Remove judges who ... are not smarter than a 5th grader MORE
... is the primary force in elections.
With so much going on in everyone's lives outside the election of judges, very rarely is the public informed enough to make an informed decision when an attorney is first up for election as a judge, resulting in party-line votes without any substantive evaluation of the candidates.
But in the Kings County Supreme Court, they must come up for re-election every 14 years for Supreme Court and 10 years for Civil Court.
After a decade or more of being a judge, one has ought have more than party-backing to go by.
Until recently, reviews of how a judge did during his or her 10/14 year term were hard to come by.
Now we present scorecard of sorts.
a bloodguard for politics?
come to pillage, stay to serve MORE
Early in the millenium, educated young people migrated to (cheap) places where they could congregate.
They sought adventure there, in the coastal cities, places where many of there parents had fled in the decades long exodus to the suburbs (Levittown, Naperville, ...)
Then the recession struck, a by product of specious financial regulation and billions and billions on questionable wars to protect, mostly, oil interests.
This may have just been a blip in history, but those young-ish needed to eat, and put a roof over their heads.
Once congregated, they became a market unto themselves with critical mass enough to support almost anything as long as they were willing to live in the abandoned carcass of the cities.
Being a recession and all, they created their own economies by reinventing artisanal craftsmanship everywhere there had been just bland commodities for decades.
Beer, Pizza, chocolate, coffee, COFFEE, soda, mustard, mayonnaise, peppers, cupcakes, barbeque, whiskey, theater, music, ...
It was if a great cry arose and said, YUCK!
Nowhere was this most evident than in Brooklyn, close enough to the wellspring of all media, Manhattan, but far away enough for cheap rents in nearly abandoned neighborhoods (Bushwick?).
They worked this for awhile and even elected the first black president, in part, by using nascent social media and sending droves of people to toss-up states door to door.
Then they went about their non-political business as the economy slowly recovered.
Until 2016, the vote heard round the world.
All the media championed a candidate that had a several million vote advantage OVERALL, but failed to address the chess game afoot, the ELECTORAL COLLEGE, the only game that mattered (whether you agreed with the rules or not, they are the rules in play).
It is often said that votes are yards and states are touchdowns.
Who hasn't seen a team garner massive yardage but fail in the red zone.
The losers complained that they didn't know it was about touchdowns, but that yards should be the only metric.
They then complained that social media was used to influence voters, as if that hadn't been the case in 2008, whether foreign backed or not. Disingenuous at best.
But then came the 2018 mid-terms and a shift in the firmament occurred. Longstanding politicians saw the handwriting on the wall and did not run for re-election. Other long time elected officials played the same old game and got beat by any other perspective than holding on to power for the boomer generation.