Judges

Judges I have come to know as a result of this lawsuit against Allstate:

Keep in mind as you read about my experiences with these judges that all of them have a few things in common. Their salaries are paid for by taxpayers, they have all taken the Oath of Professional Conduct, and in all cases they have all agreed to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America. None of them have lived up to any of their promises or oaths.

I have enclosed letters that were written and sent via certified mail to all of these judges. Without a doubt they are all involved in the Allstate Conspiracy to deny me and all U.S. citizens of our Constitutional rights. Without any doubt, all of these judges took money or direct political favors from Allstate to indulge in criminal activity.

1. William Polito, NYS Supreme Court Judge

Judge William Polito of Rochester, NY; ethical misfit

The State of New York provided William Philip Polito with a law license in 1963 after he graduated from Syracuse University Law School.

The New York Judicial Commission found Judge McKeon guilty of the following misconduct while sitting as a Justice of the Supreme Court, 7th District, Monroe County, New York.

FYI: A Supreme Court judge in New York is the same as a Superior Court, District Court or Common Pleas Judge in other states, all of which are trial level courts. During his initial election for the Supreme Court, William decided to dupe the voters in Rochester by putting forth advertisements that he absolutely knew violated the Code of Judicial Conduct.

William’s primary ads attempted to portray him as being “tough on crime” and clearly indicated a bias against criminal defendants regardless of guilt. Bill also proclaimed that he wouldn’t consider alternative sentencing for anyone and that he’d send everyone to prison. Put simply, Bill was willing to let it be known that he didn’t much care about considering the circumstances of a crime and the criminal in meting out a fair and equitable sentence.

Bill’s sham advertisements had the intended effect since he succeeded in duping the voters into electing him to a seat on the Supreme Court in Rochester. As a consequence of his misconduct, the cheerleaders for Judicial Misfits sitting on the Judicial Commission punished William by gifting him a complimentary admonition.

As we speak (ca. August 2012) William continues to sit as on the Supreme Court in Rochester, New York.

See Fall 2006 Timeline regarding William Polito’s consistent disregard for Civil Rights. The Judicial Review Board failed to address my complaints against William Polito. William Polito has been corrupted by money and power and until the present day is unable to do the job the taxpayers pay him to do.

2. Kenneth R. Fisher, NYS Supreme Court Judge

Kenneth Fisher's Judicial Review on Robe Probe says it all.

3. David G. Larimer, United States Federal Judge


List of Orders written by District Judge David G. Larimer, WDNY, in Cordero v. Trustee Gordon, - v. Palmer, and - v. DeLano showing a pattern of disregard for the law, gross mistakes of facts, and laziness that denies due process

In Cordero v. Trustee Gordon, no. 03cv6021, WDNY (dkt.
at A:458)

(cf. i. Letter of Bankruptcy Court Case Administrator Karen S. Tacy of January 14, 2003, to Dr. Cordero setting January 27 as the due date for filing his designation of items in his appeal from Judge Ninfo’s dismissal of his cross-claims against Trustee Kenneth Gordon in Pfuntner v. Trustee Gordon et al., no. 02-2230, WBNY, (dkt. at A:1551), at the hearing on December 18, 2002 .................................................................................................................... C:1107

1. District Judge David G. Larimer’s scheduling order of January 16, 2003, in Cordero v. Trustee Gordon, no. 03cv6021L, WDNY, setting a deadline 20 days hence for Dr. Cordero to file his appellate brief; however, the record at that time consisted only of his notice of appeal (A:153), his designation of items was not even due yet, and the transcript had been requested but Court Reporter Mary Dianetti had not yet filed it either (FRBkrP 8006- 8007; ToEC:47>Comment).................................................................................................... C:1108

2. District Judge Larimer’s scheduling order of January 22, 2003, stating that Dr. Cordero’s response to Trustee Gordon’s January 17 motion to dismiss his appeal must be filed with the District Court by February 14, 2003; thus showing that: .......................................................................................................................... C:1274

a. Judge Larimer scheduled on January 16 Dr. Cordero’s appellate brief before Trustee Gordon filed his motion on January 17;

b. hence, the filing of that motion had no bearing whatsoever on either the unwarranted transfer of the incomplete record from Bankruptcy Court to District Court on January 14 or the Judge’s January 16 brief scheduling order, not to mention that under FRBkrP 8007(c) the record could only be transferred at the request of a party after the

1 The documents mentioned and decisions listed here with references between parentheses or after the dotted lines and bearing the format letter:# can be downloaded through the Bank of Hyperlinks below.

2 List of District Judge Larimer’s orders in Cordero v. Tr. Gordon, - v. Palmer, - v. DeLano, WDNY latter’s designation of the parts to be transferred and such request was neither made by Trustee Gordon, nor recorded by the Bankruptcy Court, nor notified to Dr. Cordero; and

c. in light of subsequent actions by Bankruptcy Reporter Dianetti and the Bankruptcy Court as well as decisions by District Judge Larimer, the transfer occurred as a coordinated maneuver between those parties and Judge Larimer to require Dr. Cordero to file his appellate brief before he had an opportunity to receive the transcript of the hearing on December 18, 2002, and take into account in writing such brief the transcript of Judge Ninfo’s biased statements and disregard for the law at the December 18 hearing.

3. District Judge Larimer’s order of January 24, 2003, in Cordero v. Trustee Gordon, no. 03-CV-6021L, vacating the January 16 order, which scheduled Dr. Cordero’s appellate brief, “in view of the need to address Trustee Gordon’s motion to dismiss before the appeal proceeds further”, an order that was entered only at Dr. Cordero’s instigation after his calling the District Court earlier on January 24 and requesting of Clerk Brian that he bring to Judge Larimer’s attention that if Trustee Gordon’s motion, which had no return date, let alone a date for Judge Larimer to rule on it, was granted and the case dismissed, Dr. Cordero would have been required to research and write his appellate brief for nothing ................................................................................... C:1276 J1655¶50) .................................... A:200

5. District Judge Larimer’s order of March 27, 2003, in Cordero v. Trustee Gordon denying in all respects but without stating any reason at all Dr. Cordero’s motion for rehearing of the grant of Trustee Gordon’s motion to dismiss the notice of appeal ................................................................................................... A:211

B. In Cordero v. Palmer, no. 03mbk6001, WDNY (dkt. at A:462)

6. District Judge Larimer’s order of March 11, 2003, in Cordero v. Palmer accepting Judge Ninfo’s recommendation not to enter against David Palmer the default judgment applied for by Dr. Cordero in his application of December 26, 2002 (A:290); and instead requiring the conduct of “an inquest concerning damages before default judgment is appropriate”, without providing any legal basis whatsoever for any such “inquest”, or reading his peer’s recommendation carefully so as not to make gross mistakes of fact List of District Judge Larimer’s orders in Cordero v. Tr. Gordon, - v. Palmer, - v. DeLano, WDNY 3 (A:1324§B, 1340¶54, 1367¶¶130-131), or even acknowledging the filing of Dr. Cordero’s March 2 motion (A:311, 312) in favor of entering such default judgment, where Dr. Cordero discussed FRCivP 55 as its basis and noted that Palmer had been defaulted by Bankruptcy Clerk Paul Warren back on February 4 (A:303) .................................................................................................... A:339

7. District Judge Larimer’s order of March 27, 2003, in Cordero v. Palmer, no. 03-MBK-6001L, denying, again in all respects and not only without providing any legal basis, but also without engaging in any discussion at all, Dr. Cordero’s March 19 motion for rehearing (A:342) of the Judge’s March 11 decision denying entry of default judgment against David Palmer, which indicates that Judge Larimer disposed of Dr. Cordero’s briefs and motions without bothering even to read them, despite being required to read them (28 U.S.C. §157(c)(1); cf. A:1655¶¶51-53), a pattern confirmed by his lazy and perfunctory orders in DeLano ................................................ A:350

(See Dr. Cordero’s analysis of these decisions in his appeals to the Court of Appeals, 2nd Cir., at http://Judicial-Discipline- Reform.org/DrCordero_v_Trustee_Gordon_CA2_9jul3.pdf )

C. In Cordero v. DeLano, no. 05cv6190, WDNY (dkt. at Pst:1181) (cf. ii. Dr. Cordero’s letter of April 18, 2005, to Bankruptcy Court Reporter Mary Dianetti requesting that she state “the number of stenographic packs and the number of folds in each pack that you used to record that hearing and that you will be using to prepare the transcript” and on that basis indicate the cost of transcribing her own recording of the evidentiary hearing in In re DeLano, no. 04-20280, WBNY (dkt. at D:496) on March 1, 2005, of the motion of Debtors David Gene and Mary Ann DeLano to disallow Dr. Cordero’s claim against Mr. DeLano, whom Dr. Cordero had brought (A:82, 87) into Pfuntner v. Trustee Gordon et al. (i above) as a third-party defendant ............................................... Add:681) (iii. Cover letter of Bankruptcy Court Case Administrator Karen S. Tacy of April 22, 2005, to Dr. Cordero accompanying her transmittal forms to the District Court of his appeal from the disallowance by Bankruptcy Judge John C. Ninfo, II, of his claim in DeLano and informing him that the District Court Civil Case Number for Cordero v. DeLano is 05cv6190L (L for District Judge David G. Larimer) ........................................................................... Add:686) (iv. Bankruptcy Court transmittal form of April 21, 2005, addressed to District Court Clerk Rodney C. Early; marking as transmitted Dr. Cordero’s April 9 “Notice of Appeal” (D:1) and April 18 “Statement of Issues and Designated Items of Appellant(s)” (Di);

4 List of District Judge Larimer’s orders in Cordero v. Tr. Gordon, - v. Palmer, - v. DeLano, WDNY while marking as missing documents the “Statement of Issues and/or Designated items of Appellee(s)” ...................................................... Add:687)

8. District Judge Larimer’s order of April 22, 2005, informing Dr. Cordero that his appeal was docketed on that date and that he is scheduled “to file and serve his brief within twenty (20) days after entry of this order on the docket”.......... Add:692

a. whereby again (¶2 above) in a coordinated maneuver with the Bankruptcy Court, which once more violated FRBkrP 8007 by transmitting an incomplete record that did not even include the DeLanos’ statement or designation,

b. Judge Larimer required on April 22 Dr. Cordero to file his appellate brief by a date certain before Reporter Dianetti had even had a chance to respond to his April 18 letter concerning the transcript, thus ensuring that Dr. Cordero would not be able either to take it into account when writing his brief or incorporate it in the record for any subsequent appeal to the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court, and

c. thus protecting Judge Larimer’s peer, namely, Judge Ninfo, who sits downstairs in the same small federal building so propitious for the development of a web of personal relationships (Stat. of Facts 4¶4 et seq.), from the transcript becoming available

d. given that such transcript would contain:

1) not only incriminating evidence of Judge Ninfo’s bias and disregard for the law at the March evidentiary hearing (Pst:1255, 1266§§E.1.-e),

2) but also the testimonial evidence provided by Mr. DeLano, the only witness to take the stand and the only source of evidence after he (D:313, 325) and Judge Ninfo (D:327) denied Dr. Cordero every single document that he had requested (D:287, 317) to rebut the motion to disallow his claim (D:218; cf. Pst:1257¶¶4-5) against Mr. DeLano (cf. Pst:1259¶9), who under examination by Dr. Cordero made statements corroborating the latter’s contentions on that claim (Pst:1281§d),

3) as well as the account of the events at the hearing (Pst:1288§§ef) showing that the DeLanos’ motion to disallow was a subterfuge supported by Judge Ninfo in order to disallow Dr. Cordero’s claim and thereby strip him of standing to participate in DeLano before he could prove that the DeLanos had engaged in concealment of assets (D:193, 370§C) as part of a bankruptcy fraud scheme supported by Judge Ninfo and other members of the web of personal relationships;

Christina Agola, an attorney in Rochester NY who specializes in Civil Rights lawsuits, came under fire from Judge David G. Larimer. True to the code of the Allstate Conspiracy the victims who attempt to defend themselves pay the price for their actions. As we have seen there is an attempt to discredit or eliminate any and all parties who file suit against the machine. Christina Agola was hired by the Robinson’s in the year 2005 to seek redress through the use of the Civil Rights Act of 1983. Christina has done her job and now she has become an adversary to Judge David G. Larimer. The very Judge Larimer attempted to get rid of Christina Agola in the year 2012 by citing that Christina was acting unprofessionally. Larimer failed in this endeavor. As you can see from the above Larimer himself is the unprofessional. In a good world Larimer would have been eliminated from his position in the year 2003.

If there were any discipline at all judges like Larimer, Polito, and Fisher would be gone and there would be a system of justice.

It’s all about the whole system of barriers that McKinsey and Allstate have paid for to prevent American citizens from getting into court. If a party gets into court they can prove through the process of deposition that the allegations that they bring forth are in fact valid. The problem with corruption is that there is a massive cover-up that is ruining the very fabric of America.