It would be extremely unwise for decision makers to read into the recent Stop n. Frisk decision by Judge Shira Scheindlin as some indication of her willingness to enforce Discrimination laws. Judge Scheindlin has made a career out of manipulating and circumventing the purpose and intent of Federal and State Discrimination laws, and disposing of highly meritorious cases. Her contract is not with the oaths she took as a jurist or the Laws governing Discrimination or the State of NY, but with Corporate America and large corporate law firms, where she is ALWAYS willing to dispense a favor and exception, if the Ex Parte evidence supports this or if a lawyer whines loudly enough about how he is not being paid sufficiently to remain as counsel of record. The double dealing and extrajudicial communications in her Honors Court are mindboggling. As far as Minoriities, Judge Scheindlin has never shown any concern for their plight. The Stop n Frisk case was assigned to her to rehabilitate her image and to DUPE people into thinking that Her Honor has sympathies for Minorities. Clearly those sympatheties do not extend to the Workplace, or to real life situations where Minorities are struggling to survive. She should have disqualified herself from the matter, just as she should have disqualified herself in the past from ANY discrimination cases. She has an agenda. The agenda is to protect Corporate America from the vexatious litigants (all Pro Se complainants and most represented by small firm attorneys). Corporations do not need protection. They hire large law firms, have unlimited legal budgets, and they control the Courts through the Nomination Process. A law abiding judge does not have an agenda. They review the facts against the relevant law, and direct a jury appropriately. They do NOT EVER ADVOCATE for one side over another during a Settlement discussion. Once a judge (pre-empting an assigned Magistrate) assumes the role of advocate for ANY party, that judge MUST Disqualify, pursuant to 28 USC 455. Judge Scheindlin does not respect this law, nor does she respect the boundaries of her role as trial judge. She believes, as does Judge Gerard Lynch, that the Plaintiff is the enemy and has no due process rights. She believes that judges are entitled to trample on legal standards if they are on the right side of a dispute. The right side is ALWAYS the besotted corporation, who may have REPEATEDLY been cited for violations by numerous Employees, but is always deemed innocent. This kind of judicial activism is why 95% of discrimination cases are dismissed. A leopard does not change its spots. Judge Scheindlin is a very intelligent woman, and someone who in three protected classes has enjoyed the protections of Title VII and other statutes in her rise in the Courts. Unlike the amateurs on Eagle Street and 27 Madison Avenue, she actually understands the Law. She just chooses not to honor it if the circumstances are, in her mind, justifiable. Here she has made a mistake that many Federal and State judges continue to make, and it is a fatal one: Allowing attorneys (especially corporate attorneys) to get too close and to improperly influence the Court. Any judge who will hold an Ex Parte hearing on matters other than administrative ones is a judge who is writing their own career exit plan. These corporate attorneys can be very cunning and they know all the hot buttons to push including the very stereotypes that are on trial. A wise judge keeps a distance from this and ensures that a Reporter is in the room at all times. There should be no secret agreements. This is how good reputations unravel. I admire tough Rule of Law judges who have a strong command of the applicable laws. Few do. Most of the judges turn over these critical tasks to law clerks and few even check the product before putting their name on it, much less conduct de novo reviews. A second perilous practice is the one of adopting the defense attorneys position, verbatim. Not only does this assure that the Court will adopt the errors of the attorney, it completely eviscerates any semblance of impartiality. It also makes the Courts look like a group of amateurs deprived of any semblance of scholarship. This scheme has reached comical proportions in places like PBC where the 15th Circuit has, with the assent of the appellate courts, taken to colluding with attorneys to Case Sit and Fix cases the judges dont want to try. In reward for these services Attorneys are awarded legal fees even when there is no prevailing party or evidence of bad faith. Its outright FRAUD. It is a license to STEAL. Further, these judges are so unethical that they will warehouse cases for corporate law firms who are in trouble due to their own misconduct, often for several years; conduct hearings knowing they lack jurisdiction over a case; transfer a Void case to another State; prejudge a case and advance it to trial, and CHANGE THE DOCKET to help a lawyer restate the historical filings to correct errors. There is NO integrity to this Court whatsoever. NYS is not any better. You have jurists like Lippman using the appellate process to fix cases and reverse jury verdicts, while altering the Legal standards so that it is IMPOSSIBLE to prove discrimination. Again, he adopted a flawed decision from another case Stephenson Majority without regard for the legal correctness, simply because he wanted to gain influence with the law firm and to ensure his personal advancement was assured. His Honor is CLUELESS as to the legal standards,, not surprising when you promote someone TWICE in one year who has no litigation experience (7 male candidates). If this man wanted to be Chief Justice, he should have EARNED his path, and waited his turn so that far more qualified candidates could be considered. But where was the Second Circuit when Scheindlin was tossing out every discrimination cases that crossed her path. Other than the muted words of Judge Winter, NOWHERE. Enabling the cover up, thats where. This is why the Public has no confidence in our Courts. And this is Discrimination law, rooted in solid precedent! Dont get me started on what is going on in Housing Court or Family Court! That would take all day. There MUST be public hearings and there must be change. Further, if Regulators are so overlying wed to the Judges that they cannot investigate serious acts of misconduct, we will change that too. Personally, I would like to see these egregious misconduct cases heard by a Special Panel of tough retired judges, prosecutors, advocates and experts. The JCC is a joke.
Posted on: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 18:47:39 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015