Tagged: issue mootness

I wish Republican appointed federal judge P. Kevin Castel of the Southern District of New York would HURRY UP and ISSUE his “final” Order so I can take this matter up with the Second Circuit.

This time around, the Second Circuit won’t be able to falsely state that they don’t have the jurisdiction to decide my appeal or say that my arguments are “moot.”

read WME’s Premotion Letter to P. Kevin Castel Seeking a Filing Injunction Against Marcus I. Washington.

How could any non-racist and non-corrupt institution proclaiming to administer justice impartially, allow William Morris and Loeb & Loeb LLP to continue engaging in highly unethical and criminal conduct without any repercussions?

In a similar fashion to the lies contained in Arbitrator Timothy K. Lewis’s fraudulent Order dismissing my case with prejudice, Loeb & Loeb LLP also intentionally misrepresent that I did not submit a response to their Motion to Terminate. [meeting of the mind] This is a blatant LIE because both parties received confirmation e-mails from Carol Placella of the AAA, stating that the two e-mails that I asked to serve as my response (dated March 15th and 19th), were forwarded to Lewis. Although they discuss Lewis’ adverse Orders, they also continue to omit the fact that Timothy K. Lewis was unlawfully appointed and that he unlawfully vacated the Partial Final Award of the original arbitrator, David L. Gregory. This just adds to the list of their ethical violations under the New York Rules of Professional Conduct and is further reason why Zweig and his co-conspirators need to be sanctioned, disbarred and imprisoned.

I wonder how many days it will take P. Kevin Castel to respond to William Morris’ Motion (Docket No. 47). I ask because the arguments raised in their “letter” diametrically opposes the arguments made in support of my Em. Motion to Disqualify and Motion for Reconsideration and only one party is telling the truth. My Motion for Reconsideration (Docket No. 46) — a pleading which addressed the pattern of “fraud upon the Court” engaged in by Loeb & Loeb LLP and sought their disqualification, amongst other things — was submitted on April 11, 2014 and is still awaiting a decision. Castel also refused to acknowledge those arguments, as well as the evidence in support of those arguments, when he issued his March 27, 2014 Order (Docket No. 43) refusing to disqualify himself in response to my March 17, 2014 Emergency Motion to Disqualify (Docket No. 40). As a matter of law, only the court can decide a motion which seeks the disqualification of a law firm. When I gave Castel notice that I would be filing this Motion, he instructed me not to after Loeb & Loeb LLP submitted a letter response. When I filed the exhaustive Em. Motion to Disqualify, Castel ignored all arguments made against Loeb & Loeb LLP, Michael P. Zweig and Christian Carbone (similar to Republican appointed federal judge Robert P. Patterson in Leonard Rowe’s case), while instructing ME to continue arbitrating the case in “good faith.” When I brought these intentional omissions to Castel’s attention and requested an oral hearing on March 28, 2014 (Docket No. 44), he stated in a handwritten note on April 2, 2014 (Docket No. 45), that my request for an oral hearing was “moot” and again, refused to address the serious accusations that Loeb & Loeb LLP and its attorneys were engaging in a pattern of “fraud upon the Court” on William Morris’ behalf,  so that ultimately, the merits of these legitimate civil rights cases could never be heard in a public forum and decided by an impartial jury.

At this stage, I am left with no other choice than to sue all parties responsible for conspiring to interfere with the human rights of people of African descent and depriving me of my rights under the color of law. Nearly four years of my life have been wasted fighting against a law firm that should have never been allowed to represent William Morris based on what occurred in Rowe and this Republican appointed, racially biased judge cannot give himself the authority to decide whether or not I can sue him (as well as the other parties named) for depriving me of my constitutional, statutory and God-given rights under the color of law.

An impartial jury must correct this manifest injustice. If not, our nation’s democracy is nothing more than a hypocrisy.

P. Kevin Castel says my request for an oral hearing to discuss the fraud William Morris, Loeb & Loeb LLP, Michael P. Zweig, Christian Carbone and others are engaging in is “moot.”

This is the second time this word has been used by these racist and corrupt ass, white (and one Asian) federal judges in the S.D.N.Y. and the Second Circuit. Neither personal stake or issue mootness exist because FRAUD is occurring and I’ve presented a pyramid of evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that this is a fact. Castel won’t even address it and he needs to be impeached for intentionally depriving me of my rights under the color of law, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 242!

To demonstrate that I’m being screwed over and that they are all engaging in a conspiracy to interfere with the human rights of African Americans, in violation of the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871, now codified as 42 U.S.C. § 1985, and 18 U.S.C. § 241, the AAA stated over a year ago that they were unable to address my claims of the unethical and criminal conduct engaged in by Michael P. Zweig, Christian Carbone and Loeb & Loeb LLP on behalf of William Morris, and despite the circumstances, I still achieved a favorable verdict in arbitration. Now, after receiving a “final” decision and bringing to the federal court’s attention the massive fraud that William Morris and Loeb & Loeb LLP have engaged in since the inception of this case, P. Kevin Castel tells me to continue arbitrating the case in “good faith” and refuses to address my accusations of “fraud upon the Court” in either of his “orders” and denies my request for an oral hearing as “moot” without requiring a response from William Morris & Loeb & Loeb LLP!!

This is similar to what happened with Leonard Rowe’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 60 Motion for “Fraud Upon the Court,” filed in March of 2012. William Morris, CAA, Loeb & Loeb LLP and Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP never responded to the Motion. Nor did Patterson compel them to do so, even after four of Leonard Rowe’s former attorneys (all white and/or “Jewish”) from Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal LLP (now known as Dentons LLP) submitted perjurious Declarations stating that “no derogatory words” were ever found during the search. This is clearly a lie. SNR was the only firm invovled with electronic discovery in that case. Leonard Rowe discovered what is now known as “Exhibit 31” on the desk of his former attorney Raymond Heslin. On October 15, 2002, SNR faxed the document to Leonard Rowe’s co-counsel, the Willie Gary Law Firm and it was included it as “Exhibit 31” in their Opposition to Summary Judgment. The SNR attorneys did not know this because they left the case a few months after Leonard discovered the document on Raymond Heslin’s desk and they took the risk of continuing to state under “penalty of perjury” that no derogatory words were found, because at that time, Leonard Rowe never had possession of the document. On the same day that the forth attorney submitted their Declaration, I went to the Southern District of New York and retrieved “Exhibit 31.”  No oral hearing was held. When Patterson issued his decision on November 8, 2012, he made no mention of this, and instead, blamed the Willie Gary Firm. Hahaha! He also said Leonard Rowe’s accusations were “full of hot air and paranoid suspicions,” but the fact the Arbitrator David L. Gregory admitted this document into the evidence of record in my case supports that there is truth to what Leonard is saying.

Proof that Castel is not upholding the law: It is well settled that the federal court, not any arbitral forum, determines whether or not a law firm should be disqualified. See e.g., Northwestern National Insurance Company v. Insco, Ltd, 11 Civ. 1124 (SAS) (S.D.N.Y. October 3, 2011) (the court granted a motion to disqualify the law firm of Freeborn & Peters LLP from continuing to represent its client Insco in an ongoing arbitration). Smdh! He did the same thing when he wrote his July 20, 2011 decision, which erroneously compelled this case into arbitration in order to prevent an impartial jury from deciding the merits of my claims. He’s violating many Canons under the Judicial Code of Conduct to protect William Morris, Loeb & Loeb LLP and their other co-conspirators, in an effort to maintain global white supremacy (racism).

I guess it’s time to begin working on the complaint for a separate action against Loeb & Loeb LLP, Michael P. Zweig, Christian Carbone, Sasha Carbone, the AAA, P. Kevin Castel and others.