Thursday, April 5, 2012

April 4, 2012
For immediate release

Lippman, Martin Named In Department Of Justice Complaint

Judges are obligated to uphold the laws, but instead some of them break the law, and then use their positions of authority to insulate each other against any accountability. This is the sad state of affairs in the courts of  New York State, and what is at the heart of a Complaint filed with the Department of Justice - Civil Rights Criminal Division on Wednesday, April 4th 2012.

Jonathan Lippman, Chief Judge of the State of New York and Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals was named along with Justice Latia W. Martin (Bronx Supreme Court) and (White Plains attorney) Janette A. Baxter in a Complaint to the Department of Justice alleging  violations of  18  U.S.C. § 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color Of Law,  and 18 U.S.C. § 241, Conspiracy Against Rights.

The Complaint is the result of  events that occurred during and the preliminary hearings in a matrimonial action in 2006-2007  alleging  that Martin and attorney Janette Baxter used their positions as officers of the court to force Michael A. Hense, a resident of Westchester New York, to relinquish his ownership of his real property located at 94 Waterbury Parkway,  Cortlandt Manor through a process of coercion, extortion and abuse of process.

Lippman is named as condoning these actions, after the fact,  in an attempt to shield the state actors from any legal consequences arising from their actions. 

“What can only be viewed as inexplicable is his reasoning dismissing an appeal alleging deprivation of property under color of law as posing ‘no substantial constitutional question‘.  Given Lippman’s position and experience with the law, his summary dismissal of an appeal that so clearly involves an alleged constitutional civil rights violation can only serve to raise an appearance of impropriety to even the most objective observer.“-Michael Hense. 

The law is the law.  New York courts have consistently  held that “It is well settled that before some alteration in the marital relationship, courts lack the authority, absent the consent of the parties, to direct the sale of the marital residence owned by the parties as tenants by the entirety” (Adamo v. Adamo18 A.D.3d 407; 794 N.Y.S.2d 413, Kahn v Kahn, 43 N.Y.2d 203, 371 N.E.2d 809, 401 N.Y.S.2d 47; Harrington v McManus, 303 A.D.2d 368, 755 N.Y.S.2d 661; Kayden v Kayden, 234 A.D.2d 345, 650 N.Y.S.2d 790).

Section 1983 of the U.S. Code imposes liability without defense on state and local officials who, acting under color of law in their individual capacity, deprive plaintiffs of rights created by the Constitution and federal law.   Section 6 of the New York State Constitution reiterates that part of the 14th Amendment to The U.S. Constitution  where it states “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law”.

New York’s Real property laws also reinforce the rights of ownership of real property as tenants by the entireties. 

“It seems as if the parties named in the complaint think that somehow the laws don’t apply to them; that somehow they are above the law and can violate it with impunity;  that they can manipulate the legal process to fit their own personal agendas.  Our President said at a White House ceremony in 2009,  that ‘Transparency and Rule of Law will be the touchstone of this administration‘.  Here is an opportunity for the administration to come through on its promise. “ -Michael A. Hense


For additional information contact 

Michael A. Hense
1150 Commonwealth Avenue Apt.407
Bronx, New York 10472

No comments:

Post a Comment