files Archives - Home Safety Tech Pros

DOJ files complaint against federal judge for alleged hostility against government lawyer

homesafetytechpros — Sat, 08 Mar 2025 17:44:02 +0000

Judiciary

DOJ files complaint against federal judge for alleged hostility against government lawyer

February 24, 2025, 12:27 pm CST

The U.S. Department of Justice has filed a misconduct complaint for alleged “hostile and egregious misconduct” by a federal judge presiding in a challenge to an executive order that says gender dysphoria conflicts with military troop readiness. (Photo by Kevin Grant/Shutterstock)

The U.S. Department of Justice filed a misconduct complaint Friday for alleged “hostile and egregious misconduct” by a federal judge presiding in a challenge to an executive order that says gender dysphoria conflicts with military troop readiness.

The DOJ filed the complaint against U.S. District Judge Ana C. Reyes of Washington, D.C., report Law360, the Associated Press and Reuters.

“The transcript reveals multiple instances where Judge Reyes’ misconduct compromised the dignity of the proceedings and demonstrated potential bias, raising serious concerns about her ability to preside impartially in this matter,” the complaint says.

Chad Mizelle, the chief of staff for U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, filed the complaint seeking “appropriate action” with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

Reyes is an appointee of former President Joe Biden. According to Original Jurisdiction, Reyes “is an equal-opportunity benchslapper” who has also chastised “liberal legal lions.”

The Jan. 27 executive order asks the secretary for the U.S. Department of Defense to revise the military’s transgender policy in a way that is consistent with the order.

“Adoption of a gender identity inconsistent with an individual’s sex conflicts with a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, truthful and disciplined lifestyle, even in one’s personal life,” the executive order says.

The Associated Press and Law 360 report that during the hearings, Reyes:

• Raised her voice and demanded an answer from a government attorney about whether President Donald Trump’s executive order showed animus by calling “an entire category of people dishonest, dishonorable, undisciplined.”

• Engaged in a rhetorical exercise regarding discrimination. Reyes declared that graduates of the University of Virginia School of Law would be barred from her courtroom because they are “liars and lack integrity.” She then told the government lawyer who was a University of Virginia School of Law grad “to sit down.” According to the ethics complaint, the directive “served no legitimate judicial purpose and transformed an attorney appearing before the court into an unwilling participant in the judge’s unnecessary demonstration.”

• Asked the government lawyer what “Jesus would say to telling a group of people that they are so worthless, so worthless that we’re not going to allow them into homeless shelters? Do you think Jesus would be, ‘Sounds right to me’?” she asked. The complaint says the question “placed DOJ counsel in an untenable position of either appearing unresponsive or speculating about how an incoherent hypothetical aligns with Judge Reyes’ personal religious beliefs.”

The plaintiffs challenging the order are six transgender people who are active-duty service members and two others who want to enlist.

Reyes is not the only federal judge feeling the heat while presiding over challenges to Trump administration policies. Republican lawmakers have introduced articles of impeachment against U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer of the Southern District of New York after he barred Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s representative from accessing information from the Department of the Treasury, report Bloomberg Law and Axios.

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

Source link

The post DOJ files complaint against federal judge for alleged hostility against government lawyer appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

GOP Rep. files articles of impeachment against SDNY judge

homesafetytechpros — Wed, 19 Feb 2025 23:19:04 +0000

Inset: U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer (U.S. Courts/YouTube). Background: Republican Candidate for President Donald Trump attends the Building America’s Future, Southeastern Pennsylvania Roundtable at the Drexelbrook Event Center on October 29, 2024, in Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania (Matt Bishop/imageSPACE/Sipa USA via AP Images).

A Republican member of the House on Wednesday introduced articles of impeachment against a federal judge who recently barred DOGE staffers from accessing sensitive Treasury Department data.

Early on the morning of Feb. 8, Manhattan-based U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer issued a temporary restraining order blocking such access and requiring all the relevant Elon Musk-aligned employees to “destroy” any copies of documents that were previously downloaded.

Reaction online was swift and fierce – with numerous allies of President Donald Trump calling for Engelmayer’s impeachment.

Now, those calls have been answered.

Rep. Derrick Van Orden, a Republican from Wisconsin, filed House Resolution 143, which accuses the judge of “high crimes and misdemeanors” over the temporary restraining order. The bill was subsequently referred to the House Judiciary Committee.

“Paul Engelmayer, as a judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, engaged in judicial misconduct when he halted President Donald J. Trump’s Executive order establishing and implementing the President’s Department of Government Efficiency on purely political grounds, demonstrating clear bias and prejudice against the President and the 74,000,000 Americans who voted for him,’ the first article of the resolution reads.

Under a heading alleging “judicial misconduct and abuse of judicial authority,” the first article of impeachment takes direct stock of Engelmayer’s ruling and alleges that the temporary restraining order” demonstrates clear bias and prejudice against the President” and “willfully” disregards “established legal precedent.”

Van Orden also criticizes the judge for the speed with which the temporary restraining order was granted.

The resolution alleges Engelmayer acted “outside the bounds of judicial decency” by “submitting this injunction in the middle of the night” and says the timing “may have been done with the intent to influence the outcome of cases to favor certain parties.”

Temporal concerns, of course, did play a part in issuing the pre-injunction pause – but the judge did not mention the predawn nature of the ruling. The temporary restraining order was issued in response to a request for emergency relief from a 19-state coalition led by New York Attorney General Letitia James.

“The Court’s firm assessment is that, for the reasons stated by the States, they will face irreparable harm in the absence of injunctive relief,” the temporary restraining order reads. “That is both because of the risk that the new policy presents of the disclosure of sensitive and confidential information and the heightened risk that the systems in question will be more vulnerable than before to hacking.”

The second article of impeachment is quite a bit shorter, premised on the “abuse of judicial power,” and reads, in full:

Judge Paul Engelmayer has abused his judicial office by using his authority to further personal or political interests, contrary to the constitutional responsibility to apply the law impartially, including the improper handling of this case in a manner that demonstrates favoritism or undue influence, undermining the fundamental principles of justice.

The impeachment effort jumps the gun – in this case, a Sig Sauer P226 – on similar such articles promised last week by Rep. Eli Crane, an Arizona Republican. In a Wednesday afternoon post on X (formerly Twitter), Crane said he would file his resolution by Friday. Both Van Orden and Crane previously served as U.S. Navy SEALs.

The Trump administration, for their part, quickly implored the court to reconsider the restraining order – arguing that it appears to cover Senate-approved Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent.

The next day, U.S. District Judge Jeannette A. Vargas – to whom the case was actually assigned – clarified the scope of the restraining order to make clear that it did not apply to “any Officer of the United States Department of the Treasury nominated by the President and confirmed by the United States Senate.”

As of this writing, the impeachment bill has no cosponsors.

Source link

The post GOP Rep. files articles of impeachment against SDNY judge appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

Storage company contends it has no obligation to sort through client files allegedly left by defunct law firm

homesafetytechpros — Sun, 09 Feb 2025 23:46:38 +0000

Trials & Litigation

Storage company contends it has no obligation to sort through client files allegedly left by defunct law firm

By Debra Cassens Weiss

February 6, 2025, 9:36 am CST

A records management company is asking a court to declare that it has no obligation to clients of a defunct Pittsburgh law firm that allegedly left more than 7,500 boxes in its warehouse that likely contain numerous client files. (Image from Shutterstock)

In a Jan. 29 lawsuit, the Access Information Management Corp. said shuttered firm Rothman Gordon is asking the company to deliver the files to clients, even though the Access Information Management Corp. “has no authority whatsoever to relocate, handle, deliver or otherwise provide the files to any person or entity aside from Rothman.”

Indeed, the suit said, rifling through large unlabeled boxes could expose the Access Information Management Corp. to liability.

Law360 has the story on the suit, which also contends that Rothman Gordon owes the storage company more than $91,000 in unpaid bills, an amount that increases daily.

Rothman Gordon stopped operating in October 2024, but it has not filed articles of dissolution and remains obligated to fulfill its contractual obligations, the suit said. The firm allegedly stopped paying storage fees around June 2023.

The initial contract was between the firm and Business Records Management, a company acquired by the Access Information Management Corp. when it was known as Retrievex.

The firm agreed in the contract that it is the owner of the stored records, and that the storage company can’t destroy “useless records” absent written instruction and payment of the “standard published rates,” the suit said.

The Access Information Management Corp. filed the suit in Pennsylvania state court in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania.

The Access Information Management Corp. is seeking a declaratory judgment regarding its obligations, an injunction requiring Rothman Gordon to take back or destroy the files and to stop telling clients to contact the storage company, and damages of more than $91,000 for the unpaid bills.

Law360 identified the lawyer for Rothman Gordon as Matthew M. Herron of Herron Business Law. He did not immediately respond to an ABA Journal voicemail requesting for comment. Rothman Gordon’s former managing partner, Frank Salpietro, also did not immediately respond to a voicemail message.

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

Source link

The post Storage company contends it has no obligation to sort through client files allegedly left by defunct law firm appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell files RICO lawsuit against lenders

homesafetytechpros — Wed, 30 Oct 2024 19:02:04 +0000

Mike Lindell gives a thumbs-up as he passes by a rally for supporters of former President Donald Trump, Tuesday, April 4, 2023, in West Palm Beach, Fla. (AP Photo/Wilfredo Lee).

The high-dollar economic woes of Mike Lindell and his small-town Minnesota-based company MyPillow continue apace.

So does the litigation.

Last week, the pro-Donald Trump conspiracy theorist and his once-lucrative business sued several lending companies over the eye-popping repayment terms of a $600,000 merchant cash advance.

Under the terms of the agreement signed in September, Lindell and his company must pay back $16,800 each day.

In the 34-page lawsuit filed on Oct. 25 in Carver County District Court and obtained by Law&Crime, the plaintiffs claim the agreement was “usurious, unconscionable and thus unenforceable.”

Stylized as a racketeering (RICO) complaint, the lawsuit accuses various lenders of issuing a loan under the guise of a contract in which the lenders agreed to “purchase My Pillow’s future receivables at a discount” and in which “My Pillow agreed to repay the face value of its receipts through daily payments.”

The agreement was executed in this fashion, the lawsuit alleges, in order to skirt New York State’s statutory maximum interest rate.

The plaintiffs say the effective interest rate on the “loan” equates to 368% — or 441% if origination fees of $36,000 are considered.

Lindell says he and his companies “bore the risk of non-payment of any receivables and remained on the hook for the entire amount at issue,” which left the lenders with “no risk in the transaction.”

On top of that, the lawsuit alleges, Lindell and his companies “always remained liable for the debt” that was taken out.

“As a result, the [defendants] never made a bona fide purchase of My Pillow’s receivables under the [Merchant Cash Advance] Agreement and the transaction is, in reality, a usurious loan,” the lawsuit reads.

But what looks like an alleged double whammy for the beleaguered bedding vendor — once on the verge of becoming a household name until its founder repeatedly dabbled in electoral systems expertise — is, in fact, something not entirely unlike a triple whammy

Lindell also says he was snookered into making the fraught financial contract with promises of a secondary loan that never materialized.

“Plaintiffs also entered into the transaction as the result of a classic bait and switch,” the lawsuit reads.

To hear Lindell tell it, one of the named defendants, a broker, “represented that to get the other loan on the real estate,” the plaintiffs had to agree to the merchant advance loan with a lender who would then “also make a real estate loan on two properties in Minnesota.”

But, the lawsuit alleges, once the $563,000 — the amount inclusive of the aforementioned fees — was lent out, the primary lender “refused to make the real estate loan that was Plaintiffs’ reason and consideration for entering into” the merchant advance transaction.

The lawsuit also launches a shot across the bow at the entire industry, and business model, of merchant cash advance companies.

From the filing, at length:

The MCA industry specializes in providing struggling businesses with highrisk loans at exorbitant interest rates, disguising those loans as the alleged purchase of future receivables. The MCA industry typically seeks to hide within the gray areas of the law, attempting to take advantage of procedural remedies and loopholes in distant state courts to disguise its predatory lending practices.

…

This is what the MCA companies do. Among other things, they generally require unaffordable daily payments that they know the debtor is unlikely to be able to repay given the extraordinary interests rates and fees the MCA companies demand. They further leverage various legal and contractual processes to guarantee full repayment, thus assuming virtually no risk in the transaction.

With the lawsuit, Lindell aims to obtain a court order declaring his agreement with the lenders “unconscionable and unlawful,” usurious under New York law, “and therefore void and unenforceable.” The filing also seeks various damages — compensatory, direct, and consequential — as well as interest and attorney’s fees.

Law&Crime reached out to the primary lender named in the lawsuit as well as the company that allegedly “induced” the transaction, according to the filing, but no responses were immediately forthcoming at the time of publication.

The interest rates at issue is, of course, one of many economic maladies Chaska, Minnesota-based MyPillow and its founder face.

Lindell and his company have been accused of welching on their debts — an apparent knock-on effect of Lindell personally and loudly maintaining that certain conspiracies cost Trump the 2020 election.

In a long-running lawsuit, Lindell Management LLC has been repeatedly rebuked by the courts for its refusal to pay the winner of a “Prove Mike Wrong” challenge.

In that disastrous contest, engineer Robert Zeidman — himself a supporter of Trump — picked up the poly-foam gauntlet thrown down by the one-time QVC star. Despite severe doubts about his own abilities, Zeidman bested Lindell over false claims about election data.

In March, a Minnesota county judge ruled against MyPillow in an eviction hearing — finding that the company owed over $200,000 in unpaid rent for a warehouse in Shakopee.

In October 2023, Lindell confirmed that MyPillow had been “decimated” by defamation lawsuits Dominion Voting Systems and Smartmatic filed against several pro-Trump figures who insisted the voting machine companies orchestrated a plot to hand the 2020 election to President Joe Biden. As a result of being one such voice, Lindell said, his company had “lost hundreds of millions of dollars.”

Have a tip we should know? [email protected]

Source link

The post MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell files RICO lawsuit against lenders appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

Jack Smith files mystery documents in Trump Jan. 6 case

homesafetytechpros — Fri, 27 Sep 2024 07:02:31 +0000

Left: Jack Smith speaks about an indictment of former President Donald Trump, Aug. 1, 2023, at a Department of Justice office in Washington (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin, File). Right: Donald Trump speaks to members of the media before departing Manhattan criminal court, Monday, May 6, 2024, in New York (AP Photo/Julia Nikhinson, Pool).

Special counsel Jack Smith on Thursday filed a massive opening brief addressing presidential immunity issues in the Jan. 6 case against former President Donald Trump.

But substantial portions of that brief may never see the light of day — at least so far as the general public is concerned.

Earlier this week, the prosecutor was given permission to file an “oversized brief” by Obama-appointed U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan — frustrating a request by the defense to keep the special counsel confined to the typical 45-page limit under local court rules.

In an order, the court gave the government up to 180 pages to make their case — exactly quadruple the typical limits.

Late Thursday, a spokesperson for the special counsel’s office confirmed that their brief had been filed — but the public docket in the case showed no evidence of that filing. In fact, it’s unlikely to.

“We have complied with the court’s order,” the spokesperson told Politico.

While the legal and political press waited with something not entirely unlike bated breath for the lengthy filing pre-berated by Trump’s attorneys as an “unnecessary tome,” the special counsel’s original request spelled out the request in slightly-decipherable legalese.

From the government’s Monday filing, at length:

For the Court’s awareness, the opening brief and its exhibits contain a substantial amount of Sensitive Material, as defined by the Protective Order. Consistent with the Protective Order, the Government intends to file a motion for leave to file under seal that attaches an unredacted copy of the motion and appendix and proposed redacted versions to be filed later on the public docket at the Court’s direction. Because of the extensive and time-consuming logistics involved in finalizing the brief, appendix, and proposed redacted public versions of the same, the Government respectfully requests the Court’s decision on this motion as soon as practicable.

In other words, Smith’s filing anticipated at least three (and as many as five) different documents — all of which would be filed under seal.

Those documents include: (1) the unredacted brief; (2) the redacted brief; and (3) a motion for leave to file under seal. The inclusion of appendices — unredacted and redacted versions both being anticipated — could bring the total number of documents up to five depending on whether the special counsel files them separately.

More Law&Crime coverage: Rudy Giuliani’s 2020 election lawyering for Trump comes back to haunt him again as another court orders him disbarred

An October 2023 minute order by Chutkan explains why everything is — as of the 5 p.m. Thursday deadline at least — under wraps.

“Going forward, if any party seeks to make a filing under seal, the party shall file a sealed motion for leave to file under seal that attaches (1) an unredacted copy of the filing to be docketed under seal, and (2) a redacted copy of the filing that may be publicly docketed.”

This order means that even Smith’s motion to file the unredacted version on the public docket is currently sealed. As the special counsel’s office previously explained, a protective order controls the release of so-called “Sensitive Materials” used in the case.

Here’s what the court’s protective order says:

The parties may include designated Sensitive Materials in any public filing or use designated Sensitive Materials during any hearing or the trial of this matter without leave of court if all sensitive information is redacted, and the parties have previously conferred and agreed to the redactions. No party shall disclose unredacted Sensitive Materials in open court or public filings without prior authorization by the court (except if the defendant chooses to include in a public document Sensitive Materials relating solely and directly to the defendant’s personally identifying information). If a party includes unredacted Sensitive Materials in any filing with the court, they shall be submitted under seal.

All this secrecy is relevant because the gargantuan filing is likely the special counsel’s last chance to make a case against the 45th president before the November election.

For years, Smith has been frustrated by court after court — high, low, and in between — as he sought to bring Trump to trial for alleged crimes in both the District of Columbia and Florida.

A trial, of course, is nowhere in the offing anytime soon, and certainly not before November. So, now, the special counsel has to make do with the next best thing: convincing Chutkan to keep his superseding indictment more or less intact with an “oversized” argument.

A fringe benefit for the government — and a decided drawback for the defense — is that some of these arguments will likely make their way before the court of public opinion. When they are released, and how many are released, however, is entirely up to Chutkan.

Have a tip we should know? [email protected]

Source link

The post Jack Smith files mystery documents in Trump Jan. 6 case appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

Steward Health Care files for bankruptcy

homesafetytechpros — Wed, 11 Sep 2024 18:26:02 +0000

Steward Health Care files for bankruptcy – CBS News

Watch CBS News

One of the largest hospital bankruptcies in history is leading to new concerns that some communities will be left without access to medical care. CBS News chief medical correspondent Dr. Jon LaPook has more.

Source link

The post Steward Health Care files for bankruptcy appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

Family of woman killed by gator files wrongful death suit

homesafetytechpros — Sun, 28 Jan 2024 17:11:10 +0000

Bill Serge stands with his attorney Gary Lesser next to a photo on Thursday, Jan. 25, 2024, in West Palm Beach, Fla., of his 85-year-old mother, Gloria Serge, who was killed in an alligator attack on Feb. 20, 2023. The Serge family filed a lawsuit Thursday against the Wynne Building Corp., which owns the Spanish Lakes senior complex in Fort Pierce where the attack occurred. (AP Photo/Terry Spencer)

The family of an 85-year-old woman who was killed by an alligator while walking her dog outside her Florida home filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the community’s property management firm.

Gloria Serge was walking her dog, Trooper, outside her Spanish Lakes Fairways home that abuts a pond in Fort Pierce on Feb. 20, 2023. Surveillance video of the attack shows Serge and the dog walking at the water’s edge while alligator begins to swim over from the other side of the pond. Seemingly unaware of the alligator’s looming presence, Serge and Trooper continue their walk until the 10-foot alligator lunges out of the water. Serge falls down as Trooper scurries away and the alligator pulls her into the water by her left foot. Neighbors, hearing her screams, called 911 but the alligator drowned her before first responders could rescue her.

Officials captured and euthanized the alligator.

On Thursday, her family filed a lawsuit against Wynne Building Corporation, which manages the retirement community. The lawsuit claims the company failed to maintain safe premises and should have removed the alligator because it was considered a “nuisance” as it exceeded 4-feet in length.

It also said because the property manager sent her a letter saying she had to walk the dog either in her backyard or at a dog run about a mile away, it essentially forced her to walk the dog near the pond.

“In other words, the Defendant encouraged, if not forced, the Decedent to walk her dog near a retention pond that it knew, or should have known, contained large, dangerous alligators that constituted a nuisance under the definition developed by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission,” the lawsuit said.

Lawyers representing Serge’s family also say that property managers allowed residents and staff to feed the alligators in the pond behind her home which “substantially increased” the likelihood of an attack. The law firm also says it has evidence that maintenance workers in the community previously fed the alligator that killed Serge chicken scraps and named him Henry.

“There were no signs posted around the lake warning residents of the presence of an alligator, and the property managers encouraged people to sit near the lake by placing a bench along the shoreline,” attorney Gary S. Lesser said in a press release. “This flies in the face of common sense and warnings from wildlife experts.”

Serge’s family spoke at a press conference about the lawsuit. She was a mother of five, grandmother of 15 and great-grandmother of nine. She lived in the community for more than 30 years. Her son Bill Serge, 62, said he received a phone call about an emergency at his mother’s house.

“I was told there had been an event and law enforcement was on the scene,” Bill Serge said, according to Treasure Coast Newspapers. “But I never could have imagined the agonizing way in which my mom spent the final moments of her life.”

Wynne Building Corporation president Joel Wynne told CNN that as a longtime resident of the community, Serge knew of the presence of alligators and that they were dangerous.

“We certainly understand the tragedy and the feelings of Mrs. Serge’s family. However, we developed Spanish Lakes Fairways 37 years ago. We have approximately 3,000 residents. This is the very first time where a resident was attacked by an alligator,” he said.

Have a tip we should know? [email protected]

Source link

The post Family of woman killed by gator files wrongful death suit appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.