AS PROMISED: Richard Godosky Bogus 5-Page Aff. In Opp.Lacking Any Evidence Illegally Including In Caption The 4 Defendants, Who Paid Bribes To William Hamel and Dinkes & Schwtizer Alias, Schwitzer & Associates To be Ousted From Case, Dave Cronen, Florence Grossman, Winifred Kiernan, Accepted In Full (Via Crony Godosky Covert Decree), By Allegedly Corrupt 2nd Dept. Appellate Division Judges, Chambers, J.P., Hall, Cohen and Miller, JJ., Granted In Full By Same, (Allegedly, right!)

May 26, 2015 § Leave a comment

Dear Readers,

As previously promised, we are posting the 5 page unlawful tirade in the guise of an Affirmation in Opposition submitted with the thorough support of the reciprocal back-scratching Second Department Appellate Division persons, (honorifics unearned): Chambers, J.P., Hall, Cohen and Miller, JJ., accepted without exception despite its illegality. In fact in their response, in the form a of a Court Order, and per Godosky’s thinly disguised directives spewed throughout his document, these “bench warmers” follow in illicit suit by granting him his composition masked as a court document, that were it a document appropriately and legally composed, submitted and granted would have been inclusive of laws, case law and evidence.

However true to crooked fashion and corrupt culture rampant in our judiciary, the aforementioned, allegedly intentionally ignored the massive Motion that complied to relevant laws, and which included relevant and supporting evidence instead choosing the low road based on Godosky’s document, which was in response to a legitimate motion,  a court order and decision this has no legal basis whatsoever. (We are redacting names to protect the innocent):

1st page of Richard Godosky's despotic vituperation, feckless in the  attempt to double as a legal document. Photo courtesy of world-news-media.com

1st page of Richard Godosky’s despotic vituperation, feckless in the attempt to double as a legal document. Photo courtesy of world-news-media.com

Page 2 of Richard Godosky's Affirmation in Opposition where he doesn't simply opine but rather predicts that it is "usless" for McCray to pursue this endeavour,. Photo courtesy of world-news-media.com

Page 2 of Richard Godosky’s Affirmation in Opposition where he doesn’t simply opine but rather predicts that it is “usless” for McCray to pursue this endeavour,. Photo courtesy of world-news-media.com

The term “useless” is a mighty strange word in this context, as Appellate law is crystal clear when it comes to what is appealable and that which is not. We can only conclude that Godosky is not simply predicting the outcome of  what he wants, but he is predicting the court outcome as a result of the directives he is giving to his very compliant cronies, Chambers, J.P., Hall, Cohen and Miller, JJ., who will ultimately follow his mandate.

Let us not forget that Godosky & Gentile maintain their office at the Legal and Judicial cronies Club HQ at 61 Broadway, New York NY 10006.–When Godosky (& Gentile) tell a New York Judge to tie his shoelaces, the judge complies, inquires, and rejoinders with,”How tight?”

Page 3 of Richard Godosky's supposed  Affirmation in Opposition, in reality continuing to gripe that his white collar criminal cronies, who refuse to obey the law, paying reparations to their victims, are monetarily liable for the cost of this case ---which they instituted themselves as they thought they wouldn't get caught stealing their clients' monies and keeping and profitting  from money that doesn't belong to them. Photo courtesy world-news-media.com

Page 3 of Richard Godosky’s supposed Affirmation in Opposition, in reality continuing to gripe that his white collar criminal cronies, who refuse to obey the law, paying reparations to their victims, are monetarily liable for the cost of this case —which they instituted themselves as they thought they wouldn’t get caught stealing their clients’ monies and keeping and profitting from money that doesn’t belong to them. Photo courtesy world-news-media.com

Richard throughout this document continuously bemoans his his and his criminal clients self-causing and imposed fate. His incessant wailing representative of extreme unhappiness the root of which begs the question, Mr. G, is your olympic sized swimming pool not deep enough for ya’?

Page 4 of richard Godosky's Affirmation in Opposition about nothing, as it is  non-substantive,  and highly redundant for he cannot make a legitiamte point as he is inadequate. Photo courtesy of world-news-media.com

Page 4 of richard Godosky’s Affirmation in Opposition about nothing, as it is non-substantive, and highly redundant for he cannot make a legitimate point as he and as is the non-existent evidence  this document is devoid of are both inadequate. Photo courtesy of world-news-media.com

Page 5 of Godosky's Affirmation in Oppostion,--no change all in the same vein. Mr. G is demanding  the appellate Division Mssrs.     genuflect and tie his shoelaces.  Photo courtesy world-news-media.com

Page 5 of Godosky’s Affirmation in Oppostion,–no change all in the same vein. Mr. G is demanding the appellate Division Messrs. genuflect and tie his shoelaces. Photo courtesy world-news-media.com

 

The Plaintiff, Charles McCray explained in his Motion, a huge document replete with extensive supporting evidence, that the only legal caption for the case being appealed from thus the case at hand was and is:

Plaintiff,
—against, —
1625 Emmons Ave.
Defendant

because William Hamel and Schwitzer & Associates, alias Dinkes & Schwitzer, who were supposed to be prosecuting the case for the plaintiff, instead, took bribes from defendants, i.e., 4 Defendants, Dave Cronen, Florence Grossman, Winifred Kiernan, to be phased out of the case, stealing the money designated for the plaintiff having it money laundered through the defense counsel, Goldberg Segalla lawyer, Rafael Otero, grubby hands of William Hamel, Joelle Jensen, Bert Taras,, –to name but a few involved in this contrivance.

As a matter of fact the Plaintiff gave a very distinctive explanation of the whys and the wherefores, of the above caption and how any deviation alluding to anything but a single defendant, to wit, 1625 Emmons Ave, in the caption as vastly illegal rendering any documents with anything else additionally invalid.

The initial excerpt: “the only legal and accurate caption as the Defendants, Dinkes & Schwitzer, (D&S)/Schwitzer & Associates, and head lawyer, William Hamel, –(prosecuted and convicted of Bribery and Insurance Fraud and suspended by the Disciplinary Committee), committed the same crimes while involved in my case taking bribes to deliberately exclude four, (4), of the individual defendants in the original case and on the original caption, who were supposed to be parties to the action and sued separately were not. Of those three, (3), were intentionally never litigated against, and the 4th, was dismissed by deliberate failure to take a default rendering all four, (4), non-defendants in this Appeal as well as in the underlying case, All unbeknownst to me and the Great American Insurance Company, (the Insurance company involved) swindling me and the latter.”

McCray, the plaintiff of course pointedly substantiated  the above with mountainous evidence which we have also obtained:

This is the only payment made to the Plaintiff, now Appellant, Mr. McCray. MINUS  bogus fees and disbursements. There were no other monies paid to the plaintiff. There should have been separate checks from Cronen, Grossman, Keirnan, and Salzburg paid to McCray. Alternatively, had McCray agreed, (which according to documents McCray did not), the aforementioned names should have been included on the check, the only payer of which is Great American Insurance Company who covered only 1625 Emmons Ave. --their management company Marvin Gold --who we might add isn't the management company of  individuals!

This is the only payment made to the Plaintiff, now Appellant, Mr. McCray. MINUS bogus fees and disbursements. There were no other monies paid to the plaintiff. There should have been separate checks from Cronen, Grossman, Keirnan, and Salzburg paid to McCray. Alternatively, had McCray agreed, (which according to documents McCray did not), the aformentioned names should have been included on the check, the only payer of which is Great American Insurance Company who covered only 1625 Emmons Ave. –their management company Marvin Gold –who we might add isn’t the management company of individuals!

Taras attorney fired in 2005 by Plaintiff, in 2011, covertly demanding his cut of kickbacks!   "on the Plaintiff's behalf" ! Photo courtesy of World-News-Media.com

Taras attorney fired in 2005 by Plaintiff, in 2011, covertly demanding his cut of kickbacks! “on the Plaintiff’s behalf” ! Photo courtesy of World-News-Media.com

Goldberg Segalla covert 5-12-05 Kickback letter to Dinkes & Schwitzer/Schwitzer & Associates in response to Taras' 5/2/05  fax. PHoto courtesy of world-news-media.com

Goldberg Segalla covert 5-12-05 Kickback letter to Dinkes & Schwitzer/Schwitzer & Associates in response to Taras’ 5/2/05 fax. PHoto courtesy of world-news-media.com

1st page of most recent Court Order Decision of Second Department Appellate Division Photo courtesy of world-news-media.com

1st page of most recent Court Order Decision of Second Department Appellate Division Photo courtesy of world-news-media.com

 

2nd page of Second Department Appellate Division Court Order Decision complicit with the supposed alleged case fixing scams rampant in  the Judiciary, Photo courtesy of world-news-media.com

2nd page of Second Department Appellate Division Court Order Decision complicit with the supposed alleged case fixing scams rampant in the Judiciary, Photo courtesy of world-news-media.com

However, the guardians of the court and their guardians, to wit, the jurists , the latter of which are supposed to mete out justice to the rest of us, yet are as corrupt as the eon is long chose apparently, in their lack of wisdom that they would deny Charles McCray’s REPLY Motion to Godosky’s unhinged cries for the illegal help to stop him, a layperson from obtaining his own money also requested as relief, a case conducted with transparency, abidance to the law, and the deterrence of illegally embedding  or withdrawing of documents that are not in the file by Hamel, Schwitzer & Associates,  Jensen, Godosky, who have already done so. Excerpted Charles McCray’s Reply: “I didn’t have transparency in the case being appealed from and I should have gotten it in an American Court House. I would like to have it in the Appellate Division”

The request for such things as transparency– a given in any court in the U.S. was “inter alia” by  wise guys who are erroneously sitting on the bench, and the laughing stock of the legal profession as  the request by McCray for abidance to law as part of the relief request was right there in black and white in his REPLY papers, Messrs., Chambers, J.P., Hall, Cohen and Miller, JJ..

We will further add that at this point we have seen if not all relevant documents than most. Hamel, Schwitzer & Associates , Joelle Jensen and Taras who stole from the plaintiff, Mr. McCray millions of dollars, by taking bribes, owe, far more than  the originally estimated, $8, million.  The amount owed Charles McCray exceeds $10 million which we will shout from the rafters.

The amount that Charles McCray sued for is $2,50,000 which is in tact, in writting and can’t be refuted, as it is in the records, now in two courthouses at this point–that is unless there is more evidence tampering which our contacts have been keeping an eye out for.

 

Page 12 from the Original and Supplemental Summons filed by 1st crooked lawyer hired for the case but who was fired by Charles McCray for taking bribes, the task of which was illegally taken over by William Hamel when he was hired as he was in the midst of taking bribes on other cases. Photo courtesy of world-news-media.com

Page 12 from the Original and Supplemental Summons filed by 1st crooked lawyer hired for the case but who was fired by Charles McCray for taking bribes, the task of which was illegally taken over by William Hamel when he was hired as he was in the midst of taking bribes on other cases. Photo courtesy of world-news-media.com

 

Since Charles McCray sued for $2,50,000 per each Defendant and Hamel, Taras, Jensen, Schwitzer & Associates,  took under the table payments from Rafael Otero of Goldberg Segalla, and Cronen, Grossman, Kiernan, and Salzburg, are missing from the case, and they and their money is missing from the check, than Hamel, Taras, Jensen, Schwitzer & Associates have the money.

Taras attorney fired in 2005 by Plaintiff, in 2011, covertly demanding his cut of kickbacks!   "on the Plaintiff's behalf" ! Photo courtesy of World-News-Media.com

Taras attorney fired in 2005 by Plaintiff, in 2011, covertly demanding his cut of kickbacks! “on the Plaintiff’s behalf” ! Photo courtesy of World-News-Media.com

Goldberg Segalla covert 5-12-05 Kickback letter to Dinkes & Schwitzer/Schwitzer & Associates in response to Taras' 5/2/05  fax. PHoto courtesy of world-news-media.com

Goldberg Segalla covert 5-12-05 Kickback letter to Dinkes & Schwitzer/Schwitzer & Associates in response to Taras’ 5/2/05 fax. PHoto courtesy of world-news-media.com

4-28-15 $50K check with name crossed out28042015_2

 

If what we say is untrue, then we challenge you, Hamel, Taras, Jensen, Schwitzer & Associates, Defense Counsel lawyers Goldberg Segalla, Rafael Otero, explain IN WRITING all the documents that point to nothing else other than  exchanging unauthorized funds with Defense counsel lawyers Goldberg Segalla, and the missing monies from the settlement check. — That’s all you have to do. (That said, by the way there are many, many documents you need to explain). We’ll post them all!

But barring that, William Hamel, Schwitzer & Associates, Bert Taras, Rafael Otero, have to pay reparations to their victims.

 

 

Next 2 installments:

1-The 2nd Affirmation in Opposition  brazenly submitted by Richard Godosky, this time with 2 pages of moans and groans, but with the same amount of exhibits used for evidence, –that is ZERO!

2- According to inside sources, convicted criminal William Hamel deliberately left incriminating documents pointing the finger at otherwise unrevealed accomplices to share the blame and the consequences.

 

 

 

 

Please watch for more searing articles such as these on other websites and blogs we support such as counterpunch.org, among the websites who share our sentiment and our fervor for giving the money back to the victims of white-collar criminal.

We want to thank our many diligent contacts in our subscribing and donating Readership as well as in the legal profession for their help, our sources for their tips. Keep up the good work.

 

AS PROMISED: Richard Godosky Bogus 5-Page Aff. In Opp.Lacking Any Evidence  Illegally Including In Caption The 4 Defendants, Who Paid Bribes To William Hamel and Dinkes & Schwtizer Alias, Schwitzer & Associates To be Ousted From Case, Dave Cronen, Florence Grossman, Winifred Kiernan, Accepted In Full (Via Crony Godosky Covert Decree), By Allegedly Corrupt 2nd Dept. Appellate Division Judges, Chambers, J.P., Hall, Cohen and Miller, JJ., Granted In Full By Same, (Allegedly, right!)
We are now on Facebook.

THE INTERNET IS MIGHTIER THAN THE SWORD

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s

What’s this?

You are currently reading AS PROMISED: Richard Godosky Bogus 5-Page Aff. In Opp.Lacking Any Evidence Illegally Including In Caption The 4 Defendants, Who Paid Bribes To William Hamel and Dinkes & Schwtizer Alias, Schwitzer & Associates To be Ousted From Case, Dave Cronen, Florence Grossman, Winifred Kiernan, Accepted In Full (Via Crony Godosky Covert Decree), By Allegedly Corrupt 2nd Dept. Appellate Division Judges, Chambers, J.P., Hall, Cohen and Miller, JJ., Granted In Full By Same, (Allegedly, right!) at world-news-media.com.

meta

%d bloggers like this: