Scribd
Upload
116 views4 pages

10-05-15 Huminski V Rutland Pollice Department Et Al (1:99-cv-160) Alleged Honest Services Fraud at The US District Court - Vermont

Records in the case of Huminski v Rutland Police Department, from the US District Court, Vermont, detailed below in May 14, 2010 letter to Attorney Bertrand – appearing for Judge Nancy Corsones, mimicked in great detail the case of Fine v Sheriff of Los Angeles County (2:09-cv-01914) at the US District Court, Central District of California, where Attorney Kevin McCormick engaged in false appearances for Judge David Yaffe, while not Counsel of Record in the case, where the Judicial Council of California, which retained Attorney McCormick for such false appearances, insisted on referring to the case using a false caption, corrupting the name of first Defendant as "Sheriff of Los Angeles Court", [1] and where invalid NEFs were produced by the Court for Minutes, Orders, Judgment, and Mandate served in the case. [2]Service of Minutes and Orders with invalid NEFs - missing the Court Stamps - was previously documented in Huminski v Rutland Police Dept et al, as well. [3]

Uploaded by

Human Rights Alert - NGO (RA)
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
116 views4 pages

10-05-15 Huminski V Rutland Pollice Department Et Al (1:99-cv-160) Alleged Honest Services Fraud at The US District Court - Vermont

Records in the case of Huminski v Rutland Police Department, from the US District Court, Vermont, detailed below in May 14, 2010 letter to Attorney Bertrand – appearing for Judge Nancy Corsones, mimicked in great detail the case of Fine v Sheriff of Los Angeles County (2:09-cv-01914) at the US District Court, Central District of California, where Attorney Kevin McCormick engaged in false appearances for Judge David Yaffe, while not Counsel of Record in the case, where the Judicial Council of California, which retained Attorney McCormick for such false appearances, insisted on referring to the case using a false caption, corrupting the name of first Defendant as "Sheriff of Los Angeles Court", [1] and where invalid NEFs were produced by the Court for Minutes, Orders, Judgment, and Mandate served in the case. [2]Service of Minutes and Orders with invalid NEFs - missing the Court Stamps - was previously documented in Huminski v Rutland Police Dept et al, as well. [3]

Uploaded by

Human Rights Alert - NGO (RA)
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

Dr Z

Joseph Zernik, PhD


PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750;
Fax: 323.488.9697; Email: [email protected]
Blog: http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/ Scribd: http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert

10-05-15 RE: Huminski v Rutland Police Dept (1:99-cv-160) – Alleged


Honest Services Fraud at the US District Court, Vermont

Records in the case of Huminski v Rutland Police Department, from the US District Court,
Vermont, detailed below in May 14, 2010 letter to Attorney Bertrand – appearing for
Judge Nancy Corsones, mimicked in great detail the case of Fine v Sheriff of Los Angeles
County (2:09-cv-01914) at the US District Court, Central District of California, where
Attorney Kevin McCormick engaged in false appearances for Judge David Yaffe, while not
Counsel of Record in the case, where the Judicial Council of California, which retained
Attorney McCormick for such false appearances, insisted on referring to the case using a
false caption, corrupting the name of first Defendant as "Sheriff of Los Angeles
Court", [1] and where invalid NEFs were produced by the Court for Minutes, Orders,
Judgment, and Mandate served in the case. [2]

Service of Minutes and Orders with invalid NEFs - missing the Court Stamps - was
previously documented in Huminski v Rutland Police Dept et al, as well. [3]

LINKS:

[1] Correspondence with California Judicial Council in re: Engagement of Kevin McCormick in the
habeas corpus of Richard Fine.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/28645522/10-03-19b-Richard-Fine-Dr-Zernik-Mr-Carrizosa-Corresponde-in-re-Case-Caption
http://www.scribd.com/doc/28787678/10-03-22-Richard-Fine-Final-Response-by-Mr-Carrizosa-California-Judicial-Council-Re-
Case-Caption-s

[2] See Human Rights Alert Filing with the United Nations, linked as [3], in letter to Attorney Bertrand, below.

[3] Huminski v Rutland Police Dept (1:99-cv-160) – Letter to Prof Fallon, Harvard Law School,
regarding two NEFs served on Huminski with no Court Stamps.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/25112472/10-01-12-Huminski-v-Rutland-Pollice-Department-et-al-199-cv-160-Letter-to-Prof-Fallon-Harvard-
Law-in-re-Two-false-Huminski-NEFs-bearing-no-court

_______________________
May 14, 2010

Attorney Shalmon A. Bertrand


KENLAN, SCHWIEBERT, FACEY & GOSS, P.C.
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
 Page 2/4 May 15, 2010

RE: Huminski v Rutland Police Dept (1:99-cv-160) – February 12, 2010 Defendant Corsones’ objection
to Huminski’s Motion for Limited Discovery and related issues.

Attorney Bertrand:

I am in receipt of your paper, referenced above, [1] and also of Judge Murtha’s Memo and Order. [2] I found
some technical deficiencies in both papers, where I request your assistance, which would require minimal
effort at best:

1) Your service of the February 12, 2010 Defendant Corsones’ Objection failed to include the NEF
from the US District Court Vermont’s CM/ECF. [1]

As is patent in the various users manuals of the US district courts, the Notices of Electronic Filings
(NEFs) are today the authentication instruments of the US courts. However, since I am not authorized
in CM/ECF – the Court’s case management system, at the US District Court Vermont, I was denied
service and notice of such critical paper through CM/ECF by the Court itself.

The record, referenced above, [1] showed the US District Court header imprint on its pages:

Case 1:99-cv-00160-jgm Document 351 Filed 02/12/10 Page 1 of 4

Therefore, it was obvious that you served Proposed Intervenor Zernik his copy of Defendant Consones’
paper after its filing at the US District Court in Vermont. For such filing to be honest, valid, and
effectual, you should have received by email in response to your electronic filing a Notice of Electronic
Filing (NEF) from the US District Court in Vermont’s CM/ECF – the Court’s case management system.

In fact, you referred to that fact in your “Certificate of Service” (Dkt #351-1), where for some of the
parties you stated that the authentication would be delivered “VIA CM/ECF.”

I therefore request that you forward to me the NEF for the paper you served on me, so that I would be
able to discern whether the paper that you served on me was indeed a paper that was an honest, valid,
and effectual filing at the US District Court, Vermont. Given that the NEF is an electronic record, I
would be grateful if you forward it by email to <[email protected]>.

2) Your February 12, 2010 Defendant Corsones’ Objection [1] failed to state the correct caption of
the case at hand.

The Court lists the first Defendant in the case as “Rutland City Police Department.” [2] You entirely failed
to list such Defendant, and therefore, the case caption of your paper was inadequate or invalid.

I therefore request that you please serve me a corrected paper, alternatively – a reasonable explanation for the
case caption used by you.

3) Your February 12, 2010 Defendant Corsones’ Objection [1] failed to include an adequate
signature box.

I would therefore be grateful if you could forward me an explicit statement that you were and are Counsel of
Record for Defendant Corsones in the caption of Scott Huminski Plaintiff, v. Rutland City Police Department,
Rutland County Sheriff's Department, Town of Rutland, Unnamed Members of the Rutland County Sheriff's
 Page 3/4 May 15, 2010

Department, Unnamed Rutland Police Officer, State of Vermont, Nancy Corsones, Karen Predom, Vermont State
Police, Unnamed Vermont State Police Officer, Rutland District Court, R.J. Elrick, S. Schutt, Robert Emerick, M.
Patricia Zimmerman, Bennington County Sheriff's Department, Gary Forrest, City of Rutland, Rutland
County, Defendants. (1:99-CV-160) at the United States District Court For The District Of Vermont.

4) The Court’s February 12, 2010 Memo and Order [2] was likewise served with no authentication
at all.

The Court served its Memo and Order with no authentication at all. Given that I am denied access to the
NEFs in CM/ECF, there is no way that I could discern whether the paper served on me required “full faith
and credit.”

I would therefore be grateful for your help in forwarding to me by email the NEF which you surely received
by email from CM/ECF on the February 12, 2010 Judge Murtha’s Memo and Order.

Your help in these matters would be greatly appreciated. No doubt you realize that such simple
technical matters are critical for the furtherance of justice and for the safeguard of the Human Rights of
all who reside in the United States in view of the manner in which the US courts are today administered
through PACER and CM/ECF.

Truly,

___/s/_______
Joseph Zernik, PhD
<[email protected]>
PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750;
Fax: 323.488.9697; Email: [email protected]
Blog: http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/ Scribd: http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert

CC:
David L. Cleary
[email protected]

Pietro J. Lynn (terminated)


[email protected]
[email protected]

Mark J. Patane
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]. vt.us
[email protected]

Heather E. Thomas (terminated)


[email protected]
[email protected]

Scott Huminski
[email protected]

LINKS:
 Page 4/4 May 15, 2010

[1] February 12, 2010 Defendant Corsones’ Objection


http://www.scribd.com/doc/31305312/10-02-12-Huminski-v-Rutland-Sheriff-s-Department-et-al-at-the-US-
District-Court-Vermont-False-Memo-and-Order-served-with-no-NEF-at-all-s

[2] February 12, 2010 Judge Murtah’s Memo and Order


http://www.scribd.com/doc/31305312/10-02-12-Huminski-v-Rutland-Sheriff-s-Department-et-al-at-the-US-
District-Court-Vermont-False-Memo-and-Order-served-with-no-NEF-at-all-s

You might also like