Teaneck, NJ 07666
November 1, 2010
Loretta A. Preska
S. District Court
Southern District of New
U. S. Courthouse
500 Pearl Street
New York, NY 10007
Re: Removal of Judge
Richard J. Holwell, Case #10 Civ. 02239 (RJH) (JLC)
Dear Judge Preska:
distributed American Jury Institute pamphlets in front of the U. S.
District Courthouse for the Southern District of New York at noon on 12
different dates. I have been arrested 10 times, robbed once by
the federal police, and ignored once. On seven occasions I was
taken to hospitals (Saint Vincent Catholic Hospital once, Bellevue
Medical Center three times, and New York Downtown Hospital three times)
for what is euphemistically called “extraordinary
these reasons, I am the Plaintiff in Case #10 Civ. 02239 (RJH) (JLC),
in which Judge Richard J. Holwell is the presiding judge. The
Defendants are: Department of Homeland Security, New York City Fire
Department, Saint Vincent Catholic Hospital, Bellevue Medical Center,
New York Downtown Hospital, U. S. Central Violations Bureau, and some
of their employees. I am requesting that Judge Holwell be removed
from this case and replaced by a judge who will provide a fair and
impartial trial. The reasons for this request are the following:
No guarantee of a jury trial
Plaintiff’s complaint was submitted to the Pro Se
Office on January 27, 2010. Service of Defendants, except for the
John Doe Defendants, was done on May 20 and 21, 2010.
“Additional Incidents” to the complaint was submitted on
September 8, 2010. In the original complaint is a motion for a
jury trial, which is my right under Amendment VII of the U. S.
Constitution. Judge Holwell has not acted on that motion.
Apparently he has some reluctance to comply.
No judgment against Bellevue Medical Center
Summons were served on all but the John Doe Defendants on May 20
and 21, 2010. No response was received from Bellevue Medial
Center or any of its employees. On July 27, 2010, I wrote the
following to Judge Holwell:
“According to Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, the defendant must respond to the plaintiff within 21 days
or ‘judgment by default WILL (not may) be entered against you for
the relief demanded in the complaint.’ The U. S. District
Court S. D. N. Y. claims to follow this rule. A copy of its
statement of policy is enclosed. It is now over 2 months and
Plaintiff has received no correspondence from Bellevue Hospital or any
of its employees.”
“Enclosed is a motion for enforcement. Plaintiff
demands that it be executed in conformance with Federal Rule 12 of
Civil Procedure. Thank you for your expected cooperation.”
Judge Holwell has not
issued an ORDER, nor has any other action been
taken on this motion.
Stay for St. Vincent Catholic Hospital
July 29, 2010, Saint Vincent Catholic Hospital requested a stay in
proceedings, because it had declared bankruptcy and was in bankruptcy
court at the time. I replied in a letter of August 2, 2010, to Judge
James Cott, who was assisting Judge Holwell with this case, as follows:
“However, I do not have any claims on St. Vincent’s
Catholic Hospital at this time. I see three issues here:
possible outcome of the current lawsuit is that the Court order St.
Vincent’s Catholic Hospital to stop acting as a law enforcement
agent in cooperation with law enforcement officials. Health care
and law enforcement should be separate occupations. Such a decision is
not a present claim on the hospital and is not covered by the stay.
This civil suit will drag on forever as is the custom of this
court. I filed a complaint in January, 2008, which still has not
completed the discovery phase. Apparently this court does not
understand that justice delayed is justice denied. If this trial
results in a monetary award, it will be long after the bankruptcy stay
the bankruptcy claim puts a stay on all debts, then a person could
steal or borrow $1 million on Tuesday and declare bankruptcy on
Wednesday. The legal battle will go on for years, so that when
the stay is lifted, the $1 million will have been spent and no longer
exist. In such a situation the law is ridiculous. The court
should nullify the law and ignore the stay.
request that you deny Ms. Totten’s claim and keep
St.Vincent’s Catholic Hospital and its employees as
Defendants. Thank you for your consideration.”
August 18, 2010, Judge Holwell granted that stay for Saint Vincent
Catholic Hospital. This seems to me to be a ridiculous decision,
even if it is in accord with the law. On October 8, 2010, I asked
him to rescind the stay, but received no response to this request.
Immunity to prosecution of New York City Fire Department
a letter of August 23, 2010, the New York City Corporation Counsel,
representing the New York City Fire Department, claimed that the Fire
Department has immunity, because it is a department of New York City,
and cannot be sued. Why any entity should be immune from
prosecution for any illegal actions is not clear to me. I agreed
to add the City of New York, Michael Bloomberg Mayor, as a
Defendant. Nothing has been heard since from Judge Holwell
concerning this matter nor from the NY City Corporation Counsel.
No response to motion to recover property
May 25, 2010, I was arrested by the Department of Homeland Security
Police on a warrant for my arrest in connection with my criminal trial
in NY City Criminal Court. I, and most of my property, was transferred
to the NY City Police, since this was not a federal matter. This
property included my carry (“tote”) bag, pants, sweater,
sneakers, one sock, car keys, cell phone, cough drops, two Metro cards,
two pens, facial tissues, U. S. Constitution, bus schedule, citation,
pill box with teeth cleaners, clip board, JURY INFO sign, and pamphlets.
was held for 2 weeks in Riker’s Island prison before receiving a
hearing in front of a magistrate on June 8, 2010. At the hearing,
the criminal case against me was dismissed in the interest of
justice. However the NY City Police will not return my
property. I have asked the Criminal Court of Manhattan, the U. S.
Attorney for the Department of Homeland Security, and submitted motion
papers to Judge Holwell on September 30, 2010, to return the property
not needed as evidence.
U. S. Attorney is unwilling to do this because the property is in the
possession of NY City Police. However I maintain that it is the
duty of the Department of Homeland Security to obtain the release of my
property, since it is the Homeland Security Police who stole it
from me and transferred it to the NY City Police.
No response to identify John Doe Defendants except by U. S. Attorney
a letter of September 8, 2010 to Judge James Cott, who was assisting
Judge Holwell with this case, I pointed out that in the enclosed
addition to my complaint are included three motions:
“Motion to delay
service of the new Defendants until all the John Doe Defendants are
identified, so that an updated complaint can be submitted with all the
Defendants added at once.”
“I am notifying
Defense counsels, through copies of this correspondence, to provide the
identities of all John Doe Defendants. They should be given 30
days from the receipt of this correspondence to comply. If I do
not have the identity of all the John Doe Defendants within 30 days, I
shall submit motion papers for compliance.”
“I am notifying
Defense counsels, through copies of this correspondence, to return my
seized property within 15 days. If this property is not returned
within 15 days, I shall submit motion papers for compliance.”
Enclosed in my letter of July 27, 2010 to Judge Holwell were
motion papers to find judgment against Bellevue Hospital for failure to
reply to service on May 20 and 21, 2010. It is now over three
months since service and there has been no reply from Bellevue Hospital
or any of its employees. Therefore I am asking you or Judge
Holwell to respond to that motion by return mail. According to
Court rules, you have no option but to issue judgment against those
U. S. Attorney was very cooperative. He gave me the names of the
federal John Doe Defendants and the addresses where they could be
served. The other attorneys ignored this request. Judge
Holwell has failed to take any action.
7. N. Y. Downtown Hospital
submitted hearsay testimony which judge accepts
October 8, 2010, I responded to a request mailed on September 22, 2010,
from Alexandra Fridel, an attorney apparently representing NY Downtown
Hospital, who requested that NY Downtown Hospital be removed as a
Defendant, because it is an independent actor. However Ms. Fridel
has not made an appearance in the case, so the brief requires no
answer. Moreover the brief was incomplete in three ways:
addresses one of my incidents at New York Downtown Hospital. I
was brought there on three occasions. The other two events must
Of the 5 people whose affidavits are included, only one witnessed
the event. The other 4 provide hearsay evidence, which is
interesting and useful, but it is hearsay and not admissible. I
will need the identities of all the people who attended to me and their
The hospitals and
federal police are in collusion. The hospitals are not independent
actors. At the present time, I do not know of other arrested
individuals who have been taken to New York Downtown Hospital.
However from the police conversations at my arrests, it is clear that
this is routine procedure. I am investigating the possibility of
other arrestees who have been brought to hospitals.
I am treated differently than the other attorneys
October 4, 2010, I responded to Judge Holwell, that I could not respond
in the usual time of 30 days, because of my travel schedule and the
large number and length of the laws and court cases cited. On
October 11, 2010, I notified the judge that in order to respond
properly to the brief, I would need to have affidavits from the
hospital personnel who actually attended to me. Since the
Hospital will not provide that information, I will need an extension of
time until that information is provided.
October 20, 2010, Judge Holwell dismissed my request for an extension
of time, but gave NY Downtown Hospital until November 29, 2010, to file
a motion to dismiss my complaint with respect to additional
incidents. It has until November 29, 2010 to do so, and I have
until December 29, 2010 to reply. No mention was made of granting
my motion to obtain the affidavits from the hospital personnel who
actually attended to me.
had written to Judge Holwell that I could not reply by that date,
because I needed statements from the John Doe Defendants who examined
me in the hospital. First I needed the identities of these
people, so I could get their testimony. Even though one of the
New York Downtown Hospital attorneys and the New York City Corporation
Counsel had previously been granted extensions of time; and the U.S.
Attorney had been granted two extensions of time, Judge Holwell denied
my request for an extension.
Furthermore, I was somewhat shocked that Judge Holwell would
consider such a request from the NY Downtown Hospital Attorneys.
They were asking the judge to decide a matter of fact, not of
law. I have not challenged the law against independent
actors. I claim that the hospitals are not independent actors,
but are in collusion with the police. It is the responsibility of
the jury, not a judge, to decide matters of fact.
Plaintiff ordered not to correspond with Judge Holwell
the same ORDER of October 20, 2010, Judge
Holwell has ordered me not to contact him in the future, but only to
contact the District Court through the Pro Se Clerk. The defense
attorneys are allowed to contact Judge Holwell directly.
have released this letter to the public. I think that it should
know what transpires in a federal court. Thank you for your
Counsel Pro Se
CC: Judge Richard J.
Holwell, U. S. District Court, Southern District of New York, U. S.
Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007
Clerk, Room 230, U. S. District Court, Southern District of New York,
U. S. Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007
Pellegrino, Assistant U. S. Attorney, 86 Chambers Street, 3rd Floor,
New York, NY 10007, 212–637–2689
Berson, Assistant Corporation Counsel, The City of New York, Law
Department, 100 Church Street, New York, NY 10007,
Elizabeth O’Brien Totten, Kaufman Borgeest & Ryan LLP, 120
Broadway, New York, NY 10271, 212–980–9600
Drucker, Martin Clearwater & Bell LLP, 220 East 42nd Street, New
York, NY 10017, 212–916–0955
Alexandra Fridel, Martin Clearwater & Bell LLP, 220 East 42nd
Street, New York, NY 10017, 212–916–0976