Brooklyn Surrogate's Court 2005

Keep up to date with the latest Newspaper and Internet articles on this year's Brooklyn Surrogate Court race

Friday, September 06, 1996

Surrogate's Court Primaries (endorsements)

New York Times - Editorial - September 6, 1996

Surrogate's Court Primaries

Next Tuesday's Democratic primary elections for the obscure but powerful post of Surrogate's Court judge in Manhattan and Brooklyn have sparked intense competition and bitter debates over personality and patronage. Voters need to decide which of the candidates have the best mix of integrity, expertise, judicial temperament and administrative skills for a job that entails overseeing wills, estates and adoptions and dispensing millions of dollars in fees to lawyers acting as executors, guardians and estate trustees.

***

The Brooklyn Surrogate's Court has long put the needs of politicians before those of the public. All four candidates vow to clean up the place. But only State Supreme Court Justice Michael Feinberg has strong credentials. Justice Feinberg had extensive experience as a private lawyer in the Surrogate's Court before becoming a Civil Court judge and Supreme Court justice. He has a clear grasp of the court's problems and could do a better job than his three opponents -- Howard Lasher, who capped his lackluster career in the State Assembly by becoming a lackluster member of the City Council, and two undistinguished Civil Court judges, Lila Gold and Ferne Goldstein.

Justice Feinberg has promised reforms ranging from a panel to screen appointments and recommend changes in how the place is run, down to keeping the office open at lunchtime as a convenience to the public. But his ardent backing by the Democratic county organization, which wants to retain its patronage jobs and fees, is disquieting. With some wariness we endorse Justice Feinberg on the basis of his good record, and trust that he will stay true to his reform pledges.

5 Comments:

Blogger truthbtold said...

Make no mistake about it. Norman is supporting Diana Johnson and is doing nothing to help Lawrence Knipel. If Norman was for Knipel, then why put Johnson in the race. Norman could have just had Knipel in against Lopez-Torres, where Lopez would get crushed. With a 45% or so African-American turnout in the race, and Norman backing her, she has a leg up. Meanwhile, the politics as usual folks are working feverishly to get Johnson in.

Lopez-Torres is an affable lady but has been routinely criticized by the appeals courts for bizarre rulings for example... granting custody to the father of a child where the child testified that the father burned cigarettes into her arm....in part of her ruling Lopez-Torres said the burn didn't look too bad. The appeals court was so offended that they sent the case back to the lower court with specefic instructions to keep the case away from Lopez-Torres.

She also has been reversed by the appellate courts more than 60% of the time where the state average for reversal is about 22%.

It is one thing to face up against the political machine..and I applaud that, but you can't skimp in a court that deals with widows and orphans. You need the best qualified. Look at Knipel's superb record as being the go-to guy when administrative judges have problems in the court, they give it to Knipel to reform. Don't let the fact that his wife is a district leader (by the way, a reform district leader who defeated the Mel Miller party regulars about 13 years ago) held against his unblemished accomplishments that even his opponents agree to. In fact, Knipel got 40% of the vote in a recent CBID (reform/against the machine club) meeting where even Lopez-Torres supporters admit he is a great judge.

6:36 PM  
Blogger truthbtold said...

And another thing..Norman and the machine are supporting John Sampson for District Attorney...everybody knows it although there is no official endoresement since that would be the kiss of death since Norman is facing criminal charges...he is doing the same thing with Johnson.

6:39 PM  
Blogger job opportunitya said...

Striking blog. I liked the site I will be back
again! Websurfing is a good way to find blogs like
yours.
You must peep out my no win no fee scotland blog.

12:17 PM  
Blogger patentgate said...

Patentgate ~ I wonder if this recent concern of Proskauer in electronic evidence is a result of their attempt to suppress evidence against their firm in the matter of stolen patents from Iviewit technologies. The theft of the intellectual properties has led to court room requests for Proskauer to procure documents they have stored electronically and their refusal to submit such documents, case Palm Beach County, Proskauer Rose LLP v. Iviewit Holdings, Iviewit Technologies and Iviewit.com, Inc. It has also been uncovered that these corporations in this case were actually illegal set up by Proskauer to mirror their client, Iviewit's companies, in efforts to steal intellectual properties through an intricate artifice to defraud inventors and investors of their technologies. Further, Proskauer has converted these technologies by setting up an anticompetitive monopolistic patent pooling scheme commonly known as MPEG or MPEGLA, whereby Kenneth Rubenstein acted as counsel to Iviewit and then stole the technologies he was supposed to patent for Iviewit, to proliferate in his patent pool that he controls with Proskauer and others.

The inventions were invented by Eliot Bernstein, Jude Rosario, Zackirul Shirajee and others and where Proskauer representing these inventors went about a series of frauds to steal them and monetize them through MPEG. The crimes are currently under investigation at the United States Patent and Trademark Office and the attorneys are under investigation with the United States Patent & Trademark Office Office of Enrollment and Discipline which requlates corruption by federally approved patent attorneys registered with the USPTO. Other law firms such as Foley and Lardner are involved in the missapropriations.

Read the entire story at http://www.iviewit.tv or the blog Patentgate at http://patentgate.blogspot.com .

Proskauer partners Steven C. Krane, former President of the New York State Bar Association and Stephen Krane who is married to Chief Judge of the New York courts Judge Judith Kaye have also been implicated in attempting to derail Iviewit's legal efforts through undisclosed conflicts of interest and violations of Supreme Court offices in New York's bar association.

:lol:

2:00 PM  
Blogger Ak Alaska House Cleaning said...

Extraordinary blog. Your site was hip and fresh
and we'll visit it again! I love surfing the internet
for blogs.
Everyday of the month you need to peep my house cleaning blog.

2:57 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home