1. Home2. Once Upon A Time3. Victim's Statement4. My Search for Justice5. Descent into Hell6. U.S. Laws Violated by Senator Uzamere7. Nigerian Laws Violated by Senator Uzamere8. Ignored by Federal Agencies9. Ignored by Nigerian Authorities10. Victims' Loss of Child Support11. The Uzamere Family12. Municipal Employees Who Helped Senator Uzamere13. John Gray and Non-Profit Legal Community14. Hall of Shame15. 1st Judicial Blow By African-American Judge Thomas16. Law Firm of Allen E. Kaye17. Too Many Discrepancies...18. Allen E. Kaye And His Diabolical Talmud-Following Minions19. Will Sampson Staff Refuse To Help Identity Fraud Victims?20. Law Office of Gladstein & Messinger21. Patrick Synmoie's Attempts to Hide22. Consulate General of Nigeria23. Strange Chat with Senator Ekweremadu24. Proof of Legal Marriage25. Proof of Illegal Marriage/Identity Fraud26. Senator Uzamere's Attempts to Hide Crimes Will Fail27. The Proof...28. Success -- The Proof Is Finally Here!29. Will Senator Uzamere Evade Child Support Again?30. Nigeria's New Commitment to Protect Child Abandoned by Sen. Uzamere31. Judge Prus -- What Gives?32. Back on Track!33. Eugene Uzamere -- Third Attorney to Break the Law34. Petitioner's Verified Petition35. Supplemental Verified Petition36. Judge Prus Recuses Himself37. Eugene's Failed Attempt to Thwart Justice38. Kate Ezomo -- Diabolical Liar39. Letters of Complaint Against Kate Ezomo40. My Factual Response to Imaginary Cousin Godwin41. Federal Action Against Defendant Dismissed42. Open Letters to the FBI43. Open Letter to All U.S. Judges44. Open Letter to Ehigie and Eugene45. Tara's Affidavit46. $100,000,000.00 Lawsuit Against Corrupt Fiduciaries47. Will Fiduciaries Settle?48. New York City Defrauds Disabled Schvartze49. There Is No Cousin Godwin!50. Warning Letter to Governor and Chief Justice of New York State51. Deprived of Child Support by Allen Kaye52. Can International Agency Help?53. Chief Judge Wood's Court54. Will NYS' Dept. Disc. Committee and Commission on Judicial Conduct Be Corrupted?55. Subpoena Planned for Judge Garaufis56. No Negotiations for Justice...Justice is Owed!57. Will Attorneys Sign Affirmation?58. Am I Finally Being Taken Seriously?59. Evidentiary Hearing is Scheduled!60. Amy Feinstein Refuses to Prosecute!61. Robert Juceam's Useless Excuses62. Appellate Brief pages 24 to end63. No Justice -- No Peace!64. Happy Birthday My Beautiful Angel65. Are You A Victim of A Green Card Marriage Scam?66. End Green Card Marriage Sponsorship67. How to Report an Immigration Scammer and the Attorney68. Is The End Finally in Sight?69. Will Appellate Division Justices Decide Fairly?70. What Will NYSCJC's Response Be?71. How Will NYSDDC Respond?72. Will Obama's Administration Coerce Helpless Schvartze's Silence73. Will U.S. Department of State's Secretary Rise To The Challenge?74. Eugene Uzamere Calls It Quits75. Bigot Judge Sunshine Continues Courtroom Corruption76. Schvartze's Complaints Still Ignored By Appellate Division's White Judiciary77. More Talmudic Bias and Anti-Schvartze Racism At SDNY78. Senator Uzamere...You Are The Husband!79. Will U.S. Solicitor General Office Look On Idly?80. What will SCOTUS Do?81. Why did they disobey?82. Cabranes' Fraud Upon The Court83. Is Hinds-Radix Their 'Secret' Weapon?84. New York State Lawsuit for Fraud85. Judge Sunshine Is A Loser86. Judge Sunshine Out of Options87. Petitioner Prepares Request for Rehearing...88. Petition for Rehearing89. Loser Sunshine's Last Hurrah90. Lawsuit Against Daily News and Scott Shifrel91. Mort Zuckerman's Bigoted Tabloid92. Corruption at Nassau County Supreme Court and Nassau County Clerk93. Judge Scuccimarra Ruling94. Defendants Have Defaulted95. Will Judge Parga Accepts Anne Carroll's Drivel Because Defendants Are Rich Jews?96. New York and Anne B. Carroll97. Lawsuit Against President98. Will Obama Listen?99. Open Letter to Al Jazeera, President Obama and Judge Allegra100. More Court Shenanigans?101. Howard U. Schmokescreen102. Into the fire...103. What Will The New York State Division of Human Rights Do?104. Housing Court Corruption105. Mayor Bloomberg's Finest106. FEGS in Criminal Conspiracy107. FEGS Gave Victim No Choice108. What Will The New York State Supreme Court Do?109. What Will Court of Claims Do?110. Abuse of Religion Not New111. How Wicked Are They?112. What Lies???113. Federal Lawsuit114. Disastrous Results to Appeal115. Judge Garaufis' Discriminatory Decision116. Garaufis' Talmudic Shenanigans117. FOIA Hiding Evidence118. Congressional Testimony119. Unintelligible Complaint of Rachel G. Yohalem120. Uzamere v. USA, et al121. Judicial Whores Willy and Patty122. Uzamere v. USA123. Find an Unbiased Court124. U.S. Government Blacklists Own Citizens125. Appellate Brief First Circuit126. U.S. Government Hides Prosecution127. A Jewish RICO128. Jews' Demonic Doctrine -- Law of the Moser129. Mishkin Yanks His Own Nuts130. Will African American Victim of Grand Laceny Receive Justice?131. Judicial Ethics Hypocrite132. Jew Shenanigans Involved in Random Selection of Morally Compromised Judge133. Please save my family!134. Psychopaths135. Jewish Paradigm Put Jews on Top136. Pretender Bharara137. Int'l Complaint Against Israel, United States and Nigeria138. Memorial of Impeachment139. A Real Man

U.S. District Court's Decision Discriminates against
Mentally Disabled Litigant and her Helpless Schvartze Family

New York State Office of Mental Health uses innocent employees to call plaintiff's home to bribe/blackmail her with promises of federally-funded services and free food to trick/coerce plaintiff into not involving the New York State Attorney General's Office.

Judge Garaufis and defendants are trying to litigate plaintiff's action, not based on violation of Title II, ADA law, but as though plaintiff is an anti-Semitic, Nazi war criminal.  A judge who refuses to apply a relevant FRCP 12-based standard of review and supplants it with a personal, Holocaust-based decision needs to step down and be treated for Holocaust-related post traumatic stress disorder.

Plaintiff is not a Nazi war criminal . . . U.S. Courts are not Nazi war tribunals and New York State's inpatient psychiatric facilities are meant to rehabilitate people who have mental illnesses -- not as a means of punishment based on Holocaust-based delusions!

Plaintiff will not take on the European Jewish community's Holocaust-based mental health issues! Plaintiff has her own!

Litigant demands a federal monitor to ensure that she receives justice. In the meantime, the fight continues . . .

NYSOMH-staff bribe/blackmail #1 (click on link) (call from Lizzy OMH 07/22/2011)
NYSOMH-staff bribe/blackmail #2 (click on link) (call from B. Davis 07/22/2011
 NYSOMH-staff bribe/blackmail #3 (click on link) (call to B. Davis 07/25/2011)
NYSOMH-staff bribe/blackmail #4 (click on link) (call from B. Davis 07/25/2011

        Judge Garaufis allowed his criminally-biased, FRCP-Rule 12-lacking, memorandum-lacking decision to be fraudulently referred to as "Memorandum and Order" and denied mentally disabled African-American plaintiff's motion for a guardian ad litem.  Less than 48 hours after dismissing plaintiff's motion for a guardian ad litem, Judge Garaufis orders the U.S. Marshal Service to call an inpatient psychiatric facility over which Defendants New York State Office of Mental Health has oversight to accuse her of threatening the judge with bodily harm so as to give Defendants New York State Office of Mental Health and New York State Unified Court System a second opportunity to declare plaintiff mentally incompetent -- while the government defendants are litigating against her as legal adversaries.

       One more thing: Litigant publicly charges Judge Garaufis with the following felonies:  18 U.S.C. §241 (conspiracy against rights), 18 U.S.C. §242 (deprivation of rights under color and 18 U.S.C. §873 (blackmail) based on his FRCP Rule 12-lacking decision (violates Crisafi v. Holland, et al., 655 F.2d 1305 (1981); and based in Judge Garaufis' dismissal of plaintiff's motion for a guardian ad litem, proceeded by his order for the U.S. Marshal Service to contact defendant NYSOMH's-licensed psychiatric facility to accuse plaintiff of threatening him with bodily harm so that plaintiff can be forcibly hospitalized.

        18 U.S.C. §1521, Retaliating against a Federal Judge or Federal law enforcement office by false claim or slander of title says: "Whoever files, attempts to file, or conspires to file, in any public record or in any private record which is generally available to the public, any false lien or encumbrance against the real or personal property of an individual described in section 1114, on account of the performance of official duties by that individual, knowing or having reason to know that such lien or encumbrance is false or contains any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both."

        Helpless, mentally disabled African American plaintiff and her adult children are treated as worthless goyim as Judge Garaufis' decision facilitates the identity fraud she is has proven New York State Defendants continue to facilitate. Defendant OMH uses innocent, legally untrained clerical staff to bribe/blackmail impoverised plaintiff with federally-funded services (including money for food) that plaintiff needs.  Why won't the New York State Office of Mental Health engage the services of the New York State Attorney General's Office to speak with the mentally disabled plaintiff?  Are they so cocksure of U.S. Court of Appeals' eminent decision against plaintiff -- and of their and Judge Garaufis' plans to hospitalize plaintiff that they don't feel the need to be bothered with proper legal protocol or the plaintiff's legal rights?

     Federal law requires the automatic disqualification of a Federal judge under certain circumstances.

     In 1994, the U.S. Supreme Court held that "Disqualification is required if an objective observer would entertain reasonable questions about the judge's impartiality. If a judge's attitude or state of mind leads a detached observer to conclude that a fair and impartial hearing is unlikely, the judge must be disqualified." Liteky v. U.S., 114 S.Ct. 1147, 1162 (1994).

     Courts have repeatedly held that positive proof of the partiality of a judge is not a requirement, only the appearance of partiality. Liljeberg v. Health Services Acquisition Corp., 486 U.S. 847, 108 S.Ct. 2194 (1988) (what matters is not the reality of bias or prejudice but its appearance); United States v. Balistrieri, 779 F.2d 1191 (7th Cir. 1985) (Section 455(a) "is directed against the appearance of partiality, whether or not the judge is actually biased.") ("Section 455(a) of the Judicial Code, 28 U.S.C. §455(a), is not intended to protect plaintiffs from actual bias in their judge but rather to promote public confidence in the impartiality of the judicial process.").

    The Supreme Court has ruled and has reaffirmed the principle that "justice must satisfy the appearance of justice", Levine v. United States, 362 U.S. 610, 80 S.Ct. 1038 (1960) , citing Offutt v. United States, 348 U.S. 11, 14, 75 S.Ct. 11, 13 (1954).

     "Recusal under Section 455 is self-executing; a party need not file affidavits in support of recusal and the judge is obligated to recuse herself sua sponte under the stated circumstances." Taylor v. O'Grady, 888 F.2d 1189 (7th Cir. 1989). 

President Obama's administration expedited litigant's USCIS FOIA request to obtain proof of her ex-husband's identity.

Why would Judge Garaufis then deny federal and New York State governments'  decisions regarding her ex-husband's identity as "malicious" without a FRCP 12-based decision, without arresting the litigant for presenting fraudulent documents -- and while refusing litigant's motion for guardian ad litem?

Will U.S. Court of Appeal's judges uphold Judge Garaufis' criminal decision based on litigant's status of having a mental illness and based on collegial loyalty?

Litigant demands a federal monitor . . .



Proof of Allen E. Kaye's, Harvey Shapiro's and Jack Gladstein's continued facilitation of their client's commission of identity fraud


Case Caption:  Cheryl D. Uzamere vs. Andrew M. Cuomo, et al


Case Caption:  Cheryl D. Uzamere vs. State of New York


The Two Cases Are Not Related
They don't even share the same captions:
1) Uzamere vs. State of New York, et al; 2) Uzamere vs. Cuomo, et al
If the cases were related, the court would have a separate
entry entitled "Notice of Related Cases"