Appellant- Mohamed F. El-Hewie
Address: 157B Meriline Avenue,
West Paterson, NJ 07424
Phone: (973) 237-0530
Email:
Judicial Council of the Third Circuit
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
21400 UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE
601 MARKET STREET
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106-1790
Re: In the Matter of a Complaint Filed Under 28 U.S.C. §351, et seq.
J. C. No. 03-10-90007
Honorable Justices of the Judicial Council of the Third Circuit:
Plaintiff Mohamed F. El-Hewie hereby seeks an outside and neutral review of the dismissal of the Plaintiff’s claim of judicial misconduct against the Subject Judge, in the above captioned legal action, pursuant to Rule (18) of the Rules for Judicial-Conduct and Judicial-Disability Proceedings.
On November 23, 2010, Honorable Theodore A. McKee dismissed Plaintiff’s claims as frivolous and opined that:
“Moreover, I have reviewed the decisions and conclude that, without more, they do not demonstrate that the Subject Judge engaged in any form of judicial misconduct. Complainant's allegations are therefore subject to dismissal as frivolous and unsupported by any evidence that would raise an inference that misconduct occurred.”
grounds for review
(1) The reviewing Justice, Honorable Theodore A. McKee, issued a single judge’s opinion, without opposition and based his judgment on unsubstantiated claims that [H]e reviewed the decisions of the Subject Judge and concluded that, without more, they do not demonstrate that the Subject Judge engaged in any form of judicial misconduct.
Wherefore, the reviewing judge did not specify what [H]e has reviewed, or how were the decisions of the Subject Judge not constituting a pattern of habitual abuse of judicial power, and since the reviewing judge did not specify how much more was more enough to determine misconduct, Appellant requests that this tribunal review de novo Plaintiff’s detailed claims against the Subject Judge.
(2) The reviewing Justice reiterated the conventional argument made in dismissing all complaints of misconduct against judicial officers; that is “disagreement with the merits of decisions of the Subject Judge.” However, here, Plaintiff demonstrated the long and habitual deviation of the reasoning of the Subject Judge from sound legal authority. That is a Subject Judge that relied on falsified citations and irrelevant caselaws to deny litigants access to justice, since the year 2001.
(3) The reviewing Justice opined that "An allegation that calls into question the correctness of a judge's ruling ... is merits-related" However, the opinion of the reviewing Justice omitted that the Subject Judge was determined to apply the defunct laws of the year 1982 and lied by claiming that those applied to the year 2001’s employment of provisional teachers. Here, the dishonesty of the Subject Judge was substantiated by long history of habitual falsification of legal authorities and not merely merit related.
(4) Since habitual abuse of judicial power is subjective and since the reviewing Justice knows the Subject Judges personally and physically, therefore the review of the Judicial Committee is warranted in order to eliminate the inherent bias of one judge in favor of a fellow judge and against remotely related litigants.
This is an unfortunate conduct by the Honorable Theodore A. McKee who kept the name of the Subject Judge anonymous to protect her reputation, while signed and dated his own name in a letter to the Subject Judge informing her with his supportive opinion. The unfortunate aspect of such hypocritical conduct by the Honorable Theodore A. McKee is that the Subject Judge defamed this Plaintiff by accusing Plaintiff by being a failed teacher; without Trial By Jury; and when the Report of the State of New Jersey, Department of Education removed the corrupt superintendent Robert Aloia from his position for malfeasance and corruption.
Wherefore, the by the Chief Justice McKee is promoting his support to the Subject Judge who found Plaintiff Guilty as Charged by the state ALJ and without Jury Trial or review of the State Board Of Education. Appellant prays that this tribunal grants his request for an outside, neutral review.
(5) The reviewing justice failed to address the deliberate omission by the Subject Judge of the Report of the Department of Education that implicated defendants in a sixteen year long illegal/unethical/ and unsound business practice. That was not mere disagreement with the opinion of the Subject Judge but rather the indiscreet dishonesty of the Subject Judge in omitting an official state report that supported Plaintiff’s claims that the state officials engaged in fraudulent cover up on the board defendants.
(6) The Third Circuit Judges have consolidated their support beyond the Subject Judge and against Plaintiff by upholding the decision of the state Appellate Decision despite their utter lack of knowledge of the state school laws; despite the improper elimination of the State Board of education from the appeal process by governor Corzine in July 7, 2008; and despite of the scathing Report of the Department of Education on February 1, 2010, that incriminated the local board of education in fraud, illegal malfeasance, and unsound business practice.
Wherefore, the Chief Justice of the Third Circuit; honorable Theodore A. McKee, cared more about the welfare of a fellow Judge than upholding the constitutional rights of Plaintiff, by affirming the state determination on a Section 1981’s claims without Jury Trial, without the factfinding and review of the State Board of Education; without granting rehearing of Plaintiff’s request; and with falsified authorities issued by the Subject Judge, Plaintiff seeks anonymous, outside, and neutral review of Plaintiff’s complaint of judicial misconduct.
Declaration and signature
I declare under penalty of perjury that the statements made in this complaint are true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
Respectfully submitted.
Appellant- Mohamed F. El-Hewie
Address: 157B Meriline Avenue,
West Paterson, NJ 07424
Phone: (973) 237-0530
Email:
Date: November 28, 2010.
No comments:
Post a Comment