OR NO JUSTICE  FOR ANYONE TOMORROW.

We waited patiently for a decision after oral argument, more than three (3) months.

That was after waiting more than 2.5 years to be calendared (after the appeals were fully briefed by both sides and ready to be argued).

This was after filing appeals that were sure shot wins that should have corrected lower court shortcomings:

• --non-initiating plaintiff appearing without standing and later perjury to cover up appearing without standing,
• --lack of court ordered notice,
• --refusal to allow attorney to appear who had filed motion and
• --whether, on the record before the court, created and submitted by only the plaintiff, was it more than a year from default (statutory time allotted to respond) to the motion seeking a judgment of that default (if so the case was abandoned). 

As we had put non-trivial effort into the appeals and addressed both the strong points of our argument and any perceived weak points with argument, logic and case law specifically on point, we awaited decisions in 4 appeals expecting that the court would address the arguments and the case law presented and synthesize it with the facts of the case and the record on appeal and come to a reasoned decision.

Additionally, after we raised jurisdictional arguments for the first time at oral argument, a basic right for all people, the lead judge said the Second Department had an excellent reputation to uphold and that the court would get to the bottom of the issues.

We were shocked that the panel did not address, or even acknowledge, the jurisdictional arguments.

We were also sorely disappointed with decisions in the four appeals where :

1. -- the Appellate Court made up facts,
2. -- the Appellate Court misrepresented appellants's allegation of extrinsic fraud with one for intrinsic fraud thereby invoking a statute of limitations for intrinsic fraud that does not exist for extrinsic fraud,
3. -- the Appellate Court selectively quoted a case directly on point to ignore the dispositive fact that an order was no longer in effect,
4. --and, in the most interesting appeal, the Appellate Court just reiterated a challenged conclusion of law the lower court citing the same case as the lower court without addressing the arguments and decades of cases noted in the Appeal Brief finding exactly the opposite. 

This is especially troubling since the case cited by both courts makes absolutely no sense when actually broken into component parts.  

The fourth appeal was procedurally dismissed in a way we found appalling as it puts a ridiculous burden on all litigants, especially pro se (self represented) litigants, when it is clear from the record presented that the lower court refused to hear a motion by an attorney without a notice of appearance when the client was present at the hearing, a situation where a notice of appearance is not required or useful, resulting in a clear lack of Opportunity to be Heard, a due process violation negating any subsequent decisions.

We long fought, some 20 years, to make the Brooklyn Lyceum an arts facility and we are not willing, after waiting 2.5 years just to get the appeal heard, to be brushed off like so much dandruff.

To that end, shining a little light on these simple issues, issues that are core to the American justice system, seems like a good idea such that others in the future can see things for what they are sooner.

If you, JAFO, find yourself convinced of these simple issues we will shortly explain, you can help, and maybe we can help you.

Help by becoming J.A.F.O., Just Another F***ing Observer.

It is simple. Read some documents, watch a couple of minutes of court video and evaluate what you have read. Sign and mail/email an affidavit to us.

Help the Brooklyn Lyceum by paying it forward by paying attention now to ensure others due process later.