1

IN NEW YORK SUPREME COURT SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

APPELLATE DIVISION
STATE OF NEW YORK

2
3

4 5
b 7

In the Matter of mandatqry,

unconditional relief owed to Kevia Patrick Brady, pro #

I
11

10

12
13

't4
15 16 17 18

EXHIBITS d Pursuant to Kevin Patrick Brady v People of New York by Attorney General and Steven E. Feder Attorney Fourth Dept Docket # CA 13-02202 Supreme Court Docket # 2012-053

19
2A
21

22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31

32 33 34

35
36 37 38 39
4A 41

42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
50

NEW YORK SUPREME COURT

3 4 5 6
7 8

FOURTH JUDICIAL DEPT. KEVIN PATRICK BRADY, petitioner

Kffiilffi.
MAR 2

APPELLATE DIVISION NEWYORK

vffi#^'=OF
2014

I
11

10

APPEI,I,ATE DT\rISION 4TH BEPARTWTENF.C.

THE PEOPLE OF NEW YORK by Attorney General , respondent STEVEN E. FEDER, Aftorney respondent
NOTICE

s Bffioe
rrr.11'
I

-fi T:*

'd'F '\.1

*zoSs$
N) (3 frirr*t *": I-r

12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19

ti.--, "''"-'4 4'4

*\
{-

'
+ -

frl-:= 4 r!.1

li's:

@r

20
21

BE

lr KNowN

that a motion has been filed in the court above

tlV{W

for an

22 23 24 25 26 27
2B

EXTRAORDINARY WRIT OF ERROR based on an extraordinary series of dirty tricks, life altering ministerial errors, and malicious due process violations by officers of New

York supreme court and the Department of Law. The Court is asked to review the latest in a decade plus of government abuse, dirty and courthouse thuggery manifest by a malicious summary termination, with preiudice,
of a facially meritorious pro se petition to supreme court by Judge Richard Dollinger.

29
30
31

32 33 34

The proceedings below were so defective as to be VOID on due process violence alone. ln fact they rise to the level of extrinsic fraud. Having already been cheated out of nearly $8,000 in filings fees and production costs, it rises to the level of 18 U,S. S 1346
HONEST SERVICES FRAUD. Please note that [1] Jurisdiction was properly invoked by proper pleadings. [2lthe relief requested was mandatory; [3] the opposition by the State was jurisdictionally defective; disingenuous, and a cover up that violated inter alia, NY DR 7-102( )(7) EC 7-5 EC 7-6 NY EC 7-26 an allegedly laMul, but unconstitutional manifestation of ABA Rule 1.6 at my expense

35
36 37 38 39 40
41

42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
50

-1-

2 3

4 5
6 7 8

[a] The alleged neutralfact finder [Dollinger] elevated a benign civil motion, sua sponte, into criminal contempt inquiry, later feigned acknowledging the error, but imposed criminal punishment anyway. NO HEARING WAS HELD [5] State actors have again exploited an ambiguous 'pre-filing' order to the level of extrinsic fraud. [6] Dollinger arbitrarily expanded it to relieve respondents from due process mandates and to constructively block Brady from court completely.

I
11

10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

'pre-filing' order, unconstitutionally applied, they have unanimously deprived Brady of access to court; to redress grievances; once minor, but have grown extemporaneously and caused unfathomable, life-altering injuries.
'lJnder color of
lavrrful

'a quasi

20
21

New York courts and attorneys general clearly do not have a functioning grasp of the constitutional limitations of 'pre-filing'orders and clearly do not care. This pro se victim

22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31

has repeatedly advised them of the statutory scheme and controlling legal precedents that establish their wrongful interpretation of the order. They don't care. [7] Owing to the subject matter ABA Rule 1.6 dictates that 'permission' will never be granted for pro se's petitions. . [8] They act under color of 'the Rule'to the level of extrinsic fraud.

32 33 34

35
36 37 38 39

[9] Dollinger acknowledged having received but ignored a post summary termination Motion to Show Cause and refused to return my filing fee. The motion constructively remains on supreme court docket at this time..
Pro se victim demands to be free from two [2] decades of 'anything goes' lawlessness, consumer fraud, no win litigation and direct and indirect punishnents; including unlawful incarcerations for lawful exercises of constitutional rights * The Court is asked to consider, in context, two [2]additional actions pending review by this Court at this time and declare that so many patently fataljurisdictionaldefects cannot be coincidental.
NOTICES ATTACHED Brady v People of New York; [coram nobis]

40
41

42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
50

Wells Fargo Bank, v Kevin Patrick Brady

-2-

2 3 4
5 6 7 8

On Law Day, 2010 Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman lamented 'iudicial salaries must be raised for the societal value of the work judges perform; for their incredible dedicatian to the rule of law and well-being of the citizens of New York.
He said '[the PeoplesJ abitity to live the American dream is in question, that the judiciary more than ever holds together the fabric of socieqr and our way of life,

I
11

10 12 13 14

fostering the rule of taw, protecting individuat liberties, and meeting the constitutional mandate to provide 'equaliustice for all. This pro se Americans protracted nightmare with the judiciary belies his every word.
ln so far as I have been shut down, shut out, unanimously punished and abandoned by New York supreme court ON EVERY OCCASION cognizable remedies for me are exhausted. This is ostensibly the only state judicial forum accessible'
I request a hearing to submit the proof supreme court cannot accept given Rule 1.6

15
16 17 18

19 20
21

22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31

Any allegation made here not clearly understood will, on demand, be enunciated in a More Definite Statement. Any relevant document which should be included but is not will be made immediately available on demand. This Motion is made returnable to the Fourth Department op or befo ," With copies provided to the undersigned on or before 2/27

sfr/,/

32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

ft

HOWEVER, PLEASE NOTE;

40
41

42
43

Although NO PLENARY HEARING WAS HELD BELOW, the November B, 2013 order of Judge Richard Dollinger declares " frJespondents [the StateJ and their caunsel are not to respond to any papers filed or serued by BRADY in this or any other action he has previously filed or may file in the future unless fapprovedJ etc. etc.
I submit this misfeasance to be infinitely unconstitutional, and duplicitous of Rule 1.6. It exemplifies my two [2J decades of up close and personal experiences as a pro se

44 45 46
47

48 49
50

litigant in New York's Unified Court System.

-J-

AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
Be advised that I Be@{yserved a true and complete copy of this Notice and Action to the following pafties on the dates indicated,

3 4 5
6 7 8

5V t/S ftl*[C

t\

AAG Hilell Deutsch, Public lntegrity Officer New York Department of Law 144 Exchange Blvd. Rochester, New York 14614 Steven E. Feder,

10 1'l 12 13 14 15
-16

'l"l r
I
uJ

Afty

17

18
19

-"j:i::ffi ;;,?,;.,, *
Courtesy Copy Monroe County Department of Law
39 W. Main Street

J,

20
21

22 23 24

25
26 27 28 29 30
31

Rochester, 14614

I hereby depose that everything alleged herein is, to the best of my knowledge, correct and truthful except

for mafters alleged on information and belief and I believe those to be true. Nothing is intended to be frivolous, harassing or completely without merit.
ln fact as a matter of numerous court records I have nevef filed any action in any court that legally or constructively rose to the level of frivolous, vexatious, and/or completely without merit. I have not broken any laws, unlawfully prosecuted and incarcerated myself, violated my own constitutional rights and/ or destroyed my own livelihood,

32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

40
41

42 43 44 45 46 47
4B

ln the final analysis I have no complicity whatsoever for the decade plus of abuse[s] I have suffered from officers of the courts AND I challenge every allegation to the contrary.

49
50

Kevin Patrick Brady 508 Locust Lane East Rochester, New York '14445

TONI LCOON Uc. #01C06050144 Notary Publiostate of l'lr , York Qualifid MONROE My Commission Expire6 '!0n0/2014

in

-4-

FRANCES

CLERK OF TIIE COURT

E.

Carenill

NEWYORK STAIE SUPREME COURT APPELLATE DIVISION, FOURTH DEPARTMENT M. DOLORES DENMAN COURTHOUSE 50 EAST AVENUE, SUITE 2OO ROCHESTER, NEW YORK 14604 (585) 530-3100 Fax (585) s30-3247

Ar,au L. Ross
DEPUTY CLERK OF THB COI,JRT

March 3,2014
..:::

Kevin Patrick Brady 508 Locust Lane East Rochester. NY 14445

Re:

Brady v State of New York, et al. Docket No. CA 13-02202

Dear Mr. Brady:

I am returning your motion entitled "Notice of Constitutional Violations, Abuse of Discretion and Continuous Obstruction ol.Tustice" because you failed to have your affidavit notarized and did not provide a proper affidavit of service. Please re-serve all parlies if you resubmit a compliant motion.

Ivan E. Lee Principal Appellate Court Attorney

IEL/s1 Enc.

pc:

Eric T. Schneiderman, Esq. Merideth H. Smith, Esq.

www. courts. state. ny. us/ad4

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

9pp elts te Wtbisr 0 n,

ourtll Vu[

f cf s

t4

ep s

r tment

DOCKET NO. CA 13-02202 PRESENT: SCUDDER, P. J., SMITH, CENTRA, FAHEY, AND PERADOTTO. JJ.

IN THE MATTER OF KEVIN PATzuCK BRADY, PETITIONER.APPELLANT,

V
PEOPLE OF STATE OF NEW YORK BY ATTORNEY GENERAL, STEVEN E. FEDER, ES Q., RESPONDENTS -RESPONDENTS.

Appellant having moved for permission to proceed as a poor person on the appeal taken
herein from an order of the Supreme Court entered in the Office of the Clerk of the County

of

Monroe on November 20,2013,having applied for an order to show cause, and having moved

for other retee

Now, upon reading and filing the affidavit of Kevin Patrick Brady sworn to Decemb er 17,
2013, the statements of Kevin Patrick Brady received December 18,20l3,the notice of motion

with proof of service thereof, the proposed order to show cause, and all documents attached
thereto, and due deliberation having been had thereon,

It is hereby ORDERED that the motion is denied.

Entered: January 22, 2014

FRaNcps E.

C.qrannll,

Clerk -: -

A Legal Center:

Pirrello, Missal, Personte & Feder

2040 Ridge Road East Rochester, I\rY 14622-2488
Mario J. Pirrello
Paul T, Missal (1933-2011) Michael J. Personte
Steven E. Feder*

Telephone: (585) 544-7090 Facsimile: (585) 544-7093 Website: PMPFLegal.com

*also admitted in Florida

June 5,2013
I

h t:

New York Supreme Court Appellate Division Fourth Department 50 East Avenue Rochester, New York 14604 Attn: Court Clerk

f,
I

RE: Kevin Patrick Brady

vs.

The People of New York by Attorney General and Steven E. Feder, Attorney Ladies and Gentlemen:

I have received some largely incomprehensible papers, including an regard to the above matter.

Affidavit, with

I respectfully remind the Court of Judge Gorski's standing Order, disallowing the Plaintiffthe use of any Court in New York State without the specific permission of the Chief Judge of that Court, with respect to his ex-wife, his previous custody actions, or anything related to same. For the Court's convenisnce, I have enclosed a copy of that Order.
Inasmuch as the matter appears to have been submitted without the specific permission the Chief Judge of the Appellate Division, it should be ignored and sent back to Mr. Brady.

of

Respectfully yours,

Steven E. Feder SEF/cbs Encs.

Legm$ Cemer:

FfrreflXw,
h{ario "}. Firrello Faul T, Missal (1933-201n) &'lichaetr J. Fersonte
Steven E. Feder'e

&&&ssmK, ffiews&Kefe
?S4S Rie$ge Roact East ft.oq:hester" $iY i4622'248&

& Feder
Teneplione: (5E5) 544-709CI Facsimile: {5E5) 544-7893 Website: FMPFn-egaX.corn

{'also adrnitted in

Florida

September 9,2013

Honorable Matthew A. Rosenbaun; Supreme Court Justice 545 Hall of Justice Rochester, New York 14614
Frances Caffarell

Chief Clerk, Appellate Division 50 East Avenue Rochester, New York 146A4

RE: In the Matter of Kevin Patrick

People of New York, et al

Brad,r' vs.

Index Number 2013-053 Dear Judge Rosenbaum and Chief tllerk Caffarell:

I received copies of the sornewhat incomprehensible documents sent to you by Kevin Patrick Brady with regard to the above matter. * First of all, I don't believe tirat the matter;s even a case that is before the Court.
Second of all, Mr. Brady is prohibited from using the Courts rf the State of New York at all in this fashion, absent specific pennission from the Chief Judge ;f the relevant Court in which he seek to proceed. Along those lines, please find Judge Gorski's Order to that effect.

Mr. Brady had defied this Clrder on numerous occasions, and on numerous occasions various Court have refused to allour him to proceed because he has failed to obtain the necessary permission.
Respectfully yours,

PIRRELLO, MISSAL, PERSONTE & FEDER

SEFicbs Encs. cc rv/encs: Kevin Patrick Bradv

C ft&u{t

A Legal Center:

Pirrello, Missal, Personte & Feder

2040 Ridge Road East Rochester, NY 1'4622'2488
Mario J. Pirrello
Paul T. Missal (1933-2011) Michael J. Personte
Steven E. Feder*

Telephone: (585) 544-7090 Facsimile: (585) 544-7093 Websitq PMPFLegal.com

*also admitted in

Florida

October 10" 2013

Honorable Richard A. Dollinger Supreme Court Justice 545 Hall of Justice Rochester, New York 146t4

RE: Kevin Patrick Brady

vs.

People of the New York, et al Index Number 053/13

Dear Judge Dollinger:

I received the enclosed papers from Kevin Patrick Brady on October 8, 2013; they are entitled "Notice of Due Process Requirements".
Other than the fact that I have no idea what this means, and other than the fact that it is a procedural nullity, I am aware of Your Honor's recent ruling with regard to Mr. Brady. It is my understanding that he has failed to sign a Stipuiation of Discontinuance (even though Judge Rosenbaum dismissed this case last summer), and that you are imposing sanctions and will be signing an Order to that effect.

I would appreciate receiving a copy of that Order once it has been signed and filed.
In the meantime, given the Court's ruling in this matter and the Court's position, I do not intend to respond to this iatest missive from Mr. Brady. If for some reason the Court requires me to respond to it in any way, I certainly will do so if so informed. Thank you for your courtesy in this matter. Respectfully yours,

PIRRELLO, Mi

PERSONTE & FEDER

SEF/cbs cc Hillel Deutsch, cc w/o encs: Kevin Patrick Brady'1/

dencs;

ven E. Feder

Esq. /

-L-

cc w/encs: Craig Doran, JSC

Monroe County District Attomey New York State Dept. of Law Monroe County Bar Association Kevin Patrick Brady

etr4t"r-" V"* r 71*../"r"

rzr

&//*E*z;*

9/,n/*hr, e-//L &4

r'ttrr't-zr'a,,

eZtz/*'t Qd %"tt- /*r"44.-,*t;y o6/f %a'r eZr"- %r*.a

7*,". /nr) .?zr'--?zfi g,- /nr) ztz-tsatr

October 31,2013

e7;tt-Z*{'Z:*''/@;a"zr

Kevin Patrick Brady 508 Locust Lane East Rochester, New York 14445 Dear Mr. Brady:

receivedonOctober30,20l3bearinglndexNo.20l3100053. lfyoudonotagreewiththe

Judge Rosenbaunr is unable to grant you any relief on the paBers which the Court

Decision rendered in the matter, the proper avenue to pursue is an Appeal to the Appellate Division.

Very truly yours,

/!' , j'a-.-..,1:--a*^-,t-- .-i *'t<-n'{.- -tu,r-,,"" Maryanne H. Townsend, Esq. Law Glerk to Hon. Matthew A. Rosenbaum

cc:

Hon. Richard Dollinger Hon. Craig Doran

A Legal Center:

Pirrello, Missal, Personte & Feder

2040 Ridge Rcad East Rochester, NY 14622-2488
Mario J. Pirrello
Paul T. Missal (1933-2011) Michael J. Personte
Steven E. Feder'!' '"also admitted in Florida

Telephoner (585) 544-7090 Facsimile: (585) 544-7093 Website: PMFFLegal.com

December 20,2013

Appellate Division 50 East Avenue Rochester, New York 14604 Attn: Motion Clerk

RE: Kevin Patrick Brady

People of New York, Steven E. Feder

vs.

Index #20t3-53 Ladies and Gentlemen:

ln accordance with Judge Doiiinger's recent directive, I am not responding to the most recent papers filed by Kevin Patrick Brady.
Such a lack of response in no way indicates acquiescence or agreement.

In accordance with Judge Dollinger's ruling (and Judge Gorski's ruling before him), Mr. Brady's filing is a nullity.

Respectfully yours,

PIRRELLO, MISSAL, PERSONTE & FEDER

Steven E. Feder

SEF/cbs

cc: Kevin Patrick Bradf,/ Hillel Deutsch, Esq.

A Legal

Cenatee':

Pirrello,
Mario J. Firrello Paul T. Missal (1933-2011) V[ichaeX J. Fersonte
Steven E. Feder'3 ':'also admitted in Florida

h$issaX, pu*q-gry&q
202*S R.idge Road flas$ Rociaester, NY 14622-2488

&S*dq*
Telephone: {585) 544-?890 Facsixnitre: {585) 544"-7093
Wehsite: FMPFn-egal.con'r

March 24,2014

Supreme Court 545 Hall of Justice Rochester, New York 14614

Attn: Motion Clerk

RE: Kevin Patrick Brady vs. POSNY, et aI
Index Number 53113 Ladies and Gentlemen:
above I have received a number of,mostly incomprehensible papers with regard to the

matter. regard Enclosed please find the Decision and Order of the Honorable Jerome Gorski with State to this petitioner. As you will see, this Petitioner is barred from utilizing any Court in the of New York for this and related matters without first obtaining the permission of the Supervising Judge of the Court in rvhich he seeks to move forward.

It does not appear that such permission has been obtained here, and the motion is therefore a nullity.
Given Judge Gorski's Order, I will refrain from responding to this latest missive from this Petitioner, wirich itseif is riie with iechnical errors.

If for some reason the Court is even going to consider the application that brought by the Petitioner, please so advise, and I will respond.
Respectfully yours,

has been

teven E. F SEF/cbs Encs.

cc wlencs: Kevin Patrick

HiIleI

BradYr i Deutsch, Esq.