undersigned claimant, lawrence frumusa, hereby states ... · f. ny penal law § 175.40"penal...
TRANSCRIPT
STATE OF NEW YORK COURT OF CLAIMS
Lawrence Frumusa
-against-
New York State
Claimant Notice of Intent tofile Claim
Defendant/Respondent
TO:OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERALState of New York
The CapitolAlbany, New York 12224
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE, pursuant to the provisions of Sections 10 and 11 of the Courtof ClaimsAct, the
undersigned claimant, Lawrence Frumusa, hereby states his intention to file a Claim against the State of
New York.
The Post Office address of the claimant is as follows:
Lawrence Frumusa
4904 Hall Center RoadWalworth, New York 14568
The date, time, and place of the factual occurrences comprising this claim is as follows:
1. Over the period of May 12, 2008 to and continuing as of March 23, 2015.
2. In the Seventh Judicial District - County of Monroe.
3. This claim is in addition to the Notice of Claim filed by the Claimant Dated 12/2/2011 attached
here and made part of this claim. Such claim benefits from ongoing investigation the claimant has
conducted from the filing date of 12/2/2011.
This claim seeks redress in the nature of: Total Actual Damages $51,919,946 resulting from New York
State failure to provide the claimant access to the courts resulting in the illegal seizure of the following
properties of claimant (final value of damages will be determined at trial):
Scenic Village Phase 1 $9,800,000 Webster Holiday Inn Hotel $13,000,000Scenic Village Phase 2 $10,600,000 Park Side Village $1,800,000Scenic Village Phase 3 $5,200,000 Personal Assets $2,700,000Scenic Village Town Homes $2,100,000
Loss of revenue from projectsWebster Holiday Inn Hotel and Scenic Village Phase 1-3 $6,719,946
The following factual allegations set forth herein generallycomprise the basis for the claim:
Page 1 of 1
1. New York State failure to properly provide Administration of the Civil and Criminal Courts in the
Seventh Judicial District of New York, pursuant to New York State Court Administration as
defined in by the following Statutes:
a. 22 NYCRR § 200.15 "Appointment of Special District Attorney/Prosecutor".
b. 22 NYCRR § 202.3 "Individual Assignment System".
c. 22 NYCRR § 151.1 "Assignments in cases involving contributions to judicial campaigns".
d. NYJUD Sec § 255 "Clerk must search files upon request and certify as to result".
e. Court Clerk failure to accept for filing Claimants properly formed notice of appeal of a
Webster Town Court Judge decision dismissing a felony complaint related to a
$10,358,355 Larceny filed by Claimant May 9, 2011.
and actions enforced by the following Penal Code:
f. NY Penal Law § 175.40 "Penal liabilityof public servant for issuing false certificate".
g. NY Penal Law § 195 "Official misconduct".
2. New York State failure to properly oversee and staff the Court Administration Office of Inspector
General with necessary competency, skills and non-conflicted persons required to investigate
actions of court administration personnel to conspire with certain persons to deny claimant
access to the New York State Courts.
3. New York State failure to properly oversee and staff the Court Administration Office of Inspector
General with necessary competency, skills and non-conflicted persons required to investigate
actions of court appointed fiduciary receivers to conspire with certain persons to deny claimant
rights under New York State Statutes.
4. Court Administration Office of Inspector General failure in its responsibility for the investigation
and elimination of infractions of disciplinary standards, criminal activities, conflicts of interest,
misconduct, misfeasance and incompetence on the part of nonjudicial employees of the New
York State United Court System and persons or corporations doing business with the New York
State United Court System, with respect to their dealings with the courts.
5. As such the failure of the New York State Court Administration, allowed for nonjudicial employees
of the New York State United Court System and persons or corporations doing business with the
New York State United Court System to conspire to deny the Claimant access to the New York
State Courts and rights under New York State Statute resulting in damages the Claimant now
seeks.
6. This claim is further defined in the August 27, 2014; September 14, 2014 and March 6, 2015
Page 2 of 3
letters to Chief Administrator Judge Prudenti requesting the Chief Administrator investigate and
take action regarding claimant's evidence of wrong doing. Such letters are attached and made
part of this notice, however do not represent the full body of evidence that will support this claim.
7. It is claimed that the State of New York is therefore liable to maintain proper access to the courts
for all New York Citizens as provided for in the above mentioned statutes, thereby preventing
abuse of the Judicial System by certain groups of individuals.
8. Accordingly, the appropriate investigation and settlement of this claim is requested within the
statutory time period governing the same. Further please note that this notice is served within 90
days of the occurrence of the liability by the Chief Court Administrator's refusal to properly
address these claims as demonstrated by her letter of March 23, 2015. Method of service is by
certified mail return receipt requested upon the New York State Attorney General.
The undersigned Lawrence Frumusa being duly sworn says:
I am the Claimant above named; I have read the foregoing notice of intent to file a claim against
the State of New York and know its contents; the same is true to my own knowledge, except to matters
therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and to those matters I believe it to be true.
awrence Frumusa - Claimant
Sworn to before meon this 3rd dayofJune 2015,
Notary Public
Page 3 of 3
15,1 , _ f,
/</UO/.'eW,.oiisouioq
•ldl333H»HVWa3ldlllH3090IAJ9SIBlSOdS0
ssauisnqjnoAjqj,noA>|ubuj.A[UOS90LAJ9Sp99}UBJBn6JOJ.Spunky96B}S0dpUBSdUIB;SUO[BUL|S9|_BS[LV
SIZOWlOLOOOWLUfl
•saxoqod/uioo'sdsn;esul[uoxoqbjoj.dnuBls*xog
90LJ.J.O}sodajnoaseq;iM;l}ubmnoAgjauMpuBuai]M[lewjnoA;ag
•SdSn-XSV-008-l.[[BOUOL^.BUJJOJ.ULJ9lj}0
joj'96B;sodl|;lmSL9qB[Biuddiusluudo;dLL|su>jOL[o/uioo'sdsn
o;og,frZduiBis-008-LLL^ojodous/woo'sdsn;bsduiB^sjgpjg
"LL8L-ZZZ-008-LLLBOjouioo'SdSflo;oBsaumbiujoBul>|oej}joj§§
S81000:#|dL9oay
102329G06G3
199:#UOl^OBSUBJl
G082ZL:#[BAOJddv06S9XXXXXXXXXXXX:#^.unooov
L2'6$pjBOuqga:AqpLBd
LZ'6$:LBlOi
12'6$^age^sodsnssi
MK(SsZZZ0S2eL0e0fr606Stl.X:#[aqev
087$/;dL9oaymn^y(l9691?688Z06t«™i0iV:#UBHP9UW«^3SdSn
grc$^-—t+siwm^oii5L/S0/90uj:AJ9AL[9ap9}09dxa
•2QOO'OLAU39BJB1[LBHSSE[3-}SJLJ
967$S-9U0ZHZZiANANV91V
30UdgoudA;ouoL;duos9QLBULJ;.Lunalbs^onpojd
„__..,.
gg--0Z:G02UB-WS(SLB)SL02/E0/906600-6ISOMHSG
86666LSI?I>jjoaM9N'0IMV1N030IddOiSOdOldVlNO
Cell: 585-943-9999 4904 Hall Center Road Email: [email protected] Page 1of 2 Walworth, New York 14568
Friday, March 06, 2015
Judge A. Gall Prudenti
Chief Administrator Judge
Office of Court Administration
25 Beaver Street
New York, NY 10004
Re: Issues with the Seventh Judicial District Administration.
Dear Judge Prudenti,
As a follow up to my September 14, 2014 letter, I want to make you aware of my new mailing address
below. Fortunately, at my Merit Parole hearing I was able to explain my situation to a neutral competent
Parole Commissioner. Having the ability to comprehend the situation he was very responsive and
concern about the circumstances of my conviction. This resulted in him approving my release to Parole
supervision at this first opportunity (Merit release). Needless to say this action greatly facilitates my efforts
to reverse my conviction and expose the truth of what has transpired in Monroe County over the last
several years.
Having unfettered access to my records and building on what I have discovered since my August 27,
2014 letter to you, I can now conclude that indeed the New York State Court Administration personnel
and certain Judges in the Seventh Judicial District conspired in efforts to manipulate the administration of
the Monroe County courts denying me proper access, thereby allowing for the illegal appropriation of my
assets by their associates.
In fact, now having access the New York State eCourts Internet information, I can now demonstrate that
the Monroe County Court Clerk Mr. Deninger lied to me in his April 5, 2012 letter when he indicated that
Judge VanStrydonck was assigned to my case via the Individual Assignment System (IAS). From
reviewing the Judicial assignment in eCourts for Monroe County during May of 2011, of the 465 Request
for Judicial Intervention (RJI) filed in May 2011, Judge VanStrydonck was only assigned eight cases of
which one was mine. Clearly Judge VanStrydonck was not taking case assignments randomly by the IAS
system. This fact confirms my assertions that indeed the Court Administration is conspiring with others to
deny me access to the courts.
I have correspondences dating back to August, 2009 attempting to bring these clear violation of my rights
to the attention of the New York State Court Administration. There has been no action to investigate or
rectify this situation. In fact, information I have provided to the Court Administration has been used by my
adversaries to silence me hindering my efforts to expose these wrong doings.
The inability of the New York State Court Administration to properly deal with this situation has resulted in
an ongoing denial of my civil rights severely damaging me and other member of this community. Civil
Cell: 585-943-9999 4904 Hall Center Road Email: [email protected] Page 2of 2 Walworth, New York 14568
Rights which I as a citizen of New York State am constitutionally entitled to, and the New York State
Court Administration is responsible to provide.
In my recent August, and September 2014 correspondence to you I detail specific remedies required to
be in place in order to move forward to rectify this situation, remedies as follows:
1. That you assign me counsel to assist me in working with the independent Investigator to fully
expose these actions.
2. That you as the Court Administrator re-assign my cases #2011-5292 (VanStrydonck) and 2009-
10281 (Judge Fisher) to a Judge from outside Monroe County. I would suggest the Commercial
Judge presiding in Syracuse.
3. That you provide a means allowing for a, independent review of the administration of all my cases
and the information I have collected.
As of this writing I have not had a response from your office. I am requesting you advise me by March 31,
2015 of your intentions and plan to resolve these issues. I would like to resolve these issues
cooperatively however I cannot continue to endure these damages and demand equal access to justice
under the law.
Regards,
Lawrence Frumusa
Attachments:
April 5, 2012 Letter from Court Clerk Mr. Deninger – Case Assignments. April 24, 2012 Frumusa response Prudenti regarding Court Clerk Mr. Deninger assertion. September 14, 2014 Frumusa letter to Judge Prudenti. August 27, 2014 Frumusa letter to Judge Prudenti.
HON. CRAIG J. DORAN
Administrative JudgeSeventh Judicial District
STATE OF NEW YORK
MONROE COUNTY
SUPREME & COUNTY COURTS
545 HALL OF JUSTICE
ROCHESTER, NEW YORK 14614-2184
(585) 428-2020Fax (585)428-2190
April 5, 2012
Lawrence Frumusa, DIN 11B3105P.O. Box 50
Sonyea, New York 14556
Dear Mr. Frumusa:
WILLIAM M. DENINGER
Chief Clerk
AMY R. LA MAY
Associate Court Clerk
Civil Division
The following letter is written to address your requests and allegations presented in a letter this officereceived from you dated January 2,2012; and a letter dated March 11,2012, that was addressed to Justice Prudenti.
Inyourcorrespondence to this courtdatedJanuary 2,2012, youinquireas to howJusticeVanStrydonck wasassigned to Index Number 2011/5292. Justice VanStrydonck was assigned to this matter by use of the "IAS"system, which youproperly describe in your letter. Unfortunately when our correspondence clerk received yourletter, and noted your letter was mailed from a correctional facility, they only checked in our criminaldata base fortheIndex Number youprovided; thus generating theFebruary 9,2012, response youreceived from ouroffice statingthat the case did not exist. Please acceptmy apologies for this oversight made by my staff.
Next, as to the outcome of your case, Index Number 2011-5292, Justice VanStrydonck issued an Orderenjoining you from filing any action in any court in the State of New York; unless, and only if it is filed by anattorney admitted to practice law in the State of New York, or if you obtain leave to file an action from theAdministrative Judgeof the Judicial District in whichyou wish to file such action. This Orderwas mailedto youon or about August 1, 2011. I have enclosed a copy of that Order for your use.
I would like to address the allegations made by you in your letter to Justice Prudenti dated March 11,2012.You allege, first, that this office did not respondto your letterdatedJanuary 2, 2012. I ask that youpleaserefer tothe secondparagraph of this writing, whereinI explainthat we did, in fact, respondto yourcorrespondence. Onceagain, the correspondence clerk made an unfortunateoversight causing her to give you incorrect information. Asto your second allegation, that somehow we mishandled your Order to Show Cause in regard to Index Number2012/820,letme saythat this officereceivedyourdocumentsand forwarded themto the SupremeCourtJusticewhowasscheduled tohearthesemattersduringthat timeframe. JusticeArkwasassigned, hereviewed yourrequestandreturnedyourdocumentsto youwith a cover letter statingthat yourrequestwas not legallycognizableunderArticle78. I have also enclosed a copy of Justice Ark's January 25, 2012, letter to you.
-2-
Please beadvised thatpursuant to Justice VanStydonck's Order dated August 1, 2011, we should not haveassigned your submitted papers to any justice ofthis court, but should have returned them to you immediately. Ihave notified the intake staffof this officewith regard to Judge VanStrydonck's Orderand we will henceforth bein full compliance with same.
Sincerely,
William M. Deninger, Chief ClerkMonroe Supreme and County Court
WMD/aml
Encs.
Copy to: Hon. A. Gail Prudenti, Chief Administrative Judge, New York State Unified Court System
April 24, 2012
Judge A. Gail PrudentiChief Administrative JudgeOffice of Court Administration
25 Beaver Street
New York, NY 10004
Re: Issues with the Seventh Judicial District
Dear Judge Pruidenti,
I have received Mr. Deninger's, April 5 2012, response to my
January 2, 2012 inquire. Frankly I am shocked and appalled at Mr.
Deninger's attempt to conceal his wrong doings.
Based on the evidence we have acquired; the correspondences
to Judge VanStrydonck over the last three years regarding his in
action as the Seventh Judicial District Administrative Judge; and
finally the representations of a sympathetic Clerk's office
employee, it is impossible that Judge VanStrydonck was
legitimately assigned to my case pursuant to "IAS".
However in his response Mr.. Deninger attempts, at this late
date, to deny the obvious, asserting that "Judge VanStrydonck was
assigned to this matter by use of the "IAS" system". His
assertion is simply a lie!
Further he attempts to justify the invalid assignment of
Judge Ark as "Oh well we weren't suppose to do that anyway". A
foolish attempt to "un-ring the bell" of his wrong doings. The
facts are that Judge Ark was assigned arbitrarily and
capriciously to do exactly what he did, suppress my rights to due
process. For completeness I have attached my response to Judge
Ark's action which curiously Judge Ark has not responded to as of
this writing.
Mr. Deninger should be made aware that Judge VanStrydonck's
order apples only to action seeking relief in equity not mandamus
as my article 78 action request. Additionally as established by
our investigation Judge VanStrydonck's orders where fraudulently
procured, as such are void ab initio.
Finally Mr. Deninger makes no mention of the other invalid
assignments he has made, such as the recent Judge Bellini
Page 1 of 2
assignment„
Mr. Deninger's response is a foolish attempt to conceal his
wrong doings-and obstruct justice in my proceedings. As such we
are once again requesting that you engage the Office of Inspector
General to criminally investigate the actions underway in the
Seventh Judicial District.
Secondly as requested before, I ask that you assign a proper
Judge to my Article 78 action pursuant to 22 NYCRR §200.15,
allowing me to proceed in seeking an order of mandamus to
disqualify the Monroe County District Attorney and appoint aSpecial Prosecutor in my matters.
These are very serious issues we are attempting to address
pursuant to our constitutional rights. Mr. Deninger and others
obstructing Justice and abusing their positions exemplify the
entrenched white collar crime network operating in this district.
.•. Just as I informed Judge P^au (attached to my March 15, -2012
letter), and now again your office we need decisive action, now,
to stop the denial of our civil liberties in this district.
We will await the speedy contact from the Office of the
Inspector General and your immediate actions to restrain Mr.
Deninger from further damaging us.
cc: Creditors Committee,
Regards.
Lawrence Frumusa
DIN ll-B-3105
PO Box 50
Sonyea, NY 14556
Pape 2 of 2
September. 14, 2014
Jydge A. Gail PrudentiChief Administrator JudgeOffice of Court Administration25 Beaver StreetNew York, NY 10004
Re: Issues with the Seventh Judicial District Administration.
Dear Judge Prudenti,
See the enclosed, which was forwarded to me by .an attorney 1 am
seeking to represent me. It clearly demonstrates Judge Fisher
manipulating the IAS Judge assignment for my case 2009-10281. As I,
discussed in my August 27, 2014 letter these are the systemic problems
in the Seventh Judicial District. Without question Judge Rosenbaum was
initially assigned to this case (IAS assignment)! however Judge Fisher
had the case re-assigned to him July 21, 2009, without even a valid
entry on the record. Judge Fisher then denied my access to the Court.
More concerning is the two entries two+ years later and coinciding to
ray inquires to Court Clerk Deninger and your Office regarding these
issues. The' first attempt to cover this up is the 10/19/2011 entry
transferring the case to' Judge Fisher. Then a second attempt to cover
up the entire action by•transferring the case back to Judge Rosenbaum
(3/20/2012 entry) to dismiss the case.
Understanding the details of this litigation and requested relief
one would confirm my allegation that Judge Fisher and the Court Clerks
acted with, culpable intent to deny my. access to the courts for the
advantage of Judge Fisher's associate ("Bob") and. assure Judge Fisher's
re-election in November 2009. As demonstrated by the attached there is
also efforts to cover up the wrong doings by the current personnel..
As a result of the continual attempts to cover tip these wrong
doings based on my inquires. I am requesting you do not provide this
information 'to Judge Doran / the Seventh Judicial District and that you
secure all records regarding my cases (including emails from Judge
Fishers chambers) in Monroe County and treat them as evidence in
upcoming civil and criminal actions.
Once again my attempts to retain counsel has resulted in feedback
that this situation is so convoluted (as demonstrated by the attached)
Page 1 of 2
that my cost for proper representation would be insurmountable.Therefor, I am requesting that you assign me counsel to assist me inworking with the independent Investigator to fully expose these
actions.
. The realization as I acquire irrefutable evidence, that I am
correct in exposing the wrong doings in the Monroe. County Judicialsystem is very upsetting, as I have incurred significant damages bythis network. Having been provided proper access to the Court 7/21/2009and other times., 1 would not be in my current situation and have
retained my liberty and assets.
Finally I am. again requesting that you do not share thisinformation with Judge Doran until you provide me the relief requested
above and .in my August 27, 2014 letter.
Sincer
Lawrence Frumusa
DIN ll-B-3105PO Box 50Sonyea, NY 14556
Page 2 of 2
WebCivii Supreme - Appearance Detail Page 1 of 1
New York State Unified Court Svstem
\f ,r3""U' i
' \ J 1 \ i L)
WebCivi! Supreme - Appearance DetailCourt: Monroe Civil SupremeIndex Number: 010281/2009Case Name: LAWRENCE FRUMUSA vs. MARIANELA HERNANDEZ INDIVIDUALLY AND DER
Case Type: OtherTrack: Standard
Appearance Information:AppearanceDate Time On For
AppearanceOutcome
Justice /Part Comments
Motion
Seq03/20/2012 Disposition Pre-Withdrawn HON. MATTHEW A. ROSENBAUM
ROSENBAUM (Court Activity)
03/20/2012 Motion Motion Decided HON. MATTHEW A. ROSENBAUM
ROSENBAUM (Motion Part)001
10/19/2011 Transfer Transferred From las Justice HON. KENNETH R. FISHER
FISHER (Court Activity)
07/21/2009 Motion Motion Filed HON. MATTHEW A. ROSENBAUM
ROSENBAUM (Motion Part)001
Close
https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/webcivil/FCASCaseInfo?parm=Appearance&index=rlUnW... 9/8/2014
WebCivil Supreme - Motion Detail Page 1 of 1
IINew Ycjf k State Unified Court Svste 111
y~v
.. j
WebCivil Supreme - Motion DetailCourt: Monroe Civil SupremeIndex Number: 010281/2009Case Name: LAWRENCE FRUMUSA vs. MARIANELA HERNANDEZ INDIVIDUALLY AND DER
Case Type: OtherTrack: Standard
Motion Information:
Motion
Mymber
Date
Filed
Filed
By Relief SoughtSubmit
Date
Answer
Demanded Status Decision
Order
Signed Date001 PLAINT Otsc No Decided: 20-MAR-12
MOTION WITHDRAWN
Before Justice: ROSENBAUM
Close
https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/webcivil/FCASCaseInfo?parm=Motion&index=rlUnWTvOo... 9/8/2014
August 27, 2014
Judge A. Gail PrudentiChief Administrator JudgeOffice of Court Adminsitration25 Beaver StreetNew York, NY 10004
Re: Issues with the Seventh Judicial District Administration.
Dear Judge Prudent!,
I see that Judge Doran has decided to allow Justices from outside
Monroe County to preside over the New York State Attorney General's
investigation and prosecution of the Monroe County Local Development
(LDC) cases. Judge Doran's decision confirms my assertion that the
Monroe County Judicial system has systemic problems cresting an unfair
advantage for a network of certain individuals and denying others such
as myself, access to the courts. Having outside Judges such as Judge
Noonan (Genesee County) and Judge Falvey (Yates County) involved in the
LDC case is exactly the type of solution I have been asking for in both
my civil and criminal cases.
I have been making the Court Administration aware of this since
2009 when Judge Fisher demonstrated his association with my opponent at
a hearing April 1, 2009 in his court, Judge Fisher refers to my
opponent, the Plaintive on a first name bases. See the enclosed
transcript page 5 line 11 the Court: "Related to Bob", then they break
for an off the record discussion with "Bob"!
Unfortunately I was not present at the hearing or the discussion
as I was in Federal Court filing a Chapter 11 Bankruptcy to protect ray
assets from the predatory lender "Bob" and his associate Judge Fisher.
Judge fisher then demonstrates his alliance by continuing the State
Court Action in direct violation of the Federal Automatic. Stay to sign
and file a State Court order dictated by "Bob's" attorneys over the
objection of my state court attorneys. Judge Fisher then silenced my
.attempt to vacate the order by re-assigning my Order to Show Cause
filed pxro-se July 21, 2009 (2009-10281) to himself then denying me a
hearing and due process in that action. These were just a few of Judge
Fisher's efforts to manipulate the administration of the court to
protect his associate.
Of course I sought the make Administrative Judge VanStrydonck
aware of these actions who further supported these people to suppress
me. To the point where as I understand it, per Mr. Deninger, Judge
VanStrydonck was randomly assigned to my action filed May 2011 seeking
relief from these aggressors. However we now see from Judge
VanStrydonck's actions and. my prior letters that he was intentionallyassigned to deny my rights to due process and silence me. These andother issues are all captured in ray June 13, 2011 letter I wrote your
office (Judge Pfau) and Judge Doran again requesting my cases betransferred out of Monroe County' Judicial system.
Unfortunately once again the Office of Administration did not take
me seriously, allowing my opponents to take further retaliatory action
to silence me. To the point of Judge Fisher agreeing to be aprosecution witness at my Criminal trial July 11, 2011, a directviolation of the cannons of judicial conduct. The fact is that there
are biased Judges in Monroe County and this network abuses the
administrative NY Statutes to have cases assigned to a Judge of their
choice.
It has been over 24 months and Judge Doran has not responded to
your letter of April 5, 2012 (enclosed) referring the case assignmentissues I raised to Judge Doran. In fact Judge. Doran has never responded
to my concerns. Over this period I have watched Judge Doran afford theAttorney General proper access to the court and I am requesting againthat I am also allowed such access to fair and impartial Judges. To
that end as a first step, .1 am •requesting that you as the Court
Administrator re-assign my cases #2011-5292 (VanStrydonck) and 2009-
10281 (Judge Fisher) to a. Judge from outside Monroe County, I wouldsuggest the Commercial Judge presiding in Syracuse. These are twocritical cases in which I filed an Order to Show Cause, and was denied
due process. Once the proper Judicial assignment is made I will filethe appropriate motions to proceed per CPLR.
I am further requesting that you provide a means allowing for a,
independent review of the administration of all my cases and the
information I have collected. Allowing us to identify and solve once
and for all the systemic problems with the Administration of the Monroe
County courts, restoring the damages I have incurred. If this review is
not under the Administration Inspector General's jurisdiction, I would
request that you engage an independent resource to conduct this review.
I have included the following relative correspondence to start:1) June 13, 2011 letter to Judge Pfau / Judge Doran. Indicating
issues with Judge VanStrydonck administration of the court and
requesting independent review. ,
2) May 10, 2011 Letter to Judge VanStrydonck identifying issues and
demanding he act.
3) February 2, 2011 letter to Judge VanStrydonck identifying issues
and demanding he act.
4) Despite items 1-3 above, April 5, 2012 letter from Clerk Deningerrepresenting that Judge VanStrydonck was assigned randomly (notdisqualified) by the IAS system to my case filed May 2011.
5) April. 24, 2012 my response to Clerk Deninger concluding that Judge
VanStrydonck was intentionally assigned to the action filed May
2011 and acted to protect his associate, my opponent, by refusing
to act on my OTSC and barring me, a Pro-se litigant, from the New
York State court system.
6) May 28, 2012 letter requesting my cases be moved to the Syracuse
courts as a result of improper case administration channeling my
cases to biased Judges, essentially the same relief provided to
the NY Attorney General.
7) April. 5, 2012 response from Judge Prudenti referring the caseassignment issues to Judge Doran, which has not responded as of
this writing.
The above correspondents are a. portion of the evidence required to
be .review. I am again requesting, just as the Attorney General, you
provide me an independent review of my cases and restore the damages Ihave incurred. I look forward to hearing from you as- your earliest
convenence.
Sincerely ,(. J? h^
Lawrence Frumusa
DIM ll-B-3105P0 Box 50Sonyea, NY 14556
STATE OF NEW YORK: COURT OF CLAIMS
Lawrence Frumusa
Claimant,-^
-against- NOTICE OF INTENTIONTO FILE CLaJEm.
The State Of New York jDefendants.
x
TO:
Page 1 of 2
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERALState of New YorkThe CapitolAlbany, New York. 12224
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE, pursuant to the provisions of Sectionsio and 11 of the Court of Claims Act, the undersigned, j?;Lawrence grumuga hereby states his intention to filL*-*claim against the State of New York.
The Post Office address of the claimant is as follows:Lawrence FrumusaDIN # 11B3105
P.O.Box 975
Coxsackie, New York 12051
The date, time, and place of the factual occurrences comprisingthis claim is as follows:
J) Over the period of May 12, 2008 to and continuing as ofNovember 30, 2011 y . -
2) In the towns of Webster, Greece, and the city of Rochesterand syacuse in the Counties of Monroe, and Onada'guaga
This claim seeks redress in the nature of: Total Actual Damages|45,200,000Actual Damages : (illegal seizure of' the .following properties)l\ tCeni.C I1.] a^e ^ase i$U9,800,000 5) Webster loliday Inn$13 000 0002) Scenic Village Phase 2 $10,600,000 6) ParkSide SI 800 0003 Scenic Village Phase 3$5,200,000 7 Personal Assets $?'700 0004) Scenic Village Town Homes$ 2,100,000' ^ersopai Assets *-,/00,000
The following factual allegations set forth herein generallycomprise the basis for the claim:
(See Attachment 1)
o
•
•
ru
r^
•
Postage
Certified Fee
Return Receipt Fee(Endorsement Required)
Restricted Delivery Fee(Endorsement Required)
~7*t-S ;r—- 'I" ——*—r- . — al
Total Postage &Fees 1$Sent To.
^T
Postmark-Here
°l?..1.££..of ^e Atlo&ney GeberalStreet,Apt No.miaei, npi. no., !£-
PS F6rra:;3Sao-;AugusKfiuo6'U
SENDER: COMPLETE THIS SECTION^5JJItetemsi;2. and 3. Also complete
H«r, a if Restricted Del very isdesired.,SStSS™ «»address on the reversesothat we can return thecard toyou., Attaches card to the back of the mailpiece,oronthefront if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
COMPLETE THIS SECTION ON DELIVERY
A. SignaturfiECEIVED ClAaent1 FICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL £ l*Me
icliiffli"D. isdelive^addressdifferentfrorniterniY U ,-
ALBANY, NEW YORK 12224
OFFICE OF- THE ATTORNEY GENERALState of New YorkThe CapitolAlbany, New York 12224
I 3. ServiceType^Certified Mail D Express Mart__ . i riDotnrn Receic
-^y V>- V^T ' ~" r i 4. ResU. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee)_JVL^U-TTrticle Number 7007 2560 0000 10562720^
(Transfer from service label) -—— "7s Form 3811.February 2004Domest,c KetU,n Receipt
102595-02-M-1540
Page 2 of 2
It is claimed that the State of New York is therefore H*Mobased upon the following legal basis: cneretore liable
See Attachment 1
Accordingly, the appropriate investigation and settlement ofthis claim is requested within the statutory ST liodwi°tSnlnn9inety T^)' Svf^' fl**** n0to *** ~tl« 7. SS3
Attachment 1 and the exhibits to be included and become part ofthis notice of claim as if entered here.
Lawrence FrumusaDIN #11 B 3105
VERIFICATION
State of New York)County of Greene ) ss.:
«™?e undersl9ned' Lawrence Frumusa (llb3105) being duly sworn,
nnfLaniftfthe,Cl!il,iant aboVe named? I have read the foregoingwi SK intention to file a claim against the State of NeweLeDraS tV^r^5'' th.t Same ±S true to *y own knowledgeexcept as to the matters therein stated to be alleged oninformation and belief, and to those^ matters I tel?ev|9 it to
Sworn to before me on this
mber , 201)£.
iZfc^
Lawrence FrumusaDin ll-B-3105
Kim Ann JohnsonNotary Public, State ofNew York
Qualified In Greene CountyReg. No. 01JO6153744
Commission Expires Oct. 16, 20
CLAIMANT
Page 1 of 2
ATTACHMENT 1
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS TO COMPRISE THE BASES OF THIS CLAIM
New York State failure to properly oversee and staff the
Attorney Grievance Committee and the Commission on Judicial Conduct
with necessary competency, skills and non-conflicted persons required
to administer and execute the mandates and intent of the New York
State Statues as follows:
.1) 22 NYCRR 1022.19 and 1022.20
2) 22 NYCRR 100.20
3) N.Y.Ct Rules 7000.01 to 7000.14
4) Article 2-A-State Commission on Judicial Conduct.
Resulting in an unchecked group of individuals being attorneys and
judges able to operate above the law and at will to damage the
citizens of the Seventh Judicial District of New York State, including
Claimant as detailed in the attached correspondences as follows:
1) Exhibit A "Letter to Judge Pfau 6/13/2011"
2) Exhibit B "Letter to Judge Scudder 11/04/2011"
3) Exhibit C "Letter to Commission on Judicial Conduct"
4) Exhibit D "Letter to Judge VanStrydonick 2/06/2011"5) Exhibit E "McKinney's Penal Law 155.00 Larceny Owner
Definition"
As shown in Exhibit A the letter to Judge Pfau of 6/13/2011 •in "which
claimant made Judge Pfau aware of serious criminal activities in
the Seventh Judicial district. However the response was that within
30 days the claimant was convicted, and sentenced for misapropriation
misappropriation of partnership assets, a partnership in which the
claimant is a partner. However see Exhibit E definition of Larceny
per N.Y.S. Statue stating that "A Partner Can Not be Charged wthwith Misappropriation of Partnership assets when he is a partner
in such partnership". Clearly and attempt to silence the Complaint.
Above facts submitted by
Lawrence Frumusa
DIN ll-B-3105
PO Box 975
Coxsackie, New York 12051
Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT A
6/13/2011
Letter to Judge Pfau and others requesting action!
(5 Pages)
DocID 061301
June 13, 2011
Judge Ann Pfau
Office of Court Administration
25 Beaver Street
New York, NY 10004
Judge Craig J. Doran
Courts of Ontario County
27 North Main Street
Canandaigua, NY 14424
Re: Violations ofLarry Frumusa's Civil Rights 1.
Judge Pfau and Judge Doran,
We continue to discover actions of persons employed or elected to positions in the Rochester
Judicial system that deeply trouble us. Our experiences over the last two years and now in the
last few weeks, leaves us questioning the stability of our Judicial system here in Rochester New
York and the Seventh Judicial District of New York.
The Jatest actions as defined in the attached Exhibit A, demonstrate the control this group of
individuals have over this district, control which is preventing the proper administration of Justice
as per New York State Law. The effects of these individuals are propagating throughout the
system, creating a state of anarchy within our community.
Just as I experienced in 2002 when I as a concern citizen, unraveled the Amico mortgage fraud
scheme, one of the largest white collar crime schemes in this area and as described in
Demonsfrate-^and Chronicle article "The conspiracy is one of the largest fraud cases ever
uncovered in western New York" (See link to D&C Article).
Just as I found then in our financial systems, I am finding now in our judicial system. In that all
safe guards we have in our systems becomes manned by complacent, lazy and inept employees.
This situation alone allows enterprises such as the Amico and the one we are dealing with today
to flourish.
Surprisingly your responses, given your career experiences as Judges presumably able to
understand and weighfevidence with objectivity, without fear or favor, regardless of identity,
1To obtain a complete "web enabled" version of this document enabling all hotlinks to exhibits and details browse tohttD://SeventhJudicalDistrict.rico-wdnv.com/ user name justice password liberty. The document repositoryand distributionservice is provideby" Green Pleadings "
Voice: 585-872-9999 email: [email protected] PO Box 418Fax: 585-872-9000 Page 1 of 5 Webster, New York 14580
money, power, or weakness. We simply have not seen, as demonstrated in your handling of the
Judge VanStrydonck situation.
You simply ignore one of the fundamental enablers of White Collar crime, being the perpetrators
are in positions of perceived expertise and often relied upon for input to the handling of
complaints. Creating a "Fox guarding the Chicken Coop" situation and leading to the further
entrenchment of the enterprise.
To this point your handling of the Judge VanStrydonck situation, allowing him to act in a critical
position causing the exact results documented in any text book describing white collar crime.
Think of it, there were significant conversations with Judge VanStrydonck and attorney Mr. Dove
and absolutely none with myself and other member of the Creditors Committee. Why is that? We
have solid evidence and have witnessed, Mr. Dove over the last two years commit serious
crimes. Mr. Dove's actions and lack of ethics have been instrumental in advancing the Scheme to
Defraud. Now, he is able to portray himself as creditable attorney. This simply is not consistent
with the actions of Mr. Dove or the reasoning of a seasoned Justices. In fact we question if the
administration of the New York State Courts has the capability to move and eradicate these
individuals.
Your inability to comprehend the situation is demonstrated in the simplest decision, such as
having Judge VanStrydonck lead the transition to the new electronic filing system, when it is
proven that Judge VanStrydonck is the largest violator of the current system.
From these simple decision to the significant decisions as mentioned above creating the "Fox
guarding the Chicken Coop" situation, allowing our rights to be violated in what amounts to a
"hangmen's hearing" to prevent our efforts from having our assets, illegally acquired, now being
dispersed by the enterprise operating here as clearly shown in Exhibit B.
In fact the actions defined in the attached chart, in of them self, are egregious violations of
procedural abuse occurring. However these actions pail with respect to the actions of Judge
Fisher over the last two years in which have fully documented. The fact that within four weeks we
can expose the actions contained in the attached chart and others, literally defines the oversight
Judge VanStrydonck has provide during his tenure as the administrator Judge.
Given the severity of this situation and the refusal to properly address the situation we are left
very concern and with few options. Questioning if the only solution is to petition the Governor of
New York requesting he install Martial Law in the Seventh Judicial District, having the national
guard dispatched to restore law and order here.
We (the Creditors Committee and I) are requesting yourself or someone from the New York
Office of Court Administration contact us to arrange a meeting and discuss how to best approach
the situation. We would request this contact by the end of the day Wednesday June 15, 2011.
Voice: 585-872-9999 email: [email protected] PO Box 418Fax: 585-872-9000 Page 2 of 5 Webster, New York 14580
We have demonstrated our ability to understand and disclose complicated schemes to defraud.
Further we are all reputable successful business people in the community who have
demonstrated our resolve to eradicate this enterprise for the betterment of our community. These
allegation are not exaggerated of distorted in any way, they are very real and need to be
addressed.
We look forward to working with on these issues.
Regards,
Larry Frumusa
cc: Creditors Committee
Voice:
Fax:
585-872-9999
585-872-9000
email: [email protected] 3 of 5
PO Box 418
Webster, New York 14580
Exhibit A
Infringement of Rights Action
Violation of New York Criminal
Procedure Law Article 100
Commencement of an action in
local town court.
Pursuant to New York Criminal Procedure Article 100,1 attempted to
file a criminal complaint charging the defendants with two counts of
grand larceny in the first degree a class B felony and three counts of
grand larceny in the second degree a class C felony, and value in
excess of $10,000,000. (See link to Complaint).
This meritorious claim accuses persons who hold positions of trust in
the community, such as elected Village of Fairport Judge Arnold,
and should be promptly dealt with.
However, Webster Town Court Judge Di Salvo, intercepted my filing
and directed the clerk to not file this document on the court record.
Clearly acting the protect his cohorts. I then hand delivered a letter
to Judge Di Salvo demandina he file the comDlaint (See link to
Judae Di Salvo Letter), and as always I was ignored!.
It has been 4 weeks now, no Grand Jury, no preliminary hearing, no
action at all!
I would think the residents of the Village of Fairport would like to
know what actions their Judge Arnold has been accused of.
Wouldn't you also think that?
Family court, scheme to
commit perjury and defraud
me.
Family court Magistrate Rao, attorneys Ferro, Rasmussen and
Meltzer with client Ms. Frumusa scheme to submit false sworn
affidavits and testimony in an attempt to conceal an illegal
distribution of $45,000.
Then Magistrate Rao uses his position as a Magistrate to prevent my
retrieving evidence to demonstrate the perjury committed. (See link
to Criminal Complaint Hied in Rochester Citv Court I
Ex-parte communication to
conceal and silence my efforts
to expose
December or 2008 Webster town Judge Corretore, attorney Scibetta
and his client Belmore schemed to abuse Judge Corretore position
as a Judge forcing the trial of myself for alleged back rent. As a
result Judge Corretore awarded his associates a judgment of
$125,000 from Webster Town Court.
The incident was so egregious it resulted in my attorney moving from
Voice:
Fax:
585-872-9999
585-872-9000
email: [email protected] Aof 5
PO Box 418
Webster, New York 14580
Voice:
Fax:
585-872-9999
585-872-9000
Exhibit A
this area, saying he cannot practice in this "culture". Of course the
decision had no bases in Law, which decision I have been
processing the appeal.
January 2011, I created and submitted the brief for the appeal,
mostly with information my attorney provided before he left. (See link
to appellants brief providing details of actions).
May 5, 2011, five months later, I receive a very strange order from
Judge Argento dismissing the appeal "sua sponte", providing no
clear reasoning for the action, leaving me very confused. (See linkto
Judge Argento order of May 5. 2011).
However with the help of a sympathetic court employee, I discovered
that May 4 2011 attorney Scibetta and Judge Argento law clerk Bob
Masterocola had a ex-parte conversation regarding the appeal and
disposition of my appeal.
Then May 5, 2011 attorney Scibetta sends Masterocola a three page
letter detailing the conversation and concluding dismissal is a good
idea and will not have an impact. This letter, I was not mentioned or
provided a copied of. (See link to Scibetta's letter to Judge Argento
Law Clerk of May 5. 2011).
Then all of a sudden I receive the Order of May 5, 2011 informing
me that the court dismissed the appeal. Not one word about the
conversation with Scibetta or references the Scibetta letter in Judge
Argento's order.
More importantly Judge Argento is presiding over several criminal
cases, resulting from false accusations brought on in another
attempt to silence.
What conclusion would you draw from this scenario.
email: [email protected] 5 of 5
PO Box 418
Webster, New York 14580
Exhibit B Demonstration of Scheme to Defraud
Item Date Transaction of Wells Fargo and the Enterprise
Eo c
S.S
=8:
Cash
TakenValue
1 November
4, 2010
Referee Deed
Parties
Enterprise acquires Scenic Village Apartments Phase 1
Referee of L Frumusa Family Enterprise P1 (Grantor) to
Morgan Serene Park, LLC (Grantee)
$6,500,000
2 February
10,2011
04:19:53 PM
Warranty Deed
Transferring Scenic Village Apartment Phase 1 between shell LLCParties
Morgan Serene Park, LLC (Grantor) to
North Ponds Apartments , LLC (Grantee)
>>CO
XI
COCO
3 February
10,2011
04:19:53 PM
Mortgage
Parties
Wells Fargo Bank, National Association (Mortgagee) and
North Ponds Apartments, LLC (Mortgagor)•§£CO *~G>
$7,487,469 $9,851,933
4 February
10,2011
04:20:53 PM
Modification of Building Agreement
Parties
Wells Fargo Bank, National Association (Lender) and
North Ponds Apartments, LLC (Borrower)
CO ?re c
TS cCO T"
5 February
10,2011
04:21:53 PM
Spreader Agreement
Parties
Wells Fargo Bank, National Association and
North Ponds Apartments, LLC
SL.IIECO T~
6 April 25,
2011
Construction Financing
Parties
Wells Fargo Bank, National Association (Mortgagee) and
Saratoga Crossing LLC (Mortgagor)
e.CO
•oOJ
$15,702,051
Fxhihit Pan& 1
EXHIBIT B
11/04/2011
Response to Judge Scudder confirming conflict of interest
(4 pages)
Docid 110402
France* &. -C<*f~0 ('€> // ••••- '; - - < -" - "Oep^i Cteih of ~ike Court _ —^ — - ;•••Affe tic*!* -P**j"><** in 0**pt •:— --•-
fiackesUi ter //<? u/ fcWc. :~ / YG>0Y :;
.$£.- A il.Q4^t ¥ (Mi--€Uq-^--&- f^^iOt '> -
/! Ca-f&fc (I} , . f^_X cm m f espoM11 -~jq ^ -y ou/ hiOr
Of S>e fiT^fA ie/ /<?. 2a//, uJ^L ell d\je. -- -ftP^pect, 5/ epp i*j ha cU^ &-a4 reu<cwwf<j0u.f/&'i'i'efj> ^lf /€ i Or ho \ f?0^ftrf^fu(
MeacL LlP h&\ our I ±k< &( ieva*<e -p/orejj-, , ^
do* $'Jer im ort 9/?/«j ^ ^fo-ie -̂ -
<" t)/w ^ dc*n-f* oofs"' Je, i^j*>\ f\ Cf^A1 ^n
•fLr±<r alleycthv*\<L.... ^ _ ~O^f^lie/ £ffeJ 5 /Hf-Of/u/cS ^b.cl*. -
/*/. tfW^,^*^ tM/./Mef-def. -- ;-fJcateitef, /iiy/ fe,s/o/vce .J-erntiJ -
/wy /ffuejf, hoi Iks* you /<?!+<? onpel11*4 ^o /Cu-euj f^f UJood^'d
///v/// IH
__ '" ...-..' ;'^L±^^f„,fVf.c^/c£^ . - -_J/? fJfkL^ctAI ca _qj& i Co.t. AkJc ( eJ„ _wi *-k - - -i_
^Jfie _£j.Lcf((A.<4 _Qye±'JL0&- t,^uJhy _ _.d.'A .xy£M. -C.ko.o%£. to ivtppoit +ke._..___ , _jM&&$CirA__o„oKfilctir+~ - - —. ------ - -
Wk y__A >.cl _yotjL .yiof: dOf*f*dR.-C*ft-.-- -$(,_Mejl_*\er J^uukixk tS. ^* ^me-~ - - -^S Auai *0A ctflA. ft kd /A you/- £ «. ^ c_ -:-
[qcu.\ i effs •_ /to/eue/ _y VUl- f £ A*&J * <) --- —-S henlr o t\ Me fil*M
/Ajy t.-f' o*«I) y_ __you^qJe j* o . _ _•_..._.. :
_UJqo_Jiaid-Co** filou-*-/ ."T /' VJ._' *^ i^--C =__.-/<* ^Z_ ^* £._ _kP fO, ~<J.*d_jHa._v_e ji 'j1 {__ ^ ^ / ^a..::.
_i!3o_ '̂.A/j /rv^ .i'itf. &J-l*Mf»efi $9-f* r+J-ti.f-f- -.c *._ lb <>_u/?i»J <. j.Jmi; £?4. A/^.Cy ifi**vi.,„oJ^«i^^ '- &<Lh.s>+.i--<J'. .?*-(. UJPddotdj. __hoij£€^^f_^p /ys.e_^hp_Af^__.r _ _.. ^-.
'jpLeAM PLos/tdje..__tii*A. -iJ*.£ piorr>ss ____
$£foetus? -ho jhke G&rtU {jufij<~y jssun _
__ \jj_ •* b_ Je <^pe<\ jo.^oaf S'Uffej J«04//a_Z T__dpaf im'1^ t*ty do&tjh'*t tSSurl JLfl ftJe/^i^Qijif oL.L&u/etf&rt******* . _'
pa ad c m?k\<x\ _ro 44c p (op e f foe I- /c^ofu&u' &I {cr A&4 fU€> i s 4 kc-fojpafntys c*cf~ t.fl a^ €:r h* c<=x( _/v\a hofGx Jef>A<d h* Mevs<l>tk.£(«tr e^Je oY"if4h<°£. UJfHo^ ^4lixrc*l CJ.,4^cf nexf J eiLef
CtJ'r^eA P* *fo ^e p/cOccOM f/af^ijfl ef-L(c*f o J-f-ot Ayjs -'3 ftoufJle^ />yt^U (ffiueAJ<e (JJo/^^iHe^ &% J.^f^ch hy£ f& iue , A / ^o 4 ii c C^o^iH :f4c^3 O (CPol posh /h^J^ ^f of a^cttey o**^(Soft -a^^t frty jv\emh*r_s foel;^^Jc
'Mt fv'/ f'/*<* Staff f4^^0^^{iAjf cf/u4fO'-feffaf <£o**p/<*('*»& /op ft* eom^^e"e
Cue So/ey a^O(^t^{. UJ^Ok <* of Hftf-f-
of Mr S'talvfi'*
SfJ€cffc Aa-^j/e of' .rny t1jUO\ 2T~ ka^Q. .
Sco<JI$eC is duly fet/nJ *1 o {Uooidg(f\ oidet. %° 03\oLt* My f^kh afe
JA n # ^6^f
w
ijcf'y Settovf I'^af'oA /a our C°otniH</*'ly-*£ tjjt/l /(poize yoo iJj*1h -fke am^ff
£ Cj4
A^cfi r^ a*£ s,OOSJf suic ly ihcJ Co (A *̂*• he y\CMff><>* **f
/
a£
(<"f:
fO- &o> ^c<>
/ v <r o x.Jodje <ryC^JJ^r
.)(: •' i -'/' r>
j,j 41< / 1 V
/fi^ons?
EXHIBIT C
11/02/2011
Response to Commission on Judicial Conduct
(6 Pages)
DocID 110202
__ _______ ; ___ Hhdtt_Jjjv^lJlL^^u^I^J^oslC •AAj^l^Ls£a^<yL^ _/Is i^ran-f^jM_i__£.__i__a_^^^ Jf^i'cGt f Ce^k ^x^ <^"^00„„Ak.1££^A^ _>fj_^Jt_ _, _ ; _•_ __ :__ _Ll^s^r J], hl6o£ _: _ __ ___ _
Keo„Ble- io^lMitiOili _.__
; pAs. Pacj^re/.k ;
,4 fV-/- o -ofdG^tC +u
_£r <3. /n wr 1
Jl'dicoV C?-Ondu<L± ''„___.__ I Uo
_____ jae4?o^_ _)f- jui^e Mfc^en-fo t° _._____ ,' Of »1 it £. ke. < y&<>si.slic?n/<2i Q.
___ _. , j ke 0 o f fuf 4voiv o ecu «. i/v/ * / n ________ Do f OuJ>Uca\ £^ s-f e v^ a i^A S<j( ffefs la^,_ _ ' jwy efforts +° ch^^IoSc _^L __
_ __ _/_ . X" \\«oe Y\Ow b£ <? r\ ,C?dK i/\ cf <?c8 daJ __._(__f^piqW s_?v\ f<? a_ eA roc m^=sMiXj^jTcJYt~t^^ °^_. „ (XS^e^s^as, fela-fecx1 -fo a parin^fS'LLfi
,. /A u»Ui'ck ~JT <ayw a /vAe^(xr of ._ -; Tke deFjV)A^ aaA /^ost e^f^icki_
___ _ <3£{?^cf o£~ j"k^ is 4-Iao> fA«^ ak<U7^___._ ;, ._* b^n^A by A7 V. S- P^f^l Lav
I
_
_£jjy±jpLhf ._k£^J^_J&eJQja..l ^«f-
£__*•-•'
a.M-__ .._X..T Lc__£_
J_X-
Tt
Cah
\t
•^Q^&^r
__IClA;o€_^- - - i_\.___.l .L-ja (___ 2 LS>. - O Q
Mis^Ncuj loih:..„„h^ie a__^A£t^_...c_n_c>..t_ b. e_ cL&rsp^J u^ &_..._ _..-
_.j^k^.a_^..pr,.o...|2rj>_i.ro.K..- £.£.- p^if^^LS Lj#._3..4L«.1jl_!1 ,_ _. - ~- _ ..-_ - : - ----- - - —
~R&^hauo_ ___._>£A_it_^____ K^Ajr..O.K.9 cis.av\ _cx\tL q< CJ^i^A \. rh^L.. is: b.axj__c_l _^b.v_Mstu<^2^.:l k__j^ia^^ci:.._. ..._iS ^imfl^^ SO^pafjers
Mi^ii^we^ g kpaj___L ikes_ peefl^ -...__. _____Tie. tek<d<Aoty __«___J__0j_U__^^j_£__£_£__^j_dh_ &^ igxa_.Vvpt.gcv fc.y._,_±__ufiff^AioMi^ cL_y^4 £__
LiiJi^_^-_^__..l!L.J]t.?- ___ uM4lt ilii £&±lo\j).k6K„.akA keX;j_i!ii_L_fc/ifg rle-i-^vlecl iA-^-y—jp-lj^A^ l'̂ 9 ^ _________ -Sukj^McA i__ i__ 1^D#L Appeki^ __^.xjrf- in ^u^^orV i*__/v..y tia\b£^L^oj fuilmk^%je2**Jk ol- ihiiHi :. ..'.._.. : _' -., __.
'\jJOjAA itq\jes\ ^.iLo^M^fSih^h _.
S.
3
_<i__LSi__| _!___.____ ^K.cle ff <^ **>.**_ .^•Ty_QMpf gsl-e at" _jjm/_?_j 4f<^<^T-or ~f<=> f ei^fe u^
|ii__M.._li^g c4(o <A s a ^ ."' Ju o\<fr _?• AlL9_^.:.*^_t^ :ij_l
a 4 <?_>_' ^ ("° ^ __. _i_______t_-r___ __l_^.:i___-ii 3____ __l_?__^__l...iA^l^j^S: _J____*_____ t___ ___!____? £__.___j^ L__iiL___.f>_
__i_^._._v_ _:___?ri=____Co^^„£.€ j/__eu. ,' f"k_^__M.^
pos14_{^_/v__ i;0._.___£.^^*_.*.A___1_U_E£<^£1_ i..4 ^*i_t_3_____. _&________ m____i__/___^-t- J° 4c^<t(os<-L'4-k c ______f__g.:k___v__j£ ____Jh____£ <^ap( kef ; _.....C\i ScxlJ..__i_c;4...: . ._ - .
^ro
4f u^. via -Ve\A .— o.. .._j/// b<° <de ho. srf /*4<pJ_.
F.
_> ao<___ i^<v A.if ./v +• f. a. (- 7^2> _*.^u _e Ae fA / ^. •f
rfc.T-rc/vi SucL ^i"_i-^^,._XA.i_i_?__l_.^J _____i___L_?vl __!___..
j_yy rrc|L4-j fo- ^lue ^o /" __c c jjn__T__J^A £jpipl-__^__^ f-faft.ey
XA \oJl JfzL^—QA^.±0-JSL do i_^____f„ijO±,eJL _f't.- f^^s/ca4ike Jul w - _i(!.Of*\r*i f-A-v G'fa^.d '^afcenyio pr<?<i/e<\T iMy o^ta^/w^fCow.petted _o<J*s*l , _
£_)_CD-^C&LQ:
___£t..c_^ -.-i-Lxr:.. CLf__a^_Jc_._.„ :FolLI ._ uul^L.v&^.....j:L^. ...(jiB^iiifQ^ _._ _AoiLacF^ _anA SjLU^licM&j^^jfco- dJu^ih^i
_<___:_l4_._.dciLe.cfc:_.__. __ __._ •__ _ -
___3- k_ _i___Ai_i-_tid/v-----4-ii. x:_w__: dtA^d.^SjojuL<Led..jC-^ojlAjj^^-ZoA^jz, Af^ _&a..4_c^--ZE_- — ~__1'1'.„p__ uu-li- ft-Le _ioM|_l_tjL^ _-rXcAioJfv__-...oj£ Ju -4-%<l-- Af^° /&_,_ ___uctc^_4__ ^_|CU.^fta_y iuJ^e ^ ^J_U_Ju_l <| __'_R $lei. J2_Lca/j..I L£i fe_. [jbAkfld^^-i---dOtAlp IcA <a4 s. . i_ OL^^u e£ 44c__t_._ _
M/A iSSTfO A Lx__L_I,._ slj£j£CL J^JClL J^k&^_U^e^—te -_^£ivLj^_._-_a_ .___>_i._^A.A_.m._i__.__,:4" ilo.iiup_t
jlef^a j)_tu.ii_ke i^e!8_^__y _J),t/ ___Fkc £lQ_/Y_.j__JX£..(d ^•V-
I
^[^e^..^^.
! t l_:__L
LL-MoJyo^Z&J?^UlCJLkfc__ __!,. _0l_>_ d.U__Xl XjoaulA-^o^J^aUe 4:k_L____£Q_j^
g U,q f r _i_L___fc_, Jjfii jL_U_s_ JLQ-J4j£MJLS-a ^o^X^ /^Ly.-- xiM \shf. ie>
X__J___JL__. .__J_j.L-^i_i_2X___S_f _|_JL2J!__L<LL^j.^^e^Lk£ £Liii^x.
-^£_><
o^j\.iS^c^(^oj^Ar _LAj_k £/\_.£. a t- _*__.i?!_-^__f_^_d_L£L2 <? K. __ 4fQkLdexJ ,i Lc_...^_jii<_*( LA-fec/vv^i/^.^ __i.t's^Jas;.iA^ ^i^
i_ J_«_J_=...
5/A. i j,CKj'
C
.__\_\c__ M-C-i-.i-?-^..^- lI&^JL __5 ^i^j?^ ^_-:_iiZiL±e_i__^ .Af______ J<i__<_c_j _kec^,^^
...M^ . _ ___ .,-
Lupoid akh „_SatEl MM:LiAl 2,__s_ "L^_...C^QASodlll j^_w .___k__=.-__i__^xo-y..>i^i _.____.•_-__.__jaki.Ld_^____.#___. _i____:._ _o.w_u/o_[_i _^o^fJv_A•J-_.o_.___.jdlA.____(_P._s__c (lpx___^_pL.___l__.fs>i.'_ jfv <__«_____Cn_£__\.t' -__7__Ll^ &<__£ lQMHoiAiky/
c£_ a _^ io. i.kc_/Lc___^...____f_-^-_<_-..^--k-..^^-__....-
u_ if l^c^r c_A.a _££__rl__J__lk___77 iiirw, -f,^
LIajjJIz±Llbfl <=f Jli/vn fa:
Lau. / enfj^____Xii_J^.___i.^t.,' j_\_Z_[i_^2i^c_ -__LOjjS_fi___. iT-_o :: :_^L^_____, A)lS^oSJ^^:iHl±oj^,
V
\ea\t ceuj, ___!_/_j^___<iL_ F^__-±Lr__2_J_______C_ Aj^A—iX-S^Jiudi _ £._<____'. ___j^a._1it___£.»£____;_ /_o/jj3l ii i_7__i4i- _<_J_£__-_
(o
_-__J5___vfiLli^ ^Xi2f3JL_^. £id:____rj\_ A_ja^±k.X^_^ ai^__„p£.___2l.<st-l-_.. •. - — -.— - -— — - --
_R_e-_pU__JL
/0€4yt<^~~
_oai iiiixLc.r:---_..--._FQ hm^QQ_ __ __
_..£_ (J^ifCL.^Mt^^-lkr— -____. __ __' t+#s' \L(HQ^
EXHIBIT D
2/02/2011
Letter to Judge Vanstrydonck demanding he act!
(3 Pages)
DocID 020201
Wednesday, February 02,2011
Judge VanStrydonck
New York Supreme Court Administrative Chief Judge
99 Exchange Boulevard,
Rochester, NY 14614-2185
Re: Violations of Larry Frumusa's Civil Rights.
Judge VanStrydonck,
As the siege of my property continues, l draw to your attention the latest actions in Judge Fisher's
court. Action conducted first by Ms. Nussbaum and then Judge Fisher. One far more revolting
than the other, demonstrating the continual course of conduct attacking my civil liberties.
Nussbaum - Fisher Actions.
The first being the audacity of a licensed New York State attorney, Ms. Nussbaum, thinking that
she can simply file a motion asking the court to release a court appointed Receiver. Such receiver
was appointed to operate a $13,000,000 hotel project and had been doing so for 2 years,
handling over $5,000,000 in cash receipts and in the midst of a significant partnership dispute. A
dispute in which the majority partner alleged that Ms. Nussbaum orchestrated the entire
receivership to take over the project for her client the minority partner.
Now Ms. Nussbaum feels it is appropriate to release the receiver without any accounting and
actions that are in zero compliance to New York Business Corporation Law - Article 12. This
attitude alone is completely revolting.
However the second action, which is far more revolting, is the ridiculous act of Judge Fisher to
sign an order approving Nussbaum's motion from the bench of a hearing on December 18,2010.
This hearing in which I the Defendant, having to act pro-se, was not served notice of and of
course not in attendance. However Judge Fisher simply signs the order approving Ms.
Nussbaum's motion essentially allowing the receiver to walk out the front door of the facility
stealing millions of dollars from myself and hardworking creditors of mine.
These actions were the exact events that occurred at the December 18, 2010 hearing. Frankly
these action have no place in a civilized society, they are criminal actions and require immediate
attention.
Voice: 585-872-9999 email: [email protected] POBox 418Fax: 585-872-9000 Page 1 of 3 Webster, New York 14580
The hearing of December 18, 2010, demonstrates the exact course of conduct I have been
requesting you to deal with over the last year. These are not issue to be handled by an appeal
process; instead they demonstrate a complete breakdown of the Judicial system here in the
Seventh district. The perpetrators are abusing fundamental functions such as communications
with Judicial personnel and Judges, intentional violations of Federal law, rules of service and
notice, random assignment of Judges for cases, most importantly the treatment of pro-se litigants
in the system, all being abused by the perpetrators to gain a significant advantage. All areas in
which your office is charged with upholding and maintaining the fundamental structure of our
system.
I have attached my amended affidavit in response to the action of Judge Fisher. I am requesting
as a result of the significant attacks on my civil liberties by Judge Fisher and his associates that
all cases of mine be transferred to another Judge and the attacked Amended Affidavit be placed
on the docket.
However as a result of your inept and complacent oversight, these criminal elements are
proliferating throughout the seventh Judicial District.
Judge Arnold - accused of extortion
As an additional testament to your inept and incompetent oversight of the Seventh Judicial
District, I understand that Mr. Michael Arnold is an elected Judge in the Village of Fairport. Once
again this is unbelievable, Mr. Arnold is accused by me and approximately 50 citizens in the
Rochester area of extorting over $5,000,000 from us honest hard working citizens. Without
question Mr. Arnold has committed several Class B felonies in support of a criminal enterprise
operating here. Further the only thing preventing his prosecution is his stature as a Judge and
access to investigators resulting from being a sitting Judge in Fairport.
You are fully aware of Mr. Arnold's activities and you continue to allow him to remain on the
bench in Fairport. I am sure the good people of Fairport will be appalled when they are made
aware of the facts, demanding Mr. Arnold's and yours resignation.
Judge Bellini - ex-parte discussions.
As a third example of this break down, for some reason unknown to me, Judge Bellini seemingly
wakes up one day and decides reinstate my disposed matrimony case; then file an order to such
(Exhibit A). Just likethat, no moving paper, no notice to all parties, just does it!
Then covering her tracks and attempts to say her action was a response to a show cause order
filed and dismissed six months prior and case was disposed. Doesnt Judge Bellini look at the
docket to see the case was disposed of in August 2010. This is simply amazing.
Voice: 585-872-9999 email: [email protected] POBox 418Fax: 585-877-9000 Page 2 of3 Webster, New York 14580
However, oddly a few days later an attorney, Mr. Metz, runs into family court to allege that as a
result of the Bellini order to re-instate the case, a temporary support order from the original case
is still in effect. Amazingly the attorney attempts to reinstate a temporary support order issued
before I file bankruptcy when my finical situation was completely different, and from a matrimony
case that was dismissed due to lack of grounds in June of 2009. However more than a year later
Mr. Metz is spinning this ridiculous story.
So what really happened? I am sure it is obvious to your honor, Mr. Metz came up with this
ridiculous idea. Then runs to Judge Bellini has an ex-parte conversation with the court asking the
court to file an order re-instating the close matrimony case and of course the court obliges.
Now where do you start appealing in this situation?
Conclusion
The simple fact is these incidents demonstrate a fundamental break down in our judicial system
here. They are not isolated incidents in fact they define the norm of the proceedings in the
Seventh Judicial district. All as a result of your inept and complacent oversight as captured in
your response of.
Therefore I am requesting that you immediately address these significant issues and take the
following actions as a first step:
1. As requested several times, I am demanding the transfer all my cases from Judge Fisher.
2. In order to protect the good citizens of Fairport New York I am requesting you
immediately suspend Judge Arnold from the bench of the Village of Fairport.
3. Again as I have requested several times, aggressively engage the New York State
Bureau of Public Integrity, utilizing the open case I have number 10-1119.
Pending the completion of the review by the Bureau of Public Integrity, I believe the people of this
community will determine your ability to continue as the Administration Judge for the seventh
judicial district.
Larry Frumusa
Voice: 585-872-9999 email: [email protected] POBox418Fax: 585-872-9000 Page 3 of3 Webster. New York 14580
EXHIBIT E
M^ckinney's Penal Law 155.00 Larceny Definition of Owner Demonstratin
Frumusa is being held on an illegal charge.
Page 10 of 271
McKinney's Penal Law § 155.00 Page 9
Owner
For the purpose of determining the victim of a larceny, an owner of property is broadly defined as anyperson who has a right to possession of the property, however limited or contingent, which is superiorto that of the purported thief [Penal Law § 155.00(5)]. See People v. Hutchinson. 56 N.Y.2d 868, 453N.Y.S.2d 394, 438 N.E.2d 1109 (1982) (an employee of a bank qualified as the "owner" of moneywrongfully taken from the bank because the employee's right to possession of the money was superiorto that of the thief). A person in lawful possession of property has an interest in that property superior tothat of a person having only a security interest unless there is a specific agreement between the partiesto the contrary [Penal Law § 155.00(5)]. See People v. Gluck, 188 N.Y. 167, 80 N.E. 1022 (1907). Evena person who acquired possession of the property illegally has an interest superior to, and is thus the"owner" with respect to, another person who takes the property from him or her by larcenous means[Penal Law § 155.00(5)]. See Peoplev. Wilson, 93 N.Y.2d 222, 689 N.Y.S.2d 419, 711 N.E.2d 633 (1999).
A joint or common owner of property does not have an interest superior to that of any other joint orcommon owner of the property [Penal Law § 155.00(5)].See People v. Hart, 114 A.D. 9, 99 N.Y.S. 758(1st Dept. 1906). Thus, partners cannot be charged with larceny for the misappropriation of j_3r_n_as_up
-fmds^eopje v.Zinke7lTnYlf£ 556 N.Y .S.2d 1!. 555 N.r.2d 263 (1990). ——'
An attorney who was entitled to a portion of the proceeds of a settlement of a personal injury action ashis share of the fee was not an owner of such monies while they were held in the special account of thesuccessor attorney; thus, the successor attorney was not guilty of larceny from the former attorney whenhe took such monies. People v. Keeffe, 50 N.Y.2d 149, 428 N.Y.S.2d 446, 405 N.E.2d 1012 (1980).
The " 'misuse' of funds upon which a constructive trust could be imposed does not comprise the crimeof larceny by embezzlement ... because the possible "beneficiaries" of a potential constructive trustsimply do not have the requisite pre-existing interest, superior to that of the legal owner of thosefunds." People v. Yannett, 49 N.Y.2d 296, 303-04, 425 N.Y.S.2d 300, 401 N.E.2d 410 (1980); People v.Jennings, 69 N.Y.2d at 127-28, supra.
The joint owner of a money market account was properly found guilty of a larceny by false promise.People v. Antilla. 11 N.Y.2d 853, 568 N.Y.S.2d 9, 569 N.E.2d 868 (1991). In Antilla, the defendant hadinduced his great-aunt, apparently by a promise to help her in the management of her financial affairs,to acquiesce in the opening of a joint money market account with a deposit of $180,000 of the great-aunt's money. Over time, the defendant withdrew the bulk of the money exclusively for his own use,and ultimately, most of the money was lost. To the defendant's argument that a joint owner in a moneymarket account could not be convicted of misappropriating the money by unauthorized withdrawalsfrom the account, the Court of Appeals responded: "... the larcenous creation of the joint account, notdefendant's withdrawals from it, provided the basis for his conviction in this case." Id. at 855.
Kinds of Larceny
As explained in the "Larceny Defined" section of this commentary, the scope of the crime of larceny remains limited to those common law forms of larceny and other statutory forms of larceny set forth insubdivision two of Penal Law § 155.05 and elsewhere. People v. Foster, 73 N.Y.2d 596, 543 N.Y.S.2d1, 541 N.E.2d 1 (1989).
)2011 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works.
https://web2.westlawxom/print/printstream.aspx?vr=2.0&mt=W 9/19/2011