SUPREME COURT APPELLATE DIVISION

STATE OF NEW YORK FOURTH JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

ln re: KEVIN PATRICK BRADY, petitioner

PETITION FOR
WRIT OF PROHIBITION

EXHIBITS

KEVIN PATRICK BRADY, PETITIONER

BOX 862
HENRIETTA, NY 14467
EXHIBITS

A Permission to File
B Rodriguez' Threats
C Objection to Vanstrydonck
D Rodriguez Requests Sopeana
E Docket Dates
F Vanstrydonck Delusions
G Order of Commitment
H Order of Commitment
I County clerk Certificate
J County clerk Certificate
K Request for Stipulation
L Request for Stipulation
M Doran Rejection
N Doran Rejection
O Copy Cat Injunction
P Letter to Avon
P Torrigiano Rejection
P2 Appeal Decision
R Judgment East Rochester
S Letter of Termination
S2 Letter of Rejection
MISC Trial Exhibit 6
MISC Trial Exhibit 8
MISC Letter Hilell Deutsch
 STATEOFNEWYORK
IINIFIED COTJRT SYSTEM
SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
545 HALL OF ruSTICE
ROCHESTE& NEw YORK t4614-2tl4
(515) {2&2885

JONATEAN LIPPMAN THOMA.S }L VAN STRYDONCK

C[icf Adninistrtiw Jrdge
JEticc Supm Coui
Adnini:cariw Judgs
SaaftJudicirl Distsicr
JOSEPI J. TRAFICANTI, JR
Dcp uty Chid Adniilsrrriw Judgc HARRYSALIS
Corrts Ousidr Nlcry yo* City ExmtiwAsiltlnt
tsalis@ortrsbE-oy.6

September 3,2002

Mr. Kevin Patrick tsrady

508 Locust Lane
E. Rochester, New York 14445

RE: Permission To File Lawsuit

Dear Mr, Brady:

I am the confidential Law Clerk to the Hon. Thomas M. Van Strydonok, As 1'ot !:,au',ry,
Justice Van Strydonck is the Administrative Judge for the Seventh Judicial District. Li that
capaciry, your correspondence and papers were for-warded to me for review and response,

You must file a Notice of Motion with the County Clerk's Office with the appropriate
fililgfees. When the Court receives these papers, a date for your oral argument will be assigned.
Thereafter, you will need to serve the proposed Respondents. Such service must be done by a
process server who may serve the proposed Respondents Taddeo and Donofrio by service on the
Family Court Clerk.

Principal Law Clerk

HLJ/paw
 Sra::. on NEg ]|on-l<
OFFiCE ()F THE ATTOF.\rY GEIirE,rr-
-6 (. Vaa.(O Rt \t t F/.:ncf .r! Davz:rl
rEyQffal .SrlurAIsq C*,+l n o-rr|f

.Iune ZC , 199/-

Re.-'i:: Pa!r:ck E:ady

5 8lrlcisL Laire
E- i.iochester, lJ'1 1444!.
.te, Brqdv v' ili-ilSf-et-=l-
ia.iex Nc- 8309195
:-real: Yr, EraJy':
I t aas c.:re Lc my at E€E(.:"oil Lhat ycu heve
::Eaeniiy sought ieaue t: c; f ile r-::iminal charges agarns: ny
t:Lienfs, i!:e DEher nar.'reci ludges;nrf .r:u.L offiejals
Your afrempt is in direce .riolation of '.hR mandatp;q r,f
-ailstrce Gorski's Pe;-inanenE Tnjunction anci I request E haa-
yc)u :mmedrately cease an-J desis-u ycur frivolous f ilir:gs
or- iace a.jdrtrona - sancc icns . af Eorne'7's f ees and a
c!-r.m;.nai ccnEernpi {ff cDU:f c:!:arion f,=r suc','r f lagralt ani,
fr-ivolcus ccaducc.
I:: adri-'. ii:.r:. I arn reqr€sEing cha:, y=u comtrly
l-li th ihe rra::dates ,:f -]u!li tce 3=rsk:'s Judg'*en: whtcll
iireccei yo'..: io pay a'rturi-re).'s fees anc san.iicr:s rc lrr7
cl-ienf s . FarLure te conply by ju).y i . r 997, criil resuLtr
egarilst )ru1i.
Ler- me ff.aKe tt 'Jer-y clear .-o yeu, :.f you push
:Ee ii-1 file a crimfnaj con:empE cf .eourE proceedlag
a.qa!.nsr. .;::ii, I xiil seek cbe r.ai.t-r;\um senaicy of ;ai1 tirre
p).us LhE :naxi:nur-' line, pi.us addri:.ons1 san.:r-cns and
aE iorney'3 f ees : Ern very sure L!ial- Lhe Cou,rE uir!ch
revieurs. t-he motio;'l wi il punish ycLi severeiy for ycur
cDniinued abuse. ia;:assmerrt cf my cl.iencs anl other nained
ruaqes anC court ctficiais
f-rir..iher, j a,:. 11 Seek mOGrf :ca:i.on af :he
Perr:'arerri i:'riuircE tca Such ihat, ycu r.r).f I be pfohibi*-ed
f rc,m f : llr:,j ;n;* ;rer* aclicJts againsE ny cirents, arrd other
n:rffied ; d:ges a.,d court ;if rciais rn any Ccurt -
'.f!':ai i j: I -',i ala:.i
r- PErlrlm lune 2c. 1837
- EXHlBlf +r., :age 2 af 2

€ - : ' '-'fl,
f,r i i'-
Therefore, cc{nply r.tlEh '-i'rese req\r€sts or face
incarcer-:[icn and cEher penalties.

CR:6nC
Enclosure
cc: ilcn. Jerorne C- Gorskr
James vacca. Esq.
Mereoith Smrth, Esq-
Ho::. L- Paui Kehoa B
 Ilorernber 18,2o{J,z

IUew York$de $prere Court RECEIVED

llonoraUG Justicc Tluner Van Strydondr
lbn dJustit ti0v 2 .- 2Gfi2
Rahester NY 111514 },IYS OffICE OF THT ATTORNEY GENTflAT
ROCHESTE8 RTGIO}JAL OFFIGE
Re; Brady v Taddeo, Donofrb

Respeclfirlty, Irrldca Van Strydondr

I find that a proper

TespotEe in this rniler rrecessitates a rrittcn darificauon horn Utis Cort
or perhaps
sumcjent noticE, d he iltJd rEture of these troceedqF. It appeared at first appga6l6
on F,lonenrber li,
2002, BBt uls court bored alnpst exdusirrely on rrtr* I pereived to be an Or&r
r14 I oti:in ourrsel
before pro@edng. To anclid any mburdersErdrp, especialU of rprsndian@, I wish to
onfirm if drat rlras,
indeed, al order d thrs Cottt. In so far as rrlf pcsiUe incareratirn rrns raised repe*edly,
t especllidly ask
ttis @ut b dsdce if sanE was intenchd 6 advilE r uanrng

Seeking @nsd with suffi<jert qr.plifietkrrs req.ires

utat I deady asoertsin the essertiat natured fiese
prGedin{F. As I nn
no apParert notk= in Mr. Rodtgrpz papers to irriicate th* any crin$nal adhrity is
being assert€d c
purctEd, I there{ore req.Est for ftis Gorrt b disdce ufietfier it is now, or irtefib
to
ptoced ar iB owr_ in ttts regrard.

I make this reqr.est, ilEralia, oruirp to tlE verv targe cfitrererg in rp ftong as ndl a ortinrirg fiees
required o, trPoe vrf,p are sufhciertly qnlified to practie criminal and trial lil
ard tt6e wtp are nd. I
tn$ tmder the cirornstanes, that ttris Cout will rJtirnaEly a,€rd reimbrrsenertof Uese aald remnaHe
atbrney tses arnrred, strctid I be the gemilirp party. I wrll reiterde these r€quests in rny furttonrirp
r€spondirp pape6.

Thar* Yqr

lGuh Petridr Bnrdy

5B toorst tane
Ea RdEster, t{y 11115

A cogy of thb ro(|lEdt is hirq simdtan€o,rdry rnaibd to;

Grylc noAngucl
l{YS Deparunent of taw
l+{ Erdmge Ehd.
Rochester lfY l46fa

c
 (.! I L{ a,<'l .i

-\{'
. ,-! i?- i-\ L) i \'l i ,.
\ 2 | 2 !(,

S1aTE t,F NrU, \CtnX

(},rra.r ()F r Ft[ .{.tir rrtlEy Crlr-nat

Errcrr SprrziR RtGroN.Ar OtrtaE Drvrsrorr

AtlornE! GenErs Rochesler Recronai OlfLce

November 26,2002

Hon Thomas M Vanstrydonck

Supreme Court Justrce
545 Hall of Justice
Rochester , i.lY 14614

Re. Brady v Hon. Anne Marie Taddeo, Fanrily Court Judge

Hon. Gail A. Donofrio. Family Court Judge

Dear Justice VanStrydonck:

I have enclosed a proposed Judicial Subpoena Duces

Tecum requesting respondent to produce certain documents and records
rn preparation for the upcoming hearing scheduled to commence before
this Court on December 10,2002

By separate cover letter and enclosure to the Clerk of this

Court, I have filed a rnotion to hold respondent, Kevin Patrick Bracly, in
civil and criminal contempt of court pursuant to Judiciary Law Article 1g
Since a contempt proceeding under the Judiciary Law is considered a
specral proceeding, if a party desires to commence disclosure
proceedings pursuantio CPLR $ 408 and CPLR Article 31, they must first
cbtain ieave cf Couil

Therefore, I respectfully request that the Court consrder

granting the enclosed subpoena and requrre respondent to produce the
requested docurnents and items to the Supreme Court Assignment Office
on December 3,2002 (one rveek pnor to the hearing date).

Please note that I will be away from the office from

November 28.2OO2 to December 9,20902 lt would be extremely helpfut

14,1 Exchange Blvd . Rochestei, N Y 14614 O (585) 54e7430 O Fax {585) 54t;/514
Page Two

if the subpoena was signed prior to my departure. lf not, please contact

my secretary, Carol Blake, a|327-3206, and she will address any
questions and will see to it that the subpoena is obtained and duly served
upon respondent

CARLOS RODRIGUEZ
Assistant Attorney Genera I

CR:cb
Enclosures

cc: Kevin Patrick Brady

508 Locust Drive
East Rochester, NY 14445

Henry Jesserer, lll w/enclosures

Law Clerk to Justice VanStrydonck
 STATE OF \E\\T \'ORK
SE\,'ENTH TLID ICIAL DISTIU C]T
COURT REPORTER OFFICE
/(."/ - ROOi\,|I# H{LL OF JUSTICE
ROCI{ESTF:R.. \E\\- \'OP.K 14614-21 Ii
Phone: 58-<-42E-5069
Fax iE,<-:ilE-5 189

THOj\I{S NI. \..AN STR}'DOj*CK N{ICTLAEL J. DEVITO

,\dir in r stra ti ve .ludse Pnncipal Maaagemenr Analy.st
Ser rnti, .Iui:e ti. It::t:;c: Januiin I.1. l()L)-+

Kerin Patrick Bradr

i(ih Lcrcust l-anc
F.zrs1 R<tchester. Neq, \'ork 1 -iJ-15

Re: Pcoplr r F:iraclr

Indcx No 13647i20U2

I)car lvlr Ilradr,.

Your letter datcd Januar, .+. 2004. has hcen fonr:rrded to nre for response u ith rc-gard to
)'our
ruquest lltr dales and c()urt reporters assigled orr lltose dates in thc abor,'e-entitlcd acrion Follorring is
a list o1 the clates ancl c:ourt rep()rlcrs Each olthcm ma1,be contacted dircctly by,uriting 1rl thcr-.l ar the
addrcss indicated ol lhe letlerhcutl

I).\ I E: ('OUR'| REPOI{ l [,lt I),.\ I F.: COLIIT I' REPOR i LIi:
12,'10102 Patricia Srur cr 8ir 6i 0-l Barbara Liberti
I -1103 Parricia Harciing 9 10 03 \4argaret C'oppa
l,14 0l llarbara I iLrerli i 0.' L/{)3 Laurie Recd
1,-i l()3 Dcltcnah Rt_rmarrrr 10,;2,'03 Shar i \,'italonc
-5.'tr:t')f I ori KecnLrn 1 I/,1,,0_1 Patncia llardinu
1,,-lr[1-1 ( atolRacs I 1 '7,03 (lharlcne Rollens
7.2r0-l Susan Furguiele I 1,r12,o-l Laurie Ree cl
7 -i /t)-l Susan l;trrguiele

Shotrld vt,tt havc anr tunhcr questions pcrtaining to transcnpt-s ra'ith regard to the abovc plcasc fcel
.
licc tocontzrct rne at your carliest c()nvenlcnce

/.Vi.hael I oet,ilo. c s.R

(--ourt Rcporter A dministlatrrr

IJon Thotnas NI. \'anStn,donck^ Aclmtnisrratirc Justice

Neu York Starc l)epartment of Lara'

E
 UPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
OLTNTY OF MONROE

HE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK,

ELIOT SPITZER, ATTORNEY GENERAL
F THE STATE OF NEW YORK,
Petitioner,
Index No. 2002113641

DECISION and ORDER

EVIN PATRICK BRADY,
Respondent

PPEARANCES:

For the Petitioner: Eliot Spitzer, Esq., Attonley Gettet-al,

by Carlos Rodriguez, Esq., of eounsel

For the Resporldertt: Kevin Patnck Br-adr'. Pro Se

HONTAS N{. VANSTRYDONCK, J.

Tliis 1r-ratter contes before the Coult. initiallv, by wa1,'of a Petition lbr \\''rit of Mandanrirs bv

eyin Patrick Brad,v againstAnn Nlarie Taddeo and Gail A. Donoiiio. both Judges of tlie Motlroe

our:ty Faniily Court, arising from a custod;- and supporl proceeding earlier tern'iinated. Resp',lndent

racly took issue with the original terms of visitatron and support and consequently has beetl prolific
ith lawsuits and proceedings in both State and Federal Courts.
Inl996,Justice Jeronte C. Gorski. of the Nerv York State Suprente Court, sigrted an OI'del and

njunction directing Mr. Bradi, to resolr,e all past Iitigation and to Iinrit fi-rture litigation arising f}om the

an.iesubjectmatter. (JusticeGorski oftheEighthJudicral Distrrctwasassignedtheuatterin i996as

r. Brady named several judges of the Seventh Judiciai District.) Additionally, Mr. Brady lias been

trained from filing any action arising from the Family Courl proceedings in Federal District Courl

rthout first obtaining permission from U.S. District Courl Judge David Larimer.

Justice Gorski in the 1996 Order enjoined Respondent Brady from bringing future lawsr-rits in

p1, State coun based on the Fan-rilv Court case or its progeny. r,r'ithout prior pern-rissior-r from the

F
 UPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
OLTNTY OF MONROE

HE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK,

ELIOT SPITZER, ATTORNEY GENERAL
F THE STATE OF NEW YORK,
Petitioner,
Index No. 2002113641

DECISION and ORDER

EVIN PATRICK BRADY,
Respondent

PPEARANCES:

For the Petitioner: Eliot Spitzer, Esq., Attonley Gettet-al,

by Carlos Rodriguez, Esq., of eounsel

For the Resporldertt: Kevin Patnck Br-adr'. Pro Se

HONTAS N{. VANSTRYDONCK, J.

Tliis 1r-ratter contes before the Coult. initiallv, by wa1,'of a Petition lbr \\''rit of Mandanrirs bv

eyin Patrick Brad,v againstAnn Nlarie Taddeo and Gail A. Donoiiio. both Judges of tlie Motlroe

our:ty Faniily Court, arising from a custod;- and supporl proceeding earlier tern'iinated. Resp',lndent

racly took issue with the original terms of visitatron and support and consequently has beetl prolific
ith lawsuits and proceedings in both State and Federal Courts.
Inl996,Justice Jeronte C. Gorski. of the Nerv York State Suprente Court, sigrted an OI'del and

njunction directing Mr. Bradi, to resolr,e all past Iitigation and to Iinrit fi-rture litigation arising f}om the

an.iesubjectmatter. (JusticeGorski oftheEighthJudicral Distrrctwasassignedtheuatterin i996as

r. Brady named several judges of the Seventh Judiciai District.) Additionally, Mr. Brady lias been

trained from filing any action arising from the Family Courl proceedings in Federal District Courl

rthout first obtaining permission from U.S. District Courl Judge David Larimer.

Justice Gorski in the 1996 Order enjoined Respondent Brady from bringing future lawsr-rits in

p1, State coun based on the Fan-rilv Court case or its progeny. r,r'ithout prior pern-rissior-r from the

F
 The Respondent was advised on virlually every court appearance that he should retain an

ttorney, that he was at a disadvantage representing himself, that the Court could not and would not act

his attorney and that if he was found in contempt of court, he could be confined in the Monroe

ounty Jail. Respondent insisted on representing himself.

FINDINGS

The terms of the Judgment and Order of Justice Gorski were very/ clear and unequivocable in its

pplication to the Respondent. The Respondent was ordered to pay sanctions and attomeys fees witliin

0 days of the date of the Order's entry.

L
Petitioner and Respondent, by way of stipulation during this hearing, agreed that the sanctions

d attorneys fees were not paid as of the date of the hearing. Respondent submitted several video tapes

ior to the conclusion of the hearing. Court Exhibit ll4, dated July 2,2003, videotaped an interview
L
ith Respondent by a local television station in the Rochester area. Respondent in the video tape

lluded to the fact that he had not paid the required payments and boasted that he did not intend to make

he required payments in the future even if he had to go to jail.

I Petitioner's Exhibits 5, 6, and 7 were New York State Tax Relurns for 1998, 1999, and 2000.

espondent in 1998 had gross income of 571,835; in 1999 $156,612; and in the year 2000 R.espondent

d gross income of $119,863. This Court finds that Respondent's tax retun.)s denonstrate tirat iie had

he means to comply with Justice Gorski's Order. No proof to the contrary was submitted.

Petitioner further offered proof indicating that sporadic contact occurred from the date of the

rder to the date of the hearing requesting that the outstanding amounts of money be paid.

L This proceeding was brought pursuant to Sections 150 and753 of the Judiciary Law. The

imary purpose of crimir-ral contempt is to preserve a Court's authority as conpared to protecting

gainst prejudice to the rights of a party in a civil contempt. There are circumstances where the same

ct can constitute both forms of contempt, such as the disobedience of a lawful mandate of the Court.

Judiciary Law $ 753(a)(3) gives a Cqurt of Record power to punish aparty for a civii conternpt

br the non-payment of a sum of money or for any other disobedience of a lawful mandate of the Court.

titioner's proof has established that Justice Gorski's Order was a lawful mandate of the Supreme
ourt and tliat it was personally served upon Respondent. The proof has also established that

spondent has willfully and intentionally ignored the mandates of the Gorski Order, notwithstanding

aving the resources to pay the same.

Respondent has been given every opportunity to reply and to be heard during the course of the

earing. Respondent's conduct of ignoring the dictates of Justice Gorski's Order and being boastful of
is refusal to comply, amounts to a flagrant disregard of Justice Gorski's mandates.

CRIMINAL CONTEMPT
At the hearing the Petitioner introduced the Jud-ement and Order of Justice Gorski as well as

f tlrat the Respondent was served with that Order on March 21, L996. The Respondent admitted he

d received the Order and that he had not complied with its terms and had not paid any of the sums

red to any of the parties named by Justice Gorski.

Therefore, it is the finding of this Court that Justice Gorski issued a lawful order to the

espondent. This Order contained clear and unequivocal mandates which directed the Respondent to
y clearly stated sums of money to specified individuals. The Order also clearly required the

espondent to file r.vith the Court proof of compliance with the Court Order within thirty (30) days of
he e1try of the Order. The Respondent had actual notice of tire Order and, based on his testinlony, he

ntentionally and willfully chose to ignore all the provisions of the Gorski Order. This finding is also

ased upon the assertions made by the Respondent in his videotaped "summation" as well as in his

tatements to the local media (submitted by Respondent in evidence). In that interview he expressed his

ntent to be behind bars if necessary rather than pay as ordered. The Respondent's income tax returns,

bmitted into evidence at the hearing, demonstrate that he has been able to pay these sums if he so

ired. In fact, the Respondent has made no argument that he is, or ever was, unable to pay the sums
ndated by Justice Gorski.

Therefore, it is the finding of this Court that the Respondent willfully and intentionally
isobeyed the Order of Justice Gorski and that the Respondent is guilty of criminal contempt in

iolation of Judiciary Law $ 750.

 CIVIL CONTEMPT
To establish civil contempt the Petitioner must prove:

1.) that a lawful order was issued, providing clear and unequivocal direction to the Respondent;
2.) that the Respondent knew of the Court's Order and intentionally disobeyed it; and

3.) that Respondent's disobedience defeated, impaired or prejudiced another party's rights (see,
Judiciary Law g 753; Matter of Petkovsek v Snyder,25l A.D.2d 1085; Matter of Hicks v. Russi,

254 A.D.2d 801; Evans v. Evans,242 A.D.zd 955)'

in this case Respondent's failure to comply with the Gorski Order in-rpaired the lights of those
were to be compensated for the Respondent's frivolous conduct which culminated in the 1996

. It is therefore this Court's determination that the Respondent is also guilty of civil contempt in

iolation of Judiciary Law $ 753.

SUMMARY CONTEMPT
The Petitioner, on several occasions, has asked this Coun to find Respondent in cor-rtempt

mmarily based on many incidents of improper conduct by Respondent during these proceedings.

mples of such conduct include, but are not limited to:

l. The Respondent's threatening this Court, in a letter dated June 18,2003 (see Court

Exhibit #2 from 712103),that this Court would personally pay for any loss suffered by
Respondent as follows ; ". - .. This Court is now advised that your recent notice

requiring yet another appearance, conflicts with my vacation plans which have been
(_ scheduled for many months. I will be out of the state. If this Court STILL insists that I
appear, despite all of the previous identified violations, I will do so. I will not provide
the excuse for further abuse under color of law. Be advised however that i WILL recover

the financial losses from you personally.".

2.) Asserting in one of his many pleadings that Justice Gorski was involved in an illegal

conspiracy with Mr. Rodriguez and others to alter the record of the prior proceedings;
 r.) The Respondent's attempt to start a lawsuit against this Court in Federal District Court.

In that lawsuit he continues with his routine of naming several judges including Justice
Gorski, Justice Pigott as well as this judge. The apparent reason for starting such an

action is to then move to disqualify the judge currently hearing his case. This conduct

was recognized by District Court Judge David Larimer as frivolous. The latest lawsuit

was dismissed by Judge Larimer in an opinion which pointed out that the Respondent

has, on at least two prior occasions in Federal District Court, been advised about the

principal ofjudicial immunity. This Court refused to grant Respondent's motion to

assign another judge to this case as it is clear that the Respondent would simply colltinue

to sue any judge he "senses" might issue an order he would find disagreeable. We cannot
allow litigants to misuse our Courts in such a manner.

4.) Respondent's failure to appear at Court appearances without prior approval and without

explanation.

5.) Respondent's inappropriate statements in his "summation" videotape, including

references to this Court as "Tom" on at least trventy-six (26) occasions and statenlents

sucii as "... that's a crock, huh, Tom".

iie the conduct of Respondent could be found to be contemptuous as the word contempt is used in

rmal parlance, it takes more to fall into the category of contempt which can be punished sumn-rarily.

e activity complained of must be disruptive to the proceedings or violate a directive of the Court at
he proceedings. As disagreeable, and at times insulting, as the Respondent's conduct and statements

y be, this Court cannot find that they crossed the threshold of conduct which could result in a

mnaly contempt finding.

SUMMARY

Respondent has a long history of vexatious litigation (see Justice Gorski's earlier Order,

'fi'ivolous and harassing" as well as the recent Order of U.S. District Court Judge Larimer). An
 njunction was issued against Respondent limiting future litigation arising from the Family Court

tters, as well as limitations in U.S. District Court. It is this Court's intention to add to the earlier

njunction of Justice Gorski a provision prohibiting the Respondent from initiatine any new litigation

nless represented by an attorney.

Tliis Courl finds such a requirement to be mandated as a result of the liistory of the Respondent

is-a-vis the filing of frivolous lawsuits. The Rules of the Chief Administrator ($ 130-1.1-a) allorv for a

rty who is not represented by an attorney to sign ail pleadings and thereby cerlifying that trpon
ble inquiry the pleadings are not frivolous. The Respondent has demonstrated his inability or

nwillingness to provide such a certification. The requirement to retain an attorney to commence any

uture actions will assure that our courts will not continue to be misused by the Respondent in order to

ntinue to harass and annoy others with vexatious and frivolous lawsuits. Thc Respondent may apply

o proceed without an attorney by a request to procee d infornta pauperis. Such application must be

resented with a detailed financial affidavit.

Based, therefore, on all the exhibits, testimony and arguments of both parties; it is hereby

ORDERED, that:

i .) On the finding of criminal contempt, the Respondent is hereby fined $ 1,000 and ordered

to serve thirty (30) days in the Monroe County Jail. The Respondent is ordered to report

to the Monroe County Jall at or before Noon on October 1, 2003 to begin this senter-rce

unless stayed by a court of competent jurisdiction; and

2.) On the finding of civil contempt, the Respondent is hereby ordered to serve sixty (60)

days in the Monroe County Jail, with said sentence to run consecutive to the thirty (30)

L days ordered above. The Respondent is hereby given the opporlunity to purge this

finding of civil contempt and avoid serving the sixty (60) days in jail provided for in this
paragraph by providing this Court with proof of payment of:

$2,500.00 to the State of New York ;

$2,798.00 to Saperston and Day, P.C.. ;

$2,112.00 to James P. Vacca, Esq.; and

$2,167.00 to the Attorney General of the State of New York.

 r.) The Respondent's attempt to start a lawsuit against this Court in Federal District Court.

In that lawsuit he continues with his routine of naming several judges including Justice
Gorski, Justice Pigott as well as this judge. The apparent reason for starting such an

action is to then move to disqualify the judge currently hearing his case. This conduct

was recognized by District Court Judge David Larimer as frivolous. The latest lawsuit

was dismissed by Judge Larimer in an opinion which pointed out that the Respondent

has, on at least two prior occasions in Federal District Court, been advised about the

principal ofjudicial immunity. This Court refused to grant Respondent's motion to

assign another judge to this case as it is clear that the Respondent would simply colltinue

to sue any judge he "senses" might issue an order he would find disagreeable. We cannot
allow litigants to misuse our Courts in such a manner.

4.) Respondent's failure to appear at Court appearances without prior approval and without

explanation.

5.) Respondent's inappropriate statements in his "summation" videotape, including

references to this Court as "Tom" on at least trventy-six (26) occasions and statenlents

sucii as "... that's a crock, huh, Tom".

iie the conduct of Respondent could be found to be contemptuous as the word contempt is used in

rmal parlance, it takes more to fall into the category of contempt which can be punished sumn-rarily.

e activity complained of must be disruptive to the proceedings or violate a directive of the Court at
he proceedings. As disagreeable, and at times insulting, as the Respondent's conduct and statements

y be, this Court cannot find that they crossed the threshold of conduct which could result in a

mnaly contempt finding.

SUMMARY

Respondent has a long history of vexatious litigation (see Justice Gorski's earlier Order,

'fi'ivolous and harassing" as well as the recent Order of U.S. District Court Judge Larimer). An
 rD

UPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

OF MONROE

.HE
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK,
ELIOT SPITZER, ATTORNEY GENERAL
THE STATE OF NEW YORK, COMMITMENT FOR CRIMINAL
Petitioner, CONTEMPT . JUDICIARY LAW
-v-s- SECTION 750

IEVIN PATRICK BRADY, Index No. 2002113641

Respondent

O THE SHERIFF FOR THE COUNTY OF MONROE:

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that said KEVIN PATRICK BRADY, being a male, whose age is

5a, D.o.B. \O \ G \5o residing.t 5oE Lcc.l>l Lqne) E. Bo.hes+er.

and he hereby is committed to a ierm of thirty (30) days commencing at Noon on October l, 2001;

ORDERED, that KEVIN PATRICK BRADY is directed to pay a fine in the amounl of
1,000.00 to the Neu,York State Office of Court Administration on or before October 1,2003.

; September I0, 2003

Justice of the Supreme Cou(

G
 $2,i 12.00 to James P. Vacca, Esq.; and

$2]67.00 to the Attorney General of the State of New York.

yment shall be made by certified bank draft with copies of same provided to this Court. Proof of

yment must be filed with this Court on or before October 1,2003 in order to purge the contempt; and

t is further

ORDERED, that the restrictions placed on the Respondent by Justice Gorski's 1996 Order shall

tinue with the additional condition that the Respondent shall not be allowed to commence any

awsuit in the State of New York courts unless represented by an attorney. This requirement may be

aived upon an application by the Respondent sliowing that he is a "poor person" and has been denied
t
presentation by agencies which provide free legal services to "poor persons".

. THOMAS M. VAN STRYDONCK

Justice of the Supreme Court

I
 ce oJ tne County Cre
Nfo -
Cheryl Dinolfo
County Clerk

SEARCH RESULTS
[] CR|MINAUFELONY
[x] ctvtL
[] orHER
State of New York)
County of Monroe) ss.
City of Rochester)

l, cheryl Dinolfo clerk of the county of Monroe, of the county court of

said county, and of thesupreme court, both being courts of Recorj, having a
common seal, DO HEREBy CERT|Fy.

tX] That I have made a search of the records of the Monroe County Clerk,s
office from october 14 2003 through Aonl zT 20os for

and find the following

t I No civil record has been found at the Monroe County Clerk's Office
as of

t] No felony record has been found at the Monroe County Clerk's

Ofiice as of

Please check with the local jurisdictions and wrth the Rochester
City Court
regarding the disposition in question

lN wlrNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and

affixed the seal of
said_County and Courts, at Rochester, New yorX, tniis 28th
day of_Ap!l__

Monroe Cbunty Clerk

 _-:_ t

Offi c e of the County Clerk

Monroe CouEty, Ncw york
Cheryl l)lnolfo
Corntty Clqk

SEARCH BESULTS
I CRIM|NAUFELONY
xl ctvtL
I oTHER
State of New york)
County of Monroe) ss.
City ol Rochester)

. . ^1, cheryl Dinolfo, cl€rk d the Gounty of Monroe, of the Gourty court of
said county, and of
_thesupreme court, odttr oeing colrts of Record,
common seat, DO HEREBY CERTIFy:
h;fi;"

u That I have made a search of the records of the Monroe

county crerrcs
Otrjgglrol_ wovemFr zO. eP2 through reOruarv +. idOg tor
=

and find the

I I No cMl record has been found at the Monroe comty cterrcs

office as of

U No felony record has been for.rnd at the tt{onroe

county clerk,s ffice as of

Please check wifir the localjurisdictions

and with the Hochester city court
regarding the disposition in guestion.

lN wlrNESS WHEREOF, t have hereunto

set my hand and alfixed the sear of
said county and co,rB, it noc,trestei, n"*
2009.
ilrr,, *,i'-*i
oay offcbruary_,

Monroe County Cterk

J
 ce oJ tne County Cre
Nfo -
Cheryl Dinolfo
County Clerk

SEARCH RESULTS
[] CR|MINAUFELONY
[x] ctvtL
[] orHER
State of New York)
County of Monroe) ss.
City of Rochester)

l, cheryl Dinolfo clerk of the county of Monroe, of the county court of

said county, and of thesupreme court, both being courts of Recorj, having a
common seal, DO HEREBy CERT|Fy.

tX] That I have made a search of the records of the Monroe County Clerk,s
office from october 14 2003 through Aonl zT 20os for

and find the following

t I No civil record has been found at the Monroe County Clerk's Office
as of

t] No felony record has been found at the Monroe County Clerk's

Ofiice as of

Please check with the local jurisdictions and wrth the Rochester
City Court
regarding the disposition in question

lN wlrNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and

affixed the seal of
said_County and Courts, at Rochester, New yorX, tniis 28th
day of_Ap!l__

Monroe Cbunty Clerk

APPELI,-ATE DIVISION, SUPREME COURT
STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF MONROE

-^rer Anide 78 of the NYS CPLR

KEVIN PATRJCK BRADY, petitioner
VS

THOMAS M. VANSTRYDONGK, JSC respondent

CARLOS RODRIGUEZ, of counsel, rcspndent REGORD ON APPEAL
STEVEN R. SlRKlN, JSC rcspondent #2004t10367
DIANA IRIZZARY, Heaing Examiner, rcspondent
MYMOND CORNELIUS, JSC rcspndent
PERSONALLY SER
SHERRI E. WOOD, MCCSEU, respondent Assislent AfiOrney Grnera

BOCHESTER HEGIONAl. 9TIICE

On this office received the following items.

One bound volume of papers entiled RECORD ON APPEAL

One bound volume of papers entiled EXHIBITS
Transcripts of November 13,2002
Transcripts of February, 3,2OO4

L
 STATE OFNEW YORK

Hon. Craig f. Doran Seventh fudicial District

Supreme Court fustice Administrative |udge

May 4, 2018

Kevin Patrick Brady

PO Bcx 862
Henrietta, NY 14467

RE "Livi ngston County CoLr rt"

Proposed Article 78 proceeding

Dear Mr Brady,

The court has been advised that you have attempted to commence an Article 78 proceeding
in Livingston County Court.

Please be advised that pursuant to a Decision and Order of the Honorable Thomas
VanStrydonck dated September 9,2003, you are not permitted to commence an action unless
represented by an attorney. This requirement may be waived upon application showing that you
are a "poor person" and you have been denied representation byagencies which providefree legal
services to "poor persons."

Since your submitted papers do not contain a showing that you have been denied
representation by agencies which provide free legalservices to poor persons, I have instructed court
staff not to process your papers until you have complied lvith Judge ys6$lrrTdonck's Decision and
Order.

Craig J. Doran
Administrative Judge
Seventh J udicial District

COUNTY COURTHOUSE 27 NORTH MAIN STREET CANANDAIGUA,NY 14424

(5851 412-5292 FAX: (585) 412-5328 cDoRAN@NYCOURTS.GOV

HALL OF JUSTICE 99 EXCHANGE BOULEVARD ROCHESTER, *" ,,fu,

 STATE OF NEW YORK

Hon. Craig J. Doran Seventh Judicial Distric

Supreme Court Justice Administrative fudge

February 8, 2018

Kevin Patrrck Brady

P.O. Box 862
Henrietta, NY 14467

Dear Mr Brady,

I am in receipt of a Notice of Motion and Affidavit in Support of an Application to Proceed as

a Poor Person under CPLR Article 11 submitted by you for two separate actions: #2013-053 and
#2009-4419

These two appiicaiions were provided to me for determrnation as to whether the

req u ireme nt that yo u be represented by a n attorney prror to the com mencement of a n action should
be waived pursuant to the Decision and Order of then-Admrnistrative Judge Thomas M
Vanstrydonck, dated September 9, 2003

Please be advised that upon a review of your submissjons, I hereby permit your application
for Poor Person status under lndex No 2009-441,9 to be processed as I have determined that you
have met the criteria as set forth in judge Vanstrydonck's Decision and Order. I hereby deny your
application under lndex No. 2013-053

I have directed the Monroe County Supreme and County Clerk's Office to process your
application under lndex No. 2009-4419

Very truly
a.
yours, ,,.
u'

Seventh J u/dici6 I Distri cr

/;
xc: Monroe County Supreme and County Clerk

COUNTY COURTHOUSE 27 NOF.TH MAIN STREET CANANDAIGUA, NY 1,1424

(585) 41 2-s292 FAX: (585) 412-5328 cDoRAIEJYcouRrs.Gov
HALL OF JUSTICE 99 EXCHANGE BOULEVARD ROCHESTER, NY 14614
STATE OF NEW YORK COI.JNTY OF MONROE
JUSTICE COURT TOWN OF PERINTON

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK,

Plaintiff,
-vs- DECISION

KEVIN PATRICK BRADY,

Defendant.

Present: Thomas Klonick, J.

Appearances: Kevin Patrick Brady, Pro Se

The Defendant has brought the current application before the Court as a Motion for Re-

argument and Specific Findings. Together with his Motion for Re-Argument the Defendant has

included a copy of his Brief on Appeal as well as a bound document, which the Defendant has

referred to as the Record on Appeal.

The Defendant also requested oral argument of his Motion. At that time the Defendant took

the position that the Intermediate Appellate Court Judge had not even read the Brief on Appeal ofthe

(his) conviction. Furthernore, the Defendant claimed, on oral argument, that he was submitting

proof that the Appellate Court never looked at the Record on Appeal. This Court questioned the

Defendant as to what proof he possessed. The Defendant responded that the proof was in my papers

already. The Defendant also claims that the Appeals Court Judge committed fraud. The Defendant

appeared Pro Se.

This Court has examined the Record on Appeal together with all documents and relevant

paperwork submitted by the Defendant. The Defendant does not raise any new facts or issues of law,

which would support vacating his conviction. The Defendant merely alleges that there has been
fraud and that his Constitutional rights have been violated. These allegations as set forth in the

Defendant's papers are conclusory in nafure and are not supported by any new facts, old facts or

evidence.

This Court also questioned the Defendant regarding his knowledge of a previous Order made

by Supreme Court Justice Thomas Van Strydonck as well as an Order by Supreme Court Justice

Jerome Gorsky. This Court questioned Mr, Brady as to whether he was aware that Justice's Van

Strydonck and Gorsky had previously prohibited him from commencing lawsuits in New York State

unless he was represented by an attorney or in the altemative, a showing of proof that he had applied

to be represented by an attomey and further proof that he did not qualiff for the services as a poor

person. The Defendant has taken the position that Justice Van Strydonck's Order is not a valid

Order.

This Court has reviewed both Justice Gorsky's Order and Justice Van Strydonck's Order and

this Court believes both Orders to be valid.

THEREFORE, the Defendant, by this Decision, is further advised and instructed that this

Court will not entertain any future motions of the Defendant unless and until proof that Judge

Gorsky's and/or Judge Van Strydonck's Orders have been complied with. The Defendant's present

Motion is denied

It is so ORDERED.
.4t
Signed and entered this t'" day of March, 2005

THOMAS A.I(LONICK
Perinton,Town -Iustice
NOTICE OF ENTRY

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the foregoing Decision was entered in this Court on the

flUurof March,2o05.
February 12,2018

Judge Michael Torregiano

Avon Town Court
Avon, NY

Honorable Public Servant

I have no idea why I have been repeatedly mislead and/or ignored by this court in my
attempt to recover the overcharges of Peter Piampiano, but that is clearly the case.
Perhaps this court will someday identify why I remain unsuccessful after 18 months.

It appears that an Article 78 action is now necessary, or perhaps a federal action based
on Eighth 18th1 Amendment and Due Process violations. Regardless of which action I

pursue, it is clear that many courts in New York are preying on motorists for increasing
their revenue a.k.a EXTORTION

Kevin Patrick Brady

Box 862
Henrietta, 14467

Copies to Livingston County District Attorney

New York Commission Judicial Conduct
Kruk and Campbell, Attorneys
 AVON TOWN AND VILTAGE COURT

23 GENESEE STREET

AVON, NY 14414

(s8s)226-242s ExT. 13 (s8s)226-5305 fax

February 28,2018

Mr. Kevin Patrick Brady

P,O. Box 862

Henrietta, NY 14467

Dear Mr. Brady,

After reviewing your case, it appears that you have exhausted your appeals and they have been upheld
by all courts. I have received all of your motions and they are denied.

Therefore, your case is closed and disposed of here in the town of Avon. As per earlier communications,
your bail will not be returned as it has been forfeited for your failure to appear and applied to your fines
and surcharges after your trial and conviction. No further contact to this court by phone or mail is
necessery. lf you contact this court, I will consider it harassment.

Sincere iy,

f4r;-/
MichaelA. Torregiano
tr*
Avon Town Justice

P
State of \erv Ycirk
Countv of Livingston Countv Court

COPY
People of the State of Ner.,, York
J,l-stice Co Lrrl .,\"ppciii

Index No.2016-073
Ke .;in Fa.trick 1]radr
Defendant

.1 r:nr.
-:t
r,: r., ' -. .
F.?u.tlrr!!Jr

i-ri;' tiic r'cLrp-'ic; I-lciti. il,cgOry j. r'viuC,iirtC.r

I-ir. inEston Countr, Districi Attornc\
.loshla J. l'onra- Esq of counsel
2 Cblrrt Sir e et
Geneseo. NY 14454

Ftrr 1l-Le Det'enclant: pt'l ,e

,508 l-rrcust Ltrnc
East Rochcstcr'. NY 1l++5

Ilecision and Order

I he abor, e mattc'r is be lar.' the courl prrrsuant to i1n appeal tl lcd bv deltn.iant. I-)cteniian[ rr.iis

conr icted o{-tu'o traillc infractions in Ar,'on Tor,rn Court.

IJcl'c:ndant no\r,'appcals that mling and the conr.iction. In surn and sutrstancc- defendant

contencls I t that lhc aucr.rsait'i-r ir,"*slninrc jlts u crc it..s rLllic icn t ;ltr_1 that l t Lhc col-! icl ii)l s u e rc aslrinsl

the lr'r-:ight of the er idence.

ll^rematlerrvasbetbrethiscouilcnDecemb.:r14.201(r Onthatelatc.thcappealnascleerncd

srrhmittc-d on papers. Delendant huel previoush'u ritten the court and arh'ised llic court that lrc u ould

noL be appcannu.

The coltrt has carclr.riir ret icucd the rc'cord rrn appexl and tire bricls suhrnineC,

Nou. it is herelr-l'
P2
 ORDEI{ED tliat detendani'.-q appcal ie derLied anr-l the iudgmcnt and scntetlce crt tbe Avotr

[1rrr'rt .lusticc ('t 'ttrt i. in all rcspects aft-rnrred.

,/
Deted:
//t
L4 , 'd, l{,Lt /l
I il'ingston Cr-rurtv Cottrt 'hLdge

P2
 AVON TOWN AND VILTAGE COURT

23 GENESEE STREET

AVON, NY 14414

(s8s)226-242s ExT. 13 (s8s)226-5305 fax

February 28,2018

Mr. Kevin Patrick Brady

P,O. Box 862

Henrietta, NY 14467

Dear Mr. Brady,

After reviewing your case, it appears that you have exhausted your appeals and they have been upheld
by all courts. I have received all of your motions and they are denied.

Therefore, your case is closed and disposed of here in the town of Avon. As per earlier communications,
your bail will not be returned as it has been forfeited for your failure to appear and applied to your fines
and surcharges after your trial and conviction. No further contact to this court by phone or mail is
necessery. lf you contact this court, I will consider it harassment.

Sincere iy,

f4r;-/
MichaelA. Torregiano
tr*
Avon Town Justice

P
 t

, STATEOFNEWYORK FJ
COUNTY OF MONROE
EAST ROCHESTER TOWN COURT =
JTJDGMENT ORDf,R

IN THE MATTER OF
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK,

-vs_ Docket No.: 10100090

Judge: Hon. Amy Monachino
Kevrn Patrick P. Brady

508 Locust Lane

East Rochester, NY 14445

Defendant

The defendant, Kevin Patrick P. Brady, herein having been convicted of PL 240.26 03 HARASSMENT 2ND, on 04i l l/201I bef
Judge Amy Mooachino in the Town Court of East Rochester, having been directed to pay a fine, restitution or reparation, includil
any applicable mandatory surcharge aod crime victims assistance fee.

Pursuant to CPL 420.l0 it is:

ORDERED, that the defendant Kevin Pat-ick P. Brady is directed to pay the Town of East Rochester

fine of s0.00
restltutron $0.00
reparabon s0.00
mandatory surcharge $125.00
CVAF s0.00
TOTAL: $ 125.00

and IT IS FLIRTHER ORDERED, that the District Attorney is directed to file a certified copy of this Order and
Judgment with the County Clerk of Monroe.

Dated: May 17,2018

Judgment Creditor: East Rochester Town Court

317 Main Street
East Rochester, NY l4zl45

Attorney for Creditor:

I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE COPY

 Priscilla
From: Claridy, Allison
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 5:28 PM
To: Hughes, Priscilla
Sullens, Marty
Su biect: Pat Brady 7RA

P:i.c ri le

Plea.eterminatePat'saffiliationwithFSCasoftoday. Ihavesenihimaletterinwritingadvisin-ehrmrierrill
dr. sL. rmme diatell'. Let me know if you need anything ftrther.

Thanks.

Allison Claridl'
Regional Vice President
Business De '''elopmenr Manager
Norlheast Region
FSC Seuurities Corporation
800 547 2382 X3_579
770.690 _38,s 1

aclaridl @ fscorp,conr

Securities and investment advisory services offered tnrough Advantage Capital Corporation and FSC Securities Corporation, memb(
NASD. SIPC and SEC-Begistered lnvestment Advisers AIG Advisor Group is the marketing designation for the wholly owned
subsidiary broker-oealer members of AlG, This message and any attachmenls contain inlorntation f rom AIG Advisor Group. lvhici- ,-.
be confidentiai andior privileged and is intended ior use only by the addressee(s) named on this transmission. li you are not the
rntended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are notiiied iirai a'
review, copying, distribution or use of this transmission rs strictly prohibited. lf you have received this transmission in error, please ii,
notify the sender immediately by e-mail or by lelephone and (ii) destroy all copies oi this message
 VIA FAXondREGAIARMAIL

Octob€r 30, 2003

Pat Brady
5Ot l-ocust Lanc
East Rochester, NY 14445

Pat,

During my office visit that was schGdulad for Octdcr t, 2003, t had planncd to delivcr tlrc attachcd letcr and discuss
with you while thcrt. Sincc I could not conduct my officc visit, duc io yo,u pcrsonat circumstaoc€s that madc it
impossiblo for yon !o bG in your offtcc, I am delivcring thc abovo-montkmcd tcttcr now. Ptease reyierz and contact mc
with any qucstions.

Additionally, I heve rcviqped yor situatinn with scveral dcpanm€ots hcre ar FSC. Wc have madc a dccision to
tsrminatc your affilimion with FSC effectivc imrns{iglely. As always, please cotrtact mc witlr qucstions or coocctls.

Sincercly,

l?rusov-
AtllsonA. darldy U
Regional Vice President
Errsiness Development Monger
Northeast Region
2300 mndy Rtdge pkwy., Ste. I tOO
Atterta, GA 30339
Plnne: 770-69A-3579
FG: 770-690-ig|I
Ernail: rclari<lvfdfscom.corr

, cell 77019166588 lmmedlately-

t b ed*tood md mry coofrh Hofitrdo.r trC b Fitfrgod.
lo rfiadr
oa0d' nEolagp b lrct hc hbnd.d rlclpLd, or thc c.r?+orco a ilcril
har$y noffiad GA ray 'r.s|'r5don. dbtbrnton or copyine ol nfs
h rror, FE ndfy L. f?rnodrialy ty Ulcptm.nd mfrrn lh.
. TTTAI$( YOT'.

U@WW Ridgc Parlcru, o&tltc IIN oAtlata, @orgia3O339 o7m/91ffi5@

 Page I of4

Main ldentity

From: 'Robert A Pugliese' <robert pugliese@verizon.net>

Tol ' kpatbrady " <kptbrady@rochester.rr.com>
Cc: 'Traci A Shughart' <traci shughart@verizon. net>; "ClR Correspondence"
<correspondence@C I R2 com>
Sent: Friday May 04 2007 2.40 PM
Subject: RE: THANK YOU & FORMS

- j r. ':":.i t. i' r.l , Ii:l ":-' .ir',' jr , -:r-:l:l:! ti..i . tt.

-:. -:: .' .- ,,. --: :llll a: ailrirll:a i
. - l: .-" : t .:-: _, -a., it2t,iiS:t,:i..i,,;r, .:.:,.::ii ,t-.:t .,:,,?-: t-,,..,, i:i:,:;,-: j,li.; :,.-::tirlli
: :-:" -.. - ... -.,-'".-':' -;11. l.,riqaal.1. liti\:\;1 :' !!tr- ,,:',':'..j.!ii:;i,i,,'i-:i'i.,-.'a:€lr,:

From : kpatbrady Imailto: kptbrady@rochester. rr.com]

Sent: Wednesday, May 02,2007 11:35 AM
To: R.obert A. Pugliese
Subject: Rei THANK YOU & FORMS

GooC Bob thanks for your help

tt may take a couple of days
l'll be back to you

KPB

---- Original Message ---

From: ;r ,..,i: . - f)1,;;i,ii;:r
To: '.;'.,:;,::]',
Sent: Wednesday, Mav 02,2007 11:20 AM
Subject: RE: THANK YOU & FORMS
Pat,

We did hear from the home office this morning in regards to your status and everything is on hoh pending some further explanation and
information that are being requested from you You were correct that there are currently eight separate liens/judgments that appear on your
CRD report

would appear that 4 or 5 ol then are from New York for child support and another is from the IRS We will need an explanation as to the
It
nature of these various liens in terms of what caused them to be filed to begin with along with the current status of each

ln addition, if any of these liens/judgments have been satisfied or removed we will need some documentation supporting that fact For
instance, you indicated to me in your email that the child support has been satisfied That being the case, we would need a statement from
the court or the governing authority on their ofiicial letterhead thal clearly indicates that those liens have been salisfied and/or removed ln
this instance with the child support there appear to be mulliple liens so that statement would need to clearly referen@ each of them in the
case of the IRS lren we would need a statement from the IRS or the court where the lien was filed indicating that the lien has either been

620-.0,,-
November 6, 2003 Fax to: .2E-2105
1 page

To The Honorabb Thomee VanStrydonck

545 Hall of Juttlce
Rochesbr. NY t46{4

Honoreble VanStrydonck,

The current declslon and ordpr of commitrnant is defectjve and I want lt vacated and I want to
bc reb.ted imrnedkrtely. I offer tht following:

Theodore Blefr vr. Joreph Roe 37 m+sc' 2d 85, 233 N'Y'S' 2d 5l

Lerb 2111 Head notes I contempt *rhen remedy appropriate; contempt mey be inYoked in
pendlng actlons

Stnce conternpt may be invoked onty in pending sctiona {r 996 Goruki acrion} and clnce an
tctirn E no longer iending after entry of a judgment therein epplhation pulsuant to iudicbry
lrw Sec. 753 Sub- A il 0enied-
suHivbbn A ot rec 753 is intended aa a timitation on the porrer of the Gourb to punlrh for
coaempt Dollard v- Koronsky Gitatbn 57 rnisc.90 a?fd. l3E app- DiY. 213 atld- t99 N-Y. 558
rbo tflotff v. Hubbard 191 mlsc.647
A iurlgment deterrpines the rights of ttp potbtt to aa e_ction (civil Przclice Acl Sec- 1721and
rfif l nte entry thereol the ac..lnn iB longcr paqling and tfu provbbn of Sec- 753 havc no
rgPlceti,on- r

I lrJlgett you verify these citations.

k BradY

NO SUBJECT MATTER
IGNORED
cd4
:( ,t4 if
eldtr>il "ltl,
E

i
=
r
ULL-JL'-UJ ItE':C+H

October 30, 2003 Fax to: 428.2105

2 pages
To The Honorable Thomas Ven Strydonck
545 Hall of Justlce
Rochester, NY 14614

Honorable Van Strydonck,

Regarding the scheduling of the hearing for November 3, 2003, this is not ae I requeeted- t
asked to be brought to the cqurt immediatety so as to be reteased from incar"er"iion no*r.
apparent from the E-Courts webslte that thie courtg schedule ic not go crowded as to
lt i,
make
this request imposslble. I am to be transported to the Hall of Justlce today, October 30, iOOS
at 3:00 pm for a Famlly Court matter wtrich will be immediately adJourned.- I can therefore
be
made available to this court for a brlef appearance-

The purpoee is only to certify availablllty of fundo and to provide my reprosentatlve, penny
Roeina, with an account number and an etectronic routing numberjin t't tf," funds be
"t
transferred withln 24 hours. These funds are to be held Uy ttre court pending the appeat wtrich
is now ln progress.

Pleese be advised that your order to-pay $2,798.00 to Saperstein and Day is mute
as thts p.C.
no longer exist$. Your order to pay $2,500.00 to the State of New York ig not in compliance
to
the Gorski order wtrich dlrected such funds peyabte to the New York State Office of ifre Court
Adminiatration.

Slnce September 10,2003, additional evidence of fraud on the court has surfaced through my
conversations with the Givil Recovery Bureau of the Albany offlce of the NyS Attorney
General. A further Purposc of my court appearance would be to advise you of that,

To reitorate, I wish to be brought forward today and to be released today and that details of
tho
e should be provided to my representative, penny
of this morning thet the E4ourt website shows no
mber 3, 2003 (please see attached).

Kevin Patrick Brady

Copies: Csrlos Rodriguez

Elliot Spifer, NYS Dept. of Law,

Joseph Treppacanti
William Dahl, NYS Office of Gourt Administretion

James Vacca OFFER TO PAY

Judse Etlzabeth PiIFNO RED ,l4w*v'-'\;:
EXHIBIT
i" l
No'!-
1t ,"i70-.
 SrRre oF NEw YoRK
Orrrce oF THE ATronruey GerurnRl

Inrc T. ScUHeTDERMAN Drvrsror.r oF REctcNAL CFFtcES

{-:aRNEY GENERAL RocnrsreR REclo.irl Oc =,cr

February 1,2016

Hon. Richard A. Dollinger

Acting Supreme Court Justice
99 Exchange Blvd.
545 Hall of Justice
Rochester, New York 14614

Re: Brady v. The People of New York

Monroe County lndex No 2013-053

Dear Judge Dollinger:

Last week, my office was served with papers in the above-captioned matter. Per the Court's
Order signed November 14,2013, Defendants are not to respond to papers served by Plaintiff in this
or any other matter unless they are accompanied by an Order from the Administrative Law Judge or
Supervising Judge for the Civil Term requiring a response. The papers were not accompanied by any
such Order Accordingly, Defendants will not respond

Defendants further note that Plaintiff was ordered to discontinue the above-actioned action,
and was sanctioned by the Court at a rate of $50 per day he did not so discontinue. By counsel's
reckoning, it is now approximately 850 days since that Order was signed, so Mr. Brady's continuing
debt to the State of New York currently stands at $42,500.

Very truly yauls,

',
| ./
| ', r---

HILLEL D'EUTSCH
Assistant Attorney General

HD:sh
Enclosure
cc: Kevin Patrick Brady (w/enclosure)
508 Locust Lane
East Rochester, New York 14445
'lJ4 Exchange Blvd.. Rochester. Y (585) 546-7430 - Fax (585) 546-7514
N 1.16'14 hnp //ww.ag ny qov

Misc