Actions by AZ judge in HOA constitutionality case found ethical

My response letter to Commission’s finding of ethical behavior (For more info see The State of Arizona will not protect buyers of HOA homes!

 

Dear Commissioners:

 In the 1953 Supreme Court case, Brown v. Allen (334 US 443), Justice Robert Jackson commented, “We are not final because we are infallible, but we are infallible because we are final.”

 On April 30, 2009, the Arizona Commission on Judicial Conduct wrote that,

 The commission reviewed the complaint filed in this matter and found no evidence of ethical misconduct on the part of the judge. The issue raised is a legal question and is outside the commission’s jurisdiction.

 The above rationale for dismissal “is a puzzlement”.  As I wrote in my complaint,

This incredible order by McMurdie violates the overall intent and purpose of the Code of Judicial Conduct “that judges, individually and collectively, must respect and honor the judicial office as a public trust” (Preamble), that “a judge shall uphold the integrity and independence of the judiciary” (§1), and that “a judge shall perform, the duties of Judicial Office impartially and diligently” (§3B).  It is inconceivable that my submitted information would be summarily dismissed, kept from the public, not acted upon, and the default decision allowed to stand. 

 And I concluded with the appeal, “For the Court to do justice and maintain its integrity, my ‘letter of fact’ and supporting materials must be made part of the case.”   All that I asked, the real issue, was to remove a “gag order” on my materials containing factual information that could have no other result than to have Judge McMurdie, sua sponte,  as permitted under the law, put the factual materials on record in order for justice to be done.  Placing submitted materials “on the record” has occurred in the past.  The CAI attorneys could find another legitimate case to challenge the constitutionality of the statute, not this tainted case.

 Why is the Commission viewing conduct to gag information that would, by law, void the judge’s decision ab initio, solely as a question of law and not as ethical and moral misconduct explicitly prohibited by the Code itself?  Why did Judge McMurdie deny my intervention without providing reasons?  Why did Judge McMurdie not only strike my materials, but ordered the Clerk not to accept further communications from me?  Does the judge’s conduct support  judicial integrity?  Does the judge’s conduct uphold judicial impartiality?  It is hard to believe that it does! 

 Filing an appeal does nothing to regulate the ethical conduct of judges.  I  believe you are remiss in your oversight of judicial conduct in this very important case.

 I request once again, that my materials be entered into the record as public information.  Let the judge do his duty under the Code and act on my submitted materials!  Let justice be done!

  

Respectfully,

George K. Staropoli

Advertisements
Published in: on May 6, 2009 at 7:39 pm  Comments (6)  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://pvtgov.wordpress.com/2009/05/06/actions-by-az-judge-in-constitutionality-case-found-ethical/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

6 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. When I bought my house, I sent a letter to the HOA stating that I did not need any of their service. My house was located on a public street and I did not need access to any of the properties, swimming pool, or tennis courts in their community. They responded with a notarized letter that I was already in default of the first month’s HOA payment, and that I had 15 days to pay the fee or they would levy lien charges against me. I made the payments for the six years I lived there, but never once did they do anything to my property. I sold the property and no one made the payment, which added up to about $500. I didn’t know it. When I found out, I agreed to pay the $500 and then I filed a complaint with the attorney generals office. I received a response from a lawyer for the HOA, and a $2,500 lawyers fee for the letter, even though I had an agreement that I would pay the $500.00. I refused to pay it, but was just forced to pay it by the court, even though I am on sole permanent disability, which the law says they can’t garnish, but they did. It is very scary when you look at the power and corruption of these HOAs. I am planning on leaving Arizona to a place where homeowners and individuals might have more rights.

  2. There is no such thing as “ownership” once a HOA is given management of your property. I learned this week, the hard way, that there is no way to hold HOA payments for non-performance from a HOA, unless I submit a petition signed by 75% of the members of the HOA. The HOA does not have to perform anything of value to constitute a contract. These HOA lawyers and judges need to be tar and feathered, and ran out of Arizona.

  3. totalschaden…

    […]Actions by AZ judge in HOA constitutionality case found ethical « HOA Constitutional Government[…]…

  4. HOAs are illegal on their face and although your Latin is impressive, if not wholey off the mark. The state had no authority to “communize” home ownership, nor to transfer governmental powers to citizens in their collusion with developers. Period.

    And the Arizona courts will continue to violate their Constitutional oaths of office because they are on the HOA gravy train – since there also are no tax credits recognized for these excess property taxes.

    And the proof is all around them, that “communism” in land and home ownership were hardly what the founders had in mind for “property ownership” in this country.

  5. […]  As an example with respect to HOAs regarding a default decision on the constitutionality of an a two year-old Arizona HOA statute,  And I concluded with the appeal, “For the Court to do justice and maintain its integrity, my ‘letter of fact’ and supporting materials must be made part of the case.”   All that I asked, the real issue, was to remove a “gag order” on my materials containing factual information that could have no other result than to have the judge, sua sponte,  as permitted under the law, put the factual materials on record in order for justice to be done.  (See Actions by AZ judge in HOA constitutionality case found ethical). […]

  6. Please compare this judicial secretiveness with the events at the AZ Senate last June 27th where the Republicans were charged with ethics violations by creating new rules “on-the-spot.” (See the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJCJ-6v-5sk). While the following ethics complaint was dismissed,the Legislature made the ethics complaint public. The chairmain who permitted the violation to stand had to answer in public and explain himself.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s