As our readers may expect from the premiere legal affairs blog in the gulf south we were the early innovators in the topic of New Orleans Civil District Court Judge Michgael Bagneris being nominated to a spot on the Louisiana Eastern District with a post Nowdy did back in April 2009 on his nomination to the federal bench at the same time Jim Letten was retained as US Attorney for the LAED. We were also the blog which broke Bagneris’ order delaying a trial until after the Superbowl back on late January, a topic which went viral and landed on the front page of the Picayune later on that day (where we were not credited). However, we won’t take credit for breaking the news Bagneris was rejected as unfit to serve by Team Obama as Bruce Alpert at the Times Picayune did that but unlike Mr. Alpert and his employer that prefer to protect these type of characters, Slabbed add some color as to why Mr Bagneris is unfit to serve as a federal judge. Let’s begin with Bruce Alpert and his recent report on the rejection:
In a surprise move, Barack Obama’s administration has rejected Sen. Mary Landrieu’s recommendation to fill a federal judgeship in New Orleans, asking her to offer another candidate to replace her choice of Parish Civil Court Judge Michael Bagneris.
Landrieu had recommended Bagneris, 60, a 17-year veteran of the parish court, in April 2009, at the same she suggested that President Obama retain Jim Letten as U.S. attorney. Obama accepted that recommendation.
Landrieu expressed disappointment with the White House rejection, which came this week.
“Judge Bagneris has served the people of New Orleans and Louisiana with great distinction for 39 years,” Landrieu said. “As a member of the Orleans Parish Civil District Court and chair of the Judicial Council of the National Bar Association, he has been recognized as a leader nationally. I was proud to recommend such a distinguished judge, mentor, teacher and might I add, Yale University and Tulane Law School graduate.”
The article sheds no light on why he was rejected and Mary Landrieu is full of it with her praise of Bagneris, who is better known in the legal community as an arrogant jurist that treats the lawyer who practice before him “like shit”. Such sentiment is also reflected in the comments to Alpert’s story. That personality flaw is not enough to keep him from the federal bench however. That said Alpert uses Ronald Sholes as a character source on Bagneris so let’s continue with the long wet kiss from the Picayune:
His friends and associates were disappointed with the White House announcement.
“I am sorry to hear this news,” said New Orleans Traffic Judge Ron Sholes. “Judge Bagneris has done an excellent job on the Civil District Court bench. He has been a leader in law-related activities, local and national. The loss to the federal judiciary will be a gain to the state. Hopefully, he will be considered again in the future.”
Folks having Ronald Sholes vouch for one’s character is kinda like getting Butch Ward’s endorsement in Jefferson Parish. It may be meaningful to those on the take but not to those that know what kind of character Sholes possesses. It seems like just yesterday that we busted Sholes for his unethical activities as traffic court judge when the Times Picayune used as for cover in their front page story on Sholes fixing tickets and the inherent ex parte communication involved. In fact a legal expert referred to that which was going on in NOLA traffic court as “low level rot”, a fact the Times Picayune editorial board rightfully referred to on their Op-Ed page.
But isn’t there something else we are forgetting about New Orleans civil district court, besides it being the venue of choice when John Houghtaling passes threats to those that cross him? It shares office space with 1st City Court and the perpetually absent with pay Sonja Spears, who collects a paycheck for being a judge while living in the Boston area. And then of course we have those pesky rumors of corruption in the Civil District Court itself which I reported so as to lay down a timestamp for future reference.
So there you have it gang, lots of smoke plus a rejection from Team Obama. Sad thing is the Landrieu’s are plugged in and know the score yet Mary sends a miscreant up the hill hoping Team Obama is not paying attention to what his US Attorney here is doing with his current investigations.
Speaking of Mary the old saying about opposites attract comes to mind when I consider her well documented battles with Diaper Dave Vitter. Without delving into Mary’s sexual preferences I’ll add she knows a thing or two about pay to play as the good folks at CREW noted back in 2008 when they filed an ethics compliant against her for quickly repaying a $30,000 campaign contribution with a nice fat government earmark which totaled $2,000,000 to the folks at Voyager Expanded Learning. The word I get is Moon’s daughter is a fairly hollow and one track type of person so the fact she would nominate a dud like Bagneris is not really a surprise here at Slabbed. It’s politics as usual folks. No wonder the LAED is such a cesspool.
sop
Oh, man! I can’t let this one get past me without asking a few questions: (1) Was Bagneris’ “rejection” by the Obummer White House “payback” for Mary’s support of the Offshore Oil Industry, and her “opposition”, if you will, of Obummer’s moritorium on deepwater drilling (and shallow water drilling, as well)? (2) Was Bagneris’ “rejection by the Obummer White House “payback” (in some way) for Feldman’s (as in Eastern District of Louisiana) injunction against the moritorium by the Department of the Interior and The White House? (3) Was Bagneris’ (a Negro male) “rejection” by the Obummer White House simply recoginition of the fact that the Eastern District already has “one too many” incompetent Negro males (the “lazy, stupid and corrupt” Lemelle, who “learned” at the knee of his mentor, Robert Collins, the only Eastern District Judge to be convicted of bribery and impeached – before Porteous, that is)? (4) Was Bagneris’ “rejection by the Obummer White House a reflection of “something” in the FBI investigation? (5) Or “all” or “any” of the above? I’d sure like to know what the rest of you know, and think. Ashton O’Dwyer.
just want u to know the juges got a vandeta on our tobacco lawsuits thay say thay are going to shut the suits down on tobacco suits u must see my case its big its in judishell now and thay are vilating constitushinal laws
My take (pure speculation):
The FBI has a file on such people.
But in this case, they’re still looking at CDC and FCC and they’re not done yet, and in any event all their studies on the morials and the courts as such probably have more than one reference to bagneris and those being more than passing ones.
Some people get to see those files and some of those people report to the president and make recommendations.
On the other hand maybe this is is just obama bit**slapping Mary Landrieu. She is incredibly ineffectual so what’s the diff? As a bookend for context you should look at her also recently getting denied a major chairmanship that just opened up (Homeland Security I think).
Landrieu and Vitter are two shitty ends of the same senatorial spectrum. Neither deserves the position, but alas, both will keep it because sheeple are collectively stupid.
Some weeks ago Pelican had mentioned the passing over of Bagneris, and I really had not given it any thought until the rigmarole about Porteous’ impeachment trial in the Senate made the news yet again. WTF…talk about gaming the system. Now we find out that the very same lawyer who represented Porteous during the House impeachment proceedings had a pre-existing conflict. Presumedly the identical conflict that Porteous now claims would preempt Westling from defending him before the Senate ! Bada Bing, new lawyer, 6 weeks delay.
deBrief surmises that the continued publicity of the Porteous impeachment not only regurgitates his abhorrent conduct as a Judge, but his being appointed a Federal Judge in the first place Many of us who know him wonder how he could have ever passed through the FBI background check. Or was it just plain power politics: this is who my contributors want, this is who they’re gonna get. It may be that the FBI office has made a determined effort not to allow the politicians to make patsies of them again. That would be a good thing. Bagneris being appointed would have been a bad thing.
And as to the Porteous matter, something’s up. Pelican knows it and I know it. 8 years and we are expected to believe all the power in DC hasn’t been able to bring this 2 bit degenerate District Court Judge down. BULLLLLL…SHIT ! Porteous has got the goods on someone(s) and he’s pushing for his retirement guarantee in exchange for his resignation. Timing is everything…impeachment hearings vs elections…Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm…
DeBrief and I are going to drink a lot of Rebel Yell and try to forget about all this crap for a couple of days. Pas a good time on the 4th, t-sop…
Bill Clinton was never the type of guy that let doing what was right get in the way of shithouse politics. To this point his nominees on the LAED are not being judged kindly. History won’t either.
You pretty much have to be a miscreant along the lines of Fred Heebie and evidently Michael Bagneris to be denied.
sop
In the late 1990’s, I attended 2 continuing legal education events at which Porteous spoke. (I did not attend for the purpose of hearing him speak; it was coincidental). Both times he ridiculed the FBI for its feeble attempt at a background check on him before he was confirmed as a Fed judge. In retrospect it seems to have been one of those reverse, or even double-reverse, psychology things. Porteous wanted the attendees to think he was saying it tongue in cheek, but several of us present looked at one another and rolled our eyes. And, I have already recounted on slabbed a lecture he gave on Katrina litigation (ha, ha) in April of 2008 at a Jefferson Bar Assoc CLE. He was so arrogant that at the end of the speech, he quoted his favorite movie line (from Dennis Quaid in Independence Day), “Hello boys, I’m back.” Astonishingly, this appeared to be well-received among many of his peers; go figure.
And Sock, the reception you described is both the answer and the problem…the Jefferson Parish bar…most of his peers are just like him !
I just received the recent issue of “Jefferson Life, the new publishing propaganda magazine backed up by Newell Normand to spin the stories on major players in the Jefferson Parish scandals. There was a profile article article on Dick Chopin. From what I read in their magazine compared to what I read in the Porteous House impeachment transcript, I would swear we have the living model of Dr. Jekell and Mr. Hyde in Dick Chopin.
The Comments of Whitmergate and Sock Puppet reveal “more” than most, but they still don’t disclose to the Public (ie. law-abiding, ethical and honest citizens) the DEPTH of the “dirty, rotten, stinking and putrid” CORRUPTION which permeates a “Corrupt Federal System”, which include all levels of Government, as well as the Federal Judiciary and Federal Law Enforcement (and I include Jim Letten and his “spear-carriers”). Porteous continues to bring embarrassing “attention” to the Eastern District of Louisiana. But he’s been “doing what he does best” within the Federal System since 1994. Prior to that he was a Judge on the 24th Judicial District Court for the Parish of Jefferson (I mean, no one could possibly make this stuff up). For him to get into the Federal System in 1994, he had to be nominated by one or more Senators, whose Staff(s) had to vet him. Then he had to be nominated by the Clinton White House, whose Staff no doubt vetted him. Then he had to be subjected to a “rigorous” FBI investigation (the same bunch that brought us 9-11, the shoe bomber, the underwear bomber, the Fort Hood massacre – Major Abu Nidal Hasan – and most recently, 17 Afgan pilots who went AWOL from Lackland Air Force Base – does ANYONE know how many of these Muslim “ragheads” remain in our midst?). And after all of that, Congress conducted its own investigation and hearings before confirming Porteous and giving him a Federal Commission as “Judge”. Then, from 1994 forward, Porteous and his brand of JUDICIAL CORRUPTION was allowed to flourish “courtesy” of his “brother and sister” Judges on the Eastern District Bench, who HAD to know what was “happening”, b ut who DID NOTHING. And as recently as the Fifth “Circus” appellate decision in the Liljeberg case (the “Circus” reversed Porteous who OBVIOUSLY benefited his friends’ client in a District Court Opinion which even the “Circus” said made no sense). Well, if it made no sense, and if it obviously benefited the client of his lawyer friends, THEN WHY DIDN’T THE CIRCUS HAVE THE INTEGRITY TO IMPOSE DISCIPLINE or at the very least order an investigation? In my judgment, the “Circus” is as CROOKED as Porteous and the other Eastern District Judges who “enabled” him to be corrupt (because some of them would put his “penny ante” form of corruption to shame). And when Porteous “blew it”, and attracted undue attention to himself by filing an out-of-State bankruptcy case under an assumed name, the initial reaction of Chief Judge Jones of the “Circus”, and later the “Circus'” Judicial Council, was A WRITTEN REPRIMAND! Boy-oh-boy! That’s “rough justice”, ain’t it? Even now, with AT LEAST SOME of Porteous’ criminal acts having occurred within the last 10 years, The U.S. Department of “Injustice” is “missing in action” and has not charged him or anyone else CRIMINALLY, which is itself a crime. How are citizens supposed to have respect for our System of Justice, and those who currently “inhabit” or “occupy” it, when individuals from the top of the barrel to the bottom (save for one alcoholic and gambling-addicted man who should NEVER have been confirmed as a Federal Judge) can be allowed to PISS ON IT (and us), without fear of any consequences? And we haven’t even begun to address the State Judiciary, which gave birth to Porteous, to Lemelle (he was Robert Collins’ law clerk, when Collins was a Magistrate at Criminal Court – bet Lemelle learned alot aboy “ethics” there, huh?), and to Michael Bagneris (on whom the jury is still “out”). I hope the Readers of SLABBED realize how “dirty, rotten, etc…” this Federal System is, how ANGRY I am, and how COMMITTED I am to doing something about it, even if it destroys me. Ashton O’Dwyer.
Bagneris must be a piece of work. It’s virtually unprecedented for a president to reject a District Judge nomination from a senator of his own party, no matter what the relationship between the two. I’ll bet you can count on one hand the number of times it’s happened.
Anybody got a read on the Fifth District Court of Appeals? I have a mandamus appeal from judge Vance and I’m wondering if they’re going to be as…interesting, perhaps is the right word, as she is, (just to those in the know, she’s the next judge we’re all going to be hearing about).
Senator Landrieu knew from the beginning that Bagneris would never make it through the vetting process but was pressured into putting his name in the hat by the democrats in Orleans Parish as the quid pro quo to keep Letten in his position – the public being fully behind Obama retaining Letten. Now, Landrieu has plausible deniability. But, she still comes out of this looking pretty foolish. There must’ve been a ton of dirt on Bagneris for even Obama to pass in the early stages!
The strong rumor is that the White House gave him the opportunity to “bow out gracefully,” but he refused.
Another reason for Mary to not seek re-election in 2012. If we can wipe the slate clean with two new senators it would be the schizzle.
In that event, Sock, with such a display of arrogance, he would have fit right in on Camp Street!
The encouraging things in all of this is that it appears Obama is truly trying to vet these nominees. Both US Attorney slots in Mississippi are still unfilled for instance.
I’ve seen some troubling things about Judge Vance posted in the comments to several recent T-P stories. Alleged conflicts aside she generally rules according to the law unlike several of the others.
Welcome to our new commenters.
sop
Does anybody know anything about Judge Robin Giarusso of CDC?
I will detail my current and to be kind, recent “strange” experiences in due course.
Also, anybody aware of a prior professional relationship between Giarusso and Jim Garner of Sher, Garner?
Yes. She dismissed my lawsuit against my former law partners who, in the aftermath of KATRINA, falsely informed me that I had been suspended from the practice of law, but that they had “influence” with the Chief Disciplinary Counsel, and could get the suspension “lifted” so I could continue to earn a living (but not at my firm) if I agreed as follows: (1) Quit giving interviews to T.V., radio or print journalists; (2) Surrender all weapons at my home to “lawful” authority; and (3) Abandon my home and come join them “in Plato’s cave” in Baton Rouge, Shreveport, Houston, or “wherever”. Giarrusso not only did this “on the papers”, without ANY EVIDENCE or DISCOVERY, she did it in Open Court, but WITHOUT A COURT REPORTER. I only learned this when I tried to order the transcript for appellate purposes. This “aborigine turned inside-out” gives “WOPS” a bad name. Ashton O’Dwyer.
Ashton,
My issue partly concerns her failure to have a court reporter present.
I will post a narrative in due course about her, how she handles her courtroom and her willingness to not follow the law and tell you she won’t follow the law.
Just in case my prior Comment didn’t “SAY” it clear enough: This #%&@* is “on the take” and a clear and present danger to “justice” in Orleans Parish. Ashton O’Dwyer.
Ashton, NRB, I can’t tell you (yet) how useful your comments have been. Gimme time, you’ll be happy.
Sop81_1, it took a week after I filed it, and its missing most the exhibits for some reason, but there’s now a copy of my mandamus petition on pacer, case # 09-4369 Michael Paul Castrillo vs. AHMSI, et. al, #88 second Notice of Appeal.
Vance solicited exculpatory evidence after the close of discovery. Found that the record evidence proved they broke the law, so they better put something in to disprove it. They would have too, if I hadn’t filed the mandamus.
She found they broke the law and that I’d proven my case on other claims, but dismissed them anyway.
She gave the represented defendants a long string of no-cause continuances (this is Judge Vance, recall), granting them overnight, and telling me about them only after they were granted. Defendants put in last minute affidavits so I requested a continuance to conduct discovery on them-they turned ME down.
Et cetera, et cetera.
I can’t make heads or tails of it, maybe you’ll see something I missed?
I forgot to say I can email it if anyone is even remotely interested.
Michael you can find my email addy on the contact page. We’re happy to look at it.
sop
Michael Paul Castrillo — please email me info on your Supreme Court challenge. ty
http://www.prlog.org/10989444-supreme-court-challenge-to-louisiana-foreclosure-laws.html
Consider it done.
http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/vermont/vtdce/2:2013cv00187/23163/60/ family of Wendell Gauthier needs help
Hate to have to go all cynical on you, but unfortunately your claims and the underlying facts are simply standard fare in this day and age. The paramilitary internal security forces aka “cops” treat the average citizen as a “hostile force.” The BIG news day is whenever a court tags the security forces & their employer for money damages. You might read investigative journalism by William Norman Grigg who chronicles the unfortunate outcomes of such encounters.