IS THE JOAN MADDEN COURT FOR SALE? “BID HIGH AND BID EARLY”
Written by Jim Couri for Scamraiders (facts and allegations set forth in this article are based on Court Files and other Documents assembled by Jim)
Did George Pavia Esq. (former boss of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor) BUY the Joan Madden Court in the New York Unified Court System in order to avoid Rent Stabilization Laws and illegally recapture about $10mil in value for the St
abilized Building owned by the Pavias? Jim sued the Pavias for Rent Stabilization and was successful through the Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR), the Agency that determines Stabilization in NYC, and was affirmed at the Appellate Division. Scamraiders will give you the road map and you decide where it leads. Either JSC Madden and her law clerks Julie Cort and Karen Schwartz (‘all for one and one for all’) lost their Law Books, or “Georgie-porgie Pavia” found “the tune these gals danced to”; and to be sure, it was not the Law, Justice, or Due Process-- it was a “set-up”.
BACKGROUND
George and Antonia Pavia own a townhouse in New York City on the upper eastside, on 73rd Street between 5th and Madison Avenues, 18 E. 73rd Street. Lucky George didn’t pay a red cent for it; his in-laws, the Price family, “gifted” the property in about 1973. It seems there was no Gift Tax Return filed for this lovely donation by the Prices to George and Antonia. The house cost the Prices $375,000. The Pavias renovated their own 3-floor triplex and rented out the top two floors (4--one bedroom units) to tenants.
ENTER JIM COURI
Jim rented apartment 3-B because it contained a large atrium with good light. Jim’s wife is an artist and intended to use the atrium as a studio to paint in. Jim however did not know that this atrium was illegal, built by the Pavias in violation of Building Department Codes and Laws and without any Permits or approvals. In year 2000 Jim inquired of George Pavia why the premises was not Registered as Rent Stabilized as it contained 8 units (before the Pavias converted it) and was a pre-war structure. George claimed the City and the Department of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR) Staff were “morons” and the Pavias’ premises was exempt. Jim pursued the claim at the DHCR and obtained Rent Stabilization. The Pavia’s went wild and began a crusade of abuse, harassment, threats and lewd conduct. Pavias’ unleashed German Sheppard even bit Jim’s wife.
Pavias enlist the “gamesmanship” help of attorney Jay Ithowitz and continued to litigate the DHCR findings. Meanwhile the Department of Buildings (DOB) issued about 7 Violations against the Pavia building and the atrium. The DOB found the atrium to be illegal and unsafe, seven times. These DOB Violations were heard at the Environmental Control Board (ECB) Court. All the Violations were affirmed and the Pavias fined. Thereafter, George cleverly filed a false Certificate of Correction at DOB, and was found by ECB to be a liar. The Pavias then sued the Couris, falsely claiming they caused a leak and $25,000 in damage.
ENTER JSC JOAN MADDEN
After an oral examination of George Pavia and no evidence of a leak or damages were produced, Jim Moved to dismiss the Pavias’ claims, as there was no legitimate claim. Curiously, Judge Madden refused to Dismiss, a direct violation of Civil Practice Codes and Laws. At that point, Jim knew something was very wrong. Significant, this matter was a Landlord/Tenant case; why was it in Supreme Court and not in Landlord Tenant Court where it belonged? Jim learned that Attorney Ithowitz had a prior “relationship” with Judge Madden, undisclosed. Meanwhile, George Pavia continued his abuse and harassment of the Couris at the premises, which resulted in Jim writing and/or responding to Pavia’s abusive letters, sent by Jim via fax and mail to Pavia’s office. All the while Jim was ill undergoing serious medical treatment and surgeries. The Pavias tried everything to disenfranchise Jim from this apartment. 
Pavia went as far as filing false criminal harassment claims against Jim for letter writing, which was thrown out by the District Attorney as frivolous. Judge Madden then, in violation of CPLR, allowed the Pavias to amend, in about 2005, their baseless ‘leak’ Complaint to a Nuisance claim, for letter writing to the Pavia’s office, which had ceased by early 2003. Interestingly Pavia had previously brought the same claim against Jim not only at the Criminal Court but also at the ECB Court, and before JSC Rolando Acosta, JSC Diane Lebdeff and at the Division of Housing and Community Renewal. Each time this Nuisance Claim was rejected and thrown out. In fact, when Pavia refused to issue Jim a Rent Stabilized Lease again on the grounds of Nuisance at the DHCR, the DHCR Court rejected this and demanded Pavia issue the Lease to Jim.
THE MADDEN TRIAL COURT, 2007
After about forty motions in which Judge Madden carefully and “skillfully” crafted her Decisions in order to aid the Pavias/Ithowitz “preordained causes”, JSC Madden then systematically precluded multitudinous material evidence including all ECB Court findings, Decisions and Orders that Pavia violated a myriad of Laws and that the atrium in Jim’s home was illegal and hazardous and that George Pavia was found to be a liar at ECB Court and by other Judges. Judge Madden then systematically precluded all of Jim’s medical records and conditions (ie cancer, cardiac, intestinal, etc). Then as part of this “set-up” Judge Madden chose to rewrite the Nuisance Statute in violation of Law and in violation of Jim’s right to Due Process. 
Factually, in order for anyone to be accused of Nuisance a tenant’s conduct must be within the premises, not “letter writing” to someone’s office. Then the Madden “blockbuster”---in violation of Collateral Estoppel and Res Judicata, Codes, which in part precludes the re-litigation of claims previously decided in any Court or Administrative Agency, JSC Madden permitted the Pavias’ claims of Nuisance to be the foundation of the trial to steal Jim’s home. Remember this claim was litigated by Pavia FIVE times previously and lost each time. Undaunted, Judge Madden permitted the Pavias’ unlawful claim that was legally barred and precluded, and allowed these claims to be re-litigated over again. Jim and Jim’s wife’s attorneys, Mclaughlin Stern Esq.s, made two Motions to dismiss the barred Nuisance claims, but Judge Madden not only refused, she threatened to hold Jim in Contempt if he brought it up again. The trial was “railroading” and a disgrace. Furthermore, Jim’s doctors advised Judge Madden that Jim was too ill to proceed to trial. With even more conviction, JSC Madden proceeded to “twist” the Law and
Rules in order to provide Pavia and his lawyer, Kenneth Gomez Esq. (Ithowitz had quit, apparently due to Jim’s uncovering of suspect activity) an unfettered Court to violate the Rules of Evidence and systematically precluded much of Jim’s material facts. By Judge Madden’s manipulation of her Courtroom, any attempt at a fair airing of the facts of this Case was impossible. JSC Madden cleverly rewrote and in fact violated the Law to allow the Pavias to recapture Rent Stabilization and rob Jim’s rights under the Law. Further evidence of these matters is the fact that Madden, knowing that George Pavia threatened and assaulted Jim in the presence of DHCR Inspectors, issued an Order depriving Jim from bringing legal action against the Pavias WITHOUT Judge Madden’s permission. A violation of Jim’s access to the Courts.
CONCLUSION
The Pavias were facing about a $10million difference in their building’s value as Rent Stabilized and according to their Lawyer Jay Itkowitz, would do anything to “get Couri out”. Well they did----JSC Joan Madden to the Rescue. As they say “money talks and BS walks”, and so does the Law if the price is right. George and Antonia Pavia cheated the Legal System with the helping hand of a malleable Judge who, and the Record confirms, rewrote Laws, Statutes, CPLR, Case Law, and deprived Due Process. A careful analysis of JSC Madden’s Decisions reveal a systematic pattern of Bias and manipulation of facts and the law to disenfranchise Jim from Stabilization and his Home. 
JSC Madden’s conduct was an abomination to the Legal System. She permitted the Pavias’ Corruption to envelop her Courtroom and turned a blind eye. Jim’s Complaints about this Kangaroo conduct resulted only in the conduct becoming more flagrant. Understand, the Unified Court System in a “club”. Please remember Boss Tweed, Roy Cohn , John R. Crews and Don Vito Corlione. There is a time to dance and a time to pay the piper. George Pavia has continued to interfere into Jim’s Affairs, as he is a desperate spiteful rogue. George will soon find out he is not the “elitist” that he fashions himself, and he is not above the Rule of Law.
Motion by attorney Jon Paul Robbins re: Pavia claim of nuisance aga...
NOTE: Read Did Supreme Court Justice-Designate Sotomayor's Law Firm Partner, G... -- and see comments for additional perspective
Res Juticata - More information
Nuisance - more information
Did George Pavia Esq. (former boss of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor) BUY the Joan Madden Court in the New York Unified Court System in order to avoid Rent Stabilization Laws and illegally recapture about $10mil in value for the Stabilized Building owned by the Pavias? Jim sued the Pavias for Rent Stabilization and was successful through the Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR), the Agency that determines Stabilization in NYC, and was affirmed at the Appellate Division. Scamraiders will give you the road map and you decide where it leads. Either JSC Madden and her law clerks Julie Cort and Karen Schwartz (‘all for one and one for all’) lost their Law Books, or “Georgie-porgie Pavia” found “the tune these gals danced to”; and to be sure, it was not the Law, Justice, or Due Process-- it was a “set-up”.BACKGROUND
George and Antonia Pavia own a townhouse in New York City on the upper eastside, on 73rd Street between 5th and Madison Avenues, 18 E. 73rd Street. Lucky George didn’t pay a red cent for it; his in-laws, the Price family, “gifted” the property in about 1973. It seems there was no Gift Tax Return filed for this lovely donation by the Prices to George and Antonia. The house cost the Prices $375,000. The Pavias renovated their own 3-floor triplex and rented out the top two floors (4--one bedroom units) to tenants.ENTER JIM COURI
Jim rented apartment 3-B because it contained a large atrium with good light. Jim’s wife is an artist and intended to use the atrium as a studio to paint in. Jim however did not know that this atrium was illegal, built by the Pavias in violation of Building Department Codes and Laws and without any Permits or approvals. In year 2000 Jim inquired of George Pavia why the premises was not Registered as Rent Stabilized as it contained 8 units (before the Pavias converted it) and was a pre-war structure. George claimed the City and the Department of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR) Staff were “morons” and the Pavias’ premises was exempt. Jim pursued the claim at the DHCR and obtained Rent Stabilization. The Pavia’s went wild and began a crusade of abuse, harassment, threats and lewd conduct. Pavias’ unleashed German Sheppard even bit Jim’s wife. Pavias enlist the “gamesmanship” help of attorney Jay Ithowitz and continued to litigate the DHCR findings. Meanwhile the Department of Buildings (DOB) issued about 7 Violations against the Pavia building and the atrium. The DOB found the atrium to be illegal and unsafe, seven times. These DOB Violations were heard at the Environmental Control Board (ECB) Court. All the Violations were affirmed and the Pavias fined. Thereafter, George cleverly filed a false Certificate of Correction at DOB, and was found by ECB to be a liar. The Pavias then sued the Couris, falsely claiming they caused a leak and $25,000 in damage.ENTER JSC JOAN MADDEN
After an oral examination of George Pavia and no evidence of a leak or damages were produced, Jim Moved to dismiss the Pavias’ claims, as there was no legitimate claim. Curiously, Judge Madden refused to Dismiss, a direct violation of Civil Practice Codes and Laws. At that point, Jim knew something was very wrong. Significant, this matter was a Landlord/Tenant case; why was it in Supreme Court and not in Landlord Tenant Court where it belonged? Jim learned that Attorney Ithowitz had a prior “relationship” with Judge Madden, undisclosed. Meanwhile, George Pavia continued his abuse and harassment of the Couris at the premises, which resulted in Jim writing and/or responding to Pavia’s abusive letters, sent by Jim via fax and mail to Pavia’s office. All the while Jim was ill undergoing serious medical treatment and surgeries. The Pavias tried everything to disenfranchise Jim from this apartment. Pavia went as far as filing false criminal harassment claims against Jim for letter writing, which was thrown out by the District Attorney as frivolous. Judge Madden then, in violation of CPLR, allowed the Pavias to amend, in about 2005, their baseless ‘leak’ Complaint to a Nuisance claim, for letter writing to the Pavia’s office, which had ceased by early 2003. Interestingly Pavia had previously brought the same claim against Jim not only at the Criminal Court but also at the ECB Court, and before JSC Rolando Acosta, JSC Diane Lebdeff and at the Division of Housing and Community Renewal. Each time this Nuisance Claim was rejected and thrown out. In fact, when Pavia refused to issue Jim a Rent Stabilized Lease again on the grounds of Nuisance at the DHCR, the DHCR Court rejected this and demanded Pavia issue the Lease to Jim.THE MADDEN TRIAL COURT, 2007
After about forty motions in which Judge Madden carefully and “skillfully” crafted her Decisions in order to aid the Pavias/Ithowitz “preordained causes”, JSC Madden then systematically precluded multitudinous material evidence including all ECB Court findings, Decisions and Orders that Pavia violated a myriad of Laws and that the atrium in Jim’s home was illegal and hazardous and that George Pavia was found to be a liar at ECB Court and by other Judges. Judge Madden then systematically precluded all of Jim’s medical records and conditions (ie cancer, cardiac, intestinal, etc). Then as part of this “set-up” Judge Madden chose to rewrite the Nuisance Statute in violation of Law and in violation of Jim’s right to Due Process. Factually, in order for anyone to be accused of Nuisance a tenant’s conduct must be within the premises, not “letter writing” to someone’s office. Then the Madden “blockbuster”---in violation of Collateral Estoppel and Res Judicata, Codes, which in part precludes the re-litigation of claims previously decided in any Court or Administrative Agency, JSC Madden permitted the Pavias’ claims of Nuisance to be the foundation of the trial to steal Jim’s home. Remember this claim was litigated by Pavia FIVE times previously and lost each time. Undaunted, Judge Madden permitted the Pavias’ unlawful claim that was legally barred and precluded, and allowed these claims to be re-litigated over again. Jim and Jim’s wife’s attorneys, Mclaughlin Stern Esq.s, made two Motions to dismiss the barred Nuisance claims, but Judge Madden not only refused, she threatened to hold Jim in Contempt if he brought it up again. The trial was “railroading” and a disgrace. Furthermore, Jim’s doctors advised Judge Madden that Jim was too ill to proceed to trial. With even more conviction, JSC Madden proceeded to “twist” the Law and Rules in order to provide Pavia and his lawyer, Kenneth Gomez Esq. (Ithowitz had quit, apparently due to Jim’s uncovering of suspect activity) an unfettered Court to violate the Rules of Evidence and systematically precluded much of Jim’s material facts. By Judge Madden’s manipulation of her Courtroom, any attempt at a fair airing of the facts of this Case was impossible. JSC Madden cleverly rewrote and in fact violated the Law to allow the Pavias to recapture Rent Stabilization and rob Jim’s rights under the Law. Further evidence of these matters is the fact that Madden, knowing that George Pavia threatened and assaulted Jim in the presence of DHCR Inspectors, issued an Order depriving Jim from bringing legal action against the Pavias WITHOUT Judge Madden’s permission. A violation of Jim’s access to the Courts.CONCLUSION
The Pavias were facing about a $10million difference in their building’s value as Rent Stabilized and according to their Lawyer Jay Itkowitz, would do anything to “get Couri out”. Well they did----JSC Joan Madden to the Rescue. As they say “money talks and BS walks”, and so does the Law if the price is right. George and Antonia Pavia cheated the Legal System with the helping hand of a malleable Judge who, and the Record confirms, rewrote Laws, Statutes, CPLR, Case Law, and deprived Due Process. A careful analysis of JSC Madden’s Decisions reveal a systematic pattern of Bias and manipulation of facts and the law to disenfranchise Jim from Stabilization and his Home. JSC Madden’s conduct was an abomination to the Legal System. She permitted the Pavias’ Corruption to envelop her Courtroom and turned a blind eye. Jim’s Complaints about this Kangaroo conduct resulted only in the conduct becoming more flagrant. Understand, the Unified Court System in a “club”. Please remember Boss Tweed, Roy Cohn , John R. Crews and Don Vito Corlione. There is a time to dance and a time to pay the piper. George Pavia has continued to interfere into Jim’s Affairs, as he is a desperate spiteful rogue. George will soon find out he is not the “elitist” that he fashions himself, and he is not above the Rule of Law.Motion by attorney Jon Paul Robbins re: Pavia claim of nuisance aga...
NOTE: Read Did Supreme Court Justice-Designate Sotomayor's Law Firm Partner, G... -- and see comments for additional perspective
Res Juticata - More information
Nuisance - more information
Comment
© 2010 Created by Scamraider.
You need to be a member of Scamraiders to add comments!
Join Scamraiders