Podcasts about new york state court

Joe Roediger, COO, discussed Woodmont Country Club's extensive sustainability initiatives across two 18-hole golf courses, six indoor tennis courts, and a 100,000 sq. ft. clubhouse. The club has eliminated single-use plastic bottles, implemented autonomous gas-free mowers, and battery-powered maintenance equipment, reducing operational costs. They've also introduced native grasses for water conservation and GPS-guided sprayers for a 15% reduction in fertilizer use. LED lighting and a water recycling system have significantly cut energy and water consumption. Future goals include more autonomous mowers and solar panel implementation. Roediger emphasized empowering leaders to identify and capitalize on sustainability opportunities. Also in this episode … A short course readies for debut at an Indiana resort. The Sand Creek Course at French Lick, which features nine holes ranging between 40 and 90 yards, is set for opening day on May 1. This brings French Lick Resort to a total of 54 holes of golf resort-wide, complementing the 18-hole championship Pete Dye and Donald Ross courses and the 9-hole Valley Links. A Florida course is adding a state-of-the-art driving range and golf learning center. The new facility at Dubsdread Golf Course in Orlando, Fla., will feature 40 total bays, 36 outfitted with advanced golf technology for an interactive experience and four traditional bays. The learning center includes two private teaching bays featuring full Trackman technology for precision training and custom fitting. And a New York club wins an injured-golfer case in Court of Appeals. The New York State Court of Appeals issued a unanimous decision stating that the Cazenovia (N.Y.) Golf Club is not liable for injuries sustained by a golfer who was struck by an errant golf ball while playing the course. The victory sets a precedent that will help protect golf course businesses.

Send us a textIn this episode we look back at a triumphant week for President Donald Trump as he held a pre Inaugural press conference on the transition and his plans for a second Trump term. In this episode we will listen in on all the various themes and issues he touched on in his hour and 20 minute press conference and then delve into the historic legal proceeding in New York State. In our opinion, that action by the New York State Court was exactly the type of overreach that we hope the President will remember as he takes office on January 20th. Our podcast, has dove in deeply into our examples of how lawfare has created a rift on our national body politic for over a half century and how desperately we believe this evil needs to be stopped. History, fate,  or circumstance, has given Donald Trump an unparalleled opportunity to destroy this evil political ploy that no one in our history has ever been handed. The use of lawfare destroyed the Presidency of Richard Nixon, helped end the career of George H. W. Bush, crippled the remainder of the Presidency of Bill Clinton, and while Senator Ted Stevens would be eventually totally exonerated that all occurred when he wasn't a Senator any more. Donald Trump has been afforded the opportunity to right this wrong after being its victim for the entire time he was out of office between January of 2020 and literally, last week. This episode is also dedicated to President Donald Trump's biggest fan here in Horry County, a woman instrumental in his success in our State of South Carolina. Gerri McDaniel was a force of nature who exploded onto the local political scene almost 18 years ago as a leader in the Tea Party movement, she would go on to help engineer Newt Gingrich's victory in South Carolina's Primary in 2012, and was the early leader here for President Donald Trump throughout his time in politics. She passed away suddenly this week and we thought it only fitting she share in this moment of triumph for President Trump. This show is dedicated to Gerri McDaniel's memory.  Questions or comments at , Randalrgw1@aol.com , https://twitter.com/randal_wallace , and http://www.randalwallace.com/Please Leave us a review at wherever you get your podcastsThanks for listening!!

Sept. 24, 2024 - New York State Court of Appeals Judge Shirley Troutman, who serves as co-chair of the Franklin H. Williams Judicial Commission, discusses the importance of juror diversity and steps that could address the composition of juries.

Tani Cantil-Sakauye, former Chief Justice of California Supreme Court for 11 years, and current President of the Public Policy Institute of California, was interviewed by Joanne Z. Tan, host and producer of "Interviews of Notables and Influencers" of 10 Plus Podcast on June 24, 2024. Around 22 questions and answers are presented in three parts: Part One: Tani's journey, lessons learned, and insights from being the Chief Justice on the highest court in California;  Part 2: California's economy and future; Part 3: Election reform, federalism, and democracy.   –  Please SHARE it! Thank you. To read as a blog (coming soon) To watch as a video (Introduction of the Host of this Podcast:) Before I have the GREAT honor to introduce Tani Cantil-Sakauye, let me briefly introduce myself. I am Joanne Tan, host and producer of the 10 Plus Podcast, “Interviews of Notables and Influencers”.  I am the CEO of 10 Plus Brand, Inc. — a brand-building and brand-marketing agency for companies and leaders. Growing brands - business or personal - is my passion. I also have a law degree and I career-coach attorneys and executives, and manage brands of board members, leadership coaches, and consultants. I have lived and worked in the San Francisco Bay Area for 36 years. It was in San Francisco that I became a US citizen almost 30 years ago. I care deeply about my home state and our country whose ideals and values inspired me to leave everything behind in China 42 years ago. I'd like to give back to my beloved California and America.  (Introducing Tani Cantil-Sakauye:) Tani Cantil-Sakauye was the former Chief Justice of California Supreme Court for 11 years. Currently, she is the president and CEO of the Public Policy Institute of California (“PPIC”) where she holds the Walter and Esther Hewlett Chair in Understanding California's Future. One of the founders of PPIC was Walter Hewlett, also one of the founders of Hewlett Packard.  PPIC provides data-based research to the state legislature to help make better policies for all Californians. California legislators and executive officials do listen to Tani and PPIC. From 2011 to 2022, Tani served as the 28th Chief Justice of California, and led the judiciary as the chair of the Judicial Council—the constitutional policy and rule making body of the judicial branch—the first person of color and the second woman to do so. Before she was elected statewide as the Chief Justice of California, she served more than 20 years on California appellate and trial courts and was appointed or elevated to higher office by three governors. Earlier in her career she served as a deputy District Attorney for the Sacramento DA Office, and on the senior staff of Governor Deukmejian as legal affairs and legislative deputy secretary. https://www.ppic.org/person/tani-cantil-sakauye/ Disclaimer: I take a completely non-partisan approach to economic policy, election reform, and judicial issues. All my questions here are issue-based, not through the lens of politics or political partisanship, even though I regard myself as a centrist Democrat. Part 1 Questions: Tani's personal journey, lessons learned and insights as former Chief Justice of CA Supreme Court (1) Q: How did you choose your path? What were your challenges and satisfactions as a California Supreme Court Chief Justice? What lessons would you like to share with us from serving on the state Supreme Court? (2) Q: As a role model, raised in a non-privileged background, what qualities and mindset are the most important for your achievements and continued growth? What wisdom can you share with people of all backgrounds? (3) Facts or Opinions? - Critical Thinking and Human Intelligence Are Needed to Process Information and Decipher Facts from Media, Social Media, AI (4) Q: As a personal branding expert and a business brand builder, I ask all my honored guests this question: What does your brand stand for?   (5) Q: Are you considering running for any office in the future?    Part 2 Questions: California's Economy and Future (6) Q: About AI and regulations. AI is being widely adopted across many industries globally, and is playing a significant role in reducing costs and increasing productivity. (https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/quantumblack/our-insights/the-state-of-ai)  But at the same time, AI is making fake information, disinformation, as well as its distribution a lot easier, faster, and with more impact (based on the Economist Magazine in May 2024 featured two articles: “Fighting disinformation gets harder, just when it matters most”, while “Producing fake information is getting easier” (https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2024/05/01/fighting-disinformation-gets-harder-just-when-it-matters-most?utm_campaign=r.science-newsletter&utm_medium=email.internal-newsletter.np&utm_source=salesforce-marketing-cloud&utm_term=5/1/2024&utm_id=1877854 (https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2024/05/01/producing-fake-information-is-getting-easier?utm_campaign=r.science-newsletter&utm_medium=email.internal-newsletter.np&utm_source=salesforce-marketing-cloud&utm_term=5/1/2024&utm_id=1877854) What is the legislative balance between controlling the harm from AI generated or facilitated false information, and not killing the golden goose of AI technology? (7) Q: California's aging population: What are the anticipated consequences, and how are we going to tackle the issue? Can AI offset the shrinking productive population, since AI increases productivity and decreases labor cost? (8) Q: Related or unrelated to the aging population issue, do border-crossing, undocumented immigrants actually help with the labor shortage? Is it also related to political advantage, i.e. the number of congressional seats are based on the census?  What will California do with the border crossing issue?  (9) Q: Insurance:  Many insurance companies for residential homes have left California. The lack of competition has resulted in much higher premiums for all Californians. What can be done about it? (10) Q: High housing cost for Californians and exodus to other states: Californian families are leaving for other states where housing and living expenses are lower. What are the ramifications for the mid and long term California economy? Does it lead to brain drain?  (11) Q: Homelessness and the implementation of Prop. 1: What improvement have we seen? How can the implementation be improved? Who is accountable?  (12) Q: Increase of minimum wage for California fast food workers and the ripple effects: A Bloomberg article on April 16, 2024 pointed out the impact of California minimum wage hike for fast food workers on prolonging inflation and delaying the Fed's rate cut.  Now, California consumers have to pay more for fast food because the increased wage was passed down to the buyers, and most of the fast food consumers are not well off. Is it a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul? Does this well-intended law result in delayed inflation recovery for everyone? Is legislation interfering with the free market? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-04-16/how-california-s-huge-raises-for-fast-food-workers-will-ripple-across-industries (13) Q: The high cost of doing business in California creates an exodus of businesses to other states. Many are leaving due to pro-labor legislation that burdens employers. What can the state legislature do to keep the cost down for businesses? (14) Q: What does the state government need to do to keep tech giants like Google, Apple, Nvidia and others in Silicon Valley? (15) Q: Budget deficits and tax increases: In the tech industry, there are fewer IPOs now, and less tax from capital gains for the government. (https://www.sfexaminer.com/news/technology/why-california-budget-problems-could-be-blamed-on-ipo-market/article_197ac9d8-0f24-11ef-9f28-5f7fe6820efc.html#:~:text=IPOs%20%E2%80%94%20the%20typical%20way%20startups,are%20taxed%20by%20the%20state.)  Budget deficits exist at both state and local levels.  The California Supreme Court will hear arguments on the legality of a ballot measure that would strip the Legislature and governor of the ability to increase taxes (The Los Angeles Times reports). Tax increases will further the exodus of companies and Californians out of California. Are there any other options for dealing with budget deficits? (16) Q: Bullet trains:  Are they ever going to be completed, after three decades? ( - The Economist's article, May 17, 2024: https://www.economist.com/united-states/2024/05/16/the-worlds-slowest-bullet-train-trundles-ahead-in-california (17) Q: Drought and water shortage due to global warming: Governor Newsom was talking about building reservoirs. What can we do to make it happen, hopefully not in three decades since global warming might turn California into a desert in 30 years without us taking actions NOW? Part 3 Questions: Federal election reform; Term Limits, SCOTUS Ethics Rules, Republic Democracy, Politics (18) Q: Rank Choice Voting:  It has been advocated by some very intelligent Harvard professors and political consultants. Rank Choice Voting is already used in some gubernatorial and mayoral elections, can it be used in primaries for presidential elections? (As advocated in the book The Politics Industry: How Political Innovation Can Break Partisan Gridlock and Save Our Democracy, by Katherine Gehl and Michael Porter, a Harvard Business School professor.) (19) Q: Term Limits for US Supreme Court Justices: Stanford Professors Larry Diamond and other highly respected voices recommend term limits for SCOTUS, which is gaining traction widely in the US.  Some suggested the term limit to be at age 75, or three terms of six years, and the fourth term is up to six years.  Stanford Professor Larry Diamond in his book “Ill Winds” suggests limiting every SCOTUS' term to 18 years. What do you think? (20) Ethic rules for SCOTUSES:  In light of the revelations about accepting lavish gifts for decades by the US Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, do you think Congress needs to make ENFORCEABLE ethics rules that will hold SCOTUSES liable, since no one is above the law? If any of the SCOTUSES violate them, who should enforce the rules, and what would be the punishment? (21) Q: Regarding the principles of federalism, state power, and our republic. This may be a loaded question, but I think we all want to hear from your perspective. The United States was founded on the principle of a republic consisting of independent states, where federal laws and state laws are independent and separate. This question is not meant to be political (I know that your political party affiliation is independent, and I respect that) . I'd like to use the current conviction of former President Donald Trump by New York State Court to learn about federal court limitations and potential over-reach.  Federalism, checks and balances: Assume this scenario: IF the US Supreme Court rules that a sitting president has Absolute Immunity, (which sounds like the power of a king), and further rules that the New York conviction must be retried, vacated, or even overruled, on the ground that the falsification of business records under New York Law is related to the FEDERAL election, even though the illegal act related to federal election deprived citizens their right to be informed, which is a FEDERAL crime, will the federal Absolute Immunity override New York state law, under the Supremacy Clause (since Trump wrote the check to reimburse the hush money after inauguration, presumably under Absolute Immunity protection)?  If the US Supreme Court indeed rules as such, what are the ramifications, in your opinion, for our foundational principles of independent state and federal judiciaries? Would that be an overreach by the federal judicial branch? What harm would Absolute Immunity do to the checks and balances of our government? Same scenario, same questions, but with Limited Immunity instead of Absolute Immunity. (22) Q: About civility, the prerequisite for democracy. The vitriol, the hatred, the partisanship, the mutual blaming... All of these are eating America up from inside. What do you think each citizen should do, to restore civility, respect for institutions, public office, healthy debates, and save our democracy?   –  Please SHARE it! Thank you. To read as a blog (coming soon) To watch as a video © Joanne Z. Tan   All rights reserved. ========================================================= - To stay in the loop, subscribe to our Newsletter - Download free Ebook (About 10 Plus Brand: In addition to the “whole 10 yards” of brand building, digital marketing, and content creation for business and personal brands. To contact us: 1-888-288-4533.) - Visit our Websites: https://10plusbrand.com/ https://10plusprofile.com/ Phone: 888-288-4533 - Find us online by clicking or follow these hashtags: #10PlusBrand #10PlusPodcast #JoanneZTan #10PlusInterviews  #BrandDNA #BeYourOwnBrand #StandForSomething #SuperBowlTVCommercials #PoemsbyJoanneTan #GenuineVideo #AIXD #AI Experience Design

Today's episode is especially exciting as we reflect on two unique events illustrating the incredible opportunities Albany Law School offers its students. Recently, Albany Law School held two events a week apart, with the Chief Judge of the New York State Court of Appeals as the headliner, hence the name Chief Week. Part one of Chief Week was the final round of the prestigious Domenick L. Gabrielli Appellate Advocacy Moot Court Competition, which was held in front of a panel of esteemed judges, including Chief Judge Rowan Wilson. Just days later Albany Law School welcomed back Chief Judge Wilson to speak to students alongside former Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman for the Chief Judge Lawrence H. Cooke State Constitutional Commentary Symposium as part two of Chief Week. The leaders of two Albany Law School groups that played a key role in making these incredible opportunities happen—Marie-Therese Witte, editor-in-chief of the Albany Law Review vol. 87, and Abraham V. Frangie, executive director of the Anthony V. Cardona ‘70 Moot Court Program—are here to discuss how those events unfolded.

Kim Masters and Matt Belloni examine the surprising decision made by the New York State Court of Appeals to overturn Harvey Weinstein's 2020 rape conviction.  Plus, Masters speaks to writer Justin Kuritzkes about the rollout of his first effort at writing a movie, Luca Guadagnino's Challengers. He talks about how the Zendaya-led film was inspired by a particular US Open match that turned him into a tennis obsessive. And he shares how he and his wife, Celine Song — known for her Oscar-nominated Past Lives — manage to keep their work separate from their relationship.

Got an opinion? On the iHeartRadio app, tap the red microphone to record & send us your thoughts. Don't have the app? Get it free here ---> https://news.iheart.com/apps/ Follow us: Instagram - wgyradio X - WGYMornings Facebook - 810wgy & WGYMornings

Got an opinion? On the iHeartRadio app, tap the red microphone to record & send us your thoughts. Don't have the app? Get it free here ---> https://news.iheart.com/apps/ Follow us: Instagram - wgyradio X - WGYMornings Facebook - 810wgy & WGYMornings

Damon Cheronis, an attorney with Cheronis & Parente LLC, joins Lisa Dent to talk about Harvey Weinstein’s 2020 rape conviction being overturned by the New York State Court of Appeals, what it means for his client, and why he feels Weinstein was deprived of his right to a fair trial. Follow The Lisa Dent Show […]

The New York State Court of Claims is often a below-the-radar court in the state court system. It rarely makes news. Its jurisdiction is limited to civil cases against the state and some of its entities. There are no jurors, so each case is decided by a judge. And since the judges are all appointed by the Governor, they never interact with the public in the way that judges campaigning for public office do. In a new Amici podcast, Acting Presiding Judge Richard E. Sise and Court of Claims Judges Catherine Leahy-Scott and Ramón Rivera demystify the court, explaining why it exists, what it does and how it does it. Transcript: https://ww2.nycourts.gov/sites/default/files/document/files/2024-03/Court%20of%20Claims%20final.pdf

Tisha Schuller welcomes Diane Burman, New York State Public Service Commissioner, to the Energy Thinks podcast. Listeners will hear Diane's thoughts about the personal, emotional, and unique relationship stakeholders have with energy. Diane also discusses her experience engaging in the hard conversations about the expectations of the energy future from New Yorkers who are paying attention now more than ever. Diane Burman currently serves as a Commissioner of the New York State Public Service Commission, which regulates the state's electric, gas, steam, water, and telecommunications utilities. She is also a member of the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, serving on committees related to critical infrastructure, natural gas, and pipeline safety. Prior to the Commission, Diane was with the New York State Senate since 2009, including serving as the Chief Counsel to the Republican Conference. Prior to her position with the Senate, she served as Special Counsel to the New York State Public Service Commission. Diane has held a number of other legal and management positions, including Executive Director of the New York State PTA, Assistant Executive Director of the Albany Jewish Community Center, and Director of Pro Bono Affairs for the New York State Bar Association. She has served in several high-level positions within state government, including Assistant Counsel with the Department of Economic Development, Assistant Attorney General in the Department of Law, Senior Court Attorney with the Unified-Court System, and as a judicial clerk for the New York State Court of Appeals. She was also an adjunct legal professor at Hofstra University and Adelphi University. Diane obtained her Bachelor of Arts degree from Molloy College and her Juris Doctor degree from Fordham University School of Law. She was admitted to the bar in 1992. A life-long New Yorker, Diane Burman currently resides in the Capital District with her family. Subscribe here for Tisha's weekly Both of These Things Are True email newsletter. Follow all things Adamantine Energy at www.energythinks.com. Thanks to Lindsey Slaughter and Kayla Chieves who make the Energy Thinks podcast possible. [Interview recorded on February 14, 2024]

The Government Law Center at Albany Law School hosted the third and final program in the series, Transcending Gender, Sex, and the Law, on December 7, 2023. In this program, panelist discussed the future of legal rights and protections for transgender, gender non-conforming, and intersex (TGNCI) people in New York State, including potential statutory reforms, regulatory reforms, and litigation that may impact rights and protections. Panelists also discussed lessons learned from other states and the role of New York State government and the broader legal community in upholding legal for TGNCI people. Participants: Prof. Ava Ayers (moderator) – Albany Law School Allie Bohm – New York Civil Liberties Union Shain Filcher – LGBT Bar Association of Greater NY Faris Ilyas – The NEW Pride Agenda Melissa Sklarz – Equality New York Hon. Seth M. Marnin (closing remarks) – New York State Court of Claims This series was presented with support from the Office of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion at Albany Law School.

The Miranda Warnings roundtable's December episode takes a critical look at the first cases in the 2023-24 term heard by the state's highest court. The panel analyzes recent arguments dealing with when a suspect is in custody and should be read Miranda rights and whether police can stop a bicyclist in the same manner as a motorist.The episode was recorded on Dec. 1 shortly after the death of U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Albany Law School professor and court watcher Vin Bonventre recounted O'Connor's wisdom.“She was a justice that really considered the practical realities. What are the impacts of the decisions of the court on real life on real human beings, whether we're talking about affirmative action, LGBTQ rights, and the separation of Church and State,” said Bonventre. “She was the swing vote on the court. She was a Conservative Republican, but she wasn't insane, she had a great deal of common sense. You look back at most of her decisions and say, boy, they were wise, very, very wise.”Political strategist Liz Benjamin reminds listeners not to forget the groundbreaking appointment of O'Connor to the court by President Ronald Reagan more than 40 years ago.“She had a very fascinating career. You look at the bench now and you don't think to yourself there was a time when there weren't women on this bench,'” she said. “Her breaking of the glass ceiling on the highest court in the nation is an accomplishment that we don't think about enough. It's worthwhile reading her obituary and remembering all that she accomplished. “Past NYSBA President and host David Miranda turned the attention to the New York State Court of Appeals, which has seen an increase in its caseload in the four months since Chief Judge Rowan Wilson assumed leadership of the court. Bonventre detailed his research for an upcoming article on the changes at the court.“I found that the court's caseload has increased by almost 50% since Chief Judge Wilson has been in charge of scheduling oral arguments,” he said. “Wilson has made it clear, while he was associate judge, and made it clear during his interviews for chief judge, that he thought the court ought to be hearing more cases, and they certainly are.”

Frank Morano discusses some of the hottest topics and gives his opinion. Frank talks about NYS making sure schools don't have mascots with Native American inspired names and then Frank talks about Time Magazine's list of best inventions of the year. Frank talks about safety in school and then Frank talks about the New York State Court of Appeals. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Albany Law Review and Government Law Center at Albany Law School hosted a panel discussion exploring judicial selection methods for state high courts employed across the nation. Panelists discussed how judicial selection methods can affect judicial independence, accountability, diversity, and public confidence. Panelists also discussed issues that can arise during the selection process and potential solutions to address these issues. The panel took place via Zoom on October 10, 2023.   Participants: Hon. Leslie E. Stein (ret.) '81 (moderator) — Director of the Government Law Center at Albany Law School and former Associate Judge of the New York State Court of Appeals John F. Kowal — Vice President of Program Initiatives at the Brennan Center for Justice Prof. Chad Oldfather — Professor of Law at Marquette University Law School Prof. Noah Rosenblum — Assistant Professor of Law at the New York University School of Law David J. Sachar — Director of the Center for Judicial Ethics at the National Center for State Courts

On today's show, Vanessa Simon discusses the Government at community level. Later, Rep. Mesha Mainor discusses Gov Kemp and the state of Georgia and the family policies and updates. Also, Jenin Younes discusses NCLA on Covid lawsuit. GUEST OVERVIEW: Jenin Younes is Litigation Counsel for the New Civil Liberties Alliance. Having always been a passionate advocate for individual liberties, Jenin spent the first part of her career as an appellate public defender, providing representation to indigent clients convicted of criminal offenses in New York City. In this capacity, she briefed and argued countless appeals in New York's Appellate Division, Second Department, and several cases in the New York State Court of Appeals.

The Government Law Center at Albany Law School, New York University School of Law, and the New York Fair Trial/Free Press Conference convened the 2023 Fair Trial/Free Press Conference: Local Media, the Law, and Alleged Police Misconduct on April 24, 2023. The conference combines a discussion of a hypothetical scenario with an overview of media law. A panel of judges, prosecutors, journalists, and attorneys discussed the legal, political, and ethical issues that arise in the fictional scenario after a reporter is arrested while covering a police-involved shooting. Panelists: Richard Chacón - Director of News Standards and Practices, NBC News Hon. Jill Konviser - Acting Justice, New York County Supreme Court, Criminal Term, First Judicial District Anne LaBarbera - Principal Attorney, Anne LaBarbera Professional Corporation Darren LaVerne - Partner, Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP Thomas Maier - Investigative Journalist, Newsday Hon. Robert M. Mandelbaum – Acting Justice, New York County Supreme Court, First Judicial District Hon. Shira A. Scheindlin (ret.) - Former Judge, United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, and Of Counsel, Stroock & Stroock & Lavan, LLP Tanvi Valsangikar - Attorney specializing in First Amendment and media law and co-host, SLANDERTOWN Steven Wu - Chief of the Appeals Division, Manhattan District Attorney's Office Moderators: Hon. Albert Rosenblatt (ret.) - Former Associate Judge, New York State Court of Appeals, and Counsel, McCabe & Mack LLP Rex Smith – Former Editor, Albany Times Union

Frank Morano brings you the issues that matter the most with style and wit in the Other Side of Midnight Local Spotlight. Frank discusses Hochul's Penn Station Tower plan, the plumbing problem that flushable wipes cause, the process to select and confirm a new Chief Judge of the New York State Court of Appeals finally continuing, and the scaffolding issue in New York. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

As we've been discussing for weeks here, the nomination of Hector LaSalle to be New York state's next chief judge is at a stalemate. Noah Rosenblum teaches law at New York University School of Law and has advocated for court reform in New York. He also clerked in the New York State Court of Appeals. He tells us why he thinks the nomination is dead.

Last week the New York State Senate Judiciary Committee voted to reject the nomination of Judge Hector LaSalle to serve as Chief Judge on the New York State Court of Appeals. New York State Senator Luis Sepúlveda believes the nomination should be advanced. He joins host Rich Schoenstein to discuss the status of the nomination, the candidate, the process and the path forward. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Thank you for joining another episode of the Albany Update. Last week, the Senate Judiciary Committee considered Gov. Kathy Hochul's nomination for Chief Judge of the New York State Court of Appeals. Progressives in the State Senate were not happy with the pick, and unsurprisingly the Judiciary Committee failed to recommend the candidate for a full floor vote in the Senate. We'll discuss. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/albanyupdate/support

Frank Morano brings you the issues that matter the most with style and wit in the Other Side of Midnight Local Spotlight. Frank discusses Mayor Adams spending a great deal of time blasting former Mayor Bill deBlasio, the Mayor of Wayne New Jersey wanting to raise his own salary from $18, 750 to $140,000, the state Senate Democrats attempting to block Governor Hochul's nomination of Hector LaSalle for chief judge of the New York State Court of Appeals, and the Mayor Adams and Curtis Sliwa feud over the rat problem. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We look once again at the epic battle for the Hector LaSalle nomination to be the chief judge of New York State Court of Appeals, the state's highest court. The selection by Gov. Kathy Hochul has earned the ire of progressives. We speak with one of the advocates who has been leading the fight against this nomination about the broad resistance.

David Paterson and Alan Dershowitz join the show to talk about Governor Kathy Hochul nominating the Honorable Hector D. LaSalle, Presiding Justice of New York Supreme Court's Second Department, as the next Chief Judge of the New York State Court of Appeals.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Frank Morano brings you the issues that matter the most with style and wit in the Other Side of Midnight Local Spotlight. Frank discusses today being his last show of the year 2022, filling in for Sid Rosengberg on the first hour of Sid and Friends, his solution for George Santos, Anthony Weiner's questions for George Santos on the Cats at Night Show, and several prominent labor unions coming out in forceful opposition of Governor Hochul's pick to lead the New York State Court of Appeals. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

New York Post Reporter Zach Williams joins John Catsimatidis and the "Cats at Night" crew to tell us what the heck is going on in Albany. Governor Kathy Hochul has not said whether she will sign or veto the pay raise bill. Plus Hochul is facing backlash over her nomination of Hector D. Lasalle to be Chief Judge of the New York State Court of Appeals. And to top it all off, a newly elected New York Congressman might not be who he says he is.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

During the early twentieth century New York State, with its settlement houses, muckraking journalists, labor unions and national political leaders like Theodore Roosevelt, was central to the political ferment of the Progressive Era. And in that time, the New York State Court of Appeals—the state' highest court--made vitally important decisions on the constitutional legitimacy of laws relating to public health, personal liberty, privacy, the regulation of businesses, working hours for women, and compensation for workers injured on the job. The Court of Appeals, Bruce Dearstyne argues in his new book, was in these years a crucible where new and complex public issues were debated and decided. New York State was large in population (and thus spoke loudly in Congress and the Electoral College) and was at the center of fierce debates over topics such as corporate power, labor rights, public health. In The Crucible of Public Policy: New York Courts in the Progressive Era (SUNY Press, 2022), Dearstyne argues that the court's pathbreaking decisions in the Progressive Era echo into our own times. Indeed, he concludes, it was second in importance only to the United States Supreme Court. Robert W. Snyder, Manhattan Borough Historian and professor emeritus of American Studies and Journalism at Rutgers University. Email: rwsnyder@rutgers.edu. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

During the early twentieth century New York State, with its settlement houses, muckraking journalists, labor unions and national political leaders like Theodore Roosevelt, was central to the political ferment of the Progressive Era. And in that time, the New York State Court of Appeals—the state' highest court--made vitally important decisions on the constitutional legitimacy of laws relating to public health, personal liberty, privacy, the regulation of businesses, working hours for women, and compensation for workers injured on the job. The Court of Appeals, Bruce Dearstyne argues in his new book, was in these years a crucible where new and complex public issues were debated and decided. New York State was large in population (and thus spoke loudly in Congress and the Electoral College) and was at the center of fierce debates over topics such as corporate power, labor rights, public health. In The Crucible of Public Policy: New York Courts in the Progressive Era (SUNY Press, 2022), Dearstyne argues that the court's pathbreaking decisions in the Progressive Era echo into our own times. Indeed, he concludes, it was second in importance only to the United States Supreme Court. Robert W. Snyder, Manhattan Borough Historian and professor emeritus of American Studies and Journalism at Rutgers University. Email: rwsnyder@rutgers.edu. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

During the early twentieth century New York State, with its settlement houses, muckraking journalists, labor unions and national political leaders like Theodore Roosevelt, was central to the political ferment of the Progressive Era. And in that time, the New York State Court of Appeals—the state' highest court--made vitally important decisions on the constitutional legitimacy of laws relating to public health, personal liberty, privacy, the regulation of businesses, working hours for women, and compensation for workers injured on the job. The Court of Appeals, Bruce Dearstyne argues in his new book, was in these years a crucible where new and complex public issues were debated and decided. New York State was large in population (and thus spoke loudly in Congress and the Electoral College) and was at the center of fierce debates over topics such as corporate power, labor rights, public health. In The Crucible of Public Policy: New York Courts in the Progressive Era (SUNY Press, 2022), Dearstyne argues that the court's pathbreaking decisions in the Progressive Era echo into our own times. Indeed, he concludes, it was second in importance only to the United States Supreme Court. Robert W. Snyder, Manhattan Borough Historian and professor emeritus of American Studies and Journalism at Rutgers University. Email: rwsnyder@rutgers.edu. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

During the early twentieth century New York State, with its settlement houses, muckraking journalists, labor unions and national political leaders like Theodore Roosevelt, was central to the political ferment of the Progressive Era. And in that time, the New York State Court of Appeals—the state' highest court--made vitally important decisions on the constitutional legitimacy of laws relating to public health, personal liberty, privacy, the regulation of businesses, working hours for women, and compensation for workers injured on the job. The Court of Appeals, Bruce Dearstyne argues in his new book, was in these years a crucible where new and complex public issues were debated and decided. New York State was large in population (and thus spoke loudly in Congress and the Electoral College) and was at the center of fierce debates over topics such as corporate power, labor rights, public health. In The Crucible of Public Policy: New York Courts in the Progressive Era (SUNY Press, 2022), Dearstyne argues that the court's pathbreaking decisions in the Progressive Era echo into our own times. Indeed, he concludes, it was second in importance only to the United States Supreme Court. Robert W. Snyder, Manhattan Borough Historian and professor emeritus of American Studies and Journalism at Rutgers University. Email: rwsnyder@rutgers.edu. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/public-policy

During the early twentieth century New York State, with its settlement houses, muckraking journalists, labor unions and national political leaders like Theodore Roosevelt, was central to the political ferment of the Progressive Era. And in that time, the New York State Court of Appeals—the state' highest court--made vitally important decisions on the constitutional legitimacy of laws relating to public health, personal liberty, privacy, the regulation of businesses, working hours for women, and compensation for workers injured on the job. The Court of Appeals, Bruce Dearstyne argues in his new book, was in these years a crucible where new and complex public issues were debated and decided. New York State was large in population (and thus spoke loudly in Congress and the Electoral College) and was at the center of fierce debates over topics such as corporate power, labor rights, public health. In The Crucible of Public Policy: New York Courts in the Progressive Era (SUNY Press, 2022), Dearstyne argues that the court's pathbreaking decisions in the Progressive Era echo into our own times. Indeed, he concludes, it was second in importance only to the United States Supreme Court. Robert W. Snyder, Manhattan Borough Historian and professor emeritus of American Studies and Journalism at Rutgers University. Email: rwsnyder@rutgers.edu. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

During the early twentieth century New York State, with its settlement houses, muckraking journalists, labor unions and national political leaders like Theodore Roosevelt, was central to the political ferment of the Progressive Era. And in that time, the New York State Court of Appeals—the state' highest court--made vitally important decisions on the constitutional legitimacy of laws relating to public health, personal liberty, privacy, the regulation of businesses, working hours for women, and compensation for workers injured on the job. The Court of Appeals, Bruce Dearstyne argues in his new book, was in these years a crucible where new and complex public issues were debated and decided. New York State was large in population (and thus spoke loudly in Congress and the Electoral College) and was at the center of fierce debates over topics such as corporate power, labor rights, public health. In The Crucible of Public Policy: New York Courts in the Progressive Era (SUNY Press, 2022), Dearstyne argues that the court's pathbreaking decisions in the Progressive Era echo into our own times. Indeed, he concludes, it was second in importance only to the United States Supreme Court. Robert W. Snyder, Manhattan Borough Historian and professor emeritus of American Studies and Journalism at Rutgers University. Email: rwsnyder@rutgers.edu. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On this episode, Devin and Lauren visit New York's oldest continuously operating courthouse, located in the City of Johnstown in Fulton County. Built in 1772 by Sir William Johnson, the Fulton County Courthouse has seen the transition from British colonial rule to the establishment of the United States, and 250 years of legal history. Among the important judges to hold court at the courthouse include Daniel Cady, the father of Elizabeth Cady Stanton, who was heavily influenced by legal cases which demonstrated how few rights women had in the 19th Century. On September 8, 2022, the courthouse will officially celebrate its 250th birthday, with the New York State Court of Appeals conducting its business there for the first time. Marker of Focus: Suffrage Pioneer, Johnstown, Fulton County Guests: Hon. J. Gerard McAuliffe, Jr., Fulton County Family Court judge; Hon. Albert M. Rosenblatt, retired New York State Court of Appeals judge; Samantha Hall-Saladino, Fulton County historian; Noel Levee, City of Johnstown historian A New York Minute In History is a production of the New York State Museum, WAMC, and Archivist Media, with support from the William G. Pomeroy Foundation. This episode was produced by Jesse King. Our theme is "Begrudge" by Darby. Further Reading: Historic Courthouses of the State of New York, Julia Carlson Rosenblatt and Albert M. Rosenblatt (2006). Fulton County Courthouse, The Historical Society of the Courts of the State of New York. The Letters of Daniel Cady Elizabeth Cady Stanton: An American Life, Lori D. Ginzberg (2010). Building a Revolutionary State: The Legal Transformation of New York, 1776-1783, Howard Pashman, Esq. (2018). Follow Along Devin: Welcome to A New York Minute in History. I'm Devin Lander, the New York state historian. Lauren: And I'm Lauren Roberts, the historian for Saratoga County. On this episode, we're going to focus on a William G. Pomeroy marker located in the city of Johnstown, in Fulton County. The marker sits on the lawn of the Fulton County Courthouse, located on the corner of West Main Street and North William Street, and it reads: “Suffrage Pioneer, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, 1815-1902. Her father practiced law here in early 19th Century, inspiring her fight for women's rights. William G. Pomeroy Foundation, 2017.” I'm guessing most of our listeners have heard of Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and know about the incredibly important role she played in the women's suffrage movement. But they may not be familiar with her life prior to the famous Seneca Falls Convention which took place in 1848, and produced the Declaration of Sentiments, a document which listed freedoms and rights that women should be entitled to, including the right to vote. In Elizabeth's early life, she grew up in Johnstown, New York, where her father Daniel Cady practiced law. It was her exposure to his law practice, and the firsthand experiences Elizabeth had in his law office and in the courthouse, that showed her how poorly women were treated in the eyes of the law in the early 19th Century. Now, that's a huge claim to fame for any courthouse. But for this particular courthouse, its association with Elizabeth Cady Stanton and her father Daniel is only one piece of the puzzle in the big picture story it has to tell. Devin: That's right, and the William G. Pomeroy Foundation marker is only one of the markers that exists in front of the Fulton County Cou

Civics 101 teamed up with the Outside/In podcast to bring you the story of Happy, an Asian elephant living in the Bronx Zoo.Lawyers had petitioned the New York State Court of Appeals for a writ of Habeas Corpus; a legal maneuver that could have freed Happy and set a new precedent for animal rights. But in a ruling out mid-June 2022, the court decided: Happy isn't going anywhere.  In this quick update to our previous episode (listen here if you haven't already)  Hannah debriefs with Outside/In host Nate Hegyi on the 5-2 split decision, and what it means for the future of animal rights. 

Anybody who supports the show RIGHT NOW, during our June 2020 Fund Drive, will be entered to win a $500 Airbnb gift card, and will receive an adorable limited-edition Outside/In axolotl sticker.Click here to donate to Outside/In right now.  A few weeks ago, we teamed up with the Civics 101 podcast to bring you the story of Happy, an Asian elephant living in the Bronx Zoo.Lawyers had petitioned the New York State Court of Appeals for a writ of Habeas Corpus; a legal maneuver that could have freed Happy and set a new precedent for animal rights. But in a ruling out this week, the court has decided: Happy isn't going anywhere. In this quick update to our previous episode (listen here if you haven't already)  Nate and Hannah debrief on the 5-2 split decision, and what it means for the future of animal rights. Featuring: Maneesha Deckha SUPPORTOutside/In is made possible with listener support. Click here to become a sustaining member of Outside/In. Subscribe to our FREE newsletter.Follow Outside/In on Instagram or Twitter, or join our private discussion group on Facebook LINKSRead more about this week's ruling, and what it may mean for animal rights, in this article  from Slate. CREDITS Hosts: Nate Hegyi and Hannah McCarthyReported and produced by: Nate HegyiMixer: Taylor QuimbyEditing by Taylor QuimbyRebecca Lavoie is our Executive ProducerMusic for this episode by Fabien Tell, Bill Ferngren, Sarah the Illstrumentalist, and Alexandra WoodwardOur theme music is by Breakmaster Cylinder.Outside/In is a production of New Hampshire Public Radio

Oklahoma's legislature passed the country's strictest abortion bill. The ban goes further than Texas' abortion law, and if signed by Republican Governor Kevin Stitt it would take effect immediately.After the New York State Court of Appeals declared maps drawn by the legislature unconstitutional, a court-appointed “special master” released a new set of Congressional districts for the state. The Brennan Center's Michael Li joins us to discuss the chaos that erupted from New York's newly drawn maps.And in headlines: the white gunman in Buffalo, New York's racially motivated mass shooting appeared in state court, SpaceX reportedly paid $250,000 to settle a sexual misconduct claim against Elon Musk, and clusters of monkeypox have been reported in the U.S. and Europe. Show Notes:Insider: “A SpaceX flight attendant said Elon Musk exposed himself and propositioned her for sex, documents show. The company paid $250,000 for her silence” – https://bit.ly/3sLFYgXVote Save America – https://www.votesaveamerica.com/ Follow us on Instagram – https://www.instagram.com/whataday/For a transcript of this episode, please visit crooked.com/whataday

All Local Morning for 04/28/22

Thank you for joining this week's edition of the Albany Update. Multiple news reports last week indicated that the transgender deception is spreading throughout America, but the good news is that we're also witnessing resistance to the lies and a stand for what we know to be biologically and biblically true. Then, the New York State Court of Appeals, in a narrow decision, found fantasy sport betting constitutional. Dissenters however, see the decision as another case of judicial activism. Following that, we were physically present in the State Capitol this week after it was recently reopened to the public. While there, we picked up some intel about another abortion bill that may be on the move in the coming days. Considering the community that our organization represents, you can imagine our surprise when Governor Kathy Hochul and Andrew Cuomo, a former governor, both demonstrated support from members of the clergy. The Left certainly has organized within certain segments of the faith community. Finally, those on Long Island will want to listen up. There's a special election in a portion of Nassau County that you'll want to be aware of and engaged in leading up to April 7. Let's get started. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/albanyupdate/support

In this episode, Robert Fojo discusses and analyzes the various contradictions in the COVID-19 policies articulated by public health officials, including Dr. Anthony Fauci, a recent decision by a New York State court enjoining a state-wide mask mandate, the United States Supreme Court's decision staying OSHA's vaccine mandate for large employers, the common theme running through all of these cases that presents optimism that these court decisions are trending in the right direction, and how people can take back their rights by focusing on local government issues.

Videos https://brandnewtube.com/watch/sonia-elijah-interviews-efrat-fenigson-from-israel_Ws1DDYkiqAOXdis.html     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWN2PV4v0lk&t=8s   Researchers find new link between a disrupted body clock and inflammatory diseases RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences, November 25, 2021 New research from RCSI has demonstrated the significant role that an irregular body clock plays in driving inflammation in the body's immune cells, with implications for the most serious and prevalent diseases in humans. The circadian body clock generates 24-hour rhythms that keep humans healthy and in time with the day/night cycle. This includes regulating the rhythm of the body's own (innate) immune cells called macrophages. When these cell rhythms are disrupted (due to things like erratic eating/sleeping patterns or shift work), the cells produce molecules which drive inflammation. This can lead to chronic inflammatory diseases such as heart disease, obesity, arthritis, diabetes and cancer, and also impact our ability to fight infection. (NEXT) Social media tied to higher risk of depression Massachusetts General Hospital, November 23, 2021 The latest in a spate of studies investigating links between use of social media and depression suggests the two go hand in hand. The new study follows a yearlong look at social media use and onset of depression among nearly 5,400 adults. None reported even mild depression at the start. But in multiple surveys over 12 months, depression status had worsened in some respondents, the study found. The risk rose with use of three hugely popular social media sites: Snapchat, Facebook and TikTok. None showed any signs of depression at the first survey. But after completing at least one similar follow-up, nearly 9% showed a "significant" increase in scores for depression risk. (NEXT) Havacado or two. Study finds eating lots of the fruit has public health import Randomized controlled trial found that families with high avocado consumption self-reported reduced caloric intake and an overall healthier diet University of California at San Diego, November 29, 2021 In a novel study, researchers conducted a randomized controlled trial comparing the potential health effects between families that consumed a low allotment of avocados (three per week) and families that consumed a high allotment (14 per week) over six months. They found that the high avocado allotment families self-reported lower caloric consumption, reducing their intake of other foods, including dairy, meats and refined grains and their associated negative nutrients, such as saturated fat and sodium. (NEXT) Crabapple supplements could help cut cholesterol, China study discovers Crabapple extract has been show to lower cholesterol in obese mice which were fed a high-fat diet, researchers in China have revealed. Beijing and Shanghai universities, November 30, 2021 The study points out that statins are the major therapy for hypercholesterolaemia and for the prevention of atherosclerosis. However, there is some evidence to suggest that they may increase the risk of diabetes, muscle pain, liver damage and cause other side effects. Crabapple has long been used for the treatment of diarrhoea, indigestion and other digestive diseases in traditional Chinese medicine, and its antioxidant benefits have frequently been studied. (NEXT) Aerobic exercise preserves brain volume and improves cognitive function Wake Forest School of Medicine, November 30, 2021 Using a new MRI technique, researchers found that adults with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) who exercised four times a week over a six-month period experienced an increase in brain volume in specific, or local, areas of the brain, but adults who participated in aerobic exercise experienced greater gains than those who just stretched. (NEXT) Are you a morning or an evening person? It might be due to your gut bacteria University of Haifa (Israel), November 22, 2021 A new study by the University of Haifa reveals that certain gut bacteria differ between morning and evening people. It is already known that there are some genetic differences between larks and owls, but research in fruit flies in our laboratory inspired us to test the impact of gut bacteria on human chronotypes," says Prof. Eran Tauber. Fecal samples were collected from 91 individuals in order to extract and sequence the bacterial DNA. Analysis of the DNA sequences from each sample allowed identification of all gut bacterial species and quantify their abundance. The chronotype of the participants was determined based on their self-reported sleep times during the weekend (waking up without an alarm clock). (OTHER NEXT) Sonia Elijah interviews Efrat Fenigson from Israel Efrat Fenigson, a chief marketing officer and human rights activist from Tel Aviv, Israel, candidly speaks to Sonia about how 'Covid' has been marketed, as if it were a brand, by world governments and the mainstream media. She talks about the general protest movement in Israel and how it evolved from anti-corruption to anti-lockdown/green-pass demonstrations. She gives insight into the psychological state of fear that many Israelis are accustomed to living under making them compliant in obeying the draconian Covid rules and to not question the mass vaccine rollout. (NEXT) Foreclosure Looms for Homeowners Who Thought They'd Won, Thanks to Top New York Court Ruling Sam Mellings The City and New York Focus, November 30, 2021 Christine Fife was “speechless with joy” when she won her foreclosure case in January 2020, she recalled, believing her decade under threat of foreclosure in her Upper West Side condo was finally over. Now, though, Fife is once again facing the seizure of the apartment she has owned since 1990. In February 2021, New York's top court issued a decision that eliminated a path that New York homeowners had used for years to fight foreclosure. The decision in Freedom Mortgage Corporation v. Engel allowed Fife's lender to renew its foreclosure suit against her. “They said it was OK. How can they change their mind?” Fife asked during an interview with New York Focus and THE CITY. Across New York State, homeowners who believed that their cases had been settled in their favor are now once again facing foreclosure due to the Engel decision. Many are in danger of losing their homes, even as two bills aimed at protecting owners wend their way through the state Legislature. Case Reopened In New York, if a borrower misses a mortgage payment, the lender is allowed to demand the entire remaining balance immediately and then move to foreclose after 120 days, if the money owed remains unpaid.. But a lender must start the legal proceedings within six years of first demanding full payment, or the suit becomes invalid. Until recently, the clock kept ticking until the lender informed the borrower that they were no longer seeking foreclosure. In Fife's case, the lender had never done so. The bank sued Fife twice: first in 2010, a case the lender claims it later voluntarily withdrew, and again in 2017. Her lawyers, representing Fife pro bono, successfully argued that the bank's second foreclosure suit was barred by the six-year limit and got it dismissed. But the Engel decision changed the rules. The Court of Appeals found that voluntarily ending a foreclosure suit stops the clock on the six-year time limit — even if the homeowner is never notified. The court's ruling applies retroactively to any foreclosure cases ongoing or still open to appeal at the time the decision was issued. Following the ruling, many foreclosures that expired under the six-year limit have been reopened or appealed to higher courts. Holly Meyer, a Suffolk County lawyer who represented one of the defendants in the Engel case, estimated that the number of affected homeowners could be in the tens of thousands. Fife's was one of them. In April 2021, the bank moved to renew its foreclosure suit against her — and the trial judge cited the Engel ruling as a reason to rehear the case. “I was shocked at this decision, because I had put all my faith in [the foreclosure court's] initial decision, which was in my favor,” Fife said. With Fife's best defense gone, her hopes for avoiding foreclosure now appear slim, her legal counsel acknowledged. ‘Incompetently' Managed Loans It's not uncommon for lenders to allow their right to foreclose to expire, according to real estate lawyers. “There are millions of residential loans being serviced somewhat incompetently, so these things do sometimes slip between the cracks,” said Joshua Stein, a commercial real estate lawyer. Real estate industry supporters of the Court of Appeals' decision say it made little sense for a foreclosure case to fail because of what they consider a clerical error — one that basically lets borrowers shirk their debts. “The idea that you should still be at risk because you haven't repaid the money you borrowed doesn't strike me as egregious,” Stein said. Homeowner attorneys say that cases get dropped all the time in the legal system because of technical violations of procedural requirements, and that foreclosure cases should be no different. “If you have somebody on trial for murder, but you find that their constitutional rights were violated, they go free. It's the same thing here,” Meyer said. Chief Judge Conflicted? The day after the Court of Appeals ruled on the Engel case, the law firm Greenberg Traurig, which had represented two of the plaintiffs, cheered what it called a “ground shifting” victory for lenders. “Statewide application will likely protect billions in assets for mortgage holders,” its press release claimed. Chief Judge Janet DiFiore, who wrote the majority opinion in Engel, was a Greenberg Traurig client at the time that she ruled in favor of their bank clients in that and other cases, the New York Law Journal reported in April. The firm defended her in a suit brought by judges forced into retirement as a cost-cutting measure. Defense attorneys said they had not been informed of the potential conflict for the judge who ruled against their clients. “The law's not on our side anymore, and that means that there are a number of people who will be facing foreclosure when they wouldn't have faced it a couple of years ago,” Julie Howe, a senior staff attorney at the New York Legal Assistance Group, who is representing Fife pro bono, told New York Focus. Then-Governor Andrew Cuomo swears in Janet DiFiore as the new chief judge of the New York State Court of Appeals, Feb. 8, 2016. Governor Andrew Cuomo's Office Jacob Inwald, director of foreclosure prevention at Legal Services NYC, said many of the foreclosure cases affected by the Engel decision originally stemmed from the real estate crash of 2008 and freewheeling lending leading up to it. Fife, for instance, had borrowed $731,000 against her apartment in April 2007 to pay living expenses after a disabling injury and divorce. Monthly payments were nearly $5,000, with adjustable rate mortgage that started at 8% annual interest, potentially rising as high as 15%. “I didn't know anything about mortgages,” Fife said. “I was just so happy that I was able to live on another day. I was probably the easiest take on the block.” Within a year, the bank alleged that she had fallen behind on her mortgage payments — kicking off foreclosure proceedings that her loan's holder, Wilmington Trust Association, has resurrected more than a decade later. ‘It's Really Scary' Rockland County resident Susan Azcuy is in a situation similar to Fife's — believing that she'd survived foreclosure only to find the cloud hanging over her once again. For 23 years, Azcuy and her husband kept up with the mortgage payments on their house in Pomona, including a 2005 refinancing, for which she took on a debt of $210,000 at 5.75% interest. But in 2012, after Azcuy's husband was fired from his job, they missed a payment and their lender quickly moved to foreclose. The bank voluntarily withdrew the suit in March 2016 for technical reasons but did not notify Azcuy, refiling the case the next month. It went to trial in 2019, and Azcuy won, after a key prosecution witness failed to show up. ‘We're still struggling. I was very, very hopeful to be able to continue living here.' Before Engel, this would have been the end of the case, since more than six years had elapsed since the 2012 foreclosure suit. But thanks to Engel, the six-year clock restarted in 2016 — giving Azcuy's lender another chance to sue. Due to penalties and foreclosure fees, Azcuy now owes nearly $400,000, just shy of double the amount of the 2005 refinancing. Efforts to reach a settlement or a modification with the bank have been unsuccessful, according to Azcuy's attorney, Derek Tarson of the Legal Aid Society of Rockland County. If the bank brings another foreclosure lawsuit, which Tarson believes is likely, Azcuy will not be able to rely on the defense that more than six years have passed. “It's really scary. We're still struggling,” Azcuy said. “I was very, very hopeful to be able to continue living here.” Lawmakers Respond State lawmakers have introduced two bills seeking to reverse some of Engel's effects. One measure, sponsored by Sen. Kevin Thomas (D-Nassau) and Assemblymember Helene Weinstein (D-Brooklyn), would require lenders to inform borrowers if they withdraw their demands for payment, since that action serves to stop the clock on the six-year countdown. If lenders withdraw the lawsuit but fail to notify the borrowers, the clock would keep ticking — a return to the status quo before Engel. The bill would also forbid lenders from foreclosing if any part of the loan had previously expired — a measure that would bar reviving suits against homeowners like Fife and Azcuy. The legislature is also considering a second bill, sponsored by Sen. James Sanders (D-Queens) and Assemblymember Latrice Walker (D-Brooklyn). This bill would prevent lenders from discontinuing a demand for full payment, stopping the six-year countdown clock, without the consent of the borrower. The measure also would start the countdown from the time that a mortgage holder missed a payment. Though meant to protect homeowners, the Sanders-Walker bill could actually incentivize lenders to begin foreclosure more quickly, one foreclosure defense attorney told New York Focus. “If the clock is ticking, all plaintiffs are going to want to do is get their case started,” the attorney, who asked not to be named, said. Sanders rejected the critique. “I don't think that you can further incentivize the financial institutions” to foreclose after the leeway granted them by Engel, he said. Whether either of the bills would apply retroactively to homeowners like Fife and Azcuy is an open question. “It may not be able to help those, but it is our desire,” Sanders said. “We will get guidance on whether we can do that.” Sanders said that he has spoken to Gov. Kathy Hochul and legislative leaders about his bill, and while they have not endorsed it, he said they are open to supporting it. (A Hochul spokesperson said the governor “will review all legislation that reaches her desk.” “We are making excellent progress with both, and we expect good things in the coming days,” Sanders said. (NEXT) Israeli study says COVID shot efficacy decreases dramatically after 3 months, calls for boosters British Medical Journal, November 24, 2021 A study published by The BMJ today finds a gradual increase in the risk of COVID-19 infection from 90 days after receiving a second dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. The study was carried out by the Research Institute of Leumit Health Services in Israel. Israel was one of the first countries to roll out a large scale COVID-19 vaccination campaign in December 2020, but which has seen a resurgence of infections since June 2021. The findings confirm that the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine provided excellent protection in the initial weeks after vaccination, but suggest that protection wanes for some individuals with time. To do this, the researchers examined electronic health records for 80,057 adults (average age 44 years) who received a PCR test at least three weeks after their second injection, and had no evidence of previous COVID-19 infection. Of these 80,057 participants, 7,973 (9.6%) had a positive test result. These individuals were then matched to negative controls of the same age and ethnic group who were tested in the same week. The rate of positive results increased with time elapsed since a second dose. For example, across all age groups 1.3% of participants tested positive 21-89 days after a second dose, but this increased to 2.4% after 90-119 days; 4.6% after 120-149 days; 10.3% after 150-179 days; and 15.5% after 180 days or more. (NEXT) 31,014 Deaths 2,890,600 Injuries Following COVID Shots in European Database of Adverse Reactions as Young, Previously Healthy People Continue to Die Health Impact News The European Union database of suspected drug reaction reports is EudraVigilance, and they are now reporting 31,014 fatalities, and 2,890,600 injuries, following COVID-19 injections. A Health Impact News subscriber from Europe reminded us that this database maintained at EudraVigilance is only for countries in Europe who are part of the European Union (EU), which comprises 27 countries. The total number of countries in Europe is much higher, almost twice as many, numbering around 50. (There are some differences of opinion as to which countries are technically part of Europe.) Total reactions for the mRNA vaccine Tozinameran (code BNT162b2, Comirnaty) from BioNTech/ Pfizer: 14,526 deaths and 1,323,370 injuries to 20/11/2021 Total reactions for the mRNA vaccine mRNA-1273 (CX-024414) from Moderna: 8,518 deaths and 390,163 injuries to 20/11/2021 Total reactions for the vaccine AZD1222/VAXZEVRIA (CHADOX1 NCOV-19) from Oxford/AstraZeneca: 6,145 deaths and 1,075,335 injuries to 20/11/2021 Total reactions for the COVID-19 vaccine JANSSEN (AD26.COV2.S) from Johnson & Johnson: 1,825 deaths and 101,732 injuries to 20/11/2021 (NEXT) Censorship = dictatorship Dr. Jessica Rose, November 29, 2021 So the censorship continues. I did a very detailed and informative interview with Frank McCaughey of Ireland on the subject of the pointlessness, potential harms and dangers with mass injecting children during this ‘pandemic' with the known non-sterilizing COVID-19 injectable products. And it has been remove Let's check out what YouTube's Community Guidelines are, shall we? YouTube's Community Guidelines: These determine what content is allowed on YouTube and help make YouTube a safe place to foster community. A safe place to foster community, eh? What kind of community are you thinkin' ‘bout there, Youtube? A community akin to an enslaved, dead-eyed mass of hypnotized automatons? If I may: no thanks on that. I'd rather live on that cat Island. So, for those of you who didn't get to see the video (I imagine that is all of you since it was up for less than 24 hours), I talked at length about the ‘don't's of injecting pre-pubescent children with experimental products for which the ingredient list is a big secret for a ‘disease' that they do not succumb to. Ah, I see now. It was because I mentioned Ivermectin. Boy. Youtube. Get with the program! Read some studies for crying out loud! And update your censorship guidelines! Make them reflect the scientific truth and not the weird false dictates of singular beings who feast on the ‘community' to increase their ‘power'. Here's what I found in their COVID-19 medical misinformation policy. Treatment misinformation: Content that encourages the use of home remedies, prayer, or rituals in place of medical treatment such as consulting a doctor or going to the hospital Content that claims that there's a guaranteed cure for COVID-19 Content that recommends use of Ivermectin or Hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19 Claims that Hydroxychloroquine is an effective treatment for COVID-19 Categorical claims that Ivermectin is an effective treatment for COVID-19 Claims that Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine are safe to use in the treatment COVID-19 Other content that discourages people from consulting a medical professional or seeking medical advice Ok. I want to work backwards through the italicized points, if I may. 1. Hey Youtube. I AM a medical sciences professional. This IS my consultation. Doesn't that make your dictate of discouraging ‘consulting a medical professional' moot? I am not only not discouraging this, in addition to encouraging this, I am this. 2. Hey Youtube. GET WITH THE PROGRAM. Ivermectin has been affiliated with Nobel-ity. It's not only been awarded a prize for its safe use as an anti-parastic for decades and been doled out to literally billions of people, (including pregnant women and children) with no ill effects, it's has an excessively successful safety profile as an off-label drug in the context of COVID-19.¹ 3. It has also been clinically-tested and proven effective in the context of COVID-19 as an off-label drug - which is more than we can say about the clot shots, eh?²³⁴⁵⁶⁷⁸⁹¹⁰¹¹ 4. Based on points, 1, 2 and 3, I would recommend the off-label use of Ivermectin. As a Medical Scientist. Oh and by the way, aren't you violating your own ‘Community Standards' with your point on a ‘guaranteed cure for COVID-19'? You guys are so sure that your injections are the only way to deal with this situation. Doesn't that imply that this guarantees a cure? No wait. It doesn't. But what it does do is set a precedent and instigate a thought: there will never be a cure for COVID-19. It's incurable. Which is: true. But it's also no worse than the flu in the non-vulnerable, which is most people. Including children. So we don't need to seek a ‘cure'. Just like we don't need to seek a ‘cure' for the common cold or the flu. That's one of the things that our bloody immune systems are for and very good it - preventing disease. Viruses are EVERYWHERE. ALL THE TIME. It's not a reason to freak out. Educate yourself and others on this. It about high time people learned that we are constantly engaging and have co-evolved with viruses and bacteria for the entirety of our existences. It's what we are.¹² Our genome is 7% retrovirus. If we attempt to destroy this magnificence then we are not only stupid, but we will be destroyed in turn. Leave the immune system alone. Or rather, optimize it. Be healthy. Avoid toxins. As much as you can. Pretty simple. So there you are Youtube. You have been brought up-to-date. Now, I don't like simply bitching about stuff, even though it does feel good, so I wanted to bring it to everyone's attention that you can fight to have your content re-instated once it has been removed. However, it is not a common occurrence to have a video re-instated once it has been censored. The ones that do get re-instated typically are ones that were erroneously taken down. I think that the Youtube overlords would argue that since they are paid to enforce the dictate narrative, they cannot stand behind science and truth, and therefore, I think they would hold fast to their ‘claims' that Ivermectin is dangerous and ineffective. (NEXT) Why aren't healthcare workers speaking out about the catastrophe caused by the vaccines? Steve Kirsch, November 23, 2021 Everyone thinks that if the jabs were really dangerous, doctors and other healthcare workers would be speaking out about it. They are wrong. Here are the four main reasons they do not speak out.Two important things you need to know: 1.All the kids were recently vaccinated. 2. Kids that age NEVER get tachycardia (i.e., the medical experts I've talked to have never seen it before in their careers). Here are some reasons very few people are speaking out: 1. Delegated trust. People trust their doctors, the doctors trust other doctors and ultimately the CDC. Nobody is independently verifying the CDC is telling the truth. Doctors are really really bad in critically reading scientific studies. Mask guidelines are the PERFECT example of this. There isn't any scientific proof (well-done randomized trial) that masks work. Yet very few question the narrative (and those that do are ostracized). So everyone basically goes with the flow and the whole thing is a positive feedback loop despite zero scientific basis. See my article Masks don't work and read the accolades in the Nature article. All these experts who hailed the study never read it with a critical eye and lack the skills to do so. This is how misinformation propagates. 2.Fear of job loss. Nobody wants to lose their job. Look what happened to Deborah Conrad and others who speak out. Fired within hours after speaking out. So the lab technicians who are now seeing kids with tachycardia just keep their mouth shut. They know something is very wrong, but their job is more important. Besides, if they spoke out, it wouldn't make any difference since they are just a lab technician. Doctors have a similar problem. The medical system, despite claims of physician autonomy, actually offers very little, as it takes very little to be thrown out of the system. Medicare, the FDA, a state medical board, a malpractice insurer, the DEA, a hospital medical staff, an employer - you only have to cross one of these to have your career ruined. Combine that with the idea that most physicians wouldn't be willing to stand against a medical establishment agency such as the CDC (the ones who will have long since been ostracized) and that to do so would require a huge amount of energy and time spent on medical paper research to make a case (and most docs don't have time for that) and that most of medicine is necessarily a form of group think anyway. Then add on to it that the policy makers in large medical corporations roles are more immediately to protect the interests of the corporation than to "save the world," and you arrive at our current situation. 3.Belief that COVID is even worse than the vaccine injuries. Many people are deceived by erroneous reports that the number of vaccine cases (e.g., of myocarditis) are occurring far less often now that the vaccines have been rolled out. Dr. John Su is the big culprit here because he's never told the world that VAERS is under-reported. The pediatric cardiologists know what is going on, but they aren't going to say anything due to #1. So I see doctors tweeting the myth that “sure, there is myo after the vaccine, but the rates due to COVID are worse so the vaccine is the better of the two options.” 4.Belief that the injuries are really rare. I know a doctor who treats vaccine injured patients. He has no clue whether these are every single vaccine injured patient in the US or he's only seeing a tiny fraction of the injuries. He believes he's seeing them all so writes it off as just “coincidence” and “bad luck” since if it was the vaccine, the CDC would have spotted it. 5. Cognitive dissonance/trust in authority figures. They are so convinced the vaccines are safe (since nobody else is speaking out), that any adverse events that happen must be due to something else. Positive feedback loop. 6.Belief that they can treat you for your vaccine side effects, but that they can't treat you if you have COVID. So lesser of two evils. And of course, they think no early treatments work, so they think they are doing you a favor by telling you to get the vaccine. 7.Belief that there is no viable alternative for treating COVID and that the vaccines work. So even 100,000 dead or injured people is better than 750,000 dead people from COVID. 8. Trust in the NIH and CDC. If it was a problem, the CDC would tell people. Telling people isn't their job. Their job is to follow the direction set by the experts. 9.Fear of being ostracized. People who do research fear if they speak out they would be labelled as anti-vaxers and their research would thus be discredited. 10.Critical thinkers have been fired. Hospitals and medical facilities have already fired vaccine hesitant employees per vaccine mandates thereby self selecting for vax believers. 11. They think that the side-effects show that the vaccine is “working.” This is more of a patient thing. It's how the patients look at their adverse events… as a positive thing. (You really can't make this stuff up.) 12.They are being paid to look the other way. The federal government gave “grants” (aka BRIBES) to hospitals and physicians to promote the vaccines. If they speak out against them now, the government will demand the grants are repaid. [A physician reported this to me on Telegram. You really can't make this stuff up.] 13. They will lose their research funding if they publish their results.

The Albany Law Review, Vol. 84 presents its 2021 symposium: Grand Questions of the U.S. Constitution. Over this past year, we were faced with a global pandemic, tumultuous elections, and a fight against racial injustice. These events have raised important questions surrounding the U.S. Constitution. The symposium will examine how the Constitution has endured thus far, how it compares to those of other nations, whether there is a need for reform, and if such reform means altering the Supreme Court. Moderator Judge Rowan D. Wilson; Associate Judge, New York State Court of Appeals Panelists Ava Ayers - Director, Government Law Center; Assistant Professor, Albany Law School Tom Ginsburg - Leo Spitz Professor of International Law, Ludwig and Hilde Wolf Research Scholar, and Professor of Political Science, University of Chicago Jessica Knouse '04 - Professor, University of Toledo College of Law Evan Wolfson - Founder, Freedom to Marry More about the Albany Law Review: http://www.albanylawreview.org/Pages/home.aspx

Mar. 24, 2021 - The immediate retirement of New York State Court of Appeals Judge Paul Feinman on Tuesday leaves another vacancy on the top court to fill in 2021. Vin Bonventre, Justice Robert H. Jackson Distinguished Professor of Law at Albany Law School and Editor of the New York Court Watcher blog, gave his analysis of Feinman's time on the court and the impact his retirement has.

Featuring guest speaker, the Honorable Helen E. Freedman (Ret.), who served 36 years on the New York State Court bench.   In Episode 6 of Notorious, we discuss the case of Daimler A.G. v. Bauman. This case addressed the issue of personal jurisdiction.  A German corporation, Daimler A.G., was being sued in California federal court for injuries allegedly caused by Daimler's conduct that took place entirely outside the United States. Writing for an 8-1 majority of the U.S. Supreme Court, Justice Ginsburg determined that the California court could not exercise personal jurisdiction predicated on the California contacts of an American subsidiary of Daimler.  The Court found that doing so would violate the limits imposed by federal due process.  Justice Sotomayor filed a separate opinion, concurring in judgment. The Honorable Helen E. Freedman (Ret.), who served for 36 years on the New York State Court bench, joined by Patterson Belknap attorneys Michelle Bufano, Rachel Sherman, and Tom Kurland, discuss the Court's prior decisions on personal jurisdiction, Justice Ginsburg's majority opinion, and the impact of her legal legacy on personal jurisdiction jurisprudence. Related Resources: For a selection of Justice Ginsburg's writings, see Decisions and Dissents of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg:  A Selection, edited by Corey Brettschneider. For more information about Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP, see www.pbwt.com. For information about becoming a guest on Notorious, email Michelle Bufano. For questions or more information about Notorious, email Jenni Dickson. Related People: Honorable Helen E. Freedman (Ret.) Michelle Bufano Rachel Sherman Tom Kurland

Today on The Neil Haley Show, The Total Tutor Neil Haley will interview Judge Michael Corriero of Hot Bench. Judge Michael Corriero serves as one of three judges on CBS Television Distribution's syndicated court show HOT BENCH, created by Judge Judy Sheindlin. The program returned for its fourth season Monday, September 11, 2017. During the 2016-2017 season, HOT BENCH was the #3 first-run program in daytime television delivering 3.2 million daily viewers.  Prior to joining HOT BENCH, Judge Corriero was the Executive Director and Founder of the New York Center for Juvenile Justice.  Before that he was the Executive Director of the Big Brothers Big Sisters of New York City from 2008 to 2010.  He previously served as a judge in the New York State Court for 28 years. He was appointed to the New York State Court of Claims in 1990. From 1992 to 2008, Judge Corriero presided over Manhattan's Youth Part, a court set aside within the adult court system to deal exclusively with the cases of 13, 14 and 15-year-olds who are charged with the most serious and violent crimes.  HOT BENCH, CBS Television Distribution's court show, created by Judge Judy Sheindlin, returned for its fourth season Monday, September 11, 2017.  During the 2016-2017 season, HOT BENCH was the #3 first-run program in daytime television  delivering 3.2 million daily viewers. HOT BENCH was the also the #2 court show in syndication in homes, total viewers, women 18-49 and key adults, behind only JUDGE JUDY.              

My Distinguished guest today is New York City Council Member Benjamin J. Kallos—Kallos Represents District 5 in the City of New York: Roosevelt Island and the Upper East Side.   Kallos has spent his entire political career fighting for New Yorkers. As a member of the New York Democratic Lawyers Council he rose to the position of Statewide Coordination Committee Chair, organizing and managing over 4,000 attorneys and 350 law students, to protect New Yorkers' ability to vote in the most recent presidential elections. Kallos also created the VoterSearch.org program to help protect the right to vote for over 12 million New Yorkers when he learned that some 2 millions voters had been removed from the voter roles.   As a member of Community Board 8 he rose to the position of Co-Chair for the Communications Committee, implementing open source technology  to reduce waste and save the City thousands, publicizing the open application process and opportunities to become a public member.   Kallos attended SUNY Albany, where he served on the student, faculty and university governments and boards. Kallos paid his own way through University at Buffalo Law School, the State University of New York's only law school.   During law school Kallos fought to protect working class seniors who had seen their life savings and retirements lost. Kallos became increasingly involved in public service as an Editor for the Buffalo Public Interest Law Journal and interned with the Hon. Renee Forgensi Minarik in the New York State Court of Claims, a regional office of United States Senator Charles Schumer, and the New York State Attorney General's Internet Bureau.   In this episode we discussed What is "Open Government"? Legislation and initiatives in New York City focused on keeping government open. Best practices for engaging communities and empowering citizens with tools to be active participants in their governments. Resources   Free Law Founders   OpenGov Foundation   NYC Council Labs   The City Record Online   Participatory Budgeting in New York City   Trello   Getting Things Done   Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth and Happiness by Richard B. Thaler Cass B. Sunstein