Wednesday, February 29, 2012

Suggested Post emailed in about Connecticut Magistrate Misconduct

[Source, click here]

Magistrate Lifshitz Rockville his rules his court his laws

Magistrate Harris Llishitz being one person that should not be allowed in a family court or any court for that matter. He was REMOVED from HARTFORD Court, and dumped in Rockville Connecticut This is what is being said about this so called ” Magistrate”, he ruins lives he could care less about any mother, father or child. This man is a disgrace, Governor Malloy wants him off the bench, and for good reason. This man who is supposed to uphold the law does so with the ones he makes. If you have ever gone in front of this man you know that he could care less about the constitution your rights or what you have to say for that matter. He makes up his own laws, due process in not seen within the seat he sits in. So many have had to go in front of Magistrate Harris Lifshitz, this man is a cruel human being. You can have a look for yourself, go to the Rockville family court, 69 Brooklyn St Rockville , 06066 EVERY TUESDAY. And I can bet that he will send many to jail, this man has to be removed. Below are some articles written about him, and what he says about himself.

I’m told that Harris Lifshitz, the family support magistrate in Hartford who thinks that debtors’ prison is a good idea is facing reality: he is retiring and will not be among the magistrates re-appointed by Gov. Dannel Malloy in coming days.

Lifshitz, however, will still hear cases part-time on an as-needed basis. Still, the message was clear: Gov. Malloy didn’t want this magistrate on the bench any more. DID NOT WANT HIM ON THE BENCH ANYMORE!!!

Lifshitz, some of you may recall, sent a Simsbury man to jail for months in a dispute over spousal support. Gerald Frazee time in jail solved nothing, except to force taxpayers to pick up the tab,

Unfortunately, Lifshitz has issued an arrest order for Frazee, which still could land him in jail again.

Said by By JON LENDER,, The Hartford Courant. He has got it right, THANK YOU Jon Lender

One of four new family support magistrates named by Democratic Gov. Dannel P. Malloy will replace a controversial appointee of former Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell — former Old Lyme Republican Town Chairman Christopher Oliveira.

Oliveira, once a candidate for state Senate, will continue serving as a magistrate until early September, when he’ll be replaced by Jane Grossman, a Democratic Malloy appointee. She is a longtime staff attorney for New Haven Legal Assistance who has served in numerous capacities for the courts and advisory boards concerning the legal needs of low-income families.

Like all nine family support magistrates, Grossman will serve a three-year term. Legislative confirmation is not required; it’s a straight gubernatorial appointment, viewed at least partly as a political patronage plum over the years. The $121,615-a-year magistrates decide cases involving child support, alimony, visitation and paternity.

When Rell named Oliveira 3½ years ago, questions immediately arose about his qualifications. He had appeared as a lawyer in only a few civil cases. Also, he had resigned from a family relations counselor trainee’s job in the Middletown courthouse in 2004 after an internal investigation found that he used office equipment and materials for personal and political purposes. Later, it also was revealed that he failed to mention the 2004 incident on a background questionnaire he’d submitted to Rell’s office.

His term expired in January, but magistrates serve until their replacement takes office.

Malloy wrote Oliveira a letter Friday, thanking him for his service. “On behalf of the people of the state of Connecticut, please accept my thanks for your years of service to the state. … Please continue in your current capacity through September 5, 2011. You have my best wishes for the future.”

In addition to Grossman, the new magistrate appointees are:

•Michael Ferguson of Meriden, a Democrat, who will replace magistrate Linda Wihbey of Waterbury, a Republican, in September.

•Frederic Gilman of East Hampton, a Democrat, who in September will replace former magistrate Richard Adams, a Middlefield Republican who retired and assumed status as a part-time referee to handle magistrate cases in March.

•Norma Sanchez-Figueroa of South Windsor, a Democrat. In September she will replace Harris Lifshitz, a Glastonbury Democrat who is retiring to assume status as a part-time referee.

A Malloy spokesman said months ago that the governor wanted to address the concern that none of the existing family support magistrates is a member of any minority group. Two of Malloy’s four appointees are members of minority groups; Sanchez-Figueroa is Latino and Ferguson is African American.

The other magistrates whose terms had expired were reappointed by Malloy.

Lifshitz, the 24-year veteran magistrate now assuming referee’s status, attracted attention recently for what Courant columnist Rick Green in March called “a habit of throwing real and alleged deadbeats in the slammer for weeks and months.” Green reported that Lifshitz was once found by a judge to be “clearly erroneous” for jailing a man who couldn’t pay the full child support he owed.

In April, Lifshitz said: “I have been a family support magistrate for the past 24 years, since the magistrate system was first established in Connecticut. … I have decided hundreds of thousands of cases and authored over a hundred written decisions. … I listen to all sides of each and every case.” This is a STRAIGHT lie,he does not listen to all sides, he is a one sided selfish person. He will SCREAM how HE is the MAGISTRATE, it is HIS COURT. Never does he even ASK about a child, this man does not care. If you are homeless with no job and you need to modify your court order, forget it. I have seen this man in action, and I can honestly say I was scared he has no right to treat people the way he does

Oliveira had said in April that in his three-plus years as magistrate, “I have heard tens of thousands of cases involving paternity, child support, non-payment of child support and modifications of support orders. I have never been grieved, no complaints of any kind have ever been filed against me and, to my knowledge, I have never once been reversed on appeal. The people who appear in our courts are some of the state’s most vulnerable, and the chance to make positive changes in their lives gives me the greatest satisfaction in this job.”

This is what another has to say about this man, Magistrate Lifhitz.

  • I remember Magistrate Lifshitz when he was at Family Court at Rockville years ago. He was not well received by anyone going before him as well as those of us in the Courtroom who watched Lawyers and State’s Attorney’s shaking their heads because the magistrate was very threatening to those in the Courtroom. Granted there is a respect to hold for the title he holds but i watched more people go to jail in that Courtroom,as well as people walking out of that Courthouse extremely distressed then need be. There wasn’t a lot of room that man gave to anyone and if you just don’t have the money because of no work, being disabled, or on a fixed income, where the Court under the guidelines given concerning Child Support…well that man squeezed every nickel out of you or told you to as i so well remember him saying..”Beg, Borrow, or Steal” in order to pay for Support. Some Single Fathers as well as Mothers just don’t have what it takes to make it in Society financially,But tossing them in jail sure helps the Parent who has Custody now doesn’t it? Unbelievable!!!!

IF anyone has anything to say about Lifshitz, please feel free to comment. We have gotten so many complaints about Magistrate Harris Lifshitz. This man needs to be removed from the bench.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re; alimony reform
Now that Florida, Massachusetts, Colorado and Utah, New Jersey legislators, due to the changing realities of family life, proposed or passed that permanent current alimony obligations be eliminated in alimony reform legislation, it is now time to propose similar alimony reform legislation for disabled veterans, as Nevada, and West Virginia have recently enacted. You may ask why? Because,….. according to law……
38 USC 5301 Nonassignability and exempt status of benefits. "Payments of benefits due or to become due under any law administered by the Secretary shall not be assignable except to the extent specifically authorized by law,.. a beneficiary shall be exempt from taxation, shall be exempt from the claim of creditors, and shall not be liable to attachment, levy or seizure by or under any legal or equitable process whatever, either before or after receipt by the beneficiary.
“It is well established that disability benefits are a protected property interest and may not be discontinued without due process of law. See Atkins v. Parker, 472 U.S. 115, 128 (1985); Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 332 (1976)”
How is it, that state court judges can arbitrarily and capriciously award as alimony, with the mere wave of a hand waive away a portion of a veteran’s VA disability rated compensation, moneys in the form of disability compensation, the disability rights of a veteran, whose disability rating that maybe determined and factored in as critical? Judgment as if all disabilities are exactly the same? State court judges, are in reality, playing doctor, without medical license or knowledge .. a practice forbidden, providing penalties by law , and border on medical negligence. All without any input, or approval from the Veterans Administration, overstepping those whose authority it belongs, the dedicated VA medical professionals, in the practice of medicine, re-evaluation, and rehabilitation of the veteran. While at the same time violating federal law, 38 USC 5301, 42 USC 1408, and the 14th Amendment.
“Clear and substantial” major damage to federal interests occurs when state court judges make lasting decisions, that seriously impact disabled veterans’ rated compensation and complicate Veterans Administration goals, and responsibilities. Upsetting, by overruling VA medical compensation decisions, which involve many hours of work that VA medical professionals have invested in the medical care, control, follow-up, and rehabilitation of disabled veterans. All this happens with VA complicity, when a state court, arbitrarily is allowed to take away a veterans VA disability compensation in third party alimony awards in violation of….. 38 USC 5301. 42 USC § 407 - Assignment of benefits, carries similar language.
Where is it written, the VA authority, when a state judge can arbitrarily overrule the VA, the VA medical doctors and other medical professionals’ that determine a veterans’ medical rating compensation? His future now without the compensation that was by law assured? Tax payer monies mandated by Congress purposely, as veterans service compensation for injuries received, life altering as they are, now being diverted purposely by state courts to healthy third parties in many cases, in a determined and engaging violation of the law.
Where is it written? Where is the eagerness of state legislators to extend this proposal and eliminate veterans disability compensation from alimony? Opportunity knocks, do the right thing and fight for your disabled veterans.

Thursday, April 11, 2013 1:19:00 PM  
Anonymous William Heino Sr. said...

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Suggested Post emailed in about Connecticut Magist...":

State court violation Separation of Powers DISABLED VETERANS

Business at hand. Connecticut alimony reform passed into law is dependent on many variables. Something not in this variable or even considered, but overlooked… is the question is a disabled veteran’s VA disability compensation as alimony/support.
The “separation of powers” doctrine is completely ignored by Connecticut and most state court judges, acting like doctors, holding themselves as qualified, as a provider of health care, policy making outside their jurisdiction. Substituting their judgment for the judgment of VA doctors and medical professionals awarding as alimony a disabled veteran’s VA disability compensation. To allow what has been happening, was this the intent of Congress?
“The powers of government shall be divided into three distinct departments, and each of them confided to a separate magistracy, to wit, those which are legislative, to one; those which are executive, to another; and those which are judicial, to another.”
The United State court of appeals, in VETERANS FOR COMMON SENSE, VETERANS UNITED FOR TRUTH, INC., v. ERIC K. SHINSEKI, December 13, 2011, ruled, “As much as we may wish for expeditious improvement in the way the VA handles mental health care and service-related disability compensation, we cannot exceed our jurisdiction to accomplish it,..” As well, Connecticut is not in any legal position to do so. Bush v. Schiavo, 885 So. 2d 321, (Fla. 2004). Despite the law, it continues.
“It is well established that disability benefits are a protected property interest and may not be discontinued without due process of law.” See Atkins v. Parker, 472 U.S. 115, 128 (1985); Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 332 (1976)”
14th Amendment. “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, with due process of law, ..”
Which leaves the question, alimony reform for disabled veterans when is that going to happen?

William Heino Sr.

Friday, October 25, 2013 1:02:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

View My Stats