Chapter 5. McGuireWoods Commits Fraud on the Court Defending themselves from Fraud on the Court

 RVA McGuireWoods Continual Fraud on the Court exposed in Ethics Complaint case

   An ethics complaint against McGuireWoods attorneys Richard Cullen, James Comey, Howard C. Vick, William Birch Douglass III, and William Hutchens has led to more fraud on the court violations by their defense attorney Brandon Santos of McGuireWoods RVA.

   The ethics complaints filed in Henrico County Circuit Court are; CL21005759 Spanos v. Douglass et al., CL21005758 Spanos v. Vick, CL21006572 Spanos v. Vick et al., which alleged several violations of the Virginia Code of Professional Conduct, Federal and Virginia Codes, were heard on January 13, 2023, by Judge Joseph Ellis. 

   On September 19, 2022, Judge Joseph Ellis issued an order clearly stating:

              “Plaintiff lacks standing to seek the relief requested in the Complaint, and this Court has no jurisdiction to grant the relief requested in the Complaint.”

              “It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that Defendants' motions are SUSTAINED, and Plaintiff s Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice. Given this ruling, it is not necessary for the Court to rule on other motions and defenses filed by Defendants to Plaintiff s Complaint.”

              “It is further ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that this Order is SUSPENDED until further order of this Court.”

    Judge Joseph Ellis’s order clearly states that the court has no jurisdiction in these matters, and it is unnecessary for the court to rule on other motions and defenses filed by Defendants. So then, why would Judge Ellis suspend his order until further order from this court?

   On October 5, 2022, 17 days after Judge Ellis' order, Brandon Santos devised a scheme to file a Motion for Entry of Pre-filing Injunction to have Judge Ellis issue an order prohibiting the Plaintiff from filing further ethics complaints against the entire Commonwealth of Virginia.

   McGuireWoods Brandon Santos violated Judge Ellis's order and had unethically violated the Virginia Supreme Court Rules of Court, as he comingled his Motion for Injunction with the Plaintiff's ethics complaint; Santos’s Motion for Injunction should have been filed separately and before September 19, 2022, hearing date, not after Judge Ellis entered an order. Additionally, Plaintiff should have been served according to Hague Service Convention, as Plaintiff is a resident of Greece.

    The major problem with serving Plaintiff according to the Hague Service Convention, then McGuireWoods Santos would be supporting the Plaintiff's argument in his ethics complaint filed against McGuireWoods William Birch Douglass III and William Hutchins.

   William Birch Douglass III and William Hutchens are accused of committing fraud on the court during their employment with McGuire-Woods law firm. They conspired unethically to have their client illegally removed as trustee & executor of a family trust.

      McGuire-Woods’ partners initiated a lawsuit representing both the plaintiff and the defendant. The McGuire-Woods partners knew the exact location of the trustee in Greece. They communicated with him through conference calls and postal service but did not serve him through the Hague Service Convention; instead served him at his mother’s house, who was the plaintiff.

   Greece's Protocol to the Convention of 15 November 1965 on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters states that foreign service can only be processed through the Greek DOJ and served by only a certified service processor/court official. Furthermore, the documents intended to be served must also be translated into the Greek language and certified by the Greek Department of Foreign Affairs.

   The Trust had no provision for removal, and the petition for removal listed no financial irregularities to justify the petition. 

   The Defendants filed a Defense Pleading on September 27, 2021, in which they did not deny the allegations, only that the statute of limitations had expired for the criminal violations. Yet, there is no statute of limitations for fraud in the court, unethical misconduct, and violation of the Rules of the Virginia Code of Professional Conduct.

   The McGuireWoods partners responded in their defense pleadings that Nickolas Spanos was never a client of McGuireWoods despite evidence showing that Spanos was a client from 1992 and had issued several checks signed by Spanos to McGuireWoods law firm for over seven years. The checks are listed in Estate reports to the Henrico County Commissioner of Accounts. 

 

   

Corrupt Judges are the Problem with Virginia's Judicial System

 Corrupt Judges Tarnish the Image of Virginia's Judicial System

     The term "a few bad apples..." rings loud in the Virginia Justice system, as recent ethics complaints filed in the courts have exposed the deep state corruption that exists in the courts. Further evidence supports that there is a Virginia Shadow Government (VSG) that controls the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches in Virginia.

     The head of the VSG is Richard Cullen, recognized for his title as the "Godfather" of the VSG, Cullen has been in charge of McGuireWoods law firm for decades and despite some leaves of absence to take high-profile positions in the DOJ, Cullen still calls the shots. Richard Cullen is currently the Chief Legal Advisor to Governor Glenn Youngkin.

     When a syndicate like the VSG controls the three branches of the government, they control the state, but when the VSG controls the Judicial branch it controls the U.S. Constitution and the Virginia Constitution, as the courts decide due process of law and this is by far the most significant article of any constitution. 

     Judge Lee A. Harris Jr. had a distinguished and unblemished career, beginning with the Henrico County Commonwealth Attorney's office and in 1992 Judge Harris was appointed to be a Circuit Court Judge with Henrico County, Judge Harris has been a Circuit Court judge for almost 30 years. Recently, over three Ethics Complaints have been filed against Judge Harris, the most significant is CL21006572 filed in the Henrico Circuit Court, Harris and eight other defendants are accused of operating a criminal syndicate in the Virginia Justice system and promoting white nationalism, which believes that white people are superior and deserve preferential treatment and legal protections. The complaint states that Richard Cullen bribed Harris to give preferential treatment and legal protection to white affluent professionals who were McGuireWoods clients and lawyers involved in a 600-kilo cocaine case involving a international fugitive. Court records show that Judge Harris and other Henrico County prosecutors conspired together to keep the fugitive in exile, so that he could not be extradited back to Henrico County to testify against McGuireWoods clients.

     John Adrian Gibney, Jr. is a federal judge on senior status with the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. He joined the court in 2010 after a nomination from President Barack Obama. Judge Gibney is facing an Ethics complaint, CL22002249, filed in the Henrico County Circuit Court, which states that Judge Gibney refused to recuse himself for conflict of financial interest, from a case he was presiding over. The case involved an ethics complaint filed against Howard C. Vick Jr., a former Henrico Commonwealth attorney who received bribes by Richard Cullen, who offered Vick a partners position with McGuireWoods law firm in exchange for his refusal to extradite a international fugitive who was the hub of a 600-kilo cocaine organization that operated in the Richmond area for over 10 years. The ethics complaint against Judge Gibney states Judge Gibney violated the Virginia Judicial Canons (VJC) and the Virginia Code of Professional Conduct (VCPC). Judge Gibney is married to Yvonne Gibney who is on the VSB Disciplinary Board panels, had direct financial conflict of interest and personal conflict of interest concerning the Vick Complaint. A motion was filed by the Plaintiff for Judge Gibney to recuse himself but Gibney refused and issued an order and memorandum in the case, which evidenced Gibney's conflict of interests.

     Joseph J. Ellis retired in 2019 from the 15th Judicial Circuit, where he presided in Spotsylvania County. Judge Ellis currently works for Juridical Solutions, specializing in Alternate Dispute Resolution through mediation services. The Supreme Court of Virginia appointed Judge Ellis to preside over three ethics complaint cases (CL21005758, CL21005759, CL21006572) pending in the Henrico County Circuit Court, the ethics complaints are against McGuireWoods attorneys, judges, prosecutors and government officials who conspired together to violate the RICO act and constitutional rights. An ethics complaint, CL22006233, was filed in the Henrico Circuit Court against Judge Ellis violated the Virginia Judicial Canons (VJC) and the Virginia Code of Professional Conduct (VCPC) concerning Conflict of Financial Interests and violating Title 18 Section 242, Deprivation of Rights.

    All the circuit court judges in the Henrico County Circuit Court have recused themselves from hearing and cases concerning international fugitive Nickolas Spanos and the 600-kilo cocaine case, which alleges bribery by Richard Cullen to public officials for financial and political gain. Furthermore, all the U.S. District court judges of the Eastern District of Virginia have recused themselves from presiding over the Judge John Gibney ethics complaint case and a U.S. District court judge from Maryland had to be specially appointed to the Spanos-Gibney case.

    In any "rotten apple" situation, the only remedy is to separate the bad apples from the good apples, which appears to be the case concerning corrupt judges.

Chapter 4. Judge Joseph Ellis ignores Virginia Statutes & Superior Court Rulings

 McGuireWoods Corruption Surfaces in Judge Ellis Rulings on Virginia Court's Jurisdiction in Attorney Disciplinary Cases

   The Court of Appeals of Virginia Opinion on December 6, 2022, in Virginia Retirement System v. Joan S. Shelton Va. App. 434 (2022) authored by the Honorable Judge Mary Bennett Malveaux clearly states: 

• “[a]n agency does not possess specialized competence over the interpretation of a statute merely because it addresses topics within the agency’s delegable authority.” 
• “[w]hen the language of a statute is unambiguous, [courts] are bound by the plain meaning of that language.” 
• “[W]hen the General Assembly has used specific language in one instance, but omits that language or uses different language when addressing a similar subject elsewhere in the Code, we must presume that the difference in the choice of language was intentional.” 

     The CAV Opinion directs the Trial Courts to strictly adhere by Virginia codes and not to deviate from the language and prohibits it to be interpreted in any other manner than what the codes states.

     Judge Ellis' order on September 19, 2022, and the Memorandum Opinion/Order on January 13, 2023, intentionally ignored:

• Virginia Supreme Court Rule 13-2 Authority of the Courts:                 

     "Nothing in this Paragraph shall be interpreted so as to eliminate, restrict or impair the jurisdiction of the courts of this Commonwealth to deal with the disciplining of Lawyers as provided by law. Every Judge shall have authority to take such action as may be necessary or appropriate to protect the interests of clients of any Attorney whose license is subject to a Suspension or Revocation." 

• U.S. Supreme Court v. Consumers Union, 446 U.S. 719, (1980):         

   “Appellant Virginia Supreme Court, which claims inherent authority to regulate and discipline attorneys, also has statutory authority to do so. Pursuant to these powers, the court promulgated the Virginia Code of Professional Responsibility (Code) and organized the Virginia State Bar to act as an administrative agency of the court to report and investigate violations of the Code. The statute reserves to the state courts the sole power to adjudicate alleged violations of the Code, and the Supreme Court and other state courts of record have independent authority on their own to initiate proceedings against attorneys.”

• Virginia Statutes on Virginia Court's jurisdiction and authority concerning attorney disciplinary cases in the Virginia Courts:      

§ 54.1-3915. Restrictions as to rules and regulations:

    "...“nor shall it promulgate any rule or regulation or method of procedure which eliminates the jurisdiction of the courts to deal with the discipline of attorneys.”

          § 54.1-3910. Organization and government of Virginia State Bar:

              "...The Virginia State Bar shall act as an administrative agency of the Court for the purpose of investigating and reporting violations of rules and   regulations adopted by the Court under this article."

• SCV opinion disseminated in Moseley, 273 Va. 688 (2007):

           “A court has an inherent power to discipline and regulate attorneys practicing before it. This power, since the judiciary is an independent branch of government, is not controlled by statute. Thus, the court's authority to discipline attorneys and regulate their conduct in proceedings before that court is also a constitutional power derived from the separation of powers between the judiciary, as an independent branch of government and the other branches.  

     “This inherent and constitutional power is essentially acknowledged in Code § 54.1- 3915, which prohibits the promulgation of any rule or regulation or method of procedure which eliminates the jurisdiction of the courts to deal with the discipline of attorneys.”

         The January 13, 2023, Memorandum Opinion was unethically drafted by McGuireWoods Brandon Santos for Judge Joseph Ellis; Judge Ellis violated several Judicial Canons by signing the Memorandum Opinion; giving further evidence of a judicial system corrupted by the McGuireWoods Shadow Government.