Virginia Supreme Court investigating lawyers and judges conducting illegal hearings

 Richmond Lawyer Robert L. Freed and Retired Judge Daniel T. Balfour Caught Illegally Conducting "Kangaroo" Hearings

On August 18, 2023, The Supreme Court of Virginia verified that retired Judge Daniel T. Balfour was not designated in two Richmond Circuit Court cases and had no authority to preside and enter orders. 

Robert Freed and Daniel Balfour have been close personal friends for decades and worked closely together before Balfour was appointed to a judgeship in 2004. Judge Balfour was a presiding judge in Henrico County Circuit Court from 2004-2012 when he retired.

The two cases are CL21-4150 Spanos v. Freed et al., and CL23-2683 Spanos v. Panos et al. which attorney Robert L. Freed is a defendant in both cases.

In Spanos v. Freed, Nickolas Spanos filed an ethics complaint against Robert Freed where he committed extrinsic fraud on the court by defective service and failed to serve Spanos, attempting to obtain a $1,350,000 judgment against Spanos in a defamation suit. Robert Freed knowingly failed to serve Spanos with the Complaint as per the Hague Service Treaty instead, he illegally mailed the court documents by U.S. Postal Service to an address in Greece. Freed and his associate Emily Kokie made false statements to the Richmond Court that Spanos was served despite recognizing that they never followed the mandatory procedures to serve foreign residents.

Freed and Kokie of Freed & Shepherd, P.C, are represented by Julie S. Palmer and Michael Harman of Harman Claytor Corrigan & Wellman, P.C. Julie S. Palmer is currently the President of the Virginia Association of Defense Attorneys.

On February 17, 2022, Freed and retired Judge Daniel Balfour conspired to have retired Judge Balfour illegally preside over the case and enter an order dismissing the Complaint against Freed and Kokie. Retired Judge Balfour was required to be designated by either a Richmond Circuit Court Judge or by the Chief Justice of the SCV to be authorized to preside over any court hearings.

Spanos appealed the decision to the Court of Appeals of Virginia (CAV) Record Number 0706-22 and is currently pending oral arguments to be given. Spanos had filed for sanctions against Freed, Kokie, and their attorneys, Julie Palmer and Michael E. Harman, for fraud on the court and making false statements to the CAV. 

In a recent filing to the CAV, Spanos filed a Motion to Void the February 17, 2022, Order based on extrinsic fraud on the court by Freed and Judge Balfour, who conducted the "kangaroo hearing" without being designated by the Richmond Circuit Court or the Chief Justice of the SCV.

Spanos submitted the Supreme Court's investigation letter as evidence, which stated that no designation order existed for retired Judge Balfour to preside over CL21-4150 Spanos v. Freed et al. and CL23-2683 Spanos v. Panos et al.

Robert L. Freed and Daniel T. Balfour violated Va. Code § 18.2-481. Treason, which usurped the authority of the Supreme Court of Virginia and the Virginia General Assembly and Va Code § 17.1-105. Designation of judges.

 

High Profile Richmond Attorneys Face Serious Sanctions for Fraud and Misconduct

 Prominent Attorneys and their Counsel Face Harsh Sanctions in White Nationalism Case in the Virginia Court of Appeals.

On April 28, 2023, eight prominent attorneys through their counsel in the Richmond area filed a Joint Motion to Dismiss Appeal in the Court of Appeals of Virginia. What started as a normal motion has turned into a nightmare for the eight attorneys facing ethics complaints for conspiring together to promote and support a "white nationalism" syndicate which protected white affluent professionals from being investigated and prosecuted for their role in a 600-kilo cocaine organization that operated in the Richmond area for over ten years.

The Appellant immediately filed a Motion for Sanctions against the nineteen attorneys for fraud on the court and violating the rules of the Virginia Code of Professional Conduct(VCPC), specifically Rule 8.4 Misconduct. The attorneys are listed below.

APPELLEE	APPELLEE COUNSEL
Richard Cullen and Wade Kizer	Irving Blank
Judge Lee A. Harris Jr.	Brittany McGill, Amy Hensley
Shannon L. Taylor	Theodore Brenner
James B. Comey, Howard C. Vick Jr.	Brandon Santos, Garret Hooe
Michael Y. Feinmel	William Tunner, John O’Herron
Todd Stone	S. Keith Barker
George Manoli Loupassi	Bradley Marrs

The most prominent Attorney facing sanctions is Richard Cullen, the chief legal advisor to Governor Glenn Youngkin, Cullen is listed as the organizer of the "white nationalism" syndicate which operated in the Virginia Courts for over two decades.

Other prominent attorneys include James B. Comey, Judge Lee A. Harris Jr., Shannon Taylor, Howard Vick, and numerous McGuireWoods law firm attorneys. Richard Cullen, James Comey, and Howard Vick worked together at McGuireWoods. Richard Cullen is the Godfather of James Comey's daughters.

The Motion for Sanctions states that the nineteen attorneys conspired together to commit numerous violations of Virginia Codes, Fraud on The Court, and Misconduct. A copy of the Motion for Sanctions can be viewed: Motion for Sanctions in the Court of Appeals

The violations are listed as:

VCPC Rule 3.3 Candor Toward The Tribunal

(a) A lawyer shall not knowingly:

(1) make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal;

(2) fail to disclose a fact to a tribunal when disclosure is necessary to avoid assisting a criminal or fraudulent act by the client;

(3) fail to disclose to the tribunal controlling legal authority in the subject jurisdiction known to the lawyer to be adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing counsel; or

(4) offer evidence that the lawyer knows to be false. If a lawyer has offered material evidence and comes to know of its falsity, the lawyer shall take reasonable remedial measures.

(b) A lawyer may refuse to offer evidence that the lawyer reasonably believes is false.

(c) In an ex parte proceeding, a lawyer shall inform the tribunal of all material facts known to the lawyer, which will enable the tribunal to make an informed decision whether or not the facts are adverse.

(d) A lawyer who receives information clearly establishing that a person other than a client has perpetrated fraud upon the tribunal in a proceeding in which the lawyer is representing a client shall promptly reveal the fraud to the tribunal.

(e) The duties stated in paragraphs (a) and (d) continue until the conclusion of the proceeding and apply even if compliance requires disclosure of information protected by Rule 1.6.

VCPC Rule 8.4 Misconduct

It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to:

(a) violate or attempt to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct, knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do so through the acts of another;

(b) commit a criminal or deliberately wrongful act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness to practice law;

(c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation which reflects adversely on the lawyer’s fitness to practice law;

Va. Code § 8.01-271.1. Signing of pleadings, motions, and other papers; oral motions; sanctions.

B. The signature of an attorney or party constitutes a certificate by him that (i) he has read the pleading, motion, or other paper, (ii) to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief, formed after reasonable inquiry, it is well grounded in fact and is warranted by existing law or a good faith argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law, and (iii) it is not interposed for any improper purpose, such as to harass or to cause unnecessary delay or needless increase in the cost of litigation.

F. Signature defects in appellate filings, including the notice of appeal, shall be raised in the appellate court where the appeal is taken. Failure to timely raise the issue of a defective signature in an appellate pleading, motion, or other paper while the case is pending before the appellate court waives any challenge to that pleading, motion, or other paper based on such a defect.

G. If a signature defect is not timely and properly cured after it is brought to the attention of the pleader or movant, the pleading, motion, or other paper is invalid and shall be stricken. A signature defect shall be cured within 21 days after it is brought to the attention of the pleader or movant. If a signature defect is timely and properly cured, the pleading, motion, or other paper shall be valid and relate back to the date it was originally served or filed.

It is questionable if the Appellees even mailed their February 27, 2023, and October 17, 2023, “Notice” to the Appellant and should be ordered to produce a certified U.S. Postal receipt or commercial delivery receipt evidencing of completing the service process on the Appellant. The Appellees recognize that the Appellant resides in a foreign country and should have taken reasonable care to assure that the Appellant received the “Notice,” as certified in their Joint Motion submitted to this Court.

Rule 1:12. Service of Papers after the Initial Process: 

All pleadings, motions, and other papers served after the initial process in an action and not required to be served otherwise, and requests for subpoenas duces tecum must be served by delivering, dispatching by commercial delivery service for same-day or next day delivery, transmitting by facsimile, transmitting by electronic mail when Rule 1:17 so provides or when consented to in writing signed by the person to be served, or by mailing, a copy to each counsel of record on or before the day of filing.

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.

Three Richmond Lawyers Entangled in Fraud on The Court

 Prominent Richmond Lawyers face Serious Bribery Charges and Fraud on the Courts

Ethics Complaints filed in the Circuit Court and Sanctions filed in the Court of Appeals of Virginia (CAV) have placed 3 prominent Richmond lawyers facing criminal and civil action and are likely to have their license to practice law in Virginia revoked.

Robert L. Freed, who is facing ethics complaints, Case No. 0706-22-2, Spanos v. Robert L. Freed, et al., in the CAV for conspiring with his clients to commit fraud of $100,000., Fraud on the Court, misconduct, and numerous violations of the Rules of the Virginia Code of Professional Conduct (VCPC), now faces class 4 felony charges for violating Va. Code § 18.2-447. When a person guilty of bribery.

In a October 31, 2022, email to several persons and his legal assistant, Freed admitted to influencing the judges of the CAV to dismiss the complaint against him even before a hearing date for oral arguments has been set and the CAV deciding the case. A November 8, 2022, Motion for Sanctions was filed in the CAV for Freed's confession of bribing/influencing a judicial preceding. The sanctions are requesting that the CAV report the bribery/influence charge to the Richmond City Commonwealth Attorney for investigation. Click to view Motion for Sanctions November 8, 2022 

Julie S. Palmer and Michael E. Harman of Harman, Claytor,  Corrigan, & Wellman, represent Robert Freed and Emily Kokie in the ethics complaint. 

Julie Palmer was elected in 2022 as President of the Virginia Association of Defense Attorneys https://www.vada.org/directors

Julie Palmer was recently named as one of Virginia Lawyers Weekly’s 2022’s Influential Women in Law.                                        https://valawyersweekly.com/2022/04/04/vlw-names-2022s-influential-women-of-law/

Freed, Palmer and Harman are facing sanctions before the CAV for fraud on the court, making false statements to the court, and tortious interference. Palmer and Harman face separate charges of  bribery/influencing a judicial proceeding in pending cases in the Henrico County Circuit Court. 

The August 1, 2022, Motion for Sanctions against Freed, Palmer, and Harman allege that Palmer and Harman took a February 22, 2022, circuit court record transcript and had ex parte communications with Judge Wilford Taylor Jr., who was presiding over Henrico County Circuit Court Cases CL21006572, CL21005759, to influence Judge Taylor to reverse orders he had previously issued in the Plaintiff’s cases. Click to view CAV SANCTIONS Aug. 1, 2022

The Plaintiff filed a Motion to Recuse Judge Taylor with the Henrico Circuit Court on February 28, 2022, based on evidence provided to the Plaintiff about the ex parte communications between Palmer, Harman, and Judge Wilford Taylor. 

Michael Harman and Judge Wilford Taylor are connected through the McCammon Group, a dispute resolution company which employs Michael Harman and Judge Wilford Taylor as dispute mediators.        Click to view https://www.mccammongroup.com

Shortly thereafter, Judge Taylor recused himself from the Appellant’s cases in the Henrico County Circuit court. Judge Wilford Taylor had been designated by the Supreme Court of Virginia to preside over the Henrico Court cases, as all the Judges of the Henrico County Circuit Court had recused themselves. The SCV had to designate a new judge after Judge Taylors recusal.

Palmer and Harman's influence/bribery of a court member or official, is Fraud on the court and considered to be one of the most serious violations that can occur within a court of law. If fraud on the court occurs, the entire case is voided or cancelled. This means that any ruling or judgment that the court has issued will be rendered void. Additionally, the case will need to be retried, and with different court officials. This is often done in an entirely different venue in order to avoid further instances of fraud on the court.