Thursday, July 28, 2005

Stanley Michels


The New York Times, June 20, 1994

Copyright 1994 The New York Times Company

The New York Times

June 20, 1994, Monday, Late Edition - Final

SECTION: Section A; Page 16; Column 1; Editorial Desk

LENGTH: 514 words

HEADLINE: A Smart Move for New York Justice


After three decades of drift and inefficiency, New York City is moving smartly to shore up a vital function: legal assistance to defendants too poor to hire a lawyer. The action, a disarmingly simple policy change, owes much to Mayor Rudolph Giuliani's criminal justice office and his conspicuous search for places to streamline the city budget.

The city and the Legal Aid Society, which delivers defense services under contract, have agreed to reduce sharply the flow of cases from Legal Aid to generally less reliable outside private defense lawyers. This promises a substantial saving and the strong possibility of better justice, a rare combination.

In the wake of the Supreme Court's famous 1963 Gideon decision requiring states and cities to provide counsel to indigents, New York arranged with Legal Aid, an organization sponsored by bar leaders, to handle most criminal cases. The exceptions were homicides and cases where co-defendants had conflicting interests. Those were treated as judicial patronage, ladled out to courthouse regulars of varying competence at low hourly rates. The ablest of the assigned counsel were thought to have better experience for homicide cases in the early years.

Over time the outside lawyers changed from a safety valve to a "shadow legal aid," as Councilman Stanley Michels of Manhattan complained. Legal Aid lawyers, in order to keep their own caseloads down, increasingly found ways to let the court assignments flow to the roster of outside lawyers. Those assigned counsel currently cost $50 million, while Legal Aid costs less than $80 million.

The assigned counsel often performed capably but always lacked the cohesion and discipline of Legal Aid's defender service. Small scandals erupted because of lax accounting that let some lawyers wildly exaggerate their billable hours and others ignore their clients for months at a time. When Legal Aid lawyers went on a three-month strike in 1982, trial judges nervously relied on the courthouse hangers-on even more. The climate for justice and the morale of the criminal defense bar kept getting worse.

Pressed at City Council hearings, Legal Aid officers acknowledged sloughing off too many cases in the past and said lower indictment rates should enable them to reclaim those cases for no extra cost, especially in Manhattan. Meanwhile, the city has begun to police the assigned counsel claims for reimbursement and support better training for them.

It is uncertain how much these shifts can cut into the $50 million cost for assigned counsel, but Councilman Michels estimates an initial saving of up to $15 million a year. In the longer run the city, the courts and the bar must shape a more productive Legal Aid, ready to deliver more defense for the dollar and to reach out for new challenges.

Surely a proud, top-flight defender service must become capable of handling most homicides. Taking on those cases that were were too easily ceded to the assigned counsel group is a small but necessary step toward asserting Legal Aid's proper role in the justice system.

The New York Times, September 14, 1991

Copyright 1991 The New York Times Company

The New York Times

View Related Topics

September 14, 1991, Saturday, Late Edition - Final

SECTION: Section 1; Page 18; Column 1; Editorial Desk

LENGTH: 614 words

HEADLINE: Next Job for the Council: To Govern


The voter turnout was disappointingly low and the campaign was often dismayingly divisive. Yet in the first primary election for the newly enlarged City Council, New Yorkers rejected extremism and opened the way to political power for minority groups. Black and Hispanic representation on the Council is headed from 25 to 40 percent, a long-overdue change in a city that is about 50 percent black and Hispanic.

Now comes the hard part -- governing. It will not be easy, in part because of the same factors that will, come January, give the city a more representative legislature.

The Council's expansion from 35 to 51 members under the new City Charter meant smaller districts, and redistricting meant that many of those districts would have predominantly black or Hispanic populations. That gave rise to racial appeals from some candidates and to other candidacies showing little knowledge of or interest in citywide issues.

Council members should champion the parochial interests of their districts; in so large a city, people need a local voice. But a Council tied up in knots, with 51 members pursuing 51 separate agendas, cannot function.

Now that the City Charter has given the Council power over land use and the budget -- once the responsibility of the old Board of Estimate -- the worst danger is Nimby, Not In My Backyard. If Council members make deals to vote against the construction of unpopular facilities in each other's districts, they could paralyze the city.

But new Council members will also learn a fundamental fact of legislatures. If they want to get anything accomplished -- if they want the support of colleagues for a sewer here or reopening a library there -- they will have to make accommodations and form coalitions.

That is one reason New Yorkers can be grateful that the most extreme candidates, like the lawyers C. Vernon Mason, in upper Manhattan, and Colin Moore, in Brooklyn, lost to incumbents -- in their cases Stanley Michels and Susan Alter. Mr. Michels and Ms. Alter were helped by a large field of opponents who divided the opposition, and perhaps also by voters' apprehension about the racial polarization Mr. Mason and Mr. Moore represent.

Over all, incumbents did well, as usual, and insurgents -- including those supported by the labor-backed Majority Coalition -- did poorly. They were badly organized and short of money and skills.

Though running in what was considered a likely Hispanic district in Brooklyn, Joan Griffin McCabe, a white former education lobbyist, handily defeated eight opponents. But in another Brooklyn district voters apparently lost patience with the incumbent, Noach Dear, and his propensity for using his office to promote charities and businesses.

In northern Manhattan, the growing Dominican population elected a college instructor, Guillermo Linares. Voters in the Bronx appear to have narrowly elected former State Senator Israel Ruiz despite his felony conviction for filing a false bank loan application.

The winners represent a mixture of brash newcomers and old-line party stalwarts, of naive insurgents and jaded incumbents. Peter Vallone, the amiable but imperious Council Speaker, will have to accommodate some new, independent members. Headstrong newcomers like Anthony David Weiner of Brooklyn, a likely winner who stooped to distributing offensive literature in the campaign's closing days, will have to learn restraint.

And once the 51 members, perhaps including some Republicans, take office in January, they will have to define the Council's new role in city government. They are sure to better represent the city's 51 parts; their challenge is to represent the whole.

The New York Times, September 12, 1991

Copyright 1991 The New York Times Company

The New York Times

View Related Topics

September 12, 1991, Thursday, Late Edition - Final

SECTION: Section A; Page 24; Column 1; Editorial Desk

LENGTH: 705 words

HEADLINE: For the Council: Rookies of the Year


Between 6 A.M. and 9 P.M. today, New Yorkers will nominate and in many cases virtually elect the City Council that has been moving steadily, step by step, toward its full, proper role governing America's largest city.

Democracy will be only partially served, however. For one thing, although the Council is growing from 35 districts to 51, most districts are, like the city, overwhelmingly Democratic. As a consequence, winning the primary is likely to guarantee election.

For another thing, most voters have disappointing choices. Districts are smaller now, and they were drawn in a deliberate effort to empower diverse ethnic and racial populations. Unfortunately, many candidates display dismayingly parochial interests or willingness to play to divisive racial sentiments.

Even so, there is a bright silver lining. The contest has attracted a variety of promising men and women who along with accomplished incumbents could help to achieve the transformation of the Council. Here are 10 such candidates, potential Council rookies of the year:

Willie Bowman, 12th District, Bronx. A health care administrator long active in civic affairs, Ms. Bowman has a mature and independent understanding of the problems that face the entire city.

James Sullivan, 36th District, Brooklyn. This lawyer and former Congressional aide understands the destructive impact of drugs, crime and racial polarization, and the need for new housing.

Joan Griffin McCabe, 38th District, Brooklyn. A former education lobbyist, Ms. McCabe shows an incisive understanding of the city, the schools and her community.

Una Clarke, 40th District, Brooklyn. A consultant for the city's Agency for Child Development, Ms. Clarke knows her district and would champion funds for social services.

Anthony David Weiner, 48th District, Brooklyn. This assistant to Representative Charles Schumer is experienced in a wide range of issues that affect the whole city, offering precisely the broad perspective the Council needs.

Antonio Pagan, Second District, Manhattan. As a community organizer and director of a nonprofit housing organization, he knows how to make the streets more secure and to push for housing.

Philip Reed, Eighth District, Manhattan and Bronx. This district leader and director of an AIDS health project takes a thoughtful approach to issues, like the worth of providing addicts with clean needles to prevent AIDS.

Adriano Espaillat, 10th District, Manhattan. An official in the city's Criminal Justice Agency, he knows the problems of immigrants and small business.

Anthony Avella Jr., 19th District, Queens. A former aide to Mayor Edward Koch as well as the current Mayor, David Dinkins, he has unusual understanding of both his district and the inner workings of city government.

John Sabini, 25th District, Queens. This former Congressional aide has the integrity and savvy to make an outstanding contribution, as shown by his interim leadership of the Queens Democratic organization.

The following summarizes all The Times's recommendations in those contested Democratic primary contests whose outcome is tantamount to election.


12th District: Willie Bowman; 17th District: Andrew Eatmon Jr.; 18th District: Lucy Cruz


34th District: Juan Martinez; 35th District: Mary Pinkett; 36th District: James Sullivan; 37th District: Martin Malave-Dilan; 38th District: Joan Griffin McCabe; 40th District: Una Clarke; 41st District: Enoch Williams; 44th District: Robert Miller; 45th District: Susan Alter; 48th District: Anthony David Weiner


First District: Kathryn Freed; Second District: Antonio Pagan; Third District: Liz Abzug; Seventh District: Stanley Michels; Eighth District: (also Bronx): Philip Reed; Ninth District: Regina Smith; 10th District: Adriano Espaillat


Sixth Municipal Court District: Harold Adler


19th District: Anthony Avella Jr.; 20th District: Pauline Chu; 21st District: Helen Marshall; 25th District: John Sabini; 26th District: Walter McCaffrey; 27th District: Archie Spigner; 28th District: Thomas White Jr.; 29th District: Sidney Strauss; 31st District: Juanita Watkins; 32d District: Thomas Gebert

The New York Times, September 6, 1991

Copyright 1991 The New York Times Company

The New York Times

September 6, 1991, Friday, Late Edition - Final

SECTION: Section A; Page 22; Column 1; Editorial Desk

LENGTH: 679 words

HEADLINE: For City Council From Manhattan


This year's City Council primary election in Manhattan and an adjoining section of the Bronx has attracted a number of capable candidates. Here are The Times's recommendations in those districts where winning the Democratic designation next Thursday will be tantamount to election.

First District: One prominent candidate, Margaret Chin, is vague and misleading about her background and her positions on issues. She refuses, for example, to clarify her past affiliation with the Communist Workers Party and other radical organizations. That's troubling because any candidate's record bears on judgment and character.

Our choice is Kathryn Freed, a lawyer who works for the State Assembly and is familiar with issues in this southern Manhattan district.

Second District: Miriam Friedlander, an 18-year veteran of the Council, provides caring constituent service but is not notably effective on the Council. Philip Howard, a lawyer who is active in his community and a trustee of the Municipal Art Society, has great potential but would benefit from more experience. Our preference is Antonio Pagan, head of a nonprofit housing development program. Though sometimes too supportive of development, Mr. Pagan takes a tough, sensible approach to problems in a district that includes the beleaguered Tompkins Square area.

Third District: Because the likely winner of this contest will be the Council's first openly gay member, the campaign's most prominent issue has unfortunately become who most genuinely represents the gay community. It should be who would most effectively serve the entire community. Both leading candidates in this district, which includes Chelsea and Greenwich Village, are capable. Thomas Duane, a former stockbroker recently on the City Comptroller's staff, has an admirable record of community service. But his failure to participate in the public campaign finance program is disappointing, as is his opposition to needed city incinerators.

Liz Abzug, an articulate lawyer with the State Urban Development Corporation, has a less accomplished record in the community but approaches issues thoughtfully and is particularly sensible about economic development and taxation. In a very close call, we recommend Ms. Abzug.

Seventh District: Three candidates are fighting to unseat Stanley Michels, a 13-year incumbent now running in a reshaped Upper Manhattan district. C. Vernon Mason, an intemperate lawyer known for preying on racial unrest, would be a destructive force. Peggy Shepard, who works in the state's housing division, shows substantial political promise. But we endorse Mr. Michels, a solid, dedicated lawmaker who, though noticeably less outspoken than he used to be, has earned re-election.

Eighth District: Of the eight candidates in this district in northern Manhattan and part of the Bronx, we prefer Philip Reed, the thoughtful director of an AIDS health project. Adam Clayton Powell, a lawyer, is neither forceful nor versed in key issues. William Del Toro, head of a nonprofit housing agency, speaks in vague generalities and shows little political independence. Nelson Antonio Denis, a lawyer, seems well qualified for a political future, but Mr. Reed stands out.

Ninth District: The incumbent, C. Virginia Fields, two years in office representing central Harlem, has been a disappointment. Particularly disconcerting is her failure to condemn divisive figures like Prof. Leonard Jeffries of City College, who has made anti-Semitic remarks. We endorse Regina Smith, an impressive business school graduate who heads a City Partnership housing program.

10th District: This new district in a largely Dominican section of upper Manhattan has attracted three impressive candidates: Maria Luna, an accountant active in the Democratic Party; Guillermo Linares, a teacher and community school board member, and Adriano Espaillat, a coordinator in the city's Criminal Justice Agency. All could serve well, but we prefer Mr. Espaillat for his energy and fervent aspirations for his community.

The New York Times, September 12, 1989

Copyright 1989 The New York Times Company

The New York Times

September 12, 1989, Tuesday, Late Edition - Final

SECTION: Section A; Page 24, Column 1; Editorial Desk

LENGTH: 378 words

HEADLINE: The Day of the Voter


In this year's hotly competitive primary elections in New York City, more than ever, one vote can make a difference. The Democratic contest for mayor continues to look close, and for the first time in years, there's real competition for the Republican nomination.

The race to succeed Harrison J. Goldin as New York City Comptroller offers a provocative choice, and so does the contest to succeed Elizabeth Holtzman as Brooklyn District Attorney.

Even the City Council races, which usually excite little public interest, take on magnified importance. The proposed changes in the City Charter would, by 1991, make the Council a considerably more powerful legislature. The men and women elected this fall will likely form the core of that new Council.

In most cases - the mayoral contests being a dramatic exception - winning the Democratic primary in New York City is tantamount to election; today's votes will be decisive.

Residents of Yonkers face some important choices, too, for mayor and for City Council.

The polls will be open from 6 A.M. to 9 P.M. today in New York City's five boroughs and also in Yonkers.

Here is a summary of our recommendations for contested races. As always, our most urgent recommendation is two words: Please vote.



Edward I. Koch, Democrat

Rudolph W. Giuliani, Republican


Andrew J. Stein


Alan G. Hevesi



Ruth W. Messinger


3d District: Thomas K. Duane; 4th District: Ronnie M. Eldridge; 5th District: C. Virginia Fields; 6th District: Stanley E. Michels; 8th District: Carolyn B. Maloney (also Bronx).



Charles J. Hynes


26th District: James P. Sullivan; 29th District: Abraham G. Gerges; 32d District: David R. Eichenthal; 33d District: Samuel Horwitz.



Augustin Alamo


Countywide: Mark Friedlander; 1st District:

John A. Barone.



19th District: Julia Harrison



Nicholas C. Wasicsko


1st District: Joe L. Farmer; 5th District: Thomas A. Dickerson.

The New York Times, September 1, 1989

Copyright 1989 The New York Times Company

The New York Times

September 1, 1989, Friday, Late Edition - Final

SECTION: Section A; Page 26, Column 1; Editorial Desk

LENGTH: 530 words

HEADLINE: The City Council, Old and New: II


Unusual weight attaches to the choice of City Council members in Manhattan, as in the other borough races discussed yesterday. The proposed City Charter would make the Council larger and stronger, and members elected this fall would become its nucleus. These are our choices for Manhattan contests (one partially in the Bronx) in the Sept. 12 tests (one partially in the Bronx) in the Sept. 12 Democratic primary for which no serious general Democratic primary for which no serious general election challenges are in sight.

Third District: Carol Greitzer has made many contributions in 20 years on the Council, but lately her effectiveness has been limited. Tom Duane, a stockbroker and leader in the gay community, is a promising newcomer to politics, with interests ranging from zoning to tenants' rights. He could bring the district more energetic leadership, and we support him.

Fourth District: This West Side community could serve as a model for participatory democracy, with eight candidates fighting to succeed Ruth Messinger, who is running for borough president. Most could do the job, some could do it well and Ronnie Eldridge would do it best. ministrator and political leader, but shows a disturbing inclination to compromise her convictions in pursuit of support. Scott Stringer, who runs a state legislator's district office, sees the job through parochial eyes and hasn't yet learned how to balance local and citywide needs.

Jerry Goldfeder, an attorney, and Ethel Sheffer, consultant and former community board chairwould serve honorably. But Ms. Eldridge could would serve honorably. But Ms. Eldridge could serve with distinction. She has worked to improve child care and prisons and to help battered women. Her 30-year career in government and politics, city and state, promises much for the new Council -especially if Ms. Eldridge, sometimes given to weak follow-through, focuses her considerable energies.

Fifth District: In his nearly four years as a city legislator, Hilton Clark has failed to emerge as a leader of the Council or of his Harlem community. Of his two opponents, Virginia Fields, a social worker, and Wilbert Kirby, former member of the city Board of Corrections, the energetic Ms. Fields commands attention and our support.

Sixth District: The incumbent, Stanley Michels, who faces a lively challenge from Adriano Espailwho faces a lively challenge from Adriano Espaillat, continues after three terms to devote himself to the Council with unflagging interest. His energy and his sensitivity to his district's ethnic diversity recommend him for re-election. Mr. Espaillat, a coordinator with a city-funded bail reform agency, might make a promising candidate in the future, but would benefit from less rigidity and more seasoning.

Eighth District (Manhattan and the Bronx): Carolyn Maloney could be more effective, but has nonetheless provided caring representation for more than six years. Adam Clayton Powell 4th, an impressive newcomer, needs experience. William Perkins, deputy chief clerk in the Manhattan Board of Elections, instills no confidence that he would imcouraging Mr. Powell in his pursuit of a political career.

The New York Times, September 10, 1985

Copyright 1985 The New York Times Company

The New York Times

September 10, 1985, Tuesday, Late City Final Edition

SECTION: Section A; Page 26, Column 1; Editorial Desk

LENGTH: 318 words

HEADLINE: Primary Election Choices


New York City's voters go to the polls from 6 A.M. until 9 P.M. today. This primary election will determine the Democratic nominations for, and hence the winners of, important offices in this predominantly Democratic city - mayor, City Council president, comptroller, three borough presidencies and district attorney of Manhattan. Democratic nominations for the City Council are at stake in many of the 35 districts.

Republicans will pay special heed to races for two nominations in districts where they are strong: the First District, in Staten Island, and the 21st District, in Queens. In Suffolk County, the Republicans have an important contest for surrogate and Democrats will make an important choice for one seat in the county legislature.

Nominations for Civil Court judgeships are being contested by Democrats in Manhattan and the Bronx.

Here are our preferences in races likely to determine the outcome in November: Citywide MAYOR Edward Koch CITY COUNCIL PRESIDENT Andrew Stein COMPTROLLER Harrison Goldin Bronx BOROUGH PRESIDENT Jose Serrano CITY COUNCIL Eighth District (also Manhattan): Carolyn Maloney; Ninth: Wendell Foster; 11th: Sandra Love; 12th: Michael DeMarco; 13th: Fernando Ferrer.


Boroughwide: Rubin Franco Manhattan BOROUGH PRESIDENT David Dinkins DISTRICT ATTORNEY Robert Morgenthau CITY COUNCIL Second District: Virginia Kee; Third: Carol Greitzer; Fourth: Ruth Messinger; Fifth: Frederick Samuel; Sixth: Stanley Michels; Seventh: Robert Dryfoos; Eighth: Carolyn Maloney.


Boroughwide: William Thom; Ninth District: Lewis Friedman.


BOROUGH PRESIDENT Howard Golden CITY COUNCIL 25th District: Susan Alter; 26th: Enoch Williams; 27th: Victor Robles; 28th: Mary Pinkett; 30th: Richard Guay.


CITY COUNCIL 17th District: Archie Spigner; 19th: Julia Harrison; 21st: Clifford Wilson; 34th: Joseph Lisa.

The New York Times, September 5, 1985

Copyright 1985 The New York Times Company

The New York Times

September 5, 1985, Thursday, Late City Final Edition

SECTION: Section A; Page 26, Column 1; Editorial Desk

LENGTH: 781 words

HEADLINE: For the City Council


Two candidates for president of the New York City Council are spending millions on the crudest, least enlightening citywide campaign in memory. Meanwhile, three unknown candidates have been unable to make themselves heard above the hubbub. Voters can, and probably should, ignore the overheated campaign and judge the candidates on past performance.

The job has three duties: to preside over the Council, to act on citizen complaints against city government and to cast two of the Board of Estimate's 11 votes. The Council president also follows the mayor in the city hierarchy; Carol Bellamy, the incumbent, used it to keep herself in the public eye with proposals for municipal management.

Joseph Erazo, who served as aide to Mayor Beame and in other appointive offices, has shown concern for city interests and an ability to work with others, yet has won little support. State Senator Israel Ruiz, a strong voice in Albany, shows more skill as a debater than as a policy maker. Angelo DelToro has made a strong record in the Assembly, but one that shows devotion to his East Harlem community, not a grasp of city problems.

The main contenders and heavy spenders are Kenneth Lipper, who served for two years as a Deputy Mayor in the Koch administration, and Andrew Stein, the Manhattan Borough President and a former Assemblyman.

Mr. Lipper. a former financier, was often effective in advancing economic development projects for City Hall. But the successes were delayed and at times diminished by Mr. Lipper's divisiveness. He demonstrated a dismaying tendency to change direction and to antagonize adversaries and colleagues alike.

Mr. Stein has held public office for 17 years. His most impressive achievement remains pursuit of the nursing home scandal in the Rockefeller years. His glibness at times distracts from his useful service to the aged and to tenants. Yet he has also supported measures of great value to the city as a whole. We favor Mr. Stein.

Listed below are our endorsements for Council membership in contested races for the Democratic nomination, which lamentably makes the primary the only election. We tend to favor members with satisfactory past service; (*) indicates incumbents.

MANHATTAN. Second District: We favor Virginia Kee, a teacher and a Democratic state committee member who is likely to represent various community groups evenly. The incumbent, Miriam Friedlander*, has worked hard for some but others claim to have been neglected. Third District: Carol Greitzer*, third-ranking member in length of service, is preferred over David Rothenberg, a candidate with outstanding political promise. Fourth District: Ruth Messinger*, though rigid in her views, has by hard work earned re-election over Pat Wagner, an appealing newcomer. Fifth District: Frederick Samuel* merits re-election, though Hilton Clark should be encouraged to try again for public office. Sixth District: The able Stanley Michels*. Seventh District: Robert Dryfoos*, a constructive member. Eighth District (also Bronx): Carolyn Maloney*, intelligent and energetic, has amply earned re-election.

BRONX. Ninth District: Wendell Foster* deserves re-election. 11th District: Sandra Love*, long busy in local health and community affairs, is well prepared for the Council. 12th District: Michael DeMarco*, a senior Council member, warrants re-election, as do, in the 13th District, Fernando Ferrer*, and in the 14th District, Jerry Crispino*.

QUEENS. 17th District: We prefer Archie Spigner* for a fourth term but hope Joan Bryan, an airline executive, will pursue a public career. 19th District: Julia Harrison, a member of the State Assembly, has long demonstrated a realistic understanding of government and the district. 21st District: Clifford Wilson, an experienced Assemblyman, should make an excellent Council member and we prefer him to Walter Crowley*, appointed to the vacancy last year. 34th District: another difficult choice. We prefer Joseph Lisa*, former Assembly member, over Helen Curzio Sears, a Health and Hospitals executive.

BROOKLYN. 25th District: Susan Alter* has represented this district for two terms and understands it well. We favor, in the 26th District, Enoch Williams*, and in the 27th District, Victor Robles*. 28th District: Two able women present a difficult choice. Mary Pinkett* deserves to remain in her seat, but her opponent, Katie Davis, who has had a noteworthy career as a health professional, deserves a place in government. 30th District: Three candidates vie for the seat vacated by Thomas Cuite. We prefer Richard Guay, a former Federal prosecutor and community council head. 32d District: Noach Dear* should be re-elected.

The New York Times, May 22, 1983

Copyright 1983 The New York Times Company

The New York Times

May 22, 1983, Sunday, Late City Final Edition

SECTION: Section 4; Page 20, Column 1; Editorial Desk

LENGTH: 176 words



Well-Schooled Voters


Nine members of the so-called National Democratic Policy Committee, an organization inspired and led by Lyndon LaRouche Jr., entered the New York school board election in District 6, covering Inwood, Washington Heights and upper Harlem. The threat of their candidacies helped bring 14,000 voters to the polls, 6,000 more than three years ago. Not one of the group was elected.

The LaRouche-affiliated candidates complained about inadequacies of the schools and attacked public officials with harsh personal innuendoes. They also warned of the alleged threat of British and Israeli intelligence agents, a standard LaRouche issue. It was impossible to read such broad-sides without feeling that ''anti-British'' bias masked anti-Semitism.

Thanks to local organizations, unions and Councilman Stanley Michels, the anti-LaRouche forces were able to rout their opponents. The big turnout, noted also in other districts facing controversy, was in itself encouraging; it may indicate a reversal of the declining interest in school board elections since 1970.

The New York Times, November 2, 1982

Copyright 1982 The New York Times Company

The New York Times

November 2, 1982, Tuesday, Late City Final Edition

SECTION: Section A; Page 22, Column 1; Editorial Desk

LENGTH: 1045 words

HEADLINE: Election Day Choices


Here is a summary of our recommendations for closely contested races. As always, our strongest recommendation is nonpartisan: vote. The polls are open in New York State from 6 A.M. to 9 P.M., New Jersey from 7 A.M. to 8 P.M. and Connecticut from 6 A.M. to 8 P.M.

NEW YORK GOVERNOR AND LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR Mario Cuomo and Alfred Del Bello (D-L). COMPTROLLER Edward Regan (R-C). ATTORNEY GENERAL Robert Abrams (D-L). UNITED STATES SENATE Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-L).

New York City PROPOSITION Public Utility Service: Yes.


Countywide: Amos Bowman (R-L), Arnold Guy Fraiman (R-L), Edward Greenfield (R-L), Jawn Sandifer (R-L), Harold Baer Jr. (L), Shirley Levittan (R), James Leff (R-L), Felice Shea (L), Carmen Ciparik (L), Bruce Wright (L).


Renee Roth (D-R-L).


Countywide: Sheldon Levy (D-R-L), Leona Freedman (D-L), Benjamin Borden (R).


15th District: Bill Green (R-Independent Neighbors).


3d District: Carol Greitzer (D-L); 6th: Stanley Michels (D-L); 7th: Robert Dryfoos (D); 8th: Carolyn Maloney (D).


26th District: Roy Goodman (R-L); 27th: Manfred Ohrenstein (D-L); 28th: Franz Leichter (D-L).


69th District: Edward Sullivan (D-L); 71st: Herman Farrell Jr. (D-L).


18th District: Robert Garcia


10th District: June Eisland (D-L); 12th: Michael DeMarco (D-C).


34th District: John Calandra (R-C-Right to Life).


73d District: Jose Serrano (D-L); 75th: Guy Velella (R-C-RTL); 76th: Aurelia Greene (D); 78th: Gloria Davis (D-L); 79th: George Friedman (D-L); 80th: G. Oliver Koppell (D-L); 81st: Eliot Engel (D-L); 82d: Vincent Marchiselli (D-L).


14th District: Leo Zeferetti (D).


23 District: Herbert Berman (D); 25th: Susan Alter (L); 26th: Albert Blakely (L); 28th: Mary Pinkett (D); 29th: Abraham Gerges (D-L); 30th: Thomas Cuite (D-C-RTL); 31st: Salvatore Albanese (D-L); 35th District: Allen Cappelli (L).


17th District: Howard Babbush (D-L); 20th: Thomas Bartosiewicz (D); 22d: Johnny Cousar (L).


54th District: Thomas Catapano (D-L).


17th District: Archie Spigner (D-L) 19th: Edward Sadowsky (D-L); 20th: Peter Vallone (D); 21st: Thomas Manton (D-C); 34th: Joseph Lisa (D).


10th District: Andrew Jenkins (D-L); 11th: Frank Padavan (R-C-RTL); 13th: Emanuel Gold (D-L); 15th District: Thomas Santucci (D).


25th District: John Duane (D); 27th: Nettie Mayersohn (D); 29th: Cynthia Jenkins (D-L); 35th: Helen Marshall (D).


14th District: Leo Zeferetti (D).


1st District: Nicholas LaPorte (D-C-RTL).


24th District: John Marchi (D-R-C).


60th District: Robert Straniere (R-C-RTL).

Nassau and Suffolk HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 3d District: Robert Mrazek (D).


2. A $170 million bond issue to provide urgently needed relief for the state's critically overcrowded penal institutions. Yes. 4. An $85 million bond issue to promote social and commercial development in older cities and developing communities would stimulate an estimated total investment of more than $500 million in economic development activity for hard-pressed New Jersey cities. Yes.

5. A constitutional amendment to permit the State Legislature to fix the cost of settling state claims to riparian land would cheat a school bond fund out of needed revenue, since riparian land settlements support the fund. No.


1st District: James Florio (D); 3d: James Howard (D); 4th: Joseph Merlino (D); 7th: Adam Levin (D); 9th: Robert Torricelli (D); 10th: Peter Rodino Jr. (D).


1. The replacement of grand juries in death penalty and life imprisonment cases with probable cause hearings before a judge would allow prosecutors and defense attorneys to participate, permitting the state to make a more thorough presentation and the defendant to cross examine. Yes.

2. Empowering the Legislature to veto regulations promulgated by state agencies, would intrude needlessly on administrative prerogative.No.

4. Establishing an intermediate appellate court would relieve an increasinly overburdened Supreme Court and replace an existing intermediate court with narrow jurisdiction.Yes.


3d District: Lawrence DeNardis (R); 4th: Stewart McKinney (R); 5th: William Ratchford (D); 6th: William Curry Jr. (D).

The New York Times, October 25, 1982

Copyright 1982 The New York Times Company

The New York Times

October 25, 1982, Monday, Late City Final Edition

SECTION: Section A; Page 18, Column 1; Editorial Desk

LENGTH: 456 words

HEADLINE: Choices for the City Council


Only some seats in New York's City Council are hotly contested in next week's general election. Ranging through the districts, we offer these special recommendations, giving weight to competence and incumbency. (Unless otherwise identified, all are Democrats, many with Liberal endorsements.)

MANHATTAN - 3d District: Carol Greitzer, a constructive member, deserves re-election. 6th District: Stanley Michels has been a sound legislator except on rent control. 7th District: Robert Dryfoos merits re-election for serving constituents well while also supporting City Hall on unpopular issues. His law practice encroaches on Council duties, indicating poor judgment. But his Republican-Liberal challenger, David Goldstein, is a zealous prosecutor who misconceives the Council's duties as investigative. 8th District: Carolyn Maloney, with staff experience in Albany, merits election.

BRONX - 10th District: June Eisland deserves re-election. 12th District: Michael DeMarco has demonstrated intellectual and personal growth.

QUEENS - 17th District: Archie Spigner's work warrants reelection. 19th District: An invaluable fiscal expert would be lost if Edward Sadowsky is not returned. 20th District: Peter Vallone strikes a welcome conservative note amid the Council's pro-gressive attitudes. That also applies in the 21st District, to Thomas Manton. 22d District: Incumbent Arthur Katzman has sound liberal views. 34th District: Joseph Lisa, former Assemblyman, has an edge over Republican-Conservative Lawrence Linekin, an appealing but untried candidate.

BROOKLYN - 23d District: Herbert Berman is a worthy leader of borough Democrats. The 25th District's Susan Alter and the 28th District's Mary Pinkett should be returned. But in the 26th District, we favor Liberal newcomer Albert Blakely over incumbent Democrat Enoch Williams. 29th District: Despite his fight against solid waste incineration, we favor Abraham Gerges. 30th District: We urge the reelection of Majority Leader Thomas Cuite, who keeps disagreements under control, but we are impressed by Liberal challenger Stephen DiBrienza.

31st District: Republicans are underrepresented in the Council. Yet their only district member, Angelo Arculeo, shows signs of flagging interest after two decades; he should be replaced by Democrat Sal Albanese, a school teacher. 35th District (partly in Staten Island): We recommend Liberal Allen Cappelli, a lively new face.

STATEN ISLAND - 1st District: Nicholas La Porte deserves another term.


Blogger forstine said...

Start Making Money 'Processing Judicial Judgments'

One of a kind CD ROM with included media player and bonus material Never seen or ever has there been anything like it. Platform :: Windows 98/2000/ME/XP

don't have to print the whole thing out anymore cause you can't read it all sitting in front of your computer.

This CD Rom has the course cleverly seperated and ready for easy reading. No thumbing through the papers to cross reference or to get back to a certain page. Just click on the chapters and go exactly where you wanna go each and every time.

Absolutely NO SELLING. You don't even have to talk to your clients.
Leave the comfort of your home ONLY occasionally to go to the courthouse.

Judgment recovery is in its infancy throughout the entire country but this industry is getting ready to explode!! There are literally millions of people in our country today who are holding a judgment that was awarded to them by the court, and they have no way to collect it. Judgment recovery is a tremendous business that is just catching fire, and it is very likely that you will be the only Judgment Recovery Specialist in your town.

You will recieve this business start up CD ROM with an option to purchase a website for your newly formed business go here to see what your website will look like:

What is judgment recovery?

When two people go to court over a dispute, only one of them wins. The winner (plaintiff), is awarded a judgment for a designated amount of money. Now comes the problem. How to collect the money owed to them. That's what judgment recovery is - the recovery of the funds awarded to the plaintiff in the judgment. The existing recovery methods leave a lot to be desired. Collections agencies don't work - all they do is send some nasty letters and make some phone calls. Attorneys will ask for a retainer, then it will cost an arm and a leg - if the attorney can collect it at all. Trying to collect it alone doesn't work, because no one knows how to go about it. So chances are, anyone awarded a judgment ends up holding a court-awarded piece of paper that does them absolutely no good whatsoever. All because no one knows HOW to collect the judgment! Having been awarded a judgment is one thing, collecting it is quite another.

The answer?
A Judgment Recovery Specialist! As a Recovery Specialist, you are the one they will come to in order to collect their judgment. The plaintiff will pay you a handsome commission to recover the money owing him from the judgment. No! You don't have to go to court or sue anyone, this has already been done by the plaintiff. You simply help him/her collect their money. So the age old dilemma of how to collect a judgment is quickly opening up a wide door of opportunity for millions of Americans, all because of Judgment Recovery Specialists. This is a long-awaited answer to a decades-old problem.

Is judgment recovery hard to do?
Not at all. Judgment recovery is not as difficult as collection agencies and attorneys would have the public believe. You locate your clients (those who have been awarded a judgment), by going to your local county court house, looking at the county records (these records are public and are available to anyone who wishes to see them), and making a list of those you want to contact. Then it's as simple as going home and sending them a letter explaining your services. You don't have to sell anything and you don't even have to talk to people on the phone if you don't want to. But you can believe once they get your letter and understand what you're going to do for them, they will be ringing your telephone off the hook. Getting your clients is no problem whatsoever. You'll find very quickly that you'll have more clients than you can handle. What a great position to be in. There are so few Recovery Specialists in the country that once the word gets around, you'll find business coming from everywhere!

Why will your clients be so anxious to pay you such great commissions?
Because 50% of something is better than 100% of nothing. And that's what they have now. Nothing! Just a piece of paper that says they are owed 'x' number of dollars. That's it! A piece of paper. They want the money in their hands, not a piece of paper, and they are delighted to pay you up to 50% of the recovered funds in order to get their share of the money. This is the standard commission structure for the judgment recovery industry.

A Judgment Recovery Specialist is the answer for millions of people. This course is designed to teach you everything you need to know about becoming a judgment recovery specialist. It will show you how to locate debtors and their assets anywhere in the country. All the tricks of the trade are here. Never before has there been such a complete, comprehensive course of this kind offered to the public. Here are some of the chapters in this fantastic manual:

Where to Find All the Judicial Judgments You Can Handle!
What to Look For
Having Judgments Assigned to You
Your Fees
Responses from Judgment Holders
Debtor Work Sheet
Industry Etiquette
How to Find Debtors - ANYWHERE!
How to Find Debtor's Assets
Resources/Credit Bureaus
What Assets to Seize
Mailing a Summons
Collecting Post-Judgment Interest/Costs
Out of State Judgments
Samples of Letterhead/Business Envelopes

As in any profession that touches on utilizing state law, you will find that familiarizing yourself with the statutes in your particular state concerning the collection of judgments to be your best ally. There is no substitute for knowledge. This manual will teach you all you need to know about recovering judgments for others. Just think of how many people you personally know that are holding a worthless judgment because it can't be collected. Once you begin to talk about it, you'll find there are more people than you ever imagined that have been awarded a judgment, but have never been able to do anything to collect it. Now you can provide a valuable service to them and make yourself a tremendous income at the same time.

Your fees are based on a percentage of the judgment. As an example, if your client has a judgment for $5,000, and your fee to collect it is 50% of the judgment, your fee would be $2,500. You can see it wouldn't take too many judgments in a month's time to make an incredible income. A lot of your clients will be doctors, hospitals, jewelers, apartment owners, etc. These people often win multiple judgments and will be a source of continuous business for you. You can adjust your fee schedule downward for those who give you more than one judgment to collect. Hard work and dedication to your client are the secret ingredients to any business. Judgment recovery is no exception. We are not offering a "get-rich-quick" scheme. This is a highly professional, exceptionally lucrative way to earn your living without leaving the comfort of your home, except for trips to the court house and the bank. Just think of the respect you will command in your community. You and your family will be proud that you've chosen to be a Judgment Recovery Specialist.

I offer this item with website: View my company's site to see what yours will look like ofcourse it can all be customized for you.

CD ROM also contains very important links and other information, 2 bonus ebooks are also included with this CD ROM already convienently installed on the disk. Plus this CD ROM also has a small media player on it, just in case you'd like to listen to your favorite tune while sharpening your knowledge.

free legal informationjudgments

5:32 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home