Injustice Experienced By Howard And Andrea Fease In Rhode Island
Judicial Misconduct Must Go Before The Commission On Judicial Tenure And Discipline
Informational Note - Many people believe it is best to complain about a Judge to the Judge's
immediate superior. In this case, the Judge "supervising" Judge Pfeiffer
is Judge Rodgers. Note that the experience of those involved with Caught shows that
supervising Judges usually always ignore complaints of misconduct. Complaints must go to the Commission of Judicial Tenure And Discipline
To: Presiding Justice Joseph F. Rodgers, Jr. Date: June 4,
2002 From: Howard R. Fease and Andrea M. Fease Case: Newport Superior Case #NC
02-175, Allaire et al v. Fease & Fease
Dear Presiding Justice Rodgers:
We are writing you with the hope that further action will
not become necessary involving one Justice Mark Pfeiffer
of the Newport Superior Court. Our ordeal with this man began on April 5, 2002. We had
always thought that a party was innocent until proven guilty and that the Plaintiff bears
the burden of proof. However, in Mark Pfeiffer's Court, that is untrue. We are
enclosing transcripts of Hearings held on April 5, 2002, May 6, 2002 and May 28, 2002, as
well as the docket and a letter to the Judge's good pal, Attorney Anthony
DeSisto. The following is a partial list of stunts this Judge has pulled:
- April 5, 2002: Hearing for Motion for a Temporary Restraining
Order. Action: Motion Passed
- April 11, 2002: 3 days after the Defendants receive a copy, the
passed order is now entered. No provision for Rule 5 or Rule 77F apply to this
- May 6, 2002: Hearing for a TRO on a Order that was passed and
then NEVER SERVED. Pfeiffer states that he will travel to Hog Island on May 8, 2002 to
enforce a restraining order he passed and that was NEVER served. In the May 6, 2002
transcript, Attorney DeSisto admits on page 16 that he has never been on Hog Island.
- May 8, 2002: Judge Pfeiffer comes to Hog Island minus a
reporter, recorder or any device to record what he says or does. Plaintiff Frederick
Wilkinson is a member of the Bristol Harbor Commission, yet Judge Pfeiffer travels on a
boat he is in charge of anyway. Later, a person advises the Defendants that he witnessed
Pfeiffer and Fred Wilkinson talking prior to the Judge's trip. Judge Pfeiffer sees
that Attorney DeSisto lied on April 5, 2002. Pfeiffer's answer - Attorney
DeSisto's words were "not on the record". After conferring with Attorney
Borden, who took DeSisto's place on the Hog Island visit, Judge Pfeiffer tells
everyone that we will start all over on May 24, 2002.
- May 24, 2002: Suddenly this is a hearing for a Preliminary
Injunction to cover his and DeSisto's tracks on the passed TRO. Although Andrea Fease
is a Defendant, and both Howard and Andrea Fease are pro se, she is not allowed to ask the
witnesses any questions. The Defendants have ordered this transcript. He tells the Feases
to return on May 28, 2002. The Feases tell him they cannot. He says too bad. When Howard
Fease asks how come there is a TRO, and points out that we are the Defendants and that
Attorney DeSisto has misrepresented the facts, Pfeiffer has him removed from the Court.
- May 28, 2002: His Honor settles the case with NO JURY or
without any notice of a TRO to the Defendants. Despite the fact that the Defendants have
filed Motions for Joinder, Dismissal, and an Objection to the TRO, none of this appears on
the Docket. The Defendants sent every Motion with tracking, therefore Pfeiffer can't
weasel out that way.
Kindly read the transcript of May 28, 2002. Read page 10
where Pfeiffer is telling DeSisto to make sure (THIS TIME) that the order is served.
Notice on the Docket for May 24th it states "continued". We were put
on Trial on that date. On the 28th of May, Pfeiffer settled the case. He has
stated for the record that the Plaintiffs have proven their case. He states we did not
- Then why do we have Sheriffs' Receipts?
- Why did Pfeiffer issue a Preliminary Injunction without a
- Why was Pfeiffer on the Bristol Harbor Patrol Boat when a
lead Plaintiff is Vice-Chairman of the Bristol Harbor Commission?
- Why did Pfeiffer not bring a stenographer?
- Why did Pfeiffer put the Defendants on Trial on May 24, 2002
for contempt of a TRO he passed?
- Why on May 28, 2002 did Pfeiffer institute a Preliminary
Injunction in one instance, on the transcript, showing he was granting a prayer for
relief, and on the Order, which he signed in 2 days flat again, ignoring the Rules of
Civil Procedure, it states by motion? A motion the Defendants were never served, any more
than they were served the TRO.
- Why doesn't the docket show any of the Defendants'
Motion or their Counterclaim?
- Why is Pfeiffer ignoring anything the Defendants say? Because
they are pro se?
- Why did Pfeiffer ignore and deprive the Defendants of their
right to a Jury and instead did DeSisto's bidding?
- Why, on Page 17 of the transcript of May 6, 2002, does
Pfeiffer state, "I would welcome you to go to the Rhode Island Supreme Court?"
- In the transcript of May 28, 2002, page 3, suddenly the case
is a Preliminary Injunction.
- Why on the April 5, 2002 transcript is the case Adverse
Possession and now its Easement by Prescription?
- Why on Page 4, when he describes the standards, does he leave
The facts speak loud and clear. We have appealed this
matter. We further intend to file conduct charges and potentially Criminal Conduct Charges
against this Corrupt Judge. If ever a case cried out for removal of a Judge, this is
it. If you don't respond and remove him, then we will begin taking all legal steps at
our disposal to see that no other person is ever subjected to this misconduct again. We
will be bringing in further transcripts upon receipt, however the facts speak for
themselves. We have appealed this Preliminary Injunction, however every day that
this farce of a proceeding stands will be another day added to the Complaint we intend to
file against Mark Pfeiffer. Thank you for your kind attention. We will await your
Sincerely - Howard R. Fease and Andrea M. Fease
"Obviously, you are not aware of the powers available
to the Presiding Justice of the Superior Court for the State of Rhode Island. As
Presiding Justice, I have neither the authority nor the power to remove any judge from any
case. Any party who believes a judge is biased or prejudiced has a right to request
that judge to recuse him/herself from the trial. If that request is denied, I have
no authority to intervene."
"...As the Presiding Justice of the Superior Court, I am not the party to whom an
appeal from a decision of a Superior Court Justice is directed."
"Further, be advised that since I do not have the authority to review a decision of a
Superior Court Justice, there was no need to review the paperwork you submitted, I am
therefore, returning it all to you."
It was clear from the Fease complaint that
they were asserting judicial misconduct charges against Judge
Pfeiffer. It is curious that Justice Rodgers didn't encourage the Feases to file
a complaint with the Commission on Judicial Tenure and