Case 94-0436P Garganta v Union Central . Complaint filed by Mr. Garganta, the Pro Se Plaintiff. Magistrate Boudewyns and Judge Pettine made it impossible for Mr. Garganta to have a fair breach of contract trial because of the following:
The District Court's reasoning was the evidence eliminated from the trial was irrelevant and prejudicial to the insurance company. Magistrate Boudewyns and Judge Pettine acted in collusion with and assisted Union Central in breaching their contractual obligations with Mr. Garganta. A close analysis of this case will reveal nothing short of institutionalized, court sponsored insurance fraud. The District Court's handling of this case was a setup guaranteeing a loss for Mr. Garganta.
See complaint filed by Citizen Don Gill [Case Gill v Rhode Island 94-0331B] asserting complete manipulation of civil procedure, judicial bias, judicial intimidation, unauthorized practice of law, altered transcripts and manipulation and denial of due process and other civil rights. This case is a classic example of the shenanigans Citizens without influence experience in Rhode Island courts.
Some comments: 3 different lawyers familiar with Federal District Court have told those involved with Caught.net that they would not want Magistrate Judge Boudewyns to try a case for them. 2 of these lawyers said outright they would not trust the Magistrate's objectivity. The third lawyer expressed being "uncomfortable" with the Magistrate, particularly when the case involves the "little guy" against the "big guy." As was told to Caught.net:
"The Magistrate has serious problems with objectivity. The Magistrate believes "official duty" and "judicial efficiency" involves superimposing his idea of how a case should go into every aspect of a case. The Magistrate's rulings and reasoning are more affected by his view on how a case should go instead of being based on objectivity, law and facts. The Magistrate's bias in favor of the large insurance company was obvious from the start of my proceedings. In denying me summary judgment, the Magistrate created his own non-factual arguments. While some may think this a stretch, one word that comes to mind in describing the Magistrate is "pampered" by the system."