Motion to the Appellate Division

* SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK*

* APPELLATE DIVISION FIRST DEPARTMENT*

* ________________________________________*

* Sam Sloan,*

* Petitioner,*

* -against- Index No. 260328/2014*

*Jose E. Serrano*

*Board of Elections in the City of New York*

* Respondent.*

* _________________________________________*

*NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR AN ORDER GRANTING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND
AFTER A HEARING INVALIDATING THE PETITIONS FILED BY CONGRESSMAN JOSE E.
SERRANO FOR RE-ELECTION*

* _________________________________________*

*PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT upon the annexed affidavit of Samuel H. Sloan and
the exhibits attached hereto including the proposed Order to Show Cause
denied by Judge Kenneth L. Thompson filed in Bronx Supreme Court on April
25, 2014, the Petitions filed by Sam Sloan to INVALIDATE the petitions
filed by Congressman for re-election dated and filed on April 24, 2014, the
affidavit in support of the Order to Show Cause and the exhibits attached
thereto dated April 24, 2014 and the affidavit asking for rehearing of the
denial of the Order to Show Cause dated April 28, 2014, the undersigned
will move this court located at 27 Madison Avenue New York NY on the 7th
Day of May 2014 at ______ M for an order granting the Order to Show Cause
and after a hearing INVALIDATING the petitions filed by Jose E. Serrano.*

* Yours, Etc.*

* ________________________*

* Samuel H. Sloan*

* 1664 Davidson Avenue, Apt. 1B*

* Bronx NY 10453*

* 917-507-7226*

* 917-659-3397*

* samhsloan@...
<samhsloan@...> *

*To:*

*Jerry H. Goldfeder*

*Attorney for Congressman Jose E. Serrano*

*180 Maiden Lane*

*New York NY 10004*

*Steven Richman*

*Counsel to Board of Elections in the City of New York*

*32 Broadway, 7th Floor*

*New York NY 10004*

*212-487-5300*

* SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK*

* APPELLATE DIVISION FIRST DEPARTMENT*

* ________________________________________*

* Sam Sloan,*

* Petitioner,*

* -against- Index No. 260328/2014*

*Jose E. Serrano*

*Board of Elections in the City of New York*

* Respondent.*

* _________________________________________*

*AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR AN ORDER GRANTING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
AND AFTER A HEARING INVALIDATING THE PETITIONS FILED BY CONGRESSMAN JOSE E.
SERRANO FOR RE-ELECTION*

* _________________________________________*

*STATE OF NEW YORK :*

* : SS*

*COUNTY OF NEW YORK :*

*Samuel H. Sloan, being duly sworn, deposes and says *

   1. *I make this affidavit in support of a motion for an order to show
   cause. I am seeking to invalidate the election petitions by Congressman
   Jose E. Serrano, who is seeking re-election to US Congress. On Friday,
   April 25, 2014, I waited almost all day in Room 216 of the Bronx Supreme
   Court for the judge to sign an order to show cause. Then, at just 4:58 PM
   the clerk brought down an unsigned order and said that the judge did not
   sign it because the previous day, April 24, was the last day.*

*2. On Monday (today) I went back to the Bronx Supreme Court to request
reconsideration. The clerks indicated that the only recourse is to the
Appellate Division.*

*3. This special proceeding is brought to invalidate the petitions by
Congressman Jose E. Serrano to run for re-election under Election Law
Sections 16-100 and 16-102 and other provisions of New York Law.*

*4. I understand that because my initial motion was denied by the Bronx
Supreme Court judge, my motion to the Appellate Division must be decided by
a full panel of this court, not by an individual judge. Accordingly, I am
making such a motion.*

*5. Frankly, the petitions submitted by Congressman Serrano are garbage and
would never withstand review. Specific objections were filed against the
petitions filed by Congressman Serrano on the ground that these petitions
are filled with obviously false and in some cases fraudulent signatures.
Many of his subscribing witnesses are not registered to vote including
Javier Lopez, Stephen Castillo and David McKay. There are also many cases
of completely illegible signature, completely different signature, no
signature at all, signature does not match the signature on the buff care
and a few obvious forgeries. *

*6. According to the official elections calendar, a hearing was to be held
on these specific objections at 42 Broadway New York NY at 10:00 AM on
April 24, 2014. A copy of that calendar is attached hereto as an exhibit.
However, for reasons unknown or unexplained, the Board of Elections
postponed that hearing until 1:30 PM. *

*7. The Official calendar states: "Last Day to Institute Judicial
Proceedings Thursday, April 24, 2014 OR (3) business days with regard
with regard to designating petitions after BOE hearing where petition is
invalidated."*

*8. Because the hearing on April 24, 2014 was postponed until 1:30 PM that
shortened the time to file in court against the decision of the Board of
Elections. The hearing before the Board of Elections concluded at about
3:00 PM. The Board ruled that Serrano would stay on the ballot. I
immediately took the subway up to the Bronx Supreme Court. After going
through all the procedures to file a court case, I filed a petition to
INVALIDATE the petitions of Serrano at 4:40 PM. A copy of my time stamped
petition showing the filing on April 24, 2014 at 4:40 PM is attached
hereto.*

*8. However, I then ran upstairs to room 216, the room to file ex-party
orders, only to find that the door to the room was locked and nobody was
present. This was at about 4:43 PM. The court staff had decided to go home
early.*

*9. Since nothing more could be done that day I went home and came back the
following day with my papers and submitted them to room 216. That is when I
waited all day only to have the clerk come down and say that the judge had
not signed the order because April 24, 2014 had been the last day.*

*10. The time stamp shows that I did initiate judicial proceedings on April
24, 2014. It was only because the board of elections did not start their
hearing until 1:30 PM that I got to court late in the day. Had the Board of
Elections started at 10:00 AM as originally scheduled there would have been
more than enough time to file my Invalidating Petition that day. It also
took several minutes to be searched and get through security. Had I gotten
through security five minutes earlier I would have reached room 216 in time
to get the order to show cause signed. Had the staff not decided to go home
early my order to show cause would have been signed that day too.*

*11. **The hearing before the Board of Elections on April 24, 2014 is
available on youtube.com <http://youtube.com>*

*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3fSC2xtGNM
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3fSC2xtGNM>*

*The hearing with regard to my particular case starts at 3:35 after the
start of the hearing. This clearly shows that the Election Commissioners
were well aware that Congressman Serrano was in Washington DC and therefore
could not be served. Nevertheless they dismissed the specific objections
solely on the grounds that they had not been personally served on that date
and only his contact person and attorney had been served.*

*12. **This court should also consider the fact that Congressman Serrano
is a big and powerful person who has influence over the hiring of the
Commissioners of Election and they are clearly biased in his favor.*

*13. **The Board of Elections is not a court of law. It is just an
administrative body. The requirements they are imposing me that I cannot
speak as a hearing unless I am an attorney at law and that Congressman
Serrano must be personally served before filing specific objections even
though he is out of state and unavailable is unreasonable especially since
objectors often have only three days to do line-by-line review of thousands
of signatures.*

*WHEREFORE, for all of the reasons set forth above, Petitioner prays for an
order to show cause directing a hearing on:*

*1. Declaring that the Specific Objections filed by Diomedes Vega on April
16, 2014 were timely and properly served and filed in that Congressman
Serrano was in Washington DC attending a Congressional Committee Hearing
regarding Internet Security on that date and thus could not be personally
served anywhere in New York State on that date and his lawyer and official
contact person Jerry Goldfeder was properly served by Vega on that date.*

*2. Declaring that the refusal of the Board of Elections to allow Candidate
Sam Sloan to speak as to the issues of the invalidity of the petitions and
the specific objections to the petitions was improper.*

*3. Declaring that the refusal of the Board of Elections in the City of New
York to consider the specific objections filed by Diomedes Vega was
improper and contrary to law and therefore the Board of Elections must rule
and pass upon these specific objections following which this court will
rule of the issues.*

*4. Declaring the petitions submitted by Serrano were permeated with fraud
in that in the vast majority of signatures of witnesses were illegible,
unreadable, did not match the signatures on the voter registration cards or
the witnesses were not registered to vote and other reasons.*

*5. Declaring that the petitions submitted by Jose E. Serrano are invalid
and thus his name will appear on the ballot.*

* ________________________*

* Samuel H. Sloan*

* 1664 Davidson Avenue, Apt. 1B*

* Bronx NY 10453*

* 917-507-7226*

* 917-659-3397*

* samhsloan@...
<samhsloan@...> *

*Sworn to Before me this 28th *

*Day of April 2014*

Sam,

  This is good stuff -- it sounds on the face of it like you have some strong arguments here. Obviously in this corrupt system that is no guarantee of justice, but good for you for requiring them to go through the motions of making obviously unfair judgements!

  I noticed a few mostly minor grammatical errors in the following sentences of your petition (although the missing word "not" in point #5 could be important). I expect you've already filed it and that it's too late to fix them, but in case you have any opportunity to make corrections, here are some proposed fixes (in strike-thru and all-caps):

I am seeking to invalidate the election petitions by SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF Congressman Jose E. Serrano, who is seeking re-election REELECTION to THE US Congress.

3. This special proceeding is brought to invalidate the petitions by OF Congressman Jose E. Serrano to run for re-election REELECTION

There are also many cases of completely illegible signatureS, completely different signatureS, no signature at all, signature does not match the signature on the buff care CARD, and a few obvious forgeries.

The requirements they are imposing ON me that I cannot speak as AT a hearing unless I am an attorney at law and that Congressman Serrano must be personally served before filing specific objections AGAINST HIM even though he is out of state and unavailable is ARE unreasonable...

4. Declaring the petitions submitted by ON BEHALF OF Serrano were permeated with fraud in that in the vast majority of signatures of witnesses were illegible, unreadable, did not match the signatures on the voter registration cards or the witnesses were not registered to vote and other reasons OR OTHER PROBLEMS EXISTED.

5. Declaring that the petitions submitted by ON BEHALF OF Jose E. Serrano are invalid and thus his name will NOT appear on the ballot.

I have read the foregoing petition subscribed by me and know the contents thereof and the same is true of my own knowledge, except as to those matters herein stated to be alleged upon information and belief and as to those matters I believe it THEM to be true.

  If you have any further documents to file in this case and have time to run them by me prior to submitting them, I'd be happy to try to edit for you any errors I might notice. (There may be others in the petition below that I did not spot on a relatively quick perusal; in some cases the language sounded awkward, but may be following legal form.)

Love & Liberty,
                                 ((( starchild )))