United States District Court - District of Columbia — Local services in Washington

Absolutely Corrupt!!! Zero stars Zero stars and in my opinion and based on my experiences recounted in detail herein the DC Federal District Court is absolutely corrupt

I am a nationally certified fraud examiner with 2 professional fraud related professional designations, In my case 21-CV-02593 it appears the DC Federal District Court (in this case presiding Judge Tim Kelly) with violations of the United States Constitution, fabricating testimony, fraud- concealment of material facts and fraudulently dismissing my case based on these crimes (Kelly’s February 28, 2023 Judgment of dismissal was easily overturned by the DC Federal Court of Appeals on October 15, 2024 (See attached order of the DC Federal Court of Appeals) My case was before District Judge Tim Kelly It was a straightforward case against my former attorney Dale Sanders charging Sanders with fraud, conspiracy to commit fraud, malicious prosecution, abuse of process, false light invasion of privacy and breach of fiduciary duty A little background - In 2013 Sanders disputed the terms of his Fee Contract requiring refunds and filed a lawsuit against me in the Alexandria Virginia Circuit Court (styled in that Court as Sanders v Farina CL 1300 3853) instead of submitting to arbitration before the DC Bar’s ACAB as he was required to do under DC mandatory arbitration laws (requiring arbitration of attorney fee disputes). Seven years later on October 5, 2020 I won that case with a dismissal with prejudice in my favor. By the time we came to this DC Federal Court in 2021, the dispute had already been in litigation in various courts for over 10 years. The end result of all this litigation was that I had 33 dismissals with prejudice in my favor issued by both the Alexandria Virginia Court AND the DC Superior Court of Dale Sanders many lawsuits against me. Also Sanders on January 16, 2018 was documented by Judge Robert Rigsby in presenting sworn testimony in the witness stand which did not match sworn testimony provided previously in deposition and/or prior sworn testimony. And in Orders dated October 25, 2016 the DC Superior Court Judge Rigsby presiding, granted my request for Declaratory Judgment ruling that Sanders violated DC’s mandatory attorney arbitration laws AND the Court ruling that on October 1, 2013 Sanders lied to me about the provisions of DC Bar Rule XIII to evade the arbitration required of him in DC, instead Sanders filing an illegal lawsuit in Virginia, Kelly dismissed my complaint on February 28, 2023 on a Rule 12C Judgment that he converted sua sponte from Sanders second Rule 12B motion. In his dismissal, Kelly fraudulently concealed the mandatory DC arbitration laws, attributed statements to me that I never made and (according to the DC Federal Court of Appeals) dismissed entire Counts when Sanders entered no arguments at all! (See copy of DC Federal Appellate Court Judgment of October 15, 2024 attached hereto) Kelly’s February 28, 2023 Judgment was so incredibly deficient that even Sanders, the party who was favored by the Judgment and a 40 year DC attorney, vehemently refused to file an Appellee brief defending Kelly’s Judgment, despite being twice ordered by the DC Federal Court of Appeals to enter an appearance and file a brief (See attached Judgment from the DC Federal Court of Appeals) Needless to say, Kelly’s February 28, 2023 Judgement was easily reversed and remanded on October 15, 2024 for a variety of reasons raised by me in my Appellant Brief and the case continues as of the date of this review. (See copy of Oct 15, 2024 DC Federal Appellate Court Judgment attached) So a Federal Judge and all his minions defeated by a pro se litigant with no formal legal education at all’

Avoid this Court and Tim Kelly at all costs. The above narrative is my opinion as stated and any implications not expressly stated in the opinion expressed above are...

It has come to our attention that the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia has engaged in conduct that raises grave concerns about the administration of justice, particularly in case number 1:24-cv-02707, involving a U.S. Armed Forces veteran. Despite clear eligibility for In Forma Pauperis (IFP) status, the court has inexplicably delayed adjudication of the veteran’s IFP motion, thereby impeding his right to access the legal system and obtain timely justice.

Equally troubling is the court’s delay in ruling on the veteran’s motion for electronic filing, notwithstanding the fact that the veteran possesses a valid PACER account and has been authorized by higher federal courts to file electronically. These delays are not only an affront to justice but also obstruct the veteran’s ability to file further documents in support of his civil complaint and IFP motion. Such procedural inertia is wholly inconsistent with the principles of judicial efficiency and fairness that this court is constitutionally and statutorily obliged to uphold.

It is important to note that this veteran is not merely a petitioner with a perfunctory understanding of the legal system. He has earned law school credits under the tutelage of DOJ prosecutors and graduated with distinction from law school, maintaining an exemplary GPA. Despite these formidable credentials, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia has erected barriers to his legal claims by delaying his IFP motion and electronic filing status, both of which are critical to his pursuit of justice.

In response to these failures, we have assisted the veteran in filing a formal complaint with the Circuit Executive and the Judicial Misconduct Committee, which exercises oversight over this court. Additionally, a separate complaint has been filed with the DC Bar Association to address the legal and ethical implications of these delays. Exhibits documenting the court’s disregard for procedural fairness and violations of 28 U.S.C. § 1915 have been submitted to the appropriate authorities.

This court’s inability to expeditiously process both the IFP motion and the motion for electronic filing constitutes a flagrant violation of due process, as enshrined in the Fifth Amendment. The protracted delays have unduly burdened the veteran’s efforts to seek redress through the courts, a fundamental right in any democratic society. Veterans, who have honorably served their country, should be afforded no less than the utmost diligence and respect in the legal system. The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia has regrettably failed in this respect, exacerbating the suffering of those who rely on its impartiality.

The actions of this court, particularly under the supervision of Judge Boasberg, exemplify systemic inefficiencies and, indeed, neglect, that cast a shadow over the integrity of this institution. Its failure to adhere to statutory mandates and its repeated delays in providing basic judicial services underscore the reasons why this court has garnered a reputation as one of the most problematic and corrupt in the nation. This situation warrants a thorough investigation, as it represents not just an isolated failure but a fundamental breach of the principles of justice that form the bedrock of our legal system.

We remain steadfast in our commitment to ensuring that this veteran—and others who have been similarly affected—receive the justice they deserve. Exhibits detailing the court’s failures and the steps we have taken to seek remedy can be made available to ensure that transparency and...

While I respect the role of the judiciary in our democratic system, I was deeply disappointed to learn of the misconduct complaint recently filed against Judge James Boasberg. Allegations that he made politically charged remarks about the White House — including predictions of a constitutional crisis — raise serious concerns about impartiality. His rulings and courtroom demeanor often seem to reflect ideological leanings rather than balanced legal reasoning, which undermines public confidence in the court’s neutrality. Judges are entrusted with upholding the law without prejudice, and comments like these risk eroding trust in the judiciary. Regardless of political affiliation, Americans deserve a justice system that operates above partisan influence. I hope the investigation leads to greater accountability and a renewed commitment to...