Judge Denys Palowski Motion; 2nd Circuit Cancels Hearing

Natchitoches ad hoc Judge Dee Hawthorne Friday afternoon denied a plaintiff motion to add a defense attorney to the civil suit Palowski v Cork, a business dispute first filed in 2013. The hearing took place in Fourth Judicial (Morehouse, Ouachita Parishes) District Court in Monroe.

Palowski wanted to make Brandon Cork’s attorney Thomas Hayes a defendant, because, according to plaintiff attorney Joe Ward, Hayes counseled Cork on his alleged fraud against Palowski.

Hawthorne didn’t buy the argument, ruling that the suit might set a precedent that could chill a client’s ability to work with their attorney.

Hawthorne also noted that Palowski had sued Hayes individually, so it wasn’t necessary to add him as a defendant in this suit.

Ward, on behalf of the plaintiff, alleged that Cork took kickbacks from customers and concealed the payments from his business partner, Palowski, and that Hayes was a co-conspirator.

Hayes countered that the plaintiff was trying to “drive a wedge between the lawyer and his client,” in an attempt to confuse the issue.

Opening of court was delayed about twenty minutes, by a problem finding someone from the Ouachita Parish Clerk of Court’s office to tape record the session, and take notes for the record.

2nd Circuit Appeals Court Mysteriously Cancels Hearing

In other related developments, the Louisiana Court of Appeals, Second Circuit in Shreveport cancelled a hearing scheduled for Monday morning, August 8, according to Chief Deputy Clerk Debbie Ware. No explanation was given for the cancellation, nor was any future hearing date revealed.

See here the docket.

The hearing was for oral arguments on appeal of Palowski v Campbell, et al. The plaintiff, Stanley Palowski, alleges that Campbell destroyed court documents in the original civil case (Palowski v Cork), preventing a fair hearing, and the defendant judges covered up the wrongdoing.

Last year, ad hoc Judge Jerome Barberra dismissed the suit, and Palowski appealed.

In his ruling, Barberra claimed that judges enjoy “absolute judicial immunity.” In other words, they cannot be sued, even if they broke the law.


3 Responses to “Judge Denys Palowski Motion; 2nd Circuit Cancels Hearing”

  1. Bill Says:

    I don’t like the last paragraph at all. Judges, like anyone else should not be above the law. There should be protections so they aren’t run out of office for decisions that the politicians don’t agree with, but they certainly should be held to account if they actually break the law. We’ve learned that even presidents can be brought up on charges, so judges aren’t entitled to immunity.

  2. John Steven Says:

    Something stinks. Just do not know the smell yet

  3. Rick Everest Says:

    If you want justice from a judge, may be when hell freezes over. Louisiana never freezes.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: