Frederick Neroni and his dangerous questions. The first set of dangerous questions: if New York law does not define what "practice of law" is, what exactly is licensed as practice of law and what exactly is prosecuted as unauthorized practice of law?

In his lawsuit Neroni v Zayas, filed on February 2, 2013 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York, Case No. 3:13-cv-127-LEK-DEP and since then dismissed by judge Lawrence Kahn (in two stages, most of the claims in March of 2014, the remaining claims in June of 2015), Mr. Neroni asked some questions which, if answered honestly by the court, based on the law and the record in front of the court, would have eliminated the need for the Statewide Commission for Attorney discipline.

The dismissing judge, upon my information and belief based on documentary evidence in my possession, had out-of-court dealings, and, likely, received material benefits from hostile witnesses in the case and, likely, from defendants themselves, too.

I am starting to publish these dangerous and inconvenient questions tossed by the unscrupulous Judge Lawrence Kahn - who is well known since before his confirmation hearings for his unscrupulousness and who was sued by me in a separate pro se action (unlawfully dismissed before it was served by Judge Kahn's own court) for disclosure of perks Judge Kahn received from such hostile witnesses.

Here is the FIRST set of dangerous questions that Mr. Neroni posed, as of February 2, 2013, in his federal civil rights lawsuit Neroni v Zayas.

It is a fact that New York state does not clearly define what constitutes the "practice of law".

Since what constitutes "the practice of law" is not defined by law, at least five more questions arise:

1) what exactly does the State of New York license when it licenses "practice of law"?

2) what exactly does the State of New York prosecute when it prosecutes unauthorized practice of law (UPL) if what constitutes the practice of law is not defined?

3) aren't attorney licensing and UPL statutes and rules in New York unconstitutionally void for vagueness, overbreadth and allowing arbitrary enforcement?

4) isn't it true that New York UPL criminal statutes (there are several, one of them a felony) fail to give proper notice to the public as to what conduct the statutes prohibit to make criminal prosecution constitutional?

5) aren't all orders of suspension and disbarment ever issued by New York State courts void because courts have no authority to prohibit individuals to practice what the law does not clearly define?

These questions were considered by the federal court so dangerous that Mr. Neroni's access to that court to ask for redress of any future constitutional violations was blocked.

Publication of dangerous questions will continue.

Stay tuned.