Bernstein Jay S

Lawyer JAY BERNSTEIN at 8701 Georgia Av., Silver Spring, Md.20 910 (res. in Potomac) – what a piece of work! — Mark, elderly and ill w/​dementia, could have cured his tooth decay for $ 1765-​$ 2680. But he and ‘POA’ encountered lawyer Jay Bernstein & his good friend, the dentist, RONALD ROSENBERG (Goldbaum & Rosenberg — see Unilocal Review), who ‘sold’ his more costly plan. Despite laws on deception, omission, & consent, he ran his secret decay plan/​add-​on to $ 29,186! The useless Dist. Court judge, Lou Harrington, had no problem w/​this, though (privately) the bailiff, other officials & a priest differed vehemently. Here are some of JB’s PROVABLE fabrications. (1)JB said POA was told of Mark’s plan’s costs as they ran up. [Truth: w/​the burden of proof on him, he had no consent form, no witness to consent, & no admission from POA & Mark of consent] (2)He told 2 courts that his witness placed POA at an alleged talk re $ 6K add-​on to Mark’s treatment. [Transcript proves that his own witness does NO SUCH THING] (3)The brilliant Jay Bernstein told a court that POA wrote his client that POA would continue the «harassment» of the dentist. [Truth: transcript shows that he found ZERO backing for his slander as he shuffled papers. What POA did, in fact, to the «NON-​harassers» of Mark, is write that he would exercise his rights to free speech & free association.] (4)The eminent seeker of truth, Honest Jay, said in one court that, if Mark/​POA objected to the costly add-​on, «all you had to do is say no» (if only POA had been told or Mark had understood! To another court, Moral Exemplar Jay Bernstein said that this add-​on was «necessary,» a «necessity»!! His Bar buddy overseers had no problem w/​this, and JB, dedicated to fighting crime/​wrongdoing defended this tactic of HUGE contradictions. [Proof: Dist. & Circuit Ct. transcripts, JB’s Circ. Ct. brief, etc.] But for you (Average Joe), not being a Bar buddy of the «legal» racket, «a knowing falsehood, under oath, on a matter of substance» is a CRIME called perjury! When POA’s critical brief to the Circ. Ct. pointed out the above, unbeknownst to POA it VANISHED before the judge ever saw it. So did POA’s brief a month later, without POA’s or judge’s knowledge. And a critical document from the court to POA, 6 months later, VANISHED before it could get to the U.S.Mail, then to POA, to alert POA of the missing papers. Thus ended Mark’s case. This is what a MALEVOLENT CRIMINAL did to a man dying in parts over years. The Atty Genl & pols were helpful & concerned about this FILTHY THIEVERY, but lacked investigative power. Durke Thompson, the sage judge who would have heard Mark’s appeal, was under investigation (!) for other matters and, along w/​the D.A. & Court Clerk, couldn’t be bothered w/POA’s evidence of a NEFARIOUS BEING loose in court!!! [For proof, Mark’s son, Norm, agrees to calls at 301−593−6442] All are clueless as to who the FILTHY CRIMINAL is, w/​motive, means & opportunity, but he cleared the way for the dentist not to have to go to court & deal with the «non-​perjury.» With that, Jay Bernstein & his dental pal, over 3 years: threatened to take & sell the dying Mark’s house for the last few thousand of the $ 29,186 treatment!!; unlawfully took $ from Mark’s bank acct & had to return $ 3K; and they followed Mark to his grave, intruding on the family’s grief by suing for the $ 3000 that the law prevented the Moral Exemplars from keeping while Mark lived! They then added 35% interest for the 3 ½ years they had to wait for Mark to die… JB sued Norm for defamation for $ 200,000. But: ‘it’s not defamation if it’s true.’ N publicized all the preceding when Shysterland refused to help Mark. N, not a lawyer, represented himself against JB, his lawyer (and, in a way, the judge). The smart jury seemed to believe the facts, but requested the dictionary page w/​the definition of «shyster» («a person, esp. a lawyer, who uses unethical or tricky methods.») N had read it orally, but, in a decisive oversight, neglected to send it back to the jury room and it could not then be given. Also, the judge made a bad error (that could not be rectified at Appeals for technical reasons) in excluding the words of a moral judge who challenged Jay Bernstein & the dentist in taking from Mark’s bank acct. Jury awarded JB $ 7791 and 86 cents, but the first $ 6K is immune from judgment, thus, JB must find whether 6K is touchable (e.g., IRAs usually are not; pers’l property depends on state of residence). Those of us who loved Mark & believe, like the priest, that all was «an abomination,» will fight on, esp. vs. the unknown CRIMINAL.