Petition To Remove Kim D Eaton Family Division Administrative Law Judge!
October 21, 2021
PETITION TO REMOVE! The Honorable Kim D. Eaton has disrespected the Canon Rules! __________________________________________________________ Kim D. Eaton Family Law 440 Ross Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219. The Family Division Judge is suppose to uphold the Integrity and Independence of the Judiciary law. The Family Division Administrative Law Judge has not maintain and enforce high standards of conduct and should personally observe those standards, so that the integrity and independence of the judiciary can be preserved. The Family Division Administrative Law Judge has no integrity for the law or have no respect for women who experience domestic abuse. The Family Division Administrative Law Judge have no respect for single women with children and has no respect for the BEST INTEREST OF CHILDRENS LAW! The Family Division Administrative Law Judge have no independence of a judge she's been on acting on public favor from social media and given much respect to THE DOMESTIC ABUSER WHO ABUSES! Kim D. Eaton does not comply with the law and does not comply with the judges Code. The Family Division Judge has violated the Code since she been in office she have diminished public confidence in the judiciary and she also injures our system of government under law. These are the judges Canons rules and these rules are to be applied consistently with constitutional requirements, statutes, other court rules and decisional law. The Family Division Administrative Law Judge does not avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in the public. The Family Division 440 Pittsburgh PA 15219 Judge has no respect for Law. The Family Division Administrative Law Judge should respect and comply with the law and should act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary. Kim D. Eaton is not suppose to allow family, social media Face Book Instagram nor Twitter, as well as political, financial, or other relationships to influence judicial conduct or judgment. However, this is a disgrace not only to our nation. However this is a disgrace to the public as well as to the courts! The Family Division Administrative Law Judge honesty, integrity, impartiality, temperament, or fitness to serve as a judge has been permanently impaired. The Family Division Administrative Law Judge public confidence in the judiciary has also has been eroded by irresponsible or improper conduct by judges, including harassment and other inappropriate in a workplace behavior and displays in public. The Family Division Administrative Law Judge is suppose to perform duties with respect for others, especially individuals whos lives have been violated and should not engage in behavior that is harassing, abusive, prejudiced, or biased. The Family Division Administrative Law Judge Kim D. Eaton is not faithful does not maintain professional competence Kim D. Eaton is not patient, dignified, respectful, and courteous to litigants, witnesses, and others with whom the judge deals in an official capacity. The State of Pennsylvania has been allowing this The Family Division Administrative incompetent Law Judge get away with criminal activities for a long time knowingly. The State of Pennsylvania has also been allowing this The Family Division Administrative Law Judge to abuse women and children lock women up until the give their children over to the courts ignore (Protection From Abuse Orders) and so on. The United Sates Judicial Committee as well as Harrisburg and the Ethnic Committee has ignored repeatedly charges of The Family Division Administrative Law Judges abuse. However, this is a National Constitutional violation! Furthermore, The Family Division Administrative Law Judge needs to practice civility, by being patient, dignified, respectful, and courteous, in dealings with court personnel, including chambers staff. The Family Division Administrative Law Judge should not engage in any form of harassment of the courts. The Family Division Administrative Law Judge should not retaliate against those who report misconduct. Examples of misconduct from The Family Division Law Judge : My name is DaQuela Donald and I am demanding the return of my child Jesere Young from the custody of my abuser Jesse Young. Under the U.S. Constitution the privacy laws of the United States deal with several different legal concepts. One is the invasion of privacy, a tort based in common law allowing an aggrieved party to bring a lawsuit against an individual who unlawfully intrudes into his or her private affairs, discloses his or her private information, publicizes him or her in a false light, or appropriates his or her name for personal gain. Public figures have less privacy, and this is an evolving area of law as it relates to the media. Just under this law alone gives me the right to privacy. The Family Division Judges and Hearing Officers have been violating me and my child’s rights for far too long I demand justice for me and my child. For over two years now I have been battling a man who never wanted to have a child with me. I was granted a THREE YEAR PFA against this man by Judge Kim D. Eaton, who later on allowed court to continue without proper and procedure notice of any hearings I was to be present at, and then ordered for me to be arrested until I delivered my child to the courts. I have been treated unfairly, discriminated upon, and the judges have shown bias to the case in many ways. I am requesting an investigation upon both Judge Kim D. Eaton and also Hearing Officer, Laura Valles, ESQ. I have been told numerous times that I have no rights. I know that I do, and intend to enforce all and any of my civil and human rights. This has caused so much anguish and REQUEST FOR JUSTICE! DAQUELA DENEEN DONAD _______________________________________________________ The Family Division Administrative Law Judge with supervisory authority over other judges such as Hearing Officers should take reasonable measures to ensure that they perform their duties timely and effectively and honestly. Judge Kim D. Eaton should be Disqualified as The Family Division Administrative Law Judge located 440 Ross Street Pittsburgh PA 15219. The Family Division Administrative Law Judge has displayed personal bias or prejudice on many occasion the judge has refused to recuse herself on several occasions. Knowing and willingly laughing at the situation on several occasions. The Family Division Administrative Law Judge The duty to hear all proceedings fairly and with patience is not inconsistent with the duty to dispose promptly of the business of the court. Courts can be efficient and businesslike while being patient and deliberate. The Family Division Administrative Law Judge Kim D. Eaton under (Canon 2) to act in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary applies to all the judge’s activities, including the discharge of the judge’s adjudicative and administrative responsibilities. The Family Division Administrative Law Judge duty to be respectful includes the responsibility to avoid comment or behavior that could reasonably be interpreted as harassment, prejudice or bias. The Family Division Administrative Law Judge A judge’s appointees includes the bailiff counsel, and personnel such as law clerks, secretaries, and judicial assistants as well as security should act in the same civilized manner as well. The Family Division Administrative Law Judge A judge should neither engage in, nor tolerate, workplace conduct that is reasonably interpreted as harassment, abusive behavior, or retaliation for reporting such conduct. The duty to refrain from retaliation includes retaliation against former as well as current judiciary personnel. DESCRIPTION OF THE RULES OF CONDUCT: The Family Division Administrative Law Judge Under this Canon, harassment encompasses a range of conduct having no legitimate role in the workplace, including harassment that constitutes discrimination on impermissible grounds and other abusive, oppressive, or inappropriate conduct directed at judicial employees or others. See Rules for Judicial-Conduct and Judicial-Disability Proceedings, Rule 4(a)(2) (providing that “cognizable misconduct includes: ⦁ (A) engaging in unwanted, offensive, or abusive sexual conduct, including sexual harassment or assault; ⦁ (B) treating litigants, attorneys, judicial employees, or others in a demonstrably egregious and hostile manner; or ⦁ (C) creating a hostile work environment for judicial employees”) and Rule 4(a)(3) (providing that “cognizable misconduct includes intentional discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, gender, gender identity, pregnancy, sexual orientation, religion, national origin, age, or disability”). The Family Division Administrative Law Judge Public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary is promoted when judges take appropriate action based on reliable information of likely misconduct. The Family Division Administrative Law Judge judge’s assurance of confidentiality must yield when there is reliable information of misconduct or disability that threatens the safety or security of any person or that is serious or egregious such that it threatens the integrity and proper functioning of the judiciary. The Family Division Administrative Law Judge The Honorable Kim D. Eaton should consider under the Canon 3C. should consider the Recusal considerations applicable to a judge’s spouse should also be considered with respect to a person other than a spouse with whom the judge maintains both a household and an intimate relationship displaying disturbing photos on social media. The Family Division Administrative Law Judge The judge may accept appointment or the administration of justice. A judge should not, in any event, accept such an appointment if the judge’s governmental duties would tend to undermine the public confidence in the integrity, The Family Division Administrative Law Judge A judge’s obligation under this Code and the judge’s obligation that comes into such conflict should consider disqualification of the judge in violation of Canon 4D(3). Compliance with the Code of Conduct! The Family Division Administrative Law Judge should really consider retirement! Description of Compliance to retired the Rule: A judge who is retired under 28 U.S.C. § 371(b) or § 372(a) (applicable to Article III judges), or who is subject to recall under § 178(d) (applicable to judges on the Court of Federal Claims), or who is recalled to judicial service, should comply with all the provisions of this Code except Canon 4F, but the judge should refrain from judicial service during the period of extrajudicial appointment not sanctioned by Canon 4F. All other retired judges who are eligible for recall to judicial service (except those in U.S. territories and possessions) should comply with the provisions of this Code governing part-time judges. However, bankruptcy judges and magistrate judges who are eligible for recall but who have notified the Administrative Office of the United States Courts that they will not consent to recall are not obligated to comply with the provisions of this Code governing part-time judges. Such notification may be made at any time after retirement, and is irrevocable. A senior judge in the territories and possessions must comply with this Code as prescribed by 28 U.S.C. § 373(c)(5) and (d). All who is in favor of the Petition sign speak now or forever hold your peace!