DEMETRIOS K. STRATIS, ESQ.

(022391991)
RUTA, SOULIOS & STRATIS, LLP
10-04 River Road
Fair Lawn, New Jersey 07410
Tele: (201) 794-6200; Fax: (201) 794-6300
Email: [email protected]
Attorneys for Defendant Rachel B. Alintoff

BRYAN ALINTOFF, SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

CHANCERY DIVISION – FAMILY PART
Plaintiff, MONMOUTH COUNTY

-vs- DOCKET NO.: FM-13-545-12C

RACHEL B. ALINTOFF, Civil Action

Defendant. CERTIFICATION

I, Rachel B. Alintoff, hereby certify as follows:

1. I am the Defendant in the above-captioned matter and as such, I am fully familiar with the

facts set forth in this Certification. I submit this Certification in opposition to Fathers Order to

Show Cause and in support of my Motion to Recuse.

RECUSAL

2. The Honorable Angela Dalton, JSC has exhibited bias and prejudice against me that I certainly do

not believe I can have a fair and impartial trial. Judge Daltons’ recent decision, tone, manipulation

of facts in favor of Bryan Alintoff, advocating for Mr. Alintoff from the bench and acting as

counsel to Mr. Alintoff from the bench along with her overall angry conduct of yelling in court

and at my attorney and unwillingness to protect a disabled child in connection with the recent

Motion is so without basis in law or fact, so in contravention of the Rules of Court and the

Constitution for the United States of America, and so egregious, as to shock the conscience and
 leave little doubt of an appearance of bias and prejudice against me that she must be required to

recuse herself under Rules 1:12-1 and 1:12-2.

3. At the last hearing, Judge Dalton muted my microphone so I would not speak even though she

permitted the Father to speak. She told my attorney that he could cross-examine Mr. Alintoff

when he was done speaking, and only after he requested it, but then verbally announced that she

was striking Mr. Alintoff’s testimony from the record which was a convenient way of allowing

Bryan to fully speak uninterrupted and then to deny my attorney a chance to cross-examine.

4. I filed a Motion compelling the Father to comply with four (4) previous Orders of the Court

requiring him to comply with ABA Therapy for Hayden. I filed it in late September of 2020 and

oral arguments were conducted in December of 2020. She reserved decision and not for months

was a decision made. In fact, she was forced to make a decision because I filed an Order to Show

Cause on March 5, 2021 when Hayden was exhibiting the very behaviors that all the experts said

would occur if he didn’t get the ABA Therapy—that being violence to others and himself. Only

after I filed an OTSC was she prompted to make a decision that was so important for Hayden’s

wellbeing. She did not give a decision on my Motion until March 12, 2021, three months after

oral arguments and almost six (6) months after I first filed the Motion.

5. I filed an OTSC on March 5, 2021 because my son, Hayden was showing signs of self-harm,

suicidal ideations, threating to jump in front of moving traffic to end his life and kill his father with

frightening specifics of wanting to use an AK-47 rifle to murder his father. Hayden even said that

he was planning to make the murder of his father “look like an accident”. My OTSC was not

heard until a full week expired, one (1) week later, on March 12, 2021. Yet, here, Plaintiff Father

files an OTSC in the afternoon of Friday, April 23, 2021 and Judge Dalton will entertain it on

Monday morning, April 26, 2021 at 10:30 am, the very next business day after he filed it.

2
6. After oral argument of my OTSC, the Court read into the record a “report” from DCPP that was

NEVER provided to my counsel to review and most of her decision on March 12, 2021 was based

on that report. I later found out that Tara McClelland from DCPP was court ordered by Judge

Dalton to release information even though the case against Bryan Alintoff was still open and

pending under DCPP. My attorney was never notified, and it appears that Judge Dalton is acting

as counsel for Mr. Alintoff and gathering evidence which she feels might be helpful to him.

7. There were many sections of the DCPP report that were not read into the record and past DCPP

reports that say that Hayden has made statements against his Father claiming abuse. Judge Dalton

purposely did not read anything into the record about the abuse reported against Bryan Alintoff.

Judge Dalton got angry at my attorney for quoting from the Kings County Hospital report (even

though he had attached the entire document as evidence) and said that he only put in things

favorable to me. Judge Dalton pressured, yelled and retaliated against my own attorney for doing

a good job in representing me as his client. My attorney got yelled at for the very thing he is

sworn to provide and uphold for his clients because Judge Dalton knew that the evidence he

presented into the record was not at all favorable to Mr. Alintoff.

8. I have since opened up a formal complaint against Tara McClelland with the United States

Department of Justice for Disabilities for interviewing Hayden without a special needs expert in

the room with an audio recording proof that she had told me she would not interview him without

an autism specialist in the room. The ADA requires that anyone with a disability is to be afforded

appropriate accommodations and that includes while being interviewed by a public official.

9. I was not aware of nor was I provided a copy of whatever Judge Dalton was reading from and read

into the record on March 12, 2021 and we were never notified that it was even prepared or how

the Court obtained it. My attorney certainly should have received a copy if the Court was going

3
 to rely on it for her decision. In fact, based on what she read, Judge Dalton terminated the services

of my son’s only treating psychiatrist of 5 years based on one sentence in the report where

supposedly Hayden said that he doesn’t trust Dr. Yuli Fradkin. This rash and dangerous decision

by Judge Dalton shows that she has no understanding of Autism. Hayden does not like any doctors.

He is an autistic 11-year-old boy who doesn’t like to go to any doctors if he can avoid it. He gets

upset at the dentist, he doesn’t like the pediatrician well-visits, he didn’t like going on Fridays in

Brooklyn to speech therapy and was upset to go to the child podiatrist 2 years ago when he could

barely walk from inflammation in his heel. Hayden cursed at the gastroenterologist when he went

several years ago after his acid reflux was so bad that he was throwing up in his sleep several times

a week. Who lets an autistic 11-year-old pick his own doctors? Not only is that dangerous, but it

shows that Judge Dalton has little understanding for the importance of consistency of care or

having a treating doctor who has been in Hayden’s life for half a decade and knows his medical

history inside and out.

10. It appears that the reason that Judge Dalton got rid of Dr. Yuli Frakin is because Judge Dalton is

seeking to personally discredit a well-seasoned, well-respected New Jersey Psychiatrist who has

put on the record that Hayden does have suicidal ideations and who told Kings County Hospital

that Bryan Alintoff does not understand Hayden’s disabilities and does not take them seriously.

This is another example of Judge Dalton protecting Bryan Alintoff’s narrative and not the medical

needs and developmental support of an 11-year-old disabled child who is in danger and has been

in danger for a long long time under Bryan’s lack of care and neglect. Moreover, previous Judges

have adhered to and accepts Dr. Fradkins recommendations and incorporated them into their

decisions. (See Orders of Judge Sheedy dated September 12, 2019, Order of Judge Bernstein dated

October 24, 2019, Order of November 26, 2019, and Order of December 9, 2019.) Judge Sheedy

4
 quoted extensively from Dr. Fradkin’s report in her Order, yet Judge Dalton completely and on

her own dismisses Dr. Fradkin. I thought previous Orders of the court were the Law of the Case

and must be upheld.

11. Judge Dalton left Hayden with no doctor specializing in autism to monitor his daily Guanfacine

prescription. Judge Dalton reversed three other judges without a basis for doing so all because Dr.

Fradkin’s position was contrary to that of the Father. Bryan Alintoff has back and forth emails

with Dr. Fradkin that show there was communication between them and that Mr. Alintoff’s

narrative that Dr. Fradkin won’t speak to him is false and a flat out lie. Judge Sheedy court-ordered

Mr. Alintoff to go to a session with Dr. Yuli Fradkin to speak about Hayden’s needs and Bryan

never showed up and instead called on the phone and then disagreed with Dr. Fradkin’s

professional findings about Hayden’s dual disabilities of autism and ADHD.

12. During the oral argument for my OTSC on March 12, 2021, when my counsel wanted to show

more videos about what was happening to my son, Judge Dalton refused to see them because of

“lack of notice”. Yet she used and read reports that no one ever saw. This shows that Judge is

actively seeking to block evidence that supports my position.

13. Judge Dalton was also the same Judge who presided over my domestic violence trial against Bryan

Alintoff. She made credibility findings that have carried over into this matrimonial case and these

decisions. On March 12, 2021, she made statements on the record that she does not believe I am

a domestic violence survivor. I have since read many complaints against her by attorneys, litigants

and even law clerks that claim Judge Dalton has a hatred and anger against women who have been

abused. Certainly, her comments to me in court were not only unprofessional but had no basis in

fact. She has no idea about the years of abuse I have had at the hands of Bryan Alintoff. She

presided over one DV assault hearing, and I do not know why that would be interjected into an

5
 OTSC other than to show her bias against me. I have been placed in the Address Confidentiality

Program by the Brooklyn DA’s office and have been in the program for years to protect myself

and my family from Bryan Alintoff. Judges do not have a right to be demeaning and

condescending in speech towards litigants. To tell a domestic violence survivor that she was never

abused when you have not reviewed all of the evidence in the matter is bias, reckless and grounds

for judicial misconduct. There is no doubt that I cannot have a fair and unbiased proceedings

before her.

14. I filed a Complaint against the Honorable Angela Dalton, JSC with the Advisory Committee on

Judicial Conduct (ACJC). I sent her a courtesy copy of the Complaint. On April 19, 2021, she, in

turn, sent a letter to my attorney and copied the Father’s attorney and sent both of them a copy of

the Complaint I filed with the Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct (ACJC). I understand that

the proceedings before a ACJC are confidential until a formal complaint is filed against the judge

based on what they find. Yet, Judge Dalton made both attorneys aware of it and provided them

with a copy of my complaint to the Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct (ACJC). That

Committee was created to assist the Supreme Court by investigating allegations of unethical

judicial conduct and by referring to the Court those matters that the committee considers to require

public disciplinary action. The confidentiality of the allegations and the complainant are a

necessary component to remove the stigma associated when private citizens speak up. The process

should have been confidential until the Committee files a formal complaint at which time the

matter is made public. It appears that Judge Dalton purposely sent the complaint to Mr. Alintoff’s

attorney with the intention of collusion efforts against me because only 4 days after she sent the

PRIVATE and PROTECTED ACJC complaint to Mr. Alintoff, he felt emboldened to file an

6
 OTSC seeking sole custody and Judge Dalton dropped everything to hear his motion not even one

business day after he filed it with the court.

15. It appears that Judge Dalton is colluding with Bryan Alintoff and his attorney to retaliate against

me for reporting her behavior to the ACJC and for speaking to the media and press about her

misconduct, her yelling in court and muting my microphone, as well as her frightening

misunderstanding of autism and her unwillingness to even hear federal ADA laws that protect my

son in court to ensure he gets all the civil rights he deserves and is afforded under State and Federal

laws.

16. It is the Father who has not complied with Court Orders and in fact the record of the Orders in this

matter speak for themselves. There are no less than 4 Orders demanding that the Father comply

with ABA Therapy but he did not. The Court warned Mr. Alintoff that he could lose custody if he

failed to comply. Specifically, in the November 26, 2019 Order, the Court stated:

1. Husband to provide the Court and Wife's counsel by December 5, 2019

correspondence from BuildnCare Therapy, Hybridge Learning, and A and J
Behavioral Health stating that 1) they have been provided Hayden's insurance
documentation, 2) that Hayden is presently on their waiting list for ABA therapy,
and 3) an expected start date for Hayden to receive ABA therapy.
2. If said information is not provided by December 5, 2019, the Order to Show
Cause filed by Wife's counsel will be continued before me on December 5, 2019 at
1:30 PM; at that time the Court will consider a change of sole and residential
custody. (emphasis added, See Exhibit C of Defendants original certification.)

17. Mr. Alintoff never told the Court why he did not comply and yet on March 12, 2021 the

Honorable Angela Dalton did not hold him accountable and simply stated that he “agrees” to do

it.

18. Judge Dalton, in her decision on my Motion filed last Fall, brings up things from many

years ago. None of those were relevant to the issues before the Court—specifically why he has

not obtained ABA Therapy or given me the insurance information as ordered by the Court. Yet,

7
the Court brings up the trial testimony from 2013 and the report of Patricia Baszczuk, Ph.D as a

means of discrediting me and fails to address the other experts who reported in my favor. That

report was almost ten (10) years old and still, it serves as a means to attack me. She also used her

findings in the DV trial against me.

OPPOSITION TO FATHERS OTSC AND RECUSAL

19. I have provided Father with a list of psychiatrists for Hayden. The problem with his list is

that none of them have experience in dealing with Autistic children and that is a necessary

component for anyone who treats Hayden. The ones on my list do. It is not easy to replace a

doctor who will play a very important role in Hayden’s medical care. I had a lot of research to do

and many phone calls to make in order to find doctors who are suitable. Father has my list and

hopefully, he will select one.

20. As for the release of information to the media, it is Judge Dalton who played the video into

the public record at the last hearing that someone put on YouTube. It is an audio recording and

was part of the link I sent to several agencies when I made my complaint against Judge Dalton for

unethical conduct. The ACJC has a copy of the audio. Judge Thornton got a copy 2 hours after

Hayden threatened to kill his father with an AK-47 rifle and even though Judge Thornton is a

mandated reporter, she did not report it to DCPP. It was the NJ Governor’s office who reported

their concerns. The Governor’s office has a copy of the video, the United States Department of

Justice has a copy, the FBI has a copy, and several autism advocate agencies have a copy. For all

I know, someone from those many offices gave it to the press or posted it online. There are many

people who have it. The fact that it is only an audio may mean that someone got the audio of my

hearing and used that portion of the audio that Judge Dalton requested be played into the record.

8
Monmouth Courthouse has a lot of disgruntled workers which shows in online reviews that are

written by ex-law clerks and attorneys.

21. I have not exploited our son. The “video link” is not even a video, it is audio only and no

names are mentioned. The Father, other the other hand, has exploited our son. Without my

knowledge or consent, Mr. Alintoff has used Hayden as a means of promoting his “invention”,

called the sink spinner (www.sinkspinner.com.) Hayden’s picture is in the promotional material

in the Patch.com press release and the article states:

A devoted single father of Hayden, who has special needs, Bryan always has his
hands full with a variety of chores. “Hayden is an awesome kid who moves a mile
a minute,” his father says. Like most parents, Bryan was often exhausted by the end
of the day and dreaded cleaning up a dirty bathroom basin after Hayden got ready
for bed. Bryan thought there must be a better way!.

(See https://patch.com/new-jersey/middletown-nj/local-father-son-invent-remarkable-sink-

spinner-faucet)

He also uses Hayden’s interview in the article and posts a picture of he and Hayden on the internet

and for the world to see. This is something Bryan did for HIS selfish purposes.

22. When it comes to posting a picture of my son on the internet and having him interviewed

and disclosing significant privacy information about a minor, I am deeply concerned for Hayden’s

safety. The article /press release tells the town Hayden lives in (Middletown, New Jersey),

Hayden's age (so someone could absolutely figure out what school Hayden attends) and gives his

full name and a photograph of him and information about the relationship with the father. So, if

someone were to go and pick Hayden up from school and say “Hey I know your dad Bryan and he

sent me to come and get you” Hayden would probably go with that person.

23. In his promotions for sink spinner, he also tells the world that Hayden is disabled (hence

susceptible) while at the same time, ignoring Hayden's disabilities where it really counts – for

9
school and life skills purposes. This press release is a perfect example of Mr. Alintoff’s false

narrative in public and his false narrative for years to this very Court while he conducts himself a

completely different way in private--a way that is harmful and damaging to our disabled son

Hayden. Mr. Alintoff admits that Hayden has special needs when it comes to promoting his

invention, but when it comes to getting the services that his “special needs” son really needs like

ABA Therapy, he does nothing and in fact, creates roadblocks for me .

24. Judge Dalton’s direction that I be evaluated again and Bryan is permitted to tell the doctor

what he wants to is against HIPPA. It shows that she is desperate for Bryan Alintoff to be involved

in biasing anyone who would evaluate me and since the evaluation is not for the purpose of the

court taking testimony from an expert witness, it is a HIPPA violation for my abuser to be involved

in any way shape or form with any of my doctor’s appointments or court ordered evaluations. I

have already done a neurological evaluation at Lenox Hill Hospital and Judge Dalton said on the

record that the doctor I went to is highly qualified and yet, she is doubting the report which clearly

states that I DO NOT NEED ANY FURTHER TESTS. Now Judge Dalton wants to pick someone

for me to do further testing when a doctor says none is needed.

25. Judge Dalton’s bias shows that she can not be trusted to pick any doctors for Hayden or for

myself. If a judge sent a litigant to have a cancer screen and it came back that the litigant didn’t

need any further tests, it would be medically unethical for the judge to court-order a biopsy. Judge

Dalton is not a doctor and can not dictate from the bench what medical tests she thinks I should

have that are in direct opposition to the top Neurologist in the country who says there is nothing

wrong with me. Also, Judge Dalton said that the doctor only spent “45 minutes” with me in the

examining room. The truth is that 45 minutes is the national average for a new patient consult and

10
exam with a neurologist and this is considered a “thorough neurological exam” by WebMD which

is the leading source for trustworthy medical news and credible health information.

26. Judge Dalton makes many false statements on the record to undermine the facts, evidence

and documents that I present in court. Judge Dalton must disqualify herself for personal bias and

prejudice against me (and apparently all domestic violence survivors). As a litigant, I know, and

certainly reasonably believe, that I will not get a fair and unbiased hearing.

11