It’s possible that Magistrate Zach Bolitho is doing everything right.
Since coming onto the initial federal case filed by Jeremy Hales against John Cook and Michelle Preston, he’s been accused of bias by nearly everyone.
If everyone is mad at the judge, that may be a sign he’s getting it right. Maybe.
Last month, he delivered a report and recommendation (R&R) which pulverized Jeremy Hales in his second frivolous federal lawsuit.
He sued ten defendants and only two survived- that’s due to technicalities which will be rectified soon enough.
The R&R
He recommended that all other defendants be dismissed from the case with prejudice- meaning a new lawsuit can’t be filed. He pilloried the frivolous arguments made by Hales, arguing he rarely met any of the elements of the torts he claimed.
Not surprisingly, Hales made some more frivolous arguments. He objected to Bolitho’s R&R, and simultaneously, filed another motion, arguing Bolitho was biased.
The Hales seals
On cue, Hales’ talking seals quickly jumped onto YouTube to proclaim both filings to be legal genius.
Combined, Hales, his attorneys, and his sycophants have less legal knowledge than my three-year-old son. Both filings will be denied; the District Judge- Robert Hinkle, a Bill Clinton appointee- will dismiss this case with prejudice.
Stunning intellect isn’t their goal; YouTube content is the goal. That’s the only reason these two new things were filed. It’s the only reason Hales files anything.
The frivolous motion
Hales’ motion to disqualify complains about Bolitho’s R&R for approximately five of the thirty-four pages.
The rest was spent rehashing events which happened about year ago, starting when Magistrate Bolitho freaked out, and overreacted like a tyrant after Hales’ attorney, Randall Shochet, complained that his opponents’ attorney, Bruce Matzkin, had sent him mean emails.
“You are endlessly ridiculous,” Matzkin said to Shochet in one.
“POLAMOP,” Matzkin said in a couple more.
POLAMOP stands for Protraction of Litigation and Multiplication of Proceedings, the so-called legal strategy that Matzkin believes Hales continues to employ.
Bolitho didn’t even wait for Matzkin to respond, before ordering both attorneys to appear before him in person.
It was the second time in a few months that Magistrate Bolitho ordered Matzkin, who lives in Massachusetts, to appear in person.
The first time Bolitho’s wisdom was questioned
This set of events triggered at the time a motion from Matzkin to vacate consent, a motion which would have disqualified Bolitho from the original federal lawsuit.
Since both sides are mad about what happened, it’s possible that Magistrate Bolitho is doing everything right.
Hales and his crew have been mad since April 2025 because Bolitho fined Hales’ attorney, Randall Shochet, $4,000 at a hearing while not yet punishing Matzkin.
Matzkin argued that Bolitho reacted emotionally, with arguments that were arbitrary and capricious.
At the time, Hales was ecstatic, calling the $4,000 penalty money well spent.
Matzkin has not been sanctioned yet because after he filed a response, Bolitho sat on a decision.
In the meantime, Matzkin’s client, Michelle Preston, filed for bankruptcy, which stayed everything.
(Matzkin had withdrawn by then, and his motion to vacate was later denied by Judge Hinkle.)
Hales argument falls apart because he said nothing for nearly a year, only complaining after an adverse recommendation.
Shochet’s ambush, Bolitho’s ire
Since Hales brought it up, those events should be examined again.
Last winter, Randall Shochet ambushed Bruce Matzkin and filed a motion to withdraw his pro hoc vice status, arguing that Matzkin was sending him mean emails.
Shochet was required by local rules to confer with Matzkin, but that would have ruined the surprise, so he didn’t.
Before Matzkin could respond, Magistrate Bolitho ordered all parties to Florida.
Then, Matzkin responded by citing thirty-five emails.
Bolitho called the whole back and forth, “two sides of the same coin.”
Bolitho scheduled a hearing on April 3, 2025, with this ominous warning, “When counsel for both parties show up for the hearing on April 3, 2025, they must bring their checkbooks (emphasis mine).”
Matzkin skipped the hearing, a huge no no, so only Shochet was there to take heat.
April 3, 2025, hearing
At the April 3, hearing, Bolitho complained about the numerous court filings.
“During the 48-minute hearing in Hales I, Judge Bolitho admonished Shochet over 35 times. (Exhibit 1, passim). Most of it related to his overwhelming frustration and exasperation with the large number of docket entries for which he largely blamed Shochet, moreso because Shochet was present and Matzkin was not.” Shochet wrote in his motion to disqualify Bolitho.
Bolitho sanctioned Shochet $4,000 for filing two frivolous filings. In one, Shochet claimed that he was added as a co-defendant to a countersuit. (When a lawyer is added, that’s usually considered a hardship to their client.)
Only, he was never added; this was a lie, and Bolitho issued a terse order.
Arbitrary and capricious
Matzkin separately filed a motion asking for attorney’s fees to respond to the same motion which Bolitho had ruled frivolous.
Bolitho denied that motion with another terse order.
Shochet lied, causing responses, orders, and more to clog up the docket. Bolitho thought this lie was enough to warrant a sanction to the court, but it was meritless for Matzkin to ask for attorney’s fees responding to the motion Bolitho deemed frivolous. Arbitrary and capricious.
Bolitho’s box
Bolitho has put himself in this position.
Since late 2024, he has acted like a scolding parent doling out equal punishment to two lawyers, he treats more like his children- Matzkin and Shochet.
One side is acting in bad faith. Shochet filed a frivolous lawsuit designed to generate YouTube content, at the expense of legal arguments. The other side has desperately tried to get the case dismissed.
Probably due to a lack of experience, he has not recognized what’s happening, instead treating all parties as equally culpable for a docket which grew out of control.
“He (Bolitho) compared dealing with the attorneys to talking with his children,” Shochet said, referring to Bolitho.
The Hales deposition
This was especially evident in Bolitho’s response to Jeremy Hales deposition. The deposition was taken on December 2, 2024. Throughout the process, Hales was rude, nonresponsive, and argumentative.
“A judge and jury will decide that, not myself,” Hales said, a phrase he said a lot. He was repeatedly asked how his allegations violated torts and this was his response.
He didn’t know. He filed the lawsuit, but he didn’t know how any of it violated any tort.
The deposition was not designed to further his case, but to create drama when it was read by him and his cohorts on YouTube for hours.
When Matzkin brought Hales’ behavior to Bolitho’s attention, Bolitho chided everyone.
Hales acted like a jerk for YouTube drama; Shochet let him, and Bolitho found everyone at fault. Bolitho’s only criticism of Matzkin was that his questions touched on too many topics, “Second, Defendants’ counsel needs to focus on asking questions about the claims raised in this litigation instead of attempting to instigate conflict by asking about unrelated matters involving Plaintiff and Defendants.”
Conclusion
Having sat for a deposition, I know that they include many questions, some only loosely related to the lawsuit.
Furthermore, Hales acted like a jerk for effect, not because he was asked irrelevant questions.
Bolitho then ordered everyone to appear for another deposition in person in Florida.
Matzkin was forced to make a trip, despite taking the case pro bono.
Bolitho’s behavior was arbitrary and capricious in this case as well; he’s set himself up for this frivolous motion to disqualify by not recognizing the motivations of both sides.
Post-script
Check out the fundraiser to help me create more articles on the Hales case. Find articles one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, twelve, thirteen, fourteen, and fifteen, sixteen, seventeen, and eighteen.
Jeremy Hales isn’t litigating a case — he’s producing content. These motions read less like serious legal work and more like scripts for the next episode of YouTube drama. Magistrate Bolitho’s report already exposed the weakness of Hales’ claims, recommending that most defendants be dismissed with prejudice. Instead of confronting those legal deficiencies, Hales and his lawyer, Randall Shochet, are trying to turn the magistrate into the villain. That tactic rarely works in federal court. Judge Robert Hinkle will likely do what federal judges do when confronted with performative litigation: shut it down. Courts exist to resolve disputes, not to bankroll a social-media spectacle.