New Jersey judge gets sued, refuses to recuse
The Alintoff divorce takes another curious turn.
A New Jersey judge has refused to recuse herself, despite being sued by one of the litigants.
Judge Madelin Einbinder is the latest judge assigned to the divorce of Bryan Alintoff and Rachell Alintoff.
The two are still not technically divorced despite being in court over a decade.
This is the second county in New Jersey to hear their case.
If a motion is upheld, it will not be the last.
Judge Einbinder has recently been assigned to the divorce after Judge Marlene Ford stepped away. Judge Ford had previously issued her own order barring Rachel from calling the police to enforce the current custody order.
Judge Einbinder is one of many named defendants in a civil rights lawsuit that Rachel filed in 2022.
Though the rules on such recusals are murky, Ocean County, New Jersey, where this divorce is being heard, has previously set a precedent for judges to recuse themselves in such situations.
I reached out to the ombudsman for Ocean County courts for clarification on this issue but received no response.
If the only issue currently was Judge Einbinder’s refusal to recuse herself, there would not be much of a story.
Instead, she has taken the appearance of impropriety and added several layers of impropriety, calling the impartiality of all the judges in Ocean County into question.
Besides this, Judge Einbinder refused to allow Rachel’s ADA Advocate into court recently.
{Check out my interview with Malinda Sherwyn and Janice Grenadier to learn more about ADA Advocates}
Rachel suffers from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)
Her ADA Advocate did not want to be named but did allow their initials: PGA.
PGA said that they have been in media approximately twenty-five years: primarily in consumer and patient advocacy.
Their role in media became an issue for Judge Einbinder, PGA noted.
The judge claimed that PGA would use the proceedings for a news story, and they were barred from the proceedings.
Even more troubling, Judge Einbinder insisted on interviewing Rachel and Bryan’s son, who has autism, without an autism specialist present. Rachel’s attorney fired off a letter which stated in part.
Rachel’s attorney is Ken Rosselini, and he did not return a call and email for comment.
At issue currently is Bryan’s refusal to return their son for his scheduled custody time with his mom; Bryan claims his son refuses to go.
Rachel sent me a list of custodial visits that Bryan refused to honor:
January 11th, 15th, 16th, 18th, 21st, 22nd, 25th, 27th, 28th, 29th
February 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 8th, 15th,
This is not the first time such a dispute has arisen. In 2021, Bryan also claimed that their son refused to return to his mom. He even begged the judge to let their son testify to explain why.
Eventually custody was restored and there were no problems: until more recently.
Currently, Bryan may be manipulating his son, and this is the reason for the resistance. Here is part of a police report.
This may explain why Judge Ford issued her order. I sent Bryan an email but received no response.
