Before the Disciplinary Committee of
the Oregon State Bar
In Re Dan R. Hyatt
Response
of complainant ) Ethics Charges that Dan R. Hyatt
Daniel A. Bernath ) repeatedly committed the felony of
) criminal coercion and
in pro per ) conspiracy to commit criminal
coercion and compulsion
) In violation of Oregon Statutes §ORS
163.275 et seq.
Introduction
Dan R. Hyatt has conducted these criminal acts of
Coercion against claimant’s attorney Daniel A. Bernath since February 21, 2007
and only concluded the criminal coercion once the
Oregon State Bar began its investigation
Dan R. Hyatt stated on February 21, 2007 that he could not hear a case where Bernath was the representative because his emotions toward Bernath would “spill over” into his decision on whether claimant was disabled. Hyatt then recused himself on the Moody case. Thereafter, he “un-recused” himself, even though the facts of his seething anger toward Bernath had not changed and still “spilled over” into his judicial duties. He then repeatedly continued the Moss case. He heard another case but told the claimant that “Bernath is new at this, Don’t ask any questions Mr. Bernath, you’ll just mess things up; I won’t let you sit there Mr. Bernath and read from your list (as Bernath cross examined a witness), your advertising is a misrepresentation, you’re the worst lawyer appearing before Social Security-all of the judges agree, etc.” This was all an attempt by Hyatt to conduct his criminal coercion so that Bernath would close Oregon State Bar Reporter or at least the portion relating to his misconduct.
Hyatt had already told attorney Graf and attorney Wilburn the same thing-he ruled against claimants who had lawyers that Hyatt disliked regardless of the evidence.
Bernath, "well I believe that there is nowhere in HALLEX that says you have the authority to dress me down like this..."
Dan R. Hyatt (yells) "I'm not dressing you down..."
Bernath "If you wish to file some sort of complaint with the General Counsel..."
Hyatt, "I don't need to. I don’t need to Mr. Bernath."
Bernath, "well I think that you've overstated your authority, you've gone too far. If you wish to not hear this case that's fine..."
Hyatt: "I’m trying to"
Bernath, "but I think if the Appeals Council hears this tape ..."
Hyatt: "I hope they do!
Bernath, "...they may determine...that you're in a state of mind that you could not rule fairly for my client".
Hyatt: Mr. Moody I want to reassure that my discussion with Mr. Bernath has nothing to do with you, OK?
Bernath: then we should have had it (discussion) when he wasn't here...
Hyatt: Mr. Bernath would you please be quiet while I'm speaking?
Bernath: sure.
Hyatt: the purpose of my inquiring of you is that I've formed some opinions about you that I want to make sure in my mind does not spill over to the detriment of your client. And if I thought it would I would recuse myself."
A few hours after this discussion in front of claimant Moody, ALJ Dan R. Hyatt left the federal building in Washington State, drove to the office building in Portland and recused himself. With the overwhelming evidence in the file that Bernath had provided, ALJ Haack took over the Moody case and granted a Fully Favorable On the Record(s) decision the very next day!
Therefore ALJ Hyatt has REPEATEDLY stated that he has extra judicial bias against attorney Daniel Bernath, his former assistant but continued to make orders violating the attorney client agreement so the client will not have to pay Bernath for his successful representation and continuing his cases (as he promised he would) so claimants would fire Bernath to put Bernath “out of business”).
Even though he recused himself from the Moody case in February 2007 because he couldn’t be unbiased to Bernath’s clients he continued to hear cases and terrorized Bernath’s clients, holding Bernath’s clients hostage until September 2008 as coercion to get Bernath the journalist to stop news gathering and news publishing.
There is only one conclusion from this evidence. Hyatt is guilty of criminal coercion and as he used Social Security employees to further his illegal scheme, he is guilty of conspiracy as well. He only stopped his criminal coercion when the Oregon State Bar and the Federal Bureau of Investigation began its investigations. (Exhibit 103, Letter to FBI re progress of OSB investigation of Dan R. Hyatt’s conduct)
Hyatt’s long history of criminal coercion against members of the bar
Dan R. Hyatt is a member of your bar association and is currently employed by the Social Security Administration. His title is administrative law judge. Before a case reaches the office of adjudications for social security it is adjudicated by the Oregon Department of Disability Determination. Thereafter, the claimant can appeal. That appeal then is done by Social Security in-house disability determination. (The US Supreme Court has referred to ALJs as semi independent, inferior court, hearing officers.) Dan R. Hyatt is currently assigned to that job. As part of that job he must decide issues of disability based only upon the criteria set down for him by law.
Dan R. Hyatt has used criminal coercion against Bernath, using his official position to get Bernath to stop news gathering and news publishing enterprise. He said that he would recuse himself from my cases where Bernath is a social security representative IF Bernath gave up his First Amendment Rights to news gather and news publish. This after Hyatt had already stated on the record a YEAR BEFORE that he was too biased against Bernath to be fair to a claimant and his bias would spill over into his decisions. As such, Hyatt is guilty of criminal coercion. As he pulled at least two social security employees into his criminal coercion, Dan R. Hyatt is also guilty of conspiracy to commit criminal coercion.
NOW, it has come to light that Dan R. Hyatt has a long history of criminal coercion against social security representatives. Review the affidavit of Tim Wilborn who swears that after Hyatt called Wilborn “an asshole” in the presences of the court reporter and vocational expert that Hyatt then said he would betray his oath and decide against Wilborn’s clients because Wilborn filed motions regarding Hyatt’s bias against Hyatt. Hyatt said he would rule fairly in the future if Wilborn gave up his Constitutional Right to file motions regarding Hyatt’s obvious bias. (Exhibit 104 As such, Dan R. Hyatt is guilty of criminal coercion for these acts against Tim Wilborn and the many clients of Tim Wilborn ORS 163.275.
This blatant and outrageous criminal coercion was reported to the Oregon State Bar but OSB did nothing. Hyatt, as is his modus operandi, then attempted to criminally coerce Daniel A. Bernath in 2008. Hyatt then pulled two social security employees into his scheme, Mary Hardy and Charlotte Rosenthal. Thus Dan R. Hyatt is guilty of criminal conspiracy to commit coercion.
Daniel Bernath is a journalist. Hyatt’s misconduct has been published on Oregon state bar reporter since 1998. Hyatt disqualified himself from Bernath cases one year ago in February 2007 in the Moody case because of Hyatt’s admitted extra judicial bias. To get journalist Bernath to give up his US Constitutional right to gather news, report news and free speech, Hyatt continued to hear Bernath cases after he admitted his bias for the sole reason of continuing the cases till the claimant’s died or fired Bernath and/or to finally award benefits but then illegally void the agreement that the claimant would pay Bernath for his successful representations. (The so called “libelous letter” that Hyatt refers to is merely asking journalist sources for information about Dan R. Hyatt for future stories and is a standard and legitimate journalistic tool (Exhibit 105)
Hyatt did these criminal acts on;
· the Sterling Case,
· the Green Case,
· the Moss Case
· the Fisher case, and
· the Ball Case.
Indeed, Hyatt committed these acts of criminal coercion from 2007 until just a few days ago. Hyatt held onto cases where Bernath is the attorney up until the fall of 2008 in his continued attempts to coerce attorney and journalist Bernath (Exhibit 30) The last refusal was September 10, 2008 on the Ball case. (In effect Hyatt says, “stop investigating me, remove all mentions of my felonies and other bad conduct in your news magazine or your clients will never get a hearing and if they do get a hearing you’ll never get paid for working for them and I will thus “put you out of business”).
The Fisher case
and Hyatt’s criminal coercion
Hyatt held the Fisher case hostage until Bernath complied with Hyatt’s wishes. (letter to Regional Chief Judge dated May 18, 2008 and Portland HOD) Hyatt continued to hold this case hostage. Fisher was held hostage for another three weeks. After consulting with legal counsel on Jun 05, 2008, Bernath sent an email directly to Dan R. Hyatt;
You have held Mr. Fisher’s case long enough. You have stated that you will recuse yourself from any case where I am the attorney. Go to Charlotte today and tell her that you recuse yourself from the Fisher case and all other cases. Also tell the HOD that I need a copy of the Moss audio CD right now.
Please have this done by 5:00 pm today. (Exhibit 106)
Hyatt stated in February 2007 that he would recuse himself from cases where Bernath was the attorney because his emotions kept him from ruling based on the law. But to coerce Bernath, he held onto the Fisher case as long as possible. The Moss CD is where Hyatt admitted that his emotions spilled over into his decisions contrary to Social Security regulations and federal law. After a year of waiting for the tape, SSA at the apparent urging of Hyatt, still had not produced it for Bernath and Moody.
****
It was April 24, 2008 when Hyatt laid out the elements of the crime. But Hyatt lies to the Oregon Bar when he says the meeting at the Washington Federal Building was only “a few moments” and he did not commit these crimes. Hyatt lies when he says that Bernath stood at the door to the US District Court judge office and yelled to him as he sat at a desk deep inside the office (Hyatt says he threw something on the desk).
Independent witness Moody says that the meeting was 8 to 12 minutes long. He says that there was no shouting. He says that Bernath entered the office and did not stand at the doorway. He says that there were two other witnesses in the otherwise empty courtroom who would have seen that Bernath had entered the office and that there was no rising of voices by anyone.
As an example of Hyatt’s lying; In the transcript of the meeting of April 24, 2008 Bernath states that the meeting was 8 to 12 minutes long and Hyatt said:
Hyatt “I’ve been getting anonymous phone calls to my house calling me a racist. I’m not a racist. How can you say such a thing? My son married a Korean woman. I‘m not a racist.”
(Bernath) said, “I didn’t say that, other people said that. Did you call someone “white trash” and tell them that you “had a problem with interracial couples”?”
Hyatt said, “Of COURSE NOT!”
I said, “It’s in the official record at the Oregon State Bar…”
Hyatt, “and that was dismissed as having no basis in fact.”
Bernath, “no, it was dismissed because they said they had no jurisdiction.”
Hyatt, “I don’t want to get into that.”
But in his “defense” to the Oregon State Bar, dated August 27, 2008, Hyatt says, “My son’s fiancé is Korean and I look forward to their marriage…”
This contradiction is important because it proves that Dan R. Hyatt lies so much he cannot even remember the lies he told in the past to keep it all straight with his current lies. He said that during the meeting with Bernath on April 24, 2008 that the meeting lasted only a moment. Obviously, the meeting lasted much longer as he told Bernath that his daughter in law was Korean. But later in writing he had to tell the truth to OSB (Hyatt decl. para. 31 b.) so he correctly stated that his son was GOING TO MARRY a Korean woman.
This proves the meeting was much longer and the things that Bernath states were said are accurate and the things that Hyatt says was said at the meeting are false and Hyatt lied about the length of the meeting and the words he spoke that make up the criminal conspiracy elements. There is no other way for Bernath to know that Hyatt son was married to/getting married to a Korean woman unless Hyatt told him at that meeting as Hyatt complained about the charge that he doesn’t like black men, interracial couples or white women who marry black men. Hyatt says in his declaration to the OSB that such a fact was not mentioned by him. He lied to the OSB there and throughout his declaration-many new violations of his duty as an Oregon attorney. As Hyatt cannot be believed in matters large and small, nothing he says can be believed.
(Incidentally when Hyatt condemned the white woman as “white trash” it was because she was married to a black man-not a Korean man. Hyatt makes the distinction between Koreans and black men. The so called “white trash” woman demanded that SSA provide her with a copy of the tape where Hyatt called her that and where he said “I have a problem with interracial couples” but SSA sought to protect Hyatt by first telling her that (1) she was not entitled to a copy of the tape, (2) then saying that no such tape existed and (3) then finally telling her that the “tape has been lost.” Other important Social Security Administration documents also turn up missing when Dan R. Hyatt is involved. Dan R. Hyatt ruled against a Bernath client, a decision is prepared by Hyatt and must be mailed to Mr. Moss. Mr. Moss is homeless. The unfavorable decision must be mailed to attorney Bernath so he could file the appeal. But for the first time in nearly 400 cases that Bernath has conducted in the last three years THIS decision was not mailed to Bernath-Hyatt was the ALJ. As Moss was homeless the decision would not get to Moss. As the decision was not mailed to Bernath he would not know that his time to file an appeal was running and miss that deadline. Bernath protested this violation of Mr. Moss’ rights to due process of law and demanded that the HOD (Hearing Office Director) investigate Hyatt’s role in this unconstitutional mischief.
Hyatt lies at paragraph 28.
The facts of Hyatt’s misconduct have been published on Oregon State Bar Reporter since 1998 and have never been removed. Hyatt continued his coercion until September 2008. Mr. Ball hired Dan Bernath and his trial was set for August 2008. Dan Hyatt’s assistant who schedules his hearings telephoned Bernath after Bernath told her that he had just taken over the case and needed more time to review the issues and was studying English/Welch law at Oxford in August to obtain his English solicitor license. Bernath and Charlotte Rosenthal remember the mild misstatement when Rosenthal called him and said she wanted to schedule the “Ball case.” Bernath went to his shelve and said, “which one, I have two balls.” Bernath and Rosenthal laughed at the misstatement. Bernath asked, “Who’s the ALJ on this one.” She said, “Hyatt.” Bernath said, to Rosenthal that Hyatt recused himself on Bernath cases. Rosenthal then said, “No he hasn’t. I can’t take him off as ALJ until he tells me to,” or words to that effect.
Bernath demanded that Hyatt recuse himself as the claimant was desperate. The memorandum was ignored. Bernath then sent the memorandum to Rosenthal, Hyatt and the HOD (Hearing Office Director) AGAIN at a time after Hyatt was being investigated for criminal coercion. Only after the OSB began its investigation did Hyatt release the Ball case and permit another judge to hear the if not for the investigation by the Oregon State Bar of Hyatt’s criminal coercion, the Ball case would still be waiting for a hearing until Bernath complied with Hyatt’s illegal extortion demands.
Hyatt lies when he says that he had “a deal” with Bernath. Hyatt had the power to put Bernath out of business and cause the suffering and perhaps death of his 400 clients. Bernath of course had to listen to Hyatt’s proposition. Bernath never agreed to anything during the meeting. He sought advice of legal counsel, he then determined that it was not in the best interests of his clients, the Social Security Administration, the First Amendment and journalism and refused to submit to the Dan R. Hyatt’s criminal coercion. Hyatt even urged Bernath to stop his journalistic enterprise because it hurt Hyatt’s feelings (Exhibit 113”…you have hurt me very deeply.”)
This note from Dan R. Hyatt also shows that Hyatt has lied to the Oregon State Bar as it conducts its investigation. Hyatt says to OSB that Bernath and Hyatt were never friends. However, Hyatt here reveals Hyatt was Bernath’s friend and mentor (Hyatt “…you have hurt me deeply.”) and was pleading to that friendship so that Bernath would betray his 400 clients who were entitled to an unbiased decision maker.
Hyatt has also used other techniques in his coercion. In two cases where he wrote unfavorable decisions for Bernath’s clients, he intervened to that the decisions would not be mailed to Bernath but instead only to the homeless claimants (who would assume Bernath also got the decisions and filed the appeals Exhibit 111) Of the nearly 400 cases that Bernath has handled for claimants, the only two cases where the decisions were not mailed to legal counsel Bernath were decisions written by Dan R. Hyatt. Bernath asked for an investigation by the HOD to see if Dan R. Hyatt personally took the decisions out of the mail or ordered the clerks to ‘forget’ to mail the decisions to Bernath. There was no response by the HOD to Bernath’s demand for an internal Social Security investigation.
Incidentally, Dan R. Hyatt often refers to “our agreement” or “the agreement.” Hyatt has the entire force of the Social Security Administration behind him as an abusive hearing officer and has life or death power over both Mr. Bernath’s law practice and the 400 clients who have exercized their Constitutional Right of counsel in hiring Mr. Bernath. When Hyatt speaks of an “agreement” it is like an armed robber holding a gun to the chest of his victim who then asks for the victim’s wallet with the statement; “your money or your life.” When arrested the armed robber, like Dan R. Hyatt, would say, “There was no crime, it was our ‘agreement’”.
Dan R. Hyatt uses the entire nationwide Social Security Administration as his own personal tool. He blackmails attorneys with criminal coercion and pulls Social Security employees into his conspiracy. He denies homeless claimants benefits and knowing that his unfavorable decision will not reach claimant on the street and then blocks the attorney from getting Notice so legal counsel for the homeless claimant will not file an appeal with the Appeals Council.
Dan R. Hyatt has only stopped his criminal coercion and conspiracy after the Oregon State Bar and the Federal Bureau of Investigation began to make inquiries of Hyatt and demanded answers from him. If not for this, Dan R. Hyatt’s criminal coercion would continue to this day. Once the heat is off and the OSB and the FBI goes on to other criminals, Dan R. Hyatt will go back to his criminal coercion of Oregon citizens with the seal of the Social Security Administration or the US District Court on the wall behind him.