AdSurfDaily Member Dwight Owen Schweitzer Ordered Not To Send Email To Federal Judge

If you’re keeping a list of the strange sidebars associated with the AdSurfDaily Ponzi case, here is another entry for your notebook: U.S. District Judge Cecilia M. Altonaga of the Southern District of Florida has ordered onetime practicing attorney Dwight Schweitzer not to contact her by email.

The order was issued Monday, more than five months after Altonaga formally laid down the rules of decorum on how a lawsuit filed by Schweitzer and fellow pro se plaintiff Todd Disner in November against the United States and Rust Consulting Inc. would proceed.

On Nov. 9, 2011, Altonaga specifically advised Schweitzer and Disner that they were required to follow the rules, one of which was that “[n]o letters, pleadings, motions or other documents may be sent directly to the District Judge or Magistrate Judge’s chambers.”

The judge cautioned that “[e]very pleading, motion, memorandum or other paper required and/or permitted to be filed with the Court must be filed directly with the Clerk of the Court.”

Regardless, Schweitzer sent an email pertaining to a scheduling matter directly to Altonaga on Monday. The judge responded by reminding Schweitzer of the Nov. 9 order and ordering him not to send her any more emails.

“[T]he Plaintiff shall file his e-mail and all future filings directly with the Clerk of the Court,” Altonaga told Schweitzer.

Her order was issued six days after she granted Rust’s motion to be dismissed as a defendant in the case, leaving the government as the sole defendant.

It was not the first time Schweitzer allegedly had cut corners and sent an inappropriate communication directly to a judge. On April 17, 2009, the Statewide Grievance Committee of the Connecticut Bar found that he had sent an improper, ex parte communication via fax in July 2008 to a state judge in Florida on the same day she made a ruling against Schweitzer in a case in which he was suing a defendant pro se.

The 2008 fax, according to the committee findings, inappropriately identified Schweitzer as a practicing attorney and was not copied to opposing counsel.

“On or about July 1, 2008, the Respondent (Schweitzer) sent correspondence via facsimile to the chambers of the Honorable Sarah Zabel of the 11th Judicial Circuit of the State of Florida requesting that the dismissal of his case be reopened sua sponte or a hearing be noticed on a motion to set aside the dismissal,” the committee found.

“The judge had made a ruling on the case that morning,” the committee continued. “The Respondent did not send, contemporaneously, a copy of the correspondence to opposing counsel. On the correspondence, the Respondent indicated that he was an ‘Attorney and Counselor at Law[,] licensed solely in the state of Connecticut.’ The Respondent was suspended from the practice of law on August 21, 2003, and his license has been inactive since that time. The Respondent did not indicate to the judge that his license in Connecticut has been suspended.”

In response to the committee’s allegations, Schweitzer wrote, “The purpose of identifying my licensure in correspondence to a judge in a case where I am suing the very same attorney . . .  for malpractice and willful misconduct was to let the court know that I was not the typical pro se litigant and felt it completely appropriate to indicate my being licensed with all that it implies.”

But the committee begged to differ, finding that Schweitzer had violated the Connecticut Rules of Professional Conduct even as his license to practice law in the state was under suspension. Schweitzer has not filed papers to regain his license, saying he is retired from the practice of law and interested in other pursuits.

In his April 16 email to Altonaga, Schweitzer did copy opposing counsel, according to the address listed in the “To” line. Whether counsel received the email was unclear.

What is clear is that Altonaga received it — and ordered Schweitzer not to do it again.

On April 10, Altonaga dismissed Rust — the government-approved claims administrator in the civil portion of the ASD Ponzi case — as a defendant.

The claims by Schweitzer and Disner were hypothetical in nature and “far from the ‘definite and concrete’ dispute required for the maintenance of a declaratory judgment action,” Altonaga ruled.

The government has not responded to the complaint.

Among other things, Schweitzer and Disner have contended that the government seized their private information illegally in seizing ASD’s database in August 2008 and that undercover agents who had joined ASD had violated the firm’s Terms of Service.

ASD was running an international Ponzi scheme in which a securities business was disguised as an advertising company, according to the U.S. Secret Service.

About the Author

4 Responses to “AdSurfDaily Member Dwight Owen Schweitzer Ordered Not To Send Email To Federal Judge”

  1. There is some legitimate pathos regarding Mr. Schweitzer. At one time he was a licensed attorney and a respected professional. But it looks like that was already falling apart before anyone ever alleged that he kicked a hooker. What started the downward trajectory in this life is something we’ll never know and Dwight doesn’t evidence enough self insight that he may not even know himself. But I found perhaps the most concise summation of where he is now and how he plans to better himself here:

    http://www.yougetpaidtoadvertise.com/dwightowen/AboutMe.aspx

    from which I quote:

    ……………….
    About Me:
    Dwight-Owen Schweitzer
    If you are interested in my background and some of my experiences during what has been a wonderful life….and thank to Zeek Rewards, has the promise (on it’s way to being fulfilled) that I can enjoy the rest of my life in the style that characterized the past.
    ……………….

    Wait, if Dwight is in zeek, might Todd be as well?

    https://www.zeekrewards.com/join1.asp?username=tdisner

    Yea, because the last time (or was ASD just their first time?) they joined a ponzi scheme together it worked out so very well. Hey, maybe in a year or so Dwight and Todd can hold conference calls begging for donations to fund a lawsuit against the government and what ever accounting firm that get’s assigned to handle Zeek’s remissions. That’s what savvy internet marketers like Dwight call “residual income.”

      (Quote)

  2. It seems following directions is not one of Dwight’s strong suits. One would think that a former “practicing” attorney would know how to file, and not to send any documents directly to a judge. Well a competent former attorney would.

    Why does Dwight and Tod remind me of the movie Dumb and Dumber?

      (Quote)

  3. I used to live in West Hartford as a kid and remember Dwight who was very intelligent and a great guy. What happened.

      (Quote)

  4. dwight took over successful anglo jewish newspaper from me in 1999. it was published by iami herald. but he changed name and began running editorials. herald killed the paper after his incident with an alleged hooker. he should return to connecticut and forget florida

      (Quote)

Leave a Reply