A copy of the U.S. Supreme Court's denial of Mr. Noack's Petition for a Writ of Certiorari,
(despite evidence of corruption, perjury, violations of U.S. Constitution, Law, courts using 20-yr-old Law instead of going by the Civil Rights Act updates passed by Congress, etc.).
Mr. Noack showed proof of YMCA perjury to the court & that they lied to the labor board. It also was shown the labor board dropped his case like a hot-potato after the YMCA attorney denied everything -- apparently with no questioning of witnesses (as shown by labor logsheets, http://stillsupremelyunjust.yolasite.com/explain-this-ymca.php). He also showed the YMCA withheld evidence while lying to the court saying they'd sent it, showed they sent some court-ordered evidence on encrypted CD, & that the they withheld important court-ordered evidence (still unprovided to this day).
Noack gave sworn testimony of evidence-tampering (ignored by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals), and showed documented, email evidence of his employer giving a reason in response to his refusal to obey "alleged" orders to discriminate against men & blacks. That reason was proven to be "illegal discrimination" per EEOC Law, as the practice wasn't due to a business necessity. How do you justify the idea of segregation in childcare work, and could it ever be a necessity? What, do all blacks and men terrify children and parents despite passing the same background checks as female workers - is that the idea of a "business necessity" for segregation? What about 1/2 the kids being boys -- wouldn't it be good to have more good, male workers who can pass all the BG checks?
The appellate court arrogantly ignored the Law , our Constitution, many legal precedents, & the idea of justice, and the Supreme Court's denial of the Petition is another bold face-slap to such things, as well. Cronyism, apathy, & good ol' boy politics do not belong in our courts! DEMAND IMPEACHMENT OF THE JUDGES INVOLVED, and help our NATION !
Important PROOF of Corruption at Bottom of Page!!!
More pages are available thru the drop-down menu (top right). Some of it shows outrageous events against Mr. Noack as detailed in both sworn testimony & in merely some of the other evidence submitted in the case - evidence which far exceeds what Law requires to defeat "summary judgment" by current standards. (Yet, summary judgment also seems highly unConstitutional - see that section in Noack's Petition for Writ of Certiorari arguments on the preceding pages).
In Itself, An Easy Part of the Proof of Corruption
One factor that squarely shows the illegality of the courts' actions relates to the fact Noack argued in regard to having enough evidence to prevent summary judgment. The documents to the Supreme Court and other courts show Noack detailing the legal "Standard of Review" for summary judgment (which they used to oust him from court without a trial, although it seems an unconstitutional maneuver).
Noack showed lots of documents supporting his claims in addition to his sworn testimony in both affidavit & deposition (by the other party). The courts at such a stage are absolutely required by Law to regard all in the light that best favors Noack's case. As you can see by some of the emails (shown elsewhere, here) that was not done, because if so it'd be a no-brainer that the emails show YMCA guilt being admitted to by his supervisor. Noack also showed the reason given was illegal discrimination as per EEOC manual & definitions. That in itself, by Law, requires the judge to deny any YMCA request for summary judgement. Period. So, the courts outright acted corruptly.
Still, there's far more evidence than that supporting Noack's case. FOIA access to court records proves it. Noack showed documented evidence of disparate treatment in pay, and a series of emails seems to show quite plainly that his supervisor was desperately out to get him on something! At one point emails show his supervisor talking trash about him to their superiors, saying Noack couldn't get his work done because he spent so long typing a certain email to her. Noack proved her claims would mean he was typing at seven (7) words per minute - if counting every single word. Lol. Likely defamation, and that would fit reverse-discrimination, retaliation, hostile workforce, etc. that Noack claimed was happening! See his sworn affidavitt (on drop-menu)!
Other evidence included a male-bashing email from his female boss - a joke referencing Bill Clinton & men wife-swapping. Any decent HR rep would see it as a problem. Isn't male-bashing discriminatory? If so, it proves his case enough for a jury trial!
The case also shows people secretly took documentation from an afterschool childcare program licensed under Mr. Noack (as director) with the State of Texas. Info indicates the YMCA pretended to know nothing about it and never returned the documentation; yet, TX DFPS apparently could have cited Noack if the paperwork was gone during any of their surprise inspections. If cited, the fact would go on Noack's public, professional records on the TX DFPS website! The YMCA apparently confessed they took the documentation, later, during a hearing.
Yet, Noack had also shown many more documents as evidence of discrimination and retaliation during his last months at the YMCA, as well as in prior years - what looks like a constant barrage against him. Fact is, Noack even showed a YMCA internal investigation (for whatever that's worth, lol) that actually admitted incorrect timekeeping, as Noack had alleged regarding unpaid overtime. If there's a smoking gun, can they be trusted solely on their word that nothing else happened? No, not at the summary judgment stage - it must all be viwed in Mr. Noack's favor, to make sure nobody is unjustly railroaded out of court without a jury ever hearing the case. That's the Law. The same report showed a coworker of his stating they didn't like to hire all males. That also seems to corroborate Noack's claims about disparate treatment of men. Again, a fact when viewed most favorable to Noack (as required), would show discrimination as possible or likely.
There's more: Noack's email showing he was ordered to stay off his computer, while he needed it for his job and contact with HR, Noack getting a conduct report for overtime that he was required to do, etc. As for the various affidavit testimony from both sides? Noack's testimony, by Law, must be regarded as true at the summary judgment stage, barring any hard evidence otherwise, since he is the non-movant for summary judgment. That did not happen. A judge is counted as the "trier of Law", and a jury is the "trier of facts", in a legal case. That places restrictions on what they may each do. It is the jury's explicit right to weigh the evidence and make determinations about whom is telling the truth - again, perhaps barring any proof otherwise regarding the outright truthfulness of testimony.
However, Noack's testimony was not contradicted, except by YMCA testimony; yet, Noack showed documented evidence of YMCA perjury. If anything, that meant Mr. Noack was the more truthful and even greater reason to require judgment in his favor on the summary judgment challenge! The courts ignored the legal boundary, improperly & illegally favoring the YMCA, in view of the "standards" set for summary judgment issues and the legal roles of judges and juries. Simply fact. These tidbits show the courts utterly ignored the Law; and, the corruption needs to be prosecuted and Noack should not have been put out of court so unfairly, illegally, & unconstitutionally. The very fact that multiple courts so brazenly ignored all of these things - basic legal precepts - is reason itself to warrant an investigation by authorities.
One factor that squarely shows the illegality of the courts' actions relates to the fact Noack argued in regard to having enough evidence to prevent summary judgment. The documents to the Supreme Court and other courts show Noack detailing the legal "Standard of Review" for summary judgment (which they used to oust him from court without a trial, although it seems an unconstitutional maneuver).
Noack showed lots of documents supporting his claims in addition to his sworn testimony in both affidavit & deposition (by the other party). The courts at such a stage are absolutely required by Law to regard all in the light that best favors Noack's case. As you can see by some of the emails (shown elsewhere, here) that was not done, because if so it'd be a no-brainer that the emails show YMCA guilt being admitted to by his supervisor. Noack also showed the reason given was illegal discrimination as per EEOC manual & definitions. That in itself, by Law, requires the judge to deny any YMCA request for summary judgement. Period. So, the courts outright acted corruptly.
Still, there's far more evidence than that supporting Noack's case. FOIA access to court records proves it. Noack showed documented evidence of disparate treatment in pay, and a series of emails seems to show quite plainly that his supervisor was desperately out to get him on something! At one point emails show his supervisor talking trash about him to their superiors, saying Noack couldn't get his work done because he spent so long typing a certain email to her. Noack proved her claims would mean he was typing at seven (7) words per minute - if counting every single word. Lol. Likely defamation, and that would fit reverse-discrimination, retaliation, hostile workforce, etc. that Noack claimed was happening! See his sworn affidavitt (on drop-menu)!
Other evidence included a male-bashing email from his female boss - a joke referencing Bill Clinton & men wife-swapping. Any decent HR rep would see it as a problem. Isn't male-bashing discriminatory? If so, it proves his case enough for a jury trial!
The case also shows people secretly took documentation from an afterschool childcare program licensed under Mr. Noack (as director) with the State of Texas. Info indicates the YMCA pretended to know nothing about it and never returned the documentation; yet, TX DFPS apparently could have cited Noack if the paperwork was gone during any of their surprise inspections. If cited, the fact would go on Noack's public, professional records on the TX DFPS website! The YMCA apparently confessed they took the documentation, later, during a hearing.
Yet, Noack had also shown many more documents as evidence of discrimination and retaliation during his last months at the YMCA, as well as in prior years - what looks like a constant barrage against him. Fact is, Noack even showed a YMCA internal investigation (for whatever that's worth, lol) that actually admitted incorrect timekeeping, as Noack had alleged regarding unpaid overtime. If there's a smoking gun, can they be trusted solely on their word that nothing else happened? No, not at the summary judgment stage - it must all be viwed in Mr. Noack's favor, to make sure nobody is unjustly railroaded out of court without a jury ever hearing the case. That's the Law. The same report showed a coworker of his stating they didn't like to hire all males. That also seems to corroborate Noack's claims about disparate treatment of men. Again, a fact when viewed most favorable to Noack (as required), would show discrimination as possible or likely.
There's more: Noack's email showing he was ordered to stay off his computer, while he needed it for his job and contact with HR, Noack getting a conduct report for overtime that he was required to do, etc. As for the various affidavit testimony from both sides? Noack's testimony, by Law, must be regarded as true at the summary judgment stage, barring any hard evidence otherwise, since he is the non-movant for summary judgment. That did not happen. A judge is counted as the "trier of Law", and a jury is the "trier of facts", in a legal case. That places restrictions on what they may each do. It is the jury's explicit right to weigh the evidence and make determinations about whom is telling the truth - again, perhaps barring any proof otherwise regarding the outright truthfulness of testimony.
However, Noack's testimony was not contradicted, except by YMCA testimony; yet, Noack showed documented evidence of YMCA perjury. If anything, that meant Mr. Noack was the more truthful and even greater reason to require judgment in his favor on the summary judgment challenge! The courts ignored the legal boundary, improperly & illegally favoring the YMCA, in view of the "standards" set for summary judgment issues and the legal roles of judges and juries. Simply fact. These tidbits show the courts utterly ignored the Law; and, the corruption needs to be prosecuted and Noack should not have been put out of court so unfairly, illegally, & unconstitutionally. The very fact that multiple courts so brazenly ignored all of these things - basic legal precepts - is reason itself to warrant an investigation by authorities.