When I took and passed California’s bar examination and became a lawyer and a member of The State Bar of California, I was very proud of what I had accomplished. I worked hard in law school at Berkeley—and later at Georgetown, for a second law degree—and I considered it an honor to be a member of the State Bar . . . but not anymore. Under former California Governor Pete Wilson, for all intents and purposes, it was put out of business; and its uselessness was exposed for all to see, like the emperor in Hans Christian Andersen’s fairy tale, “The Emperor’s New Clothes.”[3]
This stinging indictment should have been a wake-up call for California lawyers. However, the State Bar has come roaring back with a vengeance; and it is worse than ever, and a true disgrace. Once again it is a “rogue” trade association; a waste of its members’ and taxpayers’ monies; and a travesty. It should be eliminated permanently, with its staff sent looking for other jobs.[4] Or at the very least, it should become voluntary, with its disciplinary functions transferred to an independent arm of California’s Supreme Court—and its present staff of rogue prosecutors eliminated completely.
Today, I am ashamed to be a member of the State Bar; and I never thought that I would come to that conclusion.[5] It is like belonging to a private club that discriminates, and is run by an inbred clique or cabal. At best, it is a third-rate trade association—and Sacramento and Washington, D.C. are full of them.
Undergraduates in colleges, and others who enter law schools in California, have been lulled into the belief that being a lawyer is some “magical” ticket to success—which it is not—and that it is an honorable profession to join. What they do not realize is that very successful lawyer friends of mine and I have recommended for many years that our kids and others never become lawyers or practice law . . . albeit I am proud of what I have accomplished as a lawyer.[6]
The value of this advice will be even more evident as California’s economy deteriorates during the balance of this decade, and fewer Californians are able to afford legal services. The State Bar has defrauded would-be lawyers by failing to disclose that the debt obligation a legal education entails may encumber the students (or their parents) for much of their lives, and there may be no jobs when they graduate.[7]
A $15-an-hour job as a non-lawyer will not service a $150,000 debt incurred during law school, yet the State Bar never discloses this because it is knee-deep in fraud itself. The first goals of any trade association are to perpetuate its existence and full-time employment for its staff members, which the State Bar has been doing with gusto since it essentially went out of business.[8]
Also, the State Bar has done almost nothing to police abuses by lawyers in California, relating to fraud in mortgage lending and other activities. It has wasted valuable resources pursuing “minnows,” all the while allowing the “big fish” to escape unscathed. It has never gone after the lawyers at Countrywide who participated in and/or condoned predatory lending practices; and one of Countrywide’s lawyers even testified on the State Bar’s behalf in a predatory lending case[9].
Equally disturbing, disconcerting and odious is the fact that divorce lawyers prey sexually on their vulnerable and distraught clients. They should be automatically disbarred; and the State Bar is culpable and morally reprehensible for failing to act. As in the case of other professionals—such as medical doctors and psychiatrists who prey on their vulnerable patients—the most stringent sanctions must be imposed, but they are not. The State Bar turns a blind eye, which undermines any notions of morality and propriety that it purports to represent.
Its failure to disbar these divorce lawyers is inherently repugnant. Women’s rights organizations especially should be up in arms, protesting the State Bar’s culpability. Anyone is vulnerable during divorce proceedings, and this is particularly true of women. Yet the State Bar does nothing. If some lawyers can act with impunity in the context of divorces, what use is the State Bar to society—or to those lawyers whose conduct is above reproach?
Unlike the District of Columbia Bar, of which I am proudly a member—for example, because (1) it is more prestigious, with its members being recognized on a nationwide and worldwide basis, and (2) it does a far better job, and (3) its members are charged much less in terms of annual dues—the State Bar forces its members to satisfy Continuing Legal Education (“CLE”) requirements every three years, which is absurd. Financial “kickbacks” are standard for the State Bar, which is a travesty unto itself; and mandatory CLE is merely one example.
Most CLE courses that are required have no bearing whatsoever on a lawyer’s legal specialty and practice. Over the years, I have never seen a successful lawyer who failed to keep up with the nuances of his or her specialty. Indeed, truly proficient lawyers do it each and every day that they practice law; and there is no need to take mandatory CLE courses to accomplish this. Quite to the contrary, it is a waste of time—but the State Bar mandates this because it enhances the State Bar’s financial coffers and insures the perpetuation of the trade association’s existence and power.[10]
The contrast between the State Bar and the District of Columbia Bar is striking in almost every respect. Aside from costing much more, the State Bar is grossly inefficient in serving its members. For example, I received a check from a purported “client” in what turned out to be a fraudulent “phishing” scam; and I contacted both bar associations to ask what I should do with it, ethically. The D.C. Bar got right back to me; and one of its attorneys was very thoughtful and helpful. No one from the State Bar ever called me back, and I gave up trying to reach them.
To say that the State Bar is totally worthless—and lawless, and does not pay its bills—is not to exaggerate one iota.[11] When I was sworn in as a California lawyer, I was in awe of the State Bar. However, this has not been true for many years. It is just one more fraudulent trade association, whose existence is perpetuated to serve its staff members above everyone else. Lawyers are held in low esteem today, inter alia, because rogue organizations like the State Bar exist, which are bankrupt morally and ethically.
Its support from financially strapped Californians and the equally strapped State of California[12] is wasted and must be eliminated completely; and its membership must become voluntary, at best. Clearly, enough political forces coalesced to effectively put the State Bar out of business when Pete Wilson was California’s governor. The same thing must happen now—this time to accomplish the job once and for all, and eliminate what is probably the most corrupt and diabolical trade association of its kind in the United States.
In a quotation attributed to the Irish-born statesman Edmund Burke: “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men [and women] do nothing.” California lawyers must rise up and say enough is enough, and mean it this time. Perhaps it is naïve, optimistic and idealistic to believe this will happen, but hopefully not. American justice requires nothing less.[13]
© 2014, Timothy D. Naegele
[1] Timothy D. Naegele was counsel to the United States Senate’s Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, and chief of staff to Presidential Medal of Freedom and Congressional Gold Medal recipient and former U.S. Senator Edward W. Brooke (R-Mass). He practices law in Washington, D.C. and Los Angeles with his firm, Timothy D. Naegele & Associates, which specializes in Banking and Financial Institutions Law, Internet Law, Litigation and other matters (see www.naegele.com and http://www.naegele.com/documents/TimothyD.NaegeleResume.pdf). He has an undergraduate degree in economics from UCLA, as well as two law degrees from the School of Law (Boalt Hall), University of California, Berkeley, and from Georgetown University. He is a member of the District of Columbia and California bars. He served as a Captain in the U.S. Army, assigned to the Defense Intelligence Agency at the Pentagon, where he received the Joint Service Commendation Medal. Mr. Naegele is an Independent politically; and he is listed in Who’s Who in America, Who’s Who in American Law, and Who’s Who in Finance and Business. He has written extensively over the years (see, e.g.,www.naegele.com/whats_new.html#articles), and can be contacted directly at tdnaegele.associates@gmail.com; see also Google search: Timothy D. Naegele
[2] Note: The author has held these personal opinions for many years, probably since the State Bar was effectively put out of business (see infra n.3), and he and other members woke up to problems with the Bar. The author paid dues, but worked full time in Washington, D.C. then, and did not pay much attention to the Bar. He began drafting this article in 2012, long before he heard the names Erin McKeown Joyce, Thomas A. Miller or Lucy Armendariz; and he made refinements (i.e., principally to its footnotes) before it was published here.
[3] See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Bar_of_California#Member_fee_authorization_process (“Member fee authorization process”) and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emperor%27s_New_Clothes
[4] Two general counsel (i.e., “the State Bar’s lawyer,” or chief legal officer) have served during this time frame: Joseph Starr Babcock and Thomas Allen Miller. Babcock came in to pick up the pieces after the State Bar essentially went out of business; and Miller came on board recently after practicing law.
Miller has taken a “hands’ off” approach, by saying that his “Office of General Counsel” has no “direct involvement” with “the exclusive jurisdiction of the Office of Chief Trial Counsel,” despite the fact that Miller was told by the author that (1) one of his lawyers in the latter office—Erin McKeown Joyce—has totally ignored the law nationally, as enunciated by the U.S. Supreme Court, the Ninth Circuit and California’s Supreme Court; (2) the State Bar owes the author a substantial sum of money stemming from his deposition testimony as an expert witness, and payment is required by a California statute; (3) another member of the State Bar is reportedly subject to criminal prosecution for fraud, Lloyd J. Michaelson (SBN 94145), yet no actions have been taken by the State Bar; and similarly (4) the State Bar has not taken action against a second attorney, Richard H. Lubetzky (SBN 154032), even though he suborned perjury with respect to testimony before the State Bar, and his troubled history with the State Bar began before his admission to the Bar. See, e.g., http://articles.latimes.com/1990-07-25/news/vw-1012_1_state-bar; see also infra n.11.
See, e.g., http://www.vcreporter.com/cms/story/detail/a_paramount_problem/8566/ (“The suits claim that from 2008 through early 2010, defendants Nicholaus Skultety and lawyer Lloyd Michaelson were scamming millions of dollars from individuals and businesses across the United States by fraudulently promising to fund construction projects in exchange for an up-front cash fee of 2 percent of purported loans. . . . Various people . . . , including some of the alleged victims, said they have been in contact with the FBI”) and http://redcatsboards.yuku.com/topic/34142/Local-men-charged-in-real-estate-loan-scam#.UOyJ5LtWpkg (“Local men charged in real estate loan scam – Complaint says they collected fees for loans that were never delivered”) and http://www.californiarealestatefraudreport.com/archives/date/2011/03
While Miller may be competent, and the “new kid on the block,” he is in charge now. If he will not take actions (1) to rein in abuses by lawyers in the “exclusive fiefdom” of the Office of Chief Trial Counsel, and (2) to address other serious problems with the State Bar—and he allows such problems to fester—who will? Ultimately, he is responsible and the buck stops with him, yet he is turning a blind eye to wrongdoing by those who work for him. Indeed, others beneath him have taken the State Bar down a path that must end. Investigations by California’s legislature and its Governor are warranted and needed; and there must not be a “whitewash.”
[5] The author has debated for some time whether to go “inactive,” or resign from the State Bar altogether. He applauded the actions that essentially put it out of business. While it may be best to fight it from within—because only a relatively small number of lawyers know how truly corrupt it is—the State Bar costs the author money, and it wastes his time satisfying useless CLE requirements.
Since being admitted to the State Bar, the author has handled very few matters in California, and less than a handful for individual clients. Mostly, he has purchased banks there from the federal government for large business clients located elsewhere in the U.S. or overseas; served as an expert witness for the FDIC, in connection with a failing national bank case; and served as a special consultant to the State on banking matters, during the first administration of Governor Jerry Brown.
[6] See https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2013/07/15/justice-and-the-law-do-not-mix/ (see also the footnotes and comments beneath the article) and http://www.naegele.com/documents/Twill-Naegele-JusticeAndTheLawDoNotMix.pdf (“Justice And The Law Do Not Mix”); see also http://www.naegele.com/documents/TimothyD.NaegeleResume.pdf
[7] See https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/the-american-legal-system-is-broken-can-it-be-fixed/ (“The American Legal System Is Broken: Can It Be Fixed?”) (see also the footnotes and comments beneath the article)
[8] If one looks hard enough at the State Bar’s Web site, its staggering budget is set forth, although nowhere is an overall summary presented. See, e.g., http://www.calbar.ca.gov/AboutUs/Reports.aspx (“2015 Proposed Final Budget”). Its members must be provided with such information in great specificity, because they pay dues; and the public must be as well, because the State Bar’s budget is part of the General Fund support for California’s judicial branch. Also, funds for the State Bar should be eliminated entirely.
For 2015 alone, more than $5 million is shown for the Office of General Counsel, even though the State Bar’s lawyer apparently will not “intrude” in the activities of his lawless Office of Chief Trial Counsel (see infra n.4 & 11), whose budget for the same period is shown to exceed $30 million. Both individuals are shown to earn $200,000 per year.
At the State Bar’s Web site in July, 2014, it was stated:
The bar’s programs are financed primarily by fees paid by attorneys and applicants to practice law. In 2011, the bar’s general fund budget was more than $64 million, over 75 percent of which funded the bar’s attorney disciplinary activities.
See http://www.calbar.ca.gov/AboutUs/StateBarOverview.aspx (“How is the State Bar funded?”).
Surely, the State Bar must cite figures that are more recent than three years old; and 75 percent of “more than $64 million” equals almost $50 million. This means that the Office of Chief Trial Counsel’s budget is likely more than that amount today, rather than the amount shown in the “2015 Proposed Final Budget.” And this money is paid to rogue prosecutors, who are seeking as many “scalps” as they can take. Not many lawyers can afford to fight this vicious and unholy juggernaut. See infra n.11.
[9] James Goldberg of Bryan Cave LLP, San Francisco, represented related persons and entities—for example, Bank of America, N.A., Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., ReconTrust Company, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. and Kelly Germa (hereinafter referred to collectively as “Countrywide”)—which have been defendants in a lawsuit alleging predatory lending and fraud; namely, Kaleb v. Bank of America Home Loans, et al. (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Case No. 3:09-cv-05958-RS).
In turn, Goldberg testified on behalf of the State Bar in a predatory lending case before the State Bar Court, In the Matter of Sharon Lapin, 165919, A Member of the State Bar, in which Countrywide’s wrongdoing was an issue. Clearly, the State Bar has zero problems with (1) allowing the “fox” into the “chicken coop,” and (2) not pursuing the lawyers at Countrywide—which was headquartered in Calabasas, California—for their wrongdoing, despite the fact that Countrywide has been the “poster child” for fraud in America’s mortgage lending scandals. Also, all of this occurred before State Bar Court Judge Lucy Armendariz, who presumably had no problems with it either. See also infra n.11.
[10] Instead of eliminating CLE requirements altogether, the State Bar has actually advocated increasing them, which is patently absurd—and simply underscores how irresponsible the State Bar is.
See http://calbarjournal.com/August2013/TopHeadlines/TH3.aspx
Furthermore, the State Bar is wasting money auditing thousands of its members—to ensure compliance with the requirements—which is absurd, abusive, and another reason why the trade association should be abolished.
See http://calbarjournal.com/July2014/TopHeadlines/TH6.aspx (“5,500 attorneys expected to go through MCLE audit”)
Education of California’s lawyers can and does take place on an individual, very personal basis. Also, there are many private organizations, such as universities, which provide superior educational resources.
[11] For example, the author testified as an expert witness before the State Bar pursuant to its subpoena on June 27, 2012, with respect to matters involving another member of the State Bar. Section 1986.5 of California’s Code of Civil Procedure states in pertinent part:
Any person who is subpoenaed and required to give a deposition shall be entitled to receive the same witness fees and mileage as if the subpoena required him or her to attend and testify before a court in which the action or proceeding is pending.
See http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/cacode/CCP/3/4/3/2/s1986.5
The State Bar has not paid the author, and one must assume that it has not paid others as well. In its defense, on September 12, 2013, it produced a handwritten “Clarification order,” dated July 9, 2012, for the first time—which had been signed by State Bar Court Judge Armendariz, and purported to shift the fees and costs away from the State Bar. However, it did not override or nullify the California statute; and arguably the State Bar Court judge is “complicit” in the State Bar’s lawlessness.
How many people have been “cheated” financially by the State Bar? Indeed, it must be determined—by means of an independent investigation—how many other times the State Bar has used the State Bar Court or other ruses to cheat people out of monies that are owed. The spotlight must be focused on the State Bar’s employees and State Bar Court judges who engage in such abuses.
Clearly, the State Bar is dodging the courts and the laws by turning to its own State Bar Court judges to bless its decisions. The State Bar’s rules and those of the State Bar Court are Byzantine at best, and are skewed against lawyers in California. See, e.g., rules.calbar.ca.gov and www.statebarcourt.ca.gov/ProceduresProgramsandRules.aspx (“Rules of Practice and the Rules of Procedure, which govern State Bar Court proceedings”)
Next, a “Senior Trial Counsel” with the State Bar, Joyce, told the author that the “black letter law” decisions of federal courts (including the U.S. Supreme Court, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit) do not count as far as she was concerned, nor do decisions of California’s Supreme Court.
In essence, she was saying that the “law of the land” could and should be ignored. Needless to say, the author was stunned and flabbergasted by her ignorance and naïveté, yet these are the types of lawyers who are apparently employed by and represent the State Bar. They are lawless; and hence, when the State Bar acts through them, it is lawless.
Evidently the performances of the State Bar’s prosecutors are measured by how many “scalps” they take, which gives them enormous incentives to go after the State Bar’s members, whether they are innocent or not—and grotesquely distorts the prosecutorial process. When State Bar Court judges override existing laws, without thinking twice about it, one understands how corrupt the system is, from one end to the other.
Most prosecutors seemingly have never laid eyes on an innocent defendant. As the author has written:
Anyone who thinks that prosecutors are advocates of truth and justice is living in a “Mary Poppins” fantasy world, and knows nothing about how our legal system really operates. It is seldom if ever discussed or written about, yet it is often said—by lawyers—that the only thing separating prosecutors from guilty criminals is the “badge.”
See infra n.6. Imagine a life spent hurting people. Joyce may be a perfect example, and the question is: how many people has she hurt?
Unlike some state bar associations such as the District of Columbia Bar, where the membership is worth something, the State Bar is a burden and not something to be proud of. When it essentially went out of business, it was not missed except by its staff members, who had been feeding at its trough.
As the author has written in an article cited above:
Can our legal system be fixed, and will the American people come to trust and respect lawyers and judges again, and believe that justice not only exists but prevails in this great nation? Maybe . . . if the profession is restructured, and if it attracts those people who believe that the law is sacred, sacrosanct and pristine—truly a shining city upon a hill—and they put such principles into practice. The profession does not require saints, but it does need something different than “Law West of the Pecos by Judge Roy Bean.” And it needs people who are different than it has been attracting: who are often driven, ruthless, unprincipled, money-hungry, and power-hungry.
See infra n.7 (emphasis in original). At the very least, Joyce seems to be Bean’s successor.
On July 29, 2014, Joyce commenced a disciplinary action against the author based on (1) “Failure to Update Membership Address,” and (2) “Unconscionable Fee” and “Failure To Refund Unearned Attorney Fees.” The charges were totally false, bogus and constituted pure harassment—and this article was written well beforehand (see infra n.2)—but she brought the action anyway. And Miller did nothing to stop her, even though both were briefed fully about the issues. See, e.g., infra n.4. It is unrealistic to expect even a modicum of justice from a rogue prosecutor such as Joyce, or a judge like Armendariz to whom the author’s case was assigned, who ignores the law.
It is interesting that on the same date, July 29, 2014, the homepage of the State Bar’s Web site asked in a banner headline: “What can the State Bar of California do for you?” Above that question in bold print appeared another headline: “MCLE audit will include more than 5,500 [members].” See infra n.10. Below the question appeared another headline: “State Bar Court recommends three-year suspension for prominent ex-prosecutor.” This is the State Bar today: hurting its members in every way possible, to justify its bloated budget and staff.
The author has maintained and paid for the same Post Office address continuously since 1989, but some mail was returned to the State Bar through no fault of his own. Also, the author and a legal team that he assembled lost a class-action, RICO Internet fraud case against the national infomercial company, Guthy-Renker, despite the fact that its agent in Texas testified as to the full extent of the fraudulent scheme that hurt large numbers of Americans. Other attorneys (including one who is a federal judge today), law clerks and the author worked hard to win the lawsuit; however, “success has many fathers, while defeat is an orphan.”
There is no way to predict with certainty how a federal judge will act: lawyers are not fortune tellers or seers. A new District Judge decided against the author’s clients, just as the judge decided against a major Hollywood movie studio where a friend of the author is Executive Vice President and General Counsel. Hence, the former clients came after the author—even though no lawyer can guarantee success, and the author made that clear to them—and Joyce was only too happy to oblige.
Imagine every lawyer in California being harassed by the State Bar when he or she loses a lawsuit, which is Joyce’s modus operandi and constitutes nothing more than a witch hunt. The author ceased to represent the former clients more than ten years ago. Hence, the case is time-barred by “Rule 5.21 Limitations Period” of the Rules of Procedure of the State Bar of California, which states in pertinent part: “[T]he proceeding must begin within five years from the date of the violation.” The case was baseless for other reasons as well. However, this did not matter to Miller or Joyce, or deter them.
The tragedy is that Californians and other Americans were defrauded by Guthy-Renker, yet the federal judge did not care; and certainly, neither Miller nor Joyce care, even though Guthy-Renker conducted its fraudulent scheme from and in California. Just as the State Bar does not take action against Countrywide’s lawyers—or against (1) attorneys who prey sexually on their vulnerable clients in divorce proceedings, or (2) Michaelson who is reportedly subject to criminal prosecution for fraud, or (3) Lubetzky who suborned perjury with respect to testimony before the State Bar, which is a crime—so too it looks the other way regarding Guthy-Renker and its lawyers.
Also, the lawless State Bar uses California’s taxing authority, the Franchise Tax Board, to enforce its actions—which is outrageous and egregious unto itself. It is tantamount to and the functional equivalent of the American Bar Association using the IRS to enforce its dictates. Neither bar association serves the American people; and both should be put out of business.
[12] Lots of Californians and Americans are hurting these days, including lawyers. See https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2012/02/07/poverty-in-america/ (“Poverty In America”) (see also the comments beneath the article). California has severe financial problems. However, the State Bar continues to spend like a “drunken sailor,” which is unfathomable and reprehensible.
[13] Also, it is not beyond the pale of reason to believe that boycotts of the State Bar and its activities by members may occur; mass refusals by them to pay State Bar dues may take place; and California lawyers may refuse to satisfy the State Bar’s CLE requirements.
NaegeleBlog 
Ex-California State Bar Director Files Whistle-Blower Action
The Courthouse New Service has reported:
In a whistle-blower lawsuit filed Thursday, former Sen. Joseph Dunn says the State Bar fired him as its executive director for exposing malfeasance and “egregious improprieties.”
Dunn, who was fired on Nov. 7, claims he was targeted after he discovered that the bar’s chief trial counsel, Jayne Kim, removed 269 backlogged cases from official reports released to the public in order to make her office appear more productive.
Dunn is represented by Mark Geragos in Los Angeles.
“We wouldn’t have filed this case if we didn’t think there was egregious conduct going on at the State Bar,” Geragos said.
The lawyer noted that Dunn’s fellow whistleblowers are afraid of retaliation. “They figure if they’re going to blow the whistle that their employment is at risk,” Geragos added. “They’re very brave to stand up against what I consider to be outrageous, unethical and illegal conduct at the State Bar.”
He said Dunn was not available for comment Thursday.
Filed in Los Angeles Superior Court, the complaint names the bar and the bar’s newly installed president, Craig Holden, as defendants.
Shortly after Holden took office in May, says the complaint, he began telling people he wanted “to do something about Dunn,” who had worked as executive director since 2010.
Upon learning of Dunn’s concerns with the activities at the Office of Chief Trial Counsel, Kim complained about Dunn, according to the lawsuit.
Her internal complaint led to an evaluation “conducted at exorbitant expense to the membership of the State Bar,” said Dunn. He was at no point provided with a copy or summary of her complaint.
In early November, Dunn and several other bar employees lodged complaints about Kim’s conduct with the bar’s board of trustees.
Within two days, Dunn was fired.
His lawsuit points out that Kim’s alleged misconduct occurred just as the bar is about to undergo an audit.
“The California Bureau of State Audits is set to conduct its biannual audit of the State Bar in 2015. Rather than hold Ms. Kim and the OCTC accountable for its actions as Senator Dunn encouraged, the State Bar has terminated Senator Dunn and taken adverse actions against other whistleblowers for bringing this issue to their attention,” said the complaint.
This investigation cost bar members more than $300,000, according to Dunn.
His lawsuit says the State Bar used a private law firm with close ties to one of the bar’s trustees, Miriam Krinsky, even though a retired former California Supreme Court Justice had offered to conduct a pro bono evaluation.
Krinsky was a member of the Judicial Council from roughly 2009-2012. The council decides on rules and budgets for California’s vast court system. During a period of intense turmoil in the council’s staff roughly two years ago, Dunn was under consideration to direct the staff, then called the Administrative Office of the Courts.
One of the merits to his possible ascension to that post was his knowledge of the Legislature where the administrative office had been severely criticized over its handling of public funds, including a disastrous software project. Dunn served as a California state senator representing Santa Ana in Orange County from 1998-2006.
In Thursday’s lawsuit, Dunn said, “The retention of the private firm, in addition to being an utter waste of State Bar membership dues, violated State Bar protocol.”
“Three billing partners from the private firm that were put on the ‘evaluation’ each billed in excess of $800 per hour,” said the complaint. “The current billable hours for the services rendered by that private firm likely exceeds $300,000.”
Dunn says he was given his 30-day termination notice on Nov. 7 while he was giving a speech for the State Bar in San Francisco. Holden allegedly said he couldn’t speak to the press, or risk losing his severance pay.
The State Bar has not announced a search for a new executive director, Dunn’s lawsuit notes, adding that Holden plans to take the job himself.
Dunn is seeking damages and injunctive relief reinstating him as executive director, or at the very least, an order to show cause why he should not be reinstated.
See http://www.courthousenews.com/2014/11/13/ex-bar-director-files-whistle-blower-action.htm (emphasis added); but see http://www.therecorder.com/top-stories/id=1202676922695/Investigation-Found-Dunn-Misled-Bar-Trustees-Breached-Fiduciary-Duties (“Investigation Found Dunn Misled Bar Trustees, Breached Fiduciary Duties”)
LikeLike
You are right on point Timothy Naegele. Despite being exonerated, the case being thrown out and a Federal Judge finding me factually innocent, the State Bar and its prosecutors have continued to wrongfully display a misdemeanor conviction on my record. They have been properly notified of this and yet fail to remove it rather keeping a false record on their site.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you, Peter, for your comments.
Sadly, the State Bar is totally lawless. As I wrote in my article above, it is probably “the most corrupt and diabolical trade association of its kind in the United States”—which speaks volumes.
LikeLike
Investigate Former SF Bar President For Taking $438,000 From Escrow Account
The following petition has been provided by Leah Ahn, and its facts have not been independently confirmed or denied:
See https://www.change.org/p/the-state-bar-of-california-investigate-former-sf-bar-president-for-taking-438-000-from-escrow-account
LikeLike
While I agree with you in principle because the Ca State Bar itself is in fact a corrupt cesspool. However abolishing it is not really the issue. The real truth is, the Bar and many other State agencies who are also corrupt is a function of the tiny legislature bodies we have across America. In fact, after looking over all of your articles between the the “US Department of Injustice” to the American Legal system being broken, these are all issues that directly exist due to poor representation.
The Federal level is an excellent example. 435 US House members cannot properly represent the over 700,000 constituents they each have. The idea that the US Senate has a mere 100 members for the over 300 million people in America is a cabal in itself.
Consider locally in LA County, its 10 million residents have 5 Supervisors. Each has 2 million. More violence by Government goes on there than anywhere else. So, you are correct in your views, but the problems you aptly examine are symptoms. The disease is lack of representation!
LikeLike
Thank you, Michael, for your comments.
On balance, I agree with you—and certainly with your first sentence.
I have spent my professional career thus far dealing with the federal government and State governments. The only exceptions are a few real estate projects; for example, trying to oversee the construction of a building on the California coast from Washington, D.C., which required approximately 40 different permits and turned out to be a nightmare.
You conclude: “The disease is lack of representation!”
I understand your point of view; and certainly in theory, I would agree.
However, too many chefs stirring the pot might result in nothing positive being done. This is one of the reasons why so many Americans hate government at all levels today, feeling they have lost their freedoms. However, I realize too that what is “positive” is in the eye of the beholder.
After dealing with governments, there is one conclusion that I came to years ago: the government that governs least governs best.
The United States today is a country that is strangled by government intrusions into Americans’ lives and their privacy; and perhaps the EU is even worse.
Food for thought.
LikeLike
I disagree and from your thoughts, I should sit down and do a compilation of all the powers in a law review at some point since so many people tend to misunderstand this. However, Too many chefs do not spoil the soup is not the proper analogy here even if it does seem apt.
There are two key duties of the legislative branch. The first is to take Petitions for redress of grievances. This Petitioning process is what leads to the creation of laws. Generally only those with lots of money can get laws. The rest of us are left Petitioning and getting no answers.
The second key duty is to investigate and inform.
“It is the proper duty of a representative body to look diligently into every affair of government and to talk much about what it sees. It is meant to be the eyes and the voice, and to embody the wisdom and will of its constituents. Unless Congress have and use every means of acquainting itself with the acts and the disposition of the administrative agents of the government, the country must be helpless to learn how it is being served; and unless Congress both scrutinize these things and sift them by every form of discussion, the country must remain in embarrassing, crippling ignorance of the very affairs which it is most important that it should understand and direct. The informing function of Congress should be preferred even to its legislative function. The argument is not only that discussed and interrogated administration is the only pure and efficient administration, but, more than that, that the only really self-governing people is that people which discusses and interrogates its administration. The talk on the part of Congress which we sometimes justly condemn is the profitless squabble of words over frivolous bills or selfish party issues. It would be hard to conceive of there being too much talk about the practical concerns and processes of government. Such talk it is which, when earnestly and purposefully conducted, clears the public mind and shapes the demands of public opinion.”
“By increasing the representation we make it more difficult to corrupt and influence the legislative members; we diffuse them more extensively among the body of the people, perfect the balance, multiply information, strengthen the confidence of the people, and consequently support the laws on equal and free principles.” Federal Farmer
There are a few more than 535 members of Congress. Who can they investigate? There are more Federal Agencies than Members of Congress. There are over 1,000 Federal Judges and who knows how many Federal Prosecutors? It is the duty of the Members of Congress to investigate, well all Federal expenditures and everything else.
“[George] Mason was convinced that once the US House began meeting, it would resist efforts to add more members, which he believed necessary for the body to represent the diverse interests of the people.”
The same is true at the state level. In California, we have 120 no ability to oversee the 560+ California Agencies.
LikeLike
Thank you, Michael, for your additional comments.
First, I worked in the U.S. Senate for almost four years. During this time, I wrote several pieces of legislation that are still the law today.
Second, after leaving the Hill, I worked directly with both the Senate and House for many years, and am still involved.
Third, I rewrote the financial institutions laws of the State Of Maine, which now appear as Title 9-B of the Maine Revised Statutes Annotated.
Fourth, I served as special consultant to the State of California on matters pertaining to financial institutions.
See http://www.naegele.com/documents/TimothyD.NaegeleResume.pdf
I do not say any of this to brag, but merely to point out that I know how the legislative process works.
Fifth, you have said:
Each member of Congress—Senators and Congresspersons alike—has “case workers” who receive “petitions” from constituents regarding problems. Most of the time, this relates to problems with government agencies; and the staff members handle them to the satisfaction of the constituents.
Sixth, you have said:
Generally, this is handled by the Senate and House committees, and not by the personal staffs.
Seventh, you have cited two paragraphs in quotes, which are apparently from the “Federal Farmer.” Perhaps more legislators are needed. I do not disagree. However, a constitutional change would be required at the federal level, which would be difficult if not impossible to obtain.
LikeLike
The State Bar Of California Is Further Descending Into A Banana Republic
Maura Dolan of the Los Angeles Times has reported:
See http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-state-bar-20141207-story.html#page=1; see also http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2015/jan/11/suit-spurs-calls-for-new-lawyer-discipline-model/ (“Suit spurs calls for new lawyer discipline model”—”The state bar for the last generation has been a completely dysfunctional organization”)
LikeLike
Mr. Naegele,
I appreciate your response. It is interesting reading your response and I shall respond accordingly.
I am aware that you have some experience, but the experience you have is exemplar. You are in effect an insider that has had access that more than 99% of the people do not have. You also have an idea on the process.
You wrote: “. . . Senators and Congresspersons alike has ‘Case workers’ who receive ‘petitions’ from constituents regarding problems. . . ” these petitions relate to government agencies. Then you go on to note that “. . . the staff members handle them to the satisfaction of the constituents.”
Now, there are a number of ways I can react to this. I want them all to be constructive and you not to be upset, but I also wish to be a little colorful to make my point and perhaps have it stick. These responses range “Are you kidding me?” to “Do you really believe that?” to the more obvious and proper response of “That is not really how it works in most instances” because right now is the magical moment where I don’t think you see the connection between the topics you write about, but might. What I am saying directly is that is the deficiency of the legislature and its formation which is allowing these issues to occur.
I have more direct responses with these “staffers” and there is a great book about them called “Hill Rat” that is one hell of an expose on these staffers, what they do and their effect on this process. The Average member of Congress now has about 100 non elected staffers either for themselves or the committees. Just like the members of Congress cannot oversee the executive or judiciary, but they can barely watch the staffers and as “Hill Rat” shows us, the staffers are making more and more of the decisions of the members of Congress. I argue that when members of Congress are debating, questions should not so much be “How would vote on this or that issue” but in fact, “who are you going to hire and what are they going to vote for?”
I attended Georgetown University in the Summer of 1999 and worked at a large org in DC and had many roommates who worked for members of Congress and I heard a lot about what really goes on there and what the staffers really do.
The theory is, we pay taxes, thus we have representation. What the public coffers pay for are supposed to be watched by those we elect as well as the laws they create. This is the concept of “Taxation with Representation” but if we do not have enough members of a legislative body to do its job, then what does it matter? Taxes are collected and the money is used as it is used. If the money is wasted or people are harmed, by the institutions that money creates or pays for, then what? Nothing, the abuse continues.
Also, the more people that a rep has in their district, the more money it costs to run for office. This in turn makes it so money has more import than each individual vote. So, the concentrated powers (The Bar, The DOJ, Trade Associations) and the moneyed interests have more access. The real reforms do not exist or those enjoying the current circumstances can keep them that way and those petitioning or those who should be petitioning do not. People harmed do not even assume that they can affect the process.
So, if these “staff members” who work for the members of the legislatures were indeed handling these petitions for grievances from their constituents to the satisfaction of those petitioning, then the Bar would be dealt with. The Law would not be so that the Prosecution was overcharging the Defendants because they would be able to Petition over these wrongs.
I am aware that Committees perform oversight. However, that is just my point, not only are there more agencies than there are members of Congress, but there are far more agencies than there are committees. So, you probably recall the Madoff incident. One of the things it made us aware of is the fact that members of the SEC were engaged in misconduct of an array of stripes. Lawyers not current with their bar licenses, some members were in there downloading pornographic material all day. Would you like to know why? They have no one looking over them. The Secretary of Commerce (I think it was Chris Cox at the time) overseeing the SEC did not even have an idea that this was going on. So, the internal procedures were not enough and Congress did not investigate the SEC so, the abuses were able to go on.
Wanna know why the VA is in such a mess? No oversight. Those receiving the services from the VA were letting their members of Congress know what was going on, but Congress did not respond, not until the media showed that people were dying (quite a threshold). I have a friend in this boat. He complained often. He was ignored. So, the VA (which you have not apparently written about) was engaging in abusive practices for a very long time.
So, some investigations do occur. We all remember when Baseball was being investigated. The bigger question is, what weren’t they investigating when they were investigating baseball? Well, the VA for one since it seems they were having massive problems then. They also weren’t investigating the SEC at that time either. Why weren’t they investigating Football which is rampant with steroids? What else aren’t they investigating? How about the abuses of the bar that you have written about?
The US House size is set in 2 USC 2(a-c) and its size can be between a minimum of 1 per state (which would place the house at 50) and just over 10,000. The Size of the Senate is set twice by the Constitution, both in Article I and Article V. Article I sets it at 2 per State. Article V opens the door for more, but suggests that there can be more, but that the number allocated can be equal per state. So, we could in theory have 3 per state or 4 or 6 or even 12!
I agree with you, difficult, but not for the direct reason you cited.
So, I reassert that the things you are rightfully complaining about are in fact symptoms of lack of legislative representation! So now you know why the things you are being courageous about by blogging on are happening. But, you still might not see it or agree with me!
LikeLike
Thank you, Michael, for your additional thoughtful comments.
First, I can only speak based on my personal experiences. We had exceptional case workers, who were very dedicated to doing their jobs and serving the constituents. And we monitored their efforts.
Heaven knows, this may not be true of every congressional staff member, much less those who serve constituents on a state-wide or local basis. Each of us has encountered rude, uncaring conduct on the part of government workers.
However, I have received exceptional care and attention—and when I write these words, three black men come to mind immediately, two with the federal court system and another with the Social Security Administration.
With all due respect, to increase the number of government employees seems to be no solution to anything. Also, to increase the number of our federal legislators would require a constitutional change, which again is almost impossible to obtain.
LikeLike
Again, I return to the point that all the problems you speak of are symptoms of lack of representation. It is that simple!
Second, I do not advocate the increase of Government employees at all.
Third, no, an increase in the size of the US House does not require a Constitutional amendment. The Size of the US House increased and decreased since it was formed. It’s initial size is set in the Constitution (I believe at 65 members). From there, it grew. More states were added, the population grew.
The US House actually shrunk during the Civil War when the Southern states no longer participated. Then it increased up until 1911. Then it was officially frozen at 435 until Alaska and Hawaii were added and it became 437. Then two years later it was shrunk back to 435.
The Population was about 100 million when the house was frozen today we are about 320 million. So, the Congressional districts are 3 times as large. We now add assistants in lieu of adding more reps.
The cost of running an effective campaign correlate 93% with money. So, the incumbents all have the benefit and the challengers are forced to be millionaires and the real losers are the rest of us who endure the violence of the Bar. Turn over is less than 10% and yet our reps have a favorability rating of about 10% to 20% at any given time. Turn out is low because “why bother” and at the same time, when a lawyer damages a person and they go to the bar and the bar does nothing, you will find that when you go to your representative or their assistants, they do the same and guess what, they win their next election! It’s pretty perverse.
As a simple question I ask of those who defend the current system. Where in the Constitution does it say anything about Assistants or Staffers? When I ask people “Should you as a voter have access to the Representative or the Assistant?” I rarely hear the Assistant. When you ask a big donor if they should have access to the rep or the Assistant, their answer is no different!
Guess who has their grievances remedied? Not I said the fly!
LikeLike
Thank you, Michael.
First, the “District of Columbia Voting Rights Amendment” and the “Equal Rights Amendment” have failed, and this may be reflective of other similar efforts, although I realize that the number of representatives has changed over time.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_amendments_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Synopsis_of_each_unratified_amendment (“Synopsis of each unratified amendment”)
Second, if you review all of my articles here, you will realize that in no way do I believe the “system” is perfect or above reproach. Quite to the contrary. However, there is no simple solution to remedying an imperfect system.
Having said that, I believe “trade associations” such as the State Bar of California should be abolished, or at the very least made voluntary; and their staff members should be discharged without any benefits.
LikeLike
I appreciate your thoughts here. I actually disagree on the Trade Association matter. They have the right under Amendment I to Assemble. They are like any group of like minded individuals who wish to act in concert. I just don’t believe they should have so much influence on the process as they do.
The Amendments you have raised are not really relevant here. But DC and other similar enclaves such as the US Virgin Islands do need representation and at least now have non voting (actually part time voting).
There was a reason that DC was not supposed to have a Representative. The founders were worried that such a corrupt center would have too much influence on the process. There is a great US Supreme Court case on this the topic of DC not having a Rep: Loughborough v. Blake, 18 U.S. 5 Wheat. 317 317 (1820)
There is an interesting argument raised by a resident of DC that he should not have to pay taxes since he doesn’t have a representative. John Marshall rules against him and notes:
“Although in theory it might be more congenial to the spirit of our institutions to admit a representative from the District, it may be doubted whether, in fact, its interests would be rendered thereby [Page 18 U. S. 325] the more secure, and certainly the Constitution does not consider their want of a representative in Congress as exempting it from equal taxation.”
DC has a non voting representative. Representation was supposed to run with the States. DC gets about $5 for every dollar it pays in taxes, so from that angle, it is well represented!
How many people can a representative really represent? When does agency dissipate? When is substituting an Assistant proper and when does it no longer constitute agency? I think we’ve been there.
When the size of a district was proposed by the Founders, 30,000 was decided to be the right size.40,000 was tyranny. We are 720,000 per US House member. Is that agency? Can they oversee these things?
I have read many of your articles and enjoyed them. The problems you have spoken are complex. However, the legislative branch has the duty to oversee and reign in these problems. 435 Members do not have the bandwidth to deal with these problems. It is just that simple! The better the representation, the less violence committed against the common citizen and the more liberties. More representation does not fix the core problem of man’s sometimes evil nature, however, it makes it more likely for individuals to find protection from the Bar or the other groups who are violating citizens.
I am surprised you have stayed in this so long, you need not respond, I enjoy once in a while debating this, especially with astute people as yourself. Some are more abstinent about their refusal to acknowledge the obvious. I have to keep sharp when I am not presenting to a crowd on the issue.
LikeLike
Thank you again, Michael.
First, I have represented trade associations, some very large and some small; and the State Bar is nothing more than a third-rate trade association, if that. Its “leadership” should be sacked, along with its staff. What happened when Pete Wilson was governor was the right thing to do. It should disappear permanently.
Second, you have said:
The thugs and hoods who torched Ferguson and other communities should be treated as domestic terrorists, and dealt with harshly.
They must not be coddled, which has happened since the Watts’ riots of 1965!
Third, you and I do not disagree about the need for effective representation. This is what our great country is all about. However, I have difficulty squaring that with my long-held and deep belief that the government that governs least governs best.
I am sick and tired of government, and so are most Americans. When we find corrupt organs such as the State Bar, we rail against them—privately or in public.
LikeLike
I like the idea of competing Bars. One of the problems with the State Bar as it is formed is the fact that it has a monopoly on the matter. That would take away some of the problems under the bar.
I need not touch the Ferguson matter. That is outside the scope here.
More representation does not mean more government. This is essential. There are two ways to look at the issue of Government. The first idea is that Government is all person involved in a Polity. The question is, what is our function. Some people are representatives. Some people are in the Judiciary and some are in the legislature.
Most of us are Citizens and as such, we have the potential of running for office. However, we have the function of voting and being Jurors. This means service in both Petite Juries and Grand Juries. So, under this theory Government is everyone within a Polity.
Under my Second theory, the “Government” as we know it is the Executive branch. That is anyone who executes the functions of Government. The Executive branch is the most dangerous branch of Government. The legislature in effect creates the Executive, it forms taxes that pays the Executive. It is the ultimate duty of the legislature to restrain the Executive.
I have traced this last theory back to Blackstone. He had an interesting passage in the Common Law of England where he noted that it was quite natural for the King to go out and Conquest other Countries for himself. He then noted it was necessary that Parliament restrain the King.
When we speak of a “Balance of Power” We just assume that there are three branches and they Balance. Done right? Some people take it a little bit further and they note that it is necessary for a legislature to be BiCameral and there are many reasons for this. I recall one that note that the Power of the Legislature was so great that it must necessarily be divided.
However, the Federalist Papers actually give parameters.
“The members of the executive and judiciary departments are few in number, and can be personally known to a small part only of the people. The latter, by the mode of their appointment, as well as by the nature and permanency of it, are too far removed from the people to share much in their prepossessions. The former are generally the objects of jealousy, and their administration is always liable to be discolored and rendered unpopular. The members of the legislative department, on the other hand, are numberous. They are distributed and dwell among the people at large. Their connections of blood, of friendship, and of acquaintance embrace a great proportion of the most influential part of the society. The nature of their public trust implies a personal influence among the people, and that they are more immediately the confidential guardians of the rights and liberties of the people.” Federlist 49
So, it says that there are supposed to be more Reps than Judges. In 1789 when the Judiciary Act of 1789 was first Passed, there were 19 Judge, 26 Senators and 65 House members. The Executive branch was tiny. George Washington was the entire Patent Office! Today, there 435 House members, 100 US Senators and over 1,000 Federal Judges. The Executive branch is massive. I saw one figure that noted we had 22 million Federal employees!
So, when you say “The Government” I beleive that means the Executive branch. As the Federalist notes:
“In a government where numerous and extensive prerogatives are placed in the hands of an hereditary monarch, the executive department is very justly regarded as the source of danger, and watched with all the jealousy which a zeal for liberty ought to inspire. In a democracy, where a multitude of people exercise in person the legislative functions, and are continually exposed, by their incapacity for regular deliberation and concerted measures, to the ambitious intrigues of their executive magistrates, tyranny may well be apprehended, on some favorable emergency, to start up in the same quarter. But in a representative republic, where the executive magistracy is carefully limited; both in the extent and the duration of its power; and where the legislative power is exercised by an assembly, which is inspired, by a supposed influence over the people, with an intrepid confidence in its own strength; which is sufficiently numerous to feel all the passions which actuate a multitude, yet not so numerous as to be incapable of pursuing the objects of its passions, by means which reason prescribes; it is against the enterprising ambition of this department that the people ought to indulge all their jealousy and exhaust all their precautions.” Federalist 48
There is what you are looking for! I hope that makes sense.
M
LikeLike
First, I am not proposing the idea of “competing Bars” at all. The corrupt State Bar of California would become voluntary at best, and would likely disappear quickly, similar to what happened under former Governor Pete Wilson.
Few if any bar members would want to pay its extravagant dues or satisfy its absurd CLE requirements—which are nonexistent with the District of Columbia Bar.
Second, as you know, there has been a long debate over whether our elected representatives must reflect precisely the will of a majority of their constituents, or whether they are elected to “listen” and then make intelligent, informed decisions. Each elected official sees his or her job in this context, and makes individual decisions as issues arise.
Third, your citations are interesting, and will be debated and put into effect—or not—as long as our republic exists, which hopefully will be forever.
LikeLike
As the oldest daughter of a 27 year Army Veteran, a domestic abuse survivor, former wife of an attorney and a victim of the divorce process and the lawyers and others that my ex-husband associated with, I can tell you that there is no one in government or at the State Bar level of any state that truly helps or protects child rearing parents. Many are homeless and have no voice. The District Attorneys really don’t do anything either without Police investigating the case and giving them evidence. It is a very ineffective triangle. The DCSS stops enforcing Spousal Support when all children turn 18, so once again the custodial and child rearing parent gets screwed. There has to be a Federal Website to list those individuals. They go from state to state doing the same thing. Essentially they have 50 chances to move and start over.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for your comments.
LikeLike
I have not seen any coverage of these matters in the press. I scan numerous papers online including the Sacramento Bee, which did a decent job of looking into the stunningly unprofessional conduct during the building of the new SF/Bay Bridge.
I think I’ll drop a note to a few editors and suggest they look into it.
LikeLike
Thank you, Mark, for your comments.
Aside from the Courthouse New Service article that I cited above—with respect to ex-State Bar Director Joseph Dunn and his attorney Mark Geragos—and the Los Angeles Times article regarding the same issues, I have not seen anything either.
See https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2014/09/08/the-state-bar-of-california-is-lawless-and-a-travesty-and-should-be-abolished/#comment-6460 (“Ex-California State Bar Director Files Whistle-Blower Action”) and https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2014/09/08/the-state-bar-of-california-is-lawless-and-a-travesty-and-should-be-abolished/#comment-6647 (“The State Bar Of California Is Further Descending Into A Banana Republic”)
The more people who are aware of the depth of the State Bar’s wrongdoing, the better.
LikeLike
I’ve been struggling with the blatant cover up of my complaint against an attorney for over two years now. I have to take the matter to the Supreme Court but that has burdened the holy hell out of me doing it myself. Not that I’m overly inspired by what I already know to be a seriously corrupt state supreme court.
And then there is this: https://www.tumblr.com/search/CaliforniaALL
LikeLike
Thank you, Ron, for your comments.
LOTS of good luck to you!
LikeLike
Thank you. I’ve referenced your blog here to put it in their face. I’ll need more than luck though. Actively being targeted here.
LikeLike
Don’t I know it. If you saw my cases and how they’ve been fixed, it would bear that out. With the Dunn matter further exposing the State Bar as corrupt, with the CaliforniaALL scandal exposure, with the recent audit of the court system—and I think an impending State Bar audit now—what can be done to further demonstrate that the State Bar and larger court system is a giant charade? I can tell you that things on the public side are definitely heating up.
LikeLike
Thank you again, Ron. The idea that members of the Judicial Council—whatever that is—allowed you only a minute of their precious time is a travesty unto itself!
LikeLike
California Is Lawless
Tragically, the system of “justice” in the United States—and especially in California—is little better than that of Russia and other authoritarian countries that try to silence their critics.
The principal problem is that the judges are often egotistical, callous, mean-spirited, power-hungry, self-righteous, condescending and, yes, incompetent and arrogant. They can smile at you, just as easily as they can slit your throat and never think twice about doing it.
To be perfectly blunt, they are Hitler-esque—and not worth a thimble full of a day laborer’s warm spittle.
As I have written:
See https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2013/07/15/justice-and-the-law-do-not-mix/ (“Justice And The Law Do Not Mix“); see also https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2014/09/08/the-state-bar-of-california-is-lawless-and-a-travesty-and-should-be-abolished/ (“The State Bar Of California Is Lawless And A Travesty, And Should Be Abolished“) and https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2012/03/21/the-united-states-department-of-injustice/ (“The United States Department of Injustice“) and https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/the-american-legal-system-is-broken-can-it-be-fixed/ (“The American Legal System Is Broken: Can It Be Fixed?“)
. . .
When the California Supreme Court does nothing in the face of irrefutable evidence of wrongdoing at the State Bar and State Bar Court—and even ignores its own precedents and established law, and is blindly bureaucratic—it too becomes lawless, complicit and a disgrace.
A fish rots from the head down . . .
This prompts a growing awareness of the burning need for justice in the State where I was born.
LikeLike
The State Bar needs to burn down with all inside the building . . .
Their lawyers destroyed my profession and family by all kinds of illegal actions, lies and fabrications. I filed numerous complaints about lawyers B.N.G, J R, S.G and TM but nothing happened. Then I filed complaints to their appeal unit but still nothing happened. The State Bar is a fraudulent organization that is running the biggest fraud operations, and is not really interested in taking complaints seriously.
The best option is to close this organization immediately. It is nothing more than a useless and shameful operation. They have done nothing about thousand of pages of complaints about the ongoing legal mafia; and corruption in the legal system is at the highest [level] ever.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sad to read such horrible things about our State Bar in Los Angeles, CA. We need closer monitoring on every Attorney licensed by the State Bar of California to omit corruption, abuse, and misleading of any, and all Attorneys!
Restore monitoring the Attorneys by the State Bar because the general public needs such truth who, or whom is serving with good intensions, and not with wrongful intensions! Attorneys suppose to protect, and serve the client well, not unfair!
Just like Law Enforcement protect, and serve the public, not shot to kill, and then ask questions after the fact! If one cannot depend on Attorneys, and Police Officers then who, and whom can we depend on to avoid unruly acts?
LikeLike
Thank you, Juan, for your comments.
Yes, I agree: it is sad to realize that the State Bar of California and the State Bar Court are corrupt. However, this has been true for many years.
Yes too, attorneys who are licensed in California must not abuse their duties to clients. However, sometimes there are literally “clients from Hell” who abuse the legal system as well.
A very careful balance must be achieved between protecting the public—and each of us is a member of the public—and protecting members of the legal profession. It is a “two-way street.”
As I have written in the article above:
LikeLike
The State Bar Of California Is Acting Illegally In Restraint Of Trade
In an article entitled “[U.S.] Supreme Court ruling puts state regulatory boards in crosshairs,” the Los Angeles Times‘ Michael Hiltzik has written:
See http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-20150329-column.html#page=1 (emphasis added)
This is just another way in which the State Bar of California Is lawless and a travesty, and why it should be abolished.
Also, the pathetic, incestuous and insidious relationship between the State Bar and the State Bar Court must be terminated.
LikeLike
Obviously I couldn’t agree more. I think TIm you have hit this before, the Bar is a political institution with little concern over its members and the community and is more interested in the occasional flashing headline and throwing its members under the bus when it is desirable. I hope this will lead to its being dismantled.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you, Cliff, for your comments. I agree completely.
As you may know, its executive director Joe Dunn, and its general counsel Thom Miller are both gone.
The rest of the trade association needs to be dismantled too.
LikeLike
Why Doctors And Lawyers Quit
The Washington Post‘s Charles Krauthammer—an American Pulitzer Prize-winning syndicated columnist, author, political commentator, and physician—has written an article entitled “Why doctors quit,” which states:
See http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-doctors-quit/2015/05/28/1e9d8e6e-056f-11e5-a428-c984eb077d4e_story.html; see also http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-doctors-quit-chapter-2/2015/06/04/1b2de91c-0ade-11e5-9e39-0db921c47b93_story.html (“Why doctors quit, Chapter 2”)
The Wall Street Journal has an article entitled “Ex-Partner Says Dewey & LeBoeuf Got Stuck in Debt Cycle,” which is worth reading as well.
See http://www.wsj.com/articles/ex-partner-says-dewey-leboeuf-got-stuck-in-debt-cycle-1432843524
Krauthammer’s comments echo the sentiments of many successful lawyers, who strongly recommend to their kids and others: “Never become a lawyer.”
A number of large and small law firms have gone belly-up, with many more to come.
Global economic conditions between now and the end of this decade—and beyond—are scary at best.
The legal profession is by no means sheltered from these developments. Far from it, lawyers may be on the cutting edge of the suffering.
See https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2010/09/27/the-economic-tsunami-continues-its-relentless-and-unforgiving-advance-globally/#comment-7208 (“The World’s Next Credit Crunch Could Make 2008 Look Like A Hiccup”)
Lawyers with excellent clients often break away and form their own firms, or join other firms as a ready-made “department,” when the handwriting is on the wall.
What is crystal clear, however, is that no American lawyers or lawyers from other countries need corrupt trade associations like the State Bar of California.
See https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2014/09/08/the-state-bar-of-california-is-lawless-and-a-travesty-and-should-be-abolished/ (“The State Bar Of California Is Lawless And A Travesty, And Should Be Abolished“) and https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2014/09/08/the-state-bar-of-california-is-lawless-and-a-travesty-and-should-be-abolished/#comment-7016 (“California Is Lawless“) and https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2014/09/08/the-state-bar-of-california-is-lawless-and-a-travesty-and-should-be-abolished/#comment-7217 (“The State Bar Of California Is Acting Illegally In Restraint Of Trade“)
LikeLike
The State Bar Of California Must Be Abolished
In an editorial entitled, “State Bar proves it needs a little sunshine,” The Sacramento Bee notes:
See http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/editorials/article32998614.html (emphasis added)
More than “a little sunshine,” the State Bar of California must be abolished.
As highlighted in the article and comments above, it is probably the most corrupt and diabolical trade association of its kind in the United States.
Like a rabid warthog on the rampage, it must be put down.
LikeLike
No Confidence in State Bar of California’s Discipline Chief [UPDATED]
Cheryl Miller of The Recorder has reported:
See http://www.therecorder.com/id=1202740417705/Bars-Discipline-Chief-Loses-No-Confidence-Vote?slreturn=20150922150545 (emphasis added); see also http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2015/12/02/state-bar-issues-no-con-vote-in-chief-prosecutor.html (“State Bar wrestles with controversy over its chief prosecutor”—”Only months after new management took charge, the State Bar of California is tangled in another controversy. . . . In September a new management team, lead by former McGeorge School of Law dean Elizabeth Parker, took charge of what many call a dysfunctional organization. . . . [S]enior trial counsel Erin Joyce . . . and Robin Brune, a former El Dorado County district attorney who now serves as senior trial counsel at the bar, railed about [Kim]. . . . [Famed attorney Mark Geragos said:] ‘In my 33 years of practicing law, I’ve gone up against a lot of parties. I’ve never seen a more dysfunctional group than this. In my humble opinion, it may be time to clean house or disband the bar altogether'”) and http://www.therecorder.com/id=1202745478933/Spurning-Union-Bar-Backs-Discipline-Chief (“Spurning Union, Bar Backs Discipline Chief”—”The state bar’s board of trustees voted Monday to give chief trial counsel Jayne Kim a new term despite a vote of no confidence from office workers”—”[The totally lawless and despicable] Erin Joyce, vice president of the attorney unit of the State Bar of California Association, also spoke out against Kim before Monday’s vote”)
As the article and comments above make crystal clear, the State Bar’s problems are not limited to one person. They are pervasive institutional problems, which cannot be rectified by “scapegoating” one person.
Indeed, as my article above states:
Nothing less will suffice.
Also, the employees’ union for these misfits must be eliminated. President Ronald Reagan fired 11,345 striking air traffic controllers. With the termination of the State Bar, its attorneys will be dismissed too, and its union dissolved.
See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_Air_Traffic_Controllers_Organization_(1968) (“Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization (1968)“)
LikeLike
[…] last week. My praise, though, is restrained. The California Bar has sustained plenty of hits and fault-finding the past 30 years.1 And still it has resisted genuine reforms. Apart from that, the Cal Bar getting […]
LikeLike
I think this is one of the such a lot important info for me.
And i am happy studying your article. However should commentary on some common things, The website taste is ideal, the articles is in point of fact nice : D.
Good activity, cheers
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you. 🙂
LikeLike
that’s good, thanks for sharing,.. I think this is great blog
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for your kind words.
LikeLike
I submitted a complaint to the CA State Bar approx. 6 months ago, and just recently got a call from them saying they plan on closing my case b/c of the state bar’s rule of limitations. My complaint was filed within 5 years of the date of the attorney’s violation, however, for whatever reason (backlog, laziness, forgetfulness, corruption) they chose to do nothing with it for months, and then contacted me recently to say it’s now too late to proceed. He acknowledged we had properly filed our complaint and that is was submitted with months to spare (until the 5 year mark)…And, he even said, “I’m not saying it’s fair….read the rule on our website.”
This clearly isn’t fair/right, b/c if what he is saying is true (that even though our complaint was submitted within the necessary timeframe), the CA Bar could intentionally or unintentionally stall complaints long enough to get them past the rule of limitations. (an easy way to reduce backlog, to help out a fellow atty., …) Where are the victim’s rights in this scenario?
Please explain if you think the Bar atty was explaining the rule properly. If not, how do you recommend I proceed.
Thanks in advance!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for your comments, Emily.
Pursuant to “Rule 5.21 Limitations Period” of the Rules of Procedure of the State Bar of California:
See Rules of Procedure of the State Bar of California Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 5.21.
As stated in my article above, the State Bar is corrupt and lawless, and it must be terminated. It pursues cases long after the 5-year limitations period has expired; and it fails to pursue other cases that have been filed in a timely manner, such as yours.
The California Supreme Court is equally shameful (e.g., it ignores its own precedents, as well as the law nationally enunciated by the U.S. Supreme Court), and represents the worst of America’s legal system. The State Bar festers because the California Supreme Court is lawless. Tragically, Judge Roy Bean’s notions of justice are alive and well in California.
My recommendation is that you contact state legislators. This may be your only hope, sadly, of obtaining redress. You might wish to contact the media as well (see, e.g., some of the sources cited above).
I am sorry that I cannot be more helpful, but Californians need to realize that when dealing with the State Bar, they are encountering a lawless, rogue entity that must be put out of business permanently.
Hiring new State Bar officials is tantamount to stocking a pond with sharks, or rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for every other fantastic article. Where else could anybody get that type of info in such a perfect approach of writing? I’ve a presentation next week, and I’m on the search for such information.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you, Darell, for your comments.
If you are interested in the lawlessness of the State Bar, do a Google search and you will find plenty of opinions that mirror the article above.
The State Bar is a travesty, and must be abolished, not reconstituted. To “tinker with it” is tantamount with rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
LikeLike
The State Bar Is A Cancer That Must Be Removed
In an article entitled, “California Supreme Court sets interim dues for state bar, creates $4.5 million shortfall,” it has been reported:
See http://norcalrecord.com/stories/511051325-california-supreme-court-sets-interim-dues-for-state-bar-creates-4-5-million-shortfall (emphasis added)
California’s legislature is correct: not a penny should go to the State Bar. As stated in my article above, it is “the most corrupt and diabolical trade association of its kind in the United States.”
Like a cancer, its existence must be terminated, not covered with a Band-Aid. California’s Supreme Court is corrupt and lawless too; and hence, its decision is not surprising.
LikeLike
I just suffered a painful arbitration process through California Bar Associations. California State Bar is a big lawless monster for the public, I do not think I have enough power to fight with evil attorneys under Bar’s protecting umbrella. I quit with a deep concern for “US justice”… The monster is growing so fast with decades… I will consider to leave California in future because of the darkness.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for your comments.
As I have written in the article above, the State Bar must be abolished. It is a “big lawless monster,” as you aptly described it.
LikeLike
Judiciary biggest fraud in United States almost the level of Zambia -I have been defrauded by judge Myers , judge Mel racana, judge rotschield and her colleagues at appeal court Cheney as well as Judge Johnson , judge Borenstein etc lawlessness out OF control that public court replace fraudulent judiciary-
LikeLiked by 1 person
Lawlessness Continues Unabated In California
The Courthouse News Service has reported:
See https://www.courthousenews.com/committee-approves-overhaul-california-state-bar/ (“Committee Approves Overhaul of California State Bar”) (emphasis added)
Clearly, the Left Coast legislature has blinders on, and is looking the other way; and it is complicit in the State Bar’s lawlessness—which is not surprising in the least.
LikeLike
California Bar Exam Pass-Rate Slides Below 35 Percent [UPDATED]
Cheryl Miller has written for The Recorder:
See http://www.therecorder.com/id=1202786136940/Calif-Bar-Exam-PassRate-Slides-Again-Falling-Below-35-Percent (“Calif. Bar Exam Pass-Rate Slides Again, Falling Below 35 Percent“); see also http://abovethelaw.com/2017/05/californias-bar-exam-results-are-absolutely-abysmal/ (“California’s Bar Exam Results Are Absolutely Abysmal“) and http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/politics-columns-blogs/dan-walters/article150328762.html (“Legislature tries State Bar fix, but remedy falls short“)
I passed the California Bar exam on my first attempt. However, the bar results are merely one more manifestation of very deep problems in the lawless State of California. Moreover, there is nothing great about California except its climate and physical beauty.
See, e.g., https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2014/09/08/the-state-bar-of-california-is-lawless-and-a-travesty-and-should-be-abolished/ (“The State Bar Of California Is Lawless And A Travesty, And Should Be Abolished“) and https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2014/09/08/the-state-bar-of-california-is-lawless-and-a-travesty-and-should-be-abolished/#comment-7016 (“California Is Lawless“) and https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2014/09/08/the-state-bar-of-california-is-lawless-and-a-travesty-and-should-be-abolished/#comment-6460 (“Ex-California State Bar Director Files Whistle-Blower Action”) and https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2014/09/08/the-state-bar-of-california-is-lawless-and-a-travesty-and-should-be-abolished/#comment-6647 (“The State Bar Of California Is Further Descending Into A Banana Republic”)
When my article above was published on September 8, 2014, I wrote:
Today, I regret even more deeply that I ever became a member of the State Bar. It is a grotesque and thoroughly-lawless organization, and a travesty; and it should cease to exist, period, and be abolished. No changes will ever “fix” it.
There is nothing positive about the State Bar.
Also, as I wrote in the article:
See https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2014/09/08/the-state-bar-of-california-is-lawless-and-a-travesty-and-should-be-abolished/ (“The State Bar Of California Is Lawless And A Travesty, And Should Be Abolished“), n.5 (emphasis added).
On a strictly personal note, I added:
See id. at n.11; see also https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2014/09/08/the-state-bar-of-california-is-lawless-and-a-travesty-and-should-be-abolished/#comment-9173
The law does not matter at all to the lawless State Bar, or to the equally-disgraceful California Supreme Court. Both are living examples of the “Law West of the Pecos by Judge Roy Bean.”
See https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2013/07/15/justice-and-the-law-do-not-mix/ and http://www.naegele.com/documents/Twill-Naegele-JusticeAndTheLawDoNotMix.pdf (“Justice And The Law Do Not Mix“)
LikeLike
The Lawless State Bar and Microsoft Ruin The California Bar Exam [UPDATED]
Joe Patrice of Above the Law has written:
See http://abovethelaw.com/2017/07/microsoft-ruins-the-bar-exam/ (emphasis added)
The real culprit is the despicable State Bar of California. Anyone who believes in or trusts the State Bar is ignorant, or part of the problem. It is lawless and a travesty, and it should have been abolished years ago.
It is like belonging to a private club that discriminates, and is run by an inbred clique or cabal. At best, it is a third-rate trade association—and Sacramento and Washington, D.C. are full of them.
See https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2014/09/08/the-state-bar-of-california-is-lawless-and-a-travesty-and-should-be-abolished/ (“The State Bar Of California Is Lawless And A Travesty, And Should Be Abolished“); see also http://www.courthousenews.com/california-closer-creating-sanctuary-state/ (“California Closer to Creating Sanctuary State”—”Over objections from sheriffs’ unions and the California Police Chiefs Association, the California Assembly Judiciary Committee took a step forward in making the Golden State a sanctuary for undocumented immigrants”) and http://abovethelaw.com/2017/07/california-bar-examiners-stripped-of-authority-to-determine-passing-score-on-state-bar-exam/?rf=1 (“California Bar Examiners Stripped Of Authority To Determine Passing Score On State Bar Exam“)
Microsoft has been ripping off its customers for years. Its forced upgrades are unconscionable, but predictable to the Apple faithful who watch with amusement.
See, e.g., https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2012/04/25/is-google-becoming-microsoft-or-worse/ (“Is Google Becoming Microsoft Or Worse?“)
LikeLike
More Chaos At The Corrupt And Lawless State Bar of California
Cheryl Miller of The Recorder has written:
See http://www.therecorder.com/id=1202795190514/Rindskopf-Parker-to-Resign-from-State-Bar%3Fslreturn%3D20170711163258 (emphasis added)
The “spin”—which the corrupt and lawless State Bar, and Parker have given to this story—is feckless and absurd.
As I stated above:
The State Bar Of California continues to be lawless and a travesty, and it should be eliminated permanently, with its staff sent looking for other jobs.
And I added:
LikeLike
The Lawless State Bar Of California Continues To Wallow In Corruption
Daniel Guss has written at CityWatch:
See http://www.citywatchla.com/index.php/los-angeles-for-rss/14030-did-new-california-state-bar-boss-cheat-on-bar-rules (“Did New California State Bar Boss Cheat on Bar Rules?“) (emphasis added)
As stated in my article above, and in the extensive comments beneath it, the State Bar of California is lawless and a travesty, and it must be abolished.
Nothing less will suffice.
LikeLike
SCANDALS NEVER CEASE AT THE LAWLESS STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA
Debra Cassens Weiss has written in the ABA Journal:
See http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/california_bar_spins_off_its_sections_amid_concerns_over_liquor_sales_resor (“California bar spins off its sections amid concerns over liquor spending, resort functions“) (emphasis added)
These actions are tantamount to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
As discussed in my article above and the comments beneath it, the State Bar of California is lawless and a travesty, and it must be abolished not restructured.
Nothing less will suffice.
LikeLike
Labor Problems Shadow California’s Rogue State Bar As It Ends Year Of Upheaval, Turmoil
Greg Moran has written in the San Diego Union-Tribune:
See http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/courts/sd-me-bar-problems-20171215-story.html (“Labor problems shadow State Bar as it ends a year of upheaval, turmoil“) (emphasis added)
First, as discussed in the article above and the comments beneath it, the State Bar of California is lawless and a travesty, and it must be abolished.
Second, “the current 36-hour work week”? What other employees have this, other than government workers? Where is the taxpayer revolt in California?
Third, the employees’ union for the State Bar’s misfits must be eliminated. Former California Governor and American President Ronald Reagan fired 11,345 striking air traffic controllers. With the termination of the State Bar, its attorneys will be dismissed too, and its union dissolved.
See, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_Air_Traffic_Controllers_Organization_(1968) (“Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization (1968)“)
Fourth, the “high cost of living” will not be an issue in the future, once all of the State Bar’s employees are terminated.
LikeLike
CALIFORNIA LEADS THE NATION IN POVERTY [UPDATED]
Michael Walsh has written at PJ Media:
See https://pjmedia.com/trending/whats-matter-california/ (“What’s the Matter with California?“) (emphasis added); see also https://pjmedia.com/victordavishanson/dark-ages-california/ (“California of the Dark Ages“) and https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2012/02/07/poverty-in-america/ (“Poverty In America“) (see also the other comments beneath the article) and https://www.newsmax.com/us/us-new-california-declaration-independence/2018/01/16/id/837529/ (“‘New California’ Declares ‘Independence’ From State”)
There is nothing “progressive” about America’s Left and far-Left, or its eco-Nazis. They are the Pigs that George Orwell described in his prescient Animal Farm, where all of the animals were equal until the Pigs reigned supreme and subjugated the other animals.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Farm (“Animal Farm”)
LikeLike
MORONIC JUDGES ACT AGAIN
A moronic judge in California’s lowest court—seeking media attention—has ruled that coffee requires cancer warnings. Leave aside the merits of such warnings, judges must not legislate or regulate from the bench. Those who attempt to do so must be removed.
Brian Melley has reported for AP News:
See https://www.apnews.com/936dc7ef09af4f93b6dae742796aa9a4/California-judge-rules-that-coffee-requires-cancer-warning?ito=792 (“California judge rules that coffee requires cancer warning“) (emphasis added); see also https://www.newsmax.com/t/health/article/852828 (“Coffee-Cancer Link? California Warnings Overstate Risks, Experts Say”—”The International Agency for Research on Cancer, the research arm of the World Health Organization, has repeatedly found no conclusive evidence that drinking coffee boosts cancer risk. In addition, the WHO removed coffee from the organizations list of cancer-causing agents in 2016″—”[I]n fact, a great deal of research has linked drinking coffee to longer life and a lower risk for many chronic diseases”)
As stated previously:
Clearly, that is true in the case of this moronic California judge.
[Note: Timothy D. Naegele does not drink coffee, and has not done so for more than 40 years]
LikeLike
FINALLY, CALIFORNIA ADDRESSES ATTORNEY SEX!
Almost four years after my article above was published on September 8, 2014, California is finally addressing sex between its attorneys and their clients. As I stated:
The Tampa Bay Times has reported:
See http://www.tampabay.com/california-supreme-court-approves-ban-on-attorney-client-sex-ap_national1c58c18b90d944eb9c01ae3f9d32b65b (“California Supreme Court approves ban on attorney-client sex“)
Kudos to the Tampa Bay Times for reporting about what is probably the most corrupt and diabolical trade association of its kind in the United States; and the disreputable California Supreme Court.
Needless to say, this is merely the tip of the iceberg of the State Bar’s illegality and lawlessness that has stretched over decades.
LikeLike
More Lawlessness By The State Bar Of California
Thy Vo has written for the Voice of OC:
See https://voiceofoc.org/2018/06/candidate-for-district-attorney-reinstated-by-state-bar/ (“Candidate For District Attorney Reinstated by State Bar“) (emphasis added)
LikeLike
I would like to correct something the author of the article has wrong – in fact judge Griffin ruled that a candidate for D.A. does not have to have a license to practice law. Additionally, a suspension does not take one’s license to practice away, it merely suspends it. The court ruled that only at the time the elected “takes office” does the D.A. have to have their license to practice law. Thy Vo, the author knew that fact because she was in the courtroom when she heard the arguments and she saw the order later issued by the court.
The question is why did the State Bar wrongfully misrepresent my status from March 16 to June 1, if not to allow the voters be misled that to vote for me would be a wasted vote? They were never supposed to hold my license to practice law beyond March 16, if at all. Backdating the reinstatement does not negate the harm caused by the State Bar.
This is not over yet. This is just a battle and there is a war waging.
LikeLike
Oops, I meant to say in the above comment that judge Griffin ruled that a candidate for D.A. does not have to have a license to practice law “when running for D.A.” – but does upon being elected and taking oath of that office.
LikeLike
Mr. Naegele,
Your article post is spot on. I am not an attorney; however, my experience and background involve advocacy for several non-profit organizations, that routinely encounter unethical, and sometimes criminal complicity on the part of attorneys, which result in state bar complaints all over the country.
I was recently involved in a California state bar court hearing, and witnessed firsthand, the ‘witch hunt’ nature and atmosphere of the state bar court. You are correct in your assessment that the state bar is concerned with persecuting the ‘minnows,’ yet leaves the big fish alone.
While there are a large number of honorable and ethical attorneys, unfortunately, there are some bad apples in every profession.
I found your comments on family law attorneys to be accurate. This is one area of practice where there seems to be a significant number of unethical attorneys who are primarily motivated by $$$.
To shed light on some of the unethical, and perhaps illegal methods, of some family law attorneys and firms, there is an example of a law firm doing family law that may be indirectly responsible or complicit in a mass murder.
Without naming names, any reader of this comment will be able to connect the dots. There is a very well-known and highly publicized murder case where eight people died in a mass shooting in a hair salon.
The person who committed this atrocity was embroiled in a highly contentious family law case, which continued after the dissolution with repeated instances of custody interference.
The person responsible for this atrocity had legal counsel, which could be described as your classic-textbook-greasy-sleazy-ambulance chasing-criminally corrupt-morally bankrupt-money grubbing cabal of inbred shysters.
Numerous online reviews of this firm reveal their pattern and practice of ripping off their clients, actively working against their clients interests and pro-actively compromising their client’s cases. You would think someone at the state bar would notice the gaggle of complaints, get a clue and initiate an inquiry, but nope!
Almost immediately following this crime, this poster child of a corrupt law firm with a biblical level of glutenous greed, petitioned to be withdrawn as counsel and to have the family law case sealed, and it was granted.
Why you may ask? Well the reason is blatantly obvious to anyone with more than three working brain cells.
This law firm did not want the general public to see, first hand, how they screwed up this case and how they continued to drain this killer of his money.
They did not want the public to see how, over and over again, the ex-spouse continued to deny and interfere with custody of the couple’s child. News reports revealed that numerous half-hearted and failed attempts to resolve the custody interference with the responsible parent, each time while the cash register was ringing. All failed.
The offending ex-spouse was forced back into the family court where the judge advised the offending spouse not to do it again. Virtually the next day, the offending spouse went back to the same behavior.
The killer, now at the end of his/her rope, rendered parentless and broke, went to his/hers ex-spouse’s place of employment where the offending ex-spouse was shot point blank in the face and killed instantly.
Since the killer already murdered one person, the killer then shot and killed seven others and was captured a few blocks away. The killer now sits in prison for life, but the question must be asked, why such an abysmal failure on the part of the family court and of this law firm?
The answer to these questions can be answered in one word; money!
Various letters and attempts to get the California state bar to initiate, not only a state bar inquiry, but a federal criminal investigation was ignored.
There’s at least a dozen or more various websites in CA about the corrupt family courts, all over the state, and the documentary film ‘Divorce Corp’ exposed the corrupt $50 BILLION dollar a year family court cottage industry, much of which occurs in California.
This tragedy should have been the top priority for the CA state bar; to determine the failures and complicity of this law firm and many others who engage in similar family destructive methods and actions, but it was not.
You are absolutely correct in that the CA state bar goes after ‘minnows,’ those cases which they can jump up and down on the desk and shout, ‘hey everybody, look at us and how great we are,’ then fail to address the ones that are the biggest problem, and as this case illustrates, whose failures and greed may have been complicit in a mass murder.
With attorney and prosecutorial misconduct at near pandemic levels, and a completely feckless regulatory agency whose motto should be ‘incompetent and indifferent,’ the abolishment of the California state bar is necessary.
While no one is in favor of a new governmental oversight body with layers of bureaucracy, as you succinctly articulated, the investigation of attorneys must be removed from the bar to an entity with complete transparency and oversight.
As the countless examples attest, current oversight bodies responsible for the investigation of potential misconduct of attorneys, judges, and law enforcement officers in California, can no longer be trusted to ‘police their own.’ Only an independent body with strict oversight and complete transparency can make a difference.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for your comments. They are excellent . . . albeit tragic.
As we know, divorces can be and usually are horrendous.
In that regard, for those who are interested, I recommend the following article—especially footnote 2.
See https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2011/07/14/divorces/ (“Divorces”)
LikeLike
America’s Most Corrupt And Diabolical Trade Association Clears The Creepy Porn Lawyer [UPDATED]
Brooke Singman has written for Fox News:
See https://www.foxnews.com/politics/california-state-bar-closes-probe-into-michael-avenatti-takes-no-further-action (“California State Bar closes probe into Michael Avenatti, takes no ‘further action’ on allegations of ‘professional misconduct'”) (emphasis added; Tweets and letter omitted); see also https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6393955/Michael-Avenatti-claims-domestic-violence-arrest-set-Jacob-Wohl.html (“Michael Avenatti claims his domestic violence arrest was a set up“) and https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/mar/7/judge-s-james-otero-tosses-stormy-daniels-hush-mon/ (“Judge tosses Stormy Daniels’ hush-money lawsuit against Trump“) and https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6813999/The-estranged-wife-Michael-Avenatti-says-owes-2M-spousal-child-support.html (“The estranged wife of Michael Avenatti says he owes more than $2M in spousal and child support“) and https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6848519/Michael-Avenatti-charged-four-counts-wire-bank-fraud-trying-extort-20M-Nike.html (“Michael Avenatti charged with extortion after demanding $25M from Nike“) and https://thepoliticalinsider.com/avenatti-facing-a-lot-of-years-behind-bars/ (“Avenatti Facing A Lot Of Years Behind Bars“) and https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6912187/Attorney-Avenatti-faces-new-criminal-charges-California.html (“Michael Avenatti is hit with 36 counts of fraud for ‘stealing from clients and lying to the IRS’ and now faces 335 YEARS in prison“) and https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6924035/Michael-Avenatti-paraplegic-client-sign-testimonial-realized-learn-theft.html (“Michael Avenatti made paraplegic client sign testimonial when he realized he would learn about theft“) and https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7059623/Stormy-Daniels-ex-attorney-Michael-Avenatti-facing-charges.html (“Stormy Daniels ex attorney Michael Avenatti facing more charges“) and https://www.thedailybeast.com/michael-avenatti-to-face-charges-over-misusing-stormy-daniels-money-report (“Michael Avenatti Forged Stormy Daniels’ Signature to Steal $300K: Feds“) and https://www.law.com/therecorder/2019/06/03/citing-indictments-california-state-bar-moves-to-suspend-avenatti/ (“[Finally,] Citing Indictments, [The Lawless] California State Bar Moves to Suspend [The Despicable] Avenatti”) and https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7443761/Micheal-Avenatti-embezzled-clients-settlement-buy-private-jet.html (“Micheal Avenatti ’embezzled his client’s settlement to buy a private jet'”)
Why is this not surprising in the least?
After all—as discussed in my article above, and the extensive comments beneath it—the “rogue” trade association has engaged in nonstop wrongdoing, if not outright criminal conduct endlessly.
For example, (1) it has defrauded would-be lawyers by failing to disclose that the debt obligation a legal education entails may encumber the students (or their parents) for much of their lives, and there may be no jobs when they graduate, yet the State Bar profits from this; (2) it has never gone after the lawyers at Countrywide who participated in and/or condoned predatory lending practices, and one of Countrywide’s lawyers even testified on the State Bar’s behalf in a predatory lending case; (3) women’s rights organizations should be up in arms, protesting the State Bar’s culpability in turning a blind eye to Avenatti’s abuses; (4) the State Bar is totally worthless and lawless, and does not pay its bills; and (5) justice will only be served when the State Bar no longer exists and its staff is forced to find other jobs, if they can.
LikeLike
California Bar Exam Pass Rate Reaches Nearly All-Time Low [UPDATED]
Staci Zaretsky has written the above-titled article for Above the Law:
See https://abovethelaw.com/2018/11/california-bar-exam-pass-rate-reaches-nearly-all-time-low/ (emphasis added)
It bears repeating:
Amen, in spades!
What I wrote in the article above bears repeating as well:
Indeed, what I wrote in the article above remains emphatically true:
See also https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-faigman-california-bar-exam-20181129-story.html (“Why is it so much harder to become a lawyer in California than in New York?“)
LikeLike
U.S. Supreme Court Suggests Forcing Lawyers To Pay Bar Dues Violates Their Free Speech
David G. Savage has written in the Los Angeles Times:
See https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-court-bar-dues-20181203-story.html (“Supreme Court suggests forcing lawyers to pay bar association dues violates their free speech“) (emphasis added)
As I have written clearly and unequivocally in my article above and the comments beneath it, the State Bar of California is probably the most corrupt and diabolical trade association of its kind in the United States.
It is like belonging to a private club that discriminates, and is run by an inbred clique or cabal. At best, it is a third-rate trade association—and Sacramento and Washington, D.C. are full of them.
It must be abolished, period—for all of the reasons that I have stated above.
LikeLike
The California Bar Exam Wreaks Havoc Yet Again [UPDATED]
Jill Switzer has written the above-titled article at AboveTheLaw:
See https://abovethelaw.com/2019/01/the-california-bar-exam-wreaks-havoc-yet-again/ (emphasis added)
If anything, Ms. Switzer is too kind. As stated in my article above and the comments beneath it, the State Bar of California is probably the most corrupt and diabolical trade association of its kind in the United States, and it must be abolished.
See also https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/least-educated-state-california-no-1-percentage-residents-25-and (“Least-Educated State: California No. 1 in Percentage of Residents 25 and Older Who Never Finished 9th Grade; No. 50 in High School Graduates”)
LikeLike
The State Bar Of California Is The Most Corrupt And Diabolical Trade Association Of Its Kind In The United States, And Must Be Abolished
Debra Cassens Weiss has written in ABA Journal:
See http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/california-bar-adds-gender-identity-and-sexual-orientation-questions-to-member-survey (“California bar adds gender identity and sexual orientation questions to member survey“)
WOW . . .
The title of these comments is taken from my article above, and the supporting comments beneath it. The American Bar Association is a close second.
LikeLike
The Tide Is Finally Turning Against The State Bar Of California And Other Corrupt Organizations, But Not Fast Enough [UPDATED]
As I have written in the article and comments above, there is no question that the State Bar Of California is the most corrupt and diabolical trade association of its kind in the United States, and that it must be abolished—and all of its employees must be terminated and forced to find other jobs, if they can do so.
Rachel Alexander has written at Townhall:
See https://townhall.com/columnists/rachelalexander/2019/03/18/state-bars-mandatory-unions-for-attorneys-are-finally-being-dismantled-n2543265 (“State Bar’s Mandatory Unions for Attorneys are Finally Being Dismantled“) (emphasis added); see also https://www.law.com/therecorder/2019/03/18/california-bar-seeking-100-dues-increase-warns-of-service-cuts/ (“California Bar, Seeking $100 Dues Increase, Warns of Service Cuts“)
As discussed in my article above, former California Governor Pete Wilson effectively put the State Bar out of business. Since then, it has come roaring back, worse than ever. It must be eviscerated, once and for all.
LikeLike
Open The Floodgates Of Competition In Legal Services [UPDATED]
As I have written in the article above, the State Bar of California is the most corrupt and diabolical trade association of its kind in the United States, and it must be abolished:
And I added in comments beneath the article: “The American Bar Association is a close second.”
For all of the reasons set forth above, it has been clear for years that neither organization serves California residents or the American people. The legal profession is a “closed shop,” period. America is lawless today because of the activities of these two groups, and others.
Sam Skolnik and Amanda Iacone have written for Bloomberg Law about the Big Four accounting firms’ efforts to gain a foothold in the U.S. legal market.
See https://biglawbusiness.com/big-four-may-gain-legal-market-foothold-with-state-rule-change (“Big Four May Gain Legal Market Foothold With State Rule Change“)
If the legal needs of Americans—from the richest to the poorest—are to be truly served, our legal system must be overhauled radically . . . and not by judges, who are among the very worst of the system.
See, e.g., https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2015/11/30/a-34-trillion-swindle-the-shame-of-global-warming/#comment-16534 (“Judges Are The Very Worst Of The Legal Profession, And Here Is Another Perfect Example“)
It has been said correctly by an American billionaire, with reason to know:
See http://www.wsj.com/articles/gawker-media-settles-with-hulk-hogan-in-privacy-suit-1478107236 (“Gawker Media Settles With Hulk Hogan in Privacy Suit”)
The average American has far less access to the system. And those who are indigent or close to it have essentially zero access to our legal system.
LikeLike
The State Bar Of California’s Fraud Just Keeps Growing
The article above and the comments beneath it shine a bright light on the most corrupt and diabolical trade association of its kind in the United States, which must be abolished—not reformed or reconstituted, which would be tantamount to reshuffling the deck chairs on the Titanic.
A few highlights are worth repeating:
Indeed, Jordan Rothman has written a fine article in Above the Law, which states:
See
https://abovethelaw.com/2019/04/cle-requirements-are-usually-a-big-waste-of-time/ (“CLE Requirements Are Usually A Big Waste Of Time“) (emphasis added)
And the fraud continues, uninterrupted.
LikeLike
More Insanity And Recklessness At The State Bar Of California [UPDATED]
Nick Cahill has written for the Courthouse News Service:
See https://www.courthousenews.com/watchdog-puts-brakes-on-430-hike-in-california-state-bar-dues/ (“Watchdog Puts Brakes on $430 Hike in California State Bar Dues“) (emphasis added)
This is a sick, sick “joke,” being foisted on Californians and members of the State Bar.
In the fable “The Emperor’s New Clothes” by Hans Christian Andersen, two make-believe weavers purport to spin a fine suit of clothes for the emperor, which is made of beautiful material that possesses the wonderful quality of being invisible to any man who is unfit for his office or unpardonably stupid. The potentate and his subjects acknowledge that the garments are very fine indeed. That is, until one little child sees the emperor marching in a procession, and says at last: “But he has nothing on at all”—and the grand swindle is exposed for all to see.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emperor's_New_Clothes (“The Emperor’s New Clothes“)
Surely, a growing number of Californians and members of the State Bar—the most corrupt and diabolical trade association of its kind in the United States—have seen enough to decide that it must be put out of business once and for all, not perpetuated one more day.
As discussed in my article above and the extensive footnotes and comments beneath it, the State Bar’s grand swindle has been exposed for all to see.
Indeed, as I wrote in the article above:
This must be accomplished once and for all.
LikeLike
The Corrupt And Diabolical State Bar Of California Is Trashed By Those Who Know It Best [UPDATED]
Those who know an organization best are often those who work for it, and those who are affected by its actions or inactions. The State Bar of California is no exception.
Glassdoor—one of the world’s largest job and recruiting sites, where “companies can’t alter or remove reviews”—has 13 State Bar of California reviews submitted anonymously by State Bar of California employees. Some of its findings are significant:
See https://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/State-Bar-of-California-Reviews-E996866.htm (“State Bar of California Reviews“)
Yelp‘s reviews paint a similar picture, with 29 reviews since 2013, and 25 of them giving one star out of a possible five for its Los Angeles office.
See https://www.yelp.com/biz/the-state-bar-of-california-los-angeles
Its San Francisco headquarters rated much the same, with 9 reviews and 8 of them giving the State Bar only one star.
See https://www.yelp.com/biz/state-bar-of-california-san-francisco-3
The title of the article above rings true to this day: “The State Bar Of California Is Lawless And A Travesty, And Should Be Abolished.” When will Californians and members of the State Bar wake up, and say enough is enough, and terminate the State Bar once and for all?
See, e.g., https://www.city-journal.org/lawyers-challenge-mandatory-dues (“Lawyers across the country challenge mandatory dues“)
LikeLike
The State Bar Of California Fails Again [UPDATED]
Cheryl Miller has written for TheRecorder:
See https://www.law.com/therecorder/2019/05/17/nearly-seven-in-ten-flunked-californias-february-2019-bar-exam/ (“Nearly 7 in 10 Flunked California’s February 2019 Bar Exam“) (emphasis added; State Bar’s press release omitted)
When will Californians wake up to the fact that the legal system in the State is broken, and in desperate need of being fixed—but not by those who have brought it to this point of abject failure and decline?
Many wonderful candidates for the law are being systematically excluded and discriminated against by the State Bar of California. Indeed, bar exam results are not a reliable indicia of a person’s ability to become a fine lawyer and truly serve the public.
Only after the State Bar of California is abolished—and its staff of incompetents are sent scurrying like rats, trying to find other jobs—will these critical problems be addressed. Until then, they are hopeless; sadly, but true.
As observed by a former State Bar “Investigator in Los Angeles”:
It is not surprising that they are treated like lepers, and for good reasons.
See https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2014/09/08/the-state-bar-of-california-is-lawless-and-a-travesty-and-should-be-abolished/#comment-17107 (“The Corrupt And Diabolical State Bar Of California Is Trashed By Those Who Know It Best“)
Lastly, the American Bar Association (ABA) is worthless, but voluntary. Most American lawyers do not belong to it, and should not be subjected to its dictates nor affected by them.
Reportedly, it has 410,000 purely voluntary members out of an estimated 1.25 million lawyers in the United States.
Compare https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Bar_Association (“American Bar Association“) with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attorneys_in_the_United_States (“Attorneys in the United States“)
LikeLike
What A Travesty
Lyle Moran has written at ABOVE THE LAW:
See https://abovethelaw.com/2019/05/california-lawyers-could-see-annual-bar-fees-hiked-by-40-percent/ (“California Lawyers Could See Annual Bar Fees Hiked By 40 Percent“) (emphasis added)
The State Bar of California—which is most corrupt and diabolical trade association of its kind in the United States—must be put out of business, not perpetuated.
. . .
Also, California’s Governor Gavin Newsom delivered a message to any woman looking to have an abortion in states that have outlawed the practice: “our doors are open.”
Like doctors and women who are parties to infanticide, so too is their co-conspirator Newsom. All must be prosecuted and imprisoned, at the very least. Nothing less will suffice.
See https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/california-gov-gavin-newsom/2019/05/31/id/918432/ (“Calif Governor To Women: Come Here for Abortion“) and https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2012/12/20/abortions-and-autos-kill-more-in-america-than-guns/#comment-17418 (“Boycott Hollywood . . . And Disney Until Robert Iger Is Gone“)
LikeLike
The State Bar Of California Must Be Abolished, Not Merely Subjected To A Tighter Legislative Rein
As discussed in the article above, and in the extensive comments beneath it, the State Bar of California is the most corrupt and diabolical trade association of its kind in the United States. It must be abolished, not reformed.
Maria Dinzeo has written for the Courthouse News Service:
See https://www.courthousenews.com/watchdog-advises-tight-legislative-rein-on-state-bar-of-california/ (“Watchdog Advises Tight Legislative Rein on State Bar of California“) (emphasis added)
LikeLike
Ban The State Bar Of California
John G. Browning has written in D Magazine:
See https://www.dmagazine.com/publications/d-ceo/2019/july/texas-battle-of-the-bars/ (“Texas’ Battle of the Bars“) (emphasis added)
First, Magistrate Judges are inferior federal judges, who should not be deciding constitutional issues. That is absurd on its face.
Second, the U.S. Supreme Court was correct in its 2018 decision in Janus v. AFS CME, where:
Next, the plaintiffs in the Texas case are correct:
Lastly, what happens in Texas is of lesser concern to those who believe—and have gone on record as stating—that the State Bar of California is the most corrupt and diabolical trade association of its kind in the United States. It must be abolished, not reformed.
It was effectively put out of business before; and this must happen again, with a vengeance. Not a minute can be wasted.
California is the most lawless State in the nation, so it is hardly surprising that the State Bar of California would be lawless too.
See also https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2019/02/06/the-state-of-our-union-2019/#comment-17756 (“Texafornia: America’s Future?“)
LikeLike
The State Bar Of California Must Be Abolished
There is nothing positive about the State Bar of California. Clearly, it is the most corrupt and diabolical trade association of its kind in the United States. It must be shut down completely, not reformed or reconstituted—which would be tantamount to reshuffling the deck chairs on the Titanic.
Lyle Moran has reported for Above the Law:
See https://abovethelaw.com/2019/07/california-bars-handling-of-real-estate-draws-scrutiny/ (“California Bar’s Handling Of Real Estate Draws Scrutiny“) (emphasis added)
LikeLike
The Gang That Could Not Shoot Straight [UPDATED]
In an article entitled “Ahead of Tuesday’s exam, State Bar of California leaks essay topics to law schools,” Elaine Chen has written in the Merced Sun-Star:
See https://www.mercedsunstar.com/news/state/california/article233236996.html (emphasis added); see also https://abovethelaw.com/2019/07/bar-exam-leak-massive-screwup-just-days-before-the-california-bar-exam/ (“Bar Exam Leak! Massive Screw-Up Just Days Before The California Bar Exam”—”Initially some suspected the email was a hoax — some bad actor causing chaos days before the exam. Indeed, in an email sent to the Class of 2019, David L. Faigman, Dean of University of California Hastings College of the Law, advised students, ‘Please stay confident and, for now, assume it is some profoundly misguided joke.’ But it isn’t a hoax — it was confirmed as legit by the official Twitter account of the California Bar. . . . [T]he Bar threw a monkey wrench into the last few days of studying for the most important exam of their lives”) and https://www.law.com/therecorder/2019/07/29/with-anger-and-confusion-swirling-over-bar-exam-topic-disclosure-calif-officials-vow-to-investigate/ (“With Anger and Confusion Swirling Over Bar Exam Topic Disclosure, Calif. Officials Vow to Investigate”—”California State Bar officials said Sunday they will launch an independent investigation into how the essay topics for this week’s bar exam were disclosed to 16 law school deans on Thursday. . . . ‘To have students distracted in this way, at this time, it’s outrageous,’ said Stephen Ferruolo, dean of the University of San Diego School of Law. . . . ‘It raises questions about California’s ability to administer the bar exam,’ the dean said”) and https://abovethelaw.com/2019/07/theres-about-to-be-an-investigation-into-the-crazy-california-bar-exam-leak/ (“There’s About To Be An Investigation Into The Crazy California Bar Exam Leak“) and https://www.law.com/therecorder/2019/07/31/why-the-california-bar-director-is-mum-on-exam-mayhem/ (“Why the California Bar Director Is Mum on Exam Mayhem”—”Leah Wilson, the California bar’s executive director, has been noticeably missing from the agency’s response to news that the essay topics for this week’s bar exam were inadvertently disclosed to 16 law school deans. On Wednesday the bar confirmed why: Wilson’s son is taking the exam that ends today. . . . The news regarding Wilson’s son is sure to fuel more speculation, much of it on social media, that the topics were deliberately provided to the deans”) and https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/education/article233580562.html (“After State Bar of California exam leak, hundreds of no-show applicants ask for a refund“)
As stated previously:
The State Bar was effectively put out of business in the past, as discussed in my article above. This time it must shut down forever, never to rise again. Nothing less will suffice.
LikeLike
I reported abuse and abuse of power in 2015 and again 2018, threats to kill the lawyer I hired to defend my position during a divorce from a lawyer. Lita Abella scolded me and denied me a fair hearing. She was so hostile, I dropped the entire matter. Nothing happened. It appears, in California, you can report abuse of power and terrorist threats of a lawyer, only to be met with an investigation by a staff member who owns her own private investigation firm and instead of investigating the claims will begin to investigate the person making them to put pressure on them to denounce or abandon their claims for fear. Here is another lawyer that has documented the abuse of power within that agency. https://www.scribd.com/document/370163606/Request-to-Review-CONFLICTS-Lita-Abella-10-16-17-Compressed She has been involved in three lawsuits against others and she is so free of her job duties at the State Bar that she has time to run a PI firm and be a yoga instructor and promote glam products. Strange! Also, my ex is still practicing law without a hiccup. After beating me black and blue, using his rich political clients and contacts to get the DA to look the other way,no investigation, no questions, no answers. The victim, me, went on to be stalked, harassed and his golfing buddy prosecuted on 108 death threats to me, using the words of my ex, starting on the exact day of the issued restraining order. Then my lawyer was targeted with texts to me that “i will wipe his life with my az” and that he would chop off my head and have my body thrown in a desert grave. Serious stuff when you find that my ex’s uncle is a known, well known, Luchesse Gambino crime family member. Next came cyber stalking and advancing into my life with the same style to the T as Marianna Maddalena and guess what, the wife of this felon Derrick John Toole his wife, just happened to befriend me at the same time (she goes by numerous names) and she works with my ex at a talent agency where he is the legal representative. The man who terrorized me Jeff Briones went on to burglarize a Superior Court Judge and has been linked to organized crime and a realtor hoax in the area. My ex practices, construction, real estate and entertainment law. The persons who have targeted me have been in construction, real estate and entertainment. So, you tell me – how on earth can a lawyer involved in this type of threatening abuse of power be able to continue practicing law and not even be cited? Well, it’s all favors. My ex, his client,who he is currently representing in a fraud trial, just happens to be hand in hand with the Bar as well. So, the investigation to be fair, should have been handled by an outside agency that was not involved at these levels of corruption and abuses of power. This bar agency should be dismantled and those at the top should be charged. I wrote, finally, a rip off report and to the date, one year, my son mysteriously was found dead and had been telling me my ex was asking for him to “sell all his secrets on me”. If you read Marianna Maddalena’s story, this is exactly what happened to me. So you tell me, could all of these things be a coincidence. as well, in the same time frame, My car and I were crashed at a known mafia tied steak house and I was cut at a nail salon just down the street. Seriously, the public is not safe. in the same time frame, the board in Sacramento that holds my licensing requirements on my profession just happened to change the laws to prevent me from operating as I had been and tabled various issues. Top top top corruption. They all know each other, they all play in the same sandbox and they all do favors for each other and if you look at the director in Sacramento for consumer affairs, he too is allowed to work as a lobbyist for various clientele at the same time he is the director or consumer affairs? How is this even allowed??? I left California for the fear of my life the harassment got so bad. I was followed, stalked, threatened and the police refused to write my reports leaving out details, making them as vanilla and vague as possible. The DA office refused to interview or respond and no investigation speaks volumes when you have this type of “criminal enterprise” felons all on the same piece of paper by one lone sheep attempting to stay alive.
LikeLike
Thank you, Anne, for your comments.
In situations like yours, there are multiple avenues of recourse: some of them federal, state and local. Also, there is the media, which at times can be helpful. Your facts are complicated, as you know. Assuming that everything you have stated is 100 percent accurate, then there should be recourse.
If I were you, I would start with the U.S. Attorney’s office that is closest to you. Arguably one or more federal crimes have been committed, which would satisfy that office’s jurisdictional requirements. Also, by seeking help from them, it would take the issues out of the hands of the State Bar of California and other state agencies, which might be biased against you.
You seem tenacious, so keep at it. Most of all: lots of good luck.
LikeLike
More Than 20 Million Californians Lack Access To Legal Services
This figure is probably low, and does not represent the true state of affairs in California. However, accepting this figure as accurate, it means that one half of Californians lack access to legal services.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California (“California“)
Karen Kidd has written in the Northern California Record:
See https://norcalrecord.com/stories/514044190-more-than-20-million-californians-lack-access-to-legal-services-new-state-bar-board-chair-says (“More than 20 million Californians lack access to legal services, new state bar board chair says“) (emphasis added)
If anyone believes the totally-corrupt State Bar of California, there is a bridge in Brooklyn that they might wish to invest in.
LikeLike
My ex husband’s attorney violated all the rules of holding money in trust, and the California BAR, which has these rules on their website, did nothing!!!! I even asked for a special review, and they still did nothing. The California BAR is a joke and not protecting citizens as they should.
LikeLike
Thank you for your comments, Claudia.
Of course you are correct. It is the most lawless trade association of its kind in the United States.
LikeLike
Thank you for your response. Gosh it’s in black and white on their own website the rules of an attorney holding money in trust, and it’s considered so serious, an attorney can be disbarred. They choose to do absolutely nothing. He should have at least got his hand slapped, and the complaint put in his file. Nothing! NBC reporters out of San Francisco did a pretty blistering story on this a few years back. I’m trying to get a hold of them to do a new piece that nothing has changed and attorneys are still getting away with unprofessional conduct.
Sincerely,
Claudia
LikeLike
Keep at it, Claudia.
As indicated in my article above, and in the extensive comments beneath it, the odious and lawless State Bar was effectively put out of business. However, it has come roaring back from the “dead,” and is even worse than ever.
It must be shuttered once and for all. Nothing less will suffice. It is draconian.
LikeLike
Just as bad as the state bar is the Commission on Judicial Performance, which does essentially nothing to the corrupt judges who disregard the law. When I have an older or retired judge I always know that judge is likely to not care about appellate reversals, and so often I see them do whatever they want regardless of the law or fairness. They just don’t care. A good example is Judge F. Dana Walton in Mariposa, who totally ignored the rights of landowner Jerry Cox and gave the County anything it asked for, ejecting Jerry Cox over $8,000 in repairs, destroying his business and leaving him homeless, and then when he paid the $8,000 and everything was fixed, Judge Walton ordered his land and home sold for less than the appraisal amount just to pay the fees of the County and the receiver who was placed on the property, who charged over $800,000 for their legal and other fees. This was done under color of “receivership” which gives judges so much discretion that they can ignore constitutional rights, and courts of appeal don’t do anything because once the sale occurs the appeal is moot and the bankrupted landowner cannot pay the bond to stay the appeal. This has gone on in other counties as well. They often pick California Receivership Group (Mark Adams) and the law firm of Silver & Wright to do the work. They operate as a tag team with the ultimate goal of bankrupting the landowner while racking up fees, then getting a sale and taking the proceeds. Palm Springs, Indio, and other localities finally caught on an rejected these land grabbers, but others, especially small corrupt counties, are on board. Dirty politics goes on behind the scenes. And this corruption never gets addressed on its merits in the courts of appeal because when the sale order becomes moot by the sale, the appeal is dismissed. The state agencies are doing nothing about it.
http://www.abovealllaws.com/2018/05/22/mariposa-burning-the-jerry-cox-story/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you, Marc, for your comments.
Tragically, our legal system is corrupt in so many ways; and the most corrupt are (1) the lawless State Bar of California and (2) the state’s judiciary from the California Supreme Court on down. And (3) many if not most judges are the very worst of the legal profession, who could not make it in the private practice of law.
The following article discusses these issues; and the original version of the article, which was published in Europe, can be downloaded by clicking on the link.
See “Justice And The Law Do Not Mix,”
https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2013/07/15/justice-and-the-law-do-not-mix/
At least in California, “the law west of the Pecos by Judge Roy Bean” rules, which is tragic for Californians and the American people.
LikeLike
My ex husband’s attorney clearly violated the rules in regards to holding trust money and they did nothing. He violated the rules posted on THEIR website. Lazy crooks!
LikeLiked by 1 person
They are not lazy, Claudia. They are evil personified, and the very worst of our national legal system.
They serve themselves, and not the people of California.
As I concluded in my article above, the State Bar of California is probably the most corrupt and diabolical trade association of its kind in the United States.
The word “probably” might be omitted.
LikeLike
Is It Any Surprise That America’s Most Corrupt And Diabolical Trade Association Cleared The Creepy Porn Lawyer? [UPDATED]
If there is one thread that runs through the State Bar of California and its activities, it is corruption at each and every level, and decisions that do not serve the majority of California’s residents.
The latest example involves the “creepy porn lawyer,” Michael Avenatti, whom the State Bar cleared of wrongdoing.
See https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2014/09/08/the-state-bar-of-california-is-lawless-and-a-travesty-and-should-be-abolished/#comment-15182 (“America’s Most Corrupt And Diabolical Trade Association Clears The Creepy Porn Lawyer“)
Jeff Mordock of the Washington Times has reported:
See https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/feb/14/michael-avenatti-convicted-all-counts-nike-extorti/ (“Michael Avenatti convicted on all counts in Nike extortion trial“) (emphasis added); see also https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2020/02/14/attorney-michael-avenatti-convicted-of-trying-to-extort-nike/ (“Attorney Michael Avenatti Convicted Of Trying To Extort Nike”—”The charges carry a combined potential penalty of 42 years in prison”)
LikeLike
The State Bar Of California Is The Most Odious Trade Association In America [UPDATED]
Shandyn H. Pierce is a 2020 graduate of California’s UC Hastings College of the Law, and he has written at LAW.COM:
See https://www.law.com/therecorder/2020/07/22/law-school-grad-california-bar-exam-decision-is-a-hurtful-half-measure/ (“Law School Grad: California Bar Exam Decision Is a ‘Hurtful Half-Measure’”) (emphasis added); see also https://abovethelaw.com/2020/07/deans-and-bar-applicants-ask-california-to-apply-new-lower-cut-score-retroactively/ (“Deans And Bar Applicants Ask California To Apply New Lower Cut Score Retroactively“)
Like my article above and the comments beneath it state clearly and emphatically, there is only one solution: abolish the State Bar of California NOW.
The California Supreme Court is equally disgraceful.
LikeLiked by 1 person
See also https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2021/08/12/california-is-a-mess-and-its-state-bar-remains-the-most-odious-trade-association-in-america/ (“California Is A Mess, And Its State Bar Remains The Most Odious Trade Association In America“)
LikeLike
See https://www.davisvanguard.org/2022/03/class-action-lawsuit-filed-against-state-bar-after-data-breach/ (“Class Action Lawsuit Filed against State Bar after Data Breach”)
There is no question that the State Bar of California is the most odious and diabolical trade association of its kind in the United States.
LikeLike
Finally, The Most Odious Trade Association In America Eats One Of Its Own
See https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-07-08/in-wake-of-failed-handling-of-tom-girardi-state-bar-moves-against-license-of-former-executive-director (“State Bar files disciplinary charges against former director Joe Dunn”)
Needless to say, the odious State Bar has not gone after any of the wrongdoers mentioned in my article above. Quite to the contrary, total hacks like Lucy Armendariz have been elevated.
And the Bar Association has expanded its operations like a “drunken sailor,” at a time when millions of Californians are hurting financially, and cannot afford any legal services.
What an ungodly travesty.
. . .
Also, before the State Bar goes out of business and is shut down completely, it should do something useful by cleaning up this mess that is not far from its headquarters in San Francisco.
“San Francisco school children navigate corridor of drug addicts”
https://mol.im/a/10999157
LikeLike
I had a very strong case I sent to them to reprimand an attorney. They did nothing. Then I read that they are so back logged, they let dirty attorneys slide. They are as corrupt as the people we report.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you, Claudia, as always.
First, they are totally corrupt internally, probably more than any corruption that is reported to them.
Second, as my article above states, the primary job of any trade association is to insure the full-time employment and protection of its employees. When they and the staff of California’s courts began working from home and other remote locations because of Covid-19 lockdowns, it was a gift to them.
Why come to work at all when you can call or check in once a day, and otherwise get paid for not working? It becomes an on-the-job retirement program for them.
Third, in my article above, I recommended that everyone at the State Bar should be fired; and its disciplinary functions should be transferred to California’s Supreme Court. In doing so, no former staff members of the State Bar should be hired.
Would this solve the problems, or merely shift responsibilities? Probably a bit of both, but it can’t get any worse than it is now.
LikeLike
Again, Why Hasn’t The State Bar Of California Disbarred Richard H. Lubetzky Yet?
See https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/california-state-bar-difficult-financial-position-audit-finds-2023-04-13/ (“California state bar in ‘difficult financial position,’ audit finds”) and https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2023/02/07/why-hasnt-california-disbarred-richard-h-lubetzky/ (“Why Hasn’t California Disbarred Richard H. Lubetzky?”)
LikeLike