Attorney Scott Thomas did not just cave in to the District Attorney, he fought for me and got my case dismissed!

This is a review of the Law offices of Scott C Thomas. He is an exceptional attorney who takes a real interest in your case.  When I got myself into a little snag with the law I googled around.  My experience with attorneys in the past had never been too good. In 2017, Scott Thomas became my attorney and changed forever my view of attorney’s.  In the past other attorney’s were easy to hire hard to get a hold of! Scott was very diligent, he stayed in consistent communication, he was never hard to reach.  In the past other attorneys never allow too much involvement with your idea of a good deal, they just slap an offer in front of you. Scott was very involved in my case.  What makes Scott Thomas the best lawyer was he stategized a game plan with me, one that I was allowed to be a part of, which sets Scott Thomas apart from the others.

Scott did not just cave in to the District Attorney, he fought for me and got my case dismissed! If you are looking for a great attorney, contact The Law Offices of Scott C Thomas

Scott is a criminal law specialist with both the insight of how the prosecutor’s office works and that said knows which angle to pursuit the win.  He has served me well and is worth every dollar I paid him for an excellent job well done.

Best Criminal Lawyer in Orange County – Scott Thomas has your back

With hindsight now at hand… I knew I picked a winner when I chose Scott Thomas as my attorney. My firsthand experience with him, as a client, but after I was client in 2017 Scott Thomas was Awarded the honor of “SUPER LAWYERS Rising Star for 2019”

Scott Thomas Law is a name I trust and so can you. Here is Scott’s Facebook you can see how many felons he saved! His work speaks volumes on its own or visit his website directly. He was so good to me, I took my time to write this article on my website.  I took the time to gather others views and links to others reviews so you too can not only read my personal review of the best criminal lawyer in Orange County, you can see countless others.  He is a 5 star rated TOP RATED attorney in Orange county with a perfect reputation and the many years experience he has been in businss, Scott Thomas is the lawyer you need on your team today!

and if you want to see some other cases he got dismissed for several other people recently click here.  You can see all the google reviews also by click here or the image below to read for yourself, Gooles reviews of Scott C Thomas Criminal Attorney. If you would like to see his 5 Star rating on Yelp as well, click here for Yelp

If you would like to see his 5 Star rating on Yelp as well, click here or click the image below to jump to yelp

believed to be a former cop, went on a rampage at a biker bar in Southern California, the Orange County Sheriff confirmed

At least nine people were shot Wednesday night in the Trabuco Canyon area of Orange County, a representative for the Orange County Sheriff’s Office confirmed.

The incident happened around 7:30 p.m. PT at Cook’s Corner, a well-known bar and grill, located on Santiago Canyon Road in Trabuco Canyon, in South Orange County, California, according to the OC Sheriff’s watch commander.

The suspect is down, authorities said.

The scene is not active.

FBI agents are responding to the scene, but the OC Sheriff is going to take the lead in the investigation. source

11 shot at biker bar in Orange County’s Trabuco Canyon

Deputies and medical personnel rushed Wednesday night to a mass shooting at a bar in Orange County’s Trabuco Canyon, with sources saying five could have been killed including the shooter. Six more people were transported to a hospital or hospitals.

It happened on Santiago Canyon Road at Cook’s Corner, a biker bar where it was Spaghetti Night.

Orange County Sheriff’s Capt. Aaron Brady confirmed there was a mass shooting there Wednesday evening. Sources later said it likely started as a domestic dispute. The Sheriff’s Department also later said there was a deputy-involved shooting during the response. No deputies were injured.

Sources said preliminary reports are that five were dead in the aftermath of the shooting, including the shooter. It is believed the shooter is a former law enforcement officer from outside of the area.

Social media posts showed a massive response by deputies and Orange County Fire Authority personnel.

A CBS LA reporter in a helicopter around 8:15 p.m. reported seeing what appeared to be at least three sheets covering bodies, one in a parking lot, one on the street and one at the rear of the property. At least two others were being treated by emergency personnel.

“This is real,” she wrote on Facebook at 7:45 p.m.. “… 4 or 6 shots strait (sic) at me.  But he missed me.  Thank you, God!!”

Her photos showed a large smear of blood on the floor of the bar. She shared videos of a chaotic scene outside the bar with deputies and paramedics working on shooting victims in the parking lot.

Gus Gunderman of Tustin was at Cook’s for the $8 spaghetti dinner. He left before the shooting, he said Wednesday night in a public post on Facebook.

“Family members saw family members die tonight,” he wrote. “Glad to be home safe. I left there not too long ago, like minutes before. Apparently it was soon enough.”

California Gov. Gavin Newsom was monitoring the shooting “and coordinating with local officials as more details become available,” his office said.

Cook’s Corner on its website promotes cold beer and good food and says “children welcome.” “Cook’s Corner is considered to be one of the most famous biker bar & restaurant in Southern California,” the site says.

An earlier notable mass shooting in Orange County, also involving domestic violence, happened in October 2011 when Scott Dekraai fatally shot eight people at a hair salon in Seal Beach.

Wednesday’s shooting was the first mass shooting in the county since one at a Laguna Woods

source

Review of Mark Reel Fathers Rights –

Law office’s of Reel Fathers Rights, APC

Mark Allen Reel  Cal Bar# 337182

Reviews of Reel Father’s Rights

we would never give Reel Father’s Rights any business. In our opinion even the name of the firm is designed to EMOTIONALLY grab a disappointed upset father’s attention, just imagine, they took their clients money, never did any work and got off the case for conflict of interest $5000 stolen by Mark Reel’s company Reel Father’s Rights!

Our Review is our opinion of the actions of Reel Father’s Rights.

Reel Father’s Rights should be avoided at all costs, unless you too wish to possibly have your money stolen by a slick compay that does NO WORK, removes themselves from the case on the first appearnance due to conflict of interest and then KEEPS THE MONEY ALSO.

I know personally after reading the email with the proof one of our readers sent in……. we began our investigation to review the law offices Reel Fathers Rights. Attorney at Reel Fathers Rights has received an extensive amount of bad reviews over the course of his online life which is well over a decade.  Although no one can guarentee the validity of any review one can use logic.  An opinion based on the acculation of bad reveiws that are well hidden would show a preponderance of similar bahaviors. I personally don’t mind a bad review here and there but if there is a pattern I should account for that as well.  Money is hard to make for most, use you head make wise decisions hire this guy if you want to, its all up to you! 

If over the course of over a decade a horse is seen with stripes… maybe its a Zebra.  

Attorneys’ for Reel Fathers Rights Reviewed and observed over the years has lead to a slew of findings. Our review and review of Reel Fathers Rights, Owner Mark Reel, the lawyers’ firm who has a history…. one of our readers experienced his behavior and our opinion is that he is malicious and has deviant like behavior. honesty is not his best policy from observing how our reader was treated and reviews serveral of Reel Fathers Rights reviews over the last decade. Over the last decade Reel Fathers Rights has aquired a similar patter of behavior with a vast amount of reviewers over an extended period of time which in our opinion is a pattern of behavior that we would wish to avoid,  so we wont be hiring him any time soon!

Is Reel Father’s Rights a good attorney for you? probable not, unless you want to do business with con artists that don’t do work but keep the money

Review of Reel Father’s Rights Lawyers – Stooge status in our opinion 

 REEL fathers rights attorney Law Firm Reviews

Markk REEL, of Reel father’s Rights is in our opinion a REAL FATHER’S RIGHTS SIMP SCAM in our opinion. Mark Reel’s Reel Father’s Rights did not do the duty! the did NO WORK, KEPT THE $ MONEY and never did any work.

The client was frauded and robbed by Mark Reel’s Company, Reel Fathers Rights!

Reel Father’s Rights Reviews

HIS BROKE LOOKING CHEAP IKEA LOOKING CUBICLES! SEE THE BIG LONG TABLES AND HUGE GLASS VIEW IN THE CONFERENCE ROOM? ME NEITHER!
ALL I SEE IS A TINY ROOM WITH IKEA LIKE SHIT FURNITURE ! NOTHING MUCH

Mark Reel’s attorney law firm for father’s rights is a scam. they do not do their work. the pray on fathers who want justice. Reel Father’s Rights law firm is a scam. They target hopeful fathers using the psychology of preying on angry or hurt fathers by using a psychologically pleasing name to a father in such a position “Reel Father’s Rights”

Reel Father’s Rights Review

our experience with Reel Father’s Rights was less than stellar. after the experience we realized that the positive reviews that Reel Father’s Rights has is most likely fake in our honest opinion.  Check out the females leaving reviews, and all of those women leaving reviews have only left 1 review in their life, and it happened to be Reel Father’s Rights? A FATHERS ONLY LAW FIRM as JESSE IS CLEARLY RECORDED SAYING “WE ONLY WORK WITH FATHERS, MEN ONLY! WE DON’T HELP MOTHER’S”

interesting that Reel Father’s Rights has Jesse the deal signer hustler say such words on a recorded line, and have lots of reviews by women that have only left 1 review. so we got to thinking about Reel Father’s Rights and how much of a scam these guys could be running so we did some digging on this guy MARK REEL CEO of Reel Father’s Rights.

Reviews of the Law Firm for Father’s Rights Attorney – Reel Father’s Rights Review

after finding all the buried 1 star reviews you uncover the real MARK REEL and his operations at Reel Father’s Rights.

Reel Father’s Rights DID NOT WORK ON THE CASE THEY WERE HIRED FOR AT ALL ZERO ZILTCH! Our opinion of their Reel Father’s Rights law firm is the attorney’s there suck at Reel Father’s Rights

BOOKMARK THIS TAB. WE WILL BE ADDING A LOT TO DO WITH THIS MARK REEL FATHER’S RIGHTS FIRM REVIEW COMING SOON!

Reviews of the Law Firm for Father’s Rights Attorney – Reel Father’s Rights Review

JOIN US FOR PEACEFUL ASSEMBLY AT ALL LAWYERS WHO DO NOT OBEY THEIR OATH. KEEP THIS PAGE BOOKMARKED FOR THE UPCOMING DATES.
BRING WATER AND PREPARE FOR PEACEFUL DEMONSTRATION. REMEMBER NO BLOCKING STREET ACESS BE POLITE AND RESPECT EVERYONE!

Freedom of assembly

Reel Father;s Rights Lawyer’s Reviews

REVIEWS WE FOUND OF THE LAW OFFICES OF Reel Father’s Rights

, ALTHOUGH NO ONE CAN EVER BE SURE. A PATTERN OVER THE YEARS SHOULD BE NOTED WELL, AND THAT IS OUR OPINION! 

read REEL FATHER’S RIGHTS yelp reviews

CLICK HERE TO SEE THEM ON YELP

CHECK OUT THEIR GOOGLE REVIEWS

A fiduciary duty is a legal responsibility to act in the best interest of another party. The term “fiduciary” comes from the Latin word for trust, and a person with a fiduciary duty has a legal obligation to maintain that trust. For example, lawyers have a fiduciary duty to act in the best interest of their clients.

Fiduciary duties include duties of care, loyalty, good faith, confidentiality, prudence, and disclosure. The person with a fiduciary duty is known as the fiduciary, and the person or persons they are responsible to are referred to as the principal or the beneficiary.

A fiduciary relationship existed where the fiduciary owed a duty to the principal. The fiduciary acted in a manner that contradicted, or breached, their expected duties. The principal suffered damages. The damages incurred were a direct result of the breach of fiduciary duty.

The fiduciary duty of an attorney in California is to act in their client’s best interests and keep all information provided confidential.

What Constitutes a Breach of Fiduciary Duty in California?

A breach of fiduciary duty can sometimes be difficult to prove. For a breach of duty to have occurred, the defendant (i.e. attorney, consultant, investment broker, trustee) must have a fiduciary duty to the plaintiff. When there is a fiduciary duty to the plaintiff and the defendant did not act in the best interests of their client, a breach of fiduciary duty exists. https://goodshepherdmedia.net/what-is-a-fiduciary-duty-breach-of-fiduciary-duty/

The Lawyer’s Fiduciary Duties: “The 4 C’s”:

•  1. Communicate
  

  RLGL  §20 A Lawyer’s Duty to Inform and Consult with a Client

  • (1) A lawyer must keep a client reasonably informed about the matter and must consult with a client to a reasonable extent concerning decisions to be made by the lawyer…
  • (2) A lawyer must promptly comply with a client’s reasonable requests for information.
  • (3) A lawyer must notify a client of decisions to be made by the client…and must explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the client to make informed decision regarding the representation.
    RPC 1.4 Communication
    • • (b) A lawyer shall keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable requests for information.
      • (c) A lawyer shall explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the client to make informed decision regarding the representattion.
         Rizzo v. Haines, 555 A.2d 58 (Pa. 1989). (duty to disclose settlement offers to client)
        FDIC v. Clark, 978 F.2d 1541 (10th Cir.1992) (duty to inform board of directors of a corporate officer’s fraud).

• 2. Conflict Avoidance (duty of loyalty)
  Maritrans v. Pepper Hamilton & Scheetz, 529 Pa. 241, 602 A.2d 1277 (1992)
  Matter of Silverman, 113 NJ 198 (1988) (doing business with clients)

• 3. Confidentiality Profit Sharing Trust v. Lampf Lipkind, 267 NJ Super 174 (Law Div. 1993)

• 4. Competence Starron v. Weinstein, 305 N.J.Super. 263, 701 A.2d 1325 

A fiduciary has several duties, The main liabilities for fiduciary of duties include:

• Duty of Care: The duty to take all due diligence in making decisions, providing counsel, or taking action.
• Duty to sensible care
• Duty of Total Loyalty: The duty of loyalty prevents a fiduciary from representing someone with a conflict in interests.
• Duty of Good Faith: Fiduciaries have a duty to obey the law in their dealings on the client’s behalf.
• Duty of Confidentiality: The fiduciary cannot disclose any information without the client’s consent.
• Duty of Prudence: Similar to the duty of care, the duty of prudence requires the fiduciary to take all due care in identifying risks and weighing options before taking action.
• Duty to Disclose: Fiduciaries must not withhold information that would affect the well-being of the client.

§49. Breach of Fiduciary Duty–Generally

In addition to the other possible bases of civil liability described in §§48 [professional negligence] 55[breach of contract and equitable relief] and 56 [liability to a non-client], a lawyer is civilly liable to a client if the lawyer breaches a fiduciary duty to the client set forth in §16(3) and if that failure is a legal cause of injury with the meaning of §53, unless the lawyer has a defense within the meaning of §54. 

§16  Lawyer’s Duties to a Client–Generally:

To the extent consistent with the lawyer’s other legal duties and subject to other provisions of this Restatement, a lawyer must, in matters within the scope of the representation:
(1) proceed in a manner reasonably calculated to advance a client’s lawful objectives, as defined by the client after consultation;
(2) act with reasonable competence and diligence;
(3) comply with obligations concerning the client’s confidences and property, avoid impermissible conflicting interests, deal honestly with the client, and not employ advantages arising from the client-lawyer relationship in a manner adverse to the client;
(4) fulfill valid contractual obligations to the client.

The California Rules of Professional Conduct also include:

• Rule 1.1 Competence: (a) A lawyer shall not intentionally, recklessly, with gross negligence, or repeatedly fail to perform legal services with competence.  For purposes of this rule, “competence” in any legal service shall mean to apply the (i) learning and skill, and (ii) mental, emotional, and physical ability reasonably* necessary for the performance of such service.
• Rule 1.3 Diligence : A lawyer shall not intentionally, repeatedly, recklessly or with gross negligence fail to act with reasonable diligence in representing a client.

• Rule 1.4 Communication with Clients (a) A lawyer shall: 
  (1) promptly inform the client of any decision or circumstance with respect to which disclosure or the client’s informed consent* is required by these rules or the State Bar Act;
  (2) reasonably* consult with the client about the means by which to accomplish the client’s objectives in the representation;
  (3) keep the client reasonably* informed about significant developments relating to the representation, including promptly complying with reasonable* requests for information and copies of significant documents when necessary to keep the client so informed; (b) A lawyer shall explain a matter to the extent reasonably* necessary to permit the client to make informed decisions regarding the representation.

• Rule 3-500: A member shall keep a client reasonably informed about significant developments relating to the employment or representation.
• Rule 4.1: A lawyer shall not make a false statement of fact or law to a third person.
• Rule 3-110: A member shall not intentionally, recklessly, or repeatedly fail to perform legal services with competence.
• Rule 3-700: A member shall not withdraw from employment in a proceeding before a tribunal without its permission.
• 6068(c). The ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 3.1 & 4.4, also impose a duty to the legal system which requires both that the attorney bring only meritorious claims and that they not use inappropriate means in the representation of their client that embarrass, burden, delay or violate legal rights. Barbara A. v. John G., 145 Cal.App.3d 369 (1983) (citing Herbert v. Lankershim, 9 Cal.2d 409, 483 (1937); Bacon v. Soule, 19 Cal.App. 428, 434 (1912)

In California, breach of fiduciary duty penalties includes civil remedies, civil penalties, and criminal penalties. If a breach of fiduciary duties was done with oppression, fraud, or malice (proven by clear and convincing evidence under California Civil Code § 3294) then the court may award punitive damages. According to California’s Code of Civil Procedure section 343, the statute of limitations for a breach of fiduciary duty is four years. And violates 15 U.S.C. 80a-35 – Breach of fiduciary duty and liabilities 29 U.S. Code § 1109 – Liability for breach of fiduciary duty. His responsibilities as well are §8477. Fiduciary responsibilities; liability and penalties.

WE HAVE RECORDED CONVERSATION WITH JESSE WHERE HE TELLS US WE DON’T TAKE FEMALE CASES. WE DO NOT HELP MOTHERS!

CHECK OUT THE REVIEW ABOVE? MUST BE FAKE. YOU CAN PAY FOR REVIEWS ITS EASY AND A FAST WAY TO BUILD A LIE

CHECK OUT HIS SHIT YOUTUBE CHANNEL https://www.youtube.com/@thefathersrightsattorney5717

HE HAS 2 VIDEOS AS OF THIS WRITE UP. ONE IS ABOUT RAPE AND NFL PLAYERS. SO 50% OF HIS 2 VIDEOS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH FATHER RIGHTS. THE OTHER VIDEO IS ABOUT WHO PAYS WHOEVER HAS MORE MONEY THATS HOW HE THINKS LIKE A TRUE SHIT BAG $$$$$$$ TILL HE GOT YOURS!@

Lawyers, upon being licensed and admitted to the practice of law are under oath and have a duty to be truthful with the Court in all pleadings, appearances and interactions in their role as a lawyer with the Court.

List of Bar Rule Violations, Laws and Business & Professional Codes Lawyers’ often commit and break.

Here is the list of their attorney’s doings.

1. Rule 1.1 Competence – A lawyer shall provide competent representation to a client. Competent representation requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation.
2. Rule 1.2.1 Advising or Assisting the Violation of Law
3. a) A lawyer shall not counsel a client to engage, or assist a client in conduct that the lawyer knows is criminal, fraudulent, or a violation of any law, rule, or ruling of a tribunal. HELPING CLIENTS LIE IS THAT!
4. Rule 1.3: Diligence – A lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence (careful and persistent work or effort.) and promptness in representing a client.
5. Rule 2.122. Conduct Towards Other Attorneys, the Court and Participants –
   (c) Filing of motions Motions should be filed sparingly, in good faith and when the issue(s) cannot be otherwise resolved. An attorney should not engage in conduct which forces opposing counsel to file a motion and then not oppose the motion, or provide information called for in the motion only after the motion is filed.
6. Rule 2.123 Candor to the Court and Opposing Counsel –
7. Accuracy of written and oral statements Attorneys should not knowingly misstate, misrepresent or distort any fact or legal authority to the Court or to the opposing counsel, and shall not mislead by inaction or silence. Written materials and oral argument to the Court should accurately state current law and fairly represent the party’s position without unfairly attacking the opposing counsel or opposing party.
8. 1 Meritorious Claims and Contentions

• A lawyer shall not:

1. bring or continue an action, conduct a defense, assert a position in litigation, or take an appeal, without probable cause and for the purpose of harassing or maliciously injuring any person; or
2. present a claim or defense in litigation that is not warranted under existing law, unless it can be supported by a good faith argument for an extension, modification, or reversal of the existing law.
3. Rule 3.3 Candor Toward the Tribunal
   (a) A lawyer shall not:

(1) knowingly* make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal* or fail to correct a false statement of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal* by the lawyer;
(3) offer evidence that the lawyer knows* to be false. If a lawyer, the lawyer’s client, or a witness called by the lawyer, has offered material evidence, and the lawyer comes to know* of its falsity, the lawyer shall take reasonable

1. A lawyer who represents a client in a proceeding before a tribunal* and who knows* that a person* intends to engage, is engaging or has engaged in criminal or fraudulent* conduct related to the proceeding shall take reasonable* remedial measures to the extent permitted by Business and Professions Code section 6068, subdivision (e) and rule 1.6.
2. The duties stated in paragraphs (a) and (b) continue to the conclusion of the proceeding.

8. Rule 3.4 Fairness to Opposing Party and Counsel
9. suppress any evidence that the lawyer or the lawyer’s client has a legal obligation to reveal or to produce;
10. falsify evidence, counsel or assist a witness to testify falsely, or offer an inducement to a witness that is prohibited by law;
11. Rule 4.1 Truthfulness in statement to others

(a) make a false statement of material fact or law to a third person and also requires a lawyer to disclose a material fact to avoid assisting a client in a criminal or fraudulent act, subject to the lawyer’s duties under rule 1.6 and Business and Professions Code section 6068(e).

10. California Rule of Professional Conduct 5-200(B) prohibits lawyers from misleading a judge, judicial officer, or jury by artifice or false statement . Rule 5-200 also requires lawyers to use means that are consistent with truth.
11. Business and Professions Code § 6106 – Dishonesty, whether or not committed while acting as an attorney, is considered an act of moral turpitude and is prohibited.
12. California Code, Business and Professions Code – BPC § 6068

It is the duty of an attorney to do all of the following:

1. To support the Constitution and laws of the United States and of this state.
2. To maintain the respect due to the courts of justice and judicial officers.
3. To counsel or maintain those actions, proceedings, or defenses only as appear to him or her legal or just, except the defense of a person charged with a public offense.
4. To employ, for the purpose of maintaining the causes confided to him or her those means only as are consistent with truth, and never to seek to mislead the judge or any judicial officer by an artifice or false statement of fact or law.
5. To advance no fact prejudicial to the honor or reputation of a party or witness, unless required by the justice of the cause with which he or she is charged.
6. Not to encourage either the commencement or the continuance of an action or proceeding from any corrupt motive of passion or interest.
7. Business and Professions Code – BPC § 6067 – Every person on his admission shall take an oath to support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California, and faithfully to discharge the duties of any attorney at law to the best of his knowledge and ability.
8. Rule 8.3 Required Reporting – which requires a lawyer (including judges) to report certain misconduct by another lawyer. See RULE 8.3 REPORTING SCENARIOS
   SCENARIO 6: CREDIBLE EVIDENCE]
   https://calbar.ca.gov/Portals/0/documents/ethics/Rule-8-3-Scenarios.pdf
   On June 2, 2023, the court received a request from the State Bar of California to approve a version of rule 8.3 of the California Rules of Professional Conduct. The request was granted.
9. Rule 8.4 misconduct
   It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to:
   (b) commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer in other respects; PERJURY IS THAT, FILING FALSHOODS IN CHECKBOX ANSWER FORMS IS THAT!
   (c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud,* deceit, or reckless or intentional misrepresentation; PERJURY IS THAT, FILING FALSHOODS IN CHECKBOX ANSWER FORMS IS THAT!
   (d) engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice; PERJURY IS THAT, FILING FALSHOODS IN CHECKBOX ANSWER FORMS IS THAT!
   (e) state or imply an ability to influence improperly a government agency or official, or to achieve results by means that violate these rules, the State Bar Act, or other law;
10. Rule 8.4.1 Prohibited Discrimination, Harassment and Retaliation

(4) “retaliate” means to take adverse action against a person* because that person* has (i) opposed, or (ii) pursued, participated in, or assisted any action alleging, any conduct prohibited by paragraphs (a)(1) or (b)(1) of this rule.

Both the Business and Professions Code and the Rules of Professional Conduct prohibit attorneys from making misrepresentations to a judicial officer.

Business and Professions Code section 6068, subdivision (d), provides that attorneys shall never “seek to mislead the judge or any judicial officer by an artifice or false statement of fact or law.”

Rule of Professional Conduct 5-200(B), which adds jurors to this prohibition, states that an attorney “Shall not seek to mislead the judge, judicial officer, or jury by an artifice or false statement of fact or law.”

These standards reflect the policy that “Honesty in dealing with the courts is of paramount importance, and misleading a judge is, regardless of motives, a serious offense.” (DiSabatino v. State Bar (1980) 27 Cal.3d 159, 162-163, quoting Paine v. State Bar (1939) 14 Cal.2d 150, 154); see also Daily v. Superior Court (1935) 4 Cal.App.2d 127, 132, quoting Furlong v. White (1921) 51 Cal.App. 265, 271
that attorneys are “officers of the court, and while it is their duty to protect and defend the interests of their clients, the obligation is equally imperative to aid the court in avoiding error and in determining the cause in accordance with justice and the established rules of practice.”)

Deceit may be committed by an outright affirmative falsehood or by concealment of a material fact. (Daily v. Superior Court, supra, 4 Cal.App.2d 127, 131 [“Deceit…may consist in suppression of that which it is one’s duty to declare…”]; see also Franklin v. State Bar (1986) 41 Cal.3d 700, 709 [“…concealment of a material fact ‘misleads the judge as effectively as a false statement…’”], quoting, in part, Grove v. State Bar, supra, 63 Cal.2d 312, 315 [“No distinction can therefore be drawn among concealment, half-truth, and false statement of fact.”].)

It is not necessary that the court be deceived by the misrepresentation (Davis v. State Bar (1983) 33 Cal.3d 231, 240 [“…it is sufficient that the attorney knowingly presents a false statement which tends to mislead the court”] or that the misrepresentation caused no harm. (Scofield v. State Bar (1965) 62 Cal.2d 624. 628 [“The suppression of that which is true, by one having knowledge or belief of the fact, to deceive another, or to induce him to enter into a contract, constitutes actual fraud.”]) because “it is the endeavor to secure an advantage by means of falsity which is denounced.” (Pickering v. State Bar (1944) 24 Cal.2d 141, 145.)

It is also not a defense that the attorney believed it was necessary to lie to protect her client. (Bryan v. Bank of America (2001) 86 Cal.App.4th 185, 193 [“Nor can we accept the proposition that (the attorney’s) duty to his client relieved him of the responsibility to tell the court the truth, particularly where the representation was made under penalty of perjury.”].)

The courts have already addressed the Misrepresenting of grounds for purpose of continuance or delay. (Vaughn v. Municipal Court (1967) 252 Cal.App.2d 348, 354

This current case #23AVUD01538 began 10/27/2023 yet if you read the signed Declaration of mailing affidavit under penalty of perjury they signed it 10/03/2023, as this was the same dated paper used in the previous filing.  In that filing, Joezen Callos #307712 committed the same exact type of misleading answer prior, when I retained FAST EVICTION as my attorney, they mishandled my case so that case was terminated.  The particular date they illegitimately used was a from the Declaration of mailing paperwork filed on THAT previous case#23AVUD01220 by the defendants and the same attorney of  BASTA, Inc,. / Joezen Callos #307712 was  on thatOLD case# 23AVUD01220 which began in October. The tenant’s illegal sublet answered that OLD case# 23AVUD01220

 IN : Kenworthy v. State of California (1965) 236 Cal.App.2d 378, 397-398. Offers of proof are improper are not allowed! See also Offers to stipulate are improper: Augustus v. Shaffer (1959) 171 Cal.App.2d 160, 167. See also Moving to amend a complaint is improper: Sanguinetti v. Moore Dry Dock Co. (1951) 36 Cal.2d 812, 819.
So I also ask the courts to reject their answer as it was not filed in a timely manner withing the restraints set forth by the courts of the great state of California, which is 5 days.  The defendants failed to answer in the required time.

This failure triggers Rule 2.85. Requirements for Service of Process And

Rule 2.87. Adoption of Mandatory Electronic Filing and Service; Exceptions.

The defendants still did not answer until BASTA AMENEDED THE FIRST ILLEGITIMATE ANSWER UNTIMELY FILED WITH A FALSE Declaration of mailing. The law required a legitimate answer in response with a legal Declaration of mailing to my unlawful detainer filing by the date of November 3, 2023. THEY FAILED TO DO SO WITH LEGITIMACEY AND WITHOUT PERJURY!

A “misleading is not distinguishable from a false statement, according to the State Bar, and this principle dates back to at least 1929. All these forms of deception are considered fraud upon the court, or fraud on the court. “False statement of fact,” “explicit false statement” or “affirmative misrepresentation” are the legal, technical terms for what the general public refers to as a lie. The failure to disclose adverse facts and authority is unlawful, unethical, and considered sanctionable misconduct, according to the State Bar.

The actions of Joezen Callos #307712 fall under California Business and Professions Code – BPC § 6106  “The commission of any act involving moral turpitude, dishonesty or corruption, whether the act is committed in the course of his relations as an attorney or otherwise, and whether the act is a felony or misdemeanor or not, constitutes a cause for disbarment or suspension.”

OFFERING OR PREPARING FALSE EVIDENCE

• California Penal Code Section 132, offering false evidence, is legally described as follows:
  Anyone who upon any trial, proceeding, inquiry, or investigation authorized law, offers in evidence, as genuine, any book, paper, document, record, or other instrument in writing, knowing it’s forged or fraudulently altered, is guilty of felony offense.
• California Penal Code Section 134, preparing false evidence, is legally described as follows:
  Anyone guilty of preparing a false paper, record, instrument in writing, or other matter with intent to produce or allow it to be produced for a fraudulent or deceitful purpose as genuine upon a trial, proceeding, or inquiry authorized by law, is guilty of felony offense.
• California Penal Code Section 118 – Perjury described as follows:
  Signing the court documents under the penalty of perjury would be this
• California Penal Code Section 135 destroying or concealing evidence described as follows:
  not showing the courts the major breaches like the big dog and holding back clear agreement breaches is deceptive to the court and very disrespectful to the courts and myself. please see EXHIBIT 1A , please see EXHIBIT 12 John Blunt Junior Rental Application – even puts on our application he has NO DOGS, that is why we considered him, he specifically told us he has not pets! We do not take tenants with pets per our agreement, please see EXHIBIT 1c
• California Penal Code Section 141 – Planting Evidence described as follows:
  would be when they take signed MAILING OF DECLARATION from another case and turn it in on this case.

California Penal Code Section 470 – Forgery described as follows: that would be where you look at the signatures of John Blunt Junior and clearly see 2 different signatures claiming to be John Blunt Junior

Hawk v. Superior Court – The power of the court to punish summarily for a direct contempt is contained in Code of Civil Procedure section 1211 and Rule 2.60. Sanctions. My Civil rights are being harmed by the actions of the defendants’ and their attorney Joezen Callos #307712.

• California’s Civil Code section 1710  identifies four kinds of fraud:

1. intentional misrepresentation;
2. concealment;
3. false promise; and
4. negligent misrepresentation.

Intentional Fraud/ Deceit occurs when the defrauder uses deceit or false important facts to convince the victim to rely on the false facts.  Then the victim reasonably relied on and was harmed by the deceit.

Promissory Fraud occurs when the defrauded makes a promise that is important to the transaction that he or she never intends to, nor never performs, in order to induce the victim to rely victim rely on the promise.  Then the victim must reasonably rely on and be harmed by the false promise. “An action for promissory fraud may lie where a defendant fraudulently induces the plaintiff to enter into a contract.” (Engalla v. Permanente Medical Group, Inc. (1997) 15 Cal.4th 951, 973-974; Tenzer v. Superscope, Inc. (1985) 39 Cal.3d 18, 30.)

Concealment Fraud occurs when there is a fiduciary or other relationship between the parties where there is a duty of full disclosure. The concealing person, with an intention to deceive, does not disclose important facts that the concealing person knows but the victim does not and could not know. Further, the victim reasonably relied on and was harmed by the concealment.

Constructive Fraud or Negligent Misrepresentation occurs when the perpetrator misrepresents to the victim that an important false fact is true. However, the defrauder may have honestly believed that the false representation is true.  Yet, the defrauder had no reasonable grounds for believing the representation was true when he or she made it; and he or she intends that victim rely on the representation.  The victim must reasonably rely on and be harmed by the false representation.

California Constitution
Article VI – Judicial
Section 13.

Universal Citation: CA Constitution art VI § 13

SEC. 13.

No judgment shall be set aside, or new trial granted, in any cause, on the ground of misdirection of the jury, or of the improper admission or rejection of evidence, or for any error as to any matter of pleading, or for any error as to any matter of procedure, unless, after an examination of the entire cause, including the evidence, the court shall be of the opinion that the error complained of has resulted in a miscarriage of justice.

https://www.thenalfa.org/blog/defense-prevailing-party-in-dvpa-case-dropped-by-plaintiff/

“Motion Hearing re attorney fees is denied with prejudice.”

erroneous prevailing party determination resulted in a miscarriage of justice….[B]ecause the respondent on petition for a domestic violence restraining order, the trial court had discretion to deny his request for prevailing party attorney fees under [Family Code] section 6344, subdivision (a).”

Art, VI, §13 of the state Constitution, reversal is called for only where an error has resulted “in a miscarriage of justice” which, she declared, did not occur.

California Dr. Michael Mammone, 58, was riding a bicycle when he was struck by a motorist and then attacked, Orange County authorities said

A Southern California doctor was killed Wednesday during a violent encounter in which he was hit from behind by a vehicle while cycling and then attacked by the driver.

Dr. Michael Mammone, 58, was riding a bicycle on scenic Pacific Coast Highway in Dana Point when a Lexus struck him from behind around 3 p.m., the Orange County Sheriff’s Department said. The driver of the car, identified as Vanroy Evan Smith, 39, of Long Beach, struck Mammone and then got out the vehicle and attacked him with a knife, authorities said.

When deputies arrived, they found Mammone lying in an intersection with “severe injuries,” authorities said.

Dr. Michael Mammone, 58, was killed Wednesday by a motorist who struck his bicycle and then attacked him, authorities said.  (Providence Mission Hospital Laguna Beach)

Witnesses said the suspect struck the bicyclist and proceeded to stab the victim at least once in the back, FOX Los Angeles reported. The suspect then allegedly pulled out a gun and fired multiple rounds before he was disarmed by two passersby.

Smith was detained by bystanders until authorities arrived. He was arrested on suspicion of murder, the sheriff’s department said. He is slated to appear in court Friday, according to jail records.

A knife believed to have been used in the attack was found at the scene.

Investigators said there was no known connection between Smith and Mammone. Mammone was a doctor at the Providence Mission Hospital Laguna Beach, where he practiced emergency medicine.

The scene where a doctor was killed by a motorist Wednesday in what authorities said was a violent attack.  (KTTV)

“We are stunned by this devastating tragedy,” a hospital statement to Fox News Digital read. “The entire Mission Hospital family is grieving over the loss of an incredible physician and friend. We will honor Dr. Mammone’s dedication to our community and passion for medicine by continuing to provide exceptional care.”

By Louis Casiano | Fox News

Vanroy Smith (Orange County District Attorney’s Office)

“The guiding light in that office is ‘How is it going to make Todd Spitzer look?’” one former prosecutor said.

 OC District Attorney Todd Spitzer is a Professional Criminal hiding with his immunity cloak! The United States’ Most Corrupt District Attorney To Date

The head of one of the largest district attorney’s offices in the US is tanking the local justice system with his ironfisted grip on the office, using fear and retaliation against subordinates and interfering in high-profile cases to boost his public image, according to internal documents and interviews with current and former employees.

Their accounts come as the district attorney for Orange County, California, Todd Spitzer, is facing a growing list of lawsuits and accusations of racism. More than 70 prosecutors — about a quarter of the office’s entire roster of attorneys — have left over the last three years. All of the alleged misconduct, current and former prosecutors and investigators who spoke to BuzzFeed News said, is to protect Spitzer’s public persona and political career, which they said has come at the cost of morale and the reputation of their office. Justice, they said, has come second to generating positive headlines and protecting the personal brand of the county’s top prosecutor.

“Sometimes that aligns with justice, sometimes it doesn’t,” a current prosecutor said.

BuzzFeed News spoke with 11 current and former law enforcement officials from the district attorney’s office who worked under Spitzer, most of whom spoke on condition of anonymity citing a fear of retaliation. Even those no longer working within the prosecutor’s office said they were concerned that speaking out could lead to personal or professional repercussions within the small world of the Southern California legal system. BuzzFeed News also obtained internal memos, emails, confidential investigative reports, and public court records to corroborate many of their accounts. These interviews and documents show that, among other things:

• Spitzer launched internal investigations as payback against prosecutors and investigators who pursued cases that he wanted dropped or that posed a threat of revealing comments or decisions that he wanted hidden, according to three officials with direct knowledge.
• In spite of vowing to step back to protect the prosecution’s independence, Spitzer “shopped around” for a prosecutor who’d align with his personal view in the high-profile case of Grant Robicheaux, a wealthy surgeon accused of raping multiple women, according to two sources. At least one prosecutor refused to take it on because they felt Spitzer wanted charges reduced or dropped.
• Spitzer brought up race multiple times as he made decisions on criminal prosecutions and used Black prosecutors as the face of the office to deflect criticism of his record, former prosecutors said in interviews and documents.
• Two supervisors and an outside investigator have found the district attorney “not credible” when he was questioned in two separate investigations, according to reports obtained by BuzzFeed News. In one instance, Spitzer lied to his own homicide investigator, possibly obstructing justice and tainting two criminal cases, after having an “improper” conversation with the father of a young boy killed in a mass shooting, one former high-ranking prosecutor said in a legal claim.
• Though he touted himself as a victims advocate, some alleged victims have told BuzzFeed News they were publicly discredited, abandoned by Spitzer’s office, and verbally attacked by him behind closed doors.

In a statement to BuzzFeed News, Spitzer denied using the prosecutor’s office for his political benefit, interfering in criminal cases, and taking action to tip the outcome of investigations and trials to his liking. Instead, he accused critics of “coordinat[ing] efforts to embarrass me and deter me from my efforts.”

“This is no coincidence and the motive is clear,” Spitzer said in the statement. “Nothing will deter me from continuing my mission to clean up the public corruption in the Orange County District Attorney’s Office and safeguard the criminal justice system.”

He also denied an atmosphere of fear and retaliation in the prosecutor’s office, saying that incidents of discipline were meant to ferret out a “win-at-all-costs” mentality from a previous administration.

“Accountability cannot be confused for retaliation,” he said.

The district attorney was also critical of BuzzFeed News’ use of anonymous sources for this article, suggesting they were disgruntled employees looking for a payout.

“It is disingenuous to allow people speaking under the condition of anonymity to make allegations of this nature, especially when many of them have a vested financial interest in painting the office and the DA in the worst possible light,” he said in the statement. “There has not been a single sustained allegation of retaliation by the DA and to refuse to identify sources while they are allowed unfettered ability to make unsubstantiated and factually inaccurate statements is not only unfair, it is a disservice to the public we serve and the work that we do on a daily basis to pursue justice and give the voiceless a voice.”

Yet that daily work is now threatened by what insiders have called a mass exodus from the office. The office maintains a roster of about 300 attorneys on staff, and the district attorney’s office confirmed 73 prosecutors have left over a period of three years. (Fourteen returned to do part-time work on contract, the district attorney’s office added.)

But the result, sources said, has been a “brain drain” from the Orange County district attorney’s office of mid- and high-level prosecutors. Today, several officials said, prosecutors with less experience are handling bigger caseloads and more complicated cases than they would have before.

“Everybody is looking for an exit strategy because it’s just a rotten place to work,” one former prosecutor said. “That’s 100% Todd Spitzer’s fault.”

The district attorney’s office disputed the number of departures and, despite concerns from multiple supervisors and line prosecutors about attrition, said their rate was lower than other county agencies. Officials also pointed to a county program launched in 2020 that offered up to $100,000 in incentives for long-term employees to retire.

After being contacted for this story, a spokesperson for the district attorney’s office asked prosecutors to reach out to BuzzFeed News to talk about their experiences.

Four people — including one who refused to identify themself and one person who declined to be named in this article, saying they were concerned they’d face blowback from coworkers for speaking positively about their boss — spoke highly of Spitzer and his handling of multiple scandals that have plagued the office in recent years. They also described what they said was a divided office, affected by the politics of an upcoming election.

“It is a toxic environment in the sense that if you’re pro-Todd [Spitzer], you can’t say that openly in the office because so many people are openly against him,” Jeri Katheryne Neff, a prosecutor who was asked to contact BuzzFeed News.

The recent headlines, lawsuits, and allegations raised against Spitzer have fractured the prosecution office, said Beth Costello, a senior assistant district attorney who was also asked to contact BuzzFeed News.

“If I say something good and my name is attached to it, then the other 50% of the office that’s disgruntled will have an ax to grind,” she said.

She and the others praised Spitzer for initiatives he’s launched since taking office, such as expanding the mental health and recidivism unit, as well as the veterans treatment court, which looks at providing additional services and support in select cases. He’s also directed more resources to address juvenile justice, they said.

“At the end of the day, he has a huge heart and cares about his office and its employees,” Costello said.

Todd Spitzer (center) gives the thumbs-up at his campaign headquarters in Santa Ana as election results showed he had closed the gap against his rival, incumbent district attorney Tony Rackauckas, in November 2018.

Questions about how politics have influenced investigative decisions began three days after Spitzer won the election for district attorney on Nov. 6, 2018, when Damon Tucker, an investigator within the office who suspected Spitzer of corruption, was suddenly removed from an internal inquiry. But Tucker continued to check on the inquiry, calling the new investigator on the case, according to an arbitrator’s report. At one point, he called a friend at a local police department to ask about the investigation, prompting accusations that he’d overstepped his duties in pursuing a “vendetta” against Spitzer.

In a scathing four-page memo obtained by BuzzFeed News, Spitzer called the entire incident an “accidental and completely unintentional exchange” and then blasted the accounts of his own investigator and two supervisors, calling their accounts of what happened “misleading,” “aggressive,” “biased,” and “agenda driven.”

For others who had direct knowledge about how the review was conducted, it wasn’t a surprise.

Pro Se, Sui Juris,

In Propia Persona and Pro Per Information

Pro Se is defined as someone that is representing themselves
in court or other legal proceedings.

Please Read!

Representing Yourself

There are several reasons why people represent themselves without a lawyer:

• In criminal cases, if you cannot afford a lawyer, the court will appoint a lawyer for you, like a public defender. But in civil cases, you do not have the right to a court-appointed lawyer so, if you cannot afford your own lawyer, you have to represent yourself.
• Some people choose to represent themselves even if they could pay a lawyer because they feel they can handle the case on their own.
• In small claims cases, you are not allowed to have a lawyer, so everyone in small claims court is representing himself or herself.

Whatever the reason, you have the right to represent yourself, to be your own lawyer in all cases in California. But just because you can represent yourself does not mean you should. It is very important that you learn about what is at stake in your case, and what you will be expected to do and know in order to handle it on your own.

What to consider when deciding if you need a lawyer

It is a good idea to have a lawyer to represent you. But, as we just explained, it is not always necessary or possible.

You may need a lawyer if…

• You have a complicated case or a case that may become complicated (but keep in mind you may not always realize a case is or could be complicated without talking to a lawyer).
• You want legal advice.
• You want to discuss strategies for your case, like where to file your lawsuit, whether to file a response, whether to ask for a jury, and many other decisions that will come up during the case.
• You want a confidential attorney-client relationship.
• You are worried that the other side will not “play fair” (a lawyer is more likely to notice this and know what to do).
• You are going to have a jury trial, and there are complicated decisions to make, from choosing a jury to knowing how to present a case to a jury most effectively.
• You are too close emotionally to the case and have a hard time seeing things objectively.

You may not need a lawyer if…

• Your case is straightforward and there is no opposing side (like in a petition to change your name) or the other side and you are in agreement about everything (like an uncontested stepparent adoption or a guardianship of a child where everyone agrees).
• You understand all your options and can make informed choices about your case.
• You are willing to learn and understand the law and the rules and procedures that apply to our case.
• You can spend time to prepare your case.
• You can follow written instructions and work on your own.

Tips for representing yourself

Here are some basic steps you can take to make sure you are prepared to represent yourself in court:

• Read about the law that applies to your case. Do research at the local public law library and ask for help at your court’s self-help center, family law facilitator, or small claims legal advisor. If you can, have a consultation with a lawyer to make sure you are on the right track.
• Look at the options that would solve your problem without having to go to court. For example, you can try alternative dispute resolution (ADR) like mediation or arbitration. For more information on how to solve cases out of court, read our section on Resolving Your Dispute Out of Court.
• Make sure you follow the court procedures. To do this, you must read the laws that affect your case in:
  • California Code of Civil Procedure
  • California Rules of Court
  • Your superior court local rules (you can also find these rules at your law library or your court’s website

Not being a lawyer and not knowing the law is not an excuse for not following court procedures.

• Keep track of all deadlines — especially deadlines for filing papers and serving the other side. If you miss these deadlines, you may lose your case.
  • Where the parties sit;
  • How to explain your case to the judge; and
  • How much time each side has to talk.Go to the courtroom where your hearing will be and watch some cases. You can learn:
• Be prepared for your court hearing. Have copies of:
  • Act professionally in court. Explain your side briefly and clearly. Do not talk about issues that do not support your case.
  • Be realistic about what the judge can and cannot do. Make sure you understand what legal relief you can get in your case and focus on that.
  • Show respect for the judge, the court clerks, and other people in the courtroom. Do not interrupt the judge or the other side. Do not make personal attacks against the other side.

Click for more information about preparing for court.

Risks of representing yourself

• The biggest risk is that you lose your case because (1) you are unable to follow all the required procedures to bring your case to trial so your case is dismissed, or (2) once you get to trial, you cannot meet all the technical requirements to prove your case.
• If you lose your case, the judge will likely order you to pay for the other side’s court costs and attorney’s fees, which can be a lot of money. Sometimes the costs of suing are more than the amount sued for.
• If you lose and you are ordered to pay the other side’s costs, you will get a judgment entered against you. This means that instead of winning money or some form of relief, you now owe the other side money.
• A judgment is valid for 10 years and can be renewed for another 10 years as many times as is necessary until the judgment is paid. It can result in a garnishment of your wages, a levy of your bank accounts, property liens, and other collection methods.

In order to assess whether or not to sue, you should consult with a lawyer.

Types of cases where lawyers are necessary

• Malpractice cases: If you are suing for medical malpractice, or some other type of professional negligence, the law says you need to prove that (1) the doctor or other professional breached (broke) the duty of care owed to you and (2) you suffered damages as a direct and proximate cause of the breach. These legal requirements are very hard to prove, and you will need expert witnesses to do it.  First, expert witness fees are very expensive. If you have a lawyer representing you on a “contingency” basis (meaning the lawyer only gets paid if you win), the lawyer will usually hire and pay for the expert witness upfront, so you will not have to reimburse the lawyer until the case is over. If you are representing yourself and do not have a lawyer to advance these costs, you may not be able to afford the experts you need to prove your case.  Also, getting an expert witness and establishing to the court that he or she is an expert can also be very complicated and should be handled by a trained and experienced lawyer.
• Construction defect cases: Construction defect cases often depend on expert witnesses to prove or disprove the allegations of the complaint. This may not be true of a small case in which the property owner hired a handyman or contractor to perform a single job on the property and 1 person performed all the work.  For example, if you hired a roofing contractor to install a new roof, and the new roof leaked, you may be able to sue the roofing contractor without a lawyer or expert witnesses because you may be able to prove on your own that (1) you hired the contractor to install a new roof, (2) you paid the contractor, (3) the roof leaked, and (4) the leaks caused damage.But if you had several people working on your house (like an architect, a structural engineer, and a general contractor who, in turn, hired subcontractors and purchased supplies from different suppliers), proving who is at fault when something goes wrong becomes very difficult, and you would probably need an expert witnesses to determine fault and explain it to the court.Also, while construction experts are usually not as expensive as medical experts, they can still cost a lot, especially if you need many experts in different specialties. Expert costs for these types of cases can run in the tens of thousands of dollars.Some lawyers will take construction defect cases on a contingency basis, but most charge by the hour. You may be able to hire a lawyer on a limited-scope basis to help you with certain parts of the case, while you handle other parts on your own. Get more information on limited-scope representation.
• Cases involving competing title to real estate:  Real estate cases that allege someone committed fraud, like cases in which there is competing title to real property, are usually too complicated for a person without a lot of legal training and experience. Also, even if you win, if you make a mistake in writing up the final order (in civil cases, the court generally does not prepare orders, it is up to the parties to do it), the title insurance company may not insure title, in effect preventing you, as the property owner, from selling or refinancing.
• Cases involving wrongful termination or employment discrimination claims:  If you are suing your employer for employment discrimination or wrongful termination, you most likely will need a lawyer. Proving these cases is complicated and the employer’s lawyers usually fight these cases vigorously. To win this type of case, you must have a lawyer skilled in direct and cross-examination of witnesses and the rules of evidence.
• Administrative writs and appeals:  Cases appealing a final decision by an administrative agency or hearing officer are extremely complicated and limited in the type of review the court can make. A lawyer can tell you if you have a sufficient basis in the record for an appeal and discuss other options with you.
• Other types of cases:  There are other types of cases that are difficult or impossible for non-lawyers to win because the law or procedure is extremely complex or because the cost of bringing the case to trial is high.

It is always best to consult with a lawyer before filing a lawsuit to make sure that the case is one you can bring with some chance of success. Most local bar associations have lawyer referral and information services that can provide you with a limited consultation with a lawyer for a small fee. You can also get some information from your court’s self-help center. Read our section on Free and Low-Cost Legal Help to learn about options in finding a lawyer and getting legal help. source

Pro Se Basic Information
Advanced Pro se Information Below

Pro Se Abilities

Pro Se Forms and Information

Search At CourtListener
good for all devices

Search At FindLaw
not good for all devices

Deprivation Of Rights Under Color Of Law
What It Is And What To Do About It!

Pro Se History

Pro Se Rulings

Judge Speaks On Pro Se Rights

Pro Se Policy Guide

American Pro Se Association

Pro se Legal Briefs

Tricks Of The Trade – Deception!

Bias Against The Pro se Litigant

Legal System Myths

Unauthorized Practice Of Law

Steps In A Civil Suit

Note: Pro Se Litigants Learn Research & Shepardizing!
Legal Research Intro
Shepardizing Cases Click HERE

Shit! I’m In Trouble!

Plea Bargains – Deal Or No Deal?

Criminal Trial Flow Chart 

Deal with Prosecutorial Misconduct

Handling Police Encounters

The Fifth Amendment

Series on Snitches

The Issue Of Actual Innocence

Wrongful Convictions

The Alford Plea

Search and Seizure Cases

Fellow Officer Rule

Inevitable Discovery

Reversible Error In Crim. Appeals

Center For Criminal Justice Adv.

JailHouse Lawyer’s Handbook

Should I Represent Myself?

Are Prosecutors Immune?

The ‘Harmless Error Doctrine’

Twenty First Century Policing
Sane Solutions

Pro se Advanced Information

Pro Se, Representing Yourself in Federal District Court Click here for the Handbook

Claim alleges Todd Spitzer knew of his friend’s bad behavior but promoted him to one of the highest positions in the office

By TONY SAAVEDRA | tsaavedra@scng.com | Orange County Register

A fourth sexual harassment claim has been filed against a retired high-level prosecutor in Orange County, alleging that District Attorney Todd Spitzer witnessed the misbehavior but protected and even promoted the offender.

The newest claim, filed Tuesday, against Spitzer and former Senior Assistant District Attorney Gary Logalbo — Spitzer’s former roommate and best man at his wedding decades ago — typically is a precursor to a lawsuit. Attorney Matt Murphy, a former prosecutor, is representing the four claimants, all deputy district attorneys. Murphy spends much of the latest document blasting Spitzer for promoting to management his so-called best friend — known among veteran female employees as “Scary Gary.”

The claim says Spitzer’s tough talk against harassment in the workplace doesn’t apply to those closest to him and alleges he tried to retaliate against one of the four Jane Does who filed claims.

‘Denials’ and ‘victim blaming’

The accusations have been met with an “angry tone, denials and overt victim blaming” by Spitzer, said the claim.

“The reason people were so deeply reticent to complain of this behavior was not fear of Mr. Logalbo, but because they feared, and continue to fear, the well-documented wrath of Todd Spitzer,” said the document, which like the first three seeks unspecified damages.

Kimberly Edds, a spokeswoman for Spitzer, responded that the claim mischaracterizes the district attorney.

“We are incredibly disturbed by the allegations being made by several women in the Orange County District Attorney’s Office. No one should have to suffer in silence and these women will be protected,” Edds wrote in a prepared statement Wednesday. “As soon as allegations of misconduct and inappropriate behavior came to our attention, we handled them immediately and lawfully. This fact is indisputable. … We do not need lawsuits to tell us to do the right thing. The right thing is already being done.”

Spitzer added that no official complaints were made against Logalbo — nor were any in his employment file — until November.

Logalbo was first promoted to management in 2019 and then to senior assistant district attorney in early November. Shortly afterward, the allegations against him began to surface, Spitzer has said. Logalbo resigned abruptly on Dec. 11. Spitzer has acknowledged his personal relationship with Logalbo, but denies he is his “best friend.”

Teen intern harassed?

The claim mentions another unnamed, extra-help prosecutor — a former volunteer in Spitzer’s 2018 election campaign — who allegedly harassed a 16-year-old intern. Jane Doe 4 witnessed the harassment and reported it to management, but Spitzer interceded on behalf of the prosecutor, the claim says. The alleged harasser was later “released from OCDA employment” after failing a second background check, Murphy wrote.

“Two men, each with personal relationships to the district attorney, acted with impunity when it came to the pervasive sexual harassment of at least four adult women and one teenage girl,” the document said.

The system worked

Edds responded that the system worked and the extra-help lawyer was let go.

As far as Logalbo, Jane Doe 4 describes one incident in which she was discussing a child annoyance case with him when he said, “Talking about all this sex stuff makes me horny.”

The document alleges that Chief Assistant District Attorney Shawn Nelson and Spitzer witnessed Logalbo’s misconduct but did nothing. Spitzer even raised Logalbo to the highest management post in the office, despite protests from supervisors aware of his antics, the claim said.

Before he left, Logalbo was allowed to conduct a promotion interview of one of the claimants, Jane Doe 2. She didn’t get the job.

Murphy, in the claim, also accused Spitzer of sidestepping government procedure and leaking the first three claims to the media in an effort to “control the narrative.” Edds, however, said the claims are public documents that must be released upon request. They were filed with the county and therefore public, Spitzer said.

BY JAMES QUEALLY STAFF WRITER 

Nearly five years have passed since a lawyer representing the man who slaughtered eight people inside a Seal Beach salon first raised questions about the way investigators used informants inside Orange County’s jails.

The accusation — that sheriff’s deputies planted a prolific snitch in the cell of confessed killer Scott Dekraai in the hopes of eliciting information without his lawyer present, and then covered up their unconstitutional actions — seemed outlandish at the time. But jailhouse records soon proved otherwise, and the Orange County district attorney’s office and Sheriff’s Department found themselves embroiled in a national scandal.

The state attorney general’s office opened an investigation into both agencies in 2015; the U.S. Department of Justice followed suit the next year. Orange County prosecutors were kicked off Dekraai’s case, and a judge cited the informant scheme in sparing him a place on California’s death row. The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit accusing authorities of having deployed “professional” informants for decades.