The Leslie Brodie Report

"What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other word would smell as sweet.”

R. Scott Wylie, who served as both the Vice-President of the State Bar of California and the President of the Foundation of State Bar of California, quoted the above in an article that appeared in the April 2007 edition of the California Bar Journal http://tinyurl.com/romeoandjulietlink

According to Mr. Wylie, "The California Bar Foundation was created in 1990 to serve as the charitable giving arm of the State Bar of California." He stated: "There were lots of ofs in the name ‘The Foundation of the State Bar of California' so the name was changed to ‘California Bar Foundation'. Mr. Wylie observed that this is a "much sweeter sounding name,” and one which is "easier to fit on a check.”

Nevertheless, and irrespective of the manner in which the term is pronounced – e.g., "Ish-ew” (U.S.) or "Iss-you” (U.K.) – the issue of whether the Foundation is part and parcel of the State Bar of California needs to be further explored.

Some, including the State Bar of California and the California Bar Foundation, would want the public to believe that the Foundation is an entirely "separate entity" which is only "affiliated" with the State Bar.

We were asked about it multiple times shortly after we published the article about the "Diveristy Scholarships" http://tinyurl.com/selektziaceremony , and we were asked about it again within the last few days.

Our confidential sources provided the answer: Yes, the Foundation is part and parcel of the State Bar of California, despite claims to the contrary.

The Foundation's Board of Directors reports directly to the Board of Governors of the State Bar of California, as does Ms. Leslie Hatamiya.

TLR"S readers were introduced to Ms. Hatamiya when we asked her to remove the name of Marissa Prayongratana (AKA Marissa Dennis) from the Foundation's Honor Roll. http://tinyurl.com/marrisadennis

Ms. Hatamiya never responded to this request, although she did write to the Board of Governors of the State Bar of California on June 28th of this year to seek permission to change some of the Foundation's Bylaws.

Also according to our sources, it was the Board of Governors of the State Bar of California that appointed (and reappointed for an additional two years) Douglas Winthrop of Howard Rice to sit on the Foundation's Board.

At the time Mr. Howard Miller was both a member of the Foundation's Board AND Chairman of the Board of Governors of the State Bar of California, which appointed Winthrop.

The appointment took place on November 14, 2009 during a regularly-scheduled meeting of the State Bar Board of Governors (BOG) in Los Angeles. Presiding over the meeting was president and Chairman, Mr. Howard Miller.

Also present were staff members Kathleen Beitiks, Diane Curtis, Mary Lavery Flynn, Francisco Gomez, Robert A. Hawley, Judy Johnson, Dean Kinley, Steve Mazer, Gayle Murphy, Cathy Torney, Peggy Van Horn, Colin Wong, and Larry Yee.

In addition, present at the meeting was Mr. Starr Babcock -- who earlier this year was appointed to the position of General Counsel by the individual who participated in the scheme to defraud courts and injure Dole in order to enrich himself financially --Thomas Girardi's confederate -- Mr. Howard Miller.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

For important updates, including communication from Jerome Falk,  please see @:

http://lesliebrodie.blog.co.uk/2011/12/08/jerome-b-falk-of-howard-rice-state-bar-of-california-special-prosecutor-in-ninth-circuit-matter-of-in-re-girardi-adjudicated-by-n-randy-smith-mar-12275371/

AND @:

http://lesliebrodie.blog.co.uk/2011/12/13/ninth-circuit-court-of-appeal-matter-of-in-re-thomas-girardi-adjudicated-by-marsha-berzon-n-rabdy-smith-william-fletcher-jerome-falk-howard-rice--12300044/

A young man has recently emerged to stake his claim for the role of David in fighting abuse and injustices within the corrupt California State Bar.

According to anonymous sources, David Dydzak Daniel, a relatively unknown attorney from Marina Del Ray, will be airing his grievances concerning State Bar corruption, as well as the instrumental involvement of Howard, Rice, Nemerovski, Canady, Falk & Rabkin in said corruption, at a special hearing ordered by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to examine alleged violations of David’s due process rights.

It is safe to assume that the judges on the Ninth Circuit – who were victimized and had a mockery made of them vis-à-vis the decision by the State Bar and Howard Rice's Jerome Falk not to discipline Walter Lack and Thomas Girardi – will be paying closer attention to David's grievances.

Mr. Jerome Falk of Howard Rice, an appellate specialist with a mercurial personality. In 2008, during an interview with a legal publication, Mr. Falk stated while describing some opposing counsel, “I would do anything to squash them. So those cases don't settle. You just want to rip their throats out." After visiting Vietnam, Mr. Falk joined East meets West, an organization dedicated to improving the lives of children in Vietnam. (Photo:courtesy of Vietnam, East meets West)

While it would, of course, be premature to assess the validity of David's claims without first fully examining the case file. According to the sources, however, David is a credible and capable lawyer who is passionate about justice; and has already proven that he is able to withstand the kind of punishing opposition allegedly provided courtesy of the State Bar on behalf of the wrongdoers.

More specifically, it is alleged that Howard Rice was instrumental in using the State Bar of California/State Bar Court as a vehicle to punish David for his role in exposing corruption and improprieties at brokerage house Charles Schwab, an established client of Howard Rice.

In his pleadings submitted to the Ninth Circuit, David alleges improprieties on the part of State Bar Court Judge Donald Miles, a former partner at Howard Rice, as well as Sean Selegue, who is presently a partner at Howard Rice.

Notably, Howard Rice is a major contributor to the State Bar Foundation.
Doug Winthrop, President-elect of the State Bar of California Foundation and a partner at Howard Rice, has not been named as one of the actors who participated in the alleged scheme to harm David, and as such TLR urges readers to exercise caution and not jump to conclusions regarding any involvement by him.

TLR's previously published article "Of all the lawyers, in all the towns" we were remiss in failing to mention that Justice Ronald George is also aligned as a defendant in a pending suit against Howard Rice Nemerovski Canady Falk & Rabkin; State Bar of California; State Bar Court; and Patrice McElroy.

Additionaly, named as defendant is Donald Miles, a former partner at Howard Rice Nemerovski Canady Falk & Rabkin, who currently serves as a State Bar Court hearing judge in Los Angeles. The suit also name as defendants Sean SeLegue -- a partner at Howard Rice who practices in the area of legal ethics and professional responisbilty.

Multiethnic and racially abmigious Bratz v Barbie. The non-fiction version involves litigation between MGA Entertainment, Inc. against Mattel. Former federal judge Stephen Larson, now a partner with Girardi & Keese, sided with Mattel. Alex Kozinski was of the opinion that Stephen Larson abused his discretion and reversed in favor of MGA. In July of 2010 Kozinski wrote: "America thrives on competition; Barbie, the all-American girl, will too." (Photo:courtesy)

Confidential sources have also informed TLR of the following:

In the special Ninth Circuit proceedings against Thomas Girardi (In re Girardi, 08-80090). In addition to Ms. Diane Karpman, also serving as Girardi's legal counsel was Mr. Thomas Nolan -- West Coast litigation chair at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom.

While representing Girardi, Mr. Thomas Nolan joined forces with Jerome Falk and Douglas Winthrop in representing MGA in the suit and appeal against Mattel.

Presently serving as Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom West Coast representative on the Board of Governors (BOG) of State Bar of California is Mr. Alec Y. Chang.

Alec Chang joined the Board of Governors in 2010 when serving as chairman of the BOG was the one who participated in the scheme to defraud courts and injure Dole in order to enrich himself financially -- Thomas Girardi's confederate -- Mr. Howard Miller.

Good Day, Happy Holidays, Merry Christmas, Feliz Navidad, Happy Eid al-Adha, Happy Kawanzaa, and a belated Happy Hanukah to the two newcomers--Messrs. Jerome Falk and Douglas Winthrop of Howard Rice Nemerovski Canady Falk & Rabkin.

Mr. Jerome Falk (photo:courtesy) Mr. Douglas Winthrop (Photo:courtesy)

We are going to examine Falk and Winthrop (as well as, later on, Howard Rice)in connection with the recent decision to exonerate Howard Miller, Thomas Girardi and Walter Lack for the grave misconduct the three had committed in the litigation against the Dole Food Company-- a California based corporation.

Participating in the scheme to defraud the judiciary and injure Dole in order to enrich themselves financially were (from the left) Howard Miller, Thomas Girardi, and Walter Lack.(photo:courtesy)

After Thomas Girardi and Walter Lack obtained a FRAUDULENT translation of the $489 million default judgment which both knew was fraudulent, a wholly frivolous law suit was filed in Los Angeles Superior Court. The suit was later removed to federal court.

The federal District Court (Hon. Judge Mannela)dismissed the case and referred to the translation as "suspect”. A notice of appeal was filed with the Ninth Circuit court of appeal.

Dole, not wishing to forfeit $489 Million, stepped up the effort to expose the scheme. Facing a motion for sanctions, plaintiff's attorney dismissed the appeal. Even though the appeal was dismissed, the Ninth Circuit, concerned about the events that had taken place, appointed a Special Master (Judge Wallace Tashima) and commenced a special proceedings against Howard Miller, Thomas Girardi and Walter Lack (In re Girardi, 08-80090)

Ms. Diane Karpman, who represented Thomas Girardi before the Ninth Circuit. Ms. Karpman is an ethics specialist and writes a column for the Cal Bar Journal. She is a bone fide "State Bar Insider" (In order to avoid confusion, it must be stated that she is not TLR's source and legal counsel whom we also refer to as State Bar Insider.) During the Ninth Circuit proceedings against Girardi Ms. Karpman stated: "If the court was going to look at our conduct, we wanted a neutral and objective prosecutor"(photo:courtesy)

Later, the Ninth Circuit also appointed a Special Prosecutor, Mr. Rory Little. The special prosecutor was appointed pursuant to a request by Ms. Diane Karpman, who was one of the attorneys representing Girardi in the matter.

Judge William Fletcher, one of the judges who adjudicated the matter of In re Girardi, 08-80090. Judge Fletcher rejected the lenient recommendations of Rory Little. He stated: "with any competent lawyer if you're omitting part of a document, that is not accidental. That is intentional."

The Ninth Circuit, ignoring the recommendations of Rory Little for a "stayed suspension", ordered Walter Lack and Paul Triana suspended from practicing before it for a period of six months. Mr. Thomas Girardi was reprimanded. In addition, Monterey sanctions were imposed: Walter Lack $250,000.00 ; Thomas Girardi $125,000.00; Paul Triana $10,000.00 and Sean Topp $5,000.00

The court adjudicated:

"Respondents initiated and directed years of litigation against Defendants.

Respondents efforts went beyond the use of "questionable tactics” — they crossed the line to include the persistent use of known falsehoods. (emphasis added)

This litigation was based on three falsehoods: that Dole Food Company was named as a judgment debtor by a Nicaraguan court, that the Nicaraguan court corrected any mistakes it might have made regarding Dole Food Company in its judgment by the Writ of Execution, and that Respondents had submitted the corrected Writ of Execution to the state court and the federal district court.

Respondents made these false representations knowingly, intentionally, and recklessly. Their actions vexatiously multiplied the proceedings at great expense to Defendants and required the Ninth Circuit to deal with a frivolous appeal." (At this point, Howard Miller was no longer part of the proceedings. Respondents are Lack, Girardi, Triana, and Topp)

Now, it was the turn of the State Bar of California to examine the conduct of Miller, Girardi, Lack, Triana and Topp with respect to events at the Ninth Circuit; AND with respect to the frivolous suit filed in the Los Angeles Superior Court and the U.S. District Court. (Howard Miller's name appeared on all the pleadings which were submitted to the U.S. District Court). These two courts were also victims of the scheme by Girardi & Keese and Walter Lack to defraud the judiciary and injure Dole. Additionally, the State Bar of California must examine the impact and injuries sustained by respondent's clients.

The State Bar of California declared a conflict due to:

1. Howard Miller, who participated in the scheme to defraud the judiciary and injure Dole in order to enrich himself financially, is/was the president of the State Bar of California during the time Thomas Girardi and Walter Lack self-reported the findings and sanctions by the Ninth Circuit to the State Bar.

2. Mr. James Towery, who is the chief prosecutor (AKA Chief Trial Counsel) assumed the position only few months prior. Selecting Towery, from an otherwise large pool of qualified applicants, to serve as Chief Trial Counsel was none other than Howard Miller.

Mr. James Towery, whom Mr. Howard Miller chose to serve as the Chief Trial Counsel. Mr. Towery chose Jerome Falk of Howard Rice to serve as "special prosecutor" on behalf of the people of the State of California to investigate attorney misconduct relating to the litigation against
Dole Food Company.

Nevertheless, few months ago, Mr. Towery chose (or perhaps was told to choose) Jerome Falk Jr. of Howard Rice Nemerovski Canady Falk & Rabkin to serve as special prosecutor.

Jerome Falk duties were to investigate, and if necessary, prosecute Howard Miller and Thomas Girardi of Girardi & Keese and Mr. Walter Lack, Paul Triana, and Sean Topp of Engstrom, Lipscomb & Lack.

Jerome Falk, is a named partner at the San Francisco based Howard Rice Nemerovski Canady Falk & Rabkin. The managing partner of Howard Rice Nemerovski Canady Falk & Rabkin is Mr. Douglas Winthrop.

Mr. Jerome Falk Mr. Howard Miller Mr. Douglas Winthrop

Douglas Winthrop is the President-elect of the Foundation of the State Bar of California. Serving along Mr. Winthrop on the Board of the Foundation is a familiar face, the president of the State Bar, Mr. Howard Miller.

Douglas Winthrop and Jerome Falk are good friends and work together on many of the cases handled by the firm.(such as Uziel v. Kadisha)

Additionally, aligned together as defendants in a suit filed by a plaintiff from Marina Del Rey, CA are: Howard Rice Nemerovski Canady Falk & Rabkin, State Bar of California, State Bar Court, and the one who is either unable or unwilling to recognise the seriousness of her anti-social behaviour, Judge Patrice McElroy.

Two days before Christmas, while most people were either busy shopping, traveling or on vacation, Jerome Falk, assumptively, released his findings. The State Bar of California has no interest in imposing any discipline on Howard Miller, Thomas Girardi, Walter Lack, Paul Triana and Sean Topp.

According to Walter Lack's attorney, Robert Baker of Los Angeles' Baker, Keener & Nahra "That's absolutely the right result" as appeared in the Recorder.

According to Baker, the Ninth Circuit was "FLAT WRONG".

Mr. Girardi, who recently paid for singer Paul Anka and an entire orchestra to fly from Los Angeles to Monterey in order to serenade his friend Chief Justice Ronald George at an official convention of the State Bar of California, stated to the Recorder: "The matter is closed in the State Bar. It's great to get exonerated."

Oy vey.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For important updates, including communication from Jerome Falk,  please see @:

http://lesliebrodie.blog.co.uk/2011/12/08/jerome-b-falk-of-howard-rice-state-bar-of-california-special-prosecutor-in-ninth-circuit-matter-of-in-re-girardi-adjudicated-by-n-randy-smith-mar-12275371/

AND @:

http://lesliebrodie.blog.co.uk/2011/12/13/ninth-circuit-court-of-appeal-matter-of-in-re-thomas-girardi-adjudicated-by-marsha-berzon-n-rabdy-smith-william-fletcher-jerome-falk-howard-rice--12300044/

Enclosed below are 2 letters. One which was sent to Mr. Towery, and a separate letter which was sent to the Board of Governors of the State Bar of California. The author of the letters had asked us to keep his identity private.

Dear Mr. Towery:

Thank you for serving as Chief Trial Counsel. I sincerely apologize for having to contact you at all, particularly during the holiday season.

However, I am writing to advise you that yesterday an ethics complaint was mailed to the Intake Office in Los Angeles against you, Howard Miller, Douglas Winthrop, and Jerome Folk.

The complaint alleges that it was improper for you to appoint Jerome Falk of Howard Rice, as the special prosecutor to investigate attorney misconduct relating to the litigation against Dole Food Company.

As you know, the managing partner of Howard, Rice is Douglas Winthrop, President-elect of the Foundation of the State Bar of California. This in and of itself should have disqualified Mr. Falk from serving in that capacity.

However, and in addition, Howard Miller -- one of the attorneys who participated in the scheme to defraud the judiciary and injure Dole in order to enrich himself financially -- also serves on the Board of the Foundation. The complaint alleges that Messrs. Miller, Falk and Winthrop intentionally hid the conflict and that Mr. Falk otherwise engaged in prosecutorial misconduct.

For these reasons, I must ask you and the State Bar to ignore any recommendation made by Mr. Falk, and to assign the Dole matter to a new, different special prosecutor who will reexamine the case ab initio.

Moreover, I request that my complaint also be determined by an outside entity.

Thank you for your time and attention to these matters.

---------------------------------------------------------

Dear President Hebert and Members of the Board of Governors:

Please consider this to be a formal request that the Board of Governors implement a Task Force/Committee to investigate misconductand improprieties by employees and executives of the State Bar of California relating to their handling of the investigation of misconduct committed by attorneys from the law offices of Girardi & Keese in the Dole litigation.

Such investigation should include an examination of the relationship between Thomas Girardi and Mr. Mike Nisperos, the former chief trial counsel. It should also encompass the reasons Mr. Nisperos stated on his resume immediately after he departed from the State Bar that Thomas Girardi is his "Mentor Emeritus."

However, the more serious matter that should be investigated is therecent appointment of Jerome Falk of the Howard, Rice firm by James Towery to act as special prosecutor in investigating attorney misconduct in the Dole case. The attorneys who participated in the misconduct are Thomas Girardi, Howard Miller, and Walter Lack.

Simply stated, Mr. Falk should not have served as special prosecutor because of an obvious conflict of interest. As you know, the managing partner of Howard, Rice is Douglas Winthrop, President-elect of the Foundation of the State Bar of California. This in and of itself should have disqualified Mr. Falk from serving in that capacity.

However, and in addition, Mr. Howard Miller -- the ex-president of the State Bar and one of the attorneys who participated in the scheme to defraud the judiciary and injure Dole in order to enrich himself financially -- also serves on the Foundation's Board of Directors alongside Douglas Winthrop, who is a business partner of Jerome Falk.

As such, in addition to our request for the immediate implementation of a Task Force, I also ask that the Board of Governors ensure that any findings by Jerome Falk are annulled and that a new, disinterested outside counsel be appointed to determine ab initio if Thomas Girardi, Howard Miller, and Walter Lack should be subject to any disciplinary proceedings.

Lastly, I sincerely and whole-heartedly believe that the law officesof Girardi & Keese and associated individuals have a determinable effect on the State Bar of California in general, and the administration of justice in particular. I also believe that it is unfortunate that such criticism and the above discoveries had to come from me rather than the State Bar itself.

For these reasons, and in the interest of justice, I request that you implement the measures
described above.

Thank you for your time.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For important updates, including communication from Jerome Falk,  please see @:

http://lesliebrodie.blog.co.uk/2011/12/08/jerome-b-falk-of-howard-rice-state-bar-of-california-special-prosecutor-in-ninth-circuit-matter-of-in-re-girardi-adjudicated-by-n-randy-smith-mar-12275371/

AND @:

http://lesliebrodie.blog.co.uk/2011/12/13/ninth-circuit-court-of-appeal-matter-of-in-re-thomas-girardi-adjudicated-by-marsha-berzon-n-rabdy-smith-william-fletcher-jerome-falk-howard-rice--12300044/

The State Bar of California has announced today that it will not file charges against Thomas Girardi and Walter Lack for their attempt to defraud U.S. courts with a fraudulant translation of a $500 Million judgment obtained in Nicaragua against the Dole Food Company.

Mr. Thomas Girardi, a friend of Chief Justice Ronald George , and a "good friend" of the former crack-addict and former State Bar prosecutor Mike Nisperos. Girardi was listed on Nisperos' resume as "mentor emeritus". During the litigation against Dole, Mr. Girardi created an elaborate deception in order to shield himself. In addition to deceiving courts by his actions, he vexatiously and in multiple proceedings used judicial resources in a fraudulent manner in order to enrich himself, causing injury to Dole Food Company and causing injuries to the clients, the plaintiffs in Nicaragua who desperately needed his help. (Photo:Courtesy)

Recognizing an opportunity in the country of Nicaragua, the firms of Thomas Girardi and Walter Lack joined a law firm in Nicaragua, through which they each agreed to engage in a joint venture and file a case in Nicaragua against the Dole Food Company -- a California corporation -- for product liability. The idea was to advance the suit in Nicaragua, which is "plaintiff friendly,” obtain a judgment, and then collect the judgment in the United States.

A suit naming "Dole Food Corparation" (rather than "Dole Food Company”)was filed in Nicaragua. Dole's lawyers informed the court that, even though the correct name of the entity is actually "Dole Food Company,” they were willing to continue with the case and present a defense. A request the judge denied, and a $500 Million default judgment was obtained.

Walter Lack, who realized that the default judgment was against a non-existent entity sent an urgent email to the Nicaraguan law firm (on which Girardi's firm was cc:d) stating that the "JUDGMENT IS AGAINST THE WRONG ENTITY.” Lack also wrote that he was "VERY CONCERNED,” and that "There must be a PERFECT match between the names of the entities served and the names of the entities against whom judgment has been obtained.”

Later on, Thomas Girardi and Walter Lack obtained a translation from Spanish to English of the "Writ of Execution” that refers to "Dole Food Company” as the judgment debtor. To reiterate, the Spanish version of the Writ of Execution names "Dole Food Corporation,” whereas the English translation refers to "Dole Food Company.” Walter Lack and Thomas Girardi knew that the translation was FRAUDULENT as they knew very well that "there must be a perfect match.”

Relying on the fraudulent translation, and knowing that the problem was not solved but eager to collect money, Thomas Girardi and Walter Lack (and their respective firms) filed a wholly frivolous and fraudulent law suit in Los Angeles Superior Court which was later removed to federal court.

Dole moved to dismiss the action, and again referenced that the translation of the Writ of Execution was not a true translation. Again, Thomas Girardi, Howard Miller and Walter Lack ignored those warnings, and instead asked the federal court to remand the case back to Los Angeles Superior Court because they had a true and correct judgment they wanted to enforce against defendant.

The federal District Court (Hon. Judge Mannela) refused to send the case back to state court, and dismissed the case based on Dole's argument that the Nicaraguan judgment and the Writ of Execution named the wrong entity, and that the translated English versions were fraudulent. Judge Manella, in her order dismissing the case against Dole, referred to those documents as "suspect” .

The decision was appealed in order to try and defraud also the Ninth Circuit. There, a skeptical judge , concerned about the events that had taken place, ordered a special master and a special prosecutor to determine what, if any, discipline and sanctions should be imposed on Girardi and Lack.

Mr. Lack was suspened from practicing in front of the Ninth Circuit for a period of six months; Girardi was formally reprimanded.

At the time both lawyers were under a duty to self-report the findings to the State Bar of California.

In a LAW.COM article, Doron Weinberg stated "Bar prosecutors can admit the 9th Circuit's disciplinary order, along with the entire record underpinning it."

According to LAW.COM "The argument then shifts to proper punishment. Lack and Girardi could argue that 9th Circuit punishment is enough, but the Bar often recognizes an independent interest to foster integrity of its members, Weinberg said."

Previously, we have advanced an ethics complaint to the State Bar of California against Girardi, Lack, Triana, Topp, and Howard Miller--the former president of the State Bar of California.

The complaint can be found here:

http://tinyurl.com/3x8q5r2

For more about Thomas Girardi, please visit:

http://bit.ly/xY2k5q

 

For important updates, including communication from Jerome Falk,  please see @:

http://lesliebrodie.blog.co.uk/2011/12/08/jerome-b-falk-of-howard-rice-state-bar-of-california-special-prosecutor-in-ninth-circuit-matter-of-in-re-girardi-adjudicated-by-n-randy-smith-mar-12275371/

AND @:

http://lesliebrodie.blog.co.uk/2011/12/13/ninth-circuit-court-of-appeal-matter-of-in-re-thomas-girardi-adjudicated-by-marsha-berzon-n-rabdy-smith-william-fletcher-jerome-falk-howard-rice--12300044/

 

Patricia J. Barry, an attorney who has dedicated her career to civil rights, women's rights, and workplace freedom, is the most recent victim of the California State Bar’s corruption and mistreatment.

Ms. Barry, a superb trial attorney with a distinguished career, graduated from UCLA School of Law. She is known for arguing the nation’s first sexual harassment case before the United States Supreme Court.

Recently, her tireless efforts were instrumental in exposing alleged unethical management and hostile treatment of employees at the Los Angeles DWP.

In September of this year, the friction between Barry and the State Bar of California – as well as similar friction involving nationally-renowned lawyers' lawyer Phil Kay – was on the State Bar Board of Governors Operation Committee agenda at a closed meeting held at the Marriott Hotel in Monterey, California.

In attendance were Committee members Judy Johnson, George Davis, William Gailey, William Hebert, Rex Heinke, Paul Kramer, Jr., Michael Marcus, Patricia White, Jeannine English, and Richard Rubin.

Ms. Judy Johnson, who is currently the de jure executive director of the State Bar of California. After 2 Governors' vetoes and endless scandals was ousted and is due to leave by the end of the year. (Photo: Courtesy of Bar Journal)

Also present at the meeting at the Monterey Marriot to discuss the discord between the California State Bar and these two attorneys was Mr. Howard Miller, Thomas Girardi's confederate.

For those unfamiliar with Mr. Miller, he is the former California State Bar president who graciously agreed to appear in place of a recent law school graduate at oral arguments before the Ninth Circuit on matters relating to a $500 million judgment. Because the meeting was closed, it is unknown if Committee members were briefed on progress in any disciplinary proceedings against Howard Miller, Thomas Girardi, Walter Lack, Paul Triana, and Sean Topp in connection with the attempted fraud on the Dole Company and the courts.

Asked about Ms. Barry's alleged claim of mistreatment, State Bar Insider, an expert in the area of legal ethics and TLR's legal counsel, stated that the State Bar has been undergoing a long and radical process of ethical and moral collapse due to internal as well as external forces..

While SBI stated that he is not familiar with Ms. Barry, her claim of mistreatment came as no surprise. Under pressure to maintain numbers -- executives, judges, lawyers, and investigators -- have grown accustomed to cut corners and engage in reckless behavior without having to account for their misdeeds. Additionally, according to SBI, in order to compensate for failures, the State Bar spends enormous amount of money on lobbying and self-promotion.

TLR will of course continue to monitor this sad, and indeed tragic, story and provide updates as they become available.

TLR's previously published article "BREAKING NEWS: Kastigar Evidentiary Hearing Planned against Patrice McElroy, Paul O'Brien and John Noonen," contained an error in mentioning that the "Italian-American Bar Association" sponsored an event in honor of Chief Justice Ronald George.

In actuality, it was the "Italian-American Lawyers Association" (IALA), which sponsored the event. According to appellate specialist Nate Scott an authentic Italian dinner will be served and "Ronald George will be feted and wished well."

We apologise for any inconvenience the error may have caused.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Based in Los Angeles, IALA was founded in 1977. According to IALA's web site, the organization # 1 goal is: "To foster a spirit of friendship through social and professional association among lawyers and judges."

Distinguishing itself from the rest of the local and national bar associations, IALA is "unique" and, indeed, it advertised itself as such:
"known for its outstanding speakers, authentic Italian meals, and an energy that is unique."

IALA's meetings are "never" dull and "every" meeting is a celebration. The "meeting hall is filled with good feeling, as well as aromas emanating from the kitchen."

Mr. Thomas Girardi, President-Elect of IALA (far left) enjoys an authentic dinner, friendship and comradery during an IALA event. The gentleman at the center of the photo is Tom Layton -- an investigator and an employee of State Bar of California. Layton was recently sued in federal court by Thomas Girardi's former co-counsel, Ron Gottschalk.

IALA's events include: " “Gaelic and Garlic Night,” held with the Irish American Bar Association., “Marco Polo Night,” held with the Southern California Chinese Lawyers Association and the Japanese American Bar Association."

It is rumored that MCLE certificates were withheld from those who refused a second serving of Meatballs. Tea toddlers should bring their own fiasco of water as only Chianti is available. On special occasions, only wine from Umbria will do.

Alla salute! Cin cin! Cheerio!

In the previous story "BREAKING NEWS: Kastigar Evidentiary Hearing Planned against Patrice McElroy, Paul O'Brien and John Noonen," we were remiss in failing to mention that Mr. Paul O'Brien is the brother of Mr. Thomas O'Brien.

Previously, TLR advanced a formal ethics complaint against Thomas O'Brien. The complaint may be viewed here: http://tinyurl.com/thomaspobrien

According to our sources, it was Thomas O'Brien who nominated his brother, Paul, to a judicial position within the Los Angeles County Superior Court.

Written by a staff member of The Leslie Brodie Report in London.

D E V E L O P I N G ..... S T O R Y.....

Saturday, 18 December 2010, 09:30 GMT

On Friday, 17 December 2010 at 5:07 p.m. PST Mr. Stanley Arouty was notified by the California Supreme Court that the emergency application to extend time to file the reply brief was granted until February 15, 2011.

The extension of time will allow Mr. Arouty to conduct a "Kastigar Evidentiary Hearing" against the State Bar OCTC, Paul O'Brien, John Noonen, and Judge Patrice McElroy of the State Bar Court of California.

Mr. Arouty was informed that this is the first evidentiary hearing ordered by a court based on State Bar misconduct.

Mr. Arouty will conduct the hearing on behalf of his client, Mr. Ronald Gottschalk.

As previously reported by TLR, Mr. Ronald Gottschalk and Girardi & Keese's Thomas Girardi were co-counsel representing plaintiffs in various actions.

Once a dispute erupted between Gottschalk and Girardi, the State Bar of California came knocking on Gottschalk's door.

The State Bar of California, a proxy of Mr. Girardi, realizing that the evidence against Gottschalk is weak and not credible at the extreme, obtained a default judgment against Gottschalk during a time period which the State Bar knew Mr. Gottschalk was unavailable.

Participating in the scheme against Gottschalk were Mr. Paul O'Brien from the Office of Chief Trial Counsel and Judge Patrice McElroy.

As previously reported by TLR, Gottschalk's lawyer-- Mr. Stanley Arouty-- submitted a sworn statement to the California Supreme Court accusing McElroy of intentionally destroying an audio tape which serves as the official court record.

As Mr. Girardi is a exceptionally generous when it comes to monetary donation to members of the Democratic Party, some have speculated that Paul O'Brien-- a superior court judge nominee--wishes to impress Mr. Girardi, hoping it will be a step in the right direction.

Likewise, it explains Ronald George's lack of interest in the "Bribing Pat" saga. Ronald George, as TLR's readers are aware, is also an admirer of Mr. Girardi.

Prior to leaving on a cruise to Alaska, Ronald George was the guest of honor at a dinner party sponsored by the Italian-American Bar Association.

D E V E L O P I N G....

In the last few days TLR has been communicating with a bona fide environmentalist regarding Mr. Malcolm Wittenberg.

Wittenberg, who in addition to being a convicted felon and a member of the State Bar of California, is also a former business partner of State Bar Court judge Judith Epstein as was previously reported by TLR here:
http://tinyurl.com/investigatingjudithepstein

The environmentalist -- identity of which will remain confidential -- wished for us to confirm the identity of Mr. Wittenberg.

Mr. Malcolm Wittenberg,pleaded guilty in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California to insider trading, a felony which involved the use of confidential information to profit financially. Following the conviction, he was disbarred by officials at Washington D.C.and Virginia. Wittenberg, a former business partner of California State Bar Court judge Judith Epstein was suspended from practicing law in California for a period of 3 years (Photo:courtesy)

The unorthodox manner in which the source chose to communicate with us made us skeptical. Surely waggery is at play here -- again -- we immediately suspected. We were mistaken.

Apparently, Mr. Wittenberg -- a bone fide engineer/inventor -- developed a way to detect and measure the amount of mercury in fish. Each fish is individually tested. A fish containing high level of mercury is disposed of, while a fish containing allowable level of mercury is certified safe pursuant to the "Safe Harbor" certification process. See press release issued yesterday by Safe Harbor at:
http://tinyurl.com/fishfullofmercury

After communicating back and forth, both the environmentalist and TLR agreed that Mr. Wittenberg is entitled to make a living and his past criminal conduct has no bearing on the validity, reliability, or the usefulness of the invention itself.

The information we provided the environmentalist was forwarded to a group named "Coastal Warriors" who oppose the use of Wittenberg's invention claiming it does not address the source of the problem. Yesterday, Coastal Warriors posted an article concerning the "Safe Harbor" method which can be found here:
http://tinyurl.com/coastalwarriors1

By the same token, TLR's past and future coverage of misconduct by State Bar officials surrounding Wittenberg's disciplinary and reinstatement proceedings also has no bearing on the validity, reliability or usefulness of the invention itself.

Mr. Ronald Stovitz (Photo:courtesy of Cal Bar Journal)

To date, misconduct by Mr. Ronald Stovitz (whom we previously ejected from the State Bar Court See http://tinyurl.com/nolongerjudgeron ) in the Wittenberg matter is conclusive.

Additionally, according to the secretary of SBI (State Bar Insider) a Rabbi from Northern California is presently investigating leads implicating a man associated with Ronald Stovitz and/or Judith Epstein in a "Pay to Practice Law" scheme. The man is described as "Caucasian, tall, with ginger hair."

Additionally, the secretary stated that during Wittenberg's original State Bar proceedings he was initially and very briefly represented by Mr. Jerome Fishkin of Fishkin & Slatter. Fishkin was quickly disposed of and was replaced with a different lawyer. SBI's secretary is of the opinion that it was a valid and reliable decision on the part of Wittenberg to dispose of Fishkin.

To read more about Mr. Wittenberg, including more photos, please visit:

http://www.law.com/regionals/ca/stories/edt1205c.shtml

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/malcolm-wittenberg

www.safeharborfoods.com.

*The Leslie Brodie Report offers the following as a service to the public. The editors and staff of TLR express no opinion either in support or in favor the topics mentioned below; nor can we vouch for the accuracy of the facts mentioned.

Tuesday, December 14th, 2010

Yesterday, in the Westminster Magistrates Court in London, the lawyers for WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange presented to the judge a document from Mr. Michael Moore stating that he put up $20,000 of his own money to help bail Mr. Assange out of jail.

Following is Mr. Moore's statment to the media and the affidavit submitted to the megistrate in Westminster.

Friends:

I am publicly offering the assistance of my website, my servers, my domain names and anything else I can do to keep WikiLeaks alive and thriving as it continues its work to expose the crimes that were concocted in secret and carried out in our name and with our tax dollars.

We were taken to war in Iraq on a lie. Hundreds of thousands are now dead. Just imagine if the men who planned this war crime back in 2002 had had a WikiLeaks to deal with. They might not have been able to pull it off. The only reason they thought they could get away with it was because they had a guaranteed cloak of secrecy. That guarantee has now been ripped from them, and I hope they are never able to operate in secret again.

So why is WikiLeaks, after performing such an important public service, under such vicious attack? Because they have outed and embarrassed those who have covered up the truth. The assault on them has been over the top:

**Sen. Joe Lieberman says WikiLeaks "has violated the Espionage Act."

**The New Yorker's George Packer calls Assange "super-secretive, thin-skinned, [and] megalomaniacal."

**Sarah Palin claims he's "an anti-American operative with blood on his hands" whom we should pursue "with the same urgency we pursue al Qaeda and Taliban leaders."

**Democrat Bob Beckel (Walter Mondale's 1984 campaign manager) said about Assange on Fox: "A dead man can't leak stuff ... there's only one way to do it: illegally shoot the son of a bitch."

**Republican Mary Matalin says "he's a psychopath, a sociopath ... He's a terrorist."

**Rep. Peter A. King calls WikiLeaks a "terrorist organization."

And indeed they are! They exist to terrorize the liars and warmongers who have brought ruin to our nation and to others. Perhaps the next war won't be so easy because the tables have been turned -- and now it's Big Brother who's being watched ... by us!

WikiLeaks deserves our thanks for shining a huge spotlight on all this. But some in the corporate-owned press have dismissed the importance of WikiLeaks ("they've released little that's new!") or have painted them as simple anarchists ("WikiLeaks just releases everything without any editorial control!"). WikiLeaks exists, in part, because the mainstream media has failed to live up to its responsibility. The corporate owners have decimated newsrooms, making it impossible for good journalists to do their job. There's no time or money anymore for investigative journalism. Simply put, investors don't want those stories exposed. They like their secrets kept ... as secrets.

I ask you to imagine how much different our world would be if WikiLeaks had existed 10 years ago. Take a look at this photo. That's Mr. Bush about to be handed a "secret" document on August 6th, 2001. Its heading read: "Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US." And on those pages it said the FBI had discovered "patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings." Mr. Bush decided to ignore it and went fishing for the next four weeks.

But if that document had been leaked, how would you or I have reacted? What would Congress or the FAA have done? Was there not a greater chance that someone, somewhere would have done something if all of us knew about bin Laden's impending attack using hijacked planes?

But back then only a few people had access to that document. Because the secret was kept, a flight school instructor in San Diego who noticed that two Saudi students took no interest in takeoffs or landings, did nothing. Had he read about the bin Laden threat in the paper, might he have called the FBI? (Please read this essay by former FBI Agent Coleen Rowley, Time's 2002 co-Person of the Year, about her belief that had WikiLeaks been around in 2001, 9/11 might have been prevented.)

Or what if the public in 2003 had been able to read "secret" memos from Dick Cheney as he pressured the CIA to give him the "facts" he wanted in order to build his false case for war? If a WikiLeaks had revealed at that time that there were, in fact, no weapons of mass destruction, do you think that the war would have been launched -- or rather, wouldn't there have been calls for Cheney's arrest?

Openness, transparency -- these are among the few weapons the citizenry has to protect itself from the powerful and the corrupt. What if within days of August 4th, 1964 -- after the Pentagon had made up the lie that our ship was attacked by the North Vietnamese in the Gulf of Tonkin -- there had been a WikiLeaks to tell the American people that the whole thing was made up? I guess 58,000 of our soldiers (and 2 million Vietnamese) might be alive today.

Instead, secrets killed them.

For those of you who think it's wrong to support Julian Assange because of the sexual assault allegations he's being held for, all I ask is that you not be naive about how the government works when it decides to go after its prey. Please -- never, ever believe the "official story." And regardless of Assange's guilt or innocence (see the strange nature of the allegations here), this man has the right to have bail posted and to defend himself. I have joined with filmmakers Ken Loach and John Pilger and writer Jemima Khan in putting up the bail money -- and we hope the judge will accept this and grant his release today.

Might WikiLeaks cause some unintended harm to diplomatic negotiations and U.S. interests around the world? Perhaps. But that's the price you pay when you and your government take us into a war based on a lie. Your punishment for misbehaving is that someone has to turn on all the lights in the room so that we can see what you're up to. You simply can't be trusted. So every cable, every email you write is now fair game. Sorry, but you brought this upon yourself. No one can hide from the truth now. No one can plot the next Big Lie if they know that they might be exposed.

And that is the best thing that WikiLeaks has done. WikiLeaks, God bless them, will save lives as a result of their actions. And any of you who join me in supporting them are committing a true act of patriotism. Period.

I stand today in absentia with Julian Assange in London and I ask the judge to grant him his release. I am willing to guarantee his return to court with the bail money I have wired to said court. I will not allow this injustice to continue unchallenged.

Yours,
Michael Moore

WITNESS STATEMENT

(CJ Act 1967, s.9 MC Act 1980, ss.5A(3)(a) and 5B;

Criminal Procedure Rules 2010, Rule 27)

____________________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL MOORE

Aged: Over 18

Occupation: FILM MAKER AND AUTHOR

____________________________________________________________________________

This statement (consisting of 2 pages each signed by me) is true to the best of my knowledge and belief and I make it knowing that, if it is tendered in evidence, I shall be liable to prosecution if I have wilfully stated anything which I know to be false or do not believe to be true.

I, MICHAEL MOORE, care of Finers Stephens Innocent, 179 Great Portland Street, London, W1W 5LS make this statement and say as follows:

1. I am a filmmaker, author and political commentator and I produce as my exhibit [MM/1] evidence of my identity in the form of a photocopy of my passport/driving licence. I am an American citizen.

2. I am aware of the various allegations Julian Assange faces in Sweden. I am willing to act as security for Julian in the sum of twenty thousand dollars USD$20,000.

3. I am the director and producer of Bowling for Columbine, Fahrenheit 9/11, Sicko, and Capitalism: A Love Story, four of the top nine highest-grossing documentaries of all time. In September 2008, I released my first free movie on the Internet, Slacker Uprising, documenting my personal crusade to encourage more Americans to vote in presidential elections. These experiences underpinned my conviction that it is the duty of a free press to probe, and hold government and the powerful to account – and that citizens must be properly informed and have access to information in order to exercise their democratic rights.

4. Governments have always been discomfited by a probing press. With the hollowing out of newsrooms, in large part as a consequence of the new digital world, old media have largely abandoned the territory of investigative journalism.

5. I support Julian, whom I see as a pioneer of free speech, transparent government and the digital revolution in journalism. His commitment to exposing the follies of government and business offers the greater society a chance to protect itself from these follies. Some aren't just follies. Some are crimes. What do we do with someone who informs the authorities -- and in this case it is the free people in a democracy who are the "authorities" -- that a crime has been committed? Do we arrest HIM? Do we try to shut his mouth? Do we hound him, threaten him, track him down and hunt him as if HE is the criminal? He bravely informed the citizenry of what was being done in their name and with their tax monies. That is no crime. That is an act of patriotism. He should be thanked and honored, not abused and jailed. It dishonours this court to be used in this way, holding this man without bail. Julian has made the world, and my country in particular, a safer place. His actions with WikiLeaks have put on notice those who would take us to war based on lies that any future attempts to do so will be met by the fierce bright light provided by WikiLeaks and intended to expose those who commit their war crimes. His actions will make them think twice next time -- and for that we all owe him a debt of gratitude.

6. I believe that Julian takes pride in his reputation and as any journalist would understands that if he were to abscond he would ruin his reputation in the media and journalism industries.

7. I regret that I am out of the country and therefore I am unable to attend court and explain in person that I expect Julian to observe his bail conditions. I am offering to stand and provide security for him abiding by his bail conditions to the value of USD$20,000.

8. I understand that by acting as security for Julian I risk forfeiture of the aforementioned sum to the crown if he breaches his bail conditions by absconding or by not attending Court as and when required.

9. The money which I will pay to the Court, to be held as security, is my own. As I am abroad I am unable to produce any statement as evidence of these funds. However I have already transferred the sum of USD$20,000 into the client account of FSI.

10. I have not been indemnified against the loss of this money in the event of Julian breaching his bail conditions, and understand that if I were to be so indemnified it would amount to a separate criminal offence for which I could be imprisoned.

11. I have been advised by Julian’s solicitors that it would be prudent to obtain independent legal advice in relation to my liabilities as security.

A $21 Million judgment against the SF Weekly -- a local newspaper published in San Francisco, California -- would remain intact after the justices of the California Supreme Court voted to decline review of the case.

The suit, which was filed by the San Francisco Bay Guardian, alleged that SF Weekly was unlawfully selling ads below cost in order to harm its competitors in violation of California law.

SF Weekly, referring to the suit as "Looney", maintained that the SF Guardian can only point to 100 instances where customers had been sold ads below cost.

SF Weekly, a free alternative weekly newspaper, is no stranger to controversy. Doubting the "Armenian Genocide" editor David Downs wrote "If there was a genocide, then why is there so many left of you around to bitch?" According to Wikipedia, the SF Weekly openly encourages contrarianism and questioning of political dogma. (Photo: courtesy of SF Weekly)

Mounting a convoluted legal argument on behalf of the defendant SF Weekly, Kerr & Wagstaffe attorneys (James Wagstaffe, Rod Kerr and Ivo Labar) attempted to dispose of the action by unsuccessfully moving for summary judgment multiple times.

According to SF Weekly, attorney Ivo Labar found some of the claims by SF Guardian to be somewhat "amusing" and "bizarre". "So much for discounts off the sticker prices of automobiles, or Senior Citizens' Night at Luby's," Kerr & Wagstaffe argued in the moving papers.

Additionally, during oral arguments superior court judge Richard A. Kramer rebuked Mr. Wagstaffe's argument that SF Weekly's First Amendment rights were at stake. "I don't buy it," Judge Kramer stated setting the case for trial whereupon a jury awarded the SF Guardian $16 Million in damages.

Post trial motions were otherwise rejected wholesale.

According to the San Francisco Bay Guardian "newspapers have always had to follow basic business regulations – even when they might cost money that could have gone to editorial staffing. No newspaper has ever seriously tried to claim that labor laws, or environmental laws, or workplace-safety laws, or tax laws were a First Amendment violation."

Exercising self-restraint, thousands gatherd yesterday in central London to protest an increase in univesity tution fees.

The march quickly turned violent when a mob of French youths, angry Latinos, violent African-American, British studnets tried to break through the line of officers guarding the British Parliament where lawmakers had just approved the fee increase.

(Photo:courtesy of UPL)

(Photo:courtesy of Getty Images)

Fire in Parliament Square (Photo:courtesy of Daily Mail)

Encountering bricks, bottles of urine, flares, and paint bombs police with riot shields corraled some of the violent protestors towards Westminster Bridge. Prevented from leaving the bridge, protestors deliberately try to injure police horses. (Photo:courtesy)

Today in London, we are back to sarcastically talk about the weather

Written by TLR's staff-member:

Due to the extreme and on-going weather conditions in London, TLR was not able to publish any new material over the last few days.

We apologise for any inconvenience and disappointment and hope to resume the programme soon.