The Leslie Brodie Report

In part 1 of "The Gospel of APA",  we discussed the hypocrisy of many within the Asian-American community in general, and that of NAPABA in particular in their constant and ugly push for the selection of Asian-American as judges -- either state or federal -- to the detriment of more qualified individuals who are otherwise not Asian-American.

The rationale behind the ugly push is diversity, and as we demonstrated -- is a one way street.

Mr. Goodwin Liu, was nominated by President Obama to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal.  Liu's liberal support of  same-sex marriage and affirmative action promted Republicans to filibuster his nomination.

Today, California Governor Jerry Brown announced that he is nominating Goodwin Liu, a University of California, Berkeley law professor, to the California Supreme Court.

Assuming Goodwin Liu is confirmed, and along with Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye, Associate Justice Ming Chin and Associate Justice Joyce Kennard, APA will have a 57.14 % representation on the California Supreme Court, while APA are only 12.5% of California's population.

Should Goodwin, for the sake of intellectual honesty and a diverse California Supreme Court, decries, reject, and otherwise filibuster his own nomination to the California Supreme Court?

 

From left: Dr. Stephanie Reyes-Tuccio -- Director of Center for Educational Partnerships at U.C. Irvine; Katherine Bihr -- Vice President & Executive Director, Tiger Woods Learning Center; and Ms. Sarah Attia. The above photo was taken during a Saturday Law Academy event sponsored by CaliforniaALL. (Photo:courtesy of SALUCI)

Untitled

Dear Ms. Attia:

We are writing to advise that we are declining your request that we remove your and your father's names from our publications. Please observe that, rather than contacting you directly, our response is being delivered publicly, here and now.

Also, please observe that we find you, along with the assertions made in your communication, to be wholly unreliable and not credible, and otherwise an attempt to deceive, as follows:

1. You state, "either engage me in a dialogue to reveal why you would list my father and I as ‘people of interest,' when I know this is not true, so that we at least have the opportunity to dispute your tarnishing of our reputations, and our genuine character - please take this email as a gesture of mine to remove our names from your blog." Your allegation is false. We have never referred to you and your father as "people of interest." The term "people of interest" does not appear and has never appeared in any of our publications, and is othrwise lacking any legal meaning.

Thus, you have intentionally misrepresented what we wrote, and knowingly relied on your own misrepresentation to claim that we have written something you claim you know "is not true."

2. We find not credible your assertions that, "I got the job because Ruthe Ashley had been the career director at McGeorge, where I went to law school," and "I got this contract with CalALL through McGeorge's affiliation with Ruthe Ashley because she was a career counselor there, and my father a professor of law at McGeorge."

As CaliforniaALL was housed at the Sacramento office of DLA Piper – where your father, Gilles Attia, serves as managing partner – we find disingenuous your claim that you obtained your contract with CaliforniaALL through the means described by you; rather, it appears you are attempting to intentionally carve out any involvement by your father in his role as the managing partner of DLA Piper --and DLA Piper --whose offices CaliforniaALL was housed. 

3. Additionally, your assertion that, "I planned a symposium at UCI with a large agenda, and I worked very hard for the job I was hired for," is also suspect. You also worked in planning a gala to honor Gwen Moore, as shown in a press release you issued dated September 2009.  You clearly try to minimize your involvement.

Also, your claim "I graduated law school in 2009 and was hired by the organization, CaliforniaALL, that you have written about to develop a symposium for a grant they received. I only worked as an indepedent contractor with CalALL ,and for 3 months. My salary was limited to this assignment, and I got the job because Ruthe Ashley had been the career director at McGeorge, where I went to law school" is also not credible.  You were hired by CaliforniaALL at around August of 2009, issued a press release on September 1, 2009, planned and participated an event held at the Irvine Marriot on February of 2010.    That is close to 6 months, and not "3 months" as you claimed. You clearly try to minimize your involvement.

Ms. Gwen Moore

The fact of the matter is that issues relating to CaliforniaALL are of extreme importance to us, as well as our readers, because CaliforniaALL (albeit a sham charity) was the product of a partnership between four state agencies (CalPERS, CPUC, State Bar of California, and the Department of Insurance).   While we are free to write about any topic, matters relating to CaliforniaALL fall squarely within TLR's originally-stated purpose, which is to expose corruption in connection with the "60 Days Suspension Scandal," wherein a lawyer with a prior criminal history engaged in a pogrom in a San Francisco synagogue, yet was only suspended for 60 days due to his political connections within the Democratic party, and courtesy of Judy Johnson, Mike Nisperos, and JoAnn Remke.

As we made clear, and as has became more evident over time, as with the "60 Days Suspension Scandal," matters relating to CaliforniaALL reflect the same pattern of operations in which some play fast and loose under the guise of diversity with matters relating to justice, while causing injury to the rights of others.

Matters relating to Gwen Moore, Mike Davis, as well as your father client, Cooper Lee and his companies, are of interest to us as they are public concerns, and we shall therefore explore those issues.

We suspect that while representing clients in the Wi-Fi-Broadband industry, DLA Piper might have needed clout with governmental entities, and either Gwen Moore or Mike Davis volunteered their services. This would explain DLA Piper's willingness to house CaliforniaALL "pro bono," as well yours and CaliforniaALL zeal to honor Gwen Moore, who has "clout" with the CPUC.

Also please observe that your request to remove your name is too broad a form of relief. It would have been more reasonable for you to ask us to correct or remove certain factual allegations which you could demonstrate are untrue. You did not do this, nor do you support your request by any specific factual or legal authorities. Instead, you only made a general claim that you "know" such allegations are not true.

Thank you for contacting TLR. Please direct any further communications, if any, to lesliebrodie@gmx.com.

Jon B. Streeter, partner at San Francisco based Keker & Van Nest, has been elected the new president of the State Bar of California.

Mr. Jon Streeter

Streeter, a current member of the State Bar of California Board of Governors, was elected to the position by fellow board members.

Mr. Streeter is a business litigator with an extensive record of pro-bono work. He will serve a one-year term beginning September of 2011.

Attorneys Douglas Winthrop and Jerome Falk of San Francisco based Howard Rice Canady Falk & Rabkin were exonerated recently by a special State Bar of California panel known as the RAD Committee.

Messrs. Jerome Falk and Douglas Winthrop of Howard Rice Canady Falk & Rabkin

Falk – who recently dominated the news as the lawyer who represented Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss in their quest to rescind a prior settlement with Facebook – was accused of grave misconduct earlier this year as a result of his decision to exonerate Thomas Girardi of Girardi & Keese and Walter Lack of Engstrom Lipscomb & Lack for misconduct the two committed while litigating a case against Dole Food Company before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

During the Ninth Circuit proceedings, and after the case against Dole was dismissed, Chief Judge Alex Kozinski issued an order to show cause why attorneys Walter Lack, Paul Triana, and Sean Topp of Engstrom and Howard Miller, as well as Thomas Girardi and Howard Miller of Girardi & Keese, should not be disbarred or suspended from practicing before the Ninth Circuit.

In addition, Judge Kozinski ordered the appointments of Senior Ninth Circuit Judge Wallace Tashima as special master and Rory Little as prosecutor in those special disciplinary proceedings known as the matter of In Re Girardi.

Thomas Girardi was represented in the matter by power-house Skadden Arps.

Subsequently, in late 2010, a Ninth Circuit panel consisting of Judges William Fletcher , Marsha Berzon, and Randy Smith found that Lack and Girardi had committed grave misconduct, and ordered them to report their misconduct to the State Bar of California.

The State Bar of California declared conflict in the matter because a partner of Girardi & Keese (Mr. Howard Miller) served as President of the State Bar; accordingly, Bar appointed an outside attorney, Jerry Falk of Howard Rice, to look into the matter.

In his capacity as special prosecutor, and after reviewing the Ninth Circuit file, Falk chose to not file any disciplinary accusations against Walter Lack, stating that he believed Lack's misconduct was not intentional.

Once Falk's decision was made public, a finger was pointed at him, and he was accused of having been influenced by pecuniary considerations due to the fact that Howard Rice and Skadden Arps (specifically, Falk and partner Douglas Winthrop) often litigate cases together as a team, such as in the cases of MGA vs. Mattel, Genentech and others.

In addition, allegations were made that it was improper to select the firm of Howard Rice for this appointment because Douglas Winthrop, the firm's managing partner, served as an officer of the State Bar of California. Specifically, Winthrop serves as President of a foundation which the State Bar of California maintains.

Mr. Alec Chang of Skadden Arps. (Photo:Courtesy)

In a rare show of public criticism , San Diego-based legal ethics specialist David Cameron Carr also rebuked Jerry's Falk for his decision. Although, Carr was serving as President of the Association of Discipline Defense Counsel at the time he made these comments, Carr's remarks were made in his private capacity and were posted on his blog.

As a result of Falk's involvement, an ethics complaint was filed accusing Falk and Winthrop of misconduct, and a request for an investigation was filed with a special panel of the State Bar of California known as the RAD Committee.

The RAD Committee conducted its own investigation and retained special counsel to investigate this matter.

Recently, the special master recommended that the matter be closed because there was no showing that Falk and Winthrop engaged in any misconduct; the RAD Committee adopted this recommendation.

Serving as a member of the RAD Committee is Alec Chang, a partner at power-house Skadden Arps which, coincidentally, is the same law firm that represented Thomas Girardi in the matter of In Re Girardi.

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

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/

RE: Matter of Howard Rice's Jerome Falk Acting as Special Prosecutor on Behalf of State Bar of California Relating to Grave Attorney Misconduct by Howard Miller, Thomas Girardi, Walter Lack, Paul Triana, and Sean Topp in Litigation against Dole Food Company (aka the Rule 2201(i) Matter)

Dear Mr. Hawley:

This will respond to your correspondence, in which you informed me that the RAD Committee has appointed a special counsel to inquire into the above matter, and that said special counsel prepared a report recommending closure of the matter, and that the RAD Committee adopted said recommendation.

Note, that as there are parallel proceedings (pursuant to thecomplaints I filed with both the RAD and the Intake Office), I am working on the assumption that the Intake Office is still reviewing the complaint I filed against Messrs. Towery, Miller, Falk, and Winthrop, and that the Intake Office will soon appoint outside counsel to determine the validity of the complaint. Please advise, as I have not yet heard from the Intake Office.

Note that, from my perspective, the decision of the RAD Committee is void ab initio, and I will seek such a declaration via a direct petition to the California Supreme Court. Said petition will be styled as John Doe vs. Douglas Winthrop, and will seek multiple remedies. One requested form of relief will be that the California Bar Foundation be directed to produce the signed conflict of interest forms signed by Douglas Winthrop and Howard Miller, as well as all communications and documents relating to CaliforniaALL.

RAD Committee members Gwen Moore and Alec Chang.

For your information, following are the reasons I find the RAD decision problematic:

1. The presence and participation of Alec Chang of Skadden Arps as a member of the RAD Committee, as well as a lack of disclosure on his part as required by the State Bar Act. Note that Thomas Girardi was represented by Skadden Arps in the Ninth Circuit matter of "In Re Girardi," where both Thomas Girardi and Walter Lack were found to have committed outrageous and intentional misconduct vis-à-vis years of the persistent use of known falsehoods.

Note that Alec Chang's participation is problematic not only as far as the findings, but also his misconduct arising from his participation and failure to publicly disclose conflict, as required by the State Bar Act.

Also note that Skadden's shenanigans are also currently being manifested in the matter of Fogel vs. Farmers, where Skadden represents Farmers in a case in which Thomas Girardi and Walter Lack represent the class of plaintiffs.

2. The Presence of RAD Committee member Gwen Moore. Note that I previously submitted a complaint and a request for inquiry to the BOG regarding unlawful transactions pertaining to CaliforniaALL. RAD Committee member Gwen Moore was part and parcel of events surrounding CaliforniaALL even though, technically speaking, she may have committed no misconduct. In fact, Ms. Sarah Attia, a consultant for CaliforniaALL, is shown to have participated in preparations for a gala thrown by CaliforniaALL to honor Gwen Moore at the Radisson Hotel in Sacramento ( See press-release dated Septemebr 1, 2009 issued by Ms. Attia.)

Additionally, it is apparent that Gwen Moore has a clear motive to attempt to discredit me because I exposed the scheme concerning CCPF and Judy Johnson.

3. Refusal by California Bar Foundation (where Howard Rice's Douglas Winthrop serves as President) to produce to me the signed conflict of interest forms signed by Douglas Winthrop of Howard Rice and Howard Miller of Girardi & Keese. It is patently unfair to deprive me of evidence that I am entitled to examine (as was recently stated by the First District Court of Appeal in the matter of Sander vs. State Bar of California), and would have produced to the RAD Committee in support of my complaint. This is particularly given that I am unsure of the special counsel's identity, what evidence he or she collected, and the like.

4. In addition, recent discoveries have came to light vis-à-vis the surprise disclosure by MGA and Tom Nolan that Mr. Nolan is still representing MGA and, in fact, participated in the second trial involving MGA and Mattel. Note that Skadden Arps' Tom Nolan (Girardi's counsel in In Re Girardi) and Howard Rice's Falk and Winthrop represented MGA in the first trial, and the latest revelations also lead me to conclude that it is very likely Howard Rice did as well. I am currently looking into the matter, and will also include as part of the relief sought via the writ for Howard Rice to disclose the matter.

If appropriate, I request that you please forward a copy of the report prepared by the special counsel to me at your earliest convenience. Also, I will be awaiting word about the status of the complaint against Towery, Miller, Winthrop, and Falk, which is currently pending with the Intake Office.

Thank you.

Geoffrey F. Brown (AKA Geoff Brown) -- a former commissioner with the California Public Utilities Commission ("CPUC") and the former Public Defender of San Francisco has threaten legal action against the complainant in matters relating to sham charity CaliforniaALL, The Leslie Brodie Report has learned.

Mr. Geoffrey Brown, currently a professor of law at JFK School of Law. Between 2001 to 2007 served as Commissioner with the CPUC. From 2006 to 2009 Brown serve as director with the State Bar of California Foundation (DBA "California Bar Foundation"). In 2008, California Bar Foundation quietly transferred $769,247.00 to CaliforniaALL.

CaliforniaALL, a Section 501(c)(3) charitable entity, came about as a result of a San Francisco restaurant meeting between Ruthe Ashley (a Diversity Officer at CalPERS and Vice President of the State Bar of California) and Peter Arth, Jr., Chief of Staff to CPUC President Michael Peevey. Also present at that meeting was Professor Sarah E. Redfield.

CaliforniaALL's alleged purpose was to award grants to entities that would increase minority participation in the "pipelines" that feed into various industries, such as finance, technology, and law.

Donations to CaliforniaALL came primarily from utility companies (including AT&T, Sempra Energy, and PG&E). In its brief existence from 2008 to 2010, CaliforniaALL collected close to $2 million, including an unusually large sub rosa contribution of $780,000 from the State Bar of California Foundation in 2008.

Other than in Foundation tax records and a 2 by 2 inch blurb in its 2008 annual report, the sub rosa contribution was never mentioned again – not by the State Bar of California, not in the Cal Bar Journal, not in the Foundation's "newsroom," and not by anyone or any publication of CaliforniaALL.

CaliforniaALL was abruptly dissolved in July 2010.

As we previously mentioned, Leslie Hatamiya -- Executive Director of the California Bar Foundation who colluded with Holly Fujie, Ruthe Ashley, Patricia Lee and Judy Johnson in order to maintain secrecy over the unlawful transfer of $780,00.00 from California Bar Foundation to CaliforniaALL -- has resigned and a search for a replacement is underway.

Brown, according to confidential sources familiar with the situation, categorically denies any wrongdoing on his part.

In reaction to complainant's request for an inquiry to the State Bar of California Board of Governors (See http://tinyurl.com/californiaallbog ) Brown immediately sent the complainant a cease & desist demand.

In an email to complainant and the Board of Governors, Brown wrote:

"I am named in the email with the purpose of tying my tenure at the CPUC and the Foundation to some alleged nefarious activity. The author of the email is herewith put on notice that I will pursue legal action if he persists in a claim that I have anything to do with illegal activity. He further on notice that I am in noway connected with the recipient named in the article."

According to sources close to the complainant, an examination is underway into the legal and factual aspects of Brown's demand.

In an almost unprecedented turn of events, media giant Tribune Company recently depublished an exclusive interview it had managed to secure with famed trial attorney Thomas Girardi of Los Angeles-based Girardi & Keese.

The interview, which was initially published on June 23, 2011 by the Los Angeles Times (one of the Tribune's outfits), has since been depublished and is no longer available on the newspaper's website. See above.

While we were unable to determine the identity of the reporter who managed to snag the scoop, we did obtain a copy of the interview via "Google Cache."

During the exclusive, candid, and informative interview, Mr. Girardi spoke about his passion for the law and justice, his favorite cases, the U.S. justice system as compared to those of other countries, and his ongoing efforts to promote professionalism and civility in the legal profession.

The reporter at one point asked, "I know you've done a lot of work trying to encourage professionalism among lawyers and in other associations. What are some of the highlights?”

In response, Girardi focused specifically on his efforts among lawyers who are members of International Academy of Trial Lawyers, stating: "It's been an honor to be the president of the International Academy of Trial Lawyers, which brings together the top advocates from around the world, and to watch 10 members of our firm be admitted to the American Board of Trial Advocates, which you have to have 20 trials to get in. It's very important for the lawyers who handle cases in court to work together to ensure we do everything we can to strengthen our justice system."

Touching on current events, Girardi – who was recently the subject of nationwide media coverage in connection with a $10,000 scholarship convicted felon Barry Bonds and the Barry Bonds Foundation contributed to one of Girardi's clients – stated:

"That's such a sad and despicable thing. You know, here is this man, Bryan Stow, who drives 300 miles to Los Angeles to go to a baseball game and celebrate his team's World Series win. And he will never be the same after that night. I love Los Angeles and the Dodgers, and we should not be a city that allows that situation to continue."

Asked what he likes about being a lawyer, Girardi stated, "Our justice systems, our courts, are the best things about this country. We have these very smart people who decide to become judges so they can help people settle their problems, or to preside over cases where the parties won't settle. In other countries, they settle their problems through violence, and here we go to court and everyone gets to give it their best shot at persuading a judge or jury."

Neither the interviewer nor the interviewee, however, explained why Stow's assailant chose to forego his chance to giving his best shot at persuading a judge or a jury.

Asked for final thoughts, Girardi stated, "It's really an honor to be a lawyer and help people. That's what I've tried to do my whole life, and you know, it's been a pretty good life.”

While speculation abounds, anonymous sources advise that the interview was depublished subsequent to a request pointing that the "exclusive interview" was, in actuality, nothing more than a paid advertisement.

For more about Thomas Girardi, please visit:

http://bit.ly/xY2k5q

MGA TEAM -- COUNSELS WHO REPRESENTED DEFENDANT MGA ("BRATZ DOLLS".) FROM LEFT: SKADDEN ARPS' RAOUL KENNEDY AND THOMAS NOLAN ; HOWARD RICE'S JEROME FALK AND DOUGLAS WINTHROP; KEKER & VAN NEST'S JOHN KEKER AND MGA'S IN-HOUSE COUNSEL, MR. CRAIG HOLDEN.

FOGEL vs. FARMERS TEAMS -- CURRENT COUNSELS FOR BOTH PLAINTIFFS AND DEFENDANTS. GIRARDI & KEESE'S THOMAS GIRARDI AND GRAHAM LIPPSMITH TOGHETHER WITH ENGSTROM LIPSCOMB & LACK'S WALTER LACK REPRESENT THE PLAINTIFFS. SKADDEN ARPS'S RAOUL KENNEDY REPRESENTS THE DEFENDANT.

JOHN KEKER, RORY LITTLE, AND KEKER & VAN NEST'S JAN LITTLE (SPOUSE OF RORY LITTLE) MR. KEKER REPRESENTED BOTH MGA AND CARTER BRYANT SEE http://intellirights.com/cms2/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=240&Itemid=71

DOLE TEAM -- GIRARDI & KEESE'S THOMAS GIRARDI AND HOWARD MILLER TOGHETHER WITH ENGSTROM LIPSCOMB & LACK'S WALTER LACK. ALL PLAINTIFFS' COUNSELS IN FRONT OF NINTH CIRCUIT IN THE CASE OF FRANCO VS.DOW CHEMICAL WHICH DUE TO ALLEGED FRAUD METAMORPHOSED TO THE MATTER OF IN RE GIRARDI

IN RE GIRARDI TEAM -- RESPONDENT AND HIS COUNSELS IN FRONT OF NINTH CIRCUIT. PICTURED ON THE RIGHT IS MS. DIANE KARPMAN.

DURING THE MATTERS OF IN RE GIRARDI FOGEL vs. FARMERS AND MATTEL vs. MGA --SKADDEN ARPS' THOMAS NOLAN --  DEFENDED MR. GIRARDI, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME, HE WAS ALSO PART OF THE "MGA TEAM".  SAID TEAM ALSO INCLUDED KEKER & VAN NEST'S JOHN KEKER; AND BY EXTENSION, MS. JAN LITTLE -- SPOUSE OF RORY LITTLE -- SPECIAL PROSECUTOR IN MATTER OF IN RE GIRARDI .
SKADDEN ARPS' RAOUL KENNEDY, MEANWHILE, WAS LITIGATING AGAINST GIRARDI/LACK IN FOGEL vs. FARMERS

JUDGE WILLIAM FLETCHER AND SPECIAL PROSECUTOR RORY LITTLE IN MATTER OF IN RE GIRARDI JUDGE FLETCHER: RESPONDENTS (LACK, GIRARDI, TRIANA, TOPP) MADE THESE FALSE REPRESENTATIONS "KNOWINGLY, INTENTIONALLY AND RECKLESSLY."   "PRESISTENT USE OF KNOWN FALSEHOODS."

RESPONDENT , RESPONDENT'S COUNSEL, AND THE PROSECUTOR ---- IN PROCEEDINGS INVOLVING THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA.

STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA FOUNDATION TEAM (DBA CALIFORNIA BAR FOUNDATION) AT THE TIME HOWARD MILLER OF GIRARDI & KEESE SERVED AS PRESIDENT OF STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA.

BOG TEAM. KEKER & VAN NEST'S JON STREETER AND SKADDEN ARPS'S ALEC CHANG CURRENT MEMBERS OF THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA BOARD OF GOVERNORS. ON THE RIGHT, MR. CRAIG HOLDEN, PARTNER WITH LEWIS BRISBOIS; RECENTLY ELECTED TO THE BOG; FORMERLY, PART OF MGA TEAM.

PRESENTLY SERVES AS PRESIDENT OF CALIFORNIA BAR FOUNDATION. INTENTIONALLY AND UNLAWFULLY REFUSES TO PRODUCE FOUNDATION CONFLICT OF INTEREST FORMS SIGNED BY HIMSELF AND HOWARD MILLER.

Mr. Peter Arth Jr., former Chief of Staff to CPUC's President Michael Peevey. Mr. Arth has been recently recalled as mayor of the city of Dunsmuir, California, where he was nicknamed "Mayor Juana" for his support of the growing of marijuana in the middle of town.  CaliforniaALL, a Section 501(c)(3) charitable entity, came about as a result of a San Francisco restaurant meeting between Ruthe Ashley (a Diversity Officer at CalPERS and Vice President of the State Bar of California) and Arth.  Also present at that meeting was Professor Sarah E. Redfield.  (Photo: courtesy)

Earlier this year, Arth sued Dunsmuir and four council members — Mayor Nick Mitchell, Vice Mayor Chris Raine, Diane Dolf and Arlis Steele —  for what he believes are violations of the Political Reform Act and Ralph M. Brown Act.

Arth hopes to force his former colleagues to disclose their conflicts, remove one person from a commission, and prevent two others from voting on any sewer or water issues.

See complete story at:

http://www.redding.com/news/2011/jul/09/ex-mayor-refiles-suit-against-dunsmuir/

For copy of original writ, see:

http://tinyurl.com/peterarthwrit

Following on the heels of major discoveries of alleged public corruption by a Yoloan Rabbi relating to several members of the State Bar Board of Governors ("BOG”) in areas relating to self-dealing, conflicts of interest and lack of disclosures; the BOG recently took swift action by calling a special meeting and passing a resolution to encourage the California Legislature to adopt new and revised "Conflict of Interest" policies that would apply to all members, and establish the qualifications expected from those who serve as public members of the BOG.

As previously reported here, and according to confidential sources, State Bar's establishment was shocked by the scope and magnitude of the revelations purveyed by YR as they relate to member Jeannine English and her husband, tribal gambling attorney Howard Dickstein.

In addition, the BOG was prompted to action by previous revelations purveyed by YR concerning CaliforniaALL, CCPF, Ruthe Ashley, Buchalter Nemer's Holly Fujie, CCPF's Judy Johnson; State Bar Executive Director Emeritus, Gwen Moore, Girardi & Keese's Howard Miller, Howard Rice's Douglas Winthrop; UNH's Sarah Redfield; member Council on Access and Fairness, and others.

As such, according to the sources, a complaint and a request for investigation delivered to the Board of Governors on June 12, 2011 see http://tinyurl.com/jeannineenglish , relating to member Jeannine English as well as prior revelations prompted the BOG to convene a special session on June 17 to, among others, introduce amendments to the proposed legislation.

Below is a snapshot of the outcome of the meeting and the result of the vote.

(photo:courtesy yr)

All members voted "yes", except Laura Chick, Angela Davis, George Davis, Jeannine English, Dennis Mangers, and Michael Tenenbaum.

Moreover, and according to sources, the current "conflicts of interest" policy is still lacking, and proposed revisions will soon be dispatched to the point of contact.

According to the sources, a recommendation will be proposed by which an area on the BOG website will be devoted to disclosures – similar to those appearing on court websites that provide "seminar disclosures" by judges – on which members can make public disclosures concerning matters such as membership and involvement in other organizations, foundations, business dealings, and particularly regarding litigation matters.

For example, if BOG Member A and BOG Member B presently represent plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit, such information should be disclosed and otherwise be made available for public viewing.

Prerna Lal, a matriculated student at the George Washington University School of Law, has recently assailed the State Bar of California for its inquiry into applicant Sergio Garcia's immigration status.

Referring to the State Bar of California as "Morons of the Week" , Lal stated she is "thoroughly disgusts" that the California state bar has started to act like Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Without divulging the alleged and unbelievable circumstances by which she became familiar with scores of shady characters, Lal stated: "I know lawyers who have admitted to using drugs and passed the “character and fitness” test. I know lawyers who have been arrested more than a dozen times and still passed this so-called “character and fitness” test. "

Lashing out also at the United States of America and encouraging it should be named as defendant in legal proceedings , Lal continued: "It’s morally despicable that someone is on trial for being undocumented when this country should be on trial for creating conditions that compel people to come here without papers and then stay here without papers so they are not separated from their loved ones."

Lal concluded by stating: "I can’t wait to be in front of this panel."

See full story at:

http://prernalal.com/2011/07/morons-of-the-week-california-state-bar-association-turns-into-ice/

From left, Judy Johnson, David Carr, and Gwen Moore (Photos:courtesy)

Even though—independent of one another – we are in agreement as to the appearance of shenanigans and improprieties in matters relating to the State Bar/Girardi & Keese/Howard Rice (See http://tinyurl.com/kinglehr ), David Cameron Carr, the former president of the Association of Discipline Defense Counsel, recently assailed the Leslie Brodie Report. This is the second occasion on which Carr has lashed out at TLR.

Previously, in response to our story entitled "Bribing Pat" – which addressed the fact that records prove beyond any doubt misconduct by Judge McElroy by her failure to disclose an overseas trip she accepted from Golden Gate University School of Law's Dean Peter Keane – Mr. Carr shockingly and unprofessionaly, referred to the allegations against McElroy as "Garbage."   (See http://tinyurl.com/articlepatmcelroy )

To understand the source of Carr's unexplained hostility, TLR turned to our trusted adviser, State Bar Insider ("SBI").

According to SBI, recent revelations made by Yoloan Rabbi ("YR") concerning the role of State Bar Executive Director Judy Johnson made many members of the Association of Discipline Defense Counsel uncomfortable and fearful of being sued for malpractice by their clients, largely solo practitioners who were disciplined for misconduct committed against the same large law firms that were secretly also directing millions of dollars in cy pres funds to CCPF, headed by Judy Johnson.

As a reminder, Judy Johnson concurrently (and secretly) serves as State Bar Executive Director and chairperson of the sham entity known as "CCPF.”

CCPF has obtained close to $30 million, primarily from various cy pres awards from large law firms settling class actions; CCPF then primarily funnels these funds to minority organizations in Los Angeles (for example, there have been unexplained, repeated, and vexatious payments from CCPF to a specific YMCA in Long Beach , California).

SBI (as does YR) maintains that significant prima facie evidence point to the existence of a "collusive arrangement" – otherwise, why has no member of the Association of Discipline Defense Counsel ever mentioned or objected to, formally or informally, the fact that at the same time Judy Johnson served as Executive Director of the State Bar of California, she also served as chairperson of CCPF, an entity that was at the mercy of large law firms for huge cy pres awards?

 

Mr. Jerome Fishkin of Fishkin & Slatter. According to SBI, after it was made clear in no uncertain terms that Fishkin would not be promoted while employed at the State Bar, he left in disgrace. (Photo:courtesy)

According to SBI, the Association of Discipline Defense Counsel was established by Jerome Fishkin – an attorney with a history of bitter disputes with the State Bar of California, as well as connections to Willie Brown.

Fishkin, a former prosecutor at the State Bar, was very unpopular during his tenure there. In addition to being perceived as a troublemaker, he was also regarded as generally not being able to properly present cases, and instead believing that he could "wing” such matters, or "schmooze" his way around.

This attitude did not sit well with Starr Babcock and Robert Hawley who wanted, as soon as the opportunity presented itself, to fire Fishkin.  Not so fast – Judy Johnson decided to take Fishkin under her wing due to  Fishkin's "Ghetto Pass" on the account of his daughter-in-law.

Mr. Willie Brown, a mentor and an ally of BOG member Gwen Moore.

Fishkin thereafter organized an all-out employment strike at the State Bar, during which period tensions ran extremely high. Judy Johnson summoned Willie Brown to Fishkin's aid. Hence, even to this day, a photo of Willie Brown hangs on the wall in Fishkin's office.

Later, after Babcock and Hawley made it clear, in no uncertain terms, that Fishkin would not be promoted to any supervisory role, Fishkin left in disgrace and entered private practice as a solo practitioner.

Remaining loyal to Judy Johnson and Willie Brown, Fishkin kept the secret about Judy Johnson from his clients. Even while serving as President of the Association of Discipline Defense Counsel, Fishkin never bothered to inform the public that Judy Johnson is one and the same as CCPF – an entity receiving cy pres awards arranged by the same law firms which she was supposed to supervise and discipline.

According to SBI, the latest discovery by Yoloan also caused great embarrassment to Mr. Carr, the former president of the Association of Discipline Defense Counsel. Hence, his zeal to discredit TLR.

In addition, the dual role Judy Johnson played made it profitable for certain minority communities to see as many solo practitioners disbarred and disciplined as possible, which allowed the cash to keep flowing to them.

Conversely, it would not be in the best interest of these minority communities for the State Bar to discipline an attorney from a large firm, such as Munger Tolles & Olson for example. Such actions would cause friction and a probable reduction in the amount of money available to these communities and the recipients of these funds such as Eric Moore 's EducateCA, Little Tokyo Service Center, YMCA Long Beach, Philipinos for Affirmative Action, and many other questionable outfits.

THE SERIES OF ARTICLES THE WORLD ACCORDING TO ERIN BALDWIN DOCUMENT EVENTS THAT TRANSPIRED IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA BETWEEN 2008-2010 IN THE LIFE OF A MIDDLE CLASS WOMAN NAMED ERIN BALDWIN IN THE HIGH DESERT COMMUNITY OF SAN BERNARDINO CALIFORNIA AS SANTA ANA WINDS WERE BLOWING MORTGAGE MELTDOWN OVERBUILDING AND DOWNTURN IN THE ECONOMY PROVED ENOUGH TO CREATE A PERFECT HIGH DESERT STORM HIT HARD WERE RIVERSIDE SAN BERNARDINO AND ONTARIO COUNTIES A REGION KNOWN AS THE INLAND EMPIRE MANY FAMILIES LOST THEIR HOMES TO FORECLOSURE AND ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOODS BECAME GHOST TOWNS LEGITIMATELY AND FALSELY DISTRESSED HOMEOWNERS FREQUENTLY TURNED TO LEGAL CLINICS FOR LOAN MODIFICATIONS BUT FOUND THAT MOST OFFERED NO HELP WHILE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA PRESIDENT HOLLY CHANCERY CLUB BET TZEDEK CALIFORNIALL FUJIE  WAS USING THE STATE BAR AND ITS POWER AND INFLUENCE AS A CASH COW MANY CALIFORNIAN BEGAN POINTING FINGERS AT TIMES UNFAIRLY AT THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA AND ITS LEADERSHIP FOR THEIR INABILITY TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEM OR OFFER ANY RELIEF WE STRONGLY URGE THE READERS TO EXERCISE EXTREME CAUTION AND NOT JUMP TO CONCLUSION REGARDING MISCONDUCT BY ANYONE

I, too, have had my share of attempted oppression by the California State Bar and I'm not even an attorney. In early 2009 I began blogging about the loan modification fraud perpetrated by California-licensed attorneys.

California wrote a piece of legislation called the California Foreclosure Consultants Act (CA Civil Code section 2945-2945.11) ostensibly to protect vulnerable consumers in foreclosure from predatory loan modification services. Within the law is a horrible legislative oversight that I coined "the lawyer loophole" that states that providers of loan modification services are prohibited from collecting fees in advance of services performed, EXCEPT attorneys.

This one little clause was responsible for thousands of consumers losing their homes during 2008-2010. Why? Because California-licensed attorneys began "renting" their law licenses to real estate and mortgage brokers so these non-attorneys could circumvent the law and take fees in advance. Hundreds of fake law firms popped up all over California, had no attorneys on staff, but contracted with consumers via "legal retainer agreements." This is a direct violation of Rule of Professional Conduct 1-320 prohibiting California attorneys from sharing fees with non-attorneys.

This "problem" was very well-known by the California State Bar as I personally informed Holly Fujie (former CA State Bar President) of the facts and she wrote me back stating that she and Scott Drexel (former Chief Trial Counsel)were aware of the problem and were dealing with it. Well, I waited and waited and waited for them to "deal with it," but they never did; Drexel got fired, and Fujie left the State Bar in disgrace.

It seemed like such a simple solution; just suspend all these attorneys for violation of Rule of Professional Conduct 1-320. But not one attorney was disciplined under this rule. Why? Because the California State Bar was getting rich off this misconduct so hell ... look the other way and keep anyone that wants to blab about the secret revenue stream quiet by any means possible.

During that time I was encouraging victims of loan modification fraud to seek restitution via the CA State Bar Client Security Fund, that is allegedly a consumer protection agency formed to protect consumers from the misconduct of the CA State Bar's attorney members. But claims were routinely being rejected or put on hold while the California Supreme Court "reviewed the attorney record." For example, J one of the worst offenders in the loan mod scams, was allegedly "suspended from the practice of law" on October 16, 2009 -- but almost 2 years later, claims for restitution from consumers harmed by J's loan modification fraud are being routinely rejected "because the CA Supreme Court hasn't made a final determination on J's suspension yet." J was convicted of three counts of statutory rape; what more do you have to know?

Anyway, back to the matter at hand -- keeping me quiet at all cost... Enter T who assigns California State Bar attorney P to send two California State Bar investigators (J and T) down to talk with Judge F who was presiding over a "defamation...aka SLAPP" case against me by J. On May 29, 2009, F had improper extrajudicial ex parte communications with J, T, J's attorneys and others in his chambers "unreported" - and I didn't get an invitation.

Three days later I'm slapped with a Permanent Injunction stating I can never write anything about J etc. ever again. And I have to pay him $604,515.66 for defaming his "good name." But the TRUE agenda was to find a reason to shut down my blog so that my reporting on CA State Bar shenanigans would be no more. Understand that the PERMANENT INJUNCTION was signed two weeks after Judge F had denied J's preliminary injunction against me due to "possible unconstitutional prior restraints on my speech."

Isn't that something? What a little buy-in to the secret $11 million J client trust account will do to change your ethics and legal theories. I attempted to get Judge F disqualified but it appears he has too many friends at the Fourth District - Division Three Court of Appeal and the California Supreme Court.

Unfortunately for the CA State Bar, I'm not that easily deterred and I began to report on the necessity of forming a group to support a Writ of Mandate against the California State Bar for their failure to make restitution to consumers harmed by their attorney members through their Client Security Fund. Well, that's a lot of money to pay out from a fund that doesn't even exist. Woops.

So, T in connection with J's attorneys over at B's launched a full-blown attack against me in Orange County and G County (I mean San Bernardino County) including ten more lawsuits (both civil and criminal), took all my property twice to destroy my evidence, had me incarcerated twice and beat up and threatened by the cops, and hoped and prayed that I would just stop already.

Nothing worked. I'm still writing and I'm still fighting the good fight. Oh, and those permanent injunctions? They were never valid; do you want to know why? Because B's attorneys never filed underwritings (bonds) in connection with the issuance of either injunction rendering the injunctions void (See CCP 529). An injunction does not even become valid until an underwriting is in place to compensate a party for being falsely enjoined.

But that didn't stop Judge F from signing criminal contempt orders against me in both cases for allegedly violating the fake court orders.

So, yes, I've had my share of fun with the California State Bar and even petitioned Robert Hawley to perhaps invite me to be a liaison between California consumers and the CA State Bar. On behalf of the entire Board of Governors he disrespectfully rejected my offer.

Shortly thereafter I found myself in West Valley Detention Center for 35 days for a crime I didn't commit which was dismissed in its entirety.

I hand it to R who has the guts and smarts to stand up to the CA State Bar and T because they are both just big, bumbling bullies that are no match for T or me or any other voices of opposition.

Erin Baldwin

From left: Dr. Stephanie Reyes-Tuccio -- Director of Center for Educational Partnerships at U.C. Irvine; Katherine Bihr -- Vice President & Executive Director, Tiger Woods Learning Center; and Ms. Sarah Attia. The above photo was taken during a Saturday Law Academy event sponsored by CaliforniaALL. (Photo:courtesy of SALUCI)

CaliforniaALL, a Section 501(c)(3) charitable entity, came about as a result of a San Francisco restaurant meeting between Ruthe Ashley (a Diversity Officer at CalPERS and Vice President of the State Bar of California) and Peter Arth, Jr., Chief of Staff to CPUC President Michael Peevey. Also present at that meeting was Professor Sarah E. Redfield.

In its brief existence from January 2008 to July 2010, CaliforniaALL collected close to $2 million from various utility companies (AT&T, PG&E, Verizon, Sempra). In addition, in 2008 CaliforniaALL obtained a sub rosa contribution of $769,247 from the State Bar of California Foundation (dba California Bar Foundation).

Other than in Foundation tax records and a 2 by 2 inch blurb in its 2008 annual report, the sub rosa contribution was never mentioned again – not by the State Bar of California, not in the Cal Bar Journal, not in the Foundation's "newsroom," and not by any publication published by CaliforniaALL.

CaliforniaALL was abruptly dissolved in July 2010.

According to confidential sources, the multi-prong investigation regarding these matters continues to expand, and encompasses broader inquiries than had been acknowledged until now to The Leslie Brodie Report.

A source maintains that one aspect of the inquiry, which had been acknowledged to The Leslie Brodie Report, involves 3 subparts:

1) Circumstances surrounding events relating to the CPUC and its enmeshment with the State Bar of California vis-à-vis Geoffrey Brown, Peter Arth, California Consumer Protection Foundation's Judy Johnson, Verizon Wireless, UCI, and Munger Tolles & Olson's Jeffrey Bleich.

2) Circumstances surrounding actions taken by CaliforniaALL and Ruthe Ashley – specifically, an accounting as to the whereabouts of $1.8 million.

3) Circumstances surrounding the sub rosa transfer of $769,247 from the State Bar of California Foundation to CaliforniaALL.

Moreover, and according to a source who was not authorized to speak publicly about the situation, at this time of year with the deadline looming for Section 501(c)(3) entities to file IRS returns, events and transactions are monitored very closely. According to the source, transactions surrounding the UCI Foundation are being monitored.

DLA Piper's Gilles Attia

CaliforniaALL was based in the Sacramento office of DLA Piper, 400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2400, Sacramento, California 95814. The managing partner of DLA Piper’s Sacramento Office is Mr. Gilles Attia.

On January 27, 2009 DLA Piper's Gilles Attia and the Office of Assembly-member Mike Davis co-hosted a reception honoring California ALL at the Tsakopoulos Galleria in Sacramento. Bottom (left to right): Ruthe Ashley; Judge Morrison England and Mrs. Torie Flournoy-England; Ruthe Ashley, Gilles Attia, News 10 Presenter Sharon Ito, and Assembly-member Mike Davis. Top right is Karina Hamilton. Mike Davis, an ally of former assembly-member Gwen Moore and Karen Bass, is the vice-chair of the Legislative Black Caucus, member of the Assembly Committee on Utilities and Commerce, and the Chair of the California Assembly "Select Committee on Rail Transportation." DLA Piper's Gilles Attia is the corporate counsel of Wireless Rail Network (Wi-Fi Rail)-- a high-speed broadband wireless provider with specific focus on commuter rail lines and WiFi on trains. Around 2008, Wi-Fi Rail was in negotiation with BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit) to provide lightning-fast Internet connections for thousands of daily commuters. (Photo:courtesy)

In its publication, CaliforniaALL thanked DLA Piper for providing pro bono space in its Sacramento office. Yet, CaliforniaALL's tax return , signed by Ruthe Ashley, lists an expense of $16,457 for "occupancy" during the period
CaliforniaALL was housed at DLA Piper’s offices. (See two images, below.)

Sarah Attia -- In Her Own Words
Recently, Ms. Sarah Attia, a consultant for CaliforniaALL and the daughter of DLA Piper managing partner Gilles Attia, wrote to us. We shall publish the letter in its entirety, below:

Leslie, Hello,

I am an attorney who now lives in NYC, but was recently living in Sacramento, CA.

I graduated law school in 2009 and was hired by the organization, CaliforniaALL, that you have written about to develop a symposium for a grant they received. I only worked as an indepedent contractor with CalALL ,and for 3 months. My salary was limited to this assignment, and I got the job because Ruthe Ashley had been the career director at McGeorge, where I went to law school.

My dad, Gilles, is an attorney at DLA, who housed CalALL as part of their probono program for non-profits. CalALL did not pay his firm any rent, nor did my dad or anyone from DLA ever see or contribute any money to CalALL.

I am writing to you not because I have any information or defense of Ruthe Ashley. Truthfully, the allegations you make are a total surprise to me, and I have no knowledge of the organization of CalALL. I am however deeply concerned and troubled by your mention of my father and I in your blog. I say this mainly because he and I are people of integrity, who care deeply for doing the "right" thing.

I have traveled to 35 countries and worked as an international journalist in order to help issues surrounding unethical adoptions, poverty, and other ethical dilemmas. Before going to law school, I studied philosophy and taught high school in south central Los Angeles,and taught yoga. I am in the process of interviewing for my dream job in NY, where I just moved and am trying to take the bar in July, and really begin my career.

To have a blog online that taints my reputation, when I know that such an allegation of being a "person of interest," is not accurate, is a deep injustice, and highly unethical. We live in a culture where, at the click of a mouse, people can attempt to uncover all sorts of information about others. Some of it is true, a lot of it is not.

You have written a lengthy blog disparaging many people. It is no interest of mine if you choose to post information that you know to be true, however, to post comments about people that are not true, and to which you have no information to list me or my father as such, is simply a deeply profound ethical breach, and terrible misuse of the internet.

As someone who touts being ethical and writes such information for the world to see, attempting to uncover truth, I implore you to take one of two actions: - either engage me in a dialogue to reveal why you would list my father and I as "people of interest," when I know this is not true, so that we at least have the opportunity to dispute your tarnishing of our reputations, and our genuine character. - please take this email as a gesture of mine to remove our names from your blog so that our professional careers are not further corrupted by these unjust, and unwarranted comments.

I appreciate what you are attempting to do for society, but please realize that your words have hurt my dad and I. Whatever Ruthe Ashley did, or did not do, is of no relation to the hard work and ethical behavior of me or my dad. I got the short-term contract for very little pay, and I planned a symposium at UCI with a large agenda, and I worked very hard for the job I was hired for. I got this contract with CalALL through McGeorge's affiliation with Ruthe Ashley because she was a career counselor there, and my father a professor of law at McGeorge.

Again, I am open to dialogue, but I am pleading withyou in the immediate future, to please remove my name from your blog, or at least to discuss with me why you have chosen to blindly diparage me when I am only at the beginning of my career - and work so hard to be a good person, and do the right things in life.

Thank you so much for your response, and integrity in this matter,

Sarah Attia

A California State Bar panel is considering whether an illegal immigrant undocumented resident who passed the bar exam should be admitted despite his status, according to AP. (See http://www.sacbee.com/2011/07/07/3754629/calif-bar-weighs-illegal-immigrants.html# )

Mr. Jerome Fishkin of Fishkin & Slatter who presently represents Sergio Garcia decline to comment. Mr. Fishkin, not a stranger to the Leslie Brodie Report, was previously the subject of an ethics complaint for engaging in discriminatory practices and speech that demonstrate invidious animosity toward a group different from that to which he belongs, namely White Christians -- which is otherwise an irritant to him. He often uses pejorative and demeaning stereotypes to describe them. For example, “REDNECKS” are lower-class, beer-drinking idiots. He mocks women from Virginia, their virginity and their vaginas. By taking such cheap shots, Mr. Fishkin amuses himself and some of his Facebook friends, including Susan Margolis, another ethics lawyer who practices in Los Angeles. (photo:courtesy of Facebook)

Garcia , a Mexican-born, passed the Bar exam in July 2009. Since then, he has been waiting to see if he can be admitted even though he is an illegal immigrant. He now works as a paralegal.

Diane Curtis, a spokeswoman for the State Bar of California declined to comment on Garcia's case, or any others, because applications are confidential.

In swift firing of bad apples -- Russell Weiner, Victoria Regina Molloy, Djinna Gochis, and Nancy Watson were all dismissed today from their employment with the State Bar of California, said people who requested anonymity.

As the State Bar looks to radically shake up its business in face of internal corruption, State Bar of California Executive Director Joseph Dunn is firing senior executives, according to people familiar with the matter.

TLR's State Bar Insider described the news as a "shock announcement."

Mr. Donald Steedman, Supervising Trial Counsel (Photo:courtesy)

"While such an announcement would be seen as a bolt out of the blue, it explains the reason Robert Hawley was named Interim Chief Trial Counsel, and not Rusell Weiner," SBI stated.

"The timing and location of the dismissals means that executives in the San Francisco Office are next. Weiner, Molloy, Gochis and Watson were all part of the Office of Chief Trial Counsel in Los Angeles." SBI continued.

Sources close to the situation speculate that early next week termination notices will be handed out to Jeff Dal Cerro, Donald Steedman, Esther Rodgers and Maria Oropeza.

There’s a lot going on in California this week in terms of preparation by various parties and law firms for fast approaching adversarial legal proceedings relating to California State Bar Court Judge Patrice McElroy's malfeasance in office.

Confidential sources have informed TLR of at least five (5) planned seriatim adversarial proceedings relating to Judge McElroy's misconduct.

Pictured above is Judge McElroy, who is either unwilling or unable to recognize the seriousness of her anti-social behaviour. Her involvement in the "Bribing Pat" saga alerted TLR, McElroy's integrity is amiss. (Photo: Courtesy of Bar Journal.)

According to the sources, Judge McElroy's misconduct as it relates to Ronald Gottschalk – Thomas Girardi's former co-counsel in class-action litigation and current nemesis – will be addressed in a Kastigar evidentiary hearing, as well as separate proceedings before the California Supreme Court.

Also before the California Supreme Court is the case of William G. Wells, a veteran of the U.S. Marine Corp who is represented by a Century City firm, which accuses Judge McElroy of misconduct.

Additionally, and pursuant to an order from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, "David" (who also sued Judge McElroy in a civil action) plans to call Judge McElroy to the stand during a special hearing before a federal magistrate to determine whether his due process rights were violated. Finally, in connection with the saga known as "Bribing Pat", Judge McElroy's misconduct will be addressed with the California Supreme Court.

Specifically, and as was previously reported here, 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.

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.
(See excerpts from Arouty's declaration above)

The State Bar of California, 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.

In another instance, during a hearing presided over by Judge McElroy, she disclosed that Peter G. Keane -- who was then Dean of Golden Gate University School of Law and was representing an adverse witness (Ms. Sara E. Raymond) -- had been her supervisor when she was previously employed as an assistant Public Defender.

However, Judge McElroy failed to disclose that at or about the time the hearing in question was taking place, she accepted as a gift from Mr. Keane an overseas trip.

Even more troubling is the fact that at or about the time the trip took place, Golden Gate University and the student in question were in the midst of litigating a civil case the student had filed in San Francisco Superior Court.

In yet another instance, McElroy's penchant for destroying the official records of her own courtroom also manifested itself during the proceedings against Respondent Khanna.

Feeling victimized, Mr. Khanna advanced an action against McElroy in federal court. Below is part of an order authored by Magistrate Judge Edward M. Chen. The order alluded to the alleged destruction of the court official record.

In yet another instance of McElroy's misconduct is the case of William G. Wells. In addition to McElroy's complete disregard to a specific and detailed order issued by Judge JoAnn Remke-- the presiding judge of the court.

McElroy's was accused of being biased and hostile. Below is an excerpt of pleadings prepared by attorneys from the firm of Christa & Jackson which represents Mr. Wells

"The coming weeks are a crucial time for completion of the work," said a source from California. "We will continue to expose the massive corruption which infected the State Bar."

Former U.S. District Judge Stephen G. Larson, who recently left Girardi & Keese after less than two years to join Arent & Fox, was recently criticized by Thomas Girardi of Girardi & Keese.

Mr. Thomas Girardi of Girardi & Keese who was dubbed, very early, a "regular" on the Leslie Brodie Report. While maintaining friendship with former crack addict Mike Nisperos during the litigation against Dole, 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. Girardi's misconduct was later adjudicated in a special Ninth Circuit Proceedings (In Re Girardi). During the In Re Girardi proceedings, Mr. Girardi was represented by Thomas Nolan of Skadden Arps. Presently, both Girardi and Nolan are the subject of an ethics complaint relating to alleged undisclosed conflcits of inteststs between Skadden Arps and Girardi & Keese in the case of Fogel v. Farmers Group because, at the same time of In Re Girardi, Girardi & Keese and Skadden Arps were on opposing sides in the case of Fogel v. Farmers Group, Inc.

See http://goo.gl/P4wLI

Additionally, Mr. Girardi is also under heavy scrutiny for an undisclosed cy pres award in the amount of 900,000.00 to the AARP California -- where State Bar of California Board of Governors member, Ms Jeannine English, serves as the president. (Photo:courtesy)

Subsequent to Larson departure from Girardi & Keese, Mr. Girardi stated to the Daily Journal that Larson, "...isn't cut out for this type of job."

Larson, elegantly, stated to MetNews "I have gotten to know many of the attorneys at Arent Fox,” during my legal career, and I praise their "professionalism, talent, and integrity” as "extraordinary."

For more about Thomas Girardi, please visit:

http://bit.ly/xY2k5q