Judge Pro Tem Attorney Paula Salinger Attempts End Run Around State Law - Gets Stopped At Goal Line
 |
| Divorce lawyer Paula Salinger of the prominent family law firm Woodruff, O'Hair, Posner & Salinger attempted to use decisional law from a probate case to get a default, final divorce judgment while an appeal was pending in the same case. Click here. |
Sunday Satire by RoadDog
RoadDog's Not Exactly Famous Quotes Series
"I did do some research, Your Honor, and I can't find anything exactly on point." Judge pro tem attorney Paula Salinger.
You can't fault veteran family law attorney and sworn temporary judge Paula Salinger for trying: The marquee partner at Woodruff, O'Hair, Posner & Salinger recently attempted to con a family court judge into holding a trial and signing a final divorce order while the same case was by law on hold pending an appeal of a set of prior orders. With a few exceptions, it's a high school-level principle of law that an appeal halts trial court proceedings until the appellate court is finished.
RoadDog was leaked the complete, comical court reporter's transcript from the trial FAIL where Salinger attempts to claim a 2008 appellate court decision from a probate case authorized the divorce to be finalized, despite the pending appeal. As The Dog suspected, the court record showed Salinger's opponent didn't have a lawyer: a self-respecting attorney would be embarrassed to try the same stunt against a fellow member of the State Bar.
In the trial transcript, the judge pro tem attorney confessed to the judge that she was unable to find any case law "exactly on point" to justify the wacky request, but that the probate case she did find, Gridley v. Gridley, was close enough.
To continue reading, click Read more>> below...
RoadDog's inside-the-courthouse sources say Salinger's use of the Gridley case was really just a fallback position she didn't expect to need. Weeks before when she set up the trial hearing, the Sacramento County Bar Association Family Law Section lawyer assumed that the trial would be assigned to a judge who would ignore the law and simply rubber stamp her final judgment request as a professional courtesy for a temporary judge of the same court.
Which is to say she assumed the trial would be assigned to virtually any judge in Sacramento Family Court. She wouldn't even have had to mention Gridley. The case file reveals that Judge Matthew J. Gary had in fact rubber stamped all prior requests made by Salinger at the two law and motion hearings held in the case, including a request for more than $10,000 in attorney fee sanctions against her indigent, lawyer-less opponent. To read how the rubber stamp process works for judge pro tem attorneys, click here to view the incredible court reporter's transcript from the unprecedented sanctions award hearing.
Tragically, on the day of the trial the lawyer drew the short straw: the trial was assigned to Judge James Mize. After giving Salinger a chance to make her pitch, Mize ultimately scoffed at the dog and pony show and patiently explained the concept of due process to the attorney and her client.
To view the complete transcript of the attorney stuttering and stammering her way through the cringe-inducing debacle, click here. As the transcript records, Salinger also neglected to mention the laws and legal authority that went against the okie doke she tried to pull, leaving that job to Judge Mize.
RoadDog has to wonder: what are the chances that Salinger didn't bill her client for the EPIC FAIL? That's why being a family law attorney is such a sweet deal - even when you lose, you win. Cha-Ching! Eat your heart out contingent fee personal injury lawyers! Click here and here to see Salinger billing statements from an earlier, nickel and dime law and motion hearing.
Like many of the ethically-challenged lawyers who leech a living in Sacramento Family Court, Salinger is a member of the Sacramento County Bar Association Family Law Section, a sworn temporary judge, and a proud graduate of McGeorge School of Law.
For more SFCN coverage of the people and issues in this post, click the corresponding labels below.
RoadDog's Not Exactly Famous Quotes Series
"I did do some research, Your Honor, and I can't find anything exactly on point." Judge pro tem attorney Paula Salinger.
You can't fault veteran family law attorney and sworn temporary judge Paula Salinger for trying: The marquee partner at Woodruff, O'Hair, Posner & Salinger recently attempted to con a family court judge into holding a trial and signing a final divorce order while the same case was by law on hold pending an appeal of a set of prior orders. With a few exceptions, it's a high school-level principle of law that an appeal halts trial court proceedings until the appellate court is finished.
RoadDog was leaked the complete, comical court reporter's transcript from the trial FAIL where Salinger attempts to claim a 2008 appellate court decision from a probate case authorized the divorce to be finalized, despite the pending appeal. As The Dog suspected, the court record showed Salinger's opponent didn't have a lawyer: a self-respecting attorney would be embarrassed to try the same stunt against a fellow member of the State Bar.
In the trial transcript, the judge pro tem attorney confessed to the judge that she was unable to find any case law "exactly on point" to justify the wacky request, but that the probate case she did find, Gridley v. Gridley, was close enough.
To continue reading, click Read more>> below...
RoadDog's inside-the-courthouse sources say Salinger's use of the Gridley case was really just a fallback position she didn't expect to need. Weeks before when she set up the trial hearing, the Sacramento County Bar Association Family Law Section lawyer assumed that the trial would be assigned to a judge who would ignore the law and simply rubber stamp her final judgment request as a professional courtesy for a temporary judge of the same court.
Which is to say she assumed the trial would be assigned to virtually any judge in Sacramento Family Court. She wouldn't even have had to mention Gridley. The case file reveals that Judge Matthew J. Gary had in fact rubber stamped all prior requests made by Salinger at the two law and motion hearings held in the case, including a request for more than $10,000 in attorney fee sanctions against her indigent, lawyer-less opponent. To read how the rubber stamp process works for judge pro tem attorneys, click here to view the incredible court reporter's transcript from the unprecedented sanctions award hearing.
 |
| Paula Salinger: divorce attorney, sworn temporary judge, and proud graduate of McGeorge School of Law. |
Tragically, on the day of the trial the lawyer drew the short straw: the trial was assigned to Judge James Mize. After giving Salinger a chance to make her pitch, Mize ultimately scoffed at the dog and pony show and patiently explained the concept of due process to the attorney and her client.
To view the complete transcript of the attorney stuttering and stammering her way through the cringe-inducing debacle, click here. As the transcript records, Salinger also neglected to mention the laws and legal authority that went against the okie doke she tried to pull, leaving that job to Judge Mize.
A Fabulous Job
As "officers of the court," lawyers are always required to provide a judge with legal authority that is contrary to their position, in addition to the legal authority that supports their position. This is an elementary school level principle of law. Not doing it is supposed to be regarded as an attempt to deceive and mislead the court. Click here. Attorneys have a duty to the court to cite all relevant authority, including adverse authority. Click here. "The ostrich-like tactic of pretending that potentially dispositive authority against a litigant's contention does not exist is as unprofessional as it is pointless," said several judges who actually did their job and followed the law. Click here and especially here.Citing a case known not to be controlling, and not citing a controlling case is a violation of State Bar ethical rules, and Business & Professions Code § 6106(d). As all of this occurred under Judge Mize's nose, he had a mandatory legal duty to report the attorney for unethical conduct or otherwise take corrective action so it wouldn't happen again. As a family court judge, Mize, of course, didn't. Instead, he told Salinger she was doing a "fabulous job" and apologized "for having to be a stickler for the law." Click here. But we'll take up Mize's flagrant cronyism another day.
RoadDog has to wonder: what are the chances that Salinger didn't bill her client for the EPIC FAIL? That's why being a family law attorney is such a sweet deal - even when you lose, you win. Cha-Ching! Eat your heart out contingent fee personal injury lawyers! Click here and here to see Salinger billing statements from an earlier, nickel and dime law and motion hearing. Like many of the ethically-challenged lawyers who leech a living in Sacramento Family Court, Salinger is a member of the Sacramento County Bar Association Family Law Section, a sworn temporary judge, and a proud graduate of McGeorge School of Law.
For more SFCN coverage of the people and issues in this post, click the corresponding labels below.
No comments:
Post a Comment