27 January 2014

Attorney Misconduct: Diane Wasznicky Illegal Court Filing Not In Compliance With State Law - Ignored by Court Filing Clerks

Family Court Clerks File Non-Conforming Documents for Judge Pro Tem Attorneys - Reject Pro Per Documents

Monday Document Dump

As the court filing embedded at the bottom of this article reflects, Sacramento Family Court clerks file paperwork for Sacramento County Bar Association Family Law Section attorneys which, by law, they are required to reject for filing. The document does not conform with the state law requirements for filing documents in California courts. 

The California Rules of Court specify the format of papers filed with every court in the state. The requirements are mandatory, not optional. Under rule 2.118, court clerks must reject any papers that do not comply with court rules. Click here to view the rule. For example, under rule 2.108, line numbers must be placed in the left margin of papers filed with a court. 
United States District Court Eastern District of California – Sacramento Federal Court – United States Courts - Judge William Shubb - Judge Edmund Brennan - Judge Garland Burrell Jr - Judge Carolyn Delaney - Judge Morrison England Jr - Judge Gregory Hollows - Judge John Mendez - Judge Kendall Newman - Judge Troy Nunley - Judge Allison Claire - Judge Dale Drozd - Judge Lawrence Karlton - Judge Kimberly Mueller – Office of the United States Attorneys Benjamin B. Wagner Eastern District of California, Chief Trial Counsel Jayne Kim State Bar of California Office of the Chief Trial Counsel, Joseph Robert Carlucci Deputy Chief Trial Counsel, Patsy J. Cobb Deputy Chief Trial Counsel, Michael John Glass Deputy Chief Trial Counsel, Alan Bernard Gordon Assistant Chief Trial Counsel, Melanie J. Lawrence Assistant Chief Trial Counsel, Kristen Lyn Ritsema Senior Trial Counsel, Kimberly Gen Kasreliovich Deputy Trial Counsel, California State Bar, Commission on Judicial Performance Judge Kevin R. Culhane – Hon. Kevin R Culhane – Judge Kevin Culhane -
Family court watchdogs assert that Diane Wasznicky and other
judge pro tem attorneys receive preferential treatment, and kickbacks
in the form of "rubber-stamped" court orders in exchange for running
the family court settlement conference program.

The declaration filed by judge pro tem attorney Diane Wasznicky with the request for order embedded below is drafted on blank paper without line numbers. 

The illegal and unethical litigation tactic - which also is used by other judge pro tem lawyers - prevents the opposition from filing written evidentiary objections. 

Line numbers are required because in order to make written objections to false or inadmissible evidence contained in a declaration, the opposing party must, by law, specify the line numbers to show exactly which portions of the declaration contain false, misleading, or incomplete facts. If inaccurate evidence is not objected to it is by law considered accurate

To continue reading, and to view the the unlawful court filing click Read more >> below...

The objections also are critical in any subsequent appeal, according to veteran Sacramento family law attorney Stephen James Wagner. "The failure to object to false evidence waives the right to challenge the court's ruling based on such evidence," according to California Practice Guide: Civil Procedure Before Trial, and Civil Trials & Evidence, the legal reference books used by judges and attorneys

Family court watchdogs have documented that declarations filed by attorneys often contain false or otherwise inadmissible evidence - which becomes admissible if objections are not lodged. Court records indicate that divorce lawyer and temporary judge Diane Wasznicky routinely is allowed by family court clerks to file declarations on blank paper without line numbers in cases where the opposing party is unrepresented. 

Under state law, the failure to comply with court rules constitutes moral turpitude, and a violation of Business & Professions Code § 6106 and the State Bar Rules of Professional Conduct. Under Canon 3D(2) of the Code of Judicial Ethics - the ethical standards all judges must follow - family court judges are required to take appropriate corrective action against the attorney, including reporting the misconduct to the State Bar

In addition, family court reform advocates have documented that pro per drafted pleadings are closely scrutinized and often rejected for filing by court clerks because of trivial errors, or no errors.  

Watchdogs point out that the failure of court employees to reject the defective filings, and the refusal of judges to comply with the Code of Judicial Ethics and hold attorneys accountable is additional evidence supporting their long-running assertion that a "cartel" of SCBA Family Law Section attorneys, who also serve as temporary judges, receive preferential treatment from court employees and judges. They claim that the arrangement deprives the public of the right to honest government services, a federal crime.  

Click to visit Sacramento Family Court News on: Facebook, YouTube, Google+, Scribd, Vimeo, and Twitter. For additional reporting on the people and issues in this post, click the corresponding labels below the document: