Sacramento Superior Court Controversy: Defective Fee Waivers Issued by Judges and Clerks Violate State Law, Block Court Access of Indigent Litigants

This defective fee waiver order was issued by courtroom clerk Christina Arcuri. The complete order contains multiple errors and was rejected by law and motion filing clerks and the Sheriff's Civil Division. 

A Sacramento Family Court News statistical sampling audit of family court cases reveals that court clerks are issuing incomplete, defective fee waiver orders which contain substantive errors rendering the orders useless, and depriving indigent litigants the ability to file court paperwork. 

Under California law, indigent and low income litigants are entitled to a waiver of court filing fees. Certain family court filings - including domestic violence and contempt actions - require proof of personal service and the fee waiver also entitles poor litigants to have papers served by the Sacramento County Sheriff's Department Civil Division.

Sacramento Superior Court Scandal: RoadDog Announces Sacramento Family Court 2012 Public Service Awards - Sunday Funnies

Sacramento Superior Court Clerk Wins RoadDog Efficiency In Government Award, Facilitator Locks 1st Runner Up Spot

Sunday Satire by RoadDog

Court Executive Officer Chris Volkers and other court supervisors
are invited to the annual RoadDog Family Court Public Service
Awards ceremony held at the Dante Club in Sacramento.

P.R. Brown, my esteemed colleague on the news and analysis side of the newsroom, has recently published a series of articles that some readers may have found unsettling. 

Court administrators flagrantly ignoring state law, the Family Law Facilitator dispensing less-than-accurate advice to indigent, unrepresented litigants, family court judges concealing conflicts of interest, and an appeals unit clerk unlawfully rejecting appeals by lawyer-less, financially disadvantaged litigants. And the ongoing Color of Law series is particularly compelling. Bravo, P.R. Brown. 

But while these muckraking revelations may disturb the Constitution-huggers among our readership, RoadDog's exclusive access to the Sacramento Family Court News newsroom allows the Dog to go behind the news to retrieve the exposé within the exposé. A superficial review of the meticulously documented facts reported by P.R. Brown may convey to the gullible the impression of rampant illegality, cronyism, hometowning, fraud, corruption, malfeasance, willful omission to perform duty, and gross misconduct, incompetency and inefficiency. 

Several paranoid, tin foil hat wearing readers have even suggested that the totality of the evidence reported by SFCN suggests that Sacramento Family Court operates as an organized criminal enterprise, meeting the elements required for a federal RICO prosecution. However, on closer inspection, and with supplemental facts purloined by RoadDog from the encrypted SFCN servers, the complete factual record reveals a dramatically different picture. 

To continue reading, click Read more >> below: 

Sacramento Superior Court Employee Misconduct: Family Court Whistleblower Alleges Systemic Code of Civil Procedure and Court Rule Violations by Court Administrators & Clerks

Sacramento Family Court Chiefs Julie Setzer and Colleen McDonagh Responsible for Serial State Law Violations, Whistleblower Charges

Color of Law: The Conspiracy to End Pro Per Appeals
A Sacramento Family Court News Exclusive Investigative Report. Part 1.

This story is part of an ongoing investigation and was updated in September, 2013

Sacramento County Family Court Director of Operations Julie Setzer and Manager
Colleen McDonagh have directed court employees to disregard state laws
mandating entry of judgment procedure, charges a court whistleblower.

A Sacramento County Family Court whistleblower has leaked to Sacramento Family Court News court records indicating that countless family court cases are missing critical paperwork required by state law. 

After any family court hearing which results in a judgment regarding child custody or visitation, spousal support, or any other judgment subject to immediate appeal, California Rules of Court rule 5.134 requires court clerks to enter, file and serve a Notice of Entry of Judgment. State court rule 8.104(e) defines "judgment" as any appealable order. 

By law, the court clerk must use Judicial Council Form FL-190 to provide the notice of entry to all parties. The notice provides an important notification regarding the right to appeal, and the destruction of exhibits on file with the court. In addition, two other components of the FL-190 form eliminate ambiguity in the time frame for an appeal, according to the California Supreme Court. 

In a 2007 decision, the high court noted that the title of the mandatory form and the clerk's certificate of mailing at the bottom of the notice were drafted specifically to eliminate miscalculations and disputes related to appeal time frames. Click here and scroll down to the highlighted text to view the relevant sections of the 2007 Supreme Court case.  

For appealable judgments in law and motion proceedings, Sacramento Family Court Director of Operations Julie Setzer, Manager Colleen McDonagh and Supervising Courtroom Clerk Denise Richards have directed court employees to simply ignore the law, according to the source, who provided the information on the condition of anonymity because they could be subject to retaliation for the disclosure. 

To continue reading Part 1 of our series Color of Law, click Read more >> below.