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. 

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...

Sacramento Superior Court Corruption: Leaked Court Reporter Transcript Records Flagrant State Law Violations at Unlawful Fee Waiver Hearing

Judge Matthew Gary Orders Illegal Fee Waiver Hearing to Obstruct Appeal of Own Orders, Help Judge Pro Tem Lawyer

Monday Document Dump

Sacramento Superior Court whistleblowers allege that the court acts as a
racketeering enterprise involving collusion between judges and
lawyers who also work as part-time judges in the same court.

Unilaterally overriding state law, constructing his own ad hoc interpretation of legislative intent, and legislating from the bench, Judge Matthew Gary denies a fee waiver request by a disabled, indigent, unrepresented litigant in this startling court reporter transcript, embedded at the end of this article. 

The fee waiver request by a litigant with a cognitive disability was for trial court appellate costs for an appeal of several orders issued by the judge, including an illegal, non-conforming order for more than $10,000 in attorney fee sanctions to the opposing attorney. Click here to view the order.  

The pro per had an existing fee waiver which by law automatically applied to the trial court appeal costs, making the hearing ordered by the judge patently unlawful. To view the order Gary issued after the hearing, click here. 

The opposing party is represented by divorce attorney Paula Salinger, partner at the prominent Sacramento family law firm Woodruff, O'Hair, Posner & Salinger Inc., sworn Sacramento County Superior Court temporary judge, and current officer of the Sacramento County Bar Association Family Law Executive Committee or FLEC. Days after the hearing, Gary issued a second order reversing himself and granting the fee waiver request, but at the same time embedding in the order a sham finding designed to help Salinger and her client at a pending trial in the case.

To continue reading, and to view the court reporter transcript click Read more >> below...

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.

Mute Court: Sacramento County Court Executive Officer Christina Volkers Silent on State Law Violations by Family Court Appeals Unit

Chris Volkers, Court Executive Officer for
Sacramento County Superior Court.

Christina Volkers, Court Executive Officer for Sacramento County Superior Court has declined to notify the public what corrective measures will be taken to ensure that family court clerks do not unlawfully obstruct appeals by unrepresented, financially disadvantaged litigants.

In an February 7 email to Volkers, Sacramento Family Court News asked for a response - including any planned corrective measures - to our report documenting that the family court appeals unit is illegally rejecting timely appeals as being untimely. Volkers, the court's CEO, did not respond to our request.

During the same time period, an article about court reporter cutbacks published in the Sacramento Business Journal on Feb. 15 included an email response and statement from Volkers.

Government officials are by law required to provide equal treatment and access to reporters and media organizations. If Volkers has invoked a code of silence and blacklisted Sacramento Family Court News in retaliation for its reporting, taxpayers could be liable for the costs of litigation challenging the unequal treatment.

To continue reading, click Read more>> below...

Sacramento Superior Court Misconduct: Hon. Matthew J. Gary Order for Divorce Attorney Timothy Zeff - Notice of Appeal Illegally Unfiled - Complete Original Document

Court Clerk Blocks Appeal of Judge Matthew Gary Order Issued for Judge Pro Tem Scott Buchanan Partner Timothy Zeff 

Wednesday Document Dump

In our initial report documenting that Sacramento Family Court appeals unit clerks were unlawfully rejecting appeals by unrepresented, indigent or financially disadvantaged litigants, we redacted the name of the party whose case was used as an example of the illegal practice. The litigant asked that we redact her name because she feared she would be subject to retaliation for the disclosure by Judge Matthew Gary or court employees. 

For the benefit of other indigent, pro per litigants, she has since requested that we tell her full story, and publish her name. The document below is the complete notice of appeal filed by Susan Ferris, a disabled, unrepresented 52-year-old single parent. Ferris also was subjected to an unlawful "no contact" child custody order issued by Judge Gary for divorce attorney Timothy Zeff, the partner of Sacramento County Bar Association Family Law Section lawyer and family court judge pro tem Scott Buchanan. 

To continue reading, and to view the notice of appeal document, click Read more >> below:

Paula Salinger Fraud on the Court: State Law Violations, Moral Turpitude Acts Documented In Court Filing

SCBA Family Law Executive Committee Officer Paula Salinger Moral Turpitude Acts Detailed In Leaked Court Memorandum

Friday Document Dump

Serial court rule and state law violations by Woodruff, O'Hair, Posner and Salinger partner Paula Salinger are detailed in this memorandum filed in Sacramento Family Court, and embedded below.  

The misconduct constitutes moral turpitude, violates Business & Professions Code § 6106, and provisions of the Rules of Professional Conduct, according to the State Bar, and other legal references. 

Paula Salinger holds the office of temporary judge in Sacramento County Superior Court and is an officer of the Sacramento County Bar Association Family Law Executive Committee. This is the second document in a two document set. The first document includes additional information about the case. To view the first document, click here. For additional articles about the people and issues in this post, click the corresponding labels below the document. 

Divorce Attorney Paula Salinger Fraud on the Court: SCBA Family Law Section Officer & Judge Pro Tem Files Non-Conforming Court Documents - Clerks Ignore

Sacramento Superior Court Clerks File Illegal, Non-Conforming Documents for Judge Pro Tem Attorneys

Court watchdogs assert that local divorce lawyers receive
preferential treatment from Sacramento Superior Court
judges, clerks and court employees.

Friday Document Dump

As the whistleblower leaked document embedded at the bottom of this post details, Sacramento Superior Court clerks file paperwork for SCBA Family Law Section attorneys which, by law, they are required to reject for filing. 

The document details multiple violations of the state law requirements for filing documents in all California courts committed by attorney and Sacramento Superior Court temporary judge Paula Salinger. 

The California Rules of Court specify the format of papers filed with every court in the state. The rules 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. 

The line numbers are critical because in order to make written objections to false or inadmissible evidence contained in a declaration filed by an attorney, by law the opposing party must specify the line numbers to show exactly which portions of the declaration contain defective evidence. If inaccurate evidence is not objected to it is by law considered accurate. 

The objections also are critical in any subsequent appeal, according to veteran Sacramento family law attorney Stephen James Wagner. 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.

To continue reading, and view the responsive declaration documenting serial court rule violations by SCBA Family Law Executive Committee officer and judge pro tem attorney Paula Salinger, click Read more >> below... 

Sacramento Superior Court Controversy: Court Clerks Allow Part-Time Judge Lawyers to File Counterfeit Entry of Judgment Forms

Sacramento Family Court clerks file these counterfeit entry of judgment forms for local divorce lawyers who also work as part-time judges in the same court, according to a government whistleblower.

Color of Law: The Conspiracy to Discourage and Obstruct Pro Per Appeals
A Sacramento Family Court Report Special Investigation: Part 4.

Sacramento Family Court News has obtained court records indicating that family court clerks allow judge pro tem attorneys to file counterfeit "Notice of Entry" paperwork in place of the Notice of Entry of Judgment that court clerks are by law required to file and serve on all parties.

The sham notice conceals a critical appeal rights notification from indigent, unrepresented family court litigants, and at the same time ostensibly constricts the time frame for filing an appeal from 180-days to just 60-days, according to a family court whistleblower. The fake form also omits an important clerk's certificate of mailing, which the California Supreme Court has said is designed to avoid ambiguity in appeal time frames.

Sacramento County Superior Court Misconduct: Family Court Appeals Unit Unlawfully Refusing Appeals by Indigent, Pro Per Litigants

Family Court Appeals Unit Illegally Rejecting Appeals By Unrepresented, Financially Disadvantaged Litigants

Color of Law: The Conspiracy to End Pro Per Appeals
A Sacramento Family Court News Exclusive Investigative Report. Part 3

This actual notice of appeal was filed by an unrepresented, indigent family court litigant and then unlawfully unfiled by a family court clerk. The clerk's conduct violates state law and constitutes unlawful interference with court of appeal proceedings. Click here to view the full image.  

Sacramento County Family Court clerks are unlawfully refusing to file appeals by unrepresented, financially disadvantaged family court litigants, according to a family court whistleblower. The policy constitutes an unlawful interference with court of appeal proceedings under California Rules of Court rule 8.23. 

The rejection occurs when a pro per party attempts to file a notice of appeal for child custody, support and other immediately appealable orders more than 60-days after order after hearing paperwork is filed. By law, the time frame to take an appeal from the orders is 180-days.The longer time frame applies because in family court cases, the court clerk must give the parties notice of entry of judgment using the Judicial Council FL-190 Notice of Entry of Judgment form. 

As policy, Sacramento Family Court does not issue the FL-190 form for appealable orders from motion and OSC hearings. When the form is not issued, the appeal time frame is 180-days. When the form is issued, the appeal time frame is 60-days. In Sacramento Family Court, all appealable motion and OSC orders are appealable for 180-days, yet court clerks are illegally rejecting the appeals after 60-days.  

To continue reading Part 3 of our series Color of Law, click Read more >> below. 

Sacramento Superior Court Controversy: Family Law Facilitator Office Disseminates False Information to Indigent, Self-Represented Pro Pers Without Lawyers

Lollie Roberts, the Sacramento County Superior Court Family Law Facilitator has directed her staff to dispense false information about the state law mandated Notice of Entry of Judgment FL-190 form, a whistleblower charges. 

Color of Law: The Conspiracy to End Pro Per Appeals 

A Sacramento Family Court News Exclusive Investigative Report. Part 2

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

In a scheme allegedly coordinated with family court administrators, Sacramento Superior Court Supervising Family Law Facilitator Lollie Roberts has directed her staff to dispense false information to unrepresented family court litigants. 

Roberts' objective is to help conceal systemic violations of the Code of Civil Procedure and state court rules by family court employees, according to court records and other information leaked by a family court whistleblower to Sacramento Family Court News. Another objective of the alleged plan is to obstruct pro per appeals by concealing a critical, state law mandated appeal rights notification from unrepresented, indigent or financially disadvantaged family court litigants, according to the whistleblower, who provided the information on the condition of anonymity because they could be subject to retaliation for the disclosure. 

The appeal notice is part of a mandatory Judicial Council form, FL-190, which under state law court clerks are required to file and serve after a family court judge issues an appealable order. As SFCN previously reported, court administrators have instructed court clerks not to issue the FL-190 paperwork for appealable orders issued at law and motion hearings. 

Roberts and her staff are conveying the same inaccurate information by instructing pro per parties that the FL-190 is only issued when a divorce is finalized, and that appealable law and motion orders are not judgments requiring issuance of the form. The falsity of the information has been verified by both the California Supreme Court and Third District Court of Appeal.      

To continue reading Part 2 of our series Color of Law, 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.