JUDGE MATTHEW GARY REPORTEDLY IN SIGHTS OF STATE JUDICIAL OVERSIGHT AGENCY FOR ILLEGAL JAILING OF FAMILY COURT PARENTS

UPDATE MAY 14, 2020: Judge Matthew Gary Prosecuted and Convicted by Commission on Judicial Performance.

Sacramento County Superior Court watchdogs assert that Judge Matthew Gary is under investigation by the Commission on Judicial Performance and California State Auditor for ordering the illegal imprisonment of self-represented court users. In a similar case, Contra Costa County Judge Bruce Mills  recently was charged with ethics violations by the CJP. Gary reportedly has delayed his own day of reckoning with help from 3rd District Court of Appeal Presiding Justice Vance Raye, who has intervened to cover for Gary in the appellate court. 

• Disabled, self-represented parent jailed, financially ruined, and made homeless by Judge Matthew Gary.
• Whistleblower leaked courtroom security video of illegal in-court arrest ordered by Judge Matthew Gary. 
• Judge Matthew Gary articles catalog.

Read our Special Report: Sacramento County Family Court Operates as RICO Racketeering Enterprise, Charge Whistleblowers.

3rd District Appellate Justice Cole Blease Targeted by Court Watchdogs for Role in Cover Up of Judge Matthew Gary Misconduct

The Family Court Accountability Coalition released this meme theme photo

of 3rd District Court of Appeal Justice Coleman Blease. The whistleblower

group contends that Blease effectively acts as an appellate court mole for, 

and helps cover up misconduct by trial court judges.

Sacramento Superior Court watchdogs have initiated a campaign to publicize what they allege is cronyism between judges who work at the Third District Court of Appeal and Sacramento Superior Court.

The group has catalogued personal, social, professional, and political connections between the two groups that they assert result in the appellate court effectively doctoring appeals to conceal judicial misconduct by trial court judges.

In March, 3rd District Justice Cole Blease dismissed an appeal that, among other allegations, documented criminal conduct by controversial Judge Matthew Gary. Court records show that Gary may have acted as an accessory after-the-fact to a criminal child abduction by the client of a local divorce attorney with ties to the controversial family court temporary judge program. The details are outlined in briefs from the case, which are catalogued and viewable at the Scribd document publishing website. 

Read our Special Report: Sacramento County Family Court Operates as RICO Racketeering Enterprise, Charge Whistleblowers.

Sacramento Superior Court Controversy: Judge Matthew Gary Orders Indigent, Disabled Parent To Pay Attorney Fee Sanctions Based on "Body Language"

Judge Matthew Gary assessed draconian attorney fee sanctions against a disabled, indigent family court parent without an attorney based on her "body language," according to court records from the case. 

The appellate brief excerpt embedded at the bottom of this post recounts one instance of Judge Matthew Gary's misconduct in the Susan Ferris case, in connection with an illegal attorney fee sanctions order. The appeal in the case is pending at the controversial 3rd District Court of Appeal in Sacramento. 

The embedded document package also includes the court reporter transcript from a hearing in the case recording that Gary ordered Ferris to pay $2,500 to the opposing attorney, Timothy Zeff, based on Ferris' "body language." Zeff's partner, Scott Buchanan, is a part-time judge in the same court. 

Court records indicate that the judge pro tem conflict of interest was not disclosed as required by state law. The conflict disclosure violation has occurred in hundreds of other cases involving temporary judge lawyers.

To continue reading, click Read more >> below: 

Sacramento Superior Court Controversy: Illegal Child Custody Order, Judge Approved Child Abduction Among Issues in Landmark Appeal

Judge Matthew Gary's authorization of a criminal child abduction by the client of attorney Timothy Zeff is one of several judicial misconduct issues raised in the Susan Ferris appeal. Zeff is the law partner of temporary judge divorce attorney Scott Buchanan. Court whistleblowers allege that judge pro tem attorneys receive preferential treatment that amounts to racketeering.  

Friday Document Dump

The opening brief filed in an appeal from orders issued by Judge Matthew Gary and embedded at the bottom of this post documents misconduct by the controversial judge in the Susan Ferris case. Court records show that Ferris - who is indigent, disabled and did not have a lawyer - was illegally stripped of her parental rights, subjected to draconian financial sanctions that made her homeless, and denied her constitutional rights to due process, access to the courts and equal protection.

For our complete coverage of the trial court proceedings which resulted in this landmark appeal, click here. For Sacramento Bee coverage of the case, click here. For complete coverage of Judge Matthew J. Gary, click here. To view an exclusive SFCN video of Ferris describing her ordeal in her own words, click here.

Judge Matthew Gary Misconduct, Collusion with Attorney, Accessory After the Fact to Criminal Child Abductio... by California Judicial Branch News Network

Hon. Matthew J. Gary Misconduct: Susan Ferris Case and Appeal Front Page News at Sacramento Bee

Judge Matthew Gary Abuse of Disabled, Unrepresented Mom Results in Landmark Appeal to Establish Constitutional Right to Counsel in Civil Cases 

The Sacramento Bee today published a front page story about the pending appeal in the Sacramento Family Court Susan Ferris case. Sacramento Family Court News has been covering the case for more than a year and has published several articles, including an exclusive video interview with Susan Ferris. Ferris is represented on appeal by a team of lawyers led by prominent San Francisco attorney James Brosnahan of the international law firm Morrison & Foerster.   

"This is at the point where a lot of us think it's a disgrace," Brosnahan said. "You can't take someone's child and that person doesn't have an attorney when you do it...It's an outrage," Brosnahan explained to Sacramento Bee reporter Brad Branan.  

Click here to read the full article at the Bee. For a list of SFCN articles about the case, including our exclusive Susan Ferris interview, click here.   

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 graphic:

Judge Matthew Gary Misconduct Victim Describes Emotional Trauma of Illegal "No Contact" Child Custody Order

Family Court Victim Describes Trauma of Illegal Child Custody Order and Mistreatment of Unrepresented Parents by Judge and Court Employees

News Analysis and Opinion by PelicanBriefed

In this exclusive, Sacramento Family Court News interview, indigent, disabled family court victim Susan Ferris describes in her own words the trauma of being separated from her daughter because of an illegal "no contact" child custody order issued against her by controversial, volatile, Judge Matthew Gary. Ferris also explains the frustration of having to represent herself because she can't afford an attorney, going up against an experienced family law attorney in court, and having her attempt to file an appeal blocked by court employees. 

The interview was recorded between Thanksgiving and Christmas, on December 16, 2012. In the right foreground of the video is the Christmas village Ferris and her daughter Megan together would set up each holiday season. Ferris describes the excruciating hardship of having to go through the holidays without her daughter. Megan and her mom were torn apart by six words scrawled on a yellow minute order: "No contact w/child in any manner." Click here to view the order.

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

Judicial Council Chief of Staff: Judge Laurie Earl, Court Executive Officer Chris Volkers Responsible for Judge Oversight & Accountability

Judicial Council 2nd-in-Command Verifies Presiding Judge, Court Administrators Responsible for Unlawful Orders, Socioeconomic Bias By Judge

Jody Patel, currently the Chief of Staff for the Judicial Council,
formerly was the CEO of Sacramento County Superior Court.

Jody Patel, Chief of Staff for the Judicial Council Administrative Office of the Courts in San Francisco has informed Sacramento Family Court News that local court administrators and the presiding judge are responsible for investigating and correcting the judge misconduct allegations detailed in our June 28 investigative report. 

The responsibility for Sacramento Family Court oversight and accountability rests with Presiding Judge Laurie Earl, Court Executive Officer Christina Volkers, and family court Director of Operations Julie Setzer, according to Patel, who previously held the same position as Volkers. 

Before her promotion to the Judicial Council in 2006, from 2001-2006 Patel served as CEO of the Superior Court of Sacramento County. The Judicial Council is the policymaking body of the California courts and is responsible for ensuring the consistent, independent, impartial and accessible administration of justice, according to the council website. 

For an upcoming follow-up post to our June 28 report, SFCN asked several local and state court officials to respond to the documented allegations that Judge Matthew Gary and his clerk Christina Arcuri exhibit overt bias against socioeconomically disadvantaged pro per litigants, misuse Family Code §271 sanctions against the indigent, and issue inadequate, unlawful court orders, and to the evidence that court orders issued in Sacramento Family Court are not reasonably consistent from judge-to-judge, as required by state standards. 

Click here to view our initial inquiry to Judicial Council Chief of Staff Jody Patel. Click here to view Patel's response. Click here to read our follow-up email clarifying Patel's response. Click here to read our original, June 28 investigative report. For more articles about the issues and court officials in this post, click on the corresponding labels below.  
  

Judge Matthew J. Gary Misconduct: Victim of Illegal Order Issued for Divorce Attorney Timothy Zeff Homeless But Surviving

Judge Matthew Gary Order for Partner of Judge Pro Tem Attorney Scott Buchanan Results in Homelessness for Disabled Mom 

Larscheid, Buchanan & Zeff family law attorney Timothy Zeff requested and was granted an unlawful $920 child support order by Judge Matthew J. Gary. Zeff's partner, Scott Buchanan, is a family court judge pro tem. The order financially devastated 52-year-old disabled, single parent Susan Ferris. Evicted from her Sacramento home and now homeless, she sleeps on the couch of a Bay Area friend.  

SACRAMENTO FAMILY COURT NEWS SPECIAL REPORT 

The disturbing aftermath of an unconscionable $920 child support order issued by Judge Matthew J. Gary shows one of the ramifications, and the inexorable human cost of what court watchdogs contend is unchecked family court corruption and cronyism. The April, 2012 order gutted the monthly disability income of disabled, unrepresented, financially disadvantaged family court litigant Susan Ferris from $1,256 to $336. Gary previously issued an equally unlawful order prohibiting the 52-year-old single parent from having any contact with her daughter, Megan. 

The April support order financially devastated Ferris, leaving her with far less income than she needed for food, utilities, and rent. After several months under the order and behind on her rent, Ferris was evicted from her East Sacramento home and became homeless. The same court order records that her ex-husband, David Ferris, earns $8,089 per month. Click here to view Gary's minute order, obtained and posted online exclusively by Sacramento Family Court News. As a result of the order, Susan Ferris' credit has been thrashed, the repo man came for her car, and the eviction will now be part of her renter's report, making it virtually impossible for her to rent a home in the future.

To continue reading, 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.

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:

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.