VIRAL VIDEO: Bay Area Family Court Private Judge Threatens Reporters, Refuses Access To Court Records

Support investigative reporting on family court corruption by subscribing to investigative reporter Susan Bassi's YouTube Channel. From the description for this viral video with 91,000 views: 

"One nurse, several dogs, slammed doors and calls for police and security over private judge records. Private judges are lawyers or retired public court judges who are privately paid. We have been seeking access to their records under California Rules of Court 2.400 and state and federal open proceeding laws. Links to those laws can be found here."

The private judge in this video is Gilroy attorney Richard P. Roggia, State Bar #54430. California Judicial Branch whistleblowers allege that the superior courts are being privatized, with private sector, for-profit judges taking over many of the functions of public judges. 

The Second District Court of Appeal has criticized the practice of using for-profit private or temporary judges to privatize the courts:  

Judge James T. Ford of the Sacramento County Superior Court wrote that privately compensating temporary judging was probably criminal. "Penal Code section 94 bars judicial officers from accepting gratuities for performing public acts. Judges pro tempore [i.e., temporary judges] have identical powers as sitting judges, and their decisions are those of the court without any further intervention by sitting judges. Accordingly, they must be deemed judicial officers within the meaning of the section."

Judge Ford also wrote that privately compensating temporary judges was unethical under the California Code of Judicial Ethics...

Judge Ford wrote: "While clearly not adopted with this recent phenomenon in mind, the Code stands for an important principle: justice and money do not mix. Judging is not in any way a private function; it is a quintessential public function, and should be administered without regard to compensation of the judge." Judge Ford concluded by asking the Judicial Council not to authorize privately compensated temporary judges: "I urge the judiciary to recognize that privately compensating judges pro tempore is illegal and pernicious. We are not for sale, nor is the product of our labor."

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

Get to Know the California State Bar Rules of Professional Conduct: Rule 3.4 Fairness to Opposing Party and Counsel: News You Can Use

CONSUMER PROTECTION NEWS YOU CAN USE: Having trouble with an ethically-challenged attorney? The State Bar of California may be able to help. 

The bar updated the California Rules of Professional Conduct in 2018. Pro per litigants should know the rules and hold opposing attorneys - who often violate the rules - accountable. If an attorney violates the rules, tell the judge on the case, and the presiding judge of the superior court. 

Under the Code of Judicial Ethics, judges must take "appropriate corrective action" when they become aware of lawyer misconduct. This judicial duty is not optional, or "discretionary." It is mandatory.  

If the judge on the case, or the presiding judge fails or refuses to take appropriate corrective action, make a complaint against the judge to the state Commission on Judicial Performance. 

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

SANTA ANA APPELLATE COURT JUDGE REPORTS ATTORNEY TO STATE BAR: MEANWHILE, SACRAMENTO FAMILY COURT JUDGES DEFY JUDICIAL ETHICS CANON 3D(2), IGNORE, COVER UP ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT

• Examples of systemic attorney misconduct in Sacramento family court.
• Judges are required - by law - to report serious attorney misconduct. 
• Common types of attorney misconduct. 
• Attorneys are required to tell the truth at all times, whether under oath or not. 
• Judge James Mize fails to report egregious misconduct by divorce attorney and temporary judge Paula Salinger. 
• Judge Thadd Blizzard fails to report egregious misconduct by divorce attorney and temporary judge Richard Sokol.
• Judges Thadd Blizzard and Matthew Gary fail to report attorneys who aided criminal child abductions. 
• Sacramento County Superior Court judges fail to report alleged racketeering and antitrust activity by divorce lawyers.  

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

JUSTICE ARTHUR G. SCOTLAND CONFESSES TO PRACTICING LAW WITHOUT LICENSE, MORAL TURPITUDE ACTS: 3RD DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL HISTORY

Justice Arthur G. Scotland with Justice George Nicholson from the controversial 3rd District Court of Appeal: Scotland admits to acts of moral turpitude, including serial unauthorized practice of law violations and disregard of the law as an employee of the Sacramento County District Attorney's Office.

Retired from the 3rd District Court of Appeal, Scotland now is Of Counsel at Nielsen Merksamer Parrinello Gross & Leoni LLP Sacramento office. For more information, visit the document embedded with this post.

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

CBS News 60 Minutes Hidden Camera Records Attorney Boasting Lawyers Immune from Criminal Prosecution

“They don’t send the lawyers to jail because we run the country. We’re members of a privileged class in this country. We make the laws and when we do so we make them in a way that is advantageous to the lawyers,” attorney Marc Koplik explains on hidden video in this 60 Minutes broadcast clip.

Sacramento Superior Court reform advocates allege that a group of local divorce lawyers who also work as part-time judges have made similar claims. Whistleblowers assert that many Sacramento County judges abdicate their responsibility to enforce attorney misconduct laws, and therefore share blame for the problem.    

Attorney Ethics: Misleading Judge or Other Party Constitutes Act of Moral Turpitude

MORAL TURPITUDE WEEK: MISLEADING THE JUDGE OR OTHER PARTY An attorney who misleads the judge or the other party...
Posted by California Attorney Misconduct & Ethics on Friday, February 26, 2016

Attorney Misconduct and Ethics: Moral Turpitude - Attorneys Must Be Truthful Whether Under Oath or Not

MORAL TURPITUDE WEEK: ATTORNEYS MUST TELL THE TRUTH IRRESPECTIVE OF WHETHER THEY ARE UNDER OATHWhether they are under...
Posted by California Attorney Misconduct & Ethics on Thursday, February 25, 2016

MORAL TURPITUDE WEEK #MORALTURPITUDE
Posted by California Attorney Misconduct & Ethics on Friday, February 26, 2016

California Attorney Ethics - Rules of Professional Conduct - State Bar Act - Moral Turpitude - California Lawyers

California Attorney Ethical Standards & Law Updated at SFCN Attorney Misconduct Page 

The California Supreme Court and State Bar are responsible for oversight and accountability of attorneys in the state. 

Sacramento Family Court News has just updated our Attorney Misconduct page with additional ethical standards all lawyers must by law comply with. Click here to view the page. The new information includes more than 40 disciplinary decision references from the State Bar publication California Compendium on Professional Responsibility. Click here to view the complete set of over 40 references at GoogleDocs. The annually updated 456 page Compendium collects hundreds of attorney misconduct case law decisions which specify the types of misconduct that violate the Rules of Professional Conduct and State Bar Act. The decisional law listed in the Compendium carries the same weight as all other law in California, including the Code of Civil Procedure, Penal Code, Family Code and all other statutory law.   

The Attorney Misconduct page updates include:  

• As "officers of the court," lawyers must disclose in court filings and in argument before a judge the facts, law and other authorities harmful or adverse to their position, in addition to the facts, law and authority supporting their position. The failure to disclose adverse facts and legal authority is unlawful, unethical, and considered sanctionable misconduct, according to the State Bar.
• As members of the State Bar and officers of the court, attorneys are required to be honest at all times, even when off-duty and not acting as a lawyer, according to the State Bar. Dishonesty, whether or not committed while acting as an attorney, is prohibited by Business and Professions Code § 6106, according to the State Bar. 
• It is illegal for a lawyer to mislead or make misrepresentations to an opposing attorney or party, including a self-represented litigant. Making offensive references or descriptions about an opposing party or attorney also is unlawful, according to the State Bar.

For additional reporting on the issues in this post, click the corresponding labels below: 

Controversial Judge James Mize Named Judicial Officer of the Year by State Bar Family Law Section

Judge James Mize Named Judicial Officer of the Year by Family Law Section of State Bar 

Family Court Supervising Judge James Mize

Sacramento County Superior Court has announced that family court Supervising Judge James Mize will receive the "Judicial Officer of the Year" award from the Family Law Section of the State Bar of California. 

Sacramento Family Court reform advocates were baffled by the selection of Mize, who they say since being named supervising judge has done nothing to correct long-running problems and infighting at the William Ridgeway Family Relations Courthouse. 

Mize took the helm of the troubled family court system in April after controversial Judge Jaime Roman stepped down from the post before serving out his full term. Roman's premature exit was attributed to harassment by former Supervising Judge Matthew Gary, who Roman replaced mid-term under a cloud of controversy on orders from Presiding Judge Laurie Earl. 

Family court watchdogs assert that Mize is too cozy with lawyers from the Sacramento County Bar Association Family Law Section, has neglected the needs of the 70 percent of court users who can't afford legal representation, and refuses to enforce court employee and judge disciplinary polices.   

To view the Sacramento County Superior Court press release about the Judicial Officer of the Year award, click Read more >> below:

California Divorce Attorney Misconduct and Ethics Page Added at Sacramento Family Court News

Attorney Misconduct and Ethics in California

Tani Gorre Cantil-Sakauye is a former Sacramento County Superior
Court judge. She is now chief justice of the California Supreme Court
and an authority on legal ethics.

Sacramento Family Court News often receives emails from readers asking for help with allegedly unethical attorneys who, for example, tell lies in court or in court filings. As a nonprofit news organization, SFCN does not provide legal advice or assistance with making complaints against attorneys or judges. Click here for the State Bar of California webpage about making a complaint against an attorney. Click here for the State Bar attorney ethics information webpage. 

For more information on attorney ethics, visit our new attorney misconduct page. The page contains information on basic attorney ethical standards in California, and legal references and authorities about attorney misconduct. For example, many attorneys and family court litigants are unaware that attorneys must by law tell the truth in court, even if they're not under oath, according to the State Bar. Or that, under California law, a lawyer who tells a half-truth in court or in court filings is considered to have told an outright lie. Under state attorney ethical standards, an attorney who withholds or conceals material facts or information from a judge also is guilty of lying, according to the State Bar. 

For all the details, visit our new attorney misconduct page. Click here. If you have a news tip about an allegedly unethical family law attorney, please contact us using our Contact Family Court News page, or click here to send us an email.

Attorney Misconduct: Federal Indictment for Unethical, Illegal Attorney Conduct Includes Obtaining False and Misleading Testimony

Federal Conspiracy, Honest Services Fraud Indictment Includes Violations of Attorney Fiduciary and Legal Duties

Friday Document Dump

Violations of lawyer ethical standards can be used as evidence of criminal conduct, according to records from a U.S. District Court. A federal criminal indictment filed against an attorney in Nevada indicates that violations of professional standards are one component in a criminal prosecution for honest services mail or wire fraud, conspiracy, money laundering, witness tampering and obstruction of justice. Personal injury attorney Noel Gage was charged in a scheme to defraud clients of the honest services of their attorneys, and obtain the money and property of others by false pretenses, representations, promises, omissions of material fact, and half-truths. The indictment recites the duties owed by an attorney to a client, including providing honest services that are free from self-dealing, corruption, fraud, deceit and conflicts of interest. According to the document, the duties include: 

• The duty to deal honestly and forthrightly with others in connection with a client's case;
• The duty to provide honest and independent counsel to clients;
• The duty to remain free of conflicts of interest with a client; 
• The duty to act at all times in the best interests of the client; 
• The duty to disburse money from the proceeds of a client's settlement or judgment honestly and with full disclosure to the client; and 
• The duty to ensure that others who are employed by the attorney in connection with a client's case comport with the same duties and obligations listed above.     

For additional reporting on the issues in this post, click the corresponding labels below: 

Sacramento County Temporary Judge Scott Kendall Disbarred for Moral Turpitude, Advising Client to Break Law, Incompetence & More

Sacramento Family Court Judge Pro Tem Disbarred on Multiple Charges

Sacramento County Superior Court Temporary Judge Scott Kendall has been disbarred from the practice of law by the State Bar Court. Lawyers may seek review of State Bar Court Decisions from the California Supreme Court. 

Sacramento County Superior Court Temporary Judge Scott Kendall was last month banned from the practice of law by the State Bar for multiple acts of misconduct.

Kendall, a family law attorney and member of the Sacramento County Bar Association Family Law Section was charged with advising a family court client to violate a child custody order, withdrawing from representation of a client without court permission, failure to communicate with clients, incompetence, and moral turpitude. Kendall was disbarred effective November 24, 2011. Click here to view the State Bar decision describing the charges against the family court judge pro tem. 

The disciplinary charges resulted from Kendall's conduct in four separate court cases for clients Claro Wisco, James Flynt, Theresa Licciardello and Brian Knudsen-Heryford. In the Knudsen-Heryford case, Kendall advised his client to violate a shared child custody agreement on the assurance that the attorney would obtain full custody for the client at an ex parte hearing. Knudsen-Heryford acted on his attorney's counsel and at the ex parte hearing was arrested for child abduction by the Roseville Police Department. Kendall's ex parte motion was denied on the merits. Kendall promised to defend his client in the criminal case for free, but later billed Knudsen-Heryford for $2,127 in legal fees for the criminal case, according to the State Bar.   

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