Home » Uncategorized
Category Archives: Uncategorized
Family Court Litigants’ Guide to Filing a Federal RICO Lawsuit Against Family Courts, Attorneys, Psychologists
California Coalition is grateful that the materials we’ve made available at Weightier Matter have been well-received by so many families and children who have been harmed by Family Court professionals.
Among the hundreds of emails and phone calls we receive each month, the most common question is “how can I file a RICO action in my jurisdiction?” It’s a great question, and we’re eager to help, but unfortunately the answer is complex and depends greatly on factors unique to each jurisdiction. Therefore, our ability to give firm guidance is usually limited.
However, there are some common suggestions we can pass along to you based on our experience to date. What can you do to bring a RICO action in your jurisdiction? Here are a few tips.
While any individual can bring a RICO lawsuit, we suggest that potential RICO litigants consider finding other like-minded families within your jurisdiction (i.e., state or county) who can help with the grass-roots work. RICO and civil rights conspiracy cases are enormously complex, requiring pleading detailed facts to support claims describing the inner-workings of your jurisdiction’s Family Courts, lawyers, psychologists, social workers, and other related professionals. We have seen many parents attempting to fight alone fail. Organizing with others has many benefits that help you avoid common pitfalls.
Every jurisdiction has dozens of harmed litigants, yet it is likely that each individual who has been harmed has only seen
one facet of the Family Law Community. By reaching out to others to form groups, litigants can “share notes” to find common illegal practices, bad actors, veiled relationships, and systemic behaviors that support RICO elements of enterprise, scheme to defraud, quid-pro-quo, and conspiracy. Litigants’ pooled knowledge can enable collection, analysis, and recordation of the foundation of a viable lawsuit.
February 6, 2015—San Diego, CA—California Coalition today announces filing of its Reply and Response Brief in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. In its brief, California Coalition responds to the fourteen Answering Briefs of Family Court judges, psychologists, divorce lawyers, social workers, and others within the Domestic Dispute Industry.
California Coalition’s Reply Brief sets forth seven main themes:
1. Establishing fundamental federal rights to familial association which the Family Court judges have attacked;
2. Attacking immunity of family court judges—providing the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit a detailed historic analysis of the immunity doctrine that is required under the recent United States Supreme Court case of Rehberg v. Paulk;
3. The leading Ninth circuit case granting a broad judicial immunity–Ashelman v. Pope–is abrogated law and should be overturned;
4. Commission on Judicial Performance is not entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity;
5. Ninth Circuit cases applying ancient “code” and “form” pleading are abrogate, yet still cited improperly, and should be overturned;
6. The California Public Records Act section prohibiting publication of state officials’ home addresses is unconstitutional; and
7. Family Court judges and others filed improper “cross-appeals” that should be dismissed.
Details of California Coalition’s analysis in its Opening Brief is here.
Details on WeightierMatter here.
It’s been over two years since the SEC report came out, detailing the overreach and the wastefulness of the AOC/Judicial Council staff. The report’s authors concluded that the organization “must refocus on providing service to the courts; that a fundamental restructuring of the organization is needed; that the AOC must be down-sized to correspond with its core functions; and that its internal processes need to be improved.” Our leaders “took ownership” of the report and promised change. Said Justice Douglas Miller of the Executive and Planning Committee, “We are fully committed to this report and our process, and take full responsibility for preserving its integrity.” His remarks are documented here.
So did anything happen?
Not much. Not nearly enough. We’ve now had a day to read the California State Auditor’s detailed review of how the Judicial Council staff handles the money entrusted to it. The Alliance thanks Assembly Member…
View original post 1,248 more words
Today, the Sacramento Bee’s Dan Walters, dean of the state’s political reporters, released a brief video commentary on the State Auditor’s review of Judicial Council/AOC spending. He lays out in direct language that what the Alliance has been saying for years is correct: The bureaucracy is bloated, its employees are overpaid, and the Judicial Council has failed to do its job. For those of you with problematic browsers, a transcript of his remarks follows.
As the Governor releases his budget and members of the Legislature begin the task of making decisions on how judicial dollars should be spent, our message is clear: Without significant and systemic reform, the AOC will continue to siphon off the dollars we desperately need to keep our local courts running. At a minimum, and until the statutory or constitutional changes necessary for real reform can be enacted, we call on our sister branches of government…
View original post 246 more words
You will recall that the Alliance of California Judges proposed an audit of the Judicial Council, which was requested by Assembly Member Reggie Jones-Sawyer, and which was unanimously approved by the Joint Legislative Audit Committee in the last legislative session over opposition from the Judicial Council. The State Auditor released her report today, and it is available for your review here. We will let you draw your own conclusions about the report, but we offer these highlights from the Executive Summary of the report:
(1) The Judicial Council did not adequately oversee the AOC in managing the judicial branch budget, which allowed the AOC to engage in questionable compensation and business practices. The AOC:
- Provides its staff with generous salaries and benefits—the AOC pays eight of its nine office directors more than the governor and many other high-ranking executive branch officials receive.
- Employs over 70 contractors and temporary employees…
View original post 584 more words
December 30, 2014–San Diego, CA–California Coalition today announces opening of its Crowdfunder equity offering campaign for investors interested in participating in California Coalition’s groundbreaking reform, parent resource, and professional network. California Coalition is offering 100,000 shares of AA voting stock at par value of $1.00 per share. The subscription period is from December 30, 2014 until January 31, 2015
From the Letter to New Investors by Colbern Stuart, California Coalition’s President:
Dear California Coalition for Families and Children, PBC Shareholder:
Thank you for participating in our family law reform enterprise. By purchasing equity in California Coalition for Families and Children, PBC, you have made a critical contribution to what we believe is a history-making achievement in the improvement of outcomes for families and children throughout the United States in the crisis of a domestic dispute. Our litigation, online resources, and professional network is a major advance in the evolution of family law, judicial accountability, and legal ethics. We are honored to have you as a shareholder, colleague, and partner in our journey.
California Coalition Challenging Family Court Judicial Immunity in Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Today
October 23, 2014—San Diego, CA—California Coalition for Families and Children, PBC, today announces filing of its Opening Brief with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in California Coalition for Families and Children v. San Diego County Bar Association, Case No. 14-56140. In the appeal, California Coalition asks the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to reverse rulings of the United States District Court for the Southern District of California made in July of this year.
California Coalition is advancing three arguments critical to families in domestic disputes.
1. Limiting Judicial Immunity For All Judges
California Coalition is asking the Court of Appeals to reexamine a critical 1986 case that extended broad judicial immunity to judges accused of wrongdoing in office. The case, Ashelman v. Pope—under which family court judges today receive absolute immunity for any act done in their “official capacity”—was decided inconsistently with a prior 1978 United States Supreme Court case, Stump v. Sparkman. California Coalition offers the Court of Appeals a meticulous analysis of the history of judicial immunity from the seminal 1872 case of Bradley v. Fisher, and its Twentieth Century progeny of Pierson v. Ray, Monroe v. Pape, and Pulliam v. Allen, explaining that the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Ashelman betrayed the Supreme Court’s instructions to examine whether a judge was performing a “judicial act” that was immune as of 1871—when the Civil Rights Act was passed into law by Congress.
October 3, 2014–San Diego, CA–A United States District Judge this week issued a “blistering” Order against San Diego County Child Protective Services workers, and their employer, the County of San Diego, for CPS’s unwarranted removal of the two children of Joanna and Steven Swartwood from their home for two days. Excerpts and analysis from the order granting summary judgment in the case by Judge Thomas Whelan:
“Plaintiffs filed this lawsuit after D.S. and R.S. were removed from their home without a warrant and subjected to medical exams, which included a urine test and examination of their genitalia, without notice to Steven or Joanna.”
“Plaintiffs contend Defendants’ conduct in removing the children, continuing to detain the children, and conducting the medical exams violated their Fourth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment rights and are suing under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 [and state law.]”
May 25, 2014–San Diego, CA–Today California Coalition for Families and Children delivers its update on the RICO litigation to its membership and interested friends, along with a special message endorsing Carla Keehn and Joseph Adelizzi in the June 3, 2014 judicial election. From the email:
DIVORCE INDUSTRY RICO LITIGATION
Last week’s round of briefing against the San Diego County Bar Association and the local divorce industry was a herculean event, but we’ve established some major beachheads from which to launch further attack in the litigation. I attach a copy of our 186 page opposition brief. Additional links to all of the pleadings are at our website at http://www.weightiermatter.com.
Thank you to the many CCFC members and friends who volunteered to share the workload with the legal team. We’re grateful to have so many eager hands and sharp minds.
Our lawsuit has brought together a “perfect storm” of an experienced legal team and the pure accident of California Coalition’s commercial and my personal injury to achieve standing to assert both civil rights as well as competitive injury under federal statutes. CCFC’s membership has added a deep familiarity with the family law industry and actual customs of local courts and practitioners. We know where the bodies are buried before discovery begins, and we’ve been enabled to plead our knowledge and documentation in abundance in our 1500 page appendix to the complaint.
The soft shod and brown-shirted family lawyers are well-prepared for one-on-one civil rights and state court negligence/fraud/breach of contract claims, but few lawyers understand, much less expect to see a family court litigant group successfully assert RICO against the enterprise level collaboration. RICO is often bypassed in favor of civil rights because plaintiffs haven’t been able to cobble together the collective industry-level knowledge on their own, and law firms which can do the investigation won’t spend the money to do so in a measly divorce case. By attacking the $50 billion industry as a whole and aggregating our client base to an “association” level, we’ve changed both the stakes and the number of deliriously hubristic card sharks in our casino.
San Diego Domestic Dispute Industry Equal Protection Conspiracy Centerpiece: The “Universal Female Victim” and “Universal Male Perpetrator” Ideology
California Coalition’s July 24, 2013 letter to the City of San Diego and the San Diego Family Justice Center lays out the Family Justice Center’s ideology for law enforcement: “It’s always the guy’s fault. Period.” Easy enough if you’re a social worker, cop, or a judge–but is it? Oddly, the Family Justice Center is deaf to the equal protection conspiracy implications of their publications and teachings–publications and teaching that go directly to judges, law enforcement, social workers, and attorneys enforcing domestic violence laws.
Exhibit A to the letter breaks down the ideology with references to relevant law and exhibits exemplifying the crime. This Exhibit explains “Universal Female Victim” and “Universal Male Perpetrator” ideology as evidenced by the Alliance’s own writings.
[More at Weightier Matter]