3

More

Next Blog

Create Blog
Sign In

Sacramento Family Court News

Investigative Reporting, News, Analysis, Opinion & Satire
HOME

JUDGE PRO TEMS

3rd DISTRICT COURT of APPEAL

RoadDog SATIRE

ABOUT FAMILY COURT NEWS

CONTACT FAMILY COURT NEWS

Terms & Conditions

ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT

Privacy Policy

DOCUMENT LIBRARY

18 July 2013

SHORTCUTS TO POPULAR
SUBJECTS AND POSTS

Vance W. Raye Third District Justice and Judge Peter McBrien Turn Over
Court Operations to SCBA Family Law Section Lawyers

JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT

(63)

Leaked Transcript Indicates Vance Raye & Judge

Peter McBrien Enabled Family Law Bar Control of
Court in 1991

ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT

(35)

In 1991, as a superior court judge, current3rd District Court

of Appeal Presiding JusticeVance Raye partnered with
controversial family court Judge Peter J. McBrien and
attorneys from the Sacramento County Bar Association
Family Law Sectionin establishing the current, dysfunctional
Sacramento Family Courtsystem, according to the sworn
testimony of McBrien at his 2009 judicial misconduct trial
before the Commission on Judicial Performance. Behind
closed doors and under oath, the judge provided explicit
details about the 1991 origins of the present-day family court
structure.

SCBA
(22)

MATTHEW J. GARY
(33)
FLEC
(28)

ARTS & CULTURE

(21)
CHILD CUSTODY
(21)
PETER J. McBRIEN
(20)
ROBERT SAUNDERS
(20)
WATCHDOGS
(19)
CHARLOTTE KEELEY
(18)

In essence, McBrien and Raye agreed to effectively privatize

public court operations to the specifications of private-sector
attorneys in exchange for not having to run the court's
settlement conference program. The SCBA Family Law
Section agreed to run the settlement program provided they
were given effective control over most court policies and
procedures, including local court rules.

As a result, the public court system was restructured to the

specifications of local, private-sector attorneys, according to
McBrien's testimony.To view McBrien's detailed description of
the collusive public-private collaboration, posted online
exclusively by SFCN, click here. To view an example of the
same, current day collusion, click here.

JUDGE PRO TEM

(49)

CJP
(18)
EMPLOYEE MISCONDUCT

(18)
PRO PERS
(18)
DOCUMENTS
(16)
DIVORCE CORP
(13)
Vance Raye and Peter J. McBrien were the
architects of the current family court system.

The 1991 restructuring plan began with a road trip suggested by the family law bar:
"[T]he family law bar, and it was a fairly strong bar here in Sacramento, initiated the concept of a trip
to Orange County and San Diego County to pick up some ideas about how their courts were
structured. And myself and Judge Ridgeway and two family law attorneys made that trip and came
back with various ideas of how to restructure the system," McBrien told the CJP.Click hereto view.
But before his sworn 2009 CJP testimony,
McBrien gave the public a differentaccount of
the road trip and who restructured the family

JAMES M. MIZE
(12)
COLOR OF LAW SERIES

(11)
CONFLICT OF INTEREST

(11)
SATIRE
(11)
WOODRUFF O'HAIR
POSNER and SALINGER

(11)
JAIME R. ROMAN
(10)

court system in 1991. As reported by the Daily

Journal legal newspaper, McBrien dishonestly
implied that the new system was conceived and
implemented by judges alone after they made a
county-paid "statewide tour" of family law courts.

The judge omitted from the story the fact that the
trip was initiated by the family law bar, and
included two private-sector family law attorneys
who took the county-paid tour with McBrien and
the late Judge William Ridgeway. As the Daily
Journal reported:

Sacramento Family Court judges and local, Sacramento Bar

Association attorneys openly acknowledgetheir close relationship.

LAURIE M. EARL
(10)
NO CONTACT ORDERS
(10)
SHARON A. LUERAS
(10)
WHISTLEBLOWERS
(10)
CARLSSON CASE
(9)
RAPTON-KARRES
(9)
CHRISTINA VOLKERS
(8)

"Around 1990, McBrien and a few other

Sacramento judges went on a statewide
tour of family law courts. At the time there
were continual postponements of trials.

FERRIS CASE
(8)

'This is how we came up with the system

today,' McBrien said. 'It was probably the
best trip Sacramento County ever paid
for.'

YOUTUBE
(7)

The judges changed the local system so

that family law judges presided over both law and motion matters and trials, which used to be sent to
a master calendar department and competed with criminal trials for scheduling.
'Now, if you're ready and unable to settle, chances are 99.9 percent that you are going out [to trial] the
first time,' McBrien said. 'A lot of that is attributable to the willingness of the Sacramento bar to work
as settlement counselors.'"Click hereto view theDaily Journalreport.
To continue reading the rest of this article, visit our special, updated 3rd District Court of Appeal page. Click
here. For more on the alleged collusion between judges and attorneys who also serve as Sacramento Superior
Court temporary judges and work as settlement counselors, visit our special judge pro tems page.For additional
posts about the people and issues in this report, click on the corresponding labels below.

JESSICA HERNANDEZ
(8)
JULIE SETZER
(7)

3rd DISTRICT COA

(6)
CIVIL RIGHTS
(6)
CHRISTINA ARCURI
(5)
CONTEMPT
(5)
THADD BLIZZARD
(5)
FAMILY LAW FACILITATOR

(4)
LUAN CASE
(4)
CANTIL-SAKAUYE
(3)
MIKE NEWDOW
(2)

Posted by
PelicanBriefed
at
11:20 AM

+3 Recommend this on Google

Labels:
3rd DISTRICT COA,
ANALYSIS,
APPEALS,
ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT,
CJP,
FLEC,
JUDGE PRO TEM,
JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT,

NEWS EXCLUSIVE,
PETER J. McBRIEN,
SCBA,
VANCE W. RAYE

Location:
Sacramento County Superior Court Family Relations Courthouse - 3341 Power Inn Road, Sacramento, CA 95826, USA
- William R. Ridgeway

3 comments

WE SUPPORT
Electronic Frontier
Foundation
First Amendment Coalition
Californians Aware

Add a comment

LAW BLOGS WE LIKE

Family Law Professor Blog
Law Librarian Blog
Top comments

Sacramento Family Court News via Google+ 1 year ago - Shared publicly
Vance W. Raye Third District Justice and Judge Peter McBrien Turn Over Court Operations
to SCBA Family Law Section Lawyers.
Leaked Transcript Indicates Vance Raye & Judge Peter McBrien Enabled Family Law Bar
Control of Court in 1991:
In 1991, as a superior court judge, current 3rd District Court of Appeal Presiding Justice

Law Professor Blogs

Thurman Arnold Family
Law Blog
Kafkaesq
Above the Law
The Divorce Artist

COMMISSION

ON

JUDICIAL

--

PERFORMANCE

-oOo

INQUIRY

CJP

-- ---- ------ -- - -- - -- ---- --1

JUDGE

CONCERNING

PETER

NO.

J.

ORIGINAL

McBRIEN

185

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

TRANSCRIPT

HEARING

1,

VOLUME

MASTERS

CALIFORNIA

1,

APRIL

THE

SPECIAL

SACRAMENTO,

15
16

BEFORE

OF

2009

PAGES

- 250

17
18
19
20
21
22

REPORTED

BY:

SANDRA LEHANE

REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL

23

CERTIFIED

SHORTHAND
155

24

Alameda,

Orr

NO.

7372

Road

California

(510)

REPORTE:R

REPORTER

94502

864-9645

25

------- ----

IN RE

CJF NO.

185 - 4/1/09

------- ----

720 9th Street.

A.

It's actually 920 -

Q.

That's the main Sacramento County courthouse?

A.

It is.

Q.

And how long were the family law departments

6
7
8

in that particular courthouse?

A.

Until 1999,

when we moved out to the Ridgeway

building.
Q.

Going back to when you were first appointed

to the family law department or assigned to the family

10

law department,

11

master calendar system?

12

no.

A.

what were the problems with this

The trials never got to trial.

So the Bar

13

the family law bar,

and it was a fairly strong bar

14

here in Sacramento,

initiated the concept of a trip to

15

Orange County and San Diego County to pick up some

16

ideas about how their courts were structured.

17

myself and Judge Ridgeway and two family law attorneys

18

made that trip and came back with various i

19

to restructure the system.

20
21

Q.

Now,

And

as of how

is there a family law section of the

Sacramento County Bar Association?

22

A.

There is.

23

Q.

And was there a family law section of the

24
25

Sacramento County Bar Association back in 1991?

A.

There was.

b-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -

4/1/09----------------------~

188

Q.

Is there an organization called the Family

Law Executive Committee?

A.

There is.

Q.

What is the Family Law Executive Committee?

A.

It is a group of leaders that the family law

bar e ects to take care of the administrative needs

for the section.

9
10

Q.

And did you work with the Family Law

Executive Committee in developing the current system

in the fami y law practice in Sacramento County?

11

A.

We did.

12

Q.

Could you describe what that wor

13
14

ng

relationship was?

A.

Okay.

We

we I,

first of all,

i t ' s a very

15

good relationship.

16

We keep making adjustments to the system when there

17

are problems.

18

where we have law and motion in the family

19

departments on Monday,

20

the trials on Thursday and Friday if,

21

trials are two days or less.

22

than two days,

23

calendar.

24

25

Q.

We meet -- we still meet monthly.

But basically,

we moved to a system

Tuesday,

Wednesday,

aw
and we hear

in fact,

those

And if they are more

they go down through the master

Backing up,

the Family Law Executive

Committee is appointed in what fashion?

~------------------------IN

RE CJF NO. 185 -

/09----------------------~

189

2
3

A.

They are elected by the membership of the

family law bar.

Q.

The family law bar section of the Sacramento

County Bar Association?

A.

Correct.

Q.

And you and other judges worked together with

this Family Law Executive Committee in developing the

current system?

A.

Correct.

10

Q.

Who are the other judges?

11

A.

Well,

12
13

14
15

at the time,

there was Justice Raye

now Justice Raye.

Q.

Justice Vance Raye of the Third District

Court of Appeal?

A.

16

Yes.
And another individual whose name always

17

escapes me,

18

years.

but he left the bench after about two

19

Q.

Dave Sterling?

20

A.

Dave Sterling.

21

Q.

Now,

after you went to Orange County,

you met

22

with the Family Law Executive Committee and

23

developed

24

presented to the Superior Court for its approval?

25

A.

or started to develop a plan.

It was.

Was that

And what happened is the Bar culled

L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185

4/1/09 - -_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _--1

190

through the various ideas and options,

plan,

what adjustments we felt were appropriate and then

presented the whole of it to the full bench.

presented it to the family law bench.

Q.

And was that plan approved?

A.

It was.

Q.

When?

A.

In 19

Q.

And since 1991,

10

came up with a

want to say late

We made

91 .

is that the current plan that

is employed in the family law departments?

11

A.

It is.

12

Q.

You testified that on Mondays,

13

Wednesdays f

14

matters and trials of two days or less on Thursday and

15

Friday;

16

A.

Correct.

17

Q.

Who hears the settlement conferences?

18

A.

The family law bar indicated that they would

Tuesdays and

ly law courts hear law and motion

right?

19

be willing to volunteer,

20

settlement pro terns.

21

the week except for Monday.

22

week where they have two volunteers.

23

make it gender neutral,

24

and they hear the settlement conferences.

25

Q.

and they serve as the

There are two for each day of

So they have four days a
And they try to

have one male and one female,

And are settlement conferences assigned

~----------------------IN

RE CJF NO. 185 -

4/1/09----~------------------

191

dependent upon the length of the trial?

A.

They are.

Q.

How does that work?

A.

If,

less trial,

week before the trial date.

two days or less,

9
10

Q.

in fact,

i t ' s going to be a one-day or

the settlement conference would be one

And if i t ' s going to be

it would be two weeks before.

And in connection with the estimation of the

length of the trial,

is that something that you as a

judge would do?

1.1

A.

No.

12

Q.

Who makes the estimation?

13

A.

The attorneys.

14

Q.

Are the attorneys encouraged to work together

15

in developing the estimated time?

16

A.

They are.

17

Q.

And is there any significance to the

18

estimated length of the case,

at least from the

19

judicial perspective of the Sacramento County Superior

20

Court judge?

21

A.

I believe that -- you know,

22

many of them,

23

aren't always accurate,

24

be accurate,

25

Because quite frankly,

having seen many,

that they generally are accurate.

but I

They

think they are trying to

stay within the guidance that we have.

if,

in fact,

L-------------------------IN RE Cc7F NO. 185 -

they don't

411109----------------------~

192

complete it,

Q.

they can be mistried.

And when you say "mistried," meaning that the

parties will then be given a new trial date?

A.

They would.

Q.

You were involved,

Carlsson vs.

A.

Correct.

Q.

obviously,

Carlsson case?

would like you to take a look at Exhibit C

in the respondent's

10

A.

think mine is over there.

11

MR. MURPHY:

12

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

13

May I

THE WITNESS:

15

MR.

16

THE WITNESS:

17

BY MR.
Q.

18
19

MURPHY:

You don't need

you said C?

Exhibit C,
Okay.

yes.

have it before me.

MURPHY:
For the record,

A.

could you describe what

This is an Order to Show Cause filed by

21

Ms.

22

continue the trial,

25

Yes.

Exhibit Cis?

20

24

approach the witness?

to seek permission.

14

23

with the

Huddle on behalf of Mr.

Q.

Carlsson asking to

fi ed on March 1st of 2006.

What was the basis of the request for a

continuance?

A.

That she was just served with a

' - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJ.F NO.

185

joinder

411109------------~

193

184

More

Next Blog

Create Blog
Sign In

Sacramento Family Court News

Investigative Reporting, News, Analysis, Opinion & Satire
HOME

JUDGE PRO TEMS

3rd DISTRICT COURT of APPEAL

RoadDog SATIRE

ABOUT FAMILY COURT NEWS

CONTACT FAMILY COURT NEWS

Terms & Conditions

ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT

Privacy Policy

DOCUMENT LIBRARY

SHORTCUTS TO POPULAR
SUBJECTS AND POSTS

JUDGE PRO TEMS

Sacramento Superior Court Temporary Judge

Program Controversy

JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT

(63)
JUDGE PRO TEM
(49)
ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT

(35)

Judge Pro Tem Attorney "Cartel" Controls Court

Operations, Charge Whistleblowers

MATTHEW J. GARY
(33)
FLEC
(28)
SCBA
(22)

Sacramento Family Court News Exclusive Investigative Report

This investigative report is ongoing and was last updated in September, 2014.

ARTS & CULTURE

(21)
CHILD CUSTODY
(21)

As many of the articles on our main page reflect,

Sacramento Family Law Court whistleblowers
and watchdogs contendthat a "cartel" of local
family lawattorneys receive kickbacks and other
forms ofpreferential treatment from family
courtjudges, administrators and
employeesbecause the lawyers are members
of the Sacramento County Bar Association
Family Law Section, hold the Office of
Temporary Judge,and run the family court
settlement conference program on behalf of
the court.

The kickbacks usually consist of "rubberstamped" court orders which are contrary to
established law, and cannot be attributed to the
exercise of judicial discretion.For a detailed
overview of the alleged collusion between judge
pro tem attorneys and family court employees
and judges, we recommend our specialColor of
Law series of investigative reports. The reports
document some of the preferential treatment
provided by family court employees and judges
to SCBA Family Law Section judge pro tem
lawyers. Click here to view the Color of Law
series. For a list of our reports about family court
temporary judges and controversies, click here.

PETER J. McBRIEN
(20)
ROBERT SAUNDERS
(20)
WATCHDOGS
(19)
CHARLOTTE KEELEY
(18)
CJP
(18)
EMPLOYEE MISCONDUCT

(18)
PRO PERS
(18)
DOCUMENTS
(16)
DIVORCE CORP
(13)
JAMES M. MIZE
(12)
COLOR OF LAW SERIES

(11)

Sacramento Family Court reform advocates assert that collusion

between judges and local attorneysdeprives financially disadvantaged,
unrepresented pro per court users of their parental rights, community
assets, and due process and access to the court constitutional rights.

The current day Sacramento County Family Court system andattorney operated settlement conference program
was set up in 1991 by and for the lawyers of theSacramento County Bar Association Family Law Section,
according to the sworn testimony of controversial family court Judge Peter J. McBrien at his
2009Commission on Judicial Performance disciplinary proceedings. Click here to read Judge McBrien's

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

(11)
SATIRE
(11)
WOODRUFF O'HAIR
POSNER and SALINGER

(11)
JAIME R. ROMAN
(10)

testimony. In his own testimony during the same proceedings, local veteran family law attorney and judge pro
tem Robert J. O'Hair corroborated McBrien's testimony and attested to McBrien's character and value to
Sacramento County Bar Association Family Law Section members. Click here to view this excerpt of O'Hair's
testimony. To view O'Hair's complete testimony, click here.Court watchdogs assert that the settlement conference
kickback arrangement between the public court and private sector attorneys constitutes a racketeering enterprise
which deprives the public of the federally protected right to honest government services.

LAURIE M. EARL
(10)

Court reform and accountability advocates assert that the local family law bar- through the Family Law
ExecutiveCommitteeor FLEC - continues to control for the financial gain of members virtually all aspects of court
operations, and have catalogued documented examples of judge pro tem attorney preferential treatment and
bias against unrepresented litigants and"outsider" attorneys,including:

CARLSSON CASE
(9)

Divorce Corp, a documentary film that "exposes the corrupt and collusive industry of family law in
the United States" was released in major U.S. cities on January 10, 2014. After a nationwide search for
the most egregious examples of family court corruption, the movie's production team ultimately included
fourcases from Sacramento County in the film, more than any other jurisdiction. Judge pro tem
attorneys Charlotte Keeley, Richard Sokol, Elaine Van Beveren and Dianne Fetzer are each
accused of unethical conduct in the problem cases included in the movie. The infamous Carlsson case,
featuring judge pro tem attorney Charlotte Keeley and Judge Peter McBrien is the central case
profiled in the documentary, with Sacramento County portrayed as theGround Zeroof family court
corruption and collusion in the U.S. Click here for our complete coverage of Divorce Corp.
Judge Thadd Blizzard issued a rubber-stamped, kickback order in November, 2013 for judge pro tem
attorney Richard Sokol authorizing an illegal out-of-state move away and child abduction by Sokol's
client, April Berger. The opposing counsel is an "outsider" attorney from San Francisco who was
dumbfounded by the order. Click here for our exclusive report, which includes the complete court
reporter transcript from the hearing. Click here for our earlier report on the unethical practice of
"hometowning" and the prejudicial treatment of outsider attorneys.
Whistleblower leaked court records indicate that Sacramento Bar Association Family Law
Executive Committee officer and judge pro tem attorney Paula Salinger engaged in obstruction of
justice crimes against an indigent, unrepresented domestic violence victim. The victim was a witness in
a criminal contempt case against a Salinger client. The circumstances surrounding the obstruction of
justice incident also infer collusion between Salinger and controversial Judge Matthew J. Gary. For
our complete investigative report,click here.
Two "standing orders" still in effect after being issued by Judge Roland Candee in 2006 override a
California Rule of Court prohibiting temporary judges from serving in family law cases where one party
is self-represented and the other party is represented by an attorney or is an attorney. The orders were
renewed by Presiding Judge Laurie M. Earl in February, 2013.Click here for details.
Sacramento Family Court judges ignore state conflict of interest laws requiring them to disclose to
opposing parties when a judge pro tem working as a private attorney represents a client in family
court. Click here for our exclusive investigative report. Click here for a list of other conflict of interest
posts.
Family court policies and procedures, including local court rules, are dictated by the SCBA Family Law
Executive Committeefor the financial benefit of private sector attorneys, and often disadvantage the
70 percent of court users without lawyers, according to family court watchdogs and whistleblowers.
For example, in sworn testimony by Judge Peter McBrien before the Commission on Judicial
Performance,McBrien described seeking and obtaining permission from FLEC to change a local rule.
Click here and here.
In November, 2012 Sacramento Family Court Judge Jaime R. Romanissued a rubber-stamped,
kickback orderdeclaring a family court party a vexatious litigant and ordering him to pay $2,500 to
the opposing attorney, both without holding the court hearing required by law. The opposing attorney
who requested the orders is Judge Pro Tem Charlotte Keeley. The blatantly illegal orders resulted in
both an unnecessary state court appeal and federal litigation, wasting scarce judicial resources and
costing taxpayers significant sums.Click here for our exclusive coverage of the case.
Judge Matthew Gary used an unlawful fee waiver hearing to both obstruct an appeal of his own orders
and help a client of judgepro tem attorney Paula Salinger avoid paying spousal support. Click here for
our investigative report.
An unrepresented, disabled 52-year-old single mother was made homeless by an illegal child support
order issued by Judge Matthew Gary for SCBA Family Law Section attorney Tim Zeff, the partner of
temporary judge Scott Buchanan. The rubber-stamped, kickback child supportorder, and other
proceedings in the case were so outrageous that the pro per is now represented on appeal by a team
of attorneys led by legendary trial attorney James Brosnahan of global law firm Morrison & Foerster.
For our exclusive, ongoing reports on the case, click here.
Judge pro tem attorneys Richard Sokol and Elaine Van Beverenhelped conceal judge misconduct
and failed to comply with Canon 3D(1) of the Code of Judicial Ethics when they were eyewitnesses to

NO CONTACT ORDERS
(10)
SHARON A. LUERAS
(10)
WHISTLEBLOWERS
(10)

RAPTON-KARRES
(9)
CHRISTINA VOLKERS
(8)
FERRIS CASE
(8)
JESSICA HERNANDEZ
(8)
JULIE SETZER
(7)
YOUTUBE
(7)
3rd DISTRICT COA
(6)
CIVIL RIGHTS
(6)
CHRISTINA ARCURI
(5)
CONTEMPT
(5)
THADD BLIZZARD
(5)
FAMILY LAW FACILITATOR

(4)
LUAN CASE
(4)
CANTIL-SAKAUYE
(3)
MIKE NEWDOW
(2)

WE SUPPORT
Electronic Frontier
Foundation
First Amendment Coalition
Californians Aware

LAW BLOGS WE LIKE

Family Law Professor Blog
Law Librarian Blog
Law Professor Blogs
Thurman Arnold Family
Law Blog
Kafkaesq
Above the Law
The Divorce Artist

LEGAL NEWS &

INFORMATION

an unlawful contempt of court and resisting arrest incident in Department 121. Both Sokol and Van
Beveren failed to report the misconduct of Judge Matthew Gary as required by state law.Van
Beveren isan officer of the SCBA Family Law Executive Committee.Click here for our exclusive
report...
...Four years later, Sokol and Van Beveren in open court disseminated demonstrably false and
misleading information about the unlawful contempt of court and resisting arrest incident. The
apparent objective of the judge pro tem attorneys was to discredit the victim of Gary's misconduct,
trivialize the incident, and cover up their own misconduct in failing to report the judge. For our follow-up
reports, click here. In 2014, a video of the illegal arrest and assault was leaked by a government
whistleblower. Click here for details.

California Lawyer Magazine

Courthouse News Service
Metropolitan News
Enterprise
California Official Case Law
Google Scholar-Includes
Unpublished Case Law
California Statutes

CALIFORNIA JUDICIAL
BRANCH
California Courts
Homepage
California Courts YouTube
Page
Judicial Council
Commission on Judicial
Performance
Sacramento County Family
Court
3rd District Court of Appeal

State Bar of California

In 2008controversial family courtJudge Peter J. McBriendeprived a family court litigant of a fair trial
in a case where the winning party was represented by judge protemattorney Charlotte Keeley. In a
scathing, published opinion, the 3rd District Court of Appealreversed in full and ordered a new
trial. 6th District Court of Appeal Presiding Justice Conrad Rushing characterized McBrien's
conduct in thecase as a "judicial reign of terror."McBrien subsequently was disciplined by the
Commission on Judicial Performance for multiple acts of misconduct in 2009.Click here to read the
court of appeal decision. Click here to read the disciplinary decision issued by the CJP.

State Bar Court

Judge pro tem attorneysCamille Hemmer,Robert O'Hair,Jerry GuthrieandRussell Carlsoneach

testified in support ofJudge Peter J. McBrienwhen thecontroversialjudge was facing removal from
the bench by theCommission on Judicial Performancein 2009.As a sworn temporary judges aware
of McBrien's misconduct, each wasrequired byCanon 3D(1)of theCode of Judicial Ethicsto take or
initiate appropriate corrective action to address McBrien's misconduct. Instead, each testified as a
character witnessin supportof the judge. In theCJP'sfinal disciplinary decision allowing McBrien to
remain on the bench, theCJPreferred specifically to the testimony as a mitigating factor that reduced
McBrien's punishment.Click here. Court records indicate thatJudge McBrienhas not disclosed the
potentialconflict of interestto opposing attorneys and litigants in subsequent appearances by the
attorneys in cases before the judge.Click hereforSFCNcoverage of conflict issues.
Judge pro temattorneysTerri Newman,CamilleHemmer,Diane WasznickyandDonna
Reedwereinvolved in a proposedscheme to rig a recall electionofcontroversialJudgePeter J.
McBrienin 2008. The plan involved helping McBrien defeat the recall by electing him "Judge of the
Year" before the November election.Click herefor theSacramento News and Reviewreport.
Judge pro tem attorney Robert J. O'Hair testified as a character witness for controversial Judge Peter
J. McBrien at the judge's second CJP disciplinary proceeding in 2009.Paula Salinger, an attorney
at O'Hair's firm,Woodruff, O'Hair Posner & Salingerwas later granted a waiver of the requirements to
become ajudge pro tem. A family court watchdog asserts the waiver was payback for O'Hair's
testimony for McBrien.Click hereto read our exclusive investigative report.
In cases where one party is unrepresented, family court clerks and judges permit judge pro tem
attorneys to file declarations which violate mandatory state court rule formatting requirements. The
declarations- on blank paper and without line numbers - make it impossible for the pro per to make
lawful written evidentiary objections to false and inadmissible evidence. Click here for our report
documenting multiple state court rule violations in a motion filed bySCBA Family Law Section officer
and temporary judgePaula Salinger. To view the pro per responsive declaration objecting to the illegal

Sacramento County Bar

Association

Local & National Family CourtFamily Law Sites & Blogs (may
be gender-specific)
ABA Family Law Blawg
Directory
California Coalition for
Families and Children
California Protective
Parents Association
Center for Judicial
Excellence
Courageous Kids Network
Divorce & Family Law News
Divorce Corp
Divorced Girl Smiling
Family Law Case Law from
FindLaw
Family Law Courts.com
Family Law Updates at
JDSupra Law News

filing click here, and click here for the pro per points & authorities.
Family court clerks and judges allow judge pro tem attorneys to file a fabricated "Notice of Entry of
Findings and Order After Hearing" in place of a mandatory Judicial Council Notice of Entry of
Judgment FL-190 form. The fake form omits critical appeal rights notifications and other information
included in the mandatory form. Click here for our exclusive report.
Sacramento Family Court temporaryjudgeandfamily law lawyerGary Appelblatt was charged with
13-criminal counts including sexual battery and penetration with a foreign object. The victims were
clients and potential clients of the attorney.The judge pro tem ultimately pleaded no contest to fourof
the original 13-counts, including sexual battery, and was sentenced to 18-months in prison. Court
administrators concealed from the public that Appelblatt held the Office of Temporary Judge.Click
hereto read our report.
Judge pro tem and SCBA Family Law Section attorneyScott Kendall was disbarred from the practice
of law on Nov. 24, 2011. Kendall was disbarred for acts of moral turpitude, advising a client to violate
the law, failing to perform legal services competently, and failing to keep clients informed, including not
telling a client about a wage garnishment order and then withdrawing from the same case without
notifying the client or obtaining court permission. Court administrators concealed from the public that
Kendall held the Office of Temporary Judge.Click here to view our report.

Fathers 4 Justice
HuffPost Divorce
Leon Koziol.Com
Moving Past Divorce
News and Views Riverside
Superior Court
Weightier Matter

CONTRIBUTORS
Cathy Cohen
ST Thomas

Judge pro tem attorneys Nancy Perkovich and Jacqueline Estonin 2008 helped Donna Gary - the
wife of Judge Matthew J. Gary - promote and market ClientTickler, a client management software
program for attorneys. The judge reportedly has never disclosed the conflict of interest as required by
the Code of Judicial Ethics. Click here for our exclusive report on the controversy.

PR Brown
PelicanBriefed

In February, 2013 the website of family law firm Bartholomew & Wasznicky cut off the public from the
only online access to The Family Law Counselor, a monthly newsletter published by the Sacramento
Bar Association Family Law Section. Lawyers at the firm include judge pro tem attorneys Hal
Bartholomew, Diane Wasznicky and Mary Molinaro. As SFCN has reported, articles in the
newsletter often reflect an unusual, collusive relationship between SCBA attorneys and court
administrators and judges.Click here for our report.

FCAC News

Family court reform advocates assert that judge pro tem attorneys obtain favorable court rulings on
disputed issues at a statistically improbable rate. The collusion between full-time judges and judge pro
tem attorneys constitutes unfair, fraudulent, and unlawful business practices, all of which are
prohibited under California unfair competition laws, including Business and Professions Code
17200, reform advocates claim.

Total Pageviews

RoadDog

138931

Unfair competition and the collusion between judges and judge pro tem attorneys ultimately results in
unnecessary appeals burdening the appellate court system, and other, related litigation that wastes
public funds, exposes taxpayers to civil liability, and squanders scarce court resources.
Watchdogs point out that the court operates what amounts to a two-track system of justice. One for
judge pro tem attorneys and another for unrepresented, financially disadvantaged litigants and
"outsider attorneys." Two-track systems are prohibited by the Code of Judicial Ethics, according to
the Commission on Judicial Performance and the California Judicial Conduct Handbook, the gold
standard reference on judge misconduct.Click here for articles about the preferential treatment given
judge pro tem attorneys. Click here for examples of how pro pers are treated.
After representing a client in Sacramento Family Court, San Francisco attorney Stephen R. Gianelli
wrote "this is a 'juice court' in which outside counsel have little chance of prevailing...[the] court has now
abandoned even a pretense of being fair to outside counsel." Click here to read Gianelli's complete,
scathing account.
The Sacramento County Bar Association Family Law Section is led by an "Executive Committee"
("FLEC") of judge pro tem attorneys composed ofChair Russell Carlson, Vice Chair Elaine Van
Beveren, Treasurer Fredrick Cohen and Secretary Paula Salinger. Three of the four have been
involved in legal malpractice litigation, violations of the Code of Judicial Ethics, or as a defendant in
federal civil rights litigation. Click here to read SFCN profiles of the Executive Committee members.
Click here for otherarticles about FLEC.
Judge pro tem attorneys are by law required to take or initiate corrective action if they learn that
another judge has violated any provision of the Code of Judicial Ethics, or if a lawyer has violated any
provision of the California Rules of Professional Conduct. Family court watchdogs assert that
temporary judges regularly observe unethical and unlawful conduct by family court judges and attorneys
but have never taken or initiated appropriate corrective action, a violation of the judge pro tem oath of
office. To view the applicable Code of Judicial Ethics Canons,Click here. For a Judicial Council
directive about the obligation to address judicial misconduct, a critical self-policing component of the
Code of Judicial Ethics, click here.

136

Google+ Badge

PR Brown
Follow

Labels

2011 SACRAMENTO/MARIN
AUDITS
(2)
3rd DISTRICT

COA
(6)
AB

(1)

1102
(1)
AB 590

ABA

JOURNAL

ADMINISTRATORS

(1)

(4)

AGGREGATED NEWS

(14)
AL SALMEN
(1)

AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION

(1)

ANALYSIS
(36)

FURILLO

(2)

ANDY

AOC

(1)

APPEALS
(10)
ARCHIBALD
CUNNINGHAM
(1)
ARTHUR G.
SCOTLAND
(5)
ARTS &

CULTURE

(21)

ATTORNEY
(4)
ATTORNEY
For information about the role of temporary judges in

DISCIPLINE
(4)
ATTORNEY
ETHICS
(2)

ATTORNEY

More

Next Blog

Create Blog
Sign In

Sacramento Family Court News

Investigative Reporting, News, Analysis, Opinion & Satire
HOME

JUDGE PRO TEMS

3rd DISTRICT COURT of APPEAL

RoadDog SATIRE

ABOUT FAMILY COURT NEWS

CONTACT FAMILY COURT NEWS

Terms & Conditions

ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT

Privacy Policy

DOCUMENT LIBRARY

SHORTCUTS TO POPULAR
SUBJECTS AND POSTS

3rd DISTRICT COURT of APPEAL

Third District Court of Appeal

Justice, Ideology & Conflicts of Interest

JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT

(63)
JUDGE PRO TEM
(49)
ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT

(35)
MATTHEW J. GARY
(33)
FLEC
(28)
SCBA
(22)
ARTS & CULTURE
(21)
CHILD CUSTODY
(21)
PETER J. McBRIEN
(20)
ROBERT SAUNDERS
(20)
WATCHDOGS
(19)
CHARLOTTE KEELEY
(18)

A Sacramento Family Court News investigation indicates that ideology and undisclosed conflicts of interest play a significant role in the
outcome of appeals in the Third District Court of Appeal.

An Exclusive Sacramento Family Court News Investigation

This ongoing investigative project was last updated in June, 2014.

CJP
(18)
EMPLOYEE MISCONDUCT

(18)
PRO PERS
(18)

Sacramento Family Court Newsis conducting an ongoing investigationof published and unpublished 3rd District
Court of Appeal decisions in trial court cases originating from family courts. This page is regularly updated with
our latest news, analysis, and opinion. Our preliminary findings reveal an unsettling link between how an appeal is
decided and the political ideology, work history, and family law bar ties of the court of appeal justices assigned to
the appeal.Our investigation indicates that the outcome of an appeal is in large part dependent on the luck of the
justice draw. Appeals are assigned to three of ten justices. The background of each appears to play a significant
role in how an appeal is decided.
For example, 3rd District unpublished opinions show
that Court of Appeal justices who were elevated to
the appellate courtfrom Sacramento
CountySuperior Court will often effectively cover for
judicial errors in appeals from the same court. Third
District Justices George Nicholson, Harry E. Hull,
Jr.,Ronald B. Robie, and Presiding Justice Vance
W. Rayepreviously were trial court judges
inSacramento County Superior Court. Each have
social and professional ties to family court judges and

DOCUMENTS
(16)
DIVORCE CORP
(13)
JAMES M. MIZE
(12)
COLOR OF LAW SERIES

(11)
CONFLICT OF INTEREST

(11)
SATIRE
(11)
WOODRUFF O'HAIR
POSNER and SALINGER

(11)

Filing an appeal in the 3rd District can be a gamble. Depending

JAIME R. ROMAN
(10)

on the three justices assigned, the outcomemay be influenced

attorney members of the Sacramento County Bar
byideology and unacknowledged conflictsof interest.
Association Family Law Section.After his retirement
in 2011, 3rd District Presiding Justice Arthur
Scotland described the professional and personal relationships he had with attorneys during his career on the
bench.

"[I] enjoy friendships...I go to all the county bar events. I do that for two reasons. One, I think
it's a responsibility of a judge to be active in the community, and the attorneys appreciate it.
But I really like the people. I really like going to these events. I enjoy friendships and that sort
of thing." Click here to view Scotland's statement.
To get a sense of the collusive atmosphere in Sacramento Family Law Court, we recommend reading our special
Color of Law series of investigative reports, which document the preferential treatment provided by family court
employees and judges to SCBA Family Law Section lawyers at the trial court level. Click here to view the Color
of Law series.Financially disadvantaged, unrepresented litigants who face opposing parties represented by SCBA
attorneys assert that the collusive collegiality taints appeal proceedings in the appellate court.

Pro per advocates contend that under Canon 3E(4)(a) and (c) of the Code of Judicial Ethics, Raye, Robie, Hull
and Nicholson should disqualify themselves from participating in any appeal originating fromSacramento Family
Law Court. Advocates argue that the same conflict of interest principles apply to family court appeals that resulted
in the self-recusal, or removal, of Vance Raye from participating in the 2002 Commission on Judicial
Performance prosecution of family courtJudge Peter McBrien. To view the 2002 Raye recusal andCJP decision
against McBrien, click here.The CJP has disciplined judges for violating the Code of Judicial Ethics rules
requiring judges to disclose conflicts. Click here for examples of CJP conflict of interest disciplinary decisions.
It is a basic principle of law that state appellate justices and federal judges with personal or professional
relationships with trial court judges connected to an appeal or federal court action should disqualify themselves to
avoid the appearance of partiality. Click here to view a recent order issued by a federal judge disqualifying the
entire bench of the Fresno Division of the US District Court for the Eastern District of Californiadue to personal
and professional relationships with local state court judges. The conflict disclosure problem infects the Superior
Court as well. To the benefit of local family law attorneys who also hold the office of temporary judge in the same
court, Sacramento Family Law Court judges effectively have institutionalized noncompliance with state conflict
of interest disclosure laws.Click here. For an example of a Sacramento County civil court trial judge who fully
complied with conflict laws, click here.Without oversight or accountability, family court judges routinely - and in
violation of state law - ignore the same disclosure requirements.

History & Origins of the Current Sacramento County

Family Court System

LAURIE M. EARL
(10)
NO CONTACT ORDERS
(10)
SHARON A. LUERAS
(10)
WHISTLEBLOWERS
(10)
CARLSSON CASE
(9)
RAPTON-KARRES
(9)
CHRISTINA VOLKERS
(8)
FERRIS CASE
(8)
JESSICA HERNANDEZ
(8)
JULIE SETZER
(7)
YOUTUBE
(7)
3rd DISTRICT COA
(6)
CIVIL RIGHTS
(6)
CHRISTINA ARCURI
(5)
CONTEMPT
(5)
THADD BLIZZARD
(5)
FAMILY LAW FACILITATOR

(4)
LUAN CASE
(4)
CANTIL-SAKAUYE
(3)
MIKE NEWDOW
(2)

WE SUPPORT
In 1991, as a superior court judge, current3rd District
Justice Vance Raye partneredwith controversial family
court Judge Peter J. McBrien and attorneys from the
Sacramento County Bar Association Family Law
Sectionin establishing the current, dysfunctional Sacramento
Family Courtsystem, according to the sworn testimony of
McBrien at his 2009 judicial misconduct trial before the
Commission on Judicial Performance.

Electronic Frontier
Foundation

Behind closed doors and under oath, the judge provided

explicit details about the 1991 origins of the present-day
family court structure. The public court system was built to the
specifications of private-sector attorneys from the SCBA
Family Law Section Family Law Executive Committee,
according to McBrien's testimony.To view McBrien's detailed
description of the collusive public-private collaboration, posted
online exclusively by SFCN, click here. To view the same,
current day collusion, click here. The 1991 restructuring plan
began with a road trip suggested by the family law bar:

LAW BLOGS WE LIKE

"[T]he family law bar, and it was a fairly strong bar

here in Sacramento, initiated the concept of a trip
to Orange County and San Diego County to pick up
Tani Cantil Sakauye worked with Peter J. McBrien
some ideas about how their courts were structured.

in Sacramento County Superior Court from 1997-2005.

And myself and Judge Ridgeway and two family
law attorneys made that trip and came back with
various ideas of how to restructure the system," McBrien told the CJP.Click hereto view.

First Amendment Coalition

Californians Aware

Family Law Professor Blog

Law Librarian Blog
Law Professor Blogs
Thurman Arnold Family
Law Blog
Kafkaesq
Above the Law
The Divorce Artist

LEGAL NEWS &

INFORMATION

But before his sworn 2009 CJP testimony, McBrien gave the public a different account of the road trip and who
restructured the family court system in 1991.As reported by the Daily Journal legal newspaper
McBriendishonestly impliedthat the system was conceived and implemented by judges alone after they made a
county-paid "statewide tour" of family law courts. The judge omitted from the story the fact that the trip was initiated
by the family law bar, and included two private-sector family law attorneys who took the county-paid trip with
McBrien and the late Judge William Ridgeway.
"[M]cBrien and a few other Sacramento judges went on a statewide tour of family law courts.
At the time, there were continual postponements of trials. 'This is how we came up with the
system today,' McBrien said. 'It was the best trip Sacramento County ever paid for.' The
judges changed the local system so that family law judges presided over both law and motion
matters and trials..."the Daily Journal reported. Click here to view.

California Lawyer Magazine

Courthouse News Service
Metropolitan News
Enterprise
California Official Case Law
Google Scholar-Includes
Unpublished Case Law
California Statutes

Under oath, McBrien admitted that the private-sector, for-profit family law bar dictated the public court facility
restructuring plan - conceived to serve the needs and objectives of SCBA Family Law Section member attorneys
- which then essentially was rubber-stamped by the bench.
"[T]he Bar culled through the various ideas and options, came up with a plan, presented it to
the family law bench. We made what adjustments we felt were appropriate and then presented
the whole of it to the full bench," and the plan was approved. Click here to view.
In essence, McBrien disclosed that the current public court system was set up by and for local attorneys with little, if
any, consideration of theneeds of the 70 percent of court users unable to afford counsel. The system also has
shown it is designed to repel carpetbagger, outsider attorneys, like Stephen R. Gianelli of San Francisco, and
Sharon Huddle of Roseville. Click here and here. "[T]his is a 'juice court' in which counsel outside Sacramento
have little chance of prevailing...[the] court has now abandoned even a pretense of being fair to out-of-town
counsel," Gianelli said.According to the Commission on Judicial Performance - the state agency responsible
for oversight and accountability of California judges - the structure is known as a "two-track system of justice."
"In this case, we again confront the vice inherent in a two-track system of justice, where
favored treatment is afforded friends and other favored few, and which is easily recognized as
'corruption at the core of our system of impartial equal justice, and...intolerable," the CJP said
in a 2005 judicial discipline decision involving a Santa Clara County judge.To view a list of
similar CJP decisions, click here.
According to the gold standard reference on judicial ethics, the California Judicial Conduct Handbook [pdf],
published by the California Judges Association, providing preferential treatment to local, connected attorneys
also is known as "hometowning," and is prohibited by the Code of Judicial Ethics.To view this section of the
Handbook, click here.

CALIFORNIA JUDICIAL
BRANCH
California Courts
Homepage
California Courts YouTube
Page
Judicial Council
Commission on Judicial
Performance
Sacramento County Family
Court
3rd District Court of Appeal
State Bar of California
State Bar Court
Sacramento County Bar
Association

Keeping Neutral Judges Out-of-the-Loop

One objective of the revamped system was to

keep all family court proceedings in-house: within
the isolated family relations courthouse. Prior to
the change, trials were conducted at the
downtown, main courthouse and before judges
more likely to have a neutral perspective on a
given case, and less likely to have ties to the
family law bar.
"The judges changed the local system
so that family law judges presided over
both law and motion matters and trials,
which used to be sent to a master
calendar department and competed
with criminal trials for scheduling," the
Daily Journal reported.
Family court watchdogs and whistleblowers
allege that under the system set up by Raye and
McBrien, the local family law bar - through the
Family Law Executive Committee or FLEC now controls for the financial gain of members
virtually all aspects of court operations, including
local court rules.A cartel of local family law
attorneys receive preferential treatment from
family court judges and appellate court

Local & National Family CourtFamily Law Sites & Blogs (may
be gender-specific)
ABA Family Law Blawg
Directory
California Coalition for
Families and Children
California Protective
Parents Association
Center for Judicial
Excellence
Courageous Kids Network
Divorce & Family Law News
Divorce Corp
Divorced Girl Smiling
Family Law Case Law from
FindLaw
Family Law Courts.com
Family Law Updates at

justicesbecause the lawyers are members of the

Sacramento Bar Association Family Law
Section, hold the Office of Temporary Judge,
and run the family court settlement conference
program, court reform advocates charge.

JDSupra Law News

Justice Ronald Robie performs in the "Judge's Choir" for the

Sacramento County Bar Association Family Law Section

Holiday Luncheon.

Fathers 4 Justice
HuffPost Divorce
Leon Koziol.Com

Court watchdogs have catalogued and documented examples of judge pro tem attorney favoritism, and
flagrantbias against unrepresented litigants and "outsider" attorneys. Click here for a list of watchdog claims.
Published and unpublished 3rd District opinions indicate that Court of Appeal justices without direct ties to the
same superior court are more likely to follow the law, and less likely to whitewash trial court mistakes.

Carlsson Case Exposes 3rd District Ideology &

Undisclosed Conflict of Interest Issues

Moving Past Divorce

News and Views Riverside
Superior Court
Weightier Matter

CONTRIBUTORS
Cathy Cohen
ST Thomas
PR Brown
PelicanBriefed
FCAC News
RoadDog

Total Pageviews

137887
140

One of these things is not like the others, One of these things just doesn't belong,
Can you tell which thing is not like the others, By the time I finish my song?
Third District Court of Appeal Justices Ronald B. Robie, Harry E. Hull Jr., George Nicholson and Cole Blease.
Only Blease (R) has no past connection to Sacramento County Superior Court.

Google+ Badge
One of the few Third District opinions to critically, and scathingly scrutinize the problematic Sacramento Family
Court system was the 2008 decisionIn re Marriage of Carlsson, authored by Associate JusticesM. Kathleen
Butz, Cole Blease and Rick Sims.The opinion criticized explicitly the conduct of controversial Sacramento
County Family Court Judge Peter J. McBrien. None of the three 3rd District justices who decided the appeal
had ever worked as a judge in Sacramento County. A fourth outsider jurist,Sixth District Court of Appeal
Presiding Justice Conrad L. Rushing subsequently characterized McBrien's conduct in the Carlsson case as a
"judicial reign of terror."In addition to ordering a full reversal and new trial, the 3rd Districtdecision subjected
McBriento a second disciplinary action by the state Commission on Judicial Performance.

PR Brown
Follow

Labels
The judge's first go-round with the CJPstemmed from McBrien's 2000 arrest for felony vandalism under Penal
Code 594 in connection with the destruction of public-owned trees - valued at more than $20,000 - at the Effie
Yeaw Nature Center in Ancil Hoffman Park, Carmichael, California. McBrien had the trees cut to improve the
view from his home on a bluff above the park. Click here for the 2001Sacramento News and Review coverage
of the case.Click here to view the original summons charging McBrien with felony vandalism. Click here to view
the report of Sacramento County District Attorney's Office Criminal Investigator Craig W. Tourte detailing the
complete investigation of McBrien's crime, posted online for the first time exclusively by SFCN.

Less than 48 hours after the judge was charged with the felony, McBrien negotiated a plea bargain, pleading no
contest to a misdemeanor violation of Penal Code 384a,paying restitution of $20,000, and a fine of $500.The
improved view increased thevalue of the judge's home by at least $100,000, according to a local real estate
agent, and the sweetheart deal outraged the Ancil Hoffman Park personnel who originally discovered the
butchered trees and conducted the initial investigation. McBrien's subsequent 2009 sworn testimony before the
CJP recounting his criminal case starkly contradicted Tourte's report and the truth about his criminal conviction.

2011 SACRAMENTO/MARIN
AUDITS
(2)
3rd DISTRICT

COA
(6)
AB

(1)

ABA

1102
(1)
AB 590
JOURNAL

ADMINISTRATORS

(1)

(4)

AGGREGATED NEWS

(14)
AL SALMEN
(1)

AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION

(1)

ANALYSIS
(36)

FURILLO

(2)

ANDY

AOC

(1)

APPEALS
(10)
ARCHIBALD
CUNNINGHAM
(1)
ARTHUR G.
SCOTLAND
(5)
ARTS &

CULTURE

(21)

ATTORNEY
(4)
ATTORNEY
DISCIPLINE
(4)
ATTORNEY

ATTORNEY
MISCONDUCT
(35)

ETHICS
(2)

ATTORNEYS
(11)
BAR
ASSOCIATION
(11)
BARACK
OBAMA
(1)
BARTHOLOMEW
and WASZNICKY
(3)
BUNMI
AWONIYI

(1)

CALIFORNIA

JUDICIAL CONDUCT HANDBOOK

(1)
CALIFORNIA

LAWYER
(1)

CALIFORNIANS AWARE
(2)

CAMILLE HEMMER
(3)

CANTIL-SAKAUYE

(3)

CARLSSON CASE
(9)
CECIL
and CIANCI
(2)
CEO
(4)

CHARLOTTE KEELEY

(18)
CHILD CUSTODY

(21)
CHILD SUPPORT
(3)

In the documentary film Divorce Corp, Ulf Carlsson describes egregious misconduct by Sacramento Family Law Court Judge Peter McBrien. Using
misleading sworn testimony about McBrien's reversal rate in the appellate court, 3rd District Court of Appeal Presiding Justice Arthur G. Scotland
effectively saved McBrien from being removed from the bench by the Commission on Judicial Performance.

Presiding Justice Arthur G. Scotland Intervenes in

McBrien CJP Prosecution
On his second trip to the CJP woodshed, Judge
PeterMcBrien needed all the help he could get to
save his job, and then-Third District Court of
Appeal Presiding Justice Arthur Scotland
delivered in a big way. Among other slight-of-hand
tricks, Scotland devised a clever artifice to make it
appear to the CJP judges assigned to decide
McBrien's fate that the trial court judge had a much
lower than average rate of reversal in the court of
appeal.

CHRISTINA ARCURI
(5)

CHRISTINA VOLKERS
(8)

CIVICS
(1)
CIVIL LIABILITY
(1)

CIVIL RIGHTS
(6)
CJA
(3)

CJP
(18)
ClientTickler
(2)

CNN
(1)
CODE OF JUDICIAL
ETHICS
(12)
CODE OF
SILENCE
(2)
COLLEEN
MCDONAGH
(3)
COLOR OF

(11)
SERIES

LAW

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

(11)
CONSTITUTIONAL
RIGHTS
(3)
CONTEMPT
(5)

COURT CONDITIONS
(2)

COURT EMPLOYEE
(1)
COURT

EMPLOYEE CODE OF ETHICS

(1)
COURT POLICIES
(1)
COURT
RULES
(4)
COURTS
(1)
CPG

CRIMINAL
CONDUCT
(9)
CRIMINAL

FAMILY LAW
(1)

LAW
(3)
CRONYISM
(2)

DAVID KAZZIE
(4)
DEMOTION

Scotland's 2009 testimony on McBrien's behalf

also was controversial and may itself have violated
the Code of Judicial Ethics. A critical self-policing
component of the Code,Canon 3D(1) requires
judges who have reliable information that another
judge has violated any provision of the Code take
"appropriate corrective action, which may include
reporting the violation to the appropriate authority."
Click here to view Canon 3D(1).Click here to view
a Judicial Council directive about the duty to take
corrective action, and the types of corrective action
required.

(1)
DENISE

GARY
(2)
DSM-301.7
(1)
EDITORIAL
(1)
EDWARD
FREIDBERG
(2)
EFF
(2)

RICHARDS
(1)

DIANE WASZNICKY
(2)

DISQUALIFICATION
(2)

DIVORCE
(7)
DIVORCE
ATTORNEY
(5)
DIVORCE
CORP
(13)
DIVORCE
(5)
LAWYER

DOCUMENTS
(16)

DONALD TENN
(3)
DONNA

By his own admission, Scotland's career in the Judicial Branch of government was the result of connections and
preferential treatment. The former justice candidly recited his life history in a nearly three-hour interview for the
CaliforniaAppellate Court Legacy Project in 2011. Like other gratuitous "tough-on-crime"conservative
ideologues from a law enforcement background who rose to power in the 1980's, Scotland apparently lived the
cliche of beingborn on third base and going through life thinking he hit a triple. His interest in law developed
when he worked as an undercover narcotics agent for the state Department of Justice.

EFFICIENCY

IN

GOVERNMENT

ELAINE VAN
BEVEREN
(13)
ELECTIONS
(1)
AWARD
(1)

Tani Cantil-Sakauye, Arthur Scotland, George Nicholson and

While under oath before the CJP, Scotland verified

Peter McBrien all workedfor former California Attorney General

that he was aware ofMcBrien's misconduct in the

and Governor George Deukmejian.All were appointed to the

Sacramento County bench by Deukmejian.

Carlsson case.Scotland essentially defied the selfpolicing Canon and, in effect,the published Carlsson
opinion authored by his co-workers Butz, Blease and Sims, and instead testified in support of McBrien at the CJP.
In it's final decision allowing McBrien to remain on the bench, the CJP specifically cited Scotland's testimony as a
mitigating factor that reducedMcBrien's punishment. Click here.An examination of Scotland's career in
government - funded by the taxpayers of California - provides insight into the tactics, motives, and questionable
ethics behind his unusual involvement in the McBrien matter.

EMILY

GALLUP

(3)

EMPLOYEE CODE OF ETHICS

(4)

EMPLOYEE
MISCONDUCT
(18)

EQUAL PROTECTION
(2)

EUGENE L. BALONON
(1)

EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS

(2)
EX PARTE
(1)
F4J
(4)

FAMILY COURT
(9)
FAMILY
COURT

COURT

AUDITS
(1)
FAMILY

CONDITIONS
(2)

FAMILY COURT

MEDIA COVERAGE

(1)
FAMILY COURT PROCEDURE

(1)

FAMILY
COURT
SACRAMENTO
(2)
FAMILY

COURTHOUSE
(1)
FAMILY

LAW

"[I] bluffed my way through the interview, and I got hired as a narcotics agent in 1969...I was
an undercover narcotics agent. I've bought a lot of dope in my life...all lawfully, but I've
bought a lot of dope," Scotland said. "And I testified in court. And that's what got me
fascinated in the legal process...and it got me involved in the law." Click here to view.
Having worked with prosecutors as an undercover cop, Scotland
decided he wanted to be one. But due to his lackluster
performance as a college student, law school presented a
problem, albeit a problem easily solved through a family
connection.
"[I] thought, I want to be a prosecutor. I'm going to go
to law school; I want to be a prosecutor. So I applied
in 1971. I applied to only one school: University of the
Pacific, McGeorge School of Law...[M]y grades weren't
all that great. I did very well on the LSAT test: I did
excellent on that. But I didn't figure I could get
accepted anywhere else, 'cause I really hadn't been a
serious student. So I went to University of Pacific,
McGeorge School of Law," Scotland explained. "I didn't
know [McGeorge Dean Gordon D.Schaber], but my
dad did. And my dad had done some life insurance,
estate planning work for McGeorge. And again, my
dad was an influence on my life because he knew
people and he set me up with jobs. And I'm sure that
one of the reasons I got selected for McGeorge School
of Law is my dad's relationship with the dean."Click
here to view.

(9)

FAMILY
LAW
COUNSELOR
(4)
FAMILY
LAW
FACILITATOR
(4)

FATHERS FOR JUSTICE

(1)

FEDERAL LAW
(2)
FEDERAL

LAWSUITS
(2)
FEE WAIVERS

(2)
FERRIS CASE
(8)
FIRST
AMENDMENT
(2)
FIRST
AMENDMENT COALITION
(2)

FLEC
(28)
FOIA
(2)
FOX

(1)
FREDRICK COHEN
(4)

GANGNAM STYLE
(1)
GARY E.
RANSOM
(1)
GARY
M.
APPELBLATT
(2)
GEORGE

NICHOLSON
(1)
GERALD UELMEN

(1)
GINGER

GREGORY

SYLVESTER
(1)

DWYER
(1)

HAL

BARTHOLOMEW
(1)
HATCHET
DEATH
(1)
HAZART SANKER

(2)
HONEST SERVICES
(4)

INDIGENT
(1)
INFIGHTING
(1)
J.
STRONG
(2)
JACQUELINE
ESTON
(2)
JAIME R.

(10)
JAMES
JAMES M.
MIZE
(12)
JEFFREY
POSNER
(6)
JERRY BROWN
ROMAN

BROSNAHAN
(1)

Arthur Scotland used a family connection to get into

a law schoolwith liberal admission standards.

After graduation, but before he was licensed to practice law, Scotland nonetheless practiced law while employed as
a deputy district attorney for Sacramento County. In the outside world, the unauthorized practice of law is a
crime. But in Scotland's protective law enforcement bubble, "laws" are only enforced against drug addicts and the
unwashed masses. As Scotland explained in his own words, laws are actually only "rules" when a sworn peace
officer breaks one.
"Actually, before I even got sworn in in the bar, I was assigned out to juvenile hall and we
prosecuted...I prosecuted cases without any supervision - you know, against...really against
the rules...we were trying cases without any supervision." Click here.
In McGregor v. State Bar, the seminal case on the unauthorized practice of law, the California Supreme Court
explained why a nonlicensed person is prohibited from exercising the special powers and privileges of a lawyer.
"The right to practice law not only presupposes in its possessor integrity, legal standing and
attainment, but also the exercise of a special privilege, highly personal and partaking of the
nature of a public trust. It is manifest that the powers and privileges derived from it may not
with propriety be delegated to or exercised by a nonlicensed person." Click here.
25 years after he obtained his license to practice law, Justice Arthur G. Scotlandexploited the implied integrity of
his court of appeal office and exercised his special privilege in a way that to many Sacramento Family Court
litigants was a manifest violation of the public trust.

The Artifice

(1)

JERRY

GUTHRIE

(1)

JESSICA HERNANDEZ
(8)

JODY PATEL
(1)
JOHN E.B. MYERS

(1)
JOSEPH SORGE
(1)
JOYCE
KENNARD
(1)
JOYCE TERHAAR
(1)

JUDGE
PRO TEM
(49)

JRC
(1)
JUDGE
(1)

JUDGE SALARIES
(1)
JUDGES

(10)
JUDICIAL CONDUCT
HANDBOOK

(1)

COUNCIL

JUDICIAL
(3)

JUDICIAL
MISCONDUCT

(63)
JUDY HOLZER

HERSHER
(1)
JULIE SETZER

(7)
KIDS FOR CASH
(2)

LAURIE M. EARL
(10)
LAW
LIBRARY
(1)
LAW SCHOOL

(5)
LAWYER
(1)
LAWYERS

(7)
LEGAL AID ASSOCIATION of
CALIFORNIA
(1)
LEGISLATURE
(1)

LOLLIE
LINCOLN

(1)

ROBERTS
(5)
LOUIS MAURO
(1)

LUAN

CASE

(4)

MALPRACTICE
(4)
MARY
MOLINARO
(1)
MATTHEW
HERNANDEZ

(7)

MATTHEW J. GARY

(33)
MCGEORGE

MEDIA
(1)
MICHAEL

SOL
(2)
T. GARCIA

(1)
MIKE NEWDOW
(2)
NANCY

GRACE
(1)
NANCY PERKOVICH

(4)
NEW YORK TIMES
(2)

NEWS
(24)
NEWS
EXCLUSIVE
(26)
NEWS

YOU CAN USE

(3)
News10
(1)

To help his old friend Pete McBrien keep his job, Justice Arthur G. Scotland concocted a clever plan intended to deceive the judges
deciding McBrien's punishment at the Commission on Judicial Performance.

NO CONTACT ORDERS

(10)
OPEN GOVERNMENT

(2)
OPINION
(12)
PARENT
RIGHTS

(1)

PARENTAL

In his Commission on Judicial Performance sworn character witness testimony for his old friend and law
enforcement co-workerPeter McBrien, Arthur Scotland drew on his training and experience in deceit from his
days as a narc."[Y]ou have to be an actor, you have to play the game," Scotland explained in the 2011 interview.
In front of the three CJP judges responsible for hearing evidence and deciding McBrien's fate, Scotland concocted
a clever, deceptive plan - an artifice in legal terminology - and convincingly delivered an award worthy actor's
performance.

While testifying for McBrien,Scotland also revealed that his appearance on the troubled judge'sbehalf effectively
was voluntary. Before subpoenaing Scotland to testify, McBrien's defense attorney confirmed that Scotland would
not object to the subpoena. Click here. Judicial ethics Canon 2B restricts use of the prestige of judicial office to
advance the personal interests of the judge or others. Canon 2B(2)(a) permits a judge to testify as a character
witness only when subpoenaed. The transcript of Scotland's testimony also showed that -to prepare his CJP
testimony - the presiding justice of the 3rd District affirmatively and voluntarily took the initiative(presumably on
his own time) to research 3rd District family court appeals where McBrien was the trial court judge. His objective
was to show the CJP that McBrien had a low reversal rate in the appellate court.
"I also, by the way -- when you called me to ask if I would object to being Subpoenaed as a
witness, and I said no, I did research. I looked up -- I knew what this was all about, so I
researched the number of appeals from cases from Judge McBrien's court. And so I -- and I
looked -- I read all the opinions in which he was reversed in full or in part...
I've known Judge McBrien for 32 years. I got to know, then, Deputy Attorney General Pete
McBrien. When I left the Sacramento County District Attorney's Office and went to work for
the California Attorney General's Office, he was already a Deputy Attorney General there. So I
got to know him there, mainly professionally. Socially to a relatively minor extent. We had -we had two co-ed softball teams. He played on one; I played on another. Of course, we would
attend office functions together. His -- one of his very best friends was my supervisor in the
Attorney General's Office. So, on occasion -- not frequently, but on occasion we would attend
social events with others from the office....
[McBrien had] seven reversals in whole or in part, out of 110 appeals, which is about 6%,
which actually is a remarkably good reversal rate. Because our average reversal rate in civil
cases is 20 to 25 percent." Scotland testified at pages 549-553 of the reporter's transcript. Click
here.

(1)
PAULA
SALINGER

(15)

PETER J. McBRIEN

(20)
PHILLIP HERNANDEZ
ALIENATION

(3)
PRESIDING JUDGE
(2)

PRO
PERS
(18)

PROTEST
(7)
PSY
(1)
PUBLIC
RECORDS

RAOUL

M.

RAPTON(9)

KARRES

RECOGNITION/AWARDS
(3)

REVISIONISM SERIES
(2)

RICHARD SOKOL
(12)

ROBERT
HIGHT
(5)

ROBERT
O'HAIR
(8)

ROBERT SAUNDERS

(20)
ROLAND

L. CANDEE
(1)

RON BURGUNDY
(1)
RONALD

ROBIE
(1)
RUSSELL CARLSON

(4)
RUSSELL L. HOM
(1)
RYDER
SALMEN
(2)
S. HINMAN
(3)

SACRAMENTO BEE
(4)

SACRAMENTO
COUNTY
SUPERIOR
COURT
(2)

SACRAMENTO
FAMILY
COURT
(13)
SACRAMENTO
SUPERIOR COURT
(12)

SANCTIONS
(2)
SANTA

CLARA

LAW SCHOOL
(1)
SARAH ANN

STEPHENS
(1)
SATIRE
(11)
SCBA

(22)

SCHWARZENEGGER
(1)
SCOTT
BUCHANAN
(5)
SCOTT
KENDALL
(1)
SCSD
(1)
SEATON
CASE

(1)

SELF-HELP

(1)

SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

Scotland's claim that McBrien had a

"remarkably good reversal rate" was,
at best, a half-truth. Under the legal
and ethical standards applicable to
lawyers and judges, a half-truth is the
same as a "false statement of fact" or
what the general public refers to as a
lie. Click here.

What Scotland withheld from the CJP

is the fact that the vast majority of
appeals from family court are never
decided on the merits. Unlike appeals
from civil cases, most family court
appeals are taken by unrepresented
parties who fail to navigate the
complexities of appellate procedure
and never make it past the preliminary
stages of an appeal. In other words,
Scotland rigged his statistics. While
McBrien may have had seven
reversals out of 110 appeals filed, only
a small portion of the 110 appeals filed
were actually decided on the merits.

(1)

THORBOURNE
(1)

(2)
SFCN READERSHIP DATA

(4)
SHARON A. LUERAS

(10)
SHARON HUDDLE
(6)

SO YOU WANT TO GO TO
LAW

SCHOOL

(4)

SOCIOECONOMIC BIAS

(5)
STATE AUDITOR
(6)

STATE BAR
(5)
STEPHEN
WAGNER

(2)

LEAVENWORTH

WHITE

(2)

BURLINGHAM

GEVERCER

STEUART

(1)

STEVE
STEVEN

(1)

(1)

STEVEN
STEVEN

SUNDAY
(15)
FUNNIES

SPIELBERG
(1)

SUNSHINE
WEEK
(2)

SUPERIOR COURT
(2)

SUPREME COURT
(3)
TAMI
Arthur Scotland poses with the fruits of a drug bust from his days as an

undercover cop. Trained to lie and deceive in order to make undercover

drug buys, Scotland acknowledged his skill in the role.

"You have to be an actor, you have to play the game," he said in 2011.

Scotland then made a disingenuous, self-serving apples-to-oranges comparison between the reversal rate in civil
case appeals - where both sides are usually represented by an attorney, or team of attorneys, and appeals are
decided on the merits - with the reversal rate in family court cases, where neither qualifier is true.SFCNcurrently is
conducting an audit of 3rd District family court appeals, and will have more on this subject in the near future.

Blame the Victim

BOGERT
(1)
TAXPAYERS
(1)
TERRY FRANCKE
(1)

BLIZZARD
(5)

THADD

THADDEUS

STEVENS
(1)
THE RUTTER GROUP

(1)
THOMAS M. CECIL
(4)

THOMAS WOODRUFF
(5)

TIMOTHY ZEFF
(5)
TOMMY
ULF
LEE
JONES

(1)

CARLSSON
(5)
UNITED
NATIONS
(1)
UPDATE
(2)

VANCE W. RAYE
(3)

VEXATIOUS LITIGANT
(2)

VICTORY OUTREACH CHURCH

(1)

VL-CLASS-ACTION

(1)
WALL

STREET JOURNAL
(1)
WASTE
(1)

In a final act of both flagrant cronyism to his friend and former Department of Justice co-workerPete McBrien,
and disrespect to the work of his fellow 3rd District Court of AppealJusticesKathleen Butz, Cole Blease and
Rick Sims whose published opinion in the Carlsson caseresulted in McBrien's prosecution by the CJP, Scotland
had the balls to suggest that disciplining McBrien for his conduct in Carlsson would be a "miscarriage of justice,"
that would allow "incompetent attorneys to run the court instead of competent judges."
"And you haven't asked me this question, but if [McBrien] were, for some reason, to be found
to have violated the canons of judicial ethics, or whatever, I frankly -- I know about these
cases; I know about the Carlsson case. I think it would be a miscarriage of justice. I think it
would send the wrong signal to judges and practitioners that you don't allow -- that you would
be allowing incompetent attorneys to run the court instead of competent judges," Scotland
testified at the CJP.
Like Scotland, 6th District Court of Appeal Presiding Justice Conrad Rushingknew well the Carlsson case,
which he said "developed a certain notoriety."Unlike Scotland, Rushing wasn't an old friend and coworker of
McBrien who would disingenuously suggest the blame for McBrien's "reign of terror" lay with an incompetent
attorney. Scotland's colleagues at the 3rd District,Butz, Blease and Sims reversed and remanded the Carlsson
case for retrial based on extremely rare, reversible per se, egregiousstructural and constitutional error by Judge
McBrien.Aftercarefully scrutinizing the trial court record, the panel made no mention of attorney "incompetence" in
their published opinion.

However, Scotland's incompetence assertion to the CJP did, coincidentally, perfectly dovetail with
thecarefullycrafted defense McBrien's legal team presented during three days of CJP testimony to the three-judge
CJP panel assigned to decide McBrien's fate. A key component of McBrien's defense relied on suspiciously
consistent witness testimony portraying Ulf Carlsson's attorneySharon Huddle as incompetent and effectively
provoking McBrien's multiple violations of the Code of Judicial Ethics. CJP prosecutor Andrew Blum mocked the
risible defense in a confidential court reporter transcript leaked to SFCN. Click here to view the transcript.
Ironically, the time-tested, repugnant but effectiveblame the victim strategy, was coldly aided and abetted by
Scotland, a justice who rose to power with the backing and endorsements of victims rights groups
includingCrime Victims United of California, and the Doris Tate Crime Victims Bureau. To help McBrien's
defense team, Scotland dusted off thedog-eared playbook of exploiting victims, one way or another, to advance
his personal agenda.
Scotland's irony-infusedblame the victim testimony, misleading appeal reversal data, and theweight of
character witness testimonyfrom a sitting Court of Appeal presiding justice, along with similar character
testimony from Sacramento CountySuperior Court Judges James Mize, Thomas Cecil (currentlyOf Counsel
at the family, family law firm Cecil & Cianci) , Michael Garcia and Robert Hight, and Sacramento County Bar
Association Family Law Section attorneys and judge pro temsCamille Hemmer, Jerry Guthrie, Robert O'Hair
and Russell Carlson all tipped the scale just enough to enable McBrien to keep his job. Click here to view the
complete, 12-page CJP summary of the McBrien character witness testimony.

Despite the parade of former law enforcement co-workers, friends, and family court judge pro tem
croniesMcBrien marshaled on his behalf, two of the voting CJP members saw through the ruse and dissented
from the decision to let the judge remain on the bench, stating they would have removed McBrien from
office.Click here.When he referred to McBrien's conduct in the Carlsson case as a "judicial reign of terror," 6th
District Justice Rushingalso noted that "two of the nine participating members [voted] to remove him from
the bench." Click here.
The Carlsson case is prominently featured in Divorce Corp, a documentary film that "exposes the corrupt and
collusive industry of family law in the United States." The production team for the film conducted a nationwide
search for the most egregious examples of family court corruption and collusion, and four Sacramento County
cases are included in the movie. Narrated by Dr. Drew Pinsky,Divorce Corp opened in theaters in major U.S.
cities on January 9, 2014. Following the theatrical run, the documentary will be released on DVD, RedBox, Netflix,
broadcast and cable TV. Click here for our continuing coverage of Divorce Corp.To view trailers for the movie on
YouTube, click here.

Rehabilitation FAIL
The near-career death experience apparently has had no discernible corrective effect on the ethically-challenged
judge. In subsequent proceedings in his courtroom involving the judge pro tem attorneys (and lawyers at the
same firms as the judge pro tems) whose CJP testimony effectively saved his $170,00 per year job,McBrien
reportedly has never disclosed to opposing parties and attorneys the potential conflict of interest as required by
Canon 3E(2) of the Code of Judicial Ethics. The failure to disclose the potential conflict is a violation of the canon
and other state laws, according to the CJP, Judicial Council, and California Judges Association. For the
exclusive SFCN report on conflict of interest law, click here.

Justice George Nicholson & the Law Enforcement

WATCHDOGS
(19)

WHISTLEBLOWER
PROTECTION
ACT
(2)

WHISTLEBLOWERS
(10)

WHITE HOUSE
(1)
WOODRUFF
O'HAIR POSNER and
SALINGER
(11)
XAPURI B.
VILLAPUDUA

(4)

YOLO

COUNTY
(1)
YOUTUBE
(7)

BlueCode of Silence
In addition, unpublished Third District Court of
Appealdecisions indicate that justices who come
from a law enforcement background appear to take
to the bench with them the "Blue Code of Silence"
culture often found in law enforcement agencies.
3rd District Associate Justice George Nicholson
worked as a prosecuting attorney for more than
15 years before being appointed to the bench in
Sacramento County. The first time Governor
George Deukmejian submitted Nicolson's name to
the bar for review as a judge in 1983, he was rated
as "not qualified," according to the Sacramento
Bee.
"George Nicholson, Republican candidate
for attorney general in 1982, has been
pursuing all manner of public legal
positions: U.S. District Court judge,
California Superior Court judge, U.S. Attorney, public defender in Riverside County. The other
day, when Gov. George Deukmejian appointed him a Sacramento Municipal Court judge, he
finally got one. It's an appointment that ought to cause serious concern both within the State
Bar and in the community. When Deukmejian submitted Nicholson's name to the bar for
review on a possible appointment to the Superior Court in 1983, he was rated 'not qualified.'
The bar now ranks him 'qualified', the lowest acceptable rating of three the bar can give.

Third District Court of Appeal Associate Justice George Nicholson

rode to the benchon a "law and order" agenda.

No one can be certain precisely why Nicholson received such low ratings, but there is enough
in his public record to raise serious questions about his temperament and judgment. In 1979,
he left a job as director of the District Attorneys Association after an audit showed that the
organization's finances had been badly mismanaged and that it was on the verge of
bankruptcy. Later, as a senior assistant attorney general, he was twice admonished by
superiors for promoting a ballot measure in ways that could be mistaken as an official state
Justice Department endorsement of the measure. More recently, a federally funded $4 million
'National School Safety Center' affiliated with Pepperdine University that he directed was
embroiled in an extended controversy during which 18 of 30 staff members either resigned or
were fired.
The U.S. General Accounting Office, which conducted an audit into the management of the
Pepperdine program and into how the federal money was being spent, cleared the center of
fiscal irregularities, attributing the problems to Nicholson's 'combative' personality and
management style. But because of those problems, Pepperdine named a new executive
director, who, the auditors said, restored stability to the management of the program 'while
retaining Nicholson's creative talents,'" the Sacramento Bee said in 1987. Click here.
Nicholson subsequently was elected to both Sacramento County Superior Court and the 3rd District Court of
Appeal with backing from law enforcement, Crime Victims United and other Astroturf "victims rights" and "law
and order" groups. Crime Victims United is funded by - and acts essentially as asubsidiaryof - the California
Correctional Peace Officers Association, the controversial prison guard union.
A principal architect of Proposition 8 the "The Crime Victims' Bill of Rights", after a failed run as the GOP
candidate for attorney general Nicholson rode an anti-Rose Bird, tough-on-crime platform to the bench. Over
several decades, Associate Justice Nicholson played a significant role in giving the United States one of the
highest per capita rates of incarceration in the world. Thanks to Nicholson, the prison guard union, and
Astroturf "victims rights" groups bankrolled by the union, California now spends a significantly larger portion
of the state budget on corrections than on higher education.

Role of Political
Ideology
In 1985, Nicholson was demoted
from his position as director of the
federally financed National School
Safety Center in Sacramento. The
center was administered by
Pepperdine University at Malibu,
and established with a $3.8 million
Justice Department grant awarded

without competitive bidding. Under

Nicholson's leadership, 20 of the
original 30 staff members who set up
Third District Court of Appeal justices who previously were Sacramento
the Center resigned or were
County Superior Court judges include Harry E. Hull Jr., Ronald B. Robie,
dismissed. The Associated Press
George Nicholson Louis Mauro, and Presiding Justice Vance Raye.
reported that that the debacle was
rooted in ideological conflicts between Nicholson and staff whom Nicholson perceived as too liberal. According to
the AP coverage:
"Several [staffers] described Nicholson as a political conservative who mistrusted his mostly
liberal staff members, argued with them unceasingly about the direction of projects, and
accused them of disloyalty when they questioned his ideas.
'When it became obvious to him he attracted a number of us with a different political
philosophy, we were not permitted to do our work,' said Shirley Ruge, a former principal of
schools for delinquent children and one of those dismissed. 'We were considered
troublemakers and he wanted to shut us up.'"
Nicholson and former 3rd District Presiding Justice Arthur Scotland have been close friends and colleagues for
more than 30 years. For the California Appellate Court Legacy ProjectNicholson conducted an almost threehour interview with Scotland on December 8, 2011. The transcript of the interaction reads like a meeting of the
Nicholson-Scotland mutual admiration society. Nicholson opened the interview detailing the joint work history of the
BFFs.
"George Nicholson: We are here with retired Presiding Justice Arthur G. Scotland, who served
on the Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District, for more than 20 years, from 1989 to 2011,
and that...the last dozen of which he was the Administrative Presiding Justice. I'm George
Nicholson, Justice of the Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District, and I had the pleasure of
serving with Presiding Justice Scotland for 20 years on this court. Before that, we served
together as trial judges on the Sacramento Superior Court, and even before that we served
together in the Governor's Office during the Deukmejian administration and in the California
Department of Justice. This has been a long time coming, Scotty, hasn't it?Arthur Scotland:
Nick, it has, and it's a delight for me to have you interview me for this project."
Click here to view the full interview transcript.

"Judgment Roll" Standard of Review Hits Hardest

Indigent and Low-Income Litigants
In addition, the Third District Court of Appealin Sacramento applies a unique and previously rarely used
"judgment roll" standard of review that in virtually every case where applied results in affirmance of trial court
rulings. Appeals brought by self-represented indigent and low-income litigants make up the vast majority of appeals
where the 3rd District applies the judgment roll standard of review. Although the appellate court has authored
dozens of decisions invoking the draconian standard against family court litigants, it has managed to keep the
assembly line, boilerplate process under the radar. The court has not published a single judgment roll appeal
originating from family court. Click here to see a list of unpublished 3rd District opinions archived by Google
Scholar. The judgment roll summary affirmance process helps the court maintain its title as the most
efficientCourt of Appeal in the state. Equal protection of the law is implicated because other appellate court
districts do not apply the standard nearly as often as the Third District. Equal application of the law is a
foundational attribute of American Democracy.

Justices of the Third District Court of Appeal in Sacramento:

Vance W. Raye, Administrative Presiding Justice.
Cole Blease
Ronald Robie
William Murray Jr.
George Nicholson
Kathleen Butz
Elena Duarte
Harry Hull Jr.
Louis Mauro
Andrea Lynn Hoch
For additional Sacramento Family Court News reporting on the Court of Appeal for the Third Appellate
District, click here.

Click to visit Sacramento Family Court News on: Facebook, YouTube, Google+, Scribd, Vimeo, and Twitter.

Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye, Justice Goodwin Liu, Justice Marvin R. Baxter, Justice Ming W. Chin, Justice Kathryn M. Werdegar,
Justice Joyce L. Kennard, and Justice Carol A. Corrigan of the Supreme Court are responsible for oversight and accountability of the 3rd
District Court of Appeal, and the other appellate courts in the state.

+1 Recommend this on Google

Home

Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye & Oversight of California Courts

State officials and agencies responsible for oversight and accountability of California courts, Sacramento Family Law Court, administrators, judges and employees include:Tani

G. Cantil-Sakauye Chief Justice - Elaine M. Howle State Auditor Bureau of State Audits - Victoria B. Henley Director Chief Counsel

Commission on Judicial Performance - Steven Jahr Administrative Director of the Courts - Phillip J. Jelicich Principal Auditor Bureau of State Audits - Janice M.
Brickley Legal Advisor to Commissioners Commission on Judicial Performance - Judicial Council and Court Leadership Services Division Jody Patel Chief of Staff - Doug D. Cordiner

More

Next Blog

Create Blog
Sign In

Sacramento Family Court News

Investigative Reporting, News, Analysis, Opinion & Satire
HOME

JUDGE PRO TEMS

3rd DISTRICT COURT of APPEAL

RoadDog SATIRE

ABOUT FAMILY COURT NEWS

CONTACT FAMILY COURT NEWS

Terms & Conditions

ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT

Privacy Policy

DOCUMENT LIBRARY

14 January 2013

SHORTCUTS TO POPULAR
SUBJECTS AND POSTS

Sacramento Superior Court Employee Misconduct: Family Court

Whistleblower Alleges Systemic Code of Civil Procedure and Court Rule
Violations by Court Administrators & Clerks

JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT

(63)

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

JUDGE PRO TEM

(49)
ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT

(35)
MATTHEW J. GARY
(33)
FLEC
(28)
SCBA
(22)
ARTS & CULTURE
(21)
CHILD CUSTODY
(21)
PETER J. McBRIEN
(20)
ROBERT SAUNDERS
(20)
WATCHDOGS
(19)
CHARLOTTE KEELEY
(18)
CJP
(18)
EMPLOYEE MISCONDUCT

(18)
PRO PERS
(18)

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 family court whistleblower.

DOCUMENTS
(16)
DIVORCE CORP
(13)

A Sacramento County Family Court whistleblower has leaked toSacramento Family Court Newscourt records
indicating that countless family court cases are missing critical paperwork required by state law. After any family
court hearing which results in a judgmentregarding child custody or visitation, spousal support, orany other
judgmentsubject 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 theFL-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

JAMES M. MIZE
(12)
COLOR OF LAW SERIES

(11)
CONFLICT OF INTEREST

(11)
SATIRE
(11)
WOODRUFF O'HAIR
POSNER and SALINGER

(11)
JAIME R. ROMAN
(10)

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 readingPart 1 of our series Color of Law, click Read more >> below.

Omission of FL-190 Reduces Appeals by Family Court

Parties Without Lawyers
"This has been going on for years and judges, attorneys, the family law facilitator, the court of appeal, everyone is
in on this. One objective is to reduce or eliminate appeals by the indigent and self-represented," the source
explained. "The FL-190 is the first notification they get that they even have appeal rights. Without the notice, most
pro per parties are completely unaware that they can appeal child custody, visitation, support and many other
rulings from OSC and motion hearings."
The mandatory Judicial Council form contains a notification about the right to appeal a court order, and a warning
that exhibits may be destroyed or disposed of after 60 days from the expiration of the appeal time.

LAURIE M. EARL
(10)
NO CONTACT ORDERS
(10)
SHARON A. LUERAS
(10)
WHISTLEBLOWERS
(10)
CARLSSON CASE
(9)
RAPTON-KARRES
(9)
CHRISTINA VOLKERS
(8)
FERRIS CASE
(8)
JESSICA HERNANDEZ
(8)
JULIE SETZER
(7)
YOUTUBE
(7)
3rd DISTRICT COA
(6)
CIVIL RIGHTS
(6)

Indigent and self-represented Sacramento Family Court parties do not receive this notice about their right to appeal child
custody/visitation, support and other orders.

California Supreme Court Confirms FL-190

Mandatory
In a 2007 decision,Alan v. American Honda Motor Co., theCalifornia Supreme Courtemphasized the
importance of the mandatoryJudicial Council FL-190form, and that the requirement is unique and specific to
family law proceedings. According to the Supreme Court, one critical function of the form is to establish the time
frame within which an appeal of law and motion orders can be filed.
"The clerk is required to give notice only in designated family law matters (Code Civ. Proc.,
664.5, subd. (a); rule 5.134)...In those family law proceedings in which the clerk must always
give notice, rule 5.134 requires the clerk to use a Judicial Council form (FL-190) specifically
drafted to ensure compliance with rule 8.104(a)(1). Obviously, problems are more likely to
occur when no approved form of notice is available...The Judicial Council form (FL-190) that
clerks must use in family law proceedings...avoids ambiguity...by bearing the title, "Notice of
Entry of Judgement," and by including at the bottom of its single page a form for the clerk's
certificate of mailing."Click here to viewAlan v. American Honda Motor Co.
Sacramento Family Court clerks not only do not file and serve the FL-190 form as required by law, they permit
Sacramento County Bar Association Family Law Section lawyers to file a counterfeit version of the form
which omits both the appeal rights notification and the clerk's certificate of mailing.The fictitious formalsois
served by a private sector lawyer - not a neutral public court clerk as required by both the Code of Civil
Procedure and the state court rules. Using in place of the state mandated form an unauthorized, self-serving form
that omits appeal rights and other important notifications required by law also raisesmoral turpitudeand other
ethical implications against attorneys who engage in the deception. Click here for our complete report on the
counterfeit form issue.

CHRISTINA ARCURI
(5)
CONTEMPT
(5)
THADD BLIZZARD
(5)
FAMILY LAW FACILITATOR

(4)
LUAN CASE
(4)
CANTIL-SAKAUYE
(3)
MIKE NEWDOW
(2)

WE SUPPORT
Electronic Frontier
Foundation
First Amendment Coalition
Californians Aware

LAW BLOGS WE LIKE

Family Law Professor Blog
Law Librarian Blog
Law Professor Blogs
Thurman Arnold Family
Law Blog
Kafkaesq
Above the Law
The Divorce Artist

The clerks certificate of mailing at the bottom of the FL-190 form contains information critical to filing a timely appeal.

LEGAL NEWS &

INFORMATION

California Lawyer Magazine

Judge-Attorney Legal References Confirm FL-190

Procedure
Using the family law legal references used by judges and attorneys, Sacramento Family Court Newsverified
that the FL-190 must beserved and filed by a court clerk for all appealable orders. To view the FL-190
procedure reference in California Practice Guide: Family Law, written by judges for judges and attorneys, and
published by The RutterGroup, click here. To view a similar reference in the companion California Practice
Guide: Civil Appeals and Writs, click here. In addition to the gold standard family law references, California
Practice Guide: Family Lawand Civil Appeals and Writs, the same procedure also is specified in Witkin
California Procedure. Click hereto view the Witkin instructions.

3rd District Court of Appeal Verifies Appealable

Orders Require FL-190
The Third District Court of Appeal in Sacramento publishes a Self-Help Manual [pdf] for self-represented
litigants which confirms that, by law, appealable orders are the same as judgments, and therefore require service
of the FL-190 form. Page 10 of the Self-Help Manual reads:
"Note that the same rules about an appeal from a judgment apply to an appeal from an
appealable order, as the rules of court dealing with appeals define 'judgment' as including an
order that may be appealed. (CRC 8.10(4).)" Click here to view this excerpt from the Self-Help
Manual.
The whistleblower pointed out that superior court and Court of Appeal judges, the family law facilitator and
court employees are all paid by taxpayers to know and comply with the law. "There are thousands of court files
without FL-190's. You cannot, with a straight face, tell me that they all have never noticed that the files do not
contain this mandatory Judicial Council form where required after law and motion hearings." According to public
records, Julie Setzer is paid $4,460 every two weeks, Colleen McDonagh earns $3,460 every two weeks, and
Denise Richards earns $36 per hour. Family court judges are paid $169,000 per year.
Filing and service of the Notice of Entry of Judgment is required by California Rules of Court rule 5.134. As of
2011, the failure by government employees to comply with any state court rule is a violation of the Whistleblower
Protection Act, and constitutes government misconduct in the same category as corruption, malfeasance,
bribery, theft of government property, fraud, coercion and similar types of misconduct.Court employees who
violate court rules and other laws also violate Tenet Five of the California Court Employee Code of Ethics.At
the local level,Sacramento County Superior Courtpolicies and administrative proceduresprovide a discipline
processfor court employees who violate court rules, cause discredit to the court, or engage in discriminatory,
dishonest, discourteous or unbecoming behavior.Click hereto read the court'sdisciplinepolicy.
"It is understood that the Court has a critical role to play in the County's justice system. It is
vital that the public maintain its trust in the Court system. As a result, trial court employees
will be held to a higher standard of conduct than employees of other organizations,"reads the
policy introduction.
Click here to read all articles in the Color of Law series.

Courthouse News Service

Metropolitan News
Enterprise
California Official Case Law
Google Scholar-Includes
Unpublished Case Law
California Statutes

CALIFORNIA JUDICIAL
BRANCH
California Courts
Homepage
California Courts YouTube
Page
Judicial Council
Commission on Judicial
Performance
Sacramento County Family
Court
3rd District Court of Appeal
State Bar of California
State Bar Court
Sacramento County Bar
Association

Local & National Family CourtFamily Law Sites & Blogs (may
be gender-specific)
ABA Family Law Blawg
Directory
California Coalition for
Families and Children
California Protective
Parents Association

Related posts:
Click herefor articles about family court employee misconduct.
Click herefor reporting on judicial misconduct.

Center for Judicial

Excellence

Click herefor posts about the Family Law Facilitator.

Courageous Kids Network

Click herefor family court whistleblower articles.

Divorce & Family Law News

Click herefor family court watchdog coverage.

Divorce Corp

If you found this article useful or informative please share it onFacebook,Twitteror recommend it
onGoogle+and other social networking sites.

Posted by
PR Brown
at
11:15 PM

Divorced Girl Smiling

Family Law Case Law from
FindLaw

+2 Recommend this on Google

Labels:
ADMINISTRATORS,
ANALYSIS,
APPEALS,
CEO,
CIVIL LIABILITY,
COLLEEN MCDONAGH,
COLOR OF LAW SERIES,
EMPLOYEE
CODE OF ETHICS,
EMPLOYEE MISCONDUCT,
JULIE SETZER,
NEWS EXCLUSIVE,
STATE AUDITOR,
WHISTLEBLOWERS

Location:
Sacramento County Superior Court - Family Relations Courthouse

Family Law Courts.com

Family Law Updates at
JDSupra Law News

More

Next Blog

Create Blog
Sign In

Sacramento Family Court News

Investigative Reporting, News, Analysis, Opinion & Satire
HOME

JUDGE PRO TEMS

3rd DISTRICT COURT of APPEAL

RoadDog SATIRE

ABOUT FAMILY COURT NEWS

CONTACT FAMILY COURT NEWS

Terms & Conditions

ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT

Privacy Policy

DOCUMENT LIBRARY

16 January 2013

SHORTCUTS TO POPULAR
SUBJECTS AND POSTS

Sacramento Family Law Facilitator Misconduct: Lollie Roberts Violates

State Law - Mirrors Unlawful Court Administrator Policy, Whistleblower
Alleges

JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT

(63)

Family Law Facilitator OfficeGives False Info To Pro

Per Per Parties - Parrots Illegal Court Administrator
Policy
Color of Law: The Conspiracy to End Pro Per Appeals
A Sacramento Family Court News Exclusive Investigative Report. Part 2

JUDGE PRO TEM

(49)
ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT

(35)
MATTHEW J. GARY
(33)
FLEC
(28)
SCBA
(22)
ARTS & CULTURE
(21)
CHILD CUSTODY
(21)
PETER J. McBRIEN
(20)
ROBERT SAUNDERS
(20)
WATCHDOGS
(19)
CHARLOTTE KEELEY
(18)
CJP
(18)
EMPLOYEE MISCONDUCT

(18)
PRO PERS
(18)
DOCUMENTS
(16)
DIVORCE CORP
(13)
JAMES M. MIZE
(12)

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.

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

COLOR OF LAW SERIES

(11)
CONFLICT OF INTEREST

(11)
SATIRE
(11)
WOODRUFF O'HAIR
POSNER and SALINGER

(11)
JAIME R. ROMAN
(10)

condition of anonymity because they could be subject to retaliation for the disclosure.

LAURIE M. EARL
(10)

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 SFCNpreviously 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.

NO CONTACT ORDERS
(10)

Tocontinue readingPart 2of our seriesColor of Law, click Read more >> below.

SHARON A. LUERAS
(10)
WHISTLEBLOWERS
(10)
CARLSSON CASE
(9)
RAPTON-KARRES
(9)
CHRISTINA VOLKERS
(8)

The Plan to End Pro Per Appeals

As ourseries of reports documents, the alleged plan involves ensuring that unrepresented, financially
disadvantagedpro per family court parties do not receive notification of their right to appeal court orders related
to child custody/visitation, support and other judgments that can immediately be appealed. Other parts of the
scheme include obstructing the appeal fee waiver process, imposing an illegal 60-day appeal time frame where the
lawful time frame is 180-days, and impeding the ability to obtain a court reporter at trial court hearings, and a court
reporter transcript, without which an effective appeal is impossible. Co-conspirators in the planallegedly
includefamily court administrators, employees and clerks, judges, andjudge pro tem members of the
Sacramento County BarAssociationFamily Law Section. Staff at the Third District Court of Appeal
reportedly have tacitly condoned the plan by ignoring trial court irregularities and other evidence that reaches the
reviewing court.

The Family Law Facilitator

The function and duties of the Family Law Facilitator for
each county in California are specified in the Family Law
Facilitator Act, Family Code Section 10000100015.Facilitator duties include assisting
"unrepresented and financially disadvantaged litigants
in gaining meaningful access to family court."

California Rules of Court rule 5.430 sets out the

minimum standards for the Office of the Family Law
Facilitator. The minimum standards include knowledge of
family law procedures and child support law. In
addition,Appendix C of California Rules of
Courtprovides guidelines for operation of the facilitator's
office. The guidelines include providing competent legal
information, including procedural information and
education so that litigants will have increased access to
the court.

As we reported in Part 1 of our Color of Law series, a

family court whistleblower alleges thatSacramento Family
Court Director of Operations Julie Setzer, Court Manager Colleen McDonagh and Supervising Courtroom
Clerk Denise Richards have directed court employees to ignore state lawsthat require family court parties to be
notified of their appeal rightsand the time frame within which an appeal can be filed.The notifications are part of
themandatory Judicial Council FL-190Notice of Entry of Judgment form that must be filed and served by
court clerks after any family court hearing which results in a judgment regarding child custody or visitation,
support, or any other appealable order. To read Part 1 of the series, click here.

Family Law Facilitator Dispenses False Information

Court records provided bythe whistleblower indicate that Family Court Facilitator Lollie Roberts has instructed
her staff to notifyunrepresented, in pro perfamily court litigants seeking help that the Notice of Entry of
Judgment is only required for a final judgment, issuedat the conclusion of a divorce, separation or nullity. The
information is demonstrably false and canultimately result in a waiver of critical appeal rights of orders
involving child custody, support, and other appealable orders. When the FL-190Notice of Entry of Judgment
form is not served on unrepresented and financially disadvantaged pro perlitigants, most are unaware that they
have a right to appeal the order, and after 180-days the right to appeal the order is lost forever. In Part 3 of our
Color of Law report,additional court documentsleaked by a family court whistleblower indicate that family court

FERRIS CASE
(8)
JESSICA HERNANDEZ
(8)
JULIE SETZER
(7)
YOUTUBE
(7)
3rd DISTRICT COA
(6)
CIVIL RIGHTS
(6)
CHRISTINA ARCURI
(5)
CONTEMPT
(5)
THADD BLIZZARD
(5)
FAMILY LAW FACILITATOR

(4)
LUAN CASE
(4)
CANTIL-SAKAUYE
(3)
MIKE NEWDOW
(2)

WE SUPPORT
Electronic Frontier
Foundation
First Amendment Coalition
Californians Aware

LAW BLOGS WE LIKE

Family Law Professor Blog
Law Librarian Blog
Law Professor Blogs
Thurman Arnold Family
Law Blog
Kafkaesq
Above the Law
The Divorce Artist

LEGAL NEWS &

INFORMATION

administrators have implemented an unlawful policy that condenses the 180-day appeal time frame to just 60-days.

Facilitator records provided to SFCN about the

entry of judgment issue indicate unlawful conduct
by the Family Law Facilitator's Office. Using
the facilitator e-Correspondence System, in
writing an indigent, unrepresented pro perfamily
court party asked facilitator staff why they had
not received a Judicial Council FL-190 Notice
of Entry of Judgment form after court orders for
child custody and support were issued in the
case. To read the original written question
submitted by the pro perto the Family Law
Facilitator, click here.
In response, staff of theFacilitator's Office
falsely claimed that the FL-190 "is only issued
when a judgment of dissolution, legal separation,
nullity (or some other judgment such as
In assessing whistleblower claims, Sacramento FamilyCourt News
paternity) is entered on the record." The
relies on the gold standard reference for family law, California Practice
Guide: Family Law. The Practice Guide is used by family court judges and
response also falsely asserted that a Notice of
family law attorneys. Using the Practice Guide,Sacramento Family Court
Entry of Judgment is not issued when "a formal
Judge Matthew J. Gary provides monthly "Bench Tips" to family law attorneys.
Findings and Order After Hearing is
entered."Click here to read the response. The answer is calculated to confuse an unrepresented and financially
disadvantaged in pro perlitigant who would have little or no knowledge of family law and procedure, according to
the whistleblower. The FL-340 findings and order after hearing form is usually prepared by the opposing
attorney and the form does not contain the FL-190 appeal rights notification, nor the critical clerk's certificate of
mailing which establishes the lawful appeal time frame. Under state law, a neutral court clerk - not an opposing
attorney - is responsible for filing and service of the FL-190. As explained by the source,
"The facilitator response says 'It appears that many times in your case Findings and Orders After
Hearing were entered but since these were not judgments, no Notice of Entry of Judgment was
issued.' That answer is untrue. Almost any court employee knows, or should knowthat the findings
and order after hearing paperwork simply memorializes a court order. Itis unrelated to aNotice of
Entry of Judgment, which in cases with child custody, support and other appealable orders, is by
law required to be filed after the findings and order after hearing paperwork is filed," the
whistleblower said. "Just look at California Rules of Court rule 8.104(e), it defines 'judgment' as
any appealable order."
The leadingfamily law legal reference bookused by judges,attorneys, and appellate courts reviewing trial
court mistakes isCalifornia Practice Guide: Family Law. The Practice Guideverifiesthat for purposes of
appeal, the terms judgment and order are synonymous, and the book refers to the same court rule as the
whistleblower, 8.104(e). "An appealable order is a judgment - the facilitator staff response is not accurate and could
lead an unrepresented, financially disadvantaged party to believe they could not appeal an order that was, in fact,
appealable," the source added. Other legal references parrot the Practice Guide. For example,Witkin California
Procedurespecifies that "Some determinations, although characterized as 'orders' are in effect final judgments..."
and that "the chief test is appealability." Witkin also verifies that in family court cases, the term "judgment"
includes any appealable order, and that the FL-190 must be served and filed on all parties by a court clerk. Click
here to view the Witkin excerpt. The California Supreme Court and theThird District Court of Appeal in
Sacramento provide similar information.

California Lawyer Magazine

Courthouse News Service
Metropolitan News
Enterprise
California Official Case Law
Google Scholar-Includes
Unpublished Case Law
California Statutes

CALIFORNIA JUDICIAL
BRANCH
California Courts
Homepage
California Courts YouTube
Page
Judicial Council
Commission on Judicial
Performance
Sacramento County Family
Court
3rd District Court of Appeal
State Bar of California
State Bar Court
Sacramento County Bar
Association

Local & National Family CourtFamily Law Sites & Blogs (may
be gender-specific)
ABA Family Law Blawg
Directory
California Coalition for
Families and Children
California Protective
Parents Association
Center for Judicial
Excellence
Courageous Kids Network
Divorce & Family Law News

This notice of appeal specifically notified Sacramento Family Court appeals unit staff that a notice of entry of judgment was never filed in
the case as required by law. The clerk unlawfully applied a 60-day appeal time frame and rejected the appeal as untimely. The notice was
filed well within the correct 180-day time frame. For the full story, see Part 3 of our Color of Law series. Click here.

California Supreme Court Confirms Facilitator Error

In a 2007 decision,Alan v. American Honda Motor Co., theCalifornia Supreme Courtemphasized the
importance of the mandatoryJudicial Council FL-190form, and that the requirement is unique and specific to
family law proceedings. According to the Supreme Court, one critical function of the form is to establish the time

Divorce Corp
Divorced Girl Smiling
Family Law Case Law from
FindLaw
Family Law Courts.com
Family Law Updates at

JDSupra Law News

frame within which an appeal of law and motion orders can be filed.
"The clerk is required to give notice only in designated family law matters (Code Civ. Proc.,
664.5, subd. (a); rule 5.134)...In those family law proceedings in which the clerk must always
give notice, rule 5.134 requires the clerk to use a Judicial Council form (FL-190) specifically
drafted to ensure compliance with rule 8.104(a)(1). Obviously, problems are more likely to
occur when no approved form of notice is available...The Judicial Council form (FL-190) that
clerks must use in family law proceedings...avoids ambiguity...by bearing the title, "Notice of
Entry of Judgement," and by including at the bottom of its single page a form for the clerk's
certificate of mailing."Click here to viewAlan v. American Honda Motor Co.
Sacramento Family Court clerks not only do not file and serve the FL-190 form as required by law, they
permitSacramento County Bar Association Family Law Sectionlawyersto file a counterfeit versionof the
form which omits both the appeal rights notification and the clerk's certificate of mailing.Thefictitious formalsois
served by a private sector lawyer - not a neutral public court clerk as required by both theCode of Civil
Procedureand the state court rules. Using in place of the state mandated form an unauthorized, self-serving form
that omits appeal rights and other important notifications required by law also raisesmoral turpitudeand other
ethical implications against attorneys who engage in the deception.Click herefor our complete report on the
counterfeit form issue.

Fathers 4 Justice
HuffPost Divorce
Leon Koziol.Com
Moving Past Divorce
News and Views Riverside
Superior Court
Weightier Matter

CONTRIBUTORS
Cathy Cohen
ST Thomas
PR Brown
PelicanBriefed
FCAC News
RoadDog

Total Pageviews
The "Clerk's Certificate of Mailing" at the bottom of the FL-190 form is a critical part of the form because it establishes the time frame
during which an appeal can be filed, according to the California Supreme Court.

Third District Court of Appeal Verifies Facilitator

Dispensing False Information

138819
136

The 3rd District Court of Appeal publishes a Self-Help Manual [pdf] for self-represented litigants that confirms
the same information regarding appealable orders. Page 10 of the Self-Help Manual reads:
"Note that the same rules about an appeal from a judgment apply to an appeal from an
appealable order, as the rules of court dealing with appeals define 'judgment' as including an
order that may be appealed. (CRC 8.10(4).)" Click here to view this excerpt from the Self-Help
Manual.

Google+ Badge

PR Brown
Follow

Court Rule Violations Are By Law Government

Misconduct
Filing and service of theNotice of Entry of Judgmentis required byCalifornia Rules of Courtrule 5.134.As of
2011, the failure by government employees to comply with any state court rule is a violation of theWhistleblower
Protection Act,and constitutes government misconduct in thesame categoryas corruption, malfeasance,
bribery, theft of government property, fraud, coercion andsimilar types of misconduct.Court employees who
violate court rules and other laws also violateTenet Five of the California Court Employee Code of Ethics.At
the local level,Sacramento County Superior Courtpolicies and administrative proceduresprovide a discipline
processfor court employees who violate court rules, cause discredit to the court, or engage in discriminatory,
dishonest, discourteous or unbecoming behavior.Click hereto read the court'sdisciplinepolicy.
"It is understood that the Court has a critical role to play in the County's justice system. It is
vital that the public maintain its trust in the Court system. As a result, trial court employees
will be held to a higher standard of conduct than employees of other organizations,"reads the
policy introduction.

Taxpayer Liability Exposure and Criminal Laws

If, as the whistleblower alleges, the non-compliance with rule 5.134 is part of a larger scheme or conspiracy that
ultimately deprives unrepresented, financially disadvantaged litigants of civil or constitutional rights, court

Labels

2011 SACRAMENTO/MARIN
AUDITS
(2)
3rd DISTRICT

COA
(6)
AB

(1)

ABA

1102
(1)
AB 590
JOURNAL

ADMINISTRATORS

(1)

(4)

AGGREGATED NEWS

(14)
AL SALMEN
(1)

AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION

(1)

ANALYSIS
(36)

FURILLO

(2)

ANDY

AOC

(1)

APPEALS
(10)
ARCHIBALD
CUNNINGHAM
(1)
ARTHUR G.
SCOTLAND
(5)
ARTS &

CULTURE

(21)

ATTORNEY
(4)
ATTORNEY
DISCIPLINE
(4)
ATTORNEY

employees and taxpayers could be exposed to financial liability in a civil lawsuit. Federal criminal statutes may
also apply. Federal criminal law prohibits conspiracy against civil rights and deprivation of rights under color
of law. Sacramento Family Court receives federal funding, and court users have a federally protected right to
honest services. Court employees, managers and administrators who fail to provide honest services may be
subject to criminal prosecution under federal law.

ATTORNEY
MISCONDUCT
(35)

ETHICS
(2)

ATTORNEYS
(11)
BAR
ASSOCIATION
(11)
BARACK
OBAMA
(1)
BARTHOLOMEW
and WASZNICKY
(3)
BUNMI

In Part 3 of our Color of Law report,a Sacramento County Family Courtclerk unlawfully refuses to file an
appeal for an unrepresented and financially disadvantaged litigant. Click here to read Part 3.

AWONIYI

(1)

CALIFORNIA

JUDICIAL CONDUCT HANDBOOK

(1)
CALIFORNIA

Click here to read all articles in the Color of Law series.

LAWYER
(1)

CALIFORNIANS AWARE
(2)

CAMILLE HEMMER
(3)

CANTIL-SAKAUYE

(3)

CARLSSON CASE
(9)
CECIL
and CIANCI
(2)
CEO
(4)

CHARLOTTE KEELEY

(18)
CHILD CUSTODY

(21)
CHILD SUPPORT
(3)

CHRISTINA ARCURI
(5)

CHRISTINA VOLKERS
(8)

CIVICS
(1)
CIVIL LIABILITY
(1)

CIVIL RIGHTS
(6)
CJA
(3)

CJP
(18)
ClientTickler
(2)

CNN
(1)
CODE OF JUDICIAL
ETHICS
(12)
CODE OF
SILENCE
(2)
COLLEEN
MCDONAGH
(3)
COLOR OF

(11)
SERIES

LAW

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

(11)
CONSTITUTIONAL
RIGHTS
(3)
CONTEMPT
(5)

COURT CONDITIONS
(2)

COURT EMPLOYEE
(1)
COURT

EMPLOYEE CODE OF ETHICS

(1)
COURT POLICIES
(1)
COURT
RULES
(4)
COURTS
(1)
CPG

CRIMINAL
CONDUCT
(9)
CRIMINAL

FAMILY LAW
(1)

LAW
(3)
CRONYISM
(2)

DAVID KAZZIE
(4)
DEMOTION

The staff of attorney Lollie Roberts, Sacramento County Superior Court Supervising Family Law Facilitator, provided incorrect legal
information to this indigent, self-represented family court party. The opposing party is represented by a veteran family law attorney.

Sacramento Family Court Newsacknowledges

the confidential source who provided us with the tip that resulted
in this
article. We appreciate the tip.To send us youranonymoustip
by email, use ourContact
Page. All
communications are protected by thereporter's privilegeand
theCalifornia Shield Law. For further details
about our
confidentiality policy, see ourAbout
Pageand ourTerms
& Conditions Page.
Related articles and posts:
A variety of illegal tactics used by court employees, judges, the Family Law Facilitator Office and judge
pro tem attorneys to obstruct family court appeals by unrepresented, financially disadvantaged
litigants.Click here.
Full-time family court judges failure to disclose judge pro tem conflicts of interest to opposing parties and
attorneys.Click here.
Judge pro tem attorneys promoted a software program sold by the wife of a family court judge.Click
here.
Court administrators concealing from the public judge pro tem attorney misconduct, including sexual
battery against clients.Click here.
Illegal use of California vexatious litigant law by family court judges.Click here.
Waiver of judge pro tem qualification standards.Click here.
Failure to adequately train family court judges.Click here.
Allowing courtroom clerks to issue incomplete, useless fee waiver orders which prevent indigent and
financially disadvantaged litigants from serving and filing documents.Click here.

(1)
DENISE

GARY
(2)
DSM-301.7
(1)
EDITORIAL
(1)
EDWARD
FREIDBERG
(2)
EFF
(2)

RICHARDS
(1)

DIANE WASZNICKY
(2)

DISQUALIFICATION
(2)

DIVORCE
(7)
DIVORCE
ATTORNEY
(5)
DIVORCE
CORP
(13)
DIVORCE
(5)
LAWYER

DOCUMENTS
(16)

DONALD TENN
(3)
DONNA

EFFICIENCY

IN

GOVERNMENT

ELAINE VAN
BEVEREN
(13)
ELECTIONS
(1)
AWARD
(1)

EMILY

GALLUP

(3)

EMPLOYEE CODE OF ETHICS

(4)

EMPLOYEE
MISCONDUCT
(18)

EQUAL PROTECTION
(2)

EUGENE L. BALONON
(1)

EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS

(2)
EX PARTE
(1)
F4J
(4)

FAMILY COURT
(9)
FAMILY
COURT

COURT

AUDITS
(1)
FAMILY

CONDITIONS
(2)

FAMILY COURT

MEDIA COVERAGE

(1)
FAMILY COURT PROCEDURE

(1)

FAMILY
COURT
SACRAMENTO
(2)
FAMILY

COURTHOUSE
(1)
FAMILY

LAW

Preferential treatment provided to judge pro tem attorneys by family court judges, administrators, and
employees.Click here.

Unfair competition and monopolistic practices by family court judges and attorneys who also hold
theOffice of Temporary Judgewhich may violate state unfair competition laws.Click here.

FATHERS FOR JUSTICE

(1)

FEDERAL LAW
(2)
FEDERAL

Judges cherry-picking state law and court rules to rewrite established law to reach a predetermined
result to benefit judge pro tem attorneys.Click here.
The waste of scarce court resources and taxpayer funds caused by unnecessary appeals and other
court proceedings.Click hereandhere.
Allowing judges with a documented history of misconduct and mistreatment of unrepresented litigants to
remain in family court.Click here.

LAWSUITS
(2)
FEE WAIVERS

(2)
FERRIS CASE
(8)
FIRST
AMENDMENT
(2)
FIRST
AMENDMENT COALITION
(2)

FLEC
(28)
FOIA
(2)
FOX

(1)
FREDRICK COHEN
(4)

Concealing from the public but disclosing to the family law bar the demotion of problem judges.Click
here.
Failing to enforce theCode of Judicial Ethicsprovisions applicable to temporary judges.Click here.

GANGNAM STYLE
(1)
GARY E.
RANSOM
(1)
GARY
M.
APPELBLATT
(2)
GEORGE

NICHOLSON
(1)
GERALD UELMEN

(1)
GINGER

GREGORY

SYLVESTER
(1)

DWYER
(1)

HAL

BARTHOLOMEW
(1)
HATCHET

Allowing court clerks to commit perjury without apparent consequences.Click here.

For additional coverage of the people and issues in this post, click the corresponding labels below.

Posted by
PR Brown
at
10:17 PM

(9)

FAMILY
LAW
COUNSELOR
(4)
FAMILY
LAW
FACILITATOR
(4)

Recommend this on Google

Labels:
ANALYSIS,
APPEALS,
COLOR OF LAW SERIES,
COURT RULES,
DENISE RICHARDS,
EMPLOYEE MISCONDUCT,
FAMILY LAW

DEATH
(1)
HAZART SANKER

(2)
HONEST SERVICES
(4)

INDIGENT
(1)
INFIGHTING
(1)
J.
STRONG
(2)
JACQUELINE
ESTON
(2)
JAIME R.

(10)
JAMES
JAMES M.
MIZE
(12)
JEFFREY
POSNER
(6)
JERRY BROWN
ROMAN

BROSNAHAN
(1)

FACILITATOR,
JULIE SETZER,
LOLLIE ROBERTS,
NEWS EXCLUSIVE,
PRO PERS,
WHISTLEBLOWERS

Location:
Family Court Sacramento - Sacramento County Superior Court: Family Relations Courthouse - William R. Ridgeway
Family Relations Courthouse, 3341 Power Inn Road, Sacramento, CA 95826, USA

(1)

JERRY

GUTHRIE

(1)

JESSICA HERNANDEZ
(8)

JODY PATEL
(1)
JOHN E.B. MYERS

2 comments

(1)
JOSEPH SORGE
(1)
JOYCE
KENNARD
(1)
JOYCE TERHAAR
(1)

JUDGE
PRO TEM
(49)

JRC
(1)
JUDGE
(1)

Add a comment

JUDGE SALARIES
(1)
JUDGES

(10)
JUDICIAL CONDUCT
HANDBOOK

(1)

COUNCIL

JUDICIAL
MISCONDUCT

(63)
JUDY HOLZER

Top comments

1 year ago

Most Family Law Facilitator's are also Attorneys who are currently part of the county bar
association. Unlike the facilitator in Sacramento, Attorney Kevin. J, Mendrick, he had once
represented my ex in a child support case. I called him on it, and told him that he worked on
my case back in 2001, in the facilitators office he stated, " I don't remember you" I just
laughed. He immediately got off the case. I am a strong believer in researching your

HERSHER
(1)
JULIE SETZER

(7)
KIDS FOR CASH
(2)

LAURIE M. EARL
(10)
LAW
LIBRARY
(1)
LAW SCHOOL

(5)
LAWYER
(1)
LAWYERS

(7)
LEGAL AID ASSOCIATION of
CALIFORNIA
(1)
LEGISLATURE
(1)

Cole Day Rain 1 year ago

I've been able to talk to the Family Law Facilitator's Office once. They basically took notes
and promised to call me later. Later I was contacted and basically accused of lying. Why
hadn't I signed the property settlement in the case I had agreed to sign on record? (Under
duress I might add.)
My answer was that the so-called agreement, when I finally received it
for signature, was DIFFERENT than what I had been led to believe I was agreeing to. See, I

Newer Post

JUDICIAL
(3)

Older Post

(1)

LUAN

CASE

(4)

MALPRACTICE
(4)
MARY
MOLINARO
(1)
MATTHEW
HERNANDEZ

(7)

MATTHEW J. GARY

(33)
MCGEORGE

MEDIA
(1)
MICHAEL

SOL
(2)
T. GARCIA

(1)
MIKE NEWDOW
(2)
NANCY

GRACE
(1)
NANCY PERKOVICH

(4)
NEW YORK TIMES
(2)

Home

LOLLIE
LINCOLN

(1)

ROBERTS
(5)
LOUIS MAURO

NEWS
(24)
NEWS
EXCLUSIVE
(26)
NEWS

YOU CAN USE

(3)
News10
(1)

NO CONTACT ORDERS

(10)
OPEN GOVERNMENT

(2)
OPINION
(12)
PARENT
RIGHTS

ALIENATION

(1)

(1)

PARENTAL

PAULA

More

Next Blog

Create Blog
Sign In

Sacramento Family Court News

Investigative Reporting, News, Analysis, Opinion & Satire
HOME

JUDGE PRO TEMS

3rd DISTRICT COURT of APPEAL

RoadDog SATIRE

ABOUT FAMILY COURT NEWS

CONTACT FAMILY COURT NEWS

Terms & Conditions

ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT

Privacy Policy

DOCUMENT LIBRARY

06 February 2013

SHORTCUTS TO POPULAR
SUBJECTS AND POSTS

Sacramento County Superior Court Misconduct: Family Court Appeals Unit

Unlawfully Refusing Appeals by Indigent, Pro Per Litigants

JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT

(63)

Family Court Appeals Unit Illegally Rejecting Appeals

By Unrepresented, Financially Disadvantaged
Litigants

ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT

(35)

Color of Law: The Conspiracy to End Pro Per Appeals

A Sacramento Family Court News Exclusive Investigative Report. Part 3

JUDGE PRO TEM

(49)

MATTHEW J. GARY
(33)
FLEC
(28)
SCBA
(22)
ARTS & CULTURE
(21)
CHILD CUSTODY
(21)
PETER J. McBRIEN
(20)
ROBERT SAUNDERS
(20)
WATCHDOGS
(19)
CHARLOTTE KEELEY
(18)
CJP
(18)
EMPLOYEE MISCONDUCT

(18)
PRO PERS
(18)
DOCUMENTS
(16)

This actual notice of appealwas 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 underCalifornia 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 CouncilFL-190 Notice of Entry of
Judgment form. As policy, Sacramento Family Court does not issue the FL-190 form forappealableorders from
motion and OSC hearings. When the form is not issued, the appealtime frame is 180-days.Whenthe 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.
Tocontinue readingPart 3of our series Color of Law, click Read more >> below.

DIVORCE CORP
(13)
JAMES M. MIZE
(12)
COLOR OF LAW SERIES

(11)
CONFLICT OF INTEREST

(11)
SATIRE
(11)
WOODRUFF O'HAIR
POSNER and SALINGER

(11)
JAIME R. ROMAN
(10)

LAURIE M. EARL
(10)
NO CONTACT ORDERS
(10)
SHARON A. LUERAS
(10)
WHISTLEBLOWERS
(10)
CARLSSON CASE
(9)
RAPTON-KARRES
(9)
CHRISTINA VOLKERS
(8)
FERRIS CASE
(8)
JESSICA HERNANDEZ
(8)
JULIE SETZER
(7)
YOUTUBE
(7)
3rd DISTRICT COA
(6)
CIVIL RIGHTS
(6)
CHRISTINA ARCURI
(5)
Unrepresented Sacramento Family Court litigants report that the second floor "appeals unit" at the Family Relations Courthouse is an
unfriendly place. Sacramento Family Court News audits of several pro per appeals reveal that appeals unit employees routinely do not
follow state laws governing appeals.

CONTEMPT
(5)
THADD BLIZZARD
(5)

As Sacramento Family Court News documented in parts one and twoof our Color of Law series, court
administrators - includingSupervisingFamily Law Facilitator Lollie Roberts- have directed subordinate
employees to ignore state law requiring the FL-190 Notice of Entry of Judgmentform be filed and served for all
appealable orders issued at motion and OSC hearings. Click here to read part one andhere to read part two.
The FL-190 form notifies the parties of appeal rights and contains an important clerk's certificate of mailing
which determines the time frame for an appeal, according to state law, including a 2007 California Supreme
Court decision.

When the FL-190 form is correctly issued, the 60-day appeal time frame applies and begins to run when the
clerk's certificate of mailing is completed and the form is served by the court on all parties. When the form is not
issued, the appeal time frame is 180-days. Sacramento Family Court clerksboth do not issue the FL-190 form,
andstillapply the shorter 60-day notice of appeal filing window using the filing date of order after hearing
paperwork filed by attorneys. Court records leaked by a whistleblower include a letter from a court clerk
"unfiling" a valid notice of appeal. In the letter, under penalty of perjury the clerkmisstatesthe law, and notifies
the unrepresented party that the previously filed appeal has been "unfiled." Attached to the letter is the litigants
original filed notice of appeal with a red "X" scrawled over the original filing stamp, along with the notation "unfiled"
and "SH," the initials of the clerk. SFCN has verified the authenticity of the documents by inspecting the original
court file. The documents leaked to SFCN are identical to those in the file.
Click here to view the original filed, and then unfiled notice of appeal.
Click here to view the letter from the court clerk.

FAMILY LAW FACILITATOR

(4)
LUAN CASE
(4)
CANTIL-SAKAUYE
(3)
MIKE NEWDOW
(2)

WE SUPPORT
Electronic Frontier
Foundation
First Amendment Coalition
Californians Aware

LAW BLOGS WE LIKE

Family Law Professor Blog
Law Librarian Blog
Law Professor Blogs
Thurman Arnold Family
Law Blog
Kafkaesq
Above the Law
The Divorce Artist

LEGAL NEWS &

INFORMATION

California Lawyer Magazine

Shortly after filing a notice of appeal, this indigent, unrepresented family court litigant received this letterfrom Deputy Clerk Stephanie
Hinman "unfiling" the appeal. Hinman misstated the law, and signed the letter under penalty of perjury. Click here to view the full letter.

"A Deception That Is Demonstrably False"

To justify the 60-day time frame used to reject the appeal, the letter from the court clerk refers to "a Judgment
(sic)...filed and signed on May 18, 2012," and that the litigant was "noticed via mail with said judgment on May 25,
2012." The original court file from the case shows that the May 18 "judgment" referred to by the clerk was not a
judgment. The May 18 document is a "findings and order after hearing" filed by the opposing attorney. Click
here to view the complete May 18 document.The May 25 notice referred to by the clerk is a proof of service filed
by the opposing attorney for the findings and order after hearing document.
The clerks rejection of the appeal is based on applying a 60-day appeal window using the May 25 date, making July
25, 2012 the deadline for filing the notice of appeal. The notice of appeal was filed on August 8, 2012, beyond the
incorrect date used by the clerk, but well within the 180-day lawful time frame. The 60-day time frame is only
applicable when an FL-190 is filed and served by the court clerk. The court file does not contain an FL-190. A
findings and order after hearing filed and served by an opposing attorney is not a substitute for an FL-190, and
does not result in a 60-day appeal time frame, according to state law and the family law references used by family
court judges and attorneys, includingCaliforniaPractice Guide: Family Law, published by The Rutter Group.
Click here to view the legal authority that applies to the connectionbetween the FL-190 and the 180-day time
frame. And in Alan v. American Honda Motor Co., the state Supreme Court pointed out that the title of the FL190 and the clerk's certificate of mailing at the bottom of the form are specifically designed to eliminate disputes
about the time frame for an appeal in family law cases. The alleged motive of the clerk's letter is to deceive a selfrepresented litigant with limited knowledge of family law, according to the whistleblower.
"The letter from the clerk is designed to confuse the unrepresented party, and make them
believe the appeal was untimely," the whistleblower explained. "A typical pro per unfamiliar with
the law would fall for this deception. But it is exactly that - a deception - and a deception that
is demonstrably false, and illegal under [California Rules of Court] rule 8.23. It is an unlawful
interference with court of appeal proceedings."

Courthouse News Service

Metropolitan News
Enterprise
California Official Case Law
Google Scholar-Includes
Unpublished Case Law
California Statutes

CALIFORNIA JUDICIAL
BRANCH
California Courts
Homepage
California Courts YouTube
Page
Judicial Council
Commission on Judicial
Performance
Sacramento County Family
Court
3rd District Court of Appeal
State Bar of California
State Bar Court
Sacramento County Bar
Association

Local & National Family CourtFamily Law Sites & Blogs (may
be gender-specific)

The clerk's certificate of mailing is a critical part of the mandatory FL-190 form because it determines the time fame within which a family
case appeal can be taken, according to the California Supreme Court in Alan v. American Honda Motor Co.

The Third District Court of Appeal in Sacramento also confirms that any appealable order is considered a

ABA Family Law Blawg

Directory
California Coalition for
Families and Children

judgment, and therefore requires filing and service of the FL-190 form. Without the form, the 180-day appeal time
frame applies. The information is provided in aSelf-Help Manual [pdf] for self-represented litigants published by the
appellate court. Page 10 of the Self-Help Manual includes:
"Note that the same rules about an appeal from a judgment apply to an appeal from an
appealable order, as the rules of court dealing with appeals define 'judgment' as including an
order that may be appealed. (CRC 8.10(4).)" Click here to view this excerpt from the Self-Help
Manual.

California Protective
Parents Association
Center for Judicial
Excellence
Courageous Kids Network
Divorce & Family Law News
Divorce Corp
Divorced Girl Smiling
Family Law Case Law from
FindLaw
Family Law Courts.com

The notice of appeal filed by the pro per specifically notified the Sacramento Family Court appeals unit clerk that no entry of judgment
was filed for the orders being appealed. Under state law, the time frame for the appeal was 180 days. Click here to view the complete
notice.

Family Law Updates at

JDSupra Law News
Fathers 4 Justice

HuffPost Divorce
Leon Koziol.Com
Moving Past Divorce

Oversight and Accountability

Family court watchdogs and whistleblowers have long asserted, and documented, that family court judges and
employees appear to be immune from oversight and accountability for misconduct. More than five months after
the egregious error by Deputy Clerk Stephanie Hinman in rejecting a valid notice of appeal, the error remains
uncorrected and, it is self-evident, no discipline has taken place.The refusal to file a lawful appeal constitutes
unlawfulinterferencewith appellate court proceedings - a violation of California Rules of Court rule 8.23.
"Misbehavior in office, or other willful neglect or violation of duty" by a clerk is punishable as contempt under Code
of Civil Procedure1209(a)(3). Under Canon 3C of the Code of Judicial Ethics, a judge's administrative
responsibilities include ensuring staff and court personnel under the judge's direction and control observe
"appropriate standards of conduct."
As of 2011, the failure by Judicial Branch employees to comply with any state court rule is a violation of
theWhistleblower Protection Act,and constitutes government misconduct in thesame categoryas corruption,
malfeasance, bribery, theft of government property, fraud, coercion andsimilar types of misconduct. Employee
conduct that is economically wasteful, involves gross misconduct, incompetency or inefficiency is also covered by
the act. The act is enforced by the California State Auditor. Court employees who violate court rules and other
laws also violateTenet Five of the California Court Employee Code of Ethics. At the local level, Sacramento
County Superior Court policies and administrative procedures provide a discipline process for court employees
who violate court rules, cause discredit to the court, or engage in discriminatory, dishonest, discourteous or
unbecoming behavior. Click here to read the court'sdisciplinepolicy.
"It is understood that the Court has a critical role to play in the County's justice system. It is
vital that the public maintain its trust in the Court system. As a result, trial court employees
will be held to a higher standard of conduct than employees of other organizations," reads the
policy introduction.

News and Views Riverside

Superior Court
Weightier Matter

CONTRIBUTORS
Cathy Cohen
ST Thomas
PR Brown
PelicanBriefed
FCAC News
RoadDog

Total Pageviews

138819

Yet from the local court to the state auditor, all of these rules, laws and policies have been ignored and gone
unenforced.

Taxpayer Liability Exposure and Criminal Laws

Depriving unrepresented, financially disadvantaged litigants of civil or constitutional rights may expose court
employees, supervisors, and taxpayers to financial liability in a civil lawsuit. Federal criminal statutes may also
apply. Federal criminal law prohibits conspiracy against civil rights and deprivation of rights under color of
law. Sacramento Family Court receives federal funding, and court users have a federally protected right to
honest services. Court employees, managers and administrators who fail to provide honest services may be
subject to criminal prosecution under federal law. The constitutional rights of due process, equal protection and
access to the courts apply to everyone, irrespective of wealth.

136

Google+ Badge

PR Brown
Follow

Labels

2011 SACRAMENTO/MARIN
AUDITS
(2)
3rd DISTRICT

COA
(6)
AB

(1)

1102
(1)
AB 590

ABA

JOURNAL

ADMINISTRATORS

(1)

(4)

AGGREGATED NEWS

(14)
AL SALMEN
(1)

AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION

(1)

ANALYSIS
(36)

FURILLO

(2)

ANDY

AOC

(1)

APPEALS
(10)
ARCHIBALD
CUNNINGHAM
(1)
ARTHUR G.
SCOTLAND
(5)
ARTS &

CULTURE

(21)

ATTORNEY
(4)
ATTORNEY
DISCIPLINE
(4)
ATTORNEY

ATTORNEY
MISCONDUCT
(35)

ETHICS
(2)

In Part 4 of our report Color of Law: The Conspiracy to End Pro Per Appeals, a court clerk files for a judge pro
tem attorney a faux notice of entry of judgment designed to unlawfully invoke a 60-day appeal time frame.

ATTORNEYS
(11)
BAR
ASSOCIATION
(11)
BARACK
OBAMA
(1)
BARTHOLOMEW
and WASZNICKY
(3)
BUNMI

Click here to read all published articles in the Color of Law series.
Sacramento Family Court News acknowledges the confidential source who provided us with the information and documentation for this article. We
appreciate the tip. To send us your anonymous tip by email, use our Contact Page. All communications are protected by the reporter's privilege and
the California Shield Law. For further details about our confidentiality policy, see our About Page and our Terms & Conditions Page.

Related posts:
Click here for articles about family court employee misconduct.
Click here for reporting on judicial misconduct.
Click here for posts about the Family Law Facilitator.
Click here for family court whistleblower articles.
Click here for family court watchdog coverage.
If you found this article useful or informative please share it onFacebook,Twitteror recommend it onGoogle+and other social networking sites.

For additional reporting on the people and issues in this post, click the corresponding labels below.

Posted by
PR Brown
at
11:00 PM

+1 Recommend this on Google

Labels:
ANALYSIS,
APPEALS,
COLOR OF LAW SERIES,
COURT RULES,
EMPLOYEE MISCONDUCT,
FAMILY COURT SACRAMENTO,

FERRIS CASE,
NEWS EXCLUSIVE,
PRO PERS,
S. HINMAN,
WHISTLEBLOWERS

Location:
County of Sacramento: Superior Court-William R. Ridgeway Family Relations Courthouse, 3341 Power Inn Road,
Sacramento, CA 95826, USA

3 comments

AWONIYI

(1)

CALIFORNIA

JUDICIAL CONDUCT HANDBOOK

(1)
CALIFORNIA

LAWYER
(1)

CALIFORNIANS AWARE
(2)

CAMILLE HEMMER
(3)

CANTIL-SAKAUYE

(3)

CARLSSON CASE
(9)
CECIL
and CIANCI
(2)
CEO
(4)

CHARLOTTE KEELEY

(18)
CHILD CUSTODY

(21)
CHILD SUPPORT
(3)

CHRISTINA ARCURI
(5)

CHRISTINA VOLKERS
(8)

CIVICS
(1)
CIVIL LIABILITY
(1)

CIVIL RIGHTS
(6)
CJA
(3)

CJP
(18)
ClientTickler
(2)

CNN
(1)
CODE OF JUDICIAL
ETHICS
(12)
CODE OF
SILENCE
(2)
COLLEEN
MCDONAGH
(3)
COLOR OF

(11)
SERIES

LAW

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

(11)
CONSTITUTIONAL
RIGHTS
(3)
CONTEMPT
(5)

COURT CONDITIONS
(2)

COURT EMPLOYEE
(1)
COURT

EMPLOYEE CODE OF ETHICS

(1)
COURT POLICIES
(1)
COURT
RULES
(4)
COURTS
(1)
CPG

CRIMINAL
CONDUCT
(9)
CRIMINAL

FAMILY LAW
(1)

Add a comment

Top comments

Thomas R 1 year ago - Shared publicly

Can anyone explain to me how the court clerk can set a hearing date that that makes it
completely impossible to abide by California civil code of procedure 1005 where it makes

LAW
(3)
CRONYISM
(2)

DAVID KAZZIE
(4)
DEMOTION

(1)
DENISE

GARY
(2)
DSM-301.7
(1)
EDITORIAL
(1)
EDWARD
FREIDBERG
(2)
EFF
(2)

RICHARDS
(1)

DIANE WASZNICKY
(2)

DISQUALIFICATION
(2)

DIVORCE
(7)
DIVORCE
ATTORNEY
(5)
DIVORCE
CORP
(13)
DIVORCE
(5)
LAWYER

DOCUMENTS
(16)

DONALD TENN
(3)
DONNA

More

Next Blog

Create Blog
Sign In

Sacramento Family Court News

Investigative Reporting, News, Analysis, Opinion & Satire
HOME

JUDGE PRO TEMS

3rd DISTRICT COURT of APPEAL

RoadDog SATIRE

ABOUT FAMILY COURT NEWS

CONTACT FAMILY COURT NEWS

Terms & Conditions

ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT

Privacy Policy

DOCUMENT LIBRARY

20 February 2013

SHORTCUTS TO POPULAR
SUBJECTS AND POSTS

Sacramento Divorce Attorney Paula Salinger Fraud on the Court Alleged:

SCBA Family Law Section Officer and Judge Pro Tem Files Fake Notices
with Court

JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT

(63)

Family Court Clerks Let Judge Pro Tem Attorneys File

Counterfeit Entry of Judgment Paperwork,
Whistleblower Charges
Color of Law: The Conspiracy to End Pro Per Appeals
A Sacramento Family Court News Exclusive Investigative Report.Part 4.

JUDGE PRO TEM

(49)
ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT

(35)
MATTHEW J. GARY
(33)
FLEC
(28)
SCBA
(22)
ARTS & CULTURE
(21)
CHILD CUSTODY
(21)
PETER J. McBRIEN
(20)
ROBERT SAUNDERS
(20)
WATCHDOGS
(19)
CHARLOTTE KEELEY
(18)
CJP
(18)
EMPLOYEE MISCONDUCT

(18)
PRO PERS
(18)

Paula Salinger, a family law attorney who also holds the Office ofTemporaryJudge, uses this fake "Notice of Entry" document to reduce
the chance that an unrepresented opposing party will be able to take an appeal, claims a family court whistleblower. Click here to read
the complete notice.

Sacramento Family Court News has obtainedcourt recordsindicating 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
courtclerks 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.

"This is a component of thecollaborationbetween court administrators, judges and judge pro tem attorneysto
eliminate pro per appeals," the source said. "The fake 'Notice of Entry' contains none of the mandatory
notifications about appeal rights, and appeals unit clerks use the notice to unlawfully reject appeals after 60-days as if it were the same as the mandatory Judicial Council FL-190 Notice of Entry of Judgment form," explained
the whistleblower, who spoke on the condition ofanonymitybecause they could be subject to retaliation for the
disclosure. Instead of rejecting for filing the self-serving, homemade form, court clerks file it and then appeal unit
clerks use it to impose an illegal, condensed appeal time frame on unwary pro pers, according to the source.

DOCUMENTS
(16)
DIVORCE CORP
(13)
JAMES M. MIZE
(12)
COLOR OF LAW SERIES

(11)
CONFLICT OF INTEREST

(11)
SATIRE
(11)
WOODRUFF O'HAIR
POSNER and SALINGER

(11)
JAIME R. ROMAN
(10)

LAURIE M. EARL
(10)

To continue readingPart 4of our seriesColor of Law, click Read more >> below.

NO CONTACT ORDERS
(10)
SHARON A. LUERAS
(10)
WHISTLEBLOWERS
(10)
CARLSSON CASE
(9)

To prevent indigent, unrepresented family court litigants from getting this notice regarding appeal rights, Sacramento Family Court clerks
allow judge pro tem attorneys to file a sham "Notice of Entry" form instead of the FL-190 formrequiredunder state law, according to a
court whistleblower.

As Sacramento Family Court News reported in Part 1 and Part 2 of our Color of Law series, court
administrators, including Supervising Family Law Facilitator Lollie Roberts have directed court clerks to
ignore state law requiring court staff to file and serve theFL-190 Notice of Entry of Judgmentfor all appealable
orders issued at motion and OSC hearings. Roberts hasinstructed her staff to notify unrepresented,
financiallydisadvantagedlitigants that the FL-190 is not required for appealable orders issued at motion and OSC
hearings. Click here to view the inaccurate information about the FL-190 requirement thatOffice of the Family
Law Facilitator staff dispense to unrepresented litigants. Click here to read all ofPart 1 of the Color of Law
series and click here for Part 2.

Family court supervisors also have directed court employees to

permit judge pro tem attorneys to file a fabricated "Notice of
Entry of Findings and Order After Hearing" as a substitute
for the FL-190, according to the source. SFCNobtainedthree
filed examples of the fake notice.

The three samples were filed by attorney and temporary judge

Paula Salinger. Salinger also acts as secretary on the Family
Law Executive Committee of the Sacramento County Bar
Association Family Law Section. Click here to view the
notices, which were filed in 2011 and 2012. As SFCN reported,
in 2011 Salinger was granted a waiver by then-Presiding
Judge Steve White of the minimum State Bar membership
requirement for temporary judges. The attorney is a partner at
Woodruff, O'Hair, Posner and Salinger Inc.,a prominent
family law firm where all four attorneys also hold the Office of
Temporary Judge. One of the deceptive forms was signed on
Salinger's behalf by firm partner and Judge Pro Tem Jeffrey J.
Posner. From 2006-2009, Posner held each officer post on the
Family Law Executive Committee.
Judge pro tem attorneys use thefictitiousnotice of entry against
self-represented litigants who have little knowledge of family
Paula Salinger is a family law attorney,temporary judge,
law and procedure, according to the whistleblower. "The
and secretary of theSacramento Bar Association
attorneys use the fake notice in cases where the opposing party
Family Law Executive Committee.
doesn't have a lawyer and doesn't know any better. If a pro
perdoes somehow figure out that they can appeal an order
from a motion or OSC hearing, and then tries to file a notice of appeal, the appeals unit will use the
spuriousNotice of Entry to claim the appeal is untimely after 60-days," the source explained. "Without the filing
and service of the mandatory FL-190 Judicial Council form by a court clerk, the appeal time frame is, by law,
180-days. The pseudo notice isn't used by judge pro tem attorneys in cases where both sides have a lawyer
because most attorneys know there is no such thing as a quote Notice of Entry of Findings and Order After
Hearing, unquote," the whistleblower said.
"Court clerks also know the fake notices are fake, and that they should not even be filing them.
But they do file them because they are following orders.It also should be troubling that court
filings by pro pers are routinely rejected by filing clerks because of minor technicalities, yet
here you have a judge pro tem filing completely sham paperwork without any problem.It's all
part of the plan by court administrators, full-time judges, and temporary judges to eliminate
appeals by the indigent and unrepresented," the source added.
SFCN has confirmed the allegation as substantially accurate. There is no reference to a "Notice of Entry of Findings
and Order After Hearing" in multiple family and civil law referencessearched by SFCN. The leading family law
treatise written by and for judges and attorneys, California Practice Guide: Family Law, provides detailed
instructions for order after hearing procedure and there is no reference to the notice filed by Salinger.

RAPTON-KARRES
(9)
CHRISTINA VOLKERS
(8)
FERRIS CASE
(8)
JESSICA HERNANDEZ
(8)
JULIE SETZER
(7)
YOUTUBE
(7)
3rd DISTRICT COA
(6)
CIVIL RIGHTS
(6)
CHRISTINA ARCURI
(5)
CONTEMPT
(5)
THADD BLIZZARD
(5)
FAMILY LAW FACILITATOR

(4)
LUAN CASE
(4)
CANTIL-SAKAUYE
(3)
MIKE NEWDOW
(2)

WE SUPPORT
Electronic Frontier
Foundation
First Amendment Coalition
Californians Aware

LAW BLOGS WE LIKE

Family Law Professor Blog
Law Librarian Blog
Law Professor Blogs
Thurman Arnold Family
Law Blog
Kafkaesq
Above the Law
The Divorce Artist

LEGAL NEWS &

INFORMATION

California Lawyer Magazine

California Supreme Court Confirms Judge Pro Tem

Notice Counterfeit
In a 2007 decision, Alan v. American Honda Motor Co., the California Supreme Court emphasized the
importance of the mandatory Judicial Council FL-190 form, and that the requirement is unique and specific to
family law proceedings.
"The clerk is required to give notice only in designated family law matters (Code Civ. Proc.,
664.5, subd. (a); rule 5.134)...In those family law proceedings in which the clerk must always
give notice, rule 5.134 requires the clerk to use a Judicial Council form (FL-190) specifically
drafted to ensure compliance with rule 8.104(a)(1). Obviously, problems are more likely to
occur when no approved form of notice is available...The Judicial Council form (FL-190) that
clerks must use in family law proceedings...avoids ambiguity...by bearing the title, "Notice of
Entry of Judgement," and by including at the bottom of its single page a form for the clerk's
certificate of mailing."Click here to view Alan v. American Honda Motor Co.
The fictitious form filed by family court clerks for temporary judgeattorneys does not contain a clerk's certificate of
mailing, and is served by a private sector lawyer - not a neutral public court clerk - also raising ethical
issues.Using in place of the state mandated form an unauthorized, self-serving form that omits appeal rights and
other important notifications required by law raises moral turpitude and other ethical implications against
attorneys who engage in the deception.

Courthouse News Service

Metropolitan News
Enterprise
California Official Case Law
Google Scholar-Includes
Unpublished Case Law
California Statutes

CALIFORNIA JUDICIAL
BRANCH
California Courts
Homepage
California Courts YouTube
Page
Judicial Council
Commission on Judicial
Performance
Sacramento County Family
Court
3rd District Court of Appeal
State Bar of California
State Bar Court

The deceptive, homemade "Notice of Entry" form filed by family law attorney, judge pro tem, and Sacramento County Bar Association
Family Law Section officer Paula Salinger omits this Clerk's Certificate of Mailing component of the mandatory FL-190 form.

In a related situation, SFCNrecently documentedin Part 3 of the Color of Law series that an appeals unit clerk
unlawfully rejected the appeal of an indigent, unrepresented litigant. Falsely claimingunder penalty of perjury that
the filing and service by the opposing attorney of a Findings and Order After Hearing formconstituted a
"judgment" andtriggered a 60-day appeal time frame, the clerk rejected the appeal as untimely. Click here to read
Part 3.

Family Court Oversight and Accountability

As we reported previously, filing and service of
the FL-190Notice of Entry of Judgment is
required by California Rules of Court rule
5.134.Sacramento Superior Courtinternal

policies and administrative proceduresspecify a

discipline processfor
court employees who
violate court rules, cause discredit to the court, or

engage in discriminatory, dishonest, discourteous

or unbecoming behavior.Click hereto read
the
court's employee discipline policy.
"It is understood that
the Court has a
critical role to play in the County's
justice system. It is vital that the public
maintain its trust in the Court system. As
a
result, trial court employees will be
held to a higher standard of conduct
than
employees of other
organizations,"reads the policy
introduction.

Sacramento County Bar

Association

Local & National Family CourtFamily Law Sites & Blogs (may
be gender-specific)
ABA Family Law Blawg
Directory
California Coalition for
Families and Children
California Protective
Parents Association
Center for Judicial
Excellence
Courageous Kids Network
Divorce & Family Law News
Divorce Corp
Divorced Girl Smiling
Family Law Case Law from
FindLaw
Family Law Courts.com
Family Law Updates at
JDSupra Law News

In addition,as of 2011, the failure by government

employees to comply with any state court rule is a
violation of the Whistleblower Protection Act,
The Supreme Court of California confirms that court clerks must
and constitutes government misconduct in the
serve and file the FL-190 form in applicable proceedings.
same category as corruption, malfeasance,
bribery, theft of government property, fraud, coercion and similar types of misconduct.In addition, court
employees who violate court rules and other laws also violateTenet Five of the California Court Employee
Code of Ethics.The lack of oversight and accountability indicates that the deceptive, unlawful court filings are
condoned by court administrators. According to a criminal law attorney,the elementsof a violation ofPenal
Code 182- conspiracy to pervert or obstruct justice or the due administration of the laws - specify that an
agreement or conspiracy may be inferred from the conduct of those accused of the crime. Other criminal statutes
that may apply includePenal Code 470(c),altering, corrupting or falsifying a legal document, andPenal Code
470(d), altering a document with the intent to cause damage to alegal, financial or property right. The facts and
circumstances surrounding the fake notice of entry filings imply an intent to effectively alter the valid FL-190 form
and replace it with a corrupt or altered document intended to impede the lawful appeal rights of the opposing party.

Federal Civil and Criminal Liability

Depriving unrepresented, financially disadvantaged litigants of civil or constitutional rights also may expose court
employees, supervisors, and taxpayers to financial liability in acivil lawsuit. Federalcriminal statutesmay also
apply. Federal criminal law prohibitsconspiracy against civil rightsanddeprivation of rights under color of
law.Sacramento Family Courtreceives federal funding, and court users have a federally protected right to
honest services. Court employees, managers and administrators who collude with private sector lawyers and fail
to provide honest services to the public may be subject tocriminal prosecutionunderfederal law. To a view a
federal criminal indictment for honest services fraud involving collusion between government and court
employees and private sector attorneys click here.

In Part 5of our Color of Law report:the unlawful fee waiver gauntlet used by court clerks and judges to frustrate
appeals by indigent, unrepresented family court parties.
Click here to read all articles in the Color of Lawseries.
Related posts:

Fathers 4 Justice
HuffPost Divorce
Leon Koziol.Com
Moving Past Divorce
News and Views Riverside
Superior Court
Weightier Matter

CONTRIBUTORS
Cathy Cohen
ST Thomas
PR Brown
PelicanBriefed
FCAC News
RoadDog

Total Pageviews

138819

Click herefor articles about family court employee misconduct.

Click herefor reporting on judicial misconduct.
Click herefor posts about the Family Law Facilitator.

136

Click herefor family court whistleblower articles.

Click herefor family court watchdog coverage.

Google+ Badge

Click here for articles about judge pro tem attorney Paula D. Salinger.
Click here for coverage of Woodruff, O'Hair, Posner and Salinger, Inc.
If you found this article useful or informative please share it onFacebook,Twitteror recommend it
onGoogle+and other social networking sites.If you have additional information about this subject, or any news tip
aboutSacramento Family Courtsend us an emailor use ourContact Page.

PR Brown
Follow


For additional reporting on the people and issues in this post, click on the corresponding Labels below.

Posted by
PR Brown
at
10:20 PM

Labels

2011 SACRAMENTO/MARIN
AUDITS
(2)
3rd DISTRICT

+3 Recommend this on Google

Labels:
ANALYSIS,
COLOR OF LAW SERIES,
EMPLOYEE MISCONDUCT,
FLEC,
JEFFREY POSNER,
JUDGE PRO TEM,
JULIE SETZER,

LOLLIE ROBERTS,
NEWS EXCLUSIVE,
PAULA SALINGER,
PRO PERS,
WHISTLEBLOWERS,
WOODRUFF O'HAIR POSNER and
SALINGER

Location:
County of Sacramento Superior Court - FRC -William R. Ridgeway Family Relations Courthouse, 3341 Power Inn Road,
Sacramento, CA 95826, USA

COA
(6)
AB

(1)

1102
(1)
AB 590

ABA

JOURNAL

ADMINISTRATORS

(1)

(4)

AGGREGATED NEWS

(14)
AL SALMEN
(1)

AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION

(1)

ANALYSIS
(36)

FURILLO

1 comment

(2)

ANDY

AOC

(1)

APPEALS
(10)
ARCHIBALD
CUNNINGHAM
(1)
ARTHUR G.
SCOTLAND
(5)
ARTS &

CULTURE

Add a comment

(21)

ATTORNEY
(4)
ATTORNEY
DISCIPLINE
(4)
ATTORNEY

ATTORNEY
MISCONDUCT
(35)

ETHICS
(2)

ATTORNEYS
(11)
BAR
ASSOCIATION
(11)
BARACK

Top comments

OBAMA
(1)
BARTHOLOMEW
and WASZNICKY
(3)
BUNMI
AWONIYI

Sacramento County Bar Association Family Law Section Watchdog & Whistleblower
News via Google+ 8 months ago (edited) - Shared publicly
SCBA Family Law Section attorney and judge pro tem Paula Salinger files counterfeit "notice
of entry" paperwork with court.
Family court clerks and judges allow judge pro tem attorneys to file a fabricated "Notice of
Entry of Findings and Order After Hearing" in place of a mandatory Judicial Council Notice

+2

1 Reply

(1)

CALIFORNIA

JUDICIAL CONDUCT HANDBOOK

(1)
CALIFORNIA

LAWYER
(1)

CALIFORNIANS AWARE
(2)

CAMILLE HEMMER
(3)

CANTIL-SAKAUYE

(3)

CARLSSON CASE
(9)
CECIL
and CIANCI
(2)
CEO
(4)

CHARLOTTE KEELEY

(18)
CHILD CUSTODY

(21)
CHILD SUPPORT
(3)

CHRISTINA ARCURI
(5)

CHRISTINA VOLKERS
(8)

CIVICS
(1)
CIVIL LIABILITY
(1)

CIVIL RIGHTS
(6)
CJA
(3)

CJP
(18)
ClientTickler
(2)

CNN
(1)
CODE OF JUDICIAL
ETHICS
(12)
CODE OF

SILENCE
(2)
COLLEEN
MCDONAGH
(3)
COLOR OF

Newer Post

Home

Older Post

(11)
LAW
SERIES

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

(11)
CONSTITUTIONAL
RIGHTS
(3)
CONTEMPT
(5)

COURT CONDITIONS
(2)

COURT EMPLOYEE
(1)
COURT

EMPLOYEE CODE OF ETHICS

(1)
COURT POLICIES
(1)
COURT
RULES
(4)
COURTS
(1)
CPG

CRIMINAL
CONDUCT
(9)
CRIMINAL

FAMILY LAW
(1)

LAW
(3)
CRONYISM
(2)

DAVID KAZZIE
(4)
DEMOTION

(1)
DENISE

GARY
(2)
DSM-301.7
(1)
EDITORIAL
(1)
EDWARD

RICHARDS
(1)

DIANE WASZNICKY
(2)

DISQUALIFICATION
(2)

DIVORCE
(7)
DIVORCE
ATTORNEY
(5)
DIVORCE
CORP
(13)
DIVORCE
LAWYER

(5)

DOCUMENTS
(16)

DONALD TENN
(3)
DONNA