SUPREME COURT ASKED TO REVIEW
Judicial Abuse or Kangaroo Court?
Donald L. Zachary
Former Vice President KNBC News Legal Affairs
Attorney Fees To Non-Profit Disputed
Los Angeles, CA-- The
California Supreme Court has received an unprecedented Petition For Review of a Santa Monica
Small Claims Court case that started in the courtroom of Judge Lawrence Cho and
involved an attorney fee dispute between Donald Zachary, the former Vice
President of NBC News Legal Affairs in Los Angeles and American Association of
Women, the parent organization of the Full
Disclosure Network®, a non-profit, cable and Internet television program.
JUDGE ISSUES VOID
DECISION, IGNORES COURT RULES
AAW
appealed to the Superior Court Appellant Division after Judge Cho rendered a
"VOID" decision which then the AAW filed with California Court of
Appeals, Second District. At issue was whether or not Small Claims cases are to
be decided under existing State Laws that guarantee an unbiased and fair trial
or are Small Claims cases relegated to a different standard of Justice and
application of the law?
KANGAROO COURT TV
SERIES ONLINE HERE:
The Full Disclosure Network®
has produced a Documentary TV series featuring court room witnesses to what
happened during the trial. The full six segments (8 minutes ea) are
featured online here.http://www.fulldisclosure.net/Programs/591.php
Preview 7 minutes
ISSUES
PRESENTED TO THE SUPREME COURT
1. When a trial court judge:
a) “has permitted and considered an exparte communication thereby given an appearance of impropriety.”
b) “has failed to ‘swear in’ parties and witnesses,”
c) ”has denied a party its legal right to present witnesses”
d) “has failed to enforce a valid subpoena for records, and”
e) “has failed to require a party to produce a statutorily required statement (calculation of liability), is such a judge disqualified for cause from hearing the
1. When a trial court judge:
a) “has permitted and considered an exparte communication thereby given an appearance of impropriety.”
b) “has failed to ‘swear in’ parties and witnesses,”
c) ”has denied a party its legal right to present witnesses”
d) “has failed to enforce a valid subpoena for records, and”
e) “has failed to require a party to produce a statutorily required statement (calculation of liability), is such a judge disqualified for cause from hearing the
disqualified for cause from hearing the
cases?”
2. “Is a California
Judge, who lacks personal jurisdiction, disqualified from hearing a case?”
3. “Are all California judges required to comply with the Code of Judicial Ethics?”
4. “Are trial court judges allowed to receive secret, exparte communications froma party in a
case?”
5. “Are trial court judges allowed to ignore the California Evidence Code?”
3. “Are all California judges required to comply with the Code of Judicial Ethics?”
4. “Are trial court judges allowed to receive secret, exparte communications froma party in a
case?”
5. “Are trial court judges allowed to ignore the California Evidence Code?”
CONSUMERS
PLAN SMALL CLAIMS CASES TO SUE HONDA ON MILEAGE DISPUTES
The
L A Times reported in this article on December 27,
2011 that disgruntled Honda owners are abandoning their lawyers to get a fair
shake in Small Claims Court against Honda, do consumers stand a chance?
No comments:
Post a Comment