Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

Richard Fine

Volunteer a little time and make a big difference

Become a Fan
Become a Fan.
You'll get emails whenever I post articles on OpEdNews

Richard I. Fine has been referred to as a "crusader", the "taxpayer advocate attorney" and the "peoples' lawyer" for his work in challenging and correcting the abuses and corruption in government. The breadth of his experience encompasses antitrust cases in the U.S. Supreme Court, federal and state courts, requiring United Way to allow donors to designate the beneficiary of their contributions, the lawsuit against OPEC, class action cases, complex litigation, constitutional cases, criminal cases, environmental cases, international cases including those involving diplomatic immunity, public corruption and abuse of power cases, securities cases, and helping homeowners, amongst others.

A. Approximately $1 Billion Dollars Has Been Returned To California Taxpayers, And Been Protected From Future Unlawful Expenditure, As A Result Of Lawsuits Filed by Richard I. Fine On Behalf Of California Taxpayers.

From 1993 through the present, Richard I. Fine has returned approximately $350 million dollars to California taxpayers which state, county and municipal governments have unlawfully taken from "special funds" and "trust funds" in a series of taxpayer cases filed in federal court and the California state courts, commencing with the taxpayer case of Malibu Video, et al. v. Wilson, et al., and returned $6 million to the Tidelands Trust Fund and prevented approximately $350 million from being unlawfully expended from the Tidelands Trust Fund in a series of cases against California cities and ports commencing with the taxpayer case of Veltman v. City of Los Angeles, et al. Additionally, Richard I. Fine also returned money to small and minority businesses who were not paid during California's "budget crises" in the class action case of Lido v. State of California.

In 1996, Richard I. Fine required the City of Los Angeles to change its method of calculating "sewer service charges," saving residents tens of millions of dollars per year from the previous system, from 1996 onwards for each successive year through the present, in the taxpayer class action case of Shinkle, et al. v. City of Los Angeles.

In May, 1999, Richard I. Fine required Los Angeles County to create a special environmental inspection fee fund from monies that had wrongfully been deposited in the Los Angeles County General Fund with an initial deposit of $11 million dollars, and to freeze the environmental inspection fees until the $11 million dollars was expended, and to deposit approximately $40 million dollars a year in environmental inspection fees annually into the "special fund" into the indefinite future, in the taxpayer case of Amjadi and LACAOEHS v. LA Board of Supervisors, et al. The income to taxpayers in the "special fund" since 1999 is over $400 million dollars, and is growing by over $40 million dollars each year.

B. Twenty-Six Years Of California's "Annual Budget Crisis" Were Stopped By A Taxpayer Case Won By Richard I. Fine

On July 21, 1998, Richard I. Fine won a preliminary injunction in the taxpayer case of Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. & Steven White v. Connell, which closed the California State government and stopped all payments other than pre-authorized payments during the 1998 budget crisis. This also stopped salary payments to judges. Within a few days, a $19 billion dollar "emergency bill" was passed to relieve the "budget crisis". The Court of Appeal affirmed the decision, but held that judges' salaries were pre-authorized by legislation setting their salaries and compensation under the Government Code. The Court of Appeal's decision was affirmed in the California Supreme Court in 2003, in the case of White v. Davis; Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. & Steven White v. Wesly.

View the rest of Fine's biography / resume at

OpEdNews Member for 251 week(s) and 5 day(s)

1 Articles, 0 Quick Links, 1 Comments, 0 Diaries, 0 Polls

Articles Listed By Date   List By Popularity

Friday, July 16, 2010 (1 comments)      Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon
APOLOGISTS FOR JUDICIAL CORRUPTION EXPOSED Corruption is rampant in California due to illegal bribes being paid to superior court judges by counties (especially Los Angeles County) seeking to curb losses with respect to bona fide lawsuits filed against them.