Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 47 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing Summarizing
Exclusive to OpEd News:
General News   

APOLOGISTS FOR JUDICIAL CORRUPTION EXPOSED

By       (Page 2 of 8 pages) Become a premium member to see this article and all articles as one long page.   1 comment

Richard Fine

I. FROM THE OUTSET OF THE MARINA STRAND CASE, ALL OF JUDGE YAFFE'S ORDERS AND DECISIONS WERE VOID.

Judge Yaffe was taking illegal payments from Los Angeles County. This act violated Canon 4D(1) of the California Code of Judicial Ethics. Judge Yaffe violated Canon 3E(2) by not disclosing the payments on the record at the outset of the Marina Strand case (in which Los Angeles County was a defendant). Judge Yaffe violated Canon 3E(1) and California Code of Civil Procedure 170.1(a)(6)(A)(iii) by not disqualifying himself at the commencement of the case.

Judge Yaffe committed extrinsic "fraud upon the court", along with L.A.County and its lawyers, by not disclosing his receipt of the payments and not disqualifying himself from hearing the case. The doctrine of "fraud upon the court" invalidates the entire case and voids all orders and judgments inasmuch as Judge Yaffe was never the judge in the case due to the fraud upon the court, and the superior court and any successor court did not have subject matter jurisdiction or personal jurisdiction in the case. See U.S. v. Throckmorton, 98 U.S. 61 (1878); Valley v. Northern Fire & Marine Co., 254 U.S. 348 (1920).

All of the arguments by Mr. Green, such as that I missed a deadline or that I should have sought Judge Yaffe's dismissal earlier, are irrelevant in light of the fact that Judge Yaffe, Los Angeles County and its lawyers had committed "fraud upon the court", which nullified the entire case and made all of Judge Yaffe's orders void, invalid and unenforceable.

Further, even if Judge Yaffe had not committed "fraud upon the court", he was bound to not take the payments under Canon 4D(1); bound to disclose the payments on the record at the beginning of the case under Canon 3E(2) and to disqualify himself at the beginning of the case under Canons 3(E)1 and CCP 170.1(a)(6)(A)(iii). His failure to do so also voided all of his orders from the beginning. In effect, Judge Yaffe was not the judge in the case and had no legal authority over it whatsoever.

Judge Yaffe was precluded from making any orders against me (or anyone else) or from entering any orders in the Marina Strand case.

Even if Judge Yaffe were the legitimate judge, his January 8, 2008 Order to have me pay attorney's fees and sanctions for missing a filing deadline by one day was illegal under the California Public Resources Code, and also unconstitutional for Judge's Yaffe's failure to give me notice of the hearing, resulting in me not being present at the hearing. (These arguments are set forth in my February 19, 2008 Motion to Dismiss the January 8, 2008 Order, which Mr. Green will find as part of the Los Angeles Superior Court's Request for Judicial Notice attached to its Responsive Brief in the Ninth Circuit.) Neither L.A. County nor the real party in interest in the Marina Strand case (i.e., Del Rey Shores Joint Venture and Del Rey Shores Joint Venture North, whose General Partner was Jerry B. Epstein) filed any Opposition to my February 19, 2008 Motion to Dismiss the January 8, 2008 Order to Pay Attorney's Fees and Sanctions. Neither Judge Yaffe nor the superior court ever contested the facts set forth in such motion and set forth herein.

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6  |  7  |  8

(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).

Rate It | View Ratings

Richard Fine Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

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 (more...)
 
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines

 
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

STAY IN THE KNOW
If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEd News Newsletter

Name
Email
   (Opens new browser window)
 

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

APOLOGISTS FOR JUDICIAL CORRUPTION EXPOSED

To View Comments or Join the Conversation:

Tell A Friend