Scribd Logo
Hochladen

Willkommen bei Scribd!

  • 10-07-18 Derwish V Darwish (SC060217) at The Los Angeles Superior Court - Case Summary (Not A Formal Court Record) As Printed From The Online Public Access System S

    Hochgeladen von

    Human Rights Alert - NGO (RA)
    165 Ansichten2 Seiten
    Executive Summary Los Angles, July 18 – complaint was filed with US Attorney Office, Central District of California, by Human Rights Alert (NGO) and Joseph Zernik, PhD, against John Segal – Judge, John A Clarke – Clerk, Attorney David Pasternak – former President of the Los Angles County Bar Association, and others of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, alleging public corruption and deprivation of rights relative to their conduct in Galdjie v Darwish (SC052737). The complaint named as co-conspirators all attorneys who appeared in the case, including, but not limited to Plaintiff’s Counsel Richard Green and Defendant’s Counsel Rhonda Walker. The complaint alleged that the named accused conspired to conduct pretense litigation, to employ the Court’s fraudulent case management system – Sustain - in generating fraudulent court records, and to take Defendant’s property – a 6-unit rental property in Santa Monica - under the color of law. The complaint further alleged that the case of Galdjie v Darwish, in and of itself, held sufficient evidence for prosecution of judges, clerks, attorneys, and the Los Angeles Superior Court itself for racketeering – conduct of an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity. The case proceeded from 1998 to 2006, by a group of judges, who presided with no Assignment Orders and with no authority at all, juggling the case back and forth among them. Judgments were falsely represented as entered, and a Receiver - David Pasternak - was falsely represented as appointed by the court. The minutes as registered in Sustain showed routine back-dating - at times by half a year or more, and also the “waiving” of notice and service and failure to have the minutes authenticated by the clerks. Therefore, all such records were alleged as void, not voidable. The Register of Actions (California civil docket) in Sustain showed the listing of numerous dates for jury trial, repeatedly continued. However, Defendant declared that her counsel had informed her at the onset of the litigation that the case would be heard by an ”Equity Court”. Therefore, she had been told that she would not be eligible for a jury trial at all. The Register of Actions also provided evidence of routine false registrations of numerous actions in the case. On May 13, 2002 the Register of Actions again listed jury trial in the case. However, Defendant declared that upon arriving at the Santa Monica Courthouse of the Superior Court of California, she was instructed to proceed to the Culver City Municipal Court. The Register of Actions noted that on the same afternoon a “Court Trial” was conducted by a judge who remained anonymous, listed in the Register only a “Muni-Judge”. However, Defendant declared that it was Judge John Segal, who acted with no authority at all. Attorney David Pasternak later acted as “Receiver” in the case. However, the hearing of a motion and the order for his appointment of receiver, were falsely registered. The Register of Actions also showed that no writ of execution was ever issued in the case. Regardless, David Pasternak took Defendant’s property, under the color of law, and conveyed it into possession of Plaintiff. However, no conveyance of title was ever found in searching the records of the Los Angeles County Registrar/ Recorder. The Register of Actions further showed that all court fees in the case, without exception, were listed as “Journal Entry”, whereas in other cases of the Court they were listed in the Registers as “Filing Fees”, “Motion Fees”, “Stipulation Fees”, etc. Presiding Judge Charles McCoy and Clerk of the Court John A Clarke refused to disclose the ultimate designation of the funds collected in the case. It should be noted that accountancy textbooks consider misuse of “Journal Entry” registration as a cardinal sign of high-level financial management fraud. Presiding Judge Charles McCoy and Clerk of the Court also denied access to the paper court file in the c

    Originaltitel

    10-07-18 Derwish v Darwish (SC060217) at the Los Angeles Superior Court - Case Summary (not a formal court record) as printed from the online public access system s

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Verfügbare Formate

    PDF, TXT oder online auf Scribd lesen

    Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

    Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

    Dieses Dokument melden
    Executive Summary Los Angles, July 18 – complaint was filed with US Attorney Office, Central District of California, by Human Rights Alert (NGO) and Joseph Zernik, PhD, against John Segal – Judge, John A Clarke – Clerk, Attorney David Pasternak – former President of the Los Angles County Bar Association, and others of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, alleging public corruption and deprivation of rights relative to their conduct in Galdjie v Darwish (SC052737). The complaint named as co-conspirators all attorneys who appeared in the case, including, but not limited to Plaintiff’s Counsel Richard Green and Defendant’s Counsel Rhonda Walker. The complaint alleged that the named accused conspired to conduct pretense litigation, to employ the Court’s fraudulent case management system – Sustain - in generating fraudulent court records, and to take Defendant’s property – a 6-unit rental property in Santa Monica - under the color of law. The complaint further alleged that the case of Galdjie v Darwish, in and of itself, held sufficient evidence for prosecution of judges, clerks, attorneys, and the Los Angeles Superior Court itself for racketeering – conduct of an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity. The case proceeded from 1998 to 2006, by a group of judges, who presided with no Assignment Orders and with no authority at all, juggling the case back and forth among them. Judgments were falsely represented as entered, and a Receiver - David Pasternak - was falsely represented as appointed by the court. The minutes as registered in Sustain showed routine back-dating - at times by half a year or more, and also the “waiving” of notice and service and failure to have the minutes authenticated by the clerks. Therefore, all such records were alleged as void, not voidable. The Register of Actions (California civil docket) in Sustain showed the listing of numerous dates for jury trial, repeatedly continued. However, Defendant declared that her counsel had informed her at the onset of the litigation that the case would be heard by an ”Equity Court”. Therefore, she had been told that she would not be eligible for a jury trial at all. The Register of Actions also provided evidence of routine false registrations of numerous actions in the case. On May 13, 2002 the Register of Actions again listed jury trial in the case. However, Defendant declared that upon arriving at the Santa Monica Courthouse of the Superior Court of California, she was instructed to proceed to the Culver City Municipal Court. The Register of Actions noted that on the same afternoon a “Court Trial” was conducted by a judge who remained anonymous, listed in the Register only a “Muni-Judge”. However, Defendant declared that it was Judge John Segal, who acted with no authority at all. Attorney David Pasternak later acted as “Receiver” in the case. However, the hearing of a motion and the order for his appointment of receiver, were falsely registered. The Register of Actions also showed that no writ of execution was ever issued in the case. Regardless, David Pasternak took Defendant’s property, under the color of law, and conveyed it into possession of Plaintiff. However, no conveyance of title was ever found in searching the records of the Los Angeles County Registrar/ Recorder. The Register of Actions further showed that all court fees in the case, without exception, were listed as “Journal Entry”, whereas in other cases of the Court they were listed in the Registers as “Filing Fees”, “Motion Fees”, “Stipulation Fees”, etc. Presiding Judge Charles McCoy and Clerk of the Court John A Clarke refused to disclose the ultimate designation of the funds collected in the case. It should be noted that accountancy textbooks consider misuse of “Journal Entry” registration as a cardinal sign of high-level financial management fraud. Presiding Judge Charles McCoy and Clerk of the Court also denied access to the paper court file in the c

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Als PDF, TXT herunterladen oder online auf Scribd lesen
    Markieren Sie unangemessene Inhalte
    165 Ansichten2 Seiten

    10-07-18 Derwish V Darwish (SC060217) at The Los Angeles Superior Court - Case Summary (Not A Formal Court Record) As Printed From The Online Public Access System S

    Hochgeladen von

    Human Rights Alert - NGO (RA)
    Executive Summary Los Angles, July 18 – complaint was filed with US Attorney Office, Central District of California, by Human Rights Alert (NGO) and Joseph Zernik, PhD, against John Segal – Judge, John A Clarke – Clerk, Attorney David Pasternak – former President of the Los Angles County Bar Association, and others of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, alleging public corruption and deprivation of rights relative to their conduct in Galdjie v Darwish (SC052737). The complaint named as co-conspirators all attorneys who appeared in the case, including, but not limited to Plaintiff’s Counsel Richard Green and Defendant’s Counsel Rhonda Walker. The complaint alleged that the named accused conspired to conduct pretense litigation, to employ the Court’s fraudulent case management system – Sustain - in generating fraudulent court records, and to take Defendant’s property – a 6-unit rental property in Santa Monica - under the color of law. The complaint further alleged that the case of Galdjie v Darwish, in and of itself, held sufficient evidence for prosecution of judges, clerks, attorneys, and the Los Angeles Superior Court itself for racketeering – conduct of an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity. The case proceeded from 1998 to 2006, by a group of judges, who presided with no Assignment Orders and with no authority at all, juggling the case back and forth among them. Judgments were falsely represented as entered, and a Receiver - David Pasternak - was falsely represented as appointed by the court. The minutes as registered in Sustain showed routine back-dating - at times by half a year or more, and also the “waiving” of notice and service and failure to have the minutes authenticated by the clerks. Therefore, all such records were alleged as void, not voidable. The Register of Actions (California civil docket) in Sustain showed the listing of numerous dates for jury trial, repeatedly continued. However, Defendant declared that her counsel had informed her at the onset of the litigation that the case would be heard by an ”Equity Court”. Therefore, she had been told that she would not be eligible for a jury trial at all. The Register of Actions also provided evidence of routine false registrations of numerous actions in the case. On May 13, 2002 the Register of Actions again listed jury trial in the case. However, Defendant declared that upon arriving at the Santa Monica Courthouse of the Superior Court of California, she was instructed to proceed to the Culver City Municipal Court. The Register of Actions noted that on the same afternoon a “Court Trial” was conducted by a judge who remained anonymous, listed in the Register only a “Muni-Judge”. However, Defendant declared that it was Judge John Segal, who acted with no authority at all. Attorney David Pasternak later acted as “Receiver” in the case. However, the hearing of a motion and the order for his appointment of receiver, were falsely registered. The Register of Actions also showed that no writ of execution was ever issued in the case. Regardless, David Pasternak took Defendant’s property, under the color of law, and conveyed it into possession of Plaintiff. However, no conveyance of title was ever found in searching the records of the Los Angeles County Registrar/ Recorder. The Register of Actions further showed that all court fees in the case, without exception, were listed as “Journal Entry”, whereas in other cases of the Court they were listed in the Registers as “Filing Fees”, “Motion Fees”, “Stipulation Fees”, etc. Presiding Judge Charles McCoy and Clerk of the Court John A Clarke refused to disclose the ultimate designation of the funds collected in the case. It should be noted that accountancy textbooks consider misuse of “Journal Entry” registration as a cardinal sign of high-level financial management fraud. Presiding Judge Charles McCoy and Clerk of the Court also denied access to the paper court file in the c

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Als PDF, TXT herunterladen oder online auf Scribd lesen
    Markieren Sie unangemessene Inhalte
    von 2

    7/18/2010 LASC - Case Summary

    Digitally signed by
    Joseph Zernik
    DN: cn=Joseph
    Zernik, o, ou,
    email=jz12345@eart
    Home Juror Services About the Court Locations Search hlink.net, c=US
    Date: 2010.07.18
    20:11:14 +03'00'
    You Are In: Home > Small Claims > Online Services > Case Summary > Search Results

    General Inform ation Case Summary

    Online Services Case Num ber: SC060217


    AMNON DERWISH VS DAVID DARWISH ET AL
    Get Help
    Filing Date: 01/21/2000
    Sm all Claim s Form s Case Type: Other Real Property Rights Case (General Jurisdiction)
    Status: Consolidated w ith Lead Case 03/09/2000
    Fees
    Consolidated for all Proceedings: SC052737 on 03/09/2000
    Sm all Claim s Locations

    Court Rules Future Hearings

    None

    Documents Filed | Proceeding Information

    Parties

    1319 YALE STREET TRUST THE - Defendant

    BARBARA KRAMAR DARWISH & DAVID DARWIS THE - Defendant

    DARWISH DAVID - Defendant

    DERWISH AMNON - Plaintiff

    EZER WILLIAMSON & BROWN - Attorney for Defendant

    GIBBS & WALKER - Attorney for Defendant

    GINGKO ROSE LP - Defendant

    KRAMAR-DARWISH BARBARA - Defendant

    KUDO & DANIELS LLP - Attorney for Plaintiff

    LOGERM LLC - Defendant

    MOZER PAMELA A. - Atty for Defendant and Cross-Compl

    ZELIG & MOZER - Attorney for Plaintiff

    Case Information | Party Information | Proceeding Information


    Documents Filed (Filing dates listed in descending order)

    10/08/2002 Substitution of Attorney (BARBARA AND DAVID DARWISH )


    Filed by Attorney for Defendant

    10/08/2002 Substitution of Attorney (GINKO ROSE L.P. )


    Filed by Attorney for Defendant

    10/08/2002 Substitution of Attorney (1319 YALE STREET TRUST )


    Filed by Attorney for Defendant

    10/08/2002 Substitution of Attorney (LOGERM LLP )


    Filed by Attorney for Defendant

    10/08/2002 Substitution of Attorney (BARBARA KRAMAR-DARWISH AND DAVID DARWISH REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST )
    Filed by Attorney for Defendant

    09/25/2002 Request for Dismissal (W/PREJUDICE; ENTIRE ACTION )


    Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff

    05/24/2002 Notice of Lien (LIEN CLAIMANT: ADINA STERN (FORMERLY ADINA DERWISH) )
    Filed by Attorney for Claimant

    08/31/2000 Answ er to Second Amended Complaint

    lasuperiorcourt.org/…/casesummary.asp… 1/2
    7/18/2010 LASC - Case Summary
    Filed by Attorney for Defendant

    07/26/2000 Request for Judicial Notice


    Filed by Attorney for Defendant

    05/25/2000 Second Amended Complaint (FEE PAID BY ZELIG & MOZER ATTY FOR PLTF )
    Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff

    04/28/2000 Reply To Motion (- in support of demurrer )


    Filed by Attorney for Defendant

    04/06/2000 Ntc and Acknow ledgement of Receipt


    Filed by Atty for Defendant and Cross-Compl

    04/05/2000 Demurrer
    Filed by Attorney for Defendant

    03/08/2000 Ntc of Change of Firm Name & Addr


    Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff

    03/08/2000 Declaration (in opposition to deft. The 1319 Yale Street Trust's reply in support of its mot to expunge )
    Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff

    03/03/2000 Reply To Motion (- in support of its motion to expunge lis pendens )


    Filed by Attorney for Defendant

    02/23/2000 Reply To Motion (- in support of motion to expunge lis pendens )


    Filed by Attorney for Defendant

    02/07/2000 Notice of Motion (MOTION TO EXPUNGE LIS PENDENS; )


    Filed by Attorney for Defendant

    01/27/2000 First Amended Complaint (FEE PAID BY KREITENBERG, MOZER & RILEY ATTY FOR PLTF )
    Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff

    01/21/2000 Complaint Filed

    Case Information | Party Information | Documents Filed

    Proceedings Held (Proceeding dates listed in descending order)

    09/15/2000 at 08:30 am in Department A203, Alan B. Haber, Presiding


    Status Conference - Advanced to this date & Vacated

    05/04/2000 at 01:30 pm in Department WEB, Patricia L. Collins, Presiding


    Hearing on Demurrer (S. Hughes / Reporter #7320) - Dem urrer sustained w ith leave

    03/09/2000 at 01:30 pm in Department WEB, Patricia L. Collins, Presiding


    Motion (K. Call / Reporter) - Motion denied

    02/28/2000 at 01:30 pm in Department WEB, Patricia L. Collins, Presiding


    Motion (K. Call / Reporter) - Motion continued

    Case Information | Party Information | Documents Filed | Proceeding Information

    Community Outreach Volunteers, Interns & Externs Employment

    ©2009 Information Systems and Technology Bureau

    lasuperiorcourt.org/…/casesummary.asp… 2/2

    Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen