Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 10-07-18 Derwish V Darwish (SC060217) - Minutes As Printed From Sustain - The Court's Case Management System With Table Form Summary S

    Uploaded by

    Human Rights Alert - NGO (RA)
    50 views6 pages
    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

    Original Title

    10-07-18 Derwish v Darwish (SC060217) - Minutes as printed from Sustain - the Court's case management system with table form summary s

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    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)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    50 views6 pages

    10-07-18 Derwish V Darwish (SC060217) - Minutes As Printed From Sustain - The Court's Case Management System With Table Form Summary S

    Uploaded by

    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)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 6

    Digitally signed

    by Joseph Zernik
    Human Rights Alert DN: cn=Joseph
    Zernik, o, ou,
    PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750 email=jz12345@e
    Fax: 323.488.9697; Email: jz12345@earthlink.net arthlink.net, c=US
    Blog: http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/ Date: 2010.07.18
    Scribd: http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert 20:02:28 +03'00'

    Derwish v Darwish (SC060217) - Minutes, as printed from Sustain, the Court’s case management
    system, provide unique example of the alleged fraud in conduct of the litigation as well as the fraud
    inherent in Sustain – the case management system of the court.

    Minutes in the Derwish v Darwish document litigation that was administered with no semblance of
    compliance with the law.
    • Judges and clerks with no authority at all entered false records in the case management system.
    • Notice and service were routinely “waived”.
    • Minutes were routinely back dates, at times by months.
    • No Initial Case Conference was ever held.

    Table 2. Minutes in Derwish v Darwish (SC060217), as printed from Sustain

    # Date JUDGE Nature of Proceedings Date Comments


    Entered
    1. 02 /28 COLLINS DEFENDANT THE 1319 YALE STREET 03/09/00 • Back-dated minutes
    /00 TRUST'S MOTION TO
    EXPUNDGE LIS PENDENS, OR IN
    THE ALTERNATIVE, REQUIRE
    PLAINTIFF TO GIVE AN
    UNDERTAKING;
    “…continued…”
    “Notice is waived”.
    2. 03/09/00 COLLINS “Defendant 1319 Yale Street Trust's 05/04/00 • Back-dated minutes
    motion to expunge Lis Pendens is denied.”
    3. 05/04/00 COLLIN8 DEFENDANTS’ DEMURRER TO FIR8T 00/00/00 • Fraudulent minutes, were
    AMENDED COMPLAINT;” secretly “disposed” with no
    “Notice waived.” notice at all.
    4. 00/00/00 - - 00/00/00 • Minutes were likely eliminated
    from the record. Such
    transaction must not be
    allowed in a valid case
    management system,
    SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF lOS ANGELES

    DATE: 02 /:~' 8 / 0 0 DEPT. WEB


    HONORABLE PATRICIA L. COLLINS JUDGE J. HERNANDEZ DEPUTY CLERK

    HONORABLE JUDGE PRO TEM ELECTRONIC RECORDING MONITOR


    #30
    J. JAMES Deputy Sheriff K. CALL CSR #5714 Reporter

    1:30 pm SC060217 Plaintiff


    Counsel PAMELA A. MOZER (X)
    AMNON DERWISH
    Defendant
    VS Counsel MATTHEW S. GIBBS (X)
    DAVID DARWISH ET AL

    NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS:

    DEFENmlliT THE 1319 YALE STREET TRUST'S MOTION TO


    EXPUND:~ LIS PENDENS, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, REQUIRE
    PLAINTIFF TO GIVE AN UNDERTAKING;

    Matter is called for hearing.


    Defendant 1319 Yale Street Trust's motion to expunge
    lis pendens or alternatively for order requiring
    Plaintiff to post undertaking is continued to
    March 9, 2000 at 1:30 p.m. in this department to
    allow moving party to file a reply to opposition.
    Notice waived.

    Page 1 of 1 DEPT. WEB


    I MINUTES ENTERED
    03/09/00
    COUNTY CLERK
    SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

    DATE: 03/09/00 DEPT. WEB

    HONORABLE PATRICIA L. COLLINS JUDGE J. HERNANDEZ DEPUTY CLERK

    HONORABLE JUDGE PRO TEM ELECTRONIC RECORDING MONITOR


    #24
    J. JAME:::; Deputy Sheriff K. CALL CSR #5714 Reporter

    1:30 pm SC060217 Plaintiff


    Counsel PAMELA A. MOZER (X)
    AMNON DERWISH
    Defendant
    VS Counsel MATTHEW S. GIBBS (X)
    DAVID DARWISH ET AL

    NATTJRE OF PROCEEDINGS:

    DEFENDilliT THE 1319 YALE STREET TRUST'S MOTION TO


    EXPUNGE LIS PENDENS, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, REQUIRE
    PLAINTIFF TO GIVE AN UNDERTAKING;

    Matter is called for hearing and argued.


    Defendant 1319 Yale Street Trust's motion to expunge
    Lis Pendens is denied.
    No sanctions.
    Moving party to give notice.

    Page 1 of 1 DEPT. WEB


    I MINUTES ENTERED
    05/04/00
    COUNTY CLERK
    SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

    DATE: 05/04/00 DEPT. WEB

    HONORABLE PATRICIA L. COLLIN8 JUDGE J. HERNANDEZ DEPUTY CLERK

    HONORABLE JUDGE PRO TEM ELECTRONIC RECORDING MONITOR


    #16
    J. JAMES Deputy Sheriff 8. HUGHE 8 C8 R # 7 3 2 0 Reporter

    1:30 pm 8C060217 Plaintiff


    Counsel PAMELA A. MOZER (X)
    AMNON :JERWI8H
    Defendant
    V8 Counsel MATTHEW 8. GIBB8 (X)
    DAVID ~ARWI8H ET AL
    Consolidated into 8C052737
    NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS:

    DEFENDilliT8 I DEMURRER TO FIR8T AMENDED COMPLAINT;

    Matter is called for hearing and argued.


    Demurrer to First Amended Complaint is sustained with
    20 days leave to amend as to the allegations against
    defendant Darwishes in the First cause of action for
    breach of contract on grounds the complaint fails to
    allege whether the contract is oral or written; as to
    the Third cause of action for fraud on grounds it
    lacks specificity as to who said what when to whom and
    where as well as detrimental reliance on the alleged
    misrepresentations; as to the Eighth cause of action
    fer conversion on grounds the complaint fails to
    allege a sum certain which defendants have converted
    over which plaintiff has the right to possession;
    the Ninth cause of action for constructive trust;
    Tenth and Eleventh causes of action for money and
    common count on grounds the complaint fails to allege
    a sum certain and how defendants are indebted to
    plaintiff; and Thirteenth cause of action if it can
    be alleged there is a non-privileged condition. The
    demurrer is sustained without leave to amend as to
    the Defendants Darwishes as to the Fourteenth cause
    of action on grounds the complaint fails to allege
    facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.
    The de~urrer as to the Darwishes is otherwise
    overruled.
    Demurrer to First Amended Complaint is sustained

    I MINUTES ENTERED
    Page 1 of 2 DEPT. WEB 05/04/00
    COUNTY CLERK
    SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

    DATE: 05/ C4/00 DEPT. WEB

    HONORABLE PATRICIA L. COLLINS JUDGE J. HERNANDEZ DEPUTY CLERK

    HONORABLE JUDGE PRO TEM ELECTRONIC RECORDING MONITOR


    #16
    J. JAME~; Deputy Sheriff S. HUGHES CSR #7320 Reporter

    1:30 pm SC060217 Plaintiff


    Counsel PAMELA A. MOZER (X)
    AMNON DERWISH
    Defendant
    VS Counsel MATTHEW S. GIBBS (X)
    DAVID DARWISH ET AL
    Consolidated into SC052737
    NATURE OF PROCEEDI~GS:

    with 20 days leave to amend as to the Ninth cause


    of action and sustained without leave to amend
    as to the remaining causes of action against
    Defendants Trust, Ginko Rose and Logerm, LLC. for
    failure to state any facts as to these defendants
    to constitute a cause of action.
    As to the First and Second causes of action, the
    plaintiffs are allowed to amend to name the living
    trust.
    Notice waived.

    MINUTES ENTERED
    Page 2 of 2 DEPT. 00/00/00
    COUNTY CLERK
    SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF lOS ANGELES

    DATE: 00/00/ C0 DEPT.

    HONORABLE JUDGE DEPUTY CLERK

    HONORABLE JUDG E PRO TEM ELECTRONIC RECORDING MONITOR

    Deputy Sheriff Reporter

    Plaintiff
    Counsel

    Defendant
    Counsel

    NA TURE OF PROCEEDINGS:

    Page 1 of 1 DEPT.
    I MINUTES ENTERED
    00/00/00
    COUNTY CLERK

    You might also like