Consistent with The Leslie Brodie Report’s commitment to integrity and adherence to the highest level of ethical journalism, and in order to report on both sides of the story, Rory Little (Professor, Hastings College of Law, Special Prosecutor in the matter of In Re Girardi, and spouse of Keker & Van Nest’s Jan Little) is hereby asked to reply/comment on recent allegation presented to a federal court that Girardi & Keese’s Thomas Girardi improperly attempted to influence the prosecutor /outcome of proceedings by abusing his considerable political influence to secure a judicial nomination to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals?

See paragraph 18, below:

Rory Little, Ninth Circuit judicial aspirant and professor of law at U.C. Hastings. Professor Little was appointed special prosecutor in the matter of In Re Girardi by Chief Judge Alex Kozinski. Prior to entering academia, Professor Little served as a federal prosecutor for the Organized Crime and Racketeering Strike Force, prosecuting cases of labor racketeering, money-laundering, narcotics and other organized criminal activity. (image:courtesy photo)

Judge William Fletcher, a member of the Ninth Circuit panel that adjudicated the matter of In re Girardi, 08-80090, rejected the lenient recommendations of Rory Little. He stated: “with any competent lawyer if you’re omitting part of a document, that is not accidental. That is intentional.” The court adjudicated that the grave misconduct by Walter Lack and Thomas Girardi included “the persistent use of known falsehoods,” and that the “false representations” were made “knowingly, intentionally, and recklessly” during years of litigation.

Please observe that, rather than contacting Rory Little (Professor, Hastings College of Law, Special Prosecutor in the matter of In Re Girardi, and spouse of Keker & Van Nest’s Jan Little)  directly, the query is being delivered publicly, here and now.

Any  comments, opinion or observation can be sent to lesliebrodie@gmx.com

Please see also developing story @:

http://lesliebrodie.blog.co.uk/2012/03/31/jon-streeter-of-keker-van-nest-rory…

The law firms representing two prominent Solyndra executives are major Democratic Party donors, The Daily Caller has learned.

Reuters first reported that the bankrupt company’s CEO, Brian Harrison, and CFO, W.G. Stover, plan to refuse to talk openly to congressional investigators about how their company squandered $535 million in taxpayer money. They will invoke their Fifth Amendment right not to self-incriminate themselves at a House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing on Friday.

The law firms representing the executives are Orrick, Harrington and Sutcliffe, and Keker and Van Nest. Both are major contributors to Democrats and both have handsomely helped President Barack Obama’s political efforts, according to information retrieved from Center for Responsive Politics databanks.

Employees at Orrick, Harrington and Sutcliffe, which is representing Harrison, have donated more than $1.3 million to federal campaigns, political parties and Political Action Committees since 1990. More than 95 percent of those donations went to Democrats, including $184,000 to Obama.

Steven Newmark, a litigation managing associate for the firm, has bundled between $50,000 and $100,000 for Obama’s ongoing bid for re-election.

Keker and Van Nest employees, on the other hand, have donated $527,301 in national-level political donations since 1990, 99 percent of which have gone to Democrats. Keker and Van Nest is representing Stover. (RELATED: Solyndra execs to plead Fifth in hearing)

Over the last three election cycles, Keker and Van Nest employees have donated more than $315,000 to Democrats and, since 2007, they’ve given $64,900 specifically to Obama.

In 2008, Keker and Van Nest attorney Jon B. Streeter bundled between $50,000 and $100,00 for Obama. Since 2009, Streeter has given $46,000 personally to the Democratic National Committee and, in 2010, personally donated more than $30,000 to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

Please continue @:

http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/20/solyndra-executives-pleading-the-fifth-on-f…

The Leslie Brodie Report (TLR) is carefully following a major developing story out of California relating to San Francisco-based Institute on Aging (IOA), David Werdegar, California Supreme Court Associate- Justice Kathryn Werdegar, and Matthew Werdegar of Keker & Van Nest.

According to knowledgeable sources, David Werdegar – the recently deposed President and CEO of San Francisco-based Institute on Aging –  has been named as a defendant in a lawsuit.

On April, 2011 President and CEO Dr. David Werdegar, Board Chair Anthony Wagner, State Senator Leland Yee, City Attorney Dennis Herrera, and Supervisor Eric Mar attended IOA’s Senior Campus ribbon-cutting ceremony.  A substantial portion of  IOA’s budget arrives from the City and County of San Francisco which uses IOA and its facilities to care for some its aging population.(Image:courtesy of IOA)

As was reported earlier, on March 5, 2012, IOA’s Board of Directors announced that Dr. David Werdegar has retired as Chief Executive Officer, and the Board has named J. Thomas Briody, MHSc as the organization’s new President and CEO.

TLR is gathering and analyzing data concerning the suit, and will post update as they become available.

The Leslie Brodie Report (TLR) is carefully following a major developing story out of California relating to San Francisco-based Institute on Aging (IOA), David Werdegar, California Supreme Court Associate- Justice Kathryn Werdegar, and Matthew Werdegar of Keker & Van Nest.

According to knowledgeable sources, David Werdegar – the recently deposed President and CEO of San Francisco-based Institute on Aging –  has been named as a defendant in a lawsuit.

On April, 2011 President and CEO Dr. David Werdegar, Board Chair Anthony Wagner, State Senator Leland Yee, City Attorney Dennis Herrera, and Supervisor Eric Mar President and CEO Dr. David Werdegar, Board Chair Anthony Wagner, State Senator Leland Yee, City Attorney Dennis Herrera, and Supervisor Eric Mar.  A substantial portion of  IOA’s budget arrives from the City and County of San Francisco which uses IOA and its facilities to care for some  its aging population.(Image:courtesy of IOA)

As was reported earlier, on March 5, 2012, IOA’s Board of Directors announced that Dr. David Werdegar has retired as Chief Executive Officer, and the Board has named J. Thomas Briody, MHSc as the organization’s new President and CEO.

TLR is gathering and analyzing data concerning the suit, and will post update as they become available.

(L-R) Honoring Jeffrey Bleich 2007 Dinner Chairman James Brosnahan, Mark Bostick, Honoree Jeffrey Bleich (AKA Renaissance Superman), Ninth Circuit Judge William A. Fletcher 

Below, California Bar Foundation IRS Form 990 :

Below, originally published on November of 2011:

As public service to the community, The Leslie Brodie Report publishes* a complaint filed with the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) against Orange County’s Nonprofit Investigative News Agency DBA Voice of OC, below:

Internal Revenue Service
Exempt Organizations Unit
1100 Commerce St.
Dallas, TX 75242-1198

Re: A referral for noncompliance with tax laws against exempt organization “Orange County’s Nonprofit Investigative News Agency” (dba “Voice of OC”):

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT:

In lieu of using IRS Form 13909 (Tax-Exempt Organization Referral Form), please consider this communication a formal complaint (referral) against an Orange County, California not-for-profit entity known as “Orange County Nonprofit Investigative News Agency,” which operates an online publication under the name “Voice of OC” (located at www.voiceofoc.org).

On September 1, 2011, Orange County’s Nonprofit Investigative News Agency and Voice of OC (collectively, “Voice of OC”) were duly served with a request for production of IRS Form 990, Form 990 Schedule A, and Form 1023. (See Exhibit 1.) To date, this request to produce Voice of OC’s tax returns has been ignored, despite the clear mandate by the Internal Revenue Service to fully comply with such requests within 30 days. As such, reluctantly, the undersigned makes this referral.

INTRODUCTION OF ACTORS:

1. Mr. Joe Dunn in his role as the creator of online publication “Voice of OC” – Orange County’s Nonprofit Investigative News Agency.

2. Mr. Joe Dunn in his role as Trustee of the UCI Foundation (an entity which obtained funds from a separate charitable entity known as CaliforniaALL (FEIN Number 51-0656213).

3. Mr. Joe Dunn in his role as Executive Director of the State Bar of California – an entity which also controls and maintains a foundation known as the California Bar Foundation. The California Bar Foundation very quietly transferred close to $780,000 to CaliforniaALL.

4. Mr. Joe Dunn in his role as a politician and business partner of Martha Escutia, who was involved in matters relating to utility companies operating in California.

5. Ms. Gwen Moore – a former Assembly member in the California legislature. Ms. Moore has “clout” over the CPUC and utility companies. Ms. Moore presently serves as a member of the State Bar of California Board of Governors; she has previously been the subject of an FBI sting operation.

6. Mr. Geoffrey Brown – a former commissioner with the CPUC and former board member of the California Bar Foundation. During his tenure as a board member of the California Bar Foundation, a hush-hush transfer of $780,000 was made to CaliforniaALL. Subsequent to this transfer, Mr. Brown abruptly quit his position as board member.

7. Mr. Thomas Girardi of Los Angeles-based law firm Girardi & Keese. Mr. Girardi helped Joe Dunn to establish the Voice of OC, and was a member of its board of directors. Recently, he abruptly quit that position. Mr. Girardi is a well-known donor to the Democratic Party and, in particular, to California Senator Barbara Boxer.

8. Mr. Howard Miller of Los Angeles-based law firm Girardi & Keese. Mr. Miller was a member of both the State Bar of California Board of Governors and the California Bar Foundation board of directors when the “hush-hush” transfer of $780,000 from California Bar Foundation to CaliforniaALL took place.

9. Mr. James Brosnahan of Morrison & Foerster – Mr. Brosnahan represents utility companies. He – along with Thomas Girardi – helped Mr. Joe Dunn create the Voice of OC, the subject of this complaint. Like Mr. Girardi, Mr. Brosnahan also served as member of Voice of OC’s board of directors, and recently also abruptly quit his position.

10. Ms. Susan Mac Cormac of Morrison & Foerster – Ms. Mac Cormac was part of the legal team that created the legal entity known as CaliforniaALL.

11. Mr. Victor Miramontes – a resident of San Antonio, TX and business partner of former HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros. Mr. Miramontes was the chairman of CaliforniaALL.

12. Ms. Ruthe Catolico Ashley – a former employee of McGeorge School of Law who later served as a “Diversity Officer” at CalPERS. Ms. Ashley also served as member of the State Bar of California Board of Governors, and came up with the idea to create CaliforniaALL during a meeting with Sarah Redfield and Peter Arth, Jr. (the assistant to CPUC President Michael Peevey). After CaliforniaALL came into existence, Ms. Ashley, after a simulated search, was selected to serve as CaliforniaALL’s executive director.

13. Ms. Sarah Redfield – a visiting professor at McGeorge School of Law and a member of the State Bar of California Committee. Ms. Redfield was chosen to serve as the “interim executive director” for CaliforniaALL, and later also allegedly served as a consultant to CaliforniaALL. For her services, Ms. Redfield was paid for the year of 2008 close to $160,000 as an “independent contractor.” Even though CaliforniaALL was housed pro bono at the law offices of DLA Piper in Sacramento, there is an entry on CaliforniaALL’s tax return for close to $16,000 for “occupancy.”

14. Ms. Judy Johnson – the former Executive Director of the State Bar of California. For the past 8 years, she has been secretly serving as the president of an entity with a misleading name (“California Consumer Protection Foundation”). This entity absorbed close to $30 million in class action cy pres awards, as well as fines and settlements imposed by the CPUC on utility companies. This entity forwarded those funds to mostly questionable ACORN-like entities. On its website, CCPF claims that it has available information on all grantees going back 10 years. Not so. The information is scattered and extremely difficult to ascertain. In fact, a whole year is missing (2002). During that year, incidentally, CCPF awarded funds to the real ACORN as well as to Eric Moore of Educate LA, who is presumably related to Gwen Moore. Ms. Johnson used her position as executive director of the State Bar of California (which is supposed to supervise and discipline lawyers) as “clout” to obtain cy pres awards from the settlement of class actions prosecuted and defended by countless law firms.

15. Mr. Jeffrey Bleich of Munger Tolles & Olson – presently the U.S. ambassador to Australia and a close friend of President Barack Obama. Mr. Bleich served as member of the BOG when CaliforniaALL was conceived. He is mentioned only in reference because Verizon Communications (which heavily contributed to CaliforniaALL) is a client of Munger Tules & Olson.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND:

In approximately 2007, Ruthe Catolico Ashley — an attorney from Sacramento and a member of the State Bar of California Board of Governors — was employed by CalPERS as a “Diversity Officer.” Prior to her employment with CalPERS, Ms. Ashley was employed as a diversity officer at McGeorge School of Law in Sacramento. While at McGeorge, Ms. Ashley met diversity expert Sarah Redfield.

In April 2007, Ashley, along with Sarah Redfield, met Peter Arth at a restaurant in San Francisco. During that meeting the idea to create CaliforniaALL was conceived. Eventually, CalPERS, CPUC, and the State Bar of California endorsed in principle the creation of CaliforniaALL – a Section 501(c)(3) entity that would raise funds to be used to support a more diverse workforce in California.

Papers were filed with both state and federal agencies to allow CaliforniaALL to operate as a tax exempt entity. Victor Miramontes listed himself as Chairman of the Board, and Sarah E. Redfield served as CaliforniaAll’s interim-executive director for a period of 6 months. Serving as CaliforniaALL’s legal counsel was Susan Mac Cormac of Morrison & Foerster.

California Attorney General RCT reflects that CaliforniaALL obtained its “Charity” status on March 14, 2008 (FEIN Number 510656213). The address for CaliforniaALL is listed as 400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2400, Sacramento, California. This is actually the address of DLA Piper, where CaliforniaALL resided pro bono.
In June 2008, after a “nationwide search” and aided by a pro bono head-hunting firm in its search for a permanent CEO, CaliforniaALL, not surprisingly, hired Ruthe Catolico Ashley as its chief executive officer.

Also not surprisingly, Ruthe Catolico Ashley abruptly exited CaliforniaALL in September 2009 – the same month Joe Dunn launched his non-profit online publication “Voice of OC.”

CaliforniaALL was abruptly dissolved in June 2010.

CaliforniaALL’s 990 returns for 2008 list Sarah Redfield of Orono, Maine as an “independent contractor.” Her job description is listed as “Program Director.” and she was paid $157,763. It is unknown to the undersigned whether Redfield paid self-employment taxes or any other applicable state income taxes, either in California or Maine. (Incidentally, Redfield falsely states on her resume that she was part of a “curriculum committee” with SAL-UCI, an entity associated with UCI and the UCI Foundation where CaliforniaALL forwarded funds. In addition, Redfield falsely stated that she “launched” SAL-UCI, an entity that was already in existence from 2005.)

In its brief existence from 2008 to 2010, CaliforniaALL collected close to $2 million from utility companies (AT&T, PG&E, Verizon, Sempra), including a sub rosa “hush-hush” contribution of $769,247 from the State Bar of California Foundation.

To date, data collected by the undersigned shows that CaliforniaALL (which was supposed to forward most of those funds) transferred between $300,000 to $400,000 to the UCI Foundation (where Joe Dunn serves as trustee), spent an unknown amount to honor Gwen Moore at a lavish dinner held at a luxury hotel in Sacramento, paid for other incidental expenses such as salaries, and subsequent to moving out from the offices of DLA Piper to a more modest location , paid for a UPS Store mail box slot in Citrus Heights. (Later, CaliforniaALL relocated its base to the loft of one Larrisa Parecki in Sacramento.)

Between 2001 and 2007, Geoffrey Brown served as a Commissioner with the CPUC. From 2006 to 2009, Brown served as a director of the State Bar of California Foundation. In 2008, California Bar Foundation quietly transferred $769,247.00 to CaliforniaALL. CaliforniaALL never acknowledged receipt of the $769,247.00 from the Cal Bar Foundation in any of its publications, although it did acknowledge the transfer on its IRS tax returns. Likewise, California Bar Foundation never acknowledged the largest grant it ever bestowed in its newsroom, the California Bar Journal, or similar publications; it did, however, recognize the transfer on its IRS returns, and in a 2 by 2 inch blurb in its annual report.

Several months ago, the undersigned asked the State Bar of California Board of Governors to examine the suspicious circumstances surrounding CaliforniaALL (i.e. the hush hush transfer, etc.). While simply presenting facts similar to the above, Geoffrey Brown immediately, as though bitten by a snake, threatened to file legal action against the undersigned even though the communication with the BOG was absolutely privileged and justified, and only made mention of Brown in passing.

The undersigned has met Brown casually once or twice, and was highly impressed with his modest and genteel nature. A group conversation transpired and Brown immediately, without even being asked, volunteered to help and assist. This however, can and will not serve to bar the mentioning of his name as part of the overall description of events (such as in this communication). Such tactics would be unfair to the other individuals and the proper administration of justice. Nevertheless, it should be noted that the undersigned possesses not even a scintilla of evidence that demonstrating that Brown somehow pocketed any money unlawfully or engaged in any other unlawful activities, other than the convenient circumstances described above.

Due to unsettling circumstances involving the State Bar of California (such as the highly secretive control of CCPF by Judy Johnson, the refusal of the State Bar of California to disclose amounts it transfers to Bet Tzedek, a Los Angeles-based entity, the amounts it obtains from “voluntary contributions,” and, in particular, circumstances surrounding CaliforniaALL, Joe Dunn, and the Voice of OC), the undersigned asked Voice of OC to produce its tax returns for the past 3 years.

Specifically, the following circumstances surrounding Voice of OC have caused concerns:

1. Senator Martha Escutia, Chair of the Senate Committee on Energy, Utilities and Communications (EU&C) also participated in meetings with the CPUC concerning diversity. She is a founding member of The Senators (Ret.) firm, LLP, as is Joe Dunn.

2. The fact that some individuals and entities involved in the creation of CaliforniaALL and the subsequent transfer of $769,247.00 from the Cal Bar Foundation to CaliforniaALL, were also involved in assisting Joe Dunn with the creation of “Voice of OC” to wit – on one hand Morrison & Foerster’s Susan Mac Cormac as legal counsel for CaliforniaALL; Girardi & Keese’s Howard Miller in his capacity as BOD member of Cal Bar Foundation, as well as BOG members who voted to endorse CaliforniaALL and consider it to have been a partner of the State Bar of California. On the other hand Morrison &Foerster’s James Brosnahan and Girardi & Keese’s Thomas Girardi as part of helping Joe Dunn with the establishment of Voice of OC.

3. CaliforniaALL was to transfer funds forward. It did so by awarding approximately $300,000 in grants to the UCI Foundation, where Joe Dunn serves as trustee and chair of the Audit Committee. It appears that CaliforniaALL preselected UCI Foundation, making a prior simulated request for proposal (RFP) by Sarah Redfield that led to the grant – a sham process.

4. In September 2009, Ruthe Ashley abruptly exited CaliforniaALL. That same month, Joe Dunn publicly launched his online publication, “Voice of OC.” (as though Ashley’s mission had been completed).

5. The recent abrupt departure of Thomas Girardi and James Brosnahan from ‘Voice of OC” (as though they were fleeing the scene with guilty consciences).

As such, several months ago, on September 1, 2011, the Voice of OC was duly served with a request for production of IRS Form 990, Form 990 Schedule A, and Form 1023. (See Exhibit 1 attached) Additionally, said request was delivered to Joe Dunn.

To date, this request to produce Voice of OC’s tax returns has been ignored, despite the clear mandate by the Internal Revenue Service to fully comply with such requests. As such, reluctantly, the undersigned filed this complaint.

As such, I urge you to investigate this matter to determine whether Voice of OC who ignored the request to produce said tax returns violated IRS rules and regulations. I ask that you impose appropriate sanctions against any and all involved, if supported by the results of your investigation.

I look forward to your response. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or need additional information.

*Links and photos inserted by The Leslie Brodie Report.

(L-R) Honoring Jeffrey Bleich 2007 Dinner Chairman James Brosnahan, Mark Bostick, Honoree Jeffrey Bleich (AKA Renaissance Superman), Ninth Circuit Judge William A. Fletcher 

Below, California Bar Foundation IRS Form 990 :

Below, originally published on November of 2011:

As public service to the community, The Leslie Brodie Report publishes* a complaint filed with the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) against Orange County’s Nonprofit Investigative News Agency DBA Voice of OC, below:

Internal Revenue Service
Exempt Organizations Unit
1100 Commerce St.
Dallas, TX 75242-1198

Re: A referral for noncompliance with tax laws against exempt organization “Orange County’s Nonprofit Investigative News Agency” (dba “Voice of OC”):

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT:

In lieu of using IRS Form 13909 (Tax-Exempt Organization Referral Form), please consider this communication a formal complaint (referral) against an Orange County, California not-for-profit entity known as “Orange County Nonprofit Investigative News Agency,” which operates an online publication under the name “Voice of OC” (located at www.voiceofoc.org).

On September 1, 2011, Orange County’s Nonprofit Investigative News Agency and Voice of OC (collectively, “Voice of OC”) were duly served with a request for production of IRS Form 990, Form 990 Schedule A, and Form 1023. (See Exhibit 1.) To date, this request to produce Voice of OC’s tax returns has been ignored, despite the clear mandate by the Internal Revenue Service to fully comply with such requests within 30 days. As such, reluctantly, the undersigned makes this referral.

INTRODUCTION OF ACTORS:

1. Mr. Joe Dunn in his role as the creator of online publication “Voice of OC” – Orange County’s Nonprofit Investigative News Agency.

2. Mr. Joe Dunn in his role as Trustee of the UCI Foundation (an entity which obtained funds from a separate charitable entity known as CaliforniaALL (FEIN Number 51-0656213).

3. Mr. Joe Dunn in his role as Executive Director of the State Bar of California – an entity which also controls and maintains a foundation known as the California Bar Foundation. The California Bar Foundation very quietly transferred close to $780,000 to CaliforniaALL.

4. Mr. Joe Dunn in his role as a politician and business partner of Martha Escutia, who was involved in matters relating to utility companies operating in California.

5. Ms. Gwen Moore – a former Assembly member in the California legislature. Ms. Moore has “clout” over the CPUC and utility companies. Ms. Moore presently serves as a member of the State Bar of California Board of Governors; she has previously been the subject of an FBI sting operation.

6. Mr. Geoffrey Brown – a former commissioner with the CPUC and former board member of the California Bar Foundation. During his tenure as a board member of the California Bar Foundation, a hush-hush transfer of $780,000 was made to CaliforniaALL. Subsequent to this transfer, Mr. Brown abruptly quit his position as board member.

7. Mr. Thomas Girardi of Los Angeles-based law firm Girardi & Keese. Mr. Girardi helped Joe Dunn to establish the Voice of OC, and was a member of its board of directors. Recently, he abruptly quit that position. Mr. Girardi is a well-known donor to the Democratic Party and, in particular, to California Senator Barbara Boxer.

8. Mr. Howard Miller of Los Angeles-based law firm Girardi & Keese. Mr. Miller was a member of both the State Bar of California Board of Governors and the California Bar Foundation board of directors when the “hush-hush” transfer of $780,000 from California Bar Foundation to CaliforniaALL took place.

9. Mr. James Brosnahan of Morrison & Foerster – Mr. Brosnahan represents utility companies. He – along with Thomas Girardi – helped Mr. Joe Dunn create the Voice of OC, the subject of this complaint. Like Mr. Girardi, Mr. Brosnahan also served as member of Voice of OC’s board of directors, and recently also abruptly quit his position.

10. Ms. Susan Mac Cormac of Morrison & Foerster – Ms. Mac Cormac was part of the legal team that created the legal entity known as CaliforniaALL.

11. Mr. Victor Miramontes – a resident of San Antonio, TX and business partner of former HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros. Mr. Miramontes was the chairman of CaliforniaALL.

12. Ms. Ruthe Catolico Ashley – a former employee of McGeorge School of Law who later served as a “Diversity Officer” at CalPERS. Ms. Ashley also served as member of the State Bar of California Board of Governors, and came up with the idea to create CaliforniaALL during a meeting with Sarah Redfield and Peter Arth, Jr. (the assistant to CPUC President Michael Peevey). After CaliforniaALL came into existence, Ms. Ashley, after a simulated search, was selected to serve as CaliforniaALL’s executive director.

13. Ms. Sarah Redfield – a visiting professor at McGeorge School of Law and a member of the State Bar of California Committee. Ms. Redfield was chosen to serve as the “interim executive director” for CaliforniaALL, and later also allegedly served as a consultant to CaliforniaALL. For her services, Ms. Redfield was paid for the year of 2008 close to $160,000 as an “independent contractor.” Even though CaliforniaALL was housed pro bono at the law offices of DLA Piper in Sacramento, there is an entry on CaliforniaALL’s tax return for close to $16,000 for “occupancy.”

14. Ms. Judy Johnson – the former Executive Director of the State Bar of California. For the past 8 years, she has been secretly serving as the president of an entity with a misleading name (“California Consumer Protection Foundation”). This entity absorbed close to $30 million in class action cy pres awards, as well as fines and settlements imposed by the CPUC on utility companies. This entity forwarded those funds to mostly questionable ACORN-like entities. On its website, CCPF claims that it has available information on all grantees going back 10 years. Not so. The information is scattered and extremely difficult to ascertain. In fact, a whole year is missing (2002). During that year, incidentally, CCPF awarded funds to the real ACORN as well as to Eric Moore of Educate LA, who is presumably related to Gwen Moore. Ms. Johnson used her position as executive director of the State Bar of California (which is supposed to supervise and discipline lawyers) as “clout” to obtain cy pres awards from the settlement of class actions prosecuted and defended by countless law firms.

15. Mr. Jeffrey Bleich of Munger Tolles & Olson – presently the U.S. ambassador to Australia and a close friend of President Barack Obama. Mr. Bleich served as member of the BOG when CaliforniaALL was conceived. He is mentioned only in reference because Verizon Communications (which heavily contributed to CaliforniaALL) is a client of Munger Tules & Olson.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND:

In approximately 2007, Ruthe Catolico Ashley — an attorney from Sacramento and a member of the State Bar of California Board of Governors — was employed by CalPERS as a “Diversity Officer.” Prior to her employment with CalPERS, Ms. Ashley was employed as a diversity officer at McGeorge School of Law in Sacramento. While at McGeorge, Ms. Ashley met diversity expert Sarah Redfield.

In April 2007, Ashley, along with Sarah Redfield, met Peter Arth at a restaurant in San Francisco. During that meeting the idea to create CaliforniaALL was conceived. Eventually, CalPERS, CPUC, and the State Bar of California endorsed in principle the creation of CaliforniaALL – a Section 501(c)(3) entity that would raise funds to be used to support a more diverse workforce in California.

Papers were filed with both state and federal agencies to allow CaliforniaALL to operate as a tax exempt entity. Victor Miramontes listed himself as Chairman of the Board, and Sarah E. Redfield served as CaliforniaAll’s interim-executive director for a period of 6 months. Serving as CaliforniaALL’s legal counsel was Susan Mac Cormac of Morrison & Foerster.

California Attorney General RCT reflects that CaliforniaALL obtained its “Charity” status on March 14, 2008 (FEIN Number 510656213). The address for CaliforniaALL is listed as 400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2400, Sacramento, California. This is actually the address of DLA Piper, where CaliforniaALL resided pro bono.
In June 2008, after a “nationwide search” and aided by a pro bono head-hunting firm in its search for a permanent CEO, CaliforniaALL, not surprisingly, hired Ruthe Catolico Ashley as its chief executive officer.

Also not surprisingly, Ruthe Catolico Ashley abruptly exited CaliforniaALL in September 2009 – the same month Joe Dunn launched his non-profit online publication “Voice of OC.”

CaliforniaALL was abruptly dissolved in June 2010.

CaliforniaALL’s 990 returns for 2008 list Sarah Redfield of Orono, Maine as an “independent contractor.” Her job description is listed as “Program Director.” and she was paid $157,763. It is unknown to the undersigned whether Redfield paid self-employment taxes or any other applicable state income taxes, either in California or Maine. (Incidentally, Redfield falsely states on her resume that she was part of a “curriculum committee” with SAL-UCI, an entity associated with UCI and the UCI Foundation where CaliforniaALL forwarded funds. In addition, Redfield falsely stated that she “launched” SAL-UCI, an entity that was already in existence from 2005.)

In its brief existence from 2008 to 2010, CaliforniaALL collected close to $2 million from utility companies (AT&T, PG&E, Verizon, Sempra), including a sub rosa “hush-hush” contribution of $769,247 from the State Bar of California Foundation.

To date, data collected by the undersigned shows that CaliforniaALL (which was supposed to forward most of those funds) transferred between $300,000 to $400,000 to the UCI Foundation (where Joe Dunn serves as trustee), spent an unknown amount to honor Gwen Moore at a lavish dinner held at a luxury hotel in Sacramento, paid for other incidental expenses such as salaries, and subsequent to moving out from the offices of DLA Piper to a more modest location , paid for a UPS Store mail box slot in Citrus Heights. (Later, CaliforniaALL relocated its base to the loft of one Larrisa Parecki in Sacramento.)

Between 2001 and 2007, Geoffrey Brown served as a Commissioner with the CPUC. From 2006 to 2009, Brown served as a director of the State Bar of California Foundation. In 2008, California Bar Foundation quietly transferred $769,247.00 to CaliforniaALL. CaliforniaALL never acknowledged receipt of the $769,247.00 from the Cal Bar Foundation in any of its publications, although it did acknowledge the transfer on its IRS tax returns. Likewise, California Bar Foundation never acknowledged the largest grant it ever bestowed in its newsroom, the California Bar Journal, or similar publications; it did, however, recognize the transfer on its IRS returns, and in a 2 by 2 inch blurb in its annual report.

Several months ago, the undersigned asked the State Bar of California Board of Governors to examine the suspicious circumstances surrounding CaliforniaALL (i.e. the hush hush transfer, etc.). While simply presenting facts similar to the above, Geoffrey Brown immediately, as though bitten by a snake, threatened to file legal action against the undersigned even though the communication with the BOG was absolutely privileged and justified, and only made mention of Brown in passing.

The undersigned has met Brown casually once or twice, and was highly impressed with his modest and genteel nature. A group conversation transpired and Brown immediately, without even being asked, volunteered to help and assist. This however, can and will not serve to bar the mentioning of his name as part of the overall description of events (such as in this communication). Such tactics would be unfair to the other individuals and the proper administration of justice. Nevertheless, it should be noted that the undersigned possesses not even a scintilla of evidence that demonstrating that Brown somehow pocketed any money unlawfully or engaged in any other unlawful activities, other than the convenient circumstances described above.

Due to unsettling circumstances involving the State Bar of California (such as the highly secretive control of CCPF by Judy Johnson, the refusal of the State Bar of California to disclose amounts it transfers to Bet Tzedek, a Los Angeles-based entity, the amounts it obtains from “voluntary contributions,” and, in particular, circumstances surrounding CaliforniaALL, Joe Dunn, and the Voice of OC), the undersigned asked Voice of OC to produce its tax returns for the past 3 years.

Specifically, the following circumstances surrounding Voice of OC have caused concerns:

1. Senator Martha Escutia, Chair of the Senate Committee on Energy, Utilities and Communications (EU&C) also participated in meetings with the CPUC concerning diversity. She is a founding member of The Senators (Ret.) firm, LLP, as is Joe Dunn.

2. The fact that some individuals and entities involved in the creation of CaliforniaALL and the subsequent transfer of $769,247.00 from the Cal Bar Foundation to CaliforniaALL, were also involved in assisting Joe Dunn with the creation of “Voice of OC” to wit – on one hand Morrison & Foerster’s Susan Mac Cormac as legal counsel for CaliforniaALL; Girardi & Keese’s Howard Miller in his capacity as BOD member of Cal Bar Foundation, as well as BOG members who voted to endorse CaliforniaALL and consider it to have been a partner of the State Bar of California. On the other hand Morrison &Foerster’s James Brosnahan and Girardi & Keese’s Thomas Girardi as part of helping Joe Dunn with the establishment of Voice of OC.

3. CaliforniaALL was to transfer funds forward. It did so by awarding approximately $300,000 in grants to the UCI Foundation, where Joe Dunn serves as trustee and chair of the Audit Committee. It appears that CaliforniaALL preselected UCI Foundation, making a prior simulated request for proposal (RFP) by Sarah Redfield that led to the grant – a sham process.

4. In September 2009, Ruthe Ashley abruptly exited CaliforniaALL. That same month, Joe Dunn publicly launched his online publication, “Voice of OC.” (as though Ashley’s mission had been completed).

5. The recent abrupt departure of Thomas Girardi and James Brosnahan from ‘Voice of OC” (as though they were fleeing the scene with guilty consciences).

As such, several months ago, on September 1, 2011, the Voice of OC was duly served with a request for production of IRS Form 990, Form 990 Schedule A, and Form 1023. (See Exhibit 1 attached) Additionally, said request was delivered to Joe Dunn.

To date, this request to produce Voice of OC’s tax returns has been ignored, despite the clear mandate by the Internal Revenue Service to fully comply with such requests. As such, reluctantly, the undersigned filed this complaint.

As such, I urge you to investigate this matter to determine whether Voice of OC who ignored the request to produce said tax returns violated IRS rules and regulations. I ask that you impose appropriate sanctions against any and all involved, if supported by the results of your investigation.

I look forward to your response. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or need additional information.

*Links and photos inserted by The Leslie Brodie Report.

Pierce O’Donnell Hereby Asked to Disclose if Illegal Contributions to John Edwards Stemmed From Being Disempowered by One Who Disempowered Mike Nisperos, Ronald George, Eric George, Joe Dunn, Tom Layton,  Joe Cotchett, John Keker, Starr Babcock, Robert Hawley,  Walter Lack (Who In Turn Disempowered Sean Topp), Judge William Highberger, Rory Little, Erwin Chemerinsky — Disempowerer Extraordinaire Tom Girardi of Girardi & Keese

Related stories, please see:

http://lesliebrodie.wordpress.com/2011/12/29/girardi-keeses-tom-girardi-presi…

AND @:

http://lesliebrodie.wordpress.com/2011/09/30/muslim-community-of-orange-count…

AND @:

http://lesliebrodie.wordpress.com/2010/12/20/corrigendum-to-kastigar-thomas-g…

AND @:

http://lesliebrodie.blog.co.uk/2012/03/06/in-letter-to-ninth-circuit-judges-c…

For background story, please see @:

http://lesliebrodie.wordpress.com/2012/03/12/sharon-noonan-kramer-a-really-sa…

One Mirkarimi supporter who agrees with that charge is former San Francisco Mayor Art Agnos. The two are close personally and have supported each other politically, with then-Supervisor Mirkarimi being Agnos’ main proponent during the debate over who would be interim mayor when Gavin Newsom left for the lieutenant governorship.

Other observers, however, do not believe that is true. The California Report’s Scott Shafer this week interviewed both Agnos and Hastings law professor Rory Little about the case. Agnos believes bad blood between San Francisco D.A. George Gascon and Mirkarimi is helping to drive the prosecution. But Professor Little says that given the evidence against the sheriff, Gascon had no choice but to prosecute.

Please see complete story @:

http://blogs.kqed.org/newsfix/2012/03/09/ross-mirkarimi-art-agnos-rory-little/

Part 1 @:

http://lesliebrodie.blog.co.uk/2011/12/05/kerr-wagstaffe-s-jim-wagstaffe-pecu…

Part 2 @:

http://lesliebrodie.blog.co.uk/2011/12/05/kerr-wagstaffe-s-jim-wagstaffe-pecu…

Part 3:

Communication as was sent to DLA Piper in December 2011, below:

Mr. Brenbrook:

In reference to the above case, and in connection with the decision to utilize Mr. James Wagstaffe of Kerr & Wagstaffe as an expert witness to offer an opinion as to the reasonable value of past legal services rendered by Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy to Mr. Siller and CWS, please be advised that Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy and Mr. Wagstaffe currently represent a common defendant in litigation pending in San Mateo County Superior Court.

Without exploring any legal intricacies, common sense dictates that Mr. Wagstaffe may be disinclined to offer unfavorable testimony to the effect that Cotchett inflated its billable hours (not that I suggest that it did), or that the quality of the firm’s work was sub par (not that I suggest that it was) since any such testimony by Mr. Wagstaffe could, in essence, cast doubt on the value of services being offered mutually by him and the Cotchett firm in the San Mateo litigation. As such, I urge you to address with the Court, your client, and opposing counsel the ethical and practical implications of such an arrangement.

Mr Jim Wagstaffe of Kerr & Wagstaffe.  In the above, Mr Wagstaffe offers his students legal counsel on how to avoid a traffic ticket. Wagstaffe urged the students to deceive law enforcement personnel.  He stated: “Do what I do, put a CHP magazine in your car, so they think you are one of them.”

Additionally, in that you are a partner at the Sacramento Office of DLA Piper, I am extremely uncomfortable with such an arrangement given my research into the alarming circumstances involving the now-defunct charity CaliforniaALL, which was housed at your offices pursuant to an arrangement by DLA managing partner Gilles Attia.

My ongoing research into CaliforniaALL, which recently also resulted in a complaint filed with the IRS against Voice of OC, indicates the existence of a unsettling relationship between Joe Cotchett, James Brosnahan, Pierce O’Donnell, Geoffrey Brown, Senator Joe Dunn (Ret.) of Voice of OC, and his confederate, Thomas Girardi of Girardi & Keese.

Moreover, events surrounding DLA Piper, its former client DeMeter Energy, and a botched malpractice suit by Girardi & Keese against DLA Piper on behalf of DeMeter Energy, caused me to entertain thoughts that Girardi & Keese may have intentionally let the statute of limitations expire so as to sabotage the suit against DLA Piper.

As such, and based on the above, I am also entertaining thoughts that DLA Piper may have intentionally selected Mr. Wagstaffe to testify in the bankruptcy matter of Siller/CWA to further draw him into the circle, and to offer favorable testimony on behalf of Cotchett Pitre & Mcarthy and against the interests of Siller/CWA. Granted this may sound far-fetched; however, given my familiarity with past events and the parties’ modus operandi, I still consider it a possibility.

Note that I am on friendly terms with Mr. Wagstaffe and, despite our involvement in highly contentious litigation which settled after Mr. Wagstaffe’s client took the case on appeal, I am concerned that he may be pressured, either externally or due to financial consideration, to offer testimony which is inconsistent with the truth.

RE: NINTH CIRCUIT MATTER OF IN RE THOMAS GIRARDI ; U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE MORRISON C. ENGLAND; EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA, JOE DUNN OF VOICE OF OC; JAMES BROSNAHAN OF MORRISON & FOERSTER; LAW OFFICES OF SKADDEN ARPS; HOLLY FUJIE

Dear Honorable Chief Judge Kozinski and Honorable Judges Berzon, Smith, Tashima, and Fletcher:

This is written to advise you of circumstances relating to the California State Bar’s handling of the matter of In re Girardi pursuant to an order issued by this Court.

By way of background, at the conclusion of the appeal in a civil case prosecuted by the firms of Girardi & Keese and Engstrom Lipscomb & Lack against Dole Food Company, Judge Kozinski issued an order to show cause why Thomas Girardi and Walter Lack should not be disbarred, suspended, or sanctioned for the attempt to defraud this Court for the purpose of unjustly collecting a $500 million judgment.

Representing Thomas Girardi in those disciplinary proceedings before this Court were the law firm of Skadden Arps and ethics expert Diane Karpman. Ms. Karpman asked this Court to appoint a special prosecutor, and the Court appointed Hastings Law School professor Rory Little.

Oral arguments ensued, during which one of the judges on the panel stated that the “elephant” in the room is the manner in which the matter would be developed by the State Bar of California.

Subsequently, this Court found both Girardi and Lack culpable, and imposed monetary sanctions, reprimanded Girardi, and suspended Lack. This Court also ordered Girardi and Lack to report its findings to the State Bar of California.

Judge William Fletcher, a member of the Ninth Circuit panel that adjudicated the matter of In re Girardi, 08-80090, rejected the lenient recommendations of Rory Little. He stated: “with any competent lawyer if you’re omitting part of a document, that is not accidental. That is intentional.” The court adjudicated that the grave misconduct by Walter Lack and Thomas Girardi included “the persistent use of known falsehoods,” and that the “false representations” were made “knowingly, intentionally, and recklessly” during years of litigation.

The day after this Court issued its ruling, respondents’ counsel moved to redact their names from the published decision, a motion this Court denied. (This issue will surface again, below.)

The State Bar of California assigned the matter to an outside special prosecutor (Jerome Falk of Howard Rice) since Howard Miller of Girardi & Keese served as President of the State Bar, and had hired the Chief Trial counsel of the State Bar at the time, Mr. James Towery.

After conducting an interview with Walter Lack, Jerome Falk chose to not file any charges against Lack or Girardi based on his position that any false statements submitted were not “intentional.” This determination was contrary to findings made by this Court.

Within days of the issuance of Mr. Falk’s decision, I advanced an ethics complaint against James Towery, Jerome Falk, Howard Miller, and Douglas Winthrop, contending that it had been improper for Mr. Towery to select Jerome Falk (of Howard Rice) to serve as special prosecutor because, among other reasons, Howard Miller (of Girardi & Keese) had appointed Howard Rice’s managing partner (Douglas Winthrop) as president of the California Bar Foundation, a foundation owned, controlled, and maintained by the State Bar of California.

(Incidentally, while examining materials in connection with California Bar Foundation board members, including Howard Miller of Girardi & Keese, Douglas Winthrop of Howard Rice, Holly Fujie of Buchalter Nemer, Annette Carnegie of Morrison & Foerster, and ex-CPUC Commissioner Geoffrey Brown (cousin of governor Jerry Brown, I also unearthed disturbing events relating to a Section 501 entity known as CaliforniaALL involving many of the same individuals and related entities.)

The peculiar nature of the motion to redact the names of respondents’ counsel from the published decision of this Court prompted me to look into the matter further. I then discovered that, beginning in 2003, Girardi & Keese and Engstrom Lipscomb & Lack were prosecuting a class action case against Farmers Insurance Company, which was represented by Skadden Arps. This was a nationwide class action with estimated damages of close to $15 billion that had originally been filed by Texas Governor Rick Perry.

I thereafter informed the Los Angeles County Superior Court (Judge William Highberger) of this information, and filed a State Bar ethics complaint against attorneys Thomas Girardi of Girardi & Keese and Thomas Nolan and Raoul Kennedy of Skadden Arps because neither the class of plaintiffs (consisting of 14 million Americans), nor the courts (the Ninth Circuit in the matter of In Re Girardi and the Los Angeles County Superior Court in the matter of Fogel vs. Farmers) had been informed of the concurrent representation by which Skadden Arps represented Girardi & Keese (in the Ninth Circuit matter), while at the same time defending Farmers against Girardi and Keese’s clients (in the Fogel v. Farmers matter). (This background may help explain why Skadden Arps rushed to defend Thomas Girardi before the Ninth Circuit.)

Shortly after I filed this ethics complaint, Skadden Arps moved ex parte (which, not surprisingly, was unopposed) to amend the settlement agreement in the Fogel matter and the notice to the class of 14 million Americans throughout the country to include a proviso by which members of the class would be prohibited from suing anyone due to the concurrent representation described above. Nevertheless, the State Bar of California decided not to take any action on this ethics complaint.

In the meantime, I also discovered that during the period that Howard Miller, Douglas Winthrop, Holly Fujie of Buchalter Nemer, Annette Carnegie of Morrison & Foerster, and ex-CPUC Commissioner Geoffrey Brown were serving as board members for the California Bar Foundation, a highly unusual financial transaction took place in which approximately $780,000 was quietly transferred, causing the California Bar Foundation to end the year in the red.

Upon further examination, I discovered that the money had been transferred to a newly-created Section 501(c)(3) non-profit entity (headed by a friend of Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakayue — Ruthe Catolico Ashley) known as CaliforniaALL. In turn, CaliforniaALL funneled a large portion of the money to the UCI Foundation, where State Bar of California Executive Director Joe Dunn served as trustee.

CaliforniaALL never acknowledged receipt of the $780,000 from the Cal Bar Foundation in any of its publications, although it did acknowledge the transfer on its IRS tax returns. Likewise, the California Bar Foundation never acknowledged the largest grant it ever bestowed in its newsroom, the California Bar Journal, or similar publications; it did, however, recognize the transfer on its IRS returns, and in a 2 by 2 inch blurb in its annual report.

Various factors and evidence caused me to suspect that a significant portion of the funds transferred from the California Bar Foundation ended up financing a newly-created online publication which Joe Dunn had launched with the help of Thomas Girardi and James Brosnahan of Morrison & Foerster; this online publication is known as “Voice of OC.”

Those factors include, but are not limited to, the fact that some individuals and entities involved in the creation of CaliforniaALL and the subsequent transfer of $780,000 from the Cal Bar Foundation to CaliforniaALL were also involved in assisting Joe Dunn with the creation of “Voice of OC” to wit – Morrison & Foerster’s Susan MacCormac as legal counsel for CaliforniaALL; Girardi & Keese’s Howard Miller in his capacity as BOD member of Cal Bar Foundation; and BOG members who voted to endorse CaliforniaALL and consider it to have been a partner of the State Bar of California. Morrison & Foerster’s James Brosnahan and Girardi & Keese’s Thomas Girardi also assisted Joe Dunn in establishing Voice of OC.

While James Brosnahan and Thomas Girardi served as members of the Voice of OC board of directors, for unknown reasons they subsequently chose to quit.

Based on my concerns, I requested that Voice of OC provide me with copies of its IRS 990 forms. Voice of OC did not comply with applicable IRS regulation in that it failed to reply to my request for copies of its 990 forms submitted to the IRS, whereupon I filed a complaint against Voice of OC and Joe Dunn with the IRS.

Also in connection with CaliforniaALL, I have advanced a judicial misconduct complaint against Judge Morrison England since State Bar of California Executive Director Judy Johnson, Judge England, his wife (Torie Flournoy-England), and State Bar of California employee Patricia Lee were all members of CaliforniaALL’s board of directors and/or advisory council. The basis for that complaint was these individuals’ failure to inform plaintiff Sara Granda — who had filed an action in federal court naming the State Bar of California as a sole defendant that was heard by Judge Morrison England — of these facts.

On January 27, 2009 DLA Piper’s Gilles Attia and the Office of Assembly-member Mike Davis co-hosted a reception honoring California ALL at the Tsakopoulos Galleria in Sacramento. Bottom (left to right): Ruthe Ashley; Judge Morrison England and Mrs. Torie Flournoy-England; Ruthe Ashley, Gilles Attia, News 10 Presenter Sharon Ito, and Assembly-member Mike Davis. Top right is Karina Hamilton. Mike Davis, an ally of former assembly-member Gwen Moore and Karen Bass, is the vice-chair of the Legislative Black Caucus.

Specifically, without informing plaintiff Granda of his relationship with Judy Johnson (the State Bar’s Executive Director) vis-a-vis CaliforniaALL and either obtaining a waiver from this plaintiff or independently recusing himself, Judge England summarily dismissed Ms. Granda’s complaint against the California State Bar. Fortunately for Ms. Granda, several days later then-Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger championed her cause and pressured the California Bar to accommodate her needs.

Unfortunately, the Clerk of the Ninth Circuit rejected my complaint against Judge England claiming, incorrectly, that I did not comply with a requirement to insert wording to the effect that I understand that irrespective of the complaint, the outcome of the underlying case will not be affected. At that point, I chose not to resubmit the complaint against Judge England.

My discovery concerning Jerome Falk (specifically, that Thomas Girardi and Walter Lack were clients of his firm) occurred only a few months ago, and my plan was to approach the Ninth Circuit to request either that the Court reopen the matter of In Re Girardi or that it appoint a special prosecutor to determine what, if any, ethical violations transpired.

However, in a shocking turn of events, I was recently served with a search warrant while at home. Six investigators from the Yolo County District Attorney’s office (some of them armed) arrived at my home on February 23, 2012, searched the premises, and confiscated two computers and documents relating to, among others, Joe Dunn, Thomas Girardi, Judy Johnson, Holly Fujie, Alec Chang of Skadden Arps, James Towery, and State Bar attorneys Mark Torres Gil, Lawrence Yee, and Rachel Grunberg, as well as material belonging to online publication The Leslie Brodie Report, and communications from the Internal Revenue Service relating to the complaint I had filed against Joe Dunn and Voice of OC.

My understanding is that members of the State Bar of California Board of Governors (presumably, State Bar of California Executive Director Joe Dunn of Voice of OC, Alec Chang of Skadden Arps, and others with their own financial and liberty interest at stake due to my whistleblowing activities) have presented claims to the Yolo County District Attorney’s Jeff Reisig and Michael Cabral to file criminal charges against me, for among other things, alleged violations of Business and Professions Code section 6043.5, on the purported basis that the ethics complaints I filed were unfounded and constituted criminal conduct.

Incidentally, I was informed by friendly sources many months ago that if choose to expose corruption concerning Joe Dunn and Thomas Girardi via these complaints, they will try to frame me by various means similar to the ones used against Erin Baldwin. At that time, my reaction was complete skepticism of Erin Baldwin and her story because I could not imagine that such conduct could occur in our country. It appears that I may have been naive.

Consequently, please note the motion to re-open the In Re Girardi matter will be delayed.

Thank you for your time.

RE: NINTH CIRCUIT MATTER OF IN RE THOMAS GIRARDI ; U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE MORRISON C. ENGLAND; EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA, JOE DUNN OF VOICE OF OC; JAMES BROSNAHAN OF MORRISON & FOERSTER; LAW OFFICES OF SKADDEN ARPS; HOLLY FUJIE

Dear Honorable Chief Judge Kozinski and Honorable Judges Berzon, Smith, Tashima, and Fletcher:

This is written to advise you of circumstances relating to the California State Bar’s handling of the matter of In re Girardi pursuant to an order issued by this Court.

By way of background, at the conclusion of the appeal in a civil case prosecuted by the firms of Girardi & Keese and Engstrom Lipscomb & Lack against Dole Food Company, Judge Kozinski issued an order to show cause why Thomas Girardi and Walter Lack should not be disbarred, suspended, or sanctioned for the attempt to defraud this Court for the purpose of unjustly collecting a $500 million judgment.

Representing Thomas Girardi in those disciplinary proceedings before this Court were the law firm of Skadden Arps and ethics expert Diane Karpman. Ms. Karpman asked this Court to appoint a special prosecutor, and the Court appointed Hastings Law School professor Rory Little.

Oral arguments ensued, during which one of the judges on the panel stated that the “elephant” in the room is the manner in which the matter would be developed by the State Bar of California.

Subsequently, this Court found both Girardi and Lack culpable, and imposed monetary sanctions, reprimanded Girardi, and suspended Lack. This Court also ordered Girardi and Lack to report its findings to the State Bar of California.

Judge William Fletcher, a member of the Ninth Circuit panel that adjudicated the matter of In re Girardi, 08-80090, rejected the lenient recommendations of Rory Little. He stated: “with any competent lawyer if you’re omitting part of a document, that is not accidental. That is intentional.” The court adjudicated that the grave misconduct by Walter Lack and Thomas Girardi included “the persistent use of known falsehoods,” and that the “false representations” were made “knowingly, intentionally, and recklessly” during years of litigation.

The day after this Court issued its ruling, respondents’ counsel moved to redact their names from the published decision, a motion this Court denied. (This issue will surface again, below.)

The State Bar of California assigned the matter to an outside special prosecutor (Jerome Falk of Howard Rice) since Howard Miller of Girardi & Keese served as President of the State Bar, and had hired the Chief Trial counsel of the State Bar at the time, Mr. James Towery.

After conducting an interview with Walter Lack, Jerome Falk chose to not file any charges against Lack or Girardi based on his position that any false statements submitted were not “intentional.” This determination was contrary to findings made by this Court.

Within days of the issuance of Mr. Falk’s decision, I advanced an ethics complaint against James Towery, Jerome Falk, Howard Miller, and Douglas Winthrop, contending that it had been improper for Mr. Towery to select Jerome Falk (of Howard Rice) to serve as special prosecutor because, among other reasons, Howard Miller (of Girardi & Keese) had appointed Howard Rice’s managing partner (Douglas Winthrop) as president of the California Bar Foundation, a foundation owned, controlled, and maintained by the State Bar of California.

(Incidentally, while examining materials in connection with California Bar Foundation board members, including Howard Miller of Girardi & Keese, Douglas Winthrop of Howard Rice, Holly Fujie of Buchalter Nemer, Annette Carnegie of Morrison & Foerster, and ex-CPUC Commissioner Geoffrey Brown (cousin of governor Jerry Brown, I also unearthed disturbing events relating to a Section 501 entity known as CaliforniaALL involving many of the same individuals and related entities.)

The peculiar nature of the motion to redact the names of respondents’ counsel from the published decision of this Court prompted me to look into the matter further. I then discovered that, beginning in 2003, Girardi & Keese and Engstrom Lipscomb & Lack were prosecuting a class action case against Farmers Insurance Company, which was represented by Skadden Arps. This was a nationwide class action with estimated damages of close to $15 billion that had originally been filed by Texas Governor Rick Perry.

I thereafter informed the Los Angeles County Superior Court (Judge William Highberger) of this information, and filed a State Bar ethics complaint against attorneys Thomas Girardi of Girardi & Keese and Thomas Nolan and Raoul Kennedy of Skadden Arps because neither the class of plaintiffs (consisting of 14 million Americans), nor the courts (the Ninth Circuit in the matter of In Re Girardi and the Los Angeles County Superior Court in the matter of Fogel vs. Farmers) had been informed of the concurrent representation by which Skadden Arps represented Girardi & Keese (in the Ninth Circuit matter), while at the same time defending Farmers against Girardi and Keese’s clients (in the Fogel v. Farmers matter). (This background may help explain why Skadden Arps rushed to defend Thomas Girardi before the Ninth Circuit.)

Shortly after I filed this ethics complaint, Skadden Arps moved ex parte (which, not surprisingly, was unopposed) to amend the settlement agreement in the Fogel matter and the notice to the class of 14 million Americans throughout the country to include a proviso by which members of the class would be prohibited from suing anyone due to the concurrent representation described above. Nevertheless, the State Bar of California decided not to take any action on this ethics complaint.

In the meantime, I also discovered that during the period that Howard Miller, Douglas Winthrop, Holly Fujie of Buchalter Nemer, Annette Carnegie of Morrison & Foerster, and ex-CPUC Commissioner Geoffrey Brown were serving as board members for the California Bar Foundation, a highly unusual financial transaction took place in which approximately $780,000 was quietly transferred, causing the California Bar Foundation to end the year in the red.

Upon further examination, I discovered that the money had been transferred to a newly-created Section 501(c)(3) non-profit entity (headed by a friend of Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakayue — Ruthe Catolico Ashley) known as CaliforniaALL. In turn, CaliforniaALL funneled a large portion of the money to the UCI Foundation, where State Bar of California Executive Director Joe Dunn served as trustee.

CaliforniaALL never acknowledged receipt of the $780,000 from the Cal Bar Foundation in any of its publications, although it did acknowledge the transfer on its IRS tax returns. Likewise, the California Bar Foundation never acknowledged the largest grant it ever bestowed in its newsroom, the California Bar Journal, or similar publications; it did, however, recognize the transfer on its IRS returns, and in a 2 by 2 inch blurb in its annual report.

Various factors and evidence caused me to suspect that a significant portion of the funds transferred from the California Bar Foundation ended up financing a newly-created online publication which Joe Dunn had launched with the help of Thomas Girardi and James Brosnahan of Morrison & Foerster; this online publication is known as “Voice of OC.”

Those factors include, but are not limited to, the fact that some individuals and entities involved in the creation of CaliforniaALL and the subsequent transfer of $780,000 from the Cal Bar Foundation to CaliforniaALL were also involved in assisting Joe Dunn with the creation of “Voice of OC” to wit – Morrison & Foerster’s Susan MacCormac as legal counsel for CaliforniaALL; Girardi & Keese’s Howard Miller in his capacity as BOD member of Cal Bar Foundation; and BOG members who voted to endorse CaliforniaALL and consider it to have been a partner of the State Bar of California. Morrison & Foerster’s James Brosnahan and Girardi & Keese’s Thomas Girardi also assisted Joe Dunn in establishing Voice of OC.

While James Brosnahan and Thomas Girardi served as members of the Voice of OC board of directors, for unknown reasons they subsequently chose to quit.

Based on my concerns, I requested that Voice of OC provide me with copies of its IRS 990 forms. Voice of OC did not comply with applicable IRS regulation in that it failed to reply to my request for copies of its 990 forms submitted to the IRS, whereupon I filed a complaint against Voice of OC and Joe Dunn with the IRS.

Also in connection with CaliforniaALL, I have advanced a judicial misconduct complaint against Judge Morrison England since State Bar of California Executive Director Judy Johnson, Judge England, his wife (Torie Flournoy-England), and State Bar of California employee Patricia Lee were all members of CaliforniaALL’s board of directors and/or advisory council. The basis for that complaint was these individuals’ failure to inform plaintiff Sara Granda — who had filed an action in federal court naming the State Bar of California as a sole defendant that was heard by Judge Morrison England — of these facts.

On January 27, 2009 DLA Piper’s Gilles Attia and the Office of Assembly-member Mike Davis co-hosted a reception honoring California ALL at the Tsakopoulos Galleria in Sacramento. Bottom (left to right): Ruthe Ashley; Judge Morrison England and Mrs. Torie Flournoy-England; Ruthe Ashley, Gilles Attia, News 10 Presenter Sharon Ito, and Assembly-member Mike Davis. Top right is Karina Hamilton. Mike Davis, an ally of former assembly-member Gwen Moore and Karen Bass, is the vice-chair of the Legislative Black Caucus.

Specifically, without informing plaintiff Granda of his relationship with Judy Johnson (the State Bar’s Executive Director) vis-a-vis CaliforniaALL and either obtaining a waiver from this plaintiff or independently recusing himself, Judge England summarily dismissed Ms. Granda’s complaint against the California State Bar. Fortunately for Ms. Granda, several days later then-Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger championed her cause and pressured the California Bar to accommodate her needs.

Unfortunately, the Clerk of the Ninth Circuit rejected my complaint against Judge England claiming, incorrectly, that I did not comply with a requirement to insert wording to the effect that I understand that irrespective of the complaint, the outcome of the underlying case will not be affected. At that point, I chose not to resubmit the complaint against Judge England.

My discovery concerning Jerome Falk (specifically, that Thomas Girardi and Walter Lack were clients of his firm) occurred only a few months ago, and my plan was to approach the Ninth Circuit to request either that the Court reopen the matter of In Re Girardi or that it appoint a special prosecutor to determine what, if any, ethical violations transpired.

However, in a shocking turn of events, I was recently served with a search warrant while at home. Six investigators from the Yolo County District Attorney’s office (some of them armed) arrived at my home on February 23, 2012, searched the premises, and confiscated two computers and documents relating to, among others, Joe Dunn, Thomas Girardi, Judy Johnson, Holly Fujie, Alec Chang of Skadden Arps, James Towery, and State Bar attorneys Mark Torres Gil, Lawrence Yee, and Rachel Grunberg, as well as material belonging to online publication The Leslie Brodie Report, and communications from the Internal Revenue Service relating to the complaint I had filed against Joe Dunn and Voice of OC.

My understanding is that members of the State Bar of California Board of Governors (presumably, State Bar of California Executive Director Joe Dunn of Voice of OC, Alec Chang of Skadden Arps, and others with their own financial and liberty interest at stake due to my whistleblowing activities) have presented claims to the Yolo County District Attorney’s Jeff Reisig and Michael Cabral to file criminal charges against me, for among other things, alleged violations of Business and Professions Code section 6043.5, on the purported basis that the ethics complaints I filed were unfounded and constituted criminal conduct.

Incidentally, I was informed by friendly sources many months ago that if choose to expose corruption concerning Joe Dunn and Thomas Girardi via these complaints, they will try to frame me by various means similar to the ones used against Erin Baldwin. At that time, my reaction was complete skepticism of Erin Baldwin and her story because I could not imagine that such conduct could occur in our country. It appears that I may have been naive.

Consequently, please note the motion to re-open the In Re Girardi matter will be delayed.

Thank you for your time.

Developing story….. Details soon…..

Proponents of Proposition 8, California’s same-sex marriage ban, have asked the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals for an en banc review of a ruling by a three-judge panel upholding a lower court’s striking down the law as unconstitutional.

An en banc panel is made up of 11 judges, chosen at random from the circuit.

Read the petition for an en banc panel here.

Earlier today, KQED’s Scott Shafer talked to Hastings law professor Rory Little about the procedure for and the legal strategy behind asking for an en banc panel. Edited transcript

Please see full article @:

http://blogs.kqed.org/newsfix/2012/02/21/prop-8-en-banc-hearing-deadline-today/

Lucy Haeran Koh
Judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California
Incumbent
Assumed office June 9, 2010
Appointed by	Barack Obama
Preceded by	Ronald M. Whyte
Judge of the Superior Court of Santa Clara County
In office 2008–2010
Appointed by	Arnold Schwarzenegger
Preceded by	Randolf Rice
Personal details
Born	1968 Washington, D.C.
Spouse(s)	Mariano-Florentino Cuellar
Alma mater	Harvard College (A.B.) Harvard Law School (J.D.)

Lucy Haeran Koh (born 1968) is a United States district judge on the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

[edit] Early life and education

Born in Washington, D.C., Koh earned an A.B. from Harvard College in 1990 and a law degree from Harvard Law School in 1993.^[1][2]

[edit] Professional career

From 1993 until 1994, Koh worked for the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary as a Women’s Law and Public Policy Fellow. From 1994 until 1997, Koh worked for the United States Department of Justice, first as a Special Counsel in the Office of Legislative Affairs (1994-1996) and then as a Special Assistant to the United States Deputy Attorney General (1996-1997).^[3]

From 1997 until 2000, Koh served as an Assistant United States Attorney in the Office of the United States Attorney for the Central District of California. From 2000 until 2002, she worked as a Senior Associate at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, a Palo Alto, California law firm. From 2002 until 2008, Koh worked as a litigation partner at the Silicon Valley office of the law firm McDermott Will & Emery representing technology companies in patent, trade secret and commercial civil matters.^[4]

In January 2008, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger appointed Koh a judge on the Superior Court of California for Santa Clara County, a position she held until becoming a U.S. district judge in 2010.^[3]

[edit] Nomination to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California

On January 20, 2010, President Barack Obama nominated Koh on the recommendation of California Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein to a seat on the United States District Court for the Northern District of California vacated by Judge Ronald M. Whyte, who assumed senior status in 2009.^[2] On March 4, 2010, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted to move her nomination to the full Senate.^[5]

The Senate confirmed Koh in a 90-0 vote on June 7, 2010.^[6] She received her commission on June 9, 2010.

[edit] Personal

Koh is married to Stanford law professor Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar.^[7] She is the first Asian American United States District Court Judge in the Northern District of California, the first District Court Judge of Korean descent in the United States, and the second Korean American federal judge, after Herbert Choy of the Ninth Circuit.^[8]

As Part Of A Journalistic Inquiry, The Leslie Brodie Report Hereby Asks Legal Commentators Rory Little, Vikram Amar, Eugene Volokh To Opine On Appropriateness Of Dean Erwin Chemerinsky And Sheriff Lee Baca Lending Prestige of their Respective Public Office to Mike Feuer’s Political Campaign.

Please observe that, rather than contacting the legal commentators directly, the query is being delivered publicly, here and now.

Any opinion or observation can be sent to lesliebrodie@gmx.com

Background information, please see @:

http://www.metnews.com/articles/2012/feue021512.htm

And @:

http://www.thecitymaven.com/2012/02/14/civic-leaders-co-chair-mike-feuers-cam…

*Written by a Staff Writer of The Leslie Brodie Report(TLR). Leslie Brodie is on assignment.

Leslie Brodie – who is on assignment and could only reached by telephone – expressed grave concern over Dean Frank Wu and Hastings College of the Law intentional interference with legally protected activities regularly taken by TLR in furtherance of its mission.

Specifically, Brodie maintained that The Leslie Brodie Report (“TLR”) as a news-media outlet for a faith-based group has managed to expose and report many scandals, and that recent unlawful actions taken by Hastings College of the Law and Dean Wu are also unpopular with many students, as well as faculty and staff.

While remaining intentionally vague, Brodie’s insinuation of improprieties on the part of Hastings College of the Law and Dean Wu came in the aftermath of revelations by TLR concerning Hastings College of the Law’s Rory Little and James Wagstaffe. 

Amid continuing controversy over the appointment of Jerome Falk to serve as “special prosecutor” on behalf of the State Bar of California to examine attorney misconduct in connection with the Ninth Circuit matter of In Re Girardi,  The Leslie Brodie Report hereby asks the Honorable A. Wallace Tashima — U.S. Circuit Judge and special master in matter of In Re Girardi –  to opine on recent developments.

Specifically, Jerome Falk’s alleged failure to disclose that those he was suppose to prosecute (Thomas Girardi of Girardi & Keese and Walter Lack of Engstrom Lipscomb & Lack) were actually his and his firm’s clients.  This newly discovered “Smoking Gun” evidence relates to the fact that starting in 2005, the law firm of Howard Rice Candy Falk & Rabkin represented both Girardi & Keese and Engstrom Lipscomb & Lack in a class action advanced by plaintiff Robert Copple.

Honorable A. Wallace Tashima, U.S. Circuit Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.  During the Ninth Circuit proceedings, and after the case against Dole Food Comany was dismissed, Chief Judge Alex Kozinski issued an order to show cause why attorneys Walter Lack, Paul Triana, and Sean Topp of Engstrom Lipscomb & Lack, as well as Thomas Girardi and Howard Miller of Girardi & Keese, should not be disbarred or suspended from practicing before the Ninth Circuit. In addition, Judge Kozinski ordered the appointments of Senior Ninth Circuit Judge Wallace Tashima as special master and Rory Little as prosecutor in those special disciplinary proceedings known as the matter of In Re Girardi. (photo: courtesy of Wikipedia)

Early last year, Howard Rice Partner Jerome Falk was accused of wrongdoing as a result of his decision to exonerate a friend of Ronald George – Thomas Girardi of Girardi & Keese – along with Walter Lack of Engstrom Lipscomb & Lack for misconduct the two committed while litigating a case against Dole Food Company before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

During the Ninth Circuit proceedings, and after the case against Dole was dismissed, Chief Judge Alex Kozinski issued an order to show cause why attorneys Walter Lack, Paul Triana, and Sean Topp of Engstrom Lipscomb & Lack, as well as Thomas Girardi and Howard Miller of Girardi & Keese, should not be disbarred or suspended from practicing before the Ninth Circuit.

Subsequently, in late 2010, a Ninth Circuit panel consisting of Justices William Fletcher , Marsha Berzon, and Randy Smith found that Lack and Girardi had committed grave misconduct which included “the persistent use of known falsehoods,” and that the “false representations” were made “knowingly, intentionally, and recklessly” during years of litigation.

Despite the Ninth Circuit’s determination, in his capacity as special prosecutor, and after reviewing the Ninth Circuit file, Howard Rice partner Jerome Falk chose to not file any disciplinary accusations against Thomas Girardi and Walter Lack, stating that he believed Lack’s misconduct was not intentional.

Mr Tom Girardi of Los Angeles-based Girardi & Keese. Per findings by the Ninth Circuit, Walter Lack and Thomas Girardi have resorted to employing “the persistent use of known falsehoods” and “false representations” were made “knowingly, intentionally, and recklessly” during years of litigation. Subsequnet to those findings, the State Bar of California appointed Howard Rice’s Jerome Falk to serve as special prosecutor against Girardi, Lack, and their respective firms. None mentioned that Girardi and Lack are actually clients of Jerome Falk and Howard Rice. See story here.  (Image: courtesy photo)

Please observe that, rather than contacting Hon. Judge Tashima directly, the query is being delivered publicly, here and now.

Any opinion or observation can be sent to lesliebrodie@gmx.com

Keker & Van Nest’s Jan Little is one of fourteen finalists for the prestigious Chambers & Partners Litigator of the Year Award, TLR has learned.

Ms Jan Little (photo: courtesy)

Little, who has handled high-stakes criminal and complex civil litigation for more than 25 years, was previously recognized as one of the “Best Lawyers In America” for bet-the-company litigation, commercial litigation and white collar criminal defense according to her firm.

She joined Keker & Van Nest in 1986 and elevated to partnership in 1988.  Previously, Little served as trial attorney in the Public Integrity Section of the U.S. Department of Justice Criminal Division (1982-86), and as a law clerk to the Hon. William W. Schwarzer in the Northern District of California (1981-82). She is a 1981 graduate of Yale Law School.

The final selection will be announced at the February 2012 Women in Law Awards Dinner.

Chancellor & Dean Frank H. Wu is the William B. Lockhart Professor of Law. The first Asian American to serve as dean at UC Hastings, Dean Wu previously taught for a decade at Howard University. He also has taught at the law schools of George Washington University, University of Maryland, Columbia University, University of Michigan, Peking University, as well as in the undergraduate programs of Johns Hopkins University and Deep Springs College. He served as dean of Wayne State University Law School in his hometown of Detroit.

Please continue @: http://www.uchastings.edu/faculty-administration/faculty/wu/index.html#

Related link @: http://lesliebrodie.blog.co.uk/2011/07/30/developing-is-kerr-wagstaffe-s-jim-…

685 F.Supp.2d 186 (2010)

In re PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY AVERAGE WHOLESALE PRICE LITIGATION. This Document Relates to: The City of New York, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Abbott Laboratories, et al., Defendants.

Civil Action No. 01-12257-PBS. MDL No. 1456. Subcategory Case No. 03-10643-PBS.

United States District Court, D. Massachusetts.

February 9, 2010.

AMENDED MEMORANDUM

[ 685 F.Supp.2d 195 ]

AND ORDER¹

I. INTRODUCTION

II. UNDISPUTED FACTS

This case comes as part of the massive AWP multi-district litigation concerning drug manufacturers’ publishing of fraudulently inflated prices, including AWPs, WACs, and other prices.⁴ These motions

Contending that Howard Rice’s Jerome Falk, acting as Special Prosecutor on behalf of the State Bar of California, repeatedly sought to subvert justice by failing to disclose that those he was suppose to prosecute (Thomas Girardi of Girardi & Keese and Walter Lack of Engstrom Lipscomb & Lack) were actually his and his firm’s clients, sources familiar with the situation claim plans are underway to seek the disbarment of Girardi, Lack and Falk.

In a letter to Jerome Falk and the Board of Governors of the State Bar of California, complainant minced no words in accusing Falk (as well as Girardi and Lack) of egregious misconduct.

As a service to the community, we shall publish* the communication, below:

Dear Mr. Falk:

This will serve as a formal meet and confer attempt regarding various matters, primarily relating to your repugnant and continuous deceitful actions taken in connection with your willingness to serve as a special prosecutor on behalf of the State Bar of California against two of your and your firm’s clients (Thomas Girardi and Walter Lack) as part of a scheme to exploit your authority as special prosecutor for financial gain.

In addition, this letter will serve to explore potential misconduct in connection with misrepresentations made to an official tribunal (i.e. the RAD Committee of the State Bar of California Board of Governors (“BOG”)) that appointed a special master in proceedings I initiated against you.

Mr. Jerome Falk of Howard Rice (Image:courtesy photo)

To illustrate my point, State Bar of California Board of Governors member William Gailey is a man of high honor with a prior distinguished career as a homicide detective with the Los Angeles Police Department. Presently, he operates his own investigation firm (Gailey Associates, Inc.), which as I understand is one of the best in the country and offers a wide array of services, including industrial espionage and the like.

Assume, hypothetically speaking only, that Mr. X is an industrialist and a client of Gailey Associates in connection with various business-related transactions. Assume also that Mr. X, while a client of Gailey Associates, was charged by the federal government for participating in a conspiracy to kidnap and murder Mr. Y, the owner of a competing business located in Los Angeles. Mr. X is tried and convicted and sentenced to serve a 30 year sentence in a federal correctional facility. However, after one year he is mysteriously pardoned by the U.S. president.

Public and media pressure prompt the Los Angeles District Attorney to file an information against Mr. X for violations of State Penal Code provisions, including PC 182 and 187 in connection with the crimes Mr. X committed against Mr. Y. A shortage of qualified detectives prompts the DA to seek volunteer detectives, and Mr. Gailey is deputized, issued a badge, and appointed the role of lead detective in amassing the case against Mr. X on behalf of the People.

Mr. Gailey shortly thereafter announces the closure of the investigation, and declares that, as far as he is concerned, Mr. X is innocent. As a second hypothetical, assume that with these facts in mind, Mr. Gailey is instead an attorney in private practice who is deputized to act as special prosecutor to try Mr. X, and likewise Mr. Gailey declares Mr. X to be innocent.

If you don’t see anything wrong with the above two hypothetical examples, please delete this email; otherwise, keep reading because the above hypo is very similar to the scenario that ensued when you agreed to act as special prosecutor against your clients (Thomas Girardi and Walter Lack) on behalf of the People of the State of California to examine the grave and previously adjudicated attorney misconduct Messrs. Girardi and Lack committed against the Ninth Circuit in the litigation against the Dole Food Company.

The misconduct on the part of Girardi and Lack was investigated by a special master (Senior Judge Hon. Wallace Tashima) appointed by the Ninth Circuit, and his recommendations were adopted by a panel of three Ninth Circuit judges after a full opportunity was afforded to Girardi and Lack to present defenses and bargain with a special prosecutor (Rory Little); these findings were memorialized in the published decision of In Re Girardi. Some of the findings included that Lack and Girardi have resorted to employing “the persistent use of known falsehoods” and that “false representations” were made “knowingly, intentionally, and recklessly” during years of litigation.

Rory Little, Ninth Circuit judicial aspirant and professor of law at U.C. Hastings. Professor Little was appointed special prosecutor in the matter of In Re Girardi by Chief Judge Alex Kozinski. Prior to entering academia, Professor Little served as a federal prosecutor for the Organized Crime and Racketeering Strike Force, prosecuting cases of labor racketeering, money-laundering, narcotics and other organized criminal activity. (image:courtesy photo)

As you surely recall, the Ninth Circuit also ordered Girardi and Lack to report the findings to the State Bar of California. Because Howard Miller of Girardi & Keese served as President of the State Bar, the Bar disqualified itself and you were appointed as Special Prosecutor by the State Bar to further look into this matter on behalf of the People.

Despite ample opportunities, you (nor Lack, Girardi, or members of your firm whom I contacted on several occasions in search of information) mentioned that Thomas Girardi and Walter Lack were your and your firm’s clients.

Shortly thereafter, when you had issued the decision to “exonerate” Thomas Girardi and Walter Lack (as memorialized in a “Dear Bob” letter you sent Mr. Robert Baker of Baker Keener & Nahara), I immediately protested by filing both an ethics complaint with the State Bar of California, and asking the BOG to inquire into the matter. Named in the complaint were yourself, Douglas Wintrhrop, Howard Miller, and James Towery.

At that time, I was unaware that Girardi and Lack were your clients, and the ethics complaint alleged you were biased because of your and your firm’s ongoing business relationship with Skadden Arps and partner Tom Nolan, who served as Girardi’s defense counsel in the matter of In Re Girardi. Also, I argued that since the State Bar of California had disqualified itself, you and your firm should also have been disqualified as the managing partner of your firm (Douglas Wintrhrop) is an officer of the State Bar of California, and was appointed to the position by the BOG headed by Howard Miller of Girardi & Keese.

Mr. Robert Hawley immediately appointed himself the point of contact, and only several months ago informed me that the complaint was assigned to RAD, which in turn appointed a special master who examined the complaint and found no ethical violations; RAD voted to accept this conclusion.

Mr. Thomas Girardi of Girardi & Keese and State Bar of California
Deputy Executive Director, Mr. Robert A. Hawley.

Subsequently, and fortuitously, I very recently discovered that Lack and Girardi were clients of your firm. I inquired with Mr. Hawley whether this fact was known to the RAD and Special Master investigating my complaint. The inquiry to Mr. Hawley was ignored, ipso facto terminating his role as point of contact.

Mr. Hawley’s lack of response lends credence to my belief that since you knew of the complaint and never informed the Special Master or RAD, you are also liable for defrauding and misrepresenting events to a tribunal. If you have facts to the contrary, please forward them to me ASAP.

Note that subsequent to the discovery of the attorney-client relationship between you and Lack/Girardi, I again wrote SeLegue and Philips seeking additional clarification, and no response was forthcoming. It had occurred to me that, given that Girardi and Lack are clients of your firm, any insinuation of misconduct I may previously have alleged on the part of SeLegue and Philips were improper; as such, these insinuations are hereby withdrawn as I now understand that SeLegue and Philips were acting in the best interest of their clients — Thomas Girardi and Walter Lack.

Nevertheless, the serious nature of the offenses and the harm caused by your corrupt activities (as well as the corrupt activities of Thomas Girardi and Walter Lack, primarily as a result of their failure to speak up and reject your appointment) leaves me no choice but to, again, seek discipline against you, Walter Lack, and Thomas Girardi. Additional factors surrounding Thomas Girardi and Girardi & Keese have also become relevant, including the recent malpractice suits filed by Gutierez and Demeter Energy; the secretive attorney-client relationship between Girardi & Keese and Skadden Arps in the Fogel vs. Farmers matter, the identity and nature of the firms defending MGA in the litigation against Mattel; Alec Chang’s membership on RAD; the overall corruption within the State Bar of California manifested in its unwillingness to prosecute Thomas Girardi and Walter Lack; Girardi’s unsettling friendship with Ronald George and “mentoring” of former crack-addict Mike Nisperos. These factors, coupled with my impression that the firms of Girardi & Keese, Skadden Arps, and Howard Rice have somehow exempted themselves from complying with the rules, make clear that I must press ahead to ensure that you, Walter Lack, and Thomas Girardi are held fully accountable and otherwise prevented from practicing before any federal or state court.

As such, in the near future the federal district court, appellate court, and U.S. Supreme Court will be asked to investigate your misconduct (and that of Thomas Girardi and Walter Lack), and to otherwise permanently remove your names from the roll of members allowed to practice before each of those courts.

Particularly, I plan to ask the Ninth Circuit to appoint a Special Master to investigate the matter, and to reopen the matter of In Re Girardi to examine whether Walter Lack and Thomas Girardi fully complied with the order in the matter of In Re Girardi and to report their misconduct to the State Bar of California. It is my position that the order to report their misconduct to the State Bar of California included an implied covenant that any State Bar of California proceedings would be conducted in good faith and in conformity with all rules and duties and principles consistent with the fair administration of justice. By not speaking up when you were appointed, Messrs. Girardi and Lack further aggravated matters and, arguably, violated the order handed down by the Ninth Circuit.

Mr. Walter Lack of Engstrom Lipscomb & Lack. In the matter of In Re Girardi, the Ninth Circuit adjudicated: “with respect to Respondents Lack and Traina, we conclude that the mitigating factors can affect only the length of the suspension we impose. Although Lack’s involvement in the enforcement proceedings was more long-standing than Traina’s, each was specifically responsible for the falsehoods presented to this court. Consequently, each is suspended from the practice of law in this court for six months, effective on the filing date of this order. Fed. R.App. P. 46(c). Respondents Lack and Traina may each file a petition for reinstatement after the period of suspension pursuant to Ninth Circuit Rule 46-2(h). Each shall file the petition using this docket number and include evidence that he is in good standing, with no discipline pending, in all courts and bars to which he is admitted.” (Image:courtesy photo)

Similarly, when Walter Lack sought to reinstate himself via a motion advanced to Ninth Circuit Commissioner Shaw, he relied heavily on the fact that the State Bar of California decided not to discipline him. In aggravation and while exponentially compounding his lack of credibility, Mr. Lack conveniently failed to mention that he and you (who represented the State Bar of California) have an attorney-client relationship, and that your decision to not prosecute him was the fruit of an unlawful and highly unethical scheme.

In addition, please note that I plan to file a writ with the California Supreme Court seeking to invalidate your decision, and asking the Court to order the State Bar of California to commence proceedings consistent with the State Bar Act and the Rules of Professional Conduct against you, Walter Lack, Thomas Girardi, and your respective firms, and to otherwise take action on the original complaint I submitted to the Intake Office which was never processed.

The writ will be filed prior to the end of this year so as to allow the Court to also address separate matters, and to otherwise maintain jurisdiction over Douglas Winthrop (also of Howard Rice) and Holly Fujie in their capacities as President and Vice President of the California Bar Foundation, and in connection with the overall circumstances, particularly the hush-hush and unlawful transfer of $780,000 from the Foundation to sham charity CaliforniaALL.

Hence, at your earliest convenience I ask that you provide information, as well as, if you wish, any memorandum containing legal authority explaining why your actions did not constitute professional misconduct.

Below is a synopsis of the various acts of misconduct I intend to allege. If you believe I am wrong, legally or factually, please so advise as soon as possible:

Your first act of misconduct took place once the State Bar initially contacted you. Rather than rejecting the appointment, you intentionally, deliberately, and with aforethought accepted the assignment, knowing full well that you were unable to take a position adverse to your clients Walter Lack and Thomas Girardi, and also knowing full well that you would exonerate both of them regardless of the weight of the evidence. In doing so, you hoped to maintain your attorney-client relationship with Walter Lack and Thomas Girardi in order to obtain a future stream of business from them, as well as from Thomas Girardi’s defense lawyer — your confederate, Thomas Nolan of Skadden Arps. By doing so, you have completely breached the duties expected of a prosecutor. Moreover, while temporarily holding public office, you placed your financial interests, as well as the financial interest of your firm, before those of the People, causing injury to the federal judiciary, the Dole Food Company, the State Bar of California, the People of the State of California, the fair administration of justice, myself, and frankly, even your own clients Thomas Girardi and Walter Lack.

Your second act of misconduct involved the hampering of an investigation, and misleading a tribunal (i.e. the BOG/RAD and the appointed Special Master) by not fully disclosing the attorney-client relationship.

Thirdly, and in aggravation, even to this date, and after members of your firm were informed of the recent discovery and you had ample opportunity to admit you mistakes, you still have not taken any action to remedy the situation. Instead, you appear to hope that by ignoring the problem, it will somehow disappear. It shall not.

Thank you for your consideration. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you need any further information or clarification of the above-described facts.

*Links and photos inserted by The Leslie Brodie Report.

Maria Lucy Armendariz — who goes by the name of Lucy Armendariz — is a 41 years old single mother. Armendariz was born in East Los Angeles. She attended UCLA and later graduated with a law degree from Hastings College of the Law in 1997. After a short stint in private practice, she assumed a government position in Sacramento.

Ms Lucy Armendariz. In 2007, Ms. Armendariz was appointed State Bar Court Judge. At that time, the California Bar Journal reported that she was the single mother of a 7 year old daughter. (Image: courtesy photo)

ANTONIO VILLARAIGOSA

Unlike the former cocaine addict philanderer who has “platonic sex with friends, lesbians and straight, whatever” who appointed State Bar Court Judge JoAnn Remke to the bench, Antonio Villaraigosa is in a league of his own — a serial seducer who has been perpetually involved in scandals, sexual and otherwise.

For example, while carrying on an affair with Mirthala Salinas, a Telemundo reporter, she assumptively reported that the mayor was having an affair, neglecting to mention that the affair was with her. The latest and most recent scandal the Mayor is involved in relates to free tickets to various events, for which his friends friends in Sacramento help foot the legal bill.

At the age of 21, Villaraigosa fathered the first of his first four children, after having been involved with the mother for only six weeks. At age 25, his second daughter was born to another woman. In 1987, at age 34, Villaraigosa married Corina Raigosa, who formally ended their relationship in 2009. Villaraigosa is is pictured above with his most recent partner, Lu Parker. (photo:courtesy hollywoodcelebgossips.com)

Villaraigosa Goes to Sacramento, Alone.

In 1994, Villaraigosa ran for California State Assembly. After celebrating his victory, Villaraigosa skipped town for a few days, accompanied by the wife of his closest friend, a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge. Villaraigosa defended his actions, saying, “It is a matter of the heart.” Despite this turn of events, Villaraigosa and his wife reconcile.

Accrding to Tony Castro, a Los Angeles-based author and journalist, “in the subsequent years, after their reconciliation, friends recall that she was the reluctant political wife, rarely with Villaraigosa in Sacramento while he was in the State Assembly and usually only seen in public with him during local campaign appearances…often overlooked, say friends, is the extent of Corina Villaraigosa’s heartbreak, her sense of personal humiliation among friends in the traditionally conservative, Catholic enclave of the Latino Eastside and the emotional journey she went through to accept her husband back amid gossip and rumors of continuing womanizing.”

Lucy in Sacramento with Antonio

In 1998, Villaraigosa was chosen by his colleagues to be the first Speaker of the Assembly. From late 1998 to the year 2000, a soon to become a single mother by the name of Maria Lucy Armendariz served on his staff.

Maria Lucy Armendariz — who goes by the name of Lucy Armendariz — is a 41 years old single mother. Armendariz was born in East Los Angeles. She attended UCLA and later graduated with a law degree from Hastings College of the Law in 1997. After a short stint in private practice, she assumed a government position in Sacramento.

Ms Lucy Armendariz. In 2007, Ms. Armendariz was appointed State Bar Court Judge. At that time, the California Bar Journal reported that she was the single mother of a 7 year old daughter. (Image: courtesy photo)

ANTONIO VILLARAIGOSA

Unlike the former cocaine addict philanderer who has “platonic sex with friends, lesbians and straight, whatever” who appointed State Bar Court Judge JoAnn Remke to the bench, Antonio Villaraigosa is in a league of his own — a serial seducer who has been perpetually involved in scandals, sexual and otherwise.

For example, while carrying on an affair with Mirthala Salinas, a Telemundo reporter, she assumptively reported that the mayor was having an affair, neglecting to mention that the affair was with her. The latest and most recent scandal the Mayor is involved in relates to free tickets to various events, for which his friends friends in Sacramento help foot the legal bill.

At the age of 21, Villaraigosa fathered the first of his first four children, after having been involved with the mother for only six weeks. At age 25, his second daughter was born to another woman. In 1987, at age 34, Villaraigosa married Corina Raigosa, who formally ended their relationship in 2009. Villaraigosa is is pictured above with his most recent partner, Lu Parker. (photo:courtesy hollywoodcelebgossips.com)

Villaraigosa Goes to Sacramento, Alone.

In 1994, Villaraigosa ran for California State Assembly. After celebrating his victory, Villaraigosa skipped town for a few days, accompanied by the wife of his closest friend, a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge. Villaraigosa defended his actions, saying, “It is a matter of the heart.” Despite this turn of events, Villaraigosa and his wife reconcile.

Accrding to Tony Castro, a Los Angeles-based author and journalist, “in the subsequent years, after their reconciliation, friends recall that she was the reluctant political wife, rarely with Villaraigosa in Sacramento while he was in the State Assembly and usually only seen in public with him during local campaign appearances…often overlooked, say friends, is the extent of Corina Villaraigosa’s heartbreak, her sense of personal humiliation among friends in the traditionally conservative, Catholic enclave of the Latino Eastside and the emotional journey she went through to accept her husband back amid gossip and rumors of continuing womanizing.”

Lucy in Sacramento with Antonio

In 1998, Villaraigosa was chosen by his colleagues to be the first Speaker of the Assembly. From late 1998 to the year 2000, a soon to become a single mother by the name of Maria Lucy Armendariz served on his staff.

MGA TEAM — COUNSELS WHO REPRESENTED DEFENDANT MGA (“BRATZ DOLLS”.) FROM LEFT: SKADDEN ARPS’ RAOUL KENNEDY AND THOMAS NOLAN ; HOWARD RICE’S JEROME FALK AND DOUGLAS WINTHROP; KEKER & VAN NEST’S JOHN KEKER AND MGA’S IN-HOUSE COUNSEL, MR. CRAIG HOLDEN.

FOGEL vs. FARMERS TEAMS — CURRENT COUNSELS FOR BOTH PLAINTIFFS AND DEFENDANTS. GIRARDI & KEESE’S THOMAS GIRARDI AND GRAHAM LIPPSMITH TOGHETHER WITH ENGSTROM LIPSCOMB & LACK’S WALTER LACK REPRESENT THE PLAINTIFFS. SKADDEN ARPS’S RAOUL KENNEDY REPRESENTS THE DEFENDANT.

JOHN KEKER, RORY LITTLE, AND KEKER & VAN NEST’S JAN LITTLE (SPOUSE OF RORY LITTLE) MR. KEKER REPRESENTED BOTH MGA AND CARTER BRYANT SEE http://intellirights.com/cms2/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=240&Itemid=71

DOLE TEAM — GIRARDI & KEESE’S THOMAS GIRARDI AND HOWARD MILLER TOGHETHER WITH ENGSTROM LIPSCOMB & LACK’S WALTER LACK. ALL PLAINTIFFS’ COUNSELS IN FRONT OF NINTH CIRCUIT IN THE CASE OF FRANCO VS.DOW CHEMICAL WHICH DUE TO ALLEGED FRAUD METAMORPHOSED TO THE MATTER OF IN RE GIRARDI

IN RE GIRARDI TEAM — RESPONDENT AND HIS COUNSELS IN FRONT OF NINTH CIRCUIT. PICTURED ON THE RIGHT IS MS. DIANE KARPMAN.

DURING THE MATTERS OF IN RE GIRARDI AND MATTEL vs. MGA — MR. NOLAN –  DEFENDED MR. GIRARDI, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME, HE WAS ALSO PART OF THE “MGA TEAM”.  SAID TEAM ALSO INCLUDED KEKER & VAN NEST’S JOHN KEKER; AND BY EXTENSION, MS. JAN LITTLE — SPOUSE OF RORY LITTLE — SPECIAL PROSECUTOR IN MATTER OF IN RE GIRARDI

JUDGE WILLIAM FLETCHER AND SPECIAL PROSECUTOR RORY LITTLE IN MATTER OF IN RE GIRARDI JUDGE FLETCHER: RESPONDENTS (LACK, GIRARDI, TRIANA, TOPP) MADE THESE FALSE REPRESENTATIONS “KNOWINGLY, INTENTIONALLY AND RECKLESSLY.” “PRESISTENT USE OF KNOWN FALSEHOODS.”

RESPONDENT , RESPONDENT’S COUNSEL, AND THE PROSECUTOR —- IN PROCEEDINGS INVOLVING THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA.

STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA FOUNDATION TEAM (DBA CALIFORNIA BAR FOUNDATION) AT THE TIME HOWARD MILLER OF GIRARDI & KEESE SERVED AS PRESIDENT OF STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA.

BOG TEAM. KEKER & VAN NEST’S JON STREETER AND SKADDEN ARPS’S ALEC CHANG CURRENT MEMBERS OF THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA BOARD OF GOVERNORS. ON THE RIGHT, MR. CRAIG HOLDEN, PARTNER WITH LEWIS BRISBOIS; RECENTLY ELECTED TO THE BOG; FORMERLY, PART OF MGA TEAM.

PRESENTLY SERVES AS PRESIDENT OF CALIFORNIA BAR FOUNDATION. INTENTIONALLY AND UNLAWFULLY REFUSES TO PRODUCE FOUNDATION CONFLICT OF INTEREST FORMS SIGNED BY HIMSELF AND HOWARD MILLER.

State Bar of California Deputy Executive Director, Robert A. Hawley, was selected today by Executive Director Joseph Dunn to serve as Interim Chief Trial Counsel, the Leslie Brodie Report has learned.

Hawley, a graduate of hastings College of the Law, will fill the position on a temporary basis, following the abrupt departure of James Towery amid a developing ethics probe.

Robert A. Hawley,  has served in senior executive positions with the State Bar of California for more than 25 years. Begining in 1978 and ending in 1981, he was employed as staff prosecutor in the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel prosecuting attorney misconduct cases. Resuming employment, from 1983 to 1993 Mr. Hawley was in private practice, specializing in labor and employment. In 1993, State Bar of California and Mr Hawley reunited as he was named Chief Assistant General Counsel.  Commencing in 2000, he assumed the title of Deputy Executive Director. (Photo:courtesy)

In Part 1 of “Matthew S. Melamed of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd in What’s the Name of the Game?,” we discussed the two scholarships bestowed on Mr. Melamed while a student at Hastings College of the Law in exchange for two promises by him to the people of the State of California to pursue a career in “public interest law.” See http://tinyurl.com/nameofgame1.

Mr. Melamed, a 2009 Hastings graduate, is currently employed in the San Francisco office of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP, a firm specializing in class actions relating to securities law.

On its website, www.rgrdlaw.com , and with a phenomenal display of visual aids which include Mt. Everest, a lion, the Tour de France, an orchestra, and a horse race, the firm describes itself as follows:

“Judges describe us as one of the top, most experienced, and formidable securities law firms in the country. With 180 lawyers in 8 offices nationwide, and thousands of successfully concluded class actions to our credit, we have the resources, experience, capability and tenacity to achieve superior results.

Robbins Geller’s consistent record of achieving more recoveries and higher recoveries on average than all firms demonstrates why we are the go-to firm for institutional investors. Whether it is portfolio monitoring or the need to recover lost assets by litigation, we mobilize our teams to achieve the best results for you.”

In addition, the firm’s website includes the following profile for Mr. Melamed:

“Matthew S. Melamed earned his Juris Doctor degree, magna cum laude, from the University of California, Hastings College of the Law, where he was named to the Order of the Coif and was awarded several academic and public interest scholarships and honors.” (emphasis added) See http://www.rgrdlaw.com/attorneys-99.html

While certainly The Leslie Brodie Report recognizes that people frequently change careers and decide to pursue a different paths, according to our confidential sources, however, when Mr. Melamed decided to pursue a legal career in the area of securities rather than “public interest” law, he had an ethical, and indeed, moral obligation to reimburse the California Bar Foundation for the two scholarships awarded to him.

To add insult to injury, and according to the sources, Mr. Melamed not only failed to keep his word to the people of the State of California, but for his employer, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd, to actually boasts about the fact that Mr. Melamed was awarded “public interest scholarships” is highly offensive.

Particulary because, in essence, the “public interest” scholarships were specifically designed to keep a talent like Mr. Melamed away from a firm like Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd.

Hence, our sources maintain, that by boasting about it in a way which misleads the public as well as the firm’s current and prospective clients, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd is engaging in false and misleading advertising, as well as unlawful business practices, in violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law.

According to these sources, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd will soon be contacted regarding these matters.