Update to developing story “Something is Rotten in Yolo County – Part 2: Deconstructing Shyster or Saint Dave Rosenberg,” please see @:
PG&E / Joseph Grodin:
A former member of the now-defunct, San Francisco-based law firm of Howard Rice Nemerovski Canady Falk & Rabkin has been identified as a potential wrongdoer in a civil inquiry into the peculiar circumstances surrounding familiar faces and a familiar utility company, in the context of two relatively unknown non-profit entities — IGS and CSCHS
Ms. Amy Margolin (image: courtesy photo)
Prominent LGBTQ activist and appellate law specialist Amy E. Margolin (who currently practices out of the Novato-based appellate boutique Bien & Summers) is being looked upon for indications she may have acted as a middleman and conduit for alleged financial improprieties in various legal proceedings involving Pacific Gas Electric & Company (“PG & E “), the California Public Utilities Commission (“CPUC”), former CPUC Commissioner Geoffrey Brown, private judge Joseph Grodin, and Howard Rice, the firm that represented PG&E.
Those various state, federal, and CPUC proceedings involving PG&E primarily relate to proceedings stemming from California’s energy crisis, as well as the 2001 bankruptcy proceedings and subsequent 2007 litigation in which the State of California accused PG&E and its parent company of usurping and hiding assets.
The civil inquiry, conducted by Yolo County’s YR, views Margolin — who was part of the legal team which represented PG&E — as someone who may potentially have a played a role in this misconduct, although this investigation is continuing.
Unfortunately, Margolin’s association with Howard Rice alone creates concern. As readers may recall, Howard Rice is a firm which YR has previously managed to discredit on two occasions in matters involving a) In Re Girardi / Howard Rice’s special prosecutor Jerry Falk and b) Geoffrey Brown / Douglas Winthrop (managing director of Howard Rice), who both served as directors of the California Bar Foundation in connection with PG&E’s Ophelia Basgal of CaliforniaALL, in the context of allegations of financial improprieties.
Hence, when examining the circumstances surrounding the California Supreme Court Historical Society (“CSCHS”) and discovering the presence of PG&E; PG&E’s Ophelia Basgal of CaliforniaALL, who served as the “Treasurer” of CSCHS; Amy Margolin, and private judge Joseph Grodin, whose legal opinion Bill Lockyer and Jerry Brown relied upon in deciding to dismiss the case against PG&E, it is difficult not to question whether any misconduct has taken place in this setting given the prior history between Howard Rice and PG&E.
Adding fuel to the fire is the recent discovery that CSCHS — while headed by the embattled Ronald George — seeks financial donations, some of which it later forwarded to an entity known as the Institute of Governmental Studies (“IGS”), where Eric George (son of Ronald George) serves as a director.
FBI phone interview of YR:
1. Redacted FBI report shown below.
2. The report unfairly creates the impression that YR’s demand letter to Jeannine English was sent in connection with CaliforniaALL financial scheme.
3. Per Yr, the reason CaliforniaALL came-up during the conversation with FBI Special Agent Bell was because of an initial impression FBI Special Agent Bell had called to discuss CaliforniaALL financial scheme.
4. Obviously, demand letter was only in connection with the State Bar of California intentional mishandling of the Ninth Circuit matter of In Re Girardi, potential business relationship between Howard Dickstein (husband of Jeannine English) and Thomas Girardi, conflicts of interest, lack of disclosures, etc. See YR’s involvement in matter of In Re Girardi HERE
5. Per Yr, had he wanted to unfairly impose on Jeannine English and Howard Dickstein, he would have confront them with allegations that Thomas Girardi and Bill Lockeyer “secretly own” shares in Indian Casinos that are represented by Howard Dickstein. Hear explosive audio HERE
6. Per YR, “I explained to the FBI agent that in my mind the email to Ms. English constituted a demand letter. However, the agent stated that this was incorrect because, according to his understanding, a suit has to be filed first and only later can settlement negotiations begin. As such, I immediately and spontaneously informed the agent that I would withdraw the communication. He stated that this will be very much appreciated, and that he was certain the attorney who asked him to call me would also be appreciative , and that it will “go a long way” to resolving the matter. ”
7. YR believes the “Demand Letter” did not rise to level of extortion/attempted extortion because there was never a wrongful use of force or fear or threat to: A- use force or threats of using force to injure a person or property, B- accuse anyone of a crime C-threat to reveal a secret. Nevertheless, YR plans to fully comply with the promise he had given FBI Special Agent Bell.