Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2010 16:33:29 +0200
, email@example.com Case of Borrower William Parsley (05-90374), Dkt #248: Judge Jeff Bohm's Memorandum Opinion, rebuking Countrywide's litigation practices, Countrywide's false outside counsel schemehttp://www.scribd.com/doc/25001966/At 03:53 PM 11/25/2010, Jim wrote:
From: joseph zernik
Subject: Re: Counsel appearance, Notice of Appearance, Appearance by unauthorized counsel with 'no communication with client' clause...
You failed to address the question at all...
Your admissions to the bar says nothing about your authorization asCounsel/Attorney of Record for a particular client in a particular case.
A common Fraud on the Court today, on behalf of large financial institutions, government officials, and government agencies, are counsel, who are surely admitted to the bar, but never authorized asCounsel of Record in a given case for a given client, yet appear, with'no communications with client' clause.
The scheme was best described in a Memorandum Opinion of Judge Jeff Bohm, relative to conduct of outside counsel - large national law-firms for Countrywide in US Bankruptcy Courts across the nation. 
In most US District Courts and Courts of Appeals that I have inspected, the standard Notice of Appearance fails to stateAttorney of Record, instead only stating Attorney. Moreover, if you wish to find a record, if any, where counsel was required by Local Rules to sign as Attorney of Record, you may find it in the most unlikely places. For example: US District Court, Central District of California Local Rules require it only on the Certificate of Parties...
Given the frequency of this type of Fraud on the Court, the question is:
* Is the failure to establish clear and unambiguous Federal Rules of Civil Procedures, which would put an end to this practice, just a chance event?
I cannot imagine an individual ever engaging in such Fraud on the Court, or benefiting from it...
This type of Fraud on the Court is an example of fraud enabled by CM/ECF, since attorney is able to appear without having his/her records ever reviewed by the Clerk of the Court, as was the case in the paper-era. For any paper to be entered in the docket, the clerk had to stamp it FILED on its face, and inscribe his/her signature as well. CM/ECF undermined the accountability of the clerks of the courts for electronic court records.
To wit: The clerks of the US Courts today refuse to certify the PACER docekts.
In Re Finincial institutions: audits and stuff:
I appreciate most of you are chowing down today, and may not read this;
busy as things are;
In comment on Joe's below, however.
In each federal court District one gets a certificate of admission for example if admitted to practice before U S District Court of Colorado.( if legit)
Yet, if in private private practice if have a case in the U. S District of the Central District of FLordia , would have to file an motion to appear pro hac vice if not admitted to the bar in FL and associate with local counsel in FL, admitted to the FL Bar.
Also, after the origional complaint is filed and answer, any new attorney
not on those pleadings must file a
notice of appearance, in the case, or a notice of
Withdrawl from a case
The DOJ directs things out of D C by political sorts , all the time, and had Lisa C file the pleadings, the D C attorneys( political animals) were never admitted to the Co Bar, ( Sunny's Doe matter)
I am speaking of Lisa whose hubby is John Walsh, now the U S Atty for Co,
who is touted as a Chamber man.
I have a whole box of admission certificates, like to the u S District Court of Alaska. Etc
I stopped paying dues to the Alaska Bar, and it took away the Bar membership, as they have a rule of mandatory payment of Bar dues.
I could still appear in Alaska via a motion pro hac vice. But, I don't live in Alaska, any longer, so stopped paying dues to the Ak Bar.
I had studied hard to pass the Bar examine required for Ak.( passed it)
Also, each federal appeal court has their own admission requirments.
Like the 10th Cir, 9th Cir.
U S Supreme Court.( I belong to those. have a glossy certificate from, all framed)
One has to apply for admission to get a certificate of admission.( each has own standards)
The courts maintain rolls of membership.
The mother f - er in the DoJ D C who was Jewish, in D C never was admitted in Wyo, went after Burke .
I noted Burke, before.( his cases in the 10th Cir Region, federal circuit)
Big law firms usually list for an individual attorney every court where an individual of a firm is admitted.( like the WWW site for a firm)
The FDIC hires a lot of prviate corporate firms.
Ken Starr's firm was sued in matters for funny biz.( at rep stuff at an S& L in Colo.
Yet, that same firm represented Charles Keating in the S & L matters
Met one of it's attys out walking my dogs.( on occassion)
Ken, I guess never noted E-Y accounting firm did the audits for Lincoln Savings and Loan.
Guess, he was too busy calling me names, or making up shit.
He might want to be damn careful who he throws his garbage at.
Now, he is sealed lips to Sunny, apparently.( now).
Harold had Stu M from Texas appear for him in Ca. N Dist of Ca, and the 9th Cir.
Stu lives in Texas and is not admitted to the Ca Bar.
Stu appeared for Harold in the Chevron case.( where the Ex U S Atty from L A ( then judge issued a decree on " the first to be gullotined" as to Harold( an auditor for DOE)
He must have filed a motion pro hac vice.( Harold atty that is)
Maybe Harold could chime in on that
since he noted " just- us".
Or, is he silento, now.
Ken is pro se.( around)
He has no admission certificates from any federal court.
But, he does look up donations to Grayson, etc etc
Admission to the Co Sup Court allows one to practice in any State Court in Co, as Sunny did in Summit County( once)
Al Simpson is not a member of the Colorado Bar, he just makes threats interstate.( when not blathering about " tits"
White boots Bob in Fl is a member of no Court or lawyer Bar,
But, he has blog pieces that note
Ken as a " Colorado attorney".
Amazing, what white boots Bob can do with his keyboard and plugged into a Blog.
See before on "White boots Bob"
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 24, 2010, at 7:23 PM, joseph zernik <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
I compared a number of standard forms, and also papers found online for Notice of Appearance. Only in a few of them the certificate specifically states "Counsel of Record". In most of them it only states "Counsel". In my opinion, it opens the room for Fraud on the Court.
In all cases, where I have documented such Fraud on the Court actually being perpetrated, the beneficiaries were either large financial institutions, or government officials and government agencies. I cannot imagine an individual perpetrating such Fraud on the Court, or benefiting from it.
Therefore, I tend to believe that the failure to state in standard form "Counsel of Record" was not a chance omission...
I wonder how many of the recipients have encountered this type of Fraud on the Court.
P.S. The standard text in legal dictionaries, under "Appearance", typically states the following:
"In general, the appearance of either party may be in person or by attorney, and, when by attorney, there is always supposed to be a warrant of attorney executed to the attorney by his client, authorizing such appearance."
"Supposed" appears a mild word in this context... One would have expected a "must"...
Therefore, I suppose that this is an age-old Fraud on the Court, well recognized over the generations...
* "Los Angeles County got the best courts that money could buy". KNBC (October 16, 2008) * "Innocent people remain in prison" LAPD Blue Ribbon Review Panel Report (2006) * Los Angeles County is "the epicenter of the epidemic of real estate and mortgage fraud." FBI (2004) * “…judges tried and sentenced a staggering number of people for crimes they did not commit." Prof David Burcham, Loyola Law School, LA (2000) * “This is conduct associated with the most repressive dictators and police states… and judges must share responsibility when innocent people are convicted.” Prof Erwin Chemerinksy, Irvine Law School (2000) * "Condado de Los Angeles tiene las mejores canchas que el dinero puede comprar".KNBC (16 de octubre de 2008) * "Las personas inocentes permanecen en prisión" LAPD Blue Ribbon Panel de Revisión Report (2006) * Condado de Los Angeles es "el epicentro de la epidemia de bienes raíces y el fraude de la hipoteca." FBI (2004) * "... Los jueces juzgado y condenado a un asombroso número de personas por crímenes que no cometieron." Prof. David Burcham, Loyola Law School, LA (2000) * "Esta es una conducta asociada con los dictadores más represivos y los estados de la policía ... y los jueces deben compartir la responsabilidad, cuando es condenado a personas inocentes." Prof. Erwin Chemerinksy, Irvine, la Facultad de Derecho (2000)
Thousands of Rampart-FIPs (Falsely Imprisoned Persons) remain locked up more than a decade after official, expert, and media report documented that they were falsely prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced in the largest court corruption sandal in the history of the United States...
Blue Ribbon Review Panel report (2006):
10-10-01 Corruption of the California courts noticed by the United Nations
10-10-01 United Nations Human Rights Council Records for 2010 Review (UPR) of Human Rights in the United States
Thursday, November 25, 2010
10-11-25 Fraud on the US Courts Enabled by CM/ECF // El fraude en los tribunales de EE.UU.
Please Sign Petition - Free Richard Fine // Por favor, Firme la petición - Liberar a Richard Fine
Richard Fine - 70 year old, former US prosecutor, had shown that judges in Los Angeles County had taken "not permitted" payments (called by media "bribes"). On February 20, 2009, the Governor of California signed "retroactive immunities" (pardons) for all judges in Los Angeles. Less than two weeks later, on March 4, 2009 Richard Fine was arrested in open court, with no warrant. He is held ever since in solitary confinement in Los Angeles, California. No judgment, conviction, or sentencing was ever entered in his case.
Please sign the petition: Free Richard Fine -