1

2 3
4

courts and your Judicial Bribes

"Oath of Office" to the Court!

that was "For Sale", based on

3) To "Overturn"

the Final Judgment

based on the clear and the Evidence supplied by

"Abundance

of Evidence"

of False or Fraudulent based on a Judicial

5
6 7 8 9 10

the court to get a Decision false evidence

4) That Judge(s)

Bribe to allow

entered

into the court for a Pay Off! Miller, and Commissioner Drewry on file, on

DeVanon,

and a party to this formal complaint Judicial evidence Performance be re-examined

with the Commission and re-evaluated

based on the that

on court record,

and not on lies and false evidence or confirmed as truthful.

was never certified,

verified,

11
12

5) That the Presiding

13

Judge will Order the demand by law, to in the above, and that the Presiding Judge

"Consolidation

of Cases"

14
15 16 17

will issue and Order allowing to allow Pursuant Civil Conspiracy

the Plaintiff

to amend his Complaint Section 1714.10,

to the Code of Civil Procedure by Officers of the Court.

6} That the Presiding

18

Judge will Order that each of the Defendants to defray the Cost of

pay the Plaintiff

19

a sum equal to $1500.00 Resources

waisted Economy.

time of Judicial

and the amount

spent of Judicial and Plaintiff of

20 21
22 23 24

One of the Intended purposes filings of multiple

of Paz, Mercado, was to silence

MacCarley

complaints

and to stop all criticism, decisions. A SLAPP lawsuits because

and stop him to expose the selling are filed against people or

organizations
25

they have exercised

their First Amendment judicial

right to petition corruption.

26 27 28

the government

or speak out and expose

31

PLAINTIFF'S

MOTION

& OPPOSITION

TO ILLEGAL ORDER OF 3/28/2012

1
2

VERIFICATION Verification Penalty of Pleading Form

(Code Civ. Proc.,

446) Declaration

under

3
4

of Perjury

(Code civ. Proc.,

5
6 7

446, 2015.5) in Case BC 466737 v. ESTATE OF ROBERT BERKE, COMMISSIONER Et AI, REAL

by Party Jose Castaneda CASE TITLE:

JOSE CASTANEDA

PARTY IN INTEREST: DEVANON I" declare:

JUDGE RITA MILLER,

DREWRY AND JUDGE

8
9 10

Jose Castaneda in the above-entitled matter. and know the

am the Plaintiff

I have read the fore going contents thereof.

(pleading, e.g., complaint)

11
12

The same is true of my own knowledge, which are therein 13

14 15 16 17 18 19

except

as to those matters and, as to

stated on information it to be true.

and belief,

those matters, Executed

I believe 1, 2012

on April

County of Los Angeles, I declare (or certify)

California. under penalty of perjury that the foregoing

is true and correct.

Jose Castaneda
20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

SERVICE

LIST
3

PLAINTIFF'S

MOTION

& OPPOSITION

TO ILLEGAL ORDER OF 3/28/2012

1
2

3
4

1) Estate of Robert Berke Law Office of Angela Proffitt Esq., 11755 Wilshire Blvd. 15th Floor, L.A. CA 90025 2) 3) Jack K. Conway Esq., 2460 Huntington Drive, San Marino, CA 91108 Sam Paz Esq., 5711 W. Slauson Avenue,# 100 Culver City, CA 90230

5
6 7

8
9

4) Lisa Marie MacCarley Esq., 3436 N. Verdugo Road, # 100, Glendale, CA 91208

5) 10

Susana Castaneda, 1440 17th Street, Los Osos, CA 93402

11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

116)

Emahn Counts Esq., 70 S. Lake Avenue, Pasadena, CA 91101

7) Sarah Lee Overton, 3801 Riverside Avenue, Ste 560, Riverside, CA 92501

PROOF OF SERVICE
28

PLAINTIFF'S

MOTION

& OPPOSITION

TO ILLEGAL ORDER OF 3/28/2012

1
2 3
4

STATE

OF CALIFORNIA,

COUNTY

OF LOS ANGELES

5
6 7 8
9

BC 466737 Castaneda v. Estate of Robert Berke I am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action; my home address is 123 W. Hammond Street, Pasadena, California 91103. On April ,2012 I served by mail the following document described as:
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION & OPPOSITION GRANTED WITH FALSE EVIDENCE. TO ILLEGAL ORDER OF 3/28/2012

On the interested copy thereof thereon enclosed

parties

in this action by placing with postage

a true

in a sealed envelope in the United as follows:

10

fully prepaid addressed

States mail at Pasadena,

11
12

California,

See page 33

13
14 15

am readily

familiar with the practice for mailing

of the collection with the United

and processing

of correspondence

States Postal Service. , ] FAX to

MAIL

16 II VIA 17 II VIA
18 19 20

. ;><:]

Executed

on March 31, 2012, at Pasadena,

California.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above is true and correct.

21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 3

Dated: March 31, 2012

Arm~SalgadO ~ -----------------

PLAINTIFF'S

MOTION

& OPPOSITION

TO ILLEGAL ORDER OF 3/28/2012

1
2

3
4

5
6 7 8 9 10

11
12

EXHIBITS

13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

27
28

PLAINTIFF'S

MOTION

& OPPOSITION

TO ILLEGAL ORDER OF 3/28/2012

CASTANEDA v. ESTATE OF ROBERT BERKE CASE NO.: BC466737 HEARING: 03/28/12 At the February 21,2012 status conference in this matter, all pending motions were continued. The Court rules as follows:

I. Defendants SONIA MERCADO and R. SAMUEL PAZ's motion for a finding that plaintiff JOSE CASTANEDA is a vexatious litigant and to require a security is GRANTED. C.C.P. 391, 391.1. The vexatious litigant statutes (Code of Civil Procedure sections 391 through 391.7) are designed to curb misuse of the court system by those persistent and obsessive litigants who, by repeatedly litigating the same issues through groundless actions, waste the time and resources of the court system and other litigants._ Bravo v. Ismaj (2002) 99 Cal.App.4th 211, 220-21. Code of Civil Procedure section 391, subsection (b) defines a "vexatious litigant" as a person who does any of the following: (1) in the immediately preceding 7 year period, has commenced, prosecuted or maintained at least 5 litigations (other than small claims) which have been finally determined adversely or unjustifiably been permitted to remain pending for at least 2 years without having been brought to trial or hearing, or (2) after a final determination, repeatedly re-litigates, in pro per, either the validity of the determination against the same defendants or the same claims finally determined, or ' (3) in any litigation while appearing in pro per, repeatedly files unmeritorious motions and pleadings, or engages in other frivolous tactics.

Plaintiff JOSE CASTANEDA has commenced several action l each arising out of underlying litigation regarding his brother (Luis Castaneda) a d his mother (Felicitas Castaneda) and their respective estates and the ha dling of that litigation by various attorneys. The Court takes judicial notic of case numbers GC044}45, GC039743, GC045202, YS017992 and GC0361 6, each of which was filed by plaintiff JOSE CASTANDA and subsequently dis issed.

The CourtB223549,\E32~~5Bfi, also take~ judicl~notice of certain ?.RQ!3als filed by plaintiff (case numbers B223549,(8.2.2Z?1,)3195431 and S193392), which were subsequently dismissed and/or denied. Plaintiff meets the requirements of section 391 (b)(1). He also falls within subsections (b)(2) and (3). He is attempting, by way of this action, to re-litigate the same issues against these defendants. Moreover, the complaint itself contains allegations that are not actionable, and seeks relief that has already been requested and denied. See Demurrers (on file). Defendants have demonstrated that plaintiff has no reasonable probability of prevailing (for purposes of the subject motion). The Court hereby deems plaintiff JOSE CASTANEDA a vexatious litigant as defined in section 391. Plaintiff may not file any new litigation without first obtaining leave of court asset forth in section 391.7. Defendants' request for a bond is GRANTED. C.C.P. 391.1. Plaintiff has 30 days from the hearing date, or until April 30, 2012, to post a bond in the amount of $50,000. If plaintiff fails to furnish security by that date, the action shall be dismissed. C.C.P. 391A. II. Plaintiff JOSE CASTANEDA's motion for sanctions based on defendants' improper motion re: vexatious litigant is DENIED. The motion appears to be an opposition to defendants' motion to deem plaintiff a vexatious litigant. Plaintiff has not demonstrated that his pattern of filing litigation is not frivolous or that he has a reasonable probability of prevailing. His request for sanctions is procedurally improper in that he failed to set forth the authority under which sanctions are sought. Additionally, he failed to state the amount sought or against whom the sanctions should be levied. On that basis, the request must be denied for lack of notice. In re Marriage of Reese & Guy (1999) 73 Cal.AppAth 1214. For the reasons noted above, the request for sanctions is denied on the merits as well.

III.-X. The remaining matters on calendar include (1) plaintiff's motion to consolidate, (2) plaintiff's petition to amend the complaint, (3)-(8) various demurrers. Those matters are continued to plaintiff posts his bond.

1[)

I ')>> Ii-'

, to be heard after

Case Summary Case Number: GC044745

ESTATE OF FELICITAS CASTANEDA VS. SUSANA CASTANEDA

Filing Date: 03/0112010 Case Type: Fraud (no contract) (General Jurisdiction) Status: Dismissed - Other 06/24/2010

Future Hearings
None
\

Documents Filed I Proceeding Information

Parties
CASTANEDA ALONZO MANUEL - Defendant CASTANEDA GONZALO - Defendant CASTANEDA JOSE-ADMINISTRATOR CASTANEDA MARTHA - Defendant CASTANEDASUSANA-Defundant DOES 1 TO 10 - Defendant ESTATE OF FELICITAS CASTANEDA - Plaintiff, FANGFRANCO-Derendant LISA MACCARLEY ATTORNEY AT LAW - Attorney for Defendant RAMIREZ EVEL YN CHRISTINA - Defendant - Plaintiff,

& Plaintiff

in Pro Per

& Plaintiff

in Pro Per

\
Case Information I Party Information I Proceeding Information

Documents Filed (Filing dates listed in descending order)

Click on any of the below link( s) to see documents filed on ~efore 03/02/2010 07/2312010 Order (granting demurrer to complaint) the date indicated:

r H !R ~T..2
Y.

Case Summary Case Number: GC039743 HAIFEN YE AKA JEAN LUCERO VS. GARFIELD MEDICAL CENTER Filing Date: 10/19/2007 Case Type: Med Malpractice (Drs & Surgeons) (General Jurisdiction) Status: Dismissed - Other 03/21/2008

Future Hearings None Documents Filed I Proceeding Information Parties AKA LUCERO JEAN - Plaintiff DOES 1 TO 100 - Defendant DUMMIT BOCHHOLZ & TRAPP - Attorney for Defendant GARFIELD MEDICAL CENTER - Defendant LAW OFFICE OF GORDON EDELSTEIN KREP ACK - Attorney for Plaintiff LUCERO HAIFEN YE - Plaintiff SCHMIDT

& VOILES

- Attorney for Defendant

WANG M.D. HAIPING - Defendant

Case Information

I Party

Information

I Proceeding

Information

Documents Filed (Filing dates listed in descending order) 03/21/2008 Request for Dismissal-Partial (DISMISSAL ENTERED, AS TO GARFIELD MEDICAL CENTER, WIOUT PREJ. THIS DISMISSES THE ENTIRE ACTION) Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff 03/14/2008 Request for Dismissal-Partial (DISMISSAL ENTERED, AS TO DEFENDANT HAIPING WANG M.D. WIPREJ.) Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff

"

'$

Janet Eiko Trapp - #143991

Current Status: Active

This member is active and may practice law in California. See below for more details.

Profile Information
Thefollowing information isfrom the official records of The State Bar of California. 143991 Dummit, Buchholz & Phone Number: Trapp Fax Number: 11755 Wilshire Blvd 15th FL . Los Angeles, CA 90025 e-mall: Map it Los Angeles District 2 None (310) 479~0944 (310) 312-3836 Not Available Dniv of California Riverside; CA Whittier Coll SOL; CA

Bar
Number:

Address:

County:
District:

Undergraduate School: Law School:

Sections:

Status History
Effective Date Status Change
Present 12/11/1989 Active Admitted to The State Bar of California

Explanation of member status

Actions Affecting Eligibility to Practice Law

Disciplinary and Related Actions
Overview of the attorney discipline system. This member has no public record of discipline.

Administrative Actions
This member has no public record of administrative actions.

EXHtOiT

Attorney Search
Howard David Krepack - #61777 Current Status: Active
This member is active and may practice law in California See below for more details.

Profile Information
Thefollowing information isfrom the official records of The State Bar of California. 61777 Gordon Edelstein et

Bar Number:

al Address:
3580 Wilshire Blvd #1800 Los Angeles, CA 90010 Map it
Los Angeles District 2

Phone Number: Fax Number:

(213) 739-7000 (213) 386-1971

e-mail:

Not Available

County:
District:

Undergraduate
School:

Univ of California at Los

Angeles; CA

Sections:

None

Law School:

UCLA SOL; Los Angeles CA

Status History
Effective Date Status Change
Present 12/20/1974
Explanation

Active Admitted to The State Bar of California

of member status

Actions Affecting Eligibility to Practice Law

Disciplinary and Related Actions
Overview of the attorney discipline system. This member has no public record of discipline.

fXH')UJ :3

Case Summary Case Number: GC045202

ESTATE OF FELICITAS CASTANEDA VS. THE LAW FIRM OF JACKK.

Filing Date: 05/10/2010

Case Type: Fraud (no contract) (General Jurisdiction) Status: Other Judgment 12/29/2010

Future Hearings
None Documents Filed I Proceeding Information Parties CONWAY JACK K. - Attorney for Defendant DOES 1-1000 - Defendant JACK K. CONWAY ESQ. - Defendant JOSE CASTANEDA - Plaintiff, & Plaintiff in Pro Per THE LAW FIRM OF JACK K. CONWAY - Defendant

Case Information I Party Information I Proceeding Information Documents Filed (Filing dates listed in descending order) Click on any of the below link(s) to see documents filed on or before the date indicated: 11/04/2010 05/1 0/20 10 08/24/2011 NTC. Req. Prep. ofRept. on Appeal (AMENDED AUGMENTATION) Filed by Clerk 04/22/2011 Notice (NOTICE TO PARTIES RE FEE FOR CLERK S TRANSCRIPT ON APPEAL) Filed by Clerk 04/0812011 Notice (TO REPORTERS TO PREPARE TRANSCRIPT ON APPEAL ) Filed by Clerk 02/08/2011 Request for Judicial Notice

fXHI8if4 I
j
~ .. ~

,<

";_"'

,It";-- .

Case Summary

Case Number: YS017992 JOSE CASTANEDA VS DANIEL PAPAS Filing Date: 03/1 0/2008 Case Type: Civil Harassment (General Jurisdiction) Status: Dism Lack ofProsecution-Petn ole 04/01/2008

Future Hearings
None Documents Filed I Proceeding Information

Parties
CASTANEDA JOSE - Petitioner In Pro-Per PAPAS DANIEL - Respondent In Pro-per

Case Information I Party Information I Proceeding Information

Documents Filed (Filing dates listed in descending order)

03/27/2008 Proof of Service (party served Daniel Papas. ) Filed by Petitioner In Pro-Per 03/1012008 Pet for Injunctive Ord-Harrassment

Case Information I Party Information I Documents Filed

Proceedings Held (proceeding dates listed in descending order)

04/0112008 at 08:30 am in Department INGN, William Torres, Presiding OSC re Prelim. Inj. and TRO (PETITIONER OSCITRO.) - Matter Placed Off

Calendar

Case Information I Party Information I Documents Filed I Proceeding Information

EXHIB~1-5
c

Case Summary
Cae Number: GC036176 'JOSECASTANHDA liS. SON1AMERCADO Filing Date: 10/26/2005 Case Type: Legal Malpractice (General Jurisdiction) Status: Other Judgment 03/0312006

Future Hearings None Documents Filed I Proceeding Information

Partie
CASTANEDA FELICITAS - Plaintiff CASTANEDA JOSE - Plaintiff LAW OFFICE OF JOSE CASTANEDA - Attorney for Plaintiff MERCADO SONIA - Defendant

Case Information

IParty Information

I Proceeding Information

Documents Filed (Filing dates listed in descending order) 01/26/2006 Reply (in support to demurrer) Filed by Attorney for Defendant 01126/2006 Notice (correction and clarification of hearing date) Filed by Plaintiff, & Plaintiff in Pro Per 01124/2006 Response Filed by Plaintiff, & Plaintiff in Pro Per 01112/2006 Declaration (AND RESPONSE TO DEMURRER) Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff 01/10/2006 Miscellaneous-Other (DECLARATION ETC ) Filed by Plaintiff, & Plaintiff in Pro Per 01104/2006 Demurrer
:y

E XM 1,9,n

~j
""

.~~.:..;

r;

I Of