• Embed Doc
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
D
DR
R.R
.RI
ICHARD I. F
I. FINE

ID # 1824367 c/o Men\u2019s Central Jail
441 Bauchet Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
RichardIFine@gmail.com

December 1, 2009
ATTN: Panel Justices Assigned to Case # 09-56073, Set for Hearing
12/10/2009

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
95 Seventh Street
San Francisco, CA 94103

RE: \u201cL.A. County Judges to Lose Payments From County to Avoid Conflicts\u201d;
Ninth Circuit Case No. 09-56073, District Court Case No. CV-09-1914 JFW
(CW)
Dear Panel:

Enclosed herewith is a copy of a November 28, 2009 article from Full Disclosure Network reporting Los Angeles County Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich\u2019s salient remarks of November 23rd at a meeting of the L.A. County Lincoln Club.

When asked about the continuing public concern that the County\u2019s payments created a \u201cconflict\u201d for judges and whether that conflict was going to be resolved, Mr. Antonovich replied that no \u201cnew\u201d judge (appointed or elected) will be receiving the payments. In so doing, Supervisor Antonovich has admitted that judges were being paid by the County and that the practice has been stopped.

This article concerning Supervisor Antonovich\u2019s statement is relevant to this case
because it shows that LA county is stopping the payments which do not have
immunity under SBX2-11, which gave retroactive immunity for payments made
prior to May 21,2009 and did not give immunity for payments which it allowed
after such date. Those payments are presently being challenged as
unconstitutional, and an injunction is being sought to stop them in the continuing
case of Sturgeon v. the County of Los Angeles, which is presently on appeal in the
California Court of Appeal where the Second Appellate District (serving Los
Angeles County) has recused itself.

Antonovich\u2019s statement is also a tacit admission of the County\u2019s recognition that
the payments create a conflict for the judges.
Sincerely,

RICHARD I. FINE
RIF/mlm
cc:

Aaron Mitchell Fontana, Esq.
Paul B. Beach, Esq.
Kevin M. McCormick, Esq.
PR Newswire:
\u201cJudges to Lose LA County Payments to Avoid Conflicts\u201d
Release Date: November 28, 2009

WASHINGTON, Nov. 30 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich, a long-time elected member of the
Board of Supervisors in the County of Los Angeles explained to the members of a prominent Republican organization on
November 23, 2009 that the practice of providing extra payments to Superior Court Judges will be ending with the new Judges.

Full Disclosure Network(R) presents an online 3 min video report covering the Lincoln Club meeting where Antonovich

described the judicial payments that had been ruled illegal as having been legalized on February 20, 2009 by special state legislation. He explained that the practice had been statewide in most California counties. The video report is available at the URL:http://www.fulldisclosure.net/Report_Antonovich.php

The County's payments to judges over and beyond their State salaries were ruled illegal by a Fourth District CA Court of
Appeals decision in November of 2008 in the Judicial Watch case Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles.
In response to a question about the continuing public concern about the county payments creating a "conflict" for judges who
hear cases involving the County as litigants and how this conflict would be resolved Antonovich made the following points.
\u2022
All new judges (elected or appointed) will not be receiving payments from the county.
\u2022
Most other California counties have been paying extra benefits to the judges .
\u2022
This was not just a Los Angeles County practice .
\u2022
Recent legislation, Senate Bill SBX2 11 has now made the payments legal.
\u2022
L.A. Judges have not always ruled in favor of the County.
\u2022
Several rulings have been in favor of illegal aliens (which the county opposed).
Featured in the video are quotes from : Sterling Norris, Judicial Watch, David Hernandez and

From his L.A. County Central Men's Jail cell, anti-trust attorney Richard I Fine gave his reaction to the Antonovich statement, available at:http://www.fulldisclosure.net/news/2009/11/county-to-stop-payments-for-new-judgesl.html. Fine remains in solitary "coercive confinement" following his attempt to disqualify Judge Yaffe for not disclosing to litigants in his courtroom receipt of payments from the County .

WHAT IS THE FULL DISCLOSURE NETWORK(R)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/22429230/Leslie-Dutton-Backgrounder-111109
One Pager On Series "Judicial Benefits & Court Corruption .
Contact: Leslie Dutton,ldutton@ fulldisclosure.net, 310-822-4449, Full Disclosure Network
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/judges-to-lose-payments-from-county-to-avoid-conflicts-full-
disclosure-networkr-video-news-report-3-min-78138387.html
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...