Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
3Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
09-10-28 Los Angeles Superior Court: Court Counsel Bennett on Denial of Access to Sustain. Registers of Actions, Books of Judgmentss

09-10-28 Los Angeles Superior Court: Court Counsel Bennett on Denial of Access to Sustain. Registers of Actions, Books of Judgmentss

Ratings: (0)|Views: 45|Likes:
On Registers of Actions: At the moment, the Los Angeles Superior Court Rreserves all the court records filed, lodged, or maintained in connection with the case in lieulof h1aintaining a register of actions, as authorized by section 69845.5. On Books of Judgments: Prior to 1974, all judgements of the superior, municipal, and justice courts were entered in a "Judgement Book." Code of Civil Procedure section 668. Although courts in some counties continue to enter judgments in a judgment book, section 668 no longer provides the exclusive means of entry. Code of Civil Procedure section 668.5 authorizes alternatives, including making a microfilm copy of the individual judgement, as is done in the Los Angeles Superior Court.
On Registers of Actions: At the moment, the Los Angeles Superior Court Rreserves all the court records filed, lodged, or maintained in connection with the case in lieulof h1aintaining a register of actions, as authorized by section 69845.5. On Books of Judgments: Prior to 1974, all judgements of the superior, municipal, and justice courts were entered in a "Judgement Book." Code of Civil Procedure section 668. Although courts in some counties continue to enter judgments in a judgment book, section 668 no longer provides the exclusive means of entry. Code of Civil Procedure section 668.5 authorizes alternatives, including making a microfilm copy of the individual judgement, as is done in the Los Angeles Superior Court.

More info:

Published by: Human Rights Alert, NGO on Apr 16, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

07/12/2014

pdf

text

original

 
__
< ~ < i ~ 9 : 5 : : ; ~ " " " ,
 
/ . ~ " , , , , f ' ,
 
'':l<:!",c",
""
F I ~ E D E R I C K
 
R
BENNEn
I
_ ( 2 v t ~ ) I ~ < " ~ ~ i \
COURT COUNSEL
Supenor
Court
of
Californta
\
2 ~ " ,
 
-
"'.,
~ < 8
 
i
111
NORTH
HILL
STREET.SUITE
546
--.,
\
.
': ' f" l ,~
 
, : ~ ; , o ; i ~ ' i ~ J /
 
I
County
of
Los Angeles
OSANGELES,CA90012-3014
"?J'
~
 
'
...
~ ~ .
 
'1-',.-'
(
" " " ' ~ " ~ ' , I . : : : ~ : , ~ . ~ : : ~ ~
..
""""·
October
28, 200
Joseph ZernikPOBox526 "
J
La
Vern,
CA
91750Re: Various emails and facsimile transmissio
s.
Dear Zernik:You have sent a large number
of
communications to 'the Court's Executive Officer, thePresiding Judge and others by email and facsimile.
Thos1e
clDmmunications have been referred tome for response. You raise a number
of
issues.You complain that your emails
to
judges and
coutt
p ~ r s o n n e l
 
have been blocked. I haveaddressed that issue in
t ~ e
 
attached letter to you dated
04t01"r
23,2009.
In
addition, you state that you have not been giveh
a ~
 
explanation with regard to the
cOU1i's
Sustain system, and whether the Case Summary
a v a i ~ a b l e
 
over the Internet or at publicterminals at the
c o u r t h o ~ s e
 
is an official record
ofthe
cO+lt.lyou also state that you have eithernot received a response or have received conflicting information to your many requests foraccess to the register
of
actions, court calendars, case indfxds, the book
of
judgments, minuteorders, and cCliain case files. Finally, you complain that JUdfes and clerks have not responded toyour numerous demands for legal opinions concerning
v ~ r i o u s
 
documents or about pendingcases. I have investigated your issues as I understand thefl,
lnd
provide you the followingresponses as a result
of
that investigation::SustainYou indicate that you have never been given an explanation with regard to the court'sSustain system, and whether the Case Summary availablJ
o ~ e r
 
the Internet or at public terminalsat the courthouse is an official record
of
the court. Part
0 r t ~ e
 
reason for that may be that certain
of
your communications have been confusing, not fully lflderstood by the recipients, or havebeen sent to persons who did not have sufficient information!
to
give you an appropriate .response.
It
is
for this reason, that you should send any rtller inquiries
to
my attention by
I
I
letter. Facsimile and email are not official ways
of
co unicating with the court.
In
addition, part
of
the explanation
is
that prior to
Ja11uary,
2000,
the Los Angelesseparate entities. There were twenty-four former munici al and justice courts, and one Superior
Digitally signed byJoseph H Zernik DN: cn=Joseph HZernik, o, ou,email=jz12345@earthlink.net, c=USLocation: La Verne,CaliforniaDate: 2010.04.1602:13:09 -07'00'
 
Joseph ZernikRe: Various emails and facsimile transmissionsOctober 28, 2009
Page: 2
Court that were unified into a single Superior Court in January, 2000. The resulting unifiedcourt
is
now divided into twelve districts, and housed
in
hver fifty court locations spread outover the 4,000 square miles
of
the County. The Superior Court inherited the legacy casemanagement systems that had been implemented and developed independently by the formermunicipal courts. The court is still in the process
of
integrating all
of
those legacy systems,many
of
which are still different from court location to court location. In addition, the statewideJudicial Branch is developing and implementing a single case management system for all courtsin Califomia. That statewide system is not scheduled to be implemented in most courts until2013, at the earliest, and has been delayed by decreases ih state funding due to the economicdown tum.Register
of
ActionsThe court is not required to maintain a register
of,
actions. Govemment Code section69845 provides that the clerk
of
the Court
"may"
keep a register
of
actions "in which shall beentered the title
of
each cause, with the date
of
its commencyment and a memorandum
of
everysubsequent proceeding
in
the action with its date. Altematively,
in
lieu
of
maintaining a register
of
actions, the clerk may preserve all the court records fi]ed, lodged, or maintained in connectionwith the case. Govemment Code section 69845.5.At the moment, the Los Angeles Superior Court Rreserves all the court records filed,lodged, or maintained in connection with the case in lieulof h1aintaining a register
of
actions,
as
authorized by section 69845.5.
>
While many people treat the Case Summary as a fast( history or a register
of
actions, it isnot, at the moment, an register
of
actions or
an
official relcord
of
the court. This is why there
is
a disclaimer on the court's website that reads:"The Courts and County
of
Los Angeles declare that information provided by andobtained from this site, intended for use on a casd-bYi-case basis and typically by parties
of
record and paliicipants, does not constitute
thelOf:6.Cial
record
of
the court. Any user
of
the information is hereby advised that it
is
being !provided as
is
and that it may be subjectto error
or
omission. The user acknowledges and
~ g r ~ e s
 
that neither the Los AngelesSuperior Court nor the County
of
Los Angeles arJ liable in any way whatsoever for theaccuracy
or
validity
of
the information provided.')Part
of
the reason that the court has not yet adopted the Case Summary as a register
of
actions
is
because, at the moment, as discussed above, there are at least six different legacy casemanagement systems in operation in the Los Angeles
S u p e r ~ o r
 
Court: A centralized Sustain,district versions
of
Sustain, LACAS,
ClV
AS, SCOT,
a n ~
 
SJE. Each
of
these systems is usedintemally, and information from these different systems is used to generate the Case Summaryavailable over the Internet and at the public terminals at
uhe
courthouse. However,
if
a clerkgenerates a case history using the intemal case managemfnt
system
at the court house,depending upon which case management system is used
;1t
tillat
courthouse, the case history
 
Joseph ZemikRe: Various emails and facsimile transmissionsOctober 28, 2009Page: 3report may be in a different format from the Case
S u m m ~ r y
 
or may contain additionalinformation.The court
is
currently considering a proposal to have the Case Summary serve as thecourt's register
of
actions. However, there are still issues that need to be assessed and addressedbefore that can be done.Corrections to Case Summary
In
one
of
your communications you state that a correction was made to an entry in theCase Summary or case history in Santa Monica
in
one
of
your cases.
It
was not clear whetheryou were referring
to
the Case Summary provided over the Internet and at public terminals at thecourthouse, or whether this was a case history generated by a clerk with the unique casemanagement system used internally at that courthouse.
In
some court districts and cOUlthouses, the clerks use a legacy version
of
Sustain, whichdeveloped differently and may include additional
inform(,l.tion
or present the infom1ation in adifferent forn1at.
If
a clerk uses a local version
of
Sustain at his or her non-public terminal
to
print out a case history, it may not be in the format or may have additional information that
is
notpresented in the Case Summary available over the Internet.In any event, a
nunc
pro
tunc
order
is
not
normallV'
required for changes to party nameentries, document filing entries or event scheduling entries in the Case Summary.Whether or not a
nunc pro tunc
order is warranted for a change in a minute order ordocuments
in
the case file may depend on the
c i r c u m s t a n ~ e s
 
and the nature
of
the order ordocument. Whether a
nunc
pro
tunc
order
is
required or warranted in a particular circumstance
is
normally within the discretion
of
the judge presiding in the matter.
See
Code
of
CivilProcedure section 128(a)(8).Judgement BookPrior
to
1974, all judgements
of
the superior, municipal, and justice courts were enteredin a "Judgement Book." Code
of
Civil Procedure section 668. Although courts in some countiescontinue to enter judgments
in
a judgment book, section 668 no longer provides the exclusivemeans
of
entry. Code
of
Civil Procedure section 668.5 authorizes alternatives, including makinga microfilm copy
of
the individual judgement, as
is
done in the Los Angeles Superior Court.Index
of
Civil Cas
1
 In the Los Angeles Superior Court there
is
no civil index, as such. Rather, case specificinformation
is
generated electronically
in
response to an inquiry.A person may conduct such a search personally without any fee at the public terminals at

Activity (3)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
MrJonesWM liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->