Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See 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
Dkt 66 - Yaffe's Opposition to Fine's Motion to Vacate - Fine v. Sheriff (Habeas Corpus)

Dkt 66 - Yaffe's Opposition to Fine's Motion to Vacate - Fine v. Sheriff (Habeas Corpus)

Ratings: (0)|Views: 209|Likes:
Published by Honor in Justice

More info:

Published by: Honor in Justice on Jul 20, 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

02/01/2013

pdf

text

original

123456789

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

OPPOSITION OF THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF
LOS ANGELES, ET AL, TO MOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT
1

Kevin M. McCormick CSBN 115973
BENTON, ORR, DUVAL & BUCKINGHAM
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
39 North California Street
Post Office Box 1178
Ventura, California 93002

Telephone: (805) 648-5111
Facsimile: (805) 648-7218
E-mail: kmccormick@benotonorr.com

Attorneys for Respondents, Superior Court of
California, County of Los Angeles and the
Hon. David P. Yaffe, Judge of the Superior Court
of California, County of Los Angeles

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
WESTERN DIVISION

RICHARD I. FINE,
Petitioner,
v.
SHERIFF OF LOS ANGELES
COUNTY,
Respondent.
CASE NO. CV 09-1914-JFW (CW)

OPPOSITION OF THE SUPERIOR
COURT OF CALIFORNIA,
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES,ET

AL, TO MOTION TO VACATE

JUDGMENT; MEMORANDUM OF
POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN
SUPPORT

[DECLARATION OF KEVIN M.
MCCORMICK IN SUPPORT FILED
CONCURRENTLY HEREWITH]

Date: Taken Under Submission
Time: N/A
Ctrm: 640
255 East Temple Street
Los Angeles, California
M. Judge: Hon. Carla M. Woehrle

COME NOW RESPONDENTS, the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles (“Superior Court”), and the Hon. David P. Yaffe, Judge of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles and pursuant to this Court’s July 1, 2010

Case 2:09-cv-01914-JFW-CW Document 66 Filed 07/14/10 Page 1 of 10 Page ID #:820
123456789

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

OPPOSITION OF THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF
LOS ANGELES, ET AL, TO MOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT
2
Order submit their Opposition to the Motion to Vacate Judgment filed by petitioner
in pro se, Richard I. Fine (“Fine”).
Dated: July 14, 2010
BENTON, ORR, DUVAL & BUCKINGHAM
By: /s/
Kevin M. McCormick
Kevin M. McCormick

Attorneys for Respondents, Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles and the Hon. David P Yaffe, Judge of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles

Case 2:09-cv-01914-JFW-CW Document 66 Filed 07/14/10 Page 2 of 10 Page ID #:821
123456789

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

1See F.R.Civ.P., Rule 60(c)(1) (“A motion under Rule 60 must be made in a

within a reasonable time-and for reasons (1), (2), and (3) no more than a year after the entry of judgment or order or the date of the proceeding.”) The Judgment denying Fine’s Petition was entered June 29, 2009 (Docket No. 31). Fine offers no explanation as to why he waited 364 days to bring this motion.

2See Motion to Vacate, 2:6-28.
3Id ., 3:1-4; 8:3-22.
4Id., 10-11. Fine does not remind this Court that he initially contended that

he was not served with a copy of the March 27, 2008 Order Striking Notice of Disqualification. A copy of the Order was attached as Exhibit B to the Response filed by Respondents establishing that Fine had faxed that document on or about April 8,

OPPOSITION OF THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF
LOS ANGELES, ET AL, TO MOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT
3
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
I.
INTRODUCTION
On or about June 28, 2010, Fine filed this Motion to Vacate Judgment
regarding the denial of his Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus.1

Fine brings the instant motion on the basis that a fraud was committed upon this Court based upon the “concealment” by Judge Yaffe of the payment of local judicial benefits by the County of Los Angeles.2 Fine also contends that Respondents herein, and their counsel, did not submit a copy of a February 19, 2008 motion and declaration filed by Fine in the state court “Marina Strand litigation” in their response to the Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus nor Fine’s purported California Code of

Civil Procedure, section 170.3 objection to Judge Yaffe.3

Fine further contends that the Respondents’ omission of these documents from this Court’s record led to a miscarriage of justice. Fine does not demonstrate or explain how this purported omission led to a miscarriage of justice (notwithstanding that these documents were part of the record reviewed by the Ninth Circuit in affirming the Order and Judgment denying the petition) or why Fine did not submit the documentation himself.4

Case 2:09-cv-01914-JFW-CW Document 66 Filed 07/14/10 Page 3 of 10 Page ID #:822

Activity (3)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
ikeaclockworks 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)//-->