Posted on February 28, 2011
In case you haven’t heard, Kamala Harris, while holding her nose, quietly washed her hands the AOC’s unlicensed contractors suit and sent it out to a private law firm.
The law firm taking over the case specializes in construction law. Nonetheless, the private law firm is looking out for the interests of a few AOC/JC insiders, not you the taxpayer.
One can only hope this unties the AG’s office to take a peek at what’s going on over at the AOC.
 | Wendy Darling on Yet Another Unlicensed Contrac… |
 | Paul Frehley on Yet Another Unlicensed Contrac… |
 | Maxrebo5 on Yet Another Unlicensed Contrac… |
 | Mycotic on Yet Another Unlicensed Contrac… |
| Wendy Darling on Yet Another Unlicensed Contrac… |
| Wendy Darling on Yet Another Unlicensed Contrac… |
 | Queenpumpkin on Yet Another Unlicensed Contrac… |
 | wearyant on Yet Another Unlicensed Contrac… |
| Maxrebo5 on Yet Another Unlicensed Contrac… |
| Wendy Darling on Yet Another Unlicensed Contrac… |
| Wendy Darling on Yet Another Unlicensed Contrac… |
| Queenpumpkin on Yet Another Unlicensed Contrac… |
 | Judicial Council Wat… on Yet Another Unlicensed Contrac… |
| Queenpumpkin on Yet Another Unlicensed Contrac… |
| Queenpumpkin on Yet Another Unlicensed Contrac… |
JusticeCalifornia
February 28, 2011
In or about 2004, a CCP 170.1 was filed against a Marin judge. Like so many other CCP 170.1’s made against Marin judges, the attorney general’s office represented the judge. In fact, it stepped in and stopped a hearing that had been granted that would have allowed the judge in question to be cross-examined.
I wrote a letter to the attorney general’s office, asking why the good guys (law enforcement) were protecting bad judges, and vilifying lawyers and litigants reporting bad judges.
The case was ultimately reassigned, and the judge in question soon retired.
Since then, all the CCP 170.1 challenges I have seen in Marin have been defended by private counsel.
antonatrail
February 28, 2011
Permit me to hold my nose too. You’d think the AG would prosecute the AOC, not protect them. The stink is spilling over into areas that the wrongdoers will not be able to control any longer. I’ll wait. All the little fires will not be tamped down.
JusticeCalifornia
February 28, 2011
all the little fires are kindling for what we all know is coming.
The jig is up. From Wiktionary:
Phrase “the jig is up”
An expression used to mean “We have been caught out and have no defense”, or if spoken to a person who’s just been found out as the perpetrator of an offense, it means “You’ve been discovered.”
Ron George knew this, and turned tail and ran, leaving his loyal followers to hold the bag.
SF Whistle
March 1, 2011
JC–
I seldom disagree with anything you write here—
However—-I think that recent history reveals that King George did not “turn tail” and run—
I believe he did recognize that “the jig was up” where he was concerned….and a plan was developed. CJ Tani has been rolled into play much like the Greeks and the trojan horse….She was installed for the sole purpose of executing King George’s longterm plans for the branch. She knows that the branch is broken and corrupt and does nothing to change direction. She has made no move that anyone would identify as her own….It is time to recognize that CJ Tani is “Mini-RG”—-and no one has informed her that any jig-is-up…..She will keep dancing until we take to the streets demanding reform—and her likely impeachment….
judicialcouncilwatcher
March 1, 2011
No worries. We replaced the ingredients of all their political fire extinguishers with napalm. They apparently haven’t figured that part out yet.
Michael Paul
March 1, 2011
I’ve resisted commenting because I don’t know what to say. While I am not a lawyer, I can’t imagine anyone intentionally and with great forethought possibly doing anything more to undermine their case than I have seen between the AOC and Jacobs/AGS.
I was professionally advised that as I had suspected, this is a sham lawsuit and that that the perps are going to get away with it. Mr. Huffman, doesn’t your committee manage litigation such as this? What is the incentive, Mr. Huffman, for you to undermine this suit in every imaginable way? Those of us who are paying the bills would like to know.