Former AOC Senior Technical Analyst Michael Paul has filed a whistleblower retailation suit against the AOC in San Francisco Superior Court. San Francisco Case Number CGC-11-512423 names the Administrative Office of the Courts and twenty John/Jane Does that are currently unspecified. There appears only one singular cause of action and that is the whistleblower protections granted to judicial branch employees.
The rest of us are about to find out if this law has any meaning and as statements made to the media and legislature, is fully supported by the AOC or if those statements were just window dressing that the AOC will quickly move to demur against in the basis of the law itself, which would be contrary to the statements made to the media and the legislature in support of this legislation.
The State of California is seeking to recover 42 million dollars minimum from the two unlicensed contractors solely because of Michael Paul’s disclosures. Unfortunately for the people, it is former AOC Attorney, now a Attorney General Managing Attorney, the heavily conflicted Peter Krause that is managing the litigation on behalf of the State of California. Will the taxpayers ever see a single dime of their money back in this cozy, heavily conflicted relationship? We think the Attorney General’s office should re-assign this case away from Mr. Peter Krause precisely because he used to be an AOC attorney.
Michael Paul alleges in his complaint that that he has suffered multiple distresses to his good name, reputation and ability to conduct business and that this termination was conducted on fraudulent grounds with the intention to oppress and malign him, causing him to lose (as of yesterday) a years worth of income, future opportunities, benefits and a pension and that because of this, punitive damages are in order. When contacted via email, Michael Paul made the following statement:
“While I’ve not yet secured legal counsel and I am still looking for legal counsel, this pro-per filing buys me some more time to look. Initially, I had no intent to sue after my last attorneys did not desire to represent me in the employment action. I figured I could find employment and limit my damages. Ironically, the only people trying to recruit me over the past year has been the AOC, who, through intermediaries has tried to do so three times based on my unique background and experience.
I have to admit to severe depression as a result of the termination which only got worse when my previous attorneys chose not to pursue the employment action. This depression has had far reaching effects on my willingness to even resume the search for legal counsel. I had gone through hundreds of law firms before I ever blew the whistle. I’ve restarted that search in earnest with law firms telling me that a pro-per complaint must be filed by me right away while they consider the options.
Unlike the taxpayer lawsuit, this will not be dropped because I might have to pay AOC’s legal fees. Since the company I own operates internationally, there would be a dozen countries that we do business with that would welcome me with open arms. Being permanently out of the reach of AOC attorneys I can continue to back Judicial Council Watcher’s efforts for years without interruption. I would love to settle this out of court, however I was told by my last attorneys that the AOC will fight my claim ruthlessly and without negotiation. Of course, I hope that isn’t true and that we can quickly go on our merry way with a amicable resolution to the dispute with them buying me out as opposed to terminating me, making me ineligible for further state employment when government contacting has been my bread and butter over the last 20 or so years.”
When the Chief Justice has the ability to name both the venue and the judge, it appears that Mr. Paul is at the mercy of those judges in San Francisco Superior Court that are about to lose 40% of their workforce. Given it is alleged that “he ‘had to trust that the AOC was doing the right thing” in his taxpayer lawsuit, lets hope he doesn’t hear that argument a second time.
If you happen to know a good employment attorney willing to pick the ball up on this, feel free to refer them to JCW and we will forward the name on to Michael. Alternatively, contact him at michael_paul@michaelpaul.net or call him at 510-684-8706.
Maybe some day the AOC will actually be held at least partly accountable for their actions.
Judicial Council Watcher 
Wendy Darling
July 13, 2011
Good luck and God Speed, Michael.
Published today, Wednesday, July 13, from Courthouse News Service and Maria Dinzeo:
Sac Judges Say Court Bureaucracy Should Be ‘Dismantled Forthwith’
By MARIA DINZEO
http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/07/13/38131.htm
Long live the ACJ.
Michael Paul
July 15, 2011
Five years from now this case will be heard? Hahahaha!
JCW – The AOC just guaranteed you five years of underwriting, technical assistance and investigative journalists.
You’re welcome.
Judicial Council Watcher
July 16, 2011
Gee, thanks!
Maybe knowing we’ll be on the AOC’s ass for the next five years might be motivation enough to bail out San Francisco and stop those layoffs.
robin
July 17, 2011
Why should any attorney take this case? Look what the same people did to Phil Kay when he won cases for his clients, which were upheld on appeal. Then Huffman, George, sicked the State Bar, on him and at the behest of losing counsel and two disqualified judges. Beth Jay and Colin Wong then allowed an illegal default to be taken against Kay so they could suspend him. Kay was/and is the best civil rights lawyer for employees, in this state. What was his crime? Preserving evidentiary rulings in the trial courts, so as to not create waiver, if in fact his clients lost at the trial level. Fortunately for his clients they won, and the COA had to uphold their verdicts.
While the AOC and the Judicial Council, go after judges [through the CJP], they are now using the State Bar to cower attorneys who stick up for the rights of their clients, to lie about the underlying cases in order to disbar attorneys who win,, because they cannot attack the actual verdicts they won for their clients. See Gober v. Ralphs,
Everything in the Decision, is a lie, all one has to do is read the published opinion of Gober v. Ralphs, to know that nothing happened as the Decision says against Phil Kay. The Decision stated that all these verdicts were remanded due to attorney misconduct, that’s impossible, these judgments were entered in favor of the Kay’s clients, and attorneys fees were awarded to him. However, if the State Bar can lie about the actual facts of a published case. Imagine what they will do to Michael Paul.
Good Luck! I wonder what Chuck Horan has to say about this? Now the State Bar want’s to be the last word as to what happens in the actual superior courts, and go after anyone who displeases or wins, on what the Supreme Court cannot in open court undo.
robin
July 17, 2011
What’s the saying “kill all the lawyers”? George and Huffman want any lawyer who can win big punitive damages on behalf of plaintiffs, for whistle blowing, or civil rights to go away.
The State Bar now accepts complaints from judges who have been disqualified, in order to cover up for their misconduct in attempting to sway juries. Phil Kay has all of this documented.
The Supreme Court [king george] took ten years to carefully put this scheme in place. This whole state should be terrified. He did this for all the administrative agencies under the judicial branch. The only difference is that the State Bar is a “public corporation”, while the CJC, the AOC and the CPJ, are under direct control of the CJ.
go read the complaint file by Phil Kay, you people have only discovered the tip of the iceberg
Wendy Darling
July 17, 2011
From Act IV, Scene II, of King Henry VI, by William Shakespeare:
SCENE II. Blackheath.
CADE
I thank you, good people: there shall be no money;
all shall eat and drink on my score; and I will
apparel them all in one livery, that they may agree
like brothers and worship me their lord.
DICK
The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.
CADE
Nay, that I mean to do. Is not this a lamentable
thing, that of the skin of an innocent lamb should
be made parchment? that parchment, being scribbled
o’er, should undo a man? Some say the bee stings:
but I say, ’tis the bee’s wax; for I did but seal
once to a thing, and I was never mine own man
since. How now! who’s there?
Long live the ACJ.
robin
July 17, 2011
If any of your are interested, the Decision I mentioned in the above comment refers to the State Bar Decision, and the file refers to the Complaints filed by Phil Kay in the San Francisco Superior Court. The State Bar will take down any attorney who questions Huffman. Kay did it. Huffman’s head exploded when he had to uphold the Gober, verdict. He knows of the judicial corruption in those cases. He allowed his good buddy Anello lie to the US Senate and then covered up for him. This is documented, by sworn testimony and the sworn statement he filed with the Senate. They contradict each other.
Anello had to admit he lied, under oath in the State Bar “hearing”, that’s why they had to take a default against Kay[ the facts do not support what the Decision states]. The Decision does not cite to any record, or order, in the record[ none exist]. Since when does the State Bar get to issue a Decision that lies about the actual COA published opinion? Never. Down is now up.
When the powers that be get to say that the sun comes up in the West, and no one can challenge them, all is lost.
michael, you are going to need help. Hope you were able to take documentation with you. Kay obtained his, however, as yet, no court wants to look at it.
SF Whistle
July 17, 2011
Robin–
WOW—
I read some of the Phillip Kay stuff and it is frightening—
All the cronyism—all the arrogance—all active and open defiance of law…
We…the people —-need much more than a budget solution to the Judicial branch situation—the malignant sick—corrupted state of the largest judiciary in the western world is tragic.
Our budget crisis is simply one manifestation of the infection…
WE NEED TRANSPARANCY—-ACCOUNTABILITY—-
WE NEED A RECALL—-WE NEED A JUDICIAL REFORM INITIATIVE—WE NEED LIMITS UPON JUDICIAL IMMUNITY—
Jon Wintermeyer
July 17, 2011
Robin, you are correct, Michael needs all the help he can get and he knows I am there to speak in his behalf if the day ever comes that the AOC is finally charged with the crimes of waste and fraud that they have committed. I witnessed it from the Court side, documented it and reported it to my management.
The Don Henley song “Get over it” is where you would have heard the line: “Ole Billy was right, let’s kill all the lawyers let’s kill them tonight.” Maybe we can get that one posted.
As a whistleblower that was terminated by CEO Kiri Torre from the CC Court, I had the proof that the reasons given by my CEO to the AOC’s legal Council were false and my lawyers had copies, but it still will not stop the CA Taxpayers money to be spent to represent the guilty.
I have former CC Court staffed that would all go and speak the truth in depositions regarding what happened, but why put them through the harassment of the AOC’s lawyers grilling them for hours to collect their paychecks.
There is history of documentation in the JCW site from last fall that tells the story of how the CC Court Bench has chosen to remain silent while all this has occurred and I doubt if any of them will pay any attention to the ACJ’s letter. There are some of their members that signed the letter in favor of the CCMS program, past and current PJ’s that have even been videoed as speaking out in favor of it.
Michael Paul
July 17, 2011
I need a lawyer, yes.
The AOC is in a no-win situation with me. Sure, they might win in their court but via evidence shared with the press I’ve already decimated their credibility and they’ve had a universal loss in the court of pubic opinion.
It’s been covered border to border in mainstream news going on two years.
It’s been supported by the independent findings by judges coming to the same conclusions statewide going on two years.
Those findings have been underscored by the Assembly Committee on Accountability & Administrative Review and a JLAC audit.
The facts are undeniable and only a properly constituted kangaroo court could ignore the facts and not let this matter go to trial.
I’m more than happy to make this a sustained media effort for as long as it takes for others to enact proper reforms or until a jury is entitled to hear my case, whichever comes last. Worse yet, I can sustain this coverage from anywhere on earth for as long as it takes. Being on this side of the media fence, I don’t need to utter a single word.
Bonnie Russell
July 18, 2011
For more details on the AOC see http://www.familylawcourts.com/AOC.html
They’re getting people killed.
Judicial Council Watcher
July 29, 2011
Troll:
One who frequents message boards, newsgroups, blogs or listservs deliberately posting provocative off-topic messages with the sole intent to disrupt and attack people. Oftentimes, trolls change their names to avoid being banned. The above named troll was banned from JCW and has now resorted to sending hate mail. This troll is not only an internet troll but the trollish behavior is alleged to extend into real life.
When this troll finds someone that does not blindly support her position or someone that disagrees with her, she goes on the attack much like she did here at JCW. While the above message should have been a precursor of what to expect, we were ignorant enough to give her the benefit of the doubt. Ms.Russell’s advocacy is that she wants to ensure that everyone accused of domestic violence in family law courts wears a GPS monitoring device. The device she promotes is a solution from http://www.gpsmonitoring.com
She advertises herself as a public relations firm in her email, so we are left to assume that gps monitoring, who has no issue with her internet behavior, enjoys her advocacy of their product. (We checked, they saw the posts, they replied they had no problem with the posts, – but thanked us for deleting them…… )
Her claim as we understand it is that even innocent people accused of domestic violence in family court should be wearing GPS ankle bracelets to prove they are innocent of the claims being made against them. And the cost? Just thirteen dollars a day! (do the math..) Paid for by whom? State or federal government grants.
(Meanwhile domestic victims can’t even get restraining orders because the courts are closed down but that has no relevance to her advocacy……….)
Her abrasive, attacking nature has alienated legislators and family law reform groups throught California. Having no success whatsoever with her abrasive advocacy with legislators and family law groups, she turned her sights on AOC director Diane Nunn of the AOC’s Center for Children & Families in the Courts.
Her claim is that Diane Nunn has the authority to require family court judges to implement GPS monitoring for domestic violence claims in family court. Printed directly from her web page:
“The below reveals how Diane Nunn, Director of the AOC’s Center for Children Families and the Courts, by refusing to embrace a GPS with Victim Notification enhancement to restraining orders, is getting women and children killed.”
Clearly, she is attacking yet another person that does not support her advocacy.
The reason we’re pointing this out here is because she is attacking us via our e-mail account and claims to be “unwilling to open our super secret messages” so we felt it best to respond here.
Our unopened reply to Ms. Russell and her email attacks was this:
When we conducted outreach throughout the state of California, we were careful to ask others if they were aware of others we should involve. Your name Ms. Russell came up a few times with a caveat. The caveat was that if we failed to blindly support your position or disagreed with you, you would attack us and you would attack our readers. Sadly, you lived up to your reputation.
This is the reason that you contacted us and we did not contact you.
Signed,
The team at Judicial Council Watcher
We’ve posted this message for not only Ms. Russell’s benefit so she can see our reply, but to assist others in understanding what to expect from Ms. Russell and her advocacy.
robin
July 18, 2011
Good luck Michael. Kay is trying to force the courts to recognize that his illegal suspension is void ab nitio, the courts are so frightened they won’t even rule. Judicial immunity is the ticket. Take that away and whole house of cards falls. King George spent over a million dollars of taxpayer money to defeat an amendment in South Dakota that would have stripped Judges of their immunity. His fear was that if it passed there, it would spread,
Bonnie you’re right, they are getting people killed, they are also jailing innocent people.
Delilah
July 18, 2011
Wow, Bonnie, that site is scarier than this one! Where is the media in any of this? Oh, I forgot. Bought and paid for and/or afraid to lose their press privileges. The news is dead. Has been for a long time now. But can’t we use this info in our ground war?
Judicial Council Watcher
July 18, 2011
We too are strongly opposed to cottage industries sprouting up around the judicial branch that make the well connected wealthy. It is why we’ve featured the Stephen Doyne debacle and why we support other reform efforts in the family law arena, like Nevada Courts family law whistleblower Emily Gallup and the kangaroo court of assigned judges being appointed by the AOC while the AOC pays private counsel to defend the indefensible.
When a whole system is broken, it isn’t the time to consider fixing just a part of it. These fixes need to start at the very top and work their way down. Hopefully not too late for Emily Gallup or Michael Paul.