Posted on June 1, 2012
After seeing the last effort to get everyone on board to sign the last Rosengram and the embarrassment caused by our publication of that effort, it appears that the anointed suffered from a brain fart coming to the realization that they have the right to speak for everyone. Joint TCPJAC & CEAC Letter re May 2012 Revise FINAL 05-31-12
Program note: We’re going to be catching up on a whole lot of material that will be published this weekend.
 | Delilah on Another Clifford Ham boondoggl… |
 | Bryan Belgrove on When the court falsifies the r… |
 | Judicial Council Wat… on Another Clifford Ham boondoggl… |
 | anonymous on Another Clifford Ham boondoggl… |
 | Maxrebo5 on Another Clifford Ham boondoggl… |
| Maxrebo5 on Another Clifford Ham boondoggl… |
| Judicial Council Wat… on Another Clifford Ham boondoggl… |
 | Mycotic on Another Clifford Ham boondoggl… |
| Maxrebo5 on Another Clifford Ham boondoggl… |
 | Wendy Darling on Another Clifford Ham boondoggl… |
| Maxrebo5 on Another Clifford Ham boondoggl… |
| Maxrebo5 on Another Clifford Ham boondoggl… |
| Maxrebo5 on Another Clifford Ham boondoggl… |
| Mycotic on Another Clifford Ham boondoggl… |
 | Debra Ashby on Another Clifford Ham boondoggl… |
Guest
June 1, 2012
The Branch is doomed. First the legislatures try to help the new cj with a warning shot across the bow. She doesn’t get it so she fires back (with a you tube temper tantrum for added effect). She gets warned about the CCMS fiasco and she doesn’t get it. She defends and tries to sell it as a success. State starts taking more and more Branch money to send a message. Cj doesn’t get it and starts lobbying. State final takes all money and control because cj doesn’t get it. SEC slams AOC, JC and CJ. Cj doesn’t get it and criticizes the report she took credit for asking for in the first place, by a committee she put in place. Now PJ’s and CEO’s of branch send this letter. Instead of listening to all of the warnings and reflecting that the branch does have some major problems but will fix them we continue to prove to the Governor and legislators that the branch “JUST DOESNT GET IT”. My guess is the we haven’t seen the bottom yet of what the state will do to get the point across. Thanks branch “leaders”.
Nathaniel Woodhull
June 1, 2012
Guest,
It is nice to see others expressing the same opinions that many of us have expressed now for the past decade as we watched the re-decoration of the Crystal Palace. Some of us have sacrificed out career advancement out of principle, in that we believe in providing justice to those whom we serve (i.e. those who have elected us.) So many of us are now feeling like the USS Arizona, having taken so many hits that we are sitting on the ocean floor. The only thing that keeps us going is seeing others open their eyes and start to express the outrage that has been building within us for ten years.
Your assessment is 100% correct, HRH-2 & Company “just doesn’t get it”. There are many, like Rosengram, doing a full-court press to advance their own careers and get a seat on the Court of Appeals. He has clearly demonstrated that he plays both sides of the fence. Most of these people live such insular lives that they actually believe the bull-s–t that comes out of their mouths.
Pick up the banner and keep fighting the fight.
Nathaniel
unionman575
June 1, 2012
Here’s the bottom line: They write the checks. Our branchj doesn’t remember that or anything else for that matter. You are dead on target Guest.
unionman575
June 1, 2012
And yes they plan on teaching our branch a “lesson”. It will be a brutal fiscal lesson with the message to CLEAN UP NOW.
wearyant
June 1, 2012
Guest, you’re right on in your analysis. Thanks for sharing.
And, Nathaniel, the aspect of those lowering themselves for a seat on the appellate bench is scary. California taxpayers don’t deserve a person of that unethical ilk reviewing their cases. Yes, these bureaucrat judges are becoming so insular, elitist and myopic, they really shouldn’t be seated on any bench other than park or bus.
Michael Paul
June 1, 2012
Wendy Darling
June 1, 2012
Perfect, Michael Paul! Just perfect!
Long live the ACJ.
unionman575
June 1, 2012
They haven’t a clue. That’s why we are here crowing like roosters.
unionman575
June 1, 2012
See what the letter made me do:
unionman575
June 1, 2012
“Program note: We’re going to be catching up on a whole lot of material that will be published this weekend.”.
JCW thank you again for all the effort you put into this!
JusticeCalifornia
June 1, 2012
May 25, 2012: SEC report states that the AOC has f%$#ed up and wasted money in ever so many ways right under top leadership’s nose.
May 31, 2012: Top leadership says the budget numbers are wrong and the legistlature has been mean in slashing the branch budget and the branch money problems are the Legislature’s fault.
Totally unclear on the concept. And no, you can’t make this stuff up.
wearyant
June 1, 2012
Is there some hope for public employee whistleblowers here?
ttp://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/30/us-whistleblower-osha-idUSBRE84T19520120530
wearyant
June 1, 2012
Whoops! I left off an important “h” Sorry for the mess.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/30/us-whistleblower-osha-idUSBRE84T19520120530
unionman575
June 1, 2012
Zilch Ant.
Dan Dydzak
June 1, 2012
Wearyant, unionman and others,
After approximately $ 35.00 in postage, the deposition notices for videotaped depositions of Eric M. George and Ret. Associate Justice Moreno went out from the Marina del Rey post office.
Eric George’s deposition with a substantial document request is set for end of June, 2012, and Moreno’s with a substantial document request for mid-July, 2012. I certainly want to know how monies apparently went to the Papal/Vatican Bank and other places. Much of that, according to my sources, was skimmed AOC funds which, unionman, should have been used for salaries for the rank and file and other important rational fiscal purposes. Messrs. Vickrey, Overholt, Sandor Samuels, Matthew Werdegar and numerous others, including banker Rothenberg’s attorneys, have been served with the aforesaid deposition notices. A focus of the depositions will be the RICO activities alleged.
The California Supreme Court will not meet and confer with me as to appropriate dates for videotaped depositions of CJ Tani Cantil-Sakauye and Kathryn M. Werdegar so those dates will have to be unilaterally set by me in the near term.
Mr. Tom Girardi, a close confederate of the Georges and CJ Tani, by the way, is facing a jury trial of some 5-7 days before a Los Angeles jury– re conversion and misappropriation of attorney’s fees (compensatory and punitives). The case is called Shalant v. Girardi et al.
The trial judge is letting the case go forward. Substantial damages are being sought against Godfather Giradi, referred in some circles as kingpin of the Girardi Syndicate.
Mr. Girardi and his partner, Howard Miller, are, of course, defendants in my case.
Delilah
June 2, 2012
And will there be a court reporter there to report and preserve an accurate and verbatim record for the Shalant v. Girardi jury trial? Court reporters for civil trials are out the door unless they are now privately retained.
Wendy Darling
June 1, 2012
Published today, Friday, June 1, from Courthouse News Service, by Maria Dinzeo:
Chief Bucks Up Troops After Scathing Report
By MARIA DINZ
SAN FRANCISCO (CN) – Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye strongly defended the Administrative Office of the Courts this week in the wake of a blistering report that criticized the agency as bloated, overpaid and inefficient.
“Telling me something is wrong, doesn’t necessarily mean it’s wrong,” she said. “As chief, everyone tells me everything. I have heard that AOC employees have complained that some of the descriptions of what they do are not completely accurate. Do you mean they don’t have a right to voice their opinion?”
A number of trial judges, who has been cutting in their criticism of the administrative office, said the chief justice would naturally be inclined to support her staff in the face of a withering barrage of criticism.
“I want to give the chief some space on this one,” said Judge Andrew Banks in Orange County. “I want to give the chief some room and assume what she was trying to do was speak to the AOC employees who were not part of the problem and give them some recognition.”
In a similar vein, Judge Stephen Czuleger of Los Angeles Superior Court said, “It’s important to note that the chief should be congratulated for taking the initial step in requesting this report. I can understand why she would want to buck up the AOC employees.”
In the report released last Friday, a committee of judges appointed by the chief justice last year delivered a series of body blows to the administrative office, finding that the agency is too big, spends too much money and exercises unchecked power over the state’s trial courts.
Earlier this week, Cantil-Sakauye sent a video message to the staff of the administrative office in which she appeared to criticize the accuracy of the report. “Despite the care taken by the committee, there is a good chance you will find erroneous information or misconceptions in the report,” said Cantil-Sakauye in the video.
That statement in turn prompted criticism from trial judges who saw it as attack on a messenger delivering tough but long-overdue criticism of the agency.
But Cantil-Sakauye said the employees felt demoralized by the report. She said she thought it was important to boost the staff’s morale.
“I sent the video out because I was concerned about the morale of the AOC employees that I know to be very hard working, dedicated public servants,” she said in an interview. “If I were an employee, I would feel demoralized. I work next door to those folks, so I of course did the video to explain to them that not all is lost in the world and let’s proceed.”
The voluminous report, compiled by an 11-member committee appointed by the chief, recommends sweeping change to the AOC. Its findings substantiated what many trial judges had been claiming for years, that the AOC had grown too powerful, made poor decisions, such as its embarking on a costly IT project that wasted a half-billion dollars, and consistently hid its budget, making it nearly impossible for judges, lawmakers and the public to figure out how it is funded or how it spends money.
The committee members spent a year conducting interviews and surveying hundreds of judges, justices, court officials and even AOC workers themselves.
“I read the report cover to cover, and I thought it was an impressive document,” said Judge Steve White of Sacramento Superior Court. “It rendered a great service to the judicial branch, but that service will only be realized if we implement its recommendations.”
“It’s one heck of a good start,” said Banks in Orange County Superior Court. “I’m hoping like hell that the Judicial Council jumps in and says we’re moving forward with these valid criticisms.”
Among its over 100 recommendations, the committee proposed a drastic downsizing in the number of AOC workers and overpaid executives, a new focus on serving the trial courts rather than controlling them and more transparency in its budgeting process. The committee also noted that it encountered reluctance from the AOC in providing them with information for the report, some of which it said was incomplete or nonresponsive.
White said the committee, named the Strategic Evaluation Committee or SEC, would have no reason to report anything untrue about the AOC’s lack of transparency and responsiveness.
“They had no ax to grind. All the presiding judges met with them, as did scores of other people,” said White. “They definitely did not have an agenda.”
In her video to the troops, Cantil-Sakauye indicated that some of the committee’s recommendations would need more investigation. She urged administrative office employees to point out any “incorrect” information to Jody Patel, the agency’s current director.
“The SEC’s final report is very different from a standard audit review,” said the chief justice in the video. “In audits, those being audited respond to the audit before it is finalized. The AOC did not have that opportunity. As you read the report and find information that is substantially incorrect in your view, please let Jody know. It’s important that any decisions the council makes be based on correct information.”
Faced with criticism in the past from the state auditor over an ambitious IT project, the administrative office reacted by saying it had already implemented many of the reforms suggested by the auditor. In the video, the chief justice made a similar point, saying that many changes had been made to the agency since the committee began its investigation last year.
“The report is a snapshot in time about an AOC that in some ways has substantially changed since the SEC began its work,” she said in the video.
On a side note, Cantil-Sakauye had received some criticism for the timing of the release of the committee’s 277-page critique. It was posted on the administrative office’s website and sent to trial judges after working hours on Friday before the three-day Memorial Day weekend.
“I knew that if I had sat on it over the weekend and released it on the next working day, I would have been criticized that I kept it,” she said.
Cantil-Sakauye said she could not comment on what parts of the report she thought were strongest, and would wait to give her opinion of the report until it is accepted by the Judicial Council at its meeting next month. She did add, “I thought all the recommendations were important. I’ve heard that the report is very comprehensive, and I am grateful for everyone on the SEC for what is reflective of a lot of time and effort.”
Committee chair Assistant Presiding Judge Charles Wachob of Placer County said in an interview this week that he had not seen the chief’s video, but said he had seen some change, particularly with a slew of retirements within the AOC’s upper ranks.
“Several division directors left and some divisions were consolidated, so yes, I guess there has been some change,” he said.
White in Sacramento said any change the AOC has made has been negligible compared with the sacrifices made by financially struggling trial courts all over the state.
“They are a day late and a dollar short on everything,” said White. “There is much more that needs to be done. The courts have already made dramatic cuts in the last three years. The AOC did not make dramatic cuts in that time. They are starting to make modest cuts, but even with the proposed cuts that the committee proposes, that would reduce them to the point where a lot of courts have already been reduced.”
“The problems that the SEC is addressing are problems largely of the AOC and Judicial Council’s creation. They must be addressed,” White added. “The best single document, which sets forth a blueprint for addressing those, is the SEC report. I would hope that people will take some guidance from the SEC report and not be defensive about it.”
Cantil-Sakauye placed chairman Judge Wachob and vice-chair Presiding Judge Brian McCabe of Merced County in advisory seats on the Judicial Council, an appointment Wachob said he believed will start in September.
“I believe that certainly all the people on the SEC have acquired substantial knowledge about the workings of the AOC, and input from any one of us would be helpful,” Wachob said. “I think there are a number of substantial recommendations about the need to reorganize the structure of the AOC, to make it less top-heavy, more nimble and more responsive.”
He also pointed to a core criticism of the office which said the administrators had lost sight of their main job which is to serve the trial courts rather than to exert control over them.
“There are also a number of recommendations that go toward refocusing the AOC on being a service provider to the trial courts and appellate courts,” said Wachob.
In going forward on those recommendations, the chief justice concluded that she and the members of the Judicial Council are partners.
“We are partners in this in deciding where and how to proceed,” she said. “We’ve been transparent all along. This is a committee I appointed early on.”
http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/06/01/47039.htm
Those in charge at 455 Golden Gate Avenue just don’t get it.
Long live the ACJ.
Wendy Darling
June 1, 2012
Published today, Friday, June 1, from The Recorder, the on-line publication of CalLaw, by Judge Daniel Goldstein:
Viewpoint: AOC Is Top-Heavy and Dysfunctional
By Daniel Goldstein
The Strategic Evaluation Committee report released May 25 was a scathing indictment of the San Francisco-based Administrative Office of the Courts. The nearly 300-page report was the product of a yearlong review of the AOC by judges and justices selected for the task by the current chief justice, Tani Cantil-Sakauye.
It is worth noting that even the process of information gathering was not without resistance. As the administrative office for the judicial branch one would expect prompt, candid, complete and accurate dissemination of information. Unfortunately “some AOC employees who were interviewed or who responded to surveys were defensive or resisted providing information.” Also some information provided by the AOC was incomplete or inaccurate and the SEC “encountered numerous delays” in gathering some of the needed information. As for the AOC financial processes, the report concluded: “It is difficult to obtain clear, comprehensible budget information” and “[s]ome requests for budget information still have not been resolved satisfactorily.”
The report’s condemnation of the AOC echoes criticisms leveled by California state auditor Elaine Howle in her exhaustive 2011 report on the AOC’s failed Court Case Management System. The SEC report provides further undeniable evidence of the need to reform not only the AOC, but also to democratize the selection of the members of the Judicial Council. For years, the group’s revolving-door membership (one member served for 15 years) has been little more than a rubber stamp for AOC actions. This obvious lack of oversight was largely responsible for the AOC’s abysmal performance. As the report noted, “the commitment to increased transparency, accountability and efficiency — and the tone and attitude of the [AOC] — ultimately rests with the Judicial Council.”
The report, which includes more than 100 recommendations for reforming and overhauling the agency, concludes that AOC decision making is insular; the organization is top heavy, dysfunctional, greatly overstaffed and unwieldy, with a structure that “has proved ineffective and unworkable.” This has in part resulted in the AOC losing its focus of providing service to the trial courts. Some of these observations apply equally to the Judicial Council.
Perhaps even more disturbing than the report’s findings regarding devastating financial decisions and appalling project planning is the overarching conclusion of the SEC that the AOC simply lacks credibility — financial data and “facts” issuing from the agency are often misleading, incomplete or flat-out untrue. For example, the report found that the agency’s leadership actively and continually misstated the number of its employees, as well as the degree to which it had shared in branch budget cuts. It misled the pubic, court employees and the judicial branch about its oft trumpeted “one-day per month furlough program.” The AOC furloughs, unlike those imposed by the courts, gave voluntary participants a credit of one day of leave time for each furlough day taken.
Further, it engaged in faux “hiring freezes” while continuing to add large numbers of temporary and permanent employees. The report found that these material misstatements came from the very top of the AOC, and that false data remains posted on the AOC website now. The overall tenor of the report describes an imperialistic and bloated bureaucracy, intent on growth and escalating power that was predominantly unrestrained by meaningful oversight. The unabashed growth of the organization was pursued without consideration of the fiscal impact on the judiciary and without consultation or consideration of input or viewpoints of courts and judges.
It is important to recognize that “the AOC reached its historical peak level of staff in the 2010-2011 fiscal year — 1,121 positions — even in the face of cuts to judicial branch funding.” It is significant to recognize that while the current chief justice was not sworn in until Jan. 3, 2011, she had been a voting member of the Judicial Council since September of 2008 — during this period of unabashed growth. She was the chair of the Advisory Committee on Financial Accountability and Efficiency for the judicial branch that recommended retroactive raises for approximately 80 percent of AOC staff in October 2010, in the midst of a financial crisis. This came as judges were being asked to forfeit salary.
Also noteworthy is the report’s finding that staff reductions that have since taken place “have been achieved primarily through attrition and programs such as the Voluntary Separation Incentive Program” and that the AOC has taken no proactive steps with regard to staff reductions.
Extraordinarily, none of the organizational charts provided to the SEC showed the Judicial Council at the top. Perhaps the years of lack of accountability, nonexistent scrutiny, deficient oversight and perpetual growth fed the AOC’s self-image as above even the council and the courts. As it was described in the report: “The AOC has developed a culture of control, diminishing its orientation to service.”
Other disturbing disclosures involved the AOC ignoring its own policy manual by allowing certain employees to telecommute from outside the state of California, and in one case, from outside the country. One individual was classified as a “resident scholar” and paid handsomely while working part time and residing out of state.
The AOC employee classification system has morphed into an unwieldy scheme composed of more than 200 job classifications based on unspecified or nonexistent criteria. This vague and unworkable system “has been abused as a way to provide higher compensation to employees.” There are numerous situations where “employees are being paid more — and in some cases substantially more — than is appropriate in light of the duties assigned to them.” The AOC also maintains a policy allowing geographic salary modifications. Unfortunately there are circumstances where, inexplicably, “employees receive an increased pay differential even though they are not headquartered in the higher-paying geographic region.” All of these practices allow management to reward favored employees with additional pay without any real justification or systematic controls.
Two “judges in residence” and a retired “assistant director” of the AOC were provided high-paying jobs that lacked a sufficient job description, monitoring criteria or cost-benefit analysis. The practice of engaging these individuals was highly suspect in light of the number of attorneys already employed by the AOC and other resources available to the organization.
Those responsible for preparation of this report should be commended for their efforts, and their recommendations should be immediately implemented as a necessary step toward reform. The democratization of the council and the enactment of AB 1208, a commonsense financial reform bill bitterly opposed by the bloated agency, are even more important components of cleaning up the mess that out-of-control centralization has caused.
Daniel Goldstein is a San Diego County Superior Court judge and a director of the Alliance of California Judges.
http://www.law.com/jsp/ca/PubArticleCA.jsp?id=1202556752174&Viewpoint_AOC_Is_TopHeavy_and_Dysfunctional&slreturn=1
Long live the ACJ.
Jimmy
June 1, 2012
If you want the recommendations of the SEC report to be acted upon, and want true change at the AOC to occur, everyone needs to send a letter to all of the Judicial Council members PRIOR to the June meeting, urging that they move foward with immediate implemention. You also need to encourage others to do the same. We need to keep up the pressure & the momentum. Absent action and activism by those in the trial courts, the SEC’s work will all be for naught. I would hate to see the committee’s 55 weeks of effort be in vain. I also think some of the doubters on this site owe the committee members an apology. They were unfairly castigated by many posters here, to say the least. Despite the AOC leadership’s hostility, obfuscation and delays, the committee issued a report that has resonated throughout the branch, and did so without money, staff and frankly – without Justice Scotland during the major part of the committee’s tenure.
Been There
June 1, 2012
Jimmy, please clarify how Justice Scotland was absent “during the major part of thd committee’s tenure.” I thought he exited after the SEC draft report was submitted to the CJ.
Wendy Darling
June 1, 2012
Justice Scotland delivered his SEC report to the Chief Justice in January. An “executive summary” of that SEC report was issued to all of the Court Executive Officers of the trial courts, and to the presiding judges. Scotland was then asked/directed to revise the SEC report, would not do so, and was told his services were no longer needed. The SEC report was then revised/redacted/sanitized. The SEC report, as released, reflects these alterations. For example, the SEC report, as released, references the “departure” of the recent AOC HR Director, Ernesto Fuentes, which did not happen until just recently, after Scotland issued the original SEC report to the Chief Justice, and the SEC report as now released, IMPO, then glosses over the carnage and gross mismanagement that took place in the AOC HR division under the control/regime of Fuentes and Couch, under the reasoning that Fuentes has “departed.” The original SEC report, as issued by Justice Scotland, was far more direct, to put it tactly and diplomatically.
There are other areas of the SEC report that incorporate other recent “changes” in the AOC, all of which have taken place since Scotland’s departure. Which, btw, also goes against the Chief Justice’s assertions, that the SEC report, as released, is a back-in-time “snapshot” from 55 weeks ago, and therefore somehow not applicable to things as they currently exist at the AOC.
As for the SEC report as released, it tells the truth as far as could be made palatable. It will be interesting to see if those in charge at 455 Golden Gate Avenue follow the recommendations contained therein, of if, as usual, the recommodations get cherry-picked to death, which seems to already be happening from the Office of the Chief Justice. In which case, it will be the Chief Justice and the Judicial Council that will owe the SEC committee an apology, as well as everyone else, for just wasting everyone’s time.
Long live the ACJ.
Wendy Darling
June 1, 2012
And FYI to AOC employees, if you follow the recommendation to “send a letter to all of the Judicial Council members prior to the June meeting, urging that they move forward with immediate implementation” of the SEC report, be forewarned that doing so will likely result in the immediate implementation of the AOC’s “at will” policy against you. To put it bluntly, if you do so, you should expect to be fired. The “culture of control” is still alive and kicking in AOC administration, and dissent will not be tolerated.
Long live the ACJ.
Judicial Council Watcher
June 1, 2012
JCW was the most vocal doubter about this committees work with good reason. Nearly every one of them was slated to get a new courthouse, save Scotland and our National Center for State Courts rep who was looking for a million dollar plus payout for that AOC support.
We’re not apologizing because we believe the committees work didn’t go far enough. We’ve reviewed some of the material provided to this committee because people wished to ensure we had that same material. For example:
1. In our opinion, these people who were mostly slated to get new courthouses didn’t slice, dice or shred the construction program as they should have.
2. The SEC committee expresses concern that ERS carries glocks carries tin badges, drives police cruisers and is a duplicate effort of the CHP. The difference? The CHP can book a prisoner. ERS can only make a citizens arrest. So why are they armed? Why hasn’t anyone confiscated their pistolas and cases of ammunition? How come it wasn’t even a recommendation from the SEC? Because the SEC said disband them altogether?
wearyant
June 1, 2012
Wow, GREAT article by Judge Daniel Goldstein. He sums it all up, making points that simply canNOT be disputed.
Hey, teensy Tani, that’s the trouble with truth. There are NOT variations of it. Read the article and weep.
Wendy Darling
June 1, 2012
Judge Goldstein rocks!
Long live the ACJ.
Wendy Darling
June 1, 2012
Also published today, Friday, June 1, from The Recorder, the on-line publication of CalLaw, by Cheryl Miller:
Report on AOC Seized as Weapon in Budget and Governance Battles
By Cheryl Miller
SACRAMENTO — Citing a May 24 report that blasted California’s judicial administration as overstaffed and dysfunctional, a Los Angeles assemblyman has called for deep cuts to the Administrative Office of the Courts in the 2012-13 budget.
Full article is subscription access only: http://www.law.com/jsp/ca/PubArticleCA.jsp?id=1202556911529&Report_on_AOC_Seized_as_Weapon_in_Budget_and_Governance_Battles
Long live the ACJ.
wearyant
June 1, 2012
Wendy Darling, do you know who the L.A. assemblyman is who called for deep cuts to the top heavy, bloated AOC?
Long live the ACJ
Recall Tani
Wendy Darling
June 1, 2012
No, Ant, I do not. Perhaps someone out there in JCW land that has subscription access to The Recorder could answer that question.
wearyant
June 1, 2012
Wendy D, thanks for the quick response. I imagine we’ll all eventually find out, most likely here on JCW.
Long live the ACJ
Recall Tani
Jimmy
June 1, 2012
@ Been There – Justice Scotland resigned from the committee prior to the end of January. The interim report that was released 1) described the committee’s work and progress to that point, and 2) recommended that the Chief and Judicial Council hire an Administrative Director. Hardly earth shattering recommendations that someone would want revised or redacted. Ask the current committee chair if Scotland played any role in authoring the final report. Ask Scotland if there was an initial report that was scuttled, or that he refused to redact. Better yet, have one of the reporters following the story ask these questions.
Been There
June 1, 2012
Jimmy, you reference “the interim report that was released.”. I — and probably many more who visit this site — am interested in the SEC report Justice Scotland delivered to the CJ and which was never released. Can you reconcile your information with Wendy Darling’s above? I may be missing something but the “executive summary” referenced in Wendy ‘s post was NOT Justice Scotland’s report.
Justice Scotland was on board until he was shown the door.
Wendy Darling
June 1, 2012
It is correct, Been There, that there was an “executive summary” of Scotland’s draft SEC report that was given to Court Executive Officers prior to Scotland’s departure. It is not the “executive summary” that was included in the released SEC report, but a different executive summary. Scotland’s draft SEC report, on which that first executive summary was supposedly based, was not distributed.
Of coarse, the easiest way to resolve this questions, would be for the Chief Justice to release Scotland’s draft report. But that probably won’t happen.
Long live the ACJ.
Dan Dydzak
June 1, 2012
To Been There and others,
I have scheduled the depositions of Eric M. George and Carlos Moreno, retired Associate Justice of the California Supreme Court. I certainly will ask and have put in my document requests discovery for said SEC reports, including that which Justice Scotland worked on.
An attorney with the Attorney General’s Office in LA indicated that he would be counsel for the entire California Supreme Court and retired Justice Moreno, now of counsel to Irell & Manella, but, interestingly, not Ronald M. George. He further indicated to me that he would oppose the taking of any depositions of any member of the California Supreme Court, including Justice Moreno. I advised that Justice Moreno’s deposition was set and that, certainly, I would proceed to take depositions of Moreno and other Justices. None of the CA Supreme Court is above the law and I indicated that I wanted the deposition of CJ Tani Cantil-Sakauye, among others. There is no reasonable basis in law or law for not allowing basic discovery, whether they are judges or not.
Kudos to Judge Goldstein and others for being honest and straightforward. It is refreshing that there is a honest, straight shooter jurist on the San Diego Bench. I have had cases in front of fine Alliance judges such as Judge Dukes of Pomona Superior Court, and they are beyond reproach.
It is further a good sign that many mainstream reporters are doing detailed stories on the AOC mess.
Keep up the good work, Judicial Council Watcher.
Wendy Darling
June 1, 2012
Members of the Judicial Council, the Chief Justice, and judges in general, have no immunity for depositions, or other legal proceedings, for actions they take in an administrative capacity.
Long live the ACJ.
Dan Dydzak
June 1, 2012
To Ms. Darling’s recent comment,
I certainly intend to DEFINITELY get that “draft” report, and, if it is not provided, file a motion to compel with, if necessary, a request for sanctions. Discovery MANDATES that same be provided.
JusticeCalifornia
June 2, 2012
JCW, can I just say I love the title of this post. Absolutely brilliant.