reciprocal discipline i just got a note that we were not recording we haven't received confirmation that this matter is being recorded i say this because it's important that in the event that there needs to be a record of the proceedings it's important that we we do that because everyone is here today and because it may well be that we are being recorded we just haven't received the confirmation i think it's appropriate to go forward i don't think that there will be a need to have  any record of the proceedings i think it's fairly straightforward we have the exhibits we're going to have testimony and i think my reporting recommendation will set out everything that occurs and it is somewhat of a  limited scope hearing in any event so with that being said let's let's proceed so ms perry we have the remainder of the day today for the hearing  i have questions that i would like to house to clarify my understanding of the proceedings i estimate my questions would occupy our proximately twenty minutes the remainder of the time am going to allow you to budget as you see fed in terms of percent of your case welcome to make whatever argument you wish to make i do want to assure you that i've read the materials that you have submitted that are relevant to the reciprocal discipline matter here and i think i understand the basic outline of your argument here but i'm happy to hear you synthesize what you think of the most important points i do want to review very briefly the scope of what we're doing here today no there is procedure and case law interprets those rules and supreme court cases from one hundred years ago say that the judgment of a state court will be honored by our court and will discipline will be imposed here unless the disbarred attorney bears the burden of showing by clear and convincing evidence one of three things either that you were deprived of due process that you didn't have notice and an opportunity to appear were second that the proof of the evidence supporting the disbarment in the state court proceedings was infirm insufficient or that some other grave reason exists that would cause this court not to respect the judgment of the california supreme court all right so we're going to begin i think it's appropriate at this stage for ms very few to come up to know this is a wonderful historic court room and it's relatively small beautiful the acoustics here are not as good as one would think for a room of this size so we have set up microphones both at the podium here and in the witness stand so for all of us there would be helpful to use them so i want to begin by having the courtroom deputy administer the  from my review i think some of the witnesses may be testifying as to the same thing i don't want if you want to just run them in quickly but i don't want you i want you to run out of time and i want to ask my questions to you say has been for when and when will you give your introductory statement and then i'll ask you questions has that the matter of insufficient evidence the first case that the  review judge relied on was the conviction of contempt in july of two thousand and ten and the bar hung onto it for five years and one month before this statute of limitations brand the bar offer to private reproval was not public discipline with no discipline other than take the m p r e of the bar made significant findings in my favor one that it was not a serious matter two that my career had blemished up to that point or at least i had been just that not had not been disciplined by the bar and that i was candid in cooperative i did go on and was allowed to practice law and i know that in february of two thousand and ten i won a very important decision here in the ninth circuit that was published involving a vendor who works who sold to the department of water and power and the ninth circuit held that the vendor had a right to bring a free speech retaliation claim and that he wasn't covered by the guard case that he was not performing any kind of duties remotely related to  any kind of employment the second case that they filed on me was the elwood case i know you're familiar with it i just want to say that i think it was something like ten federal judges reviewed my work and one of them ever even mention being referred to a discipline committee and then your honor in two thousand and eleven and the central district declined to impose reciprocal discipline in the case that was the elwood case th case that they filed was that that was in two thousand and eight of two thousand and fifteen that i did not file a discovery sanctions and judicial sanctions and the bar prosecutor asked for a financial statement and found based on the information i provided that i could not there was a reason i couldn't pay the sanctions but still she felt that she had a right to go forward with the discipline  other question here because that's one of the questions i had now and that was that was in two thousand and fifteen but the sanctions occurred years earlier and imposed two years earlier and was there any time before that that you had filed any application or motion with respect to the sanctions about your inability to pay them the sanctions no i didn't file anything in writing but we had been called  up that is ordered to report on the issue of nonpayment of sanctions in november of two thousand and thirteen and then december twenty two thousand and thirteen and either michelle paid for my flight to discuss the sanctions and the court just said he didn't want to hear about it i think your honor has that transcript where michelle myself and miss campbell the attorney defending to confirm that he just for some reason the judge just money or bought the sanctions even though we travelled up there to discuss them up until the time that you submitted your financial statement to the state bar in twenty fifteen you hadn't you already answered this question oh no no i had you had your earlier said you know what i can't pay this sanctions because here's my financials can't do it no i did not your honor thank you all right and then as i said i miss him for twenty it's twenty thirteen we traveled up there and i'm just rather than get into the rhythm role i feel like i was tricked and i was going to discuss the fact that i could not pay sanctions at that time and produce emails  i don't know why it got canceled i mean i feel i was tricked into going up there and wanted to be heard and explain my financial condition and the fact that michelle was unable to pay me attorney's fees and it did not get h failure to prosecute and the federal courts including the ninth circuit and california both hold that a failure to prosecute does not emerge interim orders and to the judgment and the judgment specifically eliminated or did not mention the sanctions although miss campbell had an opportunity to man that that sanctions be incorporated and the only thing that the court ordered was cos of suit be tax against michelle miss campbell ceased all in forstmann action against me and so did the cemetery court and i took it to mean looking at the judgment with no sanctions incorporated into  it and then looking at the case law that the sanctions orders had been eliminated finally there was the issue of late payment or not late payments not filing some reports on time i think two  one day late one was five days late and one was three days late out of a total of i think nine and then i filed a motion that i have here asking to extend the time on the the additional requirements which was to take the ethics bar school in for live units and in these exhibits it shows that i was in frequent contact with miss far fan mark who is far fan who was a probation officer and brandon tate he the prosecutor and i asked him can you help me locate for live units  i was having bad luck then i found one paid for it in this calendar it fell apart but i notified miss far finn of that so what happened was i began when i contacted them  granted he says it's not my problem going to miss far fan so i went to four miss for fan she said we don't do that eventually she notified me i could take the the trust account school and that was three discipline because i thought that for live units of ethics it makes sense there's plenty of great computer classes on ethics which i took and i found out of sixty four cases and i'm prepared to admit them into evidence we did the research my clerk and i and out of those sixty four cases not one attorney was required to take both the ethics bar school and the  so that there was a stipulation that you entered into a right to do both of those things yes and i'll tell you why is i wasn't familiar with the custom and practice of the bar not to impose a four life units and i thought well you know he's a prosecutor this must be a custom and practice and it wasn't until two years later something that i started doing the research that i realize that as far as i know i'm the only attorney that was ever required to do both and i might add the ethics of our school was excellent but this for live units was it was very hard because in my experience typically you get one or two units when you go to an all day or two day conference given your practice for example i used to belong to california plummet lawyers association and they tack on always to their one or two day conference one or two units of ethics but to a found a brick and mortar for life ethics units i was just having a really hard time but anyway rather than take up your time now i have an a but quite a few emails back and forth it wasn't like i was a slacker i was really trying to find it and i notified miss far fan and mr cheney of my having a difficult time and doing doing so on the issue of denial of due process i was very clear and the prosecutor was intimately aware of my situation because she told the settlement that i'm living mostly on social security not getting many but in any event that was her view and so i asked the court please to work with me because i'm trying to keep these cases all together i did not have a whole lot of cases but they all required a lot of work and she wouldn't do it although she was well aware of my being a solo practitioner and then i would end up taking cases in family court that really ate up my time but the mothers need help in family court and then finally with respect to the denial of due process i had made it very clear so i thought in my testimony that i had even though i hadn't filed the written opposition in the  malpractise fraud case i have been guaranteed oral argument and i didn't get it and then the sanctions were imposed even though the only reason for continuing the hearing on the motion for sanctions was at my request and the judge was kind enough to do it but we gots i got switched from the judge who was willing to say you can have oral argument even though you didn't file a written opposition and knowing my experience with that particular judge i do not believe i would have had the sanctions imposed finally just very briefly i just want to touch on a little bit of this irreparable harm should have taken action to communicate with the ninth circuit but i didn't know what to do and they got dismiss but these mothers have shearers of domestic violence case you'll hear briefly from her han sexual abuse case she wanted very much to appear but she has some medical problems miss ellison is here to tell briefly her story of the irreparable harm without having me to represent her and then jamie the door of the domestic violence victim and then there's others who will address the irreparable harm if i can't practice at least in the ninth circuit and you know  you mention in your papers say you were having some kind of feeling poorly medical issues exhaustion whatever did you provide any medical evidence with your motion for i believe and i believe the record shows that there was a continuance granted men trial speakers you needed to attend a client's mediation correct no i think know my recollection is that was mr pierce mediation but we finished argument but i didn't bother making my argument because i knew you you think there was no continuance granted mid trial no i think the only my recollection and you know i will go with the record but my recollection was she sped up everything we did the closings in the morning there were a number of people there one of four he and his partner drove me to the mediation for elizabeth of europe but i don't think we got i don't recollect to arabia wrong on that but i thought she set the here in and said we'll do it in the morning and then we'll see how everything happens and maybe you can get your mediation is what i recall like but i could be wrong on that so now let's go back to the requests for continuous on the first day in that who was what was the prejudice the prejudice what well my position is is that the code the business and professional code states that the prosecutor has to provide all expel the tory evidence and i was asking her to get it and i it was the fact that i was trying to juggle everything that was going on and it was one of those things that simply slipped through the cracks of  myself in my own defense also your honor is i tried to order the transcript and you have to send an e mail to i have to check the cemetery rules but i tried to order the transcript myself at a letter later date they just never responded and so my feeling is that my client i've been totally shut out of cemetery and they're not about  to help me out in any way and then i asked betsy campbell if she had you have evidence in here that you tried to obtain the transcripts for the hearing the july twenty third hearing or the voice mail remember to the record by judge a book called it was an e mail request and and i have also you in these materials that you submitted this antitrust complaint that you filed rights dismiss you say somewhere in there i think that you recently made from march this year was this is the time that you were filing your petition for review in the supreme court goes after after so what were you expecting to do with this well primarily it provided to you he said here i want to provide it to the california supreme court where i see to the center of this event in the ninth circuit for the petition for review and so let's say you got the transcript what would the transcripts have said that would have helped you he would let me make viral argument that he wouldn't let you make your that mrs kemble already had the information she injected me into a proceeding when i was only the lawyer i was not a met witness to all the malpractise and fraud that mr visited on my client and  and two more questions along those lines and i said why are you doing this you're only what has to have anything to do with this betsy you are humiliating my client and me and i'm not answering them and i did not move for a protective order because i was handling something like i don't know four cases with these mothers it's like one thing leads to another and i was hoping she would listen to reason and she didn't so she brought the motion i should have filed in opposition and i didn't but nonetheless use its name judge a book showed compassion it was willing to hear my argument without the written opposition and  i would have said look i think she should be sanctioned and i'm willing to forgive it let's just move on and strike her her in iraq but hold on a second something is this in the about this ok and that is you're making a very compelling strong argument here that it was improper to i can feel the believe it's very strongly in intensely how could you not have filed a written opposition if you feel so strongly about it that's the way lawyers operate right there's a motion and an opposition a motion that's unopposed there's no opposition it's granted typically it's like a default right so here you have a very strong position that you're telling me today but you didn't file a written opposition so you're kind of hoping maybe that you'll get an opportunity later down the line to make a written plead for mercy because you have defaulted on making your opposition that's come in the way i'm hearing this you know working itself out i missing something here well yes because i called judge it was judge book buchwald and i said look i have an in effect i said i haven't filed a written opposition but i would like an opportunity to make the oral argument and he agreed to it yeah but ok that kind of misses the point that i'm making which is how could you not file a written opposition i didn't because of all of the cases that i was juggling for michelle and i didn't file a written written opposition but she was on the line here to write not just you you had an obligation as a lawyer right not just to yourself and your own reputation as a lawyer but also to your client exactly right  to explore a little bit something you said earlier in your statement about this notion that your belief legally that the sanctions that were imposed were  disappeared even cerate is no longer a factor and i'm puzzled by the legal theory behind that here was it was in the course of discovery discovery sanctions are fairly common in litigation right they're not unheard of and you know i'm unaware that they go away just because here are not really she stated in the final judgment in the case and in my experience as a living gator and what i've seen is when a sanction is imposed in a discovery thing it's  there and the only way to get rid of it is you have to move to vacate the sanctions they are effective when ordered to be paid and so you're you're asserting here that there's some legal theory under which they would know that they were somehow vacated or rescinded by not being in the final judgment and i'm wondering whether the authority that you're a lying on is that all the while at least i think it's federal circuit's along with california say that if it's a judgement based on the failure of the plaintiff to prosecute the case which i along with california is that when it's a dismissal based on the failure of the plaintiff to prosecute the case and it becomes a judgment the orders are not the interim words and i merged into that kind of judgment now obviously  it probably is a plague of all to the plaintiffs but in this circumstance i thought the only reason he entered it was to get rid of the sanctions because i couldn't figure out why he would do failure to prosecute when she had gotten her order for summary judgment there was nothing left to prosecute your honor this is the order that said in addition to the summary judgment that was already ordered bright february yeah i'm also dismissing this for failure to prosecute within two years or right and then he ordered only costs of suit to be tax against michele and not you know nothing to do with me or the sanctions when i saw that i thought ok you have any authority in the case that has held that the sanctions it to any of them deal with sanctions no they talk about interim orders and this is the reason this is an interim order your honor that was not an interim non appealable order some sorry interim non appeal  orders and the discovery sanctions were less than five thousand so under code of civil procedure nine twelve whatever it is i couldn't take an immediate appeal on the sanctions so i'm assuming if they're not merged for purposes of the plaintive how could they be merged for purpose of the defendant to try and enforce them but i'm going also on the conduct of the court and miss campbell she hasn't recorded anything against me and prosecutor i thought why is he doing that because he's got a summary judgment that clearly gives judgment did it the judgment says it's failure to prosecute the reference the order but it's not based the judgment it's not based on the summary judgment so really i don't know i thought it was he was trying to help me out that's all or why would you know i'd be extra cautious about meeting deadlines that involve potential disciplinary matters down probate probation reports three of them may well i realize only a day or two late in most instances but i would you're an intelligent person if you think the bar's out to get you why would you give them even the faintest excuse why would you not be diligent in meeting deadlines i confess that was not first and foremost on my mind i during well particularly in terms of meeting you know you referred to the review department's decision as written by judge purcell and i didn't see any indication that it was her there were three judges do you have any is there any basis for saying that it either was your impression ok that may be but i believe i got my order your honor saying that it started on the three judge panel and then judge john recused himself so i had the if you get the oral argument kind of let it and she's the one that you know up to september fifteenth twenty fifteen the only thing on the table was a suspension and then you have to get the right well let me ask you this and they were leading with you leading me right into my next question and that is about the case when it was at the review department and then the review department issued the order asking for supplemental briefing on the possibility of an increased level of discipline that must have come a somewhat of a shock and  why did you not file anything it seems like here your career is on the line and i know defense i mean no filing by i have seen lawyers put on the best cases they have attorney representation they present the facts and the minute she brought up this form and have complained about jane's fox i said this is it  and you are saying it looks like they put on a vigorous defense or so much more than i would want to present during the trial for judgment here but when she did that your honor i'm sorry i just thought it was futile clients to care for and so on and that's why i didn't do it ok when did michele for tina says that deposition actually take place this state board decision state that the outstanding discovery issues resolved by stipulation at the november can develop this a little bit more there is an agreement to save money on my plane fare for machelp to appear with miss campbell and i thought the agreement she had appeared once before the motion to compel was brought and i thought of course the agreement was that i would listen in and make my objections on the telephone and the court reporter would take it down i don't make a lot of objections it depositions but you know she knew she was represented by a lawyer and she playing that we didn't have that agreement so she didn't motion to compel to answer your specific question i can't recall the date but it did go for you appeared by telephone at the position and michelle from tina's names appear on the pic say she's live again and i'm thinking why is she bothering with these questions she knew more than i did i didn't even realize that the shelves in my names were being circulated on the sea and without getting into a lot of background what happened was back in november of two thousand and twelve i entered wanted to honor my appearance even though by this time it was like three or four cases from a shell but i thought she was really being picked on and i wanted to protect her so i went in there as a lawyer in her parents and i walked out of the l as well as michelle so they circulated our names i think she'd already gone with her boxes of discovery by this time at that hearing on the motion to compel i suspect one or two thousand pages don't hold me to that but i i know she had produced a huge number of documents for miss campbell so we weren't being recalcitrant on the you know getting things you know like trying to get her deposition done and i felt that  just argued you know i want to get into all the details but i felt that miss campbell had misled me and she said no you misled me she said i was ready to waive my presence no lawyer would ever do that and so i had an understanding that i could i would be by by telephone and they would publicize it you know so i could hear the question and answer and then she said no  they you can they said there is you can stand for the everybody pay attention so when you go i'm up here just you know where you'll stand you'll get sworn in then you can sit down and speak into the microphone and and look at me when you're when you're answering the question so i can hear ok thanks to your i forgot some housekeeping matters yes before i call the next witness could i move my exhibits and i'm going to provisionally had made all of them subject to relevance certainly take a look at all of them ok but you can consider them as before the court part of the record all right and then i have one more request there was a supporter cindy dumas who posted you know asking people if they feel they could support me and i said well just do it by e mail you know people have busy lives and so on and i'm getting she said well if it happens to produce a lot of e mails and what i was wondering is if i could submit those  judge sal no let us go to trial on the domestic violence claim against and tony yes and tony were maris was at one time your intimate partners that correct yes and you had two children two daughters with him yes regarding the dismissal of the county hernandez and got to go yes and do you know whether that case was dismissed it was dismissed because you were over here in sacramento in san francisco was there any other attorney that you knew of that would take that case on a contingent fee knowing the knowing the complexity of the record as you know what absolutely not and i'm going to interrupt and ask questions to oh yeah i'm all right my prerogative when i when i say yeah did you look for any other attorneys you know she had she had my case for the last three and a half years she had only when you when you how did you find out about ms berry i found out about ins and see if there were any other attorneys out there or do you i did rest with her i did them out in the field was extremely high i was a single parent with two daughters homeless from the abuse me if his honor would let me practice in the nicer you know all right and do you recall during the trial whether judge sauer allowed us to put on evidence about how do and you recall him saying that he was extremely good friends with them turning over america's correct and he called you crazy in a lunatic correct and his deposition correct and when i asked him at the trial whether he was friends with  america defendant what did he say he said he's no longer friends with him ok no further questions your honor ok just to clarify so this case was one in which you won a partial summary you went to pending a case of hear about the balk at the bar association is she i was out here in november she was laid in i'm no can you please extend she had to file a response brief and they didn't allow it so there was no extension there was no extension requested or granted in the ninth circuit did you know my recollection i thought she had asked for i saw an email requesting time she's not been able to attend or kind of collaborate with me or any other people because she's been under a lot of stress that i've tried to communicate with pat she's been sick sometimes she did she can't talk that i do ellison have you been my client this will start out that way yes i have and when do you recall as you sit here today the first time you ever contacted me i believe it was at the end of two thousand thirteen and what was the purpose of your contacting me the purpose of my contact with you was to retain a civil rights attorney and what about your family law case yes it was to retain an a in attorney and family law and what did i agreed to do for you in the family law case  you agreed to represent me in family court and what was the issue the issue was i wasn't getting justice in family court had you lost custody of your children yes i had lost custody of my two daughters and what was the reason that you were told by the judge that you'd lost custody the reason that the judge told me i lost custody was i made false allegations of abuse in order to interfere with the father's custody was that you know it was not now at the time that you lost custody excuse me was there a trial in custody yes there was a trial in custody did you have an attorney at the time i did not and i represented myself during trial and did you present reports documenting the abuse i submitted the reports that i had in my possession and i was unable to get a lot of reports they were denied for me did you try on any occasion to get reports regarding the sexual abuse of your daughter yes i did i tried to obtain a copy of the police report for my daughter and i was denied on two separate occasions now there came a time when i saw all the reports regarding your child is that correct that is correct you were able to obtain them in believe it was december of two thousand and fourteen and i know we it's a long list but can you tell his honor all the documents we were finally able police report in two thousand and fourteen which was denied twice to me when i was in pro per and we were able to obtain a a report from dr carpenter who is a child abuse specialist in the county of contra costa county and what about nurse did well the starters yes and we were able to obtain the actual interview and questionnaire and exam which was by the nurse who examined my daughter now the sted well excuse me was there a taped interview of your older daughter yes there was a taped interview for her forensic exam and is a move faster on our lead herd we've tried like twice or you tried twice and then i tried twice to get that taped interview is that correct that is correct and we were denied that we were denied and do you recall sergeant testifying at your custody hearing yes i do and he confirmed that your daughter disclosed sexual abuse by his her father in that taped interview that is correct now the student well the starts did well reports the carpenter report by the way dr carpenter is the go to person to assist the county in determining whether or not there was intentional child abuse against a child is that correct that is correct he actually trained the saarc nurses and he recommended that your husband be your ex husband be put in supervised visitation and he found intentional infliction of injury on the girl is that correct that is correct all right and then there was a social worker who documented the fact that the child disclosed to her outside your presence is that correct that is correct and she was on him or in that is correct doctor correct yes she's an e r doctor and she found physical injury consistent with the abuse the child was reporting that is correct and nurse did well did on the second occasion correct redness and yes that is correct ok and then the pediatrician reported that the child was disclosing sexual abuse to him yes that is correct and her therapist also disclosed and found her credible that she was reporting sexual abuse that is correct  and then on the basis of getting this new evidence i fell the civil rights case is that correct i'm sorry repeat that again on the basis of the new reports that we got which would be said well carpenter and most importantly the police report i said we need to file a civil rights action yes that is correct and you borrowed what three thousand to pay me to retain you yes i did ok now did your your family law case continue it's continued since two thousand and thirteen yes and you paid me about five thousand on that one that is correct and i've been representing you until i was put in inactive status for about three years yes that is correct and the other side disclosed that his attorney received sixty eight thousand dollars to defend him against a change of custody correct that is correct i thought it was seventy thousand  and they're taking half your salary for child support correct that is correct and you live on what six hundred dollars a month currently that's correct are you aware of any attorney that could have taken over the ninth circuit appeal unable to prosecute your case in the ninth circuit yes i did i mean prosecute well continue to follow your brief and go forward so you thought she was unable to do that is she tell you that because of that she couldn't she didn't te that if his honor would allow me to continue practicing then i would try to get it reinstated although it's been several months you did ok you know from the questions s i believe were i believe there was seven defendants one of them being i believe my ex husband one of them being the detective xavier  one of them being i believe the social worker caitlin brooks former in county  harm that would befall them a few are not a lawyer but there are other witnesses here ms bazley being one of them and actually gets the final  all jo swinney craig martin and bessie who i as i read this are talking about the bar and their experiences with the bar and other cases that are maybe similar or maybe not somewhere in the way the bar treated i not persuaded that that evidence is relevant to what i have before me yeah i just don't think it i understand that it might be relevant to your suit that you had against the state bar that's outside the scope of what i'm able to do here i have a  i'm limited in what i can do i can i have the case law that gives me a limited scope i can look at what happened to you in your case i can make economic apply those standards to you i can't really go beyond that its outside the scope of what i can do to examine the fairness of the bar procedure and what happened to other people and i you know i may have my own opinions about that but i just don't think that can factor in to the fairly limited scope of what i have you understand that you know so i'm i'm happy here i would i want you to do is to hear all the all the other witnesses who who aren't in that west group i think she would also as to your unique capability to serve as an attorney but i don't want to go go into other peripheral matters about the state bar ok ok if you're limited to that  matter that was filed in two thousand and twelve and i'm also currently in a civil litigation with a forensic c p a related to my family litigation that is currently under appeal on an anti spam alright and how did we come to know each other i am aware of the work that was done related to custody and support issues i have a complex divorce litigation and i was unable to obtain fees and access to community property during my divorce litigation and i was declared fixations during my divorce litigation which has made access to the courts very difficult for  honor reference misspell unique capabilities do you feel that i offer something in law that is unique that you're not finding in other attorneys well i would say that the first one is her ability to take clients who can't pay her that currently and my own divorce case my attorney had been gone for sixteen months and i have incurred over a million dollars in fees to him and i have only been able to pay him about i think a total now of about one hundred thousand of that and i can't find another attorney willing to take any of my case or my civil case or my divorce case because i'm declared fixations and as soon as an attorney he that there's an inherent prejudice with being told that you're declared vexatious and barry is probably one of the only attorneys that will speak to me or has agreed to help me if she were reinstated and so the irreparable harm if if i can't practice would be what i don't have money to access the courts i don't have lawyers willing to take and i have called probably over two hundred lawyers for both my civil and my family law case two assists my attorney in waiting out orders related to a referee who was subject to state bar discipline i have a forensic c p a who i have filed a civil suit against and it doesn't really matter the merits of my case most attorneys will hear that i'm a vexatious litigant and unless i have a lot of money to be able to give them which as of january thirtieth i have thirty nine dollars left in my bank account i don't have money to pay a retainer and people like pat are some of the only ones that allowed me to have access in even my dissolution case and combined with my current attorney robert tenet who is essentially funded my divorce litigation for the last four years i please excuse the noise sorry about that all right i'm sorry continue have we ever discussed a new kind of warring work could be working together news co counsel anything along those lines yes my my family law attorney needs help desperately he has very little knowledge on the vexatious litigant issue it has definitely caused me prejudice in my case i have not been allowed to deposit money from sales of property my judge has cited that because i was a vexatious litigant my money couldn't go into my lawyers trust account i have been repeatedly appearing trying to address various issues either administratively or judicially and i and pat has always been available if i called her and she knows i don't have any money to pay her and i probably have litigation that needs to be filed in order to assure that i have parity in my divorce and perhaps current situation kind of prohibits me from addressing it so but right now you're disabled from receiving that help because ms berry is not able to help you correct the uncertainty right she's only been able to just kind of direct me but basically she's directed me to look for other people and i can't get another tourney able to help me and the this proceeding today actually concerns only whether ms berry will be allowed to practice in the ninth circuit so it would only this would only apply to you if pending before judge phillips and there's been a hold placed on it yes there has already and of course you're aware of the disciplinary proceeding correct yours or mine mine at the place well actually in the city which is the peleg unified school district in riverside county and initially i filed a lawsuit for you which was before judge phillips and  gosh when did well twelve twelve twelve twelve twelve and then that was dismissed without prejudice and i went to the court of appeals and then we refile the secor act that's correct and then this being put in  did they do they said oh i know the ruling was that even though it was just missile without without prejudice they saw nothing wrong with that and they firmed it i know it was strange it was affirmed and then you went back and file the new component right there i know it was very unusual but i will say one thing is clear the air that say control expenses because i'm just a teacher there it was important that i facilitate you in every way possible including payment of course and then there were instances where we had  we sort of have that in common the fact that we're in this older woman age group correct that's correct and you've had a very very rough verdes school district correct yes i have and so have the children and because i'm an inactive status they're taking full advantage of the fact that your case is on hold correct absolutely i feel rather broken at this point and just give me the background on this with this case is about what was the of civil rights issues specific to my students who at that time were snatched by the new principal for being in their regular classes to just removed and put in the lower classes without their i d s and special education law is very clear that this is something you don't do and that the students were very angry as the principal walked in and said well i'm sorry that you're that i had to do this and i says well if you're going to have the absolute right to do to be upis of civil rights each one of them can write something that needs to be heard by the office of civil rights and but they said no only more severe would be able to get them it wasn't that they didn't have the money it was policy made by a group of mis managers and people want to be in power and i telling you i am so said he who just want to be in power and they don't care but when there was this case brought under the individuals with disabilities act yes yes this is this was majority high school and put me in the continuation high school i worked from this three years and the good principal leads them and when comes forward with meds she doesn't know anything about special education and at that particular time she decided that the first quarter she was going to remove all of their accommodations well i said you can't because this this this illness and i and i sent the e mails to all the teachers to my principal with that didn't work because what happened was one of the teachers who teach is not adept at b but she teaches recompete personal question she is a new teacher and of course she had to comply with what the new principal wanted and she did it in the id and so she knew not have a sense of humor and when she confronted the p e teacher she was upset and she also demanded a written note that she had provided the p e teacher and  seeing will say silly things to defuse the situation so the teacher says well what are you going to do if i don't give you the paper back which you hear this i wonder how to play out if we get in front of a jury and francine says oh i know all tickle you they went to the district attorney to process the seventy year old person with a full clear credential and a masters degree devoted to her children because she  said joe she was joking all tickle you was a call to fight can you believe that and then what was the other thing that although just real quickly can you tell his honor what that principle is accusing you of doing now about running around with your shoes off i have been subjected to more discipline than i think any military person or anyone anywhere and i was supposed to be in the discipline meeting again i find monday and that's not going to happen now what i what this administrator said to me it's like going befor the same dogs big because when you want to follow a child abuse report in a school it's so different than calling c p s you don't do that and you have the police officer file the report and what they did when i was in this other room some city get this this was a class that should couldn't have been a class because i was almost as if they knew what i said and they came in with they are your words i didn't want to happened was when you were willing to give me the hearing i did a declaration to my willing you're entitled to a hearing but i never know you're willing to pay for the default and i appreciate that so much but could apply it to her with the hope that you'd let me practice here that it would spill over there and then i could resume my representation of francine have the issue then the order to show cause they didn't order show cause i responded and then i did that decorate and then she reissued and i have to get a response and by i think it's april fourteenth something like that did they say anything about the effect of this proceeding on their proceeding no circuit nothing that happens here as any other effect does although there is just like we impose reciprocal discipline and if we were to issue an order of discipline against him hang out you're shingo you're so good you help so many people but that's about the only guy would go to but he doesn't practice and then area he's done a lot of the work and  have you been a member of the california bar i became license in one nine hundred seventy eight because of a hard problem i chose to go inactive for a few years but other than that i've been you know active i've never had a problem since state bar all right and did you yourself experienced domestic violence during your marriage yes i did and are you divorce at this time or your kids raised her over the age of eighteen yes they are now have you had occasion to it did you ever i can't remember did you ever file a domestic violence restraining order against your yes i actually have a permanent domestic order did you look around for attorneys to represent you yes i did and what was your experience well i was hoping that is an attorney i would get some professional deference but what i found one as basically i was thrown under the bus people wanted large sums of money and they wouldn't even touch my case without large sums of money and my husband had locked up all the money so i didn't have much of anything i went to legal aid and i was told that my former husband had gone there and even though he was not eligible he had filled out an intake form and therefore i was on a permanent conflict of interest list so i was sent to the public law center they held onto my intake form for about six months and then told me that none of their attorneys would take my case because domestic violence complicated divorce had you ever her did you ever hear about me i've heard a great deal about you from other women who later on in my divorce you know it towards the end i heard about you from other women who are  mothers many of whom are going to agree to situations and the reputation you have is as a true fighter for women part of the trouble that even i had when i would get attorneys is they would take the money in run and they would often not even know much about their own profession which shocked me i never really did family law my background was a criminal and i was shocked by hell little the family law attorney is actually knew about  guy you had an excellent reputation with the women i know and they felt they you would be the one person who would go in there in fight for them and there were some women who lost their children to a violent abusers to sexual abusers often the kids would be taken out the country they would not know where they were it was a horrible situation and you are seen as one of their best hopes you believe that this community of domestic violence victims and other mothers who are trying to keep custody or regain custody from abusive parents would suffer reparable harm if i can't continue i police so because there are so few attorneys out there who are willing to fight particularly for domestic violence victims it's almost is up or second or third class citizens as if we had no rights and itself you know especially for stayed home moms as there were something like subhumans the way the way women are treated and i never would have expected that i've always had a great deal of respect for the whole profession my whole life and i was still so shocked when i found out what was going on and i'm only grateful that my kids were grown before i got out i go through every last beating i went through i acted as a human offer proof i just wanted to present him because of the racism said about you and i wish it weren't true and shocked by the allegations i don't know anything about that would have occurred and i very much appreciate your taking the time to come here today yeah and i as an attorney i think you can understand my reasoning why i really want to focus on his various case and i understand that fright the frustration you must feel about your treatment i i get it i get it i get where you are talking about it but i just it's just not something i can yeah but i also want to stand with my brother callie and i did review everything and i feel  i had a house that was taken away from me by court clerk only kennedy under the color of law she signed a great deed saying that she had received or witnessed money in exchange for a piece of property which wasn't true and she transferred a piece of property to my ex spouse as a sole separate property for no money whatsoever she said she did it under the color of law a court order the court order was that there were supposed to be no incumbrances no transfers nothing of the property and my children lost all access to that property almost immediately has it was filed and so i filed a lawsuit in the federal ninth circuit and they denied that lawsuit they said that under collateral stop all in race judicata that the state court had already litigated the matter and that i couldn't proceed in the federal court and our argument back was that they had specifically told this court clerk that you can't transfer the property you can't incomer it you can't you can't sign a grand deed of a property and lie that you would receive money for it when you knew you hadn't and transfer it to somebody else as their sole separate property that's a us constitutional right to hold onto  your own property so our argument was is that it wasn't under the color of law of a state order it was actually in violation of a state court order in the ninth circuit threw it out  did that originate in some superior court it was it didn't necessarily originate in the state court because the issue was once this court clerk had done something like that it became  federal issue it's a constitutional right to hold on to your own property or at least receive money for it so we went directly to the ninth circuit i'm sorry it went to the district court you're right it went to the district court they are the first ones that said  back with he's an appellate attorney had filed in the six district and said that the order that the superior court judge had made was wrong because i had a separate property interest i bought the house before marriage and the state court had said well orally that doesn't count and so they denied my separate property interest so we appealed that and when we appealed it the state superior court said too bad so sad you're vexatious you can't appeal that court case in the six district they said i did have a separate property an interest in the house they did it back to the superior court and said give her her separate interests and that still hasn't happened but i am state court  my question is when you were represented by counsel they were declaring you a fixation i was represented in the appellate court but not in the the family law court i was not represented oh it was a family law court that made you say she says yes and the federal court after i we argued about the fact that this house can't be illegally or transferred to somebody else without money the ninth circuit has also declared me vexatious now you have just met me is that correct i just met you through mutual friends i am also the proponent behind a california ballot measure to allow family law i live against you are losing legal rights to their children the right to a jury trial so there isn't a family law attorney in the state of california because i'm trying to shut down a fifty two billion dollar industry that will represent me  you aware of the work that i'm trying to do about getting a jury trial for parents regarding custody and we're working on the same page so you're the only tourney that i have left i mean what i came to heard today  is because my ex husband we have no financial we have no money left it's gone he spent seven hundred thousand dollars on attorneys we have i have four children two of which i pay child support for in their own college they work at target once a resident assistant a child that's in the recall is that i haven't been allowed to speak to for seven years and you know she just starting to speak to me and the one thing she wants is money and the house is gone my she said look this is an attorney nobody else will touch you this is an attorney that will touch you and i said great because i have an issue right now that he issued subpoenas not only against my records but my son's records everything so i in the state courts what you can do is you can the motion and when you do that it shuts everything down nobody has to give them any information so my sons and i did that in the financial institutions road just back and said ok we're not going to pursue you we're not going to give them any of this information i say great because there's nothing pending there's no child support there's no property left there we waive spousal support permanently and so he shouldn't have any of our private information because our private information shop and i have a restraining order against him he knows where we eat he knows where we sleep he knows where the kids are going so i filed in the state court i filed with the precise judge and she denied it so they're using that right now to say that under the color of state law that now all these financial records that all these financial institutions said we're not providing they're now calling me and saying we have to provide it because there's this order signed by the presiding judge that says that your motion aquash can't be heard and i'm saying that's not true but my financial records are now being dispersed to this person that i have a right to privacy he has to have a reason to try and get those records from me and my children and there's nothing i can do right now except quash and the time that all goes past if i don't have an attorney right away then what happens is all those records go in my ex's house my ex spouse his hands and these are even funds that i've been trying to save for my asked can you help me and the one said you know it's a seventy five hundred dollars retainer the one that's taken my case from the very beginning seventy five hundred dollars retainer i looked and said ok seal leader about here is the right sort of she is my attorney so she is your attorney but the only player that you are the one that decides when she's my tourney but only in the ninth circuit i can't i have no power about whether she can represent you in the supreme court or just recorder in the county that's completely out of my hands that's already been decided right now she no longer can practice law in california state court so nothing that happens here is going to affect that so we are in the ninth circuit right now we're on the ninth circuit or yeah if you were to have a federal case this soumik that she could that she was retained for and he struck the right of a jury trial for my client and after he struck the right of a jury trial which he later reinstated to give him credit he said from the bench the judge making rulings in the montage case said basically mr montalvo walks on water he's the best the best guy you could ever have he's a fabulous attorney and so on and so i began to was just ten years of experience with a very mediocre background but that's not the issue he says i over litigated the case so it seems i under litigate and i'm no good or over litigate and i'm no good i just wanted to share that with you somebody else the chair i was the president for a number of years and now i'm the policy director we have another president reagan's and executive director katherine campbell and the cole you had a co founder of california protective association correct yes and she's here in the courtroom karen anderson she's here in the courtroom all right and what is the purpose of the organization the purpose of the organization is to attempt to stop the procedure now placing children with batterers and molesters in family court we do research we do education and we do that because have you has the organization been instrumental in getting legislation passed referrals i'm moving into retirement at this point but previously yes and what was your how many women that you spoke to about this situation of finding an effective advocate for them i have to say thousands from all over the country and did you form any opinion as to whether there are sufficient number of effective advocates for this class of parents i did form an opinion and what's that right in your opinion will the community or this class suffer reparable harm if i'm not allowed to practice i believe it will definitely suffered harm because there are very few people that we can refer to who will take and he too has suffered a lot of harm by the the way family i'm sorry in contra costa county i'm sorry if i said santa clara i meant contra costa county but  what's admirable robot joe is that he did research your honor on the commission on judicial performance and  the union to discipline judges and kudos to john sweeney he and kathleen russell who heads up the center for a hold on a second you said was the lowest  n among them was mungo lowest in disciplining judges is that right is if i was reading his report and i think he said that arizona of arizona is i think four times more disciplined but he lays out the statistics so he and kathleen russell went to assembly persons in their area and they simply persons voted  to have the state auditor go to the commission on judicial performance to try and figure out why there was such a low rate of discipline going on and i think with something like two days later judge mills who's been facebook matters that were in the public record for anybody to read about his case and he said he couldn't do it and put him in jail and i think it's very very important limitations in this in this proceeding right and then the other one i just saw was the rejection of his complaint where he said provable forgery of documents by the opposing counsel one that's a bit his doctrine sure counted exhibit the witness potential witness for coming and thank you very much for coming on coming here today there's mr kay was a super lawyer and there's no question that he did everything by the book you know did the responses and everything and he was part of the reason he said why didn't you defend when she wanted more brief all right ok thank you well i do have that i will take a quick look at the materials that were submitted in any event so he sent it ok i did want to say one one word as are matters that are ones that are assigned to the state court system typically the dissolution matters custody matters most family law matters are handled in state court and as i hope i've made clear what we're doing here today that will not a fact miss barry's ability to canadian or practice and state court so no matter what i do it's not going to have any effect on that and so that's coming outside the scope of what we're talking about sort of the litigated in district court and then appeal to the ninth circuit so even in the district court even in the federal trial for what happens here today will not affect ms barry's ability to to go forward book before we leave i just wanted to get a final follow up from you on the status of your motion to vacate at the california supreme court whether this right any any recent activity that if you go to  i can be arsed yes and then on the antitrust complaint my understanding is that was dismissed for failure to pay the filing fee yes and is there anything further on that or are you all out stuff a lot of work to be put into cause of the wrongful death that was in federal court but i was also trying to juggle unhandled her family law case and her ex they allowed him to file one i know you could be quick on there but he files one thing after another and they he just hammers her and i can't abandon her and she was out of money so i continued representing her i put forty nine hours in to show his i went to every code and said she's  entitled to need space under two or three on the family code he's been violating the discovery code he's violating family code to a team which deals with discovery and family law and so on and so forth i spent a lot of time what they did your honor and this is very very important under i believe it's ten zero eight of the code of civil procedure you have to go back to the judge who made the ruling what they're doing your honor judge frankie judge still  now commissioner michelson was issuing common sense decisions he was quick he knows the stuff he's he's been a child support commissioner in orange county for years because he's a good judge they gave us this other michael sam from bringing a frivolous claim for eight fifty eight he won't pay me that so it's not just my clients are without money they have been financially abused and so what i do is i've been juggling juggling and i can't well i can't do anymore in seventy four years old so i have to figure out how to get funny so i don't come before you and say i was late on this chart and file a motion or whatever but it's just seems like something i get  i get very discouraged many times that i put all the scholarship in this hard work and my knowledge i've got forty forty before i'm attorney interrupted now at forty one and a half years federal and state court i just want to do a little brag unify could  i was in washington d c your honor i was a solo i couldn't get a job because judge william keene was sabotaging me because i supported i supported  the secretaries who back in the day before women's rights and we got going it was in seventy five i was updating the bench book on criminal law for judge criminal charge and winnie is secretary because i would talk feminism asked me to go with them to the executive director to form a judicial secretary's association because the rotating two year presiding judge would always select the cutest young woman to supervise these very sharp experience but over the hill when she was in her fifty's my god that was that's young for me yet so he started going after me and i agreed to resign and i thought no this isn't right it's retaliation so i file the d f e h complaint against him and i went to washington d c and i couldn't get admitted to the d c bar so who was the d c chair d c council for the d c bar never met the guy i don't know if he's still alive today i have nothing but good things to say about him he got me admitted to the d c bar in exchange for the dismissal but when i went for government interviews i couldn't get hired so there i was a solo and between one nine hundred seventy five and one nine hundred eighty six i have eleven reported reported cases all to the advantage of civil rights plaintiffs in the area of racial discrimination and i in those eleven years i argued twice in the u s supreme court in one thousand nine hundred eighty six nine to zero the justice rehnquist ruled that sexual harassment environmental harassment was equally as illegal is quid pro quo harassment and so i have a lot to my credit but i was often white because i was doing this all just judge robinson writing the opinion and he was complaining that i was late and they didn't care the time had come for that cause of action even though i was doing it with bubble gum and i mean you know the rubber bands and whatever wondering i don't have long straights i won't get into it but anyway i got to get my hands on volumes two and three but i was wondering when i submit the emails in the decorations i'd like to pinpoint testimony if that's ok from the transcript just say please really where are you when you want to make a further submission well know you have the transcripts if i could just pinpoint say i think this area of testimony