Federal Judge Josephine Tucker Acts w/o Jurisdiction to Deny Disqualification of Judge David O. Carter; Erin Baldwin Appeals
December 30, 2011 § Leave a Comment
Things are really heating up in the Erin Baldwin Civil Rights case filed last summer in USDC, Central District of California. Here’s a brief recap of recent events:
On November 28, Ms. Baldwin asked U.S. District Court Judge David O. Carter if she could amend her Complaint because she’d discovered important evidence about the Parsa case that basically changes everything. She also asked if he’d give her an explanation for why he had denied all her previous requests including major constitutional issues. Here’s the request: REQ FOR LEAVE TO AMEND
On December 2, Judge Carter issued an Order that is, well … a little strange. He seems pissed off that he has to answer questions from a pip squeak lawyer-less litigant. Anyway you be the “judge” of that, no pun intended: CARTER 120211 ORDER (Dated 12/2 but received 12/5)
Trying not to take Judge Carter’s insults personally, on December 6, Baldwin filed a new Request for Leave to Amend correcting all the problems outlined in Judge Carter’s December 2 Order: AMENDED REQ FOR LEAVE TO AMEND
However, Carter never ruled on it. In the meantime, Baldwin discovered information (with documentation) about Judge Carter that she believed was significant enough to cause Judge Carter to recuse himself:
(1) He’s a personal friend and jogging buddy of Judge Cormac J. Carney and Carney was named as a defendant in Baldwin’s November 14 Second Amended Complaint; and
(2) Judge Carter’s Courtroom Clerk, Dwayne Roberts, was part of a cover-up against Baldwin and her then landlord, UDR, when he was employed at the Harbor Justice Center in Newport Beach.
It’s all in the Motion to Disqualify below. Those two facts put together constitutes mandatory recusal. But nothing, no recusal, nada.
So, on December 13, Erin Baldwin filed a Motion to Disqualify Judge Carter. Against her objections, U.S. District Court Judge Josephine Staten Tucker was assigned to “evaluate” the motion to disqualify Judge Carter. But Judge Tucker and Judge Carter have worked in the same courthouse for the past 10 years; what are the odds of her ruling against him? Here’s the disqualification motion: Motion for Immediate Disqualification of Judge Carter. Again, nothing happens.
On December 19, 2011, at 10:05 a.m., Ms. Baldwin filed a Notice of Appeal of Judge Carter’s December 2, 2011 Order to the Ninth Circuit United States Court of Appeal. She felt like she was just getting railroaded and she needed to act fast to keep her claims alive. As a result, also on December 19, 2011, at 10:05 a.m., the jurisdiction of the case shifted to the U.S. Court of Appeal, Case No. 11-57210, set for briefing in May 2012. Here’s the Notice of Appeal: NOTICE OF APPEAL
Three days later, on December 22, Judge Tucker distributed to the parties an Order denying Plaintiff’s Motion to Disqualify Judge Carter. However, she had no jurisdiction to do so, because the case was already in the US Court of Appeal. So, for all intents and purposes the Order is void. It’s another strange order — so we’re posting it here: JUDGE TUCKER ORDER
The ONLY job assigned to Judge Tucker in evaluating the disqualification motion was to: Decide whether Judge Carter could be impartial with (a) his buddy, Cormac Carney, in the case as a defendant; and (b) whether his courtroom deputy’s previous acts against Erin constituted mandatory disqualification. BUT NOOOOOO … Judge Tucker goes all carpe diem on us and seizes every opportunity to make Ms. Baldwin look like a creep. For six pages she gives her personal opinion of Baldwin’s entire case – and get this – she never even mentions the courtroom deputy issue re Dwayne Roberts. You wanna know why? Because, drum roll please … Dwayne Roberts is also HER courtroom deputy. Zing!
Here’s the worst part in this whole Order — Judge Tucker had the brass ones to acuse Erin Baldwin of harassing litigation against “any judge who rules against her.” Obviously she doesn’t know much about the case or Ms. Baldwin. Since January of ’09 Baldwin has been the harassee not the harasser.
We put the Order out to the blogosphere for feedback and the consensus is that these so-called “Officers of the United States of America,” are trying to set up Baldwin to be deemed a vexatious litigant so they can throw her whole case out. What a crock. Would you read the goddamn complaint? SHE WAS THE ONE SUED 18 TIMES IN 3 YRS, how could she be a vexatious litigant?
If you knew jack – you’d know this present case IS THE ONLY lawsuit she’s ever filed. Wake up, you’re dreamin’ - it ain’t gonna work. Here are the first eight cases and this doesn’t even include all the baseless criminal charges filed against her in Big Bear, and all the cases after Big Bear when she got out of jail for 35 days on a bogus bench warrant issued by Judge Miller to get even:
1. On January 26, 2009, BALDWIN was sued by Defendant Parsa Law Group, APC, in Orange County Superior Court for defamation (aka, strategic lawsuit against public participation (“SLAPP”)), Case No. 30-2009-001177552, Judge Franz E. Miller presiding, attorneys for Parsa Law Group were Burkhalter, Kessler, Goodman & George (“BKGG”). On June 2, 2009, Judge Miller entered a $604,515.66 Judgment against Plaintiff and issued a Permanent Injunction enjoining her speech. No hearing on the merits was held. Not one false, libelous or malicious statement was identified or put in the injunction. The ”protected parties” were not identified. It is a friggin’ joke. And get this —- later, contempt charges were brought against Baldwin by BKGG but the case was dismissed in favor of BALDWIN. (See #7) Here is the Injunction: 2009-06-02_Default_Judgment_by_Court_with_Permanent_Injunction
2. On February 11, 2009, BALDWIN was sued by Defendant UDR, Inc. in Orange County Superior Court for unlawful detainer (aka, SLAPP), Case No. 30-2009-00244203, Commissioner Richard E. Pacheco presiding, attorneys for UDR, Inc were Todd A. Brisco & Associates (“TABA”) and the case was dismissed in favor of BALDWIN.
3. On March 3, 2009, BALDWIN was sued by Defendant UDR, Inc. in Orange County Superior Court for unlawful detainer (aka, SLAPP), Case No. 30-2009-00248999, Commissioner Richard E. Pacheco presiding, attorneys for UDR, Inc were Todd A. Brisco & Associates (“TABA”). On Friday, May 29, 2009, Judge Craig Robison ordered Baldwin to commence a jury trial deemng there were triable issues of fact to be decided. On Monday, June 1, 2009, there was no jury and Judge Derek Johnson granted UDR’s Motion for Summary Judgment.
4. On June 16, 2009, on the same day UDR unlawfully evicted her, BALDWIN was sued by Defendant UDR, Inc. (through its associate Public Storage, Inc.) in Orange County Superior Court for unlawful detainer of her storage unit (aka, SLAPP), Case No. 30-2009-0000276399, Commissioner Richard E. Pacheco presiding. On August 31, 2009, Commissioner Pacheco gave UDR the remainder of Baldwin’s property to go along with the property it had stolen from her on June 19, 2009.
5. On June 29, 2009, BALDWIN was sued by Defendant UDR, Inc., for the FOURTH time, 13 days after unlawfully evicting her and 10 days after seizing the entire contents of her apartment. UDR, Inc. hired Parsa Law Group’s attorneys, and sued Plaintiff for defamation (aka, SLAPP) Case No. 30-2009-00125305, Judge Franz E. Miller presiding, attorneys for UDR were BKGG, and the case is still active. But like the Parsa Case, on December 11, 2009, Judge Miller entered a $104,210.40 Judgment against Baldwin and issued a Permanent Injunction enjoining her speech. Here’s the Injunction: 2009-12-11_Default_Judgment_with_Permanent_Injunction
6. On July 13, 2009, BALDWIN was sued by Defendants Jeffrey Cancilla and Craig Laverty, for defamation (aka, SLAPP) Case No. 30-2009-00126004, Judge Franz E. Miller presiding, attorneys for Cancilla/Laverty were BKGG and the case was dismissed in favor of BALDWIN.
7. On July 14, 2009, BALDWIN was sued by Defendant Parsa Law Group, APC for Civil Contempt for allegedly violating the permanent injunction restraining Plaintiff’s speech in perpetuity (aka, SLAPP) Case No. 30-2009-001177552, Judge Franz E. Miller presiding, attorneys for BKGG and the case was dismissed in favor of BALDWIN.
8. On July 20, 2009, inspired by BKGG’s success, BALDWIN was sued by Defendants Eric V. Traut and the Traut Law Firm for defamation (aka, SLAPP) Case No. 30-30-2009-00126328, Judge Sheila Fell presiding, the Trauts represented themselves and the case was dismissed in favor of BALDWIN.
WHO’S HARASSING WHOM?
See the Complaint for the rest. But the point is Judge Tucker is nuts. What Baldwin does have, however, is a great case for First Amendment retaliatory and malicious prosecution.
We and many others really like Erin Baldwin and we are supporting and encouraging her to keep her head, stay professional and leave personalities out of it — but then comes along this pathetic “Order” from Judge Tucker that in a million years you would not believe was written by a United States Federal Judge appointed for life by the President.
Baldwin filed a Related Notice of Appeal to join Judge Tucker’s bunk Court Order with the other bunk Court Order from Judge Carter already in the U.S. Court of Appeal. When we get it we’ll post it.
Unbelievable. Keep the faith, Miss B.