Bostwick & Jassey Sue CA State Bar 11 Months Before SB 94 Expires: How Many Red Flags Can You Count?
January 24, 2012 § Leave a comment
Update, January 26, 2012: we’re just a little curious why Bostwick & Jassey would chose a plaintif like Swazi Taylor to sue the State Bar, considering he is currently on trial for 27 counts of misconduct with the State Bar Court! See: SWASI TAYLOR, I mean couldn’t you find a more sympathetic character to play the hero in your pseudo-fight-the-system lawsuit?
We have to hand it to the State Bar of California – a very unique and “outside-the-box” strategy. Get a “First Amendment” lawyer to sue them on the basis that legislation is unconstitutional, i.e., SB 94, that says no one, not even attorneys, can take fees in advance of loan modification services rendered. But add in that that certain SB 94 provisions, “as applied and enforced by the State Bar, violate both the United States and California constitutions.”
SB 94 is set to expire on January 1, 2013. And since when can you be sued for following the law?
Come on; get a grip … no lawyer in the state of California is going to sue the California State Bar. Not unless they’re not interested in practicing law any longer. And why would they file in Superior Court if the case represents a substantial federal question?
The District Court has original jurisdiction over federal question litigation – oh wait, right, that’s where Miss Baldwin’s Section 1983 Civil Rights Case against the California State Bar was filed – that wouldn’t look right.
Any lawyer in California practicing for more than a minute can tell you that the California State Bar OWNS the judicial system in California through its powerful Judicial Nomination Evaluation (“JNE”) Selection Committee that works directly with the Governor to appoint new judges that will rule in the California State Bar’s best interests – particularly in LA Superior Court – Judge Carolyn Kuhl and Hubby Highberger Land.
AND MOST IMPORTANTLY … why would someone sue on the subject of legislation that that is due to expire in less than a year? WHY NOW?
It’s complete bullshit. The California State Bar is trying to limit its liability – plain and simple – so it called upon a “constitutional attorney” to spin a few records their way.
Stay posted … this should get interesting in light of Miss Baldwin’s lawsuit against the California State Bar currently before the United States Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal.