REQUEST FOR LITIGATION RECORDS FROM LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT

May 2, 2008

D. Brett Bianco, Court Counsel
Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles
111 North Hill Street, Suite 546
Los Angeles, California 90012
213.217.4960 facsimile
bbianco@lasuperiorcourt.org
By Email and by fax


URGENT- TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE - Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) – LITIGATION RECORDS

Mr Bianco:
I am writing to you again to inform you of the refusal of Santa Monica Clerk’s Office to provide essential litigation records, and to request your help in ensuring that such records are immediately provided, and that abuse of my rights pursuant to the US Constitution, Amendment 5th and 14th, is immediately put to an end.
This is a far cry from a request for “secretarial functions” as you termed it in your April 4th, 2008 letter.
For many months I and my counsels were denied any access to litigation records in “Samaan v Zernik” as evidenced by verified declarations by legal services providers who tried to gain such access on my behalf, and my attorneys’ behalf, unsuccessfully. These services providers are surely familiar with the arrangements for payment, pick up, etc.
In recent months, as always, I am struggling to obtain access to my litigation records. The Court of Judge Terry Friedman has repeatedly refused to notice Minute Order, in abuse of my Due Process rights, and has insisted that I have to obtain them one by one (and guess when and how many were issued) from the Clerk’s office.
To keep myself informed, even if after the fact, I try periodically to obtain comprehensive set of Minute Orders and Case History from Sustain. Such efforts have always been stalled and delayed. In the past two weeks I am attempting to obtain the Minute Orders for the period of Jan 1, 2008- to present, and Case History in Sustain - to present. After many delays, legal services provider finally obtained these documents from the Clerk’s office.
However, a third critical document is still missing. Such document was promised, but was never provided. Such document was to be a printout from Sustain, including:
a) The ID Number of each Action.
In Sustain – most often the number first appears with the Journal Entry – documenting the initial payment at the time of filing for a motion, and such number defines the start of a new register Event in Sustain.
All such numbers are omitted from all printouts that I have ever received from West District, Santa Monica. But such numbers do appear in printouts of West District, Beverly Hills Actions.
b) The Time of filing and Entry and Titles of papers filed by parties in conjunction with such Event
In Sustain – most often such are entered as Document Filed.
c) Calendar information of the hearing, or no appearance review in chambers.
In Sustain – most often such are entered as Events
d) Time and succinct summary of judicial acts in the action.


In Sustain – such data are most often entered as Event Complete, simply stating: Denied, Granted, Granted in part, etc.
To the best of my knowledge such printout is termed in Sustain Register of Actions, and it is a critical litigation record. The quintessential feature of the Register of Actions is the appearance of the register numbers. Other features may or may not appear in a given printout.
I was promised such a printout yesterday, and I made necessary arrangements for pay and pickup, but such was not provided to the legal services providers. I asked for it again today by phone from John.
I again ask that you ensure that I am immediately provided with such printout.
I am also copying Mr Klunder, Director of the Court’s IT Department, on this communication, in hope that he would help and shed light on the name of the most appropriate Sustain report that includes the information described above.


Joseph Zernik
CC:
Ms Avelina Richardson, Clerk’s Office Supervisor
Mr Frank Klunder, IT Department Director