09-11-07 Case Presentation #1 – Samaan v Zernik (SC087400)

Modified Nov 8, 2009

09-11-07 Case Presentation #1 – Samaan v Zernik (SC087400)

Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, West District

Notice:

1) This record is incomplete.

2) Individuals, corporations, and government agencies named in this record in what a lay-person would term "widespread corruption" were provided initial notice on November 7, 2009. This record may be further modified with no further notice. However, the latest version is posted on blog: http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/

Executive Summary

Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) was and is misrepresented as a real estate case (2005 to this date), purported to be matter litigated at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, pursuant to California Law. Bank of America Corporation (BAC) and its subsidiary Countrywide Financial Corporation (CFC) were and are at the heart of this matter. Opinion letters by nationally acclaimed fraud experts established Samaan v Zernik as a case of real estate fraud disguised as litigation of the Superior Court.

Detailed review of events and records under this caption and the closely related caption of Galdjie v Darwish (SC052737) provided credible evidence of material deficiencies in the management and integrity of the Superior Court of California, which led to the allegations that these two captions, and other captions as well, were part of the Equity/Enterprise Track of the Court. One of the captions, which is alleged as part of the same Equity/Enterprise Track, is Marina v LA County (BS109420) – under which Atty Richard Fine is falsely jailed for over half a year with no records at all to support his arrest, booking, and jailing.

Conditions prevailing in Los Angeles County Superior Court led to the false imprisonments of thousands of persons for over a decade, as documented in official Rampart-scandal reports. This case also documented the penetration of criminal elements into the highest level of management of Bank of America Corporation following the merger with Countrywide Financial Corporation, therefore, posing extreme risk to financial systems.

The deficiencies discussed in this paper were previously brought for review by the U.S. government. Furthermore, members of U.S. Congress issued inquiries pertaining to this case in August 2008. The most senior U.S. in Dept of Justice and FBI provided to U.S. Congress false and deliberately misleading responses. It is therefore concluded that U.S. Government is not willing, ready, or able to address these issues. It is proposed that concerted international efforts are needed to address Human Rights violations of historic proportions, and extreme risks to stability of financial markets world-wide.

David Pasternak, Sandor Samuels, and Terry Friedman (L-R), the three are deemed as holding primary responsibility for the ongoing fraud that is Samaan v Zernik today. All three held the most senior positions at House of Justice – Bet Tzedek.

A. Case Description

Real estate fraud was opined by nationally acclaimed fraud experts in what is disguised as litigation at the Superior Court of California – in fact – a case of the Equity/Enterprise Track, instigated by Countrywide Financial Corporation and one of its “Loan Originators”, and continued to this date – by Bank of America Corporation.

Real estate litigation, on a cause of action of Specific Performance in equity rights, or Damages per statutory law purported to be conducted pursuant to California Law. Complaint was purportedly filed in October 2005 at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, stemming from a dispute over a 2004 uniform California Residential Purchase Agreement and Escrow Instruction pertaining to Defendant's residence. Defendant Joseph Zernik claimed that the case could not be reasonably deemed a true case of the Superior Court of California. None of the judges (some 10 were involved) was duly assigned, as required by law, neither were the false "Referee" and false "Receiver" appointed as required by law. Such judges and judicial officers refused to follow California or U.S. law in the conduct of such litigation.

The August 2007 purported Summary Judgment was false on its face, and was never entered. Likewise, it was never deemed valid by the court itself. However, the court purported to execute the judgment through the issuance of (1) August 30, 2007 false on its face Minute Order Appointing Retired Judge Gregory O’Brien Referee, and (2) November 9, 2007 false on its face Order Appointing Atty Pasternak Receiver. Defendant recognized the fraud inherent in the litigation months earlier, and refused to cooperate. The court then threaten force - unlawful, but credible, through another false on its face order - for the Sheriff to displace Defendant from his own home. Grant Deeds were then issued by the Court on Defendant's residence, which were opined as fraud by FBI veteran - arguably the most decorated alive.

The court purported to sell the property in December 2007 for $1.8 millions, over half of which was Defendant's equity. California law requires distribution of such funds within 30 day. To this date - November 2009, the court is holding Defendant's purported proceeds from a purported sale of the property, with no basis in the law at all. Much of the proceeds was expanded over the past two years in transactions that were alleged as money laundering.

Defendant alleged various criminalities by Countrywide Financial Corporation (CFC) prior to July 1, 2008, and Bank of America Corporation (BAC) – under the guidance of Sandor Samuels – Associate General Counsel of BAC, and prior to that – Chief Legal Officer of CFC. CFC and later BAC have appeared in this case since July 2007, under false and deliberately misleading party designations, through false and deliberately misleading representation by Bryan Cave, LLP, produced a large volume of false and deliberately misleading banking records, filed false and deliberately misleading declarations, and falsely moved the Court in actions that were deliberately designed to obstruct and pervert justice.

Samaan v Zernik and the closely related case of Galdjie v Darwish (SC052737) provided credible evidence of material deficiencies at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, as litigations that were conducted as part of the Enterprise/Equity Track of the Racket at the Superior Courts of California, County of Los Angeles. The best direct evidence in support of such serious allegations included, but was not limited to:

1. In both Samaan v Zernik and Galdjie v Darwish, denial of public access to court records - to inspect and to copy - prevented independent confirmation of these cases as matters litigated at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, outside of the purported case files themselves. Such denial of access to public records prevailed at this Court for the past 25 years, including, but not limited to denial of public access to Index of All Cases, Calendars of the Courts, Registers of Actions, and Books of Judgments. Concomitant with such denial of public access to court records, the Clerk of the Court, John A Clarke, and the Presiding Judges of the Court – Stephen Czuleger and Charles McCoy - repeatedly denied requests to certify these two cases, and some others, their respective judgments, and their respective judges, as pertaining to matters litigated at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles.

2. Pertaining to both Samaan v Zernik and Galdjie v Darwish, the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, failed to produce public, periodic, independently audited financial reports. Concomitantly – the Court refused to provide reasonable explanations for material deficiencies in financial management that were credibly evidenced in the two referenced cases, including, but not limited to:

a. All fees paid by parties to the Court in these two cases were designated as “Journal Entry”, whereas such fees in other cases of the Court were designated “Filing Fees”, “Motion Fees”, “Stipulation Fees”, etc. The Clerk of the Court, John A Clarke, and the Presiding Judge of the Court, Charles McCoy, repeatedly denied requests for reasonable explanations for such accounting practices, which were deemed in accountancy texts as cardinal signs of accounting fraud at system management levels. The Clerk and Presiding Judge also denied requests to disclose the final designations of the funds received by the Clerk of the Court from parties in these two cases.

b. Denial of public access to court records - to inspect and to copy - prevented independent confirmation of the registration of David Pasternak as “Receiver” of the Superior Court of California in these two cases, and also registration of the real estate and financial transactions that he purported to execute on behalf of the Court, outside of the purported case files. The Clerk of the Court and the Presiding Judges of the Court repeatedly denied requests to confirm and certify David Pasternak’s appointment as Receiver of the Court, and also denied requests to certify his real estate and financial transactions. Such requests were necessitated since David Pasternak’s conduct was founded on false on their faces Orders Appointing “Receiver” in these two cases. Both of these Orders Appointing Receiver were issued by John Segal. However, John Segal was not even a Judge of the Superior Court in May 2002, at the time that he purported to issue a Judgment, which was the purported foundation for the appointment of David Pasternak as receiver in Galdjie v Darwish.

3. In Samaan v Zernik, Countrywide Financial Corporation (CFC) and Bank of America Corporation (BAC) routinely falsely appeared for 2.5 years, and to this date, under the false, fabricated, self-designation as party titled "Non Party". In various court records, the Court itself interchangeably employed pertaining to these two financial institutions party designations of "Plaintiff", "Defendant", "Cross Defendant", "Intervenor", "Real Parties in Interest", and more – all such party designation by the court were with no legal foundation at all. However, review of the records indicated that in fact, CFC and BAC were never in fact listed as parties in Samaan v Zernik at all.

4. Coldwell Banker Residential Brokerage, and Michael Libow, appeared in this case, represented by Robert Shulkin – from the legal Department of the same corporation, and they were consistently listed as “Cross –Defendants” in court records. However, review of the Register of Actions demonstrated that they were in fact, an unlisted party.

5. “Indemnity Agreement” – for future criminalities- was purportedly issued on December 7, 2009 by the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, to Mara Escrow – a subsidiary of Old Republic Title Holding Company, Inc, to overcome resistance of the Escrow officer to execution of the real estate and financial transactions presented to them by David Pasternak on behalf of the Court. Mara Escrow, and Old Republic Title Holding Company, Inc, were also unlisted parties, and their counsel- Buchalter Nemer, PLC, attempted, in collusion with the court, to appear incognito in the December 7, 2007 proceedings.

Samaan v Zernik and the closely related case of Galdjie v Darwish (SC052737) provided credible evidence of material deficiencies at the California Court of Appeal, 2^nd District, and therefore, the Superior Court of California system as a whole, and raise serious concerns regarding the integrity of its current leadership. Evidence that supported such serious conclusions included, but was not limited to the following:

1. The evidence showed that just like the California Superior Court, County of Los Angeles, the California Court of Appeal, 2^nd District also resorts to the practice of double books – the Register of Actions that is publicly published online, is not the true Register of Actions of that court.

2. The evidence showed that the online Register of Actions of the California Court of Appeals, 2^nd District that was published online, did not even include a field for the data that was Date of Entry of Judgment.

3. The evidence showed that just like the California Superior Court, County of Los Angeles, the California Court of Appeal, 2^nd District, also denied public access – to inspect and to copy- to its books of court – Index of All Cases, Calendars of the Courts, Registers of Actions, and Books of Judgments.

4. In both Samaan v Zernik and Galdjie v Darwish, credible evidence demonstrated material deficiencies at the California Court of Appeals, 2^nd District, in the taking of appeals from judgments which were never true entered judgments of the Superior Court of California, where there was no evidence at all of entry of judgment.

5. In litigation of Samaan v Zernik, the Court of Appeals, 2^nd District, denied over a period of a full year, a series of some 7 petitions pertaining to the various steps in the fraud under the guise of litigation. Moreover, in one of the decisions issued by the Court of Appeal,2^nd District, the Court explicitly induced Petitioner to file, as a “remedy” - a Notice of Appeal from the November 9, 2007 false on its face Order Appointing Pasternak Receiver, which was never entered as a true appealable order.

6. In litigation of Samaan v Zernik, the California Court of Appeals, 2^nd District, accepted and entered Notice of Cross-Appeal, filed by Sheppard Mullin, LLP, on behalf of Plaintiff Samaan – from nothing. No Order or Judgment were listed as originating such Cross-Appeal.

7. There was no way to conceive of a plausible honest explanation of the conduct that led to the issuance of the 2 judgments and the listing of three appeals in Galdjie v Darwish by the California Court of Appeal, 2^nd District. Of particular concern was the published decision purportedly issued by the Court of Appeal, 2^nd District, from the first judgment in Galdjie v Darwish. Not only did the Court of Appeal affirm a judgment that was purportedly issued by John Segal, listed in the Register of Actions with no name at all, only as “Muni Judge”.

8. Credible evidence demonstrated direct involvement of the California Court of Appeal, 2^nd District, in the alleged fraud pertaining to the failure to list as parties that were corporation: Coldwell Banker Residential Brokerage, Countrywide Financial Corporation, and Bank of America Corporation in records of appeal pertaining to Samaan v Zernik.

Sandor Samuels Associate General Counsel of BAC, and BAC were largely responsible for the ongoing fraud in Samaan v Zernik, as opined by fraud experts. Sandor Samuels indeed entered in this fraudulent litigation "Notice of Person in Interest".

The ongoing real estate fraud, in Samaan v Zernik, by the Court and by BAC, disguised as litigation, which now entered its fifth year, stands contrary to claims of renewed rigor, or even competence, in U.S. banking regulation, and also stands contrary to Human Rights in ratified International Law and international banking accords that the U.S. claims to comply with.

This case must raise serious concerns both in the U.S. and abroad, since it was the subject of specific inquiries by U.S. Congress in August 2008. Specific responses were provided to U.S. Congress by the most senior officers of U.S. Department of Justice and FBI, and the same individuals are holding the same offices even today. The responses to U.S. Congress were false and deliberately misleading. Such conditions invalidate any claims of integrity or competence in U.S. banking regulation, even as the ongoing crisis unfolds, and even as enormous sum are diverted from the U.S. Treasury to the same financial institutions, which are here documented to engage in ongoing criminalities by their most senior officers and false reporting to regulators.

Inherent in conditions described herein are substantial risks to the stability of financial markets at home and abroad, which must not be incurred by workers and investors alike.

Inherent in conditions described herein, are extreme abuses of Human Rights pursuant to ratified International Law, and the false imprisonment of many thousands, almost exclusively Black and Latinos, by the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, as documented by official reports of the Rampart scandal and its aftermath. Widely reported, but never correctly interpreted was the case of jailing of Atty Richard Fine, since March 4, 2009, and to this date. The case was reported as presumable bias, or retaliation. In fact, it originated from a case – Marina v LA County (BS109420), which was a real estate related litigation, and is herein alleged to be part of the Equity/Enterprise Track.

In Sum:

It is alleged that the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles operated a well-established Equity/Enterprise Track, which was endorsed by the review courts, and which was covered up by the most senior officials of the U.S. Justice Department and FBI in responses to U.S. Congress on this matter.

Such systemic material deficiencies in the courts and in the U.S. Justice System gave rise to Human Rights violations, and financial institutions instability of global significance and historic proportions. Such conditions call for concerted international efforts to implement and oversee corrective actions.

B. Denial of Access To Court Records

Denial of public access to court records is alleged as one of the hallmarks of the Racket. There simply is no plausible reasonable explanation for reverting to medieval standards in the courts.

1. Paper Court File -

a) In the first two years of litigation, Defendant and his counsel were denied any service and notice,

b) In the first two years of litigation, Defendant was denied any access to paper court file. Declarations are available from legal services to this effect.

c) After the first two years, Defendant managed through substantial efforts to gain access to paper court file.

d) However, as it turned out, the court continued to hide "Volume IV Continued" where many of the false papers, particularly those by Countrywide were kept.

e) To this date, November 2009, no notice and service is practiced by the court.

2. Register of Actions

a) No access was available in the first two years.

b) Was eventually obtained, and is alleged to provide full evidence of the fraud by the court under the guise of litigation.

c) In particular, Defendant claims that similarities between this case and the case of Galdjie v Darwish, demonstrated:

i. That the two cases were litigations that followed a routine scheme, where judges were involved even before the complaints were filed.

ii. That neither case was a case of the Superior Court of California. Instead, these are alleged to be cases of the Enterprise/Equity Track of the Court.

d) The Register of Actions includes numerous false and deliberately misleading entries. Most notorious: While in open court Judge Connor dismissed Defendant's claim of malicious prosecution fabricated by Countrywide as "Conspiratorial Theory", she entered a false note, prominently placed in page 1 of the Register of Actions, "Countrywide Home Loans, Inc - Real Parties in Interest".

3. Minute Orders

a) Were obtained after the fact. during the litigation the court denied Defendant the right for service and notice.

b) Evidence showed that Plaintiff was routinely noticed and served by the court. Such scheme was documented to be employed by Judge Connor and Atty Mohammad Keshavarzi for perpetrating frauds on Defendant during litigation. E.g,. Sanctions fraud, which was the same as perpetrated on Atty Richard Fine in Marina v LA County,.

c) Each and every one of the judges who presided in any proceeding in this case engaged in the false and deliberately misleading practice of issuing unnoticed minute orders to paper court file, while invalidating the minute orders by "disposing" them in Sustain.

C. Special Issues & Alleged Criminalities

Attempting to break down the massive criminalities into digestible bites.

1. Taxonomy of Frauds

Given the large number of instances of fraud in the litigations that were analyzed from the Superior Court of California, it became imperative to engage in some classification of the frauds. Therefore, for discussion purposes frauds were classified as follows:

a. Fundamental Systemic Frauds –

Related to systemic conditions. The evidence demonstrated that these types of fraud were formalized and indoctrinated system-wide. It is not known, but assumed that there must be written records to support such systemic understandings. It is speculated that such writings would be incorporated into manuals of the case management systems.

Only a few frauds were listed so far in this class:

i. Equity/Enterprise Track

The agreements and understandings that were secretly instituted between the lower court and the review courts that allow the ongoing abuse of the residents of Los Angeles County through the mode of operation of the Los Angeles Superior Court.

ii. Case Management Systems

The installation of case management systems with no public oversight, and with no validation/ no verification of logic relative to compliance with the law are considered fundamental to current conditions at the Court.

iii. Passage of Sbx2-11

Signed into law on February 20, 2009, through the efforts of a high –priced lobbyist (reported at $60,000 for a weeks work), in violation of California Senate Rules – with no debate on the floor and no referral to committee. In was the outcome of (1) Discovery of the secret payments for over a decade to all Los Angeles Superior Court judges by the County of Los Angeles, and the extreme bias in litigations involving the County over the years, and (2) Ruling of the California Court of Appeals, 4thDistrict, that such payments were “not permitted”. This law will institute what is alleged as widespread corruption of the Los Angeles Courts.

iv. Oral Modifications of Written Real Estate Contracts –

California Court of Appeals, 2^nd District published decision in Galdjie v Darwish. This published decision is sure to guarantee the Los Angeles County position as “epicenter of the epidemic of real estate fraud” would remain unchallenged for years to come. It is also a published decision that demonstrated the collusion of the review courts in the alleged criminality that was the judgment in Galdjie v Darwish – by the anonymous “Muni Judge” - John Segal.

b. Individual Litigation Frauds

i. Long Term Frauds

This type of fraud could last for years in a given litigation, and dominated the nature of the litigation. It also required periodically additional short term fraud to support it.

· Statute of Frauds Fraud

· Entry of Judgment Fraud (e.g. Samaan v Zernik, Galdjie v Darwish, Marina v LA County)

· Sanctions Fraud

· Unregistered Party Fraud

ii. Interim Fraud

· Sanctions Fraud

iii. Short term fraud

· The filing of a particular false on its face paper – and its acceptance by the clerk

· Corporate Counsel arriving late – to have his name omitted from the list of those who participated in the proceeding.

· Signing of a Minute Order by a non-existent clerk.

· Signing of a Minute Order certificate of mailing and notice of entry, with no true notice, by the judge.

2. The Fingerprints - The Conduct of the enterprise through the pattern of racketeering activity

A small number of fundamental long term frauds are systemic, and entirely formalized, with full permission by the review courts. In that respect the allegations stated here are unprecedented. Such instituted long term frauds, dictate a long line of short-term and interim frauds superimposed on the fundamentals, to cover them up, or circumvent them. Since the Fundamentals are such, and consistent through the system, the superimposed short and interim frauds also tend to follow similar patterns in the various cases.

3. Equity Courts - The Fundamental formalizing of alleged racketeering under the guise of superior court litigations

a) Both Ms Barbara Darwish and Dr Joseph Zernik, had no legal education. Therefore, it was indeed

b) Informed Consent

c) Legality

d) Corruption of the legal profession

e) Equity Courts were limited in jurisdiction to ad hominem remedies and had no authority to convey titles to property

4. Denial of Access as Essential Prerequisite for the Equity/Enterprise Track and other miscellaneous alleged frauds

To be completed

5. Denial of Access to support adulteration of court records –

In the days preceding the summary judgment hearing, in August 2009, Defendant was particularly anxious regarding the denial of access to court records, since - initially based almost only on gut feeling, he suspected that his counsel, not counsel of record, Zachary Schorr was involved in dishonest adulteration of Defendant's papers. He therefore pressed for access, while Judge Connor was out of town, and was then allowed for a few minutes, for the first time ever - to inspect (not copy) the court file. It eventually turned out to be the case, which Defendant discovered in advance of the hearing, and alerted the court, but the court refused to allow any continuance, and even ruled that Defendant did not correctly identify his own hand and digital signatures, a false and ignorant ruling. Attorney Schorr wrote a declaration where he claimed it was his secretary's doing. This scheme is similar to the one used against Ms Barbara Darwish in proceeding before Muni-Judge John Segal, by Ms Darwish's attorney - Rhonda Walker in Galdjie v Darwish.

6. Oral Modifications of Real Estate Contract -

It is believed that to start out, the scheme was to follow the exact routine as in Galdjie v Darwish – that is – the court would find that oral modification of a written contract were valid. Needless to say, such scheme was also dependent on concomitant engagement in Statute of Frauds Fraud in both cases. Since Plaintiff in both cases could not be too specific at the outset in re: What the modifications were.

However, the scheme failed miserably in Samaan v Zernik, because:

i. Defendant never communicated with Plaintiff, and

ii. Plaintiff was a realtor herself, therefore, the original scheme - to use the false and deliberately misleading published opinion of the California Court of Appeals, 2nd District, originating from the Judgment of “Muni Judge” John Segal.

In such published opinion (see under case presentation of Galdjie v Darwish), the California Court of Appeal, 2^nd District in fact colluded in alleged criminality of John Segal by taking an appeal from such false judgment of a false judge. Moreover, the Court of Appeal, 2^ndDistrict also employed such false ruling in a false judgment to undermine established law – and to generate further ambiguity in real estate contracts.

The conduct of the Court of Appeal, 2nd District in this regard- is alleged to have created the opening for more real estate fraud in the County of Los Angeles, which is already "the epicenter of the epidemic"

can only be equated with the handiwork of the California Court of Appeal , 2^nd District, relative to the Entry of Judgment and Notice of Entry of Judgment. In a series of published opinions over some 15 years, the Court managed to take a simple and clear Due Process procedure and entirely ambiguate it. Obviously, it was a must, in order to accommodate a County that no longer kept a Book of Judgment, in what appeared to be clear contradiction with the law… Except - that the California Court of Appeal, 2^nd District, did not go as far as rule that the County was exempt from Book of Judgments sections of the California Code, but in Filipescu (1995) it simply stated it, as if it were true established law, that the County of Los Angeles there was no Book of Judgments...

The conduct of the Court of Appeal, 2^nd District, in respect to the Superior Court of the County of Los Angeles and its alleged racket, can be therefore seen as a long term, infrastructure construction/capital investment program for the alleged frauds of the racket.

D. Countrywide Financial Corporation (CFC) and Bank of America Corporation (BAC).

An attempt to provide an overview of the role of giant financial corporations in alleged widespread corruption of the courts, and also conditions that caused the current economic crisis, but are covered up by U.S. law enforcement. Records produced in Samaan v Zernik fully document the Underwriting and Legal Departments of CFC as corrupt organization already in 2004. The case also provided documentation of the penetration of criminal elements into BAC following the merger.

a) Fraud in subpoena Production

Some 400 pages of false banking records that were repeatedly produced for a total of 5 times in 2006-7. It provided the core of the litigation’s false claims. It documented in detail the work of Underwriting and the Legal Departments of CFC starting 2004.

b) Fraud in October 26, 2004 Underwriting Letter in re: Samaan’s Loan Applications

i. See above under Sheppard Mullin, above, the origins of November 2006 filing of a false banking record by Countrywide in Samaan v Zernik.

ii. The same record was later opined as fraud by nationally acclaimed fraud expert Bob Meister.

iii. In early 2007, Defendant sought comments from Countrywide on this record, which was also missing from the subpoena production that was supposed to be the complete loan file.

iv. It was the same record that was the center of alleged fraud by Sanford Shatz and Todd Book - In-house counsel of Countryside in March 2007 Meet and Confer

v. It was the same record that was the center of the alleged fraud in the entirely new subpoena production of Samaan Loan Applications, which Shatz and Book generated over 400 pages - for no apparent reason at all, in April 2007. In such subpoena they planted in the midst of what was falsely represented as the true 2004 underwriting loan file, records that were added for the first time in 2007.

vi. It was the same record that Sandor Samuels and Angelo Mozilo refused to either authenticate or repudiate from early 2007 to this date, and with that - colluded in the fraud directly.

vii. It was the same record that Defendant Zernik left in a sealed envelope with a request for Sandor Samuels help, in June 2007, in the office of Bet Tzedek - House of Justice, where Sandor Samuels served as Chairman of the Board, and where he was advertising at that time his personal commitment to fraud fighting, "Ghost Buster" style - particularly - housing fraud fighting. Sandor Samuels in fact solicited victims of fraud to ask for his help through Bet Tzedek. Similar solicitations were found on the web at that time by Angelo Mozilo, and were the reason for Defendant Zernik's approach to him, and soliciting requests for help.

viii. Within 24 hours from leaving the letter at Bet Tzedek's offices, the web site of Bet Tzedek was entirely taken off the air. When it re-appeared about a week later - it was older web pages from 2005. Sandor Samuels was nowhere mentioned anymore, neither was the campaign against fraud..

ix. Within 10 days from leaving the letter at Bet Tzedek's office, a letter was received from Jenna Moldawsky, Bryan Cave, LLP, which was the first false record in many related to the false appearances by Bryan Cave LLP ever since. A reasonable person reviewing the conduct of Bryan Cave LLP, would conclude that they were brought in to exert obstruction and perversion - to prevent Defendant from obtaining any response from Countrywide or Bank of America Corporation this opined fraud.

x. Atty Keshavarzi continued to enter this false banking record routinely, even after the time that Countrywide became a subsidiary of Bank of America corporation.

xi. In early February 2008 Defendant Zernik sent certified mail notices to key Officers and Directors of BAC, including, but not limited to such that held and hold direct reporting duties to SEC, and also - routinely certified No Fraud pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act(2002) in periodic SEC reporting - KENNETH LEWIS, and JOE L PRICE. Both acknowledged receipt, and Kenneth Lewis also returned a letter. However, neither took any action to this date to stop the fraud being perpetrated in court in Los Angeles under their names.

xii. Several times in later 2008 and early 2009 complaints were filed with the Audit Committee of BAC pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act(2002). The same record always featured prominently, with a request to authenticate or repudiate it. No response was ever received from the Audit Committee of BAC.

c) The fraud underwriting letter as a Recreated Letter

The fraud – per fraud expert opinion - in the October 26, 2004 Underwriting Letter, in concept, is the same as the Recreated Letters that were filed in the case of Borrower Hill in Pittsburgh Pennsylvania, in December 2007, and were the cause of CFC’s collapse in January 2008.

d) Alleged fraud in Restraining/Protective Order that never existed

Uniquely effective scheme - if you have a court that supports this kind of conduct..
The scheme is believe to be the same as in Hanks v Woods, need to review.

e) Fraud in representation by outside counsel who is not Counsel of Record

Representation by Bryan Cave, LLP, was and is repeat of the same scheme, which was described in detail and rebuked in the March 2008 Memorandum Opinion of the Honorable Jeff Bohm, Houston Texas in the case of Borrower Parsley (Dkt #248)

At the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, the scheme remains welcome to this date. Moreover, the Court availed itself to the same scheme – for representation in the habeas corpus of Atty Richard Fine- by Atty Kevin McCormick , of Benton, Orr, Duval & Buckingham.

f) Malicious prosecutions, sanctions, and threats of jail

In Samaan v Zernik along similar lines as in Marina v LA County, with serious sanctions issued by the Court, albeit - with no lawful foundation, and threat of jail pronounced by Judge Terry Friedman – presiding with no Assignment Order.

E. Judges, Presiding/Supervising Judges (Sj, Pj, Apj), Referees, Clerks (Cl)

Judges and Officers of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, who were/are involved in the fraud in the litigation, as opined by fraud experts.

Judges

1. Richard Neidorf - Recused per peremptory challenge by Plaintiff, which is an exact repeat of the alleged scheme in Hanks v Woods.

2. Jacqueline Connor - Allegedly instigated the case with Plaintiff's husband- a convicted felon Jae Arre Lloyd (formerly Timothy Lloyd Morrow). While in open court she dismissed Defendant's claim of malicious prosecution fabricated by Countrywide as "Conspiratorial Theory", she enter a false note, prominently place in page 1 of the Register of Actions, "Countrywide Home Loans, Inc - Real Parties in Interest"

3. Alan Goodman - recused citing "close personal friendship" with Countrywide's Sandor Samuels.

4. Joseph Biderman - the only judge who explicitly refused to participate in the alleged false litigation, held the court file for less than 24 hours.

5. John Segal - while holding Judge Connor Judgment invalid, he purported to issue a false on its face order appointing Atty David Pasternak Receiver. Later issued an order "like Unlawful Detainer after entry of judgment" for the Sheriff to remove Defendant from his own home. Was also the key judge in the alleged fraud on Ms Barbara Darwish.

6. Terry Friedman - holds the "case" for the past two years with no assignment order.

7. Patricia Collins - Engaged in an abusive procedure - issued "indemnity Agreement" to induce Mara Escrow to collude in what was opined as fraud.

8. Lisa Hart-Cole - In an ex parte proceeding attempted to allow attorney for Mara Escrow to participate n proceedings incognito.

9. SJ Gerald Rosenberg- supervising judge, West District, was directly involved in facilitating the fraud in litigation, as opined by fraud expert James Wedick.

10. PJ Stephen Czuleger - Was routinely noticed, allowed the frauds to proceed.

11. PJ Charles McCoy - Former partner at Sheppard Mullin, was noticed routinely regarding fraud being perpetrated by Mohammad Keshavarzi and Sheppard Mullin, LLP, but allowed such frauds to proceed.

Referees

12. Gregory O'Brien - (ret) - attempted to force himself as Referee with a false on its face Appointment Order, in what appears to be the same scheme as the one that led to the jailing of Att Richard Fine, where Commissioner Murray Gross attempted to force himself with no Appointment Order in Marina v LA County.

13. Atty David Pasternak - pretends to this date to be Receiver, based on a false on its face Appointment Order. Grant Deeds he issued on Defendant's residence were opined as Fraud by FBI veteran, arguably the most decorated alive.

Clerk

14. CL John Clarke - For over two years the clerk refused to certify any record in the case. However, as it turned out, he did certified Pasternak's false appointment order, which was used by Pasternak and other to perpetrate the fraud.

F. Parties And Counsel

The list was initially copied from the online Case Summary online, as is, in bold, and false data was marked in red.

1. Samaan Nivie - Plaintiff
In fact, it is alleged that it was her husband, convicted felon, Jae Arre Lloyd, Loan Originator for Countrywide, who instigated the real estate fraud litigation. It is believed that initially the purpose of the real estate fraud attempt that preceded the litigation was meant to launder funds from alleged embezzlement of ERISA funds of Skyline Funding, Inc.

2. Stein Jay R. - Former Attorney For Plaintiff
Initiated the fraud in litigation, left after Samaan's deposition, where she admitted most of the fraud, up to that time, and entirely undermined the false claims originally - the same as in Galdjie v Darwish - Oral Modifications of a Real Estate Contract.

Review from today’s perspective reveals that Defendant’s Counsel, Charles Cummings, deliberately avoided asking Nivie Samaan during her deposition any questions that could have incriminated her or her husband. Moreover, rather than continue, if he ended with insufficient time, he terminated and therefore protected Samaan from any further deposition in the case. And Likewise, retroactively , review of

Regardless, Samaan performed poorly in the deposition, and it believed that Att Jay Stein’s departure from the case was related to Samaan’s poor performance in the deposition.

In mid 2008, Atty Jay Stein issued what could be read an email death threat to Defendant Zernik (see below).

3. Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton, LLP - Attorney for Plaintiff

Atty Mohammad Keshavarzi-from Sheppard Mullin - joined the litigation in October 2006, after Samaan blew the original false claims, which were intended to be based on the false and deliberately misleading published opinion of the California Court of Appeal, 2nd District in Galdjie v Darwish - little noticed - but a huge opening for real estate frauds.

Atty Keshavarzi engaged in various alleged frauds, carefully coordinated with false Judges, false Referee and false Receiver. The Presiding Judge of the court, Charles McCoy, a former Sheppard Mullin Partner, was routinely noticed of the conduct of his former law-firm, but allowed the alleged perversion to proceed.

By the first week in November 2006, Atty Keshavarzi manufactured with convicted felon Jae Arre Lloyd and Countrywide's Maria McLaurin, a whole new set of false claims, as evidenced in fax email communications of the three. Such communications, where Plaintiff’s husband engaged in direct email communications with the Wholesale Branch Manager, undermined the false claims that Maria MCLAURIN had no involvement in the matter prior to 2006. the branch manager, approaches her by first name, and proposes that she sign a declaration that she refused to sign, in and of itself demonstrated the false nature of declarations that McLaurin later issued - as if her knowledge and relation ship to the Samaan loans was routine course of business. which could not possibly pass by any logic, and which were supported by misrepresentation of Countrywide records that could not pass by any reasonable person either. It was entirely founded on an unauthenticated, false, invalid, unsigned, unauthenticated, misrepresented, illogical Underwriting Letter - a Countrywide banking record that was automatically generated in EDGE, the case management system of the underwriting department , but was never incorporated as true part of the loan file in 2004, Judge Connor allowed Att Keshavarzi to enter new evidence in Ex Part Sur Reply - regardless of Defendant's Counsel objections.

4. Zernik Joseph - Defendant

Zernik Joseph - Defendant, & Defendant In Pro Per

Defendant Zernik claims that he has been trapped since 2004 by loosely organized white collar crime network, initially in 2004 – it was a network of real estate and mortgage fraud associated with Countrywide. However, by late 2005, it was replaced by collaborative network of the LA Superior Court. Defendant claims that from the records of this case alone, one could:

a) Indict staff of the Countrywide Legal Department including, but not limited to Sandor Samuels for alleged various criminalities that aimed to obstruct and pervert justice, and most likely amount to racketeering.

b) Derive alternative history of the so called sub-prime crisis, the collapse of Countrywide, and the merger with Bank of America, which is entirely different from that which is reported to U.S. Congress by law enforcement and banking regulators.

After never communicating with Defendant for about 3 years, Atty Jay Stein sent in mid-2008 an email to Defendant, for clear reason at all, which was interpreted by some readers as a not very veiled death threat. It made references to "Disengagement Execution”, payment for such job, and providing of flight tickets for after the job was done.

After Defendant Zernik filed notice with FBI in this regard, Atty Jay Stein claimed that his email had been "hacked".

Such claim could have been easily confirmed or refuted, but FBI never investigated threats against Defendant Zernik, and never provided Equal Protection, even though Defendant Zernik deciphered the fraud almost a year before it was consummated.

The first explicit death threat was issued after Dr Zernik managed to locate Diane Frazier, a former Senior Underwriter at Countrywide, who lost her job in relationship to the refusal to approve the fraudulent grant applications,. or tampering with witness Diane Frazier.

6. Sullivan Workman & Dee LLP - Former Attorney For Defendant
Charles Cummings represented Defendant Zernik for over a year, and deceived his client. Most likely he was intimidated. Regardless - he never disclosed to Zernik the fraud, and never filed counter claims of fraud and deceit. In December 2006 he offered to his client Zernik $25.000 in fee waivers, if Dr Zernik agreed to release him immediately.

7. Bronner Deborah R. & Associates - Former Attorney For Plaintiff
Served temporarily upon Atty Cummings departure as counsel on limited assignment for the purpose of subpoena productions only, since all subpoenas had to be repeated - Att Cummings kept records in a manner that was serious liability for his client.

8. Hoffman Edward A. - Former Attorney For Defendant
Served as counsel for only about two weeks in late august, Initially, he would not believe any of his client's claims regarding fraud under the guise of litigation. He insisted on reviewing all records independently, regardless of the time pressure. He then concluded that all his client's claims were true, and more. His client knew mostly that Judge Connor was making false findings of fact consistently, in a deliberate manner. Atty Hoffman explained to his client that it was the same relative to findings in law.
Atty Hoffman worked around the clock with Defendant to produce a Motion for Reconsideration on the Summary Judgment, in a timely fashion. Such motion was indeed filed on August 21, 2007. However, on the same date, Atty Hoffman appeared for the first time (and nest to last as well) for about 10-15 minutes in Judge Connor's court. Defendant met him soon afterwards, and Atty Hoffman appeared physically intimidated, to the point that an explanation was requested.

8. Green & Marker - Former Attorney For Defendant
Attorney of record for a few hours only, during which he engaged in deception. Much later Defendant learned about his appearance in in Galdjie v Darwish as Counsel for Plaintiff, where he was the primary instigator of the fraud under the guise of litigation.

9. Schorr Zachary D. - Former Attorney for Plaintiff

False data, Atty Schorr was counsel, but not counsel of record, for Defendant, when his office adulterated Defendant’s papers that were sent for filing in court.

10. Libow Michael – Defendant

False data – in fact – unregistered Cross-Defendant

11. Coldwell Banker Residential Brokerage – Defendant

False data – in fact – unregistered Cross-Defendant

12. Law Dept. Coldwell Banker Res. Brokerage - Attorney for Cross-Defendant

False data – in fact – unregistered Cross-Defendant

13. Countrywide Home Loans Inc. – Defendant

False data – in fact – CFC was and is an unregistered indefinite party.

14. Sandor Samuels – Chief Legal Officer, BAC

– not listed at all, filed “Notice of Person in Interest”

15. Shatz Sanford - Former Attorney For Defendant

False data – in fact – CFC was and is an unregistered indefinite party.

16. Cave Bryan - Attorney For Intervenor

False data – in fact – Bryan Cave, LLP, falsely appeared and continues to appear for CFC - an unregistered indefinite party.

17. Pasternak Pasternak & Patton – Receiver

False data

18. Olsen Christopher J. - Lien Claimant

False data – see also Liu v Zernik

19. Perry Rosario - Evaluator
False data

G. Related Cases

1. Parks v Zernik

2. Liu v zernk,

3. Galdjie v Darwish