Sunday, October 14, 2007


Sheppard Mullin is a large law firms with branches in most large cities in the US, and quite pricy too. Att. Keshavarzi is a young associate in Sheppard Mullin, and Paul Malingagio is the Managing Partner.

Samaan, who bounced twice a check for $10,000 in September of 2004, and with that made a first mark on that botched transaction. But by some estimates, she is said to have spent now over $600.000 in legal fees.

How can it be?

Doesn't it defy logic?

in pro per!
in LA!

October 14, 2007

Mr Malingagio, Managing Partner
Sheppard, Mullin, et al
Los Angeles

Mr Malingagio:

Please respond by Monday, October 15, 2007, 5:00pm, pursuant to CCP 128.7, to my request (attached) that you withdraw offending filings by Keshavarzi and Mussig in Samaan v Zernik:
a) Ex parte application of October 11, 2007
b) Motion for Summary Judgment of August 9, 2007

I know that the natural instinct is to circle the wagon. But there is also the possibility of seriously considering the claims in the attached letter, and then reacting differently.

I am copying here a few of the first and last lines:

Review (attached) shows that so far 4 judges presiding in Samaan v Zernik have been recused or disqualified, another judge resigned as referee. And then you have the neutral agency, ADR - resigned as well, stating:

“…shall decline any further reference as to this case.”

In addition, the current position of Bryan Cave LLP is unusual - I have received no substitution of attorney note from them,but they abruptly stopped responding to any communications regarding Samaan v Zernik, stating:

“We decline to get further involved in this matter.”

1) None of this would have happened unless Keshavarzi, an extremely dishonest counsel, had met Judge Connor, a uniquely corrupt judge, in Samaan v Zernik, a case involving a dazzling, unique combination of mind-boggling acts of fraud and deceit of multiple types, by Samaan, Parks, and Countrywide, against Zernik, against the US government, and also against each other!

A sample fraud, which constitutes a small fraction of the whole, to whet your appetites:
2) In my opposition to Countrywide's motion to gag me, I mentioned a specific fraud technique, where Maria McLaurin was bypassing Regulation B using Countrywide's Edge (computerized underwriting monitoring) system, to the tune of approximately $0.5 billion per year of government-backed fraudulent loan around 2004! Mr Malingagio – through your taxes you too will pay back part of it! And this was a very small fraction of the fraud per year taking in the San Rafael Branch under the tutelage of Maria McLaurin. In its reply, Countrywide did not claim that I was lying, fabricating, erroneous, or out of my mind. They only claimed that my estimates may not be accurate!

3) Connor refused to notice any of the blatant fraud. In fact, she endorsed it! Proofs of the multiple kinds of fraud brought in this case were just a distraction for her - a red herring indeed! She was too busy with her own little fraud and deceit to notice such big ones!

4) This unlikely meeting of the twain - Connor and Keshavarzi - in Samaan v Zernik, a case fraught with fraud, was not a chance occurrence, but one conceived and sponsored, directly or indirectly, by a person affiliated with Countrywide.

5) The explanation for the plethora of recent resignations is that a judge who would match Connor in dishonesty and corruption, and would agree to pick up this fraudulent claim where it was left by Connor against her will, is hard to come by. Even a close friend of Sandor Samuels, Judge Goodman, eventually did not have the guts to do it! It took him some four weeks, and some intensive review of the case, but eventually he decided he could not do it!

This matter is very likely to stay with us for some years to come, through Senate and House Investigating Committees and lawsuits of all kinds and types all over the continent, possibly intercontinental as well! And years later - through research paper of the Federal Reserve... And the enclosed document would always remain as an evidence to your small role in this big scandal. In a couple of years you may end up on a late night C-Span show, but the question is - in which role?

Joseph Zernik