Patterico's Pontifications

12/1/2009

Daily Journal Reports on Dismissal of Cyrus Sanai’s Complaints Against Kozinski and Others. The L.A. Times . . . Somehow Misses the Story. Fancy That.

Filed under: Dog Trainer,Kozinski — Patterico @ 6:17 pm

A reader passes along an article from the Daily Journal, which reports on the Ninth Circuit’s dismissal of certain ethics complaints by Cyrus Sanai against numerous judges, including Alex Kozinski. (Attentive readers will note that I first reported on this before Thanksgiving. Patterico: beating the Daily Journal by almost a week!)

The reader notes that, for all the articles that the L.A. Times has done about Kozinski, it has run absolutely zilch on this order. Indeed, a search of their archives reveals that the last mention of Kozinski was on November 14, on an unrelated matter. (Patterico: reporting the news that the L.A. Times refuses to run!)

The Daily Journal article begins:

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has dismissed a lengthy misconduct complaint against Chief Judge Alex Kozinski and numerous other jurists filed by Cyrus M. Sanai, a Beverly Hills attorney.

The article notes the investigation launched over the sexually explicit material on Judge Kozinski’s web site, and continues:

While that investigation was under way, Sanai filed a complaint against Kozinski and a dozen other circuit judges and six district judges alleging assorted acts of misconduct related to their handling of Sanai’s own civil cases, appeals and earlier misconduct matters.

That complaint was the subject of a Nov. 25 order by Circuit Judge Stephen R. Reinhardt, in which he found Sanai’s claims “frivolous,” “not supported by any evidence” or properly dismissed by earlier orders.

In sum, Reinhardt concluded, Sanai filed baseless allegations “and appears to have described his conduct as part of a litigation strategy.” Reinhardt cited that phrase in a 2008 posting by Sanai on a legal affairs blog called Patterico’s Pontifications, run by a deputy district attorney in Long Beach, John Patrick Frey.

Frey also quoted from a Sanai comment to another blog: “Once Kozinski inserted himself into my litigation inappropriately [by writing the op-ed column], it’s my duty and right to undo the negative consequences and turn the situation to my litigation advantage.”

Frey declined to comment on the matter Monday except to note it is unusual for his blog to be mentioned in an official circuit order.

Kozinski, through his attorney, declined to comment.

(Just so it’s clear, I didn’t so much “note” that it was unusual as “agree with the reporter” that it was unusual. He brought it up.)

I spoke to the reporter, John Roemer, just before lunch yesterday (nice guy) and indeed declined to comment on Cyrus Sanai’s argument that the Ninth Circuit had no business meddling in this set of complaints. The reader can make his own judgment.

Well, I guess this answers the question of who that mystery “complainant” was in Reinhardt’s order.

I had a feeling it was Cyrus Sanai! Don’t ask me how I knew . . . it just felt right.

28 Responses to “Daily Journal Reports on Dismissal of Cyrus Sanai’s Complaints Against Kozinski and Others. The L.A. Times . . . Somehow Misses the Story. Fancy That.”

  1. Andy Warhol said everybody gets their 15 minutes of fame. I haven’t gotten mine, unless you count the time the girl at Taco Bell got her had caught in the wall safe, but I think Cyrus just had his.

    Bye.

    Mike K (2cf494)

  2. Cue a mind-numbing reply from Cyrus in 3, 2, 1…

    h2u (147639)

  3. the Times doesn’t “miss” stories: they only report the ones they want told.

    after all, they *are* the deciders……..

    (except, of course, when it comes to subscribing to their rag, which is a minor nit they have yet to grasp. %-)

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  4. Store the glee, Frey.

    I actually still have not received a copy of the order from the Ninth Circuit, so I was startled to hear about it from Roemer yesterday.

    The Ninth Circuit refused to transfer my complaint in accordance with the order of Chief Justice Roberts last year. After that occurred I wrote to the Chief Justice, and the Clerk responded that the proper course of action was to file the complaint directly with the Third Circuit, which I did. It has been pending for about five months.

    What will now happen is that I will take the order up to the Judicial Council, I will lose, and then it will be vacated by the Judicial Conference, which will vacate the decision based on the Ninth Circuit’s refusal to follow the transfer order they requested from Justice Roberts.

    Reinhardt’s order was actually very helpful for me, because it substantiated what I had alleged all along–that the underlying issue in this case has been the corrupt practice of appointing the paid servants of litigants or business cronies of judges as judicial referees, and the Ninth Circuit’s fanatical dedication to ensuring that no one touches this manifestly corrupt practice.

    That’s always been the problem, and Reinhardt makes it plain; it is the accusations that appointing a party’s paid servant as a judicial referee constitutes judicial corruption which angers the Circuit, because it is a regular practice of judges such as Nevada’s James Mahan. If the Ninth Circuit wanted to dispose of this issue, all they have to do is issue a published decision stating that such conduct is consistent with due process; the problem, of course, is that is is flagrantly corrupt, and any such published decison would be reversed like a Reinhardt death penalty decision.

    What was extraordinarily gutless about the opinion though is that Judge Reinhardt himself declined to take any action. The problem with the section he cited, which concerns repetitive meritless complaints, is that my first garnered an apology and “corrective action” from Judge Kozinski, and my third and fourth were only dismissed as to Judge Kozinski because he had already been found guilty of misconduct by the Third Circuit. I thus am one of a handful of persons to successfully obtain a misconduct finding against a judge, even if the specific proceeding was Judge Kozinski’s complaint against himself.

    As for a bar complaint, anyone is capable of doing that; if Judge Reinhardt really believed there was an issue, he can write a letter. The problem, of course, is that any proceedings would further publicize what they want buried; that the underlying cause of all this has been the efforts of Judge Kozinski, Zilly et. al. to stop challenges to the appointment of a party’s paid servant as a judicial referee without having to actually address the constitutionality of the practice.

    Cyrus Sanai (311cd8)

  5. I actually still have not received a copy of the order from the Ninth Circuit, so I was startled to hear about it from Roemer yesterday.

    You should have been reading this site, then.

    I published a link to it on the day before Thanksgiving.

    Patterico (64318f)

  6. By losing, he won?

    JD (4dffeb)

  7. I predicted last week that Cyrus would appear to claim victory. What do I win?

    Cyrus – “it substantiated what I had alleged all along–that the underlying issue in this case has been the corrupt practice of appointing the paid servants of litigants or business cronies of judges as judicial referees”

    Can you point out where Reinhardt’s order does this, please? Also, you allegations of people being paid servants of judges seemed to be lacking according to Reinhardt.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  8. 5. I had better things to do that day.

    6. Here’s why this is a positive move.

    By the Ninth Circuit making this plainly void order, I demonstrate my theory of misconduct. The Third Circuit already ruled in L. Ralph Mecheam’s complaint that jurisdiction over the subject matter in his complaint and Kozinski’s complaint with the Third Circuit lies with it. Indeed, Reinhardt’s order CITES the Third Circuit opinion, demonstrating that he is aware that the matter was supposed to lie with the Third Circuit.

    Second, by Judge Reinhardt identifying that the underlying issue has always been the accusation of corruption in Washington State.

    7. Reinhardt sees what it serves his interest to see. As SCOTUS pointed out in a unanimous decision last month, when Reinhardt wants to see a lawyer putting on a substantial case, that’s what he writes; when he wants to see inadequate performance by the same lawyer in the same case, that’s what he writes. Judge Reinhardt’s view of “facts” changes with the objective he is attempting to accomplish with his opinion. That’s not me, that’s SCOTUS speaking.

    Here Reinhardt said there were no facts demonstrating improper motive in issuing multiple rulings that enforced, or refused to challenge the corruption (which was the judicial referee being the paid servant of a litigant). The problem is that the evidence is undisputed, that Philip Maxeiner, the accountant of my father Sassan Sanai, was appointed as the judicial referee in the divorce by Judge Joseph Thibodeau. Indeed, the case related materials that Judge Kozinski posted on his website included a transcript of Judge Thibodeau recusing himself after the corrupt conduct was repeatedly pointed out and challenged. The evidence is also undisputed that Judge Zilly was acting to ensure that no one “interfered” with Maxeiner’s exercise of his powers.

    The underlying issue has ALWAYS been that we challenged, as corrupt, this appointment. It is Judge Thibodeau’s conduct that animated Judge Zilly’s rage and was the key document which Judge Kozinski put on his website. Not a single judge has ruled it was consistent with due process. Instead, we get repeatedly punished and criticized without Judge Reinhardt, or any other judge, actually pointing out WHAT is the problem we are challenging.

    Frankly, I would stop leveling accusations of bad faith if just once a judicial opinion would address the appointment and say, boldly, that this is OK. The problem of course is that every other circuit but the Ninth has held that it is illegal.

    What also amazes me is that anyone finds it strange that the only reason I pursue the misconduct complaints is to obtain justice in a case. No lawyer goes out to anger a judge unless it is unavoidable to obtaining justice.

    If anyone is interested in posting my current pending complaint to show “facts” and “argument”, let me know and I will send it. I point out it is very long and full of actual facts so it is a large .pdf file.

    Cyrus Sanai (311cd8)

  9. Sure, I’ll consider posting it. Why not?

    Patterico (64318f)

  10. Patterico – Materials from Cyrus are always entertaining.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  11. Cyrus’ narrative is simply too awesome for mere words.

    It’s best expressed by video of a humping robot.

    h2u (147639)

  12. Store the glee, Frey.

    That’s Mister Frey, you worthless sack of shit. Use proper language when speaking to your betters.

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  13. Frankly, I would stop leveling accusations of bad faith if just once a judicial opinion would address the appointment and say, boldly, that this is OK. The problem of course is that every other circuit but the Ninth has held that it is illegal.

    You are aware that Jesus hates liars, right?

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  14. At last we have learned which is the more leftist paper, and it’s the Times.

    In a close call, but still.

    Mitch (e40959)

  15. Two on the same day … Next thing you know, Chris Matthews will respond on his thread.

    aunursa (862c19)

  16. Hey, look! My Cracker Jack box prize is a J.D.! It says I have to walk past a bar in Beverly (Hills, that is) and I can stand in front of all the benches I want!

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  17. Judge Zilly seems to be more upset at Cyrus and his brother Fredric than Judge Thibodeau as Cyrus claims in comment 8. The following is from Judge Zilly’s dismissal of an amended complaint related to their mother’s divorce proceeding. The Judge points out Cyrus’ use of similar litigation tactics in California where different issues are at stake, which make Cyrus’ protestations pretty silly.

    “On January 3, 2005, the Court ordered Plaintiffs to show cause why their Complaint
    should not be dismissed with prejudice because of their continued misconduct, disregard for
    Orders of this Court, and bad faith litigation tactics. See Minute Order, docket no. 641, at ¶
    10. Plaintiffs’ conduct in this litigation has been an indescribable abuse of the legal process,
    unlike anything this Judge has experienced in more than 17 years on the bench and 26 years
    in private practice: outrageous, disrespectful, and in bad faith.1 Plaintiffs have employed the
    most abusive and obstructive litigation tactics this Court has ever encountered, all of which
    are directed at events and persons surrounding the divorce of Sassan and Viveca Sanai,
    including parties, lawyers, and even judges.2 Plaintiffs have filed scores of frivolous
    pleadings, forcing baseless and expensive litigation. The docket in this case approaches 700
    filings, a testament to Plaintiffs’ dogged pursuit of a divorce long past.”

    http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/5/16/1914169/zilly-order-sanctioning-sanai.pdf

    daleyrocks (718861)

  18. Hey, Cyrus, how’s your table bussing skills? Looks like you might need ‘em, bucko.

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  19. If Cyrus ends up dis-barred, I will come out to CA and help host a party. There will be dart-throwing at pictures of Cyrus, ribald ballads about his raging stupidity, and much toasting the the good fortune of the legal profession.

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  20. I will buy the first round at Scott’s well conceived party.

    Dustin (cf255c)

  21. Once, when I was a little boy, my father caught me eavesdropping on him. I was leaning against his door as he discussed christmas gifts with my mother.

    He explained to me that this was immoral behavior, and I learned my lesson.

    Cyrus, on the other hand, was sanctioned in court for wiretapping his father in some Oedipus-style defense of his mother’s legal issues.

    Late bloomer.

    Dustin (cf255c)

  22. How close is Cyrus to being sanctioned as a vexious litigant?

    PCD (1d8b6d)

  23. I was sworn into the California bar yesterday at a ceremony in Oakland. There were little “goodie bags” on each of the chairs at the ceremony — sample issues of legal periodicals, brochures advertising liability insurance, yadda yadda.

    Imagine my surprise when, upon leafing through the goodie bag, I found a copy of the Daily Journal, with Cyrus’ face staring at me from the front page.

    Small world.

    BC (fe6289)

  24. I used to work with this guy. Just say I’m not surprised by this…

    LASue (5f0073)

  25. Cyrus gives ambulance chasers a good name.

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  26. LASue – Heh! Reality does not seem to be one of his strong suits, or truth telling when you look at his history on this blog.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  27. Comment by LASue — 12/2/2009 @ 8:28 pm

    Any personal stories that occurred in front of others and that are not covered by privilege that you would care to share with us?

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  28. Cyrus is thinking “did I make her sign all the pertinent paperwork when she walked off the job?”

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2652 secs.