But seriiously, I am just not sure that I emailed the documents to the correct address. That’s why I mentioned it. If they did not arrive, I need a different address to send them.

So, if they did not arrive, please get in touch with me.

Cyrus Sanai

When I believe the judges are wrong, and the jurisdiction is California, I either get them overturned, or I receive a reasoned decision addressing my arguments and stating why the judges did not agree. That’s the way the game is and should be played. I win plenty of cases, and have been awarded lots of attorneys fees by courts (most recently $35,000 by the Hon. L. Mira a couple of months ago). In California, every time I have raised a material argument to a state appellate court, it has been either addressed or mooted by my winning a different point.

The Ninth Circuit and Washington State are different. You can have obvious corruption, such as the appointment of an employee of a party as a judicial referee, point out that it is corrupt till one is blue in the face, and the existence of the argument is simply ignored. It’s similar to a lot of the comments on this blog and its masters; rather than address (a) the problems that Judge Kozinski has, which have resulted in an unprecedented appointment of a Third Circuit investigatory committee, everyone chooses to (b) run the one other case I have had bad trial judges in, and focus on that. No one asks about the $120,000+ and praise I received from Judge Bruguera in LA Superior Court, or my recent award from Judge Mira; instead, they point to a case where I prevailed and booted off the prior judge, got the same stuff repeated, and have a pending appeal. Supposedly the masters of this site are putting up a .pdf of my draft opening briefs in Sanai v. Saltz. It’s a fair example of my work, and I encourage anyone to read it. As I said, I lose no sleep over the Sanai v. Saltz case.

What has been interesting about this episode is that while I receive withering criticism on this blog and one or two others, I get nothing but accolades from my clients and some new enquiries for business. Making anonymous cheap shots, or running a snarky blog is easy; challenging entrenched judicial impropriety, incredibly hard. This blog and its commentators, by focusing on the bearer of bad news rather than the subject of the news, is doing its part to ensure that no private citizen or attorney will be eager to step forward with news of judicial misconduct. federal or state, in the future.

One of the cases on which I have taken most comfort, and relied most heavily, was a petition for certiorari from the Alabama Supreme Court, where a constitutional attorney convinced the Supreme Court of the United States to vacate the state high court’s decision because of impermissible financial interest of a Justice in the outcome of the case. The lawyer who prevailed on this seemingly hopeless due process attack on a done and dusted case, attacking the integrity of the Alabama Supreme Court? Theodore B. Olson. See Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Lavoie, 475 U.S. 813 (1986).

Now if someone here can tell me that the appointment of a private litigant’s accountant as a judicial referee isn’t a prima facie act of judicial corruption, I will be very interested to see the analysis and supporting case law. Until that time, I will do my best to get justice for my mother. Of course, I won’t see that; Ted Frank can’t make that argument because he knows it is false; but the existence of ingrained judicial corruption is not interesting to him, or this blog, unless it injures a corporation as opposed to a life-long housewife who had to eject her abusive husband from the house with the support of her children.

Cyrus Sanai