The "Soul" of the Judicial System

Update as of 10-15-2018 -- The case has been dismissed by both parties.  As we have agreed to move forward, the dismissed case will remain confidential

----

-If you google "soul" and "justice" together, you will find countless links to books, quotes, articles, movements and humane organizations. There is very little mentioned when it relates to the courts system.  Why is that? Is it because the Judicial System, our system of justice has no soul?

Let's define some of these terms.  According to Merriam-Webster.com, "soul" and " justice" can be defined as:

Soul 
-immaterial essence;
-a person's total self;
-the moral and emotional nature of human beings;
-spiritual or moral force.

Justice
-the maintenance or administration of what is just especially by the impartial adjustment of conflicting claims or the assignment of merited rewards or punishment.
-judge;
-the quality of being just, impartial or fair;
-conformity to truth, fact, or reason.

As to "Judicial System" also know as "Judiciary," I got this definition from
legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com.

Judiciary - The branch of government that is endowed the authority to interpret and apply the law, adjudicate legal disputes, and otherwise administer justice.

As to my lawsuit against Alfieri ... About a month ago, I went to the Los Angeles Superior Court because Alfieri's attorney was filing an emergency ex-parte request to stay discovery. I did some research and consulted with two attorneys on what to do. Both attorneys told me to appear in court and that I would be able to speak to the judge and voice my opposition to such order.

When I arrived I was told that the judge assigned to my case was the only judge, or one of the few that did not take the bench for ex-parte hearings, that she only accepted written documents. Seriously? I am notified of this hearing the day before and Alfieri's attorney does not give me any documents specifying the legal basis for his petition? How am I supposed to respond in my opposition letter?

I asked if I  could handwrite it. The clerk told me that I could not do so. She was clearly losing her patience with me. She told me to go to the first floor and get some forms or to at least get pleading paper to write it down. She added, "I don't know if the judge will accept a handwritten document, plus it has to have the proper formatting."   I also asked if Alfieri's attorney had turned in any papers and the clerk said no.  "I still have time," I thought.

I went to the first floor, bought the paper and drafted the document with the correct formatting. When I went back to the courtroom, I handed the paper to the clerk. She then said, "I don't think the judge will accept this. It's too late." I could not believe my ears. Why would this clerk first tell me that the reason the judge would not accept my letter was because it was handwritten and later tell me that the reason  was because I was too late submitting it?

The clerk did not want to accept the piece of paper I was offering. I asked her to please talk to the judge and see if she would accept it.  My letter simply stated that I did not agree with that order - something that in other courtrooms is done in front of the judge. She went into the judge's chambers and less than a minute later she came right out. "No, she will not accept it. But she said that you had very nice handwriting."

I asked the clerk again, "when did it become too late to submit this?" She responded, at 8:30 when I opened the courtroom. So why make me go through all that????  I said, "the other attorney was not even here at 8:30 am." To my surprise Alfieri's attorney was sitting in the back of the courtroom. He claimed that he had been there the whole time. The clerk said, "yes, he has been here since 8:30."

The truth is that I did not see him at 8:35 when I stepped into the courtroom for the first time. I even asked the clerk about my case and she told me he had not submitted anything.  Why would she give contradictory statements?

I immediately went toward Jason L. Fisher, Alfieri's attorney, to greet him. He did not seem very happy to see me. I would like to share my impression of him, but I will reserve my opinion for now.... at least while this case is still pending.  The only thing I will say is this - Victor has found an attorney who will faithfully represent his interests, values and ethics. Victor made an excellent choice when hiring this specific attorney. I believe that Jason L. Fisher is the perfect attorney for him.

It is sad to realize that the last thing we can expect when dealing with the judicial system is to be treated with consideration and integrity.  It is really about "playing the game" and not about bringing justice.

I will seek more legal advice before proceeding. I need to be prepared for the "legal battle."

Disclaimer – As of October 15, 2018, all legal issues have been resolved. This resolution was reached during arbitration. There are no pending issues related to fraud or theft. The resolution was mutually agreeable. There will be no more posts written about this story.