Bullies with a Law Degree

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.

What is a Bully?

A person who uses strength or power to harm or intimidate those who are weaker.

What is Bullying?

To use superior strength or influence to intimidate (someone), typically to force him or her to do what one wants.

--- Both definitions from Oxford Dictionaries (oxforddicitonaries.com).

Nowadays, this type of abusive behavior has become a serious problem. This digital era has allowed bullies to cowardly hide behind fake cyber names while verbally attacking, intimidating and threatening others whom they perceive as "weaker" or "inferior."

My Experience with Bullies

Although I was very shy when I was a young child, I cannot really say that I ever got bullied by other kids at school. The truth is that I had never really experienced feeling "bullied" until I started dealing with opposing counsel in this case against Victor Alfieri. I have got to experience intimidation and manipulative tactics by Bullies with a Law Degree. 

It is true that I am representing myself. I have not hired an attorney because I cannot afford one. Victor Alfieri took everything I had. Now his attorneys are trying to get more from me -- or at least, they are trying to intimidate me and take advantage of my lack of legal representation.  

So what qualifies them as "bullies"?  They certainly have strength and power over me --- that power is their law degree and their knowledge of the California Judicial System. They shield themselves behind the "confidentiality of the case"  They use that as an excuse to bully me and to intimidate me.
I believe that it is my duty to speak out, to tell the truth about what these attorneys have done and continue doing. This specific post is my contribution to stopping this type of bullying. I know I am not the only one who has gone through an experience such as this.  I hope this post inspires those who have felt helpless in similar situations when dealing with the legal system on their own -- those who have opted to not fight or to give up due to their apparent disadvantageous position.  Please read on. 

I will only cover what attorney Jason L. Fisher has said during our conversations, what he has done or said in open court and the documents he filed. The current arbitration process is to be kept strictly confidential. I will NOT be revealing any details related to such process. I will not be disclosing any information about the attorney retained to handle this arbitration either. The only thing I will say, is that this attorney uses a friendlier and more respectful approach. It might be because this attorney is a female and can somehow relate to what I have been through.

As to what has happened in court and all the documents filed, everything is public. If you are interested in getting copies of the documents filed in court, please go to  LA COURT CASE SUMMARY and enter case BC542748. I will be sharing some specific details about what attorney Jason L. Fisher has done while handling this case. I swear that all the statements I am about to make are true to the best of my knowledge and recollection.

As I mentioned before, this case filed in Los Angeles Superior Court is public, so are the hearings and what was said during those court appearances.  I also have the right to voice my opinion --- I have Freedom of Speech.

Los Angeles Superior Court - Summary

I filed my lawsuit against Victor Alfieri on April 15, 2014. The first phone call I received from Jason L. Fisher informing me he had been retained by Alfieri was on May 16, 2014. We had an amicable conversation during which I agreed to give him more time to file a response.  That was the only friendly conversation we would ever have.

On May 30, 2014, Jason Fisher filed over 100 pages worth of documents -- Demurrer to Complaint, Motion to Strike, Proposed Order for the Demurrer and the Motion to Strike.  Yes, over 100 pages!!!  His Demurrer and Motion to Strike basically stated that the case should be dealt in arbitration.  Why wouldn't Mr. Fisher save all that time he spent drafting these documents and simply demand arbitration???

Mr. Fisher used derogatory language to describe me and labeled my allegations as "fictional."  This is an excerpt from the Motion to Strike he filed on May 30, 2014.

"However, ascertaining that basic information from the frivolous and long-winded Verified Complaint of plaintiff nearly amounts to act of futility.  The Plaintiff chose to use the California judicial system to publicize her scornful account of an alleged personal relationship.  Plaintiff's misplaced focus on irrelevant absurdities and overtly emotionally charged fictional allegations that are completely improper and immaterial has made a Motion to Strike by Defendants proper, if not necessary."

Apparently Mr. Fisher ignored the fact that my complaint was a VERIFIED complaint. I had sworn that everything contained there was true, under the penalty of perjury.  So, Mr. Fisher was calling me a liar and claiming my complaint had "irrelevant absurdities" when, in fact, such absurdities were quotes from Victor Alfieri himself, from his deposition -- which are part of an official transcript.  He also, just like Alfieri, claimed that I had made "fictional" allegations of having a relationship with Alfieri.

I have worked as an interpreter in the courts (both State and Federal) for about 20 years. I have translated hundreds, if not thousands, of orders, motions, petitions and other legal documents. And I had never seen a document drafted by an attorney that labeled the allegations as "fictional," "irrelevant" or "absurd."  I have certainly heard those words during opening and closing arguments/statements in a trial or during motions... but never as a response to a complaint.   I believe that Mr. Fisher's choice of words and length of his documents were intended to intimidate me --- which is something attorneys are supposed to do.  I am aware of it.

A colleague of mine has assured me that such language is common in court filings in California. However, I believe that those specific words that attorney Jason Fisher chose were charged with hostility -- such hostility was evident when he and I met in person for the first time.

On August 18, 2014 - We had an Ex-Parte Protective Order Hearing.  That order was granted because the judge did not take the bench. I was not even able to oppose to that order. I was expected to submit my response in writing. Please read  "The Soul of the Judicial System" .  I talked to Jason Fisher on the phone at 4:30 pm the day before this hearing. I asked him if he could give me a copy of what he was filing because all I got from him was a simple notice. He responded that I would get a copy the following day at 8:30 am, that we could discuss it then in front of the judge.  Mr. Fisher knew this judge did not take the bench for this type of motions. How do I know this? Because the clerk told me that Mr. Fisher had called the previous day. She also told me that I should have called too to ask if I needed to respond in writing.

On August 22, 2014 -- Attorney Jason Fisher sent me a threatening letter demanding I dismiss the lawsuit against Daniela Carloni, Victor Alfieri's mother.  

"Irrespective of meritless claim(s) advanced, we are bewildered by your apparent belief that you can sue Ms. Carloni here in California, and invite to contact our office to explain under what rule or legal theory you believe you can maintain a lawsuit against a foreign citizen that resides abroad with no connection to the forum state. We would request you immediately dismiss Ms. Carloni with prejudice, and if so, we believe our client will agree to a waiver of costs. Otherwise, we will pursue recovery of costs and attorney fees against you incurred in having Ms. Carloni dismissed from this matter."

Apparently Mr. Fisher's main strategy has been to threaten to recover attorney's fees from me.  He used this strategy in court and the judge clearly told him there were no credible reasons for which he could claim those fees. 

Do I believe Daniela Carloni played a role in this???? Absolutely. She was also the one who would beg me to call Victor back in June 2011, after we had broken up. She would call me via Skype, every single day. She would say to me, "Victor needs you. He loves you. He just doesn't know how to show it. Please don't abandon him."  I would then contact Victor. He would tell me (via text) to leave him alone.  I was clearly being set up for harassment. 

On November 9, 2014 -- I filed an amended complaint in which Daniela Carloni and Black Knight Entertainment were no longer defendants. I decided to drop Daniela Carloni from the complaint because I knew how complicated it would be to keep her as a defendant not because my allegations against her were meritless.  A couple of weeks later, Mr. Fisher emailed me a letter asking me to formally dismiss the claim against Daniela Carloni.  He attached the Request for Dismissal for me to sign and mail back to him. I noticed that it stated that I would be dismissing WITH prejudice -- which means I could never sue Daniela Carloni for these allegations ever again.  Why would I do that? And what type of manipulative attorney would do something like that???  When I had not returned those requests signed as he demanded, Mr. Fisher wrote to me and again threatened to seek recovery of costs and attorney's fees from me --- as if he had the right to do so.

"Thank you for your email.  The requests for dismissal were completed for you and required nothing more than your signature.  Kindly execute and return them to my office via email as you stated you would, so I can ensure they are filed promptly.  If I do not get the dismissals back from you very soon, I may have to take further action concerning those two parties, and then would have to pursue recovery of those costs/expenses incurred from you.  I would rather avoid unnecessary steps, and chasing you for money, so please sign and return both dismissal forms to me this week."

The only reason Jason Fisher offered to file the dismissals for me was to ensure that they were dismissed with prejudice. Mr. Fisher knows that if I had an attorney, I would never be advised to dismiss with prejudice.  I believe he was basically trying to trick me into doing what he wanted. I filled out my own request forms for the dismissal without prejudice and filed them in court.  Mr. Fisher was not very happy and demanded an explanation as to why my dismissal was without prejudice.

On December 10, 2014 -- Mr. Fisher filed another Demurrer and Motion to Strike my Amended Complaint. This time they were only 50 pages total.  However, Mr. Fisher got even more vicious with the adjectives and labels he used to describe me and my complaint.

"Plaintiff improperly used a 41 page Complaint, reading much like a bad romance novel, to publicize her scornful account of and bitterness over an alleged relationship."

It is interesting that Mr. Fisher kept calling my relationship with Alfieri an "alleged" relationship when Alfieri himself stated that we were VERY CLOSE friends during his deposition. Jason Fisher dared to also call my supporting facts "tales."   

On January 22, 2015 -  We had our Demurrer Hearing. In his motion, Mr. Fisher wrote:

"The issues raised in Plaintiff's FAC. unambiguously fall squarely and exclusively within the purview and language of the Production Financing Agreement arbitration clause that requires the parties to resolve all such disputes via binding arbitration."

The Demurrer was sustained mainly based on that arbitration clause.  But why would Jason Fisher refuse to stipulate to arbitration when that was what he was fighting for?  I remember the judge asking him, "Why wouldn't you stipulate to arbitration?  Isn't that what you wanted?" Please read the post "Turning a Loss Into a Win"  for the whole story.  Bottom line -  Attorney Jason L. Fisher did all this work to this point, expecting to win, to have the case dismissed and to recover attorney's fees from me.  If that was not the case and he was being paid by Alfieri, why would he refuse to accept service of the Demand for Arbitration and claim he is not Alfieri's attorney? 

On March 17, 2015

We appeared in court to give an update on the arbitration process. Please read the post Lies, Negligence, or Memory Loss? for complete story on what happened during this hearing.   I wrote it on March 19.  A day or two after I published this post, I received a call -- (the following exchange between Jason Fisher and I is NOT verbatim.  It is paraphrased but written as a conversation to make it easier to read).

A - Hello? This is Adriana.
J - This is attorney Jason Fisher.
A - Hi Jason, how are you?
J - I am calling because I heard about a blog.
A - My blog? You read it?
J - It is my understanding that my name and my law firm have been mentioned.
A - Yes, that is right. I wrote about what happened in court and how you lied to the judge. 
......
J - I am calling to ask you to take down that blog.
A- The blog?  I am not taking down my blog. And I will not take that specific post down either. You know I am telling the truth.
.....
J - This has nothing to do with me. The problem you have is with Victor Alfieri and not with me.
A - Actually, I DO have a problem with people who lie to a judge in open court.
----
A -  I will not delete that post. But what I can do is omit your name and just leave it as "Alfieri's attorney."

And that is what I did. I removed his name and kept it off my blog until recently. Why did I change my mind?  Because I FEEL that Jason L. Fisher and his law firm, Fisher Law, have "bullied" me and continue to do so. I believe that this type of conduct should not be tolerated.  Mr. Fisher has a law degree and knowledge of the court system in California. I don't have such degree. But what I do have is my voice.  

After four years dealing with this "court drama," I feel that I have gotten into this legal battle for a bigger reason -- to bring awareness of how abusive and manipulative opposing counsel can be toward a party that proceeds "pro per" in civil court. 

Bullying and unfair abusive treatment must be reported.  Nothing will change if we pretend it is not happening and ignore this issue.   Let's stop BULLYING behavior. Let's stand up and speak out. We all have the right to feel safe, respected and honored.

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.

Lies, Negligence... or Memory Loss?

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.

---

On March 17, 2015, just a couple of days ago, I had a hearing at the Stanley Mosk Courthouse in Los Angeles. I thought that after what happened at the last hearing in January, Jason Fisher would ask to withdraw as the attorney of record. In addition, he had refused to accept service of the demand for arbitration on behalf of Victor.  He made it clear, through an email to the ICDR (International Centre for Dispute Resolution), that he had not been retained nor would he accept service of the demand for arbitration. He, of course, waited 12 days to inform us (ICDR and me) of this - just two days before our first scheduled administrative conference call.

Attorney Jason Fisher stated that I had to serve Victor Alfieri with the Demand for Arbitration separately. I had to start from square one again --  just as if I did not have the case pending in court?  I remember that during the hearing in January, the judge said that we would stipulate to arbitration.  Mr. Fisher refused to agree to that stipulation. However, the judge made it clear that we were going to arbitration.  Attorney Jason Fisher was present at the hearing. He was and is still representing Victor Alfieri. He has the DUTY to inform his client of anything that happens during any hearing and with his case -- that includes ARBITRATION. So why do I have to start this process again with Victor separately?

Because if I did not get this arbitration process started by March 17, my case would be immediately dismissed and Mr. Fisher could again try to "collect" attorney's fees from me.  The judge clearly said that she would deny that request. But Mr. Fisher probably thought that he would be entitled to make that demand if I were to fail to start the arbitration process.

Victor was served separately. ICDR, Victor and I started to communicate via email. We set up the administrative conference call two weeks later, as requested by Alfieri.  The evening prior to our call, scheduled for last Friday, March 13, at 8 am, Victor asked for more time as he had just retained a new attorney (whose name I will keep confidential). Alfieri waited 2 weeks to notify ICDR and me of this. We had no conference call but ICDR set up deadlines for documents and comments.

Now, let's go back to the hearing I had two days ago-- Jason Fisher, Alfieri's attorney of record, was present. He, again, was rude and avoided to look at me in the eye. His rudeness was not a surprise to me. What was a surprise to me was what he did during the hearing.

What you will read next is my personal account of what took place.  It is really too bad that Los Angeles Superior Court does not have court reporters for this type of hearings. This means that there is no official court record of what is being said. So we could say that this post will serve as a "record" of what happened on Tuesday.  I swear that all the statements I am writing in this post -- and all my posts, for that matter -- are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Jason Fisher told the judge that he had no idea if the arbitration process had started or if anything had been done about it.  "Your Honor, may I say something for the record?" I asked. She responded, "there is no record." That was correct. There was no court reporter taking down what was being said. "May I state something, then, your Honor?" She politely responded, "of course."

I stated that opposing attorney had been served with the Demand for Arbitration and refused to accept service. I added that he took about 12 days to notify ICDR and me that he was not the attorney representing Alfieri in the arbitration process. His refusal to accept service and failure to give timely notification had delayed the process two weeks. 

The judge then looked at him and asked, "counsel, you are not representing the respondent in this matter?" He responded, "I have not been retained yet."  Puzzled, the judge asked, "what are you doing here, then?" He then went to explain that he was indeed the attorney of record for the case in court (LASC) but not for arbitration.

Jason Fisher then said that he had not received anything related to arbitration and had not had any communication on this issue (process). He wanted to play dumb?  So this is the first time he hears anything about my demand for arbitration?  Really? "That is a  lie! And I have proof of it, right here in my hand," I said, clearly and loud enough for everyone to hear as I raised my right hand showing copies of emails and communication exchanged among ICDR, Mr. Fisher and me.

The judge said, "this is not starting well." I explained that opposing counsel would not return my phone calls or emails. This statement is totally true. The judge asked me if I had been represented by counsel before. I told her that I had always been pro se and that Mr. Fisher continued to refuse to communicate with me.  The judge said that this had to change, that there should be communication between us.... and if I had been the judge, I would have added, "and the parties shall treat each other with courtesy and respect."

Right before our short hearing ended, I asked the judge, "Your Honor, may I provide counsel copies of all communication we've had related to arbitration, including his own communications?" She smiled and said, "sure, go ahead."  I heard a couple of people laugh in the back of the courtroom. I handed him the demand for arbitration (this would be the 4th time he would get it) and a set of copies of different emails we exchanged among us and ICDR.   He accepted the papers I offered but did not dare to look at me directly.

Why did attorney Jason Fisher blatantly lie to the judge?  Did he think I would not notice that his statements did not match the facts? Did he think he could get away with lying because there was no record taken during the hearing?

Or there could be a different scenario. Scenario 2 -- negligence on Mr. Fisher's part. But this would not speak well of him or any attorney and his work ethics.  Even if the reason for giving false statements to the judge in this case were negligence, it would be undeniable that lies were used to cover his careless and irresponsible actions. So that takes us back to Scenario 1, "Jason Fisher  purposely lied to the judge during the hearing."

Well, what if he did not purposely lie?  This puts us in Scenario 3 -- Maybe he gave false statements unintentionally and without true awareness. He could have forgotten he received the demand for arbitration three times -- first, from me, then, from a process server and from ICDR. Maybe he also forgot he wrote to ICDR and to me (12 days after service) claiming he had not been retained by Alfieri and could not accept service.  Maybe Alfieri's chronic amnesia is contagious. I can only speculate to the extent of his memory loss. What I can say is that if this attorney is truly suffering from amnesia (just as Alfieri), I surely hope that the copies of those emails and letters I provided to him in court yesterday will help refresh his recollection.

Which scenario do you think explains what happened in court on Tuesday? Intentional Lies, Negligence.... or Amnesia?  Do you believe there could be a good reason for an attorney to intentionally lie in court? Are there good reasons to lie in any other situations? Feel free to share your thoughts.

ARE ALL LIES THE SAME?

There is no such thing as a little lie or a big lie. A lie is a lie.  Even "white lies" are lies. Lies can turn us into slaves -- prisoners of our own distorted reality. The good news is that every time we lie, we are  aware we are doing so -- we feel we are going against ourselves. Because we all seek the truth and strive to live by it, why not make it a practice to tell the truth at all times?  All we have to do is first go deep into our heart, as that is where the TRUTH resides. Then whatever we have to express will certainly be the truth -- a truth that will not create conflicts or hurt others.... because it is coming from a place of love. And love is the ultimate TRUTH.

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.

Turning a Loss into a Win

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.

---

About three weeks ago, I had a Case Management Conference hearing. During that hearing we were to deal with the Demurrer filed by Victor's attorney, and Motion to Strike portions of my Complaint. Jason Fisher, Alfieri's attorney, had changed the date from January 29th to January 22nd, a week earlier, giving me very little time to file my opposition to his two motions filed on December 12, 2014.  I had  until January 8th - only 26 days to respond. And these 26 days included 14 days I spent in Mexico during the holidays. So basically, I had a little over one week to prepare my opposition and what I was to present and say in court.

It is true that I am representing myself in this case. Hiring an attorney would cost me a fortune. I have  fortunately managed to pay some money to an attorney to prepare and go over the complaint and the opposition to the demurrer. I also asked a friend of mine who is also an attorney and a former judge to give me advise on how to address the court. He told me that he presided hundreds of hearings. He added that, because I was representing myself, it was important to show myself as a "human being."   He helped me prepare the following "speech."

Your Honor,
I am aware this court handles many cases of greater importance and significance than mine. I feel fortunate to be here in front of you at this time to address the motion filed which is to challenge any defects of my complaint and the issue of subject matter jurisdiction. 
Your Honor, my amended complaint sets out facts that are consistent with the causes of action and furthermore are alleged in accordance with the California Civil Procedure Code. I've listed the elements of each cause of action and drafted the complaint in accordance, eliminating any uncertainty or ambiguity.  There is particularity and specificity with respect to all claims, and all provide sufficient information as to clearly state a cause of action. 
Victor Alfieri and Bondolini Productions filed a lawsuit against me based on the production financing agreement and I ask the court to find that defendants have waived their right to arbitration. 
Your Honor, I am here today without counsel because Victor Alfieri has taken my life's savings of  $150,000. That was all the money I had in the world. He took the last $17,500 of my money to hire counsel to sue me. 
Your Honor, I know of nowhere to turn except to this court -- so I might, during discovery, bring all the proof needed to demonstrate fraud beyond clear and convincing evidence and that the money taken from me was for defendant’s personal use. 
As the pleadings allege, Victor Alfieri started a romantic relationship with me for no other reason than to secure my life's savings. He claimed to love me and further claimed that starting a production company as partners, would be a way that would allow the two of us to grow in our relationship and assure financial stability for the rest of our lives. 
Defendant never had any ambition of owning a production company or producing a movie. Most all of my money was used for Victor’s personal benefit. 
After giving Victor my life's savings, which he assured was all that he needed -- as it is also reflected in the contract -- he later writes and tells me he needs another $131,000 stating, "no money, no movie.” 
Your Honor, if the court requires I amend the pleadings, I will comply. However, your Honor, I ask that you allow me the opportunity to go forward with this case so that I can collect the necessary evidence and prevail.  He took every dime I had, your honor, and Victor has a pattern of this sort of behavior. 

So the day arrives. I ask my friend Christine to go to court with me. We arrive very early and check in.  I am nervous. I have been to court hundreds of times -- literally HUNDREDS of times --  but as a certified court interpreter, not a plaintiff in PRO PER.

Christine's presence calms me down. She tells me that everything will be okay. I then close my eyes and think of what Marianne Williamson always tells us to do in stressful and challenging situations such as this -- "Before you enter, blast everyone in the room with love."

We sit in the courtroom while all the other cases are called. I get to see how pleasant and fair the judge is to the other parties when handling their cases.  I am feeling much better. My case finally gets called. I approach and sit at a table facing the judge. Attorney Jason Fisher, is to my right. He does not even dare to look at me directly.

I have met and worked with over one thousand attorneys. This is not an exaggeration - over one thousand. And I can assert that Jason L. Fisher is the rudest lawyer I have ever met in my entire life. He refused to shake my hand when I extended it to him the first time we met in person. He does not respond to my emails or phone calls. So I am not surprised with how things unfolded during this hearing.

The judge states that her tentative ruling is to sustain the demurrer and send the case to arbitration. She then starts reading each cause of action, giving a reason why the demurrer is sustained. "As to Cause of Action 1, Fraud in the Inducement... it lacks... does not state specific... demurrer is sustained. As to Cause of Action 2... Cause of Action 3... 4... 5... 6... 7... demurrer is sustained."

I cannot believe that none of the causes survived the "demurrer" since the complaint and opposition to the demurrer were drafted and reviewed by several attorneys. None of the causes of action is properly pled???!!!  But what is more surprising to me is how calm I am. I feel this inner peace and stillness that is hard to explain.

The judge looks at us and asks if there is something we would like to say. Jason Fisher is quiet and looking down avoiding the judge's eyes. I say, "I don't know if he wants to say something first," referring to opposing counsel. The judge quickly answers, "he does not have to say anything. He won. You lost... So anything you want to say?"

At this point I am just looking at the piece of paper with my prepared speech. I cannot really read that now. I just lost, as the judge clearly stated. I do address the court and state that the first cause of action, Fraud in the Inducement goes beyond the contract containing the arbitration clause. I say something like this , "there was an agreement and promise made by Alfieri to start a production company together in July 2010. We were planning on making several movies. The first movie was 'Arturo Bond,' whose main character is Arturo Bondolini - that's why the name, Bondolini Productions. I invested money in that movie project first. By September 2010, I had already invested $60,000 into that specific movie - seven months before the production financing agreement with the arbitration clause was signed.  We did not produce "Arturo Bond," but decided to make a different film, 'Phoenix.' This film was not produced either. We then decided to make 'Looking for Clarissa.'  The false promise I am talking about is the production company. I was induced to invest in this last movie based on the false promise of a production company."

The judge looks interested in what I am saying. She says, "where is that stated in your complaint?" I read a couple of paragraphs from my amended complaint that do not cover what I am trying to convey. Because I was told by several attorneys to shorten my original 42 page complaint, my amended complaint does not have that specific information and dates that now I desperately need.

The judge then asks, "what is the reason why you don't want to go to arbitration?" I politely answer, "because it is my understanding that fraud allegations cannot be handled in arbitration." To what she responds, "that is not true. Fraud is handled in arbitration" just as it is handled in court. My eyes light up, "really?" I say with an evident tone of surprise in my voice. "She then goes to explain how arbitration works, that some arbitrators are former judges, that we get to choose our arbitrator.

Mr. Fisher says that he told me about arbitration over the phone, making it sound that he had been polite and tried to settle this before filing all those motions - which is a complete lie. In fact, that initial phone call was the ONLY conversation we had and it sounded to me more like "this is war" than anything else.

Attorney Jason Fisher starts going on and on about my refusal to go to arbitration, about the -- as he puts it -- "exorbitant" number of hours he put into writing those motions. Again, trying to make me look like an unreasonable person who filed this complaint with malice and in bad faith.

The judge points out that it is understandable I would not believe what he was telling me as he is the opposing attorney. Why would I trust him? Why would I follow any legal advise he could offer? Then she looks at me with so much compassion in her eyes and asks me, "why are you so scared to go to arbitration?" I say, "because for the first cause of action, Fraud in the Inducement, I could be awarded punitive damages - something that cannot be considered in arbitration."

The judge is now looking at me directly, being as impartial as required by her position but unable to hide her kindness and concern. "Don't be scared. All those things will be dealt with in arbitration." She adds that arbitration is pretty much like trials in court, but much more informal.

The judge looks satisfied that the case will be taken to arbitration. She then says that the case will be stayed, both parties will stipulate to arbitration, and that the case will be dismissed after arbitration is completed. Attorney Jason Fisher states that they will not agree to that stipulation, "Isn't arbitration what you wanted, counsel?" the judge asks puzzled. Mr. Fisher clarifies that I should pursue arbitration on my own and gives a series of reasons why they want the case dismissed immediately. While he is saying this, the judge is looking at me directly as I gently shake my head and non-verbally plead to her to PLEASE SAY NO to his request. I bet my facial expression is communicating something like. "please don't abandon me now. Don't throw me to the wolves. They will devour me."

The judge denies that request stating that she will not make me pay another filing fee if I were to bring the case back to court to compel arbitration. She then says that she would like the two parties to appear in person in a couple of months to give her an update on arbitration. At this point, I am aware I lost this hearing because the demurrer was sustained but I feel relieved. I feel protected by the judicial system. I still have a chance to prove my case in arbitration and get the justice I'm seeking.

The judge then looks at me and asks what day we would like to come back. "In two months?.... what about.... St. Patrick's Day?"  I respond, "that date works for me, your Honor. " As we are ready to finish the hearing, the judge asks if there is anything additional from either party. Attorney Jason L. Fisher decides to open his mouth and make additional demands.

From this point on, I say NOTHING. I am just listening to Jason Fisher talk now. I feel I am watching a bizarre show. I am witnessing as Mr. Fisher picks up a shovel and starts to dig himself in a hole. "You Honor, we would like the case dismissed at this time."  The judge says that the case is stayed for now,  that the demurrer is sustained, that I will not be allowed to amend my complaint and that the case will be dismissed after arbitration is finalized. Attorney Jason Fisher repeats several times that he wants this case immediately dismissed so his client can have peace of mind and can put this behind him.  The judge reiterates that the case will be eventually dismissed. To what this attorney quickly responds that due to the dismissal, they will be asking for attorneys fees to be paid by Plaintiff (me).

Now the judge looks upset and says, "you're overreaching, counsel." Jason Fisher starts saying that there are REASONS why the opposing party is entitled to payment of attorney's fees. The judge interrupts, "not for any credible reasons that I know." Jason Fisher keeps on talking. I really don't understand why. He is already in a big hole.... and still digging, deeper and deeper.

It is so clear to me, and probably to everyone in this courtroom, that this attorney is expecting to get paid by me, not by Alfieri. Now I understand why his motions and responses are so ridiculously long. Of course they are! He has to justify the "exorbitant" amount of work he has put into this, so he can demand $70,000 -$80,000 in attorney's fees from me. He also wants to be "off" the case. That is why he is asking to have this case dismissed immediately.

Before the hearing is adjourned the judge states that we will be coming back to court on March 17th at 8:30 am, and that I will be allowed to AMEND my complaint if necessary.  That is, as I understand it, if Alfieri refuses to go to arbitration.  So in the end, this apparent loss has turned into a WIN.

There is truly no such thing as a "loss" or a "failure." I believe that when we apparently "fail" at something, we are simply being offered an opportunity - an opportunity to let go of what has not worked out for us, what we no longer need. It is also a turning point to choose a different path to explore exciting new possibilities. And sometimes, all we have to do is to not resist it and let it be. The situation might take a sharp turn, transforming that initial loss into a triumphant win.

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.

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.