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.
