The Family Court Accountability Coalition engages in Judicial, Legislative and Executive Branch advocacy on behalf of socioeconomically disadvantaged family court stakeholders. According to the Judicial Council of California, 75 percent of family court litigants are self-represented because they cannot afford an attorney. Yet many courts cater to attorneys and the parties they are paid to represent, while denying the indigent meaningful and effective access to family court services.
In an unsettling example of judge and attorney misconduct, indigent, self-represented Santa Clara County family court victim Catherine Raffa attempted to appeal a trial court order declaring her a vexatious litigant. Raffa successfully filed the appeal, # H043207, in the 6th District Court of Appeal in San Jose.
Earlier this year, the opposing attorney, veteran family law lawyer Garrett Dailey, filed a motion to dismiss the appeal because, he claimed, Raffa was a vexatious litigant and required to get permission "from the presiding justice permitting the appeal to proceed."
But a litigant appealing a vexatious litigant order issued by a trial court doesn't need permission to appeal the order. If they lose the appeal, thereafter they need permission from a presiding judge to file anything in any court. They don't need permission to appeal the initial VL order, according to both case law and statutory law, CCP § 904.1(a)(6).
MARTINEZ — In a decision First Amendment experts have dubbed “outrageous,” a Contra Costa Superior Court judge jailed a San Ramon man for writing about his divorce on the internet — even though his writings were based on material publicly available in court files.
The judge, Bruce C. Mills, insisted in his decision that “matters that are put into court pleadings and brought up in oral argument before the court do not become public thereby” — a position that lawyers say fundamentally misunderstands the nature of court records.
Joseph Sweeney, a judicial reform advocate, served 13 days in County Jail in August after Mills’ ruling, which found that Sweeney’s web postings had violated another judge’s restraining order not to disclose the contents of his ex-wife’s cellphone or computer. The postings described Sweeney’s realizations about her medical history and contact with others that led to the collapse of the marriage.
Documents leaked to the media reveal stepmother of Audrie Pott allegedly berated by judge in Michael Lazarin paternity case. Parental alienation advocates assert that this is part of the untold story from the Audrie & Daisy Netflix documentary.
