Bankruptcy Misconduct - Downloads

Home

Documents

Downloads Home

Search document

Downloads

Downloads Home » Bar Filings

DocumentsDate added

Order by : name | date | hits [ ascendent ]

The Appeal of CA Bar Decision: "We don't have standing on attorney Misconduct"

25.06.2008

Perhaps we shouldn't be too hard on the California State Bar. In some ways they are intentionally different than every other lawyer's bar in the nation. They are the same because every bar organization gets moneys from their lawyer members, and each bar admits that they perceive their role to assist their lawyer members. How convenient then that each of these bar orgs hold monopoloy power over the investigation and prosecution of attorney misconduct complaints. In any other profession this would be called a conflict of interest. We shouldn't be too surprised that the California Bar did everything they could to get out of prosecuting this Complaint and Revised Complaint against HBD (Hennigan, Bennett & Dorman). The CA Bar went so far as to claim, in writting bless their souls, that they did not have jurisdiction to review complaints about attorney ethics and misconduct. An outrageous notion which flies in the face of their stated mission, so we appealed the decision. The brother lawyers sitting on the California State Supreme Court simply ignored the appeal. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. If we citizens want to transfer supreme rights and powers to lawyers and let them operate above the law, we should expect that they will steel every greater portions of our moneys, dignity, & freedom. Why should we hold baseball stars to stricter legal standards than lawyers? Consider many houses thay you own, and pity the bankruptcy lawyer who only owns two.
Perhaps we shouldn't be too hard on the California Bar - they decided to move to prosecute this complaint at least twice, before some invisible hand smacked them down. Kind of like a politician who voted against the war before he voted for it. Perhaps the most absurd notion is that we hold politicians to a higher standard than lawyers.

Exhibits to Appeal of CA Bar Decision

17.10.2007

These are the exhibits to the appeal of the decision against continuing the investigation and prosecution of the Complaint (as revised) against the lawyers who filed numerous false declarations in a bankruptcy court, such false declarations as having been in furtherance of numerous SEC Violations whereby a $30+ Billion dollar hedge fund majority stockholder took full control of a public company and extracted all of the money - sharing none of it with minority stockholders, and failing to disclose to the SEC the entire process. The exhibits include flip flop decisions by the CA Bar, communications with them, additional documentation they requested, as well as the original Complaint and the Revised Complaint. The latter two complaints, exhibit entries to the appeal, are also available separately on this site in their original form as .pdf files with their internal document navigation links preserved when viewed with an Acrobat compatible reader.
Prominently featured in the Revised Complaint are conflicted clients of the Respondents: Argo Partners and PwC a/k/a PriceWaterhouseCoopers. This is a large .pdf document.

CABAURHBD Chart 3

01.05.2007

Color coded chart showing the chronology of Conflicted Representation with hyperlinks into the Revised Complaint. This chart is Exhibit X of the Revised Complaint.

CABAURHBD Chart 2

01.05.2007

Color coded chart showing the chronology of Conflicted Representation with hyperlinks into the Revised Complaint. This chart is Exhibit J of the Revised Complaint.

CABAURHBD Chart 1