Judge Richard Cline leaves problems behind in San Diego probate court

Judge Richard G. Cline










See case documents HERE.

SHOULD ATTORNEYS THAT COMMIT FIDUCIARY ABUSE AND PERJURY BE ABOVE THE LAW?
Jennifer Grant
January 19, 2013

In July 2011 a petition was filed to remove attorney Rusty Grant (no relation to Jennifer Grant) as trustee from the Schwichtenberg Family Revocable Trust. Reasons included expenditures against trust terms, incuding penalties for Rusty's failure to pay property taxes on time, failure to follow trust terms, illegitimate takeover of two subsections of the trust which had become irrevocable prior to the amendment which made Rusty trustee of the other subsection, and severe discrimination against the trustor's daughter Jennifer who had served as her mom's personal assistant and subsequently cared for her during her long battle with breast cancer.

Rusty Grant and Constance Larsen (Rusty’s own attorney, friend and officemate) had served as co-vice-presidents of the North County Bar with the current president back in 2006. Judge Cline made the majority of the decisions while the case was in Vista (when Vista court still had a probate division), including one in violation of federal and state constitutional law. Judge Cline had long standing bar ties with Richard MacGurn, the attorney of Jennifer's disgruntled brother.. Additionally, Rusty was a pro-tem judge in Vista.

In September 2012, with the closure of Vista's probate division, the case was moved to San Diego's Central division where it was inherited by Judge Jeffery Bostwick. Judge Bostwick is an ethical and professional judge. However, most likely due to the huge number of Vista cases dumped on him and the slow wheels of the justice system, he failed to grasp the urgency of the matter before him. He left Rusty Grant and Constance Larsen to continue their reign of fiduciary abuse, mispenditure of trust funds and violations of law unchecked, despite Jennifer filing a motion to suspend the trustee until the court could hear the case. Judge Bostwick denied the motion because it was “not urgent”.

How exactly, if Jennifer prevails, is all the misspent money supposed to get reimbursed?

In the meantime, there is no money available to pay the ongoing expenses of the trust property, so it will likely be lost if there is no intervention before the case can go to trial. Since Constance Larsen has illegally denied Jennifer the right to be in the property, it sits neglected and further deteriorating.

When Jennifer sought help from the California state fiduciary abuse organization, she was told that they could not touch attorneys though it sounded like Constance Larsen and Rusty Grant had committed crimes. Was there any other category of fiduciary out of their jurisdiction? The answer was “no”. So basically, they were saying if you are an attorney in California, you can break the law with no repercussions.

Both attorneys were also reported to the State Bar. How much their own North County Bar connections may have weighed in is unknown. However the complaint was closed. Jennifer received a letter which basically stated that, while her complaint might have merit, that the Bar could not get involved because there was a civil case in court.

The county DA was contacted but said a police report must first be filed. Since Constance Larsen forbids Jennifer to be in the property left her, there is a pending issue with the police as to who has jurisdiction to take the report.

In the latest incident, Constance Larsen tried to create a circumstance of double jeopardy by filing an accounting petition which contained issues already under contest in the case's other three petitions.

See pleading: Objections to Accounting Petition

Judge Cline allowed Rusty to conduct the forensic accounting ahead of trial on the contested petition where the question of who should conduct the accounting was at issue. Constance Larsen was blatantly trying to press her luck twice to get rid of the Remove Trustee petition and get fees for herself and further ones for Rusty.

This was an attempt to violate Jennifer's constitutional right to due process (US constitutional 14th amendment and California Constitution Section I Article I) as it had been in the circumstance with Cline.

Fortunately Judge Bostwick listened to Jennifer's due process argument on the Accounting Petiton and thwarted Larsen by consolidating it with the three other pending petitions putting it on the same civil justice snail track. However, if one takes a look at the objections he asked Jennifer to file, one can get a small taste of what is being allowed to continue by the State Bar as well as an overburdened, inefficient justice system here in San Diego. To top it off, as can be seen from Jennifer's objections, and looking at the exhibits, Constance Larsen and Rusty Grant have made false statements, committing perjury, when they signed their petitons. The question remains, are attorneys above the law? If not, then how can they be held accountable and by whom?

(Case # 37-2011-00150239-PR-TR-NC)

Part 1: Should attorney Roland Achtel be disqualified from this San Diego Superior Court case?

This blog has long been concerned about the fact that our legal system is often used to keep wrongdoing in schools hidden from the public, and to protect the wrongdoers. The following case is not about a public entity lawyer, but tax dollars are used to conduct cases like this.

The Bar Association seems to be happy with the current arrangement. After all, both plaintiff lawyers who represent the citizens who have been wrongly damaged, as well as the public entity lawyers who defend public officials, reap huge financial benefits from the system. Does it do any good to complain to the California Bar Association about lawyers who use unethical tactics? I doubt it. The Bar Association has officially expressed the opinion that public entity attorneys should represent the interests of public officials, not the public.

Roland Achtel



The following case, featuring attorney Roland Achtel, was discussed HERE. A motion to disqualify Judge Richard Cline was also filed.

FORMAL COMPLAINT
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF TRIAL CONSEL/INTAKE, STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA
1149 SOUTH HILL STREET, LOST ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90015-2299

Name of Attorney:
Attorney Roland Achtel State Bar No. 215031

Other Attorneys
Olga Alvarez State Bar No. 222557
Jenny K. Goodman State Bar. No 177828
Jennifer W Chang State Bar No. 259643

Law Firm:
Sullivan Hill Sullivan Hill Lewin Rez & Engel
550 W "C" St Ste 1500 San Diego, CA 92101
(619) 233-4100 Fax Number: (619) 231-4372
e-mail: achtel@sullivanhill.com

Location of Court:. Superior Court of California San Diego North County Dept. NC-2
Dates of Incident:. March 1, 2012 And For The Past One And a Half Years
Name of Case:. In Re David L. Bedolla Living Trust
Case No.: 37-2010-00150345-PR-TR-NC

INTRODUCTION

This Complaint is not filed with the intent to ask the Office of The Chief Trial Counsel for legal advice; to correct errors, rulings, decision, or to issue an order in the case.

This Complaint if filed because we believed attorneys Roland Achtel, Olga Alvarez, Jenny Goodman, and Jennifer Chang engaged in an egregious pattern of misconduct that infringed the constitutional and statutory rights of our father their former client and our rights as petitioners in the above named action. These said acts by attorney Achtel and the above named attorneys were not isolated; rather, they reflected a disturbing and persistent pattern of conduct that is completely at odds with the standard of conduct expected of licensed attorneys in the State of California.

The above named attorneys, violated the American Bar Association rules of professional conduct; violations under Business and Professions Code; violations under California Rules of Professional Conduct; California Civil Rules of Procedure; Local Court rules; codes of conduct and ethics that are required guidelines for Members of the American Bar Association.

The above named attorneys actions were negligent, in bad faith, and violated public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary process. The Board of Governors has the power to discipline members as provided by law for a willful breach of any of these rules.

The exhibits attached to this complaint will support our Complaint and the facts stated in this complaint as true and correct as to the event and proceedings.

HISTORY AND EVENTS THAT LEAD TO THIS COMPLAINT

In the instant, this is a Probate/Civil case about our father who is now deceased. Our father who had been married to our mother for over 58-years before he passed away. Our father and mother had nine biological children. There were no other marriages and no other children.

Our father was emotionally and financially abused, neglected, denied medical care, and died an early horrific death. He was dehydrated, had multiple bed sores, and was isolated by our youngest sister Alejandra and our brother who is now dismissed from the complaint. Alejandra and our brother exploited their relationship with our father, and through verbal threats and abuse, manipulation, fraud and undue influence bullied our father to gift my brother and Alejandra the properties he jointly owned with his wife Maria, without Maria's knowledge or consent.

Our father was diagnosed on May 14, 2007 with terminal cance. Alejandra the Respondent did not inform any of the family members of our father's terminal diagnosis including our father and mother.

Instead By May 25, 2007 Respondent Alejandra had taken our father to the Law Office of Roland Achtel to draft a living trust under the name of David L. Bedolla Living Trust. No one knew that our father was terminal or that Respondent Alejandra Bedolla had taken our father to draft a living trust.

On May 25, 2007 Respondent Alejandra wrote a check to the Achtel Law Firm APC; check number 548 from the Bank of America Bank account of David L. Bedolla and Trinidad V. Bedolla for an amount of $ 1,200.00 signed with the name of David L. Bedolla. Alejandra Bedolla send a cashier's check from her San Diego Credit Union Account to pay for the trust.

Respondent Alejandra (a). drove David L. Bedolla to the law office of Achetel Law APC, (b). wrote the checks equal to $ 2, 400 from David L. Bedolla and his wife Maria's Bank of America checking account. (c). Alejandra made herself the, "Successor Trustee" of David Bedolla L. Living Trust. Giving herself, (d). "Financial Power," (e). "Power of Attorney" and sole decision making of David L. Bedolla "Power of health and directive (f) Conservator and (g). the, "sole beneficiary of the so-called David L. Bedolla Living Trust."

Based on attorney records Achtel Law Firm APC, staff member RHA wrote: under description as a flat fee for preparation of a living trust; certificate of trust, power of attorneys, designation of conservator (s); pour-over will (s); health care directive(s); one quit claim deed; general assignment of personal property and other ancillary living trust documents. The total charges were $ 2, 400.00 from David L. Bedolla and Maria V. Bedolla Bank of America Account balance of $ 1,200.00.

Our father died on February 4, 2010, a few months later our mother was contacted by the San Diego Assessors/Recorders Office about the name change of her home property her main residence in Cardiff CA the home value at that time was $650.000. The home our mother jointly owned with our father and marital community property. This is when we found out that our youngest sister Alejandra had taken our father to the law office of Roland Achtel and caused a living trust to be transcribed. Whereby Alejandra would be the sole beneficiary of our father's marital community property estate.

We filed a Petition in Superior Court of California San Diego North County Division [July 15, 2010] in the Probate department to have the David. L. Bedolla Living Trust nullified and have the property returned to the Bedolla estate. Alejandra Bedolla being the Respondent in the Probate Petition.

The David L. Bedolla Living Trust was fraud and flawed, in many ways. The trust gifts community property belonging to our mother [her main residence/ the Bedolla estate] to Alejandra Bedolla.

• Alejandra made herself the "Successor Trustee" of David Bedolla L. Living Trust Giving herself, (d). "Financial Power," (e). "Power of Attorney" and sole decision making of David L. Bedolla "Power of health and directive (f) Conservatorship and (g). the, "sole beneficiary of the so-called David L. Bedolla estate."
• Though our father presumably paid for a conservatorship, none was established.
• Our mother did not quit claim deed the property to the trust.
• The Living Trust is a couple of dozen pages long (on or about 30-plus) written only in English.
• Our father did not speak read or write English and only had a third grade education.
• A declaration of attorney Olga Alvarez states that she personally translated the trust to our father. Yet our father never saw the trust until the day he signed it. On the day he signed the trust our father was in the hospital gravely ill from En Vibrio Cholera and under over twenty one strong medications.
• All trust communication, email, mail, calls, faxes, translations with the Achtel law firm were made by Alejandra Bedolla not our father. All and other means of communication was conducted between these above named attorneys and Alejandra Bedolla and not our father David L. Bedolla.

Respondent Alejandra Bedolla is being represented by attorney Roland Achtel and Olga alvarez from the onset of this present action. Attorney Achtel and attorney Olga Alvarez joined the law firm of Sullivan Hill Sullivan Hill Lewin Rez & Engel prior to representing Alejandra Bedolla.

Olga Alvarez

Blogger note: Sullivan Hill attorneys Roland Achtel and Olga Alvarez were named San Diego Top Attorney Semi-Finalists for The San Diego Daily Transcript’s 2011 Top Attorneys. Achtel and Alvarez were recognized in the Estate Planning/Probate & Trust category.

Further Attorney Roland Achtel has brought in two additional attorneys into the litigation Attorney Jenny K. Goodman and Jennifer Chang. We the Petitioners in the above named action are representing ourselves.



Continued HERE.

Jennifer Chang
came to Sullivan Hill in Jan. 2011. Previously, she was an attorney at Sempra Energy and Analyst at DaimlerChrysler. Education: University of San Diego School of Law and Duke University


Sullivan Hill attorney Jenny K. Goodman has experience defending professionals, including attorneys, real estate professionals and stockbrokers, for malpractice.