Friday, November 8, 2019

PBS Videos on the Camp Fire, PGE Claim Date Extended to 12/31/19




https://youtu.be/LtwutlbJQqI  (driving through flames to get away from fire)


Note: In the Camp Fire aftermath,  crews had to remove twice as much debris here as what was left from the twin towers after Sept. 11. Most of the toxic debris piles are now gone. So are the burnt cars that lined the roads giving it an apocalyptic feel. Removal of such toxic waste allegedly came close to TWO BILLION DOLLARS.

Also, here is PGE's statement below,  in response to its obvious role in the
Camp Fire.............

Even though PGE is to be blamed for the "fire", the ones in charge of the town of Paradise made up a system that simply was useless, unless a fire was not large. 

The majority of the dead people were seniors that probably believed they did not need to evacuate, after all, hadn't the Mayor kept telling everyone there would be an orderly evacuation??  By now, no one should believe the Mayor.  And not even half of the town had agreed to using the grid "system" that Paradise officials kept saying was so great--- if it was a very small fire--MAYBE it would make for orderly exit. We think that grid system is worthless when no one even understands the size of a fire???  and GET RID OF THAT MAYOR J. JONES!! No amount of education or money makes her qualified to be a mayor, period. She's calling herself a pioneer because she gets to rebuild her home. Lord have mercy!!

Other than that, on the day of the fire, the Frontline PBS video clearly shows that many people were:

 (1) Completely misinformed on how bad the fire WAS; 

 (2) Most people, even the fire fighters, did not even realize the scope and dangerousness of the fire until it was surrounding everyone and everything; and in many cases, that was too late;

 (3) The older people who were likely the most affected, those who were disabled or without help from family/or friends, without internet or perhaps even a phone---were the ones who ended up perishing.  
We reviewed the list of all of the names/ages of those who died last year. Almost without exception, the list was composed mostly of those over 50 with exception of about five people. Most of the people were late 60's, 70's, 80s.....

As someone who ran from the fire at 0840am, we knew nothing about any "fire", except from what
we could see in the sky????     Now that may look like a fire now, (picture below) but at the time there were no reports of a fire, no sirens, no warnings, no calls, and nothing to make anyone think there was a fire at the time just by me looking at the clouds? 

           Does anyone really THINK we would be so stupid as to follow some dumb grid evacuation under such circumstances??? Absolutely not!

 I actually thought it was just clouds, (yes I admit that because in person it did not resemble any fire I have seen, and I have seen more than my share of them)....which is WHY I took the pics in the first place--because I thought gee, what puffy clouds those are?  I recall seeing pink and yellow but did not realize it was a fire.  There was no smell, no black smoke, and it actually appeared to be pink and light yellow--the cell phone makes it look darker than it really did look.  Had I known it WAS a fire, I would not have taken any pictures!!!

  I didn't see anyone running in the streets, saw absolutely no one running to their cars, in fact no one was outside at all except me???  But my friend that I called, told me, run for your life so I did, and took nothing from the house at all except my dog.  What other people did or heard, I have no idea. I can only be thankful we did not get stuck on Skyway!

We were lucky to get out via Hwy 32, even tho slow going...........we are lucky we survived....

Thank GOD we didn't adhere to that mayor Jody Jones' dumb area notification evacuation; had we waited around, we all would have likely perished.  

Such an "evacuation" plan is probably what caused in part, many seniors to DIE in the Camp Fire.........they probably felt there was no need to evacuate, and that their AREA had not been called for evacuation.....

             ...in the Camp Fire, if you did not run for your life, your life was likely lost!!!!!

 How else can such deaths occur, when coupled with that dumb program that Paradise employed, to systematically get people out? Not only did that system NOT work, it really was not even USED because had it been used, it would have likely killed even more people??  And only 50% of the people had signed up for it, so it was basically USELESS to begin with?

........Paradise is basically run by people who don't know what they are doing, because if they knew what they were actually doing, they would have solved many of the problems they already had, quite some time ago. If they were that worried about the dead end roads they could have used government authority to try and eliminate those dead ends.

 If Paradise waits enough years, they will spend all of the federal funding and still do very little for the community.  They can pretend to celebrate gold rush days, etc.  NONE of that nonsense will ever bring back people, especially those who understand that dummies can't run towns that have bad plans for dangerous situations???

The only  thing that can come out of the horrific Camp Fire is this:
               Don't pretend you have created safety escapes for people who live in dangerous areas by making up zones of any sort; that is a lost cause from day one. NO amount of such rubbish will save people from a bad fire.  Paradise was lucky they only lost 85 known people. People running through the flames is incredulous....

The run for your life advice is better than following some grid layout which ends up killing people.
Then we find out that no one was given the command for following the grid layout? It doesn't get much worse than that, but we are sure that some people believed they were not to exit until told to do so. By then it would have been too late in most cases.

Also, here is PGE's statement below,  in response to its obvious role in the
Camp Fire..........................


Here is how Rebuilding is going--hint...it's pretty slow......  https://www.npr.org/2019/11/09/777801169/the-camp-fire-destroyed-11-000-homes-a-year-later-only-11-have-been-rebuilt

Friday, November 1, 2019


Family Code 4320-4326,  basically outlines what factors are used to determine spousal support.


Jan 20, 2019 - 4320(i) now reads: "All documented evidence of any history of domestic violence, as defined in Section 6211, between the parties or perpetrated by either party against either party's child, including, but not limited to, consideration of: (1) A plea of nolo contendere...  

Child Support Factors

Family Code section 4058 - This is core statute with big implications specifically for child support, but also in terms of defining gross income for purposes of spousal support. Subsection (b) has been rewritten.

It used to say:
"The court may, in its discretion, consider the earning capacity of a parent in lieu of the parent's income, consistent with the best interests of the children." 
It now reads:
"(b) The court may, in its discretion, consider the earning capacity of a parent in lieu of the parent's income, consistent with the best interests of the children, taking into consideration the overall welfare and developmental needs of the children, and the time that parent spends with the children."

This appears to be a clarification of what factors the legislature considers to directly impact the best interests of a child for purposes of child support awards, and so wants family courts to consider....

Family Code - FAM ... 4320. In ordering spousal support under this part, the court shall consider all of the following circumstances: .... as punishable pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 664 of the Penal Code, or of soliciting the murder ... this subdivision shall only apply to convictions that occur on or after January 1, 2019.
Jan 12, 2019 - The new codes went into effect on January 1, 2019. ... Under California's Family Code Section 4320 (j), when determining spousal support, the ...

Family Code 4320 governs the amount and duration of alimony in California .... However, commencing in 2019, the new federal tax laws make modifications to .

Since the rules on spousal support have drastically changed, make sure to find out how the laws will affect you. Especially if you are the one paying, or  believe that you should not be paying the amount you were told to pay...

Thursday, October 31, 2019

Winning in Unusual Way! from 2015

In another instance of trial, after cross examining the other party, the opposing counsel suddenly called a recess.

After 7 years of never being able to get a dime out of the ex, who had already filed bankruptcy, my client, having previously used 3 different lawyers, [w/o a good result],  ended up contacting attorney herein --- for trial.
The opposing attorney stopped the trial and offered a combo of about $23,000 combined cash/property $100,000, and attorney fees of $6,000. This likely meant that if they had NOT stopped the trial, my client would had gotten spousal, but we would have had to chase him forever across the USA to get it. Client elected to take the offer. Because attorney herein cornered the ex spouse on the stand for what appeared to be potential bankruptcy fraud, the rest is history......

In another instance, a civil case by a former wife against former husband and girlfriend, the husband  had already been convicted of homicide (and was on appeal, he lost); the case then went to jury on issue on civil liability as to both husband and girlfriend. Keeping in mind husband was already convicted of first degree murder, the jury decided that husband was only 60% at fault in civil case. 

Normally the civil case has much less burden of proof, so finding the husband only 60% and not 100% evidently meant, jury wanted to punish the girlfriend because they took 40% and assigned it-- NOT-- to the husband. This verdict was reported in Verdict Search, a national reporting source for large verdicts nationwide. Counsel representing the girlfriend was from insurance defense firm.

Currently, the former wife has not been able to collect much on the verdict [of millions] after paying fees/costs and it is anticipated she will not be able to collect in the future. Very interesting case, which also involved animals (pet dogs) owned by the husband/son. Son was stabbed when father went to check on condition of dogs; father claims son ran into the knife by lunging forward.

In a very unusual scenario, attorney was substituted into a case with a client who did not reside locally;  a hearing on an issue was set for a date only several days away, at which time attorney believed the hearing could be continued. It seems the hearing was in fact a trial (according to Judge) -- and the client was not present and Judge did not want to continue the issue. Attorney went forward on the issue, with no witness or client. Using only cross examination, Attorney actually won the trial--much to surprise of  witnesses present and including opposing counsel.

This is very uncommon, but imagine how your case might work out if attorney can do this, without even having a client or a witness?

Attorney thinks it's fair to say, you would be in good hands. Especially if other attorneys have failed in the past on your case.

Note: All of these scenarios are actual cases but by no means are such outcomes considered standard. Each case has different facts and various laws which will apply; each case can vary tremendously, and attorney is not representing that such outcomes are common. However, attorney does have a very high percent of cases that settle or result in what the client wanted.

Friday, October 25, 2019



Can You Lose Custody Due to Bipolar,Drugs, Arrests, Domestic Violence, or Even Lies??

First... we should remember that there is both legal custody and physical custody. Many parents are concerned over physical custody as it is tied into child support; and many parents are concerned about legal custody, because shared legal custody is often given, unless one parent has shown he or she has issues in that area; CA law favors joint legal/physical if agreed upon, but the court has wide discretion for parenting and will consider the child or children's best interest.

Legal custody basically involves the health, welfare, education and safety issues involving raising of children. Attorney has seen many parents lose legal custody [prior to consulting attorney herein] due to very poor decisions made with kids (i.e. drunk driving, drug history, domestic violence, criminal actions, harming of kids, abandoning kids, etc.) As an example of "joint legal custody" in a form (by the CA Judicial Council, and used by all CA courts, see form FL341(E) online..)

 It is potentially possible that one parent can poison the relationship between a parent and child to extent that the Court might have to award the other child to the other parent to prevent the same parental alienation from happening?

Family Code 3042 goes over a child's preference of where to live (one parent or another) and generally,  gender, race, religion, sexual orientation or handicap supposedly are irrelevant to custody of children. If this was your partner being arrested, consider the difficulty at trial as to whether or not it would make a difference to your case?

So when your mediation results in a recommendation you do not like or want, did the mediator make informed decisions or did he or she ignore you and just listen to the other parent? It is very common to find out after the mediation that neither parent really understood what happened in the mediation itself. Not all mediators do the actual mediations exactly alike.

Attorney has found that many clients do not do well in mediation because they do not understand why they need to even go to mediation. Then they just blurt out anything they want to, may express high anger or no patience, and basically do not present well to the person that will decide their fate with the kids?

When considering whether one can lose custody to any of the named things listed in the title for this post, attorney has indeed seen parents lose custody for those things, in combination with many other things, most of which were negative. Negative things (smoking inside, falling asleep drunk, letting kids wander alone outside in front yard, giving kids alcohol or drugs, leaving kids alone home, allowing large animals with kids unsupervised, putting older kids in charge of younger kids while older kid is playing video games entire time, letting kids be truant, failing to take kids to doctor, ignoring kids' homework, etc.)

The reason that gender, race, religion and sexual orientation or handicap are not relevant to custody is because those items are already under Federal law protections, so it would be discriminatory. Note however, that if a parent was trying to get away with something by claiming it fell under one of those categories but in reality, it did NOT, that would be a different story.)

If you are facing mediation and need help, contact attorney.