Sacramento Superior Court Conflict of Interest Law Violations: Supreme Court Committee Confirms Systemic Judge Pro Tem Conflict Disclosure Violations

Judges Continuing Failure To Disclose Judge Pro Tem Conflicts Violates Supreme Court Committee on Judicial Ethics Opinions Directive

In May, 2013 Sacramento Family Court News reported that family court judges were violating state law by failing to disclose to opposing parties when a judge pro tem represents a client in court.  The violations remain ongoing. 

An attorney and Sacramento Family Court News reader provided the California Supreme Court Committee on Judicial Ethics Opinions Formal Opinion embedded at the bottom of this post. The opinion provides yet another legal reference specifying that family court judges must disclose potential conflicts of interest on the record. At court hearings where no court reporter is present, the disclosure must be in writing, according to the CJEO.

To continue reading, click Read more >> below: 

Sacramento Superior Court Temporary Judge Misconduct: Whistleblower Leaked Court Records Document Obstruction of Justice by Judge Pro Tem Lawyer

Obstruction of Justice Crimes Alleged Against Judge Pro Tem Attorney Paula Salinger, Sacramento Bar Association Family Law Executive Committee Officer

Allegations that judge pro tem lawyer Paula Salinger committed obstruction of justice crimes against an indigent, unrepresented pro per have gone viral throughout family court reform social media.

Whistleblower leaked records from a Sacramento Family Court case indicate that criminal acts were committed by family law attorney and temporary judge Paula Salinger against an indigent, unrepresented, pro per family court party. The pro per was a victim and witness in a family court criminal contempt case filed against a Salinger client, and the pro per also is a domestic violence victim, according to court records. Family court reform advocates say the case is another example of the complete lack of oversight and accountability of attorneys who engage in egregious misconduct against disadvantaged, pro per litigants who can't afford legal representation.  

To continue reading, click Read more >> below: