Palo Alto City Attorney Donald Larkin Frustrated

Tony Ciampi keeps throwing and landing legal punches’, motions and city attorney Donald Larkin is becoming increasingly frustrated as the city of Palo Alto’s top attorney attempts to recover from repeated blows.

All from a man with no formal legal experience or educational background in fact, his office is his van and his vast legal library is powered by Google.

This is a story against all odds.   As reported in the Daily Post Wednesday , Dec 15th Mr. Larkin is reported as saying, “The problem we run into is that he’s looking for things that don’t exist .  He wants the smoking gun that shows that we did things we didn’t do.  He’ll never be satisfied”.

In reality, what Mr. larkin is strongly objecting to is Mr. Ciampi’s unorthodox approach to lawful discoveries.

Any forensic audio investigator worth his salt will go the distance to uncover any traces of video, voice and or data manipulation as alleged by Mr. Ciampi.

Let’s not forget too, this is David against Goliath.  The city of Palo Alto has unlimited resources at their disposal and the powerful backing of whatever outside counsel of its choosing.

Mr. Ciampi has his mobile sleeper office, his van which Jay Thorwaldon of the Weekly in an editorial, was pushing the city of Palo Alto to have removed from its streets.   Conspiracy?  The Weekly has always been pro-police and has one of it’s reporters sitting on the commission of the Palo Alto human relations committee.

That is to say Jay feels the homeless (non-conventionally housed) , disenfranchised; those who sleep in their cars are the blight of the city and should drive elsewhere.

It would not surprise me if Mr. larkin decides to claim Mr. Ciampi to be vexatious in the filing of his motions.  But, let’s not forget one very important aspect of Mr. Ciampi’s motions.

Consider this.  After being filed and reviewed by a judge for sound reasonableness, they have been stamped – Motion Granted.    For that matter, I don’t believe any of Mr. Ciampi’s motions have been denied.

Perhaps this is the real root cause of Mr. Larkin’s frustration.

I left a voice mail message with Mr. Larkin requesting further comment on the Daily Posts story.   However, they continue to deny, access (“Blacklist”) PaloAltoFreePress. com from any news media follow-up.

The Making Of A California State Bar Complaint – Part TWO – The Intake #10-27213

Tit for tat?

I have been told by a reliable source that Mr. Sherman of the Law firm of – Ferguson, Praet and Sherman are planning a retaliatory response / law suit seeking unspecified defamation damages against Mr. Ciampi for filing a  State Bar complaint.

I have left a voice-mail message with Mr. Sherman seeking comment and will update this site with further information as things progress.   For an overview of the general complaint, please review Part One.

And for more information on how to file a complaint against a California attorney – Please visit – www.calbar.ca.gov/

THE GOLIN’S IN A STUNNING REVERSAL – STATE OF CALIFORNIA SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

It’s been a long, a very long legal battle for the Golins who since 2001 have been seeking the release of their daughter Nancy Golin from her present day captor, the State of California.  The issue in this case, is whether the Golins, Jeff and his wife have been vexatious litigants.

I don’t know about you, but as a parent, I personally would do anything, to bring about their release.    We today, can only look at a modern day event involving students  who were jailed by the Iranians for straying into their country while out hiking.

There jailing prompted international outrage and appeals by their parents.   Who in their right mind would call them vexatious?

Well, in this case, that would be lead attorney for the defendants, (City of Palo Alto)  Scott D. Pinsky in the matter of  – JEFFREY GOLIN et al. Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. CLIFFORD B. ALLENBY et al., Defendants and Respondents.

In an email received from Scott D. Pinsky he stated – “No Comment” concerning this decision.

What does this decision mean?  It means, it will now pave the way for the Golins to perhaps finally, finally have the entire merits of their case heard before a jury.

Something attorneys, Scott D. Pinsky, Gary Baum and Donald Larkin for the City of Palo Alto have been desperately trying to prevent.  It could result in not only the release of their daughter Nancy, but a multi-million dollar judgment should they prevail.

It’s a stunning reversal and a case which will ultimately impact any potential state sanctioning and alleged warehousing (jailing) of disabled Americans without the benefit of “Due Process”.

For more information on this case, go to:
http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/disposition.cfm?dist=6&doc_id=1199869