09-07-28 To 09-07-30 Correspondence W Bennett Court Counsel Denial of Access

Joseph Zernik DMD PhD
Fax: (801) 998-0917 Email: jz12345@earthlink.net; PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750
00-00-00-us-la-sup-ct-sturgeion-v-county-09-07-28-drapac-access –to –records

09-07-28- In re: Sturgeon v County (BC351286), request to access judicial records to inspect and to
copy pursuant to Nixon v Warner Communications, Inc (1978)
Gregory Drapac
Superior Court of California
Administrator II
gdrapac@lasuperiorcourt.org
Mr Drapac:
The San Francisco Court of Justice Richman informed me that you are the local coordinator for
Sturgeon v LA County (BC351286). As such, I request that you coordinate direct access to
electronic litigation records of Sturgeon v LA County (BC351286) pursuant to Nixon v Warner
Communications, Inc (1978), where the U.S. Supreme Court re-affirmed the Common Law and
First Amendment rights of public access to judicial records to inspect and to copy.
Please let me know as soon as possible of the time and place where I will be provided such
access. Request is for access to inspect and to copy electronic records of Sturgeon v LA County
(BC351286) in Sustain, which are:
1) Register of Actions/Case History in Sustain, including Audit Data;
2) Minute Orders of the case – as they appear in Sustain;
3) Book of Judgments – if any exists in LA County, and in its absence – entry of judgment
registration in the Register of Actions/ Case History in Sustain, including Audit Data;
4) Index of All Cases – in Sustain;
5) Calendars of All Courts – in Sustain.
Furthermore, in order to allow reasonable reading of such records in Sustain, additional request
is for access to inspect and to copy the following LA Superior Court records:
1) Rules of Court, published in compliance with the law, which explicitly provide the Local
Rules of LA County Superior Court, today in force and effect in LA Superior Court, for
Entry of Judgment and for Notice of Entry of Judgment;
2) Rules of Court, published in compliance with the law, or in their absence – Sustain Manual,
which explicitly provide lists of words, or “Dictionary” for Sustain, i.e. which values are
valid entries for the various variables (E.g. Motion, Order, etc). In other words – which are
the valid menu options, recognized as valid entries by Sustain for the various field which are
variable for data entry.
which explicitly provide explanation for the meaning of Date of Entry of Minutes such as
“00/00/00” or “33/33/33”.
which explicitly provide rules under which the LA Superior Court is allowed to modify or
alter the Case History/Register of Actions in Sustain, and notice to parties, if any, of such
nunc pro tunc alterations.
which explicitly provide rules under which some cases at the LA Superior Court will lists
monies paid by parties as: “Filing Fees”, “Motion Fees”, “Stipulation Fees”, etc, while in
other cases, all such moneys are listed as “Journal Entry”. It is further requested that Rules
z Page 2/3 July 28, 2009
of Court be provided as to the final disposition of funds that were originally designated
“Journal Entry”.
6) Rules of Court, published in Compliance with the law, or in their absence – Sustain Manual,
which explicitly provide rules under which some cases at LA Superior Court will list each
action with its corresponding termination, while other cases at the LA Superior Court will
allow all actions to remain unterminated.
Joseph Zernik
____________________
By: Joseph Zernik
Pro Se Party in Interest
Tel: 323 514 4583
Fax: 801 998 0917
Email: jz12345@earthlink.net
CC:
Court of Justice Richman:
Suzanne ORourke Scanlon

Judicial Assistant to th Hon. James A. Richman
(415) 865-7232
"ORourkeScanlon, Suzanne" <Suzanne.ORourkeScanlon@jud.ca.gov>
Parties and Counsel in Sturgeon v County (BC351286):
Paul J. Orfanedes, Esq.

JUDICIAL WATCH, INC.
501 School Street, SW
Suite 500
Washington, DC 20024
Tel: (202) 646-5172
Fax: (202) 646-5199
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Sterling E. Norris, Esq.

2540 Huntington Drive
Suite 201
San Marino, CA 91108
Tel.: (626) 287-4540
Fax: (626) 237-2003
z Page 3/3 July 28, 2009
Elwood Lui, Esq.

Brian Hershman, Esq.
DAY JONES
555 South Flower Street
50th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Telephone: (213) 489-3939
Facsimile: (213) 243-2539
bhershman@jonesday.com
Attorneys for Defendants
Theodore J. Boutrous Jr., Esq.

Kahn A. Scolnick, Esq.
GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
333 South Grand Ave
Los Angeles, CA 90071-3197
Tel: (213) 229-7000
Fax: (213) 229-7520
Attorney for Intervenor
MM
2009-Ju1-28 1258 PM LOS ANGELES SUPERlOR COURT 2136253964 1/2
Superior Court of California.

County of Los Angeles
Court Counsel
111 North Hill Street, Suite 546
Los Angeles, California 90012
Telephone (213) 893-1224
Facsimile (213) 625-3964
FAX COVER SHEET
DATE: 7/28/09 TOTAL PAGES (including coversheet): d:l--
TO: JOSEPH ZERNICK FAX NO.: (801) 998-0917
FROM: FREDERICK R. BENNETT

Court Counsel
RE: Electronic Access - Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles
Please see attached.
IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES, PLEASE TELEPHONE US

IMMEDIATELY AT THE NUMBER LISTED ABOVE.
confidontlatlty Notlce~ This m~ssaga, Includlna anyetmchmeme, 15 lbr till:sole mil: of lhCl Intended Nclphmt(s) and mayCORwin confidcntiEl.1 lind
privilcJI,od information. Anyunauthorized review, usa,disclosure or di!ltributlon Isprohibited. Iryou are not tha intended reclplcnt, please
c:ontnet thesenderanddestroy nilcopies altho original message,
2009-Ju1-28 1258 PM LOS ANGELES SUPERlOR COURT 2136253964 2/2
4Liis~i""""
/;:'''''I-*'''~~'.lii.N{l~,'~ FReoeRICK R. BeNN8T
I~''';~ ,'1;",<., COUIlTCOUN5el Superior Court of California
~~~ ~," ~\~ i'ii'NO:::R::IH':":H':::ll':"'lS::m::e::ET~.S~UIT::e-=54':":6~-------~----::::-"":""':"'_-~:----fo"":"-::---
"',I.~ I /.i!5 lOSANGclc5,CA90012.3014 Oounty of Los A~eles
"<>... ,,;W 12131 693-1224 Fex: (2131 625·3964
'<~~:.~~~Y
July 28, 2009
Joseph Zernik Via Facsimile to (801) 998-0917
Re: Request for electronic access to pleadings in Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles,
LASC Case number BC351286..
Dear Mr. Zernik:
Yourfacsimile and email to Los Angeles Superior Court Clerk Gregory Drapac was referred
to me for response.
Motions in pending cases must be filed in writing in accordance withthe California Rules of
Court. California Rule of Court 2.118 provides that the clerkof the courtmustnot accept for filing
or file any papers that do not comply with the California Rules of Court, Rules 2,I00 to 2.119.
California Rule of Court 2.118(a). California Rules of Court may be accessed at:
http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/rules/
Similarly, requests for court documents should be made in person 01' by letter. I do not
respond to email requests from other than court personnel. Such requests should also be submitted
in writing.
With regard to yourrequest for electronic access to pleadings in the Sturgeon litigation,
access to the court's electronic records aregoverned by California Rules of Court, Rule 2.500, and
following. Under those Rules the court may, but is not required to permit access to scanned
pleadings. When access to scanned pleadings is provided, Rule 2.506 permits the Court to impose
fees for such access,
In implementing these Rules, the Los Angeles Superior Court permits free access without
fee to paper files and available scanned pleadings at the courthouse where they are on file without
fee. Printed copies of either thepaperfiles or electronic copies are provided for a fee of fifty cents
a page. Alternatively, and as a convenience, you may view the court's registers of actions and
summaries of cases without fee on line at the court's web page, and may review, download and print
pleadings in most Central District Civil cases, including the Sturgeon case, by registering and
paying the fee therefor: httll://www.1asuperiorcourt,org!
rederick R. Bennett
Court Counsel
c: Gregory Drapac

09-07-28- In re: Sturgeon v County (BC351286), 2nd request to access judicial records to inspect
and to copy pursuant to Nixon v Warner Communications, Inc (1978)
Gregory Drapac
Administrator II
Tel: 213 974 5201
Fax: 213 625 8536
(by fax and by email)
Mr Drapac:
This is the second request to access the electronic Register of Actions of Sturgeon v County
(BC351286) in Sustain the Court’s case management system. You informed me today that Mr
Bennett , Counsel for the Court, responded on your behalf to my request earlier today.
That is not the case.
Mr Bennett wrote extensively regarding scanned pleadings, etc, but nowhere in his letter did he
address the issue of access to Register of Actions in Sustain, the official litigation record of the
LA Superior Court in Sturgeon v LA County.
I again request that you inform me when and where I would be able to access litigation records
in Sturgeon v LA County (BC351286), which are the Register of Actions, Book of Judgments (If
any exists), Calendars of the Courts, and Minute Orders in Sustain, the electronic case
management system of the LA Superior Court.
Joseph Zernik
____________________
By: Joseph Zernik
Tel: 323 514 4583
Fax: 801 998 0917
CC:
z Page 2/3 July 28, 2009

(415) 865-7232

Suite 500
Tel: (202) 646-5172
Fax: (202) 646-5199

Suite 201
Tel.: (626) 287-4540
Fax: (626) 237-2003
Elwood Lui, Esq.

DAY JONES
50th Floor
Telephone: (213) 489-3939
Facsimile: (213) 243-2539

333 South Grand Ave
Tel: (213) 229-7000
Fax: (213) 229-7520
MM
2009-Ju1-29 1007 AM LOS ANGELES SUPERlOR COURT 2136253964 1/7
---------_ .. _--_._..
County of Los Angeles
Court Counsel
III North Hill Street, Suite 546
LosAngeles, California 90012
Telephone (213) 893-1224
Facsimile (213) 625-3964
FAX COVER SHEET
DATE: 7/29/09 TOTAL PAGES (including coversheet): -r

TO: JOSEPH ZERNICK FAX NO.: (801) 998-0917
FROM: FREDERICK R. BENNETT

Court Counsel
RE: Request forAccess to Records - Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles
Please see attached.
IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES, PLEASE TELEPHONE US

IMMEDIATELY AT THE NUMBER LISTED ABOVE.
Canndenthillty Notice; This massagQ,lncludlng any enacbmeus, Isfur tho solousaof till' Intended reclplent(s) and may contain confldentlaland
privileged inforrnation. Anyunauthorized review, USQ, disclosure ordistribution Isprohibited. If youare nottheintended recipient, please
contact the .ender 'nd de.troy .lIeopie. orthe origin.1 m....go.
FREDERICK R. BENNETT
COUIlT COUNSEL Superior Court oj California
111 NORTH HILL smm. SUITE 546
lOSANGELES. CA90012·3014
County oj'Los AngeZr-
es -
(2131893·1224 FOX: (2131 625·3964
July29, 2009
Joseph Zernik Via Facsimile to (801) 998-0917
Re: July28,2009, Request for access to litigation records in Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles,
LASC Case number BC351286, and other cases.
Dear Mr. Zemik:
Your attached facsimile to Los Angeles Superior Court Clerk Gregory Drapac was referred to me for
response.
In this communication, yourequest thatyoube provided direct access to electronic litigation records in
Sturgeon v, County of Los Angeles, Los Angeles Superior COUlt casenumber BC3S1286, andothercases
under claimed Common Law andconstitutional rights of access to court records. You seekto inspect andcopy
thecourt's entire Sustain electronic databaserelated to the Register of Actions/Case history, Minute Orders,
Book of Judgements, Index and Calendars of all courts. Finally, you ask forpublished copies of'theRules of
Court, or in their absence, a copy of the Sustain Manual to assist you in understanding the Sustain electronic
databaseyou have requested.
These requests for court records arenot matters thatcan be resolved by the clerk forthejudicial officer
handling a specific case. Rather, public records requests such as yours should be directed to the custodian of
therecords, which is the Executive Officer/Clerk of theCourt, who hasrequested that I respond to your
requests on hisbehalf.
In responding to this inquiry, I have become aware thatyouhave made a number of othersimilar
requests relating to other cases overthe pasttwo years, many of which have been responded to by my
colleague, D. Brett Bianco. I also notethat youhave many pending cases in the Los Angeles Superior Court,
the Court of Appeal for the State of California, Second Appellate District, and at least one case pending in the
U.S. District Court against a number of Los Angeles Superior Court judges, personnel andothers, thatmay
relate in various ways to many of yourrequests. Reviewing the U.S. District Court docket forJoseph Zernik v.
Judge Jacqueline Connor, et al., U.S.D.C., Central District of California casenumber, CY08-I550, it appears
thatthe U.S. Magistrate recommended dismissing thataction on March 31, 2009, thatthe recommendation was
accepted by the District Court Judge on April 24,2009, andthatJudgement was entered on thatsame date
dismissing yourfederal claims withprejudice, andyourstateclaims without prejudice.
I have reviewed these matters to see if I could distill down more specifically whatyou were seeking
from the court so that I might be able to determine a feasible way to getyou what you are seeking.
Sturgeon documents: All of the pleadings, minute orders, andotherorders in the Sturgeon litigation
are public documents available for inspection andcopying by the public. A review of the matter does not
indicate thatanypleadings or orders have been sealed. Thepaper file for this case should be available for
inspection andcopying at the courthouse when the fileis not in useby thejudge, his clerk, or other members of
the public. In addition, those court records have also been scanned into electronic format and areviewable over
thepubllc electronic access terminals at thecourthouse, and copies of the pleadings maybe ordered. Finally, as
a convenience, you can also access the Register of Actions forthiscaseon line at the Court's web site,
LASuperiorCourt.org, which also presents a summary of all of thepleadings, orders and hearings in the case,
Joseph July 28,2009, Request for access to litigation records in Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles,
LASC Case number BC35 1286, andother cases.
July 29, 2009
Page: 2
andby registering andpaying the fee permitted by the California Rules of Court, youmay download andprint
copies ofthe pleadings andorders.
Inreviewing some of your pastcommunications to the court, it appears thatthere may be some
confusion as to the nature ofthe scanned electronic copies of thepleadings thatthe court makes available at the
public Sustain terminals andoverthe Internet, These documents were not electronically filed as permitted by
California Rules of Court Rules 2.250, and following. Thedocuments were filed as paper documents, andthen,
as is the practice formost civil cases in the Central District of the Court, butnot for other Districts, the paper
documents were scanned into electronic fermat, Asa result, andcontrary to a contention youhave made in
prior communications, these documents andcourt records are not governed by the provisions of California Rule
of'Court 2.254, or other provisions of Chapter 2 or Division 2 of the California Rules of Court. With certain
case specific exceptions permitted in certain complex litigation, which does not include the Sturgeon case, the
only pleadings thatare filed electronically in the Los Angeles Superior Court arecertain small claims actions.
Electronic court records generally aregoverned by Chapter 2 of Division 4 of the California Rules of
Court, Rules 2.500 andfollowing. Unlike Rille 2.254, which deals with pleadings electronically filed by the
parties in lieu of paper pleadings, these rules deal with themore general subject of electronic records,
regardless of themanner in which It has been computerized. See Rule 2.502(2).
These Rules of Court generally require thatall electronic records be made "reasonably available to the
public in some form, whether in electronic or in paper form, except those thatare sealed or made confidential
by law." Rule 2.503(a). TheRules of Court do notrequire electronic records to be made available In all forms.
In fact, the Rules mandate thatmany electronic records be made available only at the courthouse andnot over
the Internet. Rule 2.503(c).
Generally, registers of actions, calendars, and indexes arerequired to be made available overthe
Internet "to the extent it is feasible to do so." Rille 2..503(b). "Feasible" is defined to mean thata court is
required to provide such access "to the extent thatit determines it has theresources and technical capacity to do
so." This Court has done thatandthese matters areavailable to the extent the court has determined it has the
resources and technical capacity to do so on the Court's web site: LASliperiorCourt.org.
Bulkaccess to electronic records: With regard to bulk access to electronic court records such as you
have requested, the Rules of Court provide thata court "may" but is not required to provide such access. Rule
2.503(g). In this regard, this court generally follows the holding of Westbrook v. County ofLos Angeles (1994)
27 Cal.AppAth 157. As thatcaseholds, there is a qualitative difference between obtaining information
from a hand search of court files, and obtaining information from electronic data. It is the aggregate
and easily collated and manipulated nature of electronic data that warrants its difference in treatment
from access to court files.
None of the cases or authorities thatyou have provided require the court to provide youelectronic
access to therecords youhave described. Nordo such authorities give youdirect access to the court's Sustain
system or bulk distribution of all or a significant subset of the court's electronic records. Accordingly, your
request in this regard is denied.
Joseph July28,2009, Request fur access to litigation records in Sturgeon v, County of Los Angeles,
LASC Case number BC351286, andother cases.
July29,2009
Page: 3
Rules of Court: California Rules of Court may be accessed at: htto://wWW.coul1info.ca.govlrules/ The
Local Rules of the Court are available at: http://lasuperiorcourt.org/
Motions in Sturgeon or other cases: Motions, including ex parte motions, andmotions to intervene
in pending cases must be filed in accordance with the California Rules of Court andthe statutory fees must be
paid. California Rule of Court 2.118 provides thatthe clerk of the court must not accept for filing or file any
papers thatdo notcomply with the California Rules of Court, Rules 2.100 to 2.119. California Rule of Court
2.118(a).
Very truly yours,
~:::~
Court Counsel
c: John A. Clarke
Gregory Drapac
D. Brett Bianco
To: Pas.SofS 2000.07-2" 12:41:20 (GMT) Prom: Joeeph zernlk
Joseph Zemik DMDPhD

Fax: (801) 998-0917 Email: jl12346@earthlink.net; ~O Box 626, La verne. CA91760
OO.OO·OO-us-la••up.ct-sIu'll.lon-v-<:ounty-09-01-28-d",pa.,.access -to - reCOI'II.

09-07-28- In re: StIU'geon V COlUlty (BC351286), request to access judicialrecords to Inspect and to
copy pursuant to Nixon v Wamer Communications, Inc (1978)
GregoryDrapac
Superior Court ofCalifomill
AdministmtorII
gdrapac@1l1/Juperiorco\ut.org
Mr Drapac:
TheSanFrancisco Court ofJustice Richman informed methatyou arethe local coordinator for
Sturgeon v LAConnty (BC35 1286). As such, I request thatyou coordinate direct access to
electronic litigation records ofSturgeon v LACounty (BC35 1286) pursuant to Nixon v Warner
Communications. Inc(1978), where the U.S. Supreme COUlt re-affirmed the Common Law and
FirstAmendment rights of public access tojudicialrecords to inspect andto copy.
Please let meknow as soon as possible of thetime and place where I willbe provided such
access. Request is for access to inspect and to copy electronic records ofSturgeon v LACounly
(BC351286) in Sustain, which are:
1) Register of Actions/Case History in Sustain, including Audit Data;
2) Minute Orders of the ease - as they appear in Sustain;
3) Bookof Judgments - if anyexists in LA County, andin its absence - entry ofjudgment
registration in theRegister of Aotionsl Case History in Sustain, including Audit Data;
4) Index of AllCases - in Sustain;
5) Calendars of All Courts - in Sustain.
Furthennore, in order to allow reasonable reading ofsuch records in Sustain, additional request
is for access to inspect and to copy thefollowing LA Superior COUlt records:
I) Rules of Court, published in compliance withthe law, which explicitly provide tile Local
Rules ofLACounty Superior Court, today inforce and effect in LA Superior Court, for
Entry of Judgment and for Notice of Entry of Judgment;
2) Rules ofCour!, published in compliance with thelaw, or in tlleU' absence - Sustain Manual,
which explleitly provide lists ofwords, or"Dictionary" for Sustain, i.e. which values are
valid entries forthevarious variables (E.g. Motion, Order, etc). In other words - which are
thevalidmenu options, recognized asvalid entries by Snstain for thevarious field which are
variable fordata entry.
3) Rules ofCour!, published in compliance with thelaw, or in their absence - Sustain Manual,
which explicitly provide explanation for themeaning ofDateof Entry of Minutes such as
"00/00/00" or "33133/33".
4) Rules of Court, published in compliance withthelaw. or in their absence - Sustain Manual,
which explicitly provide rules under which the LASuperior Court is allowed to modify or
altertheCase HistorylRegister of Aotions in Sustain, and notice to parties, if any, ofsuch
nunc pl'O tunc alterations.
5) Rules of'Court, published in compliance with the law, or in their absence - Sustain Manual,
which explicitly provide rules under which some cases at theLA Superior Court will lists
monies paid byparties as: ''FilingFees", "Motion Fees", "Stipulation Fees", etc, while in
other cases, all such moneys are listed as "Journal Entry". It is further requested tlmt Rules
PAQ!3f5 R Rcve AT71.2812DOII 5:44:25 AM [pIC Ina Daylight Time] R SVR:1..A..!AX011O * ONIS:6520 * CSIO: * DURATION (mmoss):02.1l4
']"0: ~age 4 or5 From: Joseph Z.rnrk
• Page213 July 28, 2008
of Court be provided as to the final disposition offundsthetwere originally designated

"Journal Entry",
6) Rules of Court, published in Compliance with the law, or in their absence - Sustain Manual,
which explicitly provide rules under which some cases at LA Superior Court will list each
action with its corresponding termination, while other cases at the LA Superior Court will
allow all actions to remain unterminated.
JosephZemik
:"', IJtD11DllJ ~lllncd by
~ , JlIlitllhH :t::Rmlk
VCN~O\.'Il$~phHUIT\\1i.
o,t1u,
.." J1 151nliJI11j15G'11flh1l1l
) . ~L. toe-US
,_" 'd~i\I'~trle.
CalifornIa ,.,,;
C1al~2009.o7.2.8
05:29:110-oroo'
By;Joseph Zemik
Pro SC PlUiy inInterest
Tel: 3235144583
Fa.'\:; 801 9980917
Email: jz l2345@eartblinknet
cc:
Com"! ofJusticeRichman;

JudioialAssistanttothHon. James A, Richman
(415) 865.7232
"ORourkeSoanlon, Suzanne" <Suzanne.ORourkeSoanlOl@iudoa.gov>
Partiesand Counsel in Sturgeon v County (BC351286):

Suite 500
Tcl: (202) 646-5172
Fax: (202) 646-5199
Attorneys/or Plaintiff
Suite 201
San Marino, CA91108
Tel.: (626) 287-4540
Fax: (626) 237-2003
Attorneysfor Plaintiff
PAGI!!! 4/5 R FlCVD AT 712812D08 5:44:25 AM [paCIfiC DayllgntTIm.]" SVR:LAJAXD1/0R DNIS:1I520 R CSID: R DURATION (mm-II):D2-64
2OOll-07-2812:41::l; (GMT) From: JCMpl'l ZlImlk
• Pag93/3 July 28, 2009
Elwood Lui, Esq.

DAY JONES
SOthFloor
Los Angeles, CA90071
Telephone: (213) 489-3939
Facsimile: (213) 243-2539
bhsnhman®jonss4ay.com
Attorneysfor Defendants
Theodore J. Boutrous Jr.,Esq.

Kahn A. Scolnick, Esq,
GillSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
333 South Grand Ave
Los Angeles, CA90071-3197
Tel: (213)229-7000
Fax: (213) 229-7520
Attormyfor ~
MM
PAOI m I RCW AT 7121120016:":26 AM ['de: D8YI1gtIt Tlme) I 8VR:I...A-'~D11O" DMI:U62D" CBlD: Il DURATIOr4 (mm...):oa:a

09-07-29- In re: Sturgeon v County (BC351286), 3rd request to access judicial records to inspect
and to copy pursuant to Nixon v Warner Communications, Inc (1978)
Gregory Drapac
Administrator II
Tel: 213 974 5201
Fax: 213 625 8536
(by fax and by email)
Mr Drapac:
This is the third request to access the electronic Register of Actions of Sturgeon v LA County
(BC351286) in Sustain the Court’s case management system. I received today by fax yet another
lengthy letter from Mr Bennett , Counsel for the Court, who responded on your behalf to my 2nd
request to access court records in Sturgeon v LA County.
Mr Bennett’s 1st response, dated July 28, 2009, just skirted the issue, and never addressed the
request to access the Register of Actions, the official litigation record of Sturgeon v LA County.
Mr Bennett’s 2nd response, dated July 29, 2009, again engaged in the same pattern, for example,
discussing at length the issue of access over the Internet, when in fact, I never requested Internet
access to records, I explicitly asked when and where I would be able to access the records,
willing to appear at any location of the court for that purpose.
Mr Bennett in his 2nd response went further than that, and included false and misleading
statements:
Finally, as a convenience, you can also access the Register of Actions
for this case on line at the Court's web site, LASuperiorCourt.org,
which also presents a summary of all of the pleadings, orders and
hearings in the case, and by registering and paying the fee permitted
by the California Rules of Court, you may download and print copies
of the pleadings and orders.
As you are fully aware, the Register of Actions of Sturgeon v LA County, or any other case
of the LA Superior Court, is NOT available online at LASuperiorCourt.org. The
information that is provided there, under the title “Case Summary”, is prefaced by a
Disclaimer by the Court, explicitly stating that the records presented online are NOT official
court records. Moreover, the information provided in such records online is vastly different
from the information in the Register of Actions in Sustain.
The Clerk of LA Superior Court attempted such misleading misuse of records in the past in
two other instances:
z Page 2/4 July 29, 2009
1) At California Court of Appeals, 2nd District, in case of Zernik v LA Superior Court

(B203063), the LA Superior Court filed the “Case Summary” from
LASuperiorCourt.org in lieu of the Register of Actions in Sustain. I then filed an
objection. The California Court of Appeals, 2nd District, then issued an order on the
Clerk of the LA Superior Court to withdraw that filing, in fact accepting my
objection.
2) At U.S. District Court, LA, in case of Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550), the
LA Superior Court filed the record called “Case Summary” from
LASuperiorCourt.org in lieu of the Register of Actions in Sustain. I then filed an
objection, and OSC Contempt, for attempted fraud on the U.S. Court by the LA
Superior Court. However, the U.S. District Court refused to rule on the matter, no
matter how much I pressed for a hearing and ruling. That Court claimed that the
issue was not material to the matter at hand…
Given such history, it is likely that Mr Bennett’s most recent response, and his statement
about the Register of Actions of Sturgeon v LA County being available online at
LASuperiorCourt.org, upon review by a competent court of jurisdiction, be deemed false
and deliberately misleading.
I again request that you inform me when and where I would be able to access litigation records
in Sturgeon v LA County (BC351286), which are the Register of Actions, Book of Judgments (If
any exists), Calendars of the Courts, and Minute Orders in Sustain, the electronic case
management system of the LA Superior Court, to inspect and to copy, pursuant to Nixon v
Warner Communication, Inc (1978), where the U.S. Supreme Court re-affirmed the Common
Law and First Amendment right to access judicial records to inspect and to copy.
Joseph Zernik
____________________
By: Joseph Zernik
Tel: 323 514 4583
Fax: 801 998 0917
P.S.
Court Counsel Bennett 2nd Response can be viewed at:
http://inproperinla.com/00-00-00-la-sup-ct-sturgeon-v-la-county-09-07-29-court-counsel-bennett-response-
no2--req-access-to-records.pdf
z Page 3/4 July 29, 2009
CC:
John A Clarke,
Executive Officer/Clerk of the Court
Phone: 213 974 5050
Fax: 213 621 7952
jclarke@lasuperiorcourt.org

(415) 865-7232

Suite 500
Tel: (202) 646-5172
Fax: (202) 646-5199

Suite 201
Tel.: (626) 287-4540
Fax: (626) 237-2003
Elwood Lui, Esq.

DAY JONES
50th Floor
Telephone: (213) 489-3939
Facsimile: (213) 243-2539

z Page 4/4 July 29, 2009
333 South Grand Ave

Tel: (213) 229-7000
Fax: (213) 229-7520
MM
00-00-00-us-la-sup-ct-sturgeion-v-county-09-07-30-drapac-req-#3-addendum
09-07-30- In re: Sturgeon v LA County (BC351286), Addendum to Request #3 to access judicial
records to inspect and to copy pursuant to Nixon v Warner Communications, Inc (1978)
Gregory Drapac
Administrator II
Mr Drapac:
Please accept the following as addition to my request #3: Mr Bennett, Court Counsel, made
some false and misleading statements in re: Litigation records. It also appears that Plaintiff,
which is Judicial Watch, Inc, is yet to gain access to the true litigation records in Sturgeon v LA
County (BC351286). Therefore, let me provide some clarification in re: Litigation records at
the LA Superior Court.
In Samaan v Zernik (SC087400), purported to be matter heard at the LA Superior Court, the
following records are available for viewing online:
1) The record that Counsel Bennett falsely and misleadingly referred to as the “Register of
Actions” at lasuperiorcourt.org, or “Case Summary”, can be viewed at:
http://inproperinla.com/00-00-00-la-sup-ct-case-summary-courtnet-08-11-30-s.pdf
The disclaimers that come with that record can be viewed at:
http://inproperinla.com/00-00-00-la-sup-ct-case-summary-online-disclaimers-s.pdf
2) The record that is the true Register of Actions in Sustain, is shown at:
http://inproperinla.com/00-00-00-la-sup-ct-register-of-actions-case-history-s-v-z-sustain-08-11-14-
certified-s.pdf
3) The differences between records 1) and 2) are summarized in a table form, as filed at the
California Court of Appeals, 2nd District (B203063 ), can be viewed at:
http://inproperinla.com/00-00-00-computers-&-the-courts-false&deliberately-misleading-court-records-
s.pdf
Additional discussion of the Register of Actions, and false records in it, can be viewed at:
http://inproperinla.com/00-00-00-computers-&-the-courts-register-of-action.pdf
4) The Minute Orders, as seen in paper court file, can be viewed at:
http://inproperinla.com/00-00-00-la-sup-ct-minute-orders-s-v-z-paper-court-file-s.pdf
5) The Minute Orders, as seen in Sustain, or electronic court file, can be viewed at:
http://inproperinla.com/00-00-00-la-sup-ct-minute-orders-electronic-case-file-08-11-14-full-certif-s.pdf
6) The differences between the records in 4) and 5) are summarized in a table form in the
following record, which can be viewed at:
http://inproperinla.com/00-00-00-la-sup-ct-minute-orders-table-summary-s-v-z-s.pdf
7) Short discussion of false and deliberately misleading litigation records at the LA Superior
Court, can be viewed at:
http://inproperinla.com/00-00-00-computers-&-the-courts-abstract-&-figures.pdf
Joseph Zernik
z Page 2/3 July 30, 2009
____________________
By: Joseph Zernik
Tel: 323 514 4583
Fax: 801 998 0917
CC:

(415) 865-7232

Suite 500
Tel: (202) 646-5172
Fax: (202) 646-5199

Suite 201
Tel.: (626) 287-4540
Fax: (626) 237-2003
Elwood Lui, Esq.

DAY JONES
50th Floor
Telephone: (213) 489-3939
z Page 3/3 July 30, 2009
Facsimile: (213) 243-2539


333 South Grand Ave
Tel: (213) 229-7000
Fax: (213) 229-7520
MM, KW

09-07-28 To 09-07-30 Correspondence W Bennett Court Counsel Denial of Access

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

09-07-28 To 09-07-30 Correspondence W Bennett Court Counsel Denial of Access

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Joseph Zernik DMD PhD

Fax: (801) 998-0917 Email: jz12345@earthlink.net; PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750

00-00-00-us-la-sup-ct-sturgeion-v-county-09-07-28-drapac-access –to –records

Court of Justice Richman:

Suzanne ORourke Scanlon

Parties and Counsel in Sturgeon v County (BC351286):

Paul J. Orfanedes, Esq.

Sterling E. Norris, Esq.

Elwood Lui, Esq.

Theodore J. Boutrous Jr., Esq.

Superior Court of California.

FAX COVER SHEET

DATE: 7/28/09 TOTAL PAGES (including coversheet): d:l--

TO: JOSEPH ZERNICK FAX NO.: (801) 998-0917

FROM: FREDERICK R. BENNETT

RE: Electronic Access - Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles

Please see attached.

IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES, PLEASE TELEPHONE US

July 28, 2009

Joseph Zernik Via Facsimile to (801) 998-0917

Dear Mr. Zernik:

00-00-00-us-la-sup-ct-sturgeion-v-county-09-07-28-drapac-access –to –records

That is not the case.

Court of Justice Richman:

Suzanne ORourke Scanlon

Parties and Counsel in Sturgeon v County (BC351286):

Paul J. Orfanedes, Esq.

Sterling E. Norris, Esq.

Elwood Lui, Esq.

Theodore J. Boutrous Jr., Esq.

FAX COVER SHEET

DATE: 7/29/09 TOTAL PAGES (including coversheet): -r

FROM: FREDERICK R. BENNETT

RE: Request forAccess to Records - Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles

Please see attached.

IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES, PLEASE TELEPHONE US

Joseph Zernik Via Facsimile to (801) 998-0917

Dear Mr. Zemik:

Very truly yours,

To: Pas.SofS 2000.07-2" 12:41:20 (GMT) Prom: Joeeph zernlk

Joseph Zemik DMDPhD

OO.OO·OO-us-la••up.ct-sIu'll.lon-v-<:ounty-09-01-28-d",pa.,.access -to - reCOI'II.

']"0: ~age 4 or5 From: Joseph Z.rnrk

• Page213 July 28, 2008

of Court be provided as to the final disposition offundsthetwere originally designated

Suzanne ORourke Scanlon

Partiesand Counsel in Sturgeon v County (BC351286):

Paul J. Orfanedes, Esq.

2OOll-07-2812:41::l; (GMT) From: JCMpl'l ZlImlk

• Pag93/3 July 28, 2009

Elwood Lui, Esq.

Theodore J. Boutrous Jr.,Esq.

00-00-00-us-la-sup-ct-sturgeion-v-county-09-07-28-drapac-access –to –records

1) At California Court of Appeals, 2nd District, in case of Zernik v LA Superior Court

Court of Justice Richman:

Suzanne ORourke Scanlon

Parties and Counsel in Sturgeon v County (BC351286):

Paul J. Orfanedes, Esq.

Sterling E. Norris, Esq.

Elwood Lui, Esq.

Theodore J. Boutrous Jr., Esq.

333 South Grand Ave

Court of Justice Richman: