Case 2:08-cv-01550-VAP-CW Document 41 Filed 04/17/2008

. '
Page 1 of 27

11 Joseph
JosephZemik
Zemik
2 2415 Saint George
2 2415 Saint Georg St.
e St.
LosAngele
Los Angeles, CA90027
s, CA 90027 n.~.·,

3 Tel: (310) 4359107 "'"';'"'.

3 Tel: (310) 43591 07
Fax:(801)
44 Fax: (801)998
9980917
0917
jz12345@earth1ink.net
5@ear thlink. net
-~"".
, .
jz1234
:.:~.? :' -.J
rI
~-_._- .
55 Plaint
Plaintiff
iff z~·(~~::.~~.I
. •
r--:1
I' ,
6 in pro per
6 in pro per
DIg""'1y
OlgiUl/y
Zemlk
>lg>lgnod
nod byby _ph
Jo",ph ,.-r-. ._. ")
rr~
fP,' --n ,-
l :\
~_,
j
I t:mlk
ON;cn=Jo1ephZ~Ik,
"r- '-, )
...-.::::.. _ J)J) ON;cn=Joseph Zrmik,
)) • .' '~L.:~d=jI123.5@Jearthlink.
. ~l- : ~d =jI 1 2345@earth link.
IF - ,: ' :
l,.;~' c:
(j\(:-~
nt\ c;:;US

77
Date:
Date 2008.04.15
: iOo8.04 12:08:20
.t5 12:08:20
r C) c ;)
-{)7'«1
.()7'tX1 i; r n C)
•I • :.;- : ~
:' :;~
-J
-.l
I
88 II
I
-~
-~

UNITED
UNIT ES DIST
STATES
ED STAT RICT COU
DISTRICT RT
COURT I
99 CENTRAL
CENT DISTRICT
RAL DISTR OF CALIF
ICT OF ORNI A
CALIFORNIA
10
10
11
11
JOSEPH
JOSEP ZERNIK
H ZERN IK No. CV-08 -01550-VAP-CW
CV-08-01550-VAP-CW
12
12 E
Plaintiff
Plain tiff HON C. WOE HRLE , JUDG
WOEHRLE, JUDGE
13
13 JI:
14
14 NOTI
NOTICE 11,200 7 PLAIN
CE OF DEC 11,2007 TIFF'S
PLAINTIFF'S
JACQUELINE
JACQ CONNOR
UELIN E CONN OR ET AL
DECL ARAT ION RE:
DECLARATION RE: EX PART E
EX PARTE
15
15 Defendants
Defendants
APPE ARAN
APPEARANCES CES BY RECE
BY RECEIVERIVER
16
16 PAST ERNA K AND
PASTERNAK ANOT HER
AND ANOTHER
ATTO RNEY IN
INCO GNIT O ATTORNEY
INCOGNITO LASC
IN LASC
17
17 ES HART -COLE AND
COUR
COURTSTS OF JUDG
JUDGES HART-COLE AND
18 COLLINS, ISSUE GAG ORDE
TO ISSUE GAG ORDERS
COLL INS, TO RS
18
PLAIN TIFF, TO
AGAI NST PLAINTIFF,
AGAINST PREV ENT
TO PREVENT
19
19 FROM EXERCISING
mM FROM PROT ECTE D
EXER CISIN G PROTECTED
mM
20 SPEECH HIS OWN
SPEEC H -- HIS DEFE NSE AS
OWN DEFENSE AS
20
DEFE NDAN IN PRO PER IN LASC..
DEFENDANT T IN PRO PER IN LASC
21
21
FILED IN
FILED U.S. DISTRICT
IN U.S. IN
COUR T IN
DISTR ICT COURT
22
22 OF PLAINTIFF
SUPP ORT OF
SUPPORT TO
REQU EST TO
PLAIN TIFFREQUEST
23 ALTE RNAT
CONT INUE,ALTERNATIVELY TO
CONTINUE, IVELY TO
23
HEAR INGS
CONS OLIDA TEHEARINGS
CONSOLIDATE
24
24
25 DATE :APRIL
DATE: 2008
15,2008
APRIL15,
25
26
26 TO
TOALL
ALLPARTIES
PART IESAND
ANDTHEIR COUN SELSOF
THEI RCOUNSELS RECO RD:
OFRECORD:
27 PLEASE follo wingdocument, pre viouslyfiled
document,previously LASeinin
filedininLASC
27 PLEA SETAKE
TAKENOTICE
NOTI CEof
ofthe
thefollowing

2828 Samaan
SamaanvvZemik
Zernik(SC087400)
(SC0 87400)- - -1-
-1-

NOTICE DECLARATI ONININRE: DEC7,7,2007

RE:DEC PARTES
EXPARTES
2007EX
NOTICEOF
OFPLAINTIFF'S
PLAINTIFF'SDECLARATION
Case 2:08-cv-01550-VAP-CW Document 41 Filed 04/17/2008 Page 2 of 27

11 NOTICE
NOTI OFNOTI
CE OF NOTICE
CE OFOFDEC
DEC11,200 7 PLAIN
11,2007 TIFF'S DECL
PLAINTIFF'S DECLARATION RE:EX
ARAT ION RE: EX
PARTE APPEARANCES BY IVER
RECEIVER
RECE PAST ERNA
PASTERNAK K AND
ANDANOT HER
ANOmER
PART E APPE ARAN CES BY
22 INCOGNITO
INCO ATTORNEY
GNIT O ATTO RNEY IN LASCCOUR
INLASC COURTS OFJUDG
TS OF ES HART
JUDGES -COLE AND
HART-COLE AND
COLLINS, TO ISSUE GAG
GAG RS
ORDERS
ORDE AGAI NST
AGAINST PLAIN TIFF,
PLAINTIFF, TO
TOPREV ENT IDM
PREVENT IDM
33 COLL INS, TO ISSUE
DEFE NSE AS
FROM EXERCISING
FROM EXER CISIN G PROTECTED
PROT ECTE D SPEEC H
SPEECH - - HIS
HISOWN
OWN DEFENSE AS
44 NDAN T IN
DEFENDANT
DEFE INPRO INLASC
PERIN
PROPER LASC..

55
StatesCourt,
United States LosAngel
Court, Los es inin suppo rt of
66 This docum
This document
ent isis filed
filed in
inUnited Angeles support of
ue hearin on Motio
gs on ns toto Dismi ss,
77 Plaint
Plaintiffs
iff's exexparte
parte applic
application
ation toto contin
continue hearings Motions Dismiss,
88 alterna
alternatively
tively -- to
to consol
consolidate hearings.
idate hearin gs.
this declar ation hehe alread raised substa
y raised ntial
99 At the
At the time
time Plaint
Plaintiff wrote this
iff wrote declaration already substantial
10 concer
concerns that none
none ofofthe
the judges
judges who as Presid
served as
who served ing Judges
Presiding Judge Conno
after Judge
Judges after Connorr
10 ns that
11 was
was duly
duly assign
assigned. Plaintiff
ed. Plaint each and
asked each
iff asked one of
every one
and every them in
ofthem parte appear
ex parte
in ex ances
appearances
11
12 to
to notice
notice him of their assign ment order, but
assignment but none did. HoweHowever, more recent
ver, more recentlyly
12
13 Plaint
13 Plaintiff realized
iff realize ole, beyon
Hart-Cole,
d that Judge Hart-C beyond d having no due assign ment, was
assignment, also aa
was also
14 judge
14 judge ofof a limited civil depart ment. Samaa
department. Samaan Zernik is a civil unlimi
n v Zemik unlimited case. How
ted case. How
15 ambiguous legal situation. Plaintiff
situation. Plaintiff
15 the
the case
case ended up in her hands? It is still left an ambiguous
16 (Defendant Witts) for several months
several months
16 has
has been
been demanding
demanding from the Clerk's Clerk's Office (Defendant
17 stipulated in Rules of
fee stipulated $15.00
Court $15.00
of Court
17 certificates
certificates of the Assignment
Assignment Orders (at the fee
18 Judges, alternatively certificates that
alternatively - certificates no such
that no orders
such orders
18 per
per document)
document) of the Honorable
Honorable Judges,
19 to provide
refused to any certification
provide any one way
certification -- one or
way or
19 exist
exist on
on file.
file. The
The LASC
LASC has has soso far
far refused
20
20 the
the other.
other.
Dated: April 14thth, 2008
21 Dated: April 14 , 2008
21
22
22 Respectfully
Respectfully submitted.
submitted.
23
23
24
24 ZERN IK
JOSEP HZERNIK
JOSEPH
25
25 Plaint iff
Plaintiff
prope r
ininproper
26
26
27
27
28
28

-2-
-2-
NOTICE DEC7,7,2007
RE:DEC
DECLARATIONININRE: PARTES
EXPARTES
NOTICEOF
OFPLAINTIFF'S
PLAINTIFF'SDECLARATION 2007 EX
Case 2:08-cv-01550-VAP-CW Document 41 Filed 04/17/2008 Page 3 of 27

11 ARTIO N
STATEMENT
STAT EMEN T OF OFVERIF
VERIFICATION OFNOTI
ICATI ON OF NOTICE OFPLAIN
CE OF TIFF'S DECL
PLAINTIFF'S DECLARTION
22 DEC 11,2007
DEC11,200 RE:EX
7 RE: EXPART
PARTE ARAN CES
APPEARANCES
E APPE ON DEC 7,2007 BEFO RE JUDG
ON DEC 7,2007 BEFORE ES
JUDGES
HART-COLE
HART ANDCOLL
-COLE AND INS
COLLINS
33
44 I,I, Joseph
JosephZernik
Zernik, Defendant
amDefend
, am CrossCompl
ant && Cross ainant ininSamaa
Complainant Samaan n vvZernik
Zernik
s Superi Court,West
or Court, WestDistric t, I Iam alsoAppell
amalso ant
55 (SC087400)
(SC087 matterheard
400) matter heardininLos
LosAngele
Angeles Superior District, Appellant
63), and alsoPlainti
andalso ZernikvvConno
ff ininZernik r etet
66 ininZernik
ZernikvvLos LosAngele
Angeles Superior
s Superi Court: (B2030
or Court: (B203063), Plaintiff Connor
StatesDistric
UnitedStates Court,Los
t Court, LosAngele s, Califor nia.
77 al(CV
al (CV 08-015
08-01550) matterheard
50) matter heard in
inthe
theUnited District Angeles, California.
II have
haveread
readthe
the forego
foregoing NOTICE
ing NOTI CE OF OF PLAIN TIFF'S DECL
PLAINTIFF'S ARAT ION RE:
DECLARATION RE: EXEX
88 PARTE APPLICATIONS ON DEC 7,2007 BEFO
DEC 7,2007 BEFORE RE JUDG E HART
JUDGE BART-COLE AND -COLE AND
PART E APPL ICATI ONS ON
99 COLLINS
COLL INS and and II know
know the
the conten
contentt thereo
thereof f to be true
to be correct.. It
and correct
true and correct based
It isis correct on my
based on my
10 own person
personal knowledgedge asas Defend
Defendant
ant in per in
pro per
in pro case. II make
said case.
in said make this this declara tion that
declaration that
10 own al knowle
11 the forego
foregoing is true
true and
and correct
correct under penalty of
under penalty perjury pursua
ofperjury nt to the laws of Califor
pursuant to the laws of California nia
11 the ing is
12
12 and the
and the United
United States.
th
th
Executed
Execut ed here inin Los
Los Angele
Angeles, Los Angele
s, County of Los s, Califor
Angeles, nia, on
California, 14 day
this 14
on this day in
in
13
13
14
April,, 2008.
April 2008.
) .~
14
15
15
16 Joseph Zerni k
J osepb Zernik
16
Plaint iff
Plaintiff
17
17 proper
in proper
in
18
18
19
19
20
20
21
21
22
22
23
23
24
24
25
25
26
26
27
27
28
28

-3-
-3-
NOTICE
NOTICEOF
OFPLAINTIFF'S DECLARATIONININRE:
PLAINTIFF'SDECLARATION 2007EX
DEC7,7,2007
RE:DEC PARTES
EXPARTES
Case 2:08-cv-01550-VAP-CW Document 41 Filed 04/17/2008 Page 4 of 27
Case 2:08-cv-01550-VAP-CW Document 41 Filed 04/17/2008 Page 5" Digita
of lly27
signed by

se p n
h Zerniksigned by
, Digitally
i Josep
JoJose ~n=Joseph
; j Joseph Zernlk

p
"It ern
t1 ON:
~n:Joseph
'i ·Ze,mON: k.
f a il=JzI
ernlk,
234S@ea,

Zer n 1·1\.,",.1>£
Zern(l\t ,.,
,thlfllk.n e\: c=US
)Z123,4s@ear
Date: 2007.12.12 ·~:US
, ~ '" 08:44: 03 -08'00
Date: '
2007.12.12
, '" 08:44:03 -00'00'

DECLARATION ITI ON ER JOS RN IK

EP H ZEZERNIK
DE CL AR AT ION OFOF PETPETITIONER JOSEPH
day , Dec
FriFriday, 200
em ber 7, 7, 7
Regarding
Reg ard ing CoCourt pea ran ces onon
urt ApAppearances December 2007
I, JOSEPH ZERNIK, hereby declareasasfoll ows.
follows.
I, JOSEPH ZERNIK, hereby declare
eles
1. I amDef
I am endant & &Cro
Defendant ss-Complainant ininSam
Cross-Complainant aan v.v.Zer
Samaan nik, Los
Zernik, LosAng Angeles
1.
eles
County Superior Court Case No. SC087400, 87400, and andPet itioner ininthe
Petitioner LosAng
theLos Angeles
County Superior Court Case No. SC0
e pers onal kno wledge ofofthe facts
Court of Appeal, Division 5. As such, h, I Ihavhave personal knowledge the facts
Court of Appeal, Division 5. As suc
ect and , ififcall ed asasa awitn ess,
set forth herein, which I know to betrue trueandandcorr
correct and, called witness,
set forth herein, which I know to be
I could and would competently testify ify withwithresp ect ther
respect eto. Thi
thereto. s dec
This laration isis
declaration
I could and would competently test
submitted in connection with a Writ t Peti
Petition theApp
tion totothe eal Cou
Appeal rt Sec
Court ond
Second
submitted in connection with a Wri
dnesday mor ning Dec 12,
Circuit, Division 5, planned for submissionmission on onWe Wednesday morning Dec 12,
Circuit, Division 5, planned for sub
2007.
2007.
2. The noti
notice received from Mr
Mr Pas ternak was
Pasternak was inad equate, non
inadequate, specific, and
nonspecific, and
2. The ce rece ived from
rt File was
did not explain why this hearing was in Bev erly Hill
Beverly s, whe
Hills, when my Cou
n my Court File was
did not explain why this hearing was
told
in Santa Monica, but when called the day befo re Dep
before artment 0,
Department 0, II was
was told
in Santa Monica, but whe n I called
that the
and that
4,2 007 , and was
file was
the file
that Judge December 4,2007,
Segal was recused on December
that Judge Segal was recused
transferred to Judge Hart Cole.
transferred to Judge Hart Cole.
called the
since II called the same every
person every
same person
3. That
Tha t explanation
exp lana tion was
was somewhat
som ewh odd, since
at odd,
3.
tell me
not tell
did not
she did me that fact on
that fact Dec 4
on Dec
day,, anticipating Judge Segal recusal, and and she 4
day anticipating Judge Segal recusal,
or Dec 5, and on Dec 4 she still told me methat was an
therewas
thatthere anex exparte scheduled
parte scheduled
or Dec 5, and on Dec 4 she still told
WhenI Icame cameon onDecDec5,5,the theexex
on Dec 5, by Mr Pasternak, in Santa Monica. Monica. When
on Dec 5, by Mr Pasternak, in Santa
parteewas noticed on the door, but Mr Pasternakwas
MrPasternak wasnot andthe
there ,and
notthere, the
part was noticed on the door, but
whetherorornot thatexexparte
notthat place or
tookplace
partetook
courtroom assistant would not tell me mewhether or
courtroom assistant would not tell
not.
not.
4. InInBeverly filingper 170.6that
per170.6 thatI had preparedinin
I hadprepared
4. BeverlyHills
HillsI submitted
I submittedthe
thefiling
advance, although I did not even knowwthe nameofof
thename thethejudge. Exh ibit1 1isisa a
judge.Exhibit
advance, although I did not even kno
I servedononJudge t Cole.And
HarCole.
JudgeHart And
true and correct copy of the filing per §170.6 § 170.6 I served
true and correct copy of the filing per
turned out I madit
r on.I made
lateon. e it r to the
cleato
sure enough it was fully justified, as it itturned out later clear the
sure enough it was fully justified, as

-1--1-
Case 2:08-cv-01550-VAP-CW Document 41 Filed 04/17/2008 Page 6 of 27

Courtroom
Courtro assistant
om assista thatshe
nt that shehad deliveritittotothe
hadtotodeliver clerk,and
theclerk, hadtotobe
thatitithad
andthat be
thefirst
the firstitem
itemononthe
theagenda
agendaprior
priortotoanythin
anything Sheanswer
else. She
g else. answereded that shewas
thatshe was
notsure
sureititwould
wouldbebethe
thefirst
firsttime. clerk,who
Theclerk,
time. The whoentered fewminute
enteredaafew minutes s later,
later,
not
triedtotoconvin
tried convince meof
ce me ofthe
thesame
same-- that theywould
thatthey JudgeHart
submititittotoJudge
wouldsubmit Hart
Cole,butbutthat
thatshe
shewanted
wantedtotostart
startwith theex
withthe first. IIabsolut
partefirst.
exparte ely refused
absolutely refused..
Cole,
Theclerk
The clerkthen
thenwent
wentback
backto discussititwith
todiscuss HartCole.
JudgeHart
withJudge Cole.
5.
5. InInthe
themeanw
meanwhile
hile IInoticed thatthe
noticedthat CourtFile,
the Court File,Volum
Volume e IX, whichIIhave
IX, which have
seen. ItItwas
never seen. was sitting
sitting there.
there. So
So II asked to review
asked to it. In
review it. found interes
In itit II found ting
interesting
never
information:
inform ation:
6.
6. December
Decem 4, 2007
ber 4, 2007 MINU
MINUTE ORDER
TE ORDE R by SEGAL::
JUDGE SEGAL
by JUDGE

Titled: NON APPE

Titled: NON APPEARANCE CASE REVIE
ARAN CE CASE W -- JUDG
REVIEW JUDGEE RECU SAL. II served
RECUSAL. served
Judge Segal
Judge Segal per
per 170.3 on
on Novem
November avert that
ber 26, 2007. To avert recusal,,
that recusal
Judge Segal
Judge Segal recuse
recused himselff on 170.3(
d himsel c)(l), since he discov
170.3(c)(l), discovered he owned
that he
ered that owned

Countrywide stock. In it he wrote that "Coun

some Countrywide
some "Countrywide party ....
trywide is not aa party....
Countrywide to
himsel f to
Countrywide is just a witness
witness " Yet he was going to recuse himself
''further
"furth er the interest
interest ofJustice
ofJustice re-assignment ofthis case to
" "by re-assignment another
to another

judicial officer by the supervising district' ...

dge ofthis district' had
he had
.. . and that he
judicial offICer judge
supervisingju
done but" the
the reasons .... Arose
reasons .... were learned
and were
Arose and ofwith
learned of in
within
done his
his best
best so far, but"
so far,
the
the pastfew
pastfe w days".
days".
7.7. This dishonest by
deemed dishonest person
reasonable person
by aa reasonable
This 12-4-07
12-4-07 minute
minute order
order would
would bebe deemed
reviewing Segal recalled his stock
recalled his holding in
stock holding in
reviewing the
the case.
case. In
In recent
recent days
days Judge
Judge Segal
Countrywide... him recalled several weeks
recalled several taking
after taking
weeks after
Countrywide. .. Judge
Judge Goodman
Goodman before
before him
the
thecase
casethat
that he
hehad
had aalong
longterm
termclose friendship with
closefriendship Countrywide'sChief
with Countrywide's Chief

Legal claimedthat Countrywidewas

thatCountrywide merely
wasmerely
LegalCounsel.
Counsel. AndAndwhile
while Judge
JudgeSegal
Segalclaimed
aawitness listedininthe mailing list
themailing ofthe
listof very
thevery
witnessininthis
thiscase,
case,Countrywide
Countrywidewas
waslisted
same "Intervenor". And
Courtroomasas"Intervenor". Andonon
sameminute
minuteorder
ordercoming
comingfromfromhis
hisCourtroom
Courtnet
Courtnet- -the
theweb-based,
web-based,public
publicaccess system , Countrywide's
accesssystem, designation
Countrywide'sdesignation

-2-
-2-
Case 2:08-cv-01550-VAP-CW Document 41 Filed 04/17/2008 Page 7 of 27

waschange
was changed underJudge
d under JudgeSegal fromInterve
Segalfrom nor toto"Defen
Intervenor "Defendant', noreason
forno
dant', for reason

atatall.
all. As
AsI Iwas
wastold
toldaawhile
whileago
agoby
bythe JudgeGoodm
ClerkininJudge
theClerk Goodman's Court- - no
an's Court no
clerkwould
woulddo
doanythin
anything likethat
g like that(chang e designa
(change tions, add
designations, removeparties
addororremove )
parties)
clerk
onhis
on hisororher
herown.
own.

8.8. CourtReport
Court Reporter AngelaMap
er Angela Map(Dept phone-310
(Deptphone 288 1210)
-310288 tooknotes
1210)took ofthe
notesof the
hearing in
hearing inDept X.
DeptX.
9.
9. Judge Linda
Judge LindaHart
Hartassume
assumed the bench,
d the andstarted
bench, and bydeclari
startedby declaring thatmy
ng that my
filing per
filing per CCP §170.6 was
CCP §170.6 was dismiss since II had
ed, since
dismissed, already filed
had already CCP §170.6
per CCP
filed per §170.6
against Judge
against Judge Conno
Connor on July
r on July 12,200 7.
12,2007.
10.
10. II explain
explained to Judge
ed to Judge Hart
Hart Cole
Cole that had never
that II had filed CCP
never filed §170.6 with
CCP §170.6 with
Judge Conno
Judge Connor. What II filed
r. What filed with Judge Conno
with Judge Connor July 12,
on July
r on 2007 was
12,2007 per CCP
was per CCP
§170.3.. Howev
§170.3 However, Judge Conno
er, Judge Connor, dishonestly,
r, dishon in open-c
estly, in ourt declare
open-court declared that itit
d that

was aa filing §170.6,, and that it was untime

filing per CCP §170.6 ly, therefo
untimely, re dismiss
therefore ed.
dismissed.
was
The section
The numberr §170.6 was never even mentio
section numbe ned in the whole paper.
mentioned paper.
What
What happened
happened in the Courtroom
Courtroom was fully documented transcript.
documented in an honest transcript.
11. different record in the July 12,
July 12,
11. As As usual,
usual, Judge Connor
Connor created a vastly different
2007 me until much later. In In the minute
the minute
2007 Minute
Minute Order, which was hidden from me
order, disqualification under an unrelated
under an title, in
unrelated title, very
in aa very
order, she first of
she first of all
all hid
hid the
the disqualification
lengthy
lengthy minute
minute order
order -- same
same maneuvers she used
maneuvers she the Sept
for the
used for 2007
10, 2007
Sept 10,

disqualification
disqualification minute
minute order.
order. But
But onon July she also
12,200 7, she
July 12,2007, started from
also started from

claiming to CCP
shifted to 170.3 -- to
CCP §§170.3 fit the
to fit paper
the paper
claiming itit was
was CCP
CCP §170.6,
§170.6, and
and then
then shifted
record
record on
on my
myfiling.
filing.
12. Regardless person would
reasonable person deemthat
would deem was
thatititwas
12. Regardlessofofthe
themaneuvers
maneuvers-- aareasonable
aacase reading of
Myreading
recused . My ofthe lawwas
the law that
wasthat
caseof
ofaajudge
judgewho
who refused
refusedtotobe
berecused.
the removeher
supposedtotoremove fromthe
herfrom noneof
Butnone
case. But
thecase. of
theSupervising
SupervisingJudge
Judgewaswassupposed
that wasgood causeapparent
goodcause vacateall
apparenttotovacate all
thatever
everhappened.
happened. I Ialso
alsohold
holdthat
thatthere
therewas
of followingthat
judgmentsfollowing thatday, butno
day,but no
ofJudge
JudgeConnor's
Connor'srulings,
rulings,orders,
orders,and
andjudgments

-3-
-3-
Case 2:08-cv-01550-VAP-CW Document 41 Filed 04/17/2008 Page 8 of 27

JudgeininWest
Judge WestDistric
District wouldoverrul
t would overrulee anothe r. I Itried
another. explainall
triedtotoexplain thattoto
ofthat
allof
JudgeHart
Judge HartCole
Coleininway
wayofofexplain ing why
explaining wasentitled
whyI Iwas recusalper
herrecusal
entitledtotoher per
§170.6.
§170.6 .
13.
13. AAfew
fewminute
minutes afterthe
s after thestart
startof
ofthe hearingwith
thehearing JudgeHart-C
withJudge ole, IInoticed
Hart-Cole, noticed

aanew
newCounse
Counsel standing
l standin rightatatmy
g right myside frontof
sideininfront ofthe waswell-
judge. IIwas
thejudge. well-
versedatatsuch
suchshenan
shenanigans JudgeConno
fromJudge
igans from Connor'sr's Court, wherecorpor
Court,where ate
corporate
versed
counsels for Countr
ls for Countrywide thatroutine
doing that
were doing
ywide were ly -- so
routinely notto
as not
so as be identifi
to be ed
identified
counse
in the
the transcr
transcript as being
ipt as being there.
there. While they submit
While they submitted and attende
briefs and
ted briefs attendedd any
any
in
hearing from
hearing from July
July 66 to
to August 9,2007,, one
August 9,2007 fmd Countr
cannot find
one cannot Countrywide's name in
ywide's name in
any minute
any minute order.
order.
14.
14. II stoppe
stopped right away, and
d right and address
addressed Judge Hart-C
ed Judge Hart-Cole and asked
ole and if she
asked if she
would please
would please introdu
introduce the gentlem
ce the an who had just joined us. The
gentleman Judge was
The Judge was
visibly upset
visibly upset that I did that, and said angrily "We will do introdu
angrily:: "We ctions
introductions
later...".
later ...". I said: "I though introductions come before the argum
thoughtt introductions ents". Judge
arguments". Judge
Hart
Hart Cole
Cole refused to introduce hearing.
introduce this new party at the hearing.
15. Judge look into my
into my
15. Judge Linda Hart Cole then said she needed to take time off to look
claims
claims regarding
regarding not filing §170.6 with Judge Connor. recess II
During the recess
Connor. During
asked name andand he refused to
he refused give me
to give that
me that
asked the
the gentleman
gentleman on on my
my side
side for
for his
his name
infonnation. he was representing Mara
was representing then
Escrow! II then
Mara Escrow!
information. But But he
he diddid explain
explain that
that he
asked him how
how he he entered
entered thethe Court
Court like
like that. He answered
that. He that he
answered that bit
was aa bit
he was
asked him
late. acceptablein Courtroom for
that Courtroom
in that (and he
party (and
for aa party was
he was
late. II asked him if
asked him ifitit was
was acceptable
not that in middle of
themiddle
inthe was not
since IIwas
hearing ,since
ofaahearing, not
not aaparty)
party) to
to enter
enterthethe well
well like
like that
familiar gentleman would notanswer.
would not asked
then asked
answer . IIthen
familiar with
with this
this Courtroom.
Courtroom. TheThe gentleman
him thecase
discussedthe exparte
caseex with Judge
partewith Hart-
JudgeHart-
himifperhaps
ifperh apsby bychance
chance he
hehad
haddiscussed
Cole hadan "under standin g"that
an"understanding" would
hewould
thathe
advanceof
Coleininadvance ofthe
thehearing,
hearing ,and
andthey
theyhad
join
jointhe
thehearing
hearinglike
likethat,
that,unintroduced.
unintroduced. Again, hewould
Again,he answer.
notanswer.
wouldnot

-4-
-4-
Case 2:08-cv-01550-VAP-CW Document 41 Filed 04/17/2008 Page 9 of 27

16.
16. I Imentio
mentioned
ned totohim
himthat
thatI Icommu
communicated withLiz
nicated with Cohenthe
LizCohen theEscrow
Escrow
Officer. Hesaid
. He saidthat
thathe
hewould
wouldprefer if!commu
preferif! nicated with
communicated himinstead
withhim . II
instead.
Officer
thensugges
then suggested thathe
ted that heprovide
provideme
mewith hisbusines
withhis s card,
business sothat
card,so coulddo
thatI Icould do
that. He
that. Herefused
refusedagain
again.
.
17.
17. AAreason
reasonable personreview
able person reviewing thecase
ing the asaawhole
caseas wouldconclu
wholewould conclude thatthis
de that this
wasagain
was againaa case ofdishon
caseof dishonest
est judge, offeredprefere
whooffered
judge,who ntial treatme
preferential nt totoaa
treatment
corporation
corpor against
ation agains anindivid
t an individual, allowing
ual , allowin them to
g them remainhidden
to remain noteven
hidden,, not even
identified as aa party,
ed as party, but
but particip
participate
ate in hearing.. Moreo
in aa hearing Moreover, was probab
ver, ititwas le
probable
identifi
that the
the whole
whole urgent
urgent hearing
hearing waswas staged for the
staged for benefit of
the benefit this gentlem
ofthis an.
gentleman.
that
18. One One may
may notice
notice that
that this
this ex
ex parte called to
was called
parte was to give the Court'
give the s approv
Court's approvalal to
to
18.
the escrow
the escrow agreem
agreement, and to
ent, and to an
an agreem
agreement to indemn
ent to ify Mara
indemnify Escrow in
Mara Escrow in
relationship
relatio this transac
nship to this transaction, As review
speech.. As
tion, and to gag my free speech ed below,
reviewed below,
the reason
the reason provid
provideded for my gag, was that as long as I commu communicated with the
nicated with the

Escrow officer it was likely that the deal would not go through
Escrow officer short, the
In short,
through.. In the
Escrow Appointment of this
of this
Escrow officer
officer noticed the same defects that I did in the Appointment
Receiver.
Receiver. There was no claim that I ever said anything defamatory.
anything false or defamatory.
What concern for dishonesty
is great concern abuse
and abuse
dishonesty and
What II said
said was primarily
primarily that there is
of particular case, and II demanded
case, and the
that the
demanded that
ofthe
the office
office of
ofthe
the receiver
receiver in
in this
this particular
Escrow
Escrow Officer
Officer and
and others
others take
take additional in their
care in
additional care actions.
their actions.
19. II therefore ex parte appearance was
court appearance
parte court aimed to
was aimed to
19. therefore hold
hold and
and believe
believe that the ex
that the
show the deal sanctioned by
was sanctioned
deal was by the Court.
the Court.
show thethe Counsel
Counsel for
for Mara
Mara Escrow
Escrowthatthat the
Not
Not that
that anybody
anybody who
who witnessed
witnessedthat
that Court would be
appearance would
Court appearance persuaded
bepersuaded

that but surely

law,but was clear
surelyititwas thataagroup
clear that of
group of
thatthe
the deal
dealwas
was compliant
compliantwith
with the
thelaw,
judges determinedtotomake thishappen,
makethis withinthe
happen ,within realm
the realm
judgesininWest
WestDistrict
Districtwere
weredetermined
of
ofthe
thelaw
lawor
oroutside
outsideof
ofit.it.
20.
20. InInthe
thetime
timeleft
leftof
ofthe
therecess,
recess,I Iwrote
wroteby handaamotion
byhand disqualification
fordisqualification
motionfor
ofjudge
ofjudg eHart
HartCole
Coleper
perCCP
CCP§170.3,
§170.3 ,based onher
basedon relationshiptoto
dishonestyininrelationship
herdishonesty

-5-
-5-
Case 2:08-cv-01550-VAP-CW Document 41 Filed 04/17/2008 Page 10 of 27

thepartici
participation ofCounse
pation of Counsel MaraEscrow
forMara
l for Escrow. servedititupon
. I Iserved theCourtr
uponthe oom
Courtroom
the
assistant.
assista Thatway
nt. That waynow
nowthe
thejudge hadthe
judgehad optionof
theoption ofrecusin g per
recusing 170.3oror
per170.3
170.6.
170.6.
21.
21. JudgeHart
Judge HartCole
Colefinally
finallycame
cameback, andannoun
back,and ced that
announced shedecide
thatshe decided thatII
d that

wasright,
was right,and
andshe
shewas
wasrecused
recusedper §170.6..
per§170.6
22.
22. Around 10:30a
Around }0:30am JudgeLinda
m Judge LindaHart-C
Hart-Cole orderedus
ole ordered toimmed
usto iately go
immediately go to
to
SantaMonic
Santa Monica to continu
a to continue thehearing
e the there. Initiall
hearingthere. y she
Initially orderedus
she ordered to see
usto see
Judge Friedm
Judge Friedman, but than
an, but than itit turned out he
turned out busy, and
was busy,
he was she ordered
and she us to
ordered us go to
to go to
Judge Collins
Judge Collins.. She
She said
said wewe had had to
to be within 30
there within
be there 30 minute s.
minutes.
23. II protest
protested and said
ed and said that
that there was aa proced
there was ure that
procedure be follow
must be
that must ed for
followed for
23.
noticing ex parte
g ex parte appear
appearances,
ances, andand that they must
that they notice me
must notice the appear
ofthe
me of ance
appearance
noticin
before Judge
before Judge Collins in Santa
Santa Monic
Monica.
a.
24.
24. In respon
In response, ole ordered Mr Pastern
Hart-Cole
se, Judge Hart-C Pasternak He did
ak to notice me. He did
not do
not do so,
so, obviou sly he had no means to do so in such a rush. On the
obviously way to
the way to
the compliance with
informed him that this was all out of compliance the
with the
the elevators,
elevators, I again informed
law.
law. He
He said he was not going to argue with me, and that I better be there
be there

within
within 30 minutes.
minutes.
25. The
The unnamed
unnamed gentleman
gentleman representing
representing Mara was watching
Escrow was
Mara Escrow of
all of
watching all
25.
this,
this, and
and II thought
thought that
that II saw
saw on
on his
his face an appearance
face an amazement.
ofamazement.
appearance of
26. II asked
asked him
him ifhe
ifhe was
was going
going to
to follow us to
follow us Santa Monica,
to Santa and he
Monica, and looked
he looked
26.
shy,
shy, but
but eventually
eventually said
said that
that we
we would meet in
would meet Monica.
Santa Monica.
in Santa
27. ItIttook
tookme
me aagood
good 45
45min
min before inthe
was in
before IIwas Courtroom in
the Courtroom Monica.
Santa Monica.
in Santa
27.
When whoall
sheriffs,who
thesheriffs, allknow (aspart
me(as
know me of
partof
WhenIIapproached
approachedthe
thebuilding
building door,
door,the
ongoing sheriffmust escortme),
mustescort calling
startedcalling
me),started
ongoingharassment,
harassment,anywhere go,aasheriff
anywhere IIgo,
me,
me,totolet
letme
meknow
knowthat
thatJudge
JudgeCollins hadalready
Collinshad startedthe
alreadystarted without
hearingwithout
thehearing

me,
me,ititwas
wasthat
thatrushed.
rushed.

-6-
-6-
Case 2:08-cv-01550-VAP-CW Document 41 Filed 04/17/2008 Page 11 of 27

28.
28. WhenI Iwalked
When walkedin, MrPastern
in,Mr Pasternak
ak was readingananemail
wasreading thatI Ihad
emailthat senttotothe
hadsent the
EscrowOffice
Officer aboutthe
r about theReceiv er. There
Receiver. wasnothing
Therewas thereininparticu
nothingthere lar that
particular that
Escrow
justified theex
d the exparte.
parte.There
Therewas nothingthere
wasnothing thatwas
therethat untrueororunreas
wasuntrue onable.
unreasonable.
justifie
JudgeCollins
Judge Collinslooked
lookedbored
boredby
bythe wholeproced
thewhole ure.
procedure.
29.
29. Themyster
The mystery gentleman
y gentlem wasalso
an was there,standin
alsothere, standing andwatchi
g and ng.
watching.
30.
30. As soon
As soonas
as IIwalked
walkedin,
in,IIserved
servedJudge Collinswith
JudgeCollins filing per
withaafiling CCP §170.3
perCCP §170.3
thatII wrote
that wrote by
by hand onthe
hand on the way. Exhibit
way. Exhibi true and
t 33 isis aatrue correctcopy
and correct ofthis
copyof this
filing. Judge
filing. Judge Collins justignore
Collinsjust ignored it.
d it.
31.
31. Once Mr
Once Mr Pastern
Pasternak finished
ak finishe that email,
reading that
d reading Judge Collins
email, Judge asked me
Collins asked ifII
me if
wanted to
to say
say anythin
anything.g. II respon ded by
responded saying that
by saying needed time
that II needed to organi
time to ze
organize
wanted
my respon
my response, saw that
since II saw
se, since that packag
packagee for the first
for the that mornin
time that
first time morning.g. Judge
Judge

Collins had no use for any

Collins had any delay,
delay, and that I had
she stated that
and she 8:30am to
had since 8:30am to
review that
review that packag
package.e. I correct
corrected that since 8:30-1
and stated that
ed her, and 8:30-10:30 was in
0:30 II was in

aa court
court appear
appearance, immediately to
ance, and at 10:30 I was ordered to drive immediately to Santa
Santa
Monica, package. She repeated her
repeated her
Monica, soso that I had no time at all to review the package.
package.
statement that I had since 8:30am to review the package.
statement
32. II then out of
appearance was out with
compliance with
of compliance
32. then started by claiming
claiming that the appearance
the appearance, and
an appearance, first
handling first
and handling
the law,
law, since
since II never
never got
got notice
notice for
for such
such an
amendment unheard of. She did
of. She not respond.
did not added
respon d. II added
amend ment restrictions
restrictions like
like that
that is
is unheard
that to notice
Pasternak to me of
notice me this appearance,
ofthis but
appearance, but
that Judge
Judge Hart-Cole ordere d Mr
Hart-Cole ordered Mr Pasternak
that
thathe
he had
had disobeyed
disobeyed the
the Court
Courtorder.
order.
33. Mr wantedhim
-Colewanted
Hart -Cole to notice
him to was
notice was
33. MrPasternak
Pastern akargued
arguedthat
that what
whatJudge
JudgeHart
the minute sof
theminutes ofthe
the appearance
appear anceininBeverly not the
Hills ,not
BeverlyHills, meetinginin
upcom ingmeeting
theupcoming

Santa wasan
thiswas anexexparte with no
partewith notice. II
nonotice.
SantaMonica.
Monica. IIrepeated
repeatedmymyclaim
claim that
that this
added attorney,IIdoubt thatany
doubtthat attorneyinintown
anyattorney would
townwould
addedthat evenif!
thateven if!were
wereananattorney,
agree thanaadaydayor two,while
ortwo, hadhardly
whileI Ihad any
hardlyany
agreetotoreview
reviewthatthatpackage
packag eininless
lessthan
time CollinshadhadnonoCourt File,and
CourtFile, had
andhad
timeatatall.
all. I Ifurther
furthermentioned
mentio nedthat
thatJudge
JudgeCollins

-7-
-7-
Case 2:08-cv-01550-VAP-CW Document 41 Filed 04/17/2008 Page 12 of 27

no chance to review either the Court File or the material submitted with the ex
parte.
34. Judge Collins was getting upset with me, and she said that there was no
need for the Court File, she is just ruling on the ex parte. She then went on to
say that it is beginning to go over her lunch break, and that it was my fault, that
I did not drive faster from Beverly Hills, and she needed to conclude this. She
asked that I make some statements on the issue itself.
35. I then stated that it was not at all clear what is the justification for this ex
parte procedure, what is the rush that required violation of my rights.
36. Judge Collins referred that question to Mr Pasternak. To my surprise his
Iowan
response was basically that he needed the money, that he was low on funds
funds.. I
I protested that none of this was a reason for compromising my civil rights.
37. I then again asked what was the need to restrict my free speech, and then
Mr Pasternak said that he was concerned that ifI
if! talked with Escrow or the
Title Company,
Company , or the Lender, they would not agree to do business with him!
He never said that anything I said was untrue, or defamatory ,etc.
38. I had a list of other issues to review, but the judge was rushed for lunch,
and she just signed the copies of the order.
39. For example - the agreement to indemnify Mara Escrow in this deal
appears inherently illogical. If Mara Escrow, or the Escrow Officer feel that
the agreement was generated by a court operating outside the law, then adding
another assurance by the same court would not make any difference.
40. request to defer paying taxes was particularly disturbing. It
Otherwise, the request
confirmed most of my concerns about the actions of Mr Pasternak, Mr
Keshavarzi, and Judge Segal. At the end of this sale, the Receiver would be
left with close to $1 million dollars in cash, out of which several hundred
thousands are owed in taxes. The request to defer the taxes means that the

-8-
Case 2:08-cv-01550-VAP-CW Document 41 Filed 04/17/2008 Page 13 of 27

receiver
receive andthe
r and thejudges
judgesconspi
conspiring
ring with andMr
himand
withhim MrKeshav
Keshavarzi, alreadynow
arzi, already now
haveininmind
mindananoutland
outlandish g plan,
spending
ish spendin $1million
uptoto$1
plan,up million, andtherefo
, and re feel
therefore feel
have
thatthe
that theReceiv
Receiver hastototake
er has loanininmy
takeaaloan namefrom
myname theGovern
fromthe ment atatgreat
Government great
expense
expens e totome.
me.
41. AAreason
reasonable person,
able person uponreview
, upon reviewing thewhole
ing the wouldconclu
case,would
wholecase, de that
conclude that
41.
Friday,
Friday December
, Decem ber 7, 7,2007,
2007,was
wasaaday whenmy
daywhen myconstit utional rights
constitutional forFree
rightsfor Free
Speech,
Speech forDue
, for Due Proces
Process ofthe
s of Law, and
the Law, for Posses
and for Possession, were abused
sion, were like no
abused like no
other day
other day ininthis
this litigati
litigation, and again
on, and for aa corpor
again-- for ate client
corporate Escrow--
MaraEscrow
client-- Mara
who isis not
who not even
even aa party
party in
in this
this litigati on.
litigation.

II make
make this
this declara
declaration under penalty
tion under perjury accord
ofperjury
penalty of ing to
according the laws
to the ofthe
laws of the

State of Califor
State of California. Signed here,
nia. Signed here, in
in Los Feliz, Califor
Los Feliz, nia, Decem
California, December 11, 2007.
ber 11, 2007.

) .~
).~

ZERNIK
JOSEPH ZERNIK
JOSEPH
PETITIONER
PETITIONER
in pro per

-9-
-9-
Case 2:08-cv-01550-VAP-CW Document 41 Filed 04/17/2008 Page 14 of 27

Exh ibit11
Exhibit
Case 2:08-cv-01550-VAP-CW Document 41 Filed 04/17/2008 Page 15 of 27
Digitally signed by
Joseph Zernik
ON:cn=Joseph
DN: cn=Joseph
~. .
"'::L. 1J .lernik,
/} t:ernik,
). ~L. ~111~n=JZ12345@eart
~L.!I1;l~n=jZ12345@eart
...,hlil'ik:nef;:t-=U5
hlirlk:net;e=US
Date: 2007:12.07
1 Joseph Zernik, DMD, PhD 07:29:11
07:29:11 -08'00'
Defendant in Pro Per
2 2415 Saint George Street
Los Feliz CA 90027
3
4

5
6 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
7 FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
8
9 NIVIE SAMAAN, an individual,
individual ,

10
10 Plaintiff,

11 v.
12 JOSEPH ZERNIK, an individual,
indiv idual, and DOES 1I
through 20, inclusive,
13 FILING FOR THE PURPOSE OF
Defendants. IMMEDIATE PEREMPTORY
CHALLENGE OF JUDGE IN
15 JOSEPH ZERNIK, an individual, DEPARTMENT X, BEVERLY IDLLS
Cross-Complainant,
COURT HOUSE, FOR ANY HEARING,
HEARING,
16
16 WHETHER BASED ON A TEMPORARY,
17 v. PERMANENT, OR LACKING IN
ASSIGNMENT TO THIS CASE,
18 COLDWELL BANKER RESIDENTIAL
BROKERAGE; MICHAEL LIBOW,
LTBOW, an AND SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION
19 individual, OF JOSEPH ZERNIK IN SUPPORT
20
20 THEREOF
Cross-Defendants.
21

22 DATE: FRIDAY DECEMBER 7,07

TIME: 8:00AM
8:00 AM
23 1
111-
----
----
----
----
----
---- - - PLACE: DEPARTMENT WE-X
BEVERLY HILLS
24
25
26
27
28
FILING FOR THE PURPOSE OF
IMMEDIATE PEREMPTORY CHALLENGE
FOR A JUDGE IN DEPARTMENT
DEPARTMENT X,
BEVERLY IIILLS
HILLS COURTHOUSE.
Case 2:08-cv-01550-VAP-CW Document 41 Filed 04/17/2008 Page 16 of 27

11 TOALL
TO ALLPART
PARTIES THEIRCOUN
ANDTHEIR
IES AND COUNSELS OFRECO
SELS OF RECORD: Pleasetake
RD: Please take

22 notice:
notice:

33 Defen
Defendant andCross
dant and Cross-comp
-complainant
lainan t Joseph Zernikhereby
JosephZernik movesthat
herebymoves casebe
thiscase
thatthis be

44 REAS
REASSIGNED FROMANY
SIGNED FROM ANYJUDG
JUDGE E IN LASUPE
INLA RIOR COUR
SUPERIOR COURT, WHOMAY
T, WHO MAY
DING JUDG THISCASE
INTHIS
E IN ,
55 CLAIM THERIGH
CLAIMTHE RIGHT TOACT
T TO ACTAS
ASPRESI
PRESIDING JUDGE CASE,

66 TEMP
TEMPORARILY, ORON
ORARILY, OR ONAAPERM ANENT BASIS
PERMANENT BASIS, ANDTHAT
, AND CASEBE
TillSCASE
THATTIDS BE
OUT OF
E OUT LA SUPE
THELA
OF THE RIOR COUR T.
77 SUBM
SUBMITTED FORAACHAN
ITTED FOR CHANGE OF VENU
GE OF VENUE SUPERIOR COURT.
88
99 DECL OF JOSE
ARATION OF
DECLARATION PH ZERN
JOSEPH IK
ZERNIK
10
10 I, DEFE
DEFENDANT AND CROS S-COMPLAINANT JOSEP
CROSS-COMPLAINANT JOSEPHH ZERN IK, DECL
ZERNIK, ARE
DECLARE
I, NDANT AND
11 AS FOLLOWS:
11 AS FOLLOWS:
12
12 1)
1) II object
object to
to any
any hearing or
or any
any trial before
before any LA Superi
any Judge of LA or Court.
Superior Court.
13 2) THIS MOTION IS MADE PURSUANT
13 ANT or OT CCP §§170.6 the ground
170.6 on the that the
ground that the
2) THIS MOTI ON IS MADE PURSU
14 or
14 Supervising
Superv Judge, Gerald Rosenb
ising Judge, Rosenberg explained
erg explain LA Superi
in LA
ed to me that no judge in Superior
15
15 Court
Court would
would overrule
overrule another.
another.
16 and judgment(s) that were
that were
16 3)
3) Several
Several judges
judges in this case made rulings,
rulings, issued orders, andjudgment(s)
17
17 explained in advance by
in advance by
provided
provided good obvious for
good cause obvious for overruling vacating. Yet, as explained
overruling or vacating.
18
18 justification.
any justification.
Supervising
Supervising Judge,
Judge, all
all requests
requests for
for such
such were
were denied without any
denied without
19
19 4) I hold that such conduct,t, where same
the same
from the
ajudge from
4) I hold that such conduc where the the law provide and
law provide demanded that
and demanded that ajudge
20
20 law.
the law.
ofthe
court
court review motion to
review aa motion to vacate
vacate isis out
out of compliance and
ofcompliance violation of
in violation
and in
21
21 5) In addition, I hold and believe that records
court records
ofcourt
5) In addition, I hold and believe that Judge engaged in
Connor engaged
Judge Connor adulteration of
in adulteration
22
22
relative doing in
wrong doing inSustain the Court's
Sustain -- the case
Court' s case
relativetoto Samaan
Samaa nvvZemik,
Zernik, in
inpart
part through
throughwrong
23
23
management
managementsystem,
system,ininconspiracy
conspiracywith with her clerk, Ms
her clerk, Jaime.
MsJaime.
24
24
6)6) IIhold
hold that
thatSustain
Sustaindata
dataisispart
partof
ofmy
mycourt
courtfile,
file,and record.
publicrecord.
andaapublic
25
25
7)7) All
Allmy
myrequests
requestsfor
forSustain
Sustaindata
dataininSamaan Zernikwere
SamaanvvZernik denied.
weredenied.
26
26
8)8) I Iwas Rosenberg:Sustain dataisisprivileged
Sustaindata the
forthe
privileged-- for
wastold
toldby
bySupervising
SupervisingJudge
JudgeGerald
GeraldRosenberg:
27
27
Court
Courtonly.
only.
2828
FORTHE
FlUNGFOR
FlUNG PURPOSEOF
THEPURPOSE OF
-2-
-2- DISQUALIFICATIONOF
IMMEDIATEDlSQUAUFICATION
IMMEDIATE THE
OFTHE
HONORABLE R IDGE
HONORABLEJUDGE SEGAL §t70.3)
(CCP§170.3)
SEGAL(CCP
CaseNo.
Case SC08740 0
No.SC087400
Case 2:08-cv-01550-VAP-CW Document 41 Filed 04/17/2008 Page 17 of 27

ofPresidi
officeof
theoffice JudgeZullek
ng Judge er (spellin g?).
11 9)9) 1Iwas
wastold
toldthe
thesame
samebybysenior
seniorstaff
staffininthe Presiding Zulleker (spelling?).
10)1hold
22 10)1 holdthat
thatsuch
suchrules-
rules-regard
regarding Sustainand
ing Sustain andregard ing overru
regarding ling each
overruling otherare
eachother are

33 unwritten
unwrit ten rules ofcourt
rulesof courtininLA
LASuperi or Court.
Superior Court.
11)1hold
holdand
andbelieve
believethat
thatsuch
suchunwrit
unwritten Rulesof
ten Rilles Court,which
ofCourt, neversubjec
werenever
whichwere t totopublic
subject public
44 11)1
andininviolati ofthe
on of law(Federa
thelaw l Code).
55 challenge
challen areon
ge are ontheir
theirface
faceout
outof
ofcompli ance and
compliance violation (Federal Code).

66

77 Dated:
Dated: Decem
December 7, 2007
ber 7, 2007

88 JOSEPH
JOSEP IK, DEFEN
ZERN1K,
H ZERN DEFENDANT AND CROSS
DANT AND CROSS

99 LAINA NT
COMPLAINANT
COMP
10
10 in pro per
in pro per
11 By:
By: __
11
12
12 JOSEP
JOSEPHH ZERN
ZERN1KIK
DEFEN DANT
DEFENDANT AND
AND CROS
CROSS S COMP LAINA NT
COMPLAINANT
13
13 in pro per
14
14
15
15
16
16
17
17
18
18
19
19
20
20
21
21
22
22
23
23
24
24
25
25
26
26
27
27
28
28
FORTHE
FlUNGFOR
FlUNG PURPOSEOF
THEPURPOSE OF
-3-
-3- IMMEDI
IMMEDIATEATE DISQUA LIFICAT ION OFTHE
DlSQUAUFICATION OF THE
JUDGESEGAL
HONORABLEJUDGE
HONORABLE §170.3)
(CCP§170.3)
SEGAL(CCP
CaseNo
Case . SC087400
No. SC087400
 Case 2:08-cv-01550-VAP-CW Document 41 Filed 04/17/2008 Page 18 of 27

t , Digitally
Digitany signed
signed by
V Joseph Zernlk
Zernlk
ON
ON:: cn=JosephZernlk,
cn=Joseph Zemi'"
)) •• ~~~all=jZ1234s@earthl
~ ,~.,miai.I
.••. . =jZ12.34s@earthl

];,'Gf~ {v'I 'L

j;,'bf~
Ink.l'l~t, c;.US
i!il¢net.<"US

-'>
.) J
"D~le;2tlOl.12.29
. 'D'ate: 2007.12.29
10:06:04 -CS'OO'
10:06:04-08'00'
"
1- trl \ (~ sf
1-lrl\ .s T: c,C, (,'OltAh
(,' (jltA h-
LP erA u,()D2,l
<r:
SC uri-
O:ii- L; Zlf)
J)f)

rvo I7~S/4f/ ,Mf;--yvr-

;1~~/r;f/IMf;--YVr­
o1-v/ r
01'1/' r///&
n.·/;:-

I L. ) /1 ~
fflt)/1 &J PtI2
LI2. <>L--}4-n1
j4-n 1"
<:>L,.

~(
~~~I
.J
'Tv c c r <i3
'IV Jo;> 3
~ I Toi
r-o VI.-'VI--- 0DIi SQ.,lvllll;h{/J1
Po SU._~lJlljh{/J1 tv

6~ )"
6-t:- ) z, {){,J; 1f1;'~
c 111-'\
(oi f;

V.b(,Lft
V.bcLft It-All Z7rv h7
It-A II tJrv
)-tJy~
) -p y~ il ?::01'l1J1lz.
r:01'l1J11t.

f~17zJt:-
p~~ oert 6
o£pT
JV'O/I)!{ n
SY/!YVfft IV'()/I}!{
Sl!JvVJf' ~
oIt-Tft
ft--1J
~ I Yl't;-:
Yl't;-.' v IV
V
r 1 ~}
(;c" T'
f) (;c,- ~1-
ILI',,{)vt/JI't/
f\/ It. I'",()Vf/JI't./

)1ovIJI!fj
t r; (J)1l~V
/VV M 11 {r;,
/VrJ IJIJo
'.'~-'
" '~- '

Pfrl1-7/!/:J.
1-/ ,
.
 Olii 5' ,. 7
1 '7
j,5: '1 VItl) :"1 vV
1'!'VI 11/\Olii '7 /'l'!I{ll.".qtJ-9-L 1 tI(1) (I) ~
'vvl)! oJ]; (j f
()JM V v!
-~1I1;'! I)'J; (j {
C fI > ,1 7::J 1A t7) '0-\;
(jJMV vf t1) \'0-{; 1fJ
\ J
ifJJ
C(!l,>,'j 7 1J J .1
:J?iJ-::fJ10yu ..
t;I-u
H iJ/ 71/7
H U
71 C ([" 1
~ /1 C ( L-, U1
Viw 7,1 t;'::M ;l..\.
CrZw 7/ r;SI1f<t 111- y:t;lA:i1/1 'VI 1-\
.1) J..J J."
tl,\
L \1 L ': -wJ
[JV1 fI 1\ e,
": L/lIl/t~. >
l, Ji,\,N ')1 ~
Q
5" t 1.!
1J.jJ1J1
J N1
~I+I ~ ~ ? jq
}
1fl rVI t, tILt\ll
- } I ~ 1 1
l--}U l 1/l
1 1'1
/0) 1 i \l{
lr} if 1,1;) 1tl/\tll ll I llJ ,!'-to '1J
('4fJ 'k}, ,
'7J '7 7
1 f\ C(
tv 7 ~ l ;(} ~lD
f\ C ('i
¥-
!Jqv04ll A D . UWIta) YJv11
C lW flQ .) ~1]
Vt J f( f..Oj
lq .C l v t( ) yv
yvC}/'J
C tJ N\'
ViJ f( -r.fJj l.t!cn.\(1 ,U V A l77\\'7'P\'l\
'7sv\
J 1 (t l ' U (I /\ !
71{-} } U1
1 (,j.-i
(if-i!4
W 1-(-I1 tl
y<;'11111,tl jl
kk 1'\I~
I~jl ~J"J't1
't,j
;'V I C t 1t7
IV {c/lrJ1 } i;1A0i11
JvW)t1! f#fjJ7'i
7V 1\/j
1 J'J~()
.l7u 1\1\( ( ('('11- -
/V\q.j ~
~;~:;JY'(\/
:;JYN I \fIIJ.w. /'J\1 ·d ~
l ~\A
;t I f/ !. I !Vl
, 1UV/\ /\ Qf\41H
<;-I 5 ~1(j1(l ( ) /' J/'1JW
oN-YH l ~~
;tI fit· I !V1
,-;-5 ~.I{,A() () --\ l
(){) ./
/~
--UJ/)..-O v~\
) I f \ l- ~1,ACl<tl a..L(){) ,\ ,\ ./
G
...,U}(:::__0 vV\ <-i I f\.l~1AQ
· s ·~ V1·1 J
>*iI ",p!(~h;;jJO ' 11 Ai 1ft t tl (!f. a. ( ' \ J
'
Page 19 of 27 Filed 04/17/2008 Document 41 Case 2:08-cv-01550-VAP-CW
Case 2:08-cv-01550-VAP-CW Document 41 Filed 04/17/2008 Page 20 of 27

r
, N M f;:lJ '/':r1 r:..~:.
, 'IV Mt » 11'1"
-~ 0
PJil'V&Vc &VD 1" 1"
PJil'VC
j 0 It''; fn- f;
(i
(i
J Ditt; fn- f;r) (IIr) "f,yJ
1 (II"f,yJ ,tv tv
1 <)'~
<).~,tt~ /u!~IC'~ /fr,/()A.,
I yV
yV
CD P. f~ J'f\1(V
CD ? ff;W lV'd~~r«~ L---}'[+;'1.Yyt7/- +1Yt7~ ~fI~[-fI(;'
~ P- !() ) V)rx:1i;:-
~ p.1(J VYX/{f: fYL-tfJJ
f11-ffJfY'J rrIIt- 1/'11'./ L;,\ L;, jfk51 ? n1::0
y

{-;9....... ~ .
'/ \
I f k 5 / ? n1::0
{-O"- ~.
l
&f':l1. . f lfrl r(JIi Sl",;) /
(!(vfJL,)}I
(!(l--fJv(J C-f:lt.
l.pIiSl~ /
Y-flt v yff.h yV'byV1J il~
Y-flt ' \ )tfh i J / 4 }2!()j4tJ. 4t
}2!/Ji J.

eevv '7~~
'7H~ \0tn'
\fi err
I 'b0
/ (1/\ fV\
'b0
(1/\ f'I\
f!A'fli,Vi
f!A 17),-:11
rIV OlJ<1 #y,
rIV OlJ<1 #y,
D S/7b- tAtOrJZ{:l
() '7 116- VI{, Or)Zt()!) AA--I
TIf flft5Jt:;ilYilYUYtf!- '1)
UYff!- '1 )
U I ~J~ ( f i l L - b
u' ~ '1';' (filL-£;;. .
A'\ .f;; -V ~ytb
tlV'-\)V
\)'J .{;;-v ~ttb \111r1tM1
wV Il
tl'-A \111'f 1 'tv -
'tv if;bIJ--:LJ.::' V"
V·Al."1-11.17;
1"-''- V r-,:lu
I"' ,< -JA V Il .tV-' wv 1L
1
7))A Il r.t-V,: lu 1
~ ~ I f I 'f I I)frlVtll\l\ f.c, Uf ~ l1>
-'
"" h, o f ll , 11>
~ ~yVIA {V\ !~{V tV
"7 ~yY1A M .?h)~/~)~/A
@® I IiP-!;'P-I0
ID 1 \.1/b\.fb:>''r
:>''r !SVtSVl
l ' \I
I 1ft I L V '
01 L V '
1YH1Y\-lLlc
LlC 3D3D-
- bDbDfV' IrfV'
V IrV
Case 2:08-cv-01550-VAP-CW Document 41 Filed 04/17/2008 Page 21 of 27

r\1))Jr Jr
r\1))o
o \17\17 ~Al0
'\~~
~Al0 r
J-- J--
r: ~fy\ viI)
~tvl viI) "36"36

1~~ f tvf tv3!/

3 ! / rt' rtIN' IN tt
(
(g)g)1ft,;
1ft,; 'Tw· I ',~l. Tr/{ju
) 1 ;./t{\ t{- WVV45
II V45 \[)II',ZiZ.
Trtf!;1/.

be> .is- rt-vLmJlnn f:II'I()

'f.I-f'I{) YJ/:I-I(vi
rJ/:::l/i ( v ( ')/114
') // ;4 1
1

-\b-lbf*t
-\-1
AY\t' W'V)
M-) F.'ry'/
Pry( £'f::
£y; ()1ru1)(, IJJ.1f,Y/L
{JA-mJ(, 1JJ.C>.0-
7'711Iii.,1(.,144 cC In. l;I/ 1A ~~['S
In.,()/1A~~f S ~':Jl)
~?:> 1 ) JI.-
) 'l - n4J;.
() 4},:-
&(/fJ11 i·~''L-i <
)~ f) f ~ 1j1j-z,Y!,7.s
t"Y!,l.s f.f..
t, j 1 \! )
1\1)

(C!3J
J3J fJ IV
[)\'V t1;, ~
lf~ l
~l LL (CPu
P .U ii
l
l) ) '2'2.l;
, lj
V\~-rh ))VVlf11f
V\~l'h lf11f i ~1tl1VlV
(tJi
{ tJ <)<) LLL. L.(;r;.(LIL
.(L(L /
i

®
®fhfh ~f~?-If'J
+l() T}~b}
~b} rJrJJI)Jl) rvrvfJ'1
rJ'1
HHr¥/l1
rW:/ 11ththrllrll/b,
/b, ~V~Vl};1t,.z
l/;1t,.z L I- Jt-Jt-SI
SI
/-lU/-10'1-t"v
1-t"v Ili11i0
t? bf\bf\:
: (J (Jfttl(ttl//ff;,
// 1b ,
 Case 2:08-cv-01550-VAP-CW Document 41 Filed 04/17/2008 Page 22 of 27

(0 i
@i
aD
@ ~~ r-~L/;()
P-< jL/; () IIF
F Hilt,(
Hi lt,( (~
(~
(A
(A vtJ;" ~~i~/v ,1v16~
ytJ;/ ~~itlv /)/(()(I~
,lv1trV) ()1(f)(I/l...

fcnr
fen , .)
. ) £/i) u? Ilv/
vi)tt? ilv /t ~~ (lV{Pt·jV
[lvt'l'+fV (JJ/~
(Jl/~ to~·U/1./J
(oL-·U/1/)

® 11' ~A- ql)

ql) ,HJj1-
1MAj-'C )) U()I){rl
!J[ri' fllIlL T/
flAIL J / «-II;
Z(!J;
~+,~{)
\+'~JI) .~ PfLf~fJ4t'vt:; ((
PfLf~fJ4t'vr; IT
(5).l 4b
@.l -tb lr)
l() 1ff14
1ft14'' T 11 S
V\ 11<> I IV ( t /1 fL/ t:r: I)I)

I1-Nt?
I1-Nt? ) vf)l ({ l~fL
(j!)l{{ 1¥tfi-11 [,t?L /I/!yJ!il
GtJt{{ II/!; ;fil
lfTt') It ~/
l1JlAlITI') tvhl~P w(
~pwr;..
~"/)/j-
0- !1/l1 . YL-, r;
H/1'1..'J!L
@ P-P- ftY25~ ILp
ftY2:5~ ILpvi{v til'i-<, TH
vi£VlifL<, 'If!IS
IS

Pst;
ccPs-G- vVIIi:vL,L,- yl-
vV ~
yL tJj50W t"/el{
(rJeJ { // c: (!J1{,
(/'"-rl- ({ (tJ1;,
(i'to-

1~1Il-l
,»1A ~ )) t/O
-l fz::m t/O t)~
t)f;, C/O L!) '1D
lLJrt6
UJl{·IY Th
~eA
~tA (l(l 0r
0 r- 1f}v i7t;. ~II<{
ff}vl1t;. ~II<{; TH 1\\
; THI
Case 2:08-cv-01550-VAP-CW Document 41 Filed 04/17/2008 Page 23 of 27

(i;5/ [r
& er e L-L-
[f'c& i/vf)lT }--v
f)lr}-v ) ) cf)G/c
elk;l".

t[;;L-t-
(P el lnI IV)
/) 110
b (1/fV
II (V 1/~/
G ~~Ilit)J11/~/
ft/I 1G

»}]II ~~ C0C0vv ~~II if(7; fl/~ 5~

fl/~ 'J1nv1
5~'J1nv1
1l?
1l CcJ'~
?ccJ '~ )=
)W.;,
t-o.;,

,,;>
,,;> t/fI:J JTfD
cit- IJ"T
t /ft:J C'/- TfD !.If'
l/ <":>: [~
"OM-~/'/if1c-n; [, P

p~
ft;ft, rtt
r: }fllK
}fllK s(/~
s(/~ l~
Ll~
Tft;r; L
/D Tft;r;

-6~ lfrG'
'6'P l1tG. ST!'frE;
STf'frE; 6f' I/lv/~rh
(j f' (;t /I'lv/~rh

ftEctflt- ~~h
fJECf;/v'>':Jh. 1--, W i, Lus ~'4[££)
L·~) hJ1.,rv ill} )

~ -)---
U 1: _
Case 2:08-cv-01550-VAP-CW Document 41 Filed 04/17/2008 Page 24 of 27

-- -- -- -- -- --
.----------~
--
Case 2:08-cv-01550-VAP-CW Document 41 Filed 04/17/2008 Page 25 of 27

Exh ibit33
Exhibit
 Case 2:08-cv-01550-VAP-CW Document 41 Filed 04/17/2008 Page 26 of 27

NAME. ADDRESS AND TELEPHONE NUMBER OF ATTORNEY(S)

NAME. ADDRESS ANDTELEPHONE NUMBER OF ATTORNEY(S)
JOSEPHZERNIK
JOSEPH ZERNIK
4215 Saint GeorgeStreet
4215 Saint George Street
LosAngeles
Los Angeles, CA90027
,CA 90027
T:T:310
310435-910
435-91077 F:F:801
801998-091
998-0917
7 E:E:jzI2345
jzI2345@earthlink.net
@earthlink.net

UNITED
UNITE STATES
D STATE ICT COUR
DISTRICT
S DISTR T
COURT
CENTRAL
CENTR ICT OFCA
DISTRICT
AL DISTR LIFORNIA
OF CALIFORNIA
JOSEPHZERNIK
ZERNIK CASENUMBE
CASE R
NUMBER
JOSEPH
08-CV-01550-VAP-CW
08-CV-01550-VAP-CW
PLAINTIFF(S),
PLAINTIFF(S) .
v.
v.
JACQUELINE
JACQUE CONNOR
LINE CONNO ETAL
R ET AL
PROOF OFSE
PROOF RVICE --ACKN
OF SERVICE OWLEDGMENT
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
OF SERVI
OF CE
SERVICE
DEFENDANT(S).
DEFENDANT(S).

years, employ
18 years.
of 18
age of ed in the County of
I.I, the
the undersi
undersigned, certify and
gned. certify and declare
declare that
that II am
am over the age
over the employed in the County of
• State of California, and not a
Los Angeles
Los Angeles,, , State of California, and not a
party to
party to the
the above-e
above-entitled cause.. On
ntitled cause On April
April 15th
15th •, 20 08
08 served aa true
., II served copy of
true copy of
PlaintiffZemik's Declaration RE: EX PARTE APPLICATIONS
APPLICATIONS ON DEC 7,2007
7,2007 FOR GAG ORDER
ORDERSS
PlaintitTZernik's Declaration RE: EX
by persona
by personally delivering
lly deliver it to the person
ing it person (s) indicate d below
indicated manner as provide
below in the manner provided in FRCivP
d in 5(b); by
FRCivP 5(b); by
depositing it in the United States Mail in a sealed envelope
envelop e with the postage
postage thereon
thereon fully
fully prepaid
prepaid to
to the
the followi ng
following: :
depositing it in the United States sealed
(list names and
and address
addresses for person
es for person(s) served.. Attach addition
(s) served al pages if necessa
additional ry.)
necessary.)
(list names
Place
Place of
of Mailing: Los Angeles~
Mailing : Los Angeles. California
California
A~
Executed on A~
Executed on (1..t2
(f..t, '.20 08 at......:.:LL::.,.:o:;o,;; .;s..:.s.;:A. ;;;A,:; .n;g01,ng~e.:;.e:;..;,;;llee;;..;;::..ss California
,• California

Please
Please check
check one
one of
of these mail:
these boxes if service is made by mail:

oo II hereby
hereby certify
certify that
that II am
am aa member
member of of the
the Bar
Bar of of the States District
United States
the United Court. Central
District Court, of
District of
Central District
California.
California.
oo IIhereby
hereby certify
certify that
that II am
am employed
employed inin the
the office
office of member of
of aa member the Bar
ofthe Bar of Court at
this Court
of this the
direction the
whose direction
at whose
service
service was
was made.
made .
iii foregoing isis true
the foregoing and co
true and co
iii I hereby certify
I hereby certify under
under the
the penalty
penaltyof
of perjury
perjury that
that the

PersonMaking
Signature00 Person
Signature Service
MakingService
Hit-
7leCJVT J?
77eePr A.J
It- IIA.J
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTOF
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT SERVICE
OFSERVICE
I,I. , .received
receivedaatrue copyof
truecopy thewithin
ofthe on
documenton
withindocument __

Signature
Signature PartyS
Party erved
Served

CV-40 (01/00) PROOF

PROOFOF
OFSERVICE
SERVICE- ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF
· ACKNOWLEDGMENTOF SERVICE
SERVICE
CV-40 (01/00)
Case 2:08-cv-01550-VAP-CW Document 41 Filed 04/17/2008 Page 27 of 27

SERVICE LIST FOR ZERNIK V CONNOR ET AL (revised 4/6/08)

Sarah L Overton
Cummings McClorey Davis Acho and Associates
3801 University Avenue
Suite 700
Riverside, CA 92501
951-276-4420
Email:
Email : soverton@cmda-Iaw.com

John W Patton, Jr
Pasternak Pasternak & Patton
1875 Century Park E
Suite 2200
Los Angeles, CA 90067-2523
310-553-1500
Email : jwp@paslaw.com
Email:

Michael L Wachtell
Buchalter Nemer PC
1000 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 1500
Los Angeles, CA 90017-2457
213-891-5761
Email : mwachtell@buchalter.com
Email:

John Amberg
Bryan Cave, LLP
120 Broadway, Suite 300
Santa Monica, CA 90401-2386
(3101 576-2100
Tel (3101 576-2100
Fax (3101
(3101 576-2200
Email : jwamberg@BryanCave.com
Email: