Elder Abuse Victims’ Son Says Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Richard A. Adler Failed to Protect Victims (Part 2 of 3)

Son of elder abuse victims on Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Richard A. Adler failing to protect victims

(Page 2 of 3)

Judge Richard A. Adler fails to hold a defiant perpetrator in contempt of court

One day after this initial OSC regarding contempt hearing, Robert acknowledged to the conservator in a recorded voicemail that Robert had hoped to take advantage of Judge Adler’s obvious lack of concern about and initial readiness to approve Robert’s fraudulent accounting. In the recorded voicemail, Robert said:

Obviously, the judge [Richard A. Adler] was going to accept the accounting that I had prepared…Obviously, it [the court-ordered accounting] was not between me and the court…Like I said, with the court, it doesn’t appear to be a problem.

In addition, during the previously mentioned tape-recorded argument between the conservator and Robert, Robert acknowledged to the conservator that Robert did not think the court-ordered accounting was Robert’s duty to prepare and that Judge Adler was never interested in enforcing the court order for Robert to account. Robert said:

It’s not my obligation…I thought you said that was the court that was interested in me. It was never the court. It was you, because you were pissed that Sharon [Connelly, a co-perpetrator and niece of the conservatees,] and I stood up [in Judge Adler’s court at the hearing to appoint a conservator] and didn’t want you to do it [i.e., petition the court to be appointed conservator].

After continuing to file blatantly perjurious oppositions, Robert failed to appear at the second court-ordered OSC regarding contempt hearing. As the following verbatim excerpts from the court transcript of the second contempt hearing (except the true names of the parties) reflect, Judge Richard Adler acknowledged that Robert was definitely in contempt of court for failing to appear and account as ordered:

The Court: Let us review the facts. He was supposed to submit a detailed accounting. And he’s failed to do it. True?

Mr. Bradford: That’s correct.

The Court: He was supposed to have done that several times. We’ve given him several times to submit it. And he’s failed each and every time. True?

Mr. Bradford: That’s correct. That’s correct.

The Court: He was supposed to be here today.

Mr. Bradford: That’s correct.

The Court: And he’s not here.

Mr. Bradford: That’s correct.

The Court: He has violated a court order.

Mr. Bradford: That’s correct.

The Court: He could be sanctioned—

Mr. Bradford: That’s right.

The Court:—for the attorney fees involved.

Mr. Bradford: That’s correct.

The Court: True?

Mr. Bradford: That’s correct.

The Court: And he could be ordered—

Mr. Bradford: Right.

The Court:—the amount of money that’s unaccounted for.

Mr. Bradford: That’s correct.
…
The Court: He’s failed to appear. His submissions are insufficient, so he’s violated a court order. I suppose that’s in contempt. But what I would—it is in contempt.
…
The Court: You are to give him notice that he’s been—the Court has found that he has violated court orders pursuant to California Rule of Court 227.

[Emphasis added.]

However, as the following verbatim excerpt from the court transcript of the second contempt hearing (except the true names of the parties) reflects, Judge Richard Adler failed to find perpetrator Robert in contempt of court, even though Robert had repeatedly defied the court, committed fraud on the court, and was continuing to financially harm the conservatees due to his contempt:

The Court: I don’t think you need to hold him in contempt. All I need to know for the record is that well, this was an OSC re: contempt.

Mr. Bradford: Right.
…
The Court: But rather than find him in contempt, send him to jail—and, incidentally, the fine on contempt is only a thousand dollars—I would say none of us are really interested in doing that anyway.

[Emphasis added.]

Instead of punishing the defiant perpetrator (Robert) and finding him in contempt, Judge Richard Adler essentially directed Mr. Bradford and the conservator to spend even more of the conservatees’ money to file a motion and prepare for a hearing to surcharge Robert for the legal fees and costs that Robert forced the conservatorship to pay to enforce the court order to account. The following verbatim excerpt from the court transcript of the second contempt hearing (except the true names of the parties) reflects this:

The Court: So why don’t we just say he’s violated California Rule of Court 227. The Court is going to impose sanctions. We’ll set up a new hearing date. Mr. Bradford is going to file a motion to surcharge Mr. Sawyer, and he can file his response to that. And Mr. Bradford is going to file his motion by when, Mr. Bradford? [Emphasis added.]

After this second contempt hearing, Mr. Bradford and the conservator faithfully followed Judge Adler’s directions and spent considerable time and resources to file a well-documented motion to surcharge Robert Sawyer, properly serve all the relevant parties, and appear at a surcharge hearing a little more than five months later. However, at the surcharge hearing, which was definitely supposed to be on calendar for that day, Judge Adler indicated he had not even read the conservator’s motion to surcharge. Even though Mr. Bradford and Robert’s attorney, Kevin Lake, both asked Judge Adler to continue the matter, Judge Adler summarily dismissed the motion to surcharge and directed Mr. Bradford and the conservator to spend even more of the conservatees’ money to file the motion to surcharge and serve all the relevant parties all over again.

The following verbatim excerpt from the court transcript of what was supposed to be a hearing partly for the motion to surcharge Robert Sawyer (except the true names of the parties) demonstrates Judge Richard Adler’s failure to read court filings, readiness to dismiss petitions without due process, and lack of concern for the estates of already victimized, vulnerable seniors:

Mr. Bradford: Your Honor, you didn’t rule on the petition for surcharge. Is that continued?

The Court: Motion on the surcharge?

Mr. Bradford: Yes, your Honor. We served people from the motion to surcharge. You made a finding on the O.S.C. re contempt that there were $20,000 in losses, and that, too, was on calendar for today.

The Court: I hadn’t really considered that, Mr. Bradford.

Mr. Lake: Your Honor, excuse me. My position—I just came on board. I don’t see any underlying application that I have just heard about.

The Court: Me either. We will just say that that is denied without prejudice as well.

Mr. Lake: Thank you, your Honor.

Mr. Bradford: Your Honor, could it be continued so we don’t have—unless you will accept service again?

Mr. Lake: Your Honor, I would like it to be continued so proper notice and proper pleadings can be delivered to my office. I was trying to get things off of fax machines.

The Court: I would like to see it properly noticed myself, so I am going to say denied without prejudice. I would like to see it be brought.

Mr. Bradford: It was properly served and noticed.

The Court: I didn’t understand that it was there, so I didn’t comprehend that, so let’s focus on it again.

Mr. Lake: I will receive service, yes.

Mr. Bradford: You will accept service?

The Court: What motion was this?

Mr. Bradford: This was the motion to surcharge.

The Court: Motion to surcharge denied without prejudice.

[Emphasis added.]

After Judge Richard Adler denied the conservator’s motion to surcharge Robert Sawyer, which had been properly served and noticed, Judge Adler was not finished protecting Robert and harming the victimized conservatees. When vexatious and defiant litigant Robert filed a frivolous and meritless motion to vacate Judge Adler’s order regarding Robert’s failure to file a proper accounting, Judge Adler set a hearing date for about six weeks after he denied the motion to surcharge. As a result, Mr. Bradford and the conservator were forced to spend even more of the conservatees’ dwindling money to file an opposition and prepare for and appear at the motion to vacate hearing. However, although Judge Adler dismissed Robert’s frivolous and meritless motion to vacate at the motion to vacate hearing, Judge Adler did not sanction Robert for the attorney’s fees and court costs that the conservatees had to pay because of Robert’s continued attempt to escape punishment for his contempt of court.

« Previous Page | Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Next Page »