Attorneys MUM: Why Case Against Baca-Tanaka “Dismissed With Prejudice”, Now Represent Tanaka’s Supporters
October 13, 20134 Comments
CANDIDATE TANAKA’S SUPPORTERS PILING ON SHERIFF BACA
GOLDBERG & GAGE LAW FIRM HAS WINDFALL OF BACA-TANAKA RETALIATION CASES
|Bradley Gage and Terry Goldberg|
|$ Why Are These Guys Smiling? $|
Download Updated “The news behind the news” FDN Newsletters On this Topic:
BACA-TANAKA “BLOOD FEUD” TO COST DEARLY?
The “bad blood” between Los Angeles County Sheriff Leroy Baca and his former Under-Sheriff Paul Tanaka that prompted Tanaka being forced into retirement causing unrest within the high command of the Department. Additionally, an on-going investigation is being conducted by the U. S. Department of Justice where indictments are expected to be announced by December. Meanwhile the bad blood feud between Sheriff Baca and his second in command is fueling a legal battle that promises to reveal the dirty secrets, sexual harassment cases, over $100 million in settlements paid out to LASD employees suing each other and the county, plus outright corruption in the Sheriff’s Department that apparently stretches from the lowly custody Deputies all the way to the top of the Chain of Command. Full Disclosure Network® is closely following the developments as they occur and has released a series of reports soon to be followed by one-on-one interviews with former high members of the Chain of Command for cable TV and Internet viewing.
How Many Sheriff’s Dept. Employees Supporting Candidate Paul Tanaka, Will Sign On to The Baca Retaliation Lawsuit?
Will the Los Angeles Superior Court become a stage for a political campaign action whereby L A County Employees of the Sheriff”s Department will seek the Judge and or a Jury to endorse Tanaka by condemning Baca for punishing Tanka’s political supporters?. Will this be a ” first” time ever that Los Angeles Superior Court has been used by a political campaign to ask for an opinion that would validate one candidate over the other? Will the Paul Tanaka or Leroy Baca be validated by a Court decision to the detriment of other candidates who have no baggage?
Strange Bedfellows? Brad Gage to Represent Tanaka’s political friends and associates in lawsuit against Baca-LASD. Will Gage’s other Retaliation case against Baca and Tanaka, cause Rathbun and Sexton, to join them by dropping their opposition to Tanaka?
As reported on October 9, 2013 on the website www.WitnessLA.com, reported that: “Bradley Gage has just moved the case (Rathbun-Sexton) from federal to State Court.” The primary focus of the coverage related to attorney Gage and the announcement that he will take up the cause of Paul Tanaka representing his political friends and associates against Baca and the Sheriff’s Department on matters of retaliation, presumably due to their political support for Tanaka. This at the same time he is representing Deputy’ Rathbun and Sexton case against Tanaka and Baca.
MOTIVE TO “DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE” THE RATHBUN-SEXTON CASE AGAINST SHERIFF BACA & TANAKA?
Observers are wondering why the young L A County Deputy Sheriffs Michael Rathbun and James
Sexton allowed their attorney to file notice with the Court to “Dismiss with Prejudice” their Federal Lawsuit against
Sheriff Baca, Under Sheriff Paul Tanaka, Lt. Greg Thompson, and Detective Perkins…..and to take up the cause
of Paul Tanaka and his friends and associates. Full Disclosure® has been unable to reach the deputies,
and e-mails sent to three attorneys at the Law firm of Goldberg and Gage have received no response to that question.
COMPLAINT DESCRIBES HORROR IN “OUT-OF CONTROL” JAILS
The criminal violations cited in the case Rathbun vs. L A County Sheriff Leroy Baca, et. al. Verified Complaint in the 67 pages describe fifteen causes of action that include horrendous mismanagement, egregious and intolerable conditions in the L.A. County Jail, as well as threats to themselves and other similarly situated persons. Considering the fact that these two Deputy Sheriffs testified before a Federal Grand Jury as stated in the Verified complaint, on the same issues and were vetted by the FBI and deemed credible, why would their attorney, Bradley Gage, dismiss their lawsuit “with prejudice?”
CALIF. APPEALS CASE LAW MAY BAR FILING STATE CASES WHEN SAME CAUSES ARE RAISED IN FEDERAL COURT
Full Disclosure Network® has learned from experts, on behalf of L A County, that plaintiffs state court
action alleging same criminal violations under state law may be barred by a judgment or
a dismissal with prejudice due to a prior Federal Court action. Citing California Court of Appeal’s decision in
(Johnson vs. American Airlines, Inc. (1984) 157 Cal.App.3rd 427) that state action was challenging the
same violations under federal law. (ID. at 433.) The court reasoned that the “primary right”
allegedly violated in the state court action was the same as that asserted in the prior federal court action.”
Definitions of “Dismissal With Prejudice” (or Without Prejudice)
According to Wikipedia “Dismissed with prejudice” is considered …. “ an action taken with prejudice
indicates misconduct on the part of the party who filed the claim and forbids that party from re-filing the case.”
WiseGeek.com “The parties to the legal action may agree to a voluntary dismissal with prejudice if
they settled the matter before it got in front of a judge…….. If the lawsuit goes to court and a judgment
is handed down, the matter is considered a dismissal with prejudice. When it is settled out of court, the
plaintiff is better protected if the action is dismissed without prejudice.”
answers.yahoo.com With prejudice means that the plaintiff cannot re-file the case again. Without prejudice
means that the plaintiff may correct whatever mistake the case had the first time around and then re-file.