March 27, 2001
The California Code of Civil Procedure CCP 170.1(B)(3) states that
“170.1.(a) A judge shall be disqualified if any one or more of the following is true:
(a)(2) The judge served as a lawyer in the proceeding, or in any other proceeding involving the same issues he or she served as a lawyer for any party in the present proceeding or gave advice to any party in the present proceeeding upon any matter involved in the action or proceeding.”
Several matters are revealed in this filing, not the least being that Judge Gold awarded an attorney who did some work for me backstage, but did not appear for me at trial, $50,000 of my money, despite his prior ruling that he was not to be paid. Gold claimed to have lost that order. Schaeffer never billed me or accounted for hours worked.
In this pleading, you will see how my ex did not supply discovery to me to prepare for the financial aspects of the trial. The judge had put me in jail because he said I was “slow producing discovery.” He did nothing about putting her in jail, (although I certainly was not asking for that to happen).
This also details my ex’s surprise declaration through her attorney that the dates she wanted for trial would only allow her to be present for a short while due to an unrevealed contract to appear in London in a play (it turned out to be Michael Frayn’s “Noises Off”.)
Emily Edelman, Esq. here shows her total lack of ethics, and Judge Gold reveals his by giving advice favorable to Redgrave. Because he’s a judge, it’s called “bias”.