• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Attorney Fraud Upon The Court

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Fraudsters

Junior Member
I was involved in a civil case in California that I ultimately lost. My question for the forum is this - What are the consequences/penalties for a defense attorney who deceitfully and intentionally created false documents and then submitted those false documents to a Superior Court judge in Summary Judgment - Trial Readiness paperwork for trial and again at key witness depositions in order to win the case? The defense attorneys also created Fraud against at least one their own "Expert Witness" to comment on.
I understand that if they had not committed the fraud, their case would have been lost. FYI - My attorney requested to be removed as counsel of record and the court granted his request. One can only speculate but he might have known he blew it and the documents will show that he might have been a part of the fraud. I’m not sure if he did it on purpose but just like the court he missed the deliberate fraud committed by the defense attorney’s.

I hired another attorney that tried to salvage my case but due to certain events which happened (missing a critical statue of limitations deadline) caused by my former attorney’s actions, my new attorney was unsuccessful and the case was lost. As it turns out, my second attorney told me it was a slam dunk case from the beginning!

In closing; To date he doesn’t know the evidence that we have uncovered in actual bates stamped court documents which show the FRAUD that has occurred... I have to say though it was cleverly hid! Any suggestions which way to go with Bates stamped irrefutable documented evidence would be appreciated.
 


tranquility

Senior Member
What are the consequences/penalties for a defense attorney who deceitfully and intentionally created false documents and then submitted those false documents to a Superior Court judge in Summary Judgment - Trial Readiness paperwork for trial and again at key witness depositions in order to win the case?
No one can answer this in the abstract without knowing everything. But, the main point is that the evidence should have been challenged at trial. Since it does not seem to be newly discovered (as you could have dealt with it in the proceedings), it does not help you reopen the case.
 

Tex78704

Member
...the main point is that the evidence should have been challenged at trial. Since it does not seem to be newly discovered (as you could have dealt with it in the proceedings), it does not help you reopen the case.
If Fraudsters is complaining of extrinsic fraud (which includes fabrication of evidence by an attorney), and can substantiate this, and at the same time make a compelling argument "that if not for this fraud, the court would surely have ruled otherwise", that may be sufficient to reopen the case.
 

Fraudsters

Junior Member
Tranquility - There was never a trial. The evidence that was ruled upon at the MSJ was never challenged by my former attorney -Statue of Limitations is 6 months- He did NOTHING! Therefore the findings of the court were now chiseled in granite. My second attorney tried to show that I could have won my case but when a deadline is missed to challenge, your evidence is gone forever. I also know that if fraud is committed, then the case can be re-opened and decided in favor of the plaintiff and the judge then can reverse the decision of the court and you can now potentially receive Treble damages of your losses. My losses which were calculated by an economist at the onset of my lawsuit showed a personal loss of over 700K. Also if they are found guilty there are sever penalties for the attorneys who committed the fraud. I have Checkmate evidence in my possession. They have no way out!
 

tranquility

Senior Member
If Fraudsters is complaining of extrinsic fraud (which includes fabrication of evidence by an attorney), and can substantiate this, and at the same time make a compelling argument "that if not for this fraud, the court would surely have ruled otherwise", that may be sufficient to reopen the case.
Only if they didn't and could not have known. Here, it seems all the facts of the "fraud" in the evidence were available to them (As, it is some receipt issue.), so it should have been challenged in the proceeding.

The courts like things settled. I suspect there is not "Checkmate evidence" as attorney's don't really like the possibility of losing their ability to earn a living in order to help a client. I bet it more likely there is some odd thing which happened and the OP has latched onto it while combing over things again and again. I'm sure fraud occurs in trials. I'm sure that it is sometimes the attorney who commits it. It is rare. I think the OP should probably not plan on turning a loss at summary judgment into treble win because of a bates stamp.
 

Fraudsters

Junior Member
Tranqulity - I would agree except the evidence, ALL of it, was submitted and acted upon by the defense. Nothing was provided by the plaintiffs side and all the bates stamped files in question were as i mentioned were provided by the defense. A better way to explain it is: An exhibit document with a title of lets say "ABC" which contains lets say a "graph" was bates stamped and placed in as evidence. Now defense realizes after some depo testimony that because of the information in that ABC document they could loose their case. So defense decided to submit a second manufactured document containing a different graph cleverly useing the first "ABC"'s documents title in their pleadings before the court at their summary judgment. This was done I believe to not draw attention to the phony second document they slipped in. Therefore the judge, not having any red flags and seeing the title was the same reviewed the content of the phony document and made his ruling. Slight of hand - Shell Game - Three card Monty come to mind! So on at the least three different occasions defense continued to use this phony document in further depositions and it was even given, like I mentioned before, to their expert witness to opine on. This document as it turns out was the defining document that ultimately decided the case. This is FRAUD upon the Court! Unless I'm missing something!
 

tranquility

Senior Member
You realize that makes no sense at all. I'm sure you are being very careful to not let out vital information from your case because of....well because. But, your hypothetical is unintelligible. (By the way, a "graph" is rarely "evidence" in the way you mean. They can be changed if they are in error. Changing it is not fraud. The remedy is for the other side to present their graph and to challenge the other side's graph not to declare fraud and get treble damages after losing.)
 

Tex78704

Member
...An exhibit document with a title of lets say "ABC" which contains lets say a "graph" was bates stamped and placed in as evidence. Now defense realizes after some depo testimony that because of the information in that ABC document they could loose their case. So defense decided to submit a second manufactured document containing a different graph cleverly useing the first "ABC"'s documents title in their pleadings before the court at their summary judgment.

...This is FRAUD upon the Court! Unless I'm missing something!
Bottom line is plaintiff had an opportunity to review these documents for error when they were filed, and raise any objections. Plaintiff inadvertently missing any errors, and in turn failing to object, waives the error.

Plaintiff should have carefully reviewed the raw data and how the graphs were plotted and challenged the veracity or accuracy of these. If plaintiff was unable to analyze the source and reliability of the data, he should have hired an expert to do this.
 
Last edited:

dmcc10880

Member
Bottom line is plaintiff had an opportunity to review these documents for error when they were filed, and raise any objections. Plaintiff inadvertently missing any errors, and in turn failing to object, waives the error.

Plaintiff should have carefully reviewed the raw data and how the graphs were plotted and challenged the veracity or accuracy of these. If plaintiff was unable to analyze the source and reliability of the data, he should have hired an expert to do this.
Absolutely. With summary judgment typically very difficult to obtain, the plaintiff's lawyer must have just laid down. I don't understand if the stakes were high enough that the plaintiff didn't immediately appeal.

Fraudsters could look at a legal malpractice suit, but that's difficult to win and difficult to find an attorney to take it on.
 

Tex78704

Member
Absolutely. With summary judgment typically very difficult to obtain, the plaintiff's lawyer must have just laid down.

I don't understand if the stakes were high enough that the plaintiff didn't immediately appeal.

Fraudsters could look at a legal malpractice suit, but that's difficult to win and difficult to find an attorney to take it on.
Summary judgments are not especially difficult to obtain, and many cases meet an early demise by summary judgment.

Plaintiff had no basis for an appeal if the issue was plaintiff, or his attorney, failed to discover and file a timely objection to error in the lower court proceedings.

A malpractice suit does not appear to be even close to winnable in this case.
 

dmcc10880

Member
Tex, I've seen SJ's won, partial SJ's won, SJ's overturned on appeal, SJ's affirmed on appeal, SJ's won with costs and sanctions awarded. It's all over the board. The scale can swing either way.

I'm taking it that Fraudsters was the plaintiff and had absolutely no case as a matter of law.
 

Fraudsters

Junior Member
Tranquility - Ok a graph isnt a good example, sorry. Maybe this will help you understand what happened. It was a contract. A contract has certain language and is governed by many laws including UCC code? Lets use the ABC document title again as the example. The defense changed the terms in language of the contract. If they had not done so, they would have lost their case. They in turn used the ABC Title name to make it look authentic when they filed the papers with the court. This gave the appearance that it was the actual document that both sides had. This slight of hand was done deliberately but not found out until after 1. The attorney walked out 2. The case went to a second summary judgment where the case was dismissed (No Trial). Even if this information had been found out, which it hadn't, the statue of limitations to correct this situation had already expired. You cannot re introduce the evidence after it has been ruled on if you miss the SOL. That's the law. So when the attorney missed it and didn't argue against it and the courts missed it and ruled upon it, the case was lost. This Fraud was found out months after the fact through an investigation. My understanding is FRAUD has no statue of limitations! Does that make more sense to you?
 

tranquility

Senior Member
Look, there is no fraud here. Stop saying it. How could you not have known what was presented in the summary judgment? (Or, your attorney.) Let's use the contract example.

Other Side (OS) in brief: ABC contract says we don't have to pay because of B.
OS submits a contract titled ABC with the brief saying "OS does not have to pay because of B". This is a LIE AND COMPLETE FABRICATION. There was already a contract titled ABC in evidence (as proven by bates stamp) saying "OS *does* have to pay because of B".

The remedy is for Fraudsters (Or, Fraudsters attorney.) to reply to the brief saying: "OS is in error. ABC contract is marked as evidence at 123 and it says "OS *does* have to pay because of B".

Judge will look at the issue and decide.

Not fraud, but the way the court works. It's called an adversarial system. Each side brings it's evidence and challenges the other side's evidence.

Info edit:
Well, I can't say there isn't fraud here, but, the OP is not proving any of it up because of checkmate evidence. This essential element should have been dealt with in court. Not doing so was the failure. If it is so important, and if it really is so key, there may be a malpractice suit against the OP's attorney.
 
Last edited:

Fraudsters

Junior Member
Tranquility - You made my point for me. Nobody noticed the switch that the defense made. It wasn't a contract to determine payment of an obligation. The contrast was a binding agreement between two parties that stipulated each entities involvement of performance. It was the content of that agreement that was changed that caused the defense to alter their position to win the case. That is Fraud upon the court.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top