So a curious person might ask, why did Judge Becker want to arrive at that decision? Was she protecting Judge Eadie, as one union member tends to protect another? Whatever the reason, Becker’s misrepresentations and her ruling did not have the appearance of justice.
Stephen Dwyer, judge of Div. I, ( Middle) Washington State Court of Appeals, sat on the panel that affirmed the righteousness of the judge who appeared to be self-dealing.
Linda Lau, judge of Div. I, ( right) Washington State Court of Appeals, sat on the panel that affirmed the righteousness of the judge who appeared to be self-dealing.
Written by Carol DeCoursey, reposted with permission
We are a married couple (two seniors) of modest income. New to Washington, in 2004 we were looking for a home. Our Windermere agent arranged a home-purchase renovation package without telling us the contractor was unlicensed, unqualified for the job, and his business partner. The contractor bungled the job and ruined the value of the home. Then, in March, 2006, one of the sub-contractors sued us, complaining the prime had not paid him. (Story at http://www.RenovationTrap.com.)
We defended ourselves pro se and cross-claimed against Windermere Real Estate, the construction company, and others. We then discovered that other homeowners had been ripped off by Windermere, that the Department of Licensing (DOL) refused to discipline Windermere agents and enforce real estate laws, and that the Attorney General’s Office (AGO) defended DOL’s malfeasance. We spoke out against the corruption — we became whistleblowers. (Story at http://www.Windermere-Victims.com. See some of the fliers we circulated: “Crime Syndicate in Washington?” http://www.everyones-business.org/Crime-Syndicate-in-Washington.pdf” and “Legalizing Crime in Washington,” http://www.everyones-business.org/Legalizing-Crime-in-Washington.pdf”).
In company with other victims of Windermere, we petitioned the State Auditor’s office to investigate the DOL. After almost two years, a report was written, but the AGO attorney on the Auditor’s staff advised that DOL enforcement was discretionary and the report was shelved. We obtained a copy of the final report, which says little more than that.
We hired a young lawyer to take us to trial. He’d just started working at mega-firm Lane Powell. But we did not know that the supervisor of his practice group, Grant Degginger, was the Mayor of Bellevue and Mayor Degginger was presiding over Bellevue’s biggest building boom ever. Only months before, the Washington Association of Realtors and other development interests had financed Degginger’s election — and we were suing Degginger’s political support community. Lane Powell did not disclose any of this. Had we known, we would not have agreed to have Degginger controlling our case.
At one point we directed Lane Powell to tell the court about the corruption at DOL and AGO and its impact upon us and other Windermere victims. Lane Powell refused. We later learned that Degginger’s wife, a lawyer, had worked for 18 years in the Attorney General’s Office, another fact we would like to have known up front.
We scored a trial victory against Windermere. But during the course of trial preparation and subsequent appeals, Lane Powell bled our case for legal fees — and then gave away important awards. We had already paid the firm $313,808. As soon as we could practically do so, we dismissed Lane Powell (August 3, 2011); that day, Lane Powell filed a lien of $384,881.66 plus interest against our upcoming Windermere judgment payout.
Two months later, on October 5, 2011 (before we received the payout), Lane Powell sued us for the money. Its lawsuit was assigned to Richard D. Eadie, whose wife was a Windermere agent/broker; he was himself a beneficiary of Windermere’s retirement plan. In violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct, Eadie did not disclose this to us.
On the same day it filed suit, Lane Powell served discovery requests, demanding we produce in discovery all communications we had with its attorneys on any subject whatsoever — not just matters pertaining to Lane Powell’s lawsuit — thereby waiving all attorney-client confidentiality on all subjects. The message was clear: “Pay up, or your confidences will be revealed.” We believe that is extortion under color of law. (Judge Eadie first granted, and then denied he had granted, discovery protection.)
Lane Powell told provable and repeated lies to Judge Eadie; when we provided documentation proving the lies, Eadie simply ignored it all and incorporated the lies in his rulings. He hammered us with one unfair decision after another. Then we found out about his Windermere connection and asked him to recuse (step down). He refused. He then dismissed our defenses and counter claims and approved an award of $842,734.67 to ex-Mayor Degginger and his colleagues at Lane Powell.
We appealed, using an excellent lawyer. The Court of Appeals misrepresented the issue on appeal and affirmed the judgment. The Supreme Court — even knowing that Judge Eadie kept his Windermere connections secret while trying two Windermere whistleblowers, that Lane Powell lied in court, and that Judge Eadie had knowingly incorporated those lies into his rulings — refused to grant us an appeal. (Story at http://www.everyones-business.org)
Grant Degginger is now chair of the Public Disclosure Commission …
We have filed a Complaint with the WSBA — complete with more that 4,000 pages of documentation. (Synopsis at http://www.everyones-business.org/BarReport/Synopsis.pdf )
But WSBA will take no action, further encouraging corrupt lawyers in big law firms and government agencies. What a racket.
My Story…. Bill Scheidler
I discovered a county official was defrauding me and other retired/disabled individuals by deliberately misstating statutory language. The attorney I hired to sue the county was then “extorted” from representing me by using his Bar license as leverage to force him off the case. I filed a Bar grievance against the lawyer for his breach. The Bar Association dismissed the grievance in order to “protect the attorney and the county in their extortion scheme which was to deprive me of my counsel so as to save the fraud being perpetrated by the county upon me and all retired/disabled citizens”… no other lawyer would take the case because of the risk to their Bar license should they represent me against the county’s fraud. The WA State Bar, in dismissing the grievance against the lawyer “delegated back to me” the task of investigating my grievance stating that the Bar would “re-open the grievance” if a “judicial finding of impropriety” was obtained. No lawyer would take my case to find a “judicial finding of impropriety”. So I sued “pro se”. After more than a year of discovery, depositions and motions, the judge dismissed the case against the attorney under “CR 11″ (one week before trial by jury) and awarded the very attorney, who withdrew under the county’s extortion scheme, sanctions of $132,000. On appeal, the entire $132,000 was reversed as manifestly unjust and a consequence of the attorney’s discovery abuses and excessive motions, but remanded for reasonable fees. On remand a successor judge (a judge never before sitting or hearing any evidence) re-awarded sanctions of $120,000. On appeal of that award as a violation of the previous Appeal’s mandate, and that a successor judge has no authority to make a decision on facts he never heard, a violation of law- RCW 2.28.030(2), the clerk of the court of appeals, refused to file my opening brief and then the”clerk” dismissed the appeal for failure to file an opening brief. A motion to modify the clerks unilateral decisons to not file and then dismiss for not filing was dismissed and, as is the custom, sanctions of $4000 were levied against me for bringing a “frivolous motion”.
There is still more…. I then filed a ‘citizens criminal complaint’ against the clerk for not filing papers delivered to him – a violation of the statute that lists the duties of court clerks, one such duty is “to file ALL papers delivered for that purpose”. This ‘criminal complaint’ is authorized under a court rule. The judge REFUSED to allow me to file this criminal complaint. I then filed a recall petition, a constitutional right, to remove the judge from his ‘elected office’ because he refused to allow me to file a criminal complaint against the clerk of the court of appeals who violated the law by not filing my paper and then dismissing my appeal for not filing. This “petition to Recall”, which is a constitutional right, was blocked by a judge. An appeal was made directly to the WA State Supreme Court (a statutory procedure in “voter” issues) …. AND of course the Clerk of the Supreme Court refused to file the appeal!
Question for the readers is: Who let the pigs out?
Perhaps “we the people ” should file Recall Petitions against any elected official who spits on the civil rights of citizens the way Becker, Dwyer, and Lau did in favor of a piece of shit from Bellevue named Grant Degginger ( Degginger is also the one who gave Gold Bar’s water boy Karl Marjerle a job after public records confirmed that he sabotaged Gold Bar’s water wells and stole from the City. Snohomish County Prosecutor Sean Reay’s wife quashed the criminal charges as a political favor for a pedophile from Snohomish County named John E. Pennington and his mistress Crystal Hill. Crystal Hill Pennington ( nee Berg) plead guilty to bank fraud while she was sitting council member in 2005. Crystal Hill Pennington and John E. Pennington are being sued for RICO violations in US Federal Court with more RICO suits ready to go July 2015 as well as a defamation suit for John Pennington’s Sky Valley Chronicle postings.