Hillary Clinton
Related: About this forumSubject: Re: Voting Rights Defense Project v. Padilla: We are seeking an ex parte hearing
Cc:
Bcc:
Subject: Fw: Voting Rights Defense Project v. Padilla: We are seeking an ex parte hearing
From: Joshua White/CTYATT
To: Bill Simpich <bsimpich@gmail.com>@SFGOV,
Date: 05/26/2016 05:26 PM
Subject: Re: Voting Rights Defense Project v. Padilla: We are seeking an ex parte hearing
Mr. Simpich,
I am in receipt of your email, in which you state that you will be filing an ex parte request
with the Court tomorrow at 3:00 p.m. to shorten time on a motion for preliminary
injunction, and that you will provide me with your papers by tomorrow at noon.
I have major concerns with how you have approached this litigation and with your
decision to wait a full week after filing your complaint to ask the Court to set an
expedited briefing schedule on your motion, in which you will presumably be asking the
Court to order significant injunctive relief regarding a major election thats occurring in
less than ten days.
You first contacted my client, the San Francisco Department of Elections, almost two
weeks ago, on May 13, 2016. We spoke on the same day, and you told me that you
believed the Department was in violation of Elections Code section 3006(c), which
requires the Department to provide certain information to voters who have not
expressed a party preference. On Monday, May 16, I provided you a full explanation
about why this was not the case. I even included screenshots of the Departments
website, which contain all of the statements you claimed were lacking. I encouraged
you to re-contact me to continue our discussion. A copy of that email is attached
hereto. Instead, you ignored me and filed your lawsuit, which contains many of the
same allegations that I refuted in my email.
We spoke again on Monday, May 23, 2016, and I informed you yet again that the
allegations in your Complaint are meritless, and the Department has gone above and
beyond its legal duty to educate San Francisco voters and provide them with the
opportunity to vote in the presidential primary. In our conversation, you told me that you
were working on your preliminary injunction motion and that you would attempt to
provide it to me by Tuesday (i.e., May 24).
Now, almost two weeks have passed since our first conversation and a full week has
passed since you filed your Complaint. It is, in my view, inappropriate to go in to Court
on an emergency ex parte basis on a Friday afternoon, ten days before a major
election, and ask the Court to set a hearing on a motion that you have not even
provided to me on a schedule about which you have not solicited my input. An ex parte
hearing is simply not appropriate for a shortened schedule when, among other issues,
you have had a week to propose a schedule to me and have failed to do so. What
schedule are you proposing? If there is a statutory or other basis for your motion,
please send me that citation immediately.
Finally, please copy me on all communications with the Court. Also, let me know what
direct communications you have had with the Court on this scheduling issue and when.
Best,
Joshua S. White
Deputy City Attorney
Office of San Francisco City Attorney Dennis J. Herrera
City Hall 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 234
San Francisco, CA 94102
Phone: (415) 554-4661
Fax: (415) 554-4745
More here, including emails/correspondence: http://www.sfcityattorney.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/VRDP-Email-Correspondence.pdf
TwilightZone
(25,342 posts)They haven't taken it seriously since it was filed.
Or before, for that matter.
Her Sister
(6,444 posts)the deadline was there!
TwilightZone
(25,342 posts)So, they were pretty much guaranteeing the "it's all rigged" crowd would get what they want. Proof!!!
still_one
(91,937 posts)TwilightZone
(25,342 posts)Suppose it's the same guy?
The first couple pages of Google search for "Bill Simpich" are JFK conspiracy stuff.
TwilightZone
(25,342 posts)still_one
(91,937 posts)I do NOT recommend this attorney
1.0 star
Posted by a Civil Rights client
September 19, 2014
Around July 20XX, I retained Mr. Simpich to represent me in a federal civil rights lawsuit, titled, XXXX v. YYYY in the US District Court for Northern California. I paid him an initial retainer of $XXXX and any potential subsequent recovery on a contingency-fee arrangement. Shortly after taking the case over, in which I was originally self-represented, Mr. Simpich promised me that he would file a reply brief to a pendent motion for a protective order as well as an opposition to opposing counsels request for expenses. Mr. Simpich did not file any reply brief nor did he ever file an opposition to opposing counsels request for expenses. This was obviously a breach of his promise to me as well as a breach of his fiduciary duty. Fortunately, for me, the courts ruling was favorable. Mr. Simpich never provided me with any explanation for his failure to file a responsive pleading in this matter.
https://www.avvo.com/attorneys/94612-ca-william-simpich-357624/reviews.html
Here is another lawsuit he was involved in, and his client doesn't appear too happy here also:
https://cynthiajeanneleemd.wordpress.com/2013/01/12/what-do-katya-komisaruk-william-m-simpich-and-kenneth-frucht-have-in-common/
Here is his twitter page:
https://twitter.com/billsimpich
If you read further down, besides the JFK/Oswald was framed themes, he seems to tilt toward a lot of conspiracy based themes.
No wonder he is working for Sanders
riversedge
(69,707 posts)TwilightZone
(25,342 posts)They wanted someone who could throw together a good conspiracy theory.
This guy's *literally* written the book. Several, actually. lol
still_one
(91,937 posts)donations
Sounds like a good ponzi scheme to me
Her Sister
(6,444 posts)@BillSimpich
Civil rights attorney and antiwar activist in the San Francisco Bay Area.
San Francisco
Joined February 2009
TwilightZone
(25,342 posts)Bernie has a conspiracy theorist filing lawsuits to support his conspiracy theories.
Can't make this shit up. Well, they can. lol
Her Sister
(6,444 posts)"I think it's unfortunate -- and selfish, frankly -- that these plaintiffs would inject confusion and uncertainty into an election that has been underway for weeks," Herrera said in a statement Thursday night. "San Francisco's Department of Elections and its employees have been doing an exemplary job, and I'm equally confident that our co-defendants are also meeting or exceeding their legal duties. This lawsuit is without merit, and there is no basis for an emergency injunction. I intend to fight it aggressively."
Voting by mail began in California May 9.
A news release from the Office of the City Attorney, noted, "San Francisco, Alameda County, and state elections officials were sued last week by an unincorporated association of Sanders backers called the 'Voting Rights Defense Project,' who together with the American Independence Party and two San Francisco voters leveled an array of allegations in their May 20 civil complaint that Herrera calls wholly baseless."
The release continued, "The activists are seeking sweeping injunctive relief in their suit, including provisions to force 58 counties to segregate ballots already cast by unaffiliated voters; to allow "re-votes" by those voters for presidential primary candidates; and to extend the state's voter registration deadline -- which passed on May 23 for eligibility to vote in the June 7 primary -- until election day itself."
Two lawyers for the group -- William M. Simpich and Stephen R. Jaffe -- did not immediately respond to ABC News' request for comment.
Sanders has not issued a statement on the matter.
There is more correspondence/emails in the link in the OP. Probably, S. Jaffe is more serious than Simpich.
http://www.jaffetriallaw.com/StephenJaffe.shtml?wldpid=2945842_1
still_one
(91,937 posts)Her Sister
(6,444 posts)Like nutso conservative! So the Bernie people have aligned themselves with this group for this case!?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Independent_Party
Here their website: http://www.aipca.org/
still_one
(91,937 posts)TwilightZone
(25,342 posts)They're a bunch of crazies. Complete loons. They make the Tea Party look halfway reasonable.
In 2012, they ran Alan Keyes' political group's former political director as their candidate. He got 40k votes.
In 2008, they ran...Alan Keyes. I completely forgot he ran. He got 47k votes.
TwilightZone
(25,342 posts)In a funny coincidence, there was a Steve Jaffe involved in the Garrison investigation of JFK's assassination, but it's not the same guy. I did a Google search for Steve Jaffe JFK just for laughs and it came up.
sarae
(3,284 posts)ok, I think I've heard it all now. Yet one more thing he shares with Trump.
still_one
(91,937 posts)lot of conspiracy stuff also
riversedge
(69,707 posts)NastyRiffraff
(12,448 posts)by Sanders supporters and/or the Sanders campaign. I have to wonder how directly the campaign is involved in this crap.
riversedge
(69,707 posts)the Sanders camp via a tweet--but found nothing. Could easily have missed it.
still_one
(91,937 posts)I suspect it isn't, since they only want publicity
riversedge
(69,707 posts)--in bold. seems like a dumbo! (the folks pushing the law suit).
........... I even included screenshots of the Departments
website, which contain all of the statements you claimed were lacking. I encouraged
you to re-contact me to continue our discussion. A copy of that email is attached
hereto. Instead, you ignored me and filed your lawsuit, which contains many of the
same allegations that I refuted in my email.