Category: Improperly Processing Correspondence

Last year, I posted a video of a legal scholar named Dave Myrland who talked about how the tax man owns the court. I also wrote an article about how the legal system has been hijacked by government agencies who are unlawfully extracting extra revenue for their agencies. In my first appeal of penalties, interest and fees, I saw that the Office of Tax Appeal judges covered up the Franchise Tax Board’s bona fide criminal activities with an extremely deceptive and evasive verdict. It was no surprise when it happened again in the San Diego Superior Court case.

The biggest red flag that the case was rigged against me was that the judge denied an extension of the final hearing date. On January 23, 2022, my father got sick with a MRSA staph infection. He died on February 7. On February 18, FTB and I filed a stipulation to continue the hearing until September. The judge denied the stipulation on March 1. Since I thought the extension was a done deal, I focused on burial arrangements, moving my father’s belongings out of his apartment, probate, etc. When I found out the extension was denied, I only had 10 days to complete and file the extensive paperwork that was due. A paralegal of 23 years told me that she has never before seen a judge deny a hearing extension when both sides stipulated. And the fact that the denial took so long was suspicious.

Here is the tentative ruling, which was issued the day before the trial. He threw out the majority of the documents/evidence that I had submitted on the grounds of technical violations. The Opposition to FTB’s Motion for Sanctions exceeded the page limit and my Opposition to Summary Judgment was missing a table of contents and an authentication. He could have ordered me to re-submit these items and extend the hearing date, but he chose not to.

Just like with The OTA case, the judge refused to acknowledge the existence of FTB’s questionable business practices and refused to address the laws that I cited that proved that these business practices were unlawful. He also refused to acknowledge that the arguments the DOJ made were based on lies and deception, and that FTB had committed multiple counts of perjury and had improperly withheld and redacted documents to hide evidence. Likewise, the judge refused to acknowledge that the DOJ had posted my husband’s and my social security numbers online. If I had done the things that FTB/DOJ had done, the judge would have thrown me in jail. And yet for FTB/DOJ, he just pretended as if none of it had happened.

In the oral arguments, I asked the judge to amend his ruling. Here is the summary of the oral arguments: