 |
Baldwin Park City Attorney Robert Nacionales Tafoya,
aka Robert Tafoya, Robert N. Tafoya, aka Robert Tafo,
aka Robert Nacionales, aka Roberto Tafoya
|
City Attorney, Robert Nacionales-Tafoya has billed the city more than $300,000 a year. He won't release his attorney's bills under California Public Records law, but that's ok. I have a source on the inside that will help me put it together.
We have a hearing on Tuesday. For the third time, he submitted an opposition brief late. So, I had to write him a letter reminding him of the rules of court and conduct. It's a good read. It starts two paragraphs down.
Now, some people may criticize me because I shouldn't make these disputes public because it's between attorneys. To that, I say, yes, that's generally true. And on my blog, have I posted the bad conduct of other attorneys? No, even though I have experienced my fair share of it.
Remember, I'm a citizen and resident of Baldwin Park. I'm appalled that we spend so much money on this man. And I want everyone else to know how he behaves, because his behavior is public - as well as my letter. This is a public issue because it involves public money. Furthermore, this is the man who is the face of Baldwin Park in courts. It's not professional image of Baldwin Park.
Recently, I complained to the City Manager about the unprofessionalism and the lack of customer service in Baldwin Park - especially with the Director of Parks and Recreation, Manuel Carrillo Jr. My main complaints are generally that they break the law, are dishonest, and blame their problems on everything else. Well, it's no wonder - when you see how their legal adviser behaves and advises.
Aug. 13, 2015
To Robert Nacionales-Tafoya
Sent by email at
Robert.tafoya@tafoyagarcia.com
Re: Gentle Reminder on Rules of Court and Decorum
Dear Mr. Tafoya:
I
am writing this letter to gently remind you of the court rules and rules of
decorum. It seems there has been some confusion over the matter, as your last
three opposing motions have been submitted late. Yes, I can understand that the
rules are a bit confusing; that is why I would like to help explain them to you
Although I usually reserve such
letters for Pro Pers (those who
represent themselves), I understand –as my mentor says – that we all need to
refresh our understanding of basics – even when we have been litigating for 18
years. Currently, you are my opposing counsel on two cases, which I’ll refer to
as Casas 1 (BS147794) and Casas 2 (BS147794).
The Time to Submit Oppositions Are 10
Court Days
Under
Cal. Civ. Pro. Code 1005(b), you must submit your opposition 10 court days
before the hearing date. For our Aug. 18, 2015 motion, you submitted your
opposition only 5 court days before the hearing. This is 7 calendar days late
for the court. This is 9 calendar days late for me.
Now,
I know it seems like it’s not that important of a matter to submit things on
time, but it really is. The court must make the best decision possible on our
hearings. And we want to respect the court, by giving the court ample time to
review our work. When you submit things so late, I can’t possibly reply to your
opposition in time for the court to review the work. That means there is
information the court may not have. Hence, the court’s quality of work also
goes down. I hope that gives you a good perspective on why you need to submit
things on time. In this instance, this is the third time you’ve submitted
papers late.
Duty of Candor with the Court
Mr.
Tafoya, there is a duty of candor with the court, under the ethics rule of
Prof. Conduct 5-200(B). It says you “Shall not seek to mislead the judge . . .
by false statement of fact or law.” What that means, Mr. Tafoya is that you
must always be honest with the court. I know that the temptation of not doing
so was great for you when you intentionally misrepresented my signature to the
court, but you must never do that again. The judge in Department 82 was clear
to you to never file a stipulation by erasing my signature block because I
refuse to sign something you want. A stipulation means that two parties agree
to something. But since I didn’t agree to it, and you submitted a statement
that says I stipulated to something, one can construe this as an intentional
misrepresentation. This is because you told the court that I agreed to
something I did not. Once again, I know the temptation to be dishonest is
great, but please, as a litigator in court you must restrain yourself from time
to time.
Duty not to File Frivolous Motion
I
would like to remind you to not file frivolous motions with the court. The
court is very busy, especially in the writ departments. In Casas 1, after the
trial was won and the attorney’s fees were won, you filed nearly five motions
for sanctions against me. All of your motions have been denied because you did
not follow procedure or have merit.
I understand that the
frustration was great for you, and it’s understandable that you believe that I
was the cause of your frustration. Nonetheless, the court is not the
appropriate venue to air your frustration. There are other channels to do this.
Now, I am not saying that you
cannot file sanctions motions, but you need to have something called merit –
which means good facts to support your cause. And if you have probable cause to
do so, then it is in your discretion to do what you need to.
But, I ask that you at least
follow the procedure rules, under Cal. Civ. Pro. Code Section 128.7. This is
called the Safe Harbor Provision, in which you need to giving the opposing side
a chance to cure whatever you think I am doing wrong. And if you tell why I’m
wrong, and what I’m doing that is wrong, and I am wrong, I’m sure I will
comply.
Furthermore, in Casas 1, you have
filed a motion to tax (which is another version of sanctions), but you have
filed this several months late. Also, a new case has been published that
discusses that motions to tax cannot be filed in Public Records Act cases. Have
you reviewed it yet? If not, I can send it to you.
Please be reminded when you
file such unmeritorious filings, the court must read it. Court resources are
scarce now, given the budget cuts. Therefore, I hope you can appreciate the
court’s view.
Duty
to Appear to Mandatory Meetings
Mr. Tafoya you must appear to
court ordered meetings. The duty is imposed by the court, when the court asks
us to meet.
You have already failed to
appear to three of them. The first time was at the Trial Setting Conference in
Casas 1. The second time was with my negotiator. The third time was in our
court ordered meet and confer. In each of these instances, you’ve alleged that
you’ve had an emergency – either with your son, at city hall, or with your
associate (who had a fatal diabetic attack).
I know that managing your
calendar can be a difficult task. I am not doubting that this happened, but
it’s usually customary to send notice if this happens, instead of making people
wait an hour or two – only for you to tell them later. This is because people value
their time, and if you let them know in advance, they can use their time more
productively than having to wait for a meeting that is not going to happen.
After you give notice, people, like myself, will be more than happy to
reschedule with you.
Cooperation
with Basic Scheduling
Cooperation
is greatly helpful on matters, such as scheduling meetings. When I was opposing
counsel with the prosecutor at the District Attorney Office, another government
entity, we never had a problem with respecting each other’s schedule.
Now, I know that at times, Pro Pers believe they are “giving in”
to the other side when they agree to a schedule change, but this is not so. As
you’ve mentioned in your life: your son has emergencies, your associates have
fatal diabetic attacks, your associates run off from you, and your associates
don’t do the work you ask. Given the number of problems that have arisen, you
have always expected me to be understanding of these issues, and I have done
so. If you can do so for me, this would be helpful for both the court and me,
because it would discharge the environment of conflict. When you do not agree
to such requests, it forces me to request it from the court. And that just adds
to their already full court load. I hope this perspective is helpful.
Although
you’ve been an attorney for 18 years, I know that this is the first time that
you’ve been a city attorney – and so I’m understanding of the great challenges
you’re facing. I’ve only been practicing for two years, and I’ve been finding
litigation a completely new world. So, I understand. Feel free to email me if
you need any clarification on the law. I will be happy to provide it.
Yours truly,
Paul Cook
Attorney at Law
