Judge Wells did not think it was enough to sanction her mother with her children; see previous posting regarding using children as punitive sanctions against a parent. Judge Wells, the local judicial weapon of mass destruction of the Riverside Superior Court, continues with his violation of law, rules and procedure by scribbling sanctions on a litigants Exparte Motion that was filed that specifically addresses his conflicting sanctions order from the 5th of August 2011. The Sanctions to be addressed at the hearing pertain to Riverside Superior Court local rule 5.165 for filing an exparte.
However, this “notice” violates CA rules of court 3.20 and CA rules of Court 3.120-3.1207 as Judge Dale Wells appears to be unaware of the fact that CA rules of court 3.20 prevail and a scribbled request for sanctions by Judge Dale Wells certainly does not conform to CA rules of court or Judicial council requirements. It merely illustrates how far this court is willing to illegally sanction a litigant who refuses to have her children allocated as sanctions against her.
Specifically, CA rules of court 3.20 states “ The Judicial Council has preempted all local rules relating to pleadings, demurrers, ex parte applications, motions, discovery, provisional remedies, and the form and format of papers. No trial court, or any division or branch of a trial court, may enact or enforce any local rule concerning these fields. All local rules concerning these fields are null and void unless otherwise permitted or required by a statute or a rule in the California Rules of Court.
CA rule of court 3.120-1.207 does not contain a provision for sanctioning a litigant for filing an exparte for good cause.
CCP 575.1(a) authorizes “local rules designed to expedite and facilitate the business of the court.” Local rules are valid only to the extent that they do not conflict with statutes and the CRC. (See, e.g., 2 Witkin, Cal. Procedure, supra, Courts, §§ 186, 201 and 204; Gov.Code § 68070(a).)