Unsatisfactory Representation.
Failed to follow the judge’s order leading to adverse consequences. Sometimes withheld important documents. Did not amend the complaint to include a defendant. On occasions, didn't respond to us in a timely manner, required reminders before taking action, and did not return important phone calls. Dra...ft documents were often given to us near the deadline, and included many mistakes requiring last minute corrections. Delayed letting us know of a rescheduled motion. Made promises he did not keep. Very frustrating to deal with. The following is an excerpt of the actual court transcript. Unfortunately, it was us who ultimately had to deal with the "consequences" of Mr. Vera's defalcations:
THE COURT: Here is the problem, as I see it.
This came from a summary judgment motion on the civil
motions calendar. Maybe you are not aware of what
judicial officers have to do on a civil motions
calendar, but during the week there is probably about
five thousand pages of reading.
And even this . . . is way more than was
contemplated being considered on this particular
calendar. You have a propensity, counsel, to sort of reframe
the issues unilaterally in the way that you best see fit.
Now, maybe that's how you are used to
practicing, but when I was practicing and the Court
gave me specific instructions, I thought it was my
duty as an officer of the court to follow them. In
this case, you didn't. You missed your thirty day
deadline. You have gone way beyond in terms of
amending your complaint into areas that I did not
contemplate.
In order to adequately rule on this, it would have
required a lot of study. And I think that the posture
in which you've placed this whole thing presumes a lot
on everybody, not only counsel but on the Court.
In looking at this -- at the time of the summary
judgment motion, I thought that, and I still think
this, that with regard to the overt acts that were
committed against your clients that there were some
outstanding, or outlying causes of action that could
be plead with regards to the individuals that I named.
MR. VERA: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: I gave you thirty days to do that.
You didn't do it. The motion that you presented is
entirely a motion outside the scope.
Now, what I did to try and facilitate what you
called a more streamline and economical future.
MR. VERA: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Is I retained jurisdiction in this
case, because I knew the case somewhat because of the
summary judgment motion. That was -- what was the
phrase you used? I forget what it was. But that was
a pretty substantial benefit. Let me use my own
words. That was a pretty substantial benefit that I
extended towards you gratis without your request.
MR. VERA: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: And you just abused it.
MR. VERA: Sorry, sir.
THE COURT: What you did in response can not be
described any other way than you just abused that.
And technically you didn't follow it. This was
supposed to happen within thirty days, and it didn't
happen.
All right. So your motion to amend is denied.
I'm denying it without prejudice. And what that does
is that removes the grace that I gave you for me to
review it when I knew something about the case.
If you want to amend your complaint, file a new
complaint, you will have to do it with a different
judge.
MR. VERA: Thank you, sir. I'm sorry, sir. I
honestly did not mean to abuse the --
THE COURT: Mr. Vera, I don't need an apology. I
don't think it's important. I just want you to sort
of see my point of view that, you know, this is -- the
practice of law is something that we do as a group
between the attorneys and the judge. And if you want
to ignore instructions that go to your benefit, so be
it.
But then what happens is you are going to have to
deal with the consequences and these are the
consequences.
MR. VERA: Yes, sir.
