Digitally signed

by Joseph Zernik
Human Rights Alert DN: cn=Joseph
Zernik, o, ou,
PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750 email=jz12345@
earthlink.net,
Fax: 323.488.9697; Email: jz12345@earthlink.net c=US
Blog: http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/ Date: 2010.06.01
09:18:15 +03'00'
Scribd: http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert

08-12-23 California Supreme Court Denies Review of Sturgeon v Los Angeles County

The most plausible explanation for conduct of the California Supreme Court is the same as that applied to the
denial of review of the Application of Richard Fine by the US Supreme Court –

The California Supreme Court had no jurisdiction to review a non ruling by the California Court of Appeals
on a non-judgment by the California Superior Court – since none of the court rulings, orders, and judgments
in the case were valid and effectual court papers.
 MEDIA ADVISORY
Number: 50 Date: December 23, 2008

JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF
CALIFORNIA
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE
OF THE COURTS
Supreme Court Denies Review in
Public Information Office Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles
455 Golden Gate Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94102-3688
www.courtinfo.ca.gov
Case Concerns County-Paid Benefits for Trial Court Judges
415-865-7740
San Francisco—The California Supreme Court today denied review in
Lynn Holton
Public Information Officer Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles (S168408), 167 Cal.App.4th 630, in
which the Court of Appeal held that various benefits paid by the County
of Los Angeles to its Superior Court judges violate article VI, section 19,
of the state Constitution. That provision states: “The Legislature shall
prescribe compensation for judges of courts of record.”

There were no votes to grant review of the Court of Appeal’s decision in

this matter.

-#-