Nearly two years has also passed since the State Bar said in a Sept. 27, 2022 news release:

"The State Bar of California’s Board of Trustees Chair Ruben Duran announced today that the State Bar is investigating attorneys Mark John Geragos (State Bar No. 108325) and Brian Stephen Kabateck (State Bar No. 152054) in connection with the Armenian Genocide insurance settlement funds from which dispersals were made in the U.S. and France." in a matter in which the State Bar announced—possibly for the sake of publicity— that it was launching a probe of former Los Angeles County Bar Association President Brian Kabateck and criminal defense lawyer Mark Geragos.”

Under fire for its dereliction in failing to act on complaints about Thomas V. Girardi (now disbarred) until his dishonesty became manifest and widely reported by the news media, the announcement was made, possibly for sake of publicity. The move could backfire if the two are exonerated for a fourth time—or what would possibly be a fifth time as to Geragos.

The State Bar will not comment on what progress has been made. A spokesperson said on May 30, in response to a METNEWS inquiry:

“At this time, we can provide no update beyond what was stated in our earlier September 27, 2022 release.”

Kabateck has attained multi-million dollar judgments and settlements; Geragos is a criminal defense lawyer whose clients have included Whitewater defendant Susan McDougal, former Rep. Gary Condit, actress Winona Ryder, and entertainer Michael Jackson.

Kabateck and Geragos had obtained a settlement of $37.5 million in separate actions against two insurers who failed to pay claims under life insurance policies issued to persons who were slain in the Armenian genocide. Major attention has been focused in recent Los Angeles Times articles on what happened to proceeds from a $17.5 million settlement with a French insurer in 2005.

Questions have been raised as to whether the two lawyers pocketed any of the funds. While moneys are missing, the lawyers point out they had nothing to do with the distribution of the proceeds.

They were previously cleared of wrongdoing in at least three State Bar probes and one by independent investigators.

The State Bar’s press release quotes then-Board of Trustees Chair Ruben Duran as saying:

“The State Bar is charged with protecting the public. Confidence in our ability to do so has unfortunately been shaken in recent times by the Girardi matter and what it represents. Restoring and maintaining the public’s trust in the disciplinary apparatus of this agency is imperative.”

Geragos—who has said he will be suing the State Bar—remarked that Duran’s mention of Girardi shows that “all they’re trying to do is deflect” attention from the debacle in not responding to complaints about Girardi.

Kabateck asserted:

“This is a political stunt by the State Bar.”

Los Angeles Assistant District Attorney Diana Teran, a key aide to District Attorney George Gascón, had been charged by the Office of Attorney General with 11 counts of unlawfully accessing and, in her prosecutorial role, making use of confidential electronic personnel files on deputy sheriffs. Following pre-trial motions and a four-day preliminary hearing, six counts remain.

Teran was arrested and booked on April 27. She pled not guilty at her arraignment on July 25.

The County Counsel’s Office has disclosed, in response to a Public Records Act request by victim rights attorney Kathleen Cady, a former deputy district attorney, that Teran is being paid— $26,970.03 per month, including benefits—while on leave pending resolution of the charges.

County Civil Service Rule 16.01 provides that “[l]eaves of absence from regular duties, with pay, may be granted only by the appointing power under such conditions and for such periods as established by the board of supervisors, when such leaves are determined to be in the best interests of the service.” Rule 16.02 says that leaves without pay may be granted for reasons that are enumerated “or for such other lawful purposes as are deemed by the appointing power to be in the best interest of the department.”

A former high-level member of the County Counsel’s Office commented:

“It should be noted that ‘appointing power’ would mean department head, here Gascon. Although these rules do not expressly address investigations, my recollection is that a leave would be with pay during an investigation but once charges are filed that the leave is without pay (because the employee is frequently dismissed at that point.)”

Other knowledgeable persons say general county policy is to put employees on an unpaid suspension while criminal charges are pending.

Teran is being prosecuted by the Office of Attorney General.

U.S. District Court Judge Stephen V. Wilson of the Central District of California has come under investigation in connection with alleged misconduct of an extreme nature on Nov. 17, 2021. The probe was revealed in an order by Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Kim Wardlaw signed Aug. 23 and made public Aug. 27.

Wardlaw acted on a complaint concerning Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Mary Murguia who, it was alleged in a May 31 METNEWS editorial, was derelict in not acting upon information that was provided to her concerning Wilson’s conduct. Although the chief judge normally acts on complaints about judges, her recusal was required as to the accusation against her.

The chief judge’s excuse, accepted by Wardlaw, was that she doesn’t always read emails and wasn’t aware of having been alerted as to Wilson’s conduct. (Wilson wasn’t mentioned by name in Wardlaw’s order.)

On Feb. 2, 2023, the METNEWS sent Murguia an email saying:

“This is to brng to your attention a matter warranting investigation. Please click on the link below.

“Was a Lawyer Subjected to Barbaric Abuse at a Federal Courthouse?

“(Editorial, February 1, 2023)”

On March 1, 2023, an email was sent to her quoting the first email and saying:

“You have ordered an investigation of Judge [Roger] Benitez [of the of the Southern District of California]. Why no such probe of Judge Wilson whose alleged misconduct was far more egregious?”

A recitation of the 2021 events, as contained in this column, was included.

Wardlaw wrote that Murguia doesn’t recall receiving an email from the METNEWS and said, in a footnote:

“As with most employers, the federal judiciary employs a spam filter program. There is a possibility that an unsolicited email from a member of the public may have never reached the chief judge.”

She declared:

“To the extent complainant alleges that the chief judge failed to act on known information, the allegation is dismissed because it lacks any factual support and is conclusively refuted by the results of this inquiry.”

Wardlaw said that Murguia “did not become aware of the 2021 contempt proceedings until June 26, 2024, when another circuit judge first informed her about the editorial and, later that day, sent her a copy of the editorial itself,” adding:

“Once the chief judge received and reviewed the editorial, she immediately began conducting an inquiry process under Judicial-Conduct Rule 5.”

She also said in a footnote that “an investigation into the contempt proceedings is now underway.”

The incident was revealed by METNEWS on Jan. 26 of 2023 and commented on in a Feb. 2 editorial.

The conduct was spelled out, under penalty of perjury, by Westlake Village attorney Marina Lang. She recounted that when she got into a squabble with Wilson over his rulings, she was not merely ordered out of his courtroom but was handcuffed and manacled, forced to hobble in the courthouse hallway before onlookers, booked, and was, for hours, chained to a chair in a cold and smelly basement cell, immobilized, unable even to scratch her nose.

Actions toward her were consequent to an express order by Wilson, though the extent of his knowledge as to the precise treatment of Lang has yet to be established.

The record does show that after Wilson expressed, with the jury not present, disgruntlement over her conduct in the closing phases of a trial in a trademark dispute, and Lang indicated like displeasure with his behavior, the judge declared:

“You are in contempt,” and asked:

“Is the Marshal there?”

A deputy marshal was present. Wilson then commanded:

“Take Ms. Lang in custody. She’s in contempt of court.”

The order was, understandably, treated by deputies as an adjudication of a criminal contempt. Lang was purportedly told by deputies, when she protested the metal restraints, that they were doing what the judge wanted. Later, back in the courtroom, Wilson related to Lang’s co-counsel, who had continued representing the client, and to opposing counsel, that Lang was in a “holding area” and advised: “I’m going to order her released.”

She was eventually freed that night after court hours, according to her declaration, with her car locked in a parking lot.

The facts and the allegations are not alluded to in the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’s memorandum opinion affirming a civil contempt fine of $3,510 later imposed by Wilson on Lang, and would seem to be irrelevant to the issue before that court. Wilson imposed the fine, to be payable to the other side, and the opinion says in Footnote 1:

“Lang acknowledges that she lacks an appellate remedy for her period of temporary confinement and does not appeal it, so we express no views on that issue.”

Benitez caused the momentary handcuffing of a 13-year-old girl (as opposed to the alleged hours-long shackling of Lang). The Ninth Circuit Judicial Council on May 1 reprimanded Benitez.