Michael Pekin and the District Attorney’s Office are back at it,
filing dueling court motions regarding one lawsuit aimed at barring
Pekin and his staff from filing lawsuits against the county, and
another attempting to terminate the district attorney’s involvement
in a Grand Jury investigation into the controversial lawyer.
Hollister – Michael Pekin and the District Attorney’s Office are back at it, filing dueling court motions regarding one lawsuit aimed at barring Pekin and his staff from filing lawsuits against the county, and another attempting to terminate the district attorney’s involvement in a Grand Jury investigation into the controversial lawyer.
District Attorney John Sarsfield filed a suit in December claiming Pekin and his staff are milking the county dry for enormous sums of money by filing unwarranted lawsuits, and asked that everyone named in the suit pay the county a fine of as much as $500,000 plus attorney’s fees. Pekin and his son, Patrick Pekin, who is defending his father in this suit, had until Jan. 20 to respond to the lawsuit but failed to do so, according to Special Deputy District Attorney Roy Hubert, who is prosecuting the case.
The inaction spurred the District Attorney’s Office to file a notice for default, simply informing the court the younger Pekin did not respond to the suit as required by law.
A judge’s approval of the default could terminate Patrick Pekin’s right to defend his case and force him to petition a judge to throw out the default, Hubert said. If the default is approved, Hubert said he will ask a judge to grant the District Attorney’s Office requests outlined in the suit, which include the fine of up to $500,000 and a clause that would require Pekin get a judge’s permission before he files any more lawsuits against the county.
However, Pekin said his son sent Hubert a letter on Jan. 18 asking to extend the deadline to respond to the suit until several other motions are settled – including one to recuse Sarsfield from any involvement in a Grand Jury investigation into the lawyer.
“Instead of answering the letter Hubert ran down and took the default,” Pekin said.
Pekin then sent Hubert a letter on his son’s behalf, asking him to remove the default. Pekin said responding to a letter before filing a legal motion is standard practice, and Hubert’s refusal was unprofessional.
“Come on, you know the professional practice, withdraw this default,” Pekin said. “Sarsfield’s office is not acting professionally. Is that a fair and impartial DA?”
A court date to argue the default motion has not been set yet, but Hubert said he is hoping to decide on a date soon.
Hubert would not comment why he didn’t respond to Patrick Pekin’s request, or if he will respond to the elder Pekin’s letter, either.
“The law requires there be an answer within 30 days and there wasn’t,” Hubert said. “I don’t want to discuss what we plan to do, just that we’re prosecuting the case vigorously.”
But Pekin filed a motion last week, two days after Hubert filed the default, asking a judge to dismiss the lawsuit altogether. Pekin said his motion, called a demurrer, is based on the fact that he believes there is no legal grounds for a suit in the first place, and that Sarsfield filed it because of a personal vendetta.
Pekin believes Sarsfield’s lawsuit will be dismissed when the demurrer is heard on Feb. 15 because he will show the judge that he is being unfairly targeted by the District Attorney’s Office for speaking out against the prosecutor.
“I think the judge is an American judge and he knows the government can’t suppress people from attempting to get redress from the government,” Pekin said. “The San Benito County Superior Court judge does not think it’s funny that the judicial system has been brought to this level. It’s a public disgrace.”
Erin Musgrave covers public safety for the Free Lance. Reach her at 637-5566, ext. 336 or [email protected]
