• Report: #607294

Complaint Review: Chris Scott Graham Partner Dechert LLP Silicon Valley Diana Moralez Melegrito

Thank You

Read how Ripoff Report saves consumers millions.

  • Submitted: Tue, May 25, 2010
  • Updated: Fri, August 06, 2010

  • Reported By: Marcys Rights for me — San Jose California United States of America
Chris Scott Graham Partner Dechert LLP Silicon Valley Diana Moralez Melegrito
El Camino Real Mt. View California Internet United States of America

Chris Scott Graham Partner Dechert LLP Silicon Valley Diana Moralez Melegrito Diana Rodriguz, Contreras, Moralez, Melegrito Commercial Litigation, Intellectual Property Litigation Lawyer hires felon possibley given access to client info and beating up DV victims Internet

*Author of original report: It gets worse

*Author of original report: Francis Cole State Bar 219081

*Author of original report: MORAL CHARACTER -

*Author of original report: California Code Title 17

*Author of original report: typo

*Author of original report: Correction to typo -

*Author of original report: Are your Intellectual Property Secrets Safe?

What's this?
What's this?
What's this?
Is this
Ripoff Report
About you?
Ripoff Report
A business' first
line of defense
on the Internet.
If your business is
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..

Does your business have a bad reputation?
Fix it the right way.
Corporate Advocacy Program™

SEO Reputation Management at its best!


Chris Scott Graham - #114498



Employs Diana Rodriguez Contreras Moralez Melegrito, at his office. She is a convicted felon in Santa Clara County who embezzled funds from attorney Robin Yeamans and went to prison for 3 years and four months so I know per the court record and loan documents in which Diana has notarized Grant Deeds saying she is married to her brother


Benny Rodriguez that she is very skilled in crimes of moral turpitude. I contacted in Nov. 2009 both Patti Selan to ask if she notarized the document? And Graham as well to ask since Selan declined to answer. I explained to him based on Diana criminal history and incarceration I was suspect of that notarization and did not appreciate Diana trying to use


Usual means and modes of operation, fraud against me and my children. He said he didnt know if Selan notarized the document, and I sent to his email Dianas criminal history.



I made Mr. Graham aware of Dianas use of Patti D Selan another Dechert Employees Notary Stamp being used by Diana, (I believe fraudulently) however I could be wrong, (the idea came to me when I noticed that there was in loan documents for the house I was living in another document, that was notarized by another Dechert Employee Leslie Gates) on an affidavit that was submitted to Santa Clara County Court in case # 109CV158080, which I KNEW BEYOND ALL FACT CONTAINED PERJURY, I WAS A LITTLE UPSET , DUE TO THE FACT THAT IN ADDITION TO, TRYING TO EVICT MYSELF AND MY CHILDREN FROM A HOME SHE NO LONGER OWNED, SHE SENT, along with her attorney Francis Cole State Bar 219081, A CHILD MOLESTER FOR WHOM MY SON AND I WERE UNDER SUBPENA TO TESTIFY AGAINST TO SERVE ME THE PAPERS. My son his victim. The UD was composed by Diana and served to me, signed with or with out her brothers true signature however I doubt he signed it.



The most interesting part of it however is that the bank started evicting Benny on Nov. 5,2009. Santa Clara County Case number is 109CV156746. Benny had a move out order from a judge since Oct. 6, 2009 for a domestic violence charge in criminal court in Santa Clara County Docket #CC957911, in which I was a victim. I took a glance at my California Constitutional rights and I felt offended that this was all happening. The house I was living in and been bought by Deutsche Bank in July 2009, neither Diana or Benny had any right to claim ownership or to evict anyone. Dianas affidavit of ownership of the house notarized with Selans stamp did however manage to get her in a situation with the City of San Jose Code Enforcement, directly following that I was served a TRO from a Yellow Cab Driver, not a sheriff on Dec. 9, 2009. I was not served what Diana had filed in court. That case # is 109CH002782. That resulted in a TRO being put in place until Dec. 29, 2009 . Thru out the document Diana speaks of her Co-workers whom she doesnt name and her position at Dechert not of her true nature at the State Penitentiary rather than Penn State. So now not only am I forced to represent myself against this monster Graham employees, she is also using the prestige of the Dechert name to further her efforts to silence me for, having discovered that she gave herself a $145,000 gift on a sales addendum to the house I was living in, or rip off her brother Benny Rodriguez when in 2006 she put the house into her name. Benny could not qualify for a loan so Diana volunteered to help herself naturally. I attempted on more than three occasions to Subpoena Graham, Selan, and Gates before trial on Dec. 29th. The receptionist at Dechert had various reasons for not being able to contact them. Please see attached documents:


I find Graham lacking a moral compass in employing Diana a felon and giving her unfettered access to client information, and using her position at Dechert to brutalize my children and myself to cover her crime. The public safety from people like her and the people who employ her seems to be at risk. I do not appreciate a Corporate law firm that specializes in White Collar Crime giving Diana a brush up course while getting paid on how to screw over anyone! Let alone E-file for the Santa Clara County Courts on behalf of Graham. One would have to wonder after I provided all of this information to the DA on Bennys criminal case why she isnt telling you all of this instead of me????



Rule 3.4 D= advise or directly or indirectly cause a person to secrete himself or herself or to leave the jurisdiction of a tribunal for the purpose of making that person unavailable as a witness therein. I wonder if Graham will now in turn blame that on Decherts receptionist???? Who is in charge of Chris Graham if not Chris Graham?



Contempt of Court


Contempt of court is behavior that opposes or defies the authority, justice, and dignity of the court.


Contempt charges may be brought against parties to proceedings; lawyers or other court officers or personnel; jurors; witnesses; or people who insert themselves in a case, such as protesters outside a courtroom. Generally, however, contempt proceedings are categorized as civil or criminal, and direct or indirect.



1)Civil contempt generally involves the failure to perform an act that is ordered by a court as a means to enforce the rights of individuals or to secure remedies for parties in a civil action. in contempt of court under civil contempt.


2)Criminal contempt involves behavior that assaults the dignity of the court or impairs the ability of the court to conduct its work. Criminal contempt can occur within a civil or criminal case. For example, criminal contempt occurs when a witness or spectator shouts or insults the judge during a trial. A civil contempt usually is a violation of the rights of one person, whereas a criminal contempt is an offense against society. Courts use civil contempt as a coercive power, wielding it only to ask that the contemnor comply with the courts' actions. Criminal contempt is punitive; courts use it to punish parties who have impaired the courts' functioning or bruised their dignity.


3)A direct contempt is an act that occurs in the presence of the court and is intended to embarrass or engender disrespect for the court. Shouting in the courtroom or refusing to answer questions for a judge or attorney under oath is a direct contempt. Indirect contempt occurs outside the presence of the court, but its intention is also to belittle, mock, obstruct, interrupt, or degrade the court and its proceedings. Attempting to bribe a district attorney is an example of an indirect contempt. Publishing any material that results in a contempt charge is an indirect contempt. Other kinds of indirect contempt include preventing process service, improperly communicating to or by jurors, and withholding evidence. Indirect contempt also may be called constructive or consequential contempt; all three terms mean the same thing.


The essence of contempt of court is that the misconduct impairs the fair and efficient administration of justice.


This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 05/25/2010 11:10 PM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/Chris-Scott-Graham-Partner-Dechert-LLP-Silicon-Valley-Diana-Moralez-Melegrito/internet/Chris-Scott-Graham-Partner-Dechert-LLP-Silicon-Valley-Diana-Moralez-Melegrito-Diana-Rodrig-607294. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.

Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report.

Click Here to read other Ripoff Reports on Chris Scott Graham Partner Dechert LLP Silicon Valley Diana Moralez Melegrito

Search for additional reports

If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:

Search Tips
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?
REBUTTALS & REPLIES:
7Author 0Consumer 0Employee/Owner
Updates & Rebuttals

#1 Author of original report

It gets worse

AUTHOR: Marcys Rights for me - (USA)

Some say its darkest before the dawn, I dont know?
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#2 Author of original report

Francis Cole State Bar 219081

AUTHOR: Marcys Rights for me - (USA)

I was a little distressed to find out that Francis R Cole like his clients also has convictions for crimes yet found it necessary to try and pontificate in Judge Chatmans court room about me.  Lincoln Law School where Dianas criminal defense attorney  Guy Jinkeson works according to their website today also works with Francis Cole or Robert Cole as his criminal record indicates.  In addition yet another attorney who was counsel for Dianas brother Benny Rodriguez in Quesada vs. Rodriguez. On that particular case the original attorney was Frank Cole who recommended that Mr. Rodiguez use Greg T. whose lisence has since been in a "state of not liseced to practice law" I like the guy so I'm not going to knock him he had a little personal trouble and I wish him well.  Point being however, when that didnt work out Cole took over Rodriguezs case again and then passed it off to what is apparently his co-worker at present Jeffrey Janoff. That being said,  a series of concidents that every one knows everyone perhaps?  However,  the most interesting part of it all seems to be at this point besides the obvious hypocrisy, pecksniffery or what have you of Cole who has no room to talk about values as his are tainted with criminality. Furthermore, while investigating his process server James Troy Wilson Realtor Restricted, and friend of Edward Voit, a child molester and Wilson friend, it came to light that Wilson not only got Diana and Bennys loan papers if you will confiscated by The DA's office - regarding the M & R Contempory Solutions, project he was actively trying to recruit Rodriguez for, but per his ex-wifes report to police "had a robot in his bath tub that he was detaining." so he called his wife who had an RO against him to advise her of this and all other details,  so she telephoned the police whom Wilson then asked to assist him in detaining the robot until his batteries wore down."  Point being I think Diana taking advantage of a guy like this to do her bidding and Franks participation in it is over the top.  I was a DV victim and Cole sent "an abuser of women with several violations of his own RO to serve me a subpena? Never mind the fact I was under subpena from the DA's office for Voit at the time.  Since when do criminal defense attorneys do civil work? Cole admitted in the Quesada case that he couldnt handle a civil case to Rodriguez. That is the reason he referred Rodriguez to attorney Greg T., he wasnt eligible to practice law so Cole took back over and then the case went to Jeffrey Janoff. The DA on the Voit matter is also the DA on one of Coles criminal cases perhaps he didnt realize given the time that passed from the incident or Coles use of aka's Robert Owen Cole etc?  The most upsetting part however was at Rodriguezs sentencing when the DDA on that case said 'she didnt believe me about Cole and Melegrito, Rodriguez etc. What did she do with all the paper work I gave her? Anyway its conveinent to have everyone working with a working knowledge of the crimes and lack of discretion that was used in this case. Armando Venegas the attorney used to save the house before Troy Wilson came along with the M and R Contempory Solutions is also now suspended or dis barred as is Coles former business partner.  I hear Mr.  Jinkerson and Mr. Janoff are very good attorneys perhaps since they know all the parties involved they can help me litigate for damages against them all for personal injury, and fraud. Given all of Coles history and non sanctioned behaviors according to the bar rules, perjury and conflicts of interest x's 10 one might think that Lincoln Law School might want to consider Cole as a choice for there staff, but what do I know?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#3 Author of original report

MORAL CHARACTER -

AUTHOR: Marcys Rights for me - (USA)


Attorneys Oath


I solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California, and


that I will faithfully discharge the duties of an attorney and counse1lo2r at law to the best of my knowledge and ability.


It is the duty of an attorney to do all of the following:


(a) To support the Constitution and laws of the United States and


of this state.


(b) To maintain the respect due to the courts of justice and judicial


officers.


(c) To counsel or maintain those actions, proceedings, or


defenses only as appear to him or her legal or just, except the


defense of a person charged with a public offense.


(d) To employ, for the purpose of maintaining the causes confided


to him or her those means only as are consistent with truth, and


never to seek to mislead the judge or any judicial officer by an


artifice or false statement of fact or law.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#4 Author of original report

California Code Title 17

AUTHOR: Marcys Rights for me - (USA)

Section 679.02 relating to victims  and witnesses of crime are honored and protected by law enforcement agencies, prosecuttors and judges in a manner no less vigorous the the protections afforded criminal defendents!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#5 Author of original report

typo

AUTHOR: Marcys Rights for me - (USA)

after Francis Cole 219081 Should read a child molesters friend, or mutual friend of Diana and Troy Wilson the former SuCasa agent, who went M & R Contempory Solutions y until his office was raided by The Santa Clara County DA's office which caused loan documents to come into their possesion, after the owners arrest of that company, he moved on with his restricted real estate license to the Home Protection Group Diamond Bar CA which was the first clue that alerted me to Dianas lies filed in court in the UD case that Wilson delivered to me on Thanksgiving Day.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#6 Author of original report

Correction to typo -

AUTHOR: Marcys Rights for me - (USA)

after Francis Cole State Bar 219081 should read James Troy Wilson a friend of Child molester electrician Ed Voit, whom worked on Dianas House and whom "Troy"  helped get a bogus stated loan for his property on Roan St. in San Jose, CA. Troy formerly a Su Casa real estate agent was soliciting Dianas brother for $ for M & R Contempory Solutions, and then the Home Protection Group of Diamond Bar CA a few days later.
The HPG is the company Diana used in her affadavit stamped with Selans notary stamp. They like M & R Contempory Solutions wanted upfront fees also only they needed 10 business days before a trustees sale was scheduled to "do their magic". Immeadiately upon seeing that name in Dianas affadavit I knew her affadavit to be false like everything else she is involved in "faulty".  I wonder why Wilson has a restricted Real Estate Lisence?  Congrats to you however, for getting Dianas loan documents into the Santa Clara County District Attorneys Office, when your office was raided by investigators way to go! Consequently the writing on that UD which was not Dianas brothers is going to have to be explained along with who ever filled out the fee waiver for it to be filed.  None the less Troy knows who gave him the papers, and while he might not want to talk about it I bet he will eventually,  I know I will be asking the DRE what Wilson was  doing serving bogus UD to tenents in a foreclosure, and victims of his rancid friends folly?  Its no mistake that Wilson knew just what he was doing at the request of Diana, after all he was the one trying to work her brother for a loan modication, after the house was foreclosed on. See ya at the DRE!
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#7 Author of original report

Are your Intellectual Property Secrets Safe?

AUTHOR: Marcys Rights for me - (USA)

Victims Bill of Rights


Marsys Law significantly expands the rights of victims in California. Under Marsys Law, the California Constitution article I, 28, section (b) now provides victims with the following enumerated rights:



  1. To be treated with fairness and respect for his or her privacy and dignity, and to be free from intimidation, harassment, and abuse, throughout the criminal or juvenile justice process.
  2. To be reasonably protected from the defendant and persons acting on behalf of the defendant.
  3. To have the safety of the victim and the victims family considered in fixing the amount of bail and release conditions for the defendant.
  4. To prevent the disclosure of confidential information or records to the defendant, the defendants attorney, or any other person acting on behalf of the defendant, which could be used to locate or harass the victim or the victims family or which disclose confidential communications made in the course of medical or counseling treatment, or which are otherwise privileged or confidential by law.
  5. To refuse an interview, deposition, or discovery request by the defendant, the defendants attorney, or any other person acting on behalf of the defendant, and to set reasonable conditions on the conduct of any such interview to which the victim consents.
  6. To reasonable notice of and to reasonably confer with the prosecuting agency, upon request, regarding, the arrest of the defendant if known by the prosecutor, the charges filed, the determination whether to extradite the defendant, and, upon request, to be notified of and informed before any pretrial disposition of the case.
  7. To reasonable notice of all public proceedings, including delinquency proceedings, upon request, at which the defendant and the prosecutor are entitled to be present and of all parole or other post-conviction release proceedings, and to be present at all such proceedings.
  8. To be heard, upon request, at any proceeding, including any delinquency proceeding, involving a post-arrest release decision, plea, sentencing, post-conviction release decision, or any proceeding in which a right of the victim is at issue.
  9. To a speedy trial and a prompt and final conclusion of the case and any related post-judgment proceedings.
  10. To provide information to a probation department official conducting a pre-sentence investigation concerning the impact of the offense on the victim and the victims family and any sentencing recommendations before the sentencing of the defendant.
  11. To receive, upon request, the pre-sentence report when available to the defendant, except for those portions made confidential by law.
  12. To be informed, upon request, of the conviction, sentence, place and time of incarceration, or other disposition of the defendant, the scheduled release date of the defendant, and the release of or the escape by the defendant from custody.
  13. To restitution.

    1. It is the unequivocal intention of the People of the State of California that all persons who suffer losses as a result of criminal activity shall have the right to seek and secure restitution from the persons convicted of the crimes causing the losses they suffer.
    2. Restitution shall be ordered from the convicted wrongdoer in every case, regardless of the sentence or disposition imposed, in which a crime victim suffers a loss.
    3. All monetary payments, monies, and property collected from any person who has been ordered to make restitution shall be first applied to pay the amounts ordered as restitution to the victim.

  14. To the prompt return of property when no longer needed as evidence.
  15. To be informed of all parole procedures, to participate in the parole process, to provide information to the parole authority to be considered before the parole of the offender, and to be notified, upon request, of the parole or other release of the offender.
  16. To have the safety of the victim, the victims family, and the general public considered before any parole or other post-judgment release decision is made.
  17. To be informed of the rights enumerated in paragraphs (1) through (16).

 

Respond to this report!
What's this?
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?

Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.