Latest news with #OrangeCountySuperiorCourt
Miami Herald
11-07-2025
- Miami Herald
Cop faking disability for $600K visited Disneyland, ran races, CA lawsuit says
A California city is suing a former police officer accused of collecting more than $600,000 in disability while pretending she could not work, watch TV or look at a computer screen. Nicole Brown, of Riverside, claimed she was unable to resume working as a Westminster police officer but visited Disneyland, ran two 5K races, went skiing and golfing — among other recreational activities — as she received worker's compensation benefits, according to a lawsuit brought by Westminster officials on July 8. One of Brown's former co-workers, a fellow Westminster officer, had seen her at the Stagecoach Music Festival, an annual festival headlined by country artists in the Coachella Valley, and 'came forward' to report her in April 2023, a complaint filed in Orange County Superior Court says. He saw Brown 'dancing and drinking alcoholic beverages in a setting with loud music and bright lights, activities which were inconsistent with her claimed disabilities,' the filing reads. Brown, 39, and her stepfather, Peter Gregory Schuman, 57, a licensed California attorney, were criminally charged in connection with the theft, the Orange County District Attorney's Office announced in May, McClatchy News previously reported. The district attorney's office said Schuman, of Buena Park, conspired 'with his stepdaughter to orchestrate the fraudulent workers' compensation scheme.' Brown was previously represented by attorney Brian Gurwitz, who denied the allegations against her in a statement to McClatchy News in May. She is now represented by attorney Thomas W. Kielty, who told McClatchy News on July 11 that she 'is innocent of the charges brought against her and unequivocally denies any involvement in a scheme to defraud the City of Westminster.' Schuman did not return a message left by McClatchy News seeking comment. His law license is still active as of July 11, according to his State Bar of California profile, which has a notice about his pending criminal case. Westminster is suing Brown and Schuman on claims of fraud, conspiracy, false claims and restitution. The city wants to collect the more than $600,000 in benefits Brown is accused of stealing, officials said in a July 9 news release. A head injury while on-duty Brown began working as a Westminster police officer in June 2018 as a 'Homeless Liaison Officer,' the lawsuit says. She was injured on the job while trying to arrest a suspect in March 2022, according to prosecutors, who said she 'suffered a minor abrasion to her forehead.' After she was diagnosed with the injury at a hospital, she reported to her watch commander that she was experiencing a headache and dizziness, according to the complaint. An emergency room doctor 'released her back to work without restrictions,' the filings says, but 'she called out sick for several days thereafter.' Brown maintained she had a concussion and was granted work leave, according to the complaint. She was put on 'total temporary disability due to her claims of, including but not limited to, not being able to be in bright sunlight, not being able to tolerate loud noises and not being able to look at electronic (device) screens,' the complaint states. Three days after she first called out sick, the lawsuit accuses Brown of attending multiple soccer conferences in San Diego. Later that year, she was seen looking at her phone screen and was spotted at a 'well-lit, loud restaurant,' the complaint says. Shortly after her fellow officer caught her at Stagecoach Music Festival, Brown continued to fake her disability during a work assessment meeting, according to the complaint. She was joined by Schuman, who appeared as her legal representative and asserted Brown was unable to complete paperwork or receive messages left over the phone, the complaint says. In the meeting, Brown said she 'could not look at the screen, wore glasses for 'photophobia' and seemed unable to carry on a conversation,' the filing states. Brown was ultimately charged with nine counts of making a fraudulent statement to obtain compensation and six counts of making a fraudulent insurance benefit claim, according to the Orange County District Attorney's Office. She also faces a felony enhancement of 'committing an aggravated while collar crime over $100,000,' the district attorney's office said in May. Kielty said in an emailed statement that working as a police officer 'was Ms. Brown's lifelong calling, one she fulfilled with honor and integrity for over three years,' adding that she 'sustained serious, career-ending injuries in the line of duty.' 'Ms. Brown is confident that the evidence will exonerate her of any wrongdoing and restore her reputation as a valued member of this community,' Kielty also said. Schuman is charged with one count of making a fraudulent insurance benefit claim and one count of assisting, abetting, conspiring with and soliciting a person in unlawful act, according to officials. In a statement, Westminster Mayor Chi Charlie Nguyen said Brown 'has betrayed the public trust.' 'Our residents count on us to protect their taxpayer dollars and ensure that employees who are actually injured receive the support they need to recover,' Nguyen added. Through the lawsuit, the city seeks an unspecified amount in damages to be awarded at trial and restitution. Westminster is about a 30-mile drive southwest from Los Angeles.
Los Angeles Times
20-06-2025
- Politics
- Los Angeles Times
Judge rules Newport Beach did not have to put housing element compliance to a vote
Newport Beach did not violate its own charter last year, when it adopted a housing plan calling for the rezoning of numerous areas to accommodate high-density residential uses without putting the changes before voters, a judge ruled this week. Orange County Superior Court Judge Melissa R. McCormick on Wednesday determined Newport Beach officials acted within the parameters of local laws in July 2024, when they approved a series of general plan and zoning code amendments needed to implement the city's housing element. Two lawsuits — one filed in August by the nonprofit Still Protecting Our Newport and a second one month later from the Newport Beach Stewardship Assn. — sought to overturn the city's actions and put them to a vote of the people. McCormick applied her determination to both cases. Plaintiffs separately cited Section 423 of the city charter, which states voter approval is required for any amendments to the Newport Beach General Plan, and indicated city officials promised a vote but later reneged. 'The city made numerous statements recognizing that a Section 423 vote was required to amend other portions of the general plan to align with the housing element,' SPON's Aug. 8 legal complaint reads. '[But] despite these numerous promises and representations to local residents, the city council abruptly reversed course and declined to submit the proposed amendments to the city's general plan to the local residents for a vote.' City officials maintained the same section of the charter indicates the voter mandate would not apply if state or federal laws were to conflict with, and therefore preclude, local law. Judge McCormick agreed, stating Section 423 conflicted with a state law requiring Newport Beach officials to adopt and implement a housing plan to comply with a mandate to accommodate, through rezoning, 4,845 residential units inside city limits. 'Section 423 contradicted and was inimical to the implementation requirements of the housing element law. [That] statute provides the city no discretion whether to comply,' she wrote, adding that it's not up to the discretion of local voters to decide whether a city should follow state law. Newport Beach City Atty. Aaron Harp said city officials analyzed the local charter and determined state housing mandates precluded an election so went ahead with implementing the necessary general plan amendments. 'We're very happy with the decision,' Harp said Thursday of the ruling. 'We'll now be moving forward with considering housing projects — we actually have one [the Irvine Co.'s Newport Center project] going forward on Tuesday.' In a city statement issued Thursday, Mayor Joe Stapleton reflected on the win. 'In what has been a difficult set of policy decisions in light of state mandates, we have stood on firm legal grounds. The decision yesterday affirms that,' he said. 'We move forward today and everyday doing what is right for our residents.' SPON President Charles Klobe said Friday members were meeting that day to consider their options, including whether to appeal McCormick's ruling. In a statement provided to the Pilot, members called it a 'sad week for Newport Beach residents.' 'We are profoundly disappointed in the ruling, but it was not unexpected,' it read, decrying that the city's rezoning plan would impact a total of 8,174 parcels, a number far greater than the state mandate. 'SPON has been fighting to keep Newport Newport for over 50 years. We will continue to pursue justice for the residents and businesses of Newport Beach.'
Yahoo
03-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Judicate West Adds Judge Lon F. Hurwitz in Orange County
SANTA ANA, Calif., June 03, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Judicate West, one of California's leading providers of private dispute resolution services, has added Judge Lon F. Hurwitz to its roster of neutrals. Based out of the Santa Ana office, Judge Hurwitz is available statewide as a mediator, arbitrator and private judge. 'We have known Judge Hurwitz for more than 30 years and always held him in high regard, both as a jurist and as a respected member of the Orange County legal community. He is a tremendously accomplished lawyer and judge who has practiced and presided over cases in nearly every area we serve, and his reputation speaks for itself. The way he treats people, his humility, and his commitment to giving back all mirror the core values that define Judicate West,' said Alan Brutman, President and Co-Founder of Judicate West. 'Judge Hurwitz's passion for resolution and unmatched work ethic will make him very successful in this next chapter. He's a natural fit here at Judicate West, and we are confident our clients will feel the same way.' Judge Hurwitz served 21 years on the Orange County Superior Court bench, spending 17 years in the court's Family Law Division, including six years as its Supervising Judge. During this time, he presided over thousands of matters involving custody, finances, domestic violence, marriage dissolution, surrogacy, Hague Convention, elder abuse, paternity, and parental termination, many of which are among the most complex issues in family law. Judge Hurwitz was assigned to the Unlimited Civil and Complex Civil departments from 2021 to 2025, where he handled high-stakes, multi-party litigation, including the high-profile San Clemente landslide cases, a mass tort dental malpractice case involving 202 minor plaintiffs, and Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) matters. He served on the court's Executive Committee from 2006-2010 and chaired its Family Violence Coordination Committee from 2010-2015. Judge Hurwitz spent the first 25 years of his legal career in private practice as a civil litigator, trying construction defect, personal injury and insurance coverage matters, as well as conducting mediations. Among his many community involvements, Judge Hurwitz created the first Family Law Veterans' Domestic Violence Diversion Program in the United States. The program offers veteran families the opportunity to address issues like post-traumatic stress and traumatic brain injuries and their effects on domestic violence victims. Judge Hurwitz also served on the Judicial Council of California, where he was appointed to act as its liaison to the State Domestic Violence Task Force. Judge Hurwitz has been named 'Judge of the Year' by 11 organizations, including the Orange County Trial Lawyers Association (OCTLA) (2024), the American Board of Trial Advocates (2023), Southwestern University School of Law (2022), the Orange County Jewish Bar Association (2021), the Association of Certified Family Law Specialists (2016), the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers (2012), and the Orange County Bar Association's Family Law Section (2012). He was also named 'Veteran Advocate of the Year' in 2019 by the Veterans Legal Institute. He was a member of the Judicial Council of California from 2008-2010 and the OCTLA from 1985-2010, serving as president in 1994. He also served as president of the Robert A. Banyard American Inn of Court in 2008. Judge Hurwitz earned his J.D. from Southwestern University School of Law (1979) and his B.S. from California State University, Long Beach (1976). He received mediation training from the Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution at the University of Pepperdine School of Law in 1999. About Judicate WestFor more than 30 years, Judicate West has been one of California's leading providers of private dispute resolution services with a distinguished roster of proven neutrals, including retired state and federal court judges plus professional attorney mediators and arbitrators from a wide variety of practice areas. Founded in 1993, the firm prides itself on maintaining the utmost integrity in delivering innovative solutions to all types of civil disputes. The firm's successful formula involves top-tier neutrals, a great company culture and an experienced team of ADR professionals dedicated to delivering gold standard service in alternative dispute resolution (ADR). Contact:Melody KleimanJudicate West(714) 852-5189melody@
Yahoo
29-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
California tries again to overturn Huntington Beach's controversial voter ID law
After losing last month in Orange County Superior Court, the state of California is asking a state appellate court to overturn a Huntington Beach measure that could require voters to present photo identification to cast ballots in local elections. Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta and Secretary of State Shirley N. Weber, the state's top elections official, have been tangling with Huntington Beach in court for more than a year over Measure A, which amends the city charter to say that local officials "may" require photo ID for municipal elections starting in 2026. In April, Orange County Superior Court Judge Nico Dourbetas said the state had not shown that "a voter identification requirement compromises the integrity of a municipal election." Huntington Beach Mayor Pat Burns called the ruling a "huge victory." Bonta appealed Wednesday to the 4th Appellate District, where the state hopes for a more favorable hearing. In February, a three-judge panel from the 4th District said that Huntington Beach's assertion of a "constitutional right to regulate its own municipal elections free from state interference" was "problematic," but kicked the case back down to Orange County Superior Court. More than 53% of Huntington Beach voters supported the charter amendment in the March 2024 election. The amendment also requires that Huntington Beach provide 20 in-person polling places and to monitor ballot drop boxes. The city has not shared plans on how the law could be implemented in next year's elections. A representative for Huntington Beach didn't respond to requests for comment Thursday. The city's lawyers have argued that the city charter gives local officials autonomy to oversee municipal issues, including local elections. Bonta and Weber contend that while California's 121 "charter cities" can govern their own municipal affairs, local laws can't conflict with state laws on issues of "statewide concern," including the integrity of California elections and the constitutional right to vote. The voter ID law is one of several fronts in the ongoing battle that conservative officials in Huntington Beach have waged against California since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. The city has used similar arguments about its charter city status in fights over state housing laws, education policies for transgender students and "sanctuary state" immigration laws. The issue of voter ID has become a flashpoint with conservative politicians, including President Trump, who in January demanded that California enact a voter ID law in order to receive aid for the devastating Los Angeles area wildfires. California voters are required to verify their identities when they register to vote, and the state imposes criminal penalties for fraudulent registration. California does not require photo identification at the polls but does require that voters provide their names and addresses. The photo ID measure may also be invalidated by Senate Bill 1174, which Gov. Gavin Newsom signed last fall, which bars local election officials from requiring photo identification in elections. Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter. Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond, in your inbox twice per week. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Los Angeles Times
29-05-2025
- Politics
- Los Angeles Times
California tries again to overturn Huntington Beach's controversial voter ID law
After losing last month in Orange County Superior Court, the state of California is asking a state appellate court to overturn a Huntington Beach measure that could require voters to present photo identification to cast ballots in local elections. Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta and Secretary of State Shirley N. Weber, the state's top elections official, have been tangling with Huntington Beach in court for more than a year over Measure A, which amends the city charter to say that local officials 'may' require photo ID for municipal elections starting in 2026. In April, Orange County Superior Court Judge Nico Dourbetas said the state had not shown that 'a voter identification requirement compromises the integrity of a municipal election.' Huntington Beach Mayor Pat Burns called the ruling a 'huge victory.' Bonta appealed Wednesday to the 4th Appellate District, where the state hopes for a more favorable hearing. In February, a three-judge panel from the 4th District said that Huntington Beach's assertion of a 'constitutional right to regulate its own municipal elections free from state interference' was 'problematic,' but kicked the case back down to Orange County Superior Court. More than 53% of Huntington Beach voters supported the charter amendment in the March 2024 election. The amendment also requires that Huntington Beach provide 20 in-person polling places and to monitor ballot drop boxes. The city has not shared plans on how the law could be implemented in next year's elections. A representative for Huntington Beach didn't respond to requests for comment Thursday. The city's lawyers have argued that the city charter gives local officials autonomy to oversee municipal issues, including local elections. Bonta and Weber contend that while California's 121 'charter cities' can govern their own municipal affairs, local laws can't conflict with state laws on issues of 'statewide concern,' including the integrity of California elections and the constitutional right to vote. The voter ID law is one of several fronts in the ongoing battle that conservative officials in Huntington Beach have waged against California since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. The city has used similar arguments about its charter city status in fights over state housing laws, education policies for transgender students and 'sanctuary state' immigration laws. The issue of voter ID has become a flashpoint with conservative politicians, including President Trump, who in January demanded that California enact a voter ID law in order to receive aid for the devastating Los Angeles wildfires. California voters are required to verify their identities when they register to vote, and the state imposes criminal penalties for fraudulent registration. California does not require photo identification at the polls but does require that voters provide their names and addresses. The photo ID measure may also be invalidated by Senate Bill 1174, which Gov. Gavin Newsom signed last fall, which bars local election officials from requiring photo identification in elections.
