2009.10.29
DeLuca: Want to save money? Reform the courts
To save money, reform the courts
Karen Ann DeLuca,
DeLuca, of Alexandria, is a Virginia lawyer.
Bob McDonnell's one new idea to solve Virginia's transportation budget woes is divestiture of the ABC stores. I have a more innovative suggestion out of my everyday life. In the money hunt, I would start with the courts.
Read more.
RSS feed 
First Fred Phelps (an actual lawyer in addition to a hate filled preacher), then Orly Taitz, and Justice Scalia, and now Karen DeLuca!
Comment by Scott M. — October 29, 2009 @ 11:29 am
While I considered an appropriate response to this attack on Virginia's judiciary, I contemplated the reason such a one sided assault would be made by someone who is presented as part of the system. It didn't take me long to find the author's motivation. She recently lost an appeal related to her divorce case in Fairfax County. (check the link for the published opinion)
http://www.courts.state.va.us/opinions/opncavwp/3035084.pdf
While there may be areas of reform available for Virginia's judiciary system to consider, seeking them to benefit a jilted litigant's complaint would be an abuse of the legislative process. DeLuca's rant says more about the motives of a poor loser than a concerned citizen. The RTEB should be ashamed for allowing their publication to be used as a platform for such a display. Such a lack of editorial oversight diminishes the standing of the Roanoke Times and takes away from the benefits an informed audience might enjoy through an intelligent, and fact based debate.
Comment by MikeC — October 29, 2009 @ 1:11 pm
And lawyers win and lose appeals all the time; that is just a part of doing business in the legal system, nothing personal. The piece was written as an exposure of the system for those who do not deal with it every day, and may not know how it works until they get caught in its web. Because it is badly in need of reform and is a bloated bureaucracy. It is there to serve citizens and it does a poor job at that. I deliberately left specifics out, for Mike C and Scott M who think it is a rant. It is not; it is to educate the populace. If I laced it with details, your head would spin at what I have seen gone on. I was respectful in my concern for a system I am part of and would like to see do much better. Apparently neither of you can stand the fact that I constructively criticized something you want to continue to blindly be in awe of, and that is your right, as it is mine to say what I feel and know and advocate for change.
Comment by Karen — October 29, 2009 @ 2:44 pm
PS - read that opinion, one of the worst pieces of legal work I have ever seen. No reasoning; wrong facts; cases plopped into the text and a line written; use of Last Name; done on the last day of the term; no hearing although requested and no good reason given why (that breaks a Rule of Court). Thank you Mike C for pointing that out to the paper's readers, so they can see evidence of what I am talking about. You made my case...
Comment by Karen — October 29, 2009 @ 3:25 pm