Saturday, August 30, 2014

 
"HI, I'M OSCAR X. GARCIA WHO HIRED A PATHOLOGICAL LIAR, TO PROMOTE MY LIES AND UNETHICAL CONDUCT - VOTE FOR ME - APPOINTED JUDGE BY INDICTED GOV. RICK PERRY."


From Montoya, Garcia's hired pathological liar

""This (the Magallanes $30,000 loan) came a few months after a Cameron County jury awarded Magallanes nothing, zero. Limas then on his own awarded Magallanes $195,000 in damages and $50,000 in attorney's fees..."

 The case (2004-10-5058) was styled Bob Torres Properties vs. Southern Stone Properties, according to Salazar, who commented on Magallanes; opponent Oscar X. Garcia's FB page that "this was not a loan. This was a payback for ignoring a jury's verdict."

First and foremost the practice of loaning money or doing business with judges is standard in Texas among both Republicans and Democrats.  It is an unfortunate practice which should be stopped - but since the lawyers dominate the state legislature and they are the ones doing business with the judges, they have no interest in changing the law.

THE FIRST LIE

"Limas then on his own awarded "  100% False - I have copied the docket sheet, and it shows a Motion Not Withstanding the Verdict was filed on June 14, 2006.  LIMAS DID NOT ACT ON HIS OWN AS THE LIAR OSCAR X. GARCIA CLAIMS


"
06/14/2006  Document Filed
BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PLF'S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT NOTWITHSTANDING

HEY OSCAR - WHAT PART OF ETHICS DO YOU NOT GET?  NONE OF IT RIGHT

HOWEVER - Oscar X. Garcia and Montoya fail to tell you, the Court of Appeals and the law - not that the law matters to Oscar X. Garcia, says Judge Limas was correct in issuing the Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict. 

The Law as to the Statute of Frauds is so basic, one must wonder if Judge Oscar X. Garcia is just incompetent or devoid of even the semblance of integrity and honor.



Click for Opinion

Click for Denial of Appeal by Texas Supreme Court

In reading the docket notes from the Texas Supreme Court you will see Baltazar Salazar did not even know enough to send the entire Court of Appeals Opinion to the Court, and in  fact had to be called multiple times to get him to comply with the Court Order.

Maybe what we really have here is an unethical Baltazar Salazar misrepresenting the law to his client so he could fraudulently bill him.  In the process it seems to me we also have Baltazar Salazar misrepresenting the law to the court.  Is this not exactly what Montoya accused Salazar of [AFTER Lucy's Longoria's check cleared] in the Expungement case?

Within the first week of law school you learn about the Statute of Frauds. Judge Oscar x. Garcia, through his conduct is telling you he will not respect the decisions of the appellate courts or enforce the Statute of Frauds. We call this radical judicial activism. Is this who you want as a judge?

MONTOYA REACHES POINT OF BEING BEYOND PATHETIC - THE CASE OF THE CONFLICTING CHECKS

Montoya is so driven to lie and deceive based on the size of the check, without any regard as to the impact on the community or our children, with one check from Lucy Longoria he argues Baltazar Salazar is an unethical lawyer, being sued by Lucy by the way, but based on another check from Oscar X. Garcia a brilliant lawyer who is a victim of Juan Magallanes and Abel Limas.

JUDGE OSCAR X. GARCIA'S CONTEMPT FOR THE CANONS OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT

Canon 5

(1)     A judge or judicial candidate shall not:
(i)     make pledges or promises of conduct in office regarding pending or impending cases, specific classes of cases, specific classes of litigants, or specific propositions of law that would suggest to a reasonable person that the judge is predisposed to a probable decision in cases within the scope of the pledge;
 (ii)     knowingly or recklessly misrepresent the identity, qualifications, present position, or other fact concerning the candidate or an opponent; or
(iii)     make a statement that would violate Canon 3B(10).
(2)     A judge or judicial candidate shall not authorize the public use of his or her name endorsing another candidate for any public office, except that either may indicate support for a political party. A judge or judicial candidate may attend political events and express his or her views on political matters in accord with this Canon and Canon 3B(10).

Click  for Canons

What Canon 5 clearly shows is, it is a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct for a Judge to "(ii)     knowingly or recklessly misrepresent the identity, qualifications, present position, or other fact concerning the candidate or an opponent; or"

Oscar X. Garcia knows the Statute of Frauds - he knows the Court of Appeals on an issue of basic law affirmed Judge Limas decision, and the Texas Supreme Court refused to reverse the Court of Appeals,  but he nonetheless knowing and recklessly misrepresents his opponent's ethics in regards to the case.

This one along with his misrepresentation about Judges attending political events is being added to the Ethics Complaint I have already been working on.

OSCAR X. GARCIA CLEARLY THE MOST UNETHICAL JUDGE TO EVER RUN FOR OFFICE

I have seen a lot of Judicial Campaigns in my life - but this one takes the cake.  Oscar X. Garcia has shown an extraordinary contempt for the Rules of Ethics and Law.  I cannot believe a judge so openly would show this level of contempt for the Rules of Ethics and Law - normally it is done behind closed doors.

WE CAN SAY THIS ABOUT OSCAR X. GARCIA - HE IS TRANSPARENTLY UNETHICAL

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

You are the world champion of idiots. Oscar is the most corrupt judge to run for office? Are you serious? Even Limas dumbAss!

BobbyWC said...

Inasmuch as I never said corrupt, the only idiot is you.

Do you think my readers are so stupid that they cannot read for themselves such as Oscar you are just making things up.

I said unethical, not corrupt. I agree Limas may be one of the most corrupt judges in the history of the county - I cannot say the most corrupt because just because you have not been caught does not mean you are not corrupt.

Now, you might consider the meaning of the word unethical. It has many meanings - which do not get to corrupt, while it can.

You need to learn to read for context - I have never ever said Oscar has taken money from anyone in exchange for a ruling.

All of my discussions have been limited to the manner of his campaign - no one can say it is ethical - it is that simple.

He had this won, but chose to panic and go with deceit and dishonesty - which is not necessarily corrupt.

Again dude - you need to learn to read for context - never once have I accused Oscar of being corrupt. My posts have been limited to his ethics during the course of his campaign.

Now instead of distracting my readers with lies, how about addressing the issue - that [1] a motion for JNOV was in fact filed contrary to Montoya's claims, and [2] the COA and Texas Supreme Court saw no reason on the question of law to reverse Limas.

Yea, you can't so you go with the distraction

Bobby WC