#45, Drano Series
 


       
    Justice John J. Irwin, Jr.'s 
    Infamous Memo re 
    Guardian Ad Litem Fees*
    Dated 28 February 1997, still in effect, orders Probate & Family Court judges 
    to assess parties for GAL fees 

    Section 4(a) below is the operative section.  All the G.A.L.s provide services on behalf of the court, thereby making the parties  pay the G.A.L. fees is in violation of the statute and therefore unlawful.  The memo should be made ineffective, and restitution should be made to all parties forced to pay the G.A.L. fees. 

    falseallegations.com suspects that the state coffers were low and the judiciary wanted a larger budget. (The judiciary wants more $$$ every year.)   In 1995, Governor Weld was making his bid for the 1996 election and the use of GALs increased by 35 percent during that year.  He had to make it look like there was more money in the Massachusetts till in the Treasury Department than there was.   He probably struck a deal with Irwin, who had just become Chief Justice for Administration and Management: Save us $$$millions in GAL fees and we'll give you a larger budget.  I've asked a Boston Globe reporter to check what the budget for the judiciary was in each of the years since 1995.   It's the Woodward & Bernstein approach: FOLLOW THE MONEY!!!!
     


     
 

drano-footer







A word about the Google ads being added to this site
Over the years, I have received hundreds of phonecalls and emails for recommendations of and referrals to family-law and civil rights attorneys and self-help groups across this nation, 3500 miles wide and 1500 deep plus Hawaii and Alaska.   Clearly, it is impossible for me to be responsive to these requests.   

Sooooo . . . not only can the few dollars from the ads pay for the expenses of this website, you, too, can also benefit: you can learn on your own which attorneys and which self-help groups in those areas of the law are available to help you.  

Hoping that the ads will give you sufficient information to satisfy your  requests for recommendations and referrals, I have been reformatting the files on this website to accommodate the maximum number of ads that Google's policy allows per file.

By the way, I have no control over which ads appear.  They are chosen by Google according to the content -- I think -- in each file.

HELP:  Any  HTML programmer know how to get rid of the extra <> below the Google ads at the top of the  files and the <> in the upper right-hand corners of the Google ads on the right-hand side of the screen?  i've wasted hours, if not days, trying to figure out WHY they are there in some files and not in others . . . and how to get rid of them.  THANKS!!



Google


Drano Series HomePage (Click) Feedback (Click) The Store (Click)
#1,   Meuse
#5,   Linnehan & Brown 
#9,   Linnehan & Brown
#13, Meuse
#17, Linnehan & Brown
#21, Linnehan & Brown
#25, Sylvia v. Sylvia
#29, Linnehan & Brown
#33, Trimboli
#37, Linnehan Related
#41, Smith/Pocahontas
#45, Smith/Pocahontas
#49, Smith/Pocahontas
#53, Smith/Pocahontas
#57, Smith & Judges
#61, Smith/Pocahontas
#65, Linn. Dom. Rel.
#69, Linnehan & Brown
#73, 1st Cir. B&L Decis.
#77, LyndaPaul-Child-sup
#81, 1st Amendment/Bar
#84a, Sano case/Banned in Mass.
#88, Money from estate
#90, Count 2: Answer Interwoven
#93, Herald in on Bar War
#97, Opposition to Nissenbaum
#101, Judicial Immunity Roots
#105 Barb's letter-Rule 1.15 (am.
#109  Barb v. BBO (Federal)
#113 Smith'sOpposition to Boston
#116 Meuse's §1983 Complaint
#120 Petition-Writ of Certiorari-USSCt
#124 Meuse-Opp-to-NCMEC Dis
#128-Letter-Petition-Rehearing
#132 Pretrial-conf-Lafortune
#136 Smith o-james-recons-dism
#140 Smith o-sj-R 56.1 facts mp1
#144 surreply-to-offs-reply-recon
#148 m-dismiss-jdp-ccs-malp-2
#152 contempts-Pocahontas & Smith
-------------------------------------------------------
#156 strike-appearance-ag-for-bbo
-------------------------------------------------------
#160 m-lv-excess-pp-brief
#164 answer-to-contempt-petition

#168 m-vacate-stay-and-consolidation
#172 appeal-judgment-of-dismissal-app-ct
#176  amended-motion-for-acceleration
#180 reply-to-crane-weisberg-appellee-brf
#184 appendices-to-petition-writ-for-cert
#2,   Meuse
#6,   Meuse
#10, Meuse
#14, Linnehan & Brown
#18, GAL in Case
#22, Linnehan v. Sylvia
#26, Grandparents
#30, Meuse
#34, Linnehan Related
#38, Smith/Pocahontas
#42, Linnehan Related
#46, Smith/Pocahontas
#50, Smith/Pocahontas
#54, Smith/Pocahontas
#58, Smith/Pocahontas
#62, Smith & Judges
#66, Linn. Dom. Rel.
#70, Linn.Child-support
#74, Fraud-5-Lawyers
#78, StupidButFamous
#82, 1st Amendment/Bar
#85, Bogus contempt, coming
#89, Petition for Discipline
#90, Count 3: Answer Interwoven
#94, Restraining Order
#98, Hearse at Lawyers Weekly
#102, Bar Board:Star Chamber
#106 Motions filed at Bar Board
#110 Reply Appeal Immunity
#114 The Younger Doctrine
#117 Fed QuasiJudicial Immunity
#121 Opp. to Dismiss by FOX TV
#125 F4J London Parade Pics
#129 Letter- Editor Lawyers Wkly
#133-Barb v, BBO: App Brief
#137 Smith-o-dipiano-recons-dism
#141 Smith o-sj-Boston-memo mp1
#145 m-partial-recon-cc-wiretap
#149 reply-o-dism-jdp-ccs-2d-mal
#153 barb-v-bbo-crane-defamation
-------------------------------------------------------
#157 strike-appearance-ag-for-BC-ABC
-------------------------------------------------------
#161 m-str-docs-obc-record-appendix
#165 m-declaration of-practice-of-law
#169 o-impound-supp-appendix-record
#173 show-cause-brief for hear'g-1st-Cir
#177 motions-vacate-reverse-dismiss
#181 five-motions-and-oppositions-sjc
#3,   Meuse
#7,   Recusing Judge
#11, Meuse
#15, Linnehan & Brown
#19, Linnehan & Brown
#23, Robyn Sylvia, Aff.
#27, Meuse
#31, Linnehan & Brown
#35, Smith/Pocahontas
#39, Linnehan & Brown
#43, Linnehan Related
#47, Smith/Pocahontas
#51, Smith/Pocahontas
#55, Smith/Pocahontas
#59, Smith/Pocahontas
#63, King HarrySmith
#67, Meuse Kidnapping
#71, Smith/Judges/A-G
#75, LaidbackPocahontas
#79, Fraud-StupidButFamous
#83, 1st Amendment/Bar
#86, Proposed Findings/Bar
#90, Answer to Petition Discipline
#91, Motion for Attorney Fees
#95, Court Commits Crimes
#99, Opposition to Attorney Fees
#103 Appeal Judicial Immunity
#107 Barb v. BBO et al (State)
#111 Complaint - Sec 1983
#115 TOC-Proposed Findings
#118 Opposition to Motion Strike
#122 Barb v. BBO -- immunity
#126 Meuse- re- Bivens Claims
#130 LaFortune-Opp to Preclude
#134 Memorial Butch Bailey
 #138 o-city-recons-denial-dismiss
#142 Smith surreply-Boston-facts
#146 Smithsupp-m-partial-recon-cc
#150 Barb-appeal-recommend-BB
#154a announcement-of-disbarment
#154 opp-recommendation-disbarment
#158 m-dismis-by-bbo in Barb v BBO
---------------------------------------------------
#162 m-recuse-SJC Justice-spina
#166 claims-USDC-Local Rule-83.6(2)(D)
#170 m-decl-practice-of-law-full-panel-sjc
#174 reply-unauthorized-practice-laws-jc
#178 motion-dismiss-disbarment-violation
#182 app-for-further-app-review-Rule27-1
#4,  Meuse
#8,  Meuse
#12, Linnehan & Brown
#16, Meuse
#20, Linnehan & Brown
#24, Sylvia c. Sylvia
#28, Deleted
#32, Linnehan & Brown
#36, Smith/Pocahontas
#40, Smith.Pocahontas
#44, Linnehan Related
#48, Smith/Pocahontas
#52, Smith/Pocahontas
#56, Judge Contempt
#60, King HarrySmith 
#64, Linnehan Related
#68, GAL Fees
#72, Brown & Linnehan
#76, Fraud-LaidbackLawyer
#80, 1st Amendment/Bar
#84, Sano case/Bar
#87, Senior citizen,Gordon
#90, Count 1: Answer Interwoven
#92 Immunity-DMA-Elderly
#96, Jarasitis: Judas to Justice
#100, Motion for Jury Trial
#104 Judicial Accountability Art.
#108 Preliminary Injunction
#112 Smith'sOpposition to Det.
#115a-Proposed Findings-Divorce
#119 Barb v. BBO--Prop Findings
#123 Meuse-Opp-to-STF-Dism.
#127 Meuse- Fake FBI Docs
#131 LaFortune-Mot-to-Dismiss
#135 Smith's dipiano-mot-dism
 #139 mal-pros-garden-variety
#143 Smith's o-recon-sj-qual-iy
#147 Reply-to-offs-o-partl-recon
#151 barb-ussct-petition-writ-cert
----------------------------------------------
#155 petition-for-rehearing-spina
#159 app-brief-and-letter-to-clerk
#159a app-brief-surprises
#163 m-jury trial for contempt
#167 combined-correct-docket-order-toc
#171 appeal-judgment-of-contempt-sjc
#175 nonlawyer-representing-parties
#179 reply-apps-disbarm't-contempt
#183 -scotus-petition-for-writ-certiorari


#1, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#3, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#5, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#7, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#9, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#11, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#13, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#15, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#17, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#19, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#21, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#23, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#25, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#27, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#29, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#31, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#33, Drano  (Not available in 640 pixels)

#2, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#4, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#6, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#8, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#10, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#12, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#14, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#16, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#18, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#20, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#22, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#24, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#26, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#28
#30, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#32, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)
#34, Drano Series (640-pixel monitor)

 
Barbara C. Johnson, Attorney at Law
6 Appletree Lane, Andover, Massachusetts 01810-4102 Phone 978-474-0833