Balita/Beirne’s Pattern of Lying Evident in Ruby Sexon Deposition

2. Balita/Beirne’s Pattern
of Lying Evident in
Ruby Sexon
Deposition
By Rene Villaroman with PWD
Investigative Team

3. The „pattern of lying‟ in
the Balita/Beirne
organization once more
came to the fore during
a court-ordered
deposition of Atty
James G. Beirne‟s staff
member Ruby Sexon
conducted by Atty Joel
Bander in connection
with the Duldulao
family lawsuit.

4. In this lawsuit, the Duldulaos seek unspecified
damages against Atty James G. Beirne and the Law
Offices of James G. Beirne, due to the loss of their
home in Eagle Rock, California, after Beirne failed to
file a bankruptcy petition in their behalf even
though they had paid the attorney the fee that he
had demanded. Beirne admits that Sexon is the only
law office staff member to ever speak to the
Duldulaos before he failed to file their bankruptcy
thus losing their home.

5. Sexon has been prominently promoted as a key
Beirne staff member in earlier advertising.
PinoyWatchDog.com is inviting all its readers to
watch portions of the videotaped deposition of Ms.
Sexon to disprove its claims that she lied through
her teeth answering almost all of the questions
asked by Atty Bander in the presence of their
defense attorney, Jack Lapedis.

6. The independent videographer officially taping the
court ordered deposition commented that Ms. Sexon
couldn‟t have been telling the truth. He perceived she
would put her head down every time she was lying.
PinoyWatchDog.com is saying, without any
reservations, that Ms Sexon is factually lying in the
portions of the videotape that can be seen on our
website. This is not an opinion, but a statement of
fact. PWD is encouraging its readers to watch the
video at www.pinoywatchdog.com to validate this
claim.

7. Atty Bander has been seeking to depose Ms Sexon
for more than four months, but she continued
to avoid deposition based of the stalling tactics of
Beirne‟s attorney. But finally Judge Susanna
Bruguera had enough and ordered the deposition to
proceed.

8. Ms. Sexon‟s testimony that she had worked with Atty
Beirne for more than 10 years was unable to state a
year, or even estimate the year when she began
working there. One Filipino who asked not to be
identified stated “Filipinos are always filled with
pride when they have worked many years for an
employer. It makes no sense she would not know
when she started.”

9. Sexon was also unable to
identify her
colleagues‟s job
description, stating that
they „worked in the back‟
and she did not know. Even
though she has been
working with Beirne
General Manager Anthony
Allen for about 15 years she
even testified not knowing
his job functions, beyond
being seen in „accounting.‟
Sadly, after all those years
Ms. Sexon, working on
Filipinos bankruptcy cases,
did not remember a single
time being trained in
bankruptcy law.

10. Sadly, after all those years Ms. Sexon, working on
Filipinos bankruptcy cases, did not remember a
single time being trained in bankruptcy law.
In the Duldulao lawsuit Sexon was the only Beirne
staffer to ever talk or interact with the plaintiffs
before they lost their home. But she did not know
anyone but Beirne who worked on the Duldulaos‟
case, and that the attorney allegedly assigned tasks to
people „in the back room.‟

11. She also testified that there is no system to track
incoming documents (she does not know of any),
and just give the paper to the proper persons. Ms.
Sexon said that she did not remember having
received a notice of default from (Diosdado)
Duldulao, even though it is in the file; there was no
record of when it was received. This can all be seen
on the video on line.

12. Sexon‟s court-ordered videotaped testimony had a
chorus of „I did not recall‟, including receiving a call
from Mr. Duldulao in September 2009 about
receiving a short sale notice to stop a
foreclosure; that she told Mr. Duldulao the
bankruptcy petition had already been filed, whether
she was upset that the house was foreclosed upon or
that she even spoke with Atty Beirne about
Duldulao‟s house being foreclosed. This should be
particularly disturbing to all Filipinos, because
Attorney Berine admits she was the only
communication point between himself and the
Duldulaos.

13. Ms. Sexon testified that when Mr. Duldulao came
in she said “Beirne had to make sure he
(Duldulao) qualified for a Chapter 13” but case
documents indicate she took the Duldulaos‟
money on that first visit anyway.
Ms. Sexon is the same Beirne staff member
involved in the Pecaoco couple bankruptcy filing
mess covered in prior editions of
PinoyWatchDog.com , and in yet another pending
legal malpractice court case of De los Cientos v.
Beirne.

14. In the Pecacoco case a federal bankruptcy judge
called Beirne‟s filing „a mess‟ and dismissed her case,
providing only a partial refund. That case was also
handled by Ruby Sexon. In the De los Cientos case,
the court file indicates that Ms. Sexon instructed the
plaintiff to withdraw pension money and stop
working a second job. But again, Beirne Law Office
never filed the bankruptcy petition either.

15. The complaint in the De Los Cientos case states that
Beirne has “a law firm business model that steers clients
away from the only attorney tangentially involved in the
practice and almost completely depends on the use of
legal assistants. The involvement of attorneys in client
cases is almost non-existent as a matter of predetermined
design.
In this plaintiff‟s case, and following this business model,
Ruby Sexon, a legal assistant with no formal legal
training, and upon information and belief, an alleged
illegal alien, almost exclusively handled plaintiff‟s case on
behalf of defendants.”

16. With no training or system to keep track
of documents, this is a receipe for
disaster. And because of these lies and
deceit the Duldulaos lost their home.
Go to goo.gl/uGdlW to watch the Ruby
Sexon Deposition Footage.