Vidala Aaronoff Wants Supreme Court to take Case vs Billionaire Curtis Olson

FacebookEmailBloggerLinkedInTwitterShare

Weird case has flurry of lawsuits going back years, Vidala Aaronoff wins but court wants her to pay Curtis Olson nose-bleed-high attorney’s fees

Los Angeles (Special to ZennieReport.com) – Vidala Aaronoff, as petitioner to the US Supreme Court, urges SCOTUS to review an Equal Access to Justice claim of a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, arising from a California restraining order court’s unjustified award of statutory attorney’s fees.

Although Vidala Aaronoff, an indigent dance teacher, prevailed, the court ordered her to pay billionaire Curtis Olson’s astronomical attorney’s fees, which ballooned to over $3 Million via a legal loophole for the super-rich.

Sexual Assault Victims' Rights - Cal. Supreme Court about to Rule

Curtis Olson Accused Of Fraud

Curtis Olson

Petition alleges: Nexus Development CEO Curtis Olson fraudulently inflated a residential property value by listing neighboring properties millions of dollars over value to spike property algorithms. Then Olson lied to the trial court that Aaronoff owned the property to mislead the court that she was wealthy. Shockingly, Olson owns the property.

Olson is accused of luring Aaronoff to his residence and attempting to rape her in May 2015.  Aaronoff sought a Civil Harassment Restraining Order, which resulted in a three year protective order in December 2015.  Soon Olson violated it. The court retained jurisdiction, Aaronoff sought enforcement and Olson retaliated with a meritless cross-restraining order.

Curtis Olson’s Alleged Peeping Tom Pose Horrifies Aaronoff

Vidala Aaronoff has said Curtis Olson has taken a “peeping tom” pose in his dogged pursuit of her. Olson’s alleged to have taken actions like getting right up to her window to peer in at her at night, according to Aaronoff. Reportedly, Curtis Olson’s the latest in a long line of men who own residential multifamily complexes, only to break into the homes of an attractive female tenant and seek sex with her. Hence the need for the restraining order to keep him away from her.

A Case Of Restraining Orders

The combined dueling restraining orders were both denied. Given that each party prevented the other from obtaining a restraining order, they were both deemed prevailing parties and entitled to statutory attorney’s fees. Olson has the means to afford expensive counsel whereas Aaronoff mostly self-represented does not.  Olson claimed $300,000 in legal fees dwarfing Aaronoff’s fees. The average restraining order attorney’s fees are $5,000-$10,000.

Financial assessment of the ability to pay fees is not included in every statutory code, but California has overarching laws requiring the courts to ensure equal access to the judicial system, as guaranteed under the Fourteenth Amendment. The trial court considered Aaronoff’s indigency stating, “It looks to do substantial justice by determining whether there is or is not an ability to pay.”  

Curtis Olson’s Property Scheme Made Vidala Aaronoff Look Rich

However, Olson’s property-inflating fraudulent scheme caused the trial court to erroneously believe Aaronoff was wealthy and to order her to pay Olson $80,000 in offsetting statutory fees. Subsequently, Olson’s fees ballooned to over $3 million from charging Aaronoff for his attorney’s collection fees, which include derivative lawsuits against Aaronoff’s mother, brother and others in search of that non-existent $80,000.  Curtis Olson’s revenge goal is to make Aaronoff homeless and destroy her family. 

In dueling restraining order situations like this one, where both parties fail to prove their affirmative claims but prevail in defense, the judicial system only rewards wealthy litigants, who can outspend indigent victims. 

Appelate Court Sticks Poor Vidala Aaronoff Aaronoff With $3 Million In Attorney’s Fees

Although Aaronoff subsequently proved she never owned the property and was indeed indigent, the appellate court ignored time-honored equitable laws in the action of overturning the trial court’s “substantial justice by determining ability to pay.” That action, which sidestepped property ownership, holding that particular statute does not require “ability to pay” determinations. For that reason, Ms. Aaronoff was ordered to pay Mr. Olson’s outrageous legal fees. 

This legal quirk allows courts to protect wealthy sexual predators and financially punish vulnerable victims who seek redress in the courts, weakening the public’s trust.  

Attorney Alan Reinach in support of Petitioner Vidala Aaronoff states, “Ordering indigent litigants’ to pay exorbitant attorney’s fees is a gross violation of due process, and has a chilling effect on their ability to even pursue just claims in court.  We urge SCOTUS review!”

SCOTUS Decision Day Is Friday, April 12th 2024

Will the United States Supreme Court take Ms. Aaronoff ‘s case? We will all find out on Friday of this week.

1 thought on “Vidala Aaronoff Wants Supreme Court to take Case vs Billionaire Curtis Olson”

Leave a Comment

Index