Friedman v. Troia
Motion for Order: Reconsideration of VL-110; Motion to Set Aside VL-120 Denial; Motion to Re-Open
Motion type
Parties
Ruling
(Stanley Mosk Courthouse: Dept. 534) August 27, 2026 DEPARTMENT 534 LAW AND MOTION RULINGS
to Reconsider: Background
On June 2, 2023, Judge Valerie Salkin formally declared Barbara Friedman a vexatious litigant in Los Angeles Superior Court case 22VESC01677 Friedman v. Wanderlust Films. Under this order, Friedman became subject to a Code of Civil Procedure section 391.7 prefiling requirement that requires Friedman to obtain the permission of the presiding judge to file new litigation. Permission is granted only if it appears the litigation has merit and is not being filed for purposes of harassment or delay. (Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 391.7(b).) In the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, the Presiding Judge has designated the Supervising Judge of the Civil Division to exercise this authority and responsibility for new, non-appellate, civil litigation. (See Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 391.7(e).)
On March 13, 2026, this Court received a Judicial Council form VL-110 Request to File New Litigation by Vexatious Litigant dated March 7, 2026 bearing case number 24TRCP00102 Friedman v. Troia, lodged by Friedman in propria persona indicating a desire to file a Notice of Appeal. On March 18, 2026, this Court issued an order denying the request, noting the presiding justice of the Court of Appeal, not this Court, must determine whether Friedman can file a Notice of Appeal. On March 26, 2026, the Court of Appeal issued an order denying Friedman's request to file new litigation in B353371 / 24TRCP00102.
On April 24, 2026, Friedman filed a Motion for Order: Special Consideration to File Notice of Appeal requesting permission to file a Notice of Appeal. On May 14, 2026, Department 534 issued an order denying the motion, reiterating that the Administrative Presiding Judge of the Court of Appeal must determine any request to file a new appeal by a vexatious litigant. On May 27, 2026, Barbara Friedman filed a "Motion for Order: Re-Determination of VL-110 Petitioner's Objection: to VL-120 Denial by Judge Salkin; Lack of Due Process."
Department 534 issued an order denying the motion on June 25, 2026.
Motion and Discussion
On June 25, 2026, Friedman filed a new "Motion for Order: Reconsideration of VL-110, Petitioner's Objection to VL-120 Denial by Judge Salkin, Lack of Due Process" with the hearing set for August 27, 2026 in Department 534. The motion filed June 25, 2026 is identical to the May 27, 2026 "Motion for Order: Re-Determination of VL-110 Petitioner's Objection: to VL-120 Denial by Judge Salkin; Lack of Due Process." Accordingly, Friedman's Motion for Order: Reconsideration of VL-110, Petitioner's Objection to VL-120 Denial by Judge Salkin, Lack of Due Process filed June 25, 2026 is DENIED for the same reasons stated in the Court's June 25, 2026 order. Clerk shall give notice.
Motion to Set Aside Background
On June 2, 2023, Judge Valerie Salkin formally declared Barbara Friedman a vexatious litigant in Los Angeles Superior Court case 22VESC01677 Friedman v. Wanderlust Films. Under this order, Friedman became subject to a Code of Civil Procedure section 391.7 prefiling requirement that requires Friedman to obtain the permission of the presiding judge to file new litigation. Permission is granted only if it appears the litigation has merit and is not being filed for purposes of harassment or delay. (Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 391.7(b).) In the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, the Presiding Judge has designated the Supervising Judge of the Civil Division to exercise this authority and responsibility for new, non-appellate, civil litigation. (See Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 391.7(e).)
On March 13, 2026, this Court received a Judicial Council form VL-110 Request to File New Litigation by Vexatious Litigant dated March 7, 2026 bearing case number 24TRCP00102 Friedman v. Troia, lodged by Friedman in propria persona indicating a desire to file a Notice of Appeal. On March 18, 2026, this Court issued an order denying the request, noting the presiding justice of the Court of Appeal, not this Court, must determine whether Friedman can file a Notice of Appeal. On March 26, 2026, the Court of Appeal issued an order denying Friedman's request to file new litigation in B353371 / 24TRCP00102.
On April 24, 2026, Friedman filed a Motion for Order: Special Consideration to File Notice of Appeal requesting permission to file a Notice of Appeal. On May 14, 2026, Department 534 issued an order denying the motion, reiterating that the Administrative Presiding Judge of the Court of Appeal must determine any request to file a new appeal by a vexatious litigant. On May 27, 2026, Friedman filed a "Motion for Order: Set Aside VL-120 Denial filed 04/15/26 by Retired Judge Salkin; Unethical and Lack of Due Process."
Department 534 issued an order denying the motion on June 25, 2026.
Motion and Discussion
On June 25, 2026, Friedman filed a new "Motion for Order: Set Aside VL-120 Denial by Retired Judge Salkin; VL-125 Form Filed 04/15/26 is a Forged Document; Unethical; Lack of Due Process" with the hearing set for August 27, 2026 in Department 534. The motion filed June 25, 2026 is identical to the May 27, 2026 "Motion for Order: Set Aside VL-120 Denial filed 04/15/26 by Retired Judge Salkin; Unethical and Lack of Due Process." Accordingly, Friedman's Motion for Order: Set Aside VL-120 Denial by Retired Judge Salkin; VL-125 Form Filed 04/15/26 is a Forged Document; Unethical; Lack of Due Process filed June 25, 2026 is DENIED for the same reasons stated in the Court's June 25, 2026 order. Clerk shall give notice.
Motion to Re-Open Background
On June 2, 2023, Judge Valerie Salkin formally declared Barbara Friedman a vexatious litigant in Los Angeles Superior Court case 22VESC01677 Friedman v. Wanderlust Films. Under this order, Friedman became subject to a Code of Civil Procedure section 391.7 prefiling requirement that requires Friedman to obtain the permission of the presiding judge to file new litigation. Permission is granted only if it appears the litigation has merit and is not being filed for purposes of harassment or delay. (Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 391.7(b).) In the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, the Presiding Judge has designated the Supervising Judge of the Civil Division to exercise this authority and responsibility for new, non-appellate, civil litigation. (See Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 391.7(e).)
On March 13, 2026, this Court received a Judicial Council form VL-110 Request to File New Litigation by Vexatious Litigant dated March 7, 2026 bearing case number 24TRCP00102 Friedman v. Troia, lodged by Friedman in propria persona indicating a desire to file a Notice of Appeal. On March 18, 2026, this Court issued an order denying the request, noting the presiding justice of the Court of Appeal, not this Court, must determine whether Friedman can file a Notice of Appeal. On March 26, 2026, the Court of Appeal issued an order denying Friedman's request to file new litigation in B353371 / 24TRCP00102.
On April 24, 2026, Friedman filed a Motion for Order: Special Consideration to File Notice of Appeal requesting permission to file a Notice of Appeal. On May 14, 2026, Department 534 issued an order denying the motion, reiterating that the Administrative Presiding Judge of the Court of Appeal must determine any request to file a new appeal by a vexatious litigant. On May 27, 2026, Friedman filed a "Motion for Order: Set Aside VL-120 Denial filed 04/15/26 by Retired Judge Salkin; Unethical and Lack of Due Process."
Department 534 issued an order denying the motion on June 25, 2026.
Motion and Discussion
On June 25, 2026, Friedman filed a new "Motion for Order: Set Aside VL-120 Denial by Retired Judge Salkin; VL-125 Form Filed 04/15/26 is a Forged Document; Unethical; Lack of Due Process" with the hearing set for August 27, 2026 in Department 534. The motion filed June 25, 2026 is identical to the May 27, 2026 "Motion for Order: Set Aside VL-120 Denial filed 04/15/26 by Retired Judge Salkin; Unethical and Lack of Due Process."
Accordingly, Friedman's Motion for Order: Set Aside VL-120 Denial by Retired Judge Salkin; VL-125 Form Filed 04/15/26 is a Forged Document; Unethical; Lack of Due Process filed June 25, 2026 is DENIED for the same reasons stated in the Court's June 25, 2026 order. Clerk shall give notice. | Home -->)" -->
Cited authorities
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Ask about this ruling
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”