Steve Chavez Lodge Wins, Cynthia Ward Loses — Justice Prevails
Posted by OC Insider on September 4, 2012
The OC Register reports that Anaheim Council candidate Steve Chavez Lodge will get to keep “Chavez” as part of his name on the ballot — which shouldn’t surprise anyone since it is part of his legal name:
Margines said “Chavez” may be used on the ballot – it’s part of Lodge’s birth name – Steven Albert Chavez – and that he also remembered Lodge testifying in his courtroom when Lodge was a Santa Ana police officer. During that testimony, Margines said, Lodge was sworn in using his given name “Chavez,” the judge recalled.
To ensure no confusion, the judge ordered that Lodge’s entire name – Steven Albert Chavez Lodge – go onto the ballot.
This is a defeat for Anaheim gadfly Cynthia Ward, who filed the lawsuit — even while dodging all questions about whether or not she is personally paying for the legal services of the expensive, high-powered law firm representing her.
Ward’s lawsuit is raising other questions about who she is covertly on cahoots with in her efforts to undermine Lodge’s campaign. More on that to come in upcoming posts.
OC Political 
Homegrown857 said
I thought there were two legal issues in the suit. The name on the ballot was only one of them. The other had to do with his stated occupation. What happened there? Was that part of today’s ruling?
Warden Cynthia said
The judge ruled he can’t use “retired policeman” because he is currently employed. The name was the big-ticket item.
Homegrown857 said
Hmmm. Seems like the big-ticket item was whether or not Mr. Lodge obeyed the law when it came to his filing.
It appears that the judge made a reasoned decision to list the whole possible name, including the “n” in Steven and “Albert,” to avoid confusion because the man has and continues to use so many versions of his name depending upon what suits his circumstances. This clears up that part of the issue… but how precisely is this a big win? What does Lodge hope to gain except in half-the-story blog posts like OC Insider’s?
Steven Albert Chavez Lodge clearly did not obey the law regarding stating his occupation status, and the judge ruled soundly against him.
So, in that part of the suit, it’s:
Cynthia Ward Wins, Steven Albert Chavez Lodge Loses — Justice Prevails
Let’s be honest and tell the whole story. OK?
Homegrown857 said
While we’re addressing disingenuis reporting, I see that Mrs. Ward was characterized by OC Insider as being a “gadfly.” That seems highly appropriate as, by one definition, “In modern and local politics, gadfly is a term used to describe someone who persistently challenges people in positions of power, the status quo or a popular position.” Bingo! Go Mrs. Ward!
And let’s not forget that Mrs. Ward’s position was obviously a reasonable, thoughtful, and appropriate challenge. Judge Margines, in his preliminary decision, as reported on Voice of OC, sided with Mrs. Ward on BOTH counts. Only after an additional, last minute statements by Steven Albert Chavez Lodge’s attorney did the judge agree to the use of the magic “Chavez” on the ballot to avoid supposed voter confusion. And the judge never wavered from siding with Mrs. Ward on the second (employment designation) issue.
If OC Insider was trying to make a case that “gadfly” Mrs. Ward was somehow simply an insignificant irritant in her challenge to Steven Albert Chavez Lodge, remember that a seasoned judge was unquestionably inclined to agree with her on the first point, until final evidence was presented, and definitely agreed with her on the second point. If there’s a lightweight in this controversy, it seems likely to be OC Insider him/herself.
OC Insider said
Hmmm. Speaking of being ‘honest”…I freely admit being biased here. I think Ward’s lawsuit was stupid, political and partisan, not a lofty act of disnterested citizenship as she pretends. It was ridiculous and unjust for her to think someone cannot use their LEGAL NAME on the ballot. She has been less-than-honest when it comes to disclosing who is paying for this political lawsuit. If she was paying for it, she would have said so by now.
“Only after an additional, last minute statements by Steven Albert Chavez Lodge’s attorney did the judge agree to the use of the magic “Chavez” on the ballot to avoid supposed voter confusion.”
That’s a good one — like saying, “Hey, we were winning the game up until we were losing it.” As you state, once the evidence was heard, the judge made the common sense decision that the man can use his legal name on the ballot.
You should consider admitting your bias as well, and your interesting lack of curiousity when it comes to the circumstances surrounding this lawsuit.
OC Insider said
And she is a gadfly. She flips from love-hate relationships with candidates and officials. Curt Pringle was great and then Curt Pringle was evil. Kris Murray was wonderful, then Murray was a stooge. Shawn Nelson was bad, and now Shawn Nelson is good. Tom Tait was a stooge and now Tait is a hero. You can get whiplash trying to keep up with her always-shifting opinions.
Homegrown857 said
I think you’ve made some rather breathtaking leaps of logic here. Although we established what name Mr. Lodge can use on the ballot, you assume that this is also his “LEGAL NAME” (your caps). I don’t believe he put forth any evidence that would support that conclusion, did he? No government-issued identification of any kind was provided, but Mrs. Ward’s side put forth document after document showing him using some form of Steve/Steven A./Albert Lodge without Chavez. If, as Mr. Lodge’s attorney proposed, he never legally changed his name to Lodge, I find it simply preposterous that he could serve in the U.S. Military or get a job as a peace officer as “Lodge.”
Then for you to assume that the lawsuit was “stupid, political and partisan” when the judge found it to have merit and sided with Mrs. Ward at least on the employment designation issue, is a position that could be painted with the same brush.
Finally, your laundry list of supposed whiplash-inducing positions Mrs. Ward has taken over the years would suggest that she flip-flopped with gadfly abandon while the other parties never wavered an iota from their positions or courses of action exhibited from the very beginning.
Politics (indeed life) would be a lot easier if that were true, wouldn’t it?
OC Insider said
You’ve made some rather breathtaking assertion of facts not in evidence. Lodge provided evidence that Chavez was part of his legal name. Ward provided no evidence to the contrary; the best she could demonstrate is he hasn’t always used Chavez on forms and dcouments. So what?
If Ward’s evidence and case were as compellling as she still seems to believe, she would have won. She didn’t. She lost.
thinkoc said
The Judge tossed the new “evidence” Baric tried to introduce. The Judge made it clear that he was reversing himself only because he himself suddenly remembered him testifying in his courtroom. Now how would you propose I fight that? Have my attorney call a Judge a liar? I don’t think so. The case was not won based on anything Lodge or Baric brought in other than Baric’s last minute insistence that Lodge had testified in Margines’ own courtroom. One would think that if it was that important Lodge could at least have provided a case reference that we could check on. He didn’t. He got lucky that the Judge happened to agree, and that is fine, I have said so. http://www.ktla.com/news/landing/ktla-chavez-lodge-ballot,0,1242051.story
On the other hand, you keep insisting I “lost.” You misunderstand my purpose, which in turn leads you to misunderstand my motives as well. Did I really lose? I did not set out to rob anyone of their name, I set out to determine what his name really is. (something so completely up in the air that his own attorney could not answer correctly, and Lodge himself stumbles over in an interview afterward.)
The Judge helped us decide what name he could put on the ballot, and today we all know a LOT more about Steven Albert Chavez Lodge, which was the point of my blog post weeks ago that started all of this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cilvy2dAA0A&feature=youtu.be