Why the CA State Bar denied an investigation against Steven Rein, Esq. for his blackmail against me, & why attorneys allowed to be relieved as an attorney of record on their word alone without evidence in support of their relief? And, why are those clients of an attorney forced against their will into a Pro Per status, & why are those in Pro Per status expected to know the law(s) like an attorney? which is unfair, unequal & by common sense preposterous requirement by the court. And, why the CA State Bar further denied an investigation against Steven Rein for his malpractice against me too?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED (Cont'd) the client object's to an attorney's sole judgement that attorney goes to court & gets to be relieved as the attorney of record by just stating "conflict of interest" resulting in a prejudice in the eyes of another attorney aginst the client which in partvthis case before you is all about? Rein uses this "blackmail" tactic against me & the CA State Bar refuses to investigate this issue too. Why are the methods ; used by State Bars highly bias in favor of attorneys over the rights of clients, especially the burden of proof that automatically in bias for the attorneys? Surely these "methods" need judiciali fairness by : not allowing clients, their constitional rights as these Bars are a quasi-government arm of their State's Supreme Court for this investigation to protect clients from dishonest attorneys without obstacles to prevent an investigation to determine whether the allegations are true or not. 2. : ip oe