....STOP SMUD FROM SPENDING RATEPAYER MONEY ON SCIENCE CENTER BUILDING NAMING RIGHTS.......SEE THE LOCAL FOCUS CAMPAIGN SECTION.....

Go Back   Fight Back In Sac > Main Category > General Discussion
FAQForum Rules Members List Calendar Articles Media Center Downloads Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

General Discussion This forum is for a wide range of topics that do not fit in the other categories


Welcome to the Fight Back In Sac forums.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-22-2007, 09:11 AM
AyatollahGondola's Avatar
AyatollahGondola AyatollahGondola is offline
Soldier
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 1,316
Default MJB/Bixby Construction Co

This company has a permanent injunction and permanent restraining order you may download from this post
Attached Files
File Type: zip MJBBixbyinjunction.zip (2.97 MB, 536 views)
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-10-2007, 01:53 PM
Zack Zack is offline
New Registrant
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2
Default

The injunction was agreed to without a trial, without taking any evidence, and without any admission of liability or wrongdoing to settle the litigation. It is not evidence of any misconduct and shall not be treated as an admission of liability by any party for any purpose.
On the other hand, "AyatollahGondola" is Davi Rodrigues who sued Mr. Bixby and lost. Mr. Bixby sued Mr. Rodrigues and has a judgment against him in excess of $105,000, for breach of lease. Mr. Rodrigues’ motivation is obvious.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-10-2007, 11:47 PM
big_cheez big_cheez is offline
New Registrant
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1
Default

Zak

Sorry, nice try.
I don't know the case personaly but here's my take on it.

Bixby's attorney told him to take the stipulation, Why? Because if Bixby lost the case, which apprently there was a good chance he was going to loose otherwise he would have fought it, then Bixby would be liable for the defendants attorney fees, court costs, damages, etc, maybe even criminal procedings. This way his wrongdoing slips into oblivion.

I don't know Davi's situation but I do know Bixby. He is vindictive. If he thinks you crossed him or if he can get away with it, he will spend thousands to hound you. Thats just the way he is.

How do I know Bixby, you guessed it, I used to work for him. He's come after me too.
I have been in construction 30 years. I have been a superintendent since early 90s. In all my years, I have never worked for anyone like Bixby. Not one project I worked on was the client happy. My first project for him was heading for litigation before I even started with the company.

To everyone else reading this ... do yourself a favor, before contracting with Bixby, ask for a list of 10 happy clients you can contact as references. If he does come up with 10, check them very carefully.

Last edited by big_cheez : 09-10-2007 at 11:50 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-20-2007, 04:20 PM
Zack Zack is offline
New Registrant
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2
Default

Hey Big Cheese, if not one job you worked on was the client happy, maybe the problem was you.

Last edited by Zack : 09-20-2007 at 04:23 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-27-2007, 09:13 AM
AyatollahGondola's Avatar
AyatollahGondola AyatollahGondola is offline
Soldier
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 1,316
Default

To align the thread and my posts in a more appropriate fashion to the boards mission, I will post the evidence in the original case from both sides, and the story that might show a clear pathway towards an example the rest of us may follow when our government and the peripheral governing bodies connected to it do not protect and serve the public.
This is meant to be a direct testimonial to the malfeasance of the California state Contractors license board, the Attorney Generals office, and the local district attorney here in Sacramento. From start to finish, the highlights of the case...including the evidence alleged, the methods employed, and the results that followed.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-16-2007, 02:53 AM
AyatollahGondola's Avatar
AyatollahGondola AyatollahGondola is offline
Soldier
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 1,316
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zack View Post
The injunction was agreed to without a trial, without taking any evidence, and without any admission of liability or wrongdoing to settle the litigation. It is not evidence of any misconduct and shall not be treated as an admission of liability by any party for any purpose.
On the other hand, "AyatollahGondola" is Davi Rodrigues who sued Mr. Bixby and lost. Mr. Bixby sued Mr. Rodrigues and has a judgment against him in excess of $105,000, for breach of lease. Mr. Rodrigues’ motivation is obvious.
First off, it is still a permanent injunction. Secondly, just because it was agreed to without the taking of evidence does not mean there wasn't any. There was in fact, lots of evidence. Or should I say, there is lots of evidence? It's all still available, and the court retains jurisdiction.
And as far as it not being treated as an admission of liability, I noticed that Bixby neither admitted nor denied the allegations.
Regardless of my motivation, these things are fact:
The injunction is in effect
The injunction is permanent and forever
The injunction is a public document
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-13-2008, 11:47 PM
AyatollahGondola's Avatar
AyatollahGondola AyatollahGondola is offline
Soldier
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 1,316
Default

It also includes a permanent restraining order for the plaintiffs family; The wife, and kids?. This also, without the taking of any evidence, nor an admission of guilt? Now who would agree to such a thing under normal circumstances? Why would a plaintiff in a case even ask for such a far reaching protective order in the settlement?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-07-2008, 03:40 PM
fbsacisback fbsacisback is offline
New Registrant
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 3
Default

I hired MJB Bixby and it was a nightmare. Bixby can be beaten and has been a few times, but its best to avoid him. The guy is friendly and slick when writing the contract. But he is there to get your money, not do the job right. He thrives on bullying and pursuing others and actually seems to enjoy litigation.

The contractors board is run by contractors and mired in rules that give them every chance to protect their buddies' licenses. As a result, his record was spotless when we hired him and even after the complaints we and others filed. You can't trust their records.

If you want an indicator of whether this guy is trouble, search Sacramento courts online case listing at the link below. By my count, 16 civil cases since 2001. I think that's an obvious warning to anyone thinking of hiring him.

https://services.saccourt.com/indexsearchnew/
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-07-2008, 09:54 PM
AyatollahGondola's Avatar
AyatollahGondola AyatollahGondola is offline
Soldier
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 1,316
Default

Welcome FB,

Actually, the count is around 25 for civil, around 30 more for small claims, and then there's unlawful detainer court that has 7 or so more. Each week, more of them are uploaded to this website below

http://publicdocumentdistributors.co...hread.php?t=29
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-27-2009, 04:08 PM
fbsacisback fbsacisback is offline
New Registrant
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 3
Default MJB Bixby - Crook or Innocent? Search the court records to find out.

Here's the definitive way to find out whether you can trust MJB Bixby... go to Sac Superior online and search their case filings. You'll see that Bixby is extremely litigious.

Want to dig further, go down and check out the most recent cases. Its all there. The CSLB is filled with contractors and as such, it can't be trusted to police its own. Its set up to give the contractor every break you could imagine.

Do your own research. Go here and look at how many times he has sued others. Suing his clients is apparently a hobby for Mr. Bixby.

https://services.saccourt.com/indexsearchnew/
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.