DEFENDANT #30: DAVID SEAN MCLANE #124952 (The Vernon Patterson Dossier)

 

Role in People v. Michael Taylor (XNEGA111132)
David Sean McLane, one of the original architects of MBL LLP, joins the expanding ranks of institutional actors whose direct access to material evidence, combined with willful inaction, places him among the complicit.

As a founding partner of the very firm where Judge Ronald Owen Kaye built his professional roots before his judicial appointment, McLane stood in a unique position of both access and responsibility. The People v. Michael Taylor matter implicated Judge Kaye in numerous acts of judicial misconduct, including:

• Accepting and relying on a procedurally void competency assessment;
• Committing a defendant to involuntary hospitalization without a valid court order;
• Participating in an ongoing pattern of sealed proceedings and off-record judicial conduct that deprived Mr. Taylor of access to legal remedies.

For more than a year, McLane was carbon copied (CC’d) on dozens of emails documenting this misconduct, many of which were sent to reception@mbllegal.com and directed toward senior members of the firm.

Despite being in full possession of the details, McLane issued no acknowledgment, no disclaimer, and no report—mirroring the silence of co-founders Barry Litt and Marilyn Bednarski, each now named individually in this dossier.

Summary of Involvement
Privy to Allegations Implicating His Former Law Partner — Judge Ronald Kaye

McLane’s firm was explicitly alerted to procedural and constitutional violations committed by a former MBL partner (now Judge Kaye). Those communications included attachments, minute orders, sealed filings, and formal objections that evidenced:

• A forged or unauthorized competency proceeding;
• Sealed courtroom activity blocking redress;
• Coordination between public defenders, prosecutors, and mental health evaluators to detain Mr. Taylor extrajudicially.

Held Managerial Oversight Over a Firm Actively Receiving These Complaints
As a senior partner, McLane had full access to and control over incoming legal correspondence, particularly communications alleging misconduct by a judicial officer connected to the firm. His continued silence establishes constructive knowledge, a doctrine long recognized in law as equivalent to actual notice in matters of professional liability.

Failed to Report, Refer, or Acknowledge the Allegations
Despite receiving firsthand evidence of:

• Due process violations,
• Malfeasance by former associates,
• Judicial overreach involving the deprivation of liberty,

McLane failed to initiate any referral to the State Bar, the Commission on Judicial Performance, or any oversight agency. Such omissions are not only ethically indefensible but legally suspect under Rule 8.3 (California Rules of Professional Conduct).

Why He Is Defendant #30 in the Dossier

• Received the same volume and detail of formal notice as Barry Litt and Marilyn Bednarski, all pointing to severe constitutional and procedural breaches;
• Maintains a direct connection to the presiding judge (Kaye) at the center of the scandal, yet chose silence over disclosure;
• Bears personal, professional, and institutional liability as a founding partner of a law firm deeply enmeshed in the fabric of the Los Angeles judiciary;
• By refusing to act, investigate, or publicly disclaim involvement, McLane helped preserve a system in which defendants are removed from courtrooms under false mental health pretenses, without even the protection of a signed court order.

> “What do you owe a man wrongfully imprisoned when your name stands on the walls that built his prison? In the Dossier, David McLane is not just the one who could have spoken — he is the one whose silence preserved the rot.”