On Wednesday I appeared on behalf of Alwanna Knight (Godmother) before Judge Milton I. Shadur, Senior District Court Judge, due to her being very ill and could not attend her Hearing;
The Judge was extremely pleasant but did not in anyway reflect a person who described her Complaint as "BLUNDERBUSS" which begs the question DID HE REALLY HER COMPLAINT OR DID ANOTHER JUDGE PRESIDE OVER THE MATTER AS A FAVOR FOR HIM HELPING WITH HIS CASE LOAD--- YOU BE THE JUDGE.
IF A JUDGE IS FAIR I WILL CALL HIM FAIR NOTHING MORE OR LESS, BUT IF HE OE SHE IS ANYTHING OUTSIDE THE CONTRARY YOU WILL READ ABOUT IN MY AFFIDAVITS.
DIRECT STATEMENTS FROM AFFIDAVIT OF Jan 24, 2012 before the United States Court of Appeals, the Judges Remanded it back to the District Court
1)
Appellant is
indigent and cannot afford an attorney, the District Court Judge ordered
Appellant to pay the $350 filing fee on or before January 25, 2012 needed to
gain entry to the federal court house door;
A- Said Senior District Court Judge has demonstrated
Racism Terrorist control in that, his statement is clear because of Appellant’s
skin color, he was capable of using his
robe to deny Appellant any relief in his court;
B- Appellant filed her Complaint, Motion for Appointment
of Counsel, Motion to proceed Informa Pauperis (January 3, 2012);
C- Judge Shadur
unlawfully DENIED both the Motion and Informa Pauperis application, Jan. 5,
2012;
2) That Judge Shadur made racist denigrating remarks of
the legally sufficient documents, stating “And if that blunderbuss
characterization, coupled with a $10 million demand………et al
A- Blunderbuss defined in Webster as a noun, 1) An old
fashioned, short gun with a large bore and flaring mouth. 2) One who blunders.
B- Said Judge did not exercise the proper usage of the
noun in the context he attempted to ridicule said legal document, and further
amplifies, the lack of professional integrity on the bench;
IN THE
UNITED STATES
DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
Alwanna Knight
Plaintiff CIVIL
ACTION NO 12-CV 00011
Judge Milton I. Shadur
V
Aurora Loan
Services, LLC
Defendant
NOTICE OF MOTON
Please be
advised that on May 21, 2012, A Motion for Reconsideration Vacate Orders Dismissing
Complaint due to Error, and or Misunderstanding of case before the court, Reset
Hearing Date, Appoint Counsel
COURTESY COPIES TO THE FOLLOWING:
Plaintiff shall appear present said
Motion June 18th 2012 @9:00am
Dir. Mueller,
FBI, Wash. D.C
.
Robert
Grant U.S.
Atty. Pat. Fitzgerald
FBI 219
South Dearborn, Suite 500
2111 West
Roosevelt Road Chicago, Ill.
60604
Chicago, Ill.
60612
Madam Dorothy
Tucker (Anchorwoman)
Channel 2 News
22 West
Washington
Chicago, Ill.
60602
Because the
Court has not INVOKED JURISDICTION on Dutton & Dutton, P.C.
10325 W. Lincoln Highway
Frankfort, Il 60423 this Motion
was not tendered to them.
I affirm the above as being true.
Respectfully Submitted
Alwanna Knight
5721 S. Justine
Chicago,
Ill. 60636
(773) 430-4387
IN THE
UNITED STATES
DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
Alwanna Knight
Plaintiff CIVIL
ACTION NO 12-CV 00011
Judge Milton I. Shadur
V
Aurora Loan
Services, LLC
Defendant
MOTON FOR RECONSIDERATION VACATE ORDER
DISMISSING COMPLAINT DUE TO ERROR, AND OR MISUNDERSTANDING OF CASE BEFORE THE
COURT, RESET HEARING DATE, APPOINT COUNSEL
Now comes Alwanna Knight, Pro Se Appellant
in this cause files herewith her affidavit as required by Title 28, attesting
the veracity and accuracy of all statements recorded within.
Based thereon, plaintiff-appellant respectfully moves this Honorable
Court to read the merits of this motion personally so as to recognize its error
and enforce the laws in accordance to the United States Constitution and
according to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure not to dismiss said matter
presented before this court but grant Special Consideration in this matter, due
to the unlawful injustices recorded in said Affidavit compelling this court to
act in accordance to the Laws of the United States Constitution Instanter to
execute jurisdiction over the parties (Aurora Loan Services) involved in this
proceeding .
May 21, 2012
Respectfully
Submitted
Alwanna Knight
5721 South Justine
Chicago, Ill. 60636
(773) 340-4387
IN THE
UNITED STATES
DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
AFFIDAVIT
In Support of
MOTON
FOR RECONSIDERATION VACATE ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT DUE TO ERROR, AND OR
MISUNDERSTANDING OF CASE BEFORE THE COURT, RESET HEARING DATE, APPOINT COUNSEL
I Alwanna Knight, being duly sworn on oath
states:
1.)
That
Hon. Milton I. Shadur set this matter for Hearing May 16, 2012, due to illness,
she was unable to attend;
2.) That my Godson Joe
Louis Lawrence appeared in my behalf and requested said extension, it was
gleaned from the matter, that Judge Shadur stated, “Appellant was suing a lot of folks, Judges in particular in that, they
have absolute immunity“ which
was not true, a court reporter transcribed the entire matter;
3.) That Joe Louis
Lawrence prepared and assisted in all legal matters, in that Judge Shadur is
referencing his case on appeal under deliberation, he has State Judges and
Circuit Court Judges named in his Complaint, hereto attached, Group Ex A Brief Filed before the United
States Court of Appeals, March 26, 2012; (Joe Louis Lawrence V. Sec. of State,
Clerk of Cir Court, States Atty., Atty
Gen., Circuit Court Judges, State Judges, ATU 241, CTA Rachael Kaplan, Kent
Stephen Ray)
4.) That Judge Shadur
is very well advanced in years respectfully and has probably forgot more than
many of us may remember, but at any rate his demeanor was patient and
respectable, it was clear from his delivery he was either misinformed about the
case before him or was arguing merits of what is properly briefed in said Group Ex A;
5.) That
Appellant forgot to inform said Godson of Graduations June 8, at 9:00am in the
event the case is rescheduled on that date and Joe Louis Lawrence’s son
graduate Monday June 11, 2012;
A- Motions for Reconsideration are
designed to bring to the court’s attention newly discovered evidence that was
unavailable at time of original hearing, changes in existing law, or errors in
court’s application of law. Continental
Cas. Co. v. Security Ins. Co. of Hartford, App. 1 Dist. 1996, 216 Ill. Dec.
314, 279 Ill. App. 3d 815, 665 N.E. 2d 374, appeal dismissed, et al.;
B-
The purpose of a Motion to Vacate is to alert
the trial court to errors it has made and to afford an opportunity for their
correction. In re Marriage of King, App.
1 Dist. 2002, 270 Ill. Dec. 540, 336 Ill. App. 3d 83, 783 N.E. 2d 115,
rehearing denied pending appeal; et al.
C- Properly alleged facts within an affidavit that are not
contradicted by counter affidavit are taken as true, despite the existence of
contrary averments in the adverse
party’s pleadings. Professional Group Travel, Ltd. v. Professional
Seminar Consultants Inc., 136 ILL App 3d 1084, 483 N.E. 2d 1291; Buzzard v.
Bolger, 117 ILL App 3d 887, 453 N.E. 2d 1129 et al.
6.) That Chicago is the most Corrupt City in
America, Huffington Post, Internet Newspaper, February 23, 2012;
7.)
University of Illinois Professor Dick Simpson, “The two worst crime zones in Illinois are
the governor’s mansion…..and the City Council Chambers in Chicago.” Simpson a former Chicago Alderman told the
AP “no other State can match us.”
The United
States Supreme Court has held that 28
USCA 1915 (e) (1) does not authorize a Federal Court to require an
unwilling attorney to represent an indigent litigant in a Civil case; Mallard V. U.S. Dist. Court for Southern
Dist. Of Iowa, 490 US
296, 109 S. Ct. 1814, 104 L. Ed. 2d 318 (1989)
et al;
8.)
The Informa Pauperis Statute requires that
the litigant be unable to obtain counsel 28
USCA 1915 (e) (1) before appointment may be considered, so a plaintiff must
present evidence that reasonably diligent effort to obtain counsel has been
made before the court will favorably consider their application; Nelson V. Redfield Lithograph Printing,
728 F 2d 1003 (8th Cir 1984) rejected on other grounds by U.S. et al;.
It has been held that a court may deny a
plaintiff’s motion for counsel if it concludes that the chances of success are
highly dubious, and to reach this conclusion, it may rely in part on an
evaluation by a member of the bar that the claim has no merit; Pena V. Choo, 826 F 168 (2d Cir. 1987).
9.) There are a number of factors which a court
may consider in making a determination regarding the propriety of Appointing
Counsel including
(1) whether the litigants cause of
action appears to be meritorious; (2)
whether the litigant is financially unable to employ Counsel; (3) whether the litigant, after
diligent effort, has been unable to secure counsel, such inability including
inability because of financial status, reluctance of local lawyers to take the
case , or other reasons; Applications
of Miller, 427 F. Supp. 896 (W. D.
Tex 1977). Other factors include:
A- the plaintiff’s ability to investigate,
gather, and present crucial facts;
B- the type and complexity of the case;
C- the complexity of legal issues;
D- whether the case’s factual issues turn on
credibility, and the need for the trained presentation of evidence and cross-
examination;
E-
The plaintiff’s
apparent ability to present the case; Hodge
V. Police Officers, 802 F 2d 58 (2d Cir 1986).
The timeliness of the request is also a
factor;
finally the court may also determine
that the nature of the litigation is such that the court as well as the plaintiff would benefit from the
Assistance of Counsel; Nelson V. Redfield Lithograph Printing,
728 F 2d.1003 (8th Cir. 1984) rejected on other grounds by U.S. V. 30. 64 Acres of Land, more or less,
Situated in Klickitat County, State of Wash., 795 F 2d 796, 5 Fed. R. Serv. 3d
415 (9th Cir1986).
A- Said judges have DENIED every legally
sufficient document Appellant has put before the court protecting and upholding
corruption and Terrorism in this State, City of Chicago Turner
24 F. Cas. 337 (No. 14247) C.C.D. Md.
1867) The “equal benefit” clause is cited in what would appear to be the
earliest reported case enforcing the section. The plaintiff was an emancipated
slave who was indentured as an apprentice to her former master. Although both
whites and blacks could be indentured as an apprentice, under the law of Maryland, indentured
blacks were not accorded the same educational benefits as whites and, unlike
whites, were subject to being transferred to any other person in the same
county. Circuit Judge Chase granted a writ of habeas corpus upon finding that
the purported apprenticeship was in fact involuntary servitude and a denial
under the Civil Rights Act of 1866 of the “full and equal benefit of all laws. And most important, Civil
Rights Act of 1866- first section, enacted by the Senate and House of
Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled. That all
persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power,
excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United
States; and such citizens of every race and color, without regard to any
previous condition of slavery or involuntary servitude, except as a punishment
for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall have the same
right, in every State and Territory in the United States, to make and enforce
contracts, to sue, be parties, and give evidence, to inherit, purchase, lease,
sell, hold and convey real and personal property, and to full and equal benefit
of the laws and proceedings for the security of person and property, as is
enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, and
penalties, and to none other, any law, statute, ordinances, regulation, or
custom, to the contrary notwithstanding, Act of April 9, 1866, ch. 31, 1, 14
Stat. 27, 42 U.S.C.A. 1981 (a)
10.)
Said judges are cognizant the FBI received Notice and knowledge on the
State level ignoring said Civil Rights because she stood up to Racial Injustice trying to
steal her home, Jennings
v. Patterson,
488 F. 2d 442, equal access to public facilities. The court found that the
plaintiffs had been “denied the right to hold and enjoy their property on the
same basis as white citizens.” Jennings
suggests the potential usefulness of the equal benefit clause in guaranteeing
full and equal enjoyment of public property and public services.” Developments in the Law section 1981, 15 Harv. Civ. Rts.
---- Civ. Lib. L. Rev 29, 133 (1980). Said
judges have demonstrated no regard for the FBI or The Laws of the United States
Constitution in Appellant’s attempt to obtain Equal Access to the Courts Scott, 377 Mass. 364, 386 N.E. 2d 218,
220 (1979) See Lopez-Alexander, Unreported Order No. 85-279 (Colo. May 3, 1985)
(Judge removed for, inter alia, a persistent pattern of abuse of the contempt
power. The Mayor of Denver accepted the findings of the Denver County Court
Judicial Qualification Commission that the judge’s conduct could not be
characterized as mere mistakes or errors of law and that the conduct
constituted willful misconduct in office and conduct prejudicial to the
administration of justice that brings the judicial office into disrepute).
Canon Ethics where there is a pattern of disregard or indifference, which
warrant discipline.
11.)
Said judges have demonstrated they are “Above the Law” and has employed
tactics validating the veracity they are “Untouchable” Vaughn 462 S.E. 2d 728 (Ga. 1995), The
Supreme Court of Georgia removed a judge from office for disregarding
defendant’s constitutional rights.
Arkansas Code of Judicial Conduct Commentary to Canon 2 (1988)
provides that “(A)” judge must avoid all impropriety” And appearance of impropriety.”
Accordingly, (A) judge should disqualify himself in a proceeding in which his
impartiality might be questioned. . . . . . “Arkansas Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 3
(c) (1) 1988.
Where a judge
exhibits bias or the appearance of bias, the court will reverse. Patterson V.
RT., 301 Ark. 400, 784 S. W. 2d 777 (1990);
Farley V. Jester, 257 Ark.
686, 520 S. W. 2d 200 (1975) “The proper Administration of the law requires not
only that judges refrain from actual bias, but also that they avoid all appearances
of unfairness. “Bolden V. State, 262 Ark
718, 561 S.W. 2d 281 (1978).
12.)
To further amplify the heinous
depraved double standard of the laws Civil Rights violations, Court Order signed by Judge Sheila
Finnegan appointing an attorney to case #11-cv-5517, a Caucasian woman, with an
application to proceed informa pauperis, House worth $235,000.00, income of
$750.00, and money in the bank;
A- Federal Judge in
an Organized Racist Civil Rights Terrorists Act ORDERED widower, a
great-grandmother, a mother, a grand-mother
(Plaintiff) case #12-cv-11, filed
an affidavit with her informa pauperis application with her Complaint, Judge
Milton I. Shadur Senior Judge ORDERED her to pay $350 filing fee on or before
January 25, 2012 before her case could go forward;
U.S.
Supreme Court Digest 24 (1) GENERAL CONSPIRACY
U. S.
2003.
Essence of a conspiracy is an agreement to commit an unlawful act,-U.S. V. Jimenez Recio; 123 S Ct. 819, 537 U.S. 270, 154 L. Ed. 2d 744, on
remand 371 F 3d 1093.
Agreement to commit an unlawful act, which constitutes the essence of
a conspiracy, is a distinct evil that exist and be punished whether or not the
substantive crime ensues.-Id.
Conspiracy poses a threat to the public over and above the threat of the
commission of the relevant substantive crime, both because the combination in
crime makes more likely the commission of other crimes and because it decreases
the part from their path of criminality.-Id.
Wednesday April 26, 2006 Page 1, Illinois Political Machines help breed Corruption, Associated press writer Deanna Bellandi states” Illinois is apparently a Petri Dish for corruption. It is a real Breeding ground”
CANON 1
A judge should uphold the integrity and
independence of the judiciary.
The
integrity and independence of judges depend in turn upon their acting without
fear or favor. Although judges should be independent, they should comply with
the law, as well as provisions of this code. Public confidence in the
impartiality of the judiciary is maintained by the adherence of each judge to
this responsibility. Conversely, violation of this code diminishes public
confidence in the judiciary and thereby does injury to the system of government
under law.
Section
1983 of USCS contemplates the depravation of Civil Rights through the
unconstitutional application of a law by conspiracy or otherwise. Mansell V.
Saunders (CA 5 Fla) 372 F 2d 573, especially if the conspiracy was actually
carried into effect and plaintiff was thereby deprived of any rights
privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, the gist of the
action may be treated as one for the depravation of rights under 42 USCS 1983
Lewis V. Brautigam (CA 5 Fla) 227 F 2d 124, 55 Alr 2d 505.
794
S.W. 2d 692 (Mo. App. 1990) “No system of justice can function at its best or
maintain broad public confidence if a litigant can be compelled to submit his
case in a court where the litigant sincerely believes the judge is incompetent
or prejudicial …………{T}hat is the price to be paid for a judicial system that
seeks to free a litigant from a feeling of oppression”. State ex Rel. McNary V.
Jones, 472 S. W. 2d 637, 639-640 (Mo. App. 1971) Indeed, the right to
disqualify a judge is “one of the keystones of our legal administration
edifice” State ex Rel. Campbell V. Cohn, 606 S.W. 2d 399-401 (Mo. App. 1980).
It is vital to public confidence in the legal system that the decisions of the
court are not only fair, but also appear fair. Thus whether the
disqualification of a judge hinges on a statute or rule in favor of the right
to disqualify. A liberal construction is necessary if we wish to promote and
maintain public confidence in the judicial system. Kohn, 606 S.W. at 401; State
ex Rel. Ford Motor Co. V. Hess S.W. 2d 147, 148 (Mo. App1987).
FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH
NAUGHT
Wherefore the aforementioned reasons Appellant
respectfully requests that Judge Milton I. Shadur reinstate said complaint and
invoke jurisdiction on Aurora Loan Services and have the U.S. Marshall’s to
effect service on them;
2.) Reconsideration
for appointment of an attorney is enforced instanter.
3.)
Issue aRULE TO SHOW CAUSE FOR
FRAUD & CONTEMPT OF COURT, for any and all parties responsible for the
enforcement of this matter;
Respectfully submitted,
Alwanna Knight
Pro Se
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I
Alwanna Knight, plaintiff, certify that I have on this day deposited said
Notice of Motion and Motion to all parties recorded in said Notice of Motion
via regular mail, hand delivery, via fax transmission.
Dated
May 21, 2012
_____________________
Alwanna Knight
Pro Se
CERTIFICATE OF ATTORNEY PRO SE
I hereby
certify that I am the Pro Se Plaintiff-Appellant in the above entitled cause,
and as such prepared the above affidavit and is cognizant of the proceedings
there is and that such affidavit and application are made in good faith and not
for the purpose of hindrance or delay.
Respectfully Submitted
Alwanna Knight
5721
S. Justine
Chicago,
Illinois 60636
Monday May 21,
2012
No comments:
Post a Comment