JUDGES KENNETH RIPPLE, DIANE SYKES ANN C. WILLIAMS HAVE DEMONSTRATED UNBELIEVABLE ARROGANCE AND CONTEMPT FOR THE LAWS--NEITHER OF THEM SIGNED THE COURT ORDER.
NO SIGNATURES MAKES THE COURT ORDER VOID AND INVALID!
THE JUDGES NOT ONLY DID NOT RESPOND TO THE MERITS OF THE BRIEF PUT BEFORE THEM THEY "LIED" IN THE OPENING PART OF THEIR ORDER "IN 1987 THE STATE OF ILLINOIS ORDERED JOE LAWRENCE TO PAY CHILD SUPPORT ET AL.,"
THIS IS AN ADULTERATED LIE!!!! NO JUDGE ON THE STATE LEVEL HAVE BEEN ABLE TO COME UP WITH A CERTIFIED COURT ORDER WITH A JUDGES NAME ON IT STATING THE ABOVE FABRICATION!!!!
IN 1987 CASE#85 D 068184 RICHARD J. DALEY WAS THE STATES ATTORNEY, SEPTEMBER 17, 1987 THE CASE WAS DISMISSED WITH AN ATTORNEY ROBERT ANTHONY EGAN WAS THE ATTORNEY WE REQUESTED A JURY.
A JUDGES SIGNATURE IS ON THE COURT ORDER.
BECAUSE FRANCOISE LOUISE BARBERA HIGHTOWER'S FATHER WAS A POLICEMAN SOUGHT THE ASSISTANCE OF THE POLITICAL MACHINE, HE HAD ALREADY BEEN ARRESTED FOR IMPREGNATING ANOTHER BIOLOGICAL DAUGHTER, IN THAT EVERY IRISH AND POLIH JUDGE THIS CASE WENT BEFORE THEY FALSIFIED EVERY DOCUMENT NECESSARY TO FRAME AN INNOCENT MAN FOR HIS CHILD.
FRANCOISE IS A CHICAGO POLICE OFFICER TO THIS DAY.
MAY 18, 1988 COURT ORDER FOUND JOE LAWRENCE TO BE IN DEFAULT, NO JUDGES SIGNATURE ON COURT ORDER, NO ATTORNEY INFORMATION ON THE COURT ORDER BUT A JUDGES SIGNATURE IS ON THE COURT ORDER- COURT RECORDS REFLECT MR. LAWRENCE WAS NEVER SERVED AND HAD NO KNOWLEDGE, FRANCOISE'S ATTORNEY JOSEPH V. RODDY HAD REFILED THIS MATTER IN COURT NEVER NOTIFIED LAWRENCE OR HIS PRIOR ATTORNEY HAD ALL TYPE OF DOCUMENTS FABRICATED TO SAY HE WAS SERVED!!!!!
THE FEDERAL JUDGES HERE HAVE USED THEIR ROBES AND AUTHORITY TO PERPETRATE A HEINOUS FRAUD IN THE COURT IN AN ATTEMPT TO PROTECT ALL OF IT'S MEMBERS ASSOCIATED IN THIS DIABOLICAL CONSPIRACY.
THE JUDGES WERE SET UP BY MEMBERS IN THEIR OWN PARTY TO RECORD FALSE INFORMATION ON THE AFOREMENTIONED COURT ORDER SO AS TO TAKE HEAT OFF THE OTHER JUDGES INVOLVED;
RELIABLE SOURCES REVEAL THAT ALLEGEDLY A MALE JUDGE IN THE COURT OF APPEALS IS INTIMATELY INVOLVED WITH ANOTHER MALE JUDGE ON THE STATE LEVEL CIRCUIT COURT AND IS TRYING TO USE HIS JUDICIAL INFLUENCE TO PROTECT AND SAVE HIS LOVER, BOY FRIEND OR WHATEVER YOU CALL HIM.
NO ATTORNEY IN ANY GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES WERE ABLE TO IMPEACH THE MERITS OF ANY BRIEFS OR MOTIONS JOE LOUIS LAWRENCE FILED AND PUT BEFORE THE COURTS SO THE JUDGES HAVE ACTED OUTSIDE THEIR JURISDICTION BY ORDERING HIM NOT TO FILE ANY DOCUMENTS AND STATED HIS BRIEF WAS FRIVOLOUS.
NOW THE WORLD CAN SEE WHY CHICAGO IS THE MOST CORRUPT CITY IN THE NATION JUDGES ACTS AS RENEGADE GANGSTERS AND DEEM THEMSELVES UNTOUCHABLE FLAUNTING THEIR CORRUPT TACTICS IN FRONT OF THE FBI OPENLY CHALLENGING THEIR AUTHORITY TO COME AND REMOVE THEM FROM THEIR POSITIONS
IF A JUDGE WAS TO ORDER A DNA ON THE PLAINTIFF AND THE WOMAN'S GROWN DAUGHTER
(TYCEE HIGHTOWER) THE WORLD WOULD SEE THE HELL AND TORTURE AN INNOCENT MAN HAD TO ENDURE BEHIND THESE VICIOUS LIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Please find the envelope scanned dated May 31, 2012
SEE THE APRIL 14, 2012 POST HOW THE FEDERAL JUDGES DELIBERATELY FALSIFIED THIS COURT ORDER FRAMING AND SLANDERING AN INNOCENT MAN SIMPLY BECAUSE OF THE COLOR OF HIS SKIN.
SEE THE JULY 22, 2016 POST CORROBORATES FEDERAL JUDGES "FIXING" THIS CASE UPHOLDING TERRORIST ACTS OF UPDATED LYNCHING AT AN INNOCENT MAN BECAUSE #BLACKANDBROWNLIVESDONTMATTER
OFFICE OF THE CLERK
llnite(l ~W:es iliourt of J\pprals
Jlf or tJre ~cllentJr ili ircuit
21 g s. DEARBORN STREET
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60604-1874
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
Stf5t:.'3bu 1. 4 =--=
, ....
--
.,4-esPOs,-~
§«t~ , -- z ~-= ~Aillll!ll!l7
':) .._PI'lN[Y~
02 1M $00.65°
0004235631 MAY31 2012
MAilED FROM ZIP CODE 60604
i,/1, ,/1,,,, II",/,, II ,i ,,//", ii,,,, I!, i,, !/," /, /, /, i"/,1
NONPRECEDENTIAL
DISPOSITION
,. To be cited only in accordance with
Fed. R. App. P. 32.1
United States
Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Submitted May 2, 2012"
Decided
May 3, 2012
Before
KENNETH F. RIPPLE, Circuit Judge
ANN CLAIRE WILLIAMS, Circuit Judge
DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge
No. 11-3481
JOE LOUIS LAWRENCE,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
SECRETARY OF STATE, eta!.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District
-~-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------·
ORDER
In 1987 the State of Illinois ordered Joe Lawrence to
pay child support. He did not
comply, and consequently the
state revoked his driver's license. He appealed the revocation
to the Secretary of State, but his appeal was denied.
Lawrence also unsuccessfully sued his former
employers, International Brands Corporation and the Chicago Transit Authority,
in state and federal court for embezzlement and theft.
"The
appellees were not served with process in the district court and are not
participating in this appeal.
After examining the appellant's brief and the record, we have
concluded that oral argument is
unnecessary. Thus the appeal is submitted on the brief and record. See FED. R. APP. P. 34(a)(2)(c).
.>
No.11-3481
Page2
Lawrence
filed this suit pro se in federal court alleging that the child support order,
the driver' s-license revocation,
and the dismissal of his civil suit, were all caused by a broad
conspiracy of Illinois state
officials, and that their actions had violated his civil rights. He
also moved to proceed in forma pauperis. The district court dismissed the
complaint for
failure to state a claim and
denied Lawrence's
in forma pauperis
application. The court also
added that the complaint is too
"rambling and confusing" to give the defendants notice of
Lawrence's claims under Rule
8(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Lawrence
moved to disqualify the district
judge because of bias, but the court dismissed the motion as
moot because the case had already
been dismissed.
On
appeal Lawrence argues that the district court ignored his evidence and the law
when it dismissed the complaint. He also maintains that the district judge was
part of the conspiracy against him.
We
review de novo complaints dismissed because they fail to state a claim and comply with Rule 8(a). Wigod v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 673 F.3d 547, 555 (7th Cir. 2011) (failure to state a
claim); Borsellino v. Goldman Sachs
Grp., Inc., 477 F.3d 502, 507 (7th
Cir.
2007) (Rule 8). The district
court properly dismissed this action. Under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 8(a)(2), a complaint
must contain "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the
pleader is entitled to relief" so that defendants have fair notice of the
claims against them and the
grounds supporting those claims. Stanard v. Nygren, 658 F.3d
792, 797 (7th Cir. 2011). Several
of the defendants Lawrence has named are barely
mentioned in his complaint, and
he never explains why he believes they violated his civil
rights; two defendants, KentS.
Ray and the Amalgamated Transit Union, are not mentioned
at all. Even after we indulge in
the liberal construction that pro se complaints deserve,
Lawrence's complaint is
unintelligible. It exhibits "the lack of organization and basic
coherence [that] renders a
complaint too confusing to determine the facts that constitute the
alleged wrongful conduct." Stanard, 658 F.3d at 798. With nothing
else in the complaint to
state a claim, we find no error
in the district court's dismissal.
Lawrence
has a habit of filing frivolous lawsuits. In 2003 he attempted to bring a
class action prose, which was dismissed, because prose plaintiffs cannot represent
others. Lawrence v. Interstate Brands
Corp., No. 03 C 3754 (N.D. Ill. Aug.
8, 2003). He appealed, and we dismissed his
appeal after he ignored our repeated orders to file an opening brief.
Lawrence v. Interstate Brands Corp., No. 03-3359 (7th Cir. May 5, 2004). In 2008 we reviewed the
dismissal of his complaint against Interstate Brands Corporation, the Chicago
Transit
Authority, and the Illinois
Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission and
affirmed after concluding that
his suit was "patently frivolous." See Lawrence v. Interstate
Brands Corp.,
278 F. App'x 681 (7th Cir. May 28, 2008). Most recently, in 2011 he filed a
case
in state court, then filed a
"notice of removal" in federal court purporting to remove the case
from state jurisdiction. Lawrence v. Sec'y of State, No. 11-cv-05142 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 27, 2011).
No.ll-3481
Page3
The case was dismissed, since a plaintiff cannot
remove his own case. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 1441(a). We warn Lawrence that any further
frivolous litigation may subject him to
monetary fines and a filing bar. See Support Sys. Int'l v. Mack, 45 F.3d 185, 186 (7th Cir. 1995).
AFFIRMED.
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT
Everett
McKinley Dirksen United States Courthouse Office of the Clerk
Room 2722-219 S. Dearborn Street Phone: (312) 435-5850
Chicago, Illinois 60604 ww
w .ca7.uscourts.gov
FINAL JUDGMENT
May 3,
2012
Before:
No.: 11-3481
KENNETH F. RIPPLE, Circuit Judge
ANN CLAIRE WILLIAMS, Circuit
Judge
DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge
JOE LOUIS LAWRENCE,
Plaintiff- Appellant
v.
SECRETARY OF STATE, et al.,
District Court No: 1:11-cv-06887
Northern District of Illinois,
Eastern Division
District Judge john W. Darrah
The judgment of the District Court is AFFIRMED in
accordance with the decision of this court entered on this date.
form name:
c7_Fina!Judgment(form ID: 132)
11-3481
Joe Louis Lawrence
P.O. Box 490075
Chicago, IL 60649-0000
No comments:
Post a Comment