Wikipedia Racial Injustice in Chicago Courts

Search results

Tuesday, March 22, 2016

CHICAGO DEMOCRATS OF THE POLITICAL MACHINE DEMONSTRATING RACIAL HATRED & JIM CROW ACTS OUTLAWED BY THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT

TAKE AN IN DEPTH LOOK AT HOW PEOPLE OF COLOR ARE DESTROYED "LYNCHED" BY REPLACING THE ROPES AS WE ALL KNOW SO WELL BUT BY UNJUST UNEQUAL APPLICATION OF THE LAWS

PRAYERS DO WORK TWITTER FRIENDS

THE CHICAGO SUN TIMES REPORTERS NEED TO BE APPLAUDED FOR THEIR OBJECTIVE REPORTING TIM NOVACK, CHRIS DUMKE AND RICH HEIN CHRIS FUSCO.

WHEN CHA LEARNED THAT AN AFRICAN AMERICAN WOMAN WAS LIVING IN BRIDGEPORT WHICH HISTORICALLY HATED PEOPLE OF COLOR THEY WOULD GET BEAT BY THE RACIST WHITES IN THAT AREA WHEN GROWING UP POLICE USE TO PICK UP YOUNG MEN OUT PAST CURFEW AND DROP THEM OFF IN THAT AREA SO THAT THEY COULD GET BEAT UP.

LINDA TURPIN HAVE TO MOVE SHE PAYS NO RENT TO LIVE IN A FIVE BEDROOM HOUSE BUT WILL HAVE TO MOVE BECAUSE OF NEW VOUCHER RULES.

BUT THE WHITES MAKING AS MUCH AS $182,000.00 OR $100,000+ LIVING DOWNTOWN OR LIVING IN OPPORTUNITY AREAS ARE NOT REQUIRED TO MOVE OR LOSE THEIR VOUCHERS.

THE DEMOCRATS WANT YOU TO KEEP VOTING FOR THEM IN OFFICE SO THAT THEY CAN CONTINUE TO DESTROY ETHNIC GROUPS IN ACCORDANCE TO THE DOCTRINES OF THE REAL DEMOCRATIC PARTY.


________________________________________________________________________

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT
OF
COOK COUNTY, ILLNOIS
CHANCERY DIVISION
)
In Re Racial Discrimination                          )                            2015 CH 01670
/Source Income Violations                            )
Housing Matters:                                           )                            Hon. F. U. Valderrama     
Joe Louis Lawrence                                      )                            Room   2305  
            Petitioner                                            )                                      
                                                                       )                    
            V                                                        )        
420 East Ohio, Chicago Housing Authority  )
345 East Ohio, City of Chicago,Commission)
 On Human Relations                                     )                                                      
           Respondents                                         )                                                        
________________________________________________________________________

                                      Motion to Supplement
 Motion for Disqualification of Judge for Cause Due to Bias (Civil Rights Violations) and or Prejudice pursuant to S.H.A. 735 ILCS 5/2 ---1001 (a) (2,3) and or Vacate Nov 2nd & Nov 13th Orders Due to “Fraud” “Organized Conspiracy” 

            Now comes  Plaintiff, Counsel Pro Se Joe Louis Lawrence in this cause, files herewith his affidavit, factually establishing the Bias (Civil Rights Violations) Prejudice alleged herein, with exhibits, in accordance to Supreme Court of Illinois and Canon rules in accordance to the American Jurisprudence and pleadings (rev.) to show that the Honorable  F. U. Valerrama  has a Personal Bias  and or Prejudice but has allegedly engaged in an “Organized Conspiracy” against the Petitioner and have corroborated beyond the preponderance of the evidence standards by engaging in a criminal conspiracy assisting the Defendants denying every unchallenged Motion accompanied by an affidavit, he had  personal knowledge of undisputed evidentiary facts demonstrating the Defendants were in fact served but ignored the laws and affidavits making the Nov. 2nd & Nov. 13th orders void; 

Said judge treated defendant as if he was a Deportee, Illegal Immigrant or non U.S. citizen ignored all documents and is attempting to enforce orders absent his jurisdiction due to “Fraud Bias and or Prejudice”;

Based thereon Plaintiff respectfully moves that the aforementioned Motion be supplemented as additional evidence demonstrating the veracity that the  Honorable F. U. Valderrama is Bias and or Prejudice engaging in acts of an alleged “Organized Conspiracy” prohibiting him from proceeding any further herein; whereby, said orders of Nov. 2nd and Nov. 13th orders needs to be vacated Instanter and that the Honorable Timothy C. Evans Chief Judge or Presiding Judge of Chancery of the Circuit Court of Cook County assign this matter accordingly to the judge or judges in which this matter is before and notify Federal Officials to ascertain other violations of the laws pursuant to Petitioners Affidavits and the judges’ actions in this matter.

Federal Officials should be summoned to ascertain what other criminal allegations is present that are being ignored pursuant to the threats Judge Valderrama made in open court at the Plaintiff, “I didn’t like your motion either and apparently you mistook my kindness for weakness! Sanctions will be imposed upon you since you want to be a lawyer you will be treated like a lawyer”!

Furthermore, he never opened his mouth to admonish any of the attorneys who committed perjury saying they were never served but told the Plaintiff in a hostile “he better tread lightly” there were no Sheriff’s in the court room when this took place.

This is the first Motion to Supplement but second Motion to recuse this judge for cause Pursuant to S.H.A. 735 ILCS 5/2---1001 (a) (3) in this cause made by the movant, the party seeking substitution must establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, actual prejudice and must demonstrate, through specific allegations supported by affidavit, facts that if true, constitute actual Prejudice;   












Respectfully Submitted,

By:   _________________          

                                                                             Joe Louis Lawrence
                                                                                                         Counsel Pro Se
                                                                                                        P. O. Box 490075
                                                                                          312 927-4210
                                                                        
STATE OF ILLINOIS   )
                                        )
COUNTY OF COOK    )

                                                       AFFIDAVIT

In support of Motion to Supplement Motion to Disqualify Judge F. U. Valderrama for Bias and or Prejudice pursuant to S.H.A. 735 ILCS 5/2 ---1001 (a) (2,3)  and or Vacate Nov 2, and Nov. 13, 2015 Orders due to “Fraud” and alleged “Organized Conspiracy” where Criminal Conspiracy Civil Rights were Violated:

1.)   I am Joe Louis Lawrence, Counsel Pro Se, Petitioner in this cause, being first duly sworn on oath deposes and states, as follows;

A-    That on May 8, 2015, City of Chicago, Commission on Human Relations investigator Albert Roberson received;
B-    Hereto attached, August 3, 2014, email to Team Supervisor “Notice of Official Complaint Re Racial Discrimination in CHA Voucher Program et al.
C-    Hereto attached, July 11, 2014, email from Chris Klepper stating the rents are to high etc.
D-    Hereto attached, August 25, 2014, email sent to CHA Ya Quavia Gooden and others re Voucher Discrimination and Racial Discrimination.
E-     Fax letters sent to CHA Chairman Michael Merchant, September 28, and October 17, 2014 detailing Racial Discrimination in the CHA voucher program.


2.)     That former Hearing Officer now Circuit Court Judge Hon Fredrick H. Bates ordered the CHA to reinstate Plaintiff’s voucher 9727767 not once but twice they circumvented his authority and directive by continuously racially harassing him and still removed him from the voucher program for trying to move into the Mobility Opportunity areas of the city;

3.)     It has been alleged that vouchers are sold to the whites for $1500.00 and the only way they can receive the vouchers qualified persons of color have to be unlawfully removed from the program;

4.)     That Christine Klepper of the Housing Choice Voucher program stated to the Plaintiff, “YOU SHOULD CONSIDER SOMETHING LESS EXPENSIVE” CHA did not negotiate rent for the Plaintiff to rent in the opportunity areas because he was the wrong skin color;

5.)     That Christine Klepper, Melanie Toney and Jessie McDaniels stated emphatically no whites ever came through the Mobility program and that the units Plaintiff applied at did not have African Americans in them you had to have great credit scores and large security deposits to move in those units, CHA exercised  “Jim Crow” tactics making sure qualified applicants like the plaintiff did not move into said units;

6.)     That Plaintiff had credit scores of 716 and had 2 professional white Realtors to ascertain units for him 420 East Ohio was obtained from one Realtor, they took all of money that was placed as a deposit CHA successfully negotiated the rent, they refused him and kept his money because he and family was the wrong skin color;

7.)     That Plaintiff had another Realtor to ascertain other units 345 East Ohio, The Streeter, 355 East Ohio, 175 North Wacker, K2 Apartments, 365 N. Halsted, Trio Apartments, 660 West Wayman, 121 Chestnut, Amli Management, every building stated they accepted the Housing Choice Voucher but refused him when his ethnicity was ascertained and CHA was in cahoots with this Civil Rights Violation;

8.)     That Judge Valderama received an Affidavit accompanied with the Motion Objecting any Dismissal Due to Fraud et al (filed Oct. 15, 2015 and Re Noticed Nov. 5, 2015) he said Page 5, Par. A Petition for Rule to show Cause et al (filed Nov. 5, 2015) “that I have facts that is clear you would not have made it this far without them” “this is not an evidentiary hearing the city is not arguing your facts that is another matter”     
A-   The judge had knowledge and was in fact aware of all Racist Criminal Acts lodged at the Plaintiff in that Group Ex J, Crain’s Business article Poor families use supervouchers to rent in city’s priciest buildings;

B-   That Ex K, Page 2 shows no open balances but child support was placed on the credit report illegally as members of the Democratic Machine has engaged in a sophisticated organized Extortion operation claiming child support was owed as an excuse to unlawfully steal wages and monies from the Plaintiff, in that Alderman Edward Burke allegedly organized and engineered the appointment of his Irish or Polish ethnic judges to do his bidding in cases that required “FIXING”;

C-   That Page 4, under 2-20-2014, child support went down 74% from $68,540.00 to $17,519.00 and shows someone went into said credit file 45 times; 

9.)     That former Congressman Aaron Schock issued a press release (July 28, 2014) Investigation into Chicago Housing Authority “SuperVoucher” program it was after this investigation CHA went from negotiating rent from $5000.00 for individuals living in the Mobility areas to allegedly $3000.00

10.)   That CHA Mobility via Melanie Toney advised Plaintiff to apply at 71 West Hubbard, Amli an attorney (Donte) at the CHA stopped the process said the rent was too high but the manager had him to fill out an application said they accepted the voucher but needed something else from CHA to go with the paperwork;

11.) That former CEO Michael Merchant received faxes and phone calls describing the CHA voucher program is a fraud and racist front to house white persons at the expense of removing qualified applicants of color like the Plaintiff;
A-    Rahm Emmanuel was in error when he stated, “Tuesday March 15, 2016 from the Sun Times The Chicago Housing Authority’s voucher program is a well- intentioned policy ‘gone awry’,” hereto attached, Gr Ex A, Sun Times Article;

B-    That if the Mayor believed what he was saying was correct, he had knowledge of Plaintiff being HOMELESS with a Section 8 Voucher for 4 years did nothing said nothing and the City is in DEFAULT on a $5 Million Dollar Administrative Review Complaint and is allegedly seeking the support of Alderman Edward Burke to work his magic by finding a Racist or Inferior judge to Dismiss this valid legal claim, that corrupt judges under his authority and control do so eloquently engaging in “Jim Crow” practices;

C-    Hereto attached, Gr Ex B, Directed Evidence with a Prima Facie showing CHA officials engaging in Housing Discrimination, Page 1, Par. 4 from Sun Times article, “Lai says the woman wanted to lease his three bedroom, three and a half bath home, which has a library and is within walking distance of Soldier Field and the lakefront”

D-    Hereto attached, Gr Ex 1, Email sent to 345 East Ohio, Sept. 6, 2013, (Eve Aywaz Sales Consultant Village Green) and her reply to Plaintiff, she said, “I just want to update you that a voucher can be used toward rent but we qualify tenants based off 2.5 times the monthly income to rent ratio. This means that unit 4409 is $4080 X 12 X 2.5 = $146,000.00 and that is the documentation we need of suggested income to be approved to live in the building.”   

E-     Hereto attached, Gr Ex 10, hand written note by John Paul Losetto stating, “In order to qualify must make 33% total $182,880.00” with his voucher in order to live at 345 East Ohio attorney Christian T Novay can attest to this veracity.

F-     Plaintiff had a 3 bedroom voucher and has been DENIED to live in every building in the opportunity area because of Plaintiff’s skin color or alleged inability to have purchased his voucher for $1500; thereby validating the veracity of all pleadings properly plead to by all attorneys in this matter as the judge tried to cover this matter up;

G-    Hereto attached, Gr Ex C, Page 4, Par. 6, Garrison Hearst retired San Francisco Running Back, “He says he was contacted by a real estate agent who had a prospective tenant with a voucher, he was asking for $3,900 a month for rent” “CHA agreed to pay $3,406 a month for rent” “with the tenant paying $884 and the taxpayers picking up $2,522”.

12.)    That Separate, Unequal Ignored by Steve Bogira of the Chicago Reader, hereto attached, Gr Ex D, Page 2 Par. 1, “The case of “Dorothy Gautreaux v. Chicago Housing Authority, concerned the location of public housing—projects were being built only in the city’s black ghettos because white didn’t want blacks in their neighborhoods. But the broader issue, as judge Austin noted, was residential racial segregation, a matter of much concern back then”

13.)    That the racist administrators of the CHA and managers of various buildings in the Mobility program have managed to circumvent the Federal judge Austin’s ruling prohibiting racial segregation in housing, Page 3, Par 3, In 1971, the Gautreaux case was still inching along in judge Austin’s courtroom ….the CHA complied with Austin’s order to plan public housing in white neighborhoods as well as black by listing 235 proposed sites in white neighborhoods. But the sites needed city approval. Mayor Richard J. Daley quickly called the proposal “detrimental” and said the units “should not be built”. His Republican opponent, Richard Friedman, declined to guarantee to block the units if elected, noting open housing was “the law of the land”. The Independent Voters of Illinois called Daley “Racist” because of his opposition to the sites. But Daley knew “racist” was better in Chicago than “integrationist”. The Tribune observed afterward that Friedman’s campaign had become a “lost cause” because of his stance on the housing list”
14.)  Benedict J Fernandez, Anti black demonstration, chicago,1959:    

Anti Black demonstration in Chicago in 1959; The young children from this era are still inciting Racist Hatred from the Democratic Party within the Political Machine.         

Chicago, 1957: a couple who moved into an all-white neighborhood looking at graffiti in front of their home.:
15.) Chicago, 1957: a couple who moved into an all-white neighborhood looking at graffiti in front of their home.

16.)  That the Defendants along with every attorney and parties properly Noticed of the up-dated “Lynchings being imposed by the legal system either using corrupt racist judges or inferior incompetent judges are not using the ropes to hang persons of color or water hoses against them or dogs but unjust unlawful applications of the laws, in that everyone is reading the mayhem inflicted on an innocent because they are Democrats this is the sick norm many have systematically grown to accept;

17.)  That members of the Democratic Political Machine have demonstrated their Racial hatred against the Plaintiff but will promise them anything for a vote have deployed 21 Circuit Court judges, 14 Appellate Court Judges and about 4 Supreme Court judges to ignore and close their eyes to unlawful “Lynchings where Plaintiff was locked up 5 times for allegedly owing child support for a child that was not his when in fact the case was properly DISMISSED September 17, 1987, 85 D 068185, both paternity tests excluded him from paternity but was altered to reflect he was the father. Richard J. Daley who was the States Attorney did not want any part of this mess.

Jim Crow tactics had to be called on and enforced deploying an entire brigade of corrupt racist inferior judges to do what was required by enforcing a case where Plaintiff was never served to appear before the court no paternity tests no signed orders from any judge, like the aforementioned picture many took great pleasure in Plaintiff’s demise;   They’re proud of this murder.:  
Lynching has taken on a different identity as demonstrated in this case while groups of whites stand by frolicking at a Black man hanging from a tree from a rope, racial injustice where several attorneys are in court trying to Bully and intimidate the Plaintiff as they appear before an inferior Black man wearing a robe the same level of Democratic Racial Hatred is still being spewed in a Terrorist fashion as many are still ignoring the plights of innocent men of color victimized by these acts.

In the wake of extensive investigations by Federal Law enforcement authorities revealing widespread corruption in the Illinois court system (“Operation Greylord”) and elsewhere, indicating not only that significant professional misconduct was occurring but also that the requirement to report misconduct was frequently ignored, particularly in the cases of judges with regard to the conduct of other judges.

18.) That because Associate judges are politically appointed makes it difficult for an individual to receive Equal Protection of the Laws because the perpetrators may be “Machine Democrats” acting as Terrorist violating the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871, (Page 3, Par 2A- N of page5 of the 2nd Amended Complaint properly plead to by all Defendants) which prohibits these very criminal acts, and demonstrates Bias and or Prejudiced conduct surpassing the Preponderance of Evidence legal standard required in this matter; Ill. S. Ct. R. 286 (a) Pinnacle Corp. v Village of Lake in the Hills, 258 Ill. App 3d 205, “the failure to respond to an adversary pleadings by standing on a Motion to dismiss rather than filing an answer, constitutes an admission of all well pleaded facts”
A-    Pursuant to Page 9, Lines. 6-15, of the Court Transcript, Plaintiff recited the very Supreme Court Rule 286, the judge exercised Bias and or Prejudiced, Page 9, Line 16-24, Page 10, Lines 1-5 said ”Okay,. The only issue Mr. Lawrence, I’m not taking issue any issue with that proposition, et al. Overruled said Objection!

B-   That judge Michael F. Otto who lost a bid to become a judge in the primary but was appointed by the Illinois Supreme Court as an Associate judge has used his unlawful authority to have a bank to steal a ministers home trying to sell the home expeditiously to cover up the plethora of criminal acts in the foreclosure proceeding case #12 CH 24000, this is not the first case Plaintiff’s Godmother Alwanna Knight was before Judge Atkins where she had filed bankruptcy had the debt discharged in Federal Court but Atkins was without authority none of the bank attorneys were able to argue meritoriously any defense, judge Atkins was replaced by a female judge very professional and seemingly articulate in the laws got on the bench and informed the Plaintiff, she understood what, he was trying to do for his mother but he did not have his law license yet her home was taken and sold illegally;   

That because of the above; Fraud admissibility great latitude is permitted in proving fraud C.J.S. Fraud 104 ET Seg. Fraud 51-57. where a question of fraud and deceit is the issue involved in a case,  great latitude is ordinarily permitted in the introduction of evidence, and courts allow the greatest liberality in the method of examination and in the scope of inquiry Vigus V. O’Bannon, 1886 8 N.E 788, 118 ILL 334. Hazelton V. Carolus, 1907 132 ILL. App. 512.
C-    

In Re Marriage of O’Brien 912 N.E. 2d 729 (Ill App. 2 Dist. 2009),
When a party moves for substitution of the trial judge for cause based upon an alleged violation of rule setting forth mandatory bases for recusal, the movant need only show the existence of that factor and that an objective, reasonable person would conclude that the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned, and need not show actual prejudice. S.H.A. 735 ILCS 5/2-----1001 (a) (3); Sup. Ct. Rule 63 (C) (1).
  
D-   The Judge demonstrated Bias and or Prejudice conduct stated, “he had no knowledge of the Clerk of the Circuit Court issuing out Summons in Certified Mail” CHA attorney TB King, Christian Novay agreed with the judge Feb 27, 2015;

E-   Anne Harris of Seyfarth & Shaw was the only attorney to admit receiving certified mail and the summons a court reporter was present and recorded the entire matter;  

F-   Said Judge had jurisdiction of the case when he unlawfully dismissed the Rule to Show Cause et al Feb. 27, 2015, but because of Bias and or Prejudice conduct unlawfully used his judicious authority to assist the defendants, by dismissing said Amended Petition for Rule to Show Cause et al. because the defendants were still claiming they had not been served, March 20, 2015;

    735 ILCS 5/2—1001(a)(3) (West 2006). Although the statute does not define “cause”, Illinois courts have held that in such circumstances, actual prejudice has been required to FORCE REMOVAL of a judge from a case, that is , either prejudicial trial conduct or personal bias. Rosewood Corp. n Transamerica Insurance Co., 57 Ill 2d 247, 311 N.E. 2d 673 (1974; In re Marriage of Kozloff, 101 Ill 2d 526, 532, 79 Ill. Dec 165 463 N.E. 2d 719 (1984); see also People v. Vance, 76 Ill. 2d 171, 181, 28 Ill. Dec. 508, 390 N.E. 2d 867 (1979). Moreover, in construing the term “cause” for purposes of a substitution once a substantial ruling has been made in a case, Illinois courts have consistently required actual prejudice to be established, not just under the current statute, but under every former version of the statute

             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 reasonably 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. R.T., 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).

19.) The facts and reasons for the belief that such Bias and or Prejudice  conduct with incredible corroboration and Civil Rights Violations exists, are that, the following laws were noticeably maliciously violated, said Judge having complete knowledge and was aware of all “fraudulent” acts perpetrated at the Plaintiff but ignored them and engaged in the same conspiracy, either ignored Petitioners Motions or Petitions accompanied with affidavits but granted every frivolous motion defendants filed without any affidavits;

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

A-     That because the judge has committed a series of “Fraudulent Errors” a Motion for Reconsideration is MOOT because of the pattern of deliberate “Anarchy” in his rulings trying to protect the Defendants because they are in DEFAULT and SUMMARY JUDGMENT WITH ORDER WAS IN FACT PROPER attorneys needed the judge or any judge to act outside of their judicial immunity provisions by violating the laws as demonstrated in this matter;

B-  That due to the judges Bias and or Prejudice conduct pursuant to Sup Ct Rule 71, Sufficient for Removal, conduct which does not constitute a criminal offense may be sufficiently violative of the Judicial Canons to warrant removal for cause. Napolitano v Ward, 457 F 2d 279 (7th Cir.), cert denied, 409 U.S. 1037, 93 S. Ct. 512, 34 L. Ed. 2d 486 (1972).

C-    Said Judge violated all Rules of law Canon Ethics, Code of Judicial Conduct Rule 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.

20.)    Said judge demonstrated Bias and or Prejudice conduct when he acted outside of his jurisdiction threatening the Plaintiff to impose Sanctions on him because he did like his Motion or the fact he respectfully objected to CHA Attorney giving an oral argument because none of them filed proper appearances before the court and that oral arguments had no merits where proper affidavits had accompanied all motions; Most important Judge Valderrama and attorneys knew of this racial injustice but was trying diligently to keep these facts suppressed. Eychaner v. Gross, 202 Ill. 2d 228, 280, 269 Ill. Dec. 80, 779 N. E. 2d 1115 (2002).

21.)    That this is how members of the Democratic Political Machine really feel about people of color they only want your vote but exercise every means necessary making sure persons of color are oppressed and DENIED equal opportunities under the United States Constitution

   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).    

22.)  That the November 2, and November 13, 2015 court orders are fact void:
  
A-   Ill. App. (1st Dist. 2000) “A VOID Judgment or ORDER” is one that is entered by a court lacking jurisdiction over the parties or the subject matter, or lacking the inherent power to enter the particular order of judgment or where the order was procured by FRAUD—in re Adoption of E.L., 248 Ill. Dec. 171, 733 N.E. 2d 846, 315 Ill. App. 3d 137-Judgm 7, 16, 375

          

                                                 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 the 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.

23.)That because  of Judge Valderrama’s Bias and or Prejudice conduct overt acts of acting outside of the provisions of judicial immunity Dismissed Plaintiff’s Motion for Default & Summary Judgment with Affidavit and Order March 30, 2015;
A-   Plaintiff was articulate and respectable which made the judge noticeably agitated, he asked the Plaintiff in his Motion for Summary judgment did he attach service to the Motion? Plaintiff responded by saying pursuant to my affidavit unchallenged and court files certified -----The judge interrupted saying didn’t I tell you, I don’t accept summons in certified mail? In a very angry tone! Trying to provoke the Plaintiff;


A judge’s disrespect for the rules of court demonstrates disrespect for the law. Judges are disciplined under Canon 2A for violating court rules and procedures. Judge ignored mandated witness order in attempt to accommodate witnesses’ schedules; Citing Canon 2A the court noted, “[a] court’s indifference to clearly stated rules breeds disrespect for and discontent with our justice system. Government cannot demand respect of the laws by its citizens when its tribunals ignore those very same laws”)

24.)Jim Crow Laws are still being enacted and enforced in Chicago, Illinois courts Black and Brown lives simply don’t matter unless you give your soul to Terrorists and abide by their rules and doctrines;   
In the 20th century, the Supreme Court began to overturn Jim Crow laws on constitutional grounds. In Buchanan v. Warley 245 US 60 (1917), the court held that a Kentucky law could not require residential segregation. The Supreme Court in 1946, in Irene Morgan v. Virginia ruled segregation in interstate transportation to be unconstitutional, in an application of the commerce clause of the Constitution. It was not until 1954 in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka 347 US 483 that the court held that separate facilities were inherently unequal in the area of public schools, effectively overturning Plessy v. Ferguson, and outlawing Jim Crow in other areas of society as well. This landmark case consisted of complaints filed in the states of Delaware (Gebhart v. Belton); South Carolina (Briggs v. Elliott); Virginia (Davis v. County School Board of Prince Edward County); and Washington, D.C. (Spottswode Bolling v. C. Melvin Sharpe). These decisions, along with other cases such as McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Board of Regents 339 US 637 (1950), NAACP v. Alabama 357 US 449 (1958), and Boynton v. Virginia 364 US 454 (1960), slowly dismantled the state-sponsored segregation imposed by Jim Crow laws.
As the color line itself solidified at the turn of the nineteenth century, Jim Crow imposed on black people clear tactical disadvantages: restricted economic possibilities, narrow educational opportunities, inadequate housing options, high rates of death and disablement, persistent unemployment, and unrelenting poverty. Inasmuch as Jim Crow represented the race problem described by Gunnar Myrdal (18981987) in his 1944 treatise The American Dilemma, it was Jim Crow that created the race quandary; whites constructed the obstacles African Americans confronted, while also blaming them for their conditions, denying them access to the resources of problem solving, and daring themunder threat of violenceto complain, protest, or advance.
Finally, protests or challenges to Jim Crow often proved futile, given law enforcements complicity in the structure. From emancipation to the turn of the century, the Ku Klux Klan operated as a paramilitary arm of the Democratic Party in the South. The Klan, nightriders, red shirts, and other white terrorists intimidated African Americans with personal attacks, school burnings, and lynching’s. African Americans rarely served as policemen, sheriffs, or deputies before the late 1940s. During the 1950s and 1960s, the connections between municipal and state governments, law enforcement, and racial violence were well known by officials and citizens alike. White officers were known to harass black people, disrupt black neighborhoods, and assault black women. Arrested for inflated charges, denied satisfactory counsel, and serving harsh sentences, African Americans were further disadvantaged in the courtroom. Rarely did they receive good counsel, nor could they serve on juries. When black lawyers could appear in the courtroom to argue cases, white judges and juries rarely listened. All-white juries decided against black defendants, even in the most obvious cases of innocence, but rarely convicted white defendants, despite evidence of guilt. African Americansincluding the innocentsuffered the harsher punishments of extended jail time, forced farm labor, and peonage. Even women could be placed on the chain gangs working the roads and tracks across the South.




Jim Crow Laws: Illinois
This list contains Jim Crow laws and anti-Jim Crow laws. (Please note the source of this list in the footnotes.)
1865: Barred residency segregation [Statute]
Repealed 1853 act making it a misdemeanor for a Negro to move to Illinois.
1874: Barred school segregation [Statute]
Boards of education prohibited from excluding any child on account of color from the public schools. Penalty: Those who excluded children based on race would be fined between $5 and $100. Those who threatened a child from attending a public school were subject to a fine up to $25.
1885: Barred public accommodation segregation [Statute]
Made inns, restaurants, barber shops, public transportation, theaters and places of public amusement available to all persons. Penalty: Violators of the act would be fined between $25 and $500, paid to the victim, and would also be guilty of a misdemeanor, and subject to a fine of up to $500.
1896: Barred school segregation [Statute]
Prohibited school officers from excluding children from public schools on the basis of color. Penalty: $5 to $100.
1897: Barred public accommodation segregation [Statute]
1885 law amended to include hotels, soda-fountains, saloons, bathrooms, theaters, skating-rinks, concerts, cafes, bicycle rinks, elevators, ice cream parlors, railroads, stages, streetcars and boats.
1903: Barred public accommodation segregation [Statute]
1885 law extended to include funeral hearses as list of public services available to all persons.
1911: Barred public accommodations segregation [Statute]
Amendment to 1885 Civil Rights law stating that cemeteries could not discriminate based on race the choice of burial plots for burying the dead.
1917: Antidefamation [Statute]
Unlawful to "manufacture, sell or offer for sale, advertise or publish, prsent or exhibit in any public place any lithograph, moving picture, play, drama or sketch, which publication or exhibition portrays depravity, criminality, unchastity, or lack of virtue of a class of citizens, of any race, color, creed or religion...which exposes the citizens of any race, color, creed or religion to contempt, derision, or obloquy or which is productive of breach of the peace or riots." Penalty: Misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of between $50 and $200.
1927: Housing [Municipal Code]
Chicago adopted racially restrictive housing covenants beginning in 1927, although other tactics had been used in earlier years to maintain a segregated city. At one time, as much as 80 percent of the city may have been covered by restrictive covenants. In 1924, Nathan MacChesney, a prominent Chicago attorney and a member of the Chicago Planning Commission, drafted an addition to the Code of Ethics of the National Association of Real Estate Boards that "forbade realtors to introduce members of any race or nationality" into neighborhoods where their presence would damage property values. In 1927, MacChesney drafted a model racial restrictive covenant for the Chicago Real Estate Board, solely targeting African Americans. The Chicago Real Estate Board promoted the covenant to YMCAs, churches, women's clubs, PTAs, Kiwanis clubs, chambers of commerce and property owners' associations. Hyde Park, Woodlawn, Park Manor, South Shore, and other neighborhoods on Chicago's South Side adjacent to the so-called "black belt," responded as well as outlying Chicago neighborhoods and suburbs. Additionally, the University of Chicago was a strong supporter of the covenant campaign in Washington Park, although they denied their affiliation for many years. In 1948, the United States Supreme Court ruled that enforcement of racial restrictive covenants was unconstitutional. The Supreme Court's ruling, however, did not put an end to the problem of blacks finding adequate housing. Homeowner associations continued to push for segregation. Shortly after the court decision, the Woodlawn Property Owners wrote:
If the colored people are convinced that life in Woodlawn would be unbearable, they would not want to come in. There must be ways and means to keep whites from selling, causing colored not to want to come in because life here would be unbearable. We are going to save Woodlawn for ourselves and our children!
(Deeds of Mistrust: Race, Housing, and Restrictive Covenants in Chicago, 1900-1950)
1933: Civil rights protection [Statute]
Outlawed racial discrimination. Penalty: Criminal prosecution and damages.
1933: Barred employment discrimination [Statute]
Prohibited discrimination and intimidation on account of race or color in employment under contracts for public buildings or public works. Penalties: $100 for each offense. Fines up to $500 and or imprisonment up to 30 days.
1953: Housing [Municipal Code]
In August 1953, the first black family to move into Trumbull Park, an all-white project of the Chicago Housing Authority, came under attack by nearly fifty teenagers who hurled stones, bricks and racial slurs at their apartment. Venturing outside of their home was equally frightening, and required a police escort. Additionally, blacks traveling through the area now became targets of violence. As more black families moved into the project, they, too, were harassed daily. When blacks received a permit to organize a baseball game at the neighborhood park, tensions intensified. A hostile crowd gathered at the park. When a firecracker tossed from the crowd hit a player, the police sat motionless. A player who went to retrieve a foul ball was attacked by the crowd and a fight broke out. When the police arrested the white who started the fight, the crowd quickly turned their frustrations on the police. Reactions intensified after the fight and there was talk among whites to "burn the dirty bastards out."
Another disturbing incident occurred in July 1954 when three black women attended mass at a local Catholic church. After the mass the women waited until most of the crowd had left and exited from a side door. A crowd of about thirty awaited the women as they left the church. One white woman was so incensed that she attacked the black women with her umbrella. Father Michael Commins, the rector of the church, reproached his parishioners in a bulletin later that month, saying, "Hissing, hooting and assaulting anyone for going to Mass is very un-Christian like." Although there was much less violence within Trumbull Park by the early 1960s, anti-black sentiments were still firmly in place. Neighborhood taverns featured Members Only signs, African Americans stayed away from the park, the public swimming pool and local churches. As Arnold R. Hirsch wrote in a journal article published on Trumbull Park, "The decade of resistance that prevented all but a token of African American presence maintained South Deering as a white domain even as King negotiated the desegregation of Birmingham, Alabama." (Massive Resistance in the Urban North: Trumbull Park, Chicago, 1953-1966, The Journal of American History, Sept. 1995)
1956: Barred health care segregation [Municipal Code]
No hospital to deny to any person admission for care or treatment on account of race, color, creed or national origin.
1957: Barred housing segregation [Statute]
Neighborhood redevelopment corporations must not discriminate.
1957: Barred school segregation [Statute]
No exclusion or segregation in districts of fewer than 1,000 persons. Penalty: $5 to $100.
1958: Barred National Guard segregation [Statute]
Prohibited segregation or discrimination within state National Guard.

FOOTNOTES:
"The History of Jim Crow," n.d., <http://jimcrowhistory.org> (27 November 2009).

25.)That despite a Federal Judges’ ruling in 1969, hereto attached, Gr Ex E, against the Chicago Housing Authority, 304 F Supp. 736, United States District Court, N. D. Illinois Eastern District, CHA officials have blatantly violated this court order with the assistance of Democrats in the Political Machine as they continue to enforce “Jim Crow” laws upholding racist doctrines so as to keep persons of color oppressed and disenfranchised by every means necessary as demonstrated in this matter;     
A-   That judges are politically appointed as Associate judges in return they uphold the racist doctrines outlawed by the United States Supreme Court;
 
U. S Sup 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 SCt. 819, 537 U.S. 270, 154 L.Ed.2d 744, on remand 371F.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.
 
CONSPIRACY
Fraud maybe inferred from nature of acts complained of, individual and collective interest of alleged conspirators, situation, intimacy, and relation of parties at time of commission of acts, and generally all circumstances preceding and attending culmination of claimed conspiracy Illinois Rockford Corp. V. Kulp, 1968, 242 N.E. 2d 228, 41 ILL. 2d 215.
 
      Conspirators to be guilty of offense need not have entered into conspiracy at same time or have taken part in all its actions. People V. Hardison, 1985, 911 Dec. 162, 108. Requisite mens rea elements of conspiracy are satisfied upon showings of agreement of offense with intent that offense be committed; Actus reas element is satisfied of act in furtherance of agreement People V. Mordick, 1981, 50 ILL, Dec. 63

Vaughn 462 S. E. 2d 728 (Ga.1995), The Supreme Court of Georgia removed a Judge from office for disregarding defendant’s Constitutional rights; Hammel, 668 N. E. 2d 390 (N.Y. 1996) (Judge removed for improperly jailing defendants for their alleged failure to pay fines and make restitution which the judge had imposed, disregarding the defendants basic constitutional rights;

A-    That Plaintiff has demonstrated beyond the Preponderance of Evidence that said acts demonstrates how Section 1983 of U.S.C.S. contemplates the depravation of Civil Rights through the Unconstitutional Application of a Law by conspiracy or otherwise. Mansell v. Saunders (CA 5 F 1A) 372 F 573, especially if the conspiracy was actually carried into effect, where an action is for a conspiracy to interfere with Civil Rights under 42 U.S.C.S. 1985 (3), or for the depravation of such rights under 42 U.S.C.S. 1983, if the conspiracy was actually carried into effect and plaintiff was thereby deprived of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the United States Constitution and Laws, the gist of the action may be treated as one for the depravation of rights under 42 U.S.C.S. 1983, Lewis v. Brautigam (CA 5 F 1a) 227 F 2d 124, 55 Alr 2d 505, John W. Strong, 185, 777-78 (4 the ed. 1992).    


    Finally, this document is best closed by a jurist who has stated”; Citing Canon 2A the court noted, “[a] court’s indifference to clearly stated rules breeds disrespect for and discontent with our justice system. Government cannot demand respect of the laws by its citizens when its tribunals ignore those very same laws”)

Most recently stated in Federal Court FEDERAL JUDGE GETTLEMAN: stated, Tuesday March 10, 2009, where he found Superintendent of police Jody Weiss in Contempt of Court and Ordered the City to Pay $100,000.00, “No one is above the Law”, he cited a 1928 decision by Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, that said, “If the Government becomes the law breaker, it breeds Contempt for the Law, It invites everyman to become a law unto himself. It invites Anarchy.”      

   The Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, 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”.        

That Chicago is the most Corrupt City in America, Huffington Post, Internet Newspaper, February 23, 2012; 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.”   
                                          FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT
                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                   Respectfully Submitted

                                                                              Joe Louis Lawrence
                                                                                                       Counsel Pro Se
                                                                                                     Chicago, Ill 60649
                                                                        312 927-4210                                  

WHEREFORE the aforementioned reasons Plaintiff respectfully prays that said Judge be recused/disqualified if so at the time of the filing of this document all orders VACATED based upon the reasons cited in this document and noted in the Affidavits and appropriate Sanctions Remands be imposed pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 137 to all applicable parties for the enforcement of this matter:

   2.) That the Chief Judge or Presiding Judge summon Federal authorities to ascertain the criminal allegations noted to determine what prosecutorial remedies are afforded in this matter;

   3.)  That a Moratorium be imposed on the Chancery Division prohibiting sales or evictions of any person’s homes in Foreclosure pending the outcome of any investigation as the Department of Justice is doing in the unlawful shooting of Laquan McDonald matter;


   4.)    That Pursuant to Section 2 (42 U.S.C.) In the House of Representatives.
        “Congressional Debate of the second section of the Ku Klux Klan Act was more extensive and enduring than that of Section 1; As originally presented, Sec. 2 made it a felony for any “two or more persons” to conspire to commit certain enumerated crimes “in violation of the rights and privileges, or immunities of any person, to which he is entitled under the Constitution and laws of the United States.
           “Throughout the debates, supporters of the Act made repeated references to the depredations of the Ku Klux Klan; Victims of these atrocities included not only blacks but white Republicans as well. The crimes that were perpetrated, therefore, were not viewed as isolated occurrences, but as part of an “Organized Conspiracy….Political in its origin and aims”, “crimes perpetrated by concert and agreement, by men in large numbers acting with a common purpose for the injury of a certain class of citizens entertaining certain political principles, id, at 457 (remarks of Rep. Coburn). See also e.g., id. At 437 (remarks of Rep. Cobb) (“None but Democrats belong or can belong to these societies”) et al.
           “Where these gangs of Assassins show themselves the rest of the people look on, if not with sympathy, at least with forbearance. The boasted courage of the South is not courage in their presence. Sheriffs, having eyes to see, see not; judges, having ears to hear, hear not; witnesses conceal the truth or falsify it; grand or petit juries act as if they might be accomplices. In the presence of these gangs all the apparatus and machinery of civil government, all the processes of justice, skulk away as if government and justice were crimes and feared detection. Among the most dangerous things an injured party can do is to appeal to justice. Of the uncounted scores and hundreds of atrocious mutilations and murders it is credibly stated that not one has been punished. Cong. Globe, supra note 2, app. At 78 (remarks of Rep. Perry). (“While murder is stalking abroad in disguise, while whippings and lynching’s and banishment have been visited upon unoffending American citizens, the local administrations have been found inadequate or unwilling to apply the proper corrective”) et al., …. And the State made no successful effort to bring the guilty to punishment or afford protection or redress to the outraged and innocent.”)    

       5.)   That Under Section 4 of the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871: the law is clear, “Whenever in any State or part of a State………unlawful combinations…….shall be organized and armed, and so numerous and powerful et al…………and whenever, by reason of either or all of the causes aforesaid, the conviction of such offenders and the preservation of the public safety shall become…..Impracticable, in every such case such combinations shall be deemed a rebellion against the Government of the United States…..”

      6.)  That all parties complicit in said conspiracies be charged with terrorist acts;   

       7.)  That Cook County Sheriffs along with Federal Officials be present until this matter is properly adjudicated.

Under penalties as provided by law pursuant to 735 1265 5\1-109, the undersigned certifies that the statements set forth in this instrument are true and correct, except as to matters therein stated to be on information and belief and as to such matters, the undersigned certifies as aforesaid that he verily believes the same to be true.

                                                                                                                          Respectfully Submitted

                                                                             Joe Louis Lawrence
                                                                                                       Counsel Pro Se
                                                                                                     Chicago, Ill 60649
                                                                        312 927-4210




















       
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 Commander & Chief                            Attorney General of United States
President Barack Obama                                 Loretta Lynch
The White House                           U.S. Department of Justice
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW            950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20500                         Washington, DC 20530-0001

Chief Judge Timothy Evans                              Judge Moshe Jacobius
50 West Washington, Suite 2600                           50 West Washington, Suite 2403
Chicago, Illinois 60601                                          Chicago, Ill. 60601

 Judge Mary Lane Mikva                                   Clerk of Circuit Court, Dorothy Brown
50 West Washington, Suite                                    50 West Washington, Suite 1000
Chicago, Ill 60601                                                 Chicago, Ill. 60601

Atty. Gen, Lisa Madigan                            Asst. Atty. Gen Tyler Roland
100 West Randolph, Suite 1200                 100 West Randolph, Suite 1200
Chicago, Ill. 60601                                     Chicago, Ill. 60601
States Attorney, Anita Alvarez, Daley Center, Chg. Ill. 60601

Sec of State                                                  Asst Deputy Dir. Candace Cheffin
Asst Gen Counsel Terrence McConville     60 East Van Buren, 8th floor
100 West Randolph, Suite 500                       Chicago, Ill. 60601
Chicago, Ill. 60601      

CHA Mobility                                             CHA Mobility, HCP Counselors
Chris Klepper, Executive Dir.                     Tracey Robinson/Joann Harris
28 East Jackson Blvd.                                    4859 S. Wabash, Suite 2nd Floor 
Chicago, Ill 60604                                          Chicago, Ill. 60615    
                                                                   
CHA Mobility, Real Estate Specialist               Recorder of Deeds
Jessie McDaniel                                                    Karen Yarbrough
4859 S. Wabash                                                     118 N. Clark, Room 120
Chicago, Ill. 60615                                                  Chicago, Ill. 60602

City of Chicago, Department of Buildings       Sabre Investments
Christopher Lynch                                               120 West Madison Street
121 North LaSalle, Room 900                                Chicago, Ill 60601
Chicago, Ill. 60601

Seyfarth & Shaw
Anne D. Harris, Jeffrey K. Ross, Kyle A. Petersen, Sara Eber Fowler Suite 2400
131 South Dearborn
Chicago, IL. 60603


Chicago Housing Authority
Office of the General Counsel, Maria Sewell Joseph, Thomas B. King
60 East Van Buren
Chicago, IL. 60605

Cary G. Schiff & Associates                   Gordon & Rees LLP
Christopher R. Johnson, Yuleida Joy        Lindsay Watson, Christian T. Novay
134 N. LaSalle Street, Suite 1720             1 North Franklin, Suite 800
Chicago, Ill. 60602                                    Chicago, Illinois 60606

Stephan R. Patton, Mary E. Reuther, Rey A. Phillip Santos
Corp Counsel, Deputy Corp. Counsel, Asst Corp Counsel
30 N. LaSalle Street, Suite 800
Chicago, Ill 60602

Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP     Father Michael Pfleger
Christian Novay                                                               St. Sabina Church
55 West Monroe, Street, Suite 3800                                   1210 West 78th Pl
Chicago, Ill. 60603                                                             . Chg. Ill. 60620
                                                                                              
Jessica Mallon, Gen Counsel CHA                    Roy Martinez Manager 420 East Ohio
60 East Van Buren                                                  420 East Ohio
Chicago, Ill 60601                                                   Chicago, Ill. 60611

Eve Aywaz, Sales Consultant                                   Sarah Aredia, Leasing Consultant
345 East Ohio                                                        420 East Ohio
Chicago, Ill. 60611                                                   Chicago, Ill. 60611  

John-Paul Loseto, Executive Manager             Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, LLP
345 East Ohio                                                       550 West Adams Street, Suite 300
Chicago, Ill. 60611                                                  Chg. Il 60661
                                                                            Christian T. Novay, Julie A. Carillo                                                                                                                    
Courtesy Copies:

 US Attorney                                            FBI  Dir. Michael J. Anderson
 Zachary T. Fardon                                2111 West Roosevelt Road
219 S. Dearborn, 5th floor                         Chicago, Ill. 60612
Chicago, Ill 60604

Hon Judge Neil Cohen                              Media Personnel & Journalist
50 West Washington, Suite 2308
Chicago, Ill 60601

Mayor                                            Deputy Regional Adm., Field Office Dir.
Rahm Emanuel                                       Beverly E. Bishop
City Hall                                              77 West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, Ill. 60601                              Chicago, Ill. 60604
Governor                                                 Hon Mark Kirk                                
525 South 8th St.                                       607 East Adams, Suite 1520
Springfield, Ill. 62703                               Springfield, Ill. 62701
                                                                    
Bruce Rauner                                           Leo High School
100 West Randolph                                  7901 S. Sangamon
Chicago, Ill. 60601                                    Chg. Ill. 60620

Cook County President                               Cook County Sheriff
Toni Preckwinkle                                            Thomas J. Dart
118 N. Clark, Room 517                         Richard J. Daley Center, Room 701
Chicago, Ill. 60602                                        Chicago, Ill. 60602

Hon Dick Durbin                                       Hon. Judge
525 South 8th St.                                       Frederick Bates
Springfield, Ill. 62703                            50 West Washington
                                                                Chicago, Ill. 60601

Alderman Edward Burke
Alderman David Moore



                PLEASE BE ADVISED that on March 21, 2016, A Motion to Supplement Motion for Disqualification of judge for Cause et al,  has been filed with the Chancery Circuit Court of Cook County and said copies being served on said applicable parties via hand delivery or regular mail;

Plaintiff will present said Motion before Judge Valderrama or any judge in his stead March 28th at 9:30am.

                                                                                                                          Respectfully Submitted

                                                                             Joe Louis Lawrence
                                                                                                       Counsel Pro Se
                                                                                                     Chicago, Ill 60649
                                                                        312 927-4210

@joelouis7

No comments:

Post a Comment