Wikipedia Racial Injustice in Chicago Courts

Search results

Thursday, April 23, 2020


CORONAVIRUS OR CORRUPTION CRIMINALS DON'T CARE CORRUPT JUDGES ALONG WITH SLIMY CORRUPT ATTORNEYS STILL TRYING TO USE THIS PANDEMIC CRISIS IN TRYING TO STEAL RETIRED POLICE OFFICER AND CHICAGO BOARD OF EDUCATION TEACHER'S  HOME. 

FIRST OF ALL KUDOS TO ALL FIRST RESPONDER'S ON THE FRONT LINES TRYING TO SAVE PEOPLES LIVES.

NOW GOVERNOR PRITZKER ALONG WITH MAYOR LIGHTFOOT HAS ISSUED STAY AT HOME ORDERS TRYING TO HELP SAVE PEOPLES LIVES DURING THIS PANDEMIC; UNFORTUNATELY, THEIR ARE NIGGERS NO MATTER THE SKIN COLOR WHO ARE USING THIS PANDEMIC TO FURTHER THEIR LIFESTYLES IN THE LIFE OF CRIMES OR CORRUPTION.

SO MANY PEOPLE HAVE LOST LOVE ONES TO THIS VIRUS MY DEEPEST CONDOLENCES TO THOSE FAMILIES BUT YOU HAVE SO MANY BLACK JUDGES WHO HATE THAT THEY ARE BLACK AND ARE USING THEIR SELF-HATRED RAGE TO DESTROY THEIR OWN ETHNIC GROUPS SO AS TO BE ACCEPTED BY MEMBERS IN THE DEMOCRATIC POLITICAL MACHINE.

ALDERMAN EDWARD BURKE ONLY APPOINTED THOSE NIGGERS OR RACIST IRISH JUDGES WHO DID WHAT THEY WHAT THEY WERE TOLD TO DO AND NOT QUESTION THEIR AUTHORITY.

MANY OF THOSE UNQUALIFIED JUDGES WHO ALLEGEDLY PAID INTO THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS OF FORMER ALLEGED KING BURKE AND BECAME TYRANTS SOME OF THE WORSE BLACKS ANY PERSON OF COLOR COULD EVER GO BEFORE.

TAKE FORMER ALDERWOMAN FREDDRENNA M. LYLE DUMB AS A BAG OF SAND BUT SHE IS WEARING A JUDGES ROBE HELPING US BANK AND OTHER RACIST WHITE ATTORNEYS STEAL SENIOR CITIZENS HOUSES, THE SHIT SHE HAS BEEN ALLOWED TO DO ON THE BENCH IS ASININE NO WAY IN HELL SHE COULD HAVE PERPETRATED THESE CRIMES ON ANY CAUCASIAN FAMILIES.

BLACK HATE BLACK ON BLACK CRIMES HAS BECOME AN ACCEPTANCE SO BLACK JUDGES REALIZE NOBODY IS GOING TO ADMONISH THEM FOR DESTROYING BLACK OR BROWN PEOPLE SO THEY HAVE TAKEN STREET VIOLENCE INTO AN ORGANIZED PROFESSIONAL SETTING LIKE IN THE COURTS AND IS USING THEIR ROBES TO AID AND ASSIST WHERE RACIST JUDGES  ARE ENGAGING IN HATE CRIMES AGAINST PEOPLE OF COLOR WHO ARE COMPLAINING ABOUT RACIAL INJUSTICE.

THESE LADIES HAVE BEEN FIGHTING TO SAVE THEIR HOME FOR 13 YEARS NOT ONE FUCKING PERSON GAY STRAIGHT DEMOCRAT TRYSEXUAL OR WHATEVER THEY WANT TO BE OPENED THEIR MOUTHS AND SAID THIS IS WRONG BECAUSE BLACK DEMOCRATS HAVE NO POWER OVER WHITE DEMOCRATS WHO HAVE PERPETRATED HATEFUL OR RACIST ACTS ON PEOPLE OF COLOR.

THESE RETIRED CIVIL SERVANTS ARE A BETTER PERSON TO WEAR A JUDGES ROBE THAN A WHOLE LOT OF JUDGE BURKE APPOINTED TO THE BENCHES ESPECIALLY LYLE.

MENTAL ILLNESS IS REAL THE VERY BLACK AND BROWN JUDGES THAT HATE WHO THEY ARE ARE THE ONES IN THE STREETS KILLING INNOCENT PEOPLE OF COLOR THE POLICE SOMETIMES CAN NEVER FIND THEY HAVE ASPIRED TO ALDERMAN POSITIONS, POLITICIANS PREACHERS AND JUDGES.

HATE STARTS WITH THE INDIVIDUAL KINDA LIKE THE VIRUS IF YOU KNOW YOU ARE SICK MENTALLY OR PHYSICALLY AND DO NOTHING TO HELP YOURSELF --- YOU WILL INFECT OTHERS IN MANY INSTANCES KILL PEOPLE DUE TO YOUR OWN SELF-HATE ILLNESS.

THIS DOCUMENT WAS FILED TUESDAY AT THE DALEY CENTER APRIL 21, 2020 AT 10:45AM

            IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS
COUNTY DEPARTMENT--CHANCERY DIVISION

U.S. Bank National Association, As Trustee Under)
Pooling and Servicing Agreement Dated as of        )
December 1, 2006 Mastr Asset–Backed Securities )
Trust 2006-NC3 Mortgage Pass-Through               ) Case # 2008 CH 33616
Certificates, Series 2006-NC3                                 )                                                           Petitioner        )
                                                                                 )          
V.                                                                              ) Judge Freddrenna M. Lyle
                                                                                 )                                                                                        ) Room 2808   
                                                                                 )
Monzella Y. Johnson, A/K/A Monzella                  )                                   
Johnson; Marcia E. Johnson A/K/A Marcia            )                                                 Johnson: Mortgage Electronic Registration            )
Systems, Inc. As Nominee for New Century          )
Mortgage Corporation; Monzella Y. Johnson         )                                         
( C ) Cestui Que Trust; Discover Bank;                  )
Unknown Owners and Non-Record Claimants,      )
                                                                                 )
                                                           Respondents  )
                                                                                                                                                MOTION TO REINSTATE SUMMARY JUDGMENT, MOTION STRIKING & OBJECTING PETITIONER’S MOTION TO AMEND ET AL. MOTION FOR SANCTIONS & RULE TO SHOW CAUSE REMANDING ALEXANDER B. POSTESTIVO ET AL., MOTION STRIKING AND OBJECTING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME AS FRIVOLOUS ET AL. REPLY MOTION TO ANYTHING PLAINTIFF FILES ET AL.  DUE TO JUDGE LYLE NOT HAVING JURISDICTION TRESPASSING UPON THE LAWS COMMITTING TREASON MAKING THE ORDER “VOID” A “NULLITY” w/AFFIDAVIT

   Now comes Respondent, Monzella Y. Johnson et al. being represented Pro Se in this cause respectfully represents to this court the reasons and files herewith her Affidavit in support of Respondent’s Motion to Reinstate Summary Judgment et al;


                                                                 Respectfully Submitted,

                                                                             By:   _________________        
                                                                                               Monzella Y. Johnson
                                                                                                                    
1.      That Plaintiff’s having admitted to all facts recorded in said Motions accompanied et al. via affidavit and Court Transcripts;
A-    Court having no jurisdiction to Dismiss or preside on said matter  due to Judge Lyle corroborating and colluding their roles as “Private Citizens” unlawfully passed the case to Judge Simko on Defendant’s Motion to Disqualify Judge Lyle; thereby, keeping the Presiding Judge Moche Jacobius from having jurisdiction.

B-    That pursuant to the March 2, 2020, (hereto attached) correspondence to Special Agent Buie and US Attorney Laush this very transcript corroborates that Defendants are victims of an “Active Criminal Enterprise” judges are using their robes to engage in horrific crimes

C-    To show fraud upon the court, the complaining party must establish that the alleged misconduct affected the integrity of the judicial process, either because the court itself was defrauded or because the misconduct was perpetrated by officers of the court. Alexander v. Robertson, 882, F. 2d 421,424 (9th Cir. 1989);

D-    A void judgment does not create any binding obligation. Kalb v. Feuerstein (1940) 308 US 433, 60 S Ct 343, 84 L, Ed 370.


2.    That judge Lyle has demonstrated an unknown interest in this matter which encouraged unlawful motives and opportunity in adjudicating the merits of this matter, due to the aforementioned; Sup Ct. Rule 63 (c) (1) (d) mandates disqualification where the judge has an interest in the proceeding. (eff. April 16, 2007).

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”)

A-    Fraud upon the court is a basis for equitable relief. Luttrell v. United States, 644 F. 2d 1274, 1276 (9th Cir. 1980); see Abatti v. C.I.R. , 859 F 2d 115, 118 (9th Cir. 1988) “it is beyond question that a court may investigate a question as to whether there was fraud in the procurement of a judgment” Universal Oil Products Co. v. Root Refining Co., 328 U.S. 575, 66 S. Ct. 1176, 90 L. Ed. 1447. The power of the court to unearth such a fraud is the power to unearth it effectively. See Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co., 322 U.S. 238, 64 S. Ct. 997, 88 L. Ed. 1250; Sprague v. Ticonic National Bank, 1184 and United States v. Throckmorton, 98 U.S. (8 Otto) 61, 25 L. Ed. 93.

B-    A judge is an officer of the court, as are all members of the Bar. A judge is a judicial officer, paid by the Government to act impartially and lawfully”. People v. Zajic, 88 Ill. App 3d 477, 410 N.E. 2d 626. “A void judgment is regarded as a nullity, and the situation is the same as it would be if there were no judgment. It has no legal or binding force or efficacy for any purpose or at any place….It is not entitled to enforcement. 30A Am Judgments 43, 44, 45. Henderson v Henderson 59 S.E. 2d  227-232 

C-    “A Void Judgment from its inception is and forever continues to be absolutely null, without legal efficacy, ineffectual to bind parties or support a right, of no legal force and effect whatever, and incapable of confirmation, ratification, or enforcement in any manner or to any degree. “A void judgment, order or decree may be attacked at any time or in any court, either directly or collaterally” Oak Park Nat Bank v. Peoples Gas Light & Coke Col, 46 Ill. App. 2d 385, 197 N.E. 3d 73, 77, (1st Dist. 1964)          

  1. That under 18 U.S.C. 242 and 42 U.S.C. 1985 (3) (b). A judge does not have the discretion on whether or not to follow Supreme Ct. Rules, but a duty to follow. People v. Gersh, 135 Ill. 2d 384 (1990).

  1. Judge Lyle and Simko acted as a Private Citizens and not as  State Officers as they colluded with the Plaintiff’s in using their robes and unlawful authority violating the Defendant’s Civil rights keeping the case amongst themselves when a Motion to Disqualify Judge Lyle was filed.

The Illinois Supreme Court has held that "if the magistrate has not such jurisdiction, then he and those who advise and act with him, or execute his process, are trespassers." Von Kettler et.al. v. Johnson, 57 Ill. 109 (1870)
Under Federal law which is applicable to all states, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that if a court is "without authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. They are not voidable, but simply void; and form no bar to a recovery sought, even prior to a reversal in opposition to them. They constitute no justification; and all persons concerned in executing such judgments or sentences, are considered, in law, as trespassers." Elliot v. Piersol, 1 Pet. 328, 340, 26 U.S. 328, 340 (1828)
The Illinois Supreme Court held that if a court "could not hear the matter upon the jurisdictional paper presented, its finding that it had the power can add nothing to its authority, - it, had no authority to make that finding." The People v. Brewer, 128 Ill. 472, 483 (1928). The judges listed below had no legal authority (jurisdiction) to hear or rule on certain matters before them. They acted without any jurisdiction.
  1. When judges act when they do not have jurisdiction to act, or they enforce a void order (an order issued by a judge without jurisdiction), they become trespassers of the law, and are engaged in treason.

A-     The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that the Circuit Court   of Cook County is a criminal enterprise. U.S. v. Murphy, 768 F.2d 1518,     1531 (7th Cir. 1985)”.

6.      The United States Supreme Court recently acknowledged the judicial corruption in Cook County, when it stated that Judge "Maloney was one of many dishonest judges exposed and convicted through 'Operation Greylord', a labyrinthine federal investigation of judicial corruption in Chicago". Bracey v. Gramley, case No. 96-6133 (June 9, 1997).
Since judges who do not report the criminal activities of other judges they become principals in the criminal activity, 18 U.S.C. Section 2, 3 & 4, and since no judges have reported the criminal activity of the judges who have been convicted, the other judges are The criminal activities that the Federal Courts found in the Circuit Court of Cook County still exist, and are today under the care, custody and control of Judge Timothy C. Evans (Chief Judge). The Circuit Court of Cook County remains a criminal enterprise.
JUDICIAL IMMUNITY
Judges have given themselves judicial immunity for their judicial functions. Judges have no judicial immunity for criminal acts, aiding, assisting, or conniving with others who perform a criminal act, or for their administrative/ 
ministerial duties. When a judge has a duty to act, he does not have discretion - he is then not performing a judicial act, he is performing a ministerial act.
Judicial immunity does not exist for judges who engage in criminal activity, for judges who connive with, aid and abet the criminal activity of another judge, or to a judge for damages sustained by a person who has been harmed by the judge's connivance with, aiding and abetting, another judge's criminal activity.
TRESPASSERS OF THE LAW
The Illinois Supreme Court has held that "if the magistrate has not such jurisdiction, then he and those who advise and act with him, or execute his process, are trespassers." Von Kettler et.al. v. Johnson, 57 Ill. 109 (1870)
Under Federal law which is applicable to all states, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that if a court is "without authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. They are not voidable, but simply void; and form no bar to a recovery sought, even prior to a reversal in opposition to them. They constitute no justification; and all persons concerned in executing such judgments or sentences, are considered, in law, as trespassers." Elliot v. Piersol, 1 Pet. 328, 340, 26 U.S. 328, 340 (1828)
The Illinois Supreme Court held that if a court "could not hear the matter upon the jurisdictional paper presented, its finding that it had the power can add nothing to its authority, - it, had no authority to make that finding." The People v. Brewer, 128 Ill. 472, 483 (1928). The judges listed below had no legal authority (jurisdiction) to hear or rule on certain matters before them. They acted without any jurisdiction.
When judges act when they do not have jurisdiction to act, or they enforce a void order (an order issued by a judge without jurisdiction), they become trespassers of the law, and are engaged in treason (see below).
The Court in Yates v. Village of Hoffman Estates, Illinois, 209 F. Supp. 757 (N.D. Ill. 1962) held that "not every action by a judge is in exercise of his judicial function. ... It is not a judicial function for a judge to commit an intentional tort even though the tort occurs in the courthouse."
When a judge acts as a trespasser of the law, when a judge does not follow the law, the judge loses subject-matter jurisdiction and the judge’s orders are void, of no legal force or effect.
The U.S. Supreme Court, in Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 94 S. Ct. 1683, 1687 (1974) stated that "when a state officer acts under a state law in a manner violative of the Federal Constitution, he "comes into conflict with the superior authority of that Constitution, and he is in that case stripped of his official or representative character and is subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual conduct. The State has no power to impart to him any immunity from responsibility to the supreme authority of the United States." [Emphasis supplied in original].
By law, a judge is a state officer.
The judge then acts not as a judge, but as a private individual (in his person).
  1. That said attorney Sawyer stated, Page 11, Lines 13 -17, “I can start, your Honor. So, my firm did file two different documents. I have them with me today. It’s our objection to the motion for sanctions and our objection to the cross motion” Judge Lyle further corroborated her role in said criminal enterprise never opened her mouth to admonish the attorney for his perjured remarks, Page 11, Line 18, Monzella Johnson, “May I object?  

  1. Judge Lyle not only demonstrated being corrupt but a total disgrace to any woman wearing a judges robe with integrity and respect, especially a black woman stated Page 11, Lines 19-24 “Excuse me. Now let’s – let us establish the rules. The court reporter can only transcribe the words from one person at a time, so just as he gave you total silence while you spoke, you have to afford him that same kind of respect. So, make notes or just hold your thoughts.” Page 12 Line 1-3 Monzella Johnson “I just wanted to say that it was –we did not get a copy, but it was not an objection. It just says opposition”.  

  1. That a licensed attorney Sawyer had the audacity to stand before the court and say Page 13 Lines 15-20 “For example, their citation of rule—Local Rule 56.1, I believe they’re referencing the Local Rules of the Northern District of Illinois and not the Local Rules of Cook County. So, they have not met their burden on summary judgments and that needs to be denied.”

  1. That another licensed attorney seems to have a mockery out of the court on their limited understanding of any laws in justifying their criminal episodes in the courts stated, Page 14 Lines 12-18 Whiteman “I would just add that the issues of material facts in this case are whether or not the defendants paid their mortgage. All the irrelevant facts they bring up, a motion for sanctions, cross motions for summary judgment, they’re completely irrelevant to the matter at hand. I ask their motions be denied.

11.  That said attorney is asking the judge to ignore Federal Laws and precedents In the matter of Raymond, 442 F. 3d at 606. (7th Cir. 2013) )  The Court, nevertheless, is concerned and considers the prejudice to Plaintiff for Plaintiff’s counsel’s failure, particularly because cases should be decided on their merits. Certainly, the failure to file a response to a summary judgment motion can be fatal. See, e.g., id at 611.

12.   That the rules are in place for the aforementioned reasons so as to eradicate Frivolous litigations and Criminal actions by said attorneys who don’t respect or honor any Rules in any court, . The rule is very clear that "all material facts set forth in the statement required of the moving party will be deemed admitted unless controverted by the statement of the opposing party." Local Rule 56.1(b)(3)(B).

  1.  That Judge Lyle is making her actions clear acting a “Private Citizen” using her robe as a Thug from the streets not caring who in the FBI or any Judge witnessing her criminal episodes in this matter stated, Page 14 Lines 19-20 Monzella Johnson, “All right. Ms. Johnson, you have a limited period to reply, so why don’t you—“.

  1. That Page 14 Lines 21-24 and Page 15 Lines 1-24 Monzella Johnson stated, “Your Honor we stand on our motions. We object to what they said. They filed nothing. They served us with nothing. We had to go to the computer, got it with the clerk and there was nothing objecting to the motions that we said nothing denying it. So, by law they have agreed to everything we have said. And also, what they filed was an opposition not an objection, and once again, they have agreed to everything that we have said. And what we have  said is that we don’t have a contract, we don’t owe them anything. They have never proved anything.

There’s no pooling. It’s all fraud and they have been dragging us in the court and we are tired. We are seniors. My mom is a senior, and they are causing other issues in our family and in our life and we are tired of it. We are really tired. So, it’s time to come to an end. They need to be sanctioned. They have not done their job and they are abusing us. That is our opinion. And according to the law it has been 13 years and months. And so, they need to pay sanctions and deal with it. Our case is not like everybody else’s. And just continue – I want to say thank you. We object. They did not file. They agreed. Their time has expired. They agreed to everything that we have said. Thank you.”
      
  1. That Judge Lyle demonstrated an assortment of convoluted statements that unequivocally without a scintilla of falsity corroborates her aptitude lacking a basic interpretation of the laws as a judge presiding over any cases definitely needs to be investigated instanter, Pursuant to Page 16 Lines 12- 24 stated, “there are some burdens of proof. There are some standards. There is some evidentiary rules. All of those things have to apply to every case, even though the facts in the case that I’m going to hear next. Those rules determine the actions that I can take. It’s the box that I work in, and although this is a Court of Chancery in that I sit in the Chancery Division, the Illinois Mortgage Foreclosure Statute is a statutorily created entity. It’s created by the legislators in Springfield, and they set the rules that govern foreclosures of property in this state.”

  1. That Page 17 Lines 1-10 further amplifies the need to have her REMANDED into Custody Instanter states, “Therefore, they set the rules in terms of what a Judge can and cannot do in handling foreclosures. So, it’s not some sort of unlimited drawer full of remedies because this is chancery. I have to go by the statute and they determine what is a Summary judgment. What is sufficient to issue an order granting summary judgment ? They tell me what the burden of proof is on each side, if you allege something on your motion, what you have to prove in order to be successful”

  1. That Lines 11-24 further amplifies said judge as a street thug in a robe states, “So I have read the various pleadings that you have given me under all sorts of names. I find some of the statements, because they aren’t really allegations, they are statements. I find some of those statements very offensive, and those are not even the ones directed at me personally. I believe that there’s –it may or may not be true  so maybe I shouldn’t say it, but I believe that you’re getting a misguided sense of direction as to how to respond and how to proceed in this matter, maybe from parties who do not practice law or maybe from the internet where you see things and it’s not helpful to your case at all.”  

  1. That Page 18 Lines 2- 19 further corroborating Lyle exercising street tactics aiding and abetting in a “Terrorist Criminal Conspiracy” stated “I have read the documents. I’m denying your motion for summary judgment as you have not met your burden of proving that there is no genuine issue of material fact that – strike that. You have not met the burden of proving that there is a genuine issue of material fact preventing the plaintiff from proceeding. There’s no issue that you have presented allowing you to get a judgment against them, that there –that would survive their motion to strike because you don’t have a – your complaint against them is not a complaint in foreclosure. Your complaint is a defense. You’re defending their complaint against you alleging four, five, six, seven, eight, nine different things. But it’s not sufficient to grant your summary judgment so I’m denying that motion for summary judgment.

  1. That Page 18 Lines 20-24, Page 19 Lines 1-3 further corroborate Lyle wanting everyone to know in law enforcement she is untouchable because of her nefarious connections to the Democratic Political Machine in that her grandiose impression is that she can’t be touched or indicted because her crimes are perpetrated on senior citizen women of color; she stated, “I don’t believe that your motion for sanctions has provided sufficient factually pled allegations that they have violated the orders of the Court willfully or made misstatements of fact or law or otherwise acted in a manner that would frustrate justice, so I’m denying your motion for sanctions against the plaintiff. The other motion was the motion to –  

  1. That Page 19 Line 4 Sawyer stated, “Strike the Prove up affidavit”

  1. That Page 19 Lines 5-20 “Private Citizen” Lyle stated, “It is not sufficient to say we disagree; they’re not telling the truth. You have to have some evidentiary basis for me to take the action that you are requesting. You have to come in with an affidavit saying it’s wrong because of. You have to show me some indicia of proof that there’s something that is misstated in there. You can’t just say this whole thing is a fraud. They have no right to take this house because we say so. That it does not meet the level of proof that I’m able to entertain in these courts. Based on the box that I started talking about, the laws and the statutes, and the cases that come down from the Supreme Court of Illinois and the Appellate Court of Illinois. Therefore, I’m denying your motion to strike there prove up affidavit”.

  1. That Page 19 Line 21 Marcia Johnson stated, ‘they never asked you for a prove up affidavit.”

  1. That Page 19 Lines  23-24, “Private Citizen” Lyle stated “No, they did not ask you for a prove up affidavit. They submitted an affidavit .   

  1. That Pursuant to Respondent’s Reply Motion to Anything and Everything Plaintiff files due to them Admitting to all Pleadings et al. (Page 3 Par 7) That Gr Ex A is Petitioner’s Ex D Ref as 37 of 128, and Motion for Summary Judgment Ref as 39 of 128 unequivocally corroborate and demonstrate the veracity of Fredrenna Lyle not only as a “Private Citizen” “Trespassing upon the Laws” but an active “Terrorist”  in the in the Criminal Enterprise named Democratic Political Machine ignored Defendant’s oral argument when she explained said Petitioners never filed a Motion said judge used her unlawful authority to violate every law necessary trying to save corrupt Caucasians and their Brethren.
A-    The Plaintiff’s never filed a Summary Judgment or an Affidavit only as Gr Ex D but Re Noticed the same Fraudulent document as a Summary Judgment for May 5, 2020 before Lyle at 10:30am.

  1. That Lyle is further demonstrating her incompetent understanding of the laws as she continuously tries to undermine the Defendant’s pleadings as being legally insufficient states, Page 20 Lines 7-9 Monzella Johnson “Well, I understand that’s what they call it, but when they handed in their piece of paperwork our response was to object.” Lyle stated, “And I understand, but as I said , it’s not sufficient to say that your – that you filed a document, Respondent’s reply motion to anything and everything plaintiff filed due to them admitting all pleadings. That’s an improper pleading. We understand that while you’re a pro se person, that you should not necessarily be penalized by the formalities that are created by the statute and the laws. But on the other hand, because you are representing yourselves, you’re still bound by those formalities. While—you can name things differently and I’ll interpret them to mean what it should say, but there’s no pleading that I can interpret this to mean anything because you have to individually object to pleadings.”
   
  1. That contrary to everything egregious Lyle has stated about the Defendant’s let the Record reflect that they did not have to LIE, COMMITT FRAUD, Engage in any other infamous crimes out of desperation trying to keep their home in spite of the Terrorist Tactics Lyle has employed.

27. That racism and reverse discrimination along with systematic corruption is a norm in Illinois Courts due to their allegiance to the Machine  but the laws are clear from the United Supreme Court “No one is above the Law”,  citing a 1928 decision by Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928),
“We must subject government officials to the same rules of conduct that we expect of the citizen. The very existence of the government is imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. As Brandeis puts it, "if the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. To declare that in the administration of the criminal law the end justifies the means—to declare that the government may commit crimes in order to secure the conviction of a private criminal—would bring terrible retribution. Against that pernicious doctrine this court should resolutely set its face."         
28.  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.

            All Illinois lawyers must be familiar with the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct, and trail lawyers must be particularly familiar with the rules that apply specially to them.

            RPC 3.3, entitled “Conduct Before a Tribunal,” sets forth the standards to be followed by the trial lawyer during “battle.” Section (a) of that rule states:
(a)  In appearing in a professional capacity before a tribunal, a lawyer shall not:
(1)  make a statement of material fact or law to a tribunal which the lawyer knows or reasonably should know is false;

(2)  fail to disclose to a tribunal a material fact known to the lawyer when disclosure is necessary to avoid assisting a criminal or fraudulent act by the client;

(3)  fail to disclose to the tribunal legal authority in the controlling jurisdiction known to the lawyer to be directly adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing counsel;

(4)  Offer evidence that the lawyer knows to be false. If a lawyer has offered material evidence and comes to know of its falsity, the lawyer shall take reasonable remedial measures;

(5)  participate in the creation or preservation of evidence when the lawyer knows or reasonably should know the evidence is false ;

(6)  counsel or assist the client in conduct the lawyer knows to be illegal of fraudulent;

(7)  engage in other illegal conduct or conduct in violation of these Rules;

(8)  fail to disclose the identities of the clients represented and of the persons who employed the lawyer unless such information is privileged or irrelevant;

(9)  intentionally degrade a witness or other person by stating or alluding to personal facts concerning that person which are not relevant to the case;

(10) in trial, allude to any matter that the lawyer does not reasonably believe is relevant or that will not be supported by admissible evidence, assert personal knowledge of facts in issue except when testifying as a witness, or state a personal opinion as to the justness of a cause, the credibility of a witness, the culpability of a civil litigant or the guilt or innocence of and accused, but a lawyer may argue, on analysis of evidence, for any position or conclusion with respect to the matter stated herein;


Acts constituting direct, criminal contempt
          A wide variety of acts may constitute a direct, criminal contempt. And act may be criminal contempt even though it is also an indictable crime. Beattie v. People, 33 Ill. App 651, 1889 WL 2373 (1st Dist. 1889). As is making false representations to the court. People v. Katelhut, 322 Ill. App. 693, 54 N.E.2d 590 (1st Dist. 1944). Misconduct of an officer of the court is punishable as contempt. People ex rel. Rusch v. Levin, 305 Ill. App. 142, 26 N.E. 2d 895 (1st Dist. 1939).

Official misconduct is a criminal offense; and a public officer or employee commits misconduct, punishable by fine, imprisonment, or both, when, in his official capacity, he intentionally or recklessly fails to perform any mandatory duty as required by law; or knowingly performs an act which he knows he is forbidden by law to perform; or with intent to obtain a personal advantage for himself or another, he performs an act in excess of his lawful authority ….S.H.A. Ch 38 33-3.






                                                                            

                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                      
WHEREFORE the aforementioned reasons Respondent respectfully Prays for the Relief


1.    For an Order Reinstating Respondent’s Summary Judgment, Respondent’s Motion for Sanctions et al. Respondent’s Motion Objecting to Plaintiff’s Motion for Ext of Time et al. Respondent’s Motion Striking and Objecting et al. Respondent’s Reply Motion et al. due to court order entered deemed a Nullity void;

2.    For an Order Remanding Judge Lyle and Simko from the case for unlawfully circumventing all laws keeping the case from going before Presiding Judge Moche Jacobius for proper reassignment when Defendant filed a Motion to Disqualify her. 

3.    For an Order Remanding any and attorneys complicit in this Mortgage Fraud Criminal Enterprise.

4.    For an Order Invoking the Jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau of Investigations/United States Attorney Instanter for judges “Trespassing upon the Laws” in this “Organized Criminal Enterprise”;

5.    For an Order Pursuant to Smith v. Wade, 461 U.S. 30, 35 103 S. Ct. 1625, 1629, 75 L Ed 2d 632 (1983) Justice Brennen “The threshold standard for allowing punitive damages for reckless or callous indifference applies even in a case, such as here, where the underlying standard of liability for compensatory damages because is also one of recklessness. There is no merit to petitioner’s contention that actual malicious intent should be the standard for punitive damages because the deterrent purposes of such damages would be served only if the threshold for those damages is higher in every case than the underlying standard for liability in the first instance. The common-law rule is otherwise, and there is no reason to depart from the common-law rule in the context of {1983} of Million Dollars being amended to $13 Million Dollars covering the number of years Respondent being in court unlawfully as the Plaintiffs tried to steal said home;

6.    For the entry of an Order awarding to your Defendant for such other relief and any other relief necessary as equity may require of which this court may deem overwhelmingly just;


























                                                                  Respectfully Submitted, Monzella Y. Johnson





            IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS
COUNTY DEPARTMENT--CHANCERY DIVISION

U.S. Bank National Association, As Trustee Under)
Pooling and Servicing Agreement Dated as of        )
December 1, 2006 Mastr Asset–Backed Securities )
Trust 2006-NC3 Mortgage Pass-Through               ) Case # 2008 CH 33616
Certificates, Series 2006-NC3                                 )                                                           Petitioner        )
                                                                                 )          
V.                                                                              ) Judge Freddrenna M. Lyle
                                                                                 )                                                                                        ) Room 2808   
                                                                                 )
Monzella Y. Johnson, A/K/A Monzella                  )                                   
Johnson; Marcia E. Johnson A/K/A Marcia            )                                                 Johnson: Mortgage Electronic Registration            )
Systems, Inc. As Nominee for New Century          )
Mortgage Corporation; Monzella Y. Johnson         )                                         
( C ) Cestui Que Trust; Discover Bank;                  )
Unknown Owners and Non-Record Claimants,      )
                                                                                 )
                                                           Respondents  )
                                                         NOTICE   OF   MOTION TO REINSTATE SUMMARY JUDGMENT, MOTION STRIKING & OBJECTING PETITIONER’S MOTION TO AMEND ET AL. MOTION FOR SANCTIONS & RULE TO SHOW CAUSE REMANDING ALEXANDER B. POSTESTIVO ET AL., MOTION STRIKING AND OBJECTING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME AS FRIVOLOUS ET AL. REPLY MOTION TO ANYTHING PLAINTIFF FILES ET AL.  DUE TO JUDGE LYLE NOT HAVING JURISDICTION TRESPASSING UPON THE LAWS COMMITTING TREASON MAKING THE ORDER “VOID” A “NULLITY” w/AFFIDAVIT


Please be advised that on  April 20, 2020, Respondent has filed before this Circuit Court, Motion for Reinstatement et al; and will present said legally sufficient instrument before Judge Freddrenna M. Lyle or any Judge in her stead May 5, 2020 at 10:30 am in room 2808.       


                                 FBI Dir. Emmerson Buie, Jr.
                                  2111 West Roosevelt Road  
                                        Chicago, Ill. 60612



                                             U.S. Attorney
                                                    John R. Lausch
                                          219 South Dearborn Suite 500
                                                   Chicago, Ill 60605

        Attorney General Illinois                         Hon Mayor Lori Lightfoot
        Kwame Raoul, 1200                                       City Hall 7th floor
       100 West Randolph Street                                Chicago, Il. 60601
        Chicago, Il. 60601


        Cook County State’s Attorney            Chief Judge Timothy C. Evans
         Kim Foxx                                              50 West Washington, Suite 2600
         50 West Washington, Suite 500                Chicago, Ill. 60602
         Chicago, Ill. 60602                           

         Presiding Judge Moche Jacobius        
         50 West Washington, Suite 2403
          Chicago, Il. 60602 
                                        
Potestivo & Ass., PC                         
223 West Jackson, Blvd, Suite 610  
Chicago, IL. 60606                           
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned hereby certifies that the above notice and all attachments were caused to be personally delivered, to the above parties at the addresses provided before 5:00 pm on April 20, 2020.
                                                                ________________________
                                                                  Respectfully Submitted, Monzella Y. Johnson














COUNTY DEPARTMENT--CHANCERY DIVISION

U.S. Bank National Association, As Trustee Under)
Pooling and Servicing Agreement Dated as of        )
December 1, 2006 Mastr Asset–Backed Securities )
Trust 2006-NC3 Mortgage Pass-Through               )  Case # 2008 CH 33616
Certificates, Series 2006-NC3                                 )                                                           Petitioner        )
                                                                                 )          
V.                                                                              )  Judge Fredrenna M. Lyle
                                                                                 )                                                                                   )     
                                                                                 )   Room 2808    
Monzella Y. Johnson, A/K/A Monzella                  )                                   
Johnson; Marcia E. Johnson A/K/A Marcia            )                                                 Johnson: Mortgage Electronic Registration            )
Systems, Inc. As Nominee for New Century          )
Mortgage Corporation; Monzella Y. Johnson         )                                         
( C ) Cestui Que Trust; Discover Bank;                  )
Unknown Owners and Non-Record Claimants,      )
                                                                                 )
                                                           Respondents  )
                                                                                                                   
                                                 AFFIDAVIT

STATE OF ILLINOIS )
                                        )
COUNTY OF COOK   )

I Monzella Y. Johnson Pro Se being duly sworn on oath states the aforementioned pleadings enumerated within said motion 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                                                         Notary
                                                                        
____________________
Monzella Y. Johnson
5217 S. Ingleside. Ave
Chicago, Il 60615
773 835-5849
             IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS
                COUNTY DEPARTMENT--CHANCERY DIVISION                   


                               
                                            EXHIBIT LIST


1.)   March 2, 2020 Notice of Active Chain Conspiracy et al letter sent to Special Agent Emmerson Buie, Jr.

2.)  March 10, 2020 Court Transcript of Freddrenna M. Lyle unequivocally corroborating her role as an active Terrorist not fearing any retaliations because Valderrama and Boyd and a host of other judges committed the same crimes on their own ethnic groups so as to be accepted by members of the racist Democratic Political Machine as prominent judges in the Democratic Party closed their eyes on their crimes.

Lyle is expecting the same Democrats to save her proving Black on Black hate crimes are just as real in the courts as they are in the streets.











                                                      ________________________
                                                        Respectfully Submitted, Monzella Y. Johnson