NOBODY HAS DENOUNCED THESE DIABOLICAL ACTS WHY NOT?
CHICAGO IS NO DIFFERENT FROM CHARLOTTESVILLE ONLY IN CHICAGO BLACKS ARE HELPING THE RACIST WHITES DESTROY THEIR OWN PEOPLE THIS IS HOW BLACK JUDGES ARE PROMOTED.
PERFECT EXAMPLE OF BLACK JUDGES ARE MORE RACIST TOWARDS THEIR OWN ETHNIC GROUP THAN RACIST WHITES THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS THAT HE IS A COLORED KLANSMAN OR COLORED NAZI.
THIS JUDGE CLOSED HIS EYES TO ALL OF THE FACTS RECORDED IN THIS COMPLAINT AS WELL AS PARTS II AND III POSTED DEC. 1, 2015 PUT HIS CAREER ON THE LINE TRYING TO SAVE AND PROTECT ALL OF THE WHITES GUILTY OF THE AFOREMENTIONED CRIMES.
MANY BLACK JUDGES AND OTHERS IN ORDER TO BE REAPPOINTED AS ASSOCIATE JUDGES MUST DO WHAT THEY ARE TOLD BY THE RACIST MEN CONTROLLING THE DEMOCRATIC POLITICAL MACHINE.
A BLACK OR BROWN MAN HAS A GREATER CHANCE SLEEPING WITH A RACIST WHITE MAN AND RECEIVING FAVOR THAN A HETEROSEXUAL MAN HAS RECEIVING JUSTICE IN ILLINOIS COURTS.
NOT ONE PERSON DENOUNCED THE HORRIFIC RACIST ACTS PERPETRATED BY THE WHITES AND INFERIOR NEGROES PERPETRATING ROLES AS JUDGES BUT VALDERRAMA SCOLDED ME IN COURT FOR KNOWING THE LAW BUT WAS SOFT SPOKEN TO THE MALE LAWYERS NONE OF THEM HONORED ANY COURT DIRECTIVE BECAUSE THEY KNEW THE TYPE OF MAN HE WAS.
MANY OF MY CAUCASIAN COLLEAGUES HAVE STATED THEIR ARE TOO MANY HOUSE NIGGER JUDGES AND UNCLE TOMS WORKING IN THE COURTS THEY DID NOT UNDERSTAND WHY BLACKS WERE NOT SPEAKING UP AGAINST THESE PEOPLE.
JUDGE VALDERRAMA SAID IT IS FACTUAL BUT TO RE PLEAD THIS CASE AND EXPLAIN FRAUD & DISCRIMINATION SO THE LAWYERS CAN RESPOND
1.) EVERYBODY WAS PROPERLY SERVED A SUMMONS AND THIS COMPLAINT BY DOROTHY BROWN CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT THE JUDGE IGNORED THE AFFIDAVIT FROM THE CLERKS OFFICE SHOWING ALL PARTIES WERE SERVED.
2.) THE JUDGE DENIED EVERYTHING I FILED BECAUSE OF MY SKIN COLOR.
3.) RACIST WHITE CONNECTED DEMOCRATS HAVE BEEN ABLE TO CIRCUMVENT EVERY AREA OF THE LAWS OF DISCRIMINATION RACISM ETC BY APPOINTING BLACK OR BROWN JUDGES OR TO ADMINISTRATIVE POSITIONS SO AS TO CONTINUALLY EXERCISE JIM CROW LAWS KEEPING QUALIFIED UNITED CITIZENS FROM RECEIVING EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS.
THE AFOREMENTIONED IS DONE TO CONCEAL THE IDENTITIES OF THOSE WHITE MEN WHO STILL UPHOLDS NAZI OPPRESSIVE PRACTICES, KU KLUX KLAN TERRORISTS ACTS KEEPING JIM CROW ALIVE.
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT
OF
CHANCERY DIVISION
In Re Racial Discrimination/Source Income Violations
Housing Matters:
Joe Louis
Lawrence
Case
# 2015 CH 01670
Appellant
HON. F. U. Valderrama
Room 2305
V
420 East Ohio, Chicago Housing Authority
345 East Ohio, City of Chicago, Commission on Human
Relations, K2 Apartments
Respondents
. AMENDED
REQUEST
FOR REVIEW/APPEAL/RULE TO SHOW CAUSE FOR “FRAUD” “CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS
“CONTEMPT OF COURT” PERJURY & “CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY/COVER-UP CONSPIRACY”
“CORRUPTION” OTHER IRREGULARITIES & IMPOSE SANCTIONS WITH AFFIDAVIT
Now comes Appellant Joe Louis Lawrence,
Counsel Pro Se, in this cause respectfully represents to this court the reasons
and files herewith his Affidavit in support for said Request for
Review/Appeal/Rule to Show Cause for “Fraud” “Contempt of Court” “Perjury” “Criminal Conspiracy”/ “Cover-up Conspiracy”
“Corruption” other Irregularities & Impose Sanctions with Affidavit, pursuant to the provisions of the Admin.
Rev. Law, 735 ILCS 5/3-101 pursuant to the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871, Section 1983 of U.S.C.S., S.H.A. Criminal
Ch. 38, 33-3, Civil Rights Act of 1964, 3D (2) Reporting Lawyer Misconduct;
Be advised the Commission has committed “Fraud” of many sorts engaged in a Heinous Civil Rights
Conspiracy enacting “Jim Crow Laws”
outlawed by the United Supreme Court by covering up and ignoring the various
criminal acts by members of the Democratic Political Machine.
That Pursuant to Sup
Ct. Rule 272 “if at the time of
announcing final judgment the judge requires the submission of a form of
written judgment to be signed by the judge et al” the judgment becomes final
only when the signed judgment is filed—there was never any signatures
or seals recorded from the mailed documents! Causing
the documents to be VOID in authority!
Respectfully Submitted,
Joe Louis
Lawrence
Counsel
Pro Se/Appellant
312 927-4210
joelouislaw@yahoo.com
Twitter @joelouis7
AFFIDAVIT
I Joe Louis Lawrence, being duly sworn on
oath states:
1.) That said identified person operating
in disguise as an alleged Commissioner for the Chicago Commission on Human
Relations used his position and unlawful authority to uphold “Jim Crow Laws” of said
Confederate applications to unlawfully dismiss said Complaint filed by the City
of Chicago;
2.) Said records unequivocally
demonstrate CHA colluding with Respondents in opportunity areas making sure he
did not move into certain areas due to his skin color and the Commission having
knowledge of this falsified documents upholding racism racial discrimination
and a plethora of Civil Rights Violations in Housing and other acts of “FRAUD”,
hereto attached, Gr Ex A, B, C, D
and E Orders from the Commission
violating Supreme Court Rule 272 where a signature is required and mail
fraud Inducing Reliance on all parties;
A- That Gr. Ex A Order Denying Request for Review, in favor of Respondent
420 East Ohio with no signature or seal; (Jan. 6, 2015)
B- That Gr. Ex B Order Denying Request for Review, in favor of Respondent
CHA and The Streeter 355 East Ohio with no signature or seal;(Jan. 6, 2015)
C- That the Respondent City of Chicago
ignored Gr Ex F Motion for
Reconsideration et al w/Affidavit;(Dec. 8, 2014)
D- That Gr. Ex C Order Finding No Substantial Evidence, in favor of
Respondent 420 East Ohio with no signature or seal; (Dec. 2015)
E- That Gr. Ex D Investigative Order against Appellant seeking documents
with no signature or seal;(Dec 29, 2014)
F- That Gr. Ex E Order to Respond and Notice of Potential Default with no
signature or seal; (Jan. 5, 2015)
3.) That Appellant filed Gr. Ex’s G, H, I and M
A- That Gr. Ex G Motion Objecting Extension of Time w/Affidavit before the
Respondent City of Chicago went ignored by all parties due to the veracity
stated within;
B- That Gr. Ex H Motion Moving for a Default w/Affidavit (Jan. 22, 2015)
this said document went ignored by all parties, due to the veracity stated
within;
C- That Appellant complying with the
clerks directive, Gr Ex I recorded the names and certified numbers for
all defendant’s for proper service via United States Postal delivery;
D- That Gr. Ex M Appellant filed a Motion to Cure Defects in Investigative
Order Due to Error or Fraud w/Affidavit, nobody denied or objected to the
Motion;
E- That defendant’s attorneys from the
CHA and 345 East Ohio with contemptuous vexation for the laws committed PERJURY told the judge “they were never served”!
Allegedly a city attorney stood in the background observing took a picture of
the court order with their cell phone;
F- That Gr.
Ex J, Frank Fiorentino signed for 345 East Ohio;
G- That Gr. Ex K, Jeffrey Wilson, signed for Chicago Commission on Human
Relations;
H- That Gr. Ex L, C. Armstrong signed for the CHA;
4.) That the Honorable Franklin Ulysses
Valderrama had jurisdiction over the parties when they were properly before the
court demonstrated the level of Racial Disrespect towards the judge as
perpetrated at the Appellant;
A-
That
Appellant honestly in error failed to attach the court orders from the
Commission on Human Relations, but deliberately failed to seek the service on
all parties involved so as to demonstrate to this court, the racist animosity
of the mindset of the parties involved, in that whether they are in court
before this Honorable Court or Appellant is presenting perfected legal
documents the hue of our skin tone still to this day (year 2015) yields the
diabolical heinous acts of what white men are willing to do to undermine the
integrity of an innocent man prohibiting him and family equal access to housing
or the laws and in the judge’s case no respect because you are in a robe!
5.) That Anne D. Harris referenced the
Appellant’s documents as “Jibberish” but admitted she was in fact served
certified mail by the clerk of the Circuit Court;
6.) That Respondents CHA maliciously with
vexatious contempt for the laws incited racist policies made perjured
admissions to the Commission on Human Relations and court.
A-
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.
B-
Appellant
filed a Motion for Reconsideration Vacate Order Due To “Fraud” Terrorist
Conspiracy Acts Civil Rights Violations Impose Sanctions w/Affidavit (Dec. 8,
2014);
C-
That
a City employee in the Commission on Human Relations falsified a document
purported as an Order from the authority of the Commissioner absent a signature
or seal titled “Request for Review” denying said Motion Jan. 6, 2015;
D-
Appellant
filed a “Request for Review” Impose Sanctions w/Affidavit March 28, 2014, that
a City employee in the Commission on Human Relations falsified a document
purported as an Order from the authority of the Commissioner absent a signature
or seal titled “Request for Review” denying said document Jan. 6, 2015;
2.)
That Appellant legally with astute integrity filed an “Emergency Amended Petition for Rule to
Show Cause et al., w/Affidavit (March 14, 2014), totaling 157 pages
served on all parties as well as Hon. Rahm Emmanuel (Mayor) via personal
service, said Complaint was expeditiously dismissed unlawfully (March 18, 2014)
ignoring all of the corroborating facts of all parties involved, hereto
attached, Gr Ex F, Motion for
Reconsideration et al; Because of Appellant’s ethnicity Rahm Emmanuel
closed his eyes to the Racist Heinous Acts perpetrated by the Political
Machine.
A- "The mayor of Chicago is the mayor of Chicago land," Myron
Orfield says. Orfield, who used to live here, has been a leading force for
desegregation in the Twin Cities—he's the executive director of the Institute
on Race & Poverty at the University of Minnesota. He says a Chicago mayor
carries much clout with suburban mayors, and could use it to help ease
segregation in the city and the near suburbs.
B-
Pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2-610 where allegations of
complaint are not denied, there is admission of all facts well-pleaded by
adversary, and such admission, drawn from failure to plead, may be considered
as evidence. Hecht v. Hecht, App. 1
Dist. 1977, 7 Ill. Dec. 169, 49 Ill. App. 3d 334, 364 N.E. 2d 330.
C-
Pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2-612 Counsel never Objected to the
sufficiency of Petitioners pleadings, Objections to sufficiency of pleadings
either in form or substance must be made In trial court, and if not so made,
they will be considered waived and cannot be raised for the first time on
appeal. People ex rel. Deynes v.
Harris, App. 1948, 77 N.E. 2d 439, 333 Ill. App. 280.
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.
3.) That because the Democratic Political
Machine is likened to the Ku Klux Klan Page 3, 4 of Gr Ex F demonstrate the racial hatred “Powerful Whites” in
authority have against persons of color and the degree of “Hate Crimes they are
willing to exhaust making sure a person of color remain oppressed;
A-
A- That there has not been a
single person to stand up against the Racist Atrocities lodged at the Complainant
in every layer of this conspiracy ILL. App. (1st Dist. 2000). A “VOID JUDGEMENT
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.
B-
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 371
F.3d 1093;
Agreement to commit an unlawful act, which
constitutes the essence of a conspiracy, is a distinct evil that exist and be
punished whether or not the substantive crime ensues,-id.
Conspiracy poses a threat to the public over
and above the threat of the commission of the relevant substantive crime, both
because the combination in crime makes more likely the commission of other
crimes and because it decreases the part from their path of criminality-id;
C 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).
4.)
That because Brown, Black and some foreigners lives don’t matter this is the
consensus of Democrats in the Political Machine to maintain job security
keeping their ethnicity employed as demonstrated in this matter how top
attorneys are earning income at the demise and Racial Torture of an innocent
man standing up to them in a “Homeless State” is how The Chicago
Commission on Human Relations erred in ignoring all of Appellant’s affidavits
never challenged or objected to, (1995), Stokes v. Bullins, 844 F. 2d 269, 275
(5th Cir. 1988), Wassum v. City of Bellaire, Texas, 861 F. 2d 453,
456 (5th Cir. 1988), Benavides v. County of Wilson, 955 F. 2d 968,
972 (5th Cir.) cert. denied,__ U.S.__, 113 S.Ct. 79, 121 L. Ed. 2d
43 (1992), “Liability will accrue for the acts of a municipal official when the
official possess “final policymaking authority” to establish municipal policy
with respect to the conduct that resulted in a violation of constitutional
rights. Pembaur v. City of Cincinnati, 475 U.S. 469, 483, 106 S. Ct. 1292,
1300, 89 L.Ed. 2d 452 (1986) (plurality opinion),Smith v. Wade U.S. 30, 35, 103
S. Ct.1625, 1629, 75 L Ed 2d 632 (1983)
C - Vigus v.
O’Bannon, 1886 N.E. 788, 118 Ill. 334; Hazelton v. Carolus, 1907 132
Ill. App. 512; Carter v. Mueller 457 N.E. 2d 1335 Ill. App. 1 Dist. 1983, The
Supreme court has held that: “The elements of a cause of action for fraudulent
misrepresentation (sometimes referred to as “(fraud and deceit)”are: (1) False
statement of material fact; (2) known or believed to be false by the party
making it; (3) intent to induce the other party to act; (4) action by the other
party in reliance on the truth of the statement; and (5) damage to the other
party resulting from such reliance……………
D- Beatie v. People, 33 Ill. App 651,
189 WL 2373 (1st Dist.1989). As is making false representations to the court. People
v. Katelhut, 332 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).
E- 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).
5.) How
can any person whether they are Irish or of Polish ethnicity be the majority in
control, see wrong, ignore wrong, close their ears and eyes to wrong when a
person of their ethnic group commits fraudulent acts?
6.) How can any Judge whether
they be Asian, Mexican or African American etc., who are a minority on the bench or in a
Commission go up against a majority in control especially if that lawyer or law
firm is of the majority’s ethnic make-up or part of the Terrorist Order and
rule against that lawyer and not expect some type of repercussion from those in
control?
7.) That said document that was mailed by the
unnamed Commissioner had as much value to it as yesterday’s toilet paper where
said paper is heavily needed from those suffering from Crohn’s Disease involved
in these matters;
8.)
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.”)
The President had additional
power in case of rebellion within a state to suspend the writ of habeas corpus
and to declare and enforce marital law. Cong.
Globe, supra note 1, at 317. With respect to a definition of rebellion,
Section 4 provided;
9.) FACT:
CHA had agreed to pay rent for the Appellant via the Mobility program at 420
East Ohio but the Respondent did not want him and family in the building and used
falsified credit scores of Appellant and children credit scores only after his
identity was compromised and stolen where CHA officials were involved to deny
him access to renting the unit;
A- That said documents tendered with the
filing of the March 14, Amended Emergency Petition for Rule to Show Cause et al
clearly and unequivocally demonstrate Complainant’s credit score at 670, despite
credit report hacked and falsified;
Civil Rights Act
of 1866- first section, enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled. That all persons born in
the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not
taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States; and such
citizens of every race and color, without regard to any previous condition of
slavery or involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the
party shall have been duly convicted, shall have the same right, in every State
and Territory in the United States, to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be
parties, and give evidence, to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold and convey
real and personal property, and to full and equal benefit of the laws and
proceedings for the security of person and property, as is enjoyed by white
citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, and penalties, and to
none other, any law, statute, ordinances, regulation, or custom, to the
contrary notwithstanding, Act of April 9, 1866, Ch. 31, 1, 14 Stat. 27, 42
U.S.C.A. 1981
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.
That
because of the number of years Appellant have been harmed by said Civil Rights
Violations and no one objected to said assertions put before this tribunal, Complainant
is seeking $25 Million from the
inception of this matter, until this matter is finally adjudicated and for the
heinous Racial Hate acts associated in these matters causing some of his
children to be hospitalized for various psychological traumas where therapy was
necessary but said medical information was used unlawfully in an attempt to
destroy Appellant;
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}”
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 AFFIANTH SAYETH NAUGHT
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.
Joe Louis Lawrence
Appellant/Counsel Pro Se
WHEREFORE the
aforementioned reasons Complainant respectfully Prays for the Relief
1.) For an Order Remanding all CHA & related Respondents Section 8 employees
who had knowledge and closed their eyes to said injustices or persons in
authority absorb any and all related expenses costs relating to Appellant
vacating home which was an abandoned building CHA paid an illegal person money
who never owned the property and Judge Scully was involved as an attorney and
Judge Leonard Murray had Sheriff to break into home locking Appellant out 10058
South Vernon Instanter and being homeless, and has no income and is on welfare
receiving FOOD STAMPS only due to said parties RETALIATING and OPPRESSING him
and family EXHAUSTING TERRORISTS TACTICS PLACING HIM IN THAT STATE;
Pursuant
to Smith V. Wade, 461 U.S. 30, 35. 103 S. Ct. 1625, 1629 75 L Ed 2d 632 (1983) that
because of the noted depraved acts of all parties pay punitive damages, of $30
Million Dollars Appellant and family has endured in these matters;
2.) For an Order Recommending a Special Prosecutor outside of States
Attorney Anita Alvarez, Attorney General Lisa Madigan’s jurisdiction due to the
political influence involved and them ignoring the criminal acts perpetrated by
“Powerful” White Men in authority;
3.) For an Order REVERSING the Commission’s order for failing to follow Supreme
Court rules and procedures;
4.) For
an Order Imposing Sanctions Fining CHA and all attorneys and law firms
$20,000.00 - $30, 000.00 day until Appellant receives his law license and is
admitted to the bar.
5.) Prohibit any Attorney from delaying
prosecution of this matter with frivolous continuances due to Appellant and
family suffering behind said acts;
6.) For an Order Remanding every Party and attorneys disbarring them complicit
in said Criminal Conspiratory acts ignoring and covering-up said unlawful acts
of all parties;
7.) For an Order Compelling all Parties
to appear before a Court or Grand Jury to determine who should be INDICTED for their part in said
Conspiracy;
8.) For
an Order Appointing an Independent Examiner to ascertain all
persons removed from the CHA section 8 program in the last 4 years where the
City of Chicago, Human Relations Commission and Hearing Officers under CHA’s
authority dismissed their complaints unlawfully;
9.) For the entry of an Order awarding to your Appellant for
such other relief and any other relief necessary as equity may require of which
this court may deem overwhelmingly just;
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
Complainant
Counsel
Pro se
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Commander & Chief Attorney General of United States
President Barack
Obama Eric Holder
The White House U.S. Department of Justice
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20500 Washington, DC 20530-0001
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20500 Washington, DC 20530-0001
Chicago Housing
Authority Wilson Elser
Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP
Office of the General Counsel Christian T. Novay
Asst Gen Counsel 55 West
Monroe, Street, Suite 3800
Maria Sewell Joseph Chicago, Il 60603
60 East Van Buren
Chicago, Ill 60605 Seyfarth &
Shaw
Jeffrey K. Ross, Kyle A. Petersen & Anne Harris
131
S. Dearborn Street, Suite 2400
Chicago, Ill. 60603
TO AAG Tyler
Roland Chief Judge Timothy Evans, Daley Center, Chg., Ill. 60601
General Law Bureau Presiding
Judge Jacobius, Daley Center, Chg. Ill. 60601
100 West
Randolph Street Suite 1300
Chicago, Ill.
60601 Clerk of Circuit Court Dorothy Brown, Suite 1001, Chg. Ill.
Judge Mikva Daley
Center, Chg. Il 60601
States Attorney, Anita Alvarez,
Daley Center, Chg. Ill. 60601
Atty Gen Lisa Madigan, 100 West
Randolph, Suite 1300 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
Jessie McDaniel
4859 S. Wabash
Chicago, Ill. 60615
City of Chicago,
Department of Buildings
Christopher
Lynch
121 North LaSalle, Room 900
Chicago, Ill. 60601
Cary G. Schiff &
Associates Gordon & Rees LLP
Christopher R. Johnson Lindsay Watson,
Christian T. Novay
134 N. LaSalle Street, Suite 1720 1 North Franklin, Suite 800
Chicago, Ill. 60602 Chicago,
Illinois 60606
Courtesy Copies:
US Attorney FBI Robert J. Holley
Zachary T. Fardon 2111 West Roosevelt Road
219 S. Dearborn, 5th floor Chicago, Ill. 60612
Chicago, Ill. 60604
Mayor
Deputy Regional Adm., Field Office Dir.
Rahm Emanuel Beverly E. Bishop
City Hall
77 West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, Ill. 60601 Chicago, Ill.
60604
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
PLEASE BE ADVISED that on March 3,
2015, An Amended Request for Review, Impose Sanctions et al., has been
filed with the Circuit Court of Cook County, Chancery Division and said copy
have been delivered or emailed to the applicable parties by the Cook County Sheriff;
Respectfully Submitted
Joe Louis Lawrence Counsel Pro Se
PO Box 490075
Chicago, Ill. 60649-0075
312 927-4210
joelouislaw@yahoo.com
@joelouis7
No comments:
Post a Comment