SOMEONE IN DOROTHY BROWNS CLERKS OFFICE WENT ON THE DATABASE AND REMOVED DUTTON, BARBARA J 10325 W LINCOLN HWY, FRANKFORT IL 60423 WHERE MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGIS WAS THE ONLY ORIGINAL PLAINTIFF RECORDED IN 2008 WHERE THEY NEVER FILED APPEARANCES IN COURT

THEY ADDED ATTORNEY ROBERTS WUTSCHER, LLP 105 WEST MADISON, ST 210 CHICAGO, IL 60602 AND ADDED US BANK AS A PLAINTIFF IN 2016 HE NEVER FILED AN APPEARANCE UNTIL APRIL 7, 2009 

HOW THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IN CHICAGO STEAL HOMES IN THE NAME OF FORECLOSURE AND JUDGES IN THE STATE COURTS CLOSE THEIR EYES TO ALL UNLAWFUL ACTS

NOW UP TO THIS POINT MANY OF YOU HAVE READ HOW OTIS LEE LOVE, JR. AND MYSELF HAVE BEEN VICTIMIZED BY RACIAL INJUSTICE PERPETRATED MY MEMBERS OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY AND THE WORSE PART IS THAT IN SPITE OF THE LAWS BY THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION RECOGNIZING US AS FREE MEN AS FOR MYSELF BORN & RAISED

MEMBERS OF THE DEMOCRATIC POLITICAL MACHINE DO NOT RECOGNIZE OR HONOR THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION IN THAT MANY OF THESE MEN ARE STILL IN A TIME CAPSULE ENFORCING JIM CROW LAWS OUTLAWED BY THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT, SO WHAT THESE ORGANIZED WHITE MEN HAVE BEEN ABLE TO DO WAS TO RECRUIT, THE NECESSARY BLACK MEN AND WOMEN TO APPOINT THEM INTO POSITIONS OF POWER, SO AS TO PROTECT ALL RACIST WHITES BY CONTINUOUSLY OPPRESSING THEIR OWN RACE OF PEOPLE, SO AS TO BE ACCEPTED BY THEM, IN THE EVENT INDICTMENTS ARE HANDED DOWN BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BLACK AND BROWN APPOINTED TO CERTAIN POSITIONS ARE INDICTED FIRST.

BECAUSE CHICAGO LACK BLACK OR BROWN MEN WITH INTEGRITY IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY THEY HAVE ALLOWED THE FOREGOING ACTS TO BE PERPETRATED ON ELDERLY WOMEN OF COLOR 2 RETIRED CIVIL SERVANTS WHO FOUGHT VALIANTLY CORRUPT MEN TRYING TO STEAL THEIR HOME WHERE THEIR ELDERLY MOM RESIDES NOT FAR FROM FROM PRESIDENT OBAMA'S HOME.

THIS JUDGE HAS ALLOWED THIS CASE TO MOVE FORWARD BUT JUDGE DARRAH AN IRISHMAN WHO HAPPENS TO HATE MEN OF COLOR LIKE MYSELF WHO IS INTELLIGENT AND FREE TO TRAVEL TO ANY PARTS OF THE WORLD BUT NOT ILLINOIS COURTS BECAUSE IT IS CONTROLLED AND GOVERNED BY MEMBERS OF TERRORIST CELLS UPHOLDING AND PROMOTING JIM CROW LAWS. 

THIS DOCUMENT IS OVER 30 PAGES BUT UNTIL THE JUDGE ISSUES A RULING ON A MOTION FILED OCT. 6, 2016, MOTION TO ALLOW SUMMONS TO BE ISSUED BY THE CLERKS OFFICE THE ENTIRE DOCUMENT WILL BE POSTED ON THE BLOG.

THIS IS PROOF DEMOCRATS HATE PEOPLE OF COLOR AND ONLY TOLERATE THEM ONLY WHEN IT IS AN ELECTION TO HELP THEM AGAINST THE REPUBLICANS WHO ARE THE BOOGEYMAN--BUT PEOPLE OF COLOR ARE SUPPOSED TO ACCEPT LIVING UNDER INFERIOR CONDITIONS, BEING RACIALLY PROFILED, ETC.  

IN THE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

U.S. BANK N.A. AS TRUSTEE FOR SECURITIZED TRUST MASTR ASSET BACKED SECURITIES TRUST 2006-NC3; UBS REAL ESTATE SECURITIES INC.; MORTGAGE ASSET SECURITIZATION TRANSACTIONS, INC.; WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.; MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEM, DUTTON & DUTTON, PC, POSTESTIVO & ASSC.                                          Plaintiffs,                     MONZELLA JOHNSON AND MARCIA JOHNSON                                         Defendants.	) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )	Civil Action No. ______________________ Hon. Samuel Der-Yeghiayan Magistrate M. David Weisman  16-cv-08628 Jury Demand  $7.9 Million Dollars

 DEFENDANT’S ORIGINAL PETITION

                         NOTICE OF REMOVAL CIVIL ACTION

                            FROM STATE JURISDICTION

 {Pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. 1446 (a)}

 YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that Defendant Monzella Johnson et al. Pro Se appeals to the United States District Court for the Northern District for Jurisdiction.

Defendant will seek Sanctions Punitive Damages, applicable Remand for all criminal acts associated in said matter, due to Plaintiffs engaging in Mortgage Foreclosure crimes trying to steal Defendants home.

NOW COMES the Removing Party, MONZELLA JOHNSON and MARCIA JOHNSON (“Defendant’s”), hereby respectfully represents to this Honorable Court with an Affidavit the noted reasons why this matter should be within this court’s jurisdiction; {Pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. 1446 a} complaining of the Plaintiff’s as named above, and each of them, as follows:

To the Honorable Judges of the United States District Court for the Northern District:

Said Plaintiff’s Lacked any Standing to Foreclose, Fraud in the Concealment, Fraud in the Inducement, Quiet Title, Slander of Title, Violations of Tila, Violations of Respa, Rescission, Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, Declaratory Relief; seeking damages arising from alleged violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692 et seq. ; void assignment of mortgage in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment; lack of authority to assign mortgage; and, against all Plaintiffs in  violation of the Illinois Mortgage Foreclosure Law, 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/15-1101 et seq., and related state court rules; Defendants are demonstrating how and why this Honorable Court why this matter should be within this courts’ jurisdiction  {Pursuant to (A) Color (Title V11 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 42 U.S.C. 1981)

         (B) Race (Title V11 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 42 U.S.C. 1981)

   Racial Discrimination, Racial Retaliation, Racial Hatred, Racial Oppression, Civil Rights Violations, Unequal Applications of the Laws, and Disparate Treatment on the basis of race, color or national origin and age (42 U.S.C. 1981).

 This court has Jurisdiction over the statutory violation alleged as conferred as follows: over Title V11 claims by U.S.C. {1331, 28 U.S.C. {1343 (a) (3), and 42 U.S.C. {2000e-5 (F) (3); over 42 U.S.C. {1981 and {1983 by 42 U.S.C. {1988; over the A.D.E.A. by 42 U.S.C. {12117}.

II. JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENT

                        CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT ET AL

                                   

Order entered:    August 12, 2016 and July 26, 2016

Notice of Removal Complaint: August 31, 2016

Statute: Unequal Protection of the Laws Violations, Illinois Mortgage Foreclosure Fraud and State Violations, Disparate Unequal Protection of the Laws, Civil Rights Violations,   Judicial Bias, FDCPA 15 U.S.C. 1692  Jim Crow Violations, Judicial Abuse of  Discretion, Perjury, Admission of all facts by all Plaintiffs, No Objections by any Plaintiffs, Public, Political, Fraternal Corruption Conspiracies, Fraud on the Courts and other Un-Constitutional Lawless Violations.

Defendant is appealing to the United States District Court, for jurisdiction based on the foregoing stated above:

The United States District Court   has the Jurisdiction, to correct any error, and establish any precedent in the law where deemed necessary, without fear of reprisals from any political organization, terrorist fraternal orders, elected or otherwise, for the mandate of their decision;

The United States District Court has the Jurisdiction and Wisdom to recognize when State Courts are not enforcing laws equitably in accordance to the United States Constitution;

Defendant is before the United States District Court  because as a”Pro Se” African American elderly women the admissions recorded in this instrument demonstrates under the Illinois Legal system Black and Brown lives don’t matter and that Jim Crow methods still being exercised economically oppressing persons of color for attempting to rise above racial injustice as demonstrated in this matter; 

Defendant is before the United States District Court because of the color of his skin all defendants have admitted to all criminal acts and civil rights violations but the judges have ignored all admissions affidavits, the Laws and laws the United States Constitution and Plaintiffs Civil Liberties, validating the veracity Defendants are a nobody merely because of their skin color and age, every ruling has been issued according to racial political guidelines;

Defendant is before the United States District Court because the present administration of judges on the State and County levels are not about the business of judicial equality their rulings are based on Racial, Political, Disparate or Anarchy guidelines and not in accordance to the Laws of the United States Constitution. 

For all of the aforementioned reasons is why Defendant is before the United States District Court for Jurisdiction and Enforcement.  

I affirm the above as being true.

                                                            

Respectfully Submitted, Pro Se

Monzella Johnson

                                                                                                                                                    

I. THE PARTIES

1. Defendant is now, and at all times relevant to this action, a resident of the County of COOK, State of ILLINOIS.

2. The transactions and events which are the subject matter of this Complaint all occurred within the County of COOK, State of ILLINOIS.

3. NEW CENTURY MORTGAGE CORPORATION (herein referred to as "NEW CENTURY") is a National Banking Association, doing business in the County of COOK, State of ILLINOIS. Plaintiff is further informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that NEW CENTURY WAS the Originator of the loan.

4. Plaintiff, U.S. BANK N.A. (herein referred to as "U.S. BANK"), as Trustee for securitized trust MASTR ASSET BACKED SECURITIES TRUST 2006-NC3 (herein referred to as "TRUST 2006-NC3"). Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges that, Plaintiff U.S. BANK, is a national banking association, doing business in the County of COOK, State of ILLINOIS and is the purported Master Servicer for Securitized Trust and/or a purported participant in the imperfect securitization of the Note and/or the Mortgage/Deed of Trust as more particularly described in this Complaint.

5. Plaintiff, UBS REAL ESTATE SECURITIES INC.. Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges that, Plaintiff UBS REAL ESTATE SECURITIES INC., is a corporation, doing business in the County of COOK, State of ILLINOIS and is the purported Sponsor for Securitized Trust and/or a purported participant in the imperfect securitization of the Note and/or the Mortgage/Deed of Trust as more particularly described in this Complaint.

6. Plaintiff, MORTGAGE ASSET SECURITIZATION TRANSACTIONS, INC. Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges that, Plaintiff MORTGAGE ASSET SECURITIZATION TRANSACTIONS, INC., is a corporation, doing business in the County of COOK, State of ILLINOIS and is the purported Depositor for Securitized Trust and/or a purported participant in the imperfect securitization of the Note and/or the Mortgage/Deed of Trust as more particularly described in this Complaint.

7. Plaintiff, WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges that, Plaintiff WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., is a corporation, doing business in the County of COOK, State of ILLINOIS and is the purported Master Servicer for Securitized Trust and/or a purported participant in the imperfect securitization of the Note and/or the Mortgage/Deed of Trust as more particularly described in this Complaint.

8. Plaintiff, MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., aka MERS (“MERS”), Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that MERS is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of ILLINOIS, whose last known address is 1818 Library Street, Suite 300, Reston, Virginia 20190; website: http://www.mersinc.org. MERS is doing business in the County of COOK, State of ILLINOIS. Defendant is further informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Plaintiff MERS is the purported Beneficiary under the Mortgage/Deed of Trust and/or is a purported participant in the imperfect securitization of the Note and/or the Mortgage/Deed of Trust, as more particularly described in this Complaint.

9. Plaintiff Dutton & Dutton, 10325 West Lincoln Highway, Frankfort Illinois, 60423, Defendant alleges and believes said law firm is politically connected and is untouchable by any State Judge and has demonstrated incredible criminal acts stealing homes in the name of “Foreclosure”;

10. Plaintiff Postestivo & Assc., 223 West Jackson Blvd, Suite 610, Chicago, Illinois 60606, Defendant alleges and believes said law firm is politically connected and is untouchable by any State Judge and has demonstrated incredible criminal acts stealing homes in the name of “Foreclosure”;

11. At all times relevant to this action, Defendant has owned the Property located at  S. INGLESIDE AVENUE CHICAGO, IL 60615 (the “Property”).

12. Plaintiff does not know the true names, capacities, or basis for liability of Defendants sued herein as Pleadings 1 through 160, inclusive, as each fictitiously named Plaintiff is in some manner liable to Defendant, or claims some right, title, or interest in the Property. Defendant will amend this Complaint to allege their true names and capacities when ascertained. Defendant is informed and believes, and therefore alleges, that at all relevant times mentioned in this Complaint, each of the fictitiously named Plaintiffs are responsible in some manner for the injuries and damages to the Defendant’s so alleged and that such injuries and damages were proximately caused by such Plaintiffs, and each of them.

13. Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that at all times herein mentioned, each of the  Plaintiffs were the agents, employees, servants and/or the joint-venture of the remaining Plaintiffs, and each of them, and in doing the things alleged herein below, were acting within the course and scope of such agency, employment and/or joint venture.

14. Defendant submits Gr Ex G an Gr Ex H, said Securitization Analysis Report, prepared by Certified Forensic Loan Auditors, LLC as it relates to the foregoing pleadings and Affidavit of Chad D. Elrod, Securitization Analysis Expert;

A-    Affidavit of Michael Carrigan, Certified Mortgage Securitization Auditor, hereto attached, Gr Ex I.

III. INTRODUCTORY ALLEGATIONS

13.              This is an action brought by Defendant for declaratory judgment, injunctive and equitable relief, and for compensatory, special, general and punitive damages.

14.              Defendant filed a Motion Objecting the courts order pursuant to State Civil Procedure Rules, hereto attached, as Gr Ex A, no attorney denied or objected to said pleadings of “Fraud”

A-    That the court became a law unto themselves denied said motion Ref as Ex B;

15.              Defendant filed a Response Motion Striking & Objecting Plaintiff’s Complaint Due to “Fraud” and Barred by 5 year Statute of Limitations 735 ILCS 5/13-205 w/Affidavit, hereto attached, as Gr Ex C, no attorney denied or objected to said pleadings of Fact and “Fraud”

A-    That the court became a law unto themselves denied said motion Ref as Gr Ex E;

16.              Defendant filed a Response Motion to Impose Sanctions due to “Fraud” on the Court Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 137 w/Affidavit, hereto attached, as Gr Ex D; no attorney denied or objected to said pleadings of Fact and “Fraud”;

A-    That the court became a law unto themselves denied said motion Ref as Gr Ex  E;

17.              Defendant filed a Response Motion for Reconsideration Vacate (May 25, July 26, 2016) Order due to Error Lack of Jurisdiction & “Fraud” w/ Affidavit, hereto attached, as Gr Ex E, no attorney denied or objected to said pleadings of Fact and “Fraud”;

A-    Said court ignored the fact an African American Attorney who was the first man of color to Law Clerk for then Hon James Benton Parson’s presented evidence of “Fraud” before the Illinois Supreme Court (case number 120801) that went ignored because of his skin color;

B-    Said court ignored the fact an Affidavit was presented by Joe Louis Lawrence how attorney Dutton & Dutton engaged in “Fraud” stealing Godparents home case 2009 CH 47930;

C-     That because of Defendant’s age and they are women and ethnicity not being white the Illinois courts do not afford Equal Protection of the Laws pursuant to the United States Constitution to said individuals in that a valid Complaint is before the Federal Court case 16 CV 7434, Joe Louis Lawrence v. 420 East Ohio et al. where Hon Darrah is presiding stating the very claims articulated in this complaint;

D-      That it is futile for the Defendants to obtain relief in any state court due to skin color age and the fact the courts are still engaging in Jim Crow acts outlawed by the United States Supreme Court;

Jim Crow Laws are still being enacted and enforced in Chicago, Illinois courts Black and Brown lives simply don’t matter unless you abide by their rules and doctrines;