UPDATE ON HOW RACIST DEMOCRATS ARE PREYING ON THE ELDERLY TRYING TO STEAL THEIR HOME IN AN UNLAWFUL FORECLOSURE
BLACK AND BROWN JUDGES APPOINTED BY THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY (ALDERMAN EDWARD BURKE) CAN MAINTAIN EMPLOYMENT PROVIDED THEY REMAIN EITHER INFERIOR AND SUBORDINATE TO DEMOCRATIC DOCTRINES OF DOING WHAT THEY ARE TOLD.
THIS CASE ILLUSTRATES HOW BLACK MEN OR WOMEN IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY ARE MERE FIGUREHEADS AS FREDRENNA LYLE A BLACK WOMEN USED HER ROBE AND AUTHORITY TO CONSPIRE WHITE ATTORNEYS FORSAKEN HER OWN CAREER TO HELP STEAL THE HOME OF A RETIRED POLICE OFFICER, AND RETIRED SCHOOL TEACHER.
THE RACIST DEMOCRATS CONTROLLING THE DEMOCRATIC POLITICAL MACHINE ONLY WANT THOSE MEN AND WOMEN WILLING TO DESTROY THEIR OWN ETHNIC GROUPS WHO ARE WILLING TO IGNORE THE RACIST INJUSTICES PERPETRATED ON COLORED PEOPLE AND BECOME COMPLICIT IN DESTROYING THEIR OWN RACE SO AS TO PROTECT EVERY WHITE PERSON STILL HARBORING HATE AGAINST PERSONS OF COLOR AND IS ABLE TO CIRCUMVENT ALL LAWS AFFORDED BY THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.
IN THEORY IS THE AFOREMENTIONED ESTABLISHES VERITY COULD BE THE REASON KIM FOXX STATES ATTORNEY IS RECEIVING BACKLASH FROM SO MANY WHITES BECAUSE BLACKS IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO MAKE INDEPENDENT DECISIONS ON THEIR OWN THEY ARE TO SEEK APPROVAL FROM THE WHITES CONTROLLING THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.
BLACK AND BROWN JUDGES ARE SOME OF THE WORSE JUDGES ANY COLORED PERSON CAN GO BEFORE.
LET'S NOT GET IT TWISTED IN ILLINOIS ALL PEOPLE ARE NOT CREATED EQUAL THIS CASE DEMONSTRATES HOW JIM CROW LAWS ARE STILL BEING ENFORCED, BUT BECAUSE WE HAVE SO MANY BLACK AND BROWN PERSONS ACT LIKE THEY WANT TO RELIVE THE DAYS OF SLAVERY AND OPPRESSIVE SERVITUDE CATERING TO RACISM IS WHY THIS CITY AND LEGAL SYSTEM IS UNDER SIEGE BY COLORED TERRORIST AIDING AND TRESPASSING UPON THE LAWS VIOLATING THEIR OATH ENGAGING IN THESE DIABOLICAL CRIMINAL ACTS.
AN ASSISTANT STATES ATTORNEY APPEARED IN COURT AND WAS COGNIZANT TO WHAT WAS HAPPENING TO THESE WOMEN BUT NO CHARGES WERE FILED BECAUSE AS IT WAS EXPLAINED TO ME WHITES HAVE BEEN VIOLATING LAWS STEALING HOMES SINCE THE BEGINNING OF TIME AND NOTHING HAS HAPPENED TO THEM THEN AND THEY ARE OF THE IMPRESSION NOTHING IS GOING TO HAPPEN TO THEM NOW.
ALDERMAN BURKE CAN APPOINT JUDGES TO FIX CASES NOBODY SAYS SHIT ABOUT THAT BECAUSE IT INVOLVES PEOPLE OF COLOR, KIM FOXX RELEASES JUSSSIE SMOLLETT IT'S NATIONAL NEWS WTF!
EVERY TIME THESE WOMEN APPEAR IN COURT WHITE PROMINENT LAW FIRMS ARE MAKING MONEY AND THEY ARE LOSING MONEY BECAUSE OF THE OTHER LAW FIRMS UNSUCCESSFUL ATTEMPT TO STEAL THEIR HOME WITH JUDGES WORKING WITH THEM THE BANK HAVE RETAINED A MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR LAW FIRM MAKING $225 MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR. HINSHAW & CULBERTSON, LLP 151 N. FRANKLIN.
RACISM IS REAL IN CHICAGO!
IN
THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
NEW
CENTURY MORTGAGE CORPORATION; 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, AKA “MERS”
Plaintiffs,
MONZELLA
JOHNSON, MARCIA JOHNSON
Defendant. |
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) ) ) ) ) )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
|
______________________
Hon. Samuel
Der-Yeghiayan
Magistrate M. David
Weisman
Civil
Action No.
16-cv-
08628
|
NOTICE
DEFENDANT'S ORIGINAL
PETITION
MOTION
TO REINSTATE
NOTICE OF REMOVAL CIVIL ACTION
FROM STATE JURISDICTION
NOW COMES the Removing Party, MONZELLA
JOHNSON (“Defendant”), hereby properly Noticing the Plaintiff’s with this
Motion and all of its attachments to all parties Noticed in the Certificate of
Service {Pursuant to Fed Rules of Civil Procedures}:
That on April 8, 2019, Defendant has filed said Motion to
Reinstate Notice of Removal et al. and shall present this Motion at 9:00 am before
Honorable Samuel Der-Yeghiayan or any judge sitting in his stead April 17, 2019
in room 1903, 219 S. Dearborn Street, Chicago, IL. 60604
Respectfully Submitted,
_________________________
Monzella
Y. Johnson
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
NEW CENTURY MORTGAGE CORPORATION; 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, AKA “MERS”
Plaintiffs,
MONZELLA JOHNSON, MARCIA JOHNSON
Defendant. |
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) ) ) ) ) )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
|
______________________
Hon. Samuel Der-Yeghiayan
Magistrate M. David
Weisman
Civil Action No.
16-cv- 08628
|
MOTION
TO REINSTATE
NOTICE OF REMOVAL CIVIL ACTION FROM STATE JURISDICTION
{Pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. 1446 (a)}
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that Defendants Monzella and Marcia Johnson Pro Se
appeals to the United States District Court for the Northern District
for Jurisdiction. Defendants 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, Judicial Trespassing upon the Laws, Treason, 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 violations
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}.
JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENT
NOTICE OF REMOVAL CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT ET AL
Order entered: March
25, 2019
Notice of Removal
Complaint: April 8, 2019
Statute: Unequal Protection of the Laws Violations,
Judicial Trespassing upon the Laws, 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 Democratic Political Machine Illinois Legal system Black and Brown lives don't matter and
that Jim Crow methods still being exercised in the courts and
Defendants are being economically oppressed 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 Plaintiffs 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 Democratic 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 or any precedents established within
the 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,
_________________________
Monzella Y. Johnson
5217 S. Ingleside Ave.
Chicago,
IL. 60615
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 IIIinois, 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 & Assoc., 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 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 of an “Organized Conspiracy”.
INTRODUCTORY ALLEGATIONS
14. This is an action brought by Defendant for declaratory
judgment,
injunctive
and
equitable relief, and for compensatory, special, general and punitive damages.
15.
Defendant filed a Motion
Disqualification of Judge for “Cause” using her robe
engaging in a Criminal Conspiracy & Reconsideration Vacate (October 29th
2018) Order due to Civil Rights Violations “Fraud” Trespassing upon the Laws
making the Order a Nullity w/Affidavit pursuant to Civil Procedure Rules and Sup Ct. Rules of Illinois, 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 G;
Ex B-C Court Orders.
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).
16. That said judge stated, he did not accept
Affidavits or Court Transcripts the very documents that corroborated Associate
Judge engaging in criminal acts of “Fraud”
so as to protect and endorse said judge Trespassing upon the Laws as a “Private
Citizen”.
A- Plaintiff filed a Frivolous Non-Response Motion For Disqualification of Judge For “Cause”, hereto attached, as Gr Ex D.
B- Said attorney never opened his mouth to
defend any of the issues that was recorded in Gr Ex D, during the Hearing of March 25, 2019 as the judge didn’t
allow the attorney to say anything but acted as the Plaintiff’s attorney and
Plaintiff never forwarded any Briefs pursuant to Ex G.
17. Defendant filed Respondent’s
Motion Striking Petitioner’s Response Motion for Disqualification of Judge as
Frivolous for “Cause” due to “Perjury “Fraud” & Impose Sanctions Pursuant
to Supreme Court Rule 137 making the Response a Nullity w/Affidavit hereto attached, as Gr Ex E; no attorney denied or objected
to said pleadings
of Fact and "Fraud"
That said orders entered against
the Defendants are a “Nullity”
pursuant to Federal Laws and legal precedents.
A- That the court
became
a law unto
themselves
denied
said
motion
and
became “Private Citizens” not having any jurisdiction over the defendants.
B- 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);
C-
A void judgment does not create any binding obligation.
Kalb v. Feuerstein (1940) 308 US 433, 60 S Ct 343, 84 L, Ed 370.
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.
a.
“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
b.
“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)
18. That because
the Illinois Court system is Rigged with so many Democratic Judges “Fixing” cases as “Private Citizens”
is all the reason why this case should never be Remanded back to the Circuit
Court due to the foregoing violations:
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)”.
B-
Black and Brown Judges noted in the Exhibits not having jurisdiction over
white attorneys allow themselves to be whored out to dispensate unlawful injustices
on their own ethnic groups so as to be accepted by the whites controlling the
Democratic Political Machine.
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].
Pursuant to Vigus O’Bannon
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.
19. Defendant from another case similar in nature filed a Motion for Disqualification of judge for “Cause” Racial
Hate Bias Prejudice Pursuant to S.H.A. 735 ILCS 5/2---1001 (a) (2,3) Engaging
in an Organized Criminal Conspiracy Civil Rights Violations “Fraud” Trespassing
Upon the Laws Engaging in Treason Offenses Making All orders a Nullity
w/Affidavit., hereto
attached, as
Gr Ex
F, Detailing how Democratic
Judges and States attorneys engaged in an “Organized
Conspiracy” framing an innocent man in a Paternity matter falsifying any
and all court documents or court orders oppressing him in unfathomable ways corroborating
Black and Brown judges have no authority over corrupt white men especially
Chief Judge.
A- That said
document has court transcripts attached demonstrating how said judges and
attorneys were complicit in an “Organized
Conspiracy” corroborating their roles as “Private Citizens”.
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 and destroy citizens of the United States
not white Irish or of Polish ethnicity;
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 o[Prince Edward County); and Washington, D.C. (Spottswode Bolling v. C. Melvin Shame). These decisions, along with other cases
such as McLaurin
v. dawma State Board o [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.
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 o[Prince Edward County); and Washington, D.C. (Spottswode Bolling v. C. Melvin Shame). These decisions, along with other cases
such as McLaurin
v. dawma State Board o [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.
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. Brautigan (CA 5 F
1a) 227 F 2d 124, 55 Alr 2d 505, John W. Strong, 185, 777-78 (4 the
ed. 1992).
21.) That a Clerk
in Dorothy Browns office allegedly altered government records in the data base
at the Daley Center to reflect that Barbara Dutton was not the attorney who
filed a Complaint without filing an Appearance representing (MERS) Mortgage
Electronic Regis.
23.) Defendant
mentioned that 1.) The court never had jurisdiction on them March 25 before
judge Simko because Counsel failed to file the proper appearance making all court
orders VOID; 2.) That on June 3, 2010, Judge Gillespie entered
an Order, “The court on its own motion vacates the judgment of
foreclosure for lack of a proper affidavit in support of et al.”
Most importantly, Par 3 of Gr
Ex A, That the Appellate Court Fifth Div,……………..affirmed a decision et al.
24.) That Counsel for the Plaintiff never ever
followed the Directives of the Court’s ruling but insisted on using their own
agenda in trying to steal their home by any unlawful means necessary using a
plethora of law firms as they made money off the Mayhem and Diabolical
Terrorist Acts perpetrated by judges and lawyers, in that another law firm
yielding $225 Million Dollars a year Hinshaw & Culbertson, LLP, 151
North Franklin #2500 Chg. IL 60606 is trying to help do what the other attorneys
could not do.
A-
That the Associate Judges abused her discretion violated all Canon ethics and
Illinois Rules of Civil Procedure and Defendants Civil Rights by denying the
aforementioned Motions proving beyond the Preponderance of the Evidence that
Associate Judges cannot and will not apply the laws in a just and fair manner,
due to how they are appointed, they don’t follow the laws of the United States
Constitution or any laws of Civility they are in the legal system to wreak
havoc on the innocent, weak, elderly or anybody disenfranchised within the
legal system for their own personal gain.
B- That
the Defendants properly Petitioned the Federal Court for Removal because
justice cannot be had in those courts engaging in what is clear and
convincing “Kangaroo Rulings” better known as “Jim
Crow” enforcement Laws outlawed by the United States Supreme Court but
it is clear Illinois don’t honor those laws as demonstrated in this case;
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.
25.) Plaintiff’s
Counsels are expecting this court to ignore all of the racist Civil Rights
diabolical Terrorist Acts lodged at the Defendants and grant them anything they
request on paper so as to prove because of Defendants skin color and the fact
they are seniors’ African American persons do not receive Equal Protection of
the Laws in the State of Illinois;
A- That lawyers are relying on certain Democratic judges with Hate
in their hearts to continue to ignore and deny any claim where cases are being
obviously “Fixed” worse than in the Grey
Lord Indictments, from the Chicago Tribune article Dec. 19, 1985 the allegations
ranged from fixing drunken-driving cases to more serious felony charges. One
lawyer was caught on tape bragging that "even a murder case can be fixed
if the judge is given something to hang his hat on." By the end of the
decade, nearly 100 people had been indicted, and all but a handful were
convicted. Of the 17 judges indicted, 15 were convicted. The tally of
convictions included 50 lawyers, as well as court clerks, police officers and
sheriff's deputies.
Greylord was not
the first federal investigation of public corruption in Chicago, but it was a
watershed in its use of eavesdropping devices and a mole to obtain evidence
instead of relying on wrongdoers to become government informants.
B- That
Defendants has had their home for more than 61 years longer than many have had
careers and worked hard retiring to earn said property and a bunch of hoodlum
attorneys are using their law degrees to steal from persons they thought they
could intimidate and bully with the help of certain corrupt racist politically
connected judges.
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.
26.) That
Counsel has admitted in their responses taking part in an “Organized Conspiracy” against the Defendants trying to
steal their home using “Fraudulent Acts” surpassing human imagination, in that
every judge in the State Courts whom this matter pended before closed their
eyes to every unlawful act known to man because of their skin color
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.
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.
27.) That
in spite of the aforementioned legal precedents recorded within, the Circuit
Court politically appointed judges ignored all of Defendants pleadings
arguments and affidavits and denied every Motion against the Manifest Weight of
the Evidence demonstrating the courts are rigged against the innocent and the
just, in spite of the laws, 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
28.) That the Defendants are retired Civil
servants from respected positions within the City of Chicago and this is the
methodology how these corrupt individuals use their influence and legal wit to
take and steal from hard working individuals.
29.) That the Defendants have been
forced to spend and deplete their savings and earnings to defend against the
frivolous litigations lodged at them by said individuals “organized in this conspiracy” trying to steal their home in the
guise as a foreclosure.
30.) That Group Ex F, demonstrates
how a Rigged Court system ruined an innocent man’s life of 31 years on a
horrific lie as Black and Brown Judges are powerless in the Democratic Party as
they closed their eyes where said Defendant is homeless and displaced via the
employment arena; whereby, innocent men have been incarcerated by this same
type of rigged system for many years and later been deemed innocent, and now Defendants
in this case are unlawfully enduring the same racial injustices perpetrated in this
document 11 years and counting; moreover, it‘s 2019 beyond the statute of limitations
depleting everything they have earned to finance corrupt white men’s lives at
this rate, they would be homeless, indigent or deceased demonstrating
unequivocally Jim Crow laws still exist in Illinois and
is not outlawed in accordance to the United States Supreme Court Laws;
31.) That so many attorneys are
arrogant and contemptuous violating the laws because it is such a norm in State
Court’s they don’t feel no judge will ever admonish any of them or impose any
type of Sanction on them because persons of color are not deemed citizens of
merit or equal in Illinois in accordance to the laws of the United States
Constitution, in that Ex H, I validates’ the verity of this
fact!
A-
Plaintiff filed for a Divorce and his wife Defaulted African
American Judge William Stewart Boyd “Fixed”
the case in favor of a White Attorney unlawfully Trespassed upon every Law
against the innocent Plaintiff simply because of his skin color knowing he
would not be admonished had money extorted from his wages and had him Remanded
into Custody for not paying maintenance he never owed and is unable to pay any
of his own bills or buy food and is being forced into homelessness due to the
aforementioned.
B-
To further validate the verity of the above, Ex I is not in the database and no
Presiding judge ever granted jurisdiction to said judge to issue any judgment
on the Plaintiff in that, said case has been “Fixed” by Judge Boyd who in turn was the Defendant’s attorney in Gr Ex F and became aware of all
“Fraudulent Acts” became a judge by misrepresenting him in Gr Ex F.
C-
Said Law Firm Postestivo & Assoc. Along with a
person(s) conspired with a Clerk in the Circuit Court of Dorothy Brown’s office
by submitting an Amended Notice attached as Group Ex D, but never the original document when Defendant asked the
judge about the document, the judge said he did not know and never asked the
attorney to explain in details how the Amended document came into existence.
D-
That it is clear from the aforementioned, that certain attorneys
corroborate with judges with no regard for the laws who do not comply with laws as they circumvent any
and all laws to achieve any unlawful endeavor demonstrated in this matter and
expects this Honorable Court to adhere to all unlawful acts and continuously
deny the Defendants any justice because of their skin color and age, one can
only infer because they are seniors, in that they will not be able to
financially maintain the necessary resolve to fight the injustices in the
courts by Diabolical Machine Democrats and keep their home;
E-
." 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.
WHEREFORE DEFENDANT PRAYS that
this Court Grant the Reinstatement of this Motion in its entirety and keep this
matter in Federal Court and Invoke Jurisdiction on all parties complicit in
this “Organized Conspiracy”:
2.) For an Order imposing Sanctions reimbursing to Defendant all
costs and fees for the enforcement of this matter;
3.) For an Order of Sanctions Remanding any and all parties
complicit in this “Organized Conspiracy”
stealing Defendants home;
4.) 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 $11 Million Dollars;
5.) 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;
Finally, this Motion
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”)
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.”
Respectfully submitted,
_________________________
Monzella Y. Johnson
5217 S. Ingleside Ave.
Chicago,
IL. 60615
IN THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
NEW
CENTURY MORTGAGE CORPORATION; 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, AKA “MERS”
Plaintiffs,
MONZELLA
JOHNSON, MARCIA JOHNSON
Defendant. |
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) ) ) ) ) )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
|
______________________
Hon. Samuel
Der-Yeghiayan
Magistrate M. David
Weisman
Civil
Action No.
16-cv-
08628
|
CERTIFICATE
OF SERVICE
I Monzella Johnson, certify that on April 8, 2019 I have caused
proper service to be had on all Plaintiff’s via personally delivery or US Mail.
To: Dir. US Attorney
FBI
Dir. Chris Wray
John R. Lausch, Jr. 2111
West Roosevelt Road
219 S. Dearborn, 5th floor
Chicago,
Ill. 60612
Circuit Court of Cook County, Dorothy
Brown
50 West Washington,
Chicago, IL 60601 Suite 1001
Postestivo & Assoc.
Hinshaw
& Culbertson, LLP
223 West Jackson Blvd. Suite 610 151 N. Franklin Street, #2500
Chicago, Illinois 60606 Chicago, Illinois
60606
PLEASE BE ADVISED that
on April 8, 2019 a Notice of Motion for Reinstatement et al. has been filed in
the Northern District of Illinois Federal Court.
Respectfully submitted,
_________________________
Monzella Y. Johnson
5217 S. Ingleside Ave.
Chicago,
IL. 60615
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
NEW
CENTURY MORTGAGE CORPORATION; 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, AKA “MERS”
Plaintiffs,
MONZELLA
JOHNSON, MARCIA JOHNSON
Defendant. |
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) ) ) ) ) )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
|
______________________
Hon. Samuel
Der-Yeghiayan
Magistrate M. David
Weisman
Civil
Action No.
16-cv-
08628
|
AFFIDAVIT
I Monzella Y.
Johnson, files herewith her affidavit as required by Title 28, United States
Code:
I Monzella Y. Johnson Pro Se being duly sworn on oath states
that, I have caused the aforementioned Notice and Motion for Reconsideration,
to the noted Plaintiffs via hand delivery Nov. 4, 2016, 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
IN
THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
EXHIBIT LIST
1.)
Group Ex A
Respondent’s Motion Disqualification of
Judge for “Cause” using her robe engaging in a Criminal Conspiracy &
Reconsideration Vacate (October 29th 2018) Order due to Civil Rights
Violations “Fraud” Trespassing upon the Laws making the Order a Nullity
w/Affidavit
2.)
Group Ex B
Transfer Order Within Division.
3.)
Group Ex C
Order Setting Briefing Schedule and Hearing Date.
4.)
Group Ex D
Plaintiffs Response To Defendant’s Motion for Disqualification of Judge for
“Cause”.
5.)
Group Ex E Respondent’s
Motion Striking Petitioner’s Response Motion for Disqualification of Judge as
Frivolous for “Cause” due to “Perjury “Fraud” & Impose Sanctions Pursuant
to Supreme Court Rule 137 making the Response a Nullity w/Affidavit.
6.)
Group Ex F
Respondent’s Motion for
Disqualification of judge for “Cause” Racial Hate Bias Prejudice Pursuant to
S.H.A. 735 ILCS 5/2---1001 (a) (2,3) Engaging in an Organized Criminal
Conspiracy Civil Rights Violations “Fraud” Trespassing Upon the Laws Engaging
in Treason Offenses Making All orders a Nullity w/Affidavit.
7.)
Exhibit G March 25, 2019 Court Order denying Defendant’s valid legal
Motions.
8.)
Group Exhibit H
April 2, 2019 Order on Prove Up.
9.)
Group Exhibit I
Judgment For Dissolution of Marriage.
No comments:
Post a Comment