THAT IF PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP WAS A BLACK MAN OR WAS BEING PROSECUTED IN CHICAGO ILLINOIS BY THE DIXIECRATS AKA DEMOCRATS HE WOULD HAVE BEEN FOUND GUILTY WITH OR WITHOUT EVIDENCE, ESPECIALLY BEING REPUBLICAN.

THIS PARTICULAR POST IN NO WAY SAYS THAT THE PRESIDENT IS GUILTY OF ANY CRIME OR SHOULD BE GUILTY AND THAT ANY PERSON BEING TRIED FOR ANY CRIMES ARE SUPPOSED TO BE DEEMED INNOCENT UNTIL FOUND GUILTY.

THIS NOT THE CASE FOR THE DEMOCRATIC JUDICIAL SYSTEM IN ILLINOIS COURTS, JUDGES HAVE BEEN HAND PICKED BY ALDERMAN EDWARD BURKE TO DO HIS BIDDING'S OVERTURNING EVERY LAW ENACTED BY THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION AS JUDGES HAVE WARRED AGAINST THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BY OVERTURNING EVERY LAW ENACTED BY THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURTS AND CONGRESS PURSUANT TO THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1866.

IT IS VERY IRONIC THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES HAVING BEEN IMPEACHED FOR ABUSE OF POWERS, HMM BUT HERE IN CHICAGO DEMOCRATIC JUDGES HAVE COMMITTED CRIMINAL ACTS WORSE THAN THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND NOT ONE JUDGE HAS BEEN IMPEACHED, INDICTED, OR ADMONISHED PRIMARILY BECAUSE THEIR CRIMES FOR THE MOST PART ARE PERPETRATED ON PERSONS OF COLOR OR CAUCASIANS WITHOUT THE SUPPORT.

FOR EXAMPLE:

1.)   DEMOCRATIC JUDGES HAVE COMMITTED THE CRIMES OF ENFORCING LAWS PURSUANT TO THEIR PERSONAL OR FRATERNAL DOCTRINES MAKING THEM "PRIVATE CITIZENS" AND THESE ARE CONSIDERED "TREASON OFFENSES"

2.)   WHEN THE LAWS STATE COURT ORDERS ARE DEEMED "VOID OR A NULLITY" DEMOCRATIC JUDGES IN HIGHER COURTS CLOSES THEIR EYES AND BECOME COMPLICIT IN THE CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE BY DISMISSING ANY AND ALL CASES INVOLVING DIXIECRATS AKA DEMOCRATS.

3.)   DEMOCRATS HATE PERSONS OF COLOR SO BADLY THEY ONLY SUPPORT AND APPOINT THOSE COLORED PERSONS WHO ARE WILLING TO DO WHAT THEY ARE TOLD BY DESTROYING THEIR OWN ETHNIC GROUPS, BY MAKING SURE THEY KEEP THEIR MOUTHS SHUT AND EYES CLOSED WHEN COMPLAINTS ARE PRESENTED TO THEIR OFFICES ABOUT ANY WHITES ENGAGING IN RACIST OR HATE CRIMES AGAINST THEIR RACES.

6. In that every Colored judge associated in the crimes with said racist Democrats have sold out to the party using their ethnicity and alleged sexuality to oppress steal homes extort monies from innocent men and women of color upholding the Terrorist Doctrines of the Democratic Political Machine as Demonstrated in said Summary Judgment, Page 3 under Fraud Admissibility corroborates the hate and extent racist Democrats are still willing to exercise in promoting Jim Crow Laws outlawed by the United States Constitution, in that Pages 4-9 validate the verity and has been admitted to how judges along with their colored Terrorist are used to circumvent all laws of the United States Constitution and deny any and claims against Caucasians or their racist Brethren in the Democratic Political Machine, in that no Black Man in the Democratic Party will open their mouths and denounce said Demonic acts perpetrated on persons of color out of fear they will be exposed for all of their dirty deeds performed on behalf and within the Democratic Party as they hid in the closet as well as many women.

That Pursuant to Motion to Supplement Motion with Court Transcript of July 26, 20119 before Federal judge Norgle, (From Gr Ex A Summary Judgment Filed August 19, 2019) that said judge signed court order allowing FBI and US Attorney, Page 2 Par A and B, “that Edward A. Arce and William Stewart Boyd were complicit in their corroboration shaking down an innocent Plaintiff Cazembe O. Kabir as they used their robes extorted money from him et al. “In that no States Attorney nor the Attorney General or the judges themselves DENIED the unlawful “Trespassing upon the Laws” “Treason Offenses” pursuant to Federal Rule 56, one can infer from the above said judges were of the impression as long as they are perpetrating crimes on persons of color the alleged “White Nationalists” controlling them and the Democratic Political Machine were going to save them and protect them from any admonishments.

     THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY DON'T BELIEVE THAT PEOPLE OF COLOR SHOULD BE WORKING AND THAT THEY SHOULD BE LIVING ON WELFARE:

      THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY DON'T BELIEVE IN NOTHING POSITIVE FOR THE PRODUCTIVITY WHERE FAMILIES ARE CONCERNED INVOLVING COLORED FAMILIES, THAT IS WHY CHILD SUPPORT IS USED TO CRIMINALIZE MEN OPPRESSING SAID MEN SO AS TO KEEP DISENFRANCHISED FROM ANY GAINFUL MEANS OF EMPLOYMENT.

    THIS VERY DOCUMENT EPITOMIZES THE CONTINUES HATE THAT STILL EXIST IN A PARTY WHERE BLACK AND BROWN PEOPLE IN ORDER TO BE ACCEPTED ARE WILLING TO RISK GOING TO JAIL OR BEING EXECUTED PERPETRATING CRIMES ON THEIR OWN ETHNIC GROUPS DUE TO SELF HATE TO BE ACCEPTED BY A PARTY DON'T RESPECT OR LIKE THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE.

  TALK ABOUT MENTAL ILLNESS WHERE ARE THE PSYCHIATRIST IN THIS MADNESS?

   YOU CAN NOT BLAME THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION FOR ANY OF THIS NEVER IN THE HISTORY OF THE DIXIECRAT PARTY HAVE THEY DID ANYTHING FOR PERSONS OF COLOR BUT THE LEGACY OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY SAYS OTHERWISE.  

 

            IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS

COUNTY DEPARTMENT--CHANCERY DIVISION

U.S. Bank National Association, As Trustee Under)

Pooling and Servicing Agreement Dated as of        )

December 1, 2006 Mastr Asset–Backed Securities )

Trust 2006-NC3 Mortgage Pass-Through               ) Case # 2008 CH 33616

Certificates, Series 2006-NC3                                 )                                                           Petitioner        )

                                                                                 )          

V.                                                                              ) Judge Fredrenna Lyle

                                                                                 )                                                                                        ) Room 2808

                                                                                 )

Monzella Y. Johnson, A/K/A Monzella                  )                                   

Johnson; Marcia E. Johnson A/K/A Marcia            )                                                 Johnson: Mortgage Electronic Registration            )

Systems, Inc. As Nominee for New Century          )

Mortgage Corporation; Monzella Y. Johnson         )                                         

( C ) Cestui Que Trust; Discover Bank;                  )

Unknown Owners and Non-Record Claimants,      )

                                                                                 )

                                                           Respondents  )

                                                                                                                                                                                                        

       RESPONDENT’S  REPLY MOTION TO ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING PLAINTIFF FILES DUE TO THEM ADMITTING TO ALL PLEADINGS PURSUANT TO  Local Rule 56.1(b)(3)(B).

  w/AFFIDAVIT

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

1.      That pursuant to Federal Laws of the United States and Laws of the United States Constitution Various Cook County, State and Federal Judges do not honor, respect or adhere to the aforementioned laws:

A-    Respondent filed a Jurisdictional Memorandum (June 10, 2019) in the Seventh Circuit, Court of Appeals detailing why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction:

B-    That on June 11, 2019, it is alleged a Clerk in the Seventh Circuit or anonymous judge issued an unsigned directive, ORDER On consideration of the Jurisdictional Memorandum filed by the appellant on June 10, 2019, IT IS ORDERED that the appellee shall file, on or before June 18, 2019, a response to appellant’s filing, addressing the jurisdictional issue raised in the court’s order of June 3, 2019, hereto attached both Court Orders not signed or certified from any Judge or Clerk from the Seventh Circuit.

C-    That Pursuant to the instruments purportedly sent from the Seventh Circuit as Orders the Appellees failed to respond, comply or DENY any of the Pleadings in the Jurisdictional Memorandum; thereby causing said Motion for Summary Judgment to be filed (June 24, 2019).

2.      That because they have admitted to all of the Pleadings pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedures negates any responses extensions or continuances for any reasons due to them admitting Black and Brown judges are mere puppets for the Democratic Political Machine.

3.      That not only because of the color of Defendant’s skin color and disposition fighting RACISM, NIGGERCISM to keep their home at the hands of JIM CROW LAWS still being enforced in Illinois Courts Criminal Enterprise is why every judge closed their eyes to the plethora of Civil Rights Violations perpetrated at them by alleged Racist attorneys working on behalf of US Bank trying to steal said home, See Gr Ex A and Gr Ex B The Democratic Party's Long History of Racism, and The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow.

A-    That Gr Ex A,  It was the Democratic Party in the South that instituted Jim Crow Laws and Pursuant to Gr Ex B Par 1, “After the Civil War, most white southerners opposed Radical Reconstruction and the Republicans Party’s support of black civil and political rights. The Democratic Party identified itself as the white man’s party”   

 

B-    That said Summary Judgment unequivocally corroborate and demonstrate how Black judges aid and assist Racist Judges in a plethora of Diabolical Crimes destroying their own races to be accepted by a Democratic Party that has no love or respect for any of them as they destroy the lives of innocent people of color.

C-    That Judge Lyle has allowed said law firm to profit off the injustices of said Defendants as many racist Caucasian attorneys are able to provide for their families off the perils of a sordid legal system designed to keep people of color oppressed or incarcerated.

D-    Plaintiff’s are aware of their criminal acts failed to mail to the Defendant’s their motion for Extension of Time so as to keep Defendant’s from responding or objecting in a timely manner.

 

4.   That said father or Uncle Brian A. Potestivo is teaching his son how to keep colored people oppressed steal homes on behalf of Banks Education: J.D., Western Michigan University Cooley Law School; B.S., Michigan State University

Admitted to Practice: United States District Court, Eastern District of Michigan; United States District Court, Western District of Michigan; United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois; United States District Court, Northern District of Ohio

Brian A. Potestivo founded Potestivo & Associates, P.C. in 1990.

A-   That said attorney Brian have enough experience in the Federal area of law to know better than to think his law firm was going to get away with these unlawful criminal acts noted in all 4 documents his law firm is unable to address.

B-   Playing games with the laws trying to make asses out of decent women as Defendant’s as retired Civil Servants (retired from board of Education as an Educator (Teacher) Police Officer by engaging in Jim Crow  tactics outlawed by the United States Supreme Court.

5. 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 or inferior Puppet Colored judges with no authority over racist Democratic Caucasians.

6. In that every Colored judge associated in the crimes with said racist Democrats have sold out to the party using their ethnicity and alleged sexualities to oppress steal homes extort monies from innocent men and women of color upholding the Terrorist Doctrines of the Democratic Political Machine as Demonstrated in said Summary Judgment, Page 3 under Fraud Admissibility corroborates the hate and extent racist Democrats are still willing to exercise in promoting Jim Crow Laws outlawed by the United States Constitution, in that Pages 4-9 validate the verity and has been admitted to how judges along with their colored Terrorist are used to circumvent all laws of the United States Constitution and deny any and claims against Caucasians or their racist Brethren in the Democratic Political Machine, in that no Black Man in the Democratic Party will open their mouths and denounce said Demonic acts perpetrated on persons of color out of fear they will be exposed for all of their dirty deeds performed on behalf and within the Democratic Party as they hid in the closet as well as many women.

7. That Gr Ex A is Petitioner’s Ex D Ref as 37 of 128, and Motion for Summary Judgment Ref as 39 of 128 unequivocally corroborate and demonstrate the veracity of Fredrenna Lyle not only as a “Private Citizen” “Trespassing upon the Laws” but an active “Terrorist”  in the in the Criminal Enterprise named Democratic Political Machine ignored Defendant’s oral argument when she explained said Petitioners never filed a Motion said judge used her unlawful authority to violate every law necessary trying to save corrupt Caucasians and their Brethren.

8. 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.

9. That Joe Louis Lawrence on behalf of the Defendant’s checked the computer so as to glean any other deceptive schemes being concocted against them and learned that the court order judge Lyle signed as Final was not recorded on the court order in the computer, so he complained to the Supervising Clerk and was directed to the managing Clerk in Judge Lyles court, Judge Lyle requested, he approach the bench and stated, “she recognized him from being with the Johnson Sisters”, he explained, “that the word Final was noted on the court order that was reviewed”, but in the computer, your court order is absent your signature and Final is not on the court order, but this copy is recorded as final without your signature, and the other side can easily come in and request additional time”, Judge Lyle appeared stunned, “asked if it had a stamp on it? His reply, was yes, her reply, “that is good enough without a signature because you have a copy, have the Johnson sisters to make sure they have that court order when they come to court also, they know how to argue and object if something is not right they will bring it to the court’s attention”.

Supreme Court Rule 272 - When Judgment is Entered 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 or if a circuit court rule requires the prevailing party to submit a draft order, the clerk shall make a notation to that effect and the judgment becomes final only when the signed judgment is filed.

Preamble for Illinois Judges

Our legal system is based on the principle that an independent, fair and competent judiciary will interpret and apply the laws that govern us. The role of the judiciary is central to American concepts of justice and the rule of law. Intrinsic to all provisions of this code are precepts that judges, individually and collectively, must respect and honor the judicial office as a public trust and strive to enhance and maintain confidence in our legal system. The judge is an arbiter of facts and law for the resolution of disputes and a highly visible symbol of government under the rule of law.

The Code of Judicial Conduct is intended to establish standards for ethical conduct of judges. It consists of broad statements called canons, specific rules set forth in lettered subsections under each canon, and Committee Commentary. The text of the canons and the rules is authoritative. The Committee Commentary, by explanation, and example, provides guidance with respect to the purpose and meaning of the canons and rules. The Commentary is not intended as a statement of additional rules.

The canons and rules are rules of reason. They should be applied consistent with constitutional requirements, statutes, other court rules and decisional law and in the context of all relevant circumstances. The Code is to be construed so as not to impinge on the essential independence of judges in making judicial decisions.

The Code is designed to provide guidance to judges and candidates for judicial office and to provide a structure for regulating conduct through disciplinary agencies. It is not designed or intended as a basis for civil liability or criminal prosecution. Furthermore, the purpose of the Code would be subverted if the Code were invoked by lawyers for mere tactical advantage in a proceeding.

The canons are not standards of discipline in themselves, but express the policy consideration underlying the rules contained within the canons. The text of the rules is intended to govern conduct of judges and to be binding upon them. It is not intended, however, that every transgression will result in disciplinary action. Whether disciplinary action is appropriate, and the degree of discipline to be imposed, should be determined through a reasonable and reasoned application of the text of the rules and should depend on such factors as the seriousness of the transgression, whether there is a pattern of improper activity and the effect of the improper activity on others or on the judicial system.

The Code of Judicial Conduct is not intended as an exhaustive guide for the conduct of judges. They should also be governed in their judicial and personal conduct by general ethical standards. The Code is intended, however, to state basic standards which should govern the conduct of all judges and to provide guidance to assist judges in establishing and maintaining high standards of judicial and personal conduct.

Adopted August 6, 1993, effective immediately.

CANON 1

A Judge Should Uphold the Integrity and
Independence of the Judiciary

             An independent and honorable judiciary is indispensable to justice in our society. A judge should participate in establishing, maintaining, and enforcing, and should personally observe, high standards of conduct so that the integrity and independence of the judiciary may be preserved. The provisions of this Code should be construed and applied to further that objective.

Adopted December 2, 1986, effective January 1, 1987; amended August 6, 1993, effective immediately; amended October 15, 1993, effective immediately.

Rule 62

CANON 2

A Judge Should Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance
of Impropriety in All of the Judge's Activities

A.        A judge should respect and comply with the law and should conduct himself or herself at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.

B.        A judge should not allow the judge's family, social, or other relationships to influence the judge's judicial conduct or judgment. A judge should not lend the prestige of judicial office to advance the private interests of others; nor should a judge convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence the judge. A judge should not testify voluntarily as a character witness.

Adopted December 2, 1986, effective January 1, 1987; amended October 15, 1993, effective immediately.

Rule 63

CANON 3

A Judge Should Perform the Duties of Judicial
Office Impartially and Diligently

            The judicial duties of a judge take precedence over all the judge's other activities. The judge's judicial duties include all the duties of the judge's office prescribed by law. In the performance of these duties, the following standards apply:

A.      Adjudicative Responsibilities.

(1)       A judge should be faithful to the law and maintain professional competence in it. A judge should be unswayed by partisan interests, public clamor, or fear of criticism.

(2)       A judge should maintain order and decorum in proceedings before the judge.

(3)       A judge should be patient, dignified, and courteous to litigants, jurors, witnesses, lawyers, and others with whom the judge deals in an official capacity, and should require similar conduct of lawyers, and of staff, court officials, and others subject to the judge's direction and control.

(4)       A judge shall accord to every person who has a legal interest in a proceeding, or that person's lawyer, the right to be heard according to law. A judge may make reasonable efforts, consistent with the law and court rules, to facilitate the ability of self-represented litigants to be fairly heard.

(5)      A judge shall not initiate, permit, or consider ex parte communications, or consider other communications made to the judge outside the presence of the parties concerning a pending or impending proceeding except that:

(a) Where circumstances require, ex parte communications for scheduling, administrative purposes or emergencies that do not deal with substantive matters or issues on the merits are authorized; provided:

(i) the judge reasonably believes that no party will gain a procedural or tactical advantage as a result of the ex    parte communication, and

(ii) the judge makes provision promptly to notify all other parties of the substance of the ex parte communication and allows an opportunity to respond.

(b) A judge may consult with court personnel whose function is to aid the judge in carrying out the judge's adjudicative responsibilities or with other judges.

(c) A judge may, with the consent of the parties, confer separately with the parties and their lawyers in an effort to mediate or settle matters pending before the judge.

(d) A judge may initiate or consider any ex parte communications when expressly authorized by law to do so.

(e) A judge may consult with members of a Problem-Solving Court Team when serving as a Judge in a certified Problem-Solving Court as defined in the Supreme Court "Problem Solving Court Standards."

(6)       A judge shall devote full time to his or her judicial duties, and should dispose promptly of the business of the court.

(7)       A judge should abstain from public comment about a pending or impending proceeding in any court, and should require similar abstention on the part of court personnel subject to the judge's direction and control. This paragraph does not prohibit judges from making public statements in the course of their official duties or from explaining for public information the procedures of the court.

(8)       Proceedings in court should be conducted with fitting dignity, decorum, and without distraction. The taking of photographs in the courtroom during sessions of the court or recesses between proceedings, and the broadcasting or televising of court proceedings is permitted only to the extent authorized by order of the Supreme Court. This rule is not intended to prohibit local circuit courts from using security cameras to monitor their facilities. For the purposes of this rule, the use of the terms "photographs," "broadcasting," and "televising" include the audio or video transmissions or recordings made by telephones, personal data assistants, laptop computers, and other wired or wireless data transmission and recording devices.

(9)      A judge shall perform judicial duties without bias or prejudice. A judge shall not, in the performance of judicial duties, by words or conduct manifest bias or prejudice, including but not limited to bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation or socioeconomic status, and shall not permit staff, court officials and others subject to the judge's direction and control to do so.

(10)    Proceedings before a judge shall be conducted without any manifestation, by words or conduct, of prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation or socioeconomic status, by parties, jurors, witnesses, counsel, or others. This section does not preclude legitimate advocacy when these or similar factors are issues in the proceedings.

10. That Pursuant to Gr Ex B Motion to Reinstate Case Due to Democratic Judges/Attorneys Trespassing Upon the Laws et al. where the CTA General Attorney, States Attorney Kim Foxx, Local Union 241 President Keith Hill all have admitted to the entire 28 Page document pursuant to the Summary Judgment;

A-   That Pursuant to Page 4, Par F and G  “Not one Negroe, African American, Colored Person with authority in the Democratic Party admonish said judge further corroborating them as “Figureheads” et al. “That no African American, Latino or otherwise in authority have any real authority over Caucasians in the Democratic Party et al.

B-   That Pursuant to Page 16, Par 50, That Illinois Democrats in the Political Machine have managed to circumvent the aforementioned precedent by recruiting inferior Negroes or Hispanics to oppress deny their own ethnic groups by contributing to the Racial Mayhem described within so as to be accepted by the Democratic Party et al.

C-   That Pursuant to Gr Ex F and G Motion to Vacate Order for want of prosecution and Impose Sanctions et al. and Warranting Jurisdiction of FBI, U.S. Attorney, Court Order corroborating Democratic judge as a Racist Vile Terrorist letting everyone know the hate Democrats really have for persons of color.

D-   That Pursuant to Page 16, Par 51 Democratic Party has Roots in Violence, Racism and Bigotry . unequivocally without a scintilla of falsity corroborate that present-day Democrats are systematically engaging in Terrorist Acts against the United States Government and the Constitution pursuant to the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871 as their actions are perpetrated on persons of color.

E-   That Ex E Black Political History Facts Republicans voted to Abolish Slavery Democrats Opposed it. Republicans Passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Democrats Opposed it.

F-   Colored Democrats can sleep and marry Caucasians and can have sex with white men and marry them but as Democrats they are powerless when it comes to admonishing them within the laws, but as long as Colored Democrats are killing their own race upholding Racist Democrats in the Political Machine as they rape kill, apply Unequal Protection of the Laws commit genocide etc. and remain inferior and do what they are told like the other puppet Negroes, they might get an alleged position like William Stewart Boyd become an Associate judge and destroy other Blacks as the alleged enforcer keeping other Negroes in check destroying them by whatever means necessary making sure no Black person or African American or Negroe aspire to anything meaningful in Chicago, Illinois, See Gr Ex A from the Summary Judgment.

G-  That Pursuant to Motion to Supplement Motion with Court Transcript of July 26, 20119 before Federal judge Norgle, (From Gr Ex A Summary Judgment Filed August 19, 2019) that said judge signed court order allowing FBI and US Attorney, Page 2 Par A and B, “that Edward A. Arce and William Stewart Boyd were complicit in their corroboration shaking down an innocent Plaintiff Cazembe O. Kabir as they used their robes extorted money from him et al. “In that no States Attorney nor the Attorney General or the judges themselves DENIED the unlawful “Trespassing upon the Laws” “Treason Offenses” pursuant to Federal Rule 56, one can infer from the above said judges were of the impression as long as they are perpetrating crimes on persons of color the alleged “White Nationalists” controlling them and the Democratic Political Machine were going to save them and protect them from any admonishments.

   

11.  That not one judge associated in the aforementioned Motions accompanied with Affidavits either appointed by Indicted Alderman Edward Burke or accidentally elected due to the Machine rigging the voting so that, their Brethren or Puppet Colored persons can win the election none of them have the moral turpitude or legal aptitude of the simple responsibilities of the rules of what it takes to be a judge other than simply putting on the robe have demonstrated and Corroborated themselves as active Terrorists warring against the United States Constitution.

A-   That every act or verdict having been rendered or articulated in Judge Lyles Court or any court where Valderrama, Boyd, Norgle, Dow, and Mackoff  or Alderman Edward Burkes alleged niece Eileen O’Neil Burke have already been overturned from past attorneys appeals or simply outlawed pursuant to all Canon Laws and every ruling has been predicated on Jim Crow Terrorist application of the Laws.

B-   The Civil Rights of Heterosexual are vehemently being overturned by alleged women and judges in power as Homosexuals, Bisexuals or Trisexuals demonstrating Hate surpassing human imagination; whereby, a married man stabbed his African American wife noted in the Summary Judgment, Gr Ex A Herbert Cammon stabbing his wife in the mouth 40 times with the assistance of his Gay lover where Edward Burke had the case assigned to a judge that dropped the murder charges, Smollett on the other hand, allegedly perpetrated hate crimes on himself and was indicted by a Grand Jury States Attorney Kim Foxx dropped the charges against Jussie Smollett, but the States Attorney never investigated or questioned any of the noted criminal Civil Rights Violations in said home trying to stolen from Elderly African American women or used her position or authority to vindicate or question how an innocent heterosexual man could have been locked up 5 times for allegedly owing child support  on a court order that had no signatures of a judge or an attorney on the order.

C-   That under the sick doctrines of the Democratic Party the Civil Rights of Heterosexual independent minded persons are being diminished because the white racist men can not garner a benefit from Heterosexuals or persons of color, they need them to conform and comply as inferior beings like the puppet Negroes they control in Chicago government.  

The Mis education of the Negroe, Carter G. Woodson 1933

History shows that it does not matter who is in power... those who have not learned to do for themselves and have to depend solely on others never obtain any more rights or privileges in the end than they did in the beginning.

Here is a quote from the book:

"When you control a man's thinking you do not have to worry about his actions. You do not have to tell him not to stand here or go yonder. He will find his 'proper place' and will stay in it. You do not need to send him to the back door. He will go without being told. In fact, if there is no back door, he will cut one for his special benefit. His education makes it necessary.

12. That Judge Lyle, Plaintiffs and the rest of their Democratic Brethren tried to make the Defendants homeless like Joe Louis Lawrence who is a living testimony and example of the aforementioned doctrines of the Political Machine as a legally Homeless man living on Welfare because the Democratic Party do not accept or recognize intelligent, independent men of color who don’t accept racial oppression as a way of living or employed in any respectable means and is Heterosexual. 

13. That every attorney associated in these matters have admitted  in their responses taking part in an “Organized Criminal Enterprise Conspiracy” against the Defendants trying to steal their home using “Fraudulent Acts” surpassing human imagination, affidavits and transcripts validate the verity every City attorney, States attorney or General Counsels from all law firms where each named case is involved were defeated litigiously in every venue but because every judge in the State Courts now Federal whom this matter pended before have closed their eyes to every unlawful act known to man because of Defendant’s skin color; further corroborates the violation of the 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.

14.  Alexander first joined Potestivo & Associates, P.C. in 2017, as an Associate Attorney for the Foreclosure Department at the firm’s Chicago office. Prior to joining the firm, he served as a judicial intern for the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan, and he also served as a law clerk for the firm. Alexander graduated with his B.A. in Political Theory and Constitutional Democracy from the James Madison College at Michigan State University, and then went on to obtain his J.D. at Loyola University Chicago School of Law.

Potestivo & Associates, P.C. is pleased to announce that Alexander Potestivo has been promoted to the role of Supervising Attorney. In his new capacity, he will continue to serve and represent our law firm out of our Chicago, Illinois office.

15.  The Local Rules provide detailed instructions as to how litigants should approach their summary judgment motions and responses. Local Rule 56.1(a) provides that a motion for summary must include a "statement of material facts as to which the moving party contends there is no genuine issue and that entitle the moving party to a judgment as a matter of law."

            This statement of material facts "shall consist of short numbered paragraphs,    including within each paragraph specific references to the affidavits, parts of the record, and other supporting materials relied upon to support the facts set forth in that paragraph." Part (b) of Local Rule 56.1 requires a party opposing summary for judgment to file a concise response to the movant's statement of material facts. That statement is required to include a response to each numbered paragraph in the moving party's statement, including in the case of any disagreement, "specific references to the affidavits, parts of the record, and other supporting materials relied upon." The rule is very clear that "all material facts set forth in the statement required of the moving party will be deemed admitted unless controverted by the statement of the opposing party." Local Rule 56.1(b)(3)(B).

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

16. That because Judge Lyle became a “Private Citizen” as she corroborated and used her robe to aid and assist the Plaintiff in these diabolical crimes admitted in open court not reading any of the Motions filed by the Defendant or Plaintiff which is asinine and indefensible, she had a duty and obligation within the laws to make sure that Plaintiff were in fact compliant within the laws before signing any court orders;

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

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

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

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

D-    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).

       

17. That Defendant Monzella Johnson repeatedly insisted that the judge look into her computer, and because of the judges’ fraternal relationship to Terrorist in the Democratic Political Machine, but Judge Lyle has corroborated her role as being inferior and complicit in all criminal acts systematically ignored the verity of everything she has asserted demonstrating how the Plaintiffs have engaged in a plethora criminal acts warranting the FBI’s jurisdiction and US Attorney.

A-   Respondent’s Motion Striking & Objecting Petitioner’s Motion et al.  . Properly Re Noticed Nov. 26, 2019.

B-   Respondent’s Motion for Summary Judgment et al. Properly Filed and Noticed Nov. 19, 2019 with the attached Affidavit.

C-    Respondent’s Motion Respondent’s Motion for Sanctions & Rule to Show Cause Remanding Alexander B. Postestivo et al.

D-   Respondent’s Motion Objecting Plaintiff’s Motion for Extension of Time

18. Plaintiffs have never challenged or Objected to any of the aforementioned Motions but has admitted to the verity of every Pleading, but is relying on said inferior judge Lyle or any judge in her stead to violate the oath of their duties and “Trespass upon the Laws” and commit “Treason Offenses” and unlawfully DENY Equal Protection of the Laws to the Defendants like the other racist inferior judges.

19.  That every person attorney judges and States Attorneys receiving Notice and knowledge of the aforementioned crimes keeping their mouths shut are participants in this Criminal Enterprise, In the Matter of People v. Caraga, 2018 IL App. (1^st) 170123 (12/4/18) Cook County, 2^nd Div. Defendant Michael Caraga—along with co-defendants Bogdan Bozic, Nicholas Prittis, Jimmy Pililimis, and Artan Kollcaku 1—participated in an organized scheme to commit mortgage fraud. In this scheme, a straw buyer would obtain a mortgage to buy property sold by Pililimis; the loan proceeds would be split primarily among the straw buyer, Prittis, and Bozic; and the buyer would later default on the loan. As part of the scheme, Caraga prepared the loan application for the straw buyer, using fraudulent income documentation provided by the straw buyer and Bozic. Unbeknownst to Caraga, Bozic, Prittis, and Kollcaku, the straw buyer in the transaction involved in this case was an undercover federal agent, and this transaction was part of a sting operation in which Pililimis was a cooperating witness in the federal investigation.

¶2           Following a bench trial, the trial court found Caraga guilty of (i) loan fraud (720 ILCS 5/17-10.6(d) (West 2012)), (ii) financial institution fraud (id. § 17-10.6(c)(2)), (iii) attempted

20.   That said motion corroborates and demonstrates a Prima Facie showing that the Cook County Courts and participants colluding with one another as Terrorist Operatives in this Criminal Enterprise as judges are likened to being “Weapons of Mass Destructions” as they help advance the agendas of racist Anglo Saxons in the Machine serving as Enforcers as inferior beings destroying their own ethnic groups using the laws unlawfully to steal homes remand innocent citizens in prisons or extort money from them in a plethora of unlawful means.

21.   That Pursuant to Gr Ex A Plaintiff has already admitted to Page 7 Par. D “That because many are aware Chief judge being a Negroe realized he had no real authority caused many ethnic groups to come along and “Trespass upon the Laws” destroy black and brown families, use the laws as Ropes and Water hoses as they “Lynched” innocent men or women who stood up to their Terrorist Acts of injustices in the courts;”

          Under Federal law which is applicable to all states, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that if a court is "without authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. They are not voidable, but simply void; and form no bar to a recovery sought, even prior to a reversal in opposition to them. They constitute no justification; and all persons concerned in executing such judgments or sentences, are considered, in law, as trespassers." Elliot v. Piersol, 1 Pet. 328, 340, 26 U.S. 328, 340 (1828)

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. 

The Illinois Supreme Court held that if a court "could not hear the matter upon the jurisdictional paper presented, its finding that it had the power can add nothing to its authority, - it, had no authority to make that finding." The People v. Brewer, 128 Ill. 472, 483 (1928). The judges listed below had no legal authority (jurisdiction) to hear or rule on certain matters before them. They acted without any jurisdiction.

When judges act when they do not have jurisdiction to act, or they enforce a void order (an order issued by a judge without jurisdiction), they become trespassers of the law, and are engaged in treason (see below).

The Court in Yates v. Village of Hoffman Estates, Illinois, 209 F. Supp. 757 (N.D. Ill. 1962) held that "not every action by a judge is in exercise of his judicial function. ... It is not a judicial function for a judge to commit an intentional tort even though the tort occurs in the courthouse."

When a judge acts as a trespasser of the law, when a judge does not follow the law, the judge loses subject-matter jurisdiction and the judge’s orders are void, of no legal force or effect.

The U.S. Supreme Court, in Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 94 S. Ct. 1683, 1687 (1974) stated that "when a state officer acts under a state law in a manner violative of the Federal Constitution, he "comes into conflict with the superior authority of that Constitution, and he is in that case stripped of his official or representative character and is subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual conduct. The State has no power to impart to him any immunity from responsibility to the supreme authority of the United States." [Emphasis supplied in original].

By law, a judge is a state officer.

That because of the above and Summary Judgment Defendant has produced a number of other cases similar to the injustices they have experienced, where judges have engaged in Terrorist Acts egregiously protecting one another; 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.

               INDUCING RELIANCE

To prevail in a cause of action for fraud, plaintiff must prove that defendant made statement of material nature which was relied on by victim and was made for purposes of inducing reliance, and that victim’s reliance led to his injury. Parsons V. Winter, 1986, 1 Dist., 491 N.E. 2d 1236, 96 ILL Dec. 776, 142 ILL App 3d 354, Appeal Denied.

     In 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” or 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.

22. “No one is above the Law”,  citing a 1928 decision by Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928),

“We must subject government officials to the same rules of conduct that we expect of the citizen. The very existence of the government is imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. As Brandeis puts it, "if the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. To declare that in the administration of the criminal law the end justifies the means—to declare that the government may commit crimes in order to secure the conviction of a private criminal—would bring terrible retribution. Against that pernicious doctrine this court should resolutely set its face."         

A-    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 (9^th Cir. 1989);

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

      

23.  That Pursuant to “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)”.

The United States Supreme Court recently acknowledged the judicial corruption in Cook County, when it stated that Judge "Maloney was one of many dishonest judges exposed and convicted through 'Operation Greylord', a labyrinthine federal investigation of judicial corruption in Chicago". Bracey v. Gramley, case No. 96-6133 (June 9, 1997).

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,

                                                                                  Monzella Y. Johnson, Pro Se

                                                                                         5217 S. Ingleside Ave

                                                                                        Chicago, Il 60615

                                                                                           773 835-5849

                                                                                                                                          

WHEREFORE the aforementioned reasons Respondent respectfully Prays for the Relief

24. 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} Judgment of $13 Million Dollars for the number of years they have had to endure from the Terrorist Mayhem inflicted via stress and anxiety upon them by this Organized Terrorist Criminal Enterprise;

25. Plaintiffs have not raised any affirmative defenses but have engaged in a plethora of illegal acts trying to undermine the Defendants with the aid of judges.

26. For an Order Imposing Sanctions on all attorneys and law Firms for their “Fraudulent Acts” in this matter with Remands for Frauds on the Court. 

27. For an Order Invoking the Jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau of Investigations/United States Attorney Instanter REMANDING FREDRENNA LYLE  “Trespassing upon the Laws” in this “Organized Criminal Enterprise” and Attorney Alexander Potestivo into custody for their roles in this Criminal Enterprise;

28. For and Order Denying any Extensions due to the aforementioned Criminal Terrorist Acts

29. For and Order staying any and all Foreclosures until an investigation is had ascertaining all judges culpable in these egregious crimes of stealing citizens homes.

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

"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly." 

—"Letter from Birmingham Jail," April 16, 1963

Martin Luther King Jr.'s Life in Photos

16

"Darkness cannot drive out darkness, only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate, only love can do that." 

—Strength to Love, 1963

                                                                ________________________

                                                                  Respectfully Submitted, Monzella Y. Johnson

        IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS

COUNTY DEPARTMENT--CHANCERY DIVISION

U.S. Bank National Association, As Trustee Under)

Pooling and Servicing Agreement Dated as of        )

December 1, 2006 Mastr Asset–Backed Securities )

Trust 2006-NC3 Mortgage Pass-Through               ) Case # 2008 CH 33616

Certificates, Series 2006-NC3                                 )                                                           Petitioner        )

                                                                                 )           

V.                                                                              ) Judge Fredrenna Lyle

                                                                                 )                                                                                   )     

                                                                                 ) Room 2808

Monzella Y. Johnson, A/K/A Monzella                  )                                    

Johnson; Marcia E. Johnson A/K/A Marcia            )                                                 Johnson: Mortgage Electronic Registration            )

Systems, Inc. As Nominee for New Century          )

Mortgage Corporation; Monzella Y. Johnson         )                                         

( C ) Cestui Que Trust; Discover Bank;                  )

Unknown Owners and Non-Record Claimants,      )

                                                                                 )

                                                           Respondents  )

                                                                                                                  

NOTICE OF 

       RESPONDENT’S  REPLY MOTION TO ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING PLAINTIFF FILES DUE TO THEM ADMITTING TO ALL PLEADINGS PURSUANT TO  Local Rule 56.1(b)(3)(B).

  w/AFFIDAVIT

       

 Defendant is ready and will present said legally sufficient instrument before Judge Lyle or any Judge in her stead on or before any accelerated court date of March 10, 2020 at 11:30 am in room 2808.  

     

                                 FBI Dir. Emmerson Buie, Jr.

                                  2111 West Roosevelt Road  

                                        Chicago, Ill. 60612

                                             U.S. Attorney

                                                    John R. Lausch

                                          219 South Dearborn Suite 500

                                                   Chicago, Ill 60605

        Cook County State’s Attorney            Chief Judge Timothy C. Evans

         Kim Foxx                                              50 West Washington, Suite 2600

         50 West Washington, Suite 500                Chicago, Ill. 60601

         Chicago, Ill. 60601                           

Attorney General Illinois                         Hon Mayor Lori Lightfoot

Kwame Raoul, 1200                                       City Hall 7^th floor

100 West Randolph Street                                Chicago, Il. 60601

Chicago, Il. 60601

                                                         

Alexander B. Potestivo & Ass., PC                         Media and Fox 32 News

223 West Jackson, Blvd, Suite 610                            Mike Flannery Political Reporter
Chicago, IL. 60606                           

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned hereby certifies that the above notice and all attachments were caused to be personally delivered, to the above parties at the addresses provided before 5:00 pm on January 22, 2020.

                                                                ________________________

                                                                  Respectfully Submitted, Monzella Y. Johnson

            IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS

COUNTY DEPARTMENT--CHANCERY DIVISION

U.S. Bank National Association, As Trustee Under)

Pooling and Servicing Agreement Dated as of        )

December 1, 2006 Mastr Asset–Backed Securities )

Trust 2006-NC3 Mortgage Pass-Through               )  Case # 2008 CH 33616

Certificates, Series 2006-NC3                                 )                                                           Petitioner        )

                                                                                 )          

V.                                                                              )  Judge Fredrenna Lyle

                                                                                 )                                                                                   )     

                                                                                 )   Room 2808    

Monzella Y. Johnson, A/K/A Monzella                  )                                   

Johnson; Marcia E. Johnson A/K/A Marcia            )                                                 Johnson: Mortgage Electronic Registration            )

Systems, Inc. As Nominee for New Century          )

Mortgage Corporation; Monzella Y. Johnson         )                                         

( C ) Cestui Que Trust; Discover Bank;                  )

Unknown Owners and Non-Record Claimants,      )

                                                                                 )

                                                           Respondents  )

                                                                                                                   

                                                 AFFIDAVIT

STATE OF ILLINOIS )

                                        )

COUNTY OF COOK   )

I Monzella Y. Johnson Pro Se being duly sworn on oath states the aforementioned pleadings enumerated within said motion pursuant to 735 1265 5/1-109, the undersigned certifies that the statements set forth in this instrument are true and correct, except as to matters therein stated to be on information and belief and as to such matters, the undersigned certifies as aforesaid that he verily believes the same to be true.

Respectfully Submitted                                                         Notary

                                                                        

____________________

Monzella Y. Johnson

5217 S. Ingleside. Ave

Chicago, Il 60615

773 835-5849

          IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS

COUNTY DEPARTMENT--CHANCERY DIVISION

U.S. Bank National Association, As Trustee Under)

Pooling and Servicing Agreement Dated as of        )

December 1, 2006 Mastr Asset–Backed Securities )

Trust 2006-NC3 Mortgage Pass-Through               )  Case # 2008 CH 33616

Certificates, Series 2006-NC3                                 )                                                           Petitioner        )

                                                                                 )          

V.                                                                              )  Judge Fredrenna Lyle

                                                                                 )                                                                                   )     

                                                                                 )   Room 2808    

Monzella Y. Johnson, A/K/A Monzella                  )                                   

Johnson; Marcia E. Johnson A/K/A Marcia            )                                                 Johnson: Mortgage Electronic Registration            )

Systems, Inc. As Nominee for New Century          )

Mortgage Corporation; Monzella Y. Johnson         )                                         

( C ) Cestui Que Trust; Discover Bank;                  )

Unknown Owners and Non-Record Claimants,      )

                                                                                 )

                                                           Respondents  )

                                                 EXHIBIT LIST

1.       Gr Ex A The Democratic Party's Long History of Racism, The American Thinker

2.       Gr Ex B Motion to Reinstate Case Due to Democratic Judges/Attorneys Trespassing Upon the Laws et al. where the CTA General Attorney, States Attorney Kim Foxx, Local Union 241 President Keith Hill all have admitted to the entire 28 Page document pursuant to the Summary Judgment;

3.      Gr Ex C The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow.

4.      Gr Ex D Plaintiff’s Summary Judgment and 8/25/2016 Affidavit as an Exhibit not a Motion.

5.      Ex E Black Political History Facts.

6.      Gr Ex F and G Motion before the Illinois Appellate Court and Court Order Denying Motion, Motion to Vacate Order for want of prosecution and Impose Sanctions et al. and Warranting Jurisdiction of FBI, U.S. Attorney,