CORONAVIRUS OR CORRUPTION CRIMINALS DON'T CARE CORRUPT JUDGES ALONG WITH SLIMY CORRUPT ATTORNEYS STILL TRYING TO USE THIS PANDEMIC CRISIS IN TRYING TO STEAL RETIRED POLICE OFFICER AND CHICAGO BOARD OF EDUCATION TEACHER'S HOME.
FIRST OF ALL KUDOS TO ALL FIRST RESPONDER'S ON THE FRONT LINES TRYING TO SAVE PEOPLES LIVES.
NOW GOVERNOR PRITZKER ALONG WITH MAYOR LIGHTFOOT HAS ISSUED STAY AT HOME ORDERS TRYING TO HELP SAVE PEOPLES LIVES DURING THIS PANDEMIC; UNFORTUNATELY, THEIR ARE NIGGERS NO MATTER THE SKIN COLOR WHO ARE USING THIS PANDEMIC TO FURTHER THEIR LIFESTYLES IN THE LIFE OF CRIMES OR CORRUPTION.
SO MANY PEOPLE HAVE LOST LOVE ONES TO THIS VIRUS MY DEEPEST CONDOLENCES TO THOSE FAMILIES BUT YOU HAVE SO MANY BLACK JUDGES WHO HATE THAT THEY ARE BLACK AND ARE USING THEIR SELF-HATRED RAGE TO DESTROY THEIR OWN ETHNIC GROUPS SO AS TO BE ACCEPTED BY MEMBERS IN THE DEMOCRATIC POLITICAL MACHINE.
ALDERMAN EDWARD BURKE ONLY APPOINTED THOSE NIGGERS OR RACIST IRISH JUDGES WHO DID WHAT THEY WHAT THEY WERE TOLD TO DO AND NOT QUESTION THEIR AUTHORITY.
MANY OF THOSE UNQUALIFIED JUDGES WHO ALLEGEDLY PAID INTO THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS OF FORMER ALLEGED KING BURKE AND BECAME TYRANTS SOME OF THE WORSE BLACKS ANY PERSON OF COLOR COULD EVER GO BEFORE.
TAKE FORMER ALDERWOMAN FREDDRENNA M. LYLE DUMB AS A BAG OF SAND BUT SHE IS WEARING A JUDGES ROBE HELPING US BANK AND OTHER RACIST WHITE ATTORNEYS STEAL SENIOR CITIZENS HOUSES, THE SHIT SHE HAS BEEN ALLOWED TO DO ON THE BENCH IS ASININE NO WAY IN HELL SHE COULD HAVE PERPETRATED THESE CRIMES ON ANY CAUCASIAN FAMILIES.
BLACK HATE BLACK ON BLACK CRIMES HAS BECOME AN ACCEPTANCE SO BLACK JUDGES REALIZE NOBODY IS GOING TO ADMONISH THEM FOR DESTROYING BLACK OR BROWN PEOPLE SO THEY HAVE TAKEN STREET VIOLENCE INTO AN ORGANIZED PROFESSIONAL SETTING LIKE IN THE COURTS AND IS USING THEIR ROBES TO AID AND ASSIST WHERE RACIST JUDGES ARE ENGAGING IN HATE CRIMES AGAINST PEOPLE OF COLOR WHO ARE COMPLAINING ABOUT RACIAL INJUSTICE.
THESE LADIES HAVE BEEN FIGHTING TO SAVE THEIR HOME FOR 13 YEARS NOT ONE FUCKING PERSON GAY STRAIGHT DEMOCRAT TRYSEXUAL OR WHATEVER THEY WANT TO BE OPENED THEIR MOUTHS AND SAID THIS IS WRONG BECAUSE BLACK DEMOCRATS HAVE NO POWER OVER WHITE DEMOCRATS WHO HAVE PERPETRATED HATEFUL OR RACIST ACTS ON PEOPLE OF COLOR.
THESE RETIRED CIVIL SERVANTS ARE A BETTER PERSON TO WEAR A JUDGES ROBE THAN A WHOLE LOT OF JUDGE BURKE APPOINTED TO THE BENCHES ESPECIALLY LYLE.
MENTAL ILLNESS IS REAL THE VERY BLACK AND BROWN JUDGES THAT HATE WHO THEY ARE ARE THE ONES IN THE STREETS KILLING INNOCENT PEOPLE OF COLOR THE POLICE SOMETIMES CAN NEVER FIND THEY HAVE ASPIRED TO ALDERMAN POSITIONS, POLITICIANS PREACHERS AND JUDGES.
HATE STARTS WITH THE INDIVIDUAL KINDA LIKE THE VIRUS IF YOU KNOW YOU ARE SICK MENTALLY OR PHYSICALLY AND DO NOTHING TO HELP YOURSELF --- YOU WILL INFECT OTHERS IN MANY INSTANCES KILL PEOPLE DUE TO YOUR OWN SELF-HATE ILLNESS.
THIS DOCUMENT WAS FILED TUESDAY AT THE DALEY CENTER APRIL 21, 2020 AT 10:45AM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK
COUNTY, ILLINOIS
COUNTY
DEPARTMENT--CHANCERY DIVISION
U.S. Bank
National Association, As Trustee Under)
Pooling
and Servicing Agreement Dated as of
)
December
1, 2006 Mastr Asset–Backed Securities )
Trust
2006-NC3 Mortgage Pass-Through
) Case # 2008 CH 33616
Certificates,
Series 2006-NC3
)
Petitioner
)
)
V.
) Judge Freddrenna M. Lyle
)
) Room 2808
)
Monzella
Y. Johnson, A/K/A Monzella
)
Johnson; Marcia E. Johnson A/K/A Marcia )
Johnson: Mortgage Electronic Registration )
Systems,
Inc. As Nominee for New Century
)
Mortgage
Corporation; Monzella Y. Johnson
)
( C )
Cestui Que Trust; Discover Bank; )
Unknown
Owners and Non-Record Claimants, )
)
Respondents
)
MOTION TO REINSTATE SUMMARY
JUDGMENT, MOTION STRIKING & OBJECTING PETITIONER’S MOTION TO AMEND ET AL. MOTION
FOR SANCTIONS & RULE TO SHOW CAUSE REMANDING ALEXANDER B. POSTESTIVO ET
AL., MOTION STRIKING AND OBJECTING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME AS
FRIVOLOUS ET AL. REPLY MOTION TO ANYTHING PLAINTIFF FILES ET AL. DUE TO JUDGE LYLE NOT HAVING JURISDICTION TRESPASSING
UPON THE LAWS COMMITTING TREASON MAKING THE ORDER “VOID” A “NULLITY”
w/AFFIDAVIT
Now comes Respondent, Monzella Y. Johnson et al. being represented
Pro Se in this cause respectfully represents to this court the reasons and
files herewith her Affidavit in support of Respondent’s Motion to Reinstate
Summary Judgment et al;
Respectfully Submitted,
By:
_________________
Monzella Y. Johnson
Monzella Y. Johnson
1.
That Plaintiff’s having admitted to all facts recorded in said Motions
accompanied et al. via affidavit and Court Transcripts;
A-
Court having no jurisdiction to Dismiss or preside on said matter due to Judge Lyle corroborating and colluding
their roles as “Private Citizens” unlawfully passed the case to Judge Simko on
Defendant’s Motion to Disqualify Judge Lyle; thereby, keeping the Presiding
Judge Moche Jacobius from having jurisdiction.
B-
That pursuant to the March 2, 2020, (hereto attached)
correspondence to Special Agent Buie and US Attorney Laush this very transcript
corroborates that Defendants are victims of an “Active Criminal Enterprise” judges
are using their robes to engage in horrific crimes
C-
To
show fraud upon the court, the complaining party must establish that the
alleged misconduct affected the integrity of the judicial process, either
because the court itself was defrauded or because the misconduct was
perpetrated by officers of the court. Alexander v. Robertson, 882, F. 2d
421,424 (9th Cir. 1989);
D-
A void judgment does not create any binding obligation.
Kalb v. Feuerstein (1940) 308 US 433, 60 S Ct 343, 84 L, Ed 370.
2.
That judge Lyle has demonstrated an unknown interest in this
matter which encouraged unlawful motives and opportunity in adjudicating the merits
of this matter, due to the aforementioned; Sup Ct. Rule 63 (c) (1) (d)
mandates disqualification where the judge has an interest in the proceeding.
(eff. April 16, 2007).
A judge’s disrespect for the rules of court demonstrates
disrespect for the law. Judges are disciplined under Canon 2A for violating
court rules and procedures. Judge ignored mandated witness order in attempt to
accommodate witnesses’ schedules; Citing Canon 2A the court noted, “[a] court’s
indifference to clearly stated rules breeds disrespect for and discontent with
our justice system. Government cannot demand respect of the laws by its
citizens when its tribunals ignore those very same laws”)
A-
Fraud upon the court is a basis for equitable relief. Luttrell v.
United States, 644 F. 2d 1274, 1276 (9th Cir. 1980); see Abatti v.
C.I.R. , 859 F 2d 115, 118 (9th Cir. 1988) “it is beyond question
that a court may investigate a question as to whether there was fraud in the
procurement of a judgment” Universal Oil Products Co. v. Root Refining Co., 328
U.S. 575, 66 S. Ct. 1176, 90 L. Ed. 1447. The power of the court to unearth
such a fraud is the power to unearth it effectively. See Hazel-Atlas Glass Co.
v. Hartford-Empire Co., 322 U.S. 238, 64 S. Ct. 997, 88 L. Ed. 1250; Sprague v.
Ticonic National Bank, 1184 and United States v. Throckmorton, 98 U.S. (8 Otto)
61, 25 L. Ed. 93.
B-
“A judge is an officer of the court, as are all members of the Bar. A
judge is a judicial officer, paid by the Government to act impartially and
lawfully”. People v. Zajic, 88 Ill. App 3d 477, 410 N.E. 2d 626. “A void judgment is regarded as a
nullity, and the situation is the same as it would be if there were no
judgment. It has no legal or binding force or efficacy for any purpose or at
any place….It is not entitled to enforcement. 30A Am Judgments 43, 44,
45. Henderson v Henderson 59 S.E. 2d
227-232
C-
“A Void Judgment from
its inception is and forever continues to be absolutely null, without legal
efficacy, ineffectual to bind parties or support a right, of no legal force and
effect whatever, and incapable of confirmation, ratification, or enforcement in
any manner or to any degree. “A void judgment, order or decree may be attacked
at any time or in any court, either directly or collaterally” Oak Park Nat Bank v. Peoples
Gas Light & Coke Col, 46 Ill. App. 2d 385, 197 N.E. 3d 73, 77, (1st
Dist. 1964)
- 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).
- Judge Lyle and Simko acted as a
Private Citizens and not as State
Officers as they colluded with the Plaintiff’s in using their robes
and unlawful authority violating the Defendant’s Civil rights keeping the
case amongst themselves when a Motion to Disqualify Judge Lyle was filed.
The Illinois Supreme Court has held that "if the magistrate
has not such jurisdiction, then he and those who advise and act with him, or
execute his process, are trespassers." Von Kettler et.al. v.
Johnson, 57 Ill. 109 (1870)
Under Federal law which is
applicable to all states, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that if a court is
"without authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as nullities.
They are not voidable, but simply void; and form no bar to a recovery sought,
even prior to a reversal in opposition to them. They constitute no
justification; and all persons concerned in executing such judgments or
sentences, are considered, in law, as trespassers." Elliot
v. Piersol, 1 Pet. 328, 340, 26 U.S. 328, 340 (1828)
The Illinois Supreme Court held
that if a court "could not hear the matter upon the jurisdictional paper
presented, its finding that it had the power can add nothing to its authority,
- it, had no authority to make that finding." The People v.
Brewer, 128 Ill. 472, 483 (1928). The judges listed below had no
legal authority (jurisdiction) to hear or rule on certain matters before them.
They acted without any jurisdiction.
- When judges act when they do
not have jurisdiction to act, or they enforce a void order (an order
issued by a judge without jurisdiction), they become trespassers of the
law, and are engaged in treason.
A- “The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held
that the Circuit Court of Cook County
is a criminal enterprise. U.S.
v. Murphy, 768 F.2d 1518,
1531 (7th Cir. 1985)”.
6.
The United States Supreme Court recently acknowledged the judicial
corruption in Cook County, when it stated that Judge "Maloney was one of
many dishonest judges exposed and convicted through 'Operation Greylord', a
labyrinthine federal investigation of judicial corruption in
Chicago". Bracey v. Gramley, case No. 96-6133
(June 9, 1997).
Since judges who do not report the criminal activities of other
judges they become principals in the criminal activity, 18 U.S.C. Section 2, 3
& 4, and since no judges have reported the criminal activity of the judges
who have been convicted, the other judges are The criminal activities that the
Federal Courts found in the Circuit Court of Cook County still exist, and are
today under the care, custody and control of Judge Timothy C. Evans (Chief
Judge). The Circuit Court of Cook County remains a criminal enterprise.
JUDICIAL
IMMUNITY
Judges
have given themselves judicial immunity for their judicial functions. Judges
have no judicial immunity for criminal acts, aiding, assisting, or conniving
with others who perform a criminal act, or for their administrative/
ministerial duties. When a judge has a duty to act, he does not have discretion - he is then not performing a judicial act, he is performing a ministerial act.
ministerial duties. When a judge has a duty to act, he does not have discretion - he is then not performing a judicial act, he is performing a ministerial act.
Judicial immunity does not exist
for judges who engage in criminal activity, for judges who connive with, aid
and abet the criminal activity of another judge, or to a judge for damages
sustained by a person who has been harmed by the judge's connivance with,
aiding and abetting, another judge's criminal activity.
TRESPASSERS OF THE LAW
The
Illinois Supreme Court has held that "if the magistrate has not such
jurisdiction, then he and those who advise and act with him, or execute his
process, are trespassers." Von Kettler et.al. v. Johnson,
57 Ill. 109 (1870)
Under Federal law which is
applicable to all states, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that if a court is
"without authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as nullities.
They are not voidable, but simply void; and form no bar to a recovery sought,
even prior to a reversal in opposition to them. They constitute no
justification; and all persons concerned in executing such judgments or
sentences, are considered, in law, as trespassers." Elliot
v. Piersol, 1 Pet. 328, 340, 26 U.S. 328, 340 (1828)
The Illinois Supreme Court held
that if a court "could not hear the matter upon the jurisdictional paper
presented, its finding that it had the power can add nothing to its authority,
- it, had no authority to make that finding." The People v.
Brewer, 128 Ill. 472, 483 (1928). The judges listed below had no
legal authority (jurisdiction) to hear or rule on certain matters before them.
They acted without any jurisdiction.
When judges act when they do not
have jurisdiction to act, or they enforce a void order (an order issued by a
judge without jurisdiction), they become trespassers of the law, and are
engaged in treason (see below).
The Court in Yates
v. Village of Hoffman Estates, Illinois, 209 F. Supp. 757 (N.D.
Ill. 1962) held that "not every action by a judge is in exercise of his
judicial function. ... It is not a judicial function for a judge to commit an
intentional tort even though the tort occurs in the courthouse."
When a judge acts as a trespasser
of the law, when a judge does not follow the law, the judge loses
subject-matter jurisdiction and the judge’s orders are void, of no
legal force or effect.
The U.S. Supreme Court, in Scheuer
v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 94 S. Ct. 1683, 1687 (1974) stated that
"when a state officer acts under a state law in a manner violative of the
Federal Constitution, he "comes into conflict with the superior authority
of that Constitution, and he is in that case stripped of his official or
representative character and is subjected in his person to the
consequences of his individual conduct. The State has no power to impart to him
any immunity from responsibility to the supreme authority of the United
States." [Emphasis supplied in original].
By law, a judge is a state
officer.
The judge then acts not as a
judge, but as a private individual (in his person).
- That said
attorney Sawyer stated, Page 11, Lines 13 -17, “I can start,
your Honor. So, my firm did file two different documents. I have them with
me today. It’s our objection to the motion for sanctions and our objection
to the cross motion” Judge Lyle further corroborated her role in said
criminal enterprise never opened her mouth to admonish the attorney for
his perjured remarks, Page 11, Line 18, Monzella Johnson, “May
I object?
- Judge
Lyle not only demonstrated being corrupt but a total disgrace to any woman
wearing a judges robe with integrity and respect, especially a black woman
stated Page 11, Lines 19-24 “Excuse me. Now let’s – let us
establish the rules. The court reporter can only transcribe the words from
one person at a time, so just as he gave you total silence while you
spoke, you have to afford him that same kind of respect. So, make notes or
just hold your thoughts.” Page 12 Line 1-3 Monzella Johnson “I
just wanted to say that it was –we did not get a copy, but it was not an
objection. It just says opposition”.
- That
a licensed attorney Sawyer had the audacity to stand before the court and
say Page 13 Lines 15-20 “For example, their citation of rule—Local
Rule 56.1, I believe they’re referencing the Local Rules of the Northern
District of Illinois and not the Local Rules of Cook County. So, they have
not met their burden on summary judgments and that needs to be denied.”
- That
another licensed attorney seems to have a mockery out of the court on
their limited understanding of any laws in justifying their criminal
episodes in the courts stated, Page 14 Lines 12-18 Whiteman “I
would just add that the issues of material facts in this case are whether
or not the defendants paid their mortgage. All the irrelevant facts they
bring up, a motion for sanctions, cross motions for summary judgment, they’re
completely irrelevant to the matter at hand. I ask their motions be
denied.”
11. That said attorney is asking the
judge to ignore Federal Laws and precedents In the matter of Raymond, 442 F.
3d at 606. (7th Cir. 2013) ) The Court, nevertheless, is concerned and
considers the prejudice to Plaintiff for Plaintiff’s counsel’s failure,
particularly because cases should be decided on their merits. Certainly, the
failure to file a response to a summary judgment motion can be fatal. See, e.g.,
id at 611.
12. That the rules are in place for the aforementioned
reasons so as to eradicate Frivolous litigations and Criminal actions by said
attorneys who don’t respect or honor any Rules in any court, . The rule is
very clear that "all material facts set forth in the statement required of
the moving party will be deemed admitted unless controverted by the statement
of the opposing party." Local Rule 56.1(b)(3)(B).
- That Judge Lyle is making her actions
clear acting a “Private Citizen” using her robe as a Thug from the
streets not caring who in the FBI or any Judge witnessing her criminal episodes
in this matter stated, Page 14 Lines 19-20 Monzella Johnson, “All
right. Ms. Johnson, you have a limited period to reply, so why don’t you—“.
- That Page
14 Lines 21-24 and Page 15 Lines 1-24 Monzella Johnson stated, “Your
Honor we stand on our motions. We object to what they said. They filed
nothing. They served us with nothing. We had to go to the computer, got it
with the clerk and there was nothing objecting to the motions that we said
nothing denying it. So, by law they have agreed to everything we have
said. And also, what they filed was an opposition not an objection, and
once again, they have agreed to everything that we have said. And what we
have said is that we don’t have a
contract, we don’t owe them anything. They have never proved anything.
There’s no pooling. It’s all fraud
and they have been dragging us in the court and we are tired. We are seniors.
My mom is a senior, and they are causing other issues in our family and in our
life and we are tired of it. We are really tired. So, it’s time to come to an
end. They need to be sanctioned. They have not done their job and they are
abusing us. That is our opinion. And according to the law it has been 13 years
and months. And so, they need to pay sanctions and deal with it. Our case is
not like everybody else’s. And just continue – I want to say thank you. We
object. They did not file. They agreed. Their time has expired. They agreed to
everything that we have said. Thank you.”
- That Judge
Lyle demonstrated an assortment of convoluted statements that
unequivocally without a scintilla of falsity corroborates her aptitude
lacking a basic interpretation of the laws as a judge presiding over any
cases definitely needs to be investigated instanter, Pursuant to Page
16 Lines 12- 24 stated, “there are some burdens of proof. There are
some standards. There is some evidentiary rules. All of those things have
to apply to every case, even though the facts in the case that I’m going
to hear next. Those rules determine the actions that I can take. It’s the
box that I work in, and although this is a Court of Chancery in that I sit
in the Chancery Division, the Illinois Mortgage Foreclosure Statute is a
statutorily created entity. It’s created by the legislators in
Springfield, and they set the rules that govern foreclosures of property
in this state.”
- That Page
17 Lines 1-10 further amplifies the need to have her REMANDED
into Custody Instanter states, “Therefore, they set the rules in terms
of what a Judge can and cannot do in handling foreclosures. So, it’s not
some sort of unlimited drawer full of remedies because this is chancery. I
have to go by the statute and they determine what is a Summary judgment. What
is sufficient to issue an order granting summary judgment ? They tell me
what the burden of proof is on each side, if you allege something on your
motion, what you have to prove in order to be successful”
- That Lines
11-24 further amplifies said judge as a street thug in a robe states, “So
I have read the various pleadings that you have given me under all sorts
of names. I find some of the statements, because they aren’t really
allegations, they are statements. I find some of those statements very
offensive, and those are not even the ones directed at me personally. I
believe that there’s –it may or may not be true so maybe I shouldn’t say it, but I
believe that you’re getting a misguided sense of direction as to how to
respond and how to proceed in this matter, maybe from parties who do not
practice law or maybe from the internet where you see things and it’s not
helpful to your case at all.”
- That Page
18 Lines 2- 19 further corroborating Lyle exercising street
tactics aiding and abetting in a “Terrorist Criminal Conspiracy”
stated “I have read the documents. I’m denying your motion for summary
judgment as you have not met your burden of proving that there is no
genuine issue of material fact that – strike that. You have not met the
burden of proving that there is a genuine issue of material fact
preventing the plaintiff from proceeding. There’s no issue that you have
presented allowing you to get a judgment against them, that there –that would
survive their motion to strike because you don’t have a – your complaint
against them is not a complaint in foreclosure. Your complaint is a
defense. You’re defending their complaint against you alleging four, five,
six, seven, eight, nine different things. But it’s not sufficient to grant
your summary judgment so I’m denying that motion for summary judgment.”
- That Page
18 Lines 20-24, Page 19 Lines 1-3 further corroborate Lyle wanting
everyone to know in law enforcement she is untouchable because of her
nefarious connections to the Democratic Political Machine in that her
grandiose impression is that she can’t be touched or indicted because her
crimes are perpetrated on senior citizen women of color; she stated, “I
don’t believe that your motion for sanctions has provided sufficient
factually pled allegations that they have violated the orders of the Court
willfully or made misstatements of fact or law or otherwise acted in a
manner that would frustrate justice, so I’m denying your motion for
sanctions against the plaintiff. The other motion was the motion to – “
- That Page
19 Line 4 Sawyer stated, “Strike the Prove up affidavit”
- That Page
19 Lines 5-20 “Private Citizen” Lyle stated, “It is not
sufficient to say we disagree; they’re not telling the truth. You have to
have some evidentiary basis for me to take the action that you are
requesting. You have to come in with an affidavit saying it’s wrong
because of. You have to show me some indicia of proof that there’s
something that is misstated in there. You can’t just say this whole thing
is a fraud. They have no right to take this house because we say so. That
it does not meet the level of proof that I’m able to entertain in these
courts. Based on the box that I started talking about, the laws and the
statutes, and the cases that come down from the Supreme Court of Illinois
and the Appellate Court of Illinois. Therefore, I’m denying your motion to
strike there prove up affidavit”.
- That Page
19 Line 21 Marcia Johnson stated, ‘they never asked you for a prove
up affidavit.”
- That Page
19 Lines 23-24, “Private
Citizen” Lyle stated “No, they did not ask you for a prove up
affidavit. They submitted an affidavit .
- That
Pursuant to Respondent’s Reply Motion to Anything and Everything
Plaintiff files due to them Admitting to all Pleadings et al. (Page
3 Par 7) That Gr
Ex A is Petitioner’s Ex D Ref as 37 of 128, and Motion for
Summary Judgment Ref as 39 of 128 unequivocally corroborate and
demonstrate the veracity of Fredrenna Lyle not only as a “Private
Citizen” “Trespassing upon the Laws” but an active “Terrorist” in the in the Criminal Enterprise named
Democratic Political Machine ignored Defendant’s oral argument when she
explained said Petitioners never filed a Motion said judge used her
unlawful authority to violate every law necessary trying to save corrupt
Caucasians and their Brethren.
A-
The Plaintiff’s never filed a Summary Judgment or an
Affidavit only as Gr Ex D but Re Noticed the same Fraudulent document as a
Summary Judgment for May 5, 2020 before Lyle at 10:30am.
- That
Lyle is further demonstrating her incompetent understanding of the laws as
she continuously tries to undermine the Defendant’s pleadings as being
legally insufficient states, Page 20 Lines 7-9 Monzella Johnson “Well,
I understand that’s what they call it, but when they handed in their piece
of paperwork our response was to object.” Lyle stated, “And I
understand, but as I said , it’s not sufficient to say that your – that you
filed a document, Respondent’s reply motion to anything and everything
plaintiff filed due to them admitting all pleadings. That’s an improper
pleading. We understand that while you’re a pro se person, that you should
not necessarily be penalized by the formalities that are created by the statute
and the laws. But on the other hand, because you are representing
yourselves, you’re still bound by those formalities. While—you can name
things differently and I’ll interpret them to mean what it should say, but
there’s no pleading that I can interpret this to mean anything because you
have to individually object to pleadings.”
- That
contrary to everything egregious Lyle has stated about the Defendant’s let
the Record reflect that they did not have to LIE, COMMITT FRAUD,
Engage in any other infamous crimes out of desperation trying to keep
their home in spite of the Terrorist Tactics Lyle has employed.
27. That racism and reverse discrimination along
with systematic corruption is a norm in Illinois Courts due to their allegiance
to the Machine but the laws are clear
from the United Supreme Court “No one is above the Law”, citing a 1928
decision by Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928),
“We must subject government officials to the
same rules of conduct that we expect of the citizen. The very existence of the
government is imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. As
Brandeis puts it, "if the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds
contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites
anarchy. To declare that in the administration of the criminal law the end
justifies the means—to declare that the government may commit crimes in order
to secure the conviction of a private criminal—would bring terrible
retribution. Against that pernicious doctrine this court should resolutely set
its face."
28. That because of the above; Fraud admissibility
great latitude is permitted in proving fraud C.J.S. Fraud 104 ET Seg. Fraud
51-57. where a question of fraud and deceit is the issue involved in a case,
great latitude is ordinarily permitted in the introduction of evidence,
and courts allow the greatest liberality in the method of examination and in
the scope of inquiry Vigus V. O’Bannon, 1886 8 N.E 788, 118 ILL 334.
Hazelton V. Carolus, 1907 132 ILL. App. 512.
All Illinois lawyers must be familiar with the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct, and trail lawyers must be
particularly familiar with the rules that apply specially to them.
RPC
3.3, entitled “Conduct Before a Tribunal,” sets forth the
standards to be followed by the trial lawyer during “battle.” Section (a) of
that rule states:
(a) In appearing in a professional capacity before a tribunal, a
lawyer shall not:
(1) make a statement of
material fact or law to a tribunal which the lawyer knows or reasonably should
know is false;
(2) fail to disclose to a
tribunal a material fact known to the lawyer when disclosure is necessary to
avoid assisting a criminal or fraudulent act by the client;
(3) fail to disclose to the
tribunal legal authority in the controlling jurisdiction known to the lawyer to
be directly adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing
counsel;
(4) Offer evidence that the
lawyer knows to be false. If a lawyer has offered material evidence and comes
to know of its falsity, the lawyer shall take reasonable remedial measures;
(5) participate in the creation
or preservation of evidence when the lawyer knows or reasonably should know the
evidence is false ;
(6) counsel or assist the
client in conduct the lawyer knows to be illegal of fraudulent;
(7) engage in other illegal
conduct or conduct in violation of these Rules;
(8) fail to disclose the
identities of the clients represented and of the persons who employed the
lawyer unless such information is privileged or irrelevant;
(9) intentionally degrade a
witness or other person by stating or alluding to personal facts concerning that
person which are not relevant to the case;
(10) in trial, allude to any matter that the lawyer does not
reasonably believe is relevant or that will not be supported by admissible
evidence, assert personal knowledge of facts in issue except when testifying as
a witness, or state a personal opinion as to the justness of a cause, the
credibility of a witness, the culpability of a civil litigant or the guilt or
innocence of and accused, but a lawyer may argue, on analysis of evidence, for
any position or conclusion with respect to the matter stated herein;
Acts constituting direct, criminal
contempt
A wide variety of acts may constitute a direct, criminal
contempt. And act may be criminal contempt even though it is also an indictable
crime. Beattie v. People, 33 Ill. Ill. Ill.
Official
misconduct is a criminal offense; and a public officer or employee commits
misconduct, punishable by fine, imprisonment, or both, when, in his official
capacity, he intentionally or recklessly fails to perform any mandatory duty as
required by law; or knowingly performs an act which he knows he is forbidden by
law to perform; or with intent to obtain a personal advantage for himself or
another, he performs an act in excess of his lawful authority ….S.H.A. Ch 38
33-3.
WHEREFORE the aforementioned
reasons Respondent respectfully Prays for the Relief
1.
For an Order Reinstating Respondent’s Summary Judgment,
Respondent’s Motion for Sanctions et al. Respondent’s Motion Objecting to
Plaintiff’s Motion for Ext of Time et al. Respondent’s Motion Striking and
Objecting et al. Respondent’s Reply Motion et al. due to court order entered deemed
a Nullity void;
2.
For an Order Remanding
Judge Lyle and Simko from the case for unlawfully circumventing all laws
keeping the case from going before Presiding Judge Moche Jacobius for proper
reassignment when Defendant filed a Motion to Disqualify her.
3.
For an Order Remanding any and attorneys complicit in this
Mortgage Fraud Criminal Enterprise.
4.
For an Order Invoking the
Jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau of Investigations/United States Attorney
Instanter for judges “Trespassing upon the Laws” in this “Organized Criminal
Enterprise”;
5.
For an Order Pursuant to Smith v. Wade, 461 U.S. 30, 35 103 S. Ct. 1625, 1629, 75 L Ed 2d 632
(1983) Justice Brennen “The threshold standard for allowing punitive damages
for reckless or callous indifference applies even in a case, such as here,
where the underlying standard of liability for compensatory damages because is
also one of recklessness. There is no merit to petitioner’s contention that
actual malicious intent should be the standard for punitive damages because the
deterrent purposes of such damages would be served only if the threshold for
those damages is higher in every case than the underlying standard for
liability in the first instance. The common-law rule is otherwise, and there is
no reason to depart from the common-law rule in the context of {1983} of
Million Dollars being amended to $13 Million Dollars covering the number of
years Respondent being in court unlawfully as the Plaintiffs tried to steal
said home;
6.
For the entry of an Order awarding to your Defendant for
such other relief and any other relief necessary as equity may require of which
this court may deem overwhelmingly just;
Respectfully Submitted, Monzella Y. Johnson
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK
COUNTY, ILLINOIS
COUNTY
DEPARTMENT--CHANCERY DIVISION
U.S. Bank
National Association, As Trustee Under)
Pooling
and Servicing Agreement Dated as of
)
December
1, 2006 Mastr Asset–Backed Securities )
Trust
2006-NC3 Mortgage Pass-Through
) Case # 2008 CH 33616
Certificates,
Series 2006-NC3
)
Petitioner
)
)
V.
) Judge Freddrenna M. Lyle
)
) Room 2808
)
Monzella
Y. Johnson, A/K/A Monzella
)
Johnson; Marcia E. Johnson A/K/A Marcia )
Johnson: Mortgage Electronic Registration )
Systems,
Inc. As Nominee for New Century
)
Mortgage
Corporation; Monzella Y. Johnson
)
( C )
Cestui Que Trust; Discover Bank; )
Unknown
Owners and Non-Record Claimants, )
)
Respondents
)
NOTICE
OF MOTION TO REINSTATE SUMMARY
JUDGMENT, MOTION STRIKING & OBJECTING PETITIONER’S MOTION TO AMEND ET AL. MOTION
FOR SANCTIONS & RULE TO SHOW CAUSE REMANDING ALEXANDER B. POSTESTIVO ET
AL., MOTION STRIKING AND OBJECTING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME AS
FRIVOLOUS ET AL. REPLY MOTION TO ANYTHING PLAINTIFF FILES ET AL. DUE TO JUDGE LYLE NOT HAVING JURISDICTION TRESPASSING
UPON THE LAWS COMMITTING TREASON MAKING THE ORDER “VOID” A “NULLITY”
w/AFFIDAVIT
Please be
advised that on April 20, 2020, Respondent
has filed before this Circuit Court, Motion for Reinstatement et al; and will
present said legally sufficient instrument before Judge Freddrenna M. Lyle or
any Judge in her stead May 5, 2020 at 10:30 am in room 2808.
FBI Dir. Emmerson
Buie, Jr.
2111 West Roosevelt Road
Chicago,
Ill. 60612
U.S. Attorney
John R. Lausch
219 South Dearborn Suite
500
Chicago, Ill 60605
Attorney General Illinois Hon Mayor Lori
Lightfoot
Kwame Raoul, 1200 City Hall 7th
floor
100 West Randolph Street Chicago, Il. 60601
Chicago, Il. 60601
Cook County State’s Attorney
Chief Judge Timothy C. Evans
Kim
Foxx
50 West Washington, Suite 2600
50 West Washington, Suite 500 Chicago, Ill. 60602
Chicago, Ill. 60602
Presiding Judge Moche Jacobius
50 West Washington, Suite 2403
Chicago,
Il. 60602
Potestivo & Ass., PC
223 West Jackson, Blvd, Suite
610
Chicago, IL. 60606
Chicago, IL. 60606
CERTIFICATE
OF SERVICE
The
undersigned hereby certifies that the above notice and all attachments were
caused to be personally delivered, to the above parties at the addresses
provided before 5:00 pm on April 20, 2020.
________________________
Respectfully Submitted, Monzella Y. Johnson
COUNTY DEPARTMENT--CHANCERY DIVISION
U.S. Bank
National Association, As Trustee Under)
Pooling and
Servicing Agreement Dated as of )
December
1, 2006 Mastr Asset–Backed Securities )
Trust
2006-NC3 Mortgage Pass-Through
) Case # 2008 CH 33616
Certificates,
Series 2006-NC3
)
Petitioner
)
)
V. ) Judge Fredrenna M. Lyle
)
)
) Room
2808
Monzella
Y. Johnson, A/K/A Monzella
)
Johnson; Marcia E. Johnson A/K/A Marcia )
Johnson: Mortgage Electronic Registration )
Systems,
Inc. As Nominee for New Century
)
Mortgage
Corporation; Monzella Y. Johnson
)
( C )
Cestui Que Trust; Discover Bank;
)
Unknown
Owners and Non-Record Claimants, )
)
Respondents
)
AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF ILLINOIS )
)
COUNTY OF COOK )
I Monzella Y. Johnson Pro Se being duly sworn
on oath states the aforementioned pleadings enumerated within said motion
pursuant to 735 1265 5/1-109, the undersigned certifies that the statements set
forth in this instrument are true
and correct, except as to matters therein stated to be on information and
belief and as to such matters, the undersigned certifies as aforesaid that he
verily believes the same to be true.
Respectfully Submitted
Notary
____________________
Monzella Y. Johnson
5217 S. Ingleside. Ave
Chicago, Il 60615
773 835-5849
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK
COUNTY, ILLINOIS
EXHIBIT LIST
1.) March 2, 2020 Notice of Active Chain Conspiracy
et al letter sent to Special Agent Emmerson Buie, Jr.
2.) March 10, 2020 Court
Transcript of Freddrenna M. Lyle unequivocally corroborating her role as an
active Terrorist not fearing any retaliations because Valderrama and Boyd and a
host of other judges committed the same crimes on their own ethnic groups so as
to be accepted by members of the racist Democratic Political Machine as
prominent judges in the Democratic Party closed their eyes on their crimes.
Lyle is expecting the same Democrats to save her
proving Black on Black hate crimes are just as real in the courts as they are
in the streets.
________________________
Respectfully
Submitted, Monzella Y. Johnson
