Here is 10 Pages out of 24 on how judges help certain Bank Attorneys steal the homes of Senior Citizens of Color or Black Americans many of the black judges who help in the facilitation of these crimes seems to think as long as the crimes are on Black or Colored People--Massa white persons who controls the Blacks/Colored in their positions or sponsored them for the appointments will never admonish them because they are not stealing from the Caucasian ethnic groups.
THIS IS WHAT A BLACK OR COLORED SENIOR CITIZEN WHO HAVE RETIRED HAVE TO EXPECT IF THEY OWN ANY HOME IN CHICAGO.
Every Judge who have used their ethnicity to aid and abet in numerous criminal acts helping racist whites steal from Blacks and Colored people don't realize is that when the Feds or the Laws come down not one white person will be helping any of the Black judges, I can hear so many saying, I did this for you Massa, the Caucasians will respond by telling them, "I DIDN'T TELL YOU TO DO ANYTHING FOR ME"
The real Blacks or Colored persons who should be wearing robes or holding meaningful positions within are EXCLUDED so that the unqualified Puppets, Spineless individuals can assume the positions who have sold out and are basically the new breed of slaves, they are Political Slaves doing whatever the Machine tells them to do.
I have been in the courts fighting to clear my name since 1989 after having at least 9-12 attorneys not to mention about 4-6 law firms never ever have I appeared before a Black Judge with any integrity or understanding of the laws, the Black woman was worse.
It seems like the worse of the Blacks are the ones who excel not anyone else this is why so many people collectively have a resentment to them being in certain positions of authority.
NOBODY FEARS BLACK AUTHORITY BECAUSE EVERYBODY KNOWS THEY HAVE SOLD OUT---THEY ARE THE TYPE WHO NEEDS AN INDEPENDENT MINDED CAUCASIAN TO TELL THEM WHAT AND WHEN TO DO WHATEVER IS NEEDED TO BE DONE
IF YOU WANT TO SEE THE OTHER PAGES LET ME KNOW AND I WILL MAKE PART 2 MOST PEOPLE DON'T READ ANYTHING FOR THEMSELVES ANYWAY, SO IT IS THOSE VERY INFERIOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T EXPECT "YOU" OR ANYBODY ELSE TO READ HOW CASES ARE "FIXED" BUT THE LOW-DOWN EXTENT MANY HAVE RESORTED TO JUST TO BE ACCEPTED BY PEOPLE WHO DON'T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT THEM.
SO TIFFANY HENYARD IN DOLTON IS ONLY EMULATING WHAT THE BLACKS ARE DOING HERE IN CHICAGO BUT MANY HERE IN THIS CITY IS FAR WORSE THAN HER SO THE SAME FBI LOOKING INTO HER CORRUPT ANTICS NEED TO LOOK AT THIS CASE.
APPEAL TO THE ILLINOIS APPELLATE COURT
FIRST DISTRICT
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT
OF COOK COUNTY
DOMESTIC RELATIONS 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 ) Trial Court 2008 CH 33616
Certificates, Series 2006-NC3 )
Plaintiff-Appellee
)
) Division
No. 2
V.
) Hon James T. Derico
)
)
)
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, )
)
Defendant-Appellant
)
______________________________________________________________________
MOTION QUASHING
EVICTION AFFIDAVIT OF APRIL 24, 2024, PURSUANT TO RULE 305, “STAY OF JUDGMENTS
PENDING APPEAL” DUE TO FRAUD AND STAY OF EVICTION DUE TO “ORGANIZED” CRIMINAL
ENTERPRISE FRAUD INVOLVING JUDGES NOT A PART OF THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS BUT “PRIVATE
CITIZENS” INSTANTER w/AFFIDAVIT
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)”.
I am Monzella Y. Johnson, Pro Se, Respondent
Movant in this cause, being first duly sworn on oath deposes and states, as
follows;
1.) That Pursuant to Steinbrecher
v. Steinbrecher, 197 Ill. 2d 514, 528 (2001) “Pro Se litigants
are presumed to have full knowledge of applicable court rules and procedures”
2.) That Respondent due-diligently learned that
on April 24, 2024 an Affidavit was filed in the Electronic data system, hereto
attached Gr Ex I, Sheriff’s
Eviction Affidavit filed.
3.) That Pursuant to Vigus V. Obannon, 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., hereto attached, Gr Ex II, Motion to Vacate Court
Order Being Void/Nullity ( March 27, 2024) Due to Judge Martiza Not Having
Jurisdiction et al.
A- That
certain judges within the Democratic Party are allegedly affiliated with a
Terrorist Cell with their own Political Ambitions invoking Tyranny and Mayhem
in the Courts.
B- That
said Appellees have admitted to Pleadings via Summary Judgments, Affidavits,
Uncontested Documents corroborated with Transcripts/Affidavits still certain
judges ruled in favor of Tyranny and Corruption
C- That
Said Appellees is making a BLANKET STATEMENT in their “Brazen” attempt
to steal Appellant’s home, that Black or Colored judges have no authority over
them and that Black or Colored judges are to do what they are told due to the
ethnic make-up of the Perpetrator’s.
D- That
Black/Colored judges have demonstrated an INFERIOR disposition never
admonishing Caucasians due to self-hate and a willingness to sacrifice their
careers by being INDICTED/PROSECUTED for their roles in upholding
Insurrectional Crimes derived from “Jim Crow Laws” outlawed by the
United States Supreme Court; whereby, only a qualified Caucasian not affiliated
to the Political Machine is the only person who can effectively rule on this
matter as demonstrated in prior rulings.
E- That
Par 3 of Gr Ex II further amplifies the systemic Hate and or Racism in
that because Black Officials aware of the aforementioned crimes are standing
back keeping their mouths shut, said Latinos are taking advantage and inciting
their own racial spin by contributing to the Hate and is benefitting from the Racism
by seeking advancement or secured employment in the judicial arena.
4.)
That Respondent received Gr Ex A an Appellate
Order from the 5th Div Dec 30, 2011, Affirming the
9 Page Memorandum Order hereto attached, from Judge Gillespie #1
and #2 of Page 9 of her June 3, 2010 Order states “That
Defendants Monzella Johnson and Marcia Johnson’s Motion to Vacate the November
3, 2009 sale is GRANTED and the sale is VACATED Motion to Vacate the Judgment
of Foreclosure entered on June 3, 2009 is GRANTED because of the Insufficient
Affidavit of Proof”
5.)
That Par #5
states “That neither party shall file any pleadings without prior leave of
the court.”
6.)
Pursuant to 735 ILCS
5/2-612 Counsel never Objected to the sufficiency of Petitioners pleadings,
Objections to sufficiency of pleadings either in form or substance must be made
In trial court, and if not so made, they will be considered waived and cannot
be raised for the first time on appeal. People ex rel. Deynes v. Harris,
App. 1948, 77 N.E. 2d 439, 333 Ill. App. 280.
7.)
That the
Appellate Court’s Order Page 5 Par 14, Page 6, states “The
Court’s decision to vacate the June 2009 foreclosure judgment and subsequent
foreclosure sale was actually based on one of the issues defendants raise here,
namely that the affidavit plaintiff was required to file in order to support
the foreclosure judgment was “wholly insufficient”. We affirm the trial
court’s order.
A- That
the Plaintiff’s never requested Leave of the Court pursuant to #5 of Par 2.
B- That the Plaintiff’s never complied with Judge
Gillespie’s Order of Par 1 nor did they comply with the Affirming of the
Appellate Court pursuant to Par 4 hereto attached, Caucasian Presiding
Judge Pamela H. Gillespie VACATING FORECLOSURE/SALE JUNE 2009, MEMORANDUM
OPINION AND ORDER, 9 PAGES.
That Fed Rule Civ P. 8 and 9 require
plaintiffs to particularize their allegations of "fraud
on the court" in as short, plain, and direct a way as is
reasonable. To comply with these rules, Plaintiff in specific detail outlined
each judicial proceeding complained of, alleged specific facts that make those
proceedings "fraudulent" or otherwise improper, and named the
particular judges, parties and other individuals involved and the extent of
their involvement in each claim of "fraudulent" or otherwise improper
conduct.
That Judge Lyle
realizing, she never had jurisdiction acted as a “Private Citizen” violated the Civil Rights of Colored People
with the understanding knowing that the Illinois Judicial system is racist
towards people of Color demonstrated her amplified role as a co-conspirator to
all Terrorist Acts by entering a Court Order VOID/ A NULLITY VACATING THE
SALE OF RESPONDENT’S HOME et al, (Oct. 29, 2018) for the same Plaintiff’s.
That Judge Lyle
never had jurisdiction and violated the very laws violating her Oath “ENGAGED IN TREASON OFFENSES, (MAY 5, 2021)
ENTERED AN ORDER 2 YEARS SEVEN MONTHS LATER TO U.S. BANK from her other Order Vacating;
Judge Robert Adrian, a veteran judge in downstate Quincy,
Illinois, faced removal from the bench due to his controversial actions.
In 2022, he reversed a guilty ruling against a
young man in a sexual assault case. The Illinois Courts Commission issued a
rare decision, stating that Adrian attempted to circumvent the state’s
mandatory minimum sentencing law during a sentencing hearing for Drew
Clinton, who was previously found guilty of sexually assaulting 16-year-old
Cameron Vaughan at a 2021 graduation party. Adrian justified his
reversal by claiming that the Adams County prosecutor had “totally failed” to
prove Clinton’s guilt, but the commission saw this as a subterfuge. They
concluded that the judge intentionally circumvented the law to satisfy his
personal belief about a just sentence, resulting in the reversal of the
criminal defendant’s conviction1.
A- Whereby Inducing Reliance on this court
now before Judge Derico because his March 1, 2024 Court Order DENYING said
Motion for Reconsideration et al. is predicated on the egregious actions of
Mortgage Fraud of Judge Lyle entering Court Orders where she never had
jurisdiction.
B-
That Judge Lyle Entered a VOID ORDER / A NULLITY Granted
the Plaintiff’ a Default Judgment Dec 6, 2017, and Ordered the Confirmation
Sale (8 years after the judgment of Judge Gillespie) of said property ignoring
every criminal act said attorneys and she was complicit in said “Organized
Criminal Conspiracy”
That said EGREGIOUS CALLOUS disposition towards senior
citizens fighting to remain in their home from an OVERT ACT of Mortgage Fraud
is no different from a thug in the streets carjacking and robbing them and
shooting them even though they have complied with the criminals, in this matter
Respondents have adhered to Steinbrecher v Steinbrecher, 197 Ill. 2d 514,
528 (2001), “Pro se litigants are presumed to have full knowledge of
applicable court rules and procedures”
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 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 as guilty as the convicted judges.
8.) That
every attorney Plaintiff has retained has violated all of RPC 3.3 and
the Ethics
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;
9.)
That no Judge seems to understand or know their Oaths to the
Bench, In Illinois, 705 ILCS 205/4 states "Every person
admitted to practice as an attorney and counselor at law shall, before his name
is entered upon the roll to be kept as hereinafter provided, take and subscribe
an oath, substantially in the following form:
'I do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be), that I will
support the constitution of the United States and the constitution of the state
of Illinois, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of the office of
attorney and counselor at law to the best of my ability.'"
In Illinois, a judge must take a second oath of office. Under 705
ILCS 35/2 states, in part, that "The several judges of the circuit courts
of this State, before entering upon the duties of their office, shall take and
subscribe the following oath or affirmation, which shall be filed in the office
of the Secretary of State:
'I do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be) that I will
support the constitution of the United States, and the constitution of the
State of Illinois, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of judge of
______ court, according to the best of my ability.'"
Further, if the judge had enlisted in the U.S. military, then he
has taken a third oath. Under Title 10 U.S.C. Section 502 the judge had
subscribed to a lifetime oath, in pertinent part, as follows: "I,
__________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the
Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic;
that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; ...".
The U.S. Supreme Court has stated that "No state legislator
or executive or judicial officer can war against the Constitution without
violating his undertaking to support it.” Cooper v. Aaron,
358 U.S. 1, 78 S. Ct. 1401 (1958).
Any judge who does not comply with his oath to the Constitution of
the United States wars against that Constitution and engages in acts in
violation of the Supreme Law of the Land. The judge is engaged in acts of
treason.
Having taken at least two, if not three, oaths of office to
support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the
State of Illinois, any judge who has acted in violation of the Constitution is
engaged in an act or acts of treason.
If a judge does not fully comply with the Constitution, then his
orders are void, In re Sawyer, 124 U.S. 200 (1888),
he/she is without jurisdiction, and he/she has engaged in an act or acts of
treason.
The United States Supreme
Court 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).
10.)
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. https://unlawful1.blogspot.com/2014/12/blacklivesdontmatter-judgemikva-never.html?spref=tw
A- That
said case (88 D 079012) they had to recruit a judge from the juvenile division
because no judge in the Daley Center aka (Babylon, Hell, etc.) wanted to have
any dealings with the Respondent, Judge Mikva told the Respondent “he had a
Gift, he can tell a story using the laws and she understood everything he was
saying, in that his pleadings were unique not the way law school teaches
students how to plead.”
B-
In Re 1-23-1065
FIRST DIVISION
APPEAL TO THE ILLINOIS APPELLATE COURT
FIRST DISTRICT
)
Joe Louis Lawrence
) Petition For Review Of The
Order
) Of The Illinois Labor
Relations
Petitioner-Appellant ) Board State Panel
)
)
VS
)
) ILRB Nos.
L-CB-23-004
)
)
The Illinois Labor Relations Board, State Panel )
Lynne O. Sneed, Charles E. Anderson, Angela )
C. Thomas, Kimberly Faith Stevens, in her )
Official Capacity as Executive Director Of The )
Illinois Labor Relations Board, )
A.T.U Local 241, President Keith Hill; )
)
Respondents-Appellees )
Appellant filed a MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION AND VACATE THE FEB 28, DISMISSAL FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION DUE TO
JUDGE TERRANCE LAVINE OBSTRUCTED JUSTICE & ACTED AS A “PRIVATE CITIZEN”
DENIED EVERY MOTION PETITIONER FILED AND ORDERED THE CLERKS IN THE APPELLATE
COURT NOT TO ACCEPT HIS MOTIONS DUE
TO THEM BEING FRIVOLOUS SAID CLERKS WERE IN FACT INTIMIDATED BECAUSE OF HIS
JUDICIAL STATUS PETITIONER NEVER WAS SUPPOSED TO SUBMIT A BRIEF BECAUSE THE
LABOR BOARD NEVER HAD A RECORD OR INVESTIGATED THE CTA OR ATU LOCAL 241 IL 4TH
DISTRICT JUDGES LISA HOLDER WHITE, CAVANAGH AND KNECHT IN RE CITY OF SULLIVAN V
THE ILL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD CREATED A PRECEDENT IN THE LAWS THAT WAS
EGREGIOUSLY IGNORED BECAUSE OF PETITIONER’S SKIN COLOR AND PRO SE STATUS (filed
March 1, 2024 at 9:51am) and was DENIED immediately at 1:54pm before any judge
received it. )
1. Allegedly a Clerk impersonated a
Judge and MaryAnn Kaya emailed Ex 3.
C- That
upon the filing of the aforementioned Motion and leaving the building security
and a State Marshall requested he wait while he was the elevator and on the
first floor informed him he was not allowed to ever enter the Bilandic
Building, hereto attached Gr 2 an Order signed by judges with no
explanation of any alleged crime, the Order is dated Sept. 22, 2023 and he
informed the Marshalls and building security, he was not aware and never
received any email to this fact and he only received a court order two days ago
is the only reason, he was in the building, hereto attached Ex 3, Court
Order dated Feb 28, 2024 with judges
names typed not signed, but on Gr Ex 2 they are signed.
D- That
because no attorney in any of the courts were able to manipulate the laws and
defeat the Plaintiff acting Pro Se in his behalf and said attorneys and law
firms concurred by agreeing to everything, to what he has asserted in his
pleadings as being TRUTHFUL by not Objecting or Denying to anything recorded in
his Pleadings accompanied via Affidavits, judges resented him because of his
skin color and the fact they could not suspend any law license in an attempt to
stop him from particularizing the “Fraudulent Criminal Civil Rights Violations
of judges, so they became “Private Citizens” pursuant to Section 1983
imposing liability only when a municipality has violated a
federal right.
11.)
That
Respondent’s had Attorney Joseph P. Harris (LAW LICENSES SUSPENDED) as their
attorney in this foreclosure matter and egregious false charges were levied
against him in the same manner they were levied against Attorney Lanre Amu By Jonathan Bilyk Dec
17, 2013
12.)
That when you complain of Mortgage Fraud or about the
judges involved you get your law license suspended and now if you are a Pro se
person of Color defending yourself against corrupt or racist judges, they enter
Orders keeping you out of the very building you need to go into for further
relief being the Appellate Court or Supreme Court of Illinois where Judge Lyle
is now a part of.
13.)
That as Pro Se senior
citizens, there is not a scintilla of falsity in any of said pleadings showing Judge
Lyle ever had jurisdiction to ALLOW any EVICTION BY THE COOK COUNTY
SHERIFFS from their home of over 60
years.
A- Respondent
filed a Motion
Striking/Objecting Approving Report of Sale (Court Order Being Void/ A Nullity)
And Distribution, Confirming Sale and Eviction Order, And for a Personal Deficiency Judgment,
Order Finding Personal Deficiency Due to Judge Lyle & Other
Attorneys/Judges Complicit in a Criminal Enterprise of Mortgage Fraud Affidavit
of PHH Mortgage Corp. Corroborating Their Involvement Stealing Home Warranting
A Rule to Show Cause Remanding All Parties Instanter Into Custody w/ Body
Attachment & Disqualifying Judge Lyle Instanter (April 25, 2022) in the Circuit Court of Cook County detailing a
Plethora of Criminal Enterprise Actions.
B-
That Plaintiff’s Response to Defendant’s
Monzella Y. Johnson’s Motion Striking/Objecting Approving Sale (Court Order
Being a Void/Nullity) And
Distribution et al. (Interpreted as a Motion To Vacate The Order Approving Sale
For Not Receiving Notice) (filed June 24, 2022)
C-
That Respondent knowing that the Plaintiffs were not
going to file any reply or comply with judge Lyle’s court order, so Respondent’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Motion Pursuant
to all State of Illinois and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure w/Affidavit
seeking $33 Million Dollars for the number of years they have been frivolously
before the courts FRAUDULENTLY 14 YEARS (Filed June 2, 2022).
D- RESPONDENT’S
REPLY MOTION STRIKING PETITIONER’S RESPONSE MOTION TO MONZELLA Y. JOHNSON’S
MOTION STRIKING/OBJECTING APPROVING SALE (COURT ORDER BEING A VOID/NULLITY) AND
DISTRIBUTION ET AL.
(INTERPRETED AS A MOTION TO VACATE THE ORDER APPROVING SALE FOR NOT RECEIVING
NOTICE-WARRANTING A RULE TO SHOW CAUSE REMANDING ALL PARTIES &
DISQUALIFYING JUDGE LYLE INSTANTER w/AFFIDAVIT (filed June 30, 2022).
