CORRUPTION IN THE ILLINOIS APPELLATE COURT INVOLVING US BANK ALLEGEDLY PAYING OFF CERTAIN JUDGES COVERING UP THE FACT HOMES ARE BEING STOLEN IN ILLEGAL FORECLOSURES
PAGE 18 IS THE DRAFT ORDER WHICH STATES "This matter having come on to be heard on Motion Vacating the Court Order of June 20, et al. due notice having been given, the court having jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter, and being fully advised in the premises; By Denying this Order redacting any language You are acknowledging your role in this Mortgage Fraud Criminal Conspiracy and is letting the FBI & everyone in Law Enforcement know of this Fact and is submitting yourself voluntarily to the full extent to all prosecutions and grand jury indictments.
It is HEREBY ORDERED that Petition is Granted/Denied Instanter"
THE COURTS ARE A JOKE AND CORRUPTION IS OUT OF CONTROL GREYLORD DIDN'T TEACH THESE JUDGES ANYTHING BECAUSE THEY ARE FAR MORE RACIST AND CORRUPT THAN ANY SOUTHERN CITY OR STATE.
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 VACATING THE COURT
ORDER OF JUNE 20, 2024 DUE TO IT BEING VOID A NULLITY & REINSTATE MOTION
STRIKING/OBJECTING APPELLEES MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
DUE TO CORROBORATION AND COMPLICITY ENGAGING IN MORTGAGE FRAUD, ORGANIZED
CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY RPC ETHICS VIOLATIONS, FAILURE TO FILE AN APPEARANCE,
COLLUDING WITH JUDGES CLERK AND STATE APPELLATE CLERK, MAIL FRAUD, ADMITTING TO
ALL PLEADINGS VIA SUMMARY JUDGMENT EVERY COURT ORDER BEING VOID/A NULLITY) DUE TO JUDGE LYLE & OTHER
ATTORNEYS/JUDGES COMPLICIT IN A CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE OF MORGTAGE FRAUD
CORROBORATING THEIR INVOLVEMENT TRYING TO STEAL HOME APPELLANT NEVER HAD A MORTGAGE
WITH WARRANTING A RULE TO SHOW CAUSE REMANDING ALL PARTIES INSTANTER INTO
CUSTODY W/BODY ATTACHMENT INVOKING THE JURISDICTION OF THE ATTORNEY
REGISTRATION & DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION, ILLINOIS COURTS COMMISSION, STATE
POLICE DISQUALIFYING JUDGE NATHANIEL
HOWSE, JR. AND THE 2ND DIV INSTANTER DUE TO MOTION TO CERTIFY COURT
ORDER OF MAY 8, 2024, PARTICULARIZED JUDICIAL CORRUPTION AND INTERNAL FRAUD
WITHIN THE APPELLATE CLERKS DIVISION PURSUANT TO Fed Rule Civ P. 8 and 9, Local Rule 56.1(a) provides that a motion for summary
judgment 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."
& VACATE THE JUNE 13TH COURT ORDER DUE TO JUDGE NATHANIEL HOWSE,
JR. AND ALL APPELLEES ADMITTING VIA SUMMARY JUDGMENT ALL PLEADINGS ARE TRUE
Now comes Appellant, 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
Vacating Court Order of June 20th et al;
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)”.
APPELLEES and their
Co-Conspirators have already ADMITTED via Summary judgment filed (May
10, 2024) and are not and have never OBJECTED to any of the FACTUAL
PLEADINGS and nobody seems to have a scintilla comprehensible aptitude of
the laws or any rules within the procedures but is relying on “fraud” and a
plethora of sordid criminal conspiracy actions in an attempt availing them of
any proper legal judgements against them presented to this court.
That allegedly judges typed
signatures Nathaniel Howse, Jr., Margaret S. McBride of the Illinois
Judicial Commission, David W. Ellis of the Executive Committee in no
way verifies that said judges are actually participants in this matter, but
unequivocally demonstrate a Prima Facie showing of “JIM CROW LAWS”
being enforced because Court Order
Granting Dismissal of Appeal is CRIMINAL when Appellant timely filed a
Motion Objecting said Motion June 18th, 2024, EMAILED AT 8:58
am.
1.)
That no judge
entertained Appellant’s Motion and only entertained the Motion of Attorneys not
legally before the courts corroborating Judicial Corruption/Conspiracy.
2.)
FACT: The Appellate Court’s corrupt judges are aware US Bank
has no legal standing before them and in no way are the able to defeat the Pro
se litigant litigiously and is mortified because they have deployed a plethora
of alleged Klan law firms to try and STEAL said home and has wholly failed in
every attempt;
3.)
FACT: That US Bank and the corrupt judges/clerks involved in
this Mortgage Fraud Criminal Conspiracy do not want nobody to see how they
illegally brought this matter before the Cook County Courts, hereto attached June
3, 2009 Affidavit of Proof, Vol 1 of 4, C 906-907, Attorneys
(Barbara J. Dutton, William E. Dutton, Jr.) fraudulently certified under PENALTY
OF PERJURY, UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ET AL. in that said
law firm and the attorneys should have been disbarred from practicing law 15
years ago with this Affidavit described as being “WHOLLY INSUFFICIENT” which
was really FRAUD ON THE COURT but every racist criminal act perpetrated by US
Bank has been ignored and covered-up by Cook County and State Judges.
4.)
FACT: That this is how racist Bank employees recruit law firms
to use their legal wit to help them STEAL THE HOMES FROM HARD WORKING SENIOR
CITIZENS and Black Americans
5.)
As for the
Jurisdiction U.S. Bank and its attorneys never had Jurisdiction bringing the
Appellant before the court ever since Judge Nathaniel Howse, Jr. Joseph Gordon,
James R. Epstein AFFIRMED Judge Pamela Gillespie’s ruling VACATING the
Foreclosure (Dec. 30, 2011).
A-
U.S. Bank are no
novices at “Fraud” U.S. Bank was fined for using customer data to open sham
accounts and new lines of credit without permission. Employees were
pressured to access customer credit reports and open new accounts to inflate
sales numbers. The bank is required to pay $37.5 million and return any illegal
fees and charges — with interest.
U.S. Bank Fined $37.5 Million for
Illegally Using Customer Data ...
www.businessinsider.com/us-bank-fined-375-million-for-illegally-using-custome
A-
TheStreet
https://www.thestreet.com/personal-finance/u-s...
U.S. Bank slapped with
million-dollar fines for ‘illegal conduct’
BWEB Dec 21, 2023 · The CFPB
concluded that U.S. Bank violated both the Consumer Financial Protection Act and
the Electronic Fund Transfer Act for freezing accounts and not
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.) Appellees
having already admitted to every pleading properly presented in the Motion to
Certify and unlawfully DENIED, due to a certain Appellate Clerk and person
acting as a “sniper” if not Judge Nathaniel Howse, Jr. but a person with his
authority stamping court orders which said crimes has culminated into a
deliberate cyber crime using the internet mail to publish criminal violations.
3.) That on June 13,
2024, A Court Order was emailed by Nicole Watson an active participant aware of
the perpetrators involved sent an Order deemed Void/a Nullity stating “Motion
to Supplement Record is Denied without Prejudice. Record not in queue.”
4.)
That unbeknown to said conspirators’ communication was
established with Deanna Conn, Asst. Chief Deputy Clerk of the Appellate
Division on the 8th floor in the Daley Center (June 13, 2024) who
provided her number 312 603-5138.
A- She verified that
all five documents were in fact submitted and signed for May 23, 2024, when it
was explained that the clerks in the Appellate
Clerk’s office stated the record was not in the queue, she was shocked and
said that she would happy to resend the record missing upon a directive from
the Appellate Court, she was very courteous and helpful.
B- That Appellants
returned to the Appellate Court and learned that the record the alleged judge
or “sniper” in receipt of the signature stamp and received the record court
order stated was not in the queue.
C- That the very Law
Firm never filed an Appearance and Court never informed the Appellant’s of said
law firm Dykema Gossett PLLC, 10 S. Wacker Dr. Suite 2300, Chicago, Il.
60606.
D- That the lawyers
are in complete violation of the Ethics
Sections in RPC 3.3 filed said Motion with the very entries recorded
in Pars F-I unequivocally demonstrating and corroborating racist
collusion of certain State employees dispatching records to an attorney or law
firms not legally before the court.
E- That to further
corroborate all Pleadings recorded by the Appellant as being factual and
properly admitted to via Summary Judgment said Attorneys have provided a COURT
ORDER dated May 15, 2024, That Freddrenna Lyle has entered as a “PRIVATE
CITIZEN”
F- That Appellant
sent an email (June 8, 2022) to Acting Presiding Judge Sophia Hall but was
directed to June 21st 2022, Hearing.
G- Judge Lyle and Judge
Derico now Judge Nathaniel Howse, Jr. Have corroborated within the
Preponderance of the Evidence as Negros, Blacks, Afro Black Americans the
extent they are willing to exhaust saving their alleged Slave Masters (aka
Massa likened to being on a Plantation in the Slave Masters House) have signed
court orders for the Appellees where they have not presented or prepared trying
to help racist white bank attorneys and U.S. Bank try and steal their home.
H- That if a Negro
Judge is not mentally free to exercise independence or think and act in a
manner of moral turpitude and in accordance to the laws of the constitution
where they are deemed free men or women, they are merely colored versions of
the racist oppressors and is being prostituted to continue the agenda of Jim
Crow Doctrines within the laws outlawed by the United States Constitution.
I- For example, if
U.S. Bank was a Slave Owner and certain judges were their slaves they need not
defend anything a Free Senior Citizen presents meritoriously because the slaves
are going to do whatever they are told and the law firms embracing their
doctrines have to just show up and get paid because the “FIX” is already
in.
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.
"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." Carter G. Woodson,
1933
5.) That most
importantly said June 21st, 2022 Cout Order, Ref as C 5321 V4,
UNEQUIVOCALLY CORROBORATING NOT HAVING JURISDICTION, she set a BRIEFING
SCHEDULE on the same case DISMISSED BY THE APPELLATE COURT.
6.)
That
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. (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.
7.) That Judge
Nathaniel Howse, Jr. and all of Appellees’ attorneys have admitted to all
Pleadings!
A- That Pursuant to Page 12, Par 8
of the Motion to Certify improperly Denied “That Black Democrats who hate their own skin color as judges or
responsible persons in alleged authority are emulating the same hate and
injustices People of Color have been fighting for 14 many years trying to keep their
properties or fight against the Unequal Applications of the laws, in Illinois
courts, in that Judge Lyle has been the “defacto” attorney for US Bank ever
since this case was before her.
i.
Plaintiff’s
having already admitted to all Pleadings have never COMPLIED with any LAWS,
COURT ORDERS and it is evident thus far, they have no RESPECT for BLACK JUDGES
and it is indicative in this matter and in so many cases similar to this, as
reflected egregiously in Gr Ex 1.
ii.
That not
one judge or attorney seems to have a comprehensible understanding of the law
“Private Citizen” and their actions towards the Appellant due to her being “Pro
Se” but is holding Pro se litigants at a legal standard no licensed attorney or
judge understands or is adhering too.
8.)
That the Appellee’s Attorneys Potestivo & Assoc never
withdrew or filed an APPEARANCE BUT IS USING VICIOUS TERRORISTS’ TACTICS
by Recruiting other law firms trying to Bully/Harass or Intimidate the
Appellants with responding to the Frivolous document to Dismiss a Meritorious
Appeal which has no legal standing in a attempt to try and wear them down
litigiously and show this court and the Federal Government how they don’t
respect or honor any laws and will employ 100’s of attorneys to steal said
seniors home or take from any Black or Colored persons anything they desire
because of the number of judges on their alleged payroll.
9.)
That the Judges witnessing these egregious Hateful Criminal
Sinister Acts of Caucasian Attorneys making a mockery out of the legal system
when it is clear after the Appellate Court’s Ruling NEVER HAD JURISDICTION
on the Appellant’s trying to steal their home are likened to being cowards and
will never admonish or stand up to said Caucasians due to their inferior
disposition, in that said judges have demonstrated a willingness to falsify any
document or sacrifice their own careers closing their eyes to all egregious
crimes and destroying their own ethnic groups pursuant to Page 3, Pars G-I, of
the Motion to Certify as already admitted too in its entirety.
Plaintiffs have not raised any affirmative defenses.
Summary
judgment is appropriate when the pleadings, depositions, admissions, and
affidavits, viewed in a light most favorable to the movant or non-movant fail
to establish a genuine issue of material fact, thereby
1. Entitling the
moving party to judgment as a matter of law.
The
purpose of summary judgment is not to try a question of fact, but simply to determine
whether one exists.
When
the party moving for summary judgment supplies evidentiary facts which,
If
not contradicted, would entitle him to judgment, the opposing party cannot
Rely
upon his complaint or answer alone to raise issues of material fact. A counter
Affidavit
is necessary to refute evidentiary facts properly asserted by affidavit
Supporting
the motion or else the facts are deemed admitted.
Here, Defendant
has supplied affidavits, Certified Court transcripts and other evidentiary
material that establishes all of the elements necessary to entitle it to
recovery under the parties’ agreements, including the amount of damages. Plaintiffs
have failed to submit any evidence in opposition to the Motion or Order to
raise any genuine issues of material fact. Thus, summary judgment is proper.
That
because of the heinous acts Plaintiff have been harmed by said Civil Rights
Violations and no one objected to said assertions put before any tribunal,
Plaintiff is seeking $33 Million
Dollars as punitive damages; 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}”
Finally,
this Affidavit is best closed by a jurist who has stated”; Citing Canon 2A the
court noted, “[a] court’s indifference to clearly stated rules breed disrespect
for and discontent with our justice system. Government cannot demand respect of
the laws by its citizens when its tribunals ignore those very same laws”)
Federal
Court FEDERAL JUDGE GETTLEMAN:
stated, Tuesday March 10, 2009, where he found Superintendent of police Jody
Weiss in Contempt of Court and Ordered the City to Pay $100,000.00, “No
one is above the Law”, he cited a 1928 decision by Supreme Court
Justice Louis Brandeis, that said, “If the Government becomes the law breaker,
it breeds Contempt for the Law, it invites everyman to become a law unto
himself. It invites Anarchy.”
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 (see below).
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 as in this case Federal officers.
The judge
then acts not as a judge, but as a private individual (in his person).
That Defendant filed an Appeal with due-diligence
trying emphatically to save their family home and was before another group of
judges and the APPELLATE COURT- AFFIRMED Judge Gillespie’s Court Order, Dec
13, 2011, Judges Nathaniel R. Howse, Jr., Joseph Gordon, James R. Epstein.
10.)
That hereto attached, Gr Ex A, County Clerk’s
Office, Recorder of Deeds, Court Order of Dec. 30, 2011 which has been
Certified by the Appellate Court of Illinois First District and filed lawfully
with all fees lawfully paid.
a.
That the only time a Negro, Black, Afro
American or certain Colored People can lead or follow the laws correctly is if
an un bias Caucasian is on board directing them which is clearly illustrated
and admitted to on Page 18, Par F, of Motion to Certify et al., “That
same HATE is still being practiced and ENFORCED even with Black Judges or
Mayors they are IMPOTENT in authority as many can see the violence and racism
has not changed with Colored People in authority it is still worse in this era
Hateful White and Black Judges are working against any person color seeking
justice in this RACIST CITY.”
11.)
That Racism and egregious Hate has surpassed human
imagination where Racist/Sexist Hispanic judges are now emulating what the
Irish and Polish ethnic judges have done for years destroying Black and Brown
ethnic groups using the worse Colored People to be appointed as judges
enforcing Jim Crow Laws.
Ethics
All
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
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.
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.
- That
said judge demonstrated Bias and collusion did what was right only in the
company of competent qualified Caucasian judges
A- Judge
Nathaniel Howse, Jr. used his robe and unlawful authority in the same identical
manner as Judge Iris Y Chivira in ignoring said Summary Judgment due to
Plaintiffs Defaulting 735 ILCS 5/2—1001(a)(3) (West 2006). Although the statute does
not define “cause”, Illinois courts have held that in such circumstances,
actual prejudice has been required to FORCE REMOVAL of a judge from a case,
that is, either prejudicial trial conduct or personal bias. Rosewood Corp. n
Transamerica Insurance Co., 57 Ill 2d 247, 311 N.E. 2d 673 (1974; In re
Marriage of Kozloff, 101 Ill 2d 526, 532, 79 Ill. Dec 165 463 N.E. 2d 719
(1984); see also People v. Vance, 76 Ill. 2d 171, 181, 28 Ill. Dec. 508, 390
N.E. 2d 867 (1979).
- 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- Judge Howse with Brazen disregard for the laws
in an attempt for Appellees to try and defeat said retired Defendants That due to the judges Bias
and or Prejudice conduct pursuant to Sup Ct Rule
71, Sufficient for Removal, conduct which does not constitute a criminal
offense may be sufficiently violative of the Judicial Canons to warrant removal
for cause. Napolitano v Ward, 457 F 2d 279 (7th Cir.), cert denied, 409
U.S. 1037, 93 S. Ct. 512, 34 L. Ed. 2d 486 (1972).
2. That judge Howse has
demonstrated an unknown interest in this matter which has blinded her
objectivity 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 breed 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).
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
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 )
______________________________________________________________________ NOTICE OF
MOTION VACATING THE COURT ORDER OF JUNE 20, 2024 DUE TO IT BEING
VOID A NULLITY & REINSTATE MOTION STRIKING/OBJECTING APPELLEES MOTION TO
DISMISS APPEAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION DUE TO CORROBORATION AND COMPLICITY
ENGAGING IN MORTGAGE FRAUD, ORGANIZED CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY RPC ETHICS
VIOLATIONS, FAILURE TO FILE AN APPEARANCE, COLLUDING WITH JUDGES CLERK AND
STATE APPELLATE CLERK, MAIL FRAUD, ADMITTING TO ALL PLEADINGS VIA SUMMARY
JUDGMENT EVERY COURT ORDER BEING VOID/A NULLITY) DUE TO JUDGE LYLE & OTHER
ATTORNEYS/JUDGES COMPLICIT IN A CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE OF MORGTAGE FRAUD
CORROBORATING THEIR INVOLVEMENT TRYING TO STEAL HOME APPELLANT NEVER HAD A MORTGAGE
WITH WARRANTING A RULE TO SHOW CAUSE REMANDING ALL PARTIES INSTANTER INTO
CUSTODY W/BODY ATTACHMENT INVOKING THE JURISDICTION OF THE ATTORNEY
REGISTRATION & DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION, ILLINOIS COURTS COMMISSION, STATE
POLICE DISQUALIFYING JUDGE NATHANIEL
HOWSE, JR. AND THE 2ND DIV INSTANTER DUE TO MOTION TO CERTIFY COURT
ORDER OF MAY 8, 2024, PARTICULARIZED JUDICIAL CORRUPTION AND INTERNAL FRAUD
WITHIN THE APPELLATE CLERKS DIVISION PURSUANT TO Fed Rule
Civ P. 8 and 9, Local Rule 56.1(a) provides that a motion for summary
judgment 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." & VACATE THE JUNE 13TH COURT
ORDER DUE TO JUDGE NATHANIEL HOWSE, JR. AND ALL APPELLEES ADMITTING VIA SUMMARY
JUDGMENT ALL PLEADINGS ARE TRUE
Please be advised that on June 24th,
2024, Appellant has filed before this Appellate Court, Motion Vacating the
Court Order of June 20 et al; .
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that
Defendant-Appellant Moves to the Illinois Appellate Court, First District for
an Order on Motion Vacating the Court Order of June 20th
et al.
I have caused Courtesy Copies to be had on all of the
following via electronic service email/regular mail.
To: Cook County States Attorney Chief Judge Timothy C. Evans
Kim Foxx 50
West Washington, Suite 2600
50 West Washington, Suite 500 Chicago, Ill. 60601
Chicago, Ill. 60601
Clerk of the
Circuit Court
Iris Y.
Martinez
Attorney General
50 West
Washington, Suite 1001 Kwame
Raoul alexandrina.shrove@ilag.gov
Chicago, Ill.
60601
555 West Monroe Suite 1300
Chicago, Ill. 60601
Cook County Sheriff’s
Tom Dart
50 West
Washington, Suite 702 email CCSO@ccsheriff.org
Chg. IL 60601
President/CEO Rick Aneshansel
US Bank Natl. Assoc. rick.aneshansel@usbank.com
Registered
Agent: Grace A. Gorka US Bank Natl.
Assoc.
190 S. LaSalle,
grace.gorka@usbank.com ggorka@usbank.com
Chg. IL 60603
JSC_General@atgf.com Pamela Murphy-Boylan President CEO of the
(TJSC)
RPerdew@lockelord.com Lord & Locke Law Firm
simon.feng@lockelord.com Lord & Locke Law Firm
pmal@potestivolaw.com Potestivo Law Firm
chicagodocket@lockelord.com Lord & Locke Law Firm
Chicago Police Superintendent, 3510 S. Michigan Ave,
Chicago Ill. 60653
Email CLEARPATH@chicagopolice.org
Potestivo & Ass., PC
Bryan G. Thompson, Poulami Mal
bthompson@potestivolaw.com
223 West Jackson, Blvd, Suite
610
Chicago, IL. 60606
COURTESY COPIES
TO THE FOLLOWING:
Dir. FBI,
Hon Mayor Brandon
Special Agent in
Charge (FBI) City
Hall 7th floor
Wes Wheeler, Jr. Chicago,
IL. 60601
2111 West Roosevelt Road
Chicago, Il 60608
Illinois
Courts Commission
555 West
Monroe, 15th floor
Chicago Ill.
60661
info@IllinoisCourtsCommission.gov
Illinois Court
Commission Members
Justice P.
Scott Neville, Jr. Chairman
Justice Thomas
M. Harris
Justice
Margaret Stanton McBride
Judge Lewis
Nixon
Judge Sheldon
Sobol
Judge Aurora
Abella-Austriaco
Madam Paula
Wolf
PLEASE BE ADVISED that on June
24th, 2024, A Motion Vacating
the June 20th Court Order et al. with all
attachments has
been filed before the Appellate Court of Illinois, and served on all parties in
the aforementioned Motion via email.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned hereby
certifies that the above notice and all attachments were caused to be
personally mailed/emailed, to the above parties at the addresses provided before
5:00 pm on June 24th, 2024.
________________________
Respectfully Submitted, Monzella Y.
Johnson
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 she
verily believes the same to be true.
Respectfully Submitted
Notary
____________________
Monzella Y. Johnson
5217 S. Ingleside. Ave
Chicago, Il 60615
1-24-0568
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 )
______________________________________________________________________
ORDER
This matter
having come on to be heard on Motion Vacating the Court Order of June 20, et
al. due notice having been given, the court having jurisdiction over the
parties and the subject matter, and being fully advised in the premises; By Denying
this Order redacting any language You are acknowledging your role in this
Mortgage Fraud Criminal Conspiracy and is letting the FBI & everyone in Law
Enforcement know of this Fact and is submitting yourself voluntarily to the
full extent to all prosecutions and grand jury indictments.
It is HEREBY
ORDERED that Petition is Granted/Denied Instanter.
ENTERED:
_________________________________
Justice
_________________________________
Monzella Y. Johnson
Justice
Pro Se
5217 S. Ingleside
_________________________________
Chicago, Illinois 60653 Justice
Frogishtwo65@gmail.com
