HOW BLACK JUDGES AND CERTAIN COLORED JUDGES ARE RECRUITED AND APPOINTED TO THE JUDGES BENCH TO UNDERMINE JUDICIAL RULINGS OF QUALIFIED JUDGES WHO COULD NOT BE BOUGHT OR WOULDN'T GO ALONG WITH CORRUPTION.
SAD REALITY MANY OF THE COLORED OR RACIST JUDGES HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE OF THE LAWS OR UNDERSTANDING OF ANY RULES OF CASES PUT BEFORE THEM, BUT THEY MAKE RULINGS OFF WHAT THEY ARE TOLD TO DO OR BASED UPON THEIR OWN HATEFUL DISPOSITION ----THE RULES ARE SIMPLE---- FIND ME A BLACK OR COLORED JUDGE IN THIS STATE WHO KNOWS OR UNDERSTANDS ANY OF THE LAWS LAID OUT IN THIS DOCUMENT
IN THIS CASE TWO CAUCASIAN JUDGES AND ONE AFRO JUDGE IN THE APPELLLATE COURT RULED AND AFFIRMED THE RULING OF CAUCASIAN CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE PAMELA GILLESPIE.
IN CHICAGO COURTS RACISM AND HATE IS REAL NO BLACK JUDGE, IRISH OR JUDGES OF POLISH ETHNICTY EVER RULES IN FAVOR OF A COLORED PERSON, BLACK JUDGES DO NOT SPEAK UP OR ADMONISH CERTAIN CAUCASIAN ETHNIC GROUPS, IN THAT MANY OF THEM GO ALONG AND SUPPORT THE RACIAL HATE OR WHATEVER INJUSTICES DIRECTED AT THEIR ETHNIC GROUPS.
THIS CASE IS SHOWING IN REAL TIME WHY BLACKS HAVE BEEN APPOINTED AND THE FACT MANY OF THEM ARE IMPOTENT IN AUTHORITY WHEN IT INVOLVES RACISM AND OR CORRUPTION AGAINST CERTAIN CAUCASIANS AND BANK ATTORNEYS.
BECAUSE PAMELA GILLESPIE WAS OF A JEWISH PERSUASION AND RULED CORRECTLY AGAINST US BANK (VACATING THE FORECLOSURE, JUNE 3, 2010) AND THE RACIST BANK ATTORNEYS WHO WERE POLITICALLY CONNECTED ALLEGEDLY WITH CITY HALL FOES WHO HAD GREAT SUCCESS STEALING THE HOMES OF COLORED PEOPLE BUT JUDGES JOSEPH GORDON, NATHANIEL R. HOWSE, JR., JAMES R. EPSTEIN UNANIMOUSLY AGREED AND RULED IN FAVOR OF THE JOHNSON SISTERS.
TO SHOW THE VILE RESENTMENT AND CONTEMPT FREDRENNA LYLE AND JAMES T. DERICO WERE RECRUITED TO DO THE BIDDING OF THE RACIST PARTIES IN DOING THEIR PART IN HELPING STEAL THE HOME IN THIS ILLEGAL FORECLOSURE PROVING THAT GOING BEFORE A BLACK JUDGE IN ANY SITUATION IS WORSE THAN GOING BEFORE MANY OF THE RACIST JUDGES BECAUSE THEY ACT LIKE RACIST OR SLAVES AND DO WHAT THEY ARE TOLD.
FREDRENNA LYLE USED HER ROBE AND UNLAWFUL AUTHORITY SIGNED A COURT ORDER MARCH 15, 2022 ORDERING THE COOK COUNTY SHERIFF TO EVICT THESE SENIOR CITIZENS IGNORING THE JUDGES RULING AFFIRMING THAT THE FORECLOSURE SALE AND JUDGMENT WAS VACATED.
JUDGE JAMES T. DERICO ACTED LIKE A PLANTATION "N". WHO WAS WORKING IN MASSAS HOUSE WITH THE EXACT PERSONALITY OF "STEPHEN" THE CHARACTER PORTRAYED IN DJANGO UNCHAINED DENIED EVERY MOTION THAT WAS PRESENTED TRYING TO PREVENT AN UNLAWFUL EVICTION.
BLACK JUDGE NATHANIEL HOWSE JR., WHO RULED WITH THE CAUCASIAN JUDGES IN FAVOR OF THE JOHNSON SISTERS PROVING UNEQUIVOCALLY THAT, HE HAVE NO REAL AUTHORITY WITHOUT CAUCASIAN JUDGES IS NOW DENYING EVERYTHING THAT THE JOHNSON SISTERS IS PRESENTING BEFORE THE SAME JUDGE WHERE EVERY RACIST BANK ATTORNEY HAS IGNORED AND VIOLATED.
IMMIGRANTS AND CERTAIN HISPANIC JUDGES REALIZE THAT BLACKS IN AUTHORITY ARE FIGUREHEADS AND PUPPETS WILL NOT ADDRESS CORRUPTION OR RACISM AS ILLUSTRATED CLEARLY IN THIS CASE SO THE HISPANIC JUDGES IS TRYING THEIR ROLES IN ATTEMPTING TO "FIX" A CASE AGAINST A MAN WHO HAVE BEEN FIGHTING THE ILLEGAL EXTORTION OF CHILD SUPPORT TO A POLICE OFFICER FRANCOISE WHO HAVE RECRUITED A NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS IN THE LEGAL ARENA TO HELP HER STALK A MAN FOR CHILD SUPPORT FOR HER 41 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER CONCIEVED BY HER BIOLOGICAL FATHER WHO IMPREGNATED HER WHEN HE WAS A POLICE OFFICER.
WHAT NONE OF THESE JUDGES HAD THE LEGAL APTITUDE TO UNDERSTAND OR REALIZE WAS THAT A SUMMARY JUDGMENT WAS ATTACHED TO THE PLEADINGS $33 MILLION DEFAULT JUDGMENT WAS AGAINST POLICE OFFICER FRANCOISE ET AL AND $33 MILLION AGAINST US BANK ET AL
THAT EVERY PERSON FINALLY ADMITTED THEIR ROLES IN THESE HORRIC CRIMES SHOWING THAT COLORED PEOPLE ARE ONLY ALLOWED IN POSITIONS OF AUTHORITY PROVIDED THEY DESTROY AND EXPLOIT THEIR OWN ETHNIC GROUPS.
The Local Rules provide detailed instructions as to how litigants should approach their summary judgment motions and responses. Local Rule 56.1(a) provides that a motion for summary must include a "statement of material facts as to which the moving party contends there is no genuine issue and that entitle the moving party to a judgment as a matter of law."
This statement of material facts
"shall consist of short numbered paragraphs, including within each paragraph specific
references to the affidavits, parts of the record, and other supporting
materials relied upon to support the facts set forth in that paragraph." Part (b) of Local Rule 56.1 requires a party opposing
summary for judgment to file a concise response to the movant's statement of
material facts. That statement is required to include a response to each
numbered paragraph in the moving party's statement, including in the case of
any disagreement, "specific references to the affidavits, parts of the
record, and other supporting materials relied upon." The rule is very
clear that "all material facts set forth in the statement required of the
moving party will be deemed admitted unless controverted by the statement of
the opposing party." Local Rule 56.1(b)(3)(B).
In the matter
of Raymond, 442 F. 3d at 606. (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 the Defendant has met and exceeded the burden required in 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,
the Court instructed plaintiffs to set out each judicial proceeding complained
of, allege specific facts that make those proceedings "fraudulent" or
otherwise improper, and name the particular judges and other individuals
involved and the extent of their involvement in each claim of
"fraudulent" or otherwise improper conduct.
8. That
because of the color of said Defendant’s skin State Employees nor Democratic
judges deem him a United States citizen entitled to Equal Protection of the
Laws and is violating every area of the laws egregiously as if they are Ku Klux
Klan members.
9. That Former States Attorney Anita Alvarez via her John Ouska,
Assistant States Attorney stood above the fray and never ever colluded with the
“Private Citizens” of the Democratic Party but mostly all of the Negros,
African Americans acted as INFERIOR BEINGS went along with everything the
racist Democrats directed them to do is why the Defendant is having to
due-diligently defend himself.
10. “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.”
11. That
the recent ruling from Judge Sykes and Michael S. Kanne where former appointed
Trump Amy Barrett stated: ( ALL REPUBLICANS)
Seventh Circuit Overturns $44.7 Million
Jury Verdict Against City in Shooting Incident
Wednesday,
February 24, 2021 Julie
Tappendorf
The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals recently overturned a
jury verdict against the City of Chicago awarding $44.7 million in damages
relating to a shooting involving an off-duty police officer. First Midwest Bank as Guardian v. City of Chicago.
According to the court opinion, the plaintiff claimed that
a Chicago police officer shot his friend during an argument when the two had
been drinking. The friend suffered traumatic brain and other injuries. The
friend sued the City of Chicago seeking damages for the shooting, arguing that
the City was responsible for the officer's conduct. Specifically, the plaintiff
claimed that the City's failure to have an "early warning system" to
identify officers who might engage in misconduct, failure to adequately investigate
and discipline officers who engage in misconduct, and the "code of
silence" among police officers contributed to the shooting incident. The
City argued that the officer was off duty and not acting under "color of
state law" at the time of the shooting, so the City was not liable under
Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act. The case made its way to a jury which
found the City of Chicago liable and awarded $44.7 million in damages to the
plaintiff. The jury found that two of the City's policies - its failure to
maintain an adequate early warning system and failure to adequately investigate
and discipline officers - caused the officer to shoot his friend.
The City appealed to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals,
which reversed the jury verdict and award. The appeals court found that
although the injuries suffered by plaintiff from the shooting incident were
grievous, the City was not responsible for the officer's actions, where the
officer was acting as a private citizen and not as a City police officer. The
Seventh Circuit noted that Section 1983 imposes liability only when
a municipality has violated a federal right. Since none of the plaintiff's
federal rights were violated, the court of appeals overturned the jury verdict
against the City of Chicago.
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 )
______________________________________________________________________
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
Response Motion for Reconsideration 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 presented
to this court.
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”
Supreme Court Rule 361 Motion practice in the Illinois
reviewing courts is chiefly governed by Illinois Supreme Court Rule 361, which
supplies the general procedures for most motions in both the appellate court
and the supreme court. Ill. S. Ct. R. 361(a). Rule 361 specifies a motion as
the means to apply for an order or other relief, and requires, perhaps
obviously, that “[m]otions shall be in writing and shall state the relief
sought and the grounds therefor.”
The response to a motion is due within five days after
the motion is served personally or by e-mail, ten days after mailing of the
motion if service is by mail, or ten days after delivery to a third-party
commercial carrier for service. Extensions of this deadline are permitted by
order of the court or a single judge.
That on June 3, 2010 Hon Pamela H. Gillespie
VACATED THE FORECLOSURE JUDGMENT AND SALE OF SAID PROPERTY, with a nine-page
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
That many Caucasian attorneys were in fact RACIST
resented what Judge Gillespie did so while in the Appellate Court documents
came up missing, they were never
notified of hearing dates, lawyers appeared before certain judges and had their
Appeals Dismissed under other case numbers, Certain Clerks who was helping them
of Color where later terminated.
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.
2.)
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 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.”
3.)
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.
A-
Hereto attached, Gr Ex B email (May 29, 2024) to
Caucasian Presiding judge Regina Scannicchio unequivocally particularizing
judges engaging in diabolical Terrorists Acts on a Defendant simply because of
Heterosexual Masculine outspoken disposition and not succumbing to their
“Private Citizen” intimidation tactics.
B-
That Judge Nathaniel Howse, Jr. and Iris Y. Chivira et
al., has proven and corroborated within the Preponderance of the Evidence and
Laws their admissions in being complicit in an “Organized Criminal Conspiracy”
4.)
That justice is only afforded to those depending on
what judge decides who shall receive it and not in accordance to any laws of
the United States Supreme Court or Federal Rules in Chicago the Ku Klux Klan
and or any other fraternal order that is compelling Black and Brown ethnic
groups to sell out their own people so as to satisfy HATE, GENOCIDE,
CORRUPTION, RACISM AND SEXISM
A-
The media
everyday sensationalizes the horrific killings and senseless violence
carjackings, robberies mayhem and havoc on innocent hard-working proletariats
but those same individuals are wearing robes hiding behind their authority and
badges and deserve the same media exposure and be housed and incarcerated with
their kind, that is in the streets and not in the professional arena.
B-
That Freddrenna Lyle was only appointed to the
Appellate Court because of what she did illegally in this ILLEGAL FORECLOSURE
trying to undermine and change qualified rulings by Caucasian judges not
affiliated with the Political Machine so certain blacks and certain Colored are
recruited to do the dirty work for the architects of the Political Machine.
C-
That Appellant paid for the Record May 23, 2024 but
Appellate Clerks never forwarded the record as of the filing of this document.
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 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 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).
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
RESPONDENT’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION VACATE (May 29th
2024) ORDER DUE TO IT BEING A NULLITY/VOID IN IT’S ENTIRETY DUE TO “MORTGAGE
FRAUD” “CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE CONSPIRACY” “STATE JUDGE ADMITTING/CORROBORATING
HIS ROLE AS A “PRIVATE CITIZEN” APPELLATE JUDGE NOT HONORING CANON ETHICS &
DISQUALIFICATION OF JUDGE AND DIVISION DUE TO BIAS/JUDICIAL OBSTRUCTION OF
JUSTICE AND ORDER COMPELLING CLERK OF THE APPELLATE COURT TO PRODUCE THE RECORD
w/AFFIDAVIT
Please be advised that on May 31,
2024, Appellant has filed before this Appellate Court, Motion for
Reconsideration et al; .
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that
Defendant-Appellant Moves to the Illinois Appellate Court, First District for
an Order on Motion for Reconsideration Vacate (May 29th,
Order due to it being a Nullity/Void 2024 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
CERTIFCATE OF
SERVICE
PLEASE BE ADVISED that on May
31, 2024, A Motion for Reconsideration Vacate (May 29th
2024 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 May 31 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 for Reconsideration and Vacate the May 29th
Order 2024 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;
It is HEREBY
ORDERED that Petition is Granted/Denied Instanter.
ENTERED:
_________________________________
Justice
_________________________________
Justice
_________________________________
Justice
Monzella Y Johnson
Pro
Se
_________________________________
5217 S. Ingleside
Justice
Chicago, Illinois 60653
Frogishtwo65@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment