Wikipedia Racial Injustice in Chicago Courts

Search results

Tuesday, July 30, 2024

 

Black Democrats in Chicago do not stand up for Blacks or the Colored Communities once they are elected pandering the Colored votes after reading how so many Black and certain Colored People used their ethnicities to help Criminalize an Innocent Man by Framing him for Child Support for a woman who conceived a child by her natural biological Policeman father who was allegedly under the command of John Burge.

Because Francoise became a Police Officer with her father's connections, she has used her influence and corrupt connections to have the State's Attorney's to come after me for child support by way of extortion because Black Democrats have no voice or control over the crimes of what certain Caucasians commit, the Ku Klux Klan and all of their fraternal brethren judges in the courts can "LYNCH" any Black or Colored Person by way of Injustices replacing the ropes in any court and not one Black person is going to speak against their Massa.

Black Democrats (judges, Alderman, Police etc.)  are the vehicles to helping racist corrupt Anglo Saxons circumvent any federal laws of Discrimination, Unequal Protection of the Laws etc. because the Blacks or Colored persons are used replacing and protecting the Caucasians in the Political Machine.

Here is the actual email sent to all jurists of the Democratic Party and not one person has ever replied or attempted to rectify the unmitigated Hell, they put an innocent Heterosexual Freeman through.

My question is this if Blacks as Democrats only have authority to punish, scold or humiliate Black and Colored People but close their eyes to all of the crimes of what certain Caucasians commit, why vote for a Black Person for any position?

Chicago is like a GIANT POLITICAL PLANTATION; the Black and certain Coloreds have to do what Massa says---READ HOW SO MANY BLACKS OR CERTAIN COLOREDS ASCENDED TO POWER. 

IF A PERSON DON'T LIKE OR LOVE THE COLOR OF THEIR SKIN AND WISHES THEY WERE SOMEONE ELSE'S SKIN COLOR IS DANGEROUS SELF-HATE IS A MENTAL DISEASE AND SO MANY PEOPLE IN THIS CASE ARE ACTING AS IF THEY ARE RACIST CAUCASIANS OR PERSONS MANY WERE NOT BORN TO BE.

"An Individual is in his or her heart what he thinks himself to be and out of his heart flows the issues of life," My grandfather Roosevelt Riley who was a Deacon at Pilgram Baptist Church used to say this to be all the time.

Being a Democrat in Chicago encompasses HATE, NO LOVE FOR YOUR FELLOW MAN, COWARDNESS, BACKSTABBING, VIOLENCE, DESTROYING THE BLACK AND BROWN FAMILY, INJUSTICES, CIRCUMVENTING LAWS OF EQUALITY, EMBRACING JIM CROW LAWS, HOW NOBODY SEES ANYTHING WRONG ETC.  

But many HATE ME FOR BEING A HETEROSEXUAL MAN OF COLOR FREEMAN

 


Proposed Court Order for August 8, 202416
Yahoo/Sent
  • Joe Louis 
    From:joelouis565@yahoo.com
    To:CCC DomRelCR3006 (Chief Judge's Office),sao.csed@cookcountysao.org
    Cc:The State of Illinois,Jaime Barcas (Chief Judge's Office),ccso@ccsheriff.org,isp.contact@illinois.gov,Illinoiscourtscommission Info,OIG.Referrals,Mary Rigg Neighborhood Center,Iris Chavira (Judiciary),Maritza Martinez (Judiciary),Inspectorsgeneral Info,Alexandrina Shrove,Cook County States Attorney,Nancy Houston (Chief Judge's Office),GovernorsOffice,CCC DomRelCR1905 (Chief Judge's Office),Ocj Chief (Chief Judge's Office),The State of Illinois,CCC DomRelCR1602 (Chief Judge's Office),Governor JB Pritzker,ilrb.filing@illinois.gov,ccc.domrelcrcl08@cookcountyil.gov,Kimberly Stevens,DRDivOrders Cal97 (Circuit Court),B. Marshall Hilmes,khill@atu.org,DRDivOrders Cal01 (Circuit Court),hfs.cookorders@illinois.gov,Illinoiscourtcommission Info,The State of Illinois,CCC DomRelCRCL12 (Chief Judge's Office),ccc.domrelcrcl08@cookcountyil.gov,ccc.mfmlcalendar59@cookcountyil.gov,ccc.relcrcl06@cookcountyil.gov,attorney_general@atg.state.il.us,Pamela Cummings Cook County Preckwinkle,Marcia Johnson,clearpath@chicagopolice.org,mfmlcalendar56@cookcountyil.gov,press@cookcountyil.gov,sfountain@chicagocrusader.com
    Mon, Jul 29 at 12:00 PM
    Attention Clerk for Judge Maritiza Martinez:

    It's time for people to see and realize that Black Democrats in Chicago have no authority over Caucasians and surprisingly Judge Chavira and Martinez acted like Black women, or racist or sexist Hispanics and they are the first Hispanic women to get intertwined in this sick incest scandal.

    If you are Black and a Democrat, they must do whatever they are told and this is how so many have achieved their status within the Political Machine, you won't find a half of a Black person denouncing any of the injustices noted in any of the documents vocally because they are only servants or figureheads for the party, but Judge Arce made it clear and corroborated what has been asserted to me for years that no Black or Irish judges (aka the Good ol Boys) will ever rule in my favor, but they made it clear there are some good white judges who will do right by me where the law is concerned, I just have to get in front of one of them..

    If I was fortunate to get a Spanish sister, they helped their ethnic groups when we were at 32 West Randolph, Que las negras no me ayudan en este caso mujeres! Many told the Black Clerks what was being done to me was wrong because none of them saw where the money was going because, I never owed any money for child support and when they took my money from welfare for payments while in front of judge David Haracz, they always gave me a receipt that said suspense!

    I have had women whose fathers are racist as HELL, try and help me but not a Black person now look at all of the Blacks involved and ask them why did so many go along with this sick ass Bullshit? If you want to know the answer just watch DJANGO UNCHAINED featuring Jaime Foxx and Samuel L. Jackson as Stephen many of the Black men in the Democratic Party are just like him as well as the women. 

    This is how the Democratic Party keeps Freemen or Freewomen disenfranchised from society by oppressing them if not by imprisoning them unlawfully for 25-35 years before DNA finally says oops he didn't do it or in the worst-case scenario how they recruited so many inferior negros and certain Hispanics wanting to be accepted to take part in JIM CROW ACTS that the Ku Klux Klan perfected in the South Mississippi etc. and using the same formula showing their true hate for people of Color fighting racism and injustices.

    This Paternity case is going on 40 years old Nov 21, 2024, and this is how long the Democrats have been profiting off of the misery and injustices levied at me and my family not wanting me to work go to school but pay a bill via extortion that was never my bill in the first place.

    To further amplify the MENTAL ILLNESS of this case Francoise much rather lie and live with me being a DEADBEAT FATHER, with never any attachment to her child now a woman rather that ADMIT her DAUGHTER IS HER SISTER AND HER FATHER IS THE GRANDFATHER/FATHER. 

    Ask any Caucasian if what, I have recorded on paper is true? 
    Legally the State has already admitted to all of my pleadings as being true and correct. 


    Please find the proposed court order for the August Hearing at 9:00 am:

    Zoom Link
    Meeting ID: 98569320525
    Password: 080942
    Dial In Number: 312-626-6799



    1.)  MOTION TO VACATE COURT ORDER BEING VOID/A NULLITY (MARCH 27, 2024) DUE TO JUDGE MARITZA MARTINEZ NOT HAVING JURISDICTION AND INVOKING THE JURISDICTION OF THE STATE POLICE/JUDICIAL COMMISSION TO FORCIBLY REMOVE JUDGE (S) INSTANTER FROM THEIR POSITIONS DUE TO ADMISSIONS OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT (FILED DEC 4, 2023) Local Rule 56.1  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).
    WITH AFFIDAVIT

      2.)  RESPONDENT’S MOTION FOR DISQUALIFICATION OF JUDGE MARITZA MARTINEZ INSTANTER FOR “CAUSE” HATE BIAS PREJUDICE PURSUANT to S.H.A. 735 ILCS 5/2 ---1001 (a) (2,3)

    AS A “PRIVATE CITIZEN” SHE IS ENGAGING IN PRIMAE FACIE SHOWING

     OF AN ORGANIZED CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY  CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS “FRAUD” TRESPASSING UPON THE LAWS ENGAGING IN TREASON OFFENSES MAKING HER ORDER  VOID/NULLITY DUE TO PETITIONER & ASSISTANT STATES ATTORNEYS ADMITTING/CORROBORATING THEIR ROLES IN SAID CONSPIRACY AND JUDGE CHAVIRA BEING A FORMER ASSISTANT STATES ATTORNEY USED HER UNLAWFUL AUTHORITY WITH FORMER ASSISTANT STATES ATTORNEY THOMAS KANTAS IN COVERING-UP CRIMES OF OTHER ASSISTANT STATES ATTORNEYS UNLAWFUL INVOLVEMENT IN MANUFACTURING DOCUMENTS CAUSING AN EMANCIPATED ADULT TYCEE HIGHTOWER TO APPEAR AS A MINOR SO AS TO EXTORT MONEY FROM THE RESPONDENT JUDGE NEVER HAD JURISDICTION OR AUTHORITY TO PRESIDE OVER CASE TO DISQUALIFY CHAVIRA AND THE ASSISTANT STATES ATTORNEY IS SHOWING AS A CAUCASIAN SHE CAN VIOLATE ANY LAWS WHERE RESPONDENT IS CONCERNED AND ADMITTED REPRESENTING CHICAGO POLICE OFFICER DUE TO BLACK DEMOCRATS HAVING NO AUTHORITY OVER CERTAIN CAUCASIANS & VACATE ALL ORDERS AND RULE TO SHOW CAUSE REMANDING ALL PARTIES INTO CUSTODY INSTANTER W /BODY ATTACHEMENT  w/AFFIDAVIT

    3.) MOTION TO RECUSE THE ENTIRE COOK COUNTY JUDICIARY AND APPOINT A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR PURSUANT TO THE CASE OF 2 EX-COOK COUNTY ASSISTANT STATE’S ATTORNEY’S (NICHOLAS TRUTENKO, ANDREW HORVAT) DUE TO FORMER ASSISTANT’S STATES ATTORNEY IRIS Y. CHIVIRA ALLEGEDLY TOOK PART IN THE FALSIFICATION OF BACKDATING RECORDS MAKING HER A MINOR FOR POLICE OFFICER FRANCOISER HIGHTOWER FOR HER EMANCIPATED DAUGHTER TYCEE LAQITA HIGHTOWER CAUSING RESPONDENT TO BE REMANDED INTO CUSTODY FOR ALLEGEDLY OWING CHILD SUPPORT 5 TIMES THAT WAS NEVER OWED AND NOT HIS CHILD AND THEY HAVE ADMITTED TO THE VERACITY OF THIS VIA SUMMARY JUDGMENT/DEFAULT BUT COOK COUNTY JUDGES ARE TRYING TO CONTINUOUSLY COVER-UP THE MAYHEM & EGREGIOUS INJUSTICES BECAUSE OF HIS SKIN COLOR COVERING UP A PLETHORA OF CRIMES ASSOCIATED IN THIS MATTER WHERE THE MAY 29TH EMAIL WAS SENT TO PRESIDING JUDGE REGINA SCANNICCHIO TO VACATE COURT ORDER BEING VOID/A NULLITY (MARCH 27, 2024) DUE TO JUDGE MARITZA MARTINEZ NOT HAVING JURISDICTION AND INVOKING THE JURISDICTION OF THE STATE POLICE/JUDICIAL COMMISSION TO FORCIBLY REMOVE JUDGE (S) INSTANTER FROM THEIR POSITIONS DUE TO ADMISSIONS OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT (FILED DEC 4, 2023) Local Rule 56.1  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).

    WITH AFFIDAVIT


    4.) MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT OF FRAUD OF $50 Million Dollars






 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY ILLINOIS

DOMESTIC RELATIONS DIVISION

 

 

IN RE                                                              )

                                                                         )

 Francoise Hightower                                      )        Judge Maritza Martinez                     

        Petitioner                                                 )

                                                                         )        Cal 97 

          VS                                                          )                                 

                                                                         )        No. 88 D 079012                         

 Joe Louis Lawrence                                        )        

        Respondent                                              )        Room 3006

 

 

                                                  ORDER

 

 

       THIS CAUSE coming to be heard on Respondent’s Motion to Vacate March 27th 2024 Court Order, and Motion for Disqualification Instanter of judge, Motion to Recuse the Entire Cook County Judiciary, and Motion for Default Judgment et al. A.S.A. Tina Harris appeared in open Court on behalf of Petitioner, and Caucasian A.S. A. acknowledged the State is representing the Police Officer Petitioner Court having read the Motion accompanied with Affidavits no parties challenging the merits and Petitioner being fully advised in the premises:

 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT, DEFENDANT’S MOTION to Vacate the March 27th 2024 Court Order is Granted Instanter Court never had jurisdiction   THE COURT FINDS AS FOLLOWS:

 

  1. This Court never had jurisdiction nor did the Presiding Judge Regina Scannicchio Order the Judge to preside over the subject matter.

 

  1. Defendant’s Motion to Disqualify Judge Martinez for Cause Instanter is GRANTED and all Court Orders of Feb 26, 2024 is Vacated.  

 

  1. Defendant’s Motion to Recuse the Entire Cook County Judiciary is Granted where the computer will automatically generate the County this matter will determine this case.

 

  1. Defendant’s Motion for Default Judgment is continued to the court with the final jurisdiction after this court is removed.

 

  1. The Ill. Dept of Healthcare and Family Services being represented by the State/ ASA Tina Harris appearing and not Objecting/Denying any of the merits of Defendant’s Motion accompanied with Affidavit

 

  1. That on allegations of the Motion of other parties complicit in an alleged Criminal Enterprise Conspiracy: It is Ordered:  That the Attorney Registration & Disciplinarian Commission to invoke jurisdiction and Investigate Assistant States Attorney and any and all other Attorneys in this matter and the Judicial Inquiry Board to investigate matters involving Judge Chivira and any other judges complicit in these egregious sinister acts.

 

  1. That because the Petitioner and allegations of her being a Police Officer and Respondent having been Remanded into Custody 5 times on allegations of child support on a case Dismissed Sept 17, 1987 and reinstated without his knowledge where he was found in Default May 18, 1988 and never ordered to pay any child support:

 

A-    It is Ordered: The Attorney General Kwame Raoul and State Executive Inspector General Diane Saltoun, States Attorney Kim Foxx shall investigate all parties and bring them to justice everyone involved.

 

B-    It is Ordered: Explain in specific detail when the Respondent was found to be the father or if not, any DNA/Paternity tests, the method of service had bringing him before the court’s jurisdiction.

 

C-    It is Ordered: Explain how is it the State Child Support Enforcement Agency began representing a Police Officer and arrearage orders having been set; whereby, Tycee Laqita Hightower was an adult and no records of her initiating any actions against the Respondent ( alleged father).

 

D-    It is Ordered: That because of the egregious allegations of Assistant States Attorney Tina Harris involvement as an Officer of the Court and not bringing to the courts attention she is BARRED from practicing law in the Domestic Relations Division, until an investigation is completed determining her fate in this matter. 

 

E-    It is Ordered: That a forensic accountant ascertain how much money Petitioner (Francoise Hightower) collected from the Respondent from all of his employers make sure that the CTA records show the beginning until the end.

 

F-     It is Ordered: That Director of the State Police  Brendan F. Kelly investigate and ascertain how a Chicago Police Officer managed to use her Police authority and have a State Agency Child Support Enforcement to act as her Private Attorney involving many State employees in this alleged Criminal Enterprise.

 

 

  1. It is Ordered: That upon the signing date of this order all parties shall have 30 days from that date to comply and present its finding before the next court date.

 

 

FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THIS COURT ORDER IS PUNISHABLE WITH CONTEMPT OF COURT AND CAN/WILL BE REMANDED IN CUSTODY UP TO 30 DAYS AND FINED

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

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

     

ORDERED PREPARED BY:

                         

 Joe Louis Lawrence

 Counsel Pro Se

 Post Office Box 490075

 Chicago, Ill 60649

  312 965-6455

 

Joelouis565@yahoo.com              

 

 

ENTERED:

 

 

 

 

_________________________

Judge


Wednesday, July 24, 2024

 


Part 2 of 2 Petition for Writ of Mandamus or in the Alternative Supervisory Order filed before the Illinois Supreme Court July 23, 2024.

Because the document is 40 Pages, the first 20 Pages are posted separately, the Clerk of the Supreme Court FILE STAMPED Page 21 the Motion for Leave et al. 

Parties served were First District Appellate Court Judges Nathaniel R. Howse, Jr, Margaret Stanton McBride, David W. Ellis, via email nwatson@IllinoisCourts.gov, Potestivo & Associates, Bryan Gerald. Thompson, Poulami Mal, Lord & Locke Law Firm, Phillip Russell Perdew.   

This case amplifies the Hate the Democrats have for Black or Colored People who fight back against tyranny and injustices not one person of Color in the Democratic Party opened their mouths and denounced any of these atrocious criminal acts perpetrated by US Bank attorneys trying to illegally steal a home in the guise of FORECLOSURE, as a matter of fact, Black Democrats are PROMOTED and sponsored to judgeships on how well they fuck over Black and Brown people for members of the Political Machine.

Judge Freddrenna Lyle who don't know the rules of law and was a former Alderwoman was PROMOTED to the APPELLATE COURT for a job well done violating every law recorded in the books using her ethnicity covering up for the racist corrupt attorneys working for US Bank.

Judge James T. Derico was appointed as a Judge and followed the same suit as Lyle in DENYING every Motion presented to him showing that US Bank attorneys was committing FRAUD on the Courts, he was fucking onery as Hell and was more like a Stephen of Django portrayed by Samuel L. Jackson.  

IT IS A FACT: READ THIS DOCUMENT BLACK DEMOCRATS DO NOT HELP FREE MEN OR WOMEN WHO STANDS UP TO RACISM, CORRUPTION WHERE CAUCASIANS ARE CONCERNED, MANY OF THEM GO ALONG WITH RACISM SO AS TO BE ACCEPTED BY THE VERY ONES WHO DON'T LIKE OR RESPECT THEM.

It seems like being a Democrat in Illinois, I am not sure how Blacks acts in other cities but, I can attest to this fact in Chicago, Illinois many of them act like obedient servants on a SLAVE PLANTATION, they are violent nasty to their own ethnic groups and certain Hispanics but act in a manner of extreme supplication when dealing with Caucasians over their own ethnic groups. 

Chicago do not have a Black DEMOCRAT who has the authority regardless to any of their titles or positions to open up their mouths and say anything negative about what the racist Caucasians have done in this case or in Part 1, the only ethnic groups who can say something are certain Caucasians not affiliated or part of this case and certain Hispanics who do not share the same Inferior disposition as many of the Blacks who want to be accepted by the Democratic Political Machine.

THE REPUBLICANS HAVE CREATED LAWS MAKING SURE BLACK AND REPUBLICANS RECEIVE DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION, THE KU KLUX KLAN ACT OF 1871, the Democrats have found a way to circumvent those laws and recruit Blacks and Colored people to violate the Civil Rights of their own ethnic groups; thereby, protecting many of the racist individuals who may be the architects behind the scenes.

Many of the Black Democrats especially of Color will say anything to seek your vote but in reality once they are elected you become a NOBODY, they are in the position and don't give a dam about you your neighborhoods or your families until it is time for the next election.

   

THIS IS THE PAGE THAT WAS FILE STAMPED 

________________________________________________________________________

                                                                 IN THE

                                             SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS

________________________________________________________________________                                                                                                   

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

Pooling and Servicing Agreement Dated as of         )

December 1, 2006 Mastr Asset–Backed Securities  )

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

Certificates, Series 2006-NC3                                   )          Appeal from the Circuit Court  

                                                                                           )                    of Cook County

                                                                                   )             Chancery Division            

                 Plaintiff-Appellees                                    )               Gen No.  2008-33616    

                                                                                   )                    

                                                                                   )                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         )                                                                      

                                                                                   )

                            V.                                                   )             

                    Defendant- Appellant                            )

                                                                                   )

                                                                                   )

                                                                                   )

                                                                                                              

                                          MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE  

                                 PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

                       FOR ISSUANCE OF A SUPERVISORY ORDER HOW DOES THE APPELLATE COURT WHO HAD JURISDICTION IN 2011 (JUDGES NATHANIEL HOWSE, JR., CAUCASIAN JOSEPH GORDON, JAMES R. EPSTEIN) AFFIRMING CIRCUIT COURTS DECISION VACATING FORECLOSURE AND SALE SAME PARTIES APPELLEES NEVER APPEALED THE ORDER NEVER FILED AN APPEARANCE IN THE PRESENT MATTER APPELLATE COURT BUT SAME JUDGE (NATHANIEL HOWSE, JR., MARGARET S. MCBRIDE, DAVID W. ELLIS) NOW CHANGES HIS MIND AND COLLUDE WITH OTHER CAUCASIAN JUDGES AND RULE THEY DON’T HAVE JURISDICTION WHEN THE APPELLEES ADMITTED TO ALL PLEADINGS OF MORTGAGE FRAUD VIA SUMMARY JUDGMENT ” “TRESPASSING UPON THE LAWS” “TREASON” OFFENSES IN THIS ILLEGAL FORECLOSURE w/AFFIDAVIT  

 

               

                                                                        

      To the Honorable Justices of the Supreme Court of the State of Illinois:

 

     Now comes Plaintiff-Appellant Monzella Y. Johnson. your Petitioners, being represented Pro se, the people of the State of Illinois, by the relator herein Illinois, a Citizen, a Resident and an elector of the City of Chicago, County of Cook, and State of Illinois, by Monzella Y. Johnson., respectfully asks leave of this court to file a Petition for Writ of Mandamus et, al; and that summons issue as provided by law.

 

                                                                                    Respectfully submitted,

 

                                                                                       _______________________   

                                                                                          Monzella Y. Johnson

 

 

 

Monzella Y. Johnson, Pro Se

  5217 S. Ingleside Ave

     Chicago, Il 60615

         

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

________________________________________________________________________

                                                                 IN THE

                                             SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS

________________________________________________________________________

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

Pooling and Servicing Agreement Dated as of         )

December 1, 2006 Mastr Asset–Backed Securities  )

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

Certificates, Series 2006-NC3                                   )          Appeal from the Circuit Court  

                                                                                           )                    of Cook County

                                                                                   )             Chancery Division            

                 Plaintiff-Appellees                                    )               Gen No.  2008-33616    

                                                                                   )                    

                                                                                   )                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         )                                                                      

                                                                                   )

                            V.                                                   )             

                    Defendant- Appellant                            )

                                                                                   )

                                                                                   )

                                                                                   )

                                                                                                  

 

                       SUGGESTIONS IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION

                                                              Along with

           MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF THE RELIEF REQUESTED

 

TRESPASSERS OF THE LAW

The Illinois Supreme Court has held that "if the magistrate has not such jurisdiction, then he and those who advise and act with him, or execute his process, are trespassers." Von Kettler et.al. v. Johnson, 57 Ill. 109 (1870)
Under Federal law which is applicable to all states, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that if a court is "without authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. They are not voidable, but simply void; and form no bar to a recovery sought, even prior to a reversal in opposition to them. They constitute no justification; and all persons concerned in executing such judgments or sentences, are considered, in law, as trespassers." Elliot v. Piersol, 1 Pet. 328,

 

340, 26 U.S. 328, 340 (1828)

The Illinois Supreme Court held that if a court "could not hear the matter upon the jurisdictional paper presented, its finding that it had the power can add nothing to its authority, - it had no authority to make that finding." The People v. Brewer, 128 Ill. 472, 483 (1928). 

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

The Court in Yates v. Village of Hoffman Estates, Illinois, 209 F. Supp. 757 (N.D. Ill. 1962) held that "not every action by a judge is in exercise of his judicial function. ... It is not a judicial function for a judge to commit an intentional tort even though the tort occurs in the courthouse." When a judge acts as a trespasser of the law, when a judge does not follow the law, the judge loses subject-matter jurisdiction and the judge’s orders are void, of no legal force or effect.

The U.S. Supreme Court, in Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 94 S. Ct. 1683, 1687 (1974) stated that "when a state officer acts under a state law in a manner violative of the Federal Constitution, he "comes into conflict with the superior authority of that Constitution, and he is in that case stripped of his official or representative character and is subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual conduct. The State has no power to impart to him any immunity from responsibility to the supreme authority of the United States." [Emphasis supplied in original]. By law, a judge is a state officer.  The judge then acts not as a judge, but as a private individual (in his person).

 

NOT ONE DEMOCRAT IN THIS CITY OR STATE UNDERSTOOD THIS AREA OF LAW AND WHY THE KU KLUX KLAN ACT WAS ENACTED: 

 

 

That Pursuant to Section 2 (42 U.S.C.) In the House of Representatives.

       “Congressional Debate of the second section of the Ku Klux Klan Act was more extensive and enduring than that of Section 1; As originally presented, Sec. 2 made it a felony for any “two or more persons” to conspire to commit certain enumerated crimes “in violation of the rights and privileges, or immunities of any person, to which he is entitled under the Constitution and laws of the United States.

          “Throughout the debates, supporters of the Act made repeated references to the depredations of the Ku Klux Klan; Victims of these atrocities included not only blacks but white Republicans as well. The crimes that were perpetrated, therefore, were not viewed as isolated occurrences, but as part of an “Organized Conspiracy….Political in its origin and aims”, “crimes perpetrated by concert and agreement, by men in large numbers acting with a common purpose for the injury of a certain class of citizens entertaining certain political principles, id, at 457 (remarks of Rep. Coburn). See also e.g., id. At 437 (remarks of Rep. Cobb) (“None but Democrats belong or can belong to these societies”) et al.

          “Where these gangs of Assassins show themselves the rest of the people look on, if not with sympathy, at least with forbearance. The boasted courage of the South is not courage in their presence. Sheriffs, having eyes to see, see not; judges, having ears to hear, hear not; witnesses conceal the truth or falsify it; grand or petit juries act as if they might be accomplices. In the presence of these gangs all the apparatus and machinery of civil government, all the processes of justice, skulk away as if government and justice were crimes and feared detection. Among the most dangerous things an injured party can do is to appeal to justice. Of the uncounted scores and hundreds of atrocious mutilations and murders it is credibly stated that not one has been punished. Cong. Globe, supra note 2, app. At 78 (remarks of Rep. Perry). (“While murder is stalking abroad in disguise, while whippings and lynchings and banishment have been visited upon unoffending American citizens, the local administrations have been found inadequate or unwilling to apply the proper corrective”) et al., …. And the State made no successful effort to bring the guilty to punishment or afford protection or redress to the outraged and innocent.”)     

 

   That Under Section 4 of the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871: the law is clear, “Whenever in any State or part of a State………unlawful combinations…….shall be organized and armed, and so numerous and powerful et al…………and whenever, by reason of either or all of the causes aforesaid, the conviction of such offenders and the preservation of the public safety shall become….Impracticable, in every such case such combinations shall be deemed a rebellion against the Government of the United States….”

 

 

1.)  .       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).

 

2.)    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.

     

3.)    That the Appellant 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. 

 

4.)    That because of the Color of said Defendant’s skin and that they are Senior Citizens, State Employees nor Democratic judges deem them as United States citizen entitled to Equal Protection of the Laws and is violating every area of the laws egregiously as if the Ku Klux Klan members are controlling the Democratic Legal Arenas and or State Agencies.

 

5.)   “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.”

         

6.)       That the Seventh Circuit 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.

 

7.)  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)   

 

D-    To show fraud upon the court, the complaining party must establish that the alleged misconduct affected the integrity of the judicial process, either because the court itself was defrauded or because the misconduct was perpetrated by officers of the court. Alexander v. Robertson, 882, F. 2d 421,424 (9th Cir. 1989);

 

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

 

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).

 

The petition and the procedure in this case are based upon former proceedings in which this court granted the writ prayed. People V. Fischer, 303 Ill 430, 135 NE 751 et, al.

 

The supervisory authority of the Supreme Court of Illinois: A powerful tool for the court and practitioner alike. April 2012 Vol. 57, No. 9, Ill State Bar Ass.

 

In Philip Morris, USA, Inc. v. Byron, 226 Ill.2d 416 (2007), albeit in dissent, Justice Freeman, joined by now Chief Justice Kilbride, stated that “[g]enerally this court will not issue a supervisory order absent a finding that (i) the normal appellate process will not afford adequate relief, (ii) the dispute involves a matter important to the administration of justice, or (iii) our intervention is necessary in order to prevent an inferior tribunal from acting beyond the scope of its authority.” 226 Ill.2d at 422 (citation omitted)

 

Justice Freeman and Chief Justice Kilbride thus appear to have treated the lack of adequate appellate relief situation as an alternative basis for granting a supervisory order rather than simply a factor modifying the other two bases for granting such an order. This expanded formulation of the supervisory order standard is a logical extension given the Rule’s constitutional underpinnings. After all, as noted above, the Illinois Constitution states that “supervisory authority over all courts is vested in the Supreme Court” without any reference to the normal appellate process. Ill. Const. 1970, art. VI, Sec. 16

 

Mandamus is an appropriate remedy to compel compliance with mandatory legal standards. People ex rel. Birkett v. Konetski, 233 Ill.2d 185, 192-93 (2009) (“Mandamus relief will not be granted unless the petitioner shows a clear right to the requested relief, a clear duty of the public officer to act, and clear authority of the public officer to comply with the order.” (Emphasis in original).

 

Rule 383 and the Standards the Court Utilizes in Considering Motions for Supervisory Order:

 

Rule 383 provides, at its most basic, that “[a] motion requesting the exercise of the Supreme Court’s supervisory authority shall be supported by explanatory suggestions and shall contain or have attached to it the lower court records or other pertinent material that will fully present the issues.”Rule 383(a) After stating the requirements for service, the Rule provides a relatively expedited period for objection— seven days when service of the motion is made by facsimile or 14 days when service is accomplished by mail or commercial carrier.  Rule 383(c) Additionally, the Rule allows oral argument at the discretion of the court. Rule 383(d)

 

The formulation of the standard for supervisory orders in Suria is very broad. Suria provides that a supervisory order may be granted in any situation where a trial or appellate court acted in excess of its authority or abused its discretionary authority. Suria, 112 Ill. 2d at 38.

 

Justice Freeman and former Chief Justice Kilbride thus appear to have treated the lack of adequate appellate relief situation as an alternative basis for granting a supervisory order rather than simply a factor modifying the other two bases for granting such an order. This expanded formulation of the supervisory order standard is a logical extension given the Rule’s constitutional underpinnings. After all, as noted above, the Illinois Constitution states that “supervisory authority over all courts is vested in the Supreme Court” without any reference to the normal appellate process. Ill. Const. 1970, art. VI, Sec. 16.

 

The supervisory authority of the Supreme Court of Illinois: A powerful tool for the court and practitioner alike By Matthew R. Carter, Winston & Strawn LLP 2 Trial Briefs | April 2012, Vol. 57, No. 9

 

As the foregoing analysis reveals, the court has absolute authority to act when it feels so compelled. Moreover, the instances where the Supreme Court has issued supervisory orders are so eclectic that diligent litigators should consider it a tool to achieve timely relief in critical situations

 

   The petition proceeds in conformity with the instructions of this court in People V. Haas, 239 Ill 320, 87 NE 1111, with respect to the presentation of original petition for Mandamus et al;

 

   The issue presented in this original petition for Mandamus involves a matter of great public importance in that it concerns the power conferred upon County judges by the City Election Act to punish judges and clerks as for contempt because of misbehavior or misconduct in their respective offices.

 

   Petitioner respectfully submits that the court should grant leave to file the Petition for Writ of Mandamus et al; duly signed and verified and herewith presented with a petition, and with these suggestions and Memorandum of Law in support of the relief requested, and that a summons issue in conformity with the law, to the Appellees  returnable within a short time to be fixed by this court, so that in this proceeding the powers of the County judges under the City Election Act may be definitely and promptly determined.

 

REPORTING JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT

I.         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).    

 

        Sup Ct. Rule 63 (C) (1). S.H.A. 735 ILCS 5/2-----1001 (a) (3);

 

In Re Marriage of O’Brien 912 N.E. 2d 729 (Ill App. 2 Dist. 2009),

When a party moves for substitution of the trial judge for cause based upon an alleged violation of rule setting forth mandatory bases for recusal, the movant need only show the existence of that factor and that an objective, reasonable person would conclude that the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned, and need not show actual prejudice.

 

Canon

3 D (2) Reporting Lawyer Misconduct

Fravel v. Haughey, 727 So. 2d 1033 (Fla. App. Ct. 1999), Illinois Judicial Ethics Op. 2001-06 (2001)

Acts constituting direct, criminal contempt

          A wide variety of acts may constitute a direct, criminal contempt. And act may be criminal contempt even though it is also an indictable crime. Beattie v. People, 33 Ill. App 651, 1889 WL 2373 (1st Dist. 1889). As is making false representations to the court. People v. Katelhut, 322 Ill. App. 693, 54 N.E.2d 590 (1st Dist. 1944). Misconduct of an officer of the court is punishable as contempt. People ex rel. Rusch v. Levin, 305 Ill. App. 142, 26 N.E. 2d 895 (1st Dist. 1939).

 

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.

 

False statements

            Censure was recommended sanction for attorney who engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, made statement of material fact or law to tribunal which she knew or reasonably should have known to be false, and failed to disclose to tribunal a material fact known to her when disclosure was necessary to avoid assisting criminal or fraudulent at by client, given that attorney’s misconduct was not result of dishonest or corrupt motive, but of misguided attempt to accommodate clients.   99 Ill.Atty.Reg. & Disc.Comm. SH11

            Three-year suspension was recommended sanction for attorney who engaged in conduct involving dishonesty and fraud, made statement of material fact to tribunal which he knew or reasonably should have known was false, and offered evidence that he knew to be false and failed to take reasonable remedial measures. 96 Ill.Atty.Reg. & Disc.Comm. SH 358.

            Disbarment was recommended sanction for attorney who engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, made false statements of material fact or law to tribunal which she knew were false and engaged in conduct which tended to defeat administration of justice.  95 Ill Atty.Reg. & Disc.Comm. CH 877.

            Censure was recommended sanction for attorney who made statements of material fact or law known was false, and engaged in conduct which was prejudicial to the administration of justice. 95 Ill Atty.Reg. & Disc.Comm. CH 504

          One-year suspension was recommended sanction for attorney who made statement of material fact which he knew was false in appearing in professional capacity before tribunal, made a statement of material fact which he knew to be false in course of representing client, and engaged in conduct involving dishonesty.  95 Ill Atty.Reg. & Disc.Comm. CH 191.

            Disbarment was recommended sanction for attorney who engaged in serious misconduct by making misrepresentation during his divorce proceedings and who was a recidivist.   94 Ill. Atty. Reg. & Disc.Comm. SH469

 

 

Fraud on court

            Two-year suspension, retroactive to beginning of interim suspension, was recommended sanction for attorney who made statement of material fact or law to tribunal which lawyer knew or reasonably should have known to be false, instituted criminal charges as prosecutor when he knew or reasonably should have known that charges were not supported by probable cause, committed criminal act that reflected adversely upon lawyer ‘s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as lawyer, engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation, engaged in conduct prejudicial to administration of justice, and engaged in conduct which tended to bring courts or legal profession into disrepute.  96 Ill. Atty. Reg. & Disc. Comm. CH 118. 

 

Jim Crow Laws are still being enacted and enforced in Chicago, Illinois Courts Black and Brown lives simply don’t matter and it is clear now in these proceedings being elderly is worse because the laws are used against said parties to destroy or displaced them in society unless you are in a position to pay off certain politicians or abide by their rules and doctrines of Corrupt politicians or Terrorists operating behind the scenes making sure the events recorded never come to “Light” exposing the truth how the courts are under siege by so many judges closing their eyes to the realities of injustice, being perpetrated on the innocent and indigent.

  

In the 20th century, the Supreme Court began to overturn Jim Crow laws on constitutional grounds. In Buchanan v. Warley 245 US 60 (1917), the court held that a Kentucky law could not require residential segregation. The Supreme Court in 1946, in Irene Morgan v. Virginia ruled segregation in interstate transportation to be unconstitutional, in an application of the commerce clause of the Constitution. It was not until 1954 in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka 347 US 483 that the court held that separate facilities were inherently unequal in the area of public schools, effectively overturning Plessy v. Ferguson, and outlawing Jim Crow in other areas of society as well. This landmark case consisted of complaints filed in the states of Delaware (Gebhart v. Belton); South Carolina (Briggs v. Elliott); Virginia (Davis v. County School Board of Prince Edward County); and Washington, D.C. (Spottswode Bolling v. C. Melvin Sharpe). These decisions, along with other cases such as McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Board of Regents 339 US 637 (1950), NAACP v. Alabama 357 US 449 (1958), and Boynton v. Virginia 364 US 454 (1960), slowly dismantled the state-sponsored segregation imposed by Jim Crow laws.

                                                                   

                                                                                           Respectfully submitted,

 

                                                                                         _______________________   

                                                                                            Monzella Y. Johnson.

Monzella Y. Johnson, Pro Se

     5217 S. Ingleside Ave

        Chicago, Il. 60615                                                                                         

_______________________________________________________________________

                                                                 IN THE

                                             SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS

________________________________________________________________________                                                                                    

 

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

Pooling and Servicing Agreement Dated as of         )

December 1, 2006 Mastr Asset–Backed Securities  )

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

Certificates, Series 2006-NC3                                   )          Appeal from the Circuit Court  

                                                                                           )                    of Cook County

                                                                                   )             Chancery Division            

                 Plaintiff-Appellees                                    )               Gen No.  2008-33616    

                                                                                   )                    

                                                                                   )                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         )                                                                      

                                                                                   )

                            V.                                                   )             

                    Defendant- Appellant                            )

                                                                                   )

                                                                                   )

                                                                                   )

                                                      DRAFT ORDER

 

                                      MOTION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

                       FOR ISSUANCE OF A SUPERVISORY ORDER HOW DOES THE APPELLATE COURT WHO HAD JURISDICTION IN 2011 (JUDGES NATHANIEL HOWSE, JR., CAUCASIAN JOSEPH GORDON, JAMES R. EPSTEIN) AFFIRMING CIRCUIT COURTS DECISION VACATING FORECLOSURE AND SALE SAME PARTIES APPELLEES NEVER APPEALED THE ORDER NEVER FILED AN APPEARANCE IN THE PRESENT MATTER APPELLATE COURT BUT SAME JUDGE (NATHANIEL HOWSE, JR., MARGARET S. MCBRIDE, DAVID W. ELLIS) NOW CHANGES HIS MIND AND COLLUDE WITH OTHER CAUCASIAN JUDGES AND RULE THEY DON’T HAVE JURISDICTION WHEN THE APPELLEES ADMITTED TO ALL PLEADINGS OF MORTGAGE FRAUD VIA SUMMARY JUDGMENT ” “TRESPASSING UPON THE LAWS” “TREASON” OFFENSES IN THIS ILLEGAL FORECLOSURE w/AFFIDAVIT  

 

 

    This matter having come on to be heard on Petition for Writ of Mandamus /Issuance of a Supervisory Order  How does the Appellate Court who had Jurisdiction in 2011, (Judges Nathaniel Howse, Jr., Caucasian Judges Joseph Gordon, James R. Epstein) Affirming Circuit Courts Decision Vacating Foreclosure and Sale Same Parties, Appellees never Appealed the Order never filed an Appearance in the Present Matter Appellate Court but Same Judge (Nathaniel Howse, Jr., Caucasians Margaret S. McBride, David W. Ellis) now change his mind and collude with other Caucasian Judges and Rule they Don’t Have Jurisdiction when the Appellees Admitted to all Pleadings of Mortgage Fraud via Summary Judgment, “Trespassing Upon the Laws” “Treason Offenses” in this Illegal Foreclosure w/Affidavit

 

 

   It is HEREBY Ordered that Writ of Mandamus /Issuance of a Supervisory Order Vacating Orders et al.  Granted / Denied

 

                                                                              ________________________________

                                                                              Justice

 

                                                                              ________________________________

                                                                              Justice

 

                                                                              _________________________________

                                                                              Justice

 

                                                                              _________________________________

                                                                              Justice

 

                                                                              _________________________________ 

                                                                              Justice

 

                                                                              _________________________________

                                                                              Justice

 

                                                                              _________________________________

                                                                              Justice

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

________________________________________________________________________

                                                                 IN THE

                                             SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS

________________________________________________________________________

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

Pooling and Servicing Agreement Dated as of         )

December 1, 2006 Mastr Asset–Backed Securities  )

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

Certificates, Series 2006-NC3                                   )          Appeal from the Circuit Court  

                                                                                           )                    of Cook County

                                                                                   )             Chancery Division            

                 Plaintiff-Appellees                                    )               Gen No.  2008-33616    

                                                                                   )                    

                                                                                   )                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         )                                                                      

                                                                                   )

                            V.                                                   )             

                    Defendant- Appellant                            )

                                                                                   )

                                                                                   )

                                                                                   )

                                                                                                   

                                               CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 

                                PETITION AND MOTION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

                       FOR ISSUANCE OF A SUPERVISORY ORDER HOW DOES THE APPELLATE COURT WHO HAD JURISDICTION IN 2011 (JUDGES NATHANIEL HOWSE, JR., CAUCASIAN JOSEPH GORDON, JAMES R. EPSTEIN) AFFIRMING CIRCUIT COURTS DECISION VACATING FORECLOSURE AND SALE SAME PARTIES APPELLEES NEVER APPEALED THE ORDER NEVER FILED AN APPEARANCE IN THE PRESENT MATTER APPELLATE COURT BUT SAME JUDGE (NATHANIEL HOWSE, JR., MARGARET S. MCBRIDE, DAVID W. ELLIS) NOW CHANGES HIS MIND AND COLLUDE WITH OTHER CAUCASIAN JUDGES AND RULE THEY DON’T HAVE JURISDICTION WHEN THE APPELLEES ADMITTED TO ALL PLEADINGS OF MORTGAGE FRAUD VIA SUMMARY JUDGMENT ” “TRESPASSING UPON THE LAWS” “TREASON” OFFENSES IN THIS ILLEGAL FORECLOSURE w/AFFIDAVIT  

 

 

   

    YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that Defendant-Appellant  Appeals to the Illinois Supreme Court, for an Order on Petition for Writ of Mandamus for Issuance of a Supervisory Order How does the Appellate Court who had Jurisdiction in 2011 (Judges Nathaniel Howse, Jr., Caucasian Joseph Gordon, James R. Epstein) Affirming Circuit Courts Decision Vacating Foreclosure and Sale same Parties, Appellees Never Appealed the Order, Never filed an Appearance in the Present Matter, Appellate Court but same Judge (Nathaniel Howse, Jr., Margaret S. McBride, David W. Ellis) now changes his mind and Collude with other Caucasian Judges and Rule they don’t have Jurisdiction When Appellees Admitted to All Pleadings of Mortgage Fraud via Summary Judgment “Trespassing Upon the Laws” “Treason” Offenses in this Illegal Foreclosure w/Affidavit ,

 

 I Monzella Y. Johnson in this cause hereby certify that, I Have caused the following on said service list to receive the Petition et al., and all of its attachments by emailing and/ depositing them in a Post Office via regular mail, August. 23, 2024 to the following:

 

                                                                                          Respectfully submitted,

 

                                                                                         _______________________   

                                                                                           Monzella Y. Johnson,

 

Monzella Y. Johnson, Pro Se

     5217 S. Ingleside Ave

         Chicago, Il 60615

          Email

 

Service List: Courtesy Copies                                               

TO:  THE following         

                                            By Email

 

Homeland Security ITTF.Web@illinois.gov

Capital News Illinois jnowicki@capitolnewsillinois.com

Bureau Chief Jerry Nowiki mownbey@illinoistimes.com

Judicial Inquiry Board Michael Deno Michael.Deno@illinois.gov

 

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

         Kim Foxx                                              50 West Washington, Suite 2600

         50 West Washington, Suite 500                        Chicago, Ill. 60602 

         Chicago, Ill. 60601                          

 statesattorney@cookcountyil.gov            Presiding Judge Sophia Hall                                           timothy.evans@cookcountyil.gov             ccc.mfmlcalendar12@cookcountyil.gov

 

                                                   

                                              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

 

Hon Mayor Brandon Johnson                 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

                               

Chicago Police Superintendent,  3510 S. Michigan Ave, Chicago Ill. 60653

Email CLEARPATH@chicagopolice.org

 

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

 

Potestivo & Ass., PC                                             

Bryan G. Thompson, Poulami Mal                     

ipleadings@potestivolaw.com                            

bthompson@potestivolaw.com                     

223 West Jackson, Blvd, Suite 610  
Chicago, IL. 60606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         

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.

 

 _________________________________

       

Monzella Y. Johnson,

5217 S. Ingleside Ave

Chicago, Il 60615

 773 835-5849

 

 

                                                                                         _______________________      

                                                                                                      Notary

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

________________________________________________________________________

                                                                 IN THE

                                             SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS

________________________________________________________________________                                                                                                   

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

Pooling and Servicing Agreement Dated as of          )

December 1, 2006 Mastr Asset–Backed Securities   )

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

Certificates, Series 2006-NC3                                   )          Appeal from the Circuit Court  

                                                                                           )                    of Cook County

                                                                                   )             Chancery Division            

                 Plaintiff-Appellees                                    )               Gen No.  2008-33616    

                                                                                   )                    

                                                                                   )                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         )                                                                      

                                                                                   )

                            V.                                                   )             

                    Defendant- Appellant                            )

                                                                                   )

                                                                                   )

                                                                                   )

 

                                          

                                                      EXHIBIT LIST

 

1.)    Gr. Ex. A- MOTION STRIKING/OBJECTING  Appellees Motion to Dismiss et al.

 

2.)    Gr. Ex. B,  Attorneys who have not filed an Appearance Motion to Dismiss Appeal for Lack of Jurisdiction

 

 

3.)    Gr. Ex. C   Order Granting Gr Ex B.

 

4.)    Gr. Ex D   MOTION VACATING THE COURT ORDER OF JUNE 20, 2024 ET AL        

 

5.)    Ex. E,   ORDER PETITION NOT CONSIDERED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

 

6.)    Gr Ex  F  RESPONDENT’S MOTION FOR DISQUALIFICATION OF JUDGE MARITZA MARTINEZ INSTANTER ET AL.

 

 

7.)    Gr. Ex G MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO ILLINOIS/FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE ET AL.

 

8.)     Ex G, Court Order September 23, 2022, Ref as Ex G, that she never had lawful authority to enter.

 

9.)    Gr Ex H,  RE NOTICE OF FILING MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT OF FRAUD OF $50 MILLION DOLLARS, RE NOTICE OF MOTION TO RECUSE THE ENTIRE COOK COUNTY JUDICIARY AND APPOINT A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR ET AL.

 

10.)      Gr Ex I,   MOTION TO CERTIFY COURT ORDER OF MAY 8, 2024 ET AL.

 

 

 

 

 

                                                                                         Respectfully submitted,

 

                                                                                     _______________________   

                                                                                           

                                                                                          Monzella Y. Johnson, Pro Se

                                                                                            5217 S. Ingleside Ave

                                                                                               Chicago, Il 60615

                                                                                                  773 835-5849