But nobody is discussing the FACT, that the Negro Black, African American, Colored or Brown skinned Man is FREE or EMANCIPATED pursuant to the Civil Rights Act of 1866 or Turner 24 F. Cas. 337 (No. 14247) C.C.D.
Every Irish and Polish ethnic judge has systematically DENIED every Brief filed, Motion never challenged by any attorney accompanied with affidavits Jim Crow Laws are being managed and instituted by the Black Gate Keepers within the Democratic Party many of the alleged Black leaders are mere figureheads enforcing the same hate and discriminatory doctrines of the fraternal hate organization, that which many of the Blacks and certain Brown persons have accepted being Inferior to Anglo-Saxons doing whatever they are told by keeping their mouths shut, keeping their eyes closed to any crimes perpetrated by certain Caucasians and ears deaf to any person of color complaining about any aspect of injustices.
HOW CAN THE OBAMA LIBRARY BE CONSIDERED A PROUD MONUMENT WHEN PEOPLE OF HIS ETNICITY ARE STILL NOT FREE LEGALLY IN CHICAGO?
a.
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);
NO STATE EMPLOYEES IN HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES VIA THE STATES ATTORNEY UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF EILEEN O'NEIL BURKE EVER RESPONDED TO ANY OF THE FOLLOWING MOTIONS BUT HAS ADMITTED TO ALL PLEADINGS LEGALLY, THAT WHAT HAS BEEN ASSERTED AND PROPERLY PLEAD AS BEING TRUE.
TO VALIDATE THE VERITY THAT BLACK AND BROWN PEOPLE UNDER THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY ARE NOT AFFORDED EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS AND THAT JIM CROW LAWS ARE STILL BEING ENFORCED ---SOMEONE UNDER ALLEGEDLY THE STATES ATTORNEY AUTHORITY SUBMITTED ILLEGAL DOCUMENTS TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE ALEXI GIANNOULIAS TO UNLAWFULLY SUSPEND DEFENDANT'S DRIVERS LICENSE.AS RETALIATION FOR STANDING UP TO THE "CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE OF COOK COUNTY"
NOW COMES the Respondent, Joe Louis Lawrence, Counsel Pro se, and pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2‑1301, Illinois Supreme Court Rules, and the inherent authority of this Court to regulate Domestic Relations proceedings, respectfully moves this Court to enter a DEFAULT against Respondent and set this matter for a PROVE‑UP HEARING on monetary damages. In support thereof, Respondent states as follows:
I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY
1. This matter arises out of long‑standing Domestic Relations Case 1988 D 079012, in which Petitioner has repeatedly weaponized the judicial process, resulting in wrongful remands, fraudulent enforcement actions, and the deprivation of Respondent’s employment and liberty.
2. Petitioner served Certified Mail at her last known address and States Attorney Kim Foxx, Chief Judge Timothy Calvin Evans, Gov. JB Pritzker, Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul was properly served via Electronic delivery (email) with Respondent’s filings seeking damages, sanctions, and relief related to the wrongful enforcement actions.
3. Despite proper service, Petitioner and the State has failed to file an Appearance, failed to file any responsive pleading, and has wholly failed to participate in these proceedings.
A- That Assistant States Attorneys are
appearing before certain judges denying their involvement and is expecting that
judge to frivolously prolong this matter in an attempt to wear down the
Respondent.
2. MOTION TO ENTER DEFAULT NUNC PRO TUNC OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR IMMEDIATE RULING
Now
Comes Petitioner, Attorney Pro se, Respectfully moves this Court for entry of a
Default Nunc Pro Tunc Order, or alternatively for an immediate ruling on
Petitioner’s previously filed Motion for Entry of Default for Failure to Appear
and Failure to Plead, which has been sitting in limbo since Jan. 14, 2026 and
in support states as follows:
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”
I. PRIOR FILING OF
DEFAULT MOTION – That has been systematically and structurally ignored
- On or about Feb 9, 2024, Respondent
filed a Motion for Entry of Default for Failure to Appear and Failure
to Plead and for Setting of Prove-Up Hearing on Monetary Damages,
(filed Nov. 25, 2025)
- Said motion asserted that Plaintiff
failed to appear, plead, or otherwise respond to the allegations within
the time allowed by law.
- No written objection or
response to the motion has been filed by Respondent or any party.
- Respondent also filed a Motion for Summary
Judgment (Dec 4, 2023) and a Motion for Default (Feb 9,
2024) Seeking Monetary Damages $50 Million Dollars, and
Petitioner has again failed to respond and the Assistant States Attorneys
tried deleting their representation of her and failed to Deny, Object to
any of Respondent’s Pleadings accompanied with Affidavits. Pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2-612 Counsel never
Objected to the sufficiency of Petitioners pleadings, Objections to
sufficiency of pleadings either in form or substance must be made In trial
court, and if not so made, they will be considered waived and cannot be
raised for the first time on appeal. People ex rel. Deynes v.
Harris, App. 1948, 77 N.E. 2d 439, 333 Ill. App. 280.
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO ILLINOIS (735 ILCS 5/2-1005) & FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CORROBORRATING THE VERACITY COOK COUNTY JUDGES DO NOT HONOR DUE PROCESS OR CIVIL RIGHTS EQUAL PROTECTION TO IT’S CITIZENS PRO SE OR WITH ATTORNEYS IN ANY OF THE COURT’S w/AFFIDAVIT
Please be advised that on July 14, 2025 Respondent has filed
before this Domestic Relations Division
Motion for Summary Judgment et al; and will present said legally sufficient
instrument before Judge Fallon Aug 11, 2024 in her stead at 9:30 am
in room CL-12
I Joe Louis Lawrence, Counsel Pro Se Defendant,
certify that I have on this day deposited said Notice of Motion to Recuse Judge
Fallon et al. to all parties recorded in said Notice via regular/electronic
delivery.
Hon Judicial Council of the Seventh
Circuit
Governor JB Pritzker gov.casework@illinois.gov
To: Hon Judge Patricia Fallon
CCC.DomRelCRCL12@cookcountyil.gov
Hon Michael A. Forti
CCC.DomRelCR3004@cookcountyil.gov
Hon. Iris Y. Chavira CCC.DomRelCRCL08cookcountyil.gov
Hon. Andrea Webber CCC.DomRelCRCL06@cookcountyil.gov
Hon Maritza Martinez CCC.DomRelCR3006@cookcountyil.gov
Hon Abbey
Romanek CCC.DomRelCR3008@cookcountyil.gov
sao.csed@cookcountyil.gov Yolanda.simmons@cookcountysao.org
Cook County State’s Attorney Chief Judge Timothy C. Evans
Eilene
O’Neil Burke timothy.evans@cookcountyil.gov
statesattorney@cookcountyil.gov
Susan Mendoza Amanda.prentice@illinoiscomptroller.gov
Child Rep Marcellus H. Moore, Jr. 203 N.
LaSalle Street, Suite 2100 marcellus@childadvocatelawgroup.com
Cook County Sheriff’s
Tom Dart
email CCSO@ccsheriff.org
The Crusader Newspaper Group
Managing Editor Sharon Fountain
State Police isp.contact@illinois.gov
Illinois State Police
Illinois
HealthCare and Family Services aka Department of Public Aid
Governor JB Pritzker
Director Elizabeth Whitehorn
June 18,
2026
MOTION APPEALING & OBJECTING
HFS’S LETTERS TO SUSPEND DRIVERS LICENSE AND ANY CHILD SUPPORT DEBT DUE TO
“FRAUD” ON THE STATE “NOT HIS CHILD” COOK COUNTY JUDGE HELPED FORMER CTA
EMPLOYER ISSUED A BOGUS WARRANT UNLAWFULLY REMOVED HIM FROM HIS CTA POSITION
KEEPING THE CTA FROM PAYING HIM FOR BEING REINSTATED FROM A WORK-RELATED INJURY
AS HIS MONIES WERE STOLEN WHILE OFF ON TEMP DISABILITY FOR AN ORDER OF
PROTECTION “PERJURY” CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE
CONSPIRACY CAUSING IBC/WONDER BREAD ENJOINING THE BOGUS PATERNITY MATTER
DEFENDANT WAS THE LEAD PLAINTIFF SUING IBC $350 MILLION DOLLARS “CORRUPTION” OTHER “CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS”
w/AFFIDAVIT
Now comes
Defendant who recently studied the June 8, letter and was not aware of many of
the events in the record due to being repeatedly Remanded into custody and
bullied by judges with unimpeachable documents that establishes, he is a victim
of a Criminal Enterprise sophisticated in nature where numerous individuals are
of a racist or inferior disposition, went along or enjoined with the Domestic
Terrorists hereto attached the following:
The United States Supreme
Court acknowledged the judicial corruption in Cook County, when it stated that
Judge "Maloney was one of many dishonest judges exposed and convicted
through 'Operation Greylord', a labyrinthine federal investigation of judicial
corruption in Chicago". Bracey v. Gramley, case
No. 96-6133 (June 9, 1997).
“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)”.
1. Court Transcript 2010 Joe Louis
Lawrence -vs-Secretary State Angela Young, Edmound Michalowski, Dorothy Brown,
Timothy Evans, Mosche Jacobius, Jesse White, 2010 CH 23588, Judge Mary Lane
Mikva, June 29, 2011.
A- Page 13 Lines 8-19 That Exhibit 39, in
reference to a court subpoena, State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez, Mexican
American, responded to a court subpoena, signed by John A. Ouska, the Assistant
State’s Attorney, Chief General Litigation Division, from a subpoena: “In
response to your response subpoena issued to the Clerk of the Circuit Court
seeking certified copies of judgments entered in the Case No. 88 D 079012,
enclosed please find the documents requested. With regard to your similar
request in Case No. 85 No. 85 D 068184, be advised that there are no documents
responsive to this request.
B- Line 20-22 This document that the
State’s Attorney submitted to me is the May 18, 1988 court order. They had no
judgments after that, that said I owed anything.
C- Page 14 Lines 6-14 “Dear Mr. Lawrence, Your
facsimile of May 13th, 2008 was forwarded to the General Counsel’s
Office was forwarded to the General Counsel’s Office for a response. Your
complaints revolve around issues, which I observe, should be appropriately
handled in the first instances in the civil courts or through state
administrative agencies appointed to investigate charges of civil rights
violations, discrimination, and
corruption claims.” Nothing was done.
D- Page 15 Lines 3-8 “According to our records, it’s
stated, “no payments have been received under this case number.” There is no
person’s signature on here, but it was file-stamped “Received June 16th,
2004. Dorothy Brown, Clerk of the Circuit Court, Child Support Division.
2. That
Judge Mikva was recruited from the Juvenile Division because Defendant told Judge
O’Maki he was a racist judge and that, he wasn’t going to here what, I had to
say because of my skin color, his reply, pick up your motion, I will remove
myself and for me to save my motion for the next judge, they tried sending me
to Judge Kathleen Pantle, she saw my name became theatrical as heck, aww naww,
I heard about you, I don’t want no part of this shit.
3. Page 15 Line 9-Judge Mikva and Negro Tyler Roland
put there heads down when this was said, That throughout the entire record
–back to the brief –it unequivocally demonstrates the negative control
systematic racism has over the courts, certain judges state agencies in eluding
the laws of the United States Constitution as they invoke racial hate crimes
using laws that which to achieve and demonstrate white supremacy in the courts
in oppressing the black man with tortuous racial apartheid acts surpassing
human imagination in a country where said Draconian acts have been abolished.”
4. Page 17 Line 9-21 However, on Page 45, when under
court order –at page 45 of the record, No. 11, No. 1, “I was under a court
order by Judge Lester , “who at that time ordered me not to represent myself
anymore because, I didn’t have a law license. At that time, he indicated. “in
part, to continue my efforts to be reinstated by the CTA and cooperate with
Joseph V. Roddy, produce all names and documents which may help the court
determine my employment status with the CTA, where a hearing was set but never
had.”
5.
That on Nov 22, 2010, Said Motion was filed and never challenged or
objected or stricken to MOTION OBJECTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS DUE
TO “FRAUD” ON COURT “PERJURY” CRIMINAL CHAIN CONSPIRACY “CORRUPTION” OTHER
“CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS” w/AFFIDAVIT
6. That on Feb 24, 1993, Database
reflects Return of Service N.S. Order of Protection, Joseph V. Roddy a former
Assistant States Attorney with diabolical influence got Judge Ronald Bartkowicz
to issue a WARRANT where the record/database reflect he was never served any
information, hereto attached:
A- Feb 26, 1993, PRIORITY SERVICE (Feb
10, 1993) 1 DIVORCE, not child support Defendant was never married to her.
B- Feb 25, 1994 Deputy LOVELOCK #1427 Attempted
Services was 13 times NO CONTACT.
C- Copy of Return of Service N.S. 2
pages Blank Sheriff Affidavit
D- Copy of 07/07/1994 Printout from
database Answer to Motion Filed is an Alias Rule to Show Cause continuing to
Aug 10, 1994.
E- Aug 10, 1994 Court Order is continued
to Aug 24, 1994 to present proof of service.
7. That on Aug 24, 1994, Judge
Bartkowicz UNLAWFULLY ISSUED A WARRANT against the Defendant knowing he
had no knowledge of what was going because the database unequivocally does not
show any service on the Defendant by anyone per the Alias Summons Issued.
A- Near and around the year 1985 under
case 85 D 068184 on the Hightower v Lawrence, Defendant was on the 2nd
floor of the building 1240 S. Michigan which is now 1212 S Michigan, Defendant
was accidentally scheduled on a call strictly for white clients only, defendant
checked in with the clerk waiting for his attorney well dressed in a suit,
Judge Bartkowicz came in and asked, why was the Defendant sitting in his court,
they explained he was waiting for his attorney, he told them, it was a mistake
and had the Deputy to ask me to stand outside for Attorney Egan and when my
attorney showed up he said that is why you always seek a jury trial never go in
front of a bench trial.
8. The warrant stated Div DIVORCE,
Contempt of Court (INCLUDES FAILURE , SCARS ETC}, they had the wrong height and
weight for the Defendant, Judge Bartkowicz knew if the Defendant was picked up
in the streets on that warrant he never would have seen the light of day
according to Judge Delgado and Cook County Sheriff’s
9. The Cook County Sheriff’s remained
Defendant’s body guards until he was out of Judge Bartkowicz’s court and made
it clear to him they were dispatched to protect him because he put a lot of
heat on someone at City Hall.
10. That as a Police Officer Francoise L.
B. Hightower had the Dept of Public Aid to manufacture court documents, hereto
attached Ex A, Defendant was never informed of these kangaroo meetings.
11. That Defendant complained to the FBI
and they needed proof of IBC/wonder bread and the CTA being connected if
Defendant was able to show all three cases being connected it would not be a
coincidence but corroboration, hereto attached, Court Order March 8, 2006, Ex
B. Corroborating the involvement of all parties per FBI’s directive.
12. That IBC law firm filed a Notice of
Petition (Nov 1, 2005) sent to Ken S. Ray, Cook County States Attorney, Thomas
Kantas, hereto attached, Ex C
A-Withholding Order to IBC Wonder
bread, entry date of order of support 2/1/1995;
B- Withholding Order to Alpha Baking, he
received word from some Greeks that he was going through something in Cook
County Courts that’s not your child and informed him he had nothing to worry
about but he never confided in anyone about his business.
13. Page 13 Line 22, court subpoena. State’s Attorney
Anita Alvarez, Mexican American, responded to a court subpoena. Exhibit 39,
signed by John A. Ouska, the Assistant State’s Attorney, Chief General
Litigation Division, from a subpoena: “In response to your subpoena issued to
the Clerk of the Circuit Court seeking certified copies of judgments entered in
the Case No. 88 D 079012, enclosed please find the documents requested. With
regard to your similar request in Case No. 85 D 068184 be advised that there
are no documents responsive to this request”.
This document that the State’s Attorney submitted to me is a May 18,
1988 court order. They had no judgments after that that said I owed anything. Page 14 Line 6-14 “Mr. Lawrence, Your
facsimile of May 13th, 2008 was forwarded to the General Counsel’s office for a
response. Your complaints revolve around issues, I observe, should be
appropriately handled in the first instance in the civil courts or through
state administrative agencies appointed to investigate charges of civil rights
violations, discrimination and corruption claims. Nothing was done.
14. That Two Bonafide qualified
Caucasians speaking truthfully and objectively as Racist and Powerfully
connected white men and judges still did whatever they desired violating
Defendant’s Civil Rights where he never owed any child support.
A-
A Bonafide
African American from the Civil Rights Bureau in the Illinois Attorney General’s
office, Plaintiff received an acknowledgement letter from David R. Askew, Nov.
3, 2006, stated, “The Civil Rights Bureau of the Attorney General is in receipt of the
correspondence you delivered to our offices on 10/26/06. Unfortunately, your
file was closed because we do not have jurisdiction over child support related
matters”
B-
Hereto attached, Ex
1 Motion Objecting Withdrawal of Attorney & Supplement the Particularized
Events et al. in the 7th Cir June 8, 2026 no Attorney Challenged
anything filed before the Court
C-
Hereto attached,
Ex 2 Order “IN LIGHT OF THE COURT’S FINAL ORDER DATED MAY 29, 2026, THE
APPELLANT’S MOTION WILL BE FILED WITHOUT FURTHER ACTION OF THE COURT”.
Juneteenth is a
holiday celebrated on 19 June to commemorate the emancipation of enslaved
people in the US. The holiday was first celebrated in Texas, where on that date
in 1865, in the aftermath of the Civil War, enslaved people were declared free
under the terms of the 1862 Emancipation Proclamation.
But here in Illinois
Courts The Political Machine Mighty in Power and Authority do not honor or
recognize any laws that equates the Black or Brown Man as being Free he is
still a slave to them and every judge the Defendant has been before presenting
his claims have been systematically denied by every Irish or Polish judge in
authority, treating him as a lesser man as a Dred Scott not equal to the Civil
Rights Act of 1866, the hate they have for Colored People is instilled in their
rulings ignoring anything the United States Supreme Court Legal precedents
dictate..
15. Page 15 Line 3-8 “According to our
records” it’s stated, “no payments have been received under this case number”.
There is no person’s signature on here but it was a letter and it’s
file-stamped “Received June 16th 2004,
Dorothy Brown . Clerk of the Circuit Court , Child Support Division.
16. That Defendant made it clear in his
argument to the judge, Page 15 Line 9-18, That throughout the entire
record--- back to the brief—it unequivocally demonstrates the negative control
systematically racism has over the courts, certain judges, state agencies in
eluding the laws of the United States Constitution as they invoke racial hate
crimes using laws that which to achieve and demonstrate racial supremacy in the
courts in oppressing the black man with tortuous racial apartheid acts
surpassing human imagination in a country where said Draconian acts have been
abolished.
17. That a Republican judge (Lester
Bonoguru) was the only male who tried to
help the defendant Page 17 Line 10-18, At page 45 of the record, No 11,
No 1. “I was under a court order by Judge Lester, “who at that time ordered me
not to represent myself anymore because I didn’t have my law license. At that
time, he indicated, in part to continue my efforts to be reinstated by the
CTA and cooperate with Joseph V. Roddy,
produce all names and documents which may help the court determine my
employment status with the CTA, where a hearing was set but never had. Nowhere
in the record will you notice that monies that was garnisheed from me –it’s not
even in the record.
A- As an employee for Reliable School Bus Company the Accountant
showed me cancelled checks of my wages going to Joseph V. Roddy c/o Francoise
Hightower signing her name under his
name, Page 17- Line 19-21 Nowhere in the record will you notice monies
that was garnished from me ----it’s not in the record, they took between
$58.21-$68.21 from said check where Public Aid had to provide the maximum
allotment in food stamps because base pay was only $148.00-$160.00 and was not
enough money to provide for a wife and five children at home and pay rent.
B- The Accountant said that she has
processed 100’s of child support payments via payroll at the company and never
seen anything like this and when this became an issue and reported, I was laid
off and the company went out of business mysteriously.
18. The judge and Assistant Attorney General was aware of noted
fraudulent irregularities, Page 28 Line 1-15, Line 23-24, Page 29 Line 1-9
these are not just mixed facts. They are convoluted in such a way it
demonstrates a conspiracy. Somebody is trying to protect somebody. Every
document that has been tendered to someone official in authority have received
knowledge of that.
The Ku Klux Klan Act is clear, of 1871 It
speaks about men that’s mighty in power. In this particular city here, the
political machine is mighty within itself. That’s why that particular citation
has reference to this particular case. It’s insulting for anyone to present
before any tribunal that indicates “alleged’ and say. “Let’s go by that.” I
mean, why not lock up everybody that’s
black because they look like they did something wrong ? That’s the
purpose of the law.
There was no paternity tests, that’s in an
affidavit that was sent to the Illinois Supreme Court. So Counsel cannot say
that he’s assuming that this is a racial or self-serving letters. There is
documentation. There’s affidavits. The
law is clear. Properly alleged facts that are not contradicted by an
affidavit it is true. Nothing has ever been objected to by any document
presented before the Court. It has been properly presented in accordance of
law. The Court does in fact, have the jurisdiction over the administrative
process.
19. Defendant was unequivocally succinct in his
delivery Page 29 Line 13- 24, Plaintiff has presented to several
Honorable bodies of “justices a consistent account of fraudulent irregularities
that went ignored by the Circuit Courts, demonstrating how lawyers finagle and
misrepresent the facts before the courts. Plaintiff has followed all the rules
of Civil Procedure and the Illinois Supreme Court Rules, but the Circuit Courts
ignored and denied every legally sufficient document that was presented. The
Courts ruled along racial, ethnic lines, granted and accepted every document
opposing counsel presented.
How can a person, whether they are Irish or
of Polish ethnicity, be the majority in control, see wrong, Page 30 Line 1-21
ignore wrong, close their eyes and ears to wrong when a person of their ethnic
group commits fraudulent acts?
How can any judge whether they be Asian,
Mexican, African American et cetera, in the Circuit Courts, who is the minority
on the bench go up against a majority in control, especially if that lawyer or
law firm is of the majority’s ethnic make-up or part of the terrorist order and
rule against that lawyer and not expect some type of repercussion from those in
control?
That’s why no other attorney wanted to
take this particular case, I’ve had five different lawyers, that I have paid,
so I didn’t just haphazardly start representing myself. I had to do this myself
because of what nobody else would do. So I had to learn the law. I didn’t make
no excuses about what’s going on. I did establish what is called in law
due-diligence. So there was no grass growing under my feet by no means. I
wouldn’t be on welfare lose all the jobs that. I’ve had and the aspirations if
this was correct.
Section
1983 of U.S.C.S. contemplates the depravation of Civil Rights through the
Unconstitutional Application of a Law by conspiracy or otherwise. Mansell v.
Saunders (CA 5 F 1A) 372 F 573, especially if the conspiracy was actually
carried into effect, where an action is for a conspiracy to interfere with
Civil Rights under 42 U.S.C.S. 1985 (3), or for the depravation of such rights
under 42 U.S.C.S. 1983, if the conspiracy was actually carried into effect and
plaintiff was thereby deprived of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured
by the United States Constitution and Laws, the gist of the action maybe
treated as one for the depravation of rights under 42 U.S.C.S. 1983, Lewis
v. Brautigam (CA 5 F 1a) 227 F 2d 124, 55 Alr 2d 505, John W.
Strong, 185, 777-78 (4 th ed. 1992).
20. Finally,
most importantly unbeknownst to the Parties responsible for “fixing” and
controlling the “actors” involved the State Police, FBI and Florida Law Enforcement
and FBI in that area all ran background checks and no Child Support issues ever
appeared in their investigations and cleared applicable credentials.
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
Joe Louis Lawrence
Counsel Pro Se
Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services
JB Pritzker, Governor
Thomas Eagleson, Director
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
Joe Louis Lawrence, 88 D
079012, C01240217, last digit, Francoise Hightower
Pursuant to the April 29, 2021 letter received in the mail May 11, 2021, is the FIRST TIME ever
receiving any type of communication from the Child Support Division.
1.)
The said letter mailed to the Complainant was
“FRAUDULENT”
2.)
Certified Court Order of May 18, 1988 was NEVER VACATED,
Certified March 9, 2021, hereto attached.
3.)
Certified Court Order of August, 3, 1988, was NEVER
PROPERLY VACATED, Summons was VACATED ON FEB 24, 1988 WHEN THE AFFIDAVT STATED
FEB. 23, 1988, hereto attached.
4.)
Because the May 18, 1988 Court Order (JUDGMENT) never
ordered the Complainant to PAY ANY CHILD SUPPORT, CORROBORATES COOK COUNTY
JUDGES AND CERTAIN CLERKS UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF DOROTHY BROWN were complicit
in an “ORGANIZED CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY”
The Seventh Circuit, COURT OF APPEALS has established a legal
precedent on what a JUDGMENT IS;
KARL KIEFER MACH. CO. v.
U.S. BOTTLERS MACHINERY CO. No. 6985. 108 F.2d 469| Dec. 18, 1939.
In determining whether
decree or judgment is interlocutory or final, character thereof is important
factor to be considered and it should be borne in mind that “decree” or
“judgment” is law’s last word in judicial controversy and court’s final
consideration and determination on matters submitted to it in action or
proceeding.
Also, the Illinois Supreme Court PEOPLE ex rel. Carl M.
SCHWARTZ, Commissioner of Highways, Appellee, v.
Albert R. FAGERHOLM, Town Clerk,
Appellant, (Woodrow Wood et al, Intervenors-Separate Appellants.) No. 35176. 17 Ill.2d 131 May 22, 1959.
|Rehearing Denied Sept. 22, 1959.
A “judgment” is the official and
authentic decision of a court of justice upon the respective rights and claims
of the parties to an action or suit therein litigated and submitted to its
determination, and it is the expression of the court’s decision that
constitutes the rendition of the judgment.
A judgment is the sentence of the
law pronounced by the court upon the matter contained in the record. 3
Blackstone’s Com. 395. It is the law’s last word in a judicial controversy and
may *86 be defined as the final consideration and determination of a court upon
matters submitted to it in an action or proceeding. 15 R.C.L.,
6.)
The Illinois Code of Civil Procedure, by way of sections
2-1301 and 2-1401, provides plaintiffs and defendants with a
mechanism to vacate both final and non-final orders and judgments. Most often
these rules are employed by plaintiffs to vacate dismissals for want of
prosecution, and by defendants to vacate default judgments.
There is also an important distinction between an
“order of default” and a “default judgment.” An order of default is not a final
judgment as it does not dispose of the case and determine the rights of the
parties, but merely precludes the defaulting party from raising additional
defenses. Jackson, 397 Ill. App. 3d at 620. By contrast, a default judgment is
a final judgment that resolves the case entirely and includes: (1) a finding of
the issues for the plaintiff; and (2) an assessment of damages. Id. at 621.
While section 2-1301(e) applies to both final and non-final orders and
judgments, section 2-1401 only provides relief from final orders and judgments.
735 ILCS 5/2-1401.
As a procedural note, a trial court only retains
jurisdiction over a matter for 30 days after it has entered a final judgment.
Blazyk, 406 Ill. App. 3d at 206. As a result, a party seeking relief from a
final judgment under section 2-1401 must do so through a petition to the court,
not a motion.
7.)
Hereto attached, March 14, 1996 Accounts Receivable
Summary ZERO BALANCE.
8.)
Hereto attached, Jan 26, 2004 “C01240217” ZERO BALANCE
NO ORDER FOUND.
9.)
Hereto attached, FAX SENT APRIL 9, 2021 WITH
CONFIRMATION establishing VERACITY of him receiving said documents
10.)
The author of the drafted letter (April 29, 2021)
should be REMANDED into CUSTODY INSTANTER for said numerous fraudulent entries,
to say “CHILD SUPPORT IS NOT DISMISSABLE OR DISCHARGEABLE BASED UPON THE
DOCUMENTATION YOU PROVIDED” IS AN EGREGIOUS STATEMENT, A CONTEMPT FOR THE LAWS;
The evidence demonstrates a prima facie showing within the preponderance of the
evidence Complainant was up against an assortment of “TRASHY INDIVIDUALS”
making it clear BLACK LIVES DON’T MATTER and to what degree a Racist or
Inferior Negroe is willing to do in DESTROYING an INNOCENT PERSON’S LIFE.
No comments:
Post a Comment