SOME OF THE JUDGES IN THE CHANCERY DIVISION BASICALLY ARE APPOINTED BECAUSE THEY ARE EASILY CONTROLLED AND WILL DO WHAT THE POLITICAL MACHINE TELLS TO DO ESPECIALLY THE BLACK MEN MANY OF THEM ARE WORSE THAN WHITE MEN
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY,
ILLINOIS
COUNTY
DEPARTMENT--CHANCERY DIVISION
U.S. Bank
National Association, As Trustee Under)
Pooling
and Servicing Agreement Dated as of )
December
1, 2006 Mastr Asset–Backed Securities )
Trust
2006-NC3 Mortgage Pass-Through
) Case # 2008 CH 33616
Certificates,
Series 2006-NC3
) Petitioner
)
)
V. )
)
)
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, )
)
Respondents
)
RESPONDENT’S RESPONSE MOTION TO IMPOSE SANCTIONS DUE TO “FRAUD” ON THE COURT
PURSUANT TO SUPREME COURT RULE 137 w/AFFIDAVIT
Now
comes Petitioner, Monzella Y. Johnson et al. being represented Pro Se in this
cause respectfully represents to this court the reasons and files herewith her
Affidavit in support of Respondent’s Response Motion to Impose Sanctions due to
“Fraud” et al.
1.
That on June 7, 2010, Judge
Gillespie entered an Order “The court
on its own motion vacates the judgment of foreclosure for lack of a proper
affidavit in support et al”.
2.
That Plaintiff’s Motion states Par. 1, Complaint was filed on
September 11, 2008 and the First Amended Complaint was filed June 7, 2016”.
A-
That on the face of Plaintiff’s legal instrument demonstrates 735
ILCS 5/13-205 is applicable to the aforementioned matter;
Supreme Court Rule [137] provides in pertinent part:
If a pleading, motion, or
other paper is signed in violation of this Rule, the court, upon motion or upon
its own initiative, may impose upon the person who signed it, a represented
party, or both, an appropriate sanction, which may include an order to pay to
the other party or parties the amount of reasonable expenses incurred because
of the filling of the pleading, motion, or other paper, including a reasonable
attorney fee. Not only will the courts consider an award of sanctions for
active false statements: failures to disclose material facts to the court can
also justify an award of sanctions.
BRUBAKKEN v. Morrison, No. 1-9-1670, 1992 Ill App. LEXIS 2144 (1st Dist. Dec. 30, 1992).
Additionally, the fact that a false statement or omission is the result of an
honest mistake is no defense to entry of a sanction. ID. To the extent that an
individual lawyer has engaged in sanctionable conduct, that lawyer’s firm can
also be jointly and severally liable with the lawyer.
3.
That the attorneys in this matter pursuant to Motion for
Reconsideration et al. and Motion Striking et al. filed by the Defendants articulates
the Mayhem and Corruption that has been endured by attorneys using their legal
wit to engage in an elaborate criminal conspiracy trying to steal Plaintiff’s
home;
4.
That the attorneys are exercising “Jim Crow” tactics to unlawfully
deceive the courts into allowing them to take homes in the disguise as “Foreclosure”;
5.
Said Defendants were never late paying their Mortgage, the company
that was being paid to pay off the Mortgage in an accelerated manner was
convicted of “Fraud” and is in jail;
6.
That Bank officials and apparently all attorneys involved in this
matter, one can presume because said women are elderly retired African American
women bullying them and violating their Civil Rights would be easy;
7.
That every attorney associated in this matter past and present
should be Sanctioned with Remands, reimbursements for any and all damages and
fees incurred for the enforcement of this matter;
A-
Defendant is seeking Punitive Damages for the Racist Civil Rights
Violations perpetrated at us for standing up fighting back;
B-
Reimbursement for all fees associated for Plaintiff’s part in this
Conspiracy;
C-
Sanctions be imposed on every attorney for the expense of another
attorney at the Defendant’s choosing;
Fraud admissibility great
latitude is permitted in proving fraud C.J.S. Fraud 104 ET Seg. Fraud 51-57.
where a question of fraud and deceit is the issue involved in a case, great
latitude is ordinarily permitted in the introduction of evidence, and courts
allow the greatest liberality in the method of examination and in
the scope
of inquiry Vigus
V. O’Bannon, 1886 8 N.E 788, 118 ILL 334. Hazelton V. Carolus, 1907 132 ILL.
App. 512.
INDUCING RELIANCE
To
prevail in a cause of action for fraud, plaintiff must prove that defendant
made statement of material nature which was relied on by victim and was made
for purposes of inducing reliance, and that victim’s reliance led to his
injury. Parsons
V. Winter, 1986, 1 Dist., 491 N.E. 2d 1236, 96 ILL Dec. 776, 142 ILL App 3d
354, Appeal Denied.
In Carter V. Mueller 457 N.E. 2d 1335 ILL.
App. 1 Dist. 1983 The Supreme Court has held that: “The elements of a cause of
action for fraudulent misrepresentation (sometimes referred to as “fraud and
deceit” or deceit) are: (1) False statement of material fact; (2) known or believed
to be false by the party making it; (3) intent to induce the other party to
act; (4) action by the other party in reliance on the truth of the statement;
and (5) damage to the other party resulting from such reliance.
U. S Sup Court Digest 24(1) General Conspiracy
U.S. 2003. Essence of a conspiracy is an agreement to commit an unlawful
act.—U.S. v. Jimenez Recio, 123 S. Ct. 819, 537 U.S. 270, 154 L.Ed.2d 744, on
remand 371F.3d 1093
Agreement to commit an
unlawful act, which constitutes the essence of a conspiracy, is a distinct evil
that exist and be punished whether or not the substantive crime ensues.-Id.
Conspiracy poses a threat
to the public over and above the threat of the commission of the relevant
substantive crime, both because the combination in crime makes more likely the
commission of other crimes and because it decreases the part from their path of
criminality.-Id.
CONSPIRACY
Fraud maybe inferred from nature of acts complained of,
individual and collective interest of alleged conspirators, situation,
intimacy, and relation of parties at time of commission of acts, and generally
all circumstances preceding and attending culmination of claimed conspiracy Illinois Rockford
Corp. V. Kulp, 1968, 242 N.E. 2d 228, 41 ILL. 2d 215.
Conspirators to be guilty of
offense need not have entered into conspiracy at same time or have taken part
in all its actions. People V. Hardison, 1985, 911 Dec. 162, 108. Requisite
mens rea elements of conspiracy are
satisfied upon showings of agreement of offense with intent that offense be committed; Actus reas element is satisfied of act in
furtherance of agreement People V. Mordick, 1981, 50 ILL, Dec. 63
The
Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Wednesday April 26, 2006, Page 1, Illinois
Political Machines help breed corruption, Associated Press writer Deanna
Bellandi states, “Illinois is apparently a Petri dish for corruption. It
is a real breeding ground”.
That Chicago
is the most Corrupt City in America, Huffington Post, Internet
Newspaper, February 23, 2012; University of Illinois Professor Dick Simpson, “The
two worst crime zones in Illinois are the governor’s mansion…..and the City
Council Chambers in Chicago.” Simpson a former Chicago Alderman told the AP “no
other State can match us.”
In
Accordance to all of The Cook County Circuit Court Rules
MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF THE
RELIEF REQUESTED
The
canons of ethic in the Rules of Professional Conduct constitute a safe guide
for professional conduct, and attorneys may be disciplined for not observing
them. In re Himmel, 125 Ill.2d 531,
533 N.E.2d 790, 127 Ill. Ill. App. 3d 999, 697 N.E.2d 820, 232 Ill. Ill.
App.3d 485, 654 N.E.2d 232, 210 Ill. Dec. 933
(2d Dist.), appeal denied, 164 Ill.
Ethics
All Illinois
RPC
3.3, entitled “Conduct Before a Tribunal,” sets forth the standards
to be followed by the trial lawyer during “battle.” Section (a) of that rule
states:
(a) In appearing in a professional capacity before a tribunal, a
lawyer shall not:
(1) make a statement of
material fact or law to a tribunal which the lawyer knows or reasonably should
know is false;
(2) fail to disclose to a
tribunal a material fact known to the lawyer when disclosure is necessary to
avoid assisting a criminal or fraudulent act by the client;
(3) fail to disclose to the
tribunal legal authority in the controlling jurisdiction known to the lawyer to
be directly adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing
counsel;
(4) Offer evidence that the
lawyer knows to be false. If a lawyer has offered material evidence and comes
to know of its falsity, the lawyer shall take reasonable remedial measures;
(5) participate in the
creation or preservation of evidence when the lawyer knows or reasonably should
know the evidence is false ;
(6) counsel or assist the
client in conduct the lawyer knows to be illegal of fraudulent;
(7) engage in other illegal
conduct or conduct in violation of these Rules;
(8) fail to disclose the
identities of the clients represented and of the persons who employed the lawyer
unless such information is privileged or irrelevant;
(9) intentionally degrade a
witness or other person by stating or alluding to personal facts concerning
that person which are not relevant to the case;
(10) in trial, allude to any matter that the lawyer does not
reasonably believe is relevant or that will not be supported by admissible
evidence, assert personal knowledge of facts in issue except when testifying as
a witness, or state a personal opinion as to the justness of a cause, the
credibility of a witness, the culpability of a civil litigant or the guilt or
innocence of and accused, but a lawyer may argue, on analysis of evidence, for
any position or conclusion with respect to the matter stated herein;
Acts constituting direct, criminal contempt
A wide variety of acts may constitute a direct, criminal
contempt. And act may be criminal contempt even though it is also an indictable
crime. Beattie v. People, 33 Ill. Ill. Ill.
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.
Under
penalties as provided by law pursuant to 735 1265 5\1-109, the undersigned
certifies that the statements set forth in this instrument are true and
correct, except as to matters therein stated to be on information and belief
and as to such matters, the undersigned certifies as aforesaid that he verily
believes the same to be true.
Respectfully submitted,
Monzella Y. Johnson, Pro Se
Chicago,
Il 60615
WHEREFORE the aforementioned
reasons Defendant respectfully Prays for the Relief
1.
For an Order Pursuant to Smith v. Wade, 461 U.S. 30, 35 103 S. Ct. 1625, 1629, 75 L Ed 2d 632
(1983) Justice Brennen “The threshold standard for allowing punitive damages
for reckless or callous indifference applies even in a case, such as here, where
the underlying standard of liability for compensatory damages because is also
one of recklessness. There is no merit to petitioner’s contention that actual malicious
intent should be the standard for punitive damages because the deterrent purposes
of such damages would be served only if the threshold for those damages is
higher in every case than the underlying standard for liability in the first
instance. The common-law rule is otherwise, and there is no reason to depart
from the common-law rule in the context of {1983} of $3 Million Dollars this is
for the State Court upon appeal to the Federal Jurisdiction it will go up;
2.
For an Order reimbursing all fees and
costs to the Defendant for the enforcement of this matter;
3.
For Remands and Disbarments of all
attorneys involved in this matter;
4.
For Sanctions for all attorneys
absorbing the costs of any attorney of the Defendants choosing for the further
enforcement of this matter;
5.
For the entry of an Order awarding to your Defendant for
such other relief and any other relief necessary as equity may require of which
this court may deem overwhelmingly just;
Under
penalties as provided by law pursuant to 735 1265 5\1-109, the undersigned
certifies that the statements set forth in this instrument are true and
correct, except as to matters therein stated to be on information and belief
and as to such matters, the undersigned certifies as aforesaid that he verily
believes the same to be true.
Respectfully Submitted,
Monzella Y. Johnson, Pro Se
Chicago,
Il 60615
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS
COUNTY
DEPARTMENT--CHANCERY DIVISION
U.S. Bank
National Association, As Trustee Under)
Pooling
and Servicing Agreement Dated as of )
December
1, 2006 Mastr Asset–Backed Securities )
Trust
2006-NC3 Mortgage Pass-Through
) Case # 2008 CH 33616
Certificates,
Series 2006-NC3
) Petitioner
)
)
V. )
)
)
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, )
)
Respondents
)
NOTICE OF
RESPONDENT’S
RESPONSE MOTION TO IMPOSE SANCTIONS DUE TO “FRAUD”
ON THE COURT PURSUANT TO SUPREME COURT RULE 137 w/AFFIDAVIT
Please be
advised that on August 8, 2016, Defendant has filed before this Circuit
Court, Motion to Impose Sanctions et al; and will present said legally
sufficient instrument before Judge Myerson or any Judge in her stead August 12,
at 10:30 am in room 2808.
Potestivo & Ass., PC F.B.I. Dir. Michael J. Anderson
223 West Jackson, Blvd, Suite
610 2111 West Roosevelt Road
Chicago, IL. 60606 Chicago, Il. 60612
Chicago, IL. 60606 Chicago, Il. 60612
CERTIFICATE
OF SERVICE
The
undersigned hereby certifies that the above notice and all attachments were
caused to be personally delivered, to the above parties at the addresses
provided before 5:00 pm on August 8, 2016.
________________________
Respectfully Submitted, Monzella Y. Johnson
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS
COUNTY
DEPARTMENT--CHANCERY DIVISION
U.S. Bank
National Association, As Trustee Under)
Pooling
and Servicing Agreement Dated as of )
December
1, 2006 Mastr Asset–Backed Securities )
Trust
2006-NC3 Mortgage Pass-Through
) Case # 2008 CH 33616
Certificates,
Series 2006-NC3
) Petitioner
)
)
V. )
)
)
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, )
)
Respondents
)
AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF ILLINOIS )
)
COUNTY OF COOK )
I Monzella Y. Johnson Pro Se being duly sworn
on oath states the aforementioned pleadings enumerated within said motion
pursuant to 735 1265 5/1-109, the undersigned certifies that the statements set
forth in this instrument are true
and correct, except as to matters therein stated to be on information and
belief and as to such matters, the undersigned certifies as aforesaid that he
verily believes the same to be true.
Respectfully Submitted
Notary
____________________
Monzella Y. Johnson
Chicago, Il 60615
