A Motion to Dismiss/Non Suit for 09 P 4585 prepared just for Gloria

Dear Readers;

The RTF version of this has been sent to Gloria and KD has strongly recommended to her she file it ASAP.

The next version will be for Kathy.

I would love to see each of Cynthia Farenga, Gloria Sykes and Kathy Bakken get to court and motion this up and all present it on the same day.

And Adam, I would never leave you out.  Let me know if you want me to do one for you too!

thanks

JoAnne

Attorney Code Pro Se

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS
COUNTY DEPARTMENT, PROBATE DIVISION

In Re the Estate of

Mary G. Sykes,
An Alleged Disabled
No.: 09 P 4585
Hon. Jane Louise Stuart

NOTICE OF EMERGENCY MOTION
To: See attached service list:

Please take notice, that on the ___ day of August, 2010, the undersigned will appear before the Honorable Judge Jane Louis Stuart or any judge sitting in her stead in the courtroom usually occupied by her in Room 1814 of the Richard J Daley Center, Chicago, Illinois, and present the attached EMERGENCY MOTION TO DISMISS/NON SUIT FOR LACK OF SODINI JURISDICTION, and true and correct copes of which are attached hereto and served upon you.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

_______________________________
Gloria Sykes, daughter,
Pro Se
Prepared By:

Gloria Jean Sykes
6016 N. Avondale Ave
Chicago, IL 60631
Phone: 773-910-3310
email: gloami@msn.com                                     Attorney Code # Pro Se

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS
COUNTY DEPARTMENT, PROBATE DIVISION

In Re the Estate of

Mary G. Sykes,
An Alleged Disabled

No.: 09 P 4585
Hon. Jane Louise Stuart

EMERGENCY
MOTION TO DISMISS/NON SUIT FOR LACK OF SOLDINI
JURISDICTION/LACK OF PROPER NOTICE OF HEARING ON
PETITION FOR GUARDIANSHIP

This motion is brought by Gloria Jean Sykes, daughter of the above Respondent, who is an interested party and should have been named in Exhibit A to the Petition for Guardianship filed by Carolyn Toerpe in the above proceeding and is made pursuant to Probate Code 735 755 ILCS § 5/11a(f) requiring written Notice for any Hearing on Guardianship be provided by the Petitioner in the matter to all close relatives (as defined by the Probate Act) and served no less than 14 days in advance of the hearing.  The one and only necessary ground for this motion is that Petitioner, Carolyn Toerpe, and her attorneys of record, failed to serve ANY close relatives as required under this Probate Code section with ANY written form of notice 14 days in advance of the hearing date, as declared in the attached pleadings recently brought to my attention.
The grounds for this motion are:
1.      The Illinois Probate Act 755 ILCS § 5/11a:
(f) Notice of the time and place of the hearing shall be given by the petitioner by mail or in person to those persons, including the proposed guardian, whose names and addresses appear in the petition and who do not waive notice, not less than 14 days before the hearing.  755 ILCS § 5/11a. (Emphasis added).
2.     The Illinois Probate Act define the required notice be served upon adult children     and siblings of the Respondent.  In the above case, Mary G. Sykes has two adult     sisters, Ms. Yolanda Bakken and Ms. Josephine DiPietro, as well as a daughter     Gloria Sykes who should have been served under 755 ILCS § 5/11a.
3.     Attached is a declaration, Exhibit A, from one of the elder sisters, Ms. Bakken,     attesting to the fact that she was not served in accordance with 755 ILCS § 5/11a     (f).
4.     Attached hereto is a second declaration, Exhibit B, from the undersigned adult daughter Ms.     Gloria Sykes (“Gloria”) attesting to the fact that she was not served any Notice of     Hearing on Petition as provided for in 755 ILCS § 5/11a(f).
1.     The case, In re Sodini, (cite) (Exhibit C, hereto), makes it clear that these notices are     jurisdictional in nature and must be served strictly in compliance with the procedure     set forth by the Illinois State Legislature.  In Sodini, the adult sisters were not served with proper notice and the case was dismissed for want of jurisdiction.  (Cite).

2.     WHEREFORE, I respectfully request that
a.     The above cause of action be dismissed/non suited for lack of jurisdiction;
b.     All orders, including an Order to invalidate Ms. Gloria Sykes’ Power of Attorney be voided Ab Initio.
c.     All orders freezing Gloria’s assets be voided Ab Initio
d.     Mary be allowed to freely return to her home.
e.     Carolyn Toerpe be barred from conducting any mental or psychological examination on Mary G. Sykes.
f.     Carolyn Toerpe be permanently barred from ever filing an Illinois CCP 211 or its equivalent until further order of the court and for good cause shown, bearing in mind she instigated, continued and fomented a Probate Cause lacking jurisdiction since December 7, 2009 or nearly three (3) years, causing great harm, stress and hardship to Mary G. Sykes and her immediate family;
g.     And for any additional relief and remedies deemed proper by this honorable court.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

_______________________________
Gloria J. Sykes, Daughter, an interested party
to Respondent, Mary G. Sykes
Prepared By:
Gloria Jean Sykes
6016 N. Avondale Ave
Chicago, IL 60631
Phone: 773-910-3310
email: gloami@msn.com

Advertisements

A letter from Ken to Mr Moossy, Head of Civil Rights Division

Mr. Moossy is the head of the US department of Justice Civil Rights Division. Ken wrote him a letter on July 31, 2012 to bring to his attention the “cavalier dismissal of the Request for an honest investigation” regarding the Sykes case. Below are links to two PDFs containing the contents of this letter.

sykesblog–moossy-ltr-jul31-civ.rights

sykesblog–moossy-ltr-jul31-civ.rights2

Carolyn Toerpe VS Gloria Sykes 7/13/2012

Below is a link to the full transcript of the proceeding on 7/13/2012 between Carolyn and Gloria in eviction court.

Carolyn vs Gloria-Carolyn FOUND IN CONTEMPT OF COURT. TRANSCRIPT

It is clear that this Judge clearly understands that what Carolyn and Fred Toerpe have done IS WRONG. Here are some highlights in the transcript:

Page 24: Attorney Soehlig does not want to cross examine Gloria.
 
Page 32: Judge Garber makes the decision that Fred Toerpe’s actions are wrong.
 
Page 52: Carolyn Toerpe’s testimony starts
 
Page 60: Judge Garber grants the rule to show cause and found Toerpe in contempt of the court order:’You are not the Gestapo here, m a’am.  You’re not to make the decision when the Judge has already made the decision where she can move.”
 
He reminds her of the contempt later on.
 

For Cynthia Farenga–Motion to Dismiss/Non Suit for Lack of Sodini Jurisdiction

Dear Readers;

Below inline and via a link you can find the entitled motion I sent to Cynthia today.

We are all hoping she will file this motion and do the right thing.

If it were me, I would hate to do it, but I would do it.  I have had to do this before, and it’s a killer thing to do, but an atty has to explain to the client why s/he will dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, and then do it.

It’s horrible.  It’s a do over or start again, but it MUST be done.

Let’s wait and see what happens.  If she does it, it will most likely be the end of this blog.

JoAnne

PS – if Cynthia does not do it, I will send another to Gloria and then to Kathy and then to whomever is an “interested party” to attack that jurisdiction.  This is a serious, constitutional, due process flaw in the case ab initio.

PPS – the link:

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwTmJQdU5IU1dPYkU

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwTmJQdU5IU1dPYkU

link to exhibits:

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwbE9CQmNhelBnQjg

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwbE9CQmNhelBnQjg

Attorney Code _____________

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS
COUNTY DEPARTMENT, PROBATE DIVISION

In Re the Estate of

Mary G. Sykes,
An Alleged Disabled

No.: 09 P 4585
Hon. Jane Louise Stuart

NOTICE OF EMERGENCY MOTION
To: See attached service list:

Please take notice, that on _August 1, 2012, the undersigned will appear before the Honorable Judge Jane Louis Stuart or any judge sitting in her stead in the courtroom usually occupied by her in Room 1814 of the Richard J Daley Center, Chicago, Illinois, and present the attached EMERGENCY MOTION TO DISMISS/NON SUIT FOR LACK OF SODINI JURISDICTION, and true and correct copes of which are attached hereto and served upon you.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

_______________________________
Cynthia Farenga
Guardian Ad Litem
Prepared By:

Cynthia R. Farenga
1601 Sherman Ave, Suite 200
Evanston, IL 60201
Phone 847 475-1300
Fax 847 866 8885
cfarenga@comcast.net
Attorney Code #14,867

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS
COUNTY DEPARTMENT, PROBATE DIVISION

In Re the Estate of

Mary G. Sykes,
An Alleged Disabled

No.: 09 P 4585
Hon. Jane Louise Stuart

EMERGENCY
MOTION TO DISMISS/NON SUIT FOR LACK OF SOLDINI
JURISDICTION/LACK OF PROPER NOTICE OF HEARING ON
PETITION FOR GUARDIANSHIP

This motion is brought by Guardian ad Litem Cynthia Farenga (“Farenga”) pursuant to Probate Code 735 755 ILCS § 5/11a(f) requiring written Notice for any Hearing on Guardianship be provided by the Petitioner in the matter to all close relatives (as defined by the Probate Act) and served no less than 14 days in advance of the hearing.  The onE and only necessary ground for this motion is that Petitioner, Carolyn Toerpe, and her attorneyS of record, failed to serve ANY close relatives as required under this Probate Code section with ANY written form of notice 14 days in advance of the hearing date, as declared in the attached pleadings recently brought to my attention.
The grounds for this motion are:
1.      The Illinois Probate Act 755 ILCS § 5/11a:
(f) Notice of the time and place of the hearing shall be given by the petitioner by mail or in person to those persons, including the proposed guardian, whose names and addresses appear in the petition and who do not waive notice, not less than 14 days before the hearing.  755 ILCS § 5/11a. (Emphasis added).
2.     The Illinois Probate Act define the required notice be served upon adult children     and siblings of the Respondent.  In the above case, Mary G. Sykes has two adult     sisters, Ms. Yolanda Bakken and Ms. Josephine DiPietro, as well as a daughter     Gloria Sykes who should have been served under 755 ILCS § 5/11a.
3.     Attached is a declaration, Exhibit A, from one of the elder sisters, Ms. Bakken,     attesting to the fact that she was not served in accordance with 755 ILCS § 5/11a     (f).
4.     Attached hereto is a second declaration, Exhibit B, from the adult daughter Ms.     Gloria Sykes (“Gloria”) attesting to the fact that she was not served any Notice of     Hearing on Petition as provided for in 755 ILCS § 5/11a(f).
1.     The case, In re Sodini, (cite) (Exhibit C, hereto), makes it clear that these notices are     jurisdictional in nature and must be served strictly in compliance with the procedure     set forth by the Illinois State Legislature.  In Sodini, the adult sisters were not served with proper notice and the case was dismissed for want of jurisdiction.  (Cite).

2.     WHEREFORE, I respectfully request that
a.     The above cause of action be dismissed/non suited for lack of jurisdiction;
b.     All orders, including an Order to invalidate Ms. Gloria Sykes’ Power of Attorney be voided Ab Initio.
c.     All orders freezing Gloria’s assets be voided Ab Initio
d.     Mary be allowed to freely return to her home.
e.     Carolyn Toerpe be barred from conducting any mental or psychological examination on Mary G. Sykes.
f.     Carolyn Toerpe be permanently barred from ever filing an Illinois CCP 211 or its equivalent until further order of the court and for good cause shown, bearing in mind she instigated, continued and fomented a Probate Cause lacking jurisdiction since December 7, 2009 or nearly three (3) years, causing great harm, stress and hardship to Mary G. Sykes and her immediate family;
g.     And for any additional relief and remedies deemed proper by this honorable court.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

_______________________________
Cynthia Farenga, GAL to Mary G. Sykes

Prepared By:
Cynthia R. Farenga
1601 Sherman Ave, Suite 200
Evanston, IL 60201
Phone 847 475-1300
Fax 847 866 8885
cfarenga@comcast.net

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned herewith certifies that a copy of the foregoing Pleading entitled MOTION TO DISMISS/NON SUIT FOR LACK OF SOLDINI JURISDICTION/LACK OF PROPER NOTICE OF HEARING ON PETITION FOR GUARDIANSHIP was served upon the following parties on this ___ day of July, 2012 by the methods noted below:

Mr. Adam M. Stern
111 W Washington St, #1861
Chicago, IL 60602 via USPS first class mail (postage prepaid) and email

Mr. Peter Schmeidel
Ms. Deborah Soehlig
Fischel & Kahn Ltd
190 S. La Salle St, E 2850
Chicago, IL 60603
via USPS first class mail (postage prepaid) and email

Ms. Gloria Sykes
6014 N. Avondale Ave
Chicago, IL 60631 via USPS first class mail (postage prepaid) and email

___________________________
Cynthia R Farenga

From Gloria–a good explanation of the start of the case.

In this email, Gloria explains a number of obvious mis steps and bias against her and her mother by the GAL’s from the very beginning.  The GAL’s were never impartial, but showed clear bias.

Oh Scott, it gets better.  Adam Stern just happened to be sitting in the courtroom in Cynthia Farenga’s absense and Judge Connors, who after she admits she doesn’t have the file on the Petition for the Order of Protection (and the only reason Aunt Yo, Aunt Jo, Scott, Dorris, Suzie and I were present on August 26, 2009, was to support mother in obtaining the protection order against Carolyn Toerpe),  and notes on the record that mother was not served and is not present, appoints Stern to (1) procure all of the police reports on Toerpe and to investigate mother’s assets (for a reverse mortgage because Toerpe said Mother had no money to live in her home).  The odd this is, that before Toerpe started to financially exploit mother to the extent that she is the Plenary Guardian, et al, Mother lived comfortably in her home.  The mortgage was paid on time every month, property taxes and insurances were paid, phone was paid, electric was paid, gas, et al, and Mother ate well, and we traveled the United States together…..  Mother was so active in the Community that out precious moments together were first thing in the morning when we walked out pooches, and from dinner time until we walked the pooches at 10 pm or so each night.  Looking back and reading the verified court transcripts, the Guardianship appointment of Toerpe was a done deal on June 30, 2009 when Toerpe kiddnapped Mother from the Harrision Street courthouse and took her out of state and hid her and kept her out of Illinois so she couldn’t pursue the protective order.  Neither Adam Stern or Cynthia Farenga were ever at Mother’s home and Toerpe made certain that she took Mother to Farenga’s office.. as well as all the court friendly doctors who signed fradulant CCP211 reports where Toerpe signed PhD after her name.

 
Once Cynthia Farenga showed up on the 30 August 2009, she believed Toerpe had mother medicated enough, or enough undue influence was perpetrated on the 90 year old woman, that Mother would coward, but she didn’t.  She corrected Adam Stern when Stern went on a rampage accusing me of abusing her, and then when Farenga told the Court the same, Mother stood up to all of them and spoke her mind.  Mother has never wavered, and so, Cynthia Farenga, Adam Stern and Peter Schmiedel hired Dr. G. Shaw to testify that mother is not only incompetent now, but she was also incompetent and unable to handle her affairs on October 18, 2008, or so.  This testimony is in complete opposition to Dr. Patel’s medical reports where he clearly told Toerpe he would not sign the CCP211 because my mother instructed him not to.  That my mother ‘makes sense’ out of any topic” and can “communicate on any subject matter”.
 
But let’s go one step forward, the Court orders Toerpe has to bring mother home on September 4, 2009 and Toerpe, knowing that I’m fixing up my back yard, yes my back yard at 6016 for a huge welcome home holiday party for mother, calls me and tells me she will be bringing mother home early, but in about one hour.  But Toerpe is already in the home (6014) and she drove her daughter’s car just so I wouldn’t notice that she’s already there.  But her plan is thwarted because I have ‘workers’ around the house, and he sees Carolyn through mother’s kitchen window as he is fixing a leak on the exterior faucet.  Toerpe then calls me and demands I tell her who the “black man” is along side the house!  I immediately return to 6014 and find Toerpe in the refrigerator, looking through food which I just bought for the party.  Toerpe tells me that she will buy all of mother’s medications at Walgreens (and mother can no longer get her medications from her neighborhood pharmacy where she and Daddy have gone for over 30 years!).  Mom and I hug, but mom is very quiet and looks sickly — she’s lost a lot of weight.
 
Then Toerpe walks mother out to my backyard as if mother is a cripple, and she she leaves, Mother tell me that she doesn’t want to go over to Carolyn’s home any more: that it’s weird over there.  I go back to the home and watch Toerpe get into Kristin’s car, and all Toerpe has are her purse and keys.  Toerpe didn’t bring any of mother’s beautiful summer clothes I bought Mom back with her, and even kept all of the winder clothes including coats and jackets Toerpe took from Mother’s home in August.    Cynthia Farenga said to make a list and she would get the clothes back, but Farenga never planned on getting mother’s property back from Toerpe because she had already agreed to Toerpe’s payment plan for Farenga’s services.  
 
I can go on and on, but I ask Cynthia Farenga to provide the States Attorney’s office with the following documents and evidence:
 
(1)  That I had just purchased a ‘flashy new Lexis”
(2)  That I had gone bankrupt twice.
(3) That I dictated the letter mother wrote on September 20, 2009 and the letter 
Mother asked Cynthia to give to the Judge.
(4) That Yolanda Bakken slapped Toerpe in the face and tried to kidnap Mother in August 2009 when visiting on a court order.
(5) That Scott Evans wrote the Toerpes a threatening letter.
(6) That Doris Evans is a threat to Mother’s well being 
(7) That I abused my mother and,
(8) That I financially exploited my mother.
 
Then I ask Cynthia Farenga to provide the court with Mother’s bank statements from 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010 as ordered by the Court and provide proof of the $26,000 she took from mother in 2006 and set up a joint savings account in Toerpe and my mother’s name: then of course, proof that there was a CD or a IRA account opened in January 2009 with the $4000 Toerpe took from mother’s bank account.  Then prove to the States Attorneys office that Toerpe didn’t double pay the mortgage in July, August, September, October, November and December of 2009 so it would appear that Mother had no money in 2009!!!.. 
 
I can go on with request but this is a start.  Until you prove all of the above Cynthia Farenga, I think that you have a problem on your hands.  Of course, you believe you are immune from any lawsuits, but I got a feeling that if one person from the State’s Attorney’s office is just a little interested in proving me wrong, they’ll check it out.  What they will find is that Toerpe’s been stealing money from my mother for a very long time and it’s because my mother caught her in Feb. 2009, Toerpe set a course to take control of mother’s person and finances to cover up her crimes.  Then lucky  Toerpe, she hired a lawless attorney who would murder his own mother for money as he ripped off seniors in Indiana on remodeling and reverse mortgages: then Harvey Jack Waller was blessed to have you Cynthia Farenga appointed and now I’m back to the beginning of the case.  
 
The question is Cynthia Farenga, in absence of any evidence as you have none to your malicious allegations, how do you continue to get away with these crimes against the elderly, disabled, and all people the elderly and disabled trust and love?  That said, I know your husband and once in a while you buy and sell estates of Wards of Cook County, and your husband Michael Crowley does your dirty work and serves fraudulent documents on people’s financial advisors and institutions, and you had me served with a Pizza Flyer, too, but who do you sleep at night?  Your daughter appears to be a lovely young woman (the internet is great for ***).  Does she know who you really are?  Does she know that you lie, cheat, steal and will murder in order to earn your living off of the elderly, disabled and all people who stand up for the truth and justice?  
 
So Scott, if there were one person at the Illinois States Attorneys office willing to steal across the LINE Cynthia Farenga drew in the sand (as she keeps moving is), I know for a fact that soon after the investigation there would be a grand jury asking Carolyn Toerpe some serious questions.  I know that Toerpe, however will coward and she will turn Cynthia Farenga, Adam Stern and Peter Schmiedel in as they are orchestrating all of this by using our courts as their weapons of choice. 
 
But now I’m way a head of myself.  Let’s go back to the court transcripts ……
 
FYI the Court Reporter from the date Kevin Salam testified refuses to call me back and the Official court reporter’s office cannot help me get the transcripts from Salam’s testimony.  Similarly it took six months-for me to get the transcripts format eh Domestic Relations court in and regarding the petition for an order of protection naming Carolyn Toerpe.. That said, the records are available for any one to read and they are a good read.  
 
FYI Ya got three days to turn over the documents Cynthia Farenga  as I am prepared to publish an article — If you have any of this evidence, and proof of course of the Sodini requirements met, you may be able to prove your claims as I always give both sides of the story. As it is, the transcripts and court docket show exactly what I and other people, including Ditkowsky have said.  You, Cynthia Farenga are a liar and a fraud — well, those are my words.  I will retract and apologize once I have the above documents and records in the hands of the Illinois States Attorney — and available or the public to examine.
 
Have a beautiful day all.  I have just started… Watch me!
 
 
Gloria Jean Sykes 
Bon Ami Productions, Inc. 

773.910-3310(cell)
773.631-9262 (fax and office line)
(edited only for typos and grammar)

My fax to Diane Saltoun, Executive Directior at the Illinois Atty General

See below.  This fax was accompanied by my famous “Table of Torts” and the Probate Docket table of missing court orders, pleadings and transcripts that won’t be transcribed (note, I never said “can’t”).  Those are posted on my page of “Important Documents” and I note more than half the probate file is missing and apparently has been “cleansed”.  GDS bless my scanner!

In line is below, or click for the link.

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwcnNGSXZuZU9La1k

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwcnNGSXZuZU9La1k

I want to make this easy peasy for everyone!

FAX TRANSMITTAL SHEET
To: Diane Saltoun
Executive Inspector General
IAG
fax 312-814-8444

From:                      Admitted Ill., N.  Carolina and Patent Bars
JoAnne M. Denison,     Pat. Atty.  Reg.  No.  34,150
DENISON & ASSOCS., PC    FAX 312-553-1307
1512 N Fremont St, #202    CELL PH 773-255-7608
CHICAGO, IL 60642    PHONE 312-553-1300
JoAnne@DenisonLaw.com or http://www.DenisonLaw.com
Federal Patents, Trademarks & Copyrights
Troy S. Sieburg, associate, of counsel
Marianne Buckley, associate, of counsel

For transmission problems, please call 312-553-1300
A confirmation copy       WILL   ✔   will NOT be sent.
Pages in fax, including this coversheet – ( see fax header  )
July 27, 2012

Re:   In re Estate of Mary Sykes, 09 P 4585

Dear Diane;

While the above case has a long, long history, much of which is documented on a blog to be found at http://www.marygsykes.com, the reality of the situation is that this probate proceeding boils down to garden variety theft, embezzlement, malpractice and malfeasance by attorneys and the court.  The court has clearly, for 3 long years, been working without subject matter jurisdiction.  In probate court, the Illinois legislature has stated in the Sodini case that in order to take jurisdiction, the court must ensure the following requirements have been met that notice on any hearing for incompetency: 1) be in writing; 2) that the Petitioner serve the notice; 3) that the notice contain the time, date and place of the hearing; and 4) that the notice be served upon “close relatives”–ie, adult children and siblings.

In the above case, the Guardians ad Litem, Cynthia Farenga and Adam Stern will admit that no proper written notice was ever served in the case and/or they cannot produce proof of service at all.  In one transcript (all transcripts are published on the blog), counsel for the Guardian admitted no Sodini notices were served upon “close relatives.”  Judge Connors knew at the time she was appointing the plenary guardian, Carolyn Toerpe, without proper notice being served, and Judge Stuart has admitted in her written notes on pleadings that it is “too late” to contest subject matter jurisdiction, which is utter nonsense since subject matter jurisdiction can be brought up at any time–even on appeal.

To add to the obvious corruption, cronyism, embezzlement (there is estimated to be $1 million in gold and silver coins missing from Mary’s estate),   when another attorney (Ken Ditkowsky) and myself complained about the lack of jurisdiction, the railroading of the proceeding without discovery–one of the GAL’s has filed ARDC complaints against us–merely for calling for an investigation.  Leah Black at the ARDC is handling that and has not given up.  The proceeding against Ken Ditkowsky is clearly another railroaded proceeding built upon corruption and cronyism and Leah Black has done nothing to clean up the court system.

See the attached “table of torts” the miscreants have engaged in.  See the attached list of missing files and know that more than half the file is missing because all of the appellate volumes are gone.

Someone is systematically cleansing the Probate files and Judge Evans and security is doing NOTHING about it.

No response.

And then when I go to court to blog about the case and the corruption and cronyism, the miscreants have the court bailiff tell me not to use or open my laptop!

When I first contacted your offices regarding corruption in the courts at the Daley Center you said you “needed proof” actual proof of corruption.

I don’t see how 70% of the file missing PLUS the lack of subject matter jurisdiction could establish any less proof to conduct an investigation.

And I know your buddies at the FBI could look at this case in minutes and come up with a determination that the plenary Guardian is spending tens of thousands of dollars on house remodeling and a fancy wedding for her daughter, whereas back in Jan of 2009 she was struggling with bills and her husband was out of work.  All we need is an asset search done in 2009-2012 for Carolyn and Fred Toerpe.

What more evidence do you need?

I will continue to publish the blog speaking out against corruption in our court system.

Please look at the attached and all the information I will fax you shortly.  This is a case that could be bigger than Greylord–what is being done to deprive grandma and grandpa of their civil rights and how the Probate court (routinely) operates.

Very Truly Yours,

DENISON & ASSOCS, PC

JoAnne Denison

JoAnne M. Denison

cc: Ken Ditkowsky and http://www.marygsykes.com blog.

Answer to a Question from Scott Evans and the significance of lacking jurisdiction/Sodini notices

Question from Scott Evans:

Gloria,

That was an excellent recap of the first few months of the case.  It is chilling to read. 

It begs the question, something Tim said a year ago, about going back to the beginning. 

Are there Court actions that can be entered into given the string of not just technically wrong, but completely incorrect actions by the opposing lawyers? 

I bring it up because of all the emphasis on the Sodini aspect of the relatives not being properly noticed, events which followed the ones you just wrote about by only several months.  To me, they appear to be more provable, more serious, more compelling, more powerful than Sodini.  Do these glaring gaffs that you refer to have a name, a case law background?   

Since Sodini can be brought up almost 3 years after the fact, can’t these other issues? 

I did a REPLY ALL on this in order to garner wider responses and ideas.  ~Scott

Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2012 10:35:48 -0700
From: kenditkowsky@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Sykes Case Jurisdiction
To: scottcevans@hotmail.com; joanne@denisonlaw.com
CC: elaine@abusiveguardianships.com; glduncan@bellsouth.net; michiganadvocacyproject@gmail.com; lisabokesch@aol.com; k_bakken@att.net; timlahrman@aol.com

The significance of Sodini is jurisdiction.   Without jurisdiction everything done in the Sykes case is void.   The guardian ad litem are ‘de facto’ and therefore as there is no guardianship their actions are unauthorized.   As there is no jurisdiction their is no guardian ship.  No guardianship means that the drilling of the safety deposit box was not authorized and was a garden variety larceny by trick.    Citatons to discover assets are also ‘ultra vires’ and therefore all this nonsense of questioning Gloria as to her assets, seizing her assets is just garden variety common law fraud, theft, false imprisonment and criminal contempt of court.
Similarly the non-inventory of the assets removed from the safety deposit box is theft!   In addition as the mails were used to commit the fraud our friends are guilty of 18 USCA 1341 (mail fraud).    There are least two predicate action and therefore the government can charge each with RICO.    Of course, theft as well as breach of fiduciary relationship are taxable events.   All of our friends are guilty of conspiracy to evade the United States Income taxes    Carolyn is guilty of tax fraud.
Keeping Mary against her will is kidnapping on the criminal side and false imprisonment on the civil side.
On the other hand, had the Sodini notices been given the guardians have 100% absolute immunity.  Farenga and Stern have discretion as to what they report to the Court, and the Court can issue ‘wrong and unjust orders’ until the cows come home.  Sodini is the lynch pin!
With two of the three necessary close relatives filing affidavits that they did not receive the 14 day notices required to obtain jurisdiction over Mary and her estate any judge who takes his/her duties seriously would order an investigation.  Most judges do not like to enter orders that are beyond their jurisdiction.
What makes this case the ‘son of greylord’ is the fact that every judge has had the jurisdictional issue raised and each avoided the issue liket he plague.   The lawyers who are presumed to know the law admit that the Sondini protections were not afforded to Mary and ‘no one cares.’   An honest investigation would find out why the Judges are reluctant to determine if they had jurisdiction!    An honest investigation would require Carolyn to produce the inventory that Mary kept in the safety deposit box.   An honest investigation would find out why Farenga, Stern, Schmiedel, et al. are so afraid to participate in the investigation and why they mislead the Court on a regular basis.   An honest investigation would look into Judge Connors dates in December 2009.

Sodini goes back to Day One.   If Sodini was not complied with each of the guardians (including the GALs) is guilty of theft etc.
from Atty Ken Ditkowsky