From Atty KDD — what has happened to our Bill of Rights

Seen on a T shirt for the holidays “I read the Constitution, it has great articles!”

From Ken:

Subject: Re: Fw: Fw: Fw: [NASGAmembers] [New post] From Lisa Belanger in Mass. Her struggle to protect her father

In the Sykes case, Ms. Farenga, Mr. Stern, and the plenary guardian have not put in for any fees.    It is now three years!    Adam Stern ‘for free’ spend dozens of hours prosecuting a Rule 137 motion against me knowing that the Probate Court had no jurisdiction and that any order that he could hoodwink a judge into entering would be reversed on Appeal.   Cynthia Farenga has spent hundreds of hours examining the “probate shark, Nasga, and your ( blogs so that she could supply with Ms. Black with writings that depict the fact that you and I have been calling for an investigation of the terrible violations of civil and human rights that Mary Sykes has suffered.     Indeed, even Peter Schmiedel has contributed to fiasco.    Each of the aforesaid attorneys have spend hundreds of uncompensated hours so keep the ‘ball in the air’ so that a Probate Court Judge was not directly confronted with either having to refer the 42 USCA 1983 violation to the United States Attorney and/or the States Attorney of Cook County or over-rule the Appellate Court decision in Sodini.    These attorneys have not presented any substantial fee petitions for all their services to the Estate in protecting it from having to address the fact that Gloria Sykes protestations have merit and that a million dollars in gold coins was never inventoried!*    Thus, if we use precedent the attorney acting for $5 dollars an hour my be getting too much!    Farenga/Stern/Schmiedel are doing it for nearly free!
I sent you by a separate cover a short essay
What happened to the Bill of Rights?
Title XI a of the Probate Court is a comprehensive legislative plan for the protection of the liberty, property, civil rights, and human rights of a person who is allegedly disabled.    The First Ten Amendments of the Constitution are the ‘core’ of Americana.    The Illinois Constitution of 1970 is a State reiteration of commitment of the State of Illinois to the Bill of Rights and 735 ILCS 110 et seq. is a more recent affirmation. 
The Probate Court is a Court of limited jurisdiction.    It is not intended to be a ‘super court!’ Thus, 755 ILCS 5/11a – 1 et seq.  grants the jurisdiction to the Probate  Court to address limited issues, and the legislature by using the word “shall” mandates the maximum protection for the alleged incompetent.    Section 11a -3 mandates venue.   Section 8 determines what must be in the petition.   Section 10,11 (Jurisdiction) mandates jurisdictional criterion.      Section 17,18 mandate the procedure and limitations on the guardians and their activities.     The protection of the liberty rights of the alleged incompetent is the clear focus of the Legislation.
Unlike the mortgage foreclosure situation and the appointment of a receiver,   the Rules are strict and unbending.   Discretion that affects the Liberty right of an alleged incompetent is severely limited by due process requirement  (proper notice and hearing).   The hearing process is intended to be procrustean so that a ‘ward’ is not ‘willy/nilly deprived of the valuable liberty right.   Thus, after the petitioner seeking to declare a person disabled or incompetent proves the fact by clear and convincing evidence the incompetency and the degree thereof,  the guardian is limited to performing only the actions that the disabled person would have performed, and if there is question or something usual the guardian must seek a hearing on necessity (section 18).    The generous use of the word “shall” is antagonist to what has been reported to have occurred in the Sykes, Gore, Wyman, Tyler and many other cases.   
The Evidence Deposition of  Justice M. Connors taken in my Illinois ARDC proceeding demonstrates the paradox that is creating a scandal that rivals Greylord and the fact that currently two Illinois Governors are tenants of the United States  Department of Prisons.       The Illinois Appellate Court and the Illinois Supreme Court have both acknowledged that 755 ILCS 5/11a -3 et seq.  Is intended to protect the Liberty, Property, Civil and Human Rights.      The protection is to place a simple ‘due process’ criterion upon the imposition of a guardianship on an alleged incompetent.    Section 10 and Section 11 make it clear that Notice must be served on the close (near) relatives of the alleged incompetent.     (See In re: Sodini 172 ILLApp3d 1055)
The GAO report to Congress (Sept 2010) discloses that Illinois is not alone in what appears to be a systemic effort to deny seniors their  liberty, property, civil and human rights.      That fact many of the political community have been successful in perverting the aforesaid liberty, property, civil and human rights of the Mary Sykes of this world is not an excuse for what appears to be wholesale deprivation of liberty, property, human and civil rights of seniors.    It does not exculpate law enforcement and the media for turning their heads to avoid observing the deterioration of the Rule of Law.    It certainly does not obviate the duty of the Judges to understand and honor the decisions of the Appellate Courts, and not act where jurisdiction is not obtained.    Indeed, as a lay citizen does not have the excuse of not knowing the law, certainly a Judge (who is paid over a $100,000 a year) has even less excuse in not knowing and/or following the law.   (Compare the Sodini case with Judge Connor’s evidence deposition!).
Now to the prime question – what happened to the Bill of Rights!    The question is answered when you read Judge Connor’s deposition testimony.    The question is answered when you read the Sykes transcripts for August 2009 and August 2010.     The question is answered when you read sanction motion written by Adam Stern seeking to sanction me and is further answered in his and Cynthia Farenga’s ARDC complaints concerning my seeking to investigate the Sykes case and/or the ARDC complaints against me and Attorney Denison making appeals to law enforcement to investigate the Sykes case and in particular:
1)     the failure of Carolyn Toerpe (as petitioner) to name Mary Sykes’ siblings in the petition to declare Mary Sykes incompetent
2)     the failure of Carolyn Toerpe to disclose in her petition her ‘power of attorney’ granting her dominion over Mary Sykes assets.
3)     The failure of the Court to hold a hearing on the sworn petition of Mary Sykes for a protective order barring Carolyn Toerpe’s alleged misconduct toward her.
4)     The failure of the Court to require Carolyn Toerpe to comply with the Section 10 (Sodini) notice requirements.    And in particular, the failure of Stern, Farenga et al (and the Court) to recognize that the Appellate Court and the Supreme Court of Illinois have both pointed out that without the compliance with the Sodini notices the Court lacked jurisdiction.
5)     The Court acting without jurisdiction.   And in particular, the Court freezing Gloria Sykes’ assets, allowing the Isolation of Mary Sykes, the seizure and non-inventory of about a million dollars of gold coins etc.
6)     The refusal of the Court to address the lack of jurisdiction.  Etc.
The Bill of Rights and in particular the First Amendment is absolutely clear in prohibiting any government censorship of citizens including lawyers.    The Alvarez case is the Supreme Court of the United States’ statement on the subject.      The foregoing not withstanding the freezing of Gloria Sykes’ assets by an Illinois Court in Indiana and the prosecution of objecting lawyers (including JoAnn Denison and yours truly) are oxymoronic.    
Now back to the question!   We are losing our Bill of Rights because each of us is sitting  back and allowing the political elite, law enforcement and the press to allow the guardians in the Sykes case deny Mary Sykes due process and equal protection of the law.    We – you and me –  allowed a State Judge to ignore the notice requirements necessary to vest her with jurisdiction and enter orders that she knew or should have known were unauthorized.  
Yes, we objected and wrote letters, e-mails, and protested.    The Judge however was retained in the last election – so we failed!    Indeed, by our ineffectiveness and by our failure to raise a ‘hue and cry’ we  are allowing Mary Sykes and those persons similarly situated to be denied their First Amendment Rights and in particular their liberty, property, human and civil rights.   Every day that Mary Sykes and those persons similarly situated are in bondage or our help hostage is a day that you and I are losing our First Amendment Rights and hundreds (if not thousands) of Mary Sykes’ are ‘second class citizens’ who have been and are being denied their ‘liberty, their property, their civil rights, and their human rights.’  
Mary Sykes and those who are similarly situated are entitled as citizens of the United States of America to an honest, complete and comprehensive investigation of the deprivation of their liberty, their property, civil and human rights that they are subjected to right now!      As citizens they are entitled to law enforcement doing its job and prosecuting those persons who act under color of law to deprive Mary Sykes and those persons similarly situated of their LIBERTY, PROPERTY, CIVIL, RIGHTS & HUMAN RIGHTS.       The State of Illinois and the United States of America in addition to doing the right thing has a pecuniary interest – it only stands to reason that if the guardian has not filed an inventory disclosing the almost a million dollars in Gold coins, she has not paid her Federal Income Tax on the coins.     
Ken Ditkowsky

Wyman–updated report to Court re Affiavit of Atty Leinen

As you will recall, during oral argument (the transcript is posted on this blog),  Attorneys Kimberly Timmerwilke McKenzie and Sharon Rudy argued that Atty JF Heckinger represented John Wyman (despite the fact that Atty Heckinger never called or mailed John Wyman any written notice of hearing on the petitioner stating the time, date and place of hearing to declare Winifred Carol “Carol”) Wyman incompetent, as required by the Illinois Probate Act, and for which the case In re Soldini (also on this blog) makes this a jurisdictional requirement.)  Further the Illinois Act requires that the Petitioner mail the appropriate notice to all parties listed in Exhibit A, and Exhibit A was defective on its face because it did not list all the adult siblings and sisters of Carol.  The Illinois Probate Act does not say call some atty you think might be representing someone and talk about it. There are specific and solid groundrules for all of the notice requirements.

I previously submitted a report to the court following my conversation with Attorney Leinen confirming he never filed an appearance, he never represented ANY party at all in the Probate proceeding or appeared in that matter, and he further never received any notices from SRR regarding the hearing on Powell Wyman’s Petition for Guardianship of his wife, Carol.

Below is his affidavit and an updated Report to the Court.

We still do not have an Order from Judge Fabiano.

There is still sufficient time for each of SRR, KTM and Judge Fabiano to do the right thing, and in the face of overwhelming evidence that there was no jurisdiction for this probate proceeding for 3 years–dismiss this lawsuit, let Carol return home and order that Powell fiile an accounting for all assets.

Let’s hope and pray everyone does the right thing.  Carol wants to go back to her own home and John says he will go with her to protect her and to fix up her home so she can be where she wants and see her grandchildren on a regular basis.  There are babies in this family that she loves to hold and cuddle and let’s hope for that to happen.

Atty Ron Leinen Afft and Updated Report to Court 11/27/12

Amazing new site–the official “back burner”

You just have to check out this site.  While there is not a lot of content, just a couple of articles and a couple of chapters of a book, the site is amazing and mind boggling.

It tells the story and philosophy of elder abuse and exploitation and explains why no one cares.  After reading this site, I know why the Probate courts have been lax, and why the ARDC thinks that anyone who screams out about elder abuse and exploitation is crazy.

There is nothing to prove and no one cares when the victim is 90!

How many 90 year olds does anyone know?  I got to know quite a few in my charitable work and through my church, but I have to admit, I was always amazed at what they knew and what they were doing.

Who isn’t amazed and ponders how Grandma Moses from age 70 to 100 was one of the most prolific and talented US painters with 1600 paintings of amazing quality that invoked numerous emotions and understandings as you gazed at her works–the works of an artist, a seasoned observer of Americana, a person who knew the innermost details of ourselves as persons born and/or living in this country for decades.

He starts with the old classic of Arsenic and Old Lace and leads us through a plethora of criminals and their victims that typically take years to find, to incriminate and eventually prosecute.  He explains why victims of the elderly are so dismissed, are put aside and become the official “back burner” of society and even criminologists and criminal prosecutors.

After spending just 30 minutes on his website, I was very moved.

We need more bloggers like this dedicated man.


In re Wyman–Appeal Filed!

Below are the documents to file an appeal for lack of jurisdiction based upon failure to serve the notice of hearing by the petitioner 14 days in advance of the date, time and place of hearing to all adult siblings and children.

I also believe in this case, the Respondent, an alleged disabled person, was not served with a summons or complaint.  Data from the nursing home indicates that at the time or shortly there after Ms. Wyman was scoring 26 to 29 on “mini mentals” indicating that she did not need to be in a nursing home (against her will–read the book), nor did she need to have a guardian appointed for her.  But she wrote in her diary she wanted to have an atty to fight the guardianship but neither the GAL nor the judge ever appointed one for her.

This is a familiar song in our nation’s probate courts.

Read the notice of appeal and docketing statement, Motion for an Expedited appeal (because Mrs. Wyman is 80 and they are threatening to sell her house.)

John Howard Wyman tells me he is proud to share these appeals documents and he hopes it helps others and he hopes it will start to uncorrupt our very corrupt probate court system.

In re Wyman–Notice of Appeal, Motion to Expedite Appeal, Docketing Statement

If the link breaks

Sykes Probate files which were imaged Mar 2011 to Oct 2012

I believe the following zip file contains all the Sykes pleadings from March of 2011 to present clearly showing that when AS told the court that “jurisdiction had been brought up many times before and it was denied.”  That was a lie.  I have challenged him to produce the alleged orders and so far, nada.  I have the orders through Jan 2010 and nothering there.  After that, KDD was involved in the case in 2010, he went to several court hearings and status calls and he has shown me his files and shared them with me and there are no such orders, so where are they then?  PS said he recalls filing an appeallate breif arguing this point, but that was a lie because GJSs brief was dismiss for 341 or formatting (margins and page length) non compliance, so that was a lie.

The Court seems to think that PS and AS can do not wrong, AS is supposed to be the “eyes and ears of the court” as Mary’s GAL, but it seems he is in dire need of better contact lenses and a good hearing aid.

AS and PS are silent on this one.  They have produced nothing, filed nothing.

BUT they could be honest about all of this and save GJS the time and trouble of filing an appeal BY DOING THE RIGHT THING AND CALLING TO DISMISS THE CASE for lack of jurisdiction (Sodini)

Here are the files:

Probate case 09 P 4585 from Mar 2011 to Oct 2012

and the direct link, in case that one breaks:


From Ken Ditkowsky — Keep up the emails and blogging, the probate storm continues

—–Original Message—–
From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Nov 23, 2012 9:30 AM
To: Janet Phelan
Subject: Re: Elaine Renoire has sent you this Story link from

Rome was not built in a day.   It took years to put Al Capone in jail.    It took a world war to rid us the 1936 National Socialists.
The helpless are prime targets for abuse, neglect and exploitation.    The seniors worked a lifetime to accumulate a few dollars and for the miscreants with a little political clout each senior is a ‘candy store!’    Mary Sykes had a million dollars in untraceable Au coins.   All the plenary guardian had to do was to remove them from the safety deposit box and Cynthia Farenga (who admitted under oath having no knowledge as to what was removed from the safety deposit box) was ready willing and able to not only deny the existence of a million dollars in assets, but obtain the co-operation of the Illinois ARDC to try to stop me from objecting to inventories promulgated by the plenary guardian that deleted the Au coins.
Au this morning is over $1,700 an ounce.    That means the ‘double eagle’ coins have a value of over $3,500 each.   The container in which the coins were kept was described by family members as being about a foot high (mail sack) and filled about 50%.    The diameter was about six inches.    Most of the coins were in the coin containers that collectors usually use.    (I have not seen the sack or the coins – Mary when she can to see me had a coin with her)    Mary’s Sibling described the coins in open court and Gloria has furnished the information in her affidavits.     (It is my information that some of the coins that were from the A. B estate belonged to Gloria – and with their current value a ‘felony theft’ has occurred that Gloria has disclosed to law enforcement and is being ignored).
The ABC report is progress.   It is also a ‘red flag’ directed to law enforcement that a new Hurricane Sandy is on the horizon and their inaction may prove very embarrassing for them.   The report is clear in saying to the media you can either be part of the problem or part of the solution.   The wrath of the public that will be generated will not have room for prisoners!
Ken Ditkowsky

From Lisa Belanger in Mass. Her struggle to protect her father

Lisa Bellanger, an atty in Mass. has been very kind to send me the recent Petition she filed to protect her father against some atty and CPA miscreant who threaten to deplete her father’s $9 million estate in about 7 years!

Absolutely amazing.  Apparently the cost for staying in your own home as an elderly senior where you aren’t threatened with a nursing home is about $1 million per year in Massachusetts.

See attached.  Atty Bellanger did a tremendous job on this pleading, and I have made some comments in pink, of course!


Lisa Belanger’s Petition Re her father’s estate 

Form for Motion for Special Process Server

Since I know a lot of you out there are pro se’ers because attorneys are very expensive and there is really no good method at the present time to get litigation loans to fund all of the lack of procedure, immense bias, a system that can suck you dry, I will start posting forms that might help you in court.

Please be aware that these forms are only for the court you are in.  I can’t help you with states other than Illinois, and I practice mainly in Chicago, but if you can hook up with an attorney and pay her or him to look over the stuff you file and discuss it a bit, that should help you out.

See the attached form for a Special Process Server.

In Illinois service may be attempted where ever the defendant may be found.  So you can serve at work, far as I know, correct me if I am wrong.

Form for Special Process Server–RTF

Form for Special Process Server – WPD

Form for Special Process Server – PDF

After you have a defendant served, you will want to have your Process Server do a Declaration of Service and file that with the court so the Judge knows your defendants have been properly served.

A court is not supposed to take jurisdiction or issue any substantive orders in a case generally, unless and until your defendant is served.


Can you waive Sodini jurisdiction? An important consideration–see in Re Pellico

One of the issues that popped up in the Wyman case, and one which is of central importance is whether or not John Howard Wyman waived his jurisdictional defect by filing motions without first filing an objection to jurisdiction.  John Wyman did not know at the time that he could object to jurisdiction.  Now he had an attorney, JF Heckinger, but Atty Heckinger never told him that he could object.  Two years have passed, so there is no action against Heckinger for malpractice, perhaps breach of contract, that limitations period is 5 years, but not malpractice.

In any case I found one case which says that if you file pleadings, and appear, you might waive your Soldini notice jurisdiction, HOWEVER, this is a case where apparently there was only one person that required this notice, and he waived that notice.

In the cases of Tyler, Gore, Bedin, Wyman, etc.  there were numerous adult siblings and children not served and the court took note of that in In re Sodini.  Further, in the vast majority of these cases, grandma and grandpa never received a summons and complaint 14 days in advance of any hearing on a petition for guardianship, and that is required by statute.  It would appear that any “interested party” can file for lack of jurisdiction based upon non-service of other siblings or adult children, or lack of service of a summons and complaint upon the Respondent.

From  In re Estate of Pellico, 916 N.E.2d 45, 334 Ill.Dec. 12 (Ill. App., 2009) it is explained further:

Subject matter jurisdiction refers to a court’s power to adjudicate the general question involved and to grant the relief requested. In re M.M., 15,6 Ill.2d 53, 189 Ill.Dec. 1, 619 N.E.2d 702 (1993); In re Dontrell H., 38,2 Ill.App.3d 612, 321 Ill.Dec. 108, 888 N.E.2d 627 (2008). In the general civil context, circuit courts enjoy, with limited exceptions, “original jurisdiction of all justiciable matters.” Ill. Const.1970, art. VI, § 9; see Steinbrecher v. Steinbrecher, 197 Ill.2d 514, 529-30, 259 Ill.Dec. 729, 759 N.E.2d 509 (2001). As our supreme court explained in Steinbrecher:

“Effective January 1, 1964, an amendment to article VI replaced limited jurisdiction: `Circuit Court[s] shall have unlimited original jurisdiction of all justiciable matters.’ Ill. Const. 1870, art. VI, § 9 (amended 1964); accord Ill. Const.1970, art. VI, § 9 (`Circuit Courts shall have original jurisdiction of all justiciable matters except when the Supreme Court has original and exclusive jurisdiction’). This amendment created a single integrated trial court vested with jurisdiction to adjudicate all controversies.

* * *

An administrative agency, like the pre-1964 circuit courts, is powerless to

[916 N.E.2d 55]

act unless statutory authority exists. City of Chicago, 65 Ill.2d at 112[, 2 Ill.Dec. 711, 357 N.E.2d 1154]. An administrative agency is a statutory creature with no general or common law power. City of Chicago, 65 Ill.2d at 112-13[, 2 Ill.Dec. 711, 357 N.E.2d 1154]. Conversely, a circuit court is a court of general jurisdiction, which need not look to the statute for its jurisdictional authority.” Steinbrecher, 197 Ill.2d at 529-30, 259 Ill.Dec. 729, 759 N.E.2d 509.

Further, once a circuit court obtains jurisdiction, an order will not be rendered void merely because the court makes an error of law in rendering its judgment. People v. Davis, 156 Ill.2d 149, 157, 189 Ill.Dec. 49, 619 N.E.2d 750 (1993). “Accordingly, a court may not lose jurisdiction because it makes a mistake in determining either the facts, the law[,] or both.” Davis, 156 Ill.2d at 157, 189 Ill. Dec. 49, 619 N.E.2d 750.

Accordingly, in this case, the circuit court erred when it ruled that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction. Although the circuit court and the parties attempt to determine whether the circuit court had subject matter jurisdiction by looking to section 11a-18(d) of the Probate Act, neither that statute’s section nor any other statute restricted the circuit court’s jurisdictional authority. See Steinbrecher, 197 Ill.2d at 529-30, 259 Ill.Dec. 729, 759 N.E.2d 509. The circuit court, a court of general jurisdiction, had original jurisdiction of all justiciable matters (Ill. Const. 1970, art. VI, § 9), including the one at bar, and did not need to look to the Probate Act for jurisdictional authority. See Steinbrecher, 197 Ill.2d at 529-30, 259 Ill. Dec. 729, 759 N.E.2d 509. Whether the circuit court acted improperly pursuant to section 11a-18(d) of the Probate Act was a question of whether it erred in determining the law, not a question of subject matter jurisdiction. See In re Marriage of Chrobak, 34,9 Ill.App.3d 894, 285 Ill. Dec. 369, 811 N.E.2d 1248 (2004). Accordingly, we agree with the Public Guardian and the GAL that the circuit court erred when it determined that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction to order payment of guardianship fees, because it, indeed, had subject matter jurisdiction over the issue and the trusts.

To support Gregory’s argument that section 11a-18(d) of the Probate Act limited the circuit court’s jurisdiction, Gregory cites In re Estate of Gebis, 18,6 Ill.2d 188, 237 Ill.Dec. 755, 710 N.E.2d 385 (1999), for the proposition that “[w]hen a court’s power to act is controlled by statute, the circuit court is governed by rules of limited jurisdiction and must proceed by the statute’s stricture.” We note that the circuit court also relied on Gebis. The circuit court’s and Gregory’s reliance on Gebis was and is misplaced.

In 1999, prior to our supreme court’s decision in Steinbrecher, the court in Gebis limited a circuit court’s jurisdiction where the “circuit court’s power to act is controlled by statute.” Gebis, 186 Ill.2d at 193, 237 Ill.Dec. 755, 710 N.E.2d 385. The Gebis court reasoned that in those cases, “the circuit court is governed by the rules of limited jurisdiction and must proceed within the statute’s strictures.” Gebis, 186 Ill.2d at 193, 237 Ill.Dec. 755, 710 N.E.2d 385. However, Gebis relied on In re M.M., 15,6 Ill.2d 53, 189 Ill.Dec. 1, 619 N.E.2d 702 (1993), which was overruled regarding its subject matter jurisdiction holding by three subsequent supreme court cases, People ex. rel. Graf v. Village of Lake Bluff, 206 Ill.2d 541, 552-54, 276 Ill.Dec. 928, 795 N.E.2d 281 (2003), Belleville Toyota, Inc. v. Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc., 199 Ill.2d 325, 337, 264 Ill. Dec. 283, 770 N.E.2d 177 (2002), and Steinbrecher, 197 Ill.2d at 529-30, 259 Ill.Dec.

[916 N.E.2d 56]

729, 759 N.E.2d 509 (the Belleville trio). In In re Alex T., 37,5 Ill.App.3d 758, 314 Ill.Dec. 85, 873 N.E.2d 1015 (2007), we explained the holdings of the Belleville trio as follows:

“Since the Steinbrecher decision, the supreme court has continued to reject the principle of statutorily limited jurisdiction in general civil cases while accepting it in criminal cases, at least those involving the trial court’s authority to impose a specific sentence. On the civil side, the supreme court in Belleville Toyota and Graf reaffirmed its position that the legislature cannot limit the circuit court’s jurisdiction.” Alex T., 375 Ill.App.3d at 762, 314 Ill.Dec. 85, 873 N.E.2d 1015.

Therefore, the citation to Gebis for the proposition that the circuit court’s subject matter jurisdiction was limited by section 11a-18(d) of the Probate Act fails. The circuit court had original subject matter jurisdiction over the trusts. See Steinbrecher, 197 Ill.2d at 529-30, 259 Ill.Dec. 729, 759 N.E.2d 509.


On appeal, the Public Guardian and the GAL also argue that the circuit court erred by finding that it lacked personal jurisdiction over Gregory as trustee of the Evelyn and Peter Pellico trusts. The Public Guardian and the GAL contend that Gregory was properly served as an interested person and that he waived objection to personal jurisdiction by filing responsive pleadings and motions and representing himself to the court as the trustee before objecting to personal jurisdiction. Not surprisingly, Gregory argues, both in his appellee’s brief and in his own appeal, that the circuit court lacked personal jurisdiction over him as the trustee because no service of process was served on him as the trustee, he first appeared as a pro se litigant, he requested a continuance to obtain counsel, and objection to jurisdiction was made “at the first practicable opportunity.”

We review de novo a circuit court’s dismissal of a complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction. KSAC Corp. v. Recycle Free, Inc., 364 Ill.App.3d 593, 594, 301 Ill.Dec. 418, 846 N.E.2d 1021 (2006). A circuit court can acquire personal jurisdiction over a party by the consensual authority of a voluntary appearance. GMB Financial Group, Inc. v. Marzano, 385 Ill.App.3d 978, 984, 326 Ill.Dec. 81, 899 N.E.2d 298 (2008).

Before 2000, a defendant seeking to appear before the circuit court to contest the exercise of personal jurisdiction was obliged to file a special appearance pursuant to section 2-301(a) of the Code of Civil Procedure (Code). 735 ILCS 5/2-301(a) (West 1998). Effective January 1, 2000, the amended section 2-301(a), and the entirely new section 2-301(a-5) (see 735 ILCS 5/2-301(a-5) (West 2006)), contain an explicit waiver provision that now provides for waiver of an objection based on personal jurisdiction only if the party files a responsive pleading or a motion (other than seeking an extension of time to answer or otherwise appear) before filing a motion asserting the jurisdictional objection. KSAC, 364 Ill.App.3d at 595, 301 Ill.Dec. 418, 846 N.E.2d 1021. In KSAC this court explained: “A pleading `consists of a party’s formal allegations of his claims or defenses,’ and a motion is `an application to the court for a ruling or an order in a pending case.'” KSAC, 364 Ill.App.3d at 597, 301 Ill.Dec. 418, 846 N.E.2d 1021, quoting In re Marriage of Wolff, 35,5 Ill. App.3d 403, 290 Ill.Dec. 1011, 822 N.E.2d 596 (2005).

[916 N.E.2d 57]

In this case Gregory not only appeared before the circuit court, albeit pro se, but filed a responsive pleading to the Public Guardian’s emergency petition for guardianship, entitled a “Responsive Declaration of Gregory Pellico to Robert I. Mork’s Emergency Petition for Guardianship of the Person and Estate of Evelyn Pellico,” before his attorney filed an objection to personal jurisdiction. This “Responsive Declaration” contended that, if any guardian were appointed on Evelyn’s behalf, it should be her sister. Also, prior to Gregory’s attorney’s objection to jurisdiction, Gregory represented himself as trustee of his mother’s “trust” to the circuit court. Because Gregory filed a responsive pleading and represented himself as trustee to the circuit court before his attorney objected to personal jurisdiction, Gregory waived any objection to personal jurisdiction. See 735 ILCS 5/2-301(a), (a-5) (West 2006).

So, if you intend to object to jurisdiction, an objection to jurisdiction must be your first pleading–ie, a motion or response.  If you file nothing, then there it would seem that you have not waived your right to object to jurisdiction.

I will continue to look at cases, but this case seems quite important where the Probate courts are dealing primarily with pro se litigants, summonses and complaints are not served and many adult children and siblings are not being served their Sodini notices.

Another call upon attorneys to do the right thing.

Dear Readers;

One of the interesting things is that I have learned if you want to (often because you have to) file a complaint with the ARDC, it is best to fax it in after hours.  I can only assume that the staff there, when they see a large fax come in, they shut off the fax machine for awhile.  I note longer faxes (my 15 to 25 or more pages, which I receive at my office all the time, no problem on my $2500 copier), do not get through during the day.  My suggestion to the ARDC is to just get an efax for $12 per month for longer faxes which will just come into any email account.

While a I sent Atty Black at the ARDC a copy of John Howard Wyman’s book last month, apparently no investigation has come from that.  So I faxed in a formal complaint during the day last week and my efax (which I love), came back as “unsuccessful transmission.”


So yesterday, I sent her the faxes.  You know, the one with John’s highly excellent 48 “talking points” he sent to the FBI to investigate and also to the US attorney’s offices Atty John McKenzie, who “promised to start an investigation”, but then it turned out he was investigating Kim Timmerwilke a bit too closely and they got married instead — breaking up two long term relationships.

In any case, attached is a copy of the complaint regarding John Howard Wyman’s case wherein the court is operating without jurisdiction for 3 years, and then when I went in on the hearing, the attys just lied about everything.  Judge Fabiano never issued and order, so then what happened, she sent a letter asking the attys Timmerwilke-McKenzie to turn in their “fee petitions” so she can award sanctions against “the parties.”

Another prime example of shoot the messenger and not the miscreant.

Monday out goes the Emergency Notice of Appeal, Docketing Statement and Request to Prepare the record in response to all of this nonsense.

Of course, Attys Timmerwilke and Rudy could have simply done the right thing and asked the judge to dismiss the case based upon lack of jurisdiction and just told the truth, but I guess that did not occur to them.

The record is clear.  No Sodini notices were served on the adult sisters and all the children.  There is no testimony, no certificates of service in the file, and it appears that Winifred Carol Wyman was in the hospital and there was no summons, complaint and affidavit of service.

No basics.

See the attached complaints at:

ARDC Wyman Complaint File No. 1

ARDC Wyman Complaint File No. 2

I don’t like filing these.  It would have been easier if Attys Rudy and McKenzie would have just said, “your honor, I’m sorry, but there is no jurisdiction.  We looked at our files and the court files and we could not find any Notice of Time, Date and Place of Hearing served 14 days in advance upon all the adult children of Carol Wyman.  We are truly sorry.  A serious mistake was made for which we humbly apologize.”

I have had to dismiss cases for lack of jurisdiction (generally in FED where the 5 day note was grossly improper, not served personally, etc.) and you just have to do it as an (honest, ethical) attorney.

Have a good day


PS–on the second try, the longer faxes went through, no problem. But that’s just a pain for me.

efiling–one of the MOST pressing problems in state court

Dear Readers;

From the time I was admitted to the bar way back in 1985, one of the problems I found is that when attorneys made errors or forgot something or no longer wanted something in the file, it would just appear or disappear!

In 2000 all the Federal Courts went to efiling on a system called Pacer.  Now, I am certain that’s because efiling is immune to court record tampering and I submit for your amusement the fact that federal court went to efiling first is because that system abhors file tampering, whereas 10 years later in most of Illinois, the system is not efiling, there is no public access to most of the system on line and the court’s filing system in Illinois is a dinosauric, antediluvian tragedy which I have been ticked off about since 2000 when the federal court system went to efiling but the states are lumbering along.

I know this will put a ton of (unskilled, paper shuffling) file clerks out of business in favor of a rarified smaller group of IT specialists, but civilization moves ahead in time with or without you.

Small children know how to operate a cell phone, text, tweet, facebook, myspace, build and operate their own webpages, etc. but our nation’s state court system simply cannot tolerate such forward thinking.

And in case you’re wondering about all those 80 + year attys toddling about federal court, yes, Virgina, they finally let them forego Pacer and walk up to the pro se desk with all the other pro se’ers and file there.  I don’t personally have a problem with that.  I think if an older attorney files an affidavit that he or she (but that was a time when women could not be attorneys, but I will save that for another post), still thinks a post is something you hitch a horse to, and a tweet is something birds do, and myspace refers to the bathroom or something, by all means I think THEY and only such attorneys should be allowed to still paper file anything.

Getting back to my point, it truly irks me that while Obama has mandated EMRS or electronic medical records by 2014, where is our nation’s court system on this position?

Why is there no hue and cry that court records and files MUST be electronic by that date also.

see the article at:

And before you think that HIPAA is any great shakes, you should know that during a recent case I had taken on briefly, I was shocked to find out that HIPAA has no remedy!  That’s right folks.  If your doctor, pharmacist or any other health care provider publishes your medical records online to secure payment because you did not pay a bill–nothing to sue over.  It’s true.  There’s nothing in the statute, and only 3 Illinois cases have looked at this and the Ill. App. Ct. said, hey, there’s no remedy for a HIPAA violation.  So next time you’re at your docs and they blame something irksome on HIPAA you can just turn to them and say, so what?  There is no remedy and no violation and if you wanted to, you could paper the bathroom walls with any medical record you want and I can’t do anything about it, so don’t blame HIPAA.  I believe HIPAA was created so that insurance companies could freely exchange med info to slap unsuspecting insureds with the dreaded “pre existing condition” and lying about your med records to deny or increase your coverage.  I guess with Obama, that’s dead, but HIPAA is not and it only allows insurers to freely pass around your medical information DESPITE the fact it was touted as a law to protect the consumer!

Go hug a lawyer today for telling you the truth.  The statute was a scam and should be repealed.  What a load of junk.

And where was AARP on this issue when they recommended HIPAA?  Out selling overprice medicare supp insurance, that’s where they were.

Getting back to efiling, I know that the Rockford court system in Illinois was granted $80 million to implement it and what they have is a horrid sham.  Well, except for the fact I have been in Rockford and the Winnebago court system and every person out there can tell horrible stories of being shafted by a corrupt court system.

This has to end.  Obama, get in there and give us CLEAN court systems via electronic filing.

I have talked to the dudes at Pacer.  They claim they can come in and within a month set up a court filing system on efile from soup to nuts, in about a month and for minimal cost.

What is going on with our court system, that’s what I want to know.

thanks for listening

PS–okay, the cases on HIPAA were a bit of overkill.  If your doc plasters his bathroom with your medical reports, or publishes them online, etc., you CAN still sue.  The Illinois courts have adopted the tort of “intrusion of seclusion” which came from the common law, and when I say common law, that means some court in England from centuries ago.  It’s amazing how the “common law” is better than an expensive, insurance company touted legislation that does nothing whatsoever for consumers except let one insurance company rat on you to another.  That stinks.

Letters from KD still calling for an investigation

Dear Readers;

I supposed since a police officer from the Naperville police dept was called by LB as a witness to “Ken’s misconduct” in calling for an investigation, and Senator Kirk did not testify against him, Richard Durbin or anyone from the Department of Justice in Washington DC, I would assume these letters are proper.

It is only complaints to Attys Cynthia Farenga, Adam Stern and police officers in Naperville that complaints are improper!

See attached and we are all still wondering when anyone out there in criminal justice will take a look at the fact at the following criminal and wrongful misconduct which is created when a probate court clearly operates without jurisdiction in Sykes (conversion, wrongful eviction, false imprisonment, etc.); Tyler, Gore, Bedin, Wyman (conversion, Medicare fraud, false imprisonment, violations of 42 USC 1983, etc.)

It is clearly a mystery to me.  I still think both Ken and I have to get jobs at the ARDC and the US Atty’s offices so that someone there will actually DO something about all the bias and corruption in probate court.




From Ken Ditkowsky — a form for requsting an accounting.

A form is guide as to the basics.    (These are Ken’s comments on WestlawNext – HORNER–PPE, § 50:22. Citation to compel accounting and settlement—Forms—Petition for citation, available at any law library.  Chicago has a great public and free law library on the 29th floor of the Daley center).
I am suggesting that this form be used by an ‘interested person’ to require the guardian/executor or other appointed individual to account.   For instance, in the Sykes case I am suggesting to Gloria/Kathy/Aunt Jo/Aunt yo and/or other interested persons to ask for an accounting for Carolyn.   For instance, the petition should disclose:
1) We know that Mary was a millionaire.   She had inherited from her husband and from Albert Biddy gold coins worth at this point in time over a million dollars. We also know that she had a safety deposit box that also had Gloria’s name on it and this safety deposit box was drilled by Carolyn.   (This is the safety deposit box that Cynthia Farenga testified that neither she or Adam Stern went to observe and Carolyn had free rein over it).    We also know that Mary had money of her own, and in particular there were funds that she had in a mattress.  Finally there was jewelry, antiques etc.
2) Under Illinois law being appointed a guardian does not create a forfeiture of the ‘ward’s assets’ but it places the guardian in a fiduciary relationship to the ward.   Ergo, there is not only a statutory duty to account for all of the assets, but a common law duty.    The published form provides a guide as to what should be said and is an acknowledgement that even those persons (including guardians and guardian ad litem) who are governed by Title XIa of the Probate act have to comply with this duty.
The time to take off the gloves is right now.    There is no reason for the State of Illinois and the United States of America not to collect the taxes due created by the taxable event of the plenary guardian not inventorying assets that she obtained in the raid on the safety deposit box, the house etc.    One has to be an idiot not to be suspicious of the fact that neither the plenary guardian or the two Guardian ad Litems have not made application for fees – why should they – over a million dollars of assets have not been inventoried.   The Wizard of Oz has not made the million dollars disappear.    It is logical that the two guardian ad litem and the plenary guardian who are trying desperately to vitiate the First Amendment Rights of persons (including me) who have spoken out have some ‘role’ in the non-inventory of the substantial assets.
Ken Ditkowsky


From John Wyman – 48 talking points–to the FBI

This is from a letter that John Wyman sent to the FBI.  I don’t know when that letter was sent, but so far nothing has become of it.

The letter was sent to the US Dept of Justice attorneys at 219 S. Dearborn St, 5th Floor in Chicago, IL 60604, but so far, nothing has come from this obvious fraud.  Do you think I should put in an application to work there?  Obviously, whatever attys are there are not doing their job.

Yeah, I think Ken and I need to apply there–tomorrow.  I’ll call them for an application and submit a resume.
I think John Howard Wyman did a wonderful job on this and I want to thank him for doing this and being proud to share it with us.

see below and take care all.

PS–please excuse formatting errors and some typos.  It was scanned in and OCR’ed, and we all know how those computers are!


Department of Justice, 219 S. Dearborn, 5th floor, Chicago, IL
Thank you for reviewing the Elder Abuse case involving my mother, Winifred Carol Wyman. Her birthday is 12/26/31. Winifred Carol Wyman’s case number is 2009 P-197 in the 17th Judicial District of Northern Illinois, Winnebago County. I believe mine and my mother’s civil rights have been violated for the last three years.
I will present my case in chronological order to the best of my abilities. I’ve studied intensely Elder Abuse and the law for the last three years.
1) December 2008 – I saw my mother at my father’s, aka Powell Wyman, sister’s house, aka Pam Freeman. She appeared fine at that time except for missing most of her teeth due to neglect by my father.
2) January 3, 2009 – I received a frantic call from my father’s sister, Pam Freeman, that my mother was refusing to go into a nursing home and my youngest brother, aka David Wyman, needed help putting her there. (Physiological Abuse) is threatening elder senior citizens with placement in a facility that they do not want or need. After call to my brother, David Wyman, he assured me he could handle it himself.
3) March 3, 2009 – My father and brother, David, doctor shopped for a licensed clinical social worker, Bruce Person, LCSW. He found no sign of dementia or need for placement in a facility and said my father refused to sit in on the exam and that he was angry and defiant in the reception area when addressed. My father has been both physiologically and physically abusive to his wife and his children as long as I can remember. At some point my mother is prescribed Aricept. My father denied my mother medication saying he can’t afford meds. Denial of medication is another form of Elder Abuse.
4) April 3, 2009 – An incident happened at 1704 Belmont Blvd. Rockford, IL, my parent’s home, where my mother called the police on my father. The police arrived and found my mother alone and confused. My father was nowhere around. When he finally arrived, the police interviewed both my parents and because my mother allegedly threaten to shoot my father (even though there are no guns in the house and she didn’t know how to use one) the police made the decision to take my mother to Swedish American Hospital for a psychiatric hold.
S) April 2009 – In reports, my father admits giving my mother his sleeping pills (Ambien) to control her after she drank with him. A clear violation of Federal Law.  My mother has had stomach reduction surgery years ago and cannot drink alcohol at all.  Even a small amount will make her drunk and sick.  My father knew this at the time.
6) April 12, 2009 – Nine days stay in psychiatric ward – my father had my mother moved
around to different areas of the hospital to keep her away from another brother, aka Bill
Wyman, when he came to see her because Bill didn’t agree with our father’s actions.
Isolating her from other family members is another form of Elder Abuse according to IL state law.
7) April 2009 – Mid April, my mother was moved to the dementia unit at Alden Park
Strathmoor nursing home. I contacted my brother, David, and he states our mother had
her chance to go to assisted living. He said she is where she belongs (Alden Park
Strathmoor/dementia unit) and hung the phone up on me. I contacted my father and his first question was do you have any girlfriends in Rockford. I can’t get it up anymore, I’m lonely and I need someone to cook and clean for me. I replied that is what you had a wife for!)

8) April 2009 – My father isolated my mother by restricting all outside communication which included the use of the phone to call family members. Abuse again.
9) May 9, 2009 -I, aka John Howard Wyman, fly to Rockford to assess the situation myself. I arrived with my brother Bill at noon at Alden Park Strathmoor nursing home to visit our mother. My brother Bill has been put on the “no call no see list” with other family members by our father. Even though medicated, our mother looks and acts fine – not at all like the other patients.
10) May 9,2009 – Our father appears looking surprised to see me. After a casual conversation, I asked him if we could take mom out to celebrate Mother’s Day and my birthday also inviting him to join the family. The answer was “no” because she is not allowed to leave the home.
I go to the front desk to ask if the home does anything special for families on Mother’s Day. The receptionist states they couldn’t handle the volume of people but we could sign her out for the day. My father is standing behind me listening. As I turn to talk to him, He walks away. I then ask the receptionist who has Power of Attorney (POA). She just points in my father’s direction. My father turns around, comes back to the desk, and agrees to go to Mother’s Day brunch then leaves.
11) May 10, 2009 – The family (me, Bill and his children) shows up at nursing home to take our mother/grandmother to brunch. We wait for our father but he doesn’t show up. I try to contact him only to get a hold of his sisters (Pam). Pam informs me that he is not coming and that our mother cant’s go with us. Our mother says she wants out. I tell her I’ll come and get her tomorrow. More isolation for her!
12) May 11, 2009 -I show up at the nursing home with POA and witnesses Mom sign the
papers. After showing the nurse the POA, we gather her things to leave only to be kept
“locked in” for approximately 8 minutes. We pleaded with them to let us go. One can’t
hold US citizens against their will. Finally, out of the building and into the car. Seven police officers showed up with my father and stopped us from leaving the nursing home. After 20 minutes, they told me they didn’t understand the POA and that after I get it notarized I could take my mother tomorrow. I relented and took her back into the nursing home stating to the nurses not to medicate my mother. On my way out of the building 2 health care workers told me that my mother didn’t belong there. I asked them if they would testify for my mother. They said “no” because they would lose their jobs.
13) May 12,2009 -I show up at the nursing home with POA and waited for police. One officer arrived and told me I couldn’t take her even though the POA was correctly notarized because an emergency guardianship was in the pipeline. I found out later that it wasn’t going in front of a judge until May 14.
14) May 13, 2009 – An Order of Protection (OOP) was served at 6:00AM to 6 family members, namely, myself, Bill, three of Bill’s children and his son’s fiancee. It made no sense. Two of the OOP were totally unwarranted! Bill’s son Mark, aka Mark Wyman, and Mark’s fiancee were not involved. On these two unwarranted OOP, my father totally lied. Perjury is a class 4 felony. My nephew, Mark, and his fiancee are pursuing careers in health care and law enforcement. I went to the state police, which is part of “triad,” and was assigned to Dave Sam Thomas. Before meeting with him, I called District Attorneys, aka DA, office in reference to the two unwarranted OOPs. They told me it was a felony but weren’t interested in pursuing the charge. After meeting with Detective Thomas he told me he understood but his hands were tied.
15) May 2009 – I went to my attorney, aka JF Heckinger, and he informed me that the public guardian, Sharon Rudy, was my father’s attorney and that she was one of his best friends and we should be able to work this out He would see her and me back in Rockford June 16,2009 for the OOP hearing.
16) June 15,2009 – After I arrived in Rockford, I called attorney, JF, and he said he would see me in court June 16. The six of us that had been served the OOPs were in court plus Bill’s family attorney. My brother’s attorney, my attorney, JF, and my father’s attorney, Sharon Rudy, went into the judge’s chambers and “cut a deal.”  If I don’t pursue my father’s perjury charges they will vacate they OOP so my nephew, Mark, and his fiancee would be able to pursue their careers. “I fell on my sword.” When the judge gave his order, he stated that the OOPs were without meri;t however, this would be reinstated if we violated them. Didn’t make sense!  And this will turn out to create a situation where my mother is nearly killed in an abusive nursing home.  Without the “good” children who cared to come see her and make sure she is fine, the nursing home she is put in is abusive and neglects her medical care.
17) June 2009 – Still having my mother’s POA, I pursued my mother’s medical records. Before her adjudication, the physician hospital diagnosed her homicidal, suicidal, dementia, Alzheimer, alcoholism and schizophrenia.
18) June 2009 – I went to the visiting nurses association. They told me the reason my mother was removed from her home was for her own safety. They said the home was unfit to live in. I tried to explain to them that my father was the hoarder–and he was living there. My explanation fell on deaf ears only to find out later they were picking up attorney, Sharon Rudy’s fees.
19) June 16-19, 2009 – Saw my attorney, JK, and gave him Bruce Person, the LCSW, name because he was to testify at my mother’s adjudication on July 9, 2009. Attorney, JF, said he would draw up motion and send it. I received motion draft and it all but buries my mother.  I called attorney, JF, and told him not to summit it and that I would see him in court with Bruce Person, LCSW and other witnesses.
20) June 2009 – I received a call from Bruce Person, LCSW. He had spoken to my attorney, JF Heckinger and that JF stated he would do a better job if I would pay him. I called my attorney, JF, and told him he should not be discussing our business with anybody but me. At that point, I told him I would pay the balance on at court.
21) June 2009 – Before my return to Rockford, I spoke with the Guardian Ad Litem, aka GAL, Ruth Robertson, as she is the eyes and ears for the court. I filled her in on the situation of my mother’s denial of medical, health and dental care, the isolation from her family which includes her two sisters, Marilynn Cook/Colorado and Phyllis Campbell/North Carolina, and the repeated lifelong physiological and psychological abuse by my father.
22) July 2009 – I called my attorney, JF, before leaving for Rockford for the July 9 hearings. I arrived at court house at 8:45AM with my mother’s LCSW, Bruce Person. We waited until 9:15AM when a bailiff walks by and tells us there is no court today. I go to county clerk’s office to find out what went on. I am told that attorney, Sharon Rudy, had walked the case in on July 6th with my attorney, JF, and GAL, aka Kim Timmerwilke. I read the order and my attorney, JF, objected to my father being guardian as did my mother. The attorneys knew that the LCSW, Brian Person, and I were to be in court July 9th to testify that my father was abusive and a hoarder and should be removed from the home so my mother could live there safely. This is a direct violation of our due process of law to present evidence – a federal law.
23) I go to the DA’s office to complain only to have my attorney, JK, walk in for another case. He asked me what am I doing here -I said you did not tell me not to be here.
24) July 2009 -I met with GAL, Kim, and she told me she had met with my mother on July 4th at Strathmoor. Kim said my mother was delusional. At that time I told Kim about LCSW, Bruce Person, report and she said she would not believe a thing he said. She also stated that my mother requested an attorney to which she said she did not think my mother was serious. Another federal violation of my mother’s Constitutional Rights!
25) July 2009 – During this time I tried to obtain an attorney for my mother through Prairie State Legal Services. I was told that my mother had to call herself. My mother was not allowed to use a phone per my father’s orders at Strathmoor. Later, I found out that attorney, Sharon Rudy and JF Heckinger were on the board of Prairie State Legal Services. Collusion?? Conflict of interest?
26) July 12, 2009 – My mother’s sister, Marilynn, called the Rockford police from Colorado requesting a wellness check on her sister, Winifred Carol Wyman, institutionalized at Strathmoor. My mother had told her she has been beaten. The police do welfare checks but stated they did not think it was their jurisdiction. The Illinois Dept. of Health did an investigation and found that Strathmoor nursing staff failed to report and failed to protect.
My mother was beaten on July 4, 2009 by another patient. My father refused to press
charges. One of his duties as guardian is to protect and report harm to my mother. Later, GAL, Kim, admitted she saw bruises on my mother’s face. She is a mandated reporter. It is a further crime not to document/report.
27) July 27,2009 -I am back in Rockford to present information on my mother’s beating to judge, Lisa Fabiano. I am told I would have to wait until September 16th. LCSW, Bruce
Person, is ordered to do another evaluation on my mother and I am ordered to pay for his findings. The nursing home placement was not necessary because my mother scored 28 out of a possible 30 on the mini dementia test at Strathmoor in court. ????
28) July 31, 2009 – Evidently, my mother’s situation at Strathmoor had shed too much notoriety on the institution. They wanted her gone so she was transferred to another facility. My father did not have time to isolate her at the new home. My mother asked to use the telephone and called, from memory, her hairdresser to come help her do her laundry. The hairdresser picked my mother up and my mother requested to be driven to Colorado. When I first see her, she has a bruised jaw, blacken eye and a large knot on her forehead. She is extremely anemic. I get the necessary medical care for her. I take my mother every week to the doctor for iron and B12 shots. The judge, Lisa Fabiano, lets me keep her acknowledging that I was doing a good job. I am HAPPY and cannot believe with my mother’s diagnosis of homicidal and suicidal behavior that they let me keep her.
29) September 16, 2009 – Before the hearing, attorney, JF, asked to be excused from the case. I go PRO SE. I am smelling collusion–and lies. They ask me when it is convenient for me to come back for a hearing and I tell them November 30, 2009. At this next hearing, I will present evidence. They request for my phone number again so my father may call his wife. He never calls.
30) September 2009 – While still in Rockford, my roommate calls saying my mother was
complaining of chest pains. My roommate takes my mother to the emergency room. The Doctor admits her to the hospital because she is two pints short of blood. If she had been in Illinois, she would have died. With the blood transfusion, it was like the lights had been turned on! I keep the GAL, Kim, informed on my mother’s recovery during this time.
31) November 30,2009 -I return to Rockford for hearing and file the motion my attorney, JF, had prepared so I could present evidence in court. Attorney, Sharon Rudy, objects to everything that I have to say. Attorney, Sharon Rudy, again requests my phone number because she has misplaced the number and that is why my father has not contacted my mother. The court sets January 7, 2010 for a status hearing. Attorney, Sharon Rudy, court ordered to obtain ID, social security card etc. for my mother. They also set value of estimate for the house at 1704 Belmont Blvd. at $101,000.00. (Turns out that value is lie only to put probate atty fee liens and medicare liens on the house to have it sold.  The clear value, after reviewing comps and talking to a Realtor is $60,000–this was done as a ruse to meet the medicare cut of off of $101,000 to prevent impoverishing a spouse, only homes over $104,000 can be sold to pay nursing home liens!)  I ask for my mother’s social security payments for September, October and November 2009. Federal law mandates that the money follows the person.  My mother needs clothes, food and living expenses!
32) January 7, 2010 – I return to Rockford for status hearing. In court, I asked attorney, Sharon Rudy, for my mother’s ID and social security card. Attorney, Sharon Rudy, does have these items but states she did not understand the order. Ignoring a court order is contempt. I told the judge that I had made my mother a Colorado citizen and asked for her social security checks and they said they would look into it. Also at this status hearing, they make me guardian of person but I would not receive papers until May 2010. I am taking care of all
my mother’s health and welfare needs with my old Power of Attorney Form. At this point in time, my father is in a nursing home. I made a request to bring my mother back to her home, 1704 Belmont Blvd/Rockford to live. Both attorneys objected, saying the house is too deplorable—yet it was perfectly fit for my father to live in from May of 2009 to January 2010! Attorney, Sharon Rudy, filed a “Motion to Show Cause” why I should not be sanctioned (for saving my mother’s life and taking her to Colorado)  for me to pay her and GAL, Kim, for my contemptuous behavior and kidnapping my mother, yet they agree I am doing a great job with my mother. Attorney, Sharon Rudy, still objects to me presenting evidence and accuses me of copying her motion (word for word verbatim) that I filed November 30,2009. It was the same motion that my attorney, JF, had drafted and billed me for as did attorney, Sharon Rudy. Doubled billed! More collusion? I do not know.  If a doctor would have engaged in such fraud in order to place a homeless person in a nursing home and taken fees for it, he will be given 15 years and put in federal prison for 15 years.  But when judges and attorneys do the exact same thing–medicare fraud by altering home price appraisals to put a senior in a nursing home, get guardianship and then sell the home to a “friend” or “business parter”, for some reason the FBI looks the other way.
33) March 2010 -I return to Rockford for another status hearing. They give me my letters of guardianship for my mother. I give my answers to RTSC and motion to set aside
adjudication. I started to gather medical and nursing home records. The nursing home
administrator asked outright if this was for a lawsuit.
34) April 2010 – My mother breaks her hip and ends up with medical delirium.
35) June 2010 – I bring my mother back to Rockford for hearing. We drove from Aspen to Chicago arriving on a Friday. I receive a phone call from GAL, Kim, saying I hope you have not left Colorado yet because court has been cancelled by attorney, Sharon Rudy. Attorney, Sharon Rudy, claims she has not had time to look over my answers. I am not happy. Judge Fabiano agrees to see me June 2. GAL, Kim, says she cannot attend and attorney, Sharon Rudy, will not be there either so I will be able to present my evidence. However, attorney, Sharon Rudy, shows up and objects to me presenting evidence.
36) July 2010 – I fly into Rockford on a Friday for the Monday hearing. Again court is cancelled late on that Friday. The judge, Lisa Fabiano, went on vacation to Italy. I cannot believe she did not know in advance about her pending vacation to Italy. My mother is in hospital in Colorado recovering from her condition. I keep the GAL, Kim, well informed. I then go to U.S. Attorney’s office next to GAL, Kim’s, office to file a complaint in reference my mother’s case against attorney, Sharon Rudy, GAL, Kim, and judge, Lisa Fabiano. The office refuses to hear my case. Only later, I find out that GAL, Kim, is having an affair with US attorney, aka John McKenzie. An attorney in that office. More collusion? I do not know?
37) July 2010 – The next hearing is to be held in late July. Judge, Fabino, apologizes for her absents and lets me appear by phone saying this must be getting expensive for me. I
request my mother’s back social security and again they say they will look into it. Nothing is accomplished. Final court date is set for late November 2010. I also informed the court that my father has plenary guardianship and has failed to obtain supplemental insurance for my mother. This created a mess for Medicaid after my mother’s broken hip.
38) November 30,2010 – My mother is doing better in rehab. I return to Rockford for the
hearing. It is the first time my father appears in court. By this time I have two file boxes full of evidence and conflicting reports created by different agency – Rockford police,
administration at Strathmoor and the courts. They see my boxes and ask if they could do this in judge’s chambers. I agree with the understanding that the atmosphere would be more open and friendly. Did not happen. Every time I spoke, attorney, Sharon Rudy,
objected. Again, I asked for my mother’s social security checks and attorney, Sharon Rudy, advised me that they were going to use the social security for my mother’s share of the legal fees. This is in direct violation of federal law! A lien was filed against the house at 1704 Belmont Blvd. and they had it appraised. I informed them how my mother was doing and that she was coming back to my house to live. They also ordered me to pay my share of GAL, Kim’s, and attorney, Sharon Rudy’s, bills, basically for saving my mother’s life. My father was ordered to pay my mother’s bills through attorney, Sharon Rudy. My father is still living in the deplorable house (1704 Belmont Blvd.).
39) December 2010 – My mother is home with me again and I am taking her to Rockford for Christmas so she can celebrate with her grandchildren. My father had a heart attack and has been placed in a nursing home. When I heard this new, I immediately I called attorney, Sharon Rudy, to ask her again to allow my mother to be in her own home (1704 Belmont Blvd.). Again, she said the home condition was deplorable. I volunteered to clean it. No deal.
40) January 2011-1 have been sending my mother’s bill to attorney, Sharon Rudy, office only to have them returned to me. The office informed me that there are no funds to pay these bills. I should pay them out of the social security checks ($500.00) a month. That amount is all that she has to live on. It cost me an additional $10,000.00 a year for her care.
41) August 2011- I do not hear from the courts until I receive a notice by mail to sell my
parent’s home (1704 Belmont Blvd.) I make a phone call the day before hearing explaining that I cannot make the hearing so I file motion to vacate order. I then file another motion to set aside order and also file a Lis Pendes.
42) October 2011- Hearing is set for October 2011. I asked for a court date but never heard back from the court. I arrive at 11:45 on court date and call GAL, Kim. She says I failed to appear and have to reinstate my motions. I have sat in this courtroom for a 9:00AM hearings many times and have waited until noon. They would not hear my motion to re-file even after I re-filed. Their last minute cancellations oftwo court dates and my mother’s adjudication were moved up without notifying me. Does not seem fair.
43) December 2011- I am back in Rockford. After re-filing, I am not in front of the judge more than a minute and she upholds the sale of the house for 75% of the value of the house and all the cost involved. Furthermore, the cost for attorney, Sharon Rudy, and the new GAL, Atty Mrs. Kim McKenzie. I go to the U.S. Attorney’s office again to complain and again I am turned away. I think because GAL, Kim, and US attorney, John, are now married. More collusion?
44) March 2012 – My mother is allowed to go into her home (1704 Belmont Blvd.) for the first time in almost three years to tag her personal possessions. She is allowed to tag about 14 items. I record the whole house that I can see with a camcorder. Attorney, Sharon Rudy, enters the house with my mother’s caregiver and attorney, Sharon Rudy, states this is a real nice and at that point she tells the caregiver that she had not been in the house before! With the exception of the garage, all the other rooms were clean and livable. After taping for 45 minutes, since I am in town anyway, I offer to do a complete inventory. Attorney, Sharon Rudy, says no that the auction service would do it. While in town, I do an interview on a CBS news program in reference to the book I wrote on Elder Abuse.
45) May 11, 2012 – The court ordered that there would be an auction but would not be held until I went over the complete inventory list for all of my mother’s art supplies, art work and personal possessions etc., Attorney, Sharon Rudy, and GAL, Kim, tell Judge,  Lisa Fabiano, it is like a divorce without there being a divorce. My parents are still married! My brother, Bill, was told to pick up the 14 items that our mother had previously selected. I have to wait until Monday for the order to be handed down. This delays our trip back to Colorado.
46) May 2012 – We stayed just to sign the order Monday after the court hearing. GAL, Kim, saw my mother privately for 7 minute but claims that she was with her 20 minutes in court and states if my mother’s caregiver does not go to Colorado that they will revisit the case and try to place my mother in a nursing home in Illinois.
47) July 2012 – My brother, Bill, goes to house to retrieve my mother’s 14 selected items only to be given 4 of the items and was not allowed to look in the house. He looked in the windows and said that the house was empty and our mother’s stain glass is missing from the yard. Bill calls me to get a hold of GAL, Kim, to ask her for the rest of the 14 items on the list. GAL, Kim, said she would look into it and make sure attorney, Sharon Rudy, either emails or mail them to me. This has not happened yet… I get a call around the July 10th stating that they had a garage sale without my knowledge – another court order violation. They sold my mother’s life away against court orders. I made two calls and one e-mail to  GAL, Kim, but no reply from her as of yet and no inventory list from attorney, Sharon Rudy. I also saw Kevin O’Connell from Lisa Madigan’s office 1 am sure he will cooperate with the US Attorney’s office. They have trampled my mother’s and my rights with their collusion and complicity. There is more information to prove that all of these people should be investigated.
a. Sharon Rudy/Public Guardian and Attorney
b. Lisa Fabiano/Judge
c. Kim Timmerwilke McKenzie/GAL
d. John McKenzie/US Attorney
e. JF Heckinger/attorney
f. Alden Park Strathmoor/nursing home
g. District Attorney’s Office/Rockford, IL
h. U.S Attorney’s Office/Rockford, IL
48) July 2012 -I have written my mother’s story in book form called Against Her Will. The book has received national attention. Regardless of your decision to investigate our case, I have become an advocate against Elder Abuse.
Thank You Very Much,

John Howard Wyman

From Ken Ditkowsky, the gun is still smoking.

From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Nov 12, 2012 4:02 PM
To: Janet Nideb
Subject: Smoking gun – Did you see it?

I think we are at a juncture.   It is fish or cut bait!
I have in my possession an e-mail from Cynthia Farenga to a Illinois ARDC lawyer that is a smoking gun.    So that it does not disappear I published it by sending a copy to the United States Attorney General, Senator Kirk, Senator Dubin, and the ARDC itself.  I intentionally did not make any reference to the document that would make it stand out or even be noticed.   I then tested the waters by sending a copy of the document containing the ‘smoking gun’ to my elected representatives, law enforcement, my wife and also to a excellent and seasoned investigator.     To my surprise, the document passed by all the prying eyes totally un-noticed.  (so much for diligence and concern about the First Amendment)  There were also a few organizations that received copies of the document and again it passed un-noticed.
Let me assure you the ‘smoking gun’ will not continue for long to be passed over. like a cancer the ‘smoking gun’ will lie un-noticed until I think the time right to uncover it. I mention this little event because the time to get on the bandwagon and to mark your claims is right now.   This is your opportunity to be profound and get in position to say *****.
The public is getting restless – Grandma is being abused on the front parkway and too many people are watching and cheering the abuser.   It soon will be time to arrest and bring the rapists to Justice and administrate a little pain to the cheering multitude.  If you are with Grandma – send a letter to your elected representatives and local law enforcement and demand an honest investigation of such august people as the guardians and guardian ad litem who have done such a marvelous job in luring grandma to the rape site and stripping her naked of her liberty, her property, her human rights and her civil rights.   [However, if you are not with us – you are free and we will even help you send a letter to your elective representatives to disclose to him/her what terrible people we are and how reprehensible it is to interfere with ‘nature’ by stopping the rapists from ravaging Grandma!]
Ken Ditkowsky

How to Structure a Complaint — don’t be chatty

On of the things that comes up when I am working with a client on a complaint is that they want to be chatty!  Also in briefs, even when I have a 20 page limit and I have to cite caselaw, they want to dump the case law and get chatty!  No, it does not work that way.  Most business clients with a business degree understand and have no problems with that, but your average client that want to regurgitate all about her kitchen sink yesterday–yikes!

So, for all your pro se’ers out there and those of you permitted to have some input in your attys briefs, this post is dedicated to you.

And you know what?  I also have to dedicate it to new law school grads!  Because law schools are officially nuts and have no bearing in the real world, I have to spend hours and hours explaining basic procedure, steps, dealing with court hours employees, the details of depositions and structuring cases.  You name any practical, anything nuts and bolts, anything necessary to win your case and you can bet that a fresh law grad never heard of it.

Forget the bar exam–what about the practicalities of working in a law environment.

Getting back to the topic, here are the steps:

1) pick your jurisdiction.  Federal court is for federal laws generally and you might get dismissed for bring state legal breaches and torts in federal court.  Federal court is a court of limited jurisdiction.  Fortunately, all of it’s rules (about 95%) are set forth clearly and concisely in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Evidence, but of course, some you will have to get from case law.  State court takes longer and is more messy.  Plus, the decisions can be not too great and much poorer and biased because the judge loves your OC who works for some big law firm he wants to join some day.  It can be disappointing.  But the best way to combat that is to show the court you have a good case, OC and his client is scum and lies all the time, and you will not lie.  After a while when you show you are trustworthy, the judge will likely warm up to you.

2) Watch your “limitations” period.  If you are at or near a deadline, there are some great lists on the internet for seeing what your deadline is based upon your “counts” or “causes of action.”  You might want to see an attorney or look up further case law for more information.  A case in your jurisdiction in your court is the best case for you to use.  In Chicago there is a fabulous law library open to the public on the 29th floor of the Daley center in Chicago.  The law librarians (most have a law degree, but may not be admitted to the bar), are typically very nice and helpful, having worked in a fairly stress free environment.

3)  Start writing the complaint.

A complaint is always “a clear and concise” statement of numbered facts and issue that will entitle you to the relief you are seeking.  It is not a time to be chatty.  It is not a time to write a novel, but if you want to attract attention to your case, writing a novel like John Howard Wyman did is a great idea.  He did a wonderful job.


a)  Title.  The title of your complaint should be the counts you are bringing.  For example “Complaint for 42 USC section 1983, Abuse of Process, Malicious Prosecution, Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress”–it should name your basic counts.  If you are doing pro se try not to file more than 3 counts.  One or two is best.  I have a small law firm, and believe me, even with putting 3 attorneys on the case, it is hard to do 5 or 6 counts.  Don’t file more than you are willing to try.  You can change these around later by filing an “amended complaint” which often occurs after discovery and depositions and you see all the dirty tricks your opponent has pulled behind your back.

b) the next step is a basic introduction naming all the counts and the defendants and a one sentence statement of why you are bringing the law suit, ie, “wrongful guardianship of a competent woman”

c) Jurisdiction and Venue.  If you are filing in federal court, this will be trickier because the statute should say you can file there.  Not all federal claims can be brought in federal court.  Federal court is a court of limited jurisdiction because the states have rights to glom on to probably 90% of the litigation out there with their crazy, elected (and often obviously biased) judges and court system.  Federal court is a special exception so you will have to find it in a statue or court ruling you can bring your claim there.  Often it is the opposite where a federal case says your claim, even if federal is “not important enough” to get into federal court and you are stuck in state court.  The good news is, state courts rarely hand out sanctions, the judge has to be really mad at you or really biased.  Most of the time you and your opponent can say anything and the court just sighs.  So you will have to say “jurisdiction is proper because all the defendants reside in this jurisdiction and the acts complained of occurred in this jurisdiction.”  Then a statement of venue (that’s the best court in the jurisdiction, and the statement is typically “venue is proper because all the actions complained of took place in this court’s area.”

c) next, bring a count one.  Carefully research your count one and find out what the “elements” of that count are.  Then read through a few cases and try to find one that is either very close or exactly like yours.  Make sure you have made a list of the elements.  Write down a short list of the facts in your case that would make up those elements. Save that list for later.

c) bring your next 2 or 3 counts via the same process.  Find a case and/or statute in your jurisdiction or state.  Write down the elements.  Write down the basic and concise fact that would comprise your claim against the defendants.

d) start writing.  take your clear concise list of facts and start a section entitiled “statement of facts and parties” or introduce the parties first and then the facts that comprise elements of your cliam.

e) write up a count .  Count I for violation of 42 USC section 1983.  Refer to what facts support those claims by paragraph number, say paragraphs 1 to 20, etc.  At this point you might want to add in a few more (2 or 3 please, not a dissertation), that help establish that claim.  Close this section with what relief you want.  Do you want an injunctions, actual damages, punitive damages, exceptional damages.  Add in attorneys fees if you will have those by hiring an attorney that will appear for you at a later day.  Perhaps you want your attorney only for trial and the statute allows attorneys fees.  You can do that.  If you find you are entitled to and want an injunction because you found it in a case, say that, ie, pursuant to case law in Illinois, Plaintiff asks for an injunction prohibiting “the filing of a CCPA211″ in the future.  If you can get punitive or exemplary damages pursuant to statute, write down the statute cite that entitles you to that, ie, pursuant to 755 ILCS sec X, Plaintiff asks for exemplary damage because the defendants behavior was extreme, cruel, willful, wanton and without justifiable excuse.  take this language directly from a case or statute, don’t just make it up and stick it in there.

Keep on writing additional counts until you are done.  Remember, you might have to try these, so if you are pro se, pick your two or three best and keep it short and simple.

At the end, write up a ‘conclusion” restating all the counts, the defendants you are bringing each count against (not all defendants might have engaged in all the illegal activites prohibited for each count, some might have statutory or case law immunity from liability).

Give a summary of this, eg:

a)  Plaintiff seeks an injurnction, treble damages and reasonable attorneys fees for Patent infringment under XXX USC secion XX against Defendants X and Y;

b) Plaintiffs seeks actual and exemplary damages for Trademark Infringement under XXX USC section XX against defendants A and B;

and so forth.  you can even add in c) and for all other just and equitable relief as this court determines to be appropriate.

Now for the hard part for some of you, esp. those pro-se’ers out there.  If your complaint is over 20 pages, it is too long.  You weren’t paying attention to the rule “short, clear and consise statement of facts and issues that would make up a claim for relief.”  Go back and start cutting or the court will think you are crazy.  No one wants to read how it affected your pet in 3rd grade.  Get that stuff out.  Clear and concise, not chatty and gabby, and Oh, wouldn’t this be great to add in?  Nope.  The court and OC will be laughing at you.  One paragraph for your introductory summary; 2, maybe 3 pages for your “statement of facts”, one to 1.5 pages for each count.  One page for a conclusion.  So if you think your case is going to the US Supreme Court, 2 pages for an introduction, 5 pages for statement of facts and parties, 4 counts 2 pages each, and a one page conclusion, that’s still only 15 pages, get it?

Most courts limit briefs to 20 pages double spaced, so get used to writing in a very concise manner, just stating the facts.

I don’t think I have even seen a fresh law school grad that can properly write up a complaint.

Most pro se people can barely do this, but I think it’s because they just need good instructions.

take care


Am I the target of a cover up at the ARDC?

From Ken Ditkowsky.  Do you think he’s right?  Is there anything there?

I have to admit, with all of the lack of jurisdiction and terrorizing of senior citizens and their families that I am learning about, it is clear there are a ton of not so “dirty little secrets” flowing around probate that clearly involve lack of jurisdiction.

For some reason, many probate judges and GAL’s have not figured out that 1) personal service of a summons and complaint upon the alleged disabled period is a requirement in order to attain jurisdiction over that person; and 2) Sodini notices must be served on all the close relatives defined as at least the adult children and siblings of an elderly person.  If the alleged disabled person is younger and might have parents, then the Petitioner must serve notice of the time, date and place of hearing.

I note on the Rockford forms, one GAL does mention the time, date and place and that is a great idea, but the address of the courthouse is omitted. The problem with this is that if the relative is from out of town, they should not have to look up that address.  It should be there on the form.

But it is the Petitioner who has the duty to set forth the time, date and place of hearing, and I believe those notices should be filed with the court, the judge should question closely if the Petitioner knows and has served all of the adult parents, children and siblings, and make sure the alleged disabled person was served.

According to the Illinois statute, the Clerk of Court should set a hearing date on a petition for plenary guardian within thirty days after it is file.

Just so you all know.  For many of you I am preaching to the choir.

take care and now from Ken Ditkowsky who has some amazing words of wisdom for today:

To: matt senator kirk <>
Subject: More on the Sykes case
Date: Nov 9, 2012 10:37 AM
The attempt to silence me was not successful and even the ARDC’s threats have not stopped me from continuing enjoy my First Amendment Rights.    It is now 3 1/2 years that Mary Sykes has been held hostage under color of law – but law without jurisdiction (see Article XIa of the Probate Act).    The stonewall continues unabated.
Attorney JoAnn Denison is now the target of the ARDC cover-up.   It is all explained in the letter to the ARDC   (Inquiry Panel).   It appears that while we slept the First Amendment privileges and immunities were abrogated for Lawyers.    If a lawyer addresses a prohibited subject – like corruption in our Courts – he subject to sanction.    If he complains that a favored individual has not inventoried a million dollars in gold coins – good-by!
As Ms. Denison communicated my call for an investigation and therefore placed herself in the gun sights I feel a responsibility toward her.   It never occurred to me that it was unethical to be an American and a lawyer in the same time period.  (see e-mail from Farenga – exhibit 3).     It never occurred to me that certain National Socialists enjoyed special rights over the rest of us peons that allowed them to censor our communications; however, ****
In all seriousness we need right now an HONEST, complete and comprehensive investigation of the Sykes case and the similar cases.   (see GAO report to Congress September 2010).    With the budget crisis at the local and federal level there is an incentive.   As the Guardian did not inventory the gold coins, it is very safe to assume that the Federal and State income taxes were also not paid.    With interest and penalties there should be million dollars due at this point in time.
Thank you for your courtesy – I know I am a pain in the lower regions, but, at 76 years old this fat old jewish guy still believes the virtues that made America great, and is not willing to attorn to *****.    In Greylord the legal profession (and especially the regulators) did not cover themselves with glory – in these elder abuse cases the second oldest profession is vying to be more disreputable than the first.
Ken Ditkowsky
—– Forwarded Message —–
From: Law Office Assistant <>
Sent: Friday, November 9, 2012 9:49 AM
Subject: ltrs to ARDC Kirk Durbin DOJ w attachments


Larry G. Chambers
Assistant Office Manager

847 600-3421

From Ken Ditkowsky–the complaints re Probate just keep on rolling in


The fight is the same in every one of these cases.    One group of victims have been subject to the tender mercies of Miriam Solo, another Farenga, another Stern, etc.    The result is always the same and the frustration coupled with a major shake of head in wonderment!     How could this happen in America?

Unfortunately we know how this happens!      Unfortunately when we go to the polls to vote some of us forget that voting party label or being fooled by one or more talking points is the way we got into this problem.    The years 1940 through 1945 did not teach a large number of us anything!    Thus, we are back in 1936 and the brown shirts and black shirts have changed their attire and their victims.     The new victims are the ‘elderly.’    The ‘keepers of the faith’ do not take out the teeth of the elderly for its gold and silver – collectibles are a richer booty!   In Sykes a million in gold coins is a nice prize.    All the miscreants have to do is shut up ‘Gloria’ and that ‘fat old Jewish guy’ who Cervantes memorialized and they have a million dollars tax free and unreported!

Guess what!     Scott Evans told me that I was not going to be invited to Adam Stern’s birthday party so I drafted another letter to the United States Attorney, the Illinois Attorney General, etc.    It in words and phrases states:

At this point in time very few days go by without my receiving a letter from a person who has been subjected to an encounter in which an elderly person has either been exploited or mistreated.    The Government Accounting Office has submitted a report to congress in which it was reported that Elder Abuse and Financial Exploitation of the Elderly are America’s “dirty little secret.”     Hundreds of seniors are being subjected to miscreant conduct by “respected attorneys,” “respected judges,” and “respected care givers.”

Enclosed is a letter that I received today by e-mail from (name redacted).      The letter speaks for itself.    Ms. (redacted) has great detail to support her allegations and to demonstrate how what had been the finest medical provider system has degenerated into Avarice, and disrespect for human dignity.    In the Sykes of record appear two doctors.    These doctors have quite interesting representations.   (They will be referred to as Dr. A and Dr. S).      By reputation, both are reported to have never found a patient (who had a few dollars in his/her jeans) who was not in need of 24/7 guardianship.       If President Obama or Governor Romney were to be ordered to appear for a competency test before Dr. A he would find neither able to take care of himself.   Dr. S is more clairvoyant and less subtle.    He found Ms. Sykes incompetent without even seeing her or reading all the medical records.

Thus, a premier medical facility is not bluffing when they threatened that a cloutless senior will be guardianized if the whim and caprice of the medical facility is not fostered–and removed from her family members .     Indeed, with Guardian ad litem such as Adam Stern and/or Cynthia Farenga in charge the helpless elder is ripe for whatever the plenary guardian desires.    In the Sykes case relieving Mary Sykes of about a million dollars in gold coins and 10% of her body weigh were well fulfilled goals.
I and others have been writing letters complaining of miscreant acts that are documented of record in the Sykes case and the other similar cases.    The Illinois ARDC feels that this activity is un-ethical as it reminds the public of the 17 judges who were provided free room and board in a Federal prison; however, Citizen Complaints against the two guardian ad litem and the attorney for the plenary guardian who have ignored the statutory protections promulgated by the Illinois legislature are not a concern for action.     It is reported that most of the Sykes file is now missing!      It is reasoned that if law enforcement were to examine the documents filed in the Circuit Court law enforcement would have to conclude that since day one of the Sykes case the Court at the behest of the two guardian ad litem and the Attorneys for the plenary guardian has been entering orders without jurisdiction.

Do not take my word, or the word of any of the thousands of victims of elder abuse/financial exploitation or their families!    We, the GAO, recently the American Broadcasting Corporation, and the complaining public are all liars!       Obviously, the Court reporter – whose transcript has now disappeared out of the Court file – made up the words and phrases that she recorded as no judge would ever give direction to a plenary guardian to go out and get a more co-operative medical provider so that a patently competent lady could be declared incompetent.    Indeed, when Mary Sykes was taken to Edwards Hospital having lost 10% of her body weight – it was a malpractice on the part of the hospital as CF said that it was a hallucination!     I by reporting the same was labeled a ‘liar’ by the attorney for the ARDC and asked by another if I was prepared to repent!   Therefore as a non-repentant sinner – please do not take my word.   Review the Court records – I submit – if the records have not gone in the ‘watergate’ file they will verify every single word that either I or the victims of elder abuse/financial exploitation have said – however – have a look for yourself.

Instead of taking my word or the words and families, the neighbors, or the cloutless taxpayers, please promulgate an ‘HONEST’, complete, and comprehensive investigation of the Sykes case, the Bedin case and all the similar cases.     It is an embarrassment that 1936 is here again and the Jews of the 21st century (who are slated to participate in the new holocaust) are the ‘elderly!’     It is horrific that the modern gestapo should be appointed by our judiciary.

Thank you for your courtesy and co-operation,

Yours very truly

Ken Ditkowsky

Ken Ditkowsky asks–Tomorrow is election day, can we make a change in court?

From Ken Ditkowsky:

      Talk is cheap.   Tomorrow is an election – it is not too late to send a message to some of our elected representatives who foster elder abuse/financial exploitation.      Everyone of us has received a letter from an elected representative who had told us how he/she is fighting for our social security in response to a complaint that grandma is being ‘raped’ by the system!       A vote against the letter writer might be a nice gesture.      Mark down the number of times that you have called on your elected representative and asked him to cause an HONEST comprehensive and complete investigation of horrible situations such as the Sykes case.     When you give a political contribution and/or your vote remember those representatives who were actively  supportive of grandma and her plight!
Once again – talk is cheap!    We need the investigation of attorneys Adam Stern, Cynthia Farega, Peter Schmiedel,  Carolyn Toerpe, et al.    We need to know how and why the Sodini protections were ignored in Sykes, Wyman, Tyler et al.    We need to know where the Sykes file disappeared to!     Indeed, we need to know why Stern, Farenga, Schmiedel, et al. have ARDC immunity and why the ARDC is protecting them.      The million dollars in gold coins that have not been inventoried in the Sykes case is only part of the explanation.

And from myself;

I am very, very disappointed in these elected officials, how they turn their back on calls from Ken Ditkowsky, the Sykes famiily, the Tylers, the Gores, etc.  You name it and the first thing these victims did was write their Federal and State Senators, Congressional Representatives, Congresspersons, the Presiding Judges (who are elected too), even the judges–and nary a bit of action.  Nada.
So tomorrow is time we voted them out and make it clear they will not receive campaign donations from their constituents who let grandma and grandpa waste away in nursing homes with estates pilfered by probate attys and Medicare when they could be living in their own homes.  The forced druggings, the beatings and the isolation, the bad nursing homes–after hundreds of complaints and reports just to this blog alone in one year is enough to make everyone wonder what is going on in the Illinois Capital and the US Capital that such complaints can be tolerated and ignored.
Nothing is not good enough for the elderly and disabled–those without a voice.
Our “civilization” must bring itself to be called “civilized” and that is by protecting grandma and not abusing her in our very own probate court system!


A Miriam Solo Deposition Example–words cannot describe

While running this blog (and even before), I have heard of a Probate attorney named Miriam Solo and a whole lot of complaints regarding her.

Apparently, her depositions speak for themselves, see attached:

Deposition example of Miriam Solo’s Talents and Abilities

There is yelling and screaming and talking over the witness, condescension at every turn–you name the bad behavior, it is there.

I don’t know what this woman (viper) was doing before she got to the deposition, but whatever it is, she needs to stop it.





Suing the Government–the difference between a 42 USC 1983 claim and bring a tort action

One of the interesting things about the government acting without jurisdiction–as in the Wyman case, the Gore case, the Tyler case, etc.  The next question is what do you sue them for.

Clearly the action is not over and the statute of limitations has not run unless and until the “close family” members file and win a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction or the ward dies, and we know that oftentimes, because the courts are so very slow in conducting hearings, issuing orders (the Wyman case), assembling together court records and transcripts for the record on appeal–where the record is 80% missing, as in the Mary Sykes case–death is the only way out, still the entire process appears to be slow and cumbersome.

But what happens when you finally get to the point of suing in Federal Court?

Here is an interesting table I found on the differences between bringing a 42 USC 1983 proceeding and a cause of action based in tort.

Table comparing 42 USC 1983 to cause of action based in tort

I think many of you will find it very interesting.