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 <email@example.com>
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.
—– Forwarded Message —–
From: Law Office Assistant <Larry.Chambers@ditkowskylawoffice.com>
Sent: Friday, November 9, 2012 9:49 AM
Subject: ltrs to ARDC Kirk Durbin DOJ w attachments
Larry G. Chambers
Assistant Office Manager
Ken may I include this post in my complaint as advocate to Pres , DOJ , OCR etc As complaint of retaliation along with the other Discrimination and violations
I will send my introduction comments to you for approval and critique
Nancy Vallone Rn Ohio and AZ
“New kid on the block ” Danielle Murphy’s Aunt
What about target of “discrimination and “Retaliation , coercion Discrimination by association ”
Federal code DOJ OCR title 2&3 Approx chapter or Article 35 & 36
I only know a few chapters to get Federal assistance
I have to check other Fed code wording
I am an attorney, I don’t know if I could claim “discrimination, retaliation and coercion discrimination by retaliation.”
Further to get anywhere, you have to have either a commonlaw tort or legal breach (something the courts have developed for hundreds of years, eg, breach of contract, personal injury, defamation, libel, etc.), OR you have to have a statute that says in the statute it provides for a civil remedy and the courts have respected that in your state.
I don’t think I have been discriminated against. Discrimination generally means you are in a protected class and that class is being treated differently on account of the classification. I am a woman, but they went after Ken in a bogus manner as equally as they are going against me. Discrimination usually occurs in the work place, with Realtors and home sales, etc. Not with the ARDC.
Good points tho, keep on thinking.
How come justice and fairness are only legal when they benefit the powers that be? Keep up the good fight, Ken. We are on your side and have got your back — although I don’t know if I will be able to get to Chicago to visit you in jail if it comes to that. But if I have to, a birthday cake with a file baked inside might be involved. Allegedly.
PS: I just went to court for a small claims case regarding slander and libel, and the judge carefully instructed me that anyone can say ANYTHING in a court document and it will not be considered libel. So apparently lying is not a crime and neither is character assassination as long as you do it in court? Huh?
However, in this case, I propose that when the atty for the Petitioner has set a court date and that date is told to the GAL and the Respondent, BUT no Sodini notices are served and no there is no summons and complaint served upon the alleged disabled person, then the court loses jurisdiction and what is done there is void ab initio.
While people can pretty much say what they want in court, there still is defamation per se outside of court. And there is abuse of process and malicious prosecution and sanctions for open and notorious lying in court. It’s a high standard.