Catalano SCOI and the “litigation privilege”

Accoring to the Supreme Court of Illinois, where some claims they have been defamed, the defendant is allowed a “litigation defense.”  Most of the time this applies to attorneys that make statements about a case before, during and after the case is filed, but it can also apply to litigants.

So what has the Supreme Court of Illinois said about “defamation” in the wake of SCOTUS and the New York Times defamation case (Google this or see my prior post if you not familiar with this ground breaking case, I believe with an unanimous or near unanimous  result)?  In Catalano v. Pechous, where a Berwyn Alderman acoused the council of fraud in selecting a new city garbage vendor (of all things), this is what was said:

“The finder of fact must determine whether the publication was indeed made in good faith. Professions of good faith will be unlikely to prove persuasive, for example, where a story is fabricted by the defendant, is the product of his imagination, or is based wholly on an unverified anonymous telephone call.”

However, in the Sykes case, while the inventory was swiped by CT, we have several relatives who have told me the million in Au coins exist.  Further, KDD in his business records for estate planning purposes relates the story of the gold coins.  AS and CF keep on telling the court that the gold coins are “imaginary”.

There is nothing on this blog that hasn’t been related over and over by at least several family members and over the years.  AS and CF barely know CT.  I know her and KDD and GJS and Mary and the family and close friends for years and years–half a dozen people over and over relate the same story.

I also know numerous attys complaining the Circuit Court records are a disaster, Pacer could have come in there 10 years ago and fixed the system, and now Mary bears the brunt of it.

KDD says all the files in Sykes have returned, that they were swiped by the FBI, but I will let you all know when I have gone through them, most likely early next week.

While I do hope the FBI is investigating Sykes and other probate cases and will do something about the situation, with the complaint against me which is purely protected under the First Amendment, I strongly wonder about that.

I will publish my thoughts and reactions on the complaint later.  I am truly not happy that the ARDC is infringing my copyright rights either.  They need to take my 16 paragraphs of creating writing out of their complaint.  I have no idea if they offer or get paid to publish those complaints and that turns my “unpublished” work into a “published one”.   This means I have to file for a copyright right away and I have to be aware of how they sell their issues and rights. It’s not worth it.  They have no authorization to publish my works, esp. if these writings go to Lexis or Westlaw and they receive money in return.

I would like to know, would not you?

thanks

Joanne

2 thoughts on “Catalano SCOI and the “litigation privilege”

  1. Joann, any complaint against you is utterly outrageous. I am an attorney in NY, and it is widely acknowledged here that while Brooklyn (Kings County) NY is really corrupt, Cook County IL is probably the most corrupt county in the US. And since when doesn’t freedom of speech cover blogs?
    Good for you for exposing the infection that is rampant in Chicago. The ones who object are likely the biggest offenders.

    • Thank you for your comment. As you know, the ARDC is accusing me of lying when in fact all I say is TRUE and there is obviously corruption when a probate case functions for THREE YEARS without jurisdiction, the respondent was not served, 80% of the file is missing, Dorothy Brown, the clerk of court is an IT disaster, etc.
      It’s all well known.
      If the ARDC gets away with this, it will chill everyone’s free speech–even among the lawyers who enforce first amendment rights in our nations court system.
      The ARDC was created to get rid of Greylord corruption and now they’re protecting it, saying my blog is false and/or contains a reckless disregard for the truth.
      I say I am disseminating the truth. I will fax them your comments and probably put up a page on this website for attorneys to post their knowledge of the Chicago court system.
      You cannot defame a person or entity with a lousy reputation to begin with.
      I think I need a survey.
      thanks again
      joanne

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s