From Candice Schwager and Barbara Stone–Orders without Jurisdiction are Void

Judge Michael Genden in Florida has persecuted and prosecuted Atty Barbara Stone to no end.  She has only tried to protect her mother from severe harm and her mother is still in grave danger at the hands of the probate court and judges in Florida.  Barbara has not seen her mother in long months.  Reading from the transcript the other day, Lustig’s excuse is “it was a legal matter”.  No, it is not.  What the Lustig/Genden team is doing is seriously violating Helen and Barbara’s Constitutional rights to association and to love one another.

Read on.

Michael Genden has endangered the life and safety of Helen Stone.  Michael Genden has engaged in criminal elder abuse, aggrevated abuse and financial exploitation.  Michael Genden has abetted criminal elder abuse, aggravated elder abuse and financial exploitation.  Michael Genden has issued unconstitutional orders without an evidentiary hearing. Michael Genden has denied Barbara Stone and Helen Stone due process.  Michael Genden never had jurisdiction. Michael Genden issued fraudulent and void “orders” based on fraud and fraud on the Court which he orchestrated.  Michael Genden issued “orders” based on slanderous and defamatory statements which he knew were false. Michael Genden has illegally and unethically reversed his own albeit illegal decision.  Michael Genden has colluded with a criminal enterprise.  Michael Genden has engaged in ex parte conduct.  Michael Genden has engaged in illegal and unethical conduct in protecting, and covering up his own misconduct, criminal conduct of elder abuse   Michael Genden tried to muzzle Barbara Stone to cover up his illegal orders and elder abuse.  Michael Genden has violated the US Constitution.
1.    An order is void if it was procured by fraud upon the court,” In re Village of Willowbrook, 37 Ill. App. 3D 393(1962)
2.    The United States Supreme Court has clearly, and repeatedly, held that any judge who acts without jurisdiction is engaged in an act of treason. U.S. v. Will, 449 U.S. 200, 216, 101, S. Ct. 471, 66 L.Ed. 2d 392, 406 (1980): Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat) 264, 404, 5 L.Ed 257 (1821).
3.  Due Process is a requirement of the U.S. Constitution. Violation of the United States Constitution by a judge deprives that person from acting as a judge under the law. He/She is acting as a private person, and not in the capacity of being a judge (and, therefore, has no jurisdiction). The United States Supreme Court, in Twining v. New Jersery, 211 U.S. 78, 29 S.Ct. 14, 24, (1908), stated that “Due Process requires that the court which assumes to determine the rights of parties shall have jurisdiction.”; citing Old Wayne Mut. Life Assoc. V. McDonough, 204 U. S. 8, 27 S. Ct. 236 (1907); Scott v McNeal, 154 U.S. 34, 14, S. Ct. 1108 (1894); Pennoyer v. Neff, 95 U.S. 714, 733 (1877).
4. The state Supreme Courts have held that those who aid, abet, advise, act upon and execute the order of a judge who acts without jurisdiction are equally guilty. They are equally guilty of a crime against the U.S. Government.
5. A void order is an order issued without jurisdiction by a judge and is void ab initio and does not have to be declared void by a judge to be void. Only an inspection of the record of the case showing that the judge was without jurisdiction or violated a person’s due process rights, or where fraud was involved in the attempted procurement of jurisdiction, is sufficient for an order to be void. Potenz Corp. v. Petrozzini, 170 Ill. App. 3d 617, 525 N.E. 2d 173, 175 (1988). In instances herein, the law has stated that the orders are void ab initio and not voidable because they are already void.
6.  A void order is void ab initio and does not have to be declared void by a judge. The law is established by the U.S. Supreme Court in Valley v. Northern Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 254 U.S. 348, 41 S. Ct. 116 (1920) as well as other state courts, e.g. by the Illinois Supreme Court in People v. Miller. A party may have a court vacate a void order, but the void order is still void ab initio, whether vacated or not; a piece of paper does not determine whether an order is void, it just memorializes it, makes it legally binding and voids out all previous orders returning the case to the date prior to action leading to void ab initio.
7.  This principle of law was stated by the U.S. Supreme Court as “Courts are constituted by authority and they cannot go beyond that power delegated to them. If they act beyond that authority, and certainly in contravention of it, their judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. They are not voidable, but simply VOID, AND THIS IS EVEN PRIOR TO REVERSAL.” [Emphasis added]. Vallely v. Northern Fire and Marine Ins. Co., 254 U.S. 348, 41 S. Ct. 116 (1920). See also Old Wayne Mut. I. Assoc. v. McDonough, 204 U.S. 8, 27 S.Ct. 236 (1907); Williamson v. Berry, 8 How. 495, 540, 12 L. Ed, 1170, 1189, (1850); Rose v. Himely, 4 Cranch 241, 269, 2 L.Ed. 608, 617 (1808).
8.  Pursuant to the Vallely court decision, a void order does not have to be reversed by any court to be a void order. Courts have also held that, since a void order is not a final order, but is in effect no order at all, it cannot even be appealed. Courts have held that a void decision is not in essence a decision at all, and never becomes final. Consistent with this holding, in 1991, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that, “Since such jurisdictional defect deprives not only the initial court but also the appellate court of its power over the case or controversy, to permit the appellate court to ignore it. …[Would be an] unlawful action by the appellate court itself.” Freytag v. Commissioner, 501 U.S. 868 (1991); Miller, supra. Following the same principle, it would be an unlawful action for a court to rely on an order issued by a judge who did not have subject-matter jurisdiction and therefore the order he issued was Void ab initio.
9.  A void order has no legal force or effect. As one court stated, a void order is equivalent to a blank piece of paper.

A Judge has no lawful authority to issue any order which violates the Supreme Law of the Land.
The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that all entities have the mandatory right of an adequate, complete, effective, fair, full meaningful and timely access to the court.
The First and the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right of association.
The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment guarantees Due Process and Equal Protection to all. “No state shall deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” United States Constitutional Amendment XIV and adopted by State of Indiana Constitution.
“Choices about marriage, family life, and upbringing of children are among associational rights ranked as of basic importance in our society, rights sheltered by the Fourteenth Amendment against State’s unwarranted usurpation, disregard, or disrespect. U.S.C.A. Constitutional Amendment 14.
Dated:   June 20, 2014

Barbara Stone

This pleading contains a whole lot of verbiage and case law that can be used in other cases, and perhaps most of all the Sykes case.

I wish everyone a wonderful Mother’s day, but I know the probate victim with a living mother in a nursing home or abuse situation is under tremendous stress and unhappiness because they often cannot see their own mothers.  The courts and probate attorneys don’t care and make no efforts, as in the Helen Stone and Mary Sykes case, for these loving children to see their mothers.

The injustice and illegality of it is all glossed over.

Please pray today for Helen Stone, Barbara Stone, Gloria Sykes and Mary Sykes and all the other mothers in an abusive guardianship where the courts and authorities look the other way and where we know the cases simply consist of a string of felonies and fraud on the court.

In Illinois, Larkin is responsible for all of the felonies in the Sykes case.  Write him and tell him that abuse in probate will not be tolerated.

The ARDC has now suspended the licenses of three attorneys–myself, Mr. Ditkowsky and Mr. Amu and does so in kangaroo courts banning witnesses left and right and acting scandously toward honest attorneys doing their jobs. Ask Larkin what he knows about Judge Patrick Murphy and the OPG fire that killed 6 people, ask Lisa Madigan about all the probate cases and who her real father was and what he really did for a living.

Until we clean up Illinois, the corruption will breed in the courts and the ARDC like the black death, and it only ends in an early and unjust death for disabled seniors.  Corruption is funny== kind of when it involves money.  But when it involves death, that’s a whole other story.


4 thoughts on “From Candice Schwager and Barbara Stone–Orders without Jurisdiction are Void

      • that’s why they always insist on a quick cremation==to destroy all the evidence.
        autopsies of the elderly who appear thin and emacitiated (possible euthanization by narcotics, starvation and dehydration) should be mandatory.
        plus, while funeral directors in Chicago must file reports of abuse and homocide and starvation and dehydration and file them, apparently these reports go nowhere and are seen by no one.
        that has to change.

  1. This case is exactly what my combined complaints against Judge Deborah Davis Walker are. I Believe I can clearly prove a case of treason against her Because of the illegal actions stipulated in this case. This pulls in the judge in Arizona for enforcing her non jurisdictional orders. I have purchased copies of the audio trial transcripts Where lack of jurisdiction was proven and is on record. Her court clearly only qualified as a court of enforcement for a foreign judgment. It was testified to that neither party was a legal resident of the State of New Mexico. Therefore no other possible jurisdiction could exist. The court of original decree actually qualified in all seven forms of jurisdiction. under state, federal and international law The Arizona court enforced her illegal orders on demand. The clerk of the Arizona court wanted to charge me 181 dollars to register my lawful custody orders and My ex wife was charged only 18 dollars to register her unlawful orders. The sheriffs department knew five days in advance that I had legal custody and they kidnapped my daughter at gun point. Three deputies read my lawful orders then arrested me. They refuse to contact the judge. I wrote a detailed letter to the county government explaining my complaints with a warning to never step foot on my property ever again or face the consequences. I believe they violated their oath of office and have committed serious crimes against me therefore they have no legal authority over me. any future efforts to assault me will be dealt with as self defense. years ago the county law enforcement agencies considered contracting with me to teach them how to shoot better.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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