In response to the Citation by the ND of Illinois to suspend me there, filed courtesy of miscreant Sharon Opryszek:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwcE5kdXZpWktKZXc&authuser=0

Also included:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwS091SjhKeVdJMlk&authuser=0

And a separate Motion demanding additional relief from the Illinois Supreme court:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwWnQ4TDUzSXJOVVE&authuser=0

Exhibit C, which details the continuing assault of the ARDC on the First Amendment of the US constitution.  Note how they never, ever cite case law properly.  The rules of Case Citation, as found in the Harvard Blue Book, or the Standford Red Book requires that attorneys, except in highly unusual circumstances, must only cite to Appellate decisions.  They are not to cite to trial court decisions (which are almost never published) because a trial court is too close to the matters at hand and are only supposed to focus on trial court issues and not act as a reviewing court.

That never stops the ARDC.  They prefer to cite to their own decisions (pretty much like being part of circle jerk), and do not like to cite to Appellate decisions on First Amendment rights because then they also have to cite “dicta” which is also not permitted.

Dicta is the stuff mentioned at a passing glance and is not part of the holding of the case, and the cases an attorney cites are supposed to go their way.

None of the major Supreme Court Decisions or Illinois Supreme Court decisions go their way.  Far from it.  Citizens United (the part that speaks about the First Amendment, not that corporations have the same First Amendment rights as citizens do to skew elections unfairly), Alvarez, Sawyer, etc. and now we have Enois where the Supreme Court said that mens rea and scienter or a criminal mind is required to find someone guilty of threats by posting on social media.

The interesting part of the Review Board decision is that they do not state which statements in fact are false. They also claim that a blog told Gloria to file certain pleadings and blog down her mother’s guardianship case, which is ridiculous.  I was never her attorney at the time, she had her own attorneys and her own paralegals and I was never part of that team.  But the ARDC would never know because they quashed all my witnesses!  Then one witness, Judge Stuart, lied or changed her testimony on the stand and the Review Board said nothing about that.  They did not care the trial was grossly unfair and completely tained and devoid of any relevant applicable case law.

It’s a sad day when the ARDC continually mis cites and misleads caselaw in the oral argument part of their brief and cannot find any cases on their side.

Then they run trials with no meaningful discovery, strike all opposing witnesses and then just come to the conclusion of violation of the rules of ethics when they themselves have engaged in underhanded and deceptive means and trickery ten times over to get the verdict they were told to get.

The next document is a Motion to Reconsider my Interim Suspension which was filed today and which asks for the following relief:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwT3dWcmJTZnhxQ28&authuser=0

1) call for a federal monitor to take valid citizen complaints on the 18th floor.  this would bypass the ARDC process where citizens file complaints and then tied in and corruption probate attorneys file motions for sanctions which are rubber stamped by their friendly judges;

2) that I be allowed to represent pro bono clients, or that the ARDC/Illinois Supreme Court find low cost or free counsel for my clients

3) that my charity be funded with 2 to 3 attorneys to provided low cost or pro bono service in the probate courts of Illinois

4) that I be declared a Protected Whistleblower by the Illinois Supreme Court to protect my work and my blog

Jerome Larkin has $1.2 million in mortgage payoffs.  Melissa Smart has a free condo.  No one investigates that and removes them.

The payoffs and payouts abound.  Esp at the ARDC and in the Probate court arena with Stern-Schmeidel and Farenga.

Ken Ditkowsky has plenty of time to write hundreds of emails and speak out.  The ARDC granted him that time.

And as for me, I will continue to fight for your rights, to demand the resignation of Jerome Larkin, Sharon Opryszek and other no-ethics attorneys who help other attorneys turn our court system into nothing more than a marketplace to wheel and deal seniors and disableds to the highest bidder.  All of that has to end.  The ARDC has to start filing ethics reports, the ARDC must start investigating attorneys on staff that live beyond their means and have questionable financials, and I don’t mean by just asking them, but by using discovery and subpoenas.

The ARDC has to step in and demand that citizens who file valid complaints cannot be sanctioned by clout heavy tied in attorneys in court trying to cover their tracks.  The ARDC should be protecting court room victims of corruption and yet it does not.

The public wants and demands it.

JoAnne