My fax to the ARDC – re In re Weddington

ARDC Attys:
Jerome Larkin, Sharon Opryszek, Melissa Smart, Leah Black Guiterrez, Steven Splitt

Fax 312-565-2320    From:                      Admitted Ill*., N.  Carolina and Patent Bars
JoAnne M. Denison,      Pat.  Agent.  Reg.  No.  34,150
DENISON & ASSOCS., PC    FAX 312-553-1307
5940 W Touhy Ave, #120
Niles, IL 60714    PHONE 312-553-1300  or
Federal Patents, Trademarks & Copyrights
Important Notice
This facsimilie message contains attorney privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above.  If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone, collect, and return the original message to the above address.  You will be reimbursed.  Your cooperation is immensely appreciated.
For transmission problems, please call 312-335-1300
A confirmation copy       WILL   ✔   will NOT be sent.
Pages in fax, including this coversheet – ( see header  )
November 4, 2015

RE:   ARDC v. JMD 13 PR 001 – In re Weddigen 4-15-2015

Dear Counsel;

Please read the attached decision which was recently rendered by the 4th Dist. Appellate Court in Illinois.  In this case decision, once again, yet another court recognizes Brandenburg as the law and not the “lazy cheat” that Attorney Smart used at the opening of my trial that a blog or social media is akin to “yelling fire in a crowded theater” when it clearly is not.  Who died?  Who almost died from my blog?

You can read the excerpts of the case on my blog, which you are well aware of.  This case makes it clear a court cannot and should not regulate Face Book postings. These are clearly covered under the First Amendment to the US Constitution.

The case of Rosemont made that clear.  Now Weddigen makes it clear.

How many cases must issue with the courts saying we will not (and likely cannot) regulate social media because social media is clearly protected under the First Amendment.

You might not like the criticisms of the Courts and the ARDC which I publish, but I challenge you to make the public statement that you will defend the rights of Illinois citizens, myself and Ken Ditkowsky and Lanre Amu included, to criticize a court, a decision, a law or a statute (In re Sawyer) and you will and must uphold the US Constitution and the Illinois Constitution’s declarations that US citizens have completely free speech.

I challenge you to do this and uphold your sworn oaths as attorneys in Illinois.

None of you at the ARDC or the judges or attorneys in the probate courts of Cook County fall into the category of “delicate snowflakes” described by this court at ¶ 66, nor can you claim to be running a Stalinist show trial or a Vietnam “re-education camp” circa 1976 (para 64), so what exactly is the ARDC doing to eliminate attorney corruption and uphold the First Amendment and Free Speech?

Please explain or I expect you to send a Motion to the Illinois Supreme Court you are withdrawing all charges and are reinstating my license in accordance with recent court decisions and you have decided to uphold the First Amendment to the US Constitution.

Very Truly Yours,


/joanne m denison/esignature/

Joanne M. Denison

cc: blog

1 thought on “My fax to the ARDC – re In re Weddington

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 )

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