Yet another Motion to Dismiss filed for Lack of Jurisdiction filed

This time again  in Rockford.

First there was Wyman, now there is Spera.  Thank you Dominic for coming forward finally and contacting me about your case.

Dominic Spera’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction (Summons and Complaint)

And, as always, if you are in a probate case where you are questioning jurisdiction, use the forms on this website and do not hesitate to contact a lawyer to make sure the proper notices were served in a timely fashion (14 days prior to any notice on a hearing on guardianship, all adult children, parents and siblings must be informed of the time, date and place of hearing)

Advertisements

And while Nero fiddles–Rome is burning

Dear readers,

As you are all aware, for some reason my opposing counsel at the ARDC that have filed a complaint against me merely for BLOGGING, of all things, then motioned to have my attorney disqualified (bogus), seem to think it is perfectly okay for the ARDC to hound, harass, persecute and parriahcize me.

I think the only thing going on is I am just one more poster child for corruption among the courts, attorneys and judges in the US.

We have already learned that the Judicial Inquiry Board has not filed a single recommendation to discipline a judge in Cook County for YEARS due to infighting, and we KNOW there are plenty of judges acting badly in court — and nothing is done.

I am hearing reports that judges ban laptops, cell phones–even pen and paper–for note taking–and all in our courts which are supposed to the public and free and the banner of a free country and free speech.  A civil rights suit against all of this is in planning.

But who is carrying the banner for nationwide elimination of corruption?  Bill Windsor and he is making substantial progress.  Contact him thru his website if you want to make your particular record of injustice and corruption.

Lawless America goes nationwide after corruption in our nations courts

So while the ARDC is disciplining me for saying there is corruption, this completely ignores the fact that Google reports that corruption with the courts, judges and attorneys is  rampant all over the internet, with thousands and thousands of stories and articles abound on the internet regarding attorneys, courts and judges acting badly.

Go write Attys Jerome Larkin, Atty Haskel and Atty (sp?) Ozysprey and let them know it is wrong on so many levels to go after me and atty Ditkowsky while Rome is burning.  1)  I have the right under decades, if not 150 years of SCOTUS case law to speak my mind about corruption and the Illinois court system 2) they waste taxpayer money going after us instead of the miscreants–the judges and attorneys working without jurisdiction and 3) by telling me and atty Ditkowsky to shut up, they foster more injustice and corruption in the court system.

Please write the Administrator Jerome Larkin, Atty Haspel and Atty Opryszek and tell them that Ken and I have constitutional rights, we must be allowed to root out corruption in the court.

Honestly, I have no idea how to practice there when all this is going on.  What do I tell clients?  How can I practice in state court with all this going on?  The ARDC has not explained that to any honest and ethical attorney out there.  When I first entered practice and took my oath, the ARDC never sent me a disclaimer, “be careful what you wish for–the Illinois State Courts are full of corruption.  Good luck in finding any justice there except on rare occasions.”

Well, I guess I’m publishing the disclaimer for them and they don’t like it.

Of course, thousands of other sites and just ask Bill Windsor from “Lawless America” if he finds the courts to be a slice of StonyBrook Farms.

Please support those who speak out against injustice in the court systems.  Donate to and be a part of that cause.

The work I am doing now is extremely, extremely difficult and it leads to bar complaints when I just do my job–protecting the elderly and infirm–those that do not have a voice and cannot speak for themselves.

Cook County Court systems–is this a move toward “secret proceedings” and a police state?

From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Feb 14, 2013 9:27 AM
To: matt senator kirk
Cc: Chicago Tribune , SUNTIMES , NASGA , probate sharks , Cook Sheriff , states attorney, probate blogs
Subject: Fw: Court watchers

In examining the e-mails that were recently  sent to me, I noted this one and its attachments is most interesting.    It fits very nicely into the category of the Son of Greylord.     With Sykes, Gore, Tyler, Wyman as horrible examples of the plight of seniors and those individuals who fall into the clutches of some of the “judicial officials” who populate our Court system we appear to be affected by terminal cancer.  [Most of the Judicial officials are good, decent, hardworking and caring individuals who take their positions seriously – however, a bunch of well connected miscreants have developed a ‘cottage industry’ that threatens our democracy]
 That said, the documents attached allege that our ‘open Courtrooms’ and transparent (and open) legal proceedings are being less so.    Viewing the attachments in the light of the Sykes case, and the Denison case if no action is taken we should order the funeral arrangements for the real victim – our Democracy!.      It may be beating a dead horse, but the Denison case is particularly troubling as it is impossible that the ARDC is not aware of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and that no matter what JoAnne puts in her blog regarding corruption and unfairness in the court system they cannot stop her publishing it.   47 USCA 230 reiterates that Constitutional prohibition and the Supreme Court cases are legend – however, *****
Jumping forward we now have a new situation – proceedings in which ordinary people are not allowed to take notes so that they can record accurately what they saw and heard.    We are getting very close to having ‘secret proceedings.’     I have sent you a copy of these documents as ‘we the ordinary citizens’ who are constituents of Senator Mark Kirk are concerned over what appears a runaway express train reasonably calculated to bring Soviet, Taliban, North Korean, Iranian justice to the United States.
In all candor – can you believe that the Sykes case is not a figment of someone deranged mind?    can you believe the ARDC complaint brought against me?    Can you believe the ARDC complaint brought against JoAnne?     Can you believe that in the United States of America a spectator in a Courtroom can be barred from taking notes or a lawyer observing a case and not disrupting anyone told to close her computer?     In the face of Article 1 of the Illinois Constitution and the First Amendment to the United States Constitution this is indeed happening?
While in many parts of the world individual liberties are not important to the government, but in America each individuals personal liberties are extremely important.   Or maybe from the responses that government has been making in relation to the anguish of seniors and her families being victimized by certain ‘judicial officials’ who the ARDC refuses to investigate (and repeated acts in derogation of 755 ILCS 5/11a -1 et seq and the Bill of Rights ) maybe our current government has adopted the Taliban credo.
On bended knee I am begging Senator Kirk and our elected representatives to demand that law enforcement do an honest, complete and comprehensive investigation of these very serious allegations.   I personally would appreciate law enforcement finding out how any person can obtain a license to practice law in the State of Illinois and suggest that is unethical act for a lawyer writing or otherwise publishing a demand for his/her elected representative to investigate allegations that a 90 year old (plus) senior citizen was actively deprived of her civil rights.    When the State of Illinois and the United STates of America are in fiscal crisis I would also appreciate knowing how investigations are justified of the complaining parties and not the alleged miscreants.
Ken Ditkowsky

www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

What do you do if you realize your case is pathetic? Inspirational Fash! Go after the attorney on the other side!

One of the things I have learned in the sleazy world of probate (and please, don’t write up another stupid paragraph about me saying it’s sleazy–just google sleazy probate and see what you get–dozens and dozens of websites–about 2 mil results in .2 secs!–and they’re not all mine, but they do seem to emanate from around the US.) is if you are being attacked by someone honest and with a good point–go for the attack on the tangent.

That is, if you don’t have the law, then pound the facts, if you don’t have the facts or law, then just pound the table.

A tried and true tactic of sleazy lawyers.

I have had cases when there was no jurisdiction, and I had to tell the client and the court we need to dismiss and nonsuit–as an officer of the court.  I don’t want to bring liabiity on the state or the court and the judges and others that depend upon me to be honest

But what do I find in Illinois probate?  Exactly the opposite.  Judges and GAL’s that desperately and vehemently and even obnoxiously cling to jurisdiction that just isn’t there.

Let me say it again, Tyler, Sykes, Gore, Bedin, Spera and others.

These should have never, never happened.  Attys and judges acting badly.

So, if you’ve decided to act badly, file bogus complaints against honest attoneys, what then do you do?  Perhaps the authorities are noticing.  The pubic is noticing and writing angry letters and they are mightily unhappy.

So how do you go about pounding the table and create a tear gas distraction, not just the red herring, but more of a pink and purple herring?

Go for the motion to Disqualify the person’s attorney!  Yah! that will do it.  Say the attorney will be a witness, there is a conflict, whatever it takes.  Go for the down low and dirty.

see the following

Motion to Disqualify Atty Ken Ditkowsky with Response

You know, I see these a lot in Federal Court where the litigants have a lot of money to burn in litigation but the movant knows the motion is a loser.  I see them once in a while in state court, and in the law division, they’re a total loser.  But in probate from a litigant and not a GAL?   Just another rubber stamp for the day

Remember, see my prior post on how in probate –justice only comes from a List the judge keeps on her desk.  it is not contained in briefs or case law or stare decisis which is a ton of work to read all those (boring) cases.

I have no idea how the ARDC can promulgate this stuff for 83,000 lawyers at an annual fee of $450, but it’s a total waste.  JMHO.

 

Keep on writing the ARDC for justice and allow lawyers to blog against corruption in the courts.  Write the Director, Atty Jerome Larkin or fax him at 312-565-2320. One prudential Plaza, 130 E Randolph Dr, #1500, Chicago, IL 60601.

 

Let’s keep this country what the founding fathers and mothers wanted (well, at least the fathers, the mothers wanted equal rights and the  vote and that took another 150 years or so).

joanne

Letters to the Judicial Inquiry Board–do they really do any good?

From an anonymous source:

“The JIB has only 2 investigators for the whole State.  The problem is that they are over-worked.  They pump out reports without any opinions.  The reports go to the Board who make recommendations to the Commission.  Here is where serious infighting is occurring.  The Commission has been refusing to accept recommendations from the Board for punishment of judges.  The Board is now refusing to make recommendations because they look stupid with all their recommendations being turned down.  So now we have no recommendations for punishment.  All rumors.”

So, until the public puts pressure on “the commission” to do it’s job, it looks like the letters are just “rumors” until someone gets in there and kicks butt and stops the infighting.

 

My suggestion is to write to Senators Kirk and Durbin and let them know the Judicial Inquiry Board is woefully inadequate, has done nothing in the Sykes, Gore, etc. cases.

GJS and her brilliant day in Court

February 11, 20013

Judge Stuart – JS

Chase attorney is here.  No one from Fannie Mae. GJS is complaining that the Chase atty won’t give her a business card or say who he is.

Carolyn’s here.

All the appellate volumes.

Michael Blattner, commissioner they appointed.

Official court reporter present.

GJS tells me the last time she was in court, she overheard CT and company said they were going drill out the locks again and get into the house.  Horrors, more criminal activities.

GJS shows me letter that her mom was never served.

Stuart chained GJS to a chair in the back room for about a half hour, threatened her to euthanize her pets–a beloved dog named “Shaggy” and a cute long haired kitty named “Kitty.”  Okay, GJS isn’t very creative with pet names.

During GJS’s last hearing in court, Judge Murray let GJS put on atty Gene Moskowitz and he said that mom didn’t file anything in the Lumberman’s case.

GJS relates that Chase has admitted they owe her damages for drilling out locks on her property and creating severe damage to her home.  Chase was supposed to negotiate a settlement in the last BK.  GJS just filed a new BK case 14 days ago.

GJS is working.

Adversary proceedings need to be reopened in bankruptcy.

Richard Bussee is still representing GJS in the BK.

All of PS and his firm, CT, the Chase atty, Michael Blattner, etc. all walk in and within two minutes the judge walks out.   GJS says this happens all the time.  It used to be the GAL’s would walk from the judge’s door, then the judge, but since I published on this blog that is unethical and improper, now they are about 10% less blatant about “getting prepared” with the judge.  Now only she walks thru that door, but it’s all a coincidence, still.

attorneys step up

GJS objects to jurisdiction.

Sykes is not represented by counsel.  PS, CT, AS present CF has another family emergency.

GJS an interested party.

Court lacks jurisdiction.

GJS says that she also had a family emergency like CT but she came to court regardless.

Michael Blattner also present for subdivion of property.

Chase is the mortggee.

GJS says fannie mae is not here and they now they own the note.

PS says they have not been served (with GJS’s new action).  GJS has refiled the chapter 13 in January.

This interferes with the ability to subdivide her property.

At this point I am asked by Judge Stuart to shut off my laptop so I just start taking notes on the back of some court orders.  Waste of paper and time if you ask me, but if you like pet dinosaurs, you probably like taking notes on paper.  Personally, I don’t.  I told her that I could type 100 wpm and I prefer to type my notes.  This very polite request was ignored by the court.  I wonder if we need a federal law that litigants can take notes in any state, federal or hearing tribunal.  I don’t understand how this simple request is such a problem for the court. I’m not playing games, I’m not texting anyone.  I am admitted to the bar and helping a friend and the pubic rooting out corruption in the courts, and if you ask me, this case is a hot bed of questions on corruption, aberrations from the rules and law, GAL’s that do strange things and are on the case forever.

You name it, this case has got it, but I digress.

PS says they need time to check on the status of the mortgage with chase.

JS asks how long that will will take.

GJS says that there is a bankruptcy she has newly filed.

Then they start looking for dates.

April 4, 2013 is the next date they can agree upon.

GJS suggests April Fool’s day as being more appropriate.  I give her the tumb’s up.

JS – says this will be only a status date.
Date selected, everyone stands down.

GJS’s filing are uploaded here:

Pleading 1 filed today (regarding partition)

Pleading 2 filed today (regarding objection to inventory)

I want to thank her for sharing her motions with everyone. They contain important case law and information if you are ever in probate.  They are for the most part, well drafted and contain important assertions on behalf of the non Carolyn Toerpe portion of the Sykes family, which is pretty much the rest of the family.  I have no idea why the ARDC does not allow the sisters of Mary and the other daughter of Mary to speak out via me on the web.  I can’t represent GJS, I was disqualified, but I can be her news reporter and I can go to court and take notes and I can be her blogger, just as you all can.

The ARDC is trying to make blogs “sinister” and disrespectful.  They are trying to discredit WordPress and Blogger and/or tell people what they can and cannot post.  In a repressive, fascist society, the first thing a dictator does is go after the lawyers telling the truth.  That’s what the Gestapo did in Germany in the 1930’s.  Take a look at this.  Who, other than the ARDC cares about a blog?  A blog, for chrissakes.  It’s insane.

I have tried and tried, but I can find no other case law about a lawyer getting disciplined for running a blog.  Lawyers get disciplined for stealing money, forgetting a client matter, not appearing in court, not writing a brief on time, etc.–but a blog?

Again, I have read hundreds of notes over the years on attorneys that have stolen money–most of it in very large amounts and mostly real estate attys– and they get disbarred or suspended.  Then there are the lawyers that forget to come to court, forget to write briefs, forget to email clients.  Now, if you are one of my clients or opponents, you know I am a maniac about text and email and will hound you until you get something done.  It’s the “mom” nature in me.  Anyway the lawyers that don’t steal anything generally get “censured”.

What about the lawyers that write a blog on corruption?  What about the lawyers who speak up for the likes of Tyler, Wyman, Gore, Bedin, Spera, etc.?

PS–in the ARDC complaint for BLOGGING filed against me on Jan 8, 2013 (of all things, come on now, blogging?  How desperate is that).

In the meanest, most aggressive tone I suppose you can gather for a complaint on BLOGGING on corruption, the ARDC says (you won’t believe how horrifying this is) I use initials!  That’s right, initials.  The sinister, ARDC mystifying use of intitals.

Well, it’s really I’m typing lazy and then I LOVE LONG FINGERNAILS.  Okay, I said it.  I get really pretty long fingernails which makes my typing just a tad more difficult and initials a bit easier on my qwerty keyboard, and so I use initials.

Okay, this is a BLOG.   For those of you ARDC attys that are too old or too ensconced in your Ivory White Towers of the Prudential Towers and removed from the hoi poli an the unwashed masses that I routinely gather with on the 18th floor and even the 14th floor of FED, horrors of horrors, a blog is supposed to be the immediate impressions, thoughts and stream of conscience that we are supposed to experience via our fingertips.

To show that where the ARDC is located consists of two “ivory towers” see the picture on wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Prudential_Plaza

I have never seen the likes of Ms. Leah Black or any ARDC atty there.  Just the litigants.

JoAnne

Exactly what are the words of the laws that entitle us to free speech that the ARDC should be aware of

Courtesy of Atty Ken Ditkowsky and his wonderful wife Judy who also “gets it”.

ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.
Note: The following text is a transcription of the first ten amendments to the Constitution in their original form. These amendments were ratified December 15, 1791, and form what is known as the “Bill of Rights.”
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Constitution of the State of Illinois

ARTICLE I

BILL OF RIGHTS

SECTION 1. INHERENT AND INALIENABLE RIGHTS
    All men are by nature free and independent and have
certain inherent and inalienable rights among which are life,
liberty and the pursuit of happiness. To secure these rights
and the protection of property, governments are instituted
among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the
governed.
(Source: Illinois Constitution.)

SECTION 4. FREEDOM OF SPEECH
    All persons may speak, write and publish freely, being
responsible for the abuse of that liberty. In trials for
libel, both civil and criminal, the truth, when published
with good motives and for justifiable ends, shall be a
sufficient defense.
(Source: Illinois Constitution.)

**************************
THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.
RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all, or any of which Articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; viz.
ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.
Note: The following text is a transcription of the first ten amendments to the Constitution in their original form. These amendments were ratified December 15, 1791, and form what is known as the “Bill of Rights.”
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
*******
Dear "non believer in free speech"

The question is not what YOU believe a delegated agency of the Illinois Supreme Court is empowered to do.

This country and this state have Constitutions which DEFINE what the rights of people are and what the government through its agencies can and cannot do.


There have been U.S. and Illinois Supreme Court cases which enlarge specifically on what the rights governmental agencies have 
under the Constitution: an agency of the government DOES NOT HAVE POWERS that the government does not have.


When something has become part of the GOVERNMENT RECORD, through
 some court procedure, be it deposition, trial, affidavit, it is subject to public comment.
Judy Ditkowsky
Ken Ditkowsky