From Ken Ditkowsky–the breadth of the First Amendment!

Posted on June 30, 2012

From Ken Ditkowsky:

Yesterday I re-read the ARDC complaint that was filed concerning my protests and communications in regard to Adam Stern, Cynthia Farenga and the miscreants who acted under color of statute to deprive Mary Sykes of her liberty, property, civil rights and human rights.   The action taken is not even subtle.   It is a heavy handed attempt to shut me up.  My protest and exercise of my First Amendment Rights are particularly unpleasant to Mr. Stern, Ms. Farenga and those aiding and abetting their conduct.   I mentioned the fact that the breach of a fiduciary relationship is a ‘taxable event!’   When Stern, Farenga et al concealed the isolation and abuse of Mary Sykes by not filing reports to the Court of such conduct and instead defamed and castigated Gloria Sykes and those who protested they breached their fiduciary relationships to Mary Sykes.    When the plenary guardian drilled the safety deposit box and removed from it a large number of double eagle gold coins and other valuables and did not inventory the same it was not only a breach of fiduciary relationship but ‘theft!’    If the Federal and STate Income taxes have not been paid – that is tax evasion and possibly tax fraud.

As this has been now disclosed and made public we have called for an honest, comprehensive and complete investigation.   There is no just reason for Mary Sykes (aged 93) to be denied her civil rights and there is no reason why those persons who benefited by the non-inventory of the very valuable double eagle gold coins (worth about $3000 each) should not pay the Federal and State of Illinois taxes on the collectibles.

My continued mention of the fact that usually non-inventoried valuables in the possession of a guardian are not reported as income by the fiduciary has generated personal attacks on me from not only the two guardian ad litem, the plenary guardian and her attorneys, but now the ARDC.   Indeed, the fact that I undertook an investigation is the sole complaint against me.   I am also defending an attorney who is being investigated upon similar charges.  My defense to the Gulag is the First Amendment.    The following quote is particularly appropriate:

Like freedom of speech and a free press, the right of peaceable assembly was considered by the Framers of our Constitution to lie at the foundation of a government *523 based upon the consent of an informed citizenry-a government dedicated to the establishment of justice and the preservation of liberty. U.S.Const., Amend. I. And it is now beyond dispute that freedom of association for the purpose of advancing ideas and airing grievances is protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment from invasion by the States. De Jonge v. State of Oregon, 299 U.S. 353, 364, 57 S.Ct. 255, 259, 81 L.Ed. 278; N.A.A.C.P. v. State of Alabama, 357 U.S. 449, 460, 78 S.Ct. 1163, 1170, 2 L.Ed.2d 1488.
3 Freedoms such as these are protected not only against heavy-handed frontal attack, but also from being stifled by more subtle governmental interference. Grosjean v. American Press Co., 297 U.S. 233, 56 S.Ct. 444, 80 L.Ed. 660; Murdock v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105, 63 S.Ct. 870, 87 L.Ed. 1292; American Communications Ass’n, C.I.O. v. Douds, 339 U.S. 382, 402, 70 S.Ct. 674, 685, 94 L.Ed. 925;

Bates v. City of Little Rock, 361 U.S. 516, 522-23, 80 S. Ct. 412, 416, 4 L. Ed. 2d 480 (1960)

Last week there was a protest outside a courtroom near Riverside California instituted by a group of persons protesting similar elder abuse and financial exploitation of senior citizens.   I understand that the Media blackout and political censorship of this ‘dirty little secret’ continues just as in a past decade the Gulag florished in Soviet Russia.   I hope that in the year 2012 the 4th of July celebration is all form and no substance.

Ken Ditkowsky

http://www.ditkowskylawoffice.com/

In response to Gloria’s reply yesterday:

Gloria -

I was just having the very same thought.    Rudy Bush wrote me and I remembered the situation with his mother and how her death was handled.

The League of Women Votes had a slogan – “democracy is not a spectator sport!”   Indeed, it is not and while we were complacent our democracy was hijacked!   Instead of protections for ‘grandma’ we have a gulag!    The Supreme Court decision of Buck vs. Bell was the legal precedent for the Holocaust.    Today we are more subtle however, like the National Socialists and the Communists we surround our miscreat behavior with Judicial CYA.    The distinction between the Sykes case and most of the others is the fact that because no one bothered to follow strictly the statute and provide the appropriate Sodini protections – i.e. naming in the petition the close relatives and giving them 14 days notice prior to the hearing to appoint a guardian the Probate Court lacked jurisdiction and the expropriation of approximately a million dollars of your mother’s (and your) assets lacks ‘judicial cover!’    In my opinion it is pure theft and if law enforcement believes in equal protection we will see some people in jail.   If our Federal Government is serious about enforcing taxes on an equal and equitable basis the unreported ‘income’ will be collected from the guardians (plus every penalty and interest due and payable).

We have only ourselves to blame!   We have the ballot but *****.    We have a right of assembly and free speech (except for me in the opinion of the ARDC).   Democracy is not a spectator sport!

From JoAnne:

What do the courts have to say about the First Amendment:

102 S.Ct. 929
Supreme Court of the United States
In re R. M. J., Appellant.
No. 80-1431. | Argued Nov. 9, 1981. | Decided Jan. 25, 1982.
Disbarment proceedings were instituted against attorney. The Missouri Supreme Court, 609 S.W.2d 411, issued a private reprimand. Appeal was taken. The Supreme Court, Justice Powell, held that the provisions of the Missouri Supreme Court rule regulating lawyer advertising which prohibit deviating from a precise listing of areas of practice included in the advisory committee addendum to the rule, which prohibit a lawyer from identifying the jurisdictions in which he is licensed to practice and which prohibit the mailing of cards announcing the opening of an office to persons other than “lawyers, clients, former clients, personal friends and relatives” violate the First Amendment where there was no showing that the advertising was misleading or that the mailings and handbills would be more difficult to supervise.
Judgment reversed.

Most notable quotes from this case:

Truthful advertising related to lawful activities is entitled to protections of First Amendment. U.S.C.A.Const.Amends. 1, 14.
Although potential for deception and confusion is particularly strong in context of advertising professional services, restrictions upon such advertising may be no broader than reasonably necessary to prevent deception. U.S.C.A.Const.Amends. 1, 14.
Under commercial speech doctrine, states may not place absolute prohibition on certain types of potentially misleading information if information may be presented in way that is not deceptive. U.S.C.A.Const.Amends. 1, 14.
Even when communication is not misleading, state retains some authority to regulate; but state must assert substantial interest and interference with speech must be in proportion to interest served. U.S.C.A.Const.Amends. 1, 14.
In regulating communication which is not misleading, restrictions must be narrowly drawn and state lawfully may regulate only to extent regulation furthers state’s substantial interest. U.S.C.A.Const.Amends. 1, 14
Restriction prohibiting attorney from mailing cards announcing opening of his office to persons other than “lawyers, clients, former clients, personal friends and relatives” violated First Amendment without indication that inability to supervise mailings and handbills was reason state restricted potential audience of announcement cards, nor was it clear that absolute prohibition was the only solution. V.A.M.R. 4, Code of Prof.Resp., DR2-102(A)(2); U.S.C.A.Const.Amends. 1,
Although states may regulate commercial speech, First and Fourteenth Amendments require that they do so with care and in manner no more extensive than reasonably necessary for their substantial interests. U.S.C.A.Const.Amends. 1,

Nothing more fun than playing the game of what’s in the Sykes Probate File today…

Posted on June 29, 2012

Dear Readers;

The following is the probate file for 09 P 4585 between May1 and May 13, 2009:

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwZG02MkVITlpVcms

cut and paste this if link does not work:

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwZG02MkVITlpVcms

In any case, there is an accounting filed by CT for 2011 and there is also an Amended Petition for Partition.  I have not seen Gloria’s response to this, but there is no briefing schedule, so she has a few more days to prepare this.

With respect to the accounting, it looks fine except it is not explained why Hannah is so sickly and has $1000 in vet bills.  She is a young, healthy dog.  Her sister, Peanut, whom I have, is in perfect health and I think cost me about $70 in vet bills for just a check up last year.  Did anyone see this and wonder why Carolyn can’t take care of a simple 10 lb Pekingese, how can she take care of elderly Mary G?

Interesting.

Further, the mortgage payment doubled and that was not explained.  What’s up with that?

She also needs to revamp and refile her Motion to Dismiss or Non Suit for lack of jurisdiction.  I saw one in the file at one time. I will be finding that and redoing it for her next court appearance.  I have prepared declarations for Aunt Yolanda and Aunt Josephine and published them here and sent them off, but have heard nothing back.  All those declarations are necessary for 1) the Probate Court, 2) Gloria’s cases, most notable now the partition that will strip her of her brown house; 3) Ken’s ARDC complaint, 4) My ARDC complaint and a whole host of other reasons.

I’m hoping to get this all done soon so that justice may prevail and we can all go home soon!  Yeah!

JoAnne

FAX TRANSMITTAL SHEET
To:
ARDC
Attn: Ms. Lea Black, esq.
Fax 312-565-2320    From:                      Admitted Ill., N.  Carolina and Patent Bars
   JoAnne M. Denison, Pat.      Atty.  Reg.  No.  34,150
   DENISON & ASSOCS., PC    FAX 312-553-1307
 1512 N Fremont St, #202    CELL PH 773-255-7608
   CHICAGO, IL 60642    PHONE 312-553-1300
   JoAnne@DenisonLaw.com  or www.DenisonLaw.com
    Federal Patents, Trademarks & Copyrights
 Marianne Buckley, Associate, Of Counsel
 Troy Sieburg, Associate, Of Counsel
    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 efax header  )
June 26, 2012

        Re: JoAnne M. Denison ,  In relation to Cynthia Farenga’s Complaint AND
            Kenneth Ditkowsky, the Sykes Probate matter 09 P 4585
            PLUS my request to open an investigation against Cynthia Farenga, Peter Schmeidel, Adam Stern, Harvey Waller
            Request for subpoenas!
       
Dear Ms. Black;
   
Without waiving my representation by Mr. Ditkowsky, who is aware of this communication, attached are two declarations for signature by the adult sisters of Mary G Sykes, namely, Ms. Josephine DiPietro and Ms. Yolanda Baaken.

Their addresses are as follows:

Ms. Josephine DePietro
222 Park Avenue
Bloomingdale, Illinois 60108

Yolanda M. Bakken
1600 N. 39th Avenue
Stone Park, IL

I would appreciate your transmitting these to these ladies to inquire if the declarations are in fact true, and they were never formally noticed by the Petitioner in the above Probate matter as to the Dec 7, 2009 Petition for Guaradianship of Mary G Sykes which was filed by Carolyn Toerpe.  This would make the entire matter–the freezing of Gloria’s $272,000, her subsequent eviction, the partition action filed against her home, her continued harrassment by the miscreants–void ab initio.

Thank you for your continued attention and investigation of the above matter.   

This important communication was also posted on my blog at www.marygsykes.com, and www.marygsykes.blogspot.com, so if you lose it, it will be available there.  Also, if you do not want to retype it, today’s post provides a convenient link so you can just download a Word file to change as you please or just print out..

                    Very Truly Yours,

                       DENISON & ASSOCS, PC

                    JoAnne Denison   

                    Joanne M. Denison




Cc: Ken Ditkowsky, via email, MaryGSykes blogs.

PS–this is also being sent to you as part of my (our) continuing duty to report serious and flagrant violations of the rules of ethics and relevant state and federal laws to the ARDC.

PPS–I am told by a little bird that Josephine thinks “being allowed” to visit her sister once every two months and a phone call once or twice per month is okay because neither Yolanda or her daughter Kathy Bakken–family members once very, very close to Mary G Sykes–were told they “took the wrong side” in the dispute and therefore they are not allowed to see Mary.  I find such conduct of an officer of the court deplorable, but ****.  So you might make Josephine aware it is part of her civic duty to step forward and tell the truth–the court has no jurisdiction and Mary is able to go free and go back and live in her own home if she wants.  And, no a Guardian ad Litem is not supposed to “take sides”, but report fairly and honestly.  Mary G’s sisters used to phone each other all the time.  Gloria held parties for her all the time.  Now CT keeps her in near total isolation with just handful of visits/phone calls.  I am told at a favorite niece’s wedding, the sister’s family table was only about 5 relatives when that side of the family used to have dozens of extended family members visiting Mary (see the Christmas tape links on Vimeo – the links are on the home page of www.marygsykes.com.

Direct Links to the Sodini Notice Draft Declarations for the Sisters:

Posted on June 25, 2012

see below.
please cut and paste link if it does not work in your browser.
Yolanda
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwSzNuZUpDR1ExMHc
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwSzNuZUpDR1ExMHc
Second declaration–Josephine:
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwM2ZTVHNQOFZDOFU
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwM2ZTVHNQOFZDOFU
Now, if Ken wants to ‘CALL FOR AN INVESTIGATION” and ask the GAL’s to inform the court regarding these declarations, it’s a whole new ballgame.
A Guardian ad Litem, doing her job properly, would immediately, upon seeing Gloria’s documents in the file, or having been served with them, brought them to the court’s attention and start an investigation.
But see my “Table of Torts”.  TEN PAGES of questionable behavior, corruption, misfeasance, malfeasance, perpetration of misdemeansors and felonies have occurred in this case and law enforcement and even the ARDC have swept it under the rug.   Okay, maybe Atty Lea Black does not do this law and she needs help in this area, but the table of torts that I sent her should have raised some huge, huge red flags, even to the casual observer.
I’m not the one that should be scouring the files and preparing these declarations–she should be, or her staff.
The probate court is upside down right now (see attached picture), and I just wonder if the ARDC isn’t just standing on its head so the view looks good and proper to them.

Is this our Probate Court on the the 18th Floor? Should there be signage when you get off the elevator at floor 18 “Welcome to Wonderwerks?”

Ms. Black, YOU have the ability to change all of this.  I know you can do it and let justice prevail.

Posted

Another Reason for the Miscreants to start Gulping and back off

Posted on June 25, 2012

Dear Readers;

Now that I have had some time to go back and read transcripts and look over the my computer files (yes, I do have practically all the court orders and documents in my records, so this is a QED, AND I do plan on making those computer files consisting of filed and unfiled pleadings, court orders, court transcripts, etc. complete so Gloria can pursue her claims against the miscreants), and as a result of that and the upcoming July 6, 2012 Hearing on Motion to Partition, I have drafted the below affidavits and will fax them to Lea Black at the ARDC.

Now it is my understand (from a little bird), that Josephine “might be reluctant to sign” because apparently she “took the wrong side” and is allowed to see her sister every couple of months and call her a couple times per month.  What?  Gloria gave Mary parties all the time and included her in EVERYTHING.  Her mom called her sisters all the time.

The most disturbing part of this comment is that it is clearly obstruction of justice and a further breach by the GAL’s of their duty to report to a court fairly and impartially on matters concerning the disabled person.

I, myself, cringe at hearing such comments being made out of the mouth of an Officer of the Court.  Disgusting.

When this situation occurs, I will let Ms. Black know and to put in her cover letter to the sisters that it is their important civic duty to come forward and present court testimony (an affidavit is used as an important precursor to court testimony, it allows the parties, their attys and the court to determine if the witness has something worthwhile to say or not), and inform the court fully of the truth before it.  It is similar to jury duty, an important and cherished civic right, but perhaps signing that affidavit might be even more important.

Ms. Black should further know these witnesses have been tampered with by the GAL’s.

JoAnne

From Ken Ditkowsky today:

From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Jun 25, 2012 7:56 AM

Subject: Re: Request for Information on Incidents of The Use of Chemical Restraints on the Elderly and/or Disabled– from latifa . ring@comcast.net–she is looking for persons experienced with the drugging of elders to put them in nursing homes, keep them from family.  Generally these drugs are prescribed by physicians upon a complaint the elder is unruly and agitated.  Often this agitation occurs when they are put in a nursing home, personal effects and homes are sold–all to generate fees from lawyers, CPA’s and others that put them there.  The worst thing about it is that often these psychotropic drugs (Seroquel, Risperodol, etc.) are hard on the internal organs–heart, liver, kidneys, etc., and over time cause them to fail resulting in the death of the elder. An elder that would be perfectly fine in her own home, without money grubbing miscreants.

From Ken Ditkowsky

Just about every one of the Elder Abuse cases has an element of chemical restraint.    I forwarded your note to people who can report to you the information that you request.

The new Health Care Privacy laws are specifically designed to prevent this information from being readily attainable.   In Court 1 of the ARDC complaint against me (in relation to the Sykes case) Ms. Black is attempting to back door the First Amendment by suggesting that I cannot question a doctor about reports he wrote, and cannot address the fact that he as the treating doctor refused to sign the certificate of incompetency, yet a doctor called in one moment had no trouble signing.   The cache of doctors (except for Dr. Patel – the treater) have an amazing record of finding people incompetent so as to need the full time services of a plenary guardian.

 

As I said previously – using the criterion of the Circuit Court of Cook County in the Sykes case President Obama – if you stripped him of his clout – could wake up tomorrow morning and find Carolyn Troepe as his plenary guardian.   (No, I am not suggesting that the president is need of a plenary guardian – all I am saying is that when the goal is to create a need for plenary guardian the facts and the law do not get in the way – Yes, most of the Court appointed lawyers are good and decent people  - however, what has happened in Sykes and some similar cases is so reprehensible as to stand out in its stark perfidy).

Ms. Harris to whom this e-mail is directed can provide you with the information as to Robert Jaycox.   When I visited Mr. Jaycox he was so heavily sedated that he looked and sounded as if he were a sleepy drunk.  Of course – for privacy concerns the nursing home did not put up the safety bars – Mr. Jaycox has had at least one incident in which he fell out of bed and hit his head.   Gloria Sykes can tell you what the plenary guardian did to her mother.

 

All that said – you are investigating a ‘nerve!’   If you take away the chemical restraints as to indigent patients the nursing homes might have to provide services and these elderly (and disabled) could not be warehoused.   Indeed, you might take the profit out the warehousing -

Ken Ditkowsky

www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

 

Now, here’s the affidavits:

Josephine’s

In Re Estate of                                 No: 2009 P 4585
Mary G. Sykes,
An alleged disabled person.
Declaration by Josephine DiPietro
The undersigned doth deposes and sayeth
1.     I am the adult sister of Mary G. Sykes.
2.     That I have been informed that on November 18, 2009, a hearing date of December 7, 2011 at 10 am in courtroom 1804 was set on Carolyn Toerpe’s Petition for Guardianship.  On that date the hearing was held, and Carolyn Teorpe was appointed Plenary Guardian of Mary G Sykes.
3.     I have also been told of the following requirement under Illinois law:
(f) Notice of the time and place of the hearing shall be given by the petitioner by mail or in person to those persons, including the proposed guardian, whose names and addresses appear in the petition and who do not waive notice, not less than 14 days before the hearing.  755 ILCS § 5/11a. (Emphasis added).
4.     No one ever served me with any written notice of hearing 14 days prior to that hearing, either by mail or in person.
5.     I was not present at the hearing.  (State whether you would have been there had you been informed 14 days in advance.)    ______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
I hereby declare that the above statements are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and recollection at the time they were made.  Where based upon information and belief, they were believed to be true at the time the statements were made.  If I am called to testify, I will give testimony that is the same as stated within this document. I understand that false statements may subject me to penalties for perjury under the relevant Illinois laws and regulations.Further declarant saith not. ___________________________________
Josephine DePietro
Dated this ____ day of June, 2012

For Yolanda Bakken

In Re Estate of                                 No: 2009 P 4585
Mary G. Sykes,
An alleged disabled person.
Declaration by Yolanda Bakken
The undersigned doth deposes and sayeth
1.     I am the adult sister of Mary G. Sykes.
2.     That I have been informed that on November 18, 2009, a hearing date of December 7, 2011 at 10 am in courtroom 1804 was set on Carolyn Toerpe’s Petition for Guardianship.  On that date the hearing was held, and Carolyn Teorpe was appointed Plenary Guardian of Mary G Sykes.
3.     I have also been told of the following requirement under Illinois law:
(f) Notice of the time and place of the hearing shall be given by the petitioner by mail or in person to those persons, including the proposed guardian, whose names and addresses appear in the petition and who do not waive notice, not less than 14 days before the hearing.  755 ILCS § 5/11a. (Emphasis added).
4.     No one ever served me with any written notice of hearing 14 days prior to that hearing, either by mail or in person.
5.     I was present at the hearing only because Gloria Sykes, younger daughter of Mary G Sykes, notified me informally in the following manner there was to be a hearing:
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
(State whether it was via an email to someone else, a phone call, etc. or you were unaware that the Petition was being heard on December 7, 2010 at 10 am in court room 1804 of the Richard J Daley Center, 55 W. Washington St, Room 1804, Chicago, IL 60602.
I hereby declare that the above statements are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and recollection at the time they were made.  Where based upon information and belief, they were believed to be true at the time the statements were made.  If I am called to testify, I will give testimony that is theInitials_______
Yoland Bakken Declaration
Page 2 of 2 same as stated within this document. I understand that false statements may subject me to penalties for perjury under the relevant Illinois laws and regulations.
Further declarant saith not.
___________________________________
Yolanda Bakken
Dated this ____ day of June, 2012

These declarations should be signed ASAP and sent IMMEDIATELY to both myself for publication on the blog AND please fax them to Ms. Lea Black at the ARDC, fax no. 312-565-2320

 

I will put these inline in this post and also put them up as a shared file in word that can be edited because these should be used by every atty practicing in probate that is having a problem with a ward that may not be disabled and some family members want to fight it.

Fax to Hon Timothy Evans, Presiding Judge, Cook County

Posted on June 23, 2012

Dear Readers;

Okay, you know I just couldn’t resist a responsive fax to Judge Evans, so here it is:

FAX TRANSMITTAL SHEET
To: Hon Presiding
Judge Timothy Evans
Circuit Court Cook County

Fax: 312-603-5366
From:                      Admitted Ill., N.  Carolina and Patent Bars
JoAnne M. Denison,     Pat. Atty.  Reg.  No.  34,150
DENISON & ASSOCS., PC    FAX 312-553-1307
1512 N Fremont St, #202    CELL PH 773-255-7608
CHICAGO, IL 60642    PHONE 312-553-1300
JoAnne@DenisonLaw.com or www.DenisonLaw.com
Federal Patents, Trademarks & Copyrights
Troy Sieburg, associate, of counsel
Marianne Buckley, associate of counsel
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 312-553-1300
A confirmation copy       WILL   ✔   will NOT be sent.
Pages in fax, including this coversheet – ( 1  )
June 23, 2012

Re: Seizure of attorney laptops in Probate court

Dear Judge Evans;

I am in receipt of your cursory letter sent my snail mail to my offices.

However, snail mail is very costly to the taxpayers and emails and efax are much more efficient and I strongly encourage you to use those.  I promise you I will respond promptly to all communications, generally in a day or two, so do not worry about non receipt of mail.

Further, the USPS readily admits from studies that are decades old and extremely consistent, that only 95% of snail mail reaches its destination in 5 days!  I think email easily beats that statistic hands down.

As you may or may not know, this issue is part of a much larger issue going on in the Probate Court right now and we have a very active blog on all aspects of a case which is extremely contentious and appears to be the center of substantial corruption and wiring.

Discussions among the attys that are helping out the client pro bono are lively and active.

The seizure of the laptop has become part of those discussions, and one of the attys on the blog is extremely active and eloquently outspoken, so I thought perhaps you might enjoy his comments.  Below is the post for today, of which you are a subject.

Ken Ditkowsky says that Judge Timothy Evans sent me a bug letter
Posted on June 23, 2012

Dear Readers;

As you well know, last December 2011 my laptop was seized when Adam Stern whined to Judge Connors that I was blogging (soon the transcripts will appear on the first page of this blog, I am working on that), So finally, finally I got a response from Cook County presiding judge Timothy Evans after 3 faxes and waiting about 2 weeks. (I guess he has no law clerks or staff).

in any case, see below:
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwQVh3bm5fbWU3VkE (cut and paste link)

Obviously, the letter says nothing in response to consititutional rights, the ability to best serve your client, etc. but Ken Ditkowsky had an even better anecdote regarding a “bug letter.”

KD’s anecdote:
“Many years ago before the age of computers on every desk, the Illinois Central Railroad ran trains to Southern Illinois. The trains had windows that opened, and sometimes passengers were harassed by insects. On one such trip a traveler was so upset that he wrote to the Chairman of the IC to complain.
In the 40?s and 50?s Banks and large institutions had automatic typewriters – these were typewriters that we very much like player pianos. A secretary would type a master, and then another secretary would fill in the details such as name, address, etc.
Anyhow, our traveler received a letter very similar to what you received, and in the unsophisticated era the personal signature totally mollified him – until he turned the letter over and saw in pencil the words: “send bug letter.”
It is a shame that everyone is watching what appears to be a crime being committed, i.e. a 93 year old lady, kidnapped and robbed and the thieves acting in concert with the judicial system. The Illinois legislature enacted the Sodini protections and made the protections jurisdictional to prevent exactly what has happened in the Sykes case. Now for four years this Gulag has continued in full sight of law enforcement, the highest ranking judicial officials, and the world. Mary Sykes has been totally deprived of her liberty, her property, civil rights and even human rights in full sight. Approximately a million dollars in assets have been illegally sequestered by the thieves who have the temerity to brag in open court of the perfidy! (see Sykes transcripts)
The distinction between Chicago street crime and guardian crime is that the ‘thugs’ are not ‘minority individuals’ not Italian mafia etc. They are ‘clout’ heavy political types who have for many years ‘played’ the system to make their bread at the public expense. By targeting Grandma who they could characterize as senile they are apparently safe as their co-conspirators cover their tracks with CYA letters, intimidation, and deceit! These criminals are just as vicious as the gang member who grabs grandma’s purse and throws her onto the elevated tracks! The only distinction is the the judicial system protects them. Shame, Shame, Shame.
The attached letter from Judge Evans is a symptom of the corruption that gave rise to Watergate, Greylord, Sykes, etc. It is difficult to speak to deaf ears glued onto public officials whose sole aim in life is CYA. Rest assured, at some point in time the right combination of circumstances will occur. How many years did Sandusky prey on male children? How many responsible people watched? What did the public authorities do? How many lives did the SOB ruin?
Why are the public officials who ignored the problem not in the ‘dock?’ Every one of them Aided and abetted the criminal activities while they occurred – each should be independently prosecuted and sent to jail as an Accessory during the fact. Each public official who ignored a complaint letter or other communication had an affirmative duty (parens Patrie) and in ignoring his/her duty assisted in the crime. These elder abuse cases are identical. Today – all the is required of the public officials (who have nothing to hide – those who do should take the fifth) is to demand a complete honest and comprehensive investigation of all the facts of the Sykes case.”
Sigh, now I have to send him a fax saying that his letter was non responsive, I will make the security guy aware of the letter, but the reality is lawyers protect our rights and not security people.  I have yet to see a cop or security officer say, you have important constitutional rights and I want to protect those.  Nope, their mantra is “an arrest a day keeps the sarge away.”
I don’t think the Hon. Timothy Evans  knows that I am serious enough to sue him over this because it is a very important right to be able to take notes in court when needed and to do the best possible job for your client.
So more faxes. I will let you know if I get a real response from him or if I have to go to a federal court district judge to do it.
thanks all.
JoAnne

There were other comments I receive about your letter, but KD”s was clearly the best, hands down.

Kindly let me know if and when you decide to write a responsive letter that protects the rights of attys and their clients in the courtroom, and PULEEZE do not push off YOUR responsibility to “security” who know nothing of these rights, don’t know, don’t care, aren’t being paid to worry about anyone’s rights, and always seem surprised when a lawyer brings up the fact that due process and constitutional rights were supposed to be part of a class and exam passed in 6th grade!

I already had a discuss with the courtroom employees over constitutional rights, and they admitted security personnel knew “nothing about” that (due process and constitutional rights” and they said that was not their job to know these things or evaluate these things.
I agree.

So why are you passing something to a department that knows nothing of these things, readily admits it, and they say they take their direction from the court after the lawyers argue their respective points?

All good questions, but where are the good answers.

Very Truly Yours,

DENISON & ASSOCS, PC

JoAnne Denison

JoAnne M. Denison

cc: www.marygsykes.com  And www.marygsykes.blogspot.com

cc:

Ken Ditkowsky says that Judge Timothy Evans sent me a bug letter

Posted on June 23, 2012

Dear Readers;

As you well know, last December 2011 my laptop was seized when Adam Stern whined to Judge Connors that I was blogging (soon the transcripts will appear on the first page of this blog, I am working on that), So finally, finally I got a response from Cook County presiding judge Timothy Evans after 3 faxes and waiting about 2 weeks. (I guess he has no law clerks or staff).

in any case, see below:

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwQVh3bm5fbWU3VkE (cut and paste link)

Obviously, the letter says nothing in response to consititutional rights, the ability to best serve your client, etc. but Ken Ditkowsky had an even better anecdote regarding a “bug letter.”

KD’s anecdote:

“Many years ago before the age of computers on every desk, the Illinois Central Railroad ran trains to Southern Illinois. The trains had windows that opened, and sometimes passengers were harassed by insects. On one such trip a traveler was so upset that he wrote to the Chairman of the IC to complain.

In the 40′s and 50′s Banks and large institutions had automatic typewriters – these were typewriters that we very much like player pianos. A secretary would type a master, and then another secretary would fill in the details such as name, address, etc.

Anyhow, our traveler received a letter very similar to what you received, and in the unsophisticated era the personal signature totally mollified him – until he turned the letter over and saw in pencil the words: “send bug letter.”
It is a shame that everyone is watching what appears to be a crime being committed, i.e. a 93 year old lady, kidnapped and robbed and the thieves acting in concert with the judicial system. The Illinois legislature enacted the Sodini protections and made the protections jurisdictional to prevent exactly what has happened in the Sykes case. Now for four years this Gulag has continued in full sight of law enforcement, the highest ranking judicial officials, and the world. Mary Sykes has been totally deprived of her liberty, her property, civil rights and even human rights in full sight. Approximately a million dollars in assets have been illegally sequestered by the thieves who have the temerity to brag in open court of the perfidy! (see Sykes transcripts)

The distinction between Chicago street crime and guardian crime is that the ‘thugs’ are not ‘minority individuals’ not Italian mafia etc. They are ‘clout’ heavy political types who have for many years ‘played’ the system to make their bread at the public expense. By targeting Grandma who they could characterize as senile they are apparently safe as their co-conspirators cover their tracks with CYA letters, intimdation, and deceit! These criminals are just as vicious as the gang member who grabs grandma’s purse and throws her onto the elevated tracks! The only distinction is the the judicial system protects them. Shame, Shame, Shame.

The attached letter from Judge Evans is a symptom of the corruption that gave rise to Watergate, Greylord, Sykes, etc. It is difficult to speak to deaf ears glued onto public officials whose sole aim in life is CYA. Rest assured, at some point in time the right combination of circumstances will occur. How many years did Sandusky prey on male children? How many responsible people watched? What did the public authorities do? How many lives did the SOB ruin?

Why are the public officials who ignored the problem not in the ‘dock?’ Every one of them Aided and abetted the criminal activities while they occurred – each should be independently prosecuted and sent to jail as an Accessory during the fact. Each public official who ignored a complaint letter or other communication had an affirmative duty (parens Patrie) and in ignoring his/her duty assisted in the crime. These elder abuse cases are identical. Today – all the is required of the public officials (who have nothing to hide – those who do should take the fifth) is to demand a complete honest and comprehensive investigation of all the facts of the Sykes case.”

Sigh, now I have to send him a fax saying that his letter was non responsive, I will make the security guy aware of the letter, but the reality is lawyers protect our rights and not security people.  I have yet to see a cop or security officer say, you have important constitutional rights and I want to protect those.  Nope, their mantra is “an arrest a day keeps the sarge away.”

I don’t think the Hon. Timothy Evans  knows that I am serious enough to sue him over this because it is a very important right to be able to take notes in court when needed and to do the best possible job for your client.

So more faxes. I will let you know if I get a real response from him or if I have to go to a federal court district judge to do it.

thanks all.

JoAnne

Some additional questions for Atty Black at the ARDC

Posted on June 21, 2012

From Ken Ditkowsky:

Sent: Jun 20, 2012 12:32 PM

Subject: elder Abuse

Here in Illinois we have a bunch of senior citizen cases in which a number of seniors have been deprived of their liberty, property, civil and human rights by court appointed miscreants.    Illinois government ignores the problem until after the senior dies and the Judicial watchdogs stand squarely protecting the miscreants.

If you are interested Attorney JoAnne Denison maintains a website that has the Mary Sykes matter as its keynote.   Probate Sharks and NASGA maintain more comprehensive blogs.    The details are the same.   A Gulag exists!    An individual who is targeted can be declared incompetent, and have his/her rights terminated.   GALs serve to protect the new status quo until the estate is stripped and the victim is allowed to die.    In the Sykes case a person who the ‘ward’ complained about to the authorities was the preferred plenary guardian.

In spite of her treating doctor refusing to declare her incompetent, and Mary Sykes passing a written examination administered by the Secretary of State of Illinois Mary Sykes was declare incompetent.   Of course no medical testify was need – the GAL told the Court that the written protestations of the victim were ‘undue influence’ of a close family member (the younger daughter) and the victim did not want a lawyer.   As the treating physician was unwilling to certify, the Court counseled the miscreant applicant to find a doctor who was more co-operative.

It has been a scandal that some our expert witnesses will testify to just about anything for a price =  Naturally one of those doctors was found.   The rest is history.

The scary thing is that placed in proper context one of the compliant judges could and would declare you or me as incompetent and appoint a plenary guardian for us depriving us of our liberty, property, and civil rights.

When a group of citizens requested I investigate, I did.   I was first subjected to a sanction motion.   It did not bother anyone that the Court had no jurisdiction over me,  I was sanctioned.   As I am a lawyer, I took an appeal.    The Appellate Court vacated the sanction award and dismissed it on jurisdictional grounds.   The two GALs in the Sykes case filed ARDC complaints against me for the unethical activity of protesting the violation of my First Amendment Rights (and that of my clients).   Believe it or not the ARDC refused to investigate the GAL who misused their positions, but it has filed a disciplinary action against me.

In Illinois exercising First Amendment Rights is unethical.

Ken Ditkowsky

http://www.ditkowskylawoffice.com/

From JoAnne Denison;

While the GAL’s have repeatedly alleged that KD (and I have seen this erroneously reported on other blogs) state that he allegedly sent a letter to Dr. Patel stating he represented Mary and needed her medical records, I have not seen a copy of that letter anywhere.  It should have been attached to the complaint against KD.  Did the miscreants forge such a letter?  In any case, KD had the authority of Gloria who undoubtedly had the authority of Mary to obtain medical records.  I am certain that Gloria was listed as a person to disclose Mary’s medical information to.

Has the ARDC subpoenaed Dr. Patel for those authorization forms?  I bet not.

I believe that KD received quite a few medical records for Mary from Gloria nonetheless.

All good questions for Ms. Black at the ARDC, since her complaint seems to turn on all of these issues.

JoAnne

From Lisa Belanger, esq.–a Father’s Day Poem

Posted on June 19, 2012

Dear Readers;

As some of you might be aware, Lisa Belanger is a lawyer in Mass. who has had her father ripped from her by a number of court appointed and connected “professionals”, namely a greedy CPA and lawyer appointed as conservator for her father–DESPITE the fact her dad was a lawyer, has a substantial estate and named her and her sister in Power of Attorney Documents to care for him, manage his affairs when it came time, and be his conservator.  But the court appointed “friends” of the court–most notably NYC Mellon Bank who hold this estate.

She has filed an appeal of those decisions and we all wish her well.

But she cannot see her father because “that agitates him.”  Of course he is agitated when he cannot see his two beloved daughters and 5 grandchildren and wants to call them several times a day–as he had in the past!  He is told not to call them and he has a fit and physically grabs that phone!  He won’t let anyone stand in the way of calling his beloved daughters, so what do they do?  Physically restrain and drug him–despite the fact he has heart disease and kidney problems and the psychotropic drugs they use are hard on his heart and kidneys!

Now he is drugged and isolated from his daughters and grandchildren.  How abusive is that?  And it is all done under the gloss of authority of the Mass. Probate Court.

Another case of evil and greedy and severe emotional abuse of an elderly senior.

Please pray for Lisa and her sister Devora and the grandchildren and the dad.

JoAnne

A TRIBUTE TO:

MY FATHER—

MARVIN H. SIEGEL

MY FATHER TAUGHT ME:

To Live in Hope

To Have Loyalty, Morals

To Have Compassion, Kindness

To be Gentle When Stroked, Fierce When Provoked

To Fight for Justice for Family, for Others

To Not be Silent When People Suffer at the Hands of Others—

To be Heard in Defending Others

To Right the Wrong and To Not Stop Until Won

And to Be Able to Look in the Mirror When the Day is Done

I Miss You–More Than Words Can Ever Say;

Yet, I will Overcome the Obstacles in Our Way—

Because of What You Taught Me

I LOVE YOU,

LISA

by Lisa Belanger for her father on Father’s Day 2012

More good questions surrounding the Declaration of Incompetency from KD and Gloria

Posted on June 19, 2012

From Ken Ditkowsky:

The written test administered by the Secretary of State is not only significant but it is positive proof that Mary Sykes was competent when Carolyn made her application to have Mary Sykes declared incompetent.   It also clarifies why Carolyn was unable to obtain a certificate of incompetency until they went to an incompetency mill doctor.    These doctors for a price will prepare and sign certificates of incompetency for just about anyone including but not limited to the current presidental candidates.  They operate under the credo “do not confuse me with the facts, I’ve made up my mind.”

The doctors of infamy provide cover so that the estates of the senior citizen victims can be ‘looted’ and the Adam Sterns, Cynthia Farenga’s and Carolyn Troepes can hide behind their victim’s right of privacy*****.

Ken Ditkowsky (his experience and his opinion).

And dear readers, that is exactly why Gloria has not receive any discovery answers regarding these individuals.  I would have asked them in interrogatories how many seniors they have declared incompetent for court purposes, by year, how many seniors they have determined to be competent, and what they were paid for doing this.  Clearly these court appointed or court friendly doctors routinely declare seniors incompetent so they lose their rights, they have to live in nursing homes or where the court says, they no longer can stay in their own homes and most important, some nursing home, some elder care service agency tied into the court gets fees, GAL’s get fees and make campaign donations to the court—and the list goes on.  This is a system intended to strip sentions of their property and their rights, and their ability, like Mary G to live at home in comfort all her remaining years–as her Power of Attorney for Health Care so states.

From Gloria to Ken Ditkowsky, Esq.
Subject: RE: Affidavit 214

True but at the end of the day Dr. Patel wrote Carolyn Toerpe a letter on June 15, 2009 and was clear that my mother was competent so much so that she-mother-instructed him and he-Dr Patel- followed her instructions and refused to sign the CCP form. Then on June 25, 2009 mother met with Mr. Lippmann of the Chicago Volunteer Legal Services. The attorney also found mother highly competant and mother vacated parts of the 2005 trust removing Carolyn Toerpe as Trustee and specifying with clarity that 6016 I was the sole owner and she was to live in her home 6014 until her passing and then it was to be passed down to Toerpe and I 50/50 and all she owned including the cash, coins, valuable furniture, jewelry et al. also split 50/50. All these safeguards, and yet Toerpe and her attorneys have taken everything for their own financial gain including my mothers freedoms and liberties as an American Citizen. So I find that she passed a driving test in January 2009 a little irrelevant when she also filed a verified petition with State employees for an order of protection on the 9th of June 2009 and right under Judge Kirby’s nose Toerpe was able to kidnap mom from the courthouse and bring her to Dr Rabin who signed a Ccp211 in a New York minute a little foolish for the political elite or policing agencies to care about now three yeas after the fact. They are watching my mother slowly die as AS CF PS CT HJW DJS and AB continue to have her drugged, isolated, and emotionally and socially neglected.

I’m completing my book for publication soon and it’s a horrific journey in time where the people mother trusted to help protect her all helped Toerpe and company destroy all people she loves and trusts and slowly murder my Mother in the process.

from Gloira Jean Sykes

Dear Readers:

Of course my question is, how is it that the GA:’s don’t see that Mary is in an unhappy place, she made numerous written directives to come home, she was doing fine with Glroia for 10+ years, and now the State of Illinois interferes with all of that.

I don’t understand why the court and why LB do not see how unfair all of this is, and Ken is right that an immediate launch of an investigation should be conducted–including interviewing Mary away from the miscreants.  It is easy for an abusive guardian to threaten the ward with a nursing home “if she does not behave.”

Mary wants to go home and she deserves to go home.  With all of the uncertainty, the litigation surrounding the two homes, they are unlikely to sell or to sell for much at all, even perhaps than the mortgages on the property.  I would not be surprised if there is a short sale on the brown house, or even on the front house to get those two properties sold. But this is the first step the Commissioner is supposed to take–can the brown house be partitioned, (and Gloria can jump in and ask what she would need to pay to avoid this, what her share it, if garage rights can be sold, etc.)  Then the commissioner should decide if it’s worth even putting the property on the market.  PS and Chase did great harm to the brown house (despite the fact the GAL’s stood by and have said nothing about that and neither has CT even tho she is a fiduciary to Mary, what’s up with that?), and most likely that damage means the property cannot be sold at a profit.  The commissioner should make that determination and that the court should release the property from the Estate because it is a burden and unlikely to realize any profit.  Gloria can submit such a report to the commissioner and maybe she will.

It’s soooo sad, when Mary was clearly very happy with Gloria and living in Norwood Park.  Gloria was going to fix up her home and eventually live there.  Mary could have lived at her home with a companion if the court or GAL’s found that necessary.  I know Gloria would have arranged for that.

JoAnne

So why is Chase now asking for a 60 to 90 day stay to lift the stay in bankruptcy?

Posted on June 15, 2012

Hot off the press:  see the links:

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwbmhuZU1GUWtNeFU

if link breaks: cut and paste

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6FbJzwtHocwbmhuZU1GUWtNeFU

Two days ago I went to court and heard Chase earnestly plead with the bankruptcy judge, the hon. Donald Cassling to lift the stay in bankruptcy and allow them to promptly file a foreclosure against Gloria’s home.  Ah, but this judge is experienced, so he set the hearing for a quick date and quick discovery, two week and just a few days to a hearing Chase claims is needed to preserve its rights in foreclosure.  Obviously prompted by the GAL’s with Deborah Soehlig agreeing and encouraging this event.

So what happens next, the very next day they file a Motion to Extend the hearing by 60 to 90 days claiming that’s how long it takes to get one of their own witnesses to court!

Do you think that’s it, or do you think Gloria has some very valid defenses against Chase?

Why did Chase come and break into Gloria’s home, smashing out walls for no apparent reason on both the first and second floors.  They claim (Peter Schmeidel?) someone called them and said the home was abandoned, when it was clearly not abandoned, and that they were “securing the premises.”  Does that involve smashing out walls?  Throwing all of Gloria’s furniture into the snow in the alley in the dead of winter?  Does it involve disabling the security cameras in a detached garage not part of that premises?  I believe the garage belongs to Mary G’s lot and not Glorias.  And what about disabling the security system in the garage and disconnecting the 4 cameras.  How is breaking and entering into a garage and disabling a security system part of “securing a premises.”  Seems to me they wanted to trash the place, scare Gloria and render her homeless hoping she would go away forever.

All good questions.

JoAnne

PS–nonetheless, Chase will assuredly get 60 to 90 days to go to hearing on their request to lift the stay in bankruptcy.  So this is a great time to ask Chase, Peter Schmeidel and anyone involved with Chase the above questions in interrogatories, requests for document and requests for admissions so the matter can properly go to trial.  I know I have 33 questions I would like to ask Chase and it’s puppet Peter Schmeidel and I would like to ask the GAL’s what part, if any, they had in all of this.

Another day in court, but this time Federal Court and the playing field is level…..

Posted on June 13, 2012

Dear Reader;

These are my notes from today. They are my impressions and my typing (and btw, Tim Evans still has not gotten back to me on the use of laptops in court, but that is my preferred method for taking notes because I can do it all day with hardly a wrist/hand ache, but writing, I’m good for about 15 min tops. Since Gloria talks a lot, I think it is very important for me to be able to take notes on my laptop!  So we all need to put together another fax to him, and then perhaps a declaratory judgment lawsuit.  First amendment reigns supreme!)

If you want an accurate transcript, please order one and pay for it and I will publish it here.  Lea Black needs more documents for her file that tell the truth, since that virtue seems to be a challenge for Deborah Soehlig today, and in the past I have seen that this is a deep challenge for Adam Stern and Cynthia Farenga also.

take care all

JoAnne

Sykes bankruptcy status call on Chase’s motion to lift stay and file foreclosure in circuit court.

Gloria and an atty is in court, it is probably her new one.  Should be interesting.

Case is far behind and switched to Hon. Donald Cassling for judge

Court asks parties to identify themselves for record: Richard Bussie, debtor Gloria, Deborah for Estate of Mary G Sykes, Atty Lovejoy and an atty for Chase.  No GAL’s.  Good,

Lovejoy and DJS start right in.  They assert there is a conflict of interest over the $200M being held in Indiana.  They explain the stay was modified to allow for a partition.   Judge Hollis modified that stay to allow for partition of Gloria’s home, or the brown home.

There is no appeal of that stay according to DJS.  (This is a lie, I just found the case on Pacer and Gloria just submitted a very good trial brief on 6/5/12 and I found in on Pacer).

OC’s agree that Judge Hollis already ruled this was a probate matter and did not belong in bankruptcy.

OC explains that there is due an accounting to the Estate of MGS and that the debtor is claiming $200M in Indiana and so is the estate.  They claim there is a hearing scheduled on July 12 in Indians, which is 30 day within June 6.

Gloria raises her hand.  Oh boy, let’s go!  She starts in, visibly shaken, but she is going strong:

But first, her atty RB explains:
There is no true conflict.  This is Gloria’s money.  It was put into a bank account in someone else’s name via a verbat trust.  RB was hired by Gloria to release those funds in Indiana, and he is attempting to obtain those funds.  He explains further, the Motion for Relief from the Stay is before the court, and there is some discussion about his certification and he hands a copy of some pleadings to the lawyer from Chase, etc.

He asserts that this is a prima facie case, that the money is in escrow, it cannot be affected by an Illinois Probate court, and he is asking for the to stay in bankruptcy court.

He goes on to explain that many of the bk docts and schedules are in error, were not properly filed and he wants time to correct them and amend the ch. 11 proceeding
We are asking , o prima facie case, money is in escrow fund,

The Chase atty proceeds with how he wishes to proceed with his foreclosure and he needs the stay in bk modified.  He? Says he wants the stay lifted pursuant to both houses.  (DJS explains the white house and brown house)

6016 has been served in partition action.

The Judge asks about the stay and the status and lifting the stay against one or both houses.

OC talks about a court proceeding in probate last week (Something was done last week in probate?  It’s not on the docket.  Hmmm.)

They start to explain about the stay, and the foreclosure and partitioning a property which is the interest in the property.  DJS explains, I’m not sure how this oges.  I’m not sure it will happen.

Beemis says they have no standing in bk and the atty for the Guardian should not be there at all– this is seconded by a statement from Gloria.

Gloria wants to talk.  She has been raising her hand, she has been giving the court looks she wants to talk…..

And there we go, the judge starts with a statement, “ma’am, you cannot speak if you are represented by counsel, ….”

NOT.

Gloria starts talking.  She (DJS) has no standing, we are appealing the modification of the stay in district court (true).  Both Chase and the Estate of MGS come to the court as creditors but they are not creditors,

I prevailed in a lawsuit agains Lumbermans which involved my home, and I wanted to move forward and fix up my property.  That is also my home office.  They (all Opposing Counsel)  came into probate and stopped me from doing that.  Six attys I have hired and paid have told me that I have no standing, I have I have not been served, I have not been served at all.  They said they had to summons Chase to bring Chase into this proceeding.  I find an ambush, and I am now before Judge Darrah (sp).  There’s also a 2 1401 proceeding in the eviction they filed against me because they wrongfully took my property which was listed in my bk. No one ever lifted that (the automatic bk stay) to take my property (and wrongfully detain it from my possession).

(Attys) People from probate come in here and they have no standing.

Popjoy came in here and he told me he was collecting a debt and he was my debt collector.

All these issues are part of my Adversarial Proceeding cases.  I can prove Chase willy nilly froze all my accounts (wrongfully) in 2009.  I can prove Chase has refused my payments. (Wrongfully)

All im asking is that you (consider these wrongful actions).

I know nothing about a hearing on the 12th, they have not served me.  I think the probate court must serve me (if they want to partition my property).

Now 3 attys start talking/responding to what Gloria has spewed all over the court.

US federal credit union has the $200,000.

The court:  Enough has been raised as to allegations.  We need an evidentiary hearing (to lift the stay in bk).

I don’t know.  We’ve got a secured creditor who says he has not been paid, and that’s all they need to prove (in order to lift the stay so Chase may foreclose).

They may not be the proper holder of the note (hey glo, ask for discovery)

I cannot indefinitely string them out. This has to be set for a quick evidentiary hearing.  I will give every one expedited discovery.  Set a hearing on two weeks .

(Attys start to argue about their schedules).  The court: I can set this for the 25th starting at 10 am.

The court: the only issue presented will be Chase’s motion for relief of the automatic stay.  They will need to establish they hold the note, they have not been paid, they will be allowed to establish defenses to Gloria’s claims.

this will be in the morning on the 26th.

I will set it 9 am on the 25th.  9 to 11, should be plenty of time, by close of business, look at pretrial order, and get those done by 22nd, close of business.  One line description of witnesses and what they will testify to.

Split it up an hour apiece.   Now popjoy brings up 200,000 and wonders if chase will file suit against those for the deficiency.  I don’t have a motion in front of me.
I need list of witnesses and exhibits by the 22nd.

Status terminated.