Skip to content

Contact

What’s Your Story?

Tell us your story in the comments section below. We’ll get back to you about an on-air interview.

Want to talk about your experience with the Florida Bar on-air? call 305-773-5167



Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon
Sign up for our Email Newsletter


For Email Marketing you can trust

20 Comments

  1. Raimundo Couret, CLU says:

    I wonder why is it that all my contributions to the Page were blocked and so kept out of the sight of anyone just after I notified DISBAR THE FLORIDA BAR that I had legally filed a grievance targeting a judge engaged in racketeering, violation of rules of legal process, co-complicity with predatory insurance companies, and allowing of traffic of influences in the Courthouse.
    As a responsible and civic citizen I used the weapons that the JUSTICE SYSTEM allows us to use and offered all of the incontestable evidences in file to the BAR’S JUDICIAL DIVISION in spite of the fact that said incontestable material evidences are at the fingertips of bar’s personnel.
    This is why I believe that I have very good reasons to believe that the Page “Disbar the Florida Bar” may have any conflicts of interest because I dared to mention each one of the Parties engaged in obvious racketeering by name and title.
    Therefore, I cannot rule out potential threats by the prevaricating judge or by the bar itself in its customary intention to protect bar’s members in detriment of “justice”.

  2. Elizabeth Wallace says:

    You post a 2pm show but what day and where ? I am in Oregon and working with Dennis Schulke from TN. There are not too many of us who are focusing on the real problems, so many are following paper gurus they do not see the simple truth that the 13th amendment tells it all. The STATEBARS, NLG, and attorneys/lawyers are the problem. This was mentioned clearly from the quoted speeches of Lenin who also began the No fault divorce and began the NLG in NY through the communist party. “Legalees, [ he stated] would infiltrate through every town in the [ US ] until they controlled everything including political positions/legislator. They did this, and the corporate Congress continues on to fool the people that they are being represented. It is time to open this can of worms, across each state of this nation and get these evil destroyers of our nation out. Our Legislator, through the Governor has also created another entity overlording the medical matters, as we will see by 2014 when the revised statues reflect the birth of a new power against the people protecting all insurance lords, attorneys, and the IRS watch and see if the people do not address the attorney issues immediately !! I am on board to make a chapter here in Oregon.

  3. Raimundo Couret says:

    CIRCUNVENTION OF LAW AND COVER-UP OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES IN THE OFFICE OF THE STATE ATTORNEY FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY. ATTORNEY GENERAL’S MANEUVER TO PROTECT PREVARICATING STATE ATTORNEY.

    Dear Lex Winston:

    Please take this comment as a formal request for an invitation to be in your show. I am certain that the substance of my appearance will have a great impact in your audience.

    I never imagined that the corruption of TFB and of ABA would permeate the Court System at its highest level, including the Office of Katherinne Fernandez Rundle, South Florida State Attorney for District XI, and that of [Wilfredo Ferrer] the United States General Attorney for South Florida.

    Although the Justice System is the spine of all the freedoms that we still emjoy in this Great Nation, Corruption is so rampant that we, Americans, are on the brink of losing our most intrinsic Civil Rights. TFB and FBA are turning the very best laws in the whole world into wet toilet paper.

    Seating in her throne and surounded by a corrupt or incompetent personnel, KFR has engaged in Circunvention of the Law by helping to cover up Criminal Activities by two lawyers. Scott E. Danner in Fort Lauderdale and Felipe E. Diez in Miami.

    KFR boasts (in a 710 AM Program) that her Agency answers each piece of correspondence received. Yet, her urgency to protect the backs or her peers causes her to prevaricate.

    To make it worse, Wilfredo Ferrer, US ATTORNEY GENERAL for South Florida, prevaricates to protect KFG and her Assistants Ulises Martinez, Juan Somoano, and Frank Solano.

    Quite a few days ago I presented a formal inquiry/complaintdemanding an investigation for apparent circunvention of law by KFR and her personnel. In spite of the fact that the cover-sheet clearly states that the Agency will provide a File Number when Complainant calls the indicated telephone number, AG’s personnel has so far ignored each one of my calls and messages. Therefore, I have very good reasons to denounce foul play by the U.S. Justice System. Where are we heading?

    A local candidate said to me: “Ray, you have a lot of courage”.
    “No”, I answered him. then continued: “I wouldn’t have dared to come this far if I didn’t have the absolute truth and all the necessary documentation to substantiate my allegations far beyond the slightest shadow of a doubt. Yet, I am afraid of corruption in the Justice System.

  4. Alex Sokolow says:

    Dear Les Winston For Congress,

    Do you remember the email I sent you suggesting we partner with experts to show rainforest landowners and their countries how to harvest the rainforests more sustainably and profitably (as described at http://www.rain-tree.com/facts.htm) –and divide the increased profits four ways? I’m not sure if the landowners or their governments would agree to do that indefinitely; if not, maybe we can do it for 20% ownership of the land. (If combined with some deficit reduction measures, e.g. those of Senators Coburn and/or Lieberman, it could eliminate our national debt and the looming entitlement shortage.)

    (As for the rainforests’ subsistence farmers, we should look at the http://www.rainforestsaver.org discussion of Inga alley cropping.)

    As for cutting down trees for firewood, an organization known as Solar Cookers International can eliminate such need for about $5 per person.

    Many lumber companies will need assistance in learning sound practices of selectivity without clear-cutting, but we could make that available for a fee.

    Sincerely,
    Alex Sokolow

  5. Judy Frankel says:

    Dear Congressional Candidate,

    Writeindependent.org is pleased to announce the powerful “Pledge for Honest Candidates” that will remove the need for year-round fundraising and finally make it clear that there shall be no more bribery in government.
    Why The Pledge? Because smart voters will choose which candidate they want based on campaign finance reform. Nothing else matters as much as getting money out of politics this year.
    To read the Pledge, just click on the link next to “Signed the Pledge” on our Candidate Form.
    http://writeindependent.org/candidateform.php

    When you agree it’s time to stop the insanity with special interests bribing politicians, you will get a red star and red lettering on your platform on our website, notifying voters of your honesty and integrity.
    Even if you don’t want campaign financing reform, you can post your platform for FREE.
    http://writeindependent.org/candidateform.php
    We take all comers: Republicans, Democrats, Green, Libertarian, anybody who craves some publicity.
    If you have any questions, please feel free to ask at: info@writeindependent.org.

    Judy Frankel

  6. Bob Hurt says:

    Dr. Charles Lincoln sent me this pleading:

    Liana Thanou. Plaintiff, in pro per
    269 South Beverly Drive, #1347
    Beverly Hill, California 90212
    Telephone: 310-735-7882

    SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
    FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

    Liana Thanou, §
    Plaintiff, §
    § CASE NUMBER:
    v. §
    §
    Daniel Krescko aka Daniel Krecsko, § ____________________________
    Daniel Kresco, Daniel Krecso; §
    Eugene Rome; Rome & Associates, §
    A.P.C.; Michael Krechko aka §
    Michael Krecsko, Michael Krescko, §
    Mihaly Krecsko, Mihali Krecsko; and §
    Does 1-20, inclusive, §
    Defendants, §
    ______________________________ §

    1. COMES NOW THE PLAINTIFF, Liana Thanou, with this Complaint for Declaratory Judgment pursuant to the United States Constitution, 28 U.S.C. §§1331, 1343, and 42 U.S.C. §§1983, 1988(a) to declare two provisions of California Law (namely Code of Civil Procedure §§ 340.6 & 425.16) Unconstitutional under Article 1, §10, Cl. 1, as well as the First, Fifth, Seventh, Ninth, Tenth, and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution either on their face or as applied by the California Courts in general and/or as applied to her case in particular.
    2. This case relates in part to the subject matter of another action pending in the California Superior Court in and for Los Angeles County, namely BC 466758, and the matters raised herein constitute in part a collateral attack on the law as it is being applied in that case. The Plaintiff’s present claims cannot properly be raised in BC466758 because the time to file amended and supplemental pleadings in that case has passed. Plaintiff Liana Thanou files this lawsuit to protect her most valuable single asset, namely her claim to her long-time home and residence located at the foot of the Hollywood Hills.
    3. However, in the sound discretion of the Courts, these causes could and perhaps should be consolidated, and the constitutional subject matter of the present action decided prior to the final resolution of certain issues now pending in that first-filed case.
    4. Because this Complaint challenges the constitutionality of a state statutes and customs, practices, and policies having the force and effect of law in this State, a copy of this Complaint is being concurrently served on Governor Edmund G. Brown, Attorney General Kamala Harris, and Secretary of State Deborah Bowen although they are not named as parties in this lawsuit.
    5. Plaintiff Liana Thanou asserts that she is a long-time resident of the State of California and that she is both a consumer and victim of the (allegedly) professional services of attorneys licensed by the State Bar of California.
    6. Plaintiff Thanou submits that C.C.P. §§340.6 and 425.16 constitute an infringement on her right to equal protection and together deny her both her Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment rights to due process and equal protection of the law to the extent that her rights are denied by award of special privileges and immunities to a special class of individuals who have no legitimate right to such privileges, and in whose protection the government of the State of California can demonstrate neither any compelling or even important consideration.
    7. It is simply abhorrent in a civilized, democratic-republican society governed by an egalitarian constitution that attorneys should have special privileges and immunities from liability for criminal conduct or civil tort in this state, especially because such privileges and immunities permit non-attorneys to hide their own criminal and tortuous conduct “behind the robes and under the wigs ,” as it were, of licensed attorneys.
    8. California Code of Civil Procedure §340.6 sets the statute of limitations for all actions (other than “actual fraud”) against an attorney for a wrongful act or omission arising from the performance of services, regardless of the theory pled, whether in tort or in Contract.
    9. This statute provides that an action against an attorney must be commenced “within one year after the plaintiff discovers, or through the use of reasonable diligence should have discovered, the facts constituting the wrongful act or omission, or four years from the date of the wrongful act or omission, whichever comes first.” Thus the limitations period is either “one year after the actual or constructive discovery or fourt years after the occurrence (the date of the wrongful act or omission), whichever occurs first (Radovich v. Locke-Paddon, 35 Cal.App.4th 946, 966 (Cal. Dist.Ct.App. 1995).
    10. On its face, C.C.P. §340.6 discriminates between attorneys and non-attorneys as classes of individuals. Attorneys are treated as a privileged class and non-attorneys as an inferior, disfavored class. Article I, §10, Cl. 1 of the United States Constitution forbids the states from granting titles of nobility. The issue of titles of nobility had a place of central importance in the minds of the Founding Fathers, both in Declaring American Independence in 1776 and in framing the Constitution in 1787. Most, although certainly not all, of the leaders of the Revolutionary generation felt that titles of nobility had no place in an equal and just society because they clouded people’s judgment in relation to their dealings with one another.
    11. Attorneys throughout the United States use a traditional title of nobility (namely “esquire”), derived from British Tradition, in their styles and signatures as a matter of custom, practice, and policy, but this extreme “lower end” title of nobility has little significance compared with the award of a lower statute of limitations to certain individuals who by virtue of their education, knowledge, and practical involvement in the legal process have greater knowledge of the law, and hence of their rights and obligations, than the population at large.
    12. The government of the State of California has no legitimate reason to favor attorneys over non-attorneys as a class of citizens, and no rational basis for this law except an exceedingly corrupt one, namely that most of the members of the legislature and many officers of the executive branch, and most if not all of the officers of the judicial branch, are themselves licensed attorneys.
    13. Such illegitimate and irrational legal discrimination in favor of attorneys and against all whom they may wrong, by virtue of their superior knowledge and expertise in the law, is intolerable in a free and nominally egalitarian society, especially from the standpoint of all California residents who happen to be non-attorneys who are at best relegated to “second class citizen” status by the operation, construction, and effect of California C.C.P. §340.6, especially as transmitted and applied to this case through the application of the Anti-SLAPP statute 425.16, which is itself a defense available, almost exclusively, to attorneys who can claim that almost anything that they do is somehow related to the right to “publicly petition.”
    14. The grant of special privileges and immunities to attorneys, such as a shorter limitations period than that applicable to all others, forbid courts from inquiring equally into the character of the possessor of such “noble” privileges and immunities, it is as if the Courts of the State of California wanted all non-attorneys to be bewitched to admire the great attorneys the vices which are honestly condemned in all others.
    15. In the words of Thomas Paine, “this sacrifice of common sense is the certain badge which distinguished slavery from freedom; for when men yield up the privilege of thinking, the last shadow of liberty quits the horizon .”
    16. Truly, by virtue of their education and the intrinsic nature of their occupation, as a class, all attorneys are better able to defend themselves against lawsuits than all the members of any and every other class or business or professional group in society, and accordingly, they require less rather than more legal armour and should have fewer rather than greater privileges and immunities than all other citizens, if they were to be marked out any differently at all.
    17. Worse yet, when non-attorneys who hire attorneys can obtain derivative privileges and immunities by exploitation of their status as clients protected by the superior “noble” class of licensed brigands, the evil inheritance from the “bad old traditions” of European Nobility are altogether highlighted, enhanced, and exaggerated. It is well-known that, from a historical standpoint, the Priestly and Warrior Nobile Classes of the Old World evolved, in no small part, owing to the success that nobles had in foisting “protection rackets” on the common people.
    18. California C.C.P. §425.16 as applied and construed by the California District Court of Appeals in Vafi v. McCloskey, 193 Cal.App.4th (Cal. Dist.Ct. App. 2011) illustrates the degree to which private non-attorneys may effectively insulate their own tortuous conduct from prosecution by invocation of C.C.P. 340.6 via the Anti-SLAPP statute in exactly the manner proposed by Eugene Rome and Rome & Associates in BC466578 to defeat this Plaintiff’s claims.
    19. Eugene Rome and his alter-ego Eugene Rome & Associates, however, are guilty not merely of tortious but actually criminal conduct, in violation of California Penal Code §115, which states and provides (in full) as follows:

    (a) Every person who knowingly procures or offers any false or forged instrument to be filed, registered, or recorded in any public office within this state, which instrument, if genuine, might be filed, registered, or recorded under any law of this state or of the United States, is guilty of a felony.
    (b) Each instrument which is procured or offered to be filed registered, or recorded in violation of subdivision (a) shall constitute a separate violation of this section.
    (c) Except in unusual cases where the interests of justice would best be served if probation is granted, probation shall not be granted to, nor shall the execution or imposition of sentence be suspended for, any of the following persons:
    (1) Any person with a prior conviction under this section who is again convicted of a violation of this section in a separate proceeding.
    (2) Any person who is convicted of more than one violation of this section in a single proceeding, with intent to defraud another, and where the violations resulted in a cumulative financial loss exceeding one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000).
    (d) For purposes of prosecution under this section, each act of procurement or of offering a false or forged instrument to be filed, registered, or recorded shall be considered a separately punishable offense.
    20. Whether filed by an attorney or not, False Notices of Pendency Action (aka “Lis Pendens”) purporting to document the existence of “non-existent” or dismissed lawsuits and adjudicated and settled claims or other completed credit transactions can hardly be described as anything other than “a scheme or artifice … to obtain any of the moneys, funds, credits, assets, securities, or other property owned by, or under the custody or control of, a financial institution, by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises” within the language of the Federal Banking Statute 18 U.S.C. §1344.
    21. That attorneys should have or even claim such privileges and immunities from prosecution is a reprehensible, despicable thing. A non-attorney Plaintiff such as the Plaintiff herein, Liana Thanou, should, as a matter of absolutely, fundamental right, be able to sue an attorney who commits crimes or serious, highly injurious torts, on exactly the same terms of law, including statutes of limitations, as all other citizens.
    PLAINTIFF’S FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION:
    CONSTITUTIONAL DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
    22. Plaintiff Liana Thanou realleges paragraphs 1-21 as if fully copied and restated herein, and incorporates the same by reference.
    23. Plaintiff prays that this Court will review and evaluate Sections 340.6 and 425.16 both on their faces and as applied and construed by the California Courts as matters of binding precedent, and after reviewing each, in turn, under Article I, Section 10, Clause 1, the First Amendment, the Fifth Amendment, the Seventh Amendment, the Ninth Amendment, the Tenth Amendment, and the Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution, will declare and adjudge that these sections are unconstitutional, null and void, and in fact violate one or more provision of each of the constitutional provisions cited.
    PLAINTIFF’S SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION:
    CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE §1714.10 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL
    24. Plaintiff Liana Thanou realleges ¶¶(1)-(23) and incorporates the same as if fully recopied and restated herein below.
    25. Plaintiff alleges that she has been and continues to be personally and directly injured by Eugene Rome and his alter-ego Rome & Associates, A.P.C.,’s actual or perceived, de facto and/or de jure, immunity as a Licensed California Attorney-at-Law, which immunity is expressly provided by Civil Code §1714.10.
    26. Plaintiff alleges that §1714.10 bestows upon attorneys a special class of privileges and immunities to a certain class of professional practitioners whose membership is controlled by “admission to the bar” under terms mandated and outlined by the state of California itself, such that §1714.10 has the force and effect of a law erecting or defining a title of nobility, unconstitutionally impairing the obligations of contract by exempting certain actors from contractual ethics or duties including but not limited to the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing in contractual dealings, as well as the general obligation to abstain from common law tortuous or civil law delictual conduct which leads to civil injuries arising not from but from Anglo-America tort or Continental Civil [aka “Napoleonic”] Code delict.
    27. The California law providing that

    No cause of action against an attorney for a civil conspiracy with his or her client arising from any attempt to contest or compromise a claim or dispute, and which is based upon the attorneys’ representation of the client, shall be included in a complaint or other pleading unless the court enters an order allowing the pleading that includes the claim for civil conspiracy to be filed after the court determines that the party seeking to file the pleading has established that there is a reasonable probability that the party will prevail in the action.
    28. violates 42 U.S.C. §1981 as well as Article I, §10:1 of the Constitution in that it creates special classes of privileged citizenry and denies both equal protection of the law and due process of law to certain classes of citizens (including all non-lawyers who might be defrauded by lawyers or non-lawyers who have hired lawyers to assist them in the commission of their frauds, and/or breaches of contract and/or the implied duty of good faith and fair-dealing in contractual relations).
    29. The Court should declare and adjudge that California Civil Code §1714.10 is facially unconstitutional under the First, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution as a denial of the right to Petition, denial of due process, infringement upon the rights reserved to the people, and a violation of equal protection of laws by creating a privileged class.
    30. The creation of this privileged class of attorneys also and further violates both Article 1, §10, Clause 1, of the United States Constitution by effectively creating a title of nobility, as well as violating the privileges and immunities clause of Article IV, §1, Cl.2 by creating for California lawyers a special privilege and immunity not available to other California residents nor to citizens of any other of the several states.
    31. No state can grant to any of its citizens special privileges or immunities that discriminate against citizens of other states or create an inequality between citizens of one state and those of another, but Cal Civil Code §1714.10 has this precise effect.
    32. Plaintiff alleges that BUT FOR the provisions of §1714.10, Eugene Rome and his alter-ego Rome & Associates, A.P.C., would not have been free (or perceived himself as free) to engage in fraud or assist his clients in committing fraud, assault, extortion, mail fraud, and other acts of racketeering, both privately against the Plaintiff and in the Los Angeles County Superior Court of unlimited jurisdiction.
    33. Thus the provisions of §1714.10 are the direct and proximate, and therefore legal, causes of Plaintiff’s injuries. This provision of California statutory law has so deprived Plaintiff of her common law rights in violation of the fundamental guarantees of the United States Constitution that these provisions must all be struck down.
    34. Statutes cannot indirectly impair the obligations of contract without straightforwardly modifying the nature of contractual obligations ab initio, which is to say prior to the decision to enter into or agree to certain contractual relations or not. In short, statutes cannot transform contracts for representation into licenses to STEAL, without the expressed knowledge and consent of all (potentially) contracting parties, and Plaintiff Liana Thanou neither knew nor consented to giving Eugene Rome a special license to help the Kreskos steal from her.
    35. Plaintiff submits that because both the California legislature and the United States Congress never abrogated common law contractual doctrines (such as “fraud-in-the-inducement,” “fraud-in-fact” and/or “privity of contract”) that means that the State of California cannot insulate anyone from violating the law as it still exists (through statutory provisions or the judicial construction of those statutory provisions, cf. e.g. 42 U.S.C. §§1981-1982).
    36. The statutory law cannot, by classification of the parties in a manner inconsistent with the constitution, set one class of actors oppressively against the other and essentially reverse the actual (historically, objectively occurring) action. It is as if the State of California is in full view of a standard transaction between two parties, from one to the other, only to give the complete opposite account of the event itself afterward, based on whether or not a licensed attorney/state bar lawyer is involved or not.
    37. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that California Civil Code §1714.10 be declared unconstitutional on both its face and as applied, null and void for all purposes and applications, and will grant her all their reasonable costs of suit as well as permitting her to sue Eugene Rome and his alter-ego Rome & Associates, A.P.C., for all their actual damages resulting from his collusion and conspiracy with other Defendants and non-Defendants, including Superior Court Judges who may be immune from suit.

    THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION:
    CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE §1714.10
    DOES NOT IMMUNIZE EUGENE ROME AND HIS ALTER-EGO ROME & ASSOCIATES, A.P.C.,
    38. Plaintiff re-alleges ¶¶(1)-(37) and incorporates the same by reference as if fully copied and restated herein below.
    39. Plaintiff alleges that Eugene Rome and his alter-ego Rome & Associates, A.P.C., have actually committed fraud on the Court (as well as on the Plaintiff) and other crimes for which §1714.10 provides no immunity, but for which Plaintiff should be allowed to sue, and Rome should be held liable for civil damages to the Plaintiff under but Civil R.I.C.O. [18 U.S.C. §§1961-1964(c)] and for direct violations of 42 U.S.C. §1981.
    40. Plaintiff further alleges that any rule, even if not facially unconstitutional, is unconstitutional as applied according to a state judicial norm “which requires a judicial determination of reasonable probability of success prior to permitting the filing of an action against an attorney based on a claim of civil conspiracy with a client” because such a rule (as articulated by Defendants) constitutes a per se denial of equal access to the courts due process and of equal access to the courts and legal processes in violation of 42 U.S.C. §1981.
    41. Access to discovery of facts is a key element of due process of law and equal access to the Courts as discovery procedures are often critical to the determination of the accuracy or inaccuracy of any legal complaint, suit at law, or equitable action.
    42. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that (in the alternative to the previous count) even if California Civil Code §1714.10 is not unconstitutional on its face, it is either unconstitutional as applied to Eugene Rome and his alter-ego Rome & Associates, A.P.C., or simply does not, as a matter of fact or law, apply to Eugene Rome and his alter-ego Rome & Associates, A.P.C., under the circumstances of this case and in his relationship with the Krescko Defendants (collectively) at all, and Plaintiffs pray that this Court will so declare and adjudge, granting them all their costs of suit as allowed by both 28 U.S.C. §§2201-2202, 18 U.S.C. §1964(c), and 42 U.S.C. §1988.

    FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION:
    CALIFORNIA CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE §405.21
    DEPRIVES PLAINTIFFS OF BOTH DUE PROCESS AND
    THE EQUAL PROTECTION OF LAW
    43. Plaintiff re-alleges ¶¶(1)-(42) and incorporates the same by reference as if fully copied and restated herein below.
    44. Plaintiff needs injunctive relief to preserve the status quo until the resolution of this case. She originally sued in California Superior Court to remove the lis pendens filed by Eugene Rome on behalf of the Kreskos, then sought Bankruptcy Protection pursuant to Chapter 7 and the automatic stay. Now the Plaintiff needs to sue the Defendants for quiet title and to enforce and foreclose her rights against the Defendants in this case, and only the privileges and immunities afforded to attorneys would seem to stand in her way.
    45. This Court should declare and adjudge that California Code of Civil Procedure §405.21, together with California Civil Code §1714.10, and all similarly discriminatory statutes which deprive private (non-attorney) parties of certain rights or impose upon them certain additional burdens if they are not represented by counsel in the form of an attorney “licensed” by the Supreme Court and/or in possession of a membership and bar number from the State Bar of California are unconstitutional deprivations of due process of law and the equal protection of law in violation of the First, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, as well as a violation of the prohibition on titles of nobility in Article I, §10:1 of the Constitution or the creation of classes of people exempt from the operation of certain laws by membership in certain social, economic, or professional/labor classes.
    46. Plaintiff accordingly requests leave to file a lis pendens regarding her claim to quiet title to the property in question in this litigation, as a pro se litigant without the aid of a lawyer must now do under California law. To Plaintiff’s knowledge and belief California is the ONLY state in America that prohibits the notice of clouded title via Lis Pendens filed by a pro se litigant. 1714.10 effectively immunizes lawyers from suit, creating a special class of people, while § 405.21 furthers that special class by giving attorneys the sole power to file lis pendens with a county recorder’s office.
    47. WHEREFORE Plaintiff prays, in that 405.21 and 1714.10 are directly related, that this court to declare both statutes unconstitutional as applied. Plaintiff further requests that this court accordingly allow them leave to file a lis pendens with the Los Angeles County Recorder’s office to notify any potential buyer that a suit concerning the real property in question is in fact pending. FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION:
    PLAINTIFFS’ LEGAL ABUSE SYNDROME
    48. Plaintiff re-alleges ¶¶1-47 of this her Original Complaint and incorporates the same by reference as if fully copied and restated herein below.
    49. Plaintiff is exhausted after two years of continual fighting and litigation with the Krescko and Rome Defendants in which certain small time crooks have been empowered to ruin this Plaintiff’s life by collaboration with their attorney Eugene Rome and his alter-ego Rome & Associates, A.P.C.,.
    50. Plaintiff is victims of and suffer from Legal Abuse Disorder (a psychologically recognized variant of Post-traumatic stress disorder). To wit, Karen Huffer, a long-time marriage and family law counselor, has written a book entitled “Legal Abuse Syndrome”, a form of post-traumatic stress disorder, which often develops in individuals dealing with abusive court settings.
    51. Abuse of authority and a profound lack of accountability in many court systems such as the Los Angeles County California Superior Courts have become rampant, Huffer says, which adds greatly to the original distress requiring court assistance in the first place. 


    52. The Center for Judicial Accountability says that a central point of Ms. Huffer’s book is that victims in America are not only assaulted by crime, but also by the abuses of power and authority administered by tax dollars intended to provide due process of law for the protection of civil rights:

    According to Ms. Huffer you may be suffering from Legal Abuse Syndrome if you feel deeply disillusioned and oppressed as a result of your experience with the legal system; if you feel you were frustrated in obtaining justice; if you feel your dreams and plans for your life were torn from you by a system that is supposedly there to protect your rights and property; if you fear that the system will defeat you at every turn and there is nothing you can do about it, and if you feel that you have been victimized several times over, by the perpetrators, by lawyers, judges, bailiffs and other court personnel. As a consequence you may suffer from tension and anxiety, recurring nightmares you may feel emotionally and physically exhausted, numb, disconnected and vulnerable.
    http://www.judicialaccountability.org/legalabuse.htm
    53. Plaintiff should have the right to seek to conduct both a psychological and/or psychiatric examination of the Krescko and Rome Defendants pursuant to the Rules of Civil Procedure, but she alleges upon information and belief at the present time (and for at least two years now) that she can recognize in themselves the symptoms of Legal Abuse Disorder/PTSD in their psychological and physical conditions resulting directly and proximately and therefore legally from the abusive and deceptive, wholly unethical conduct of attorney Eugene Rome and his alter-ego Rome & Associates, A.P.C.,, as well as that of his clients, in and concerning the Los Angeles County California Superior Courts.
    54. Plaintiff moves and requests that this Court, again pursuant to its inherent remedial powers, but especially those recognized by 42 U.S.C. §1988(a), recognize the existence of this Plaintiff’s suffering from Legal Abuse Disorder as a partial but in and of itself sufficient reason for accommodating what may be her slow pace in prosecuting the present case, and that the Plaintiff may need extra time and extensions of time, even if requested ex-parte, as an accommodation to her Post-Traumatic (or continuingly traumatized) state of mind and ability to operate.

    CALIFORNIA CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
    §425.16(c) IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL
    55. Plaintiff realleges ¶¶(1)-(54) and incorporates the same as if fully recopied and restated herein.
    56. California’s anti-SLAPP law provides a civil action whose effect is to enhance the freedom of speech and right to petition of defendants by limiting the right of Plaintiffs to free speech and to petition.
    57. As alleged elsewhere throughout this Complaint, the primary beneficiaries of this Anti-SLAPP statute are attorneys who can claim that almost all of their activities somehow constitute “access to public process” within the meaning of the statute, even when their activities would (in the hands of any non-attorney) be outrageously barbaric, tortious or even criminal.
    58. In 1992, the Legislature enacted section 425.16 to provide a procedure for a court “to dismiss at an early stage nonmeritorious litigation meant to chill the valid exercise of the constitutional rights of freedom of speech and petition in connection with a public issue.” Sipple v. Foundation for Nat. Progress (1999) 71 Cal. App. 4th 226, 235.
    59. Taken in conjugation with §340.6 as described above the attorney Defendants Eugene Rome and his mere alter-ego Rome & Associates, A.P.C., have used this statute to depreciate and/or defeat the Plaintiff Liana Thanou’s ability to petition this Court for relief, by requesting the dismissal of this action.
    60. On October 12, 2011 Defendant Eugene Rome filed his special anti-SLAPP motion to dismiss against Plaintiff Liana Thanou, in case number BC466578 in the California Superior Court for the City of Los Angeles and has gone so far as to claim an “Absolute Litigation Privilege” for filing false documents which would otherwise subject him to criminal liability under California Penal Code §115 and/or 18 U.S.C. §1344.
    61. Thanou accordingly has standing here to challenge the anti-SLAPP laws of California because those laws were used against him in state Court to undermine is ability to raise meritorious claims against Defendant Silverstein.
    62. Plaintiff Thanou asserts that the anti-SLAPP law undermines valid constitutional and civil claims against attorney to the oppression and unconstitutional favor of the State-Bar Licensed “Attorney Nobility” complete with its own special courts and rules of immunity from charges by “second class” non-attorney citizens.
    63. The key constitutional issues are that (1) the complete adjudication of due process violations of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments committed by the attorneys who alone have the position and capacity to effect and enforce these violations are (2) immunized and otherwise privileged or protected from civil suit under the anti-SLAPP laws from the just powers and rights of the people to protest such violations, i.e. to petition for redress of grievances as is the people’s right under the First Amendment. Further, the anti-SLAPP law has the further effect (3) to infringe and limit the right of the people to present their civil suits against attorneys and their clients to juries, which constitutes a violation of the Seventh Amendment, and thus both the (4) rights preserved to the people under the ninth amendment and the (5) powers preserved to the people under the tenth amendment are also infringed and suppressed. There is really nothing worse for Freedom to Petition and the Right to Due Process of Law than the California Anti-SLAPP law.
    64. Plaintiff Lian Thanou asserts that this statute directly inhibited her constitutional rights to petition and free speech by favoring licensed attorneys such as Eugene Rome (who is part of the bar association) and small time thieves and con-artists such as Rome’s client who are able to pick-a-back on his claims to special attorney immunity and privilege, all enacted under color of law by the attorneys in the Californian government.
    65. California Code of Civil Procedure §§425.16 et seq. is perhaps the most irrational and counterproductive law in the United States of America today.
    66. Plaintiff alleges that the California anti-SLAPP law embodied in §425.16 et seq. constitutes an unconstitutional infringement upon the First, Fifth, Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution, as well as a plain violation of the right to sue and give evidence secured by 42 U.S.C. §1981.
    67. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Liana Thanou prays that the Court will declare §425.16 et seq. to be unconstitutional, null and void.

    WHEREFORE, Debtor prays that this Court will take Notice of her Removal and allow the Debtor and the Chapter 7 Trustee to evaluate the merits of this case in light of core bankruptcy proceedings, and to evaluate and make a determination about whether a discretionary stay should be applied to preserve the Estate’s interest in the claims herein represented.
    Respectfully submitted,

    Liana Thanou
    Plaintiff
    In Propria Persona
    269 South Beverly Drive #1347
    Beverly Hill, California 90212
    Telephone: 310-735-7882

  7. Lee Silber says:

    Please email me immeditaly, call me march 1 786-454-0556. I want to kick out several attorneys from the FL Bar I have been falsly arrested, falsly imprisoned, I have been a victim of obstrudtion of justice, I have been a victim of assaults, people trying to kill me with drugs in Jackson Crisis Hospital, Westchester General Hospital in Miami,Fl. I have been beaten, robbed, almost killed the system has done nothing to help me get justice!!! I have been assaulted on private property, discriminated against, victim of negliance, breech of contract my own brother stole $10,000 my mother left me in her Will, $100,000’s my father left me. I will give you several names of attorneys ,as well as the FL Bar who could care less about my civil and constitutional freedoms,and victims justice!!! Please help me with good civil rights attorneys I cna go too so I as a victim of atrocities can finally get justice!!!!!!!

  8. Joyce Alison Cappello says:

    Must See For Understanding- Change is on the Horizon http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOPIgNB-hGY

  9. UPDATE OF PREVIOUS COMMENTS.

    Dear Mr. Winston:

    Although the corruption of some Officers of the Florida bar is more than obvious according to numerous testimonies from complainants, I am not so scared yet. What alarms me is the high probability that said self-regulating agency may seek to make it illegal for victims of prevaricating Counsels of TFB to continue to expose our complaints targeting them and the colleagues protected by them.

    Their potential excuse may consist of our “failure” to allow the bar to project the image of decorum that “every bar member” projects to Floridians. My story is the classical example of the fact that the Florida Bar appears to be a fannatical sect, a fraternal organization, a lodge, or a private club whose members and directors have been sworn in to cover one another’s backs rather than protecting the intrinsic rights of citizens victimized by unscrupulous lawyers and their clients.

    Can Floridians enjoy political freedom in the absence of compliance by regulatory and enforcing agencies like TFB? Where are we heading? Have said Agencies designated themselves as our omnipotent masters? Are we facing a potential tyranny where thinking, reasoning, and exposing complaints will be strictly prohibited by the so-called “experts” entitled to do it for us?

    Again, a bar member named Felipe E. Diez ordered me to appear for an EUO, but failed to attend. He violated his own Rules of Professional Conduct by trusting the illegal “interrogatory” to a [claims adjuster] non layer named Delpha Blanchard, of Miami. Said adjuster flagrantly violated several specific prohibitions clearly depicted under Rule 60B-220.201 (Professional Conduct for Adjusters).

    One of said prohibitions is that “an adjuster shall exercise care not to engage in Unlicensed Practice of Law”. Another is the fact that the specific duty of any adjuster is limited to working on the mechanics of adjusting claims, filling blanks on forms provided by Insurer, and writing reports to his/her Principal. However, the illegal interrogatory was made by above nemed adjuster who exercised as if she were a State Attormey viciously interrogating a criminal suspect in Court while baselessly accusing me of at least four acts of felony that may take me to do time in prison and ruin my professional life when The State revokes all my professinal licenses in compliance with regulations prohibiting Moral Turpitude.

    Subsequently, Mr. Lawyer added two more unsubstantiated allegations of felony. This is why all adversary parties refuse to submit denied legal materials to which I am entitled by law.

    Regardless, Jacquelyn P. Needelman, UPL Consel in Miami, in a letter addressed to me admitted that she had not read and did not need to read the documented proofs of UPL in which adjusters knowingly and viciusly incurred. Her Goal? To throw the towel for Attorneys Felipe E. Diez and Scott E. Danner… Scandalos? Yes!, but absolutely true as substantiated by incontstable evidences presented to Counsel together with my request for denied due investigation.

    Now it is sufficient to say that the approaches taken by Ms. Needelman, by the accused adjusters of Gainsco’s and Progressive’s, and by three prevaricating lawyers have left me no other alternative but filing criminal charges in an attempt to defend my high moral standing before Socienty.

    Chief Investigator for the South Florida State Attorney appears to have found probable cause for the investogation of the File submitted by this victimized insurance consumer. Therefore, I trust that probable cause for the due criminal process will be found as well because I have provided the Investigator with most of the necessary documented evidences of criminal activities against me, including the gross violation of a Federal Law: THE WANTON ACT. Moreover, I have asked of Investigator to request whatever other documented proofs he may need in case of doubt. Will Justice be served this time?

    Raimundo Couret, CLU

  10. Wendy says:

    After the conversation we had today I did forget to ask you 1 question…How can I start a radio show? Seems to be a great way to vent.

  11. John Hunsinger says:

    I too have a problem with Judge Marra he denied me my rights to a fair trial, ignored offical documents from the State of Fl that prove my case, and by doing soo exposed Fl to legal actions. Read pasted copy of the complaint filed on May 3, 2011.

    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA —————————————–
    JOHN HUNSINGER PLAINTIFF
    VS
    Martin County Tax Collector; COMPLAINT Martin County Sheriffs office; Martin County Court; Hobe sound mobile home park; Judge Marra of the US District Court; Edward Farren; LeeHi International
    DEFENDANT
    PARTIES:
    PLAINTIFF John Hunsinger, PO Box 8353 Turnersville NJ 08012
    DEFENDANT Martin County Tax Collector PO Box 9013 Stuart Fl 34995
    DEFENDANT Martin County Sheriffs Office, 800 SE Monterey Road
    Stuart, Florida 34994

    DEFENDANT Martin County Court, 100 Ocean Blvd Stuart Fl34995

    DEFENDANT Hobe Sound Mobile Home Park, 11090 Se Federal Hwy Hobe Sound Fl 33455

    DEFENDANT Judge Marra, 701 Clematis St West Plam Beach Fl 33401

    DEFENDANT Edward Farren, 2212 Seafury Ln Port Saint Lucie Fl 34952

    DEFENDANT John Gurino (Leehi International) 1228 Hillsboro mile unit 301 hillsboro beach Fl 33062

    Jurisdiction of the court is invoked pursuant to Constitution of Fl article 1 section 2; Constituion of Fl article 1 section 9; Fl Statue Statue 319.22(1); and other federal and state laws listed in this complaint. With Facts proving a cover-up that conflict with documents that were delivered to Plaintiff from Defendants being discovered on 6/22/2010 through Judge Marra Statues of Limitation start to run from this date.

    Page 1 of 7
    STATEMENT OF CLAIM
    Plaintiff claimes that his rights to obtain property, to possess property, and to protect property have been denied and impaired by the Defendant(s) and denied Plaintiff fair justice. Furthermore the Plaintiff claims that Defendant(s) has committed Theft of documents and the Defendant(s) unjustly and illegaly seized property, Impossed excessive and unreasanable penalty(s) and used their office to grant favors to their associates.
     Being Discovered on June 24, 2010 within the Judgment on case # 08-cv-14315 made By Judge Marra after reviewing Submitted documents submitted by John Hunsinger (that was received from Martin County Tax Collectors and other state offices that state that the Title Dated 8/1/01 submitted for transfer was invalid because another title was issued to LeeHi on 5/9/02) And a Sworn Affidavit from John Gurino (that states that LeeHi did provid the proper title, refering to the title dated 8/1/01) has ruled that Documents proving that LeeHi did not surrender the Proper title dated 5/9/02 to John Hunsinger from Martin County Tax Collectors and other state offices are not admissible in his court, That the Title dated 8/1/01 is valid and LeeHhi did receive payment in full and has no further oblication to John Hunsinger.
    1. Martin County Tax Collector has refused without proper cause to grant transfer of title Number 4994000 over to John Hunsinger.
    2. The title signed by John Gurino dated 8/1/01 was the proper title and should not have beed confiscated as a duplicate title as acording to Judge Marra.
    3. Payment in full was made that includded sales tax to LeeHi from John Hunsinger.
    4. In 2007 Martin County Tax Collector has listed John Hunsinger as owner but refusses to grant title.
    5. Martin County Tax Collector has accepted tax payments from John Hunsinger as owner but refusses to grant title.
    6. Martin county tax collector has refused to issue title to John Hunsinger even with the properly endorsed title.
    7. Martin county Tax Collector has lied about a title dated 5/9/02 to prevent John Hunsinger from receiving a title to the property that was paid for in full.
    8. Martin county Tax Collector has confiscated a valid title stating it was invalid when it was not.
    9. Martin county Tax Collector has violated the Constitution of Fl article 1 section 2 by preventing John Hunsinger to acquire, possess and protect property.
    10. Martin county Tax Collector has violated Statue Statue 319.22(1) by preventing John Hunsinger from receiving a Certificate of Title when he submitted title dated 8/1/01 for title and owner tranfer.
    Page 2 of 7
    11. Martin county Tax Collector has violated Statue Statue 319.22(2) by keeping LeeHI as owner and not tranfering title.
    12. Martin county Tax Collector did not keep proper records on this title.
    13. Martin county Tax Collector has committed theft of documents by seizing the title Dated 8/1/01 as a duplicate title.
    14. The 4th Amendment has been violated by the Martin county Tax Collector by the Seizure of property (title for transfer) without a court order.
    15. Martin County Tax Collector has violated the Constituion of Fl article 1 section 9 by depriving the rightfull owner of property (title) without due process.
    16. Martin County Tax Collector has violated the Constituion of Fl article 1 section 12 by seizing property (title for transfer) without warrant.
    17. John Hunsinger was and still is unable to receive a decal to the proerty thus preventing him from using, residing, moving, saling, or any other action that is legal for a owner of a property.
    18. Without a title issued to John Hunsinger He is unable to claim property on taxes.
    19. Without a title John Hunsinger is unable to take possession of property.
    20. Without a title John Hunsinger is unable to use the property as he sees fit.
     Being Discovered on June 24, 2010 within the Judgment on case # 08-cv-14315 made By Judge Marra after reviewing submitted documents to the Court:
    1. In strict contras to the letter from McAllister Civil Process Manager for the Martin County Sheriffs Office that was submitted to the Court in the above case McAllister has conceiled the fact that the Martin County Sheriff did place the property in possession of Hobe Sound Mobile Home Park.
    2. Martin County Sheriffs Office has wrongfully used its authority to remove personal property without a court order from its rightful owners and has conceiled it in lies.
    3. The 4th Amendment has been violated by the Martin County Sheriffs office by the Seasure of property without a court order.
    4. Martin County Sheriffs office has violated the Constituion of Fl article 1 section 9 by depriving the rightfull owner of property without due process.
    5. Martin County Sheriffs office has violated the Constituion of Fl article 1 section 12 by seizing property without warrant.

    Page 3 of 7
    6. Judge Marra after reviewing documents submitted befor him showing that there being no order or action granting possession of personal property has deemed that Martin County Court and Sheriffs office has passed a judgment done actions that are excessive and illegal by both federal and state laws and removed owner(s) of personal property.
     With there being no court records showing that the Martin County Court awardded Hobe Sound Mobile Home Park a Mobile home for lot rent in case Number 03-713cc Judge Marra has determined in case number 08-cv-14315 that such award was giving based on a court documents submitted by John Gurino who received these documents from DANIEL F. TORDELLA associate Ernest A. kollra(who operates from the same law office as Daniel F. Tordella and who also represented Hobe sound Mobile Home Park in case 03-713) ***Take note This document only shows a writ for land not for the property. ***Take further note LeeHi was another defendant in case number 03-713 and could not be found for service of Summons eventhough both LeeHi and Hobe Sound Mobile Home park use the same Law Office located at 1995 east Oakland Park Blvd ste 300 Ft Lauderdale Fl 33306.
    1. Martin County Court has placed a Judgment with out notifieing the defendant.
    2. Martin county Court did not provide any copies of Judgment to defendant.
    3. Martin County Court did not issue a write of possession for the personal property (mobile home). But if they did It would be an unreasanable penalty and violate Federal and State Laws.
    4. Fl State Statue 723.062 a mobile home is personal property and can not be awarded for none payment of lot rent.
    5. If Martin County Court did grant a writ to the mobile home then they violated the Constituion of Fl article 1 section 12 by issuing a writ for the home.
    6. If Martin County Court did grant a writ to the mobile home then they violated the Constituion of Fl article 1 section 17 by excessive punishment by granting the writ along with lot fee of and lawyer cost.
     Being Discovered on June 24, 2010 by the Judgment made by Judge Marra, Judge Marra has determined That Hobe Sound Mobile Home Park has taken possession of personal property on June 9 2003. Martin County Court did not give writ for this and the Martin County Sheriffs office did not place them in possession of the property. Judge Marra has made this assumption based on the Lawyers (that were used by both LeeHi and Hobe Shound Mobile home park) incorrect and twisted wording of the writ insistance that it was granted by the court when it was not.
    1. Hobe Sound Mobile home Park did not give notice to former tenant of personal property remaining on premises after tenancy has terminated as outlined under Fl Statue 715.104.

    2. Hobe Sound Mobile home Park did not give notice concerning abandoned property to former tenant as outlined under Fl Statue 715.105

    Page 4 of 7

    3. Hobe Sound Mobile home Park did not give notice concerning abandoned property to owner other than former tenant as outlined under Fl Statue 715.106

    4. Hobe Sound Mobile Home Park has lied in the complaint for eviction by stating they owned property and the property is real not personal.

    5. Hobe Sound Mobile Home Park is liable for any loss as outlined by Fl Ststue 715.107 for its deliberate act of entry into the locked personal property without any legal right to do so on June 9th 2003. Martin County Court and Martin County Sheriff have a strong stance (documented and writen) that they did not place Hobe sound Mobile Home Park in possession of the personal property.

    6. Judge Marra has determined that Hobe Sound mobile Home Park was placed in possession of the property and did enter it on June 9th 2003 based on affidavits from LeeHi and statements from the law office located at 1995 east Oakland Park Blvd ste 300 Ft Lauderdale Fl 33306 that was used by both Hobe Sound Mobile Home Park and LeeHi. These Statements are in conflict with the Martin County Court and the Martin County Sheriff Statements, files and other documents that state that Hobe sound Mobile home Park was not giving a writ to the personal property and was not placed in possession of the personal property.

    7. Hobe Sound Mobile Home Park having no right or permossion and with there being no danger to persons or property has entered Mobile home on june 9th 2003 thus violating Fl Statue 723.025.

    8. Being discovered as determined by Judge Marra that LeeHi fulfilled its obligations to John Hunsinger by delivering 1st and last months rent and other payments to Hobe Sound Mobile Home Park. Based on this and the fact that Hobe Sound Mobile home park did not evict John Hunsinger as the owner of the Mobile home but as a tenent John Hunsinger was current on lot rent at time of eviction and Hobe Sound mobile Home Park falsely filed for eviction. Fl Statue 723.061

    9. Hobe Sound Mobile home park has concieled from Martin County Court imprtant facts to get a judment. On June 24, 2010 Judge Marra has determined that LeeHi fulfilled its oblication to John Hunsinger This includded Money for first months rent and last months rent (that was clearly marked on the check with the purcharch of the home) that had been delivered by LeeHi to Hobe Sound Mobile Home Park for John Hunsinger. Hobe Sound Mobile Home Park hid this fact that the rent had been paid.

     Being Discovered on June 24, 2010 within the Judgment on case # 08-cv-14315 made By Judge Marra after reviewing Submitted documents (Signed Letter From Edward Farren stating he did not receive any documents) submitted by John Hunsinger And a Sworn Affidavit from John Gurino with no proff of delivery of documents to Edward Farren Judge Marra has determined that Edward Farren did receive documents from LeeHi in care for John Hunsinger.
    Page 5 of 7
    1. Edward Farren has stollen the Bill of Sale thus preventing the transfer of title.
    2. Edward Farren has stollen the Affidavit that pertains to the vinn number of the home.
    3. Edward Farren has stollen other documents that would aid in the transfer of ownership of the home.
     It is believed that Judge Marra used his office to grant favor to possible associate John Gurino of LeeHi International.
    1. Judge Marra and John Gurino both have history of being from the same district in NY and having large families that still reside in a very close nit neiborhood of this district in some casses only a couple houses of each other may have in fact been associated in some degree as to cause Judge Marra to be unfair and one sided in case 08-14315.
    2. Judge Marra actions of not allowing offical state documents to be admisible in his court has betrayed the trust placed with him as governed by all state and federal laws and left the state of Fl open and exposed.
    3. Judge Marra has determined that Plaintiff in the case 08-cv-14315 has lost personal property for nonpayment of lot rent. Acording to Marting County Court, Martin County Sheriffs Office, and within offical documents from these govenmental offices (copies of submitted before Judge Marra) clearly state that Personal property was not removed from the Plaintiff and no judgment was passed to do so.
    4. Judge Marra has determined that the Defendant in case 08-cv-14315 was servable and the statues ran their time. This conflicts with the facts that the court apointed server was unable to locate defendant several times at known addresses (where and when defendant was finaly located was at a new address that the defendant provided to the Division of Corporations after Plaintiff notified them of lack of service), an affidavidid from defeddant stating that they were not properly served in prior case, and was not located for service in case 03-713 in Martin County Court eventhough the use the same law firm as the plaintiff in case 03-713.
    5. Judge Marra has determined in case 08-14315 that LeeHi International provided John Hunsinger with a proper title but acording to the Martin County Tax office and othe offices and within offical documents (copies of submitted before Judge Marra)from these governmental offices John hunsinger WAS NOT provided with the correct title but was provided a cancieled title that was seized as duplicate.
    6. Judge Marra has determined that offical state issued documents submitted befor him is not admissible in his court. In fact these documents are admissible and are regulated and protected by the state of Florida.
    7. Judge Marra has determined that the statement from Ed Farren a deputy of Martin County Sheriffs Office (copy of set befor Judge Marra) is not admissible in his court.
    8. Judge Marra being known to take the Pledge of Allegiance has denied Plaintiff Justice.
    Page 6 of 7
    9. Judge Marra having taken Judicial Oath of Office HAS NOT administed justice without respect to persons, and did NOT do equal rights, and WAS NOT impartial in case 08-14315.
    On Oct 29 2010 John Gurino of LeeHi International sent to John Hunsinger a propossed agrement to deliver title and pay fees after being notified by the Martin County Tax office about June 23, 2010 that John Hunsinger did sign and return to John Gurinos lawyer. As of date Leehi still refusses title and martin county Tax office still has not issued title to John Hunsinger (Martin county did receive a copy of this document between both parties on Nov 24, 2010.
     The State of Florida and its agencies and subdivisions have waived sovereign immunity as outlined by Fl Statue 768.28(1) for loss of property caused the wrongful and negligent acts of their employee(s) while acting within the scope of and circumstances of employment. Sovereign immunity is waived for Martin County Court Fl State Statue 768.28(2)
    REMEDY:
     John Hunsinger seeks to recover from any and all Defendants in whole or part for damages caused by the theft of documents and theft property plus damages to property plus for the violations against his U.S. Constituional rights plus the violation of his Fl constitusional rights and all other violation of his other rights as outlined by all Federal and state laws plus for damages caused by the actions of any and all Defendants in whole or part in the sum of 26,000,000.00 dollars plus possession of the property Located at 11090 se Federal Hwy lot 13 Hobe Sound Fl 33455 that consist of One mobile home title number 4994000, 10 by 10 shed and all things in on or atteched to the property.
    Page 7 of 7

  12. Sergio Sanchez says:

    I listen to your radio show great job you are doing .. Looking for a patent attorney that I can trust and will not steal my idea .. Can you recommend a trusted attorney .. I’m in the Miami FL …

    Thanks

    Sergio

  13. PHILIP WILSON says:

    DEAR SIRS THIS WEB IS GOOD AND NECESSARY. MY STORY IS ABOUT A CORRUPT FEDERAL JUDGE NAMED KENNETH MARRA. ALONG WITH CORRUPT ATTORNEY ALAN L. QUILES OF LAW FIRM RUDEN-MCCLOSKY. I HAD A RICO CASE IN THE FEDERAL COURT IN WEST PALM BEACH. IT WAS DONE PRO-SE MY ME. I AN VERY SAVOY IN THE LAW AND FULLY UNDERSTAND ALL RULES OF CRIMINAL AND CIVIL PROCEDURE. YET JUDGE HAS DONE ALL HE CAN NOT TO MAKE A RULING ON THIS CASE. NOT THE CIVIL PART AND WOULD NOT TURN THE CRIMINAL PART OVER TO THE FBI,U.S.ATTORNEY OR THE STATE ATTORNEY’S OFFICE FOR REVIEW AND PROSECUTION. INSTEAD MARRA DISMISSED THE CASE BECAUSE HE SAID I FILED THE AMENDED COMPLAINT ONE DAY LATE. HOWEVER ATTORNEY QUILES WAS 9DAYS LATE IN RESPONDING TO THE COMPALINT AND A MOTION FOR DEFAULT WAS FILED. AND BELIEVE IT OR NOT QUILES ALSO FILED A MOTION FOR MORE TIME TO ANSWER EVEN THOUGH HE WAS 9 DAYS LATE IN RESPONDING. GUESS WHAT?, MARRA GRANTED QUILES MOTION FOR MORE TIME TO ANSWER??? BEFORE HE DISMISSED THE CASE FOR BEING 1 DAY LATE. HOWEVER I REFILED THE CASE. AND THE SAGA CONTINUES. THERE IS MUCH MORE TO THIS OH YEAH DID I MENTION THAT I HAVED FILED A CMPLAINT WITH THE JUDICIAL REVIEW ACCUSING MARRA OF MISCONDUCT; I’VE GOT A SHIT LOAD IF PROOF. SUCH AS RECORED PHONE CONVERSATIONS AND OUT RIGHT LIES FROM MARRA AND QUILES. I WILL BE GOING TO THE MEDIA VERY SOON THE DEFENDANT IS THIS CASE IS STILL IN BUSINESS IN DELRAY STEALING LYING AND CHEATING THE PUBILC OUT OF HUNDREDS AND THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS AND NO ONE WILL STOP HIM; YET!!!!

  14. Hello Mr. Winston,
    I would like to enlist your support to encourage your listeners to sign up to learn about and support http://www.countygrandjury.org.
    Juries are being trained and seated in every county of every state.
    Many of us believe that it may be the only peaceful solution to the ever growing number of complaints we are encountering that have failed to be addressed and/or corrected.
    The people have not lost their authority, they have just be duped into believing that they do not have any. Nothing could be further from the truth. Join us, we need at least thirty people from each county. Such a small number, with a little exposure, this will be the year we see real, positive changes for the people. Keep the faith.
    Sincerely,
    Ms. Joyce Alison Cappello

  15. Francesca Moore says:

    I am writing this letter with a heavy heart regarding the state-sanctioned medical abuse of my only child by the Florida Department of Children & Families Coalition Team. A few powerful individuals within the department working in conjunction with certain pediatricians on their payroll and court official Guardian Ad Litem; blatantly disregarded Chapter 39, GAL Rules, Medical, Florida family law and completely trampled upon my Civil Rights and my Enumerated Rights in the process. As a result of their actions, crucial evidence to my defense was either omitted or withheld, making it impossible for me to defend myself against their unwarranted, tampering with evidence and documents, deliberately lied under oath falsified information,lead and mislead, allegations, threats, perjury, and falsified medical reports. With the outcome of my TPR hearing sealed, DCF proceeded with their initial goal for the (out of home) placement of my child to a family member and DCF employee of the agency; went against the My daughter born severely premature due to 11 rare pregnancy complications which hospitalized my baby for six months and I was hospitalized for three months. After ten days I was told I delivered a beautiful little girl I have always dreamed and wanted all my LIFE! God answered my prayers! My baby born so tiny, Miracle from God, most beautiful gift I was blessed. My little girl, my only child was diagnosed with Severe medical conditions such as “Organic FTT, Chronic disease, severe Prematurity, Respiratory distress, Retinpathy, critically fighting for her life and surviving. My only child weighed a mere one pound, eight ounce after only a 26 weeks gestation age, at 357 grams at five months. She was diagnosed with Severe (FTT) “Organic Failure to Thrive” an feeding disorder that required a surgically implanted feeding tube to be connected to her stomach, providing adequate nutrients to survive.
    Her “medically needy” circumstances and prior history of FTT should have eliminated DCF and their pediatricians from administering any unsuitable medication. Adult medication should never been administered period! DCF and their Coalition Team, employees, GAL, and their Pediatricians knew the “ severity, born extremely near death miracle fighting for her life at birth, with extreme medical complications, any kind of weight loss medications should never have been prescribed or drugging my baby in her food at the starting age of three and half in pre-k, kindergarten. After the “Head Director” of the four formed” Teams “ and my daughter’s’ pediatrician’s who had knowledge, prescribed and drugged my child at the Doctor’s appointments and weight visits at the Family Continuity between 1999-2001. The Pediatricians who were/are colleagues were “Head Directors” of Growth & Development Team, Help A Child Team, Family Continuity Team, all the offices closed down due to family complaints and had the same pediatrician who had to resign in 2001 at “All children’s Hospital” in Saint Petersburg, Florida; where my child began to withdraw from the Adult Psychotropic meds. There was also documents showing that my child severely suffered the severe side effects of the “Celexa and Lexapro” and had to be rushed to the ER for Weight Loss, Loss of Appetite, Vomiting, Stool Impaction, Head Injury, Bleeding Internally, Diarrhea, dizziness, faint, and could have killed my Child, and damaged my child as she grows severely by experimenting Adult Psych Drugs, Not for Children Period! Not Studied or Approved. After our appointment at the FCP for her weight check a few days before she started to get ill and I wanted her to stay home and was excited to start Pre-k. I told my daughter’s teacher if she gets worse because, she started feeling sick, and I was concerned and worried, to call me. The teacher called me told me my baby was getting worse, clammy, pale, vomiting, diahrrhea, crying for her mommy so, I went to pick her up. I had no idea my baby’s very own; one of the pediatricians prescribed her Celexa and Lexapro without my knowledge or consent in the foster care custody of the sisters. The nurse said, “He was not there, we have a Substitute who is following his appts.and my child is not due for an appt for a couple of days” I told the nurse” She needs to see her NOW! I immediately took her to the Doctor and she diagnosed after checking my child with an “Ear Infection “ and medications. I wanted a second opinion because, she was getting very pale, having experience working at Hospice and other medical facilities; I knew she misdiagnosed my daughter. I carried my baby to the ER at Bay front where the ER doctor saw my child and told me she has “ Strep Throat and Ear infection” The ER Pediatrician also said” My baby is “Growing well and appropriate, due to severe prematurity she will remain small’ written on her prescription paper. Immediately ER doctor comes back in the room and stated” My daughter is extremely ill and she is puzzled because, can’t come up with the diagnose which is not meeting up with ear infection or strep throat” I did NOT know about the prescribing and drugging “Celexa or Lexapro” Adult Psychotic meds, so we couldn’t check for that. I was angry for the Substitute holding back that my daughter had also “strep throat” My daughter had to be hospitalized ASAP There was another child in my child’s room and my daughter was vomiting so bad it went all over the room and floor. The mother of the child asked if she could help me, my child wasn’t eating yet, and was very very ill. I thanked her; told her she has her child to take care of. I logged down all my daughter’s food in take and vomiting. Apparently the hospital held that info from the court. The same Pediatrician came walking in that was the one that knew and prescribed, drugged my child with these deadly drugs I never knew; and could have killed my only precious baby girl. In the documents it showed the reason my child was taken by DCF Coalition Team is because of Ear infection, Strep Throat, and the Pediatrician forced me out of the room and called 911 hotline, 2nd time to put a hold on my child for losing weight, she went in weighing 23 ¼ pounds, lost ¼ pound. I later found about the deadly combined Adult Psych “ Celexa and Lexapro” for Adults only; that were prescribed to my child. DCF files scrambled with 1,000’s of out of place, mixed documents were scrambled in different files so it would be in possible if the attorney, court or anyone if they thoroughly reviewed my case, which I know they did not by the way I had a very hard time because, the testimonies showed that FCP, DCF employees, and the GAL had access to the files, and evidence to do whatever they need to do, to accomplish a change of reunification to TPR – Adoption for the MFM’s SISTER. I was shocked and devastated, angry thinking how can a few powerful DCF employees, the GAL, DCF doctors for our children could prescribe deadly, adult drugs, drug my/our babies for experiments, drug companies and kickbacks, awards, commit Medicaid fraud, falsely accusing, hatred, blaming, vengeance toward the mother and almost attempted murder and Detrimental HARM and DANGER; to Our children /My Only daughter, at the age of 3 ½, was prescribed the adult anti-depressants “Celexa” and “Lexapro”, without my knowledge or consent of either: the Family Court, my council, or my child’s private physician. As I read the transcripts years of fighting and lost my Appeal which was never notified for any court proceedings by my attorney or Appeal attorney. The medical documents showed the Adult Psychotropic meds “Celexa and Lexapro which did not show up until after my transcripts came back after 2007, case was closed. Attorney’s told me for years there is nothing you can do to fight and we are so sorry that you were falsely accused, still not knowing the adult drugging of my child till 2008-2011. My fiancé and I was thoroughly reviewing over and over mixed up pages, missing pages, scrambled in different places too complicated to review and the GAL, FCP, and DCF employees, others who had access to the files messed them up so bad you have to go word to word to find the real crucial evidence, extrinsic, intrinsic, frauds, Medicaid Fraud came in 2010-2011, Conspiracy, child trafficking and endangerment to accomplish the adoption goal. I cannot believe our own Pediatricians we are supposed to trust could evilly Drug my baby at three-half in her food with these Deadly drugs for “Drug Companies” Unbelievable, the company that manufactures, markets, who distributes the Adult psychotropic drugs “Celexa” and “Lexapro”, recently plead guilty to multiple criminal charges DCF and their cohorts, clearly violated my civil rights and my ability to defend myself when they willingly disregarded FS 1.540 FS 39.407 and Rule 8.355, as well as many other laws on the books pertaining to the administration of psych meds to a child in the custody of DCF. Florida Statute 39.407(3)(e) clearly states: “before the department provides psychotropic medications to a child in its custody, the prescribing physician shall attempt to obtain express and informed consent, as defined in s. 394.455(9) and described in s. 394.459(3)(a), from the child’s parent or legal guardian.
    Last year, the FDA finally approved the anti-depressant drug “Lexapro” for the treatment of acute depression in adolescents age 14-17yrs old. The reason that this is so shocking is because my daughter was placed on this and other “unapproved” drugs without my knowledge at the age of 3 ½. In September 2010, Forest Laboratories entered into a plea deal with the US Attorney’s Office, entering in guilty pleas for “obstruction of justice”, off-label marketing, and willfully violating the “False Claims Act” to close the case. In plea deal, Forest Labs admits that false claims could be filed with government health care organizations like Medicaid by marketing the drugs “Celexa” and “Lexapro” to pediatric physicians without providing the proper studies on negative side effects in children. My daughter was also on Medicaid due to the exorbitant medical costs associated with the numerous medical complications she’s had since birth. The Inspector General did investigate and there is merit for Medicaid Fraud.
    As a mother, my only child I am extremely worried about the long-term health risks associated with “Lexapro” and “Celexa” while in such a delicate health state when she was a young child. Prior to this writing, I discovered yet another horrific story about these drugs and other children. In one case, of many others, suicide by an 11-year-old little precious girl was attributed to the “Lexapro” drug therapy that she was receiving without her mother’s knowledge or Consent. As an American citizen, with no charges or allegations of abuse or neglect, period, it is my goal to try to tell my story so that parents can better understand the ways which greedy corporations and corrupt tax-funded state agencies, trample on their Civil Rights. A whistle – blower for other Gov’t officials so this horror to” Our Children” will never happen AGAIN! Due to the a few powerful DCF Coalition Team employees, their two Pediatricians who could have killed and damaged my child, which the DCF and GAL called my child a “China Doll” and my daughter told the GAL that she never wanted to see her biological mother again, would rather see the her and loves the GAL more than her own Biological mother’ This GAL sounds to me has severe problems. This GAL does not have the ability and I know she is dangerous to families and does not deserve to be working with the court or DCF. DCF,GAL, DCF Doctor’s and Judge who broke every law in State of Florida, Constitution, Chapter 39, Canon Law and the GAL program. The Pediatricians and all involved almost killing and kidnapping my child, not returning to family court ordered need to all be held accountable. There are many foster, adopted, Gal, Pediatricians, and counselors in the world! Not in my case, I need JUSTICE! How many more children they, their injustice, and malpractices have harmed?
    MY daughter and I were extremely bonded and over seven Doctors both DCF and my private stated” IT would be very “DETRIMENTAL HARM to mother’s child if REMOVED, the mother and daughter are very, very bonded, there are no Negatives with mom, she is “Good Mother” Mother has completed all of her case plan and more… The DCF employees, GAL, two Pediatricians had vengeance towards the mother using their powerful allies to tamper with evidence; and access to court documents and files without court order, falsely lie under oath, destroying a mother and her only child, daughter, did not care what harm came to mother or child. As long as the court appointed GAL, DCF employees esp. the foster parents to accomplish the change of “Reunification to TPR-Adoption for MFM’ her sister.
    My Civil Rights were All destroyed including: my Right to defend myself in court, my Right to informed consent with regards to the drugs my child was placed-on, due process as well as my right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” are but a few of the inalienable Rights so blatantly denied to me and my only child based on my financial status. The safety and well being of my child have always been my priority in life. The same people charged with her safety, are the same people who illegally administered drugs to her as a “experiment for drug companies and pediatricians getting awards, all kinds of kick backs to murder and experiment on babies and children UNACCEPTABLE
    I pray that this letter has provided a bit of insight into the nightmare that my fiancé and I have been fighting for years. I did not get a FAIR TRIAL!!! I deserve and request my Parental rights back, a dismissal or Grand Jury!
    The recent criminal guilty plea from the drug-maker, Forest Labs, combined with the two enormous civil cases against DCF clearly shows; everything we’ve been saying has been the truth NO child should be prescribed and drugged with Adult meds of any KIND! They all should be held accountable for almost and did cause harm, abuse, torture, and could have killed my only child. These are criminals that need to go to prison and lose their license before they kill more children. PLEASE SAVE MY/OUR CHILDREN!!! GOD’S CHILDREN!!!
    PLEASE! The DCF employees, GAL, DCF Pediatricians received kickbacks for trips, awards, games, restaurants to drug our innocent BABIES and FALSELY STEALING FOR PROFIT!! MY attorney who switched with DCF and IAC due to he should have recused himself as a private council to defend based on I had no knowledge and found out years later in 2009-2011 that his wife is a Founder for “Adoption” and he owned Adoption Agencies and Adoption Services all over the U.S. Florida, Georgia, UK, Australia, and is not a USA citizen according to the news articles. The DCF Coalition Team said “MY baby was adjudicated in Feb 7,1990 and my sister home study was not in a time manner on Oct 1,1996. MY CHILD WAS BORN ON SEPTEMBER 28, 1997. My child should never been on any drugs to make you lose weight, especially Adult drugs of any kind! PLEASE HELP ME SAVE MY ONLY CHILD! PLEASE don’t let my ONLY baby, my child, my daughter DIE!!! The most frightening time of my life my baby born tinier than a cell phone, helping her survive with my love, nurturing, caring, never left her side, kept her safe and healthy with Our Lord’s guidance.
    I love and want my baby, would never, ever hurt or harm my child or any child; MY daughter is My Heart, My Life, and My EVERY BREATHE I TAKE! Not one day or night goes by I am not crying, praying, worrying, wondering, fighting and frightened for my little girl. Hearing a ambulance because, during the times shown in the transcripts and MFM and her sister who accomplished and is the adopted mother, before I was my hearing of the TPR, adopted mother was sharing custody without court order for bonding and Adoption; my child was hospitalized still having my rights as a mother and noone notified ME! Now all I hear is an ambulance and I start to cry thinking and praying “ Please God, she is my little girl, please don’t let nothing happen to her” Noone knows what it feels like to have your only child taken against a few powerful criminals that are supposed to be working for the families and the LAW! DID NOT! I never received a “FAIR TRIAL” Noone could imagine you hear a child has been hurt in an accident or tragic, so your eyes are constantly pinned to the TV and radio haunting you, because your praying it’s not your little one, only precious child. I am a “Great Catholic, Christian ½ breed Algonquin American Indian, Biological mother, that truly wanted, has been fighting and LOVES her DAUGHTER I know and believe that the TPR Judge was either threatened or bribed off to go verbatim, because, he never thoroughly checked my case, broke the Canon Laws, my evidence was not allowed in the court room, just like my 30 of my witnesses and myself! Whatever the GAL demanded he followed and gave her the decision and DCF for the fate and life of my child, which was not in the ‘Best Interest” The GAL, DCF employees, and Doctors, have harmed my child according to the medical records, which we need to subpoena the doctor’s offices records before they are destroyed. Now my child is suffering and seeing all this evil harm to the children on TV and now I feel I am being crucified, I did NOTHING WRONG! If I did not bring my child to the hospital, she would have DIED! She was not ever in the hospital before that only her feeding tube for “Organic FTT that she was born with, the child grows out of it as they grow, unless the Doctors prescribe a “ severe side effects of “weight loss, loss of appetite, the other effects above in the letter, like the DCF Pediatricians DID! My daughter has a real mother, a awesome step dad that has been with me for almost 6 yrs, the person that signed the Birth Certificate because I was on life –support, was not told I delivered my little girl for ten days in critical. I also was fighting for my life to help my daughter fight for her life as soon I found out I was a MOMMY! I was/ am the HAPPIEST, HONORED, BLESSED MOTHER IN THE WORLD! My Fiancé and I will never stop fighting until my daughter is returned and Justice is served so, this Horror and torture to my only child will never happen to any child or generations to FOLLOW! . We won’t get married until our little girl comes HOME. . The sad part is her grand pa tried to hold on who passed away two days ago from prostate cancer was waiting for her to come home, love and spoil her, put her in “Shore crest Preparatory “school where his only child, son went to played football with Culpepper, other football NFL players and Bullard families etc. We are still going to put her in the school when she comes home! I also want to open a really nice if a child had to go to a very nice Catholic/Christian ,girl’s, boys, school with trades, love, nurturing, care and safety. They won’t be harmed and have college experience at a young age, learn how to be presentable adults when they grow up and receive a degree. All kinds of learning just like I did, only way better. Shut DCF aka CPS out for GOOD! NOT LIKE DCF STEALIING CHILDREN and HARMING them and Putting OUR babies and children in HARMFUL FAMILIES Later found I out in the transcripts, DCF files hidden from me, attorneys, and the court that the DCF, GAL and MFM did not follow Judge’s rulings and follow the ICPC to give my child to my sister” Maternal aunt” on Oct. 15, 1999 while mom was completing her case plan and when the GAL demanded to change mother’s “Reunification to TPR, Judge ordered to return child to sister in 2003, both never happened. There is so much more to this nightmare my only little girl I can have has gone through, she needs to come home to her real loving mother, father, family, and relatives. . I was a preemie and an Orphan, not as tiny as my angel, and the GAL, DCF employees, targeted my child since birth. I also have a documentary in 2008 that was made when I was a speaker in DC at the Capitol fighting for my Only CHILD! I am a very strong advocate for Children’s RIGHTS! My private Council IAC and his wife is a founder and owns all over the USA, UK , Austrailia, Adoption agencies and services, has adopted children and should have recused himself. These deadly drugs that my only child was put on and also making the schoolchildren harm each other and go awire on others. WE need to do what is right with GOD and the Florida LAWS. I know the Lord will Prevail! If DCF employees, GAL followed the Judge orders my little girl would be home and not drugged, Adult Meds. My Little girl was extremely happy, nurtured, safe, healthy, cared, loved and spoiled. My child would be with her real mother, blood family, relatives that love and miss her immensely! I did nothing WRONG! NEVER BEEN CHARGED WITH ANYTHING! I deserve my PARENTAL RIIGHTS BACK!
    I DO REQUEST A DISMISSAL OR GRAND JURY! PLEASE, HELP ME, MY DAUGHTER IS MISSING OUT ON HER REAL FAMILY LIFE LOVE, and THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS, NUTURING, AND FUN; PLEASE DON’T LET MY ONLY CHILD, MY DAUGHTER DIE BY THESE ADULT DRUGS AND EVIL DOERS! PLEASE I WILL GET JUSTICE, and FREE My / All CHILDREN IN CAPTIVITY!

    .
    God Bless!
    Sincerely,
    Francesca Moore
    DESTROYED MOTHER

  16. Grant H. Goodman
    Office No: 602-955-0208
    Fax no: 602-538-4357

    To Whom It May Concern,
    This letter is a request for your help and support. The great state of Florida and this country are in danger of being deceived by corrupt Judges and deceiving Lawyers, that help them selves to the assets of venerable and innocent people via a predator guardianship on them.
    My name is Mary Mieczynski (DOB) 1951, my son Anthony Mieczynski(DOB) 1982, and my husband Allen Mieczynski(dob) 1947 are all victims of (Florida) Seminole County’s injustice. Please give Mr. Goodman a call, Mr. Goodman has all the details and needs the support of caring people who may someday find themselves facing worst situations if they don’t help put a stop to this injustice now.
    Thank you,
    Mary Mieczynski

  17. QNY81 says:

    Foreclosure lawyers’ misdeeds ignored in Florida?
    Posted by Foreclosure Fraud on January 18, 2011 · 3 Comments

    Foreclosure lawyers’ misdeeds ignored in Florida?
    Despite complaints, ethics breaches slip past discipline system

    By Todd Ruger

    Florida courthouses are rife with evidence of errors and fabrications made by attorneys handling foreclosure cases, and yet so far no lawyers have been disciplined.

    With pressure mounting to police its own members, the Florida Bar established a special category of complaints listed as “foreclosure fraud.”

    But in 20 complaints investigated in that category, the Bar has not found cause to discipline anyone — even lawyers who admitted to breaking ethical rules.

    Some observers say that early track record of ignoring misdeeds by its members raises questions about whether the system of self-policing for lawyers can handle the depth of wrongdoing in the foreclosure crisis.

    The complaints have been filed by judges, lawyers, homeowners and the Florida Bar itself, and reflect the issues seen in courtrooms almost daily for the past two years, including forged signatures and backdated documents used to improperly seize homes in foreclosures.

    In addition, attorneys for lenders have filed false motions, left out important information that would hurt their case, or skipped mandatory mediations and court hearings.

    The state Attorney General’s Office is investigating and found the same evidence of wrongdoing. But with no known criminal investigations launched into the behavior, the public and the court system must rely on the Florida Bar to stop bad behavior by attorneys.

    Dozens of complaints against foreclosure lawyers are still pending, including complaints against the head of the four law firms that handled the vast majority of Florida’s foreclosures and often had multiple attorneys handling one file.

    http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20110118/ARTICLE/101181061/2416/NEWS?p=2&tc=pg

  18. Christina Sigler says:

    I filed a complaint with the Florida Bar that just after I asked opposing to request that my former husband take my child to the doctor, opposing sent me e mails both threatening contempt and that my child will not receive medical care until financial demands are met. This is in addition to $1200.00/month child support being garnished each month. There are no orders for any more, but they know I am willing to pay medical in addition.

    The reply from the bar is that he was doing his job to defend his client. ???

    Question 1: Why am I e mailing his attorney? Despite shared parenting former husband and father of child has cut me off all forms of contact/communication with his attorney telling me to e mail him instead… and I live 700 miles away.

    There were other things I complained to the Florida Bar about but that upset the most. My child is still not seeing a doctor for ADHD medication, for therapies for autism, for counseling, and /or for rectal pain and bleeding, for headaches, throwing up and a sore throat.

    After 12 years of custody litigation and violations of Florida Statutes, VAWA and the UCCJEA with domestic violence and the court ordering of my child to known and admitted abuse and neglect, I am beyond traumatized. And that an attorney can threaten both my child and I in violation of criminal provisions of VAWA and have it approved by the Florida Bar is …

  19. I have repeatedly notified the florida bar about the misconduct of several florida attorneys and the florida bar refused to assist me.

  20. Hello,

    My name is Sheila Dennis and I am informing you that the federal government officials are allowing its police officers and many males in society to watch me and try to have sexual relations with me. I have filed federal cases including in the Supreme Court of the United States. The clerk of court and judges in the federal courts are altering my complaints and/or not docketing certain motions and opposing attorneys such as of Miami Dade County, City of North Miami, and Tenet Health Care Corporations are outright knowingly and willfully filing false statements about the cases.
    Today at 1:00 p.m. I have meeting with the Mayor Michael Pizzi of the City of Miami Lakes concerning the sexual lewd and lascivious behavior of the Miami Dade County police officers (including female officers) in the city Miami Lakes area.
    The officials need to be placed in jail and even worst for what they are doing to me and even maybe to your own female love ones.
    The following are the few cases:
    No. 09-10893

    IN THE
    Supreme Court of the United States
    _________

    SHEILA DENNIS “`
    Petitioner
    v.

    CITY OF AVENTURA,
    Florida, et al.,

    Respondents

    ____________
    On a Writ of Certiorari to the
    United States Court of Appeals for the
    Eleventh Circuit
    ___________

    PETITION FOR REHEARING
    ____________

    Sheila Dennis Pro se, Petitioner
    8054 W. 21st Ct
    Hialeah, Fl. 33016-1832
    Phone#: N/A
    PETITION FOR REHEARING

    Pursuant to Rule 44.1, petitioner respectfully petitions this Court for rehearing.
    The court of appeals’ decision requiring petitioner Ms. Dennis to pay initial court fees for this case, conflicts with the decision of this supervising Court which did not require Ms. Dennis to pay but allowed her to proceed “in forma pauperis” for this case.
    As a result, this Court’s decision as pursuant to its Rule 10, reverses the court of appeals’ decision for requiring payment for this case on appeal.
    Moreover, respondent Miami Dade County (“County”), in the state criminal trial part of this case, altered the state criminal record two different times and switched out the name of the true trial Judge, the Honorable Karen Mills-Francis and over a year later after the completion of the criminal trial, replaced her name with Jose L. Fernandez, (See Exhibit A attached hereto) who was a practicing attorney and not a judge during the time when Ms. Dennis’ criminal case was pending.
    Then next, when this Court was about to schedule Ms. Dennis’ “Petition For Writ of Certiorari” for conference, County, in order to discredit Ms. Dennis, to bring further harm to her and so that the respondents won’t have to account for their wrongdoings against Ms. Dennis, replaced the name of Jose L. Fernandez with judge Jacqueline Schwartz (See Exhibit B) in the criminal court.
    This Court is fully aware that Ms. Dennis is pro se, that her case has merit and willfully has not squarely presented her case before this court.
    Ms. Dennis used certified mail with signature confirmation card for proof of receipt of her mail (her “Petition For Writ of Certiorari”). However, the signature card is stamped with the date May 11, 2010 (Exhibit C attached hereto) without any signature, but the post office’s hard copy shows a signature of a person named John Kauros with the date of receipt as May 10, 2010 at 8:01 a.m. and not May 11, 2010. (Exhibit D attached hereto).
    Nevertheless, for Ms. Dennis’ other filed “Petition For Writ of Certiorari” for case, Sheila Dennis v. Keller Meyer Building Services, No. 09-7878, this Court, initially docketed the wrong respondents for the case; and as a result, Ms. Dennis filed a “Motion For Relief” from clerk’s error, and in response, this Court consciously and deliberately named the right number for respondent but failed to file and docket Ms. Dennis’ “Motion For Relief”.
    The opposing attorney for that case knew to refuse to accept Ms. Dennis’ “Motion For Relief” and already arranged with the post office to return back to Ms. Dennis her “Motion For Relief” and knew to tell the court that that case did not show that the lower courts had not so far departed from the accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings when actually the case showed a plethora of direct evidence that the lower courts have done so; and then next, this Court denied Ms. Dennis’ petition for that case on her birthday.
    This Court must not use deception in handling this case but should rule righteously so that Ms. Dennis can be made whole.

    CONCLUSION
    For the foregoing reasons, the petition for rehearing should be granted, the decision of October 4, 2010 vacated, and the case scheduled for conference for a) reversal of the court of appeal’s decision b) remand and/or c) other just reasons.

    Respectfully submitted by:
    __________________
    Sheila Dennis Pro se
    8054 W. 21st Ct
    Hialeah, Fl. 33016-1832 Phone#: N/A
    October 27, 2010
    CERTIFICATE OF COUNSEL
    As a pro se petitioner, I hereby certify that this petition for rehearing is presented in good faith and not for purposes of delay. /s/ Sheila Dennis
    No. 09-10893

    IN THE
    Supreme Court of the United States
    _________

    SHEILA DENNIS
    Petitioner
    v.

    CITY OF AVENTURA,
    Florida, et al.,

    Respondents

    ____________
    On a Writ of Certiorari to the
    United States Court of Appeals for the
    Eleventh Circuit
    ___________

    MOTION FOR RELIEF
    ____________

    Sheila Dennis Pro se, Petitioner
    8054 W. 21st Ct
    Hialeah, Fl. 33016-1832
    Phone#: N/A
    MOTION FOR RELIEF
    Pursuant to Rule 21, petitioner respectfully moves this Court to remove petitioner’s “petition for rehearing” from the “paid” conference list and properly place it on the “in forma pauperis” conference list.
    The Clerk wrongfully placed the petition on the conference list for a paid case (list 3) when this case is actually an “in forma pauperis” case that must be placed on the conference list for “IFP” (In Forma Pauperis) cases.
    In addition to this Court‘s policy for the proper placement of cases on the proper conference lists being required, the “in forma pauperis” status of this particular case, also determines the granting of the petition; and thus, the change for the correct placement of the petition on the correct list is most imperative.
    CONCLUSION
    For the foregoing reasons, the “motion for relief” should be granted, relieving the petition from the “paid” list by righteously placing it on the “in forma pauperis” list for conference.
    Respectfully submitted by:
    __________________
    Sheila Dennis Pro se
    8054 W. 21st Ct
    Hialeah, Fl. 33016-1832 Phone#: N/A
    November 15, 2010
    CERTIFICATE OF COUNSEL
    As a pro se petitioner, I hereby certify that this “motion for relief” is presented in good faith and not for purposes of delay. /s/ Sheila Dennis

Leave a Reply