Professional Documents
Culture Documents
3
4
5
6
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
8
9 10
11 JOSE CASTANEDA,
12
an individual Corruption,
&
B 229512]
13
14 15 16 17
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION & OPPOSITION TO ILLEGAL, CORRUPT ORDER, BY THE COURT ON MARCH 28, 2012 ...
)
)
Misconduct
to
an "Engineered" Verdict or
&
1. [FACT & EXHIBIT(S}: OF A COURT ORDER THAT WAS ASSIGNED ) FOR "ALL" PURPOSES TO JUDGE ) ) HICCOCK PHILIP] TO OLD & RIDGED TO
) ) ) ) )
) )
18
UNDERSTAND IN COURTS
COMMITTED
"Predictive"
19
(Per Exhibi
1#)
20
21 22
Decision
23
24 25 26 27 28
2. PER ORDER OF THE COURT, BY "ALL" ) JUDGE HICKOK, DIRECT JUDGE TO ) FILINGS TO PRESIDING used in the court, and "NOT" on ) HEAR, BUT "ERASED" FROM ) OFFICIAL COURT RECORD! (Per "Official" record which ) ) Exhibit 2#)
by unlawful tactics
"Edit's"
true justice!
Plaintiff,
) ) ) ) ) ) )
3. PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF FOLLOWING & COMPLYING WITH COURT'S ORDER VERBATIM. (Not on Court Minutes & another ) judicial lie in court)
)
) )
4. MY RIGHTS & PER THE LAW, TO "CONSOLIDATE" THE RELATED "FALSE" CASE (S) BY LAW
PLAINTIFF'S
MOTION
&
OPPOSITION
1
2
Vs.
ESTATE OF ROBERT BERKE, JOSEPH F. DEVANON, ANTOHONY B. DREWRY, RITA "SUNNY"MILLER, LISA MACCARLEY,SONIA MERCADO, EMAHN COUNTS, JACK K. CONWAY, SEVAG NIGOGHOSIAN, CHARLES LOVE, IVAN SHOMER, JAMES R. FELTON, LEON J. OWNES, AND SAMUEL R. PAZ nominated by President Clinton in 1994 AND DOES 1 through 10, inclusive,
AS
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
) MANUFACTURED, FALSE EVIDENCE, ) FALSE CASE(S), THAT WAS A LIE ) TO THE COURT FOR A FAVOR & ) BRIBE BY DEFENDANTS TO RECIEVE ) ) UNJUST REWARDS FOR A BRIBE TO ) THE BENCH. (For proof, see ) altered court records, with no ) ) objections by Defendants, when ) false case(s) & false evidence ) were introduced to & by the ) court by "ALL" parties!)
Defendants; 10 AND THE FORMAL REQUEST FOR PROTECTION AND FREE FROM RETALATION FOR EXPOSING JUDICIAL CORRUPTION:
11
12 13
) ) ) ) ) )
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
***WHISTLE-BLOWER REQUESTED;
PROTECTION FOR
14 15 16
5. ABUSE OF DUE PROCESS BASED ON A JUDICIAL BRIBE, JUDICIAL PERJURY, JUDICIAL ABUSE OF DISCRECTION, AND PERJURY BY JUDGE FOR A BRIBE TO ALLOW FALSE EVIDENCE BY JUDGE HICKOK AND HIS CRAZY "SCREW UP" COURT!!! *Judge Hickok ... needs to retire and "Step Down or Step Aside!" FOR PROOF SEE EXHIBIT
lO#,Page judicially
BY JUDICIAL
&
is
17
18 19
and thinks he is an
CRIMES OF JUDICIAL
BRIBERY!***
)
******************************* PURSUANT
20
) )
Appellate Court Judge, by now; he must think he is a Supreme Court Judfl.ein his "Cracked" MIND!!!
21
22
6. OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, WITH EVIDENCE TO 391.7 (b) f PLAINTIFF MOVES THIS) RECEIVE UNJUST REWARDS & A ) KICK-BACK FOR ALLOWING A SERIES ) COURT THAT THE PRESIDING JUDGE ) OF LIES IN AS EVIDENCE TO CAL. CIV. PROCEDURE)
) TAMPERING
)
23 24
25 26
SHALL PERMIT THE FILING OF SUCH) LITIGATION ONLY IF IT APPEARS HAS MERIT
7. SELLING OF DECISIONS
BY
TO STEER CASES TO A
PURPOSES
OF HARASSMENT
PLAINTIFF'S
MOTION
&
OPPOSITION
1
2
OF THE COURT,
3
4
) ) ) ) )
)
UPON MY WITNESS & uINTERPRETER" IN THE COURT, WHILE "INTERPRETING" WITH HIS SERVICES TO THE COURT & I.
5
6 7 8 9 10
11
12 13 14 15 16 17
OF TITLE 18, 241 & ) 242, CONSPIRACY TO VIOLATE MY ) RIGHTS BY "ALL" OFFICERS OF THE BERKE, OVERTON, FELTON, COUNTS, ~ COURT, AS THE COURT ALLOWS FOR ) A BRIBE ) NIGOGHOSIAN, VIOLATING THE ) 10. VIOLATION OF PENAL CODE CONSTITUTION OF THE U.S.A. AND ~ 182, JUDICIAL CONSPIRACY. ) BETRAYING THEIR OATH OF OFFICE, ) 11. OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE IN ) CASES GC 039459 & GC 039473 BY ) AS KNOWN TRAITORS TO THE ) ATTORNEY PRATT, CONWAY AND LISA M. MACCARLEY CONSTITUTION, THE PEOPLE, THEIR ~ ) 12. TAMPERING WITH EVIDENCE, ) FOR PROOF SEE CASES BS 118244, OFFICE, AND THEMSELVES FOR ) BC 402096, GC 042105, & GC 045202 THE REMOVAL OF A ) MONEY OR A JUDICIAL BRIBE. ) "STIPULATION" FORCED BY SAM R. ) PAZ PAZ, MERCADO,SHOMER,
) 9. VIOLATION
)
THE DIRTY ATTORNEYS THAT PAY THE DOWN ) 13. VIOLATION OF PENAL CODE ) SUBORDINATION OF PERJURY ) ) 14. VIOLATION OF PENAL CODE ) OFFERING FALSE EVIDENCE FOR ) CONVICTION; TO RECEIVE A ) JUDICIAL BRIBE. ) ) 15. VIOLATION OF PENAL CODE ) PREPARING OF FALSE EVIDENCE ) (CASES No GC 039743, & YS ) 017992) 127 132 A
134
21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28
OF PENAL 67 & 68, ) OFFERING, & TAKING A BRIBE ) ) 17. TO VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION ) OF THE UNITED STATES, TREASON ) ) 18. Violation Cal. Civ. Proc. ) Code 391.7 (b) "THE PRESIDING ) JUDGE SHALL PERMIT THE FILING ) OF SUCH LITIGATION ONLY IF IT .
) 16. VIOLATION
PLAINTIFF'S
MOTION
&
OPPOSITION
1
2 3
4
Jose Castaneda,
et. al.,
&
Opposing
a "So-Called"
trial or hearing,
on 03/28/2012,
and witness,
5
6 7 8 9 10
Discharge,
11 JUDICIAL
12
"INCIDENT"
THAT DEPRIVE
ME OF MY RIGHTS:
Request
for
13
14 15 16
"Judicial evidence
Notice"
Fallacy)
and criminal
17
as evidence
18
as follows:
19
20
21 22 23 24 25
"1", As Tentative
Ruling
in Case BC 466737,
that
and manufacture
1, Page I,
In Case # 1.:
26
GC 044745, Estate
of Felicitas
Castaneda
v.
Susana Castaneda
27 28
I am enclosing
& OPPOSITION
1
2 3 4
that Shows Lisa MacCarley and both attorneys This proves re-litigate
who appeared
on 4/16/08,
"agreed"
conspiracy.
5
6 7
GC 039743, Haifen Ye AKA Jean Lucero vs. Center [Exhibit 3] Filed by Attorneys record, Trapp
&
by
8
9
filed this case; the court claimed insane, unless The Parties and Attorney
I did!!!
judicially guilty!!!
10
it was "intentionally"
Edelstein
Plaintiff,
Janet Eiko Trapp for the Defendant, any business courtroom! dealing
11
12
or have conducted
[See Exhibit
13
14 15 16
In Case # 3.
Castaneda
v. The
[Exhibit 4] As Administrator
of the
It was my job to file the case to pursue for "gross intentional legal malpractice"
Conway
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
two cases opened by Chad T. Pratt, who was fired for his dishonesty as he was requesting forward matter thousands of dollars to pursue a straight There were well and Pratt was
$5,000.00
dollar
see II,
MY CLIENTS
INTERESTS
IF THAT IS
WHAT MRS.
[See
27
28
the estate.
PLAINTIFF'S
MOTION
& OPPOSITION
1
2 3 4
In Case # 4.
v. Daniel
Papas
this case was filed in The City of fabricated by the court for to
Courthouse, Bribe!
and is apparently
a Judicial
I never
filed this case! The court continues and fake cases to receive monies received
Evidence
a Judicial
8
9 10
It is NOT my case,
case the court claimed the Defendant's NOT! For proof, corrections
did! The court lies and claims along with I did file a case in court, but I did were made in court, "NO" were ever made courthouse,
by stating
11
12
"NO" objections
"NO" clarifications
in court, 13
14 15 16 17 18 19
just continuous
the Appellate
same case and Jurisdiction! !! This is criminal Superior Jeopardy! Appeals Court Judges in this Jurisdiction, Court Judge,
applying
"Double
Can a Superior
Judge Hickok
"Act" as an in
Court Judge,
and "OVERTURN"
the Appeals
Court Ruling,
the Superior
20 21 22 23
Castaneda,
[Exhibit 5], I did file this case on behalf Castaneda, after the discovery Sonia Mercado's
Felicitas
for $113,626.25
24
made at Attorney
Institution
25 26
or Bank. Attorney
Mercado
put my mother's
27
28
On Case # 6.
Angeles County
B 229567, Castaneda
et al. Related
PLAINTIFF'S
MOTION
&
OPPOSITION
1
2 3
4
Be advised,
there is NO Superior
[Exhibit v.
10, Page 1 & 2, that lists Trial Court Case GC 045202, Conway] In Case # 7. B 227826, connected Castaneda v. S.C.L.A.
Castaneda
Related
Case Case
5
6 7
there is NO Superior
did
NOT file
this
I never
8
9
Case or Complaint.
MacCarley
file this case. Not me as per the court thinks proof, [See Exhibit
10
I did! For
10, Pages 3 & 4, that lists Trial Court Case GC This case B 227826, was falsely case was filed on and "engineered" case
042105, Ramirez 11
12 13 14 15 16
to win a "designed",
by Default
Conway was too busy lying to the court! After Mercado and Paz filed a Vexatious
case BC 402096,
Litigant
I expose
their lies and the investment against me and to keep me The Court did See Exhibit
DENY
22
23
not believe
24
For Proof,
on number
2, it reads:
DEFENDANT
"WE ALSO
REQUEST BECAUSE
LITIGANT
PLAINTIFFS
INSUFFICIENT IS
EVIDENCE
WHETHER DEFENDANT
A VEXATIOUS
LITIGANT
391
OF THE CALIFORNIA
CODE OF CIVIL
PROCEDURE"
PLAINTIFF'S
MOTION
& OPPOSITION
1
2
AKA his
Castaneda
litigant
3
4
to CCP 391.7 and made by the Fraudulent Evidence, and the Case This This is
5 6
7
distorting
Bribe.
For proof,
and the Order was never based on true and relevant was a Purchased Decision
evidence. Bribe.
8
9 10
13
14 15 16 17 18
double
jeopardy
looking
it is improper to supersede
the Superior
Court.
A}
19 20 21
Castaneda
v.
Estate of Robert Berke, displays Mercado and shows that, and R. Samuel is
[Exhibit 7, Page 1, Lines 24 -27] Clearly "having considered Defendants Sonia Jose
22
23 24
Castaneda security,
vexatious
to
require
to
post
and having
considered
heard is GRANTED.H
25
arguments
26
of Jose Castaneda
and counsel,
27
28
How can the Court grant this Ridiculous evidence supplied and manufactured
PLAINTIFF'S
MOTION
& OPPOSITION
1
2
[SEE Exhibit
3
4
For absolute
6
to
me at the Hearing
of March 28, 2012, it reads and states that the Section 391. Subsections (b) defines a
8
9 10
as a person
7 year period,
has commenced,
11
at least 5 litigation.
12
I DID NOT, OR EVER, AS PER THE EXHIBIT FILED 5 LITIGATIONS THE SAME CLAIMS
13
14
15 16 17 18 19
SUPPLIED ACTION,
FINALLY DETERMINED.
II proof,
[SEE Exhibit
3], provided
ARGUMENT
20 21 22 23
evidence
to find me a
24
25
[Exhibit 7] Clearly
displays
caption
PLAINTIFF'S
MOTION
&
OPPOSITION
1
2
3 4
Inglewood
Courthouse,
this is Judicial
it was
fraud, the Judge never ask me if it was my filing, planted the evidence,
Substantiated
by anyone
of perjury
4, IS NOT
8
9 10
and shenanigans,
11 in this Jurisdiction,
12 13 14 15 16 17
as Defendant
and on same Order on Page 2, and on Line 21, it [SEE Court Opinions denying the Vexatious that was
adjudicated
Justices
and approved
by
Ar.mstrong, Acting
19 20 21
it lists as a related
22
23
24
II
Presided
by Simpson
at Pasadena
Superior
Court case.
Be advised,
25 26
Morejon
illegally,
GC 045202!I
27
28
case B 227826
PLAINTIFF'S
MOTION
& OPPOSITION