Professional Documents
Culture Documents
________,
Plaintiff
_________________________________________________________________
Now comes the above named, _____ (“W______”) and moves to either void the illegal
summary judgment of foreclosure made against her on December 17, 2009, dismiss this
case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction with prejudice, or a demand to recuse Judge
Charles Kahn (Judge) from the above entitled matter under 28 USCS Sec. 455(a) which
states: “Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself
judge should be disqualified only if a reasonable person, apprised of all the facts and
circumstances, would question the judge's impartiality. Hunt v. Am. Bank & Trust Co.
of Baton Rouge,783 F.2d 1011, 1015 (11th Cir.1986); Potashnick v. Port City Constr.
Co.,609 F.2d 1101, 1110-11 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 820, 101 S.Ct. 78, 66 L.Ed.2d
22 (1980).
Apparently my written motions, judicial notices etc. are not “on the record” and have no
legal significance in this courtroom, and only those items expressed verbally are “on
the record,” as every motion or other paperwork submitted was totally ignored by the
way, I’m sure the law wouldn’t have gone to so much trouble to make sure that
judgment dealt with any material facts or any other substantive evidence or laws. The
Judge did not make W_______ aware of this obscure procedure of denying or ignoring
all written paperwork. In addition, W_______ answered every motion filed by Ocwen,
and most if not all of their false affidavits, within her motions and with signed and
notarized affidavits… all ignored or denied. In addition, Ocwen’s lawyers sat stone-
faced and mute as the Judge did all their work for them.
Abuse of Discretion: When a court does not apply the correct law or if it rests its
decision on a clearly erroneous finding of a material fact. U.S. v. Rahm, 993 F.2d 1405,
1410 (9th Cir.'93). http://www.lectlaw.com
It’s a legal requirement that, when challenged, standing and subject matter jurisdiction
must be proven, and that the burden of proof lies on the person bringing the suit. The
Judge ignored that, and refused to make Ocwen prove standing. Proof of standing, by law,
requires the production of the Original Note and Mortgage, with all endorsements and/or
Enforcement of a note always requires that the person seeking to collect show that it is the
holder. A holder is an entity that has acquired the note either as the original payor or
bearer paper properly signed and endorsed. These requirements are set out in Article 3 of
the Uniform Commercial Code, which has been adopted in every state. Correspondingly, in
1
The standard of review to use is abuse of discretion. Carey v. State, 405 A.2d 293 (Md. Ct.
Spec. App. 1979), cert. denied, 445 U.S. 967 (1980).
United States v. Butner, 440 U.S. 48, 54-55 (1979). (Federal Bankruptcy Judge Samuel
Bufford's Presentation Paper before the Universal Commercial Code Committee titled
“Where’s The Note, Who’s The Holder: Enforcement Of Promissory Note Secured By Real
Estate”).
The Judge put the burden on W_______ to prove Ocwen did not have standing to bring the
if I’m not mistaken, was a courtroom trick to put me under the Court’s jurisdiction. This
I do not consent to the Court’s jurisdiction where Ocwen’s standing has not been
proven.
“Plaintiffs have the burden of establishing standing.” Loren v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield
of Michigan, No. 06-2090, 2007 WL 2726704 at *7 (6th Cir. Sept. 20, 2007). “If they cannot
do so, their claims must be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.” Id.
(citing Central States Southeast & Southwest Areas Health and Welfare Fund v. Merck-Medco
Managed Care, 433 F.3d 181, 199 (2nd Cir. 2005).
Judge allowed Ocwen to submit documents of no legal consequence, and not submit
imposed on Ocwen for their refusal to properly comply with Discovery for eight months.
However, sanctions were imposed on W_______ for inadvertently missing a court hearing
A court "cannot confer jurisdiction where none existed and cannot make a void
proceeding valid." People ex rel. Gowdy v Baltimore & Ohio R.R. Co., 385 Ill. 86, 92, 52
N.E.2d 255 (1943).
33 Am. Jur. Proof of Facts 3d 459, II. Elements of Proof, and Sect. 24, states “severe
sanctions are warranted for discovery failures” where the following facts and
circumstances establish proof of grounds for imposition of discovery sanctions when the
responding party has failed to properly respond to a discovery order with:
1. Proper service of discovery request
2. Responding party’s failure to respond to discovery request
3. Failure to appear or designate a witness to testify at deposition
4. Failure to serve written response to interrogatories or to request for production of
documents or other materials
Ocwen never proved standing. W_______ never knowingly gave jurisdiction to the Court,
and made it clear throughout the eight months that Ocwen had no standing, the Court had
no jurisdiction, and that W_______ did not consent to the proceedings for those reasons…
however the Judge made a judicial decision contrary to all law that he did, in fact, have
"Obviously a judgment, though final and on the merits, has no binding force and is
subject to collateral attack if it is wholly void for lack of jurisdiction of the subject
matter or person, and perhaps for excess of jurisdiction, or where it is obtained by
extrinsic fraud." (7 Witkin, Cal. Procedure, supra, Judgment, § 286, p. 828.). Section 437,
subdivision (d), provides that a court, on noticed motion, may set aside void judgments and
orders. Courts also have inherent power to set aside a void judgment. (Reid v. Balter (1993)
14 Cal.App.4th 1186, 1194.).
Affidavits were signed by Ocwen’s lawyers, who had no personal knowledge and were not
competent fact witnesses. Motions to strike those affidavits were denied. W_______’s
affidavits were not considered at all. Not one competent fact witness was ever in the Court.
Ocwen’s pleadings make no allegation of how, when, where, or under what circumstances,
W_______ requested necessary parties be added to the lawsuit, so the truth and facts could
counter-claims.
W_______ demanded proof of standing by way of the ORIGINAL Mortgage and Promissory
Note, including all endorsements required by law. Judge allowed a copy, with no
Ocwen.
In addition, the copy of the promissory note was signed “In Blank”, signed over to anyone
apparently who had a copy of said promissory note, of which there is no way to know WHO
has copies. In addition, said promissory note was “signed” with scribbled and unreadable
initials.
Note also that on the date W_______ filed the Temporary Restraining Order (2/2/09), she
was handed the court file to see the documents filed since the Summary Judgment, as she
had requested copies of that information, which she had never received. Upon examination
A court may also abuse its discretion when the record contains no evidence
to support its decision. MGIC v. Moore, 952 F.2d 1120, 1122 (9th Cir.'91).
Judge allowed an “Assignment of Mortgage” that was signed by known robo-signer Scott
Anderson and notary Leticia Arias, who had no personal knowledge, and at this point in
time, its unknown if these two individuals even exist. Scott Anderson and Leticia Arias did
addition, it was assigned by MERS “as nominee”, which designation has been rejected as
having no legal authority in courtrooms across the country, and MERS is being investigated
by numerous Federal and State agencies for their part in this fraud, and in the later
LPS is now under a federal criminal investigation by the U.S. attorney's office for the middle
district of Florida for alleged false, fraudulent, and forged assignments of mortgages, deeds
of trusts, and deeds to secure debt used by the “foreclosure mill” law firms3and their
servicer clients in an attempt to establish standing and authority to foreclose and recreate
chains-of-titles to mortgages and promissory notes that have been intentionally and
admittedly lost and/or destroyed to conceal the fact that the real and lawful owner of such
promissory notes.
8. Judge ignored request for trial by jury and proceeded to illegal Summary
Judgment
Judge allowed NO trial in between presentation of fraudulent Promissory Note and Summary
Judgment. Judge “read” my 60+ counterclaims and dismissed them all as unimportant, all
counter-claims, and which Discovery documents were denied. The reading of counter-
claims and denial thereof, took approximately 3 minutes, before Summary Judgment was
2
Exhibit K, page 1, taken from page 36 of “Unfair, Deceptive and Unconscionable Acts in
Foreclosure Cases, prepared by June M. Clarkson, Theresa B. Edwards and Rene D. Harrod for the
Office of the Attorney General, Economic Crimes Division (See document called “Florida-Attorney-
General-Fraudclosure-Report-Unfair-Deceptive-and-Unconscionable-Acts-in-Foreclosure-Cases.pdf” on
the attached CD, incorporated fully herein).
A judgment is void on its face if the trial court exceeded its jurisdiction by granting
relief that it had no power to grant. Jurisdiction cannot be conferred on a trial court
by the consent of the parties. (Summers v. Superior Court (1959) 53 Cal. 2d 295, 298 [1
Cal. Rptr. 324, 347 P.2d 668]; Roberts v. Roberts (1966) 241 Cal. App. 2d 93, 101 [50 Cal.
Rptr. 408].)
The Supreme Court of Wisconsin stated in AccuWeb: “As we noted previously, summary
judgment is appropriate only if there are no genuine issues of material fact, and the
moving party, having established a prima facie case, is entitled to judgment as a
matter of law. Wis. Stat. § 802.08(2). Furthermore, summary judgment materials, including
pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file are viewed in the
light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Rainbow Country Rentals, 286 Wis.2d 170, ¶ 13,
706 N.W.2d 95. Also, the “burden is on the moving party to prove that there are no
genuine issues of material fact.” Central Corp. v. Research Prods. Corp., 2004 WI 76, ¶
19, 272 Wis.2d 561, 681 N.W.2d 178.” AccuWeb, Inc. v. Foley & Lardner, 308 Wis.2d 258, ¶
21 (2008).
As stated repeatedly and clearly throughout all her motions and “on the
record” in the court, because Ocwen does not have standing, and the Court
CONCLUSION
This document may be incomplete as I was given all of five days to research and prepare it,
at the same time as having to try to pack an entire household. The listing here of filed
papers is only a small part of my written documentation. When asked if there was anything
I should be doing in that five days, the Judge said, “PACK!” making it clear he intended to
At the absolute bare minimum, Ocwen was required to produce the ORIGINAL Promissory
Note and Mortgage, together with all endorsements directly on those documents, and/or a
securely attached allonge, in order to prove standing. In fact, those documents by law
should have been brought forward immediately when requested, and in fact, should have
been in their possession as holders in due course at the time of filing of the original
Complaint. All DENIED AND IGNORED by Judge! If standing had been proven, THEN
Discovery and trial by jury could move forward. Instead this Court went from fraudulent
documents to summary judgment within a matter of about five minutes, ignoring the
The judge was polite, patient, did not display irritation, and only a little sarcasm, as he
systematically stripped me of all due process rights. I do not think his impartiality
procedure” for foreclosure cases, attempting to efficiently expedite cases out of the
court system, and at the same time maintain the status quo. However, with the clear
fact that the entire mortgage system is based upon fraud ab initio as evidenced in
hundreds or thousands of litigating cases nationwide, and the fact that Ocwen and its
lawyers clearly do not have standing and have committed fraud upon the court, it was
and is the Judge’s duty to follow the law and demand Ocwen prove standing or dismiss
the case with prejudice, irregardless of how foreclosures have been handled in the
past. He chose instead to give Ocwen summary judgment, despite all Federal and
RELIEF
The United States Constitution3 guarantees an unbiased Judge who will always provide
litigants with full protection of ALL RIGHTS. Therefore, W_______ respectfully demands
1. Void the illegal summary judgment made on December 17, 2009, which was made
2. Dismiss this case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction with prejudice; or
3. Judge recuse himself in light of the evidence detailing unethical and/or illegal
conduct, “in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned,” and “if a
reasonable person, apprised of all the facts and circumstances, would question the
judge's impartiality.”
A court may also abuse its discretion when the record contains no evidence
to support its decision. MGIC v. Moore, 952 F.2d 1120, 1122 (9th Cir.'91).
Copies of all relevant documents, including this one, will be sent to a number of Federal and
State agencies that are presently looking into the corruption and fraud swirling around the
foreclosure industry, with instructions to either start an investigation or to include my
information into their existing investigations regarding acts of felony conspiracy (RICO).
“Plaintiffs have the burden of establishing standing.” Loren v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield
of Michigan, No. 06-2090, 2007 WL 2726704 at *7 (6th Cir. Sept. 20, 2007). “If they cannot
do so, their claims must be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.” Id.
(citing Central States Southeast & Southwest Areas Health and Welfare Fund v. Merck-Medco
Managed Care, 433 F.3d 181, 199 (2nd Cir. 2005).
3
Article 6 of the United States Constitution: “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United
States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made,
under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in
every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary
notwithstanding.”
"The neutrality requirement helps to guarantee that life, liberty, or property will not be
taken on the basis of an erroneous or distorted conception of the facts or the law." This is
applicable to this court by application of Article VI of the United States Constitution and Stone v
Powell, 428 US 465, 483 n. 35, 96 S. Ct. 3037, 49 L. Ed. 2d 1067 (1976).
______________________________
Name W_______, Pro Se
Address
Phone
Maxim of law:
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of each of the afore-listed documents was
served upon counsel for Ocwen, Blommer Peterman, and counsel for Federal Home Loan
Mortgage Corporation, Gray Associates(?), or whomever is in court on February 7, 2009
regarding this matter. Service was by hand.
_______________________
____ __ W_______