2013
07.16

It is a simple concept. How difficult could it be to get an error corrected? I’ve been trying to be heard since May 2011. BUT, I had to wait for a petition that I could respond to.

The tricky part is getting in front of a judge. The phrase “provided the party is properly before the court”. is an important one.

When Judge Carluccio was notified in writing in a petition AND an emergency petition, … I wasn’t able to get ‘properly before the court.’

When Judge Carluccio refused to hold a hearing on her void order… I wasn’t able to get ‘properly before the court.’

When Judge Carluccio held a short list conference where she ridiculously listened to the title of the piece of paper and completely ignored the content of the document, … I wasn’t able to get ‘properly before the court.’

When Judge Carluccio held the bully session on September 23, 2011, … I wasn’t permitted to testify or present any information about the void order… while Judge Carluccio issued a third void order. I wasn’t able to get properly before the court.

Properly before the court in July 2012, Judge Haaz addressed the deliberate actions of Angst & Angst which would cause a lapse in jurisdiction. Judge Haaz recognized that the issues would not be resolved in a short list conference. He ordered a hearing which was never scheduled.

However, when Judge Page conducted the hearings in February 2013, I was FINALLY properly before the court and the issue of the void order was very relevant to the petitions being discussed. Judge Page IGNORED the challenge to jurisdiction and ordered an absurd enforcement of a void order based on a void order, based on a void order, based on a defective divorce decree.

The issue is that while they deny me access to the courts, there is no way to retroactively provide jurisdiction to the defective divorce decree. So the delays only serve to harass, intimidate and threaten while my life passes by waiting for justice. I persevere.

A void judgment which includes judgment entered by a court which lacks jurisdiction over the parties or the subject matter, or lacks inherent power to enter the particular judgment, or an order procured by fraud, can be attacked at any time, in any court, either directly or collaterally, provided that the party is properly before the court.

Long v. Shorebank Development Corp., 182 F.3d 548 ( C.A. 7 Ill. 1999).

No Comment.

Add Your Comment

%d bloggers like this: