It is the sworn duty of the courts to determine and fix the rights of the parties in each particular case brought before them, if they have the power to do so.

To do this, they must determine what the facts are and the law applicable thereto. The facts must be determined either from the evidence or from the want of evidence. The tribunal may err. The law must be determined from the books.

The validity of the proceeding must be determined. If any jurisdictional question is debatable or colorable, the court must decide jurisdiction; and an erroneous conclusion can only be corrected by some proceeding provided by law for so doing.

Where it can be shown, lawfully, that some matter or thing essential to jurisdiction is wanting, the proceeding is void.

The doctrine of stare decisis does not forbid overruling what has been affected by defects which prevent jurisdiction.

DIRECT ATTACK: A direct attack on a judicial proceeding is an attempt to avoid or correct it in some manner provided by law. The litigant has a responsibility to notify the court to address the defect and the resulting lack of jurisdiction.

– Petition to the Court June 6, 2011, June 9, 2011
– Testify/Evidence/Exhibits July 18, 2011
– Petition the Court Summer 2011
– Appeal of the Order August 15, 2011

COLLATERAL ATTACK: A collateral attack on a judicial proceeding attempts to avoid, defeat, evade or deny its force and effect.

– Asserting ownership of my property – October 3, 2013
– Fraudulent documents are presented – October 22, 2013
– Challenge Jurisdiction – November 12, 2013

Any proceeding provided by law for the purpose of avoiding or correcting a judgment, is a direct attack which will be successful upon showing the error; while an attempt to do the same thing in any other proceeding is a collateral attack, which will be successful only upon showing a want of power.


The following is the volume of litigation currently active because Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio issued ONE PROCEDURALLY DEFECTIVE DIVORCE DECREE without proper jurisdiction. Notified promptly of the defect Carluccio, and other judges, have refused to address/correct/resolve choosing instead to issue further DEFECTIVE and VOID orders causing further irreparable harm and damage and to harass the litigant.

Given the chance to fix it, EVERY JUDGE MAKES IT WORSE. Since 2007, this matter has been before twenty judges of the Montgomery County Pennsylvania Judiciary. It now advances to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania with two concurrent appeals of Superior Court decisions which IGNORED AND NEGLECTED to address the lack of jurisdiction for the Court. While another Appeal awaits action by the Superior Court.

If they could prove jurisdiction, that would have occurred by now. This is abuse of power under color of law with the intentional infliction of emotional distress…. being done by persons pretending to be the judiciary.

You just cannot argue with stupidity like this.

I must persevere through their relentless corruption and re-documentation.

1The Order of May 9, 2011 is being directly attacked in Healy v Healy by the Appeal filed on August 15, 2011.

As necessary, the Direct Attack has been coordinated with the requests for the courts to conduct hearings on petitions which have been neglected, unheard, ignored and improperly.

The petitions should have been heard prior to any Request for Entry of A DIVORCE DECREE.

No Request for Entry of a Divorce Decree was ever filed, served, or advanced as REQUIRED BY PENNSYLVANIA LAW.

Where a Request for Entry of A Divorce Decree has not been filed, the Court DOES NOT HAVE JURISDICTION to enter a Divorce Decree.

An Order in Equitable Distribution may only be issued contemporaneous with or subsequent to a Divorce Decree.

The Equitable Distribution Order is consequently procedurally defective and void for lack of jurisdiction.

The Court in the Opinion dated October 18, 2011 neglected to include a statement of jurisdiction for the Order of May 9, 2011. THE COURT IGNORES AND NEGLECTS THE PROBLEM.

The Appeal is prevented from the Superior Court of Pennsylvania by the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas. THE COURT IGNORES AND NEGLECTS THE PROBLEM.

There is nothing I can do to get the Montgomery County Court of Common Please to do their job function.
THE DIRECT ATTACK is pending. I must wait for the Appeal to move forward.

2The Order of May 9, 2011 has been improperly presented to the Montgomery County Sheriff’s Department and the Montgomery Township Police who assisted Sonya Healy in her return to the property on June 10, 2011.

3The Order of May 9, 2011 has been improperly presented to the Domestic Relation Office as a valid Order by Angst & Angst which has stopped their enforcement of court orders in this matter.
– The Domestic Relations Office (DRO) has refused to schedule any hearing, or conference.
– Letters filed with the DRO and Prothonotary have been ingored.

4The Order of May 9, 2011 is being challenged collaterally in Healy v Healy by the Appeal filed on April 29, 2013 EVEN WHILE the earlier Appeal remains inexplicably stalled.

The defective and void order has been presented to the Court for enforcement by ANGST & ANGST.
THERE IS A PENDING APPEAL, the court lacks jurisdiction.
Angst & Angst haven’t filed their petition properly.
Angst & Angst haven’t served their petition.
Angst & Angst have been secretly writing to Court Admin to have Judge Haaz removed.
Angst & Angst have been secretly writing to Judge Carluccio asking her to take the case back.
Angst & Angst certainly seem surprised when I appear at the short list conference anyway.
Judge Haaz was clearly not pleased. He doesn’t schedule the hearing.

10 Months later, Judge Page schedules their hearing, ignoring the pending Appeal, which I call to his attention frequently.

All evidence demonstrating the pending Appeal is presented and ignored.

The defect and the lack of jurisdiction has been demonstrated on the court record, evidenced in hearing statements, presented during testimony.

Angst & Angst have deliberately neglected to present any evidence within petitions, testimony or exhibits which address the defect. THEY IGNORE AND NEGLECT THE PROBLEM.

It is the responsibility of Angst & Angst to provide the information regarding jurisdiction for the court. THEY IGNORE AND NEGLECT THE PROBLEM WHICH SERVES TO EMBARRASS THE COURT.

The Court neglects in it’s Order to explain or address how the defect does not void jurisdiction for the Order of May 9, 2011. THE COURT IGNORES AND NEGLECTS THE PROBLEM.

ON APPEAL: The information presented within Briefs to the Superior Court demonstrated the defect and the lack of jurisdiction.

AGAIN, Angst & Angst have deliberately neglected to present any evidence within petitions, testimony or exhibits which address the defect. There is NO INFORMATION provided to support the challenge of jurisdiction. THEY IGNORE AND NEGLECT THE PROBLEM.

September 6, 2011 – Immediately upon notice by facsimile from Angst & Angst, the Court continued and rescheduled petitions filed by Defendant which had been scheduled for September 20, 2011. Continuing to September 23, 2011. Courtesy would require that the person who filed the petition agree to the continuance. There was no courtesy extended.

When Angst & Angst had a hearing rescheduled to a date when my mother was having emergency open heart surgery, they refused to permit a continuance. Judge DelRicci proceeded with the hearing. As my primary witness was in surgery, I would be hindered. Their information was completely fabricated falsehoods which had been filed to delay custody proceedings. I had waited 2 years for the custody hearing and was forced to request a continuance on what mattered most to me. Angst & Angst refused to continue their counter petition and permit me and my brother to go to the hospital where the rest of the family had gathered. After Judge Del Ricci asked Angst & Angst to reconsider several times, he became disgusted by the malice of their refusal and ordered a continuance.

The petitions to be heard on September 20, 2011 related the closing date of the home.
All parties involved in the sale were preventing and denying all information from me.
This was NOT required or indicated within any order.
They were conspiring voluntarily.

On July 18, 2011, the Court had issued a verbal order for all of my belongings to be disposed of if
not removed by the closing date.

All parties were informed about the conditions for removal of my personal possessions and conspired voluntarily to remain silent.
The attorney for the Keller Williams Real Estate additionally would not provide the information.
Copies of Letters and Petitions were filed on the Court Record.

From May 2007 when Sonya Healy abandoned the home, I had held the place together, accomplished all payments, and maintenance, and prevented the destruction of every item in the home. They had swept in with a VOID order and were destroying everything… and they prevented me from resolution.

5The Order of May 9, 2011 has been fraudulently presented by Sonya Healy in the commission of a fraudulent conveyance of the marital residence.

All real estate personnel, title companies agents and managers, and transaction preparers and coordinators associated with the closing were aware that they were presenting a defective and void instrument within the transaction. They all emailed each other about it.

Sonya Healy swears that she is both married and divorced during the closing meeting.

The defective and void order of May 9, 2011 was referenced within statements on the documents BUT missing from the papers filed with the Montgomery County Recorder of Deeds.

On September 23, 2011, upon arriving in court, I was informed of the closing on the sale of my home. September 20, 2011. I was additionally presented with a newly filed petition which Judge Carluccio acted upon immediately to the exclusion of the petitions which had been scheduled and continued and prepared for hearing.

Judge Carluccio issued her Order of September 23, 2011 addressing everything in the freshly filed petition, and conducted further housekeeping where I was ordered under duress and penalty of contempt to endorse checks presented by Angst & Angst.

According to a verbal order issued on July 18, 2011, all of my belongings not removed prior to the closing date had been placed in the trash. Judge Carluccio was a direct party to the destruction of my personal property by continuing the hearing date.

The Court’s verbal order of July 18, 2011 is ALSO VOID as it is based on enforcement of the defective and void order of May 9, 2011.

On September 28, 2011, Angst & Angst withdrew their petition (1) to conceal their failure to follow any procedure in the matter, (2) to conceal the corruption demonstrated by the court and (2) to prevent any response or hearing on the matter.

During the proceeding on July 18, 2011, the Court had neglected and ignored the petitions and evidence, repeatedly interrupting testimony/responses regarding the procedural errors which had caused the Order to be defective and void.

EMERGENCY Petitions/Motions had been filed on June 6, 2011 and June 9, 2011 and IGNORED.


The void order (September 23, 2011), based on a void order (July 18, 2011), based on a defective and void Divorce Decree (May 9, 2011).

Jurisdiction cannot be obtained retroactively.

The Court had been notified of the procedural defect immediately on June 6, 2011 and June 9, 2011.

Involving County personnel in the enforcement of defective and void orders place them at risk for their improper actions. They do not have the immunity offered the judiciary.

The Sheriff’s Department and the Police Department were enforcing the defective and void order of May 9, 2011 which ordered me to vacate my home. The Sheriff Department has not been able to produce a report of why they were there or who had requested their assistance.

Where immunity may excuse error and permit a judge to be malicious and cruel, Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio was not acting as a judge.

She lacked integrity and honor, but above all else Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio lacked JURISDICTION – courtesy of Angst & Angst. Every attempt resolve any matter within the court was continued, denied, neglected and ignored by Judge Carluccio.

6The Order of May 9, 2011 is being challenged collaterally in Healy v Miller by the Appeal filed on March 6, 2014.
– When the Order of May 9, 2011 was asserted by Zarwin, Baum, DeVito, Kaplan, Schaer, Toddy, attorneys Scott Goldstein and Philip Magen representing the Miller’s deliberately neglected to present any evidence within petitions, testimony or exhibits which address the defect in jurisdiction.

The Court neglected in it’s Order to explain or address in any way how the defect does not affect jurisdiction for the Order of May 9, 2011.


ON APPEAL: The information presented within Briefs to the Superior Court demonstrated the defect and the lack of jurisdiction.

AGAIN, Zarwin, Baum, DeVito, Kaplan, Schaer, Toddy, attorneys Scott Goldstein and Philip Magen have deliberately neglected to present any evidence within petitions, testimony or exhibits which address the defect.

Pretending to have jurisdiction IS NOT JURISDICTION.
Ignoring the lack of jurisdiction IS NOT JURISDICTION.
… Yes, Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio acted with malice forethought to cause irreparable harm and damage and to continue causing irreparable harm and damage instead of admitting her error.

Remember, this IS the short version…. the vexatious and overwhelming litigation, false allegations, obstruction of justice, denial of civil rights, while without any protection of the law have been happening since I lost my constitutional rights.

Any single act of misconduct, or injustice, within a court (Civil, Criminal or Family) can cause a litigant to lose all constitution rights, lose all civil rights and be left without any protection of the law without explanation of what has occurred and with no available recourse or resolution from any level of state or federal government or law enforcement.

Enacted into law in 1987 (without the protections of those ‘fraud provisions’) by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, a collateral effect of Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct MANDATES CONFIDENTIALITY AND NON_DISCLOSURE by everyone who must follow the Rules of Professional Conduct. All lawyers, all state and federal law enforcement (District Attorneys, Prosecutors, Attorneys General, etc…), all state and federal courts are mandated BY LAW to follow Rule 1.6 Confidentiality. This is accomplished through the LOCAL RULES of each Federal Court, and the McDade-Murtha Amendment affecting all Department of Justice and other federal attorneys.

The Lawyers Code had not been LAW before. Concealing and Permitting further frauds against an innocent victim is not ethical behavior, NOR IS IT LAWFUL.

In 1983, the American Bar Association stripped the ‘fraud provisions’ from their “NEWLY DEVELOPED” Model Rules of Professional Conduct. The ABA misrepresented their illegal, unethical and immoral “Code of Ethical Conduct” to each state supreme court for the purpose of being enacted into LAW.
– without ANY Construction as would have been performed by a state legislature,
– without the signature of ANY Governor, and
– without any Constitutional Review
An Aggressively enforced MANDATE OF CONFIDENTIALITY AND NON-DISCLOSURE was enacted nationawide into law from 1984 (New Jersey) through 2009 (Maine).

The foreclosure crisis where fraudulent and robo-signed documents submitted to the court caused people to lose their homes with complete disregard for any law.

Kids For Cash, in Luzerne County, and entire legal community and county and state judiciary permitted the trafficking of children to prisons while judges received payments.

The pseudo INJUSTICE business being conducted within the clerks offices of every state and federal judiciary. The illusion of a judiciary incapable of facts, relevance, law, or logical thought or reason is being perpetrated upon the American litigant. Concealing the systemic corruption of the judiciary which has undermined judicial independence, usurped the authority of the judicial branch, and caused the Rule of Law and the US Constitution to be ignored.

Healy v. Healy – all that ignoring the facts at every level by every one…. A VIOLATION OF MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS caused by Rule 1.6


In the Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 filed on August 8, 2013, the intercept teams at the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and the Third Circuit Court of Appeals FAILED. THEY HAD NOTHING. THEY MADE THINGS UP. The documents which they attributed to the Federal Judiciary were a shameful desperate abomination.



Angst & Angst had leveraged complete impunity to ignore EVERY court order when they secured A Secret Order from Judge Rhonda Daniele in August 2007.

In May 2008, The Secret Order was flashed to Judge DelRicci by Robert Angst during the short list after the Easter Break-In and Burglary (which was in violation of three Court Orders). Judge DelRicci reviewed the document and DENIED ME A COPY or any review. Law and Procedure (or courtesy) were never applicable.

The Secret Order was used to slander me to every policeman I asked to check on my kids.

The Secret Order was available only to Angst & Angst and to the Court Staff. It was not distributed to me. It was not docketed. There had been no hearing. Judge Rhonda Daniele, head of the Family Court Division, had NEVER been assigned the matter.

The Secret Order was leveraged to prevent the court from enforcing ANY AND ALL COURT ORDERS against Angst & Angst’s client.

During Discovery, the existence of the document was denied and mocked by Valerie Angst. It was not provided.

The Secret Order was used to induce a sense of paranoia.

The Secret Order was used to undermine credibility.

The Secret Order was kept concealed within a separate file at the Prothonotary.

Until in August 2010, it was handed to me. Signed by Judge Daniele. No notations for distribution. No sticker indicating it had been docketed. Immediately, I had the order docketed and filed petitions requesting an Explanation from the Court.

Judge Bertin recused without explanation.

So when it all comes down…..
One Question – Jurisdiction or NOT – PROVE IT. BUT, They GOT NOTHING.



It is very clear that the idiots I am dealing with are the central legal staff following Bar Association scripts.

The lawyers are members of the various ‘intercepting’ bar associations which are positioned within every level of the state and federal judiciary.

READY AND AVAILABLE to intercept all documents and ‘play court’ by responding to litigation without signatures, logic, law or any sense.

Lawyers are permitted to continue the effort to conceal the fraud of their clients. Rule 1.6 – and the various flavors enacted in every state has them thinking they are legal, while STILL UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

PA Courts, Superior Court, Supreme Court. District Court, Circuit Court of Appeals.
Their fake ‘judicial’ documents and maintaining the extra dockets. Yes, I see things which I am not supposed to be seeing – like the extra dockets. Philly got caught ding that before. Old habits die hard.

It’s how they have undermined and usurped the judiciary.

It’s how they have affected judicial independence.

It’s how the US Constitution is going ignored.

It’s how the Constitutional Rights of Millions of American have been ignored.

The deliberate actions of the American Bar Association, undermining the US GOVERNMENT since 1983 when they made lawyer/client fraud ethical, permitted the continued crimes against the innocent victim, called it a Code of Ethics, and sold it to EVERY state supreme court which enacted it into LAW.

Right now, the only people to report it to is the lawyers…. and they will commit fraud and cover it up…. or just IGNORE.

You are supposed to think the judges are ignoring you…. but with unsigned paperwork how do you know if it even got past the CENTRAL LEGAL STAFF.

Ask any Central Legal Staff or Prothy Clerk a question.
For Example: May I get a copy of the judges order WITH a signature…

I asked two prothy folks the other day,
The first response was that they would charge me $1 per page.
The second response was that they would charge me 50 cents per page.
Then they asked why I wanted it?
Then they asked if I had gotten a copy in the mail.
I explained that the Judge had not signed the document.
I was told that judges NEVER sign documents.
And had two ladies looking at me like I was crazy for expecting a judge to sign his own decisions.
I had to sign my paperwork, and the verification and the cert of service.
If they had scheduled the argument I would have had to sign the acknowledgement.
I would have to sign the guest log upon arrival at Superior Court.

Yea ladies, the judges spew the chaotic and insulting paragraphs at Seletyn and head to the shore.

I DIDN’T GO HOME EMPTY HANDED, though I filed a notice with the court that a signed copy of the order was denied…
Then, it was off to the Department of Justice to file an obstruction of justice complaint.

If you are going to whine in your ‘documents’ that the briefs are difficult to follow, perhaps your triple nested void orders after 5 years of constant litigation where IF AN ISSUE IS NOT LISTED IT IS WAIVED RULE needs to be revised.

How About this: Please only give list one basic simple issue per document.
Finding irrelevant citations, references and misstatements of fact to format into Memorandums without losing all sense of form results in accidental inclusion of valid statements which become confusing for everyone.

The CLS Cut n Paste works though – that’s why documents have been captioned wrong in the judge’s documents several times also. Too lazy to even get their fraud done cleanly. Geesh!


No Comment.

Add Your Comment

%d bloggers like this: