While other States’ judiciary repeatedly confront Big Banks foreclosures fraud – Illinois Judges create most bogus precedents; trespass all applicable laws; disregard a hundred year of The United States Higher Courts binding precedents and heinously declare fraud and corruption into the law.
One of such Judges is Judge David Ellis, a corrupt lawyer who obtained his Appeal Court seat through personal connections with IL Democratic Party Speaker, Michael Madigan who regularly patronage judicial elections. About 85% of all Judges owe their seats to Mr. Madigan, in exchange of handsome “donations” of course, (up to $1 million, like Justice Harris) , with support from his daughter, IL Attorney General Lisa Madigan who covers for her Dad and his cronies rampant corruption.
On June 22, 2017 Justice David Ellis denied an Appeal in case 12-CH-33751, where ProSe Appellant George Pote challenged void judgement entered by corrupt Judge Pamela McLean Meyerson; and procured by fraud.
According to Justice David Ellis (presiding) “Judgement affirmed. [..because his (Pote’s) allegations of fraud, even if true, would not render judgement void”
This is absurd and corrupt abuses of judicial power. During more than 100 years ALL US Courts held that judgement obtained by fraud is void ab initio and can be attacked at any Court and at any time.
A judge is an officer of the court, as well as are all attorneys. A state judge is a state judicial officer, paid by the State to act impartially and lawfully. A federal judge is a federal judicial officer, paid by the federal government to act impartially and lawfully. State and federal attorneys fall into the same general category and must meet the same requirements. A judge is not the court. People v. Zajic, 88 Ill.App.3d 477, 410 N.E.2d 626 (1980).
Whenever any officer of the court commits fraud during a proceeding in the court, he/she is engaged in “fraud upon the court”. In Bulloch v. United States, 763 F.2d 1115, 1121 (10th Cir. 1985), the court stated “Fraud upon the court is fraud which is directed to the judicial machinery itself and is not fraud between the parties or fraudulent documents, false statements or perjury. … It is where the court or a member is corrupted or influenced or influence is attempted or where the judge has not performed his judicial function — thus where the impartial functions of the court have been directly corrupted.”
“Fraud upon the court” has been defined by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to “embrace that species of fraud which does, or attempts to, defile the court itself, or is a fraud perpetrated by officers of the court so that the judicial machinery can not perform in the usual manner its impartial task of adjudging cases that are presented for adjudication.” Kenner v. C.I.R., 387 F.3d 689 (1968); 7 Moore’s Federal Practice, 2d ed., p. 512, ¶ 60.23. The 7th Circuit further stated “a decision produced by fraud upon the court is not in essence a decision at all, and never becomes final.”
What effect does an act of “fraud upon the court” have upon the court proceeding? “Fraud upon the court” makes void the orders and judgments of that court.
It is also clear and well-settled Illinois law that any attempt to commit “fraud upon the court” vitiates the entire proceeding. The People of the State of Illinois v. Fred E. Sterling, 357 Ill. 354; 192 N.E. 229 (1934) (“The maxim that fraud vitiates every transaction into which it enters applies to judgments as well as to contracts and other transactions.”); Allen F. Moore v. Stanley F. Sievers, 336 Ill. 316; 168 N.E. 259 (1929) (“The maxim that fraud vitiates every transaction into which it enters …”); In re Village of Willowbrook, 37 Ill.App.2d 393 (1962) (“It is axiomatic that fraud vitiates everything.”); Dunham v. Dunham, 57 Ill.App. 475 (1894), affirmed 162 Ill. 589 (1896); Skelly Oil Co. v. Universal Oil Products Co., 338 Ill.App. 79, 86 N.E.2d 875, 883-4 (1949); Thomas Stasel v. The American Home Security Corporation, 362 Ill. 350; 199 N.E. 798 (1935).
Under Illinois and Federal law, when any officer of the court has committed “fraud upon the court”, the orders and judgment of that court are void, of no legal force or effect.
But corrupt to his core Justice David Ellis, who regularly fix cases in favor of Big Banks, regardless of standing, jurisdiction and fraud (including his own fraud), denominated US Supreme Court authority and declared fraud lawful in Illinois.
Which does not surprise at all. Nobody in Illinois expects honesty and integrity from Michael Madigan’s cronies.
On February 14, 2018 Florida Judges ruled:” We hold that the trial court erred in admitting a copy of the document and remand for a new trial. Section 90.952, Florida Statutes (2012), provides as follows: “Except as otherwise provided by statute, an original writing . . . is required in order to prove the contents of the writing. . . .” In Rattigan v. Central Mortgage Co., 199 So. 3d 966, 967 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016), a similar failure resulted in a reversal of a foreclosure judgment. “JAMES McCAMPBELL, Appellant,v. FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION, Appellee.
On June 6, 2017 Hawaii Supreme Court ruled: “We adopt the majority rule followed by the ICA inU.S. Bank Nat. Ass’n v. Salvacion, 134 Hawaii 170, 338 P.3d1185 (App.2014) and hold that a third party unrelated to a mortgage securitization pooling and servicing agreement lacks standing to enforce an alleged violation of its terms Accordingly, we vacate the ICA’s March 9, 2016 Judgment on Appeal, as well as the circuit court’s August 26, 2014 Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order Granting Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Decree of Foreclosure Against All Defendants on Complaint Filed July 21, 2011, and remand this case to the circuit court“. US Bank v. Mattos. here
On December 3, 2015 Ohio Court of Appeals held: Without duly attested documents or other competent evidence, we cannot infer the transfers of the note and assignments of the mortgage as matters of fact and therefore cannot affirm summary judgment or any separate but related judgment in foreclosure. Because of these findings, other issues argued by the parties are deemed moot, and we decline to address them. We sustain appellants’ sole assignment of error for the reasons stated in this decision and reverse the judgment of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas, thereby denying appellee’s motion for summary judgment and remand this case to the trial court with instructions to proceed in accordance with this decision. US Bank v. Douglas George, here