Archive Unfiltered New Discovery Brewing

"Starting With Key Recorded Evidence"

If This Isn't A Constitutional Crisis What Is?...

 

 

Corla Jackson the (Appellant) did Timely filed a (Motion for Extension of Time) within (7) Days, it was filed on (03/13/2018) via (U.S. Postal Mail Priority Overnight) from (Mobile Alabama) to (Atlanta Georgia).  The U.S. Postal Receipts and the Docket Sheet Prove This Guaranteed.  Corla Jackson Motion was Delivered to the Court Of Appeals Eleventh Circuit on (03/14/2018).  This Motion wasn’t recorded until (03/22/2018) and it wasn’t Granted until (03/29/2018) it took (5-7) days for Corla Jackson to receive it, from Atlanta GA to Mobile Alabama.  According to the recorded (Docket Sheet) it was impossible for Corla Jackson to file her Appendix (14) days from the date of the Order was issued because she didn’t have the Order the day the Order was issued (03/29/2018). 

 

The Clerk didn’t have proof of service that the United States Court Of Appeals Eleventh Circuit presented Corla Jackson with the Order Granted (03/29/2018) on (03/29/2018).  This would have been Impossible because United States Court Of Appeals Eleventh Circuit sent out their Order’s and mail to Corla Jackson via standard U.S. Postal Mail from Atlanta Georgia to Mobile Alabama which took (5-7) days to receive.  

 

Pro Se Corla Jackson filed a Timely Motion For Extension of Time way in advance and had not received the Order Granted (03/29/2018) on (03/29/2018).  This would have been Impossible because United States Court Of Appeals Eleventh Circuit sent out their Order’s and mail to Corla Jackson via standard U.S. Postal Mail from Atlanta Georgia to Mobile Alabama which took (5-7) days to receive. Corla Jackson U.S. Postal Receipts prove Corla Jackson filed her Brief and Motion without days on (03/12/2018) and (03/13/2018). The Extension of Time to file an Appendix was received by the Court Of Appeals Eleventh Circuit on (03/14/2018). 

 

The Clerk didn’t file this motion for an Extension of Time To File an Appendix until (03/22/2018). The Order wasn’t recorded as being Granted until (03/29/2018) but Corla Jackson had not received it, it was impossible. Every time Corla Jackson would call the Clerk’s Office they would tell her, she had to wait on the Judge to issue the Order, to Grant the Extension of Time.   

 

Pro Se Corla Jackson Did Timely File An Extension Of Time To File Her Appendix.  The Order wasn’t issued until (03/29/2018) it was impossible for anyone to receive the Order (03/29/2018) to allow (14) days to complete from the Order Date.  It takes (5-7) days to receive mail from Atlanta depending on when the Clerks send it out after they record it and ship it via standard U.S. Postal Mail. The Clerk illegally sent back the Appendix without a Court Order from the Judge.  The Clerk Issued a Mandate for the Corrupted Law Firm and Lawyers Dismissing the Case without lack of standing! 

 

This cannot be ignored because it’s recorded on the Face of the Docket Sheet from the United States Court Of Appeals Eleventh Circuit on case (17-12563) Guaranteed!

 

11th Cir. R. 46-5 Entry of Appearance. Every attorney, except one appointed by the court for a specific case, must file an Appearance of Counsel Form in order to participate in a case before the court. The form must be filed within 14 days after the date on the notice from the clerk that the Appearance of Counsel Form must be filed.

 

 

Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure

 

 

When appeal is taken from a void judgment, the appellate court must declare the judgment void. Because the appellate court may not address the merits, it must set aside the trial court's judgment and dismiss the appeal.  A void judgment may be attacked at any time by a person whose rights are affected. See El-Kareh v. Texas Alcoholic Beverage Comm'n, 874 S.W.2d 192, 194 (Tex. App.--Houston [14th Dist.] 1994, no writ); see also Evans v. C. Woods, Inc., No. 12-99-00153-CV, 1999 WL 787399, at *1 (Tex. App.--Tyler Aug. 30, 1999, no pet. h.).  Since the trial court's dismissal "with prejudice" was void, it may be attacked either by direct appeal or collateral attack Ex parte Williams, No. 73,845 (Tex.Crim.App. 04/11/2001). 

 

A void judgment is a nullity from the beginning, and is attended by none of the consequences of a valid judgment. It is entitled to no respect whatsoever because it does not affect, impair, or create legal rights." Ex parte Spaulding, 687 S.W.2d at 745 (Teague, J.,concurring). Section 6-9-147: Setting aside of sales by courts. Courts have full power over their officers making execution or judicial sales, and whenever satisfied that a sale made under any legal process is infected with fraud, oppression, irregularity, or error to the injury of either party, the sale will be set aside. (Code 1907, §4134; Code 1923, §7849; Code 1940, T. 7, §561.)Whenever any officer of the court commits fraud during a proceeding in the court, he/she is engaged in "fraud upon the court".  

 

In Griffen v. Griffen, 327 U.S. 220, 66 S. Ct. 556, 90 L. Ed. 635 a pro se litigant won his case in the Supreme Court who stated. When rule providing for relief from void judgments is applicable, relief is not discretionary matter, but is mandatory, Orner. V. Shalala, 30 F.3d 1307 (Colo. 1994).  Judgment is a void judgment if court that rendered judgment lacked jurisdiction of the subject matter, or of the parties, or acted in a manner inconsistent with due process, Fed. Rules Civ. Proc., Rule 60(b)(4), 28 U.S.C.A., U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 5 - Klugh v. U.S., 620 F.Supp. 892 (D.S.C. 1985).

 

Since the trial court's dismissal "with prejudice" was void, it may be attacked either by direct appeal or collateral attack Ex parte Williams, No. 73,845 (Tex.Crim.App. 04/11/2001). "A void judgment is a nullity from the beginning, and is attended by none of the consequences of a valid judgment. It is entitled to no respect whatsoever because it does not affect, impair, or create legal rights." Ex parte Spaulding, 687 S.W.2d at 745 (Teague, J.,concurring). Section 6-9-147: Setting aside of sales by courts. Courts have full power over their officers making execution or judicial sales, and whenever satisfied that a sale made under any legal process is infected with fraud, oppression, irregularity, or error to the injury of either party, the sale will be set aside. (Code 1907, §4134; Code 1923, §7849; Code 1940, T. 7, §561.).

 

No statute of limitations or repose runs on its holdings, the matters thought to be settled thereby are not res judicata, and years later, when the memories may have grown dim and rights long been regarded as vested, any disgruntled litigant may reopen old wound and once more probe its depths. And it is then as though trial and adjudication had never been. Fritts v. Krugh, Supreme Court of Michigan, 92 N.W.2d 604, 354 Mich. 97 (10/13/58). Under Federal law which is applicable to all states, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that if a court is “without authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. They are not voidable, but simply void; and form no bar to a recovery sought, even prior to a reversal in opposition to them. They constitute no justification; and all persons concerned in executing such judgments or sentences, are considered, in law, as trespassers.


 

 

Rule 26. Computing and Extending Time Facts

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BREAKING NEWS UPDATE BELOW

 

HOW DID GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION AKA GMAC MORTGAGE LLC OBTAIN AN ILLEGAL ORDER OUTSIDE JURISDICTION AND MORE!  GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION AKA GMAC MORTGAGE LLC WASN'T LICENSED TO DO BUSINESS IN THE STATES WHERE THE ORDERS WERE ISSUED WHEN THEY WERE ISSUED. 

 

SEE THE EVIDENCE LISTED FROM THE SECRETARY OF STATE.  THIS IS MORE THAN SECURITIES FRAUD THIS WAS A WHITE COLLAR CRIME ROBBERY ON A VOID JUDGMENT WITH A FABRICATED ASSIGNMENT.  THIS IS RECORDED EVIDENCE GUARANTEED!

 

Failure to complete the web-based CIP will delay processing of the motion, case, or appeal, and may result in other sanctions under 11th Cir. R. 26.1-5(c). The e-filing of a CIP by an attorney registered to use the ECF system does not relieve that attorney of the requirement to complete and keep updated the web-based CIP. Pro se filers (except attorneys appearing in particular cases as pro se parties) are not required or authorized to complete the web-based CIP. 11th Cir. R. 26.1-2 CIP: Contents.

 

(a) General. A CIP must contain a complete list of all trial judges, attorneys, persons, associations of persons, firms, partnerships, or corporations that have an interest in the outcome of the particular case or appeal, including subsidiaries, conglomerates, affiliates, parent corporations, any publicly held corporation that owns 10% or more of the party’s stock, and other identifiable legal entities related to a party. 

 

(c) CIPs in Motions or Petitions. The CIP contained in each motion or petition filed must include a complete list of all persons and entities known to that filer to have an interest in the outcome of the particular case or appeal. The CIP contained in a response or answer to a motion or petition, or a reply to a response, may include only persons and entities that were omitted from the CIP contained in the motion or petition. Filers who believe that the CIP contained in the motion or petition is complete must certify to that effect.

 

A Party Affected by VOID Judicial Action Need Not APPEAL. State ex rel. Latty, 907 S.W.2d at 486. If an appeal is taken, however, the appellate court may declare void any orders the trial court signed after it lost plenary power over the case. "A void judgment is a nullity from the beginning, and is attended by none of the consequences of a valid judgment. It is entitled to no respect whatsoever because it does not affect, impair, or create legal rights." Ex parte Seidel, 39 S.W.3d 221, 225 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001).  Under Federal law which is applicable to all states, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that if a court is “without authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. They are not voidable, but simply void; and form no bar to a recovery sought, even prior to a reversal in opposition to them. They constitute no justification; and all persons concerned in executing such judgments or sentences, are considered, in law, as trespassers.

 

A court cannot confer jurisdiction where none existed and cannot make a void proceeding valid.  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. See Long v. Shorebank Development Corp., 182 F.3d 548 (C.A. 7 Ill. 1999).

 

 

GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION AKA GMAC MORTGAGE LLC

WAS CLOSED AND THEY DIDN'T HAVE A JURISDICTION PERIOD!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

HOW DID GMAC MORTGAGE LLC GET ALL THOSE ILLEGAL ORDERS BASED UPON FRAUD UPON THE COURT OUTSIDE JURISDICTION

YOU HAVE TO BE OPEN AND LICENSED TO DO BUSINESS IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA LEGALLY TO WIN A CASE

GMAC MORTGAGE LLC WAS CLOSED WHEN THE ILLEGAL ORDERS WERE ISSUED!

 

 

 

Rule 26. Computing and Extending Time

 

 

Rule 26. Computing and Extending Time

 

 

 

 

This court’s rule for the conduct of complaint proceedings Under 28 U.S.C. §§ 351-364 is outlined in Addendum Three.

 

A “void” judgment, as we all know, grounds no rights, forms no defense to actions taken thereunder, and is vulnerable to any manner of collateral attack (thus here, by).  No statute of limitations or repose runs on its holdings, the matters thought to be settled thereby are not res judicata, and years later, when the memories may have grown dim and rights long been regarded as vested, any disgruntled litigant may reopen old wound and once more probe its depths. And it is then as though trial and adjudication had never been. Fritts v. Krugh, Supreme Court of Michigan, 92 N.W.2d 604, 354 Mich. 97 (10/13/58). Under Federal law which is applicable to all states, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that if a court is “without authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. They are not voidable, but simply void; and form no bar to a recovery sought, even prior to a reversal in opposition to them.  

 

Failure to complete the web-based CIP will delay processing of the motion, case, or appeal, and may result in other sanctions under 11th Cir. R. 26.1-5(c). The e-filing of a CIP by an attorney registered to use the ECF system does not relieve that attorney of the requirement to complete and keep updated the web-based CIP. Pro se filers (except attorneys appearing in particular cases as pro se parties) are not required or authorized to complete the web-based CIP. 11th Cir. R. 26.1-2 CIP: Contents.

 

(a) General. A CIP must contain a complete list of all trial judges, attorneys, persons, associations of persons, firms, partnerships, or corporations that have an interest in the outcome of the particular case or appeal, including subsidiaries, conglomerates, affiliates, parent corporations, any publicly held corporation that owns 10% or more of the party’s stock, and other identifiable legal entities related to a party. 

 

(c) CIPs in Motions or Petitions. The CIP contained in each motion or petition filed must include a complete list of all persons and entities known to that filer to have an interest in the outcome of the particular case or appeal. The CIP contained in a response or answer to a motion or petition, or a reply to a response, may include only persons and entities that were omitted from the CIP contained in the motion or petition. Filers who believe that the CIP contained in the motion or petition is complete must certify to that effect.

 

11th Cir. R. 46-4 Pro Hac Vice Admission. An attorney who does not reside in the circuit but is otherwise eligible for admission to the bar pursuant to FRAP 46 and these rules, and also meets the requirements of 11th Cir. R. 46-7, may apply to appear pro hac vice in a particular proceeding. The following items must be provided: • a completed Application to Appear Pro Hac Vice form, available on the Internet at www.ca11.uscourts.gov, with proof of service; • a certificate of good standing issued within the previous six months establishing that the attorney is admitted to practice before a court described in FRAP 46(a)(1); and • a non-refundable pro hac vice application fee prescribed by the court and posted on the court’s website. An attorney may apply to appear before this court pro hac vice only two times. To practice before the court, an attorney who resides in the circuit or who has two times previously applied to appear before this court pro hac vice, must apply for admission to the bar pursuant to 11th Cir. R. 46-1, unless the attorney is eligible to be admitted for a particular proceeding pursuant to 11th Cir. R. 46-3. The clerk is authorized to grant an application to appear pro hac vice in an appeal not yet assigned or under submission, in such circumstances as determined by the court, when an attorney meets the requirements of the rules.

 

11th Cir. R. 46-5 Entry of Appearance. Every attorney, except one appointed by the court for a specific case, must file an Appearance of Counsel Form in order to participate in a case before the court. The form must be filed within 14 days after the date on the notice from the clerk that the Appearance of Counsel Form must be filed.   85-352 Applies to (1985) requires a lawyers nonfrivolous basis for a lawyer to "bring or defend a proceeding, or assert or controvert an issue therein." See also ABA Model Rule 3.3.

 

Section 6-9-180: Jury trial on issues of fact. If the motion or application is to enter satisfaction of a judgment under the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure or to set aside the entry of satisfaction of a judgment, on request of either party, the issue of fact must be tried by a jury. (Code 1886, §2870; Code 1896, §3340; Code 1907, §4146; Code 1923, §7861; Code 1940, T. 7, §573.) .  When appeal is taken from a void judgment, the appellate court must declare the judgment void. Because the appellate court may not address the merits, it must set aside the trial court's judgment and dismiss the appeal.  A void judgment may be attacked at any time by a person whose rights are affected. See El-Kareh v. Texas Alcoholic Beverage Comm'n, 874 S.W.2d 192, 194 (Tex. App.--Houston [14th Dist.] 1994, no writ); see also Evans v. C. Woods, Inc., No. 12-99-00153-CV, 1999 WL 787399, at *1 (Tex. App.--Tyler Aug. 30, 1999, no pet. h.).

 

A Party Affected by VOID Judicial Action Need Not APPEAL. State ex rel. Latty, 907 S.W.2d at 486. If an appeal is taken, however, the appellate court may declare void any orders the trial court signed after it lost plenary power over the case. "A void judgment is a nullity from the beginning, and is attended by none of the consequences of a valid judgment. It is entitled to no respect whatsoever because it does not affect, impair, or create legal rights." Ex parte Seidel, 39 S.W.3d 221, 225 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001).  Under Federal law which is applicable to all states, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that if a court is “without authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. They are not voidable, but simply void; and form no bar to a recovery sought, even prior to a reversal in opposition to them. They constitute no justification; and all persons concerned in executing such judgments or sentences, are considered, in law, as trespassers.


 

 

 

 

 

  

 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(a)(1) which requires that “[a]n action must be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest.” See also, In re Jacobson, 402 B.R. 359, 365-66 (Bankr. W.D. Wash. 2009); In re Hwang, 396 B.R. 757, 766-67 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2008). Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. v. Chong, 824 N.Y.S.2d 764 (2006). MERS did not have standing as a real party in interest under the Rules to file the motion. The declaration also failed to assert that MERS, FMC Capital LLC or Homecomings Financial, LLC held the Note.  12 U.S. Code § 2605: Servicing of mortgage loans and administration of escrow accounts: Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(a)(1) which requires that “[a]n action must be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest.” See also, In reJacobson , 402 B.R. 359, 365-66 (Bankr.W.D. Wash. 2009); In re Hwang, 396B.R. 757, 766-67 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2008).

 

The Appellate Division, Second Department (Kluge v Fugazy, 145 AD2d 537, 538 [2d Dept 1988]), held that a "foreclosure of a mortgage may not be brought by one who has no title to it and absent transfer of the debt, the assignment of the mortgage is a nullity." Citing Kluge v Fugazy, the Court (Katz v East-Ville Realty Co., 249 AD2d 243 [1st Dept 1998], held that "[p]laintiff's attempt to foreclose upon a mortgage in which he had no legal or equitable interest was without foundation in law or fact. Violation of 18 U.S.A. § 1962(b) which prohibits “any person through a pattern of racketeering activity or through collection of an unlawful debt to acquire or maintain, directly or indirectly, any interest in or control of any enterprise which is engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce.

 

When appeal is taken from a void judgment, the appellate court must declare the judgment void. Because the appellate court may not address the merits, it must set aside the trial court's judgment and dismiss the appeal.  A void judgment may be attacked at any time by a person whose rights are affected. See El-Kareh v. Texas Alcoholic Beverage Comm'n, 874 S.W.2d 192, 194 (Tex. App.--Houston [14th Dist.] 1994, no writ); see also Evans v. C. Woods, Inc., No. 12-99-00153-CV, 1999 WL 787399, at *1 (Tex. App.--Tyler Aug. 30, 1999, no pet. h.).  Since the trial court's dismissal "with prejudice" was void, it may be attacked either by direct appeal or collateral attack Ex parte Williams, No. 73,845 (Tex.Crim.App. 04/11/2001). 

 

A void judgment is a nullity from the beginning, and is attended by none of the consequences of a valid judgment. It is entitled to no respect whatsoever because it does not affect, impair, or create legal rights." Ex parte Spaulding, 687 S.W.2d at 745 (Teague, J.,concurring). Section 6-9-147: Setting aside of sales by courts. Courts have full power over their officers making execution or judicial sales, and whenever satisfied that a sale made under any legal process is infected with fraud, oppression, irregularity, or error to the injury of either party, the sale will be set aside. (Code 1907, §4134; Code 1923, §7849; Code 1940, T. 7, §561.)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.  A “void” judgment, as we all know, grounds no rights, forms no defense to actions taken thereunder, and is vulnerable to any manner of collateral attack (thus here, by).  

 

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.  A “void” judgment, as we all know, grounds no rights, forms no defense to actions taken thereunder, and is vulnerable to any manner of collateral attack (thus here, by).

 

No statute of limitations or repose runs on its holdings, the matters thought to be settled thereby are not res judicata, and years later, when the memories may have grown dim and rights long been regarded as vested, any disgruntled litigant may reopen old wound and once more probe its depths. And it is then as though trial and adjudication had never been. Fritts v. Krugh, Supreme Court of Michigan, 92 N.W.2d 604, 354 Mich. 97 (10/13/58). Under Federal law which is applicable to all states, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that if a court is “without authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. They are not voidable, but simply void; and form no bar to a recovery sought, even prior to a reversal in opposition to them. They constitute no justification; and all persons concerned in executing such judgments or sentences, are considered, in law, as trespassers.



The Law Firms, Lawyers and Judges Link To This Case Had To See There Was No Foreclosure Order Prior To This Letter Being Written, This Is Securities Fraud.  In Addition To Victims Were Not Paid B y OCWEN.  This Crime Was Initiated Prior To By GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC Was Initiated In (2005) Without Lack Of Standing, They Forced Corla Jackson Into Her Initial Bankruptcy Case Prior To Their Fabricated Assignment Dated (June 19, 2008) Filed (July 11, 2008).

 

Bankruptcy Judge Shuman Committed Fraud Upon Federal Courts As Well In Alabama, For The Law Firms Link To This Complaint.  It Is Recorded GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC, Didn't Have Lack Of Standing Prior To The Wrongful Foreclosure June 1, 2012, On Arrears Dated Back To (2005) Without Lack Of Standing In Bankruptcy Case (05-13142) Prior To Him Issuing All Those Illegal Orders.  It Was Recorded and The Assignments Were Fraud. 

 

The Illegal Relief Was Based Upon Arrears Dated Back Prior To (2008) Without Lack Of Standing. There Were No Arrears Owed To GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC Prior To Their Fabricated Assignment Filed (July 11, 2008) The Bankruptcy Cases Under Judge Shulman After (January 20, 2010).

 

GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC Didn't Have A Recorded Release or Conveyance Of Mortgage or Deed Of Trust, Endorsed Allonge and More To Collect Arrears Dated Back To (2005-2006) Prior To (2008).  Recorded Conveyance's, Assignments, Deed Of Trust and More Were-Are Required Prior To Initiating A Foreclosure, Not After A Foreclosure By Purchasing A Mortgage Back From Yourself To Obtain A Foreclosure Deed Unlawfully! 

 

The (SEC) Securities Exchange and Trumps (FED-CHAIR) Was Suppose Protect Citizens and Wall Street Investors Linked To All Stolen Mortgages Between (2008-2020) Under The Same Fabricated Mortgages That Were Stolen Under Victims Stolen Identity, Credit, Assets, Equity, Insured Covered Losses On Slandered and Clouded Titles To Date. The Assignment Of Mortgages Were Fabricated After Option One Mortgage Corporation Was Sold and Closed (April 30, 2008). 

 

Some Of These Victims Stolen Mortgages, Identity, Credit and Assets Are Link To (Wilbur Ross-Mnuchin-Deutsche Bank, Trump Affiliates and Jeff Sessions State Affiliates-Law Firms-Lawyers and More Need To Answer From Victims Being Robbed and Complaints Being Covered Up Based Upon Fraud Upon Courts With Illegal Orders Under Closed Trust and Closed Company's Names Around The SEC, Federal Reserve, Wall Street Investors and More Unlawfully. Majority Of The Minority's Were Denied Short Sales and Loan Modifications Which Was Suppose To Prevent Illegal Foreclosures Prior To (2017). 

 

OCWEN'S Mortgages Were Frozen By The FED-Chair SEC... Foreclosures Were Halted Between (2009-2010) Until All Victims Were Paid, Which Didn't Happen, Most Of The Cases Were Pending Trial Between (2016-2020) When They Were Robbed Again.  The Law Firms and Their Affiliate Frims Were Stealing Mortgages With Illegal Orders Flipping Stolen Homes and Property's.  The Law Firms and Their Affiliate Firms Were Using Closed Company's Names Under Closed Trust and More Using Deceptive Practices With Illegal Orders Based Upon Fraud and Fraud Upon Courts Link To Judges Link To Their Law Firms and Affiliate Firms, Knowing Victims Were Not Paid, They Got The Money!

 

The Law Firms and Their Affiliate Firms Illegally Kept Going After The Same Fabricated Mortgages They Were Illegally Profiting From With Their Clients, Under Victims Stolen Identity, Credit, Assets, Insured Covered Losses, Settlement Funds and More.  The Law Firms and Their Affiliate Firms and Clients Knew OCWEN-Altisource-HLSS-Deutsche Bank, Bradley Arant Boult Cummings and Their Affiliate Firms and States Willfully and Illegally Covered Up Massive Stolen Mortgages Between (2017-2020).  Majority Of The Cases and Complaints Were (Pending Demand By Jury Trial's) Which Never Occurred!

 

The Law Firms and Their Affiliate Firms Used Judges Linked To The Crimes To Issue Them Illegal Orders Based Upon Fraud After The Letters Were Issued To Customers Nationwide!  The Assignment Of Mortgage Was Fraud and Recorded After The Crimes Were Committed By Law Firms, Their Affiliate Frims With Corrupted Judges Illegal Orders Who Violated Dodd Frank Laws, Securities Laws and More For Personal Gain, Political Gain, Favor and More Unlawfully!

 

 

Look At All Victims Letters and Wrongful Foreclosure Illegal Court Orders, You Will See There Was No Court Orders When OCWEN Wrong Victims Letters Such As This Guaranteed.

Majority Of The  Illegal Orders In The Wrongful Foreclosures Came About" After GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC Was Closed and No Longer Licensed To Do Business Nationwide!  This Is Recorded Facts!

 

  

 

 

OCWEN NEVER PAID ALL VICTIMS TO DATE GUARANTEED, THEY KEPT THE VICTIMS MONEY and STOLE THEIR PROPERTY AGAIN UNLAWFULLY.  THE LAW FIRMS AND LAWYERS PROFITED FROM THE SCAM MULTIPLE WAYS WITH CORRUPTED JUDGES ILLEGAL ORDERS THEY KNEW LINK TO THEIR LAW FIRMS AND AFFILIATE FIRMS, TO KEEP THIS COVERED UP BETWEEN (2017-2020).

 

OCWEN'S MORTGAGES WERE FROZEN BY THE FEDERAL RESERVE (JOSEPH SMITH). TRUMP'S HAS THE WORSE MORTGAGE CRISIS EVER THAN ANYONE CAN IMAGINE, THEY WERE LYING ABOUT IT!  Majority Of The Minority's Were Denied Short Sales and Loan Modifications Which Was Suppose To Prevent Illegal Foreclosures Prior To (2017). 

 

 

Rule 26. Computing and Extending Time Facts

 

 

Rule 26. Computing and Extending Time

 

 

Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure

 

 

Court Of Appeals Eleventh Circuit Rules  

 

 

This court has jurisdiction on a void judgment and constitutional issues. 28 U.S.C. §1254 (1).  There is diversity of citizenship between the parties and the amount in controversy exceeds the sum of $75,000. The district court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §1332(a).  The Appellant’s Fourth Amendment claim is plainly ripe. The Appellant’s alleged injury is complete. The district court erroneously dismissed the Appellants’ Fourth Amendment claim. 

 

CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PROVISIONS INVOLVED

 

U.S. Const. amend. XIV: The 14th amendment of the United States Constitution gives everyone a right to due process of law, which includes judgments that comply with the rules and case law. Most due process exceptions deal with the issue of notification. If, for example, someone gets a judgement against you in another state without your having been notified, you can attack the judgement for lack of due process of law. In Griffen v. Griffen, 327 U.S. 220, 66 S. Ct. 556, 90 L. Ed. 635 a pro se litigant won his case in the Supreme Court who stated

 

court cannot confer jurisdiction where none existed and cannot make a void proceeding valid.  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. See Long v. Shorebank Development Corp., 182 F.3d 548 (C.A. 7 Ill. 1999).

Sending the Appellant’s case back to state court while a due process claim still remains an constitutional issue would needlessly, Therefore, the district court erred by dismissing the Appellant’s issuing an final judgment (October 10, 2018).  The Plaintiff has a ripe Section 1983 due process claim. See: Toloczko, 728 F.3d at 398-99.  Judgment is a void judgment if court that rendered judgment lacked jurisdiction of the subject matter, or of the parties, or acted in a manner inconsistent with due process, Fed. Rules Civ. Proc., Rule 60(b)(4), 28 U.S.C.A., U.S.C.A. Const.

FRCP RULE 60(b) FRCP Rule 60(b) provides that the court may relieve a party from a final judgment and sets forth the following six categories of  reasons for which such relief may be granted: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2) newly-discovered evidence which by due diligence could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under Rule 59; (3) fraud, misrepresentation, or misconduct by an adverse party; (4) circumstances under which a judgment is void; (5) circumstances under which a judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged, or a prior judgment upon which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated, or it is no longer equitable that the judgment should have prospective application; or (6) any other reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment. F.R.C.P. Rule 60(b)(1)-(b)(6).  To be entitled to relief, the moving party must establish facts within one of the reasons enumerated in Rule 60(b).

A Party Affected by VOID Judicial Action Need Not APPEAL. State ex rel. Latty, 907 S.W.2d at 486.  It is entitled to no respect whatsoever because it does not affect, impair, or create legal rights.” Ex parte Spaulding, 687 S.W.2d at 745 (Teague, J.,concurring).   This cannot be ignored its fact recorded! Judgment is a void judgment if court that rendered judgment lacked jurisdiction of the subject matter, or of the parties, or acted in a manner inconsistent with due process, Fed. Rules Civ. Proc., Rule 60(b)(4), 28 U.S.C.A., U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 5 –Klugh v. U.S., 620 F.Supp. 892 (D.S.C. 1985).

 

This court has jurisdiction on a void judgment and constitutional issues. 28 U.S.C. §1254 (1). There is diversity of citizenship between the parties and the amount in controversy exceeds the sum of $75,000. The district court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §1332(a). The Appellant’s Fourth Amendment claim is plainly ripe. The Appellant’s alleged injury is complete. The district court erroneously dismissed the Appellants’ Fourth Amendment claim.

 

Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 1574: Void judgment.  One which has has no legal force or effect, invalidity of which may be asserted by any person whose rights are affected at any time and at any place directly or collaterally.  Reynolds v. Volunteer State Life Ins. Co., Tex.Civ.App., 80 S.W.2d 1087, 1092.  One which from its inception is and forever continues to be absolutely null, without legal efficacy, ineffectual to bind parties or support a right, of no legal force and effect whatever, and incapable of confirmation, ratification, or enforcement in any manner or to any degree.  Judgment is a "void judgment" if court that rendered judgment lacked jurisdiction of the subject matter, or of the parties, or acted in a manner inconsistent with due process.  Klugh v. U.S., D.C.S.C., 610 F.Supp. 892, 901.  See also Voidable judgment.  Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 1574.

 

Wells Fargo, Litton Loan v. Farmer, 867 N.Y.S.2d 21 (2008). “Wells Fargo does not own the mortgage loan… Therefore, the… matter is dismissed with prejudice.
 

Conveyances are required to be recorded prior to the illegal foreclosure June 1, 2012: Conveyances required to be recorded in office of probate judge. Conveyances of property, required by law to be recorded, must be recorded in the office of the judge of probate. (Code 1852, §1268; Code 1867, §1537; Code 1876, §2147; Code 1886, §1791; Code 1896, §985; Code 1907, §3367; Code 1923, §6853; Code 1940, T. 47, §94.).
 

Wells Fargo v. Erobobo, published held: “The assignment of the Defendant’s note and mortgage, having not been assigned from the Depositor to the Trust, is therefore VOID as in being in contravention of the PSA. See: Governed Laws and Security Laws under Sections 17(a)(2) and 17(a)(3) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21C of the Exchange Act of 1934 and Sections 13(a), 13(b)(2)(A) and 13(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act and Rules 12b-20, 13a-1, 13a-11, 13a-13-using deceptive practices and more.

 

Section 35-10-9: Sales contrary to article null and void. All sales of real estate, made under powers contained in mortgages or deeds of trust contrary to the provisions of this article, shall be null and void, notwithstanding any agreement or stipulation to the contrary. (Code 1907, §4134; Code 1923, §7849; Code 1940, T. 7, §561.).
 

Sturdivant v. BAC Home Loans, LP, [Ms. 2100245, Dec. 16, 2011] _ So. 3d _ (Ala. Civ. App. 2011). In Sturdivant, BAC Home Loans, LP ("BAC"), initiated foreclosure proceedings on the mortgage encumbering Bessie T. Sturdivant's house before the mortgage had been assigned to BAC.
 

 

Section 6-9-180: Jury trial on issues of fact. If the motion or application is to enter satisfaction of a judgment under the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure or to set aside the entry of satisfaction of a judgment, on request of either party, the issue of fact must be tried by a jury. (Code 1886, §2870; Code 1896, §3340; Code 1907, §4146; Code 1923, §7861; Code 1940, T. 7, §573.) .

A Party Affected by VOID Judicial Action Need Not APPEAL. State ex rel. Latty, 907 S.W.2d at 486. If an appeal is taken, however, the appellate court may declare void any orders the trial court signed after it lost plenary power over the case. "A void judgment is a nullity from the beginning, and is attended by none of the consequences of a valid judgment. It is entitled to no respect whatsoever because it does not affect, impair, or create legal rights." Ex parte Seidel, 39 S.W.3d 221, 225 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001). Under Federal law which is applicable to all states, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that if a court is “without authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. They are not voidable, but simply void; and form no bar to a recovery sought, even prior to a reversal in opposition to them. They constitute no justification; and all persons concerned in executing such judgments or sentences, are considered, in law, as trespassers.”

When appeal is taken from a void judgment, the appellate court must declare the judgment void. Because the appellate court may not address the merits, it must set aside the trial court's judgment and dismiss the appeal. A void judgment may be attacked at any time by a person whose rights are affected. See El-Kareh v. Texas Alcoholic Beverage Comm'n, 874 S.W.2d 192, 194 (Tex. App.--Houston [14th Dist.] 1994, no writ); see also Evans v. C. Woods, Inc., No. 12-99-00153-CV, 1999 WL 787399, at *1 (Tex. App.--Tyler Aug. 30, 1999, no pet. h.).
 

 

The law is well-settled that a void order or judgement is void even before reversal", VALLEY v. NORTHERN FIRE & MARINE INS. CO., 254 U.S. 348, 41 S. Ct. 116 (1920) "Courts are constituted by authority and they cannot go beyond that power delegated to them. If they act beyond that authority, and certainly in contravention of it, their judgements and orders are regarded as nullities; they are not voidable, but simply void, and this even prior to reversal." WILLIAMSON v. BERRY, 8 HOW. 945, 540 12 L. Ed. 1170, 1189 (1850).


Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(a)(1) which requires that “[a]n action must be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest.” See also, In re Jacobson, 402 B.R. 359, 365-66 (Bankr. W.D. Wash. 2009); In re Hwang, 396 B.R. 757, 766-67 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2008). Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. v. Chong, 824 N.Y.S.2d 764 (2006). MERS did not have standing as a real party in interest under the Rules to file the motion. The declaration also failed to assert that MERS, FMC Capital LLC or Homecomings Financial, LLC held the Note.

12 U.S. Code § 2605: Servicing of mortgage loans and administration of escrow accounts: Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(a)(1) which requires that “[a]n action must be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest.” See also, In reJacobson , 402 B.R. 359, 365-66 (Bankr.W.D. Wash. 2009); In re Hwang, 396B.R. 757, 766-67 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2008).
 

The Appellate Division, Second Department (Kluge v Fugazy, 145 AD2d 537, 538 [2d Dept 1988]), held that a "foreclosure of a mortgage may not be brought by one who has no title to it and absent transfer of the debt, the assignment of the mortgage is a nullity." Citing Kluge v Fugazy, the Court (Katz v East-Ville Realty Co., 249 AD2d 243 [1st Dept 1998], held that "[p]laintiff's attempt to foreclose upon a mortgage in which he had no legal or equitable interest was without foundation in law or fact.
 

 

FRAUD UPON THE COURT: In the United States, when an officer of the court is found to have fraudulently presented facts to court so that the court is impaired in the impartial performance of its legal task, the act, known as "fraud upon the court", is a crime deemed so severe and fundamentally opposed to the operation of justice that it is not subject to any statute of limitation.


Officers of the court include: lawyers, judges, referees, and those appointed; guardian ad litem, parenting time expeditors, mediators, rule 114 neutrals, evaluators, administrators, special appointees, and any others whose influence are part of the judicial mechanism. 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 cannot perform in the usual manner its impartial task of adjudging cases that are presented for adjudication. 

 

The 14th amendment of the United States Constitution gives everyone a right to due process of law, which includes judgments that comply with the rules and case law. In Griffen v. Griffen, 327 U.S. 220, 66 S. Ct. 556, 90 L. Ed. 635 a pro se litigant won his case in the Supreme Court who stated.  Failure to provide adequate notice of the trial court's intent to dismiss for want of prosecution is a Due Process Violation and Requires Reversal. Villarreal, 994 S.W.2d at 630; Donnell v. Spring Sports, Inc., 920 S.W.2d 378, 386 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1996, writ denied).

 

A trial court abuses its discretion when it acts in an arbitrary or unreasonable manner, or if it acts without reference to any guiding rules or principles.  Moss v. Waste Mgmt. of Tex., Inc., 305 S.W.3d 76, 81 (Tex. App.- Houston [1st Dist.] 2009, pet. denied). The 14th amendment of the United States Constitution gives everyone a right to due process of law, which includes judgments that comply with the rules and case law. Most due process exceptions deal with the issue of notification. If, for example, someone gets a judgement against you in another state without your having been notified, you can attack the judgement for lack of due process of law.

 

 

In Griffen v. Griffen, 327 U.S. 220, 66 S. Ct. 556, 90 L. Ed. 635 a pro se litigant won his case in the Supreme Court who stated. When rule providing for relief from void judgments is applicable, relief is not discretionary matter, but is mandatory, Orner. V. Shalala, 30 F.3d 1307 (Colo. 1994).  Judgment is a void judgment if court that rendered judgment lacked jurisdiction of the subject matter, or of the parties, or acted in a manner inconsistent with due process, Fed. Rules Civ. Proc., Rule 60(b)(4), 28 U.S.C.A., U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 5 - Klugh v. U.S., 620 F.Supp. 892 (D.S.C. 1985).

 

Since the trial court's dismissal "with prejudice" was void, it may be attacked either by direct appeal or collateral attack Ex parte Williams, No. 73,845 (Tex.Crim.App. 04/11/2001). "A void judgment is a nullity from the beginning, and is attended by none of the consequences of a valid judgment. It is entitled to no respect whatsoever because it does not affect, impair, or create legal rights." Ex parte Spaulding, 687 S.W.2d at 745 (Teague, J.,concurring). Section 6-9-147: Setting aside of sales by courts. Courts have full power over their officers making execution or judicial sales, and whenever satisfied that a sale made under any legal process is infected with fraud, oppression, irregularity, or error to the injury of either party, the sale will be set aside. (Code 1907, §4134; Code 1923, §7849; Code 1940, T. 7, §561.).


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.
 

 

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.  A “void” judgment, as we all know, grounds no rights, forms no defense to actions taken thereunder, and is vulnerable to any manner of collateral attack (thus here, by).  

 

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.  A “void” judgment, as we all know, grounds no rights, forms no defense to actions taken thereunder, and is vulnerable to any manner of collateral attack (thus here, by).

 

Section 6-9-180: Jury trial on issues of fact. If the motion or application is to enter satisfaction of a judgment under the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure or to set aside the entry of satisfaction of a judgment, on request of either party, the issue of fact must be tried by a jury. (Code 1886, §2870; Code 1896, §3340; Code 1907, §4146; Code 1923, §7861; Code 1940, T. 7, §573.) .

 

 

 

 

 

This Is The Archive Unfiltered While Under Construction!

 

This Story Is Off The Hook The Lies Is Over Guaranteed!

If This Isn't A Constitutional Crisis What Is?...

 

 

 

Read More