Gulf Coast Tribune.Com

www.socialmediafeed.co

 

Corla Jackson Retained A Lawyer To Represent Her On The Rehearing

In The United States Supreme Court Only At This Time Because This Is Where Case 18-7070 Is At Not Alabama! 

 

 

The Fourteenth Amendment states: No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. U.S. Const. amend.

 

I Can't See The Supreme Court Not Hearing This Complaint On (No Due Process) Violating Their Own Constitutional Laws.  In Addition To This, The United States Federal Government, Wall Street Investors and More Has Been Robbed Around The SEC, Federal Reserve, CFPB, FDIC, OCC, Consent-Enforcement Orders Which Has Been Violated, As Well As Securities Laws-More.  Victims Are Being Robbed Which Cannot Be Ignored Or Denied Because Its Recorded Facts!  READ MORE

 

THERE WAS NO DUE PROCESS UNTIL AFTER THE ILLEGAL FORECLOSURE JUNE 1, 2012 THIS IS RECORDED: A judgment may not be rendered in violation of constitutional protections. The validity of a judgment may be affected by a failure to give the constitutionally required due process notice and an opportunity to be heard. Earle v. McVeigh, 91 US 503, 23 L Ed 398. See also Restatements, Judgments ' 4(b). Prather vLoyd, 86 Idaho 45, 382 P2d 910. The limitations inherent in the requirements of due process and equal protection of the law extend to judicial as well as political branches of government, so that a judgment may not be rendered in violation of those constitutional limitations and guarantees. Hanson v Denckla, 357 US 235, 2 L Ed 2d 1283, 78 S Ct 1228.

 

The law is well-settled that a void order or judgment 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).

 

 

 

See: 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.

 

The Fourteenth Amendment states: No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. U.S. Const. amend.


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.).


See: 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.
 

See: 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.

 

 

See CODE OF ALABAMA: 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.).

 

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.).

 

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.


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 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 6-9-180: 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.).
 

 

 

 

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).

 

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).


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).
 

 

CORLA JACKSON DID FILE AN APPENDIX IN PRO SE LANGUAGE SEE RECEIPT AND READ MORE DETAILS LISTED BELOW ON FACTS.  THE LAW FIRMS WAS USING CLERKS TO MANIPULATE THE DOCKET SHEETS WITHOUT READING THE MOTIONS AND TRUE FACTS ON A VOID JUDGMENT WITHOUT DUE PROCESS VIOLATING CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS AND MORE GUARANTEED! 

CORLA JACKSON FILED A APPENDIX AND ASK FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME IF HER APPENDIX WASN'T ACCEPTED AND NEEDED TO BE CORRECTED, ALL THEY READ AND RECORDED IN TEXT WAS EXTENSION OF TIME AND DISMISSED THE CASE ILLEGALLY ON A VOID JUDGMENT VIOLATING CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS.  THE LIES IS OVER GUARANTEED!

 

 

 

Pro Se Language: Corla Jackson Filed Her Appendix With An Extension Of Time If Her Appendix Wasn’t Accepted and Needed To Be Corrected. There Was No Notice Of Corrections Sent To Corla Jackson Filed Through The Court To Correct or Accept Her Appendix In Pro Se Language After The Order Filed To File Her Appendix (3.29.2018).
All CITIZENS Are Granted A Notice Of Correction To Correct Appendix and Documents If Needed, Except Corla Jackson On A VOID JUDGMENT Without Due Process and Without GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC Reordering and Conveying Their Mortgage Between Corla Jackson and GMAC Prior To Their Illegal Foreclosure June 1, 2012.   In Addition To This, GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC was Closed and No Longer In Business When The Illegal Orders Were Issued Which Is Fraud and Fraud Upon The Court. All This Was Covered Up Guaranteed!

 

The law is well-settled that a void order or judgment 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.

 

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).

 

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.

 

I Can't See The Supreme Court Not Hearing This Complaint On (No Due Process) Violating Their Own Constitutional Laws.  In Addition To This, The United States Federal Government, Wall Street Investors and More Has Been Robbed Around The SEC, Federal Reserve, CFPB, FDIC, OCC, Consent-Enforcement Orders Which Has Been Violated, As Well As Securities Laws-More.  Victims Are Being Robbed Which Cannot Be Ignored Or Denied Because Its Recorded Facts!

 

 

STATEMENT OF RECORDED FACTS AND MORE GUARANTEED

 

THERE WAS NO CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTIONS FILED TO CORRECT APPENDIX OR ACCEPT THE PRO SE LANGUAGE APPENDIX FILED THROUGH THE COURT AFTER THE ORDER WAS ISSUED (3/29/2018) THEY JUST DISMISSED THE CASE ILLEGALLY AND ITS RECORDED SEE EVIDENCE. 

CORLA JACKSON FILED AN APPENDIX AND WITH AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO CORRECT HER APPENDIX IN PRO SE LANGUAGE ON A VOID JUDGMENT IF NEEDED. 

THE CLERK MANIPULATED THE DOCKET SHEET AND JUST RECORDED AN EXTENSION OF TIME WITHOUT STATING SHE FILED AN APPENDIX THAT NEEDED TO BE CORRECTED BY ISSUING A CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION ON THE TIMELY FILED APPENDIX WITH HER EXTENSION OF TIME IF NEEDED AFTER THE ORDER WAS ISSUED TO FILE HER APPENDIX.  THERE WAS NO CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTIONS ISSUED AFTER THE ORDER WAS ISSUED ON THE TIMELY FILED MOTION AND APPENDIX, THIS IS FACTS GUARANTEED! 

 

 

 

 

IN ADDITION TO THIS GMAC WAS CLOSED AND NO LONGER IN BUSINESS WHEN THE ILLEGAL ORDERS WERE ISSUED NO ONE TOLD THIS TO CORLA JACKSON THAT JUDGE YORK COMMITTED FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON THE COURT WHEN HE ISSUED HIS ILLEGAL ORDER AFTER GMAC CLOSED 2.22.2017 THAT THE ILLEGAL EJECTMENT WAS BASED UPON, THE DISTRICT COURT JUDGE KNEW THIS AND SHE KNEW BETTER AS WELL AS THIS COURT!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CORLA JACKSON FILED TIMELY OVER AND OVER AGAIN AND ALL THIS WAS COVERED UP!

 

THE COURT OF APPEALS CLERKS KEPT ILLEGALLY DISMISSING THE CASE-COMPLAINT EVEN WHEN CORLA JACKSON PAID AND WAS PROPERLY BEFORE THE COURT THEY BLOCKED THIS CASE BASED UPON FRAUD FROM THE VERY BEGINNING UNTIL JUDGE YORK COULD ISSUE AN ILLEGAL EJECTMENT AND ALL THIS SH-T IS RECORDED THAT THE BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS AND MORRISON AND FOERSTER AND THEIR ALABAMA AFFILIATE FIRMS AND LAWYERS COVERED UP AND MORE. 

 

THERE WERE EVEN LAWYERS OUT OF ATLANTA LICENSED IN ALABAMA THAT COMMITTED FRAUD UPON THE COURTS AFTER GMAC MORTGAGE CLOSED SO THEY COULD STEAL VICTIMS PROPERTY'S AROUND THE FEDS WALL STREET INVESTORS AND MORE. 

 

GMAC HAD CLOSED DOWN ITS SERVICING UNITS WHEN THE JUDGES ISSUED THEIR ILLEGAL ORDERS BASED UPON FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON THE COURT CAUSED BY GMAC AND ITS LAW FIRMS AND CORRUPT JUDGES LINKED TO THE FIRMS, THIS CANNOT BE IGNORED OR DENIED ITS RECORDED FACTS, THEY KNEW THEY WERE COVERING UP A WHITE COLLAR CRIME ROBBERY HERE AND MORE LINKED TO MASSIVE STOLEN VICTIMS PROPERTY'S IN ALABAMA AND NATIONWIDE!

 

IT DIDN'T MATTER IF CORLA JACKSON PAID OR NOT THEY STILL COMMITTED FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON THE COURT TO BLOCK THIS COMPLAINT FROM BEING HEARD ILLEGALLY BASED UPON FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON THE COURTS INSIDE ALABAMA JURISDICTION THAT BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS WAS BASICALLY OVER THAT WAS COMMITTING THE CRIMES THROUGH THEIR AFFILIATE FIRMS AND MORE WITH CORRUPT JUDGES AND CLERKS FROM THE VERY BEGINNING FOR RESCAP AND GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION AKA GMAC MORTGAGE  LLC AND MORE GUARANTEED!

 

CORLA JACKSON PAID AND THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ILLEGALLY DISMISSED THE CASES AND COMPLAINTS WHETHER VICTIMS PAID OR NOT!~

BECAUSE OF THE CORRUPT JUDICIAL SYSTEMS IT HAS LEAD TO A WHITE COLLAR CRIME ROBBERY BEING CARRIED OUT BASED UPON FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON THE COURT-CORRUPTION BY ALABAMA ELECTED OFFICIALS LAW FIRMS AND AFFILIATE FIRMS WHICH BENEFITED AND PROFITED FROM CRIMES SUCH AS THIS MULTIPLE WAYS, WHICH CANNOT BE IGNORED OR DENIED. 

 

VICTIMS WERE NOT PAID AND THERE WAS NO INDEPENDENT FORECLOSURE REVIEWS, THE STATE OF ALABAMA COVERED THIS UP AS WELL AS MARTIN GLENN AND DISTRICT JUDGES THAT CANNOT BE IGNORED OR DENIED ITS RECORDED FACTS. 

 

THERE ARE OTHER VICTIMS, THE STATE KEPT FUNDS THAT WAS DUE TO VICTIMS USING DECEPTIVE PRACTICES USING THE MONEY FOR ELECTIONS AND THEIR LAW FIRMS STATING THEY WERE HELPING VICTIMS WHEN THEY WERE NOT, IT IS OBVIOUS THEY WERE DOING THE OPPOSITE OF THE CONSENT AND ENFORCEMENT ORDERS ISSUED BY GOVERNMENT, CFPB, FDIC, OCC, AND MORE! THEY EVEN VIOLATED DUE PROCESS CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS AND COVERED THAT UP AS WELL!  READ MORE  6    7

 

THE ALABAMA MONOPOLY FIRMS WERE OVER UNDER JUDGE MARTIN GLENN IN RESCAP BANKRUPTCY IN NEW YORK.  JUDGE MARTIN GLENN SHOULD HAVE NEVER APPROVED BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS FOR RESCAP THEY BOTH COMMITTED THE CRIME THROUGH CORRUPT JUDGES THEY HELP PUT INTO OFFICE TO COMMIT CRIMES FOR THEM SUCH AS THIS!

 

BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS HAD THEIR AFFILIATE FIRMS AND LAWYERS KEEP HAVING VICTIMS CASES ILLEGALLY DISMISSED BASED UPON FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON COURTS AROUND THE SEC, FEDERAL RESERVE, CFPB, OCC, FDIC, WALL STREET INVESTORS TRUST AND MORE GUARANTEED!

 

VICTIMS WENT BANKRUPT TRYING TO GET JUSTICE AND THEY KEPT ROBBING THEM AFTER VICTIMS PAID TO HAVE THEIR COMPLAINTS HEARD BY LAW.  THE FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON THE COURT IS INSIDE ALABAMA'S JURISDICTION THAT CAUSED A DOMINO EFFECT FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON THE COURT BASED UPON THEIR FRAUDULENT MOTIONS AND MORE GUARANTEED! 

TH4E BLOCK IS INSIDE THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT BASED UPON FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON THE COURT BY CLERKS THAT DID WHAT BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS TOLD THEM TO DO UNDER PARTICULAR JUDGES ITS OBVIOUS ITS FRAUD UPON THE COURT UNDER JUDGE MARTIN GLENN AND MORE!   READ MORE  6    7

 

CORLA JACKSON WAS PROPERLY BEFORE THE COURT WHEN THIS ILLEGAL ORDERS WAS ISSUED!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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).

 

 

 

 

Corla Jackson Alabama Prior Lawyers Didn't Tell Her What Was Going On With GMAC and How They Robbed Her Instead They Covered It Up and Illegal Orders Were Issued To Force Corla Jackson To Pay For A Mortgage That She Never Had With GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC.  The Lawyers Covered Up The Judges Orders From Corla Jackson So GMAC Could Embezzle Money From Corla Jackson Under False Pretense This Cannot Be Ignored Or Denied This Is Facts Guaranteed!

 

Look At Dates GMAC Said Corla Jackson Was Behind In Payments Violating They Said Orders Of The Court When That Was A Dam Lie! Corla Jackson Paid GMAC Just Like The Courts Told Her To Do Until Further Notice, The Notices Were Covered Up From Corla Jackson" That's How GMAC Embezzled The Money From Corla Jackson Under False Pretense.  GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC Told Trustee's They Were Giving Back The Money and They Never Did" Instead GMAC Lawyers-Trustee Law Firms Committed Fraud and Faked A Discharge Through Their Affiliate Firm That's What They Covered Up.

 

Judge Mahoney Never Signed A Discharge January 20, 2010 In The Initial Bankruptcy Case 05-13142.  Judge Mahoney Only Signed Order Disallowing GMAC Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC From Robbing Corla Jackson and The Trustee's and Had To Amend The Order To The Amount Paid Because GMAC Trustee Law Firm Kept Going Around Judge Mahoney and her Orders!

 

GMAC Came To Corla Jackson to Process Her Insurance Claims That Is How They Robbed Her Around The FEDS On Insured Covered Losses.  Corla Jackson Tried To Stop Them and Got Robbed As Well Because They Faked An Illegal Foreclosure Action Against Her Under Their Fabricated Mortgage Slandering Her Complaints Willfully and Illegally Through Alabama Corrupt Judges and Lawyers That Is How It Occurred Initially. The Lawyers  Covered This Up!

 

GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC Never Recorded or Conveyed A Mortgage Between Corla Jackson and GMAC Prior To Their Illegal Foreclosure June 1, 2012.  GMAC Committed Fraud and Filed False Proof Of Claims On Funds They Already Had Robbing Corla Jackson and The Bankruptcy Trustee's In The Initial Bankruptcy Case 05-13142, Based Upon False Proof Of Claims-More, and GMAC Never Gave Back The Money and They Never Paid For All The Damages They Caused From 2005-2019.  The Lies Is Over Read More

 

How Corla Jackson Found Out What Was Going On A Trustee Employee Told Her What Was Going On and They Said Corla Jackson Lawyers Were Involved, What Ever That Means Because They Never Told Her She Didn't Own GMAC and They Never Told Her To Stop Paying GMAC Based Upon The Order Issued March 1, 2006, September 18, 2009 or October 1, 2009. 

 

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.

 

 

Corla Jackson Original Note Was Secured By All Policy's and More Which Cannot Be Ignored Or Denied. GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC Slandered and Clouded The Title Faking An Illegal Foreclosure Action Without Lack Of Standing.  In Addition To This, GMAC Robbed Corla Jackson and Funds From Bankruptcy Courts-Trustees As Well As Robbing Corla Jackson of Her Identity, Credit, Home, Land and More Under False Pretense Based Upon Mail and Wire Fraud With Illegal Orders Fabricated Assignments and More Without Reordering and Conveying Their Mortgage Between Corla Jackson and GMAC January 3, 2005 or Prior To The Illegal Foreclosure June 1, 2012.  This Has Caused Corla Jackson Massive Damages That The Law Firms Covered Up!

 

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).

 

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).

 

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). 

 

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.   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.


THIS IS THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG IT WAS ALREADY BAD PRIOR TO 2016  IT GOT WORSE BETWEEN 2016-2019 THE BANKS-SERVICERS COMMITTED SAME CRIME OVER AGAIN THIS TIME FAR WORSE THAN BEFORE GUARANTEED. 

 

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. 

 

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 regs narded aullities; 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).

 

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.  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. 

 

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.  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). 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). 

 

 

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).

 

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).  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.   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.

 

GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC perpetrated fraud upon the court from the beginning since (2005-2019) and concealed GMAC Mortgage Corporation didn’t own the property in the initial bankruptcy case (05-13142) that their illegal relief and illegal orders were based upon dated back to (2005) initial bankruptcy case that had Disallowed their proof of claims on their new mortgage they illegally created January 3, 2005 without lack of standing and they knew this, it was recorded.  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).

 

Corla Jackson was before the court properly from the beginning under bankruptcy case 05-13142 when GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC initiated their false proof of claims that their ILLEGAL RELIEF was based upon on arrears dated back to (March 2006) without lack of standing that was DISALLOWED and AMENDED TO THE AMOUNT GMAC EMBEZZLED FROM CORLA JACKSON AND THE TRUSTEE'S AROUND THE JUDGES COURT ORDER TERMS AND CONDITIONS MARCH 1, 2006. IN FACT" GMAC MORTGAGE LLC DIDN'T OWN THE PROPERTY MARCH 1, 2006 WHEN THE ORDER WAS ISSUED ON THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS IT WAS BASED UPON PERIOD!

 

 

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.

 

42 U.S. Code § 1982 - Property rights of citizens: All citizens of the United States shall have the same right, in every State and Territory, as is enjoyed by white citizens thereof to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, and convey real and personal property. (R.S. § 1978.)

 

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.).

 

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.).


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.

 

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).

 

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.”


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). 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).


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.   A proof of execution by a subscribing witness cannot be used in conjunction with any quitclaim deed, grant deed document (other than a trustee’s deed or a deed of reconveyance), mortgage, deed of trust or security agreement. (Government Code section 27287 and Civil Code section 1195(b)…


 

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:

 

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.”
 

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.   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.


 

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.).


Void order may be attacked, either directly or collaterally, at any time, In re Estate of Steinfield, 630 N.E.2d 801, certiorari denied, See also Steinfeld v. Hoddick, 513 U.S. 809, (Ill. 1994). Void order which is one entered by court which lacks jurisdiction over parties or subject matter, or lacks inherent power to enter judgment, or order procured by fraud, can be attacked at any time, in any court, either directly or collaterally, provided that party is properly before court, People ex rel. Brzica v. Village of Lake Barrington, 644 N.E.2d 66 (Ill.App. 2 Dist. 1994).

 

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.


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 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 6-9-180: 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.).
 

 

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).


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).

 

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).

 

 

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.

 

 

 

I Can't See The Supreme Court Not Hearing This Complaint On (No Due Process) Violating Their Own Constitutional Laws.  In Addition To This, The United States Federal Government, Wall Street Investors and More Has Been Robbed Around The SEC, Federal Reserve, CFPB, FDIC, OCC, Consent-Enforcement Orders Which Has Been Violated, As Well As Securities Laws-More.  Victims Are Being Robbed Which Cannot Be Ignored Or Denied Because Its Recorded Facts!

 

INITIAL BANKRUPTCY WAS DISALLOWED GMAC FILED A FALSE CLAIM

IN BANKRUPTCY CASE: 05-13142

 

See. 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.

 

In Bulloch v. United States, 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.

 

42 U.S. Code § 1982 - Property rights of citizens: All citizens of the United States shall

have the same right, in every State and Territory, as is enjoyed by white citizens thereof to

inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, and convey real and personal property. (R.S. § 1978.)

 

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".

 

Governing rules: Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure governs the assertion of affirmative defenses in civil cases that are filed in the United States district courts. Rule 8(c) specifically enumerates the following defenses: "accord and satisfaction, arbitration and award, assumption of risk, contributory negligence, discharge in bankruptcy, estoppel, failure of consideration, fraud, illegality, injury by fellow servant, laches, license, payment, release, res judicata, statute of frauds, statute of limitations, waiver, and any other matter constituting an avoidance or affirmative defense."

 

Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that affirmative defenses be based on knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances.

 

The distinction between civil and criminal contempt lies in the rights that are being vindicated and the level of willfulness of the conduct: Civil contempt has as its aim the vindication of a private right of a party to litigation and any penalty imposed upon the contemnor is designed to compensate the injured private party for the loss of or interference with that right ( State of New York v. Unique Ideas, 44 N.Y.2d 345, 405 N.Y.S.2d 656, 376 N.E.2d 1301). Criminal contempt, on the other hand, involves vindication of an offense against public justice and is utilized to protect the dignity of the judicial system and to compel respect for its mandates (King v. Barnes, 113 N.Y. 476, 21 N.E. 182).

 

 

The Supreme Court Of The United States Thought Corla Jackson Made A Mistake When She Said GMAC Mortgage LLC Had Robbed Her February 22, 2017 Under Judge Jay York and Judge Kristi Dubose Because GMAC Mortgage LLC Was Closed and No Longer Doing Business In Alabama and Nationwide.  Corla Jackson Had To Hire A Lawyer To Represent Her In The United States Supreme Court Rehearing To Verify She Was Telling The Truth and More. 

 

The Crooks had it looking like Corla Jackson was trying to get a free house, that was not true! Corla Jackson got robbed trying to protect the FEDS, Wall Street Investors Trust and Herself from being robbed on a mortgage backed by securities that was an insured covered loss from the perils of (2) major hurricanes that totaled her home and the theft of land by her neighbors, that she was illegally forced to make payments on under false pretense at her expense under a fabricated mortgage without telling her the truth that GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC had stolen her identity and fabricated a mortgage in her name to process her insurance claims based upon mail and wire fraud stating that they owned her property when they did not at her expense. 

 

 

 

All of Corla Jackson insurance policy's prevented a foreclosure action and the payments she was illegally forced to make by illegal court orders prevented a foreclosure action.  The illegal foreclosure took place while her complaint was pending trial without Due Process on arrears dated back to the initial bankruptcy case (05-13142) which Disallowed GMAC from robbing Corla Jackson, the FEDS, Wall Street Investors Trust aka Option One Mortgage Corporation, this is recorded. The illegal relief that was issued by Judge Shulman after January 20, 2010 was fraud on arrears dated back to a new mortgage GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC created to themselves for illegal profits without a recorded deed and without recording and conveying their new mortgage 0835002124 between Corla Jackson and GMAC which was required by FEDERAL and STATE LAW!

 

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. 

 

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).

 

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.

 

GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC didn't have a recorded trustee's deed of sale from the Pool of Trust PSA from Wells Fargo Bank N.A. aka Option One Mortgage Corporation recorded with the SEC filings-more January 3, 2005 prior to creating their new mortgage without lack of standing. 

 

Wells Fargo Bank N.A. aka Option One Mortgage Corporation PSA Trust" never filed a proof of claim or any complaints in the Bankruptcy Cases-Cases filed by Corla Jackson or her Lawyers prior to the illegal foreclosure (June 1, 2012) this is recorded.  The United States Federal Government need to be looking at how the Law Firms, Lawyers and Judges got away with this White Collar Crime Robbery from (2005-2019) based upon fraud and fraud upon the courts which cannot be ignored or denied its recorded facts. 

 

The State Court Stated in their Order GMAC didn't own the property until June 1, 2012, which proved fraud and fraud upon the courts because the mortgage GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC illegally created to themselves January 3, 2005 was done without lack of standing.  The Illegal Mortgage was created prior to the fabricated assignment dated June 19, 2008 filed July 11, 2008, after Option One Mortgage Closed April 30, 2008

 

This was not Corla Jackson mortgage number (0835002124) and this mortgage was never recorded or conveyed between Corla Jackson and GMAC, who was it conveyed to is the BIG Question because it wasn't conveyed to Option One Mortgage Corporation Trust-PSA account and neither was the payments January 3, 2005There was never a recorded mortgage 0835002124 between Corla Jackson and GMAC prior to GMAC filing their false proof of claims in the initial bankruptcy case (05-13142 or prior to the illegal foreclosure June 1, 2012, what the Hell is going on USA-WORLD!

 

In addition to the above GMAC and its lawyers and corrupt judges willfully violated securities rules-laws, constitutional laws as well as Corla Jackson civil rights and more. This look like Judge York and Judge Dubose committed a federal crime and they RETALIATED against Corla Jackson for exposing the truth on what they all did which turned into a Hate Crime as well as a White Collar Crime Robbery.  Judge York issued the ILLEGAL EJECTMENT BASED UPON FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON THE COURT TO COVER UP THEIR CRIMES, linked to this entire complaint dated back to (2005) without lack of standing.  It is crystal clear that Judge York illegal ejectment (2.22.2017) that was enforced (2.5.2019) was done after GMAC closed its servicing units, which is a federal crime-fraud upon the court and more. 

 

GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION AKA GMAC MORTGAGE LLC WAS CLOSED WHEN JUDGE YORK ISSUED THE ILLEGAL EJECTMENT THIS WAS FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON THE COURT VIOLATING ENFORCEMENT ORDERS (2.22.2017) and (2.5.2019) WITHOUT LACK OF STANDING AROUND THE FEDS-CFPB-BOARD OF GOVERNORS-FDIC-OCC-MORE! GMAC WAS CLOSED AND NO LONGER OPERATING IN BUSINESS WHEN THE WHITE COLLAR CRIME ILLEGAL ORDERS WERE ISSUED! 

 

Its crystal clear the all the Orders were fraud after (January 20, 2010) and more.  The Judges that issued the illegal orders that is linked to this crime willfully abused their power and used it as a WEAPON against Corla Jackson with illegal orders with the intent to corrupt her cases and complaints through their Alabama State Firms and Courts inside Alabama Jurisdiction initially.  Alabama State Firms and Judges were the ones committing the crimes with their client GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC for personal gain-profits that the State Of Alabama Covered Up, they knew what was going on. The Judges and Lawyers linked to this crime all knew they were committing a crime!

 

Corla Jackson complaint stated this when she filed her complaint which was ignored by the State of Alabama because it was their Judges that committed the crimes with the illegal orders inside their jurisdiction that lead to a Domino affect through the federal courts based upon fraud and fraud upon the courts caused by Alabama Court Officials initially covering up what their law firms were doing with their clients for illegal profits around the SEC, FEDS, CFPB, OCC, FDIC, WALL STREET INVESTORS TRUST as well as Victims-More.

 

There was never a recorded mortgage 0835002124 between Corla Jackson and GMAC prior to GMAC filing their false proof of claims in the initial bankruptcy case (05-13142 or prior to the illegal foreclosure June 1, 2012, what the Hell is going on USA-WORLD!

 

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).

 

Don't Stop The American People From Finding Out Victims Has Been Robbed Because They May Have Been Robbed Too. 

GMAC Mortgage LLC Was Illegally Operating In Alabama and More Around The SEC, Board Of Governors, Federal Reserve, OCC, FDIC, CFPB, Wall Street Investors and More.  No Further Comment At This Time.  (New Update Below)

 

Everyone Is Watching This Case To See What Justice Is Really About Inside USA Because The Law Firms Are Saying Government Told Them To Rob Victims and More.  These Law Firms Need To Be Brought Before Justice As Well As The Company's To See What The Hell Is Going On Because Citizens, the United States Government has been Robbed as well as Wall Street Investors and Jackson stand up for all of them and more.  United States Citizens Need To Know The Truth As Well As Government!

 

 

Governed Laws and Security Laws were violated 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...  1    4    5

 

 

 

 

THIS IS THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG GMAC BUSTED AND IT GET WORSE!  I Can't See The Supreme Court Not Hearing This Complaint On (No Due Process) Violating Their Own Constitutional Laws.  In Addition To This, The United States Federal Government, Wall Street Investors and More Has Been Robbed Around The SEC, Federal Reserve, CFPB, FDIC, OCC, Consent-Enforcement Orders Which Has Been Violated, As Well As Securities Laws-More.  Victims Are-Were Being Robbed Which Cannot Be Ignored Or Denied Because Its Recorded Facts!

 

Loan Number 651003367-Servicing Number 001347464-8. 

 

The Mortgage Contract Is Dated May 26, 2004

 

11/8/05     424B5  [ re:  Option One Mortgage Loan Trust 2005-5, Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2005-5 ]     1  / 1   424B5   ... – e22764_424b5   240
10/4/05     424B5  [ re:  Option One Mortgage Loan Trust 2005-4, Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2005-4 ]     1  / 1   424B5   ... Supplement – e22553_424b5   243
7/14/05     424B5  [ re:  Option One Mortgage Loan Trust 2005-3 ]     1  / 1   424B5   Definitive Materials – file001   HTML
5/3/05     424B5  [ re:  Option One Mortgage Loan Trust 2005-2 ]     1  / 1   424B5   Option One Mortgage Acceptance Corp – d328276   242
1/12/05     424B5  [ re:  Option One Mortgage Loan Trust 2005-1 ]     1  / 1   424B5   ... Supplement – b403648_424b5   239
1/11/05     424B5         1  / 1   424B5   ... Supplement – b403648_424b5   239
10/5/04     424B5  [ re:  Option One Mortgage Loan Trust 2004-3 ]     1  / 1   424B5   Option One Mortgage Acceptance Corporation – d267762   213
4/12/04     424B5  [ re:  Option One Mortgage Acceptance Loan Trust 2004-2 ]     1  / 1   424B5   Option One Mortgage Acceptance Corp – d222686   213
1/21/04     424B5  [ re:  Option One Mortgage Loan Trust 2004-1 ]     1  / 1   424B5   Option One Mortgage Acceptance Corp – d201380   205
10/16/03     424B5  [ re:  Option One Mort Accep Corp Asset Backed Cert Ser 2003-6 ]     1  / 1   424B5   Option One Mortgage Acceptance Corporation – d178424   209
7/23/03     424B5  [ re:  Option One Mortgage Accep Corp Asset Back Certs Ser 2003 5 ]     1  / 1   424B5   Option One Mortgage Acceptance Corporation – d159369   206
6/13/03     424B5  [ re:  Option One Mortgage Accep Corp Asset Back Certs Ser 2003-4 ]     1  / 1   424B5   Option One Mortgage Acceptance Corporation – d149222   202
4/18/03     424B5  [ re:  Option One Mortgage Accep Corp Ast Back Certs Ser 2003-3 ]     1  / 1   424B5   Option One Mortgage Acceptance Corporation – d136512   207
3/14/03     424B5  [ re:  Option One Mort Acceptance Corp Asset Back Cert Ser 2003 2 ]     1  / 1   424B5   Option One Mortgage Acceptance Corporation – d127726   201
1/15/03     424B5  [ re:  Option One Mort Accept Corp Asset Backed Certs Ser 2003 1 ]     1  / 1   424B5   Option One Mortgage Acceptance Corp – d116286   204
10/29/02     424B5  [ re:  Option One Mortgage Accept Corp Asset-Backed Cert Se 2002-6 ]     1  / 1   424B5   Option One Mortgage Acceptance Corporation – d99666   201
7/30/02     424B5  [ re:  Option One Mortgage Loan Tr Asset Backed Cert Ser 2002-5 ]     1  / 1   424B5   Option One Mortgage Acceptance Corporation – d80413   199
6/7/02     424B5  [ re:  Option One Mortgage Accept Corp Asset Backed Cer Ser 2002-4 ]     1  / 1   424B5   Option One Mortgage Acceptance Corporation – d70482   250
4/25/02     424B5  [ re:  Option One Mort Accept Corp Asset Backed Cert Ser 2002-3 ]     1  / 1   424B5   Option One Mortgage Acceptance Corporation – d59914   202
3/13/02     424B5  [ re:  Option One Mortgage Loan Tr Asset Backed Cert Ser 2002-2 ]     1  / 1   424B5   Option One Mortgage Acceptance Corporation – d50504   184

 

ALABAMA NOT FOOLING ANYONE: SIROTE & PERMUTT P.C. COULD NOT DO A FORECLOSURE IN GMAC MORTGAGE LLC NAME PERIOD ITS THE LAW, THEY COULD NOT EVEN ANSWER A COMPLAINT.  JACKSON'S CASE-COMPLAINT IS FORCING THEM TO LEAVE THEIR PAPER TRAIL ON HOW THEY COMMITTED AND CARRIED OUT THIS WHITE COLLAR CRIME ROBBERY AND ROBBED THE UNITED STATES FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, WALL STREET INVESTORS and OTHER VICTIMS AROUND THE SEC, FEDERAL RESERVE, FDIC, OCC, CFPB, AND MORE AROUND SECURITIES LAWS AND MORE WITH ILLEGAL ORDERS BASED UPON FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON THE COURT'S LINKED TO THE FIRMS THAT COMMITTED THE CRIMES AND MORE!  THIS CASE-COMPLAINT WILL ALSO SHOW WHAT OCWEN DIDN'T DO AND DID WITH THEIR AFFILIATES AROUND THE SEC TO PREVENT FROM PAYING THE VICTIM, GOVT., WALL STREET INVESTORS AND MORE...

THE LAW FIRMS WERE NOT APPROVED BY THE UNITED STATES FEDERAL BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DIVISION OF NEW YORK TO CARRY OUT AN ILLEGAL FORECLOSURE JUNE 1, 2012 PRIOR TO DUE PROCESS OR AN INDEPENDENT FORECLOSURE REVIEW, ITS RECORDED... THIS COMPLAINT WAS PENDING A DEMAND BY A REAL JURY TRIAL WHEN IT GOT CORRUPTED IN ALABAMA WHICH LEAD TO AN DOMINO AFFECT OF ILLEGAL ORDERS BASED UPON FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON THE COURTS, THAT IS WHAT THEY COVERING UP!  

 

 

The Code of Alabama 1975 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 1923, § 9018; Code 1940, T. 47, §172.

 

Option One Mortgage Corporation (4/30/2008) A proof of execution by a subscribing witness cannot be used in

conjunction with any quitclaim deed, grant deed document (other than a trustee’s deed or a deed of reconveyance),

mortgage, deed of trust or security agreement. (Government Code section 27287 and Civil Code section 1195(b)...

 

 

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.

 

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.

 

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).

 

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.

 

 

 

THE EVIDENCE SPEAKS FOR ITSELF AND MORE GUARANTEED READ MORE!

 

 

1    2    3   4   5   6    7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17

 

 

 

SIROTE & PERMUTT P.C. AND BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS COULD NOT DO AN FORECLOSURE ON CORLA JACKSON PROPERTY AND THE FRICKING JUDGES LINKED TO THIS WHITE COLLAR CRIME RETALIATION HATE CRIME KNEW THIS!

 

 

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.

 

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).

 

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.

 

 

THIS IS WHAT BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS COVERED UP FROM THE FEDS.  GMAC WAS NEVER APPROVED IN CORLA JACKSON THE INITIAL BANKRUPTCY CASE 05-13142 THAT GMAC ILLEGAL RELIEF IS BASED UPON ON ARREARS DATED BACK TO BK CASE 05-13142 MARCH 1, 2006 ORDER. THE ILLEGAL FORECLOSURE THAT TOOK PLACE JUNE 1, 2012 IS BASED UPON FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON THE COURT COVERING UP THE TRUTH GUARANTEED! THE LAW FIRMS SHOULD HAVE BEEN SHUT DOWN AND THE LAWYERS AND JUDGES LINKED TO THIS CRIME THEY COVERED UP SHOULD HAVE BEEN ARRESTED BECAUSE THIS WAS A WHITE COLLAR CRIME ROBBERY THE STATE OF ALABAMA COVERED UP THROUGH THEIR STATE FIRMS WITH ILLEGAL ORDERS THAT IS BASED UPON FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON THE COURT AROUND THE SEC, FEDERAL RESERVE WHISTLE BLOWER PROTECTION ACT, LAWS AND MORE FOR EXPOSING THEM!

 

 

THE BANKRUPTCY FILES IN BK CASE NUMBER 05-13142 WAS NEVER AMENDED TO THE COURT'S ORDER-JUDGE MINUTE ENTRY 09/22/2005 OR THE MARCH 1, 2006 ORDER.  GMAC WAS NEVER APPROVED IN BANKRUPTCY CASE 05-13142 BASED UPON THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS RECORDED!

GMAC TRUSTEE COMMITTED FRAUD WITH THEIR LAW FIRMS WITH CORRUPT JUDGES ILLEGAL ORDERS AFTER THE ORDER WAS ISSUED MARCH 1, 2006 IS WHAT OCCURRED HERE.

THE STATE OF ALABAMA WAS PROFITING FROM THEIR LAW FIRMS MASSIVE STOLEN MORTGAGE FRAUD RING FOR ILLEGAL PROFITS PERSONAL GAIN OR FAVOR WHICH IS A FEDERAL CRIME.

THE JUDGES LINKED TO THIS CRIME EITHER WORKED FOR THE STATE OF ALABAMA OR FOR THE LAW FIRMS PRIOR TO BECOMING JUDGES THAT IS WHY THEY WERE CHOSEN TO BE A JUDGE TO HANDLE CASES SUCH AS THIS AND MORE AGAINST VICTIMS THAT TRIED TO INFORM THE SEC, FEDERAL RESERVE, OCC, CFPB, WALL STREET INVESTORS AND MORE PRIOR TO THE ILLEGAL FORECLOSURES THAT THE ALABAMA STATE FIRMS COVERED UP FOR RESCAP. 

THE BIG QUESTION IS DID MARTIN GLENN REPORT THE LAW FIRMS AND CORRUPT JUDGES TO DOJ, BECAUSE CLEARLY THIS IS A WHITE COLLAR CRIME ROBBERY ALABAMA COVERED UP THROUGH THEIR STATE FIRMS BECAUSE THE STATE OF ALABAMA WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR MASSIVE DAMAGES BASED UP THE FRAUD UPON THE COURT THEIR JUDGES ISSUED BASED UPON FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON THE COURT! 

THE STATE OF ALABAMA DIDN'T REPORT THEIR STATE FIRMS AND THEIR AFFILIATE FIRMS AND LAWYERS ON THEIR WHITE COLLAR CRIME ROBBERY'S BECAUSE, THEY ALL-BOTH BENEFITED MULTIPLE WAYS.  THE STATE OF ALABAMA COVERED UP THEIR FIRMS MASSIVE STOLEN MORTGAGES GUARANTEED!  THIS CANNOT BE IGNORED ITS FAR WORSE THAN ANYONE CAN IMAGINE THAT IS WHY GMAC LAW FIRMS ILLEGALLY AND WILLFULLY KEPT THIS CASE AND OTHER VICTIMS CASES FROM BEING HEARD OUT OF ALABAMA AND JURISDICTION BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS WAS OVER NATIONWIDE WHICH IS BASED UPON FRAUD. 

 

THE STATE OF ALABAMA JUDGES ILLEGAL ORDERS STOLE MORTGAGES BACKED BY SECURITIES SAND VICTIMS PROPERTY BASED UPON FRAUD BY THE LAW FIRMS AND THE JUDGE ILLEGAL ORDERS WHICH CANNOT BE IGNORED ITS RECORDED FACTS GUARANTEED.

 

MARTIN GLENN SHOULD HAVE NEVER LET BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS HANDLE THE CASES THEY COMMITTED CRIMES ON AND MORE THEY WERE CROOKS PROFITING FROM THE SCAMS MULTIPLE WAYS INSIDE AND OUTSIDE THEIR JURISDICTION, THAT IS WHY THEY BLOCKED THE CASE-COMPLAINTS THAT EXPOSED THEM AND THEIR CLIENTS THEY WERE COMMITTING THE CRIMES UNDER BASED UPON FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON COURTS!

 

 

 

THIS IS RECORDED FACTS SO NO ONE CAN LIE GMAC WAS NEVER APPROVED IN CORLA JACKSON INITIAL BANKRUPTCY CASE THEIR ILLEGAL FORECLOSURE WAS BASED UPON THAT JUDGE SHULMAN ISSUED ILLEGAL RELIEF'S BASED UPON ON ARREARS ATTACHED GO GMAC FABRICATED MORTGAGES DATED BACK TO MARCH 2006!

 

GMAC WAS NEVER APPROVED IN THE INITIAL BANKRUPTCY CASE 05-13142 THAT GMAC ILLEGAL RELIEF WAS BASED UPON UNDER JUDGE SHULMAN, THIS IS WHAT BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS IS COVERING UP FOR THEIR AFFILIATE FIRMS, THE STATE OF ALABAMA AND THEIR CORRUPTED JUDGES BECAUSE THEY ALL BENEFITED FROM THE WHITE COLLAR CRIME ROBBERY'S MULTIPLE WAYS ON MASSIVE STOLEN MORTGAGES WITH ILLEGAL ORDERS BASED UPON FRAUD BY COVERING UP THE TRUTH WHICH CANNOT BE IGNORED OR DENIED VICTIMS WERE ROBBED ILLEGALLY!  THE LAW FIRMS LINK TO THIS CRIME KNEW WHAT THEY WERE DOING ITS RECORDED!

THIS IS RECORDED EVIDENCE THAT THE LAW FIRM COMMITTED FRAUD THEY COVERED UP THE TRUTH WILLFULLY AND CONTINUED ROBBING CORLA JACKSON, ALABAMA VICTIMS AND VICTIMS NATIONWIDE, WHICH CANNOT BE IGNORED OR DENIED ITS RECORDED FACTS! 

GMAC WAS NEVER APPROVED IN THE INITIAL BANKRUPTCY CASE 05-13142 THAT THEIR ILLEGAL RELIEF UNDER JUDGE SHULMAN WAS BASED UPON! GMAC AND ITS LAW FIRMS HAS COMMITTED FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON THE COURT THAT LEAD TO ILLEGAL ORDERS KNOWING GMAC WAS NEVER APPROVED IN BK CASE 05-13142. 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: THE FILES WERE NEVER AMENDED TO THE COURT'S-JUDGE MINUTE ENTRY 09/22/2005 OR THE MARCH 1, 2006 ORDER.  GMAC WAS NEVER APPROVED IN BANKRUPTCY CASE 05-13142 BASED UPON THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS RECORDED! GMAC TRUSTEE COMMITTED FRAUD WITH THEIR LAW FIRMS IS WHAT HAPPENED HERE AND THAT IS WHAT THEY COVERED UP ITS RECORDED FACTS!

 

THIS IS THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG"

GMAC BUSTED AND IT GET WORSE!

 

 

 

GMAC WAS NEVER APPROVED IN THE INITIAL BANKRUPTCY CASE 05-13142 THAT THEIR ILLEGAL RELIEF UNDER JUDGE SHULMAN WAS BASED UPON! GMAC AND ITS LAW FIRMS HAS COMMITTED FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON THE COURT THAT LEAD TO ILLEGAL ORDERS KNOWING GMAC WAS NEVER APPROVED IN BK CASE 05-13142. 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: THE FILES WERE NEVER AMENDED TO THE COURT'S-JUDGE MINUTE ENTRY 09/22/2005 OR THE MARCH 1, 2006 ORDER.  GMAC WAS NEVER APPROVED IN BANKRUPTCY CASE 05-13142 BASED UPON THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS RECORDED! GMAC TRUSTEE COMMITTED FRAUD WITH THEIR LAW FIRMS IS WHAT HAPPENED HERE AND THAT IS WHAT THEY COVERED UP ITS RECORDED FACTS!

 

BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS HAS COMMITTED A FEDERAL CRIME COVERING UP THIS CRIMES THEIR AFFILIATE FIRMS COMMITTED THAT THEY WERE LINKED TO WITH THEIR ALABAMA AFFILIATE FIRMS AND CORRUPT JUDGE INSIDE THEIR JURISDICTION AND MORE TO KEEP THIS COMPLAINT FROM EXPOSING THEM FOR WHAT THEY COVERED UP AND DID HERE...  MORRISON & FOERSTER LAW FIRM OUT OF NEW YORK KNEW WHAT THEIR CLIENT RESCAP WAS DOING WITH BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS WERE DOING WITH THEIR AFFILIATE FIRMS ITS RECORDED THEY COMMITTED BANKRUPTCY FRAUD AND MORE CONTINUING TO COMMIT THE SAME CRIMES OVER FROM 2005-2019....

 

THE LIES IS OVER! GMAC WAS NEVER APPROVED IN CORLA JACKSON INITIAL BANKRUPTCY CASE 05-13142 UNDER JUDGE MAHONEY! THIS IS RECORDED FACTS GUARANTEED!  BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS AND SIROTE & PERMUTT P.C. HAS COMMITTED MULTIPLE CRIMES TOGETHER!

GMAC WAS NEVER APPROVED BY A COURT ORDER CONFIRMING GMAC IN CORLA JACKSON INITIAL BANKRUPTCY CASE 05-13142 BY A COURT ORDER PERIOD.  THE ORDER ISSUED MARCH 1, 2006 WAS A CONDITIONALLY DENIED COURT ORDER SPELLING OUT THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THAT GMAC COULD BE GRANTED A LEAVE TO FILE A PROOF OF CLAIM BECAUSE THEY KEPT IGNORING THE JUDGE IN COURT WHEN SHE TOLD THEM TO PROVIDE HER WITH THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CORLA JACKSON AND GMAC.

 

 

More New Discovery Will Be Released In New Book Coming Soon!

 

What Occurred Here Is GMAC Mortgage LLC Law Firm and Affiliate Firms Switched Out Federal Court Documents In The Initial Bankruptcy Case (05-13142) Replacing The Certificate Of Service Notice and Court Order with their Proof Of Claim Which Is Fraud Upon The Court. 

 

What Happened When People Were Clicking On The Certificate Of Service Documents GMAC False Proof Of Claim Kept Coming Up That The Judge Never Approved With An Agreement Between Corla Jackson and GMAC, All This Was Covered Up And More Guaranteed.  This Is Just The Tip Of The Iceberg, Corla Jackson Wasn't ($14,809.60) Behind In Payments Because She Was Told By GMAC Mortgage LLC Lawyer That The Judge Told Her To Pay Them Directly, When The Judge Didn't Tell The Trustee's or Corla Jackson to Pay GMAC a Dam Penny Until She Approved Them With A Court Order With The Agreement Between Corla Jackson and GMAC, Which Never Happened! 

 

When GMAC Mortgage LLC Lawyer Got Busted By Judge Mahoney The Lawyer-Law Firm Ran and Never Responded To The Courts, Judge Mahoney, or Corla Jackson After The Judges Disallowed GMAC Proof Of Claims September 18, 2009 In Its Entirety Which Had To Be Amended To The Amount Paid October 1, 2009 by Jackson and Trustee's Paid Under Claim Number 1 and Claim Number 7, because GMAC Filed A Proof Of Claim Around The Judge and Courts Order After March 1, 2006 Order Was Issued. 

 

GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC Filed A False Proof Of Claim Without A Court Order and Agreement Between Corla Jackson and GMAC Was Without Lack of Standing Prior To (2008) Which Caused Massive Damages From (2005-2019) That They Covered Up In Alabama Because The Law Firms and Judges Linked To This Crime Was Involved.  GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC Committing This Crime January 3, 2005. 

 

GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC Had Embezzled Money From The Trustee's and Corla Jackson Without A Federal Court Order In The Initial Bankruptcy Case 05-13142.  GMAC Mortgage LLC Law Firm's Relief In The Other (2) Bk Under Judge Shulman Cases Were Based Upon Arrears Dated Back To The March 1, 2006 Order When Jackson Wasn't Behind In Payments and Neither Was The Trustees Payments Because The Judge Stopped All Payments To GMAC by Court Order by Disallowing Their Proof Of Claims To the Terms and Conditions of the Order Issued March 1, 2006. 

 

The Law Firm and Lawyer's Knew This, This Is What They Were Covering Up To Prevent From Coming Out, This Is What They Are Blocking But It Get Worse Than This Guaranteed!  Judge Shulman Order-Release Was Based Upon Bankruptcy Case 05-13142 Proof Of Claim That Was Never Approved Which Is Fraud Upon The Court That GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC Law Firms Committed!  GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC Didn't Have A Mortgage With Corla Jackson and GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC Didn't Own Corla Jackson Property When They Filed Their False Proof Of Claims In The Initial Bankruptcy Case (05-13142).

 

 

The Alabama Law Firms Committed Bankruptcy Fraud With Their Affiliate Trustee Firms-More Around Judge Mahoney In The Initial Bankruptcy Case 05-13142.  The Evidence Listed Below Was Discovered When The Docket Sheet Didn't Match The Documents That Was Filed or Its Tracking Numbers Located At The Bottom Of Each Page Of The Recorded Documents.  After The New Discovery It Wasn't Hard To Figure Out How GMAC Mortgage LLC Law Firms Got Their False Proof Of Claims Filed Around Judge Mahoney And The Trustee's To Obtain Money That Had To Be Amended To The Amount Paid By Debtor, This Was Covered Up and More! 

 

The Law Firms That Committed This Crime Did This Around Judge Mahoney.  This Was A Hard Case To Solve Because They Switched Out Documents that Didn't Match What Was Filed.  The Alabama Judges Linked To This Crime Knew What The Law Firms Had Done, This Is What They Were Covering Up Between 2009-2010. This Is Just Part Of What They Did It Get Worse Guaranteed! 

 

See Details Listed Below Backed By The Recorded Evidence So No One Can LieThe Alabama Law Firms Didn't Know Corla Jackson Had Copies Of Her Entire Bankruptcy Files Because, This Had To Be Done Because They Could Not Be Trusted and Neither Could the Corrupt Judges That Covered Up This Crime To Date.  This Is Just Part Of The Key Evidence That They Covered Up Which Is Recorded Facts Guaranteed. This Is How GMAC Mortgage LLC Filed Their False Proof Of Claim Around Judge Mahoney Without The Agreement Between Corla Jackson and GMAC, and Without Owning The Property The Day The Order Was Issued (March 1, 2006) and More.  The Lies Is Over!

 

Refer To Docket Sheet: Bankruptcy Case 05-13142: Document (31) was the Certificate Of Service and Court Order issued March 1, 2006 that was entered (03/03/2006). Total Pages Were Page 1of 1 and Page 2 of 2.  The Certificate Of Service was not a Proof Of Claim, Alabama Law firms for GMAC Mortgage LLC and their affiliate firms Switched Out Documents, which was bankruptcy fraud.  They were stupid because the documents were coded and labeled on the description of the documents that were filed. 

It Is Crystal Clear Now That GMAC Law Firm and their Affiliate Firm replaced the Certificate of Service Documents with a Proof Of Claim without a Federal Court Order issued by Judge Mahoney after March 1, 2006!

 

 

 

 

 

 

What Happened When People Were Clicking On The Certificate Of Service Documents GMAC False Proof Of Claim Kept Coming Up That The Judge Never Approved With An Agreement Between Corla Jackson and GMAC, All This Was Covered Up And More Guaranteed.  This Is Just The Tip Of The Iceberg, Corla Jackson Wasn't ($14,809.60) Behind In Payments Because She Was Told By GMAC Mortgage LLC Lawyer That The Judge Told Her To Pay Them Directly, When The Judge Didn't Tell The Trustee's or Corla Jackson to Pay GMAC a Dam Penny Until She Approved Them With A Court Order With The Agreement Between Corla Jackson and GMAC, Which Never Happened! 

When GMAC Mortgage LLC Lawyer Got Busted By Judge Mahoney The Lawyer-Law Firm Ran and Never Responded To The Courts, Judge Mahoney, or Corla Jackson After The Judges Disallowed Their Proof Of Claim September 18, 2009 and Amended To The Amount Paid October 1, 2009 by Jackson and Trustee's Paid Under Claim Number 1 and Claim Number 7.   GMAC Mortgage LLC Had Embezzled Money From The Trustee's and Corla Jackson Without A Federal Court Order In The Initial Bankruptcy Case 05-13142.  GMAC Mortgage LLC Law Firm's Relief In The Other (2) Bk Cases Were Based Upon Arrears Dated Back To The March 2006 Order When Jackson Wasn't Behind In Payments and Neither Was The Trustees Payments Because The Judge Stopped All Payments To GMAC and The Law Firm and Lawyer's Knew This, This Is What They Were Covering Up, To Prevent From Coming Out In Trial That They Blocking!      

 

More New Discovery Will Be Released In New Book Coming Soon!

GMAC Mortgage LLC Law Firm and Affiliate Firms Switched Out Federal Court Documents That Is What Occurred Here That No One Could Figure Out Until Now.  This Was Like Looking For A Needle In A Hay Stack But The Mystery Is Solved Finally, Maybe Justice Will Be Served Now Because The Evidence Speaks For Itself and More Guaranteed!  The Lies Is Over Guaranteed!  

 

 

Initial Bankruptcy Case 05-13142: Debtor Education - Required to Receive Discharge. We Know What GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC Did With The State Of Alabama's Trustee Law Firm and Sirote & Permutt P.C. Around Judge Mahoney.

 

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings Has Committed A Big Crime Under Judge Martin Glenn With and Through Their Affiliate Firms-Lawyers-Alabama Corrupt Judges and More Its Recorded To Date So Know One Can Lie.  Bradley Arant Boult Cummings Stalked and Followed This Complaint and Case With The Intent To Keep It From Being Heard Its Recorded Facts Guaranteed!  They Abused Their Power and Name As A Weapon To Commit and Carry Out A White Collar Crime Robbery Bottom Line!

 

Discharge in Bankruptcy

A bankruptcy discharge releases the debtor from personal liability for certain specified types of debts. In other words, the debtor is no longer legally required to pay any debts that are discharged. The discharge is a permanent order prohibiting the creditors of the debtor from taking any form of collection action on discharged debts. The bankruptcy discharge varies depending on the type of case a debtor files: chapter 7, 11, 12, or 13. There are some debts that generally cannot be eliminated such as student loans, domestic support obligations, child support and alimony and some taxes.

 

Debtor Education - Required to Receive Discharge

The term "debtor education" generally refers to the instructional course in personal financial management in chapters 7 and 13 that an individual debtor must complete before a discharge is entered. This is a separate course, not to be confused with the pre-petition credit counseling requirement. While the credit counseling must take place before you file, the debtor education must take place after you file before the discharge can be entered.  Approved Financial Management Instructional Courses

 

 

 

There were lawyer's trying to tell Government about cases like this for a long time but the person that committed the crime was over the crimes is what happened here.  I was reading someone else's motion and I came across my name being in the SPOTLIGHT which was shocking to see lawyers had been following my case for a long time.  See Evidence Below...

 

 

Corla Jackson was in bankruptcy (2009-2010) under case (05-13142) and again in (2010) under case (10-04820) trying to stop GMAC for violating Enforcement Orders and Prior Orders under the initial bankruptcy case (05-13142).

 

The Alabama Law Firms linked to the crimes was over the cases in New York is what happened they were stealing mortgages and victims property's and profiting from them multiple ways through their affiliate firms. 

 

The Judge in New York didn't listen because he was involved after signing all those illegal orders based upon fraud and fraud upon the court from the law firms Bradley Arant Boult Cummings and Morrison & Foerster and their Affiliate Firms and Judges that is why they used corrupt judges to issue illegal orders for them, with the intent to keep Corla Jackson complaint covered up making it appear as if she was wrong when as you all can see she was not and this is what they trying to block from being heard with illegal orders Guaranteed!

 

The Judge abused his power as a weapon against victim's is the bottom line here which is a federal crime because not only was the victim-victims robbed government, wall street investors and more has been robbed by those illegal orders, that is also what they trying to keep covered up!  The Alabama Law Firms and Judges inside their jurisdiction did all this around the SEC, Federal Reserve, OCC, FDIC, CFPB and more under closed trust names and closed company's name that is why they never got busted.  There was not independent foreclosure reviews on the cases the illegal orders were issued on and if the feds ask Martin Glenn for those reports by their rules he want have them. 

 

Corla Jackson was in bankruptcy case 05-13142 was in bankruptcy (2009-2010) and again in (2010) under case (10-04820) trying to stop GMAC for violating Enforcement Orders and Prior Orders under the initial bankruptcy case (05-13142).  Jackson's case-complaint was guaranteed to be reviewed and a Demand by Jury Trial to be heard prior to the illegal foreclosure June 1, 2012.  There was No Due Process, Summary Judgment or Remand prior to the illegal foreclosure June 1, 2012.

 

There was never a recorded deed, recorded trustee's deed of sale or a recorded release-cancellation of the Original Note between Corla Jackson and Option One Mortgage Corporation to GMAC prior to April (2008) or prior to GMAC Mortgage LLC illegal foreclosure June 1, 2012, this is recorded.

 

The Board Of Governors issued an Enforcement Order that all victims cases and complaints in foreclosure or pending foreclosures between 2009-2010 and again in (2010) under case (10-04820) trying to stop GMAC for violating Enforcement Orders and Prior Orders under the initial bankruptcy case (05-13142).

 

The Law Firms and Corrupt Judges committed and covered up a federal crime, this is why they issued all those illegal orders to keep this case from being heard.  Bradley Arant Boult Cummings worked for RESCAP they are the ones that committed the crime and should have never been approved by Judge Martin Glenn to oversee a DAM THING! The lawyers should have been DISBARRED and ARRESTED right alone with the corrupt judges that issued all the illegal orders.  The illegal orders Defrauded The SEC, Federal Reserve, OCC, FDIC, Wall Street Investors and More...This cannot be ignored or denied its recorded facts. Why would any court let them practice law or be a judge over cases, abusing their power as weapons that is a federal crime!

 

Board Of Governors-United States Federal Government know something is wrong here because Corla Jackson was in bankruptcy 2009-2010 they sent her a form confirming that they knew but what they didn't know is what really happened above because the case was corrupted by Bradley Arant Boult Cummings through their Affiliate Firms, Lawyers and Judges linked to their firms that had became judges that issued the illegal orders for them!

 

 

At This Time this case-complaint is pending review in the United States Supreme Court, they have been told USA Federal Government Wall Street Investors and More Has Been Robbed and More.  Maybe they will see what happened now after Jackson hired a lawyer.  The Review Was Denied because Corla Jackson said GMAC Mortgage LLC robbed her and they said GMAC Mortgage LLC was closed when they were not Closed (2.22.2017) or (2.5.2019) because this is when they robbed Corla Jackson again with illegal orders based upon fraud and fraud upon the court knowing she didn't have Due Process until (10.23.2012) this was after GMAC Mortgage LLC did their illegal foreclosure (6.1.2012) under Judge Martin Glenn, which is a BIG RED FLAG! 

 

I Can't See The Supreme Court Not Hearing This Complaint On No Due Process and United States Federal Government, Wall Street Investors and More Has Been Robbed Around The SEC, Federal Reserve, CFPB, FDIC, OCC, Consent-Enforcement Orders Has Been Violated as Well As Securities Laws-More!

 

 

NO DUE PROCESS PRIOR TO THE ILLEGAL FORECLOSURE 6.1.2012

CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS WERE VIOLATED AND MORE

CORLA JACKSON CIVIL RIGHTS WAS VIOLATED BOTTOM LINE!

 

 

Corla Jackson was in bankruptcy (2009-2010) under case (05-13142) and again in (2010) under case (10-04820) trying to stop GMAC for violating Enforcement Orders and Prior Orders under the initial bankruptcy case (05-13142).  GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC was trying to foreclosure under (2) bankruptcy cases between (2009-2010) on arrears dated back to March 1, 2006 Order which was conditionally denied and again from (2010-2012) under Judge Shulman under the same fabricated mortgage with the same fabricated arrears attached.    

 

The law firms and lawyers illegally went around SEC, FEDERAL RESERVE, FDIC, CFPB, and WALL STREET INVESTORS without independent foreclosure reviews-more!

 

The United State Federal Government should have been the one to represent Corla Jackson but because the case was corrupted with illegal orders by Martin Glenn, the  Alabama Law Firm Bradley Arant Boult Cummings, Morrison & Foerster with corrupt judges illegal orders based upon fraud and fraud upon the court through their affiliate firms and lawyers, it was impossible for the Federal Government see what happed here until now, this is what the law firms and corrupt judges is trying to keep covered up with illegal orders the truth behind the lies around the SEC, FDIC, CFPB, Wall Street Investors, OCC, and More!

 

 

STATEMENT OF FACT: Corla Jackson was in bankruptcy (2009-2010) under case (05-13142) and again in (2010) under case (10-04820) trying to stop GMAC for violating Enforcement Orders and Prior Orders under the initial bankruptcy case (05-13142).

 

GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC was trying to foreclosure under (2) bankruptcy cases between (2009-2010) on arrears dated back to March 1, 2006 Order which was conditionally denied that they violated.  They tried to foreclosure again between (2010-2012) under Judge Shulman under the same fabricated mortgage 0835002124 with the same fabricated arrears attached dated back to Bankruptcy Case 05-13142 that was DISALLOWED

 

GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC didn't own Corla Jackson property when they created their fabricated mortgage to themselves for illegal profits January 3, 2005 with arrears attached, they committed civil bankruptcy fraud and willfully and illegally filed multiple false proof of claim under in the initial bankruptcy case (05-13142) which was DISALLOWED this was recorded!

 

Because the law firm that committed the crime has corrupted this case with judges they knew with illegal orders they got to send this case to a Federal Trial, the judges and lawyers linked to this complaint has committed a white collar crime robbery to cover up what they did which is recorded facts!

 

 

The United States Constitutional Laws Were Violated and Covered Up Which Is A Bigger Crime the Judges never reported to DOJ on what the law firms has done here through their affiliate firms and lawyers to date, which has caused massive damages that cannot be ignored or denied..

 

The State Of Alabama was issuing illegal orders in GMAC Mortgage LLC name after GMAC Mortgage LLC was closed which is a bigger crime that cannot be ignored they did this around the SEC, Federal Reserve, OCC, CFPB, FDIC, enforcement orders and consent orders and more. 

 

The State Court and District Court New GMAC had shut down their servicing units when they issued their illegal orders and OCWEN didn't pay victims and more, this to was covered up by the State Of Alabama State Firms and Lawyers, which cannot be denied or ignored its recorded facts!  This violated securities laws rules and regulations multiple ways as well as bankruptcy  laws.  The Law Firms, Lawyers and Judges linked to this crime knew they were committing a Federal White Collar Crime Robbery with Illegal Orders based upon fraud upon court, this cannot be ignored or denied its recorded facts!

 

GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC was trying to foreclosure under (2) bankruptcy cases between (2009-2010) on arrears dated back to March 1, 2006 Order which was conditionally denied that they violated prior to obtaining an illegal orders based upon fraud from Judge Shulman. 

 

Why did Alabama U.S. District Court Judge Cover Up Fraud Upon The Court and No Due Process prior to the illegal foreclosure June 1, 2012...?  Judge Dubose was linked to the law firm Bradley Arant Boult Cummings multiple ways she should have recused herself from being over the case as well as Jeff Sessions she worked with Sessions who was linked to Bradley Arant Boult Cummings and Luther Strange...

 

GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC tried to foreclosure again between (2010-2012) under Judge Shulman under the same fabricated mortgage 0835002124 with the same fabricated arrears attached dated back to Bankruptcy Case 05-13142 that was DISALLOWED. 

 

Judge Shulman's illegal orders on the fabricated arrears and fabricated mortgage that was created January 3, 2005 was fraud.  GMAC Mortgage LLC didn't own Corla Jackson property when he issued his illegal orders in bankruptcy case (11-01545) to conduct an wrongful foreclosure on to steal property based upon fraud and fraud upon the court, this is a federal crime there was no arrears dated back to MARCH 2006 due to GMAC Mortgage LLC the illegal orders were based upon under Judge Shulman in bankruptcy case (11-01545).  Its crystal clear Bradley Arant Boult Cummings committed crime under their affiliate firms and lawyers and this is what they trying to keep covered up!

 

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings were actually stealing mortgages with affiliate judges illegal orders and they are profiting around the FEDS-MORE with and through their affiliate firms and lawyers in their massive stolen illegal profiting ring around the SEC, Federal Reserve, Wall Street Investors Trust, CFPB, OCC, FDIC, and More multiple ways GUARANTEED!  Sirote & Permutt P.C. was working with and through Bradley Arant Boult Cummings and their affiliate firms and judges who use to work for their firms or whom worked for the State of Alabama, they were all benefiting from the massive stolen property profiting ring multiple ways!

 

 

All the cases are Bankruptcy Cases-Complaints what were they doing in Alabama's State Court's to obtain illegal orders for Bradley Arant Boult Cummings through their affiliate firms and lawyers around the FEDS-SEC-CFPB-FDIC-OCC-More...?

 

STATEMENT OF FACT: Corla Jackson was in bankruptcy (2009-2010) under case (05-13142) and again in (2010) under case (10-04820) trying to stop GMAC for violating Enforcement Orders and Prior Orders under the initial bankruptcy case (05-13142). 

 

There was NO DUE PROCESS prior to June 1, 2012 prior to the illegal wrongful foreclosure which VIOLATED CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS AND MORE!

 

 

 

 

NO DUE PROCESS ISSUED UNTIL AFTER THE ILLEGAL FORECLOSURE JUNE 1, 2012. IT OCCURRED IN AN ILLEGAL EVICTION ACTION WHICH VIOLATED CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS-MORE THAT ALSO DENIED GMAC CORPORATION AKA GMAC MORTGAGE LLC YOU CAN'T GET ANY WORSE THAN THIS.  JUDGE YORK COMMITTED CIVIL FRAUD UPON THE COURT HE LIED ABOUT THE ENTIRE ISSUE ABOVE BECAUSE THE STATE OF ALABAMA WAS LIABLE FOR MULTIPLE ISSUES LINKED TO JACKSON AND HER PROPERTY THEY TRIED TO AVOID PAYING SO JUDGE YORK ISSUED AN ILLEGAL EJECTMENT WHICH IS A FEDERAL CRIME. 

 

GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION aka GMAC MORTGAGE LLC WAS CLOSED 2.22.2017 and 2.5.2019 WHEN JUDGE YORK ISSUED AND ENFORCED HIS ILLEGAL ORDER.

JUDGE YORK KNEW GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION AKA GMAC MORTGAGE LLC HAD COMMITTED A FEDERAL CRIME AND DIDN'T HAVE A MORTGAGE CONTACT AGREEMENT BETWEEN CORLA JACKSON AND GMAC AND THERE WAS NO DUE PROCESS BECAUSE THEY WENT TO HIM INITIALLY IN CASE (DV-2012-902844) VERSUS JUDGE HARDESTY. 

 

THE LAW FIRMS AND JUDGES LINKED TO THIS CRIME USED DECEPTIVE PRACTICES TO COVER UP THE CRIME BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE A REMAND OR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, THEY WENT BACK AND COMMITTED THE CRIME OVER AFTER GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION AKA GMAC MORTGAGE LLC HAD CLOSED.  JUDGE YORK WAS INVOLVED IN THE CRIME WITH THE FIRMS FROM THE VERY BEGINNING WITHOUT DUE PROCESS AND MORE THAT HE COVERED UP!

JUDGE YORK ISSUED ORDERS FOR BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS AND THEIR AFFILIATE FIRMS AFTER GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION AKA GMAC MORTGAGE LLC HAD CLOSED, WHICH IS FRAUD, HE ABUSED HIS POWER AND USED IT AS A WEAPON TO COVER UP A CRIME HE IS LINKED TO-MORE!

JUDGE YORK USED HIS POWER-ILLEGAL ORDERS AS A WEAPON WHICH CANNOT BE IGNORED OR DENIED HE KNEW ABOUT THIS ENTIRE MATTER-CASE PRIOR TO ISSUING HIS ILLEGAL ORDER 2.22.2017 THAT HE'S INVOLVED IN WITH BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS, THE CORRUPTED ALABAMA JUDGES INSIDE ALABAMA JURISDICTION, THEIR AFFILIATE FIRMS AND LAWYERS GUARANTEED. 

GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION AKA GMAC MORTGAGE LLC WAS CLOSED WHEN THE ILLEGAL ORDERS WERE ISSUED FROM STATE AND DISTRICT COURT'S.  BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS AND MORRISON & FOERSTER, JUDGE MARTIN GLENN, JUDGE DUBOSE AND JUDGE YORK COVERED UP THE COURT ORDER LISTED BELOW AND MORE GUARANTEED!

GMAC MORTGAGE LLC LOSS THE EVICTION ACTION COMPLAINT!  MARTIN GLENN, AND THE OTHER JUDGES DIDN'T MENTION THE TRUTH ON THE ORDER LISTED BELOW, INSTEAD THEY COVERED IT UP AND WAITED ON JUDGE YORK TO ISSUE AN ILLEGAL EJECTMENT VIOLATION CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS ON NO DUE PROCESS AND MORE AS SHOWN ABOVE-BELOW WHICH IS A FEDERAL CRIME, ABUSING POWER AS A WEAPON TO CARRY OUT WHITE COLLAR CRIME ROBBERY KNOWING CORLA JACKSON HAD WON CASE BELOW DATED BACK TO JANUARY 3, 2005 FABRICATED MORTGAGE 0835002124.  IN ADDITION TO THIS THERE WAS (NO DUE PROCESS) PRIOR TO THE ILLEGAL FORECLOSURE JUNE 1, 2012 ON ARREARS DATED BACK TO MARCH 2006 THAT JUDGE SHULMAN ISSUED HIS ILLEGAL RELIEF BASED UPON! 

 

GMAC DIDN'T OWN THE NOTE OR THE PROPERTY AND THERE WAS NEVER A MORTGAGE CONTRACT AGREEMENT OR CONVEYANCE OF GMAC MORTGAGE TO CORLA JACKSON PRIOR TO THE ILLEGAL FORECLOSURE JUNE 1, 2012. BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS, MORRISON & FOERSTER AND THEIR AFFILIATE FIRMS AND LAWYERS HAS COVERED UP A FEDERAL CRIME THEY COMMITTED-LINKED TO. THEY KNEW GMAC MORTGAGE LLC HAD ROBBED CORLA JACKSON AFTER THEY CLOSED UNDER JUDGE YORK BASED UPON FRAUD UPON THE COURT AND MORE!  THEY ALSO KNOW OCWEN OWNED THE MORTGAGE AND DIDN'T REPORT THIS CRIME GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION AKA GMAC MORTGAGE LLC COMMITTED TO AVOID PAYING VICTIMS AROUND THE SEC, FEDERAL RESERVE, CFPB, FDIC, OCC, AND MORE!

 

 

All the cases are Bankruptcy Cases-Complaints what were they doing in Alabama's State Court's to obtain illegal orders for Bradley Arant Boult Cummings through their affiliate firms and lawyers around the FEDS-SEC-CFPB-FDIC-OCC-More...?

 

 

 

STATEMENT OF FACT: Corla Jackson was in bankruptcy (2009-2010) under case (05-13142) and again in (2010) under case (10-04820) trying to stop GMAC for violating Enforcement Orders and Prior Orders under the initial bankruptcy case (05-13142). 

 

There was NO DUE PROCESS prior to June 1, 2012 prior to the illegal wrongful foreclosure which VIOLATED CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS AND MORE!

 

 

 

 

THE EVIDENCE LISTED ABOVE AND BELOW  SPEAKS FOR ITSELF ITS RECORDED!

GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION aka GMAC MORTGAGE LLC WAS CLOSED 2.22.2017 and 2.5.2019 WHEN JUDGE YORK ISSUED AND ENFORCED HIS ILLEGAL ORDER WITHOUT DUE PROCESS PRIOR TO THE ILLEGAL FORECLOSURE JUNE 1, 2012. THE JUDGES KNEW BETTER THAT'S LINKED TO THIS CASE-COMPLIANT THEY KNEW DUE PROCESS WAS REQUIRED BY FEDERAL LAWS AND STATE LAW PRIOR TO THE ILLEGAL FORECLOSURE (6.1.2012) NOT AFTER (10.23.2012)!

 

JUDGE YORK WAITED UNTIL GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION AKA GMAC MORTGAGE LLC CLOSED TO ISSUE AN ILLEGAL EJECTMENT BASED UPON FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON THE COURT KNOWING GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION AKA GMAC MORTGAGE LLC WAS NO LONGER IN BUSINESS OR DOING BUSINESS IN ALABAMA.  JUDGE YORK WENT BACK AND ISSUED ILLEGAL ORDERS BASED UPON FRAUD TO COVER UP THE CRIME THEY ALL WERE LINKED TO WITHOUT NO DUE PROCESS AND ARREARS DATED BACK TO 2006 WITHOUT LACK OF STANDING FOR BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS AND THROUGH THEIR AFFILIATE FIRMS AND LAWYERS!

 

 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS GUARANTEED!

 

GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION aka GMAC MORTGAGE LLC WAS CLOSED 2.22.2017 and 2.5.2019 WHEN JUDGE YORK ISSUED AND ENFORCED HIS ILLEGAL ORDER WITHOUT DUE PROCESS PRIOR TO THE ILLEGAL FORECLOSURE JUNE 1, 2012. THE JUDGES KNEW BETTER THAT'S LINKED TO THIS CASE-COMPLIANT THEY KNEW DUE PROCESS WAS REQUIRED BY FEDERAL LAWS AND STATE LAW PRIOR TO THE ILLEGAL FORECLOSURE (6.1.2012) NOT AFTER (10.23.2012)!

 

There was never a recorded mortgage 0835002124 between Corla Jackson and GMAC prior to GMAC filing their false proof of claims in the initial bankruptcy case (05-13142 or prior to the illegal foreclosure June 1, 2012, what the Hell is going on USA-WORLD!

 

JUDGE YORK WAITED UNTIL GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION AKA GMAC MORTGAGE LLC CLOSED TO ISSUE AN ILLEGAL EJECTMENT BASED UPON FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON THE COURT KNOWING GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION AKA GMAC MORTGAGE LLC WAS NO LONGER IN BUSINESS OR DOING BUSINESS IN ALABAMA.  JUDGE YORK WENT BACK AND ISSUED ILLEGAL ORDERS BASED UPON FRAUD TO COVER UP THE CRIME THEY ALL WERE LINKED TO WITHOUT NO DUE PROCESS AND ARREARS DATED BACK TO 2006 WITHOUT LACK OF STANDING FOR BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS AND THROUGH THEIR AFFILIATE FIRMS AND LAWYERS!  THIS IS THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG GMAC BUSTED AND IT GET WORSE!

 

 

LOOK AT THIS!

 

LIKE OTHER FEDERAL COURTS-COURTS Alabama Judges Knew Bradley Arant Boult Cummings Couldn't Do The REMOVAL To District Court Ally Financial Corporation aka Trustee's Bank Had To Do It!

 

 

 

 

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. 

 

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).

 

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).

 

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. 

 

 

 

 

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.

 

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 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.).

 

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.

 

 

Discharge in Bankruptcy

A bankruptcy discharge releases the debtor from personal liability for certain specified types of debts. In other words, the debtor is no longer legally required to pay any debts that are discharged. The discharge is a permanent order prohibiting the creditors of the debtor from taking any form of collection action on discharged debts. The bankruptcy discharge varies depending on the type of case a debtor files: chapter 7, 11, 12, or 13. There are some debts that generally cannot be eliminated such as student loans, domestic support obligations, child support and alimony and some taxes.

 

Debtor Education - Required to Receive Discharge

The term "debtor education" generally refers to the instructional course in personal financial management in chapters 7 and 13 that an individual debtor must complete before a discharge is entered. This is a separate course, not to be confused with the pre-petition credit counseling requirement. While the credit counseling must take place before you file, the debtor education must take place after you file before the discharge can be entered.

Approved Financial Management Instructional Courses

 

 

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).  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.   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.

 

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.).


Void order may be attacked, either directly or collaterally, at any time, In re Estate of Steinfield, 630 N.E.2d 801, certiorari denied, See also Steinfeld v. Hoddick, 513 U.S. 809, (Ill. 1994). Void order which is one entered by court which lacks jurisdiction over parties or subject matter, or lacks inherent power to enter judgment, or order procured by fraud, can be attacked at any time, in any court, either directly or collaterally, provided that party is properly before court, People ex rel. Brzica v. Village of Lake Barrington, 644 N.E.2d 66 (Ill.App. 2 Dist. 1994).


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.).

 

 

 

 

THIS IS THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG GMAC BUSTED AND IT GET WORSE!

 

THE EVIDENCE SPEAKS FOR ITSELF AND MORE GUARANTEED READ MORE!

 

GMAC DIDN'T OWN CORLA JACKSON PROPERTY JUNE 2006 OR MARCH 2005 THAT THE ILLEGAL RELIEF WAS BASED UPON UNDER JUDGE SHULMAN.  WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON HERE!

 

WHY WAS ALABAMA JUDGES FORCING VICTIMS TO GIVE GMAC MORTGAGE LLC MONEY UNDER FALSE PRETENSE UNDER FABRICATED MORTGAGES LINKED TO BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS, SIROTE & PERMUTT P.C., THEIR AFFILIATE FIRMS AND LAWYERS BASED UPON FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON THE COURT'S THAT IS THE BIG DAM QUESTION EVERYONE WANT TO KNOW THAT HAS BEEN FOLLOWING THIS CASE FROM (2005-2019).

 

CLEARLY JUDGE SHULMAN-JUDGES ISSUED ILLEGAL ORDERS FOR BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS, SIROTE & PERMUTT P.C., THEIR AFFILIATE FIRMS AND LAWYERS LINKED TO THIS WHITE COLLAR CRIME ROBBERY THAT WAS COVERED UP WITH ILLEGAL ORDERS BASED UPON FRAUD....

 

 

 

THE EVIDENCE SPEAKS FOR ITSELF ABOVE GUARANTEED READ MORE!

 

THE ILLEGAL RELIEF ISSUED BY JUDGE SHULMAN IS FRAUD HE ILLEGALLY ISSUED AN ORDER BASED UPON ARREARS DATED BACK TO 2006" GMAC DIDN'T OWN CORLA JACKSON PROPERTY IN (2006) AND CORLA JACKSON WASN'T BEHIND IN PAYMENTS IN (2006) PERIOD, SHE WAS IN BANKRUPTCY CASE 05-13142...

 

GMAC DIDN'T OWN CORLA JACKSON PROPERTY (2005) or (2006) THAT JUDGE SHULMAN ILLEGAL ORDERS WERE BASED UPON. HOW CAN ANY JUDGE ISSUE AN ORDER-RELIEF ON ARREARS DATED BACK TO 2005 or 2006 WITHOUT GMAC HAVING LACK OF STANDING. 

 

GMAC FILED FALSE PROOF OF CLAIMS: CLEARLY THE EVIDENCE ABOVE PROVES JUDGE SHULMAN-JUDGES ISSUED ILLEGAL ORDERS BASED UPON FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON THE COURT ON A GMAC FABRICATED MORTGAGE 0835002124 THAT WAS ILLEGALLY CREATED JANUARY 3, 2005 WITH ILLEGAL ARREARS ATTACHED DATED BACK TO 2005-2006, WITHOUT GMAC OWNING THE PROPERTY IN 2005 OR 2006 OR PRIOR TO THEIR ILLEGAL FORECLOSURE!   CLICK HERE

 

 

 

CORLA JACKSON WAS FORCED TO GIVE GMAC MONEY UNDER FALSE PRETENSE AND THEY COVERED THIS UP KNOWING THEY HAD ALREADY EMBEZZLED THE MONEY THEY FILED THEIR FALSE PROOF OF CLAIMS BASED UPON AND CONTINUED TO STEAL THE PROPERTY UNDER FALSE PRETENSE-MORE FOR ILLEGAL PROFITS TO ROB GOVERNMENT AND MORE!

 

 

 

 

GMAC FILED FALSE PROOF OF CLAIMS IN THE INITIAL BANKRUPTCY CASE 05-13142 IN (2005) WITHOUT LACK OF STANDING THEIR PROOF OF CLAIMS WERE DISALLOWED UNDER THEIR FABRICATED MORTGAGE 0835002124 AND THEY KNOW THIS' ITS RECORDED!...

 

MOBILE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT (JUDGE YORK'S) ILLEGAL ORDER DATED 2.22.2017 STATES GMAC PURCHASED THE PROPERTY IN A FORECLOSURE SALE JUNE 1, 2012.  THIS CRIME WAS INITIATED JANUARY 3, 2005 WITHOUT LACK OF STANDING, THE LAW FIRMS AND CORRUPT JUDGES LINK TO THIS CRIME KEEP LYING OVER AND OVER AGAIN TO COVER UP THIS WHITE COLLAR CRIME ROBBERY!

 

GMAC MORTGAGE LLC WAS CLOSED (2.22.2017) WHEN JUDGE YORK ISSUED HIS ILLEGAL ORDERS BASED UPON FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON THE COURT, THIS IS REAL BAD AND IT GET WORSE GUARANTEED!

 

SEE EVIDENCE READ MORE...

 

 

1    2    3   4   5   6    7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17

 

It is illegal to knowingly and with intent to defraud, file a bankruptcy petition or other document, or make a false or fraudulent representation, claim.
18 US 157 also applies to involuntary bankruptcies. This statute is based on the wire, mail, and bank fraud statutes. See 18 US 1341, 1343, and 1344, respectively.
• Perjury. 18 US 1621. Perjury is punished by a maximum of 5 years in prison.
• Conspiracy. 18 US 371. Conspiracy has a maximum 5-year prison sentence (or less if the underlying crime has a lesser penalty, such as a misdemeanor).
• Wire fraud. 18 US 1341. This offense has a possible sentence of 20 years in prison, or 30 years with a possible $1,000,000 fine where the offense impacts a financial institution.
• Mail fraud. 18 US 1343. Mail fraud has the same penalties as wire fraud.
• Bank fraud. 18 US 1344. Bank fraud is a criminal offense with a possible penalty of 30 years imprisonment and $1,000,000 fine.
• RICO (racketeering). 18 US 1962. The sentence for a RICO charge can be 20 years incarceration.
• Finally, 18 US 157 prohibits any scheme to defraud another, or attempt, during bankruptcy. The sentence for this charge is a maximum 5 years in federal prison.
It is illegal to knowingly and with intent to defraud, file a bankruptcy petition or other document, or make a false or fraudulent representation, claim. 18 US 157 also applies to involuntary bankruptcies. This statute is based on the wire, mail, and bank fraud statutes. See 18 US 1341, 1343, and 1344, respectively.
In a federal prosecution for conspiracy, the defendant is typically charged with two offenses. First, he is charged with conspiracy. Second, he is charged with the offense that he and his co-conspirators were conspiring to commit. This is known as the object of the conspiracy. For instance, a person charged in connection with a drug or burglary.
• Conspiracy against the rights of citizens. See 18 USC 241. This offense has a sentence of 10 years in prison.
• Conspiring in bribery of sporting contests. See 18 USC 224.
Under 18 USC 371, a person can be charged with conspiracy based on two elements
1. An agreement to commit a criminal offense.
2. An overt act that furthers the conspiracy.
The US Attorney does not have to prove that the agreement was in writing. It can be verbal and still subject the parties to criminal liability.
It is not a violation of double jeopardy for the defendant to be prosecuted and sentenced for both the conspiracy and the offense he agreed to commit.
Each is a separate and distinct offense.
 

 

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).


The Court Has a Responsibility to Correct a Void Judgment: The statute of limitations does not apply to a suit in equity to vacate a void judgment. (Cadenasso v. Bank of Italy, p. 569; Estate of Pusey, 180 Cal. 368, 374 [181 P. 648].) This rule holds as to all void judgments. In the other two cases cited, People v.Massengale and In re Sandel, the courts confirmed the judicial power and responsibility to correct void judgments.

GROUNDS: RULE 60(b) (1) (2) (3) (4) (6) 60(d) (1) (2) (3) and FRAP 25(a)(2)(B) and RULE 17(a)(1) and 9(b).

NO DUE PROCESS PRIOR TO THE ILLEGAL FORECLOSURE JUNE 1, 2012 AND FRAUD-FRAUD UPON THE COURT
 

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.).


It has also been held that"It is not necessary to take any steps to have a void judgment reversed, vacated, or set aside, It may be impeached in any action direct or, collateral.' Holder v. Scott, 396 S.W.2d 906, (Tex.Civ.App., Texarkana, 1965, writ ref., n.r.e.). A court cannot confer jurisdiction where none existed and cannot make a void proceeding valid. It is clear and well established law that a void order can be challenged in any court", OLD WAYNE MUT. L. ASSOC. v. McDONOUGH, 204 U. S. 8, 27 S. Ct. 236 (1907).
 

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).
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). 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.
 

 

 

I Can't See The Supreme Court Not Hearing This Complaint On (No Due Process) Violating Their Own Constitutional Laws.  In Addition To This, The United States Federal Government, Wall Street Investors and More Has Been Robbed Around The SEC, Federal Reserve, CFPB, FDIC, OCC, Consent-Enforcement Orders Which Has Been Violated, As Well As Securities Laws-More.  Victims Are Being Robbed Which Cannot Be Ignored Or Denied Because Its Recorded Facts!  READ MORE

 

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).

 

 

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).

 

Judgments entered where court lacked either subject matter or personal jurisdiction, or that were otherwise entered in violation of due process of law, must be set aside, Jaffe and Asher v. Van Brunt, S.D.N.Y.1994, 158 F.R.D. 278. We have both violations for a Void Judgment in this particular case out of Alabama. There was no Summary Judgment, Remand or Due Process Prior To The Illegal Wrongful Foreclosure (June 1, 2012).

 

The Court Has A Responsibility To Correct a Void Judgment: The statute of limitations does not apply to a suit in equity to vacate a void judgment. (Cadenasso v. Bank of Italy, p. 569; Estate of Pusey, 180 Cal. 368, 374 [181 P. 648].) This rule holds as to all void judgments. In the other two cases cited, People v. Massengale and In re Sandel, the courts confirmed the judicial power and responsibility to correct void judgments.

 

 

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.).

 

 

Governed Laws and Security Laws were violated 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...  1    4    5

 

 

 

 

THIS IS THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG GMAC BUSTED AND IT GET WORSE!

THE EVIDENCE SPEAKS FOR ITSELF AND MORE GUARANTEED READ MORE...

 

 

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.).

 

CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS INVOLVED: Fraud on the court is one of the most serious violations that can occur in a court of law. If fraud on the court occurs, the effect is that the entire case is voided or cancelled and" Any ruling or judgment that the court has issued will be void. CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS INVOLVED:
 

The Fourteenth Amendment states: No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. U.S. Const. amend.


CODE OF ALABAMA: 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 judgment may not be rendered in violation of constitutional protections. The validity of a judgment may be affected by a failure to give the constitutionally required due process notice and an opportunity to be heard. Earle v. McVeigh, 91 US 503, 23 L Ed 398. See also Restatements, Judgments ' 4(b). Prather vLoyd, 86 Idaho 45, 382 P2d 910. The limitations inherent in the requirements of due process and equal protection of the law extend to judicial as well as political branches of government, so that a judgment may not be rendered in violation of those constitutional limitations and guarantees. Hanson v Denckla, 357 US 235, 2 L Ed 2d 1283, 78 S Ct 1228.


See: 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.
 

See: 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.

 

See: 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.).

 

SEE: CODE OF ALABAMA:  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.).

 

 

See: 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.

 

The Fourteenth Amendment states: No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. U.S. Const. amend.


 

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.).

 

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 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).

 

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).

 

 

A judgment may not be rendered in violation of constitutional protections. The validity of a judgment may be affected by a failure to give the constitutionally required due process notice and an opportunity to be heard. Earle v. McVeigh, 91 US 503, 23 L Ed 398. See also Restatements, Judgments ' 4(b). Prather vLoyd, 86 Idaho 45, 382 P2d 910. The limitations inherent in the requirements of due process and equal protection of the law extend to judicial as well as political branches of government, so that a judgment may not be rendered in violation of those constitutional limitations and guarantees. Hanson v Denckla, 357 US 235, 2 L Ed 2d 1283, 78 S Ct 1228.

 

 

I Can't See The Supreme Court Not Hearing This Complaint On (No Due Process) Violating Their Own Constitutional Laws.  In Addition To This, The United States Federal Government, Wall Street Investors and More Has Been Robbed Around The SEC, Federal Reserve, CFPB, FDIC, OCC, Consent-Enforcement Orders Which Has Been Violated, As Well As Securities Laws-More.  Victims Are Being Robbed Which Cannot Be Ignored Or Denied Because Its Recorded Facts!  READ MORE

 

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).

 

 

1    2    3   4   5   6    7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18 

 

 

 

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.   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.

 

 

GMAC WAS CLOSED WHEN JUDGE YORK AND JUDGES ISSUED THEIR ILLEGAL ORDERS ITS WAS RECORDED FACTS AND MORE SINCE 2.15.2013...

 

 

Website Under Construction While Being Updated   1   2   3   4    5   25  26

 

 

THIS IS THE WORKSITE LINK BREWING AND MORE!