Gulf Coast Tribune.Com

www.socialmediafeed.co

 

BREAKING NEWS CONFIRMED BACKED BY THE EVIDENCE AND MORE GUARANTEED

 

Corla Jackson Has Retained The Top Of The Line Attorney Specialized In Securities Fraud Stolen Mortgages Backed By Securities and More. This Lawyer Fight To Uphold Constitutional Laws and More Regardless Of Race-Gender Its On!

 

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. 

 


 You Can't Convince Me or Anyone That The Judges That Issued The Illegal Orders Didn't Knot GMAC Mortgage LLC Was Closed and They Were Withdrawn From Doing Business In Alabama When District Court and Judge York Issued Their Illegal Orders (6.21.2016).  Alabama Judges Committed Civil Fraud Upon The Court With Illegal Orders (GMAC Mortgage LLC) Didn't Exist That They Issued Their Illegal Orders Based Upon, So That Is Fraud aka Fraud Upon The Court.  Victims Cannot Force Judges To Uphold Federal Laws and State Laws, The Dam Company's Didn't Exist When They Issued Their Illegal Orders February After GMAC Mortgage Was Sold and Closed-Withdrawn From Doing Business In Alabama So We Know The Judge Committed Fraud Upon The Court and Was Stealing Victims Property Their State Firms and Lawyers Were Profiting and Benefiting From Using Deceptive Practices Outside The Law, Which Is A Federal Crime Seizing Victims Property's Without Lack Of Standing, Multiple Ways. 

 

Under Federal law, when any officer of the court has committed “fraud upon the Court”, the orders and judgment of that court are void or of no legal force or effect.  Federal law requires the automatic disqualification of a Federal judge under certain circumstances. In 1994, the U.S. Supreme Court held that “Disqualification is required if an objective observer would entertain reasonable questions about the judge’s impartiality.  If a judge’s attitude or state of mind leads a detached observer to conclude that a fair and impartial hearing is unlikely, the judge must be qualified. 
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.....

 

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.).  

 

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.

 

GMAC MORTGAGE LLC and OCWEN ARE SERVICERS

1

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.

 

 

Prior To GMAC Mortgage LLC Being Sold In (2012-2013) The Orders The Judges Issued Linked To The Corla Jackson Case-Complaints Were Fraud, Those Company's Had Withdrawn From Doing Business In Alabama.  After The Other Company's Withdrawn From Alabama Servicing Mortgages The Law Firms Allowed GMAC Mortgage To Break Federal Laws Around The SEC-Federal Reserve and More and They Continued Robbing Victims The FEDS Wall Street Investors and More Which Is A Federal Crime. 

 

The Judges Committed Fraud Upon The Court To Cover Up The Crime Their State and State Law Firms Had Committed Knowing GMAC Mortgage LLC Had Withdrawn From Doing Business In Alabama Which Cannot Be Ignored Or Denied Its Recorded. 

 

This Is What They Covered Up. The Evidence Below Speaks For Itself. How Did The Judges Inside Alabama Jurisdiction Issue Illegal Orders For GMAC Mortgage and Bradley Arant Boult Cummings Without Being Busted and Reported To Wall Street Investors-SEC-Federal Reserve and More.

 

 

The Police Dpt. Had A Fiduciary Duty Prior To Doing Illegal Ejectments-Evictions On Victims To See If GMAC Mortgage LLC Were Open or Closed, As You Can See That Didn't Happen, Which Cannot Be Ignored Or Denied.  GMAC Mortgage LLC Was Under A Purchase Agreement and Had Been Sold Between (2012-2013).  GMAC Mortgage Was Closed and Had (Withdrawn) From Doing Business In Alabama On (6.21.2016) and Victims Were Still Being Robbed, OCWEN didn't Report This or That Victims Didn't Have Independent Foreclosure Reviews Instead They Robbed The Victims and Kept The Money or The Law Firms or State Of Alabama Got The Victims Money, Its Either One Of The Other or Both. 

 

The State, State Firms, Lawyers and Judges Inside Alabama Jurisdiction That Issued All Those Illegal Orders On Closed Trust, Closed Businesses, and More Without Victims Being Paid For Massive Damages To Date Cannot Be Ignored or Denied Its A Crime!  CFPB Consent and Enforcement Orders Were Violated and More, Victims Were Insured Which Prevented Foreclosures In Many Case and Complaints Their Firms and State Were Profiting From Based Upon Fraud and Fraud Upon Courts With Illegal Orders. 

 

BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS COMMITTED CIVIL FRAUD UPON THE COURT AND STATED CORLA JACKSON ONLY SUED GMAC MORTGAGE LLC IS WHERE THE PROBLEM IS AT...

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings had a clerk served as GMAC Mortgage LLC as the (Headquarters Principal Office) to their Registered Agent Office In Alabama, versus serving the (Headquarters Principal Office) located at (100 WITMER ROAD HORSHAM, PA. 19044). GMAC Mortgage Headquarters was never served by law.

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings stated there were no other parties involved other than GMAC Mortgage LLC, this was a lie and its recorded on the Certificate of Service.  GMAC Mortgage LLC was only served a copy of the complaint filed against (GMAC) Mortgage Unit because this crime initiated January 3, 2005 without lack of standing January 3, 2005 and they knew this and covered it up based upon fraud and fraud upon the court with illegal orders which cannot be ignored or denied its recorded facts. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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.

 

CORLA JACKSON PAID THE COURTS FOR A DEMAND BY JURY TRIAL and SERVE SERVICE OF PROCESS TO THE FOLLOWING COMPANY’S LISTED BELOW.

 

GMAC MORTGAGE aka GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION ET, AL.  PRINCIPAL OFFICE MAILING ADDRESS FOR SERVICE OF PROCESS: 100 WITMER RD HORSHAM, PA. 19044

 

CORLA JACKSON SERVED GMAC MORTGAGE LLC A COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SHE FILED AGAINST GMAC MORTGAGE aka GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION ET, AL., THROUGH THEIR REGISTERED AGENT: CSC LAWYERS INCORPORATING SVC INC 150 S PERRY ST MONTGOMERY, AL 36104.

 

GMAC MORTGAGE LLC WAS A SERVICER NOT A BANK THEY DIDN’T OWN THE FABRICATED MORTGAGE 0835002124 THAT GMAC MORTGAGE CREATED JANUARY 3, 2005 WITHOUT LACK OF STANDING WITHOUT RECORDING or CONVEYING it between CORLA JACKSON and GMAC from 2005-2012.  Because of this, it SLANDERED and CLOUDED CORLA JACKSON TITLE TO HER PROPERTY DESTROYED HER CREDIT and MORE causing massive affirmative and direct damages to date.

 

GMAC MORTGAGE LLC WAS THE SERVICER, THEY COULDN’T ANSWER OR FILE A COMPLAINTS OR A PROOF OF CLAIMS IN ANY OF THE BANKRUPTCY CASES OR CASES PERIOD.

                          

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.

 

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

 

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.) .

 

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.).

 

 

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).
 

 

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

 

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

 

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).

 

 

PRIOR TO 3.13.2019

The Initial Original Complaint under GMAC Mortgage Corporation Mortgage 0835002124 is recorded in the initial Bankruptcy Case 05-13142.  GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC Violated the Court Orders and the Automatic Stay in reference to the Order issued March 1, 2006 using deceptive practices. 

 

The Judge in the initial bankruptcy case 05-13142 issued an Order telling GMAC Mortgage Corporation the terms and conditions they could file a proof of claim under because GMAC Mortgage Corporation Law Firm Sirote & Permutt P.C. and Lawyer kept ignoring what she was requesting from them in order to file a proof of claim in the initial bankruptcy case 05-13142 prior to the order issued March 1, 2006. 

 

The first Motion For Relief From Automatic Stay was filed (August 26, 2005) it was Denied without prejudice on (September 22, 2005).

 

The second Motion For Relief From Automatic Stay was filed (January 20, 2006) it was Denied without prejudice on (February 15, 2006).

 

Corla Jackson Bankruptcy Case 05-13142 was October 25, 2005 based upon the terms and conditions in that Order Confirming Corla Jackson Chapter 13 Plan. GMAC was Denied without prejudice on (February 15, 2006).  The terms and conditions without prejudice to file their proof of claim on was spelled out in the Order issued March 1, 2006.  GMAC Mortgage Corporation had not been granted a leave to file a proof of claim on arrears or direct payments from Corla Jackson until GMAC Mortgage Corporation provided the Court-Judge with the following terms and conditions in the Order Issued March 1, 2006

 

The Order March 1, 2006 specifically stated GMAC is granted to file a Proof of Claim based upon the terms and conditions of the Order issued March 1, 2006, because Judge Mahoney denied GMAC prior proof of claims without prejudice and their lift from automatic stay’s to foreclosure on Corla Jackson and her property. 

 

GMAC Mortgage Corporation, its Law Firm and Lawyer Violated the Judges Orders March 1, 2006 and corrupted bankruptcy case 05-13142 by filing a Proof Of Claim electronically on January 3, 2006 without the Court’s Order and the Agreement between Corla Jackson and GMAC. 

 

GMAC Mortgage Corporation filed a proof of claim electronically without the terms and conditions of an order being issued after March 1, 2006, confirming the Debtors Chapter 13 Plain with the Agreement between Corla Jackson and GMAC.  This is what GMAC’s Law Firm Covered Up, the Violation of a Court Order and a Violation of an Automatic Stay.  They did all this around the Judge with a Trustee. 

 

The Judge Mahoney didn’t know what was going on until Corla Jackson bankruptcy Case had to be Reinstated (June 27, 2007) because she never issued an Order granting GMAC Mortgage Corporation a leave to file a Proof of Claim after the Order March 1, 2006 confirming GMAC in the debtor Corla Jackson’s bankruptcy plan (05-13142) without the Agreement between Corla Jackson and GMAC prior to GMAC filing their proof of claims on arrears from (February 2005) through (March 1, 2006) under GMAC Mortgage Corporation mortgage (0835002124). 

 

It was later discovered GMAC had filed a False Proof of Claim, which violated the False Claims Acts and it was Bankruptcy Fraud, which was a bigger crime GMAC Mortgage Corporation didn’t own the property they illegally created their mortgage 0835002124 under January 3, 2005, they were without lack of standing, Bankruptcy Case (05-13142) was Discharged (January 20, 2010).

 

GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC never recorded or conveyed their mortgage 0835002124 between Corla Jackson and GMAC it was recorded they never recorded their mortgage 0835002124 or conveyed it to anyone but themselves.  

 

 

 

 

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.

 

 

Under Federal law, when any officer of the court has committed “fraud upon the Court”, the orders and judgment of that court are void or of no legal force or effect.  Federal law requires the automatic disqualification of a Federal judge under certain circumstances. In 1994, the U.S. Supreme Court held that “Disqualification is required if an objective observer would entertain reasonable questions about the judge’s impartiality.  If a judge’s attitude or state of mind leads a detached observer to conclude that a fair and impartial hearing is unlikely, the judge must be qualified. 
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.....

 

 

After The United States Supreme Court Approve This Rehearing Appeal On The Unconstitutional Issues Below, Corla Jackson Is Geared Up and Equipped With A Top Line Lawyer-Team That's On STANDBY Licensed in the Supreme Court Of The United States Of America to Present Her Case-Complaint from (2005-2019) Guaranteed!  GMAC Mortgage LLC Was Closed When The Orders Were Issued and OCWEN Didn't Pay To The Terms and Conditions Of The Consent-Enforcement Orders Which Is A Bigger Crime. Read More: 1    2    3 

 

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

 

Officers of the court include: lawyers, judges, referees, and those appointed; guardian ad litem, parenting time expeditors, mediators, rule 114 neutrals, evaluators, administrators, special appointees, and any others whose influence are part of the judicial mechanism.  Fraud upon the court" has been defined by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to "embrace that species of fraud which does, or attempts to, defile the court itself, or is a fraud perpetrated by officers of the court so that the judicial machinery can not perform in the usual manner its impartial task of adjudging cases that are presented for adjudication".  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.

 

Jackson Says Thank God They Been Following Her Complaint and Story Online Through Social Media From The Beginning To Date.  Most Of Them Said" They Thought Corla Jackson Was Paid When She Was Not Paid For All Her Damages and Insured Covered Losses To Date.  What They Did Was Obtained Illegal Order To Fake An Illegal Foreclosure On Insured Covered Losses and More For Illegal Profits At Corla Jackson Expense and they Covered It Up In An Hate Crime Act and More For Exposing Them To Date. 

 

No One In Alabama Investigated This Complaint To See If Corla Jackson Had Been Paid and All Policy's Invoked To Prevent An Illegal Foreclosure On A Slandered and Clouded Title Multiple Ways.  The Law Firms, Lawyers and Judges Linked To This Crime Conspired Together That Is Why It Took So Long To Uncover This Case Which Is Recorded Through The Judicial System So No One Can Lie, Jackson Forced Them To Leave The Paper Trail On The Same Mortgage Number 0835002124 From (2005-2019). 

 

No One Investigated The Servicers To See If They Paid Corla Jackson Based Upon The Terms and Conditions In The Consent and Enforcement Orders Issued by CFPB the Federal Reserve and More.  The Case Was Blocked From Proceeding To Trial Using Deceptive Practices That Corrupted The Cases Is What Happened Here, Because Judges Issued Illegal Orders Based Upon Fraud and Fraud Upon The Courts For The Law Firms and Lawyers Linked To This Crime, Operation Outside The Law That They Took Their Oath Under, They Were Not Impartial Because They Were Involved! 

 

The Crooked Law Firms Linked To This Case-Complaint To Date Continued To Commit The Same Crime Over Again With Their Servicing Clients Except, This Time Far Worse Than Before and The Corrupt Judges and Lawyers Link To GMAC Mortgage Corporation ET, AL.  The Law Firms and Judge Illegal Orders Were Based Upon Fraud and Fraud Upon Courts Guaranteed!  Don't Worry The Team Is Not From Alabama, They Covered Up The Crime and Caused Massive Damages On The Theft Of Property and More, Which Is A Bigger Crime Far Worse Than Anyone Can Imagine!

 

Corla Jackson Giving You Update Prior To Rehearing. 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 Mobile County Circuit Courts Did Not Have Jurisdiction Over Jackson Original Complaint Anymore" Involving Any Issues Between (Corla Jackson And GMAC Mortgage) And Its Subsidiary's Linked To This Case Period Because" a notice of removal was signed pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal Laws" Which Act As An Original Complaint Under" 72 of title 28, U.S.C.

 

GMAC Mortgage LLC was closed when all the illegal orders were issued and when Judge Martin Glenn Expunged her Proof Of Claim, they all seen that GMAC Mortgage 0835002124 was never recorded and conveyed between Corla Jackson and GMAC since January 3, 2005 or prior to the illegal foreclosure June 1, 2012.  There was no due process, summary judgment or remand filed through the courts in case 12-00111 prior to the illegal foreclosure June 1, 2012, this case was pending a Demand by Jury Trial.  Read More 1   

 

Corla Jackson was mention on page (8) bottom footer Read More  2

 

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.).  Judge Martin Glenn Denied Victims Lift Of Automatic Stays To Proceed To Trial On Affirmative Damages and Judge Dubose Block Victims On State Damages Based Upon Fraud-Fraud Upon Court. 

 

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.).  

 

Read More

 

 

The Judges link to this crime knew Corla Jackson never got her Demand by Jury Trial styled as she filed her complaint on her motion Corla Jackson vs. G MAC Mortgage Corporation ET, AL, because the law firm and Alabama Judges changed the name on the complaint and added GMAC Mortgage LLC only to block this case from being heard.

 

The Orders that were issued in this case is recorded as GMAC Mortgage LLC vs. Corla Jackson on an Eviction Action and Ejectment without Corla Jackson Demand by Jury Trial styled Corla Jackson vs. GMAC Mortgage Corporation ET, AL., to allow her to sue all the proper parties to date linked to this crime.  Ally Financial aka Ally Bank were not in bankruptcy and the case should have proceed to trial on all the parties that were not in bankruptcy in New York if they knew Martin Glenn were committing crimes against Victims without independent foreclosure reviews and more. Corla Jackson name was mention on page (8) at the bottom footer notes in this complaint.  Read More

 

 

Corla Jackson sued GMAC Mortgage Corporation ET, AL., meaning there were others involved other than GMAC Mortgage LLC all of them were not in Bankruptcy in New York under Judge Martin Glenn.  Corla Jackson was denied a lift of automatic stay to proceed to trial against the others that were not in bankruptcy under Judge Martin Glenn in New York, this violated Corla Jackson Civil Rights as well as Constitutional Laws and more. 

 

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.

 

 

Under Federal law, when any officer of the court has committed “fraud upon the Court”, the orders and judgment of that court are void or of no legal force or effect.  Federal law requires the automatic disqualification of a Federal judge under certain circumstances. In 1994, the U.S. Supreme Court held that “Disqualification is required if an objective observer would entertain reasonable questions about the judge’s impartiality.  If a judge’s attitude or state of mind leads a detached observer to conclude that a fair and impartial hearing is unlikely, the judge must be qualified. 
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.....

 

 

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.).  Judge Martin Glenn Denied Victims Lift Of Automatic Stays To Proceed To Trial On Affirmative Damages and Judge Dubose Block Victims On State Damages Based Upon Fraud-Fraud Upon Court. 

 

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: 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.

 

State courts, like federal courts, have a constitutional obligation to safeguard personal liberties  and to uphold federal law.” Stone v Powell, 428 US 465, 483 n 35, 96 S. Ct 3037, 49 L Ed. 2d 1067 (1976)” Any judge who does not comply with his oath to the  Constitution of the United States, wars against that Constitution and engages in violation of the Supreme Law of the Land. If a judge does not fully comply with the Constitution, then his orders are void, In re Sawyer, 124 U.S. 200 (1888), he is without jurisdiction, and he/she has engaged in an act or acts of treason.” U.S. v. Will, 449 U.S. 200, 216, 101 S. Ct. 471, 66 Ed.2d 392, 406 (1980); Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat) 264, 404, 5 L.Ed 257 (1821)...
 

 

 

Under Federal Laws and State Laws Section 6-6-227: Persons to be made parties; rights of persons not parties.  All persons shall be made parties who have, or claim, any interest which would be affected by the declaration, and no declaration shall prejudice the rights of persons not parties to the proceeding. In any proceeding which involves the validity of a municipal ordinance, or franchise, such municipality shall be made a party and shall be entitled to be heard; and if the statute, ordinance, or franchise is alleged to be unconstitutional, the Attorney General of the state shall also be served with a copy of the proceeding and be entitled to be heard. (Acts 1935, No. 355, p. 777; Code 1940, T. 7, §166.).

 

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.

 

GMAC MORTGAGE LLC and OCWEN ARE SERVICERS

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.
 

Section 6-5-255: Failure or refusal of purchaser to reconvey title. If the purchaser or his or her vendee or transferee fails or refuses to reconvey to such party entitled and desiring to redeem such title as the party acquired by the sale and purchase, such party so paying or tendering payment shall thereupon have the right to file in the circuit court having jurisdiction thereof a complaint to enforce his or her rights of redemption.
 

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.). 

 

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).

 

 

At the time this crime was initiated and occurred January 3, 2005, GMAC had had not separated its servicing unit from GMAC it was later separated it into Residential Capital Corporation aka Residential Capital LLC.  The subsidiary servicers were licensed under GMAC'S  Residential Capital Corporation aka Residential Capital LLC later.  Residential Capital Corporation aka Residential Capital LLC was the servicer for GMAC Bank Ally Financial Corporation, they licensed subsidiary's under the umbrella of Residential Capital Corporation aka Residential Capital LLC, whom was licensed under GMAC-GMAC Bank Ally Financial Corporation.

 

GMAC Mortgage LLC was a servicer licensed under Residential Capital Corporation aka Residential Capital LLC, whom was licensed under GMAC-GMAC Bank Ally Financial Corporation.  GMAC Mortgage LLC was closed with the illegal orders were issued which is fraud and fraud upon the court, the Judges knew this because it was recorded and Corla Jackson told them GMAC Mortgage LLC was closed and they ignored her.  

 

THE LIES IS OVER ALL THIS ___ CAME OUT PRIOR TO THE REHEARING IN THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT APPEAL.  THE LAW FIRM LINKED TO THIS CRIME HAD A DAM CLERK CORRUPT THE CASE WHICH IS BEING WATCHED NOW!  PRIOR TO THE NEW DISCOVERY THEY WERE COMMITTING FRAUD  THE LAW FIRM HAD A CLERK TO HELP THEM AND GMAC MORTGAGE LLC WAS STILL OPERATING IN ALABAMA 2.5.2019 AFTER THEY CLOSED. 

 

THIS IS A BIGGER CRIME THE JUDGES COMMITTED FOR THEMSELVES TO PREVENT PEOPLE FROM FINDING OUT WHAT THEY DID TO DATE, WHICH CANNOT BE IGNORED OR DENIED THEY DIDN'T HAVE LACK OF STANDING FEBRUARY 22, 2017 ON AN ILLEGAL EJECTMENT OR A REMAND TO DO AN ILLEGAL EJECTMENT IN VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS AND MORE AND THEY KNEW THIS!  EVERY ORDER ISSUED AFTER GMAC MORTGAGE LLC WAS CLOSED IS VOID MULTIPLE WAYS GUARANTEED...

 

CORLA JACKSON KNEW WHAT THEY DID BUT DIDN'T HAVE ALL THE EVIDENCE BECAUSE THE STORY WAS STILL UNFOLDING AND MORE.  START SHUTTING DOWN OCWEN, ALTISOURCE AND HLSS GUARANTEED!

 

ITS CONFIRMED THE JUDGE LINKED TO THIS CRIME DID IN FACT COMMIT FRAUD UPON THE COURT TO COVER UP THE CRIMES THEY COMMITTED LINKED TO THIS CASE-COMPLAINT TO DATE and MORE GUARANTEED... 

 

JACKSON SAYS SHE GOING TO TELL THE TRUTH JUDGE MARTIN GLENN STATED IN WRITING REGARDLESS OF THE LAWYERS WEATHER CORLA JACKSON WAS TELLING THE TRUTH HE WASN'T GOING TO GIVE HER CASE WHICH VIOLATED CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS AND MORE ITS A FEDERAL CRIME NOT TO MENTION ITS UNCONSTITUTIONAL!

 

IT GOT WORSE LOOK WHAT MARTIN GLENN DID WITH VICTIMS PROPERTY'S TIED UP THIS THIS ___ ON INSURED COVERED LOSSES AND MORE.  NO WONDER HE ISSUED ALL THE ILLEGAL ORDERS AGAINST JACKSON MOTIONS HE HAD SOLD HER PROPERTY AND LIED ABOUT IT USING DECEPTIVE PRACTICES BY DOING THIS WHEN HE KNEW BETTER.  

 

MARTIN GLENN KNEW VICTIMS NEVER HAD INDEPENDENT FORECLOSURE REVIEWS AND THE LAW FIRMS AND LAWYERS WERE LYING BECAUSE HE WAS THE INDEPENDENT FORECLOSURE REVIEW AND EVERYTHING WHICH WAS ILLEGAL.  MARTIN GLENN BLOCKED VICTIMS AND BUSINESSES FROM PROCEEDING TO TRIAL BASED UPON FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON THE COURT IN NEW YORK AND DID THIS! 

 

THE FRICKING LIES IS OVER GMAC MORTGAGE LLC WAS SOLD 11.21.2012.  THEY WENT BACK AND TRIED TO FIX THE MESS AND IT GOT WORSE VICTIMS GOVERNMENT WALL STREET INVESTORS TRUST AND MORE HAS BEEN ROBBED. MARTIN GLENN KNEW VICTIMS CASES AND COMPLAINTS WERE PENDING TRIAL PRIOR TO SIGNING THIS ILLEGAL ORDER TO SALE VICTIMS PROPERTY'S WITHOUT DUE PROCESS, IT WAS RECORDED THE LAW FIRMS AND LAWYERS WERE LYING AS WELL AS JUDGES LINKED TO THE CRIMES. 

 

CORLA JACKSON PROPERTY WAS PAID OFF IN FULL WHEN SHE WAS ROBBED SECURED BY ALL HER INSURANCE POLICY'S WHICH PREVENTED A FORECLOSURE GUARANTEED" THAT IS WHY SHE KEPT FIGHTING TO DATE THIS WAS A WHITE COLLAR CRIME ROBBERY CARRIED OUT WITH CORRUPT JUDGES ILLEGAL ORDERS AND THEY WAS TRYING TO COVER UP THE CRIME TO SAVE THEMSELVES NOT VICTIMS OR CORLA JACKSON ITS CRYSTAL CLEAR, THEY VIOLATED CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS CIVIL RIGHTS AND MORE MULTIPLE WAYS GUARANTEED !

 

READ MORE  1    2    3

 

 

How Did The Judges In Alabama Issue Orders To GMAC Mortgage LLC Closed The Orders Issued After GMAC Mortgage LLC Closed Is Fraud Because GMAC Mortgage LLC Was Closed and They Never Recorded and Conveyed Their Mortgage Between Corla Jackson and GMAC Mortgage Corporation ET, AL., January 3, 2005 or Prior To The Illegal Foreclosure June 1, 2012 Without The Demand By Jury Trial As Jackson Paid For January 18, 2012 Styled Corla Jackson vs. GMAC Mortgage Corporation ET, AL. 

 

GMAC Mortgage Corporation ET, AL., Didn't Have A Summary Judgment, Remand and They Didn't Serve Due Process Through The Courts, Prior To Their Illegal Foreclosure June 1, 2012.  Both Complaints Was STAYED May 31, 2012, Which Was Violated and Never Recorded or Reported by The Courts or Judge In Case (12-00111).  How Did They Give Orders On A Closed Company Anyway, It Was Illegal.  Every Order Issued After GMAC Mortgage Sold Its Servicing Unit Is Void.  GMAC Mortgage LLC Was Closed When The Orders Were Issued Which Is Fraud and Void! 

 

The Mobile County Circuit Courts Did Not Have Jurisdiction Over Jackson Original Complaint Anymore" Involving Any Issues Between (Corla Jackson And GMAC Mortgage) And Its Subsidiary's Linked To This Case Period Because" a notice of removal was signed pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal Laws" Which Act As An Original Complaint Under" 72 of title 28, U.S.C.

 

READ MORE 1    2    3    4    5

 

 

For the official who acted in fraud upon the court, they may very well be required to step down from their position and may even be subjected to criminal consequences like a fine or a jail sentence. It could also result in other serious consequences, such as an attorney being disbarred, or a judge being removed from service.
 

If a court official is found to be biased or prejudiced even before fraud occurs, they are required to excuse themselves from the case, and a different official must be appointed.  In some jurisdictions, a trial tainted by fraud on the court will be vacated or set aside for a certain time period (such as two years), to be “reopened” at a later date.  Fraud on the court can be devastating, especially for a party that may be waiting to receive relief from the court.

 

Violations of Oath of Office: Violation of Oath of Office is not only grounds for void judgment, but more importantly is grounds, forever barring holding of Judicial Office.” Void Judgments...
 

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.

 

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. Sturdivants house before the mortgage had been assigned to BAC.

 

 

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.


Discrimination – unfairness – bias – prejudice: Plaintiffs have been discriminated against and treated with unfairness, bias and prejudice by this Court and the opposing counsel. An uninterested, lay person, would question the partiality and neutrality of this Court” Fairness of course requires an absence of actual bias in the trial of cases. But our system of law has always endeavored to prevent even the probability of unfairness.”In re Murchinson, 349 U.S. 133, 136 (1955)...
 

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.).  Judge Martin Glenn Denied Victims Lift Of Automatic Stays To Proceed To Trial On Affirmative Damages and Judge Dubose Block Victims On State Damages Based Upon Fraud-Fraud Upon Court. 

 

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.).  

 

No man in this country is so high that he is above the law. No officer of the law may set that law at defiance with impunity. All the officers of the government from the highest to the lowest, are creatures of the law, and are bound to obey it.” Butz v. Economou, 98 S.Ct. 2894 (1978); United States v. Lee, 106 U.S. at 220, 1 S.Ct. at 261 (1882)...Further it is the obligation of every Judge to honor, abide by, and uphold not only the Constitution and laws of the State, but they are bound by the laws and Constitution of the United States as well.
 

 

THE JUDGES IN ALABAMA WERE USING (DECEPTIVE PRACTICES UNDER THE NAMES GMAC MORTGAGE LLC USED IN THE PAST (8) YEARS) AS GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION WITHOUT THE ET, AL WHICH WAS THE SAME COMPANY AS GMAC MORTGAGE LLC.  IF THIS ISN'T FRAUD UPON THE COURT WHAT IS FRAUD UPON THE COURT USING DECEPTIVE PRACTICES?  SEE EVIDENCE READ MORE 1 

 

CORLA JACKSON COMPLAINT STYLED AS CORLA JACKSON VS. GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION ET, AL, MEANING ALL PARTIES INVOLVED.  THEY TOOK ET, AL OFF THE  TO BLOCK CORLA JACKSON FROM PROCEEDING TO TRIAL AGAINST ALL PARTIES INVOLVED.  ONCE THEY DID THIS THEY LISTED GMAC MORTGAGE LLC AS THE DEFENDANT NOT CORLA JACKSON YET.  CORLA JACKSON DIDN'T KNOW WHY THEY DID THIS UNTIL LATER AND SHE DEMANDED THEY CORRECT THE NAME ON HER COMPLAINT AND SHE WAS DENIED BY JUDGE KRISTI DUBOSE IN CASE 12-00111 WHICH IS SHOWN ON THE DOCKET SHEET.  THE JUDGE AND BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS CONTROLLED CORLA JACKSON COMPLAINT WHICH IS ILLEGAL CORLA JACKSON HAD NOT NAMED GMAC MORTGAGE LLC IN HER COMPLAINT WHEN THIS ORDER WAS ISSUED MAY 31, 2012. 

 

State courts, like federal courts, have a constitutional obligation to safeguard personal liberties  and to uphold federal law.” Stone v Powell, 428 US 465, 483 n 35, 96 S. Ct 3037, 49 L Ed. 2d 1067 (1976)” Any judge who does not comply with his oath to the  Constitution of the United States, wars against that Constitution and engages in violation of the Supreme Law of the Land. If a judge does not fully comply with the Constitution, then his orders are void, In re Sawyer, 124 U.S. 200 (1888), he is without jurisdiction, and he/she has engaged in an act or acts of treason.” U.S. v. Will, 449 U.S. 200, 216, 101 S. Ct. 471, 66 Ed.2d 392, 406 (1980); Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat) 264, 404, 5 L.Ed 257 (1821)...
 

 

Under Federal law, when any officer of the court has committed “fraud upon the Court”, the orders and judgment of that court are void or of no legal force or effect.  Federal law requires the automatic disqualification of a Federal judge under certain circumstances. In 1994, the U.S. Supreme Court held that “Disqualification is required if an objective observer would entertain reasonable questions about the judge’s impartiality.  If a judge’s attitude or state of mind leads a detached observer to conclude that a fair and impartial hearing is unlikely, the judge must be qualified. 
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.....

 

 

 

CORLA JACKSON PRO SE PLAINTIFF DIDN'T INCORRECTLY NAMED THE DEFENDANTS AS GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION IN HER PLEADINGS, BECAUSE SHE NAMED HER PLEADING AS GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION ET, AL AND HAD NOT NAMED THE SERVICERS YET BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT A BANK AND THEY DIDN'T OWN HER PROPERTY WHEN THEY CREATED THEIR MORTGAGE 0835002124 ON JANUARY 3, 2005 AS SHOWN IN BANKRUPTCY CASE 05-13142.  READ MORE

 

THERE WAS NEVER A RECORDED DEED OR CONVEYANCE OF GMAC MORTGAGE 0835002124 BETWEEN CORLA JACKSON AND GMAC JANUARY 3, 2005.  THE ILLEGAL RELIEF IS BASED UPON ARREARS DATED BACK TO A MORTGAGE THAT WAS ILLEGALLY CREATED IN 2005 WITH ARREARS ATTACHED IN BANKRUPTCY CASE 05-13142 WHICH WAS A FALSE CLAIM AND IT VIOLATED THE FALSE CLAIMS ACTS LAWS AND MORE.  READ MORE

 

CORLA JACKSON IS FIGHTING AGAINST FRAUD UPON THAT ROBBED GOVERNMENT WALL STREET INVESTORS TRUST VICTIMS NATIONWIDE AS WELL AS FOR HERSELF BY FORCING THEM TO LEAVE THE PAPER TRIAL ON HOW THEY WERE COMMITTING THEIR CRIMES WITH ILLEGAL ORDERS INSIDE ALABAMA'S S JURISDICTION THAT LEAD TO FRAUD UPON THE COURT OUTSIDE ALABAMA JURISDICTION.  WHAT THEY DID WAS ISSUED ILLEGAL ORDERS TO BLOCK THE CASE FROM BEING HEARD BY CORRUPTING HER COMPLAINT WITH ILLEGAL ORDERS THAT JACKSON IS TRYING TO EXPLAIN.  THEY PUBLISHED THOSE ILLEGAL ORDERS WHICH IS THE EVIDENCE WHICH IS SHOWN ON THE DOCKET SHEETS AND MORE.  READ MORE

 

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.).  Judge Martin Glenn Denied Victims Lift Of Automatic Stays To Proceed To Trial On Affirmative Damages and Judge Dubose Block Victims On State Damages Based Upon Fraud-Fraud Upon Court. 

 

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.).  

 

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.

 

GMAC MORTGAGE LLC and OCWEN ARE SERVICERS

1

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.

 

Section 6-5-255: Failure or refusal of purchaser to reconvey title. If the purchaser or his or her vendee or transferee fails or refuses to reconvey to such party entitled and desiring to redeem such title as the party acquired by the sale and purchase, such party so paying or tendering payment shall thereupon have the right to file in the circuit court having jurisdiction thereof a complaint to enforce his or her rights of redemption.

 

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.). 

 

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).  

 

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 GOVERNMENT NEED JACKSON MORE THAN SHE NEED THEM BECAUSE WHAT THEY DID TO HER THEY DID TO OTHER VICTIMS NATIONWIDE AS WELL AS TO THE FEDS WALL STREET INVESTORS AND MORE AROUND THE SEC AND FEDERAL RESERVE WITH ILLEGAL ORDERS THAT IS BASED UPON FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON COURTS UNDER CLOSED TRUST AND CLOSED PRIOR SERVICERS NAMES TO PREVENT FROM PAYING VICTIMS NATIONWIDE AND THE FEDS WALL STREET INVESTORS TRUST AND MORE.  THE JUDGES LINKED TO THIS CRIME IN ALABAMA IS WHERE THE FRAUD BEGIN THAT IS WHERE WE HAVE TO START HERE.

 

THE ORIGINAL CV-2012-000049 COMPLAINT FILED JANUARY 18, 2012 WAS REMOVED FROM MOBILE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT FEBRUARY 23, 2012 BY BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS OVER TO JUDGE KRISTI DUBOSE IN CASE 12-00111 AND YOU SEE WHAT SHE DID FOR GMAC MORTGAGE LLC AND ITS LAWYERS BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS. CORLA JACKSON IS FIGHTING FOR LEGAL JUSTICE ON NOT JUST THE COMPLAINT ITSELF SHE IS FIGHTING FOR LEGAL JUSTICE ON FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON THE COURT IN BLACK AND WHITE!  READ MORE

 

THE CASE HAD TO BE APPROVED WITH A UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CASE NUMBER (12-00111) BEFORE IT WAS REMOVED FROM MOBILE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, THEN A COPY HAD TO BE PROVIDED TO MOBILE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT TO RECORD AFTER THE DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS WERE SERVED BY CORLA JACKSON THROUGH THE COURTS AND SHERRIFF'S DEPT AS REQUIRED BY LAW. CORLA JACKSON PAID TO HAVE THE PARTIES SERVED THROUGH THE COURTS SO THEY COULD NOT LIE AND SAY THEY DIDN'T GET A COPY OF HER COMPLAINT STYLED AS CORLA JACKSON VS. GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION ET, AL.

 

THIS JUDGE KNEW THE ILLEGAL WRONGFUL FORECLOSURE VIOLATED HER ORDER ISSUED MAY 31, 2012 WITHOUT DUE PROCESS, WITHOUT THE DEMAND BY JURY TRIAL, WITHOUT A SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND WITHOUT A REMAND JUNE 1, 2012 FILED THROUGH THE COURTS IN CASE 12.00111.  THE REMOVAL WAS APPROVED BY DISTRICT COURT GIVING THEM ORIGINAL JURISDICTION OVER THIS COMPLAINT WHICH HAS LEAD TO FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON THE COURT THEY COVERING UP!

 

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

 

Officers of the court include: lawyers, judges, referees, and those appointed; guardian ad litem, parenting time expeditors, mediators, rule 114 neutrals, evaluators, administrators, special appointees, and any others whose influence are part of the judicial mechanism.  Fraud upon the court" has been defined by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to "embrace that species of fraud which does, or attempts to, defile the court itself, or is a fraud perpetrated by officers of the court so that the judicial machinery cannot perform in the usual manner its impartial task of adjudging cases that are presented for adjudication.

 

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).

 

 

THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS CRIME THAT WAS COVERED UP IN ALABAMA WITH ILLEGAL ORDERS THAT CORRUPTED THE COMPLAINT WITHOUT THE DEMAND BY JURY TRIAL WITH A REAL JURY.  THE DOCKET SHEET EVEN SHOW CORLA JACKSON NEVER HAD A DEMAND BY JURY TRIAL AND GMAC MORTGAGE LLC CLOSED DECEMBER 17, 2013 ALL THE ORDERS WERE ILLEGAL AND FRAUD!

 

OCWEN DIDN'T PAY ALL VICTIMS AND THEY KNEW THIS GUARANTEED. VICTIMS DIDN'T HAVE TO GIVE OCWEN THEIR HOMES FOR RELIEF ON MASSIVE DAMAGES CAUSED BY THEIR AFFILIATES-MORE!

1

READ MORE  1    2    3    4    5    6

 

 

THE DOCKET SHEET EVEN SHOW CORLA JACKSON NEVER HAD A DEMAND BY JURY TRIAL AND GMAC MORTGAGE LLC CLOSED DECEMBER 17, 2013 ALL THE ORDERS WERE ILLEGAL AND FRAUD THEY WERE ISSUED AFTER GMAC MORTGAGE LLC WAS CLOSED WHICH COULD NOT BE DONE BY ANY LAW. THERE WERE CONSENT AND ENFORCEMENT ORDERS AND MORE THAT WAS VIOLATED.

 

ITS CRYSTAL CLEAR CORLA JACKSON NEVER HAD A DEMAND BY JURY TRIAL AND GMAC MORTGAGE LLC CLOSED DECEMBER 17, 2013 ALL THE ORDERS WERE ILLEGAL AND FRAUD...

 

 

 

DON'T THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DIVISION OF ALABAMA HAVE SURVEILLANCE CAMERA'S..?  : CORLA JACKSON NEVER HAD A DEMAND BY JURY TRIAL STYLED CORLA JACKSON VS. GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION ET, AL IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DIVISION OF ALABAMA BECAUSE JUDGE KRISTI DUBOSE REFUSED TO CORRECT THE NAME ON THE COMPLAIN IN CASE (12-00111) AND SHE CLOSED DOWN THE CASE FOR BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS PRIOR TO HER ORDER SHE ISSUED MAY 25, 2017 WITHOUT THE DEMAND BY A JURY TRIAL.  THEY ACTUALLY CHANGED THE NAME ON THE COMPLAINT ON HOW CORLA JACKSON FILED HER COMPLAINT NOW THAT'S CORRUPTION-BAD!

 

THE ORDERS ISSUED IN 2017 IS OVER (3) YEARS LATER WITHOUT THE DEMAND BY JURY TRIAL STYLED CORLA JACKSON VS. GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION ET, AL.  THE COMPLAINT WAS FILED JANUARY 18, 2012 AND REMOVED BY BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS OVER TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DIVISION OF ALABAMA ON FEBRUARY 23, 2012, CLEARLY SOMETHING IS WRONG HERE. ALL THE ORDERS THAT WAS ISSUED WERE ISSUED TO GMAC MORTGAGE LLC AFTER GMAC MORTGAGE LLC CLOSED DECEMBER 17, 2013, WHICH COULD NOT BE DONE BY LAW FOR MULTIPLE REASONS IT VIOLATED GOVERNED LAWS AND CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS. READ MORE      

 

THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS CRIME THAT WAS COVERED UP WITH ILLEGAL ORDERS WITHOUT THE DEMAND BY JURY TRIAL WITH A REAL JURY. CORLA JACKSON REQUESTED JUDGE TO BE REMOVED FROM HER CASE AFTER SHE REFUSE TO OPEN THE CASE TO ALLOW HER TO GO TO TRIAL BECAUSE SHE FILE SUITE STYLED CORLA JACKSON VS. GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION ET, AL. NOT CORLA JACKSON VS. GMAC MORTGAGE LLC AKA GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION, WITHOUT ET, AL, MEANING ALL PARTIES INVOLVED.  IT APPEARS THE MORE THEY TRY TO COVER UP THIS CRIME THE WORSE IT GET!

 

I WANT THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT TO SHOW ME HOW THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DIVISION OF ALABAMA CAN APPROVE A REMOVAL FOR ORIGINAL JURISDICTION STYLED DIFFERENTLY THAN THE COMPLAINT CORLA JACKSON PAID FOR AND FILED AS CORLA JACKSON VS. GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION ET, AL. AND NAME THE JURORS THAT TRIED THIS CASE (DEMAND BY JURY TRIAL) IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DIVISION OF ALABAMA UNDER JUDGE KRISTI DUBOSE, WHICH ISN'T GOING TO HAPPEN BECAUSE THERE WAS NO DEMAND BY JURY TRIAL OR A SUMMARY JUDGMENT REMAND, DUE PROCESS OR RECORDING AND CONVEYING GMAC MORTGAGE LLC MORTGAGE 0835002124 PRIOR TO THE ILLEGAL WRONGFUL FORECLOSURE ON A MORTGAGE THEY ILLEGALLY CREATED LICENSED UNDER GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION ET, AL., JANUARY 3, 2005

 

THE BOTTOM LINE HERE IS: CORLA JACKSON FILED A COMPLAINT STYLED CORLA JACKSON VS. GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION ET, AL., MEANING ALL PARTIES INVOLVED, TAKING OFF ET, AL., BLOCKED HER FROM FILING HER COMPLAINT AGAINST GMAC BANK, ALLY FINANCIAL, RESIDENTIAL CAPITAL CORPORATION AKA RESIDENTIAL CAPITAL LLC BECAUSE THEY FORCED HER TO SUE ONLY ONE COMPANY THAT THEY ISSUED ILLEGAL ORDERS ON BY CORRUPT JUDGES OUT OF ALABAMA LINKED TO THE LAW FIRMS THAT COMMITTED THIS CRIME THEY TRYING TO KEEP COVERED UP WHICH ISN'T GOING TO WORK, THE SUPREME COURT CAN BE SUED FOR FRAUD UPON THE COURT IF THEY GET AWAY WITH THIS CRIME BECAUSE IT VIOLATED THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS AND MORE. 

 

THE LAW FIRM HAD A CLERK IN THE SUPREME COURT THAT BLOCKED THE CASE FROM GOING TO TRIAL WHICH VIOLATED THE CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS.  THEY GAVE CORLA JACKSON 25 DAYS TO REFILE A REHEARING. 

 

NO SUPREME COURT JUDGE CAN DENY THESE ALLEGATIONS THEY ARE RECORDED FROM DAY ONE SO THEY HAD TO USE A CLERK LIKE THE LAW FIRM SAID TO BLOCK THE CASE FOR THEM... CORLA JACKSON IS FILING A REHEARING THAT SHOULD BE RECORDED SOON.  THIS CASE IS RECORDED FROM 2005-2019 SO NO ONE CAN LIE GUARANTEED.

 

I KNEW A CLERK BLOCKED THE CASE BECAUSE THE LAW FIRM TOLD THE POLICE THAT THE SUPREME COURT KNOCKED IT DOWN WHEN THAT WAS IMPOSSIBLE, THE SUPREME COURT DO NOT KNOCK DOWN CASES IN VIOLATIONS OF DUE PROCESS AND VIOLATIONS OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS ON A MORTGAGE THAT WASN'T RECORDED AND CONVEYED TO ANYONE FORCING THEM TO GIVE THEM MONEY AND THEIR PROPERTY ON A MORTGAGE GMAC ILLEGALLY CREATED JANUARY 3, 2005 ON AN ASSIGNMENT OF MORTGAGE FILED JULY 11, 2008 AFTER OPTION ONE MORTGAGE CLOSED APRIL 30, 2008.

 

THE SUPREME COURT CERTAINLY DON'T BLOCK CASES WHERE THE NAME HAS BEEN ALTERED AND THE JUDGES REFUSED TO CORRECT IT WHEN THE MOTION FILED SHOWS HOW CORLA JACKSON FILED HER COMPLAINT FOR A DEMAND BY JURY TRIAL IN WHICH SHE NEVER GOT.

 

THE DOCKET SHEET EVEN SHOW CORLA JACKSON NEVER HAD A DEMAND BY JURY TRIAL AND GMAC MORTGAGE LLC CLOSED DECEMBER 17, 2013 ALL THE ORDERS WERE ILLEGAL AND FRAUD!

 

 

THE ORIGINAL COMPLAINT OCCURRED IN BANKRUPTCY CASE 05-13142 GMAC HAD A MORTGAGE DIVISION UNDER GMAC BANK ALLY FINANCIAL WHEN THIS CRIME WAS INITIATED WITHOUT LACK OF STANDING.  GMAC MORTGAGE 0835002124 THEY ILLEGALLY CREATED TO THEMSELVES FOR ILLEGAL PROFITS JANUARY 3, 2005 WAS NEVER RECORDED AND CONVEYED TO CORLA JACKSON  THIS WAS ALL COVERED UP READ MORE
 

1

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

 

GMAC Mortgage LLC did not own any interest in the (DEFENDANT) Corla Jackson property when it commenced its Ejectment action on (08/21/2013). GMAC Mortgage LLC did not have standing to bring that action February 22, 2017  and, consequently, the trial court could not acquire subject-matter jurisdiction over the Ejectment Action in any court,  GMAC Mortgage LLC Was Closed February 17, 2013.  

 

All The Orders Were Fraud That Was Issued From The State Of Alabama and More Prior To And After December 17, 2013 GMAC Mortgage LLC did not have standing to bring its (EJECTMENT ) action or a trial over the GMAC Mortgage Ejectment Action and order is (TORT, NULL, MOOT, VOID).

READ MORE

 

This case is straight FRAUD UPON THE COURT.  ALL THE ORDERS THE STATE OF ALABAMA ISSUED TO
CORRUPT THIS COMPLAINT TO STEAL JACKSON HOME WITH BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS AND THEIR AFFILIATE FIRMS, WAS BASE STATE JUDGES ILLEGAL ORDERS, THAT IS FRAUD UPON THE COURT.  THIS WAS COVERED UP FROM VICTIMS AND MORE GUARANTEED. 

 

IT DIDN'T TAKE A ROCKET SCIENTIST TO SEE THE ASSIGNMENT OF MORTGAGE WAS FRAUD BELOW.  GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION AKA GMAC MORTGAGE LLC ILLEGALLY CREATED THEIR MORTGAGE 0835002124 TO THEMSELVES JANUARY 3, 2005 WITHOUT LACK OF STANDING AS SHOWN IN THE INITIAL BANKRUPTCY CASE 05-13142.

 

JUDICIAL ESTOPPEL AND MORE PREVENTED GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION AKA GMAC MORTGAGE LLC FROM COMMITTING THE SAME CRIME OVER UNDER THE SAME LOAN NUMBER THEY CREATED JANUARY 3, 2005 WITHOUT STANDING.  

 

1

OPTION ONE MORTGAGE CORPORATION WAS CLOSED WHEN

THIS ASSIGNMENT WAS FABRICATED AND RECORDED READ MORE   

 

 

This Assignment Was Fraud and It Was Crystal Clear Dodd Frank Laws Were Violated and More As Well As Consent and Enforcement Orders By Judge York February 22 2017

 

1   2   3   4   5   6   7    8    9   10  11

 

 

THIS ASSIGNMENT OF MORTGAGE WAS FRAUD AND THE JUDGE KNEW THIS AND COMMITTED FRAUD UPON THE COURT ISSUING AN ILLEGAL ORDER TO COVER UP THIS CRIME ON FEBRUARY 22, 2017 THAT HE WAS LINKED TO.  IT WAS RECORDED WORLDWIDE GMAC MORTGAGE LLC CLOSEDREAD MORE 1   2

 

 

WILBUR ROSS PURCHASED THE STOLEN MORTGAGE PROPERTY'S FROM AHM IN AHM BANKRUPTCY LIQUIDATION SALE AFTER THEY GOT BUSTED READ MORE1    2   

 

WILBUR ROSS'S AHM COMPANY THEN PURCHASED OPTION ONE MORTGAGE CORPORATION STOLEN PROPERTY'S  AFTER (AHM) ILLEGALLY CREATED STOLE-FLIPPED WITH WILBUR ROSS AND GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION AKA GMAC MORTGAGE LLC JANUARY 3, 2005. THEY COMMITTED THE CRIME PRIOR TO THE PURCHASE OF OPTION ONE MORTGAGE CORPORATION (APRIL 30, 2008) AND PRIOR TO PURCHASING (AHM). 

 

THIS CRIME OCCURRED (JANUARY 3, 2005) WITHOUT LACK OF STANDING AND THIS COMPLAINT IS RECORDED THROUGH THE COURTS FROM DAY ONE TO DATE SO NO ONE CAN LIE GUARANTEED.   THEY WERE EMBEZZLING FUNDS FROM VICTIMS DUE UNDER THEIR ORIGINAL NOTES AND APPLYING THEM TO THEIR FABRICATED MORTGAGES WITHOUT RECORDING AND CONVEYING THEM AND MORE WITHOUT LACK OF STANDING...

 

OPTION ONE MORTGAGE CORPORATION BACKED OUT THE DEAL WITH WILBUR ROSS AND AFFILIATES THEY KEPT THE INFORMATION THEY OBTAIN FROM THE CANCELLATION OF THE SALE THEN THEY CREATED NEW FABRICATED MORTGAGES WITH THAT INFORMATION.  THE TERMS INSIDE THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CORLA JACKSON AND OPTION ONE MORTGAGE CORPORATION EXECUTED MAY 26, 2004 WAS VIOLATED AND BREACHED WHICH SPELLED OUT THE TERMS ON SERVICING AND SALE OF NOTES AND MORE.

 

THEY ACTUALLY ILLEGALLY CREATED NEW MORTGAGES WITH THE INFORMATION IN VICTIMS NAMES UNDER THEIR CREDIT AND PROPERTY WITHOUT PAYING FOR THE MORTGAGES AND WITHOUT RECORDING AND CONVEYING THEIR NEW FABRICATED MORTGAGES THEY CREATED TO THEMSELVES FOR ILLEGAL PROFITS, THIS IS A CRIME. 

 

AMERICAN HOME MORTGAGE (AHMSI) THEN FILED BANKRUPTCY BECAUSE OPTION ONE MORTGAGE CORPORATION MORTGAGES WERE STOLEN AND NOT PAID FOR INVESTORS WANTED THEIR MONEY BACK AND MORE.  ONCE THIS WAS DONE WILBUR ROSS CHANGED (AHMSI) NAME TO (HOMEWARD) SO VICTIMS COULDN'T FIND THEIR MORTGAGES READ MORE 1    2    3

 

 

AFTER WILBUR ROSS CHANGED (AHM-AHMSI) SERVICERS NAME TO (HOMEWARD) WILBUR ROSS THEN SOLD THE STOLEN MORTGAGES AND PROPERTY'S FROM (AHM) AND (OPTION ONE MORTGAGE CORPORATION) .

 

AHM AND AHMSI WERE BOTH IN BANKRUPTCY.  WILBUR ROSS THEN MADE DEAL WITH OCWEN AND SOLD THE STOLEN MORTGAGES (AHM) STOLE FROM OPTION ONE MORTGAGE CORPORATION, SO THEY BOTH WOULD BENEFIT AT VICTIMS EXPENSE WITHOUT PAYING THE VICTIMS TO DATE, WHICH IS A FEDERAL CRIME AND MORE THAT THEY COVERED UP THROUGH THEIR LAW FIRMS SERVICER GMAC MORTGAGE LLC AKA RESIDENTIAL CAPITAL CORPORATION AKA RESIDENTIAL CAPITAL LLC. 

 

OCWEN AND WILBUR ROSS DIDN'T PAY THE VICTIMS WALL STREET INVESTORS TRUST OF THE FEDS THIS IS WHAT THEY ARE COVERING UP!  WILBUR ROSS SHOULD STEP DOWN FROM OFFICE HE INVOLVED IN THIS CRIME LINKED TO MASSIVE STOLEN MORTGAGEES ROBBING THE FEDS AS WELL AS WALL STREET INVESTORS TRUST AND VICTIMS UNDER FABRICATED MORTGAGES THEY ATTACHED TO VICTIMS PROPERTY'S, IDENTITY, CREDIT AND MORE CAUSING MASSIVE DAMAGES TO DATE, WHICH CANNOT BE IGNORED OR DENIED ITS RECORDED FACTS. 

READ MORE  1

 

 

THEY ACTUALLY COMMITTED THE SAME CRIME OVER USING DECEPTIVE PRACTICES THAT THEY GOT COVERED UP WITH THEIR LAW FIRMS WHOM BENEFITED AND PROFITED FROM THEIR CRIMES WITH THEM WITH CORRUPT JUDGES LINKED TO THE LAW FIRMS THAT ISSUED ILLEGAL ORDERS BASED UPON FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON COURTS TO KEEP THE VICTIMS CASES AND COMPLAINTS FROM BEING HEARD, WHICH IS A BIGGER CRIME. 

 

THEY COMMITTED THE SAME CRIME AGAIN BETWEEN (2016-2019) AROUND THE SEC FEDERAL RESERVE AND MORE GUARANTEED ITS RECORDED FACTS.  WHAT IS GOING NOW" THEY ILLEGALLY SEIZING PROPERTY UNDER FABRICATED MORTGAGES WITHOUT CONVEYING THEIR FABRICATED MORTGAGES BECAUSE THEY COMMITTED THE CRIMES PRIOR TO PURCHASING THE POOLS OF MORTGAGES AFTER THEY GOT BUSTED.  THEY WENT AROUND PAYING THE VICTIMS, WALL STREET INVESTORS TRUST AND THE FEDS AND MORE USING DECEPTIVE PRACTICES AROUND THE SEC, FDIC AND MORE. 

 

THEY USING ALTISOURCE, HLSS, DEUTSCHE BANK AND MORE GUARANTEED!  THEY ARE OPERATING UNDER CLOSED TRUST AND CLOSED COMPANY'S NAMES TO AVOID BEING BUSTED.

READ MORE:  1

 

 

WILBUR ROSS SHOULDN'T BE PROFITING UNDER BLIND TRUST LINKED TO MASSIVE STOLEN PROPERTY'S VICTIMS STOLEN IDENTITY AND CREDIT HE ILLEGALLY BENEFITED AND PROFITING FROM WITH OCWEN AND ITS AFFILIATES AND MORE..

 

GMAC MORTGAGE LLC WAS WILBUR ROSS'S SERVICER THEY COMMITTED THE CRIME INITIALLY WITHOUT LACK OF STANDING WITHOUT OWNING THE PROPERTY THEY ILLEGALLY CREATED THEIR NEW MORTGAGES UNDER WITHOUT RECORDING AND CONVEYING THE VICTIMS MORTGAGES UNDER A NEW DEED BETWEEN THE NEW SERVICERS AND OWNER'S.  INSTEAD THEY KEPT FLIPPING THE STOLEN PROPERTY'S IN VICTIMS NAMES UNDER THEIR PROPERTY'S COMMITTING THE SAME CRIMES OVER AGAIN UNDER CLOSED TRUST AND PRIOR SERVICERS NAMES THAT WAS OUT OF BUSINESS, SO THEY DIDN'T GET BUSTED AND OCWEN DIDN'T HAVE TO PAY FEDS OR VICTIMS BECAUSE THEY WERE OBTAINING ILLEGAL ORDERS THROUGH CORRUPTED JUDGES IN PRIOR SERVICERS NAMES WHICH IS FRAUD AND THE ORDERS ARE VOID BY THE RULE OF GOVERNED LAWS. 

 

WILBUR ROSS AND OCWEN SHOULD HAVE BOTH BEEN PROSECUTED AND THEIR OPERATIONS SHUT DOWN BECAUSE THE CRIME WERE COMMITTED PRIOR TO THEM PURCHASING THE POOLS OF MORTGAGES BASED UPON FRAUD WITH CREDITS AND MORE USING DECEPTIVE PRACTICES WITH OCWEN, ALTISOURCE, HLSS AND DEUTSCHE BANK AND MORE. 

 

 

NEW DEEDS WERE REQUIRED TO BE RECORDED AND CONVEYED BETWEEN THE NEW OWNERS AND THE WRONGFUL FORECLOSURE VICTIMS EACH TIME THE PROPERTY WAS SOLD PRIOR TO THE ILLEGAL WRONGFUL FORECLOSURES NATIONWIDE, WHICH DIDN'T HAPPEN INSTEAD THEY COVERED THIS UP SO THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO PAY VICTIMS KEEPING MONEY THAT WAS DUE TO VICTIMS THAT THEY USED FOR THEIR INVESTMENTS AND MORE, WHICH IS A BIGGER CRIME.

 

 

Company Overview: GMAC Mortgage, LLC Was Illegally Operating In Alabama As Of 2.5.2019.  The Federal Reserve, FDIC and More Thought Corla Jackson Wrong When She Was Not Wrong, GMAC Mortgage LLC Was Illegally Operating In Alabama Operating Full Forced With Illegal Orders To Continue Carrying Out Their Crimes They Started Initially Without Lack Of Standing.

 

 

Corla Jackson never had the Demand by Jury Trial she paid for styled as Corla Jackson vs. GMAC Mortgage Corporation ET, AL allowing her to file suit against all parties that did this to her. This is why the law firm altered the docket sheet name and the name on the complaint taking off ET, AL., which is shown on the Motion Filed In the Initial Complaint that was altered and removed by Bradley Arant Boult Cummings in case CV-2012-000049.  

 

The Remand Was On GMAC Mortgage LLC Illegal Ejectment Without The Demand By Jury Trial Styled As Corla Jackson vs. GMAC Mortgage Corporation ET, AL. It Was Recorded That The Judge Committed Fraud and Stated In The Remand Back To Mobile County Circuit Court Wasn't Corla Jackson REMOVAL COMPLAINT.  This Committed This Crime Without The Real Jury Like Jackson Paid For Demand By Jury Trial, Jackson Didn't Pay For A Trial By Court Because The Judges Were Involved, and They Knew This, Its Recorded. 

 

The Judges Were Issuing Illegal Orders Under Closed Company's and Closed Trust In Alabama, Like What They Did In The Corla Jackson Case For GMAC Mortgage LLC Which Is A Crime, GMAC Mortgage LLC Was Closed. 

 

Judge Kristi Dubose In United States District Court Stated Corla Jackson Couldn't Remove GMAC Mortgage LLC Ejectment and Her Trying To Remove This Ejectment Had Nothing To Do With Her Case-Complaint On The REMOVAL in case CV-2012-000049 from Mobile County Circuit Court filed January 18, 2012 That Bradley Arant Boult Cummings Removed February 23, 2012

 

Judge Kristi Dubose Committed Fraud In Her Order Because She Knew This Was The Same Loan Number and Complaint That Was Under Her, She Willfully and Illegally Committed Fraud Upon The Court To Help Keep This Complaint Covered Up According To The Evidence She Knew Better! 

 

Now They All Busted Because GMAC Mortgage LLC Was Closed When All The Orders Were Issued That Prevented Corla Jackson From Proceeding To Her Demand By Jury Trial By A Real Jury vs. a Trial by Court, So The Could Keep This Complaint Covered Up.

 

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.).  

 

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.

 

GMAC MORTGAGE LLC and OCWEN ARE SERVICERS

1

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.

 

 

THIS CRIME OCCURRED IN (2005) READ MORE

1

1

On December 17, 2013, GMAC Mortgage, LLC  went out of business as per its Chapter 11 liquidation filing under bankruptcy. GMAC Mortgage, LLC operates as a home mortgage originator. The company provides mortgage services for loan accounts, including billing, payment, and general customer services. Its mortgage programs for homebuyers include fixed and adjustable rate mortgages, and FHA and VA loans. The company was formerly known as GMAC Mortgage Corporation. The company was incorporated in 1968 and is headquartered in Fort Washington, Pennsylvania. GMAC Mortgage, LLC operates as a subsidiary of GMAC Residential Holding Company, LLC.

 

GMAC Mortgage LLC still operating in Alabama around the SEC, Federal Reserve, Wall Street Investors and More On Mortgages And Property's They Stole For Illegal Profits Using Deceptive Practices Without Summary Judgment, Remands, and Without Conveying Their Mortgages To Victims Prior To Their Illegal Wrongful Foreclosures and More.  They Didn't Stop They Continued Their Crimes To Date As Of 2.5.2019, They Robbed Me So I Know What I'm Talking About Guaranteed!  See Details Listed Below and Keep Up With Updates...

 

The Mortgage Fraud Crisis Got Worse This Is What The State Of Alabama State Firms Covering Up Because They Are Benefiting and Profiting from the SCAMS as well as the State Of Alabama Guaranteed! GMAC Mortgage LLC never stopped operating in Alabama as of 2.5.2019.  GMAC Mortgage LLC Is Not Closed Guaranteed I Know!

 

GMAC Mortgage LLC and its Alabama law firms and lawyers fooled wall street investors, federal reserve, sec, fdic and more using deceptive practices, its recorded facts to date Guaranteed.  

 

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. §1962. Prohibited activities

 

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.

 

GMAC MORTGAGE LLC and OCWEN ARE SERVICERS

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 ET, AL. AKA GMAC MORTGAGE LLC never recorded or conveyed their mortgage 0835002124 between CORLA JACKSON and GMAC prior to or after their Instrument 2008050095 at Book 6409 and Page 1483 or prior to their Illegal Foreclosure (June 1, 2012).

 

The Evidence Speaks For Itself!

 

 

This is not the mortgage loan number between Corla Jackson and Option One Mortgage Corporation in Instrument 2004042906 Book 5605 page 1910.  

 

This Assignment was created June 19, 2008 filed July 11, 2008 by the law firm that committed this crime after Option One Mortgage Closed April 30, 2008.  This assignment of mortgage clearly is fraud it doesn't match the terms and conditions of the mortgage contract agreement executed May 26, 2004 or the mortgage loan number between Corla Jackson and Option One Mortgage Corporation in Instrument 2004042906 Book 5605 page 1910.

 

 

GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION ET, AL. AKA GMAC MORTGAGE LLC never recorded or conveyed their mortgage 0835002124 between Corla Jackson and GMAC prior to or after they recorded Instrument 2008050095 at Book 6409 and Page 1483 or prior to their Illegal Foreclosure (June 1, 2012) as shown on Mobile County Probate Court in Mobile County, Alabama probate court records.

 

There was never a recorded Release-Cancellation of the Original Mortgage-Note between Corla Jackson and Option One Mortgage Corporation under loan number (651003367) servicing number (001347464) prior to GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC creating their new mortgage to themselves January 3, 2005 and Instrument 2008050095 at Book 6409 and Page 1483 or prior to their Illegal Foreclosure (June 1, 2012).

 

GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION ET, AL., AKA GMAC MORTGAGE LLC COMMITTED FRAUD IN 2005 IN THE INITIAL BANKRUPTCY CASE 05-13142. 

 

GMAC committed this crime January 3, 2005 without lack of standing the mortgage 0835002124 was created prior to Instrument 2008050095 at Book 6409 and Page 1483 or prior to their Illegal Foreclosure (June 1, 2012).

 

What they doing is illegally foreclosing on property's to themselves to file illegal foreclosure deeds to steal property's without paying robbing victims around the sec and federal reserve wall street investors and more, stealing victims identity, credit, property, equity, insurance policy's, homes and additional land that had nothing to do with mortgages on insured covered losses and more guaranteed.  They don't know the Original Lenders set things loans with owners of property's they stealing, in fact they didn't have the survey's that the victims and their lenders did and more. 

 

The State firms are benefiting and profiting from the scams as well as the judges linked to these crimes that issued illegal orders using deceptive practices.  The Judges knew servicers didn't own the mortgages they were stealing with illegal orders because it was recorded they didn't own the mortgages and never recorded and covered the property's they were illegally seizing and stealing that the State Of Alabama and its AG's were covering up guaranteed.

 

This Assignment created June 19, 2008 filed July 11, 2008 After Option One Mortgage Closed April 30, 2008 is clearly fraud its doesn't match the terms and conditions of the mortgage contract agreement executed May 26, 2004 or the mortgage loan number (651003367) and servicing number (001347464-8) between Corla Jackson and Option One Mortgage Corporation in Instrument 2004042906 Book 5605 page 1910.  The amount of the mortgage being transferred or the payments was not recorded on the assignment or the value of the sum paid for the mortgage was not recorded on the assignment and more, which is void. 

 

In addition to this, GMAC Mortgage LLC had their Mortgage 0835002124 Assigned to themselves over (3) years after the crime was committed January 3, 2005 without recording and conveying their mortgage between Corla Jackson and GMAC Mortgage Corporation ET, AL., aka GMAC Mortgage LLC prior to Instrument 2008050095 at Book 6409 and Page 1483 or prior to their Illegal Foreclosure (June 1, 2012).

 

GMAC Mortgage Corporation ET, AL., aka GMAC Mortgage LLC committed this crime prior to their Instrument 2008050095 at Book 6409 and Page 1483 or prior to their Illegal Foreclosure (June 1, 2012).

 

This info is recorded in the initial bankruptcy case 05-13142 they didn't own the property they illegally created their mortgage 0835002124 and they never recorded or conveyed their mortgage between Corla Jackson and GMAC. 

 

What ever going on in Alabama the law firms were involved with the judges that issued all the illegal orders this is what they trying to keep covered up, which is a Federal Bankruptcy Crime in violation of the False Claims Acts, RICO and more, the law firms and Judges that committed this crime know what they did and covered up which cannot be ignored or denied its recorded facts. 

 

The Law Firms should have been shut down and the lawyers and judges linked to this crime should be arrested for this white collar crime robbery this crime was committed prior to the Assignment filed July 11, 2008.

 

Signing a False Affidavit is A Federal Crime far worse than the false claims acts violations guaranteed.  GMAC Mortgage Corporation ET, AL., aka GMAC Mortgage LLC didn't own Corla Jackson property (2005-2006) or prior to their illegal foreclosure June 1, 2012 they never recorded or conveyed a mortgage this appears to be a hate crime white collar crime robbery involving the State Of Alabama and Its State Law Firms. 

 

These people knew GMAC didn't own Corla Jackson property and allowed her to be robbed which is unconstitutional and more this is Bankruptcy Fraud. The Judges That issued all those illegal orders knew this was a white collar crime robbery and a hate crime they covered up. 

 

This is how they robbed Black people in Alabama and covered it up with false affidavits and false proof of claims without lack of standing and the State Of Alabama AG's and their State Firms, Lawyers and Judges Covered it up with Corrupt Judges Illegal Orders.  The Evidence speaks for itself GMAC Mortgage Corporation ET, AL., aka GMAC Mortgage LLC didn't own Corla Jackson property when they filed this false proof of claim and false affidavit ...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

AFTER GMAC MORTGAGE LLC GOT BUSTED IN CORLA JACKSON'S INITIAL BANKRUPTCY CASE 05-13142 COMPLAINT GMAC MORTGAGE LLC FILED AN APPLICATION TO DO BUSINESS IN ALABAMA MAY 10, 2006. 

 

The INITIAL COMPLAINT (CV-2012-000049) filed (January 18, 2012) was fraudulently recorded improperly by Mobile County Circuit Court prior to the Removal over to the United States District Court For The Southern Division Of Alabama, it didn’t match the motion filed by Corla Jackson styled as (Corla Jackson vs. GMAC Mortgage Corporation ET, AL.) they took off (ET, AL.) blocking her from filing suit against all parties involved to date because of what is filed on the face of the docket sheets.  This violated Corla Jackson civil rights, constitutional laws, and more which cannot be ignored or denied its recorded facts. 

 

A courts, lawyer, or judge cannot pick and chose who Corla Jackson could sue by recording false info on the face of the docket sheets it corrupted the case-complaints filed through the courts blocking her from suing all parties involved to date.  The courts had to see the docket sheet recording didn’t match the motion filed by Corla Jackson January 18, 2012 styled as (Corla Jackson vs. GMAC Mortgage Corporation ET, AL.) requesting a Demand by Jury Trial, which never happened. 

 

The orders issued were issued on behalf of GMAC Mortgage LLC styled as (GMAC Mortgage LLC vs. Corla Jackson) which also violated constitutional laws Corla Jackson civil rights and more which is unconstitutional because she filed the complaint first, Demand by a Jury Trial she paid for that she never got it to date styled as (Corla Jackson vs. GMAC Mortgage Corporation ET, AL.) this is recorded. 

 

The District Court For The Southern Division Of Alabama stated the Ejectment in the State Action had nothing to do with the Removal, when it had everything to do with Removal, which is fraud and fraud upon the court.  Corla Jackson was denied a Demand by Jury Trial like she paid for, and there was no Due Process filed through the courts prior to the illegal foreclosure June 1, 2012. 

 

There was never a conveyance of a mortgage recorded and conveyed between Corla Jackson and GMAC Mortgage LLC under loan number 0835002124 prior to Instrument 2008050095 at Book 6409 and Page 1483 in the records of the Probate Court in Mobile County, Alabama. This instrument is under GMAC Mortgage Corporation ET., AL., aka GMAC Mortgage LLC loan number 0835002124 that they created January 3, 2005 to themselves without lack of standing.  They had their mortgage assigned to themselves and foreclosed to themselves to steal Corla Jackson property, which is a fraud using deceptive practice which cannot be ignored or denied its recorded facts.  An Appeal on an issue is Brewing as of (2.26.2019) because this should have never occurred had they went by the law versus race or gender. 

 

From the records filed through the court the evidence show Corla Jackson was blocked from her Demand by Jury Trial and GMAC Mortgage LLC was allowed to walk all on top of her by committing fraud upon the court using deceptive practice through corrupt judges link to them and their law firms.  The illegal orders cannot be ignored or denied its recorded facts, they never corrected the name styled on Corla Jackson complaint to allow her to sue all parties involved to date, and they allowed GMAC Mortgage LLC and the Judge to name GMAC Mortgage LLC on the complaint themselves not Corla Jackson she hadn’t named GMAC Mortgage LLC yet because they were a servicer and not a bank.

 

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.

 

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). No Due Process by the RESPONDENT(S) prior to the illegal foreclosure June 1, 2012.

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS

White Collar Crime Robbery by GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC from (January 3, 2005) through (2019).

 

May 26, 2004

Corla Jackson already had a ($240,000.00) mortgage with her lender Option One Mortgage Corporation.  The Mortgage was executed (May 26, 2004) between Corla Jackson and Option One Mortgage Corporation based upon the following terms and conditions of the mortgage contract agreement loan number (651003367) and servicing number (001347464-8).

 

Corla Jackson’s loan number (651003367) and servicing number (001347464 is located at

the top of her recorded deed and at the top of each page of her loan documents as shown in

in Instrument 2004042906 Book 5605 page 1910.

 

GMAC Mortgage created their fabricated assignment on June 19, 2008 fuled July 11, 2008 as shown in Instrument 2008050095 at Book 6409 and Page 1483 in the records of the Probate Court in Mobile County, Alabama.  This occurred over (3) years later after Option One Mortgage Closed April 30, 2008.

 

January 3, 2005

GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC committed bank and wire fraud by creating a new mortgage (0835002124) to themselves for illegal profits (January 3, 2005) using deceptive practices without owning Corla Jackson property.

 

GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC willfully and illegally stole Corla Jackson identity, credit and property to create a new mortgage to themselves for illegal profits without recording and conveying their new mortgage (0835002124) between Corla Jackson and GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC, because they didn’t have a recorded trustee’s deed of sale or the Release-Cancellation of the Original Note or an Endorsed Allonge of the Original Note prior to creating their new mortgage 0835002124 (January 3, 2005). They were without lack of standing.

 

Judge York Stated

This Court finds that Jackson executed a mortgage in favor of Option One Mortgage Corporation on (May 26, 2004).  The mortgage had an attached Adjustable Rate Rider that was executed by Jackson the same day.  Also signed on (May 26, 2004) was an Adjustable Rate Note in which Jackson promised to pay ($240,000.00) to Lender, Option One Mortgage Corporation.  Pursuant to the Adjustable Rate Note Jackson agreed to send her payments to the Lender or to whom the Lender may transfer the note.

 

Corla Jackson Answer

This is an Alabama Hate Crime and White Collar Crime Robbery linked to massive stolen mortgages backed by securities and more. 

 

Judge York committed fraud upon the court using deceptive practices (February 22, 2017) under Jeff Sessions Watch as U.S. AG.  Judge York’s intent was to carry out this crime with an illegal order to keep massive stolen mortgages covered up that their law firms were committing inside Alabama’s Jurisdiction that they were illegally benefiting and profiting from using deceptive practices with illegal orders from corrupt Alabama Judges stealing properties.

 

The illegal orders were stealing property’s to attach fabricated mortgage to without paying for the mortgages robbing victims, government and wall street investors trust and more using deceptive practices.  The profits from these stolen mortgages helped fund campaigns, law firm’s investments in Alabama Real Estate and more multiple ways; this is what they trying to keep covered up.

 

Judge York didn’t mention in his Order (February 22, 2017) that the Alabama law firm and their affiliate firm and lawyers filed an Wrongful Eviction Action against Corla Jackson under him in Mobile County District Court under case (DV-2012-902844) without a Demand by Jury Trial Summary Judgment or Remand, filed through the United States District Court For The Southern Division Of Alabama under case 12-00111, this case and complaint was STAYED (May 31, 2012) pending a Demand by Jury Trial, which prevented case number (DV-2012-902844) from being docketed in Mobile County District Court prior to sending it over to Mobile County Circuit Court under case (CV-2013-902219) under Judge

 

Under Federal Laws and State Laws Section 6-6-227: Persons to be made parties; rights of persons not parties.  All persons shall be made parties who have, or claim, any interest which would be affected by the declaration, and no declaration shall prejudice the rights of persons not parties to the proceeding. In any proceeding which involves the validity of a municipal ordinance, or franchise, such municipality shall be made a party and shall be entitled to be heard; and if the statute, ordinance, or franchise is alleged to be unconstitutional, the Attorney General of the state shall also be served with a copy of the proceeding and be entitled to be heard. (Acts 1935, No. 355, p. 777; Code 1940, T. 7, §166.)

 

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.

 

The most often cited new York state Court decision regarding Assignments signed by Elpiniki Bechakas from The Baum Firm was written by the Honorable Judge Arthur M. Schack, Kings County, New York: U.S. Bank, N.A. as Trustee for SG Mortgage Securities Asset backed Certificates, Series 2006-FRE2 v.Emmanuel, 27 Misc.3d 1220(A), 2010 WL 1856016 (N.Y.Sup.).

 

In re Foreclosure Cases, 2007 WL 3232420 (N.D. Ohio Oct. 31, 2007). On October 10, 2007, Judge Boyko issued an order to Deutsche Bank to show cause for their filed complaint, demanding that Deutsche Bank file copies of the Assignments showing that they were the holder and owner of the Notes and Mortgages, as of the date the complaint was filed, which was July 27, 2007.

 

To the Court, this revealed that Deutsche Bank did not have the particular assignment at the date of the complaint, and created Assignments for trial. U.S. District Judge Christopher Boyko, Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division, rendered a decision dismissing 14 of the foreclosure cases in In re Foreclosure Cases without prejudice, due to the filing of executed Assignments after the date of the filed complaint for 10 of the cases, and the lack of Assignments for four of the cases. 

 

Johnston and Judge York both issued illegal Ejectment: Judge York, Judge Hardesty, and Judge Johnston all knew it was recorded there was no Due Process prior to the illegal foreclosure and neither was there a Demand by Jury Trial, Remand or Summary Judgment filed through the courts in the United States District Court For The Southern Division Of Alabama in case (12-00111) prior to their illegal orders being issued. 

 

The Judges had to see it was recorded GMAC Mortgage Corporation ET., AL., aka GMAC Mortgage LLC had not recorded and conveyed their mortgage 0835002124 between Corla Jackson and GMAC Mortgage Corporation ET, AL., aka GMAC Mortgage LLC (January 3, 2005) or prior to their illegal foreclosure or prior to Instrument 2008050095 at Book 6409 and Page 1483 in the records of the Probate Court in Mobile County, Alabama, or prior to their foreclosure (June 1, 2012). It was also recorded that Option One Mortgage Corporation never recorded a Trustee’s Deed Of Sale or an Endorsed Mortgage with the attached Allonge and Release-Cancellation of the mortgage between Corla Jackson and Option One Mortgage Corporation the loan number is (651003367) servicing number (001347464-8) in Instrument 2004042906 Book 5605 page 1910.

 

It appears that the State of Alabama placed Judge York over Judge Johnston court in this case (CV-2013-902219) after he got busted issuing the Illegal Ejectment without the Demand by Jury Trial, Summary Judgment or Remand, being filed through the United States District Court For The Southern Division Of Alabama under case 12-00111. 

 

This complaint was STAYED (May 31, 2012) pending a Demand by Jury Trial not a Trial by Court with Judges that committed this crime with the law firms, lawyers and their servicing clients. Corla Jackson paid for a real Demand by Jury Trial which never happened.  The Orders issued by Judge York, Judge Hardesty and Judge Johnston is styled as (GMAC Mortgage LLC vs. Corla Jackson) on an Eviction Action and Ejectment Action.

 

Corla Jackson never had the Demand by Jury Trial she paid for styled as Corla Jackson vs. GMAC Mortgage Corporation ET, AL allowing her to file suit against all parties that did this to her. This is why the law firm altered the docket sheet name and the name on the complaint taking off ET, AL., which is shown on the Motion Filed In the Initial Complaint that was altered and removed by Bradley Arant Boult Cummings in case CV-2012-000049.

 

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.).  

 

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.

 

GMAC MORTGAGE LLC and OCWEN ARE SERVICERS

1

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.

 

 

 

DO YOU SEE GMAC MORTGAGE LLC ON CORLA JACKSON COMPLAINT CV-2012-000049 ANYWHERE?

PRO SE PLAINTIFF CORLA JACKSON DIDN'T NAMED THE DEFENDANT'S GMAC MORTGAGE LLC AS GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION INITIAL COMPLAINT IN CASE (CV-2012-000049) BECAUSE THEY WERE A DEBT COLLECTOR-SERVICER NOT A BANK AND THEY DIDN'T OWN HER NOTE AND COULD NOT FILE AND ANSWER A COMPLAINT!

 

THE JUDGE COULDN'T CHANGE THE NAME ON CORLA JACKSON COMPLAINT FOR GMAC MORTGAGE LLC TO ISSUE ILLEGAL ORDERS FOR AND BLOCK THE CASE FROM PROCEEDING TO TRIAL WITH ALL THE OTHER PARTIES THAT WASN'T IN BANKRUPTCY UNDER JUDGE MARTIN GLENN IN NEW YORK. 

 

THE WHOLE DAM CASE IS CORRUPTED AND THIS IS WHAT THEY KEEP ISSUING ILLEGAL ORDERS FOR TO KEEP THIS COVERED UP, WHICH ISN'T GOING TO HAPPEN HERE.  CORLA JACKSON WILL KEEP FILING APPEALS UNTIL LEGAL JUSTICE IS SERVED BECAUSE NOT ONLY WAS HER CIVIL RIGHTS WERE VIOLATED CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS WERE VIOLATED AND SHE WAS ROBBED BASED UPON ALL THE ILLEGAL ORDERS TO DATE WHICH CANNOT BE IGNORED OR DENIED ITS RECORDED FACTS. 

 

THE ORIGINAL CV-2012-000049 COMPLAINT WAS REMOVED FROM MOBILE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT BY BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS OVER TO JUDGE KRISTI DUBOSE IN CASE 12-00111 AND YOU SEE WHAT SHE DID FOR GMAC MORTGAGE LLC AND ITS LAWYERS BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS. CORLA JACKSON IS FIGHTING FOR LEGAL JUSTICE ON NOT JUST THE COMPLAINT ITSELF SHE IS FIGHTING FOR LEGAL JUSTICE ON FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON THE COURT IN BLACK AND WHITE!

 

THIS JUDGE KNEW THE ILLEGAL WRONGFUL FORECLOSURE VIOLATED HER ORDER ISSUED MAY 31, 2012 WITHOUT DUE PROCESS, WITHOUT THE DEMAND BY JURY TRIAL, WITHOUT A SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND WITHOUT A REMAND JUNE 1, 2012 FILED THROUGH THE COURTS IN CASE 12.00111.  THE REMOVAL WAS APPROVED BY DISTRICT COURT GIVING THEM ORIGINAL JURISDICTION OVER THIS COMPLAINT WHICH HAS LEAD TO FRAUD AND FRAUD UPON THE COURT THEY COVERING UP!

 

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

 

Officers of the court include: lawyers, judges, referees, and those appointed; guardian ad litem, parenting time expeditors, mediators, rule 114 neutrals, evaluators, administrators, special appointees, and any others whose influence are part of the judicial mechanism.  Fraud upon the court" has been defined by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to "embrace that species of fraud which does, or attempts to, defile the court itself, or is a fraud perpetrated by officers of the court so that the judicial machinery cannot perform in the usual manner its impartial task of adjudging cases that are presented for adjudication.

 

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).

 

.

POST BELOW IS PRIOR TO 2.26.2019

 

I Went All The Way For The United States Of America And Victims Nationwide

As Well As For Myself Walls Street Investors And More

 

Trump-Sessions Team Was Robbing Victims To Fund 2016-Midterms Election Campaign

Through Law Firms Money Laundering Linked To Deutsche Bank

Through Alabama Law Firms Mortgage Servicing Clients With

Illegal Judges Orders Linked To Sessions and Luther Strange Jurisdiction!

 

See: 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.     GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC didn’t own Corla Jackson property when they created their mortgage (0835002124) to themselves (January 3, 2005).

 

2.     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.

 

3.     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).

 

4.     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.

 

5.     See: 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. 

 

6.     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.

 

7.     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.).

  

8.     How did the State Of Alabama allow GMAC Mortgage LLC aka GMAC Mortgage Corporation and their lawyers to force Corla Jackson into her initial bankruptcy case under their mortgage (0835002124) without owning her property, without recording trustee’s deed of sale and without conveying their new mortgage between Corla Jackson and GMAC Mortgage LLC aka GMAC Mortgage Corporation January 3, 2005. 

 

9.      Notice the law firms styled the complaints in prior servicers names after OCWEN purchase agreements.  The law firms did this with their affiliate firms and laws who used a particular Corrupt Judges that would issue them illegal orders based upon fraud and fraud upon the courts without lack of standing and without paying victims dated back from the very begging of the crimes, which is fraud. 

 

10.  GMAC Mortgage LLC didn’t own the mortgage when Alabama Judge’s issued their illegal orders against Corla Jackson without the (Demand by Jury Trial) she paid for.  Instead they were issuing illegal orders for the Servicers GMAC Mortgage LLC on illegal eviction and ejectment actions, filed by their law firms and lawyers styled with the Servicers Names vs. the Wrongful Foreclosure Victims, they did this usually via (Trial by Jury) under a particular judge linked to the crimes versus a real Demand by Jury Trial by a Real Jury so they wouldn’t get busted.  They were committing fraud and fraud upon the court to continue money laundering and more for illegal profits, this cannot be ignored or denied its recorded facts.

 

11. Corla Jackson paid for a Demand by Jury Trial and never got it, to date.  All the illegal orders are styled GMAC Mortgage LLC vs. Corla Jackson which could not be done by the rule of governed and state laws, they didn’t own the property they were Servicers and could not answer or file complaints. They did this in a manner around due process, without recording and conveying their fabricated mortgages prior to their illegal foreclosures, which is based upon fraud and fraud upon courts that they covered up. The Illegal Orders that were being issued were styled in prior servicer’s names without prior servicers owning the property’s they couldn’t answer or file a complaint.

 

12. The servicers, their law firms and affiliate company’s continued stealing the homes carrying out the crime  without paying the victims, using deceptive practices around the SEC, CFPB, FDIC, FEDERAL RESERVE and more, far worse than before.

 

13.The Servicers didn’t own the property’s the corrupt judges were issuing illegal orders on styled in servicers names, that was a money laundering scam around the SEC, Federal Reserve, CFPB, FDIC, Wall Street Investors and more, that was covered up.

 

14. Illegal Orders that were being issued were styled in prior servicer’s names without prior servicers owning the property’s they couldn’t answer or file a complaint.  The servicers, their law firms and affiliate company’s continued stealing the homes carrying out the crime  without paying the victims, using deceptive practices around the SEC, CFPB, FDIC, FEDERAL RESERVE and more, far worse than before. 

15. The Servicers didn’t own the property’s the corrupt judges were issuing illegal orders on styled in servicers names, that was a money laundering scam around the SEC, Federal Reserve, CFPB, FDIC, Wall Street Investors and more, that was covered up.

 

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). 

Section 6-5-100: Fraud – Right of action generally. Fraud by one, accompanied with damage to the party defrauded, in all cases gives a right of action. (Code 1907, §2468; Code 1923, §5676; Code 1940, T. 7, §107.).

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 agreementor stipulation to the contrary. (Code 1907, §4134; Code 1923, §7849; Code 1940, T. 7, §561.).

Section 6-5-255: Failure or refusal of purchaser to reconvey title. If the purchaser or his or her vendee or transferee fails or refuses to reconvey to such party entitled and desiring to redeem such title as the party acquired by the sale and purchase, such party so paying or tendering payment shall thereupon have the right to file in the circuit court having jurisdiction thereof a complaint to enforce his or her rights of redemption.

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.). 

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).  

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

 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS

GMAC Mortgage LLC was a Servicer, they could not file an eviction complaint or an ejectment complaint under Judge York styled GMAC Mortgage LLC vs. Corla Jackson in cases (DV-2012-902844) and (CV-2013-902219).  Judge York knew GMAC Mortgage LLC was a SERVICER it was recorded. 

Judge York knew GMAC Mortgage LLC no longer had licenses to service mortgages in Alabama using GMAC name because it sold its rights to OCWEN. See Asset Purchase Agreement signed (November 2, 2012) and consent agreements attached.  In addition to this a Servicer could not answer and file a complaint in cases (DV-2012-902844) and (CV-2013-902219). 

GMAC Mortgage LLC was a Servicer and they couldn’t Answer or File A Complaint period styled GMAC Mortgage LLC vs. Corla Jackson, they didn’t own the property when Judge York issued his illegal order (February 22, 2017). 

OCWEN was the Servicer, they violated the consent and enforcement orders issued by Federal Reserve, SEC, CFPB, FDIC and more, knowing they had not paid the victims to the terms of the consent agreements and enforcement orders to date.  This was covered up under the prior servicers name using deceptive practices, so they couldn’t get busted.  

OCWEN, Altisource and HLSS and Deutsche Bank is committing fraud upon courts using deceptive practices under the prior servicers name with their employee’s that worked for GMAC Mortgage LLC aka GMAC Mortgage Corporation and more, which cannot be ignored its recorded facts. 

GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC used their prior employee’s who worked for Sand Canyon Corporation , AHM, AHMSI, HOMEWARD and OCWEN in their trial by court to obtain an illegal order- ejectment, which cannot be ignored or denied its recorded facts.  

It didn’t do them any good because they were all Servicers in which they couldn’t file or answer a complaint according to the rule of law in the servicers name or business.  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). 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.).

 

They were all Servicer and Prior Employee’s of GMAC Mortgage Corporation aka GMAC Mortgage LLC., prior to being sold in New York to OCWEN, they conspired together under GMAC Mortgage LLC, so OCWEN wouldn’t get busted-caught because they kept the money that belong to victims and they didn’t pay to the terms and conditions of the consent and enforcement orders committing the same crimes over and over again to date guaranteed, its recorded facts.      

 

They were creating illegal new loans-mortgages in victim’s names without conveying their fabricated mortgages; they were money laundering and more for illegal profits.  After They created their fabricated mortgages without lack of sanding, they attached payments to their illegal mortgages and foreclosed in victims in their names under their credit and property without lack of standing stealing their property right from under the victims, wall street investors trust and more around the SEC, Federal Reserve, FDIC, CFPB, and more using deceptive practices with illegal court orders by the their law firms corrupted judges linked to these crimes to date, they are far worse than before guaranteed.

 

OCWEN name wasn’t styled on the complaint; they knew GMAC Mortgage didn’t own the mortgage when the illegal orders was issued under Judge Johnston, Judge York, Judge Kristi Dubose and all other Judges to date.  There were servicers…

 

1.     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.

 

2.     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).

 

3.     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.

 

4.     See: 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. 

 

5.     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.

 

6.     In addition to the above, the Servicer GMAC MORTGAGE LLC could not answer and file a complaint in cases (DV-2012-902844) and (CV-2013-902219) how did they get the illegal orders around the United States Federal Government, SEC, Federal Reserve, CFPB, FDIC, and Wall Street Investors without getting busted before now, the lies is over.

 

7.     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.

 

8.     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).

 

9.     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.

 

10.  See: 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. 

 

11.   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.

 

Alabama Judges were issuing illegal orders in prior servicers names without servicers owning the victims property under their fabricated mortgages.  They were robbing the real owners Wall Street Investors Trust, the Government-Fannie Mae, Victims and more on mortgages backed by securities and around the SEC, Federal Reserve, CFPB, FDIC, and Wall Street Investors Trust, and more, in their money laundering scam, far worse prior to and after the (2016) election.  They got worse after the (2016) election far worse than before guaranteed.

 

Focus on Judge York’s Order they used for an Illegal Eviction and Ejectment action, notice its styled in the servicers names after OCWEN purchased Residential Capital Corporation aka Residential Capital LLC Servicing Unit-Platform, which included GMAC Mortgage LLC. 

 

It look like the prior services and their law firms stole the money that purchased the platform-servicing units and went back and stole the mortgages using deceptive practices or to prevent from paying the victims around the SEC, Federal Reserve, Wall Street Investors Trust, FDIC, CFPB, and More, on CONSENT and ENFORCEMENT ORDERS they VIOLATED, this cannot be ignored or denied its recorded facts proving something is wrong here.  See file attachments.

 

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. §1962. Prohibited activities

 

GMAC Mortgage LLC was a Servicer who filed False Claims violating the false claims acts, they were money laundering and more with the use of illegal orders from corrupt judges based upon fraud and fraud upon courts violating federal and state laws.  RICO laws were violated as well, mail and wire fraud and more.

Why was Alabama’s State Court’s handling securities fraud issues, federal questions, federal issues, federal order violations, diversity jurisdiction and more related to both party’s bankruptcy cases..?

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. §1962. Prohibited activities .  The additional lawyers link to this crime is listed on the CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE filed in the Supreme Court Of The United States Under Case 18-7070.

Corla Jackson suppose to be protected under the Whistle Blowers Laws, she was the Wall Street Whistle Blower that bust these crooks initially to date and more from (2005-2019) guaranteed.  This complaint is in reference to all bankruptcy issues, federal questions, diversity, and hate crime and more from retaliation because Corla Jackson busted the crooks that robbed her and government as well as other victims by telling her story and filing complaints after complaints to date, its recorded facts.   

 

This is an update from August 18, 2017. 

The law firms for the Servicers were having Mobile County Sherriff’s Department Enforce their Illegal Orders they obtained From Judge York In State Courts and More based Upon Fraud and Fraud Upon The Courts without lack of standing.  This is technically a White Collar Crime Robbery with the use of the Mobile County Sheriff’s Dept doing illegal lock-outs of victims out their homes so they could take over them illegally for profits with the law firms and their affiliate firms and Servicers, it’s a money laundering scam violating securities agreements, enforcement orders consent orders and more that was covered up guaranteed.

 

Appendix A:

Update from August 18, 2017

 

 

Appendix B:

Illegal Orders Issued and Enforced under the Servicer GMAC Mortgage LLC, whom couldn’t answer of file a complaint which is fraud. They didn’t own the property when they created their illegal mortgage to themselves without conveying it January 3, 2005.  The complaints were usually styled in the Services name vs. their victims which is a Federal Crime and more, breaching securities laws around the SEC, Federal Reserve, FDIC, CFPB, Wall Street Investors Trust and more Guaranteed.  The Lies is Over!

 

They were illegally foreclosing in victims name under fabricated mortgages without recording and conveying their mortgages between the victims and the services that filed the complaints illegally, prior to their illegal foreclosures to themselves, using deceptive practices with illegal orders based upon fraud and fraud upon courts from corrupted judges. 

 

The judges that issued the illegal orders knew better, they were involved, and willfully committed fraud and fraud upon the courts for the Alabama State firms and their Affiliate Firms for illegal profits personal gain or favor which is a bigger crime because victims were robbed of their identity and credit first that crated their illegal mortgages that they never covered until after they conducted their illegal foreclosure getting a foreclosure deed to themselves, this is money laundering, wire fraud, mail fraud and more guaranteed. 

 

 

This Company Is Not Closed As Of 2.5.2019  

 

On December 17, 2013, GMAC Mortgage, LLC  went out of business as per its Chapter 11 liquidation filing under

bankruptcy. GMAC Mortgage, LLC operates as a home mortgage originator. The company provides mortgage services

for loan accounts, including billing, payment, and general customer services. Its mortgage programs for homebuyers

include fixed and adjustable rate mortgages, and FHA and VA loans. The company was formerly known as GMAC

Mortgage Corporation. The company was incorporated in 1968 and is headquartered in Fort Washington, Pennsylvania.

GMAC Mortgage, LLC operates as a subsidiary of GMAC Residential Holding Company, LLC. 

 

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. §1962. Prohibited activities

 

GMAC MORTGAGE LLC, and OCWEN and their affiliates company’s Altisource, HLSS, Deutsche Bank and more, continued to violate the FALSE CLAIMS ACT LAWS RICO AND MORE, THEY GOT WORSE BETWEEN (2016-2019).

 

 

Corla Reeves Jackson Busted The Servicers Judges And All Guaranteed 

Backed By The Evidence And More Its Facts...

 

Jackson Says She Knew They Were Going To Retaliate

Because They Are Busted Big Time Guaranteed!

 

 

GMAC Mortgage Corporation ET, AL.: The filing of a bankruptcy petition triggers the automatic stay that halts most pre-petition litigation against a debtor. See 11 U.S.C. §362(a)(1). The stay does not, however, suspend the commencement or continuation of criminal proceedings against a debtor. See 11 U.S.C. §362(b)(1). Generally, actions for civil contempt are considered private collection devices 8 The Court subsequently granted (Corla Jackson) Automatic Stay. See Order (March 1, 2006) And After (March 1, 2006) Granting Corla Jackson Relief Of Automatic Stay” and Denying GMAC Mortgage Corporation et, al.) Of being a Creditor) period.  (Management’s Motion Pursuant to Fed. R. Bankr. P. §2004, under Bankruptcy Case #: (05-13142 MAM 13).   
 

  An affirmative defense to a civil lawsuit or criminal charge is a fact or set of facts other than those alleged by the plaintiff or prosecutor which, if proven by the defendant, defeats or mitigates the legal consequences of the defendant's otherwise unlawful conduct.  In civil lawsuits, affirmative defenses include the statute of limitations, the statute of frauds, and waiver. In criminal prosecutions, examples of affirmative defenses are self defense,[1] insanity, and the statute of limitations .   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.

BREAKING NEWS CONFIRMED: READ MORE

 

 

AFTER WILBUR ROSS PURCHASED (AHM) AND (OPTION ONE MORTGAGE CORPORATION) APRIL 30, 2008  THIS IS WHAT OCCURRED NEXT...

 

They Violated 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

 

TO BE CONTINUED

 

 

Bankruptcy crime is known as bankruptcy fraud, and it is prosecuted under 18 USC 152. The statute makes it a criminal offense

 

Federal prosecutors can prosecute bankruptcy crimes through sections 152 through 157 of Title 18 of the United States Code.

 

any creditor to make a false claim against the debtor, or receive property outside the bankruptcy and Bankruptcy Discharge January 20, 2010 from the debtor. They all knew what they were doing at Jackson expense to date in this hate crime corruption conspiracy committing perjury To Date 

 

During bankruptcy, the court will appoint an trustee to administer the debtor’s estate. 18 USC 153 governs conduct of the trustee. It is a crime for a trustee, custodian, marshal, or any other officer to knowingly and fraudulently appropriate property. It is a criminal offense to embezzle, spend, or transfer any property or secrets, or to destroy any document that is in that person’s charge.

 

The United States Attorney will prosecute bankruptcy fraud using these specific statutes as well as other criminal statutes:

·         Perjury. 18 USC 1621. Perjury is punished by a maximum of 5 years in prison.

·         Conspiracy. 18 USC 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 USC 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 USC 1343. Mail fraud has the same penalties as wire fraud.

·         Bank fraud. 18 USC 1344. Bank fraud is a criminal offense with a possible penalty of 30 years imprisonment and $1,000,000 fine.

·         RICO (racketeering). 18 USC 1962. The sentence for a RICO charge can be 20 years incarceration.

·         Finally, 18 USC 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 USC 157 also applies to involuntary bankruptcies. This statute is based on the wire, mail, and bank fraud statutes. See 18 USC 1341, 1343, and 1344, respectively.

 

A defendant can be charged with conspiracy based on statutes within the criminal code

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.

 

 

 

THIS IS WHAT YOU CALL BUSTED!

 

LOOK WHAT JUDGE MARTIN GLENN DID TO THIS LAWYER THAT BUSTED HIM, THIS IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL!

 

JUDGE MARTIN GLENN WAS COMMITTING FRAUD UPON THE COURT AS WELL IN NEW YORK.  CORLA JACKSON NAME WAS MENTION ON PAGE (8) AT THE FOOTER OF THE PAGE.

 

READ MORE

 

 

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 WAS ALL COVERED UP READ MORE

 

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

 

 

 

BREAKING NEWS CONFIRMED

 

The Mobile County Circuit Courts Did Not Have Jurisdiction Over Jackson Original Complaint Anymore" Involving Any Issues Between (Corla Jackson And GMAC Mortgage) And Its Subsidiary's Linked To This Case Period Because" a notice of removal was signed pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal Laws" Which Act As An Original Complaint Under" 72 of title 28, U.S.C.

 

How Did The Judges In Alabama Issue Orders To GMAC Mortgage LLC Closed The Orders Issued After GMAC Mortgage LLC Closed Is Fraud Because GMAC Mortgage LLC Was Closed and They Never Recorded and Conveyed Their Mortgage Between Corla Jackson and GMAC Mortgage Corporation ET, AL., January 3, 2005 or Prior To The Illegal Foreclosure June 1, 2012 Without The Demand By Jury Trial As Jackson Paid For January 18, 2012 Styled Corla Jackson vs. GMAC Mortgage Corporation ET, AL. 

 

READ MORE 1    2    3    4    5    6

 

 

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).

 

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.

 

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.
 

 

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, 91US 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 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.


 

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).


 

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.”

 

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

 

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

 

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).

 

 

 

 

A NEW DEED and Conveyances were required to be recorded prior to the illegal foreclosure June 1, 2012 each time the property was sold and conveyed: 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 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 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).

 

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).

 

THE JUDGE ORDERS WERE FRAUD GMAC MORTGAGE LLC WAS CLOSED AND THEY HAD WITHDRAWN FROM DOING BUSINESS IN ALABAMA!

 

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

 

FRAUD UPON THE COURT: In the United States, when an officer of the court is found to have fraudulently presented facts to court so that the court is impaired in the impartial performance of its legal task, the act, known as “fraud upon the court”, is a crime deemed so severe and fundamentally opposed to the operation of justice that it is not subject to any statute of limitation: Officers of the court include: lawyers, judges, referees, and those appointed; guardian ad litem, parenting time expeditors, mediators, rule 114 neutrals, evaluators, administrators, special appointees, and any others whose influence are part of the judicial mechanism. Fraud upon the court” has been defined by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to “embrace that species of fraud which does, or attempts to, defile the court itself, or is a fraud perpetrated by officers of the court so that the judicial machinery cannot perform in the usual manner its impartial task of adjudging cases that are presented for adjudication.

 

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

 

A 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 Has Retained The Top Of The Line Attorney Specialized In This Area This Lawyer Do Not Play! This Is The First Time Corla Jackson Has Obtained A Lawyer Outside The State Of Alabama Which Means The Truth Will Finally Be Uncovered Thank GOD

 

Right Now" The Lawyer Is Updating The Supreme Court Documents On What Occurred From The Time The Case Complaint Was Filed and While The Case Was Pending Before Them and To Date and Why This Issue Should Have Never Occurred By Merits Based Upon Fraud and Fraud Upon The Courts, Constitutional Laws Were Violated As Well As Securities Laws-More That Cannot Be Ignored Or Denied Its Recorded Facts! 

 

Corla Jackson Lawyer Said The Appeal On The Rehearing In The Supreme Court Will Be Filed On Time By The Deadlines Guaranteed. Jackson Says She Never Had A Lawyer Tell Her She Will Call Her At (7:00 A.M.) Before.  Jackson Says She Be Glad When This Deadline Is Over Because This Lawyer Will Not Leave Any Stones Unturned... 

 

When This Is Over The United States Supreme Court Should Honor This Lawyer For Uncovering The Truth Behind The Lies and Errors Of The Court In This Case-Complaint To Date.  This Case Not Only Uphold Constitutional Laws, It Will Uncover Servicers That Continued To Violate Securities Fraud and More. 

 

Jackson Says The Supreme Court and Court's Need Honest Good Lawyers To Fight To Uphold The Constitutional Laws By The Rule Of Civil Procedures, Especially On Corrupted Complaints That Was Covered Up By Corrupt Law Firms and Lawyers That Committed Crimes and Obtained Illegal Orders From Judges They Never Should Have Got Causing Victims Massive Damages, Personal Injuries and More Which Cannot Be Ignored Or Denied In This Case-Complaint Its Recorded Facts Guaranteed!

 

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).

 

 

 

BY LAW JACKSON HAD ALREADY WON THIS CASE BY THE RULE OF LAW WHEN THE APPEAL WAS TAKEN ON A VOID JUDGEMENT!

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.).

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.

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.).
 

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

 

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.).


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 complaint was stayed but they did an illegal foreclosure without due process and recording and conveying their mortgage prior to the illegal foreclosure June 1, 2012. A new deed is required after a mortgage is sold and was suppose to be recorded which didn’t happen in this case-complaint. Constitutional Laws, Securities Laws, Civil Rights Laws and More Were Violated!

 

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.

 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS

 

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.).
 

 

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

 

 

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.).


 

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 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).
 



JACKSON HAD ALREADY WON THIS CASE BY THE RULE OF LAW WHEN THE APPEAL WAS TAKEN ON A VOID JUDGEMENT.



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

 

A 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).

 

 

This Webpage Is Under Construction While Being Updated