Motion and Criminal Complaint

Published on May 2016 | Categories: Types, Business/Law, Court Filings | Downloads: 61 | Comments: 0 | Views: 454
of x
Download PDF   Embed   Report

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTMIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDAFORT MYERS DIVISIONDR. JORG BUSSE, JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT, Plaintiffs,versus Case # 2:10-CV-0089-FtM-JES-SPC JOHN EDWIN STEELE; SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL; ROGER ALEJO; KENNETH M. WILKINSON; JACK N. PETERSON; GERALD BARD TJOFLAT; RICHARD JESSUP; CIRCUIT JUDGE BIRCH; CIRCUIT JUDGE DUBINA; RICHARD ALLAN LAZZARA; CHARLIE CRIST; LEE COUNTY VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD; LORI L. RUTLAND; EXECUTIVE TITLE CO.; JOHNSON ENGINEERING, INC.,Defendants.INDEPENDENT ACTION FOR RELIEF FROM GOVERNMENT CRIMES, CORRUPTION,AND FACIALLY FRAUDULENT WRIT OF EXECUTION____________________________________________________________________________/MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM CLERK’S EXPIRED-writ-FRAUD-SCHEME,FRAUD ON THE COURT, AND JUDICIAL FALSIFICATIONS OF “claim”, PRIMA FACIE SCAM “O.R. 569/875” & FORGED foreign “$5,048.60” “money judgment” AFTER APPEAL CLOSURE AND AFTER LOSS OF appellate jurisdiction in June 2009,CH. 712; 95; 73, 74; 55; §§ 695.26, 695.09, 689.01, 55.10, 55.509, FLORIDA STATUTES,FLORIDA ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN JUDGMENT ACT; AND MEMORANDUMNOTICE OF APPEAL FROM FACIALLY FRAUDULENT “order”, DOC. # 22,ORGANIZED GOVERNMENT CRIME & CORRUPTION, RACKETEERING,RETALIATION, OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, FRAUD, DEPRIVATIONS AT THE HANDS OF BUNGLING GOVERNMENT CROOK & IDIOT JAMES S. MOODY, JR.,RELATED Case # 2:10-cv-00390-FtM-30-AEP [ADOPTION BY REFERENCE]FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF EXPIRATION OF ANY AND ALL “writ”1. The Clerk of this Court fraudulently concealed and conspired with other Officials to conceal that a. there never was any genuine “$5,048.60” “judgment”;b. the D.C. Clerk never had any authority to issue the falsified “writ”, Doc. # 425, 2:2007-cv-00228;c. there never was any valid authentic “writ of execution”;d. a genuine and authentic “writ of execution” would have expired after 180 days;e. any procedure on execution shall be in accordance with the practice and procedure of the state of Florida;f. the legislative history and judicial application of Rule 69(a) make clear that the first sentence of the Rule expresses a limitation on the means of any enforcement of money judgments;g. the legislative history and judicial application of Rule 69(a) does not create a general power to issue writs of execution in disregard of the state law incorporated by the rest of the Rule.2. Rule 69(a) represents the drafters' adoption of prior practice under former 28 U.S.C. § 727, Rev.Stat. § 916. United States v. Yazell, 382 U.S. 341, 355, 86 S.Ct. 500, 15 L.Ed.2d 404 (1966); See 1937 Notes of Advisory Committee on Rules, Reprinted in, 7 J. Moore, Federal Practice P 69.01(2). MEMORANDUM: STATE LAW WOULD HAVE LIMITED effect of a valid writ3. "Section 916 prohibit(ed) the courts of the United States from adopting, recognizing, or giving effect to any form of execution, except such as was . . . a writ authorized by the laws of the state." See Custer v. McCutcheon, 283 U.S. 514, 517-18, 51 S.Ct. 530, 531, 75 L.Ed. 737 (1931). Thus, the overall intent of Rule 69(a) is to limit both the procedure for obtaining process and the effect of writs to that available under state law.4. The first sentence of Rule 69(a) does not affect this rule that state remedies are exclusive. 5. Equity Rule 8 is the source of the first sentence of Rule 69(a). 7 J. Moore, Supra at 69-10. Equity Rule 8 restricted remedies on purely monetary equitable judgments to those provided for legal causes. See Hamilton v. MacDonald, 503 F.2d 1138, 1148 (9th Cir. 1974); See 7 J. Moore, Supra at P 69.03(2). 6. Thus, the purpose of the first sentence of Rule 69(a) is to restrict remedies on money judgments to legal process and to avoid broad invocation of in personam relief.7. The courts have consistently read Rule 69(a) as limiting all federal process on money judgments to the type of process available under state law. 8. Here, Florida law did not give any effect to the facially fraudulent writ, D

Comments

Content

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION DR. JORG BUSSE, JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT, Plaintiffs, versus Case # 2:10-CV-0089-FtM-JES-SPC

JOHN EDWIN STEELE; SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL; ROGER ALEJO; KENNETH M. WILKINSON; JACK N. PETERSON; GERALD BARD TJOFLAT; RICHARD JESSUP; CIRCUIT JUDGE BIRCH; CIRCUIT JUDGE DUBINA; RICHARD ALLAN LAZZARA; CHARLIE CRIST; LEE COUNTY VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD; LORI L. RUTLAND; EXECUTIVE TITLE CO.; JOHNSON ENGINEERING, INC., Defendants. INDEPENDENT ACTION FOR RELIEF FROM GOVERNMENT CRIMES, CORRUPTION, AND FACIALLY FRAUDULENT WRIT OF EXECUTION ____________________________________________________________________________/ MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM CLERK’S EXPIRED-writ-FRAUD-SCHEME, FRAUD ON THE COURT, AND JUDICIAL FALSIFICATIONS OF “claim”, PRIMA FACIE SCAM “O.R. 569/875” & FORGED foreign “$5,048.60” “money judgment” AFTER APPEAL CLOSURE AND AFTER LOSS OF appellate jurisdiction in June 2009, CH. 712; 95; 73, 74; 55; §§ 695.26, 695.09, 689.01, 55.10, 55.509, FLORIDA STATUTES, FLORIDA ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN JUDGMENT ACT; AND MEMORANDUM NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM FACIALLY FRAUDULENT “order”, DOC. # 22, ORGANIZED GOVERNMENT CRIME & CORRUPTION, RACKETEERING, RETALIATION, OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, FRAUD, DEPRIVATIONS AT THE HANDS OF BUNGLING GOVERNMENT CROOK & IDIOT JAMES S. MOODY, JR., RELATED Case # 2:10-cv-00390-FtM-30-AEP [ADOPTION BY REFERENCE]

FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF EXPIRATION OF ANY AND ALL “writ”

1. The Clerk of this Court fraudulently concealed and conspired with other Officials to conceal that a. there never was any genuine “$5,048.60” “judgment”; b. the D.C. Clerk never had any authority to issue the falsified “writ”, Doc. # 425, 2:2007cv-00228; c. there never was any valid authentic “writ of execution”; d. a genuine and authentic “writ of execution” would have expired after 180 days; e. any procedure on execution shall be in accordance with the practice and procedure of the state of Florida; f. the legislative history and judicial application of Rule 69(a) make clear that the first sentence of the Rule expresses a limitation on the means of any enforcement of money judgments; g. the legislative history and judicial application of Rule 69(a) does not create a general power to issue writs of execution in disregard of the state law incorporated by the rest of the Rule. 2. Rule 69(a) represents the drafters' adoption of prior practice under former 28 U.S.C. § 727, Rev.Stat. § 916. United States v. Yazell, 382 U.S. 341, 355, 86 S.Ct. 500, 15 L.Ed.2d 404 (1966); See 1937 Notes of Advisory Committee on Rules, Reprinted in, 7 J. Moore, Federal Practice P 69.01(2). MEMORANDUM: STATE LAW WOULD HAVE LIMITED effect of a valid writ 3. "Section 916 prohibit(ed) the courts of the United States from adopting, recognizing, or giving effect to any form of execution, except such as was . . . a writ authorized by the laws of the state." See Custer v. McCutcheon, 283 U.S. 514, 517-18, 51 S.Ct. 530, 531, 75 L.Ed.

2

737 (1931). Thus, the overall intent of Rule 69(a) is to limit both the procedure for obtaining process and the effect of writs to that available under state law. 4. The first sentence of Rule 69(a) does not affect this rule that state remedies are exclusive. 5. Equity Rule 8 is the source of the first sentence of Rule 69(a). 7 J. Moore, Supra at 69-10. Equity Rule 8 restricted remedies on purely monetary equitable judgments to those provided for legal causes. See Hamilton v. MacDonald, 503 F.2d 1138, 1148 (9th Cir. 1974); See 7 J. Moore, Supra at P 69.03(2). 6. Thus, the purpose of the first sentence of Rule 69(a) is to restrict remedies on money judgments to legal process and to avoid broad invocation of in personam relief. 7. The courts have consistently read Rule 69(a) as limiting all federal process on money judgments to the type of process available under state law. 8. Here, Florida law did not give any effect to the facially fraudulent writ, Doc. # 425, Case 2:2007-cv-00228. 9. Rule 69 made availability and effect of federal process strictly subject to state law. 10. Therefore here, the writ of execution fraudulently issued by the clerk had no effect. 11. Because a writ fraudulently issued in the record absence of any judgment solely on the nonexistent authority of a crooked U.S. District Court clerk has no effect under Florida law, it has no effect under Rule 69(a). NOTICE OF APPEAL - ADOPTION BY REFERENCE 12. The Plaintiff Government corruption and crime victims hereby adopt by reference the attached Notice of Appeal and Falsifications in Case No. 2:10-cv-00390-FtM-30-AEP. OBSTRUCTION OF SATISFACTION OF $24.30 MANDATE & MONEY JUDGMENT

3

13. On Tuesday, August 24, 2010, PM, the Clerk of Court, Defendant Drew Heathcoat, obstructed Dr. Jorg Busse’s satisfaction of the record final mandate and judgment in the amount of $24.30. OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE AND EXTORTION VIOLATIVE OF FLORIDA LAW 14. On Tuesday, August 24, 2010, PM, Defendant Crooked Clerk Drew Heathcoat illegally demanded “$5,048.60” from Dr. Jorg Busse with criminal intent to defraud, extort, and deliberately deprive. CRIMINAL COMPLAINT 15. Dr. Jorg Busse and Jennifer Franklin Prescott complained to Fort Myers Police about the crimes perpetrated by Defendant Drew Heathcoat. FLORIDA BAR COMPLAINT 16. Defendant Heathcoat asserted to be a lawyer. Plaintiffs complained to the Florida Bar about the Defendant Heathcoat’s crimes on the record. COMPLAINT, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE U.S. COURTS 17. The Plaintiff public corruption and crime victims complained about Defendant Clerk Heathcoat to the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, Washington, D.C. 20544, James C. Duff, Director; Jill C. Sayenga, Deputy Director. ALTERATION OF OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS & RECORDS 18. Defendant Drew Heathcoat altered and conspired with other Officials and Defendants to alter the official records and documents. 19. In particular, Defendant Heathcoat fabricated ninety (90) pages, Notice of Appeal, Doc. # 436, Case 2:2007-cv-00228.

4

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Government corruption and racketeering victims demand 1. An Order relieving the Plaintiffs from the fraud on the Courts and falsified “judgment”, fake “writ of execution”, fake “lien” and fake “Lee County” “land parcels” “12-44-20-0100000.00A0” and “07-44-21-01-00001.0000”, which cannot be found on the Cayo Costa Subdivision Plat, Lee County Plat Book 3, Page 25 (1912); 2. An Order declaring the “writ of execution”, Doc. # 425, Case 2:2007-cv-00228, on its face false, falsified, and/or expired; 3. An Order taking judicial notice of said Florida Statutes; 4. An Order taking judicial notice of CH. 712; 95; 73, 74; 55; §§ 695.26, 695.09, 689.01, 55.10, 55.509, FLORIDA STATUTES, and the FLORIDA ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN JUDGMENT ACT; 5. An Order taking judicial notice of a. Art. I, s. 10, Fla. Const., stating that "No . . . law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be passed."; b. Art. I, s. 2, Fla. Const. stating that "[a]ll natural persons are equal before the law. . ."; c. Article I, s. 9, Fla. Const., stating that "[n]o person shall be deprived of . . . property without due process of law…”. See fake “lien”, fake “writ”; fake “land parcels”; fake “resolution/law”; fake “judgment”. 6. An Order declaring the facially fraudulent “writ of execution”, Doc. # 425, violative of Fed.R.Civ.P. 69 and null and void; 7. An Order declaring the lack of any genuine authentic foreign (out-of-Florida) judgment; 8. An Order declaring the falsified “writ of execution”, Doc. # 425, 2:07-cv-228, null and void;

5

9. An Order recusing and disqualifying Defendant Crooked and objectively partial Judge James S. Moody, Jr.; 10. An Order recusing Def. Crooked Charlene E. Honeywell because of publicly recorded organized crime, racketeering, corruption, bribery, retaliation against the Plaintiffs, and extortion of said money and Lot 15A in violation of Florida and Federal law; 11. An Order vacating and/or setting aside the prima facie unconstitutional and null and void “pre-filing injunction”, Doc. # 245, which was for criminal and illegal purposes of, e.g., cover-up, concealment, and conspiracy to extort said money and land, Lot 15A; 12. An Order recusing Def. Crooked S. Polster Chappell, because she conspired to conceal said falsifications and extend the record racketeering and retaliation; 13. An Order vacating and/or setting aside any and all orders by Defendants Sheri Polster Chappell and Charlene Edwards Honeywell, because they were procured through fraud, and falsification and destruction of official records, documents, and conclusive evidence; 14. An Order declaring that Defendant K. M. Wilkinson did NOT “have any lien”; 15. An Order declaring that Defendant Wilkinson did NOT “hold any $5,048.60 judgment” as falsely pretended and falsified by said Defendant Wilkinson and Defendant Crooked Attorney JACK N. PETERSON [see falsified, fraudulent and deceptive “affidavits” asserting a fake “July 29, 2009 judgment” in the Collier and Lee County Public Records; 16. An EMERGENCY Order suspending and enjoining as absolutely mandatory any proceedings on any illegal and criminal execution in violation of, e.g., Chapters 55 and 56, Fla. Stat., and the 4th, 14th, 1st, and 7th U.S. Const. Amendments, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961 – 1968; 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985, 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242; s. 838.022, Fla. Stat.;

6

17. An Order sanctioning Defendant Attorney JACK N. PETERSON for recorded perjury and conspiring with Def. Wilkinson and other Government Officials to extort, racketeer, retaliate, and deliberately deprive Dr. Jorg Busse and Jennifer Franklin Prescott; 18. An Order declaring the final record mandate in the amount of $24.30 paid; 19. An Order vacating and setting aside the facially oppressive and unconstitutional “pre-filing injunction”, Doc. # 245, Case No. 2:2009-cv-00791, which on its face was for criminal and illegal purposes of racketeering, retaliation, intimidation, oppression, and “protection” of the organized Criminals and criminal Defendants in this Court and the 11th Circuit; 20. An Order restraining and preventing the record violations of section 1962 under the RICO civil provisions; 21. An Order declaring the lack of any recorded mandate and/or money judgment other than the $24.30, which was “issued as mandate on June 11, 2009” and recorded on June 15, 2009 pursuant to the certified Docket, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228, U.S. District Court, M.D. Florida, Fort Myers Division; 22. An Order declaring that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit had lost jurisdiction on 06/11/2009, as had also been evidenced by its own Case Docket, 08-13170-BB]; 23. An Order sanctioning and punishing Defendant Kenneth M. Wilkinson for the publicly recorded falsifications of, e.g., said fake “judgment”, “land parcels”, fake “resolution”, extortion, and racketeering, all of which obstructed justice; 24. An Order declaring INSTRUMENT 4371834, O.R. 4517 PG 1914, Collier County Public Records, and the equally fraudulent filing in Lee County part of a racketeering, extortion, and fraud scheme

7

25. An Order restraining any further racketeering by Defendant Government Officials and in particular the illegal forced selling of Plaintiffs’ said riparian Cayo Costa property, Lot 15A, in the absence of any recorded “$5,048.60” “judgment”; 26. An Order dissolving and/or reorganizing the corrupt Government enterprise under, e.g., civil RICO, and 18 U.S.C. 1964(a); 27. An Order removing the publicly recorded corrupting influence and make due provision for said express fundamental rights of innocent persons under the Florida and Federal Constitutions and, e.g., the 14th, 1st, 7th, 4th, 5th, and 11th U.S. Constitutional Amendments; 28. An EMERGENCY Order recusing Defendant Crooked, Objectively Partial, and Unfit Government Racketeer John E. Steele; 29. An Order making the Government enterprise of record subject of injunctive relief, because it is designed to aid the illegal enterprise of, e.g., obstructing justice, retaliating and punishing, and extorting money, Government fees, and property; 30. An Order enjoining said U.S. Courts from retaliating against the Plaintiffs because they blew the whistle on Government crimes & corruption, rather than punishing the Defendant Racketeers of record and providing remedies and relief to the Plaintiff racketeering and corruption victims; 31. An EMERGENCY Order recusing Defendant Crooked and Objectively Partial and Unfit Judge C. E. Honeywell; 32. An EMERGENCY Order recusing Defendant Corrupt and Objectively Partial and Unfit Judge S. Polster Chappell; 33. An Order for equitable relief;

8

34. An Order declaring Plaintiffs’ record title to Lot 15A, Cayo Costa, free & clear and unencumbered; 35. An Order declaring fake “land parcels” “12-44-20-01-00000.00A0” and “07-44-21-0100001.0000” falsified and prima facie forgeries as conclusively evidenced by the 1912 Cayo Costa Plat in Lee County Plat Book 3, Page 25; 36. An Order for EMERGENCY relief from the publicly recorded public corruption, extortion, coercion, fraud, and concealment in said Courts; 37. An Order for compensatory damages; 38. An Order for triple punitive damages; 39. An Order for triple punitive damages under, e.g., Civil RICO, 18 U.S.C. § 1964, 1964(c); 40. An Order for expenses, costs, legal expenses, and fees; 41. An Order enjoining any and all Governments and the Defendants and Officials from any trespass onto the private undedicated “Cayo Costa” “Subdivision” as legally described in reference to said 1912 Plat in PB 3 PG 25; 42. An Order declaring the prima facie forgeries of non-existent “land parcels” “12-44-20-0100000.00A0” and “07-44-21-01-00001.0000” fraudulent and criminal acts of record; 43. An Order permanently enjoining any and all entries and publications of any “resolution 569/875”, “O.R. 569/875”, “legislative act 569/875”, and non-existent “land parcels” “1244-20-01-00000.00A0” and “07-44-21-01-00001.0000” from any and all Government records and publications; 44. An Order permanently enjoining any and all Governments and Defendants from fraudulently “claiming” “asserting” “publishing” Government ownership of the street lands along the

9

Gulf of Mexico as legally described and conveyed in reference to the Plat of the prima facie private “Cayo Costa” Subdivision; 45. An Order enjoining and restraining any extortion of property and money and foreclosure fraud by Defendants Eugene C. Turner, Richard D. DeBoest, II, Chene M. Thompson, and Hugh D. Hayes.

___________________________ /s/Jorg Busse, M.D., M.M., M.B.A. Private Attorney General; Plaintiff public corruption & racketeering victim 10 Benning ST # 135 West Lebanon, NH 03784-3402, U.S.A. c/o International Court of Justice Peace Palace The Hague, Netherlands _____________________ [/s/Jennifer Franklin Prescott] Private Attorney General; Plaintiff Government racketeering & corruption victim 10 Benning Street # 135 West Lebanon, NH 03784-3402, U.S.A. c/o International Court of Justice Peace Palace The Hague, Netherlands

10

STATE OF FLORIDA SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT BY CLERK OF COURT The undersigned Clerk of Court acknowledges on this 24th day of August, 2010, receipt from Dr. Jorg Busse, Plaintiff, Case 2:2007-cv-00228, purported judgment debtor, of $30.00, comprised of $24.30 face amount of the June 2009 final mandate/judgment; and $5.70 miscellaneous costs. Pursuant to section 55.141, Florida Statutes, said sum is again paid to satisfy the judgment for “copies” under Fed.R.App.P. 39, Doc. # 365, and to discharge that certain final judgment and mandate in the amount of $24.30 procured through fraud in favor of Defendant Kenneth M. Wilkinson (fictitious judgment holder), whose last known address is Lee County Property Appraiser Thompson ST, Fort Myers, FL 33901. Here, Defendant crooked Official Kenneth M. Wilkinson did not file any authentic affidavit as required; did not file any lis pendens; and did not record said final mandate and $24.30 money judgment in the Public Records of Lee County. Here, neither the $24.30 nor any other judgment or debt became any lien on any property. Here in particular, no judgment ever became any lien on Plaintiff’s property, Lot 15A, Cayo Costa. The only Florida judgment was the $24.30 judgment, which was procured through fraud and fraud on the Court. Upon the execution of this satisfaction, said $24.30 judgment is satisfied and discharged. No address for the purported judgment holder was provided under section 55.10(1), Florida Statutes. Dr. Jorg Busse certifies that a copy of this Notice of Satisfaction and Discharge has been sent to Defendant “land parcel” Forger [facially forged Lee County parcel “12-44-20-0100000.00A0”] Kenneth M. Wilkinson, purported holder of said $24.30 judgment at Lee County Property Appraiser’s Office, Thompson ST, Fort Myers, FL 33901 by certified U.S.P.S. mail with return receipt requested. Hereby, Dr. Jorg Busse applies that the Clerk of Court shall pay over to the purported judgment holder, Defendant “judgment and land parcel” Forger Kenneth M. Wilkinson the full amount of the payment received, less the clerk’s fees for issuing execution on such judgment, if any has been issued.

Clerk of Court, Fort Myers, Florida, August 25th day of 2010

11

SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT; DUTIES OF CLERK OF COURT, § 55.141, F.S. (1) All judgments and decrees for the payment of money rendered in the courts of this state of Florida and which have become final, may be satisfied at any time prior to the actual levy of the purported fraudulent execution issued thereon by payment of the full amount of such judgment or decree, with interest thereon, plus the costs of the issuance, if any, of execution thereon into the registry of the court where rendered. (2) Upon such payment, the clerk shall execute and record in the official records a satisfaction of judgment upon payment of the recording charge prescribed in s. 28.24(12). Upon payment of the amount required in subsection (1) and the recording charge required by this subsection and execution and recordation of the satisfaction by the clerk, any lien created by the judgment is satisfied and discharged. In this Case, there was no lien. (3) (5) The satisfaction of judgment is to be executed by the clerk. Upon application of the judgment holder, the clerk shall pay over to the judgment holder the full amount of the payment received, less the clerk’s fees for issuing execution on such judgment, if any has been issued.

12

CC:

Federal Bureau of Investigation U.S. Department of Justice Eric Holder, Attorney General Barack Hussein Obama, The White House Florida Department of Law Enforcement The Florida Bar Real Property Probate and Trust Lawyer Section, The Florida Bar

13

7/31/2010

Electronic Case Filing | U.S. District Co…

U.S. District Court Middle District of Florida (Ft. Myers) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:07-cv-00228-JES-SPC
Busse v. Lee County, Florida et al Assigned to: Judge John E. Steele Referred to: Magistrate Judge Sheri Polster Chappell Case in other court: 08-13170B 09-12372-B 09-13517F 09-13519F 09-13522F 09-14281F 09-14282F 09-14284F 09-14285F 09-16211F 09-16212F 09-16213F 09-16214F 09-16335F 10-10963-I 10-10967-I 10-11884-I Cause: 28:1331 Fed. Question: Civil Rights Violation Plaintiff Jorg Busse represented by Jorg Busse P.O. Box 1126 Naples, Fl 34106-1126 239/595-7074 PRO SE Date Filed: 04/10/2007 Date Terminated: 05/06/2008 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Plaintiff Kenneth M. Roesch, Jr. TERMINATED: 09/21/2007 represented by Kelly Lina Rooth Rooth Law Group, PA Suite 322 4399 35th St N St Petersbsurg, FL 33714 727/824-6212 Fax: 727/822-8048 Email: [email protected]
1/5

ecf.flmd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.p…

7/31/2010

Electronic Case Filing | U.S. District Co…

LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Plaintiff Anita M. Roesch TERMINATED: 09/21/2007 represented by Kelly Lina Rooth (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff Troy Parnell TERMINATED: 09/21/2007 represented by William Alfred Keyes , Jr. Stewart & Keyes, PL 2125 First St - Ste 101 PO Drawer 790 Ft Myers, FL 33902 239/334-7477 Fax: 239/334-7941 Email: [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant Lee County, Florida represented by Jack Neil Peterson Lee County Attorney's Office 2115 Second St PO Box 398 Ft Myers, FL 33902 239/533-2236 Fax: 239/485-2118 Email: [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant Board of Lee County Commissioners represented by Jack Neil Peterson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant The Lee County Property Appraiser represented by Jack Neil Peterson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY
2/5

ecf.flmd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.p…

7/31/2010

Electronic Case Filing | U.S. District Co…

ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Sherri L. Johnson Dent & Johnson, Chartered 3415 Magic Oak Lane Sarasota, FL 34232 941/952-1070 Email: [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Defendant State of Florida, Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund past & present represented by Harold George Vielhauer Florida Department of Environmental Protection MS 35 3900 Commonwealth Blvd Tallahassee, FL 32399-3000 850/245-2242 Fax: 850/245-2296 Email: [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Linda Kathryn Funchess Florida Department of Environmental Protection MS 35 3900 Commonwealth Blvd Tallahassee, FL 32399-3000 850/245-2242 Fax: 850/245-2296 Email: [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Reagan Kathleen Russell Florida Department of Environmental Protection* MS 35 3900 Commonwealth Blvd Tallahassee, FL 32399-3000 Email: [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
ecf.flmd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.p… 3/5

7/31/2010

Electronic Case Filing | U.S. District Co…

Defendant Kenneth M. Wilkinson represented by Jack Neil Peterson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Sherri L. Johnson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Defendant Lee County Attorney represented by Jack Neil Peterson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant State of Florida Department of Environmental Protection, and Division of Recreation and Parks represented by Harold George Vielhauer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Linda Kathryn Funchess (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Reagan Kathleen Russell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Defendant Jack N. Peterson

Date Filed 06/15/2009

#

Docket Text

365 USCA judgment (certified copy) affirming the decision of the District Court as to 341 Notice of appeal filed by Jorg Busse Entered on docket 03/05/09. USCA number: 0813170-BB. Issued as Mandate on: 06/11/09 (slp) (Entered: 06/16/2009)

PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt
ecf.flmd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.p… 4/5

7/31/2010

Electronic Case Filing | U.S. District Co…

07/31/2010 18:54:05 PACER Login: we0083 Client Code:

2:07-cv-00228-JES-SPC Starting with Docket Search document: 365 Ending with document: Description: Report Criteria: 365 Billable Pages: 3 Cost: 0.24

ecf.flmd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.p…

5/5

Case 2:07-cv-00228-JES-SPC Document 365

Filed 06/15/09 Page 1 of 16

Case 2:07-cv-00228-JES-SPC Document 365

Filed 06/15/09 Page 2 of 16

Case 2:07-cv-00228-JES-SPC Document 365

Filed 06/15/09 Page 3 of 16

Case 2:07-cv-00228-JES-SPC Document 365

Filed 06/15/09 Page 4 of 16

Case 2:07-cv-00228-JES-SPC Document 365

Filed 06/15/09 Page 5 of 16

Case 2:07-cv-00228-JES-SPC Document 365

Filed 06/15/09 Page 6 of 16

Case 2:07-cv-00228-JES-SPC Document 365

Filed 06/15/09 Page 7 of 16

Case 2:07-cv-00228-JES-SPC Document 365

Filed 06/15/09 Page 8 of 16

Case 2:07-cv-00228-JES-SPC Document 365

Filed 06/15/09 Page 9 of 16

Case 2:07-cv-00228-JES-SPC Document 365

Filed 06/15/09 Page 10 of 16

Case 2:07-cv-00228-JES-SPC Document 365

Filed 06/15/09 Page 11 of 16

Case 2:07-cv-00228-JES-SPC Document 365

Filed 06/15/09 Page 12 of 16

Case 2:07-cv-00228-JES-SPC Document 365

Filed 06/15/09 Page 13 of 16

Case 2:07-cv-00228-JES-SPC Document 365

Filed 06/15/09 Page 14 of 16

Case 2:07-cv-00228-JES-SPC Document 365

Filed 06/15/09 Page 15 of 16

Case 2:07-cv-00228-JES-SPC Document 365

Filed 06/15/09 Page 16 of 16

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT, DR. JORG BUSSE, Plaintiffs, versus Case # 2:10-cv-00390-FtM-30-AEP

CHARLENE EDWARDS HONEYWELL; SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL; JOHN EDWIN STEELE; JENNIFER WAUGH CORINIS; A. BRIAN ALBRITTON, Defendants. NOTICE OF APPEAL INDEPENDENT ACTION FOR RELIEF FROM GOVERNMENT CRIMES, CORRUPTION, FACIALLY FRAUDULENT WRIT OF EXECUTION, AND FORGED AND VOID judgments and orders ____________________________________________________________________________/ NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM FACIALLY FRAUDULENT “order”, DOC. # 22, ORGANIZED GOVERNMENT CRIME & CORRUPTION, RACKETEERING, RETALIATION, OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, FRAUD, DEPRIVATIONS AT THE HANDS OF BUNGLING GOVERNMENT CROOK & IDIOT JAMES S. MOODY, JR. NOTICE OF FALSIFICATIONS OF “claim”, PRIMA FACIE SCAM “O.R. 569/875”, AND FORGED foreign “$5,048.60” “money judgment” AFTER APPEAL CLOSURE, CH. 712; 95; 73, 74; 55; §§ 695.26, 695.09, 689.01, 55.10, 55.509, FLORIDA STATUTES, FLORIDA ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN JUDGMENT ACT

NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM FRAUDULENT “order” [DOC. # 22] & RACKETEERING 1. The Plaintiff unimpeachable record owners of and holders of indisputable unencumbered title to Lot 15A, Cayo Costa, S-T-R-A-P 12-44-20-01-00015.015A, hereby appeal from the publicly recorded prima facie Government racketeering and extortion of

“$5,048.60” and/or “$5,000.00” and their accreted riparian Gulf-front Lot 15A [by criminal means of Doc. # 22] as perfectly conveyed and legally described, Plaintiffs’ publicly recorded WARRANTY DEED, INSTR 4450927, Collier County Public Records, INSTR 2010000171344, Lee County Public Records, 2 pages: “… Lot 15A, private undedicated residential Cayo Costa Subdivision, as recorded and legally described in Plat Book 3, Page 25 (1912), Public Records of Lee County, Florida, U.S.A. Property I.D./S.T.R.A.P.: 12-44-20-01-00015.015A [“A” for “Accreted”; see PB 1, PP. 48, 51, 52] TOGETHER with all the tenements, hereditaments, appurtenances, publicly recorded natural accretions and riparian rights thereto belonging or in anywise appertaining. GRANTORS further warrant the within described riparian accreted Gulf-front property is not presently homestead property and that the Grantors’ legal address is: Post Office Box 7561, Naples, FL 34101-7561. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same in fee simple forever. AND the Grantors hereby covenant with said Grantees that the Grantors are lawfully seized of said riparian upland and adjoining riparian street land on the Gulf of Mexico in fee simple; that the Grantors have good right and lawful authority to sell and convey said riparian Gulf-front upland and street land on said Gulf as legally described in reference to said private 1912 Subdivision Plat; that the Grantors hereby fully warrant the unimpeachable record title to said riparian accreted street and up-lands on the Gulf of Mexico and pursuant to the Lee County, State of Florida, and Federal Public Records have defended and will defend their marketable record title against the lawful and unlawful claims of all persons whomsoever, and in particular, against the prima facie unlawful and criminal claims of Lee County, the State of Florida, and the United States of America, and their corrupt Agents, Officials of record, and the Defendants in their private individual capacities of record such as, e.g., Joel F. Dubina, Charlene E. Honeywell, Sheri Polster Chappell, Gerald B. Tjoflat, John E. Steele, Stanley F. Birch, Jr., Tony West; and that said accreted riparian street and up-lands on the Gulf of Mexico are free of any legitimate and valid encumbrances and/or judgments, except taxes accruing subsequent to December 31, 2010; zoning, building code and other restrictions legitimately imposed by lawful governmental authority; outstanding oil, gas, mineral, and or any other interests of record, if any; and private riparian water-front easements of record, restrictions, if any, and unimpeachable private implied street and alley easements of record as conveyed in reference to said 1912 Plat.”

2

NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM CORRUPT JUDGE MOODY’S ORDER, DOC. # 22 2. The Plaintiff unimpeachable record owners of Lot 15A, Cayo Costa, S-T-R-A-P 12-44-2001-00015.015A, hereby appeal from the publicly recorded prima facie organized Government crime, corruption, racketeering, extortion, retaliation, obstruction of justice, fraud, fraud on the Court, deliberate deprivations, et al., “Doc. # 22, filed 07/27/2010”, by Defendant U.S. Judge and Racketeer James S. Moody, Jr. DEF. MOODY’S FRAUDULENT AND IDIOTIC PRETENSES OF “claim as public land” 3. Under fraudulent pretenses of a facially idiotic and incomprehensible “claim as public land” and fictitious “$5,000 sanctions”, Doc. # 22, Defendant Racketeer Moody conspired to extort Lot 15A and money from the Plaintiff unimpeachable record owners of Lot 15A, Cayo Costa. COVER-UP OF RECORD CRIMINALITY & ILLEGALITY OF “execution”, DOC. # 22 4. Here, no domesticated foreign judgment existed. Therefore, Defendant Forger and Racketeer Kenneth M. Wilkinson could not sequester, levy on, or seize control of, any assets of Dr. Jorg Busse. Here in exchange for bribes, Defendant Crooked Judge James S. Moody, Jr., covered up, concealed, and conspired to cover up and conceal the Government crimes, corruption, and racketeering. PERVERSION OF RULE 69 & FABRICATION OF “writ of execution” 5. Rule 69, Fed.R.Civ.P., did not apply or “govern” to any “extent”: “(1) Money Judgment; Applicable Procedure. A money judgment is enforced by a writ of execution, unless the court directs otherwise. The procedure on execution — and in proceedings supplementary to and in aid of judgment or execution — must accord with the procedure of the state where the court is located, but a federal statute governs to the extent it applies.”

3

Here, “the procedure on execution” did not “accord with the procedure of the state [Florida] where the court is located.” 6. Here, the recorded final money judgment and mandate was for $24.30, and the federal statute governed as to the extent it applied: Here, Rule 69 did not apply at all, and the Clerk was never authorized to issue the fraudulent and forged “writ of execution”, Doc. # 425. 7. Here, Defendant Crooked Officials Kenneth M. Wilkinson, Jack N. Peterson, Sheri Polster Chappell, John Edwin Steele, and Drew Heathcoat (D.C. Clerk) idiotically conspired to pervert Rule 69 for criminal purposes of, e.g., racketeering, retaliation, extortion, fraud, fraud on the Court, and obstruction of justice, and falsified an unauthorized “writ of execution”, Doc. ## 425, 386, 432, 424, 338. LACK OF exemplified copy OF FACIALLY FORGED “foreign judgment” 8. Florida's statutory law required that a. An exemplified out-of-state and/or foreign judgment first be recorded in the county in which the purported debtor resides and/or has any property; b. An attached certificate be signed three times, twice by the clerk of the issuing court, and once by the presiding judge. 9. Here, the facially forged and falsified foreign “July 2009 judgment” was a. Never validated; b. Never authenticated; c. Never certified. Here, the purported judgment creditor, Dr. Jorg Busse [and Jennifer Franklin Prescott], filed lawsuits and appeals on the fake foreign judgment and attacked the prima facie criminality, illegality, and nullity of Defendant Crooked Official Kenneth M. Wilkinson’s fraud, extortion, and racketeering scheme. See, e.g., U.S.A. Ex. Rel., et al. v. U.S.A., et al.

4

10. Here, Kenneth M. Wilkinson had never been entitled to begin any collection efforts and “execute” on Dr. Busse’s assets. 11. Def. Wilkinson conspired with Jack N. Peterson, Esq., and other Defendants and Officials to perpetrate record fraud on the Courts and falsify a “writ of execution””, e.g., Doc. ## 386, 432, 424, 425. 12. Def. “land parcel” Forger Wilkinson did a. Not record any authentic judgment; b. Not domesticate any genuine foreign judgment; c. Not file a case. 13. Here, no case number existed for the clerk of court to, e.g., a. issue a writ of execution, and b. schedule any depositions to review a purported debtor's assets. STAY OF ENFORCEMENT OF FACIALLY FORGED foreign judgment 14. § 55.509, Florida Statutes, Stay of enforcement of foreign judgment, provides: “(1) If, within 30 days after the date the foreign judgment is recorded, the judgment debtor files an action contesting the jurisdiction of the court which entered the foreign judgment or the validity of the foreign judgment and records a lis pendens directed toward the foreign judgment, the court shall stay enforcement of the foreign judgment and the judgment lien upon the filing of the action by the judgment debtor. (2) If the judgment debtor shows the circuit or county court any ground upon which enforcement of a judgment of any circuit or county court of this state would be stayed, the court shall stay enforcement of the foreign judgment for an appropriate period, upon requiring the same security for satisfaction of the judgment which is required in this state.” Here, Defendant “land parcel” Forger and Racketeer Kenneth M. Wilkinson, Lee County Appraiser’s Office, had fraudulently pretended a. a falsified foreign or out-of-Florida “July 29, 2009 judgment”, Doc. ## 386, 432;

5

b. unauthorized recordation of a fake “July judgment” in Lee County Circuit Court; c. a falsified “writ of execution” illegally issued by the Clerk of U.S. District Court. 15. Here, the U.S. District Court, Middle Division of Florida: a. had no jurisdiction; b. had no authority to enforce the fake foreign judgment; c. had no authority to issue the falsified writ of execution, Doc. # 425, Case 2:07-cv-00228. Here, the Defendant Clerk of U.S. District Court had no authority to enforce the facially forged and falsified out-of-Florida judgment and/or “July 29, 2009 judgment”. Here, said U.S. Clerk could not have possibly enforced the fake out-of-Florida foreign judgment “recorded” by the Clerk of Florida or Lee County Circuit Court. NON-OPERATIVE “lien” AND FAKE “foreign judgment” 16. § 55.507, F.S., Lien; when effective, states: “A foreign judgment does not operate as a lien until 30 days after the mailing of notice by the clerk…” Here, the Clerk had never “mailed” any “notice” of the facially forged judgment, and the fake foreign judgment could not have possibly “operated as a lien”. PUBLICLY RECORDED FRAUD ON THE COURTS 17. Here, Defendant [Appellee] Crooked Official Kenneth M. Wilkinson was a. No judgment holder; b. No judgment creditor; c. Not entitled to enforce anything; d. Not entitled to enforce a fake foreign judgment “recorded” in State Court by unauthorized means of Doc. # 425, U.S. Case 2:2007-cv-00228;

6

Here, Plaintiff(s) had contested the “validity of the [facially forged] foreign judgment” and filed an action directed toward the prima facie fraudulent foreign judgment. Here, the Court shall stay enforcement of the fake foreign judgment and the facially forged judgment lien, § 55.509, Florida Statutes. DEFENDANT J. S. MOODY CONCEALED THAT FLORIDA LAW GOVERNED 18. Florida law governs the question of whether the proper procedures were followed on execution, Sephus v. Gozelski, 670 F.Supp. 1552, 1554 (S.D.Fla.1987): “It is clear from Rule 69 that Florida law governs the question of whether the proper procedures were followed on execution, there being no federal statute applicable to the contrary. Juneau Spruce Corp. v. International Longshoremen's & Warehousemen's Union, 128 F. Supp. 697 (D.C. Hawaii 1955). *fn2" “Section 56.29(1), Florida Statues,*fn2 provides that: When any person or entity holds an unsatisfied judgment or judgment lien obtained under chapter 55, the judgment holder or judgment lien holder may file an affidavit so stating, identifying, if applicable, the issuing court, the case number, and the unsatisfied amount of the judgment or judgment lien, including accrued costs and interest, and stating that the execution is valid and outstanding, and thereupon the judgment holder or judgment lien holder is entitled to these proceedings supplementary to execution. Fla. Stat. § 56.29(1).” “A judicial sale differs from an execution sale in that it is conducted pursuant to directions of the court and federal statutes, whereas an execution sale is by mere praecipe of the judgment creditor. United States v. Branch Coal Corp., 390 F.2d 7 (3d Cir. 1968).” Id., * fn 2. In Continental Cigar Corp. v. Edelman & Co., Inc., 397 So. 2d 957 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), the Third District Court of Appeal rejected earlier court decisions*fn3 requiring two jurisdictional prerequisites for post-judgment proceedings supplementary: (1) a returned and unsatisfied writ of execution and (2) an affidavit averring that the writ is valid and unsatisfied…” “Florida has since enacted the Florida Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act, Florida Statutes Section 55.501-55.509, which places a dual responsibility on the Clerk of Court and on the judgment creditor to give notice of the recordation of the judgment to the debtor. Fla. Stat. Section 55.505.” Id., * fn 3.

7

Here, Defendant Forger Wilkinson had never incurred actual and necessary attorney’s fees. Here, Def. Wilkinson could have never possibly incurred any attorney’s fees, because the U.S. Court of Appeals had lost jurisdiction, and “frivolity” had never been any issue in the closed appeal. See 11th Circuit “Opinion”, Doc. # 365, Case 2:2007-cv-00228. RECORD RECUSALS OF FOUR (4) JUDGES 19. On 07/27/2010, the Case was reassigned to Defendant Crooked Judge James S. Moody, Jr., after the a. Recusal of Defendant Crooked Judge John E. Steele (07/22/2010); b. Recusal of Defendant Crooked Judge Charlene E. Honeywell (06/22/2010); c. Recusal of Defendant Crooked Judge Sheri Polster Chappell (06/30/2010); d. Recusal of Judge Douglas N. Frazier (06/28/2010). DEF. JAMES S. MOODY’S 07/27/2010 PRE-MEDITATED CASE FIXING & BRIBERY 20. On the day of his re-assignment, 07/27/2010, Defendant Crooked Judge James S. Moody fixed and conspired to fix Plaintiffs’ Case in exchange for Defendants’ bribes:

8

21. Here within hours, Defendant Moody fixed and conspired to fix Plaintiff record public corruption victims’ Case and fraudulently and falsely pretended to have reviewed a. “four years” of “proceedings”; b. “eleven actions”; c. “hundreds, if not thousands, of filings”; d. “appeals, up to 20 in one case alone”; e. falsified “adoption” of a fake “1969” “resolution”. MANDATORY RECUSAL OF OBJECTIVELY PARTIAL & CORRUPT J. S. MOODY 22. Here, no fit, honest, intelligent, and reasonable judge or person in Defendant Moody’s shoes could have possibly reviewed said alleged hundreds/thousands of “filings”, “eleven actions” … and Plaintiffs’ highly meritorious and conclusively proven allegations within hours. PRIMA FACIE ARBITRARY, CAPRICIOUS, AND MALICIOUS JUDICIAL TRASH 23. Here another bungling Government idiot, Def. Judge Moody, copied and pasted “repetitive” and “incomprehensible” judicial trash, Doc. # 22, which on its very face was, e.g.: a. “patently frivolous”; “baseless”; b. absurd; idiotic; “abusive”; c. irrational; unintelligent; d. corrupted and “vexatious”; e. arbitrary, capricious, and malicious; f. premeditated and reckless. Here, Def. Crook Moody “impacted the resources” of the Court(s) and further tarnished its publicly recorded reputation of organized crime and corruption, 28 U.S.C. § 455.

9

RECORD INSANITY & IMPOSSIBILITY OF execution of lien on “claimed land” 24. In particular, Def. Crooked Judge Moody concealed and conspired to conceal that as a matter of law, execution proceedings and/or enforcement of a facially forged lien and “writ of execution” in the record absence of any “July 29 judgment”, Doc. ## 425, 432, 386, Case 2:2007-cv-00228, were impossible if there would have [hypothetically] been any “claim as public land”. 25. Here, the Clerk of U.S. District Court conspired with Defendant Crooked U.S. Judges to issue a writ of execution, Doc. # 425, while the Court, its Crooked Judges, and Def. Corrupt Judge Moody idiotically and falsely pretended a Lot 15A “claim as public land”. 26. If [hypothetically] there had been involuntary alienation of Plaintiffs’ Lot 15A against Plaintiffs’ will in a court of law, and a record judgment, as a matter of law there could not have possibly been: a. any forced sale of purportedly involuntarily alienated Lot 15A; b. any genuine “writ of execution”; c. any lis pendens; d. any execution. PATTERN & POLICY OF ORGANIZED CRIME & CORRUPTION ON RECORD 27. Here in action after action, organized Criminal Judge after Judge, extended the publicly recorded premeditated pattern and policy of, e.g., fraud, corruption, extortion, fraud on the Court, Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.540. DEF. MOODY OBSTRUCTED JUSTICE & RELIEF FROM VOID orders & judgments 28. Rule 60(b)(4) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that a court may relieve a party from an order or final judgment that is void. A judgment is “void” under Rule 60(b)(4)

10

if it was rendered without jurisdiction of the subject matter or the parties or in a manner inconsistent with due process of law. DEF. MOODY’S RECORD “TIRADE” AGAINST PUBLIC CORRUPTION VICTIMS 29. This corrupt Court’s latest “order”, Doc. # 22, “in this case is not so much” an order “as it is a free-flowing, stream-of-consciousness tirade against” Plaintiff whistle-blowers and victims of Government corruption and racketeering under fraudulent pretenses of the publicly recorded “involuntary-alienation-by-fake-legislative-act-extortion scheme”, “O.R. 569/875”. PRIMA FACIE INCOMPREHENSIBILITY OF IDIOTIC “order” and “claim”, DOC. # 22 30. The law did not recognize the facially incomprehensible and absurd “claim as public land”, Doc. # 22. See Ch. 73, 74, EMINENT DOMAIN; 95, ADVERSE POSSESSION, 712, FLORIDA’S MARKETABLE RECORD TITLE ACT, Florida Statutes. 31. Here, the public perception of “judicial fraud and corruption” by Defendant Dishonorable Officials Charlene Edwards Honeywell and Def. Dishonorable John Edwin Steele were the inescapable and indisputable conclusions of any reasonable person in Defendant Moody’s shoes. 32. Here, no reasonable and intelligent person in Def. Moody’s shoes could have possibly determined that the fake “resolution/legislative act” and “$5,000 sanctions” Government scams were not prima facie extortion and fraud schemes in violation of Florida Statutes, Constitution, and law. JUDICIAL NOTICE OF PLAINTIFFS’ PUBLICLY RECORDED PERFECTED TITLE 33. § 90.201 (1), Fla. Stat., states: Matters which must be judicially noticed. A court shall take judicial notice of:

11

(1) Decisional, constitutional, and public statutory law and resolutions of the Florida Legislature and the Congress of the United States. Here, the U.S. Courts shall take judicial notice of Chapter 712, Florida Statutes, Florida’s self-enforcing Marketable Record Title Act. Here as a matter of law, Chapter 712, Florida Statutes, governed supremely and superseded the facially falsified and forged “resolution”, scam “O.R. 569/875”. Here, Defendants Lee County, FL, had no authority to pervert Florida law. JUDICIAL NOTICE OF IMPOSSIBILITY OF involuntary alienation by “resolution” 34. Here, the U.S. Courts shall take judicial notice of Chapters 73, 74, EMINENT DOMAIN, and 95, ADVERSE POSSESSION. Here as a matter of law, said Statutory Chapters governed supremely and superseded the facially falsified and forged “adoption”-“resolution”-scam “O.R. 569/875”. Here, the Government Defendants and Officials had no authority to pervert Florida law. EXPRESS FLORIDA STATUTORY PROHIBITIONS, CH. 73, 74, 95, FLA. STAT. 35. Here, Florida Statutes, law, and Constitution expressly prohibited any and all involuntary alienation. See, e.g., Ch. 73, 74, EMINENT DOMAIN; Ch. 95, ADVERSE POSSESSION. Any involuntary alienation would have strictly and necessarily been a judicial function. Here, it was elementary that no “legislative act” could have possibly divested the Plaintiffs of their Lot 15A against their will. Here, the public record, Doc. # 22, established Defendant Moody as a bungling Government idiot and crook, who disrespected and perverted the law for criminal and illegal purposes of cover-up and fraudulent concealment. JUDICIAL NOTICE OF CH. 55, § 55.10, F.S., FLORIDA FOREIGN JUDGMENT ACT 36. Here in violation of § 55.10, Florida Statutes, there were a. No Florida judgment;

12

b. No U.S. District Court judgment; c. No “July 29 judgment”; d. No domesticated judgment; e. No “simultaneous” valid affidavit, § 55.10, F.S.; f. No curative affidavit. Here, the U.S. Courts shall take judicial notice of Chapter 55, § 55.10, Florida Statutes, and Florida’s Foreign Judgment Act. PRIMA FACIE RECORD FALSIFICATION & FORGERY OF FAKE “judgment” 37. Here, Dr. Busse had challenged the prima facie falsification and forgery of a fake foreign “$5,048.60” judgment in the publicly recorded absence of any jurisdiction by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit after June 2009 and closure of Case 2008-13170-BB. 38. [Hypothetically,] had there been any foreign judgment, the judgment holder would have been required to present a certified copy of the judgment, execute an affidavit concerning the identity of the judgment holder and judgment debtor and pay the filing fee charged by the court wherein the judgment is filed. 39. Here, the clerk of court never served the purported judgment debtor, Dr. Jorg Busse, with any notice. Here, no lien had ever legally existed. CONTESTED “lien”, “writ of execution” FRAUD, EXTORTION, RACKETEERING 40. Here, Dr. Busse had contested, e.g., the fake “lien”, fake “writ of execution”, fraud, fraud on the Courts, extortion, and racketeering. 41. Here, nothing could have possibly become a “lien” on any real property of Dr. Jorg Busse. 42. Here, no Florida Court had ever issued any writ of execution. JUDICIAL NOTICE OF CH. 695, PRIMA FACIE SCAM & SHAM “claim O.R. 569/875”

13

43. Here, the U.S. Courts shall take judicial notice of Chapter 695, § 695.26, Florida Statutes, Requirements for Recording instruments affecting real property, and § 695.09, F.S., Identity of grantor. Here, Defendants Lee County, FL, had no authority to pervert Florida law. Here, prima facie scam and sham “claim” “O.R. 569/875” could not have possibly “affected real property”, because it was null and void and violated the Florida Constitution Statutes. 44. § 695.09, F.S., Identity of grantor, states: “No acknowledgment or proof shall be taken, except as set forth in s. 695.03(3), by any officer within or without the United States unless the officer knows, or has satisfactory proof, that the person making the acknowledgment is the individual described in, and who executed, such instrument or that the person offering to make proof is one of the subscribing witnesses to such instrument.” PUBLICLY RECORDED RACKETEERING & EXTORTION SCHEMES 45. Here, there were a. No witnesses; b. No notary; c. No acknowledgment; d. No grantor; e. No grant; f. No conveyance; Here, there were known racketeering, retaliation, extortion, and fraud schemes on the record. Record scam and sham “claim” “O.R. 569/875” was an extortion and racketeering scheme by organized Government Criminals who covered up, concealed, and conspired. JUDICIAL NOTICE OF 689.01, FLA. STAT., AND U.S. JUDICIAL CRIMES 46. § 689.01, How Real Estate Conveyed, Florida Statutes, provides: “No estate or interest of freehold, or for a term of more than 1 year, or any uncertain interest of, in or out of any messuages, lands, tenements or hereditaments shall be

14

created, made, granted, transferred or released in any other manner than by instrument in writing, signed in the presence of two subscribing witnesses by the party creating, making, granting, conveying, transferring or releasing such estate, interest, or term of more than 1 year, or by the party’s lawfully authorized agent, unless by will and testament, or other testamentary appointment, duly made according to law …” 47. Here, prima facie scam and fake “resolution 569/875” could not have possibly a. “created” any interest; b. “transferred” any interest; c. “conveyed” any interest. Here, the judicial and Government Defendants covered up, concealed, and conspired to conceal publicly recorded Government crimes, racketeering, extortion, and fraud. DEF. MOODY VEXATIOUSLY FIXED THE CASE IN EXCHANGE FOR BRIBES 48. Here, Def. Moody’s “order”, Doc. # 22, was “patently frivolous, baseless, vexatious, and harassing”. No intelligent, fit, and honest judge or person in Defendant J. S. Moody’s shoes could have possibly determined any a. Lot 15A “claim as public land” in violation of, e.g., Chapters 712, 73, 74, 95 Fla. Statutes; b. “resolution”; c. “adoption” of any resolution; d. any transfer of title to Lee County from Plaintiffs to Lee County against Plaintiffs’ will; e. any transfer of title by any legislative act, resolution, or law, whatsoever. PRIMA FACIE CRIMINALITY OF INCOMPREHENSIBLE “claim as public land” 49. § 90.202 (12), Fla. Stat., states: “Facts that are not subject to dispute because they are capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot be questioned.”

15

ACCURATE & READY DETERMINATION OF PLAINTIFFS’ RECORD OWNERSHIP 50. Here, Plaintiffs’ publicly recorded title to and ownership of accreted riparian Lot 15A, Cayo Costa Subdivision, as legally described in reference to the 1912 Plat of Survey in Lee County Plat Book 3, Page 25 was a. Indisputable; Ch. 712, F.S.; b. Unimpeachable; c. Unencumbered; d. Perfected; e. Marketable; f. Exclusive; g. Protected under express Florida Constitutional Guarantees; h. Protected by the fundamental right to own property; i. Protected by the fundamental right to exclude government from one’s property. See Florida’s self-enforcing Marketable Record Title Act; Ch. 712, Florida Statutes. See Plaintiffs’ publicly recorded Warranty Deed, Lot 15A, Cayo Costa, on file. PUBLICLY RECORDED ORGANIZED GOVERNMENT CRIME AND CORRUPTION 51. Defendant U.S. Judge James S. Moody, Jr., is part of a Government crime and corruption organization in Florida, U.S.A. “For approximately four years”, the publicly recorded policy and pattern have been cover-up, fraudulent concealment, obstruction of justice, racketeering, fraud, fraud on the Court, and extortion of Lot 15A, Cayo Costa, and money. GOVERNMENT FRAUD UPON THE COURT, FLA.R.CIV.P. 1.540

16

52. “For approximately four years”, Defendant U.S. Judges and Government Officials have “showered courts in the Middle District of Florida with hundreds” of prima facie corrupted fraudulent orders and communications for criminal and illegal purposes of racketeering and extortion of Lot 15A and money under fraudulent pretenses of, e.g.: a. Fake “resolution”; b. Fake “land parcels” see, e.g., “12-44-20-01-00000.00A0”; “07-44-21-01-00001.0000”; c. Fake “5,048.60 judgment”, Case 2:2007-cv-00228; d. Fake “writ of execution”, Doc. # 425, Case 2:2007-cv-00228; 53. Here, absolute power produced absolute judicial & Government corruption and the publicly recorded perpetration of fraud upon the Courts. 54. The procedural and substantive rules prohibited Defendant Moody from fixing the Case based upon the perversion of conclusive public record evidence. CONSPIRACY TO RACKETEER, EXTORT, RETALIATE, AND DEFRAUD 55. Defendant Crooked U.S. Judge James S. Moody, Jr., conspired with other Officials, Defendants, and Government gang members to racketeer, retaliate, obstruct justice, and extort money and Lot 15A, Cayo Costa, from the Plaintiff indisputable record land owners. DEF. MOODY FRAUDULENTLY CONCEALED PLAINTIFFS’ RECORD TITLE “At the heart of each case, Plaintiffs allege that they are the owners of Lot 15A in the Cayo Costa subdivision of Lee County, Florida. Plaintiffs attempt to challenge a resolution adopted in December 1969 by the Board of Commissioners of Lee County, Florida, where Lot 15A, among other property, was claimed as public land.” See Doc. # 22, p. 1. Here, Defendant Crooked U.S. Judge James S. Moody, Jr., knew, fraudulently concealed, and conspired with other Officials and Criminals to conceal that

17

a. The Plaintiffs had conclusively proven and alleged that they are the record owners of Lot 15A in the Cayo Costa subdivision of Lee County, Florida; b. The public record had conclusively evidenced that indisputably, the Plaintiffs are the unimpeachable record owners of Lot 15A in the Cayo Costa subdivision of Lee County, Florida; c. Lot 15A, Cayo Costa, was never “claimed as public land”; d. Lot 15A could not have possibly been “claimed as public land” under any law; e. The prima facie fake “claim as public land” was incomprehensible and unrecognized; f. The Plaintiffs were entitled to defend their perfected record title and prosecute; g. Plaintiffs were entitled to redress their well-proven recorded Government grievances; h. The facially forged colorless “claim” lacked any authentic legal description; i. The colorless facially forged “claim” lacked any legislative signature and name(s). DEF. MOODY FRAUDULENTLY CONCEALED NULLITY OF SHAM “claim” 56. Here in particular, Def. Crooked Judge Moody knew, fraudulently concealed, and conspired to conceal that Ch. 95, Florida Statutes, would have absolutely required Defendants Lee County, FL to pay real property taxes prior to any [hypothetical] judicial adjudication of any colorless adverse possession “claim” by Defendants Lee County, FL. 57. Here, the Plaintiffs and their predecessors in title had paid property taxes, Lot 15A, since 1912 and since the date of the publicly recorded Federal Land Patent root title. See Lee County Grantor/Grantee Property Index. 58. Here more than thirty (30) years had passed since the recordation of the Cayo Costa U.S. Land Patent root title, the statute of limitations had expired, and any and all claims had been barred and extinguished., Ch. 712, Florida Statutes.

18

59. Here, Defendant Crook and Racketeer J. S. Moody extended the Government pattern and policy of, e.g., public corruption, racketeering, retaliation, extortion, fraud on the Courts, and deliberate deprivations under fraudulent pretenses of, e.g., a legally and factually impossible and falsified “claim”, “resolution 569/875”, “legislative act”, “sanctions”, “judgment” in the record absence of any authority and jurisdiction. Here, Defendant Crook Moody had no authority to break Florida law on the record and perpetrate Government crimes under color of office. DECEPTION, TRICKERY, FRAUD; LACK OF RECORD OF ANY “claim” 60. § 695.26, Requirements for recording instruments affecting real property, provides: (1) No instrument by which the title to real property or any interest therein is conveyed, assigned, encumbered, or otherwise disposed of shall be recorded by the clerk of the circuit court unless: (a) The name of each person who executed such instrument is legibly printed, typewritten, or stamped upon such instrument immediately beneath the signature of such person and the post-office address of each such person is legibly printed, typewritten, or stamped upon such instrument; (b) The name and post-office address of the natural person who prepared the instrument or under whose supervision it was prepared are legibly printed, typewritten, or stamped upon such instrument; (c) The name of each witness to the instrument is legibly printed, typewritten, or stamped upon such instrument immediately beneath the signature of such witness; (d) The name of any notary public or other officer authorized to take acknowledgments or proofs whose signature appears upon the instrument is legibly printed, typewritten, or stamped upon such instrument immediately beneath the signature of such notary public or other officer authorized to take acknowledgment or proofs; (e) A 3-inch by 3-inch space at the top right-hand corner on the first page and a 1inch by 3-inch space at the top right-hand corner on each subsequent page are reserved for use by the clerk of the court; and (f) In any instrument other than a mortgage conveying or purporting to convey any interest in real property, the name and post-office address of each 19

grantee in such instrument are legibly printed, typewritten, or stamped upon such instrument. History. s. 1, ch. 90-183; ss. 8, 22, ch. 94-348; s. 773, ch. 97-102. 61. Here, Defendant Corrupt Judge Moody knew, concealed, and conspired to fraudulently conceal that a. No “claim” had ever legally existed; b. No “claim” had ever been legally recorded; c. No “claim” could have possibly ever legally existed; d. Any and all “claims” had been extinguished and barred, Ch. 712, 95, Fla. Stat. DEF. MOODY FRAUDULENTLY CONCEALED EXTORTION, RACKETEERING 62. Defendant Moody fraudulently asserted and pretended, Doc. # 22, p. 2: “Plaintiff Busse was sanctioned $5,000 but refused to pay.” Here, Defendant Racketeer Moody knew and fraudulently concealed that Defendant Kenneth M. Wilkinson had never incurred actual and necessary attorney’s fees in the facially falsified amount of “$5,000”. In June 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit had lost “jurisdiction”. Here, Def. Moody conspired with Def. Wilkinson and other Officials to falsify a fake “July 29 judgment” and alter the official records. 63. Here, Dr. Jorg Busse had paid the final money judgment in the amount of “$24.30” for “copies” issued as mandate in June 2009, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228. 64. Here just like a bungling Government crook and idiot, Defendant Moody covered up, concealed the truth, and obstructed justice for publicly recorded criminal purposes of extortion and racketeering. 65. Here, Def. Moody knew that frivolity had never been any issue, whatsoever, as publicly recorded and conclusively evidenced by the Opinion, Judgment, and Mandate in said Case. 20

COMPULSORY JUDICIAL NOTICE 66. § 90.203, Florida Statutes, COMPULSORY JUDICIAL NOTICE, provides: “A court shall take judicial notice of any matter in § 90.202 when a party requests it..” Here for years, the Plaintiff exclusive indisputable record owners of Lot 15A, Cayo Costa, PB 3, PG 25 (1912) had requested the Federal Courts to take judicial notice of the matter and issue of their record unencumbered and perfected ownership and title, 12-44-20-0100015.015A. DEFENDANT CROOKED JUDGE MOODY’S SHAM “order”, DOC. # 22 67. Here on its face, Defendant Crooked Judge Moody’s sham “order”, Doc. # 22, was a. Controverted by Plaintiffs’ publicly recorded indisputable title to Lot 15A; b. Controverted by Plaintiffs’ publicly recorded property tax payments; c. Facially incomprehensible and baseless; d. Arbitrary, capricious, and malicious; e. Idiotic and irrational. RECORD TAX PAYMENTS WERE CAPABLE OF ACCURATE DETERMINATION 68. Here, Plaintiffs’ publicly recorded satisfactory real property tax payments, Lot 15A, were capable of accurate and ready determination and indisputable. Said indisputable record tax payments had controverted any “claim”. PLAINTIFFS’ RECORD DEED WAS CAPABLE OF READY DETERMINATION 69. Here, Plaintiffs’ publicly recorded Warranty Deed, Lot 15A, was capable of accurate and ready determination and indisputable. 70. Here as a matter of law, Plaintiffs’ record title and tax payments had conclusively controverted:

21

a. Any and all barred “claims”, Ch. 712, Florida Statutes; b. Sham “claim” “O.R. 569/875”; c. Any and all absurd, unrecognized, and frivolous “claim(s) as public land”; d. Any and all non-existent “title transfer” to Lee County, FL; e. Any involuntary alienation; Chapters 73; 74, 95, Florida Statutes. AS A MATTER OF LAW, ANY AND ALL CLAIMS HAD BEEN BARRED, CH. 712, F.S. 71. As a matter of law, Ch. 712, Fla. Stat., had extinguished any and all “claims” against Lot 15A, Cayo Costa. 72. In “1969”, the fabricated date of the fictitious “resolution”, the statute of limitations for any and all “claims” had expired. Here, more than thirty (30) years had passed since the root title to Lot 15A, which had barred any and all “claims”. Period. 73. Here, Lee County, FL, had never “claimed” anything, and no authentic record of any “claim” had ever legally existed or had ever been legally recorded. FALSIFIED “claim”, “O.R. 569/875” WAS LEGALLY ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE 74. Here as a matter of law: a. No “resolution” could have possibly involuntarily divested the Plaintiffs of their Lot 15A; b. No “law” could have possibly involuntarily divested the Plaintiffs of their Lot 15A; c. Any involuntarily alienation would have necessarily been a judicial function; d. Plaintiffs were the indisputable record owners, Lot 15A, Cayo Costa; e. Plaintiffs were the unimpeachable title holders, Lot 15A; f. Plaintiffs’ said record ownership was capable of accurate and ready determination; g. Plaintiffs’ said record title, Lot 15A, was capable of accurate & ready determination; h. Defendant Moody fabricated and conspired to falsify an incomprehensible “claim”.

22

PERVERSION OF RULE 69 FOR CRIMINAL PURPOSES OF RACKETEERING 75. Rule 69, Fed.R.Civ.P. states: (a) In General. (1) Money Judgment; Applicable Procedure. A money judgment is enforced by a writ of execution, unless the court directs otherwise. The procedure on execution — and in proceedings supplementary to and in aid of judgment or execution — must accord with the procedure of the state where the court is located, but a federal statute governs to the extent it applies. (2) Obtaining Discovery. In aid of the judgment or execution, the judgment creditor or a successor in interest whose interest appears of record may obtain discovery from any person — including the judgment debtor — as provided in these rules or by the procedure of the state where the court is located. 76. Here, Def. Moody conspired to conceal that a. The paid $24.30 money judgment and final mandate, Doc. # 365, Case 2:2007-cv00228 could not be “enforced by a writ of execution”; b. The facially fraudulent procedure on the falsified execution did not “accord with the procedure of the State”. c. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit had lost jurisdiction in June 2009; d. Defendant Crooked Official Kenneth M. Wilkinson falsified and fraudulently pretended a “July 29, judgment”; e. Defendant Jack N. Peterson, Esq., perjured himself; see facially fraudulent “Affidavit”; f. No genuine July 2009 judgment could have possibly existed in said Case; g. The fictitious “July 29, judgment” could not be found in the public records. 77. Here, the prima facie criminality, illegality, and nullity of the fake “5,048.60 judgment”, Doc. ## 386, 432, fake “writ of execution”, Doc. # 425, fake “legislative act”, fake “resolution 569/875” were capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot be questioned.

23

MANDATORY RECUSAL AND DISQUALIFICATION, 28 U.S.C. § 455 78. Recusal and disqualification of objectively partial and corrupt Defendant J. S. Moody were absolutely mandatory, 28 U.S.C. § 455. Def. Moody fraudulently concealed and conspired to conceal the prima criminality, illegality, and nullity of a falsified $5,048.60 judgment, fake lien, and fraudulent execution and enforcement for criminal purposes of, e.g., racketeering, retaliation, and extortion. 79. Furthermore, RULE 1.432 DISQUALIFICATION OF JUDGE states: (a) Grounds. Any party may move to disqualify the judge assigned to the action on the grounds provided by statute. (b) Contents. A motion to disqualify shall allege the facts relied on to show the grounds for disqualification and shall be verified by the party. (c) Time. A motion to disqualify shall be made within a reasonable time after discovery of the facts constituting grounds for disqualification. (d) Determination. The judge against whom the motion is directed shall determine only the legal sufficiency of the motion. The judge shall not pass on the truth of the facts alleged. If the motion is legally sufficient, the judge shall enter an order of disqualification and proceed no further in the action. (e) Judge's Initiative. Nothing in this rule limits a judge's authority to enter an order of disqualification on the judge's own initiative. Committee Note: The rule is intended to unify the procedure for disqualification. RULE 2.330. DISQUALIFICATION OF TRIAL JUDGES 80. Said Rule states: (b) Parties. Any party, including the state, may move to disqualify the trial judge assigned to the case on grounds provided by rule, by statute, or by the Code of Judicial Conduct. (c) Motion. A motion to disqualify shall: (1) be in writing; (2) allege specifically the facts and reasons upon which the movant relies as the grounds for disqualification; (3) be sworn to by the party by signing the motion under oath or by a separate affidavit;”

24

SECTION 38.10, FLA. STAT. 81. Section 38.10 gives parties the right to move to disqualify a judge when the party fears that “he or she will not receive a fair trial . . . on account of the prejudice of the judge of that court against the applicant or in favor of the adverse party.” Fla. Stat. § 38.10. Rule of Judicial Administration 2.330 specifies that a motion to disqualify must show that “the party fears that he or she will not receive a fair trial or hearing because of specifically described prejudice or bias of the judge.” Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.330. 82. § 38.10, Fla. Stat., states: 38.10 Disqualification of judge for prejudice; application; affidavits; etc.-Whenever a party to any action or proceeding makes and files an affidavit stating fear that he or she will not receive a fair trial in the court where the suit is pending on account of the prejudice of the judge of that court against the applicant or in favor of the adverse party, the judge shall proceed no further, but another judge shall be designated in the manner prescribed by the laws of this state for the substitution of judges for the trial of causes in which the presiding judge is disqualified. Here, Plaintiffs have been “stating fear that they have not and will not receive a fair trial in the court where the suit is pending on account of the prejudice of the Judge(s) of that court [James S. Moody, Jr.; Thomas G. Wilson; Charlene Edwards Honeywell; John E. Steele; Sheri Polster Chappell; Richard A. Lazzara] against the applicants. Here, objectively biased and bribed Judge Moody “shall proceed no further, but another judge shall be designated in the manner prescribed by the laws of this state for the substitution of judges for the trial of causes in which the presiding judge is disqualified.” PLAINTIFFS’ RIGHT TO APPEAL: FRAUDULENT lien, execution; EXTORTION … 83. If the judge denies a motion to disqualify brought under § 38.10 the movant has the right to appeal. Lynch v. State, ___ So. 2d ___, Nos. SC06-2233, SC07-1246, 2008 WL 4809783, at

25

*26 (Fla. Nov. 6, 2008). As the Florida Supreme Court recently held: “A motion to disqualify is governed substantively by section 38.10, Florida Statutes, and procedurally by Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.330. Here, Plaintiffs’ pleadings to disqualify, e.g., Defendant objectively partial Judges Moody, Steele, Chappell, Wilson, and Honeywell are citing 28 U.S.C. § 455, § 38.10 and Rule 2.330, as well as Canon 3E(1). RECUSAL: MOODY’S ORGANIZED CRIMES & OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE 84. The Florida Supreme Court has also held, in effect, that § 38.10 and the Canons require the same thing. See Livingston v. State, 441 So. 2d 1083, 1086 (Fla. 1983). In Livingston the court cited the Canon’s requirement that a judge disqualify himself when his “impartiality might reasonably be questioned” and concluded that it was “totally consistent” with Florida case law applying § 38.10. Id. Both require disqualification when a party can show “a well grounded fear that he will not receive a fair trial at the hands of the judge.” Id. (quoting State ex rel. Brown v. Dewell, 179 So. 695, 697-98 (Fla. 1938)); see also Berry v. Berry, 765 So. 2d 855, 857 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000) (quoting Canon 3E(1) when describing the standard for granting a motion under § 38.10). Here of course, this Court was bound to follow Florida appellate court decisions interpreting that state’s law. The final arbiter of state law is the state Supreme Court, which is another way of saying that Florida law is what the Florida Supreme Court says it is. 85. Here in particular, Def. Moody concocted and conspired to concoct a “resolution 569/875”, “claim” of Lot 15A, “law”, “legislative act” for criminal and illegal purposes of, e.g., racketeering, retaliation, and extortion of Plaintiffs’ land and money. Here, Def. Moody perpetrated fraud upon the Court(s), and the Plaintiffs could not possibly get a fair, just, and

26

speedy trial because of Def. Moody’s publicly recorded lies, corruption, bribery, racketeering, partiality, and incompetence. CANON(S) 3E(1), 3E(1)(f), FLORIDA CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT 86. The Florida Supreme Court has adopted a Code of Judicial Conduct to govern the actions of state court judges and candidates for judicial office. Canon 3E(1) states, e.g.: (1) A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to instances where … Those provisions address situations in which a judge must disqualify himself because his “impartiality might reasonably be questioned,” including when he has “made a public statement that commits, or appears to commit, the judge with respect to” a particular party, issue, or controversy. Canon 3E(1) [general disqualification provision in Canon 3E(1)], 3E(1)(f) [“commits clause” at Canon 3E(1)(f)]. 87. Here in exchange for bribes, Def. Moody had made facially idiotic public statements that committed Moody to the fabrication of a fake “resolution 569/875” and illegal benefits for the Defendants at Plaintiffs’ expense and injury. Here, Moody fraudulently concealed and conspired with other Def. Government Crooks to conceal the particular issues of, e.g., facially forged “land parcels” “12-44-20-01-00000.00A0” and “07-44-21-01-00001.0000”, a fake “park”, a fake “writ of execution”, Doc. # 425, 2:2007-cv-00228, a fake “$5,048.60 judgment”. Here, Plaintiffs lived in fear of being kicked down the Courthouse stairs and not receiving a fair trial at the dirty hands of bribed and crooked Judge Moody. 88. Canon 3E(1), backed by the threat of a disciplinary proceeding, requires a judge to disqualify himself if his “impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” Fla. Stat. § 38.10, supplemented by Rule 2.330, allows a party to have a judge disqualified for the same reason.

27

Canon 3E(1)(f), which the Florida Supreme Court adopted in January 2006, covers areas in which a judge’s “impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” See In re Amendment to Code of Judicial Conduct, 918 So. 2d 949 (Fla. 2006). In addition to the Florida Supreme Court, the Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee (Ethics Committee) and the Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC) have roles in administering the Code. The Florida Supreme Court established the Ethics Committee “to render written advisory opinions to inquiring judges concerning the propriety of contemplated judicial and non-judicial conduct.” Petition of Comm. on Standards of Conduct for Judges, 327 So. 2d 5, 5 (Fla. 1976). Here, Def. Judge Moody’s fabrications and perversions of the law were reckless and for criminal purposes. Canon 3E is enforced by the Judicial Qualifications Commission, which has the authority to bring disciplinary charges against a judge. SPECIFIC ALLEGATIONS – WELL-GROUNDED FEARS 89. Here under 28 U.S.C. § 455, Plaintiffs have been specifically alleging the above facts and reasons upon which the movants rely as the grounds for Defendant Judge Moody’s disqualification/recusal. Here, Defendant Moody has been silencing and shutting up the Plaintiffs without any authority and for criminal purposes of cover up and concealment of organized Government crimes. See, e.g., Def. Moody’s and Honeywell’s facially fraudulent “orders”, gag, pre-filing injunction. 90. Here, the Plaintiff Government racketeering & corruption victims had well grounded fears that they will not receive a fair trial at the hands of Defendant objectively partial and bribed Judge James S. Moody, Jr., who fraudulently concealed said fabrications of, e.g.: a. Fake “judgment”; b. Fake “lien”;

28

c. Fake “writ of execution”; d. Facially forged “land parcels”; e. Fake park. RECORD FACIALLY FORGED judgment AND FAKE “lien” 91. Here, there were a. No “July 2009 judgment”, because the 11th Circuit had lost jurisdiction in June 2009; b. No “judgment”, whatsoever, because the 11th Circuit had closed the Case in June 2009; c. No “judgment”, because “frivolity” had never been any issue until the Case was closed; d. No “lien”, because a non-existent judgment could not have matured into a “lien”; e. No “lien”, because the lienholder's address did not appear on the forged judgment. 92. Here, there was no judgment. A [hypothetical] judgment does not mature into a lien where the lienholder's address does not appear on the judgment. § 55.10(1), Fla. Stat. Consequently here, no lien could have possibly attached to Plaintiffs’ real property and/or Lot 15A as a result of the unlawful recordation of a fictitious and facially forged judgment. See Tomalo v. Kingsley Displays, Inc., 862 So. 2d 899, 900-01 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (citing Hott Interiors, Inc. v. Fostock, 721 So. 2d 1236, 1238 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)); Dyer v. Beverly & Tittle, P.A., 777 So. 2d 1055, 1058 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001); Decubellis v. Ritchotte, 730 So. 2d 723, 725-26 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999). DEF. WILKINSON HAD NO “lien”, NO “judgment”, AND NO RIGHT TO “execute” 93. In Florida, a lien is not any conveyance of the legal title or of the right of possession, § 697.02, F.S. The [hypothetical] execution of any [hypothetical] lien would not destroy any of the unities. Therefore, the joint tenancy and the right of survivorship could not have possibly been destroyed.

29

PUBLICLY RECORDED “resolution”-RACKETEERING & EXTORTION SCHEME 94. Any involuntary alienation would have been strictly a judicial function. No legislator ever had (or could have possibly had) any authority to divest the Plaintiffs’ of their record title against Plaintiffs’ will. See Separation-of-Powers-Doctrine and Florida’s express Constitutional Protections; 14th, 4th U.S. Const. Amendments. PRESCOTT v. STATE OF FLORIDA PROVED ORGANIZED GOVERNMENT CRIME 95. Prescott, et al., v. State of Florida, et al., 343 Fed. Appx. 395, 396-97 (11th Cir. Apr. 21, 2009) had stated: “I. BACKGROUND A. Current Action The Appellants are owners of Lot 15A in the Cayo Costa subdivision in Lee County, Florida.” “The Appellants' Lot 15A is on the west side of the Cayo Costa subdivision on the Gulf of Mexico and is adjacent to land that was claimed through Resolution 569/875 to create the Cayo Costa State Park.” CRIMINAL & ILLEGAL “pre-filing injunction”, DOC. # 245 96. Here, the Plaintiff record owners and title holders had paid real property taxes, Lot 15A, Cayo Costa, and were entitled to defend against, e.g., publicly recorded Government racketeering, wire fraud, extortion, retaliation, obstruction of justice, deliberate deprivations, and bribery. See Lee County Tax Collector’s public records, riparian Lot 15A, Cayo Costa. 97. Here, Defendant Crooked Judges Moody and Honeywell had no authority to fraudulently conceal Plaintiffs’ unimpeachable record ownership, real property tax payments, rights to own and exclude Government from Lot 15A, Cayo Costa, under color of facially forged “resolution 569/875” and by prima facie criminal and illegal means of a “global pre-filing injunction”, Doc. # 245, Case 2:2009-cv-00791.

30

BRIBERY & OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE 98. Here in exchange for bribes, Defendant Crooked Judges Moody Honeywell obstructed justice, retaliated, and deliberately deprived [and conspired to] the Plaintiff record title holders and owners of their fundamental rights to redress Governmental grievances and defend against unlawful Government seizures of Plaintiffs’ private property, racketeering, extortion, due process and equal protection violations, 1st, 14th, 4th, 7th U.S. Constitutional Amendments. FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT AND CONSPIRACY TO CONCEAL 99. Here, Defendant Corrupt Judges Moody and Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired to conceal that, e.g.: a. The Plaintiffs are the unimpeachable record “owners of Lot 15A in the Cayo Costa subdivision of Lee County, Florida”, pursuant to, e.g., Ch. 712, Fla. Stat., Florida’s selfenforcing Marketable Record Title Act; b. No “claim” or “resolution”, whatsoever, could have possibly involuntarily divested the Plaintiffs of their perfected marketable record title to Lot 15A, Cayo Costa, PB 3 PG 25 (1912); c. No legislator or lawmaker, whatsoever, had any authority to usurp judicial authority to make a judicial order transferring title against Plaintiffs’ will; d. No judge had ever made any order or judgment involuntarily alienating Lot 15A; e. “The Board of Commissioners of Lee County, Florida,” never adopted any “resolution 569/875” in December 1969; f. No name of any commissioner appeared on prima facie scam “O.R. 569/875”; g. Scam “O.R. 569/875” was not any law, resolution, or legislative act and unauthorized; h. “Involuntary-alienation-by-fake-resolution” was a racketeering & extortion scheme; i. The prima facie sham “land claim” lacked any color and was legally incomprehensible; j. Lot 15A was never “claimed as public land”; see Tax Records & Grantor-Grantee Index; k. Prima facie extortion and fraud scheme “O.R. 569/875” was not any “claim”; l. The law did not recognize facially incomprehensible “resolution 569/875”; m. The legal description of Lot 15A, Cayo Costa, did not appear in the sham “resolution”; n. No valid authentic legal description appeared in the facially forged “resolution”; o. Falsified “resolution 569/875" had never legally existed; p. Scam “O.R. 569/875” did not, and could not have possibly, complied with Ch. 11, Fla. Stat., Legislative Organization, Procedures, and Staffing; q. Said facially forged “resolution” was not any writing, instrument, or muniment of title; r. The fake “resolution” was not any conveyance, instrument, or eminent domain document;

31

s. The prima facie unauthorized “global pre-filing injunction” was an organized Governmental crime scheme for criminal and illegal purposes of, e.g., extortion and racketeering; t. Def. Honeywell obstructed justice under color of authority & scam “O.R. 569/875”; u. Def. Honeywell obstructed justice under color of a fake writ of execution, Doc. # 425; v. Def. Lee County Commissioners had no authority to sign any “claim” of uncertain and legally un-described lands; w. Lot 15A was never subject to any enforcement of any money judgment against Dr. Busse; x. The fake writ of execution, Doc. # 425, Case 2:2007-cv-00228, violated Florida’s Judgment Lien Law; see Ch. 55, Fla. Stat.; y. Defendant Appellee Kenneth M. Wilkinson was not any judgment creditor; z. Def. K. M. Wilkinson never incurred any actual and necessary attorney’s fees; see business records on file; aa. Dr. Jorg Busse was not any judgment debtor; bb. Lot 15A was exempt real property and owned by the entireties; cc. Litigation has been pending and no final judgment existed. APPEAL BECAME FINAL ON JUN 15, 2009 100. An appeal becomes final on the date the mandate is issued. Here, the judgment entered

March 5, 2009 was issued as mandate Jun 11 2009. 101. Since the clerk had responsibilities for entering a judgment, Fed.R.App.P. 36, and for

taxation of costs, Fed.R.App.P. 39(d), the duty to issue the mandate contemplated by Rule 41 was the responsibility of the clerk. 102. The Eleventh Circuit has held that the action becomes final on the date the district court

receives the appellate court's mandate. See U.S. v. Lasteed, 832 F.2d 1240-43 (11th Cir. 1987). The District Court received and filed the Appellate Court’s June 11, 2009 mandate on JUN 15 2009 when the Appeal, No. 2008-13170-BB, became final. Thereafter, the 11th Circuit had no jurisdiction as a matter of law. Here, there have been publicly recorded racketeering and extortion by Government Agents. NO 11th CIRCUIT JURISDICTION AFTER JUN 15, 2009 103. Jurisdiction followed the mandate. “The effect of the mandate is to bring the

proceedings in a case on appeal in our Court to a close and to remove it from the jurisdiction

32

of this Court, returning it to the forum whence it came.” It was the date on which the $24.30 mandate was received and filed, Jun 15, 2009, which determined when the district court reacquired jurisdiction for further proceedings. 104. Issuance of the $24.30 mandate on June 11, 2009, and the District Court’s receipt and

filing on June 15, 2009 was an event of considerable institutional significance. A mandate could NOT possibly “simply” "issue", because it should have been issued, or because the panel may have intended it to issue, or because the statute commands it to issue. See F.R.App.P. 27, 41. ADOPTION BY REFERENCE OF LIS PENDENS, U.S. LAWSUIT, CIVIL RICO… 105. The Plaintiffs hereby adopt by reference their attached Federal action in this published

Government Racketeering and Corruption Notice, USA, Ex Rel et al. v. USA et al. DEF. WILKINSON’S RACKETEERING, RETALIATION, AND COERCION 106. Defendant Racketeer Wilkinson retaliated on or around August 20, 2008, Doc. # 386-2: “In order to discourage the Appellant from engaging in the same practices …” 107. Wilkinson coerced Plaintiff Appellant to refrain from rightful prosecution for prima facie

criminal and illegal purposes of concealing crimes and covering up. PUBLICLY RECORDED CRIMINAL AND ILLEGAL FALSIFICATIONS 108. Just like Defendant Racketeer Wilkinson had falsified fake “land parcels”, and a fake

“real property transaction”, “O.R. 569/875”, Defendant Forger Wilkinson falsified a fake “judgment”; “July 29, 2009 in Docket 08-13170-BB against Appellant JORG BUSSE in the amount of $5,048.60.” See, e.g., INSTR 4371834, O.R. 4517 PG 1914, Collier County Circuit Court.

33

109.

Here, Defendant Racketeer Wilkinson could not have possibly held that which had never

existed. Here, said $24.30 money judgment had been the final mandate, and the facially null and void “writ of execution”, Doc. # 425, was a prima facie racketeering and extortions scheme just like the fake “regulation”, fake “legislative act” and/or “O.R. 569/875” that had never legally existed and never been legally recorded. RACKETEERING-EXTORTION-FRAUD SCHEMES, DOC ## 432, 434, 435 110. Plaintiff Dr. Jorg Busse attached a copy and Exhibits of prima facie racketeering-

extortion-fraud schemes, Documents ## 338, 386, 432, 434, and 435, 2:2007-cv-00228 and adopted them by reference in this NOTICE OF APPEAL and EMERGENCY MOTIONS. FRAUDULENT ATTACHMENT OF FICTITIOUS DEBT TO CAYO COSTA LAND 111. The publicly recorded and facially fraudulent attachment of a fake judgment and/or

debt to Plaintiff(s)’s Lee County property was a criminal and illegal scheme. NO service OF ANY “writ of execution” UPON DR. JORG BUSSE 112. Here, Dr. Jorg Busse was never served and could not have possibly been served [with]

any “writ of execution”. No evidence of any service existed on the record. Doc. ## 425, 429, 430, 2:2007-cv-00228, were facially fraudulent and for criminal and illegal purposes of, e.g., racketeering, extortion, retaliation, obstruction of justice, and unconstitutional property seizure in brazen violation of, e.g., the 4th, and 14th U.S. Constitutional Amendments, and Chapters 55, and 56, Florida Statutes. MANDATORY SUSPENSION OF ANY ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDINGS 113. Under color of a prima facie falsified “writ of execution”, Doc. ## 425, 435, 434 and in

the publicly recorded absence of any debt, and after Dr. Jorg Busse had paid the final mandate of $24.30 for “copies” (under FRAP 39) to Def. Wilkinson, the Def. U.S. Marshal

34

and Defendants Richard Jessup and Ryan Barry recklessly extended, e.g., the extortion, racketeering, and organized crimes of public record in order to retaliate against Dr. Busse, extort fees and said real property without any authority and for organized and conspiratorial criminal purposes. Here, said Officials coerced the Plaintiff(s) to refrain from rightful prosecution and obstructed justice. Here, any and all Marshal(s), Sheriff(s), and/or law enforcement Officials were under the absolute obligation to NOT enforce and/or suspend any proceedings on the illegal execution of the facially fraudulent and forged “writ”, Doc. ## 425, which had never been served upon Dr. Busse. AFFIDAVIT; DEMAND FOR MANDATORY SUSPENSION OF PROCEEDINGS ON FRAUDULENT AND ILLEGAL execution, CH. 56, 55, U.S. CONST. AMENDMENTS 114. Here Dr. Jorg Busse had demanded, has been demanding, and again demands the

absolutely mandatory suspension of any proceedings to enforce and/or execute a prima facie fictitious, un-documented, un-substantiated, un-recorded and null and void debt in the facially falsified amount of “$24.30”. Here. Dr. Busse had fully paid the $24.30 final money judgment and 06/11/2009 mandate (“copies”). Here, the Defendants and Wilkinson knew that the 11th Circuit never had any jurisdiction and authority to alter and amend the “$24.30 mandate/judgment” and to sanction and punish the Plaintiff corruption victim Dr. Jorg Busse, who rightfully prosecuted Crooked Government Officials. AFFIDAVIT: ORGANIZED CRIME, RACKETEERING, EXTORTION, CORRUPTION 115. In this organized crime scheme, Defendant Beverly Martin had suspended, and

conspired with, e.g., judicial Def. Steele, Chappell, Lazzara, Pizzo, Honeywell, and other Defendants and Officials to suspend, the Rules and extended anarchy and lawlessness to

35

obtain unlawful benefits. Here, Def. Crooked Judge Martin recklessly violated Section 838.022, Official Misconduct, Fla. Stat. PUBLICLY RECORDED ORGANIZED CRIME EVIDENCE 116. Def. Honeywell deceived this Court, Doc. # 213, p. 18: “In this case, Plaintiffs allege that all Defendants conspired to deprive them of their alleged property rights in Lot 15A. Plaintiffs repeatedly state that various judicial officers accepted bribes to deprive them of this alleged property interest. However, these statements are merely conclusory, and Plaintiffs provide no factual basis to support a conspiracy among Defendants.” Here, e.g., the idiotic Court orders, opinions, 1912 Plat of Survey of the private undedicated residential Cayo Costa Subdivision, PB 3, PG 25, the WARRANTY DEEDS, surveys, title abstracts, and binding precedent on file were an indisputable “factual basis” to support said well proven allegations. Here, Def. Honeywell’s and Def. Chappell’s orders in this and the related Cases were conclusive record evidence of organized judicial crime, because they evidenced the brazen perversion of the law and public record evidence. CASE 2:2007-CV-00228: ORGANIZED CRIME 117. Upon receipt of 443 pages on 08/03/2010, Case 2:2007-cv-00228, the Clerk of this Court

filed 533 pages, thereby fabricating 90 pages, Doc. # 436. 118. Here pursuant to the Docket, 2:2007-cv-00228, Defendant Clerk Drew Heathcoat:

a. Altered the public record and obstructed justice; b. Falsified a “writ of execution”, Doc. # 425, 2:2007-cv-00228; c. Fraudulently concealed the lack of any recorded money judgment and mandate other than the final $24.30 mandate, Case 2:2007-cv-00228; d. Refused to accept the appeal fee in the amount of $455.00 while wrongfully alleging that it was after 4:00 PM; e. Refused to just file the original 443 pages but fabricated 90 additional pages (533 p.); 36

119.

In Case, 2:2009-cv-00791, hundreds of pages of Plaintiffs Complaint, Doc. # 1, had

disappeared. See Doc. # 213, p. 3, fn 3: “Plaintiffs’ Complaint, that was transferred from the West Palm Beach Division of the Southern District of Florida, contains 103 pages. However, the last two pages of the Complaint are numbered 179 and 180. Pages 101-178 are not included in the instant Complaint. The Court has confirmed, through inquiry of the Clerk of the Southern District of Florida, that Plaintiffs’ Complaint was filed without pages 101 178 and without any exhibits.” POLICY OF DESTRUCTION, ALTERATION, AND FALSIFICATION OF RECORDS 120. Here, this Court exhibited its pattern and policy of crimes & corruption; see, e.g.:

a. Altering and falsifying official records and documents; b. Falsifying a fake “resolution 569/875”; c. Falsifying judgments; d. Falsifying mandates; e. Falsifying a “writ of execution”, Doc. # 425, Case 2:2007-cv-00228; f. Falsifying a “legislative act”; g. Falsifying a “land claim”; h. Falsifying an idiotic and incomprehensible “public land claim” of Lot 15A in the presence of a controverting WARRANTY DEED; i. Destroying public records for, e.g., cover-up, concealment, and racketeering; j. Destroying public records as “scandalous material” for criminal purposes; k. “Striking” and removing official documents and records, because they conclusively proved judicial and Government corruption, racketeering, retaliation, and organized crime. RECKLESSLY, DEF. JAMES S. MOODY PERVERTED SUPREME FLORIDA LAW

37

121.

Art. I, s. 10, Fla. Const., states that "No . . . law impairing the obligation of contracts

shall be passed." 122. 123. Art. I, s. 2, Fla. Const. states that "[a]ll natural persons are equal before the law . . . ." Article I, s. 9, Fla. Const., states that "[n]o person shall be deprived of . . . property

without due process of law . . . ." RECORD BRIBERY, CORRUPTION, AND CRIMES 124. Here on the public record, Def. Crooked Judge James S. Moody accepted bribes and

acted like a bungling corrupt Government idiot, who could not even present and hold an elementary legal argument. In particular, and as publicly recorded, Def. Moody was objectively incapable of spotting the issue [I], applying relevant and material rules [R], analyzing [A], and drawing proper lawful conclusions [C]. PRIMA FACIE IDIOCY AND PERVERSION OF LAW AND PUBLIC RECORD FRAUD ON THE COURT, TRICKERY, AND DECEPTION 125. Any reasonable average law student could readily determine the prima facie idiocy and

perversion of Doc. # 22. Here in particular, no fit, intelligent, and honest judge or person in Judge Moody’s shoes could have possibly explained and justified WHY, and HOW the cited erroneous authorities could possibly apply: a. Davis v. Kvalheim; b. Baffford v. Township. Here, said facially deceptive and fraudulent authorities served as weapons of mass deception. 126. Here within three (3) pages, Doc. # 22, Defendant insane Judge Moody could not even

maintain the spelling of Dr. Jorg Busse’s name. Any reasonable person could readily detect

38

the fear of being victimized, raped, and injured by criminal means of corruption and Government crimes at the hands of idiotic judicial bully James S. Moody, Jr. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Government corruption and racketeering victims demand 1. An Order taking judicial notice of said Florida Statutes; 2. An Order taking judicial notice of CH. 712; 95; 73, 74; 55; §§ 695.26, 695.09, 689.01, 55.10, 55.509, FLORIDA STATUTES, and the FLORIDA ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN JUDGMENT ACT; 3. An Order taking judicial notice of a. Art. I, s. 10, Fla. Const., stating that "No . . . law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be passed."; b. Art. I, s. 2, Fla. Const. stating that "[a]ll natural persons are equal before the law. . ."; c. Article I, s. 9, Fla. Const., stating that "[n]o person shall be deprived of . . . property without due process of law…”. See fake “lien”, fake “writ”; fake “land parcels”; fake “resolution/law”; fake “judgment”. 4. An Order declaring the facially fraudulent “writ of execution”, Doc. # 425, violative of Fed.R.Civ.P. 69 and null and void; 5. An Order declaring the lack of any genuine authentic foreign (out-of-Florida) judgment; 6. An Order declaring the falsified “writ of execution”, Doc. # 425, 2:07-cv-228, null and void; 7. An Order recusing and disqualifying Defendant Crooked and objectively partial Judge James S. Moody, Jr.; 8. An Order recusing Def. Crooked Charlene E. Honeywell because of publicly recorded organized crime, racketeering, corruption, bribery, retaliation against the Plaintiffs, and extortion of said money and Lot 15A in violation of Florida and Federal law;

39

9. An Order vacating and/or setting aside the prima facie unconstitutional and null and void “pre-filing injunction”, Doc. # 245, which was for criminal and illegal purposes of, e.g., cover-up, concealment, and conspiracy to extort said money and land, Lot 15A; 10. An Order recusing Def. Crooked S. Polster Chappell, because she conspired to conceal said falsifications and extend the record racketeering and retaliation; 11. An Order vacating and/or setting aside any and all orders by Defendants Sheri Polster Chappell and Charlene Edwards Honeywell, because they were procured through fraud, and falsification and destruction of official records, documents, and conclusive evidence; 12. An Order declaring that Defendant K. M. Wilkinson did NOT “have any lien”; 13. An Order declaring that Defendant Wilkinson did NOT “hold any $5,048.60 judgment” as falsely pretended and falsified by said Defendant Wilkinson and Defendant Crooked Attorney JACK N. PETERSON [see falsified, fraudulent and deceptive “affidavits” asserting a fake “July 29, 2009 judgment” in the Collier and Lee County Public Records; 14. An EMERGENCY Order suspending and enjoining as absolutely mandatory any proceedings on any illegal and criminal execution in violation of, e.g., Chapters 55 and 56, Fla. Stat., and the 4th, 14th, 1st, and 7th U.S. Const. Amendments, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961 – 1968; 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985, 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242; s. 838.022, Fla. Stat.; 15. An Order sanctioning Defendant Attorney JACK N. PETERSON for recorded perjury and conspiring with Def. Wilkinson and other Government Officials to extort, racketeer, retaliate, and deliberately deprive Dr. Jorg Busse and Jennifer Franklin Prescott; 16. An Order declaring the final record mandate in the amount of $24.30 paid; 17. An Order vacating and setting aside the facially oppressive and unconstitutional “pre-filing injunction”, Doc. # 245, Case No. 2:2009-cv-00791, which on its face was for criminal and

40

illegal purposes of racketeering, retaliation, intimidation, oppression, and “protection” of the organized Criminals and criminal Defendants in this Court and the 11th Circuit; 18. An Order restraining and preventing the record violations of section 1962 under the RICO civil provisions; 19. An Order declaring the lack of any recorded mandate and/or money judgment other than the $24.30, which was “issued as mandate on June 11, 2009” and recorded on June 15, 2009 pursuant to the certified Docket, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228, U.S. District Court, M.D. Florida, Fort Myers Division; 20. An Order declaring that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit had lost jurisdiction on 06/11/2009, as had also been evidenced by its own Case Docket, 08-13170-BB]; 21. An Order sanctioning and punishing Defendant Kenneth M. Wilkinson for the publicly recorded falsifications of, e.g., said fake “judgment”, “land parcels”, fake “resolution”, extortion, and racketeering, all of which obstructed justice; 22. An Order declaring INSTRUMENT 4371834, O.R. 4517 PG 1914, Collier County Public Records, and the equally fraudulent filing in Lee County part of a racketeering, extortion, and fraud scheme 23. An Order restraining any further racketeering by Defendant Government Officials and in particular the illegal forced selling of Plaintiffs’ said riparian Cayo Costa property, Lot 15A, in the absence of any recorded “$5,048.60” “judgment”; 24. An Order dissolving and/or reorganizing the corrupt Government enterprise under, e.g., civil RICO, and 18 U.S.C. 1964(a);

41

25. An Order removing the publicly recorded corrupting influence and make due provision for said express fundamental rights of innocent persons under the Florida and Federal Constitutions and, e.g., the 14th, 1st, 7th, 4th, 5th, and 11th U.S. Constitutional Amendments; 26. An EMERGENCY Order recusing Defendant Crooked, Objectively Partial, and Unfit Government Racketeer John E. Steele; 27. An Order making the Government enterprise of record subject of injunctive relief, because it is designed to aid the illegal enterprise of, e.g., obstructing justice, retaliating and punishing, and extorting money, Government fees, and property; 28. An Order enjoining said U.S. Courts from retaliating against the Plaintiffs because they blew the whistle on Government crimes & corruption, rather than punishing the Defendant Racketeers of record and providing remedies and relief to the Plaintiff racketeering and corruption victims; 29. An EMERGENCY Order recusing Defendant Crooked and Objectively Partial and Unfit Judge C. E. Honeywell; 30. An EMERGENCY Order recusing Defendant Corrupt and Objectively Partial and Unfit Judge S. Polster Chappell; 31. An Order for equitable relief; 32. An Order declaring Plaintiffs’ record title to Lot 15A, Cayo Costa, free & clear and unencumbered; 33. An Order declaring fake “land parcels” “12-44-20-01-00000.00A0” and “07-44-21-0100001.0000” falsified and prima facie forgeries as conclusively evidenced by the 1912 Cayo Costa Plat in Lee County Plat Book 3, Page 25;

42

34. An Order for EMERGENCY relief from the publicly recorded public corruption, extortion, coercion, fraud, and concealment in said Courts; 35. An Order for compensatory damages; 36. An Order for triple punitive damages; 37. An Order for triple punitive damages under, e.g., Civil RICO, 18 U.S.C. § 1964, 1964(c); 38. An Order for expenses, costs, legal expenses, and fees; 39. An Order enjoining any and all Governments and the Defendants and Officials from any trespass onto the private undedicated “Cayo Costa” “Subdivision” as legally described in reference to said 1912 Plat in PB 3 PG 25; 40. An Order declaring the prima facie forgeries of non-existent “land parcels” “12-44-20-0100000.00A0” and “07-44-21-01-00001.0000” fraudulent and criminal acts of record; 41. An Order permanently enjoining any and all entries and publications of any “resolution 569/875”, “O.R. 569/875”, “legislative act 569/875”, and non-existent “land parcels” “1244-20-01-00000.00A0” and “07-44-21-01-00001.0000” from any and all Government records and publications; 42. An Order permanently enjoining any and all Governments and Defendants from fraudulently “claiming” “asserting” “publishing” Government ownership of the street lands along the Gulf of Mexico as legally described and conveyed in reference to the Plat of the prima facie private “Cayo Costa” Subdivision; 43. An Order enjoining and restraining any extortion of property and money and foreclosure fraud by Defendants Eugene C. Turner, Richard D. DeBoest, II, Chene M. Thompson, and Hugh D. Hayes.

43

___________________________ /s/Jorg Busse, M.D., M.M., M.B.A. Private Attorney General; Plaintiff public corruption & racketeering victim 10 Benning ST # 135 West Lebanon, NH 03784-3402, U.S.A. c/o International Court of Justice Peace Palace The Hague, Netherlands _____________________ [/s/Jennifer Franklin Prescott] Private Attorney General; Plaintiff Government racketeering & corruption victim 10 Benning Street # 135 West Lebanon, NH 03784-3402, U.S.A. c/o International Court of Justice Peace Palace The Hague, Netherlands

44

EXHIBITS SUPPORTING PUBLIC RECORD EVIDENCE EXTORTION, FRAUD, OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, RETALIATION, BRIBERY … A. FACIALLY FRAUDULENT AFFIDAVIT [DEF. JACK N. PETERSON, K. M. WILKINSON] INSTR 4371834, O.R. 4517 PG 1914, Collier County Public Records B. PRIMA FACIE NULL & VOID “writ of execution”, Case No. 2:07-cv-00228 C. PRIMA FACIE NULL & VOID “O.R. 569/875” AND LAND EXTORTION SCHEME D. 07/21/2010 letter by Def. Racketeer JACK N. PETERSON E. Def. CHARLIE GREEN’S recording instructions F. RACKETEERING AND EXTORTION record evidence, Doc. # 429, Case 2:07-cv-228 G. Docket as CERTIFIED by Def. Diane Nipper on 07/16/2010, Case No. 2:07-cv-00228 Conclusively evidencing record absence of fictitious and fabricated appeal “09-13196” H. FALSIFICATION of “appeal no. 09-13196” by Def. Beverly B. Martin pursuant to CERTIFIED docket at B., which evidenced the lack of any such “appeal” and the “frivolity”-racketeering-and-extortion-scheme of record; “JUL 19 2010” CASE FIXING & “DISMISSAL AS FRIVOLOUS” I. DOC. # 434, 07/22/2010, by Def. JOHN E. STEELE, CASE NO. 2:2007-CV-00228 J. Third Amended Complaint, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228, Doc. # 288, 282 (11 pages), PRIMA FACIE NULL AND VOID “legislative act” and/or “law”, Fake “O.R. 569/875”, FACIALLY FALSIFIED “regulation” and/or “resolution” attached as Page 9 of 11; ETHICS COMPLAINT against Def. Crooked Lee County Official JACK N. PETERSON Attached as Page 10 of 11

45

K. PRIMA FACIE FRAUDULENT and FRIVOLOUS motion by Defendant Racketeer and “land parcel” Forger K. M. Wilkinson; “Appellee Property Appraiser’s Motion for Sanctions for Filing of a frivolous Motion”, “Rule 27-4”, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228, Doc. # 386-2, pp 1-3, Doc. # 386-3, p. 15 L. BINDING PRECEDENT and RECORD EVIDENCE of OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, JUDICIAL RETALIATION, and EXTORTION under color of fake “judgment” & “writ”, WEST PENINSULAR TITLE CO. v. PALM BEACH COUNTY, 41 F.3d 1490(11th Cir.1995); Murrell v. United States, 269 F.2d 458 (5th Cir.1959) M. Lee County, FL, INSTRUMENT # 2010000171344, WARRANTY DEED Lot 15A, “Cayo Costa, Lee County Plat Book 3, Page 25 (1912) (2 pages) N. RECORD RACKETEERING EVIDENCE: “Motion for Issuance of writ of execution …”, RECORDED EVIDENCE of EXTORTION, FRAUD & FALSIFICATION of un-recorded judgment, Doc. # 386, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228, by Def. Racketeer Jack N. Peterson; PERVERSION of recorded “$24.30 judgment” into fake “$5,048.60 debt” O. Lee County Tax Collector’s Office, Statement of Paid Property Taxes, Lot 15A, Cayo Costa (2 pages) P. DENIAL of “Appellee Wilkerson’s Motion to Alter or Amend the Judgment”, FALSIFICATION of “Rule 38 motion”, record evidence, Doc. # 386-5 FALSIFICATION of “Rule 38 judgment”, record evidence, Doc. # 386-5 FALSIFICATION of “Rule 38 bill of costs”, record evidence, Doc. # 386-5 FALSIFICATION of unsubstantiated “$5,000 in attorney’s fees”, Doc. # 386-5 By Defendant Racketeers Dubina, Chief Judge, Tjoflat, and Birch, Circuit Judges Facially forged and pasted “certification”, Doc. # 386-5, p. 2, right lower corner

46

Q. MEMORANDUM OF NO DEDICATION OF THE CAYO COSTA ROADS TO PUBLIC, From The Office of Lee County, Florida, Attorney, Dec. 29, 2000, Joan C. Henry, Esq. R. 1912 Plat of undedicated private “Cayo Costa” Subdivision in Lee County Plat Book 3, P. 25 S. Recorded Survey of riparian Lot 15A, Cayo Costa, PB 3 PG 25 (1912) on the Gulf of Mexico T. Fraudulent Lee County Inventory Control File, FALSIFIED parcel 12-44-20-01-00000.00A0 O.R. 1651 / 2488, O.R. 2967 / 1084 – 1090, BLUE SHEET 980206, 03/24/1998(6 pages) U. Falsified “Parcel 12-44-20-01-00000.00A0” by Def. Racketeer Kenneth M. Wilkinson (2 p) V. Falsified “resolution”, “legislative act”, and/or “law” by Def. Racketeer John Edwin Steele, Doc. ## 288, 282, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228 W. “Judgment Issued as Mandate June 11 2009”, in the amount of $24.30, FRAP 39 (1 p) RACKETEERING/EXTORTION EVIDENCE: March 5, 2009 “opinion”, 11th Circuit X. Bill of Costs Issued as Mandate June 11 2009, in the amount of $24.30, FRAP 39 (1 p) Y. Fraudulent “Conclusion” and Case Fixing by Defendant U.S. Circuit Judges, Doc. # 365, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228; Doc. # 386. Z. STATE Court Docket, Plaintiffs’ Case No. 2006-CA-003185, BUSSE v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Defendant Judge GERALD, LYNN, Jr., Filed 07/31/2006, REMOVED to U.S. District Court by Def. Judges John E. Steele and S. Polster Chappell AA. EXTORTION & PUBLIC CORRUPTION NOTICE to Def. Drew Heathcoat, U.S.

Clerk (2 pages) BB. CC. Federal Bureau of Investigation Special Agent in Charge, Steven E. Ibison DESTRUCTION of official records as evidenced by search of “2007-00228”, 11th

Circuit DD. DESTRUCTION of Docket No. 201010963, U.S. Court of Appeals, 11th Circuit

47

EE.CASE FIXING, OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, AND RETALIATION by Def. Judges Black, Carnes, and Martin, dated “JUL 19 2010” (2 pages) FF. NOTICE OF CORRUPTION AND LETTER DEMANDING AUTHENTICATION, Def. JOHN LEY, U.S. Circuit Clerk, 11th U.S. Appellate Circuit (2 pages) GG. Motion to Stay Prima Facie Illegal Execution as a Matter of Law, Case No. 2:10-cv00390 (5 pages) HH. Section 838.022, Florida Statutes, OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT Chapter 838, Fla. Stat., BRIBERY, MISUSE OF PUBLIC OFFICE II. Case No. 2:2010-cv-00089, Doc. # 29, pp. 4, 7, Def. U.S. Attorney, Tony West, Matthew L. Fesak, affirming U.S. jurisdiction under “civil RICO” JJ. FACIALLY FALSIFIED “writ of execution”, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228, Doc. # 425 KK. Section 55.10, Florida Statutes, Judgments…, Chapter 55 Judgments, Florida Statutes LL. Defendant Racketeer K. M. Wilkinson’s Answers to Plaintiff’s First Set of Interrogatories” under oath, 10/22/2007; in particular, asserting under oath the RECORD ABSENCE of “public Cayo Costa easements”, Answer # 24 MM. Florida 19th Statewide Grand Jury on Public Corruption (09/30/2009 Petition), Florida Statewide Prosecution Office, Office of the Attorney General of Florida. NN. FALSIFIED “Plat” of “Cayo Costa Subdivision” as falsified and filed by Defendant

Racketeer K. M. Wilkinson as “Exhibit A”, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228 OO. Publicly recorded Case Fixing and Obstruction of Justice by Defendant Judges Gerald

B. Tjoflat, Susan Birch, and Joel F. Dubina, Chief Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals, 11th Circuit, Doc. # 365, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228

48

PP. Fraudulent Order, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228, Doc. # 422, pp. 17-18, by Defendant Racketeer John E. Steele, evidencing extortion, obstruction of justice, obstruction of court access, and retaliation under fraudulent pretenses of, e.g., “writ of execution”, “lack of jurisdiction”, “ripeness requirements”, “frivolity”, “sanctions”, and under color of authority and office. QQ. RR. Steele SS. FBI Complaint against Def. U.S. Circuit Judge Beverly B. Martin, Including “JUL 19 2010” CASE FIXING FOR BRIBES and RACKETEERING TT. Record Evidence of Destruction of Plaintiffs’ Appeal Records, ## “10-10963, 10-10967” UU. VV. Steele WW. March 08, 2010 Letter by Def. John Ley, U.S. Circuit Clerk XX. YY. ZZ. DESTRUCTION AND ALTERATION OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, EVIDENCE FRAUDULENT 04/06/2010 Order by Def. Crooked Circuit Judge Beverly B. Martin Supreme Court Justice David Souter Communications, including binding precedent of WEST PENINSULAR TITLE CO. v. PALM BEACH COUNTY AAA. OTHER; OTHER PUBLIC RECORDS BBB. SATISFACTION OF ONLY MONEY JUDGMENT OF RECORD, $24.30 GOVERNMENTAL FORGERIES, “O.R. 569/875”, FORENSIC EVIDENCE Facially Fraudulent Order, Doc. # 338, Case 2:2007-cv-00228, by Def. John E. FBI Complaint against Def. Lee County Commissioner John Manning Concealment of fake writ, Doc. # 434, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228, by Def. J. E.

49

STATE OF FLORIDA SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT BY CLERK OF COURT The undersigned Clerk of Court acknowledges on this 24th day of August, 2010, receipt from Dr. Jorg Busse, Plaintiff, Case 2:2007-cv-00228, purported judgment debtor, of $30.00, comprised of $24.30 face amount of the June 2009 final mandate/judgment; and $5.70 miscellaneous costs. Pursuant to section 55.141, Florida Statutes, said sum is again paid to satisfy the judgment for “copies” under Fed.R.App.P. 39, Doc. # 365, and to discharge that certain final judgment and mandate in the amount of $24.30 procured through fraud in favor of Defendant Kenneth M. Wilkinson (fictitious judgment holder), whose last known address is Lee County Property Appraiser Thompson ST, Fort Myers, FL 33901. Here, Defendant crooked Official Kenneth M. Wilkinson did not file any authentic affidavit as required; did not file any lis pendens; and did not record said final mandate and $24.30 money judgment in the Public Records of Lee County. Here, neither the $24.30 nor any other judgment or debt became any lien on any property. Here in particular, no judgment ever became any lien on Plaintiff’s property, Lot 15A, Cayo Costa. The only Florida judgment was the $24.30 judgment, which was procured through fraud and fraud on the Court. Upon the execution of this satisfaction, said $24.30 judgment is satisfied and discharged. No address for the purported judgment holder was provided under section 55.10(1), Florida Statutes. Dr. Jorg Busse certifies that a copy of this Notice of Satisfaction and Discharge has been sent to Defendant “land parcel” Forger [facially forged Lee County parcel “12-44-20-0100000.00A0”] Kenneth M. Wilkinson, purported holder of said $24.30 judgment at Lee County Property Appraiser’s Office, Thompson ST, Fort Myers, FL 33901 by certified U.S.P.S. mail with return receipt requested. Hereby, Dr. Jorg Busse applies that the Clerk of Court shall pay over to the purported judgment holder, Defendant “judgment and land parcel” Forger Kenneth M. Wilkinson the full amount of the payment received, less the clerk’s fees for issuing execution on such judgment, if any has been issued.

Clerk of Court, Fort Myers, Florida, August 24th day of 2010

50

SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT; DUTIES OF CLERK OF COURT, § 55.141, F.S. (1) All judgments and decrees for the payment of money rendered in the courts of this state of Florida and which have become final, may be satisfied at any time prior to the actual levy of the purported fraudulent execution issued thereon by payment of the full amount of such judgment or decree, with interest thereon, plus the costs of the issuance, if any, of execution thereon into the registry of the court where rendered. (2) Upon such payment, the clerk shall execute and record in the official records a satisfaction of judgment upon payment of the recording charge prescribed in s. 28.24(12). Upon payment of the amount required in subsection (1) and the recording charge required by this subsection and execution and recordation of the satisfaction by the clerk, any lien created by the judgment is satisfied and discharged. In this Case, there was no lien. (3) The satisfaction of judgment is to be executed by the clerk. (5) Upon application of the judgment holder, the clerk shall pay over to the judgment holder the full amount of the payment received, less the clerk’s fees for issuing execution on such judgment, if any has been issued.

51

CC:

Federal Bureau of Investigation U.S. Department of Justice Eric Holder, Attorney General Barack Hussein Obama, The White House Florida Department of Law Enforcement The Florida Bar Real Property Probate and Trust Lawyer Section, The Florida Bar

52

Case 2:10-cv-00390-JSM-AEP Document 22

Filed 07/27/10 Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FT. MYERS DIVISION

JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT, pro se, and DR. JORG BUSSE, pro se, Plaintiffs, v. CHARLENE EDWARDS HONEYWELL, et al., Defendants. ____________________________________/ CASE NO: 2:10-CV-390-FtM-30AEP

ORDER THIS CAUSE comes before the Court, sua sponte. Plaintiffs, who are proceeding pro se, have a persistent history of filing baseless, incomprehensible, and repetitive pleadings which have impacted the resources of numerous courts within the Middle District of Florida. This appears to be the eleventh action brought by Plaintiff Dr. Jorge Busse and the tenth action brought by Plaintiff Jennifer Franklin Prescott. At the heart of each case, Plaintiffs allege that they are the owners of Lot 15A in the Cayo Costa subdivision of Lee County, Florida. Plaintiffs attempt to challenge a resolution adopted in December 1969 by the Board of Commissioners of Lee County, Florida, where Lot 15A, among other property, was claimed as public land. For approximately four years, Plaintiffs have showered courts in the Middle District of Florida with hundreds, if not thousands, of filings, and have ignored repeated court orders

Case 2:10-cv-00390-JSM-AEP Document 22

Filed 07/27/10 Page 2 of 3

dismissing their lawsuits as frivolous and vexatious. Plaintiff Busse was sanctioned $5,000 but refused to pay. The Eleventh Circuit has imposed a prefiling injunction to screen out the Plaintiffs’ frivolous filings, but still they file appeals, up to 20 in one case alone. Indeed, on July 20, 2010, in case 2:09-cv-00791 at Dkt. 245, the Honorable Charlene Edwards Honeywell, entered a pre-filing injunction against Plaintiffs in light of their vexatious and abusive behavior. That order describes in detail the history of Plaintiffs’ abusive behavior against various judicial officers, state officers, and other entities and individuals. Plaintiffs’ latest complaint in this case is not so much a claim for relief as it is a freeflowing, stream-of-consciousness tirade against numerous government officials, including, the Honorable Charlene Edwards Honeywell and the Honorable John Edwin Steele, regarding what they perceive to be judicial fraud and corruption. District courts have inherent power to dismiss frivolous lawsuits with prejudice, without prior notice to the parties. Davis v. Kvalheim, 2008 WL 67676, *3 (11th Cir. Jan. 8, 2008). The instant complaint is patently frivolous, baseless, vexatious, and harassing and sua sponte dismissal with prejudice is therefore warranted, especially in light of the numerous sanctions already imposed against Plaintiffs based on their prior lawsuits. ACCORDINGLY, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: 1. 2. Plaintiffs’ complaint and this case are dismissed with prejudice. The CLERK is directed to CLOSE this case and terminate any pending motions

and deadlines as moot.

-2-

Case 2:10-cv-00390-JSM-AEP Document 22

Filed 07/27/10 Page 3 of 3

3.

In light of Plaintiffs’ persistent and unrestrained history of filing baseless and

incomprehensible pleadings, the CLERK is directed not to accept for filing any future pleading submitted by Plaintiffs in this case, except for a notice of appeal from this Order. See Baffford v. Township Apartments Assoc., Ltd., 2008 WL 1817333, *4 (M.D. Fla. 2008) (directing clerk not to accept any additional filings except a notice of appeal after sua sponte dismissal of pro se plaintiff’s complaint with prejudice as patently frivolous, harassing, and vexatious). DONE and ORDERED in Tampa, Florida on July 27, 2010.

Copies furnished to: Counsel/Parties of Record
S:\Even\2010\2-10-cv-390.orderofdismissal.wpd

-3-

AFFIDAVIT OF DR. JORG BUSSE STATE CERTIFIED RESIDENTIAL APPRAISER, REAL ESTATE BROKER

STATE OF FLORIDA BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority authorized to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, personally appeared Dr. Jorg Busse, and who, after first being duly sworn, deposes and says upon oath the foregoing and/or attached Notice of Appeal, lis pendens, and Complaint in U.S. District Court, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Ex Rel. et al. v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al.

FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT. __________________________ /s/JORG BUSSE, M.D., M.M., M.B.A.

Sworn to and subscribed before me on this ___ day of August, 2010. Name of Notary Public: Expiration of Commission: __________________ /s/Notary Public Attachments: 506 pages + Doc. # 22 (3 pages) / 563 pages total

56

AFFIDAVIT OF JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT

STATE OF FLORIDA BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority authorized to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, personally appeared Jennifer Franklin Prescott, and who, after first being duly sworn, deposes and says upon oath the foregoing, 56 pages, and/or attached Notice of Appeal, lis pendens, and Complaint in U.S. District Court, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Ex Rel. et al. v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al.

FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT. __________________________ /s/JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT Sworn to and subscribed before me on August 24, 2010. Name of Notary Public: Expiration of Commission: __________________ /s/Notary Public Attachments: 506 pages + Doc. # 22 (3 pages) / 563 pages total

57

Sponsor Documents

Or use your account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Forgot your password?

Or register your new account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link to create a new password.

Back to log-in

Close