tHE CALM BEFORE THE STORM
 Lance G. Johnson Esq CHICAGO-(AEAE)-THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS HAS ORDERED Appellee to file a response to Stoller's Jurisdictional Memorandum by Novermber 24, 2009. Stoller appealed a Northern District of Illinois Judge William J. Hibbler decision granting Pure Fishing's motion to dismiss. Stoller never received the Pure Fishing Motion to dismiss. Dispite that fact Judge Hibbler granted the Pure Fishing Motion to Dismiss. Stoller filed a motion for reconsideration which was denied by Judge Hibbler. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeal sue sponte order Stoller to file a Jurisdictional Statement. Stoller went back before Judge Hibbler and the Judge stated that his order was final and appealable. Now the Seventh Circuit wants to hear from Pure Fishing. Lance G. Johnson from the law firm of Roylance, Abrams, Berdo and Goodman represents Pure Fishing. Stoller moved to disqualify Johnson for abusing the legal system by avoiding service of process of a criminal contempt summons. Johnson who has billed Pure Fishing Inc over $450,000 for legal work performed in Illinois has denied in a 100 million dollar Illinois defamation case that Stoller has filed against that Illinois Courts do not have personal jurisdiction over Johnson because he has little contact with Illinois.
 Lance G. Johnson Esq. CHICAGO-(AEAE)-STOLLER FILES MOTIONS BEFORE THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS AND THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS TO DISQUALIFY LANCE G. JOHNSON FROM PRACTICING IN THE SAID APPEALS COURTS. Lance G. Johnson, David Abrams and Alfred Goodman all law partners from the Washington DC law firm of Roylance, Abrams, Berdo and Goodman www.roylance.com were sued by Stoller for per se defamation, seeking 100 million dollars. For two years Lance G. Johnson, David Abrams and Alfred Goodman have been dodging service of process. In pleadings filed by Johnson before Illinois Circuit Court Judge Kathy Flanagan, Stoller charged Johnson, Abrams and Goodman with “indirect criminal contempt!” Now the Johnson crowd have refused to accept service of Indirect Criminal Contempt Summons. Lance G. Johnson has filed an appearance in a Federal Circuit Court of Appeals case that Stoller has filed. Lance G. Johnson has also filed an appearance in an appeal that Stoller filed before the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago, Illinois. Now Stoller has filed two separate motions before the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals advising the court that despite the fact that Lance Johnson and his partners have been charged with “criminal” contempt in Cook County Illinois, Lance Johnson has refused to accept service of process and has thus brought the legal profession into disrepute. Stoller is requesting that both the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals and the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington disqualify Johnson, Abrams and Goodman from practicing law pending the resolution of their “criminal” contempt proceeding in Chicago, Illinois. As a member of the Americans for the Enforcement of Attorney Ethics (AEAE) attorney misconduct conduct should be called to the attention of each disciplinary commission in every state where an attorney is licensed to practice law. Johnson could not be reached for this article. Legal Disclaimer: Johnson, Abrams and Goodman are considered innocent of all charges until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.  David Abrams Esq. ILLINOIS COOK COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT JUDGES TO RULE ON TWO STOLLER INDIRECT CRIMINAL COTEMPT CITATIONS11/14/2009  LITIGATION IS A 'BLOOD' SPORT CHICAGO-(AEAE)-THE WEEK BEFORE THE 2009 THANKSGIVING MEAL GOES INTO THE RECORD BOOKS, TWO ILLINOIS COOK COUNTY JUDGES WILL RULE ON STOLLER'S PETITIONS FOR INDIRECT CRIMINAL CONTEMPT PETITIONS CHARGING SEVERAL LAWYERS AND PROFESSIONALS WITH FELONIES. If convicted the respondents are staring at serious jail time. Litigation is a “blood” sport. This week the Washington DC sniper John Allen Mohammad was put to death by lethal injection. Get on the wrong side of the American Jurisprudence System and and the system will “kill”. Abuse the system and you can be charged with Indirect Criminal Contempt. Stoller this summer spent 37 days in the Illinois Cook County Jail for the “crime” of publishing “speech” on his former “blog”. Stoller would “never” have believed that a Illinois Circuit Court Judge would have locked him up for exercising his First Amendment Rights of “free” speech”. Likewise, the defendants in Stoller's two indirect criminal contempt petitions believe that “no” Illinois Cook County Judge will lock them up. Stoller's opponents sought to have him jailed for up to 6 months for publishing speech on the Internet. Stoller is seeking sentences of up to ten years for much more serious crimes. The Law firm of Gordon and Rees and the Washington D.C. Law firm of Roylance, Abrams, Berdo and Goodman have been dogging service of process of an Indirect Criminal Contempt Petition that has been properly lodged with the Illinois Cook County Courts. They and their attorneys who are defendants in the Indirect Criminal Contempt Petitions will soon learn why it is not a good idea to dodge service of process of any legal proceeding, let alone a Criminal Contempt Petition. In any event stay tuned this week there will be a lot of legal fire works to see before the holidayay
STOLLER APPEALS ILLINOIS CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE DENNIS PORTER'S DECISION EFFECTING FREE 'SPEECH'11/13/2009  CHICAGO-(AEAE)-STOLLER APPEALED ILLINOIS JUDGE DENNIS PORTER'S DECISION CONTEMPT DECISION FOR THE PUBLICATION OF SPEECH ON THE INTERNET. The U. S. Supreme Court in 1996 issued a decision in ACLU v. Janet Reno stricking down the Child Indecent Act in support of "free" Speech on the Internet. Stoller has appealed to the Illinois Appellate Court, First District and is confident of a reveral. The Illinois Appellate Court needs to establish standards for Illinois Judges to follow when dealing with "free" speech issues on the Internet.
 CHICAGO-(AEAE)-STOLLER FILES A JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENT IN AN APPEAL THAT HE FILED WITH THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS. The Seventh Circuit ordered Stoller to file a jurisdictional statement regarding Judge Hibbler's Order.
Stoller has also filed his appeal of Judge Thomas Dedgedon's Order with the Second Circuit Court of Appeals today. Judge Denis Porter is set to rule today in case involving Stoller's right to publish Speech on the Internet. Stoller was previously held in contempt of court by Judge Carol K. Bellows and spent 37 days in the Illinois Cook County Jail for the "crime" of publishing articles on Stoller's former blog. Stoller is preparing a Section 1983 Lawsuit to be filed against all of the parties responsible for Stoller's false imprisonment....There is a lot of legal "action" between now and Thanksgiving...Stay tuned...Litigation is War...Welcome to the Front.....  CHICAGO-(AEAE)--STOLLER OPEN CORRESPONDENCE WITH GORDON AND REES ATTORNEY HAYES RYAN: Mr. Hayes Ryan: Thank you for your email. In over 30 years I as you well know have participated in a considerable amount of litigation. In over 30 years I have "never" been sued for defamation. The "truth" is the best defense to any claim of defamation. Since you refuse to have a meeting in order to attempt to resolve this controversy amiciably, I will inform you that the "words" on the summons, which was signed by the Judge state in plan english that the charge against all of the respondents is "criminal contempt". Had you not refused summons you would clearly have seen the charge. I did not place that language on the summon(s) that were signed by the judge. The Court did. Consequently, the allegation that the respondents are charged with "criminal contempt" is factually correct. Please advise me immediately if the respondents will waive service of process so that I can send you the summons. Under the circumstances, it will not look very good when your clients, Lance G. Johnson, David Abrams and Alfred Goodman have attempted to dodge Service for 18 months and now Gordon and Rees is following in there foot steps. Whether Gordon and Rees will acknowledge it or not for a well known law firm and three of its attorneys to be "charged" with "criminal contempt" is very serious business. I cannot understand for the life of me why a firm of your calibur would "refuse" service of summons and force me to retain a process server to effect service. Should Gordon and Rees decide to sue me, please call me 312-545-4554 so I could pick up the summons. Please advise me by email or phone by Nov 19, 2009 or sooner as to whether you will wave service of summons so that I can send your the summons and complaints. As you know we have a first hearing in December. Also advise me if Gordon and Rees will represent itself in this matter or if you plan on obtaining outside counsel. Likewise please advise me if Lance G. Johnson, David Abrams and Alfred Goodman will waive service of summons by the same date. Most Cordially, Leo Stoller 7115 W. North Ave #272 Oak Park, Illinois 60302 312-545-4554 www.rentamark.net Subject: RE: Stoller v. Johnson, et al. Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 09:52:31 -0800 From: [email protected] To: [email protected] CC: [email protected] .Leo, As my letter identifies the articles on your blog that are defamatory, I see not point in meeting. As you know, no one from Gordon & Rees has been charged with criminal contempt. Rather, you simply have filed a Petition for Adjudication of Indirect Criminal Contempt Citation. To date, there has been no Show Cause hearing, and no authoritative or policing body has backed your Petition. Further, as noted on page 9 of your Appellant Brief, "[o]n June 5, 2009, Judge Flanagan denied a motion for evidentiary hearing on whether [Defendants] were telling the truth [as to service]." By claiming that I and other lawyers at Gordon & Rees have been "charged" with a crime, you have committed defamation per se. These statements, which are factually and legally inaccurate, may mislead the public into believing that criminal charges have been filed against the firm and/or named attorneys by a policing agency. In this connection, your statements have caused, and continue to cause, serious irreparable injury to this firm’s reputation and the reputation of the individual attorneys named. Given that these statements constitute defamation per se and threaten to tortuously interfere with our client relationship(s), they actionable under Illinois law. As noted in my letter of October 29, 2009, we will be taking legal action to protect the rights of this firm and its attorney’s, seeking compensatory and punitive damages. Regards, Hayes This is your new blog post. Click here and start typing, or drag in elements from the top bar.
DIVORCE LAWYER ENGAGED IN A CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY TO HIDE INCRIMINATING EVIDENCE OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY11/10/2009  CHICAGO-(AEAE)-ATTORNEYS ARE BLOCKING A PSYCHOLOGISTS FROM HAVING TO PRODUCE COPIES OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY THAT A MOTHER acquired falsely claiming that a father produced in order to take a collateral advantage in a high conflict divorce involving children. The attorneys are conspiring with the psychologists to withhold the production of the incriminating evidence. This matter is being referred to the U.S. Justice Department. [email protected]
 CHICAGO-(AEAE)- IN A HIGH CONFLICT DIVORCE A WIFE UNLAWFULLY PRODUCED CHILD PORNOGAPHY to a 604(b) Court appointed psychologist in order to gain a collateral advantage in a divorce involving offspring. The male was cleared of all charges by the Illinois Children and Family Services regarding the Child pornography. The father has moved to subpoenia from the psychologist copies of the child pornography but the divorce lawyer has threatened to have the father held in contempt of court in order to shield the psychologist whom she does "not" represent from having to produce the incrimining evidence.
 CHICAGO-(AEAE)-THE UNITED STATES WAS ATTACKED BY THE JAPANESE ON DECEMBER 7, 1941 at Pearl Harbor. Over 2500 Americans were killed that day. Four years latter to the date the Navey announced that all of the 6 Japanese Aircraft Carriers : Akagi, Kaga, Soryu, Hiryu, Shokaku, and Zuikaku had been sunk. Likewise Stoller was also unlawfully attacked on several fronts four years to the date, AEAE announces with today filing of Indirect Criminal Contempt Petitions against two lawyers, a psychologists and a medical professional, that all of the attorneys and parties who have unlawfully participated in that unlawful attack on Stoller are today either facing Indirect Criminal Contempt charges and/or have Petitions for leave to file Indirect Criminal Contempt Charges against them as of today Nov. 9, 2009 for “clear” violations of Illinois Criminal statutes. Substantial jail time is being sought in each instance. Clausewitz, ON WAR Said, “Litigation is War!” Stoller says, “Welcome to the Front!”
|
EQUAL JUSTICE PARTY
|
RSS Feed
