BREAK IN BANK FRAUD CASE, DEFENDANT AGREES TO ROLL OVER AGAINST THE OTHER DEFENDANTS

8/12/2010

CHICAGO-(AEAE) SEVERAL DEFENDANTS IN A MAJOR MORTGAGE FRAUD, RICO LAW SUIT THAT HAS BEEN WRITTEN ON THIS BLOG HAS AGREED TO ROLL OVER ON THE OTHER DEFENDANTS. Without giving away any of the important details, the first real break in the Chicago Civil Racketeering law suit against several banks and numerous attorneys, several of the defendants have agreed to now testify against the other defendants in exchange for being dismissed out of the litigation. Normally defendants in criminal cases accept a plea, a reduced sentence in exchange for testifying against the main defendant that the government wants to nail. In the instant case, several defendant that has been charged agreed to testify in order to accept a release from the litigation. It will be just a matter of time before the main defendants are found guilty of the major allegations in Stoller's complaint. Stay tuned. The main defendants in this case are worth over 2 trillion dollars! If there are any other defendants who would like to settle in exchange for testimony against the others. Stoller will make you an offer that "you can refuse!" Email [email protected] or call Stoller at 312-5445-4554 for a confidential discussion.
SIDEBAR: I was in the Chicago, Illinois Cook County Court house, the Daley Center today. I was filing some pleadings as I do every day, for many years. I was standing next to the self filing stamping device. When a clerk approached me. She looked at some of my pleadings, as I was stamping them, and throwing them into a box.
She said, "Are you the Plaintiff?"
I said, "Yes."
She said, "YOU'RE LEO STOLLER!"
I said,"Yes I am Leo Stoller."
She looked shocked, staired at me for a minute, than walked away. When the Clerk said my name it sounded more like she was talking about a "brand" rather than a real person's name. As if the name LEO STOLLER was really a "brand" rather than the name of a live person.

7 Comments

EQUAL JUSTICE PARTY
Internships not available now

Help the Equal Justice Party www. equaljusticeparty.org a registered political party in Illinois, support conservative candidates and endorses AEAE. Contribute today!
FREE SPEECH ON THE NET IS NOT 'FREE'. PEOPLE GO TO JAIL FOR BLOGGING ALL OF THE TIME. THE EQUAL JUSTICE PARTY IS FIGHTING TO MAINTAIN THE FIRST AMENDMENT WHICH IS SUPPOSE TO GUARANTEE FREEDOM OF SPEECH. , the First Amendment means that government has no power to restrict expression because of its message, its ideas, its subject matter, or its content." Police Dep't of Chicago v. Mosley, 408 U.S. 92, 95, 33 L. Ed. 2d 212, 92 S. Ct. 2286 (1972); see also Consolidated Edison Co. v. Public Serv. Comm'n, 447 U.S. 530, 537, 65 L. Ed. 2d 319, 100 S. Ct. 2326 (1980)

YOU CAN SUPPORT FREEDOM OF SPEECH BY SUPPORTING THE EQUAL JUSTICE PARTY. DONATE ON-LINE
Supporting Equal Justice Party helps to maintain the Internet a free voice and EJ supports the First Amendment of the U.S Constitution.
The Equal Justice Party (EJ) is a registered Political Action Committee in Chicago, Illinois S 10127 L 15656. The EJ supports conservative causes, conservative candidates, small government.
Americans for the Enforcement of Attorney Ethics (AEAE) www.rentamark.net is a not for profit group that supports Equal Justice www.equaljustice.org and advocates the strict enforcement of attorney ethics since 1974.
The purpose of the AEAE Blog is to exalt the law, by holding to the fundamental right of “Equal Justice” for all. It keeps “watch” on attorney and judicial misconduct issues, evolving trademark and constitutional law. It assures all people with the “good news” that in American “right” will prevail especially for those who “never” give-up “fighting” to obtain “justice”. This site adheres to the Law and the Constitution as its authority. The AEAE, is a attorney rating Service. The comments made by AEAE are not actionable because they are statements of opinion Moriarty v. Greene 732 N.E.2d 730, 740 Ill.App), citing Owen v. Can 497 N.E.2d 1145, 1148 (Ill.1986) see Law offices of David Freydin,PC v Vitoria Chamara et al No 18-3216 Seventh Circuit No 18-3216 decided 01-28-2022.
Ratings are non-actionable opinion statements David Freydin,PC v Vitoria Chamara et al citing Syngenta Seeds Inc v. Bung North America,Inc 773 F.3d 58 (8th Cir 2014) Illinois Law on expressions of Opinion , an unexplained one star review simply could not be actionable as defamation David Freydin case citing Cf. Kimzey v. Yelp!Inc. 836 F. 3d 1263, 1269-70 (9th Cir 2016)
AEAE LEGAL ETHICS AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY EXPERTS, valuations, expert
witness testimony, trademark surveys, brief writer, Appellate Expert.
The author(s) graduated from Mayville State College with a BS Degree, North Dakota State University, MASTERS DEGREE and attended the University of Iowa a for a PHD. The Author(s) are the nation's most renowned
Legal Ethics experts and Intellectual Property Entrepreneur(s) with many years of experience in the field of brief writing, trademarks, licensing and
enforcement, expert witness testimony, trademark valuation Americans for the Enforcement of Attorney Ethics (AEAE) an attorney watch dog group since 1974. AEAE has appeared on FOX NEWS, CBS and in
numerous national news papers including the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Chicago Sun Times etc and on many radio talk shows. AEAE accepts political contributions. AEAE, P.O. Box 60645, Chicago, Illinois 60660. Email [email protected]
312-545-4554
Copyright AEAE 2017, all rights reserved. AEAE accepts no liability for incorrect or inaccurate information appearing here. The opinions expressed here are those o f AEAE Use of this site is subject to our "terms of use" which is published here. Nothing can be duplicated without written permission.
"Litigation is the Sea We swim in,
Litigation is the Air We Breathe
Litigation is War,
Welcome to the Front!"

To Prove Defamation Case?
What Do You Have To Prove? There are two things you have to prove to be true in order to win a case of defamation of character in the court of law. First of all, you have to prove without a doubt that what was said or written about you is not true. Once you have proved that the statement is, in fact, false you have to prove that the other person said the false statement with the intent of causing you some form of harm.
The Fair Reporting Privilege is a defense to any claim of Defamation

The Fair Report Privilege applies to the information contained on this web site.

“[T]he fair report privilege has two requirements: (1) the report must be of an official proceeding; and (2) the report must be complete and accurate or a fair abridgment of the official proceeding. [Citation.] *** For a publication to be considered a fair abridgment, the report must convey to readers a substantially correct account of the official proceedings. [Citation.] A reporter is not privileged to make additions of his own that would convey a defamatory impression or to indict expressly or by innuendo the veracity or integrity of any of the parties. [Citation.] Finally, it is the accuracy of the summary, not the truth or falsity of the information being summarized, that is the benchmark of the privilege. [Citation.]” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Eubanks, 397 Ill. App. 3d at 749 (citing Solaia Technology, LLC v. Specialty Publishing Co., 221 Ill. 2d 558, 588-90 (2006)). ¶ 30
AEAE argues it reports on the law and law suits and it is the intent of AEAE to "fairly report" these official proceedings.

AEAE has the legal right to evaluate and rate attorneys, government officials, College educators, business leaders See JOHN HENRY BROWNE, et al., AVVO, INC., et al Case No. C07-0920RSL UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 18th day of December, 2007. A Robert S. Lasnik United States District Judge

VERITAS OMNIA VINCIT

DISCLAIMER: The AEAE does not provide legal services or legal advice. Discussions of legal principles and authority, including, but not limited to, constitutional provisions, statutes, legislative enactments, court rules, case law, and common-law doctrines are for informational purposes only and do not constitute legal advice.

Reality

8/10/2010 05:05:29 pm

Hey Fattie, why don't you take your name and cut and paste it to a picture of a tennis ball you plucked from the Internet then try to register it with the Trademark Office? Imbecile.

your leo stoller

8/10/2010 09:04:35 pm

Iwouldn't take it as a compliment asshole

Through the Broken Lens

8/11/2010 12:42:02 am

Only you could think that the horrified screams of children fleeing from you were a compliment.

BREAKING NEWS

8/11/2010 04:37:06 am

THE COUNTRYWIDE BANK, (BANK OF AMERICA) 900 TRILLION DOLLAR LAWSUIT FILED BY LEO "THE FOOL" STOLLER WAS DISMISSED ON AUGUST 4TH 2010 BY A COOK COUNTY CHANCERY JUDGE.

REPEATED PHONE CALLS TO LEO "THE FOOL" STOLLER WENT UNANSWERED AS A RESULT HE WAS UNAVAILABLE FOR COMMENT AND SEEMS TO HAVE FORGOTTEN TO REPORT THIS BREAKING NEWS.

A CHICAGO UNIVERSITY LAW PROFESSOR WHO WISHES TO REMAIN ANONYMOUS STATED THAT:"THIS FOOL WILL OF COURSE FILE A SERIES OF ANONYMOUS APPEALS ALL OF WHICH WILL BE DISMISSED." WHILE LEGAL FEES WILL BE EARNED THE ATTORNEYS INVOLVED WILL BY SPENDING THEM WILL REINSERT MORE MONEY INTO THE ECONOMY. THE BANK WILL SIMPLY GET MORE FROM THE GOVERNMENT. SO EVERYONE PROFITS EXCEPT THE FOOL WHO REMAINS IN HIS RATHOLE.

This Just In

8/11/2010 06:16:16 am

Unconfirmed reports of unconfirmed reports confirm that Leo Stoller, indeed, still has no dick. A University of Chicago medical professor, who wished to remain anonymous, stated that an operation commonly referred to as a "dickeotomy" would be futile in attempts to cure Stoller's condition, as his genetic predisposition to wearing dresses and dancing to Whitney Houston's greatest hits would thwart such efforts.

Leo SUXXX it

8/11/2010 03:53:51 pm

' She looked shocked, staired at me for a minute, than walked away. When the Clerk said my name it sounded more like she was talking about a "brand" rather than a real person's name. As if the name LEO STOLLER was really a "brand" rather than the name of a live person"

The clerk has obviously heard of Leo. She probably has heard of his epic stupidity. They probably tell stories about Leo all day long in the court house, about what a loser he is.

hahahahahaha

8/11/2010 04:16:06 pm

blahahahahahahahahahaha

Give the woman a break, Leo

blahahahahahahahahahahaha

It was probably the first time she's
seen a midget in person

blahahahahahahahahahahaha

Americans for the Enforcement of Attorney Ethics