ILLINOIS CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE RONALD F. BARTKOWICZ GRANTS STOLLER\'S MOTION FOR SUBSTITUTION OF JUDGE AND TRANSFERS CASES TO THE CHIEF JUDGE MADDOX FOR RE-ASSIGNMENT

4/24/2010

CHICAGO-(AEAE)-STOLLER FILED A MOTION BEFORE ILLINOIS JUDGE RONALD F. BARTKOWICZ for substitution of judge on the grounds that Judge Bartkowicz was bias and prejudice against Stoller. After the hearing on Friday, Judge Bartkowicz agreed with Stoller, and issued an order transferring two “Stoller” cases to the Chief Judge Maddox of the Law Division of Cook County Illinois. Michael Werich from the law firm of Bryan Cave unexpectedly show up in casual jeans to make the argument for Well Fargo Bank, a defendant in one of the cases. In an other case Stoller has charged Mr. Werich with Indirect Criminal Contempt before Illinois Judge Mary Ann Mason. That Motion is set for next week. Judge Mary Ann Mason, unlike Judge Ronald F. Bartkowicz, refused to grant a request for her to recuse herself from another Stoller case. Stoller has renew his motion for substitution of Judge Mary Ann Mason based upon recent prejudicial statements that Judge Mason is alleged to have made bias and prejudicial statement against Stoller, according to the charges in the said motion. Although there are about 400 Illinois Cook County Judges, Judge Mason refuses to recuse herself from Stoller's case. In 40 years Stoller has never had a judge “refuse” to recuse himself if a request was made of that judge to do so, until Judge Mason was assigned to one of Stoller's cases. Illinois Judge Mary Ann Mason is married to Northern District of Illinois Judge Michael T. Mason. http://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/home/JudgeInfo.aspx

2 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.

The Bull

4/24/2010 05:36:04 am

thanks for the link to the wikpedia article I reprint it here. All of us should publish this link every day here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Stoller

Paul Stan link

10/9/2011 11:55:08 am

Ask any voter in Cook County; Can you name just three Cook County Judges…or how about just two?
The Cook County Court is a cloistered, clandestine organization that has given themselves an unimaginable power and a disgusting flow of continual money and benefits with absolutely no outside oversight or accountability, whatsoever.
Did you know that the Cook County Courts operate at an efficiency you would be fired for, while our classrooms are overcrowded due to teacher layoffs and our streets less safe from a $190 million dollar public safety budget cut?
Did you know we can employee 3- 4 more teachers or 2-3 police officers in place of just one Judge?
The Cook County Courts inefficiencies do however allow for many more Judges to be on the payroll.
And the majority of Cook County Voters cannot even name three sitting Judges, let alone two-yet they can also take all of your freedoms and constitutional rights away in under 5 seconds, without justifying it to a living soul.
If you look into the Cook County annual budget, you will find that the judicial budget portion is cleverly hard to total for a true picture of what they spend annually; It appears it is somewhere between $100,000,000-150,000,000!
The ‘lowest’ Judge on the pecking order is an associate Judge-they are NOT voted in, rather, they are appointed by other Judges-a very political position-and if you get a ‘bad’ one, there’s not a dam thing you can do about it.
Associate Judges start at approximately $167,000 per year, plus health Insurance, vacation and retirement/pensions-putting them well over $200,000 per year.
Circuit Judges, Presiding Judges and Chief Justices-dwarf that figure
Do you know how many hours they truly work per year?
Some states and cities are waking up to this fact in this economy; August 17, 2011 Michigan started to wake up when the Detroit News reported that “it is recommended to cut 45 Judges, saving $7.8 million in just salaries alone”, the report says’ there isn't enough workload to justify the current allotment of 584 trial judges and 28 appeals court judges’ (http://detnews.com/article/20110817/POLITICS02/108170402/Michigan-Supreme-Court-supports-cutting-49-judge-positions#ixzz1ZpkDAegQ)
They cannot be fired-except through a Judicial Inquiry board (we will discuss) they cannot be sued, liable or held accountable
If they are caught in wrongdoing, it’s a very long process, but they can be tried-You and I pay for their legal defense and pay for any fines they owe-and they can return to the bench!
And they ‘police’ themselves-in ‘theory’
We have allowed one of the biggest scams, blights and drain on our society that has ‘ordained’, empowered and protected its’ interests ,so cleverly cloaked and almost ‘invisible’ that you don’t even know it’s happening-and that was surely by design.
You can’t even name two.
Thomas Jefferson said, “We get the government we deserve”
Gore Vidal said, “We have become the United States of Apathy”
The combination in our judicial system has become lethal.
And it gets better.
They have given themselves the power of contempt, which almost no lay person understands what this allows them to do to each and every one of us.
For any reason whatsoever, a Judge can hold you in contempt; you’re wearing the wrong shirt or a bad haircut-it’s all up to them.
When you are held in contempt, you will be arrested and every right you have under our constitution and bill of rights-ENDS.
The Judge that puts you in jail has to justify that incarceration to not a living soul!
The only Judge that can set you free is the one that put you in jail, to begin with.
Yes there is a ‘writ of habeas corpus in some scenarios, which puts you before another ‘brethren’ Judge, who most likely has lunch scheduled with the Judge that put you away-so good luck on that.
I asked an attorney why they don’t fight that unmitigated power, he said, “we love it, for Judges hardly ever put attorneys in jail and the contempt power makes people do what the attorney wants them to do”!
Who Judges the Judges?
In theory, it’s the voters who supposedly have the ‘power’ to elect and or to ‘not retain’ Cook County Judges (except of course the appointed associate Judges-whom are completely ’cloaked’ and ‘invincible’)
But you the voter really don’t care-and boy oh boy, do they count on that!
When you, the apathetic voter go to the polls, they have conveniently given you one simple button that simply says, ‘retain all’
And, since you cannot even name two, and, you have errands to run, you ‘retain all’, because after all, if you do not want to retain them, you have to go through a seemingly endless list of no name Judges whereby you must check

Americans for the Enforcement of Attorney Ethics