SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA 191 North First St., SAN JOSE, CA 95113

Transcription

1 HI&RH Prince Anthony-Victor III: Guancione, Sui Juris, the natural man Rosalie Aubreé Guancione Sui Juris, the natural woman (aka HI&RH Empress Aubreé Regina Dei Gratia, c/o U.S.P.O. Postmaster, c/o temporary mailing location PO Box Nine-Zero-Four-Five-Two, near San Jose, at Santa Clara County, on California, [zip code exempt] DMM Reg., Sec 1., Public Law 1-, Sec. 0 Tel: 0-0- Rosalie Aubreé Guancione, HI&RH Prince Anthony-Victor III: Guancione, Cross Complainants/Libellants, V. Richard K. Davis (private capacity, Richard C. Hartnack (private capacity, Jay Brian Ledford (private capacity Neil Patel (private capacity Carol Overton (private capacity Patricia M. Lucas (private capacity Edward J. Davila (private capacity Leslie C. Nichols (private capacity Griffin Bonini (private capacity Deborah Ryan (private capacity Cross Defendants/Libellees RIVERWALK HOLDINGS LTD PLAINTIFF V. ANTHONY GUANCIONE DEFENDANT SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA 1 North First St., SAN JOSE, CA Page 1 / 1 Case No: 1-1-CV-, Cross Complainants Affidavit of Notice to Clerk of Fraudulent Fee Exemption Claim by Cross Case: 1-1-CV- Guancione et al v. Richard K. Davis et al Cross Complainant Rosalie Aubreé Guancione, aka, Dei Gratia, the natural living woman s: 1 Notice of Fraudulent Claim of Filing Fee Exemption and Violation of CCP 1. and Cal. Const. Art. 1 Sec., by Cross Defendant s Lucas and Overton, Notice of Fraudulent Claim of Filing Fee Exemption and Violation of CCP 1. and Cal. Const. Art. 1 Sec., by Cross Defendant Attorneys Gilbert and McLaughlin, Notice of Fraudulent Claim of Filing Fee Exemption and Violation of CCP 1. and Cal. Const. Art. 1 Sec., by Attorney Firm MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK, SILVER & WILSON. [CCP 1.; Cal. Cons. Art. 1, Sec. ; FRCP Rule (b, Rule ].

2 Page / 1 Case No: 1-1-CV-, Cross Complainants Affidavit of Notice to Clerk of Fraudulent Fee Exemption Claim by Cross IN ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION Date Action Filed: February 0, 1 AFFIDAVIT OF HI&RH Empress Aubreé Regina Dei Gratia STATE OF CALIFORNIA subscribed and sworn AFFIDAVIT OF TRUTH COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Comes now your Affiant: HI&RH Empress Aubreé Dei Gratia also known as Rosalie Aubreé Guancione, the natural living woman, being over the age of makes these statements under oath and after first being duly sworn according to law, states that she is your Affiant, and she believes these facts to be true to the best of her belief based upon first hand knowledge states as follows: 1 Your Affiant makes this affidavit in the CITY OF SAN JOSE, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, on February, 1. Your Affiant states that the facts described herein are true, complete and not misleading Your Affiant states that the undersigned has first hand knowledge of all the facts stated herein. Your Affiant states that the facts described herein describe events that have occurred within the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA. Your Affiant states that HI&RH Empress Aubreé Dei Gratia is also known as Rosalie Aubreé Guancione. Your Affiant states that HI&RH Empress Aubreé Dei Gratia also known as Rosalie Aubreé Guancione, is a non-corporate, real, mortal, sentient, flesh and blood, natural born woman, who is a living, breathing, and a being, on the soil, with clean hands, rectus curia.

3 Your Affiant states that your Affiant makes these statements freely, without reservation. Your Affiant states that if your Affiant is compelled to testify regarding the facts stated herein that the undersigned is competent to do so. Your Affiant states that the CROSS COMPLAINT clearly represents that Cross Defendant Carol Overton, and Cross Defendant Patricia M. Lucas, ARE EACH SUED in their private capacity. Your Affiant states that the court docket for this case reflects that Cross Defendant Carol Overton, and Cross Defendant Patricia M. Lucas, ARE EACH SUED in their private capacity. Your Affiant states that the caption on court papers submitted by the Cross Defendant Carol Overton, and Cross Defendant Patricia M. Lucas, clearly represent that they are sued in their private capacity. 1 Your Affiant states that when a public official is sued in their private capacity, that is a private lawsuit. 1 Your Affiant states that public officials sued in their private capacity MUST PAY FOR THEIR OWN COURT FILING FEES, in accordance with California Constitution Article 1 Section NO PUBLIC FUNDS (or resources in kind SHALL BE USED FOR PRIVATE PURPOSES. 1 Your Affiant states that public employees sued in their private capacity are BARRED FROM THE USE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR PUBLIC RESOURCES in kind for the legal defense of their private lawsuit. 1 Your Affiant states that neither attorney Kevin E. Gilbert nor Kevin P. McLaughlin, attorneys for Cross Defendant Carol Overton (private capacity, nor Cross Defendant Patricia M. Lucas (private capacity, CAN NOT CLAIM public servant, nor government employee, nor government agency status, nor fee Page / 1 Case No: 1-1-CV-, Cross Complainants Affidavit of Notice to Clerk of Fraudulent Fee Exemption Claim by Cross

4 exemption for the filing of court papers, in the case -CV-, pursuant to California Government code section and California Constitution Article 1 Section. 1 Your Affiant states that NEITHER ATTORNEY FIRM MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK, SILVER & WILSON, attorney firm for Cross Defendant Carol Overton (private capacity, nor Cross Defendant Patricia M. Lucas (private capacity, can claim public servant nor government employee nor government agency status nor fee exemption pursuant to California Government code section and California Constitution Article 1 Section. Your Affiant states that NEITHER CROSS DEFENDANT Carol Overton (private capacity, nor Cross Defendant Patricia M. Lucas (private capacity, can claim public servant nor government employee nor government agency status nor fee exemption pursuant to California Government code section and California Constitution Article 1 Section. Your Affiant states that in general ONLY parties who are parties to a case can file documents into the case. Your Affiant states that there are NO OFFICIAL CAPACITY CORPORATE ALTER EGO PARTIES that are Cross Defendants in the instant case for Overton nor Lucas. Your Affiant states that NON-PARTIES ARE BARRED from submitting pleadings into the instant case, as they are NOT PARTIES TO THE CASE. Your Affiant states that Aubreé Regina Dei Gratia, the natural living woman and her son, Anthony Victor Guancione III, the natural living man, are the Cross Complainants in the instant case, and they are the sole determiners of who are parties to the Cross Complaint. Your Affiant states that Judge Carol Overton (official capacity is NOT A PARTY to the instant case, but Carol Overton (private capacity is a party to the instant case. Page / 1 Case No: 1-1-CV-, Cross Complainants Affidavit of Notice to Clerk of Fraudulent Fee Exemption Claim by Cross

5 Your Affiant states that Judge Patricia M. Lucas (official capacity is NOT A PARTY to the instant case, but Patricia M. Lucas (private capacity is a party to the instant case. Your Affiant states that CCP 1. states in relevant part: (a Every pleading, petition, written notice of motion, or other similar paper shall be signed by at least one attorney of record in the attorney's individual name, or, if the party is not represented by an attorney, shall be signed by the party. Each paper shall state the signer's address and telephone number, if any. Except when otherwise provided by law, pleadings need not be verified or accompanied by affidavit. An unsigned paper shall be stricken unless omission of the signature is corrected promptly after being called to the attention of the attorney or party. (b By presenting to the court, whether by signing, filing, submitting, or later advocating, a pleading, petition, written notice of motion, or other similar paper, an attorney or unrepresented party is certifying that to the best of the person's knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances, all of the following conditions are met: (1 It is not being presented primarily for an improper purpose, such as to harass or to cause unnecessary delay or needless increase in the cost of litigation. ( The claims, defenses, and other legal contentions therein are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law or the establishment of new law. ( The allegations and other factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, are likely to have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery. ( The denials of factual contentions are warranted on the evidence or, if specifically so identified, are reasonably based on a lack of information or belief. Your Affiant states that each and every filing of attorneys Kevin E. Gilbert into the instant case has been certified by the signer as not being presented for an improper purpose pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 1.. Your Affiant states that each and every filing of attorneys Kevin E. Gilbert into the instant case has been certified by the signer as having evidentiary support pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 1.. Page / 1 Case No: 1-1-CV-, Cross Complainants Affidavit of Notice to Clerk of Fraudulent Fee Exemption Claim by Cross

6 Your Affiant states that each and every filing of attorneys Kevin E. Gilbert into the instant case has been certified by the signer as warranted by existing law. Your Affiant states that each and every filing of attorneys Kevin P. McLaughlin into the instant case has been certified by the signer as not being presented for an improper purpose pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 1.. Your Affiant states that each and every filing of attorneys Kevin P. McLaughlin into the instant case has been certified by the signer as having evidentiary support pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section Your Affiant states that each and every filing of attorneys Kevin P. McLaughlin into the instant case has been certified by the signer as warranted by existing law. 1 Your Affiant states that each and every filing of the law firm of MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK, SILVER & WILSON into the instant case has been certified by the signer as not being presented for an improper purpose pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 1.. Your Affiant states that each and every filing of the law firm of MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK, SILVER & WILSON into the instant case has been certified by the signer as having evidentiary support pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 1.. Your Affiant states that each and every filing of the law firm of MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK, SILVER & WILSON into the instant case has been certified by the signer as warranted by existing law. Your Affiant states that each and every filing of Cross Defendant Carol Overton, into the instant case has been certified by the signer as not being presented for an improper purpose pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 1.. Page / 1 Case No: 1-1-CV-, Cross Complainants Affidavit of Notice to Clerk of Fraudulent Fee Exemption Claim by Cross

7 Your Affiant states that each and every filing of Cross Defendant Carol Overton, into the instant case has been certified by the signer as having evidentiary support pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 1.. Your Affiant states that each and every filing of Cross Defendant Carol Overton, into the instant case has been certified by the signer as warranted by existing law. Your Affiant states that each and every filing of Cross Defendant Patricia M. Lucas, into the instant case has been certified by the signer as not being presented for an improper purpose pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 1.. Your Affiant states that each and every filing of Cross Defendant Patricia M. Lucas, into the instant case has been certified by the signer as having evidentiary support pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 1.. Your Affiant states that each and every filing of Cross Defendant Patricia M. Lucas, into the instant case has been certified by the signer as warranted by existing law. 0 Your Affiant states that the COURT DOCKET FOR THIS CASE DOES NOT REFLECT that either Carol Overton, nor Patricia M. Lucas were sued in their official capacity. 1 Your Affiant states that the Cross Defendants Carol Overton (private capacity and Patricia M. Lucas (private capacity ARE NOT ELIGIBLE FOR ANY FEE EXEMPTION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION. Your Affiant states that the following individuals and entities have CONSPIRED TO COMMIT FRAUD upon the SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, by FRAUDULENTLY CLAIMING FEE EXEMPTION for filing fees for which they are INELIGIBLE under California Page / 1 Case No: 1-1-CV-, Cross Complainants Affidavit of Notice to Clerk of Fraudulent Fee Exemption Claim by Cross

8 Government Code section as BARRED BY CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 1 SECTION, in the instant case in all of their filings: a Kevin P. McLaughlin (SBN 1 b Kevin Ellsworth Gilbert (SBN. c MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK, SILVER & WILSON d Carol Overton (private capacity e Patricia M. Lucas (private capacity Your Affiant states that she gave telephonic notice of these facts to Kevin Ellsworth Gilbert on 0//1, at telephone number ( -1, at 1: PM, and was hung up on by Attorney Gilbert, when an offer to enter into confidential settlement discussions was made. Your Affiant states that the undersigned attempted to contact Kevin P. McLaughlin at MEYERS NAVE, but has not receive a call back, and this has been the usual behavior of the attorneys for Cross Defendants Carol Overton (private capacity and Patricia M. Lucas (private capacity. Your Affiant states that the undersigned has informally requested each of the attorney s Gilbert and McLaughlin s legal malpractice insurance carrier disclosure, on 0//1 directly to Gilbert by phone, and separately to McLaughlin s human resources department manager at MEYERS NAVE on 0//1. Your Affiant states that California Code of Civil Procedure section 1. states in relevant part: (c If, after notice and a reasonable opportunity to respond, the court determines that subdivision (b has been violated, the court may, subject to the conditions stated below, impose an appropriate sanction upon the attorneys, law firms, or parties that have violated subdivision (b or are responsible for the violation. In determining what sanctions, if any, should be ordered, the court shall consider whether a party seeking sanctions has exercised due diligence. Your Affiant states that the court may seek sanctions on the attorneys, law firm and parties, Page / 1 Case No: 1-1-CV-, Cross Complainants Affidavit of Notice to Clerk of Fraudulent Fee Exemption Claim by Cross

9 a Kevin P. McLaughlin (SBN 1 b Kevin Ellsworth Gilbert (SBN. c MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK, SILVER & WILSON d Carol Overton (private capacity e Patricia M. Lucas (private capacity for violation of California Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1.(b FOR FALSELY AND FRAUDULENTLY CLAIMING A FILING FEE FOR A PRIVATE LAWSUIT, AND FOR EMBEZZLEMENT OF PUBLIC FUNDS AND PUBLIC RESOURCES from the California Judicial Council and the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara. Your Affiant states that the court may seek all fraudulently exempted filing fees to be paid nunc pro tunc by: a Kevin P. McLaughlin (SBN 1 b Kevin Ellsworth Gilbert (SBN. c MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK, SILVER & WILSON d Carol Overton (private capacity e Patricia M. Lucas (private capacity Your Affiant states that the court may recommend disbarment proceedings against the attorneys who have committed fraud upon the court: a Kevin P. McLaughlin (SBN 1 b Kevin Ellsworth Gilbert (SBN. c Carol Overton (private capacity d Patricia M. Lucas (private capacity 0 Your Affiant states that the court may determine that sitting judges who have committed fraud upon the court are ineligible to continue as a judge for the SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA: Page / 1 Case No: 1-1-CV-, Cross Complainants Affidavit of Notice to Clerk of Fraudulent Fee Exemption Claim by Cross

10 a Carol Overton (private capacity b Patricia M. Lucas (private capacity 1 Your Affiant states that a sitting judge who served as both trial judge in the instant case, and then served as chairperson of the appellate division panel hearing an appeal in the instant case, and then denied that fact, may be determined by the court as having committed fraud upon the Defendant, and fraud upon the court, and further the court may determine that the following judge is ineligible to serve as a judge for moral character, ethics violations, and statutory and case law violations reasons: a Patricia M. Lucas (private capacity Your Affiant states for informational purposes, for those who fail to comprehend why certain judges are being sued: when Judge Lucas served as an appellate panel chairman in the instant case that she was the trial court judge in also, the other members of the fraudulent appellate panel were Judges Bonini and Ryan, to deny Defendant and Cross Defendant s rights. Your Affiant certifies, Pursuant to CCP 1., that all of the following conditions are met: (1 This document is not being presented primarily for an improper purpose, such as to harass or to cause unnecessary delay or needless increase in the cost of litigation. ( The claims, defenses, and other legal contentions therein are warranted by existing law or by a non-frivolous argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law or the establishment of new law. ( The allegations and other factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, are likely to have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery. ( The denials of factual contentions are warranted on the evidence or, if specifically so identified, are reasonably based on a lack of information or belief. I declare under penalty of perjury by the laws of the STATE OF CALIFORNIA that the foregoing is true and correct. Page / 1 Case No: 1-1-CV-, Cross Complainants Affidavit of Notice to Clerk of Fraudulent Fee Exemption Claim by Cross

11 Further your Affiant sayeth naught. Date: February, 1 By: _/s/_ Empress Aubreé Regina Dei Gratia _ HI&RH Empress Aubreé Regina Dei Gratia (aka Rosalie Aubreé Guancione Secured Party Creditor Common Law Notarization The undersigned are witnesses to the signatures of the real man, and/or, real woman above. 1 1 Date: February, 1 By: _/s/_ William-Bullock III: Stewart _ HI&RH Prince William-Bullock III: Stewart Witness #1, Common Law Notarization Date: February, 1 By:_ /s/_ K. Romano RA Pharol Beaujayam _ K. Romano RA Pharol Beaujayam Witness #, Common Law Notarization Page / 1 Case No: 1-1-CV-, Cross Complainants Affidavit of Notice to Clerk of Fraudulent Fee Exemption Claim by Cross

12 CERTIFICATE OF FILING AND SERVICE This statement is made under penalty of perjury of the laws of the STATE OF CALIFORNIA. I, HI&RH Prince William-Bullock III: Stewart, the undersigned and not a party to the instant case, being over the age of, do hereby certify that I served a true and correct copy of the: 1 Notice of Fraudulent Claim of Filing Fee Exemption and Violation of CCP 1. and Cal. Const. Art. 1 Sec., by Cross Defendant s Lucas and Overton, Notice of Fraudulent Claim of Filing Fee Exemption and Violation of CCP 1. and Cal. Const. Art. 1 Sec., by Cross Defendant Attorneys Gilbert and McLaughlin, Notice of Fraudulent Claim of Filing Fee Exemption and Violation of CCP 1. and Cal. Const. Art. 1 Sec., by Attorney Firm MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK, SILVER & WILSON. [CCP 1.; Cal. Cons. Art. 1, Sec. ; FRCP Rule (b, Rule ]. in case Dei Gratia v. Davis et al, Case No. 1-1-CV- on each of the following individual parties, and the Court, as follows by postage fully prepaid, First Class, U.S. Mail, on February, 1: NELSON & KENNARD ROBERT SCOTT KENNARD 0 Harvard St., Ste. Sacramento, CA 1, PO Box ( MEYERS NAVE Kevin P. McLaughlin 1 th St. - Ste 0 Oakland, CA 0 Richard K. Davis (private capacity OFFICE OF THE CORP SEC Y, US BANCORP BC-MN-H0 00 Nicollet Mall Minneapolis, MN 0-0 Edward J. Davila (private capacity UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 So. First St., San Jose, CA LOZANO SMITH Attn: Kevin Ellsworth Gilbert 01 N Main St. - Ste 0 Walnut Creek, CA Leslie C. Nichols (private capacity 1 Began Avenue # Mt View, CA 00 Richard C Hartnack (private capacity 0 Jones Branch Dr. - MS 0 McLean, VA Neil Patel (private capacity Glade Road, Colleyville, TX 0 Page 1 / 1 Case No: 1-1-CV-, Cross Complainants Affidavit of Notice to Clerk of Fraudulent Fee Exemption Claim by Cross

13 1 1 1 in case Dei Gratia v. Davis et al, Case No. 1-1-CV- on each of the following individual parties, and the Court, as follows by substituted personal delivery to clerk of the court for each party listed below, on February, 1: Deborah Ryan (private capacity c/o David H Yamasaki, Clerk SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 1 N. First St., San Jose, CA Carol Overton (private capacity c/o David H Yamasaki, Clerk SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 1 N. First St., San Jose, CA Presiding Judge Risë Jones Pichon c/o David H Yamasaki, Clerk SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 1 N. First St., San Jose, CA My usual address of business is: William Stewart, PO Box, San Jose, CA Griffin Bonini (private capacity c/o David H Yamasaki, Clerk SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 1 N. First St., San Jose, CA Patricia Lucas (private capacity c/o David H Yamasaki, Clerk SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 1 N. First St., San Jose, CA 1 1 DATED: February, 1 By: / s /_HI&RH Prince William-Bullock III: Stewart HI&RH Prince William-Bullock III: Stewart Secured Party Creditor Page 1 / 1 Case No: 1-1-CV-, Cross Complainants Affidavit of Notice to Clerk of Fraudulent Fee Exemption Claim by Cross