You are on page 1of 10

1

JOSE CASTANEDA P. O. BOX 947 PASADENA, CA 91102

3
4

5
6

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

8
9 10

TO BE FILED UPON DEMAND!


PER THE CONSTITUTION
) ) ) ) ) )
) )

Case No.: BC 466 737


[FILED IN GC 047300

11 JOSE CASTANEDA,
12

an individual Corruption,

&

B 229512]

13
14 15 16 17

tired of Judicial Judicial Judicial Threats, Engineer

Discrimination, Prejudice, Judicial Judicial

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION & OPPOSITION TO ILLEGAL, CORRUPT ORDER, BY THE COURT ON MARCH 28, 2012 ...

)
)

Misconduct

to

an "Engineered" Verdict or

&

1. [FACT & EXHIBIT(S}: OF A COURT ORDER THAT WAS ASSIGNED ) FOR "ALL" PURPOSES TO JUDGE ) ) HICCOCK PHILIP] TO OLD & RIDGED TO
) ) ) ) )
) )

18

UNDERSTAND IN COURTS

THE NEW CRIMES OF LAW!

COMMITTED

"Predictive"
19

(Per Exhibi

1#)

20
21 22

Decision

23
24 25 26 27 28

2. PER ORDER OF THE COURT, BY "ALL" ) JUDGE HICKOK, DIRECT JUDGE TO ) FILINGS TO PRESIDING used in the court, and "NOT" on ) HEAR, BUT "ERASED" FROM ) OFFICIAL COURT RECORD! (Per "Official" record which ) ) Exhibit 2#)

by unlawful tactics

"Edit's"

true justice!

Plaintiff,

) ) ) ) ) ) )

3. PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF FOLLOWING & COMPLYING WITH COURT'S ORDER VERBATIM. (Not on Court Minutes & another ) judicial lie in court)
)
) )

4. MY RIGHTS & PER THE LAW, TO "CONSOLIDATE" THE RELATED "FALSE" CASE (S) BY LAW

PLAINTIFF'S

MOTION

&

OPPOSITION

TO ILLEGAL ORDER OF 3/28/2012

1
2

Vs.
ESTATE OF ROBERT BERKE, JOSEPH F. DEVANON, ANTOHONY B. DREWRY, RITA "SUNNY"MILLER, LISA MACCARLEY,SONIA MERCADO, EMAHN COUNTS, JACK K. CONWAY, SEVAG NIGOGHOSIAN, CHARLES LOVE, IVAN SHOMER, JAMES R. FELTON, LEON J. OWNES, AND SAMUEL R. PAZ nominated by President Clinton in 1994 AND DOES 1 through 10, inclusive,

) "INTRODUCED" BY DEFENDANTS, ) TRUTHFUL, & THE COURT AS ) ) TRUTHFUL; THAT WERE

AS

3
4

5
6
7

8
9

) MANUFACTURED, FALSE EVIDENCE, ) FALSE CASE(S), THAT WAS A LIE ) TO THE COURT FOR A FAVOR & ) BRIBE BY DEFENDANTS TO RECIEVE ) ) UNJUST REWARDS FOR A BRIBE TO ) THE BENCH. (For proof, see ) altered court records, with no ) ) objections by Defendants, when ) false case(s) & false evidence ) were introduced to & by the ) court by "ALL" parties!)

Defendants; 10 AND THE FORMAL REQUEST FOR PROTECTION AND FREE FROM RETALATION FOR EXPOSING JUDICIAL CORRUPTION:

11
12 13

) ) ) ) ) )
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

***WHISTLE-BLOWER REQUESTED;

PROTECTION FOR

WITH THE REWARD

14 15 16

THE EXPOSING DECISIONS

THE "SELLING OF FRAUD

5. ABUSE OF DUE PROCESS BASED ON A JUDICIAL BRIBE, JUDICIAL PERJURY, JUDICIAL ABUSE OF DISCRECTION, AND PERJURY BY JUDGE FOR A BRIBE TO ALLOW FALSE EVIDENCE BY JUDGE HICKOK AND HIS CRAZY "SCREW UP" COURT!!! *Judge Hickok ... needs to retire and "Step Down or Step Aside!" FOR PROOF SEE EXHIBIT
lO#,Page judicially

BY JUDICIAL

&

5#! Judge Hickok


senile

is

17
18 19

and thinks he is an

CRIMES OF JUDICIAL

BRIBERY!***

)
******************************* PURSUANT
20

) )

Appellate Court Judge, by now; he must think he is a Supreme Court Judfl.ein his "Cracked" MIND!!!

21
22

6. OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, WITH EVIDENCE TO 391.7 (b) f PLAINTIFF MOVES THIS) RECEIVE UNJUST REWARDS & A ) KICK-BACK FOR ALLOWING A SERIES ) COURT THAT THE PRESIDING JUDGE ) OF LIES IN AS EVIDENCE TO CAL. CIV. PROCEDURE)

) TAMPERING

)
23 24
25 26

SHALL PERMIT THE FILING OF SUCH) LITIGATION ONLY IF IT APPEARS HAS MERIT

7. SELLING OF DECISIONS

BY

) "ENGINEERING" A PREDICTIVE & ) PURCHASED VERDICT OR DECISION )

THAT THE LITIGATION

) BY THE COURT TO ALLOW FALSE


) EVIDENCE,

TO STEER CASES TO A

AND HAS NOT BEEN FILED FOR THE


27
28

) PURCHASED OUTCOME BY JUDICIAL ) MANIPULATION TO RECEIVE A BRIBE )

PURPOSES

OF HARASSMENT

OR DELAY ~ 8. JUDICIAL "INTIMIDATION" & ) JUDICIAL THREATS BY THE COURT

PLAINTIFF'S

MOTION

&

OPPOSITION

TO ILLEGAL ORDER OF 3/28/2012

1
2

DUE TO OFFICERS INCLUDING SIMPSON, ATTORNEYS

OF THE COURT,

JUDGES DREWRY, MILLER, DEVANON, AND

3
4

) ) ) ) )
)

UPON MY WITNESS & uINTERPRETER" IN THE COURT, WHILE "INTERPRETING" WITH HIS SERVICES TO THE COURT & I.

5
6 7 8 9 10

11
12 13 14 15 16 17

OF TITLE 18, 241 & ) 242, CONSPIRACY TO VIOLATE MY ) RIGHTS BY "ALL" OFFICERS OF THE BERKE, OVERTON, FELTON, COUNTS, ~ COURT, AS THE COURT ALLOWS FOR ) A BRIBE ) NIGOGHOSIAN, VIOLATING THE ) 10. VIOLATION OF PENAL CODE CONSTITUTION OF THE U.S.A. AND ~ 182, JUDICIAL CONSPIRACY. ) BETRAYING THEIR OATH OF OFFICE, ) 11. OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE IN ) CASES GC 039459 & GC 039473 BY ) AS KNOWN TRAITORS TO THE ) ATTORNEY PRATT, CONWAY AND LISA M. MACCARLEY CONSTITUTION, THE PEOPLE, THEIR ~ ) 12. TAMPERING WITH EVIDENCE, ) FOR PROOF SEE CASES BS 118244, OFFICE, AND THEMSELVES FOR ) BC 402096, GC 042105, & GC 045202 THE REMOVAL OF A ) MONEY OR A JUDICIAL BRIBE. ) "STIPULATION" FORCED BY SAM R. ) PAZ PAZ, MERCADO,SHOMER,

) 9. VIOLATION

)
THE DIRTY ATTORNEYS THAT PAY THE DOWN ) 13. VIOLATION OF PENAL CODE ) SUBORDINATION OF PERJURY ) ) 14. VIOLATION OF PENAL CODE ) OFFERING FALSE EVIDENCE FOR ) CONVICTION; TO RECEIVE A ) JUDICIAL BRIBE. ) ) 15. VIOLATION OF PENAL CODE ) PREPARING OF FALSE EVIDENCE ) (CASES No GC 039743, & YS ) 017992) 127 132 A

JUDGES OFF ARE RUNNING


18

COURTS AND OUR COUNTRY


19 20

INTO THE GROUND AND GUTTER!

134

21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28

OF PENAL 67 & 68, ) OFFERING, & TAKING A BRIBE ) ) 17. TO VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION ) OF THE UNITED STATES, TREASON ) ) 18. Violation Cal. Civ. Proc. ) Code 391.7 (b) "THE PRESIDING ) JUDGE SHALL PERMIT THE FILING ) OF SUCH LITIGATION ONLY IF IT .

) 16. VIOLATION

PLAINTIFF'S

MOTION

&

OPPOSITION

TO ILLEGAL ORDER OF 3/28/2012

1
2 3
4

INTRODUCTION: IIMotion, Pleading, Litigant

In comes the Plaintiff,

Jose Castaneda,

et. al.,

&

Opposing

a "So-Called"

Order of Vexatious with his "Interpreter" with an Honorable

trial or hearing,

on 03/28/2012,

and witness,
5
6 7 8 9 10

Mr. James Blume,

former Marine award,

Discharge,

and a "Good Conduct"

former Police Officer, who was order to of the Content!

former Peace Officer

for the state of California, the court's clarifying,

be quiet while clarifying case, while Interpreting,

facts and direction and in the "Proper"

11 JUDICIAL
12

"INCIDENT"

THAT DEPRIVE

ME OF MY RIGHTS:

Request

for

13
14 15 16

"Judicial evidence

Notice"

of all cases that were presented false. (A Judicial

in court as true This illegal my For are

but were really

Fallacy)

and criminal

act that was conducted

in a court of law violated Bribe.

rights to a fair trial, proof,

and was done based on a Judicial that were introduced

17

the cases and evidence

as evidence

18

as follows:
19

20
21 22 23 24 25

On EXHIBIT was given,

"1", As Tentative

Ruling

in Case BC 466737,

that

and manufacture

by the court. On Exhibit

1, Page I,

IIBottom of page or last paragraph

it states a list of cases that Litigant":

were falsely used to find me a "Vexatious

In Case # 1.:
26

GC 044745, Estate

of Felicitas

Castaneda

v.

Susana Castaneda
27 28

[Exhibit 2], I re-open

and filed this case as an Castaneda. The connected

Administrator or attached PLAINTIFF'S

of the Estate of Felicitas case is GC 039459, MOTION

I am enclosing

the Court Minutes

& OPPOSITION

TO ILLEGAL ORDER OF 3/28/2012

1
2 3 4

that Shows Lisa MacCarley and both attorneys This proves re-litigate

and Jack Conway, to dismissed

who appeared

on 4/16/08,

"agreed"

case "with Prejudice".

conspiracy.

It is a lie that I am a "VL" and trying to [Exhibit 11, P~ge 4]

the same issue, or case!

5
6 7

in Case # 2. Garfield Krepack. I never Medical Not

GC 039743, Haifen Ye AKA Jean Lucero vs. Center [Exhibit 3] Filed by Attorneys record, Trapp

&

by

me, and for the official

I don't know them. This is

8
9

filed this case; the court claimed insane, unless The Parties and Attorney

I did!!!

judicially guilty!!!
10

it was "intentionally"

done to find me Krepack for I never with

listed are Gordon

Edelstein

Plaintiff,

Janet Eiko Trapp for the Defendant, any business courtroom! dealing

11
12

hired this attorneys

or have conducted

them, it was just made up in Judge Hickok 3, Page 2, and Page 3]

[See Exhibit

13
14 15 16

In Case # 3.

GC 045202, Estate of Felicitas

Castaneda

v. The

Law Firm of Jack K. Conway Estate,


17

[Exhibit 4] As Administrator

of the

It was my job to file the case to pursue for "gross intentional legal malpractice"

a claim against of dismissing the

Conway
18 19 20 21 22 23 24

two cases opened by Chad T. Pratt, who was fired for his dishonesty as he was requesting forward matter thousands of dollars to pursue a straight There were well and Pratt was

of fraud where monies missing

where missing. accounts,

over $112,000.00 accepting property

from my mother's settlement

$5,000.00

dollar

for the return of the For proof, as Exhibit WILL


TO 1377

that was taken and stolen Attorney, writes: THEIR

from the estate.

see II,

letter of dishonest Page I, as MacCarley


25 26

Lisa Marie Maccarley, "HAVING SAID THAT,

MY CLIENTS

AGREE TO TRANSFERRING RUTAN WAY, Exhibit PASADENA,

INTERESTS

IN THE REAL PROPERTY CASTANEDA DESIRES"

IF THAT IS

WHAT MRS.

[See

27
28

11, Page 1, fourth paragraph

for proof of the theft from

the estate.

PLAINTIFF'S

MOTION

& OPPOSITION

TO ILLEGAL ORDER OF 3/28/2012

1
2 3 4

In Case # 4.

Case YS 017992, Jose Castaneda

v. Daniel

Papas

[Exhibit 5] Be advised, Inglewood


5
6
7

this case was filed in The City of fabricated by the court for to

Courthouse, Bribe!

and is apparently

a Judicial

I never

filed this case! The court continues and fake cases to receive monies received

lie and Manufacture Bribe,

Evidence

a Judicial

and to keep the "Kick-Back" the court!

by the opposing never filed this

8
9 10

Party, that bribed

It is NOT my case,

case the court claimed the Defendant's NOT! For proof, corrections

did! The court lies and claims along with I did file a case in court, but I did were made in court, "NO" were ever made courthouse,

by stating

11
12

"NO" objections

were made in court,

"NO" clarifications

in court, 13
14 15 16 17 18 19

just continuous

lies in this "Dirty" County

with dirty Judges overturning

that now "ACT" as an Appeals Court's Decisions

Court Justices, in this by a

the Appellate

already made behavior

same case and Jurisdiction! !! This is criminal Superior Jeopardy! Appeals Court Judges in this Jurisdiction, Court Judge,

applying

"Double

Can a Superior

Judge Hickok

"Act" as an in

Court Judge,

and "OVERTURN"

the Appeals

Court Ruling,

the Superior
20 21 22 23

Court? CAN A SUPERIOR

COURT JUDGE RETRY AN APPELLATE Court for a bribe??? Jose Castaneda of my v.

COURT CASE AND OVERTURN

IT in the Superior Felicitas

In Case # 5. GC 036176, Sonia Mercado mother,

Castaneda,

[Exhibit 5], I did file this case on behalf Castaneda, after the discovery Sonia Mercado's

Felicitas

of "investment" Financial money in her

for $113,626.25
24

made at Attorney

Institution
25 26

or Bank. Attorney

Mercado

put my mother's

own Bank; to steal from my mother's

estate! v. Superior Court of Los v. Conway.

27
28

On Case # 6.
Angeles County

B 229567, Castaneda

et al. Related

Case GC 045202, Castaneda

PLAINTIFF'S

MOTION

&

OPPOSITION

TO ILLEGAL ORDER OF 3/28/2012

1
2 3
4

Be advised,

there is NO Superior

Case other than the above

[Exhibit v.

10, Page 1 & 2, that lists Trial Court Case GC 045202, Conway] In Case # 7. B 227826, connected Castaneda v. S.C.L.A.

Castaneda

Related

Case Case

5
6 7

to case GC 042105. Be advised,

there is NO Superior

other than the above.

did

NOT file

this

case, as stated by the filed, signed, Attorney or did

court. This is a lie! For Proof, submitted this Fraudulent

I never

8
9

Case or Complaint.

MacCarley

file this case. Not me as per the court thinks proof, [See Exhibit
10

I did! For

10, Pages 3 & 4, that lists Trial Court Case GC This case B 227826, was falsely case was filed on and "engineered" case

042105, Ramirez 11
12 13 14 15 16

Et Al v. Castaneda] was wrong,

and "intentionally" behalf

and the appeal

of the Defendants Litigant"

to win a "designed",

of "Vexatious Conspiracy Litigant criteria

against me, but based on a Judicial Vexatious

to commit theft to win this fake constructed proof,

case! For clear, and "Absolute" of Vexatious Litigant, an appeal

I do "NOT" fit the Division

per the Court of Appeals, from Superior Mercado

Five, in Case B223S49,


17 18 19 20 21

court Case BC402096. because my I

I lost a case filed by Attorney lawyer, Attorney appealed

by Default

Conway was too busy lying to the court! After Mercado and Paz filed a Vexatious

case BC 402096,

Litigant

charge against me because

I expose

their lies and the investment against me and to keep me The Court did See Exhibit
DENY

fraud. they filed that case to retaliate quiet in exposing

22
23

the scam to steal from the Estate. was denied.

not believe
24

them, and the Motion

For Proof,

9, and on Page S,at bottom


PLAINTIFFS' 25
26 27 28

on number

2, it reads:
DEFENDANT

"WE ALSO

REQUEST BECAUSE

FOR AN ORDER FINDING PROVIDE

A VEXATIOUS FOR THIS UNDER

LITIGANT

PLAINTIFFS

INSUFFICIENT IS

EVIDENCE

COURT TO DETERMINE SECTION

WHETHER DEFENDANT

A VEXATIOUS

LITIGANT

391

OF THE CALIFORNIA

CODE OF CIVIL

PROCEDURE"

PLAINTIFF'S

MOTION

& OPPOSITION

TO ILLEGAL ORDER OF 3/28/2012

1
2

ON EXHIBIT Jose Salazar

7#. Is The Order Finding a vexatious pursuant Cases,

that Jose Castaneda and Prohibiting

AKA his

Castaneda

litigant

3
4

filing of new litigation court based on Fraudulent

to CCP 391.7 and made by the Fraudulent Evidence, and the Case This This is

5 6
7

distorting

Case Law based on a Judicial

Bribe.

For proof,

and the Order was never based on true and relevant was a Purchased Decision

evidence. Bribe.

8
9 10

by the court for a Judicial if the Court of Appeals I am not a Vexatious

insane, and makes no sense, the Superior

that supersede Litigant, how This is Fraud on

Court and states

11 can the Superior


12

Court grant a Motion to backdoor

on the same evidence. Judicial

13
14 15 16 17 18

double

jeopardy

my rights and commits

the Court! The Defendants decision

are forum shopping

looking

for favorable for

based on a bribe. Again, Court, a lower Court,

it is improper to supersede

and illegal a Higher

the Superior

Court.

A}
19 20 21

The Court Order

in Case No. Be 466737,

Castaneda

v.

Estate of Robert Berke, displays Mercado and shows that, and R. Samuel is

[Exhibit 7, Page 1, Lines 24 -27] Clearly "having considered Defendants Sonia Jose

22
23 24

Paz motion litigant

for a finding and

that Plaintiff him

Castaneda security,

vexatious

to

require

to

post

and having

considered

the opposing papers, the motion

heard is GRANTED.H

25

arguments
26

of Jose Castaneda

and counsel,

27
28

How can the Court grant this Ridiculous evidence supplied and manufactured

Order based on false

by the court and officers?

PLAINTIFF'S

MOTION

& OPPOSITION

TO ILLEGAL ORDER OF 3/28/2012

1
2

[SEE Exhibit

7, Page 1, Lines 24 through planted

27] This Order was clearly

based on false evidence These officers immediately!

by the court to find me guilty. and must be stopped

3
4

of the Court are out of control

For absolute
6

Proof, even supplied

by the Court, and handed

to

me at the Hearing

of March 28, 2012, it reads and states that the Section 391. Subsections (b) defines a

8
9 10

Code of Civil Procedure "vexatious preceding litigant"

as a person

who files in the immediately prosecuted, or maintained 1

7 year period,

has commenced,

11
at least 5 litigation.
12

I DID NOT, OR EVER, AS PER THE EXHIBIT FILED 5 LITIGATIONS THE SAME CLAIMS

13
14
15 16 17 18 19

SUPPLIED ACTION,

BY THE COURT, OR RE-LITIGATED

ON THE SAME CAUSE OF For

FINALLY DETERMINED.

II proof,

[SEE Exhibit

3], provided

by the court that I did not file "IT IS NOT" HAIFEN

this action because

my name is Jose Castaneda, MEDICAL CENTER.

YE AKA JEAN LUCERO v. GARFIELD

ARGUMENT
20 21 22 23

FOR "A" THE ABOVE: by the court

This is false and fraudulent

evidence

manufactured Vexatious supplied B)

(that the Court supplied this false evidence

to find me a

Litigant!?)And was manufactured The Court Order

that the court

by the court to find me guilty. in Case No. BC 466737, Castaneda v.

24
25

Estate of Robert Berke,


26 27 28

[Exhibit 7] Clearly

displays

and shows that Jose

on Page 2, on Line 18 it states as Case YS 017992, Castaneda v. Daniel Papas,

caption

I did NOT filed this case in the

PLAINTIFF'S

MOTION

&

OPPOSITION

TO ILLEGAL ORDER OF 3/28/2012

1
2
3 4

Inglewood

Courthouse,

this is Judicial

Fraud. For proof

it was

fraud, the Judge never ask me if it was my filing, planted the evidence,

the Court the evidence,

and to prove the court planted Confir.med, Verified, in court presided

it was never Certified,


5
6 7

Affir.med or even I swear

Substantiated

by anyone

by Judge Hickok. as Exhibit

under the penalty me! Who would me guilty? planted!

of perjury

Case YS 017992, false evidence

4, IS NOT

8
9 10

file and present

to the court to find be

I was framed by false evidence

that the Court allowed

With this tactics

and shenanigans,

I will never win a case

11 in this Jurisdiction,
12 13 14 15 16 17

ever! In addition, in case Caption

I DO NOT know anyone by Daniel Papas.

the name that appears Furthermore,

as Defendant

and on same Order on Page 2, and on Line 21, it [SEE Court Opinions denying the Vexatious that was

lists case B 223549 TWICE Litigant already

adjudicated

in the Court Appeals

Justices

denied by Judge Kumar,


18

J., and concurring

and approved

by

Ar.mstrong, Acting
19 20 21

P.J. and Mosk, J.Court,

and I flatly deny ever

filing cases B 2229567 website

(a quick look at the Court of appeals GC 045202, heard in Dept. "R",

it lists as a related

22

23
24

II

Presided

by Simpson

at Pasadena

Superior

Court case.

Be advised,
25 26

Court Clerk Patricia

Morejon

advises me, also deny ever filing website it

illegally,

to amend the Complaint

GC 045202!I

27
28

case B 227826

(a quick look at the Court of appeals

PLAINTIFF'S

MOTION

& OPPOSITION

TO ILLEGAL ORDER OF 3/28/2012