You are on page 1of 25

KENNETH M.

WILKINSON RECORD RACKETEERING & EXTORTION


$24.30 MONEY JUDGMENT ISSUED AS MANDATES JUNE 11, 2009
1. The publicly recorded $24.30 money judgment “issued as mandate June 11, 2009”. See
Doc. ## 365 (p. 1), 386-3 (p. 1).
$24.30 MONEY JUDGMENT UNDER FRAP 39, COSTS
2. The $24.30 money judgment was awarded pursuant to Rule 39, Fed.R.App.P.
COPY OF $24.30 MONEY JUDGMENT, DOC. # 386-3
3. A copy of the final $24.30 money judgment issued as mandate was included in Defendant
Appellee’s facially fraudulent “motion for issuance of a writ of execution”, Doc. # 386. See
pages 10 and 24.
4. Of the $29.70 requested in Racketeer Wilkinson’s Bill of Costs, Doc. # 386, the 11th Circuit
allowed $24.30 for Costs under FRAP 39:

$24.30 WERE THE ALLOWED ACTUAL AND NECESSARY COSTS


5. Here, $24.30 were the allowed actual and necessary costs.

$24.30 MONEY JUDGMENT BECAME FINAL ON JUNE 15, 2009


6. Pursuant to Doc. ## 365 (p. 1), 386-3 (p. 1), the U.S. District Court received and filed the
$24.30 money judgment on June 15, 2009:

RACKETEERING: EXTORTION OF MONEY:


“FRIVOLOUS APPEAL” MOTION WAS ADMITTEDLY NEVER FILED
7. Defendant Racketeer Wilkinson extorted money, Doc. # 386, by fraudulently pretending
a Rule 38 motion, which Wilkinson knew he had never filed:
“The Judgment
4. On August 22, 2008, Wilkinson filed a Motion for Sanctions pursuant to Eleventh
Circuit Rule 27-4 …”
Said Rule 27-4 motion could not have possibly been for a “frivolous appeal”.
THE 11th CIRCUIT HAD CLOSED CASE ON 06/11/2009
8. The 11th Circuit had CLOSED THE CASE on 06/11/2009:

BRIBERY
9. Here, Defendant Appellee K. M. Wilkinson and his Attorney had no right to bribe the 11th
Circuit and illegally cause the 11th Circuit to fraudulently alter the recorded final $24.30
mandate after the CASE HAD BEEN CLOSED and the 11th Circuit had LOST
JURISDICTION.
DEFENDANT’S APPELLEE’S RACKETEETING AND EXTORTION WERE ILLEGAL
10. Def. Wilkinson’s record racketeering and extortion were illegal and unauthorized by law.

RACKETEERING & EXTORTION IN VIOLATION OF:


FED.R.CIV.P. 54; LOCAL RULE 4.18; 28 U.S.C. 1921-1924; FRAP 39
11. The $24.30 money judgment pursuant to Rule 39, Fed.R.App.P., became final on June 15,
2009.

“LOCAL RULE 4.18 APPLICATIONS FOR COSTS OR ATTORNEY'S FEES


(a) In accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 54, all claims for costs or attorney's fees
preserved by appropriate pleading or pretrial stipulation shall be asserted by separate
motion or petition filed not later than fourteen (14) days following the entry of
judgment. The pendency of an appeal from the judgment shall not postpone the filing
of a timely application pursuant to this rule.”

DEF. WILKINSON VIOLATED REQUIREMENTS UNDER 28 U.S.C. §§ 1920-1924


The $24.30 money judgment was unauthorized by law.
Itemization was for $24.30.
No documentation for $24.30.
The record unauthorized Bill of Costs was for $24.30.
Bill of Costs must be verified as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1924.
No known affidavit.
Plaintiff(s) objected to the unauthorized $24.30 money judgment.
The unauthorized $24.30 money judgment was procured through, e.g., publicly
recorded racketeering and extortion by illegal and criminal means of fraud and
extortion scheme “O.R. 569/875”, and facially forged “land parcels” “00A0” and
“00001”. See RICO Complaint in U.S. District Court.

RACKETEERING & EXTORTION IN VIOLATION OF:


FRAP 39 [FED.R.APP.P. 39]
12. A copy of Rule 39, Fed.R.App.P., is attached.
“(d) Bill of Costs: Objections; Insertion in Mandate.
(1) A party who wants costs taxed must — within 14 days after entry of
judgment — file with the circuit clerk, with proof of service, an itemized and
verified bill of costs.”
13. Here, the “judgment”, No. 2008-13170-BB had been “entered: March 5, 2009”, Doc. ##
365, 386. Defendant Appellee Wilkinson had filed with the circuit clerk a $24.30 Bill of
Costs. “Date signed” was “3-17-2009”, which was “issued on: Jun 11 2009”, Doc. ## 365,
386, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228.

2
14. No “proof of service” existed on the record.
15. The “14 days after entry of judgment” on “March 5, 2009” had expired on March 19,
2009.
APPEAL BECAME FINAL ON JUN 15, 2009
16. An appeal becomes final on the date the mandate is issued. Here, the judgment entered
March 5, 2009 was issued as mandate Jun 11 2009.
17. Since the clerk had responsibilities for entering a judgment, Fed.R.App.P. 36, and for
taxation of costs, Fed.R.App.P. 39(d), the duty to issue the mandate contemplated by Rule 41
was the responsibility of the clerk.
18. The Eleventh Circuit has held that the action becomes final on the date the district court
receives the appellate court's mandate. See U.S. v. Lasteed, 832 F.2d 1240-43 (11th Cir.
1987). The District Court received and filed the Appellate Court’s June 11, 2009 mandate on
JUN 15 2009 when the Appeal, No. 2008-13170-BB, became final. Thereafter, the 11th
Circuit had no jurisdiction as a matter of law. Here, there have been publicly recorded
racketeering and extortion by Government Agents.
NO 11th CIRCUIT JURISDICTION AFTER JUN 15, 2009
19. Jurisdiction followed the mandate. “The effect of the mandate is to bring the proceedings
in a case on appeal in our Court to a close and to remove it from the jurisdiction of this
Court, returning it to the forum whence it came.” It was the date on which the $24.30
mandate was received and filed, Jun 15, 2009, which determined when the district court
reacquired jurisdiction for further proceedings.
20. Issuance of the $24.30 mandate on June 11, 2009, and the District Court’s receipt and filing
on June 15, 2009 was an event of considerable institutional significance. A mandate could
NOT possibly “simply” "issue", because it should have been issued, or because the panel may
have intended it to issue, or because the statute commands it to issue. See Fed.R.App.P. 27,
41.
ADOPTION BY REFERENCE OF FEDERAL LAWSUIT, CIVIL RICO…
21. The Plaintiffs hereby adopt by reference their Federal action in this published Government
Racketeering and Corruption Notice.
WILKINSON’S RACKETEERING, RETALIATION, AND COERCION
22. Defendant Racketeer Wilkinson retaliated on or around August 20, 2008, Doc. # 386-2:
“In order to discourage the Appellant from engaging in the same practices …”
23. Wilkinson coerced Plaintiff Appellant to refrain from rightful prosecution for prima facie
criminal and illegal purposes of concealing crimes and covering up.
CRIMINAL AND ILLEGAL FALSIFICATIONS
24. Just like Defendant Racketeer Wilkinson had falsified fake “land parcels”, and a fake “real
property transaction”, “O.R. 569/875”, Defendant Forger Wilkinson falsified a fake
“judgment”; “July 29, 2009 in Docket 08-13170-BB against Appellant JORG BUSSE in the
amount of $5,048.60.” See, e.g., INSTR 4371834, O.R. 4517 PG 1914, Collier County
Circuit Court.
25. Here, Defendant Racketeer Wilkinson could not have possibly held that which had never
existed. Here, said $24.30 money judgment had been the final mandate, and the facially
null and void “writ of execution”, Doc. # 425, was a prima facie racketeering and
extortions scheme just like the fake “regulation”, fake “legislative act” and/or “O.R.
569/875” that had never legally existed and never been legally recorded.

3
RULE 4.18 APPLICATIONS FOR COSTS OR ATTORNEY'S FEES

(a) In accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 54, all claims for costs or attorney's fees preserved
by appropriate pleading or pretrial stipulation shall be asserted by separate motion or petition filed
not later than fourteen (14) days following the entry of judgment. The pendency of an appeal from
the judgment shall not postpone the filing of a timely application pursuant to this rule.

12/1/09 4 - 22
7/30/2010 United States Code: Title 28,1924. Ver…

Search Law School Search Cornell

LII / Legal Information Institute


hom e se arch find a la wyer dona te

U.S. Code
m a in page faq index sea rch

TITLE 28 > PART V > C HAPTER 123 > § 1924

§ 1924. Verification of bill of costs


Before any bill of costs is taxed, the party claiming any item of cost or disbursement shall attach thereto an affidavit, made by himself or by his
duly authorized attorney or agent having knowledge of the facts, that such item is correct and has been necessarily incurred in the case and
that the services for which fees have been charged were actually and necessarily performed.

Ask A Lawyer
Online.
Get an Answer ASAP!

Dona tions cover only


20% of our costs.

Franchise
Attorney
Full Service
Franchise Law
Practice Scott
Weber-Partner
(813) 472-7892
www.franchiselegalteam

Employment Law
Attorney
Sexual
Harassment,
Unemployment,
Overtime,
Minimum Wage
239.262.2141
www.WeldonRothman.c

Adams &
Associates PA
Know your
Bankruptcy
Rights. Call for
Free Consultation.
www.richardadamslaw.c

Randall Spivey -
Attorney
Spivey Law Firm -
Personal Injury &
Wrongful Death
www.spiveylaw.com

LII has no control over and does not endorse any external Internet site that contains links to or references LII.

about us sitemap help terms of use friend us follow us contact us

…cornell.edu/…/usc_sec_28_0000192… 1/2
7/30/2010 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure - Rule…

Search Law School Search Cornell

LII / Legal Information Institute


hom e se arch find a la wyer dona te

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure


m a in page se arch | civil procedure overvie w

VII. JUDGMENT > Rule 54. Prev | Next

Rule 54. Judgments; Costs

Donations cover only


(a) Definition; Form. Notes
20% of our costs. “Judgment” as used in these rules includes a decree and any order from whic h
Law About ... Civil
an appeal lies. A judgment should not inc lude recitals of pleadings, a master's
Procedure
report, or a rec ord of prior proceedings.
Divorce Attorney
SW FLA (b) Judgment on Multiple Claims or Involving Multiple Attorneys: reach
Martin Law Firm, interested clients by
Parties.
P.L. Divorce sponsoring an LII page
Attorney in Cape When an action presents more than one claim for relief — whether as a claim,
Coral
www.mlg-legal.com counterclaim, c rossclaim, or third-party claim — or when multiple parties are
involved, the court may direct entry of a final judgment as to one or more,
but fewer than all, claims or parties only if the court expressly determines that
Adams & there is no just reason for delay. Otherwise, any order or other decision,
Associates PA however designated, that adjudicates fewer than all the claims or the rights
Know your
and liabilities of fewer than all the parties does not end the action as to any
Bankruptcy
Rights. Call for of the claims or parties and may be revised at any time before the entry of a
Free Consultation. judgment adjudicating all the claims and all the parties' rights and liabilities.
www.richardadamslaw.c

(c) Demand for Judgment; Relief to Be Granted.


Don't Pay Debt
A default judgment must not differ in kind from, or exceed in amount, what is
Collectors
Sue Harassing demanded in the pleadings. Every other final judgment should grant the relief
Debt Collectors. to which each party is entitled, even if the party has not demanded that relief
Make Them Pay in its pleadings.
You. 100% Free &
Fast Help
WeStopDebtCollectors.c
(d) Costs; Attorney’s Fees.
(1) Costs Other than Attorneys’ Fees.
Divorce
Attorneys Unless a federal statute, these rules, or a court order provides otherwise,
Life is Better after costs — other than attorney's fees — should be allowed to the prevailing
Divorce 30 years party. But costs against the United States, its officers, and its agencies
combined
may be imposed only to the extent allowed by law. The clerk may tax costs
experience
www.roberts-robold.com on 14 days' notice. On motion served within the next 7 days, the court may
review the clerk's action.

(2) Attorneys’ Fees.

(A) Claim to Be by Motion. A claim for attorney's fees and related


nontaxable expenses must be made by motion unless the substantive law
requires those fees to be proved at trial as an element of damages.

(B) Timing and Contents of the Motion. Unless a statute or a court order
provides otherwise, the motion must:

(i) be filed no later than 14 days after the entry of judgment;

(ii) specify the judgment and the statute, rule, or other grounds entitling
the movant to the award;

(iii) state the amount sought or provide a fair estimate of it; and

(iv) disclose, if the court so orders, the terms of any agreement about
fees for the services for which the claim is made.
www.law.cornell.edu/…/Rule54.htm 1/2
7/29/2010 FindACase™ | United States v. Lasteed

Buy Document Now

United States v. Lasteed

U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit

Docket Number available at www.versuslaw.com


Citation Number available at www.versuslaw.com

November 24, 1987

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,


v.
RONALD ALBERT LASTEED, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

F. Lee Bailey, Daniel Patrick Leonard Bailey & Fishman, for Appellant.

Leon B. Kellner, U.S. Attorney, Samuel Rosenthal, Chief, Criminal Appellate Section, Department of Justice, Joel M. Gershowitz,
Department of Justice, for Appellee.

Hill and Vance, Circuit Judges, and Propst,*fn* District Judge.

Author: Vance

Vance, Circuit Judge:

This case presents an intricate timing issue involving a retrial, an interlocutory appeal followed by an intercircuit transfer, and an
uncertain period of excludable delay under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161. The question is whether the 70 day period
following a mistrial within which a defendant must be tried again begins to run when the court of appeals issues its mandate, or
when the district court receives the mandate. We affirm the district court's ruling in this case that the clock begins to run against the
government upon the district court's receipt of the mandate.

I.

Appellant Ronald Lasteed was indicted along with Joseph Peeples for mail and wire fraud, inducing interstate travel in execution of a
fraudulent scheme, and conspiracy to commit these offenses, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1342, 1343, 2314, and 371. Appellant was
tried originally in October, 1984 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas. On October 10, 1984 the district
court declared a mistrial because of prosecutorial misconduct. In August, 1985 the district court in Texas denied defendant's motion
to dismiss,*fn1 but granted defendant's motion to change venue to the United States District Court for the Southern District of
Florida. Defendant took an interlocutory appeal of the Texas district court's denial of his motion to dismiss. The United States Court
of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed, refusing to dismiss the indictment. The Fifth Circuit issued its mandate on March 13, 1986.
Appellant contends that the Speedy Trial Act's 70 day period commenced on that date.

The district court in Florida did not receive the Fifth Circuit's mandate until May 19, 1986, more than two months after it was
issued.*fn2 The government contends that the Speedy Trial Act's 70 day period commenced on that date. On June 6 defendant filed
a motion to dismiss on Speedy Trial Act grounds, which the district court denied on June 23.

At the second trial, there was evidence that appellant had engaged in a fraudulent scheme to obtain money from investors by
falsely representing that he had invented a process for transforming water into combustible fuel.*fn3 Appellant called the product of
this process "Ionagen," and claimed it was a gasoline substitute.*fn4 There was evidence that appellant made numerous other
false statements and misrepresentations relating to his education, background, other investors in the Ionagen process, and
governmental interest in his work. The prosecution also produced various wire transmissions and recordings of meetings between
appellant and Al Hill, Jr., a potential investor in the scheme.

II.

…findacase.com/…/wfrmDocViewer.aspx 1/4
Case 2:07-cv-00228-JES-SPC Document 425 Filed 02/02/10 Page 1 of 1
2JS 44 (Rev. 12/07) CIVIL COVER SHEET
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as provided
by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating
the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON THE REVERSE OF THE FORM.)

I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA EX REL. DR. JORG BUSSE AND UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES COURTS,
JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT, DR. JORG BUSSE, JENNIFER UNITED STATES CUSTOM & IMMIGRATION SERVICE, TONY
FRANKLIN PRESCOTT, STATE OF FLORIDA EX REL. DR. JORG BUSS WEST, BEVERLY B. MARTIN, JOHN EDWIN STEELE, RYAN BAR
(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff County of Residence of First Listed Defendant WASHINGTON, D.C.
(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF THE
LAND INVOLVED.

(c) Attorney’s (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) Attorneys (If Known)
DR. JORG BUSSE AS PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL, JENNIFER U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL
FRANKLIN PRESCOTT AS PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL,

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an “X” in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES(Place an “X” in One Box for Plaintiff
(For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant)
u 1 U.S. Government u 3 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEF
Plaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of This State u 1 u 1 Incorporated or Principal Place u 4 u 4
of Business In This State

u 2 U.S. Government u 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State u 2 u 2 Incorporated and Principal Place u 5 u 5
Defendant of Business In Another State
(Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III)
Citizen or Subject of a u 3 u 3 Foreign Nation u 6 u 6
Foreign Country
IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an “X” in One Box Only)
CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES
u 110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY u 610 Agriculture u 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 u 400 State Reapportionment
u 120 Marine u 310 Airplane u 362 Personal Injury - u 620 Other Food & Drug u 423 Withdrawal u 410 Antitrust
u 130 Miller Act u 315 Airplane Product Med. Malpractice u 625 Drug Related Seizure 28 USC 157 u 430 Banks and Banking
u 140 Negotiable Instrument Liability u 365 Personal Injury - of Property 21 USC 881 u 450 Commerce
u 150 Recovery of Overpayment u 320 Assault, Libel & Product Liability u 630 Liquor Laws PROPERTY RIGHTS u 460 Deportation
& Enforcement of Judgment Slander u 368 Asbestos Personal u 640 R.R. & Truck u 820 Copyrights u 470 Racketeer Influenced and
u 151 Medicare Act u 330 Federal Employers’ Injury Product u 650 Airline Regs. u 830 Patent Corrupt Organizations
u 152 Recovery of Defaulted Liability Liability u 660 Occupational u 840 Trademark u 480 Consumer Credit
Student Loans u 340 Marine PERSONAL PROPERTY Safety/Health u 490 Cable/Sat TV
(Excl. Veterans) u 345 Marine Product u 370 Other Fraud u 690 Other u 810 Selective Service
u 153 Recovery of Overpayment Liability u 371 Truth in Lending LABOR SOCIAL SECURITY u 850 Securities/Commodities/
of Veteran’s Benefits u 350 Motor Vehicle u 380 Other Personal u 710 Fair Labor Standards u 861 HIA (1395ff) Exchange
u 160 Stockholders’ Suits u 355 Motor Vehicle Property Damage Act u 862 Black Lung (923) u 875 Customer Challenge
u 190 Other Contract Product Liability u 385 Property Damage u 720 Labor/Mgmt. Relations u 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) 12 USC 3410
u 195 Contract Product Liability u 360 Other Personal Product Liability u 730 Labor/Mgmt.Reporting u 864 SSID Title XVI u 890 Other Statutory Actions
u 196 Franchise Injury & Disclosure Act u 865 RSI (405(g)) u 891 Agricultural Acts
REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS u 740 Railway Labor Act FEDERAL TAX SUITS u 892 Economic Stabilization Act
u 210 Land Condemnation u 441 Voting u 510 Motions to Vacate u 790 Other Labor Litigation u 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff u 893 Environmental Matters
u 220 Foreclosure u 442 Employment Sentence u 791 Empl. Ret. Inc. or Defendant) u 894 Energy Allocation Act
u 230 Rent Lease & Ejectment u 443 Housing/ Habeas Corpus: Security Act u 871 IRS—Third Party u 895 Freedom of Information
u 240 Torts to Land Accommodations u 530 General 26 USC 7609 Act
u 245 Tort Product Liability u 444 Welfare u 535 Death Penalty IMMIGRATION u 900Appeal of Fee Determination
u 290 All Other Real Property u 445 Amer. w/Disabilities - u 540 Mandamus & Other u 462 Naturalization Application Under Equal Access
Employment u 550 Civil Rights u 463 Habeas Corpus - to Justice
u 446 Amer. w/Disabilities - u 555 Prison Condition Alien Detainee u 950 Constitutionality of
Other u 465 Other Immigration State Statutes
u 440 Other Civil Rights Actions

V. ORIGIN (Place an “X” in One Box Only) Appeal to District


u 1 Original u 2 Removed from u 3 Remanded from u 4 Reinstated or u 5 Transferred from
another district u 6 Multidistrict u 7 Judge from
Magistrate
Proceeding State Court Appellate Court Reopened Litigation
(specify) Judgment
Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):
18USC§1964,18USC§§1961-1968,18USC§1341,4th,7th,14th,1st,5th,11th U.S. Const.Amend. Civil Rights Act
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION Brief description of cause:
Racketeering/Civil RICO, Corruption, Obstruction of Justice, Extortion of Property & Money; 4th, 7th, 14th, 1st U.S.
VII. REQUESTED IN u CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMAND $ CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:
COMPLAINT: UNDER F.R.C.P. 23 19,000,000.00 JURY DEMAND: ✔
u Yes u No
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)
(See instructions):
IF ANY JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER

DATE SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD


07/27/2010 PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERALS /S/DR. J. BUSSE /S/J. FRANKLIN PRESCOTT
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

RECEIPT # AMOUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG. JUDGE


UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA EX REL. DR. JORG BUSSE AND JENNIFER


FRANKLIN PRESCOTT, DR. JORG BUSSE, JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT,
STATE OF FLORIDA EX REL. DR. JORG BUSSE AND JENNIFER FRANKLIN
PRESCOTT, DR. JORG BUSSE AND JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT AS
PRIVATE ATTORNEY(S) GENERAL,

Plaintiffs,

v. Case No. 1-2010-cv-000_____

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES COURTS, UNITED STATES


CUSTOM & IMMIGRATION SERVICE, TONY WEST, BEVERLY B. MARTIN,
JOHN EDWIN STEELE, RYAN BARRY, CHARLENE EDWARDS HONEYWELL,
SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL, KENNETH M. WILKINSON, RICHARD A.
LAZZARA, JACK N. PETERSON, RYAN BARRY, DREW HEATHCOAT, BETTYE
G. SAMUEL, STANLEY F. BIRCH, JR, GERALD B. TJOFLAT, SUSAN H. BLACK,
JOEL F. DUBINA, SHERRI L. JOHNSON, EUGENE C. TURNER, LEE COUNTY,
FL, COMMISSION AND COMMISSIONERS, ED CARNES, JOHN E. MANNING,
U.S. RACKETEERING AGENTS, HUGH D. HAYES, JOHN LEY, RICHARD
JESSUP, DIANE NIPPER, LYNN GERALD, JR., KENNETH L. RYSKAMP,
CHARLIE CRIST, CHARLES “BARRY” STEVENS, JOHNSON ENGINEERING,
INC., MARK ALLAN PIZZO, ANNE CONWAY, CHARLIE GREEN, REAGAN
KATHLEEN RUSSELL, RICHARD D. DEBOEST, II, CHENE M. THOMPSON, et al.,
Defendants.
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL AND $19,000,000.00
__________________________________________________________________________/
COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
COMPLAINT OF RACKETEERING, EXTORTION, PUBLIC CORRUPTION
IN THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT, MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA,
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT,
20TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR LEE & COLLIER COUNTIES, FL, AND OF
UNLAWFUL AND CRIMINAL ACTS BY GOVERNMENT AGENTS & OFFICIALS
IN THEIR PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL CAPACITIES OUTSIDE ANY “IMMUNITY”
COMPLAINT UNDER CIVIL RICO, 18 U.S.C. § 1964, 1961-1968
COMPLAINT OF GOVERNMENTS’ MALICIOUS CIRCULAR ARGUMENT
FOR PURPOSES OF RACKETEERING, EXTORTION, AND RETALIATION:
‘THE CONCLUSIVELY PROVEN ALLEGATIONS ARE FRIVOLOUS.
THEREFORE THE CASE IS FIXED AS FRIVOLOUS.’
REPORT TO THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE, THE HAGUE

[PAGES TOTAL: 196 + 213 (Exhibits)]


FRAP 39. Costs

(a) Against Whom Assessed. The following rules apply unless the law provides or the court
orders otherwise:

(1) if an appeal is dismissed, costs are taxed against the appellant, unless the parties agree
otherwise;

(2) if a judgment is affirmed, costs are taxed against the appellant;

(3) if a judgment is reversed, costs are taxed against the appellee;

(4) if a judgment is affirmed in part, reversed in part, modified, or vacated, costs are taxed
only as the court orders.

(b) Costs For and Against the United States. Costs for or against the United States, its agency,
or officer will be assessed under Rule 39(a) only if authorized by law.

(c) Costs of Copies. Each court of appeals must, by local rule, fix the maximum rate for taxing
the cost of producing necessary copies of a brief or appendix, or copies of records
authorized by Rule 30(f). The rate must not exceed that generally charged for such work
in the area where the clerk’s office is located and should encourage economical methods
of copying.

(d) Bill of Costs: Objections; Insertion in Mandate.

(1) A party who wants costs taxed must — within 14 days after entry of judgment — file
with the circuit clerk, with proof of service, an itemized and verified bill of costs.

(2) Objections must be filed within 14 days after service of the bill of costs, unless the court
extends the time.

(3) The clerk must prepare and certify an itemized statement of costs for insertion in the
mandate, but issuance of the mandate must not be delayed for taxing costs. If the
mandate issues before costs are finally determined, the district clerk must — upon the
circuit clerk’s request — add the statement of costs, or any amendment of it, to the
mandate.

(e) Costs on Appeal Taxable in the District Court. The following costs on appeal are taxable
in the district court for the benefit of the party entitled to costs under this rule:

(1) the preparation and transmission of the record;

(2) the reporter’s transcript, if needed to determine the appeal;

Rev.: 12/09 154 FRAP 39


(3) premiums paid for a supersedeas bond or other bond to preserve rights pending
appeal; and

(4) the fee for filing the notice of appeal.

(As amended Apr. 30, 1979, eff. Aug. 1, 1979; Mar. 10, 1986, eff. July 1, 1986; Apr. 24, 1998,
eff. Dec. 1, 1998; Mar. 26, 2009, eff. Dec. 1, 2009.)

****

11th Cir. R. 39-1 Costs. In taxing costs for printing or reproduction and binding pursuant to FRAP
39(c) the clerk shall tax such costs at rates not higher than those determined by the clerk from time
to time by reference to the rates generally charged for the most economical methods of printing or
reproduction and binding in the principal cities of the circuit, or at actual cost, whichever is less.

Unless advance approval for additional copies is secured from the clerk, costs will be taxed only
for the number of copies of a brief and record excerpts or appendix required by the rules to be filed
and served, plus two copies for each party signing the brief.

All costs shall be paid and mailed directly to the party to whom costs have been awarded. Costs
should not be mailed to the clerk of the court.

11th Cir. R. 39-2 Attorney’s Fees.

(a) Time for Filing. Except as otherwise provided herein or by statute or court order, an
application for attorney’s fees must be filed with the clerk within 14 days after the time to file a
petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc expires, or within 14 days after entry of an order disposing
of a timely petition for rehearing or denying a timely petition for rehearing en banc, whichever is
later. For purposes of this rule, the term “attorney’s fees” includes fees and expenses authorized by
statute, but excludes damages and costs sought pursuant to FRAP 38, costs taxed pursuant to FRAP
39, and sanctions sought pursuant to 11th Cir. R. 27-4.

(b) Required Documentation. An application for attorney’s fees must be supported by a


memorandum showing that the party seeking attorney’s fees is legally entitled to them. The
application must also include a summary of work performed, on a form available from the clerk,
supported by contemporaneous time records recording all work for which a fee is claimed. An
affidavit attesting to the truthfulness of the information contained in the application and
demonstrating the basis for the hourly rate requested must also accompany the application.
Exceptions may be made only to avoid an unconscionable result. If contemporaneous time records
are not available, the court may approve only the minimum amount of fees necessary, in the court’s
judgment, to adequately compensate the attorney.

Rev.: 12/09 155 FRAP 39


(c) Objection to Application. Any party from whom attorney’s fees are sought may file an
objection to the application. An objection must be filed with the clerk within 14 days after service
of the application. The party seeking attorney’s fees may file a reply to the objection within 10 days
after service of the objection.

(d) Motion to Transfer. Any party who is or may be eligible for attorney’s fees on appeal may,
within the time for filing an application provided by this rule, file a motion to transfer consideration
of attorney’s fees on appeal to the district court or administrative agency from which the appeal was
taken.

(e) Remand for Further Proceedings. When a reversal on appeal, in whole or in part, results in
a remand to the district court for trial or other further proceedings (e.g., reversal of order granting
summary judgment, or denying a new trial), a party who may be eligible for attorney’s fees on appeal
after prevailing on the merits upon remand may, in lieu of filing an application for attorney’s fees
in this court, request attorney’s fees for the appeal in a timely application filed with the district court
upon disposition of the matter on remand.

11th Cir. R. 39-3 Fee Awards to Prevailing Parties Under the Equal Access to Justice Act.

(a) An application to this court for an award of fees and expenses pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
2412(d)(1)(B) must be filed within the time specified in the statute. The application must identify
the applicant, show the nature and extent of services rendered, that the applicant has prevailed, and
shall identify the position of the United States Government or an agency thereof which the applicant
alleges was not substantially justified.

(b) An application to the court pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 504(c)(2) shall be upon the factual record
made before the agency, which shall be filed with this court under the procedures established in
FRAP 11 and associated circuit rules. Unless the court establishes a schedule for filing formal briefs
upon motion of a party, such proceedings shall be upon the application papers, together with such
supporting papers, including memorandum briefs, as the appellant shall submit within 14 days of
filing of the record of agency proceedings and upon any response filed by the United States in
opposition thereto within the succeeding 14 days.

****

I.O.P. -

1. Time - Extensions. A bill of costs is timely if filed within 14 days of entry of judgment. Judgment
is entered on the opinion filing date. The filing of a petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing
en banc does not extend the time for filing a bill of costs. A motion to extend the time to file a bill
of costs may be considered by the clerk.

2. Costs for or Against the United States. When costs are sought for or against the United States,
the statutory or other authority relied upon for such an award must be set forth as an attachment
to the Bill of Costs.

Rev.: 12/09 156 FRAP 39


3. Reproduction of Statutes, Rules, and Regulations. Costs will be taxed for the reproduction of
statutes, rules, and regulations in conformity with FRAP 28(f). Costs will not be taxed for the
reproduction of papers not required or allowed to be filed pursuant to FRAP 28 and 30 and the
corresponding circuit rules, even though the brief, appendix, or record excerpts within which said
papers are included was accepted for filing by the clerk.

Rev.: 12/09 157 FRAP 39


Case 2:07-cv-00228-JES-SPC Document 434 Filed 07/22/10 Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT


MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION

JORG BUSSE

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No. 2:07-cv-228-FtM-29SPC

LEE COUNTY, FLORIDA; BOARD OF LEE


COUNTY COMMISSIONERS; THE LEE COUNTY
PROPERTY APPRAISER; STATE OF FLORIDA
BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE INTERNAL
IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND, STATE OF
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION,

Defendants.
___________________________________

ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on review of defendant’s

Motion for Entry of Order Directing Public Sale of Real Property

(Doc. #432) filed on May 21, 2010. No response has been filed and

the time to respond has expired.

Upon review, the Court desires a response from plaintiff.

Recognizing that a Pre-Filing Injunction (Case No. 2:09-cv-791-FTM-

36SPC, Doc. #245) was issued on July 20, 2010, prohibiting any

further filings without leave of Court, the Court will grant

plaintiff leave to file a single responsive document to defendant’s

motion.

Accordingly, it is now

ORDERED:
Case 2:07-cv-00228-JES-SPC Document 434 Filed 07/22/10 Page 2 of 2

Plaintiff may file one response to defendant’s Motion for

Entry of Order Directing Public Sale of Real Property (Doc. #432)

within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS of this Order. If no response is

received, the Court will rule on the motion without the benefit of

a response and without further notice.

DONE AND ORDERED at Fort Myers, Florida, this 22nd day of

July, 2010.

Copies:
Plaintiff
Counsel of record

-2-