Mailed on April 11, 2013 to be filed in the California Supreme Court

(“Plaintiffs”) are toxic tort defense witnesses and co-owners of (“Veritox”), Inc. Veritox was formerly known as GlobalTox, Inc. The six Plaintiffs & owners of Veritox are Bruce (“Kelman”), Bryan (“Hardin”), Coreen (“Robbins”), Loni (“Swenson”), Robert (“Schreibe”) and Robert (“Clark’). 

Toxicologist Kelman holds a PhD in veterinary science. He comes to the Mold Issue from Big Tobacco. Toxicologist Hardin holds a PhD in mathematics. His second career of expert witnessing began upon his 2001 retirement as a US Asst. Surgeon General & Deputy Director of CDC NIOSH.

Known to be a party since 2005, Plaintiff Hardin’s involvement has been concealed by Plaintiffs, Plaintiff Counsel Keith (“Scheuer”) & judicial officers including Justice Judith (“McConnell”) of the (“Respondent”) Fourth District Division One Appellate Court.  A 2010 (“Remittitur”) was falsified by Respondent’s Clerk, the late Stephen (“Kelly”), &  Deputy Clerk Rita (“Rodriguez”) to conceal false 2006 & 2009 Plaintiffs’ (“Certificate of Interested Persons”)

(“Petitioner”) Under Duress, Sharon Noonan Kramer, is an advocate for integrity in health marketing, which is the study of how and why concepts are marketed to influence public health policies. She holds a BA in marketing with emphasis in accounting.  Via the US Senate HELP Committee and late Senator Edward Kennedy, Petitioner caused the 2008 Federal Government Accountability Office Report, “INDOOR MOLD Better Coordination of Research on Health Effects and More Consistent Guidance Would Improve Federal Efforts”. It exposes Plaintiffs’ pseudoscience as fraud upon the court.

“Real Party in Interest, McConnell, Administrative Presiding Justice of Respondent, must be disqualified. All rulings, orders and opinions she has issued in this and the Predicate Case, Kelman & GlobalTox  v. Kramer from November 2006 to March 26, 2013 must be vacated and reversed; or by C.C.P.1087 she must be commanded show good cause why not.

In January of 2011, Justice Patricia Benke denied to recall and rescind the falsified remittitur and vacate the court falsified, and thus void judgment in the Predicate Case . (See Doc 5 Pg 146) A void judgment cannot be used for any purpose. Yet, the lower court has used the ante-dated legal document from the Predicate Case as the sole foundation to the case to harass Petitioner for over two years in this second case. (See Doc 6 Pg 150-152).  Now in 2013, Benke again refuses to recall the falsified remittitur and vacate the ante-dated void judgment. (See Doc 5 Pg 147).

This is enabling Justice McConnell to use the falsified court document to feign Respondent has subject matter jurisdiction.  Rather than proving jurisdiction, on March 26th, 2013, Justice McConnell dismissed the appeal, and thus the case, when Petitioner challenged Respondent’s jurisdiction. (See Doc 1 Pg 1,2)(See Doc 2) Multiple judicial court officers using known falsified court documents to harass a U.S. and where there is no jurisdiction is called “conspiracy to defraud without judicial immunity” under Penal Code 162(a)(1)(3)(4)(5), 134, & C.C.P.410.10.  This is particularly eggregious when they know their acts are aiding and abetting scientific fraud to be practiced upon many U.S. courts. 

---

 The defamation (“Predicate Case”) to this case was filed in May of 2005, Superior Court Case No. GIN044539. In the November (“2006 anti-SLAPP Opinion”) Case No. D047758, McConnell, Justices Cynthia (“Aaron”) & Alex (“McDonald”), Plaintiffs & Counsel colluded to falsely portray Petitioner to be a malicious liar for the words “altered his under oath statements” in her (“March 2005 Writing”) of how the pseudoscience was mass marketed to miselead the courts. The justices suppressed the evidence of Plaintiff Kelman’s perjury to establish false light reason for Petitioner’s alleged malice.

 

 

In the alleged September (“2010 Review Opinion”) Case No. D054496, Justices Patricia (“Benke”), Richard (“Huffman”), Joan (“Irion”) colluded with Plaintiff Counsel to conceal the framing and the perjury. Also concealed, the December 2008 judgment document was ante-dated by the Court & is void. It states a date of Entry of Judgment that is not possible to have occurred. It is contradictory to the Abstract of Judgment, also issued by the Court.

This 2^nd case is founded solely upon that (“Void Judgment”). In March 2012 Petitioner was jailed by Judge Thomas (“Nugent”) for refusal to sign a false confession under penalty of perjury — while knowing his court held no subject matter jurisdiction.

In April 2012, Judge Nugent ordered Petitioner’s (“Sheriff Record”) to be falsified to make it appear she was lawfully jailed for violating a contempt order with which the court knew she could not comply under C.C.P1219(a), even if the Court held jurisdiction.  They tried to scare & coerce Petitioner into perjury to state that McConnell did not frame her for libel in the 2006 anti-SLAPP Opinion over Petitioner’s writing regarding Plaintiffs’ pseusoscience in public health polices and mold litigations nationwide.

“If the remittitur issues by inadvertence or mistake or as a result of fraud or imposition practiced on the appellate court, the court has inherent power to recall it and thereby reassert its jurisdiction over the case. This remedy, though described in procedural terms, is actually an exercise of an extraordinary substantive power.…its significant function is to permit the court to set aside an erroneous judgment on appeal obtained by improper means. In practical effect, therefore, the motion or petition to recall the remittitur may operate as a belated petition for rehearing on special grounds, without any time limitations.” (9 Witkin, Cal. Procedure(4th ed.1997) Appeal, § 733, pp. 762-763.

Once a court’s jurisdiction is challenged it must be proved to exist. Stuck v. Medical Examiners, 94 Ca2d 751.211 P2s 389. “No judicial process, whatever form it may assume, can have any lawful authority outside of the limits of the jurisdiction of the court or judge by home it is isssue; and an attempt to enforce beyond these boundaries is nothing less than lawless violence.” Abelman v. Booth, 62 U.S. 506 (1859) 

Please go to our sister blog, ContemptOfCourtFor.ME, to read Petitioner’s Petition to the CA Supreme Court for Writ to Mandate that McConnell must prove her court’s jurisdiction or reverse all orders, rulings and opinions in these cases — beginning with her own 2006 anti-SLAPP Opinion.