California Supreme Court Case No. S210102 Kramer v CA1/4(MCCONNELL)
Gist: Justices Patricia Benke
and Judith McConnell
will not recall and rescind the undeniably court falsified 2010 Remittitur
and vacate the ante-dated 2008 Void Judgment
from the (Predicate Case) of Kelman & GlobalTox v. Kramer
. The Predicate Case Void Judgment is the sole foundational document to a second case, Kelman v. Kramer.
Justice McConnell has issued a ruling upon appeal in the second case while refusing to address the direct evidence that the foundational documents to the second case are the fraudulent documents from the Predicate Case. What this means is that Justice Judith
McConnell is refusing to recall/rescind/vacate court falsified documents from one case and simultaneously using them to feign her court has subject matter jurisdiction in another.
Fourth District Division One Court of Appeal (Respondent) Administrative Presiding Justice Judith McConnell (Real Party In Interest), lower court judiciaries, Plaintiffs and Plaintiff Counsel have been using the court falsified & ante-dated documents from the first case to feign the courts have subject matter jurisdiction in the second case since November of 2010 to harass a United States citizen, coram non judice. (that’s Latin for ain’t got no legal right to rule on nuthin’ while abusing the courts to harass a United States citizen)
It would appear that Justice McConnell may soon be mandated by the California Supreme Court to prove Respondent’s jurisdiction and that she is may be prohibited from issuing a Remittitur until she proves her own court’s jurisdiction that would enable her to legally pass it on to another court, via a Remittitur. (That’s the legal document that an Appellate Court issues to give the lower court control to finish the deal after the Appellate Court is finished with an appeal. Legally, it can’t be falsified by clerks of the court, under seal of the State of California, to conceal that appellate justices twice concealed parties on appeal — a retired U.S. Asst. Surgeon General who was also a Deputy Director of CDC’s National Institute of Occupational Safety & Health).
Justice McConnell is the former Chairwoman of the California Commission on Judicial Performance. This is the California Constitution mandated “independent state agency” which is to police ethics in the California Judicial Branch. However to date, it would strongly appear they do not police ethics breaches involving one of their own committee members, including their Chairwoman
Also involved in the debacle is Justice Richard Huffman. Justice Huffman was the Chairman of the Executive and Planning Committee of the California Judicial Council for fourteen years under former California Chief Justice Ronald George. In that capacity, Justice Huffman was the most influential judiciary in the State of California. Both Justices McConnell and Huffman have recently been retired from these influetial committees. They maintain their positions as appellate justices in San Diego, California. For the good of the people, hopefully this is not for long!
We feel quite certain that the Learned Judiciaries
of the California Supreme Court know that, legally, a court ante-dated document (Void Judgment from the Predicate Case of Kelman & GlobalTox v. Kramer
) cannot be used for any purpose or by anyone to feign jurisdiction including by the Supreme Court justices’ judicial mentors, colleagues and friends.
No matter who is involved, a void judgment = no subject matter jurisdiction = no judicial immunity for collusive acts by judicial officers of the courts who knowingly use a criminally ante-dated legal document to feign their courts have jurisdiction; while simultaneously refusing to vacate the same court falsified legal documents which prove their courts do not have jurisdiction.
So….the True Question before the good justices of the California Supreme Court is:
Will former Chief Justice Ronald George’s mandate for the California judicial branch to always “Speak With One Voice”, even if it is via forked tongue, be permitted to continue to compromise the integrity of the entire California legal system?
– OR –
Will Chief Justice Cantil-Sayauke and the six additional justices of the California Supreme Court take a real stand to restore ethics, integrity and law to the California courts while ridding the system of the still influential, compromised Old Guard?
The good justices of the California Supreme Court merely needs to say,
Hey Judy McConnell, prove that you and Patty Benke are not concealing court falsified documents before you give what your court does not own, jurisdiction, to another court.
Undo this massive mess you have caused and stop abusing the courts to harass a United States citizen by practicing politics, not law, from the bench.
Step aside, get off the bench and let us undo this massive mess you have caused while we restore true ethics to the California judicial branch.
We shall see the true intent and true colors of the judicial officers of the California Supreme Court, shortly. They have been petitioned to intercede on an emergency basis. They have been provided the direct evidence of the legal documents that were falsified by the courts themselves; and then used by judicial officers in the feigning of subject matter jurisdiction to harass a United States citizen, coram non judice.
Please wish us luck on behalf of the citizens of California and the entire United States. There is much riding on this for literally hundreds of thousands of people, including lives.
About Sharon Kramer
Hi, I'm an advocate for integrity in health marketing and in the courts.
The courts of CA lost their ethics many years ago. this writer, after being the WC court all the way to the federal appellate level from 1980 till current, IT CLEARLY IS OBVIOUS THAT our courts became an extension to and for corporations will and in doing so California individuals due process of and for citizens who have so shamefully lost their right to due process and became persecuted and prosecuted instead. Sharon Kramer became one of those persecuted and illegally prosecuted individuals who dared only to expect what belongs to us all, the right to justice. The courts lack not only ethics but the moral turpitude that they take under oath as a public official to protect us all under our state and federal constitutions.