SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA - Florida Courts

SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA

Kurtis and Lauren Bradley, et. Al Petitioner,

Vs.

SC:

2DCA Case #2D16-66 L.T. Case #12000977CA

State of Florida Respondent

8

SURPERCEEDUS

Habeas Corpus

Discretionary Jurisdictional Review

(Auction of home = Friday, May 5, 2017)

Orders Under Review:

Through God we pray for review and relief of this court to the lower courts of The FL. Second

District Court of FL (2DCA), Judges: LaRose, Crenshow and Rothstein-Youakim, AND the 20*

Judicial Charlotte County Court of FL; Judge Porter, Judge McIver, Judge Thompson, and

Judge McHugh, where there were numerous fundamental errors.

These fundamental errors denied us; fairness, equality, fair protection under law in a neutral magistrate and violated our 9* due process of law.

Because we had ineffective counsel in Appellate Court who filed an inadequate prima facia motion against F.R.A.P. Violating his oath as counsel, and our rights of due process of law, we have no other option but to beg this court for relief.

1

We pray this court (upon reading this motion) will direct the 20th circuit court for a "Stay of Sale" (set for this Friday, May 5th, 2017) for property Located at: 1556 Eagle Street, Port Charlotte, FL 33952, (if the lower court has not already done so) until this Supreme Court has had a chance to review our case.

4-2-12: Bank of America, N.A. S/B/M to BAC Home Loan Servicing, L.P. (BANA) complaint. (Mortgage servicer) 11-24-15: Trial was set (No "Notice of Trial" was sent) 11-18-15: Substitution of Party Plaintiff GRANTED New Plaintiff:

PROF-2013-S3 Legal Title Trust, by U.S. Bank as Legal Title Trustee (USBANK) 12-8-15: Trial continued date. 8-31-05: Original Note and Mortgage = Countrywide Home Loans, INC. (CWHLI) with MERS as nominee)

EXHIBITS ATTACHED (in the order of appearance in this motion): "AP" = 2?d Motion for Clarification, 2DCA, February 2, 2017 "A" = Defendants Motion to Strike Order Denying Stay, January 30, 2017 "B" = Defendants Motion to Remove/Disqualify Judge Lisa Porter, January 30, 2017 "C" = Affidavit of Ronald Gillis, July 10, 2014 "T-A" = Hearing transcript of October 13, 2015 "F" = Amended Motion for Clerk Default, May 1, 2017 "D" = Plaintiff's Trial Exhibit List, December 8, 2015 "T-B" = Hearing transcript ofNovember 18, 2015 "T-C" = Hearing transcript of June 22, 2015 "T.T." = Trial Transcript December 8, 2015

2

We hereby enter the orders, fundamental errors and fraud on the court for review and move for a prayer of relief

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS (2DCA):

Judges: LaRose, Crenshow and Rothstein-Youakim,

The 2DCA ruled "per curiam affirmed" on our appeal. We were PRO SE' for the 99% of the Appeal. We hired an attorney for the sole purpose of writing: "Motion for rehearing, rehearing en banc and request for written opinion". The conditions we hired this attorney under was "Only HIM" on our case. That attorney then hired a different someone outside of his firm, without our knowledge, (we assume) to write the motion we'd requested. The motion was submitted to the 2DCA, and came back "Facially Insufficient". Because the attorney would not reply to our inquiries of what "facially insufficient" meant, I re-read the motion his office submitted to the 2DCA and realized he did NOT include the Mandatory Language (F.R.A.P. 9.331(d)(2)). We first wrote the attorney and asked for a refund ($2,500), and did not receive a reply. We have now complained to the FL Bar (their File #2017-10,783(6B)) and received a letter from them (addressed to the attorney, with us as a "cc") and are awaiting their determination I filed "Motion to request a written opinion" and the 2DCA replied with "strike represented". I sent the 2DCA proof (emails) of my asking the attorney to withdrawal, and resubmitted my request. The 2DCA came back with "untimely". Our last attempt was February 3, 2017 when we filed "2"? Motionfor Clarification, RE: Pro Se motion for written opinion" (EXHIBIT AP1-4). This motion was simply Denied. There is no "re-do" on a Motion for rehearing in banc, therefore

3

leaving us with no choice but to include this in our habeas corpus motion to the FL Supreme Court.

20th JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT OF CHARLOTTE COUNTY, FL

JUDGE PORTER: 1. See "Defendants Motion to strike order denying stay" filed on January 30, 2017 (EXHIBIT

A 1-2). Judge Porter "GRANTED" (1-22-16) and "DENIED"(1-25-17 - prior to the Appeals Court mandate). the Same Exact Defendants motion in opposite directions (about a year apart). 2. Please see also defendants "motion to remove/disqualify Judge Lisa Porter" which shows our history of treatment from this judge. (EXHIBIT B1-4). This motion was denied. 3. Defendants previously filed a JQC Complaint on Judge Porter 7-8-15.

JUDGE McIver:

June 24, 2014:

First "trial" in lower court. This trial occurred, was ruled on - with an

open "Motion to compel discovery" (filed June 17, 2014) and a Bankruptcy Stay in place.

Because of the (unheard) motion to compel the case was not "at issue". We attempted to call

Judge McIver's Judicial Assistant, to postpone trial, I was told "it's too late". I (Lauren Bradley)

was forced to file BK the morning of trial, in order to escape injustice, and injured my credit

rating in doing so. I filed the "suggestion of bankruptcy" in 20th Circuit court at 1:10 pm on the

day of trial (6/24), giving courtesy copies for the Judge and explaining the trial was set for 3 pm.

4

I did not attend the trial, (knowing with a STAY in place they could not go forward). A friend of ours was in the courtroom - See Affidavit of Ronald Gillis (EXHIBIT C 1-3). Although Mr. Gillis tried to stop the trial several times, (all Judges or their JA's have laptops on the bench?) they continued. The "attending" Attorney for the plaintiff(?), had NOT filed any "notice of appearance", and was not from the law finn representing Plaintiff (i.e. there was no plaintiff in the courtroom). Judge McIver ruled in favor of the Plaintiff, Bank of America, N.A. (BANA). We believe this to be blatant discriminatory action against pro se' defendants, & certainly a violation our due process rights, along with being procedurally incorrect and a violation against the STAY of a bankruptcy. Upon visiting the clerk of courts & requesting the minutes ofthe trial, the ruling was vacated. However, the record "our docket" - prejudiced all judges, from that day forward, We filed a JQC complaint against Judge McIver, and he recused himself.

SENIOR JUDGE THOMPSON

October 13, 2015: Transcript of 10-13-15 (EXHIBIT T-A 1-12 ) (Page 5, lines 1-7)

Although Judge Thompson accepted our "Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Compaint" as Defendants "ANSWER", it did not come without warning:

MR BRADLEY: Your Honor, we're not attorneys, and in our eyes any paper including - -

COURT:

You might try to take out your appendix, but if you are not a doctor you're 04p2 robably going to die. It's the same thing with not being a lawyer, . . .

Petitioner (then defendants) took this as a warning, and it was then we (unfortunately) decided to

hire an attorney for trial "only". This is bias in its purest form against PRO SE' defendants, and

5

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download