Posted by
Eng. Sidaross on Wednesday, June 18, 2008 7:30:00 AM
JUNE 18, 2008 COURT CORRUPTION OF TODAY
SEE POSTING BELOW, SENT TO COURT yesterday
IMMEDIATE PRESS RELEASE
PLAINTIFF DISPUTES
ILLEGAL COURT TRIAL
OF TODAY 6/18/08
JUDGE DISCRIMINATES AND IS DEFENDANT
PLAINTIFF IN PRO PER SHALL NOT ATTEND HEARINGS BEFORE A "DEFENDANT JUDGE" !!!
THIS IS VEXATIOUS AND STUPIDITY
NO JURY ALLOWED IN CLOSED DOOR
NO DISMISSAL OF THIS MATTER IS ALLOWED
COURT CORRUPTION OBSERVED
PLAINTIFF RESERVES THE RIGHT FOR TRIAL OF THIS MATTER AT ANY TIME BEFORE HONEST JUDGE!?!
PLAINTIFF REQUESTS HEARING
BEFORE GOVERNOR SCHWARZENEGGER,
HOUSE REPRESENTATIVES,
LAWMAKERS
NEED TO BE HEARD TO DISCUSS ISSUES IN DETAILS
In Pro Per & my compensation &
deficit caused by funding the court
Plaintiff is being threatened by Vexatious Litigant, Res Judicata while judge Helen Bendix supports defendants in corruption, lies, money laundry, hiding the crime, HIPPA violation acts, address personal issues out of Plaintiff's complaint, and to prevent Plaintiff to sue the judge. The goal of judges and attorneys collectively is to stop Plaintiff from reporting court corruption and injustice by judges. Plaintiff is accused by causing "Whistle blower agaisnt the legal system" It is my right by law to report this fact. Unfortunately, Dept of Justice "DOJ" !! supports the corruption against the public as myself. What a precious name that is sneakily altered by Attorney General Office who is supposed to protect the JUSTICE.
Some attorneys told me "You are taking our food"!! I said: "How about attorneys and judges? They are taking our food too under duress with no service rendered to us or to the country. By signature of each litigant, they are collecting food from double sources "both parties". Which law is this?" Then judges control the outcome upon who is who or how much behind the scene!!! Therefore, since they are in control, attorneys and judges should split the litigation expenses among each other. My stand is: "Correcting the system does not take food of any one. It is justice, safety, civilization, and fairness to all."
In the Union matter 2003 ended with suprise fact of corruption inside Supreme court. I lost about $300,000 of my own saving and family money to pursue the "JUSTICE" in the free country. Unfortunately, judge STOLL covered up on threat of life e-mail that "Plaintiff Woman Engineer Union President" received from her "Union PECG and SPB judges" to put Plaintiff, myself, in JAIL if I do not stop!! it was because I asked the UNION of where is our UNION DUES is spent and other corruption of Board of engineers of California. Bylaws were altered guided by judges to RECALL the FIRST WOMAN ENGINEER UNION PRESIDENT out of presidency before releasing information to memberships, 2003; then conspiracy of Caltrans employer - union to terminate Plaintiff, 2004. Then, attroney Leonard Chaitin, ex-attorney of Plaintiff supported union corruption as well, 2003-present... this attorney work with criminal cases only and knows nothing but being expert in criminal subjects. Attorney Knickerbocker charged $7000 and disappeared in 2004, it was intended to protect Plaintiff job but unfortunately he never filed it in the court until Plaintiff gets terminated. It was a plan between Caltrans/Union to approach my attorneys and threaten all my witnesses whom are "employees of caltrans and union memberships". They are all run by UNION DUES. Union shall be closed for
good; why should judges and attorneys care about Union function (union dues)??
Attempt to kill me many times: Inside my office at Caltrans Oct-Nov 2004, and during past few years especially after J. Stoll and Chaintin involvement. If I get killed they are liable, as well as all defendants in the caption.
THE ABOVE CORRUPTION IS DISMISSED AGAIN
BY JUDGE HELEN BENDIX TO COVER ON IMMUNITY OF JUDGES AND GOVERNMENT PRIVILIGE TO SUSTAIN CRIME BEHIND THE SCENE.
I DO NOT WANT TO GET KILLED NOW. THIS SHOULD BE LEFT FOR GOD TO DECIDE WHEN.
Monique S. Sidaross, Engineer
MONIQUE S. SIDAROSS, Engineer
Plaintiff, In Pro Per
P.O. Box 6705
Rosemead, CA 91770
(626) 309-2998
Plaintiff, In Pro Per
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
|
MONIQUE S. SIDAROSS, Eng., as an individual, State employee, In Pro Per,
Plaintiff,
vs.
State of California, a governmental entity; California Department of Transportation, a California Government Agency; individuals directly caused wrongful termination: Art Salazar, Art Duffy, Paula Durham, Steve Nakao, Tom Rut, Gedion Werrede, Barton Newton, Shannon Post, Phil Lutz, Jim Calkins, Hadi Behrooj, Mohammad Ali Molla, Safwat Salahieh, Kamal Abdul Karim, Gay Norris, Bob McNew, Marian Woo, Steve Takigawa, Lydia Lewis, SPB board members, ALJ Bretcher, ALJ Segal, ALJ Brown, Judge Ross, Judge Stoll, Richard Knickerbocker, Leonard Chaitin, Wayne Dryden; Second Appellate Court of State of Calif.; Supreme Court of Calif.; State Bar of Calif.; Board of Engineers of Calif.; Cindi Christenson; Jerry Montoya-Caltrans Legal Div. (11/2/07); J. Helen Bendix (2/29/08); Nena Vuong (3/23/08); and Does 1-50,
Defendants.
A SEAL: For safety of life reason, this caption shall not be altered or changed as judge Stoll, appeal & supreme courts did and put Plaintiff life in danger. Only Plaintiff decides whom to sue for that reason. Dismissal system is defendants’ opportunity to escape, and shall cause life threat or assassination to plaintiff as occurred several times before, and on 11/29/07 after the hearing of Nov 28, 2007 when judge dismissed defendants. Feb 6, 2008 another attempt of attack directly at the door of Plaintiff residence. A Complex Matter with ONE Plaintiff In Pro Per is very frustrating, needs attention and justice of the court.
|
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
|
Case No. BC354160
DAMAGES & COURT INJUSTICE
Second Time Plaintiff Requests to
POSTPONE TRIAL OF 6/18/08
JUDGE IS DEFENDANT- RETALIATION PERSISTS UNDER DURESS TO IN PRO PER - NO LEGAL REPRESENTATION FOR PLAINTIF
60 DAYS EXTENSION OR MORE
PLAINTIFF IN PRO PER HAS LEGAL RIGHT TO CHANGE JUDGE
PLAINTIFF IN PRO PER HAS LEGAL RIGHT FOR EQUAL LEGAL REPRESENTATION
JUDGE BENDIX IS DEFENDANT – COURT IS IN SEVERE CONFLICT OF INTEREST / ILLEGALLY CONDUCTING COURT HEARINGS
PLAINTIFF UNAVAILABLE 7/15/08 TO 9/15/08
JUDGE…(DEF)..: Hon Judge Helen Bendix
ACTION FILED : June 16, 2006
TRIAL DATE : June 18, 2008 to vacate &move
TIME : 9:30 a.m. to vacate &move
HEARING DATE: Reply by mail
TIME :
DEPT : D 18 – D1 - Governor schwarzenegger - Lawmaker, House Representativ
|
TO ALL PARTIES, 39 DEFENDANTS, AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
TO JUDGE EDMON D1, PRESIDING JUDGE, GOVERNOR SCHWARZENEGER, HOUSE REPRESENTATIVES:
Plaintiff is hereby requesting for the second time to postpone the trial of 6/18/08 due to conflict of interest with judge Bendix, being a defendant. Plaintiff requests stopping trial/hearings & 60 days excluding unavailable period mentioned above or until satisfying the conditions mentioned herein.
1. Legally, plaintiff has the right to change judge due to conflict of interest, discrimination, threat while judge Bendix is defendant since Feb 2008. No higher judge has authority to overrule this request, by law. Matter has been abused without merit or justice.
2. Defendants are in default of nonappearance on 12/18/06 and other dates after being served in person. Plaintiff won the matter and shall be evaluated by other qualified judge, the governor, House Representatives for justice & merit reason.
3. No law, retaliatory actions, rules of any kind shall be applied on plaintiff under duress and harassment.
4. This Plaintiff has not given a fair opportunity to be heard on the merit of issues, nor given the chance for discovery.
5. Plaintiff reserves the right for protection of any harm that may occur under court duress and malpractice.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
DATED: June 15, 2008
________________________
Monique S. Sidaross, Eng
Plaintiff, In Pro Per
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
CURRENT FILING
STOP COURT HEARING IN ABSENCE OF PLAINTIFF
INJUSTICE AND UNFAIR TRIAL IS ATTEMPTED BY THE COURT FOR RETALIATION REASON
PLAINTIFF PRESERVE HER RIGHT FOR SAFETY OF LIFE
ANY HARM MAY HAPPEN, IT WOULD BE DUE TO COURT AND JUDGES CORRUPTION
THIS IS AN ANNOUNCEMENT
Concern and unique situation does not exist in the law:
This Plaintiff has been excluded and singled out and is targeted by all attorneys, judges, and courts due to honestly reported corruption in governmental agencies, women engineers civil rights, judicial malpractice, and court sytems that needed to be adjusted for justice reason and future better generation. Unfortunately, Department of Justice (DOJ) supported the injustice, corruption in courts and state work place, and denied woman engineer right for legal representation and safety of life. Therefore, the DOJ is not qualified to be named as such and has to change its name; also a new law and accommodation by the Governor and House Representatives shall be created for this excluded Plaintiff.
I did not mean and did not request any harm to defendants though their repetitive violations and harm against me, but I like to be heard and I need my rights that I deserve such as my full retirement and compensation for the willful defamation, discrimination, and retaliation against a woman engineer in the male dominated field in the Free Country. Otherwise the society shall not improve at all if judges themselves violate the laws in the court.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Monique S. Sidaross, Engineer
MONIQUE S. SIDAROSS, Engineer
Plaintiff, In Pro Per
P.O. Box 6705
Rosemead, CA 91770
(626) 309-2998
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
|
MONIQUE S. SIDAROSS, Eng., as an individual, State employee, In Pro Per,
Plaintiff,
vs.
State of California, a governmental entity; California Department of Transportation, a California Government Agency; individuals directly caused wrongful termination: Art Salazar, Art Duffy, Paula Durham, Steve Nakao, Tom Rut, Gedion Werrede, Barton Newton, Shannon Post, Phil Lutz, Jim Calkins, Hadi Behrooj, Mohammad Ali Molla, Safwat Salahieh, Kamal Abdul Karim, Gay Norris, Bob McNew, Marian Woo, Steve Takigawa, Lydia Lewis, SPB board members, ALJ Bretcher, ALJ Segal, ALJ Brown, Judge Ross, Judge Stoll, Richard Knickerbocker, Leonard Chaitin, Wayne Dryden; Second Appellate Court of State of Calif.; Supreme Court of Calif.; State Bar of Calif.; Board of Engineers of Calif.; Cindi Christenson; Jerry Montoya-Caltrans Legal Div. (11/2/07); J. Helen Bendix (2/29/08); Nena Vuong (3/23/08); and Does 1-50,
Defendants.
A SEAL: For safety of life reason, this caption shall not be altered or changed as judge Stoll, appeal & supreme courts did and put Plaintiff life in danger. Only Plaintiff decides whom to sue for that reason. Dismissal system is defendants’ opportunity to escape, and shall cause life threat or assassination to plaintiff as occurred several times before, and on 11/29/07 after the hearing of Nov 28, 2007 when judge dismissed defendants. Feb 6, 2008 another attempt of attack directly at the door of Plaintiff residence. A Complex Matter with ONE Plaintiff In Pro Per is very frustrating, needs attention and justice of the court.
|
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
|
Case No.: No. BC354160
DAMAGES & COURT INJUSTICE
CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL
OF 6/18/08
AND MOVE OUT OF DEPT 18
STOP HEARINGS AND TRIAL IN D18 IMMEDIATELY, OTHERWISE FELONY, CHARGE OF ABUSE, AND VIOLATION OF CONSTITUTION WOULD BE FILED VS. ALL DEFENDANTS ON THE CAPTION.
JUDGE ..(Def)….: Hon Judge Helen Bendix ACTION FILED : June 16, 2006
TRIAL DATE : June 18, 2008 to vacate & move
TIME : 9:30 a.m. to vacate & move
HEARING DATE: reply by mail
|
TO ALL PARTIES, 39 DEFENDANTS, AND ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
Plaintiff (PL) is hereby notifying all parties and the court D18 and D1 of the urgent need to postpone the trial to open time until Lawmakers and House Representatives reply and meet with Plaintiff regarding corruption of court system, self representatives, and litigation process. All hearing and trials are illegal and Plaintiff shall not appear for safety reason.
This matter is public concern and shall be presented in full to the media for the public to read, ask questions, and reply to issues. NO Jury allowed in closed courtroom for safety and justice reason for Plaintiff In Pro per due to prior court harassment, abuse & discrimination that have not been resolved to satisfaction of Plaintiff, and to ensure justice and fair trial. The media & the public are the jury and a new judge is the ruling party.
If otherwise ruling or court order from any judge or court, it would be Felony, breach of constitution, and sanction shall be applied with interest if not paid immediately by the court. All process shall stop since Feb 2008 when judge reported with discrimination and hostile environment in court.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
DATED: May 18, 2008
________________________
Monique S. Sidaross, En
Plaintiff, In Pro Per
Monique S. Sidaross, Engineer
MONIQUE S. SIDAROSS, Engineer
Plaintiff, In Pro Per
P.O. Box 6705
Rosemead, CA 91770
(626) 309-2998
Plaintiff, In Pro Per
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
|
MONIQUE S. SIDAROSS, Eng., as an individual, State employee, In Pro Per,
Plaintiff,
vs.
State of California, a governmental entity; California Department of Transportation, a California Government Agency; individuals directly caused wrongful termination: Art Salazar, Art Duffy, Paula Durham, Steve Nakao, Tom Rut, Gedion Werrede, Barton Newton, Shannon Post, Phil Lutz, Jim Calkins, Hadi Behrooj, Mohammad Ali Molla, Safwat Salahieh, Kamal Abdul Karim, Gay Norris, Bob McNew, Marian Woo, Steve Takigawa, Lydia Lewis, SPB board members, ALJ Bretcher, ALJ Segal, ALJ Brown, Judge Ross, Judge Stoll, Richard Knickerbocker, Leonard Chaitin, Wayne Dryden; Second Appellate Court of State of Calif.; Supreme Court of Calif.; State Bar of Calif.; Board of Engineers of Calif.; Cindi Christenson; Jerry Montoya-Caltrans Legal Div. (11/2/07); J. Helen Bendix (2/29/08); Nena Vuong (3/23/08); and Does 1-50,
Defendants.
A SEAL: For safety of life reason, this caption shall not be altered or changed as judge Stoll, appeal & supreme courts did and put Plaintiff life in danger. Only Plaintiff decides whom to sue for that reason. Dismissal system is defendants’ opportunity to escape, and shall cause life threat or assassination to plaintiff as occurred several times before, and on 11/29/07 after the hearing of Nov 28, 2007 when judge dismissed defendants. Feb 6, 2008 another attempt of attack directly at the door of Plaintiff residence. A Complex Matter with ONE Plaintiff In Pro Per is very frustrating, needs attention and justice of the court.
|
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
|
Case No.: No. BC354160
DAMAGES & COURT INJUSTICE
No judge for this matter
Judge Bendix is defendant continues violating the law and abusing In Pro Per
Plaintiff opposition to motion to dismiss Board of engineers and Cindi Christenson mail dated 5-27-08 received by mail Friday 5-30-08 includes order from a defendant judge Bendix for Plaintiff reply by 6-2-08 over weekend!! Continuous illegal abuse of ruling and overtime to Plaintiff by the Judge Bendix who shall be liable to pay all losses for mangling with Plaintiff In Pro Per life, matter, the proceeding, and delay of Plaintiff education.
Plaintiff opposition to Notice of Ruling on Ex Parte Application dated 5-27-08, mail of ruling received 5-30-08 without knowledge of Plaintiff or any notification at least 24 hours before the ex parte by law, CRC 379(b) notice of ex parte. Repeated proof of Judge Bendix violation of constitution and the law, supporting Defendant against Plaintiff In Pro Per and accepting this abuse. As consequences, J. Bendix is not qualified to act as a judge at least for this matter.
JUDGE…Defendant: Hon Judge Helen Bendix
ACTION FILED : June 16, 2006
TRIAL DATE : June 18, 2008 continued pending house representatives reply, vacate & move to other judge
TIME : 9:30 a.m. vacate &move
HEARING DATE: reply by mail
TIME :
DEPT: 18, 1, Calif. Governor, House Representatives
|
TO ALL PARTIES, 39 DEFENDANTS, AND ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
Plaintiff (PL) is hereby opposing continuous violation of Dept 18 of Superior Court Los Angeles in mangling with court proceeding in favor to Defendants against Plaintiff throughout the matter with no justice while court record is falsified.
1. Plaintiff is opposing motion to dismiss Board of Engineers and Cindi Christenson mail dated 5-27-08 received Friday 5-30-08 includes order by judge Bendix defendant for Plaintiff to reply by 6-2-08 over the weekend!!! It is obvious insult, violation of laws and constitution, abusing In Pro Per life, and discrimination.
This mail was prepared by Dept of Justice D. Helfat on behalf of defendants mentioned above. Mr. Helfat never contacted Plaintiff in timely manner by law assuming regular procedures and a qualified judge, but at this time, Plaintiff is opposing continuous conspiracy between Judge and Defendants and given the fact that Judge Bendix is currently a defendant since 2/29/08.
2. Plaintiff opposes Notice of Ruling Ex Parte Application dated 5-27-08 received 5-30-08 as a surprise to plaintiff who had never received any notification at least 24 hours before ex parte from Dept of Justice, D. Helfat, attorney representing Board of Engineers and Cindi Christenson and other defendants. Dept of justice violated the law along with Judge Bendix who is defendant. Plaintiff has never received any notice pursuant to Calif Rules of Court, rule 379(b); notice of the ex parte application must be made on all interested parties by 10:00 a.m. or 24 hours preceding the court appearance on the ex parte application. Similar and other violation of the law occurred by Judge Bendix while other judicial authorities support this illegality. Therefore court system shall be reformed and any funding of Taxpayers’ money is illegal and questioned if this matter is not heard on the merit, and for future protection of the public and the economy.
Judge Helen Bendix and her associates supporting injustice against Plaintiff shall be liable of all losses of Plaintiff for mangling with In Pro Per life, matter, court proceeding, and delay of Plaintiff education and income.
3. California Governor and House Representatives are to reply to Plaintiff requests, and communicate in person with Plaintiff in public. Plaintiff declines any hidden orders by force that cause harm to Plaintiff, her matter, losses, career, income, education, and goal in life due to corruption around without actions to protect citizens. Call for Calif. Governor and House Representatives to protect safety of life, career, and all losses of Plaintiff. No losses shall be ceased by the State Agency or the country due to hostile legal system and harassment to Plaintiff and women in the Free Country without justice
Department of Justice is unqualified to carry its title any more due to multi-violations by former Attorney General Bill Lockyer and continuous violation and false representation until now during this matter. The public should be informed that Dept of Justice and its employees are working against the public interest while it is funded by Taxpayers’ money.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
DATED: June 1, 2008 ________________________
Monique S. Sidaross, Eng
Plaintiff, In Pro Per