robosummons illinois courts foreclosure mortgage denied signature stamp

Illinois Appellate Court Approves Robo-signed Summons

Says these documents are signed. Says the stamp "DOROTHY BROWN" is her signature...unbelievable!

Let me know what you think by commenting in the blog https://sites.google.com/site/robosummons/home/roboseal

Watch this video of the Clerk's seal being used by the public

Cruz Summons
Cruz Summons

Majerczyk Summons

Dorothy Brown's signature registered with the Illinois Secretary of State


(received from the Secretary of State's office via a FOIA request - the document came from the archives so it is a little hard to read)

Order your own Dorothy Brown "Signature" Stamp from Staples for $13.99 (free shipping)


What just happened?

I wanted to let you know about something that just happened in Illinois.

Here's the story: Mr. Cruz and
Mr. & Mrs. Majerczyk were in foreclosure. They did not appear in court right away to defend their foreclosures. In both cases, their attorney found a defect in the paperwork (the summons wasn't signed by the Court Clerk, thereby making it defective) and complained that the court didn't have jurisdiction to enter the foreclosures. In both cases,the trial court judges refused to follow the law.

Cruz and Majerczyk both appealed. They couldn't believe that a trial court judge could truly believe that a stamp is a signature.

They finally got their answer in two separate rulings in December 2011. To support the trial court judges and approve the banks foreclosures, The Illinois Court of Appeals approved the robo-signing of these court documents by stating that a stamp is a signature on a legal document, against Illinois Law.

If these judges followed the law it would potentially void all the foreclosures that had similarly issued summonses. I'm not sure how many that is, but it was enough for these judges to ignore many laws.

What would be so bad if the banks had to follow the law to foreclose on properties?

What did the banks have to do to get this special ruling? I've included copies of the summons and the rulings in each case for your review; you be the judge!

Here are the applicable laws:


"Every action... shall be commenced by the filing of a complaint. The clerk shall issue summons upon request of the plaintiff. The form and substance of the summons... shall be according to rules." (735 ILCS 5/2-201)


"The summons shall be issued under the seal of the court, tested in the name of the clerk, and signed with his name." (Illinois Supreme Court Rule 101(a))


"when the written signature of any person is required by law on any official or public writing or bond, required by law, it shall be (1) the proper handwriting of such person."  (5 ILCS 70/1.15)

 

"The clerks shall, in all cases, attend in person to the duties of their offices... In the performance of the duties of the office of clerk of the circuit court, any such clerk, after filing with the Secretary of State his or her manual signature certified by him or her under oath, may execute or cause to be executed with a facsimile signature, in lieu of his or her original signature, all forms of process [summons] and notices issued by his or her office. "Facsimile signature" means a reproduction by engraving, imprinting, stamping, or other means of the manual signature of an authorized officer." (705 ILCS 105/8)

 

Here is what the judges ignored:

According to these laws, there are only two valid ways to sign a summons (which is an official writing required by law). First, Dorothy Brown can personally hand write her name or, second, an authorized person can stamp her facsimile signature that was registered with the Secretary of State.

 

A lettered stamp cannot be used, only a stamp of her facsimile (manual, handwritten signature) that was registered with the state (see attached doc from SOS). However, ALL of these judges ignored the law. This stamp is not the handwritten signature of Dorothy Brown, nor is it the facsimile signature stamp registered with the state.

 

Now, with this ruling, people do not have to sign anything; they can just use a lettered stamp of their name. So, instead of signing a mortgage, just use your stamp. Even a notary can just stamp their name to the oath of another person's stamped name. What about a power of attorney? Or a will? What about checks? Anything is fair game now that they've approved it at the appellate court. How would one ever know if the person that stamped the lettered stamp is the person who is supposed to have signed it?

 

Here's what the Illinois Supreme Court said about Summons and the requirements of the Court Clerks in an opinion from last century (1881); the summons requirements have never changed:

"Where the law expressly directs that process shall be in a specified form, and issued in a particular manner, such a provision is mandatory, and a failure on the part of the officer whose duty it is to issue it, to comply With the law in that respect, will render such process void." "If such laws are merely directory, then writs are as valid without their observance as with it, and every clerk would be at liberty to issue process in whatever form might suit his fancy. If one of these requirements may be omitted, all may, on the same principle. Under such a system, one clerk might conclude that the ceremony of attaching a seal was idle and useless. Another might think the writ would be sufficient with the seal, and that the addition of the name of the clerk would therefore be superfluous. Another might think all these requirements of the law are but idle ceremonies, and for them substitute something altogether different. Under such a system of things, how could the defendant in the process know what was valid and binding upon him and what was not, and when to obey and when not?" "The decisions, therefore, with respect to the omission of a seal or other statutory requirement, will be directly in point upon the question involved in this case." [The Cruz and Majerczyk cases are directly on point with this Supreme Court Ruling, which the Appellate Court refused to consider]

 Is Dorothy Brown above the law? Why does she get to decide how to issue summons that do not follow the law? Why didn't these 6 judges follow the laws of the Illinois Supreme Court?

Additionally, if the appellate court said that a stamp with block letters is a signature, where is the "tested in the name of the clerk" on the summons? That, is the attestation. Therefore, the stamp couldn't be both a signature and the attestation. One or the other is missing. Both are mandatory.

 

The people of Illinois cannot stand idle when judges disregard laws. What is next? Judges can do whatever they want to do? If they don't have to follow our laws, then who does? What tie in do these judges have that made them ignore the law? It is interesting that Aurelia Pucinski was the Court Clerk right before Dorothy Brown, what might she be hiding?

The General Rules of the Supreme Court of Illinois State:

"A judge should respect and comply with the law and should conduct himself or herself at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary." SUPREME COURT RULE 61

Law is defined in the preamble to the Illinois Supreme Court Code of Judicial Conduct as "court rules as well as statutes, constitutional provisions and decisional law."


By the way, did you read the Cruz and Majerczyk rulings? It is very suspect that both of these rulings were done by two different panels each having 3 different judges; however, the text is almost exactly the same, uses the same analysis and quotes the same cases and were released within days of each other. I'll guarantee there were some back-door dealings in putting these rulings together to make sure that Majercyks and Cruz lost these cases. 

What do you think?



Ruled in favor of bank and against Mr. Cruz
 

 
 Aurelia Pucinski
David P. Sterba
 Terrence J. Lavin
 Ruled in favor of bank and
 against Majerczyk 
 
 
 
 Bertina E. Lampkin            
 Rodolfo Garcia            
Robert E. Gordon

If you are as outraged as I am over this injustice,Contact the Chief Justice at :
Thomas L. Kilbride, Chief Justice
Illinois Supreme Court
Supreme Court Building
200 E. Capitol 
Springfield, IL 62701


(217) 782-2035
     


File a complaint using this form here:

Let me know what you think by commenting in the blog


Subpages (1): roboseal
Comments