Sunday, February 10, 2008
Chairman of the board and CEO:
This is the deal – Obama is President and Chairman of the board and Clinton is CEO – following Chaney powerful Vice-president’s office by major input into the budge, OMB, and joint decisions about cabinet officers. Obama sets policy and motivates the masses while Clinton does the nuts and bolts. There is little or no disagreement on policy and a clear desire to get things done.
You can go to jail if you defend you civil rights!
Petition for emergency relief and writ of Prohibition
Defendant, Peter will be arraigned and tried at this hearing in conformance with criminal procedures.
He can go to jail for making a defense of his property stolen by his brother Thomas Esq. and sister-in-law Leanne Esq!
How far will Thomas go in this attack on his brother using his really mean lawyers?
Is it right? Is it common? Thomas has learned how the judicial system can be used as a tool to abuse Peter in a civil dispute in order to intimidate, and blackmail Peter to abandon his rights. This has been done for four years without Peter every having hearing on the issues and the law so the Thomas’s attack team never had to present an affirmative case. Instead of the courts hearing two sides of a case, and making a decision on the issues, Thomas uses the system to deprive Peter of a fair hearing.
Is this why the state licenses attorneys? They are given powers and these powers are abused.
James Madison
If men were angels, judges would not be necessary. If judges were angels to control other men, neither external nor internal controls on judges would be necessary. In framing a judicial system which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the judges to control the citizens; and in the next place oblige judges to control themselves. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the judges; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa51.htm
YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED to appear CASE No. 2005-CA-2363 DIV K Hearing Monday March 4, 2008 9:30 AM (March 4 is Tuesday) , for a hearing on Plaintiffs' Motion for Sanctions If you fail to appear, you may be in contempt of Court. 12/14/05 motion for sanctions TABLE OF CONTENTS
RULE 5.020. PLEADINGS; VERIFICATION; MOTIONS
Forms of Pleading. All technical forms of pleadings are abolished. No defect of form impairs substantial rights, and no defect in the statement of jurisdictional facts actually existing renders any proceeding void. – the technical faults in the complaint are not sufficient to prevent the right to a hearing on the merits of the basic remedy the plaintiff claim to relief from the continuous damages compounded over four years of unjustified delay.
Peter Pflaum and his family suffers every single day from the damages, pain and suffering, false arrest, threats, financial poverty, increasing debt and lack of an ordinary life, distress because of his inability to take care of his children because of the evil ways of his brother. The court must not allow this harm to go forward.
CASE NO: SC07 655 Case Number: 1D07-6102
The petitioner is entitled to mandamus relief. See Huffman v. State, 813 So. 2d 10, 11 (Fla. 2000) (stating that in order to be entitled to a writ of mandamus, petitioner shows clear legal right to performance of requested act of probate according to the last will and testament of Melanie Pflaum,, that respondent has indisputable legal duty to fairly perform that act, and that no other adequate remedy exists). To the extent that the petition seeks issuance of a writ prohibiting the Honorable Toby S. Monaco from presiding over further proceedings involving petitioners, the petition is facially sufficient.
The lawyer for the Defendant/Appellee BILL HOPPE has a long record of misleading the court on issues of substance. Thomas Pflaum Esq. and his legal team here again distort, twist and outright lie, so as is said about politics “we may not know the truth when we see it because we haven’t seen it for so long.” .
Peter Pflaum has been damaged in Volusia County and seeks relief. He claims a right to a fair hearing of the issues of fact and law. Thomas Pflaum et al seeks to block and deny Peter a day in court because he has no case only a bag a nasty tricks. The defendants have driven Peter into poverty and distraction and block his road to justice at every turn.
THE ABSURD CLAIM THAT PETER PFLAUM owns an undivided 1/3 interest in real property in Spain inherited from his parents, Irving and Melanie Pflaum. The property was appraised for federal estate tax purposes at $327,000.00 in 2007. The defendant has seized this property along with a million dollars of the plaintiffs property inherited from their mother and now uses the stolen property in a claim that it belongs to the plaintiff. This is turning reality upside down – black is white, lies are true, false is valid – if Thomas wants to send me $109,000 it would show he is honest, he does not and is not. He has claimed the estate is worth $100 and has spent $700,000 is expenses attacking the plaintiff.
Honorable Robert Roundtree
Alachua County Courthouse
201 East University Avenue
Gainesville, Florida 32601
Re: Pflaum v. Pflaum, Case No. 2005-CA-2363 Div. K
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 8™ JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR ALACHUA COUNTY, FLORIDA GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISION CASE NO. 2005-CA-2363 DIV. K
THOMAS M. PFLAUM and LEANNE J. PFLAUM, Plaintiffs, vs.
PETER PFLAUM, MARY ANNE PFLAUM, and JOHN PFLAUM, Defendants.
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
The Court has reviewed Plaintiffs* Motion for Sanctions dated December 12, 2007 and the affidavit of attorney Bill Hoppe dated January 30, 2008. The Court held hearing by Judge Toby Monaco on January 16, 2008 on the Motion for Sanctions. At that time Defendant PETER PFLAUM was given an opportunity to be heard.
Under Criminal Procedure Rule 3.840, the Defendant PETER PFLAUM is ordered to show cause why he should not be held in indirect Criminal contempt of court. A hearing on the criminal contempt will be held on Monday March 4, 2008 at 9:30 AM before Circuit Judge Robert Roundtree, Room 304
Defendant will be arraigned and tried at this hearing in conformance with Rule 3.840(d). The Defendant PETER PFLAUM may be represented by counsel, have compulsory process for attendance of witnesses, and testily in his own defense.
Reply to order to show cause
Motion to strike
No cause of action
Lack of jurisdiction
Hearing March 4th 9:30 is not a Monday but Tuesday 9:30 AM
http://www.wiredbrain.com/
Sanctions were made in another case not the one cited:
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR ALACHUA COUNTY, FLORIDA
PROBATE DIVISION File No. 2004-CP-0770 Division A
RE: ESTATE OF MELANIE SOPHIA PFLAUM Deceased:
Honorable Toby S. Monaco
In the Probate case the judge has ruled 12/14/05 that ”All claims, Motions, and other pleadings or papers filed herein by said Peter Pflaum are hereby considered stricken and of no force or effect. 4. Except appropriate appellate filings pertaining to this order, no further pleadings, Motions or papers may be filed herein by said Peter Pflaum pro see Any further actions by said Peter Pflaum herein, including the filing of any papers whatsoever, shall only be taken by an attorney authorized to practice law in Florida. Should said Peter Pflaum violate the provisions of this order, he shall be assessed a fine of $300 per violation which shall be taxed upon MOTIONS of any party or by the court’s own initiative. Continued violations may be punishable by contempt and may result in incarceration”
(b) Peter Pflaum denies as not germane 12/14/05 motion for sanctions for failure to comply with the Court's orders (filed in companion defamation case);(c) Peter Pflaum denies as not germane 2/7/06 motion for sanctions for failing to follow the Court's orders and contacting THOMAS PFLAUM and LEANNE PFLAUM IN regular order to appeals and issues not in the jurisdiction of this court; Peter Pflaum has charged since September 2005 that Judge Toby Monaco is grossly prejudiced and biased and should recuse himself in line with the code of judicial ethics.
This action is a clear unconstitutional continuation of an enterprise to defraud and blackmail the defendant by denial of his right to publish the conspiracy to defraud him of his inheritance and seek legal help. Thomas and Leanne Pflaum have planned, and admitted to a illegally taking all of the estate of Melanie Pflaum and have stolen Peter Pflaum’s inheritance. Having done extreme damage they have added insult to injury. They have engaged in a prolonged, four years, of legal attack, harassment, threats, and wild and false claims.
There are no facts to support criminal contempt which occurs when the contemnor actually interferes with the ability of the court to function properly - for example, by yelling at the judge. This is also called direct contempt because it occurs directly in front of the judge. A criminal contemnor may be fined, jailed or both as punishment for his act.
The issue, if any, is civil contempt which occurs when the contemnor willfully disobeys a court order. This is also called indirect contempt because it occurs outside the judge's immediate realm and evidence must be presented to the judge to prove the contempt. 38.23 Contempts defined.—
Following the hearing on January 16th, Bill Hoppe filed an affidavit and proposed order under Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.840.
Mr Hoppe left the time, date and Judge blank on the proposed order since the Court indicated that another judge may hold the hearing.
38.01 Disqualification when judge party; effect of attempted judicial acts.--Every judge of this state who appears of record as a party to any cause before him or her shall be disqualified to act therein, and shall forthwith enter an order declaring himself or herself to be disqualified in said cause. Any and all attempted judicial acts by any judge so disqualified in a cause, whether done inadvertently or otherwise, shall be utterly null and void and of no effect.
Judge Monaco is disqualified as he is a party to the dispute 38.04 Sworn statement by judge holding himself or herself qualified.--Whenever any judge shall enter an order under s. 38.02 declaring qualification to act in said cause, he or she shall contemporaneously therewith file therein a sworn statement that to the best of his or her knowledge and belief the ground or grounds of the disqualification named in the suggestion do not exist.
38.02
Following the hearing on January 16th, Bill Hoppe filed an affidavit and proposed order under Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.840.
Mr Hoppe left the time, date and Judge blank on the proposed order since the Court indicated that another judge may hold the hearing.
NOTICE OF APPEAL to First District Court Of Appeal
Case Number: 1D07-6102
Final Notice from Alachua County
Peter E. Pflaum vs. Thomas and Leanne Pflaum, et al.
Lower Tribunal Case(s): 2004-CP-0770, 2005-CA-2363
IN THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT COURT FOR ALACHUA COUNTY, FLORIDA
Case No. 01-2007-CA-4714
PETER E. PFLAUM, ET AL, Pro Se Plaintiffs, Petitioners
THOMAS and Leanne PFLAUM Esq., ET AL. Richard White Esq., Bill Hoppe Esq., Defendants, Respondents
Petition to the court of appeals the defendants are entitled to mandamus relief Petition for emergency relief and writ of Prohibition
Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have read the foregoing, and the facts alleged are true, to the best of my knowledge and belief."
Signed_________________________________________________
This is the deal – Obama is President and Chairman of the board and Clinton is CEO – following Chaney powerful Vice-president’s office by major input into the budge, OMB, and joint decisions about cabinet officers. Obama sets policy and motivates the masses while Clinton does the nuts and bolts. There is little or no disagreement on policy and a clear desire to get things done.
You can go to jail if you defend you civil rights!
Petition for emergency relief and writ of Prohibition
Defendant, Peter will be arraigned and tried at this hearing in conformance with criminal procedures.
He can go to jail for making a defense of his property stolen by his brother Thomas Esq. and sister-in-law Leanne Esq!
How far will Thomas go in this attack on his brother using his really mean lawyers?
Is it right? Is it common? Thomas has learned how the judicial system can be used as a tool to abuse Peter in a civil dispute in order to intimidate, and blackmail Peter to abandon his rights. This has been done for four years without Peter every having hearing on the issues and the law so the Thomas’s attack team never had to present an affirmative case. Instead of the courts hearing two sides of a case, and making a decision on the issues, Thomas uses the system to deprive Peter of a fair hearing.
Is this why the state licenses attorneys? They are given powers and these powers are abused.
James Madison
If men were angels, judges would not be necessary. If judges were angels to control other men, neither external nor internal controls on judges would be necessary. In framing a judicial system which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the judges to control the citizens; and in the next place oblige judges to control themselves. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the judges; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa51.htm
YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED to appear CASE No. 2005-CA-2363 DIV K Hearing Monday March 4, 2008 9:30 AM (March 4 is Tuesday) , for a hearing on Plaintiffs' Motion for Sanctions If you fail to appear, you may be in contempt of Court. 12/14/05 motion for sanctions TABLE OF CONTENTS
RULE 5.020. PLEADINGS; VERIFICATION; MOTIONS
Forms of Pleading. All technical forms of pleadings are abolished. No defect of form impairs substantial rights, and no defect in the statement of jurisdictional facts actually existing renders any proceeding void. – the technical faults in the complaint are not sufficient to prevent the right to a hearing on the merits of the basic remedy the plaintiff claim to relief from the continuous damages compounded over four years of unjustified delay.
Peter Pflaum and his family suffers every single day from the damages, pain and suffering, false arrest, threats, financial poverty, increasing debt and lack of an ordinary life, distress because of his inability to take care of his children because of the evil ways of his brother. The court must not allow this harm to go forward.
CASE NO: SC07 655 Case Number: 1D07-6102
The petitioner is entitled to mandamus relief. See Huffman v. State, 813 So. 2d 10, 11 (Fla. 2000) (stating that in order to be entitled to a writ of mandamus, petitioner shows clear legal right to performance of requested act of probate according to the last will and testament of Melanie Pflaum,, that respondent has indisputable legal duty to fairly perform that act, and that no other adequate remedy exists). To the extent that the petition seeks issuance of a writ prohibiting the Honorable Toby S. Monaco from presiding over further proceedings involving petitioners, the petition is facially sufficient.
The lawyer for the Defendant/Appellee BILL HOPPE has a long record of misleading the court on issues of substance. Thomas Pflaum Esq. and his legal team here again distort, twist and outright lie, so as is said about politics “we may not know the truth when we see it because we haven’t seen it for so long.” .
Peter Pflaum has been damaged in Volusia County and seeks relief. He claims a right to a fair hearing of the issues of fact and law. Thomas Pflaum et al seeks to block and deny Peter a day in court because he has no case only a bag a nasty tricks. The defendants have driven Peter into poverty and distraction and block his road to justice at every turn.
THE ABSURD CLAIM THAT PETER PFLAUM owns an undivided 1/3 interest in real property in Spain inherited from his parents, Irving and Melanie Pflaum. The property was appraised for federal estate tax purposes at $327,000.00 in 2007. The defendant has seized this property along with a million dollars of the plaintiffs property inherited from their mother and now uses the stolen property in a claim that it belongs to the plaintiff. This is turning reality upside down – black is white, lies are true, false is valid – if Thomas wants to send me $109,000 it would show he is honest, he does not and is not. He has claimed the estate is worth $100 and has spent $700,000 is expenses attacking the plaintiff.
Honorable Robert Roundtree
Alachua County Courthouse
201 East University Avenue
Gainesville, Florida 32601
Re: Pflaum v. Pflaum, Case No. 2005-CA-2363 Div. K
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 8™ JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR ALACHUA COUNTY, FLORIDA GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISION CASE NO. 2005-CA-2363 DIV. K
THOMAS M. PFLAUM and LEANNE J. PFLAUM, Plaintiffs, vs.
PETER PFLAUM, MARY ANNE PFLAUM, and JOHN PFLAUM, Defendants.
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
The Court has reviewed Plaintiffs* Motion for Sanctions dated December 12, 2007 and the affidavit of attorney Bill Hoppe dated January 30, 2008. The Court held hearing by Judge Toby Monaco on January 16, 2008 on the Motion for Sanctions. At that time Defendant PETER PFLAUM was given an opportunity to be heard.
Under Criminal Procedure Rule 3.840, the Defendant PETER PFLAUM is ordered to show cause why he should not be held in indirect Criminal contempt of court. A hearing on the criminal contempt will be held on Monday March 4, 2008 at 9:30 AM before Circuit Judge Robert Roundtree, Room 304
Defendant will be arraigned and tried at this hearing in conformance with Rule 3.840(d). The Defendant PETER PFLAUM may be represented by counsel, have compulsory process for attendance of witnesses, and testily in his own defense.
Reply to order to show cause
Motion to strike
No cause of action
Lack of jurisdiction
Hearing March 4th 9:30 is not a Monday but Tuesday 9:30 AM
http://www.wiredbrain.com/
Sanctions were made in another case not the one cited:
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR ALACHUA COUNTY, FLORIDA
PROBATE DIVISION File No. 2004-CP-0770 Division A
RE: ESTATE OF MELANIE SOPHIA PFLAUM Deceased:
Honorable Toby S. Monaco
In the Probate case the judge has ruled 12/14/05 that ”All claims, Motions, and other pleadings or papers filed herein by said Peter Pflaum are hereby considered stricken and of no force or effect. 4. Except appropriate appellate filings pertaining to this order, no further pleadings, Motions or papers may be filed herein by said Peter Pflaum pro see Any further actions by said Peter Pflaum herein, including the filing of any papers whatsoever, shall only be taken by an attorney authorized to practice law in Florida. Should said Peter Pflaum violate the provisions of this order, he shall be assessed a fine of $300 per violation which shall be taxed upon MOTIONS of any party or by the court’s own initiative. Continued violations may be punishable by contempt and may result in incarceration”
(b) Peter Pflaum denies as not germane 12/14/05 motion for sanctions for failure to comply with the Court's orders (filed in companion defamation case);(c) Peter Pflaum denies as not germane 2/7/06 motion for sanctions for failing to follow the Court's orders and contacting THOMAS PFLAUM and LEANNE PFLAUM IN regular order to appeals and issues not in the jurisdiction of this court; Peter Pflaum has charged since September 2005 that Judge Toby Monaco is grossly prejudiced and biased and should recuse himself in line with the code of judicial ethics.
This action is a clear unconstitutional continuation of an enterprise to defraud and blackmail the defendant by denial of his right to publish the conspiracy to defraud him of his inheritance and seek legal help. Thomas and Leanne Pflaum have planned, and admitted to a illegally taking all of the estate of Melanie Pflaum and have stolen Peter Pflaum’s inheritance. Having done extreme damage they have added insult to injury. They have engaged in a prolonged, four years, of legal attack, harassment, threats, and wild and false claims.
There are no facts to support criminal contempt which occurs when the contemnor actually interferes with the ability of the court to function properly - for example, by yelling at the judge. This is also called direct contempt because it occurs directly in front of the judge. A criminal contemnor may be fined, jailed or both as punishment for his act.
The issue, if any, is civil contempt which occurs when the contemnor willfully disobeys a court order. This is also called indirect contempt because it occurs outside the judge's immediate realm and evidence must be presented to the judge to prove the contempt. 38.23 Contempts defined.—
Following the hearing on January 16th, Bill Hoppe filed an affidavit and proposed order under Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.840.
Mr Hoppe left the time, date and Judge blank on the proposed order since the Court indicated that another judge may hold the hearing.
38.01 Disqualification when judge party; effect of attempted judicial acts.--Every judge of this state who appears of record as a party to any cause before him or her shall be disqualified to act therein, and shall forthwith enter an order declaring himself or herself to be disqualified in said cause. Any and all attempted judicial acts by any judge so disqualified in a cause, whether done inadvertently or otherwise, shall be utterly null and void and of no effect.
Judge Monaco is disqualified as he is a party to the dispute 38.04 Sworn statement by judge holding himself or herself qualified.--Whenever any judge shall enter an order under s. 38.02 declaring qualification to act in said cause, he or she shall contemporaneously therewith file therein a sworn statement that to the best of his or her knowledge and belief the ground or grounds of the disqualification named in the suggestion do not exist.
38.02
Following the hearing on January 16th, Bill Hoppe filed an affidavit and proposed order under Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.840.
Mr Hoppe left the time, date and Judge blank on the proposed order since the Court indicated that another judge may hold the hearing.
NOTICE OF APPEAL to First District Court Of Appeal
Case Number: 1D07-6102
Final Notice from Alachua County
Peter E. Pflaum vs. Thomas and Leanne Pflaum, et al.
Lower Tribunal Case(s): 2004-CP-0770, 2005-CA-2363
IN THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT COURT FOR ALACHUA COUNTY, FLORIDA
Case No. 01-2007-CA-4714
PETER E. PFLAUM, ET AL, Pro Se Plaintiffs, Petitioners
THOMAS and Leanne PFLAUM Esq., ET AL. Richard White Esq., Bill Hoppe Esq., Defendants, Respondents
Petition to the court of appeals the defendants are entitled to mandamus relief Petition for emergency relief and writ of Prohibition
Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have read the foregoing, and the facts alleged are true, to the best of my knowledge and belief."
Signed_________________________________________________
Labels: Chairman of the board and CEO:
