Professional Documents
Culture Documents
by Joseph Zernik
DN: cn=Joseph
Zernik, o, ou,
email=jz12345@e
arthlink.net, c=US
Date: 2010.05.12
13:56:07 +03'00'
5
Attorneys for Non-Party COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS, INC.
6
7
8
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, WEST DISTRICT
10
20 ~'----~-- ---'I
21
24 II law firm of Bryan Cave LLP, counsel of record for non-partY Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.
25 II ("Countrywide"). I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth in this Second
27 " evidence to support Countrywide's pending motion for monetary sanctions and for other
2 II Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of Bank of America Corporation, and Teresa M.
3 II Brenner, Associate General Counsel for Bank of America Corporation. In the letter Zernik
4 II demands that Bank of America Corporation "mitigate [his] damages" relating to the present
5 II action, and calls for "corrective action." Included in the letter is a purported "press release"
6 II in which Zernik alleges that Countrywide is guilty of "fraud," and accuses the Los Angeles
7 II Superior Court of "elaborate court fraud." A true and correct copy of this correspondence is
9 3. On December 11, 2008, Zernik sent another letter to Mr. Lewis and Ms.
10 II Brenner, along with Timothy Mayopoulos, General Counsel for Bank of America
11 II Corporation, and William J. Mostyn III, Deputy General Counsel for Bank of America
(0
(Xl
(I)
C)I 12 Corporation. In the letter, Zernik claims that he is "a victirri of real estate fraud perpetrated by
I
0-
00
(I) ~ 13 Countrywide Home Loans, Inc." and accuses those involve1d in the present action of
[L III Ol
oJ !: <
oJ :l Z
III r/I It
> - 0
14 "fabricat[ing] court records." Zernik demands a response tb his letter by December 16, 2008.
~ ~ !=
~ oJ
Z Q <
< < U 15 A true and correct copy of this correspondence is attached to this declaration as Exhibit B
~ ~ -<
mm ~
o Z 16 and incorporated herein by reference.
_ :E
til 0
<
I-
Z
17 4. Countrywide reserves its right to submit further evidence in advance of the
<
Ul
18 II hearing on its Motion.
19 II I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
22
23
24 ~~AMF
J nna Moldawsky
25
26
27
28
SMOIDOCS715392.\ 2
SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION TN SUPPORT OF
MOTION FOR SANCTIONS
V .LIHIHXH
Digitally signed by Joseph
Zemlk
~. JJ
DN: m",Joseph Z€!mik.
). . ~L enlall=jz12345@earthUnk
net,.<,<US
Date: 2008.'2.0il~:09:07
Joseph Zemik DMD PhD ..{)8'()O'
December J, 2008
KENNETH D. LEWIS
Chainnan, Chief Executive Officer, and President
Bank of America Corporation
TERESA M. BRENNER
Associate General Counsel
Bank ofAmerica Corporation
100 North Tryon St
Bank of America Corporate Ccnter
Charlotte, North Carolina 28255
Mr Lewis. Ms Brenner:
My rec.ords show that in early February 2008, soon after your initial decision to takeover Countly\vide, I send you
"ffitten notices describing the c:onduct of Countrywide in COlIrt here in Los Angeles, relative to litigation in
Samaan. v Zemik, SC087400, which started in October 2005, and is still going on today.
Enclosed is a press release dated December 3,2008, titled:
Who's in Control? Countrywide's Involvement in a Dubious Los Angeles Superior Court Case Continues even
afterTakeoverby Bank of America; U.S. Department of Justice has tolerated the runaway LA court in the past 8
years, and thousands (?) are falsely imprisoned by the same court for over a decade, ..
Also enclosed is a letter to various parties, please accept it as addressed personally to you with the demand for
immediate action to mitigate damages, to safeguard my civil rights. to return my borne to my possession, 10 stop
my harassment by Countrywide, and for compensation for harm to me by Countrywide*. .
Plea~e immediately. but no later than Friday, December 12, 200S, 5:00pm inform me ofyourdccision in this
regard.
).~
Joseph Zernik
* Countrywide here denotes Countrywide Financial Corporation (CFC) and all its subsidiaries and affiliates,
jointly and/or severally.
Digitally signed by
Joseph Zt!mik
"'::l.. IJ
DN: cn=Joseph Zernlk,
) ,. ~l-.. .email=jZl234SIfi<>arthlin
.k."etic~US
Darc: 2008.12.03'
07:U:57 -08'00'
PRESS RELEASE
Title;
Who's in Control? Countrywide's Involvement in a Dubious Los Angeles
Superior Court Case Continues even after Takeover by Bank of America;
U.S. Department of Justice has tolerated the runaway LA court in the
past 8 years, and thousands (1) are falsely imprisoned by the same
court for over a decade...
Subtitle:
Defendant calls for the highest priority action by the Obama administration
regarding the collapsedjustice system of Los Angeles county..,
fu1:Qy;
Samaan v Zemik stems from a dispute over a real estate transaction, entered by the
parties in 2004 for purchase of Zetnik's Beverly Hills residence by Samaan, • She was 8
straw buyer, and everything sfart,i1g with herPre-qualification Letter and her Loan
Applications end continUIng in the lawsuit that was filed e year later was part of an
elaborate series of frauds, "states Zernlk. Indeed, an opinion letter by nationally
acclaimed fraud expert Robert Meister shows that the signatures on both the
prequalification letter and the loan applications were forged. Claims of such fraud and
other instances of fraud by Samaan, by Countrywide, and by the LA Superior Court,
were made by Zemik in court papers throughout the litigation. Regardless, on August 9,
2007 Judge Jacqueline Connor· best known for derailing the Rampart tnal in 2000-
held a summary jUdgment hearing, and rendered summary jUdgment in favor of.
Semaan. Zernik was required to sell the propertyto Samaan fbr over $1.8 million.
However, to this date, thatjudgment has never been entered. "Judge Connor and
Samaan's counsel (Sheppard Mullin) engaged in a convoluted fraud regarding the entry
of the jUdgment. Therefore, there was never a valid effectual jodgmentin this case". A
case with no jUdgment leaves Zernik exposed to unending litigation.
~Had there been a valid enteredjudgmenf claims Zemik "It would have been the
foundation of Pasternak's appointment." Instead, court transcripts show that while
claiming to appoint Pasternak Receiver for execution of the judgment, neither Judge
Segal nor counsel for Samaan recognized the judgment as valid. Accordingly, the
judgment was never referenced as the legal basis for the appointment, neither was any
section of the code. "Judge Segal and Bamaen's counsel, in collusion with Pasternak,
iSSUed, but never entered, a fraudulent appointment order", says Zerhik "had there beeh
a valid judgment and a valid appointment, Pasternak would have issued a Writ of
Execution, and with that, he could have filed a genuine grantdeed. And had this been a
legitimate transfer of title by the court, Pestemak would have given me the money no
later than 30 days from the date of the sale, as required by law".
Zemik had moved out in November 2007, as was his plan ever since 2004, but also
under threat of use of force by JUdge Segal and David Pastemak. Samaan began
occupying the Zernik's residence in December 2007. Later, Zemik found out that
Pasternak filed a fraudulent grant deed transferring the ownership of property to
Samaan. James Wedick, a veteran FB~ agent and acclaimed fraud expert (best known
for his role in the probe where six members of Congress were found guilty oftaking
bnbes in 1981), confirmed the fraud in the execution of the grant deed by David
Pasternak, purportedly on behalf of the LA Superior Court.
In late January 2008, since he had notreceived any proceeds from the purported
escrow, Zemik brought a motion for the court to distribute to him his equity which
purportedly was he'ld by Pasternak following the safe of the property to Samaan. Judge
Friedman denied the motion and instructed Zemik never to bring such motion again or
face sanctions.
In court papers Zernik claims that the elaborate court fraud in this case was based on
fraudulent records produced by Countrywide, where Samaan's husband was a "loan
originator". Indeed Countrywide has regularly appeared in this case - represented by Bryan
Cave, LLP. tn papers filed in court, Countrywide routinely referred to itself as "Non-Partyt', but
the court interchangeably designated Countrywide as ·Plaintiff', "Defendanf, "InteIVenot,
"Cross-Defendanf, and more. "Fraud in court by Country't,/ide is not unusual at alf claims
Zemik "It was their routine aft over the U. S. The only unique feature here was the coflusion
by the court. Judge Friedman threatened to jail me if I ask his friend Sandy [Sandor Samuels
- formerly Chief Lega! Officer of Countrywide and President of Bet TZedek] anytilfng about
this fraud n. Indeed, a 72 page March 2008 opinion by U.S. District Court in Texas Judge
Boome rebuked Countrywide's legal practices in his court, and in courts around the U.S.
Since JUly 2008, Countrywide no longer exists as an independent entity. Control of
Countrywide is now by Bank of America, following a January 2008 stock market crash of the
Countrywide share, prompted by exposure of its legal practices in a Pennsylvania court.
'1I\Iflat took place in the Pennsylvania court is a Cllild's play in comparison n says Zemik, «And
it is not clear at all that Bank of America even knows what Countrywide is doing in Los
Angeles, even today". At present Bryan Cave, LLP refuses to disclose whom they represent.
•Judge Teny Friedman issued efraudulent notice for a November 21, 2008 proceeding,
where he concealed Countrywide's participation. This is no exception, • says Zemik "Judge
Connor and Judge Seg8! did just the same. There is no way t6 explain this as a tmecourt
case" says Zernik. "Does Terry Friedman, have an assignment order? Does he·/J8ve any
authority in the case at af/? And for that matter, did Judge Segal have an assignment order?
Did Judge Connor have one? Was the November 21, 2008 notice; issued in the name 0'
Clerk Clarke an authentic Superior Court notice? Is the case as a whole, 8 true case of the
Califomia Superior Court system? How is the court allowed to deny me for the fourth year in
a row access to my own litigation records? How could Samaan file papers for the
November 21 hearing, be deSignated 'Post-judgment Motion", when neither she nor the
court have ever acknowledged the August 9, 2007 judgment? The Presiding Judge of
the Court, the Clerk of the LA Superior COlJrt, their in-house attomeys and the outside
counsel they retained are refusing to answer any questions regarding this case for half a
year now. The court is taking the Fifth ... 'f Inl;leed, both the Register of Actions, and also
the online Case Summary indicate that judgment in this case is still pending.
"In fact, it is an Enterprise-track case" says Zemik"1f reflects comJption of the eMl division of
LA Superior Court that is the mirror image of eomJption of the crimina! division documented in
great detail in the Rampart scandal investigations. How could anybodyexpecfanylhing else?
fUsthe same judges 8tler all... " Indeed, th~ protagonist- Jacqueline Connor - is one and
the same in both cases. The Blue Ribbon Report of the Rampart s.candal (July 2006),
showed that thase who were confirmed innocent in the initial Rampart scandal investigatiOn
by the Board of Inquiry (1998-2000), but had been falsely convicted and imprisoned by the
LA Superior Court were still falsely imprisoned in 2006. Most likely they number in the
thousands, and some of them also had confessions extracted through torture. Such crimes
were called "heinous", and "characteristic of the most repressive dictators and police
states"**". But the2006 report described in great details that LAPD, DA prosecutor'S, and LA
Superior Court judges were blocking the release of the victims of such <;:rirnes for ~most a
decade.
"TIle LA County Superior Court is still holdihg thousands of peop/o fa/sely imprisonecf
concludes Zemik • Most of fflem are likely to be black and minorities. It undermines any
claim of legitimacy by government in this country. The new administrotion must not 1m
this stand!"
FOOTNOTES;
Countrywide here denotes Countrywide Financial Corporation, Inc, and any and all its subsidiaries and
affiliates, jointly an<j/or severally.
All referenced materials, including court records and correspondence with FBI and US DOJ can be
found at; http://inproperir1la.CQml. Listed Below are some 1)f the specific key references.
ENvin Chemerinsky. today Dean, irvine Law School, in: 57 Guild Pract. 121,2000
REFERENCES;
1) b.tt.iW.ilJ.P.I9.Ps.rL'1!.~8-11-3Q..-queslions{o-presiding-iudge-&-clerk-s.Qdf November 30, 2008
LeUer by defendant Zemik to Presiding Judge Czuleger and Clerk Clarke of LA Superior COlirt.
2) http://inproperinla.comlQ7-12-17-opinlon-letter-lraud-inilranl-<leeds-s.pdf Wedick's opinion letter re:
Pasternak's Grant Deed.
3) htto;l/inproperinla.com/04-09-07 -opinion-letter-fraud-in-otegualificaion-ietter.S,pdf Meister's opinion
letter in re: Samaan's pre-qualilication letter.
4) hltp:llinproperinla. comJ04 -09-27-opinlon-lctter"!raud-in-loan-applicationS=ljigna lure-s,Pdf Meister's
opinion letter in re: signatures on Sarnaan's loan applications with Countrywide.
5) htto:l!inproperinla.com/04-D9~27-d0c-40-sarnaan-fraudulent-loan-applications-s.pdf Detailed review
of frauds in Samaan's Joan applicalions with Countrywide in records filed in U.S. District Court.
6) I1ttp:llinptQ.Q.~rinla.coml04-.10-26-oplnion-letter-countrywide-underwriting-1etter-ocl-~
Meister's opinion letter in re: fraud in Countrywide's underwriting leiter.
7) !l!!P.:llinproperinla.coml04-10-25~0c-45-countrywidecfraud-contracl-record.pdf U.S. District Court
filingdescnbihg the fraud in Countrywide's real.eslate contract record.
8) http:/rmproperin'a.com/Q4-10:26~o~countrywide-fTaud-underwritinq-letter,pdfU.S. District
Court filing describing the fraud in Countrywide'S underwriting letter. .
9) hllp:/linproperinla.coml07-08-09-judgment&order-<l@l1tinq-sllmmaryjudgmenl-s.pdf Augus19,
2007 Judgmenl by Judge Connor, rendered but never entered, and a corresponding order thet
served as the basis for the fraud by the court.
10) http://inproperinla,corrl108-09-08-conqressional-assistance-S.pdf Correspondence with FBI and
U.S. Dept of· Justice.
11) http://inproperinla.coIl1/0B-06-03~ enla I-of-access-book-of-iudg01enl-i~-mccoy-letters-s .pdf
Presiding Judge's refusal to answer regarding existence of judgment in (Samaan v Zemik).
12) hl.!P-:llinproperinla.com/oo-OQ-Oo-la-sup-ct-register-of-agions-sustain-08-11-14 -certified-s.Qdf
November 14, 2008 Register of Actions in Samaan v Zemik (SC087400)
13) !l!!P.:i/inproperinla.comlQ!U.1:.30-case-summary-,s.p9.f November 30, 2008 Case Summary in
Samllan v.Zemik (SC087400)
14) http; llinproperinla....com/OQ-QO..OO-rampart-blue-ribbon-rei!iew;f1anel-2006-report.QQf Slue Ribbon
Report of 2000, describing the failure to release lhose falsely imprisoned In LA County as part of
the Rampart scandal.
----------CON:.rACT-;-·---- - - - - - - - - - - - . - - - - - - - - - -
Dr Joseph Zemi:<
Tel: 310 435-9107
Email: jz12345@earthlink.net
.Joseph Zemik DMD PhD
Fax: (801) 998-0917 Email: jz12345@earthlink.net
RE: 1) Fraudulent conveyance of title and real estatefraud on real property commonly known as 320
Souih Peck Drive, Beverly Hills,.California,90212, 2) Samoan v Zernik (SC089400) fraUlfulent
litigation at the Los Angeles Superior Coort of the State ofCalifornia, 3) Racketeering in the Lus
• Page217 Novembet28,2008
Angeles Superior Court, 4) Thousands of innocent people fal"CIy imprisoned in Los Angeles County,
California.
I had no background and no fomlal training in the .law, economics, banking or mortgage lending, and yet by
Januaw 2007, I figured out the business mooel of Countrywide and the nature of Angelo Mozilomld Sandor
Samuels' fuuJduleht c.onduct sufficiently we/! that 1 filed complaints with the FBI, and then also with Banking
Regulators such as Office of Thrift Supervision and Office of Federal Trade Commission. r c1airnedthat
CoUiltrywide was involved in massive fraud against the U.S. Government and the American tax-payer.
By March 2007 I was able to come up v.'ith initial rough estimates, which indicated potential liability to the US.
Government in the hundreds of billions of dollars (in retrospect - a conservative estimate). r also wrote a series of
open letters to the Board of Directors of the f louse ofJustice - Ikt Tz.edek. I warned them that an organimtion
that purports to be the "House of Justice" must never allow Sandor Samuels to be the President.of its Board of
Directors. 1warned them that he was personally involved in fraud against me, and that tens ofthousands of
families would lqosc their homes as a result of his business activities (in retrospect - a conservative estimat.e). Bet
Tze<lek Board of Dircetors never responded to my alarming messages. But C-ountrywide, Sandor Samuels, and
Angelo Mozilo did. They retained Bryan Cave, LLP, to harass me, to retaliate against me, to intimidate me, and
[0 supervise the perversion ofjustice under the guise of litib>ation in the Los Angeles Superior Court.
On J nix 6_ 2007 slIch campaign was initiated with an ex parte appearance, for a gag order against me in the dllfk
courtroom of Judge Jacqueline Connor, who remained in chambers - nowhere to be seen - with no recogni7..abJe
clerk of the court in attendancc.
By mid- 2007 and more so by the beginning of.f008 r figured out the business model ofthe Los Angeles
Superior Court sufficiently well that 1 understO<Xi that Samoan v Zemik (SC0874fJO), in fact never was a true
case of the Superior Court oflhe State ofCalifomia, but instead, a case of the "Enterprise Track" of the· Los
Angeles County judiciary, designated as sll<;h by Judge Jacqueline Connor even before the complaint was filed.
r graduaUyleamed more about Sustain, the Los Angeles Superior Court's computer system, realizing that such
system Was quintessential for the operations oftile Enterprise in the fann it is manifested today. 11lis system was
procured and installed arOUild 198~, out of compliance and in violation ofthe law, by a company by the same or
similar name (Sustain or Sustained), which is solely controlled by the Daily Journa~ the largest legal newspaper
in Los Angles, a' fact that is apparently trnrecognized in the legal community. Around the same time. the
Honorable Ronald George, today Chief Justice of the California Supreme COllrt, held variQus leadership
positions it! the Los Angeles Superior Court
B. Beyond Real Estate Frauds - the Rampart Scandal
In recent rnbnths, I tried to better understand the scope ofopcrationsofthe Enterprise beyond real estate and
other litigation frauds, and the 1,!nique position ofJudge Jacqueline Connor relative to organiz..ed crime in Los
Angeles. I studied the history ofthe Rampart scandal (1998-2000),euphe1nistically named the Rampart-Area
Corruption Incident. The Blue RibhonRcview Pnncl report (July 2006), makes it ablUldantly clear that the
activities characteristic of that scandal were never limited to the Rampart area, and were and probably still are
endemic, not an isolated incident at all.
Furthermore, I soon realized what the main goal was of the 8lJtbors ofthat report: First - to document what they
called the "suhcult ofcriminality toletated in tlte raflks' ofthe LA County justice system- and second, to
document how suchjustice system is preventing the release from long tenn false imprisonment ofthe thousands
of people, who were repeatedly confiffi1cd by several successive investigation committees as innocent but framed.
Even today, ten years after the scandal was exposed, nobody knows the exact scope of it.
Erwin Chemerinsky, today FOlmding Dean,]rvine Law School, described it already in 2000 as follows:
"Any analysis of the Rampart scandal must begin with an appreciation of the heinous nature
of what the officers did, This is conduct associated with the most repressive dictatol'$ and
police states, •
And David Burcham, Dean of the Loyola Law School, with Catherine Fisk wrote in 2000:
•...Judges tried and sentenced a staggering number of people for crimes they did not commit.
How could so many participants in the criminal justice system have failed either to rectY;.lnize
• Page4r7 November 28, 2008
C. The court's case management system as the enabling tool of the Enterprise.
My reading of the Blue Ribbon Review Panel is that the panel, like all invest.igation committees before it,
and like the public at large in LA County, were dellied access to public records that are the Books of Courts
of LA County Superior COllrt. Such public Records, are critical for the safeguard of the integrity ofthe
courts. However, such Book of Court are since 1985 implemented in Sustain, and off limits to the pubic a
mass-scale routine and continuous abuse of civil rights of all who live in LA County, by the LA County
Court itself. Such abusc is tolerated by the U.S. Department of Justice, who fails to perfoffil its duties.
I also believe lilat the jack of access to such public records is a main handicap in the operations of the oOice of the
Overseer ofcivil rights in LA, U.S. Judge Gal)' Feess, appointed pursuant to the Consent Decree of 2001. My
reading of the reports was that by 2004 he \-vas trying, unsuccC$sfully to establish acce..% to such data ba..'C"S, and
hi.. demands ignored by the LA COlmty justice system Needless to say, Tbelieve that the Overseer, in his seven
years in office., never freed even one singte person ofthe thousands who are falsely imptisoned.
Therefore, the failure of the U.S. Department of Justice to enforce the basic civil right fur Books ofCourt that are
Public Records, free for the public to inspect and to copy, also paints u.s. law enforcement agencies as impotent
in LA O:mnty - since they cannot enforce the Consent Decree that was the outcome of the yielding of the City of
LA to the U.S. Government in 2001.
The proposed action -,- take-over ofcontrol of the LA County Superior Court's computers by Federal, Agencies, is a
relatively simple task. Jt was practiced repeatedly in recent months anytime the U.S. Government took over any major
failing financial iru.1itulion. Surely there ate units fully prepared in Department oft11e Treasury. It is all olX--'tdtion that
can be accompli.<;hed ovemight.. ,at minimal risk and cos~ and with miijor positive impact on the life of individual and
the luk oflaw' ioLA County.
D. lJnanswered Questions
I) LA Superior Court
1have been denied access to my own Utigationrecordsin SuStain throughout this purported litigation., and I bold
that had I been allowed access to Sustain, none of it could ever have bappened.
Since June 2008, the office of Presiding Judge ofthe Los Angeles Superior Court, Stephen Czlileger has been
refusing to answer the simplest questions:
• Is Sarnaan v Zernik (SC087400) a true case of the California Superior Court?
The simplest answer would have wen to allow me access through Sustain to Ike Books of
Court. the Index ofAll Cases.. Calendar ofthe Courts. etc. Thai is still denied
• Is tbere or isn't there an entered, effectual Aug 9,2007 Judgment in Samaan vZernik?
1was robbed q(my homepurportedly pursuant to such judgment, But it is obviollS that no
such valid effectualjudgment exists.
• Is there or isn't there 8 judge duly assigned to SamRan v Zernik ?
Jud..r;e Terry Friedman still }u)ld~ thefiZe. and continues his racketeering/rom the bench
2) Martin Berg - Da;]y Journal, and ROllakl GeIJrge - Chief Just;ce of the California Supreme Gourf
Mr Martin Berg, Editor of the Daily J()urna~ and the Honordble Ronald George, ChiefJustiec, California
Supreme Court, have failed to respond as well. The questions addressed to them was and is:
• What was/is your role in the desigo, inslaUatioli, maintenance of Sustain in LA Superior Court?
-Do you hold tbl; operation of Sustain, as seen today, in compliance \\ith the Jaw?
• Do you t'Onsider that a public disclosure on your part in this mafterls required?
• Page 5f7 November 28, 2008
~
"'v"IIly>lgnodbyJ<><opnZ,mJlt
[1N~~l-t'mtk..
) •~ .:;:-/l1'J4S4ll<""...."""""
o.,~e: 100$.1 t.18 1"':.S"~ ·()i'W
.Joseph Zemik
, Copies of the grant deeds produced by.Att David Pastemak,former president of House of JuStice - Bet Tzedek.
purportedly approved by the LA Superior Court, and then filed in the·office of RegistrartRecorder, can 'be viewed at
http://www.inprot>erinla.comlO7-12-17-oplnion-!etter-fraud-in·want-deeds-s.Qdf
The fraud in such actions was confirmed by an opinion letter of Veteran FBI agent, James WOOicl<, commended bytheU-s
Congress, the U.S. Attorney General,and the Director of the FBI, for his contribution to stemming public COmJption in
Califomia government.
CC:
James WediCk
Judiciary Committee of the U.S. House ofRepresentatives
Judiciary Conunittee ofthe U.S. Senate
Office of President Elect
Office {)fVice President Elect
H .LIHIHX3:
. D~t~ly ~Qned
. by JoH-ph a,ttik-
ON;cnoJc •• ph
~." Zcrnlk,..
) . ~/_ .....6'*'2345..
tJ!th1tnk.~t;
(aUS
Dale: 1OQ8.12:11
.Joseph Zemik DMD PhD 11);J?;J6..oe'OO'
. 1 _Reports pertainIng to "recreated lett~rS' filed as eVlde~ce, by Cou.ntryWide in Pennsylvania court. ..' .
htlp:/finpropennla.coml08-04c.Q2"-us-dlst-et-la·1-requeSl·JudIClal·notice-att·fjn~.Judge·bohm-recreated..fetters·s.pdf·
A. NOTICES
L Please Take Notice: Harassment and Intimidation bv CountrywIde continues eventodav.
Having had rio business with CountryWide, and initially not even knowing about
Countrywide' s involvement in the case, it took till December 2006. before I discovered the
fraud and requested directly ftom MrSandor Samuels and Mr Angelo Mozilo to stop it,
which they refused to do.
Instead, Countrywide started Olt July 6. 2007 a campaign of harassment andint-imidation.
Sand{)r Samuels dec)aredhimself"Parly ofinlerest in the case in early 2008~ BtyanCave,
LLP~ was retained to represent COimtIywide, and ~uch counsel started· appearing in this case
on arcgular basis, without any defined party designation. As it turned out; several of the
jUdges of the LA Superior Court were <;Usa Mr Samuels' personal friends.
I trust that BOA would never knowingly continue in such conduct as took place under
previous leadership of Cotmtrywide. I am eager to bring this sordid tale to an end and move
on with my life. Therefore I am again \vriting to notice you and demand your attention to
this serious matter, now under your watch.
flooked forward to the takeover by BOA, sinee Iexpeeted it to be tbeend·of my
harassment and abuse. I therefore also sent Ms Brenner, Mr Lewis, Mr Mostyn Hl, and
others on the Boardpersonal notices in early Febroary1008; alerting you to the situation in
this matter, and requesting that you take eareofthis matter as soon as change ofconttolwas
completed.
In response, I received a non·specific letter,dated Feb 18.2008, signed by Regina Parker.
staffofthe Chairman's o'fficc.i
2. Please Take Notice: Currentdintradietions regar.ding identity o{couflSel (ot C01Jnt!lrwide,
whichmlistbe feso/vet!
And once the change.of control Was· completed, harassment and abuse continued, just as
before, under the guise 'Oflegalacclon in LA Superior Court. . .
lwould stin Hketo believe thatwhat is taking place in recent months ,is don~ without your
knowledge, and there were gOod feaS:On to su:Spectso, because the court, among its most- .
recentftauds, was again trying to hide the involvement of COUritrywide, by deleting the list of
parties and counsel from formal eourt notice,s, out of compliance and in violation of the law.
Thereforc~ at the end of last week I caHedtheoffices bfMrMayopoulosandotherS in the
Legal Depart:ni.ent. in an attempt to con:f1rtn whether those who represented themselves as
CQunsei for DOA, while going on with racketeering in the eourtroom in LA - Art John
Amberg andlenna Mbldawsky, bfBryanCave, LLP- are indeed authorized by BOA.
Indeed,. your Legal Department had no knowledge· of engagement ofBiyan Cave for
representation ofBOA inthis matter. Instead~ your Legal Department mstI1.lcted me that only
Mr Todd Book ofCountrywide Legal Division was authorized toiepresentBOA in this
matter. Your legal departmentalsoert'ooeoUsly noted that there was.pending matter-
2 LeUer by Regina Parker, dated Ft:b 1'8, 2008. Offoce Qr Bank of Nneik;a Chair;
http:lrmproperinla.comf68-02-1g.,boa-respolise~fTorri,oflice-:Of.chair.to-letter.re-countiywide-s.pdf
• Page 31102 December 11, 2000
c. Please Take Notice: Disqualification/recusal of Judge John Segal, prior to that, directly
involved Countrywide. 1n his recusal statement JJudge Segal claimed that Countrywide
was "merely a w'itness"in this case. But elsewhere in the same statement, Countr)'vride
was once designated Defendant, and another time yet another party designation.
d. Please Take Notice: Judge Segal, who held thecoUlt me
in this case from October 5,
2007 to December 4. ~-o07. and acted as presiding judge for all purposes; never had the
case duly assigned t(l him by order ohhe Supervising Judge, as required by law,
e. Please Take Notice: Judge Allan Goodman, who held the court file in this case from Sept
I I, 2007 to Oct 3, 2007, eventually recused citing his ".• longstanding t;/ose personal
relationship willI tll·eGeneral Counselo/Counlrywide 4" - Sandor Samuels.
f. Please Take-Notice: Judge Goodman, too, had no assignment order to this case.
g. Please Take Notice: Judge was first disqualified for a cause in open courton July 12,
2007, and the causes listed mostly referred to her treatment of Countrywide in the court,
beyond preferential - out of compliance and in Violation of the law. She deceitfully
ignored the Disqualification for a Cause,ruling it "vas an untimelyPeremptol)' Chanenge~
h; Please Take Notice: Judge Connor was disqua:Iified for a cause a second time on Sept 10,
2007, agaitl,- roUGh ofthe Statement of Disqual i fication referred to her treatment of
Countrywide in court.
l. Please Take Notice: On Sept 11, 1007., a day after her second disqualification fora cause,
and. teCusal, Judge Comiot dooeitfully entered a minute order of a fictitious hearing that
was never heard~d a ruling that wasnev~rruled,to the effect that there was no fraud in
Countrywide's fraudulent subpoena productionS.
j. Please Take Notice: Judge COMor,too, had no assignment order to this case.
k.. Please Take Notice: [appeared before each and every one of these judges with a request
that they notice me oftheirassignmcntorder to establish their jurisdictional authority. All
denieq such rcquest&. . .
1. Please Take Notice: rappe~ several times before Supervising Judge Rosenberg with a
request that he duly issue Assignment Order to judges presiding in this case, as required
by law,but he denied, all such requests. ..
3 JUdge Segal's fra udulent RecusalStatement can be viewed at pages -183- at seq ofthe compiled minute orders of
$amaan v Zernlk (page number 4#,. refers to number al·~ right of each page of the record). Such statement opened with
a fraudulent claim: 'Although judgment was entered on the complaint in lhisaction "afore this action was assigned to
the und ersigned judge... '. In fact even today, tho office· pf Presiding Judgo and the Offioo of the Clerk ofthe Court
refuse to certify the eXistence cif an entered jUdgment in this case, and also refuse to certify the non-exiSlenteOf
entered jUdgment In this case. The true facts in this ma'tt&r are that LA County Supl9rior Court 01) ionger keeps a Baok
ofJudgments (either electronic or paper-based), in violation ofthe law, and also in violationofits own L06alHules of
Coort.
~:llinproperinla.COmlOO-O~la-sup:ct"D1inut~rders-electronio-ca~-lile-08-11-14~fulI~rtir-$~,pdf.
JUdge Goodman ReclIsalstafement",...ambe vlewedcat page-9S- et seq (jf records.hnked In3) above..
$ Fraudulent minute order entered l:lyJud.ge Connor tlrJ Sepi 11, 2007. after disqualification and recusel Or:lsel1t10. '2007,
purporting to reoord.a fictitious hearing ahd fictifiousrulJngthat fouoo·nofraud in Couhtrywide'ssubpoenarecords; pages-
81- of ~rds linked in 3) above
• Page 5112 December 11 , 2008
4. Please Take Notice: No active litigatwnand!or pending nuztters ,exist bv Zernik against
BOA/COWl1lVwide at present in either St~ of CaJifnrma .orCl..:.({. court... .contrary to what
BOA waS probably misleadinglvinfonned.
I repeatedly heard it stated by phone by individuals in your Legal Depart:n:i.ent that I was
involved inlitigalion agdinstCuuntrywide and/or Bank of Arnerica. Such are false
statements that I wanted tooorrect.
Please be infonncd that currently there is no valid litigation by Joseph Zemik against Bank
of America and/or its subsidiary Countrywide Home Loans, Inc in either California
Superior Court or in U.S. District COllrt:
a) Samatin v Zernik (SC087400) was all along an "Enldrprise Case" of the Judiciary, and
not a genuine California SUperior Courtcase, as indicated by the evidenee. The office of
Presiding Judge and the Office of the Clerk. of the Court, as well as their counsel refuseto
answer any questions on th.issubject in recent months, in fact confinning such designation
ofthis case. Had the case been a true Superior Court Case, no valid CHL litigation would
have been in existence either, sin.cc CHL corruptly assumed the designation of "Non-
Party", under which the Judges allowed it to bring actions against Zcmik,butdcnicdZcrriik
the right to bring actions against CH1. Such obviously could norbe validlitigation ofany
US. court system.
kJ Zernik v Connor (2:2008CV015SOJ Litigation in U.S. District Court, LA, was
invalidated from day one, when thepro sa clerk refused to accept and-sign valid summons,
and instead, In violation of the Rules (jfCOUi1,..utsisted puproducing and signing hiSQ\vn
summohS - which were defective; When Z:ernik caughttbis dishcmesty,and tried to present
thecleik with valld slirritnohs for the second time, same clerk again tefusedto issue the
vaIidstunmons,~laimingto dQ sounder order of Magistrate Judge Woehrl~. Obviously
litigation with no valid swtUnCinS cannot be vaiid litigation. Other defects noted in this
litigation, .whiCh indicate tlmt Judge Phillips and Judge Woehrle never cons-ideted it true
valid litigation are: .
- Failure to conduct initial case conference
- Failure to list corporate entities as requke by law
- Failure to acljudicate motions.
- Gag order set on aU Zernik's filings incourt.
The most recent scheduledhe.aring in Samaan V Zernik was on November 21,2008, and
there too, CHL appearance was part of fraud by the court, aimed at Obstruction/Perversion
of Justice, In this latestproceediilg, the coUrt sent notice to only 3 parties: Samaan, Zemik,
andCHL. Two other parties were omitted, out ofcomptiance with the law. And em was
added, also out of cC)mpliancewith the .Iaw,and this time was designated as "J)efendant."
To hide the fact that CHL was noticcdas such fraudulent party, the Court used defective
notice fanTIs, and omittc(j the mailing list required by law in valid notice.
For the past year and a half the court .has engaged in such fraudulent litigation practices
relative to Cm...
6.PJease Take Notice: Sham litigation under the designation Samoan V Zernik in the LA
Superior Coy.rl was-and lY the outcome o(ex/etrsive conspiracy by CHL San Rafael
Bral1.ch and its Manager -Maria McLaurin, Counflywide's Legal Divisiott, includingAtt
Sandor Samuels and All Todd Book. Bryan COJle, LLP {counsel (Pr putpd11ed "Noil"C"
Partv~' Counirvwide). Samnan lourpol1ed plai;lti(f) ,.KeshavamlCo.unst!/ for purported
plairiiiffl• .JliiIges CONnor, SegaL FriednulIt, and Rosenberg (pu"'borl~dlv judges in
litigatiOn ofthe California SuperilJr COidtJ. pworfed Court OffICers Da.vidPasfernak,
Gregory 0 'Brien, and others.
A reasonable personrevi~wing,thiscase as ~ ""hole, wOljlq mo$t likely conclude that Judge
Connor participated in the design of this fraud even before the complaint was filed~sitice
the complaint was made to tnatebJudge Coru;lor's fraud on enUy ofjudgment,anU it isnpt.
likely that the attomey inVolved, Jay Steih,was familiar with all the technical details (jfthe
fraud. On the oilier hahd,already in the first proceedinl;, on J3i:n.iary 30,2006, Judge
Connpr was invol~ in extensiveproducljo:n of fraud\;llent litigation records,. for her own
Assigrtrtlent Order (backdated by 3tnonths), for Denmrrer(secretly disposed/voided), and
for Ihitial Case Confe~et'tCe(c()rtducted off the record).
While the jUdiciary was engaging in obstructionJpetversion ofjustice, they were
colltiuuouslyinvoIved in attempts to pufblame on me. From the second' time I came to
c(jurt. at least<>ne sheriff, sometimes t\yQ, and once - a sheriff with a Germahshepherd
were escorting. me everywhere in the cotltt:, asafonn ofharassment.
7. Please Take Notice: UpO;! review bv a ()()ntpetent court it is practiCallv certaIn tltat
various QS(1!!-cJs ofthe· conspiracy in Samaan v Zernik, and in the (ailed TeN estate
tninsadio.n that precedcditils well. be deemed as violation o(multfple-secuoirs of
us.
.C«J;fortlw.Iln:d ti,e Penal codes bv Ihe variOlIs c~conspiratorst incfudingsach
sectwhS where the.vibLatiohS ate counted as Preditated Acts pet RICO- '18 USC §1961"
1968.
--.
a. Conduct that is explicitly listed as Predicated Acts per RICO:
b. Rela1ing to maiffraud - 18 USC§1341
• Page7/12 December 11 , 2008
ti Fraudulent underwriting records as part of wireffax fraud For examples see pages CWi7..fi9:Cw71-89~ In CHL;s
sUbpoena production at·
hftp:J1innrfib@rinla.Cb!l1tb7,.{)2-08=d>Unlrywide--fraUduleril-subpoena"productioh-ci§ Pdf
12. Fraudulent Mclaurin's letter ~nd Declarations;
ht1p;/linproperinlaco!'!V06-11-o9-doc-3a-'-¢OlJDfr:VWide-mClatltiMal$fBledaratiCinsodf
http://inprooerinlaGOm/06-11-00<!oc-3a:.2-count!VWide-mclaurin-:false-declaratiOl1s.pdf
• Page 9/12 December 11 i 2008
2. Demand & Reql1est:P{~ase establish the identity of counsel for Country/wide in matters
pertaining to Jo.seph Zgrnik.
Such counsel must bewiJling to cotnmunicate with me. 1 request that such counsel be an
individual who has not been involved in the racketeering in this case, under previousconttol
uf Cuunlry wide. PI~enutifyme who such cuunsel is. Doing su would allow immediate
resolution of the dispute between Joseph Zernik and Bank of America.. employing the
individuals listed above will not a\low such resolution to move forward, albeit - it is most
likely at the best interest of BOA, Joseph Zcmik. Itrnay al~o be fur Ule benefit of;ill who live
in LA County. if BOA supports steps requested by me below.
3. Demand: Pletl$e immediately withdraw the entire subpoena production or CHL,repudiate
ilas fraudulent on its race, and notive ti,e court and parties accordingly;
Although not every single page in the subpoena production was fraudulent:, the.package as a
whole was designed and organized to deliberately mislead the reader a1)d present the
subpoena as the true history ofSamaan's loans appIicationsand their underwriting.
4. Dt!l11imd: Please immediately withdraw tillY and a/IJJtfll.!./'S tJ!..ed in this ltUitter, which were
generated hI' MarklMcLaurin, COL San Rafael Branch Manager, and notice ihe court
and parties accordinglv.
Such papers are ba~ed em frauds as detailed above and in footnoted paper filed in court.
5.Demand.~ Pleas'e wit/It/raw llnv and alloff1,OJJers filed bv· eR!, li party with neitlter
desigftlItum nor Iegalstanding from die LA SuperiorCourl'ssham litigation. designated
t
I will fully cooperate with investigative procedures duly instituted in compliance with the
la\-v.
7. Demand: Please issue to Zerhik declaratory statement. to the effect that:
a) BOA will take. immediate action to mitigate damages.
b) BOA will aSsunie responsibility for compensating Zemik for damages resulting froni
the past and present conduct of CHt,
c) BOA, in coordination with Zernik, will employ all necessary .legalll1easures to vacate
any and aU orders, decrees. judgments that appear in the record, and were purportedly
the products of litigation in the Superior C,ourt of California,
d) BOA, in coordination with Zemik, will employ aU necessary .legal measures to remove
,fium the records in the Office of LA County Registrar/Recorder the fi'audulen~ Grant
Deed 13fiJedthere by David Pasternak,Officer of the Court, on behalf of the LA
Superior Court.
e) BOA, in coordination with Zemik, will employ all necessary legal measur~ to
:immediately return thc property commonly known as '320 South Peck Drive, Beverly
Hills, 90212 to Zetnik's possession, and to compensate him for the unlawful
occupancy of his property since November 2007, and any and all damages related to
the use of the property or its condition vpon repossession.
f) BOA will ente.r ntlgot~ations with Zetnik inre:compensation for any inoidental
damages andreso]utionofthedispute stemming from Samaan v Zernik.
8. Request: Pteaseloin andfullv support requests already advanced by Zernik that the
Judiciary Committees ofboth House and Senate initiate in the upcomiltgSl!Sswn oru;s~
COngreSS urgent hearin.gs regarding: ..
a) Ongoing failure oftheju(;ticesy~tc'm in LA C'..ounty, from the Rampart to
Countrywide.
b) Wide-spread pUbl1ccorrupti(}n and wide..-spreadabuse ofcivil rights in LA Cooory;
c)' Actions required in attempt to restore an adequate justice syst'effi in LA County
d) Actions required to enforce theBiIlof~ghts,as well as Common Law rights fo.t
access to judicial Records per Nixon v Warner Communications.
e) Actions require4 to affect immediate release of an those who were confmned as
innocent> but are falsely imprisoned in LA County since before the Rampart scandal
(1998).
13 Fraudulenl g~nt deed wasfifed on Dec 17. 2007 by David Pastemak. without ever issuing Writ of Execution or Abstra<;t of
Judgmenl The fraud In SUd'l GraJ'ltDeed was confirrtled in notariZed opinion lelter of veteran FBI agent, JamesWOOick~,
decorated by U.S. Cohgress, Far Director, and U,S. Attorney Geneml _ Please view at
httpJ6nprOOerinla.<;:omf07-12-17-opinion-letter.fraud-in:granl-deeds-s. pdf .
• Page 11/12 Decem~r 1·1, 2008
C. CONCLUSION
I h9ld th.at in due course itwould be fully recognized that Countrywide and some at the LA
Superior Court were the dominamforcesin.organized crime in LA County in recent decades.
Thatmuch can be gleaned even from the little evidenced in this letter. Such conditions are.
inherently tied to the installment of a fraudulent case management system at the LA Superior
Court circa 1985, and the concomitant elimination of Books of Court that are public records, as
required by law l4 . I hope that BOA recognize such{acts and take appropriate actions, as part of
its control of Countrywide,and as part of its corporate responsibilities~
lhope that this dispute will be expediently concluded with efforts for the benefit of all those who
liVe in LA County, and particularly for tho~ whose basic rightS and Ii berties w~reabused in
re.cent decades by the court and police. With the passage oftiinc such goal became itnperati~
fur me, since it was the only explanation J could fmd for thisefltlrely crazed cond,uct of senior
managemenl in Counlrywid~. Jutl:g~~ u[lheSupenur Cuurt, anti: COUllScl from somt:: oflhc::
large.st law turns in the world - that it was aU meant to bring about the release o{those who were
falsely imprisoned and were and are the weakest and most vulnerable of all.
1hOpe that all issues related to Sainaan vZernik be expediently resolved in a manner that would
also be hailed as a prime example f61' the contribution of one of'the.]argest corpOrations in the
U.S. to the resolution ofmajor public policy problems.
Sincerely,
).~i
Joseph Zetnik:
cc:
b. u.s. 'HoOse an.i:! Senate
14 The oo11usion of the <A>urt of Judge Connorsncl CHL In the perversion and obstructi.o!1ofjustice-, the pT"Oduetipn of
fraUdulent trial court litigation records, the centra~ role of the fraudulent ~se management system and the denial of public
llccess to books of oourt,areall fully demonstrated In the Register of Actions~.wf1ereJudge Connor prominently posted on
July 24; 2007 a l10tedeslgnating 'CHL ·REAL·PARnES IN' INTEREST", whiJeCountrywide- even today absurdlydeims to
be 'Non-Party', At the same tii'ne·Judge Connor r~felTed tbrtly daims in d;>urt - th~ .CHl. wasbehinp 1hi$ ii~~Oh as
'C<lnsplratOlial Theory". That note was fraudufently back<lated to the absurd filing ~te of July ~4,20G4 ~ prior to the filing of
the c:omplaint lano my counsel wete denied aceess to any paper or electronic cburtrecords for:almos12 Years. Once '!wa$
allowedlo see copy of the Register of Actions (I am stilideniecHhe right to lnspectsndto copyeYen today), I discovered this
and many other frauds by the court in litigation records. as lseJsewhere documented. After I· documented this p8r!ieular fraud
bylhe OOurt·in papers filed in bOth the SupeiforCouitand in U.S.bislJidC6uit $udi ilbtesdisappeared fromthe Register of
Actions, with no notation. no (lune profuriCOfder. aI\dno notice·topar!ies.
htfp:iflnoroperinla.com/OO"bo-OO.la-sUp-d"register-cif-actions"s.,v"z.adulererations-QO=Page-one-sustain:-s:pdf
In
The overall criminal natute of the conduct of the court this case, and its deliberate engagement in real estate. frauds,
Where L County Is routlnelylisted as first in the U.S., [spest evlde.riced by thefraudulant coveyanceof tiUeon JM.
pro tpertyby David Pasternak, "Re~iV?rolaPPOlnted by tl1a court
htlp:flihpropeiinla.<:omlb7-12 -17~grant"deeds-weClick-s.t)pin·ion-s.pdf
• Page 12/12. December 11 , 2008
CommiUe~s on the JQdiciary, Subcommittees on Oversight and Administration of the Cowts, Senate Banking
Committ~. and the House Fi.nancial Services Committee, Congressman/women representing LA County. This
letter is intended as part ofongoing requests to institute hearings on the tailed justice system ofLA County
Senator Joseph Biden
Senator Barbara Boxer
Senator Russell D Feingold
Senafor Diane Feinstein
Senator Patrick Leahey
Senator Charles Schumer
Senator Christopher Dodd
Reprtlseulalive Xavit:r BeiXfTd
Representative Howard Bennan
Representa~ve Joh~ Conyers Jr
Representative David Drier
Representative Jane Hantlan
Representative Howard McKeon
Represcntative Grace Napolitano
Re~sentatTve Hilda Solis
Represcntlitive Maxine Waters
Representative Drane Watson
Representative Henry Waxman
24 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America and the
State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
25
26
Alexa Kim
27
28
SMOIDOCS715392.1 3
SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF
MOTION FOR SANCTIONS