Victims of Crimes

What You Can Do If You Are a Victim of Crime. You Have Rights. You Can Get Help. Download Brochure

Wednesday, November 12, 2008

Judicial Errors and Omissions by the 18th Judicial Circuit Court, Judge Bonnie M. Wheaton, Chancery, Room 2007

My name is Gardenia C. Hung, M.A., B.A., Lombard resident homeowner, taxpayer, and U.S. citizen at 502 S. Westmore-Meyers Road and Washington Blvd., Lombard, Illinois in DuPage County—I am a Victim of Disaster, Crimes, and Domestic Violence in the Village of Lombard, DuPage County, Illinois USA. I am legally requesting Cash Compensation and Financial Restitution as remedy and relief for the Disaster Demolition of the Lombard Historic Brick Bungalow. As a Victim of Disaster, Crimes, and Domestic Violence in the Village of Lombard, DuPage County, I, Gardenia C. Hung, do hereby petition for remedy and relief, to be compensated in cash for the disaster demolition of the Hung Family Real Estate Property, family documents, business professional files, and State of Illinois Notary Public legal records.

Last Wednesday, November 5, 2008, the Lombard Fire Department demolished my family home, real estate property, family assets, legal documents on file cabinets, as well as professional business equipment, documents, and Illinois State Notary Public legal files at 502 S. Westmore-Meyers Road, Lombard, IL 60148-3028 USA. On Tuesday, November 4, 2008, at 9:00 AM, I requested to remove all the Hung Family documents on file cabinets when Keith Steiskal and the Lombard Police Department, along with Rev. Robert Hatfield, Sandra Hill from the First Church of Lombard United Church of Christ, and Diane Arturi with other Staff from Yorktownship General Assistance were present. I was there in person, able to remove all the Hung Family documents, but I was not allowed to return to the house to pick up anything else that was to be saved before the demolition of the Lombard Brick Bungalow. I was told that I would return to pick up and save what I needed, but, I was sent to the Motel 6 in Villa Park, instead. In the afternoon, Keith Steiskal only allowed (1) one hour, from 3PM to 4PM, to collect all important family items remaining before demolition of the Lombard Brick Bungalow scheduled for Wednesday morning, November 5, 2008.

On Wednesday morning, no one collected the legal documents on file cabinets in my office which included State of Illinois Notary Public legal documents, as well as Mr. Roberto Hung legal documents in a safe, located at the office on the second floor.

Since then, the Village of Lombard, Fire Department and others, are refusing to provide financial remedy and relief to Gardenia C. Hung, who is a Victim of Disaster, Crimes, and Domestic Violence in DuPage County, Illinois, USA.

As a Victim of Disaster, Crimes, and Domestic Violence in the Village of Lombard, DuPage County, I, Gardenia C. Hung, do hereby petition for remedy and relief, to be compensated in cash for the disaster demolition of the Hung Family Real Estate Property, family documents, business professional files, and State of Illinois Notary Public legal records.

For cash restitution and financial compensation, please contact Gardenia C. Hung, Lombard resident homeowner, taxpayer, U.S. citizen, U.S. mailing address at Post Office Box 1274, Lombard, Illinois 60148-1274 USA, Fax: 1-702-925-0527.

Thursday, November 6, 2008

A Constitutional Petition to Compensate the Hung Family for the Demolition of the Lombard Brick Bungalow and the Real Estate Assets at 502 S. Westmor

The family of Mr. Roberto Hung, Lombard resident homeowner, taxpayer, and U.S. citizen, is petitioning full cash compensation for the public use and demolition of private real estate property and family assets, by the Village of Lombard, the Police Department, and the Fire Department in the County of DuPage.

Compensatory cash donations are requested for the Hung Family due to financial hardship, imposed by the Village of Lombard, and experienced by the eldest daughter Gardenia C. Hung. Please mail your cash contribution for disaster roofing water damages, plumbing flooding, and final losses, in care of Gardenia Hung, by mail to Post Office Box 1274, Lombard, Illinois 60148-1274, United States of America.

The Lombard Historic Brick Bungalow was acquired by Roberto Hung on September 2, 1993 through September 2, 1996, with cash retirement funds, IRA money markets, and 401K monies accrued in employment savings through profit-sharing invested at Fel-Pro, Inc. auto gasket company, also known today as Federal Mogul Corporation Sealing Systems, located at 7450 North McCormick Boulevard, in Skokie, Illinois 60076-8103. Fel-Pro, Inc. was managed and family-owned by Lewis C. Weinberg, the Lehman Brothers, Mr. Kessler, and others, along with son David Weinberg and daughter, Barbara Kessler.

After Roberto Hung paid for the Lombard real estate property, he was abused as a resident homeowner, taxpayer, and U.S. citizen. On December 22, 1996, Mr. Hung was injured at home in Lombard after 9:00 PM, before Christmas Day. After recovering from a stroke in 1997, Roberto Hung was throttled and murdered by the respiratory therapist Ben Aguilar at Vencor Northlake Hospital, on June 18, 1998.

Coincidentally, Fel-Pro, Inc., the automotive gasket sealing magnet, known for a wide-range of worker benefits was also sold in 1998, in the amount of $720 million dollars to Federal Mogul Corporation based in Michigan and nation-wide. Ten years later, Mr. Lewis C. Weinberg died, last Thursday, on October 30, 1998, at his Chicago home in Illinois, at the age of 93 years old.

Since Fel-Pro, Inc. was sold in 1997, Mr. Roberto Hung became abused, injured, and eventually murdered, while holding Lombard real estate property, residency, and homeownership in the County of DuPage.

In addition, the Lombard Brick Bungalow was damaged extensively by public use of the Lombard Police Department, the Fire Department, and the Village of Lombard, during the course of municipal services and operations which caused detrimental disaster roofing water damages , plumbing flooding and demolition losses.

On Wednesday, November 5, 2008, the Lombard Fire Department, instigated by Keith Steiskal, and others, demolished the Lombard Historic Brick Bungalow at 502 S Westmore-Meyers Road in DuPage. Now the Hung Family is petitioning for cash compensation and financial remuneration by the Village of Lombard and others who have publicly used the private property owned by the Hung Family.

Forward compensatory cash donations for the Estate of Roberto Hung by mail, in care of daughter Gardenia Hung, directly to Post Office Box 1274, Lombard, Illinois 60148-1274, United States

Friday, October 31, 2008

Before Election Day, Tuesday, November 4, 2008, Stop Demolition of Lombard Brick Bungalow in DuPage County, Illinois USA

Before Election Day, Tuesday, November 4, 2008, Stop Demolition of Lombard Brick Bungalow in DuPage County, Illinois USA

Good Afternoon. My name is Gardenia C. Hung, Lombard resident homeowner, U.S. citizen, as well as Victim of Disaster, Crimes, and Domestic Violence in DuPage County, Illinois, USA. I am responding to your correspondance via Email to support discrimination in fair housing in the Village of Lombard by reporting that I have not received any of the civil court proceedings presented by Howard C. Jablecki on behalf of Keith Steiskal for the Village of Lombard Fire Department. Before Election Day, November 4, 2008, I am requesting your assistance at the Illinois Department of Human Rights to prevent the demolition of the Lombard real estate property at 502 S. Westmore-Meyers Road and Washington Blvd., in DuPage County, Illinois by Court Order of Judge Bonnie M. Wheaton, Chancery Division, Room 2007, DuPage Judicial Center, 505 North County Farm Road, Wheaton, Illinois 60187 and represented by Howard C. Jablecki and Keith Steiskal for the Village of Lombard.

Please note that the Village of Lombard has been trying to harm me and the Hung Family members as Lombard resident homeowners, taxpayers, and U.S. citizens with physical injury, abuse, home intrusions, roofing damages and losses, water damages, disrepair, and stealing by the Lombard Police Department and other intruders without authorization and permission from the Hung Family. These are all examples of violence, heinous hate crimes, and discrimination against myself and the Hung Family members on record for verification int he Village of Lombard, DuPage County, Illinois.

There are other forms of fair housing discrimination which I have reported to the Office of Housing and Urban Development and other government agencies. The Village of Lombard has been excluding the Hung Family from Lombard homeownership rights and abusing each of the Hung Family members at home with violence, crimes, and disasters arranged by the Lombard Police Department, the Carpenters, and other accomplices, on record.

There is evidence of grass burning of the side lawn, burn marks behind the front porch door, burnt bushes, plants, and other forms of heinous hate crimes, such as torn clothing, broken household items, dead aquarium fish by poison with Clorox and left dead floating in the aquarium for me to find, upon return from being out-of-town. Also roofing disaster damages and losses. Attached are photos as proof of discrimination and heinous hate crimes at 502 S. Westmore-Meyers Road, owned by the Hung Family, and arranged by the Village of Lombard Police Department and other accomplices in DuPage County, Illinois, USA.

Please note that Howard C. Jablecki representing the Village of Lombard, has not been providing Gardenia C. Hung copies of the court proceedings nor notifying her about Court Appearances within the legal 14 days allowed by law, in order to obtain an Order for Demolition of the Lombard real estate property owned by the Hung Family.

In addition, Gardenia C. Hung was told in person, instead of by legal notice, about an Emergency Court Meeting without legal Due Notice or Mail Notice for Monday, 27 October 2008, less than 14 days from the court date of appearance, on Tuesday, October 21, 2008, 9:30 AM. Received a Visit from Keith Steiskal, Bureau of Inspectional Services, Lombard Fire Department, 225 E. Wilson Avenue , Lombard , IL 60148 , Tel. (630) 620-5750. Gardenia C. Hung has not received any U.S. mail notice from the 18th Judicial Circuit Court, Judge Bonnie M. Wheaton, Room 2007, DuPage County Judicial Center , Illinois 60187 .

• Keith Steiskal mentions that there is the smell of wood-fire burning around the house and Gardenia C. Hung does not have any firewood burning stove at 502 S. Westmore-Meyers Road , Lombard , IL 60148-3028 .
• Keith Steiskal mentions that the Deed to my Lombard house is going to be transferred and Gardenia C. Hung has not received any legal notice or advise about the legal proceeding.
• Keith Steiskal mentions that the intent is to Demolish the Lombard Brick Bungalow, while Gardenia C. Hung has filed for a Lombard Building Permit to Restore and Preserve the Historic Brick Real Estate Property.

Let it be known that I have been complaining to prevent the demolition of my house on Election Day, Tuesday, November 4, 2008, by the Village of Lombard and Keith Steiskal, in order to stop the enforcement of the demolition of this Lombard real estate property owned by the Hung Family.

Please note that all these statements can be verified by law and are a reality for disrepair, damages, and losses, heinous hate crimes, and discrimination in fair housing, based on facts of evidence, abuse, and disasters arranged by the Lombard Police Department and other accomplices in DuPage County, Illinois, USA. For additional evidence please contact the State of Illinois Victims of Crime Division and the Office of the Attorney General. Attached are photos to show heinous hate crimes and discrimination on record to support fair housing discrimination practices in the Village of Lombard, DuPage County, Illinois, USA.

Sincerely,


Gardenia C. Hung, M.A.
502 S. Westmore-Meyers Road
Lombard, IL 60148-3028 USA

http://www.preservehistoricestate.zoomshare.com http://www.2008damagesandlossescausedbylombard.blogspot.com/


VERIFICATION

Under penalties as provided by law, pursuant to Section 1-109 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure, the undersigned certifies that the statements set forth in this instrument are true and correct, to the best of my ability, so help me God.

Dated: 29 October 2008


Signed by Gardenia C. Hung, M.A. (Reserved Signature)
502 S. Westmore-Meyers Road , Lombard , Illinois 60148-3028 , USA

Executed in the Village of Lombard , County of Du Page , in the State of Illinois , United States of America .

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Stop Demolition on Tuesday, November 4, 2008, Election Day

Gardenia C. Hung requests your intervention to stop the demolition of the Lombard Brick Bungalow at 502 S. Westmore Avenue on Tuesday, November 4, 2008, due to abuse of human rights and constitutional rights, abuse of the legal process, malicious prosecution, no legal notice or mail notice within 14 days for Notice of Demolition at 502 S. Westmore-Meyers Road, Lombard, Illinois 60148-3028.

On Tuesday, October 28, 2008 Gardenia C. Hung received a Notice of Demolition from Keith Steiskal for a court order to allow demolition of the house on Tuesday, November 4, 2008, Election Day.

Last Tuesday, October 21, 2008, Gardenia C. Hung was told in person about Emergency Court Meeting without legal Due Notice or Mail Notice for Monday, 27 October 2008, less than 14 days from the court date of appearance, on Tuesday, October 21, 2008, 9:30 AM. She received a visit from Keith Steiskal, Bureau of Inspectional Services, Lombard Fire Department, 225 E. Wilson Avenue, Lombard, IL 60148, Tel. (630) 620-5750. Gardenia C. Hung did not receive any U.S. mail notice from the 18th Judicial Circuit Court, Judge Bonnie M. Wheaton, Room 2007, DuPage County Judicial Center, Illinois 60187.

I am requesting your intervention in the Village of Lombard, DuPage County, before Judge Bonnie M. Wheaton, at the 18th Judicial Circuit Court in Wheaton, Illinois 60189-0707 to prevent the demolition on Tuesday, November 4, 2008, of the Lombard Historic Brick Bungalow at 502 S. Westmore-Meyers Road in DuPage County, Illinois. I have contacted York Township for General Assistance in care of Diane Arturi, Director, Tel. 630-620-2400, 1502 S. Meyers Road, Lombard, IL 60148 in DuPage County.
Sincerely,


Gardenia C. Hung, M.A., B.A.
Wednesday: 29 October 2008

Enclosure: Notice of Demolition by Tuesday, November 4, 2008


VERIFICATION

Under penalties as provided by law, pursuant to Section 1-109 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure, the undersigned certifies that the statements set forth in this instrument are true and correct, to the best of my ability, so help me God.

Dated: 29 October 2008


Signed by Gardenia C. Hung, M.A. (Reserved Signature)
502 S. Westmore-Meyers Road, Lombard, Illinois 60148-3028, USA

Executed in the Village of Lombard , County of Du Page , in the State of Illinois , United States of America .

Wednesday, September 17, 2008

A Constitutional Anniversary, since 17 September 1787—From a Time Traveler, Then and Now.

U.S. Constitution Day and Citizenship Day

The Constitution of the United States was signed in agreement, two hundred and twenty-one years ago, on September 17, 1787, at the closing of the Constitutional Convention held in Independence Hall, Philadelphia, in Pennsylvania. There were thirty-nine (39) representatives of the states, who signed willingly:

“In Witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed Our Names”.

George Washington, President and deputy from Virginia
John Langdon and Nicholas Gilman from New Hampshire
Nathaniel Gorham and Rufus King from Massachusetts
Wm. Samuel Johnson and Roger Sherman from Connecticut
Alexander Hamilton from New York
William Livingston and David Brearley from New Jersey
Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Mifflin, Robert Morris,George Clymer from Pennsylvania
T’hos. FitzSimons, Jared Ingersoll, James Wilson and Gouv Morris from Pennsylvania
Geo: Read, Gunning Bedford jun, John Dickinson, Richard Basset from Delaware
Jaco: Bromm from Delaware
James McHenry, Dan of St. Thos. Jenifer, Danl Carroll from Maryland
John Blair and James Madison Jr. from Virginia
Wm. Blout, Richd. Dobbs Spaight and Hu Williamson from North Carolina
J. Rutledge, Charles C. Pinckney, Charles Pinckney, Pierce Butler from South Carolina
William Few and Abr Baldwin from Georgia

Attest William Jackson, Secretary

According to a feature article, “Inside the Masons” in the U.S. News and World Report, issued on September 5, 2005, George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, and thirteen (13) of the 39 signers of the U.S. Constitution, were members of the Fraternal Order of the Freemasonry and founders of the new nation, called the United States of America .

Constitutional and inalienable rights inherent in the laws of equal justice, fairness, and equity, drawn by the 39 state representatives, are based upon the Masonic values of the fraternal order for honorable civic-mindedness with “equal justice under the law”, a high regard for learning and progress, and a broad tolerant religiosity. In retrospect, “freemasons helped to give the new nation a symbolic core and a sense of the American civic culture”, as stated by Steven Bullock, historian and leading scholar of the Masonic brethren in America .

Symbols of the Freemasonry have transcended the stonemason guilds for the display of the compass, square, and other signs of the Freemasons—including the Great Seal of the United States which contained Masonic symbols.

The founding fathers, Washington and Franklin, were documented and active members of the Masonic lodges, while Jefferson and Adams were not.

The first President of the United States, George Washington was initiated into Masonry rites on November 4, 1752, at the age of twenty, in the Lodge of Fredericksburg, in Virginia .

The American Revolution was won by patriotic men, united by Masonic ties and religious events.

Benjamin Franklin was a Freemason in the Lodge of Saint John in Philadelphia in 1731. Franklin used his resources and printing presses to promote Masonry, writing pro-Masonry articles, drafting the lodge’s by-laws, and printing the first Masonic book in America.

The U.S. Constitution was drawn by several influential Freemasons—including Washington, Franklin, and Randolph—and by non-Masons John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. The signers of the Constitution were already Masonic brethren and others would become Freemasons afterwards. Although, Madison, Adams, and Jefferson were not Masons, nearly all the signers participated in Masonic lodge activities. David Brearley was active in the Masonic Order in New Jersey. Mr. Brearley supported the Constitution at the New Jersey ratifying convention .

Later, on April 30, 1789, George Washington was sworn as the first president of the United States of America by Robert Livingston, the grand master of New York’s Grand Lodge who administered the first presidential oath of office. General Jacob Morton, a Freemason, was the marshal of the day. General Morgan Lewis, also a Freemason was Washington’s escort. George Washington was the master Freemason of the Alexandria Lodge in Virginia .

More than two hundred years ago, the new nation’s capital was blueprinted in a Masonic plan, designed by the French Mason Pierre-Charles L’Enfant—that is to say, Washington, D.C.

For historical reference, Freemasons practice faith in God, addressed as the “Great Architect of the Universe”. In the Middle Ages, freemasons formed guilds of stonemasons working with free-stone. There were 25 lodges in Scotland during the 17th century, from which 16 became centres of Masonic skills—stonemasonry. The order of Ancient Free and Accepted Masons began in London as the first Grand Lodge, in 1717. During the 18th century, Freemasonry was promoted in Great Britain and traveled to the new nation of the United States in the Americas, Europe, and around the world.

Sources:

The United States Constitution and Fascinating Facts About It, page 30, supplemental text by Terry L. Jordan. Copyright©2005 by Oak Hill Publishing Company.
U.S. News & World Report, page 30, September 5, 2005. Copyright© 2005 by U.S. News & World Report, Inc.
Ibid., pages 30-31.
“The Masonic Lodge and the American Revolution”, Steven Sora, page 118.
McCormick Tribune Freedom Museum, Blueprint for Freedom, What Will You Build?, page 20. The United States Constitution and Fascinating Facts About It. Copyright© 2006 by Oak Hill Publishing Company.
“The Masonic Lodge and the American Revolution”, Steven Sora, page 171.
QPB Dictionary of Ideas. Copyright©1994 by Helicon Publishing Ltd. Originally published in 1995 , in the United Kingdom under the title, The Hutchinson Dictionary of Ideas.

Thursday, August 28, 2008

Great Investment for Sale: Lombard Historic Brick Bungalow

GREAT INVESTMENT FOR SALE

Lombard Historic Brick Bungalow, at 502 S. Westmore Avenue, is located at the corner of Washington Blvd. and Westmore-Meyers Road, one block from Westmore Elementary School and also, one block from St. Pius X Parish School, near the State of Illinois Vehicle License Facility on Westmore-Meyers Road in DuPage County, Illinois, USA.

York Township Parcel No. 06-09-315-038, is under a Deed Trust for the Estate of Mr. Roberto Hung Supplemental Health Care. This Lombard Historic Brick Bungalow was built in 1927 as a residential family home, lot size at 60 ft. X 144 ft., for a total square feet of 8,640.00. The estimated market value is $272.850. It is a Brick Masonry structure with nine (9) rooms, four (4) bedrooms, three (3) full baths, Central Heating and Air Conditioning, two (2) enclosed porches, and a 2-car garage.

The Zees Group Services for Disaster Restoration of the Lombard Historic Brick Bungalow is engaged to improve the Lombard real estate property for sale and investment. We will be selling this Lombard Historic Brick Bungalow at 502 S. Westmore Avenue, one block from Westmore Elementary School and one block from St. Pius X Parish School, near the State of Illinois Vehicle License Facility on Westmore-Meyers Road.

Please contact Gardenia C. Hung, M.A., legal resident homeowner in Du Page County, Illinois, USA. I have been proposing the sale of this Lombard Brick Bungalow at the corner of Westmore Avenue and Washington Blvd. in Du Page County, Illinois, USA.

I can be reached directly via Email at gardenia359@hotmail.com, in person or by U.S. mail at 502 S. Westmore-Meyers Road, Lombard, IL 60148-3028, USA.

Visit our Web Site at http://www.preservehistoricestate.zoomshare.com

Saturday, February 2, 2008

Common Law conversion and trespass as "action in trover" in Lombard, Du Page County, Illinois USA





Courtesy Article

Part II: Intentional tort--Conversion and trespass as “action in trover”


An intentional tort arises from deliberate invasion of another person’s rights, causing injury without just cause or excuse. For instance, the new neighbor drives backward into the owner’s fence posts between the adjoining driveway and damages the existing fence on the first moving day into their new home. The owner of the damaged fence posts can sue the new neighbor for repeatedly driving into the owner’s fence posts with a van, a lawnmower, or deliberate carelessness.


Intentional torts include interference with a person’s freedom of movement, defamation of character (libel and slander), invasion of privacy, interference with property rights, misuse of the legal process, fraud, and the intentional infliction of emotional distress.


Trespass is a tort, a civil wrong because it interferes with a person’s property rights. For instance, the new neighbor’s son jumps the fence adjoining the owner’s property repeatedly without permission. Or, the Lombard Police Department in Du Page County, Illinois allows intruders, strangers, terrorists, and criminal repeat offenders to jump the owner’s fence into the backyard, under approval of the Village of Lombard, Town Hall staff, and the Village Manager, Bill Lichter, President Bill Mueller, including Trustee for District 5 Ken Florey, and others, without the authorization of the Hung Family as owners of the real estate property.


Common law “tort” action features unreasonable interference with the interests of another. For instance, intentional infliction of emotional distress is a tort. Case-in-point, John Carpenter, the neighbor calls the Lombard Police Department on the Hung Family when the daughter arrives one evening, last summer 2006, and walks into the backyard—there was nothing wrong in the backyard, at the house, or with the daughter of the late Mr. Roberto Hung, J.D.


An injured person may sue anyone who commits a tort against him/her to collect damages—money to compensate for the wrong.


Trespass is an unlawful intrusion that interferes with someone else’s possession of property. A trespass gives the property owner the right to bring a civil lawsuit and collect money damages for the interference and for any harm caused. Some states in the U.S.A. have laws that make trespass a crime and prosecute illicit access entry into property with punitive fines, sanctions, and imprisonment. Generally, a trespass is committed on real property (real estate or land and everything that is attached to it), but a trespass can also be to personal property (all other forms of property) as well.


Criminal trespass is accomplished by violence or tends to be a “breach of peace”. Some statutes consider any unlawful entry on another person’s real estate property as a criminal act. When the trespass involves violence or injury to a person or property, it is always considered criminal, and penalties may be increased for more serious or malicious acts. Criminal trespass is prosecuted in the State of Illinois by punitive fines, sanctions or imprisonment or both.


The standard remedy in an action for trespass to chattels is a judgment for an amount equal to the value of loss or use of the property. Damages from a trespass claim are based on the harm caused to the owner’s property, rather than the general value of the chattel. Under common law, many acts can constitute both “conversion” and “trespass” as “action in trover”.


Conversion as an “action in trover” under English common law is an ancient, historical form of legal action to recover possession of personal property, and its practice to settle disputes, contests, and arguments, has developed our modern sense and interpretation in the application of common law in the 21st century and beyond.


Action in trover is the technical name for a lawsuit to recover damages incurred for a wrongdoer’s “conversion” (wrongful taking, misuse, abuse, alteration or destruction) of personal property belonging to someone else. In trover actions, the measure of damages is normally in proportion to the value of the property at the time of conversion.


Legal “action in trover” is a remedy for conversion or the wrongful appropriation of the owner’s personal property. During the course of the 16th century, “action in trover” developed as a special form of legal action in a case.


Trover damages are measured in proportion to the market value of the property, plus compensation for deprivation of use, and compensation for other losses naturally and proximately caused by the wrongful taking of another’s property. The owner can also recover interest that would have been earned by the money value of the object and any expenses incurred in attempting to recover the property.


Another example of common law is “negligence per se”, that is to say behavioral conduct which is evidence of an unreasonable action (or failure to act) that causes injury to a person or damages to his/her property. Negligence per se, as carelessness in itself, is behavior that falls below the standards set by law for protecting others against risk or harm. As a result of “negligence per se”, anyone who is injured, or whose property is damaged because of someone else’s negligent act or failure to act, is entitled to bring a civil lawsuit against the wrongdoer, for an “action in trover”.


In itself, negligence is a state of mind involving carelessness, forgetfulness, inattentiveness, refusal to perform duties and obligations required by law and professional standards.


In negligence law, a person has an obligation and duty to exercise reasonable care for the physical safety and for the property of others people.


Negligence per se involves “misfeasance” which is to say, the improper doing of an act, and “nonfeasance”, that is to say, the failure to perform the required duty. In cases involving “imputed negligence”, the first person in charge may have a duty to see that the second person in force exercises care in regard to any third party or property. Thus, “imputed negligence” falls upon the first person when the second person fails to perform the duty of care for the third person, “vicariously”. In the same way, “respondeat superior”, in Latin, illustrates a principle of law that holds an employer liable and responsible for anything that an employee does during the course of employment. Case-in-point, the Village of Lombard is responsible for all its employees’ actions and non-actions, at all times.


When a person suffers harm because of someone else’s negligence, the same person can sue the negligent person and make him or her pay for the harm, damages and/or losses caused. Given that the negligent person owed the injured party a duty to use care; that he/she violated that duty by failing to act according to the required standard of care; and that the party incurred injury or that property was damaged as the result of the negligent person.


In the doctrine of “negligence per se”, the violations of statutes by the negligent person creates a case for legal action in itself, by default. In order for this doctrine (of negligence per se) to operate, the statute which has been violated must have been designed to prevent the type of injury or damaged suffered by a victim of crime, abused by another person due to “negligence per se”.


Case-in-point, in the legal action for Village of Lombard v. Hung, et al., the Plaintiff is subject to “negligence per se” for the violations of Illinois statutes pursuant to consumer service fraud, breach of the Fair Housing agreement contract, and Lombard real estate liability for the sale of old houses in Du Page County, Illinois, USA.


Since 1993, in the Village of Lombard, the Hung Family real estate property and all family members, have all been injured, disabled, and damaged due to the Village of Lombard’s failure to provide the duty of care, according to the required standard of care; and the Hung Family members and real estate property have all been victims of crime as a result of “negligence per se” by default in the Village of Lombard, Du Page County, Illinois, USA.


English common law is based on legal court precedents. Each legal cause of action is decided by a judge to establish a precedent which may be used as a guide for other judges to make subsequent decisions. Thus common law is active, dynamic, functional, and constantly evolving in time, upon legal precedents.


Traditionally, English common law was unwritten, “lex non scripta”—not written as a body of law; however, nowadays, there are extensive, historical, and contemporary compilations of the English common law for the 21st century and beyond.


Common law follows natural reason, logic, and man’s sense of justice, equity, and fairness. It is adopted by men and women to regulate legal behavior in social settings, disputes, contests, and arguments. Common law action is a civil lawsuit between opposing parties over a real legal issue in which the relief (help) requested as remedy is generally money granted as an award for damages.

Common law developed after the French Norman Conquest in 1066 A.D. as the law common to the whole of England, rather than the local law used by the Saxons, the Angles, the Jutes, and the Celts. As the court system became established later under King Henry II, and judges decisions became recorded in law reports, the doctrine of precedents developed[1].


Historically, common law is a system of laws that prevails in England and in all countries colonized by Great Britain and the British Commonwealth. The concept of “common law” is derived from the medieval theory that the law is administered by the King’s Court which represented “the custom commonly used throughout the realm”, in contrast to the custom of local jurisdiction that was applied in local or manorial courts. According to Sir John Davies (1`569-1626), “it was nothing else but the Common Custome of the Realm” quoted in Preface to Reports, (1612). Later, Sir John Fortescue declared that the “realm has been continuously ruled by the same customs as it is now”, as noted “In Praise of the Laws of England”, c. 1470, in the original title, “De Laudibus Legum Angliae” in which the English Chancellor of the High Court of England discussed royal and political control, “sovereignty”, in response to the problem of tyranny, as presented by St. Thomas Aquina and Ptolemy of Lucca. Thomas Aquina exposed the idea of “De Regimine Principum” among the highest goals of medieval political thought—Sir John Fortescue sustained that while England was a “dominium politicum regale”, France, its secular opponent, represented a simple “dominium regale”. As the most important exponent of English political thought in the 15th century, Sir John Fortescue expressed simply that in contract to France, in England, the King was subject to the same right that the monarch approved with the two Chambers of Parliament, whose consensus was also necessary in order to establish taxes (11)—Sir John Fortescue, “De Laudibus Legum Angliae” as “In Praise for the Laws of England”, Chapters IX and XVIII[2].


English common law developed from legal usage within three (3) English courts as follow: the King’s Bench, Exchequer, and the Court of Common Pleas. The King’s Bench originally litigated the crown’s business (including criminal matters and had jurisdiction to correct errors from other courts of record). The Exchequer of Pleas, involved primarily revenue matters. Then, in a narrower sense, the common law was the body of law administered in Westminster Hall by the twelve (12) judges of the three superior courts of law. These were the Common Pleas, whose position as the prime court of civil suits had been secured by the Magna Carta (1215) and which continued to attract most civil litigation until the 18th century. The common law administered in these three (3) courts contrasted with “equity” as practiced primarily in the Court of Chancery. The Court of Chancery was originally designated as a “Court of Conscience”, concerned with securing justice in individual cases, rather than following strict rules[3].


In “Roots,” the role of the sheriff is presented as “the oldest continuing, non-military, law enforcement entity in the history of England”. In the 9th century, “shires” were municipal and administrative kingdoms divided by the King of England and assigned to trusted representatives. The shire representative appointed by the King protected his interest and the people of his particular land territory. In medieval English, the appointed trustees were called “reeves” as “guardians of the shire”. Historical usage of the words “shire-reeve” together, derived the contemporary term for the concept of “sheriff”, as we know their office of service today, before and after the French Norman invasion of England in 1066 A.D. In the past, the sheriff was responsible for keeping the peace, collecting taxes, maintaining jails, arresting fugitives, maintaining lists of wanted criminals, serving orders and writs for the King’s Court.


According to DeKalb County Sheriff Roger Scott, “the responsibilities of the office of the sheriff in England ebbed and flowed, depending on the mood and needs of kings and government”. The Magna Carta (1215) signed by King John restricted and circumscribed the responsibilities and duties of the sheriff in his times.


In the British Commonwealth, as well as in America, the concept of the sheriff has been adopted with the common law, through time, space, and physical presence. In the American colonies settled by the British since 1607 A.D., sheriffs were also appointed following the role model of English government. The first sheriff in the United States of America has been noted to be Captain William Stone, appointed in 1634 for the Shire of Northampton in the colony of Virginia. The first elected sheriff was William Waters in 1652 for the same shire. The word “shire” was used in many of the Commonwealth colonies, before the word “county” replaced its usage[4].


Under English common law, notaries public also provide another timeless office of service for the legal court system and the community at large. Since the Roman Republic, in the past, notaries public have drawn important documents and records writing for business and employment. During the times of the Roman Empire, notaries public were known under various titles in Latin, such as “scriba”, “cursor”, tabularius”, “tabelio”, “exceptor”, “actuaries”, and “notarius”, according to the historical times in which they lived and the duties performed. Notaries public are subject to regulation by law since the later days in Ancient Rome. Some of the notarial acts have been granted degrees of authenticity to be designated as public instruments and were required to be kept as records to be deposited in public archives for the government[5].


Notaries public are commissioned by the State of Illinois, Office of the Secretary of State Jesse White. Their term of office is four (4) years from the time of commission.


Throughout history, in the early past, notaries public were well known functionaries during the times of the great Charlemagne who vested notarial acts by scribes with public authority and provided notaries public appointments by his deputies in every locality in their territories. Charlemagne provided that each bishop, abbot, and count should have a notary public.


In England, appointed notaries public acted as “conveyancers”, before the French Norman Conquest in 1066 A.D., as shown by the fact that a grant of lands and manors was made by King Edward the Confessor, to the Abbot of Westminster by a charter written and attested by a notary public. In Great Britain, notaries public are authorized to administer oaths, and this official power is vested by statute.


The laws of the United States of America, under the Constitution and under God is similar, for notaries public and is often declared by the statutes of the various states and other jurisdictions.


It is my opinion that common law is established in the history of languages with the legal tradition of the past, interpreted in the present as precedents, to be preset in the future and beyond…the 21st century.


English common law is based on timeless, immemorial customs and legal practices founded on natural reason, persuasion, and logic. According to Edward Coke, “reason is the life of the law, nay, the common law itself is nothing else but reason”—from the First Part of the Institutes of the Laws of England or A Commentary upon Littleton by Edward Coke. Edited by Francis Hargrave and Charles Butler, (London, 1794).


Common law, within the context of its core principles, is perceived to be “timeless”. It is derived from legal authority “throughout the kingdom” as stated by Sir William Blackstone (1723-1780), in his Commentaries on the Laws of England, (1765-1769).


After the Civil War, U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote a book called, “The Common Law” (1881), in order to recognize that law evolved and that it was a byproduct/ consequence of historical events, rather than simply the result of reason. According to Oliver Wendell Holmes, “a moment’s insight is a life’s experience”. Holmes’ book “The Common Law” focuses on experience rather than logic and has been compared as a legal analog to Charles Darwin’s “Origin of the Species” which discusses biological processes, rather than divine ones. Oliver Wendell Holmes helped to popularize the understanding that law evolves…through time, space, physical presence, and beyond the 21st century.


After the Second World War, there was a growing interest in the use of the common law as a tool for social reform. While some academics spoke of the legal process—the belief that there were methods of common law and statutory interpretation that were independent of politics existed—other academics and jurists on both ends of the political spectrum urged judges to use their common law power to remake the law on its foundations. Where once judges had wielded the law to limit corporate liability, some began to expand “tort” law to facilitate recovery of damages and losses for injured parties in hazardous conditions, as victims of crime, to dangerous drugs to professional malpractice.


Now in the 21st century, Modern America continues to practice “common law” as a byproduct of generations of judicial decisions and during the course of time and beyond. Common law is understood to be the result of judge-made innovations, interpretation, application, and perception of the circumstances involved in judicial case review. However, a more conservative conception of the common law has been re-emerging in the U.S. Supreme Court under Chief Justice John G. Roberts and fellow jurists, scholars, and colleagues during 2007. During the first term of office appointed by President George W. Bush, Chief Justice John G. Roberts moved the U.S. Supreme Court toward a new conservative direction within the context of President Bush’s “faith-based initiative”.[6]


Since 1607, and for the last 400 years, judges still grapple and deliberate with new legal actions and struggle to apply precedents. Modern day judges are still using, applying, and interpreting the English common law system to date as a legal foundation to establish law practices for justice, equity, and fairness under the Constitution of the United States, and under God, throughout the 21st century and beyond…in the spirit of the times. Zeitgeist!



Sources:
From the Law Library of my father, Mr. Roberto Hung, J.D.
You and the Law. A Practical Guide to Everyday Law and How It Affects You and Your Family. Advisory Editor Henry V. Poor, Associate Dean of Yale University Law School, 1967-1972. Reader's Digest Association, Inc., New York, 1971.

Family Legal Guide. A Complete Encyclopedia of Law for the Layman. Reader's Digest Association, New York, 1971.

Periodical, 'The Week', May 18, 2007 on the “400th Anniversary of Jamestowne, Virginia”.


Periodical,” The Week”. July 6-13, 2007. News. Main Stories. “The Roberts Court Chars a new direction”.


Periodical, 'Newsweek'. Ideas, 'Ties of Blood and History: Sir Winston Churchill', February 26, 2007.


McCrum, Robert et al. The Story of English. BBC Public Television Series.

The Illinois Sheriff, Spring 2005. 'Roots. A Historical Perspective of the Office of the Sheriff'. DeKalb County Sheriff Roger Scott.

Fortescue, John (1394-1477). De Laudibus Legum Angliae. In Praise of the Laws of England.

http://www.answers.com/topic/commonlaw

John Marshal School of Law in Chicago, Illinois, USA.


Canada's Court System, Department of Justice Publication.

American Heritage Dictionary.

Village of Lombard, et al. vs. Hung et al., Eighteenth Judicial Circuit Court, Chancery Division, 505 North County Farm Road, Wheaton, IL 60187, County of Du Page, State of Illinois, United States of America.

Churchill, Winston. A History of the English-Speaking Peoples.

Roberts, Andrew. A History of the English-Speaking Peoples since 1901.


QPB Dictionary of Ideas. Quality Paperback Book Club. (New York: Helicon Publishing Ltd., 1995 in the United Kingdom under the title The Hutchinson Dictionary of Ideas), page 108, Common Law.


Cambridge text in the History of Political Thought, CUP, 1997. Law: Sovereignty in the British Doctrine (From Bracton to Dicey). Notes by Joaquin Varela Suanzes in http://www.murdoch.edu.au/elaw/issues/v6n3/suanzes63_ notes.html


Fortescue, John. The Governance of England: Otherwise called the Difference between an Absolute and Limited Monarchy. Editor Charles Plummer. London: Oxford University Press, 1885. Reprinted 1999 by the Law Book Exchange, Ltd.


Anderson’s Manual for Notaries Public. Fifth Edition. Gilmer, Wesley, Jr., B.A., M.S.L.S., J.D. W.H. Anderson Company. Cincinnati, 1966.


Richard, Tom, PhD. Professor Emeritus of Linguistics, University of Wisconsin, USA.

Hung, Gardenia C., M.A., B.A., Communications, Languages & Culture, Inc., 502 S. Westmore-Meyers Road, Lombard IL 60148-3028 USA. Email:
GardHn@netscape.net








[1] QPB Dictionary of Ideas. Quality Paperback Book Club. (New York: Helicon Publishing Ltd., 1995 in the United Kingdom under the title The Hutchinson Dictionary of Ideas), page 108, Common Law.


[2] Cambridge text in the History of Political Thought, CUP, 1997. Law: Sovereignty in the British Doctrine (From Bracton to Dicey). Notes by Joaquin Varela Suanzes in http://www.murdoch.edu.au/elaw/issues/v6n3/suanzes63_ notes.html

Fortescue, John. The Governance of England: Otherwise called the Difference between an Absolute and Limited Monarchy. Editor Charles Plummer. London: Oxford University Press, 1885. Reprinted 1999 by the Law Book Exchange, Ltd.



[4] The Illinois Sheriff. Spring 2005. A magazine published by the Illinois Sheriff Association. “Roots. A Historical Perspective of the Office of the Sheriff”. By DeKalb County Sheriff Roger Scott. Pages 6-7.


[5] Anderson’s Manual for Notaries Public. Fifth Edition. Gilmer, Wesley, Jr., B.A., M.S.L.S., J.D. W.H. Anderson Company. Cincinnati, 1966. Chapter 1, Page 2.


[6] The Week. July 6-13, 2007. News. Main Stories. “The Roberts Court Charts a new direction”.

Monday, January 28, 2008

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION TO DISMISS AND STRIKE THE VERIFIED COMPLAINT WITH A SECOND OBJECTION TO THE SAME PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED COMPLAINT

State of Illinois United States of America County of Du Page
In the 18th Judicial Circuit Court
Village of Lombard,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Gardenia C. Hung and Robert S. Hung, Trustees of the Trust Agreement Designated as the Roberto Hung Supplemental Care Trust, Jeffrey D. Papendick, a tax-purchaser, and non-record claimants and unknown users
Defendants
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
))))))))))
Case No.:2007CH001284 Consolidated
Case No.:2006OV005982, LO25448NT;
Case No.:2006OV005983, LO25449NT;
Case No.:2006OV004446, LO12418NT; LO12419NT
NOTICE OF FILING
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION TO DISMISS AND STRIKE THE VERIFIED COMPLAINT WITH A SECOND OBJECTION TO THE SAME PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DEMOLITION AND FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

Attn. Judge Ken Popejoy, Chancery Division To:Circuit Court Clerk
18th Judicial Circuit Court Mr. Chris Kachiroubas
505 North County Farm Road 505 North County Farm Road
Wheaton, Illinois 60189-0707 USA Wheaton, IL 60187 USA
CC: Law Firm of Klein, Thorpe and Jenkins, Ltd.
Mr. Howard C. Jablecki, et al. Attn. Mr. Joseph E. Birkett
Attorneys for the Plaintiff Illinois State’s Attorney
20 North Wacker Drive, Suite 1660, 503 North County Farm Road
Chicago, Illinois 60606-2903, USA Wheaton, Illinois 60187 USA
Tel. 312-984-6400; To Whom It May Concern






DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION TO DISMISS AND STRIKE THE VERIFIED COMPLAINT WITH A SECOND OBJECTION TO THE SAME PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DEMOLITION AND FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

Now comes Gardenia C. Hung, as Defendant Pro Se, to reinstate all of the Defendants’ responses and supporting arguments in this Motion for Reconsideration to Dismiss and Strike the Verified Complaint with a Second Objection to the same Plaintiff’s Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief, on legal constitutional grounds upholding the Illinois homeowner’s right to repair Lombard real estate property pursuant to the Constitution of the United States of America, the State of Illinois Constitution, the Bill of Rights, Victims of Crime Act, Illinois Human Rights Act, Housing and Urban Development Act, Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, 815 ILCS 505/1 et seq.; 815 ILCS 505/2 et seq., Unlawful Prohibited Practices; 815 ILCS 510/1 et seq., Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act; Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 USC §45 et seq.
Counsel Howard C. Jablecki’s response for the Plaintiff disregards U.S. constitutional issues in this legal action, since in the State of Illinois, Lombard homeowners have constitutional rights to repair Lombard Historical real estate property in the County of Du Page, United States of America. Mr. Jablecki is subject to perjury upon stating that, “In this case, Defendant Hung has not provided adequate grounds for this court to reconsider its denial of the motion to dismiss...” “Defendant Hung has alleged no newly discovered facts, no change in the law, and no error in this Court’s application of the law aside from its use of “fancy legal terms”. (Village of Lombard v. Gardenia C. Hung and Robert S. Hung, et al., Plaintiff’s Response to Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration of Motion to Dismiss, Page 3).
For the record, Defendants petition to reinstate all legally filed evidence, as follow:
1. Defendants’ Response/Answer to Summons. Counterpoint: At Issue Legal Memorandum in Opposition to the Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief to Support the Defendants’ Compulsory Counterclaims to Setoff/Offset the Verified Complaint from Plaintiff on legal grounds for “action in trover”, criminal conversion of property, consumer service fraud, breach of the Fair Housing Partnership Resolution Contract and Real Estate Liability for Lombard Old Houses.
2. Affidavit of Damages in Excess of $50,000.
3. Amended Defendants’ Response/Answer to Summons. Counterpoint: At Issue Legal Memorandum in Opposition to the Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief to Support the Defendants’ Compulsory Counterclaims in the sum of $2,000,000, two million, to Setoff/Offset the Verified Complaint from Plaintiff on legal grounds for “action in trover”, criminal conversion of property, consumer service fraud, breach of the Fair Housing Partnership Resolution Contract and Real Estate Liability for Lombard Old Houses.
4. Abridged to 10 Pages, Defendants’ Response/Answer to Summons. Counterpoint: At Issue Legal Memorandum in Opposition to the Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief.
5. Defendants’ Motion for Discovery, Exhibit A, to Petition Attorney’s Fees under §10(A)C of the Consumer Fraud Act for “action in trover”, in the sum of $32,497.41
6. Defendants’ Amended Petition, Exhibit B, in Motion to Accept All Legal Expenses in the sum of $33,725.41 for Reimbursement Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 137 and §10(A)C of the Consumer Fraud Act, 815 ILCS 505/1 et seq.
7. Defendants’ Combined §2-615 Motion to Dismiss and §2-619 Motion to Strike the Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 137.
8. MOTION FOR DISCOVERY, EXHIBIT C, AS EVIDENCE FOR CONTRACTS A-1, B-1, AND C-1, AS PROOF OF PROPOSED PLANS FOR RESTORATION, REPAIR CONSTRUCTION, REMODELING, AND REHABILITATION IN ORDER TO BRING THE LOMBARD HISTORICAL BRICK BUNGALOW INTO COMPLIANCE WITH MUNICIPAL BUILDING CODE.
9. SUBPOENA REQUEST FOR PLAINTIFF TO PRODUCE ALL HOUSEHOLD KEYS
BELONGING TO DEFENDANTS, ET AL. AT 502 S. WESTMORE-MEYERS ROAD, LOMBARD, ILLINOIS 60148-3028, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
10. 1993-2007 DAMAGES AND LOSSES AT THE HUNG FAMILY REAL ESTATE AT
502 SOUTH WESTMORE-MEYERS ROAD, LOMBARD, DUPAGE COUNTY, ILLINOIS 60148-3028
MEMO OVERVIEW REPORT BY GARDENIA C. HUNG, M.A., DAUGHTER OF THE LATE MR.
ROBERT HUNG, J.D.
11. DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR OBJECTION TO THE VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DEMOLITION
AND FOR INJUCTIVE RELIEF.
12. DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION TO DISMISS AND STRIKE THE VERIFIED
COMPLAINT WITH A SECOND OBJECTION TO THE SAME PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED COMPLAINT
FOR DEMOLITION AND FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF.

Plaintiff’s response states improper opinions, contrary-to-fact statements, and fails to consider all of the newly discovered evidence presented and filed in conformity to proof before this court, along with all the supporting arguments reported by U.S. law enforcement agencies and the State of Illinois on behalf of the Defendants, included as a Second Objection to the Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief.

Defendants hereby reinstate all the legal documentation and supporting arguments presented to date before this court, in this Motion for Reconsideration to Dismiss and Strike the Verified Complaint with a Second Objection to the same Plaintiff’s Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief. For the record, Defendants have submitted into evidence as Exhibit C, Contracts A-1, B-1, and C-1, underwritten by ZSC INSURANCE RESTORATION SERVICE, LLC., P.O. Box 56553, Chicago, Illinois 60656-0553, ZeesGroup.com, in conformity to proof of the proposed plans for Restoration, Renovation, Repair Construction, Remodeling, and Rehabilitation presented during November 2006 and January 2007, by Gardenia C. Hung, in order to comply with the Village of Lombard Municipal Building Code Violations caused by the Plaintiff in this legal 'action in trover' and 'conversion' of the Lombard Historical Brick Bungalow owned by the Hung Family in Du Page County, Illinois, United States of America.
The Hung Family is seeking monetary compensation for Damages and Losses to include Contracts for Special Disaster Restoration Construction Repair Services in the sum of $281,830US contracted and underwritten by ZSC Insurance Restoration Services LLC for repair at the expense of the Village of Lombard Community and DuPage County.
Plaintiff’s Counsel Howard C. Jablecki presents false arguments based on improper opinions and hearsay, not well supported in fact to justify condemnation, demolition, and injunctive relief without affording to the Defendants the option to repair with due process and just payment in “cash” for compensation at a fair market value upon sale of the Lombard Historical Brick Bungalow owned by the Hung Family, under the Bill of Rights and the Constitution of the United States of America and the State of Illinois. Defendants as Lombard homeowners have the right to repair this Lombard Historical Brick Bungalow in Du Page County, Illinois, United States of America.
Counsel Howard C. Jablecki’s allegations for demolition and for injunctive relief do not state a public purpose or present specific plans for reuse of the Lombard Historical Brick Bungalow by the Village of Lombard, et al. The Verified Complaint fails to prove that the Lombard Historical Brick Bungalow is “Unfit for Human Habitation”, since the Hung Family has been Lombard resident homeowners since 1993 to date, in 2008, for the last 15 years now.
Consequently, Defendants have petitioned to redress grievances as victims of crime in the Village of Lombard, Du Page County, Illinois, based on constitutional grounds, as follow:
Section 11-31-1 of the Illinois Municipal Code (65 ILCS 5/11-31-1) pertaining to demolition by a municipality is unconstitutional because it does not allow the Defendants, as Lombard resident homeowners in Du Page County, Illinois, the right to repair the Lombard Historical Brick Bungalow at 502 S. Westmore-Meyers Road, owned by the Hung Family. In City of Aurora v. Meyer, 38 Ill. 2d. 131 (1967), the Supreme Court construed the statute as meaning that, “if the specific defects that render a building dangerous and unsafe ‘may readily be remedied by repair’, demolition should not be ordered without giving the owners a reasonable opportunity to make the repairs.” Furthermore, in the previous Supreme Court Rule 23 (166 Ill. 2d R. 23) order (Village of Lake Villa v. Stokovich, No. 2-00-0943 (2001), the Illinois Supreme Court in the exercise of its supervisory authority directed the presiding judge to vacate the judgment in the Circuit Court of Lake County ordering demolition and to address the Defendants that Section 11-31-1 is unconstitutional. Defendants assert that ordering demolition without giving a homeowner a reasonable time to repair her/his property without considering the cost constitutes an unlawful infringement upon rights of real estate ownership and/or a due process violation;
Section 11-31-1 constitutes an invalid delegation of legislative power in the Village of Lombard, Du Page County, Illinois, in the United States of America;
Plaintiff and Counsel, Howard C. Jablecki et al. are abusing the Court’s discretion in “scienter” with guilty knowledge, as accomplices for direct cause of action for Damages and Losses to the Lombard Historical Brick Bungalow, as noted on record, and by non-disclosure and/or exclusion of key evidence leading to the current damages, losses, and disrepair of the subject property;
This Court is abusing the Defendants, as Lombard resident homeowners, by admitting the Plaintiff’s speculation as improper opinions, not well grounded nor supported by facts of evidence for restoration and preservation of the Lombard Historical Brick Bungalow, already on record to comply with provisions of the municipal building code;
Keith Steiskal’s finding on May 5, 2006 as stated, does not validate that the Lombard Historical Brick Bungalow is dangerous and unsafe, requiring demolition under Section 11-31-1. Keith Steiskal’s “improper opinions and hearsay” under Section 11-31-1 is against the manifested weight of evidence and the Defendants’ proposed restoration plans which have sought alternative remedy and relief in the form of bringing the subject property into compliance;
This Court has erred in denying the Defendants’ Combined §2-615 Motion to Dismiss and §2-619 Motion to Strike the Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief, based on the presiding judge’s “improper opinions and hearsay” about “improper language” and “fancy legal terms”, abuse of the legal process, malicious prosecution, “scienter”, negligence per se, consumer service fraud, and obstruction of justice;
The municipal ordinance violations alleged in Counts I, II, and II for Injunctive Relief do not apply to the subject property, nor are these allegations supported or warranted by existing laws under the Constitution of the United States of America, the State of Illinois Constitution, Bill of Rights, Victims of Crime Act, Human Rights Act, Housing and Urban Development Act, Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, 815 ILCS 505/1 et seq., 815 ILCS 505/2 et seq., Unlawful Prohibited Practices; 815 ILCS 510/1 et seq., Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act; Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 USC §45 et seq., and
The Court’s order on Monday, November 29, 2007 by Judge Kenneth Popejoy, based on “improper use of language and fancy legal terms” is still so deficient as to require a Judicial Review for Reconsideration pursuant to legal, constitutional grounds under the Constitution of the United States, and the State of Illinois Bill of Rights.
Defendants hereby present a Second Objection to the Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief in this petition to redress grievances as victims of crime. Please take notice that assertion by the Defendants of Lombard homeowners’ right to repair is protected under the fifth and fourteenth amendments to the U.S. Constitution and Sections 2 and 15 of the Bill of Rights of the Illinois Constitution (Ill. Const. 1979, art. I, §§2,15) which upon review supports the constitutionality of a statute de novo (Miller v. Rosenberg, 196 Ill. 2d 50, 57 (2001).
Wherefore, Defendants reinstate Combined §2-615 Motion to Dismiss and §2-619 Motion to Strike the Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 137, as noted.
For the record, Plaintiff as the Village of Lombard et al. has “defrauded”
the real estate investment of the late Mr. Roberto Hung, and daughter, Gardenia C. Hung, et al. by direct cause of action in conversion of the Lombard Historical Brick Bungalow into a distressed real estate property as an “access to crime” in the Village of Lombard, Du Page County, Illinois, through conspiracy, heinous/hate crimes, damages, losses, disrepair, and personal injury, to include the murder of the late Mr. Roberto Hung. Consequently, Plaintiff owes the Defendants the obligation, the duty, and service to repair the subject property, damaged by Negligence Per Se and breach of duty, on legal grounds for “action in trover”, criminal “conversion” of real property owned by Gardenia C. Hung, to include consumer service fraud.
For the record, as noted on the Defendants’ pleadings filed in this court, the Village of Lombard and DuPage County, have contributed directly and indirectly to the extensive structural damages and losses to the Hung Family real estate property at 502 S. Westmore Avenue and Washington Boulevard in Lombard, DuPage County, Illinois, U.S.A.
Plaintiff’s allegations are not well supported in fact to justify condemnation, demolition, and injunctive relief without stating a public purpose or presenting specific plans for the reuse of the property. Thus, the Verified Complaint is incomplete, inconclusive, and invalid. The subject property owned by the Hung Family is not a dangerous, unsafe building nor a health hazard or safety risk to the community.
In conclusion, Defendants have reinstated and re-submitted a Second Amended Response to the Verified Complaint in this Motion for Reconsideration to Dismiss the Verified Complaint with a Second Objection to Demolition and Injunctive Relief, thus presenting valid constitutional arguments for historical preservation and restoration, remodeling, and repair construction of the Lombard Historical Brick Bungalow owned by the Hung Family, at the expense of the Plaintiff, also known as the Village of Lombard, et al., All Employees, accountable and liable for all damages, losses, and disrepair to the subject property as a direct cause of action, in access to crime by the Lombard Police Department.
WHEREBY, Defendants pray for remedy and relief to sustain this Motion as a Second Objection to the Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief, based upon constitutional grounds, as noted, with the proposed plans for restoration and historical preservation of the Lombard Historical Brick Bungalow owned by the Hung Family, at the cost and expense of the Plaintiff.
WHEREFORE, Defendants also pray to sustain Combined §2-615 Motion to Dismiss and §2-619 Motion to Strike the Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 137, upon judicial review for reconsideration with justice, equity, and fairness, under God. Defendants petition for additional relief and financial remedy in affording the Defendants the right to repair Illinois real estate property, as follow for:
(1) GENERAL DAMAGES AND LOSSES IN THE SUM OF $123,200, AS NOTED IN CONTRACT C, IN CONFORMITY TO PROOF;
(2) OTHER SPECIAL DISASTER CONSTRUCTION REPAIR DAMAGES AND LOSSES IN THE SUM OF $92,480, AS EVIDENCED IN CONTRACT B, IN COMFORMITY TO PROOF.
(3) AND DEFENDANTS PRO SE ALSO PRAY FOR THE COMPENSATION OF SUCH OTHER AND ADDITIONAL DISASTER RESTORATION CONSTRUCTION DAMAGES AND LOSSES IN THE SUM OF $66,150, ITEMIZED IN CONTRACT A, IN CONFORMITY TO PROOF, AND FOR FURTHER REMEDY AND RELIEF AS THE COURT DEEMS JUST, FAIR, EQUITABLE, AND PROPER IN THIS CAUSE OF ACTION FOR DISASTER RESTORATION CONSTRUCTION CAUSED DIRECTLY BY PLAINTIFF, THE CITY OF LOMBARD ET AL., IN THE TOTAL SUM OF $281,830.
Furthermore, Defendants also pray for any other remedy and relief provided by this court with due process and just payment in “cash” for compensation at a fair market value upon sale of the Lombard Historical Brick Bungalow owned by the Hung Family; as this Court deems just, fair, and equitable due to family tragedy, hardship, and poverty as victims of crime, under the Constitution of the United States of America and the State of Illinois Constitution, Bill of Rights, with justice, under God.

Respectfully submitted by,


Gardenia C. Hung, M.A., PRO SE
502 S. Westmore-Meyers Road
Lombard, Illinois 60148-3028
United States of America



VERIFICATION

Under penalties as provided by law pursuant to Section 1-109 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure, the undersigned certifies that the statements set forth in this instrument are true and correct, to the best of my ability, so help me God.

Dated on January 25, 2008,
Signed by:

_________________________ Gardenia C. Hung, M.A.
In the County of Du Page, State of Illinois, United States of America