Upload
vohuong
View
214
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
HI&RH Empress Aubreé Dei Gratia, ExecutrixSui Juris, the natural living womanc/o U.S.P.O. Postmaster, c/o temporary mailing location PO Box Nine-Zero-Four-Five-Two, near San Jose, at Santa Clara County, on California, [zip code exempt] DMM Reg., Sec 122.32, Public Law 91-375, Sec. 403Tel: 408-830-6266
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIASUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIACOUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
Appellate Division191 N. First St., SAN JOSE, CA 95113
Aubreé Dei Gratia©, Secured Party Creditor,
Appellant/Plaintiff,
vs.
WACHOVIA MORTGAGE FSBAppellee/Defendant
__________________________/
))))))))))))))))))))))
Appeal Case No.: 1-14-AP-001825Trial Court Case No.: 1-10-CV-178733
Dei Gratia© vs WACHOVIA
Appellant/Plaintiff’s Request for Judicial Notice of Prima Facie Evidentiary Affidavits in Support of Objection to JudgeVincent J Chiarello for Disqualification for Cause1) Exhibit 2: Affidavit of HI&RH Empress Aubreé Regina Dei Gratia©2) Exhibit 3: Affidavit of William Bullock Stewart III©3) Exhibit 4: Affidavit of Robert C. Cutright4) Exhibit 5: Affidavit of Walter James Kubon5) Exhibit 6: Affidavit of Wayne Springfield©6) Exhibit 7: Affidavit of Raymon E. Tate III©7) Exhibit 8: Affidavit of Matt P. Jacobsen©
– Page 1 of 31 –
Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825, Dei Gratia© vs WACHOVIA
Case #1-10-CV-178733, Appellant Aubreé Dei Gratia©’s Judicially Noticed Evidence
in Support of Recusal of Judge Vincent J. Chiarello for Mandatory Disqualification for
Cause, including for Bias and Prejudice, previous self recusal, and Public Perception of
Bias and Prejudice pursuant to Hernandez v. VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
))))
[CCP 170.1, 170.3; Title 28 USC 144, 455; 4TH, 5TH
AND 14TH AMENDMENTS TO FEDERAL CONSTITUTION OF 1787; Fed. R. of Evid., RULES 201, 102, 104, 106, 402; Hernandez v. VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC., 174 Cal.App.4th 1441(2009)]
Note to Court Clerk: 18 U.S. Code § 2071 –Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally
(a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or
destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record,
proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any
clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any
judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned
not more than three years, or both.
(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document,
paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates,
falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than
three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any
office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not
include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the
United States.
Appellant/Plaintiff Aubreé Regina Dei Gratia©, the natural living woman’s,
Request for Judicial Notice of Prima Facie Evidentiary Affidavits
in Support of Objection to Judge Vincent J. Chiarello for Mandatory Disqualification for Cause, including for Bias and
Prejudice, – Page 2 of 31 –
Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825, Dei Gratia© vs WACHOVIA
Case #1-10-CV-178733, Appellant Aubreé Dei Gratia©’s Judicially Noticed Evidence
in Support of Recusal of Judge Vincent J. Chiarello for Mandatory Disqualification for
Cause, including for Bias and Prejudice, previous self recusal, and Public Perception of
Bias and Prejudice pursuant to Hernandez v. VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
previous self recusal, and Public Perception of Bias and Prejudice
pursuant to Hernandez v. VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC.PLEASE BE ADVISED AND TAKE NOTICE that in accordance with Federal Rules
of Evidence, which this court uses and is noticed of, Rule 201 Judicial Notice, Plaintiff
Empress Aubreé Regina Dei Gratia©, the natural living woman and Secured Party,
hereby respectfully submits the following Affidavits for this Honorable Court's review.
Pursuant to Federal Rules of Evidence Rule 201 Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts,
the foregoing evidentiary exhibits are submitted.
EXHIBIT LISTEXHIBIT LIST
Exhibit 2Exhibit 2: : Affidavit of Truth, Empress Aubreé Regina Dei Gratia©, the natural living
woman, signed by Affiant on June 07, 2015, 12 pages, and notarized by STATE OF
CALIFORNIA commissioned Notary Public with CALIFORNIA JURAT on June 07,
2015;;
Judicial Significance to the case sub judice is that the Affiant is the Plaintiff in the trial
court case Dei Gratia v. WACHOVIA MORTGAGE FSB (dissolved corporation, lacks
corporate capacity), Case #1-10-CV-178733, and Appellate in Appeal No. 1-14-AP-
001825. Appellant is a living mortal woman, private citizen. Each of the assigned judges
of the Appellate Division hearing the instant appeal, including Judge Vincent J.
Chiarello, admitted in case #107-CV-189409, SFPCU v. Stewart and cross complaint, in
which Appellant was a party, that Judge Vincent J. Chiarello has a lifetime bar to
hearing cases in which the Appellant HI&RH Empress Aubreé Regina Dei Gratia©, the
natural living woman, is a party. The UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT has ruled
that regular payments from other than the judge’s employer of record are bribes with an
– Page 3 of 31 –
Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825, Dei Gratia© vs WACHOVIA
Case #1-10-CV-178733, Appellant Aubreé Dei Gratia©’s Judicially Noticed Evidence
in Support of Recusal of Judge Vincent J. Chiarello for Mandatory Disqualification for
Cause, including for Bias and Prejudice, previous self recusal, and Public Perception of
Bias and Prejudice pursuant to Hernandez v. VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
associated ‘quid-pro-quo’ agreement. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello is a recipient of regular
bribes from the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello had a
fiduciary duty to disclose the bribes given to him by the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
to the parties appearing before him. The COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA will profit
from the outcome of this case if ruled in favor a transfer of real property from Appellant
to the Respondent, in ‘quid-pro-quo’. The US SUPREME COURT has ruled in U.S. v.
Kemp that payments to judges establish a quid pro quo, and no proof other than proof of
payments is necessary to establish the quid pro quo between the judge and the entity
making the payments. The payments to the judge by the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
establish a bias against Plaintiff/Appellant. The transfer of real property from the
Plaintiff/Appellant is done to fulfill the quid pro quo. The COUNTY OF SANTA
CLARA profits from rulings that result in the transfer of real property ownership, thru
the county property transfer tax, and thru a reassessment of the property for increased
property tax which is done after every real property transfer. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello
had a duty to disclose the payments from the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA made to
Judge Vincent J. Chiarello, which he failed to perform. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello
admitted in 2013 that he self recused in 2008 in case #107-CV-189409, SFPCU v.
Stewart and cross complaint, in which Appellant was a party. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello
had a mandatory duty pursuant to 28 USC § 455(a) to self recuse due to previous self
recusal in case #107-CV-189409, in which the Plaintiff/Appellant herein was a party,
and due to tacit agreement to having a lifetime bar to presiding in cases involving
Aubreé Dei Gratia as a party, and due to public perception of bias or prejudice by Judge
Vincent J. Chiarello against Aubreé Dei Gratia, CCP §§ 170.1(a)(6)(iii), 170.1 (a)(6)(B),
170.3(b)(4), and objection perception of bias by anyone who knows the aforementioned
– Page 4 of 31 –
Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825, Dei Gratia© vs WACHOVIA
Case #1-10-CV-178733, Appellant Aubreé Dei Gratia©’s Judicially Noticed Evidence
in Support of Recusal of Judge Vincent J. Chiarello for Mandatory Disqualification for
Cause, including for Bias and Prejudice, previous self recusal, and Public Perception of
Bias and Prejudice pursuant to Hernandez v. VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
facts. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello has a bias against the Appellant herein. Judge Vincent
J. Chiarello has a fiduciary duty to track all of his conflicts, and to disclose them to
litigants in cases that she is assigned. Appellant has a land patent that exists in perpetuity
by federal court order of the United States Land Court in San Francisco, California, as
an assign to her real property located at 1461 Forrestal Ave., San Jose, CA as a portion
of the original Land Patent on the Pueblo Lands of the City of San Jose, which is exempt
from lien and levy. The Land Patent makes any claim by Defendant and Respondent
WACHOVIA MORTGAGE FSB without standing, and a claim for which relief cannot
be granted. Further Plaintiff/Appellant is a Secured Party, for which neither the
Defendant/Respondent WACHOVIA MORTGAGE FSB, nor the SUPERIOR COURT
OF CALIFORNIA have standing to take to make any claim for which relief can be
granted. Each of the assigned judges of the Appellate Division hearing the instant
appeal, including Judge Vincent J. Chiarello, have ignored Plaintiff/Appellant’s standing
as a secured party with immunity to all incorporated state court civil cases. Each of the
assigned judges of the Appellate Division hearing the instant appeal, including Judge
Vincent J. Chiarello, have denied Plaintiff/Appellant’s civil rights by ignoring
Plaintiff/Appellant’s land patent on the property located at 1461 Forrestal Avenue, San
Jose, California, issued by the United States Land Court, San Francisco, California, to all
heirs and assigns in perpetuity, as directed by the President of the United States.
Exhibit 3Exhibit 3: : Affidavit of Truth, William Bullock Stewart III©, the natural living man,
signed by Affiant on June 07, 2015, 13 pages, and notarized by STATE OF
CALIFORNIA commissioned Notary Public with CALIFORNIA JURAT on June 07,
2015;;
– Page 5 of 31 –
Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825, Dei Gratia© vs WACHOVIA
Case #1-10-CV-178733, Appellant Aubreé Dei Gratia©’s Judicially Noticed Evidence
in Support of Recusal of Judge Vincent J. Chiarello for Mandatory Disqualification for
Cause, including for Bias and Prejudice, previous self recusal, and Public Perception of
Bias and Prejudice pursuant to Hernandez v. VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Judicial Significance to the case sub judice is that the Affiant Stewart verifies that Dei
Gratia is the Plaintiff in the trial court case Dei Gratia v. WACHOVIA MORTGAGE FSB
(dissolved corporation, lacks corporate capacity), Case #1-10-CV-178733, and
Appellant in Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825. Affiant Stewart has known
Plaintiff/Appellant since 2003. Affiant is not related to Plaintiff/Appellant, neither by
blood nor marriage. Affiant is an honorably discharged US Army Officer. Affiant has
first hand knowledge of all facts stated, thru direct attendance at all court hearings, and
review of all court documents.
Appellant is a living mortal woman, private citizen. Each of the assigned judges of the
Appellate Division hearing the instant appeal, including Judge Vincent J. Chiarello,
admitted in case #107-CV-189409, SFPCU v. Stewart and cross complaint, in which
Appellant was a party, that Judge Vincent J. Chiarello has a lifetime bar to hearing cases
in which the Appellant HI&RH Empress Aubreé Regina Dei Gratia©, the natural living
woman, is a party. The UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT has ruled that regular
payments from other than the judge’s employer of record are bribes with an associated
‘quid-pro-quo’ agreement. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello is a recipient of regular bribes
from the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello had a fiduciary
duty to disclose the bribes given to his by the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA to the
parties appearing before him. The COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA will profit from the
outcome of this case if ruled in favor a transfer of real property from Appellant to the
Respondent, in ‘quid-pro-quo’. The US SUPREME COURT has ruled in U.S. v. Kemp
that payments to judges establish a quid pro quo, and no proof other than proof of
payments is necessary to establish the quid pro quo between the judge and the entity
making the payments. The payments to the judge by the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
– Page 6 of 31 –
Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825, Dei Gratia© vs WACHOVIA
Case #1-10-CV-178733, Appellant Aubreé Dei Gratia©’s Judicially Noticed Evidence
in Support of Recusal of Judge Vincent J. Chiarello for Mandatory Disqualification for
Cause, including for Bias and Prejudice, previous self recusal, and Public Perception of
Bias and Prejudice pursuant to Hernandez v. VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
establish a bias against Plaintiff/Appellant. The transfer of real property from the
Plaintiff/Appellant is done to fulfill the quid pro quo. The COUNTY OF SANTA
CLARA profits from rulings that result in the transfer of real property ownership, thru
the county property transfer tax, and thru a reassessment of the property for increased
property tax which is done after every real property transfer. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello
had a duty to disclose the payments from the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA made to
Judge Vincent J. Chiarello, which he failed to perform. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello
admitted in 2013 that he self recused in 2008 in case #107-CV-189409, SFPCU v.
Stewart and cross complaint, in which Appellant was a party. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello
had a mandatory duty pursuant to 28 USC § 455(a) to self recuse due to previous self
recusal in case #107-CV-189409, in which the Plaintiff/Appellant herein was a party,
and due to tacit agreement to having a lifetime bar to presiding in cases involving
Aubreé Dei Gratia© as a party, and due to public perception of bias or prejudice by
Judge Vincent J. Chiarello against Aubreé Dei Gratia©, CCP §§ 170.1(a)(6)(iii), 170.1
(a)(6)(B), 170.3(b)(4), and objection perception of bias by anyone who knows the
aforementioned facts. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello has a bias against the Appellant herein.
Judge Vincent J. Chiarello has a fiduciary duty to track all of his conflicts, and to
disclose them to litigants in cases that she is assigned. Appellant has a land patent that
exists in perpetuity by federal court order of the United States Land Court in San
Francisco, California, as an assign to her real property located at 1461 Forrestal Ave.,
San Jose, CA as a portion of the original Land Patent on the Pueblo Lands of the City of
San Jose, which is exempt from lien and levy. The Land Patent makes any claim by
Defendant and Respondent WACHOVIA MORTGAGE FSB without standing, and a
claim for which relief cannot be granted. Further Plaintiff/Appellant is a secured party,
– Page 7 of 31 –
Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825, Dei Gratia© vs WACHOVIA
Case #1-10-CV-178733, Appellant Aubreé Dei Gratia©’s Judicially Noticed Evidence
in Support of Recusal of Judge Vincent J. Chiarello for Mandatory Disqualification for
Cause, including for Bias and Prejudice, previous self recusal, and Public Perception of
Bias and Prejudice pursuant to Hernandez v. VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
for which neither the Defendant/Respondent WACHOVIA MORTGAGE FSB, nor the
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA have standing to take to make any claim for
which relief can be granted. Each of the assigned judges of the Appellate Division
hearing the instant appeal, including Judge Vincent J. Chiarello, have ignored
Plaintiff/Appellant’s standing as a secured party with immunity to all incorporated state
court civil cases. Each of the assigned judges of the Appellate Division hearing the
instant appeal, including Judge Vincent J. Chiarello, have denied Plaintiff/Appellant’s
civil rights by ignoring Plaintiff/Appellant’s land patent on the property located at 1461
Forrestal Avenue, San Jose, California, issued by the United States Land Court, San
Francisco, California, to all heirs and assigns in perpetuity, as directed by the President
of the United States.
Exhibit 4Exhibit 4: : Affidavit of Truth, Robert C. Cutright, the natural living man, signed by
Affiant on June 07, 2015, 13 pages, and notarized by STATE OF CALIFORNIA
commissioned Notary Public with CALIFORNIA JURAT on June 07, 2015;
Judicial Significance to the case sub judice is that the Affiant Cutright verifies that Dei
Gratia© is the Plaintiff in the trial court case Dei Gratia© v. WACHOVIA MORTGAGE
FSB (dissolved corporation, lacks corporate capacity), Case #1-10-CV-178733, and
Appellant in Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825. Affiant Cutright has known
Plaintiff/Appellant Dei Gratia© since May 2015. Affiant is not related to
Plaintiff/Appellant, neither by blood nor marriage. Affiant is a licensed Hedge Fund
Securities manager. Affiant has first hand knowledge of all facts stated thru examination
of court records and court judicially noticed evidence.
Appellant is a living mortal woman, private citizen. Each of the assigned judges of the
Appellate Division hearing the instant appeal, including Judge Vincent J. Chiarello,
– Page 8 of 31 –
Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825, Dei Gratia© vs WACHOVIA
Case #1-10-CV-178733, Appellant Aubreé Dei Gratia©’s Judicially Noticed Evidence
in Support of Recusal of Judge Vincent J. Chiarello for Mandatory Disqualification for
Cause, including for Bias and Prejudice, previous self recusal, and Public Perception of
Bias and Prejudice pursuant to Hernandez v. VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
admitted in case #107-CV-189409, SFPCU v. Stewart and cross complaint, in which
Appellant was a party, that Judge Vincent J. Chiarello has a lifetime bar to hearing cases
in which the Appellant HI&RH Empress Aubreé Regina Dei Gratia©, the natural living
woman, is a party. The UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT has ruled that regular
payments from other than the judge’s employer of record are bribes with an associated
‘quid-pro-quo’ agreement. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello is a recipient of regular bribes
from the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello had a fiduciary
duty to disclose the bribes given to his by the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA to the
parties appearing before him. The COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA will profit from the
outcome of this case if ruled in favor a transfer of real property from Appellant to the
Respondent, in ‘quid-pro-quo’. The US SUPREME COURT has ruled in U.S. v. Kemp
that payments to judges establish a quid pro quo, and no proof other than proof of
payments is necessary to establish the quid pro quo between the judge and the entity
making the payments. The payments to the judge by the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
establish a bias against Plaintiff/Appellant. The transfer of real property from the
Plaintiff/Appellant is done to fulfill the quid pro quo. The COUNTY OF SANTA
CLARA profits from rulings that result in the transfer of real property ownership, thru
the county property transfer tax, and thru a reassessment of the property for increased
property tax which is done after every real property transfer. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello
had a duty to disclose the payments from the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA made to
Judge Vincent J. Chiarello, which he failed to perform. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello
admitted in 2013 that he self recused in 2008 in case #107-CV-189409, SFPCU v.
Stewart and cross complaint, in which Appellant was a party. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello
had a mandatory duty pursuant to 28 USC § 455(a) to self recuse due to previous self
– Page 9 of 31 –
Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825, Dei Gratia© vs WACHOVIA
Case #1-10-CV-178733, Appellant Aubreé Dei Gratia©’s Judicially Noticed Evidence
in Support of Recusal of Judge Vincent J. Chiarello for Mandatory Disqualification for
Cause, including for Bias and Prejudice, previous self recusal, and Public Perception of
Bias and Prejudice pursuant to Hernandez v. VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
recusal in case #107-CV-189409, in which the Plaintiff/Appellant herein was a party,
and due to tacit agreement to having a lifetime bar to presiding in cases involving
Aubreé Dei Gratia© as a party, and due to public perception of bias or prejudice by
Judge Vincent J. Chiarello against Aubreé Dei Gratia©, CCP §§ 170.1(a)(6)(iii), 170.1
(a)(6)(B), 170.3(b)(4), and objection perception of bias by anyone who knows the
aforementioned facts. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello has a bias against the Appellant herein.
Judge Vincent J. Chiarello has a fiduciary duty to track all of him conflicts, and to
disclose them to litigants in cases that she is assigned. Appellant has a land patent that
exists in perpetuity by federal court order of the United States Land Court in San
Francisco, California, as an assign to her real property located at 1461 Forrestal Ave.,
San Jose, CA as a portion of the original Land Patent on the Pueblo Lands of the City of
San Jose, which is exempt from lien and levy. The Land Patent makes any claim by
Defendant and Respondent WACHOVIA MORTGAGE FSB without standing, and a
claim for which relief cannot be granted. Further Plaintiff/Appellant is a secured party,
for which neither the Defendant/Respondent WACHOVIA MORTGAGE FSB, nor the
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA have standing to take to make any claim for
which relief can be granted. Each of the assigned judges of the Appellate Division
hearing the instant appeal, including Judge Vincent J. Chiarello, have ignored
Plaintiff/Appellant’s standing as a secured party with immunity to all incorporated state
court civil cases. Each of the assigned judges of the Appellate Division hearing the
instant appeal, including Judge Vincent J. Chiarello, have denied Plaintiff/Appellant’s
civil rights by ignoring Plaintiff/Appellant’s land patent on the property located at 1461
Forrestal Avenue, San Jose, California, issued by the United States Land Court, San
– Page 10 of 31 –
Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825, Dei Gratia© vs WACHOVIA
Case #1-10-CV-178733, Appellant Aubreé Dei Gratia©’s Judicially Noticed Evidence
in Support of Recusal of Judge Vincent J. Chiarello for Mandatory Disqualification for
Cause, including for Bias and Prejudice, previous self recusal, and Public Perception of
Bias and Prejudice pursuant to Hernandez v. VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Francisco, California, to all heirs and assigns in perpetuity, as directed by the President
of the United States.
Exhibit 5Exhibit 5: : Affidavit of Truth, Walter James Kubon, the natural living man, signed by
Affiant on June 07, 2015, 13 pages, and notarized by STATE OF CALIFORNIA
commissioned Notary Public with CALIFORNIA JURAT on June 07, 2015;
Judicial Significance to the case sub judice is that the Affiant Kubon verifies that Dei
Gratia© is the Plaintiff in the trial court case Dei Gratia© v. WACHOVIA MORTGAGE
FSB (dissolved corporation, lacks corporate capacity), Case #1-10-CV-178733, and
Appellant in Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825. Affiant Kubon has known Plaintiff/Appellant
Dei Gratia© since beginning of 2014. Affiant is not related to Plaintiff/Appellant,
neither by blood nor marriage. Affiant is a computer network consultant. Affiant has
first hand knowledge of all facts stated thru examination of court records and court
judicially noticed evidence.
Appellant is a living mortal woman, private citizen. Each of the assigned judges of the
Appellate Division hearing the instant appeal, including Judge Vincent J. Chiarello,
admitted in case #107-CV-189409, SFPCU v. Stewart and cross complaint, in which
Appellant was a party, that Judge Vincent J. Chiarello has a lifetime bar to hearing cases
in which the Appellant HI&RH Empress Aubreé Regina Dei Gratia©, the natural living
woman, is a party. The UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT has ruled that regular
payments from other than the judge’s employer of record are bribes with an associated
‘quid-pro-quo’ agreement. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello is a recipient of regular bribes
from the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello had a fiduciary
duty to disclose the bribes given to him by the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA to the
parties appearing before him. The COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA will profit from the
– Page 11 of 31 –
Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825, Dei Gratia© vs WACHOVIA
Case #1-10-CV-178733, Appellant Aubreé Dei Gratia©’s Judicially Noticed Evidence
in Support of Recusal of Judge Vincent J. Chiarello for Mandatory Disqualification for
Cause, including for Bias and Prejudice, previous self recusal, and Public Perception of
Bias and Prejudice pursuant to Hernandez v. VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
outcome of this case if ruled in favor a transfer of real property from Appellant to the
Respondent, in ‘quid-pro-quo’. The US SUPREME COURT has ruled in U.S. v. Kemp
that payments to judges establish a quid pro quo, and no proof other than proof of
payments is necessary to establish the quid pro quo between the judge and the entity
making the payments. The payments to the judge by the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
establish a bias against Plaintiff/Appellant. The transfer of real property from the
Plaintiff/Appellant is done to fulfill the quid pro quo. The COUNTY OF SANTA
CLARA profits from rulings that result in the transfer of real property ownership, thru
the county property transfer tax, and thru a reassessment of the property for increased
property tax which is done after every real property transfer. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello
had a duty to disclose the payments from the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA made to
Judge Vincent J. Chiarello, which he failed to perform. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello
admitted in 2013 that he self recused in 2008 in case #107-CV-189409, SFPCU v.
Stewart and cross complaint, in which Appellant was a party. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello
had a mandatory duty pursuant to 28 USC § 455(a) to self recuse due to previous self
recusal in case #107-CV-189409, in which the Plaintiff/Appellant herein was a party,
and due to tacit agreement to having a lifetime bar to presiding in cases involving
Aubreé Dei Gratia© as a party, and due to public perception of bias or prejudice by
Judge Vincent J. Chiarello against Aubreé Dei Gratia©, CCP §§ 170.1(a)(6)(iii), 170.1
(a)(6)(B), 170.3(b)(4), and objection perception of bias by anyone who knows the
aforementioned facts. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello has a bias against the Appellant herein.
Judge Vincent J. Chiarello has a fiduciary duty to track all of his conflicts, and to
disclose them to litigants in cases that she is assigned. Appellant has a land patent that
exists in perpetuity by federal court order of the United States Land Court in San
– Page 12 of 31 –
Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825, Dei Gratia© vs WACHOVIA
Case #1-10-CV-178733, Appellant Aubreé Dei Gratia©’s Judicially Noticed Evidence
in Support of Recusal of Judge Vincent J. Chiarello for Mandatory Disqualification for
Cause, including for Bias and Prejudice, previous self recusal, and Public Perception of
Bias and Prejudice pursuant to Hernandez v. VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Francisco, California, as an assign to her real property located at 1461 Forrestal Ave.,
San Jose, CA as a portion of the original Land Patent on the Pueblo Lands of the City of
San Jose, which is exempt from lien and levy. The Land Patent makes any claim by
Defendant and Respondent WACHOVIA MORTGAGE FSB without standing, and a
claim for which relief cannot be granted. Further Plaintiff/Appellant is a secured party,
for which neither the Defendant/Respondent WACHOVIA MORTGAGE FSB, nor the
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA have standing to take to make any claim for
which relief can be granted. Each of the assigned judges of the Appellate Division
hearing the instant appeal, including Judge Vincent J. Chiarello, have ignored
Plaintiff/Appellant’s standing as a secured party with immunity to all incorporated state
court civil cases. Each of the assigned judges of the Appellate Division hearing the
instant appeal, including Judge Vincent J. Chiarello, have denied Plaintiff/Appellant’s
civil rights by ignoring Plaintiff/Appellant’s land patent on the property located at 1461
Forrestal Avenue, San Jose, California, issued by the United States Land Court, San
Francisco, California, to all heirs and assigns in perpetuity, as directed by the President
of the United States.
Exhibit 6Exhibit 6: : Affidavit of Truth, Wayne Springfield©, the natural living man, signed by
Affiant on June 07, 2015, 13 pages, and notarized by STATE OF CALIFORNIA
commissioned Notary Public with CALIFORNIA JURAT on June 07, 2015;
Judicial Significance to the case sub judice is that the Affiant Springfield© verifies that
Dei Gratia© is the Plaintiff in the trial court case Dei Gratia© v. WACHOVIA
MORTGAGE FSB (dissolved corporation, lacks corporate capacity), Case #1-10-CV-
178733, and Appellant in Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825. Affiant Springfield© has known
Plaintiff/Appellant Dei Gratia since 2010. Affiant is not related to Plaintiff/Appellant,
– Page 13 of 31 –
Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825, Dei Gratia© vs WACHOVIA
Case #1-10-CV-178733, Appellant Aubreé Dei Gratia©’s Judicially Noticed Evidence
in Support of Recusal of Judge Vincent J. Chiarello for Mandatory Disqualification for
Cause, including for Bias and Prejudice, previous self recusal, and Public Perception of
Bias and Prejudice pursuant to Hernandez v. VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
neither by blood nor marriage. Affiant is a businessman and entrepreneur, and the
creator of the Point of Sale Coupon Credit Card. Affiant has first hand knowledge of all
facts stated thru attendance at court hearings, examination of court records and court
judicially noticed evidence.
Appellant is a living mortal woman, private citizen. Each of the assigned judges of the
Appellate Division hearing the instant appeal, including Judge Vincent J. Chiarello,
admitted in case #107-CV-189409, SFPCU v. Stewart and cross complaint, in which
Appellant was a party, that Judge Vincent J. Chiarello has a lifetime bar to hearing cases
in which the Appellant HI&RH Empress Aubreé Regina Dei Gratia©, the natural living
woman, is a party. The UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT has ruled that regular
payments from other than the judge’s employer of record are bribes with an associated
‘quid-pro-quo’ agreement. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello is a recipient of regular bribes
from the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello had a fiduciary
duty to disclose the bribes given to him by the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA to the
parties appearing before him. The COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA will profit from the
outcome of this case if ruled in favor a transfer of real property from Appellant to the
Respondent, in ‘quid-pro-quo’. The US SUPREME COURT has ruled in U.S. v. Kemp
that payments to judges establish a quid pro quo, and no proof other than proof of
payments is necessary to establish the quid pro quo between the judge and the entity
making the payments. The payments to the judge by the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
establish a bias against Plaintiff/Appellant. The transfer of real property from the
Plaintiff/Appellant is done to fulfill the quid pro quo. The COUNTY OF SANTA
CLARA profits from rulings that result in the transfer of real property ownership, thru
the county property transfer tax, and thru a reassessment of the property for increased
– Page 14 of 31 –
Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825, Dei Gratia© vs WACHOVIA
Case #1-10-CV-178733, Appellant Aubreé Dei Gratia©’s Judicially Noticed Evidence
in Support of Recusal of Judge Vincent J. Chiarello for Mandatory Disqualification for
Cause, including for Bias and Prejudice, previous self recusal, and Public Perception of
Bias and Prejudice pursuant to Hernandez v. VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
property tax which is done after every real property transfer. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello
had a duty to disclose the payments from the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA made to
Judge Vincent J. Chiarello, which he failed to perform. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello
admitted in 2013 that he self recused in 2008 in case #107-CV-189409, SFPCU v.
Stewart and cross complaint, in which Appellant was a party. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello
had a mandatory duty pursuant to 28 USC § 455(a) to self recuse due to previous self
recusal in case #107-CV-189409, in which the Plaintiff/Appellant herein was a party,
and due to tacit agreement to having a lifetime bar to presiding in cases involving
Aubreé Dei Gratia© as a party, and due to public perception of bias or prejudice by
Judge Vincent J. Chiarello against Aubreé Dei Gratia©, CCP §§ 170.1(a)(6)(iii), 170.1
(a)(6)(B), 170.3(b)(4), and objection perception of bias by anyone who knows the
aforementioned facts. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello has a bias against the Appellant herein.
Judge Vincent J. Chiarello has a fiduciary duty to track all of his conflicts, and to
disclose them to litigants in cases that she is assigned. Appellant has a land patent that
exists in perpetuity by federal court order of the United States Land Court in San
Francisco, California, as an assign to her real property located at 1461 Forrestal Ave.,
San Jose, CA as a portion of the original Land Patent on the Pueblo Lands of the City of
San Jose, which is exempt from lien and levy. The Land Patent makes any claim by
Defendant and Respondent WACHOVIA MORTGAGE FSB without standing, and a
claim for which relief cannot be granted. Further Plaintiff/Appellant is a secured party,
for which neither the Defendant/Respondent WACHOVIA MORTGAGE FSB, nor the
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA have standing to take to make any claim for
which relief can be granted. Each of the assigned judges of the Appellate Division
hearing the instant appeal, including Judge Vincent J. Chiarello, have ignored
– Page 15 of 31 –
Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825, Dei Gratia© vs WACHOVIA
Case #1-10-CV-178733, Appellant Aubreé Dei Gratia©’s Judicially Noticed Evidence
in Support of Recusal of Judge Vincent J. Chiarello for Mandatory Disqualification for
Cause, including for Bias and Prejudice, previous self recusal, and Public Perception of
Bias and Prejudice pursuant to Hernandez v. VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Plaintiff/Appellant’s standing as a secured party with immunity to all incorporated state
court civil cases. Each of the assigned judges of the Appellate Division hearing the
instant appeal, including Judge Vincent J. Chiarello, have denied Plaintiff/Appellant’s
civil rights by ignoring Plaintiff/Appellant’s land patent on the property located at 1461
Forrestal Avenue, San Jose, California, issued by the United States Land Court, San
Francisco, California, to all heirs and assigns in perpetuity, as directed by the President
of the United States.
– Page 16 of 31 –
Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825, Dei Gratia© vs WACHOVIA
Case #1-10-CV-178733, Appellant Aubreé Dei Gratia©’s Judicially Noticed Evidence
in Support of Recusal of Judge Vincent J. Chiarello for Mandatory Disqualification for
Cause, including for Bias and Prejudice, previous self recusal, and Public Perception of
Bias and Prejudice pursuant to Hernandez v. VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Exhibit 7Exhibit 7: : Affidavit of Truth, Raymon E. Tate III©, the natural living man, signed by
Affiant on June 07, 2015, 13 pages, and notarized by STATE OF CALIFORNIA
commissioned Notary Public with CALIFORNIA JURAT on June 07, 2015;;
Judicial Significance to the case sub judice is that the Affiant Tate© verifies that Dei
Gratia© is the Plaintiff in the trial court case Dei Gratia© v. WACHOVIA MORTGAGE
FSB (dissolved corporation, lacks corporate capacity), Case #1-10-CV-178733, and
Appellant in Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825. Affiant Tate© has known Plaintiff/Appellant
since 2010. Affiant is not related to Plaintiff/Appellant, neither by blood nor marriage.
Affiant is a General Construction Contractor licensed by the STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
Affiant has first hand knowledge of all facts stated, thru direct attendance at all court
hearings, and review of all court documents.
Appellant is a living mortal woman, private citizen. Each of the assigned judges of the
Appellate Division hearing the instant appeal, including Judge Vincent J. Chiarello,
admitted in case #107-CV-189409, SFPCU v. Stewart and cross complaint, in which
Appellant was a party, that Judge Vincent J. Chiarello has a lifetime bar to hearing cases
in which the Appellant HI&RH Empress Aubreé Regina Dei Gratia©, the natural living
woman, is a party. The UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT has ruled that regular
payments from other than the judge’s employer of record are bribes with an associated
‘quid-pro-quo’ agreement. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello is a recipient of regular bribes
from the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello had a fiduciary
duty to disclose the bribes given to him by the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA to the
parties appearing before him. The COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA will profit from the
outcome of this case if ruled in favor a transfer of real property from Appellant to the
Respondent, in ‘quid-pro-quo’. The US SUPREME COURT has ruled in U.S. v. Kemp
– Page 17 of 31 –
Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825, Dei Gratia© vs WACHOVIA
Case #1-10-CV-178733, Appellant Aubreé Dei Gratia©’s Judicially Noticed Evidence
in Support of Recusal of Judge Vincent J. Chiarello for Mandatory Disqualification for
Cause, including for Bias and Prejudice, previous self recusal, and Public Perception of
Bias and Prejudice pursuant to Hernandez v. VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
that payments to judges establish a quid pro quo, and no proof other than proof of
payments is necessary to establish the quid pro quo between the judge and the entity
making the payments. The payments to the judge by the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
establish a bias against Plaintiff/Appellant. The transfer of real property from the
Plaintiff/Appellant is done to fulfill the quid pro quo. The COUNTY OF SANTA
CLARA profits from rulings that result in the transfer of real property ownership, thru
the county property transfer tax, and thru a reassessment of the property for increased
property tax which is done after every real property transfer. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello
had a duty to disclose the payments from the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA made to
Judge Vincent J. Chiarello, which he failed to perform. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello
admitted in 2013 that he self recused in 2008 in case #107-CV-189409, SFPCU v.
Stewart and cross complaint, in which Appellant was a party. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello
had a mandatory duty pursuant to 28 USC § 455(a) to self recuse due to previous self
recusal in case #107-CV-189409, in which the Plaintiff/Appellant herein was a party,
and due to tacit agreement to having a lifetime bar to presiding in cases involving
Aubreé Dei Gratia© as a party, and due to public perception of bias or prejudice by
Judge Vincent J. Chiarello against Aubreé Dei Gratia©, CCP §§ 170.1(a)(6)(iii), 170.1
(a)(6)(B), 170.3(b)(4), and objection perception of bias by anyone who knows the
aforementioned facts. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello has a bias against the Appellant herein.
Judge Vincent J. Chiarello has a fiduciary duty to track all of him conflicts, and to
disclose them to litigants in cases that she is assigned. Appellant has a land patent that
exists in perpetuity by federal court order of the United States Land Court in San
Francisco, California, as an assign to her real property located at 1461 Forrestal Ave.,
San Jose, CA as a portion of the original Land Patent on the Pueblo Lands of the City of
– Page 18 of 31 –
Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825, Dei Gratia© vs WACHOVIA
Case #1-10-CV-178733, Appellant Aubreé Dei Gratia©’s Judicially Noticed Evidence
in Support of Recusal of Judge Vincent J. Chiarello for Mandatory Disqualification for
Cause, including for Bias and Prejudice, previous self recusal, and Public Perception of
Bias and Prejudice pursuant to Hernandez v. VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
San Jose, which is exempt from lien and levy. The Land Patent makes any claim by
Defendant and Respondent WACHOVIA MORTGAGE FSB without standing, and a
claim for which relief cannot be granted. Further Plaintiff/Appellant is a secured party,
for which neither the Defendant/Respondent WACHOVIA MORTGAGE FSB, nor the
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA have standing to take to make any claim for
which relief can be granted. Each of the assigned judges of the Appellate Division
hearing the instant appeal, including Judge Vincent J. Chiarello, have ignored
Plaintiff/Appellant’s standing as a secured party with immunity to all incorporated state
court civil cases. Each of the assigned judges of the Appellate Division hearing the
instant appeal, including Judge Vincent J. Chiarello, have denied Plaintiff/Appellant’s
civil rights by ignoring Plaintiff/Appellant’s land patent on the property located at 1461
Forrestal Avenue, San Jose, California, issued by the United States Land Court, San
Francisco, California, to all heirs and assigns in perpetuity, as directed by the President
of the United States.
Exhibit 8Exhibit 8: : Affidavit of Truth, Matt P. Jacobsen©, the natural living man, signed by
Affiant on June 07, 2015, 13 pages, and notarized by STATE OF CALIFORNIA
commissioned Notary Public with CALIFORNIA JURAT on June 07, 2015;;
Judicial Significance to the case sub judice is that the Affiant Matt P. Jacobsen©
verifies that Dei Gratia© is the Plaintiff in the trial court case Dei Gratia© v.
WACHOVIA MORTGAGE FSB (dissolved corporation, lacks corporate capacity), Case
#1-10-CV-178733, and Appellant in Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825. Affiant Matt P.
Jacobsen has known Plaintiff/Appellant since 2010. Affiant is not related to
Plaintiff/Appellant, neither by blood nor marriage. Affiant is a Telecommunications
– Page 19 of 31 –
Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825, Dei Gratia© vs WACHOVIA
Case #1-10-CV-178733, Appellant Aubreé Dei Gratia©’s Judicially Noticed Evidence
in Support of Recusal of Judge Vincent J. Chiarello for Mandatory Disqualification for
Cause, including for Bias and Prejudice, previous self recusal, and Public Perception of
Bias and Prejudice pursuant to Hernandez v. VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Contractor. Affiant has first hand knowledge of all facts stated, thru personal knowledge
of the real estate and banking industries, and review of all court documents.
Appellant is a living mortal woman, private citizen. Each of the assigned judges of the
Appellate Division hearing the instant appeal, including Judge Vincent J. Chiarello,
admitted in case #107-CV-189409, SFPCU v. Stewart and cross complaint, in which
Appellant was a party, that Judge Vincent J. Chiarello has a lifetime bar to hearing cases
in which the Appellant HI&RH Empress Aubreé Regina Dei Gratia©, the natural living
woman, is a party. The UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT has ruled that regular
payments from other than the judge’s employer of record are bribes with an associated
‘quid-pro-quo’ agreement. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello is a recipient of regular bribes
from the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello had a fiduciary
duty to disclose the bribes given to him by the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA to the
parties appearing before him. The COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA will profit from the
outcome of this case if ruled in favor a transfer of real property from Appellant to the
Respondent, in ‘quid-pro-quo’. The US SUPREME COURT has ruled in U.S. v. Kemp
that payments to judges establish a quid pro quo, and no proof other than proof of
payments is necessary to establish the quid pro quo between the judge and the entity
making the payments. The payments to the judge by the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
establish a bias against Plaintiff/Appellant. The transfer of real property from the
Plaintiff/Appellant is done to fulfill the quid pro quo. The COUNTY OF SANTA
CLARA profits from rulings that result in the transfer of real property ownership, thru
the county property transfer tax, and thru a reassessment of the property for increased
property tax which is done after every real property transfer. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello
had a duty to disclose the payments from the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA made to
– Page 20 of 31 –
Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825, Dei Gratia© vs WACHOVIA
Case #1-10-CV-178733, Appellant Aubreé Dei Gratia©’s Judicially Noticed Evidence
in Support of Recusal of Judge Vincent J. Chiarello for Mandatory Disqualification for
Cause, including for Bias and Prejudice, previous self recusal, and Public Perception of
Bias and Prejudice pursuant to Hernandez v. VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Judge Vincent J. Chiarello, which he failed to perform. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello
admitted in 2013 that he self recused in 2008 in case #107-CV-189409, SFPCU v.
Stewart and cross complaint, in which Appellant was a party. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello
had a mandatory duty pursuant to 28 USC § 455(a) to self recuse due to previous self
recusal in case #107-CV-189409, in which the Plaintiff/Appellant herein was a party,
and due to tacit agreement to having a lifetime bar to presiding in cases involving
Aubreé Dei Gratia© as a party, and due to public perception of bias or prejudice by
Judge Vincent J. Chiarello against Aubreé Dei Gratia©, CCP §§ 170.1(a)(6)(iii), 170.1
(a)(6)(B), 170.3(b)(4), and objection perception of bias by anyone who knows the
aforementioned facts. Judge Vincent J. Chiarello has a bias against the Appellant herein.
Judge Vincent J. Chiarello has a fiduciary duty to track all of his conflicts, and to
disclose them to litigants in cases that she is assigned. Appellant has a land patent that
exists in perpetuity by federal court order of the United States Land Court in San
Francisco, California, as an assign to her real property located at 1461 Forrestal Ave.,
San Jose, CA as a portion of the original Land Patent on the Pueblo Lands of the City of
San Jose, which is exempt from lien and levy. The Land Patent makes any claim by
Defendant and Respondent WACHOVIA MORTGAGE FSB without standing, and a
claim for which relief cannot be granted. Further Plaintiff/Appellant is a secured party,
for which neither the Defendant/Respondent WACHOVIA MORTGAGE FSB, nor the
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA have standing to take to make any claim for
which relief can be granted. Each of the assigned judges of the Appellate Division
hearing the instant appeal, including Judge Vincent J. Chiarello, have ignored
Plaintiff/Appellant’s standing as a secured party with immunity to all incorporated state
court civil cases. Each of the assigned judges of the Appellate Division hearing the
– Page 21 of 31 –
Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825, Dei Gratia© vs WACHOVIA
Case #1-10-CV-178733, Appellant Aubreé Dei Gratia©’s Judicially Noticed Evidence
in Support of Recusal of Judge Vincent J. Chiarello for Mandatory Disqualification for
Cause, including for Bias and Prejudice, previous self recusal, and Public Perception of
Bias and Prejudice pursuant to Hernandez v. VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
instant appeal, including Judge Vincent J. Chiarello, have denied Plaintiff/Appellant’s
civil rights by ignoring Plaintiff/Appellant’s land patent on the property located at 1461
Forrestal Avenue, San Jose, California, issued by the United States Land Court, San
Francisco, California, to all heirs and assigns in perpetuity, as directed by the President
of the United States.
Pursuant to Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 201, for adjudicative facts, the
evidentiary Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, contain facts that under Federal Rules of
Evidence, Rule 201(b)(2) can be accurately and readily determined from sources whose
accuracy cannot be reasonably questioned. Further, the court, pursuant to Federal Rules
of Evidence, Rule 201(c)(2) must take Judicial Notice if a party requests it and the court
is supplied with the necessary information.
VERIFICATION
The signer certifies the following about this document:
(1) it is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause
unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation;
(2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law or
by a nonfrivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law or for
establishing new law;
(3) the factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified,
will likely have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further
investigation or discovery; and
(4) the denials of factual contentions are warranted on the evidence or, if specifically
so identified, are reasonably based on belief or a lack of information.
I declare under penalty of perjury by the laws of the UNITED STATES, and by
– Page 22 of 31 –
Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825, Dei Gratia© vs WACHOVIA
Case #1-10-CV-178733, Appellant Aubreé Dei Gratia©’s Judicially Noticed Evidence
in Support of Recusal of Judge Vincent J. Chiarello for Mandatory Disqualification for
Cause, including for Bias and Prejudice, previous self recusal, and Public Perception of
Bias and Prejudice pursuant to Hernandez v. VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
the laws of the STATE OF CALIFORNIA, that the foregoing is true and correct.
Further your Declarant, sayeth naught.
Date: June 08, 2015 By: _/s/______ Empress Aubreé Dei Gratia©_______ HI&RH Empress Aubreé Regina Dei Gratia©
(aka Rosalie Aubreé Guancione ©) Secured Party Creditor
– Page 23 of 31 –
Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825, Dei Gratia© vs WACHOVIA
Case #1-10-CV-178733, Appellant Aubreé Dei Gratia©’s Judicially Noticed Evidence
in Support of Recusal of Judge Vincent J. Chiarello for Mandatory Disqualification for
Cause, including for Bias and Prejudice, previous self recusal, and Public Perception of
Bias and Prejudice pursuant to Hernandez v. VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DECLARATION UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURYDECLARATION UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURYON BEHALF OF APPELLANTON BEHALF OF APPELLANT
I, the Appellant, Empress Aubreé Dei Gratia©, the natural living woman, and Secured
Party, declare under penalty of perjury of the Laws of the United States that: I have read
and examined the foregoing Affidavits, Exhibit 2: Affidavit of HI&RH Empress Aubreé
Regina Dei Gratia©, Exhibit 3: Affidavit of William Bullock Stewart III©, Exhibit 4:
Affidavit of Robert C. Cutright, Exhibit 5: Affidavit of Walter James Kubon, Exhibit 6:
Affidavit of Wayne Springfield©, Exhibit 7: Affidavit of Raymon E. Tate III©, Exhibit
8: Affidavit of Matt P. Jacobsen©, and I do certify that the evidentiary documents are
true and correct copies of the same documents obtained from the Affiants. The original
documents are being maintained by the undersigned, as document custodian.
All Rights Reserved UCC § 1-308
Date: June 08, 2015 By: _/s/_ Empress Aubreé Regina Dei Gratia© _ HI&RH Empress Aubreé Regina Dei Gratia©
the natural living woman and Secured Party
– Page 24 of 31 –
Appeal No. 1-14-AP-001825, Dei Gratia© vs WACHOVIA
Case #1-10-CV-178733, Appellant Aubreé Dei Gratia©’s Judicially Noticed Evidence
in Support of Recusal of Judge Vincent J. Chiarello for Mandatory Disqualification for
Cause, including for Bias and Prejudice, previous self recusal, and Public Perception of
Bias and Prejudice pursuant to Hernandez v. VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
EXHIBIT 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
EXHIBIT 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
EXHIBIT 4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
EXHIBIT 5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
EXHIBIT 6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
EXHIBIT 7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
EXHIBIT 8