Judge Skipper Koetter: You are constitutionally disqualified!

Judge Koetter: I sued you on May 10, 2013, and on May 15, 2013, you signed a Summary Judgment against me by being misled, deceived, and defrauded by Randall W. Hill, Plaintiffs’ counsel. RANDAL W. HILL’S PERJURY & SUMMARY JUDGMENT OBTAINED BY FRAUD ON THE COURT IN CONSPIRACY WITH SKIPPER KOETTER Posted on May 18, 2013.

Wait a second, your honor! Please sign the order I prepared in advance of the hearing so that I can show my client MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

Here you go!

In fact, besides pleading Plaintiffs’ lack of standing and your lack of subject matter jurisdiction, I sued you for civil rights violations on June 5, 2012. See AMENDED Cover Letter + PETITION FOR SECTION 1983 AND STATE LAW CLAIMS filed on June 4, 2012 Posted on May 23, 2013, and on August 27, 2012, I filed MOTION TO SET ASIDE THE SHERIFF’S DEED REAL ESTATE, ALL THE VOID WARRANTY DEEDS ISSUED BY ANITA’S RESORT PROPERTIES, INC., THE VOID ORDERS/JUDGMENTS WITHOUT SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION, AND TO CHANGE VENUE, OR TO REMOVE TO THE FEDERAL COURT Posted on August 23, 2012, in which you were one of the Defendants.

When you were sued, you became a party to the proceedings, and you became constitutionally disqualified. Consequently, “any judgment you render is void and a nullity.”

Your VOID Orders and Judgments protected the fraudsters, e.g., Terry J. Cox, Anita L. Koop, among others: 

 

Is the man Terry J. Cox, and the woman Anita L. Koop in disguise?

Do you understand that neither subject matter jurisdiction nor constitutional disqualification can be waived? As Anita’s Resort Properties, Inc. has lacked standing since June 6, 1993, any order or judgment rendered for it is VOID ab initio. See Expiration of Assumed Name Certificate and Standing to Sue Posted on May 18, 2012 & AnitaS Resort Property, Inc. – Wysk.  Your orders and judgments, being founded upon those VOID Orders/Judgments, are worthless waste paper because  “A void judgment has been termed mere waste paper, an absolute nullity; and all acts performed under it are also nullities.” See Commander v. Bryan, 123 S.W.2d 1008, (Tex. Civ. App., Fort Worth, 1938, n.w.h.); 34 Tex. Jur., Sec. 262, page 177; Maury v. Turner, 244 S.W. 809, (Tex. Com. App., 1922). And having taken an oath to uphold the Constitution of Texas and that of the United States, your “willful or persistent” violations constitute TREASON. So you should be labeled a TRAITOR, shouldn’t you?  See Abuse and Misuse of Judicial Power, Trespassing, Usurpation, Conspiracy, Corruption, Treason, and RICO  (posted September 26, 2012). You should have been removed, not just openly reprimanded by the State Commission on Judicial Conduct!  What are the Penalties for Treason? (with pictures) – wiseGEEK  See for yourself, your dishonor!

Blind Lady Justice holding scale and sword.

In the olden days, the bloody scene was the consequence of TREASON.

Do you know the destiny of a TRAITOR in modern-day America, Mr. Koetter?

The fact that my repeated accusations  of your wrongdoings over the past two years have met with complete silence reminds me of: “Silence is the safest course for any man to adopt who distrusts himself.” — François de la Rochefoucauld

Some constitutional disqualification case law to share with you:

1. Unlike recusal, disqualification cannot be waived. Sun Exploration & Prod. Co., 729 S.W.2d at 312; see also Gamez v. State, 737 S.W.2d 315, 317 (Tex.Cr.App. 1987). If a judge is disqualified under the Texas Constitution, he is without jurisdiction to hear the case, and therefore, any judgment he renders is void and a nullity. Buckholts Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Glaser, 632 S.W.2d 146, 148 (Tex.1982); Gulf Maritime, 858 S.W.2d at 559. Disqualification may be raised at any time. See Buckholts Indep. Sch. Dist., 632 S.W.2d at 148. A trial court or an appellate court may raise the issue on its own motion. See Lee v. State, 555 S.W.2d 121, 122 (Tex.Crim.App.1977); City of Houston v. Houston Lighting & Power Co., 530 S.W.2d 866, 868 (Tex.Civ.App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1975, writ ref’d n.r.e.).

2. Judges shall disqualify themselves in all proceedings in which: they know that, individually or as a fiduciary, they have an interest in the subject matter in controversy. Tex.R.Civ.P. 18b(1) (Vernon Supp.1995). This is one of the constitutional grounds for disqualification which cannot be waived. The Texas Constitution states three circumstances in which a judge is disqualified from sitting in a case. Article V, section 11 states, in pertinent part, that “[n]o judge shall sit in any case wherein he may be interested.” Tex. Const. art. V, § 11. Two statutes codify this mandate. The Government Code provides, in pertinent part, that a judge is disqualified from sitting in cases in which the judge is interested. Tex.Gov’t Code Ann. § 21.005 (Vernon Supp.1995).

3. Disqualification cannot be waived and can be raised at any time. Buckholts Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Glaser, 632 S.W.2d 146, 148 (Tex .1982). As a general rule, a judge who is a party to a suit, even though he or she has not been served with process, may not preside over that case, decide any matters requiring judicial discretion, or approve the minutes of the court. Hawpe v. Smith, 22 Tex. 410 (1858). Article V, Section 11 of the Texas Constitution provides that no judge shall sit in any case wherein he or she may be interested. See Tex. Const. art. V, § 11. Likewise, Rule 18b(1) of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure provides that the judges shall disqualify themselves in all proceedings in which they have an interest in the subject matter in controversy. See Tex.R. Civ. P. 18b(1)(b). The interest that disqualifies a judge is an interest, however small, which rests on a direct pecuniary or personal interest in the result of the case. Cameron v. Greenhill, 582 S.W.2d 775, 776 (Tex.1979) (per curiam). If a judge is disqualified, the judge is without jurisdiction to hear the case, and therefore, any judgment rendered is void and a nullity. Buckholts Indep. School Dist. v. Glaser, 632 S.W.2d 148 (Tex. 1982); Gulf Mar. Warehouse Co. v. Towers, 858 S.W.2d 556, 560 (Tex.App.-Beaumont 1993, writ denied); Lone Star Indus., Inc. v. Ater, 845 S.W.2d 334, 336 (Tex.App.-El Paso 1992, no writ).

Didn’t you ever see my pleadings? Take a look here; it’s in the record of this case, and has been posted online since 05/13/2013. Please click: AMENDED PAUL CHEN’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, TRESPASS …

Here, the issue is whether you have a direct pecuniary or personal interest in this case. My claims were $75 million money damages, remember? Why? I suffered financial loss in the amount of $34,999,640.91 evidenced from the Creditors Matrix in Case Number: 96-24925 on 11/25/1996 as a result of the crooked couple Terry J. Cox and Anita L. Koop’s wrongful foreclosure on 7/2/1996. Therefore, being one of the Defendants, you do have an enormous, direct, personal, pecuniary interest in this case, and you should have disqualified yourself, but you didn’t!

With so much money at stake, how can you be just and fair

if you do not play the role of the blindfolded lady of justice?

Rest assured that judicial immunity is unavailable to you because you sat on the bench without jurisdiction, power or authority resulting from Anita’s Resort Properties, Inc.’s lack of standing!

There is no such thing as justice – in or out of court. — Clarence Darrow

You almost made me believe in the above pessimistic view! Now I do believe: “Punishment is justice for the unjust.” — Saint Augustine did speak my mind because they deserve it!

I am confident that, in the end, common sense and justice will prevail. I’m an optimist, brought up on the belief that if you wait to the end of the story, you get to see the good people live happily ever after. — Cat Stevens (Cat and I speak the same language!)

The fight for justice against corruption is never easy. It never has been and never will be. It exacts a toll on our self, our families, our friends, and especially our children. In the end, I believe, as in my case, the price we pay is well worth holding on to our dignity. — Frank Serpico (Frank and I sing the same tune!)

You must be kidding, counselor! My price is a minimum of $1,000.

Take it back, and add $9,800 to it before coming back!

But you said $1,000, Skipper!

Come on, David. I awarded you $100,000 of attorneys’ fees in this case. My 10% cut is not unreasonable, David!

*************************************************************************************

How about these $100 bills, your honor? 

That’s the best we can do because we are a new small law firm!

That’s more like it! Leave the cash and leave by the back door, Mr. Rookie Lawyer!

 

“Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe.”
― Frederick Douglass

 

TO BE CONTINUED.

Paul Chen