http://ThirstForJustice.net/AmendedDaniggelis11162015.pdf


http://ThirstForJustice.Tripod.com/AmendedDaniggelis11162015.pdf


      IN THE  CIRCUIT COURT OF  COOK COUNTY, IL
                           LAW DIVISION
G.M.A.C.

V                                       07 CH 29738

Richard Daniggelis et al.


Amended Notice of Intervention by right, and, in the alternative,

Petition for Intervention by Non-attorney, Robert J. More


Comes now, Robert J. More (hereinafter abbreviated “RJM”) and amends my pleading, dated Tuesday, October 13, 2015, in the above-styled case, as a matter of right of 1st Amendment Redress:


amended complaint – definition:

“n. what results when the party suing (plaintiff or petitioner) [in the case, RJM] changes the complaint he/she has filed. It must be in writing, and can be done before the complaint is served on any defendant... Complaints are amended to correct facts, add new causes of action (bases for the lawsuit)...” Source: LAW.com –

http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=2395

“Rule 15 of the federal rules of civil procedure (USCS Fed Rules Civ Proc R 15) [which RJM apprehends is controlling viz the Supremacy Clause] provides that a plaintiff may amend his complaint as a matter of course, if the defendant has not filed an answer to the original complaint.” Source: http://definitions.uslegal.com/a/amended-complaint/


ROBERT J. MORE'S COUNTER-CLAIMS AND CROSS-CLAIMS


Now comes non-lawyer Robert J. More (hereinafter “RJM”), a named party to this case, pro se, and makes the following counterclaims:

Introduction


I incorporate, by reference, my claims and statements contained within the 4 corners of the original complaint (dated Tue., Oct. 13, 2015), for which this filing is an amendment.


This counterclaim, infra, is restricted Solely to the Incident of 10/29/13, Regarding the Allegedly Unauthorized Entry into the Residence at 1720 N. Sedgwick St. Chicago, IL, (“1720”) Accompanied by Notice of Intent to Specify Other Damages Incurred by RJM from Various Tortious Activities of Various Tortfeasors Involved in the Case this Document Concerns as the Circumstances of Providence May Permit. I aver and affirm that I attempted, but was unable to,


1

to e-file this claim in the above-styled case on or before 10/29/15, in order to beat the 2-year deadline, but, insofar as I was unable, I invoke the Common Law standard of nunc pro tunc, if that would be needed (it may not be) regarding “changing back to an earlier date of an order, judgment or filing of a document” i.e., said failed attempt to file this counterclaim.


Claim Proper – for Trespass on the Case Damages of 10/28/15:


  1. RJM abided, abode, and resided on the property referenced herein supra as 1720, from mid January of 2011 until early November, 2013.

  2. On or about 10/30/13, RJM was informed by Mr. Richard B. Daniggelis (“RBD”) that he had encountered one or more individuals climbing the stairs to his second floor living area on or about 10/29/13.

  3. RBD claimed that such individuals had cut the lock on the front door of 1720 w/o RBD’s permission.

  4. RBD claimed that the men whom he encountered on this occasion fled the residence shortly after this encounter.

  5. RBD then changed the locks on 1720 from those to which RBD had provided RJM a key to locks to which RJM was denied any key.

  6. RBD then established a complex rule or more appropriately, collection of rules for RJM’s entrance and departure from 1720.

  7. These rules were so onerous that RJM returned to residing (homeless) under the bridge from which he had relocated to 1720 in January of 2011, upon the request of Mr. John Dzendrowski to help rescue the alleged victim of mortgage fraud – RBD.

  8. RJM did not succeed in getting his possessions removed from 1720 at that juncture.

  9. This development ended up costing RJM enormously in terms of lost access to the possessions which he had brought from various origins to 1720, which costs and the arrangements and developments to which they correspond will be itemized at some future date, Providence permitting.

  10. RJM finally succeeded in recovering such possessions in 2015, including a water filter recovered in July of 2015 as RBD was removing his own possessions subject to his eviction.

  11. This document supersedes any and all demands issued in regard to this matter prior to its filing, such as that referenced in Doc. #8 of the D/L of 10/28/15.


Prayer for Relief

RJM herein demands the sum of $5,000.00 for all damages incurred from the trespass on the case referenced herein supra, not constituting consequential damages of the duty breach(es) this conveyance concerns, with all consequential damages of this particular tort claim to be itemized as might be necessary at some future date, along with particularization of the components of other claims and itemization of any and all damages concerned wherewith. Trial by Jury herein demanded on this claim and any and all others which RJM might ever have to file in regard to





2

the matters this document concerns.


Respectfully submitted,
Robert J. More, Heb. 10:31, 1 Cor. 10:13, Jas. 2:13, Rom. 12:21


Addendum to the Doc. List of the original complaint – record of time spent:

Research, Organization, Composition of Documents - 10/27, 19:00 -
19:30, 10/28, procurement of email addresses of parties concerned 9:00 – 10:00 and transfer of “…Demand….” document and emailing, 14:45 - 16:45 – Composition of Documents, Posting, Filing, Service, Report, Posting
Entries adjacent to which there is an "X" have been included in
document submission of 10/28/15 in this case


Additional Counter-Claims: Regarding Front-Door Lock Disassembly described supra:


Robert J. More herein demands the sum of $5,000.00, as settlement of all claims other than any claim for consequential damages in regard to the injuries he sustained via the trespass referenced in the title to this documentation, which are demanded via a trespass on the case theory in regard to the matters concerned.


This demand has been transmitted in lieu of the filing of any legal case in the Circuit Court of Cook County, IL  ("CCCC") in regard to the matters it concerns, in light of the demonstrably criminal and tortious order issued by Judge Sidney Jones on 9/13/13 postulating that Robert J. More ("RJM")  is prohibited from filing any legal case in the CCCC unless and until RJM remits a fine which RJM understands that he entirely lacks the moral authority to remit and which he lacks the resources to remit, even were he to not lack the moral authority to remit, and without the permission of whatever Judge would be presiding in Room 1307 of the R. Daley Center at the time of any attempted filing of any new case.


Given the constraints and exigencies to which RJM has been made, howsoever unjustifiably, unconscionably, criminally, despotically, and tortiously, subject as referenced herein supra, it is RJM's understanding that the transmission of this document to those to whom it has been transmitted effectively puts such persons and entities on notice of the matters concerned to a measure sufficient to ensure the protection of  any and all claims related to the incident so referenced from any legitimate invocation of any Statute of Limitations ("SOL") Defense and/or any other such type defense, that might, absent the delivery of this document have been available as a legitimate defense whereto. The law cannot require the impossible and this notice enables those receiving it to preserve evidence as it might ever be considered necessary to preserve such in order to present a legitimate defense if any can be presented in regard to the claims concerned.


Additional Demands / Notices to satisfy the due Process of 1st. Amendment Redress:


  1. This Court has been apprised that, to the best of my ability, I shall post these documents as front-page news at http://ThirstForJustice.Tripod.com and http://www.ThirstForJustice.net

3

  1. Robert J. More shall be permitted to possess and use an electronic recording device (“ERD”) on the property of the R. Daley Center as he understands he would ever have to possess and use such, limited only the limitations referenced in the People v. Clark, 2014 IL 1097190, and People v. Melongo, 2014 IL 114852, decisions of the IL Supreme Court, issued simultaneously on March 20, 2014.


  1. To satisfy Constitutional Redress and Due Process requirements, and applicable case law, RJM shall be permitted access to the complete case file compiled in re the case this document concerns which is in the custody of the Clerk of the CCCC, IL, with the possession and use of the means to reproduce the entirety and/or any component part whereof.


  1. RJM has informed this Court that it is his informed understanding that there would be no justification for the addressing of the merits of the case this document concerns prior to the adjudication of all of the Standard & Method of Adjudication issues (“S&MAI”) referenced in RJM’s “…Petition for Intervention of …10/13/15….” – in order, inter alia, to ensure adequate “Webb v. Webb,” (451 U.S. 493) preservation of any and all issues of a federal constitutional dimension present to this juncture in re the merits of this case and/or the S&M of Adjudication used thus far in re whereto and/or in regard to whatever such S&M might be used in re whereto in the future such that what would either be ensured in re whereto would be that if a legitimate adjudication would not result in re whereto, that such result could not be legitimately attributed to any culpable negligence in there not having been an adequate securing of this theatre – or that a legitimate adjudication will be executed and conducted in regard to this case.


  1. This Court has been informed that RJM will endeavor to procure protection for any and any and all government official(s) ever requesting such in order to enable him, her and/or them, respectively, in any given instance, to bear the burdens of the exercise of the authority of any given government office w/o having to expect uncontested retaliation from the button pushers and string pullers of this nation's institutions as a consequence of the bearing of any given burden, such as that most onerous one referenced in In re Murchison 349 U.S. 133, 136 (1955) to keep the adjudication balance "nice, clear and true" between the parties competing in any given adjudication.


  1. This Court has been informed that it is the informed understanding of Robert J. More ("RJM") that for, inter alia, the resuscitation of the Non-counterfeit Version of the Rule of Law and the salvaging of what might still be salvaged from the ruins of the civilization once known as "Christendom" - from which countless blessings of every type accrued to the human race- that the presumption of regularity in government activity implicitly present in the enforcement of laws and the deployment of military units, which is not not defined, w/ a presumption that the ordinary and customary arrangement in re which activity has been conducted in and by government entities in this period of history has continued to be one of the accommodation of the patently illegitimate agenda of the



4

corrupt business leaders who directly, or indirectly, influence the courts with an agenda to defraud legitimate reliance interests anchored in unalienable natural law rights w/ impunity, and which implemented agenda in its implementation, besides having unjustifiably caused hundreds of millions of deaths and incalculable suffering and misery and worse, sin, has left according to seemingly creditable reports the poorest 80% of Americans possessing claim to just 7% of this Country's resources and the replacement of the regulation of the summonsing of the collective force of the body politic/bearing of the sword from the Court systems presently in place and operative in this nation, to common law tribunals of the type referenced as the "25 Barons" in Clause # 61 of the Magna Carta and the Standing Armies" presently in place both professedly for National Defense and Domestic Law Enforcement w/ the Militia referenced in the Constitution and the Posse Summonsing and Deployment Used in Medieval England, respectively and that the matters this document concerns thoroughly substantiates such claim.


TRANSLATION: This Court is being told and informed (in point #6. supra) that Robert J. More ("RJM") holds out some hope that This Court (Judge Sanjay T. Tailor, presiding) will give a 'fair hearing' to the above-styled case.


*** CONCLUSION: ***


Wherefore, RJM hereby prays for a “nice, clear, and true” adjudication by This Court (cf: In re Murchison 349 U.S. 133, 136 (1955)), of the matter at case currently before the court.


In order to expedite this, RJM asks This Court to:


  1. Carefully review all the filings of RJM and other parties, and:

  2. Either:

    1. issue an order allowing RJM to attend this morning's hearing at 9:30am (RJM is 'trespassed' from the main courthouse, and thus Due Process and Redress are DENIED, thus necessitating my request for you to issue an order permitting me to attend) – or:

    2. permit me, as a matter of right, to participate in this hearing by telephone: See Art. II, Rule 185 (Telephone Conferences), R.Civ. Proceedings in the Trial Court, Rule 206(h)(Remote Electronic Means Depositions), etc. via telephone means.

    3. My telephone number is (608) 445-5181.

  3. It has come to RJM's attention that This Court believes that RJM and Gordon W. Watts (hereinafter “GWW”) are one in the same person: “Who is that Robert More from Florida?” (reported to me to be a question that Judge Tailor asked RBD)

  4. Therefore, RJM asks This Court to allow GWW to participate by teleconference in today's hearing, as with myself. GWW's telephone numbers of record are:

    1. Home number is (863) 688-9880.

    2. Cell number is (863) 409-2109.




5

    1. GWW is the “guy in Florida,” and can not attend; I am the “guy in Chicago,” and am willing, ready, and able to attend the hearing, for which you have scheduled a hearing date.

    2. Therefore, I ask This Court, Judge S.T. Tailor presiding, to carefully review all docs filed in this cause and rule accordingly.


Respectfully submitted,


Electronic Signature:


Robert J. More, Heb. 10:31, 1 Cor. 10:13, Ja. 2:13, Rom. 12:21


Intervenor Non-attorney Robert J. More

P.O. Box 6926, Chicago, IL, 60680-6926. PH: (608) 445-5181

Web: http://ThirstForJustice.Tripod.com and http://ThirstForJustice.net

Email: Anselm45@gmail.com Date: Monday, November 16, 2015


Certificate of Service


The undersigned, hereby certifies under penalties of perjury as provided by law pursuant

to 735 ILCS 5/1-109, that the above notice and all attached pleadings were delivered to

the following parties as indicated:


Clerk of the Circuit Court, Cook County, IL, Law Division, by electronic filing - and by email, if applicable/possible.


Andjelko Galic, Esq. (atty for Defendant, Daniggelis) (Atty No.: 33013) 134 N. LaSalle

St., STE 1040 – (Email: AndjelkoGalic@Hotmail.com and

AGForeclosureDefense@Gmail.com) CHICAGO IL, 60602. Cell: 312-217-5433, FAX:

312-986-1810, PH: 312-986-1510


Gordon W. Watts URL: www.gordonwatts.com and www.gordonwaynewatts.com (Email:

Gww1210@aol.com and Gww1210@gmail.com) 821 Alicia Road, Lakeland, FL, 33801-

2113. Cell: 863-4092109, PH: 863-688-9880


Joseph Younes Law Offices / http://ChicagoAccidentAttorney.net 1166 W WASHINGTON ST Ste 600, Chicago, IL 60602-3596 Phone: (312) 372-1122, Fax: (312) 372-1408 Email:

RoJoe69@yahoo.com


Peter King (Atty. for Joseph Younes) (Atty. No.: 48761) c/o: King Holloway LLC, 101 N.

Wacker Dr., STE 2010, Chicago, IL 60606, Email: PKing@khllaw.com


Richard Indyke, Esq. (312-332-2828 Atty for LaSalle Bank Natl Assn), John K. Kallman,

Esq. (312-578-1515, atty for STG: atty no: 25182) 221 N. LaSalle St. STE 1200,

Chicago, IL 60601-1305, no known email address.

6

Paul L. Shelton, Pro Se, 3 Grant Square, SUITE #363, Hinsdale, IL 60521-3351.

PMSA136@aol.com, PLShelton@SBCGlobal.net


Paul L. Shelton, 10 North Adams Street, Hinsdale, IL 60521.

PMSA136@aol.com, PLShelton@SBCGlobal.net


I, Robert J. More, the undersigned, hereby certify under penalties of perjury as provided

by law pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/1-109, that the above notice and all attached pleadings

were served upon all parties listed above, this 16th day of November, 2015 by the following

methods:


I am serving all parties by electronic filing, using the court's electronic filing system.


I am contemporaneously serving all parties by email, as indicated above.


Internet: I shall, when practically possible, post a TRUE COPY of this filing – and related

filings – online at my official websites, infra.


I am not serving any party by hard copy due to the fact that it is a morally and financially

unfeasible burden for which I am not morally obliged to waste the nonrenewable limited

resources for which I am an humble steward. Let this statement serve as notice as to

whom I have and have not served.


Electronic Signature:


Robert J. More, Heb. 10:31, 1 Cor. 10:13, Ja. 2:13, Rom. 12:21


Date: Monday, November 16, 2015

Intervenor Non-attorney Robert J. More

P.O. Box 6926, Chicago, IL, 60680-6926. PH: (608) 445-5181

Web: http://ThirstForJustice.Tripod.com and http://ThirstForJustice.net

Email: Anselm45@gmail.com

Date: Monday, November 16, 2015













7