Illegal Eviction - Motion To Continue Paying Rent Into Court
Link to this blogpost:
http://www.publiusroots.org/2024/12/illegal-eviction-motion-to-continue.html
Incase this may help others LOCATED IN CONNECTICUT USA who are in a bind regarding #HousingEvictions go to https://www.doorloop.com/laws/connecticut-landlord-tenant-right #SunriseCT
This reference should have all references:
https://singhasongflower.blogspot.com/2024/11/home-on-the-deranged.html?m=1
UPDATE 12/26/2024
TRANSCRIPTS ARE FRAUDED BY THE RECORDED MESSAGE BEING ALTERED BEFORE THE TRANSCRIBER GETS IT. FOR THE MOST PART, THEY DELETED DIALOGUE BUT IN SOME CASES THEY MOVED DIALOGUE AND EVEN CREATED DIALOGUE OBVIOUSLY USING MY DOCUMENTS WHICH THEY HACK.
http://www.publiusroots.org/2024/12/illegal-eviction-transcripts.html
WTF:
I NOW HAVE TO SUBMIT THIS MOTION BECAUSE THE JUDGE CLAIMS MY MOTION HAS TO BE TITLED "MOTION TO PAY FAIR USE AND VALUE INTO COURT" EVEN THOUGH i CITED THE RIGHT LAW!
This motion was updated on 12/27/2024 and I need to remove this one and paste the updated version. First I will paste the updated version because I want to make sure it will post. -12/27/2024 4:50am
=====================================================================
DOCKET NO. NHH-CV24-6024196-S : SUPERIOR COURT OF CT
ANSONIA STATE STREET, LLC : J.D. OF NEW HAVEN
V : HOUSING SESSION
ANNE M. BRADLEY : December 26, 2024
MOTION TO PAY FAIR USE AND VALUE INTO COURT
Pursuant to CGS 47a-26b, Defendant motions this court to allow her to Pay Fair Use and Value Into Court on this case.
HISTORY
Defendant Submitted a sufficient Motion To Continue to Pay Rent into Court, pursuant to 47a-26b. Judge Spader denied it on December 24, claiming Defendant’s motion has to be a motion “To Pay Fair Use And Value” into court. This motion is to satisfy the judge’s requirement. Additionally, this Judicial Authority claimed: “As a responsive pleading has been filed and this matter has been scheduled for trial, payments into Court are presently moot.” There was no responsive pleading in this Case History - not on the requests to pay rent; not on the Motion itself. Yet the Plaintiff was served all documents promptly by the Defendant.
FACTS
1. Judge Alayna Stone claimed the Notice To Quit as valid because it was typed “properly” is absurd.
a) There was no cited law. They failed to use the court-published form on Notice To Quit.
b) Courts have allowed errors of writ so grotesque as the the date on the Notice; admitting they were only concerned with the LEGAL EFFICACY.
c) There is no caselaw which allows a Notice to Quit to be illegal for a Housing Complaint, and legal for the Eviction Process - when the Notice To Quit was based on FRAUD; and/or when the Notice To Quit is insufficiently served, as specified by the Defendant in the Housing Complaint as well as on this case.
i. Caselaws which refer to NTQ’s at different junctures had TWO NOTICE TO QUITS served on the business-defendants! One would be ruled as defective; the other would be separately ruled on.
ii. If Judge Alayna Stone is even an attorney remains to be seen since her Juris number is not validated in the Juris Lookup and the Juris Lookup has no mention of any cyber work being done to updated its data, which includes a number of Juris codes, not just in-state attorneys, as A. In fact the F code, referring to Pro Hac Vice is used by the representative of this plaintiff, which is ILLEGAL since they are not an out of state attorney obtaining permission “One time only” on this matter. A search on this company in Housing Court will uncover numerous cases, some of which involve ANSONIA APARTMENTS, which is not even registered as a business in Connecticut, yet apparently owned by Gideon Freidman since it is referenced in the $89 billion mortgages on this $2.2 billion piece of property which was sold for $160 million without any closing. They have a plaza in the back which is referred to Pitkin Plaza as well, and there is a restaurant on that Plaza-part of this same property.
2. Attached are all documents reflecting the relevant Motion To Continue to Pay Rent into Court. Rent was paid for October and November 2024.
3. Document No. 117 on aforesaid case, Defendant submitted due to the landlord refusing to cash rent check, which was left in the office. That check has not been cashed as of today, December 26, 2024.
a) Landlord has refused to provide a ledger to Defendant since August 2024 although has provided her a ledger printout monthly when she requests it.
4. Document No. 118; December 10, Defendant issued a REQUEST to Pay Rent into court. That request was denied. Defendant claims this was an unfair tactic by the court, which is BOUND BY THE LAW.
5. December 6 was the date which Defendant submitted the check for rent into court yet it was rejected by Attorney Pitt. He did not indicate it could be submitted with a motion. Defendant had to research this herself, along with contending with ELM CITY COMMUNITIES informing her they would be discontinuing her HUD assistance, accusing her of not submitting a packet back to them, which she never got and they mailed to a defective mailing address. Defendant had to complete this 60-page form which serves as a Section 8 Renewal. This interrupted her ability to remain persistant with the payment issue. Email reflecting this circumstance is provided with this motion, as pages 29-32 of Appendix.
6. Aforesaid Motion TO PAY FAIR USE AND VALUE into court is thus submitted, which encompasses her Motion To Continue to Pay Rent into court along with section on laws titled LAW SUPPORTING MOTION TO PAY FAIR USE AND VALUE INTO COURT
7. Plaintiff, who is Defendant on the Housing Complaint Case, did not object to Defendant, who is Plaintiff paying rent into court, which is their right to do so.
a) Notice of Intent to appeal; fee waiver granting appeal
b) Notice of Intent to Motion To Open has also been submitted within body of another pleading
8. Plaintiff did not object to Defendant, Pro Se’s Motion to Continue To Pay Rent into court.
9. Trial has not even taken place.
10. Notice of Intent to Appeal has been submitted.
11. Efforts to CONTINUE to Pay Fair Use and Value in court are NOT MOOT. There is proof these efforts have been thwarted, not litigated; which the Defendant has further used diligence in asserting her rights.
12. This motion comprises of 6 pages with an Appendix of 33 pages.
LAW
Provided in Appendix
Summary
Defendant considers the court’s denial of Defendant’s paying fair use and value into court just because she referred to it as RENT, when the check has to be made out to the RECEIVER OF RENTS, as abuse of procedure.
Motion to Remove both JA Alayna Stone as well as JA Spader will be submitted forthwith. Motion to Transfer Venue will also be submitted forthwith. As a disabled person who is in her 60’s - almost killed by a 20-ton truck which slammed head-on into her vehicle, illegally driving in her lane on a no-passing highway, she has found all this so abusive to her. She had to sleep on her apartment floor made of cement for two years due to continuous illegal entries and retaliation by the landlord for complaining that the maintenance manager relieved himself in her bathroom trashcan - no attention to that very fact was given by the management at 360 State Street. Kyle Huckle’s title was Property Manager and when the supposed sale of this $2.2 billion piece of property took place for an alleged $160 million and thereafter rigged an $89 billion mortgage, Kyle Huckle’s title was changed to Community Services Manager which is frankly odd and illogical. Nevertheless there is no one who holds the title of Property Manager on this premises and Kyle only tells defendant “I was told not to talk to you”; despite having to submit numerous complaints, sufficiently detailed and well-formatted, with absolutely no results. Defendant’s doctor has recently left the practice he was in and her need to secure another doctor is immanent due to severe pain in her legs and back. Though she was able to repair her bed after making numerous changes in her apartment, including placing her bookshelves on a furniture dolly to make space when needed, she has had longstanding pain caused from being forced to sleep on the floor to the humor of the landlord at 360 State Street. I also remind the court that this same maintenance manager broke into her apartment on July 2, using force, smashing her latches which were locked while she was taking a bath. She screamed at him to stay out yet he entered anyway and she feared for her life. A higher authority obviously ordered him out since Kyle Huckle tried to defend what he did, despite telling the Defendant, “I was told not to talk to you”.
How much more depravity has to take place on this case with no merit? DEFENDANT PAID HER RENT! THE NOTICE TO QUIT WAS FRAUD AND ILLEGALLY SERVED BY THE MARSHAL. The Plaintiff claimed that Rent for August and September were not paid, which was a lie! She has been paying the same amount, $198 on her Section 8 since BEFORE this alleged change in title took place with Ansonia State Street, which also aligns with Ansonia Apartments and has been Plaintiff on several eviction cases despite the very fact that THEIR COMPANY IS NOT REGISTERED WITH THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT AS A BUSINESS.
Additionally, this plaintiff has an illegal appearance as Pro Hac Vice and also the court allows the Return Date to be November 4, which at this point is DELIBERATE FRAUD. The Return Date on the summons was November 12. Was it a mistake by the 30-year old who fraudulently claimed he was Attorney Peter Hoops, who entered the BAR in 1987? Does the court ever validate anything?
A Notice To Quit is NOT VALID if it fails to support the legal efficacy of which that document has been prepared and cited for! Not citing a law is another breach by this plaintiff who seems to have a “blank check” in committing infraction after infraction which reflects OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE and deliberate abuse to a disabled tenant who pays her rent diligently and timely.
Appendix
Motion To Pay Rent, 32 pages
Added Pages to Revised Appendix
Prepared and Submitted,
FOR THE DEFENDANT, PRO SE
_____________________
Anne M. Bradley
PO Box 206514
New Haven, CT 06520
Ph. 203-508-0858
CERTIFICATION OF MAILING
December 26, 2024
Aforesaid Motion To Pay Fair Use And Value is in compliance with the Rules of Court and has been faxed to the following plaintiff’s Attoney-At-Law:
Peter Hoops
Hoops & Associates
FAX: 860-445-8919
____________________
Docket No. NHH-CV24-6024196-S : SUPERIOR COURT OF CT
ANSONIA STATE STREET, LLC : J.D. OF NEW HAVEN
V : HOUSING SESSION
ANNE M. BRADLEY : December 26, 2024
Appendix
Motion For Payment of Use and Occupancy - REVISED 12/26/2024
DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION PAGE NO.
Supporting Documents
Notarized Statement 1
Memo to Housing Authority
Referenced Documents One Page 7
Ledger Fraudulent Balance $13,723.75 8
Removed by Court Order
Fraudulent Billing Resumed
LAWS Paying Rent Into Court 10
30-Day Notice by Landlord Required
PRIOR to Notice To Quit
Checks/Copies December Rent To Pay in Court 18
- RE
AUGUST & SEPTEMBER RENTS PAID
VALIDATION THEY WERE CASHED
Reprinted Letter/Memo Regarding Rent For December 2024 21
Case Information To validate efforts to pay timely rent into court 25
Email to Sec 8 Admin Nov 7, 2024 - she changed the date 29 Letter to Housing Auth By Hoops & Assoc
(missing yet Tara Jones said she left it to be picked up; it was not left; email requesting it again provided. She has not provided it)
Order “proper action”…”motion to pay fair use and occupancy”… 33
This is the full order, one page scanned:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
UPDATED ABOVE, 12/27/2024
.png)
Note, this motion was denied by an appointee of the governor who took part in the SANDY HOOK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SHOOTING HOAX, where nobody died and Obama frauded the economy by over a trillion dollars. Some have claimed over a trillion in the US Gov alone since he had 65 or more federal agents go to the scene. Pretty damn over the top, wouldn't you say? All to spin his lie, that is why he did that - at the expense of the United States Government.
There is no Juris number for him in the Juris Lookup. So they are messing with that system; it may be due to all the corruption in this state.
https://trellis.law/judge/walter.m.spader.jr
Here is the "ruling"
I had to make 3 screenshots, due to the abusive layout of this laptop. Also I have been frequently interrupted by cyber crime and will show you a screenshot or two of that.
.png)
It completely covers up where I type!
.png)
.png)
.png)
This is 32 pages. I could not copy and paste the document I typed because it was remotely deleted! I scanned all pages with the appendix. Yet I have a nightmare just uploading it here due to cyber crime!
Hopefully it is all here. Next, I will upload the HUD Renewal Packet for people to see and hopefully effect accountability.
It is New Year's Eve, 12/31/2024
DOCKET NO. NHH-CV24-6024196-S : SUPERIOR COURT OF CT
ANSONIA STATE STREET, LLC : J.D. OF NEW HAVEN
V : HOUSING SESSION
ANNE M. BRADLEY : December 31, .2024
Affidavit of Defendant
MOTION TO REMOVE JUDICIAL AUTHORITY ALAYNA STONE
Pursuant to PB 1-22 and 1-23
1. My name is Anne Bradley and I am over the age of 18 and believe in the power of oath.
2. That oath belief also includes the oaths which an attorney takes as well as what a judge takes and what a chief clerk takes.
3. I am also submitting a Motion to Remove Judge Slader and also motioning to change the venue.
4. January 13, 2025 is a scheduled hearing for an unknown reason and also a trial.
5. In the hearing on December 3, “Judge Alayna Stone” claimed I did not have to worry about her stating the Notice To Quit was valid in the Housing Complaint. She stated it did not have a bearing on the eviction case, which makes absolutely no sense at all. She fails to articulate; refuses to articulate; and in that hearing said the Notice To Quit not valid in this case as a weird reassurance! I could not believe my ears and emphasized the case should be dismissed due to no merit, no probable cause. She had no subject matter jurisdiction to carry it out this far and certainly the exhorbitant waste on this case is a discredit to the court.
a) I did not even have to submit an Appendix with the Complaint. I could have uploaded it after the complaint was served - yet this court 10 approved a $3,000 charge by the marshal to serve it and the marshal expected me to deliver it to her in Hamden. It is obvious there was some kind of deal made at some point - most likely when she took it to the Secretary of State’s office. Attorney Pitt claimed someone died to have it served there, yet that was not true. In fact the Secretary of State has been the Bozzuto Agent of Service for over 10 years. Nevertheless, I was fully prepared to print copies, having it scanned in for me and on a flashdrive for accuracy and clarity - for the eight parties which were listed due to numerous companies associated with the management of this $2.2 billion building which according to media was sold for $160 million only, with no closure on the property before doing so. They also have an $89 billion mortgage!
6. I do not even know if Alayna Stone is an attorney, let alone a judge since she does not exist in the Juris lookup. The Juris Lookup provides all codes which it covers, which include judges and attorneys with positions in the government, and PRO HAC VICE, which means they are out of state attorneys. There is nothing otherwise stated in the Juris lookup.
7. The fact that this person has no regard over the legitamacy of a case even when I have brought up specific matters, is reflective of lack of Due Process.
a) As a Pro Se, I should not be expected to look up volumes of references to validate what the duties are of a judge. This is a cut and dry case. There is no probable cause. They just expected to get away with stealing my records out of my apartment so I would have nothing to go by. The landlord also refused to provide me ledger printouts for August and September, which is contrary to every month when I make a payment for my rent, I am given the ledger to ascertain they are posting my rent, which by the way, exceeds what I should be paying since I have had a FEDERAL POVERTY LEVEL INCOME since I moved here. Social Security is my only income.
i. The fact that the Housing Case was docketed and my rent was payable to the RECEIVER OF RENTS of the court also is proof that this court, this judge is deliberately evading duties and in fact violating the law by playing its DEVILS CHESSBOARD TRICKS.
8. The fact that the court entered my Housing Complaint and accepted my payments into court is validation that my rent is current and the NOTICE TO QUIT IS INVALID. Otherwise, they would have held a hearing on whether or not the case should be admitted into court before docketing it.
a) It is pureley elementary for this “judge” to claim that the Notice To Quit is valid just because it is typed and dated and allegedly formatted properly - WHEN THERE WAS NOT EVEN A CITED LAW; and the attorney or whoever that person is, since he was only about 30 and his Juris Number claimed he entered the BAR in 1987 - and in the December 3 hearing a DIFFERENT man appeared claiming he, too was Peter Hoops.
i. I could have spent time in claiming all this deliberate fraud, but it would have taken away from my one single truth on the lack of merit to this case! Why I even had to argue this so persistently when the court had my checks before the Summons was even issued is a very dishonest and abusive way to conduct a case! I am a targeted person because I am against corruption in this state!
9. The Housing Hearing is titled “Anne Bradley vs Ansonia State Street, et al” since the determination of exactly who the real landlord is should have been addressed first. I titled it as Anne Bradley vs Bozzuto Mangagement Company (Yet Attorney Pitt said it would be more consistent if it was titled using the same parties in the ANTICIPATED eviction case, which he said would be “Ansonia State Street vs Anne Bradley”) since Bozzutos paid all salaries, including to Dragana LaCore, who claimed she represented MEPT Chapel Street - which was in fact a listed Non-profit which solicited money from the public, as I found out when I was cheated by my prior landlord, refusing to give me my $1600 deposit, having illegally entered my apartment after I gave them a 30-day notice and destroyed the porcelain surface of my bathTUB and my need to file a Small Claim lawsuit.
a) For emphasis, I want to make mention that comedian Barry WeinTRAUB (pronounced “wine-trub”) appeared for Colonial Fountain Management when I filed a small claim for my money and costs to fix the tub since I purchased two porcelain repair kits at Home Depot, costing in excess of $200. My prior address was 564 Prospect Street, yet that landlord, Colonial Fountain Management, thereafter moved their mailboxes facing the opposite side of the building, which is what they were using for a cheaper tax rate. This was a significant issue of fraud and reflective of their continuous behavior.
i. That prior apartment was rented immediately. Tenants moved in the day I left. I met the tenants and even gave them one of my Vornado space heaters since that apartment had very poor and expensive electric heating. I had to pay up to $248 for one month yet did not even heat my livingroom. My neighbor was only paying $40/month year around!
ii. Dragana LaCore, of MEPT Chapel nonprofit/paid employee of Bozzuto Management here at 360 State Street, frauded my preliminary Section 8 Documents completed December 13, 2012 - changing my address from 564 Prospect Street to 38 Arch Street, New Haven. I gave her no permission to and would have claimed that was frauding. Dragana told me to make checks payable to 360 State Street only - not MEPT or Bozzutos. I discovered they quit claimed this building to 360 State Street, yet that company was dissolved on record after I entered the complaint. The marshal included that service to the office of Gidean Freidman at 42 Temple Street.
iii. Barry Weintraub was not an attorney; yet refused to identify himself to the Small Claims Court with any credentials regarding his affiliation with the company; considering it all joke, as well as the magistrate who was presiding. I requested his credentials since I had never met him and he was not listed as any officer or employee of the company. He was only showing up as a comedian. He gave “You snooze, you lose” comments to further humor himself and this magistrate, who ruled in the favor of Colonial Fountain Management.
b) Colonial Fountain Management actually owns the property at 42 Temple Street, which Gideon Freidman has several titled businesses operating from the same location. One, in fact, I do know is not even a registered company yet the Housing Court allows the company to be Plaintiff in several cases: Ansonia Apartments, LLC. This company is also refereed to in the $89 billion mortgage on the property, which had only been described as the apartment complex at 360 State Street despite the fact that the whole Pitkin Plaza has been a part of this property which the City of New Haven “sold” to Bozzuto Management Company for $1. There was no closing, which have included a thorough survey of the property; documented and certified for the record.
10. The person who presided over the housing hearing on October 31 was NOT the same person as the one who presided over the eviction hearing on December 3. Yet she ruled on both hearings. I did not argue this fact of fraud because I wanted to emphasize, as a Pro Se, the eviction case has no merit. The Notice To Quit for nonpayment of Rent for August and September were deliberate statements of FRAUD. I paid the same amount for a number of years and timely. The Plaintiff neither brought any ledger at any time nor did the Plaintiff give me a letter 30 days in advance claiming I owed anything. In fact, the manager of this apartment building refused to speak to me regarding the numerous breaches which they have caused due to illegal entries, vandalism, theft, and deliberate manipulation of appliances to cause them to not operate properly. They vandalized my bed and I had to sleep on the floor for almost two years before it was fixed. The maintenance manager not only defecated and uriniated in my bathroom trash can but also on July 2, 2024 he smashed in my door when I was taking a bath and I screamed for my life! This was all brought up in court by documentation as well as testimony.
a) I also brought up and PROVED the fact that this alleged landlord was ordered by a court to REMOVE THE FRAUDULENT BILLING BALANCE from my ledger. When the order was given, the maintenance manager relieved himself in my trashcan in my bathroom when he was supposed to be just changing filters in the dryer. He is his alleged “trainee” who was not even in the bathroom yet was outside of it, scoping out my apartment, as I was working on papers, was told by this manager to go to their office. He said “My tip is broken”. If it was a need for a replacement screwdriver, when they had a fully-loaded cart out in the hall, that raised concern on what he was doing and planning. I did not go in the bathroom. I continued to work on documents yet in this small apartment I was able to tell minimally if he was involved with any suspcious activity. It must have been at that point he made a ‘water closet’ out of the washer and dryer area - as some kind of retaliation for the landlord, which was fraudulently billing me for years. Even though they removed the $14,000 (rounded) they resumed the fraudulent billing since January 2013. One ledger indicated the “adjustment” occurred in January; another ledger which I got the following month, March 2023, indicated it occurred in February; 2/11/2023. They have altered these ledgers like they are Excel Spreadsheets rather than legitimate accounting software which would require a password to make such adjustments and those entries would be retained in its system.
11. The complete and deliberate disregard for the physical harm and trauma which this person has reflected could not be more evident! She gave no time for discussion on the merits of the case even!
a) Instead, this assigned judge claimed that she was following a procedure and the merits of the case took a back seat! This is not DUE PROCESS! She was obviously stalling for time to make those checks to go away somehow, in my opinion.
i. The Chief Clerk removed the identification numbers of the checks, which are located on the bottom of the checks. Thereafter he had one of the clerks tell me that it was MY account number and he was allegedly protecting my privacy. This was at a time when the courthouse was closing and I had no time to have any discussion and just wanted to enter documents which included more bank checks to prove I made one out to the landlord, who said they were refusing to cash (yet the check is in their possession, not mine) and a previous one to the court, dated December 6 - to continue to pay rent into court on this aforesaid case. The court rejected that check, yet I have held onto it because I consider it unfair.
1. I have submitted to the court my intent to Motion To Open the Housing Complaint upon disposition of the eviction case, which I should be prevailing on. After this, the court used means of delay to enter another hearing or trial - here this is for NONPAYMENT OF RENT; and usually only one hearing/trial takes place. They altered the Return Date to November 4, when on the Summons it shows November 12. The Chief Clerk has corrected information on the case information; yet in this circumstance he refused to do so and made up an excuse which for all intense purposes is abuse of procedure and a DEVILS CHESSBOARD TACTIC. To this day that return date has not been corrected when I had emphasized other documents were inadvertently changed; such as I think my Memorandum of Law on Motion to Strike being titled Objection to Motion To Strike. One of the clerks took responsibility for that error, which I consider a very kind gesture of diffusing the situation.
12. The issue of CYBER CRIME as a tool for both the plaintiff and the court is ongoing - to cover up for their tricks as well as create new ones to keep this meritless case going! This includes the recording for the court reporter to type the transcripts and I had to purchase, even though my fee waiver for them emphasized I would not need to obtain them again for appeal if necessary on the eviction case.The transcripts are defective because the recording was defective, obviously altered by cyber crime, in my opinion! My fee waiver for appeal on the housing complaint was granted. Yet the Appellate Court refused to allow me to appeal the Housing Complaint Case, refusing to take in hard copies and denying my REQUEST FOR EXEMPTION since I could not use their e-services since this landlord, as one of many retaliatory actions, disabled wifi from my apartment - though they have numerous more wifi accounts than even prior to November 2022. As a disabled person who was almost deliberately killed by a 20 ton sander truck driver years ago (I was hospitalized 3 1/2 months and on crutches for 3 months) - after telling a stalking sex trafficker to leave me alone, he was a pig - it is immensely unfair for them to expect me to stand up in their court service center, log in to email on a public computer, and also arrange my documents to prepare documents - all in a public place which leaves me not only suffering physically but also my security was at stake. This landlord should have been ordered to restore the wifi, but no - that along with many other breaches of the Section 8 Addendum and HAP Contract were insignificant - even though I have had to wash my clothes out by hand for two years as well and suffered irreversible orthopedic damage from having to sleep on a cement floor for almost two years!
13. No one should be treated with such abuse, when they pay their rent timely and yet I am abused, and I only wanted this case to be dismissed due to the lack of probable cause. Subject Matter Jurisdiction is limited to what is on the Notice To Quit. To further the fraud, the Plaintiff in its Complaint had the audacity to claim more falsehoods which I denied and ANSWERED timely.
a) This person who refers to herself as Judge Alayna Stone claims that probable cause is NOT part of the initial process and picks at superfluous issues instead. This is deliberate abuse of process.
b) The court even had my proofs of payment prior to the issuance of a Summons; they are bound by the law to determine that this juncture was outright fraudulent and should not take place. Rather, it appears that the court has conspired with the plaintiff, who is also a fraud and I have stated so since they not only have a Pro Hac Vice appearance but also claimed he was Peter Hoops at the October 31 hearing and yet the court altered it on record to be the alleged Attorney St. Rock - to cover up for the fact that Peter Hoops claimed he wrote the Motion To Dismiss - which he did not, yet he was there to argue it and made no sense in the argumentation yet “Judge Stone” allowed him to proceed. This is outright fraud. I objected to the “Attorney Peter Hoops” claim that I did not pay rent and Judge Stone said my objection was not relevant to that case. Not only did this young man identify himself as Peter Hoops at the hearing, which took place at 2:30 instead of noon, which I was assured would be the hearing time SHARP with no changes - but also in a coerced mediation hearing, which I did not want to attend, considering the fact that the Motion To Dismiss was so badly, haphazzardly prepared without page numbers or paragraph numbers and more (which is why I motioned to Strike it, as a matter of right) - the mediator claimed that Judge Stone marked it off and demanded I settle in mediation. I said that had to be a lie and wanted to go to the housing court. She said, “No, you can’t do that.” I said, “If I told you I had to go to the bathroom, I could have done that. I am not responding to your dishonesty with more dishonesty.”
i. This 30-year old man also identified himself as Peter Hoops and the mediator called him Attorney Hoops.
ii. No other defendant on the case appeared that day and should have all been DEFAULTED. I asked Attorney Pitt why they weren’t and was only told, “These are informal hearings. They do not have to attend if they don’t want to” This is a court for a reason! Judge Stone should have ensured they were defaulted! Instead the Hoops appearance was frauded twice thereafter, adding two total pages of clients who they obviously never even agreed with. For instance, they spelled Beachwold - Beachwood (Residential). Nothing mattered to this “Judge Stone” - she did not ask for any validations of anything. And to claim the Notice To Quit was Valid just because it was typed “Correctly” was absurd! The Plaintiff even argued that the date of the NTQ did not matter whether it was consistent with the marshal’s proof of service. Caselaws were not cited by Judge Stone and upon my own research the only times Notice To Quits were considered valid at one juncture yet not another were when there two Notice To Quits. I consider this and many other circumstances malpractice of law.
iii. I would also like to point out that non-appearing housing auithority (on that hearing of October 31), told me I could pick up the November 7 letter sent to them by Hoops & Associates, to serve as its notice of eviction. I physically went to their office and they instead handed me a notice they were ending my Section 8 assistance on JANUARY 1, 2025 for failure of not completing a packet which I never got. Their renewal packets have more pages than the contract itself, which I have claimed is over the top. Yet I would have completed it had they sent it to me. Instead they sent it to a defective mailing address and still claimed I should have completed it even though it was admitted it was returned to them. A most upsetting and disrupted time for me yet I completed it in a few days, and attempted to drop it off. They placed a sign on the door saying they were closed for an undetermined length of time due to an alleged flood. I went to Federal Express around the corner from them and they made sure it was delivered to them by December 24; yet Tara Jones denied she had it on December 26 and fails to return my calls. I sent her an email claiming the person who received it and when.
1. The Housing Authority, titled Elm City Communities, is located at 360 Orange Street and its Director is Beverly Walton-Porter. Though they entered an appearance on the Housing Complaint, with Attorney representation, there was no appearance at the hearing on October 31. Ms. Porter holds several business officer positions with a number of companies that are for-profit at that location. I motioned for Disclosure to find out how they can keep the federal funding and duties of HUD as diligent and accurate matters. That motion was never ruled on and no objection to it was made. I plan to mention this and more in my Motion To Open the Housing Complaint Case.
14. This concludes my affidavit on “Judge Alayna Stone” whose Juris number fails to show in the Juris Lookup. I am preparing an affidavit for the following as well, to submit with motions: affidavit on Judge Spader. Motion To Change Venue will be submitted forthwith, hopefully January 2.. This comprises of 11 pages. Notary is on Page 11. .
DOCKET NO. NHH-CV24-6024196-S : SUPERIOR COURT OF CT
ANSONIA STATE STREET, LLC : J.D. OF NEW HAVEN
V : HOUSING SESSION
ANNE M. BRADLEY : December 31, .2024
Affidavit of Defendant - NOTARY PAGE 11
MOTION TO REMOVE JUDICIAL AUTHORITY ALAYNA STONE
Pursuant to PB 1-22 and 1-23
_______________________
Anne M. Bradley, Pro Se Defendant.
Next.....
DOCKET NO. NHH-CV24-6024196-S : SUPERIOR COURT OF CT
ANSONIA STATE STREET, LLC : J.D. OF NEW HAVEN
V : HOUSING SESSION
ANNE M. BRADLEY : December 31, .2024
MOTION TO REMOVE JUDICIAL AUTHORITY
WALTER SPADER
ALAYNA STONE
Pursuant to PB 1-22 and 1-23
Pursuant to PB 1-22 and 1-23, Defendant motions this court to remove Judicial Authority Walter Spader.and Judicial Authority Alayna Stone.
History
This case arose from the landlord claiming NONPAYMENT OF RENT FOR AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER 2024.
The Plaintiff knew the defendant paid the rent and had refused to print the ledgers for August and September 2024 when she requested them as she always did when making payments. She wanted to know why. Their only respons was, “Kyle told us you cannot have a printed ledger”
Additionally, defendant’s mother passed away in August.
Defendant showed the court the payments and provided proof they were deposited by the landlord.
The court refused to dismiss this eviction case.
FACTS
1. Affidavits to remove both Judicial Authorities Alayna Stone and Walter Spader have been prepared for submission.
2. Due to continuous cyber crime on the defendant’s laptop, she is unable to submit separate motions timely and therefore is submitting aforesaid motion.
3. Defendant has been subjected to much abuse and the landlord has breached the HAP Section 8 contract numerous times including continuous illegal entries, theft, vandalism, food poisoning, and more.
4. Fraudulent billing amounted to almost $14,000 at which time the landlord was ordered by a court to remove the charges. Yet they have continued to fraudulently bill, and obviously why the Plaintiff fails to submit any ledger to the court; which further validates they are frauding.
5. The court has received copies of the rent payment checks several times as emphasis since the first step in the court process is to determine probable cause.
6. The Plaintiff has a pro hac vice appearance which is FRAUDULENT. They are not out-of-state attorneys.
7. At the Housing Complaint hearing on October 31, a young man about the age of 30 appeared claiming he was Peter Hoops with a Juris Number which actually reflected he entered the BAR before he was obviously born.
8. Transcript of this case reveals frauded information since the appearing Plaintiff was NOT Attorney St. Rock.
9. It would behoove the court to order all three to appear on January 13, yet this court’s officials have shown complete disregard over the fact of the case:
a) The rent was paid
b) Insufficiency of a Notice To Quit since its legal efficacy is required and the the claim of nonpayment of rent for August and September is fraudulent.
10. Defendant will be submitting the following motions into court on January 2, to the best of her ability:
a) Motion to change Venue
b) Motion For Disclosure
i. This motion was submitted in the Housing Complaint Case; it was neither objected to or litigated by this court.
ii. This motion reflects a distinct need to establish the actual activity at the housing authority’s offices at 360 Orange Street since there are a number of for-profit businessses run from that location and at the least they are obviously distracted from doing their jobs as administrators of HAP, Section 8. Hearing requests have been made and defendant has had no response, except back-dated mail about missing a phone hearing. They failed to even call her out of courtesy, particularly since she has informed them two years ago that wifi internet has been disabled in her apartment. That would have been the decent way of handling her request.
iii. There is no email to even reflect they notified her of any phone hearing when she requested in 2023. This request has been one of several; none of which this Housing Authority has responded to . Therefore the defendant has taken time to meticulously prepare documentation, citing laws, and reminding them of what they have even placed on record (such as no landlord has any right to charge a tenant over and above the rent which is paid by the Section 8 tenant)
iv. There are at least 5 for-profit businesses which are conducted from 360 Orange Street. Elm City Communities should be nonprofit yet they had registered it as for-profit despite getting federal funding. Defendant has found it necessary to bring up in court due to the many violations which have occurred and their failure to do anything about it.
11. Failure ot the court to even cover the SUBJECT MATTER JURISIDICTION is indeed a disgrace to DUE PROCESS OF LAW AND well-intended, indigent, disabled tenants such as the defendant who claims they are abusing power to abuse her; not implement justice on a meritless case.
Law
PB 1-22, PB 1-23
Summary
This is not a funny matter yet most likely many with depraved mindsets are laughing behind closed doors. The lack of transparency of this court is an additional abuse of power. The case management reflects abuse of power. Whether or not defendant has other personal goals, including a desire to leave this state when she can afford it is not relevant to this matter. She pays rent timely. The landlord has breached the contract so often she should not not have to pay them anything because of obvious abatement, viliating and harming her - and the trauma of a maintenance manager using force to enter her apartment without her permission - never calling her and terrifying her to the point she almost had a heart attack - is indeed a violation of HOUSING LAW and frankly is quite disturbing for a judge to claim lack of subject matter jurisdiction on housing laws! The only case information which reflects a Notice to Quit is valid at one juncture and not valid at another is when they have served a defendant TWO NOTICE TO QUITS - a seemingly deliberate “minor detail” which this Judge Alayna Stone fails to cite to cover her tracks of non-transparency despite being BOUND TO THE LAW. Whether she is an attorney or judge cannot be determined through a Juris lookup.
Abusing power to harm people just to serve wants of elites is unlawful on many counts. That is what this case is reflecting. There is no merit to this case. That is why defendant has motioned to remove both JA’s and will be motioning the following to the best of her ability, considering cyber crime is a big drawback, even when she is not on wifi. She is targeted by the one and only one string this landlord plays, which is fraud. Why this court just skips over the fact this landlord was ordered to remove the fraudulent charges, then retaliates with a maintenance manager not only relieving himself in her bathroom trashcan but also worsening the times of illegal entries, vandalism and remotely controlling the washing machine to keep her from washing clothes for two years; which she has to wash out by hand because of BREACH OF THE SECTION 8 CONTRACT. And all the Housing Authority does is join in the bullying by telling her she can pick up a 60-day-past due letter by the landlord informing the Housing Authority they are evicting the defendant, when they are supposed to submit it 30 days before considering serving her with a Notice To Quit to allow for a cure period. And that cure period includes HOLDING THE LANDLORD ACCOUNTABLE FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT, FRAUD. Defendant has submitted many complaints to the Housing Authority, the landlord, even LCI - all to no avial! Instead they retaliate, to include the maintenance manager who most likely was goiing to kill and or rape her to “teach her a lesson” that organized crime rules.
This concludes this motion.
WHEREFORE, defendant moves this court to remove both judicial authorities from this case.
Prepared and Submitted,
FOR THE DEFENDANT
____________________
Anne M. Bradley, Pro Se
PO Box 206514
New Haven, CT 06520
Ph 203-508-0858
CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE
12/31/2024
Aforesaid motion and affidavits have been prepared according the Practice Book Rules and faxed the the Plaintiff’s representative, who has an illegal appearance as Pro Hac Vice:
Hoops & Associates
Fax 860-445-8919
One more...affidavit about Judge Walter Spader
DOCKET NO. NHH-CV24-6024196-S : SUPERIOR COURT OF CT
ANSONIA STATE STREET, LLC : J.D. OF NEW HAVEN
V : HOUSING SESSION
ANNE M. BRADLEY : December 31, .2024
Affidavit of Defendant
MOTION TO REMOVE JUDICIAL AUTHORITY WALTER SPADER
Pursuant to PB 1-22 and 1-23
1. My name is Anne Bradley and I am over the age of 18 and believe in the power of oath.
2. I am defendant in this aforesaid eviction case, which is not being adjudicated properly, fairly, or honestly.
3. Judge Spader was recently pulled into this case without my knowledge and ruled on my MOTION TO CONTINUE TO MAKE RENT PAYMENTS INTO COURT, citing the proper law. As a Pro Se I find it more than ignorant for this judge to deny my motion when I am a Pro Se and and cited the proper law. By using the excuse that I did not title my motion properly as a right to deny my motion is unfair on my levels. As a judge of the court, one is not supposed to abuse power. One is not supposed to conspire with a prior -judge who even allowed someone to impersonate her at the housing complaint hearing - and just go along with what she wants. This is conspIring, it is not adjudicating on a case. There is no independent thought when he states that whatever she rules is okay with him.
4. I am defendant in this aforesaid case and my ability to have an apartment is at stake all because of a fraudulent NOTICE TO QUIT which stated I did not pay my rent for August and September 2024 when I did.
5. And now I have to spend all this time to remove judges who are deliberately dishonest!
6. He ruled on my REQUEST, and though I served it on the Plaintiff, no objection was ever made. In fact the plaintiff never objected to my paying rent into court on the Housing Complaint Case - which was served to EIGHT parties - NONE OF THEM EVEN ANSWERED AND THE COURT FAILED TO ENTER DEFAULT JUDGMENT or possibly order them to answer. Their answers by law were supposed to be entered into court two weeks after the marshal’s service.
7. Due to the Chief Clerk taking it upon himself to upload the case prematurely and deliberately, these parties obviously had access to the case much sooner.
a) Though my Appendix had very clear pages, the copies which Attorney Pitt made are very faded and when they are printed, they are even more faded. So I had to include certain ones for emphasis with my pleadings thereafter.
b) A decent judge who looks at this case would realize something nefarious has gone awry!
c) Just because Judge Stone claimed the Notice To Quit was valid when requirement for its legal efficacy to determine validy proves that it is indeed NOT valid should have been addressed by this judge!
d) This court has been very abusive to me - all to fulfill the wants of a fraudulent landlord, who in fact was ordered to drop the fraudulent billing charges, amounting to almost $14,000 in January 2024 - two months AFTER they supposedly purchased this complex for $160 Million when it is worth $2.2 billion and they have an $89 billion mortgage! The owner is Gideon Friedman using a number of company titles to hide behind - many of which use the same Agent of Service Address, which is 42 Temple Street, New Haven, CT. That buidling is owned by Colonial Fountain Management; a company which stole my $1600 deposit for my prior apartment and they also invaded my apartment and vandalized the TUB, which cost me over $200 to repair alone! All completely illegal and there was no enforcement through the office I received some rent assistance, which was 50% of the rent. I had to suffer a great deal paying all that money and tried to make the most out of my circumstances, only to have my efforts continuously thwarted by this corrupted system!
e) Cyber crime seems to be the favorite tactic yet many others like ILLEGAL EVICTIONS are another.
f) This is indeed an ILLEGAL EVICTION.
8. I paid my rent! And now I am continuously harmed with this cyber abuse in preparing this affidavit! All to stall for time to keep me from submitting it in court today, and tomorrow is a holiday!
9. This affidavit should serve as the History and FACTS I will cite the PB Rule in the body of the Motion.
10. Judge Spader is not reviewing anything; he is just going along with the crowd. He has no value.
11. I notice the firm he worked at for 15 years in Branford uses an illegal appearance as Pro Hac Vice, when they are in-state attorneys! I consider that not only fraudulent yet evidence that he does not care or worry about being just.
12. I also noticed in one circumstance he supposedly “cracked down” on a housing case where a two year old supposedly ATE PAINT OFF THE WALL. NO PAINT IS HEALTHY IS FOR A CHILD. Yet he claimed that was a basis to remove lead from the apartment building, when lead is actually a useful mineral to sustain the longevity of paint and the only drawback is that lead blocks internet - let that be people’s choice if they want lead or not, not because a child eats paint. I do not find this type of analysis on a case useful to the public and do not find this judge being one who actually reviews or analyzes. I cannot afford to have a judge claim a defective, ILLEGAL, FRAUDULENT NOTICE TO QUIT IS VALID JUST BECAUSE JUDGE ALAYNA STONE SAID SO WHEN SHE DID NOT EVEN APPEAR ON MY OCTOBER 31 HEARING YET RULED ON IT AND ALLOWED A FRAUD TO TO IMPERSONATE HER - just like David Wheeler impersonated FBI Supervisory Agent William Aldenburg for the Sandy Hook event, which invoved an non-existant Adam Lanza and nobody died!
13. Stop the witch-hunting in this state! Stop the targeting of people for just speaking out with their opinion! I am disabled and very abused here by people who only want to keep the corruption going!
14. I notice that this judge was a former selectman/councilman in North Haven for an undetermined length of time and with no validation he actually ran; he may have replaced someone in the city council. I don’t know. And then he apparently became a police commissioner. Was this position one which gained power or one which he made achievements? I do not know and only can focus on this case.
15. Judge Spader did not review anything. He just said whatever Judge Stone wants, Stone gets. He doesn’t care about the mismanagement of the case information and the very fact this case has no merit to begin with since I paid my rent.
16. Adding spin is abuse of a job; wasting taxpayer dollars and harming a person who has paid her rent every month and shown much diligence. She has been greatly abused by this landlord, who still has yet to prove that they are HUD-approved.
17. I was requested to submit a new housing packet for approval and refused. I am already HUD-approved. That is abuse and I had to take the time to show the them the law, making a document and sending it email. My consequence is they disable wifi in my apartment. Ignorance is bliss.
18. I do not want an “ignorance is bliss” judge on an eviction case which should have never been docketed to begin with!
19. I request consideration of the affidavit I prepared on Judge Stone. I cannot type anymore due to the time factor and my inability to stop the cyber crime. Yet they have backed off some so I can quickly finish this affidavit without once again retyping it. I had to do that when I typed the complaint! I had to keep retyping it due to hacking and abuse of the formatting and even changing what I was typing!
20. Crime does not pay!
_______________________________
Anne M. Bradley, Pro Se Defendant
NOTARY
Happy New Year. :(
It is 3Jan2025 - I just submitted another motion. Appendix is 92 pages so I can't put it here. The list will be here. Fortunately cyber criminals did not delete it.
DOCKET NO. NHH-CV24-6024196-S : SUPERIOR COURT OF CT
ANSONIA STATE STREET, LLC : J.D. OF NEW HAVEN
V : HOUSING SESSION
ANNE M. BRADLEY : January 3, 2025
Defendant’s Motion to Change Venue
Pursuant to PB 12-1, Defendant Motions this court to transfer venue to another court.
History
1. Defendant saw a crumpled up paper in her door on September 18, 2024. She communicated her concern that it was a bomb in social media before leaving her apartment on September 20.
a) The landlord knew Defendant had been sick since the 12th of September since she called the concierge and informed her that she would not be able to pick up the Home Depot order being delivered on September 13. The concierge said she would note that in their system and place her order of 5 crates in the back.
2. This crumpled up paper turned out to be a NOTICE TO QUIT claiming that defendant had not paid her rent August and September of 2024, which she claimed was a lie and therefore the the Notice to Quit was FRAUDULENT.
a) Checks which the landlord cashed for August and September were presented to the court in a Housing Complaint, at Appendix A as uploaded by the court, Page Number 4. which proved the Notice To Quit was NOT VALID; it had no legal efficacy.
i. Defendant has had to argue that the Notice to Quit had no legal efficacy and strangely the woman who claims to be JUDGE ALAYNA STONE, at the December 3 hearing, claimed she ruled it was valid in the Housing complaint hearing on October 31 because ‘it was typed properly’, completely foregoing the fact that the rent was paid and her duty to limit SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION to the claim of Nonpayment of Rent, as what was stated in the Notice To Quit.
1. Nothing which took place in the hearing had any bearing on what Judge Stone Ruled.
2. The woman who appeared as Judge Alayna Stone on October 31 was a woman appearing to be in her 60’s and did not at all look like the woman who appeared on December 3, 2024.
3. Judge Alayna Stone claimed the NTQ was not valid for the eviction case and therefore they could proceed. Her dialogue was removed from the recording of transcript in many sections which disrupts the merits of the case.
a) Defendant has claimed that this court is abusing procedure and forgoing the fact that the aforesaid case has no merit; rent was paid for August and September 2024.
b) Defendant claimed it is illegal for the courts to fraud the recordings.
c) Defendant requested ALL PROCEEDINGS and knows this is not the court reporter’s fault.
d) The court reporter typed what was on the recording, placing dashes in areas which it appeared dialogue was missing. Defendant agrees with what the court reporter prepared based on what she heard.
e) Should the court have altered the transcript after she prepared it, that also would be FRAUD since there is no acknowledgment of the court striking any motions or dialogue.
f) Defendant motioned to change venue since the judge has proven not to be impartial and more. Judge Stone claimed the Notice to Quit was valid at one juncture and yet changed its legal efficacy at another.
4. Hearing on December 3 did not even cover the fact that the Notice To Quit was Invalid which is the merits of the case. The Defendant brought that very fact up as often as she could emphasize.
a) For the Plaintiff, who said he was Peter Hoops, to claim that the burden of proof was on the Defendant, was more absurdity, which the Defendant argued - yet once again, has been removed from the recording of that hearing. Judge Stone only defended the Plaintiff.
i. Though this Plaintiff appeared old enough to be an attorney who entered the BAR in 1987, he failed to explain why a young man about 30 was also claiming he was Attorney Hoops at the Housing Complaint hearing on October 31.
1. Defendant was told by the Housing Court Clerk she could not file a Housing Complaint; basing it as well on a decision of the housing judge when this same landlord attempted to evict her in 2019 for nonpayment of rent.
2. The judge’s decision was unlawful and his refusal to apply the fact that the landlord BREACHED the contract on several counts as well as the Housing Authority never even performing an initial inspection - yet making the defendant wait 30 days before moving in when she was actually assured that she could move in, in just a matter of days after completing the preliminary documents December 12, 2013. This allowed COLONIAL FOUNTAIN MANAGEMENT, which owns the property at 42 Temple Street, New Haven as well - opportunity to snatch and grab the $1600 deposit using fraudulent and abusive means.
ii. Not One of the 8 defendants answered the Housing Complaint and not all of them made appearances. The Hoops & Associates (alleged law firm with no real credentials) actually altered their appearance TWICE rather than enter a new appearance, by adding pages - which the Chief Clerk of Housing told the Defendant was never acceptable in court; that lists added to the form are never acceptable. Four of those defendants used the same agent at 42 Temple Street, New Haven, CT. 2 of the defendants were the Housing Agency and the city’s housing inspectors, Livable City Initiative. One, Bozzuto Management Inc, has somehow gotten away with using the Secretary of State as Agent of Service for over ten years - yet the Chief Clerk claimed that was because someone died. One other defendant used CT Corporation as their Agent of Service, which was located in East Hartford.
1. The court failed to enter defaults on the case. MOTION TO OPEN on the housing complaint will be submitted forthwith, as already stated to the court in one of the documents submitted on that case; The Appellate Court refused to take hard copies for an appeal. Disabled tenant no longer has wifi in her apartment due the landlord blocking her apartment after she made a complaint on the maintenance manager deficating and urinating in her bathroom trashcan January 2023; the same month which the landlord was ordered by a court to remove their fraudulent charges on Defendant’s ledger, amounting to almost $14,000.
2. Defendant was told to make all her checks out to 360 State Street, which she has since December 2012 when she completed the preliminary documents to include deposit fee. One of these defendants, 360 State Street, LLC , was NOT the company which was affiliated with Bozzuto’s or the property at 360 State Street, New Haven. Their agent of service is Attorney Samuel Herowitz on Whitney Avenue. That company manages an apartment building in Hamden. They manage a property in Hamden. The other company, 360 State Street, was dissolved, yet did not show on the Secretary of State’s record until after the defendants were served. The marshal’s service to 42 Temple Street was an error; most likely brought on by altering records at the Secretary of State’s office; which has a reputation of changing records like they were Excel spreadsheets, whith no validation when or if it even occurred; similar to what aforesaid landlord does with its ledger management. There was no correction made by the Agent of Service, Attorney DeStefano at 42 Temple Street, New Haven.
b) The reason the judge issued dismissal of the case, which the Defendant has repeatedly claimed had no merit, was the following: Insufficiency of Process was argued only.
i. The judge neither responded on the two main arguments in Defendant’s Answer and Special Definses:
1. The rent was current; it was paid for August and September 2024
2. The landlord failed to issue a Pretermination Notice which is required by law for Section 8 Tenants; to allow time for a hearing with the Housing Authority, etc.
a) Housing Authority manager Tara Jones claimed they had nothing to do with evictions, which furthered the abuse
b) Housing Authority manager Tara Jones shocked the Defendant with a backdated letter telling her they were cutting her HUD assistance effective in 10 days, January 1 due to not completing a renewal packet they mailed to a defective address and even received back. Defendant was able to get help from an employee by the name of Dale who returned to work and told her what she could do to overcome that barrier. Defendant thanked her and the receptionist for their assistance. The Housing Authority received that packet on December 24, proof through Federal Express delivery, which was signed for.
ii. Defendant’s main argument throughout has been on the merits of the case (and lack thereof), “I paid the rent. You have the proof.”
iii. Defendant has claimed the insufficiency of process is just more validation that the case has no merit.
1. Defendant has motioned to remove Judge Alayna Stone.
2. Defendant has also motioned to remove another judge, Walter Spader, since he ruled on a MOTION TO CONTINUE TO PAY RENT INTO COURT. His reasoning was whatever Judge Alayna Stone ruled was okay with him.
3. He serves no purpose and only exacerbates the problem, as stated by the Defendant in her motion to remove that JA.
4. Defendant also emphasized that for the JA to DENY her motion which was properly cited and of which she has done before in housing case of Corey Spruill vs Anne Bradley (For Lapse of Time; BACKGROUND: The Notice To Quit was a complete violation of the lease, which stated it would automatically renew for the tenant and a 60 day notice would have to be issued by the landlord should he wish to request her to leave; yet the court once again illegally evicted her despite the strong argument and Defendant - not the Landlord - producing the lease, which the landlord failed to ever produce. Again, that case was a cut-and-dry reason to dismiss, yet this court kept it open for a year, which deprived the inept and desperate Plaintiff=Corey Spruill- of the rent he needed. The Plaintiff was victimized by the corruption of the city which retracted the Certificate of Occupancy on the building once they got this young man to purchase it. Defendant was made an enemy by the landlord because she was easier to harm for the wrongdoings made by city, which was an immature approach to his problem; yet the city was fine with it because they were not made accountable even though they were part of her Answser and Special Defenses. Defendant was illegally evicted and almost died from unknown reasons; being rushed to the hospital when the plane she took touched down in Minnesota, where she was going to seek legal help in her appeal to the US Supreme Court. The marshal was very rude and and used a code to trip her ADT System to keep police from responding, which validated who was illegally entering her home when she was not there. She was taken out of a drug-induced coma for three days and told she would be transported to the med ward for observation and recovery for a few days and could leave. Defendant called the Court in Connecticut to notify them she was at the hospital and remained intentional to continue her rights with the US Supreme Court Appeal. Just 1/2 hour after that, while she was eating a lunch, a man dressed as an orderly told her he needed to take her to the med ward at that time. As it turned out the psyche ward director was disguised as an orderly and lied to her, kidnapping her into their psyche ward, where she was forced for at least 45 days, including forced meds she did not need, having a severe dental infection which he refused to treat as well as denying her any special dental cleaning supplies which they could even purchase for her using her money. The sinus infection which she had prior to eviction got worse. She continued to fight for her rights in probate and was finally released on her own recognizance yet they would not allow her to remain in Minnesota to her her legal rights on the US Supreme Court Case. Later it was determined that the State of Connecticut only relied on the pro-paedophile judge Ruth Ginsberg for ALL US Supreme Court appeals)
5. Defendant informed the court she would appeal on aforesaid case; and also expressed intention to MOTION TO OPEN the Housing complaint due to the continuous BREACH OF LEASE made deliberately by the landlord-plaintiff and deliberate lack of ajudication on that associated case; further emphasizing that the landlord was ordered to remove the fraudulent charges amounting to almost $14,000 the same month which the maintenance manager relieved himself her bathroom trashcan - which she complained about. (January 2023)
a) Defendant has expressed her opinion that the court uses means of delay to seemingly evade the opportunity to MOTION TO OPEN the Housing case which was wrongfully dismissed without Due Process of Law, which was ruled out with no final judgment as normally expected.
b) A Motion To Open may be submitted within 4 months of the date of ruling, which apparently is without a FINAL JUDGMENT; yet due to cyber crime being their main tool to serve wants of abusive elites, it is apparent this will change now that the Defendant has stated this on this aforesaid document, which has taken a number of days to fully prepare.
FACTS
1. This case should have been dismissed without a hearing. It should not have even been docketed.
a) Judge Stone apparently only had a hearing to save-face - yet ironically it was not even HER face that was at the hearing!
i. The young man at the housing hearing, who claimed he was Peter Hoops, used ignorance as a tool - claiming there was no law cited regarding Pretermination Notices as a requirement and therefore he said it did not matter. Defendant argued that their office claims to be expert in Landlord-Tenant Laws and IF that was really the case, they would know the law exists and they would also know that a real attorney would never make such a statement to a Pro Se party in court.
b) Defendant has found no caselaw supporting Judge Stone’s flip-flopping legal malpractice. Defendant found caselaws which have had different rulings on Notice To Quits involved TWO separate Notice To Quits that were served by a plaintiff. For the most part they were commercial leases.
c) This alleged judge who allowed herself to be impersonated on October 31 without being above-board on why she did that - fails to uphold the duties of a judge and fails to reflect the oaths she took as an attorney and as a judge. Defendant has motioned to remove that alleged Judicial Authority whose Juris Number does not exist in the Juris Lookup.
2. A case is decided on the merits when a judge bases their decision on the fundamental issues of the case, rather than on PROCEDURAL GROUNDS.
3. The merits of the case is the first and foremost issue for the court to decide on in order to expedite justice, comply with DUE PROCESS OF LAW, and not waste government money.
a) A Housing complaint was entered by the Defendant, claiming the Notice To Quit was Not Valid, that it was fraudulent. DEFENDANT REPEATEDLY ARGUED SHE PAID THE RENT. HER RENT CHECKS WERE CASHED.
i. The court knowingly allowed the Plaintiff to have Defendant served a Summons despite its fully knowing the Notice To Quit was invalid; even deliberately fraudulent.
1. Just because a check is written with no misspellings does not mean the check is valid when the account holder knows it has insufficient funds!
2. Checks are cashed for LEGAL EFFICACY; an obviousl misspelling is considered an error
3. The courts have ruled on Notice To Quits as being valid for LEGAL EFFICACY despite misspellings and even considering wrong dates.
a) The Plaintiff’s fraudulent “proxy” had even argued the wrong date of the Notice To Quit is not relevant; did not matter - at the Housing Complaint Hearing on October 31, 2024.
ii. Not only was the Housing Complaint taken in, but the Housing court took the rent payments of the Defendant, for October and November.
iii. It is the court’s responsibility to ascertain the case has merit and they cannot accept rents (for fair use and value) for rents which are not current.
iv. “Without a Valid Notice To Quit there can be no foundation for Summary Process”
1. The Legal Efficacy is what makes the Notice To Quit Valid/Invalid - not whether the words are spelled correctly
a) As a reminder, the Notice To Quit was free-lanced; they failed to use the published housing form, which the Chief Clerk claimed was mandatory when a form was published. They also failed to even cite a law, which is legal malpractice and should have been deemed defective to accept by the court.
2. Payment in Absence of Rental Agreement does not apply here; Section 8 is still in force
a) Although the Housing Authority recently attempted to conspire with the Landlord by inadvertently and deceptively leaving an unexpected Notice that her Section 8 would be canceled as of January 1, due to not completing an renewal packet WHICH SHE NEVER RECEIVED, the Housing Authority was unsuccessful with this fraudulent and abusive tactic.
i. Defendant was told by the Housing Authority that she could pick up the letter they received from the Plaintiff, dated November 7, which indicated they were evicting the Defendant.
ii. Rather than provide that letter to her, they instead left an envelope containing a backdated letter telling her she could no longer have assistance due to not completing the renewal packet, which they inadvertently refer to as an application - WHICH SHE NEVER RECEIVED since they deliberately mailed it to a defective address.
iii. This constant abuse from the Housing Authority has compounded the Defendant’s heart problems as well as phsysical and emotional stress - all on a matter which FRAUDULENT IN NATURE since the rent was paid for both August and September.
3. It is the Chief Clerk’s responsibility to establish cause on whether or not a tenant who is paying into court is current; and whether or not the lease can be deemed as Absent.
a) In aforesaid matter, the landlord/Plainitff was still receiving assistance from HUD for the aforesaid apartment and therefore the lease remained active and if the lease addendum was for some LEGITAMATE reason discontinued, there would be no lease.
4. Defendant had produced ledgers which showed she paid her portion of the rent for a number of years at the same rate, which was $198
5. The lease which the landlord had on record; provided at the Defendant’s request from the landlord, indicated the rent to be $171/month
6. Therefore the Defendant’s rent was determined as current and the very main reason to determine that the Summary Process, which has to be court-approved prior to service, was in fact illegitamate due to FRAUD.
v. Duties of the Court when a case is taken in are provided in the Appendix to this moition.
vi. Duties of the Chief Clerk not made public and impossible to attain with specificity; yet the Connecticut Statutes relays a general expectation of duties.
1. Defendant, Pro Se, has had an older version of the Statutes of Connecticut, which was given to her; that book was stolen from her apartment. Defendant has had a Black’s Law Dictionary; that book was stolen from her apartment. In fact many items have been stolen out of her apartment when ilegal entries are made and usually at the same time they vandalize her apartment. They have not YET stolen her Connecticut Practice Book of 2016.
a) Eviction Cases which bring up BREACH OF CONTRACT BY THE LANDLORD are promptly dismissed once validated as being true. These are on record as caselaws.
4. It is evident to the Defendant that this court’s officials care little to nothing about actually litigating this case - which has no merit.
5. For a judge to limit a Strike to only on Complaints is NOT LAWFUL.
a) American JurisPrudence has shown that Motions To Strike Pleadings are allowed, yet with little procedural relief should the ruling not be in the pleader’s favor.
b) Despite the Rules of Practice not providing an actual Rule of Court which may be cited for clarity when motioning, a Motion To Strike can be made on any part of proceeding; any part of a case that is conducted in the Superior Court. Judges have stated “I am striking that” during a proceeding. Any action which a judge makes is reflective of the right of either party to motion on such type of action.
6. Defendant, Pro Se, has researched at the local library and is providing copies to what she deems as relevant to aforesaid matter in Appendix.
7. Not even the Return Date was fixed by the Chief Court Clerk. On the caselaw it indicates December 4; whereas on the Notice To Quit it is December 12.
a) Defendant Pro Se presumes the problem is that the this proves the SUMMONS is DEFECTIVE, and therefore causes this whole Summary Process Action to be deliberately litigated using legal malpractice - covering up for the Hoops Associates who are frauds and also covering up for this Alayna Stone who is an obvious Fraud, allowing someone else, most likely an actor since she was preoccupied with her ear the duration of the hearing, to impersonate being a judge.
8. This motion For Change of Venue comprises of TEN PAGES, with a Certification Page and Appendix.
LAW
PB 1-2
Additional laws have been referred to throughout, to support the Defendant’s right to DUE PROCESS OF LAW.
3 Conn Practice, Civil Practice Forms Section 61:6. ComplaintsFor Summary Process Against Lessee or Tenant
Carter v Bouchard caselaw. 47a-18. Temporary Injunction Seeking Relief. LANDLORD’S CLAIM FOR POSSESSION IS NOT PROVED
Steineggar vs Rosario, CV1-787-43618.
Evergreen Corp v Jimmy Brown, 35 Conn Sup 549 (Jan 1977)
Burrit v Lunny 196
47a-15a
“where delay in paying rent” (though not applicable in aforesaid matter) is due to actions of the landlord, THE TENANT IS EXCUSED
RETALIATORY EVICTION (Mobilia, Inc v Santos)
Connecticut General Statutes: Title 51. Duties and Powers of Chief Court Clerk
SECTION 8 LAWS IN THE CFR AND 42 USC 1437f
Summary
Due to an affidavit being included in Appendix, Defendant reserves the right to refer the court to her affidavit as a reference to this Summary; not as a substitution for the Summary.
WHEREFORE, Defendant motions this court for change of venue.
Appendix attached
Prepared And Submitted,
FOR THE DEFENDANT, PRO SE
_____________________
Anne M. Bradley
PO Box 206514
New Haven, CT 06520
Ph 203-508-0858
CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE
Aforesaid motion with Appendix is compliant with the CT Rules of Practice and has been faxed to the Plaintiff, Hoops & Associates, on today’s date, January 3, 2024.
Fax: 860-445-8919
____________________
Anne M. Bradley
DOCKET NO. NHH-CV24-6024196-S : SUPERIOR COURT OF CT
ANSONIA STATE STREET, LLC : J.D. OF NEW HAVEN
V : HOUSING SESSION
ANNE M. BRADLEY : January 3, 2025
APPENDIX
Defendant’s Motion To Change Venue
Page No.
A Affidavit by Defendant, Pro Se 13
B Proof Rents for August and September were paid 17
C Validation Ansonia State Street is bank account name 18
For Depositing Rent
D Validation Reminder: Fraud Charges $13,723.75 ordered 20
By the court to be removed Jan 2023; posted 2/16/2023
E Ref #5 in FACTS 21
Defendant, Pro Se, has researched at the local library
and is providing copies to what she deems as relevant
to aforesaid matter in Appendix.
F Validation of NO INITIAL INSPECTION ON RECORD 78
Example form which SHOULD BE ON RECORD
Tenant’s door lock was never changed!
G MOTION TO DISMISS HOUSING COMPLAINT 86 Plaintiff-Landlord admits Notice To Quit only for Nonpayment of Rent For August and September
Plaintiff claims CARES Act was why they lengthened Return Date by
30 days. CARES Act was discontinued in 2022!
This has no relevance to a Pretermination Notice required by law
H Prior Landlord: COLONIAL FOUNTAIN MANAGEMENT 92
Which stole deposit of $1600 and vandalized tub apartment
Issued a fraudulent report by almost non-Englinsh speaking
Immigrant from Albania
Fraudulent Statement - Rent for December 2012 pd $800; Rent for Jan 2013: pd $400; apartment was moved in by new tenants on 1/16/2013
There was no damage; landlord should have pursuied tenant’s insurance but this was deliberate FRAUD; court was FRAUDULENT AS WELL
DOCKET NO. NHH-CV24-6024196-S : SUPERIOR COURT OF CT
ANSONIA STATE STREET, LLC : J.D. OF NEW HAVEN
V : HOUSING SESSION
ANNE M. BRADLEY : January 3, 2025
Affidavit of Defendant, Pro Se
Motion to Change Venue
1. My name is Anne Bradley and I am over the age of 18 and believe in the power of oath. The notary has seen my license, used for ID.
2. Trial on my case has been marked for January 13, 2024.
3. I have submitted a Motion to Remove Judicial Authorities Alayna Stone and Walter Spader. I submitted affidavits, which were signed under oath at the Housing Court Office. The notary was not available due to the holiday season.
4. This eviction case has no merit yet this court keeps spinning it for all its worth! It is abuse of procedure and abuse to me!
5. I cannot believe that Judge Alayna Stone would not grant my dismissal and then lie about why I wanted a dismissal even though I argued it very persisently repeatedly claiming
a) “I paid the rent”
b) and I also mentioned the Plaintiff failed to comply with Section 8 Housing law requiring a PRETERMINATION NOTICE.
c) And the Landlord - whoever they are - since they are so fraudulent - Breached the Contract on a Daily basis
6. Plaintiff filed a Motion To Dismiss on the Housing Complaint claiming the Notice To Quit was Valid and it was the Plaintiff’s burden of proof to show otherwise. Proof the rent was paid was submitted in the complaint! This was not even argued by the Plaintiff, who is Defendant in the Housing Complaint. Upon discussing this at the hearing, regarding the rent was paid, the woman who fraudulently claimed she was Judge Alayna Stone told me, the Plaintiff to stop because she was not going to cover that issue that the rent was paid - AND THE COURT DELETED THAT DIALOGUE OUT OF THE RECORDED HEARING AS WELL!
a) The Motion To Dismiss was signed by Attorney St. Rock yet the one who attended the hearing to argue that motion was allegedly Attorney Peter Hoops, fraudulently representing the real Attorney Peter Hoops who entered the BAR in 1987!
i. He admitted the Notice To Quit was written accusing nonpayment of rent for August and September
ii. Yet he claims because it was “typed properly” as reason the Notice To Quit was valid!
iii. How can a judge even support that? It is so elementary as well as evading from the LEGAL EFFICACY!
iv. It is obvious this court is serving a plutocracy, not justice and its deliberate breaking of laws and rules and lying in opinions is all proof that no justice will take place for a trial in this location! This forces even more hardship on the Defendant - all because they shoose to lie and fraud and get away with it!
1. The order by Judge Walter Spader injects a few lies. He claimed the Notice To Quit was served AFTER this housing complaint was docketed. Anyone with any sense, can clearly see the case was erroneously uploaded a week after the Notice To Quit was served and should bee deemed illegal since the court refused to upload Defendant’s Answer and Special Defenses, and more - all because it did not have a Docket Number and the case when uploaded deliberately had a Return Date which did not reflect the Notice To Quit! Most likely the Return Date is automaticly figured when it is for nonpayment of rent and yet the court fails to be transparent on this deliberate operation of fraud and harm to the Defendant, who has suffered immenselfy from a an abusive, fraudulent, criminal landlord! They are only ganging up on me, the Defendant!
a) This may help the court to cover up the fact that the housing complaint was uploaded AFTER the Notice To Quit and reflects agreement that the Notice To Quit was Invalid!
2. It is apparent that rent from 360 State Street is deposited into a Bank Of America Account titled Ansonia State Street, contrary to what the prior management was doing, using various accounts. Defendant can only relay facts and emphasize she is a truthful person who has been greatly harmed by the wrongdoings of those who have worked in management on this premises. To include FRAUD.
7. I also emphasized the Plaintiff was so abusive with BREACH OF LEASE, that they even had the maintenance manager break in to my apartment on July 2, 2024 when I was taking a bath and screaming for him to get out but he would not. It was obvious a higher authority had him removed because he was coming right at me and stopped and turned around!
8. There are so many who are obviously using devices that were only used by police - so they can conspire with each other. It is not just the manager I speak to, for instance. He obviously wears a device and is told what to say and do.
9. My apartment is broken into on a weekly basis and they steal so much from me! The $260 radiowave meter was stolen just recently! It was in a leather-like square, zippered bag which also had other tech supplies in it; even an older cell phone which someone disabled yet I hoped I could recover it by taking it to a computer expert at some point in the future. They break locks to access cupboards/wood crates which I lock. They stole the access to one lock on a crate, which I cannot open now and will have to take it to Home Depot in mild weather to get the lock broken off.
10. For the court to have complete disregard over the trauma of the maintenance manager smashing his way in my apartment is completely ruthless!
11. Police serve the wants of this landlord; they rely on them for their pensions, which I consider a very unethical, even illegal dynamic since they no longer serve the public but a plutocracy.
12. There is a lot of pay-to-play in this city’s government. I consider the Housiing Authority to be operating unethically to say the least.
13. I understand the Housing Authority is no undergoing major administrative changes, as stated by one one employee.
14. I have had heart issues due to all this stress and abuse heaped on me!
15. There has been no assurrance by the court that this matter is being held justly. I was told I could not EVER file a housing complaint in court. I have been told that different times and a clerk emphatically told me that in September when I went to the office due to an invalid Notice To Quit being bunched up in my door frame. I found out after persisitent research, through a resourceful blog titled doorloop.com that a housing complaint cah be submitted; as long as VALID Notice To Quit had not been served. The Notice to Quit was Invalid. The court took in my case. They took my rent payments. So for the judge to completely flipflop and claim that the reason she was dismissing it AFTER A HEARING WHICH MADE NO DIFFERENCE AND WAS PRESIDED BY AN IMPOSTER OF HER, which she obviously permitted, only exacerbated her legal malpractice.
16. This judge has ruled the Notice to Quit was Valid; she denied my dismissal - she has proven she does not even care about the very merits of the case, which is the fact I PAID RENT FOR AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER. Her subject matter jurisdiction is limited to the Notice to Quit! She knows that!
17. Hoops & Associates are frauds. My landlord is a fraud. I am not an attorney. I just want to remain in my HUD-approved apartment and I should not even have to pay anything for all the hell they have put me through here - particularly illegal entries and vandalizing my apartment.
18. This is why I want a change of venue. Burden of proof that defendant could not otherwise receive a fair and impartial trial” is evident. I should not have even needed any trial! The case had no merit to begin with and the fact they refuse to change the Return date to MATCH the Summons, reflects the Summons is KNOWINGLY DEFECTIVE and they court plays catch-me-if-you-can rather than administer justice. They also failed to enter defaults on the housing matter. One minute the chief clerk says, “We are very particular and you have to follow a process” and then he flipflops and says things like “This is very informal here” and also “You can enter whatever you want”
19. This concludes my affidavit which is included with my Motion To Change Venue on this case which NEVER HAD MERIT and should have been dismissed before even having a hearing. What I have shared only scratches the surface of hell they caused me here due to BREACH OF CONTRACT and CONSPIRING WITH Livable City Initiative and the Housing Authority. Burden of proof is on the Plaintiff! He had the audacity to claim in court I had the burden of proof and I thoroughly responded that he failed to prove the case and even though I proved him wrong, the court still keeps the case going, which I consider very abusive and using their positions as a weapon!
_____________________
Anne M. Bradley
.png)
Comments