A Consumer Service Fraud Practice in Water Overbilling in the Village of Lombard

The Village of Lombard Water Service Department managed by Sharon Meyers has a water bill for $118.00US which was being used by Keith Steiskal at the Building Permits Departments to deny a building permit purchase requested by the Zees Group Disaster Restoration Services, in care of Mr. Zee Kawa, contractor, www.zeesgroup.com . Even when there was No Water, No Sewage, and No Water Service since 2004, 2005, when the Lombard plumbing pipes burst under ungauged and excessive water pressure released by the Village of Lombard Public Works, there was No Water or Sewage Service at 502 S. Westmore Avenue —the Village of Lombard had already installed new PSI valves to monitor water pressure for Lombard water mains which overflow to cause plumbing failure, water flooding and damages, www.villageoflombard.org.

The Village of Lombard adds surcharges, overcharges, and triple the water service charges and sewage utilities billing for resident homeowners in DuPage County, Illinois, USA. Lombard even overbills resident homeowners for water utility services as part of the consumer service fraud practice at the Village of Lombard Town Hall in DuPage County, Illinois USA. Waterbill padding for surcharges, overbilling, and surplus service charges are a common business deceptive practice used by the Village of Lombard to collect additional funding from resident homeowners in DuPage County, Illinois USA. A Lombard water bill can duplicate or triplicate consumer usage per household based on surcharges and overbilling service charges attached for deceptive business practices in the Town Hall, subject to consumer service fraud, www.ftc.gov, in DuPage County, Illinois USA.

A Consumer Service Fraud Practice in Water Billing by the Village of Lombard

The Village of Lombard Water Service Department managed by Sharon Meyers has a water bill for $118.00US which was being used by Keith Steiskal at the Building Permits Departments to deny a building permit purchase requested by the Zees Group Disaster Restoration Services, in care of Mr. Zee Kawa, contractor, www.zeesgroup.com . Even when there was No Water, No Sewage, and No Water Service since 2004, 2005, when the Lombard plumbing pipes burst under ungauged and excessive water pressure released by the Village of Lombard Public Works, there was No Water or Sewage Service at 502 S. Westmore Avenue —the Village of Lombard had already installed new PSI valves to monitor water pressure for Lombard water mains which overflow to cause plumbing failure, water flooding and damages, www.villageoflombard.org.

The Village of Lombard adds surcharges, overcharges, and triple the water service charges and sewage utilities billing for resident homeowners in DuPage County, Illinois, USA. Lombard even overbills resident homeowners for water utility services as part of the consumer service fraud practice at the Village of Lombard Town Hall in DuPage County, Illinois USA. Waterbill padding for surcharges, overbilling, and surplus service charges are a common business deceptive practice used by the Village of Lombard to collect additional funding from resident homeowners in DuPage County, Illinois USA. A Lombard water bill can duplicate or triplicate consumer usage per household based on surcharges and overbilling service charges attached for deceptive business practices in the Town Hall, subject to consumer service fraud, www.ftc.gov, in DuPage County, Illinois USA.

MOTION FOR A THIRD OBJECTION TO THE VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DEMOLITION AND FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF PURSUANT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

State of Illinois United States of America County of Du Page
In the 18th Judicial Circuit Court
Village of Lombard,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Gardenia C. Hung and Robert S. Hung, Trustees of the Trust Agreement Designated as the Roberto Hung Supplemental Care Trust, Jeffrey D. Papendick, a tax-purchaser, and non-record claimants and unknown users
Defendants
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No.:2007CH001284 Consolidated
Case No.:2006OV005982, LO25448NT;
Case No.:2006OV005983, LO25449NT;
Case No.:2006OV004446, LO12418NT; LO12419NT
NOTICE OF FILING MOTION
DEFENDANTS’ THIRD AMENDED RESPONSE/ANSWER TO SUMMONS.
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR AN ORDER TO REPAIR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WITH A MOTION FOR A THIRD OBJECTION TO THE VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DEMOLITION AND FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF PURSUANT TO ACTION FOR INVERSE CONDEMNATION, CONSUMER SERVICE FRAUD, CONVERSION OF REAL PROPERTY AS AN ACCESS TO CRIME.
MOTION TO COMPEL ORDER TO REPAIR
Hearing Date: March 19, 2008, 9:00 AM
Second Objection: January 24, 2008
Objection Filed: November 26, 2007

Attn. Judge Kenneth L. Popejoy, Chancery Division To: Honorable Circuit Court Clerk
18th Judicial Circuit Court Mr. Chris Kachiroubas
505 North County Farm Road 505 North County Farm Road
Wheaton, Illinois 60189-0707 USA Wheaton, IL 60187 USA
CC: Mr. Howard C. Jablecki, et al. Attn. Zees Group Services
Law Firm of Klein, Thorpe and Jenkins, Ltd. ZSC Insurance Restoration Svces. LLC
Attorneys for the Plaintiff 6850 West Montrose Avenue
20 North Wacker Drive, Suite 1660 Hardwood Heights, Illinois 60706-7192
Chicago, Illinois 60606-2903 USA Tel. 708/867-7676, Fax: 708/867-6868
Tel. 312/984-6400, Fax: 312/984-6444 To Whom It May Concern
NOTICE OF FILING MOTION

YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT on the 19th day of March, in the year 2008, I shall appear before Judge Kenneth L. Popejoy or any other judge as may be holding court in his/her absence, at 9:00 a.m., in Room 2005, located at the Du Page County Judicial Center, 505 North County Farm Road, Wheaton, Illinois and then and there present the following:
DEFENDANTS’ THIRD AMENDED RESPONSE/ANSWER TO SUMMONS.
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR A THIRD OBJECTION TO THE VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DEMOLITION AND FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF PURSUANT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, PREAMBLE, ARTICLE I, BILL OF RIGHTS, AND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNDER THE DOCTRINE FOR INVERSE CONDEMNATION, CONSUMER SERVICE FRAUD, CONVERSION OF REAL PROPERTY, AND DISCRIMINATION.

Now comes Gardenia C. Hung as PRO SE to submit the Defendants’ Motion for a Third Objection to the Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief, pursuant to the Constitution of the State of Illinois, Preamble, Article I, Section 1, about Inherent and Inalienable Rights, in the Bill of Rights which state the following:

We, the People of the State of Illinois—grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political, and religious
Liberty which He has permitted us to enjoy and seeking His blessing upon our endeavors—in order to
Provide for the health, safety, and welfare of the people, maintain a representative and orderly
government; eliminate poverty and inequality; assure legal, social, and economic justice; provide
opportunity for the fullest development of the individual; insure domestic tranquility; provide for the
common defense and secure the blessings of freedom and liberty to ourselves and our posterity
–do ordain and establish this Constitution of the State of Illinois.

Article 1, Section 1, Inherent and Inalienable Rights

All men are by nature free and independent and have certain inherent and inalienable rights among
which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. To secure these rights and the protection of property,
governments are instituted among men, deriving their powers from the consent of the governed.

Defendants hereby present an affirmative defense with this Third Motion for Objection to the Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief, subsequent to the doctrine of inverse condemnation, consumer service fraud, conversion of real property as an access to crime set up by the Plaintiff, the Lombard Police Department, the Carpenters, and other accomplices in the Village of Lombard, and reasons for discrimination and abuse of the Defendants’ fundamental rights, civil rights, residential rights, homeowners’ rights, personal rights, and constitutional rights in the State of Illinois.

Plaintiff as the Village of Lombard, et al. has taken and/or damaged the Lombard Historical Brick Bungalow, P.I.N. No. 06-09-314-038, owned by the Estate of Mr. Roberto Hung Supplemental Care Trust and the Hung Family, during the course of municipal services in Du Page County, without authorization from Gardenia C. Hung, et al., without the Plaintiff or Counsel requesting legal power of attorney, without providing just compensation to the Defendants, by law, only for the Plaintiff’s own intent and public purposes; unbeknownst to Gardenia C. Hung and Family—all of which have caused damages and losses to private real estate property owned by the Hung Family, at losses in excess of $50,000—disregarding the homeownership interest that Gardenia C. Hung has in this Lombard Historical Brick Bungalow, built during 1927 for the Lilac Festival and the anniversary of Lilacia Park, in Du Page County, Illinois, USA.
Please Take Notice of the Following:
· Defendants have ownership interest with three (3) warranty deed titles registered by the Du Page County Recorder of Deeds in Wheaton, Illinois for the Lombard Historical Brick Bungalow purchased with cash retirement funds by the late Mr. Roberto Hung, J.D. and eldest daughter Gardenia C. Hung, M.A. (Ref. County of San Diego v. Miller (1975) 13 Cal. 3d, 684.)
· Plaintiff as the Village of Lombard, an Illinois Municipal Corporation, et al., All Employees, that is to say, the Lombard Police Department, Fire Department, Public Works, Water Department and Sewage Services have engaged in “public” activities and/or projects, trespassing, access to crime, unauthorized access entries, involving breach of service contracts, negligence per se, “bad faith”, consumer service fraud, heinous hate crimes, and discrimination which have damaged the subject real estate property during the course of services rendered, as an access to crime and under the doctrine of inverse condemnation. (Ref. Stoney Creek Orchards v. State (1970) 12 Cal. App. 3d 903.)

· The Village of Lombard, et al. have been taking and/or damaging the Lombard Historical Brick Bungalow through trespassing, jumping Gothic fence posts, unauthorized municipal services, access entries leaving the porch door open while Gardenia C. Hung and the Defendants have been away from home, hospitalized, injured, traveling, working, without asking the Defendants for permission, consent or authorization, and without having any legal power of attorney from the Hung Family. (Ref. People ex rel Department of Transportation v. Romano (1971) 18 Cal. App. 3d 63)

· Plaintiff’s public activity or failure to act during 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, and to date in 2008, as planned and customary by municipal standards and regular norms is the proximate or substantial, direct cause of the takings or damages incurred by the Lombard Historical Brick Bungalow owned by Gardenia C. Hung, et al. (Ref. Ingram v. City of Redondo Beach (1975) 45 Cal. App. 3d 628; Aaron v. City of Los Angeles (1974) 40 Cal. App. 3d 471, 478; Blau v. City of Los Angeles (1973) 32 Cal. App. 3d 77)

· There is a “continuing damages” theory practiced by the Village of Lombard, et al. from 1993, when Mr. Roberto Hung, J.D. purchased the Lombard Brick Bungalow, during 1996 when the same Lombard resident completed cash payment for this subject property and he was injured at home on December 22, 1996, and increasing “continuing damages and losses” after Mr. Robert Hung, J.D. was murdered during June 18, 1998, while his eldest daughter Gardenia C. Hung has been representing the Estate of Mr. Roberto Hung Supplemental Care Trust, as Executor Trustee, and she and the Defendants have been supporting the estate trust financially, physically, and residentially in the Village of Lombard, Du Page County, Illinois, USA.

· Defendants hereby object to the Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief with false allegations at issue presented by Counsel Howard C. Jablecki et al., in order to support counterclaims to set off/offset the Verified Complaint under the doctrine for inverse condemnation, consumer service fraud, conversion of real property as an access to crime by the Village of Lombard, et al., as a direct cause of action and “substantial factor” issues for the Third Objection to the Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief.

· Gardenia C. Hung, et al. invokes the doctrine of inverse condemnation, consumer service fraud, conversion of real property, and discrimination in order to claim attorneys’ fees, expert fees, and legal costs, expenses available for inverse cases and in enforcing a judgment in such a case. (Ref. Downen’s Inc. v. City of Hawaiian Gardens Redevelopment Agency (2001) 86 Cal. Appp. 4th 856)

· This Third Motion for Objection to the Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief restates that in the State of Illinois, it is illegal to discriminate against people because of their race, color, religion or national origin. It is illegal to discriminate against people for housing ownership and property resident in the Village of Lombard, Du Page County, Illinois, USA. Please note that the Civil Rights Act of 1866 with respect to housing and property ownership is still in effect today in 2008, one hundred and forty-two (142) years later… The Civil Rights Act of 1866 provides that all citizens of the United States have the same rights as whites to inherit, buy, lease, sell, own, hold, and transfer title to any real property (real estate) or personal property. Under U.S. federal law, any person who wrongfully uses his/her office to deprive another of his civil rights will be liable for nominal and/or compensatory damages, plus punitive damages. Civil rights include consumer rights, homeowners’ rights, citizens’ rights, constitutional rights, and real estate property rights.

· Gardenia C. Hung, et al., as a woman, resident, homeowner, taxpayer, and citizen in the Village of Lombard, reinstates objections in this Motion pursuant to the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) to the Constitution which supports that “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex gender.” It is unlawful in the State of Illinois to discriminate against women as resident homeowners, taxpayer, and U.S. citizens in the Village of Lombard, Du Page County, USA.

· This Motion for a Third Objection to the Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief is based on constitutional grounds, under the legal concept of inverse condemnation, consumer service fraud, and conversion of real property as “action in trover”. (Case-in-point, Pacific Bell v. City of San Diego (2000) 81 Cal. App. 4th 596; Albers v. Los Angeles (1965) 62 Cal. 2d 250) which establish case precedents even when a public works improvement was designated and constructed according to normal engineering standards, and it fails (or works satisfactorily and causes damages in an unintended way), Plaintiff can still be liable for water rupture due to ungauged water pressure, as the Village of Lombard, an Illinois municipal corporation. Please take notice that in flood-related claims, courts have imposed an element of fault, and/or proof of unreasonableness. (Ref. Bunch v. Coachella Valley Water Dist. (1997) 15 Cal. 4th 432).

· The Lombard Historical Brick Bungalow is located in the Village of Lombard, District 5 area, designated by the name of “Lincoln”. District 5, as a community-based residential area, does not demolish historical real estate property. Lombard resident homeowners in District 5, on Washington Boulevard and Westmore-Meyers Road, are known to repair, restore, and preserve Lombard Historic Real Estate Property. One hundred and thirty-nine (139) years ago, the Village of Lombard was established in 1869, in the County of Du Page, State of Illinois, United States of America. As an Illinois historic village and municipal corporation, Lombard owes Gardenia C. Hung and Family, just compensation for all the damages and losses caused by the Plaintiff, from 1993 through 2008, during takings through trespassing and damages due to unauthorized consumer services, the Village’s own intents and public purposes, without having paid any compensation to Gardenia C. Hung, or to Mr. Roberto Hung, J.D., or to the Estate of Mr. Roberto Hung Supplemental Care Trust, and/or to the Hung Family assets, investments, and holdings. Case-in-point, in 1897, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that state and local governments are required to pay “just compensation” when taking or “damaging” private property for public use occurs. (Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Company v. Chicago (1897)
· For the record, in 1922, Parcel 1: Lot eighty (80) in Robertson’s Westmore, as subdivision of part of the West half of the Third Meridian, lying South of the Right Way Line of the Chicago Aurora and Elgin Railroad Company, Document 15681, was recorded according to the Plat thereof on June 1st 1922 in Du Page County, Illinois, USA. This Lombard real estate property is now where John and Eva Carpenter have lived since 2001. That house is now eighty-six (86) years older than the subject property build in 1927, according to the Du Page County Recorder of Deeds Office and the York Township Assessor’s Office records and warranty deeds in trust.
· The Lombard Historic Brick Bungalow designated as P.I.N. 06-09-315-038 has been subject and target of “regulatory takings”, damages, and losses by the Village of Lombard, et al., All Employees, through trespassing and unauthorized access entries.
· Concurrently, since 1922, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes extended the definition of “takings” and/or damages by declaring that “when the diminution (i.e. depreciation) in value resulting from “the regulation of using (private) property without paying compensation to affected Illinois homeowners, “reaches a certain magnitude, in most if not in all cases, there must an exercise of eminent domain and just compensation to sustain a taking for inverse condemnation requiring payment of just compensation.”
· The Supreme Court repeatedly has stressed that takings claims “under the doctrine of inverse condemnation” must be decided in light of the basic purpose of the just compensation clause “to bar Government from forcing some people alone to bear public burdens which in all fairness and justice, should be borne by a public as a whole.” (Ref. Armstrong v. United States, 1960, p. 49).
· The Village of Lombard, et al., All Employees, have caused damages and losses to the Lombard Historic Brick Bungalow during the course of municipal services in Illinois, and as such, Plaintiff is liable for consumer service fraud pursuant to the Federal Trade Commission Act, FTC, 15 USC § 45 et seq. and 16 CFR, and subsequent Illinois statutes for consumer service protection against consumer service fraud, deceptive business practices, and prohibited business practices. The Consumer Service Fraud Act, 815 ILC 505/1 et seq. (West 2004), enacted in 1961 includes a variety of consumer service abuses, such as fraud, deception, false promise, misrepresentation, and the intentional omission of material fact (of evidence) with respect to real estate property and Illinois homeowners, as consumers.
· Defendants, as the aggrieved party, hereby reinstate this Motion for a Third Objection to the Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief on legal constitutional grounds since Counsel Howard C. Jablecki is liable for Estoppel in denying the truth about facts of evidence for the repair, restoration, and preservation plans by Zees Group Services, underwritten by ZSC Insurance Restoration Services, LLC., and proposed by Gardenia C. Hung during November 2006 to the Village of Lombard and the Du Page County Board of Commissioners in Wheaton, Illinois, USA.
· Gardenia C. Hung, et al., support this Motion for a Third Objection to the Verified Complaint for Demolition and Injunctive Relief subsequent to consumer service reports to the Federal Communications Commission, Federal Trade Commission, Illinois Commerce Commission, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Renewal, Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. Department of Interior, U.S. Department of Commerce, Internal Revenue Service, and the Office of the President of the United States of America, in Washington, D.C., United States of America.

WHEREFORE, DEFENDANTS, GARDENIA C. HUNG ET AL. PRAY TO SUSTAIN THIS MOTION FOR A THIRD OBJECTION TO THE VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DEMOLITION AND FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, IN ORDER TO SUPPORT THE DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO COMPEL COURT ORDER TO REPAIR THE LOMBARD HISTORICAL BRICK BUNGALOW, PURSUANT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, PREAMBLE, ARTICLE I, BILL OF RIGHTS, AND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNDER THE DOCTRINE FOR INVERSE CONDEMNATION, CONSUMER SERVICE FRAUD, CONVERSION OF REAL PROPERTY, AND DISCRIMINATION, THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1866, EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION; SUBSEQUENT TO ARTICLE I, SECTION 15, OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS; THE ILLINOIS HOME REPAIR AND REMODELING ACT, ILLINOIS VICTIMS OF CRIME ACT, ILLINOIS HUMAN RIGHTS ACT WITH PROTECTIONS IN HOUSING UNDER THE LAW, HATE CRIMES LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ENHANCEMENT ACT, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN RENEWAL ACT, AND FEDERAL TRADE COMMISION ACT , 15 USC § 45 ET SEQ. AND 16 CFR, SUBSEQUENT TO THE ILLINOIS STATUTES FOR CONSUMER SERVICE PROTECTION AGAINST CONSUMER SERVICE FRAUD, DECEPTIVE BUSINESS PRACTICES, AND PROHIBITED BUSINESS PRACTICES.

IN ADDITION, DEFENDANTS PRAY FOR EXTRAORDINARY REMEDY AND RELIEF, IN THE FORM OF JUST COMPENSATION WITH JUSTICE, FAIRNESS, AND EQUITY, UNDER THE DOCTRINE OF INVERSE CONDEMNATION, WHICH PROVIDES CASH REMEDY AND MONETARY RELIEF FOR RESTITUTION AND INDEMNITY TO THE AGGRIEVED, UNDER THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES AND THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, UNDER GOD.
Respectfully Submitted and Dated on the 27th day of the month of February in the year 2008.

_________________________________________
(Reserved Signature)
Gardenia C. Hung, M.A. for the Defendants
On behalf of the Estate of Mr. Roberto Hung Supplemental Care Trust
502 S. Westmore-Meyers Road
Lombard, IL 60148-3028 USA

Verification

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

Date: February 27, 2008 Signed by:____________________________________
Gardenia C. Hung, M.A.

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

Third Amended Response/Answer to Summons, Motion for Order to Repair Historical Brick Bungalow in the Village of Lombard, Du Page County, Illinois USA

State of Illinois United States of America County of Du Page
In the 18th Judicial Circuit Court
Village of Lombard,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Gardenia C. Hung and Robert S. Hung, Trustees of the Trust Agreement Designated as the Roberto Hung Supplemental Care Trust, Jeffrey D. Papendick, a tax-purchaser, and non-record claimants and unknown users
Defendants
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No.:2007CH001284 Consolidated
Case No.:2006OV005982, LO25448NT;
Case No.:2006OV005983, LO25449NT;
Case No.:2006OV004446, LO12418NT; LO12419NT
NOTICE OF FILING
DEFENDANTS’ THIRD AMENDED RESPONSE/ANSWER TO SUMMONS.
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR AN ORDER TO REPAIR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WITH A THIRD OBJECTION TO THE VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DEMOLITION AND FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF PURSUANT TO ACTION FOR INVERSE CONDEMNATION, CONSUMER SERVICE FRAUD, CONVERSION OF REAL PROPERTY AS AN ACCESS TO CRIME.

Hearing Date: March 19, 2008, 9:00 AM
Second Objection: January 24, 2008
Objection Filed: November 26, 2007

Attn. Honorable Judge, Chancery Division To: Honorable Circuit Court Clerk
18th Judicial Circuit Court Mr. Chris Kachiroubas
505 North County Farm Road 505 North County Farm Road
Wheaton, Illinois 60189-0707 USA Wheaton, IL 60187 USA
CC: Mr. Howard C. Jablecki, et al. Attn. Zees Group Services
Law Firm of Klein, Thorpe and Jenkins, Ltd. ZSC Insurance Restoration Svces. LLC
Attorneys for the Plaintiff 6850 West Montrose Avenue
20 North Wacker Drive, Suite 1660, Hardwood Heights, Illinois 60706-7192
Chicago, Illinois 60606-2903 USA Tel. 708/867-7676, Fax: 708/867-6868
Tel. 312/984-6400, Fax: 312/984-6444
To Whom It May Concern

DEFENDANTS’ THIRD AMENDED RESPONSE/ANSWER TO SUMMONS.

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR AN ORDER TO REPAIR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS PROPOSED BY THE ZEES GROUP SERVICES, IN EXHIBIT C, FOR CONTRACTS A-1, B-1, AND C-1, WITH A THIRD OBJECTION TO THE VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DEMOLITION AND FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF PURSUANT TO ACTION FOR INVERSE CONDEMNATION, CONSUMER SERVICE FRAUD, CONVERSION OF REAL PROPERTY AS AN ACCESS TO CRIME, UNDER THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, BILL OF RIGHTS, AND STATUTES UNDER THE ILLINOIS GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

COUNTERPOINT: AT ISSUE LEGAL MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO THE VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DEMOLITION AND FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, IN ORDER TO SUPPORT THE DEFENDANTS’ PROPOSAL FOR PRESERVATION, RESTORATION, RENOVATION, AND DISASTER-CONSTRUCTION REMODELING OF THE LOMBARD HISTORICAL BRICK BUNGALOW WITH THE HOMEOWNER’S COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIMS TO SETOFF/OFFSET THE VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DEMOLITION AND FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FROM PLAINTIFF, PURSUANT TO “ACTION FOR INVERSE CONDEMNATION”, CONVERSION OF REAL PROPERTY, CONSUMER SERVICE FRAUD, BREACH OF THE FAIR HOUSING PARTNERSHIP RESOLUTION CONTRACT, REAL ESTATE LIABILITY FOR LOMBARD OLD HOUSES.

Comes now Gardenia C. Hung to appear and submit all of the Defendants’ pleadings in a Third Amended Response/Answer to Summons on behalf of the Defendants and as Executor Trustee for the Roberto Hung Supplemental Care Trust which includes the subject property at 502 S. Westmore Avenue, in the Village of Lombard, Du Page County, Illinois, in the Unites States of America. Defendants hereby present a Motion for an Order to Repair the Subject Property by Contractual Agreement signed with the Zees Group Services, and proposed in 2006 by Gardenia C. Hung to the Village of Lombard and the County of Du Page Board of Commissioners, and noted in Exhibit C, Contracts A-1, B-1, and C-1, attached herewith, presented by the Zees Group, General Contractor License No.GC052400D, for the repair, preservation, restoration, and disaster-construction of the Lombard Historical Brick Bungalow, underwritten by ZSC Insurance Restoration Services, LLC.

Gardenia C. Hung is representing herself as Defendant PRO SE, legal Lombard resident, Illinois Homeowner and Taxpayer in Du Page County, U.S. citizen at 502 S. Westmore Avenue, Lombard, Illinois 60148-3028, USA, and as a Du Page County Notary Public, commissioned by the State of Illinois, to appear in person and respond/answer with a Third Objection to the Plaintiff’s Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief pursuant to “Action for Inverse Condemnation”, Conversion of Real Property, Consumer Service Fraud, Breach of the Fair Housing Partnership Resolution Contract, Real Estate Liability for Lombard Old Houses which becomes an action for damage to real estate property under Article I, Section 15 of the Illinois Constitution, supporting that: “Private property shall not be taken or damaged for public use without just compensation as provided by law.” (August 1986, Illinois Municipal Review, page 1).

Defendants hereby deny, dispute, and oppose each and every other allegation, presented by Counsel Howard C. Jablecki, since facts of evidence, laws, and prior court decisions for these consolidated actions do not support the Verified Complaint as follow:
· Count I, Demolition for Dangerous and Unsafe Building
· Count II, Statutory Injunction
· Preliminary Injunction and Permanent

Defendants hereby present a Motion for an Order to Repair the Subject Property against the Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief with a Third Objection to the same Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief pursuant to the Constitution of the United States of America and the Constitution of the State of Illinois, based on the following legal grounds:

The U.S. Supreme Court has stressed that takings claims (for condemnation) must be decided in light of the basic purpose of the “just compensation clause”, in order “to bar Government from forcing some people alone (Defendants) to bear public burdens which in all fairness and justice, should be borne by the public as a whole.” (Armstrong v. United States, 1960, page 49).

For the last fifteen (15) years, the Village of Lombard, et al. has damaged and abused the subject property for its own public purposes in Du Page County, Illinois as an access to crime, without just compensation to the Hung Family and the Estate of Mr. Roberto Hung Supplemental Care Trust, pursuant to the doctrine of “Inverse Condemnation”, the Defendants hereby petition to redress damages and losses as follow:

Since 1993 through 2008, the Village of Lombard has been abusing and damaging the subject property more through trespassing, unauthorized access entries, access to crime after 1996, when the late Mr. Roberto Hung purchased the Lombard Historical Brick Bungalow.
During 2004, the subject property was damaged by water flooding from bursting plumbing pipes under ungauged water pressure caused by Lombard plumbing rupture and faulty storm draining system in Du Page County, which required PSI valves to be installed by the Department of Public Works and Water Services in the Village of Lombard. Case reference to Yee v. City of Sausalito, Appellate Court Decision.
During 2004, 2005, and 2006, the Village of Lombard has interrupted public utilities services for the Hung Family and the subject property causing additional damages and losses to the Lombard Historical Brick Bungalow for lack of telephone service lines, no electricity, and no water service to the homeowners.
During 2005, the subject property suffered extensive roofing damages and losses to existing telephone utilities caused by unauthorized SBC Telephone Services by the Lombard Police Department, the neighbors John and Eva Carpenters, sons, relatives, associates, and other accomplices trespassed into the Hung Family real estate property by jumping over the adjoining fence posts between the Carpenters’ driveway and the backyard of the subject property.
During 2006 and 2007, there were also existing damages and losses to the green lawn and landscaping, as well as the plant life, flower beds and borders due to the Village of Lombard Public Works Project for street pavement and water sewage inspection.

Consequently, Defendants do not plead guilty to each and every allegation presented in the Verified Complaint, since none of the persons in the Hung Family has been at home when the Village of Lombard et al. and other accomplices as Plaintiff have arranged and authorized access entry to cause extensive damages and losses to the Lombard property at 502 S. Westmore Avenue and Washington Blvd., in Du Page County, Illinois, USA, purchased and paid in full with cash retirement funds by the late Mr. Roberto Hung, J.D. in September 1996 with eldest daughter, Gardenia C. Hung as a witness.

On legal merits, Defendants present a Third Objection to same Verified Complaint since facts of evidence, laws, and prior court decisions do not support any of the Plaintiff’s Motion for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief which raises false arguments, lacking in foundation. Since 2006, Gardenia C. Hung has presented the Hung Family’s proposal by the Zees Group Services for Restoration, Remodeling, Repair and Re-Construction of the distressed Hung Family Real Estate Property, due to “Criminal Conversion” used by Plaintiff as “Access to Crime”, authorized and arranged by the Lombard Police Department, under Chief Raymond Byrne, and the Fire Department Bureau of Inspectional Services, Keith Steiskal, under Chief George Seagraves, with accomplices John and Eva Carpenter, sons, handymen, construction associates, friends, and others from the community-at-large in Du Page County, Illinois.

2007-2008 Construction Statistics Reports and public records indicate that for Lombard Historical Real Estate Property –“it is more expensive to demolish and destroy real estate property at today’s prices and cost of construction materials, than to restore, repair, and rebuild historical real estate property”—“which can be remodeled and reconstructed for damages and losses” due to disaster, disrepair, “Conversion of Real Property” as an “Access to Crime” caused and authorized by Plaintiff under Lombard unethical real estate service practices.

6. Defendants deny and dispute the same Verified Complaint based on Plaintiff’s speculations which state improper opinions, based on lack of foundation for irrelevant arguments, contrary-to-fact.
7. Furthermore, Defendants, hereby represented by Gardenia C. Hung continue to oppose, deny, and dispute each and every allegation in the same Verified Complaint based on additional Objections to the Plaintiff’s “Improper Character References” and lack of facts of evidence for the false concern about the health risk and safety of Gardenia C. Hung, in order to prevent the Defendants from residing, inhabiting, and protecting the Hung Family Real Estate Property after Plaintiff has caused and authorized SBC Telephone Company in Illinois/Indiana, Edward Westenholtz, and other trespassers, intruders, criminals, vandals, and other accomplices to jump the backyard fence, adjoining the Carpenter family driveway, in order to damage and destroy existing roofing structures and penetrate the Hung Family Real Estate Property in Lombard, Du Page County, Illinois, USA.
8. Defendants hereby present legal Compulsory Counterclaims to Setoff/Offset the Plaintiff’s Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief that arises from “Action for Inverse Condemnation” and is otherwise connected with the same issues involving real estate controversy over the Hung Family Real Estate Property. Consequently, the Defendants demand full restitution and cash compensation equal to the value of this Lombard property and all the damages and losses incurred by the Defendants since 1993, and during 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007, for the last fifteen (15) years, inclusive, for the following Casualties and Thefts, 2006 IRS Form 4684: Property A, Lombard Brick Bungalow, 3-Level house at 502 S. Westmore Avenue, in Lombard, Illinois, acquired during September 1996, $900,000; Property B, T-Mobile Motorola RAZOR V3, Camera Telephone, acquired at Yorktown Center on December 20, 2005, in the sum of $300; Property C, 2003 Derbi Boulevard 150 CC Motorcycle, acquired on June 11, 2003, currently disabled in disrepair at Champion Cycle Center, Inc., 3625 N. Western Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60618, in the sum of $16,071.35. In addition to damages and losses to eight (8) automobiles owned by the late Mr. Roberto Hung, Ms.Gardenia C. Hung, and Mr. Nathan S. Wittler: Buick Montecarlo, Ford Escort Station Wagon, Ford Mustang Hatchback, Chrysler Capri Sports, Geo Tracker, Nissan 200SX, Mitsubishi Galant, in the sum of $100,000.
9. In this legal action and pursuant to the “Doctrine of Inverse Condemnation”, Defendants invoke the “just compensation clause” wherein the original cost of the real property damaged, plus the added cost of the repair, restoration, and renovation by the Zees Group, minus depreciation for damages and losses, equals the fair market value sum, plus additional compensation for severance damages and losses owed to Gardenia C. Hung, et al. , Defendants, family members, as victims of crime in the Village of Lombard, Du Page County, in the State of Illinois, United States of America.
10. Gardenia C. Hung, et al. as the aggrieved Lombard resident homeowner is entitled by law, and has the constitutional right to recover the monetary value of the real property damaged by the Village of Lombard, et al., and is entitled “to be placed in as good as a financial position as s/he would have been in, if the Estate of Mr. Roberto Hung Supplemental Care Trust, had not been damaged and/or taken by the Plaintiff, for public use through trespassing, access to crime, conversion, consumer service fraud, and public use in the Village of Lombard, Du Page County, Illinois, USA.

In addition, Gardenia C. Hung, et al., Defendants, have suffered from the operational loss of business at home, loss of earning and gainful employment, during the course of damages and losses from 1993 through 2008, for the last fifteen (15) years.

Defendants hereby petition full indemnity for the Lombard real estate damages and losses sustained by the Estate of Mr. Roberto Hung Supplemental Care Trust and assets, at a fair market value.

Under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.” The Fifth Amendment recognizes the real estate property rights of individuals and guarantees that the government must provide a fair payment to a person whose property is taken for public use.

Wherefore, Defendants petition to redress all grievances under the U.S. Constitution and the Constitution of the State of Illinois, Bill of Rights, to be considered as victims of crime in order to be treated fairly, justly, and equitably as Illinois resident homeowners who have been subjected to abuse and discrimination by the Village of Lombard, in Du Page County, Illinois, USA.

WHEREBY, Defendants continue to assert and demand their legal rights as Lombard resident homeowners to recover all damages and losses for the misuse of the Hung Family Real Estate Property, which has been abused illegally, and criminally converted to distressed Lombard property by the Plaintiff who has authorized and arranged access to crime from the Lombard Police Department, the Fire Department Bureau of Inspectional Services, John and Eva Carpenter, as well as other accomplices in Du Page County, Illinois, USA.

PURSUANT TO THE DOCTRINE OF INVERSE CONDEMNATION, DEFENDANTS’ HEREBY ESTABLISH COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIMS TO SETOFF/OFFSET THE VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DEMOLITION AND FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FROM PLAINTIFF PRESENTED BY THE DEFENDANTS ON LEGAL GROUNDS FOR “ACTION DUE TO INVERSE CONDEMNATION”, CRIMINAL CONVERSION OF PROPERTY, CONSUMER SERVICE FRAUD, BREACH OF THE FAIR HOUSING PARTNERSHIP RESOLUTION CONTRACT, REAL ESTATE LIABILITY FOR LOMBARD OLD HOUSES. Defendants’ Do Not Plead Guilty; Defendants’ Objection to Wrongful Citations for Lombard Municipal Violations PURSUANT TO THE HATE CRIMES LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ENHANCEMENT ACT, VICTIMS OF CRIME ACT, ILLINOIS HUMAN RIGHTS ACT WITH PROTECTIONS IN HOUSING UNDER THE LAW; u.s. department of housing and urban development act (hud); the homeowners repair act, housing and community development act (1974), federal fair housing acts, the federal trade commission act (FTC, 15 USC § 45 et seq. and 16 CFR, subsequent illinois statutes for consumer service protection against consumer service fraud, deceptive business practices, and prohibited practices established by the illinois general assembly, under the constitution of the united states and under god. subsequent to the USA PATRIOT ACT: pRESERVING LIFE AND LIBERTY (2001); Defendants’s COMBINED §2-615 MOTION TO DIMISS AND §2-619 MOTION TO DISMISS BASED ON WRONGFUL CHARGES, MALICIOUS PROSECUTION, ABUSE OF THE LEGAL PROCESS AND PURSUANT TO ILCS 720 5-31 PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE AND PROOF OF GUILT;
DEFENDANTS’ STATEMENTS OF FACT
Pursuant to the Constitution of the State of Illinois, Article I, in the Bill of Rights, Gardenia C. Hung and the Hung Family, are entitled to the same laws for protection of their real estate property under God and the United States of America, as follows:
Section 2.- Due Process and Equal Protection. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law nor be denied the equal protection of the laws.
Section 8.1.- Crime Victims’ Rights.
Section 12.- Right to Remedy and Justice. Every person shall find a certain remedy in the laws for all injuries and wrongs which she/he receives to her/his person, privacy, property or reputation. She/He shall obtain justice by law, freely, completely, and promptly.
Section 15.- Right to Eminent Domain. Private property shall not be taken or damaged for public use without just compensation as provided by law. Such compensation shall be determined by a jury as provided by law.
Section 20.- Individual Dignity. To promote individual dignity, communications that portray criminality, depravity or lack virtue in, or that incite violence, hatred, abuse or hostility toward, a person or group of persons by reason of or by reference to religious, racial, ethnic, national or religious affiliation are condemned.
Plaintiff, as the Village of Lombard, et al. is barred from pursuing the cause of action stated in the Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief under the State of Illinois applicable statutes of limitations for Negligence Per Se actions for “Criminal Conversion of Property” owned by the Defendants, since the hateful, heinous crimes occurred more than two (2) years ago and have been taking place repeatedly and continuously for the last fifteen (15) years, from 1993 through 2004, 2005, 2006, and to date, in 2007.
· On Count I, Demolition of Dangerous, Unsafe Building, Defendants deny, dispute, and oppose, each and every allegation of the Plaintiff’s Verified Complaint for Demolition of Dangerous and Unsafe Building, on legal grounds for information and belief, based on the Tort of Conversion and unethical business real estate practices, since the Village of Lombard, the Police Department under Chief Raymond Byrne, the Bureau of Inspectional Services Inspector Keith Steiskal, the Fire Department under Chief George E. Seagraves, neighboring accomplices John and Eva Carpenter and sons with friends, handymen, associates, and family, have all criminally, maliciously, and deliberately altered in “Conversion” and damaged the Hung Family Real Estate Property at 502 S. Westmore Avenue and Washington Blvd. in Lombard, Du Page County, to cause a disaster, disrepair, and distress in the same property for the purpose of the depreciation of equity value since 1993 through 2004, 2005, 2006, and to date in 2007. This Lombard brick bungalow house with 3-stories, 2-car garage, and 4-car driveway, has been misused, abused, and victimized as an “Access to Crime”, along with all the Defendants who have been subject to personal injury surrounding homeownership of the same Lombard real estate property.
· On Count II, Statutory Injunction, Defendants deny, dispute, and oppose each and every allegation of the Plaintiff’s Verified Complaint for Statutory Injunction, on legal grounds, information, and belief based on the Plaintiff’s Intentional Interference with the Defendants Personal Health, Well Being, and Right to Privacy in Real Estate Property Rights, which constitutes a “Private Nuisance” by the Village of Lombard et al., John and Eva Carpenter and Family, who are adjoining neighbors by the driveway at 504 S. Westmore-Meyers Road in Lombard, SBC Telephone Company in Illinois/Indiana, Edward Westenholtz, and the community-at-large in Du Page County, Illinois—-who have been all harmful and destructive of the Hung Family Real Estate Property. For the record, Plaintiff interferes with the Defendants’ peace of mind due to constant harassment, hateful and heinous criminal acts, malicious prosecution, and abuse of human rights in housing and the abuse of the legal process.
· On Count III, Preliminary and Permanent Injunction, Defendants deny, dispute, and oppose each and every allegation of the Plaintiff’s Verified Complaint for Preliminary Injunction on legal grounds, information, and belief based on the Plaintiff’s Breach of Duty for Consumer Service Fraud, Deceit, and Misrepresentation of the Village of Lombard residential homeowners’ services by “Criminal Conversion” of Real Estate Property owned by the Hung Family which has been altered, damaged, and victimized to become a distressed Lombard house, improperly “Induced” with Lombard Police “Access to Crime” arranged with drugged addicts as trespassers, intruders, repeat offenders as criminals, vandals, and real estate trickery, deception, and fraud in the sale of property by the Village of Lombard et al. who authorizes damages and losses to the Hung Family Property in order to depreciate the equity value of the same real estate property. For the record, Plaintiff interferes and constantly invades Gardenia Hung’s privacy since 1993 and to date in 2007, for the last fifteen years (15) years; furthermore, the Village of Lombard et al. interferes with the Defendants’ reputation and is subject to “Defamation of Character”, “Slander” and “Libel”. In addition, Plaintiff is also subject to and liable for interference with the Defendants’ Real Estate Property Rights, causing undue real property theft, burglary, annoyance, inconvenience, discomfort, and even “Personal Injury” to the Defendants which have been abused, victimized, kidnapped, set up for accidents, hospitalized, disabled, and even murdered. Plaintiff, as the Village of Lombard et al., to include the neighbors John and Eva Carpenter and sons, the community-at-large in Lombard and in Du Page County constitute for the Defendants a “Private Nuisance” which is arranged by the Lombard Police Department, under Chief Raymond Byrne and District 5 Police in particular, and Keith Steiskal, Lombard Fire Department Bureau of Inspectional Services, under Chief George Seagraves, and other accomplices reported to U.S. law enforcement agencies under terrorism, bioterrorism, threats, coercion, and intimidation of the Hung Family members which is punishable and prosecuted by law in the State of Illinois, under the Constitution of the United States, under God. Whereby Defendant and the Hung Family require cash restitution in the sum of $2,000,000, two million dollars, and a public apology from Plaintiff, the Village of Lombard et al.
Defendants’ Statements of Legal Authorities
Defendants assert the following affirmative defense on valid legal grounds supported by U.S. legal authorities and international courts of law for human rights around the world, beyond a reasonable doubt, based upon the preponderance of evidence on public record and on file for this legal case in action consolidated in the U.S. Supreme Court and in the 18th Judicial Circuit Court, in the County of Du Page, in the State of Illinois, United States of America, as noted.
Pursuant to the Constitution of the State of Illinois, Article I, in the Bill of Rights, Gardenia C. Hung and the Hung Family, are entitled to the same laws for protection of their real estate property under God and the Constitution of the United States of America.
WHEREBY, Defendants support this Motion for an Order to Repair the Subject Property with a Third Objection to the same Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief, presented along with the Defendants’ Compulsory Counterclaims pursuant to the Doctrine of Action for Inverse Condemnation, to Setoff/Offset the Verified Complaint. This Third Amended Response/Answer to Summons is presented, not only to deny, dispute, and oppose each and every one of the Plaintiff’s allegations, but also to accuse the Plaintiff for direct cause of action as the Village of Lombard et al., liable for the charges involving “Criminal Conversion” of the Hung Family Real Estate Property, which now in 2008, remains as a Lombard Historical Real Estate property, criminally damaged and distressed due to the Village of Lombard’s accountability for Consumer Service Fraud, breach of the Fair Housing Partnership Resolution contract and liability for Lombard Real Estate Old Houses in Du Page County, Illinois, USA.

COUNTERARGUMENT: IN SUPPORT OF THE DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR AN ORDER TO REPAIR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WITH A THIRD OBJECTION AGAINST THE VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DEMOLITION AND FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, TO ESTABLISH COUNTERCLAIMS TO SETOFF/OFF SET THE SAME VERIFIED COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO THE DOCTRINE OF INVERSE CONDEMNATION
Please Take Notice that Plaintiff as the Village of Lombard, represented by Counsel Howard C. Jablecki et al. from the Law Firm of Klein, Thorpe, and Jenkins, Ltd. is legally liable and “Guilty” of the Tort of “Criminal Conversion” in this legal “Action for Inverse Condemnation” surrounding the Hung Family Real Estate Property at 502 S. Westmore Avenue, Lombard in Du Page County, Illinois, USA. The Village of Lombard and other accomplices have all “misused and borrowed” Hung Family assets and real estate property without authorization, permission, or legal power of attorney issued by Gardenia C. Hung or any of the Defendants in this legal matter.
For the record, Plaintiff is deliberately and criminally responsible for altering with disaster, destruction, damages, and losses, the Lombard Historical Bungalow, built in 1927, and now owned by Gardenia C. Hung as Defendant(s), since the Hung Family Real Estate Property was purchased by her late father, Mr. Roberto Hung, J.D.–former attorney, judge, and prosecutor–in 1993 and paid fully in 1996 with cash retirement funds at the First State Bank of Maple Park in Illinois, witnessed by his eldest daughter, Gardenia C. Hung, an Illinois Notary Public. Let it be known that during June 1998, the late Mr. Roberto Hung was murdered at Vencor Northlake Hospital in Northlake, Cook County, Illinois, following hospitalization at Elmhurst Memorial Hospital in Elmhurst, Du Page County, Illinois. The Roberto Hung Supplemental Care Trust was legally settled and closed during January 1999 before presiding Judge Robert E. Byrne in the 18th Judicial Circuit Court, in the County of Du Page, State of Illinois, United States of America. Gardenia C. Hung was the appointed Executor, as Trustee with Robert S. Hung. The Village of Lombard and other accomplices have been harmful as destructive service operatives who are directly responsible and liable for the Hung Family Real Estate Consumer Service Fraud, Damages, Losses, and Disrepair for Lombard Plumbing Failure, Roofing and Landscaping Criminal Activity, Sabotage and Destruction of All (9) Nine Motor Vehicles owned by the Hung Family and registered under the State of Illinois, Office of the Secretary of State, Motor Vehicles and Drivers License Facilities, in order to depreciate real assets for distressed real estate property belonging the Defendants so that they lose equity value as resident homeowners in Lombard, Du Page County, Illinois, USA.
Plaintiff interferes with the Hung Family’s legal possession of real property and homeownership as an “Access to Crime” which is subject to prosecution for altering and misusing this Lombard historical bungalow to arrange criminal activity, as evidenced by the visible damages and losses in excess of $50,000, as follow:
· Plaintiff has been instrumental in the removal and damage of existing public utilities, that is to say, Lombard residential telephone lines, electricity, gas, water service, sewage, waste management, etc. without the authorization or permission of the Hung Family.
· Plaintiff as the Village of Lombard et al. has arranged disrepair and damages through trespassers and unauthorized access entry into the Hung Family Real Estate Property, in order to depreciate the same Lombard historical bungalow as a distressed property to lose the Hung Family homeowners’ equity value upon sale of the same by the Village of Lombard realtors.
· Defendants are hereby establishing Counterclaims to Setoff/Offset the Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief as a legal demand for financial restitution and cash relief as full compensation from the Plaintiff for “Criminal Conversion” of the Hung Family Real Estate Property for the last (15) fifteen years, from 1993 through 2004, 2005, 2006, and to date in 2008.
· Plaintiff as the Village of Lombard is subject to prosecution for “Breach of Duty” on legal grounds, facts of evidence, and belief for Negligence Per Se. The Village of Lombard and other accomplices refuse services, do not respond, and act unreasonably, unlawfully, unethically, and criminally arranged by the Lombard Police Department, under Chief Raymond Byrne and the Lombard District 5 Police, John and Eva Carpenter, handymen, associates, public utility operatives for Nicor Gas, Commonwealth Edison Electric Company, SBC Telephone Company in Illinois/Indiana, Edward Westenholtz, the Village of Lombard Water Service and Sewage under Public Works, Waste Management of Illinois, Keith Steiskal and Chris Hanigan for the Bureau of Inspectional Services, Lombard Fire Department, under Chief George Seagraves, and the community-at-large in Lombard and Du Page County, Illinois.
· Plaintiff’s carelessness directly has caused damages, losses and disrepair to the Hung Family Real Estate Property in Lombard, as well as personal injury, forced hospitalization arranged by the Lombard Police Department, physical disabilities, and other inconveniences to the Defendants themselves in this legal response to the Verified Complaint filed by Counsel Howard C. Jablecki et al. on behalf of the Village of Lombard.
· For the record, Defendants are currently suffering from economic losses and damages, criminal disrepair in real estate property, loss of employment, personal injuries, and psychological distress as human beings, due to the Plaintiff’s malicious and insidious “Criminal Conversion” of the Hung Family Real Estate Property in Lombard, Du Page County, Illinois, USA.
· The Village of Lombard et al. and All Employees as Plaintiff, have violated legal terms of service and management without authorization, legal power of attorney, or permission from Gardenia C. Hung for the Hung Family Real Estate Property in Lombard.
· Let it be known that Gardenia C. Hung does not suffer from any of the health-related allegations cited and reported by Keith Steiskal and George Seagraves for the Bureau of Inspectional Services under the Lombard Fire Department.
· By law in the State of Illinois and under the Constitution of the United States, Defendants are entitled to recover in cash all damages and losses equal to the value of the Hung Family Assets and Real Estate Property for the last (15) fifteen years from Plaintiff, as the Village of Lombard, as Counterclaims to Setoff/Offset the Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief; plus the reimbursement of all court costs, fees, and extraneous legal expenses incurred by the Defendants during the course of all legal proceedings involving the same Lombard historical bungalow, since 1993 to date in 2008, for the last (15) fifteen years.
· Pursuant to the Doctrine of Inverse Condemnation, Defendants hereby establish Counterclaims to Setoff/Offset the same Verified Complaint for Demolition and for Injunctive Relief as a response/answer in this legal “Action in Trover”, in order to recover all damages and losses, as well as compensate “Personal Injury” during the course of “Criminal Conversion” of the Hung Family Real Estate Property by Plaintiff as the Village of Lombard et al., who have altered, misused, borrowed and kept real property, abused, and victimized not only the Lombard Historical Bungalow, but also members of the Hung Family and others, based on facts of injury, forced hospitalizations, information, and belief.
· All the Defendants hereby demand a personal and written apology from Plaintiff as the Village of Lombard, et al. in Du Page County, Illinois, USA, as well as cash restitution/reimbursement for all damages and losses to the Hung Family Estate and assets.

WHEREFORE, DEFENDANTS, GARDENIA C. HUNG, ROBERT S. HUNG, ET AL. PRAY THAT THIS MOTION FOR AN ORDER TO REPAIR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, BE SUSTAINED PURSUANT TO THE DOCTRINE OF INVERSE CONDEMNATION, AND FOR WRONGFUL CHARGES AND MISDEMEANORS SET AGAINST THE VILLAGE OF LOMBARD ET AL., IN THIS LEGAL “ACTION IN TROVER”, WITH PREJUDICE, WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND, AND THAT ALL DAMAGES AND LOSSES, AS WELL AS LEGAL COURT EXPENSES, COURT COSTS, , BE COMPENSATED AND REIMBURSED TO THE DEFENDANTS FROM 1993 THROUGH 2008, FOR THE LAST (15) FIFTEEN YEARS, SINCE PLAINTIFF, THE VILLAGE OF LOMBARD, ET AL. INITIATED THE DIRECT CAUSE OF DISASTER AND CRIMINAL ACTION FOR CONSTRUCTION, DAMAGES, AND LOSSES AGAINST THE LOMBARD REAL ESTATE PROPERTY AT 502 S. WESTMORE AVENUE & WASHINGTON BOULEVARD OWNED BY THE HUNG FAMILY FROM 1993 TO THE PRESENT, IN 2008, PURSUANT TO ILCS 720, 5-31, PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE AND PROOF OF GUILT, UNDER THE HATE CRIMES LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ENHANCEMENT ACT, THE VICTIMS OF CRIME ACT, THE ILLINOIS HUMAN RIGHTS ACT FOR PROTECTIONS IN HOUSING UNDER THE LAW, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN RENEWAL (HUD); 735 ILCS 5/ART. II, ET SEQ. CIVIL PRACTICE LAW AND THE RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT IN THE STATE OF ILLINOIS AND UNDER THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES, AS FOLLOWS FOR:
(1) GENERAL DAMAGES AND LOSSES , TO INCLUDE, EXHIBIT C, FOR THE REPAIR, PRESERVATION OF THE ESTATE, RENOVATION, RECONSTRUCTION, REHABILITATION, AND REMODELING ESTIMATEED AT A COST OF $123,200, AS NOTED IN CONTRACT C-1, IN CONFORMITY TO PROOF;
(2) OTHER SPECIAL DISASTER CONSTRUCTION REPAIR DAMAGES AND LOSSES IN THE SUM OF $92,480, AS EVIDENCED IN CONTRACT B-1, IN COMFORMITY TO PROOF.
(3) AND DEFENDANTS PRO SE ALSO PRAY FOR THE COMPENSATION OF SUCH OTHER AND ADDITIONAL DISASTER RESTORATION CONSTRUCTION DAMAGES AND LOSSES IN THE SUM OF $66,150, ITEMIZED IN CONTRACT A-1, IN CONFORMITY TO PROOF, AND FOR FURTHER REMEDY AND RELIEF AS THE COURT DEEMS JUST, FAIR, EQUITABLE, AND PROPER IN THIS CAUSE OF ACTION FOR DISASTER RESTORATION CONSTRUCTION CAUSED DIRECTLY BY PLAINTIFF, THE CITY OF LOMBARD ET AL., IN THE TOTAL SUM OF $281,830.
WHEREBY, DEFENDANTS ET AL. PRAY FOR JUST COMPENSATION UNDER THE DOCTRINE OF INVERSE CONDEMNATION, IN THE FORM OF FINANCIAL REMEDY AND MONETARY RELIEF AS COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIMS TO SET OFF/OFFSET THE VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DEMOLITION AND FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AGAINST THE PLAINTIFF, AS THE VILLAGE OF LOMBARD. DEFENDANTS DENY, DISPUTE AND OPPOSE EACH AND EVERY ALLEGATION PRESENTED BY THE PLAINTIFF IN ORDER TO DEMAND THE COURT’S PROTECTION, WITH PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, SO THAT PLAINTIFF “CEASE AND DESIST” HARASSMENT AND INTERFERENCE ARRANGED BY THE VILLAGE OF LOMBARD ET AL. WHO IS SUBJECT TO CRIMINAL PROSECUTION, IN JUSTICE, EQUITY, AND JUDGEMENT AGAINST THE PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DEMOLITION AND FOR INJUCTIVE RELIEF ON ALL COUNTS.
DEFENDANTS ALSO PRAY FOR SEVERANCE DAMAGES AND LOSSES, AS ADDITIONAL FINANCIAL REMEDY AND MONETARY RELIEF TO BE COMPENSATED UNDER U.S. LEGISLATION BY THE PLAINTIFF, FROM 1993 TO DATE IN 2008, FOR THE LAST (15) FIFTEEN YEARS, IN ORDER TO SUPPORT THE DEFENDANTS COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIMS SETOFF/OFFSET AGAINST THE VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DEMOLITION AND FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, UNDER THE DOCTRINE FOR INVERSE CONDEMNATION, FOR ALL DAMAGES AND LOSSES CAUSED AND ARRANGED BY THE VILLAGE OF LOMBARD ET AL., DUE TO UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO CRIME, TRESPASSING, “CRIMINAL CONVERSION” OF THE HUNG FAMILY REAL ESTATE PROPERTY AS AN ACCESS TO CRIMINAL ACTIVITY IN LOMBARD, DU PAGE COUNTY, ILLINOIS, USA.
Respectfully Submitted and Dated on the 27th day of the month of February in the year 2008.
_________________________________________
(Reserved Signature)
Gardenia C. Hung, M.A. for the Defendants
On behalf of the Estate of Mr. Roberto Hung Supplemental Care Trust
502 S. Westmore-Meyers Road
Lombard, IL 60148-3028 USA

Verification

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

Date: February 27, 2008 Signed by:____________________________________
Gardenia C. Hung, M.A.

In the County of Du Page, in the State of Illinois
United States of America

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

Courtesy Article

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Canada‘s Court System, Department of Justice Publication.

American Heritage Dictionary.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

---

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

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

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

[3] http://www.answers.com/commonlaw

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Respectfully submitted by,

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

VERIFICATION

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

Dated on January 25, 2008,
Signed by:

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