On 26 June 2019 I filed a ‘Motion’ to ‘Vacate’ the “default judgment” of 12 May 2017 by “honorable” Stephen Rubin.
Somerset County Court received it on 28 June 2019.
I did not file it sooner because I was advised not to, instead let my daughter file an appeal for lack of ‘Due Process’.
My daughter won her Appeal on 8 December 2018.
My motion, though late, was filed on the grounds that “judge” Rubin denied me ‘Due Process’, denied me the right of trial by jury as guaranteed by both Article 1, Sec 9, of the New Jersey Constitution, and the US Constitution, Amendments 7, and 14.
In addition, I discovered that “judge” Stephen Rubin deliberately lied about a divorce settlement check, (one of three), I gave to Debra Albano as part of the original divorce settlement in 2004. (Court Rue 4:50-1, (b), (c), (e), & (f). ).
Also because “judge” Stephen Rubin committed the following errors;
a. Rubin included the name and assets of an woman, hitherto unknown, and not in any way, remotely connected to my case.
Then Rubin compounded his error by including this unknown individual’s assets with mine !!
b. Rubin grossly undervalued my home, thereby ensuring that more of our assets would be taken, (stolen is the correct word), from us.
c. Rubin determined my personal assets to be between $1,000.000., and $1,200,000.
However, he had no basis to come to that conclusion, having co mingled unknown woman`s assets with mine and my family`s.
As a matter of fact, Rubin, inappropriately, as he openly admitted, asked me personally what my net worth was, because he could not get an intelligent answer from Debra Albano`s lawyer….
See Court Rule 4:50 for the above errors and lies……..To continue;
Having never received a court date for the ‘Vacate motion’, I wrote a letter to Somerset County Court on 27 July 2019 questioning why I have not yet received a court date for this motion……
Suffice it to say, I never received a reply.
The motion to ‘Vacate’ was NEVER scheduled, and never was a word of the court’s intent to hear this motion ever published, implied, inferred, and/or contemplated by any one that I know of
One thing is absolutely certain, no one ever mentioned a thing about a date for this ‘vacate’ motion to be heard to me.
On 16 August 2019, I walked into the courtroom prepared for the scheduled “Assets” hearing. To my shock and confusion, I am told by the “honorable” Robert Ballard that the hearing is to be about the “vacate” motion.
I told Ballard that I was not made aware of the fact that the “vacate” motion was going to be heard on this date.
Therefore, I was not prepared for it, nor did I bring my file with the relevant evidence with me.
I was only prepared for the Scheduled “Assets” hearing, as this was the only one scheduled.
Didn`t matter to this guy, he just continued on like he didn`t hear me.
(I have attached a copy of the transcript so you can see for yourself what I am continually up against with these “judges”).
Just a note here; this is not the first time this guy didn`t notify me of a hearing, and/or changes he made.
Makes you wonder, just how far down to the bottom of the cesspool they go to recruit…….
I put in writing when I filed this ‘Vacate’ motion that I wanted a jury trial, which is our constitutional right as citizens, but as usual, Ballard just ignored it.
Talk about arrogance.
He made a point to focus on one comment I made in my Unscheduled motion to ‘vacate’, Ballard asked me if I was calling ‘judge’ Stephen Rubin a liar.
I responded to Ballard most emphatically, “YES” !
Man, he didn`t like that !
I went on to point out to Ballard, that he also had in front of him, a copy of the same document that “judge” Stephen Rubin lied about, so he could see for himself that Rubin deliberately lied.
(see transcript, attached, Page 6, lines 4 thru 22)
Having been cornered, Ballard then said that he had other cases to hear, and moved on.
(see transcript, attached, Page 7, lines 1 thru 6)
Interestingly, neither Debra Albano, the defendant, nor Hiedi Ann Lepp, the Co Defendant, (lepp works for Shimalla, Wechsler, lepp & D`Onofrio of Warren, NJ.),
Were NOT present as they were required to be.
Debra Albano was on “call”, in case she was “needed”……so said her lawyer, Carol Jeney.
“If she was needed” ?….She was the star witness, and the lead Defendant !!!
As for Hiedi Ann Lepp, as I said before, she was a CO DEFENDANT !!…
Again, doesn`t matter, Ballard made up his mind before breakfast that he was going to screw me !!!!
Guess what will happen to one of us, if we don`t show up ?!
The whole system is a scam, a con job…..just another way to separate working folks from our earnings ..
I DEFY ANYBODY TO PROVE ME WRONG !!..
Coming up…….Blog 46….”Let`s be fair, she, (Debra Albano, got $500,000.00 plus much, much more from the real divorce agreement in 2004, and what was stolen from my family), needs peace”…….so sayeth “judge” McDonald…….
Get your crocodile tears ready………
Excerpts from the transcript….
1 was entitled to the same thing because I never received
2 a trial during the past seven and a half years even
3 though I demanded it more than once. That’s A. B, the
4 presiding judge at the judgment hearing in May
5 deliberately lied about a particular fact and a check
6 that I wrote in 2004. And I think I include that and
7 the sample of the check in my request for a vacate.
8 THE COURT: March 12, 2004, Check Number 119.
9 MR. WITTIK: Right.
10 THE COURT: Right?
11 MR. WITTIK: $30,000. He said that, and it’s
12 right in the transcript, which I also provided a copy –
13 –
14 THE COURT: Yes.
15 MR. WITTIK: — that it was used to buy my
16 ex-wife a car, which was never true and he knew it. So
17 that’s the second reason.
18 THE COURT: So you’re not — you’re
19 suggesting not only did Judge Rubin not understand or
20 misspoke, that he deliberately did that and lied, is
21 that what you’re saying, sir?
22 MR. WITTIK: Yes, sir.
23 THE COURT: Okay.
24 MR. WITTIK: He had a copy of the check in
25 front of him when he said that.
1 THE COURT: All right. Great. All right.
2 Anything else you want to tell me? I’ve got three more
3 domestic violence hearings apparently that have been
4 added to my list today, so let’s get through this.
5 Tell me what else you want to say. I’ve reviewed all
6 of your papers, sir.
7 MR. WITTIK: Well, what I came prepared for –
8 –
9 THE COURT: Tell me what — tell me what you
10 want to tell me what you had come prepared for.
11 MR. WITTIK: That the defendant provide me an
12 accounting of all the money and the assets that they
13 took during the past two years. According to my
14 accounting, it comes down to $270,000 more, also
15 assets, above and beyond what the judgment was made and
16 that includes the money the judge gave her, her
17 attorney and the $20,000 he gave the trustee to collect
18 the money.
19 THE COURT: Okay.
20 MR. WITTIK: I would also like the Court to
21 issue a document saying that the judgment from 2017 is
22 satisfied and that all the excess monies that I can
23 prove will be returned to me and my family. That’s it
24 in a nutshell, sir.
25
Divorce, New Jersey Style 