13. lta logistics vs enrique varona (varona reseting trial, and notice of felony for fraud upon...

7/29/2019 13. LTA LOGISTICS vs Enrique Varona (Varona Reseting Trial, And Notice of Felony for Fraud Upon the Court)

1/11

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF THE ELEVEN TH JUDICIAL CIRCUITIN AND FOR MIAMI DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA

GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISIONCASE NO. 11 20527 CA 21

LTA LOGISTICS, INC. ; ORlQ/NAtLESTER TRIMINO, et al;p i a M f f , N O V . / 9 2 0 1 2V- IN TH E OFF ICE-

C / R C U / T C O U R T rfc"Enrique Varona,Defendant,

DEFENDANT ENRIQUE VARONA MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE OFTRIAL SET FOR DECEMBER 10. 2012

Defendant E nrique Varona who is su i juris an d acting pro se in this cause of actionan d pursuant to applicable rules of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure file thismotion fo r continuance of trial and states the following;1. Trial in this matter is set for December 10, 2012 at 9:00 a.m. defendant neveragreed to this date for trial nor was he consulted on this matter by plaintiff.2. Pursuant to agreement of the parties and as instructed by the honorable JudgeMarcia C aballero on O ctober 22, 201 2, defendant submitted a revised request ofproduction, clarification of request of admissions to questions 3 & 4, notice ofperjury to plaintiff on November 16, 2012.3. T he C ourt has served an O rder of compliance on the revised request of productionan d clarification of request of admissions 3 & 4 on plaintiff, he will have ten daysto reply to the order as per rules of F.R.C .P.


2/11

4. Defendant revised request of production and clarification of admissions 3 & 4,seek to identify witnesses for deposition that are essential as they have first handknowledge of the issues related to defendants case and defense.5. A trial date of Decem ber 1 0, 201 2 less than ten days after plaintiff due datefor submitting his answers (if he complies with the courts order) to the request ofproduction an d clarification of request of admissions 3 & 4, leaves or creates a timeframe which makes it impossible for defendant to serve and/or depose witnesses fortrial an d/or issue subpoenas as required under discovery rules.6. Defend ant has notified plaint if fs counsel and he does not oppose this motionfor continuance of trial.Wherefore, in the interest of justice defen dan t request this court to enter an ordergranting this motion fo r continuance of trial fo r those reason se t forth herein.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby, certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was served by emailan d US Ma il upon Scott E gleston, P. A. Attorney fo r plaintiff at 12000 BiscayneBlvd, Suite #220 Miami, F lorida 33181 on Mon day Novem ber 19, 2012.

ique Varona suijuris

tfully Submitted by ,L/


3/11

IN THE COUNTY CO URT OF THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUITIN AND FOR MIAM I DADE COUNTY, FLORIDAGENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISIONCASE NO. 11 20527 CA 21

LTA LOGISTICS, INC.A Florida corporation, an dLESTER TRIMEVO, et a/.,Plaintiff,Vs.Enrique Varona,

MEMORANDUM OF LAWNOTICE OF FELONY AFFIDAVIT

T he defendant, Enrique Varona proceeding S/ Juris an d acting Pro se in thismatter and by virtue of possessing firsthand knowledge of the facts an d actionsstated below hereby serves this N O T I C E O F F E L O N Y A F F I D A V I T to this courtpursuant to Title 18 United States Code. Part I . Chapter 1. 4 which states:

"Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felonycognizable by a court of th e United States, conceals and does not assoon as possible make kn own the same to some judge or otherperson in civil or military authority under th e United States, shallbe fined under this title or imprisoned n ot more than three years, orboth."


4/11

STATEMENT OF FACTS REGARDING PLAINTIFF'SFRAUD UPON TH E COURT

1. T he defendant Enrique Varona, (from hereon, "The defendant") acting oninformation an d belief declares the following. O n November 15, 2012 T he attorneyfor the plaintiff in this action Mr. Scott Egleston P.A. Florida Bar No. 883425 (fromhereon, "plaintiff counsel") was directed by the court to attend an order settingconference in preparation fo r trial as well as to come into compliance withF.R.C.P. 1.200(b).2. The defendant believed that he was not required to attend the order settingconference as he is not an ATTORNEY, but is proceeding Sui Juris, and acting Prose in this action. T he defendant construed the courts notice literally and inferredthat this was an ex-parte meeting between Bar certified attorneys and the judge.3. O n information and belief the defendant alleges that the plaintiff counselinformed the judge that the parties had agreed to settle the case and that it wasready to proceed to trial, that a set for trial date of December 5 th 2012 would beacceptable to both parties and the court so noted on the docket.4. The fact is that the defendant never agreed to any settlement with the opposingcounsel, the defendant was never consulted or told of any settlement agreement bythe opposing counsel, the defendant was never consulted nor did he agree to asetting of trial date on December 5th, 2012, the defendant was never notified of asetting of trial on that date.


5/11

5. As a result of a courtesy visit by the defendant to the judge's chambers did thedefendant learn about a setting of the trial scheduled for December 10, 2012. Thedefendant filed a motion for continuance of trial and for a hearing with the judge.

On Tuesday, December 4, 2012 the bailiff informed the defendant that the settingof trial was set for the 5th (the next day) and not the 10th of December as he hadbeen told.6. On information and belief is that the plaintiff counsel by telling the court thecase had been settled and by requesting a setting of trial on December 5th, 2012and by failing to notify the defendant acted in bad faith and was negligent towardsthe defendant. These desperate and fraudulent actions by the plaintiff counsel werepart of a scheme to secure a default judgment against the defendant.

STATEMENT OF FACTS REGARDING PLAITIFF AND ITS COUNSELOBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE

7. The defendant repeats and re-alleges the foregoing as if the same were fully setforth at length herein.8. Since August 18, 2011 the defendant following rules of procedure has filedseveral motions that seek production of documents that are essential to his defenseas they are exculpatory in nature, documents that identify witnesses with firsthandknowledge of the facts, witnesses that would have to be deposed in preparation fortrial, these are documents that may establish the facts regarding the allegationscontained in the plaintiff complaint and that support the defendant's counterclaim.


6/11

9. T he plaintiff counsel has refused to produce this information and in doing so isin violation of the defendants 4l amendment due process right since " ...due proc essrequires an opportunity to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses". E. g . ,IC C v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 22 7 U.S. 88, 93 -94 (1913); Willner v. Committee onCharacter & Fitness, 373 U.S. 96, 103 -104 (1963). Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S.254(1970).10. T he plaintiff and its counsel by failing to produce ANY evidence in support oftheir ow n complaint are committing fraud upon the court and are in breach of theirfiduciary obligation to the defendant as " " f r a u d upon th e court includes th edeliberate concealment of material information in a setting of fiduciary obligation"see United States v. Dial, 757 F.2d 163, 168 (7th Cir. 1985).11 . To date only a request for admissions has been answered by the plaintiff and itturned out to be sham since "A "sham pleading", is one that is good in form, bu tfalse in fact, and not pleaded in good faith." Scott v. Meek, 228 S.C. 29,88 S.E. 2d768, 769. Due to the plain tiff filing false answers for interrogatories 1, 3, and 4,of the request of admissions the plaintiff has committed fraud and deceit upon thedefendant " ...failure to state th e true facts when such statement is legally required,to the detriment of the one relying upon such conduct. . . " can be termed "fraud an ddeceit", as per Atilus v. United States. 406 F.2d 694, at 698.12. T he plaintiff and its counsel by failing to provide any evidence in support oftheir allegations, by lying to the court about the defendant's position on the settlingof the case and by failing to in form the defendan t of the official court schedule haveengaged in fraud upon the court as defined by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals


7/11

"embrace that species of fraud which does, or attempts to , defile th e court itself, or isa fraud penetrated by officers of the c o u r t so that th e judicial machinery cannotperform in the usual man ner its impartial task of adjudging cases that are presentedfor adjudication. "Kennerv. C.I.R.. 387 F.3d 689 (1968); 7 Moore's Federal Practice,2ded.,p. 512, f 60.23.

STATEMENT OF FACTS REGARDING PLAINTIFFCRIMES AGAINST JUSTICE

13. T he defendan t repeats and re-alleges the foregoing as if the same were fully setforth at length herein.14. The plaintiff and its counsel are in violation of Section 914.22(l)(f) of theFlorida code, by misrepresenting the facts at the order setting conference and byengaging in "misleading conduct" toward the defendant with intent to deny himtestimony from witnesses at trial an "official proceeding".15. T he plaintiff and its counsel are in violation of Section 918.13 of the F loridacode. By engag ing in a pattern of concealing evidence with the "purpose to impairits verity or availability" at trial, an "official proceeding".16. T he plaintiff and its counsel are in violation 772.103(4) F lorida code engagingin evidence concealment and witness tampering.17. T he plaintiff and their counsel are now liable for racketeering prosecution as thelisted violations cited above in Paragraph 1 and 2 are predicate acts of RIC O . 18U.S .C . $ 1964fc). and F lorida RIC O . T itle 45. S 772.104(1):1 8. T he Plaint iff and i ts counsel are in violation o f l S U S C 1512 Tamperingwith a witness, victim, or an informan t fBl2')(AB)(C )(D').


8/11

19. The plaintiff and its counsel are in violation of Title 42 1983 Depravation ofcivil rights under color of law. for fabrication/concealment of evidence,malicious prosecution fo r filing a SLAP lawsuit against the defendant, firstamendment retaliation for defendants exercise of his free speech and opinions in theinternet, retaliatory inducement to prosecute, obstruction of due process / stigmaplus, violations of common law rights and violations of defendants first, fourth andfourteenth amendment rights.20. The plaintiff and its counsel for the reasons stated in paragraph 21 are inviolation of Title 42 1985 Conspiracy to deprivation of civil rights under color oflaw.21. The plaintiff and its counsel are in violation of Title 18USC 891-894 becausethe defendants rights are his property and every act of the plaintiff to seize or takeproperty without due process of law is nothing more than "Extortionate CreditTransactions" to take that which does not belong to them by threats, intimidation andcoercion.22. The plaintiff and its counsel are in violation of F.R.C.P. rule 11 and 28 USCA $1746 by certifying circumstances by signing pleadings and other documents whichare false as they are intended to mislead the court have committed perjury.23. The plaintiff and its counsel are in violation of Title 1 7 U.S.C. $ 512(f).Misrepresentation of copyright by asserting and certifying to the court that theyhave a copyright license as evidenced in their response to interrogatories 3 & 4 tothe defendants request of admissions


9/11

24. The plaintiff and its counsel are in violation of Title LXX Crimes C h. 4. 5407which states:

" I f two or more persons in any State or Territory conspire for thepurpose of impeding, hindering, obstructing, or defeating, in a n ymanner, the due c our se o f jus t i ce in any State or Territory, within t en t to d e n y to any citizen th e equal protect io n o f th e laws , or toinjure him or his property fo r lawfully enforcing, or attempting toenforce, th e right of any person, or class of persons, to the equalprotection of the laws, each of such persons shall be punished by afine of not less than five hundred nor more than five thousanddollars, or by imprisonment, with or without hard labor, not lessthan si x months n or more than six years, or by both such fine andimprisonment. [See 1977-1991, 2004-2010, 5506-5510.]"

25. T he Plaintiff and its counsel are in violation of T IT LE 18 PART 1 C H A P T E R47 1001 Statements or entries generally which states:

(a ) Except a s otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in anymatter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, orjudicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowinglyan d willfully(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by a n y trick, scheme, or devicea material fact: (2 ) makes any materially false, fictitious, or

fraudulent statemen t or representation; or (3) ma kes or uses a n yfalse writing or document knowing the same to contain anymaterially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry; shallbe liable ..


10/11

26. The plaintiff and its counsel are in violation of Statute at Large 1997. ch 45. A 10: Statute at Large 2005. ch 120. AS 228. For filing a frivolous lawsuitconstituting a legal harassment of the defendant, which states:

(Text of section effective July 1 , 2006) Harassment by threat offraudulent legal proceedings or liens prohibitedMisdemeanor-Subsequent violation felony. Any person who harasses any otherperson by sending or delivering, or causing to be sent or delivered,any letter, paper, document, notice of intent to bring suit, or othernotice or demand that simulates any form of court or legal processand that threatens the other person, directly or indirectly, withincarceration, monetary fines, or penalties, or with the impositionof a counterfeit lien on the real or personal property of the otherperson is guilty....

29. The plaintiff and its counsel are also liable to the defendant for violation ofTitle 18 USC. Sec 242 and Sec 245 which states:

(A) Se c 242, "...whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance,regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State,Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation ofa ny rights, vrivileees. or immunities secured or protected by theConstitution of laws of the United States shall be fined under thistitle or imprisoned not more than on e year, or both", and,( B ) Se c 245, provided that, "...whoever, whether or not acting undercolor of law, intimidates or interferes with any person fromparticipatim in or enioyins an y benefit, service, privilege, prosram.facility, or activity provided or administered by th e United States; [or]applying for or enjoying employment, or any perquisite thereof, bv anyagency of th e United States; shall be fined under this title, or imprisonednot more than oneyear, or both", and,...


11/11

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I, Enrique Varona, Sui Juris, solemnly affirmand verify that I have read the foregoing, and know its contents to be true tothe best of my knowledge, except as to the matters which are therein stated onmy information or belief, and as to those matters, I believe them to be true.This instrument is submitted upon good faith effort that is grounded in fact,warranted by existing law for the modification or reversal of existing law andsubmitted for proper purposes, and not to cause harassment and unnecessarydelay or costs, so help me God. See Supremacy Clause (Constitution, Lawsand Treaties are all the supreme Law of the Land).

:lare under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the STATE OF?LORIDA, that the foregoing is true and correct:

I Enriflue Varona, Sui Juris14823-W 125CourtMiami, Florida 33186On this day came before me the Affiant, a living flesh and blood man/womanto oath and attest and affirm the signature is true, complete, and correct on theforegoing affidavit. Enrique Varona, the above signed, who is personallyknown by me or upon proper oath and identification, personally came beforeme, the subscriber, a notary public in and for said Miami-Dace County and theState of Florida, and Duly Affirmed the truth of the foregoing Affidavit in mypresence. The Affiant also acknowledged the signing thereof to be his ownvoluntary act and deed, signing the within instrument in my presence and forthe purpose therein stated.

Date: (2Identification provided:

^^~*r y - /^^ ~ \NotaryPublic: s7ff~~J

13. lta logistics vs enrique varona (varona reseting trial, and notice of felony for fraud upon...

Documents