Judge Ronald Ibarra Mischief Evidences Persecution and Civil Rights Abuses, Not Simply Attorney Paul J. Sulla Jr.’s Malicious Prosecution of Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz
“I can live with myself even if attorney Paul J. Sulla, Jr. and Judge Ronald Ibarra get away with the theft of my property,” Dr. Horowitz told a friend.
“I can live with myself for doing the best job I can to save the property. But I refuse to go to my grave regretting any concession to extortion and organized crime damaging more than me, my property, and the citizens of Hawaii. These injustices are damaging many others in our community and even on the mainland. The integrity of our justice officials, law enforcers, especially our prosecutors, secures the welfare of our families, states, and nation. If our judges and prosecutors can’t be trusted to act lawfully, they need to be exposed and replaced,” Dr. Horowitz said.
According to Dr. Horowitz, and massive evidence compiled over more than a decade, Judge Ronald Ibarra caused most of the doctor’s damages beginning with ordering Horowitz to make the “final balloon payment” on April 2, 2008, to secure his Hawaii geothermal estate that the doctor paid on February 27, 2009.
But then, Judge Ibarra flip-flopped on his own jurisdiction, effectively extending Horowitz’s persecution. Ibarra issued a new series of rulings that undermined the payment plan and Horowitz’s right to have the mortgage released. In tort law that is called “promissory estoppel.” Couple the Court’s promissory estoppel with administrative evidence tampering and Judge Ronald Ibarra has arguably lost his “absolute immunity,” making the Chief Justice of the Third Circuit Court personally liable for millions of dollars of Horowitz’s damages.
Here’s how Judge Ronald Ibarra and corrupt attorney Paul J. Sulla, Jr. turned a five-year malicious prosecution and fraud upon the court into Horowitz’s ten-year struggle to defend the doctor’s property and reputation against Sulla’s theft and the court’s published defamation:
(1) On October 15, 2008, Judge Ibarra “DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE” Horowitz’s motion to payoff the mortgage that was effectively voided by property-seller Lee’s fraud. The judge, purportedly, did not trust Horowitz’s accounting, and ordered him to “submit an accounting of total payments made to date no later than November 13, 2008,” which Horowitz did early, on November 5, 2008.
(2) At the same time, on October 15, 2008, the judge made sure the damaging fraud upon the court would continue by granting Lee’s and Sulla’s motion to vacate Horowitz’s $200,000.00 jury award by reason of Horowitz’s attorney John Carroll not having plead fraud “with particularity.” That was Ibarra’s ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW OR ALTERNATIVELY NEW TRIAL ON ISSUE OF DEFENDANT’S JULY 6th, 2006 COUNTERCLAIM FOR FRAUD AND MISREPRESENTATION. By approving this motion, Judge Ibarra made sure that the $200,000.00 jury award to Horowitz would be vacated; and that the case would need to be retried on the issue of fraud in the sale that was, allegedly, not plead properly by Carroll (especially for concealing the Hara File).
(3) Judge Ibarra inferred is his Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law, and the Final Judgment, that the case would be over when Horowitz made the “final balloon payment” that, as shown in the payment summary above, Horowitz made by February 27, 2009. That “Final Judgment” on July 31, 2008 included the $200,000.00 jury award (not included in the above table) that any reasonable person in Horowitz’s position would have applied to the final payoff, because at that time, the Judge had not even indicated that award would be vacated. Even worse, the Mortgage itself contained a clause that permitted Dr. Horowitz to deduct the jury award as a “judgment credit” from the final balloon payment.
(4) Judge Ibarra, in fact, reinforced the finality of the case and his “Final Judgment” when, on January 9, 2009, he issued his “ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SHOW CAUSE WHY PARTIES SHOULD NOT FOLLOW PAY OFF PLAN AND PAY THE INTERVENOR IN FULL AT THE MATURITY OF THE NOTE.” The judge DENIED this Motion by writing, “this Court lacks jurisdiction in this matter to grant such relief because Final Judgment was entered in this matter on July 31, 2008.” (Note: The Final Judgment had not been appealed by either party at that time. Sulla first appeared in the case on May 21, 2009, and immediately filed the first appeal of the $200,000.00 jury award to Horowitz.)
Because the $200,000.00 jury award had not been appealed “timely,” the judge clearly and convincingly stated that he would not rule on the matter of any payoff plan because the case was over—he lacked jurisdiction.
But the judge flip-flopped. On October 15, 2008, after Lee filed an “untimely” Rule 50(a) Motion for JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW IN JURY TRIAL, the case suddenly took on a new demonic life. That Rule 50(a) permits judges to rule before trials on issues that could not be contested during trial. In other words, matters of indisputable fact do not need to go to trial; and can be adjudged to save time and money at trial. BUT ONLY IF there are no “material facts in dispute” on the specific issues and facts that the jury is to decide. In this case, the specific issue–“misrepresentation and fraud” in the sale of the property– had many material facts in dispute. Nonetheless, Lee filed his Rule 50(a) motion AFTER TRIAL, and the judge went along with it!
On March 5, 2009, Lee moved to Amend the Final Judgment, and the judge suddenly regained his jurisdiction to favor the predicate felon over Horowitz. In a highly irregular and blatantly biased move, Judge Ibarra GRANTED Lee’s motions.
Yet, even then, the Amended Final Judgment denied foreclosure and retained the $200,000.00 jury award owed Horowitz; but that ruling was also short-lived. Judge Ibarra’s “erroneous” October 15, 2008, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW OR ALTERNATIVELY NEW TRIAL (despite being filed untimely) hung over the proceedings like a cloud, and following a few objections by Lee and Sulla, Horowitz’s $200K jury award was “VACATED.”
This is how Sulla came to claim that Horowitz still owed the $200,000 on the original, completely void, mortgage. Then Sulla abused this “entitlement” to foreclose again on the same property “non-judicially.” Sulla then filed another case in the same court, and moved Judge Ibarra to grant the property title to Sulla’s sham “client,” Jason Hester.
Sulla’s Certification of the Lee’s Sham “Church” Unravels
Typically, in law, if you elect to file a court complaint, that is called a “judicial remedy.” And if you dislike the result, you are precluded from filing the same case, or a similar case, again. That’s called res judicata in the legal community. Ethically, as a lawyer, you are not supposed to generate another civil action to gain another result contrary to the first judgment, especially while the first case is still ongoing. But these rules don’t apply to the outlaw named Paul J. Sulla, Jr., nor the courts that grant him leave to persecute and prosecute his victims.
Between January and August 2009, while Dr. Horowitz repeatedly issued notices to Lee, and to Sulla, to advance a final accounting and release of the mortgage. Each notice was purposely evaded.
So with the jury award still in place, and Judge Ibarra flip-flopping on jurisdiction, but claiming no jurisdiction to rule on the payoff plan, Horowitz paid the final “balloon payment” of $354,204.13, including the $200K jury award as a credit. He made the last of that final payment of $154,204.13 on February 27, 2009, to move his life forward.
Unfortunately for the doctor, and the integrity of the courts, several more litigations were about to unfold, courtesy of Mr. Sulla.
Besides breaking Hawaii Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 50(a) (and a host of ethics rules), on May 21, 2009, Sulla and Ibarra instantly broke Rule 21.1(d) requiring attorneys to file their notice of appearance in cases such as this. Instead, Sulla simply filed his Notice of Appeal on May 21, 2009, to oppose and vacate the jury award. Mind you, this was seventeen (17) months after Judge Ibarra ordered Horowitz to make an “accelerated” final balloon payment, three months after Horowitz requested the final accounting, payment acknowledgment, and the mortgage release required by law, and four months after Judge Ibarra ruled that he no longer had jurisdiction to decide on any matters of the final payoff.
Six days earlier, on May 15, 2009, Sulla, supposedly met with Lee in Hawaii, and decided they would form a “church.” The incorporation papers evidence outrageous fraud:
(1) The “church” was said to be located at a fraudulent address;
(2) The name of the “church” was suspiciously (and ridiculously) long—THE OFFICE OF OVERSEER, A CORPORATE SOLE AND ITS SUCCESSOR, OVER AND FOR THE POPULAR ASSEMBLY OF REVITALIZE, A GOSPEL OF BELIEVERS (imagine writing that on your checks);
(3) the “period of duration” was “perpetual”—ironic for a dying alleged faithful Mormon to form a new church with only six more weeks to live;
(4) “Jason Hester of Pahoa, Hawaii” was named as the new “Overseer” of the sham “church,” but Hester was domiciled exclusively in California, not Hawaii, according to public records, and was later determined not to be Lee’s “nephew” as Sulla declared;
(5) the eight page “church” Articles of Incorporation was signed on two different dates: May 8, and May 28 (supposedly), by exclusively Lee, but sworn expert analysis proved Lee’s signatures were forged, apparently by Sulla. (See sworn expert analysis by Beth Chrisman, by clicking: xxxx.)
(6) the “CERTIFICATE OF EVIDENCE OF APPOINTMENT” of Lee as the “Overseer” of the church, designated by “Gwen Hillman” as the “Scribe,” certifying is signed by Lee, not Hillman.
In other words, the Incorporation paperwork was all fraudulent, and void on it face, but Judge Ronald Ibarra refused to see it, or do anything about it, to secure Dr. Horowitz’s railroading and Sulla’s thievery.
Sulla et. al. Need to Explain the Forgeries on the Untimely Mortgage and Note Assignments
Even more troubling for law enforcers and justice officials needing to explain their obviously neglected duties, Sulla is the only one with the wherewithal (motive and means) to assign Horowitz’s mortgage and two promissory notes to “Hester’s church.” Sulla did this on May 15, 2009. BUT THE SIGNATURES ON THOSE ASSIGNMENTS DO NOT MATCH LEE’S SIGNATURES, AND APPEAR TO BE EXCLUSIVELY SULLA’S FORGERIES!
This means that the police, prosecutors, and judges have been overlooking prima facie evidence of securities fraud, organized crime, racketeering, and fraudulent transfers for at least six years, permitting Horowitz et. al. to be damaged nearly $9 million, and falsely holding Horowitz responsible for Lee’s fraud and Sulla’s forgeries.
Lee was dying in Arizona at that time Sulla filed this fake paperwork with the State of Hawaii, according to Lee’s death certificate. Sulla alone had the motive and means to forge Lee’s signatures on the invalid assignments of the mortgage and notes to evade and defraud five judgment creditors and the courts. Sulla was in charge of everything—Lee’s finances and estate. Linked here is a copy of Sulla’s contract with Hester illegally secured by Horowitz’s property, proving Sulla conflicting interest as the “king pin” administering this criminal enterprise: MORTGAGE of SULLA to HESTER Record.
Sulla’s Conflicting Interests Get Him Disqualified, but Not Arrested
Lee died dead broke. He had declared bankruptcy in 2006, and by 2008 could no longer pay for his attorney. Add a dozen months of living expenses without a job, and medical care costs on his death bed dying from cancer, and any reasonable person would conclude that Sulla entered under a contingency contract. That is, Sulla’s payoff depended on stealing Horowitz’s money and property, with or without Judge Ibarra’s complicity.
More proof is in the fact that Sulla’s name and address appears on the “church” incorporation paperwork as the certifying attorney for his false filings with the State on May 28, 2009.
Also, Lee left no will, but had one son, Clark Lee, of Mesa, AZ, and several sisters. According to Sulla’s filings, Sulla alleged that he contacted Clark Lee, but neglected to contact any of Lee’s sisters in violation of Hawaii’s intestate laws. This can be known from Sulla’s Feb. 8, 2012, filing in Judge Strance’s court of an “Application for Informal Appointment of Personal Representative (Without Will),” on behalf of, allegedly, Hester. Sulla filed that nearly two years after he demanded Horowitz pay the $200K jury award that remained under appeal at that time, until Sept. 2013.
In this single filing (i.e., Intestate Application by Sulla for Hester 2-8-12), Sulla is evidenced having had zero legal authority to do anything he has done. Zero standing in any court to bring any claim for foreclosure, or quiet title, or whatever! And here you can see that Horowitz’s new attorney, Margaret Wille, has called the Court to explain how it could adjudge this case with Sulla, as the real party in interest, being a party, without Hester having standing, and without Judge Ibarra having jurisdiction to decide any of this, especially since the $200,000.00 is still under appeal! (See: Motion to Stay or Dismiss 62(b) Complete Filing 10-5-15.)
Sulla blatantly committed perjury in his intestate filing with the Strance Court (and many others) by stating: (1) Altering his claim that Hester was Lee’s “nephew” with another lie that Hester’s was Lee’s “grandnephew.” (There was no blood kinship whatsoever between Lee and Hester.); (2) at the time of Lee’s death, Lee “was domiciled in the County of Hawaii”—not so, Lee died in Arizona with his family; (3) at the time of death, Lee was domiciled under the jurisdiction of the Third Circuit Court—not so, Lee did not even have a legal address in Hawaii at the time of death, according to federal court filings by members of his gang; and (4) “applicant is unaware of any unrevoked testamentary instrument relating to property”—when, in fact, all the cases revolved around Sulla’s fraudulent “unrevoked” financial instruments (i.e., mortgage and promissory note assignments) “bequeathed” to Hester but secured by Horowitz’s property—representations that Sulla and Hester both swore were “TRUE AS FAR AS APPLICANT KNOWS OR IS INFORMED, AND THAT PENALITES FOR PERJURY MAY FOLLOW DELIBERATE FALSIFICATION.”
Part time Hawaii District Court Judge, and the Past President and current member of the Senior Counsel Division of the Hawaii State Bar Association, Peter Stone, wrote this about Sulla, in one of Horowitz’s defense filings:
Throughout this prolonged title dispute, there remains one constant. Paul J. Sulla, Jr. was the attorney for Lee when he filed the motion to vacate the $200,000 jury award at end of the Judicial Foreclosure Action; he still is the attorney for Jason Hester as the Overseer of the [Gospel of Believer’s, “GOB”] in the pending appeal; he recorded the Assignment of Mortgage from Lee to Lee as Overseer of [GOB]; he conducted the non-judicial foreclosure for Jason Hester as the Overseer of [GOB]; he drafted and recorded the two Quitclaim Deeds, first to Jason Hester as Overseer to [GOB] and finally to Jason Hester, individual, the Plaintiff herein. Although Plaintiff initially filed this action pro se, now that Royal has challenged the Court’s subject matter jurisdiction based on the title dispute, Mr. Sulla has again entered his appearance as counsel for Jason Hester.
Sulla’s Non-Judicial Foreclosure Scam is in Criminal Contempt of the Ibarra Court
Sulla claimed the entire mortgage amount remained “due and owing” when he illegally foreclosed non-judicially on Horowitz’s property. This, of course, violated several laws, including Hawaii Revised Statute 667-5, that Sulla claimed by affidavit that he followed to bring the illegal foreclosure.
In effect, Sulla defied Judge Ibarra’s rulings DENYING FORECLOSURE. Sulla also defied due process ongoing at the Intermediate Court of Appeals of the Hawaii Supreme Court at the time he illegally foreclosed. And because Sulla did this to steal Horowitz’s property, the crime is a double felony–a class C felony for criminal contempt of the Ibarra Court’s Final Judgment(s), and a class A felony for first degree theft.
Sulla’s non-judicial foreclosure was as flawed as his “church” incorporation. But that didn’t stop Judge Strance, and Judge Ibarra, from aiding-and-abetting by willful blindness Sulla maliciously prosecuting and persecuting Horowitz, putting him through years of litigation, and massive losses of time and money, to cover-up for Third Circuit Court bar members’ crimes and mistakes.
Dr. Horowitz’s motion to disqualify Judge Ibarra presented shocking facts and evidence. A copy of the full filing, including exhibits, is available for a free download by clicking here.
Horowitz had no other reasonable choice other than to call for Judge Ibarra’s disqualification. The evidence for Judge Ibarra’s bias, prejudice, and obstruction of justice damaging Horowitz is overwhelming. Few lawyers have ever seen anything like this. Several said they never heard of such a case in which the judge filed five “Final Judgments,” each defective as though planned to keep the case going and Horowitz being damaged.
Certainly the Chief Justice of the Third Circuit Court of Hawaii knows how to write a “Final Judgment” that is final. Surely he knows how to dismiss a case for fraud upon his court. And surely he knows that when attorney Sulla, Jr. disobeyed the Judge Ibarra’s denial of foreclosure, and foreclosed anyway using fraudulent transfers of the mortgage and notes into a sham, not-yet-existing “church” to steal the property, that is criminal contempt.
But instead of recusing himself, or sanctioning Sulla, the judge has, instead, elected to adjudicate Horowitz’s ongoing malicious prosecution causing further irreparable harm. At the time of this writing, in fact (Oct. 14, 2015), Judge Ibarra has Horowitz’s ejectment paperwork sitting on his desk.
So far, the doctor as not filed suit against the judges in the interest of getting on with his life. However, if this injustice continues, the doctor plans to file complaints under 42 U.S.C. 1983 for injunctive and declaratory relief, holding the judges personally liable for their role in causing Horowitz’s damages.
And there are many others who have filed parallel complaints against these same judges with police. Some victims claim judicial corruption in the Third Circuit Court has contributed to genocide and “war crimes” against native Hawaiians. Members of the Kingdom of Hawaii’s Restoration Government have charged these same judges with bias, prejudice, and foreclosure fraud benefiting foreign-owned banks that have been damaging native Hawaiians for years while violating State, Federal, and International laws.
Judges are very hard to sue for anything less than ruling without “personal jurisdiction.” In this case, that violation is no longer questioned since Judge Ibarra: (1) flip-flopped between having jurisdiction and not having jurisdiction; and then permitting Sulla’s shill Hester’s standing, denying Horowitz’s standing to plead for his ministry, all while knowingly concealing Sulla’s real party in interest.
In Hawaii, government officials are personally liable for committing fraud, crime, and breaching their oaths of offices. This includes County of Hawaii officials with whom the doctor established a “special relationship” by reason of a special land grant the County issued Horowitz related to the contested property, granted to enable landlocked neighbors to access highway, Rt. 130. Typically, a “special relationship” is required in order for citizens to take successful legal actions against law enforcers.
In this case, Horowitz filed more than a dozen police complaints that Hilo prosecutors Mitch Roth and Rick Damerville simply neglected or personally disappeared. In recent years these prosecutors neglected to return numerous calls, and at the time of this writing, were claimed by Deputy Attorney General in Oahu, Michael S. Kagami, (in an e-mail dated April 24, 2015) to have no record of any “outstanding cases.” Dr. Horowitz is certain that is a lie coming from the Hilo prosecutors’ office.
Dr. Horowitz was interviewed at length a number of times in recent years by Hilo Police Department investigators who, like he, became convinced Sulla committed a number of crimes. Twice during the past couple of years extensive investigation reports were prepared by diligent and competent police investigators at taxpayer expense. The police investigators transferred their shocking findings indicting Sulla to Prosecutor Roth. For Roth to deceive AG Kagami is unconscionable and actionable.
CLICK HERE to read the final segment of this report. . . .