Complaint Review: Eastburn and Gray PC - Doylestown Pennsylvania

This is my story; a story filled with facts and proof. The rights to bring forward other people’s testimony should have been mine, but those rights were taken away from me. “HAINES v. KERNER ET AL”

My constitutional rights were over looked for what reason? Lies, trickery?

Michael Savona and Michael E. Peters were alleged to have influenced the lower Southampton township supervisors. I even heard one of them say “everything was under control” with regards to illegal efforts aimed at zoning and variances on various properties in that community. One of which is the subject property which I write about.

Eastburn and Gray’s attorneys were working with both, the developers and the township representatives?

Reportedly Eastburn and Gray were working for CountyBuilders, so the Honorable Judge (Judge Gene E.K. Pratter) had requested Michael E. Peters to secure another non-conflicting Attorney. That was deemed necessary because, Eastburn and Gray had close ties to the CountyBuilders and the community reps; they were all players themselves in their respective actions?

In my own opinion, I believe the courts had been fooled by the lies of Attorneys representing Eastburn and Gray.

“DiSarrio v. Mills, 711 So.2d 1355 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)”

“Unsworn argument by counsel simply is not evidence.”

Honorable Judge Gene E.K. Pratter’s ORDER pre-dates the final decision. “When it is clearly established that a federal law preempts a state law, the state law must be declared invalid”.

“A federal law taking claim also cannot ripen, if a final decision has been reached. The federal court cannot determine, if there has been a taking or not, if it cannot determine what use can be made of the property.”

"A judgment entered without service of process is void and will be set aside and stricken from the record on motion at any time."  

Hear my call now from the wilderness, as you did before, because I believe you can still bring justice to this case in front of the court.

Mr. Peters of Eastburn and Gray was asked by Honorable Judge Gene E.K. Pratter on November 8, 2016, to provide the needed certified copies that would have been sent to me for zoning changes. He clearly stated that he did not have them and would need to go and get them.

It was understood by all partied involved that, there would be need for hundreds of notices to be sent certified.

The city council director of civic engagement knew that, without the certified notices, the judge was not going to let Eastburn, Gray and the township supervisors get away with any sham activity.

“With no substantive due process, fraud destroys the validity of everything into which it enters,” Nudd v. Burrows, 91 U.S 426.

“Fraud vitiates everything” Boyce v. Grundy, 3 Pet. 210

"Fraud vitiates the most solemn contracts, documents and even judgments." 

Eastburn and Gray were allowed to use a local newspaper, although I’m not in support of that. As there was no sufficient, notice to satisfy the requirements.

352 U.S. 112 (1956) WALKER v.CITY OF HUTCHINSON ET AL. No. 13. Supreme Court of United States. Argued October 15-16, 1956. Decided December 10, 1956.

"Notice that was published in the official newspaper was not sufficient enough to satisfy the requirements of the Due Process clauses of both Federal and State Constitutions”. 352 U.S. 112 (1956)

Sincerely and respectfully: This case is still in front of the Court.  In light of the Judge coming to the realization that an error was made, it is not too late for everyone’s constitutional rights to be spared.

I need to file for an application en banc. Because, I believe the Honorable Judge has some vital information that are linked to the above, missing; which could bring justice to the system.

8 North Westview Ave.