Bridget Brown Parson v. Select Portfolio Servicing, et al.

NO RESPONSE BY ANY OF THE APPELLEES IN THIS CASE TO THE LAWSUIT REGARDING THE ALLEGATIONS OF FRAUD, CIVIL AND CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY AND THE FACT THAT THE APPELLEES, SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING AND U S BANK ARE NOT THE ORIGINAL NOTE HOLDERS, CANNOT PRODUCE THE NOTE AND THAT HER HOME SHOULD BE EXPUNGEMENT OF HER MORTGAGE DEBT IN WHICH THERE ARE “DOCTORED” DOCUMENTS AND THE APPELLEES, HAVE REFUSED TO INTENTIONALLY ANSWER BUT YET HAVE CONTINUED TO VIOLATE THE BANKRUPTCY CASE FILED IN ACTIVE BANKRUPTCY AND HARASS HER IN THE LOWER COURTS AS WELL AS THE HIGHER AND APPEALS COURTS. NO RESPONSE SHOULD EQUATE TO THE ENTIRE MONETARY SANCTIONS PER PERSON OF $4,350,000.00.

DOES THE NO RESPONSE FROM THE APPELLEES CONSTITUTES THAT A DEFAULT JUDGMENT HAS OCCURRED AND THE MONETARY SANCTIONS REQUESTED PER PERSON AND PROFESSIONALLY IS DUE IMMEDIATELY AND PAYABLE TO THE APPELLANT, BRIDGET PARSON, AKA BRIDGET BROWN PARSON. FAILURE TO RESPOND TO THE LAWSUIT IN THE APPEALS COURT HAS SHOWWN THE LACK OF RESPECT FOR FAIR AND EQUAL JUSTICE AND DISALLOWS FAIR AND EQUAL JUSTICE IN WHICH THE MONETARY SANCTIONS ARE DUE THAT HAVE BEEN PENDING SINCE 2014 THAT IS SOME SEVEN YEARS.

THE “BOGUS “ LETTER GIVEN TO THE APPELLANT, BRIDGET BROWN PARSON, AKA BRIDGET PARSON IN BAD FAITH TO DECEIVE A BLACK AMERICAN AND FEMALE AND TO DISALLOW FAIR ND EQUAL JUSTICE IN WHICH THE MANY ATTEMPTS TO STEAL THE REAL PROPERTY IS STILL ON-GOING NOW IN WHICH APPELLANT, BRIDGET PARSON HAS RESIDED INSIDE HER HOME FOR SOME THIRTY-TWO YEARS AND HER SPOUSE DIED INSIDE OF THE HOME IN WHICH THE APPELLANT, BRIDGET BROWN PARSON IS A WIDOW.

THE ACTIONS AND INACTIONS OF THE APPELLEES, SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING AND U S BANK TO DISALLOW IN THE MANY LAWSUITS FILED AND PENDING THAT THEY ARE SEPARATE AND NOT ASSOCIATED WITH THE LOAN SERVICER, SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING DOES THAT CONSTITUTE FRAUD, MISREPRESENTATION AND DISALLOW FAIR AND EQUAL JUSTIC;E? U S BANK, APPELLEE USES AND CONTINUES TO USE THE FALSE DOCUMENTATION AND FACTS FROM THE LOAN SERVICER, SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICER BUT CONTINUES TO ON SOME LAWSUIT DOCUMENTS IN THE ORIGINAL PETITION TO “INTENTIONALLY” NOT LIST THE LOAN SERVICER, SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVIXCING WHO HAS MANY INACCURATE ACCOUNTING THAT HAS BEEN MENTIONED SINCE 2014. THE “BOGUS” LETTER MENTIONED ABOVE CONTINUES TO STATE THAT NO FEES ARE DUE AND THAT NOTHING SHOULD BE WORRIED ABOUT FROM THE APPELLANT, BRIDGET BROWN PARSON BUT THEY CONTINUE TO THROUGH DECEPTTION, FRAUD, MISREPRESENTATION TO DISALLOW FAIR AND EQUAL JUSTICE.

CAN THE APPELLEE, U S BANK MAKE FALSE STATEMENTS IN THE 2014 LETTER THAT IS “BOGUS” AND STATE THAT EVERYTHING IS O.K. AND NOTHING IS OWED MONETARILY AND THEN CHOSE TO FILE MANY LAWSUITS AND MAKE FALSE STATEMENTS BEFORE THE MANY JUDGES.?

CAN THE APPELLEE, U S BANK, SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING NOT APPEAR IN THE BAN KRUPTCY PROCEEDING AND YET LATER STATE THAT THEY ARE OWED MONEY SINCE 2014?

THE AGREED ORDER IN BANKRUPTCY COURT WAS SIGNED IN 2015 BY THE CHIEF JUSTICE BARBARA HOUSER WHEN THE APPELLEES, U S BANK AND SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING FAILRED TO APPEAR IN COURT IN 2016 IN WHICH A FALSE CLAIM WAS MADE THAT IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE “BOGUS” LETTER MENTIONED ABOVE THQAT STATES THAT NO MONEY IS OWED AND THAT THE ACCOUNT IS IN GOOD STA1NDING.

DO THE APPELLANT, BRIDGET BROWN PARSON BELIEVE THE “BOGUS” LETTER THT HAS BEEN PROVEN TO BE FRAQUDULENT IN WHICH THE APPELLEES, U S BANK AND SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING HAVE BROUGHT THE SAME IDENTICAL CLAIM TO MANY COURTS SEEKING TO CONTINUE TO DISCRIMINATE AGAINST A BLACK AMERICAN AND FEMALE.?

CAN THIS COURT MAKE A RULING ON THE “BOGUS” LETTER SIGNED IN DECEMBER 2014 AND DISALLOW THE CONTINUED INCONSISTENT TACTICS OF APPEARINJG IN BD FAITH AND STATING TO THE MANY JUDGES AND JUSTICES THAT THE APPELLANT, BRIDGET BROWN PARSON IS IN ARREARAGES IN HER HOME MORTGAGE.

CAN THIS COURT MAKE A RULING THAT THE APPELLEES, U S BANK, SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING ARE NOT THE ORIGINAL NOTE HOLDERS CANNOT PRODUCE THE NOTE IN WHCH THERE HAVE BEEN MANY “DOCTORED” DOCUMENTS FILED OVER AND OVER AGAIN IN WHICH THE ABUSE OF POWER OF THE APPELLEE, JUDGE HARLIN HALE HAVE JOINED IN WITH THE APPELLEES, U S BANK AND HAVE IGNORED THE AGREED ORDER SIGNED BY THE CHIEF JUSTICE BARBARA HOUSER WHO HAS SINCE RETIRED AND THE APPELLEE, HARLIN HALE HAVE BEEN SELECTED AS THE NEW CHIEF JUSTICE IN THE BANKRUPTCY COURT ALTHOUGH THE FILED JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT AND PENDING MOTJIONS FOR EXPUNGEMENT OF MORTGAGE DEBT IS STILL PENDING.

CAN THIS COURT MAKE A RULING TO ALLOW THE PENDING MOTONS IN LIMINE REGARDING HER MORTGAGE DEBT TO BE GRANTED IN WHICH THE APPELLEES FAILED TO FILE A RESPONSIVE PLEA AND HAVE THEREFORE COMMITTED DEFAULT JUDGMENT IN WHICH THERE IS A PER PERSON MONETARY JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,350,000.00

CAN THE JUDGE, HARLIN HALE STATE TO THE TYPING COURT REPORTER, A YOUNG BLACK FEMALE TO STOP THAT TYPING AND TO DISALLOW FAIR AND EQUAL JUSTICE BY REFUSING TO ALLOW A FAIR AND EQUAL JUSTICE HEARING REGARDING THE OBJECTIONS MAKE BY THE APPELLANT, BRIDGET PARSON? 13, HAVE THE APPELLEES, U S BANK AND SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING COMMITTED AGGRAVATED PERJURY BY STATING THAT THE .NOTICE OF DEFAULT WAS SENT OUT TO THE APPELLANT, BRIDGET PARSON WHEN ACTUALLY N O NOTICE WAS EVER SENT TO HER REGARDING HER MORTGAGE? THIS FALSE STATEMENT CONTINUES TO BE PLACED WITHITN MANY COURT DOCUMENTS.

HAVE THE JUDGE HARLIN HALE JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT OF A “CD” BE USED IN WHICH THE REQUEST WAS MADE BY THE APPELLANT, BRIDGET BROWN PARSON THAT HAS BEEN PENDING SINCE 2018?

CAN THE JUDGE HARLIN HALE TELEPHONE THE POLICE AND/OR SECURITY TO THE COURT ROOM WHEN HE DOES NOT LILKE THE OBJECTIONS MADE BY THE APPELLANT, BRIDGET BROWN PARSON, IN AN IMPROMPTU HEARING WITHOUT ANY NOTICE NORA RIGHT TO ILLEGALLY DETAIN HER?

IS THE JUDGE HARLIN HALE AIDING AND ABETTING THE APPELLEES, U S BANK AND SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING WHEN HE REFUSES TO ALLOW FAIR AND EQUAL JUSTICE AND TO CONTINUE WITH AN IMPROMPTU HEARING “AFTER” THE POLICE AND/ OR SECURITY HAS BEEN CALLED SO THAT THE APPELLANT, BRIDGET BROWN PARSON WILL NOT BE INSIDE THE COURT ROOM TO ALLOW FAIR AND EQUAL JUSTICE.

IS IT ILLEGAL FOR THE APPELLEES, U S BANK TO USE FAKE DOCUMENTS WITHIN A COURT SETTING THAT IS OBJECTED TO BY THE APPELLANT, BRIDGET PARSON WHO HAS STATED THAT NO “REQUIRED” ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED BY THE APPELLEES, U S BANK AND SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING AND THE FACT THAT THE CONTINUED “DOCTORED DOCUMENTS CONTINUES TO DISALLOW FAIR AND EQUAL JUSTIC. \

HAVE THE APPELLEES, U S BANK AND SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING VIOLATED THE BANKRUPTCY STAY BY CONTINUING TO FILE THE SAME DOCUMENTS WITHIN THE MANY COURTS SEEKING FRIENDSHIP RATHER THAN JUSTICE.?

WITHOUT THERE BEING A COURT REPORTER RECORD IN THE LOWER COURT, THE DISTRICT COURT IN 2014 THAT LED TO THE DEFAULT JUDGMENT ALTHOUGH AN ANSWER WAS FILED BE A VIOLATION OF THE BANKRUPTCY STAY AS WELL AS FAIR AND EQUAL JUSTICE THAT THE DECISION WAS ARBATRARILY AND CAPRICIOUSLY DONE?.

CAN THERE BE A FAIR TRIAL WITHOUT A REPEATED REQUEST FOR A COURT REPORTER RECORD?

WITHOUT A COURT REPORTER RECORD DOES THAT MAKE THE APPELLEES, U S BANK SELECT PORTFOLIO HARLIN HALE, JUDGE, ETAL IN VIOLATION OF OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE REGARDING THE MORTGAGE HOME BELONGING TO THE APPELLANT, BRIDGET BROWN PARSON, AKA BRIDGET PARSON.?