COMMONWEALTH
OF MASSACHUSETTS
APPEALS COURT
_______________________________________________________________________
NOTICE
OF APPEAL
CIVIL APPEAL NO._______________________
LOWER COURT CONSOLIDATED
CIVIL ACTION DOCKET NO. SUCV - 13-0651G
____________________________________________________________________________
Phillip C.
Ofume & Associates
Appellants/Defendants (Pro se
& Forma Pauperis)
v.
GWENDOLYN CRANMORE
Respondents/Plaintiff
________________________________________________________________________
Appellant, Dr. Phillip Chukwuma
Ofume and Associates move to appeal the
lower court arm-twisting Decision/Order (attached) dated March 1, 2013 and
reversal of the Decision/Order which was issued by The Presiding Honourable
Associate Justice, a Justice of the
Superior Court of the Suffolk County of Massachusetts under conspiracy between
the defendant and some local attorneys who lately discovered gold in two major
litigations (, Gwendolyn Cranmore v. SSSB
Docket No. 2012-2006-C, Gwendolyn
Cranmore v. MPIUA Docket No. 2012-00522 ) which appellants worked hard to
win with heavy award of about $93,000.00 without compensation and over
$36million is in dispute before this Court and the appellants appeal the
decision of this Judge because they see the decision as one of the worst
injustice in the world and the decision should be reversed and also this Petition for Review is made
because of the following reasons:
A. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF REVIEW
1. Defendants, Dr. Phillip C. Ofume
& Associates (hereinafter, “Corporate Body and Incorporated in the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts”) move this honourable court filing appeal in opposition to Plaintiff ’s
Complaint to exclude appellants a
monitored action which is politically motivated by politicians, court, churches
and gold digging attorneys/lawyers to remove the appellants, Dr. Phillip C.
Ofume & Associates from these
lawsuits, Gwendolyn Cranmore v. SSSB
Docket No. 2012-2006-C, Gwendolyn
Cranmore v. MPIUA Docket No.
2012-00522,
which they (Plaintiff et als) constructed in their greedy mind as “moneyed milk
pot” to get several million dollars to themselves, in part which they see also
as future bedrock that will pump money
into Dr. Phillip Chukwuma Ofume’s Presidential Campaign for the President of
Nigeria 2015 ( see http://limptinc.blogspot.com/2013/02/international-movement-for-new-federal.html) and campaign for the President
of American Association for Affirmative Action (AAAA – see http://limptinc.blogspot.com/2012/11/phillip-c-ofume-v-aaaa-civil-docket-no_22.html) and Defendants request for outright dismissal of decision
appealed (EXHIBIT
A) because it
failed to state a Claim such as the inability of the appellants to prosecute
these cases from stage to stage to conclusion when appellants have done several
of similar cases inside and outside the United States of America
2. Appellants and Respondent entered into oral
and written agreements supported with
POWER OF ATTORNEY and the Respondent has not revoked the agreement entered into
and the court below which has politically done several harm to force appellants
to disengage from these cases.
Appellants also see the action of the respondent and the court below as
an arm-twisting adventure, breach of
contract or agreement, and lacks any fact that will thrive during trial
3. Appellants have completed the major work required in
Respondent’s cases to withstand trial/appeal review and also it is improper and
unwarranted trespass via lawsuits to arm-twist defendants under the fraudulent
support which the respondent has earned from her friends and appellants further
request for dismissal of the Complaint of the respondent and the decision of
the court below pursuant to Mass. R. Civ. P. Rule 12
(b), 5th and
14th Amendments to the Constitution and Bill of Rights of the United
States, and
appellants submit below their Memorandum of Law, Fact, Argument, Exhibits,
Issues and Relief.
B. PROFESSIONAL
SKILL OF THE DR. PHILLIP C. OFUME & ASSOCIATES TO FINISH THIS CASE AND
PREVAIL AND CONSPIRACY TO EXCLUDE APPELLANTS
4. Internationally, over 77 years Dr. Phillip C.
Ofume & Associates have been advocating with the specialties of these cases
under State and Federal economic, social, political, human rights and
constitutional rights Questions. They have fought hard to advocate and stop severe
forms of violation of human rights , economic, habitat, civil, environmental,
public safety, social and healthcare,
constitutional and habitation rights in jeopardy. In this case there is an
overwhelming obstruction of justice and the intervention of civil liberties
experts and workers is inevitable to enable the respondent in this case get desired justice and public
interest will be adequately and equitably secured and served. In over 220
countries including the United States appellants’ Non-Profit, Non-Political, Non-governmental
organizations and members shortlisted
below have acted alone and as intervenor /intervener and done several
contentious and other strong cases independently from country to country and
from mortgage to other real estate/property cases and enlarged to the highest
courts in these countries. In Africa, North America, Europe, etc within the
capacity and knowledge of Dr. Phillip C. Ofume & Associates in Africa and
North America, Dr. Ofume has led several our Non-Profit, Non-Political,
Non-governmental organizations and members pursue and secure desired justice in
the oil/gas rich and impoverished Niger Delta Region of Nigeria and also see
below.
5. Paragraph 39 of the Amended Complaint or paragraphs 24 and 25 of the Amended Consolidated Petition for
Review are the most terrible aspects of the conditions which have the potential
to breed abuses and sanction on civil liberties of the respondent if the
appellants are excluded because attorneys are not skillful to advocate for
clients under this danger. EXHIBIT B in this appeal is the handwritten narratives of the
respondent and these narratives disclosed several disabilities from the
infections which she suffered from about 8000 counts of deadly toxic and deadly
molds and fungal which invaded part of the disputed home.
6. In further review of the testimonies of the
respondent, Dr. Ofume and their
organizations found that several attorneys and mortgage/insurance agents have
worked and dropped the case and the respondent alleged that these folks take
bribes from her opposition to drop out or disengage from her case. Because of
this conduct, the case has over 20,000 pages of important document which must
be read verbatim and page by page. According to the respondent, over 22 attorneys and real estate/property agents
that she consulted and paid dropped out initially or midway after receiving
bribe and other gains from the defendant. In the first instance, there is no lawyer/attorney in the United
States that will agree to start reading, researching, investigating and ready
to take carriage of case with paperwork of over 20,000 pages without payment of
a dime. For the sake of human rights,
justice, and the plea of the pastors and other members of Petitioner’s church
(Fountain of Grace Church, Canton, MA), Dr. Ofume & Associates agreed to
intervene pursuant to M.C.P.R. 24 and help the respondent who is pro se and
unrepresented litigant and all assistance provided would be compensated in the
future if relief sought is granted.
7. Now after
this hard work and the case reached final stage to go to trial latest in March
2013 and the past and present attorneys viewed or read the briefs of Dr. Ofume
and his organizations and attorneys saw future
possibility that the respondent will prevail the respondent/Plaintiff
was lobbied by Dr. Ofume’s political
opponent and using Boston Police Department and other street boys to issue
threat on Dr. Ofume to leave the case immediately, or he will be arrested and
jailed for several years for defending civil liberties in the United States. Worst part of this plot is that the Respondent
said that she has found a lawyer/attorney and refused that this attorney work
with Dr. Phillip C. Ofume & Associates and when the respondent continued to
force the plan to remove appellants the
respondents imposed condition that her attorney will lead the appellants and
the appellants agreed but suddenly without reason the respondent filed a
complaint requesting the court below to fire the appellants.
8. On the conduct
of the insurer , Dr. Ofume and his organizations found multiple acts of
deception, arm-twisting, professional misconduct, judicial failure to act
correctly, inequities in providing legal and other services to insured person,
failure of process and procedure, censorship in delivery of professional
service, etc. Under Bar restrictions several attorneys are scared to
investigate the conducts of the state and federal agencies and their
principals. Dr. Phillip C. Ofume & Associates will assist the court and
attorneys to under these prongs which are capable of obstructing justice.
9. Dr. Ofume &
his organizations have completed all work in this case and without them
Petitioner will not get justice in this case. Woman Judge in this Court has
granted Dr. Ofume’s and their organizations’ Motion to Intervene in another
contentious lawsuit, Ogechi Eke v. Department of Children and Families (DCF)
Civil Action Docket No. SUCV 2012-04516-A . The appellant in this case
confessed that some people had meeting with her in the church to force her to
sign agreement to remove Dr. Phillip C. Ofume & Associates entirely from
her case and also sign that she will not have any contact with them and their
families. Ms. Ogechi Eke will be one of the witnesses in this appeal. Information reveals that the same time of
insurgents met the respondent and they assured her and she agreed with them.
10. For the sake
of justice and human rights, Dr. Ofume and his organizations request the court below
to grant their Motion to intervene and also because the toxic and dusty mold and fungal infection
have affected the respondent’s memories
and the ability to speak because in
place of speaking she unconsciously cries, yells and disrupts the flow of the
proceeding. See the 13-day Reference Proceedings’ tape and transcripts. These
constant and endless crying, yelling and disruption stopped the proceedings
several times and enlarged the hearing time frame to 13 days which is a hearing
that would have been completed within two to three days if the Chairman of the
Referees ( who was supportive to the defendant at the abnormal rate of over 95%
through 13 days) had allowed Dr. Ofume
to act as intervenor to speak out and focus,
unblock and redirect several unnecessary presentation of fact, issue,
arguments, the unnecessary postures and arrogance of the defence attorney, etc.
11. In
Canada and United States Dr. Ofume and his organizations have done several
strong cases relating to Real Property
including Ofume et al v. CIBC Mortgage
Corporation - The Supreme Court of
Canada Case No. 30054; Ofume et al v.
Nancy Vigorito et als – The Supreme Court of the United State Civil Action No. 08-8873; See https://sc c.lexum.org/decisia-scc-csc/scc-csc/news/en/item/1925/index.do;
https://scc.lexum.org/decisia-scc-csc/scc-csc/news/en/.../index.do;
18. PhillipChukwuma Ofume, et al. v. CIBC
Mortgage Corporation (N.S.) (30054); Decision Information
- Supreme Court of Canada - Lexum
.
12. Dr.
Ofume has strings of academic and
professional qualifications and his summarized resume is located online at http://www.blogger.com/profile/08744093752636542613.
14.
Sitting as Pro Se over 35 years
Dr. Ofume and their organization have been doing cases country to
country and in the United States and Canada Dr. Ofume has successfully done
different cases, lower courts to the Supreme Courts of Canada and United
States and after exhausting these domestic mechanisms he appealed some of these
cases to the United Nations because of
insufficient judgment or relief.
C. REASON DECISION APPEALED MUST BE DISMISSED
13. Appellants request this Court to reverse the decision appealed because the originating complaint and the
decision appealed are trump up and frivolous because the respondent intent was
not reviewed because the appellants have been interested in working with any
attorney of record and enter into supplemental contingency and other agreements
with the intended attorneys/lawyers and the respondent but the respondent
refused and failed to compensate past work which appellants have done and also the decision appealed failed to
place any lien or attachment on past award and future awards. Communications between Plaintiff and
Defendants will be incorporated as marked below as EXHIBIT G
14. The Respondent has
not started the administrative process to terminate or revoke the oral and
written POWER OF ATTORNEY between Plaintiff and Defendants. Plaintiff did not
file any sworn and other exhibits in
support of her Complaint such as sworn Memorandum of Termination of the POWER
OF ATTORNEY attested and signed by the Plaintiff stating what she intend to do
to resolve the liability clauses defined in this POWER OF ATTORNEY (marked
below as EXHIBIT B & B.1.)
“A Power of Attorney
is a powerful legal document which can enable an Attorney-in-fact to do almost
anything with your property (depending on the powers you have granted in the
Power of Attorney document). A revocation of a Power of Attorney is not
effective against the Attorney-in-fact or any third party (e.g. bank) until
notice of the revocation has been received by that party. Consequently, it is a
good idea to have a written document as evidence of your revocation to make
sure there is no doubt as to your intention to revoke the power.” Christopher
Dimakos, Lawyer
15.
Jurisdictionally, termination of the POWER OF ATTORNEY or agreement
between appellants and the respondent was not pleaded by the respondent but
the Court below interceded to terminate
this legal document hereto incorporated and marked as EXHIBIT B & B.1. by
removing appellants from these cases. The
uncontested POWER OF ATTORNEY and the appellants are faultless and the defendants has not
presented any case against the appellants vis-à-vis the Power of Attorney and
power to prosecute her case to conclusion.
Appellants have severally agreed that respondent retain any attorney of her choice to work with
the appellants.
16. After the defendants helped the rspondents to
advance a strong Amended Loss Claim (EXHIBIT
H), Amended Original Complaint and
Amended Demand Letter 93A before the referees prior to the reference proceeding
and plaintiff was awarded $92, 958.00 without compensating defendants pursuant
to the POWER OF ATTORNEY. Criminally, soon as Plaintiff got this money,
after Plaintiff removed two large
luggages of the majority of the documents in support of these cases, Plaintiff was implicated in a plot when she
used a nearby facility to monitor the exit of Dr. Ofume from his home and came
into the home and deceived Dr. Ofume’s
family that Dr. Ofume and other people were working in her home and that
they requested her to come and bring the luggages. Dr. Ofume’s family freely
allowed the Plaintiff to remove the luggages because severally his family did the same during reference proceedings
when Dr. Ofume requested them to allow the Plaintiff to remove the lugguages
and after the day’s proceeding they came back home with the luggages. In another criminal conduct, Plaintiff sent a
man that the Plaintiff called her former
contractor to Dr. Ofume to remove the working key of the disputed home and that
after inspection that the man will return the key to Dr. Ofume. Dr. Ofume
freely gave the key to the man and several defendants’ written documents were
given to the man and to present time the man has not returned the key and
documents to Dr. Ofume and Plaintiff and her friends are trying to sell the
disputed home.
D. BASIC
FACTS
17. Dr. Phillip C. Ofume is High Priest of The
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and a visiting member of The
Fountain of Grace Church and Islamic Religion and he is a political and
convention refugee adopted Prisoner of Conscience by the United Nations High
Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) and Amnesty International (Intl. Secretariat,
London UK) and nominated to run for the
Presidents of Nigeria 2015 and American Association for Affirmative Action
(AAAA) December 16, 2011 and the election result is contested before U.S. Court
of Appeals for the First Circuit (see links above) and Dr. Ofume has strings of
academic and professional qualification unlimited to Doctorat du 3e Cycle (DEA,
D.E.Phil), Lyon France; Doctorat du 3e Cycle (DEA), Lyon France; Scolarite au
Doctorat du 3e Cycle (S.Dr.), Lyon France; M.Sc. (Labor Science -1/2) Lyon
France; M.Phil., Lyon France; B.Phil., Lyon France; D.E.F. (Lyon/Geneva);
Post-doctoral studies: Ph.D. (Min.) (on-going) NY USA; Juris-doctor, Canada/USA
(on-going with over 35 years law study, practice, research, and investigation).
NCMP - Mediation Negotiation and Conflict Management ( Dalhousie University
,Law School); NCMP - Negotiation and Conflict Resolution (Dalhousie University,
Law School) ; NCMP -Advanced Mediation (inter-governmental and large corporate
body mediation and conflict management and resolution, (Dalhousie University,
Law School); Cert. Info Tech. – Mass and Strategic Communications; Phillip
Ofume speaks English, French and Nigerian languages; etc.
18. Dr. Phillip C. Ofume & Associates are corporate body and a sub-division of
LIMPT, INC and fully incorporated to train national and international Pro Se
and Unsigned Lawyers/Attorney to save and stop obstruction of justice created
by the high legal costs to retain lawyers/attorney; advocate/support/intervene
in wide range of cases such insurance, mortgage, rental, shelter, criminal,
civil liberties, etc. etc. etc.
19. In Late May
2012 Plaintiff met Dr. Ofume in this Court and recognized Dr. Ofume as member
of The Fountain of Grace Church, Canton, MA and Dr. Ofume and the Plaintiff had
several meetings inside and the Plaintiff, Ms. Gwendolyn Cranmore cried and cried and recounted and narrated
her terrible experiences with over 22 attorneys and insurance agents in the
United States to the extent Ms. Cranmore alleged that after spending a lot of
money to retain them, they turn round to sabotage her case and also take bribes
from her opponents and dump her case. The Senior Pastor and owner of The Fountain
of Grace requested Dr. Ofume to help Ms. Cranmore and Dr. Ofume brought her
case to his national and international chapters of their Non-governmental
Organizations (NGOs) and they voted and approved to take Ms. Cranmore under
contingency oral and written agreements to cover their service costs and
consolidated agreement called POWER OF ATTORNEY was written and signed between
Ms. Gwendolyn Cranmore and Dr. Phillip C. Ofume & Associates. EXHIBIT
B & B.1. (oral and written agreements).
20. Several months
starting from June 2012 Dr. Phillip C. Ofume & Associates visited Ms. Cranmore’s
different apartments and they started several mouths research,
investigation, critic and review of the Plaintiff’s case procedural history and
records which they found to be over
20,000 pages and also severally visited the disputed home located at 631 Blue
Hill Parkway, Milton MA 02186.
21. After months of
research, investigation, critic and review, Dr. Phillip C. Ofume &
Associates drew a strategic take off plan which critically review the original
Complaint and Demand Letter 93A written and filed with this Court by the
attorneys retained by Ms. Cranmore. Dr. Phillip C. Ofume & Associates were
shocked that the purported attorneys of record could be paid to write such
worthless Complaint and Demand Letter 93A without over 97% of the fact and
other relevant material in support of Ms. Cranmore’s cases particularly mentioned above. To save
these cases from falling into opposition’s Motion to Dismiss for failure to state
Claim upon which relief could be granted,
Dr. Phillip C. Ofume & Associates moved to amend the entire
Complaint and Demand Letter 93A which defendants hereto incorporate and marked
as follows:
a. Demand Letter
93A written and filed by Attorneys EXHIBIT C
b. Original Complaint
written and filed by Attorneys EXHIBIT D
c. Amended Demand
Letter 93A written and filed by Dr. Phillip C. Ofume & Associates EXHIBIT E
d. Original Complaint
written and filed by Dr. Phillip C.
Ofume & Associates EXHIBIT F
22. After laying
this strong background on these causes, the Defendant strategized on how to
save the disputed home from falling into foreclosure. Defendant and the
Plaintiff attended two successful mediation with SOUTH SHORE SAVINGS BANK
(SSSB) and the home was saved.
23. Per the Motion of the Defendants in July 2012 the
Presiding Judge understood the fact of the cause and order that parties should
proceed to discussion and this step yielded Reference Proceeding and Defendant
objected to the proceeding but the Defendants were able to advise the Plaintiff
to participate and she weakly agreed to part-take.
24. In October 2012
and November 2012 after selection of
three referees. All the attorneys the
Plaintiff consulted to assist her during the reference proceedings
refused. Defendants’ daily assignment
was 8.00 am to 7.00 pm at peanut rate of
$150.00 per day and the Reference
Proceedings lasted for 13 days. Plaintiff refused to pay
defendants but the Plaintiff paid other workers which she hired during this
proceeding. Defendants were instructed
by the Chair of the Referees to whisper
and write their representations
for the Plaintiff and during the proceedings defendant did secretarial services; writing of opening
statement; preparing facts, argument, exhibits and closing statement; stopping the proceeding to discuss with the
Plaintiff ; advice on opposition to
other parties and stop irrelevant submission by the opposition; writing
questions and answers for cross examination; etc. During the proceedings
several disruptions were deliberately done by the Plaintiff such as incessant
crying and crying to get unnecessary attention which impeded some of the
defendants’ work.
25. After the
reference proceedings the Plaintiff was awarded $92,958.00 and upon receiving this award check she stopped
talking to defendants in an orderly manner and appointed several “men of god”
and other intermediaries to act as her errand runners and spokespersons to run
different errands and undertake activities
between her (Plaintiff) and the defendants. Plaintiff reunited with the
lawyers/attorneys that rejected her case and other attorneys/lawyers and because
of the defendants’ work stated in paragraph
5 above, these attorneys/lawyers found gold and diamond in this case and
they (Plaintiff, lawyers/attorneys, men/women of god, court, hire assassins,
etc) want to remove the defendants at all costs. Some of the assassins they hired unfortunately were suspected Dr.
Ofume supporters for the President of AAAA and they came to Dr. Ofume’s
apartment to disclose the assignment given to them by the Plaintiff. Defendants
have filed Complaint with the Federal
Bureau of Investigation (FBI).
26. December 2012
through January 2013 with $92,958.00 Plaintiff increased her lobbying
activities in this court and the case files, Gwendolyn Cranmore v. SSSB Docket
No. 2012-2006-C, Gwendolyn Cranmore
v. MPIUA Docket No. 2012-00522 have been severely infiltrated the case files
and removed several documents which the defendants filed since May 2012.
27. Between September
2012 and February 2013 some absentia
motions and hearings were conducted and during defendants weekly case file
reviews, they uncover these absentia motions,
hearing and dismissal orders to the extent that the defendants found
over 11 dismissals and filed several motions and appeals to revive and
stabilize cases, Gwendolyn Cranmore v. SSSB Docket No. 2012-2006-C, Gwendolyn Cranmore v. MPIUA Docket No. 2012-00522 and
at present all the appeals and motions have been filed by the defendants. In major part September 2012 through
February 2013, Plaintiff stopped sending
photocopies of the letters of this court to defendants to accuse them of
failure to perform. The defendants have been getting information on these cases
during weekly case file review.
E. ISSUE
17. Whether
Plaintiff erred when she desires to disengage defendant without fault
18. Where there is
no fault with the Power of Attorney whether Plaintiff erred for blocking
working relationship between defendants and Plaintiff’s intended attorney.
19. Whether
Plaintiff erred for blocking dialogue between defendant and her attorney
F. ARGUMENT
In further support of this opposition, particularly their
academic and professional qualifications and experiences and taken and
concluded related cases, Defendants incorporate their AMENDED
APPLICANT’S, DR. PHILLIP C. OFUME &
ASSOCIATES (LIMPT, INC. EDUCATION AND WORK FORCE PROJECT) VERIFIED EMERGENCY
MOTION (EX-PARTE) FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE IN THE ABOVE MENTIONED MATTER
PURSUANT TO MASS. CIVIL PROCEDURE RULE 24 (a)
AND M.C.P.R. 1 TO SINGLE JUDGE EXHIBIT “I”
There is no law courts in the United States that will
accommodate deceptive, bad faith, fraudulent, arm-twisting and false business.
Because the Plaintiff has not stated any justifiable claim including convincing
this Court that Defendants have mistreated her when they worked for several
months and won a large amount of money without compensation and that because
they have completed these cases, saved her home from foreclosure and appealed
all emerging cases which would have posed threat to the disputed home, with deceits,
the Plaintiff is trying to hide under the umbrella of the Court to arm-twist
Defendants therefore Plaintiff’s Complaint should be dismissed with
prejudice.
The foreclosure proceeding has been variously put on hold
and cannot proceed years ahead because the Plaintiff is working and has other
sources of income to maintain payment of her mortgage. These are plans which
the Defendants have forwarded to the SSSB to move the foreclosure forward for
further review in 8-12 months. The SSSB is also owing the Plaintiff and what
the SSSB owe Plaintiff will be sufficient to offset months of mortgage payment.
Defendants are ready at any time to open up to discussion
with any attorney the Plaintiff will retain to work with defendants. Defendants
will allow soft payment plan of the overdue compensation which the Plaintiff
has refused to pay.
This type of greedy or deceptive business or principal has appeared before The Presiding
Honourable Justices Dreben, Gillerman and Lawrence in the matter, FRANCIS
W. GAGNON vs. JOAN G. COOMBS, individually and as trustee, & another 39
Mass. App. Ct. 144. The Defendants respected the POWER OF ATTORNEY which was
signed by the Plaintiff and Defendants.Under Common Law Principles termination of Power of Attorney, has rule and if the Court should terminate the power of attorney without the Plaintiff doing so by herself, G. L. c. 201B, Section 5, inserted by St. 1981, c. 276, Section 2 the meaning of the operating law will be also confused and would question the jurisdiction of this Court will be questioned.
Off set of the clauses of this Power of Attorney is the meaning of the Plaintiff’s Complaint because the purpose of sworn affidavit is defeated by this Complaint. See comment to Uniform Durable Power of Attorney Act Section 5, 8 U.L.A. 327 (1979) (on which G. L. c. 201B, Section 5, was based). See also Uniform Probate Code, prefatory note to part 5 of Art. V, 8 U.L.A. 511 (1975), and comments to Sections 5-502, 5-504, & 5-505, 8 U.L.A. 514, 516, 517 (1975). Plaintiff’s Complaint has down-sided G. L. c. 201B, Section 5, affidavit as a ground for affirmative undertaking.
D.
RELIEF
THEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons
appellant and his family request this Court to reverse the decision appealed
and other Order Court deems fit.
Respectfully submitted,
__________________
Dr. Phillip C. Ofume & Associates
Appellants/Defendants
P. O. Box 2416
Lynn, MA 01903
Tel. 781-479-9027
limptintinc@gmail.com
CERTIFICATE OF
SERVICE
I, Dr. Phillip
Ofume certify that a true copy of the foregoing NOTICE OF APPEAL was
served up on all parties by electronic
mail and Hand Delivery on March 7, 2013
at:
Ms. Gwendolyn Cranmore
2 Kenway Street
Cambridge, MA 02138.
.
Clerk, Civil Action
Suffolk County Superior Court Department
Suffolk County Courthouse , 12th Floor
Three Pemberton Square
Boston, MA 02108
_______________
Dr. Phillip
Ofume
cc. President
Barack Obama, Vice-President Joseph Biden, H.E. United Nations High
Commissioner for Human Rights, Counsels for DCF, Child and Foster Parents, The
Hon. Secretary and Attorney-General of the United States, Eric H. Holder, Jr.,
Hon. Secretary of State, Senator Hilary Clinton, H.E. Secretary General of the
United Nations, Bakim Moon, Executive Director, UNICEF, Chair, Amnesty
International (Intl. Secretariat, London, UK), Executive Director, Human Rights
Watch (USA), President, AAAA (Washington, DC, USA), LIMPT, INC. (EDUCATION
& WORKFORCE PROJECT, c/o Dr. Phillip
Chukwuma Ofume – National Coordinator), Senator Elizabeth Warren, etc.
No comments:
Post a Comment