1 VERIFIED COMPLAINT

2 I. Nature of the Action

3
Judge Araceli Martinez-Olgiun failed to respond to Summary Judgement by October 29, 2024,
4
as mandated and obligated under oath to the constitution for united states of America. By her
5
failure to respond by October 29, 2024, as mandated pursuant the 5th and 14th Amendments,
6
pertaining to due process of law, Judge Araceli has violated the due process of law, violating her
7
oath of office, violating her office of trust, and violating her office of honor, thus violating the
8
Supreme Law of the Land. The laws previously presented in filings, and the uncontested
9
affidavits presented in filings stand as judgment in law against Defendants, and judgement is
10
NOW obstructed in these proceedings by Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin, an officer of the court
11
under oath to the united states constitution. All officials are required by Federal, State and
12 Municipal Law to provide the name, address and telephone number of their public hazard and
13 malpractice bonding company, the policy number of the bond and if required, a copy of the
14 policy describing the bonding coverage of their specific job performance.
15
Plaintiff demands Clerk of Court provide the name, address and telephone number of Judge
16
Araceli Martinez-Olguin’s public hazard and malpractice bonding company, the policy number
17
of the bond and if required, a copy of the policy describing the bonding coverage of her specific
18
job performance, pursuant to Federal, State and Municipal Law.
19
Plaintiff demands Clerk of Court Mark B Busby, in his official oath of office capacity, to report
20
this breach of trust, and violation of oath of office by Public Office/Public Officer Judge Araceli
21
Martinez-Olguin. The Clerk of Court is obligated under oath of office to file said claim with the
22
authorized Public Hazard and Malpractice Bonding Company for Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin
23
enable to properly prosecuted a malfeasant public official for criminal malpractice.
24
25
See JUDICIAL NOTICE;KNOWLEDGE / UCC § 1-202: CONSTITUTIONAL DUE
26
PROCESS VIOLATION AND FRAUD UPON THE COURT, filed into this account via
27
USPS Certified Mail No.: 07016 1970 0000 2259 5000, Shipping Date September 1, 2024.
28

JUDICIAL NOTICE: OBSTUCTION OF PROCEEDINGS / DEMAND CLAIM WITH MALPRACTICE AGENCY - 2

1 NOTICE OF OFFICIALS’ OATH – BOUND OBLIGATIONS AND FIDUCIARY DUTIES TO
CLERK, JUDGE AND PROSECUTING ATTORNEY
2
3 When someone has a fiduciary duty to someone else, the person with the duty must act in a way

4 that will benefit someone else financially.

The person who has a fiduciary duty is called the fiduciary, and the person to whom the duty is
5
owed is called the principal or the beneficiary. If the fiduciary breaches the fiduciary duties, the
6
fiduciary would need to account for the ill-gotten profit. The beneficiaries are typically entitled
7
to damages.
8
Corporations and Fiduciary Duties Obligatory Upon Court Officials
9
Directors of corporations, in fulfilling their managerial responsibilities, are charged with certain
10
fiduciary duties. The primary duties are the duty of care and the duty of loyalty.
11
Duty of Care
12
The duty of care requires that directors inform themselves “prior to making a business decision,
13
of all material information reasonably available to them.”
14
See Smith v. Van Gorkem, 488 A.2d 858 (1985).
15 Whether the directors were informed of all material information depends on the quality of the
16 information, the advice available, and whether the directors had “sufficient opportunity to
17 acquire knowledge concerning the problem before action.”
18 See Moran v. Household Intern. Inc., 490 A.2d 1059 (1985).
19 Moreover, a director may not simply accept the information presented. Rather, the director must
20 assess the information with a “critical eye,” so as to protect the interests of the corporations and
21 its stockholders.
22 See Smith v. Van Gorkem, 488 A.2d 858 (1985).
23 Duty of Loyalty

24 The duty of loyalty means that all directors and officers of a corporation working in their

25 capacities as corporate fiduciaries must act without personal economic conflict. As the Delaware

26 Supreme Court explained in Guth v. Loft, 5 A.2d 503, 510 (Del. 1939), “Corporate officers and
directors are not permitted to use their position of trust and confidence to further their private
27
interest."
28

JUDICIAL NOTICE: OBSTUCTION OF PROCEEDINGS / DEMAND CLAIM WITH MALPRACTICE AGENCY - 3

1 Duty of Good Faith
2 Under the duty of good faith, a corporation's directors and officers must advance interests of the
3 corporation and fulfill their duties without violating the law.
4 See In re The Walt Disney Co. Derivative Litig., 906 A.2d 27 (Del. 2006).
5 A fiduciary duty is often described as an obligation of loyalty and good faith of the highest order

6 to a person or entity known as a beneficiary. The duty is synonymous with the highest degree of

7 loyalty and care, and doesn’t allow for any sort of violation without exposing the violator to

8
liability. To simplify, the “fiduciary” (the person with the duty) owes the “beneficiary” (the
person to whom the duty is owed) the highest degree of care and devotion. This means the
9
fiduciary must act with the best interests of the beneficiary in mind at all times and must refrain
10
from taking any action that could potentially harm the beneficiary or the beneficiary’s interests.
11
Full disclosure of all potential conflicts of interest must be disclosed to and discussed with the
12
beneficiary. In certain instances, this could require the fiduciary to undertake a proactive
13
investigation to determine what would be in the best interest of the beneficiary and to act
14
accordingly.
15
A breach of fiduciary duty occurs when the fiduciary acts in his or her own self-interest rather
16
than in the best interests of those to whom they owe the duty. As stated above, a fiduciary’s
17
actions must be free of any conflicts of interest and self-dealing; and, as a fiduciary, one cannot
18
use the relationship with the beneficiary to their own personal advantage.
19
20 Amendment V

21 “ No Person shall be deprived of due process of law”

22 The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise
23 infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land
24 or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person

25 be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any
criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due
26
process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
27
The clauses incorporated within the Fifth Amendment outline basic constitutional limits on police
28
procedure. The Framers derived the Grand Juries Clause and the Due Process Clause from the Magna Carta,

JUDICIAL NOTICE: OBSTUCTION OF PROCEEDINGS / DEMAND CLAIM WITH MALPRACTICE AGENCY - 4

1 dating back to 1215. Scholars consider the Fifth Amendment as capable of breaking down into the following
2 five distinct constitutional rights:

3 The right to indictment by the grand jury before any criminal charges for felonious crimes
A prohibition on double jeopardy
4 A right against forced self-incrimination
5 A guarantee that all criminal defendants have a fair trial, and
A guarantee that the government cannot seize private property without making a due compensation at
6 the market value of the property.
7
While the Fifth Amendment originally only applied to federal courts, the U.S. Supreme Court has partially
8
incorporated the Fifth Amendment to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth
9
Amendment. The right to indictment by the grand jury has not been incorporated, while the right against
10
double jeopardy, the right against self-incrimination, and the protection against arbitrary taking of private
11 property without due compensation have all been incorporated into the states.
12
13 The California Constitution contains the source of law for California and lists: the Magna Carta (1215 A.D.-

14 common law), the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution and the 1879 (1879 void, 1849 valid
constitution) California Constitution among others. The Declaration of Independence is law and I have a
15
Right not a privilege that can be infringed upon, to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness / property’.
16
On the 13th of April, 1850, the legislature of California had passed an act "adopting the common law,"
17
which reads: "The common law of England, so far as it is not repugnant to or inconsistent with the
18 constitution of the United States, or the constitution or laws of the state of California, shall be the rule of
19 decision in all the courts of this state." (Stats. 1850, p. 219.) The validity of the acts of the first legislature
20 of California, or of rights acquired under them, even prior to the admission of the state, has never been

21 questioned. Certainly, when constitutional, those acts became valid and in operation for every purpose from
the date of the admission of the state into the Union.” Lux v. Haggin 69 Cal 255 (1886).
22
23 Procedural Due Process Civil

24 The Requirements of Due Process

(2) Hearing. “[S]ome form of hearing is required before an individual is finally deprived of a property [or
25
liberty] interest.”759 This right is a “basic aspect of the duty of government to follow a fair process of
26
decision making when it acts to deprive a person of his possessions. The purpose of this requirement is not
27
only to ensure abstract fair play to the individual. Its purpose, more particularly, is to protect his use and
28 possession of property from arbitrary encroachment . . . .”760 Thus, the notice of hearing and the
opportunity to be heard “must be granted at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner.”761
JUDICIAL NOTICE: OBSTUCTION OF PROCEEDINGS / DEMAND CLAIM WITH MALPRACTICE AGENCY - 5
1 18 U.S. CODE § 1505 - OBSTRUCTION OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE DEPARTMENTS,
2 AGENCIES, AND COMMITTEES

3 Whoever, with intent to avoid, evade, prevent, or obstruct compliance, in whole or in part, with any civil
investigative demand duly and properly made under the Antitrust Civil Process Act, willfully withholds,
4
misrepresents, removes from any place, conceals, covers up, destroys, mutilates, alters, or by other means
5
falsifies any documentary material, answers to written interrogatories, or oral testimony, which is the
6
subject of such demand; or attempts to do so or solicits another to do so; or
7
Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication influences,
8
obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede the due and proper administration of
9
the law under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United
10 States, or the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is
11 being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress—
12 Shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or

13 domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both.

14
JUDICIAL NOTICE TO THE FIDUCIARY OFFICERS OF THE COURT
15
16 SUMMARY JUDGEMENT, AFFIDAVIT OF FACT / POINTS AND AUTHORITES as a “MOTION”
which is discretionary and an assumption that permission must be requested to exercise my Constitutional
17
Rights and an exercise of a right is a Constitutional Right, not a Request and this office knows that.
18
This is a direct violation of my “Secured Constitutional / Treaty Rights which is the Supreme Law of the
19
Land and “Stare Decisis” and a violation of your “Oath of Office”.
20
Furthermore, as there is no law as prescribed in the United States Constitution stating a “Motion” requesting
21
permission must be submitted in order to exercise my Constitutional Rights, your deliberate violation of
22
Substantive Due Process is a violation of Amendment IX of the United States Constitution and a violation
23 of your fiduciary duties.
24
Amendment IX
25
“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others
26 retained by the people”.
27
Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule-making or legislation, which
28
would abrogate them. Miranda v. Arizona 384 US 436, 125:

JUDICIAL NOTICE: OBSTUCTION OF PROCEEDINGS / DEMAND CLAIM WITH MALPRACTICE AGENCY - 6

1 Most fundamentally, the Permission Society undermines the principle of equality. When freedoms
2 are seen as privileges that the government gives the citizen, that means the citizen stands beneath the
3 government—and must beg for the right to act. That’s the opposite of how freedom is supposed to

4 work. Rights aren’t permissions, because rights already belong to us—we don’t ask the government
for them, and the government can’t impose conditions on them. But when bureaucrats treat rights as
5
privileges, they empower themselves and reduce citizens to a subservient position that is equivalent to
6
the practice of slavey.
7
8 SLAVERY IS PROHIBITED BY THE 13TH AMENDMENT AND THE CALIFORNIA
CONSTITUTION.
9
10
Plaintiff attest, any claim of " immunity" by Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin is a fraud because, if
11
valid, it would prevent removal from office for crimes against the people, which removal is
12
authorized and or mandated under U.S. Constitution Article 2, Section IV; as well as 18 U.S. CODE
13
241, 42 U.S. CODE 1983, 1985, 1986, and other state Constitutions.
14
15 THE ALL CAPS NAME IS FOREIGN TO THE U.S. AND THE STATES. IT IS IMMUNE
16 UNDER THE FOREIGN IMMUNITIES ACT BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN RECLAIMED
17 FOR CAUSE BY THE EXECUTOR IN TRUST.
18
19 Plaintiff attest, by using the words “Executor” or “Estate”, I, Richard Cecil Howell, am
the Creditor. Creditors have immunity from the debtor.
20
21 "No man in this country is so high that he is above the law. No officer of the law may set that law at
22 defiance with impunity. All the officers of the government, from the highest to the lowest, are
23 creatures of the law and are bound to obey it.. ... it is the only supreme power in our system of
24 government, and every man who, by accepting office participates in its functions, is only the more
25 strongly bound to submit to that supremacy, and to observe the limitations it imposes on the exercise

26 of the authority which it gives." U.S. v. Lee, 106 U.S. 196,220 1 S. Ct. 240,261, 27 L. Ed. 171
(1882).
27
28

JUDICIAL NOTICE: OBSTUCTION OF PROCEEDINGS / DEMAND CLAIM WITH MALPRACTICE AGENCY - 7

1 The Estate is in the nature of a trust but is not a trust. The Estate is subject to trust law and is
2 affected by probate law. Probate Law is the highest form of law. Scripture is trust and estate law
3 and trumps all other law, i.e., Treaty, Civil, Criminal, Law of Nations, Domestic, Probate, Equity.

4 True law has to be simple and must work equally for everyone, i.e., equality.

5 The Estate is a realm of action that is a combining of the physical and spiritual aspects of each
6 individual. The Estate is older than any form of law or legal issue that is in or around the world
7 today and has been passed down through generations, having come from God. As such, no form of
8 law, other than scripture, can access or penetrate the truth of the Estate.
9
A trust is a contract and pursuant to the constitution for the united states of America, Article 1,
10
Section 10 which reads, “No state shall pass any law impairing the obligation of contracts.” In
11
essence, an Estate or trust (contract) is private law between the parties thereto. No one, not even
12 the courts, have the authority to look into the business of the Estate.
13
BENEFICIARY “Cestui Que Trust” – RICHARD CECIL HOWELL, THE ALL-CAPS
14
ESTATE.
15
16 CESTUI QUE TRUST defined: The person for whose benefit a trust is created or who is to enjoy

17 the income or the avails of it. See Beneficiary. Black’s Law Dictionary Sixth Edition (page 1511)

18 CESTUI QUE USE defined: He for whose use and benefit lands or tenements are held by another.
19 The cestui que use has the right to receive the profits and benefits of the estate, but the legal title and
20 possession (as well as the duty of defending the same) reside in the other. 2 Bla.Comm. 330; 2

21 Washb. Real Prop. 95. Black's Law Dictionary Fourth Edition (page 289)

22 1) The Executor Office is the “Court” as the Sovereign is in equality. Definition of Court in the
23 Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th edition, states that, “The Sovereign with their real retinue -

24 wherever they may be – is the Executor Office.”

2) The Executor Office always deals with the administrative office because the Executor’s Office
25
is a Court. It is an administrative office, but it is a judicial office, also.
26
3) Plaintiff attest, The Constitution is the mandate of a sovereign people to its servants and
27
representatives, which no one of them has a right to ignore or disregard. John F. Jelke Co. v.
28
Emery, 193 Wis. 311, 214 N.W. 389, 53 A.L.R. 463.

JUDICIAL NOTICE: OBSTUCTION OF PROCEEDINGS / DEMAND CLAIM WITH MALPRACTICE AGENCY - 8

1 4) Plaintiff attest, “In our system of government, a written Constitution is the highest
2 expression of law.” Re Denny, 158 Ind. 104 59 N.E. 359, 51 L.R.A. 722.
3 5) CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE ARTICLE 1. RESIDENCE OF
4 SOVEREIGNTY 100. (a) The sovereignty of the state resides in the people thereof, and all
5 writs and processes shall issue in their name.

6 6) CALIFORNIA CODE, GOVERNMENT CODE - GOV § 11120 It is the public policy of

7 this state that public agencies exist to aid in the conduct of the people’s business and the

8
proceedings of public agencies be conducted openly so that the public may remain informed.

9 In enacting this article the Legislature finds and declares that it is the intent of the law that
10 actions of state agencies be taken openly and that their deliberation be conducted openly.
11 The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. The
12 people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is
13 good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on

14 remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created.

15 This article shall be known and may be cited as the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act.

16
17 All officials and government servants have taken an oath. Even if they have not taken an oath on
18 record, they have cashed a paycheck and accepted the responsibility. The fiduciary duty of all
19 officials is to serve and protect the Estates and the occupant of the Executor Office. A fiduciary
20 responsibility is the highest responsibility in law.
21
Any Denial order is in Violation of the Vatican Canonum De Ius Positivum
22 Canons of Positive Law Article 100:
23
24
Canon 2055
While the private secret trusts of the private central banks cannot be directly addressed, they are
25
still formed on certain presumptions of law including claimed ownership of the name, the body,
26
the mind and soul of infants, men and women. Each and every man and woman has the absolute
27
right to rebuke and reject such false presumptions as a member of One Heaven and holder of
28
their own title.

JUDICIAL NOTICE: OBSTUCTION OF PROCEEDINGS / DEMAND CLAIM WITH MALPRACTICE AGENCY - 9

1 Canon 2056
2 Given the private secret trusts of the private central banks are created on false presumptions, when a
3 man or woman makes clear their Live Borne Record and claim over their own name, body, mind and

4 soul, any such trust based on such false presumptions ceases to have any property.
Canon 2057
5
Any Administrator or Executor that refuses to immediately dissolve a Cestui Que Vie Trust, upon a
6
The person establishing their status and competency is guilty of fraud and fundamental breach of
7
their fiduciary duties requiring their immediate removal and punishment.
8
9
BONDING OF CORPORATE ENTITIES
10 (This is a verified plain statement of fact)
11 Maxims:
12 1. The Legitimate Political Power of a corporate entity is absolutely dependent upon its possession of
13 commercial Bonds against Public Hazard.
14 2. No Bond means no responsibility, means no power of Official signature, means no real corporate

15 political power and means no privilege to operate statutes as the corporate vehicle.
3. The Corporate Legal Power is secondary to Commercial Guarantors. Case law is not a responsible
16
substitute for a Bond.
17
4. Municipal corporations, which include cities, counties, states and national governments, have no
18
commercial reality without bonding of the entity, its vehicle (statutes), and its effects (the execution
19
of its rulings).
20
5. In commerce, it is a felony for the Officer/Public Office to not receive and report a Claim to its
21 Bonding Company – and it is a felony for the agent of a Bonding Company to not pay the Claim.
22 6. If a bonding Company does not get a malfeasant public official prosecuted for criminal
23 malpractice within (60) days, then it must pay the full-face value of a defaulted Lien process at (90)
24 days

25 7. PUBLIC HAZARD BONDING OF CORPORATE AGENT: All officials are required by

26 Federal, State and Municipal Law to provide the name, address and telephone number of their public
hazard and malpractice bonding company, the policy number of the bond and if required, a copy of
27
the policy describing the bonding coverage of their specific job performance.
28

JUDICIAL NOTICE: OBSTUCTION OF PROCEEDINGS / DEMAND CLAIM WITH MALPRACTICE AGENCY - 10

1 JUDICIAL NOTICE TO MARK B BUSBY CLERK OF COURT
2
Clerk of Court Mark B Busby, salutations to you, please honor your obligation of Good Faith in
3 Performance of your Duty to report claim against Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin, it is a felony for
the Officer/Public Office to receive and not report a Claim to its Public Hazard and Malpractice
4
Bonding Company – and it is a felony for the agent of a Bonding Company to not pay the Claim.
5
Mark B Busby, public trustee “Fully Personally Liable Now” on your honor and solemn Oath to
6 perform your obligations and duties to Protect My un-a-lien-able Rights in your Fiduciary Capacity.
7
In addition, please return to me the name, address and telephone number of their public hazard and
8 malpractice bonding company, the policy number of the bond and if required, a copy of the policy
describing the bonding coverage of their specific job performance.
9
10 CONCLUSION

11 Due to the constitutional violations of law committed by Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin, THE
12 STATE OF CALIFORNIA has defaulted in this account (CV24 5588 AMO) with respect to the
13 violation of public office of trust, honor, and obligations to the living spiritual man and woman.

14 Agent of THE STATE Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin, in her official capacity has violated her public
office of trust, she is in breach of trust, she has damaged Plaintiff’s right to due process of law via
15
obstruction of proceeding, and fraud upon the court.
16
17 Plaintiff attest, no civil tort claim will necessarily be needed to file against Judge Araceli Martinez-

18 Olguin, pursuant to her constitutional violations of oath of public office/trust/honor, and HONEST
SERVICES FRAUD - 1341, 1343, 1346, should the court now in default, and liable to Plaintiff for
19
One-million five-hundred-thousand ($1,500,000.00) in Functional U.S. currency, honor Plaintiff’s
20
claim, and pay claim in full to Plaintiff within Thirty (30) days, no later than December 1, 2024.
21
22 Mark B Busby, in your public fiduciary / trustee capacity, and as Clerk of the Court, please do not

23 hesitate to file a claim with the Public Hazard and Malpractice Bonding Company, and get the
malfeasant public official Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin prosecuted for criminal malpractice within
24
(60) days, should the officers of the court not honor Plaintiffs claim, then the Bonding Company can
25
pay the full-face value to Plaintiff of the defaulted Lien process at (90) days, and at this stage
26
Plaintiff shall be forced to initiate civil tort claim against Judge Araceli Martinex-Olguin, after
27
December 1, 2024.
28

JUDICIAL NOTICE: OBSTUCTION OF PROCEEDINGS / DEMAND CLAIM WITH MALPRACTICE AGENCY - 11

EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT B