1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

VIRGINIA:

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY

Ilona Heckman (lawyer) Individually and

As Trustee of The Ilona Ely Grenadier

Heckman Revocable Trust

Motion for Default Judgment

Plaintiffs,

vs. Case No. : CL 14 - 2185

JANICE WOLK GRENADIER,

Defendant

_________________________________

MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGEMENT And that Legal Fees were illegal and inappropriate awarded Plaintiffs’ attorneys

due to Lies told in Court and in Documents filed in this court

Defendant incorporates all filings in Response to Plaintiff’s fillings on or around March

24, 2014. Plaintiff’s attorneys were disingenuous and misleading to this court. The

filings and statements were knowingly and with purpose to mislead this court and Judge

as Plaintiff’s have done in the past. Plaintiff’s attorneys statements on page 2

paragraph 2 “Janice Grenadier’s prior abusive filings” in this great Country we are all so

blessed to be a part of, we have a Constitution that standing up for your Birth Rights

and Due Process is not frivolous or without cost.

As John F Kennedy said “The cost of freedom is always high, but Americans have

always paid it. And one path we shall never choose, and that is the path of surrender, or

submission” and “There are risks and costs to action. But, they are far less than the

long range risks of comfortable inaction.

Ben Dimuro, Andrea Mosley, Hillary Collyer, Judge John Tran of DiMuroGinsberg and

Michael Weiser have lied and or were in collusion with VSB and Commonwealth

Attorney Randy Sengel and Virginia Judicial community to intimidate and to

protect the illegal actions of his client attorney Ilona Grenadier Heckman:

1. Plaintiff’s attorneys Ben DiMuro past president of the Virginia State Bar knowingly and

maliciously attempted to mislead and confuse this court about Defendant and lied in Court on

April 4, 2014.

2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

2. Plaintiff’s attorney Ben DiMuro met with Defendant and then Defendant’s husband on or

around April of 1989 they met in his law office to discuss a fire that he was representing

GIC/Monroe Ave partnership for the coverage on the insurance from a fire. Which at the time it

was told to Defendant he was representing Defendant and her husband (GIC) for the portion of

the overage that they were being sued for. Conflict of interest to now represent Plaintiff against

Defendant?

3. Plaintiff’s attorneys Ben DiMuro and Andrea knowingly with a malicious attempt to mislead

and confuse this court about Defendant lied in documents submitted to the court on March 24,

2014. Below the e-mails by Mr. DiMuro shows they knew Defendant has not and was not

barred from filing documents with the Circuit Court of Alexandria, and the one e-mail shows a

Judge that did not have Jurisdiction imposed legal fees paid.

4. That on or around February 2, 2011 Plaintiff’s attorneys Ben DiMuro, Judge John Tran, Hillary

Collyer of DiMuroginsberg and Michael Wieser (Represanting Plaintiff;s son) purposely

knowingly and maliciously lied on Page 2 of Paragraph 2 in documents submitted to the

Supreme Court of Virginia. Saying “Petitioner has failed to ensure that the record contains

either transcripts or a written statement of Facts”.

5. Extortion Charges were enforced and made up by Plaintiff’s attorney in collusion with Plaintiff,

Randy Sengel, and Detective Pax of the Alexandria Police to intimidate Defendant, as there is no

police report number and Detective Pax admitted that there was no intention to file charges

against Defendant. Defendant can prove and give evidence of all money owed to Defendant.

6. Plaintiffs attorneys were in collusion with Ex-parte communications to delay a Motion with

Judge’s chambers on or around August of 2011.

7. The use of Ben DiMuro’s being a past president of the VSB to quash complaint against Ilona

Heckman for stealing and misleading how much she had stolen from the Sonia Grenadier Trust.

Along with the much publicized 10% donation to the VSB at his death. “That VSB President –

elect Bernard J. DiMuro and his wife Sandy, have designated 10% of their estate to the Virginia

law Foundation. DiMuro is the first Virginia attorney to make a gift of this kind to the VLF”.

8. Ben DiMuro / DiMuroGinsberg along with Grenadier, Anderson, Starace, Durffett and Kiesler

generous donation to Judge Haddock’s portrait fund which was published. Judge Haddock is

who denied Defendant in front of the Grand Jury because he admitted “ I believe you are going

to talk about me” Judge Haddock then denied access. Even assuring him the discussion would

be about Plaintiff Ilona Grenadier Heckman. Along with choosing he Judge’s who would rule in

Favor of Plaitniff after informing Defendant that he “Loved Ilona” and Defendant would not get

a fair trial.

9. Mr. DiMuro and Micheal Wieser et al are a big part of the Old Boy’s Network which in articles

Plaintiff has been acknowledged as being party to the Old Boy’s Network, Through the Collusion

and Power has kept everyone in check to protect his paying client Ilona Grenadier Heckman who

is guilty of several Criminal activities that Jim Arthur lost his law license and went to jail for 5

years for similar actions in 1993. By all appearance Ilona Grenadier Heckman was in collusion

with Jim Arthur in Plaintiffs cover up of her thefts, and the help of the Fagelson Law firm to

commit such criminal actions prior to Jim Arthur moving to Mays and Valentine.

3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

10. That Mr. DiMuro was involved in a string of e-mails calling the Pope a “Wanker” trying to

intimidate and harass defendant.

The above actions by appearance show the lawyers are guilty of Bribery, perjury, Fraud

on the Court, conspiracy/collusion to obstruct due process, miscarriage of justice and

appearance of justice, conflict of interest, conflict of interest recusal, breach of fiduciary

duties, ignoring the Oath of Office, Conspiracy against civil rights of Janice Grenadier,

and other violations of the VSB duties of an officer of the court. Janice Grenadier is

only and has only followed the rules of the courts and filled appropriate actions to

protect and stand up for her right to Due Process and any Judge who has an issue with

this has acted while not having Jurisdiction. The Judicial Cannons are very clear as

well as the rules of the Supreme Court of Virginia on ruling in Favoritism and Cronyism.

Further down in paragraph 2 on page 2 Mr. DiMuro states as he stated in court

“Moreover, the Alexandria Circuit Court has barred Janice Grenadier from filing

pleadings absent leave of court” This is a lie. This statement used in court and in

attorney Ben DiMuro pleadings has no truth to it at all. On or around July 12, 2013

Defendant re-opened Defendants Divorce case on Fraud paying appropriate fees. The

Defendant filed appropriately and served appropriately subpoenas that would have

given further proof of the criminal actions of Plaintiff. These subpoenas were ignored;

Ilona has also intervened into the re-opening of Defendant’s divorce by Ben

DiMuro again shows he knew Defendant had not been Barred from filing

documents in the Circuit Court of Alexandria. The same Judge who mailed back

Defendants documents submitted into court also with no hearings, denied appropriate

hearings. On or around March 13, 2014 Lis Pendens was filed in the City of Alexandria

by Defendant with no issue in the City of Alexandria Courts. The actions that Plaintiff

and Plaintiff’s attorney call frivolous are actions of Lawyers, Judges, and other Judicial

and Government officials that are in collusion of the Cover up of the criminal actions of

Lawyer Ilona Ely Freedman Grenadier Heckman. Defendant in this Motion for

Default Judgment requests the full value of the Lis Pendens to be awarded to

Defendant to uphold the law and send a strong message to these attorneys who

believe they are above the law and do not have to follow the law that through ex-

parte communications with the Judges for rulings in favor for them. The Affidavits of

4

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

attorney’s fees show the ex-parte communications, which defendant will be able to

show that this is not the first time. The blackouts in Plaintiff’s attorney affidavit of legal

fees leave Defendant to believe they are inappropriate meetings or discussions that

were blacked out.

This e-mail from Mr. Dimuro in his own words shows that Plaintiff was only awarded

legal fees once – Which the Judge did not have Jurisdiction, that the Affidavit from the

attorneys show more calls to Judge’s chambers than to his own client which was

submitted into court on April 4, 2014. That the judge 2 weeks after Defendant submitted

documents in the court to the Judge with no objections from Plaintiff and attorneys they

were then mailed back to Defendant. Which was the box Defendant showed this court

on April 4, 2014. Judge Clark by all appearance was paying back for the votes and

support to become a judge. Remember also: FBI cautions residents of

public corruption in Va.

http://www.wusa9.com/story/news/local/2014/02/18/fbi-cautions-residents-of-public-

corruption-in-northern-virginia/5585877/

WASHINGTON (WUSA) -- The Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI) Washington Field

Office is looking to identify any public corruption occurring in Northern Virginia.

The FBI says public corruption can occur "when a public official, at any level of government –

local, state or federal – does any official act in exchange for money, or other free goods or

services, for private gain. Public corruption could also include public employees who take

something of value for their own personal gain, thereby violating the public's trust."

The FBI says many of their investigations into public corruption start once they receive a tip

from someone. If you want to help identify potential criminal activity, the Washington Field

Office has set up a Northern Virginia Public Corruption Hotline at 703-686-6225 and you can

also e-mail them at NOVAPC@ic.fbi.gov.

Some of the examples of corruption include:

Government officials such as DMV employees, city inspectors, taxing or zoning assessors

or other regulatory agency employees, or even town councils or mayors;

Contracting officials at all levels, including those who manage government contracts or

regulatory permits; or, school resource officers who manage school accounts;

Local officials colluding with real estate investors to rig the bidding process at

foreclosure auctions;

A person representing the judicial branch - a judge, member of the jury or court

personnel; or,

5

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

A person representing law enforcement, who steals drugs from criminals, embezzles

government funds, falsifies records or smuggles contraband

On April 8, 2014 Defendant questioned through e-mail Mr. DiMuro in his statement of

all these Sanctions and being barred from Filing Documents in the Courts – his

response as follows:

from: Ben Dimuro bdimuro@dimuro.com

to: JW Grenadier <jwgrenadier@gmail.com>, Ilona Grenadier <igrenadier@vafamilylaw.com>, "AEB66@aol.com" <AEB66@aol.com>

cc: Andrea Moseley <AMoseley@dimuro.com>

date: Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 9:41 AM

subject: RE: Ilona

By order of court dated September 26, 2012, Judge Clark ganted Ilona Grenadier and GIC’s Motion to Quash the LIs Pendens, for an award of fees pursuant to Va. Code Section 8.01-271.1 and an order barring you from filing further filings.

That same order permitted my firm to submit an affidavit for attorney’s fees.

By a second order on September 26, 2012 Judge Clark denied your motion to re-open and found that the pleadings violated Va. Code Section 8.01-271.1 and awarded David Grenadier attorney’s fees against you.

By a third order of court on September 26, 2012 Judge Clark reiterated that you had violated

Va. Code Section 8.01-271.1 and awarded Ilona Grenadier and GIC attorney’s fees against you.

These are exhibits K, L and M to the petition to quash lis pendens that I filed in Prince William.

Va. Code Section 8.01-271.1 is referred to as the sanctions statute. An order under Va. Code Section 8.01-271.1 is an order of sanctions.

So, by the terms of three separate order where the Judge relies on Va. Code Section 8.01-271.1, orders sanctions in the form of attorney’s fees were ordered against you.

I trust this is now clear.

Ben DiMuro Bernard J. DiMuro

DiMuroGinsberg, PC 1101 King Street, Suite 610

Alexandria, Virginia 22314 703.684.4333 703.548.3181 (fax)

6

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

The Truth is Plaintiff was awarded legal fees once prior to this on September 26, 2014

by a Judge that did not have Jurisdiction and ruled by all appearance on favoritism and

cronyism. That Judge Clark had been asked to recuse himself and he refused. Judge

Clark was also in collusion with the Commonwealth Attorney and Judge Potter when

Defendant and her witness’s were kidnapped into a court room by Judge Potter who

was demanded and ordered in a Letter and Order by Chief Justice of the Supreme

Court of Virginia Cynthia Kinser to assist Defendant and her witness’s in going in front

of a Grand Jury to ask for a Special Grand Jury to look into the criminal actions of

Plaintiff.

Ben DiMuro et als actions have been willful acts that were and are malicious, violent,

oppressive, fraudulent, wanton and grossly reckless.

Defendant also reminds this court that under the Preamble, A Lawyer’s Responsibilities

reads in part:

“A lawyer’s conduct should conform to the requirements or the law, both in professional service to clients and in the lawyer’s business and personal affairs. A lawyer should use the law’s procedures only for legitimate purposes and not to harass or intimidate others. A lawyer should demonstrate respect for the legal system and for those who serve it, including judges, other lawyers and public officials. While it is a lawyer’s duty to uphold

legal process.” “In the mature of law practice, however, conflicting responsibilities are encountered. Virtually all difficult ethical problems arise from conflict between a lawyer’s responsibilities to clients, to the legal system and to the lawyer’s own interest in remaining an upright person while earning a satisfactory living.” “the legal profession’s relative autonomy carries with it special responsibilities of self-government. The profession has a responsibility to assure that its regulations are conceived in the public interest and not in furtherance of parochial or self-interested concerns of the bar. Every lawyer is responsible for observance of the Rules of

Professional Conduct. A lawyer should also aid in securing their observance by

other lawyers. Neglect of these responsibilities compromises the Independence of the profession and the public interest which it serves,” Maintaining the Integrity of the Profession Rule 8.3 Reporting Misconduct Is very clear if a lawyer knows of another lawyers illegal actions they are required to report such actions to the appropriate authorities. Rule 8.4 Misconduct:

7

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to: (a) Violate or attempt to violate the Rules of Professional

Conduct, knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do so through the acts of another;

(b) Commit a criminal or deliberately wrongful act that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness or fitness to practice law;

(c) Engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation which reflects adversely on the lawyer’s fitness to practice law;

(d) State or imply an ability to influence improperly or upon irrelevant grounds any tribunal, legislative body, or public official; or

(e) Knowingly assist a judge or judicial officer in conduct that is a violation of applicable rules of judicial conduct or other law.

Ilona Ely Freedman Grenadier Heckman as an attorney is guilty of:

1. Being involved in the forgery of an addendum of the Sonia Grenadier Trust to

use to steal funds close to $95,000. For gain in Real Estate close to a value

today of $12 million or more and monthly income of approx. of $150,000 or more.

2. Stealing Herman Grenadier from his Garden at King David and donating his 3

spaces at King David and by all appearance taking a tax donation herself for the

3 spaces. IRS Fraud

3. That Plaintiff stole the property by all appearance called Bristow Rd., that

Defendant had Lis Pendens on. That on or around February 13, 1986, where by

all appearance not only did Plaintiff take funds, Plaintiff put Plaintiff’s name on a

property that by all appearance and documents show belonged in the Trust of

Sonia Grenadier.

4. Plaintiff paid GIC partner under the table to be able to take all the tax deductions.

5. Plaintiff lied once caught from stealing the funds from the Sonia Grenadier Trust

through her law firm to the other lawyers and Family Members on how much was

stolen.

6. Plaintiff maliciously and knowingly lying to Defendant regarding funds to

purchase property called 28 E. Bellefonte Ave.

7. Plaintiff illegally using an attorney to liquidate the GIC property agreement with

an attorney not licensed to do business in Virginia.

8

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

8. Plaintiff maliciously manipulating Defendant on July 7, 1990 to get $30,000.

Commission to negotiate and make it look like Plaintiff was not involved in the

theft of funds from the Sonia Grenadier Trust.

9. Plaintiff acting as attorney to Defendant and holding a note for the $30,000.

10. Plaintiff manipulating and stealing funds out of the 28 E. Bellefonte partnership.

11. Plaintiff misleading and lying in the Federal Bankruptcy court that Defendant was

forced into because of the lies and manipulation of Plaintiff.

12. Plaintiff acting as an attorney to protect her illegal actions tried to get Defendant

to sign a Parenting Agreement and Separation Agreement that benefited Plaintiff.

13. Plaintiff a divorce attorney manipulated defendant into believing she had no

rights to the properties in GIC. Plaintiff lied, Plaintiff was aware that at this point

defendant had participated in all aspects of GIC and running it as well as putting

more money into GIC then Defendants husband which gave Defendant at least

½ of Defendants ownership in GIC (49%). Defendant never gave Plaintiff

permission to represent her interests and Defendant has been denied the tax

benefits as well as monthly income off of properties since 1989.

14. That Plaintiff knowingly as an attorney lied in the Circuit Court of Alexandria in

court, in admissions, filing false / fraudulent documents with court on several

occasions.

15. Plaintiff Bribed Judges through donations of tables, for donations towards

portraits, and parties.

16. Plaintiff bragged about giving free legal advice to Judge Brown who proceeded

over case three (3) times.

17. Plaintiff Bragged on several occasions on her influence over Judges ie Judge

Haddock to Defendant “WE LOVE ILONA, you will never get a fair trial”

18. Plaintiff / Ilona a lawyer politically/ with some financially supported Clerk of Court

Ed Semonian, Commonwealth Attorney Randy Sengel, Patsy Ticer, Adam Ebbin

and David Englin.

19. The collusion of Patsy Ticer and Judge Kent to set Defendant up with the x-wife

of Judge Kent; Martha Kent informed Defendant “she had no rights, just like

Martha and her family the x-wife of Judge Kent had no rights. That Defendant

9

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

needed to move on because she could never win this, because she was no

longer one of them.”

20. Plaintiff Ilona a lawyer made it clear her ‘HATE” of Catholics when she informed

Defendant “Me and my family had nothing to do with you and your girls because

you raised them Catholic” has since then callously, and maliciously has shown

her “HATE” through her attorney Ben DiMuro, Robin Grenadier, Andrea

Grenadier, Leah Lax Miller aka Lorretta Miller aka Muggy Cat aka Billy Sullivan.

Emails will show how much she “HATES” Catholics. The e-mails will show the

collusion to torment Defendant.

21. Plaintiff used her friendships to influence the Old Boy Network to support her

illegal and unprofessional behavior.

22. Plaintiff filed a false and disingenuous complaint with the State of Virginia against

King David Cemetery for burying a stranger in her garden. Who Plaintiff had

signed the appropriate documents for Ruth to be buried in the garden. The

stranger was buried with her Brother the late Judge Albert Grenadier, Her father

Herman Grenadier whom Ilona had stolen from his grave and moved using

according to King David the forged Addendum to the Trust agreement. The

forged trust addendum was also used to donate the 3 grave sites that belonged

to Sonia Grenadier. Emails and documentation from the State of Virginia can be

back this.

23. Plaintiff refuses to provide the canceled checks used to purchase the garden or

the permission she was given to move Herman and which accounts the funds

came out of to purchase the new garden.

24. Plaintiff in 1990 represented Defendant as her lawyer in the assignment

document of Defendants commission for a property called Holland Road. Is

owed with the interest from a not a value of $570,000 + refusing to turn over the

note or the money. This money went to keeping Plaintiff out of jail which Jim

Arthur went in 1993 to jail for 5 years for what Plaintiff has done.

25. Plaintiff arrogantly has bullied Defendant , manipulated money, the loss of

clients, to protect her own Law License using scare tactics, false pretense and

lies.

10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

26. That Plaintiff in collusion with David Grenadier, Andrea, Robin passed a rumor

around that caused David Grenadier to pull a gun in Defendants home with

Defendants girls in the home.

27. That Plaintiff hired or as a favor had a gentleman that in collusion with the

Judges of the Circuit Court of Alexandria ( Haddock, Kemler, Dawkins and Clark)

was to drug Defendant and get sexually inappropriate pictures, to rape one of

Defendants daughters or to plant drugs in Defendants home or on Defendants

children to give Judges the power to claim Defendant was incompetent to move

forward in demanding Justice and Due Process.

28. That Plaintiff in collusion with David Grenadier sold a car which was not there’s to

sell and in e-mails mocked defendant for not being equal to them to be able to

get justice.

29. Plaintiff’s actions have been willful acts that were and are malicious, violent,

oppressive, fraudulent, wanton and grossly reckless.

30. Defendant will be able to show other actions in court that are criminal actions.

That Plaintiff a lawyer is guilty of the following criminal actions: of being involved in ,

Perjury, Obstruction of Justice, Aiding and abetting obstruction of Justice, Fraud on the

Court, Involvement of Forgery, Theft of money from the Sonia Grenadier Trust account

through her law office for great personal gain over $10 Million in Real Estate, Theft of

Herman Grenadier, malpractice, Bribery, Abuse of her Oath of Office, Conspiracy,

Collusion, Miscarriage of Justice, preventing Due Process, conflict of interest – related

to the practice of law, violating code of ethics, has liability to her victims, has violated

Plaintiffs Religious, Political, United state Constitutional, Virginia Constitutional and

Civil Rights, Breach of Fiduciary Duties, RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT, Title

18 US code 241 Conspiracy against rights, and 242 Deprivation of rights under color of

law, Retaliatory & Retribution actions, Treason, Title VI Civil Rights Act of 1964 Title

VI, 42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq., was enacted as part of the landmark Civil Rights Act of

1964, 18 USC§ 912. With her Intention to 18 USC § 1341 -Frauds and swindles,

Defraud, Breach of Contract, Arbitrary and Capricious behavior, Committed Fraud on

the Court, § 18.2-498.3. Misrepresentations prohibited, § 18.2-172 - Forging, uttering,

11

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

etc., other writings et al. All of above charges will be proven with letters,

documents, witnesses who have also been harmed by the actions of Plaintiff.

Defendant is owed for funds stolen out of Bellefonte Ave, as well as other costs,

24.5% of GIC since on or around 1997, Note held by Plaintiff with interest, Loss of

client, bankruptcy legal fees, Damages for actions that are willful acts that were and

are still malicious, violent, oppressive, fraudulent, wanton and grossly reckless to any

lay person. That value of the above without damages is approximately and may be

more when tax advantages and income from rental properties along with properties that

have been sold is estimated to come to around $8 million dollars. That Plaintiff mislead

and has been disingenuous for years. Plaintiff through her own greed is desperate and

as this court can see has stolen from the elderly and children for years.

Conclusion

That many mistakes have been made by the Judicial community, but, this is not about

that. This has nothing to do with the judicial community except to point out the collusion.

This has to do with the actions of Plaintiff and Plaintiffs’ attorneys and their actions

against Defendant. The arrogance to lie and mislead this court which Plaintiff and

Plaintiffs’ attorneys have done several times to protect the criminal actions of Ilona

Grenadier Heckman. The affidavit of legal fees show blanked out areas that could or by

appearance be as in the past to Judges or others who could influence the outcome of

the hearing on April 4, 1990. That Plaintiff never once in any court case has put forth a

defense of Defendant being disingenuous or that Defendant has lied in court or in any

documents. The defense used by the Plaintiff and Plaintiffs’ attorneys is “it is

frivolous to expect the Old Boys Network or the Plaintiff and her attorneys to

follow the law and be held responsible for their actions as others are.” By all

appearance Plaintiff and Plaintiffs’ attorney documents show their defense as to why

Plaintiff should not be held responsible for her actions is because Plaintiff is an attorney,

part of the Old Boy Network, widow of Judge Albert Grenadier that this gives Plaintiff a

hall pass and makes her above the law and says she has the right to steal from the late

Judge Albert Grenadiers mother, his father, his sister, his sisters children, his children

12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

and his grandchildren, to treat the mother of his grandchildren like trash. Does this

court believe that the late Judge Albert Grenadier, who was by all appearance only

married to Plaintiff for 6 years before he passed, would have wanted this outcome?

That Plaintiff remarried approximately 7 months after his death to his first cousin whom

it is well known to Defendant from family members that Judge Albert Grenadier called

Jerome Heckman a weasel and did not like him. Which through witness’s in court

Defendant will be able to prove. That Plaintiff by all appearance with the knowledge of

Jerome Heckman by his signature on the Bristow Road property on or around February

13 of 1986 (even though he is giving up his rights to the money and property) as a

lawyer was aware of the benefits to his actions. That Plaintiff and Plaintiffs’ attorneys

since September of 2007 have lied in court - lied in court documents, have worked in

collusion to intimidate, maliciously manipulate Defendant using scare tactics, the

Alexandria police and the Courts of Virginia, motivated by financial interests and

cronyism. That the actions have been and are willful acts that were and are still

malicious, violent, oppressive, fraudulent, wanton and grossly reckless. That Plaintiffs

and Plaintiffs’ attorneys actions were knowingly and with purpose to make Defendant

suffer financially and mentally as well as defendants children innocent victims from

these actions of Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s attorneys.

This court should keep in mind:

Disciplinary Responsibilities of this court and all courts in Virginia .

1. A judge who receives reliable information indicating a substantial likelihood that another judge has committed a violation of these Canons should take appropriate action. A judge having knowledge that another judge has committed a violation of these Canons that raises a substantial question as to the other judge's fitness for office should inform the Judicial Inquiry and Review Commission.

2. A judge who receives reliable information indicating a substantial likelihood that a lawyer has committed a violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility should take appropriate action. A judge having knowledge that a lawyer has committed a violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility that raises a substantial question as to the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects should inform the Virginia State Bar.

That the legal profession is largely self-governing. Although other professions also have been granted powers of self-government, the legal profession is

13

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

unique in this respect because of the close relationship between the profession and the processes of government and law enforcement. This connection is manifested in the fact that ultimate authority over the legal profession is vested largely in the courts.

That legal fees ordered to Plaintiffs attorney should be reversed due to the

disingenuous statements knowingly to mislead this court and in court documents filed.

That Defendant should be awarded the value of the Lis Pendens towards the amount

owed to Defendant from Plaintiff anything less than that would show bias. That

defendant has not had her day in court Boddie v. Connecticut, 401 U.S. 371 (1971),

was a case before the United States Supreme Court. That this court holds the

responsibility to send a strong message that we support The Virginia Constitution, the

Constitution of America, The Civil Rights of individuals, and more importantly we

uphold the Rules of The Virginia Supreme Court. That this court must take into

consideration the fact this is not the first time Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s attorneys have

made a mockery of the legal system and the Oath of Office. The Defendant also prays

this court appoints a Special Grand Jury to look into the actions of the Plaintiff and

Plaintiff’s attorneys for trying to prevent Plaintiff from her birth right as an American

citizen the Basic Liberty of Due Process. The basic liberty that our Flag stands for and

here is where the standard of Liberty is set for the rest of the World. It is under the Oath

that each Judge and Justice has taken that this heavy burden lies on your shoulders to

protect the Rights of each and every Virginia Citizen.

Dated this April 11, 2014 __________________________________

Janice Wolk Grenadier Pro Se 15 West Spring Street Alexandria, Virginia 22301 jwgrenadier@gmail.com 202-368-7178

Certificate of Service

I hereby certify that a true and accurate copy of the foregoing document was delivered on April

11, 2014 to Defendants attorney Ben DiMuro at DiMuroGinsberg PC – 1101 King Street, Suite

610, Alexandria VA 22314.

April 11, 2014 Janice Wolk Grenadier

Pro Se