AC48416 22Dec2025
Link to this blogpost:
https://publiusroots.blogspot.com/2025/12/ac48416-22dec2025.html
Not finalized but almost
AC 48416
NHH-CV24-6024196-S : APPELLATE COURT OF CT
ANSONIA STATE
STREET : STATE OF CONNECTICUT
V : HOUSING SESSION
ANNE M. BRADLEY : December 22, 2025
STATEMENT OF APPELLANT-DEFENDANT ON MEMORANDUM OF LAW, DATED JANUARY 25, 2025
1. There was no Memorandum of Law on aforesaid case information despite submitting a Notice Of Intent to Appeal on the case. Appellant-Defendant found it upon researching in Westlaw. The court uploaded it only after the Appellant-Defendant motioned the court for a Memorandum of Law, and then claimed it was already on the court case.
2. This Memorandum Of Law, issued by Alayna Stone, is placed after this statement, which is appendixed to the Appellant-Defendant’s Motion to Deviate and Supplement, also dated December 22, 2025.
3. The case is described as a “summary process action for non-payment of rent against the Defendant” which is a fraudulent description since the Summons indicated “non-payment of rent for August and September 2024” only. It is spin, rather than factual.
a) Appellant-Defendant paid the same rent for over two years, despite being in opposition of it due to the numerous abuses of the landlord as well as the personal struggles as a tenant with a Federal Poverty Level income, who should be paying 10% of the rent, as proven in her Brief and in this Supplement due to no access to bookmarks or hyperlinks to make it readily available for the court to see the law cited in 42 USC 1437 (f). Page ______ In fact, they mocked her by
______
reporting to DSS that her rent was 10%, which would be $93.20 if this landlord and housing authority followed the law. They did not contact Appellant-Defendant about what they reported to DSS. The landlord is the office to which DSS claims to use as a source for determining her portion of the HAP rent. This was a nefarious abuse to get Appellant-Defendant’s food stamps, which are already low, to be lowered more.
b) Appellant happens to be aware of tenants who pay nothing for rent on this premises yet they have social security income.
4. REFERENCE 1, as marked by Appellant-Plaintiff on this Memorandum of Law reflecting the Housing Complaint, which is associated with the illegal eviction case appealed (AC48416) particularly, among other things, due to the fact the court ordered Appellee-Plaintiff in AC48416, to not proceed with any Summary Process; yet they violated this order and the court did absolutely nothing about it, responding as if the court was victim to dramatize and evade from its duties as state-paid and supposedly licensed attorneys. Appellee-Plaintiff did not purchase the property at 360 State Street, New Haven, CT. They do not hold the title. The $2.2 billion building could not have been purchased for $160 million and then have an $89 billion mortgage on it. They, in fact, failed to prove ownership by submitting a LIMITED DEED as apposed to Title of the property during trial. Appellant-Defendant allowed that evidence and stated for all evidence which was issued, that they only frame themselves in their fraudulent activity, and thus prove the case has no merit. Additionally, for emphasis, when a 15-minute break was called before the trial , which had nothing to do with Due Process, Attorney Peter Hoops could have easily obtained it if a Title to the Property existed, since it was challenged by the Appellant-Defendant. And it was Attorney Peter Hoops, who entered the BAR in 1987, who attended the trial - not an Attorney St. Rock, who had no appearance on the case. Appellant does not
____
even know if this Attorney St. Rock exists, let alone know what he looks like. Alayna Stone completely ignored this fact, that they do not have the title to the property and they do not have any legal ability to sell the property, and therefore are not the owners of this $2.2 billion property which they claim to have PURCHASED for $160 million and yet have an $89 billion mortgage on the property. All of these real estate documents were presented to the court in an Appendix of 246 pages to the complaint in the Housing Complaint Case, which has been referred to throughout this case. Additionally, most or all of those documents were uploaded on this aforesaid case in trial court. For the court to deliberately ignore this and claim it can call the shots as to what it reviews and what it doesn’t is obstruction of justice - abuse of process! Any person who has any logic about landlord-tenant rights fully knows that the Summons has to be paid for before it is served and a docket number has to be created! Other court cases are shown to have that, particularly when the payment is made to the clerk personally in the Housing Court Office. PROCESSING REQUIREMENTS ARE THE SAME FOR ANY LANDLORD. That is why there is a square on the Summons form, marked “For court purposes only” where the receipt is shown and the docket number is shown If, for whatever reason it is not shown there, it is the obligation of the marshal and the landlord to provide it in attached documents. In fact, the only attachment was an advertisement for attorneys! There was no letter of arrearage which is legally required for even regular tenants to receive 10 days prior to serving an eviction. (Let alone a Pretermination Letter as required by law for HAP Contracts, issued 30 days or more prior to serving a Termination Letter, aka Notice To Quit) That is a univesal law, so to speak, always a legal responsibility. A Pretermination Letter does not end the lease and is required according to the HAP Contract. It circumvents a Notice To Quit and provides the tenant opportunity for the Housing Authority to allow a hearing, etc. The Housing Authority, instead,
____
claimed “We have nothing to do with your eviction case”. The Notice to Quit had no LEGAL EFFICACY, yet this Alayna Stone, who is claimed to be a licensed attorney and judge (though her juris number she uses does not exist in Juris Lookup and she has no Juris number in the Juris lookup) claimed that the Notice To Quit was valid because it was spelled right and the form was properly filled out! She stated that in court and even what the transcript has from the frauded recording of the hearing, shows that the hearing was a botched-up, self-serving event which had nothing to do with abiding by the law. After all, the Chief Clerk let this Appellee-Plaintiff pay a marshal who lived at 360 State Street to shove this crumpled up Notice To Quit in her door frame, appearing to look like a bomb, on September 18 - five days after it was dated - not even using her doorbell, when she was sick in her apartment. He fully knew she was sick since the management has to be contacted before the marshal served her and the concierge noted on September 12 that her Home Depot Order could not be picked up yet due to her being sick. The service of the Termination Notice was illegal! There was no Pretermination Letter 30 days prior to that! This was illegal, and someone ordered this marshal, who resided in the same building, to move out of the building immediately - most likely FBI, since the landlord wanted this dishonest person to deliberately evade the process of serving a person according to law. Serving an intentional illegal document should have been of the interest of the court and thus a Housing Complaint was issued to include the longstanding breaches of HAP contract as well as ongoing outright criminal entries in her apartment when she is not in her apartment. It is a violation of the HAP contract, as already relayed to the court. THIS CASE HAS NO MERIT TO EVEN HEAR AND SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DOCKETED AND THEREFORE THE SUMMONS WAS ILLEGALLY SERVED SINCE APPELLANT-DEFENDANT WAS PAYING RENT INTO COURT, WHICH THE COURT
____
THUS AGREED HER RENT WAS CURRENT AND ALSO THEY WERE ORDERED NOT TO PROCEED WITH A SUMMONS, AS STATED RIGHT ON THE HOUSING FORM AND AGAIN SHOWN IN PAGE ____ OF THIS SUPPLEMENT.
5. REFERENCE 2. The judge based a 2024 letter stating the rent will be $264 in 2022. How is that even a legal document? She approved $198 as rent in case AC48452, Appendix C, Form JD-HM-19. Page ____ Appellant-Defendant said, “Go ahead, you frame yourselves if you want to submit that as evidence., Where is the supposed original letter, supposedly submitted in 2022? Where is the addendum to the lease indicating a change in tenant’s portion of the rent?” They would not even respond where the original was and they did not care since Alayna Stone had every intent to evict the Appellant at trial. This is an Ends Justifies Means agenda. It was all set up and that is why the hearing and trial were set for the same day. No matter what the outcome of the Motion to Dismiss and other motions at the hearing, the trial was going to take place! A pre-arranged event rathr than Due Process! Apellant-Defendant claimed the evidence to be fraudulent, demanding the original letter which was never received by her. Alayna Stone is the alleged judge who seems to be a paid actor, who defendant claims to be either a very incompetent attorney - or not an attorney at all. She has no juris number in the Juris Lookup, though the the juris lookup provides judge’s juris numbers, as provided in Appendix E of this supplement, Page ____. The judge had no evidence to prove that $264 was last agreed upon rent - there was no addendum to the lease entered by the Appellee-Plaintiff, and the judge had already agreed Appellant’s rent was $198 and accepted it as payments into court on the Housing Complaint Lawsuit! The court has an obvious propensity - even obsession - to favor the Appellee, who is an obviously illegal landlord who fraudulently claims to be owner without even holding the
____
title to the property and having an illegal mortgage as well as purchasing it for way below its value which disrupts the laws of insurance. In fact, they most likely use it as leverage in insurance claims - particularly ones which tenants dispute and also frauding the HAP contract as a Project-Based contract as apposed to Tenant-Based, which is indicated right on the contract! No city representative has any right to push the lie, yet they do and have Section 8 meetings without calling or notifying the Appellant-Defendant. This has been discussed in full to Alberta Witherspoon, who was appointed to be a Housing Commissioner in the past year.
6. REFERENCE 3. The Memorandum of Law indicates a Notice To Quit was served on September 13, 2024.k It was prepared on September 12, 2024, which was the date which the Appellant-Defendant called the Concierge and asked her to hold onto her Home Depot order (some of which was stolen from her before she picked up the order several days later, once she was feeling better, since she was sick and had to sleep on the floor since her bed was vandalized by illegal intruders who enter her apartment on a regular basis since Dione, the maintenance supervisor, transferred to the “twin apartment building” of this aforesaid property, after they finished building it and opened it to tenants. The Notice to Quit and Summons are provided at Appendix A and D. The return date of November 12 is fraudulent on the Summons. The Return Date of November 4 on the Case Information is also fraudulent. The Return Date is required by law to be three days from the date the Summons is served. The Summons was not even paid for! There was no docket number on the case! The Chief Clerk refused to upload Appellant’s Appearance and Answer and Special Defenses when she submitted them in court! The Chief Clerk fraudulently indicated it sas filed a week after it was submitted! The Notice to Quit is a TERMINATION OF THE LEASE as of the very day it is served. It is a Federal order. It therefore states that any
____
payments are considered for use and occupancy only. How can they receive HUD payments? Yet the Housing Authority continued to pay them! The Housing Authority refused to “get involved” when it is their job to uphold the rights of the Section 8 tenant! The lease is a HAP Contract. If there is no HAP Contract, there is no lease. The lease cannot deviate from the HAP Contract. It states this right on the tenancy addendum portion of the HAP Contract, which the court has received multiple times, including at the time the Housing Complaint was accepted and administered by the court, including approving fee waiver for the indigent Pro Se Appellant-Defendant. The trial court repeatedly violated Due Process of Law!
a) Thereafter, on /11/2025, Alayna Stone oddly claimed that the Notice To Quit was valid for the Housing Complaint because it was spelled right and properly filled out, despite the fact the LAW specifically emphasizes LEGAL EFFICACY, and laws are cited on the form! She also said it did not need to meet the same criteria for case involving AC48416, which is legal malpractice. December payment was made to the landlord because the court was using tactics to cause her to be evicted for nonpayment. The check had to be left on the management’s desk because Kyle Huckle refused it - despite what the Notice To Quit had right on it, that all future payments would be entered as payment for use and occupancy. Additionally, the landlord continued to receive HAP payments, which meant the contract continues and deviates from the Notice To Quit’s legal efficacy. Additionally, as for another emphasis, the Notice To Quit claimed the rent was not paid for August and September 2024, when in fact they got both the tenant’s portion and the HAP portion. They also have a reputation for frauding billing and were ordered by a court to remove the fraudulent charges amounting to almost $14,000 in November 2022.
____
This leasing of the property by Ansonia State Street is just a tactic to evade from accountability by the real owner - who may be Bozzutos or the City of New Haven.
(i) At the hearing of 2/11, Alayna Stone additionally overrode the legal efficacy of the Notice To Quit by informing the Appellant-Defendant to pay the rent to the landlord and not the court; and she took it upon herself to increase the rent based on a 2024 letter which stated the tenant’s portion of the rent WILL BE $264 effective in 2022, which was PRIOR to the court order for them to remove all the fraudulent charges, which included the fraudulent increast in the tenant’s portion of rent with no ADDENDUM TO THE LEASE, and obviously to compensate for an abatement they were imposed - a very very mild abatement, indeed - considering the continuous breaches of contract! The Appellee-Plaintiff in AC48416 even submitted another self-incriminating piece of evidence, which was the landlord lease, indicating that rent for her portion was $171. That, in fact was the only agreed upon rent documented! She requested hearings and instead was abused more - to include being harmed physically - to include harming her sexually when someone caused her to lose consciousness and her apartment was ransacked when she got up and on another day which was election day when Bob Stefanowski was running for Governor in Connecticut - and also they have continuously damaged and stolen her possessions, including damage to a dresser which was made in VietNam and is an antique, given to her by another tenant - including theft of the authenticity record that was taped to the back of the dresser! It
____
is now in need of repair for the surface due to some sort of adhesive they layered on it. Appellant-Defendant worked on it using a certain scrub tool and linseed oil, yet has not been able to for over a year due to this illegal eviction case and her need to file a housing complaint lawsuit, and additionally due to health problems which she claims were caused by this landlord. Appellant-Deendant of AC48416 has concluded that this the consequence of reporting wrongfulness of the Appellee-Plaintiff.
7. REFERENCE 4. The “Discussion” admits the Housing Complaint Case is also a Summary Process yet the court breaks laws and procedures reflecting what a summary process is, including the right to cross claim in AC48416. The Housing Complaint covers issues of longstanding harm to the Appellant-Defendant and most importantly to note is that she had no confidence in this court to ever issue a housing complaintdue to the corrupted officials that run it, not due to the office clerks who do processing efficiently and honestly. Therefore submitting a housing complaint into court was not only futile but would result in more harm to her. The fact this “Discussion” begins with “it enables landlords to obtain possession of leased premises” is a direct reflection of what takes precidence in eviction processes in this court. Yet the landlord has no legal right to just kick out tenants they feel like kicking out. And yet, certainly that has occurred to the Appelllant-Defendant in the past and she is facing more legal abuse/legal malpractice now.
8. REFERENCE 5. To prevail on the case, the subject matter jurisdiction must be met first. For the Memorandum of Law deliberately not even mentioning what the subject matter jurisdiction is, is obvious intent to evade from justice. This same alleged judge, Alayna Stone, dismissed the Housing
___
Complaint Case without even hearing it! And she claimed lack of subject matter jurisdiction! This is reflective of malicious and vexatious prosecution by this alleged judge as well as the Chief Clerk. Neither serve the public; they serve themselves and the wants of certain elites in this state. Attorney Pitt, the Chief Clerk, PREMATURELY UPLOADED the housing complaint lawsuit and DELIBERATELY DELAYED upload of the illegal eviction case, which is appealed on AC48416. He would not allow the Appellant-Defendant to even mail those complaint packets on AC48452 through certified return receipt mail - which also violates Due Process of Law - and he madesome sort of inept agreement wiuth the marshal so she got paid either two or three thousand dollars for just serving 4 packets to at the local office owned by COLONIAL FOUNTAIN MANAGEMENT (which was her prior landlord at the previous property she lived at 264 Prospect Ave, New Haven - yet they frauded the record with the Housing Authority claiming she lived at 38 Arch Street, which was when she applied for this Section 8 yet they wrongfully set aside her application submitted in 2009), two other local offices (City of New Haven Livable City Initiative, and Elm City Communities who are the Housing Authority). This marshal also served the Secretary ot State,which acted as agent for the Bozzuto Companies, which seems illegal. This marshal also served CT Corporation, which was on the Secretary of State’s website, as agent of service for MEPT, LLC - yet thereafter they altered the record and backdated they were dissolved prior to the service of the Complaint - which obviously the Agent should not of accepted since they were no longer their client SUPPOSEDLY. Bozzutos defaulted on the Housing Complaint Case, yet the Chief Clerk failed to enter a default. Elizabeth Bozzuto has been the Chief Administrative Judge, who had the power to fire the Chief Clerk of Housing, and also tell him what to do. She is retiring, effective this year, almost a year after these housing cases, AC48416 and AC48452 were brought to trial court. It is a known fact that abuse of power in this state is a “normal
____
procedure” by politicians and state officials. “The date of nonpayments” was not even shown in the Notice to Quit and Summons. The Appellee only indicated that Appellant-Defendant failed to pay rent in August and September 2024. Had it not been for this case, the Appellant would not have disccovered they cash her checks rather than deposit them. That is not her fault! She has to pay $15 for each bank check due to the fraudulent processing of her rent payments. It is also important to note that on July 2, the maintenance manager used violence to break in her apartment while she was taking a bath! She almost had a heart attack, screaming for her life! These are people who take pleasure in painting the vaginal areas of all of her underwear black! They damage her clothes where the vaginal areas are!
a) All of this time and expense will be appended to what the Appellant-Defendant has already submitted in the trial court case of the Housing Complaint, AC48452.
9. REFERENCE 6. It is a complete lie that “the only element that is disputed is the amount of rent”. Kyle Huckle is not the Plaintiff. He is the imployee of the Plaintiff. He may even still be on the Bozzuto payroll. He has been employed at this premesis since the Appellant-Defendant moved to 360 State Street. When they attempted to illegally evict the Appellant-Defendant in 2019, they used MEPT Chapel as the plaintiff on the case. Yet all of the employees in the management officer were employees of the Bozzutos and according to property records, Bozzutos quit claimed the property to MEPT Chapel for $1. “MEPT Chapel” is how they described themselves yet their registered name was MEPT, LLC - a foreign-owned company that claimed to be nonprofit like a church with several satanic images displayed throughout the lobby and 6th floor. This dynamic is a distinct reflection of what several YouTube channels have been warning the public about - that the underworld/Order of Barbarians/New World Order
____
Illuminati have planned - to channel their wealth to foreign countries, especially Isreal - so WHEN they cause the USA to lose their planned WW3, they, these traitors to USA, will be able to make Isreal the global powersource after they cause a genocide in USA. These people comprise of the majority of politicians, aka “Deep State”, in the USA now, as well as the “Shadow Government” - all comprising of 1% of the total population - hijacking this country as traitors to the government! These are well-known facts by intelligent people in Russia, China, and even in England (though they are embattled with a major political tug of war, and would be better off with just the Monarchy running the country because they are committed to less government and service to the people)
10. REFERENCE 7 is also false. In REFERENCE 6, the alleged judge claims that rent had been icnreased in January 2022. In this REFERENCE 7, these are the following lies:
a) The tenant portion of payment had only been recorded since January 2023.
i. It can be clearly seen right in the ledger that was a lie. The tenant portion of of payment had always been in the ledger, not that the ledger was even justified. This is a judge who is lying about the evidence entered into court like it was a day at the park! No attorney in their right mind would be so innately dishonest - not even career criminal attorneys.
ii. The ledger shows they were ordered by the court to remove the fraudulent charges, which took place in February 2023 WITH A BALANCE OF ZERO, which means all those fake additional $66/month chargesw were erased due to fraud! This Appellee-Plaintiff attempted to ride off the back of Kyle Huckle, who is one day Property Manager and another day Community Services Manager - claiming Dragana LaCore who changed from
____
Bozzutos, to another company, and now to SOM Living - is Property Manager. Kyle Huckle has been obviously wired to say and do what they want. He answered questions in court with “That’s above my pay grade”. It is beyond comprehension how this governor of the State of Connecticut has been allowed to appoint Alayna Stone as a judge. This is obviously not a legal appointment. She is a paid actor, as was David Wheeler in the Alex Jones case where the Clinton Foundation Criminal Networrk is - Westport, CT. David Wheeler impersonated FBI Supervisory Agent William Aldenburg several times - at the fake Sandy Hook shooting in 2012 and thereafter making appearances in public claiming to be Agent William Aldenburg. He should be in prison for the rest of his life on so many counts of fraud and impersonation! The court also was criminal in conspiring with this trial, most likely laundering crime money that way - and probably also sending it to foreign countries, especially Isreal.
11. REFERENCE 8. Alayna Stone lied again about Appellant-Defendant’s mailing address. In 2019, this Appellee-Plaintiff brought eviction proceedings by not issuing a Pretermination Letter and frauding the ledger. The Appellant-Defendant won the case, proving she had paid the rent timely every month. Her mailing address was PO Box 206514, New Haven - not 360 State Street. She made that clear in her appearance form since they were known to tamper with her mail. In 2019, Appellant-Defendant informed the Housing Authority in writing that her mailing address was only the PO Box. Additionally, she forwarded all of her mail to the PO Box. The USPS refused to continue forwarding her mail after a year. Appellant-Defendant told them they can never put mail in it, yet some employees probably still do. Others do not. The last time she checked her mailbox was a few years ago - during the Bill Gates fraudulent Covid Scare when the death rates were never even higher
____
than birth rates - and it was because a mail employee said to her in the lobby that her mailbox was full of mail. She said to return it all since she has informed people which she keeps in contact with that she only uses her postal mail box. The distribution center on Sargent Drive assured her it would not happen again. Whether it does or not is not known since Appellant-Defendant does not check that postal box.
12. The Subject Matter Jurisdiction of AC48416 is nonpayment of rent for August and September. The rent was paid! It was the same amount paid in July 2024 and that check was presented to the court with the August And September checks. None of these were deposited by the landlord. They were cashed - a similar tactic by Lawrence Mark Hurley who was at the Milford Court for 19 years and obviously stole over a million dollars, since in just a 3-year investigation, he was found to be guilty of embezzleing on over 100 counts - hundreds of thousands of dollars - which were all changed to just one charge larceny and one count forgery by a judge in Middletown. The state police could not appeal if they wanted to; due to the wants of the State’s Attorney Kevin Kane. Why was it that recently Attorney Langhammer sent a letter to Appellant-Defendant’s Appellate Case Manager Attorney Peter Keane and disrespectfully referred to him as Attorney Kane in the letter? Was this some kind of satanic curse by the underworld which runs the State of Connecticut? Is it not obvious that this fake judge Alayna Stone is one of the satanic underworld “chosen” who can say and do whatever she wants because they will all rally behind her and lie and fraud for her and the Hoops & Associates “company”? Are not people realizing the Sandy Hook FAKE shooting profited over one trillion dollars, as orgaqnized by Barack Obama? And those who went along with his fraud were amply rewarded in pay-to-play schemes including writing off all the mortgages of their homes. The Church of Satain is Newtown, CT - and Sandy Hook is a branched-off community of Newtown A similar circumstance with where illicitly-arrested William Dong lived. His parents lost their chain of Chinese restaurants in New York City, due to paying exhorbitant money to sabataging attorneys on the illicit arrest at the University of New Haven. In fact, the money was so free-flowing, Kevin Russo, et al decided to also make a federal case of these lies and commit Double Jeopardy by charging William Dong the same offenses in the federal court. Kevin Russo took over FOR Lawrence Mark Hurley and thereafter was a rewarded a judicial position in New London - and was a great help in covering up the fraudulent Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting. It is a well-known fact now that no children died and this was a fraudulent operation. It is also a well-known fact that Americans mass murdered Americans on September 11, 2001. The Middle East were blamed like my crooked attorney blamed me for running into a sander truck driver who used a spotter so he could position himself on sunny day with bare roads - to slam into me as I was going down the hill on the highway. My only support was my father and I was ashamed of the burden I placed on him. I was criticized by siblings: “You need to forgive and lead him to Jesus”; and “You should do what your attorney tells you to do” and “Hey, you will soon be rich so just ride the wave” and more comments to that affect. He tried to murder me because I told a stalking sex trafficker to leave me alone, he was a pig. They even erected a restaurant named “Pig’s Ear” right where he tried to kill me! I was severely injured and still, it was mainly about the money I was getting and if I had just died, they would get it themselves. That is what Attorney Frederick Kendall wanted and he sold himself to Appellant-Defendant’s mother when her father wasn’t around since he was aware of what her father stood for and would not go along with it. Her father was devestated that her mother did not consult with him first. He would have suggested settling with the insurance company due to the crooked personal injury attorneys ripping people’s lives apart in society.
13. This concludes this 16-page Appellant Defandant’s statement. She had to retype it due to her file being deleted by cyber criminals who work for the underworld in Connecticut. Additionally, her landlord has whimsically informed all tenants on December 19 that they would have an exterminator come to all apartments between 10 am and 1 pm this day, December 22. And thus, the Appellant Defendant needs to break down all of her work on her Motion To Supplement and Deviate in order to prepare for this alleged visit which will probably not even take place since they have done this to her before. It is conceivable that her Motion cannot be uploaded today due to this setback and the need for her to retype this Statement. WTF - hacker!
==============================================================
AC 48416
NHH-CV24-6024196-S : APPELLATE COURT OF CT
ANSONIA STATE
STREET : STATE OF CONNECTICUT
V : HOUSING SESSION
ANNE M. BRADLEY : December 19, 2025
APPELLANT-DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DEVIATE FROM WORD LIMIT AND TO SUPPLEMENT BRIEF APPENDIX
Appellant-Defendant moves this court to supplement brief appendix with documents attached to this motion, pursuant to PB 60-3.
HISTORY
This appeal on this case arose from the trial court’s failure to apply the law to an unjust Eviction Case, claiming she did not pay rent for August and September of 2024 when she proved she had. The Appellee-Plaintiff cashed the checks, rather than depositing them. Summons was hung on her door knob either the evening of October 23 or the morning of October 24, 2024 - which Appellant-Defendant also argued that was the common area and whoever placed it there did not ring her doorbell or knock on her door. Plaintiff had not paid for this Summons and therefore failed to provide docket number on the case. The Chief Clerk also failed to docket the case for a week, which caused the Appellant-Defendant to file her appearance on October 24, 2024
417
and thereafter submit her Answer and Special Defenses. Upon vefifying her
rent checks were deposited by the landlord, the Appellant discovered they only cashed July, August, and September 2024 checks despite having an account with the same bank, Bank of America. Appellant-Defendant attempted to file a cross claim on this summary process, yet the housing court claimed no cross-
claims were allowed. She therefore filed a housing complaint, which was a very stressful and time-consuming project and referrred to the Housing Eviction Case, Ansonia State Street v Anne M. Bradley. Her housing issues have been longstanding, spanning over 13 years, and she listed several defendants including BOZZUTO COMPANIES (since all employees at 360 State Street were their employees. The Obama Administration issued an agreement with Bozzutos upon granting them millions of dollars of “funding”, to include having 50 apartments as Section 8 apartments, and they were inferred as the owners of 360 State Street, which they developed, yet no presence of a title to this property was found in the real estate records and this contract which Bozzutos made with the federal government was removed from the city’s record - all of which the Appellant-Defendant scanned in for her records yet her flash drives were stolen from her. She claimed the City of New Haven Livable City Initiative and the housing authority, Elm City Communities has an alliance with the people affiliated with 360 State Street, which is reflecting a very inept alliance - due to the fact there is no real owner
418
of record; Bozzutos or possibly the city government itself are the real owners, since the city assessors office do not charge them taxes, as relayed and confirmed by the employee at the Assessor’s Office. The first hearing of the housing complaint case took place on October 31, 2024. The woman presiding said she was Alayna Stone and the court recognized her as Alayna Stone, which was fraudulent since this woman was approximately 20 years older than Alayna Stone. Additionally a young man appeared for Hoops & Associates and said he was Attorney Peter Hoops, yet he obviously was not born when Attorney Peter Hoops entered the BAR. The real Alayna Stone appeared at the first hearing of the aforesaid eviction case and made comments which reflected that she was being told what to say and do and was not addressing the gravity of the situation, that the case had no merit since the rent was paid and she was paying that same amount, $198, into the court on the
Housing Complaint Case.. She was focused on evicting the Appellant-Defendant using tricks, including evading from Due Process of Law by ruling on motions without hearing them, to include not getting objections from the Plaintiff on either case, except for two which weres claimed to be an inept objections,
Appellant-Defendant motioned to strike since it was not prepared by the Appellee-Plaintiff in accordance to legal practices. Motion to Strike was denied. Alayna Stone evicted the Appellant-Defendant at 10 am on a Friday, with a 3-day notice, which the Housing Court allows to include weekends,
419
claiming it is a straight 3-day notice. This would make SUNDAY Day 3 if she had her way. Additionally, this order was not uploaded until the afternoon, which the Appellant-Defendant claimed was a typical trick since they knew through cyber crime that she had checked the status of the case at about 10:30 am and there was no change. She was unable to call the court to verify since the CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE, ELIZABETH BOZZUTO, also pancaked another trick, making all calls go to a Centralized Processing Unit and not allowing her to speak to anyone at the courthouse; namely, Lisa, or Courtney, or Yvanna to verifiy the case status.
It was not until after 5pm that Appellant-Defendant discovered that they evicted her and the chief clerk deliberately failed to call her to let her know, despite uploading the order later in the day and also making that day count as Day One since the order was issued in the morning. It was the conclusion of the Appellant-Defendant that not only was Alayana Stone participating in fraudulent actions, she was obviously not even an attorney. Her juris number did not exist in the Juris lookup and she is only shown to have have worked for the Secretary of State and possibly the Attorney General in the State of Connecticut. Appellant=Defendant brought all these issues up in her pleadings, fully aware that the the recordings of hearings is altered by malware before the court reporter prepares the transcripts. She had submitted
requests to remove the malware in order for the court reporter to proceed with
typing transcripts, particularly since Judge Stone made her pay for transcripts
420
in trial court despite the fact she knew the Appellant-Defendant would appeal if necessary, to ascert her rights. The court denied these requests and motions, which were not even objected to by the Appellee-Plaintiff. .
Today, the Appellant-Defendant is also submitting a letter to the housing authority, which includes today’s upldated account of payments into court, appendixed to this motion.
FACTS
1. This motion begins with Page 416.
2. Included with the letter to Housing Authority will be supporting documents - all of which will be provided in attached Appendix. The Subject Matter Jurisdiction was verbatum: nonpayment of rent
for August and September 2024. Nothing more.
3. NO PRETERMINATION LETTER WAS SUBMITTED TO THE APPELLANT-DEFENDANT. It is NOT a Notice To Quit. Appendix A. It does not end the lease; it is a serious warning which allows the Section 8 tenant to respond and access Section 8 records as well as have a hearing with the Housing Authority. . Caaselaw: Presidential Village, LLC v Tonya Perkins, et al. Appendix L. This aforesaid case was not reflective of that. The Appellant had no rights with the Housing Authority. The Housing Authority claimed they would not get invovled, which violates Section 8 Law. Appendix L. Yet Elm City Communities have retained an attorney in AC48452 as well as aforesaid case - in fact they have two attorneys. Attorney
421
Langhammer has a fraudulent appearance as Pro Hac Vice, when he is an in-state attorney. Appendix B. He also claims to be representing “all Appellees” without listing them to coincide with the retrainers he is SUPPOSED to have with each, yet obviously does not. Hoops & Associates altered their appearance at least twice, even adding :360 State Street” yet the Secretary of State altered the record claiming they were dissolved and backdated their ceasing to exist to a date much prior to this case. Attorney Langhammer failed to identify who he represented and the Chief Clerk William Pitt failed to ensure any record on the case was adequate for review.
4. The court allowed this Appellee-Plaintiff to not only serve the Summons - Appendix D - with no docket number or receipt that it was paid, but also delayed this transaction for a week, despite the numerous times the Appellant-Defendant claimed that was abuse of process at the least. Appendix C, Case Information.
a) Appellant claimed this action as well as others this court’s officials have taken, to be Obstruction of Justice.
5. The Return date on the Summons - Appendix A - was entered as November 12. The Return date on the case information - Appendix C - was November 4. This is another reason which makes this case FRAUDULENT, and the chief clerk’s responsibility to determine that the plaintiff prepared and submitted information correctly was deliberately neglected. He was part of an “Ends Justifies Means” plan!
422
a) Default by a party is when they fail to perform their obligations according to law when submitting or responding. From researching this debacle, the Appellant-Defendant has found several conflicting
resources, some of which claim that default is allowed as a tradition when the court permits it - favoring the plaintiff, even allowing a non- appearing plaintiff at a hearing and telling the defendant to argue literally nothing in court - since it is the plaintiff’s responsibility to prosecute the case and stay within the subject matter jurisidiction. Yet it is the Appellant’s logic that what one party is required to do is also the obligation of the other party. It takes two to tango! If someone brings an action against someone, they are the ones who are obligated to establish the case. They cannot do that if they are permitted to not be at the hearing, referring to the upcoming Argument for this case in Appellate Court; requiring the diligent Appellant to argue when the action was taken against her and thus reflects she has to prove she paid the rent when it is the obligation of the Plaintiff to further its cause. She only has to state “I paid the rent for August and September; you have the checks” For the Appellee not to even deposit them is even more self-incriminating evidence. They only cashed them. This aligns with the activity of Lawrence Mark Hurley, who cashed checks and deposited the court money in his personal accounts
423
- hundreds of thousands - probably millions during his 19 years as Prosecutor in the Milford Court. THIS IS A VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS.
b) Appellee-Plaintiff DEFAULTED by entering a Fraudulent Juris Number, Appendix B and E, by issuing an illegal Notice To Quit with No Efficacy, by issuing an unpaid Summons which also had their illegal Juris Number as Pro Hac Vice and also. as already mentioned, having a fraudulent Return Date on the Summons Document and not even mentioning it themselves until they were called out by the Pro Se Appellant-Defendant. Appendix D, Answser to Summons by Appellant-Defendant was detailed. Appendix F. Response to Answer by Appellee-Plaintiff was only “denied” with no detail, no reason.
c) The alleged judge, Alayna Stone, has no Juris number Appendix H in the Juris Lookup. Appendix I. The number which she uses in court does not exist.
6. The case has no merit. The months of August and September were paid. Appendix J. The month of July was paid at the same rent amount and the management marked July rent paid by signing the copy of the check.
a) July 2, 2024 is when the maintenance manager violently broke in Appellant-Defendant’s apartment.
424
Three times this trial court has attempted to rig a nonpayment of rent by the Appellant using tricks.
b) First, Alayna Stone delayed a decision in paying rent into court, delaying a hearing, and upon holding the hearing, refused to take the checks Appendix K which the Appellant-Defendant had cut and was holding onto as apposed to establishing an escrow account. The court refused those payments, telling her she would not have to pay rent into court until March and also VERY ODDLY, this alleged judge increased the rent, despite showing right on the housing Notice of Suit, HM-19, that the court agreed that the rent was $198! Appendix M. Alayna Stone said in court that the landlord deserved their just amount - yet deliberately skipped over December, January and February for that so-called needed money for the landlord - and had the Appellant-Defendant had not set that check on the management’s desk Appendix N and walked out of the office, Additionally, the Housing Complaint, which was approved by Alayna Stone, states right on it in Paragraph 7 COURT ORDER that this Appellee cannot proceed with an eviction. Alayna Stone didn’t even care! This scheme of nonpayment of rent for three months would nefariously “qualify” the housing authority conspirators to stop the Section 8 Funding! And the Chief Clerk is scheming as well, by overriding the clerk’s acknowledgment of payment of rent in
425
November 2025, by having the Deputy Chief Clerk take her payment for this month, December 2025, and also not uploading this payment to the case. Should they get away with this for January, they leave another open door for the the Housing Authority to use that fraudulent information without validating anything - as a means to evict the Appellant. These are all typical tricks used by the Connecticut Courts and the Housing Authority. As mentioned, the Housing Aurhority was ordered by a court to remove almost $14,000 in charges to the Appellant-Defendant who is a Section 8 tenant. They refuse to inform her what court ordered it and refuse to provide the order. Appendix O The Appellee-Plaintiff fraudulently charging the Appellant-Defendant! The reduction in HUD Assistance was probably an abatement.
c) The Housing Authority, which is Elm City Communities - is defendant on the associated Housing Complaint, AC48452, as stated in the Appeal documents. The Housing Authority additionally lied about the Appellant not completing the so-called 65-page Renewal Packet, which she did not even obtain. The aforesaid cases (AC48416 and AC48452) had already commenced and the Housing Authority was well aware they were defendant in AC48452 before they pulled that trick. The Housing Authority already had been notified twice that the Appellant’s only mailing address allowed would be PO Box 206514 due to tampering with her mail at 360 State
426
Street, by the management office [and other unknowns, who even placed a Priority Mail envelope in her mailbox on the premises after the mailman had left - which was from a so-called investigator in Chicago, IL who prepared a fraudulent small claim against against her for AMAZON, which she owed no money to!] There was no tracking information on the tracking number when Appellant looked it up; also confirmed by the Yale Post Office when they looked it up.. That was included in her complaint Appendix, which appears now to be a frauded recorded by the court.
d) And recently, as mentioned, Appendix P, the Housing Court attempts this again by overriding the clerk’s entry of payment on the case for November, and deleting it, and the Deputy Chief Clerk wanted to process this month’s payment and deliberately did not enter the payment on the case. He is responsible for training the clerks - at least in part - and certainly is well aware of that process. Payment into court in January would then result in an opportunity to fraud the record again and allow the Housing Authority to conspire and stop funding, bypassing all procedures and claiming the court’s discretion takes precedence, which is an Ends Justifies Means application, rather than application of the law. Letter to the Housing Authority with attachments is at Appendix P.
The Housing Authority uses various titles such as “360 Management”
e) This $2.2 billion property, 360 State Street, was allegedly sold to
427
Ansonia State Street for only $160 million. Ansonia State Street does not have the legal right to sell it due to only having a Limited Deed and not holding the Title. They also enjoy a nefarious $89 billion mortgage, with the manager claiming that the tenants are collateral as reason to have such a high mortgage.
7. According to the State of Connecticut Law, it is the obligation of the Chief Clerk to enter default judgment, thereby recognizing that the other party has not complied with court requirements and/or orders. Appendix L
a) As a TRADITION, the court only allows default judgment on the defendant, which gives the plaintiff opportunity to evade from its responsibilities and is essentially a “free pass” which disrupts the balance of justice. This tactic provides more opportunity for legal malpractice.
i. Upon Appeal by the Defendant: 1) The Plaintiff becomes the Appellee, which in some respect is similar to a Defendant in trial court; 2) The Appellate Court defines an appeal as a “new action” as if it is a new case; 3) The Appellate Court does not require parties to enter appearances, claiming it, along with the records of the trial court, are all brought to the Appellate Court; 3) Appellant finds this contradictory as to what an appeal is and the obligations of the court to view an appeal; particularly since the Appellate Court has the power to motion unto itself any ruling it
428
may want to rule, to include ruling for Appellant since in this case, SHE PAID THE RENT FOR AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER 2024 as she has every month and proved she had in July 2024; which is the only subject matter of the case.
b) The Appellee-Plaintiff failed to show any diligence, issuing only one objection in the Appeal which was inusffieient, basically making - things up as they go along in its opposition to the Appellant’s Motion To Correct/Rectify the transcript Appendix Q - which was her third attempt motioning this. The Appellate Court, though it has the power to compel, refused to compel trial court, fully knowing that the Appellant had made diligent efforts for the trial court to have the obviously - altered transcript corrected, but what the Appellant claims to be simply removing the malware used to alter the transcript. The Appellee’s opposition claimed, among other things, that the Appellant failed to detail what was wrong with the transcript. In fact, Appellant would have been more detailed using her recording of the hearing, yet Chief Clerk Attorney Pitt or a judge ordered an IT expert to send a signal to her phone, which she had prominently accessible on the table she was sitting at - and disabled the recording function without being transparent on his actions; and immediately thereafter he replaced the court clerk who was taking the recording and made a signal to Alayna Stone, who the Appellant claims is either a very
429
incompentent attorney or most likely just a paid actor rather than a judge. The efforts of the Appellant-Defendant in moving the trial court to correct the transcript became more direct in her third motion, presented through the Appellate Court - by requesting they remove the obvious malware in the recording. No other motion was objected to in trial court by the Appellee-Plaintiff. Alayna Stone denied it. Most motions which she denied did not even have opportunity to be heard.
c) Appellant views an appeal as not a separate action from the case. It is a CONTINUATION OF TRIAL COURT CASE. The court makes no sense in claiming that an appeal is a new action to excuse the Appellee-Plaintiff in defaulting; and then claim it is the same action when addressing matters to the Appellant-Defendant. That is clearly an imbalance. Therefore, the Appellee, who prosecuted this matter, is obligated to motions as a matter of Due Process and hearing of motions. The Appellee-Defendant not only did not respond to motions in trial court yet also enjoyed this dynamic in the Appellate Court - not responding to the Preliminary Statement of Issues, or taking any other responsible action made available through the Appellate Court Process - continuing Attorney Peter Hoops’ excuse of “The court knows what I mean, I don’t need to say anymore - it is your obligation to prove me wrong” This statement was made at trial, along with several other self-incriminating statements - which aligned
430
with the self-incriminating Evidence which he submitted at the trial. This alleged judge, Alayna Stone, deliberately did not hear motions and denied them. This includes her granting fee waiver for Motion to OpenAppendix R in AC48452, the associated case to this one, and immediately with a stroke of the pen denying the Motion To Open without hearing it according to Due Process. This is obstructing justice!.:Letter to Housing Authority, Elm City Communities,Appendix P
8. The total words in this motion are 4,569.
SUMMARY
This case has never had any merit and the court’s use of fraud. The Appellees committed fraud by allowing a young man to claim he was Attorney Peter Hoops on October 31, 2024 on the Housing Lawsuit case. Numerous other abuses as already relayed to the court makes this a disgusting reflection of how deliberately criminal the trial court can be. The Appellate Court should have promptly realized the simple premises of the facts in this Motion to Deviate and Supplement Brief.
“Dirty Pool” is when an experienced player can predict the move of the other player and use tricks to circumvent the other players’ efforts to just play the game. Sports players who have trusted reputations - yet years later they are somehow labeled as being non-compliant and using steroids. This is just a scenario on FRAUD, yet most importantly due to the fact these alleged
431
actions were not addressed at the time they were committed, there are many other underlying suspicions as to what is true and not true - including the possibility of use of blackmail and extortion as Jeffrey Epstein set the pace for in this society of United States.
Appellant-Defendant resents the probability that the court is again showing its intent rather than application of the law; and thereby evict her unlawfully, claiming they can use the “court’s discretion” and later on report they errored after causing this disabled person who paid her rent timely even much more harm than what they already have done to her using legal malpractice and abuse of procedure. Attorneys have oaths. Judges have oaths. They are obligated to administer the law, not their wants.
What also makes this case reflective of legal malpractice is the very fact the rent was paid. Case closed. This landlord tried to do this to her in 2019 - and failed to serve her a PRETERMINATION LETTER. They steal her documents, they inject frauded documents in her cart when she takes these documents with her due to the numerous illegal entries that have taken place for 13 years. There was no initial inspection, yet Dragana LaCore, who still exists here, lied to the Appellant that the inspection would take place in a few
days and therefore the Appellant informed the landlord COLONIAL FOUNTAIN TERRACE, which owns 264 Prospect Avenue, that she would be leaving in 30 days. For those 30 days, Livable City Initiative and Elm City Communities enjoyed not having an inspection on the apartment she was
432
moving to, aforesaid address, 360 State Street. Additionally they deliberately did not change the lock, which gave way to more corruption, to allow whoever had a key to this drug and sex party apartment to illegally enter whenever they felt like it.
What is it going to take for the court to rule in Appellant’s favor? It is all there in black and white, yet even her motions for Dismissal of the Case, for the Appellate Court to rule in her favor - they are all denied and this has no reflection on justice. It has reflection of the court behaving as they did for Lawrence Mark Hurley, who for years stole money from the State of Connecticut and all those around him would be aware of it because books would not be balanced, and just a simple obvious need to check this person’s work, as anyone’s work should be checked/audited did not even exist. He just kept stealing and stealing, forging checks and using accounts which no doubt were established for years. The State Police attempted to do a further investigation - not just a limited 3 years by the judge. But it was denied by the judge despite the obvious probable cause. In fact, if he had not been stealing prior to that, it would have cleared him - but he obviously was stealing and court officials did not care about his criminality and even stuck up for him which is reflective on their unjust standards and practices. Lawrence Mark Hurley took a personal interest in prosecuting the Appellant-Defendant in an abusive arrest made by the University of New Having polic in collaboration with the West Haven police - when all she did was go to the campus to pick up
433
a book which she purchased for her class which was beginning the next day. And Jerald S. Barber made her situation even worse when he promised he would sue the police and university, that she was violated and he felt badly for her. He requested what he obviously knew was her last penny, the $2300 she obtained from a workers compensation case, when she was injured. AND HE STOLE THAT MONEY. He did not do as he promised and she removed him quickly due to his obvious dishonesty. He had that money for two weeks only and yet refused to give it back to her and claimed he deserved it. The case she brought up against him resulted in his deliberately defaulting on the case when she even made sure he would not violate the court’s requirements, she had him subpoena’d. They still allowed him to default! He had his secretary claim he had to stay at home because his daughter was sick, which was an obvious lie since he was getting a divorce or already divorced and his wife had custody. The court did not even care and conspired with him rather than reschedule the hearing - so Judge Robbins could dismiss the case!
Is that what the Appellant is having to suffer with all this time? Yet often when a criminal commits a crime, the court will dismiss the case on a technicality rather than the obvious fact he or she committed the crime. How can a society operate with such dishonesy by the court that justice would really be served, as apposed to “Just Us”? No laws. Only the will of the court to convict or as in this case, to evict, because the Appellant is marked, like the
mafia mark people.
434
WHEREFORE, this Motion by the Appellant, Pro Se, is to Deviate from the maximum word requirement and to Supplement Brief with the aforesaid documents, which are also attached and labled appropriately.
APPENDIX attached
Prepared and Submitted,
THE APPELLANT, PRO SE
_______________________
Anne M. Bradley
IllegalEviction2024
PO Box 206514
New Haven, CT 0652
Phone: 203-508-0858
CERTIFICATION
THIS MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT BRIEF COMPRISES OF 11 PAGES with Appendix of _____pages, It is Pursuant to P.B. §§ 62-7 and 66-3, it is hereby certified that a copy of the foregoing was sent electronically this 12th day of December, 2025, to the following Attorneys who are listed by the Appellate Court:
Lloyd L. Langhammer (Appellate)
JURIS NO. Is oddly different than AC 48416 appearance
LAW OFFICES OF LLOYD L. LANGHAMMER, LLC
18A Granite Street
New London, CT 06320
860-440-3340
HOOPS & ASSOCIATES
19A THAMES STREET
GROTON, CT 06340
PHONE: 860-445-8911
FAX: 860-445-8919
____________________
Anne M. Bradley, Pro Se
435
AC 48416
NHH-CV24-6024196-S : APPELLATE COURT OF CT
ANSONIA STATE
STREET : STATE OF CONNECTICUT
V : HOUSING SESSION
ANNE M. BRADLEY : December 19, 2025
APPENDIX OF APPELLANT-DEFENDANT
Motion to Deviate and Supplement Brief
A. NOTICE TO QUIT
B. APPEARANCE OF ATTORNEY LANGHAMMER
C. CASE INFORMATION
D. SUMMONS & APPEARANCE BY ATTORNEY PETER HOOPS
E. ATTORNEY HOOPS APPEARANCE ON AC48452
F. ANSWER TO SUMMONS
G. APPELLEE’S ANSWER TO SUMMONS
H. ALAYNA STONE’S JURIS NUMBER
I. JURIS LOOKUP INFORMATION
J. APPELLANT-DEFENDANT’S RENT CHECKS FOR AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER 2024
K. APPELLANT-DEFENDANT’S CHECKS PURCHASED TO PAY RENT FOR DECEMBER AND JANUARY INTO COURT - REJECTED
L. LAWS AND CASELAW
M. HOUSING NOTICE OF SUIT, FORM HM-19
436
N. CHECK TO ANSONIA STATE STREET, DECEMBER 2024
O. COURT ORDER TO ANSONIA STATE STREET REMOVE ALMOST $14,000 FROM THE LEDGER OF THE APPELLANT-DEFENDANT
P. APPELLANT-DEFENDANT’S LETTER TO HOUSING AUTHORITY
Q. MOTION FOR RECTIFICATION OF TRANSCRIPT
R. MOTION TO OPEN AC48452
S. COURT’S RULING TO DENY MOTION TO OPEN
# # # # # # # # #
_____________________________
437
Comments