AC48416 STATEMENT FOR ARGUMENT
Link to this blogpost:
https://publiusroots.blogspot.com/2026/05/ac48416-statement-for-argument.html
FINAL VERSION-FINAL VERSION-FINAL VERSION
Appellant’s Oral Argument for Court
AC48416
June 1, 2026
My name is Anne Marie Bradley and I am the Appellant on aforesaid case AC48416.
I am reading what I have typed and realize I am limited to a 20-minute argument. Appellee Hoops & Associates and Attorney Langhammer are allowed not to show up for Argument, allowed not to respond to my Preliminary documents, and allowed not to respond to my Brief. Yet this court would not grant my Motion For Dismissal due to the very fact the case had no merit to begin with in trial court. The trial court ordered them not to issue a Summary Process and were served this order by this same trial court of AC48452 prior to issuing the Summary Process. Alayna Stone and William Pitt play catch me if you can for Elizabeth Bozzuto, who was Chief Judge of Administration of the Judicial Department and therefore their boss. They are desensitized to being lawful, from my observations.
There is no published Oath which judges in Connecticut take anymore. There used to be. As a Pro Se, I emphasize the Attorney’s Oath which is published and made part of at least one of my two briefs, as an opening statement. This includes promising to acknowledge and/or report illegal activity by another attorney when it is discovered.
I am the victim; this is an illegal eviction. Your court must realize they failed to comply on many counts. The Notice to Quit was not valid and the trial court even accepted my housing complaint case reflecting the Notice to Quit was not valid and therefore my housing complaint should be accepted into court. The trial court is obligated to verify all information and not just fly by the seat of their pants and docket the case. They can reject the case which means it is not docketed. They can deny a fee waiver if the case has no merit to go forward. Yet they docketed the trial case of AC48452. They confirmed my rent to be $198 a month. I paid that into court until Abuse of Procedure by Elizabeth Bozzuto stopped me. My request for exemption to e-file was ineptly processed as a means of delay, fully knowing the case was in appeal and they did not want me to appeal.
The Subject Matter Jurisdiction is Limited to the Notice To Quit. They claimed I did not pay rent for August and September 2024; Not only did I pay rent and proved it, but they received the HAP Contract money from the Housing Authority. THE HAP CONTRACT IS THE CONTROLLING LEASE. IT STATES THIS RIGHT ON THE CONTRACT. The Lease Addendum is part of the HAP Contract and also made part of the landlord lease, which cannot have anything in it which contradicts the HAP Contract. They don’t even need to have a lease. I asked why they did that and they said they just want all tenants to have the same, uniform lease as a matter of procedure. There is not even a reference to the HAP contract in that lease, which based on numerous circumstances, is a tool they use to fraud tenants and enjoy a court agreeing to this fraudulent behavior - to claim, for instance, the tenant owes all of the rent. The appellee only submitted the ledger and their lease, which has no legal value, at trial. The burden of proof is on them. I said they failed to prove anything more than that they are frauds since the ledger shows they get HAP payments. THE NOTICE TO QUIT IS A TERMINATION OF THE LEASE. Yet this landlord at 360 State Street is still getting HAP payments to this day! Their idiotic claims there are two leases is deliberately fraudulent.
The trial court kept the fraud spinning rather than administer the law. It is wrong to treat the court as one run by socialism and make up their rules and laws as they go along. The Housing Court Handout begins with an emphasis that they are formal. They follow laws and rules.
I really don’t think Alayna Stone is even an attorney. Her Juris Number as a judge does not show when I search Juris Lookup. I don’t find her in Martindale-Hubble Registry yet she alleges to have received a Juris Doctorate from Yale University. My impression is she is a paid actor. She allowed a woman 20 years older than her to impersonate her at the first hearing I had, which was October 31, 2024 - which should have been sooner since my Complaint was first submitted in September. I do not consider it fair for it to be rejected just because a few more forms should be prepared and submitted. Due to Cyber Crime on my laptop using the wifi where I live at 360 State Street, I greatly struggled with typing forms and submitting documents throughout the trial court cases, which includes this illegal eviction case and the housing complaint case.
****The appellees (Hoops & Associates and Attorney Langhammer) stated they didn’t feel like attending this so-called ARGUMENT. They did not respond to my Preliminary Documents. They did not respond to my briefs. They only occasionally responded with an objection to motions. The court sanctioned them before they violated Due Process because they told the court they would be violating Due Process. A sanction is a punishment for something the entity fails to do; not states they will fail to do it. I suspect they have private or public ways of taking advantage and communicating this case with the court rather than be transparent in front of me. Hoops & Associates uses an out of state appearance when they are in-state. This should have been corrected by the trial court yet apparently the money they give the court for this type of appearance takes precedence over the law.
Argument requires two sides. There are not two sides here. It requires REMARKS. It requires analyzing and pointing out or repudiating a desired inference, FOR THE ASSISTANCE OF THE DECISION-MAKER. Why wasn’t this case dismissed in my favor? Why do I as a Pro Se litigant have to go through all this suffering? Both of my legs had injured hamstrings from just going to Hartford to sit in on Appellate cases to familiarize myself with the process. I had severe pain for days. The marshals were very kind and professional. The clerk was also very kind, answered my questions, was very professional. I am grateful for that. I am grateful for the case managers in both cases, especially in this aforesaid case since I am facing another wrongful eviction in this state and have had to put aside resolving some serious matters (including a $2,000 descrepency on a credit card issued to me by my bank about 2 years ago; which I maintained a zero balance in every month, paying off all charges when the payment was due - until inept charges showed up beginning in June 2025 - the same timeframe I had to go to the hospital and be on an IV of antibiotics and also take oral antibiotics for 24 hours - I was subjected to a severe skin infection which I am still recovering from. I was sick for about 6 months and they said it would take 6 months to a year to fully heal.
By allowing the other party to not show up, is an indicator to me that this is not a fair hearing, in my opinion as a Pro Se litigant.
DEFAULT is committed when the apposing party fails to enter appearance, frauds its appearance, fails to Answer a Complaint, fails to show up in court. I submitted a timely Answer and Apperance on this case, despite the fact the Notice To Quit was illegal and so was the Summons thereafter for the following reasons:
NO PRETERMINATION LETTER; In their attempt to evict me in 2019, the trial court even ruled in my favor due to that and due to the fraudulent billing - resulting in this inept landlord of being ordered to remove all fraudulent charges! Case No. ______ The trial court stated in its oddly lengthy 8 page Memorandum of Law, that all I owed was $40, which was an on-site charge, and the judge was also wrong about. Yet he did not indicate I had a balance of anything more than $40 - when this fraudulent landlord indicated I owed at that time over $8,000.
They were ordered by a court to remove the charges prior to the issuance of the Memorandum Of Law, which is Appendixed to my brief. They obviously appealed it.
This trial court refused to provide me the order to remove charges and even attempted to claim there was no order, that they were just being nice to me. This was shear hogwash said by Kyle Huckle at trial. Obviously they went through appeals on that order because they did not remove the erroneous charges (of excess rent, fraudulent overages, fraudulent bounced checks, and more) until November 2022. They resumed their Modus Operandi of fraudulent billing despite the fact I paid rent - rent which should be $93.20 yet Housing continued to refuse me a hearing for that and many problems here for over 13 years. They have violated Section 8 laws since I moved here in January 2013!
My argument in the housing case appeal elaborates on some of the problems, though with only 20 minutes to argue I was limited with what I could say.
The Summons was illegal for the following reasons:
This Plaintiff Ansonia State Street, was ordered not to issue a summons on my housing complaint case, which this trial court accepted as valid, with merit, and hearable. That order is right on the face of the main document of the complaint packet served them!
No valid Notice To Quit - housing court agreed it was not valid and permitted me to pay rent into court on the previous case, trial court of AC48452.
The Return Date was entered as November 4 on the form, which was NOT three days after it was served, as required by law, and only pivoting off their October 31, 2024 Satanic “masquerade”; and fraudulently entered on the Docket as November 12, which was the date Alayna Stone pivoted off from to issue her decision on the trial court case of AC48452.
My rent was current; I proved it. The ledger was fraudulent. I proved it.
I provided Proof that several times I submitted complaints to this landlord, to the Housing Authority, even to Livable City Initiative - and they only helped make matters worse rather than do anything! I submitted a complaint to the BBB because of this. Bozzutos were the ones who received this property from the City of New Haven for $1. They also received millions of dollars from the Obama Administration - all free money. They had to abide by an agreement, and one of those items in the agreement was to have at least 50 Section 8 portable tenants.
The HAP Contract and the Tenancy Addendum reflect they are portable contracts, which means I have the right to request portability after a year. The Housing Authority lied about this arrangement, later claiming this was project-based units which is more fraud since the the HAP contract is tenant-based, not project-based.
JUDGE’S MEMORANDUM OF LAW IS FRAUDULENT - refer to what I stated in the brief
DELIBERATE FAILURE OF DUE PROCESS OF LAW
DELIBERATELY ALLOWING THE FRAUDULENT APPEARANCE OF HOOPS & ASSOCIATES. The man who appeared claimed he was Attorney Peter Hoops, when he was in his 40’s and Attorney Peter Hoops entered the BAR in 1987, which would make him about 65-70 years old if he attended college right after highschool. It takes 6-8 years to obtain a Juris Doctorate. If he immediately attended college after high school graduation, he would have graduated around 1980. I am 67 years old. I graduated from high school in 1978.
I tried to appeal the other case, as I have stated. Abuse of Procedure and even outright Devil’s Chessboard tactics tripped me up from pursuing an appeal! Elizabeth Bozzuto was obviously the main cause since she was affecting my efforts to be exempt from e-filing., It is obvious that she wanted to rely on cyber crime to manipulate my case and deprive me of my lawful rights! I knew all this would be such a mess in getting my rights! Although when I found out that I had a right to file a housing complaint and was being deceived by the trial court, I demanded they take my carefully typed complaint. It was like pulling hair out of a stone or teeth - in getting it processed. I remained quiet and consistently demanding my rights. Making me submit other forms and rejecting what I had prepared did not stop me. I remained diligent and stated in my submissions that Alayna Stone was not the judge at the hearing on October 31, a hearing they seemed to be affixed on having that date since it violated the rules of court to set a prompt hearing 2 weeks after the court dockets the case. In fact the court in my opinion, intentionally and repeatedly used tactics, and therefore it was legal malpractice. Ansonia State Street was ordered by this same court to not issue a Summons during the disposition of the housing case which the court docketed prior to the Summons - and yet this court allowed this anyway!
The bottom line is they accused me of not paying rent for August and September. I proved I paid rent for July, August and September - all the same amounts. They were obviously abated with a slap on the hand for frauding the ledger for so long and being ordered by a court to remove what was about $8,000 charges in 2019, yet increased to $14,000 in charges when their appealing efforts failed in 2022. This concludes my limited 20 minute argument.
Words: 2346 IllegalEviction2024
Comments