Preview
A
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
Document Scanning Lead Sheet
Jan-07-2014 11:22 am
Case Number: CUD-13-644474
Filing Date: Jan-07-2014 11:20
Filed by: KEITH TOM
Juke Box: 001 Image: 04331838
EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ORDER FOR STAY OF
EXECUTION
NASIR PATEL VS. MARK THOMAS EDWARDS
001004331838
Instructions:
Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.FILE
San Franniens Caine “
Mark Edwards JAN = 7 264
2048 Polk Street . .. -
San Francisco, CA 94109 CLERKVOF THE
Blessingsent2ya@mail.com
SUPERIOR OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
Nasir Patel, ) CUD - 644474
)
Plaintiff, ) Ex Parte Motion to Stay Execution
) of Order/ Obstructing Justice by
v. ) Plaintiff Against of Court
)
Mark Thomas Edwards, ) ORDER DEPT: 501
) JUDGE:
Defendant. ) DATE: 1/8/2014
EX PARTE MOTION FOR STAY OF EXECUTION; ECLARATION IN SUPPORT
THEREOF; POINTSAND AUTHORITIES; SEEKING TEMPORARY STAY
TO: THE COURT AND PLAINTIFFS OF RECORD:
Defendant, Mark Thomas Edwards , respectfully applies for an order of this court, ditectedto PlantiffS to the
Sheiiff's Office ofSan Franciscoandto any other person acting on behalf of, or in concert with to be plaintiffs,
staying execution of the judgment entered on December 24, 2013, and the order of the San Francisco Sheriff
Office on Discovery Grounds of New Evidence that (1) the judgment may be set aside in accordance with the
Motion’s illegality to stipulation for possession per December 24, 2013 and that New Evidence Supporting
Motion for a New Trial (or Vacate the Judgment) exist, which shall be filed in lieu of this application on
constitution grounds of existing violation which shall pending before this court; (2) extreme hardship, in that the
defendant would suffer if the judgment were to be executed at this time; and, (3) that Plaintiff tainted concealed
fabricated and inaccuracy in his motion, (4) that plaintiff lieu of the courts given defendant 3weekly order of
possession plaintiff alter the time period contrary to the courts directed order in “Obstructing AdministrativeOrder of Justice,” (5) that plaintiff and his agents further is further “obstructed the administration of justice”
withholding both this court order in this case and pertinent federal mail of significant important enabling
defendant to execute transition of housing right pursuant to ADA of 1990 to Fair Employment and Housing Act
Govemment Code §12955.8(b), 42 USC 12021, Unuha Civil Rights Act.
Date of January 7, 2014 -
MARK THOMAS EWDARDS
Defendant In Pro Se
DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF MOTION
1, Mark Thomas Edwards , declare:
1. Iam the defendant in the above-referenced matter, and this declaration isin support of my/our application
for a stay of execution of the judgment on December 24,2013 inthermatterhere.
2. Atthe time of the filing of this action, I had lived at the subject premises for only 16 months. My presence
source of income is Social Security Benefits, which totals $770 in bank account transfer per month. Until the time
of my eviction is based on retaliatory treatment and obstructing administrative justice of San Francisco Stabilize
Rent Arbitration Board proceeding tampered with.
3. Although the basis for the eviction was not related to unpaid rent, though primary on existing factors
Non-habitant violations which plaintiff and this agents where under state and federal investigation for slumlord
activities of their building at 2048 Polk Street San Francisco, CA 94109. Since Defendant had become an disable
person Whistle Blower of illegal housing violations reprisal treatment to block in ongoing claims was do through
intimidation, hate crimes on his property and mail theft and tampering to block investigations.4. The writ of execution was purportedly posted by the sheriff on or about January 8th, 2014; however, for
6: am show plaintiff intentionally alteration the court order for time period 3 weeks extended to defendant for
Move out date of January 15,2014 not January 8, 2014 at 6:am for relocation. (See Attached Execution of
Eviction — by San Francisco Sheriff Office)
5. That the stipulation of the record is inaccurate of its stipulation with existing legality technicalities made
by plaintiffto conceal proof “obstructing justice” and “unlawful interference with administrative proceedings”
which permits defendant to challenge new existing evidences concealed. (See attachment plaintiff non-
compliance of services, violations of plaintiff s due process of inadequate filing and hearing ofa motion
proceedings, that A April 25. 2013 Judicial Commission Motion was address in this case against inappropriate
conduct conceming plaintiff manipulation of the judicial process system.
Date of JANUARY 7, 2014
MARK THOMAS EDWARDS
Defendant In Pro PerEX PARTE MOTION—MEMORANDUM OF LAW
For purposes of the stay under §918, it is irrelevant whether an appeal will, in fact,
be brought. CCP §918(c).In Medford v. Superior Court (1983)140CA3d23624019CR2D7,
‘Thecourt stated in dicta that the possibility of loss of back rent or accrued damages
is
not a consequence of granting such relief to the tenant. The landlord gains
sufficient protection from the deposit of the contract rent a sit becomes due.5. The
trial court has discretionary authority under CCP §918(a) to stay execution of any
judgment or order [see Cobyv.Colby(1954)127CA2d602.274P2d417: Buffncear v.
Edmonckon (1861) 17C436] AlhoughCOCP §918 doesnot expressly so provide, the usual
grounds for a request by a tenant for a stay under this statute are the following:
Hardship or other good cause;* To allow time to give notice and be heard on the t
tenant’s application for relief from forfeiture and restoration of the tenancy, under CCP
§1179; and, To allow a full hearing before execution of judgment on Order of
Possession such as noticed motions for a new trial, for judgment notwithstanding
the verdict, and to vacate the judgment.Where new existing evidence shows 18 U'S.C. §1505 was committed by plaintiffand his
agents to block justice from prevailing.
Dated: April 8th, 2013
Respectfully submitted,
Mark Thomas Edwards
Defendant in pro per
EX PARTE MOTION of Defendant Mark Edwards
ORDER
That Good cause appearing: I
TIS ORDERED the Ex Parte Motion for Stay of Execution is hereby GRANTED or /
DENIED.
There shall be no further action taken by plaintiff or by anyone acting for or with plaintiff,
including the Office of the Sheriff for the County of San Francisco to enforce or execute the
judgment herein entered against the defendant inthe above-entitled action until January 15,2013
Dated: January »2014
Judge of the Superior Court.r
[TO (Name and Address):
Mark Thomas Edwards
Broadway Hotel
2048 Polk St, #303
San Francisco, CA 94109
LEVYING OFFICER (Name and Adress}
San Francisco County Sheriff's Office
San Francisco Sheriff Civil Section
41 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett PL
Rm 456 Civil Divison
San Francisco, CA 94102
NAME OF COURT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT or BRANCH COURT, IF ANY
(415) 554-7235
San Francisco - Superior Court
400 McAllister Street California Relay Service Number
San Francisco, CA 94102 (800) 735-2929 TDD or 711
PLAINTIFF COURT CASE NO
Nasir Patel
DEFENDANT CUD136444474
Mark Thomas Edwards
LEVYING OFFICER FILE NO.
Notice to Vacate 2013415341
By virtue of the Writ of Execution for Possession/Real Property (eviction), issued out of the above court, you are hereby ordered to vacate the
premises described on the writ.
Broadway Hotel
Eviction Address: 2048 Polk St, #303
San Francisco, CA 94109
Final notice is hereby given that possession of the property must be turned over to the landlord on or before:
Final notice is hereby given that possession
of the property must be turned over to the Wednesday, January 08, 2014 6:01 AM
Landlord on or before:
Should you fail to vacate the premises within the allotted time, | will immediately enforce the writ by removing you from the premises.
All personal property upon the premises at the time will be turned over to the landlord, who must return said personal property to you
upon your payment of the reasonable cost incurred by the landlord in storing the property from the date of eviction to the date of
payment. If the property is stored on the landlord's premises, the reasonable cost of storage is the fair rental value of the space
necessary for the time of storage. If you do not pay the reasonable storage costs and take possession within fifteen (15) days, the
landlord may either sell your property at a public sale and keep from the proceeds of the sale the costs of storage and of the sale
(1988 CCC), or, if the property is valued at less than $300.00, the landlord may dispose of your property or retain it for his own use.
(715.010(b)(3), 1174 CCP)
If you claim a right of possession of the premises that accrued prior to the commencement of this action, or if you were in
possession of the premises on the date of the filing of the action and you are not named on the writ, complete and file the attached
Claim of Right of Possession form with this office. No claim of right to possession can be filed if box 24a(1) located on the back of
the writ is checked.
Ross Mirkarimi
Sheriff
Sheriffs Authorized Agent
DEC 3 12013
CPM Form 8.32 Originaleect
EJ-130
REDE RRO REE PIO ATTORNEY tame Sate Bar namoar an sees
BROADWAY HOTEL
2048 POLK ST SF CA 94109
reveprone no: 415 260 3905
E-MAIL ADDRESS
ATTORNEY FOR (Name)
IN PRO PER
attorney For [¥ | JUDGMENT CREDITOR
ASSIGNEE OF RECORD.
FAX NO,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALI
STREET ADDRESS,
MAILING ADDRESS:
400
CITY AND ZIP CODE:
BRANCH NAME
FORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
C CALLISTER ST
SAN FRANCISCO 94102
PLAINTIFF: NASIR PATEL
DEFENDANT: MA.
K THOMAS EDWARDS
FOR COURT USE ONLY
WRIT 2] POSSESSION OF
OF vo
SALE
EXECUTION (Money Judgment)
Personal Property
Real Property
CASE NUMBER
CUD-13-6444474
¥_} Limited Civil Case
Small Claims Case
Unlimited Civil Case
Other,
4. Judgment debtor (name, type of legal entity stated in 9.
5.
6.
7.
To the Sheriff or Marshal of the County of: SAN FRANCISCO
You are directed to enforce the judgment described below with daily interest and your costs as provided by law.
is the L¥_] judgment creditor
judgment if not a natural person, and last known
address):
MARK THOMAS EDWARDS
BROADWAY HOTEL
2048 POLK ST SF CA 94109 # 303
Judgment entered on (date):
12/24/13
Judgment renewed on (dates).
. Notice of sale under this writ
alv
bL_}
Joint debtor information on next page.
has not been requested.
has been requested (see next page).
assignee of record
Additional judgment debtors on next page
4
11. Total judgment
memo CCP 685.090) ..... .
13. Subtotal (add 11 and 12)
14, Credits
15. Subtotal (subtract 14 from 13)
17. Fee for issuance of writ
18. Total (add 15, 16, and 17)
19, Levying officer:
(a) Add daily interest from date of writ
(at the legal rate on 15) (not on
GC 6103.5 fees) of.
(b) Pay directly to court costs included in
11 and 17 (GC 6103.5, 68637,
CCP 699.520(i))
12. Costs after judgment (per filed order or
46. Interest after judgment (per filed affidavit
CCP 685,050) (not on GC 6103.5 fees)
. To any registered process server: You are authorized to serve this writ only in accord with CCP 699.080 or CCP 715.040.
. (Name): NASIR PATEL
whose address is shown on this form above the court's name.
See next page for information on real or personal property to be
delivered under a writ of possession or sold under a writ of sale.
10, This writ is issued on a sister-state judgment.
$ 0.00
$ 0.00
20. [_] The amounts called for in items 11-19 are different for each debtor.
These amounts are stated for each debtor onf Attachment 20.
Issued on (date):
DEC 4 2015
Cierk, by
CLERK os THE Soe
, Deputy
NOTICE TO PERSON SERVED: SEE NEXT PAGE FOR IMPORTANT ine OE on) i y V U
Page 1 of 2
Form Approved for Oplicnat Use:
Judicial Counei! of California
4-130 Rev, January 1, 2012}
WRIT OF EXECUTION
Code of Civil Procedure, §§ 699.520, 712.070. 715.010
Government Code, § 6103.5
www.couns.ca.govCLAIMANT OR CLAIMANT'S ATTORNEY (Mame and Address) TELEPHONE NO. FOR COURT USE ONLY
ATTORNEY FOR (ame)
NAME OF COURT: San Francisco - Superior Court
STREET ADORESS 400 McAllister Street
MAILING ADORESS
city ano zip cove: San Francisco, CA 94102
BRANCH NAME.
PLAINTIFF
Nasir Patel
DEFENDANT:
Mark Thomas Edwards
Fd
CLAIM OF RIGHT TO POSSESSION case NuMBER 2013415341
AND NOTICE OF HEARING CUD136444474
NOTICE TO LEVYING OFFICER:
[1 cisim granted ~[_] Ciaim denied
Complete this form only if ALL of these statements are true:
1. You are NOT named in the accompanying form called Writ of Possession.
2. You occupied the premises on or before the date the unlawful detainer
(eviction) action was filed. (The date is in the accompanying Writ of
Possession.)
3. You still occupy the premises.
4. A Prejudgment Claim of Right to Possession form was NOT served with
the Summons and Complaint.
Clerk, by
(For tena thee use ont)
‘Completed form was received on
Date; Time:
| DECLARE THE FOLLOWING UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY: By
1. My name is (specify): Le
2. | reside at (street address, unit No., city and ZIP code):
3. The address of "the premises" subject to this claim is (address):
4. On (insert date): } the landlord or the landlord's authorized agent filed a complaint to recover
possession of the premises. (This date is in the accompanying Writ of Possession.)
5. | occupied the premises on the date the complaint was filed (the date in item 4). | have continued to occupy the premises ever since.
6. | was at least 18 years of age on the date the complaint was filed (the date in item 4).
7. | claim a right to possession of the premises because | occupied the premises on the date the complaint was filed (the date in
item 4).
8. | was not named in the Writ of Possession.
9. | understand that if | make this claim of possession, a COURT HEARING will be held to decide whether my claim will be granted
10. (Filing fee) To obtain a court hearing on my claim, | understand that after | present this form to the levying officer | must go to the
court and pay a filing fee of $ or file with the court the form "Application for Waiver of Court Fees and
Costs." | understand that if | don’t pay the filing fee or file the form for waiver of court fees within two court days, the court will
immediately deny my claim.
11. (Immediate court hearing unless you deposit 15 days’ rent) To obtain a court hearing on my claim, | understand | must also deliver
to the court a copy of this completed claim form or a receipt from the levying officer. | also understand the date of my hearing will
be set immediately if | don’t deliver to the court an amount equal to 15 days’ rent.
(Continued on reverse)
CPI [Rev January 1, 1991] [weer Seo | CoM aoe oe FeeennsioN Code of Civil Procedure, §§ 716.010, 718,020, 1174.3
282344350 JONES ST - HOMELESS STORAGE
RULES AND REGULATONS (REVISED)
The 350 Jones St Homeless Storage Facility accepts ONLY clothing and shoes and requires
that all items be in an acceptable container, large plastic bags, duffle bags, back packs.
Revision 9/20/11>
The following items can not be stored at this facility:
Alcohol e Drugs & Drug e Weapons of any e Glass
Paraphernalia kind .
Food or e Combustibles or © Pillows e Toiletries
Drink Flammabies e Paper items e Electronics or
(books, appliances
paperwork, etc.
Any other item that does not meet this criteria or that poses a safety risk by facility
management.
of
The following actions may result in a denial of service at this facility:
Threats e Violence of any kind «Abusive language
Profanity e Solicitation of goods or e Loitering and/or sleeping
drugs in front of facility
Stealing e Being under the influence, usage or sale of alcohol or other
illegal drugs on facility.
VIOLATIONS MAY RESULT IN A PERMANENT BAN FROM THE FACILITY,
NOTIFICATION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND REMOVAL OF ALL STORED ITEMS.
This policy applies to ALL clients of the 350 Homeless Storage Facility. A six-month (180
day) limit exists for storage at this facility. After six months of storage has expired, you may
return to this facility and request additional storage after a period of 90 days has elapsed
from the end of the first six month storage period, provided that space is available and that
you agree to comply will all the rules and regulations of this facility, as may be amended
from time to time.
Access is limited to one entry per day. However, if you are taking your belongings to the
laundry, you may take your clothes to wash and return later that day to have your cleaned
clothes retumed to storage. You are invited to speak with staff if you have a special need
requiring an accommodation.2/20/43
BROADWAY HOTEL
2048 POLK ST SE CA 94109
415 260 3905
PATEL VS EDWARDS CASE # CUD-13-644474
TO: MARK THOMAS EDWARDS
BROADWAY HOTEL
2048 POLK ST SE CA 94109 # 303
FROM: BROADWAY HOTEL
NASIR PATEL
2048 POLK ST SF CA 94109
415 260 3905
You are Hereby Notified Of Ex Parte Hearing at the Superior Court of California,
400 Mc Callister st sf ca 94102 in Dept 561 at 11 AM on December 23, 2013,
Le
a we
NASIR PATEL27
28
2046 Polk Street 9 B
an Francisco, CA 94109 sere!
Telephone: (415) 260-3905 i
WC 23 2013
K CF ya GOURT
NASIR PATEL ENPORSE!
Plaintiff INPRO PER CLER
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY - LIMITED CIVIL JURISDICTION
NASIR PATEL,
No. CUD-13-644474
Plaintiff,
EX PARTE
vs. APPLICATION FOR ENTRY OF
JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO
MARK THOMAS EDWARDS, STIPULATION AND SUPPORTING
Defendant, DECLARATIONS
Date: DECEMBER 23, 2013
Time: 11:00 a.m.
Dept: 501
Plaintiff, NASIR PATEL in pro per, hereby applies before this Court on DECEMBER 23,
2013, at 11:00 a.m., in the Law and Motion Department, Room 501, for entry of Judgment
Pursuant to Stipulation. This application is made pursuant to the terms of the Stipulation for
Entry of Judgment entered into on APRIL 25, 2013, executed by the parties and filed with the
Court thereafter on APRIL 25, 2013.
By the terms of the parties Stipulation, defendant agreed to vacate the Defendant failed to
vacate on DECEMBER 1, 2013 and continues to reside in the unit.
EXPAF VE APPLICATION FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO STIPULATION 1By the terms of the parties Stipulation, defendant agreed that in the event that he failed to
timely make agreed payments the parties authorize this Court to take the following action: Upon |
Court days written notice via HAND DELIVERY to defendant , plaintiff could seek an exparte
application, for Judgment Pursuant to Stipulation, for possession of the premises from defendant
and all occupants in possession.
Pursuant the terms of the Stipulation Plaintiff now seeks entry of judgment for restitution
of the premises.
Dated: LLLL £/09
NASIR PATEL
Plaintiff in pro per
DECLARATION OF PLAINTIFF'S ATTORNEY IN SUPPORT
OF ENTRY OF JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO STIPULATION
I, NASIR PATEL declare as follows:
1. 1 am the plaintiff in the entitled action.
2. This is an unlawful detainer action for nonpayment of rent involving residential
premises. The parties entered into a Stipulation for Entry of Judgment on APRIL 25, 2013 and
filed it with the Court on APRIL 25, 2013. A true and exact copy of said Stipulation for Entry of
Judgment, is attached, marked “Exhibit A,” and incorporated by reference herein.
3. By the terms of the parties Stipulation, defendant agreed to vacate the unit on or
before DECEMBER 1, 2013.
4. Defendant failed vacate the unit on or before DECEMBER 1, 2013, defendant,
EXPARTE APPLICATION FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT. PURSUANT TO STIPULATION 25. On DECEMBER 20, 2013, I sent a confirming HAND DELIVERY PERSONAL
notice to defendant of my intent to submit this exparte application on DECEMBER 23, 2013, at
11:00 a.m., at 400 McAllister Street, San Francisco, in Department 501 because defendant had
not vacated the unit on DECEMBER 1. 2013 as agreed in the parties settlement. A true and exact
copy said notice is attached, marked “Exhibit B,” and incorporated by reference herein.
6. Under these circumstances, plaintiff requests that this Court enter judgment against
Defendant MARK THOMAS EDWARDS, for restitution of possession of the premises located
at 2048 Polk Street, #303, San Francisco, California 94109.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration was executed in the City and County of San
Francisco, State of California.
paea: 72Z/ Lofts
NASIR PATEL
Plaintiff in pro per
EXPARTE APPLICATION FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO STIPULATION 3XK
Mark Edwards
In Pro Se - Litigation
2048 Polk Street #303
San Francisco, CA 94109
4/25/2013 RECEIVED
APR 25 2013
Attn: Commission on Judicial Performance COMMISSION ON
JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE
455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 14400
San Francisco, CA 94102-3660
Re: File Review — April 11, 2013
Nasir Patel vs. Mark Edwards
Case No: CUD-13-644474
Pretrial Procedures-“‘Settlement Conference 4/18/13”
UPDATE ADDITION-
Did this Judicial Commission authorize the Pretrial to commit “prejudice structural error”
In illegal defendant his right to jury trial, denial of discovery rights presentation by counsel
without appropriate 24 hour notice motion to Superior Court APPEAR 109?
Defendant Edwards never waived his rights to Jury that presently being held department 608
Of Superior Court, nor did he waive his rights to discovery.
The entire proceedings is a blatant miscarriage of Justice pursuant to U.S. v. Coppola (2008)
671 F.3 220, 225-229.
This a clear examine of Kangaroo injustice regarding civil rights toward people of color.
Defendant have several motions pending for discovery and CCP §170.0 showing the pretrial
judge went behind the record as they did April 5, 2013 and April 11, 2013 scheduling court dates
to defeat defendants motions.This is a clear mockery of justice and a total sham of the integrity of the Judicial Process System
in San Francisco.
This show “disparate impact” is still covertly implemented.
Respectfully Submitted,
Zon Ks
MARK EDWARDS
CLAIMANT
Preview
A SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO Document Scanning Lead Sheet Jan-07-2014 11:22 am Case Number: CUD-13-644474 Filing Date: Jan-07-2014 11:20 Filed by: KEITH TOM Juke Box: 001 Image: 04331838 EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ORDER FOR STAY OF EXECUTION NASIR PATEL VS. MARK THOMAS EDWARDS 001004331838 Instructions: Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.FILE San Franniens Caine “ Mark Edwards JAN = 7 264 2048 Polk Street . .. - San Francisco, CA 94109 CLERKVOF THE Blessingsent2ya@mail.com SUPERIOR OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO Nasir Patel, ) CUD - 644474 ) Plaintiff, ) Ex Parte Motion to Stay Execution ) of Order/ Obstructing Justice by v. ) Plaintiff Against of Court ) Mark Thomas Edwards, ) ORDER DEPT: 501 ) JUDGE: Defendant. ) DATE: 1/8/2014 EX PARTE MOTION FOR STAY OF EXECUTION; ECLARATION IN SUPPORT THEREOF; POINTSAND AUTHORITIES; SEEKING TEMPORARY STAY TO: THE COURT AND PLAINTIFFS OF RECORD: Defendant, Mark Thomas Edwards , respectfully applies for an order of this court, ditectedto PlantiffS to the Sheiiff's Office ofSan Franciscoandto any other person acting on behalf of, or in concert with to be plaintiffs, staying execution of the judgment entered on December 24, 2013, and the order of the San Francisco Sheriff Office on Discovery Grounds of New Evidence that (1) the judgment may be set aside in accordance with the Motion’s illegality to stipulation for possession per December 24, 2013 and that New Evidence Supporting Motion for a New Trial (or Vacate the Judgment) exist, which shall be filed in lieu of this application on constitution grounds of existing violation which shall pending before this court; (2) extreme hardship, in that the defendant would suffer if the judgment were to be executed at this time; and, (3) that Plaintiff tainted concealed fabricated and inaccuracy in his motion, (4) that plaintiff lieu of the courts given defendant 3weekly order of possession plaintiff alter the time period contrary to the courts directed order in “Obstructing AdministrativeOrder of Justice,” (5) that plaintiff and his agents further is further “obstructed the administration of justice” withholding both this court order in this case and pertinent federal mail of significant important enabling defendant to execute transition of housing right pursuant to ADA of 1990 to Fair Employment and Housing Act Govemment Code §12955.8(b), 42 USC 12021, Unuha Civil Rights Act. Date of January 7, 2014 - MARK THOMAS EWDARDS Defendant In Pro Se DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF MOTION 1, Mark Thomas Edwards , declare: 1. Iam the defendant in the above-referenced matter, and this declaration isin support of my/our application for a stay of execution of the judgment on December 24,2013 inthermatterhere. 2. Atthe time of the filing of this action, I had lived at the subject premises for only 16 months. My presence source of income is Social Security Benefits, which totals $770 in bank account transfer per month. Until the time of my eviction is based on retaliatory treatment and obstructing administrative justice of San Francisco Stabilize Rent Arbitration Board proceeding tampered with. 3. Although the basis for the eviction was not related to unpaid rent, though primary on existing factors Non-habitant violations which plaintiff and this agents where under state and federal investigation for slumlord activities of their building at 2048 Polk Street San Francisco, CA 94109. Since Defendant had become an disable person Whistle Blower of illegal housing violations reprisal treatment to block in ongoing claims was do through intimidation, hate crimes on his property and mail theft and tampering to block investigations.4. The writ of execution was purportedly posted by the sheriff on or about January 8th, 2014; however, for 6: am show plaintiff intentionally alteration the court order for time period 3 weeks extended to defendant for Move out date of January 15,2014 not January 8, 2014 at 6:am for relocation. (See Attached Execution of Eviction — by San Francisco Sheriff Office) 5. That the stipulation of the record is inaccurate of its stipulation with existing legality technicalities made by plaintiffto conceal proof “obstructing justice” and “unlawful interference with administrative proceedings” which permits defendant to challenge new existing evidences concealed. (See attachment plaintiff non- compliance of services, violations of plaintiff s due process of inadequate filing and hearing ofa motion proceedings, that A April 25. 2013 Judicial Commission Motion was address in this case against inappropriate conduct conceming plaintiff manipulation of the judicial process system. Date of JANUARY 7, 2014 MARK THOMAS EDWARDS Defendant In Pro PerEX PARTE MOTION—MEMORANDUM OF LAW For purposes of the stay under §918, it is irrelevant whether an appeal will, in fact, be brought. CCP §918(c).In Medford v. Superior Court (1983)140CA3d23624019CR2D7, ‘Thecourt stated in dicta that the possibility of loss of back rent or accrued damages is not a consequence of granting such relief to the tenant. The landlord gains sufficient protection from the deposit of the contract rent a sit becomes due.5. The trial court has discretionary authority under CCP §918(a) to stay execution of any judgment or order [see Cobyv.Colby(1954)127CA2d602.274P2d417: Buffncear v. Edmonckon (1861) 17C436] AlhoughCOCP §918 doesnot expressly so provide, the usual grounds for a request by a tenant for a stay under this statute are the following: Hardship or other good cause;* To allow time to give notice and be heard on the t tenant’s application for relief from forfeiture and restoration of the tenancy, under CCP §1179; and, To allow a full hearing before execution of judgment on Order of Possession such as noticed motions for a new trial, for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and to vacate the judgment.Where new existing evidence shows 18 U'S.C. §1505 was committed by plaintiffand his agents to block justice from prevailing. Dated: April 8th, 2013 Respectfully submitted, Mark Thomas Edwards Defendant in pro per EX PARTE MOTION of Defendant Mark Edwards ORDER That Good cause appearing: I TIS ORDERED the Ex Parte Motion for Stay of Execution is hereby GRANTED or / DENIED. There shall be no further action taken by plaintiff or by anyone acting for or with plaintiff, including the Office of the Sheriff for the County of San Francisco to enforce or execute the judgment herein entered against the defendant inthe above-entitled action until January 15,2013 Dated: January »2014 Judge of the Superior Court.r [TO (Name and Address): Mark Thomas Edwards Broadway Hotel 2048 Polk St, #303 San Francisco, CA 94109 LEVYING OFFICER (Name and Adress} San Francisco County Sheriff's Office San Francisco Sheriff Civil Section 41 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett PL Rm 456 Civil Divison San Francisco, CA 94102 NAME OF COURT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT or BRANCH COURT, IF ANY (415) 554-7235 San Francisco - Superior Court 400 McAllister Street California Relay Service Number San Francisco, CA 94102 (800) 735-2929 TDD or 711 PLAINTIFF COURT CASE NO Nasir Patel DEFENDANT CUD136444474 Mark Thomas Edwards LEVYING OFFICER FILE NO. Notice to Vacate 2013415341 By virtue of the Writ of Execution for Possession/Real Property (eviction), issued out of the above court, you are hereby ordered to vacate the premises described on the writ. Broadway Hotel Eviction Address: 2048 Polk St, #303 San Francisco, CA 94109 Final notice is hereby given that possession of the property must be turned over to the landlord on or before: Final notice is hereby given that possession of the property must be turned over to the Wednesday, January 08, 2014 6:01 AM Landlord on or before: Should you fail to vacate the premises within the allotted time, | will immediately enforce the writ by removing you from the premises. All personal property upon the premises at the time will be turned over to the landlord, who must return said personal property to you upon your payment of the reasonable cost incurred by the landlord in storing the property from the date of eviction to the date of payment. If the property is stored on the landlord's premises, the reasonable cost of storage is the fair rental value of the space necessary for the time of storage. If you do not pay the reasonable storage costs and take possession within fifteen (15) days, the landlord may either sell your property at a public sale and keep from the proceeds of the sale the costs of storage and of the sale (1988 CCC), or, if the property is valued at less than $300.00, the landlord may dispose of your property or retain it for his own use. (715.010(b)(3), 1174 CCP) If you claim a right of possession of the premises that accrued prior to the commencement of this action, or if you were in possession of the premises on the date of the filing of the action and you are not named on the writ, complete and file the attached Claim of Right of Possession form with this office. No claim of right to possession can be filed if box 24a(1) located on the back of the writ is checked. Ross Mirkarimi Sheriff Sheriffs Authorized Agent DEC 3 12013 CPM Form 8.32 Originaleect EJ-130 REDE RRO REE PIO ATTORNEY tame Sate Bar namoar an sees BROADWAY HOTEL 2048 POLK ST SF CA 94109 reveprone no: 415 260 3905 E-MAIL ADDRESS ATTORNEY FOR (Name) IN PRO PER attorney For [¥ | JUDGMENT CREDITOR ASSIGNEE OF RECORD. FAX NO, SUPERIOR COURT OF CALI STREET ADDRESS, MAILING ADDRESS: 400 CITY AND ZIP CODE: BRANCH NAME FORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO C CALLISTER ST SAN FRANCISCO 94102 PLAINTIFF: NASIR PATEL DEFENDANT: MA. K THOMAS EDWARDS FOR COURT USE ONLY WRIT 2] POSSESSION OF OF vo SALE EXECUTION (Money Judgment) Personal Property Real Property CASE NUMBER CUD-13-6444474 ¥_} Limited Civil Case Small Claims Case Unlimited Civil Case Other, 4. Judgment debtor (name, type of legal entity stated in 9. 5. 6. 7. To the Sheriff or Marshal of the County of: SAN FRANCISCO You are directed to enforce the judgment described below with daily interest and your costs as provided by law. is the L¥_] judgment creditor judgment if not a natural person, and last known address): MARK THOMAS EDWARDS BROADWAY HOTEL 2048 POLK ST SF CA 94109 # 303 Judgment entered on (date): 12/24/13 Judgment renewed on (dates). . Notice of sale under this writ alv bL_} Joint debtor information on next page. has not been requested. has been requested (see next page). assignee of record Additional judgment debtors on next page 4 11. Total judgment memo CCP 685.090) ..... . 13. Subtotal (add 11 and 12) 14, Credits 15. Subtotal (subtract 14 from 13) 17. Fee for issuance of writ 18. Total (add 15, 16, and 17) 19, Levying officer: (a) Add daily interest from date of writ (at the legal rate on 15) (not on GC 6103.5 fees) of. (b) Pay directly to court costs included in 11 and 17 (GC 6103.5, 68637, CCP 699.520(i)) 12. Costs after judgment (per filed order or 46. Interest after judgment (per filed affidavit CCP 685,050) (not on GC 6103.5 fees) . To any registered process server: You are authorized to serve this writ only in accord with CCP 699.080 or CCP 715.040. . (Name): NASIR PATEL whose address is shown on this form above the court's name. See next page for information on real or personal property to be delivered under a writ of possession or sold under a writ of sale. 10, This writ is issued on a sister-state judgment. $ 0.00 $ 0.00 20. [_] The amounts called for in items 11-19 are different for each debtor. These amounts are stated for each debtor onf Attachment 20. Issued on (date): DEC 4 2015 Cierk, by CLERK os THE Soe , Deputy NOTICE TO PERSON SERVED: SEE NEXT PAGE FOR IMPORTANT ine OE on) i y V U Page 1 of 2 Form Approved for Oplicnat Use: Judicial Counei! of California 4-130 Rev, January 1, 2012} WRIT OF EXECUTION Code of Civil Procedure, §§ 699.520, 712.070. 715.010 Government Code, § 6103.5 www.couns.ca.govCLAIMANT OR CLAIMANT'S ATTORNEY (Mame and Address) TELEPHONE NO. FOR COURT USE ONLY ATTORNEY FOR (ame) NAME OF COURT: San Francisco - Superior Court STREET ADORESS 400 McAllister Street MAILING ADORESS city ano zip cove: San Francisco, CA 94102 BRANCH NAME. PLAINTIFF Nasir Patel DEFENDANT: Mark Thomas Edwards Fd CLAIM OF RIGHT TO POSSESSION case NuMBER 2013415341 AND NOTICE OF HEARING CUD136444474 NOTICE TO LEVYING OFFICER: [1 cisim granted ~[_] Ciaim denied Complete this form only if ALL of these statements are true: 1. You are NOT named in the accompanying form called Writ of Possession. 2. You occupied the premises on or before the date the unlawful detainer (eviction) action was filed. (The date is in the accompanying Writ of Possession.) 3. You still occupy the premises. 4. A Prejudgment Claim of Right to Possession form was NOT served with the Summons and Complaint. Clerk, by (For tena thee use ont) ‘Completed form was received on Date; Time: | DECLARE THE FOLLOWING UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY: By 1. My name is (specify): Le 2. | reside at (street address, unit No., city and ZIP code): 3. The address of "the premises" subject to this claim is (address): 4. On (insert date): } the landlord or the landlord's authorized agent filed a complaint to recover possession of the premises. (This date is in the accompanying Writ of Possession.) 5. | occupied the premises on the date the complaint was filed (the date in item 4). | have continued to occupy the premises ever since. 6. | was at least 18 years of age on the date the complaint was filed (the date in item 4). 7. | claim a right to possession of the premises because | occupied the premises on the date the complaint was filed (the date in item 4). 8. | was not named in the Writ of Possession. 9. | understand that if | make this claim of possession, a COURT HEARING will be held to decide whether my claim will be granted 10. (Filing fee) To obtain a court hearing on my claim, | understand that after | present this form to the levying officer | must go to the court and pay a filing fee of $ or file with the court the form "Application for Waiver of Court Fees and Costs." | understand that if | don’t pay the filing fee or file the form for waiver of court fees within two court days, the court will immediately deny my claim. 11. (Immediate court hearing unless you deposit 15 days’ rent) To obtain a court hearing on my claim, | understand | must also deliver to the court a copy of this completed claim form or a receipt from the levying officer. | also understand the date of my hearing will be set immediately if | don’t deliver to the court an amount equal to 15 days’ rent. (Continued on reverse) CPI [Rev January 1, 1991] [weer Seo | CoM aoe oe FeeennsioN Code of Civil Procedure, §§ 716.010, 718,020, 1174.3 282344350 JONES ST - HOMELESS STORAGE RULES AND REGULATONS (REVISED) The 350 Jones St Homeless Storage Facility accepts ONLY clothing and shoes and requires that all items be in an acceptable container, large plastic bags, duffle bags, back packs. Revision 9/20/11> The following items can not be stored at this facility: Alcohol e Drugs & Drug e Weapons of any e Glass Paraphernalia kind . Food or e Combustibles or © Pillows e Toiletries Drink Flammabies e Paper items e Electronics or (books, appliances paperwork, etc. Any other item that does not meet this criteria or that poses a safety risk by facility management. of The following actions may result in a denial of service at this facility: Threats e Violence of any kind «Abusive language Profanity e Solicitation of goods or e Loitering and/or sleeping drugs in front of facility Stealing e Being under the influence, usage or sale of alcohol or other illegal drugs on facility. VIOLATIONS MAY RESULT IN A PERMANENT BAN FROM THE FACILITY, NOTIFICATION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND REMOVAL OF ALL STORED ITEMS. This policy applies to ALL clients of the 350 Homeless Storage Facility. A six-month (180 day) limit exists for storage at this facility. After six months of storage has expired, you may return to this facility and request additional storage after a period of 90 days has elapsed from the end of the first six month storage period, provided that space is available and that you agree to comply will all the rules and regulations of this facility, as may be amended from time to time. Access is limited to one entry per day. However, if you are taking your belongings to the laundry, you may take your clothes to wash and return later that day to have your cleaned clothes retumed to storage. You are invited to speak with staff if you have a special need requiring an accommodation.2/20/43 BROADWAY HOTEL 2048 POLK ST SE CA 94109 415 260 3905 PATEL VS EDWARDS CASE # CUD-13-644474 TO: MARK THOMAS EDWARDS BROADWAY HOTEL 2048 POLK ST SE CA 94109 # 303 FROM: BROADWAY HOTEL NASIR PATEL 2048 POLK ST SF CA 94109 415 260 3905 You are Hereby Notified Of Ex Parte Hearing at the Superior Court of California, 400 Mc Callister st sf ca 94102 in Dept 561 at 11 AM on December 23, 2013, Le a we NASIR PATEL27 28 2046 Polk Street 9 B an Francisco, CA 94109 sere! Telephone: (415) 260-3905 i WC 23 2013 K CF ya GOURT NASIR PATEL ENPORSE! Plaintiff INPRO PER CLER SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY - LIMITED CIVIL JURISDICTION NASIR PATEL, No. CUD-13-644474 Plaintiff, EX PARTE vs. APPLICATION FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO MARK THOMAS EDWARDS, STIPULATION AND SUPPORTING Defendant, DECLARATIONS Date: DECEMBER 23, 2013 Time: 11:00 a.m. Dept: 501 Plaintiff, NASIR PATEL in pro per, hereby applies before this Court on DECEMBER 23, 2013, at 11:00 a.m., in the Law and Motion Department, Room 501, for entry of Judgment Pursuant to Stipulation. This application is made pursuant to the terms of the Stipulation for Entry of Judgment entered into on APRIL 25, 2013, executed by the parties and filed with the Court thereafter on APRIL 25, 2013. By the terms of the parties Stipulation, defendant agreed to vacate the Defendant failed to vacate on DECEMBER 1, 2013 and continues to reside in the unit. EXPAF VE APPLICATION FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO STIPULATION 1By the terms of the parties Stipulation, defendant agreed that in the event that he failed to timely make agreed payments the parties authorize this Court to take the following action: Upon | Court days written notice via HAND DELIVERY to defendant , plaintiff could seek an exparte application, for Judgment Pursuant to Stipulation, for possession of the premises from defendant and all occupants in possession. Pursuant the terms of the Stipulation Plaintiff now seeks entry of judgment for restitution of the premises. Dated: LLLL £/09 NASIR PATEL Plaintiff in pro per DECLARATION OF PLAINTIFF'S ATTORNEY IN SUPPORT OF ENTRY OF JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO STIPULATION I, NASIR PATEL declare as follows: 1. 1 am the plaintiff in the entitled action. 2. This is an unlawful detainer action for nonpayment of rent involving residential premises. The parties entered into a Stipulation for Entry of Judgment on APRIL 25, 2013 and filed it with the Court on APRIL 25, 2013. A true and exact copy of said Stipulation for Entry of Judgment, is attached, marked “Exhibit A,” and incorporated by reference herein. 3. By the terms of the parties Stipulation, defendant agreed to vacate the unit on or before DECEMBER 1, 2013. 4. Defendant failed vacate the unit on or before DECEMBER 1, 2013, defendant, EXPARTE APPLICATION FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT. PURSUANT TO STIPULATION 25. On DECEMBER 20, 2013, I sent a confirming HAND DELIVERY PERSONAL notice to defendant of my intent to submit this exparte application on DECEMBER 23, 2013, at 11:00 a.m., at 400 McAllister Street, San Francisco, in Department 501 because defendant had not vacated the unit on DECEMBER 1. 2013 as agreed in the parties settlement. A true and exact copy said notice is attached, marked “Exhibit B,” and incorporated by reference herein. 6. Under these circumstances, plaintiff requests that this Court enter judgment against Defendant MARK THOMAS EDWARDS, for restitution of possession of the premises located at 2048 Polk Street, #303, San Francisco, California 94109. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration was executed in the City and County of San Francisco, State of California. paea: 72Z/ Lofts NASIR PATEL Plaintiff in pro per EXPARTE APPLICATION FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO STIPULATION 3XK Mark Edwards In Pro Se - Litigation 2048 Polk Street #303 San Francisco, CA 94109 4/25/2013 RECEIVED APR 25 2013 Attn: Commission on Judicial Performance COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE 455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 14400 San Francisco, CA 94102-3660 Re: File Review — April 11, 2013 Nasir Patel vs. Mark Edwards Case No: CUD-13-644474 Pretrial Procedures-“‘Settlement Conference 4/18/13” UPDATE ADDITION- Did this Judicial Commission authorize the Pretrial to commit “prejudice structural error” In illegal defendant his right to jury trial, denial of discovery rights presentation by counsel without appropriate 24 hour notice motion to Superior Court APPEAR 109? Defendant Edwards never waived his rights to Jury that presently being held department 608 Of Superior Court, nor did he waive his rights to discovery. The entire proceedings is a blatant miscarriage of Justice pursuant to U.S. v. Coppola (2008) 671 F.3 220, 225-229. This a clear examine of Kangaroo injustice regarding civil rights toward people of color. Defendant have several motions pending for discovery and CCP §170.0 showing the pretrial judge went behind the record as they did April 5, 2013 and April 11, 2013 scheduling court dates to defeat defendants motions.This is a clear mockery of justice and a total sham of the integrity of the Judicial Process System in San Francisco. This show “disparate impact” is still covertly implemented. Respectfully Submitted, Zon Ks MARK EDWARDS CLAIMANT