These photos were taken after I had my condo freshly painted inside and the final parts of the privy pit remediation completed. I had new moss rock landscaping done, a new light fixture outside, I had my condo cleaned so that it was sparkling, and then I listed it with Sotheby’s Realty.

This is my front door at 729 W. Manhattan in Santa Fe. I had it painted a brighter blue, but Julianne wanted it repainted as you see it here. The light fixture is the new one.

My condo was foreclosed and sold without a hearing. I didn’t know when I was spending the money on it that a Realtor at Sotheby’s where I had it listed had bought it at the auction which I didn’t even know about. I guess he watched me spending thousands of dollars on it and thought it was good for him not to tell me about the auction.

I appealed on the issue of lack of due process which is supposed to make a judgment void. But if a legal system is corrupt, then “supposed to” doesn’t enter in.

I don’t know if it’s true but on a national news forum someone told me he’d seen Judge Vigil and Rick Green partying together at a gay party. I’m a big defender of gay rights, but not denial of due process. I was told that Judge Vigil told Green’s broker “There’s no way she’ll get the condo back.” A very prejudiced thing to say, but totally prophetic.

This is my: Corrected Revised Brief

Above: Julianne Hope, my friend with whom I listed, took pictures of my condo. The pictures were used in Sotheby’s advertising materials. The advertising brought in offers that I was unable to accept because another Sotheby’s agent had bought my condo at a foreclosure sale I didn’t know about. In fact, I hadn’t been sent notice of the foreclosure.

Was listing with Sotheby’s a mistake? Or, was the mistake that the New Mexican wrote as if there was no pit?

Above: My living room’s beam ceiling, louvred closet doors, and French doors letting in sunshine. I loved the French doors and kept them open all summer. I wish the little star shaped Mexican light were on, so it showed up better. It’s quite lovely.

Above: A closer view of my kitchen. I had gotten money to redo the kitchen but then I had to use it to excavate the privy pit. I still have the brass sink I thought would look lovely with the new counters I was going to put in and new appliances. (I paid on my condo for 17 years.)

Above: Outside my kitchen window was the most lovely peach tree. I siphoned all my household water out the window to it. Its peaches were sooooo good. I planned to live out my life in my condo. It’s all flat, so I thought it would be good for when I got old. And it was close to things so I could walk everywhere. Only then I started falling from the toxins, but I didn’t know why at the time. Luckily I kept a Time Line.

Above: I had the brick floor washed and a special solution used where there were water marks. Then I had it waxed, and waxed again. Doesn’t it ever look lovely? This was my home until I had to leave because of the hydrogen sulfide and the toxic attitude of the condo association.

Above: My living room and dining area. You can see the counter that separates the large space from the little kitchen. I bought the black vase and silk flowers at Cost Plus, just around the corner when I listed it.

Above: My bedroom was pretty large, something like 15×15. It was much cooler before the driveway was paved with asphalt. I had tried to stop the paving because I was already having “sink holes”. I was afraid that if rain couldn’t sink in except near my condo, it would make the sink holes worse. But I lost. The developers, Wally Sargent, Steve Yablon, and Steve Jackson — who built my condo over the outdoor toilet pit — got an injunction against me stopping the work. Magdalena Associates, I think their group was called.

Above: My bathroom. I’d painted the mirror and shower walls three different colors of green, using a sponge. It was arty and very soothing and I loved it. But Julianne wanted me to have it painted white, too, to make it easier to sell. So I had her workman paint it white. Then her co-worker bought it at the auction no one told me about. I was told he was also the real estate agent for the condo association director. I don’t know if that’s true.

Above: Picture of Rick Green, Sotheby’s agent who bought my condo at the auction I didn’t know about until he told Julianne he was the real owner of my condo. This was, of course, after I’d paid for all that work. I thought it was sleazy to know about the foreclosure and watch me pay for work, and watch the ads for my condo, and not tell me about the foreclosure auction.

But I guess he was also the real estate agent of the condo association director. So for all I know the director, Rob Hunt, lent him the money. The director had once tried to get me to sell to him for very little. So… maybe in the end he contrived to get it for very little. That’s how it seems to me.

My Condo Story

It was ’03 when I had the privy pit excavated and the condo association refused to pay its share.

The Condominium Act says an association must share costs of any work needed on a common element, which the lot is.

Instead of paying it’s 4/5ths share of the $12,000 bill, Rob Hunt and the condo association hired two powerful “groups”.

One group, Sommer Law Firm, said the problem was a broken sewer pipe for which the association had no duty to pay.

If the only problem had been a broken sewer pipe I would agree. But you can’t flush bottles so there was a privy pit. You can see pictures of the bottles on my privy pit page.

The other “group” was Christopher Alba and the New Mexican newspaper for which he regularly wrote an opinion piece.

Alba wrote a factually false piece focusing on the “broken sewer pipe”. He made horrible fun of me, saying I had refused expert advice.

The fact is I didn’t hire Alba because I preferred the expert advice of the structural engineer I had been working with throughout.

The condo association did hire him, though. I saw a check for over sixteen hundred dollars written to him by the condo association and I never saw him do any work. (other than the libelous opinion piece)

After the article ran I was so embarrassed I hated to go out. I was mortified to know people had read the article and probably believed the false statements in it. I had had a good name.

The sewer pipe had broken, yes. It had broken because it was laid over the privy pit and the raw excrement had continued to decompose and subside and in time there was nothing holding up the pipe. It broke because of the outdoor toilet pit.

I tried to sue the New Mexican and Alba because the things he wrote and the paper published as facts were not facts. They were false, and saying false things is not protected by the right to freedom of speech.

But Judge Hall would not allow me to present the evidence at the Rule 56 hearing. I was shocked. I think the lawyers for the New Mexican were actually shocked, also.

Hall had already said to the condo association in a hearing that he would see to it that I paid everything I owed. He said this as if there was no question that I was the one in the wrong, not the condo association. He assured them not to worry because he would hear all my foreclosure cases.

(I had a friend who worked as a dispute moderator, who said that to her knowledge Judge Hall had caused typed transcripts of hearings to be altered from what had happened.)

So I never got the transcript. I thought he’d have had it fixed.

I was going to appeal: I had the exact case to use but the N.M. Supreme Court clerks couldn’t get the micro fiche right to find the Brief in Chief for me. Then I got tetanus and couldn’t go back.

I felt I would lose my home if Judge Hall were able to hear all the cases as he had said. So I sued him under the ADA, Title II, for discrimination.

My complaint needed to be amended; I moved for leave to amend but I forgot that you have to attach the amended complaint in federal
court, so they dismissed my case.

Still, Judge Hall could not hear the other cases after that. So, I still have my home, for which I am deeply grateful.

Why did Judge Hall do that? My feeling is that it relates to Wallace Dean Johnson who sued me for $80,000 (the equity in another property) for legal work he said he’d done for which I hadn’t paid him.

In fact I had paid him all I owed him, plus I’d lent him money on “diamonds” that were really cubic zirconium.

Johnson wrecked my car;  he prepared my Chapter 11 docs to make it look as if I didn’t have any equity, and I didn’t catch it due to my disability, so it cost me over $50,000 because I had to keep fighting the opposing lawyers who jumped right on it, and I had to pay their fees.

Johnson said in court that I was manipulative and took advantage of him and all he’d ever done wastry to help me. What he said he’d done, in
reality I had done. He said I abused him, on and on. The fact is that he told me I was “abusive” to ask him for the money he owed me.

He was always saying that if I was a good, true Christian that I wouldn’t bring up the money.

I prepared for court by assembling the documents that showed I had paid Johnson and some that showed Johnson had forged. But because of my disability I had to read so I didn’t sound as “good” as Johnson who’s adopted a country-bumpkin way of talking.

In the end Judge Hall said in court, to Johnson, “I believe you.”

I was devastated. I am pretty much the opposite kind of person from Johnson (who recently went to prison for stealing $30,000 from a woman who isn’t mentally disabled; she and the state police got him, luckily in another jurisdiction.) He has a 40+case history in Colorado.

I only found out about the Colorado cases because after Judge Hall said that I came home and called a jeweller in Pueblo and asked about Johnson.

The jeweller’s wife sent me 20 of the cases and told me how to find more.

What should concern people is that the Court refused to look at evidence at the Rule 56 hearing. When courts do that they are choosing to decide on the basis of their feelings, which is prejudice.

I should have been allowed to present the privy pit facts.

I think that it is because I sued Judge Hall under the ADA, Title II, that the foreclosure of my condo was done without a hearing — again, prejudice.