Judge Yokich

FACT: Absence of Consent or Signature on Original and Amended Judgments
The original judgment, as well as two subsequent amended judgments, were entered without my consent, without my signature, and without my knowledge.
As such, no valid agreement existed to support entry of a consent judgment or its amendments.
On August 11, 2025, Judge Yokich denied my Motion to Set Aside Judgment, despite the absence of consent and the lack of a valid underlying agreement.

Void Judgments Cannot Be Enforced
Under well-established Michigan law, a void judgment is a nullity and cannot be enforced under any circumstances. Courts have no discretion to uphold or enforce a judgment that is void, regardless of equitable doctrines such as laches or estoppel. See People v. Ferranti, 504 Mich. 1 (2019); Lawrence M. Clarke, Inc. v. Richco Construction, Inc., 489 Mich. 265 (2011); Abbott v. State, 202 Mich. App. 228 (1993).
In the present case, the original judgment and two amendments were entered without my consent, without my signature or knowledge, and without informed authorization by counsel as to their substance. As such, no valid agreement existed to support entry of a consent judgment.
Because the judgment is predicated on a non-existent or unauthorized agreement, it is void. A void judgment is a legal nullity from its inception and cannot be enforced, ratified, or cured through equitable doctrines.
Accordingly, the Court lacks discretion to uphold or enforce the judgment, and it must be set aside.