Judicial Tenure Complaint

Bigger text (+)Smaller text (-)

Affidavit - Part of an actual Judicial Tenure Complaint

AFFIDAVIT of (Name Removed)

I, (Name Removed), the Undersigned, Sui Juris, do solemnly swear, declare, and depose:

1. THAT I, (Name Removed), am competent to state to the matters set forth herein.

2. THAT I, (Name Removed), have personal knowledge of the facts stated herein.

3. THAT all the facts stated herein are true, correct, and certain, admissible as evidence, and if called upon as a witness, I, (Name Removed), will testify to their veracity.

4. THAT I, (Name Removed), is not and has not waived any constitutional rights or any judicial machinery defects and if I have in the past waived any rights, I hereby reclaim those rights.

5. THAT Truth is expressed in the form of an Affidavit.

6. THAT an unrebutted Affidavit stands as Truth.

7. THAT an unrebutted Affidavit becomes Truth.

8. THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that Article 1 § 11 Searches and seizures states: “Sec. 11. The person, houses, papers and possessions of every person shall be secure from unreasonable searches and seizures. No warrant to search any place or to seize any person or things shall issue without describing them, nor without probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation.” The Property of (Name Removed) was seized without permission, without legal authority and without a Court Order from a Court of Record. Case No. (CASE NUMBER REMOVED) (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED) and Case No. (CASE NUMBER REMOVED) (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED). See Previous unrebutted Affidavits Exhibits B1, B2, B3.

9. THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that MICHIGAN COMPILED LAWS ANNOTATED (MCLA) 85.10, Oath of Office states: “Sec. 10. All officers elected or appointed in the city, within 10 days after receiving notice of election or appointment, shall take and subscribe the oath of office prescribed by the state constitution of 1963 and file the oath with the city clerk. See Oaths of Office, (Judge's Name Removed) – Elected November 5, (Year) – Oath signed December 5, (Year) – Filed April 20, (Year) four (4) years late Exhibit A1 and (Judge's Name Removed) – Elected November 5, (Year) – Oath signed December 9, (Year) – Filed December 14, (Year) Exhibit A2 which verifies the our Oaths were not filed timely and lawfully.

10.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that immunity has never been recognized for trespass on private property ...whether of long or short duration....in the absence of a properly issued search warrant...may nonetheless be held liable for damages for the tort of trespass.... see attached ORDER. Exhibit A3

11.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that MCLA 85.10 makes (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED) a Coram Non Judice Judge which means a "De Facto" Judge or a person fraudulently claiming to be one. (Judge's Name Removed) oath was filed 4 years late. - See Exhibit A1. The Oath of (Judge's Name Removed) was also not filed lawfully and timely - See Exhibit A2.

12.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that MCLA 168.420, Oath, filing states ”Sec. 420 Every person elected to the office of judge of the circuit court, before entering upon the duties of his office, shall take and subscribe to the oath as provided in section 1 of article 11 of the state constitution, and file the same with the secretary of the state and a copy with each county clerk in his circuit” and this was not lawfully filed by me, (Judge's Name Removed)/(JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED).

13.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that MCLA 168.467j, Oath of office states: ”Sec.467j Every person elected to the office of judge of the district court, before entering upon the duties of his office, shall take and subscribe to the oath as provided in section 1 of article 11 of the state constitution, and file the same with the secretary of the state and a copy with each county clerk in his district” and this was not lawfully filed by me, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED).

14.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that by having taken at least two oaths of office to support the Constitution of the United States, and the Michigan Constitution, and by not lawfully filing timely have acted in violation of the Constitution engaging in an act or acts of Treason.

15.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that a person fraudulently claiming to be a judge, and has voluntarily vacated my judicial office, and has no jurisdiction to do anything means all of my court cases are Null and Void and all actions were not as JUDGE'S but a private individuals in my own personal capacity.

16.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), are without jurisdiction and have engaged in an act or acts of Treason by not fully complying with the Constitution makes all of the Court Orders I signed Null and Void. U.S. Supreme Court IN RE SAWYER, 124 U.S. 200 (1888) 31 L.Ed. 402

17.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that the Supreme Court has ruled Pro Se litigants can not be held to the same standards as Attorneys. See Exhibits B1, B2, B3.

18.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), ignored all Affidavits of (Name Removed) knowing they are already were Accepted as True because they have not been rebutted by Affidavit. See Exhibits B1, B2, B3.

19.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that the Defendants-Appellees failed to define or interpret the definition of frivolous, but used it numerous times in their defensive theories.

20.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that all matters must be expressed to be resolved.

21.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), and the Defendants-Appellees and our purported attorneys know or should have known that (Name Removed) was and is being irreparably harmed based upon Slander, Libel Allegations, Fraud, Extortion, Grand Theft, Racketeering, Conspiracy, and Impersonating State Officers and/or Judicial Officers including Treason supported by attached unrebutted Affidavits. See Exhibits B1, B2, B3.

22.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that Article I §14 Jury trials in the Constitution of Michigan of 1963 states: “Sec. 14. The right of trial by jury shall remain, but shall be waived in all civil cases unless demanded by one of the parties in the manner prescribed by law.

23.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that we failed to honor a jury trial as (Name Removed) requested, paid and contracted for. (Name Removed) request was denied and we failed to have any oral arguments whatsoever. The minimum requirements for due process is to have a hearing. Title 5 U.S.C. § 556(d) and Title 5 U.S.C. § 557.

24.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that 5 U.S. 137 Marbury v Madison states: “Any law repugnant to the constitution is null and void of Law.

25.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that the Constitution of the United States of America - Article VI Paragraph 2 states: “This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the JUDGE'S in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.”

26.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that a lien or claim can be satisfied only through an Affidavit by a point-for-point rebuttal, resolution by jury or payment.

27.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that, (Name Removed), relied on all arguments presented to the Court, in Affidavit form, on all pleadings, motions, and briefs as filed and were not construed to omit any factual allegations or negate facts not mentioned and supported by this and attached unrebutted Affidavits. See Exhibits B1, B2, B3.

28.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that all previous unrebutted Affidavits were ignored by the Defendants and the Court. Defendants never provided Discovery and were in Default and Contempt of Court all supported by unrebutted Affidavit. (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED) ignored Michigan Court Rules that were brought to the attention of the Court by Motions and unrebutted Affidavits . See Exhibits B1, B2, B3.

29.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that the Court and the Defendant failed to honor the constitutional rights to Petition the Government for redress of Grievances, Due Process of Law, and Equal Protection of the Law based of (Name Removed) upon failing to answer the unrebutted Affidavits (pleadings and motions) on a point by point basis as required by law.

30.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that the Defendants-Appellees failed to timely answer the Discovery and Orders of the Court and I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), refused to enforce my own Court Order, as required by law, which I knew where in Default and Contempt of Court. The demands for judgment in the Complaint is now res judicata.

31.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that no judge, court, government or any agencies thereof, or any other third parties whatsoever, can abrogate anyone's affidavit of truth and only a party affected by an affidavit can speak and act for himself and is solely responsible for responding with his own affidavit of truth, which no one else can do for him.

32.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that Article XI § 1 Oath of public officer’s states: “Sec. 1. All officers, legislative, executive and judicial, before entering upon the duties of their respective offices, shall take and subscribe the following oath or affirmation: I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the constitution of this state, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of the office of........ .......... according to the best of my ability. No other oath, affirmation, or any religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust.”

33.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that 15 U.S.C 1692g(4) states: “the debt collector will obtain verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment against the consumer and a copy of such verification or judgment will be mailed to the consumer by the debt collector.” This was Ordered in Discovery and the defendants ignored the Discovery and the Court Order and ((Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED)) the Judge's refused to enforce the Discovery and the Court Order. The Defendants were in Default and Contempt of Court with our permission.

34.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that the U.S. Supreme Court has stated that "No state legislator, or executive or judicial officer can war against the constitution without violating his undertaking to support it." Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 78 S.Ct. 1401 (1958). Any judge who does not comply with their "Oath of Office, wars against the Constitution and engages in acts in violation of the Supreme Law of the Land. It appears (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED) have engaged in acts of Treason.

35.THAT I (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that whenever a judge acts where they do not have jurisdiction to act, the judge is engaged in an act or acts of Treason. U.S. v. Will, 449 U.S. 200, 216, 101 S.Ct. 471, 66 L.Ed.2d 392, 406 (1980); Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat) 264, 404, 5 L.Ed. 257 (1821).

36.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that JUDGE'S have no judicial immunity for criminal acts, aiding and abetting, assisting, or conniving with others who perform a criminal act, or for their administrative/ ministerial duties. In Pierson v. Ray, 386 US 547 (1967), a judge conspiring to deprive a person his civil rights is liable for their action which is considered a ministerial act and has no immunity, citing Ex Parte Virginia 100 US 339, 25 L.Ed. 676 and 2 Harper & James, The Law of Torts 1642-1643 (1956). Judicial immunity does not exist for JUDGE'S who engage in criminal activity, for JUDGE'S who continue with, aid and abet the criminal activity of another judge, or to a judge for damages sustained by a person who has been harmed by the judge's connivance with, aiding and abetting, another judge's criminal activity.

37.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that JUDGE'S who do not report the criminal activates of other JUDGE'S become principals in the criminal activity, Title 18 U.S.C. § 4 Misprison of Felony. Since no JUDGE'S have reported the criminal activity of (Judge's Name Removed) who has committed civil rights crimes and Treason against the United States, all JUDGE'S, assistant attorney generals, and attorneys that have knowledge of this case are as guilty as the above mentioned JUDGE'S for civil rights crimes and Treason against the United States, Title 18 § 2381, 2382, 2383, 2384, and 2385.

38.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that Article VI §19 Courts of record; seal, qualifications of JUDGE'S states: “Sec. 19. (1) The supreme court, the court of appeals, the circuit court, the probate court and other courts designated as such by the legislature shall be courts of record and each shall have a common seal. Justices and JUDGE'S of courts of record must be persons who are licensed to practice law in this state.”

39.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that we are not a bonafide judge in fact or law, but a Coram Non Judice judge which means a De Facto judge or a person fraudulently claiming to be one. (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED) and our purported attorneys have no license to practice law from the State of Michigan.

40.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that a license is definitely required by the Michigan Constitution of 1963, as amended Article VI Section 19 to be a bonafide and lawful judge in fact and law. (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED) and our purported attorneys only have a membership in a private club, "STATE BAR OF MICHIGAN", a union of which is made up of persons to practice law, not a license to practice law.

41.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that we did not timely file an "Oath of Office". By not lawfully fulfilling the obligation to timely file the required "Oath of Office", (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED) have no jurisdiction to do anything, clearly establishing Fraud and Treason. By having no jurisdiction, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED) can be sued in the personal capacity and have no purported immunity.

42.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that the U.S. Supreme Court stated that if a court is "without authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as nullifies. They are not voidable, but simply void; and form no bar to a recovery sought, even prior to a reversal in opposition to them. They constitute no justification; and all persons concerned in executing such judgments or sentences, are considered, in law, as trespassers." Elliot v. Piersol, 1 Pet. 328, 340, 26 U.S. 328, 340 (1828).

43.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that the U.S. Supreme Court in Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 94 S.Ct. 1683., 1687 (1974) stated that "when a state officer acts under a state law in a manner violative of the Federal Constitution, he "comes into conflict with the superior authority of that Constitution, and he is in that case stripped of his official or representative character and is subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual conduct. The State has no power to impart to him any immunity from responsibility to the supreme authority of the United States.”

44.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that the U.S. Supreme Court has stated that "No state legislator or executive or judicial officer can war against the Constitution without violating his undertaking to support it." Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 78 S.Ct. 1401 (1958). Any judge including (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED) who do not comply with their "Oath of Office" wars against the Constitution and engages in acts in violation of the Supreme Law of the Land. (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED) have engaged in acts of Treason.

45.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), perpetrated a "Fraud" in fact and law against (Name Removed) in which he has stated in pleadings and motions. The Defendant and the Court knew or should have known as well schooled officers of the law, long schooled in the art and practice of law that (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED) induced injury and irreparable harm by a specie of misinformation, disinformation and/or specie of silence, wherein, the Defendant and the Court have used all manner of colorable officialdom to make false and fraudulent claims of frivolous allegations against (Name Removed) in total violation of "Law". U.S. v. Prudden, 424 F2d 1021, and U.S. v. Tweel, 550 F2d 297 at 299-300, which the cases held: "Silence can only be equated with Fraud when there is a legal and moral duty to speak the truth or when an inquiry left unanswered would be intentionally misleading to the injury of the parties. In Re: Dunahay v. Struzik, 393 P2d. 930 (1964) Arizona 246, which held: "Fraud may be committed by a failure to speak when the duty of speaking is imposed." (Res ipsa loquitur, with exclusive control.) In Re: Batty v. Arizona State Dental Board, 112 P2d 870, 57 Arizona 239 (1941) which the court held: "Fraud" may be committed by a failure to speak when the duty of speaking is imposed as much as by speaking falsely.. In Re: State v. Coddington, 662 P.2d 155 135 Arizona 480 Ariz. App. (1983) which the court held: "When one conveys a false impression by disclosure of some facts and the concealment of others, such concealment is in effect a false and Fraudulent representation that what is disclosed is the whole truth and nothing but the truth."

46.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that "Suppression of a material fact which a party is bound in good faith to disclose is equivalent to a false or Fraudulent representation." Please see Leigh v. Loyd, 244 P.2d 356, Ariz 84 (1952) case, and further, "When one conveys a false impression by disclosure Fraud or Deceit may arise from silence where a duty to speak the truth, as well as from speaking an untruth." Please see Morrison v. Action, 198 P.2d 590, 68 Ariz 27 (1948) case.

47.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), have done all of the misrepresentations and more, as was stated in (Name Removed)s’ motion to vacate the Court's Order supported by attached unrebutted Affidavits Exhibits B1, B2, B3 under MCR 2.612(C). (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED) deliberately sought to defraud (Name Removed) by those actions to misrepresent the facts, which is false and fraudulent. Now, clearly, Fraud voids the most sacred contract including any and all judgments, and further, (Name Removed) can not be made to participate in a Fraud or Unconscionable Contract or Order and this is Exactly What the Defendant and the Court did by Misrepresentation and/or Silence. The Defendant's and the Court know this to be a true statement of fact and we further know that this Fraud exists in which we are continuing on with their course of action Willfully and Maliciously, and this is the plain facts of the truth.

48.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that Black's Law Dictionary defines "Fraud" as: "An intentional perversion of truth for the purpose of inducing another in reliance upon it to part with some valuable thing belonging to him or to surrender a legal right. A false representation of a matter of fact, whether by words or by conduct, by false or misleading allegations, or by concealment of that which should have been disclosed, which deceives and is intended to deceive another so that he shall act upon it to his legal injury. Anything calculated to deceive, whether by a single act or combination, or by suppression of truth, or suggestion of what is false, whether it be by direct falsehood or innuendo, by speech or silence, word of mouth, or look or gesture. A generic term, embracing all multifarious means which humane ingenuity can devise, and which are resorted to by one individual to get advantage over another by false suggestions or by suppression of truth..."

49.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that the Illinois Supreme Court has held that "if the Magistrate (or judge) has not jurisdiction, then he and those who advise and act with him, or execute his process, are trespassers." Von Kettler et. al. v. Johnson, 57 111. 109 (1870).

50.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that the Illinois Supreme Court held that if a Court "could not hear the matter upon the jurisdictional paper presented, its finding that it had the power can add nothing to its authority, it had no authority to make that finding." The People v. Brewer, 128 Ill. 472, 483 (1928). I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED) have no legal authority or jurisdiction to hear or rule on any matter. (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED) acted without any jurisdiction. When JUDGE'S act when they do not have jurisdiction to act, or they enforce a void order, they become trespassers of the law, and are engaged in Treason. The Court in Yates v. Village of Hoffman Estates, Illinois, 209 F. Supp. 757 (N.D. Ill. 1962) held that "not every action by a judge is in exercise of his judicial function... it is not a judicial function for a judge to commit an intentional tort even though the tort occurs in the courthouse." When a judge acts as a trespasser of the law, when a judge does not follow the law, the judge loses subject-matter jurisdiction and the JUDGE'S orders are void, of no legal force or effect.

51.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that by not having any jurisdiction to be a lawful and bonafide judge and (Name Removed) was apparently maliciously and arbitrary prosecuted in our court, in which (Name Removed) has just and right cause to sue under the Civil Rights Act which is not frivolous.

52.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that judicial immunity only applies to JUDGE'S in the lawful performance of their judicial duties, Constitution of the United States of America Article III Section 1 which states: "The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The JUDGE'S, both of the supreme court and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "Good Behaviour", and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office."

53.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that it is clearly shown that (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED) and our purported attorneys have in fact committed felonies in open court by failure to uphold the United States Constitution. See Title 18 U.S.C. § 241-242, 872, 1001, 1963, 2381, 2382, 2383, 2384, 2385; and not to mention Title 42 U.S.C. §1983, 1985, and 1986. Clearly, these crimes do not come under "Good Behaviour" of the Constitution of the United States of America, and further, ignorance of the law is no excuse. Owen v. City of Independence Mo. 100 U.S. 1398; and Maine v. Thibitout, 100 U.S. 2502.

54.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that there is no such thing as judicial immunity for violations of Constitutional Rights, and there is no judicial immunity to injure a person (Res ipsa loquitur) with exclusive control not to injure a person. There is only accessory to a Felony, Aiding And Abetting, Treason against the people of the United States of America. Therefore, the Court's Orders and Sanctions are Null and Void for just and lawful cause.

55.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that a Civil Rights Complaint and the Appeal taken in "Good Faith" "is not frivolous”. A party demonstrates "Good Faith" when seeking review of any issue which is not frivolous; determination of "Good Faith" necessitates an inquiry into merits of the appeal, but does not require that probation success be demonstrated; inquiry is limited to whether appeal involves legal points arguable on their merits and therefore not frivolous (Jones v. Frank D.C. Tex. 1985, 622 F. Supp. 1119). A complaint is frivolous within meaning of statute governing in forma pauperis proceeding if it lacks an arguable basis in law if the claim is based on an indisputably meritless legal theory (Martinez v. Turner C.A. 8 (Mo.) 1992, 977 F. 2d 421, certiorari denied 113 S.Ct. 1658, 123 L.Ed. 2d 277). In order to respect congressional goal of assuring equality of consideration for all litigants, initial assessment of frivolousness of in forma pauperis Plaintiff's factual allegations must be weighed in favor of Plaintiff (Denton v. Hernandez U.S. Cal. 1992, 112 S.Ct. 1728, 118 L.Ed. 2d 340, on remand 966 F.2d 533). Allegations in complaint accompanying a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis will be assumed to be True for purpose of the motion (Nichols v. McGee D.C. Cal. 1959, 169 F. Supp. 721, appeal dismissed 80 S.Ct. 90, 361 U.S. 6,- 4 L.Ed. 2d 52).

56.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that a Civil Rights Complaint and the Appeal is considered a Petition for redress of Grievances, which is a constitutional right to the 1st Amendment, as confirmed by our State Constitution, and as a matter of right, (Name Removed) cannot be punished for the exercise of a constitutional right (Miller v. United States 230 F2nd 486). If the Court refuses to honor (Name Removed)s’ constitutional right to Petition the Government for redress of Grievances, Due Process of Law, and Equal Protection of the Law; and implements the erroneously sanctions, (Name Removed) is entitled to ignore the sanction and exercise the right with total impunity (Schuttlesworth v. Birmingham Alabama, 373 US 262).

57.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that by the Court not fulfilling their obligation, the facts are very clear that when such activities of misinformation and/or disinformation, or a specie of silence whose clear purpose is to misinform and/or dis-inform a party of the real fact and law than a "Fraud" has been perpetrated especially if a party has relied in good faith on such misrepresentation to their injury that a clear Fraud has in fact been done. "Fraud" Voids the most sacred contract including the Court's Order and/or Sanctions.

58.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), know or should have known that the Defendants-Appellees and their purported attorneys are not licensed attorneys and they have no standing to do anything including asking for sanctions and that their pleadings, motions, and briefs are completely "Null and Void."

59.THAT I, (Judge's Name Removed) / (JUDGE'S NAME REMOVED), fully agree that (Name Removed) was aggrieved because Michigan does not issue a document to attorneys called a license but ignores the fact that (Name Removed) has been irreparably harmed and damaged, and fails to do anything about it. The Defendants-Appellees and their purported attorneys have no standing or authority to file or plead anything.

60.THAT I, (Name Removed), am not an expert in the law however I do know right from wrong. If there is any human being damaged by any statements herein, if he will inform me by facts I will sincerely make every effort to amend my ways. I hereby and herein reserve the right to amend and make amendment to this document as necessary in order that the truth may be ascertained and proceedings justly determined. If the parties given notice by means of this document have information that would controvert and overcome this Affidavit, please advise me in Written Affidavit Form within thirty (30) days from receipt hereof providing me with your counter-affidavit, proving with particularity by stating all requisite actual evidentiary fact and all requisite actual law, and not merely the ultimate facts or conclusions of law, that this Affidavit Statement is substantially and materially false sufficiently to change materially my status and factual declarations. Your silence stands as consent to, and tacit approval of, the factual declarations herein being established as fact as a matter of law.

I thank you for your valuable time and or trouble in regards to this matter.

Thank you Sir.

__________________________

(Name Removed)
Dated: June (Year)
Street Address
City, State Zip

Notary: _______________________________

Witness: ______________________________

Witness: ______________________________

[Ed. Note: Said Exhibits are not currently available.]


NOTICE: Unknown author is not affiliated with Freedom School.
NOTICE: If anything in this presentation is found to be in error a good faith effort will be made to correct it in timely fashion upon notification.
       Specialty Areas

All the powers in the universe seem to favor the person who has confidence.
Share/Save/Bookmark Subscribe

More & Other Information - Resource Pages
Admiralty related itemsBelligerent Claimant
BondsAttention Signing the Constitution Away
Citizenship / nationality related itemsEducation
GraphicsHistory
Jerry KirkAware
JurisdictionLaw related items
Lewis MohrLuis Ewing
MoneyOath related items
Reading MaterialReading Room
StuffTax matters
Travel relatedTruth
 Video
NOTICE: The information on this page was brought to you by people who paid this website forward so that someone such as you might also profit by having access to it. If you care to do so also please feel encouraged to KEEP THIS SITE GOING by making a donation today. Thank you. Make donation with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure!


Freedom School is not affiliated with the links on this page - unless otherwise stated.

Freedom School information served for educational purposes only, no liability assumed for use.
The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice.
Freedom School does not consent to unlawful action.
Freedom School advocates and encourages one and all to adhere to, support and defend all law which is particularly applicable.
Information is intended for those men and women who are not "US CITIZENS" or "TAXPAYERS" - continued use, reference or citing indicates voluntary and informed compliance.

Freedom School is a free speech site and operation as there is no charge for things presented
this site relys on this memorandum and others in support of this philosophy and operation.
The noteworthy failure of the government or any alleged agency thereof to at any time rebut anything appearing on this website constitutes a legal admission of the fidelity and accuracy of the materials presented, which are offered in good faith and prepared as such by Freedom School and third parties affiliated or otherwise. THIS IS AN ELECTRONIC AGREEMENT AND IS A LEGALLY BINDING CONTRACT, EQUIVALENT TO A SIGNED, WRITTEN CONTRACT BETWEEN PARTIES - If the government, or any one else, wants to assert that any of the religious and/or political statements that are not factual appearing on this website are in error, then they as the moving party have the burden of proof, and they must responsively meet that burden of proof under the Administrative Procedures Act 5 U.S.C. §556(d) and under the due process clauses found in the Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Amendments to the national Constitution BEFORE there will be response to any summons, questions, or unsubstantiated and slanderous accusations. Attempts at calling presented claims "frivolous" without specifically rebutting the particular claim, or claims, deemed "frivolous" will be in deed be "frivolous" and prima facie evidence that shall be used accordingly. Hey guys, if anything on this site is found to be in error a good faith effort will be made to correct it in timely fashion upon notification.

Freedom-School.com site, the DVD, or work computers´ DMCA Policy

the Freedom-School.com site, the DVD, and/or work computers, make effort to be in compliance with 17 U.S.C. § 512 and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA"). It is our policy to respond to any infringement notices and take appropriate actions under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA") and other applicable intellectual property laws.

If your copyrighted material has been posted on the Freedom-School.com site, the DVD, or work computers, in other than fair use capacity or if links to your copyrighted material are returned through our search engine and you want the material removed, you must provide a written communication that details the information listed in the following section. Please be aware that you will be liable for damages (including costs and attorneys´ fees) if you misrepresent information listed on the site that is allegedly infringing on your alleged copyrights. We suggest that you may want to first contact competent legal assistance on this matter.

The following elements must be included in your copyright infringement claim:

* Provide evidence of the authorized person to act on behalf of the fully disclosed alleged owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed. Please notice that we generally do not deal with third parties.
* Provide sufficient contact information so that we may contact you. You must also include a valid email address.
* You must identify in sufficient detail the copyrighted work claimed to have been infringed and including at least one search term under which the material appears in Freedom-School.com search results.
* A statement that the complaining party has a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.
* A statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.
* Must be signed by the authorized person to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly being infringed. (Proper ratification of commencement.)


Send the infringement notice via email to the postmaster at Freedom-School.com

Please allow 1-3 business days for an email response. Note that emailing your complaint to other parties such as our Internet Service Provider (ISP) or server host(s) will not expedite your request and may result in a delayed response due the complaint not being properly being filed.


Presentation Copyright© 2007, 2016
All Rights Reserved

H O M E