COURT SHALL NOT DENY FOR WANT OF FORM -
"AS ANY REASONABLE PEOPLE UNDERSTAND"

KEEP THIS AND USE IT

This language can and possibly should be included in the papers you write Sui Juris to the court.  The court will say anything to refuse to act or to dismiss your cases.  One of their favorite ruses is "denied for want of form". 

This language, from the First Congress in 1789, clearly outlines the intent of what a court is to be and that the court is the one who is "deemed to know the law" and must assist sovereign people in our courts to plead our cases before a jury of our peers as we see fit to plead our cases, with counsel of out own choice.  The court works for us, and has NO discretion to refuse to hear cases of deprivation of rights and criminal injury.  They know it; they just get away with it as long as we let them.

Use this language to shove it back in front of them and make them tell you this is NOT the law.  Then ask what jurisdiction they have you in if this does not apply.

This IS the law and this stands.

The Writ SHALL not be dismissed for lack of form or failure of process.  All the pleadings must be is as any reasonable man/woman would understand. Clearly written, affidavits of facts and law.  Use this under "jurisdiction" in the Complaints you write.

"And be it further enacted.  That no summons, writ, declaration, return, process, judgment, or other proceedings in civil cases in any of the courts or the United States, shall be abated, arrested, quashed or reversed, for any defect or want of form, but the said courts respectively shall proceed and give judgment according as the right of the cause and matter in law shall appear unto them, without regarding any imperfections, defects or want of form in such writ, declaration, or other pleading, returns process, judgment, or course of proceeding whatsoever, except those only in cases of demurrer, which the party demurring shall specially sit down and express together with his demurrer as the cause thereof.  And the said courts respectively shall and may, by virtue of this act, from time to time, amend all and every such imperfections, defects and wants of form, other than those only which the party demurring shall express as aforesaid, and may at any, time, permit either of the parties to amend any defect in the process of pleadings upon such conditions as the said courts respectively shall in their discretion, and by their rules prescribe (a)"
Judiciary Act of September 24, 1789, Section 342, FIRST CONGRESS, Sess. 1, ch. 20, 1789

Control the Judge ...

The first question one can ask the judge at a hearing on your motion(s) is, "Judge, have you read my motion?"

If the judge says he's already read your motion, then you can refer to it in general as an outline while making your argument - taking care to touch all points so the court reporter writes down every word.

If the judge says he's not read the motion, One might ask, "Would the court care to take a moment now to review the written motion?"

If the court agrees, wait silently while the court reads the motion, keeping on guard for your opponent's attempts to interrupt the judge's train of thought (which happens when you're dealing with crooked or less-than-professional attorneys.)

If the court gruffly commands, "Get on with it, Mister [you]. Present your argument" then inquire, "Are we on the record?" and don't say anything until you're satisfied that you are and then make certain that you touch every point of your written motion completely and in every pertinent regard, and with the court reporter writing down every word said. After all, your written motion was prepared at the office, where you weren't being interrupted, and where you had hours (instead of only a few minutes) to set out your arguments.

While writing the motion, you had the advantage of doing the legal research, reading cases, statutes, rules, and occasionally constitutional provisions in support of your motion ... whereas standing in a courtroom, being stared at by a gun-toting bailiff, being listened to by an impatient judge who'd rather be playing golf, and being interrupted by one's opponent at every opportunity imaginable, it is far less likely one can keep their concentration on all those points by simply working from memory.

Use your motion as an outline and cover every point in detail before sitting down.

If the judge wants you to hurry along ask, "Excuse me, why the rush to judgment?"

Get admissible facts into the court's record using what are called discovery tools.
There are only five of these discovery tools:

1. Requests for Admissions — just what they sound like.
2. Requests for Production — getting papers and things from the other side.
3. Interrogatories — written questions that must be answered under oath.
4. Depositions — spoken questions that must be answered under oath.
5. Subpoenas and other court orders — that command others to respond.

One needs to be aware of their State's Rules of Civil Procedure regarding discovery. Should be readily available in local law library.

Belligerent Claimant