17849Ongoing cases - was Return of property tax bills.
- Sep 9, 2010Frog Farmer sez: "I won the drivers license case three times, three different ways. It was my educational process."
We've had some interesting twists & turns on that issue too, I lost one by not being prepared (my own fault), had other cases dismissed & I've got a Rule 5.1 motion in federal court now - that's a constitutional challenge to a state statute - what it boils down to is the requirement to have a valid SSN card to get a NC driver's license & this question, which I've never seen raised before - what authority does a state legislature have to make me (or anyone) join with a voluntary federal "benefits" program to get a state privilege? The answer is simple - no such authority exists. But no ruling has been made on my motion & while by Rule, the state attny. general can intervene within 60 days, that's long passed & not a peep from the state.
The Social Security system is voluntary & I even have 3 letters from S.S. Admin. officials that all start out the same way - "There is no law which requires anyone to get a social security number to live or work in the United States, or just for the purpose of having one." One goes on to say, "Of course, a person with no social security number would have no taxable income." HELLO !!! But back on point - how can the state legislature make me (or anyone) get a SSN to get a driver's license? They can't & I've only found one case on that issue, from the Tulare Co. superior court in California & it doesn't set a "legal precedent". Long story short, the court held that having or not having a SSN has NOTHING to do with whether or not you can "operate a motor vehicle" safely on the public highways & they ordered the state to renew the guy's license - he'd had one for years & had a clean driving record, but once they changed the law & started requiring a
SSN, since he wouldn't get one, they wouldn't renew his license. That case is People of the State of California v. Pyatt, Tulare County Superior Court, No. 65724 (2001).
> Who is "we" and where did you find like-minded people in your area?!
Long story behind that, but in brief, when I moved to this general area in 1991 & started looking things up @ the university law library just to satisfy my own curiosity about certain issues, I happened to meet some other folks who were doing the same thing. I never in a million years expected the study to "snowball" & turn into a vocation, but it did & there are a few folks who still study daily as I have ever since Jan., 1991. We've seen every "Patriot" argument there is, all the "Strawman", "Admiralty", "UCC", etc. ad nauseum stuff & while some are more interested in legal theory, all I care about is what actually works. And we know from experience that what worked last time may not this time - "they" will change the statutes / regulations when some tactic you developed works too well - believe me!
> Speaking of 90% of the time, that is the percentage of convictions due to admissions and confessions! Coincidence? YOU DECIDE!
No, it's certainly not coincidence, one of the biggest errors people make is making "affirmative defenses" where they take the burden of proof upon themselves & unfortunately, most people who contact me for help are already in a lot of trouble which they could have avoided if they knew more about who they were dealing with. One key is to flip that burden of proof over onto "them" & as you have said, doing things such as filing a motion in a court case gives them jurisdiction over you - you can't "move" a court to do anything unless the court has the jurisdiction to do it & by filing a motion, you just said it does.
>> Use their own documents & procedures against them. But of course you have to know how . . .
> Isn't that easy enough? You read the same stuff they read, right? Maybe a little more!
Absolutely - and a LOT more! Like look up every single case that's ever been decided on issues like the ones in your situation. Whether you like the court rulings or not is irrelevant, but you will get to see the arguments the other side will make & how a court is likely to rule on the issues. I study cases where people lost as much if not more than those where people won - so I can see what the people who lost did wrong & not make the same mistakes! Those who like to live in a fantasy world where administrative procedures work the way they're supposed to, where judges rule the way they should, etc. are virtually guaranteed to lose & especially if they don't learn the procedural rules & follow them very carefully - whether you like the rules or not is irrelevant - but if you don't follow them you will lose.
For example, I bought the Annotated Rules of North Carolina & you can get the same type books for any State - the Annotated version not only has the Rules, but if there's ever been a "legal precedent" case about the meaning or application of any given rule, such cases will be listed - a brief description of each case & the full citation so you can look it up if it applies to your situation. I also have the General Statutes, Annotated, which are arranged the same way. You can bet your opponent is using such books & if you don't, that's your fault.
What it boils down to is has the issue I'm raising been raised before? And/or has the argument I intend to make ever been made before? If so, how did the courts rule on those issues / arguments? Again, it matters not whether you agree with the rulings - but you most assuredly need to know what they have been or you're "toast" before you even start.
~ ~ ~
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>