Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Basic federal definitions

Expand Messages
  • Sterling W Wyatt
    Newbies often ask about some basic definitions that Title 1 USC Secs 1-8 clarify. For example: Does person include individuals & corporations ? If
    Message 1 of 3 , Jun 29, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      "Newbies" often ask about some basic definitions that Title 1 USC Secs 1-8 clarify.  For example:  Does "person" include "individuals" & "corporations"?  If you haven't done so, take a couple of minutes to flip (Next) through these several sections.  http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/
      SWW
      ----------------------
       
      TITLE 1 > CHAPTER 1 > § 1Prev | Next

      § 1. Words denoting number, gender, and so forthIn determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, unless the context indicates otherwise—

      words importing the singular include and apply to several persons, parties, or things;
      words importing the plural include the singular;
      words importing the masculine gender include the feminine as well;
      words used in the present tense include the future as well as the present;
      the words “insane” and “insane person” and “lunatic” shall include every idiot, lunatic, insane person, and person non compos mentis;
      the words “person” and “whoever” include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals;
      “officer” includes any person authorized by law to perform the duties of the office;
      “signature” or “subscription” includes a mark when the person making the same intended it as such;
      “oath” includes affirmation, and “sworn” includes affirmed;
      “writing” includes printing and typewriting and reproductions of visual symbols by photographing, multigraphing, mimeographing, manifolding, or otherwise.
       
      ----end---
    • Cornerstone Foundation
      Cornerstone Foundation asks the group: Is the real,living, flesh and blood man who is an inhabitant on and domiciled on the land an individual as defined in
      Message 2 of 3 , Jul 1, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
         
         
        Cornerstone Foundation asks the group:
         
        Is the real,living, flesh and blood man who is an inhabitant on and domiciled on the land an "individual" as defined in the federal code or can only "persons" be individuals?

        Sterling W Wyatt <swwyatt@...> wrote:
        "Newbies" often ask about some basic definitions that Title 1 USC Secs 1-8 clarify.  For example:  Does "person" include "individuals" & "corporations"?  If you haven't done so, take a couple of minutes to flip (Next) through these several sections.  http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/
        SWW
        ----------------------
         
        TITLE 1 > CHAPTER 1 > § 1
        Prev | Next
        § 1. Words denoting number, gender, and so forthIn determining the
        the words ...the words “person” and “whoever” include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals;
        “officer” includes any person authorized by law to perform the duties of the office;
        “signature” or “subscription” includes a mark when the person making the same intended it as such;
        “oath” includes affirmation, and “sworn” includes affirmed;
        “writing” includes printing and typewriting and reproductions of visual symbols by photographing, multigraphing, mimeographing, manifolding, or otherwise.
         
        ----end---


        Sneak preview the all-new Yahoo.com. It's not radically different. Just radically better.

      • Frog Farmer
        ... In MY opinion, individual is an adjective, which because it was always followed by the same word (person), began to be used alone without the second
        Message 3 of 3 , Jul 27, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          On Jul 1, 2006, at 1:09 PM, Cornerstone Foundation wrote:

          > Cornerstone Foundation asks the group:
          >  
          > Is the real,living, flesh and blood man who is an inhabitant on and
          > domiciled on the land an "individual" as defined in the federal code
          > or can only "persons" be individuals?
          >

          In MY opinion, "individual" is an adjective, which because it was
          always followed by the same word (person), began to be used alone
          without the second word, implying a noun - an adjective misused as a
          noun.

          You know, just like "drunk". Only a real flesh and blood man can "be"
          "a" "drunk".

          It's probably the same with "individual". All "individuals" are real
          flesh and blood, just as are all "drunks", but not every living flesh
          and blood human is an individual or a drunk (______fill in missing term
          modified by remaining adjectives____).

          I think that redundancies are avoided when possible, so the only reason
          for saying "individual human being" in a law context is when only one
          human being constitutes the "business" (corporation, trust, etc.), then
          adding the word "individual" makes sense, as opposed to a board of
          officers. The individual is an officer, a holder of an office, and has
          a fiduciary duty within the terms of the original charter. Please
          correct me if I'm wrong - I just like things to make sense, and
          "individual human being" to refer to ALL people is a redundancy, like
          "affidavit of truth" (you know, as opposed to that OTHER kind of
          affidavit!) Same thing here if you ask me. So, to avoid redundancy,
          taking it in the "business" sense makes sense. Now, do you "have" "a"
          "business"?

          Regards,

          FF
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.