> If you fail to state all elements, you fail to state the cause of
> The statement above I got from one of the studies.
California code pretty much spells it out for everybody willing to read
> From this I come
> to the conclusion that the complaint without all the elements of the
> cause of action is an invalid complaint. If that be so, then the
> court lacks jurisdiction!!!
Yes, and please apply that principle, that anything without all the
parts isn't the same thing as it is with all the parts. An officer
without an oath, a jury without 12 people, an arraignment without the
required steps, etc. etc. Guess how many people will settle for less
than the contract requires? Are you one of them?
> From my understanding all that would be needed is to petition court to
> dismiss for failure to state a cause of action, and or lack of
> jurisdiction for violation of due process.
From my understanding nothing is needed. I don't need to be prosecuted
for anything, and I'm not going to cooperate in it. Why should I
"petition" (read "grant jurisdiction to act") ANYONE to "dismiss"
something ("an action") THAT DOES NOT YET EXIST?! How many angels on
the head of a pin is the same number as how many cases exist to be
dismissed that don't start with a complaint!