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

Purported Clerk of Court forecloses absent a Note or proper Oath of Office

Expand Messages
  • Email41@aol.com
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PowNaORctbA In absence of the proper oath of office, and in absence of the Note (which is required), and with written admission
    Message 1 of 6 , Nov 2, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PowNaORctbA

      In absence of the proper oath of office, and in absence of the Note (which is required), and with written admission from the bank that they don't have any copies of any documentation concerning the loan, Brian Shipwash, illegally in office as Davidson County Clerk of Superior Court, forecloses. Then the Sheriff brings a SWAT TEAM, and evicts the family, (As seen on Michael Moore's CAPITALISM - A LOVE STORY).



    • Michael
      Tuesday 3 November 2009 While what is presented may be true, it is still only half a story. The two people in question are not criminals, but are acting
      Message 2 of 6 , Nov 3, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Tuesday 3 November 2009

        While what is presented may be true, it is still only
        half a story. The two people in question are not
        criminals, but are acting under color of law.

        There is no mention as to whether there was a challenge and
        demand made to produce the note, and a challenge and demand
        made to prove oath of office. Without such challenge, the
        foreclosed party waives it.

        A subpeona was issued, and the bank responded, apparently
        in truth. Was there then a further challenge and demand to
        produce the note and the holder in due course, or was that
        also waived?

        The other half of the story, unknown, is more pertinent.

        Cheers,

        nm
      • Frog Farmer
        ... Right, and I was wondering how the scene went down when the debt was attempted to be paid in lawful money by the patriot third party trying to help out.
        Message 3 of 6 , Nov 3, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          Michael wrote:

          > There is no mention as to whether there was a challenge and
          > demand made to produce the note, and a challenge and demand
          > made to prove oath of office. Without such challenge, the
          > foreclosed party waives it.

          Right, and I was wondering how the scene went down when the debt was
          attempted to be paid in lawful money by the patriot third party trying
          to help out. Unless there wasn't one. Then how did it go down when
          they were offered silver or gold, which did they choose and who made the
          choice, and how did it calculate out?

          > A subpeona was issued, and the bank responded, apparently
          > in truth. Was there then a further challenge and demand to
          > produce the note and the holder in due course, or was that
          > also waived?

          Here, do you know how long THAT would take, getting qualified actors to
          do everything?! It couldn't get done with proper and timely publicly
          witnessed objections.

          Regards,

          FF




          >
          > The other half of the story, unknown, is more pertinent.
          >
          > Cheers,
          >
          > nm
          >
          >
          >
          > ------------------------------------
          >
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          >
        • B
          No Oath, No Authority to perform the duties of the Office. This may make the actions taken VOID as they were conducted by a non official party and not the
          Message 4 of 6 , Nov 3, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            No Oath, No Authority to perform the duties of the Office.

            This may make the actions taken VOID as they were conducted by a non official party and not the actual Officer of the Court.

            This may be worth looking into. Void Judgments are Void whether or not you make a challenge in court during trial or hearing.

            Without an Oath of Office anything that was done under color of Office or Law by the party assuming the Office without perfecting their position in the Office may be void. Where is their authority to do anything under the Office?

            On the Note issue, the cases that have received a lot of attention (Ohio, as example) were won based on arguing the lack of a contract and not the absence of a Note. The U.C.C. places a time limit on Notes (Section 3.) You may not have a Note, but rather a Contract (Section 8). This may be worth looking into.

            --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, "Michael" <mn_chicago@...> wrote:
            >
            >
            >
            > Tuesday 3 November 2009
            >
            > While what is presented may be true, it is still only
            > half a story. The two people in question are not
            > criminals, but are acting under color of law.
            >
            > There is no mention as to whether there was a challenge and
            > demand made to produce the note, and a challenge and demand
            > made to prove oath of office. Without such challenge, the
            > foreclosed party waives it.
            >
            > A subpeona was issued, and the bank responded, apparently
            > in truth. Was there then a further challenge and demand to
            > produce the note and the holder in due course, or was that
            > also waived?
            >
            > The other half of the story, unknown, is more pertinent.
            >
            > Cheers,
            >
            > nm
            >
          • Michael
            ... Not true. Read up on the defacto officer doctrine, and a few cases covering same. Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425, 440 (1886) ... If you are
            Message 5 of 6 , Nov 4, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, "B" <fticeo@...> wrote:

              > No Oath, No Authority to perform the duties of the Office.

              > This may make the actions taken VOID as they were conducted by a non official party and not the actual Officer of the Court.

              Not true. Read up on the defacto officer doctrine, and a
              few cases covering same.

              Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425, 440 (1886)

              > This may be worth looking into. Void Judgments are Void whether or not you make a challenge in court during trial or hearing.

              If you are suggesting that the judgment would be void
              due to no oath or no offical act, see above.


              > Without an Oath of Office anything that was done under color of Office or Law by the party assuming the Office without perfecting their position in the Office may be void. Where is their authority to do anything under the Office?

              Asked and answered.


              Half information can be as dangerous as wrong information.
            • The Handyman
              I have a case on appeal where the sheriff and Director of the Tax Bureau were not under oath and they seized and sold a home. The judge refuses to void the
              Message 6 of 6 , Nov 4, 2009
              I have a case on appeal where the sheriff and Director of the Tax Bureau were not under oath and they seized and sold a home. The judge refuses to void the tax sale. The attached is useful to void a judgment for no recorded oath. .
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.