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

RE: [tips_and_tricks] Calif. S.Ct. on Jurisdiction

Expand Messages
  • Gary- D
    Here in Pa the same procedure, however the court have ruled this in and of itself does not confirm jurisdiction, when it is well settled on the record by
    Message 1 of 3 , Oct 18, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Here in Pa the same procedure, however the court
      have ruled this in and of itself does not confirm
      jurisdiction, when it is well settled on the record
      by objection, as noted, while one wades through to
      get the relief sought.

      My brief to the Superior Court of Pa as attachment
      for learning.

      Kindest regards, Gary  


      Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail communication (including any attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U. S. C. 2510 et seq. This communication is CONFIDENTIAL. The work product contained herein are PRIVILEGED and intended only for disclosure to or use by the person(s) listed above. If you are neither the intended recipient(s), nor a person responsible for the delivery of this communication to the intended recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify me immediately by using the "reply" feature and then immediately delete this message and all attachments from your computer. Sender exercises his 1st amendment protection, nothing herein is legal advice for such seek an attorney at law. All rights reserved, without prejudice. Thanking you. Delete all within five (5) days.

      To: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
      From: ebobie@...
      Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 18:05:36 -0500
      Subject: Re: [tips_and_tricks] Calif. S.Ct. on Jurisdiction

      Bear, while this research is fresh on your mind I wonder if you or anyone found a case where status of a defendant caused lack of jurisdiction. I am working on a small claim court's service of a petition and trying to avoid litigation therein because in my state the defendant must pay $75.00 up front to move it to another court where there is a record and right of appeal.If you lose in the small claims court here you have no right of appeal and if you request transfer to another court you must first pay an advance cost of $75.00. The rules of evidence do not apply but jurisdiction surely does. Just how they can charge a defendant any cost before judgment seems to be a due process issue. As far as I know a court that denies due process loses jurisdiction.  If you don't transfer the court will proceed without you and ...no appeal.
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Legalbear
      Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 5:15 PM
      Subject: [tips_and_tricks] Calif. S.Ct. on Jurisdiction


      [3] We now proceed to a consideration of the meaning of the term "jurisdiction" in its relation to the granting of a writ of prohibition. The term, used continuously in a variety of situations, has so many different meanings that no single statement can be entirely satisfactory as a definition. At best it is possible to give the principal illustrations of the situations in which it may be applied, and then to consider 288*288 whether the present case falls within one of the classifications.

      Call me at: 720-675-7230

      On Skype: legalbear

      Best times to call: 8:30 am to 9:00 pm MST

      Join my Yahoo Group Tips & Tricks for Court by sending an email to:


      My blog: legalbearsblog.com

      Tax sites: IRSTerminator.com IRSLienThumper.com IRSLevyThumper.com

      (formatted like this so this email doesn't end up in your spam folder)

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