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

RE: [tips_and_tricks] Re: Case law on tendering payment (gold)

Expand Messages
  • Cyril Grosse
    I ve stumbled across research that seems to indicate that most modern alleged acts of legislature are non-constitutional on their face due to the lack of
    Message 1 of 11 , Apr 29, 2005
      I've stumbled across research that seems to indicate that most modern
      alleged "acts" of legislature are non-constitutional on their face due to
      the lack of enacting clause which specifies the legislative origin of
      authority.

      -Cyril Grossé
      ________________________________________________________________
      "A truth's initial commotion is directly proportional to how deeply the lie
      was believed. When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to
      the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and
      its speaker, a raving lunatic." --Dresden James




      -----Original Message-----
      From: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
      [mailto:tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of paradoxmagnus
      Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 10:04 PM
      To: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [tips_and_tricks] Re: Case law on tendering payment (gold)

      If you really want case law, you might like this.

      Patrick in California

      "An unconstitutional act is not law: it confers no rights; it imposes
      no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal
      contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed."
      NORTON v. SHELBY COUNTY, 118 U.S. 425












      Yahoo! Groups Links
    • Christopher Dilts
      Hello Well you cannot just site the constitution. Yes it is a first class legal authroity but, from begining of a Republic case law (form of common law) has
      Message 2 of 11 , Apr 30, 2005

        Hello

        Well you cannot just site the constitution. Yes it is a first class legal authroity but, from begining of a Republic case law (form of common law) has always been used to define such things as our constitution, law, court rules etc. As to it being worthless opinions I do aploygies if this offends anyone , but in my experiance positive case law (headnotes, or legal holdings not context of case) when used correctly has boxed even the most prejudical of courts into a corner where they had to rule in my favor. So case law that is head notes or holdings that are positive law will make your case. The one real problem with just citing the constitution here is that since the UCC came in and since I am assume this is dealing with a mortgage of some kind you cannot boardly cite the constitution as a defense. Their first and valid defense will be that under the contract which is government by UCC (most contracts actaully state this) it was agree that certain tender which is consider federal reserve notes are considered legal tender in whatever state in most of these contracts. In order to win on that type of argument you will have to cite state case law states gold and silver is tender (remeber states can always give more constitutional protects that supersede federal), that the bank in forming and excution of the contract actaully never gave anything of value (since federal resevre notes not worth nothing and all partyies in contract must give somthing of value in order not to be adhesive or void), this is where tender case law comes in to show value, also we have to show how you truly where not aware of this at time(so then can not raise defenses that you where aware of all conditions of contract) this is so they can not bring up not our fault you made dumb contract, and finally you will want speically plead this in most states as your answer and motion to dismiss or you may waive right to.(most states require void contracts, or usury, fraud, to be raised speificaly in answer with facts supporting it or it is consider waived).

        If this is a mortgage there are other defenses I will look for such as TILA violations, RESPA violations, or even state law violation of usuary statutes(above legal limit Illinois is 9 percent)

        If credit card FDCPA, FCRA, and defenses such as lack of personal knowledge (failure to have affidavit filed with complaint)

        If you like I can send you tender case law for your state. I have already research all 50 states on the issues.MODERATOR/BEAR: PAY ATTENTION!! DO NOT request the case law for your state by posting to the group; REQUEST IT STRAIGHT FROM JAMIE AT HIS EMAIL ADDRESS...THIS IS A WARNING!So would be no problem. Oh what ever you do not cite that Michigan case that suppose to support Federal Resevre Money is no good etc. That case was overturned , not to mention it was only a case ruled on by magistrate (has no binding authority even in that local court), and from what I have seen is just a patriot siver bullet argument sold at high prices and personally know people that it failed to work for. Welll I hope this helps , that I did not assume anything incorrectly, and if did hope it still helps. Let me know if you want case law

        Oh one last thing I used usuary defenses, as well as essiental elements of contracts, (no meeting of mind, considerartion, value etc), and void contract due to violation of statute in mortgage void judgment case and actaully had attorneys try to settle case after judgment been rendered for 5 years. That should show the power of it would have probably vacated if person who motion was used would have went through to hearing instead of dropping it.

        Jamie

        >From: greg lesher <downwiththeun@...>
        >Reply-To: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
        >To: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
        >Subject: [tips_and_tricks]Case law on tendering payment (gold)
        >Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 21:43:03 -0700 (PDT)
        >
        >
        >
        >__________________________________________________
        >Do You Yahoo!?
        >Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
        >http://mail.yahoo.com
        >
        >
        >
      • Bob law
        ... It is my understanding that the Enactment Clause is only required when the Congress of the united States(50 union state Republics) is assembled and
        Message 3 of 11 , May 1 8:17 AM
          Cyril Grosse' wrote:
          > I've stumbled across research .........modern
          > alleged "acts" of legislature >

          It is my understanding that the "Enactment Clause" is
          only required when the Congress of the united
          States(50 union state Republics) is assembled and
          legislating for the States.
          I could be mistaken, and have been before, but as I
          understand the jurisdiction of Congress it is
          bifurcated, and they legislate for predominately the
          "federal zone", and for the States only on rare
          occasion.
          Later,
          Bob L.



          > I've stumbled across research .........modern
          > alleged "acts" of legislature >

          __________________________________________________
          Do You Yahoo!?
          Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
          http://mail.yahoo.com
        • Christopher Dilts
          Hello Note: Mr Bear sorry about attaching case law I will not send attachments to group when for speific members. Thanks for the heads up. The enactment
          Message 4 of 11 , May 1 8:46 AM

            Hello

            Note: Mr Bear sorry about attaching case law I will not send attachments to group when for speific members. Thanks for the heads up.

            The enactment argument is a beautiful legal pricnipal. I defined it in my Winning Before you Plea packet along with misnomer argument, the procedure verified complaint argument, and the common law verified complaint argument (no victum no crime). The enactment argument does take some good legal research to pull off and I have always gave a procedure reason to dismiss the charge so as to give court a way out. Iin most states that I know of it would be a question that the court would most likely require to be address by state supreme court first if you where to challenge the constitutionality of statute being charge with, but if use argument as grounds to attach charge for defects in the prosecution for missing valid statement of violation then this is simply procedural question. Below is segment from packet of mine I hope you find this interesting.

            Jamie

            (From Winning before you Plea)

            Enactment Argument

             

            Layman�s definition: The enactment argument is when the books that contain the law are missing an enactment clause on the face of the law or the law itself failed to be enacted properly. One may think that this is trivial, but for example in Illinois the enactment clause was on the face of the law books from 1850 to 1975 that in itself should show its importance not to mention it is a piece of evidence the court then have to take mandatory judicial notice of. So what is the enactment clause? It simply is a statement that is required to be including in all bills (laws) in order to show the public that the law has been enacted.  Most states require it in their constitution (In Iowa it is found in Art 3 sec 1 of their constitution In Illinois it is Art. 4 section 8) some do not. The courts have ruled that if the law books (statutes) lack this simple requirement they are not valid laws since courts are to interupt statutes as a whole.

             

             

             

            Legal Definition: I will use Iowa and Illinois as an example

             

            General assembly. SECTION 1. The legislative authority of this state shall be vested in a general assembly, which shall consist of a senate and house of representatives: and the style of every law shall be. "Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Iowa ."

            Passage of Bills section 8 The enacting clause of the laws of this State shall be, �Be it enacted by the People of the State of Illinois , represented in the General Assembly.�

            Application:  In order to use this argument correctly one must apply their states case law in several areas of law.  First, find when your state stopped placing the enactment clause in their law books. The reason for this is, when you can show that your state had the enactment clause in their books at one time, you can force the court to take judicial notice of that undisputable fact. Second, one must find case law on how the constitution of the state is supreme authority in your State court and all laws not pursuant to it are void. The reason for this is to force the court to abide by the constitutional requirements for statutes to have an enactment clause on the face of the law. Third, one must find case law on how the courts are required to read, construe, and apply statutes. The reason for this is that the court will not be able to say that the law has the enactment clause, but it is just not on the face of the law when they interpret the application of the enactment statute. Finally, give the court a way out by allowing them to dismiss your case on a procedural defect instead of trying to force the issue itself.

            Sample format  see motion to dismiss at end of this packet



             

            >From: "Cyril Grosse" <cyril@...>
            >Reply-To: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
            >To: <tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com>
            >Subject: RE: [tips_and_tricks] Re: Case law on tendering payment (gold)
            >Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 19:56:04 -0700
            >
            >
          • paradoxmagnus
            Rre statutes that are non properly enacted VOID or are they PRIVATE law? Patrick in California It ain t what ya don t know that hurts ya. What really puts a
            Message 5 of 11 , May 1 10:50 AM
              Rre statutes that are non properly enacted VOID or are they PRIVATE
              law?

              Patrick in California

              It ain't what ya don't know that hurts ya. What really puts a hurtin'
              on ya is what ya knows for sure, that just ain't so. -- Uncle Remus


              --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, "Christopher Dilts"
              <christopherdilts@h...> wrote:
              >
            • Sterling W Wyatt
              Agreed. That is the missing case cite I am looking for that says to the effect that the presumption is that UNLESS EXPRESED OTHERWISE, the Laws of Congress
              Message 6 of 11 , May 1 12:58 PM
                Agreed. That is the missing case cite I am looking for that says to the effect that the presumption is that UNLESS EXPRESED OTHERWISE, the "Laws of Congress" are under the "exclusive legislation" clause and apply only to the so called "federal zone".
                 
                Now apply that knowledge to the various excise and income tax laws in the IRC.  Seems to me to fit nicely with Ralph's recent release of his research on "substantive" regulations - which most of the income tax laws don't have.
                 
                Wayne
                 
                 On Sun, 1 May 2005 08:17:21 -0700 (PDT) Bob law <saveyourpay@...> writes:
                ---snip---
                I could be mistaken, and have been before, but as I
                understand the jurisdiction of Congress it is
                bifurcated, and they legislate for predominately the
                "federal zone", and for the States only on rare
                occasion.
                 
              • paradoxmagnus
                Is this what you were looking for? (c) Application of Terms. As used in these rules the following terms have the designated meanings. Act of Congress
                Message 7 of 11 , May 1 4:59 PM
                  Is this what you were looking for?

                  (c) Application of Terms. As used in these rules the following terms
                  have the designated meanings. "Act of Congress" includes any act of
                  Congress locally applicable to and in force in the District of
                  Columbia, in Puerto Rico, in a territory or in an insular
                  possession.
                  Title 18 United States Code FEDERAL RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE,
                  Rule 54. Application and Exception



                  --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, Sterling W Wyatt
                  <swwyatt@j...> wrote:
                  > Agreed. That is the missing case cite I am looking for that says
                  to the
                  > effect that the presumption is that UNLESS EXPRESED OTHERWISE,
                  the "Laws
                  > of Congress" are under the "exclusive legislation" clause and
                  apply only
                  > to the so called "federal zone".
                  >
                  > Now apply that knowledge to the various excise and income tax laws
                  in the
                  > IRC. Seems to me to fit nicely with Ralph's recent release of his
                  > research on "substantive" regulations - which most of the income
                  tax laws
                  > don't have.
                  >
                  > Wayne
                  >
                  > On Sun, 1 May 2005 08:17:21 -0700 (PDT) Bob law <saveyourpay@y...>
                  > writes:
                  > ---snip---
                  > I could be mistaken, and have been before, but as I
                  > understand the jurisdiction of Congress it is
                  > bifurcated, and they legislate for predominately the
                  > "federal zone", and for the States only on rare
                  > occasion.
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.