All cases are friendly suits ...

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
51 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

All cases are friendly suits ...

iamsomedude
Administrator
and can thus be defeated simply by "appearing specially, not generally" while asserting that "none of the facts are in dispute" and that "I reserve all my rights without recourse."

Read The Friendly Sovereign
Read Operation of a Claim in the Nutshell
Read Stopping the Insanity


but this is from the guy who was the key speaker at the meeting in NJ last weekend …
I just contributed ... here are the videos

part_1
 

part_2


part_3



here is the story:
I need to make a video about this but a guy I met from Houston told me about what happened to him.

He is a plastic surgeon and also a student of the law and had filed a lawsuit against the banks over a mortgage. During the progress of this lawsuit he had been in several hearings in federal court and a certain judge had put him in jail several times for contempt of court.

Then something happened and now they were dragging him in on a criminal matter. He didn't say what the matter was all about (and it doesn't matter). He went into the federal court and was before the same judge. He said; "I am here by special appearance, not general appearance. None of the facts are in dispute. I reserve all my rights without prejudice." and then he shut up.

The judge looked at the prosecutor and started to tear a strip off the lawyers. He told them that if they ever brought this man into his court again, he would have their BAR card and he would have them in jail. Then he got up and started to leave the room and as he was going through the door he said over his shoulder; "now why couldn't we have said this in the other proceedings with the bank?"

The first statement about special appearance is saying that he is NOT giving the court jurisdiction. The second statement about the facts is taking away the controversy. The courts MUST have a controversy to rule on. The facts are not relevant because it is a commercial transaction and you could be an axe murderer and do this, because the facts do not matter. Many times they just make up the facts which is further evidence that the facts do not matter. The third statement about reserving all rights and without prejudice brings in common law under their satanic Uniform Commercial Code.

This could be done in any country that has signed onto the UNIDROIT statute. Canada, UK, the Netherlands, USA, most of Europe, 66 countries currently.
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: All cases are friendly suits ...

iamsomedude
Administrator
31 CFR § 363.6 Minor means an individual under the age of 18 years. The term minor is also used to refer to an individual who has attained the age of 18 years but has not yet taken control of the securities contained in his or her minor account.  



Just do search for "friendly suit" on youtube and google. The majority of the results will be for cases involving minors. One youtube video equates "friendly suit" to "friendly fire" which is also "collateral damage."


I am led to believe that all cases are friendly suits and that all cases are initiated with the expectation (estate in expectancy) that one will "opt for" an "alternative agreement between the parties" (26 USC 2032A (d)(2)) in an attempt to avoid or defeat a tax obligation resulting from the transfer of securities/properties held in the minor account of the decedent/US Citizen estate (civilly dead) that incurs otherwise under 26 USC 2032A.

Therefore, when one comes in specially, not generally" while expressing that "none of the facts are in dispute" while "reserving all rights without prejudice," there is no "opting for an alternative agreement" and thus the "friendly suit" falls flat on its face because not only is there no controversy, but there is also no agreement because the whole case was based upon a "gambling/wagering scheme" that one would "opt in" by way of argument.
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: All cases are friendly suits ...

iamsomedude
Administrator

Friendly suits are generally prohibited in the Article III courts of the United States. ["United States v. Johnson", ussc|319|302|1943] In practice, however, friendly suits are rarely explicitly described as such, and they could easily slip into the judicial system through some casual omissions.


Also termed Amicable Action: An action commenced and maintained by the mutual consent and arrangement of the parties to obtain a judgment of a court on a doubtful Question of Law that is based upon facts that both parties accept as being correct and complete.


and look what we find here.
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: All cases are friendly suits ...

derek moran
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: All cases are friendly suits ...

don7411
In reply to this post by iamsomedude
Great stuff.  General jurisdiction is the jurisdiction of the general assembly which is public and invokes the long arm statute of each state or federal.  Special is private and amicable with no controversy or public seal needed.  Beautiful.  
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: All cases are friendly suits ...

derek moran
...from Black's Law 9th

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: All cases are friendly suits ...

derek moran
...from Gibson's equity text

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: All cases are friendly suits ...

derek moran
...from Black's Law 9th

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: All cases are friendly suits ...

iamsomedude
Administrator
In reply to this post by derek moran
PROBLEM: if one is emburdened with a "bail bond," the court already has jurisdiction and if one comes in "specially, not generally," the court can and may just revoke the bond and one may find one's self put back in jail for "breach of contract" which in these "military courts" is actually "dereliction of duty" : a position of "dishonor."

HOWEVER there may just be a SOLUTION:

One should still be able to come into the matter and "appear specially, not generally, under the equitable right of subrogation" to establish one's position.

and as such, I am led to believe that there are actually 3 types of "appearance" ...

general - general = current default that most people engage in the court under (with bail bond, I am so and so, etc ...)
general - special = I am here specially, not generally ... the basic middle ground (without bail bond, as attorney-in-fact, etc ....)
special - special = I am here specially, not generally, under the right of subrogation ... appear with a specific purpose and intent of action in execution of a right


this is along the line of how I approach matters in that there is:

public - public = current default most people engage in commerce and commercial interactions
(agent of agency: a position of TRUST within AGENCY/OFFICE as TRUSTEE of the usufruct of the AGENCY/OFFICE ... must follow orders given)

private - public = there is as executor (ie: politician, name changer), administrator (ie: judge, attorney) and the like ... this is acting with one foot in and one foot out.
(private wo/man acting for AGENCY/OFFICE within the TRUST: a position FOR PROFIT/GAIN within AGENCY/OFFICE as TRUSTEE of the naked ownership of the AGENCY/OFFICE of public-public TRUSTEE ... gives orders to public-public TRUSTEE)

private - private = one is there as personal representative acting for the decedent estate
(appropriate person: position of GRANTOR and BENEFICIARY ... writes the rules of the TRUST creating the AGENCY/OFFICE that the private-public executes and administrates)


I also operate with this one immutable fact: the ONLY right one has in these courts and quasi-contractual proceedings (mediation, etc ...) is the RIGHT OF SUBROGATION since one is being brought in to "pay the debt" or "service the account" and since one is being treated AS IF one were the "surety," then the RIGHT OF SUBROGATION means that one should be able to present the BC as evidence, not of identity, but of interest, and then release that interest to the CLAIMANT, and then under SUBROGATION exercise powers of the usufructuary under Treasury Regulations 1-614(b) and 26 USC 614 without the GRANTOR being treated as the OWNER, thus avoiding TAX LIABILITIES and pay close attention to (b)(5) for this is how these guys are transferring/moving "property" from the control of the CESTUI QUE TRUST name after the "alternative agreement" is established under 26 USC 2032A(d)(2) through the "court case" or whatever.

If you have yet to do so, sit down and READ; I mean REALLY read Treasury Regulations 1-614(b) and 26 USC 614 along with 26 USC 2032A (start at (e)(11) and (d)(2)) ... REALLY!! SIT DOWN AND READ THESE SECTIONS and then go look at United States v Pewee Coal (paragraph 5) again and again until it sinks in that all these actions in courts are attempts to REPUDIATE the duties of the usfuructuary by "forcing" an alternative agreement upon the BENEFICIARY of the CESTUI QUE TRUST in order that BENEFICIARY renounce their allegiance to God Almighty with claims that the BENEFICIARY is not worthy of receiving the blessings of the covenants (ie: Declaration of Independence, Articles of Confederation, US Constitution, and Northwest Ordinance: the 4 Organic Laws; physical manifestation of the Kingdom of Heaven here on Earth) ...

the Accuser is working thru the attorney, must like Christ works through you, and the Accuser is testifying that you are not worthy, thus has right to DEVOUR your inheritance and ONLY God Almighty working through the LORD (earthly government ordained by God) can REBUKE the devourer and SILENCE the accuser.

READ Malachi 3: 7-11 and REMEMBER Book of Job and RECITE the Lord's prayer granted/gifted to his people as written in Matthew 6:9-13 when before these HEATHENS.

~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: All cases are friendly suits ...

don7411
novation=new deal

without novation=original jurisdiction

all of this stuff is just the majick they have pulled out of their hat and put into words.

if you notice all the remedies include without.

either your a debtor or not.  If you argue, then the presumption is you are because if your not there is no argument.

Of course if the bar attorney sitting on the bench is practicing law from the bench, then call him to the Kings bench without the aid of the bar (attorney). Remember he is the trustee, not you.  Your in camera proceeding in the CR process compliments of our brother in christ, Boris.  The remedy we seek must be in private or we expose the reprobate and the ecclesiastical canon law (cestui que vie) they operate under while denying the man standing as executor of his own ecclesiastical trust and authority for all real law not law merchant with in rem and in personam which is admiralty law.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: All cases are friendly suits ...

Rschallmo
In reply to this post by iamsomedude
If I only had this information when I was in court I would have spoken it. Although I did mention my right to surbrogation and equitable subrogation. I also stated I have no adverse claims. The attorney said  in his motion to dismiss  the Complaint that each count fails to state a claim for which relief can be granted and I have not alleged any of the elements of equitable subrogation.

He also stated that it is clear from the allegations of the Complaint that Schallmo is not a subrogee and that I cannot establish it, which is the most basic element of equitable subrogation.

He brought up the subject of alleged violation of 18 USC 1346, rights of honest services. He said this claim is often applied in relation to mail and wire fraud and that the plaintiff must state with particularity the circumstances constituting fraud. The requisite particularly should include what conduct was fraudulent; why the conduct was fraudulent; how the fraud was carried out; and when and where the conduct took place.

I know when I was in court that I made mistakes, I tried my best from what I knew. When you’re in court it’s plays on your psyche.

I am constantly studying and will not give up. Doing this is a full time job.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: All cases are friendly suits ...

bill
It appears that your first priority would be to figure out what "failure to state a claim" means.  The court has no subject matter jurisdiction with out a statement of claim.  What constitutes a "statement of claim"?  

"Where there are no depositions, admissions, or affidavits the court has no facts to rely on for a summary determination." Trinsey v. Pagliaro, D.C. Pa. 1964, 229 F. Supp. 647.

Where is your VERIFIED affidavit with PROOF OF CLAIM, [CR(tm)] on and for the court record?  Works both ways, now you are the [ACCUSER] Plaintiff,  so where is your PROOF OF CLAIM.

 
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 12:22 PM
From: "Rschallmo [via UNDERGROUND CANTINA]" <[hidden email]>
To: "Jo King" <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: All cases are friendly suits ...
If I only had this information when I was in court I would have spoken it. Although I did mention my right to surbrogation and equitable subrogation. I also stated I have no adverse claims. The attorney said  in his motion to dismiss  the Complaint that each count fails to state a claim for which relief can be granted and I have not alleged any of the elements of equitable subrogation.

He also stated that it is clear from the allegations of the Complaint that Schallmo is not a subrogee and that I cannot establish it, which is the most basic element of equitable subrogation.

He brought up the subject of alleged violation of 18 USC 1346, rights of honest services. He said this claim is often applied in relation to mail and wire fraud and that the plaintiff must state with particularity the circumstances constituting fraud. The requisite particularly should include what conduct was fraudulent; why the conduct was fraudulent; how the fraud was carried out; and when and where the conduct took place.

I know when I was in court that I made mistakes, I tried my best from what I knew. When you’re in court it’s plays on your psyche.

I am constantly studying and will not give up. Doing this is a full time job.


 
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://underground-cantina.83190.x6.nabble.com/All-cases-are-friendly-suits-tp3598p3646.html
To start a new topic under UNDERGROUND CANTINA, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from UNDERGROUND CANTINA, click here.
NAML
Take the road less traveled
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: All cases are friendly suits ...

Rschallmo
This post was updated on .
I put the 3 CR(tm)’s in the complaint along with my BC. I am trying the best I know to save my house from foreclosure. It’s not easy when you’re stressed out.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: All cases are friendly suits ...

bill
That's good but w/o a sworn statement that explains all the facts, everything you entered will be ignored because there was no one that SWORE under oath that these things actually happened. [here-say] who, what, where, how, when, etc.
 
The attorney knows this and the court will agree to the dismissal unless you come up with "goods" to give the court  SMJ.       Without any "testimony"  your'e wasting your time. 
 
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 1:33 PM
From: "Rschallmo [via UNDERGROUND CANTINA]" <[hidden email]>
To: "Jo King" <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: All cases are friendly suits ...
I put the 3 CR(tm)’s in the complaint along with my BC.
 
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://underground-cantina.83190.x6.nabble.com/All-cases-are-friendly-suits-tp3598p3648.html
To start a new topic under UNDERGROUND CANTINA, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from UNDERGROUND CANTINA, click here.
NAML
Take the road less traveled
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: All cases are friendly suits ...

Rschallmo
So what would I do now? The attorney put in for dismissal yesterday.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: All cases are friendly suits ...

bill
This post was updated on .
find another house.................no, seriously,  I would make up affidavits that the def. can not rebut. about everything that happened and subpeana the bank and demand the note be bought forward for my signature and assignment to the US, you have loads to talk about and they have nothing.  but you gotta have a signed, notorized affidavit in the court record then   go for discovery of the note.    
 

Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 3:04 PM
From: "Rschallmo [via UNDERGROUND CANTINA]" <ml+s83190n3651h62@n6.nabble.com>
To: "Jo King" <freetradezone@mail.com>
Subject: Re: All cases are friendly suits ...

So what would I do now? The attorney put in for dismissal yesterday.
 


If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://underground-cantina.83190.x6.nabble.com/All-cases-are-friendly-suits-tp3598p3651.html 

To start a new topic under UNDERGROUND CANTINA, email ml+s83190n1h12@n6.nabble.com
To unsubscribe from UNDERGROUND CANTINA, click here .
NAML




Take the road less traveled
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: All cases are friendly suits ...

Rschallmo
Not funny. Low blow.

I’m asking because I’m not sure what to do next. I don’t think I’ve ever done an affidavit so where would one start.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: All cases are friendly suits ...

Rasdiggy
In reply to this post by bill
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE


On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 12:48 PM Jo King [via UNDERGROUND CANTINA] <[hidden email]> wrote:
find another house
 
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 3:04 PM
From: "Rschallmo [via UNDERGROUND CANTINA]" <[hidden email]>
To: "Jo King" <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: All cases are friendly suits ...
So what would I do now? The attorney put in for dismissal yesterday.
 
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://underground-cantina.83190.x6.nabble.com/All-cases-are-friendly-suits-tp3598p3651.html
To start a new topic under UNDERGROUND CANTINA, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from UNDERGROUND CANTINA, click here.
NAML
Take the road less traveled



If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://underground-cantina.83190.x6.nabble.com/All-cases-are-friendly-suits-tp3598p3653.html
To start a new topic under UNDERGROUND CANTINA, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from UNDERGROUND CANTINA, click here.
NAML
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: All cases are friendly suits ...

Rschallmo
Rasdiggy

I appreciate the input that some are putting out there but if I don’t understand it how can I prepare it. I need something to go off of to understand it.  I found “notice of entry and special appearance” that Boris put out after you get the CUSIP report back, I’m going to look into that .
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: All cases are friendly suits ...

Rasdiggy
Make sure anything you send, have someone do the actual mailing and create the affidavit of service; the Original to see he clerk of clerk and copies to the other parties.  There are your two witness's. One is the man/woman that did the mailing the other is the post office. For affidavit  a template Boris provided when he posted the CR docs around November 2017-Feb2018. Relax and do NOT stress about the outcome. Let go. Surrender all to the Christ.

On Nov 15, 2018 7:20 AM, "Rschallmo [via UNDERGROUND CANTINA]" <[hidden email]> wrote:
Rasdiggy

I appreciate the input that some are putting out there but if I don’t understand it how can I prepare it. I need something to go off of to understand it.  I found “notice of entry and special appearance” that Boris put out after you get the CUSIP report back, I’m going to look into that .


If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://underground-cantina.83190.x6.nabble.com/All-cases-are-friendly-suits-tp3598p3665.html
To start a new topic under UNDERGROUND CANTINA, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from UNDERGROUND CANTINA, click here.
NAML
123