Kevin Walker Estate Files Writ of Mandamus, Notice, and Order in Federal Case Demanding Court Enforce $1.1 Billion Contract and Default Judgment, and Sanctions Against Dishonorable Defendants

Categories
Business, Constitution, Education, Intangibles, Law/Legal, News, Realworldfare, Remedy, Securities, Sovereigns, Strawman/Artifical Entity/Legal Fiction, Trust

The Kevin Walker Estate, et al., has intensified its legal fight for rights, accountability, and justice by filing a Writ of Mandamus and an Order Granting Default and Summary Judgment, demanding the court enforce Defendants’ binding default and immediate liability for $1.1 billion. The court has already identified PHH Mortgage Services’ Motion to Dismiss as procedurally defective and subject to striking, further evidencing Defendants’ dishonor. With Chevron deference overturned, the court is bound to rule strictly on constitutional and statutory law, without arbitrary dismissal. Should the court fail to act, Plaintiffs are prepared to escalate the matter through appellate relief, federal enforcement, and sanctions for obstruction of justice. This case has the potential to establish a landmark precedent in ensuring financial institutions and courts adhere to the rule of law.

The Kevin Walker Estate, et al., has intensified its legal fight for rights, accountability, and justice by filing a Writ of Mandamus and an Order Granting Default and Summary Judgment, demanding the court enforce Defendants’ binding default and immediate liability for $1.1 billion. The court has already identified PHH Mortgage Services’ Motion to Dismiss as procedurally defective and subject to striking, further evidencing Defendants’ dishonor. With Chevron deference overturned, the court is bound to rule strictly on constitutional and statutory law, without arbitrary dismissal. Should the court fail to act, Plaintiffs are prepared to escalate the matter through appellate relief, federal enforcement, and sanctions for obstruction of justice. This case has the potential to establish a landmark precedent in ensuring financial institutions and courts adhere to the rule of law.

How to Lawfully Represent Your ‘Trust’ as an “Attorney-in-Fact” in Accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1654, U.C.C. § 3-402, and Article 1 Section 10 of the Constitution

Categories
Business, Constitution, Education, Intangibles, Law/Legal, News, Realworldfare, Remedy, Securities, Sovereigns, Strawman/Artifical Entity/Legal Fiction, Tips, Trust

The authority to represent a trust as an attorney-in-fact is firmly established under federal law, the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), and longstanding legal precedent. Contrary to common misconceptions, a trust operates as a contractual entity, granting it the ability to be lawfully represented by an authorized agent, including an attorney-in-fact. This article explores the legal framework affirming this right, highlights key statutory provisions, and provides strategies for enforcing it against courts and financial institutions that unlawfully challenge or deny such authority.

The authority to represent a trust as an attorney-in-fact is firmly established under federal law, the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), and longstanding legal precedent. Contrary to common misconceptions, a trust operates as a contractual entity, granting it the ability to be lawfully represented by an authorized agent, including an attorney-in-fact. This article explores the legal framework affirming this right, highlights key statutory provisions, and provides strategies for enforcing it against courts and financial institutions that unlawfully challenge or deny such authority.

KEVIN WALKER ESTATE’S Conditional Acceptance Exposes PHH Mortgage’s Motion as Procedurally Defective, Deceitful and Dishonest, Unconstitutional, and Legally Void

Categories
Business, Constitution, Education, Intangibles, Law/Legal, News, Realworldfare, Remedy, Securities, Sovereigns, Strawman/Artifical Entity/Legal Fiction, Trust

PHH Mortgage Corporation’s Motion to Dismiss in Kevin Walker Estate, et al. v. PHH Mortgage Corporation, et al. is a glaring example of procedural misconduct, constitutional violations, and a deliberate attempt to obstruct justice. The Plaintiffs have conditionally accepted PHH Mortgage’s non-compliant filing, thereby tendering a binding counteroffer that PHH must now rebut. PHH’s continued silence and failure to rebut the conditional acceptance further compounds their non-performance and dishonor. Additionally, the Defendants’ filing, prepared by Neil J. Cooper of HOUSER LLP, violates multiple-defendant court rules, misrepresents the law, displays incompetence and a war against the Constitution, and constitutes blatant obstruction of justice.

Further exacerbating this obstruction, critical documents remain missing from the court docket and record, preventing a full and fair adjudication of the Plaintiffs’ claims. This deliberate suppression of filings by the court and Defendants undermines due process, conceals key evidence, and constitutes judicial misconduct. The failure to properly record and acknowledge Plaintiffs’ filings further demonstrates systematic efforts to manipulate the proceedings in PHH Mortgage’s favor, reinforcing the need for immediate judicial correction, sanctions, and enforcement of Plaintiffs’ default judgment demands.

DOJ Dismantles Unconstitutional Barriers Protecting Corrupt Administrative “Judges”

Categories
Business, Constitution, Education, Law/Legal, News, Realworldfare, Remedy, Securities, Sovereigns, Strawman/Artifical Entity/Legal Fiction, Trust

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has concluded that restrictions on the removal of Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) are unconstitutional, referencing the Supreme Court’s ruling in Free Enterprise Fund v. PCAOB. Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris notified Senate President Pro Tempore Charles Grassley that the DOJ will no longer defend these protections in court. DOJ Chief of Staff Chad Mizelle emphasized that unelected ALJs have wielded excessive authority without accountability for too long and must be answerable to the President and the American people.

Judicial Misconduct in Riverside, California: Defendant PHH Mortgage’s (“loan servicer”) Baseless Motion and the Court’s Obstruction of Justice

Categories
Business, Constitution, Intangibles, Law/Legal, News, Realworldfare, Remedy, Securities, Sovereigns, Strawman/Artifical Entity/Legal Fiction, Trust, Wealth

PHH Mortgage’s Motion to Dismiss in Kevin Walker Estate, et al. v. PHH Mortgage Corporation, et al. exemplifies judicial overreach, procedural abuse, and a blatant disregard for constitutional rights. The motion falsely asserts that a trust cannot be represented by an attorney-in-fact, denying individuals their right to self-representation and claiming that only "attorneys at law" can act in court. This contradicts established legal principles, including the American Bar Association’s recognition of power of attorney as a legitimate instrument granting broad authority. Additionally, the court has obstructed the record by refusing to file Plaintiffs’ documents, prompting a writ of mandamus to expose the Riverside Federal Court’s misconduct. This case underscores a broader pattern of legal corruption, defamation, and deprivation of rights under the color of law.

KEVIN WALKER Estate Demands Writ of Mandamus as Riverside Federal Court Engages in Corruption, Record Tampering, and Obstruction of Justice

Categories
Business, Constitution, Education, Intangibles, Law/Legal, News, Realworldfare, Remedy, Securities, Sovereigns, Strawman/Artifical Entity/Legal Fiction, Trust

The United States District Court, Central District of California (Riverside), stands accused of obstructing justice, tampering with records, and violating due process by unlawfully refusing to file and docket legitimate pleadings. Plaintiffs KEVIN WALKER ESTATE, et al., hav presented irrefutable evidence of judicial misconduct, calling for criminal prosecution, sanctions, and immediate enforcement. Despite proof of receipt, court officials have concealed filings, manipulated records, and obstructed legal proceedings, in direct violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1505, 1512, 1519, and 2071. With Pam Bondi CC’d on the correspondence, high-level authorities have been alerted to this grave constitutional violation that threatens judicial integrity and fundamental rights.

Riverside, California Billion Dollar Judicial Misconduct Exposed? Fraud, Docket Manipulation in Kevin Walker Estate vs Sierra Pacific Mortgage Company

Categories
Business, Constitution, Education, Intangibles, Law/Legal, News, Realworldfare, Remedy, Securities, Sovereigns, Strawman/Artifical Entity/Legal Fiction, Trust, Wealth

Central to the Plaintiffs’ claims are five (5) unrebutted affidavits submitted in compliance with UCC § 3-505, which explicitly establish the Defendants’ dishonor and tacit admission to all claims outlined therein. These affidavits, accompanied by an Affidavit Certificate of Non-Response, stand as irrefutable evidence in commerce. Under binding legal principles, such as stare decisis, res judicata, and collateral estoppel, the facts contained in the affidavits are now deemed conclusively established and uncontested. Despite United States Postal Service (USPS) tracking records confirming that the filings were successfully delivered twice—once via Registered Mail and once via Express Mail—the documents are not reflected on the court docket. Additionally, one (1) critical notice sent to the court has gone missing entirely, with USPS failing to mark it as delivered or account for its whereabouts.This disappearance of properly filed documents raises serious concerns about potential malicious interference, fraud upon the court, and obstruction of justice.

A Verified Complaint as a Negotiable Debt Instrument and Special Deposit: Legal and Financial Implications Under 28 U.S.C. §§ 2041, 2042, 2045, 12 U.S.C. § 1813, and 31 U.S.C. §§ 1321 & 3302 – Application of IRS Forms 1099-OID, 1099-A, and 1099-B

Categories
Business, Constitution, Education, Intangibles, Law/Legal, News, Realworldfare, Remedy, Securities, Sovereigns, Strawman/Artifical Entity/Legal Fiction, Trust, Wealth

A verified complaint submitted to the court functions not only as a legal pleading but also as a negotiable debt instrument and a special deposit, as established under 28 U.S.C. §§ 2041, 2042, and 2045. Additionally, it is classified as a financial asset governed by 12 U.S.C. § 1813(l)(1), 31 U.S.C. § 1321(a)(62), and 31 U.S.C. § 3302. Courts operate as depository institutions, responsible for receiving, managing, and investing funds, with all case-related deposits held in trust by the U.S. Treasury. Furthermore, under 26 U.S.C. §§ 1271-1275, a verified complaint qualifies as an Original Issue Discount (OID) security, mandating proper financial reporting. Every legal case is effectively a commercial transaction, in which funds, securities, and judgments are recorded and managed within the court’s custodial accounts. Understanding a verified complaint as a financial obligation allows for proper accounting and the reclamation of funds through the use of IRS Forms 1099-A and 1099-OID, thereby ensuring transparency and compliance with federal financial regulations.

Using IRS Forms 3949-A and 211 to Expose Organized Crime, Corrupt Judges, Clerks, Courts, and Financial Misconduct

Categories
Business, Constitution, Education, Law/Legal, Realworldfare, Remedy, Sovereigns, Strawman/Artifical Entity/Legal Fiction, Tips

Corruption within the judicial system, including fraudulent accounting, improper banking practices, and organized crime, poses a severe threat to justice and financial stability. Fortunately, whistleblowers have powerful tools at their disposal to report such misconduct to the Department of the Treasury – Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Two of the most effective mechanisms for exposing financial fraud involving corrupt courts, clerks, judges, and officials are IRS Form 3949-A (Information Referral) and IRS Form 211 (Application for Award for Original Information).

The Redefinition of U.S. Currency: The Impact of the Emergency Banking Act, HJR 192, Title 31 U.S. Code, and Constructive Expansion Policy

Categories
Constitution, Education, Law/Legal, News, Realworldfare, Remedy, Securities, Sovereigns, Strawman/Artifical Entity/Legal Fiction, Trust

The U.S. financial system underwent a monumental transformation due to the Emergency Banking Act of 1933, House Joint Resolution 192 (HJR 192), and key provisions of Title 31 U.S. Code, including 31 U.S.C. § 3123, § 5118, and § 5103. These legislative acts, combined with the Constructive Expansion Policy established by Congress on March 9, 1933, fundamentally reshaped the nature of currency and debt obligations in the United States. This shift not only dismantled the gold standard but also recognized negotiable instruments—including bills of exchange, bonds, and acceptances—as legal currency.

“citizen of the United States”: A ‘legal fiction’ Born from the Fourteenth (14th) Amendment

Categories
Constitution, Education, Law/Legal, News, Realworldfare, Securities, Sovereigns, Strawman/Artifical Entity/Legal Fiction, Trust

The concept of citizenship in the United States is more complex than commonly understood. Legal precedents and statutory definitions reveal a critical distinction between a "state Citizen" (also referred to as a "national") and a "citizen of the United States." This article explores this distinction, highlighting key legal authorities, statutory provisions, and judicial opinions to clarify the implications for individuals seeking to understand their legal status and rights

Article III Courts: Protecting Equity, Enforcing Affidavits, and Upholding Rights

Categories
Business, Constitution, Education, Intangibles, Law/Legal, News, Remedy, Securities, Sovereigns, Strawman/Artifical Entity/Legal Fiction, Trust, Wealth

Article III courts, established under the U.S. Constitution, are essential for protecting rights in civil contract disputes involving unrebutted affidavits. They uphold due process guaranteed by the Constitution, recognize uncontested evidence, and offer both legal and equitable remedies. With exclusive equity jurisdiction, these courts can enforce obligations, issue injunctions, and affirm binding agreements, ensuring justice and constitutional compliance