While the order purports to address procedural concerns, its broader implications—and the actions (or inactions) of the court—have sparked significant criticism. The case has drawn attention due to the court’s handling of filings, its potential disregard for due process, and what many perceive as a concerning lack of judicial accountability. When contacting the CLERKS in chambers to inquire about to missing filing/documents which have clearly been receiving, the clerks either refuse to provide any information or guidance on a time frame, and/or they act arrogantly and hang up in your face, telling you to "never call chambers." The clerks act as if they are above the law and they show little to no respect for the people as their public servants.
While "pro se" and "in propria persona" both involve self-representation, their underlying philosophies and legal implications differ significantly.’ Pro Se’ litigants work within the framework of the court, seeking remedies and relief through statutory law. In contrast, ‘In Propria Persona‘ litigants assert their inherent rights without pleading to the court, challenging jurisdiction and emphasizing their status as a natural person. Both approaches have their place in legal contexts, but success often hinges on the individual’s ability to articulate their position effectively and navigate the complexities of the legal system. Understanding these distinctions empowers individuals to choose the approach that best aligns with their goals and principles when representing themselves in court.
The Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) standardizes commercial transaction laws across all U.S. states, ensuring consistency in commerce, contracts, and finance. The United States Code (USC) organizes federal statutes into 54 titles, serving as the legal foundation for areas like taxation, criminal law, and public welfare. The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) provides detailed rules from federal agencies to implement these statutes, defining industry-specific compliance. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law, establishing the framework for governance and safeguarding individual rights, while state constitutions address local governance and rights within the bounds of federal law. The Organic Constitution, encompassing foundational documents like the Declaration of Independence and Articles of Confederation, offers historical context and reflects the Founders’ vision of limited federal power and state sovereignty. Together, these frameworks define the interplay between federal, state, and administrative laws.
If a judge takes an excessive amount of time to decide a case, there are multiple actions you can take, including some lesser-known or rare strategies. These options range from procedural remedies to extraordinary measures, depending on the severity of the delay and the jurisdiction. Below is a comprehensive list
The Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) and equity law provide distinct frameworks for resolving disputes and enforcing obligations. Equity law focuses on fairness and flexibility, often stepping in when strict legal rules lead to unjust outcomes. Conversely, the UCC brings structure and predictability to commercial transactions while incorporating equitable principles to ensure fairness in its application. This article explores how the UCC integrates equity, examines the strengths and weaknesses of each system, and highlights key provisions like UCC §§ 1-103, 2-202, 2-203, 2-204, 2-206, 2-302, 3-303, 3-311, 3-603, 3-604, and others.
The Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) provides a structured legal framework for negotiable instruments, obligations, and their discharge. Among its provisions, sections like UCC §§ 3-303, 3-604, 3-104, 3-409, 2-206, and 1-103 reveal a clear foundation for the Accepted for Value (A4V) process. This process allows obligations such as mortgages, loans, or other debts to be addressed through lawful mechanisms of discharge, settlement, or setoff.
West Coast Exotic Cars, along with Eric Curran, Aaron Johnson, Hunter, and additional staff, are embroiled in a $1 billion […]
Steven MacArthur Brooks’ estate has filed a $2.975 billion lawsuit against San Diego County Credit Union, asserting a binding contract and seeking summary judgment. The lawsuit emphasizes the plaintiffs’ status as secured creditors under UCC provisions, supported by unrebutted affidavits and evidence of contractual acceptance. The case centers on a contract and security agreement, with claims of non-response from defendants validating the demand for summary judgment as a matter of law.
The Fourteenth Amendment created and clarified the concept of U.S. citizenship. Before the amendment, it was widely believed and accepted […]
Explore the secret ties between major entities like Bank of America, Chase, Wells Fargo, and the IRS, all controlled under Northern Trust Corporation. Learn how these financial powerhouses, alongside the American Bar Association, work together to dominate the legal and financial systems. Delve into their interconnected influence and how it shapes the role of government agencies and banks in America. Uncover the truth behind this corporate web and its impact on society.
The term "Sovereign Citizen" is a derogatory and weaponized label, used as propaganda to describe men or women who claim sovereignty but lack a full understanding of the legal distinctions between public and private law. As outlined in CFR § 27.11 and Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution, the commercial nature of all interactions is evident, yet these individuals struggle to navigate this framework correctly. They attempt to reserve their rights and operate independently but misuse terminology, failing to create unsworn declarations that comply with 28 U.S. Code § 1746. They also misunderstand critical concepts like jurisdiction, contract law, and administrative procedures. They often mix public and private law, leaving them unable to effectively assert and protect their rights as intended under UCC § 1-308. Additionally, they overlook the significance of Article 1, Section 10 of the Constitution, which highlights the restrictions placed on states concerning legal tender, further emphasizing the complexities they misunderstand.
When a purported borrower takes out a loan from a bank, it may appear that the bank is lending its own money. However, under 12 U.S.C. § 83, banks are prohibited from lending their own funds. Instead, they use the purported borrower’s promissory note as collateral to create credit, not using their own capital. This process lacks transparency, leading to non-disclosure and fraud, which may render such agreements void ab initio (invalid from the outset).