Equitable Subrogation and Trust Law The Hidden Remedy for Unjust Enrichment and Property Restitution

Equitable Subrogation and Trust Law: The Hidden Remedy for Unjust Enrichment and Property Restitution

Equitable Subrogation along with Natural Law and Trust Law is the Remedy to Stop the Unjust Enrichment. It is for the “Restitution” of our Private God Given Rights which is our PROPERTY. Subrogation means “Substitution”. That’s what the Banksters and the Fictional “STATE” did to our Mothers when they were “deceived” into “Registering” our PROPERTY — Our Equitable Rights and Remedies were Subrogated/Substituted.

This is how they “Presumed” themselves “Creditors”. In other words, they are now Playing Us and We are now Playing “presumed Debtors”.


🔍 The Discovery of Subrogation

It so happens that I found this tool, Ironically called Subrogation, in doing my due diligence in research, that Lawfully Reverses the “Fraud” and the Unjust Enrichment.

Maxim of Equity States:

“Equity aids the vigilant, and not those who slumber on their Rights.”


🧍‍♂️ The Role of the Living Man/Woman

This can only be done when we the “Living Man/Woman” STOP Volunteering.

Maxim of Equity States:

“Equity will not aid a Volunteer.”

By the way, One cannot mix UCC terms like “Secure Party Creditor” in Equity because we are the original Creditors already by Default without perfecting that position. Equity is not competing for any Lien or Security position.


⚖️ The Function of Surety and Subrogation

Look into Surety Equitable Subrogation further and you will see that every time the Surety Subrogee Creditor, who is also the True Beneficiary of the CQVTrust, Stops Volunteering by Discharging and Settling all Debt Obligations In the Private, Equity steps in and Subrogate[s] the Presumed Creditor/Beneficiary by Operation of Law.

Remember, in Subrogation, a “Subrogor” loses the “Claim” to seek Compensation. I am sure you will understand why that is.


🚪 The Limits of Corporate Fiction

The Corporate Fictions actors cannot do Equity, they have to come alive into the Private Jurisdiction, with “clean hands” to make or to challenge our Rightful Equitable Interest and Title.

As I stated before when I first contacted you, there are a lot of Folks out there teaching Equity and Common Law, yet they do not know anything about Surety/Subrogee Equitable Subrogation Rights. Even when you bring it for their attention, they refuse to do the “research”.

There is only one brother I know of who teaches Exclusive Equity and Subrogation — his name is at Amir_Law Academy.


🚫 The Caution on Mixing Jurisdictions

It is unwise to mix Equity and UCC.
Equity is God’s Law, Law of the Air, is above Land and Sea Law or Man-made Laws. It is Spiritual, in order to do Justice.


🔄 How Subrogation Operates

Simply stated:

When the Surety/Creditor/Subrogee Discharges the “Presumed” Debt “Lien” against our Cestui Que Vie Trust, Substitution/Subrogation takes place by Operation of Law — which means “Restitution” takes place and Recovery of our original position in the Constructive Trust, which is another Equitable Remedy for Breach of Trust.

Maxim of Equity States:

“Equity will not allow Statutes and codes to be used as a Cloke for FRAUD.”


💸 What Instrument Discharges the Lien?

When all of the Equitable Principles and “Rights” are understood — what monetary instrument will I be using as Surety/Subrogee/Creditor to “Pay off”, “Discharge”, or to “Purchase the Lien” against the Estate?


📜 The Promissory Note as Legal Tender

The Bill of Exchange Act 1882 describes the Promissory Note as “Cash”.

This is where I am — to learn how to perfect and write a Lawful Promissory Note as the Maker/Drawer/Indorser.

I am assuming that you have practical knowledge and experience of this operation in Reality, even though it wasn’t by Exclusive Equity.


🪙 The Intersection of Law and Commercial Remedy

The Bill of Exchange Act and HJR 192 together seem to be as good as Gold/Cash.

In conclusion, by simply Discharging the whole Debt with a Promissory Note by the Drawer, Maker, and Endorser as Surety/Subrogee/Creditor, in essence, means it’s subrogation time!!


👥 Understanding the 3-Party Relationship

According to the Bill of Exchange Act, the Bank is the “Drawee and Trustee” with a Fiduciary Duty, in this 3-Party Relationship.

🔚 Final Thoughts

In this construct of fiction layered upon fiction, Equity remains the highest jurisdiction, and subrogation is the lawful key to restoring what was taken through presumption, deception, and silence.

By understanding and applying Surety/Subrogee principles, we step back into our rightful roles — as creditors, as beneficiaries, and as the true parties in interest. When we act with clean hands, in honor, and with perfected security, Equity moves by operation of law, displacing every fraudulent claim and restoring the estate.

“He who comes to Equity must come with clean hands — but once he does, Equity does not sleep.”

The time for waiting is over. The remedy exists. We are the living authority.
Let those with eyes to see and minds to act, do so now.

In remedy, in honor, and in peace.

Leave your vote

3432879 points
More

Don’t Stop Here

More To Explore

20410479 329d 40a2 8d4d 492022986bb5

Void Means Void: When Judges Act Without Jurisdiction, Their Orders Are Legal Nullities

When a court acts without lawful jurisdiction—whether through improper removal, lack of subject matter or personal authority, or constitutional violations—its orders are void ab initio and carry no legal force. This article explains how judges who continue to issue rulings after losing jurisdiction are not merely mistaken—they are acting under color of law and are subject to direct civil liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Backed by black-letter case law and statutory authority, this piece dismantles the myth of absolute judicial immunity and affirms a fundamental truth in law: jurisdiction is everything. When it’s gone, so is the court’s power to act.

Riverside County Commissioner Tamara Wagner Sued Under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for Railroading Plaintiffs Under Color of Law Without Jurisdiction

Riverside County Commissioner Tamara Wagner Sued Under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for Railroading Plaintiffs Under Color of Law Without Jurisdiction

In a federal civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Plaintiffs Kevin: Realworldfare and Corey: Walker expose Riverside Court Commissioner Tamara L. Wagner’s unlawful railroading under color of law and total absence of jurisdiction. Despite a pending Quiet Title Action and perfected federal removal, Wagner issued void orders to dispossess the Walker Estate—yet the Estate remains lawfully and firmly in possession. Now under Article III jurisdiction, Judge Kenly Kiya Kato presides over the live case, which alleges constitutional violations, commercial fraud, and abuse of process. This is a high-stakes confrontation between equity and overreach—where immunity fails and facts prevail.

Judges Can Be Sued: Public Servants, Oaths, and Liability Under the Clearfield Doctrine AND 42 U.S.C. 1983

Judges Can Be Sued: Public Servants, Oaths, and Liability Under the Clearfield Doctrine AND 42 U.S.C. 1983

Judges are not immune when they operate outside lawful jurisdiction, conspire under color of law, or engage in commercial enforcement without consent. Under the Clearfield Doctrine, they become corporate actors subject to liability like any private party. 42 U.S.C. § 1983 enables civil rights lawsuits against them individually, while 18 U.S.C. §§ 241–242 provides for criminal penalties for conspiracy and deprivation of rights. Through tort law, UCC, and case law like Rankin v. Howard, 633 F.2d 844 (9th Cir. 1980), and Pulliam v. Allen, 466 U.S. 522 (1984), judges can face personal and injunctive accountability.

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.

error: Content is protected !!