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 shift from the term “chauffeur” to “driver” in legal contexts represents more than just a change in terminology; it reveals a broader attempt by the State to regulate vehicle operation as a commercial activity. This transition directly impacts citizens’ fundamental right to travel freely, as upheld by the Supreme Court on numerous occasions. Below, we delve into how this shift affects your rights and why State laws often blur the lines between private travel and commercial activity.
The actions of AFFINIA DEFAULT Services, WELLS FARGO, SIERRA PACIFIC MORTGAGE, and RECON DEFAULT Services go beyond mere procedural errors—they represent a coordinated effort of racketeering, organized crime, and bank fraud. These entities are falsely asserting standing to conduct trustee sales under false pretenses and engaging in slander of title and color of title to unlawfully transfer ownership. Their deliberate misrepresentation of their authority is not only fraudulent but also constitutes treasonous activity, as it undermines the very legal framework that protects property rights and ownership.
All contracts with the government are fundamentally voluntary, allowing every man and woman to stand on their rights and exemptions as private citizens. When proceeding, In Propria Persona, sui juris, One can reserve their natural common law right not to be compelled to perform under any contract that they did not enter into knowingly, voluntarily, and intentionally. One can not be forced to accept the liability associated with any compelled and pretended "benefit" of any hidden or unrevealed contract or commercial agreement. As such, the hidden or unrevealed contracts that supposedly create obligations to perform, for persons of "subject status," are inapplicable to private citizens/non-citizen nationals/nationals/State Citizens/nationals of the United States, and are null and void.
"Under the color of law" refers to actions taken by government Officials or Agents that appear to be within the bounds of their lawful authority but are, in fact, abuses of power or violations of an private citizen/non-citizen national‘s constitutional rights. This phrase is often used in legal contexts to describe situations where "law enforcement Officers" or other public officials misuse their positions to commit unlawful acts of injustice and/or or discrimination, such as unlawful arrests, excessive force, unlawful and illegal foreclosures (since all foreclosures are fraud since Executive Order 6102 and House Joint Resolution 192 of June 5, 1933, public law 73-10), unlawful repossessions/thefts, or illegal searches and seizures.