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.
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.
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
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 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.
A bill of exchange can function as "legal tender" or "tender of payment," but its status depends on acceptance and context but regardless, if tendered correctly, it does discharge the debt and respective amount tendered. It is a written instrument where one party (the drawer) orders another (the drawee) to pay a specific amount to a third party (the payee). While bills of exchange can be negotiable, they can also be non-negotiable, meaning they don’t always transfer ownership upon indorsement.
When it comes to protecting your personal or business assets, becoming a secured party under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) provides the legal framework to gain full control over your property. By filing the appropriate documentation, you ensure that your interests are legally recognized and protected from claims by third parties. Here’s how you can become a secured party in three essential steps:
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.
In California, the creation and existence of a debtor and creditor relationship are governed by Law, statutes, and/or case law. It could be the Uniform Commercial Code, United States Code, California Civil Code, or Commercial Code, and depends on the situation, parties, and their respective location(s). These relationships are fundamental to the legal and financial system, impacting contracts, secured transactions, and obligations.
Certificates of Non Citizen Nationality The Department of State occasionally receives requests for certificates of non-citizen national status pursuant to […]