You all remember when i said the use of the word person is how they are tricking you to pay for court filings look here. a) in common usage, the term person does not include the sovereign, [and] statutes employing the [word] are normally construed to exclude it. Wilson v Omaha Tribe, 442 US653 667, 61 L Ed 2d 153, 99 S Ct 2529 (1979) (quoting United States v Cooper Corp. 312 US 600, 604, 85 L Ed 1071, 61 S Ct 742 (1941). See also United States v Mine Workers, 330 US 258, 275, 91 L Ed 884, 67 S Ct 677 (1947) Will v Michigan State Police, 491 US 58, 105 L. Ed. 2d 45, 109 S.Ct. 2304 b) “a sovereign is not a person in a legal sense” In re Fox, 52 N. Y. 535, 11 Am. Rep. 751; U.S. v. Fox, 94 U.S. 315, 24 L. Ed. 192. They state the under title 28 thet you must pay you point out that only apply s to person or persons which is a corporation, and you need the law that says the people or a natural person is required to pay,. cause COURTS ARE FREE! Take Mandatory Judicial Notice and Cognizance ( Federal Rules of Evidence 201 (d) that “plaintiff” ie Libellant has a lawful right to proceed without cost, based upon the following law: The US Supreme Court has ruled that a natural individual entitled to relief is “entitled to free access to its judicial tribunals and public offices in every State of the Union(2 Black 620, see also Crandell v Nevada, 6 Wall 35]. Plaintiff (libellant) should not be charged fees or costs for the lawful and Constitutional Right to petition this court in this matter in which he/she is entitled to relief, as it appears that the filing fee rule was originally implemented for fictions and subjects of the State and should not be applied to the Plaintiff who is a natural individual and entitled to relief (Hale v Hinkel, 201 US 43, NAACP v Button, 371 US 415); United Mineworkers v Gibbs, 383 US 715; and Johnson v Avery, 89 S.Ct. 747 (1969). Members of groups who are competent non- lawyers, can assist other members of the group, achieve the goals of the group in court without being charged with “unauthorized practice of law.” Petitioner (libellant) cannot be charged a fee as no charge can be placed upon a citizen as a condition precedent to exercise his/her Constitutional Rights, his/her rights secured by the Constitution. A fee is a charge “fixed by law for services fixed by public officers or for use of a privilege under control of government.” Fort Smith Gas Co. v Wisemen” 189 Ark.675 74 SW.2d 789,790, from Black’s Law Dictionary 5th Ed. The US Supreme Court has ruled that a natural person entitled to relief is “entitled to free access to its judicial tribunals and public offices in every State of the Union(2 Black 620, see also Crandell v Nevada, 6 Wall 35]. Plaintiff (libellant) should not be charged fees or costs for the lawful and Constitutional Right to petition this court in this matter in which he/she is entitled to relief, as it appears that the filing fee rule was originally implemented for fictions and subjects of the State and should not be applied to the Plaintiff who is a natural individual and entitled to relief (Hale v Hinkel, 201 US 43, Petitioner (libellant) cannot be charged a fee as no charge can be placed upon a citizen as a condition precedent to exercise his/her Constitutional Rights, his/her rights secured by the Constitution. A fee is a charge “fixed by law for services fixed by public officers or for use of a privilege under control of government.” Fort Smith Gas Co. v Wisemen” 189 Ark.675 74 SW.2d 789,790, from Black’s Law Dictionary 5th Ed.
Posted on: Sat, 13 Dec 2014 18:47:12 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015