C J U – Standing Up For Liberty, Equal Rights & Justice
One Client At A Time
Questions …. Contact Us
We are here for “you” … professional or layman … we can assist with “your most important needs”
USA Federal USA States Brits&Irish Australia Common Law WorldWideLaw
we’re here to help you
the Federal Judicial Center’s Benchbook for U.S. District Court Judges has … Holderman (N.D. Ill.) (the FJC Board Liaison to the Benchbook Committee),. Judge …
By Civil Procedure & Federal Courts Blog
- Chapter 2: Jurisdiction
- Chapter 3: The Case or Controversy Requirement and Other Preliminary Hurdles
- Chapter 4: Drafting and Filing the Complaint
- Chapter 5: Causes of Action
- Chapter 7: Class Actions
- Chapter 8: Limitations on Relief
- Chapter 9: Relief
This site is a must if you are going to be up on current rulings on the relatively new mortgage fraud case law and precedents being set daily. It is free.Free Legal Search Engine and Alert System – CourtListener.comcourtlistener.comCreate alerts, search for and browse the latest court opinions. Updated automatically with the latest court documents. An initiative of the Free Law Project.
Paralegal Practice & Procedure Fourth Editionbooks.google.comThe completely revised and updated fourth edition of the most trusted paralegal desk references on the market.Now fully revised and expanded: the bestselling desk reference for paralegals at any level. Each chapter has been completely updated to include the latest
caught.net/prose/badjudge2.htmShareYou are at the Caught.net Legal Reform Website and the Pro Se Way Website … on the judge(s) who either denied our pleading(s) or dismissed our matter before the court.…. Haines v Kerner is a US Supreme Court case, which has not been …
Haines v. Keaner, et al. 404 U.S. 519,92 s. Ct. 594,30 L. Ed. 2d 652. … We frequently have stated that pro se pleadings are to be given a liberal construction. … Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972), a pro se complaint, “however inartfully pleaded,” must …Pro Se Case Law http://www.leitgebindustries.com/prose_caselaw.htmMany pro se litigants will use this in their pleadings; “Pleadings in this case are …lawyers. See Haines v. Kerner 92 Sct 594, also See Power 914 F2d 1459 (11th …
“Pro Se Litigants pleadings are to be construed liberally and held to less stringent standards than lawyers” Haines v Kerner, Warden of Illinois State Penitentiary …
I am re-posting these rulings do your due diligence people look them up and read them• Picking V. Pennsylvania R. Co.151 Fed. 2nd. Pucket V. Cox 456 2nd 233. Pro Se pleadings are to be considered regards to technicality; pro se litigant’s pleadings are not to be held to the same high standards of perfection as lawyer.
1) Platsky V. C.I.A. 953 F. 2d. 25 additionally. Pro se litigants are to be given reasonable opportunity to remedy the defects in their pleadings. Reynolds V. Shillinger 907 F. 124,126 (10th cir. 1990) See also Jaxon V. Circle K Corp. 773.F.2d.1138,1140 ( 10th cir. 1985) (1)
2) Haines V. Kramer (92. S. C.T. 594) The respondent is this action is a nonlawyer and is moving forward in Propia Persona
3) NAACP V. Button (371 U.S. 415) United Mineworker of America V. Gibbs (383 U.S. 715) and Johnson V Avery 89 S. Ct. 747 (1969) Members of groups who are competent nonlawyer can assist other members of the group achieve the goal of the group in court without being charged with” Unauthorized practice of law.
4) Brotherhood of Trainmen V. Virginia Ex. Rel. Virginia State Bar (377 U.S. 1) Gideon V. Wainwright 372 U.S. 335 Argersinger V. Hamlin, Sheriff 407 U.S. 425. Litigants may be as assisted by unlicensed layman during judicial proceedings.
5) Howlett V. Rose, 496 U.S. 356 (1990) Federal Law and Supreme Court cases apply to State court cases. (Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1) (1958)–States are bound by United States Supreme Court Case decisions.
6) Federal Rights Civil Proc. Rule 17, 28 U.S.C. A “Next Friend “a next friend is a person who represents someone who is unable to tend to his or her own interest.
7) Oklahoma Court Rule and Procedures Title 12, Sec. 2d. 7 © if an infant or incompetent person does not have a duly appointed representative he may sue by his next friend or by a guardian adlitem”
8) Mandonado -Denis V. Castillo Rodriguez 23 F. 3d. 576 (1st Cir. 1994) Inadequate training of subordinates may be basis for 1983 claim.
9) Warnock V. Pecos County. Tex. 88 3d. 341(5th Cir. 1996) Eleventh Amendment does not protect State officials from claims for prospective relief when it is alleged that state officials acted in violation of federal law.
10) Title 42 U. S. C. Sec. 1983 Wood V. Breier 54 F.R.D. 7, 10 -11 (E.D. Wis. 1972 Frankenhouser V. Rizzo, 59 F.R.D. 339 (E.D. PA. 1973) “Each citizen acts as a private attorney general who “takes on the mantel of Sovereign.”
11) Oklahoma is a ‘Right to work’ State Bill S.J.R. 11 its ok to practice Gods Law without a license Luke 11:52 Gods Law was here first! “There is a higher loyalty then loyalty to this country loyalty to God” US V. Seeger, 380 U.S. 163, 173, 85 S. Ct. 850 13 L Ed. 2. 733 (1965)
12) “The practice of law cannot be license by any state/state. Schware V. Board of Examiners. United States Reports 353 U.S. pgs. 238, 239, in Sims V. Aherns, 271 S.W. 720 (1925) “The practice of law is an occupation of common rights.” A bar card is not a license. It’s a dues card and/or membership card. A bar association is “that what it is, a club association in not a license, it has a certificate through the State, the two are not the same
13) CHISHOLM V GEORGIA 2 DALL 419
(ONLY COMMON LAW MAY BE APPLIED TO THE PEOPLE per the constitution).
Proof #1: There is a separation of powers. Judicial courts cannot enforce statutes. Only legislative courts enforce statutes. “Courts enforcing statutes do not act judicially” Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 579; FRC v. GE, 281 US 464; Keller v. PE, 261 US 428.
U.S. Supreme Court (Miller v. United States, 78 U.S. 11 Wall. 268 268) (1870). Where one inalienable rights are concerned there can be no rule making and exercising ones inalienable rights cannot be turned into a crime.)
Supreme courts ruled “Without Corpus delicti there can be no crime”“In every prosecution for crime it is necessary to establish the “corpus delecti”, i.e., the body or elements of the crime.” People v. Lopez, 62 Ca.Rptr. 47, 254 C.A.2d 185.
“In every criminal trial, the prosecution must prove the corpus delecti, or the body of the crime itself-i.e., the fact of injury, loss or harm, and the existence of a criminal agency as its cause. ” People v. Sapp, 73 P.3d 433, 467 (Cal. 2003) [quoting People v. Alvarez, (2002) 27 Cal.4th 1161, 1168-1169, 119 Cal.Rptr.2d 903, 46 P.3d 372.]
TURNER v. ROGERS et al. certiorari to the supreme court of south Carolina No. 10-10.Argued March 23, 2011–Decided June 20, 2011
When the action being brought is capable of repetition the defendant’s paperwork cannot be moot.
PEOPLE. People are supreme, not the state. I.Waring vs.the Mayor of Savanah,60 Georgiaat 93]; The state cannot diminish rights of the people. [Hertado v. California, 100 US 516];
Article VII. In suits at common law, where the value is controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common Jaw.
Preamble to the US and NY Constitutions – We the people … do ordain and establish this Constitution…;…at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects…with none to govern but themselves… [CHISHOLM v. GEORGIA (US) 2 Dall 419, 454, 1 L Ed 440, 455, 2 DALL (1793) pp471-472]: The
People of this State, as the successors of its former sovereign, are entitled to all the rights which formerly belonged to the King by his prerogative.[Lansing v. Smith, 4 Wend.9 (N.Y.) (1829), 21Am. Dec. 89 10C Const. Law Sec. 298; 18 C Em.Dom. Sec. 3, 228; 37 C Nev.Wat. Sec. 219;Nuls Sec. 167; 48 C Wharves Sec.3, 7].http://www.fathersunite.org/New/pro_se_standard_of_review.htmKerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21, 92 S. Ct. 594, 596, 30 L. Ed. 2d 652 (1972), and take them … Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46, 78 S.Ct. 99, 2 L.Ed.2d 80 (1957)); Haines v. …1992)(holding pro se petition cannot be held to same standard as pleadings …
In the courtroom, the jury is the best judge of how good a lawyer is. There is no secret formula to winning; some lawyers win more than others. Experience helps – your own and that of others. Learn from the experience of some of the country’s preeminent trial lawyers and judges in The Litigation Man…
[PDF]File Format: PDF/Adobe AcrobatHaines v Kerner, 404 U.S. 519-520 (1972); further at, supra, 520; allegations of pro secomplaints are held to “less stringent standards than formal pleading …
sharonstephens.blogspot.com/2011/01/pro–se-laws.htmlJan 6, 2011 – Acting Pro Se can be beneficial, especially if you are in a position where… Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972), a pro se complaint, “however inartfully pleaded,” …standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers, see Haines v.
[PDF]ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2754…File Format: PDF/Adobe AcrobatHaines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972) (per curiam) (pro se pleadings held to less stringent standards than those applied to attorneys). 70. This appears …
[PDF]File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick ViewThe only right to procedural change the Supreme Court has recognized for pro selitigants is a reduced pleading standard. In Haines v. Kerner the district court …
There are many many great resources available for Free and Articles on Self Representation at the Bottom of this site. Please Share Your Information with us …. NFSC is an Open Source free Share Site. Good Luck. There are some good legal resources to be found here ….. http://digitallawlibrary.blogspot.com/The Digital Law Librarydigitallawlibrary.blogspot.com
http://books.google.com/books?id=UCTQB8wtt1UC&pg=PR7&dq=Discovery+Checklist&hl=en&sa=X&ei=ptI_UY21Nofo9ATynoCICQ&ved=0CEgQ6AEwAzgU#v=onepage&q=Discovery%20Checklist&f=falsePractical Legal Writing for Legal Assistants
http://books.google.com/books?id=PvJohSehGlkC&pg=PR5&dq=Discovery+Checklist&hl=en&sa=X&ei=r9E_Uer4OIue8QSAs4FY&ved=0CDcQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Discovery%20Checklist&f=falseThe Electronic Evidence And Discovery Handbook
http://books.google.com/books?id=0IB922c2x7wC&pg=PA14&dq=Foreclosure+Fraud&hl=en&sa=X&ei=NMw_UZfqKor28gTYwIHQCw&ved=0CFQQ6AEwBTgU#v=onepage&q=Foreclosure%20Fraud&f=falseFederal Trade Commission (FTC) Report to the White House Council on Women and GirlsFinancial Investigation and Forensic AccountingProtect Yourself from Real Estate andMortgage Fraud
For The “Professional” Or The “Layperson”…. We’re Here To Help
|Constitutions||United States||Other States||International|
|Bills & Laws
||Bill-Tracking Guide||State Laws & Legislatures|
|Rules & Regulations||U.S. Rules & Regulations||State Rules & Regulations|
|President/Governor||U.S. Presidential Publications||Governors (National Governors Association)|
|Agency Decisions & Guidance Documents||Administrative
Decisions & Other Actions (University of Virginia Library)
LexisNexis Academic [UW Restricted] (federal agency decisions combined file) Judicial BranchCourt Opinions & Rules U.S. Court OpinionsState Court Websites (National Center for State Courts)World Legal Information InstituteRelated SourcesCity & County Ordinances & Codes [not applicable]Code Library (Municipal Code Corporation) Public Records U.S. Public Record DatabasesState Agency Databases (American Libraries Association) Legal & Government Directories
U.S. Government Directories Other Mulit-State, Multi-SourcesStarting Places
Our Legal Collection in addition to the Digital Resources
Truly is a National Treasure