Quote:
|
Originally Posted by David Merrill
There are State district courts and United States district courts. In either case your cause seems to have been adjudicated in the common law and so it is res judicata. Unless you entertain the cause in the district court, it cannot be heard there. Ergo I asked:
Were you served a summons? How did you respond to the summons?
Regards,
David Merrill.
|
Forgive me for not being explicit.
The Plaintiffs have filed a complaint in State District Court. The main jist of the complaint is that I since I filed the Affidavit and Truth as a judgement against my land since it was unrebutted, and since it has no merit in their opinion, I have clouded my title to the land and damaged the land association who is the plaintiff. They go so far as to say I am guilty of conspiracy for talking to my neighbors about what I did.
I responded with a Motion to Dismiss, on the grounds that a Federal Patent had been brought forward into at-law status on the property into my name, on the grounds that the Affidavit of Truth had already put them into estopple, on constitutional grounds of freedom to associate and speech, laches and unclean hands based on timing and specific issues in the Affidavit.
They have countered with a motion to dismiss my motion, because the Land Patent Protections were not included as an issue in their complaint, and that my bringing forward of the Land Patent was finalized after the service of their complaint so provides no protection on the Land. They contend that though Patent is a strong showing of title, no law exists that disallows a previous owner from waiving the Patent Rights for the Assigns after her, through contracting covenants.
They say it doesnt even matter that she did not disclose at sale time that the land was under Federal Patent Protections. She didnt even know herself.
We contend that when she devided the land and placed covenants on it, she collaterally attacked the Patent and the Law, and that she defrauded everyone out of their Patent Rights based on the premis that you cannot make a contract that contravenes a public law, which a Patent is, and that as such the Rights of the Assigns enumerated in that law are to be the same for all subsequent Assigns, as they were for original Patentee.
Their argument is that no case law or ruling exists that supports that an owner of such land cannot contract away the rights of future Assigns. They also counter the estoppel by acquiescense of the Affidavit of Truth filed before their complaint, with the argument that no case law or ruling gives the creator of an Affidavit of Truth right to set an arbitrary response date that forces the acquiescense.
I am currently creating a Motion to Quash their motion on the res judicata of the Patent and the validity of the estoppel, and am running out of time. This of course is their plan. I am but one man to their firm, and have to make a living in the meantime. I really need some good case law arguments about the Patent res judicata of the covenants being invalid after the Patent Procedings even by an owner, and about the setting of the response limits in an affidavit, to make this work...
Comments of help would be appreciated...