|
Cites - Case Law Prohibitions on Banking
Sadie,
Have you looked into judcial notice? check the FRE on this.
If this does not work (which it should if you put it on record)--look into a writ of mandamus and file it with the district court against the judge. Consider this:
“There is a canon of legislative construction which teaches Congress that, unless a contrary intent appears [legislation] is meant to apply only within territorial jurisdiction of the United States.”
U.S. v. Spelar, 338 U.S. 217 at 222 (1949)
“the United States never held any municipal sovereignty, jurisdiction, or right of soil in Alabama or any of the new states which were formed ... The United States has no Constitutional capacity to exercise municipal jurisdiction, sovereignty or eminent domain, within the limits of a state or elsewhere, except in the cases in which it is expressly granted ...”
Pollard v. Hagan, 44 U.S. 213, 221, 223 (1845)
“... the states are separate sovereigns with respect to the federal government”
Heath v. Alabama, 474 U.S. 82 (1985)
“No sanction can be imposed absent proof of jurisdiction” [Stanard v. Olesen, 74 S. Ct.768]
"...Federal jurisdiction cannot be assumed, but must be clearly shown." Brooks v. Yawkey, 200 F.2d 633
"Jurisdiction is essential to give validity to the determinations of administrative agencies and where jurisdictional requirements are not satisfied, the action of the agency is a nullity..." City Street Improv. Co. v. Pearson, 181 C 640, 185 P. 962; O'Neill v. Dept of Professional & Vocational Standards, 7 CA2d 393, 46 P2d 234
“Once challenged, jurisdiction cannot be ‘assumed’, it must be proved to exist.” [Stuck v. Medical Examiners, 94 Ca2d 751.211 P2s 389]
"The law requires PROOF OF JURISDICTION to appear on the Record of the administrative agency and all administrative proceedings." Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 533 (1974)
"Therefore, it is necessary that the record present the fact establishing the jurisdiction of the tribunal." Lowe v. Alexander 15C 296; People v. Board of Delegates of S.F. Fire Dept., 14 C 479
"A Justice's Court is an inferior court, and its jurisdiction must be shown affirmatively by a party relying upon, or claiming any right under, its judgments." Jolley v. Foltz (1867), C. 321.
"If any tribunal (court) finds absence of proof of jurisdiction over person and subject matter, the case must be dismissed." Louisville RR v. Motley, 211 U.S. 149, 29 S.Ct. 42 (1908)
"A judgment is absolutely void if it appears that there was a want of jurisdiction in the court rendering it either of the subject matter or the person of the defendant." Hahn v. Morse (1868), C. 391.
"An officer who acts in violation of the Constitution ceases to represent the government." Brookfield Const. Co. v. Stewart, 284 F.Supp. 94.
"Judges not only can be sued over their official acts, but could be held liable for injunctive and declaratory relief and attorney's fees." Lezama v. Justice Court, A025829.
"Our own experience is fully consistent with the common law's rejection of a rule of judicial immunity from prospective relief. We never have had a rule of absolute judicial immunity from prospective relief, and there is no evidence that the absence of that immunity has had a chilling effect on judicial independence." Pulliam v. Allen, 466 U.S. 522, 104 S.Ct. 1970 (1984); cited in Lezama v. Justice Court, A025829.
"Judge acted in the face of clearly valid statutes or case law expressly depriving him of (personal) jurisdiction would be liable." Dykes v. Hosemann, 743 F.2d 1488 (1984).
I think this is the direction you should look into if the judge does not adhere to judicial notice. I am most certain that they did not establish jurisdiction. Kind a step back and stop arguing a little and look more into taking control through the judge. Put it on the record.
Hope that helps.
__________________
"FOR AS HE THINKETH IN HIS HEART, SO IS HE."
|
