Filing fees and money of substance.

[phreeman2003]

I'll post those docs in the other thread after I scan and compress. Sorry, I missed the request earlier. I Pulled an all nighter.

[Shoonra]

Originally Posted by Lawdog

It matters not one whit what version you prefer, I prefer, or DiM prefers.

I, for one, think it does make a difference. Deliberately relying on a statutory text which is no longer in effect calls attention to the fact that the argument is built on something that is not now in effect, and more persuasively dooms the case.

[phreeman2003]

Yick Wo v. Hopkins 118 U.S. 356, 370: "Sovereingty itself, is of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law...sovereinty itself remains with the people...

Then from Black's Law 5th Ed:
Court: The person and suit of the sovereign: the place where the sovereign sojourns with his regal retinue, wherever that may be.

[Lawdog]

Nice quote mining. Here's the FULL quote from the Yick Wo case, emphasis added.

Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts. And the law is the definition and limitation of power. It is, indeed, quite true that there must always be lodged somewhere, and in some person or body, the authority of final decision; and in many cases of mere administration, the responsibility is purely political, no appeal lying except to the ultimate tribunal of the public judgment, exercised either in the pressure of opinion, or by means of the suffrage.

- 118 U.S. 356 at 370.

Sovereignty ultimately rests with people because, due to rights of suffrage, we have a representative form of government. But any argument in court by a person that he has sovereign immunity from any particular law he does not like is laughable and doomed to fail.

[Shoonra]

Originally Posted by phreeman2003

from Black's Law 5th Ed:
Court: The person and suit of the sovereign: the place where the sovereign sojourns with his regal retinue, wherever that may be.

Does Black's really say that??

I don't have the Fifth Edition, but the Third edition spent nearly three pages on definitions of Court, not counting the following 6 pages on specific courts. Your words come in under the definition of "Court - in international law". You didn't bother to mention that (and I doubt this parochial usage became the lead definition in the 5th edition).
The definition for "Court - in practice" is "An organ of the government, belonging to the judicial department, whose function is the application of the laws to controversies brought before it and the public administration of justice...." This is followed by about a half-page of similar definitions to the same effect.

In the current 8th edition, the definition of Court covers more than five pages, and begins with "A governmental body consisting of one or more judges who sit to adjudicate disputes and administer justice." I can't even find the words you quoted.

Looks like you're 0 for 2 as regards reliability of quotations.

[phreeman2003]

Here, at sui juris, lies a court of public opinion whom shall be the judges of this triffling matter.

1. Did I not utilize proper grammatical procedure to signify portions were missing from the Wick Yo quote? And, what I posted was completely accurate in form and substance of that citing.

2. Attached for your lawyerly constricted minds is a copy of page 320 from Black's 5th. I never claimed it was an all inclusive definition. But, as evidence shows Black's does list that very wording near the beginning of the listed definitions.

I could show you some classic, as you call it, quote mining from the writings of the local black robed highwaymen!