declaratory judgment win!!!

[Ice]

In regards to paying court fees: somewhere I have seen it quoted, whether from law or case cite, that the a fee cannot be imposed because justice should be dispensed "freely"... or something to that effect.



Does anyone know have a clue to what I'm talking about?



Ice

[TheBlackTruth]

<font color=darkblue size=3 face=tahoma>Yes, sir.



We all are gauranteed free access to the courts. I will have to look up where that is written.



What i'm saying is if this is so, then what does paying for access do to prejudice our rights? Is there some sort of implied contract when you pay for something which is your right to have freely? That seems to be the case in all other government fees.. . .[/color]

[Libertarian]

The Clearfield Doctrine is stare decisis upon all courts, and imposes that “an entity cannot compel performance upon its corporate statutes or corporation rules unless it, like any other corporation, is the Holder in Due Course of some contract or commercial agreement between it, and the one on whom its demands for performance are made, and is willing to produce said document, and to place the same into evidence before trying to enforce its demands."

Clearfield Trust Co. v. United States, 318 U.S. 363-371 (1942)

As I posted on another thread, this seems to be a spurious quote-- I looked at <u>Clearfield</u> in Findlaw, and it doesn't say that (or anything similar).

[TheBlackTruth]

<font color=darkblue face="tahoma">

I indicated on the other thread that I'm investigating. So far i've come to the source as being www.commonlawvenue.com in their glossary section. I've emailed the webmaster to find the source of the quote but have not yet received a reply. I shall keep you all posted!

[/color]

[Akira]

Originally Posted by Libertarian

As I posted on another thread, this seems to be a spurious quote-- I looked at <u>Clearfield</u> in Findlaw, and it doesn't say that (or anything similar).

I concur...



I had added the Clearfield post to the top of the brief on contracts, to remind me to research it further.... and inadvertantly included it in my post.. realizing my error I have since removed the reference... and.... having just spent 3 hours trying to find a source for the quote, I must presume, until seeing proof otherwise, that it is, most likely concocted...



http://www.sovereignliving.com/gloss...sary_c_01.html

http://www.hdd-gods-ministry.com/mar...e_beast_iv.htm



the earliest reference I can find is by:

StaR_x_at_kissmyass.com in May of 2003

and the reference is immediately labeled as fraudulent



read the informative exchange here



The hurrier I go,

the behinder I get...



sorry for the goof / inconvenience...



For HIS Glory,

Akira



P.S. it would also appear that www.commonlawvenue.com has removed the reference... as it was there earlier, but seems to be gone now..

[TheBlackTruth]

<font color=darkblue face=tahoma>

hmmm. . . Perhaps they took the quote down from commonlawvenue because of my email. It was there not 7 days ago!



Another group i'm a member of started doing an investigation on bogus quotes. I've come to realize that a majority of those quotes we see attributed to Hitler are bogus as well. Its frustrating to have to deal with BB AND bad information at the same time!

[/color]

here is what you are looking for blacktruth. i used this in my petition and they still ignored it:





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 in the Union" (2 Black 620; see also: Crandell vs. Nevada, 6 Wall 35). Plaintiff should not be charged fees or costs for the lawful and constitutional right to petition this court in this matter in which he is entitled to relief, as it appears that the filing fee rule was originally implemented for fictions and subjects of government, and should not be applied to the Plaintiff who is a natural individual and entitled to relief (Hale vs. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43).

[TheBlackTruth]

<font color=darkblue face=tahoma>

Great find, kgodd. Thanks. I should've known it was Hale v Henke![/color]

perhaps because you weren't/aren't a "natural individual" kgod...



jon

yeah, i thought about that too jmunson, but im not too concerned with the filing fee thing just yet. i will use it with other stuff, i wanna just finish handling this i got here.