You also need standing to get subject matter jurisdiction. The supreme Court has ruled for any court civil or criminal to hear a case the plantiff must show standing. Which means the defendant must violate a legal right and cause personal injury.
I think you're mixing up constitutional law with civil procedure. When it comes to standing as you mentioned that has to do with justiceability requirements which includes standing, ripeness, mootness etc
You filled out the paperwork, foreign act paperwork and bar stands for british accredited registry, you are foreign to me a private man! You dont have jurisdiction period
BAR members only understand civil procedure. Not American common law or the fundamental and intention of law. Nor do they understand how religion and history brought about what we have. They think that judges can decide law and that case law is an actual thing. Instead of merely a legal opinion. I'd like to know what part of our constitution says that only BAR members can practice law, it doesn't. Most lawyers and judges, magistrates contradict the judiciary act of the constitution like whenever there is a common law jurisdiction for a case it supersedes any and every civil law. They've been trained to destroy our legal system and with the help of our education system they've done just that. Why do you think they're paid so well? It sickens me as an American Soldier to watch my own people destroy the amazing government they were handed. Trust law = Roman Catholic (pope), feudalism. Exactly what our forefathers protected us from when they separated from England. Then England went bankrupt to the Rothschild and the BAR distorted our law, replacing American freedoms with permissions of the crown dynasty.
Derek Syroka wow,you amaze me being a soldier and seeing this corruption,my hats off to you Sir.we need to take our country back,and we need more men and women like you.God bless
Charles...This is a civil case...the court has no jurisdiction until the plaintiff can prove that the court ought to take his case...legally....jurisdiction....the lawful power of the court to hear the case...in civil, the plaintiff must convince the judge.
P = Plaintiff D = Defendant A plaintiff is the person filing suit. A defendant is the person who the suit is being brought against. I'm not sure what the other responder is smoking, but yeah...
But then when over $.75.001.your in federal court.but states supreme courts ruling are higher in the rank because duel sovernty so references case law only becomes persuasive not manditory on the chain of power of case law reference toping seperation of powers doctrine or supremacy..if the supremcey claws applys then it un does state sovernty and all the case law from state supreme court over the federal circuit court meaning by ratifying the federal constitution they fourfited all of state sovernty
A citizen is a legal person and only exists on black ink on white paper that involves a corporate body that has no common sense. A man is a natural person and exists with a corporeal body. The citizen belongs in positive law and the man belongs with natural law. So the question is does the corporate body have jurisdiction over the corporeal body. No, because the corporeal body is the author of the corporate body.
I should have viewed your video. Cause the Federal Magistrate Dismissed my claim as time-barred. Then the CA Circuit JUdge dismissed my appeal for frivolous. SUing a Judge for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
No. Consult a bar certified attorney. They are required to give you factual legal advice. UA-cam attorneys are not required to give you factual legal advice.
No, federal law is law decided by the supreme court. Pre Erie it was law decided by federal circuit courts using " federal" common law , but that was deemed unconstitutional.
Margo Lockweeze Citizens? What are these citizens you speak of. Isn't a citizen one that exchanges the duty of allegiance for the duty of protection? That's odd, because the state has no duty to protect; so if the duty of protection isn't given, then why is the duty of allegiance required; because guns, that's why.
This is part of a course that prepares people who are going to take the Bar Exam. "Tackle" is used in the sense of tackling a question about this topic on the exam.
You also need standing to get subject matter jurisdiction. The supreme Court has ruled for any court civil or criminal to hear a case the plantiff must show standing. Which means the defendant must violate a legal right and cause personal injury.
I think you're mixing up constitutional law with civil procedure. When it comes to standing as you mentioned that has to do with justiceability requirements which includes standing, ripeness, mootness etc
Very instrumental in clarifying all the various legal jurisdictions.
You forgot the arrow for, "our laws apply to him," and the proof of that claim.
You’re an idiot huh?
subject matter jurisdiction is the laws violated and the applicability of those laws, if they cant prove the laws apply then they lack jurisdiction.
The Moors are back, How dose a colorable Court tackle that???
why at intro you got the name john preis but in video you go as jack? do you still work at that university? your name is not on there web site.
Good video but you missed removal
You filled out the paperwork, foreign act paperwork and bar stands for british accredited registry, you are foreign to me a private man! You dont have jurisdiction period
How do I get in contact with you? Do I need a laywer to better handle tackle personsal jurisdiction
Thank You Oh King
Thank you.
BAR members only understand civil procedure. Not American common law or the fundamental and intention of law. Nor do they understand how religion and history brought about what we have. They think that judges can decide law and that case law is an actual thing. Instead of merely a legal opinion. I'd like to know what part of our constitution says that only BAR members can practice law, it doesn't. Most lawyers and judges, magistrates contradict the judiciary act of the constitution like whenever there is a common law jurisdiction for a case it supersedes any and every civil law. They've been trained to destroy our legal system and with the help of our education system they've done just that. Why do you think they're paid so well? It sickens me as an American Soldier to watch my own people destroy the amazing government they were handed. Trust law = Roman Catholic (pope), feudalism. Exactly what our forefathers protected us from when they separated from England. Then England went bankrupt to the Rothschild and the BAR distorted our law, replacing American freedoms with permissions of the crown dynasty.
Derek Syroka wow,you amaze me being a soldier and seeing this corruption,my hats off to you Sir.we need to take our country back,and we need more men and women like you.God bless
Derek Syroka...Please run for presidency and make GOD & HIS people happy you did. 😙
The law practiced today is foreign to America, that is why they have no jurisdiction, but it does apply to US citizens, citizens of Washington DC.
well said.
why doesn't state work like that IDGAF what it is they always think they have jurisdiction even when they don't
Charles...This is a civil case...the court has no jurisdiction until the plaintiff can prove that the court ought to take his case...legally....jurisdiction....the lawful power of the court to hear the case...in civil, the plaintiff must convince the judge.
Plz tell us all about
Fram of suit, decree, issue examination , judgment and execution of decreean order
Thank you .
Advocate
R S Charan
India
some one should have told darrel brooks this
Can i get a definition for P and D?
P = Plaintiff D = Defendant A plaintiff is the person filing suit. A defendant is the person who the suit is being brought against. I'm not sure what the other responder is smoking, but yeah...
Plaintiff and Defendant
very nice
Yet citizens, double talk again. We are government and you will comply. England rule yet again.
But then when over $.75.001.your in federal court.but states supreme courts ruling are higher in the rank because duel sovernty so references case law only becomes persuasive not manditory on the chain of power of case law reference toping seperation of powers doctrine or supremacy..if the supremcey claws applys then it un does state sovernty and all the case law from state supreme court over the federal circuit court meaning by ratifying the federal constitution they fourfited all of state sovernty
BAR attorneys are not lawyers.
Incorporated corporations are also citizens of the state in which they are incorporated for diversity purposes
A citizen is a legal person and only exists on black ink on white paper that involves a corporate body that has no common sense. A man is a natural person and exists with a corporeal body. The citizen belongs in positive law and the man belongs with natural law. So the question is does the corporate body have jurisdiction over the corporeal body. No, because the corporeal body is the author of the corporate body.
I should have viewed your video. Cause the Federal Magistrate Dismissed my claim as time-barred. Then the CA Circuit JUdge dismissed my appeal for frivolous. SUing a Judge for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
+Spark916916 Don't sue......... Commercial Lien them.
Continued violations doctrine as long as you have 1 claim in the time frame then they all comeback😁
@John Smith I really want to learn this Lingo you guys are using...
Isn't Constitutional law Federal Law???
No. Consult a bar certified attorney. They are required to give you factual legal advice. UA-cam attorneys are not required to give you factual legal advice.
Yes
No, federal law is law decided by the supreme court. Pre Erie it was law decided by federal circuit courts using " federal" common law , but that was deemed unconstitutional.
@Bill Scott Pre Erie it was, not anymore .
@Bill Scott By that logic so is any one who holds a degree or has a licence.
you speak of citizens. What of Sovereigns.
Margo Lockweeze Citizens? What are these citizens you speak of. Isn't a citizen one that exchanges the duty of allegiance for the duty of protection? That's odd, because the state has no duty to protect; so if the duty of protection isn't given, then why is the duty of allegiance required; because guns, that's why.
Then the argument would be of personal jurisdiction, not subject matter. It'll have to be proven by contract or consent.
+Derek Syroka can you explain the difference more in debt?
That is 100% true in my mind. The whole point of this nations confusion. I always hear about subject matter.@@dereksyroka6288
Do you mean challenge? not tackle
Hey Rip whats goin on buddy?
This is your friend wayne
This is part of a course that prepares people who are going to take the Bar Exam. "Tackle" is used in the sense of tackling a question about this topic on the exam.