Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Duane G.Davis Vs the United States of America.

Duane G.Davis Vs the United States of America.

Ratings: (0)|Views: 28|Likes:
Published by Duane G. Davis
I have a Right to my Property i have a right to have those officials held accountable for Knowing abusing their political powers and used their Power of their Offices to distribute political Revenge.
Well this is MY Right and legal response to Hold Gansler O'Malley and the Machine accountable.
I have a Right to my Property i have a right to have those officials held accountable for Knowing abusing their political powers and used their Power of their Offices to distribute political Revenge.
Well this is MY Right and legal response to Hold Gansler O'Malley and the Machine accountable.

More info:

Published by: Duane G. Davis on Jun 16, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

08/27/2013

pdf

text

original

 
 Original Complaint - 11234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132
Pro SeDuane Gerald Davis, Sr.7904 Jody Knoll DriveOwings Mills, MD 21249(443) 831-1188
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
  Northern DivisionDuane Gerald Davis, Sr.
 Plaintiff 
vs.THE UNITED STATES, Case No.THE State of Maryland,
Governor Martin O‟Malley,
EMERGENCY MOTION
Baltimore County Police Chief 
FOR RECONSIDERATION
 James W. Johnson,Balt
imore City State‟s Attorney
A HEARING WITHIN 20 DAYS
 Gregg L. Bernstein,
RESPECTFULLY REQUESTED
 
Baltimore County State‟s Attorney
 Scott D. Schellenberger, in their official
 Defendants _______________________________________ 
Motion for reconsideration under FRCP rule 608(2), (6)
Rule 60. Relief from a Judgment or Order
(a) Corrections Based on Clerical Mistakes; Oversights and Omissions. The court may correct a clericalmistake or a mistake arising from oversight or omission whenever one is found in a judgment, order, or other part of the record. The court may do so on motion or on its own, with or without notice. But after anappeal has been docketed in the appellate court and while it is pending, such a mistake may be correctedonly with the appellate court's leave.
 
 Original Complaint - 21234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132
(b) Grounds for Relief from a Final Judgment, Order, or Proceeding. On motion and just terms, the courtmay relieve a party or its legal representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for thefollowing reasons:(1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect;(2) newly discovered evidence that, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered in time tomove for a new trial under Rule 59(b); (3) fraud (whether previously called intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or misconduct by anopposing party;(4) the judgment is void;(5) the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged; it is based on an earlier judgment that has been reversed or vacated; or applying it prospectively is no longer equitable; or (6) any other reason that justifies relief.(c) Timing and Effect of the Motion.(1)
Timing.
A motion under Rule 60(b)must be made within a reasonable time
 — 
and for reasons (1), (2),and (3) no more than a year after the entry of the judgment or order or the date of the proceeding.(2)
 Effect on Finality.
The motion does not affect the judgment's finality or suspend its operation.
ARGUMENT
Previously this court dismissed Plaintiff‟s original complaint
entitled:
PLAINTIFF’S
COMPLAINT FOR FRAUD, UNLAWFUL CONVERSION, BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY,COLLUSION, NEGLIGENCE, AND TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE.
At the time of the complaint,Plaintiff did not have the following information and hereby presents it now in support of this motion.
ADDITIONAL ARGUMENT FAVORING EMERGENCY 20 DAY HEARING
The latest developments in the country favor an expedited handling of this motion. Currently theOversight Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives is conducting an investigation over theslaughter of the U.S. Ambassador and staff of the U.S. consulate in Benehzi, Libva. Testimony that wasmade public shows Obama and his administration falsifying and altering the CIA report, removing thewording in regards to radical Muslims connected to Al Qaeda attacking the embassy and defrauding 315
 
 Original Complaint - 31234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132
million American citizens by claiming that the mortar attack and deaths were the result of spontaneous demonstration. Plaintiff is presenting these issues to show a modus operandi. If Obama and his staff couldfalsify the official CIA report in order to win an election, similarly, he, working with other federalemployees, could defraud the American people and cover up the fact that the administration retaliatesagainst individuals who have conservative values.
CASE HISTORY
Duane Gerald Davis, Sr. hereby incorporates by reference thereto the Corporate Surety Bonds of 
Baltimore County State‟s Attorney Scott D. Schellenberger, Baltimore County Police Chief James W.Johnson, and Baltimore City State‟s Attorney Gregg L. Bernstein
, to this action required by the MarylandConstitution at Article 5, Section 12 and hereby makes an official claim against said bonds.Duane Gerald Davis, Sr. hereby incorporates by reference thereto the Sworn and Subscribed Oathof Office of Judge Susan Souder, Assistant Judge of the Third Judicial Circuit Court of Maryland, a copyof which is attached hereto, and any corporate surety bond for faithful performance to act within the bounds of the law and the discretionary dictates of her own conscience in favor of her fellow MarylandBar members.Plaintiff was incarcerated at the times relevant in the complaint, and therefore was in fact avulnerable adult.
That the Baltimore County Police Department by and through the Office of the
State‟s Attorney of Ba
ltimore County are in unlawful possession of the personal property of Duane Gerald Davis, Sr. and are under a lawful duty to return said property undamaged and inthe good and proper condition in which it was confiscated by a purported search warrant that wasnever served on Duane Gerald Davis, Sr. The property includes but is not limited to a 1999Charcoal Grey Chevrolet Suburban; A Daily Diary from 1986 made of yellow legal papers;Black Legal Briefcase with legal material, as well as, Private Business Organizational and TaxPapers; a Video Camera; a Digital Camera; SD Cards; (9) Video Documentaries and Video Film,
a book entitled “The Minority Report” by Duane “Shorty” Davis; and various keys.
Theestimated value of the above listed property is $250,000.00. That Duane Gerald Davis, Sr. islawfully entitled to repossession of said property, and that Scott D. Schellenberger is lawfullyaccountable to return the aforesaid property or the monetary value thereof. Upon Mr.
Schellenberger‟s refusal to uphold Plaintiff‟s Constitutional Rights, Mr Douglas Gansler, States

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->