Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
REPLY in Opposition to Barry Margolis

REPLY in Opposition to Barry Margolis

Ratings: (0)|Views: 6 |Likes:
Published by SLAVEFATHER
ABRAMS GURFINKEL MARGOLIS GERSON against KRICHEVSKY
ABRAMS GURFINKEL MARGOLIS GERSON against KRICHEVSKY

More info:

Published by: SLAVEFATHER on Sep 24, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

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

03/08/2014

pdf

text

original

 
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURTRETURN DATE: August 1, 2013EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------xIN THE MATTER OF:ELENA SVENSON,CASE NO. 1-12-43050-essDebtor.CHAPTER 7--------------------------------------------------------xMICHAEL KRICHEVSKY,Plaintiff/Creditor,v.ELENA SVENSON,Adversary Proceeding No. 12-01229-essDefendant/debtor,BOARD OF MANAGERS OF OCEANACONDOMINIUM NO. TWO; INTERNALREVENUE SERVICE, INC.,Defendants/Creditors,VICTORIA EDELSTEIN, DDS; BORISKOTLYAR, COOPER SQUARE REALTY, INC;LANA KAPLUN, personally; FARIDBADALOV, personally; BORIS MEYDID, personally;JOHN DOE and JANE JOHNS, personally (fictitious names to be discovered),Defendants.---------------------------------------------------------------xVICTORIA EDELSTEIN, DDS and BORISKOTLYAR,Cross-Claimants,v.MICHAEL KRICHEVSKY,Cross-Defendant.-----------------------------------------------------------------x
OBJECTION, REPLY TO CORPORATE DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISSMIS
MICHAEL KRICHEVSKY, Pro Se, under penalty of perjury, deposes and says:1.I am the plaintiff in the within action.2.I make this objection and affidavit in opposition to the motion to dismiss SECONDAMENDED COMPLAINT (SAC).
ASSERTION OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS
3.United States Constitution and Constitution of the State of New York protect individual
 
constitutional rights to form a contract and conduct commerce. Therefore, “All lawswhich are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void."
 Marbury
v.
 Madison,
5U.S.137, 174,176. A law that "impinges upon a fundamental right explicitly or implicitlysecured by the Constitution is presumptively unconstitutional."
 Mobile
v.
 Bolden,
446 US55, 76;
 Harris
v.
 McRae,
448 US 297,312.4.A law that improperly infringes on Constitutional Rights is void from its inception and no person can be obligated to obey such a law. 16A Am Jur2d Constitutional Law, Section203.55."Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule-making or legislation which would abrogate them."
Miranda
v.
Arizona,
384 U.S. 436.6.The Supreme Court has forcefully established that court proceedings must be withinConstitutional provisions.
Smith
v.
US,
360 US 1;
 Muskrat 
v.
United States,
219 US 346.7."But whenever the judicial power is called into play, it is responsible directly to thefundamental law and no other authority can intervene to force or authorize the judicial body to disregard it."
Yakus
v.
U.S.,
321 U.S., 414 pg. 468.
Violation of Constitutional Rights voids
in personam
 
 jurisdiction. 
8."A judgment rendered in violation of due process is void."
World Wide Volkswagen
v.
Woodsen,
444 U.S. 286, 291;
 National Bank v. Wiley,
195 US 257;
 Pennoyer 
v.
 Neff,
95US 714.9. "If the Bill of Rights is not complied with, the court no longer has jurisdiction to proceed. The judgment ... pronounced by a court without jurisdiction is void ... "
 Johnson
v.
 Zerbst,
304 US 458,468.10.. " ... the requirements of due process must be met before the court can properly assert in
 
 personam jurisdiction."
Wells Fargo
v.
Wells Fargo,
556 F2d 406, 416.11.. "It is beyond question, of course, that a conviction based on a record lacking anyrelevant evidence as to a crucial element of the offense charged violates due process."
Vachon
v.
 New Hampshire,
414 US 478.
Assertion Of Constitutional Right To Petition Government For Redress Of Grievances
12.Plaintiff, Pro Se for the 2
nd
time requests the court and its officers to be mindful of his ProSe status. In cases and precedents that mostly reported, there is a presumption that partyrepresented by trained and licensed attorneys. KRICHEVSKY, however, is none of them.Below are the cases that apply directly to Plaintiff’s status:
Wright v. SZCZUR,
Dist. Court, WD New York 2012 “Although pledinartfully and in a rather conclusory fashion, considering the Wrights' prose status, such allegations state a valid claim under the FourteenthAmendment's Due Process Clause. See
., 953 F.2d 26, 28(2d Cir.1991)("[T]he Supreme Court has instructed the district courts toconstrue pro se complaints liberally and to apply a more flexible standardin determining the sufficiency of a pro se complaint than they would inreviewing a pleading submitted by counsel."). See also “The Erie CountyDefendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity, which protects officials from § 1983 liability if their actions
(1) did not violateclearly established law or (2) were objectively reasonable
. See
196 F.3d 330, 332 (2d Cir. 1999). However, if the Wrightsestablish that these Defendants violated their constitutional right to care

You're Reading a Free Preview

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