MAJOR OBJECTIONS First for the Record I formally OBJECT to the Plaintiff(s)/ Petitioner(s) claims of ASSUMED JURISDICTION.

I cite McNutt vs. GENERAL MOTORS ACCEPTANCE CORP. 56 S. Ct. 502, which case held ….. Jurisdiction may NEVER be assumed not even by COLORABLE CLAIMS OR STATUS OR BLACK ROBES OR OFFICIALDOM OR APPEARANCES, but must be substantively proven by the PLAINTIFF(S)/ CLAIMANTS of said Jurisdiction. Aslo see [Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 528 @ 533], and Once challenged by ANY PROPER PARTY the Plaintiff(s)/ Claimants MUST prove their JURISDICTION in a timely manner. Failure to timely prove said claimed Jurisdiction and LACHES INCURRS. Now Title 5 U. S. CODE section 556(d) which states; (d) Except as otherwise provided by statute, the proponent, [ meaning YOU. ], of a rule or order has the burden of proof. Any oral or documentary evidence may be received, but the agency as a matter of policy shall provide for the exclusion of irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly repetitious evidence. A sanction may not be imposed or rule or order issued except on consideration of the whole record or those parts thereof cited by a party and supported by and in accordance with the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence. The agency may, to the extent consistent with the interests of justice and the policy of the underlying statutes administered by the agency, consider a violation of section 557(d) of this title sufficient grounds for a decision adverse to a party who has knowingly committed such violation or knowingly caused such violation to occur. A party is entitled to present his case or defense by oral or documentary evidence, to submit rebuttal evidence, and to conduct such cross-examination as may be required for a full and true disclosure of the facts. In rule making or determining claims for money or benefits or applications for initial licenses an agency may, when a party will not be prejudiced thereby, adopt procedures for the submission of all or part of the evidence in written form.” UNITED STATES CODE ANNOTATED TITLE 5. GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION AND EMPLOYEES PART I--THE AGENCIES GENERALLY CHAPTER 5--ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE SUBCHAPTER II--ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE Current through P.L. 104-98, approved 1-16-96 Sec. 557. Initial decisions; conclusiveness; review by agency; submissions by parties; contents of decisions; record (a) This section applies, according to the provisions thereof, when a hearing is required to be conducted in accordance with section 556 of this title.


Current through P.L. 104-98, approved 1-16-96 Sec. 706. Scope of review To the extent necessary to decision and when presented, the reviewing court shall decide all relevant questions of law, interpret constitutional and statutory provisions, and determine the meaning or applicability of the terms of an agency action. The reviewing court shall-(1) compel agency action unlawfully withheld or unreasonably delayed; and (2) hold unlawful and set aside agency action, findings, and conclusions found to be-(A) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; (B) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity; (C) in excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, or short of statutory right; (D) without observance of procedure required by law; (E) unsupported by substantial evidence in a case subject to sections 556 and 557 of this title or otherwise reviewed on the record of an agency hearing provided by statute; or (F) unwarranted by the facts to the extent that the facts are subject to trial de novo by the reviewing court. In making the foregoing determinations, the court shall review the whole record or those parts of it cited by a party, and due account shall be taken of the rule of prejudicial error.

17 (See Above). “Special provision is made in the Constitution for the cession of jurisdiction from the states over places where the federal government shall establish forts or other military works. And it is only in these places, or in territories of the United States, where it can exercise a general jurisdiction” [New Orleans v. United States, 35 U.S. (10 Pet.) 662 (1836)] “All legislation is prima facie territorial” [American Banana Co. v. U.S. Fruit, 213, U.S. 347 at 357-358]

“the United States never held any municipal sovereignty, jurisdiction, or right of soil in Alabama or any of the new states which were formed ... The United States has no Constitutional capacity to exercise municipal jurisdiction, sovereignty or eminent domain, within the limits of a state or elsewhere, except in the cases in which it is expressly granted ...” [Pollard v. Hagan, 44 U.S.C. 213, 221, 223] “No sanction can be imposed absent proof of jurisdiction” [Stanard v. Olesen, 74 S. Ct.768] “Once challenged, jurisdiction cannot be ‘assumed’, it must be proved to exist.” [Stuck v. Medical Examiners, 94 Ca2d 751.211 P2s 389] “Jurisdiction, once challenged, cannot be assumed and must be TIMELY PROVEN, AND EMPHATICALLY DECIDED. ” [Maine v. Thiboutot, 100 S. Ct. 2502] “The law requires proof of jurisdiction to appear on the record of the administrative agency and all administrative proceedings” [Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 533] If any tribunal finds absence of proof of jurisdiction over person and subject matter, the case must be dismissed.” [Louisville R.R. v. Motley, 211 U.S. 149, 29 S. Ct. 42] Other cases also such as McNutt v. G.M., 56 S. Ct. 789,80 L. Ed. 1135, Griffin v. Mathews, 310 Supp. 341, 423 F. 2d 272, Basso v. U.P.L., 495 F 2d. 906, Thomson v. Gaskiel, 62 S. Ct. 673, 83 L. Ed. 111, and Albrecht v U.S., 273 U.S. 1, All these cases confirm, that, when challenged, jurisdiction must be documented, shown, and proven, to lawfully exist before a cause may lawfully proceed in the courts..

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful