Home

TS Radio: Abolishing Probate #14 ..Citizen Oversight Committees

Leave a comment

Join us this evening February 5, 2018 at 7:00 pm CST!

More

Advertisements

New Hampshire Woman Takes on Oklahoma- and a Moot Court

Leave a comment

Written by: Michael Volpe and Tanya Hathaway

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It’s All About Jurisdiction

A judgment from a court that did not have subject-matter jurisdiction is forever a nullity.[1][2] Wikipedia

With a corrupt judge refusing to remove himself from the case, he had no problem ignoring the evidence that the court had no jurisdiction.

A court must have some sort of a stake in a case before it can hear it; that’s called Subject-matter jurisdiction.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 PROVING SUBJECT-MATTER JURISDICTION

Proper implementation of Subject–matter jurisdiction prevents judge shopping or forum shopping.

Some of a few of the many exhibits Hathaway presented for supporting arguments for lack of Subject-matter jurisdiction include: 1) Their marital home was in New Hampshire. Hathaway never lived in Oklahoma, and XXX (referring to Hathaway’s estranged husband) wasn’t living in Tulsa County.  XXX swore their marital home as his legal residence when he applied for a P.O. box, 2) XXX obtained a New Hampshire’s driver’s license on June 27th 2014- just weeks before filing- where he swore that he lived in New Hampshire, 3) Their marriage certificate listed New Hampshire as their legal address 4) Confirmation from the US Postal Service (USPS) that XXX permanently changed his home address from Tulsa to New Hampshire 5) dozens of resumes which XXX sent to potential employers where his return address was New Hampshire  6) While Hathaway examined XXX for her motion to vacate the suit due to lack of jurisdiction, he admitted that he did not have a residence or stay anywhere in Tulsa County during the time period required to claim Subject-matter jurisdiction.  Clearly, he relied on his insiders to take care of things.

Miller, during an argument with XXX’s attorney, even threw Hathaway a bone, saying, “I don’t understand why a driver’s licenses would not be admissible to go to evidence of where a person’s residence is in a hearing on Subject-matter jurisdiction.”

Judge Miller noted that Subject-matter jurisdiction came down to, “was the petitioner a resident of Oklahoma for six months prior to filing the petition?”

When XXX testified, he insisted that he was domiciled- or had a residence in-Oklahoma at the time he filed his petition in June 2014, but when asked to provide his address, he responded, “I did not have a formal address in Tulsa.”

He even repeated this assertion when Miller asked him the same question minutes later.

 JUDICIAL ESTOPPEL

Just as XXX knew he could rely on Hughes and Hastings, lawyers on XXX’s behalf, Hughes knew they could rely on Miller to make it all work. All they needed was something with the veneer of legitimacy: thinking Hathaway didn’t know better. Judicial Estoppel is a legal technicality which “prevents a party from asserting a position in one legal proceeding that directly contradicts a position taken by that same party in an earlier proceeding.According to the Cornell Law Review.

Hughes and her team argued because Hathaway had come to Oklahoma to challenge the lawsuit, this implicitly gave the state jurisdiction, except, as in this case, without Subject-matter jurisdiction, Judicial Estoppel is moot. They all know it.

Hathaway knew there was no Subject-matter jurisdiction, but couldn’t prove it until discovered additional evidence that was rock solid. Knowing she could prove it, she motioned to vacate the suit in a county that by law cannot hear or rule over the matter.

Put another way, you aren’t allowed to go to New Hampshire’s Department of Motor Vehicle and swear you live there and turn around and tell a court in Oklahoma weeks later you live in that state, if all your evidence is a storage receipt.

By all rights, it was a slam dunk. No evidence was presented to overcome the lack of Subject-matter jurisdiction as the defense relied solely on Judicial Estoppel.

That’s fraud, and neither estoppel nor anything else can be achieved by fraud, unless your friends with facing the Orwellian Miller appointed by the upstanding Presiding Judge Linda Morrissey who ignored requests to review the gross negligence claimed in this matter in her court.

By all rights, it was a slam dunk. No evidence was presented to overcome the lack of Subject-matter jurisdiction as the defense relied solely on Judicial Estoppel.

Miller denied Hathaway citing Subject-matter jurisdiction as the key to vacating the suit. Yet, The Hughes Team didn’t use that dedense! If they had, it was still a slam dunk.

Still, knowing Subject-matter jurisdiction overrides Judicial Estoppel (the defenses claim), Hathaway filed an emergency motion for reconsideration, arguing that Judicial Estoppel does not apply because subject matter was not established.  This caused Miller to augment his rulings the next day in court.

“I apparently, I left the impression and I want to correct it, that the only basis for my ruling yesterday was on the basis of Judicial Estoppel. It’s my intention to indicate that after hearing those many hours of testimony, the facts support that this court has Subject-matter jurisdiction,” the Orwellian Judge Miller stated at this hearing, “He was a resident based on the factual record presented.”

Factual Record information from Cornell University Law School Includes:

In General. In an action tried on the facts without a jury or with an advisory jury, the court must find the facts specially and state its conclusions of law separately. The findings and conclusions may be stated on the record after the close of the evidence or may appear in an opinion or a memorandum of decision filed by the court.”

The “factual record” evidence consisted of a Tulsa storage unit receipt.  

Check out the You Tube video for highlights from the Subject-matter jurisdiction hearing.

Judge Halbrooks: Sandra Grazzini-Rucki Too Poor For Court Costs But Can Pay Child Support

4 Comments

Michael Volpe

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

This is not the first time Judge Flaskamps-Halbrooks has ruled on matters related to Grazzini-Rucki.

In September 2012, Grazzini-Rucki was ordered out of her home, out of the state, and ordered not to contact anyone she knew.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Months after a Minnesota Appeal’s Court Judge ruled that Sandra Grazzini-Rucki was capable of paying nearly $1,000 per month in child support, the same judge ruled that paying several hundred dollars in her ex-husband’s court costs would be too burdensome.

On December 1, 2017, Minnesota Appeal’s Court Judge Jill Flaskamps Halbrooks ruled that Sandra Grazzini-Rucki paying for David Rucki’s court costs.

“Although David Rucki prevailed on appeal, it appears that allowance of the claimed costs and disbursements would cause financial hardship, in light of the district court’s determination that appellant (Sandra Grazzini-Rucki) is entitled to proceed in forma pauperis.”

When someone receives in forma pauperis status, they are deemed to poor to afford an attorney.

Sandra Grazzini-Rucki has been represented in her divorce since early 2013 by Michelle MacDonald, who has worked pro-bono since receiving a $5,000 payment at the beginning of the case.

The same Judge, Jill Flaskamps-Halbrooks, ruled in September 2017 that Sandra Grazzini-Rucki had the ability to pay her ex-husband $975 per month in child support, despite Grazzini-Rucki being convicted of six felonies, homeless, and unemployed.

“Grazzini-Rucki asserts that she had no ability to pay child support because her employment with the airline was ‘in flux’ and that the CSM made ‘vague, generalized and conclusory findings’ that did not justify imputing income under Minn. Stat. § 518A.32, subd. 1.5 But these assertions misconstrue the record, particularly the evidence admitted during the September 2016 hearing. The CSM found that after Grazzini-Rucki was released from jail, she submitted a document in March 2016 that stated that she currently worked as a flight attendant Grazzini-Rucki testified, and the CSM acknowledged, that her status of employment was unknown at the time of the September 2016 hearing. But Grazzini-Rucki did not provide any evidence that her employment status had changed or that her employment had been terminated after March 2016.” Judge Flaskamps-Halbrooks asserted in her August ruling, when she confirmed that an earlier ruling ordering Grazzini-Rucki to pay her ex-husband $975 per month was appropriate.

After Judge Flaskamps-Halbrooks ruled in his favor in the child support appeal, his attorney, Lisa Elliott, filed to recoup his court costs.

Elliott did not respond to an email for comment.

David Rucki was granted child support even though he already received 100% of a multi-million-dollar estate which included numerous homes, classic cars, and the entirety of a thriving trucking business. More

Abolishing Probate # 5: Congress’s Failure to Act

Leave a comment

Join us live November 6, 2017 at 7:00 pm CST!

5:00 pm PST … 6:00 pm MST … 7:00 pm CST … 8:00 pm EST

Listen Live HERE!

call in # 917-388-4520

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hosted by Marti Oakley and including Luanne Fleming, Robin Austin, Katherine Hine

Under its duty to the public, Congress has repeatedly failed to act to protect the public from the system of probate in all its forms.  Declaring a living, breathing individual dead in the law (civil death) is equal in its consequences to a natural death.  They make this declaration of death under the guise of “ward of the state”.  Once a ward, you have no rights whatsoever.  Prisoners who have committed the worst crimes imaginable have more rights [reserved than a “ward of the state”.  Under this system, the elderly, the disabled and children are trafficked by the government for profit.

This sytem of human trafficking is the result of Congress’s failure to act within its duty to the public.  As congress is charged under the Constitution for the United States with organizing the courts, it stands to reason these probate courts could not exist without their complicity and their abject failure to act to protect the public from these professional predators.

Inferior Courts Clause Art 111 Sect. 2 Clause 1

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleiii

Section 1.

The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. (this bill s 178 is an example of congress abdicating its duty to end these administrative tribunals and to make laws protecting the public from professional predators and to organize the courts). (emphasis, mine)

 

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/marti-oakley/2017/11/07/abolishing-probate-5-congresss-failure-to-act

“Its Mr. Hanson’s Fault.” – Attorney for Jared Shafer

2 Comments

  Plaintiff Jason Hanson and attorney Jacob Hafter in court, Oct. 31, 2017 (Photo by Steve Miller)
LAS VEGAS – For the second time in two weeks, attorneys for ddefendants in a Breach of Fiduciary Duty lawsuit brought by 28 year old cerebral palsy victim Jason Hanson, tried to convince the court that Hanson was in full control of guardianship hearings in 2007, therefore he is time barred from suing their clients.
Steven J. Parsons, attorney for embattled private guardian Jared Shafer, tried to convince Clark County District Judge Tierra Jones that Hanson, in 2007, upon reaching his 18th birthday, took charge of Guardianship Commissioner Jon Norheim’s court, and from that point forward controlled his own destiny, a destiny that allegedly cost Hanson his entire inheritance at the hands of court appointed guardians, trustees, and attorneys that Hanson believes bled over a quarter of a million dollars of his inheritance in unnecessary fees and costs.
Based on today’s testimony, it appears that the defendant’s main defense is that the statute of limitations ran out in 2009, and Hanson himself shirked his responsibility to personally file lawsuits against his court appointed caretakers in a timely manner.
However, had Hanson been aware of the draining of his estate, and was able to afford to hire an attorney after reaching the age of maturity in 2007, he would have had to sue his court appointed guardians, trustees, and attorneys whom he relied upon for his well being under an unneeded guardianship that lasted until 2015.

What the Erie Co. Surrogate/ Probate Court “Judge” Barbara Howe and her Posse of Evil Lawyers are responsible for

8 Comments

Anne Morales“On November 21, 2016, when my Father was on Death’s Doorstep (e-mails and Hospital reports show)- one of the Lawyers filed a new Petition to, SURPRISE – SURPRISE, declare my Father “Incapacitated” and in need of a “Permanent Guardian” which is outrageous. He hung on for a while, but died one month later, and by filing this phony Petition all the Lawyers involved were now in control of everything of His, and are still in the picture even though there is no one to be a “Guardian” of. Proving once and for all what we are dealing with was NEVER ACTUALLY about my Fathers Well Being or Him as a Person, but them getting ALL His Finances $$ & Property for themselves!”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Ed Visser-PA Petition-Cem Plot 2016

What the Erie Co. Surrogate/ Probate Court “Judge” Barbara Howe and her Posse of Evil Lawyers are responsible for doing to my beloved Father. The person my brother’s and I loved and respected very much. An extremely talented man who contributed greatly to his community and DID NOT deserve this ungodly end. I also have a plethora of pictures-video-evidence which tells the Whole story. There is no excuse for what happened.

It’s why I want the people responsible exposed/ held to account / stopped before they destroy one more life because of their (beyond the pale) GREED and ABUSE OF POWER.

As Officers of the Court- Lawyers have an obligation to TELL THE TRUTH- not manipulate the system for their own greedy gain or sick Agendas.

None of us should tolerate what has happened here, because anyone could find themselves in a similar situation. Martin Luther King said it all in his letter from Birmingham jail:-

 “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” – “Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly”

In my Father’s case there ISN’T ONE Court Petition or Court Order that wasn’t done in a Fraudulent manner – the paper trail / transcripts & evidence is crystal clear my Father and our Family’s RIGHTS were seriously trampled so a bunch of Evil Lawyer’s and a “Next door neighbor” who should never have been in the picture, could make themselves a lot of my Father’s money that never belonged to them ($200,000 and counting!!!) My Father had 3 Children and 8 Grandchildren to give his worldly goods to. Not once did “Judge” Barbara Howe follow (interpret) the Law or rule in my Father’s behalf- she along with her “posse” made it up as they went along.  It has been a ONE SIDED FALSE NARRATIVE since February 2015, and even though my Father has been dead since December 2016, the same Players ARE STILL in the picture, racking up more bills, filing more false Petitions and creating Havoc. It has been Pure Insanity.

“An Unjust Law is No Law at All”; St. Augustine.

My Father’s wife Gladys Visser died October 23, 2014- It was a simple matter.

In Her Will, she gave everything she owned to my Father and one other beneficiary – her hairdresser- $5,000.00.

My Father and his wife owned 2 homes- one in Alabama which was in both their names and the one in Amherst, NY, which was given to Gladys by her ex-husband in 1970. It was still in her maiden Married name of “Orser”. My Father’s Lawyer told us it was a simple transaction of transferring the house into his name, as he was living in it, having been married to Gladys for over 20+ years, and my Father being the one who maintained it financially.

Instead of being a simple transfer though it has turned into a Nightmare of Epic proportions – a 2 1/2 year – “Hostile Takeover and Land Grab” and still not over! – Long story short – The next door neighbor who was named as Executor of Gladys Will got the Court involved because he thought he was going to get everything from my Fathers and Gladys Estate.  Then, instead of the neighbor taking over (because my Father did not want him to be Executor), a “TEMPORARY” Public Administrator (Acea Mosey) was given the reins (against my Fathers Petition and wishes), who had a LEGAL obligation to probate Gladys Visser Will within a reasonable time frame. She absolutely refused to put the Deed of the House into my Fathers name. Obviously done to control the outcome (which she is sill doing).

By controlling the Deed to the House- they controlled my Father’s life and my Family. The Attorneys spent from March 2015 through all of 2016 trying to declare my Father incapacitated, which he was not as numerous Videos, Physician’s reports and other reports prove (done without a Hearing and most of the time while he was not being represented by Counsel). Importantly, Prior to my Fathers Wife’s Death, He was the one taking care of the Her, their household, doing errands, Driving Her around because she was ill with Emphysema.  Not one person ever filed anything with the Court or any other agency believing him to be “Incapacitated”, unable to live in his own home or in need of Court intervention.  More

Abolishing Probate #3: Chris Forsyth & Judicial Integrity Project.org

Leave a comment

Join us live October 9, 2017 at 7:00 pm CST!

More

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: