Paul Andrew Mitchell, Sui Juris
c/o general delivery
San Marcos [ZIP code exempt]
TEXAS STATE
In Propria Persona
All Rights Reserved,
without prejudice
At Law
DISTRICT COURT OF TEXAS STATE
HAYS COUNTY
Paul Andrew Mitchell, ) Case No. CV-98-0547
)
Plaintiff, ) AFFIDAVIT OF PROBABLE CAUSE
)
v. )
)
City of San Marcos, )
San Marcos Utility, )
Community Action, Inc. )
of Hays, Caldwell, & )
Blanco Counties, )
Century Telephone, Inc., )
and Does 1 thru 25, )
)
Defendants. )
_________________________)
COMES NOW Paul Andrew Mitchell, Sui Juris, Citizen of
Arizona state, Federal Witness, Counselor at Law,
Private Attorney General, and Candidate for the United
States ("U.S.") House of Representatives, currently
inhabiting Hays county in Texas state ("Plaintiff"),
to present this, His AFFIDAVIT OF PROBABLE CAUSE.
Said AFFIDAVIT now follows:
I, Paul Andrew Mitchell, Sui Juris, am the
Plaintiff in this case. I am of majority age, and
competent to make this verified statement, to wit:
On Monday, May 18, 1998, I learned, from written
notes which he had left for Me, that My roommate of
only six (6) weeks was moving out on very short notice,
and that the telephone and electricity services would
be disconnected on Tuesday, May 19, 1998.
On Monday, May 18, 1998, I called Century
Telephone's customer service number and spoke with
their representative concerning My options. I then
requested to keep the same telephone number that had
been previously assigned to My roommate. That
representative advised Me to call first thing on
Tuesday morning, in order to reserve that number
before it was assigned to someone else.
Upon waking on Tuesday, May 19, 1998, I then
discovered that the telephone and electrical services
had, indeed, been disconnected, most probably before
I arose that morning.
Soon after waking on the morning of Tuesday,
May 19, 1998, I called Century Telephone's
customer service again, and spoke with a different
woman. She reserved My roommate's former
telephone number for Me, and also asked Me for a
Social Security Number. I told her I did not have one,
and gave her numerous reasons why I do not have one,
after she specifically asked Me why that was the case.
She advised Me to bring photo identification ("ID")
to their business office, as soon as possible.
Later in the day on Tuesday, May 19, 1998, I
delivered a photo ID and business card to the Century
Telephone business office in the city of San Marcos.
The counter clerk made photocopies the photo ID and
business card, and returned both to me. I was then
advised by the counter clerk that these forms of
identification would be unacceptable, and that I would
need to present a valid Texas Driver's License ("TDL")
and/or valid Texas state-issued photo ID ("TID").
I explained to the counter clerk that the
TDL and TID both require the disclosure of a Social
Security Number on the application forms for these
documents, and that it was primarily for this reason
that I do not currently have either a TDL or TID, and
have no plans to obtain either a TDL or TID, because
I have strongly held religious objections to the
Social Security system and number.
I also told her that I am a Citizen of Arizona.
Later in the afternoon on Tuesday, May 19, 1998,
I specifically requested the personal intervention of
Father Daryl Olds, Assistant Pastor at St. John's
Catholic Church in San Marcos, Texas. Father Olds
agreed to call Century Telephone's business office
immediately.
On Wednesday, May 20, 1998, I visited the offices
of Community Action, Inc., and was introduced to
Mr. Frank Cantu, who is a staff member of this
organization. We had a cordial introduction and
met for about 20 minutes, during which time I
explained that I could use some help activating the
electricity in My dwelling unit. Mr. Cantu wrote some
information onto his "in-take" form, and requested some
identification. I handed him copies of My photo ID
and business card, which he promptly photocopied and
returned to Me. He told me that a valid TDL and/or
TID would be required, and I told him that I did not
have either of these.
Mr. Cantu then called someone at the San Marcos
Utility, to confirm their identification requirements.
After finishing that telephone conversation, Mr. Cantu
informed Me that the San Marcos Utility requires either
a Texas Driver's License, and/or Texas state-issued ID.
Mr. Cantu asked Me to come back the following day,
in order to complete the application process and to
meet the Manager concerning this matter. He also
informed Me that his organization had sufficient funds
to pay for the required deposit -- approximately $80.
On Wednesday, May 20, 1998, I learned from Father
Olds that Century Telephone did, in fact, deny
telephone service to Me, because I did not have what
they termed "proper" identification.
On Thursday, May 21, 1998, I prepared and
delivered a letter and document set concerning
Social Security to the Community Action, Inc.
secretary, and requested that she forward these
documents to Mr. Frank Cantu. See Exhibits A & D,
which are both incorporated by reference,
as if set forth fully herein.
On Thursday, May 21, 1998, I prepared and
delivered a letter and document set concerning
Social Security to Century Telephone's counter
clerk, and requested that she make copies only of
the 3-page hand-written letter. See Exhibits B & D,
which are both incorporated by reference,
as if set forth fully herein.
The counter clerk was gone for what seemed to Me
to be an inordinate amount of time (to photocopy only
3 pages), the line of customers was getting rather
long behind Me. When the counter clerk finally
returned, she attempted to return the document set
to Me, and said, "Please call Christen on our in-house
courtesy phone there, in the lobby."
I told her that Father Olds had informed Me of
the decision by Century Telephone employees to refuse
telephone service to Me. She then replied, "We are NOT
refusing telephone service to you. PLEASE call
Christen, our representative, on the courtesy phone."
I expressed frustration with the long wait, and
for what I considered to be obviously inconsistent
treatment, by telling the counter clerk that I thought
this inconsistent treatment now warranted a law suit.
At that moment, rather than to get into such a
difficult and frustrating subject on the courtesy
telephones in the lobby of Century Telephone's business
office, where other customers waiting in line would,
most likely, hear only My side of the story, I made
a decision to leave immediately, without speaking with
Christen, or anyone else, on their lobby courtesy
telephones.
Later in the afternoon on Thursday, May 21, 1998,
I prepared and delivered a letter and document set to
the business office of San Marcos Utility, which is
adjacent to St. John's Catholic Church and also to the
city hall business offices of the City of San Marcos,
on Hopkins Street in San Marcos, Texas. See Exhibits
C & D, which are both incorporated by reference,
as if set forth fully herein.
In the early afternoon of Friday, May 22, 1998,
I visited the offices of Community Action, Inc., and
met briefly with the Manager and with Mr. Frank Cantu.
After a discussion of numerous unrelated and
irrelevant subjects, such as the true identity of
the Internal Revenue Service [sic], the Manager
informed Me that Community Action, Inc. would not
provide Me with any vouchers for the deposit on an
electric utility account, until and unless I provided
him with a TDL and/or TID. He said this decision was
now final.
Each of these separate experiences, forming a
consistent pattern, convinced Me that I am being
denied both telephone and electricity services
specifically because I am unable to provide a
Social Security Number, and specifically because
I refuse to apply for a Social Security Number,
for all of the many valid and verifiable reasons
which I provided to these three (3) organizations
in the document set attached to My cover letters.
See Exhibit D.
Further this Affiant sayeth naught.
VERIFICATION
I, Paul Andrew Mitchell, Sui Juris, a Citizen of
ONE OF the United States of America, hereby verify,
under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the
United States of America, that the above statement
of facts is true and correct, according to the best
of My current information, knowledge, and belief,
so help Me God, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1746(1).
See Supremacy Clause.
Dated May 26, 1998
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell
Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Counselor at Law, Federal Witness,
Private Attorney General, and Candidate
for the U.S. House of Representatives
All Rights Reserved without Prejudice
[See USPS Pub. 221 for addressing instructions.]
Exhibit "A"
5/21/98
TO: Frank Cantu
Community Action, Inc.
SUBJECT: application for
electricity voucher
Dear Frank,
Attached please find a collection
of excellent documents which I
obtained from the Internet yesterday.
Please note on page 4 of 7 in
the case of Yeager v. Hackensack
Water Company, that public utilities
are subject to P.L. 93-579. Here
is the pertinent sentence from that
case:
"In certain situations, where
there is a close nexus between
the state and an action by a
regulated entity, the action of
the latter may be fairly treated
as that of the state itself. citing
Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison
Company, 419 U.S. 345, 351 (1974).
Thus, under subsection (b)
of P.L. 93-579, I believe I am
correct to request that either
you, or the local power utility,
do the following:
(1) disclose whether SSN disclosure
is mandatory or voluntary;
(2) disclose by what statutory
or other authority such number
is solicited; and,
(3) disclose what uses will be
made of it.
Please also be informed, as I told
you yesterday, that I currently
do not have a Social Security
Number assigned to me, and
I have strongly held religious
objections against ever obtaining
one. Thus, the law does not
recognize impossibilities ("lex non
cogit impossibilia" in Latin).
I cannot give, what I do not have.
VERIFICATION
I hereby verify, under penalty
of perjury, under the laws of the
United States of America, that
the above statement of facts is
true and correct, according to
the best of my current information,
knowledge, and belief, so help
me God, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1746(1).
Dated: May 21, 1998
Signed,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell
PRINTED:
Paul Andrew Mitchell
Citizen of Arizona state
Exhibit "B"
5/21/98
TO: Century Telephone
Attention: Christen
SUBJECT: application for residential
telephone service (1 line)
Attached please find a collection
of excellent documents which I
obtained from the Internet yesterday.
Please note on page 4 of 7 in the
case of Yeager v. Hackensack
Water Company, that public utilities
are subject to P.L. 93-579. Here
is the pertinent sentence from
that case:
"In certain situations, where
there is a close nexus between
the state and an action by
a regulated entity, the action
of the latter may be fairly
treated as that of the state
itself. citing Jackson v.
Metropolitan Edison Company,
419 U.S. 345, 351 (1974).
Thus, under subsection (b)
of P.L. 93-579, I believe I am
correct to request that your
company do the following
no later than 5:00 p.m.
on Friday, May 22, 1998:
(1) disclose whether SSN disclosure
is mandatory or voluntary;
(2) disclose by what statutory
or other authority such
number is solicited; and,
(3) disclose what uses will be
made of it.
Please also be informed, as I told
your co-worker on the telephone
last Tuesday morning, that I
currently do not have a Social
Security Number assigned to me,
and I have strongly held religious
objections against ever obtaining
one. Thus, the law does not
recognize impossibilities ("lex non
cogit impossibilia" in Latin).
I cannot give, what I do not have.
VERIFICATION
I hereby verify, under penalty
of perjury, under the laws of the
United States of America, that
the above statement of facts is
true & correct, according to
the best of my current information,
knowledge, and belief, so help
me God, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
section 1746(1).
Dated: May 21, 1998
Signed,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell
PRINTED:
Paul Andrew Mitchell
Citizen of Arizona state
Exhibit "C"
5/21/98
TO: San Marcos Utility
City of San Marcos
SUBJECT: application for voucher
from Community Action, Inc.
Dear Customer Representatives,
Attached please find a collection
of excellent documents which I
obtained from the Internet yesterday.
Please note on page 4 of 7 in the
case of Yeager v. Hackensack
Water Company, that public utilities
are subject to P.L. 93-579.
Here is the pertinent sentence from
that court case:
"In certain situations, where
there is a close nexus between
the state and an action by
a regulated entity, the action
of the latter may be fairly
treated as that of the state
itself. citing Jackson v.
Metropolitan Edison Company,
419 U.S. 345, 351 (1974).
Thus, under subsection (b)
of P.L. 93-579, I believe I am
correct to request that your
company do the following
no later than 5:00 p.m.
on Friday, May 22, 1998:
(1) disclose whether SSN disclosure
is mandatory or voluntary;
(2) disclose by what statutory
or other authority such
number is solicited; and,
(3) disclose what uses will be
made of it.
Please also be informed, as I told
Mr. Frank Cantu of Community Action,
Inc., that I currently do not have a
Social Security Number assigned
to me, and I have strongly held
religious objections against ever
obtaining one. Thus, the law does not
recognize impossibilities ("lex non
cogit impossibilia" in Latin).
I cannot give, what I do not have.
VERIFICATION
I hereby verify, under penalty
of perjury, under the laws of the
United States of America, that
the above statement of facts is
true and correct, according to
the best of my current information,
knowledge, and belief, so help
me God, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
section 1746(1).
Dated: May 21, 1998
Signed,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell
Sui Juris, Citizen of Arizona state
PRINTED:
Paul Andrew Mitchell
(one of the unnumbered people)
# # #
Return to Table of Contents for
Mitchell v. City of San Marcos et al.