Time: Wed Jul 23 11:52:31 1997 by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA03193 for [address in tool bar]; Wed, 23 Jul 1997 11:45:47 -0700 (MST) by usr03.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id LAA20376; Wed, 23 Jul 1997 11:45:29 -0700 (MST) Date: Wed, 23 Jul 1997 11:44:56 -0700 To: Karl Kleinpaste <karl@jprc.com> From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] Subject: Got the paperwork! Cc: [address in tool bar] References: <Paul Andrew Mitchell's message of "Tue, 22 Jul 1997 07:50:55 -0700"> <3.0.3.16.19970722075055.088f4f10@pop.primenet.com> Karl, I got the package. When do you leave? I want to do several things right away: 1. get your permission to use $25 of the retainer to send you Gilbertson's OPENING BRIEF; DOJ has, evidently, fallen silent and defaulted upon their deadline to file a REPLY BRIEF; we are trying to confirm this right now; if they have defaulted, this is EXTREMELY significant, because their silence means consent, at this stage in that case. 2. get your permission to print and deliver to you, at your vacation site, some of the pleadings which we filed in U.S.A. [sic] v. Knudson. This will allow you to understand your options at this stage. 3. persuade you to consider setting a jury trial as one of your several goals; this will allow your goals to mesh with ours, because we have attacked the Jury Selection and Service Act on behalf of all state Citizens. The procedure would be to demand a jury trial (something which you failed to do in your original complaint); see FRCP Rule 38 for the rule about waiver of that Right. 4. however, tempering #3 is the fact that we have found the statute which grants authority to the U.S. Supreme Court to promulgate rules for the USDC (the court you are in), but said statute does not mention the DCUS (the court you want to be in). So, begin by reading "Karma and the Federal Courts" in the Supreme Law Library at URL: http://www.supremelaw.com, and you will see exactly what I mean. 5. get you to consider filing some key FOIA requests, the answers to which we already know (you will learn this from Gilbertson's OPENING BRIEF). The first FOIA request which they fail to answer (because they CAN'T!) will invoke the DCUS, the court in which you want to be in the first place. 6. Your complaint failed to specify the statute which grants subject matter jurisdiction to the USDC; your complaint is fatally defective for this reason, until remedied timely. I have not reviewed any briefs by the Defendants in your case. The subject matter jurisdiction of the USDC is strictly dictated by grants of authority by Congress -- no Act of Congress, no subject matter jurisdiction. The Knudson briefs show you how to determine whether or not subject matter jurisdiction exists in the first instance. 7. We are developing a nationwide strategy to challenge the Jury Selection and Service Act in all federal Circuit Courts of Appeal. In light of this goal of the Supreme Law Firm, we are looking for cases like yours which can be steered onto a similar course. Pennsylvania is the Third Circuit, and we do not have a JSSA challenge pending in the Third Circuit as yet; your case would be an excellent opportunity to bring this challenge, but you and I would need to negotiate a "mesh" of our respective strategies. If you will consent to working towards a mesh, we can donate some time to helping your case along in that direction, but we cannot do all the work pro bono. So, we need to strike a bargain in this regard. 8. 28 U.S.C. 2201 (Declaratory Judgments Act) bars federal courts from issuing declaratory relief when the subject matter is federal income taxes; you may have compromised your procedural remedies by requesting, or implying, any such relief. Under 2201, given that citizenship is a political status which you can freely choose (federal or state citizenship), the court is precluded from issuing any declaratory relief on this subject matter either, due to the fundamental nature of the First Amendment and the Right of Election. So, you will never get lawful relief from any federal court, if this is what you are trying to do. A simple declaration, under penalty of perjury, should suffice, as long as you are willing to run the risk of a perjury charge. Do you understand this? 9. Your original complaint also failed to request an award of actual damages. Without actual damages, there can be no consequential damages, because nothing causes nothing. Similarly, "punitive" damages are a moot question if there have been no actual damages. Lastly, in civil cases, it is more proper to request "exemplary damages" instead of "punitive" damages, but this is a semantic error which you can correct with a clerical update motion. 10. I would do this immediately: NOTICE the court that you have erred by requesting relief from the wrong federal court; incorporate the Gilbertson OPENING BRIEF via Mandatory Judicial Notice (Rule 201(d), Federal Rules of Evidence); file your FOIA request, and then request a STAY OF PROCEEDINGS pending discovery of documents requested under FOIA; then, NOTICE the court of your intent to compel discovery of the documents requested under FOIA, but in the District Court of the United States ("DCUS"), NOT the USDC, and of your intent to get declaratory relief from a competent and qualified jury in the DCUS. Once this foundation is set, then you can stay the DCUS proceeding, pending final review of the JSSA challenge, which you will file timely. This will set the stage for the Third Circuit to rule on the JSSA challenge, and our goals will be meshing perfectly. I got all that from your original Complaint, but remember that I have not read anything else. I wanted to give you the best return on your partial retainer. Please let me know where I can send you overnight delivery, while you are on vacation. Please acknowledge receipt of this message asap, even if you don't say anything else except: "Got it!" Thanks, Karl. I will look forward to working with you. My office telephone is: (520) 320-1514 (answering machine) fax is: (520) 320-1256 (24-hour dedicated thermal paper fax machine) I am standing by. Sincerely yours, /s/ Paul Mitchell http://www.supremelaw.com At 12:57 PM 7/22/97 -0400, you wrote: >FYI, today (as I am about to leave town), I have mail from the court, >observing that defendants have filed motion to dismiss with supporting >brief, and as a result I have until August 8 to respond. > >Materials were sent your way via UPS next-day, about an hour ago. You >should receive the package by 10:30am. > >--karl > > ======================================================================== Paul Andrew Mitchell : Counselor at Law, federal witness B.A., Political Science, UCLA; M.S., Public Administration, U.C. Irvine tel: (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night email: [address in tool bar] : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU website: http://www.supremelaw.com : visit the Supreme Law Library now ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech, at its best Tucson, Arizona state : state zone, not the federal zone Postal Zone 85719/tdc : USPS delays first class w/o this As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice. We shall not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal. ======================================================================== [This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail