Scribd Logo
Încărcați

Bine ați venit la Scribd!

  • Writ of Execution - U.S. DISTRICT COURT, NJ - Cv-Writ2

    Încărcat de

    Judicial_Fraud
    399 vizualizări2 pagini
    MEMORANDUM: STATE LAW WOULD HAVE LIMITED effect of a valid writ 3. "Section 916 prohibit(ed) the courts of the United States from adopting, recognizing, or giving effect to any form of execution, except such as was . . . a writ authorized by the laws of the state." See Custer v. McCutcheon, 283 U.S. 514, 517-18, 51 S.Ct. 530, 531, 75 L.Ed. 737 (1931). Thus, the overall intent of Rule 69(a) is to limit both the procedure for obtaining process and the effect of writs to that available under state law. 4. The first sentence of Rule 69(a) does not affect this rule that state remedies are exclusive. 5. Equity Rule 8 is the source of the first sentence of Rule 69(a). 7 J. Moore, Supra at 69-10. Equity Rule 8 restricted remedies on purely monetary equitable judgments to those provided for legal causes. See Hamilton v. MacDonald, 503 F.2d 1138, 1148 (9th Cir. 1974); See 7 J. Moore, Supra at P 69.03(2). 6. Thus, the purpose of the first sentence of Rule 69(a) is to restrict remedies on money judgments to legal process and to avoid broad invocation of in personam relief. 7. The courts have consistently read Rule 69(a) as limiting all federal process on money judgments to the type of process available under state law. 8. Here, Florida law did not give any effect to the facially fraudulent writ, Doc. # 425, Case 2:2007-cv-00228. 9. Rule 69 made availability and effect of federal process strictly subject to state law. 10. Therefore here, the writ of execution fraudulently issued by the clerk had no effect. 11. Because a writ fraudulently issued in the record absence of any judgment solely on the non-existent authority of a crooked U.S. District Court clerk has no effect under Florida law, it has no effect under Rule 69(a). NOTICE OF APPEAL - ADOPTION BY REFERENCE 12. The Plaintiff Government corruption and crime victims hereby adopt by reference the attached Notice of Appeal and Falsifications in Case No. 2:10-cv-00390-FtM-30-AEP. OBSTRUCTION OF SATISFACTION OF $24.30 MANDATE & MONEY JUDGMENT 13. On Tuesday, August 24, 2010, PM, the Clerk of Court, Defendant Drew Heathcoat, obstructed Dr. Jorg Busse’s satisfaction of the record final mandate and judgment in the amount of $24.30. OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE AND EXTORTION VIOLATIVE OF FLORIDA LAW 14. On Tuesday, August 24, 2010, PM, Defendant Crooked Clerk Drew Heathcoat illegally demanded “$5,048.60” from Dr. Jorg Busse with criminal intent to defraud, extort, and deliberately deprive. CRIMINAL COMPLAINT 15. Dr. Jorg Busse and Jennifer Franklin Prescott complained to Fort Myers Police about the crimes perpetrated by Defendant Drew Heathcoat. FLORIDA BAR COMPLAINT 16. Defendant Heathcoat asserted to be a lawyer. Plaintiffs complained to the Florida Bar about the Defendant Heathcoat’s crimes on the record. COMPLAINT, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE U.S. COURTS 17. The Plaintiff public corruption and crime victims complained about Defendant Clerk Heathcoat to the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, Washington, D.C. 20544, James C. Duff, Director; Jill C. Sayenga, Deputy Director. ALTERATION OF OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS & RECORDS 18. Defendant Drew Heathcoat altered and conspired with other Officials and Defendants to alter the official records and documents. 19. In particular, Defendant Heathcoat fabricated ninety (90) pages, Notice of Appeal, Doc. # 436, Case 2:2007-cv-00228. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Government corruption and racketeering victims demand 1. An Order relieving the Plaintiffs from the fraud on the Courts and falsified “judgment”, fake “writ of execution”, fake “lien” and fake “Lee County” “land parcels” “12-44-20-01-00000.00A0” and “07-44-21-01-00001.0000”, which cannot be found on the Cayo Costa Subdivision Plat, Lee County Plat Book 3, Page 25 (1912); 2. An Order declaring the “writ of execution”, Doc. # 425, Case 2:2007-cv-00228, on its face false, falsified, and/or expired; 3. An Order taking judicial notice of said Florida Statutes; 4. An Order taking judicial notice of C

    Titlu original

    Writ of Execution - U.S. DISTRICT COURT, NJ - Cv-writ2

    Drepturi de autor

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Formate disponibile

    PDF, TXT sau citiți online pe Scribd

    Vi se pare util acest document?

    Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

    Raportați acest document
    MEMORANDUM: STATE LAW WOULD HAVE LIMITED effect of a valid writ 3. "Section 916 prohibit(ed) the courts of the United States from adopting, recognizing, or giving effect to any form of execution, except such as was . . . a writ authorized by the laws of the state." See Custer v. McCutcheon, 283 U.S. 514, 517-18, 51 S.Ct. 530, 531, 75 L.Ed. 737 (1931). Thus, the overall intent of Rule 69(a) is to limit both the procedure for obtaining process and the effect of writs to that available under state law. 4. The first sentence of Rule 69(a) does not affect this rule that state remedies are exclusive. 5. Equity Rule 8 is the source of the first sentence of Rule 69(a). 7 J. Moore, Supra at 69-10. Equity Rule 8 restricted remedies on purely monetary equitable judgments to those provided for legal causes. See Hamilton v. MacDonald, 503 F.2d 1138, 1148 (9th Cir. 1974); See 7 J. Moore, Supra at P 69.03(2). 6. Thus, the purpose of the first sentence of Rule 69(a) is to restrict remedies on money judgments to legal process and to avoid broad invocation of in personam relief. 7. The courts have consistently read Rule 69(a) as limiting all federal process on money judgments to the type of process available under state law. 8. Here, Florida law did not give any effect to the facially fraudulent writ, Doc. # 425, Case 2:2007-cv-00228. 9. Rule 69 made availability and effect of federal process strictly subject to state law. 10. Therefore here, the writ of execution fraudulently issued by the clerk had no effect. 11. Because a writ fraudulently issued in the record absence of any judgment solely on the non-existent authority of a crooked U.S. District Court clerk has no effect under Florida law, it has no effect under Rule 69(a). NOTICE OF APPEAL - ADOPTION BY REFERENCE 12. The Plaintiff Government corruption and crime victims hereby adopt by reference the attached Notice of Appeal and Falsifications in Case No. 2:10-cv-00390-FtM-30-AEP. OBSTRUCTION OF SATISFACTION OF $24.30 MANDATE & MONEY JUDGMENT 13. On Tuesday, August 24, 2010, PM, the Clerk of Court, Defendant Drew Heathcoat, obstructed Dr. Jorg Busse’s satisfaction of the record final mandate and judgment in the amount of $24.30. OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE AND EXTORTION VIOLATIVE OF FLORIDA LAW 14. On Tuesday, August 24, 2010, PM, Defendant Crooked Clerk Drew Heathcoat illegally demanded “$5,048.60” from Dr. Jorg Busse with criminal intent to defraud, extort, and deliberately deprive. CRIMINAL COMPLAINT 15. Dr. Jorg Busse and Jennifer Franklin Prescott complained to Fort Myers Police about the crimes perpetrated by Defendant Drew Heathcoat. FLORIDA BAR COMPLAINT 16. Defendant Heathcoat asserted to be a lawyer. Plaintiffs complained to the Florida Bar about the Defendant Heathcoat’s crimes on the record. COMPLAINT, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE U.S. COURTS 17. The Plaintiff public corruption and crime victims complained about Defendant Clerk Heathcoat to the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, Washington, D.C. 20544, James C. Duff, Director; Jill C. Sayenga, Deputy Director. ALTERATION OF OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS & RECORDS 18. Defendant Drew Heathcoat altered and conspired with other Officials and Defendants to alter the official records and documents. 19. In particular, Defendant Heathcoat fabricated ninety (90) pages, Notice of Appeal, Doc. # 436, Case 2:2007-cv-00228. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Government corruption and racketeering victims demand 1. An Order relieving the Plaintiffs from the fraud on the Courts and falsified “judgment”, fake “writ of execution”, fake “lien” and fake “Lee County” “land parcels” “12-44-20-01-00000.00A0” and “07-44-21-01-00001.0000”, which cannot be found on the Cayo Costa Subdivision Plat, Lee County Plat Book 3, Page 25 (1912); 2. An Order declaring the “writ of execution”, Doc. # 425, Case 2:2007-cv-00228, on its face false, falsified, and/or expired; 3. An Order taking judicial notice of said Florida Statutes; 4. An Order taking judicial notice of C

    Drepturi de autor:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Descărcați ca PDF, TXT sau citiți online pe Scribd
    Indicator pentru conținut neadecvat
    399 vizualizări2 pagini

    Writ of Execution - U.S. DISTRICT COURT, NJ - Cv-Writ2

    Încărcat de

    Judicial_Fraud
    MEMORANDUM: STATE LAW WOULD HAVE LIMITED effect of a valid writ 3. "Section 916 prohibit(ed) the courts of the United States from adopting, recognizing, or giving effect to any form of execution, except such as was . . . a writ authorized by the laws of the state." See Custer v. McCutcheon, 283 U.S. 514, 517-18, 51 S.Ct. 530, 531, 75 L.Ed. 737 (1931). Thus, the overall intent of Rule 69(a) is to limit both the procedure for obtaining process and the effect of writs to that available under state law. 4. The first sentence of Rule 69(a) does not affect this rule that state remedies are exclusive. 5. Equity Rule 8 is the source of the first sentence of Rule 69(a). 7 J. Moore, Supra at 69-10. Equity Rule 8 restricted remedies on purely monetary equitable judgments to those provided for legal causes. See Hamilton v. MacDonald, 503 F.2d 1138, 1148 (9th Cir. 1974); See 7 J. Moore, Supra at P 69.03(2). 6. Thus, the purpose of the first sentence of Rule 69(a) is to restrict remedies on money judgments to legal process and to avoid broad invocation of in personam relief. 7. The courts have consistently read Rule 69(a) as limiting all federal process on money judgments to the type of process available under state law. 8. Here, Florida law did not give any effect to the facially fraudulent writ, Doc. # 425, Case 2:2007-cv-00228. 9. Rule 69 made availability and effect of federal process strictly subject to state law. 10. Therefore here, the writ of execution fraudulently issued by the clerk had no effect. 11. Because a writ fraudulently issued in the record absence of any judgment solely on the non-existent authority of a crooked U.S. District Court clerk has no effect under Florida law, it has no effect under Rule 69(a). NOTICE OF APPEAL - ADOPTION BY REFERENCE 12. The Plaintiff Government corruption and crime victims hereby adopt by reference the attached Notice of Appeal and Falsifications in Case No. 2:10-cv-00390-FtM-30-AEP. OBSTRUCTION OF SATISFACTION OF $24.30 MANDATE & MONEY JUDGMENT 13. On Tuesday, August 24, 2010, PM, the Clerk of Court, Defendant Drew Heathcoat, obstructed Dr. Jorg Busse’s satisfaction of the record final mandate and judgment in the amount of $24.30. OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE AND EXTORTION VIOLATIVE OF FLORIDA LAW 14. On Tuesday, August 24, 2010, PM, Defendant Crooked Clerk Drew Heathcoat illegally demanded “$5,048.60” from Dr. Jorg Busse with criminal intent to defraud, extort, and deliberately deprive. CRIMINAL COMPLAINT 15. Dr. Jorg Busse and Jennifer Franklin Prescott complained to Fort Myers Police about the crimes perpetrated by Defendant Drew Heathcoat. FLORIDA BAR COMPLAINT 16. Defendant Heathcoat asserted to be a lawyer. Plaintiffs complained to the Florida Bar about the Defendant Heathcoat’s crimes on the record. COMPLAINT, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE U.S. COURTS 17. The Plaintiff public corruption and crime victims complained about Defendant Clerk Heathcoat to the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, Washington, D.C. 20544, James C. Duff, Director; Jill C. Sayenga, Deputy Director. ALTERATION OF OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS & RECORDS 18. Defendant Drew Heathcoat altered and conspired with other Officials and Defendants to alter the official records and documents. 19. In particular, Defendant Heathcoat fabricated ninety (90) pages, Notice of Appeal, Doc. # 436, Case 2:2007-cv-00228. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Government corruption and racketeering victims demand 1. An Order relieving the Plaintiffs from the fraud on the Courts and falsified “judgment”, fake “writ of execution”, fake “lien” and fake “Lee County” “land parcels” “12-44-20-01-00000.00A0” and “07-44-21-01-00001.0000”, which cannot be found on the Cayo Costa Subdivision Plat, Lee County Plat Book 3, Page 25 (1912); 2. An Order declaring the “writ of execution”, Doc. # 425, Case 2:2007-cv-00228, on its face false, falsified, and/or expired; 3. An Order taking judicial notice of said Florida Statutes; 4. An Order taking judicial notice of C

    Drepturi de autor:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Descărcați ca PDF, TXT sau citiți online pe Scribd
    Indicator pentru conținut neadecvat
    din 2

    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

    DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

    CIVIL NO.
    WRIT OF EXECUTION

    TO THE MARSHAL OF THE UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT, DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY :

    WHEREAS, judgment was entered on the day of , 20 in an action in the


    United States District Court, __________________ between plaintiff(s) and
    defendant(s) in favor of said and against said
    for the sum of $ and costs taxed in the sum of $ as
    appears by the judgment filed in the Office of the Clerk of the United States District Court,
    District of New Jersey; and

    WHEREAS, the said judgment was duly entered in the Office of the Clerk of the United
    States District Court, District of New Jersey, and the sum of $ plus taxed
    costs in the sum of $ is now actually due thereon;

    THEREFORE, you are hereby commanded to satisfy the said judgment out of the personal
    property of the said judgment debtor, as set forth in the attached affidavit, and if sufficient
    personal property cannot be found, then out of the real property belonging to such judgment
    debtor at the time said judgment was entered in the Office of the Clerk of this Court, or at any
    time thereafter, in whosoever hands the same may be, as set forth in the attached affidavit and
    that you do pay the moneys realized by you from such property directly to said
    or to their attorney in the said action, and return this execution and your proceedings thereon
    within one (1) year after date of its issuance to the Clerk of the United States District Court,
    District of New Jersey.

    WE FURTHER COMMAND YOU, that in case of a sale, you make return of this writ with
    your proceedings thereon before said Clerk and pay to the Clerk of this Court any surplus in your
    hands within thirty (30) days after said sale.

    WITNESS, the Honorable , a Judge of the United States


    District Court, District of New Jersey this day of , 20 .

    William T. Walsh, Clerk


    United States District Court

    Prepared By: by:


    Deputy Clerk
    Attorney at Law LEVY:
    Damages..........$
    Address: Costs...........$
    Interest thereon from

    Besides Marshal's Execution Fees


    CIVIL NO.
    Writ of Execution

    COUNTY OF :
    STATE OF : AFFIDAVIT

    being duly sworn, says:

    1. I am the attorney for judgment creditor in the matter of


    vs.
    Civil Action No. , and in that capacity and in conformance with N.J.S. 2A:17-1, et.
    seq., as made applicable to this case by Rule 69(a), Fed. R. Civ. P., I have caused to be conducted
    an examination of the assets of judgment debtor
    .

    2. I have determined the following non-exempt personal property of the judgment debtor is
    subject to execution in satisfaction of the judgment therein:

    PROPERTY DESCRIPTION PROPERTY LOCATION

    3. I have determined the following non-exempt real property of the judgment debtor is subject
    to execution in satisfaction of the judgment therein:

    PROPERTY DESCRIPTION PROPERTY LOCATION

    (Signature)
    Subscribed and Sworn before me this
    day of , 20

    Notary of RETURNABLE ON OR BEFORE


    My Commission Expires
    ...........................................................................................................................................................
    Recorded in the Clerk's Office of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey
    in Book of Executions, Page .

    William T. Walsh, Clerk


    by:
    Deputy Clerk

    S-ar putea să vă placă și