Monday, February 1, 2010

Sharon4 v. MNCourts Deceptive Trade
View more documents from Sharon Anderson.
Posted by at

Sunday, January 31, 2010

Sharon4Anderson QuiTam Petition v. MN Courts_Magnuson_Toussaint enbanc

CC: infor@judicialwatch.org, HumanEvents@HumanEventsOnline.com, fccinfo@fcc.gov, mc@whistleblowers.org, eagle@eagleforum.org
Sent: 1/31/2010 7:55:48 A.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: Test MN Courts Deceptive Trade_Restraint Trade and Sec.3 HUD Reporting
31Jan10
AFFIDAVIT SHARON ANDERSON AKA SCARRELLA AKA PETERSON
WITH 30 YEARS STANDING VA WIDOW_WHISTLEBLOWER http://www.blogger.com/home
QUITAM_RELATOR_PETITION
To Whom it may Concern MN Chief Justice Eric Magnuson
Election by the People 2010 re: MS2.724MS 2.724
COUNT I
1988 File no.'s 495722 (Gearin) C6-88-859 (Huspeni) Grittner a Licensed Lawyer
Falsified Court Records, acting as a Judicial Officer in a "Patterened Enterprise" since 1988 up to and including 2010 apparantly acting in concort to embelleze over $110,000.00 of Sharons Equity in her Paid For Homestead at 1058 Summit Ave, St.Paul, MN. Forensic Files are Extensive.
MN Appellate Court Enbanc: Specifically former St.Paul City Attorneys Harriet Lansing and Natilie Hudson. http://citizenery-mncourts.blogspot.com/
Current Files 62cv09-1163 (Vandenorth) A09-2031(Toussaint)
6Jan10 Order stating "Abandoned" if False,Misleading, Attempt to Coverup the 3 thousand Property Owners alleged 2008 Tax Delinquent, based on Deceptive Trade, Restraint of Trade, Anti-Trust, Criminal Violations of Hud Sec. 3 Mandates et al. http://eastsidereviewnews.1upprelaunch.com/SiteImages/FileGallery/RamseyCoTax033009_230.pdf
,Good Faith to expose the Deceptive Trade Practices of the Minnesota System in its Entirety.
COUNT I I
The Heinous Denial of "Due Process" now over thirty years, must be addressed specifically in the City of St.Paul, County of Ramsey MN.

MN Judge Edward Toussaint A09-2031

January 11, 2010 by sharon4anderson

Date: Sunday, January 10, 2010, 2:05 PM

OPEN LETTER TO CHIEF JUDGE EDWARD TOUSSAINT
RE: CANONS CONSTRUCTION
MS 645.Canons of Construction Clarify “Abandoned” A09-2031
Sun.10Jan10
Judge Profile To: Chief Judge Eward Toussaint
ISSUES:
Pursuant to Ramsey 62cv09-1163 « Sharon4anderson’s Weblog Dist.Crt. File 62cv09-1163(Vandenorth)
Affiant “takes” Issue with your “Orders” Please clarify “abandoned”
Published now for Public Scrunity
COUNT I OATH OF OFFICE
HAS CHIEF JUDGE EDWARD TOUSSAINT VIOLATED HIS OATH V. SHARON SCARRELLA ANDERSON?
Every judge of such municipal court, before he or she enters upon the duties of his or her office, shall take and subscribe the following oath or affirmation: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Washington, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of the office of judge of the municipal court of the city of . . . . . . (naming such city) according to the best of my ability; and I do further certify that I do not advocate, nor am I a member of an organization that advocates, the overthrow of the government of the United States by force or violence.” The oath shall be filed in the office of the county auditor. He or she shall also give such bonds to the state and city for the faithful performance of his or her duties as may be by law or ordinance directed.
COUNT II 42USC sec.1983-86
Civil Rights of Widow_WhiteWoman_Whistleblower 42usc

Statutes Pertaining to Violations of Civil Rights. Title 42 U.S.C. § 1983. … Title 42 U.S.C § 1985 Conspiracy to interfere with civil rights …
www.defraudingamerica.com/civil_rights_act.html – Cached – Similar
in the “takings” of 91 Chrysler, denying “Transit”,Commerce by Theft, unabated by Black Police Chief John Harringon?
covert methodology of Diesel Therapy
a. “takings” Drivers License by Senile Judge Larry Cohen ,without Court Order and who’s 3rd Wife Kathleen Donnelly Cohen is VP of Comcast Cable Franchised by City St.Paul Mike Reardon with Relative Jack Reardon DSI Building Inspector giving rise to Appeal A09-2031 (Toussaint) Denial of Constutional Issue of
MS 429
COUNT 111 Constutional Challenge Rule 24.04
429 – LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS, SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS, 2009 Minnesota Statutes
429.061, 2009 Minnesota Statutes
city attorney Judy Hanson
b. Theft of Sharons 91 Chrysler to St.Police Impound Lot,
legaleaglesharon.blogspot.com re: Manager Aaron Foster .
c. Diesel Therapy on the general public to force Bus Ridership and that Damm Light Rail, now “taking” busines US CODE: Title 18,1595. Civil remedy along University Ave.
MN 2nd District Court
COUNT IV INTERFERANCE WITH HEATLH CARE DIESEL THERAPY
Diesel Therapy – Google Search and to join with 62cv09-011693 Unallotment File with Affidavit of Prejudice against Kathleen Gearin in her offical and personal capacitys re: SCAP “taking” Homestead Credits on Disabled, SilverSTar Marine etc.
COUNT V DUE PROCESS FOR 30 YEARS
AFFIANT HAS BEEN DENIED FOR 30 YEARS IN HER COMMERCE,PROPERTY,TRANSPORTATION ANSASC_1988_15 D MARRIAGE,CHILDREN DM-1399_23 RIGHTS
memorandum of case law’s

Punitative,Compensatory,Tort Damages in the millions for 30 years of heinous, repugnant Death,Disabilitys,Disparagment of Titles.
When the Court wilful fail to implement pdf files and/or Read the Entire Records………..Pervase/Fatal Any all Bogus Judgments are therefore VACATED.

LEGAL NOTICE: /s/Sharon4Anderson@aol.com ECF_P165913Pacersa1299

telfx: 651-776-5835:
Attorney ProSe_InFact,Private Attorney General QuiTam Whistleblower, Sharon4 Anderson – Google Profile Candidate AG2010 www.sharonagmn2010.blogspot.com Blogger: User Profile: Sharon Anderson SharonsYahoo! iGoogle

Homestead Act of 1862 Twitter / Sharon4Anderson Shar1058’s Buzz Activity Page – My Buzz Activity – Yahoo! Buzz neopopulism.org – Pro Se Dec Action Litigation Pack Sharon4Anderson Scribd Document’s are based on SEC filings, Blogger: Dashboard Home
FAIR USE NOTICEThis site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of whistleblower protection issues, MY FindLaw SharonsWritProA06_1150_30Jun06_26
The CAN-SPAM Act: Requirements for Commercial Emailers
kare11.com_SA
Sharons-Psychic-Whispers: Sharons Gypsy Curse-Court-Cop Corruption 3Apr0http://www.givemeliberty.org/RTPlawsuit/courtfilings/Docket.htm Sharon4Council: DLJ Management v. City St. Paul A06-2118,Money LaunderinNo direct un-apportioned tax confirmed by the US Supreme Court rulings in CHAS. C. STEWARD MACH. CO. v. DAVIS, 301 U.S. 548, 581-582(1937) g andFCC Complaints – http://sharons-copywrite.blogspot.com/knowledge gained as financial journalists , http://taxthemax.blogspot.com/ securities they recommend to readers, affiliated entities, employees, and agents an initial trade Public domain recommendation published on the Internet, after a direct mail publication is sent, before acting Google Search Times v. Sullvian Libel with malice – on that recommendations, and may contain errors. Investment decisions should not be based solely on these or other Public Office documents expressly forbids its writers from having financial interests in Google Search BlogItBabe2007 Candidate profile Sharon4Anderson’s Legal BlogBriefs Sharon4And

WOW !!! You Go Girl !!!
Blessings,
Bill
— On Sun, 1/10/10, Sharon4Anderson@aol.com wrote:

From: Sharon4Anderson@aol.com
Subject: OPEN LETTR(Toussaint) A09-2031 DIESELTHERAPY TAKING DL AND CAR
To: edward.toussaint@courts.state.mn.us, eric.magnuson@courts.state.mn.us, fred.grittner@courts.state.mn.us, john.vandenorth@courts.state.mn.us, tim.pawlenty@state.mn.us, askdoj@usdoj.gov, askcorrections@co.ramsey.mn.us, askhomesteads@co.ramsey.mn.us, AskHumanServices@co.ramsey.mn.us, baverill@mndaily.com, eeskola@cbs.com, ddavis@forumcomm.com, hopfen@startribune.com, rstassen-berger@pioneerpress.com, ochsnews@yahoo.com, bbowring@tpt.org, charley.shaw@legal-ledger.com, mlohn@ap.org, jragsdale@pioneerpress.com, ahart@kare11.com, mfischenich@mankatofreepress.com, EEskola@aol.com, tim.budig@ecm-inc.com, ndraper@startribune.com, lmccallum@mpr.org, bsalisbury@pioneerpress.com, lschumacher@stcloudtimes.com, pcondon@ap.org, mbrunswick@startribune.com, ntibbetts@mndaily.com, pjkessler@wcco.cbs.com, jcroman@kare11.com, plopez@startribune.com, tscheck@mpr.org, thauser@kstp.com, mlahammer@tpt.org, pdoyle@startribune.com, rrosario@pioneerpress.com, klksnews@yahoo.com, lsturdevant@startribune.com, jayjohnson@postbulletin.com, bbakst@ap.org, dbrewster@startribune.com, glenn.wilson@state.mn.us, commerce.commissioner@state.mn.us, financial.commerce@state.mn.us, weights.measures@state.mn.us, energy.info@state.mn.us, securities.commerce@state.mn.us, licensing.commerce@state.mn.us, mn.relay@state.mn.us, telecom.commerce@state.mn.us, unclaimed.property@state.mn.us, commerce.webmaster@state.mn.us, insurance.commerce@state.mn.us, market.assurance@state.mn.us, general.commerce@state.mn.us, petrofund.commerce@state.mn.us, marcia.moermond@ci.stpaul.mn.us, kenneth.smith@ci.stpaul.mn.us, margaret.egan@ci.stpaul.mn.us, elizabeth.davis@ci.stpaul.mn.us, trudy.moloney@ci.stpaul.mn.us, thomas.davenport@ci.stpaul.mn.us, mkib73@hotmail.com, tim@e-democracy.org, eva@evaformayor.com, Sharon4Mayor@aol.com, BillDahn4Mayor@aol.com, chris.coleman@ci.stpaul.mn.us, bob@calhouncompanies.com, will@willrossbach.com, aonealpha@yahoo.com, mayorlongrie@yahoo.com, jtstiles@gmail.com, FreedomLawSchool@yahoogroups.com, COURTWATCHERS_OF_AMERICA@yahoogroups.com.luis
Cc: bruc0015@umn.edu, silha@tc.umn.edu, a_democracy@yahoo.com, nancylazaryan@gmail.com, leslie@lesliedavis.org, shari.moore@ci.stpaul.mn.us, Sharia4Law@aol.com, curt.brown@startribune.com, webmaster@am1500.com, infor@judicialwatch.org, JURIST@law.pitt.edu, b.todd.jones@usdoj.gov, newsroom@mpr.org, newstips@wcco.com
Date: Sunday, January 10, 2010, 2:05 PM

OPEN LETTER TO CHIEF JUDGE EDWARD TOUSSAINT
RE: CANONS CONSTRUCTION
MS 645.Canons of Construction Clarify “Abandoned” A09-2031
Posted by at

Wednesday, January 13, 2010

MaryJaneDuchene v.KoriLand_WSt.Paul,MN



http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=MaryJane+Duchene+MN&btnG=Google+Search

West St. Paul, Minnesota,
RE: Alleged Noise Violations

Citation:LINK
Long Form ComplaintLINK
Initial Motion to DismissLINK
Motion to Vacate and ReverseLINK
WARRANTLINK
ContinuanceLINK
MOTION TO DISMISS, November 25, 2009LINK
REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW, PREJUDICE, December 09, 2009LINK
MOTION FOR ORDER COMPELLING RELEASE OF EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE, December 16, 2009LINK
REMOVAL TO FEDERAL COURT, JANUARY 11, 2010
LINK

http://www.ci.west-saint-paul.mn.us/index.asp?Type=B_LIST&SEC={5AB2A4C2-6052-4911-A
F1B-3C51575DB80A}#{F9B67795-70B5-4335-B2BE-77C50FD85B54}
"Lost/Found Pets
If a pet has been found, and the pet has a license tag, call the West St. Paul Municipal Center at 651-552-4100. The City has a record of all licenses and owners. You can also inquire about lost or found pets by calling the petline at 651-322-2323."



Posted by at

MaryJaneDuchene RemovalFC Dakota Co 3441797


From: DDAweb
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 04:40:34 -0600
To:
Subject: FC

United States District State of Minnesota

City of West St. Paul, Plaintiff, Notice of and Removal of Dakota County District Court Criminal Case on Grounds of Judicial Prejudice and Violations of
14th Amendment Due Process Rights.
VS.
Mary Jane Duchene, Defendant Federal Court File no.___________
Dakota County Citation no. 3-441797
Dakota County Court file: 19WS-CR-09-15734

TO: Dakota County District Court, Attorney for the City of West St. Paul

The undersigned removed this to US District Court BY VIRTUE OF 28 U.S.C. 1443;
28USC1443 - Google Search

"Any of the following ... criminal prosecutions, commenced in a State court
may be removed by the defendant to the district court of the United States
for the district and division embracing the place wherein it is pending:


(1) Against any person who is denied or cannot enforce in the courts of
such State a right under any law providing for the equal civil rights of
citizens of the United States, or of all persons within the jurisdiction
thereof[.]

on the following grounds:

1) This Dakota County criminal action is observably a malicious prosecution by the plaintiffs in that action and the plaintiffs failed to comply with the legal process required by law and the Fourteenth and Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution, by stating facts 5th,14th Amendments US Constitution - Google Searchwhich comprise a criminal action, in continuing prosecution, which is shown in the selected court documents attached hereto.

That established US Supreme Court requirements as to required
specificity of a criminal accusation, see. e.g. United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1876), US v Cruikshank,92US - Google Search quoted and affirmed in Russell v. United States, 369 U.S. 749 at 763-765, Russell v. US 39 US 749 - Google Search which in turn is cited with approval in State v. Gross, 387 N.W. 2d 182 at 189 (Minn. App. 1986) . Gross,387 NW 2d 182 Minn App.1986 - Google Search

PDF]


State of Minnesota District Court County of Dakota First Judicial ...


File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
Oct 25, 2009 ... Gross, 387 N.W. 2d 182 at 189. (Minn. App. 1986). That the right to a specific accusation including separate counts for distinct ...
www.angelfire.com/mn3/advocate6/2009dog/motionvacatereverse.pdf


That the right to a specific accusation including separate counts for
distinct offenses charged has been incorporated by the fourteenth amendment to the United States Constitution. See: e.g. Cole v. Arkansas, 333 U.S. 196 at 201 (1942), Cole v. Arkansas,333 US 196 - Google Search and Faretta v. California, 442 U.S. 806 at 818(1975). Faretta v. California - Google Search

The plaintiffs have tried to allege that a police officer, allegedly hear a barking dog noise at my property, from a distance of over 200 feet, when scientific evidence clearly shows it would be impossible to identify such a sound, or even hear it, from such a distance, because sound diminished by about 75% at a distance of 200 feet or sixty meters, SEE SOUND CALCULATOR:


http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-distance.htm.


The failure to withdraw the criminal complaint, AND INSTEAD RELENTLESSLY PURSUE MALICIOUS PROSECUTION, shows the plaintiffs are relying on a failure of due process and fairness in the Dakota County Courts and there is obvioulsy the potential for progressively more insane criminal accusations to transpire in future because of this case.
2) The plaintiff have done this as part of a pattern of misconduct which has occurred over a period of more than fifteen years.
3) The defendant cannot get a fair trial in Dakota County, as detailed in the select Dakota county court documents attached hereto, as there has been a hostile history with the Dakota County.
Federal law requires the automatic disqualification of a Federal judge under certain circumstances.
In 1994, the U.S. Supreme Court held that "Disqualification is required if an objective observer would entertain reasonable questions about the judge's impartiality. If a judge's attitude or state of mind leads a detached observer to conclude that a fair and impartial hearing is unlikely, the judge must be disqualified." [Emphasis added]. Liteky v. U.S., 114 S.Ct. 1147, 1162 (1994).
Liteky v US 114 S.Ct.1147,1162 (1994) - Google Search


Judicial Disqualification


Feb 1, 2000 ... Liteky v. U.S., 114 S.Ct. 1147, 1162 (1994). Courts have repeatedly held that positive proof of the partiality of a judge is not a ...
www.clr.org/Judicial-disqualification.html - Cached - Similar

Courts have repeatedly held that positive proof of the partiality of a judge is not a requirement, only the appearance of partiality. Liljeberg v. Health Services Acquisition Corp., 486 U.S. 847, 108 S.Ct. 2194 (1988) Liljeberg v. Health Services Acquisition Corp 486 US847 - Google Search(what matters is not the reality of bias or prejudice but its appearance); United States v. Balistrieri, 779 F.2d 1191 (7th Cir. 1985) Liljeberg v. Health Services Acquisition Corp 486 US847 - Google Search(Section 455(a) "is directed against the appearance of partiality, whether or not the judge is actually biased.") ("Section 455(a) of the Judicial Code, 28 U.S.C. 455(a), is not intended to protect litigants from actual bias in their judge but rather to promote public confidence in the impartiality of the judicial process.") .28USC 455 Judicial Code - Google Search



That Court also stated that Section 455(a) "requires a judge to recuse himself in any proceeding in which her impartiality might reasonably be questioned." Taylor v. O'Grady, 888 F.2d 1189 (7th Cir. 1989). In Pfizer Inc. v. Lord, 456 F.2d 532 (8th Cir. 1972), the Court stated that "It is important that the litigant not only actually receive justice, but that he believes that he has received justice."
The Supreme Court has ruled and has reaffirmed the principle that "justice must satisfy the
appearance of justice", Levine v. United States, 362 U.S. 610, 80 S.Ct. 1038 (1960), citing Offutt v. United States, 348 U.S. 11, 14, 75 S.Ct. 11, 13 (1954). A judge receiving a bribe from an interested party over which he is presiding, does not give the appearance of justice.
"Recusal under Section 455 is self-executing; a party need not file affidavits in support of
recusal and the judge is obligated to recuse herself sua sponte under the stated circumstances." Taylor v. O'Grady, 888 F.2d 1189 (7th Cir. 1989).
Further, the judge has a legal duty to disqualify himself even if there is no motion asking for his disqualification. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals further stated that "We think that this language [455(a)] imposes a duty on the judge to act sua sponte, even if no motion or affidavit is filed." Balistrieri, at 1202.
Judges do not have discretion not to disqualify themselves. By law, they are bound to follow the law. Should a judge not disqualify himself as required by law, then the judge has given another example of his "appearance of partiality" which, possibly, further disqualifies the judge. Should another judge not accept the disqualification of the judge, then the second judge has evidenced an"appearance of partiality" and has possibly disqualified himself/ herself. None of the orders issued by any judge who has been disqualified by law would appear to be valid. It would appear that they are void as a matter of law, and are of no legal force or effect.
Should a judge not disqualify himself, then the judge is violation of the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution. United States v. Sciuto, 521 F.2d 842, 845 (7th Cir. 1996) US v. Sciuto 521 F.2d 842 - Google Search


("The right to a tribunal free from bias or prejudice is based, not on section 144, but on the Due Process Clause.").


State and Federal Due Process - Google Search



Should a judge issue any order after he has been disqualified by law, and if the party has been denied of any of his / her property, then the judge may have been engaged in the Federal Crime of "interference with interstate commerce". The judge has acted in the judge's personal capacity and not in the judge's judicial capacity. It has been said that this judge, acting in this manner, has no more lawful authority than someone's next-door neighbor (provided that he is not a judge).
However some judges may not follow the law.
If you were a non-represented litigant, and should the court not follow the law as to
non-represented litigants, then the judge has expressed an "appearance of partiality" and, under the law, it would seem that he/she has disqualified him/herself.
However, since not all judges keep up to date in the law, and since not all judges follow the law, it is possible that a judge may not know the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court and the other courts on this subject. Notice that it states "disqualification is required" and that a judge "must be disqualified" under certain circumstances.
The Supreme Court has also held that if a judge wars against the Constitution, or if he acts
without jurisdiction, he has engaged in treason to the Constitution. If a judge acts after he has been automatically disqualified by law, then he is acting without jurisdiction, and that suggest that he is then engaging in criminal acts of treason, and may be engaged in extortion and the interference with interstate commerce.
Courts have repeatedly ruled that judges have no immunity for their criminal acts. Since both treason and the interference with interstate commerce are criminal acts, no judge has immunity to engage in such acts.

4) The defendant¹s First Amendment rights are also being abused by this action as this action appears to be retaliation by the City of West St. Paul Attorney, for speaking out on disability issues, via a web site, relevant to Alice Krengel, as the citation was issued one week after the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled against that City Attorney, and in favor of Ms. Krengel.
RELIEF REQUESTED

1. AN INJUNCTION PROHIBITING THE CITY OF WEST ST. PAUL FROM CONTINUING THIS MALICIOUS PROSECUTION, AND CONTINUING TO SOLICIT AND ENGAGE IN DUE PROCESS VIOLATIONS IN THIS ACTION.
2. DAMAGES (INCLUSIVE BUT NOT LIMITED TO ACTUAL, PUNITIVE, AND EXEMPLARY) FOR ENGAGING IN A LONG TERM PATTERN OF HARASSMENT AGAINST THE DEFENDANT, FOR AN UNSPECIFIED AMOUNT.
January 11, 2010 Respectfully Submitted:
*
Mary Jane Duchene, BA, BS
1144 Ottawa Avenue
West St,. Paul, MN 55118
Fax: 651 457 4376
MariJaynDuchene@aol.com


http://www.angelfire.com/mn3advocate6/2009dog/wspnoise.html



Posted by at

Thursday, January 7, 2010

Free Tim Kinley 62f196163(Cleary)

Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Tim Kinley 62F196163(Cleary)

January 7, 2010 by sharon4anderson Edit

Civil, Family & Probate Case Records Search Results lEGAL NOTICE TO THE PUBLICPlease be so informed of Tim Kinley’s Court Hearing 25Jan2010 _ 62f196163(Cleary) Please send Appellate and Federal File Case NO’s for Research, Anyone having trouble with any Judges Listed: Help make the Courts Accountable, PDF Files must be scanned in URL for Public Scrunity, Fair,Impartial Justice.
Logout Search Menu New Civil Search Search Criteria: 62f196163
Location : All MNCIS Sites – Case SearchHelp
Case NumberStyleFiled/Location/Judicial OfficerType/Status
62-F1-96-000163BARBARA A. KINLEY vs.TIMOTHY C. KINLEY & Ramsey County, Intervenor [CHW REMOVED] [GWB RECUSED]{EFB REMOVED]** Box File ** [J&D 120997 FLINN J(CAF) 1031 218-239]01/23/1996
Ramsey Family Main
Cleary, Edward J.
Dissolution with Child
Dormant
Logout Search Menu New Civil Search Back
Location : All MNCIS Sites – Case SearchHelp
Register of Actions
Case No. 62-F1-96-000163
BARBARA A. KINLEY vs.TIMOTHY C. KINLEY & Ramsey County, Intervenor [CHW REMOVED] [GWB RECUSED]{EFB REMOVED]** Box File ** [J&D 120997 FLINN J(CAF) 1031 218-239]§
§
§
§
§
§
Case Type:Dissolution with Child
Date Filed:01/23/1996
Location:Ramsey Family Main
Judicial Officer:Cleary, Edward J.
Party Information

Lead Attorneys

Intervenor

COUNTY OF RAMSEY
ST PAUL, MN 55102

Petitioner

KINLEY, BARBARA A.
OAKDALE, MN 55128		08/19/1967DUNN, TIMOTHY W J

Retained

Respondent

KINLEY, BARBARA A.
OAKDALE, MN 55128
Removed: 12/24/2007
Ordered		08/19/1967DUNN, TIMOTHY W J

Retained

Respondent

KINLEY, BARBARA A.
OAKDALE, MN 55128
Removed: 12/24/2007
Ordered		08/19/1967DUNN, TIMOTHY W J

Retained

Respondent

KINLEY, TIMOTHY C.
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109		05/26/1958CLARK, JILL ELEANOR

Retained

Events & Orders of the Court
DISPOSITIONS
12/10/1997Default (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding)

Converted Disposition:
Related Participants:

KINLEY, TIMOTHY C.
07/21/1998Closed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding)

Monetary Award (Status: Expired, Debtor: TIMOTHY C. KINLEY, Entered: 07/21/1998, Docketed: 07/28/1998, 1:13 PM, Original Principal: $10,346.99)
05/20/2008Closed at filing (Judicial Officer: Bastian, Gary W.)
02/09/2009Judgment (Judicial Officer: Ostby, Elena L.)

Monetary Award (Status: Active, Debtor: TIMOTHY C. KINLEY, Entered: 02/09/2009, Original Principal: $500.00)
02/09/2009Judgment (Judicial Officer: Ostby, Elena L.)

Monetary Award (Status: Active, Debtor: TIMOTHY C. KINLEY, Entered: 02/09/2009, Original Principal: $500.00)
02/09/2009Judgment (Judicial Officer: Ostby, Elena L.)

Monetary Award (Status: Active, Debtor: TIMOTHY C. KINLEY, Entered: 02/09/2009, Docketed: 03/25/2009, 8:54 AM, Original Principal: $32,403.68)
OTHER EVENTS AND HEARINGS
01/23/1996Converted Filing Fee
01/23/1996FLD-Case Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
01/23/1996SCH-Schedule Hearing (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
02/16/1996DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
02/23/1996Converted Filing Fee
02/23/1996CRP-Certificate of Representation (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
02/26/1996DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
03/01/1996Temporary Hearing (9:30 AM) (Judicial Officer Yanish, Jo Anne M.)

Result: Converted Activity Status Flag Occurred

03/23/1996RSI-Review for Scheduling Information (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
04/23/1996RSO-Review for Scheduling Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
05/23/1996DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
05/29/1996NUL-Null Activity (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
05/30/1996AJU-Adjudicated (Judicial Officer: Yanish, Jo Anne M. )
05/30/1996DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
05/30/1996ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
06/04/1996DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
06/14/1996DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
06/21/1996RSO-Review for Scheduling Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
06/24/1996DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
06/28/1996DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
07/17/1996DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
07/19/1996DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
08/12/1996FSF-Family Scheduling Form (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
08/13/1996CANCELED Scheduling Conference (10:00 AM) (Judicial Officer Administrator, Conference)

Other
08/20/1996ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
08/20/1996SCH-Schedule Hearing (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
08/28/1996DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
09/09/1996ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
09/25/1996DRV-ADR Status Review (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
09/25/1996ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
09/26/1996DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
11/18/1996JAS-Judge Assignment (Judicial Officer: Flinn, Charles A., Jr )
11/18/1996ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
11/18/1996SCH-Schedule Hearing (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
11/18/1996Pre-trial (9:00 AM) (Judicial Officer Flinn, Charles A., Jr)

Result: Converted Activity Status Flag Occurred

12/06/1996DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
01/03/1997DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
01/06/1997ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
01/07/1997SCH-Schedule Hearing (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
01/27/1997CANCELED Hearing (1:30 PM) (Judicial Officer Flinn, Charles A., Jr)

Other
02/18/1997SPT-Schedule Pre-Trial (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
02/24/1997CANCELED Pre-trial (9:00 AM) (Judicial Officer Flinn, Charles A., Jr)

Other
05/05/1997DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
05/12/1997Pre-trial (1:30 PM) (Judicial Officer Flinn, Charles A., Jr)

Result: Converted Activity Status Flag Occurred

05/13/1997DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
06/03/1997SCH-Schedule Hearing (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
06/24/1997SCH-Schedule Hearing (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
06/24/1997Hearing (9:30 AM) (Judicial Officer Flinn, Charles A., Jr)

Result: Converted Activity Status Flag Occurred

07/25/1997Hearing (9:00 AM) (Judicial Officer Flinn, Charles A., Jr)

Result: Converted Activity Status Flag Occurred

07/28/1997SCH-Schedule Hearing (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
08/15/1997SCH-Schedule Hearing (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
08/18/1997Court Trial (9:00 AM) (Judicial Officer Flinn, Charles A., Jr)

Result: Converted Activity Status Flag Occurred

08/19/1997SCH-Schedule Hearing (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
08/19/1997CANCELED Hearing (9:00 AM) (Judicial Officer Flinn, Charles A., Jr)

Other
09/08/1997Hearing (1:30 PM) (Judicial Officer Flinn, Charles A., Jr)

Result: Converted Activity Status Flag Occurred

12/09/1997CLO-Closed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
12/09/1997DCR-Decree (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
12/11/1997DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
12/22/1997DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
03/09/1998ARC-Archive (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
03/23/1998SCH-Schedule Hearing (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
04/13/1998DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
04/13/1998DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
04/17/1998ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
04/27/1998SCH-Schedule Hearing (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
04/28/1998CANCELED Hearing (2:15 PM) (Judicial Officer Flinn, Charles A., Jr)

Other
05/15/1998DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
05/20/1998DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
05/21/1998DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
05/22/1998DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
05/26/1998Hearing (9:30 AM) (Judicial Officer Flinn, Charles A., Jr)

Result: Converted Activity Status Flag Occurred

07/13/1998ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
07/21/1998ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
07/28/1998JDG-Entry of Judgment (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
07/31/1998NOT-Notice (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
08/12/1998ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
08/24/1998ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
01/19/1999SCH-Schedule Hearing (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
01/26/1999DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
02/11/1999SCH-Schedule Hearing (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
02/16/1999CANCELED Hearing (2:00 PM) (Judicial Officer Flinn, Charles A., Jr)

Other
02/26/1999SCH-Schedule Hearing (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
03/30/1999CANCELED Hearing (2:00 PM) (Judicial Officer Flinn, Charles A., Jr)

Other
04/07/1999DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
04/09/1999DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
04/20/1999Hearing (10:30 AM) (Judicial Officer Flinn, Charles A., Jr)

Result: Converted Activity Status Flag Occurred

05/17/1999ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
08/19/1999DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
05/01/2000DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
05/01/2000POS-Proof of Service (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
05/01/2000XPO-Expedited Process (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
06/08/2000SUB-Submitted (Judicial Officer: Frias, Luz )
06/08/2000Hearing (1:15 PM) (Judicial Officer Frias, Luz)

Result: Converted Activity Status Flag Occurred

06/21/2000AJU-Adjudicated (Judicial Officer: Frias, Luz )
06/22/2000ORS-Child Support Order (Judicial Officer: Frias, Luz )
12/03/2001SCH-Schedule Hearing (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
02/08/2002RAS-Reassignment (Judicial Officer: Smith, Joanne M. )
02/08/2002UAG-Unassigned-Agreement (Judicial Officer: Flinn, Charles A., Jr )
02/25/2002NOT-Notice (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
03/04/2002AFF-Affidavit (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
03/06/2002NOT-Notice (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
03/11/2002SUB-Submitted (Judicial Officer: Smith, Joanne M. )
03/11/2002Hearing (2:00 PM) (Judicial Officer Smith, Joanne M.)

Result: Converted Activity Status Flag Occurred

03/12/2002DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
04/15/2002AJU-Adjudicated (Judicial Officer: Smith, Joanne M. )
04/16/2002ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
04/17/2002LTR-Letters (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
04/22/2002LTR-Letters (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
04/30/2002MTN-Motion Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
04/30/2002POS-Proof of Service (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
04/30/2002XPO-Expedited Process (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
05/23/2002NOT-Notice (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
06/04/2002LTR-Letters (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
06/05/2002LTR-Letters (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
06/12/2002LTR-Letters (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
06/25/2002UAG-Unassigned-Agreement (Judicial Officer: Smith, Joanne M. )
07/02/2002RAS-Reassignment (Judicial Officer: VanDeNorth, John B., Jr. )
07/12/2002NOT-Notice (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
07/12/2002POS-Proof of Service (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
07/12/2002SUB-Submitted (Judicial Officer: Wray, Tsippi )
07/12/2002XPO-Expedited Process (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
07/12/2002Hearing (9:30 AM) (Judicial Officer Wray, Tsippi)

Result: Converted Activity Status Flag Occurred

07/13/2002AJU-Adjudicated (Judicial Officer: Wray, Tsippi )
07/13/2002ORS-Child Support Order (Judicial Officer: Wray, Tsippi )
07/16/2002CANCELED Hearing (2:30 PM) (Judicial Officer Magistrate, Child Support)

Other
07/18/2002NOT-Notice (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
07/29/2002DCS-Dismiss Child Support (Judicial Officer: Frias, Luz )
07/11/2003SCH-Schedule Hearing (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
08/26/2003AFF-Affidavit (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
08/26/2003MTN-Motion Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
08/27/2003LTR-Letters (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
08/27/2003RAS-Reassignment (Judicial Officer: DeCourcy, Michael T. )
08/27/2003UAG-Unassigned-Agreement (Judicial Officer: VanDeNorth, John B., Jr. )
09/09/2003CANCELED Hearing (1:30 PM) (Judicial Officer DeCourcy, Michael T.)

Other
12/01/2003SCH-Schedule Hearing (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
12/02/2003SCH-Schedule Hearing (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
12/05/2003MTN-Motion Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
01/12/2004CANCELED Hearing (9:30 AM) (Judicial Officer DeCourcy, Michael T.)

Other
02/09/2004MTN-Motion Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
02/17/2004AFF-Affidavit (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
02/23/2004Hearing (10:00 AM) (Judicial Officer DeCourcy, Michael T.)

Result: Converted Activity Status Flag Occurred

04/15/2004ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
04/19/2004AJU-Adjudicated (Judicial Officer: DeCourcy, Michael T. )
04/19/2004ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
04/30/2004POS-Proof of Service (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
04/30/2004XPO-Expedited Process (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
05/06/2004RAS-Reassignment (Judicial Officer: Bastian, Gary W. )
05/06/2004UAG-Unassigned-Agreement (Judicial Officer: DeCourcy, Michael T. )
06/08/2004NOT-Notice (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
06/11/2004ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
06/16/2004SUB-Submitted (Judicial Officer: Moriarity, Michael )
06/16/2004Hearing (2:20 PM) (Judicial Officer Moriarity, Michael)

Result: Converted Activity Status Flag Occurred

07/08/2004AJU-Adjudicated (Judicial Officer: Moriarity, Michael )
07/08/2004ORS-Child Support Order (Judicial Officer: Moriarity, Michael )
08/09/2004DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
08/10/2004SCH-Schedule Hearing (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
08/15/2004RVW-Case Status Review (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
11/09/2004CANCELED Hearing (1:30 PM) (Judicial Officer Bastian, Gary W.)

Other
12/29/2004DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
01/03/2005AFF-Affidavit (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
01/06/2005CANCELED Hearing (2:30 PM) (Judicial Officer Bastian, Gary W.)

Other
02/17/2005POS-Proof of Service (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
02/17/2005XPO-Expedited Process (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
03/04/2005DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
03/10/2005Hearing (9:00 AM) (Judicial Officer Bastian, Gary W.)

Result: Converted Activity Status Flag Occurred

03/23/2005AJU-Adjudicated (Judicial Officer: Anderson, Ronelle )
03/23/2005ORS-Child Support Order (Judicial Officer: Anderson, Ronelle )
03/23/2005SUB-Submitted (Judicial Officer: Anderson, Ronelle )
03/23/2005Hearing (10:00 AM) (Judicial Officer Anderson, Ronelle)

Result: Converted Activity Status Flag Occurred

04/18/2005Hearing (2:30 PM) (Judicial Officer Bastian, Gary W.)

Result: Converted Activity Status Flag Occurred

05/09/2005SUB-Submitted (Judicial Officer: Bastian, Gary W. )
05/10/2005DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
05/16/2005SUB-Submitted (Judicial Officer: Bastian, Gary W. )
07/12/2005CANCELED Hearing (10:30 AM) (Judicial Officer Bastian, Gary W.)

Other
08/08/2005AJU-Adjudicated (Judicial Officer: Bastian, Gary W. )
08/08/2005ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
08/12/2005DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
08/12/2005LTR-Letters (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
09/16/2005SCH-Schedule Hearing (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
09/21/2005MTN-Motion Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
10/07/2005ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
11/02/2005MTN-Motion Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
11/15/2005CANCELED Hearing (2:00 PM) (Judicial Officer Bastian, Gary W.)

Other
11/18/2005NOT-Notice (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
01/13/2006DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
01/19/2006Hearing (3:30 PM) (Judicial Officer Bastian, Gary W.)

Result: Converted Activity Status Flag Occurred

02/03/2006SUB-Submitted (Judicial Officer: Bastian, Gary W. )
02/22/2006AJU-Adjudicated (Judicial Officer: Bastian, Gary W. )
02/22/2006CLO-Closed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
02/22/2006ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
02/28/2006POS-Proof of Service (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
02/28/2006XPO-Expedited Process (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
03/27/2006POS-Proof of Service (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
03/27/2006XPO-Expedited Process (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
03/28/2006AJU-Adjudicated (Judicial Officer: Anderson, Ronelle )
03/28/2006CLO-Closed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
03/28/2006ORS-Child Support Order (Judicial Officer: Anderson, Ronelle )
03/28/2006SUB-Submitted (Judicial Officer: Anderson, Ronelle )
03/28/2006Hearing (8:30 AM) (Judicial Officer Anderson, Ronelle)

Result: Converted Activity Status Flag Occurred

04/07/2006MCC-Motion for Correct (Judicial Officer: Anderson, Ronelle )
04/07/2006POS-Proof of Service (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
04/14/2006DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
04/17/2006SUB-Submitted (Judicial Officer: Anderson, Ronelle )
04/20/2006DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
04/24/2006AFF-Affidavit (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
04/24/2006ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
04/26/2006AJU-Adjudicated (Judicial Officer: Anderson, Ronelle )
04/26/2006CLO-Closed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
04/26/2006NUL-Null Activity (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
04/26/2006ORS-Child Support Order (Judicial Officer: Anderson, Ronelle )
04/26/2006ORS-Child Support Order (Judicial Officer: Anderson, Ronelle )
04/26/2006SUB-Submitted (Judicial Officer: Anderson, Ronelle )
04/26/2006Hearing (10:00 AM) (Judicial Officer Anderson, Ronelle)

Result: Converted Activity Status Flag Occurred

05/15/2006NOT-Notice (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
05/23/2006NOA-Notice of Appeal (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
05/23/2006ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
06/05/2006ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
06/15/2006RVW-Case Status Review (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
06/22/2006ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
07/08/2006CLO-Closed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
07/08/2006CLO-Closed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
07/08/2006NOT-Notice (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
07/10/2006ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
08/24/2006ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
08/30/2006DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
08/30/2006DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
08/30/2006DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
09/13/2006DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
09/13/2006TSC-Transcript Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
09/15/2006DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
09/15/2006TSC-Transcript Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
10/16/2006ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
10/17/2006DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
10/17/2006TSC-Transcript Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
10/27/2006CLO-Closed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
10/27/2006DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
11/20/2006NOT-Notice (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
11/20/2006POS-Proof of Service (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
12/11/2006DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
12/11/2006ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
12/13/2006LTR-Letters (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
12/14/2006NOT-Notice (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
12/14/2006ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
12/18/2006DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
12/18/2006ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
12/19/2006SUB-Submitted (Judicial Officer: Flynn, Mary H. C. )
12/19/2006CANCELED Hearing (1:00 PM) (Judicial Officer Magistrate, Child Support)

Other
12/19/2006Hearing (1:00 PM) (Judicial Officer Flynn, Mary H. C.)

Result: Converted Activity Status Flag Occurred

01/02/2007AJU-Adjudicated (Judicial Officer: Flynn, Mary H. C. )
01/02/2007CLO-Closed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
01/02/2007ORS-Child Support Order (Judicial Officer: Flynn, Mary H. C. )
01/16/2007CANCELED Hearing (2:30 PM) (Judicial Officer Magistrate, Child Support)

Other
02/02/2007DOC-Document Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
04/03/2007NOT-Notice (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
05/23/2007SCH-Schedule Hearing (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
06/11/2007MTN-Motion Filed (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
06/11/2007OSC-Order to Show Cause (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
07/05/2007NOT-Notice (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
07/11/2007ORD-Order (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
07/16/2007AFF-Affidavit (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
09/19/2007Appellate Court Order
09/21/2007Notice of Withdrawal of Counsel
09/21/2007Affidavit of Service
09/24/2007Affidavit-Other
09/25/2007Hearing (9:00 AM) (Judicial Officer Bastian, Gary W.)

09/25/2007Reset by Court to 09/25/2007

Result: Held

09/27/2007Order-Other (Judicial Officer: Bastian, Gary W. )
10/22/2007Findings and Order (Judicial Officer: Bastian, Gary W. )
10/30/2007Notice of Filing of Order
11/06/2007Motion and Affidavit
11/07/2007CANCELED Motion Hearing (10:00 AM) (Judicial Officer Bastian, Gary W.)

Other
11/16/2007Appellate Court Order
11/20/2007Order-Other (Judicial Officer: Johnson, Gregg E. )
12/11/2007Other Document
12/21/2007Order Discharging Guardian Ad Litem (Judicial Officer: Bastian, Gary W. )
12/24/2007Notice of Case Filing
12/24/2007Order Denying In Forma Pauperis Petition (Judicial Officer: Finley,John T. , )
12/24/2007Affidavit for Proceeding In Forma Pauperis
12/24/2007Motion
01/11/2008Appellate Court Order
02/22/2008Notice of Hearing
03/20/2008Order-Other (Judicial Officer: Anderson, Russell A. )
04/17/2008Notice of Hearing
05/06/2008Order to Show Cause Hearing (10:30 AM) (Judicial Officer Bastian, Gary W.)

Result: Held

05/12/2008Notice of Case Filing
05/14/2008Other Document
05/20/2008Order-Other (Judicial Officer: Bastian, Gary W. )
05/22/2008Notice for Implementation of Cost of Living Adjustment
05/23/2008Appellate Court Order (Judicial Officer: Toussaint, Edward, Jr. )
06/03/2008Notice of Case Assignment
06/12/2008Notice to Remove (Judicial Officer: Beddow, Earl F., Jr. )
06/26/2008Certificate on Notice of Removal/Affidavit of Prejudice (Judicial Officer: Beddow, Earl F., Jr. )
06/26/2008Notice of Case Assignment
07/09/2008Affidavit for Proceeding In Forma Pauperis
07/09/2008Order for Proceeding In Forma Pauperis (Judicial Officer: Ostby, Elena L. )
07/15/2008Notice of Motion and Affidavit
07/28/2008Converted Pending Activity (Judicial Officer: Judge, Presiding )
08/28/2008Notice of Hearing
11/05/2008Affidavit-Other
11/05/2008Other Document
11/05/2008Affidavit of Service
11/10/2008Order to Show Cause Hearing (2:30 PM) (Judicial Officer Ostby, Elena L.)

11/10/2008Reset by Court to 11/10/2008

Result: Held

11/10/2008Taken Under Advisement (Judicial Officer: Ostby, Elena L. )
11/20/2008Notice of Case Filing
11/20/2008Correspondence
11/20/2008Other Document
12/04/2008Order Denying In Forma Pauperis Petition (Judicial Officer: Ostby, Elena L. )
12/04/2008Affidavit for Proceeding In Forma Pauperis
12/11/2008Appellate Court Order (Judicial Officer: Toussaint, Edward, Jr. )
01/13/2009Notice of Hearing
02/02/2009Affidavit-Other
02/02/2009Affidavit of Service
02/03/2009CANCELED Order to Show Cause Hearing (2:00 PM) (Judicial Officer Ostby, Elena L.)

Settled
02/03/2009Reset by Court to 02/03/2009
02/09/2009Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order (Judicial Officer: Ostby, Elena L. )
02/09/2009Processed Judgment Entry
02/09/2009Notice of Entry of Judgment
02/09/2009Processed Judgment Entry
02/09/2009Notice of Entry of Judgment
02/09/2009Processed Judgment Entry
02/09/2009Notice of Entry of Judgment
02/12/2009Notice of Filing of Order
02/12/2009Affidavit of Service
03/24/2009Affidavit of Identification
03/25/2009Processed Judgment Docketing
03/25/2009Notice of Docketing of Judgment
04/14/2009Order Denying In Forma Pauperis Petition (Judicial Officer: Ostby, Elena L. )
04/14/2009Affidavit for Proceeding In Forma Pauperis
04/14/2009Motion
04/15/2009Notice of Case Filing
05/01/2009Appellate Court Order (Judicial Officer: Toussaint, Edward, Jr. )
05/13/2009Order Denying In Forma Pauperis Petition (Judicial Officer: Ostby, Elena L. )
05/13/2009Motion
05/13/2009Affidavit for Proceeding In Forma Pauperis
05/22/2009Appellate Court Order (Judicial Officer: Toussaint, Edward, Jr. )
06/12/2009Notice of Motion and Motion
06/12/2009Affidavit-Other
06/12/2009Affidavit of Service
06/17/2009Notice-Other
06/26/2009Notice of Hearing
08/31/2009Affidavit-Other
08/31/2009Affidavit of Service
09/02/2009Notice of Withdrawal of Counsel
09/02/2009Correspondence
09/03/2009Motion Hearing (1:30 PM) (Judicial Officer Cleary, Edward J.)

07/02/2009Reset by Court to 07/02/2009
07/02/2009Reset by Court to 09/03/2009

Result: Held

09/15/2009Order-Other (Judicial Officer: Cleary, Edward J. )
09/15/2009Other Document
09/15/2009Order-Other (Judicial Officer: Cleary, Edward J. )
09/15/2009Order-Other (Judicial Officer: Cleary, Edward J. )
09/15/2009Warrant Issued
09/16/2009Correspondence
09/16/2009Affidavit of Service
09/29/2009Notice of Filing of Order
09/29/2009Affidavit of Service
10/07/2009Correspondence
11/05/2009Order-Other (Judicial Officer: Montgomery, Ann )
11/23/2009Warrant Returned
11/25/2009Order-Other (Judicial Officer: Cleary, Edward J. )
12/21/2009Correspondence
12/21/2009Notice of Appearance
12/21/2009Motion
12/21/2009Correspondence
12/24/2009Notice-Other
01/25/2010Motion Hearing (10:00 AM) (Judicial Officer Cleary, Edward J.)

Financial Information
Obligor KINLEY, TIMOTHY C.
Total Financial Assessment235.00
Total Payments and Credits235.00
Balance Due as of 01/07/20100.00
11/07/2007Transaction Assessment55.00
11/07/2007Counter PaymentReceipt # FM62-2007-01644KINLEY, TIMOTHY C.(55.00)
07/15/2008Transaction Assessment55.00
07/15/2008Counter PaymentReceipt # FM62-2008-04419KINLEY, TIMOTHY C.(55.00)
04/09/2009Transaction Assessment20.00
04/09/2009Counter PaymentReceipt # FM62-2009-02614KINLEY, TIMOTHY C.(20.00)
05/12/2009Transaction Assessment5.00
05/12/2009Counter PaymentReceipt # FM62-2009-03566KINLEY, TIMOTHY C.(5.00)
12/24/2009Transaction Assessment100.00
12/24/2009Mail PaymentReceipt # FM62-2009-09142CLARK, JILL ELEANOR(100.00)
Petitioner KINLEY, BARBARA A.
Total Financial Assessment10.00
Total Payments and Credits10.00
Balance Due as of 01/07/20100.00
04/29/2009Transaction Assessment10.00
04/29/2009Counter PaymentReceipt # FM62-2009-03207KINLEY, BARBARA A.(10.00)

Posted in Uncategorized Leave a Comment »

Gearins Unallotment “Files”62cv09-11693_62cv09-1163(Vandenorth)

December 31, 2009 by sharon4anderson Edit

Pay Fines Online Fees Court Forms Find Court Calendars Access to Trial Court Records Appellate Court Records and Opinions Rule

–>
High-Profile and Multi-District Litigation Cases Ramsey Co. District Court pdf Files while http://www.mncourts.gov/ does not>
In this section:

Text size:
reduce font size increase font size


2009 Unallotment Litigation:

62-CV-09-11693:
Multiple Parties v. Governor of MN, et al

Documents

December 30, 2009
Motion for Temporary Restraining Order – Granted retroactive to 11/1/2009 – See Document
Amended Order – See Document

November 23, 2009
Affidavit of Service – See Document

November 20, 2009
Briefs – See Document
Affidavit – Other with Exhibits – See Document

November 17, 2009
Affidavit of Service - See Document

November 16, 2009
Plaintiffs Reply Memo in Support of TRO - See Document
Amended Class Action Complaint – See Document

November 12, 2009
Affidavit of Service – See Document
Affidavit Other with Exhibits MO – See Document
Affidavit Other with Exhibits PR = See Document
Defendants Notice of Motion and Motion to Dismiss – See Document
Defendants Memo. in Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion for TRO – See Document
Defendants Certifcate of Representation – See Document

November 6, 2009
Affidavit of Service - See Document
Affidavit of Service - See Document
Notice of Motion and Motion for Temproary Restraining Order See Document
Memorandum in Support of Plaintiffs Motion for Temporary Restraining Order See Document

November 3, 2009
Affidavit of Service - See Document
Summons and Complaint – See Document
Certificate of Representation and Parties See Document

Posted in Uncategorized 1 Comment »

Sharons Informal Brief re: FIAFEA_FIRREA_A09-2031

December 26, 2009 by sharon4anderson Edit

Florida: Fraudulent Notices of Federal Tax Lien – a matter for the Statewide Grand Jury. – Lawmen Google Groups State Court Administrator’s Office Sue Dosal
(651) 296-2474 (phone) (651) 297-5636 (fax)
Send an email via our contact form Minnesota Judicial Center (MJC)
Suite #: 135_25 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
FAX TRANSMITTAL INFORMAL BRIEF QUITAM_RELATOR


Legal Published E-Service: Ed.Toussaint’sCovert OrderTitle18s1951 Ramsey Dist.Crt.File 62cv09-1163(Vandenorth) Appellate A09-2031(ToussaintSt. Paul, MN 5515 www.slideshare.com/sharon4anderson and www.scribd.com/sharon4anderson

AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY E-COMMERCE AND FAX:
TO: Ramsey Co. Clerk of Court, Lynae.Olson@courts.state.mn.us tel:651-266-8255 F 266-8263 mary.jurek@courts.state.mn.us
2nd Jud.Court Admin. Larry.Dease@courts.state.mn.us 651-266-8266 F 266-8278
Sheriff: bob.fletcher@co.ramsey.mn.us 651-266-9333 F 266-9301
Susan Gaertner rca@co.ramsey.mn.us jean.stepan@co.ramsey.mn.us 266-3222 F 266-3010
Lori Swanson MN_AG attorney.general@state.mn.us 651-296-3353 F 282-2155
St.Paul City Clerk shari.moore@ci.stpaul.mn.us 651-266-8688 F 266-8574
and all others as their interest appear.
FAX VIA OUTGOING: SHARON CANNOT RECEIVE FAXES

IN COURT APPEALS STATE OF MINNESOTA
A09-2031(Toussaint)-A06-1150(Russell Anderson)-C6-88-859(Huspenie) etal 62CV09-11693(Gearin) Ramsey Dist Crt. Example
Appellant-QuiTam-Relator Sharon4Anderson’s
Informal Brief pdf Format

STATE OF MINNESOTA,ALL AGENCIES, REVENUE,Ward Einess COMMERCE, Glenn Wilson,PUBLIC SAFETY,Michael Campion,CITY ST.PAUL,Kathy Lantry,COUNTY RAMSEY,AUDITOR MARK OSWALD, Elections/Taxes Supervisor, Canvass Board,
State of Minnesota, Rule 24.04 by and thro State Attorney General Lori
Swanson www.ag.state.mn.us, Michael Campion, Public Safety,Larry Dease,Court Administrator,St.Paul
Mayor Chris B. Coleman,City Clerk Shari Moore,Council President Kathy Lantry et al,
www.ci.stpaul.mn.us, Janice Rettman res: No 2009-012,Toni Carter Canvass Board
and County Commissioners, www.co.ramsey.mn.us DSI Bob Kessler,Joel Essling John Harrington Chief Police,his agents , Kathy Wuorinen,Don Luna,Tanya Hunter, Aaron Foster, Police Impound Lot, Rapid Towing et al in
their Official Capacitys, Individually,Severally, acting in concort with John Doe
and Mary Roe. SCAP,Judges Kathleen Gearin,Joanne Smith,Gregg
Johnson,Salvador Rosas,Larry Cohen et al, unk at this time 1988 Files 495722 499129 Default 66
Million Dollars. In re Scarrella4 Assoc. Justice 221NW 2nd 562 Plaintiffs
V.

Page 53_697 SURREY AVE 32.29.22.41.0053$2,499.43
St.Paul,MN.55106 ,Intestate Decedant James R. Anderson et al,
www.cpljimanderson.blogspot.com ,VA Widow,Senior,Disabled Political Activist
Sharon Anderson aka Peterson_Chergosky_Scarrella
www.sharon4staterep64a.blogspot.com http://sharon4council.blogspot.com
http://sharon4privateattorneygeneral.blogspot.com + 101 Blogs
www.sharon4anderson.org , et al as their interest appear , Defendants and
3rd Party Plaintiffs,Intestate Decedants Tenant in Common Wm.O and Bernice
A.Peterson. Title to Sharons Cars,Trailers,Peterbilt,Realestate in Fee Simple AbsoluteNotice: Ins.Claim Stolen 91 Chrysler V-1C4GY54R5MX597169 Defendants: 3rd Party Plaintiffs www.sharonagmn2010.blogspot.com

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
1.
Interpretation of a statute is a question of law, and an appellate court’s review is unlimited. Accordingly when determining a question of law, the appellate court is not bound by the trial court’s interpretation of a statute. or Denial of MN Const.Art.X and Separation of Powers Art. III

Affiants Answer/Cross 4 1/2 Million Dollars, overlooked,misapplied by Judge John Vandenorth
in a “Patterned Enterprise” of Judicial Fraud upon the Citizenery


2.
When construing a statute, a court should give words in common usage their natural and ordinary meaning. MS429.061
429.061, 2009 Minnesota Statutes Theft,Trespass,Treason is NOT IMPROVEMENT.



3.

The fundamental rule to which all other rules are subordinate is that the intent of the legislature governs if that intent can be ascertained. When language is plain and unambiguous, there is no need to resort to statutory construction. An appellate court merely interprets the language as it appears; it is not free to speculate and cannot read into the statute language not readily found there.
MS 645.Canons of Construction Lower Court Vandenorth Treasonable Act’s
4.
If a city or county governing body has a two-thirds majority vote of its membership, it may modify a recommendation from its planning commission without first returning the proposal to the commission.
or in MN Issues of MS609.43 Misconduct of Public Officials to exploit the Seniors,Elderly,Vunerable Homeowners
in their Bizzare Taxing Methods of Illegal Fees/Assessments by Theft,Trespass,Treason? in this RICO Case for over 25 years…..re: C6-88-859 (Doris Huspeni) with Clerk Chris Coleman, now City St.Paul Mayor.
5.
Under the facts of this case, the Board of County Commissioners’ alleged Administrative Hearing without “due process” or Civil/Criminal S&C triggering Constitutional Challenge of Jurisdiction/Authority of Judge John Vandenorth File 62cv09-1163,amendment’s published 2008 Tax Delinquency’s was a legislative action.

Quitam Relator Sharon4Anderson is the only homeowner to challenge out of 3 thousand propertys?
giving rise to Major Corruption in the State of Minnesota,City of St.Paul and County of Ramsey


6.
Aesthetics and conformance with a governing body’s comprehensive plan may be considered as bases for zoning and Tax rulings.
42 USC 3631
7.
Zoning is not to be based upon a plebiscite of the neighbors; neighborhood objections alone are not legally sufficient to support land use regulation. Nevertheless, their views remain a consideration in a governing body’s ultimate decision.
8.
A county-wide ”takings” “Condemnations” by Water,Electric Shutoff , Stalking causing Fractured Ankle, taking 91 Chrysler, Trailer, Contents, Porta Potty by Theft, Trespass,Treason since 1988 Ramsey Dist. File 495722 and 66 Million Default Judgment File no 499129 giving rise to AFFIDAVITS OF PREJUDICE AGAINST NOW CHIEFAffidavitPrejudice Kathleen Gearin Judge
JUDGE KATHLEEN GEARINSCAP
IN her capacity-conflict as Commitment Judge, triggering DEATH,DISABILITY,DISPARAGMENT OF TITLES AND
on all citizens in a “protected class” of Social Security Receipants, Disability, in the instant case is unreasonable per se and therefore improper. Summary Judgment taken without
Evidentary Hearings, List of Witness’s

62CV-09-11693
Amicus 20brief 9.
The district court is vested with broad discretion in supervising the course and scope of discovery.
10.
In actions to review the final zoning decision of a governing body, the admission of evidence not presented to the governing body is subject to the district court’s discretion.
11.
Although strongly encouraged, a governing body is not required to make formal findings of fact concerning its decisions regulating land use. It is more important that there exists a record of what the governing body considered before making its decision so that the reviewing court is not left in a quandary as to why the decision was made.
12.
The test for determining whether a state law violates the Contract Clause of the United States Constitution is: (1) whether the state law has, in fact, operated as a substantial impairment of a contractual relationship; (2) whether there is a significant
and legitimate public purpose behind the legislation; and (3) whether the adjustment of the contracting parties’ rights and responsibilities is based upon reasonable conditions and is of a character appropriate to the public purpose justifying the legislation’s adoption.
13.
Despite a court finding of substantial impairment of a contractual relationship, legislation may still be upheld under an analysis of the Contract Clause of the United States Constitution if there is a significant and legitimate public purpose behind the legislation and if the adjustments to the contracting parties’ rights and responsibilities are based upon reasonable conditions and are of a character appropriate to the public purpose justifying the legislation’s adoption.
14.
For the threshold issue in an analysis of the Contract Clause of the United States Constitution—whether the regulation has, in fact, operated as a substantial impairment of a contractual relationship—a court must consider whether the industry the complaining party has entered has been regulated in the past. This consideration is required because one whose rights, such as they are, are subject to state restriction, cannot remove them from the power of the State by making a contract about them.
15.
In an analysis of the Contract Clause of the United States Constitution, whether the adjustment of rights and responsibilities of contracting parties is based upon reasonable conditions and is of a character appropriate to the public purpose justifying the legislation’s adoption, the courts properly defer to legislative judgment as to the necessity and reasonableness of a particular measure when the State is not a contracting party.
16.
An appellate court review of whether a board of county commissioners’ resolution is preempted by statute is, like interpretation of statutes and ordinances, a question of law. The standard of review is therefore unlimited.
17.
State law preemption of a particular field cannot be implied but must be expressed by a clear statement in the law.
18.
There is a presumption that the legislature does not intend to enact useless or meaningless legislation.
19.
Absent an express statement by Congress that state law is preempted, federal preemption occurs where (1) there is an actual conflict between federal and state law; (2) where compliance with both federal and state law is, in effect, physically impossible; (3) where Congress has occupied the entire field of regulation and leaves no room for states to supplement federal law; or (4) when the state law stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full objectives of Congress.
20.
In the absence of express preemption in a federal law, there is a strong presumption that Congress did not intend to displace state law.
APPELLANT_QUITAM_RELATOR SHARED ISSUES:

1. Did the district court err in determining that the City Council and Ramsey Co. Board’s decision “takings” by Theft,Trespass,Treason without Improvements on Homestead, Disabled Property Owners, amending the taxing regulations by Illegal Fees/Assessment, Summary Abatements without “due process” was lawful, i.e., that it did violate the
2. Did the district court err with Libel with Malice in determining that the Full Taxes of Homestead Property at 697 Surrey, 2008 were paid and that Title is in the name of Decedant James R. Anderson et al and
decision amending the online banking statement of regulations was reasonable?
Property taxes paid $949.86 Property taxes paid




No.4. Did the district court err in dismissing the claim alleging that the property taxes for 697 Surrey 2008 were paid in full? Judge John Vandenorty complicity with Auditor Mark Oswald to violate the Contract Clause of the United States Constitution? YES.
ISSUES:
5. Did the district court CRIMINALLY err by having a Student Attorney who failed to research the Case in its entirety alleging preemption of the Bank and Wire Fraud regulation’s amendment by Fraud unpon the Court and Fraud on the United States of America on a Protected Class of Citizens. Techinally Repealing State Laws thus Treason YES.

6. Did the district court err in dismissing Attorney Pro Se’s pdf. Forensic Files to expose Major Corruption of the Judgescomplicit with Auditor, and DFL Gubnatorial Cadidate, Ramsey Co Attorney Susan Gaertner who is claiming alleging preemption of the Banking laws and regulation amendments by federal law? YES
Memorandumn


Concurrent with the release of A09-2031 Order (toussaint) court has ordered Affiant to submit Informal brief on certain questions raised in the issues originally presented on appeal by both Plaintiff State of Minnesota and Respondant.

Those original issues are: whether the district court erred in Summary Judgment dismissing the claims alleging that the taxing decision’s amending the regulations violated the Takings Clause and the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution. YES.

Minnesota’s Strike Force “taking” our Cars for Profit, involving Aaron Foster, Manager of
St.Paul Police Impound Lot, without Public Improvements, taxing to forclosure
without Tickets,Warrants,Approval to Prosecute


Bill Dahn: USDist02-0332(Rosenbaum)(FIAFEA&FIRREA)
LEGAL NOTICE: /s/Sharon4Anderson@aol.com ECF_P165913Pacersa1299 telfx: 651-776-5835:
Attorney ProSe_InFact,Private Attorney General QuiTam Whistleblower, Sharon4 Anderson – Google Profile Candidate AG2010 http://www.sharonagmn2010.blogspot.com/Blogger: User Profile: Sharon Anderson

Bill Dahn: Bud Shaver Stole Bill’sCampaign Bus?
Our order requiring supplemental briefing on takings necessarily stays our resolution of the following issues originally presented on appeal by Intervenors: whether the district court erred in dismissing their claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) and inverse condemnation.
FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT AT THIS TIME
EXCEPT ACCESS TO THE COURTS MUST BE IN PDF FORMAT, FORENSIC FILES FOR PUBLIC
SCRUNITY.

These Criminal Charges against the State do not have to have Filing Fees,

Posted in Uncategorized Leave a Comment »

Sharons QuoWarranto v. MN Judge Edward Toussaint A09-2031

December 23, 2009 by sharon4anderson Edit

Wed. 23Dec09

AFFIDAVIT OF E:SERVICE:BYSHARON SCARRELLA ANDERSON, ATTORNEY PRO SE,QUITAM
TO: The Above named :Sue Dosal,Staff,Court Employees in their Official Capacities, Severally, Individually, John Doe and Mary Roe. State Court Administrator’s Office

AFFIANT: Sharon reserves the Right to Quo Warranto re: Toussaints Order dtd.7Dec09 A09-2031 to join with A06-1150 re: My Presentations on SlideShare RICO Charges.
Sue
Sue Dosal,
State Court Administrator 		Sue Dosal serves as the State Court Administrator of the Minnesota Judicial State Court Administrator’s Office Branch. She was appointed to this position on July 16, 1982. Prior to her appointment she served as Senior Staff Attorney for the National Center for State Courts, Deputy State Court Administrator for the state of Florida, Staff Director of the Florida Legislature’s Joint Select Committee on Judicial Personnel, AFFIANTS NOTE:


Florida: Fraudulent Notices of Federal Tax Lien – a matter for the Statewide Grand Jury. – Lawmen Google Groups State Court Administrator’s Office
(651) 296-2474 (phone)
(651) 297-5636 (fax)
Send an email via our contact form

Minnesota Judicial Center (MJC)
Suite #: 135
25 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
St. Paul, MN 5515



Legal Published E-Service: Ed.Toussaint’sCovert OrderTitle18s1951 Ramsey Dist.Crt.File 62cv09-1163(Vandenorth) Appellate A09-2031(Toussaint)
FAX TRANSMITTAL Resubmit Sat.19Dec09 23Dec09
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY E-COMMERCE AND FAX:SHARON ANDERSON CHARGES MARK OSWALD and others




COUNT I Title 18 sec.1951 HRA charging off Loan to Selective Contractors ie: Sherman Associates.

COUNT II Title 26 sec 1602 Tax Credits

COUNT III Loan Forgiveness re: MN Const. Art X.

COUNT IV RICO Pattern of HRA and City’s Bizzare Taxing Scheme, contrary to MN Constitution, and State Crim Code MS 609.xx


http://about:blank Challenge in its Entirety,
“taking” without Public Hearing.

Relator admits to Published Order by Chief Appellate Judge Edward Toussaint dtd.7Dec09, Affiant found Published today.

Florida: Fraudulent Notices of Federal Tax Lien – a matter for the Statewide Grand Jury. – Lawmen Google Groups US CODE: Title 18,1030. Fraud and related activity in connection with computers
TO: Ramsey Co. Clerk of Court, Lynae.Olson@courts.state.mn.us tel:651-266-8255 F 266-8263 mary.jurek@courts.state.mn.us
2nd Jud.Court Admin. Larry.Dease@courts.state.mn.us 651-266-8266 F 266-8278
Sheriff: bob.fletcher@co.ramsey.mn.us 651-266-9333 F 266-9301
Susan Gaertner rca@co.ramsey.mn.us jean.stepan@co.ramsey.mn.us 266-3222 F 266-3010
Lori Swanson MN_AG attorney.general@state.mn.us 651-296-3353 F 282-2155
St.Paul City Clerk shari.moore@ci.stpaul.mn.us 651-266-8688 F 266-8574
and all others as their interest appear.



FAX VIA OUTGOING: SHARON CANNOT RECEIVE FAXES
CANDIDATE AttorneyGeneral http://www.sharonagmn2010.blogspot.com/ SHARON ANDERSON CHARGES MARK OSWALD and others
WITH TITLE 18S1030 RE: Taxes/Elections, Challenges the City St.Paul,MN Agenda 23Dec09 in its Entirety

42 USC 3631 MS 2.724 Disclaimer: Sharon has been reduced to Poverty, QuiTam Whistleblower In Fact her new Medicare now “takes” 140.10 for Insurance and 14.40 for Prescriptions?




LEGAL NOTICE: /s/Sharon4Anderson@aol.com ECF_P165913Pacersa1299

telfx: 651-776-5835:
Attorney ProSe_InFact,Private Attorney General QuiTam Whistleblower, Sharon4 Anderson – Google Profile Candidate AG2010 http://www.sharonagmn2010.blogspot.com/Blogger: User Profile: Sharon Anderson


Legal Notice to the State of MN, Revenue,All Agencies, County of Ramsey,Mark.Oswald,Risk Management,Land Acquistion et al,City St.Paul,Mayor Coleman,DSI Bob Kessler,Joel Essling,Risk Management Ron.Guilfoile,HRA,Kathy Lantry,City Council enbanc,Shari.Moore Clerk,Marcia Moermond et al
East Side Review News alleged to be Tax Delinquent. 62cv09-1163
Interesting MN Court Administrator Sue Dosal Husband former MN Fed. Court Clerk
with “Tys” to Florida
re:

Group: http://groups.google.com/group/lawmen/topics

    “Bob Hurt” Dec 22 07:22PM -0500 ^

    Remedies for Fraudulent Notices of Federal Tax Lien in Florida


    Florida Statutes <http://leg.state.fl.us/Statutes> provide possible remedies for fraudulent notices of tax lien.

    28.222 requires the clerk to KNOW US LAW regarding federal tax liens and levies and to record federal tax liens ONLY if made in accordance with that law. The clerks don’t know anything about US law, and the county attorneys falsely inform them from IRS booklets made just to suborn clerks. You could point out that a lien notice has no validity unless a duly authorized assessment officer signed (under penalties of perjury) the assessment that forms the basis for the lien. I have NEVER seen such an assessment document signed under penalties of perjury that it is a bona fide and accurate assessment of taxes owed, due, and payable

    713.31 – Remedies for fraud and collusion – worth looking at – treble damages.


    713.901 (4) requires the certification of notices of liens (see IRS 7806 and 6065 and examine any lien notice for proper certification) by a “responsible” person (where’s the proof that the submitter is responsible to collect taxes and has a delegation of authority to perform that function?). Clerks never verify credentials of submitters or certification of the notice.


    Filing of Recorded Notices of Federal Tax Lien


    A lien notice is not a lien. The Clerk should file ONLY ACTUAL liens in the system of records reserved for liens. The Clerk should NOT file Notices in the Liens system. If the IRS does not like this, it can start creating paper liens, not invisible ones that it claims exist but really don’t. If it isn’t written, it isn’t true.


    Statewide Grand Jury


    IMO the clerk engages in racketeering with the IRS across multiple circuits throughout the state. Right now the Governor has empaneled (or will empanel) a Statewide Grand Jury. You should file an evidence package about this crime and demand SGJ investigation.


    —————————————————————————————–

    BobHurtSuit200707small <http://bobhurt.com/> Bob Hurt
    2460 Persian Drive #70
    Clearwater, FL 33763
    +1 (727) 669-5511
    Donate to my <http://bobhurt.com/lawdonation.htm> Law Scholarship fund
    Learn civil litigation with <http://www.jurisdictionary.com/index.asp?refercode=HB0002> Jurisdictionary
    Subscribe to <http://bobhurt.com/subscribetolawmen.htm> Lawmen Newsletter FREE
    Download <http://groups.google.com/group/lawmen/files> Files FREE from the Lawmen <http://groups.google.com/group/lawmen> Archive
    Improve your financial fortunes with <http://www.getzooks.biz/index.php?aff=bobhurt> GetZooks!
    <http://www.fuelsaver-mpg.com/affiliates/jrox.php?id=145_1_tlid_8_MailFoot> Save Fuel

    —————————————————————————————–

    “Bob Hurt” Dec 22 12:52PM -0500 ^

    Tom Cryer has filed a lawsuit (see below press release) against Rebecca O’Dell for defaming him in comments she made to subscribers of the St. Pete area Constitution Party meetup group. When I saw her comments, seemingly timed to coincide with Tommy’s upcoming Tea Party Squared tour of 7 Florida cities, I felt shocked because 1) they did not constitute truth, and 2) they seemed so atypical of an attorney because of their libelous nature.

    I forwarded them to Tommy. He wrote a correction to Rebecca and told her, effectively, that if she’d find laws making people liable, he’d let her off the hook. She published a partial-correction letter to her readers, but she otherwise spurned his mercy. So, he sued.

    The lawsuit does not please me, but then neither have I felt pleased about Rebecca’s intransigent attitude about the implementation of income tax in America, nor her attack on Tommy. And, Tommy should protect his reputation.


    She told me repeatedly that she did not like income tax, but that the courts say we all have to pay it, and we need to do that and take up the issue with Congress. I told her that the income tax as implemented violates Article I Section 2 Clause 3 and Section 9 Clause 4 of the US Constitution. She seemed to think that since the lower courts have ruled thousands of times in favor of the IRS , they must be right.


    Rebecca wrote me, in effect, that if she believed me, stopped paying tax as a consequence, and the IRS attacked her and prevailed against her, she’d sue me for damages for misleading her. She seemed pretty hostile about all the anti-income-tax gurus causing so many people to lose fortunes to the IRS and losing liberty to the courts.


    I guess that hostility spilled over onto Tom Cryer when I sent her his memorandum. She must have thought him one of the anti-income-tax gurus who tells people to stop filing and stop paying. But Tom has repeatedly explained, effectively, that such an action constitutes financial suicidal, and we can only prevail in that if many millions of Americans do it at the same time. Tom has said that we must work together on ALL FRONTS of activism, politically, socially, legally, and financially, to attack and defeat IRS abuses and the courts and politicians who support them.


    For several years I have advocated out and out legal attacks against IRS agents who abuse individuals – find the IRS agent errors, then demand correction, and failing correction, sue them and file administrative and criminal complaints against them. If EVERYBODY did this, IRS abuses would stop. Unfortunately, most people take Rebecca’s position and cave in to them without a fight.


    ——————————————————————————————————

    <http://bobhurt.com/> Bob Hurt • <http://bobhurt.com/subscribetolawmen.htm> Lawmen • <http://groups.google.com/group/lawmen/files> Files • <http://groups.google.com/group/lawmen> Archive • <http://bobhurt.com/lawdonation.htm> Scholarship • <http://www.jurisdictionary.com/index.asp?refercode=HB0002> Jurisdictionary • <http://www.getzooks.biz/index.php?aff=bobhurt> GetZooks!

    ——————————————————————————————————


    From: Tom Cryer
    Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 1:48 AM
    To: undisclosed-recipients:
    Subject: Update


    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE


    INTERNET DIATRIBE

    LANDS FLORIDA EMAILER IN COURT


    SHREVEPORT, LA—In a law suit filed by Louisiana attorney Tommy K. Cryer a Florida woman is being taken to task for distributing an email containing what Cryer’s suit alleges is a string of false and defamatory claims. According to the law suit filed in Shreveport, Louisiana, Rebecca O’Dell Townsend, a St. Petersburg, FL, attorney, published and distributed emails falsely accusing Cryer of being a disbarred tax evader who does not believe there is any such thing as a federal individual income tax.


    Cryer, who has been in uninterrupted law practice in Louisiana for over 36 years and who was cleared of tax evasion and willful failure to file charges by a unanimous “not guilty” jury verdict, says “I have no idea what prompted Townsend to fabricate and publish the false statements. Call me old fashioned, but I don’t understand why some people feel compelled to lie.”


    At the time Truth Attack (www.truthattack.org), a non-profit political action organization, which Cryer founded and heads up and whose stated mission is “putting the government back in its box—one tentacle at a time,” was in the process of promoting and conducting seminars for tea party and other political activists on what they called “The Lost Art of Citizenry”. The seminars offered instruction on how to organize and coordinate group activities, how to learn about our rights and government’s limitations, ways to distribute information to the public and inside information on how to influence representatives’ and government officials’ actions.


    Barely a week before the seven seminars were to begin Townsend published and distributed a blistering mass emailing that was distributed widely across the internet, stating that Cryer was a disbarred tax evader who contended that there is no such thing as a federal individual income tax and that Cryer and those associated with him “have left a wake of destroyed families in their wake.” Cryer said “I am not nor have I ever been disbarred, I am not a tax evader and have never destroyed a family in my life, let alone a ‘wake of families’, whatever that means.”


    Now Cryer has filed suit in Shreveport seeking damages for defamation. Cryer said “I don’t know this woman and have never heard of her before. I don’t know why she made up and published all these lies about me and my organization, but I will not sit idly by while someone attempts to destroy an unsullied reputation I have spent a lifetime in building.”


    Source: Truth Attack

    Contact: Jim Kerr, 318 795-2030

    hq@truthattack.org

    Interviews available on request

–
You received this because you have membership in the “Lawmen” Google Group.
Comment to group owner – reply to the message (only the owner posts messages).
See the archives, change options – visit http://groups.google.com/group/Lawmen
Join / Subscribe – send email to Lawmen+subscribe@googlegroups.com
Resign / Unsubscribe- send email to Lawmen+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com








LEGAL NOTICE: /s/Sharon4Anderson@aol.com ECF_P165913Pacersa1299

telfx: 651-776-5835:
Attorney ProSe_InFact,Private Attorney General QuiTam Whistleblower, Sharon4 Anderson – Google Profile Candidate AG2010 http://www.sharonagmn2010.blogspot.com/Blogger: User Profile: Sharon Anderson


Legal Notice to the State of MN, Revenue,All Agencies, County of Ramsey,Mark.Oswald,Risk Management,Land Acquistion et al,City St.Paul,Mayor Coleman,DSI Bob Kessler,Joel Essling,Risk Management Ron.Guilfoile,HRA,Kathy Lantry,City Council enbanc,Shari.Moore Clerk,Marcia Moermond et al
East Side Review News alleged to be Tax Delinquent. 62cv09-1163
Interesting MN Court Administrator Sue Dosal Husband former MN Fed. Court Clerk
with “Tys” to Florida
re:

Group: http://groups.google.com/group/lawmen/topics

    “Bob Hurt” Dec 22 07:22PM -0500 ^

    Remedies for Fraudulent Notices of Federal Tax Lien in Florida


    Florida Statutes <http://leg.state.fl.us/Statutes> provide possible remedies for fraudulent notices of tax lien.

    28.222 requires the clerk to KNOW US LAW regarding federal tax liens and levies and to record federal tax liens ONLY if made in accordance with that law. The clerks don’t know anything about US law, and the county attorneys falsely inform them from IRS booklets made just to suborn clerks. You could point out that a lien notice has no validity unless a duly authorized assessment officer signed (under penalties of perjury) the assessment that forms the basis for the lien. I have NEVER seen such an assessment document signed under penalties of perjury that it is a bona fide and accurate assessment of taxes owed, due, and payable

    713.31 – Remedies for fraud and collusion – worth looking at – treble damages.


    713.901 (4) requires the certification of notices of liens (see IRS 7806 and 6065 and examine any lien notice for proper certification) by a “responsible” person (where’s the proof that the submitter is responsible to collect taxes and has a delegation of authority to perform that function?). Clerks never verify credentials of submitters or certification of the notice.


    Filing of Recorded Notices of Federal Tax Lien


    A lien notice is not a lien. The Clerk should file ONLY ACTUAL liens in the system of records reserved for liens. The Clerk should NOT file Notices in the Liens system. If the IRS does not like this, it can start creating paper liens, not invisible ones that it claims exist but really don’t. If it isn’t written, it isn’t true.


    Statewide Grand Jury


    IMO the clerk engages in racketeering with the IRS across multiple circuits throughout the state. Right now the Governor has empaneled (or will empanel) a Statewide Grand Jury. You should file an evidence package about this crime and demand SGJ investigation.


    —————————————————————————————–

    BobHurtSuit200707small <http://bobhurt.com/> Bob Hurt
    2460 Persian Drive #70
    Clearwater, FL 33763
    +1 (727) 669-5511
    Donate to my <http://bobhurt.com/lawdonation.htm> Law Scholarship fund
    Learn civil litigation with <http://www.jurisdictionary.com/index.asp?refercode=HB0002> Jurisdictionary
    Subscribe to <http://bobhurt.com/subscribetolawmen.htm> Lawmen Newsletter FREE
    Download <http://groups.google.com/group/lawmen/files> Files FREE from the Lawmen <http://groups.google.com/group/lawmen> Archive
    Improve your financial fortunes with <http://www.getzooks.biz/index.php?aff=bobhurt> GetZooks!
    <http://www.fuelsaver-mpg.com/affiliates/jrox.php?id=145_1_tlid_8_MailFoot> Save Fuel

    —————————————————————————————–

    “Bob Hurt” Dec 22 12:52PM -0500 ^

    Tom Cryer has filed a lawsuit (see below press release) against Rebecca O’Dell for defaming him in comments she made to subscribers of the St. Pete area Constitution Party meetup group. When I saw her comments, seemingly timed to coincide with Tommy’s upcoming Tea Party Squared tour of 7 Florida cities, I felt shocked because 1) they did not constitute truth, and 2) they seemed so atypical of an attorney because of their libelous nature.

    I forwarded them to Tommy. He wrote a correction to Rebecca and told her, effectively, that if she’d find laws making people liable, he’d let her off the hook. She published a partial-correction letter to her readers, but she otherwise spurned his mercy. So, he sued.

    The lawsuit does not please me, but then neither have I felt pleased about Rebecca’s intransigent attitude about the implementation of income tax in America, nor her attack on Tommy. And, Tommy should protect his reputation.


    She told me repeatedly that she did not like income tax, but that the courts say we all have to pay it, and we need to do that and take up the issue with Congress. I told her that the income tax as implemented violates Article I Section 2 Clause 3 and Section 9 Clause 4 of the US Constitution. She seemed to think that since the lower courts have ruled thousands of times in favor of the IRS , they must be right.


    Rebecca wrote me, in effect, that if she believed me, stopped paying tax as a consequence, and the IRS attacked her and prevailed against her, she’d sue me for damages for misleading her. She seemed pretty hostile about all the anti-income-tax gurus causing so many people to lose fortunes to the IRS and losing liberty to the courts.


    I guess that hostility spilled over onto Tom Cryer when I sent her his memorandum. She must have thought him one of the anti-income-tax gurus who tells people to stop filing and stop paying. But Tom has repeatedly explained, effectively, that such an action constitutes financial suicidal, and we can only prevail in that if many millions of Americans do it at the same time. Tom has said that we must work together on ALL FRONTS of activism, politically, socially, legally, and financially, to attack and defeat IRS abuses and the courts and politicians who support them.


    For several years I have advocated out and out legal attacks against IRS agents who abuse individuals – find the IRS agent errors, then demand correction, and failing correction, sue them and file administrative and criminal complaints against them. If EVERYBODY did this, IRS abuses would stop. Unfortunately, most people take Rebecca’s position and cave in to them without a fight.


    ——————————————————————————————————

    <http://bobhurt.com/> Bob Hurt • <http://bobhurt.com/subscribetolawmen.htm> Lawmen • <http://groups.google.com/group/lawmen/files> Files • <http://groups.google.com/group/lawmen> Archive • <http://bobhurt.com/lawdonation.htm> Scholarship • <http://www.jurisdictionary.com/index.asp?refercode=HB0002> Jurisdictionary • <http://www.getzooks.biz/index.php?aff=bobhurt> GetZooks!

    ——————————————————————————————————


    From: Tom Cryer
    Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 1:48 AM
    To: undisclosed-recipients:
    Subject: Update


    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE


    INTERNET DIATRIBE

    LANDS FLORIDA EMAILER IN COURT


    SHREVEPORT, LA—In a law suit filed by Louisiana attorney Tommy K. Cryer a Florida woman is being taken to task for distributing an email containing what Cryer’s suit alleges is a string of false and defamatory claims. According to the law suit filed in Shreveport, Louisiana, Rebecca O’Dell Townsend, a St. Petersburg, FL, attorney, published and distributed emails falsely accusing Cryer of being a disbarred tax evader who does not believe there is any such thing as a federal individual income tax.


    Cryer, who has been in uninterrupted law practice in Louisiana for over 36 years and who was cleared of tax evasion and willful failure to file charges by a unanimous “not guilty” jury verdict, says “I have no idea what prompted Townsend to fabricate and publish the false statements. Call me old fashioned, but I don’t understand why some people feel compelled to lie.”


    At the time Truth Attack (www.truthattack.org), a non-profit political action organization, which Cryer founded and heads up and whose stated mission is “putting the government back in its box—one tentacle at a time,” was in the process of promoting and conducting seminars for tea party and other political activists on what they called “The Lost Art of Citizenry”. The seminars offered instruction on how to organize and coordinate group activities, how to learn about our rights and government’s limitations, ways to distribute information to the public and inside information on how to influence representatives’ and government officials’ actions.


    Barely a week before the seven seminars were to begin Townsend published and distributed a blistering mass emailing that was distributed widely across the internet, stating that Cryer was a disbarred tax evader who contended that there is no such thing as a federal individual income tax and that Cryer and those associated with him “have left a wake of destroyed families in their wake.” Cryer said “I am not nor have I ever been disbarred, I am not a tax evader and have never destroyed a family in my life, let alone a ‘wake of families’, whatever that means.”


    Now Cryer has filed suit in Shreveport seeking damages for defamation. Cryer said “I don’t know this woman and have never heard of her before. I don’t know why she made up and published all these lies about me and my organization, but I will not sit idly by while someone attempts to destroy an unsullied reputation I have spent a lifetime in building.”


    Source: Truth Attack

    Contact: Jim Kerr, 318 795-2030

    hq@truthattack.org

    Interviews available on request

–
You received this because you have membership in the “Lawmen” Google Group.
Comment to group owner – reply to the message (only the owner posts messages).
See the archives, change options – visit http://groups.google.com/group/Lawmen
Join / Subscribe – send email to Lawmen+subscribe@googlegroups.com


LEGAL NOTICE: /s/Sharon4Anderson@aol.com ECF_P165913Pacersa1299

Legal Notice to the State of MN, Revenue,All Agencies, County of Ramsey,Mark.Oswald,Risk Management,Land Acquistion et al,City St.Paul,Mayor Coleman,DSI Bob Kessler,Joel Essling,Risk Management Ron.Guilfoile,HRA,Kathy Lantry,City Council enbanc,Shari.Moore Clerk,Marcia Moermond et al
East Side Review News alleged to be Tax Delinquent. 62cv09-1163
Interesting MN Court Administrator Sue Dosal Husband former MN Fed. Court Clerk
with “Tys” to Florida

    “Bob Hurt” Dec 22 07:22PM -0500 ^

    Remedies for Fraudulent Notices of Federal Tax Lien in Florida


    Florida Statutes <http://leg.state.fl.us/Statutes> provide possible remedies for fraudulent notices of tax lien.

    28.222 requires the clerk to KNOW US LAW regarding federal tax liens and levies and to record federal tax liens ONLY if made in accordance with that law. The clerks don’t know anything about US law, and the county attorneys falsely inform them from IRS booklets made just to suborn clerks. You could point out that a lien notice has no validity unless a duly authorized assessment officer signed (under penalties of perjury) the assessment that forms the basis for the lien. I have NEVER seen such an assessment document signed under penalties of perjury that it is a bona fide and accurate assessment of taxes owed, due, and payable

    713.31 – Remedies for fraud and collusion – worth looking at – treble damages.


    713.901 (4) requires the certification of notices of liens (see IRS 7806 and 6065 and examine any lien notice for proper certification) by a “responsible” person (where’s the proof that the submitter is responsible to collect taxes and has a delegation of authority to perform that function?). Clerks never verify credentials of submitters or certification of the notice.


    Filing of Recorded Notices of Federal Tax Lien


    A lien notice is not a lien. The Clerk should file ONLY ACTUAL liens in the system of records reserved for liens. The Clerk should NOT file Notices in the Liens system. If the IRS does not like this, it can start creating paper liens, not invisible ones that it claims exist but really don’t. If it isn’t written, it isn’t true.


    Statewide Grand Jury


    IMO the clerk engages in racketeering with the IRS across multiple circuits throughout the state. Right now the Governor has empaneled (or will empanel) a Statewide Grand Jury. You should file an evidence package about this crime and demand SGJ investigation.


    —————————————————————————————–

    BobHurtSuit200707small <http://bobhurt.com/> Bob Hurt
    2460 Persian Drive #70
    Clearwater, FL 33763
    +1 (727) 669-5511
    Donate to my <http://bobhurt.com/lawdonation.htm> Law Scholarship fund
    Learn civil litigation with <http://www.jurisdictionary.com/index.asp?refercode=HB0002> Jurisdictionary
    Subscribe to <http://bobhurt.com/subscribetolawmen.htm> Lawmen Newsletter FREE
    Download <http://groups.google.com/group/lawmen/files> Files FREE from the Lawmen <http://groups.google.com/group/lawmen> Archive
    Improve your financial fortunes with <http://www.getzooks.biz/index.php?aff=bobhurt> GetZooks!
    <http://www.fuelsaver-mpg.com/affiliates/jrox.php?id=145_1_tlid_8_MailFoot> Save Fuel

    —————————————————————————————–

    “Bob Hurt” Dec 22 12:52PM -0500 ^

    Tom Cryer has filed a lawsuit (see below press release) against Rebecca O’Dell for defaming him in comments she made to subscribers of the St. Pete area Constitution Party meetup group. When I saw her comments, seemingly timed to coincide with Tommy’s upcoming Tea Party Squared tour of 7 Florida cities, I felt shocked because 1) they did not constitute truth, and 2) they seemed so atypical of an attorney because of their libelous nature.

    I forwarded them to Tommy. He wrote a correction to Rebecca and told her, effectively, that if she’d find laws making people liable, he’d let her off the hook. She published a partial-correction letter to her readers, but she otherwise spurned his mercy. So, he sued.

    The lawsuit does not please me, but then neither have I felt pleased about Rebecca’s intransigent attitude about the implementation of income tax in America, nor her attack on Tommy. And, Tommy should protect his reputation.


    She told me repeatedly that she did not like income tax, but that the courts say we all have to pay it, and we need to do that and take up the issue with Congress. I told her that the income tax as implemented violates Article I Section 2 Clause 3 and Section 9 Clause 4 of the US Constitution. She seemed to think that since the lower courts have ruled thousands of times in favor of the IRS , they must be right.


    Rebecca wrote me, in effect, that if she believed me, stopped paying tax as a consequence, and the IRS attacked her and prevailed against her, she’d sue me for damages for misleading her. She seemed pretty hostile about all the anti-income-tax gurus causing so many people to lose fortunes to the IRS and losing liberty to the courts.


    I guess that hostility spilled over onto Tom Cryer when I sent her his memorandum. She must have thought him one of the anti-income-tax gurus who tells people to stop filing and stop paying. But Tom has repeatedly explained, effectively, that such an action constitutes financial suicidal, and we can only prevail in that if many millions of Americans do it at the same time. Tom has said that we must work together on ALL FRONTS of activism, politically, socially, legally, and financially, to attack and defeat IRS abuses and the courts and politicians who support them.


    For several years I have advocated out and out legal attacks against IRS agents who abuse individuals – find the IRS agent errors, then demand correction, and failing correction, sue them and file administrative and criminal complaints against them. If EVERYBODY did this, IRS abuses would stop. Unfortunately, most people take Rebecca’s position and cave in to them without a fight.


    ——————————————————————————————————

    <http://bobhurt.com/> Bob Hurt • <http://bobhurt.com/subscribetolawmen.htm> Lawmen • <http://groups.google.com/group/lawmen/files> Files • <http://groups.google.com/group/lawmen> Archive • <http://bobhurt.com/lawdonation.htm> Scholarship • <http://www.jurisdictionary.com/index.asp?refercode=HB0002> Jurisdictionary • <http://www.getzooks.biz/index.php?aff=bobhurt> GetZooks!

    ——————————————————————————————————


    From: Tom Cryer
    Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 1:48 AM
    To: undisclosed-recipients:
    Subject: Update


    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE


    INTERNET DIATRIBE

    LANDS FLORIDA EMAILER IN COURT


    SHREVEPORT, LA—In a law suit filed by Louisiana attorney Tommy K. Cryer a Florida woman is being taken to task for distributing an email containing what Cryer’s suit alleges is a string of false and defamatory claims. According to the law suit filed in Shreveport, Louisiana, Rebecca O’Dell Townsend, a St. Petersburg, FL, attorney, published and distributed emails falsely accusing Cryer of being a disbarred tax evader who does not believe there is any such thing as a federal individual income tax.


    Cryer, who has been in uninterrupted law practice in Louisiana for over 36 years and who was cleared of tax evasion and willful failure to file charges by a unanimous “not guilty” jury verdict, says “I have no idea what prompted Townsend to fabricate and publish the false statements. Call me old fashioned, but I don’t understand why some people feel compelled to lie.”


    At the time Truth Attack (www.truthattack.org), a non-profit political action organization, which Cryer founded and heads up and whose stated mission is “putting the government back in its box—one tentacle at a time,” was in the process of promoting and conducting seminars for tea party and other political activists on what they called “The Lost Art of Citizenry”. The seminars offered instruction on how to organize and coordinate group activities, how to learn about our rights and government’s limitations, ways to distribute information to the public and inside information on how to influence representatives’ and government officials’ actions.


    Barely a week before the seven seminars were to begin Townsend published and distributed a blistering mass emailing that was distributed widely across the internet, stating that Cryer was a disbarred tax evader who contended that there is no such thing as a federal individual income tax and that Cryer and those associated with him “have left a wake of destroyed families in their wake.” Cryer said “I am not nor have I ever been disbarred, I am not a tax evader and have never destroyed a family in my life, let alone a ‘wake of families’, whatever that means.”


    Now Cryer has filed suit in Shreveport seeking damages for defamation. Cryer said “I don’t know this woman and have never heard of her before. I don’t know why she made up and published all these lies about me and my organization, but I will not sit idly by while someone attempts to destroy an unsullied reputation I have spent a lifetime in building.”


    Source: Truth Attack

    Contact: Jim Kerr, 318 795-2030

    hq@truthattack.org

    Interviews available on request

–
You received this because you have membership in the “Lawmen” Google Group.
Comment to group owner – reply to the message (only the owner posts messages).
See the archives, change options – visit http://groups.google.com/group/Lawmen
Join / Subscribe – send email to Lawmen+subscribe@googlegroups.com
Resign / Unsubscribe- send email to Lawmen+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com



Posted in Uncategorized Leave a Comment »

SharonsFiles2005_2009

December 5, 2009 by sharon4anderson Edit

Recap Firefox Extension “turning PACER around” http://angelfire.com/mn3/andersonadvocates/2006water/water.html

Better Access to Public Court Records

RECAP is a free extension for Firefox that improves the experience of using PACER, the electronic public access system for the U.S. Federal District and Bankruptcy Courts. It:

You must be using Firefox to install Recap.
Download Firefox
(if you are using a Firefox variant
Files on E-
Democracy, St.
Paul – April 06, 2006:Best regards from,
Sharon		 HOME
Water Board, 2006
Download/Get: File 1Constitutionality State Laws
Download/Get: File 2Health Issues
Download/Get: File 3Eminent Domain Demolition
Download/Get: File 4Election Contest
Download/Get: File 5POA 4/17/2006
Download/Get: File 6Sharon’s Federal Cases 1973 to 2006
Download/Get: File 7USDist.Crt.02-0332 (Rosenbaum)
Download/Get: File 8Eminent Domain Homeless Andersons
Download/Get: Index E Democcracy April 6, 2006

Posted in Uncategorized Leave a Comment »

Sharon4Anderson Budget_Fights

December 1, 2009 by sharon4anderson Edit




Please help fight these Budgets,Its our Money “taken” by Theft,Trespass,Treason, Creating Mortgage 42 USC 3631Forclosures iGoogle

REPORTER NANCY LAZARYANLine Drawn in the Sand Nancy Lazaryan MN – Google Search

November 26, 2009 rice, Minnesota Vetting explained

johnkhutchis Posted johnkhutchis

iReport —

LINE DRAWN IN THE SAND RNC CONVENTION

2nd Judicial Judges are complicit 4 Pecuniary Judges As Criminals?GainJudgeJoanneSmith_Qualifications re complicity AffidavitPrejudice Kathleen Gearin Judge Sharon4 Anderson – Google Profileg Judge John Vandenorth et al,

From: Sharon4Anderson
To: fred.grittner@courts.state.mn.us
, shari.moore@ci.stpaul.mn.us , Julie.Kleinschmidt@co.ramsey.mn.us
CC: dorrick@pioneerpress.com, bsalisbury@pioneerpress.com, ericwblack@gmail.com
Sent: 12/1/2009 7:33:39 A.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: Court Forms mnd.courts.gov District of MM,Sharon4Anderson v CitySt.Paul,CoRamsey BudgetLIEN




Tues. 1Dec09

LEGAL NOTICE TO FRED GRITTNER CLERK,ADMINISTRATOR LARRY DEASE SUE DOSAL Media, Public at Large

AFFIDAVIT OF SHARON SCARRELLA ANDERSON AKA CHERGOSKY-PETERSON
FOR TITLE SEARCH’S

Why the State of MN has not kept up with Word or pdf filings of any all documents. re: www.mnd.uscourts.gov

LEGAL NOTICE TO CHALLENGE THE CITY ST.PAUL, CO.RAMSEY FINAL

BUDGET HEARINGS, via EF ie: Electronic Filings, Title 18 Case Fixing by Auditor Mark Oswald,complicity with Lynn Moser and Judge John Vandenorth. re: www.slideshare.com/sharon4anderson complicit with the Ponzi Scheme by Student Lawyer
John Edison who wilfully failed to research that Taxes were paid re: 2008, Exemptions of the “taking” Homestead Credit, Exemption of Disabled, Senior, Death,Disability,Disparagment of Titles, Complicity County

Attorney DFL Susan Gaertner aka Mrs. John Wodele aka Mrs. James B. Froehle 5505 Porland White Bear Town, MN 55110 and the Gaertner Family (TRUST) 1179 Summit Ave. St. Paul MN 55104
Dm 1399 23 exploiting the Anderson Family to Death,Disability,Disparagment of Titles in a “Patterened Enterprise” in the Office of County Attorney.


The Tax Payer pays for this re: Ramsey Dist. Crt. 62c09-1163 Appeal A09-2031 Any all Forensic Doc are Filed, Any all Jurisdiction has been met
with Answers Cross, since 1974 , current 1/2 million Default Judgment against the City St. Paul Published on File with Risk Manager Ron Guilfole




Good Faith intent to Challenge the City of St.Paul and County of Ramsey’s Budget, with Affiants Default Claims, Damages since 1974 In the Matter of Sharon Scarrella Associate Justice 221NW2nd562
when current Chief Justice Eric Magnuson was clerk for Decedant Justice Sheran.

23.2010 Proposed Budget and Tax Levy. (Public hearing will be held at 6:00 p.m.)






Public Hearing
At all times material: the Heinous, Repugnant Deprivation of Affiants 91 Chrysler, Answer CrossComplant

THEREFORE: PUNITATIVE,COMPENSATORY,TORT DAMAGES IN THE MILLIONS ARE TAKEN……….



LEGAL NOTICE: /s/Sharon4Anderson@aol.com ECF_P165913Pacersa1299 telfx: 651-776-5835:
Attorney ProSe_InFact,Private Attorney General QuiTam Whistleblower, Sharon4 Anderson – Google Profile Candidate AG2010 http://www.sharonagmn2010.blogspot.com/Blogger: User Profile: Sharon Anderson


Public Hearing
At all times material: the Heinous, Repugnant Deprivation of Affiants 91 Chrysler, Answer CrossComplant

THEREFORE: PUNITATIVE,COMPENSATORY,TORT DAMAGES IN THE MILLIONS ARE TAKEN……….



LEGAL NOTICE: /s/Sharon4Anderson@aol.com ECF_P165913Pacersa1299 telfx: 651-776-5835:
Attorney ProSe_InFact,Private Attorney General QuiTam Whistleblower, Sharon4 Anderson – Google Profile Candidate AG2010 http://www.sharonagmn2010.blogspot.com/Blogger: User Profile: Sharon Anderson

Public Hearing and Open House-Nov. 30th, 6:30 pm

Ramsey County invites you to attend its Public Hearing/Open House regarding its Proposed 2010 Budget and Levy, Monday, Nov. 30th, 6:30 p.m. in the Roseville Area High School Cafeteria, 1240 County Road B2, Roseville. (map)

Hear a presentation on the proposed 2010 budget and levy and how property taxes are determined, have a chance to address the County Board and visit the many informational booths on County programs.

For detailed information on the Ramsey County budget.

For more information on property taxes.

Posted in Sharons Tax/Election Files, Uncategorized Leave a Comment »

SharonsAppealA09-2031ProSe

November 18, 2009 by sharon4anderson Edit

At all times Material the RULES are followed Call today to 651-296-2581 Mona was curteous, Suzie stated IFP was not in the Packet,

Sharon Anderson’s Presentations on SlideShare

Case Information

Case Number:A092031Filing Date:11/06/2009
Jurisdiction:Court of AppealsStatus:Pre-Briefing
ORCA:Civil Division Ramsey County District CourtHearing Type:Nonoral
Classification:Standard – Civil – Other
Short Title:In the Matter of Delinquent Real Property Taxes for Real Property Described, to wit: Lyman Dayton Addition to St. Paul, Lot 5, Blk 46, a/k/a 697 Surrey Avenue, PIN: 32.29.22.41.0053, Sharon Lee Anderson a/k/a Sharon Scarrella Anderson, record owner
Full Title:In the Matter of Delinquent Real Property Taxes for Real Property Described, to wit: Lyman Dayton Addition to St. Paul, Lot 5, Blk 46, a/k/a 697 Surrey Avenue, PIN: 32.29.22.41.0053, Sharon Lee Anderson a/k/a Sharon Scarrella Anderson, record owner
Summary:
Citation:

- Hide Party Information

Party Information
MACS IDAppellate RoleParty NameAttorney(s)
51332AppellantSharon AndersonPro Se
10976RespondentRamsey CountyJEAN STEPAN

Docketing Filter View
Display: ChronologicalThreaded
Docket Information
Document DescriptionJurisdictionFiling DateDocket Entry TypeFiling TypeStatus
Notice – Case Filing

Aff Ser4 Nov09 Ifp Tit18 6

Court of Appeals11/12/2009NoticeCase FilingFinal
Statement – Case – Appellant

Sa Statement MNAppeal62cv09-1163Court of Appeals

11/06/2009StatementCase – AppellantFinal
Notice – Appeal – Case Filed

Court of Appeals

11/06/2009NoticeAppeal – Case FiledFinal
Transcript – Initial Certificate – Patricia Martinez Court of Appeals10/15/2009TranscriptInitial CertificateFinal

Posted in Uncategorized Leave a Comment »

SharonsAppealA09-2031

November 18, 2009 by sharon4anderson Edit

HelpHelp
Sharon ForensicFiles all at Slideshare or Scribd

Sharon Anderson’s Presentations on SlideShare
Case View
ORCA Info
Case Information
Case Number:A092031Filing Date:11/06/2009
Jurisdiction:Court of AppealsStatus:Pre-Briefing
ORCA:Civil Division Ramsey County District CourtHearing Type:Nonoral
Classification:Standard – Civil – Other
Short Title:In the Matter of Delinquent Real Property Taxes for Real Property Described, to wit: Lyman Dayton Addition to St. Paul, Lot 5, Blk 46, a/k/a 697 Surrey Avenue, PIN: 32.29.22.41.0053, Sharon Lee Anderson a/k/a Sharon Scarrella Anderson, record owner
Full Title:In the Matter of Delinquent Real Property Taxes for Real Property Described, to wit: Lyman Dayton Addition to St. Paul, Lot 5, Blk 46, a/k/a 697 Surrey Avenue, PIN: 32.29.22.41.0053, Sharon Lee Anderson a/k/a Sharon Scarrella Anderson, record owner
Summary:
Citation:

- Hide Party Information

Party Information
MACS IDAppellate RoleParty NameAttorney(s)
51332AppellantSharon AndersonPro Se
10976RespondentRamsey CountyJEAN STEPAN

Docketing Filter View
Display: ChronologicalThreaded
Docket Information
Document DescriptionJurisdictionFiling DateDocket Entry TypeFiling TypeStatus
Notice – Case Filing Court of Appeals11/12/2009NoticeAff Ser4 Nov09 Ifp Tit18 6Case FilingFinal
Statement – Case – Appellant Court of Appeals11/06/2009StatementCase – Sa Statement MNAppeal62cv09-1163AppellantFinal
Notice – Appeal – Case Filed Court of Appeals11/06/2009NoticeAppeal – Case FiledFinal
Transcript – Initial Certificate – Patricia Martinez Court of Appeals10/15/2009TranscriptInitial CertificateFinal

Posted in Sharons Tax/Election Files, Uncategorized Leave a Comment »

SharonsStatementCase_62cv09-1163_Appeal

October 28, 2009 by sharon4anderson Edit

Sent: 10/26/2009 6:37:21 P.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Appeal from 62cv09-1163SharonScarrellaAnderson Quitam Relator
Sent: 10/26/2009 5:19:55 P.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Appeal 62cv09-1163 http://www.mncourts.gov/



Abolish Property Taxes


TRANSMIT AND CERTIFY RECORD ON APPEAL WITH IFP SERVICE BY THE SHERIFF


This document must be accompanied by 2 copies of a completed statement of the case. IFP Service by Sheriff Bob.Fletcher@co.ramsey.mn.us Faxes & Electronically.
SharonsAppeal 62cv09-1163(VAndenorth) HYPERLINK “RCAP.htm” \l “a13303
APPENDIX OF FORMS



mn const. art.x taxes – Google Search


FORM 103A. NOTICE OF APPEAL (COURT OF APPEALS)



MN 62cv09-1163 � Sharon4anderson s Weblog


STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT



COUNTY OF RAMSEY COUNTY COURT
SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT



CASE TITLE Civil,Criminal,General Eminent Domain



To: All Persons with legal interest in the Parcels of Real Property described in the
Following Delinquent Tax List, Filed with District Court Administrator Lynae.K.E. Olson 651-2202,
published 18Mar09 MapleWood Review www.review-news.com


and all Candidates for Political Offices www.sharon4mayor2010.blogspot.com
******************************************************************************


STATE OF MINNESOTA,Ward Einess, Revenue, Michael Campion DPS,Cal Ludman HS,All Agencies,County of Ramsey,All Agencies, City of


St.Paul,MN,All Agencies, DSI,HS,HR,



AUDITOR MARK OSWALD, Elections/Taxes Supervisor, Canvass Board,
State of Minnesota, Rule 24.04 by and thro State Attorney General Lori
Swanson www.ag.state.mn.us, Michael Campion, Public Safety,Larry Dease,Court Administrator,St.Paul
Mayor Chris B. Coleman,City Clerk Shari Moore,Council President Kathy Lantry et al,
www.ci.stpaul.mn.us, Janice Rettman res: No 2009-012,Toni Carter Canvass Board
and County Commissioners, www.co.ramsey.mn.us DSI Bob Kessler,Joel Essling


John Harrington Chief Police,his agents , Kathy Wuorinen,Don Luna,Tanya Hunter, Aaron Foster, Police Impound Lot, Rapid Towing et al in
their Official Capacity s, Ind ividually,Severally, acting in concort with John Doe
and Mary Roe. SCAP,Judges Kathleen Gearin,Joanne Smith,Gregg
Johnson,Salvador Rosas,Larry Cohen et al, unk at this time 1988 Files 495722 499129 Default 66
Million Dollars. In re Scarrella4 Assoc. Justice 221NWS2d,562


Plaintiffs
V.


697 SURREY AVE 32.29.22.41.0053$2,499.43
St.Paul,MN.55106 ,Intestate Decedant
www.cpljimanderson.blogspot.com ,VA Widow,Senior,Disabled Political Activist
Sharon Anderson aka Peterson_Chergosky_Scarrella
www.sharon4staterep64a.blogspot.com http://sharon4council.blogspot.com
http://sharon4privateattorneygeneral.blogspot.com + 96 Blogs
www.sharonanderson.org , et al as their interest appear , Defendants and
3rd Party Plaintiffs,Intestate Decedants Tenant in Common Wm.O and Bernice
A.Peterson. http://crimes-against-humanity.blogspot.com


Title to Sharons Cars,Trailers,Peterbilt,Realestate in Fee Simple AbsoluteNotice: Ins.Claim Stolen 91 Chrysler V-1C4GY54R5MX597169


Defendants: 3rd Party Plaintiffs


Cop- Corruption-Minnesota: Theft Trespass Larceny RICO


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *



NOTICE OF APPEAL TO COURT OF APPEALS


TRIAL COURT CASE NUMBER: 62cv09-1163
DATE OF ORDER: 8Sept.09
OR
http://www.slideshare.net/Sharon4Anderson/62cv091163vandenorthsumjudg8sept09


DATE JUDGMENT ENTERED:10Sept09



TO: Clerk of the Appellate Courts Fred Grittner et al
Minnesota Judicial Center
St. Paul, MN 55155
Please take notice that the above-named defendant’s 3rd party plaintiff’s appeals to the Court of Appeals of the
State of Minnesota from an order (judgment) of the court filed (10Sept09) on the date shown,
denying defendant’s_ QuiTam Relator motion’s Jury trial Evidentiary Hearing, Fact Finding,Continuence, Affidavit of Prejudice and for Public Policy pdf Formats found at http://www.sharon4anderson.wordpress.com/




Document SharonsSanction Attorneys_Fraud on Court pg26Sharons Letter Motion 62cv09-1163




NAME,ADDRESS AND NUMBER OF ATTORNEY(S) FOR PLAINTIFF’S


Ramsey Co. Attorney Susan Gaertner aka Mrs. John Wodele, M.Jean Stepan aka Mrs.John Tancabel 895 Osceola St.Paul, (105120) MN Student John Edison address unk


Sicko-City StPaul: FindLaw InterrogatoriesJean Tancabel aka Jean Stepan re: 62cv09-1163


Phone:Tel: 651-266-3222 Fax: 651-266-3010 Email: RCA@co.ramsey.mn.us


Ramsey County Attorney



NAME, ADDRESS, ZIP CODE, TELEPHONE NUMBER, AND ATTORNEY
REGISTRATION LICENSE NUMBER OF ATTORNEY(S) FOR DEFENDANT:
/s/ VA Widow_Whistleblower QuiTam Relator, Attorney Pro Se,Private AG, InFact, Sharon Anderson aka Peterson-Chergosky-Scarrella Tel: 651-776-5835



Legal Domicile: 1058 Summit/PO Box 4384 and 697 Surrey Ave St.Paul,MN 55104-0384




ECF :P 165913_sa1299___sharon4anderson@aol.com _E Democracy Files – Sharon Anderson


_____
http://www.angelfire.com/mn3/andersonadvocates/PDFedem2006/file6.pdf


SIGNATURE
(The trial court caption is used on the notice of appeal. Subsequent documents shall bear the
appropriate appellate court caption. {HYPERLINK “RCAP.htm” \l “a10301″}, subd. 1 specifies
the contents of the notice of appeal and filings required to perfect an appeal, including filing fees.
{HYPERLINK “RCAP.htm” \l “a10303″} sets forth judgments and orders which are appealable
to the Court of Appeals. {HYPERLINK “RCAP.htm” \l “a10401″} specifies time limits for
filing and service of the notice of appeal. {HYPERLINK “RCAP.htm” \l “a107″} provides for
bond or deposit for costs. {HYPERLINK “RCAP.htm” \l “a10801″} provides for a supersedeas



FORM 133. STATEMENT OF THE CASE
STATE OF MINNESOTA
(IN COURT OF APPEALS)
CASE TITLE: General,Civil,Criminal Eminent Domain,Taxes,Forfeiture,Constitutionality MS 429.061 Fees/Assess/ROW
STATEMENT OF THE CASE OF
(RESPONDENT)
TRIAL COURT CASE NUMBER:62cv09-1163 (Vandenorth)Reporter(Martinez)
vs.
APPELLATE COURT CASE NUMBER: UNK
Respondent.
1. Court or agency of case origination and name of presiding judge or hearing officer.Answer/Cross/1/2MillionClaim v.CitySt.Paul St.Paul City Council (Lantry) thurs,5Jul2007,Res Assess 07-601pub.hearing 15Aug07,(GS3041156) Notice to Combine Item 51 Res.Ratifying Assessments 07-609 from 12Apr to 27Apr07 (J0707A J0708A: Assm.#8337 697 Surrey ID 32-29-22-41-0053, Referred to Risk Management Ron Guilfoile, See Venue: Ramsey Dist. Crt. 62cv09-1163 Judge Edward Cleary, Recused, Judge Gregg Johnson Recused, Judge John Vandenorth.



2. Jurisdictional statement









QUESTIONS PRESENTED
1. Whether the Court criminally abused its discretion by Acting a WAR with MN Constitution Art. X to dispose of appellants  constitutional challenge , Bizzare Method of City St.Paul Fees/Assessments/ROW by Theft,Trespass and Treason.? Usury Interest on Property Tax Statement without WritProA06-1150 30Jun06 Formal Complaints,Warrants,Tickets to Defend



2. Auditor Mark Oswald in perjury as http://www.usbank.com/ Tax Receipts pdf format.


Mark Oswald Auditor/Elections re: 2008 US Senate


Mark Oswald Canvass Board US Senate 2008 MN – Google Search


Auditor’s False Statements have put at risk 3 thousand Propertys + QuiTam Relator


MN 62cv09-1163 � Sharon4anderson s Weblog ,


. Sections 212, 214(b), 214(c), 304, 319, and 403(b) of the Bipartisan Campaign Re-form Act of 2002 (BCRA), Pub. L. No. 107-155, 116 Stat. 81, because those challenges are plainly nonjusticiable or insubstantial under settled law.
bipartisan campaign re-form act 2002 – Google Search


3. Whether, in other respects, the Court should note probable jurisdiction over appellants  constitutional challenges to BCRA, Relators Medicare, Federal Jurisdiction and set the appeals on those issues for briefing and oral argument.






Minnesota’s Longest Arm: Jurisdiction Over the Internet – Law Firm Mansfield, Tanick and Cohen, P.A. Attorneys Minneapolis, M..



PROOF OF SERVICE 62cv09-1163




BY PDF FORMAT SHARONSCARRELLA ANDERSON AKA PETERSON


AKA CHERGOSKY_VA Widow_Whistleblower_Candidate State AG,Attorney Pro Se_Private AG



AFFIANT; SET’S FORTH THIS CLAIM OF INJURY CAUSED
BY EMPLOYEES OF THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF ST. PAUL ,COUNTY OF RAMSEY, POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA AND THEIR TRUSTEE’S UNDER THE NAME
OF THE UNITED STATES /GOVERNMENT/CORPORATION 42 USC 3631 GROUNDS FOR INJURY VIOLATIONS OF



TITLE 18 USCs: 241,242,245,
Civil Rights Division Home Page HATE CRIMES, R.I.C.O. 18 USCs 1581 Peonage, 1584,Servitude



HONEST SERVICE FRAUD & VIOLATION OF THE US and State of Minnesota’s Constitution’s & STATUTES of wrong doings, “Bad Behavior” MS609.
609 – CRIMINAL CODE, 2009 Minnesota Statutes



Title 42 USC sec.1983 – Google Search



Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation,
custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia,
subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or
other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any
rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws,
shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in
equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any
action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken
in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be
granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief
was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress
applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered
to be a statute of the District of Columbia.



1 . Title 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983, Wood v. Breier, 54 F.R.D. 7, 10-11 (E.D. Wis. 1972).
Frankenhauser v. Rizzo, 59 F.R.D. 339 (E.D. Pa. 1973).



Title 42 USC sec.1983 Wood v. Breier, Frankenhauser v. Rizzo, Private AG’s – Google Search



Each citizen acts as a private attorney
general who takes on the mantel of sovereign , 



2. Minnesota is a Right to Work  State! Affiant 1973 Started the Church of Justice Reform, legally incorporated at 1058 Summit Ave. St. Paul, re: Scarrella v. Midwest Fed S&L – Google Search


536F.2d.1207


Its OK to practice God`s law with out a
license, Luke 11:52, Sharon in Good Faith re: God`s Law was here first! There is a higher loyalty than the Office of Justice of the MN Supreme Court. Sharon Scarrella for Assoc. Justice MN Sup Crt. – Google Search loyalty to this
country, loyalty to God  U.S. v. Seeger, 380 U.S. 163, 172, 85 S. Ct. 850, 13 L. Ed. 2d 733
(1965)


US v. Seeger – Google Search



3. The practice of law can not be licensed by any state/State. Schware v. Board of Examiners,
United States Reports 353 U.S. pgs. 238, 239. Schware v. Board Examines – Google Search



In Sims v. Aherns, 271 S.W. 720 (1925)



Sims v Aherns – Google Search



The practice of law is an occupation of common right.  A bar card is not a license, its a dues card
and/or membership card. A bar association is that what it is, a club, A association is not license,
it has a certificate though the State, the two are not the same……….


RELIEF CAN BE GRANTED BY
Relief can be granted in the following ways in dollar amount Option (A). Approximately
$60,000,000.00 million tax free dollars (Sixty-Six Million Dollars) including Legal Fees, Costs,


Research and Time or tax free;



PLUS THE RIGHTS TO RECOVERY.All 13 Propertys, 91 Chrysler,Trailer,Drivers License, triggering Long Formal Complaints, Warrants, List of Witness, Evidentary , Indictments in the Murder of Cpl.Jim Anderson, 21Sept2000 Sharons 2nd Husband
, Intestate Decedants Tenants in Common , William O and Bernice A. Peterson, Sharons Parents,


Murder of Steven Monroe Quale Sr. and the “takings” of Sharons Daughter Vonessa


40 yrs ago by Corrupt Officials, Cold Case Murders http://minnesota-murders.blogspot.com Barb Winn aks Aaron Foster Manager of Police Impound Lot “who stole sharons car”, Greenly and 10 month Baby Boy Henry Gooselaw Jr (40) years ago.



Remove the City Attorney John Choi,Ramsey County Attorney Susan Gaertner and Jean Stepan, Student John Edison and State Attorney General Lori Swanson affilliates ,ABA BAR Association and place all lawyer’s under the state or federal
licensing program to work in this country under the Constitutional Mandate as it was originally
required. Remove all Lawyers and Attorneys as Staff employment for The State of Minnesota and Congress. Have the State of Minnesota and Congress
restate the state militia under the intent of HR11654 better known as the DICK ACT of 1902



Dick Act 1902 – Google Search




and allow the state militia to enforce and bring claims of injury to the Minnesota State Legislature and floor of Congress to have
these issue address and deal with in 72 hour of such complaint or before a citizen tribunal
hearing board. or Convene Grand Jurys.




Option (B), Bring in the military to help set up a new government to be put in
place and remove all federal and state officials who are guilty of Malfeasance,Nonfeasance,Misfeasance from office and brought them up on military
charges as was done in Germany 1945 for crime against humanity. That how relief can be
granted. The debt cause in this action comes under the 14th amendment section 3 people section


4 tell how to collect this debt..as the “takings” of our Homesteads via City Council’s RICO Acts of Theft,Trespass,Treason placed on Property Taxes without Public Improvements to cause Eminent Domain must not stand.




Disclaimer: City of St.Paul cannot and must not tax,Fees/Assessments/ROW based on



Criminal RICO Acts of Theft of Cars,Trailers,Personal Property, Water, Trespass on private Property ie 3 Thousand Cases, Affiant is the only one to Answer, and Treason to Deny Act at War with STate and Federal Laws, Constitutional Guarantees on Candidate Sharon Anderson aka Sharon4Anderson,Scarrella,Peterson-Chergosky_Beckley, Woman,Senior,Disabled, in a Protected Class.
REFERANCE COURT CASES
1. Picking v. Pennsylvania R. Co. 151 Fed. 2nd 240; Pucket v. Cox 456 2nd 233.



Picking v. Pennsylvania – Google Search


Pro se
pleadings are to be considered without regard to technicality; pro se litigants pleadings are not to
be held to the same high
standards of perfection as lawyers. Platsky v. C.I.A. 953 F.2d. 25.



Platsky v CIA – Google Search



Additionally, pro se litigants
are to be given reasonable opportunity to remedy the defects in their pleadings. Reynoldson v
Reynoldson v Shillinger – Google Search Shillinger 907F .2d 124, 126 (10th Cir. 1990); See also Jaxon v Circle K. Corp. 773 F.2d 1138,
1140 (10th Cir. 1985) (1)
Jaxon v. Circle K. Corp – Google Search



2. Haines v. Kerner (92 S. Ct. 594). The respondent in this action is a not a Liar or -lawyer and is moving forward in
Haines v. Kerner – Google Search


Private Attorney General and Attorney Pro Se, IFP



3. NAACP v. Button (371 U.S. 415); United Mineworkers of America v. Gibbs (383 U.S. 715);
NAACP v. Button – Google Search


and Johnson v. Avery 89 S. Ct. 747 (1969). Members of groups who are competent non-lawyers
Johnson v. Avery – Google Search can assist other members of the group achieve the goals of the group in court without being
charged with Unauthorized practice of law. 



Unauthorized Practice of Law Rev. Dick Bullock MN – Google Search



4. Brotherhood of Trainmen v. Virginia ex rel. Virginia State Bar (377 U.S. 1); Brotherhood of Trainmen v. Virginia Bar – Google Search


Gideon v.Wainwright 372 U.S. 335;



gideon v. wainwright case brief – Google Search


Argersinger v. Hamlin, Sheriff 407 U.S. 425. Litigants may be
assisted by unlicensed layman during judicial proceedings.
Argersinger v. Hamlin – Google Search



5. Howlett v. Rose, 496 U.S. 356 (1990) Federal Law and Supreme Court Cases apply to State
Howlett v. Rose – Google Search Court Cases
6. Federal Rules Civil Proc., Rule 17, 28 U.S.C.A. Next Friend  A next friend is a person who represents
Fed Rules 17, 28 USCA Next Friend – Google Search



someone who is unable to tend to his or her own interest…




7. Minnesota Court Rules and Procedures,
Minnesota Court Rules – Google Search Title 12, sec. 2017 (C) If an infant or incompetent person does not have a duly appointed
representative he may sue by his next friend or by a guardian ad litem. 
8. Mandonado-Denis v. Castillo-Rodriguez, 23 F3d 576 (1st Cir. 1994) Inadequate training of subordinates may be basis for 1983 claim.



Mandonado-Denis v. Castillo-Rodriguez – Google Search



9. Warnock v. Pecos County, Tex., 88 F3d 341 (5th Cir. 1996) Eleventh Amendment does not
Warnock v. Pecos County Tex – Google Search



protect state officials from claims for prospective relief when it is alleged that state
officials acted in violation of federal law.
government offices, State, local political subdivision, judicial etc comes under Rule 4 j as a
Foreign State.
The question will arise to the issue of 12(b)(6) failure to state a claim to which relief can
be grant. How does put a price on such crimes against humanity. The issue should be
were the 12(b)(6) for the People or 12(b)(1)(2) rule 17 where was the people immunity.
If they were as censured about the people 12 (b) s and immunity and their rights We the
People would not be in this Court now.



NOTICE: We, the people, reserve the right to amend this Appeal at any time daring the
Process of this action at bar as www.usbank.com is the holding company for City of St. Paul and County of Ramsey Taxes, and that 20+ years ago Lesbian Judge Kathleen Gearin kicked us out of our Paid for Home, triggering the Heinous, Repugnant Deprivation of the Anderson’s both Disabled, Jim Silver Star, Purple Heart Marine (Korea), as said Judge apparantly embellzed over $110,000.00


“taking” our Homestead in a “Patterened Enterprise for over 20 years


currently the County Auditor Mark Oswald is in Perjury or MN 62cv09-1163 � Sharon4anderson s Weblog he has also Embellzed the Property Tax Payment of $
449.92, > The Payment of $449.93 was returned and run thro again.


even tho Affiant called and thro another account processed.


Totalling $893.xx Paid May 15,16th 2008.


Affiant charges Mark Oswald as he has been notified by Phone,E-mails and Bank Statements. Oswald has tried to circumvent Affiants online Banking for his pecuniary gain.



Federal Reserve Banks,
mn const. art.x taxes - Google Search


Examining the organization and function of the Federal Reserve Banks, and applying the
relevant factors, we conclude that the Reserve Banks are not federal instrumentalities for purpose
of the FTCA, but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations. 
Each Federal Reserve Bank is a separate corporation owned by commercial banks in its region.
The stockholding commercial banks elect two thirds of each Bank’s nine member board of
directors. The remaining three directors are appointed by the Federal Reserve Board. The Federal
Reserve Board regulates the Reserve Banks, but direct supervision and control of each Bank is
exercised by its board of directors. 12 U.S.C. � 301. The directors enact by-laws regulating the
12 USC 301 – Google Search



manner of conducting general Bank business, 12 U.S.C. � 341, and appoint officers to implement
12 USC 341 – Google Search



and supervise daily Bank activities. These activities include collecting and clearing checks,
making advances to private and commercial entities, holding reserves for member banks,
discounting the notes of member banks, and buying and selling securities on the open market.
See 12 U.S.C. �� 341 361.
12 USC 341-361 – Google Search



The fact that the Federal Reserve Board regulates the Reserve Banks does not make them federal
agencies under the Act. In United States v. Orleans, 425 U.S. 807, 96 S. Ct. 1971, 48 L. Ed. 2d
US v. Orleans – Google Search


390 (1976), the Supreme Court held that a community action agency was not a federal agency or
instrumentality for purposes of the Act, even though the agency was organized under federal
regulations and heavily funded by the federal government. Because the agency’s day to day
operation was not supervised by the federal government, but by local officials, the Court refused
to extend federal tort liability for the negligence of the agency’s employees. Similarly, the
Federal Reserve Banks, though heavily regulated, are locally controlled by their member banks.
Unlike typical federal agencies, each bank is empowered to hire and fire employees at will. Bank
employees do not participate in the Civil Service Retirement System. They are covered by
worker’s compensation insurance, purchased by the Bank, rather than the Federal Employees
room. When the Department Of Justice fails to prevent these actions in the courtroom
and conceal the truth this now show collusion between all three branches of
government. One branch of our government such had integrity to stand up for what is
right. Their failure to do so comes under the term of high crimes and treason, war
crimes, human rights violations, R.I.C.O., and etc. This Appellate Court
of the State of Minnesota www.mncourts.gov is being placed on Notice. Every Federal and State Court
outside of the Ten square miles area and the Federal Court inside of that ten
square miles, area have made it impossible, through its own corruption. For the People and Sharon Scarrella Anderson for over 30 years
lacked enforcement and has been denied the ability to defend herself as those in
Nazis Germany under Hitler. Those who set in the same position in Germany at ,that
time as member of their Government and Military stood before our Military Court and
the World Court and were tried for war crimes and crime against humanity. Years later
they are still being rounded up and charged. There is no statute of limitation on these
types of crimes. This Superior Court of the STate of Minnesota has the choice to find
some type of humanity to give to the People of this nations or pursuing their course of
action, knowing that such action is a crime and some day run the risk of be tried in
another world court.



This Superior Court of the State of Minnesota is fully aware that a corporation
can not bring charges against a living being. The High Court has ruled this in U.S.
Supreme Court PENHALLOW v. DOANE’S ADM’RS, 3 U.S. 54 (1795) and Rule 17,
requires a interest party a living body. Penhallow v. Doanes Admr – Google Search


Case law
Title 28, USC 1601-1611 FSIA



Title 28 USC 1601 FSIA – Google Search


protects the people under the 11th amendment as all


11th amendment commerce clause – Google Search
public welfare. But because Congress’ control over the Civil Air Patrol is limited and the
corporation is not designated as a wholly owned or mixed ownership government corporation
under 31 U.S.C. �� 846 and 856, the court concluded that the corporation is a nongovernmental,
31USC 846 – Google Search


independent entity, not covered under the Act.
Finally, the Banks are empowered to sue and be sued in their own name. 12 U.S.C. � 341.


31USC 846 – Google Search


Conclusion
The issue being place before this Superior Court of the State of Minnesota is a
history of the abuse being allowed by the Federal and State Courts outside the Ten
square miles and by the Federal Courts inside the State of Minnesota against all
American Nationals. This is in direct violation of our federal constitution and statutes
and title 50 and the 15 Statutes at Large, Chapter 249 (section 1), enacted July 27,
1868 Chap. CCXLIX. —An Act concerning the Rights of American Citizens in foreign
Title 50 – Google Search States and of the above. The American people never rescinded their citizenship to their
country, but by the misuse of legislation, created by the Bar Association, they have
fraudulently expatriated the public officials from our Country the united States of
America and their citizenship to a foreign state standing outside of the constitution and
Suspended the Federal and all State Constitutions without the people knowledge or
consent. By the Courts continuing these actions in the courtrooms they have become a
co-conspirator in acts of mutiny and the overthrow of a constitutional form of
government. Legislators are hiding behind the separation of power clause,
knowing full well of these injuries, being done to the people. When legislation by
Congress could be created to prevent this injury, and their willful failure to do so, make
them as guilty as those Court officials who deny the supreme of the land in their court
bears the risks, and the Maritime law compelling specific performance in paying the interest, or
premiums are the same.
Prior to 1913, most Americans owned clear, allodial title to property, free and clear of any
Allodial Title – Google Search



liens or mortgages until the Federal Reserve Act (1913) “Hypothecated” all property within the
Federal Reserve Act (1913) – Google Search


federal United States to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, -in which the Trustees
(stockholders) held legal title. The U.S. citizen (tenant, franchisee) was registered as a
“beneficiary” of the trust via his/her birth certificate. In 1933, the federal United States
hypothecated all of the present and future properties, assets and labor of their “subjects,” the
14th amendment us constitution – Google Search 14th Amendment U.S. citizen, to the Federal Reserve System.
In return, the Federal Reserve System agreed to extend the federal United States corporation all
the credit “money substitute” it needed. Like any other debtor, the federal United States
government had to assign collateral and security to their creditors as a condition of the loan.
Since the federal United States didn’t have any assets, they assigned the private property of
their “economic slaves”, the U.S. citizens as collateral against the un-payable federal debt.
They also pledged the unincorporated federal territories, national parks forests, birth
certificates, and nonprofit organizations, as collateral against the federal debt. All has already
been transferred as payment to the international bankers.
The Banks are listed neither as “wholly owned” government corporations under 31 U.S.C. �
31 USC – Google Search


846 nor as “mixed ownership” corporations under 31 U.S.C. � 856, a factor considered in 31 USC 846,856 – Google Search


Wilful failure to address the Affidavit of Prejudice against Ramsey Co. Chief Judge Kathleen Gearin http://www.sharon4anderson.wordpress.com/


Ex. Disclosure Statement



http://www.povertylaw.org/poverty-law-library/case/55500/55504/55504a.pdf



Pearlv. United States, 230 F.2d 243 (10th Cir. 1956),



which held that the Civil Air Patrol is not a
Pearl v. US,230 F. 2d 243 – Google Search federal agency under the Act. Closely resembling the status [*1242] of the Federal Reserve
Bank, the Civil Air Patrol is a non-profit, federally chartered corporation organized to serve the
from sources within or outside the United States.
United States Congressional Record, March 17, 1993 Vol. 33, page H-1303



US Congressional Record Mar 17,1993 Vol 33 – Google Search



It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has been dissolved by the
Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1,Public Law 89-719; declared by President
Emergency Banking Ace Mar 9 1933 – Google Search


Roosevelt, being bankrupt and insolvent. H.J.R. 192, 73rd Congress m session June 5, 1933 -
Emergency Banking Act June 5th 1933 – Google Search



Joint Resolution to Suspend the Gold Standard and Abrogate the Gold Clause dissolved the
Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official capacities of all United States
Governmental Offices, Officers, and Departments and is further evidence that the United States
supply of a money substitute in the economy without a corresponding increase
in the gold and silver backing, inflation occurs.
The Federal Reserve System is based on the Canon law and the principles of sovereignty
protected in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. In fact, the international bankers used a
“Canon Law Trust” as their model, adding stock and naming it a “Joint Stock Trust.” The U.S.
Congress had passed a law making it illegal for any legal “person” to duplicate a “Joint Stock
Trust” in 1873. The Federal Reserve Act was legislated post-facto (to 1870),
3. 1935 U.S. v. Constantine, 296 U.S. 287 The INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE Ruled
US v. Constantine 296 – Google Search


unconstitutional since prohibition has been repealed. No legislative act Has ever lawfully
established the IRS as a Department of the United States Treasury.
4. 1818: U. S. v. Beavans, 16 U.S. 336. Established two separate jurisdictions within the
US v. Beavans – Google Search


United States Of America: 1. The federal zone  and 2. the 50 States . The I.R.C.
(INTERNAL REVENUE CODE) only has jurisdiction within the federal Zone .
5. Fraud by Trickery: Zone Improvement Plan (Zip Code) Congress divides the union states
(50 ) into 10 Federal Zones in violation of Constitution and Color of Law. Found in
Postal Code.
There are to type of action to which any Court can operate one is civil as found in the
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 2 or under Criminal Which is found under Title 50 Chapter
3 Section 23 Jurisdiction of United States courts and judges; upon complaint against any
alien enemy resident and at large within such jurisdiction or district, to the danger of the public
peace. The department of the IRS is misusing this section as defined below. {HYPERLINK
“http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sup_01_26.html” \o “TITLE 26 – INTERNAL
REVENUE CODE”} > {HYPERLINK
“http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sup_01_26_10_A.html” \o “Subtitle A -
Income Taxes”} > {HYPERLINK
“http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sup_01_26_10_A_20_3.html” TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 245
The portion of Section 245 of Title 18 which is primarily enforced by the Criminal Section
makes it unlawful to willfully injure, intimidate or interfere with any person, or to attempt to do
so, by force or threat of force, because of that other person’s race, color, religion or national
origin and because of his/her activity as one of the following: (b) a participant in any benefit,
service, privilege, program, facility or activity provided or administered by the United States. (e)
a participant in any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. The offense is
punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term, or the death penalty, depending upon
the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any.
{HYPERLINK “http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/26/usc_sup_01_26.html” \o “TITLE 26 – INTERNAL
REVENUE CODE”} > {HYPERLINK “http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/26/usc_sup_01_26_10_F.html“
\o “Subtitle F – Procedure and Administration”} > {HYPERLINK
“http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/26/usc_sup_01_26_10_F_20_64.html” \o “CHAPTER 64 -
COLLECTION”} > {HYPERLINK
“http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/26/usc_sup_01_26_10_F_20_64_30_D.html” \o “Subchapter D -
Seizure of Property for Collection of Taxes”} > {HYPERLINK
“http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/26/usc_sup_01_26_10_F_20_64_30_D_40_II.html” \o “PART II -
LEVY”} > � 6331. Levy and Distraint
(a) Authority of Secretary
If any person liable to pay any tax neglects or refuses to pay the same within 10 days after notice
and demand, it shall be lawful for the Secretary to collect such tax (and such further sum as shall
be sufficient to cover the expenses of the levy) by levy upon all property and rights to property
(except such property as is exempt under section {HYPERLINK
“http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00006334—-000-.html“}) belonging to
such person or on which there is a lien provided in this chapter for the payment of such tax. Levy
may be made upon the accrued salary or wages of any officer, employee, or elected official, of
the United States, the District of Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality of the United States
or the District of Columbia, by serving a notice of levy on the employer (as defined in section
3401(d)) of such officer, employee, or elected official. If the Secretary makes a finding that the
collection of such tax is in jeopardy, notice and demand for immediate payment of such tax may
be made by the Secretary and, upon failure or refusal to pay such tax, collection thereof by levy
shall be lawful without regard to the 10-day period provided in this section.
United States Supreme case decision on taxes just to name a few. Taxes can only apply to
those under 26 USC 6331 and not the people of the several fifty states. Below are the case laws.
1. 1895 Pollock v. Farmers Loan and Trust Co. 157 U. S. 429, 158 U.S. 601 The Supreme
Court ruled income tax  unconstitutional.
Pollock v. Farmers Loan – Google Search



2. 1920 Eisner v. Mcomber, 252 U.S. 189, 206



Eisner v. Macomber – Google Search



Congress cannot by any definition it
may adopt conclude what income is, since it cannot by legislation alter the
Constitution, from which alone it derives its power to legislate and within who s
limitations alone that power Can be lawfully exercised.
long been a part of human history. It is only recently, however, that our society has given it a
name and decided to monitor it, study it and legislate against it.” 1
The FBI defines a hate crime (a.k.a. bias crime) to be: “a criminal offense committed against a
person, property or society which is motivated, in whole or in part, by the offender’s bias against
a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicity/national origin.” (America Nationals)
Public Law #103-322A, a 1994 federal law, defines a hate crime as: “a crime in which the
Hate Crime Public Law #103-322A – Google Search defendant intentionally selects a victim, or in the case of a property crime, the property that is the
object of the crime, because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin,
ethnicity, gender, disability, or sexual orientation of any person.”
Official definitions of hate crimes:
Typical hate crime laws criminalize the use of force, or the threat of force, against a
Person because they are a member of a specific, protected group. Four definitions of
the term “hate crime” are:
Hate Crimes Statistics Act (1990): “… crimes that manifest evidence of prejudice based on
race, religion, sexual orientation, or ethnicity, including where appropriate the crimes of murder,
nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, aggravated assault, simple assault, intimidation, arson,
and destruction, damage or vandalism of property.” (Public Law 101-275).
Bureau of Justice Administration (BJA; 1997): “Hate crimes–or bias-motivated crimes are
defined as offenses motivated by hatred against a victim based on his or her race, religion,
sexual orientation, ethnicity, or national origin.”
Anti-Defamation League (ADL): A hate crime is “any crime committed because of the victim’s
actual or perceived race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, gender [male or
female] or sexual orientation.”
National Education Association (NEA): “Hate crimes and violent acts are defined as offenses
motivated by hatred against a victim based on his or her beliefs or mental or physical
characteristics, including race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation.”
Traditional hate crime legislation protects persons because of “his race, color, religion or
national origin , ” as in the case of the 1969 federal hate crimes law. (18 U.S.C. Section 245).
Most state laws now include additional protected groups. Some laws are restrictive and
Only protect a member of a group if she/he is involved in specific activities. For
example, the 1969 federal law only applies if the crime happens when a person is
attending a public school or is at work or participating in one of four other “federally
protected activities.”
persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any
segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.  (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85)
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 113B > � 2331
� 2331. Definitions
(5) the term domestic terrorism  means activities that 
(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United
States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended 
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
HR 3162 RDS
SEC. 802. DEFINITION OF DOMESTIC TERRORISM.
`(5) the term `domestic terrorism’ means activities that–
`(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United
States or of any State;
`(B) appear to be intended–
`(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population
HATE CRIMES
When the Federal Government; Legislative, Executive and Judicial branches allows
such action they are now aiding & abating in Hate crimes as defined by the FBI in the
following issue. When these Government offices have had complaint filed into them and
the people has had appointment to cover these issues in person with the public officials
and they refuse to address the complaint. By hiding behind the separated of power
clause. These are the same official who created, enforce and minister the laws. If law
can be created to injury, be enforced and minister to injury the people then laws can be
made to reversed such injuries by the same means.
The FBI’s hate-crime report for 2002 quotes a statement about hate crimes by the
American Psychological Association:
“…not only is it an attack on one’s physical self, but is also an attack on one’s very
identity.”Attacks upon individuals because of a difference in how they look, pray or behave have
(B) Cruel or inhuman treatment.  The act of a person who commits, or conspires or attempts to
commit, an act intended to inflict severe or serious physical or mental pain or suffering (other
than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions), including serious physical abuse, upon
another within his custody or control.
(C) Performing biological experiments.  The act of a person who subjects, or conspires or
attempts to subject, one or more persons within his custody or physical control to biological
experiments without a legitimate medical or dental purpose and in so doing endangers the body
or health of such person or persons.
(D) Murder.  The act of a person who intentionally kills, or conspires or attempts to kill, or
kills whether intentionally or unintentionally in the course of committing any other offense under
this subsection, one or more persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including those
placed out of combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause.
(I) Taking hostages.  The act of a person who, having knowingly seized or detained one or
more persons, threatens to kill, injure, or continue to detain such person or persons with the
intent of compelling any nation, person other than the hostage, or group of persons to act or
refrain from acting as an explicit or implicit condition for the safety or release of such person or
persons.
(2) Definitions.  In the case of an offense under subsection (a) by reason of subsection (c)(3) 
(A) the term severe mental pain or suffering  shall be applied for purposes of paragraphs
(1)(A) and (1)(B) in accordance with the meaning given that term in section 2340 (2) of
this title;
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 113C > � 2340
� 2340. Definitions
Title 18 2340 – Google Search


(2) severe mental pain or suffering  means the prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting
from
(C) the threat of imminent death; or
(D) the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or
suffering, or the administration or application of mind-altering substances or other procedures
calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality; and
(3) United States  means the several States of the United States, the District of Columbia, and
the commonwealths, territories, and possessions of the United States.
DOMESTIC TERRORISM
There is no single, universally accepted definition of terrorism. Terrorism is defined in
the Code of Federal Regulations as …the unlawful use of force and violence against
pretender and or agents who has expatriated themselves from the constitutional form of
government to a foreign state standing then to allow the misuse or impersonate a
constitutional position in order to collect federal funds and to bond these cases to place
in a insurance account under ticket numbers, case number or use of federal ID number
in a time that a State Emergency has been declared. This misuse of that public office
and in a state of emergency a war crime and also is defined as a hate crime as a group
is being singled out (American National) and also falls under the term of R.I.C.O. (TITLE 18 >
PART I > CHAPTER 96 > � 1961)
� 1961. Definitions
Title 18 s 1961 – Google Search


(1) racketeering activity  means (A) any act or threat involving murder, kidnapping, gambling,
arson, robbery, bribery, extortion, dealing in obscene matter, or dealing in a controlled substance
or listed chemical.
(2) State  means any State of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of
Puerto Rico, any territory or possession of the United States, any political subdivision, or any
department, agency, or instrumentality thereof;
(4) Enterprise  includes any individual, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal
entity, and any union or group of individuals associated in fact although not a legal entity;
(5) pattern of racketeering activity  requires at least two acts of racketeering activity, one of
which occurred after the effective date of this chapter and the last of which occurred within ten
years (excluding any period of imprisonment) after the commission of a prior act of racketeering
activity;
Definition of a war crime comes under.
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 118 > � 2441
� 2441. War crimes
Title 18 s 2441 – Google Search


(d) Common Article 3 Violations. 
(1) Prohibited conduct.  In subsection (c)(3), the term grave breach of common Article 3 
means any conduct (such conduct constituting a grave breach of common Article 3 of the
international conventions done at Geneva August 12, 1949), as follows:
(A) Torture.  The act of a person who commits, or conspires or attempts to commit, an act
specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or
suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical
control for the purpose of obtaining information or a confession, punishment, intimidation,
coercion, or any reason based on discrimination of any kind.



TITLE 50, APPENDIX App. > TRADING > ACT > � 2
Title 50 Trading Act s2 – Google Search


� 4. Licenses to enemy or ally of enemy insurance or reinsurance companies; change of name;
doing business in United States.
Required SR 22 bond
Laws vary from state to state on the legal requirements one must meet in order to be a licensed
driver. In most states, one must carry proof of insurance in order to drive; being caught without
proof of insurance carries a stiff penalty. An SR22 is a financial responsibility document that
informs the state that a driver has met his or her insurance requirements.
Function
While all states require drivers to be insured in order to legally drive, most states do not require
that the state has documentation of said insurance unless the driver is pulled over or otherwise
attracts the attention of the Department of Motor Vehicles. In certain cases, however, a driver
will need to register his or her insurance with the state, and that is where the SR22 comes in. The
SR22 is generally filed by the insurance provider and tells the state that the driver does have the
insurance required to be on the road. In the event that the insurance policy is canceled, the
provider is likewise required to inform the state that the driver does not have the required
coverage.
State-to-State Differences
Some states (Pennsylvania, Delaware, Minnesota, Kentucky, New Mexico, and Oklahoma) never
require an SR22, but if a driver required one in his or her previous state, it is still necessary to
remain on file with that state; moving from Ohio to Oklahoma will not absolve one of his or her
responsibilities towards Ohio. Additionally, if the requirements for insurance are different, the
driver must meet the requirements for both states in order to drive legally. Neither New York nor
North Carolina, however, require out-of-state SR22 filings

so returning by circumstances beyond his control.
By the Federal and State Courts allowing such act by the Federal and State
v. Bevans, 16 U.S. 3 Wheat. 336 336 (1818) these case law show
that there are three different and distinct forms of the United States of America.
The Federal and State Courts and the Federal and State pretenders and their
agents have misused the meaning of these Supreme Court cases along with title 50 of
the USC and have knowingly defrauded the America people by expatriation them from
their own country in the courtrooms and silenced them making the people the enemy of
the state under this USC title 50. By and thru mandatory licensing, regulation of
transactions in foreign exchange of gold or silver to FEDERAL RESERVE NOTES,
property transfers by placing all property under the name of the State such as homes
,vehicles, children, animals, firearms and etc. The Federal and State pretender and or
agents have made a willful presumption of expatriation on the part of the People
therefore denying the People their rights to their lawful standing as an American National.
The court has willfully and knowing concealed this from the people. The following
Congressional Statute at large has given the People protection from foreign state under
the federal constitutional 11th amendment not subject to foreign state.
15 Statutes at Large, Chapter 249 (section 1), enacted July 27, 1868.
American citizens, with their descendants, are subjects of foreign states, owing allegiance to the
government thereof; and whereas it is necessary to the maintenance of public peace that this
claim of foreign allegiance should be promptly and finally disavowed, Therefore:
Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States of
American in Congress assembled, That any declaration, instruction, opinion, order, or decision,
of any officers of a government which denies., restricts , impairs or questions the rights of
expatriation , is hereby declared inconsistent with the fundamental principles of this government.
(B) the court having jurisdiction over the defendant in the case;
(ii) shall be an officer of the court, and the powers of the Federal Receiver shall include the
powers set out in section 754 of title 28, United States Code; and
(iii) shall have standing equivalent to that of a Federal prosecutor for the purpose of submitting
Title 28 – Google Search


requests to obtain information regarding the assets of the defendant -
(I) from the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network of the Department of the Treasury; or
(II) from a foreign country pursuant to a mutual legal assistance treaty, multilateral agreement, or
other arrangement for international law enforcement assistance,
provided that such requests are in accordance with the policies and procedures of the Attorney
General.
(c) As used in this section -
The term United States has been defined in Title 28, USC under � 3002 15 (a) as a Federal
Title 28 USC 3002 – Google Search



Corporation CJS Vol 20 � 1785 a Foreign Corporation and substantiated by Supreme Court case
laws.
BLACKS LAWS FIFTH EDTION
FOREIGN STATE; A foreign state  within statues providing for expatriation of America
Blacks Law 5th ed – Google Search


citizens who are naturalized under laws of a foreign state in a country which is not the United
States, or its possession or colony, an alien country, other than their own. Kletter v. Dulles,
Kletter v. Dulles – Google Search



D.C.D.C.111F.SUPP.593, 598.
TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER I > � 1101
(14) The term foreign state  includes outlying possessions of a foreign state, but self-governing
dominions or territories under mandate or trusteeship shall be regarded as separate foreign states.
At no time have the People expatriated his/her self from his country. By and
through the passing of Title 50, USC TWEA all public officials knowingly or unknowingly
have declared themselves to be foreign and did expatriate from the original united
States of America to become a citizen of the UNITED STATES located in the District of
Columbia as defined by the United States Supreme Court in the following case laws.
The high Court confirmed that the term “United States” can and does mean three
completely different things, depending on the context:  Hooven & Allison Co. vs. Evatt,
hooven & allison co. v. evatt – Google Search



324 U.S. 652 (1945) & United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1876) & United States
US v. Cruikshank – Google Search



SECTION TITLE 50 > CHAPTER 3 > � 23
Title 50 chapter 3 – Google Search


� 23. Jurisdiction of United States Courts and Judges; After any such proclamation has been
made, the several courts of the United States, having criminal jurisdiction,  All judgments 
against the people fall under criminal.This is why the Courts refuse to answer the challenges of
jurisdiction. Under the TWEA this is but one jurisdiction and that jurisdiction is criminal.
Second; TITLE 50 > CHAPTER 3 > � 21
� 21. Restraint, regulation, and removal. TITLE 50 APPENDIXES — WAR AND NATIONAL
DEFENSE Sec. 16. Offenses; punishment; forfeitures of property(a) Whoever shall willfully
violate any of the provisions of this Act or of any license, rule, or regulation issued there under,
and whoever shall willfully violate, neglect, or refuse to comply with any order
AND
Third; TITLE 18 – CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PART I – CRIMES
CHAPTER 95 – RACKETEERING
Title 18 RICO – Google Search


(2) Jurisdiction over foreign persons. – For purposes of adjudicating an action filed or enforcing a
penalty ordered under this section, the district courts shall have jurisdiction over any foreign
person, including any financial institution authorized under the laws of a foreign country, against
whom the action is brought, if service of process upon the foreign person is made under the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or the laws of
the country in which the foreign person is found, and 
(A) the foreign person commits an offense under subsection
(a) involving a financial transaction that occurs in whole or in part in the United States;
(B) the foreign person converts, to his or her own use, property in which the United States has an
ownership interest by virtue of the entry of an order of forfeiture by a court of the United States;
or
(C) the foreign person is a financial institution that maintains a bank account at a financial
institution in the United States.
(3) Court authority over assets. – A court described in paragraph (2) may issue a pretrial
restraining order or take any other action necessary to ensure that any bank account or other
property held by the defendant in the United States is available to satisfy a judgment under this
section.
(4) Federal receiver. -
(A) In general. – A court described in paragraph (2) may appoint a Federal Receiver, in
accordance with subparagraph (B) of this paragraph, to collect, marshal, and take custody,
control, and possession of all assets of the defendant, wherever located, to satisfy a civil
judgment under this subsection, a forfeiture judgment under section 981 or 982, or a criminal
sentence under section 1957 or subsection (a) of this section, including an order of restitution to
any victim of a specified unlawful activity.
Section 3); and (Article I section 10 clause 1)The Federal CEO Corporate President of then as
well as of today along with all Federal and State government. Federal Corporation/State
Corporation/Foreign Corporation or doing business as under any other name aka has become a
“domestic enemy” by implementing & reimplementing the Bankruptcy of (1930-32) and “War
and Emergency Powers” (March 9, 1933 and subsequently) and “International Emergency and
War Powers” (1977) in contradiction to Article 4 Section 4; “The United States shall guarantee
to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them
against Invasion (from all enemies foreign and domestic); and on Application of the Legislature,
or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.”
By and thru the passing of The Amendatory Act of March 9, 1933. Title 50, USC
Trading with the Enemy Act Public Law No. 65-91 (40 Stat. L. 411) October 6, 1917.
The original Trading with the Enemy Act excluded citizens of the United States from
being treated as the enemy when involved in transactions wholly within the United
States. The Amendatory Act of March 9, 1933, however, included the people of the
United States as the enemy by inserting the following citizens within the United
States . The issue of abuse upon the American national(s) comes from the misuses of
Title 50 of the U.S.C. TWEA.
JUDICIAL NOTICE TO THIS COURT
That, We, the people of the States in America has overly provided Congress House and
Senate Judiciary Committees with Evidence and/or Exhibits with NO concern of ANY
“Due Process “Violation of/in the Courts, Judges, Prosecutors, Lawyers, Attorneys, et
al., ect… Evidence of Summies and Documentation will be provided in Discovery after
Scheduling Order Issued.
The Doctrine of Contra Non Valentem
The rule that a limitation or prescriptive period does not begin to run against a plaintiff
who is unable to act usually. Because of the defendants culpable act, such as concealing material
information that would give rise to the plaintiffs claim- Often shortened to Contra Non
Valentem( Case limitation of action key 43,95,CJS Employer- Employee Relationship sec. 87;
Limitation of action sec. 81-84,87,131,138,142,164-165,170-173,175-176,183,198-205;
Physicians, surgeons, and other health-care providers sec. 108, RICO sec 16
COMPLAINT
Now Comes, David Lee; Buess & Rodney Dale; Class a naturalist citizen of the United
States of America whomever rescinded his/her Citizenship to his/her Country. This document
comes in a form of a complaint in the name of David Lee; Buess & Rodney Dale; Class SET
FORTH THIS CLAIM OF INJURY CAUSED BY EMPLOYEES OF THE CORPORATION
AND THEIR TRUSTEE UNDER THE NAME OF THE UNITED STATES
/GOVERNMENT/CORPORATION TITLE 28 SEC.3002 SEC.15(a) GROUNDS FOR INJURY
VIOLATIONS OF TITLE 50 TWEA WAR CRIMES, HATE CRIMES, R.I.C.O. HONEST
SERVICE FRAUD & VIOLATION OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CONSTITUTION &
THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA STATUTES That the actions of the federal Government and
State Government, the federal President and State Governor, the federal Congress and State
legislators and the federal Judiciary and State Judicial branch acting in concert with the Treasury,
DOJ and FRB constitute an unlawful usurpation of the Constitution for the united States of
America, for the purpose(s) of implementing exclusive Legislation, in all cases whatsoever
(Statutory Jurisdiction) over the People, to the detriment of lawful money in these united States
of America and for Treason, high Crimes and Misdemeanors (Article II Section 4 and Article III
2. The STATE OF OHIO Law Firm represents REGINALD J. ROUTSON which collected
fraudulent taxes under the heading STATE OF OHIO dba Corporation for the United
States Corporation in the name of the Department of IRS.
3. The STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA Law Firm represents Gaston County Tax
Department which collected fraudulent taxes for the United States Corporation for the
Department of IRS under the Treasury Department, which collect for the Federal Reserve
Bank which is also a private Corporation.
4.
The complaint below goes into detail on how the fraud came about and that we are
dealing with the departments/ corporations of the United States under the Judiciary and
judicial procedure manual under Title 28 USC. 3002 15(a) and under the Constitution of the
United States 14th amendment section 3 which was created by the reconstruction Act of
1868. Placing all of the State offices under the jurisdiction of the Federal Corporation know
as the District of Columbia / The United States.
The doctrine of Uberrima Fides; Hold the four rules of fiduciary obligation
1. Must not benefit from their position(s)
2. Must provide full disclosure of all activities 
3. May not compromise the beneficiary s interests
4. May not delegate absolute responsibility over their beneficiary s interest
outside of the ten square miles have become co-conspirer in aiding& abating in war
crimes and hate crimes against a united States national(s) with the intent to cause
and/or commit human trafficking on such united States national(s). This
Superior Court of the District of Columbia is an aware that there is no statute of
limitation on fraud, war crimes, hate crimes, human trafficking, R.I.C.O. or
constitutional violation. The United States Bill of Right as found in the District of
Columbia Constitution and in the United Nations charter defines this as acts as crimes
against humanity.
PARTIES OF THE CASE
Respondant-Appellant_QuiTam Private AG Whistleblower Sharon Scarrella Anderson aka Peterson-Chergosky for Realestate,Car Title Search’s are the Relators in this State of Minnesota Appellate Action setting
forth claim of injuries
Appelle’s_ United States dba Corporation, Department of the Minnesota Revenue and IRS dba Corporation, STATE
OF Minnesota dba Corporation Law firm State Attorney General Lori Swanson Rule 24.04, Employee of Corporation


. All of the Parties involved:
come under Title 28 USC 3002 15 (a) as department under the United States
Corporation definition
title 28 usc 3002 – Google Search


FOUNDATION & BASES FOR THE COMPLAINT
The MN Government Officials ie: DSI Employee Joel Essling and Cop Tanya Hunter have committed tax fraud upon the Affiant Sharon Scarrella Anderson by stealing her 91 Chrysler with Disabled License Plates. By and thru the different
departments of the United States Corporation as listed under 28 USC 3002 15 (a). The United
States Corporation created Title 26 of THE UNITED STATES CODES and Title 26 of CODE
OF FEDERAL REGULATION on how they are to tax it own Federal & State employee, aliens,
and corporations as found under 26 USC 6331(a) and the CFR under Title 26
1. The United States dba Corporation is the Law Firm for the Department of IRS
Corporation under the Treasury Department, which collect for the Federal Reserve Bank
which is also a private Corporation.
These are the Corporate laws being missed use by the Corporate employees are the
Delaware Code Title 8 under Corporate Law is Chapter 6 CHAPTER. PROFESSIONAL
Delaware Code Title 8 – Google Search


SERVICE CORPORATIONS section 617 Corporate names The corporate name of a corporation
organized under this chapter shall contain either a word or words descriptive of the professional
service to be rendered by the corporation or shall contain the last names and the Texas
Administrative Code under Corporation Chapter 79 CORPORATIONS Subchapter C. ENTITY
NAMES section 79.31. The amendments to �79.31, which relates to the characters of print
acceptable in a proposed entity name, are required to more specifically identify the capabilities
and limitations in the entry of entity names into the present computer system maintained by the
Secretary of State even the Style Manual created by the Corporation for use of grammar in their
Corporate usage.
.
NOTICE
Notice is being placed into this Superior Court of the State of Minnesota to have it placed on the record of fraud commit by the Corporate employees under the
name of the UNITED STATES aka, Federal Corporation, Foreign Corporation doing
business as  the UNITED STATES /GOVERNMENT/CORPORATION, UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA. The Superior Court of the State of Minnesota is here by
placed on Notice that the State and Federal ie: Ramsey Co. Auditor Mark Oswald


appointed by the 2nd Judicial Judges , apparantly has committed Bank Fraud, Wire Fraud in the Taxes/Elections of Ramsey County with selective False Statements on the Propertys of Sharon Scarrella Anderson et al and fraudulently took public oath with the intent to expatriate his/ herself with the
intent to created injury and allow fraudulent claim against Sharon Scarrella Anderson and the united States national/s under
Title 50, USC Trading With Enemy Act (TWEA). Sharon et al are coming before this
Superior Court of State of Minnesota for Domestic Terrorism crimes against Sharon and those
who hold these federal public offices. As of date all Federal and State Courts
All offices attached to the seat of government shall be exercised not elsewhere, except as otherwise expressly provided by law.
TITLE 42 > CHAPTER 21 > SUBCHAPTER I > � 1985
� 1985. Conspiracy to interfere with civil rights (3) Depriving persons of rights or privileges
Delaware Legislation passed a Act called An Act to Provide General Corporate
Law  This act created a corporation into a Person with all the same rights as a natural
person to buy, sell, mortgage, receive licenses. Pledges, etc but not to be construed as
a natural person /being. The High Court has rule in three case law that a corporation
can be sued as a Person. SANTA CLARA COUNTY v. SOUTHERN PAC. R. CO., 118
U.S. 394(1886), New York Central R. Co. v. United States, 212 U.S. 481 (1909)
United States v. Dotterweich, 320 U.S. 277 (1943)
Superior Court of the District of Columbia has jurisdiction over this matter as it is not a
State and not represented in Congress and is not part of this country but holds a neutral
position as all parties having a claim against them hold residents and work within the
District of Columbia area and are federal citizens of that District. All crimes and their
planing to injury the people of this nation were within the federal district of District of
Columbia as made subject by the Constitution and not outside of District of Columbia.
All injury originated within this ten square mile area. As no State Court has jurisdiction to
hear such an action. No Federal Court outside of the D.C. or inside of D.C. has
jurisdiction to hear this case as they are a party to this action. The District of Columbia
Constitution and it federal statutes have been violated by all parties named by their
constitutional standing in Article I, II, III of the D.C. Constitution and under the 14th
amendment section 3. This gives the Superior Court of the District of Columbia
jurisdiction over subject matter jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction to hear this claim
providing for the protection of civil rights, including the right to vote.
(b) For purposes of this section -
(1) the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a State;
and
(2) any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to
be a statute of the District of Columbia.
Sec. 1443. Civil rights cases
-STATUTE
Any of the following civil actions or criminal prosecutions,
commenced in a State court may be removed by the defendant to the
District Court of the United States for the district and division embracing the place wherein it is
pending
:
(1) Against any person who is denied or cannot enforce in the
courts of such State a right under any law providing for the
equal civil rights of citizens of the United States, or of all
persons within the jurisdiction thereof;
(2) For any act under color of authority derived from any law
providing for equal rights, or for refusing to do any act on the
ground that it would be inconsistent with such law.
{HYPERLINK “http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/usc_sup_01_28.html” \o “TITLE 28 – JUDICIARY
AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE”} > {HYPERLINK
“http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/usc_sup_01_28_10_VI.html” \o “PART VI – PARTICULAR
PROCEEDINGS”} > {HYPERLINK
“http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/usc_sup_01_28_10_VI_20_171.html” \o “CHAPTER 171 – TORT
CLAIMS PROCEDURE”} >� 2671. Definitions
As used in this chapter and sections {HYPERLINK
“http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode28/usc_sec_28_00001346—-000-.html“} {HYPERLINK
“http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode28/usc_sec_28_00001346—-000-.html” \l “b”} and
{HYPERLINK “http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode28/usc_sec_28_00002401—-000-.html“}
{HYPERLINK “http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode28/usc_sec_28_00002401—-000-.html” \l “b”}
of this title, the term Federal agency  includes the executive departments, the judicial and
legislative branches, the military departments, independent establishments of the United States,
and corporations primarily acting as instrumentalities or agencies of the United States, but does
not include any contractor with the United States.
{HYPERLINK “http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode04/usc_sup_01_4.html” \o “TITLE 4 -
FLAG AND SEAL, SEAT OF GOVERNMENT, AND THE STATES”} > {HYPERLINK
“http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode04/usc_sup_01_4_10_3.html” \o “CHAPTER 3 – SEAT
OF THE GOVERNMENT”} > � 72. Public offices; at seat of Government
jurisdiction” as used in reference to subject matter jurisdiction.) Public Law 96-170 Dec
29 1979. AN ACT  To permit civil suit under section 1979 of the Revise Statutes(42
USC1983) against any person acting under color of any law or custom of the District of
Columbia who subject any person within the jurisdiction of the District of Columbia to
the deprivation rights, privilege, or immunity secured by the Constitution and Laws
including & 24 Am Jur 2d District of Columbia � 21 � 21 Superior Court of the District of
Columbia and divisions thereof The District of Columbia Court of General Sessions, the Juvenile
Court of the District of Columbia, and the District of Columbia Tax Court were consolidated in a
single court known as the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. (Title 28,). (2) by adding at
the end thereof the following new sentence;  for the purposes of this section , Any Act of
Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of
the District of Columbia. Sec.2 Section 1343 of title 28 UNITED STATES CODES is amended
(1) by inserting (a)  before : The district court . Sec. 1343. Civil rights and elective franchise…
-STATUTE-
(a) The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action authorized by law to be
commenced by any person:
(1) To recover damages for injury to his person or property, or because of the deprivation of any
right or privilege of a citizen of the United States, by any act done in furtherance of and
conspiracy mentioned in section 1985 of Title 42;
(2) To recover damages from any person who fails to prevent or to aid in preventing any wrongs
mentioned in section 1985 of Title 42 which he had knowledge were about to occur and power to
prevent;
(3) To redress the deprivation, under color of any State law, statute, ordinance, regulation,
custom or usage, of any right, privilege or immunity secured by the Constitution of the United
States or by any Act of Congress providing for equal rights of citizens or of all persons within
the jurisdiction of the United States;
(4) To recover damages or to secure equitable or other relief under any Act of Congress


SET FORTH THIS CLAIM OF
INJURY
CAUSED BYEMPLOYEES OF THE CORPORATION AND THEIR TRUSTEE UNDER
THE NAME OF THE UNITED STATES /GOVERNMENT/CORPORATION TITLE 28
SEC.3002 SEC.15(a) GROUNDS FOR INJURY VIOLATIONS OF TITLE 50 TWEA
WAR CRIMES, HATE CRIMES, R.I.C.O. HONEST SERVICE FRAUD & VIOLATION
OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CONSTITUTION & THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
STATUTES
NOTICE TO THE PRINCIPLE IS NOTICE TO THE AGENTS
NOTICE TO THE AGENTS IS NOTICE TO THE PRINCIPLE
R.I.C.O.
FRAUD, BANK FRAUD, POSTAL FRAUD
CONSPIRACY/OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE
TAX FRAUD, MONEY LAUNDERING, WIRE FRAUD, PERJURY,
PETITION IN THE NATURE OF A SUIT FOR DEPRIVATION
OF FEDERALLY PROTECTED RIGHTS TITLE 28, 42 USC 1983, 1981, 1985, 1988,
TITLE18 USC 241, 242, 1512, 1968, 1964, 1918 AND 18 USC SECTION 4 FOR
INJUNCTIVE AND DECLARATORY RELIEF AND
OTHER DAMAGES AS THE COURT SHALL DETERMINE REASONABLE, LAWFUL,
AND JUST
JURISDICTION
Private Attorney General VA Widow Sharon Scarrella Anderson Attorney Pro Se

Petitioners-Relator QuiTam
Vs ___________________State of Minnesota, All Agencies, Ward Einess, Revenue,



Michael Campion DPS, Mark Oswald Ramsey Co. Auditor,City St.Paul, All Agencies DSI Joel Essling, Cop Tanya Hunter John Doe and Mary Roe, Individually,severally, official capacity , 2008 Tax Delinquent




/s//s/ Ramsey Co. Attorney Susan Gaertner, aka Mrs. John Wodele, M.Jean Stepan aka Mrs.xxx Tancibel (sp) (105120) Student John Edison UNK. 560 RCGC W. 50 Kellogg Blvd. St.Paul Mn 55102 tel 651-266-3110
UNITED STATES dba CORPORATION
LAW FIRM ERIC HOLDER
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 2053
Department of IRS dba Corporation
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
WASHINGTON, DC 20224




(A) Appeal from Ramsey district court, 62cv09-1163 (John Vandenorth, Court Reporter Patricia Martinez)
Statute, rule or other authority authorizing appeal: MN Const. Art. X, MS429.061,Rule 24.04,RICO Charges of Bank Fraud,Wire Fraud by Auditor Mark Oswald False Statements.




Date of entry of judgment or date of service of notice of filing of order from which appeal is
taken:8Sept09
Authority fixing time limit for filing notice of appeal (specify applicable rule or statute): 60 Days
Date of filing any motion that tolls appeal time:10Sept09
Date of filing of order deciding tolling motion and date of service of notice of filing:10Sept09
(B) Certiorari appeal.
Statute, rule or other authority authorizing certiorari appeal:
Authority fixing time limit for obtaining certiorari review (cite statutory section and date of
event triggering appeal time, e.g., mailing of decision, receipt of decision, or receipt of other
notice):
(C) Other appellate proceedings.
Statute, rule or other authority authorizing appellate proceeding:
Authority fixing time limit for appellate review (cite statutory section and date of event
triggering appeal time, e.g., mailing of decision, receipt of decision, or receipt of other
notice):
(D)Finality of order or judgment.
Does the judgment or order to be reviewed dispose of all claims by and against all parties,
including attorney fees? Yes ( ) No ( X)
If no:
Did the district court order entry of a final partial judgment for immediate appeal pursuant to
MINN. R. CIV. APP. P. 104.01? Yes ( ) No (X ) or
If yes, provide date of order:
If no, is the order or judgment appealed from reviewable under any exception to the finality
rule? Yes (x ) No ( )
If yes, cite rule, statute, or other authority authorizing appeal:
(E) Criminal only:RICO MS 609 MS609.43, Theft,Trespass,Treason
Has a sentence been imposed or imposition of sentence stayed? Yes ( ) No ( X)
If no, cite statute or rule authorizing interlocutory appeal:
3. State type of litigation and designate any statutes at issue. Constitutionality 429.061, Forfeiture, Eminent Domain,Taxes/Election




4. Brief description of claims, defenses, issues litigated and result below. For criminal cases,
specify whether conviction was for a misdemeanor, gross misdemeanor, or felony offense.
5. List specific issues proposed to be raised on appeal.
6. Related appeals.
http://www.sharon4anderson.wordpress.com/



MN 62cv09-1163 � Sharon4anderson s Weblog List all prior or pending appeals arising from the same action as this appeal. If none, so






Google Lawmen Cases MN 62cv09-1163


September 23, 2009 by sharon4anderson




Lawmen Google Groups http://www.slideshare.net/Sharon4Anderson/quowarranto-a06-1150-30-jun06 ApplBlog5Apr07_71 SharonvCitySt.Paul, Car,Insurance,TitledTheftImage removed by sender. [UntitledMA12398759-0008.jpg]







http://www.rockyou.com/show_my_gallery2.php?instanceid=133464503


MN Courts www.mncourts.gov Re: Ramsey Dist.Crt. 62cv09-1163 2008 697 Sur reyTax ThreatJudge VandeNorth SharonScarrellaAnderson Attorney Pro Se Appeals based on Fraud,Abuse of Disgression Judges As Criminals? Financial Institution Recovery Reform Enforcement Act  Google Financial Institution Anti Fraud Enforcement Act  Google Regulation Z  Google SearchSearchSearchhttp://taxthemax.blogspot.com All Files @ www.slideshare.net/sharon4anderson and www.scribd.com/sharon4anderson MS 363AHumanRights Forfeiture Cars etc. Trilogy Impeach1992 35 Copaitkbgs













Logout Search Menu New Civil Search Back









Location : All MNCIS Sites  Case Search

Help










Delinquent Real Property Taxes for 2008 EastSideRevies DelTaxesI_73pgs pg.53Forfeiture Cars etc.42 USC 3631 MS555DeclaratoryJudgmentAct

�
�
�
�
�
�



















Case Type:

Administrative File


Date Filed:

02/12/2009


Location:

Ramsey Civil


Judicial Officer:

VanDeNorth, John B., Jr.


john.vandenorth@courts.state.mn.us





Events & Orders of the Court Sa 62cv09 1163 1 Apr09



DISPOSITIONS


02/12/2009



Closed administratively


09/10/2009



Judgment (Judicial Officer: VanDeNorth, John B., Jr.) http://www.slideshare.net/Sharon4Anderson/62cv091163vandenorthsumjudg8sept09



Sa 62cv09 1163 1 Apr09



OTHER EVENTS AND HEARINGS


02/12/2009



Notice-Other http://www.slideshare.net/Sharon4Anderson/sa-tax-del62cv09-1163-18 pg.7 proof taxes pd $449.93 and $449.13


03/31/2009



Affidavit for Proceeding In Forma Pauperis Sa Tax Del62cv09 1163 18 84


03/31/2009



Order-Other (Judicial Officer: Lindman, Dale B. )


03/31/2009



Affidavit-Other http://www.slideshare.net/Sharon4Anderson/sa-tax-del62cv09-1163-18-84-1252842


04/02/2009



Other Document Sa Tax Del62cv09 1163 18 84


04/06/2009



Affidavit of Service


04/06/2009



Correspondence Sa 62cv09 1163 1 Apr09


04/06/2009



Other Document Sa Affid Hud Hra Fair Ho45pdf


04/06/2009



Other Document 435  PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS, OTHER PROCEEDINGS, 2009 Minnesota Statutes


04/06/2009



Other DocumentTamar N. GronvallMNAG_DenyService did not serve all Parties,Refused Rule 24.04 Constitutionality of Fees/Assessments


04/07/2009



Order to Remove (Judicial Officer: Johnson, Gregg E. )Dm 1399 23


04/09/2009



Notice of Case Reassignment Edward Cleary


04/10/2009



Correspondence


06/26/2009



Affidavit of PublicationTamar N. GronvallMNAG_DenyService


06/26/2009



Other Document


07/06/2009



Publicly Viewable Note to File


07/15/2009



Motion Sa62cv09 1163 Stephan Ans 15


07/15/2009



Memorandum


07/15/2009



Affidavit-Other Auditor Mark Oswald Affidavit 62cv09-1163


07/15/2009



Affidavit-OtherSa 62cv09 1163 Aff Lynn Moser Dtd.8 Jul09 13


07/15/2009



Affidavit of Service


08/10/2009



Affidavit of Prejudice AffidavitPrejudice Kathleen Gearin Judge


08/12/2009



Notice of Motion and MotionSharons FactFinding 62cv09-1163 Taxes/Elections


08/13/2009



Other DocumentMotion to Continue 62cv09-1163Judge John Vandenorth


08/17/2009



Motion http://www.slideshare.net/Sharon4Anderson/sharon4andersonwebnair-20aug09


08/19/2009



Other Document SharonsSanction Attorneys_Fraud on Court pg26Sharons Letter Motion 62cv09-1163


08/20/2009



Motion Summary Judgment (10:30 AM) (Judicial Officer VanDeNorth, John B., Jr.)






Result: Held


09/09/2009



Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order (Judicial Officer: VanDeNorth, John B., Jr. )


09/10/2009



Judgment


09/10/2009



Notice of Entry of Judgment http://www.slideshare.net/Sharon4Anderson/62cv091163vandenorthsumjudg8sept09


09/11/2009



Other Document


09/11/2009



Other Document


09/14/2009



Notice of Appeal


09/14/2009



Other Document


09/14/2009



Supplemental Affidavit for Proceeding In Forma Pauperis


09/15/2009



Supplemental Affidavit for Proceeding In Forma Pauperis 15 Sept09 Ifp Implement ECF http://www.slideshare.net/Sharon4Anderson/sharonsifp62cv091163appeal 24pgs


09/18/2009



Supplemental Order for Proceeding In Forma Pauperis (Judicial Officer: VanDeNorth, John B., Jr. )


09/18/2009



Correspondence http://www.slideshare.net/Sharon4Anderson/sharonsifp62cv091163appeal 24pgs.


09/21/2009



Affidavit of Service LetterMotionRequestCourtReporter ECF 36pgs


RElated Briefs:aff6apr07inditcoleman_20 1058 Warrant 34 St.Paul,MN Tax_ElectionAssessor MarkOswald Handbook for Electronic Filers VA-1345 Declaration for Electronic Filing VA-8453 sharon4anderson v. judge john vandenorth mn  Google Search



Posted in Blogroll Tagged 62cv09-1163, Appeals, CaseFixing, CitySt.Paul, Clerks, Constitution, CoRamsey, Courts, Felony, Forms, Fred Grittner, Google, Judge John Vandenorth, lawmen, MN, sharon4anderson No Comments Yet


state.










List any known pending appeals in separate actions raising similar issues to this appeal. If
none are known, so state.
7. Contents of record.
Is a transcript necessary to review the issues on appeal? Yes ( X) No ( )
If yes, full (X ) or partial ( ) transcript?
Has the transcript already been delivered to the parties and filed with the trial court
administrator? Yes ( ) No (X )
If not, has it been ordered from the court reporter? Yes (X ) No ( )
If a transcript is unavailable, is a statement of the proceedings under Rule 110.03 necessary?
Yes ( X) No( )
In lieu of the record as defined in Rule 110.01, have the parties agreed to prepare a statement
of the record pursuant to Rule 110.04? Yes ( ) No (X )
8. Is oral argument requested? Yes ( X) No ( )
If so, is argument requested at a location other than that provided in Rule 134.09, subd. 2?
Yes ( ) No ( X)
If yes, state where argument is requested:
9. Identify the type of brief to be filed.
Formal brief under Rule 128.02. ( )
Informal brief under Rule 128.01, subd. 1 (must be accompanied by motion to accept unless
submitted by claimant for reemployment benefits). (X ) Online pdf Format
Trial memoranda, supplemented by a short letter argument, under Rule 128.01, subd. 2. (X )
10. Names, addresses, zip codes and telephone numbers of attorney for appellant and respondent.
NAME, ADDRESS, ZIP CODE, TELEPHONE NUMBER, AND ATTORNEY
REGISTRATION LICENSE NUMBER OF ATTORNEY(S) FOR (APPELLANT)
(RESPONDENT)
__/s/ Sharon Anderson Attorney Pro Se_Privat AG Legal Domicile 1058 Summit Ave. St.Paul,MN PO Box 4384 _55104-0384 tel 651-776-5835 sharon4anderson@aol.com http://www.sharon4anderson.wordpress.com/ http://www.sharonanderson.org/ ECF P165913-sa1299______________________________________________
SIGNATURE
OR, IF NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL:
NAME, ADDRESS, ZIP CODE AND TELEPHONE NUMBER OF (APPELLANT)
(RESPONDENT)
________________________________________________
SIGNATURE (OF APPELLANT) (OF RESPONDENT)
Dated: Mon. 26Oct09
(The Statement of Case is not a jurisdictional document, but it is important to the proper and
efficient processing of the appeal by the appellate courts. The “jurisdictional statement” section
is intended to provide sufficient information for the appellate court to easily determine whether
the order or judgment is appealable and if the appeal is timely. The nature of the proceedings
below and the notice of appeal determine the jurisdiction of the appellate court. The sections
requesting information about the issues litigated in the lower court or tribunal, and the issues
proposed to be raised on appeal are for the court’s information, and do not expand or limit the
issues that might be addressed on appeal. Likewise, the section asking counsel to identify and
prior or pending appeals from the same case, and any separate appeals that raise similar issues is
intended to provide more information about the procedural history of the case and to ensure that
the court has early notice of other pending related matters in case consolidation is appropriate




FORM 105. PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW
STATE OF MINNESOTA
IN COURT OF APPEALS
CASE TITLE: PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW
Petitioner, Sharon Scarrella Anderson
vs. TRIAL COURT CASE NUMBER: 62cv09-1163
Respondent. DATE OF FILING ORDER: 10Sept09
TO: The Court of Appeals of the State of Minnesota:
The petitioner (SharonScarrella Anderson ) requests discretionary review of the (8Sept09) order of the
Ramsey Co. Second Judicial Court. John VandeNorth
1. Statement of facts necessary to an understanding of the issues presented.
2. Statement of the issues. See Above
3. Statement why immediate review of interlocutory or otherwise nonappealable order
necessary. See Above
WHEREFORE, the petitioner requests an order of the court granting the petition for
discretionary review.
DATED:
NAME, ADDRESS, ZIP CODE, TELEPHONE NUMBER, AND ATTORNEY
REGISTRATION LICENSE NUMBER OF ATTORNEY(S) FOR PETITIONER
_/s/ Sharon Anderson __ECF P165913 sa:1299_____http://www.angelfire.com/mn3/andersonadvocates/2006water/PDFcases/sharoncases.pdf ___________________
SIGNATURE
(The content requirements of the petition for discretionary review are found in RCAP 105. A
memorandum of law and pertinent lower court documents should be attached to the petition.
The submission and the requirements for filing, form and the number of copies are contained in
RCAP 105.02.State of Minnesota District Court
County Judicial District:
Court File Number:
Case Type:
Plaintiff/Petitioner Affidavit for Proceeding
vs / and In Forma Pauperis
(Minn. Stat. � 563.01)
Defendant/Respondent
1. I am a party in this action. I am a natural person (not a corporation, partnership or other entity).
In good faith, I request a court order waiving court fees and costs. I cannot support my family
and myself and also pay or give security for costs.
2. I believe that I have valid reasons for pursuing this action. My pleadings (the Petition,
http://www.slideshare.net/Sharon4Anderson/sharonsifp62cv091163appeaMN 62cv09-1163 � Sharon4anderson s Weblog l Complaint, Answer, Appeal or other pleading) are attached.
3. a. I am receiving public assistance under one or more of the following means-tested programs:
MSA (Minnesota Supplemental Assistance Programs);
MFIP (Minnesota Family Investment Program);
Food Stamps;
General Assistance or Discretionary Work Program;
MinnesotaCare, Medical Assistance, or General Assistance Medical Assistance;
Energy Assistance;
b. I am receiving public assistance under some other means-tested program: (Name the program)
I have attached proof that I receive public assistance (such as MFIP card or cancelled check
from agency) or I will provide proof if requested.
XXXc. I receive Supplemental Security Income (SSI) as a resource for meeting my expenses.
If you checked #3a or 3c and receive help under one of the listed programs, skip to the signature line
on page 2. If you checked #3b and receive some “Other” means-tested assistance, go to Question 4.
4. I am represented by attorney pro se on behalf of Self,
a civil legal services program or volunteer attorney
program, based on indigency. If you checked #4, skip to the signature line on page 2.
5. My family size is ______1_____. (Include yourself, your spouse, your minor children, and other
dependents in your household.) For my family size, I counted myself and (list all others):
Name Age Relationship to you
6. My gross annual family income (before taxes and deductions) is $ 11 thous,which
is less than 125% of the Federal Poverty Line for my family size of ____1_____ Sharons_Medicare_Ramsey Co.#670295 members. I have
attached proof of my family income or I will provide proof if requested. If you checked #6, skip re: Affidavits IFP
to the signature line on page 2.
Print Form
CONFIDENTIAL
IFP102 State ENG Rev 9/09 www.mncourts.gov/forms Page 2 of 220fi)




State of Minnesota District Court
County Judicial District:
Court File Number:
Case Type:
Plaintiff/Petitioner Affidavit for Proceeding
vs / and In Forma Pauperis
(Minn. Stat. � 563.01)
Defendant/Respondent
1. I am a party in this action. I am a natural person (not a corporation, partnership or other entity).
In good faith, I request a court order waiving court fees and costs. I cannot support my family
and myself and also pay or give security for costs.
2. I believe that I have valid reasons for pursuing this action. My pleadings (the Petition,
Complaint, Answer, Appeal or other pleading) are attached.
3. a. I am receiving public assistance under one or more of the following means-tested programs:
MSA (Minnesota Supplemental Assistance Programs);
MFIP (Minnesota Family Investment Program);
Food Stamps;
General Assistance or Discretionary Work Program;
MinnesotaCare, Medical Assistance, or General Assistance Medical Assistance;
Energy Assistance;
b. I am receiving public assistance under some other means-tested program: (Name the program)
I have attached proof that I receive public assistance (such as MFIP card or cancelled check
from agency) or I will provide proof if requested.
c. I receive Supplemental Security Income (SSI) as a resource for meeting my expenses.
If you checked #3a or 3c and receive help under one of the listed programs, skip to the signature line
on page 2. If you checked #3b and receive some “Other” means-tested assistance, go to Question 4.
4. I am represented by attorney on behalf of
a civil legal services program or volunteer attorney
program, based on indigency. If you checked #4, skip to the signature line on page 2.
5. My family size is ___________. (Include yourself, your spouse, your minor children, and other
dependents in your household.) For my family size, I counted myself and (list all others):
Name Age Relationship to you
6. My gross annual family income (before taxes and deductions) is $ which
is less than 125% of the Federal Poverty Line for my family size of _________ members. I have
attached proof of my family income or I will provide proof if requested. If you checked #6, skip
to the signature line on page 2.
Print Form
CONFIDENTIAL
IFP102 State ENG Rev 9/09 www.mncourts.gov/forms Page 2 of 220fi




appropriate appellate court caption. Minnesota Statutes, Section 632.14 provides that appeals
from a final judgment of conviction of the crime of murder in the first degree are taken directly
to the Supreme Court. Rule 29, subdivision 1 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure specifies the
procedure for service and filing of the notice of appeal; subdivision 2 itemizes the contents of the
notice of appeal; subdivision 3 defines the time for taking an appeal; and subdivision 4 cites
other relevant procedures in first-degree murder appeals.)





LEGAL NOTICE: /s/Sharon4Anderson@aol.com ECF_P165913Pacersa1299 telfx: 651-776-5835:
Attorney ProSe_InFact,Private Attorney General QuiTam Whistleblower, Sharon4 Anderson – Google Profile Candidate AG2010 www.sharonagmn2010.blogspot.com Blogger: User Profile: Sharon Anderson SharonsYahoo! iGoogle

Homestead Act of 1862 Twitter / Sharon4Anderson Shar1058’s Buzz Activity Page – My Buzz Activity – Yahoo! Buzz neopopulism.org – Pro Se Dec Action Litigation Pack Sharon4Anderson Scribd Document’s are based on SEC filings, Blogger: Dashboard Home
FAIR USE NOTICEThis site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of whistleblower protection issues, MY FindLaw SharonsWritProA06_1150_30Jun06_26
The CAN-SPAM Act: Requirements for Commercial Emailers
kare11.com_SA
Sharons-Psychic-Whispers: Sharons Gypsy Curse-Court-Cop Corruption 3Apr0http://www.givemeliberty.org/RTPlawsuit/courtfilings/Docket.htm Sharon4Council: DLJ Management v. City St. Paul A06-2118,Money LaunderinNo direct un-apportioned tax confirmed by the US Supreme Court rulings in CHAS. C. STEWARD MACH. CO. v. DAVIS, 301 U.S. 548, 581-582(1937) g andFCC Complaints – http://sharons-copywrite.blogspot.comknowledge gained as financial journalists , http://taxthemax.blogspot.com securities they recommend to readers, affiliated entities, employees, and agents an initial trade Public domain recommendation published on the Internet, after a direct mail publication is sent, before acting Google Search Times v. Sullvian Libel with malice – on that recommendations, and may contain errors. Investment decisions should not be based solely on these or other Public Office documents expressly forbids its writers from having financial interests in Google Search BlogItBabe2007 Candidate profile Sharon4Anderson’s Legal

Posted in Sharons Tax/Election Files, Uncategorized Comments Off

Affidavit Prejudice Judge Kathleen Gearin (MN)

October 22, 2009 by sharon4anderson Edit

Sent: 8/9/2009 3:31:33 P.M. Central Daylight Timehttp://s3.amazonaws.com/ppt-download/sa62cv09-1163affpregearin9aug09-090809163337-phpapp01.pdf…


STATE OF MINNESOTA IN DISTRICT COURT

COUNTY OF RAMSEY 2ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT


AFFIDAVIT OF PREJUDICE RE: Chief Judge 2nd Judicial District

KATHLEEN GEARIN_RICO CHARGES DTD. SUN.9AUG09

To: All Persons with legal interest in the Parcels of Real Property described in the

Following Delinquent Tax List, Filed with District Court Administrator Lynae.K.E. Olson 651-2202, published 18Mar09 MapleWood Review

STATE OF MINNESOTA, All Agencies,County of Ramsey,All Agencies, City of St.Paul,MN,All Agencies

3rd Party Plaintiffs,Intestate Decedants Tenant in Common Wm.O and Bernice A.Peterson. http://crimes-against-humanity.blogspot.com/ Title to Sharons Cars,Trailers,Peterbilt,Realestate in Fee Simple AbsoluteNotice: Ins.Claim Stolen 91 Chrysler V-1C4GY54R5MX597169


Cop- Corruption-Minnesota: Theft Trespass Larceny RICO

Sharon Anderson v. Kathleen Gearin – Google Search

pg 8 Paid the full property taxes of $949.86, for 2008. Challenge that Title 18 USC 1001 False charges. By Mark Oswald to “take” HS Credit,

INTENT

It is the intent of this fiduciary to challenge the RICO “BAD BEHAVIOR” of current Judge Kathleen Gearin for the past 24 years in her apparent Lesbian Bias in a “Patterened Enterprise” of Bogus Court Orders contrary to

AUDITOR MARK OSWALD, Elections/Taxes Supervisor,State of Minnesota, Rule 24.04 by and thro State Attorney General Lori Swanson www.ag.state.mn.us, Michael Campion, Public Safety,Larry Dease,Court Administrator,St.Paul Mayor Chris B. Coleman,City Clerk Shari Moore,Council President Kathy Lantry ET AL.www.ci.stpaul.mn.us, Janice Rettman res: No 2009-012,Toni Carter Canvass Board and County Commissioners, www.co.ramsey.mn.us DSI Bob Kessler,Joel Essling John Harrington Chief Police,his agents , Kathy Wuorinen,Don Luna,Tanya Hunter et al in their Official Capacity‘s, Ind ividually,Severally, acting in concort with John Doe and Mary Roe. SCAP,Judges Kathleen Gearin,Joanne Smith,Gregg Johnson,Salvador Rosas,Larry Cohen et al, unk at this time 1988 Files 495722 499129 Default 66 Million Dollars. In re Scarrella4 Assoc. Justice 221NWS2d,562 Plaintiffs

42 USC 3631 to cause Death,Disability,Disparagment of Titles in a RICO Pattern tomalign,injure,terrorize Sharon and her Family or any Pro Se Litigant. http://taxthemax.blogspot.com/ admitted to having Homestead Classification since 1992, (17 yrs), Ex. http://sharon4privateattornygeneral.blogspot.com

TO THE ABOVE NAMED PLAINTIFF’S AND THEIR ATTORNEYS

LORI SWANSON,STATE CAPITOL,SUSAN GAERTNER,JOHN CHOI,AT THEIR RESPECTIVE OFFICES , Legal Notice to Sheriff Bob Fletcher

State of Minnesota )

)ss

County of Ramsey )

VA Widow Sharon Scarrella Anderson aka Peterson first duly sworn on the Graves of Tenants in Common, Murder of 2nd Husband James R. Anderson and ECF165913-Pacer 1299 ,

appears to be a Criminal Defendant in the Property Taxaction re: 62cv09-1163 and that Sharon has good reasons,criminal probable cause to believe and does believe and so states, that because of bias and prejudice on the part of Judge Kathleen Gearin, Chief Judge 2nd Jud. Dist. apparantly one of the Judges in the above named Court, a fair trial and or hearing cannot result, and therefore Sharon Scarrella Anderson aka Peterson makes this Affidavit to disqualify said Judge Kathleen Gearin for ALL PURPOSES.



File No. 62-cv09-1163 Case Type: Other Civil and Criminalhttp://www.review-news.com/ and allCandidatesforPoliticalOfficeswww.sharon4mayor2010.blogspot.comwww.cpljimanderson.blogspot.com ,VA Widow,Senior,Disabled Political Activist Sharon Anderson aka Peterson_Chergosky_Scarrella http://www.sharon4staterep64a.blogspot.com/ http://sharon4council.blogspot.com/ http://sharon4privateattorneygeneral.blogspot.com + 96 Blogs www.sharonanderson.org , et al as their interest appear , Defendants and

V.

697 SURREY AVE 32.29.22.41.0053$2,499.43 St.Paul,MN.55106 ,Intestate Decedant http://cpljimanderson.blogspot.com/ VA Widow, Sharon Anderson aka Scarrella aka Peterson-Chergosky et al



against Kathleen Gearin for her Conspired Coverup of the following Property Ownership 1058 Summit,448 Desnoyer,325 N. Wilder a 6 unit, given Tax breaks for

20 years,2194 Marshall, Buck Lake, Gun Lake, Gull Lake

Propertys for the past 20 years.

/s/ Sharon Scarrella Anderson ECF 165913-sa1299

Sharon will Challenge Jurisdiction/Authority and will only appear by Fax or Telephone Conference on the 20thDay of Aug. before Bias Judge John VandeNorth.

Motions by county Attorney Jean Stepan are techinally false as Stepan has willfully failed to read Sharon’s Motions now Attached and Sharon Anderson v. Kathleen Gearin – Google Search

Skip to content

Criminal Section

Conspiracy Against Rights



18 U.S.C. §


241. Section 241 of Title 18 is the civil rights

conspiracy statute. Section 241 makes it

unlawful for two or more persons to agree

together to injure, threaten, or intimidate a

person in any state, territory or district in the

free exercise or enjoyment of any right or

privilege secured to him/her by the

Constitution or the laws of the Unites States,

(or because of his/her having exercised the


Posted in Uncategorized Comments Off

Older Posts »






Posted by at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Search This Blog

Worth Reading Headline Animator

Worth Reading

↑ Grab this Headline Animator