From: sharon4anderson@aol.com
To: shari.moore@ci.stpaul.mn.us, ron.guilfoile@ci.stpaul.mn.us
CC: Julie.Kleinschmidt@co.ramsey.mn.us, bob.fletcher@co.ramsey.mn.us, rca@co.ramsey.mn.us, jean.stepan@co.ramsey.mn.us, john.edison@co.ramsey.mn.us, larry.dease@courts.state.mn.us, mark.oswald@co.ramsey.mn.us, fred.grittner@courts.state.mn.us, sue.dosal@courts.state.mn.us, eric.magnuson@courts.state.mn.us
Sent: 12/1/2009 12:20:38 P.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: Fwd: Court Forms mnd.courts.gov,SharonvCitySt.Paul,CoRamsey BudgetChallenge1Dec09LEGAL NOTICE:At all times Material the City of St. Paul has wilfully failed to Answer,THEREFORE: DEFAULT IN THE MILLIONS IS HEREBY TAKEN.Wed. 2Dec09 at the City Council Budget hearings belowCONSPIRACY THEORY WITH JESSE VENTURA on truTV JESSIE THE NEW STEVEN SEGAL.STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURTCOUNTY OF RAMSEY COUNTY COURT
SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICTAFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY FAX RULE 5.05 ELECTRONICALLY
FORM 133. STATEMENT OF THE CASE(IN COURT OF APPEALS)
CASE TITLE: General,Civil,Criminal Eminent Domain,Taxes,Forfeiture,Constitutionality MS 429.061COURT CASE NUMBER:62cv09-1163 (Vandenorth)Reporter(Martinez)
vs.
APPELLATE COURT CASE NUMBER: A09-2031 http://www.sharonagmn2010.blogspot.com/TO Ramsey Co. District Court Clerk: Lynae.Olson Tel: 651-266-8255,FX:266-8263Larry.Dease 2nd Judicial Administrator Tel:651-266-8266FX:266-8278MN Ramsey County - Court Calendars Room 1700, 15 W. Kellogg Blvd, St. Paul, MN 55102
Phone: (651) 266-8300Fred Grittner
State Court Administrator's Office
(651) 296-2474 (phone)
(651) 297-5636 (fax)Sheriff Bob.Fletcher Tel: 651-266-9333 Fax 266-9301Ramsey County Sheriff Law Enforcement Center
425 Grove Street St. Paul, MN 55101RamseyCo.Attorney Susan Gaertner 651-266-3222 Fax:266-3010Ramsey County Attorney 560 RCGC W. 50 W. Kellogg Blvd.St.Paul,MN 55102Rule 24.04 State AG Lori Swanson Tel: 651-296-3353 Fax: 282-2155Office of Minnesota Attorney General Lori Swanson Minnesota Attorney General's Office1400 Bremer Tower 445 Minnesota Street St. Paul, MN 55101 (651) 296-3353
(800) 657-3787 TTY:(651) 297-7206 TTY:(800) 366-4812
Julie Kleindschmidt: Ramsey County Online Ramsey Co. Manager 651-266-8000 Fax 266-8039. Ramsey County Court House 15 W. Kellogg Blvd., Room 250 Saint Paul, MN 55102.Mark Oswald Taxes/Elections Phone:
Ramsey County Elections Home 651-266-2171 651-266-2177 Fax90 West Plato Boulevard, St. Paul, MN Ramsey County Elections P.O. Box 64098 St. Paul, MN 55164-0098Shari Moore St.Paul City Clerk: City of St. Paul, MN - Official Website - City Clerk Contact
Email 310 City Hall 15 Kellogg Blvd., West Saint Paul, MN 55102
Ph: (651) 266-8688 Fx: (651) 266-8574At all times Material,Affiant Sharon Anderson aka Peterson-Chergosky-Scarrella, Attorney Pro Se,Private Attorney General, and as Republican Candidate for State AGdid by Legal Notice perfect service on all of the above. Electronically,pdf format,Blogs,FaxAffiants Affidavit (42) pgs re: 697 Surrey 32.29.22.41.0053_2008 $2,499.52 pg 53APPEAL,STATEMENT OF CASE,2ND NOTICE APPEAL,3RD IFPPETITION DISCRETIONARY REVIEW,CASE LAW'S, BALLOT, VERIFIED AFFIDAVITOF FACTS AND PROBABLE CAUSE,AND SERVICE: MON. 26OCT09 TO THURS 29OCT09.Affiants Service by Fax on all of the Above pgs from 651-776-5835/s/__________________________________________
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 Minnesota,CitySt.Paul,CoRamsey BudgetLIENTues. 1Dec09LEGAL NOTICE TO FRED GRITTNER CLERK,ADMINISTRATOR LARRY DEASE SUE DOSAL Media, Public at LargeAFFIDAVIT OF SHARON SCARRELLA ANDERSON AKA CHERGOSKY-PETERSONFOR TITLE SEARCH'SWhy the State of MN has not kept up with Word or pdf filings of any all documents. re: http://www.mnd.uscourts.gov/LEGAL NOTICE TO CHALLENGE THE CITY ST.PAUL, CO.RAMSEY FINALBUDGET 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 LawyerJohn 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 CountyAttorney 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 55104Dm 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 metwith Answers Cross, since 1974 , current 1/2 million Default Judgment against the City St. Paul Published on File with Risk Manager Ron Guilfolehttp://www.sharon4anderson.wordpress.com/ http://www.taxthemax.blogspot.com/ http://www.sharonagmn2010.blogspot.com/ with POAGood 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 221NW2nd562when current Chief Justice Eric Magnuson was clerk for Decedant Justice Sheran.Sharon4Anderson v. Co. Ramsey Risk Management MN - Google Search
23. 2010 Proposed Budget and Tax Levy. (Public hearing will be held at 6:00 p.m.) 
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.
To view a video on property taxes.
At all times material: the Heinous, Repugnant Deprivation of Affiants 91 Chrysler, Answer CrossComplantAffidavitPrejudice Kathleen Gearin Judge 62cv09-1163 « Sharon4anderson’s Weblog over 20 years is BIZZARE.THEREFORE: PUNITATIVE,COMPENSATORY,TORT DAMAGES IN THE MILLIONS ARE TAKEN..........LIENED ON ALL CITY,COUNTY ASSETS.....
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 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 documentsexpressly forbids its writers from having financial interests in Google SearchBlogItBabe2007 Candidate profile Sharon4Anderson's Legal BlogBriefs Sharon4And
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Sharons Budget Fight A09-2031
Monday, November 30, 2009
REDRESS OF GRIEVANCE - 16TH AMENDMENT NOT RATIFIED Petition - Bill Benson Litigation
REDRESS OF GRIEVANCE - 16TH AMENDMENT NOT RATIFIED Petition - Bill Benson Litigation
Petitioners,
v.
CONGRESS OF THE
UNITED STATES,
Respondents.
Come now the below signatories, representing the People of the United States, who hereby Petition the Congress of the United States for redress of grievance, and demand Congress commence an investigation into the fraudulent ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment, and issue a resolution declaring the Sixteenth Amendment to be null and void, ab initio, in that less than the required number of States voted to ratify same, in violation of U.S. Const. art. V.
(fields marked with * are required)
E-mail: jdlaw1 at wi.rr.com
Full details of the Benson litigation is available here: jeffdickstein.com
Powered by iPetitions - start your online petition now
REDRESS OF GRIEVANCE - 16TH AMENDMENT NOT RATIFIED
The petition
IN THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS
In Re:
WE THE PEOPLE,Petitioners,
v.
CONGRESS OF THE
UNITED STATES,
Respondents.
PETITION FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCE
The Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States was not Ratified in Accordance with the Provisions of U.S. Const. art. V, and is Null and Void
DEMAND FOR INVESTIGATIVE HEARING
DEMAND FOR RESOLUTION OF NULLIFICATION
Come now the below signatories, representing the People of the United States, who hereby Petition the Congress of the United States for redress of grievance, and demand Congress commence an investigation into the fraudulent ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment, and issue a resolution declaring the Sixteenth Amendment to be null and void, ab initio, in that less than the required number of States voted to ratify same, in violation of U.S. Const. art. V.
WHEREAS, U.S. Const. art. V requires proposed amendments to the Constitution of the United States must be ratified by three-fourths of the States then in the Union; and
WHEREAS, the States are without jurisdiction to alter or amend the language of a constitutional amendment proposed by Congress (see Ames, The Proposed Amendments to the Constitution of The United States, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1886, at 294 (Vol. II, Gov. Printing Office (1897); Amending the Federal Constitution-Procedures of the General Services Administration and of the State Legislatures, Report No. 80-89 A 731/77 at 8, Congressional Research Service (April 18, 1980); Memo from the Office of the United States Solicitor to Secretary of State Knox (Feb. 15, 1913)(on file with the National Archives), and
WHEREAS, at all times relevant hereto, Revised Statute 205 imposed an administrative duty on Secretary of State Knox to review the "official notices" received at the Department of State to insure the proposed Sixteenth Amendment had been adopted, according to the provisions of the Constitution; and
WHEREAS, the States submitted their "official notice" of their respective action in the form of enrolled resolutions, duly signed by the appropriate officers of the houses of each State's Legislature; and
WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court has held that such duly enrolled resolutions constitute the official authentication of the action of the respective houses of legislative bodies, which are conclusive as a matter of law (see Field v. Clark, 143 U.S. 649 (1892); Lesser v. Garnett, 258 U.S. 130 (1922); and Coleman v. Miller, 307 U.S. 433 (1939)); and
WHEREAS, the "official notices" received at the Department of State show on their face that what the States ratified is different from what Congress proposed; and
WHEREAS, Secretary of State Knox knew there were differences, and
WHEREAS, Secretary of State Knox obtained an opinion from the Solicitor of the United States; and
WHEREAS, the Solicitor acknowledged States have no jurisdiction to alter the language proposed by Congress; and
WHEREAS, the Solicitor relied upon a presumption that the States did not intentionally modify the language of the proposed Sixteenth Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the Solicitor relied upon a presumption that the changes in the enrolled resolutions were merely typographical errors; and
WHEREAS, in 1984 William J. Benson went to the capitols of all forty-eight States then in the Union in 1913; and
WHEREAS, William J. Benson obtained certified copies of the Legislative Journals from all forty-eight States, and
WHEREAS William J. Benson also traveled to the Offices of the National Archives in Washington, D.C. and obtained certified copies of the State Department documents; and
WHEREAS, the certified documents conclusively establish that the presumptions relied upon by Secretary of State Knox and the Solicitor are false because States, in fact, intentionally amended the language of the amendment proposed by Congress; and
WHEREAS, subtracting those States from the official tally of the States that voted to ratify the proposed Sixteenth Amendment in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution, less than the constitutionally required number of States ratified the proposed Sixteenth Amendment; and
WHEREAS, only four States voted to ratify the proposed Sixteenth Amendment according to the provisions of the Constitution, and;
WHEREAS, in numerous federal District Court and Court of Appeals cases the federal judiciary has refused to look at the certified documents contending the issue of the ratification of a proposed constitutional amendment is a "political question" for Congress; and
WHEREAS, in the absence of the ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment, the federal income tax found at Title 26, United States Code, is a non-apportioned direct tax which violates the taxing provisions of the United States Constitution (see Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Company, 157 U.S. 429, aff. Reh., 158 U.S. 601 (1895));
NOW THEREFORE, the People of the United States demand the United States Congress conduct an investigation into the above allegations, and thereafter, being satisfied the declaration of ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment by Secretary of State Knox is fraudulent, and that less than thirty-six States voted to ratify the proposed Sixteenth Amendment according to the provisions of the Constitution, issue its resolution declaring the Sixteenth Amendment null and void ab initio.
Prepared this 23rd day of October, 2009 by:
JEFFREY A. DICKSTEIN
Attorney at Law
500 W. Bradley Rd., C-208
Fox Point, WI 53217
(414) 446-4264
jdlaw1@wi.rr.com
Sign the petition
 |
Petition sponsor
This Petition for Redress of Grievance was prepared by Jeffrey A. Dickstein, Attorney at Law, 500 W. Bradley Rd., C-208, Fox Point, WI 53217.E-mail: jdlaw1 at wi.rr.com
Full details of the Benson litigation is available here: jeffdickstein.com
Links
To send e-mails to local and national newspapers, radio stations and TV stations, and to learn more about the Crisis in America, visit FightBackNow.us
The views expressed in this petition are solely those of the petition's sponsor and do not in any way reflect the views of iPetitions. iPetitions is solely a provider of technical services to the petition sponsor and cannot be held liable for any damages or injury or other harm arising from this petition. In the event no adequate sponsor is named, iPetitions will consider the individual account holder with which the petition was created as the lawful sponsor.
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Reporter NancyLazaryan A09-1115_Line Drawn in Sand
REPORTER NANCY LAZARYAN - CNN iReport
Sun.29Nov09
To Reporters Bill Salisbury and Eric Black et al
MINNESOTA MALICE
Affiant Sharon Anderson Attorney Pro Se, Candidate Municipal and Supreme Court Justice In re: Scarrella4AssocJustice 221NW2nd562
Blogger: Dashboard Growning old with you Guys: However in this High Tech Age, The Courts
have Blantantly Discriminated against any/all Attorney Pro Se's
By the Grace of God, Turbulence of Nature, On the Graves of Tenants in Common
Intestate Decedants , We the Citizenery must make the Courts Accountable that is why POA is online in the event of Deaths? http://www.sharonanderson.org/
With Great Respect for Nancy Lazaryan,and others , Affiant has tracked their Cases
as seen below Affiant as Whistleblower, Protected Class, Senior, are requesting
the Media to pick up on Accountability of the Courts,City,Counts.
AffidavitPrejudice Kathleen Gearin Judge as well as others: Henous Conflicts of Judges on the SCAP Panel
Click here: C-Track - Public Site
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 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 Managment 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
 |
| |||||||||||
 |  | |||||||||||
|  | |||||||||||
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 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 Managment 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
Saturday, November 21, 2009
SharonsAppealA09-2031
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Monday, November 16, 2009
We the People Continental Congress 2009
| ||||||||||||
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
