PatriciaWickMoore

Пікірлер

@ScottStOnge 3 күн бұрын

Thank you for your work and service to bring awareness to legality and keep the conversation going for the populous. A very important ignorance that needs to be bridged.

@ScottStOnge 3 күн бұрын

Contact equals contract whether implied or expressed.

@ScottStOnge 3 күн бұрын

Please discuss the "Color Of Law" How civil procedures are distorted as law. Appearing as law under "The Color Law"

@ScottStOnge 3 күн бұрын

Why emphasize citation of case law when case law is commmon law and common law is not civil law or procedure. Statutes and codes are fundamental to rules and procedures. The contract. The agreement. Civil procedure ramrods its way past common law to establish the contact and contract and get the money. Common law doesn't enter in until dues have been paid and the STATES have extracted significant time and resource from the person willing to pursue "THE LAW" Due process is not synonymous with statues and codes.

@ScottStOnge 3 күн бұрын

Lets keep in mind these are rules and statutes they are not laws, they are contractual arrangements that if you abide by the rules you agree to the contractual arrangement. Implied consent is how these things work. "Here, come and play in our court. These are the rules of the game" "We are serving you"

@ScottStOnge 3 күн бұрын

Im pursuing this long arm statute under interstate commerce rules and procedures. I think it falls well within the legal ramifications of contractual jurisdiction.

@cjkaz7974 20 күн бұрын

Just a little after Christmas, I was talking to my Grandma and I saw this book on her shelf that really stuck out to me. That book was actually one of the Pope Cookbooks. I asked her about it and turns out that François Pope is her uncle, making this guy my second cousin? Something like that. I've been gathering some of these books and trying to get the ingredients to cook for my loving grandma. It's interesting to learn about these things.

@LuisAlvarez-kr8bj 2 ай бұрын

Thank you so much! the flow chart was very helpful!

@jocelynbey5944 Жыл бұрын

I'd love to see the next video, but cant find it. It certainly *seems* that 1331 gives Fed Distrirct Courts jurisdiction over all (or almost all) Constitutional or USC federal law issues, but it seems that Mottley very much limits the scope of Fed District Court jurisdiction. .... I did find discussion of Mottley in the 2nd half of the 2 week review. kzbin.info/www/bejne/nGnEoXeEateDZpI

@joed5343 2 жыл бұрын

Have been making this recipe for more than 50 years and my parents for another 25 years. Thanks for sharing this.

@RiseofTheRepublic1776 2 жыл бұрын

You should define "person" and how a statute would apply to men/women as defendant who have not violated anyones rights or caused injury.

@ScottStOnge 3 күн бұрын

They can't define that too much otherwise they would incriminate themselves.

@brandonharvey7939 2 жыл бұрын

So how did the court assume the power of judicial review without a legislative statute? Seems awfully convenient that the court can assume powers on a whim but when it comes to fulfilling it's constitutional obligations and protecting the rights of the People, suddenly there's strict procedures and stipulations that must be met, which the Constitution makes no mention or implication of. There's a profound difference between interpreting the Constitution and making it up as it pleases the court. This interpretation implies that when the first Federal Courts were created by the Constitution, the courts had absolutely no jurisdiction over anything whatsoever because the Congress established under the US Constitution had not yet convened and passed legislation under the authority of the United States Constitution, which also implies that the entirety of Article VI is a complete nullity without any meaningful purpose. We the People gave the Judiciary life, power, and purpose, not Congress.

@brandonharvey7939 2 жыл бұрын

where has everyone drawn the conclusion that States have broad subject matter jurisdiction? The same provision if the US Constitution that limits the Federal Judiciary's jurisdiction, Amendment x, also limits the jurisdiction of the States "respectively" and reserves to, for and by the People jurisdiction over that which has not been explicitly delegated to either the Federal or their respective State governments. Neither the Federal government, nor State government. have the power to decide which of the People's sovereign powers must be delegated to government and which may be retained by the People. In so doing, a State ceases to be a Republic.

@dbgraner 3 жыл бұрын

Excellent

@liamsheridan9334 3 жыл бұрын

These videos are so helpful! Wish you had them on every subject in Civ Pro. Thank you!

@christinecoles9701 3 жыл бұрын

Thank you! solidified my understanding!

@garywilliamowski6814 3 жыл бұрын

Smart women is hard to fine are you married

@garywilliamowski6814 3 жыл бұрын

What if the person move every two year’s

@garywilliamowski6814 3 жыл бұрын

I like you video but you need to talk faster

@allwaysman4378 4 жыл бұрын

or You all can grow up and act as Man. Who does not require another Man to tell him what his constitution should be, there for maintaining Man's Authority over Government, Effectively establishing original God Given Freedom and eliminating ALL jurismydicktion crap all together.

@Colgate64 4 жыл бұрын

Brilliant legal analysis. I'm surprised the Supreme Court hasn't taken it up.

@christinajane7311 3 жыл бұрын

Leave and tuck in a private trust moving to the free-est state constitutions or another country’s state constitution. They’re losing grip and will face Nuremberg Style Trials in every community around the world and lose those secret trusts. 😂

@lindacinader1241 4 жыл бұрын

I am the daughter of Frank Pope who died in May. Today he would of been 94.

@Coffeeists 4 жыл бұрын

Wow, I've been hoping to find one of the Popes making one of the family recipes. This is a dream come true!

@Stackstackblahblah 4 жыл бұрын

Prof. WickMoore is the MVP of CA Bar Prep this year. Thank you!!!

@lorenzolenchorodriguezjr4746 4 жыл бұрын

The "act" or acting of a fairy tale character called a "defendant". I really don't do acting nor am I a fairy tale character. 👈👀🧐 Nor do I understand the jurisdiction and or authority of the corporate special maritime jurisdiction because I am a natural living man from the texas republic with un-a-lien-able rights as protected by the Constitution for the united States.

@Colgate64 4 жыл бұрын

And to top it off, you're an idiot.

@lorenzolenchorodriguezjr4746 4 жыл бұрын

@@Colgate64, "top it off" 😆 what are you doing? Putting the icing on a cake? 😆 owwwe I'm an "idiot". My feelings! I'm a sensitive "person" 😆 I swear some people are lame as f**k bro.

@Colgate64 4 жыл бұрын

@@lorenzolenchorodriguezjr4746 None are so lame as those who don't understand a thing about the legal system and pretand that they do.

@lorenzolenchorodriguezjr4746 4 жыл бұрын

@@Colgate64 , you stay right where you're at and stay understanding all that leven filled tacit agreement crapola special maritime jurisdiction and proven to be a fraud by non disclosure and deception. I'll stay overstanding as a king, grantor, Inhabitant on the land commonly known as the texas republic and American National. You can stay in phatasia where u can "do as thy will" and then suffer probably the worst consequences u can't even begin to imagine. Hey you submissive Citizen subject of the territorial and jurisdiction of the United States Corporation aka Washington DC which most people don't realize is actually foreign to the several states landmasses, the republic established by We the People. Later debtor

@Colgate64 4 жыл бұрын

There is no such thing. As you'll discover the day you get ticketed.

@user-bo6ks9yv9u 4 жыл бұрын

put the speed on 1.25 - 1.50 thank me later

@Otis-Tank Жыл бұрын

I'm gonna thank you only 1 minute into this video. 1.5 times.

@wer113 5 жыл бұрын

And where did the $70,000 amount come from? And do you believe that it is usurping the 7th amendment of the constitution?

@wer113 5 жыл бұрын

Hello! Can a defendant request a jury trial in this 28 USC 1441 removal in a fed court? Thank you!

@anniethomas9731 5 жыл бұрын

Thank you so so so much. Super helpful!!!!!

@joro2743 5 жыл бұрын

Devices/methodologies/techniques/tools for Discovery: DISCOVERY 1. Request for Documents 2. Request for Admissions 3. Depositions 4. Written Interrogatories 5. Examinations by Expert Witness (ie. by Medical Examiner)

@KhadijahMichelle 5 жыл бұрын

Thank you, this video has been extremely helpful

@wolfie13s 5 жыл бұрын

What is the difference between a defendant being regarded as an "Individual" and "en Propria Persona?"

@tajaicalip3825 5 жыл бұрын

Most Judges speak in this professional manner. They do not speak like Presiding Judge Wynn Carvill and his Clerk Yolanda Estrada's speaks. I have every right to question the competency of these People who allowed Trespassers to enter my home and tried to put a wrong name on my home in a wrong jurisdiction Court. This is the kinds of questions the Judges asks. They make sure we are where we are supposed to be. They do not hold us in limbo or play with our lives after we won our case by complying to another jurisdiction that had our case. The Judge does nkt let the oppising side that did not comply use their wrong jurisdiction Court as proof that they receive an unlawful eviction and that eviction is upheld by the original jurisdiction. The opposing side cannot use anything from the wrong jurisdiction Court to receive any kinds of justices from the original jurisdiction. This case was not complex. It was corrupted and intentional fraud. The Judge do not accept the opposing side to come to their jurisdiction because they did not comply to the first jurisdiction. The Renee C. Davidson Court actions committed for prosecution does not start ordering me around and slandering my name because they wronged my Family and I without authority and jurisdiction. A dismissal was to be granted in the wrong jurisdiction Court. Instead these annoying petty People kept playing with my life over and over again. The damages that their actions caused is enough for them to be permanently removed from this field. No excuses.

@fanzyp3099 5 жыл бұрын

I cant listen to this she is too low and boring extremely boring Lord have mercy on her students

@doughelms558 6 жыл бұрын

Loved the tv show from the '50's. (What was that Chopin piece they used as the theme song?)

@laborstrong 6 жыл бұрын

Excellent teaching style. Great content.

@humancapital2982 6 жыл бұрын

Have to comply...? Is that not a contract forced under duress? RESPECT THE RULE OF LAW OR GO TO HELL !!

@humancapital2982 6 жыл бұрын

If a man fails to respond it's because he does not consent or want to enter into contract with the for profit foreign courts that lack the jurisdiction required to enter into contract with innocent men and women!

@humancapital2982 6 жыл бұрын

Corrupt corporate criminals for profit courts benifiting off the pain and suffering of human beings.... creating fraudulent jurisdiction over intelligent human beings that are awake and aware of just how evil and corrupt the foriegn crown corporations truly are! All personal corporate entities have been created under duress without a meeting of the minds or consent making all corporate NAMES under contract null and void... Now why not understand and respect the laws of contract and stop harassing innocent men and women who don't want to act in your for profit courts as there's a conflict of interest as you continue to remove the integrity of a once equal and just hearing under the rule of law not under the interest of corporate profits so practice the law respect inalienable rights of non consent.... All you corrupt criminals need a hole in the head ... If a man or women does not consent they do not consent ENOUGH SAID... Yet you don't wish to respect the rule law or inherent human rights.... NOW GO FUCKING DIE ... !!

@billf.rights2300 6 жыл бұрын

great job!

@Casmo1407 7 жыл бұрын

What a treasure! Pope's Caesar Salad has been a family favorite for decades and by which all others are compared!

@gaychiappetta5817 Жыл бұрын

Same here! I can't tell you how many times I've given the recipe to people!

@quentinmitchell225 7 жыл бұрын

So I'm guessing that she's trying to tell us the U.S. Supreme Court's opinion supersedes the Constitution of America? In that case, whats the point of having or abiding by the Constitution

@fiddletown2002 5 жыл бұрын

As the Supreme Court said over 200 years ago in Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803), at 177 -- 178: "...If an act of the legislature, repugnant to the constitution, is void, does it, notwithstanding its invalidity, bind the courts, and oblige them to give it effect? Or, in other words, though it be not law, does it constitute a rule as operative as if it was a law? This would be to overthrow in fact what was established in theory; and would seem, at first view, an absurdity too gross to be insisted on. It shall, however, receive a more attentive consideration. It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases, must of necessity expound and interpret that rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must decide on the operation of each...." However, that doesn't answer who decides whether a law is unconstitutional. And it isn't you. Your opinion on the question is meaningless; no one cares what you think. So who does decide? The Founding Fathers in the Constitution assign the authority to decide questions regarding the meaning and application of the Constitution to the federal courts (Article III, Sections 1 and 2): "Section 1. The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.... Section 2. The Judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution,..." Many of the Founding Fathers were lawyers and understood what judicial power (www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-3/section-1/judicial-power# ) was. In fact, of the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence, 25 were lawyers: and of the 55 framers of the Constitution, 32 were lawyers. The Supreme Court has also ruled (see Brown v. State of Maryland, 25 U.S. 419 (1827) and U.S. v Morrison, 529 U.S. 598 (2000)) that a statute is presumed constitutional and is valid and enforceable unless/until it is found unconstitutional by a proper court.

@citygalmelanieproductions1431 Жыл бұрын

BAR Members will be held liable for crimes against humanity

@KentBey 7 жыл бұрын

Interesting .........

@flashpoint90 8 жыл бұрын

Hi, I am from Croatia and I'm doing my thesis which is forum non conveniens and this REALLY helps to understand it for someone who comes from civil-law country! Thank you !!

@PatriciaWickMoore 7 жыл бұрын

Glad it helped and good luck with your thesis.