1. THIS XMind map was authorized by China Brown, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT OF Lisa Stinocher O'Hanlon on 2014.08.04
    1. How to use my study maps:
    2. 1
    3. Head over to XMind.net.
    4. 2
    5. Download and install the FREE software.
    6. 3
    7. Now you can download any XMind map you like from my XMind account to your own computer and use it to work your own case. Save the originals in a special folder so that you can start over if you mess up, or share them with a friend or loved one.
    8. 4
    9. Please share my maps as much as possible. You can find them here:
    10. For more AUTHORIZED mind maps visit: https://www.xmind.net/share/hennalady/
    11. http://pinterest.com/thehennalady/
    12. http://hennalady.minus.com/uploads
    13. http://www.scribd.com/AngryJeweler
    14. 5
    15. Please take them to your local copy center and have large versions printed. Now you can deliver them to your local child support agency, or to low income neighborhoods, pin them to your local pub bulletin board; bus stops, the break room at work, AA clubs, your local workhouse, --> wherever!
    16. Distribution copy. This document is copyright free; and is NOT FOR SALE at any cost; VOID WHERE PROHIBITED.
    17. 6
    18. I wanted to tell you -->
    19. that if you download this map and then highlight the title (by clicking on it once) and then hit control + C and then
    20. go to a word processor document like Google docs or OpenOffice and put down your curser and then hit control + V;
    21. All of this work will drop into your document like magic and then you can pick up and start where I left off today after fifteen years of research...
    22. and, you can use MY NOTES http://angryjeweler.wix.com/write
    23. <3 ~ A.J.
  2. RULE 1. SCOPE AND PURPOSE
    1. 1
      1. In the interests of justice & judicial economy...
        1. ALL CIVIL ACTIONS
        2. EXCEPT
        3. RULE 81
        4. (See also:)
        5. (and See also:)
        6. PUBLIC v. PRIVATE
        7. ACTS IN ULTRA VIRES
        8. DEFINITION Latin, meaning "beyond the powers." Describes actions taken by government bodies or corporations that exceed the scope of power given to them by laws or corporate charters. When referring to the acts of government bodies (e.g., legislatures), a constitution is most often the measuring stick of the proper scope of power.
    2. 2
      1. I AM; SPECIAL
      2. 28 U.S. Code § 2072 - Rules of procedure and evidence; power to prescribe
        1. 28 U.S. Code Chapter 131 - RULES OF COURTS
    3. 3
      1. ONE FORM OF ACTION
        1. MERGER
        2. LAW
        3. EQUITY
        4. CIVIL ACTION; ALL CRIMES ARE COMMERCIAL
        5. EXPRESS v. IMPLIED LEGAL v. EQUITABLE RIGHT v. BENEFIT AT LAW v. EQUITY
        6. Historically, courts of equity have had four important characteristics that allow them to operate in ways that would appear illegal or unconstitutional in courts of law. “In Law or Equity”? by Alfred Adask
        7. 1
        8. First, courts of equity have no obligation to recognize legal rights or legal arguments.
        9. 2
        10. Second, they function almost entirely according to the alleged “conscience” and personal discretion (unbridled power) of the judge on a case-by-case basis.
        11. 3
        12. Third, they are the natural court to hear cases based on trusts.
        13. 4
        14. Fourth, they are primarily available to hear the pleas of trust beneficiaries who, by definition, have no legal title and therefore no legal rights to property.
    4. 4
      1. when we assume we are being tried in law, we are actually being administered in equity
        1. UNSUPECTING CONSUMER (assumes he’s being tried in law) would be incensed that the judge ignored his “constitutional arguments”. But if the case were actually being heard in equity, 1) the “defendant” would probably have the legal status of a “beneficiary”; and 2) the only relevant “law” (the “law of the case”) would be the contract or trust indenture under which the defendant/ beneficiary was being “tried”. Until the defendant/beneficiary identified that underlying contract or trust indenture and rendered it void (perhaps for fraud), the defendant/beneficiary would remain in equity where “constitutional rights” are irrelevant and only government “policy” may (or may not) be honored according to the judge’s conscience and personal discretion.
        2. LEGAL STATUS
        3. BENIFICIARY
        4. LAW
        5. LAW OF THE CASE TRUST INDENTURE CONTRACT = AGENCY = LAW
        6. RELIEF
        7. "TRIED"
        8. CHALLENGE
    5. 5
      1. 1938
        1. ABOLISHED THE DISTINCTION
        2. ACTION AT LAW v. SUITS IN EQUITY
      2. FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE
        1. EFFECT
        2. UNIFICATION
        3. CIVIL PROCEDURE
        4. ADMIRALTY PROCEDURE
        5. THERE IS ONE FORM OF ACTION; CIVIL ACTION
      3. 1948
        1. ABOLISHED THE DISTINCTION
        2. CIVIL ACTIONS v. SUITS IN ADMIRALTY
    6. 6
      1. AND ADMINISTERED
        1. AFFIRMATIVE DUTY OF THE COURT
        2. JUSTICE & JUDICIAL ECONOMY
        3. THE "JUDGE" IS NOT THE COURT THE RECORD IS THE COURT
        4. ADMINISTRATOR ADMINISTRATES
      2. RIGHTS FLOW FROM & DEPEND ON TITLE
        1. 11. Rights are also divided into legal and equitable. The former are those where the party has the legal title to a thing, and in that case, his remedy for an infringement of it, is by an action in a court of law. Although the person holding the legal title may have no actual interest, but hold only as trustee, the suit must be in his name, and not in general, in that of the cestui que trust [a trust’s beneficiary] . . . . Equitable rights are those which may be enforced in a court of equity by the cestui que trust.2 LAW. . . law denotes the rule . . . of human action or conduct. In the civil code of Louisiana . . . it is defined to be a solemn expression of the legislative will.”3 . . .
        2. Equitable rights are those which may be enforced in a court of equity by the cestui que trust.
        3. EQUITABLE v. LEGAL TITLE
        4. EQUITABLE v. LEGAL RIGHTS
        5. WITHOUT TITLE; YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS
        6. RIGHT; TITLE; INTEREST
        7. SUPERIOR v. LESSOR
    7. 7
      1. 2007
        1. MERGER IS COMPLETE
        2. AT LAW
        3. IN EQUITY
        4. ADMIRALTY PRACTICE
    8. 8
    9. 9
      1. CIVIL ACTIONS & PROCEEDINGS
      2. RULE 50 JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW IN A JURY TRIAL; RELATED MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL; CONDITIONAL RULING
    10. 10
      1. TO ACHIEVE CLEARER PRESENTATION
    11. 11
      1. USE OF LANGUAGE:
        1. INCONSISTENT
        2. AMBIGUOUS
        3. REDUNDANT
        4. REPETITIVE
        5. ARCHAIC
      2. CONFUSION IS NOT ALLOWED
        1. ALL PARTIES ARE IN AGREEMENT STATEMENT OF STIPULATED FACTS
        2. NO CONTROVERSY; JUDGMENT IS APPROPRIATE
      3. INFANT; MINOR; WARD
        1. SHALL; MUST; MAY; SHOULD
    12. 12
    13. 13
    14. 14
    15. 15
      1. ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS
    16. 16
    17. 17
      1. RULE 65; INJUNCTIONS & RESTRAINING ORDERS
    18. 18
    19. 19
      1. DEMAND FOR THE RELIEF S0UGHT v. RELIEF IN THE ALTERNATIVE
    20. 20
      1. I made two of these because I want you to read that again please, thanks.
    21. 21
      1. F.R.C.P. 16(e) Final Pretrial Conference and Orders. The court may hold a final pretrial conference to formulate a trial plan, including a plan to facilitate the admission of evidence. The conference must be held as close to the start of trial as is reasonable, and must be attended by at least one attorney who will conduct the trial for each party and by any unrepresented party. The court may modify the order issued after a final pretrial conference only to prevent manifest injustice.
        1. RULE 36. REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION