This Blog is set up to assist attorneys responding to various "Debt Elimination", "monetary protester", "money lent", "Modern Money Mechanics", "Mandrake Mechinism", "'The Creature from Jekyll island" and "militia" types of defenses to credit card accounts. Typically these defenses are based upon the Plaintiff not being a holder in due course, failure to prove that the Plaintiff uses "generally accepted accounting principles", the "FDCPA", and Fair Credit Billing Act. As I have time I will post

Tuesday, April 04, 2006

THE ALL CAPS DEFENSE

Idiot Legal Arguments Section Four: "Objections to name printed in block letters (all-caps): US v. Lindbloom (WD Wash unpub 4/16/97) 79 AFTR2d 2578, 97 USTC para 50650; Braun v. Stotts (D Kan unpub 6/19/97) aff�d (10th Cir unpub 2/4/98); Jaeger v. Dubuque County (ND Iowa 1995) 880 F.Supp 640 at 643 ('The court finds Jaeger�s arguments concerning capitalization otherwise specious. The court routinely capitalizes the names of all parties before this court in all matters, civil and criminal, without any regard to their corporate or individual status....'; crank's reference to a law dictionary's definition of 'capitalize' -- as a financial term -- was completely misdirected); Vos v. Boyle (WD Mich unpub 4/11/95); Liebig v. Kelley-Allee (EDNC 1996) 923 F.Supp 778; Boyce v. CIR (9/25/96) TC Memo 1996-439 aff�d (9th Cir 1997) 122 F3d 1069; Smith v. Kitchen (10th Cir 1997) 156 F3d 1025, 97 USTC para 50107; US v. J.F. Heard (ND WV 1996) 952 F.Supp 329; J. Napier v. Jonas (WD Mich unpub 2/10/95); Wacker v. Crow (10th Cir unpub 7/1/99); Rosenheck & Co. Inc. v. US ex rel IRS & Kostich (ND Okla unpub 4/9/97) 79 AFTR2d 2715 (court explicitly found that perp was the same person as his name typed in all-caps and without punctuation); ('claims because his name is in all capital letters on the summons, he is not subject to the summons. ... completely without merit, patently frivolous, and will be rejected without expending any more of this court's resources') Russell v. US (WD Mich 1997) 969 F.Supp 24; US v. Klimek (ED Penn 1997) 952 F.Supp 1100 (tried to refuse all pleadings and court pa"

 
Submit your Resources and Stories! Hit Counter
Web Site Counters