Posted by Common Right Group on November 04, 1997 at 02:21:56:
In Reply to: Citing case law posted by Two Cities on November 04, 1997 at 01:02:22:
: If a case is cited, is all "law" that that case ever touched,
: including the cites within the cited case, incorporated by reference?
: If one does not know, or have time or 'money' to research each
: reference to law within the cite(cite(cite)), and ascertain the seal
: that issued the law as being on the constitutional side, rather than
: the corporate side, does that mean accquiescense to corporate jurisdiction
: by voluntarily invoking the buried law?
: Would it be better (safer) to argue all cases de novo, only referencing
: 'gold' standards, such as the several constitutions, the Bible (which translation), and
: case law with a presumed constitutional content only?
: Any case law past 1861 might thus be suspect?
: The court may give "in camera" recognition to the several constitutions,
: but may pounce on any opportunity for the exercise of public policy.
This is NOT the case of U.S. v. XYZ. This IS the case of Me vs. Them. Now, Mr. Judge and Mr. opposing attorney, if there is a principle of Law hear, I'd like to hear it under the Maxim "Where the reason is the same, the rule should be the same."
The courts' job is to declare the law and to determine the law's applicability to a given set of circumstances/case, not to make the law.
There is a place for Case Law, but don't use it frivolously and don't let the other party use it as a catch-all. Object whenever case law is brought up. Object immediately and strenously. That preserves rights and makes the record for appeal, if necessary.
Post a Followup