10 nu 2 a3 ue 18 16 n 1e 1 20 a 22 23 24 25 26 21 28 29 30 ‘LUIS A. DEL MAZO PO BOX 160891 NASHVILLE, TN 37216 LUIS.DELMAZO@YAHOO.COM 615-543-6587 (PHONE) LUIS A. DEL MAZO, JR. pro se , DECLARENT vs. STATE OF TENNESSEE CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES OF TENNESSEE / A.K.A DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES LISA COWEN, Esq. DAPHANE DAVIDSON, Esq. PHILLIP ROBINSON, Esq. RESPONDANTS NOTICE OF VERIFIED AFFIDAVIT OF ADMINISTRATIVE CLAIM DECLARENT Luis A. del Mazo is a resident and citizen of Nashville, TN and is a competent man of sound mind and herby acknowledges the following statements made to be true and comrect, ‘NOTICE: THIS CLAIM/COMPLAINT IS NOT INTENDED TO THREATEN, HARASS, HINDER OR OBSTRUCT ANY LAWFUL OPERATIONS. IT IS FOR THE PURPOSES OF OBTAINING LAWFUL REMEDY AS IS PROVIDED BY LAW. AFFIDAVIT OF TRUTH eS10 aL a u a5 16 ru 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 21 2a 29 30 1. JURISDICTION T.C.A. 9-8-307, Jurisdiction — Claims — Waiver of actions — Standard for tort liability— Damages — Immunities — Definitions — Transfer of claims. — (@ (1) The commission or each commissioner sitting individually has exclusive jurisdiction to determine all monetary claims against the state based on the acts or omissions of “state employees,” as defined in § 8-42-101(3), falling within one (1) or more of the following categories: (@ The state will be liable for actual damages only. No award shall be made unless the facts found by the commission would entitle the claimant to a judgment in an action at law if the state had been a private individual. ‘QN) Negligent deprivation of statutory rights created under Tennessee law, except for actions arising out of claims over which the civil service commission has jurisdiction. The claimant must prove under this subdivision (a)(1)(N) that the general assembly expressly conferred a private right of action in favor of the claimant against the state for the state's violation of the particular statute's provisions; (S) (i) Claims for compensation filed under the Criminal Injuries Compensation Act, compiled in title 29, chapter 13, and § 40-24-107. Claims filed pursuant to this subdivision (@)(1)(S) shall be determined in accordance with the provisions of title 29, chapter 13.(ii) [Notwithstanding the provisions of title 29, chapter 13, to the contrary, the claims commission has exclusive jurisdiction to determine all claims filed for compensation under the Criminal Injuries Compensation Act in accordance with the provisions of title 29, chapter 13; provided, AFFIDAVIT OF TROTH 210 u 2 as Fry 15 16 a 18 as 20 an 22 23 24 25 26 21 28 29 30 that this exclusive jurisdiction shall apply only to claims for compensation filed on or after January 1, 1987. At the request of the claimant and with the consent of the court, any claim filed prior to January 1, 1987, may be transferred to the claims commission for determination of the claim; (V) Unconstitutional taking of private property, as defined in § 12-1-202, including intentional state governmental action resulting in a taking other than the taking of real property and real property rights for the state's system of highways or the state's system of interstate highways; 2010 Tennessee Code Title 39 - Criminal Offenses Chapter 16 - Offenses Against Administration of Government Part 4 - Misconduct Involving Public Officials and Employees 39-16-402, 39-16-401 - Official misconduct, 39-16-401. Definitions for public misconduct offenses. As used in this part, unless the context otherwise requires: (1) “Act” means a bodily movement, whether voluntary or involuntary, and includes speech; @) “Law” means the constitution or a statute of this state or of the United States, a written opinion of a court of record, a municipal ordinance, or a rule authorized by and lawfully adopted under a statute; and AEFIDAVIT OF TRUTH a10 a a u as 16 u Fry 19 20 aa 22 23 24 25 26 a1 28 28 30 (@) “Public servant” means a person elected, selected, appointed, employed, or otherwise designated as one (1) of the following even if the public servant has not yet qualified for office or assumed the duties: (A) An officer, employee, or agent of government; (B) A juror or grand juror; (© An arbitrator, referee, or other person who is authorized by law or private written ‘agreement to hear or determine a cause or controversy; (®) An attomey at law or notary public when participating in performing a governmental function; (©) A candidate for nomination or election to public office; or (®) A person who is performing a governmental function under claim of right although not legally qualified to do so. 39-16-402. Official misconduct. (@) A public servant commits an offense who, with intent to obtain a benefit or to harm another, intentionally or knowingly: (@) Commits an act relating to the servant's office or employment that constitutes an unauthorized exercise of official power; ABFIDAVIT OF TRUTH10 a 2 a a 15 16 re ae 19 20 an 22 23 24 25 26 an 28 29 20 @) Commits an act under color of office or employment that exceeds the servant's official power; @) Refiains from performing a duty that is imposed by law or that is clearly inherent in the nature of the public servant's office or employment; @) Violates a law relating to the public servant's office or employment; or () Receives any benefit not otherwise authorized by law. (b) For purposes of subdivision (a)(2), a public servant commits an act under color of office ‘or employment who acts or purports to act in an official capacity or takes advantage of the actual or purported capacity. (©) It is a defense to prosecution for this offense that the benefit involved was a trivial benefit incidental to personal, professional or business contact, and involved no substantial risk of undermining official impartiality. (@ An offense under this section is a Class E felony. (© Charges for official misconduct may be brought only by indictment, presentment or criminal information; provided, that nothing in this section shall deny a person from pursuing other criminal changes by affidavit of complaint. stan tennessee/201 O/title-39/chay AFFIDAVIT OF TRUTH aa0 a a a3 aa 18 16 uv 1s 13 20 aa 22 23 24 25 26 a 28 29 20 42, US. Code § 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights - Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer's judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia. 18 USC § 241 - Conspiracy against rights — If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Tertitory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the ‘same; o If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, ‘ith intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; ‘and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death, AFPIDAVIT OF TRUTH10 nu 12 a3 a4 18 16 a 18 as 20 a 22 23 24 25 26 2 28 29 30 IL. PARTIES 1.) DECLARENT, Luis A. del Mazo, Jr., being a citizen of the State of Tennessee and at all times relevant hereto and residing and doing business in Nashville Davidson County. 2.) RESPONDANT State of Tennessee is a municipal entity chartered and doing business in Davidson County. The State of Tennessee operates Judicial process including judicial services at Davison County courthouses; creates and implements judicial policies, customs, and practices administered by judicial officers, administrators, and staff; and provides professional legal services and advice to the citizens of Davidson County, including services related to the practice of ‘family law"— divorce and paternity, custody and visitation, child support, domestic violence, restraining orders, self-help services, frequently asked questions, form selection and advice, and public information. The State of Tennessee are also the recipients of Title IV-D funding under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. §§ 651-669), specifically 42 U.S.C. § 667 and 45 CFR. § 302.56 and at all times relevant hereto, 3.) RESPONDANT Child Support Services of Tennessee Also known as the Department of Human Services, working in conjunction and Collusion with the State of Tennessee and operates in the enforcement of Collection of child support. The mission of Child Support Services is to increase the reliability of child support paid by parents when they live apart from their children. Title IV-D of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. §§ 651-669), specifically 42 U.S.C. § 667 and 45 C.E.R. § 302.56, requires that states establish guidelines for setting and Modifying child support award amounts in each state based on employment and income. Tennessee Code Annotated §§ 36-5-101(e), 71-1-105(15), and 71-1-132 AFFIDAVIT OF TRUTH a10 uu a 13 u 15 16 uv 18 19 20 aa 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 implement these requirements and direct the Tennessee Department of Human Services to establish those guidelines to enforce the provisions of federal law. 4.) RESPONDANT Lisa Cowen is an authorized representative for the State of Tennessee and Department of Human Services of Tennessee and at all times relevant herein. She exercised “day-to-day oversight and administrative management” of the Child Support Law office, operations, services, personnel, paperwork therein, and receives all compensation from the State of Tennessee and also a member of the Tennessee B.A.R. association. 5.) RESPONDANT Daphne Davidson is an authorized representative and attomey for the State of Tennessee and Employee of Department of Human Services of Tennessee and at all times relevant hereto, She wrote and signed unverified sworn affidavit alleging Nonpayment of Child support. RESPONDANT receives all compensation from the State of Tennessee and is also a member of the Tennessee state B.A.R. Association. 6.) RESPONDANT Judge Phillip Robinson an Employee for the State of Tennessee and the ‘Municipal Corporation. In such capacity oversees, administers, prepares, and implements all policies, practices, procedures, and operations of all Third District Division operations, ‘including oversight and control of the operation of the family law facilitators’ offices, procedures, policies, forms, and personnel. He is an elected official by the citizens of Davidson County, receives all compensation from the State of Tennessee and also a member of the Tennessee's state BAR Association. AEFTDAVIT OF TRUTH -8-10 u 2 13 “4 a5 16 un 18 a9 20 aa 22 23 a 26 21 28 29 30 UL. BACKGROUND 7.) On September 4, 2012 a final divorce decree was entered and granted to the DECLARENT, Luis A. del Mazo. 8.) DECLARENT, Luis A. del Mazo, Jr. was not present at time of hearing, 9.) Income and days child would be with parent were imputed and calculation based on desired amount for Ashlee R. del Mazo. 10.) Luis A. del Mazo, Jr. continued to pay Ashlee R. del Mazo directly rather than through child support services as evident in Affidavit of direct payments. 11.) DECLARENT questioned amount needed to be sent to child support services of ‘Tennessee as nothing in the Divorce decree stated Declarant was obligated to pay alimony to ‘DHS and/or its affiliates. 12.) On May 21%, 2013 Luis A. del Mazo sent certified mail # 7012 1010 0002 3564 2479 to Child Support Services of Tennessee at 220 Athens Way, Suite 500, Nashville, TN 37228 ‘with a request for a Validation of the debt they alleged DECLARANT owed and for a ‘modification of the calculated amount based on actual income, Affidavit of direct payments to Ashlee del Mazo and days spent with children as Thomas Elijah del Mazo had been living and Residing with DECLARANT. 13.) DECLARANTS Real Estate Licenses was revoked keeping DECLARANT from earning Income and paying ordered Child Support. DECLARANT Lost over 38,600.00 in earnable commission at the time of revocation and has not been able to recuperate those loses. APEIDAVIT OF TRUTH -9-10 a 2 3 1 a5 16 nv a8 as 20 a 22 23 24 25 26 2 28 23 30 14,) The RESPONDANTS continued to deny request for modification despite revoking his ability to eam a living and instead of lowering monthly payment increased monthly payments. 15.) DECLARENT filed for Affidavit of Indigence on June 13, 2014 and modification of support on June 14,2013 16.) RESPONDANTS filed a Petition for contempt on July 17, 2013 even though DECLARANT provided proof of income and affidavit of direct payments 17.) DECLARANT filed Verified affidavit of support along with exhibit was filed with the ‘court clerk on August 20, 2013. 18.) DECLARANT filed a Motion for Final Default in reference to his willful unemployment and alleged contempt violation with county clerk on September 5, 2013. Final default, writ of Praecipe, and Writ of mandamus was filed on September 13,2013, 19.) RESPONDANTS failed to respond and defaulted under Tennessee Rules of Civil procedure 55(a) (b). 20.) DECLARANT was denied due process and equal protection under the law as guaranteed by Article 14 of the US Constitution and Article 1 sections 18, 35, 7, 8,9, 1,2 of the Constitution of the State of Tennessee. 21,) alleged complaint was not verified by a third party witness but written, endorsed and ‘contrived by RESPONDANT Daphne Davidson despite knowing an affidavit of direct child support payments had been filed with the Davidson County court clerk and at no time prior to ABFIDAVIT OF TRUTH -10-10 n 12 a3 u“ 15 16 uv ae 19 20 a 2 23 2 25 26 2 28 23 30 reversed or amended her complaint to reflect the Evidence weather done maliciously or Negligently.. 22.) RESPONDANTS failed to establish jurisdiction and state a claim for which relief could be granted or bring forth a Claimant as required in Article V1 (confrontation clause) of the constitution or witness to the fraudulent complaint as guaranteed by the constitution of the State of Tennessee Article 1 Section 9 “to demand the nature and cause of the accusation ‘against him, and to have a copy thereof, to meet the witnesses face to face...” 23.) RESPONDANTS have intentionally deprived and denied DECLARANT due process and ‘equal protection under the law and in fact obstructed justice under the color of law. 24.) DECLARENT was held in civil contempt for an unverified alleged debt and unlawfully detained FLAGRANTLY Violating DECLARANTS Article 1 Section 18 of Tennessee State constitutional rights. Furthermore DECLARANT had an Appeal in place and had made several requests and entered into the record Pursuant to Rule 62 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil procedure and gave notice to RESPONDANT of DECLARANTS Right to a stay and injunctive relief pending appeal as related in Tennessee Rules of Civil procedure Rule 62.04. 7 CLAIM 25, On February 10, 2014 DECLARENT was kidnapped, detained and held against his will for an alleged Civil Child Support contempt violation on an unverified, fraudulent, and false complaint based on conjecture, speculation and Hearsay, with no witness or claimant present and whose United States Article 6 and Tennessee State Constitutional rights, Article 1 Section 18 were flagrantly violated. AFFIDAVIT OF TROTH aas 20 a 22 23 24 25 26 a 28 29 30 26. DECLARANT filed an affidavit of direct Child support payments to Ashlee del mazo ‘on August 8, 2013 for a total of 8,627.87. This was verified and validated proof That DECLARENT was not in fact in contempt but had been paying his support directly to Ashlee del Mazo and therefor the RESPONDANTS had no actual Verified or Validated Complaint and in Fact it was RESPONDANTS Daphne Davidson and Lisa ‘Cowen who were in contempt and committed perjury for continuing to support an unverified and fraudulent complaint with no witness to endorse or verify. 27. On August 20, 2013 DECLARENT filled motion to quash, vacate and set aside order of RESPONDANTS complaint that DECLARENT was willfully unemployed and alleged that DECLARENT was not paying child support. In fact the Reduction in income was due and as a direct result of Child Support Services of Tennessee A.K.A Depart of Human services revoking DECLARENTS Real Estate License and his ability to eam the income demanded and Ordered by the State of Tennessee and affiliated RESPONDANTS. 28, DECLARENT entered a Notice of Default on September 5, 2013 and Final Default on ‘September 13, 2013 on RESPONDANTS allegations for Contempt and lack of proof for alleged complaint filed by the RESPONDANTS Daphne AND Lisa Cowen, and heard by RESPONDANT Judge Phillip Robinson for the State of Tennessee who pledged and took an oath of office to up hold DECLARENTs State and Constitutional Rights. 29, DECLARENT Filed for an Appeal on August 8, 2013 and filed a Notice of Appeal and Application for stay of lower court proceedings on October 18,2013 and was denied equal protection and Due process of the laws by denying the automatic stay on AFFIDAVIT OF TRUTH n12-10 rr a2 a3 4 15 16 a 18 as 20 aa 22 2a 2 25 26 21 28 29 30 appeal as required by LAW and STATUTE (Tennessee Rules of Civil procedure Rule 62.04). 30.) DECLARANTS constitutional rights of the state of Tennessee Article 1, sections 6- 18 were flagrantly violated and disregarded. 31.) DECLARANT was denied due process and equal protection of the law, was harassed, and unconstitutionally arrested and detained for a Civil debt by RESPONDANTS, resulting in trespass of DECLARANTS Person, deprivation DECLARANTS liberty and rights causing irreparable and monetary damages by Revoking DECLARANTS Real Estate License and ability to Eam an income Required to pay what the State of Tennessee Ordered DECLARANT to pay. - Count 1 Illegal Search, Seizure, Assault, Battery, False Arrest, and Imprisonment Deprivation of Constitutional Rights Under Color of State Law 42 US.C. 1983 US. Const. Ist, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 14th Amend 2 million dollars per count per person 32.) RESPONDANTS in have Used, attempted, and threatened use of force CULPABLY and UNREASONBLY (to be defined as “without due care, in breach of duty without provocation, justification, defense, privilege or immunity, and in an ‘unjustified and excessive manner”); Terrorized, seized, detained, restrained, arrested, imprisoned, assaulted ,searched, injured, cruelly and unusually punished, harassed, AFFIDAVIT OF TRUTH ws10 cry 2 Fey Fay a5 16 uv 18 a9 20 a 22 a 24 25 26 2 28 23 30 intimidated ,and annoyed DECLARANT Luis A. del Mazo, Jr. in violation of his rights. ‘These and other terroristic threats, abuse, assaults, and illegal activity described herein shall be denominated HARRASSEMENT AND ABUSE 33), As an actual and proximate result, DECLARANT has been HARMED Count 2 Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress Extreme and Outrageous Breach of Duty Deprivation of Constitutional Rights Under Color of State Law 42. US.C. 1983U.S. Const. Ist, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 14th Amend. 2 million dollars per count per person 34.) In performing the acts ascribed to them, RESPONDANTS knew or should have known, that DECLARANT has been supporting his children and that kidnapping and Trespassing on DECLARANT Luis A. del Mazo would cause severe mental distress resulting in personal and business injury. Specifically, RESPONDANTS knew or should have known resulting impact on del mazo children and would cause loss of business assets, income, and good will, causing further emotional distress to DECLARANT Luis A. del Mazo and his Family. 35.) As an actual and proximate result, DECLARANT has been HARMED 36.) During Unlawful detainment DECLARANT was tortured with sleep deprivation and starvation by Davidson County Sheriff's department and/or Comrections Corporations of America and unnamed employees at facilities ABIDAVIT OF TRUTH ou10 n 12 a3 ua as 16 uw 18 1 20 a 22 23 24 25 26 21 28 23 30 ‘Count 3 Denial of Due Process / Culpable Breach of Duty Deprivation of Constitutional Rights and ‘Malfeasance of a Public official 42 U.S.C. 1983U.S. Const. Ist, 4th, Sth, 6th, 7th, 8th, 14th Amend All Defendants as Indicated 2 million dollars per count per person The Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause has a substantive component that "provides heightened protection against government interference with certain fundamental rights and liberty interests," Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702, 720, including parents’ fundamental right to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of their children, see, e.g., Stanley v. Ilinois, 405 U.S. 645, 651. Pp. 5-8. :/hwww.law.comel].edu/supremecourt/text/530/57 37.) At ll times pertinent hereto, RESPONDANTS, and each of them, owe one or more PROFESSIONAL DUTIES to DECLARANT with respect to their status as a citizen retaining all his constitutional rights. 38.) Said PROFESSIONAL DUTIES include: A. All RESPONDANTS: Duty of ordinary reasonable care: The duty to act REASONABLY, and to avoid acting UNREASONABLY and CULPABLY. ABFIDAVIT OF TRUTH n15-10 u 2 3 a4 as 16 uw ry 19 20 a 2 23 2 25 26 2 28 28 30 39.) Exercise color of law powers only in the presence of jurisdiction: those provided under enabling legislation, rules, charters, or constitutions; protect uphold, and defend the laws and ‘the Constitution of the United States; act only in the public interest; provides only honest government services; avoid all conflict, undue influence, bribery, self-dealing, bias, nepotism; commit no deprivations of clearly established civil rights; create or inflict no HARM unless specifically authorized after due process of law 40.) Protect rights of those in courtroom; “ensure rights”; all duties enumerated in Canons 1-6 (Ex. 39) and related codes; 41.) Contractual: Specific duties under contract, and duty of good faith and fair dealing; 42.) Municipal: Enact no policies, rules, laws, customs, behaviors or procedures which are intended to or deliberately indifferent to constitutional injury. 43.) Pursuant to T.C.A. § 3-6-106, the Tennessee Ethics Commission, Guiding principles of ethical conduct for Public Officials , Article IM, Section 1, and 1(a), and 2 (a) (http://www. tn.gov/sos/tec/GuidingPrinciplesOfficials. pdf )“a public employee is liable for injury caused by his act or omission to the same extent as a private person.” This special “ordinary care” duty of Tennessee state public employees extends not only to avoid harm by the public employee's direct actions, but to avoid harm to all those who are foreseeably injured by virtue of the public employee’s actions which “set in motion” acts that result in constitutional injury. APFIDAVIT OF TROTH n16-10 u 2 13 4 a5 16 uv 18 as 20 a1 22 23 2 25 26 21 28 29 30 This Court has long recognized that freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage and | family tife is one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth | Amendment, ~ Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur, 414 U.S. 632 (1974) The liberty interest in family privacy has its source, and its contours are ordinarily to be sought, not in state law, but in intrinsic human rights, as they have been understood in "this Nation's history and tradition." /--Smith v. Organization of Foster Families, 431 U.S. 816 (1977) Count 4 Trespass Under Color of Law 42 U.S.C, 1983U.S. Const. 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 14th Amend. ‘Supplemental State Claim Against All 2 million dollars per count per person 44.) Each RESPONDANT acting under color of state law is empowered and restrained from acting by virtue of the respective constitutions, charters, articles of incorporation, appointments, or other entity formation documents describing the RESPONDANTS jurisdiction. 45.) In proceeding as described RESPONDANTS, and each of them acted in the complete absence of jurisdic jon, causing “off the reservation” injury. AFFIDAVIT OF TRUTH ae10 na 12 a3 44 18 16 a 18 as 20 a 22 23 24 25 26 2 28 29 30 46.) In exceeding the limits of their authority, RESPONDANTS, and each of them, committed a trespass onto the property, persons, rights, privileges, and immunities of DECLARANT and are strictly liable for all HARM resulting therefrom. 47. )As an actual and proximate result, DECLARANT has been HARMED. Count 5 ‘Municipal Liability Deprivation of Rights under Color of State Law 42. US.C. 1983US. Const. Ist, 4th, 5th, 14th Amend. 2 million dollars per count per person 48.) RESPONDANTS iin this Count are “governments beneath the state level” within the definition of that term in Board of Comm'rs v. Brown, 520 U.S. 397(1997).( MUNICIPAL DEFENDANTS). 49.) RESPONDANTS maintained rules, policies, customs, procedures, traditions, practices and permitted behaviors by policymakers themselves which perpetrated an intentional, reckless, and deliberate indifference to the likelihood of constitutional injury of the type [caused to DECLARANT in the False FRAUDULENT COMPLAINT filed and without Evidence, including customs and policies in violation "Consulting services" under T. § 2-10-12 means "services to advise or assist a person or entity in influencing legislative or administrative action, as that term is defined in § 3-6-301, relative to the municipality or county represented by that official.", and permitting HARASSMENT AND ABUSE against DECLARANT Luis A. del Mazo, Jr. RESPONDANTS were acting pursuant to such custom ABIDAVIT OF TRUTH a16-10 n 12 as a4 a5 16 7 as 20 a 22 23 24 25 26 20 28 29 30 and policy in committing the acts ascribed to them herein. As an actual and proximate result, DECLARANT has been HARMED. Count 6 Breach of Contract, Fraud, Abuse of Due Process, CULPABLE/NEGLIGENT Breach of Duty 42 US.C. 1983US. Const. 4th, Sth, 14th Amend 2 million dollars per count per person 50.) Committing perjury in a hearing relating to the DECLARANT Luis A. del ‘mazo to file false reports and encourage the (false) investigation even after an affidavit of paying child support by the actual individual the Municipal Corporate state and its Officers alleged and complained that DECLARANT was in Contempt of RESPONDANTS initial report against DECLARANT del Mazo; By virtue of the State of Tennessee special statutory. duties imposed on DECLARANT possess reciprocal rights under state and federal due process to the observance of those duties 51) Terrorizeing, intimidating, distressing, harming, defrauding, extorting, and robbing DECLARAENT Luis A. del Mazo ABFIDAVIT OF TRUTH “1910 a a 3 u as 16 a 18 19 20 a 2 23 28 25 26 a7 28 29 30 CLAIM FOR RELIEF AND/OR OPPORTUNITY TO CURE ‘The RESPONDANTS have 21 calendar days to cure their Dishonor by the Following: 1. Dismiss any and all pending child support complaints including but not limited to compliance hearings against the Declarant with prejudice. Settle DECLARENTS Claim for a total of $88,600.00 dollars (Eighty Right thousand and six hundred US Dollars). Includes 38,600.00 in lost commissions and Real Estate contracts plus 10,000.00 dollars pr. Day for Five (5) days of unlawful detention as indicated in public record Register of Deeds instrument No. 201210002-0089729 (250,000.00 per 25 min. of unlawful detention). oR 2. Pay all damages as indicated by the claim contained (20,000,000.00 Twenty million dollars) herein with Real Money, Surrender any and all Public Hazard Bonds, other Bonds, Insurance Policies, CAFR Funds, 801K funds, personal properties, land, real estate, etc, and Prove your Complaint against me, and disprove my claims, by providing me with lawfully documented proof that is certified by the States Attomey, in his unlimited commercial liability, while Under Oath, On and For the Official Record, under penalties of the law including Perjury. This proof must prove your case by preponderance, or the greater weight of proof and must answer each and every Point by Point individually. If any and all points are ‘not answered fully and accompanied by lawfully documented proof, as provided herein, that vill be Default on the part of the Respondents. Non Response according to the conditions herein will be default and entered into the record as. Incomplete answers and | or lack of documented proof as outlined herein will be Default. If the Defendants fail to respond as AFFIDAVIT OF TRUTH -20-10 a 2 3 4 as 16 uv a8 a9 20 aa 22 23 24 25 26 20 28 29 30 outlined herein, withi Executing Confession of summary Judgment through tacit acquiescence on behalf of the respondent, and complete agreement with all the statements in this claim. Declarant reserves ct! rights under the common law and do not voluntarily waive any rights. Se = = $s 21 calendar days, defendants will be in Default. Default will be a Self- Submitted, on this 10““day (Signature) WITNESS CERTIFICATION OF AFFIANT’S SIGNATURE ABOVE, be Luis A. del Mazo, Jt, did personally appear before us in Davidson County, State of ‘Tennessee, and upon affirmation execute and affix the above signature. (Signature, Witness No. 1) (Signature, Witness No. 2) ‘Address of Witness No. 1: Address of Witness No 2: G3 Windellrecd Ce o7 513 Smqrne TS BFGF AFFIDAVIT OF TRUTH -21- We, the undersigned, witness this jo day (Dec. _, 2014, that the one known to us to10 Fey 12 aa “ 18 16 uv 18 1s 20 a 22 23 24 25 26 20 28 23 30 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Luis A. del Mazo, certify that I have served the Office of the RESPONDANTS attomey a true and correct copy of this legal document on this__day of. 2014, and that will also filed a copy of this legal document with the US DISTRICT COURT WITHIN 45 DAYS of this administrative complaint if no settlement can be made, Submitted, on this day of, 2014. Affiant, (Signature) AFFIDAVIT OF TRUTH 22