COURT JUDGMENTS ARE NON-CASH ITEMS

One of the reasons I have referenced the article Dispatch of Merchants is because of his explanation of
how the courts are being utilized to enforce a chose-in-action.
Blacks Law Dictionary defines a chose as: a thing, whether tangible or intangible; a personal article; a
chattel.
And a chose-in-action as follows: 1. A proprietary right in personum, such as a debt owed by another
person, a share in a joint-stock company, or a claim for damages in tort. 2. The right to bring an action
to recover a debt, money, or thing. 3. Personal property that one person owns but another person
possesses, the owner being able to regain possession through a lawsuit.
[recall one of the trust maxims: where someone is in possession of a thing to which he is not legally
entitled, then he is construed as the trustee of that thing. That should make it clear that when you are
drawn into court that it is a waste of time to claim that you are not the Defendant. The assumption is
that you are in possession of some thing/chose that belongs to the person appearing as the Plaintiff and
they are claiming that you are the Trustee and that the Plaintiff is the beneficiary so fork it over! So,
one response to any claim from a Plaintiff by you would be please identify what it is that I in
possession of which belongs to you, and what is your proof that the thing actually belongs to you. If the
Plaintiff would say money, you would either respond that you have no money or that the Defendant
JOHN DOE is bankrupt (refer to the Chapter 11 bankruptcy of the US hint: JOHN DOE is the US it is
their trust, not yours, and the US is a constitutor for John Doe anyway!)]
By this point all should understand that Blacks Law Dictionary is a dictionary created to facilitate
commerce. Do not confuse it with Boviers or Ballentynes law dictionaries. And so I have emphasized
certain words in the definition for consideration.
1. Proprietary right what kind of entity can have a proprietary right? Well, a beneficiary of a trust
can have a proprietary right to the trust corpus hmmm, so the beneficiary of the straw man trust has a
proprietary right? So, who is that beneficiary, since the straw man trust is set up as a cestui que vie
trust?
2. Person by this time all students should be well aware that a person is a fictional entity, a
corporation, a straw man. Blacks definition fails miserable here where it says one person owns,
because obviously a person/fiction cannot own anything.
So, it should be obvious that when a court tries to enforce a chose-in-action that there are serious flaws
already embedded in the whole process just by the definitions alone.
***obviously, the whole process in a court deals in fictions, etc. If the court is looked in this light, then
obviously the judgment which would come from such a court is also a fiction and has absolutely no
joinder or in other words, the judgment of the court has power of enforcement in the real world.

In the Dispatch of Merchants, it points out that the courts are rendering a judgment on a chose-in-action
but the trick is that they are demanding payment on the judgment in specie cash.
For those of you who understand securities law, this is an unlawful act for conversion of a nonregistered security into a security. Oops.
FICTIONS
When the law does not provide a remedy, the courts will create a fiction to deal with it, and then once
past that defect in the law, the fiction disappears and the law is continued with.
What is the situation when we start out in fiction? Can we ever get into law? The answer is NO. So, if
we start out in fiction, can the court move to the real world by conversion of a non-security into a
security? NO.
So, why would we be tricked into it?
ADMIRALTY/COURTS MARTIAL
When we consider an Admiralty Court we can only conclude that this is a military court. Hence the
proceeding is a courts martial.
Now in a Courts Martial any allegation brought by an officer is automatically taken as truth an officer
is a gentleman and does not lie. Hence, the allegation of the officer is the summary judgment. And
what is the only remedy available for a summary judgment? counterclaim.
The municipalities and governments are all a result of the rules of occupation as a result of the Civil
War. Hence, all alleged state and local governments including the courts serve at the pleasure of the
military government of that military district. [actually the military districts were a result of the efforts of
Pres. George Washington from the earlier times, not Pres. Abraham Lincoln]
So, lets draw a comparison between the military courts martial and the civilian courts (martial).
An attorney is an officer of the court. Hence the allegation of the attorney/officer is grounds for
summary judgment.
And what is the remedy for a summary judgment? The answer is: counterclaim.
Note: the attorney comes to the court with a fictional claim. Do not make that mistake with your
counterclaim. Always make a counterclaim as a verified claim. That is why I prefer affidavit pleading.

NON-CASH ITEMS
First of all everything in the public is on the basis of non-cash [the reason for this which should be
obvious to intermediate and advanced students is that everything in the public is prepaid. Any

transaction whether wholesale or retail is prepaid, and the only thing that needs to occur is that we
need to adjust the accounting which we do via AFV, pass-through Treasury Direct, etc.]
COURT JUDGMENT IS A NON-CASH ITEM
Okay, so we have been through a court process and have a judgment against the Defendant. And you
are construed as the trustee for the Defendant. Can the court or the plaintiff demand that you render
cash to satisfy the judgment. The answer is NO. What can the court demand of your? The can demand
that you as trustee adjust the account as you have that legal responsibility to do so as trustee.
So how do you want to adjust the account? A short cut would be a promissory note.
A more favorable to you procedure would be a counterclaim. Remember that the counterclaim can be
before, during or after. And certainly, as we have seen, the counterclaim should be a verified claim.
And the counterclaim can be for less than, equal to, or more than the original claim.