Notice of Claim Template, for How To Prosecute Government/Public Servants, for "any Thing... to the Contrary" of these "fundamental principles" of "the common law", which are "the supreme Law of the Land" here in the USA!
Here you can download this "NOTICE OF CLAIM OF DEPRIVATION(S) OF RIGHTS UNDER COLOR OF LAW" - Basic Template:
www.nrdl.org/lawdocs/
NOTICE OF CLAIM, of Deprivations of Rights-For_Basic_Template.pdf
NOTICE OF CLAIM, of Deprivations of Rights-For_Basic_Template.odt
Here is a newer version of this notice_template I am working on now:
https://freeornottobe.wordpress.com/2022/06/08/criminal-complaint-for-crimes-against-humanity/comment-page-1/#comment-540
(Sorry if some things dont work as I am still learning how to program and use this webpage editor.-Harley)
LawDoc.4_NOTICE OF CLAIM TEMPLATE_New-2023.pdf
_____________________________________________________________________________________
NOTICE OF CLAIM OF DEPRIVATION(S) OF RIGHTS UNDER COLOR OF LAW:
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF ,
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF .
(Address, Website, Etc.: )
_______________________________
__________________________, |
Plaintiff, |
v. |
__________________________, |
__________________________, |
Defendant(s) |
_______________________________|
This notice is regarding the following (Court Case, Law, Contract, etc.):
_________________________________________________________________________________________,
_________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________.
INTRODUCTION:
NOW COMES Plaintiff _________________________________________ ('Pro Se', 'Representing' self), alleging as follows, based upon the following evidence and facts and relevant Law of the Land, making the following claims, including that any previous court orders mentioned herein are clearly "to the Contrary" of "fundamental principles" of "the common law" and "the supreme Law of the Land" as explained herein, and clearly not in the best interests of Justice and Parties to this Case (especially the welfare of any children which are supposed to be the Family Courts primary concern), therefore previous court order(s) are not “Constitutional", and said “orders” are not valid or “Lawful” to “make or enforce”, as explained herein for the following reason(s).
For these reasons this court and Judge may be liable for causing and/or any future failure to stop such "deprivations of rights under color of law"[6] as described herein, unless this Judge can explain on the public record why these alleged reasons are incorrect, why said previous court orders are not "unconstitutional" and thus "unlawful" as alleged herein. Therefore by neither stopping the allegedly and clearly unlawful previous court orders, nor explaining why the allegations of being unconstitutional are incorrect, then this judge could become complicit and liable in the same unlawful acts, because:
Essentially the only real purpose of “Government” and “Law” in these United States of America is to "establish Justice... and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity" (See Preamble, US.Const)[1], which is therefore also the primary "duty" of any "Judge" or "Public Servant" (See “Purpose of Government” in any State Constitution)[7], "and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution" above all, (US.Const.Art.6)[7], and to “bear true faith and allegiance” (ARS 38-231) to the United States of America and their State, and “to support the constitution thereof." (SEE ATTACHED "SOURCES OF AUTHORITY...")[7].
Therefore protecting equal Human Liberty to Pursue Happiness is the only real Purpose of Government and Law (US Constitution & Declaration of Independence)[1], and these “rights”[2] include owning property and land, free travel, fair exchanges, common practices, Liberty in general[2] and Privacy[10] from all “searches and seizures”[3] unless there is “probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation”[3], to accuse the “Defendant” of an actual “crime”[4] against the equal individual rights of another Human being, by “intent or inexcusable neglect” (US.Supr.Ct.), and in violation of valid Criminal “Law of the Land” (US.Const.Art.6. & Amend.4,6,14 & US.Supr.Ct. Citations Needed)[4].
Therefore to “make or enforce” “any Thing… to the Contrary”[6] is a “deprivation of rights under color of law”[6] which is an actual federal “crime” and a civil liability to even “neglect to prevent”[6] once one “reasonably should know”[3], in violation of the oath and contract to defend “the supreme Law of the Land” “against all enemies, foreign and domestic”[7], including “taxes” on owning land[12] and payment for labor[14], and “licenses” for practicing law and medicine[13] as well as to travel on public roads (not including to “drive” “people or property for hire” when it requires a “CDL”)[11], and basically all harmless civil and criminal “offenses”[4], and especially any violations of “due process of law”[5] as explained herein.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
PARTIES, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE:
1. Plaintiff is a Citizen of these United States of America and resides in the State of ______________________, in the Jurisdiction of this Court, in the County of _____________________, City of ______________________, in the State of ______________________;
2. Defendant(s) include ______________________ who did reside in the County of ______________________, City of ______________________, in the State of ______________________, at the time of the previous court orders mentioned herein, and/however (for purposes of this suit and their liability) currently resides in the City of ______________________, in the State of ______________________;
3. Defendant(s) may also include any Attorney representing or assisting in these violations of
"due process" under "the supreme Law of the Land", such as _________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________, Representing ________________________________________ in Case ________________________________;
(continue adding other Parties as necessary)
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
GENERAL CLAIMS, RELEVANT FACTS, EVIDENCE, ETC.:
Plaintiff makes the following Claims:
CLAIM ( 1 ) _____________________________________________________________________________;
CLAIM ( 2 ) _____________________________________________________________________________.;
CLAIM ( 3 ) _____________________________________________________________________________.;
CLAIM ( 4 ) _____________________________________________________________________________.;
CLAIM (___) Furthermore...
IN CLOSING:
____________________________________________________________________________________.
For these reasons it is clear that any Public Servants ('Judges' etc.) who even "neglect to prevent"[6] such a "deprivation of rights under color of law"[6] as these previous court orders described above, are also personally liable[7] under "the supreme Law of the Land"[1], under federal civil and criminal laws starting with the "Constitution for the United States of America"[1] and of the Relevant State, and Supreme Court "Precedents", and US Codes like USC 18-241 & 242 and 42-1983 & 1986 for examples[6]. Therefore it is required by "the supreme Law of the Land" that the previous court orders be "Modified" by this court so this Judge does not likewise become liable for continuing this "pattern or practice" of "deprivation of rights under color of law"[6] and possibly even "treason to the Constitution"! (Quoting US.Supr.Ct. Cohens v. Virginia; See USC 2381)[19].
__________________________________________________________________________________________
SPECIFIC CHARGES / VIOLATIONS OF LAW:
Plaintiff makes the following specific charges:
CHARGE (1 ) ___________________________________________________________________________.;
CHARGE (2 ) ___________________________________________________________________________.;
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
REQUESTED RELIEF:
WHEREFORE Plaintiff hereby requests the following relief:
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
SIGNATURE, STATEMENT OF TRUTH, NOTARY SECTION:
I hereby declare under penalty of perjury the foregoing is true to the best of my knowledge,
__________________________________________________________________________________________
[Signature, Printed Name of Claimant, Date Signed]
__________________________________________________________________________________________
NOTARY STAMP & SIGNATURE, ACKNOWLEDGMENT:
Subscribed and affirmed to before me, ___________________________________________________, a
Notary Public, this _______ day of ___________________, ___________, that the above-named man/woman
did appear before me, and proved to be the man/woman executing this document.
Notary Public Signature, Printed Name, and Stamp:
__________________________________________________________________________________________,
My commission expires: _________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
REFERENCES/"SOURCES OF AUTHORITY":
(SEE ATTACHED "SOURCES OF AUTHORITY”)
For the actual quotes and links to sources and more go to the webpage in the link below:
https://freeornottobe.wordpress.com/2022/03/13/sources-of-authority-by-topic-subject-of-law/
[1] The Purpose of Government: “We the People” “ordain and establish” “the supreme Law of the Land” “in order to …establish Justice… and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity”, so to punish us just for “disobeying” orders or legislation from our hired “Public Servants” is exactly the opposite of the very Purpose of Law and Govt., and technically that’s “Treason to the Constitution”! -US.Const.,US.Supr.Ct.Cohens-v-Virginia,USC-18-2381;
[2] List of ‘self-evident’ basic Human Rights: We hold these Truths to be self-Evidence that all Humans are endowed by their Creator with equal inalienable rights including Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, to own Land and other Property, to Privacy from search and seizure without probable cause to accuse one of a crime against another Human right, to any common practice, to fair exchanges like payment for labor, to free travel on public roads for common personal needs, and to free speech and Liberty in general. -Decl.of.Ind.,US.Supr.Ct.;
[3] “Probable cause”: For all “searches and seizures” and “criminal prosecutions” to be “lawful” there must be “probable” evidence of an actual “crime” against another Human beings equal rights, to a “reasonable and prudent” person who thinks critically and checks facts, caused by “intent or inexcusable neglect” of the accused, and in violation of valid criminal “Law of the Land”. -US.Const.,US.Supr.Ct.;
[4] Three Elements to a Crime: A “crime” requires actual or “probable” harm or threat to another Human Beings equal individual natural rights aka “Corpus Delicti”, caused by “Intent or inexcusable neglect” of the accused suspect aka “Mens Rea”, and in violation of valid Criminal “Law of the Land” aka “Actus Reus”. -US.Const.,US.Supr.Ct.;
[5] Essential elements of due process of law: “The essential elements of due process of law are notice and opportunity to defend, and in determining whether such rights are denied, the Court is governed by the substance of things, and not by mere form.” -US.Supr.Ct. Simon v. Craft, 182 U.S. 427 (1901);
[6] "Deprivation of rights under color of law", "Colorable Law" (See USCs BELOW ALSO): “any Thing… to the Contrary” of The Constitution for the United States of America and “Laws made in Pursuance thereof” is “unconstitutional” and therefore not “lawful” but is called “colorable law” or “color of law”, and “deprivation of rights under color of law” to even “neglect to prevent”! See USCs 18-241&242 &42-1983,1985,1986,1988,US.Const.;
[7] Public Servants’ Oath(s), and resulting lack of “immunity”: “the supreme Law of the Land” requires in article 6 that Members of the Legislative, Judicial and Executive Branches of Federal and State Governments “shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution” and only those “Laws made in Pursuance thereof”. Accordingly any person who causes any person to be deprived of any right under the color of any law or order shall be liable to that party, including actions for “neglect to prevent”. See US.Const.,USCs 18-241&242 &42-1983,1985,1986,1988.;
[8] We are ‘sovereign’, not ‘subject’ to Law/Statutes/Etc. without Consent or Injured Party: “...at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people, and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects... and have none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the sovereignty.” - Decl.of.Ind.,US.Supr.Ct.(Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. 419, 1793). ;
[9] Parental Rights: Include choosing pretty much everything for their children so long as there is not “probable” evidence of actual harm to the childrens equal Human rights to Life, Liberty, the Pursuit of Happiness, good health and education, and so forth.US.Const.,US.Supr.Ct.;
[10] Right to privacy: Due to the right to privacy “We the People” need only “state… true full name” for police when there is “probable” evidence to accuse us of an actual “crime” against another Human beings equal individual rights, or reserve “the right to remain silent”. -US.Supr.Ct.,US.Const.Amend.4,6,14,ARS-38-231.;
[11] Right to Free Travel on Public Roads “in the conveyance of the day”: ‘Held… The right to travel is a part of the “liberty” of which a citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. …as early as the Magna Carta.’ (Kent v. Dulles, 357 U.S. 116, 1958, U.S. Supreme Court!) ; “...[T]he right finds no explicit mention in the Constitution…. freedom to travel throughout the United States has long been recognized as a basic right under the Constitution.” (Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618, 1969). ; ‘The right of a citizen to travel upon the public highways… is a common right…to use the ordinary and usual conveyances of the day…to operate an automobile thereon… It is not a mere privilege, like… moving a house… or transporting persons or property for hire along the street, which a city may permit or prohibit at will.’ (THOMPSON v. SMITH, Supreme Court of Virginia, Sep 11, 1930) ;
[12] Right to own Land and other Property: US.Const.(Amend.4,5,14),US.Supr.Ct.;
[13] Right to any ‘Common Practice’: US.Supr.Ct.;
[14] Right to ‘fair exchanges’: “Fair Exchanges” like compensation for labor, are a Natural Common Human right, and therefore not “lawful” to “license” or “tax” or “infringe” in any way. US.Supr.Ct.;
[15] Right “to solicit for donations for ones self” is a right of free speech under the 1st Amendment: See Az. v. Boehler - caselaw.findlaw.com/az-court-of-appeals/1580052.html;
[16] An unrebutted affidavit stands as a fact in a court of law: US.Appeals.Ct., Data Disc, Inc, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Systems Technology Associates, Inc., Defendant-appellee, 557 F.2d 1280 (9th Cir. 1977).;
[17] Motions are deemed filed when handed to the Officer: US.Supr.Ct.;
[18] Void for Vagueness Doctrine: US.Supr.Ct.;
[19] “Jurisdiction”, requirements, limits: For a Court of Law to have proper “Jurisdiction” there are three “Elements” required, starting with “Territorial Jurisdiction” meaning the location where the incident occurred which determines which court should hear the case, according to the “Subject Matter” such as Criminal or Civil cases which determines the specific Court(s) which have proper “Jurisdiction”, and finally “Persona Jurisdiction” meaning the individuals or agencies which are parties to the case which also affect which Courts are appropriate to hear the case.;
[20] ‘Justice’: “The constant and perpetual disposition to render every man his due. I... The conformity of our actions and our will to the law... In the most extensive sense of the word it differs little from “virtue;” for it includes within itself the whole circle of virtues. ..." - thelawdictionary.org/justice-n/ ;
[21] ‘State’: “A body politic, or society of men united together for the purpose of promoting their mutual safety and advantage, by the joint efforts of their combined strength. Cooley, Const. Lim. 1. One of the component commonwealths or states of the United States of America. The people of a state, in their collective capacity, considered as the party wronged by a criminal deed; the public; as in the title of a cause. “The State vs. A. B.” The section of territory occupied by one of the United States.” - thelawdictionary.org/state-n/ ;
[22] “Lawful” “Money”: Only Gold and Silver Coin made according to Constitutional “Coinage Acts” can be “Lawful” “Money” in these United States of America, because “No State shall ... make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts;…” US.Const.Art.1,Sec.10.;
[23] “Trespass…means…enter or remain unlawfully… except…when premises are open to the public”: See ARS 13-1501, 13-1502] (See also Numbers 2-6):
[24] Names of all Govt. units and Humans must be “Proper Nouns” (only 1st Letters capitalized) by “Law”: See Standard English Rules of Capitalization, required by US.Govt.Printing.Manual;
[25] All govt., cities, states, police, courts, etc., are ‘corporations’ registered on Dunn and Bradstreet (dnb.com):
[26] Our Constitutional republic was lost in 1861, when the 1st State seceded:
[27] “private attorney general doctrine”:
[28] INFO ON PERFORMING WRITS OF MANDAMUS:
[29] INFO REGARDING HOW TO PERFORM COMMERCIAL LIENS:
[30] RIGHT TO RELEASE FROM JAIL PENDING CRIMINAL CONVICTION: See Arizona Constitution and Criminal Procedure for one example, the Right to release exists unless there is “probable” evidence one is a danger to another person or the public, and the only purpose of bail in criminal procedure is to assure appearance in court, therefore we have a right to be released “On Own Recognizance” if there is not such evidence against us.;
__________________________________________________________________________________________
ANY MORE I NEED TO ADD HERE??? (I’M SURE THERE ARE PLENTY!)
Anyone wanting to contribute can do so here:
https://freeornottobe.wordpress.com/2022/03/13/sources-of-authority-by-topic-subject-of-law/
__________________________________________________________________________________________