Receiving Service = Consent = Jurisdiction

((It appears that in this case jurisdiction to a US court was not automatic, possibly the judges noticed territorial jurisdiction was lacking and the Defendant was likely going to play that card.))

This is a Forum Thread from the Trustees & Agents Group

Re: service of summons papers

Robert, You mentioned there were times when your friends were served correctly and they then returned the papers to the clerk of courts.

You also mentioned there were times your friends went out the garage, right in front of the servers, is this because they could not be served correctly outside of their house or perhaps the address on the service document???

Would you explain what constitutes correct service or where we might look in the law to find it?

Thanks, Dee
Re: [TRUSTEES_AGENTS] Re: service of summons papers

Hi, Dee. No one HAS to accept an offer. “Service” is an “offer to contract”. It is a distinct and separate “offer” than the one contained in the Summons & Complaint. You must “volunteer” to receive the papers, a consenting act. By returning the papers to the court, and by getting (witnessing) the date stamp, you are “refusing for cause” the documents. When you “rebut” the affidavit of service filed into the case by the process server, you are filing into the case while remaining “out” of the case by appearing specially and in Pro Per.

He says he handed the “defendant” named in the caption, the papers. You are saying “NO ONE handed me anything, since THAT IS NOT ME”. Everything else is just hearsay. And pictures evidencing service can’t be used without your permission.

The rules of service vary from state to state, but usually, anyone over the age of 14 can accept service at your RESIDENCE, but you must be served PERSONALLY, if you are AWAY from your residence. Just ponder: what if it really ISN’T YOU who gets served. Would it really make a difference if it isn’t you, and you just toss it in the trash? Someone is going to get default judgment against them, for not showing up in court. Bringing the service BACK to the court will drive the plaintiff’s attorney completely over the edge! You make getting served a very costly affair for the attorney and his client. Look in your state statutes and county statutes for rules of service.


Refusal of Service

MESSAGE FROM THE MODERATOR   Message #114 of 1173

My friends were a good example of people who “awakened on the fly”, so to speak. They were livid at the audacity of the plaintiff, since they had nothing to do with the “case”. They asked me what they should do. My question was: Have you AGREED to subject yourself to the jurisdiction? Did you “accept” the service of the summons and complaint? They had. My next question was: Is this you? They said it was. Next, I asked them: Did you do what they are accusing you of? They said no.  I asked what they had to lose by being subject to the “voluntary agreement” they made to “appear”? First, they did not see nor understand how they “voluntarily” did anything. They kept talking about their large property “nest egg”, their “good name”, their “reputation among their friends” and their “perfect credit” as what they had to lose. I explained that they were voluntarily MAKING themselves public by continuing in that standing.

They agreed to follow my advice.

They filed an “affidavit of fact” into the case, in the local pleading format. They also filed a Notice of Filing and gave 30 days to “rebut” the facts described in the affidavit. Their affidavit “flipped” the case and placed the burden of proof on the plaintiff. It also created the only real “facts” of the case. The plaintiff’s attorney’s were LIVID.

My friends appeared in Pro Per on the Aff and the Notice. It went unrebutted. Now the attorneys for the plaintiff had to get them to appear generally. We boned up on the service of process statutes. They tried with EVERYTHING THEY HAD . . to serve my friends, and they never got it on. Process servers camped out at their doorstep every night for 7 nights straight. They came and went using their garage IN FULL VIEW of the process servers. The process servers tried everything to serve them; all kinds of tricks.

They would catch them on the street and smack them with the papers and walk away, papers on the ground. They published the Summons and Complaint in the newspaper legal classified ads. They attempted service at my friend’s place of business. They even came in and threw the papers over the counter after catching my friends at a vulnerable moment. Then they lied in their affidavits of service and said my friends were served personally.

In each instance where my friends were considered served, they actually returned the service to the court house and left it with the clerk with a “received by the clerk” date stamp within the 3 day period required under regulation Z, Truth In Lending Act, voiding any contract that acceptance of  service may have created.

They were effectively REFUSING TO CONTRACT with the courts. They also appeared in Pro Per and “rebutted” all the affs of service filed into the case by the process servers.

Since all of this was filed into the case, the plaintiff asked the court for a default judgment, but the judge said, “No, you have to serve the parties and in addition their subsequent filings in “proper person” negate any service you are claiming by default. You have not served the parties in question. And “et al” doesn’t cut it, because they filed an affidavit of fact that “cured” any presumption of their involvement in this case. Get your parties SERVED, or you are going to have to file a NEW CASE!”

The next day, my friends having learned their lesson, decided to make themselves “judgment proof” by “disowning” all of their property and equity so as to avoid the fear and stress and learning curve associated with defending against service of process.

My biggest source of irritation and stress came from “teaching” my friends. They were so conditioned to the system that I found myself constantly monitoring them to keep them from voluntarily entering into agreements and traps set by the attorneys. (There were 3 trying to serve actually; it was a huge case) I literally had to argue with them almost everyday due to the rude awakening they were experiencing regarding the law.

They drained my energy. I had less problems with their legal “standing” and defense than I did in getting them to “not” do something that would compromise their standing! They believed the world revolved around them and their “interpretation” of “right and wrong”, which left me no choice but to withhold information that would probably be beneficial to them.  Robert

(((If one is legally served one is legally in their jurisdiction, so one must challenge the legal foundation of the “being served”.  Such are all territorially limited.)))

 Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System. Done in free, need done in

About Paul John Hansen

Paul John Hansen -Foremost I love the Lord, His written Word, and the Elect Family of God. -My income is primarily derived from rental properties, legal counsel fees, selling PowerPoint presentations. -I am a serious student of territorial specific law, and constitutional limitations of the US and STATE Governments. -I have been in court over 250 times. -I have received numerous death threats that appear as to come from NEBRASKA STATE agents. -I have been arrested an estimated 8 times. Always bogus false warrants, misdemeanor charges. (Mostly Municipal Housing Codes, or related acts.) -I file no Federal Income Taxes (1040 Form) since the year 2001. (No filings in any form.) -I pay no State income taxes. -I do not pay STATE sales tax on major purchases. -I pay no COUNTY property taxes with out a judicial challenge. ( I believe I have discovered a filing for record process that takes my land off the tax roles. ) -I currently use no State drivers license, carry no vehicle liability insurance, do not register my automobiles. -I do not register to vote for any representatives. -I am a 'free inhabitant' pursuant to Article 4 of The Articles of Confederation. (Not a US citizen.) -I am subject to the Church jurisdiction, and a strong advocate of full ecclesiastical independence from the United States jurisdiction. -I believe in full support of the perpetual Union as found in the Articles of Confederation. -I believe that a free inhabitant has the lawful standing to choose to live independent of the constitutional corporate US governments, and its statutory courts in the vast majority of his daily life, and to be forced to do otherwise is slavery. -I believe that most all US written law is constitutional, but most all of that same law is misapplied upon jurisdictions where it has no force and effect of law and the bar association has perfected a system of keeping the people from knowing its true application. Order my 5$ presentation 'Free Inhabitant One A', for the truth in limited jurisdiction of all US written law.
This entry was posted in Jurisdiction Consent by Service. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *