Famspear wrote:When the mother realized that she was wrong, and that I had given her daughter exactly the right change, the mother became even more irate.
This may not be exactly the same thing, but a mentor of many years ago convinced that the insults that bother us the most are not the ones that are completely false, but the ones that we fear are true.
Stevens seemed very sensitive to the charge of "sophistry," which suggests that there's a part of his brain that suspects it might be true.
Stevens didn't accuse me of sophistry (or if he did I didn't notice), and it wouldn't bother me if he did, because it's not something I worry about. (There are accusations that I worry about, but we're not going to talk about them, are we?)
Dan Evans
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
He really went out on a rather puerile note, didn't he?
Many of his posts seemed rather childish, but the final temper tantrum seemed particularly so.
Dan Evans
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
marc stevens wrote:Oh here's a case # from the Miami bankruptcy court, the "nightmare case" 07-22912 BKC-RBR, I helped a Dr. get the complaint against him kicked out. Spin that.
Stevens has now posted a link to a distorted TIF on his own board that seems to be the first page of an order of dismissal of an adverse proceeding in the bankruptcy case of Certified HR Services Company, No. 05-22912 (S.D. Fla.)
The TIF includes an adversary proceeding number, 07-1271, which can be found on the docket, and was an action to recover preferences in the amount of $91,000 from one "Kolker Lon."
The order dismissing the complaint does not seem to be available.
Not sure why this is a "nightmare" or what role Stevens might have played (if any).
From his forum:
Marc Stevens wrote:They lied again today claiming I've never helped someone be successful in court. I present evidence, as well as Armando, and they claim it had nothing to do with me, Armando is "hardly neutral" and it's not from a court of record. I post a case # from a court of record and they claim it doesn't exist. So, I will post it here http://marcstevens.net/order.tif and many listeners to the show will remember this bankruptcy proceeding I helped a friend with this. I could not find the final order dismissing the complaint, this is the first time the complaint was dismissed with leave to re-file.
Who is Armando?
And is it just me or is this largely incoherent?
Could the guy have become unhinged?
Dan Evans
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
Imalawman, entirely true, which is of course why they almost inevitably hang out and more to the point hide out on their own websites where they can control the dialog and setting, as witness good ole Prattlin’ Pete who couldn’t and wouldn’t tolerate any discussion not of his magnificence or genius, and our current drive by equally so.
As you have pointed out they have built up a fantasy world where logic and water run up hill and people only ask the questions they have pre set answers to. The problem is that when they get out of their carefully controlled universe it NEVER works that way, and “non-believer” have this nasty habit of asking questions they don’t have the answers to or else actually knowing what really happened and destroying their carefully built up story, court cases and the like. They have a certain logic to their thought processes, it just doesn’t happen to be real logic, and is generally actually almost always built around a false or faulty premise that doesn’t stand up well to even casual thought on the subject. The problems for them start when you don’t give them the answers they expect and want, and then it is all down hill from there for them, and then yes they do get angry since all their carefully collected fantasies just blew up in their faces or crumble back in to dust right there on the spot.
Old maxim famspear, the only think more embarrassing than being proven wrong, is proving yourself wrong.
It is not only psychological “capital”, it is more importantly an immense, very fragile ego that is involved. I quite agree with your summation, and Prattlin’ Pete is and remains the prime and penultimate example of which you speak. Narcissistic Personality Disorder or not, he is the poster child for it and its results.
I don’t know enough about Marvelous Marc to hazard any kind of guess as to his personality, although pompous ass does seem immediately to come to mind on first blush. I do know that his particular fantasy is fairly thin, not overly or terribly original, and not I would say all that well done when it comes right down to it. I can see why he was particularly popular over at Sui since his particular variety of bilge doesn’t require much in the way of imagination or hardly thinking at all to swallow, and there isn’t much to it so they don’t get confused and lost easily, and the users are generally too dim to figure out they aren’t getting anywhere.
I have to admit to being somewhat disappointed since I was looking forward to finally seeing some of what Stevens had been pushing all this time, as I kept hearing about how he had done this or that and how great he was in court, and I would have liked to see some of his stuff straight from the horse's mouth so to speak so I could get a feeling for it, guess now we know he was just one more "Legend in His Own Mind", and I will just have to soldier on somehow in my disappointment.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
I looked up docket #05-22912 in Florida and checked out the one for Certified HR Services. It's a frickin' long docket. The image Marc posted looked like it was filed in 2007 (hard to make out at the top), so I only pulled up stuff filed in 2007. Frickin' long docket. Maybe I was in the wrong spot, but when I did a search for "motion to dismiss", it's not found anywhere in the docket.
I scrolled around a bit. On May 8, 2007 there are a buttload of "Adversary case 07-01259. Complaint by James S Feltman against F.W. Davison & Company, Inc.. Filing Fee Paid. Nature of Suit:,(13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)),(12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other)) (Battista, Paul) (Entered: 05/08/2007)" Only the case # and the creditor changes. When I say there's a buttload, there's like 120 of them.
I asked myself, "What the hell is this?" so I pulled up the first one. Something about Debtor One Year Transfers and Debtor Four Year Transfers. Nine whole pages of "over my head." I recap'd it in case anyone cares to take a peek.
In August, there were a few Adversary Cases closed: "Complaint Dismissed". Not sure which ones. Then in early November, there's a buttload more - same reason. Then in mid-November there are a buttload more - some closed as dismissed, others found in favor of plaintiff. If I had to hazard a guess, I'd say it was 50/50. Then in early December there's about 120 "Objection to Claim"s which all also say [Negative Notice].
Is there a lawyer to English handbook or something?
When chosen for jury duty, tell the judge "fortune cookie says guilty" - A fortune cookie
webhick wrote:I looked up docket #05-22912 in Florida and checked out the one for Certified HR Services. It's a frickin' long docket. The image Marc posted looked like it was filed in 2007 (hard to make out at the top), so I only pulled up stuff filed in 2007. Frickin' long docket. Maybe I was in the wrong spot, but when I did a search for "motion to dismiss", it's not found anywhere in the docket.
I scrolled around a bit. On May 8, 2007 there are a buttload of "Adversary case 07-01259. Complaint by James S Feltman against F.W. Davison & Company, Inc.. Filing Fee Paid. Nature of Suit:,(13 (Recovery of money/property - 548 fraudulent transfer)),(12 (Recovery of money/property - 547 preference)),(14 (Recovery of money/property - other)) (Battista, Paul) (Entered: 05/08/2007)" Only the case # and the creditor changes. When I say there's a buttload, there's like 120 of them.
I asked myself, "What the hell is this?" so I pulled up the first one. Something about Debtor One Year Transfers and Debtor Four Year Transfers. Nine whole pages of "over my head." I recap'd it in case anyone cares to take a peek.
This is a Chapter 11 (reorganization) bankruptcy case where a Chapter 11 Trustee was appointed. Unusual, but it happens. As far as I can see, the case has never converted to Chapter 7, which is also somewhat unusual.
The references to "548" and "547" are references to sections of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code dealing with fraudulent transfers and preferences, respectively. These are provisions of the law which allow the Trustee, in certain cases, to recover funds paid by the debtor entity to various people or entities prior to the bankruptcy. It's actually a pretty interesting area of bankruptcy law.
Each adversarial proceeding is a "proceeding" within the bankruptcy "case." Each adversarial proceeding will have its own, separate docket as well.
Any more detail than this might bore anyone here who isn't a bankruptcy practitioner.
"My greatest fear is that the audience will beat me to the punch line." -- David Mamet
Stevens posted a link to a partial order in a bankruptcy adversary proceeding (docket 07-1271). The full docket is 05-22912; Stevens got the year wrong, so Prof and I didn't find it. Here is the full order of which Stevens posts only the first distorted page; it took me about two minutes to find it, which means Stevens is completely inept at research. I'm shocked.
Please note that the order dismisses without prejudice, and explicitly gives the plaintiff (the trustee) 30 days to re-file. The order is dated July 11, 2007; the trustee refiles an amended complaint on August 8, 2007. Defendant moves to dismiss again - denied. Here is the order. A couple of months later, plaintiff files a stipulation of discontinuance, which virtually always means the case was settled.
Twice Stevens identifies cases as wins, twice they turn out to be losses.
"A wise man proportions belief to the evidence."
- David Hume
The adversarial proceeding under docket # 07-01271-RBR was an action by the Chapter 11 Trustee, James S. Feltman, against "Kolker Lon" or "Kolkerlon" in San Diego, California, under sections 544 and 550 of the Bankruptcy Code, and Florida statutes.
However, a "Dr. Lionel Kolker" appears to be the principal in "Kolker Lon."
There is a U.S. Tax Court case involving a tax protester by the name of Lionel D. Kolker: Kolker v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-288 (2004):
Petitioner's hearing under section 6330 was held on February 23, 2004. The hearing was audiotaped and transcribed. At the hearing, Ms. Chadwell [the IRS Settlement Officer] reminded petitioner of her prior requests for information, including a completed Form 433-A, and of her admonition that she would not consider frivolous or groundless arguments. Petitioner stated that he had not completed Form 433-A but that he was interested in resolving the collection issue. Although petitioner produced documentation to show that he had timely requested a hearing pursuant to section 6330, petitioner raised no other relevant issue and presented no evidence to prove either that he did not owe the 1993 liability, that the 1993 liability had been paid, or that a collection alternative was appropriate. Instead, petitioner and a "friend" whom he had brought to the hearing pressed Ms. Chadwell to discuss whether petitioner had an "obligation" to file a return and pay tax. When petitioner and his friend refused to discuss collection alternatives, Ms. Chadwell terminated the hearing.
The name of the "friend" is not disclosed.
EDIT: More, from the same Tax Court case:
Petitioner complains about the alleged bias of Ms. Chadwell and describes the hearing as a sham because Ms. Chadwell would not engage in a discussion of the legal basis for his "obligation" to file a tax return and pay tax. The transcript of the hearing amply demonstrates that Ms. Chadwell provided a meaningful opportunity to present relevant, nonfrivolous arguments why the levy should not be allowed to proceed, but petitioner repeatedly refused to provide any such arguments and the information necessary to support them. For example, despite several requests for information regarding petitioner's financial condition made both before and during the hearing, petitioner failed to provide it. When petitioner did not cooperate, Ms. Chadwell justifiably terminated the hearing. Her decision to terminate the hearing was not evidence of bias; rather, it demonstrated that there is a limit to the tax system's tolerance for unproductive and frivolous exchanges regarding a taxpayer's obligations to file returns and pay tax.
On this record, we conclude that there is no genuine issue of material fact requiring a trial in this case, and we hold that respondent is entitled to the entry of a decision sustaining the proposed levy as a matter of law.
"My greatest fear is that the audience will beat me to the punch line." -- David Mamet
Dr. Lionel Kolker has been a repeat litigant in U.S. Tax Court:
>case # 000567-03; pro se petition filed on January 13, 2003.
>case # 005724-04L; pro se petition filed on April 1, 2004 (this is the case containing the aforementioned Tax Court opinion at T.C. Memo 2004-288).
>case # 015175-04; pro se petition filed on Aug. 23, 2004.
>case # 003488-08; pro se petition filed on Feb. 8, 2008.
My guess is that Marc Stevens may have tried to "help" Dr. Lionel Kolker with one or more of his federal tax problems, and with the bankruptcy litigation in Florida.
"My greatest fear is that the audience will beat me to the punch line." -- David Mamet
Dan Evans
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
marc stevens wrote:Oh here's a case # from the Miami bankruptcy court, the "nightmare case" 07-22912 BKC-RBR, I helped a Dr. get the complaint against him kicked out. Spin that.
Stevens has now posted a link to a distorted TIF on his own board that seems to be the first page of an order of dismissal of an adverse proceeding in the bankruptcy case of Certified HR Services Company, No. 05-22912 (S.D. Fla.)
I like the fact that Stevens blacked on the name of the defendant in the adverse proceeding, but left the docket numbers intact. Apparently, the moron thinks that everyone else is as stupid and incompetent as he is.
Dan Evans
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
