English grammer rules

[Patriotdiscussions]

I saw in the heading of this section about the all caps name.

Which it seems you folks dismiss, was thinking you folks must have found the rule in English grammer that states it is ok to capitalize every letter in a proper noun.

Could you folks direct me to this rule?

The only other entity in the us with an all capital proper noun are legal fictions such as corporations.


One of the reference books obtained was the "Manual on Usage & Style," Eighth Edition, ISBN I-878674-51-X, published by the Texas Law Review in 1995. Section D, CAPITALIZATION, paragraph D: 1:1 states:

"Always capitalize proper nouns... [Proper nouns], independent of the context in which they are used, refer to specific persons, places, or things (e.g., Dan, Austin, Rolls Royce)."

Paragraph D: 3:2 of Section D states:

"Capitalize People, State, and any other terms used to refer to the government as a litigant (e.g., the People's case, the State's argument), but do not capitalize other words used to refer to litigants (e.g., the plaintiff, defendant Manson)."

Either no attorney, judge, or law clerk in Texas has ever read the recognized law style manual that purports to pertain to them, or the act is a deliberate violation of the rules for undisclosed reasons. In either ignorance ("ignorance of the law is no excuse") or violation (one violating the law he enforces on others is acting under title of nobility and abrogating the principle of equality under the law) of law, they continue to write "Plaintiff," "Defendant," "THE STATE OF TEXAS" and proper names of parties in all capital letters on every court document.

[Fmotlgroupie]

The word you're looking for is grammar. Except that it isn't:

In linguistics, grammar is the set of structural rules governing the composition of clauses, phrases, and words in any given natural language.

(from Wikipedia)

I think maybe a better term would be "usage", although someone may have a better suggestion.

Usage, or for that matter grammar, isn't defined by a set of laws (take that, proscriptivists!) but is simply what two speakers of the language would agree to be correct and intelligible. Rules are made up to try to describe this, but they don't work particularly well.

When it comes to capitalisation, in English we usually capitalise the beginnings of sentences, names of people, countries, and certain geographic ideas (the sun sets in the west but ISIS gates the West). All-caps is sometimes used for legibility, to indicate a surname, which is very handy with unusual (to Western eyes) names (PARK Geun-Hye, or David LLOYD GEORGE), or to make the surname stand out in a big blck of text like a legal document. Or, in the internet age, all-caps can be used for the written equivalent if shouting, as in "CONGRATULATIONS, YOU'VE MANAGED TO SHOW US THAT THERE IS SUCH A THING AS A STUPID QUESTION, EVERY TIME YOU OPEN YOUR MOUTH!!!"

[AndyK]

Did you bother to do ANY research?

For example, threads here which discuss (and dismiss) the capitalization issue, court decisions throwing out arguments based on capitalization, or anywhere else.

To start all over again, once upon a time there weren't any computers, typewriters, or any other form of mechanical transcription of text to paper. Instead, writing was literally that -- writing. People wrote things by hand.

It became convenient, at that time, to scribe the names of parties to legal disputes in bold, upper-case letters to make them easier to find and to stand out from the rest of the text.

This scrivning had (and still has) absolutely no legal significance. It was a mere convenience and became a tradition which is followed to this day.

Many people have attempted to ascribe some degree of legal significance to names appearing in capital letters on verious legal documents -- most recently the sovereign citizens and others of their ilk. They have been, without exception, unsuccessful.

Every court which has faced a claim that an upper-case name is somehow distinct from the actual name of the party to the case has dismissed that argument. The same has happened with people who allege they are (for example) not John Doe Smith but are in fact John Doe: Smith or John Doe of the Family Smith.

These silly word games have absolutely no legal relevance and anyone who attempts them risks annoying the judge handling the case. As a rule, it is not a good idea to annoy a judge -- especially with frivolous word games.

Overall, the all-caps versus standard capitalization issue is one invented by legal wannabes who want it to make a difference but have absolutely no concept about how the scrivning of legal doccuments does/does not matter.

[Famspear]

I saw in the heading of this section about the all caps name.

Which it seems you folks dismiss, was thinking you folks must have found the rule in English grammer that states it is ok to capitalize every letter in a proper noun.

First of all, the word is "grammar," not "grammer."

Could you folks direct me to this rule?

There is no such "rule." More to the point, there doesn't need to be a "rule" that says it's OK to capitalize every letter in a proper noun.

One of the reference books obtained was the "Manual on Usage & Style," Eighth Edition, ISBN I-878674-51-X, published by the Texas Law Review in 1995. Section D, CAPITALIZATION, paragraph D: 1:1 states...

Hold it right there. First of all, manuals on style do not constitute rule books for filing documents in a court of law.

Either no attorney, judge, or law clerk in Texas has ever read the recognized law style manual that purports to pertain to them, or the act is a deliberate violation of the rules for undisclosed reasons.

Wrong again. Style manuals for lawyers are designed primarily for prescribing rules for formal law review articles. Style manuals are not "the law" and they don't govern citation forms, etc., in a court of law. "Not following a style manual" doesn't violate the rules applicable to lawyers or judges in Texas, either.

If you had actually attended a law school in Texas, if you had actually taken a first year course in law school in Texas on legal research and writing (as I did, at the University of Houston Law Center), if you had actually taken the required course in law school on regulation of the legal profession (as I did at the University of Houston Law Center), if you had actually graduated from law school in Texas (as I did, from the University of Houston Law Center), if you had actually passed the Texas bar examination (as I did), if you were actually licensed to practice law in Texas (as I am), you would not have made the stupid mistakes you just made.

[JamesVincent]

Wonder if the next question is why case names are italicized.

[AndyK]

That's simple.

The italics (leaning letters) symbolize the fringe on the flag AND the fact that one must stand at an angle to the deck of a ship when it's tossed by waves -- thus maritime law.

[LPC]

From the Tax Protester FAQ:

Some courts have actually addressed this nonsense:

“Defendant Glenn Stinson argues that the case should be dismissed or “quashed” on the grounds that: ... 4) GLENN STINSON and NAOMI STINSON, as spelled in all capital letters in the caption of this case, are “tombstone names,” and therefore, are “nonliving persons” who have never conducted any business in Oklahoma; ....

“Defendant Glenn Stinson purports to be confused as to whether the Government’s complaint in this proceeding is directed at “Glenn Stinson and Naomi Stinson” or against “GLENN STINSON and NAOMI STINSON.” The difference between the fully capitalized and the first-letter capitalized versions of the Defendants’ names is immaterial, and provides no defense to the claims asserted by the Government.”

United States v. Glen H. Stinson et al., 2005 TNT 160-2, No. CIV-03-50-R (U.S.D.C. W.D.Okla. 7/22/2005) (tax assessments reduced to judgment and fraudulent conveyances set aside).

“Plaintiff also contends that the person designated as “MOGI JASON ROFICK” in all capital letters on the IRS notices is a fictitious entity created by the IRS with the purpose of taking title to his property as his name is “Mogi Jason Rofick,” designated by both capital and lower case letters. The Court finds this argument to be frivolous.”

Mogi J. Rofick v. Commissioner, 87 AFTR2d ¶2001-1003, 2001 TNT 112-95, No. 00-CV-74333-DT (U.S.D.C. E.D.Mich. 5/9/2001) (complaint to abate taxes dismissed).

“In his various motions to strike, plaintiff seeks to have the court strike a number of the United States’ filings from the record of this case, on the basis that these filings are ‘directed to a person not a party to this instant case.’ More specifically, plaintiff complains that the United States’ filings have been directed to a person named CRIS TIMOTHY HILLMAN, whose name is spelled in bold, capital letters, in contrast with plaintiff’s name, which is spelled in upper and lower case letters, which are, according to him ‘proper English.’ [Footnote omitted] Plaintiff contends that the person CRIS TIMOTHY HILLMAN ‘is either a dead person or a corporate fiction’ who is not a party to this case.

“To the extent that the mere usage of a boldface font or all capital letters may be considered a misspelling of plaintiff’s name -- a proposition which the court seriously doubts -- it is an error which is purely technical in nature. In some instances, the law will not countenance technical errors. However, the misspelling of a party’s name on a pleading or filing in an action in a United States District Court is not one of those instances. Such an error in this situation must be considered one of form not substance, and assuming that a party receives the document containing the misspelling and realizes it is directed to him, no reason exists not to hold that party to have notice of the document’s contents. Here, plaintiff must have received the documents containing the alleged misspellings, for he has moved to strike them. Because they were sent to his address, contained the case caption, and were identified by the correct case number, the court finds that he must have realized they were directed to him -- how could he not recognize this? In summary, because the manner in which plaintiff’s name is spelled, printed, or punctuated on filings in this case does not, in the court’s view, impact on the substance of the pleadings, the court denies plaintiff’s motions to strike as meritless.”

Cris Timothy, Hillman v. Secretary of Treasury, 85 AFTR2d ¶2000-707, 2000 TNT 111-13, No. 1:99cv136 (U.S.D.C. W.D. Mich. 3/28/2000).

“Wright brings what he has labeled a ‘motion to dismiss for plaintiff’s lack of standing and misjoinder of parties.’ First, he contends that since the amended complaint states that this action is brought against ‘FLOYD A. WRIGHT’ and his name is ‘Floyd A. Wright’, he is not the proper defendant. ... These arguments are patently frivolous and the motion is thus summarily DENIED.”

United States v. Wright, 83 A.F.T.R.2d 99-533, KTC 1998-630, No. S-94-1183 (U.S.D.C. E.D.Cal. 1998), (action by United States to reduce assessed taxes to a judgment against the defendant).

See also, United States v. Furman, 168 F. Supp. 2d 609 (E.D. La. 2001) (rejecting criminal defendant’s contention that he was not properly identified in federal government documents that misspelled his name or used his properly spelled name in all capital letters); United States v. Lindsay, 184 F.3d 1138, 1144 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 981 (1999),(affirming a district court decision not to reduce a tax protester’s prison sentence because, among other things, the tax protester claimed not to be the person named in the court documents); Wilcox v. Commissioner, 848 F.2d 1007, 1008 (9th Cir. 1988) (calling “baseless” defendant’s contention that the indictment must be dismissed because his name, spelled in capital letters, “is a fictitious name used by the government to tax him improperly as a business”); United States v. Washington, 947 F.Supp. 87, 92 (S.D.N.Y. 1996); United States v. Feinstein, 717 F.Supp. 1552, 1557 (S.D.Fla. 1989).

In Rev. Rul. 2005-21, 2005-14 I.R.B. 822, the IRS rejected the claim that there might be a “straw man” separate from the individual taxpayer, and confirmed that arguments concerning the formatting of a taxpayer’s in capital letters are “frivolous” and can result in civil and criminal penalties.

The claim that “[a] taxpayer is not obligated to pay income tax because the government has created an entity separate and distinct from the taxpayer—a ‘straw man’—that is distinguishable from the taxpayer by some variation of the taxpayer’s name, and any tax obligations are exclusively those of the ‘straw man,’ or similar arguments described as frivolous in Rev. Rul. 2005-21, 2005-14 I.R.B. 822“ has been identified by the IRS as a “frivolous position” that can result in a penalty of $5,000 when asserted in a tax return or included in certain collection-related submissions. Notice 2007-30, 2007-14 I.R.B. 883.

[Fmotlgroupie]

That's simple.

The italics (leaning letters) symbolize the fringe on the flag AND the fact that one must stand at an angle to the deck of a ship when it's tossed by waves -- thus maritime law.

And the word "Italics" is used because enslaving people is a trick of the popes and/or secret reptilian Roman emperors.

We really should be charging $50/ month for this like Mary Croft!

[Barnzibul]

So does that mean if I write my name in all caps and italics, I don't have to pay any taxes?

[Funkalicious]

So does that mean if I write my name in all caps and italics, I don't have to pay any taxes?

Sorry, the double negative rule comes into effect; by using both ALL CAPS and italics you lose your sovereign protection, become a vassal of Queen Elizabeth, and will be used as a food source by our reptilian Illuminati overlords.

[Gregg]

I've seen enough, the question asked has been answered sufficiently for any sane person with the IQ of a houseplant to understand. Since the original poster has yet to show he really wants an answer to any question he's asked, I'm stopping this before it goes any further.

I would also put you on notice that the purpose of this forum is not to provide you cheap thrills by seeing if you can twist and evade rational thought. Take it to Saving to Suitors or GLP....

[notorial dissent]

Sovrunidjitjibber, nice to see you're a multi-disciplinary ignoramus.

If you knew what you were talking about you would know that style manuals are for formal writing in a specific area, they have nothing to do with legal filings have a different stylistic format, often dependent upon which court they are filed with. There you go, flaunting your general and specific ignorance again for all to see.

The only other entity in the us with an all capital proper noun are legal fictions such as corporations.

There is nothing either legally or stylistically that says or requires that a corporation has to have its name spelled out in capitals, or use any capitalization at all for that matter.

[Barnzibul]

So does that mean if I write my name in all caps and italics, I don't have to pay any taxes?

Sorry, the double negative rule comes into effect; by using both ALL CAPS and italics you lose your sovereign protection, become a vassal of Queen Elizabeth, and will be used as a food source by our reptilian Illuminati overlords.

Rats!!!

I hate being a food source for our reptilian overlords. They always use way too much paprika.

[AndyK]

It appears that

(1) PD hasn't had a chance to follow up on the opening post

and

(2) there is still more discussion going on.

So, thead is UNLOCKED to provide PD an opportunity to insert his foot further into his mouth

ON THIS TOPIC ONLY

and for any additional refutations, explanations, or rebuttals to be posted.

However, the sword is dangling. Any motion of the goalposts and it will drop.

[Burnaby49]

So does that mean if I write my name in all caps and italics, I don't have to pay any taxes?

Sorry, the double negative rule comes into effect; by using both ALL CAPS and italics you lose your sovereign protection, become a vassal of Queen Elizabeth, and will be used as a food source by our reptilian Illuminati overlords.

Exactly the position I'm in now. Damn constitutional monarchy.

[PeanutGallery]

So does that mean if I write my name in all caps and italics, I don't have to pay any taxes?

Sorry, the double negative rule comes into effect; by using both ALL CAPS and italics you lose your sovereign protection, become a vassal of Queen Elizabeth, and will be used as a food source by our reptilian Illuminati overlords.

Rats!!!

I hate being a food source for our reptilian overlords. They always use way too much paprika.

As someone in a social club with a couple of members of Queen Elizabeth's immediate family (and therefore by extension one of your reptilian illuminati overlords) may I ask all potential food sources to go easy on the pepper, we don't want you over seasoned.

[Patriotdiscussions]

Sweet.

My English professor would love to hear that in grammar there are no rules.

Let me ask, when did last names start being used?

If the capitalization means nothing, ask for your name to be spelled correctly next time you reup your license.

Andy k, your first post alluded to some research, perhaps you have a link to it so that I might correct my error.

[Famspear]

...My English professor would love to hear that in grammar there are no rules.

I have a feeling your English professor is/was pretty disappointed with you. I suspect that your ability to absorb and retain the rules of English grammar is no better than your ability to understand how rules of law work.

Let me ask, when did last names start being used?

Let me ask: Who gives a sh*t?

If the capitalization means nothing, ask for your name to be spelled correctly next time you reup your license.

I know this is going to be difficult for you to grasp, but capitalization "means" things -- but it doesn't mean the things you apparently think it does.

Your ability to understand the rules of capitalization is important when you're writing a term paper or a letter to Mommie or some business correspondence. As already explained, however, capitalization does not generally have some sort of magical legal significance in documents filed in a court proceeding. If your name is George Michael Jones, it matters not in court documents whether, in a caption, for example, it's written in all capital letters or not.

Most kids past about the fourth grade have enough common sense to know stuff like this without having a grownup have to explain it to them.

[Patriotdiscussions]

...My English professor would love to hear that in grammar there are no rules.

I have a feeling your English professor is/was pretty disappointed with you. I suspect that your ability to absorb and retain the rules of English grammar is no better than your ability to understand how rules of law work.

Let me ask, when did last names start being used?

Let me ask: Who gives a sh*t?

If the capitalization means nothing, ask for your name to be spelled correctly next time you reup your license.

I know this is going to be difficult for you to grasp, but capitalization "means" things -- but it doesn't mean the things you apparently think it does.

Your ability to understand the rules of capitalization is important when you're writing a term paper or a letter to Mommie or some business correspondence. As already explained, however, capitalization does not generally have some sort of magical legal significance in documents filed in a court proceeding. If your name is George Michael Jones, it matters not in court documents whether, in a caption, for example, it's written in all capital letters or not.

Most kids past about the fourth grade have enough common sense to know stuff like this without having a grownup have to explain it to them.

What I thought, you spent about zero point five seconds on any kind of research on the topic of origin of name.

[Pottapaug1938]

More goalpost-moving from PD. He either is incapable of giving a direct answer to a direct question; so until and unless he changes, and starts responding to our answers to this questions with something besides inanities and irrelevancies, his questions are not worth a moment's additional thought from any of us.