http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/defa ... 727467.pdf
From the opinion:
In July 2019, Harvey drafted a document captioned “Acceptance of the Corporate Offer to Contract With Full Immunity and Without Recourse.” S.A. 103. The document contains an amalgamation of allegations related to Harvey’s rights and liabilities as a U.S. citizen. More specifically, in the document, Harvey claims that he is no longer a citizen of the United States and has suffered harms against his person by being treated as a citizen even though he is not. It also contains an arbitration clause, S.A. 161–65, and purports to be self-executing such that a failure to respond to the document constitutes “tacit acquiescence” to all facts raised in this “binding [and] irrevocable contractual agreement.” S.A. 160–61. Harvey claims to have mailed this document to several named parties, including the United States Attorney General, the Internal Revenue Service, the Louisiana Attorney General, the Commissioner of the Louisiana Division of Administration, and Hancock Whitney Bank. S.A. 31, 103. Harvey’s is the only signature that appears on the face of the document.
Harvey then promptly sought arbitration. An arbitration hearing was held on August 12, 2019 with an arbitrator from Sitcomm Arbitration Association.1 Harvey claims that the arbitrator awarded $5,158,667.43 in damages for breach of contract and $54,252,793.54 in additional penalties for each day since the “default of infraction,” S.A. 36–37, 53, and concluded that Harvey and the named parties had entered into a legally binding contractual relationship without fraud or inducement of contract. On August 30, 2019, Harvey sent demand letters to the defendants seeking to enforce the award.
When the parties did not respond to his request, Harvey filed suit in the Claims Court on February 27, 2020. The complaint requests that the court enforce the arbitration award against the alleged parties—now defendants— for breach of contract and requests damages for a wide variety of other claims, including violation of copyright, unauthorized withholding of revenue, refusal to withdraw federal tax liens, violation of injunction, and breach of fiduciary duty, for a total of $59,411,460.97. It also requests the removal of federal tax lien notices and correction of his political status and nationality from American to Louisianan, among other demands.Footnote 1: As the Claims Court noted, numerous federal courts have expressed serious concerns regarding Sitcomm Arbitration Association. See, e.g., Schlihs v. United States, 146 Fed. Cl. 495, 497 n.1 (describing the recurring “tarradiddle and lack of clarity” in Sitcomm’s decisions); PennyMac Loan Servs., LLC v. Sitcomm Arb. Ass’n, No. 2:19-CV193-KS-MTP, 2020 WL 1469458, at *1–2 (S.D. Miss. Mar. 26, 2020) (noting claims that “Sitcomm is a sham arbitration organization that uses the guise of legitimacy to market itself as an authorized and legitimate arbitration company . . . . [and] issues fake exorbitant final arbitration awards against various entities, despite no arbitration hearing having ever been held”).
