http://www.rantrave.com/Rant/LIST-OF-FA ... COURT.aspx
I wonder what this clown's track record is....
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
Moderators: Prof, Judge Roy Bean
28 US Code § 1330 actually deals with actions against "foreign states" - meaning other countries and their subdivisions, agencies and the like (in particular, it does NOT mean another state of the United States). The section gives federal district courts jurisdiction over cases between a US party and a foreign country, unless international agreements or the like provide otherwise.That Title 28 USC 1330 states that the United States District Court has to grant permission for the suit to be pursued once the court has been supplied sufficient proof that the united states citizen is actually a corporate entity and not a living man upon the land.
It turns out that the correct citation (some of you may have realized that an Oklahoma state court decision would not be reprinted in the Federal reporter) is:"The courts are not bound by an officer's interpretation of the law under which he presumes to act." Hoffsomer v. Hayes, 92 Okla 32, 227 F 417.
What! A sovrun with a reading comprehension problem? Who would have guessed?fortinbras wrote:From the document on Rant/Rave that you linked:
28 US Code § 1330 actually deals with actions against "foreign states" - meaning other countries and their subdivisions, agencies and the like (in particular, it does NOT mean another state of the United States).That Title 28 USC 1330 states that the United States District Court has to grant permission for the suit to be pursued once the court has been supplied sufficient proof that the united states citizen is actually a corporate entity and not a living man upon the land.