Today’s comment is by Mark Nestmann, Wealth Preservation and Tax Consultant for The Sovereign Society and President of The Nestmann Group.

Dear Reader,

A friend of mine happens to be a very successful trial lawyer. He assures me that he’s never filed a frivolous lawsuit. Even if that’s true, many of his colleagues aren’t nearly as judicious in the legal claims they file.

One study estimates that 50,000 new lawsuits are filed every day in U.S. state and federal courts. At that rate, the odds are that every person in the United States will be sued sometime in the next 16 1/2 years!

Why the U.S.A. Leads the World in Lawsuits

There are many reasons why the United States is the world leader when it comes to lawsuits.

In most countries, if someone wants to sue someone else, they have to pay a lawyer to do so. That sounds like a reasonable proposition. But in the U.S. that’s not the case.

In the good ‘ole U.S.A., lawyers can take cases on “contingency.” That means the attorney receives no fee unless the defendant has to pay. As a result, there’s nothing to prevent someone with a chip on their shoulder from suing you, even if they don’t have the money to hire an attorney. It also means trial lawyers are constantly searching for “deep pocket” defendants.

Your Next Lawsuit is Just One Greedy Click Away

If that’s not bad enough, numerous websites promise to make it easier to file lawsuits. For instance, www.sueeasy.com pairs trial lawyers and potential litigants. The site promises to let you “take the first step towards resolving grievances, ONLINE!”

To encourage even more lawsuits, investors have formed companies to finance lawsuits by buying a share of the settlement. When I searched on Google today under the term “lawsuit funding,” I received an amazing 159,000 hits.

Another reason lawsuits are so common is Congress has created an avalanche of laws that practically invite people to file lawsuits in U.S. courts.

For instance, just a few months ago, President Bush signed a bill amending an obscure law called the “Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.” The bill makes it easier for terrorist victims to recover civil damages. It also launched an orgy of lawsuits against U.S. companies that never had anything to do with terrorism.

Other federal laws that encourage individuals to file lawsuits include the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Racketeering in Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), and many others.

No More Frivolous Lawsuits? Yeah Right.

Some people collect stamps, coins, or antique furniture. My collecting habits are somewhat more esoteric: I collect stories of frivolous lawsuits. Here are a few of the more outrageous examples recently crossing my desk:

Group claims allergy to Wi-Fi signals. A group of “electro-sensitive” individuals in Santa Fe, New Mexico, claim they’re allergic to wireless Internet signals. And they’re suing the city for discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The group wants the city to disband all Wi-Fi devices in public buildings.

“Chaperone” sued for wrongful death. Have you ever accompanied your child on a school trip? If you have, and someone else gets hurt, you might be sued for failing to act as a “responsible party.”

That’s what happened to Susanne Sadler. She accompanied her cheerleader daughter on a trip to the 2004 Hula Bowl. Trouble is, another cheerleader on the same trip did a little too much partying and plunged naked to her death from a nine-floor hotel room. Sadler claims that she never agreed to chaperone anyone. Nonetheless, the parents of the dead cheerleader sued her, and an arbitrator awarded the parents US$690,000.

Packaging company sued for unintended use of product. In 2003, fire raced through the Rhode Island Station nightclub, killing 100 people. A company called Sealed Air that manufactures polyethylene foam is now on the hook for US$25 million. Why you ask? The nightclub owner used this product for soundproofing and the product allegedly spread the fire more quickly.

But guess what? There’s no evidence that the owner used Sealed Air’s polyethylene foam for soundproofing. Nor is there any evidence that Sealed Air ever promoted its foam for this purpose. Nonetheless, under Rhode Island’s “joint and several liability” law, if the court proved Sealed Air was even 1% liable for the fire, the company would have to pay a possible multi-billion-dollar claim. To avoid that possibility, Sealed Air will pay US$25 million in what amounts to protection money.

Bar responsible for your customers who ARE NOT drinking alcohol. “Dram shop laws” in all 50 states require bartenders to refuse to serve alcohol to obviously intoxicated patrons. In New Jersey, however, a court has gone even further. The court ruled that a bar owner may be sued for negligence because he did not try to protect a patron who purchased only soft drinks at the bar.

In this case, the owner was sued for failing to prevent a non-drinking patron from getting into a vehicle with a driver who was visibly intoxicated. The passenger died in a subsequent accident. There’s no reason to believe that a non-drinking guest in your own home wouldn’t be covered by the same legal logic.

“The most erroneous stories are those we think we know best - and therefore never scrutinize or question.” — Stephen Jay Gould

“OCALA, Fla. — A federal judge on Thursday sentenced the actor Wesley Snipes to three years in prison for willfully failing to file tax returns.”

“Mr. Snipes, who was convicted in February, received one year for each count, to be served consecutively, and an additional year of probation. The sentence was handed down by Judge William Terrell Hodges of Federal District Court.”

The above is from an article in the New York Times.

When I heard of this verdict, I was saddened, but not surprised. Its just another example of how stupid or vengeful American jurors can be. Just how corrupt the Federal injustice system is.

Let me explain.

For someone to be found guilty of “willful failure” of anything, they must first be required to do something. Sound confusing?

Let’s use tax returns as an example. For Mr. Snipes to be guilty of willful failure to file, he first must be required by law to file a return. Most of you are probably saying to yourself: well, he is.

Before you jump to this erroneous conclusion, look at the facts.

When you file a tax return you are required to sign it at the bottom. Not only do you sign it, you must sign it under “penalty of perjury.” This is another way of saying you swear the facts are true and correct and this information can be used against you in a court of law.

Put another way, when you sign a tax return you are being a witness against yourself.

If any of you have heard of the Constitution for the United States of America, specifically Amendment 5, it states, quite clearly: “No person shall…; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…”

This is why they used to call the filing of a tax return – voluntary. But, how can anything be called voluntary if they will throw you in jail for not doing it? That’s called being compelled.

This, dear reader, is why we used to live in a free, prosperous, “REPUBLIC” and now live in a bankrupt totalitarian empire on the verge of collapse.

Welcome to the Brave New World.

What would you do if you received a summons?

Would you end up like this lady?

I need some serious advice…. I had a attorney send me information regarding a credit card debt that was nearly 4 years old. I replied to this summons, sent a certified letter asking for more information, and they disregarded my letter and sent me another stack of papers and a long list of items they required of me, I send another certified letter demanding to see the general ledger and my signature on any customer agreement… again they disregarded it and today just garnished my bank accounts for $2819.73 in fees, interest, and whatever else they wanted to…. The really disturbing part of this is my name is on 3 of my families bank accounts because I help them (my father 85 years old, my disabled brother, and my daughter) and they cleared their accounts as well as my personal account. Is there any way you can help me… because seriously, I need help….. any advice would be GREATLY appreciated!!!

This is nothing more than a lack of knowledge.  She doesn’t know how our legal system works.

This lack of knowledge is what these bottom feeding collection attorneys rely on.  Its unfortunate, but this happens thousands of times a week all across America.  It shouldn’t.

Let us teach you how the system works - so this won’t nappen to you.

Dear Reader,

A few days ago my wife and I met a law professor from one of our local universities. After several minutes of conversation we learned that she’s involved in a free local tax assistance program. My mind instantly went to our dear friend that’s having the major problems with the IRS.

I began asking this law professor some questions.

The questions I asked involved the law, as its written, in the Code. My concern was and is, what does the law allow the IRS to do when collecting taxes and even more importantly, what does the law require the IRS to do before they can attempt to collect taxes. And most importantly, who does the law apply too?

Her answer should shock you.

She said she didn’t get involved in the law. She doesn’t question whether the IRS is doing its job legally or illegally. She presumes the IRS is complying with the law. She presumes tax laws apply to everyone alive. She relies completely on the RULES. The rules written by the IRS explaining how they interpret the law and how they require you to comply.

Her job is to help people comply with the IRS rules. If necessary, point out to the IRS where they may have made a data entry or mathematical mistake, and request the IRS correct it. She helps people negotiate a reduction in penalties and interest. But, never questions whether those penalties or interest charges are valid, let alone legal.

What really got my goat, she accused me of being a “tax protester.” According to her standards and her world (her words) anyone who questions the law and how the IRS administers it, is a tax protester.

This coming from a law professor. Someone who teaches people how to be an attorney at law. Someone who allegedly teaches “law.”

Later that evening, after giving some thought to our conversation, I looked at my wife and declared: I really feel sorry for the poor schmuck. She’s helping to ruin our world and her world and is to stupid to even know it.

Consider our history.

One night, a couple of hundred years ago, a bunch of men got together, dressed up like Indians and illegally boarded several ships belonging to someone else and threw the cargo into the harbor.

I don’t know if they still teach this in public school history class; but, this was known as the “Boston Tea Party.” It was American colonists protesting the increase in “TAX” on the tea imported into the colonies. This marked the beginning of the Revolutionary War. Our country was founded on and by “tax protesters.” Which puts me in pretty good company.

What little freedom you, me and this law professor still have is the direct result of the bravery these long forgotten “tax protesters” showed many years ago. The massive amount of freedoms we have lost over the years is due to the go along to get along, don’t rock the boat, which way is most profitable, attitude of people like our law professor.

I had another realization.

I have, for a long time, considered attorneys at law just lying, cheating, dishonest, traitors. That may not be entirely true.

This lady is a law professor. She teaches other people how to be attorneys. More than likely, all the other law professors are just like her. Don’t question the law, don’t question their world, they just teach people how to manipulate it for profit.

Which would mean that most attorneys at law aren’t necessarily stupid, they’re just ignorant. They don’t know any better.

Na….

When our country was set up, when the Constitution was written, the judicial branch was designed to be independent. Its sole purpose was to protect you and I from the power grabs of the administrative and congressional branches of government. The authors must have thought lawyers of their day were above the petty need to gratify their egos and a lust for power. That they would put the people and their country before the needs of a few. Two Hundred and Thirty years ago, this might have been true. It certainly isn’t today.

The members of the judicial branch, those alleged guardians of the law, have failed us miserably. And intentionally.

If you’re rights and freedom still have any meaning to you, you’ll have to protect them on your own. Todays attorneys at law don’t get involved in the law, rights, or freedom.

Jim

P.S.  Maybe this is why people who use our information are so successful in defending against law suits.  They are taught to use the law and facts.  Something attorneys at law seem to be unfamiliar with.

First, let me thank you so much for taking time out of your busy schedule to help me solve a very perplexing problem.

I’m the Defendant in this case and I’m completely confused.

When I was a kid going to school I was taught that the judicial system in the United States was designed to protect the life, liberty, and property of we the people. You and me.

I was taught that when someone injures you, you can use the courts to make yourself whole. Get back what you lost. What was taken from you. Our courts weren’t created to help attorneys and corporations make profits.

Plaintiff (Credigy Receivables Inc, or LVNV Funding, LLC, or whomever) is claiming that I owe them a large amount of money. Which is perplexing since I had never heard of them until I received a very threatening letter in the mail from them about a year ago.

I have checked all my records. I have no record of a contract with them. I have no record of ever doing any business with them. Yet, they say I owe them money?

They say they bought an account of mine from a bank. And because of this alleged purchase, I now owe them the alleged balance due on this account.

I have asked for a copy of any contract they might have with the bank that shows my name, account number, and the amount they paid for the account. They refuse to provide this evidence. They insist I take their word for it.

What I need you to do, is put yourself in my shoes. See this strange situation from my perspective. Then decide how you would like to be treated.

Imagine if you would.

One day, out of the blue, you get a letter from one of your neighbors from two doors down saying you owe them money. They claim they bought a debt from your next door neighbor. Your next door neighbor claims they paid your electric bill several months ago and you have refused to repay them for the favor. Now, your neighbor two doors down who bought this alleged debt and wants to collect.

Here’s the first problem.

When your next door neighbor originally asked you to repay them, being a fair minded person you asked for a little evidence.

You asked the next door neighbor for a copy of this alleged electric bill that he said he paid and a receipt showing he paid it, when he paid it, and how much he paid, and a sworn statement saying he used his own money to pay the bill. You didn’t want to pay your neighbor if it wasn’t his money that paid the bill, even if he had receipts.

He refused. The only thing he would give you was a statement/invoice that he created on his computer showing the amount he claims you owe.

Now, the neighbor two doors down is trying to collect on the same alleged debt.

You ask him for a copy of the contract showing he purchased the debt. A contract that shows your name, account number, amount allegedly owed, amount he paid for the account. Proof that he actually bought this account. He refuses.

You also ask him for the same evidence you asked your next door neighbor for. Proof of the original debt. Instead of doing the honest thing, providing proof, he files a law suit. Hoping you won’t be able or willing to pay an attorney to represent you or capable of defending yourself.

The only evidence that your neighbor two doors down has, is the statement created by your next door neighbor. But no supporting evidence. A statement that anyone, including your next door neighbor, could create if they owned a computer.

If this happened to you, what would you want me to do? Make you pay the bill? Make your neighbors provide some valid proof that you actually owe the money?

I have attempted to pay the bank, upon receipt of proof that they lent me money. They refused my payment. Evidence of this will be provided.

I have demanded evidence from plaintiff and its attorneys through discovery. They have refused. Evidence of this will be provided.

I have motioned the court to force plaintiff and its attorneys to provide evidence of a contract, evidence of the debt. The judge has denied all my motions. This is a matter of court record.

Today, I’m the defendant, tomorrow, it may be you. If corporations don’t have to prove they actually lent you money, if corporations don’t have to prove they actually own an account, they can do pretty much whatever they want. Today they are trying to steal from me. Tomorrow it might be you. Unless you’re willing to put a stop to this abuse of our court system.

Our future is in your hands.