DOCSLIB.ORG

Supreme Court of the United States

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Supreme Court of the United States tj j.r FILED MAR 25 2019 OFFICE OF THE CLERK L'PPFME CQJRT 'iS. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Donald Eugene Mallory - PETITIONER VS. WILLIAM P. BARR - RESPONDENT ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIQRA11I Donald Eugene Mallory, Cestui Que Trust C/O DONALD MALLORY # 142119 L.C.F. 141 First Street Coldwater, Michigan [49036) QUESTIONS PRESENTED IS A PRE-1933 PRIVATE U.S. CITIZEN AND CESTUI QUE TRUST WHO IS NOT AN ENEMY, ALLY OF AN ENEMY, OR FOREIGN NATIONAL PRECLUDED FROM SUING THE U.S. GOVERNMENT FOR THE RETURN OF VESTED PRIVATE TRUST PROPERTY UNDER 50 U.S.C. SEC. 4309(a) BECAUSE OF INCARCERATION? DID THE LOWER COURTS' RULINGS VIOLATE THE CESTUI QUE TRUST PETITIONER'S 1st, 5th, 9th, & 14th AMENDMENT RIGHTS OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION WHEN: (a) DENIED THE REDRESS OF GRIEVANCE; (b) JUST COMPENSATION, (c) PROTECTION OF THE CONSTITUTION AND, (d) DUE PROCESS BY REFUSING JUDICIAL REVIEW UNDER 50 U.S.C. SEC. 43O9(a)wHERE A?TICLE III ALLOW SUCH SUIT AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT? LIST OF PARTIES [j All parties appear in the caption of the case on the cover page. [1 All parties do not appear in the caption of the case on the cover page. A list of all parties to the proceeding in the court whose judgment is the subject of this petition is as follows: AI TABLE OF AUTHORITIES CITED CASES PAGE Beck v Clark, 88 F.S. 565 13 Becker Steel Co. v. Cummings, 296 U.S. 74, 79, 56 S.Ct. 15; 80 L.Ed.2d 54 15 Brtek v. Cihal, 245 Neb. 756, 55 LW. 2d 628 (1994) 14 Bump V. Stewart, Wimer & Bump, P.C. 336 N.W. 2d 731 (Iowa, 1990) 16 Carsens v. Central Nat. Bank & Trust Co., 461 NW 2d 331 (Iowa, 1990) Christus Health Southwest Texas V. Griffen, 75 S.W. 3d 584 (2005) 1(0 Crafts v. Pitts, 161 Wash. 2d 16, 162 P. 3d 382 (2007) 16 Discover Bank v. Owens, 129 Ohio Misc. 2d 7, 2004-Ohio 7333, 822 N.E. 2d 869 16 Draeger v. Crowley, (D.C. N.Y.) 49 F.S. 215 15 Duisberg v. Crowley, (D.C. N.Y.) 54 F.S. 365. 15 FRC V. GE, 281 U.S. 464. 14 In re Estate of Shaw, 2004 OK, Civ. App. 38; P. 3d 588 (Div. 2, 2004). 14 In re Marriage of Langham and Kolde, 153 Wash. 2d 553, 106 P. 3d 212 (2005). 13 In re Mossaui, 334 N.J. Super. 112, 756 A.2d 1076 (Ch. Div. 2000), 16 Jewell v.. Jewell, 602 S.W. 2d 35 (1980). 13 Jewett Car. Co. V. Kirkpatrick Const. Co., 107 F. 622 16 Kelley V. Intermountain Planned Parenthood, Inc., 828 F.S. 788 (D. Mont. 16 1992).Keller V. PF, 261 U.S. 428. 14 LaDue & Co. v.. Cabell, 326 U.S. 404, 410, 66 S. Ct. 93, 96, 90 L.Ed. 165. 13 Mogensen v.. Mogensen, 273 Neb. 208, 729 N.W. 2d 44 (2007). 14 Murphy v. Murphy, 698 N.E. 2d 877 (Ind. Ct. App. 1998) 16 Schilling V. Rogers, 363 U.S. 666, 4 L.Ed 2d 1478, 80 S.Ct. 1288. 14 Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE. 579. 14 Wellington Hotel Associates V Miner, 543 A.2d 656 (R.I. 1988). 16 Wilmont Homes Inc. v. Willer, 42 Del. Ch. 8, 202 A.2d 576 (1964). 14 CONSTITUTION AND STATUTORY PROVISIONS Article III, Sec. 2. 15,3,13 Amendment i 3,13 Amendment V 3,13 Amendment XIV 4,13,14 50 USC Sec. 4309(a) 5-6,13,14,15 50 USC Sec. 4307(c) 8-9115 Amendment ix 4,13 MAXIMS OF EQUITY CONCLUSION 17 TABLE OF CONTENTS OPINION BELOW 1 JURISDICTION 2 CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PROVISIONS INVOLVED 3-9 STATEMENT OF THE CASE 10-12 REASONS FOR GRANTING THE WRIT 13-17 CONCLUSION 17 INDEX TO APPENDICES APPENDIX A - Order Adopting Recommendation; Order & Judgment; Order of OA; Notice of Claim & Bill in Equity; Notice of Acknowledgment; Affidavit of Status. APPENDIX B - Affidavit and Bonds with Certificated Security. APPENDIX C - 2012 1040-X Tax Return; 1099-A, 1099-B, 1099-OlD & Examination Letter. APPENDIX D - Private Administrative Remedy; Notarial Protest; Certificate of Dishonor; True Bill; 1099-A, 1099-B, 1099-OlD; 1040-V; 1040 Tax Return 2013. APPENDIX E * Notice of Interest; Special Private Trust Indenture; Statement of Interest. APPENDIX F - Legal Title Holder by Nature; Notice of Deed; Notice of Conveyance; Certificate of Live Birth; Social Security Number; Name DONALD EUGENE MALLORY; WAYNE COUNTY 3RD JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT CASE NO. 86-07734-01- FY; Bonds; Court Judgment & 1040 Tax return voucher 2013. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI Petitioner respectfully prays that a writ of certiorari issue to review the judgment below. OPINIONS BELOW [ ] For cases from federal courts: The opinion of the United States court of appeals appears at Appendix to the petition and is [ ] reported at ; or, [ ] has been designated for publication but is not yet reported; or, [>1 is unpublished. The opinion of the United States district court appears at Appendix to the petition and is [ ] reported at ; or, [1 has been designated for publication but is not yet reported; or, [x] is unpublished. [ ] For cases from state courts: The opinion of the highest state court to review the merits appears at Appendix to the petition and is [ ] reported at ; or, [ I has been designated for publication but is not yet reported; or, [I is unpublished. The opinion of the - court appears at Appendix to the petition and is [] reported at ; or, [ ] has been designated for publication but is not yet reported; or, [ ] is unpublished. 1. JURISDICTION [ rr For cases from federal courts: The date on which the United States Court of Appeals decided my case was _______________ [,. I No petition for rehearing was timely filed in my case. [1 A timely petition for rehearing was denied by the United States Court of Appeals on the following date: , and a copy of the order denying rehearing appears at Appendix [ ] An extension of time to file the petition for a writ of certiorari was granted to and including (date) on ____________________ (date) in Application No. A______ The jurisdiction of this Court is invoked under 28 U. S. C. § 12544'. [ ] For cases from state courts: The date on which the highest state court decided my case was A copy of that decision appears at Appendix [] A timely petition for rehearing was thereafter denied on the following date: and a copy of the order denying rehearing appears at Appendix [ ] An extension of time to file the petition for a writ of certiorari was granted to and including (date) on ________________ (date) in Application No. A______ The jurisdiction of this Court is invoked under 28 U. S. C. § 1257(a). CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PROVISIONS INVOLVED ARTICLE III Section 2. The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority; - to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, orther public Ministers and Consuls; - to All Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; - to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party; to Controversies between two or more States; - between a State and Citizens of another State; - between Citizens of different States; -between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under the Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects. In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be a Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make. The trial of all Claims, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by jury; and such trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed. AMENDMENT 1 Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of free speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peacefully to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. AMENDMENT V No person shall be held for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be witness against himself, nor deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. AMENDMENT XIV Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States, nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Confidential Relations and Unenforcible Express Trusts
    University of Chicago Law School Chicago Unbound Journal Articles Faculty Scholarship 1928 Confidential Relations and Unenforcible Express Trusts George Gleason Bogert Follow this and additional works at: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/journal_articles Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation George Gleason Bogert, "Confidential Relations and Unenforcible Express Trusts," 13 Cornell Law Quarterly 237 (1928). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Chicago Unbound. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal Articles by an authorized administrator of Chicago Unbound. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CONFIDENTIAL RELATIONS AND UNEN- FORCIBLE EXPRESS TRUSTS GEORGE GLEASON BOGERT* It is a commonplace that courts of equity frequently base relief solely on the violation of a confidential relation. One of numerous examples of this action is to be found in the constructive trusts which are often created where a grantee has broken an oral, unenforcible promise to hold in trust for the grantor, and the grantee stood in a confidential relation to the grantor at the time of the making of the promise. The following is a typical case: A has conveyed land to B on B's oral agreement to hold it in trust for A and reconvey at A's command. A and B were in confidential relations before the deed was made. The Statute of Frauds prevents the enforcement of B's express promises. The retention of the land after setting up the Statute is not generally regarded as such inequitable conduct as to justify a decree that the holder is a constructive trustee.
    [Show full text]
  • Orphans' Court of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia County. Mckee Estate
    83 Pa. D. & C. 492 Page 1 3 Fiduc.Rep. 274, 83 Pa. D. & C. 492, 1953 WL 4499 (Pa.Orph.) Orphans' Court of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia County. Charities 37(1) McKee Estate 75k37(1) Most Cited Cases No. 654. Distribution of assets of a charitable trust cy pres was delayed for a five year period during which income was to April term, 1902. be applied under a scholarship plan authorized by the audit- February 6, 1953. ing judge and by which the court retains supervisory con- trols of a fund for a limited period of years "in order to per- **1 *493 Exceptions to adjudication. mit the situation to crystallize." West Headnotes Charities 37(6) Wills 618 75k37(6) Most Cited Cases 409k618 Most Cited Cases Where it is clear from a will as a whole that testator's intent The fact that no beneficiary is named to receive and enjoy is primarily charitable, a provision that the fund is to be surplus income earned by testator's residuary estate during used for the specific charitable purposes outlined and for the life of certain of his descendants does not violate any "no other purpose", does not prevent the application of the rule of law where it is clear from the will as a whole that the doctrine of cy pres, unless accompanied by restraints upon surplus income is to be accumulated for the benefit of a alienation, forfeiture or reverter clauses. charity. Charities 37(8) Charities 4 75k37(8) Most Cited Cases 75k4 Most Cited Cases Where a testator who was a Negro and military man left his A gift to charity is not rendered invalid where it vests imme- residuary estate of approximately $1,000,000 for the pur- diately upon testator's death because possession and enjoy- pose of founding and maintaining an inter-racial school for ment are postponed during the life of certain of testator's orphan boys desiring naval training, and the fund is insuffi- descendants.
    [Show full text]
  • Original 10/16/2018
    ORIGINAL 10/16/2018 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MONTANA IN THE STATE OF MONTANA A Private for-profit governmental services Corporation STATE OF MONTANA - DUN AND BRAD #945782027 ) Case # D DST) A private registered legal business entity A subsidiary corporation of UNITED STATES Corporation A De Facto for profit Governmental Services Corporation'FILED ) OCT 1 5 vS 2018 Ed" Smith DARRIN LELPAD REI3ER dba CLERK OF THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF MONTANA An artificial entity created through fraud, and Unlawful Conversion of natural Name by the STATE OF MONTANA Unlawfully Convicted, the man being involuntarily held as surety appearing by special appearance of Darrin Leland; of family of Reber A Living Soul, A man of GOD, Bondservant of Christ, Non Personam, Sui Juris a Non-representative/Non-agent CC: US Army Provost Marshal General Notified in Writing CC: US Commerce Secretary Notified in Writing U.S.C. Title 18 242: Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law This is a Living Testimony in form of an Affidavit; a Challenge of my Rights, Status, Standing &Jurisdiction; a Notice of Discovery of Fraud and Impropriety; a Writ of Habeas Corpus; a Demand for Remedy; and a Claim for Compensation Notice to principle is notice to agent, Notice to agent is notice to principle. I hereby pray to God for relief and command the administrator as public servant of"We the People" to read this thoroughly and with comprellension, this document is of a very serious nature and is not frivolous. Page 1 of 87 There will be no presumptions or assumptions, no Tacit agreements, no waiver of rights, no hearsay, no lawyering or attornment from the bench.
    [Show full text]
  • Use of Declaratory Judgment Actions in Probate
    North Dakota Law Review Volume 46 Number 3 Article 2 1969 Use of Declaratory Judgment Actions in Probate Shirley A. Webster Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.und.edu/ndlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Webster, Shirley A. (1969) "Use of Declaratory Judgment Actions in Probate," North Dakota Law Review: Vol. 46 : No. 3 , Article 2. Available at: https://commons.und.edu/ndlr/vol46/iss3/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Law at UND Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in North Dakota Law Review by an authorized editor of UND Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. USE OF DECLARATORY JUDGMENT, ACTIONS IN PROBATE SHIRLEY A WEBSTER* An action for a declaratory judgment is an extremely useful procedure in probate. Probate administration gives rise to complex problems involving every conceivable kind of property. The intertwined and often con- flicting rights of the distributees, heirs and creditors create uncer- tainties which can delay the closing of administration. A prompt and final determination of these problems is most desirable from the point of view of the fiduciary, his attorney, the persons interested in the estate and the general public. A fiduciary is often confronted with problems as to the inter- pretation of a will, determination of who are heirs or distributees, questions of priority of claims, title and rights to property, abate- ment of bequests and many other matters. The parties interested do not have all of the information held by the fiduciary and are not in a position to see the overall picture of the estate.
    [Show full text]
  • Its the Secret Trust? the Law
    Trust? Its the Secret Trust? The law ROMAN CANON LAW 3.3 Rights Suspension and Corruption Article 100 - Cestui Que Vie Trust Canon 2057 Any Administrator or Executor that refuses to immediately dissolve a Cestui Que (Vie) Trust, or if the man/woman wants to take control upon their Private Person establishing their status and competency, The Fiduciary is guilty of fraud and fundamental breach of their fiduciary duties requiring their immediate removal and punishment Canon 2045 By 1815 and the bankruptcy of the Crown and Bank of England by the Rothschilds, for the 1st time, the Cestui Que Vie Trusts of the United Kingdom became assets placed in private banks effectively becoming "private trusts" or "Fide Commissary Trusts" administered by commissioners (guardians). From 1835 and the Wills Act, these private trusts have been also considered "Secret Trusts" whose existence does not need to be divulged. Canon 2046 From 1917/18 with the enactment of the Sedition Act and the Trading with the Enemy Act in the United States and through the United Kingdom, the citizens of the Commonwealth and the United States became effectively "enemies of the state" and "aliens" which in turn converted the "Fide Commissary" private secret trusts to "Foreign Situs" (Private International) Trusts. Canon 2047 In 1931, the Roman Cult, also known as the Vatican created the Bank for International Settlements for the control of claimed property of associated private central banks around the world. Upon the deliberate bankruptcy of most countries, private central banks were installed as administrators and the global Cestui Que Vie/Foreign Situs Trust system was implemented from 1933 onwards.
    [Show full text]
  • The Use of Trusts By
    The Use of Trusts By Ronald D. Aucutt McGuireWoods LLP Prepared for The Heart of America Fellows Institute of The American College of Trust and Estate Counsel Kansas City, Missouri Developing Our Profession’s Future Leaders November 29, 2018 © Copyright 2018 by Ronald D. Aucutt. All rights reserved. The Use of Trusts TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. The Origin of Trusts ........................................................................................ 1 A. The Trust ..................................................................................................................1 B. English History ........................................................................................................1 II. Trust Law in America ...................................................................................... 2 A. Origin, Distinctions, and Taxes ...............................................................................2 B. “A Quiet Revolution” ..............................................................................................3 C. The Uniform Prudent Investor Act ..........................................................................4 D. The Revised Uniform Principal and Income Act .....................................................5 E. The Uniform Fiduciary Income and Principal Act ..................................................6 F. Conversion to a Total Return Unitrust .....................................................................7 G. The Uniform Trust Code ..........................................................................................9
    [Show full text]
  • Some Observations on Living Trusts
    Denver Law Review Volume 7 Issue 5 Article 2 July 2021 Some Observations on Living Trusts Ralph G. Lindstrom Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/dlr Recommended Citation Ralph G. Lindstrom, Some Observations on Living Trusts, 7 Dicta 3 (1929-1930). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Denver Law Review at Digital Commons @ DU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Denver Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ DU. For more information, please contact [email protected],[email protected]. DICTA Vol. VII MARCH, 1930 No. 5 SOME OBSERVATIONS ON LIVING TRUSTS By Ralph G. Lindstrom of the Denver Bar T will be the object of this article to make some general ob- servations with reference to so-called "Living Trusts". No attempt will be made to comprehensively treat even of fundamentals, but rather only to comment or perhaps specu- late in a desultory way on some matters of interest. The development of trust companies, thoroughly organ- ized and efficient, has given such an impetus to trust arrange- ments of almost illimitable variety, that one might wonder a bit if we were returning to so general a practice of having legal title in one person, and use and enjoyment in another, as caused Lord Bacon to observe: . .. "By this course of putting lands into uses there were many inconveniences, as this use, which grew first from a reasonable cause, namely, to give men the power and liberty to dispose of their own, was turned to deceive many of their just and reasonable rights, as namely, a man that had cause to sue for his land knew not against whom to bring his action nor who was the owner of it.
    [Show full text]
  • Mason's Minnesota Statutes, 1927
    1 94 \ Supplement To Mason's Minnesota Statutes, 1927 and #• Mason's 1940 Supplement Containing the text of the acts of the 1941 and 1943 Sessions of the Legislature, both new and amendatory, and notes showing repeals, together with annotations from the various courts, state and federal, and the opinions of the Attorney General, construing the constitution, statutes, charters and court rules of Minnesota together with Law Review Articles and digest of all common law decisions. Edited by the Publisher's Editorial Staff MINNESOTA STATE LAW LIBRARY MASON PUBLISHING CO. SAINT PAUL 1, MINNESOTA 1944 OF MAHOWiSE&W LIBRARY iON §8081 CHAPTER 60 Uses and Trusts 8081. Uses and trusts abolished. That much of trust estate consists of personalty does Provisions of will and deed of trustee conveying audi­ not prevent operation of rule that use of words of in­ torium to city of Red Wing created a gift on condition heritance indicates an intention to pass an absolute in­ and not a charitable trust. Longcor v. C, 206M627, 289 terest. First & American Nat. Bank v. H., 208M295, 293 NW570. See Dun. Dig. 9887. NW585. See Dun. Dig.9888a. Provision in deed making gift of an auditorium to a Where instruments creating trusts manifest an inten­ city on condition that income was to be used for benefit tion that gifts shall be vested, "divide and pay over of auditorium only was valid. Id. See Dun. Dig. 9878. rule" does not prevent vesting. Id. A provision in a trust agreement for a gift in trust to The common law recognized and upheld charitable named beneficiaries "and to their heirs at law by right trusts, but legislature abolished all trusts except those of representation, in accordance with the then laws of authorized by statute.
    [Show full text]
  • Trusts and Duties of Trustees: Instruction Paper
    University of Michigan Law School University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository Books Faculty Scholarship 1912 Trusts and Duties of Trustees: Instruction Paper George L. Clark Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/books/68 Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/books Part of the Contracts Commons, Estates and Trusts Commons, Legal Education Commons, Legal History Commons, and the Legal Remedies Commons Trusts and duties of trustees. Instruction paper ... Clark, George Luther, 1877- Chicago, American school of correspondence [c1912] https://hdl.handle.net/2027/hvd.hb1q8r Public Domain, Google-digitized http://www.hathitrust.org/access_use#pd-google We have determined this work to be in the public domain, meaning that it is not subject to copyright. Users are free to copy, use, and redistribute the work in part or in whole. It is possible that current copyright holders, heirs or the estate of the authors of individual portions of the work, such as illustrations or photographs, assert copyrights over these portions. Depending on the nature of subsequent use that is made, additional rights may need to be obtained independently of anything we can address. The digital images and OCR of this work were produced by Google, Inc. (indicated by a watermark on each page in the PageTurner). Google requests that the images and OCR not be re-hosted, redistributed or used commercially. The images are provided for educational, scholarly, non-commercial purposes. TRUSTS AND DUTIES OF TRUSTEES HID HB 1QBR A AMERICAN SCHOOL OF CORRESPONDENCE CHICAGO ILLINOIS HARVARD UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION BAKER LIBRARY VARD ET SANA VE RIA2 ECCL RISTO TAS TONOV CHR ÓEMIA SVISS.
    [Show full text]
  • OSLJ V4N2 0260.Pdf (272.3Kb)
    26o LAW JOURNAL - MARCH, 1938 this remedy shows that due to the lack of remedy both at common law and chancery, and due to the great demand for such a remedy, the statutes were enacted. In the case of In re Ungaro, 88 N.J. Eq. 25, IO2 Ad. 244 (1917), the court of chancery admitted it would have been unable to construe wills and other written instruments prior to the statute but that now such a declaratory remedy was available. In the principal case the dissenting opinion is apparently well sup- ported by authority in its position that the declaratory judgment was purely a creature of statute and not within the inherent jurisdiction of chancery. It is well settled in Ohio that the question of the appealability of a case depends upon whether the basic principle of the statute is equitable in character and based upon some equitable doctrine. Harper & Kirschten Shoe Co. v. The S. & B. Shoe Co., 16 Ohio App. 387 (1922). Clearly the basic principle and character of the declaratory judgment statute is not equitable. Therefore the declaratory judgment is not a chancery case and can not be appealed on both questions of law and fact. To have the appellate review of the declaratory judgment on law alone will in no manner harm the effectiveness of the declaratory judg- ment remedy or do violence to any sound principle of policy. On the contrary it will better serve the declaratory judgment, the aim of which is speed and simplicity in securing the relief sought, by avoiding a trial de novo on appeal thus securing greater dispatch in the final disposition of the litigation.
    [Show full text]
  • International Registered Mail Number: “IRREVOCABLE TRUST
    International Registered Mail Number: “IRREVOCABLE TRUST” Common-Law Trust Public Notice/Public Record IRREVOCABLE TRUST defined: Trust which may not be revoked after its creation as in the case of a deposit of money by one in the name of another as trustee for the benefit of a third person (beneficiary). Black’s Law Dictionary Sixth Edition (page 1512) BENEFICIARY “Cestui Que Trust” CESTUI QUE TRUST defined: The person for whose benefit a trust is created or who is to enjoy the income or the avails of it. See Beneficiary. Black’s Law Dictionary Sixth Edition (page 1511) CESTUI QUE USE defined: He for whose use and benefit lands or tenements are held by another. The cestui que use has the right to receive the profits and benefits of the estate, but the legal title and possession (as well as the duty of defending the same) reside in the other. 2 Bla.Comm. 330; 2 Washb. Real Prop. 95. Black's Law Dictionary Fourth Edition (page 289) PRIVATE TRUST defined: One established or created for the benefit of a certain designated individual or individuals, or a known person or class of persons, clearly identified or capable of identification by the terms of the instrument creating the trust, as distinguished from trusts for public institutions or charitable uses. Black’s Law Dictionary Sixth Edition (page 1512) Trusts, with their separation of legal and equitable property interests, arose under English law. Historically, England had two court systems, courts of law and courts of equity or chancery. Law courts applied fixed rules, whereas the equity courts applied more flexible principles of justice based on considerations of equity or fairness.
    [Show full text]
  • Book VI. Title XLIX. As to the Trebellian Senate Decree. (Ad
    Book VI. Title XLIX. As to the Trebellian senate decree. (Ad senatus consultum Trebellianum.) Bas. 41.3; D. 36.1. Headnote. 1. This senate decree was originally passed in the time of Nero. It provided, in effect, that where a trust, which an heir was directed to turn over to a cestui que trust, was turned over by the heir to the cestui que trust, both should be capable of suing and being sued in proportion to their shares which they obtained out of the inheritance. In other words, the cestui que trust became, in effect, a coheir. The testator might, however, direct too great a portion to be turned over, so that it would not be worthwhile for the heir to enter on, that is, accept the inheritance. The Falcidian law, dealt with in the next title, allowing an heir to retain a fourth of the net value of the inheritance, applied at that time only when direct bequest, i.e. legacies, in the technical and original sense of that term, were made, and did not apply when the heir was directed to turn over a potion of the inheritance as a trust. Thus many heirs refused to accept. To remedy this, the Falcidian law was extended to apply to trusts. This was done in the time of Vespasian, by the so- called Pegasian law. This law, also containing other provisions, was repealed by Justinian, but the terms of another law, namely the Trebellian senate decree, were amended so as to also include the valuable portions contained in the Pegasian senate decree.
    [Show full text]