Richards Asset Management Trust, et al. - Page 11

                                       - 11 -                                         
               On January 16, 2002, Richards Management Trust filed a                 
          response to respondent’s motion to hold petitioner in default in            
          the case at docket No. 10764-00, and Mr. Richards filed a re-               

               2.   This Courts’ [sic] order states “. . . petitioner                 
                    purports to be a trust . . .”  Petitioner is a                    
                    trust, and the respondent has never been able to                  
                    prove otherwise.  Nor does the respondent have the                
                    right or ability to set aside a contract.                         
                  *       *       *       *       *       *       *                   
               4.   Petitioner does not want this false tax claim to                  
                    be litigated in court, and has petitioned this                    
                    Court to have this case removed from the docket as                
                    having been petitioned in error due to the errone-                
                    ous instructions given by the respondent.                         
               WHEREFORE it is prayed that:                                           
               1.   This Court dismiss this case at petitioner’s re-                  
                    quest as the original petition was issued in error                
                    due to false directions given to petitioner by                    
                    respondent.  Petitioner believes that he has the                  
                    right to correct his mistake and withdraw the                     
                    original petition.                                                
               2.   This Court and the respondent recognize the peti-                 
                    tioner as a Trust and cease attempting to set                     
                    aside a contract in direct opposition to the Con-                 
                    stitution of the United States of America.                        
               3.   This court sanction the respondent for using this                 
                    Court for illegal purposes.  Respondent has no                    
                    legal tax claim as petitioner has noted to respon-                
                    dent and this Court on numerous occasions.  With-                 
                    out a legal claim, respondent fraudulently in-                    
                    structed petitioner to use this Court to legiti-                  
                    mize his illegal attempt to deprive petitioner of                 
                    his assets.                                                       
               4.   This Court instruct the respondent to cease, now                  
                    and forever, harassment of petitioner.                            

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011