Notice of Void Judgment

Azle Municipal Court

_________________________________________________________________

CAUSE NUMBER A023735

STATE OF TEXAS, INC.

            VS.

GLENN W FEARN

_________________________________________________________________

Notice of Void Judgment

_________________________________________________________________

 

I, Me, My, or Myself, also known as Glenn Winningham; house of Fearn, a sovereign, living soul, a man living upon the land, a judicial power Citizen by right of blood, without the corporation called STATE OF TEXAS, do hereby provide Notice of Void Judgment, by Declaration, as follows;

• Whenever a Judge is dealing with a statute, like the Texas Government Code, or the Texas Penal Code, or the Texas Code of Civil Procedure, he becomes a Clerk working for the prosecutor

“…judges who become involved in enforcement of mere statutes (civil or criminal in nature and otherwise), act as mere “clerks” of the involved agency…” K.C. Davis, ADMIN. LAW, Ch. 1 (CTP. West’s 1965 Ed.)

 

“It is the accepted rule, not only in state courts, but, of the federal courts as well, that when a judge is enforcing administrative law they are described as mere ‘extensions of the administrative agency for superior reviewing purposes’ as a ministerial clerk for an agency…” 30 Cal 596; 167 Cal 762

 

“”When acting to enforce a statute and its subsequent amendments to the present date, the judge of the municipal court is acting as an administrative officer and not in a judicial capacity; courts administrating or enforcing statutes do not act judicially, but merely ministerially….but merely act as an extension as an agent for the involved agency — but only in a “ministerial” and not a “discretionary capacity…” Thompson v. Smith, 154 S.E. 579, 583; Keller v. P.E., 261 US 428; F.R.C. v. G.E., 281, U.S. 464 [emphasis added]

 

• When a Judge is operating as a Clerk masquerading as a Judge, he cannot do anything judicial, and if he attempts to do anything judicial, it is a nullity

“Ministerial officers are incompetent to receive grants of judicial power from the legislature, their acts in attempting to exercise such powers are necessarily nullities” Burns v. Sup., Ct., SF, 140 Cal. 1

 

• Once jurisdiction is challenged, it must be proven

“Where a court failed to observe safeguards, it amounts to denial of due process of law, court is deprived of juris.” Merritt v. Hunter, C.A. Kansas 170 F2d 739

 

“Jurisdiction can be challenged at any time,” and “Jurisdiction, once challenged, cannot be assumed and must be decided.” Basso v. Utah Power & Light Co. 395 F 2d 906, 910

 

“Defense of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter may be raised at any time, even on appeal.” Hill Top Developers v. Holiday Pines Service Corp. 478 So. 2D, 368 Fla a DCA 1985)

 

“Once challenged, jurisdiction cannot be assumed, it must be proved to exist.” Stuck v. Medica1 Examiners 94 Ca 2d 751. 211 P2d 289

 

“There is no discretion to ignore that lack of jurisdiction.” Joyce v. US, 474 F2d 215

 

“Where jurisdiction is contested, the burden of establishing it rests upon the plaintiff.” Loos v American Energy Savers, Inc., 168 I11.App.3d 558, 522 N.E.2d 841(1988)

 

“the burden of proving jurisdiction rests upon the party asserting it.” Bindell v City of Harvey, 212 I11.App.3d 1042, 571 N.E.2d 1017(1st Dist. 1991)

 

“Court must prove on the record, all jurisdiction facts related to the jurisdiction asserted.” Lantana v. Hopper,102 F. 2d 188; Chicago v. New York 37 F.Supp. 150

 

• The Defendant has previously served literally thousands of Notices upon Andrew Vogle, and Steve Myers, who is Pippins predecessor, and their superiors in Texas and Washington, District of Columbia, and England, which is proof that their assault, kidnapping, false imprisonment, and extortion upon and the Defendant, was premeditated, deliberate, calculated, and malicious.

 

• The Defendant filed a Challenge to jurisdiction by special appearance and these Satanist have not answered one word, or even attempted to prove jurisdiction.

 

• Havins #259, who is Pippins Satanist order follower PIG forged my signature on his citation in conspiracy with Stutsman, and I filed a Revocation of Signatures.

 

• In order to prove jurisdiction there MUST be a contract

“It is impossible to prove jurisdiction exists absent a substantial nexus with the state, such as voluntary subscription to license.  All jurisdictional facts supporting claim that supposed jurisdiction exists must appear on the record of the court.”  Pipe Line v Marathon. 102 S. Ct. 3858 quoting Crowell v Benson 883 US 22

 

• No corporation has standing to do anything in any court

“My opinion is and long has been that the mayor and aldermen of a city corporation, or the president and directors of a bank, or the president and directors of a railroad company and of other similar corporations, are the true parties that sue and are sued as trustees and representatives of the constantly changing stockholders…. A corporation, therefore, being not a natural person, but a mere creature of the mind, invisible and intangible, cannot be a citizen of a state, or of the United States, and cannot fall within the terms or the power of the above mentioned article, and can therefore neither plead nor be impleaded in the courts of the United States.” Rundle v Delaware & Raritan Canal Company 55 U.S. 80 (1852) [emphasis added]

 

therefore the real parties of interest in this matter are Havins #259, Pippins, Hudman, Vogel, McClure, Stutsman, Brundrett, Chambers, Jones, Crabtree, Rothenberger, and Barrett.

 

• Hudman, Vogel, Pippins, Stutsman, and Havins were NOT acting in their official capacity, but were all acting in their private capacity ONLY.

“A judge ceases to set as a judicial officer because the governing principals of administrative law provides that courts are prohibited from substituting their evidence, testimony, record, arguments and rationale for that of the agency.  Additionally, courts are prohibited from their substituting their judgments for that of the agency.” AISI v US, 568 F2d 284.

 

“An officer who acts in violation of the Constitution ceases to represent the government”.  Brookfield Const. Co. v. Stewart, 284 F. Supp. 94.

 

• Hudman the clerk masquerading as a Judge committed treason, and a seditious conspiracy with Vogel, Pippins, Stutsman, and Havins pursuant to your federal codes

“When a judge acts where he or she does not have jurisdiction to act, the judge is engaged in an act or acts of treason.“ US v Will, 449 US 200,216, 101 S Ct, 471, 66 LEd2nd 392, 406 (1980) Cohens V Virginia, 19 US (6 Wheat) 264, 404, 5LEd 257 (1821)

 

“An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.” Norton vs Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425, p. 442

 

“An unconstitutional law is void, and is as no law. An offence created by it is not a crime.” Ex parte Siebold, 100 U.S. 371, 376 (1880), quoted with approval in Fay v. Noia, 372 U.S. 391, 408 (1963)

 

“No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.” 16th American Jurisprudence 2d, Section 177 late 2nd, Section 256

 

• When Hudman becomes a Clerk Masquerading as a Judge, he walks away from any immunity he may enjoy, and becomes personally liable

“Judge loses his absolute immunity from damage actions only when he acts in clear absence of all jurisdiction or performance of an act which is not judicial in nature.” Schucker v. Rockwood, 846 F.2d 1202

 

“When enforcing mere statutes, judges of all courts do not act judicially” and thus are not protected by “qualified” or “limited immunity,” SEE: Owen v. City, 445 U.S. 662; Bothke v. Terry, 713 F2d 1404

 

• The decision in Hudman’s kangaroo so-called court is brutum fulmen

“brutum fulmen”:  “An empty noise; an empty threat.  A judgment void upon its face which is in legal effect no judgment at all, and by which no rights are divested, and from which none can be obtained; and neither binds nor bars anyone.  Dollert v. Pratt-Hewitt Oil Corporation, Tex.Civ.Appl, 179 S.W.2d 346, 348. Also, see Corpus Juris Secundum, “Judgments”  §§ 499, 512 546, 549. Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition.

 

• Hudman intended to be an accomplice to Pippins, Vogel, and their order followers Havins and Stutsman in my assault, under the color of their so-called law

“Color” means “An appearance, semblance, or simulacrum, as distinguished from that which is real. A prima facia or apparent right. Hence, a deceptive appearance, a plausible, assumed exterior, concealing a lack of reality; a disguise or pretext. See also colorable.” Black’s Law Dictionary, 5th Edition, on page 240.

 

“Colour, color. Signifies a probable plea, but which is in fact false…” Tomlin’s Law Dictionary 1835, Volume 1

 

“Colorable” means “That which is in appearance only, and not in reality, what it purports to be, hence counterfeit feigned, having the appearance of truth.” Windle v. Flinn, 196 Or.  654, 251 P.2d 136, 146.

 

“Colour of Law – Mere semblance  of a legal right. An action done under colour of law is one done with the apparent authority of law but actually in contravention of law.” Barron’s Dictionary of Canadian Law, Sixth Edition, page 51,

 

“Color of Law” means “The appearance or semblance, without the substance, of

legal right. Misuse of power, possessed by virtue of state law and made possible only because wrongdoer is clothed with authority of state is action taken under ‘color of law.'” Atkins v. Lanning. D.C.Okl., 415 F. Supp. 186, 188.

 

• Hudman the Clerk masquerading as a Judge knows that it is my right to have a neutral and detached judge, but instead chose to conspire with Vogel and Pippins and thereby participate in a fraud and a nullity;
  1. Hudman presented himself as neutral and unbiased when in actually Hudman was bought and paid for by Pippins, Vogel and Brundrett, and their handler in England, Elizabeth Windsor

“It is a fundamental right of a party to have a neutral and detached judge preside over the judicial proceedings.” Ward v Village of Monroeville, 409 U.S. 57, 61-62, 93 S.Ct 80, 83, 34 L.Ed. 2d 267 (1972); Tumey v Ohio, 273 U.S. 510, 5209, 47 S. Ct. 437, 440, 71 L.Ed. 749 (1927)

 

1. Hudman knows that King George signed the Definitive Treaty of Peace of 1783 as the King of England and France, and the Arch Treasurer and Prince Elector of the Holy Roman Empire and of the United States of America, and Queen Elizabeth is the successor to King George, therefore Hudman is taking orders from that bitch in England (no disrespect to dogs intended), and the Satanist POPE, Inc, in the Vatican, and conspired with these PIGs named herein, in a seditious conspiracy to the Constitution for the United States of America in violation of their own federal codes.

 

1. They assaulted the Defendant with their corporate codes and statutes and the Defendant has served hundreds of documents on them and their superiors stating that the Defendant is not interested in participating in their satanic commercial transactions, and Hudman is their accomplice

 

1. They assaulted the Defendant with their criminal corporation

“My opinion is and long has been that the mayor and aldermen of a city corporation, or the president and directors of a bank, or the president and directors of a railroad company and of other similar corporations, are the true parties that sue and are sued as trustees and representatives of the constantly changing stockholders…. A corporation, therefore, being not a natural person, but a mere creature of the mind, invisible and intangible, cannot be a citizen of a state, or of the United States, and cannot fall within the terms or the power of the above mentioned article, and can therefore neither plead nor be impleaded in the courts of the United States.” Rundle v Delaware & Raritan Canal Company 55 U.S. 80 (1852) [emphasis added]

 

and Hudman is their accomplice.

 

• For all of the foregoing reasons, all of the ORDERs, Judgments, and decisions, in this case, are absolute nullities and void ab initio

“Where there is no jurisdiction there is no judge; the proceeding is as nothing. Such has been the law from the days of the Marshalsea, 10 Coke 68; also Bradley v. Fisher, 13 Wall 335,351.” Manning v. Ketcham, 58 F.2d 948.

 

“A void judgment is one which, from its inception, was a complete nullity and without legal effect” Lubben v. Selective Service System Local Bd. No. 27,  453 F.2d 645, 14 A.L.R. Fed. 298 (C.A. 1 Mass. 1972).  Hobbs v. U.S. Office of Personnel Management,  485 F.Supp. 456 (M.D. Fla. 1980).

 

“Void judgment is one which has no legal force or effect whatever, it is an absolute nullity, its invalidity may be asserted by any person whose rights are affected at any time and at any place and it need not be attacked directly but may be attacked collaterally whenever and wherever it is interposed.”  City of Lufkin v. McVicker,  510 S.W. 2d 141 (Tex. Civ. App. – Beaumont 1973).

 

“A void judgment, insofar as it purports to be pronouncement of  court, is an absolute nullity” Thompson v. Thompson,  238 S.W.2d 218 (Tex.Civ.App. – Waco 1951).

 

“Void order may be attacked, either directly or collaterally, at any time”  In re Estate of Steinfield, 630 N.E.2d 801, certiorari denied, See also Steinfeld v. Hoddick, 513 U.S. 809, (Ill. 1994).

 

“A void judgment is one which, from its inception, is and forever continues to be absolutely null, without legal efficacy, ineffectual to bind the parties or to support a right, of no legal force and effect whatever, and incapable of enforcement in any manner or to any degree.” Loyd v. Director, Dept. of Public Safety, 480 So. 2d 577 (Ala. Civ. App. 1985).

 

“Not every action by any judge is in exercise of his judicial function.  It is not a judicial function for a Judge to commit an intentional tort even though the tort occurs in the Courthouse, when a judge acts as a Trespasser of the Law, when a judge does not follow the law, the judge loses subject matter jurisdiction and The Judge’s orders are void, of no legal force or effect”! Yates Vs. Village of Hoffman Estates, Illinois, 209 F.Supp. 757 (N.D. Ill. 1962)

 

and all such judgments and ORDERs are brutum fulmen

“brutum fulmen”:  “An empty noise; an empty threat.  A judgment void upon its face which is in legal effect no judgment at all, and by which no rights are divested, and from which none can be obtained; and neither binds nor bars anyone.  Dollert v. Pratt-Hewitt Oil Corporation, Tex.Civ.Appl, 179 S.W.2d 346, 348. Also, see Corpus Juris Secundum, “Judgments”  §§ 499, 512 546, 549. Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition

 

• Hudman intended to be a bought and paid for Clerks masquerading as a Judge held a show-trial in his kangaroo court

“Kangaroo court. Term descriptive of a sham legal proceeding in which a person’s rights are totally disregarded and in which the result is a foregone conclusion because of the bias of the court or other tribunal.” Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th Edition, page 868,

 

• PIG is an acronym which stands for “Persons In Government who intend to perjure their oaths.”

 

• Everything they do is a fraud

“Once a fraud, always a fraud.” 13 Vin. Abr. 539.

 

“Things invalid from the beginning cannot be made valid by subsequent act.” Trayner, Max. 482. Maxims of Law, Black’s Law Dictionary 9^th Edition, page 1862

 

“A thing void in the beginning does not become valid by lapse of time.” 1 S. & R. 58.  Maxims of Law, Black’s Law Dictionary 9^th Edition, page 1866

 

Time cannot render valid an act void in its origin. Dig. 50, 17, 29; Broom, Max. 178, Maxims of Law, Black’s Law Dictionary 9^th Edition, page 1862,

 

“Ex dolo malo non oritur action. Out of fraud no action arises. Cowper, 343; Broom’s Max. 349.” Bouvier’s Maxims of Law, 1856,

 

and any act by any government official, to conceal the fraud becomes an act of fraud;

“fraus est celare fraudem. It is a fraud to conceal a fraud. 1 Vern. 270.” Bouvier’s Maxims of Law 1856

 

and fraud is inexcusable and unpardonable;

“Fraus et dolus nemini patrocianari debent. Fraud and deceit should excuse no man. 3 Co. 78.” Bouvier’s Maxims  of Law 1856

 

and any fraud amounts to injustice;

“Fraus et jus nunquam cohabitant. Fraud and justice never dwell together.” Maxims of Law, Black’s Law Dictionary, 9^th Edition, page 1832

 

“Quod alias bonum et justum est, si per vim vei fraudem petatur, malum et injustum efficitur. What is otherwise good and just, if sought by force or fraud, becomes bad and unjust. 3 Co. 78.” Bouvier’s Maxims of Law, 1856

 

everything these City of Azle PIGs do is a fraud and a lie, and they get their Satanist BAAL priests like Vogel, and Hudman to help them with their assaults, kidnappings, false imprisonments, and thefts

“Fraud and deceit may arise from silence where there is a duty to speak the truth, as well as from speaking an untruth.” Morrison v Acton, 198 P.2d 590, 68 Ariz. 27 (1948)

 

“Fraud” may be committed by a failure to speak when the duty of speaking is imposed as much as by speaking falsely.” Batty v Arizona State Dental Board, 112 P.2d 870, 57 Ariz. 239. (1941).

 

and these City of Azle PIGs, as well as Hudman, Vogel, and Brundrett are all satanic children of the devil

“Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.” John 8:44

 

and their judgment day is coming

“…I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, [or Christians] and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.” Revelations 2:9

 

“But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers [pharmaceutical drug pushers], and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.” Revelations 21:8

 

• Havins #259, before God, Angels, and these witnesses below, and any witnesses who read this document, I shake the dust of the earth from off my feet against you and we will be talking about this on judgment day, satanist! (Matt 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5)

 

• Andrew Vogel, before God, Angels, and these witnesses below, and any witnesses who read this document, I shake the dust of the earth from off my feet against you and we will be talking about this on judgment day, satanist! (Matt 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5)

 

• Douglas R. Hudman, before God, Angels, and these witnesses below, and any witnesses who read this document, I shake the dust of the earth from off my feet against you and we will be talking about this on judgment day, satanist! (Matt 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5)

 

• Rick Pippins, before God, Angels, and these witnesses below, and any witnesses who read this document, I shake the dust of the earth from off my feet against you and we will be talking about this on judgment day, satanist! (Matt 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5)

 

• David McClure, before God, Angels, and these witnesses below, and any witnesses who read this document, I shake the dust of the earth from off my feet against you and we will be talking about this on judgment day, satanist! (Matt 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5)

 

• Steve Stutsman, before God, Angels, and these witnesses below, and any witnesses who read this document, I shake the dust of the earth from off my feet against you and we will be talking about this on judgment day, satanist! (Matt 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5)

 

• Alan Brundrett, before God, Angels, and these witnesses below, and any witnesses who read this document, I shake the dust of the earth from off my feet against you and we will be talking about this on judgment day, satanist! (Matt 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5)

 

• William Chambers, before God, Angels, and these witnesses below, and any witnesses who read this document, I shake the dust of the earth from off my feet against you and we will be talking about this on judgment day, satanist! (Matt 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5)

 

• Bill Jones, before God, Angels, and these witnesses below, and any witnesses who read this document, I shake the dust of the earth from off my feet against you and we will be talking about this on judgment day, satanist! (Matt 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5)

 

• Paul Crabtree, before God, Angels, and these witnesses below, and any witnesses who read this document, I shake the dust of the earth from off my feet against you and we will be talking about this on judgment day, satanist! (Matt 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5)

 

• Rouel Rothenberger, before God, Angels, and these witnesses below, and any witnesses who read this document, I shake the dust of the earth from off my feet against you and we will be talking about this on judgment day, satanist! (Matt 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5)

 

• Lee Barrett, before God, Angels, and these witnesses below, and any witnesses who read this document, I shake the dust of the earth from off my feet against you and we will be talking about this on judgment day, satanist! (Matt 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5)

 

• Greg Abbott, before God, Angels, and these witnesses below, and everyone who reads this document as witnesses, I shake the dust of the earth from off my feet against you (Matt 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5) and we will be talking about this on judgment day Satanist!

 

• Ken Paxton, before God, Angels, and these witnesses below, and everyone who reads this document as witnesses, I shake the dust of the earth from off my feet against you (Matt 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5) and we will be talking about this on judgment day Satanist!

 

• This Declaration is sealed pursuant to locus sigilli

“locus sigilli – The place of the seal. Today this phrase is almost always abbreviated “L.S.” ” Black’s Law Dictionary 9th Edition, page 1026.

 

Signed and sealed in red ink on the land, under penalties with perjury.

 

I, Glenn Winningham; house of Fearn, Sui Juris, a natural man of the republic, living in the republic, a common man, does declare that I have scribed and read the foregoing facts, and in accordance with the best of my firsthand knowledge, such are true, correct, complete and not misleading, the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, before God, Angels, and everybody who reads this document as witnesses, and pursuant to your rules of evidence.

 

This Declaration is dated this ______________ day of June in the year, two thousand and sixteen.

 

 

______________________________________________L. S.

Glenn Winningham; house of Fearn, sui juris

sovereign living soul, holder of the office of “the people”

Judicial Power Citizen by right of blood

a man, Inhabitant of the land

With full responsibility for My actions

under YHWH’s law as found in the Holy Bible and no other

With a postal address of;

Non-Domestic Mail

C/O 6340 Lake Worth Blvd., #437

Fort Worth, Texas

ZIP CODE EXEMPT

 

Name                                            Location                                              Signature

 

_______________________        _____________________________  _______________________

 

 

_______________________        _____________________________  _______________________

 

 

_______________________        _____________________________  _______________________

 

 

_______________________        _____________________________  _______________________

 

 

_______________________        _____________________________  _______________________