www.federalmcc.webs.com
First Subsequent Civil Complaint to Federal MASTER CIVIL COMPLAINT

First Subsequent Civil Complaint to Federal MASTER CIVIL COMPLAINT

Click here to edit subtitle

1.    NOTE TO CLERKS AND JUDGES: This complaint seeks quick settlements. To facilitate settlement, or expedited jury trials, ample evidence to prove my claims herein is contained in the accompanying EXHIBIT BOOK.

2.    See Colorado First Judicial District case 2005DR0000.

3.    See Title IV-D Child Support Enforcement case #xx-xxxxxx-xx-xx.

4.    See Interstate Title IV-D Child Support Enforcement case #xx-xxxxxx-xx-xx.

5.    See Minnesota Rule of Civil Procedure 65.

6.    Minnesota has adopted the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act, Minn. Stat. §§ 555.01-.16.

7.    The main distinguishing characteristic of the declaratory judgment is the fact that by the act authorizing it, courts are empowered to adjudicate on disputed legal rights whether or not further relief is or could be claimed, Montgomery v. Minneapolis Fire Dep’t Relief Ass’n (1944) 218 Minn. 27, 15 N.W.2d 122; Connor v. Chanhassen Twp. (1957) 249 Minn. 205, 81 N.W.2d 789

8.    Since the Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act has been adopted by the state of Minnesota, a foreign judgment is essentially converted to a Minnesota judgment. Consequently, Minnesota law is applicable to the enforcement and adjudication of foreign judgments in Minnesota courts, Matson v. Matson (Minn. 1981) 310 N.W.2d 502. See Ladd v. Martineau (1939) 205 Minn. 129, 285 N.W. 281


9.    A judgment of a sister state may be attacked by a party on the ground of fraud if it could be attacked on that ground in the state of its rendition, either directly or collaterally, Tillinghast v. United States Sav. & Loan Co. (1906) 99 Minn. 62, 108 N.W. 472; see also Kreisler Mfg. Corp. v. Homstad Goldsmith, Inc. (Minn. 1982) 322 N.W.2d 567 (judgment of another state could be impeached if it was entered or procured by fraud)


10.    A judgment may be set-aside at any time for fraud on the court. Where a court is misled as to the material circumstances or where its process is abused, resulting in the rendition of a judgment that would not have been given if the whole conduct of the case had been fair, the court has inherent power to vacate the judgment for fraud, Halloran v. Blue & White Liberty Cab Co. (1958) 253 Minn. 436, 92 N.W.2d 794


11.    A void judgment has no effect and must be set aside, Lange v. Johnson (1973) 295 Minn. 320, 204 N.W.2d 205


12.    Satisfaction of judgment extinguishes the judgment, Boulevard Del, Inc. v. Stillman (Minn.Ct.App. 1984) 343 N.W.2d 50


13.    Minn. R. Civ. P. 60.02 allows a court to relieve a party of a final judgment for any reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment, Anderson v. Anderson (1970) 288 Minn. 514, 179 N.W.2d 718


14.    NOTE TO THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY COLORADO: Depending on the support that I get from you in securing justice and protection for my family and in bringing the criminals and child abusers to justice, I will be giving back to you, through a nonprofit organization, up to 94% of what my family receives from Jefferson County and Colorado in settlement and jury awards. Details will be provided soon at www.federalmcc.webs.com.