maritime directory | maritime registry | maritime companies | maritime managers | maritime operators | maritime charterers | maritime builders | maritime repairs | maritime finance | maritime insurance | maritime equipment | maritime owners | maritime brokers

maritime builders construction directory companies, Belgium maritime builders construction directory companies, Canada maritime builders construction directory companies, Channel Islands maritime builders construction directory companies, China maritime builders construction directory companies, Cyprus maritime builders construction directory companies, Czech Republic maritime builders construction directory companies, Denmark maritime builders construction directory companies, Estonia maritime builders construction use or benefit of another PETITION FOR DEFAULT ON FAILURE TO ANSWER, GENERAL ADMIRALTY RULE (GAR) 28 for the following reasons: 1. The time for Respondents/Libelants has expired, pursuant to GAR 28 to answer. 2. The Respondents/Libelants have filed faulted Notices or caused to be filed faulted“Notice of Federal Tax Liens” in the public record as shown in documents already before this court, absent their verified oath or solemn affirmation of complaint pursuant to Supplemental Rules (B)(1), (C)(2) & (E)(4)(f) or in the alternative F.R.Civ.P.4(e), thereby denying Claimants procedural due process. 3. The action before the court is in GENERAL ADMIRALTY and not SPECIAL ADMIRALTY therefore the court may pronounce the Respondents/Libelants to be
Finland maritime builders construction directory companies, France maritime builders construction directory companies, Germany maritime builders construction directory companies, Greece maritime builders construction directory companies, Highlands maritime builders construction directory companies, Holland maritime builders construction directory companies, Hong Kong maritime builders construction directory companies,United States Jurisdiction and venue of Act of 1964 and interesting comment was made which bares light on this instant case. This following is not a direct quotation but is simply paraphrased: Most attorneys and for that matter most courts are singularly lacking expertise in Admiralty/Maritime Law. Judicial Canon #1 is extremely important. Due diligence and a complete review of the merits of the case are necessary in the interest of justice. These Pro se litigants are not knowledgeable in the law and rely upon the discretion of the court to apply justice fairly and evenly pursuant to 28 USC § 471, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure - Rule 81 and rights and safe guards paid for in the highest premium, the blood of patriots, for the people of the United States of American and their posterity. Respectfully, specially, supplemental Rule Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (SFRCP) Rule E(8) “Restricted Appearance,” in the original in the alternative, as a matter of right and privilege and enter their Norway maritime builders construction directory companies, Philippines maritime builders construction directory companies, Poland maritime builders construction directory companies, Portugal maritime builders construction directory companies, Russia maritime builders construction directory companies, Scilly Isles maritime builders construction directory companies, Singapore maritime builders construction directory companies, Slovakia maritime builders construction directory companies, South Korea maritime builders construction directory companies, Spain maritime builders construction directory companies, Sweden maritime builders construction directory companies,The Petitioners/Claimants again United States.” F.R.C.P. 17. The district courts are prohibited from granting venue where theadded. Since no court order issuing from a court of competent jurisdiction is evident a question is raised, who receives the property and where did the money go that was in the custody of the law at termination of bankruptcy proceedings backXXXXC? See 28 USC §2463. Did the governor of the International Monetary Fund or any of his agents post a bond (28 USC § 2464) in order to protect the interest of the United States of America? Is it reasonable to assume that this court is barred by the Anti-Injunction Act 26 USC § 7421 in protecting the property that is placed in it’s custody by the agents of the International Monetary Fund pursuant to the revenue laws of the 40 corporate United States? This Petitioner thinks not. In simple words, the much over used § 26 USC 7421 is inappropriate as generally applied by the Internal Revenue Service. 19. Upon review of the Unificationdirect the attention of the court to to show any authorization.onstitution for the united States of America, Article III § 2; and, in tha

construction directory companies, Ireland maritime builders construction directory companies, Islands of Scotland maritime builders construction directory companies, Isle of Man maritime builders construction directory companies, Isle of Wight maritime builders construction directory companies, Italy maritime builders construction directory companies, Latvia maritime builders construction directory companies, Liechtenstein maritime builders construction directory companies, Lithuania maritime builders construction directory companies, Luxembourg maritime builders construction directory companies, Malta maritime builders construction directory companies, New Zealand maritime builders efend upon their rights as such rights exist at the institution of the action; the assignment of a right of action being deemed to vest in the assignee all the privileges and remedie possessed by the assignor. According to the rule of common law, the injured party alone is permitted to sue for a trespass, the damages being deemed not legally assignable; and if there be an equitable claimant, he may sue only in the name of the injured party. In admiralty, however, the common practice is to have the suit conducted in the names of the real parties IN INTEREST.” 1 R..C.L. § 33, PG. 424 (1914); A. . . and when a statue of the United States so provides, an action for the use or benefit of another shall be brought in the name of the construction directory companies, Northern Ireland maritime buildersjurisdiction thereof.shall be deemed in the custody of the law and subject to the orders and decrees of the courts of the United States having jurisdiction thereof.” Emphasis added. 5. As a further indication that the issue before the court is a matter of admiralty, Petitioners refer the court again to “Benedict’s Admiralty,: 7th Ed., Col., 2 Chapter IV § 51 footnote 7. “. . . [I]t is now generally held that government tax clais under 26 USC § 6321 >upon all property and rights of property whether real or personal rank below all other maritime liens . . .” 6. “A cardinal principle, in which the practice of admiralty courts differs from that of courts of common law, permits the parties to a suit to prosecute and d

Shipping News | Maritime News | Shipping Directory | Maritime Directory | Maritime Newsletter | Shipping Newsletter | www.maritime-newsletter.com | www.shipping-newsletter.com