Fifth Circuit

US Supreme Court 5th Circuit Orders (November 18 2019)

US Supreme Court 5th Circuit Orders and Grants for 5th Cir. and Other Notable Cases from Other Circuits (November 18, 2019)

US SUPREME COURT – 5TH CIR.,

Order List for Monday, Nov 18, 2019

What happened when people or companies appealed to the US Supreme Court
(Petition for Writ of Certiorari)

18-9538 (18-60399) Mark Anthony Head v. United States (Criminal)
18-9687 (18-40388) Candelario Lucio-Garza v. United States (Criminal)
19-104 (17-41176)  Flavio Tamez v. United States  – Petiton Denied and Rehearing Denied (Criminal) .
19-340 (18-10382) – Featured LIT Case (DeJoria) – see Below; Petition Denied. (Civil Bankruptcy).
19-384 (18-40272) Harmon L. Taylor v. City of Sherman, Texas, et al. (Criminal)
19-5171 (16-70025) Victor Hugo Saldano v. Lorie Davis, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division (CAPITAL CASE)
19-5199 (19-10078) Billy John Roberson v. Rowlett Police Department, et al. (Criminal)
19-5553 (18-60261) Angela Roy v. United States (Criminal)
19-5934 (17-50914) Bruce Randol Merryman v. Lorie Davis, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division (Criminal)
19-5947 (18-50539) Michael Patrick Kennedy v. Lorie Davis, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division (Criminal)
19-5952 (18-60869) Keith A. Gordon v. Cenedra D. Lee, et al. – Petition Filed regarding Judicial Bias at the Lower Court (Denial of Writ of Mandamus to 5th Circuit)
19-5985 (18-20263) Leeroy Cesar Carballo v. Lorie Davis, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division (Criminal) – Petition Filed complaining “whether and to what extent will the criminal justice system tolerate a defense attorney who overrides a defendant.’s right to testify”
19-6004 (18-11453) Lynn Taylor v. United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Criminal)
19-6109 (18-50616) James Abraham Mata v. United States (Criminal)
19-6295 (18-10403) Antonio Flores, Petitioner v. United States (Criminal)
19-6334 (17-11490) Ignacio Arellano-Banuelos v. United States (Immigration AND Criminal)
19-6335 (19-40697) James Morris Balagia, v. United States (Criminal)
19-6353 (17-20694) Bekir Buluc, aka Celebi Buluc, aka Bekir Celibi v. United States (Immigration AND Criminal)

ORDERS IN PENDING CASES (HOMEOWNER/BANK/NON-BANK RELATED)

19-408 NEHRKE, GAREY R. V. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.

“The fate of future generations hangs on the steadfastness to cor­rect these Constitutional violations against Mr. Nehrke, his family and millions of others.

Rule of law directs that void judgements are a nullity and have no standing, and no Court or judge can make valid that which is not. The injustices plaguing the Courts in fa­vor of corporate and political interests must end.

It’s time for Constitutional rights of due process, fairness and justice to prevail as it was meant to be when cre­ated by our founding fathers.

The U.S. Government is undeniably utilizing the GSEs as State-actor financial agents, and is syphoning Billions of unlawful monies from these companies which is coming from countless wrongful foreclosures on Americans homes.

With the recent federal Court rul­ing that the NWS is unconstitutional, and the previous ruling deeming the FHFA unconstitutional, this High Court must step in and set the rightful precedent that is needed to correct over a decade of wrongful foreclo­sures.

This is clearly a Constitutional issue which de­mands exclusive federal jurisdiction and the address­ment of this Supreme Court. Wells Fargo has commit­ted unconscionable acts against millions of Americans in furtherance of these unlawful foreclosures, many that the government has an undeniable financial inter­est in.

These are far reaching issues of great public im­portance which affect the lives of all Americans.

These issues can no longer be ignored and/or stonewalled in the Courts, as the largest heist of American property and wealth in our Country’s history must be rectified. State records divisions contain a plethora of corrupted land titles while secret securitizations, rehypotheca­tions, default policies and multiple derivative hedges have allowed Wells Fargo and others to gain unjust monies from mass foreclosure fraud.

These unlawful and undisclosed securities transactions were misrepre­sented to unsuspecting victims as traditional mort­gages.

Furthermore, the government has collected Bil­lions in fines for numerous frauds that substantiates the need for homeowner restitution, as unlawful bene­fits well above the note balances owed were syphoned from each property by non-legal owners like Wells Fargo.

These questions are ripe for review and address­ing by the Court to set rightful Constitutional precedent.”

19-340 – Carey D. Ebert v. John Paul DeJoria, et al.

“Application of the Article III constitutional analysis is straightforward here. As the jury found, LSI was harmed when Respondents caused it to take on millions of dollars of debt that it had no hope of repaying.

As the jury found, that debt was a direct result of the efforts of Respondents, who were corporate fiduciaries and their abettors, to inflate LSI’s stock price for their personal gain.

And, as in Norris, “this litigation can redress the loss through damages, as the judgment demonstrates.” Norris, 869 F.3d at 366.

Thus, there can be no doubt about LSI’s (and, in bankruptcy, the Trustee’s) constitutional standing to assert these claims.

To overcome their failure to raise—much less prove—these merit-based defenses in the district court, Respondents disguised them in standing “garb”12 in the hope of misleading the Fifth Circuit on appeal.

Unfortunately, the Respondents’ ruse worked.”

CASE CODE KEY

First Letter  =  Jurisdictional Grounds  (ex. 13-100  CSX)

–  Certiorari

A  –  Appeal

–  Certified Question

q  Second Letter  =  Court Below  (ex. 13-100  CSX)

S  –  State

F  –  U.S. Court of Appeals

T  –  Three-Judge District Court

M  –  U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

O  –  Other Court

q  Third Letter  =  Nature of Case  (ex. 13-100  CSX)

X  –  Civil

Y  –  Criminal

H  –  Habeas Corpus or other collateral attack

1 Comment

1 Comment

  1. Pingback: US Supreme Court 5th Circuit Orders (November 25, 2019) | Laws In Texas

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Most Popular

Laws In Texas is a blog about the Financial Crisis and how the banks and government are colluding against the citizens and homeowners of the State of Texas and relying on a system of #FakeDocs and post-crisis legal precedents, specially created by the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to foreclose on homeowners around this great State. We are not lawyers. We do not offer legal advice. We are citizens of the State of Texas who have spent a decade in the court system in Texas and have been party to during this period to the good, the bad and the very ugly.

Donate to LawsInTexas. Make a Difference.

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

We keep your data private and share your data only with third parties that make this service possible. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

© 2020 Laws In Texas. | All Rights Reserved.

To Top