Requirement for Consent

An appearance may be either general or special ; the former is a simple and unqualified or unrestricted submission to the jurisdiction of the court, the latter is a submission to the jurisdiction for some specific purpose only, not for all the purposes of the suit. A special appearance is for the purpose of testing or objecting to the sufficiency of service or the jurisdiction of the court over defendant without submitting to such jurisdiction; a general appearance is made where the defendant waives defects of service and submits to the jurisdiction of court. Insurance Co. of North America v. Kunin, 175 Neb. 260, 121 N.W.2d. 372, 375, 376.

1

2

3

4

5

6

[ Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 97]

7

Those who do not consent to the jurisdiction of a specific court: 8

1. Cannot enter an “appearance” in the court and must insist on the record that they do not consent and are not making an 9 “appearance”. 10 2. May ONLY challenge jurisdiction of the court and do so by what is called “special visitation”. 11 3. If they are the respondent or defendant, must place the burden of proof upon the Plaintiff or Petitioner to prove WITH 12 EVIDENCE on the record of the proceeding that the court HAS jurisdiction to hear the case. 13

Another very important consideration is that jurisdiction over the parties cannot be conferred ONLY with the mutual 14 consent of the parties: 15

U.S. Code Annotated, Article III-The Judiciary:

16

UNITED STATES CODE ANNOTATED CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES

17

18

ARTICLE III--THE JUDICIARY

19

Current through P.L. 106-73, approved 10-19-1999

20

Section 2, Clause 1. Jurisdiction of Courts

21

Consent of the parties cannot confer subject matter jurisdiction on federal court, nor can party ever waive its right to challenge the subject matter jurisdiction of the court. United Indus. Workers, Service, Transp., Professional Government of North America of Seafarers' Intern. Union of North America, Atlantic, Gulf, Lakes and Inland Waters Dist. AFL-CIO, (Local No. 16) on Behalf of Bouton v. Government of Virgin Islands, C.A.3

22

23

24

25

(Virgin Islands) 1993, 987 F.2d. 162.

26

Federal jurisdiction cannot be conferred upon court by consent of parties, nor may its absence be waived.

27

Commonwealth Land Title Ins. Co. v. U.S., D.Conn.1991, 759 F.Supp. 87.

28

United States district court has only limited jurisdiction, depending upon either the existence of a federal question or diverse citizenship of the parties, and where such elements of jurisdiction are wanting district court cannot proceed, even with the consent of the parties. Wolkstein v. Port of New York Authority,

29

30

31

D.C.N.J.1959, 178 F.Supp. 209.

32

Parties may not by stipulation invoke judicial power of United States in litigation which does not present actual "case or controversy." Sosna v. Iowa, U.S.Iowa 1975, 95 S.Ct. 553, 419 U.S. 393, 42 L.Ed.2d. 532; Memphis Light, Gas and Water Division v. Craft, Tenn.1978, 98 S.Ct. 1554, 436 U.S. 1, 56 L.Ed.2d. 30.

33

34

35

Parties may not confer jurisdiction either upon the Supreme Court of the United States or a United States District Court by stipulation. California v. LaRue, U.S.Cal.1972, 93 S.Ct. 390, 409 U.S. 109, 34 L.Ed.2d. 342,

36

37

rehearing denied 93 S.Ct. 1351, 410 U.S. 948, 35 L.Ed.2d. 615.

38

Parties may not by stipulation invoke judicial power of the United States in litigation which does not present an actual case or controversy. Citizens Concerned for Separation of Church and State v. City and County of Denver, C.A.10 (Colo.) 1980, 628 F.2d. 1289, certiorari denied 101 S.Ct. 3114, 452 U.S. 963, 69 L.Ed.2d. 975.

39

40

41

Federal courts are not bound by factual stipulations that impact on their jurisdiction; hence, courts are not bound by stipulations on which existence of a "case or controversy" might turn. Occidental of Umm al Qaywayn, Inc. v. A Certain Cargo of Petroleum Laden Aboard Tanker Dauntless Colocotronis, C.A.5 (La.)

42

43

44

1978, 577 F.2d. 1196, certiorari denied 99 S.Ct. 2857, 442 U.S. 928, 61 L.Ed.2d. 296.

45

Parties cannot invoke jurisdiction of federal court by stipulating to jurisdictional requirement of standing. Vannatta v. Keisling, D.Or.1995, 899 F.Supp. 488, affirmed 151 F.3d 1215, certiorari denied 119 S.Ct. 870,

46

47

142 L.Ed.2d. 771.

48

Before a court can have jurisdiction over a suit, it must be proven on the record with evidence to have: 49

1. The Plaintiff must satisfy all the elements of “standing” to sue. Those elements are: 50

Requirement for Consent

136 of 396

Copyright Sovereignty Education and Defense Ministry, http://sedm.org Form 05.003, Rev. 7-23-2013

EXHIBIT:________