PART 1
THE WASHINGTON STATE CONSTITUTION AT ARTICLE IV, § 1 PROVIDES THAT . . . “JUDICIAL POWER OF THE STATE SHALL BE VESTED IN A SUPREME COURT, . . .”
THIS IS TRUE IN EVERY STATE!!!!
The Washington State Supreme Court in Graham v. Washington State Bar Ass’n, 86 Wn.2d 624, 548 P.2d 310 (1976), citing to Sharood v. Hatfield, 296 Minn. 416, 210 N.W.2d 275 (1973), held that the:
“. . . regulation of the practice of law and “the power to make the necessary rules and regulations governing the bar was intended to be vested exclusively in the supreme court, free from the dangers of encroachment either by the legislative or executive branches.” Graham v. Washington State Bar Ass’n, 86 Wn.2d 624, 548 P.2d 310 (1976). See also In re Juvenile Director, 87 Wash. 2d 232, 552 P.2d 163 (1976) and State v. Osloond, 60 Wash. App. 584, 805 P(2d) 263 (1991). And;
The definition of practice of law is the province of the courts, rather than the legislatures. Lowell Bar Assn. v. Loeb, 315 Mass. 176, 52 N.E. 27 (1943); People v. ex rel. Chicago Bar Assn. v. Goodman, 366 Ill. 346, 8 N.E.2d 941 (1937).
It is undisputed pursuant to CR 8 (d) that in Hagan v. Kassler Escrow, Inc., 96 Wn.2d 443 (1982), that the Washington State Supreme Court reaffirmed its earlier ruling in Bar Association v. Great Western Federal, 91 Wn.2d 48, 586 P.2d 870 (1978), that:
“. . . the selection and completion of form legal documents [such as Dependency Petitions or Termination Petitions], or the drafting of such documents, including deeds, mortgages, deeds of trust, promissory notes and agreements modifying these documents constitutes the practice of law.” Hagan Escrow, Inc., 96 Wn.2d 443 (1982). And;
In Ferris v. Snively, 172 Wash. 167, 174, 19 P.2d 942 (1933), it is said:
“The practice of law is defined in 2 R.C.L., p. 938, § 4, as follows:
“According to the generally understood definition of the practice of law in this country, it embraces the preparation of pleadings and other papers incident to actions and special proceedings, and the management of such actions and proceedings on behalf of clients before judges and courts, and, in addition, conveyancing, the preparation of legal instruments of all kinds, and, in general, all advice to clients, and all action taken for them in matters connected with the law. An attorney at law is one who engages in any of these branches of the practice of law.” Ferris v. Snively, 172 Wash. 167, 174, 19 P.2d 942 (1933) (citing Ruling Case Law at page 938, § 4). And;
As a matter of fact, long before the Great Western and Kassler decisions, it was already enjoinable conduct for a real estate broker to select and complete form deeds in closing real estate transactions. See Washington State Bar Association v. Washington Association of Realtors, et al., 41 Wn.2d 697, 251 P.2d 619 (1952) in which the Court barred a real estate broker from doing precisely that.
Similarly, the Illinois court’s have held that . . . “A bill was filed by the corporation for an accounting. Held, that a general demurrer to the bill should be sustained upon the ground that this was an attempt upon the part of a corporation to "practice law." Mid land Credit Adjustment Company et al v. Donnelley, 219 111. A 271 (1921).
IF REAL ESTATE AGENTS CAN’T PRACTICE LAW, THEN NEITHER CAN CPS SOCIAL WORKERS!!!!
IF REAL ESTATE AGENTS CAN’T PRACTICE LAW, THEN NEITHER CAN GUARDIAN AD LITEMS!!!!
WE CAN DEMAND THAT THE COUNTY PROSECUTORS CHARGE . . . “ALL CPS SOCIAL WORKERS” . . . AND . . . “ALL GUARDIAN AD LITEMS” . . . WITH . . . “UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW” . . . ABSENT AN RCW ____________STATUTE THAT SPECIFICALLY EXEMPTS THEM FROM BEING SO CHARGED????
WE CAN DEMAND THAT THE FAMILY COURT JUDGE CHARGE . . . “ALL CPS SOCIAL WORKERS” . . . AND . . . “ALL GUARDIAN AD LITEMS” . . . WITH . . . “CONTEMPT OF COURT” . . . ABSENT AN RCW ____________STATUTE THAT SPECIFICALLY EXEMPTS THEM FROM BEING SO CHARGED????
IF THE PROSECUTORS REFUSES TO PROSECUTE THEM, WE CAN CHARGE THE PROSECUTORS WITH OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT, OR BETTER YET, MAYBE WE CAN CHARGE THE PROSECUTORS AS CO-CONSPIRATORS AND AIDERS AND ABETTERS OR ACCESSORIES AFTER THE FACT OF THE FELONY CRIMES OF KIDNAPING, CUSTODIAL INTERFERENCE, CHILD STEALING, CHILD SELLING, HUMAN TRAFFICKING, MONEY LAUNDERING, ETC.
IT IS THE CRIMINALLY CORRUPT WSBA ATTORNEYS WHO DRAFTED THE ILLEGAL . . . “RCW 13.34.040 DEPENDENCY PETITIONS” . . . AND . . . “RCW 13.34.180 (1) TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS PETITIONS” . . . THAT HAVE NO LEGAL FOUNDATION AND NO LEGAL STANDARDS!!!!
IT IS THE CRIMINALLY CORRUPT WSBA ATTORNEYS WHO DRAFTED . . . “THE FORGED” . . . AND . . . “PERJURED” . . . “RCW 13.34.040 DEPENDENCY PETITIONS.”
IT IS THE CRIMINALLY CORRUPT WSBA ATTORNEYS WHO DRAFTED . . . “THE FORGED” . . . AND . . . “PERJURED” . . . “RCW 13.34.180 (1) TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS PETITIONS.”
THIS IS WHY THE PROSECUTORS DO NOT WANT TO SIGN THESE FAKE LEGAL DOCUMENTS!!!!
The Prosecutors know that the Family Court Judges and Superior Court Judges and all the Assistant Attorney Generals are committing Subornation of Perjury by getting CPS Social Workers and Guardian Ad Litems to Sign and File Forged and Perjured RCW 13.34.040 Dependency Petitions!!!!
WHAT PROVES THAT ALL OF THESE CRIMINAL CO-CONSPIRATOR WASHINGTON STATE BAR ASSOCIATION MEMBERS KNOW THAT THEY ARE ALL COMMITTING FELONY CRIMES IS THE FACT THAT THEY INFILTRATED OUR STATE LEGISLATURE AND REMOVED THE FOLLOWING STATUTES FROM OUR LAW BOOKS TO PROTECT THEMSELVES JUST IN CASE THEY GOT CAUGHT:
“9.72.080 Offering false evidence.
[1909 c 249 § 106; RRS § 2358.]
Repealed by 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 § 9A.92.010, effective July 1, 1976.
9.72.100 Subornation of perjury.
[1909 c 249 § 108; Code 1881 § 876; 1873 p 199 § 81; RRS § 2360.]
Repealed by 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 § 9A.92.010, effective July 1, 1976.
9.72.110 Attempt to suborn perjury.
[1909 c 249 § 109; Code 1881 § 877; 1873 p 199 § 81; 1869 p 216 § 77; 1854 p 89 § 71; RRS § 2361.]
Repealed by 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 § 9A.92.010, effective July 1, 1976.” And;
71.02.210 Jury trial — Request for — Date, detention pending.
[1959 c 25 § 71.02.210. Prior: 1951 c 139 § 23; 1949 c 198 § 8, part; Rem. Supp. 1949 § 6953-8, part.]
Repealed by 1973 1st ex.s. c 142 § 66.
THE CRIMINALLY CORRUPT WSBA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION ATTORNEYS AND FAMILY COURTS ARE USING THE CPS SOCIAL WORKERS TO DO THEIR DIRTY WORK!!!!
THE STATE BAR ASSOCIATION ATTORNEYS AND FAMILY COURTS ARE USING THE GUARDIAN AD LITEMS TO DO THEIR DIRTY WORK!!!!
THE WASHINGTON STATE BAR ASSOCIATION ATTORNEYS ARE COMMITTING THOUSANDS OF COUNTS OF SUBORNATION OF PERJURY AND A FRAUD UPON ALL THE FAMILY COURTS AND A FRAUD UPON ALL SUPERIOR COURTS BY GETTING UNTRAINED AND UNLICENSED CPS SOCIAL WORKERS AND GUARDIAN AD LITEMS TO COMMIT NUMEROUS AND COUNTLESS FELONY CRIMES BY SIGNING AND FILING FORGED AND PERJURED DEPENDENCY PETITIONS AND FORGED AND PERJURED TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS PETITIONS FOR THEM!!!!
Basically all the CPS Social Workers and Guardian Ad Litems . . . “ARE GETTING PAID OFF TO COMMIT FORGERY AND PERJURY” . . . and for . . . “PRESENTING FALSE INSTRUMENTS FOR FILING” . . . in official court proceedings in furtherance of CPS’s overall general criminal conspiracy to commit the Felony Crimes of Kidnaping, Custodial Interference, Child Stealing, Child Selling, Human Trafficking, Leading Organized Crime and Money Laundering, etc.
Let’s face the facts, these untrained, unqualified and unlicensed CPS Social Workers and Guardian Ad Litems. are illegally getting paid right now to commit Unauthorized Practice of Law.
THAT’S AGAINST THE LAW!!!!
THEY CAN’T USE . . . “TAX PAYERS MONEY” . . . TO PAY UNQUALIFIED . . . “ CPS SOCIAL WORKERS” . . . AND . . . “ GUARDIAN AD LITEMS” . . . TO ENGAGE IN . . . THE UNLAWFUL AND ILLEGAL . . . UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW!!!!
THEY CAN’T USE TAX PAYERS MONEY TO PAY UNQUALIFIED CPS SOCIAL WORKERS AND GUARDIAN AD LITEMS TO SIGN AND FILE FORGED AND PERJURED DEPENDENCY PETITIONS AND FORGED AND PERJURED TERMINATION PETITIONS INTO A OFFICIAL COURT PROCEEDING WHERE THE JUDGES KNOWINGLY ALLOWED THEM TO PLAY ATTORNEY BY ENGAGING IN THE UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW IN THEIR PRESENCE!!!!
(The previous information was provided by Luis Ewing. Full credit goes to Mr Ewing,the original Author of this information )
No comments:
Post a Comment