Skip to content

Mario Apuzzo Responds to Jedi Pauly’s Five Jurisdictional Requirements

January 22, 2011
Atty. Mario Apuzzo


To Mr. “Jedi Pauly:”

I will address your points briefly. I will not go into all the legal details of the Kerchner case because I do not think it is necessary to show that you are wrong in what you write. You continue to attack me, my work, and the Kerchner case for some unknown reason. The last time you attacked me, you said you thought I was Dr. Conspiracy. But now you are back at it in your grand pseudo scientific style.

You state:

“You MUST have all FIVE of these:

The Court must have TERRITORIAL jurisdiction over all of the parties listed in a suit.

The Court must have PERSONAL jurisdiction over all of the parties listed in a suit.

The court must have SUBJECT MATTER jurisdiction over the issues being adjudicated. And such matters must be raised by the plaintiffs in their petition.

There must be stated a specific non-general INJURY and an injuring party.

The court must be able to provide a REMEDY that is within their powers to provide.

That is it. There are no other jurisdictional issues or areas. This is the sum total of all world-wide legal systems as concerns “standing.” They are all the same.”

I will now address you points:

And now… the rest of the story. …..

No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: