Here is some useful information for those who wish to eliminate “entangling alliances” such as making private arrangements into corporate snares. That 3rd party can become a 900 lb. gorilla; look up in your copy of Black’s Law Dictionary the terms; “parens patrie” and then “novation”.

 

From: We The People for Independent Texas [mailto:wtpfit@gmail.com] 
Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2008 12:43 PM
To: wtpfit@gmail.com
Subject: Misc RM 30 Misc reference material Part 2..

Misc RM 30    Misc reference material   Part 2
Reference Material - For Information Only!
 
Over time we have collected a lot of reference material. 
We figured it would be better to share with all rather than just delete it.
If you want it, keep it, otherwise just delete it.  
Due to the volume it will take more than one mailing.

Part 2
The following is not intended to teach you anything!
It is intended to give you some facts that should make you mad and to be shared with others.
 
CAPITAL- CAPITALIZATION –CAPITALIZE
 Taken from Black's Eight Edition Law Dictionary - Short Version of definition.
 
ANY CAPITALIZED NAME OF ANY ENTITY IS A TAXABLE ENTITY BY THIS STATE or THE UNITED STATES as operating CAPITAL for the De Facto State and the De Facto United State. 

Any CAPITALIZED Human is CAPITAL and a Human Resource. Look it up and read what it says then you will understand why the attorneys CAPITALIZE your name. That is why every document presented to you by any Government Agency to sign has your name CAPITALIZED they are asking you to contract to be the CAPITAL for the CPRPORATE DE FACTO GOVERNMENT  

License 
Why is it that so many common and ordinary activities have become illegal so that you must be licensed to do, but your forefathers did not? Remembering that a 'LICENSE', is permission by the government to do what is otherwise illegal. 

This would include the 'MARRIAGE LICENSE'. 

Did you know that getting married was an illegal activity? 

What has occurred that requires licensing of virtually any business activity and, in many cases, activities of everyday living? 

Well, through the tedious and time-consuming research of others, there is now an answer. But it would not be wise to present the answer out of context or understanding. When the answer is presented without the supporting proof of its accuracy, it becomes far too easy to assign the name 'nut case' to the person providing the answer, which in this case - is me.  

And I can guarantee you that I did not go to this much trouble to be thought of as a nut. On the other side of the coin, there will be those who will think that if you choose to ignore the information contained in this writing, you will be considered to be a 'nut case'. So I guess it works both ways.
 
License. 
The permission by competent authority to do an act which, without such permission, would be illegal, a trespass, a tort, or otherwise not allowable. 
[People v. Henderson, 391 Mich. 612, 218 N.W.2d 2, 4 - Blacks Law Dictionary, sixth edition] 

This definition applies to all licenses, including the marriage license. By applying for the license to marry, you are admitting that you do not have the right to marry the person you intend. By virtue of the license, you are entering into an illegal activity. How do we know it is illegal? Read the definition... permission to do what is illegal.
 
When you obtain a marriage license and then marry, you are entering into a three party criminal partnership. In this partnership there is you, your spouse and the corporate government who is the competent authority that issued the license. It is the job of you and your spouse to collect and accrue assets in this partnership and it is the job of the government to make the rules and regulations related to this corporate licensed activity. You and your spouse are to discover the rules and adhere to them as best as possible, being appropriately abused when you fail to do so.
 
By going to the State and asking for permission, couples are acknowledging that they do not have any right to get married under God's Law, a marriage over which God is Sovereign. By virtue of applying for a license they are asking for a marriage under the Laws of the corporate State in which the application for license was submitted and over which the State is Sovereign. After all, if the couple had the right to get married under God's Law, why would they go to the State and ask for permission? Possession of a license is the prima facie evidence that the holder of the license is engaged in a privileged (and illegal) regulated activity, with no inherent right to engage in such activity.
 
Unknown to many, you can marry without a marriage license. It is a marriage under the law of the Republic, the common law and is termed a common law marriage. There has been much effort to demonize this marriage by government in general. I remember well how the public school system teachers condemned the common law marriage when I was young and in school. Yet it is a marriage in the eyes of God, not a corporation. The common law marriage may be formalized through ceremony, or it may be as simple as a man and woman agreeing to be man and wife, writing it in the family bible and then cohabiting as man and wife.
 
But this type of marriage places a much larger burden of responsibility on the woman than does the corporate licensed marriage. In the common law marriage, she must to be responsible for her choice. There are no unfair corporate laws to abuse the male in this marriage. She needs to find a man of good character who truly loves her and then she must conduct herself in a manner to maintain that love and devotion, which means that her responsibilities are different and greater than under a corporate licensed marriage. 

In a corporate licensed marriage the female can put forth very little effort in maintaining the love and devotion of her husband, and if the male don't like it, she can divorce him and viciously use the laws of the corporate structure to in her revenge against this animal

Warning: this concept of collective right contains a danger that lies in its application by the ignorant, the uneducated and the authoritarian.
You can not confer or delegate powers that you do not possess.
Above all else, we must understand this concept or the collective right will turn into a monster that will devour us all. 
 
Those in power are constantly reaching for powers and authorities that can not possibly have been conferred on it by any American. 
 
And it does so with impunity because of our ignorance. 
 
Remember that those in power are within a corporation that you know under two names, "the District of Columbia", and "the United States". 
 
The Corporation of 1871 is one and the same under both of these names. It is confusing because we generally think of the United States as our Republic of the several states united, and this is part of the deception (psychological profiling) that has taken place. 
 
Formally, the Republic is known as the united States of America. 
 
Notice the lower case 'u' on united. When the 'U' is capitalized, it is a reference to the corporate United States and not to the Republic of the united States of America.
 
I would like to inject a cautionary note here. This discussion of the United States is not opinion, it is taken from case law of our country and this topic will surface again in this document and the legal cite will be included at that time. I am putting forth these facts now so that you have a little better understanding of what is being said and asserted.
 
When we think of the collective right and come to understand that it controls the collective force, then we understand that we must have a very tight reign on the collective right lest it unleash the collective force on us all to the destruction of our great country. 
 
A full understanding of the collective right requires that we understand that its very reason for existing, its lawfulness, is based on individual right. 
 
The common force that this collective right controls, can not, and I repeat can not, logically or lawfully have any other mission or purpose than that for which it acts as a substitute. 
 
And that is Defense Of Individual Right.
 
Let's present an example and see if I have made my point clearly with regards to the common right and its control over the common force. For example, do I have the right to use force if necessary, go into your wallet or purse, take out a hundred dollars and give it to whom I feel is needy, or have I broken a law if I do so? 
 
Most of us can see that I've broken a law of course. 
 
I have no right or lawful authority to go into your wallet or purse and take your property (money).
 
If I do it stealthily (sneaky) without force the crime is called theft, whereas if I use force or the threat of force, the crime is called robbery. 
 
Now, since I don't have the right (authority) to perform this act, then how can I confer this power or authority upon government? 
 
Answer: I can not. 
 
Therefore, when government acts in this manner, it is using the common force against the foundational principles of law and has, in fact, perverted the law. 
 
It has turned law against itself. 
 
To determine if a law is perverted I need only ask myself if I will be arrested if I were to do the same thing that the law is permitting the government to do. 
 
If I would be arrested then the government is acting unlawfully or under color of law (which is another way of saying unlawfully).

 
SOCIALISM: Legalized Plunder; Legalized Theft; Enslavement.
This is where socialism fails. With all its compassion, and desire to help the less fortunate, socialism must, through the threat of force or with actual force, take what belongs to one person and give it to whom it does not belong. It is simple robbery, condoned by law.

 
 
USE OF LAWFUL FORCE 
Since an individual cannot lawfully use force, outside the realm of defense of his rights, then the common force, which is only a collection of individual forces, can not lawfully be used to destroy or harm the person, liberty or property of another individual (or group) outside the realm of defense. 
 
To use force in such a manner is entirely contrary to our established premise, that of defense (justice); not offense (injustice). Consequently, we can not confer any authority or power (right) upon government that allows that government to use the common force unlawfully.
 
And so the constraint or restriction that we place on the use of the 'common force' is that it is to do only what an 'individual' has the 'natural and lawful right to do:  
To protect persons, liberties and properties; to maintain the right of each, and to cause justice to reign over us all.

 

Color of law.
The appearance or semblance, without the substance, of legal right. 
 
Color of law -- The appearance or semblance, without the substance, of legal right. Misuse of power, possessed by virtue of state law and made possible only because wrongdoer is clothed with authority of state, is action taken under "color of state law." 
(Atkins v. Lanning, 415 F. Supp. 186, 188)
 
Color of law          
We have seen law come into effect that allows the government to take your property (cars, real estate, money, bank accounts) and      
transfer ownership to someone to whom it does not belong. 
Color -- An appearance, semblance, or simulacrum, as distinguished from that which is real. A prima facie or apparent right. Hence, a deceptive appearance; a plausible, assumed exterior, concealing a lack or reality; a disguise or pretext. 
(Black's Law Dictionary, 6th Ed.)
 
Colorable --That which is in appearance only, and not in reality, what it purports to be, hence counterfeit, feigned, having the appearance of truth. 
(Windle v. Flinn, 251 P. 2d 136, 146)
 
Colorable alteration -- One which makes no real or substantial change, but is introduced only as a subterfuge or means of evading the patent or copyright law. 
(Black's 6th)
 
Colorable imitation -- In the law of trademarks, this phrase denotes such a close or ingenious imitation as to be calculated to deceive ordinary persons. 
(Black's 6th)
 
The Title 4 U.S.C. 1, 2 American Flag of the united States of America takes precedence over all other flags, as it is the superior flag, and establishes the jurisdiction of the united States of America, and the laws made in pursuance thereof.

Robbery, theft and stealing "is robbery theft and stealing, whether it be done under color of law by government, or not. 

The action stated above makes the government a simple thief (of Grand Theft magnitude), and the receiver of stolen property. 

How proud they are to display the vehicles stolen without due process of law, to publish the sum of cash received from the sale of a home taken without due process of law. 

The whole time, the uneducated sheeple, cheer these actions and behaviors and our police seem oblivious to criminal activity committed by government.
 
I wonder how the average American would react when, after getting five traffic citations in three years; his car and home are confiscated because they provide the means and base of operations from which these crimes can be committed. 

Well, maybe that's a stretch and maybe it is not. The precedent has been set, has it not? 

Let us not forget the confiscation of a woman's car whose husband was caught having sex with a prostitute within. 

Do you support this? If so, do not whine when your property is taken from you in ever increasing amounts.

 

 
THE LAW OF THE FLAG
The Law of the Flag, an International Law, which is recognized by every nation of the planet, is defined as: " .. a rule to the effect that a vessel is a part of the territory of the nation whose flag she flies. 

The term is used to designate the right under which a ship owner, who sends his vessel into a foreign port, gives notice by his flag to all who enter into contracts with the ship master that he intends the Law of that Flag to regulate those contracts, and that they must either submit to its operation or not contract with him or his agent at all." 
(Ref.: Ruhstrat v. People, 57 N.E. 41)
 
By the doctrine of "four cornering" the flag establishes the law of the country that it represents. 

For example, the embassies of foreign countries, in Washington D.C., are "four cornered" by walls or fencing, creating an "enclave." 

Within the boundaries of the "enclave" of the foreign embassy, the flag of that foreign country establishes the jurisdiction and law of that foreign country, which will be enforced by the Law of the Flag and international treaty. 

If you enter an embassy, you will be subject to the laws of that country, just as if you board a ship flying a foreign flag, you will be subject to the laws of that flag, enforceable by the "master of the ship," (Captain), by the law of the flag.
 
Under Article IV, section 3, of the Constitution for the united States of America, no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State. 

So -- why have the Germans been allowed to erect a German enclave at Holloman Air Force Base in New Mexico, under the Law of the Flag? 

Why have the judges of the State and Federal courts been allowed to erect foreign enclaves within our courthouses under the foreign flag of the yellow fringe on the soil of Texas?
 
The flags displayed in State courts and courts of the United States have gold or yellow fringes. (And over 90% of the “churches” in America)

It is your warning that you are entering a foreign enclave and will be under the jurisdiction of that flag. 

The flag of the gold or yellow fringe has no constitution, no laws, and no rules of court, and is not recognized by any Nation on the earth, and is foreign to Texas and the united States of America. 

When you enter a courtroom displaying a gold or yellow fringed flag, you have just entered into a foreign country, and you better have your passport with you, you may not be coming back. 

The judge under a gold or yellow fringe flag becomes the "captain" or "master" and has absolute power to make the rules as he goes. 

The gold or yellow fringe flag is your warning that you are leaving your Constitutionally secured rights at the door. 

"It is an elementary rule of pleading, that a plea to the jurisdiction is a tacit (silent) admission that the court has a right to judge in the case and is a waiver to all exception to the jurisdiction." 
(Girty v. Logan, 6 Bush KY, 8)
 
You can watch over the ramparts by the dawn's early light, with bombs bursting in the air, until you go blind, but you will not see a title 4 U.S.C. 1, 2 Flag with its bright stars and broad stripes. When the flags are gone, the Country is gone. (An example of the shell game the corporate government is playing can be found at Post Offices. The flag outside will be the correct united States flag which governs over the former Constitutional united States Postal Service, once inside the flag becomes the yellow fringed flag of The United States Corporate Post Office Dept. This is a for profit corp. that continually raises rates and lowers services)
 
You may see something that looks like an American Flag, (a colorable flag, a colorable alteration or imitation) but it is a shortened National Flag, for military use only. Take your tape measure and calculator to determine what kind of a flag it is. Five will get you ten that its proportion is 1 X 1.66 or 1 X 1.5. It looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, but it ain't a duck.
 
Why do private businesses display National Flags with military adornments on the flag pole? 

Why do banks display gold or yellow fringed flags, with gold adornments, in their lobbies? 

Is McDonalds competing with the Army recruiters? 

Why have military "colors" been placed in our public schools? 

Why are our children being taught under martial law, in foreign or military enclaves with no constitutionally secured rights, under the Law of the Flag?

Why do most churches display gold or yellow fringed flags with gold adornments? 

Does your Church have a pastor or chaplain? 

A military or foreign flag, displayed without the presence of a title 4 U. S.C. 1, 2 Flag suspends the Constitution, by the international law of the flag.
 
But most of all, why do civilian courts display military or foreign flags? 
Why do civilian judges conduct courts martial for civilians?

 

Under martial law, you are presumed guilty until proven innocent.
Why are there no manufacturers that produce correct title 4 u.s.c. 1 flags? 
Try to buy one.
America has been conquered and by tacit admission, the people have surrendered!!
          
When two nations go to war, the object of the game is to capture the other guy's flag. 

When you go onto foreign soil, take the other guy's flag down and put yours up, you have captured the other guy's territory and put it under the law (Constitution) of your flag.
Sun Tzu, the ancient Chinese philosopher and general, said that when the Art of War is brought to its highest pinnacle, the enemy will be conquered without the opposing armies ever having met in the field. By skillfully using the art of deception, and skillful use of agents to infiltrate the enemy's government, the enemy may be conquered without the enemy even knowing that it had been conquered.

 
 
We have been conquered!    Where is the VFW?    
Where are the veterans that paid so high a price for the title 4 U.S.C. 1, 2 American flag and the liberty and country that it represents? 
Will these men who sacrificed so much continue to consent to the fall of our nation by their continued silence? 
Have they capitulated by tacit agreement?
 
Capitulation -- the act or agreement of surrendering upon negotiated or simulated terms. (Black's Law Dictionary, 6th Ed.)
 
Tacit -- Existing, inferred, or understood without being openly expressed or stated; implied by silence or silent acquiescence, as a tacit agreement or tacit understanding. Done or made in silence, implied or indicated, but not actually expressed. Manifested by the refraining from contradiction or objection; inferred from the situation and circumstance, in the absence of express matter. 
(Black's Law Dictionary 6th Ed.)
 
Tacit admissions -- An acknowledgment or concession of a fact inferred from either silence or from the substance of what one has said.
 
Maxim of Law -- "Tacita quaedam habentur pro expressis" -- 
things unexpressed are sometimes considered as expressed.

 
 
CONCLUSION
Our elected officials, judges, county commissioners, city councils, school boards and school administrators, police, the State Legislators, Governor, the U.S. Congress, and even the President have all committed acts of CONSTRUCTIVE TREASON, (defined as: "..an attempt to establish treason by circumstantiality, and not by the simple genuine letter of the law, and therefore is highly dangerous to public freedom."  C.J.S., vol. 87, p. 910) either knowingly or unknowingly, against the People of the united States of America by surrendering the American Flag of Peace of the united States of America to the foreign state/power of the yellow fringe flag and erecting 'foreign enclaves' on the soil of the several States in breach of Article IV, Section 3. When all of the title 4 U.S.C. 1, 2 American Flags are gone, our country, the united States of America and our precious Constitutions are gone.

 

If the flag is not important, why then, did an entire battalion of Marines, in early 1942, die to the last man on Wake Island defending the flag against the Japanese? These Marines DID NOT SURRENDER THE FLAG!
 
In early 1942, in the Philippines, a young officer named Lt. Ramsey, under the command of Gen. Wainwright, led the last mounted calvary charge in the history of the U.S. Army. Lt. Ramsey and his men fought so viciously and with such determination that, against overwhelming odds, the Japanese were routed, buying precious time to enable the American forces to retreat to the peninsula of Bataan. When the American forces were finally forced by starvation to surrender to the Japanese, Lt. Ramsey refused to surrender and slipped through the Japanese lines with a handful of his men and continued to make war against the Japanese with the Philippine Army. By hiding in the mountains and jungle, Lt. Ramsey, though poorly equipped, was able to train a guerrilla army and wreak havoc on the Japanese until Gen. McArthur returned. Lt. Ramsey did not surrender his flag!

 

Constructive Treason -- Officers that swear an oath and affirmation for supporting and defending the Constitution for the united States of America and by surrendering the oath and affirmation to the foreign state/power of the foreign yellow or gold fringe flag, causing the party before the court a deprivation of rights, with will of intent by the judge, by overt acts to surrender the Constitution of the united States of America into the hand of a foreign power/state, by definition is guilty of constructive treason.
 
Constructive Treason -- Treason imputed to a person by law from his conduct or course of action, though his deeds taken severally do not amount to actual treason. (Black's 6th)

 
 
ATTORNEY & CLIENT 
"His [the attorney] first duty is to the courts and the public, not to the client and whenever the duties to his client conflict with those he owes as an officer of the court in the administration of justice, the former must yield to the latter." 7 C.J.S Section 4
 
It should be understood that the job of the Attorney is to protect his clients rights, not to prove his clients innocence.
 
Protect his clients rights? What does this mean when translated? It means that if the attorney has done his job and protected your rights during the proceedings, then once you are convicted, there are no issues on which to appeal and your conviction stands. If you think this is a joke, take into consideration that attorneys, on a nation wide average in criminal proceedings, win only six cases in a hundred. That means that prosecutors win 94 cases in a hundred.
 
Represent yourself? 
Have you ever heard the old saying: "Anyone representing himself has a fool for a client." Take this into consideration. Those people who reject representation by an attorney and represent themselves, knowing nothing of the law or court room procedure, will win 16 times out of a hundred. That's right, you can go into court knowing nothing about the law, represent yourself and change six wins in a hundred to sixteen.
 
Whenever we get into trouble, the first thing we are told by friends and relatives, is that "you need a good attorney". Yet the chief justice of the Supreme Court, Warren Burger, had this to say in a speech to the American Bar Association in Las Vega, Nevada:
"Ninety percent of the trial attorneys in the United States are incompetent."
 
Now, if 90% of the trial attorneys are incompetent, how are you going to pick a good attorney to represent you? It looks to me as though the chances are 9 out of 10 that you're going to pick an incompetent attorney.

 

"Artificial persons. Persons created and devised by human laws for the purposes of society and government, as distinguished from natural persons." [Blacks Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition.]
We have been taught to think of a person as a human being. But through corporate law the meaning has been greatly expanded. From Black's Law Dictionary, sixth edition, here is the definition of person.
 
Begin of PERSON definition [Black's Law Dictionary: Sixth Edition]
Person. In general usage, a human being (i.e. natural person), though by statute term may include labor organizations, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. See e.g. National Labor Relations Act, Sec. 2(1), 29 U.S.C.A. sec. 152; Uniform Partnership Act, Sec. 2.
 
The meaning of the term "person" is controlled by statute. Whenever "person" is applied to you as an individual it is most likely a reference to your status as a 'corporate franchise' and not as a natural person or human being. If you are a state citizen I would not recommend that you go into court claiming you are a person. When the law states "any person required shall ...", it is referring to a corporate person. An artificial person.
 
"corporation. An artificial person or legal entity created by or under the authority of the laws of a state." 
[Blacks Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition]

The primary function of a corporation is to amass as much wealth as possible ... to garner the big bucks. When a church becomes a 501(c)(3) tax exempt entity under District law, it is not operating on God's behalf and it will not properly teach God's law.

Lawfully, the Internal Revenue Service, Inc., cannot collect taxes from a person who does not hold a Social Security Card or derive compensation from within a Federal zone, who is not a member of that Governmental Insurance Program, does not possess a Federal Identification Number nor is a United States Citizen. You must place yourself under the Districts jurisdiction for the IRS to have authority over you.
 
"Unless the defendant can prove he is not a citizen of the United States, the IRS has the right to inquire and determine a tax liability."
          [U.S. v. Slater, 545 Fed. Supp. 179,182 (1982)]

Many of our laws, rules and regulations are called 'code'.  "CODE" is language always written in such a way that average ordinary citizens who do not know the encryption and special meanings of the words cannot understand what they have read or been told. 'Code' is not the law. The law is the act passed by the legislative body and the 'code' is the administrating agency's interpretation of the law, written as a code. Such as a 'vehicle code'. 

 

 
In American common law, citizenship is entirely different in that the citizens are collectively sovereign as well as individually sovereign.
 
State Citizens are subject to the Common Law, not commercial law and not statutory law that is non-positive law. 
That is, until they contract. 

The contract is a very powerful tool and our educational processes do not adequately train us in its power and uses. 

The government, since they control our education, know that we have virtually no knowledge of this and they use it to their advantage as discussed thus far in this document.
 
The People, as in we the people, have never given the legislature the authority to regulate them, only the authority to regulate residents and commercial activities.

 

 
ZIP = Zone Improvement Plan. 
What zone? A Federal Zone of course. 
Having a ZIP code attached to you is evidence that you reside within a Federal Zone, which is the same as a Federal area and are subject to Public Salary Tax Act of 1939. 
Your enslavement leaves no stone unturned. 

 

PROPERTY
PROPERTY CODE   CHAPTER 12. RECORDING OF INSTRUMENTS

Sec. 12.001.  INSTRUMENTS CONCERNING PROPERTY.  (a)  An instrument concerning real or personal property may be recorded if it has been acknowledged, sworn to with a proper jurat, or proved according to law.
(b)  An instrument conveying real property may not be recorded unless it is signed and acknowledged or sworn to by the grantor in the presence of two or more credible subscribing witnesses or acknowledged or sworn to before and certified by an officer authorized to take acknowledgements or oaths, as applicable.
(c)  This section does not require the acknowledgement or swearing or prohibit the recording of a financing statement, a security agreement filed as a financing statement, or a continuation statement filed for record under the Business & Commerce Code.
(d)  The failure of a notary public to attach an official seal to an acknowledgment, a jurat, or other proof taken outside this state but inside the United States or its territories renders the acknowledgment, jurat, or other (THE COMMON LAW CLAUSE) proof invalid only if the jurisdiction in which the acknowledgment, jurat, or other proof is taken requires the notary public to attach the seal.

 
PROPERTY
PROPERTY CODE   CHAPTER 22. TRESPASS TO TRY TITLE
SUBCHAPTER A. GENERAL PROVISIONS
 
Sec. 22.001.  TRESPASS TO TRY TITLE.  (a)  A trespass to try title action is the method of determining title to lands, tenements, or other real property.
(b)  The action of ejectment is not available in this state.
Acts 1983, 68th Leg., p. 3509, ch. 576, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1984.
 
Sec. 22.002.  TITLE SUFFICIENT TO MAINTAIN ACTION.  A headright certificate, land scrip, bounty warrant, or other evidence of legal right (THIS IS WHERE OUR METES AND BOUNDS COME IN TO PLAY) to located and surveyed land is sufficient title to maintain a trespass to try title action.
Acts 1983, 68th Leg., p. 3509, ch. 576, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1984.
 
Sec. 22.003.  FINAL JUDGMENT CONCLUSIVE.  A final judgment that establishes title or right to possession in an action to recover real property is conclusive against the party from whom the property is recovered and against a person claiming the property through that party by a title that arises after the action is initiated. 
Acts 1983, 68th Leg., p. 3509, ch. 576, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1984.
 
Sec. 22.004.  EFFECT OF FORMER LAW.  This chapter does not affect rights that existed before the introduction of the common law in this state.  Those rights are defined by the principles of the law in effect at the time the rights accrued.
Acts 1983, 68th Leg., p. 3509, ch. 576, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1984.
 
SUBCHAPTER B. JUDGMENT AND DAMAGES
Sec. 22.021.  CLAIM FOR IMPROVEMENTS.  (a)  A defendant in a trespass to try title action who is not the rightful owner of the property, but who has possessed the property in good faith and made permanent and valuable improvements to it, is either:
(1)  entitled to recover the amount by which the estimated value of the defendant's improvements exceeds the estimated value of the defendant's use and occupation of and waste or other injury to the property;  or
(2)  liable for the amount by which the value of the use and occupation of and waste and other injury to the property exceeds the value of the improvements and for costs.
 (b)  In estimating values of improvements or of use and occupation:
(1)  improvements are valued at the time of trial, but only to the extent that the improvements increased the value of the property;  and
(2)  use and occupation is valued for the time before the date the action was filed that the defendant was in possession of the property, but excluding the value resulting from the improvements made by the defendant or those under whom the defendant claims.
(c)  The defendant who makes a claim for improvements must plead:
(1)  that the defendant and those under whom the defendant claims have had good faith adverse possession of the property in controversy for at least one year before the date the action began;
(2)  that they or the defendant made permanent and valuable improvements to the property while in possession;
(3)  the grounds for the claim;
(4)  the identity of the improvements;  and
 (5)  the value of each improvement.
(d)  The defendant is not liable for damages under this section for injuries or for the value of the use and occupation more than two years before the date the action was filed, and the defendant is not liable for damages or for the value of the use and occupation in excess of the value of the improvements.
Acts 1983, 68th Leg., p. 3509, ch. 576, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1984.
 
Sec. 22.022.  WRIT OF POSSESSION.  If in a trespass to try title action the plaintiff obtains a judgment for the contested property, but the defendant obtains a judgment for the value of the defendant's improvements in excess of the defendant's liability for use, occupation, and damages, the court may not issue a writ of possession until the first anniversary of the judgment unless the plaintiff pays to the clerk of the court for the benefit of the defendant the amount of the judgment in favor of the defendant plus interest.
Acts 1983, 68th Leg., p. 3510, ch. 576, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1984.
 
Sec. 22.023.  FAILURE TO PAY.  (a)  If after a trespass to try title action a plaintiff does not pay a judgment awarded to a defendant, plus accrued interest, before the first anniversary of the judgment and if the defendant, before the sixth month after the first anniversary of the judgment, pays the value of the property, less the value of the defendant's improvements, to the clerk of the court for the benefit of the plaintiff, the plaintiff may not obtain a writ of possession or maintain any proceeding against the defendant or the defendant's heirs or assigns for the property awarded to the plaintiff in the trespass to try title action. 
(b)  If an eligible defendant does not exercise the option under this section, a plaintiff may apply for a writ of possession as in other cases.
Acts 1983, 68th Leg., p. 3511, ch. 576, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1984.

 
 
Conveyance of Real Property
PROPERTY CODE   TITLE 2. CONVEYANCES   CHAPTER 5. CONVEYANCES   
SUBCHAPTER A. GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 5.001.  FEE SIMPLE.  (a)  An estate in land that is conveyed or devised is a fee simple unless the estate is limited by express words or unless a lesser estate is conveyed or devised by construction or operation of law.  Words previously necessary at common law to transfer a fee simple estate are not necessary.
(b)  This section applies only to a conveyance occurring on or after February 5, 1840.
Acts 1983, 68th Leg., p. 3480, ch. 576, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1984.
 
Sec. 5.002.  FAILING AS A CONVEYANCE.  An instrument intended as a conveyance of real property or an interest in real property that, because of this chapter, fails as a conveyance in whole or in part is enforceable to the extent permitted by law as a contract to convey the property or interest.
Acts 1983, 68th Leg., p. 3480, ch. 576, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1984.

 

2004 Texas Penal Code ON PROPERTY
TITLE 7. OFFENSES AGAINST PROPERTY   CHAPTER 32. FRAUD
SUBCHAPTER D. OTHER DECEPTIVE PRACTICES
Sec. 32.51. Fraudulent Use or Possession of Identifying Information.
(a) In this section:
(1) "Identifying information" means information that alone or in conjunction with other information identifies an individual, including an individual's:
(A) name, social security number, date of birth, and government-issued identification number; 
(B) unique biometric data, including the individual's fingerprint, voice print, and retina or iris image; 
(C) unique electronic identification number, address, and routing code, financial institution account number; and
(D) telecommunication identifying information or access device.
(2) "Telecommunication access device" means a card, plate, code, account number, personal identification number, electronic serial number, mobile identification number, or other telecommunications service, equipment, or instrument identifier or means of account access that alone or in conjunction with another telecommunication access device may be used to:
(A) obtain money, goods, services, or other thing of value; or
(B) initiate a transfer of funds other than a transfer originated solely by paper instrument.
(b) A person commits an offense if the person obtains, possesses, transfers, or uses identifying information of another person without the other person's consent and with intent to harm or defraud another. 
(c) An offense under this section is a state jail felony.
(d) If a court orders a defendant convicted of an offense under this section to make restitution to the victim of the offense, the court may order the defendant to reimburse the victim for lost income or other expenses, other than attorney's fees, incurred as a result of the offense.
(e) If conduct that constitutes an offense under this section also constitutes an offense under any other law, the actor may be prosecuted under this section or the other law.
Added by Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 1159, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1999. 
Amended by Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 1104, Sec. 4, eff. Sept. 1, 2003.
 
 Disclaimer: We are just people that get together and exchange information. 
We are not a group or organization. 
We are not a company or corporation or association.  
We sell nothing and we charge nothing.

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.24.2/1471 - Release Date: 5/28/2008 5:33 PM