His apparent thesis is that the only 'Legal Tender Dollars' are those which contain a mixture of gold and silver and that only those dollars may be constitutionally taxed. In rejecting his appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit noted: "Defendant's fourth contention involves his seemingly incessant attack against the federal reserve and monetary system of the United States. He was convicted of willfully failing to file federal income tax returns for the years 19.
The defendant, Jerome Daly, was a longtime tax protester. Jerome Daly's disbarment and criminal convictions District Court decision in Utah in 2008 mentioned half a dozen such citations, noting that similar arguments have "repeatedly been dismissed by the courts as baseless" and that "courts around the country have repeatedly dismissed efforts to void loans based on similar assertions."
Because the Credit River decision was nullified, the case has no value as precedent. Such groups argue the case demonstrates that the Federal Reserve System is unconstitutional. This nullified case and its reasoning have nevertheless been cited by groups opposing the Federal Reserve System and, in particular, the practice of fractional-reserve banking. However, the bank appealed the next day, and the decision was ultimately nullified on the grounds that a justice of the peace did not have the power to make such a ruling. The immediate effect of the decision would have been that Daly would not have been required to pay the mortgage debt or relinquish the property. The justice admitted in his order that his decision might run counter to provisions in the Minnesota Constitution and some Minnesota statutes, but contended that such provisions were repugnant to the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights in the Minnesota Constitution. The jury returned a verdict for the defendant, and the justice of the peace declared that the mortgage was "null and void" and that the bank was not entitled to possession of the property. The jury and the justice of the peace, Martin V. Daly argued that the bank had thus not given him anything of value and was not entitled to the property that secured the loan. The plaintiff was the First National Bank of Montgomery, which had foreclosed on Daly's property for nonpayment of the mortgage, and was seeking to evict him from the property.ĭaly based his defense on the argument that the bank had not actually loaned him any money but had simply created credit on its books.
0 kommentar(er)
