An attorney must file an appearance in PA

I might have error in judgment, but I did think it through.

PMT, the trust, collects rents and pays for repairs.

A utility company doing work on the street, put black top
over the vent sewer line, which caused many back up
and thousands in cost.

So I did not pay this bills personally, the PMT trust did.

That was the thinking behind why I filed suit in the trusts
name, it was that trust that absorbed the loss.

Am I wrong here, if I sued personally, I was thinking they would
have it tossed because I was not damaged.

The property is in it's own separate trust.

The trusts are so called constitutional common law contract in trust form
(pure trust)

So I am supposed to be out of the statutory reach, but I might not
be that way in the courts ?

The courts coined the term unincorporated business trust, that was not
my term, but it came the closest to what I use.
Just want to make sure I do not get tossed out on my ear, court is
set for Dec 2005.

Thank you again Bill, Gary

I really don\'t know about corporate law and trusts would fall into the
realm of corporations, LLCs and the like.

Whether or not you did the trust the right way is something I have no
idea about but I do know that many such trusts are bogus and based on
scam ideas. If you did a family or other type trust you would most
likely have hired an attorney to do it for you or you would have at
least registered the trust with some state or other. Maybe you used
one of those offshore trusts. I don\'t know. If your trust was not done
properly or was some kind of offshore trust the IRS will not normally
recognize those. Neither will the courts. But your trust,
unincorporated or otherwise is a non-natural person and in most cases
non-natural persons cannot represente themselves in court but rather
must be represented by an attorney.

In your situation why would you claim that you were before the court
as a trust of any kind? The only way you would do that is if the
trust were being sued or had filed suit against someone else.

The trust is supposed to be a hidey hole so unless the trust were
directly summmoned for some reason you would not even want to mention
that it existed. If the trust was not summoned it would have no reason
to be before the court at all since it would not be a party to the case.

So whether or not you did the right thing would depend on who was
being sued. If the trust were being sued and you wanted to save money
by representing the trust in court then you would have to apply to the
court to do so. If the trust were to be sued you could not represent
the trust without the permission of the court. Only an attorney could
do that and in some states he would have to inform the court by filing
a notice of appearance and in other states the mere filing of a motion

Just want to make sure I do not get tossed out on my ear, court is
set for Dec 2005.

Thank you again Bill,
Gary

I really don't know about corporate law and trusts would fall into the
realm of corporations, LLCs and the like.

Whether or not you did the trust the right way is something I have no
idea about but I do know that many such trusts are bogus and based on
scam ideas.

If you did a family or other type trust you would most
likely have hired an attorney to do it for you or you would have at
least registered the trust with some state or other.

Maybe you used
one of those offshore trusts. I don't know. If your trust was not done
properly or was some kind of offshore trust the IRS will not normally
recognize those. Neither will the courts.

But your trust, unincorporated or otherwise is a non-natural person and in most cases
non-natural persons cannot represente themselves in court but rather
must be represented by an attorney.

In your situation why would you claim that you were before the court
as a trust of any kind? The only way you would do that is if the
trust were being sued or had filed suit against someone else.

The trust is supposed to be a hidey hole so unless the trust were
directly summmoned for some reason you would not even want to mention
that it existed. If the trust was not summoned it would have no reason
to be before the court at all since it would not be a party to the case.

So whether or not you did the right thing would depend on who was
being sued.

If the trust were being sued and you wanted to save money
by representing the trust in court then you would have to apply to the
court to do so. If the trust were to be sued you could not represent
the trust without the permission of the court. Only an attorney could
do that and in some states he would have to inform the court by filing
a notice of appearance and in other states the mere filing of a motion
or an answer or whatever he files serves as his notice of appearance.

That is something else that we need to know about. Does the attorney
have a notice of appearance before the court or does he even need one
in your state. If he needs one then check to see if he did in fact
file one. If multiple attorneys from differing firms show up in a case
does the newly introduced attorney work for the same firm as the first
or has the plaintiff hired a new attorney or what? If a new attorney
enters the case then did he do so correctly? All that is usually
explained in your court\'s rules of procedure and in order to know
those things and more you must be familiar with the rules of civil
procedure and your rules of evidence. They will answer your questions
most of the time. If you aren\'t familiar with them then be prepared to
lose because you probably will.

DeWayne Flint just posted about that in another forum. I posted what
he had to say on the j-accuse blog.

, "Gary D"
wrote:
> Bill - Thank you that was appreciated.
>
> I am here to learn, in 1999 I put everything into
> trusts, that is why I need this case law.
>
> I do not want to have to hire a lawyer for small
> things.
>
> Or are you saying I can not represent the trust ?
>
> Gary

or an answer or whatever he files serves as his notice of appearance.