Tag Archives: counsel

Henry D. “Butch” Binford, Circuit Judge, 20th Judicial Circuit Court of Houston County, (Civil Division, Dothan) Alabama, invited to ALTER or AMEND his NOVEL LEGAL THEORY Judgment, Monday, March 27, 2017 (3/27/2017) 9:50:07 AM (38-CV-2015-900261.00)


_________________________________________________
Unified Judicial System

State of Alabama

AlaFile E-Notice

38-CV-2015-900261.00

To: Jerry Michael Blevins
ATTYJMBlev@LawOfficeOfJerryMBlevins.com

Judge: Henry D. “Butch” Binford

NOTICE OF ELECTRONIC FILING

In the Circuit Court of Houston County, Alabama

Plaintiff

v.

Brian Ralph Beasley

38-CV-2015-900261.00

The following matter was Filed on 3/27/2017 9:50:07 AM

C001

Motion to Vacate or Modify

[Filer: Blevins Jerry Michael]

Notice Date: 3/27/2017 9:50:07 AM

Carla H. Woodall
Circuit Court Clerk
Houston County, Alabama
P.O. Drawer 6406
Dothan, AL 36302
334-677-4859
_________________________________________________
DOCUMENT 51

In the Circuit Court of Houston County, Alabama

Plaintiff

v.

Beasley Brian Ralph
Defendant

Civil Action No.: CV-2015-900261

MOTION TO ALTER OR AMEND JUDGMENT

COMES NOW the Plaintiff, by and through his undersigned counsel, and respectfully moves the Court to alter or amend the judgment previously rendered in this cause, and in support thereof says as follows:

Relevant Procedural History

1. On May 12, 2015, Plaintiff filed his Complaint in this cause seeking damages stemming from an assault and battery committed on his person by Defendant on or about February 9, 2015

2. On July 2, 2015, Defendant filed his answer

3. On February 21, 2017, a bench trial occurred at which Defendant failed to attend in-person or through counsel

The only testimony presented at trial was Plaintiff’s, which was uncontroverted by other admissible evidence

4. On February 23, 2017, the Court rendered a final judgment in favor of Defendant

Discussion

5. Plaintiff contends that pursuant to Rule 55, Ala.R.Civ.P., because Defendant failed to appear at trial in-person or through counsel, he was entitled to a default judgment against Defendant on the assault and battery claim

See Seventh Wonder v. Southbound Records, Inc.,

364 So.2d 1173 (Ala. 1978)

(A party who fails to appear on the day the case is set for trial is in default);

and

Cassioppi v. Damico,

536 So.2d 938 (Ala. 1988)

(A judgment entered after one party fails to appear at trial is treated as a default judgment)

6. Plaintiff further contends that because his trial testimony was uncontroverted by other

1
_________________________________________________
admissible evidence, he was entitled to an award of damages stemming from the assault and battery

7. Plaintiff contends the Court erred in not granting him a judgment, and in not awarding appropriate damages, on the assault and battery claim

WHEREFORE Plaintiff requests that the Court alter or amend the judgment previously entered in this cause, and grant him a default judgment against Defendant, and award him damages in the sum of $30,000.00, on the assault and battery claim, for the reasons set forth herein

Jerry M. Blevins
(BLE003)
Attorney for Plaintiff

OF COUNSEL:
Law Office of Jerry M. Blevins
Carr, Riggs and Ingram Building
7550 Halcyon Summit Drive, Suite 100
Montgomery, Alabama 36117
(334) 262-7600 (Voice)
(334) 262-7644 (Fax)
E-Mail: ATTYJMBlev@LawOfficeOfJerryMBlevins.com

2

Filing
_________________________________________________
DOCUMENT 51

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that I have served a copy of the foregoing upon:

Mr. Brian Ralph Beasley
368 Hanchey Field Road
Daleville, Alabama 36322

via electronic transmission and / or by depositing a copy of the same in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid this 27th day of March, 2017

Jerry M. Blevins
_________________________________________________
Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure (ARCP) VII. JUDGMENT Rule 55.
………………………………………………..
(a) Entry
(b) Judgment
(1) By the Clerk

Committee Comments on 1973 Adoption

The rule eliminates the requirement of notice prior to entry of judgment by default when the default arises from failure to appear on the day the case is set for trial

Rule 55(a) authorizes the clerk to enter defaults upon the civil docket when the party fails to plead or otherwise defend
——————————————————————

_________________________________________________
Seventh Wonder v. Southbound Records, Inc.
364 So. 2d 1173
(Ala. 1978)
77-602
………………………………………………..
Alabama Supreme Court

December 1, 1978
——————————————————————
http://www.ecases.us/case/ala/c1102643/wonder-v-southbound-records-inc
——————————————————————
(A party who fails to appear on the day the case is set for trial is in default)
——————————————————————
https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1102643/wonder-v-southbound-records-inc/
——————————————————————
http://law.justia.com/cases/alabama/supreme-court/1978/364-so-2d-1173-1.html
_________________________________________________
Cassioppi v. Damico
536 So. 2d 938
(Ala. 1988)
87-965
………………………………………………..
Alabama Supreme Court

November 18, 1988
——————————————————————
https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1932665/cassioppi-v-damico/
——————————————————————
(A judgment entered after one party fails to appear at trial is treated as a default judgment)
——————————————————————
https://casetext.com/case/cassioppi-v-damico
_________________________________________________
Henry D. “Butch” Binford, Houston County Circuit Court, 20th Judicial Circuit Judge, Dothan, Alabama (since February 12 2008) Huntingdon College (@HuntingdonColl) University of Alabama School of Law (@UALawSchool) former Veteran Prosecutor, in the Assault and Battery Civil case: Plaintiff v. Brian Ralph Beasley, Defendant (of Daleville, Dale County, Alabama) WHO FAILED TO APPEAR on the DAY the CASE (38-CV-2015-900261.00) WAS SET FOR TRIAL (February 21 2017) on February 23, 2017, espoused a NEW LEGAL THEORY when he ENTERED JUDGMENT for the DEFENDANT CONTRARY to Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure (ARCP) VII. JUDGMENT Rule 55: The rule eliminates the requirement of notice prior to entry of JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT when the DEFAULT arises from FAILURE TO APPEAR on the day the case is set for trial
——————————————————————
http://wp.me/p5tuFO-1rB
_________________________________________________

Is the Alabama State Bar, Center for Professional Responsibility, Disciplinary Commission, Office of General Counsel, Corrupt and / or Just Inept❓

Is the Alabama State Bar, Center for Professional Responsibility, Disciplinary Commission, Office of General Counsel, Corrupt and / or Just Inept❓

Friday, January 2, 2015, Billy Shaun McGhee of Smith and McGhee P.C., 211 W. Main Street, Suite 1, Dothan, Alabama 36301, was Retained for $300.00 (Three-Hundred Dollars), Receipt No. 911961, to assist with the recovery of a client’s property
image
Sunday, January 18, 2015, 5:44 PM, B. Shaun McGhee’s Legal Assistant was advised via e-mail, by the client, that the parties who had the client’s property, had moved to a NEW address, and provided the NEW address
image

image

image

February 14, 2015, 9:39 AM, B. Shaun McGhee’s office was requested via e-mail, to provide the date the letter had been sent to the parties who had the client’s property
image

image

image

image
February 24, 2015

Complaint Against a Lawyer
B. Shaun McGhee
was mailed to the Alabama State Bar
Complaint Against a Lawyer

Complaint Against a Lawyer

Complaints Against a Lawyer
Complaints Against Alabama Lawyers
Complaint Against an Alabama Lawyer
“A lawyer who is accused of misconduct suffers whether or not he is found to be at fault”

UNFORTUNATELY, the ALABAMA STATE BAR, CENTER for PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY, DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION, OFFICE of the GENERAL COUNSEL, does NOT advise the general public what this SUFFERing is
Complaint Against an Alabama Lawyer

Complaint Against an Alabama Lawyer
Your complaint will receive the Alabama State Bar’s prompt attention and every attempt will be made to resolve your complaint in a manner which is fair to both you and the lawyer

IF YOU REALLY BELIEVE THE Alabama State Bar WILL MAKE EVERY ATTEMPT TO RESOLVE YOUR COMPLAINT IN A MANNER WHICH IS FAIR TO BOTH YOU AND THE LAWYER, there is some swampland available for sale in Louisiana

Alabama State Bar
Center for Professional Responsibility
415 Dexter Avenue
Montgomery, AL 36104
334-269-1515
http://www.alabar.org

February 24, 2015, around 1:30 pm, B. Shaun McGhee provided the client a copy of the letter which had been sent to the parties OLD address, after a meeting regarding an unrelated matter

The letter was dated January [NO DAY] 2015
image
It is interesting that the letter had NO DAY provided, since other letters from McGhee’s office have a complete date

March 12, 2014
(actually March 12 2015)
image
September 4, 2014
image

February 24, 2015
image
PS Form 3811 Domestic Return Receipt 7001 1140 0001 5356 0781, showed that the letter had been signed for on Thursday, January 22, 2015, 11:39 am
image

image
The United States Postal Service’s web-site’s Certified Mail Tracking Number screen showed that item 7001 1140 0001 5356 0781 had been mailed to the parties OLD address, Wednesday, January 21, 2015, 3:32 pm
image

This was three (3) days AFTER the client had advised McGhee’s office that the parties had moved to a NEW address

McGhee refused to rectify the situation by sending the letter to the NEW address
image
McGhee also did NOT provide the Certified Mail Receipt from the United States Postal Service
image
A Certified Mail Receipt looks like this
image
Or just a receipt from the USPS, showing the DAY the item was mailed
image
February 26, 2015

Alabama State Bar
Center for Professional Responsibility
Disciplinary Commission
Office of General Counsel

Mr. Billy Shaun McGhee
Attorney at Law
PO Box 1225
Dothan AL 36302-1225

Re: CSP 2015-345
Complaint

Dear Mr. McGhee

Enclosed is a copy of a complaint / letter received in this office from the above-referenced individual concerning you

Rather than opening a formal investigative file at this time, you are requested to review the enclosed and submit, in writing, within fourteen (14) days from the date of this letter, your comments concerning the enclosed complaint / letter

In your response, you may include copies of any documents which are relevant to this inquiry

Please submit the original and one copy of your written response and enclosures to this office within fourteen (14) days from the date of this letter

Robyn Bernier
Investigator / Paralegal
For the Office of the General Counsel
image
March 12, 2014
(actually March 12 2015)

B. Shaun McGhee sent
Robyn Bernier
Alabama State Bar
The Disciplinary Commission
P. O. Box 671
Montgomery, AL 36101

RE: CSP No. 2014-345
(actually CSP 2015-345)
Complaint
image
Thursday, April 2, 2015

Alabama State Bar
The Disciplinary Commission
Telephone: 334-269-1515
P.O. Box 671
Montgomery, AL 36101
Fax: 334/261-6311
Delivery Address
415 Dexter Avenue
Montgomery, AL 36104

CSP 2015-345
Complaint against Billy Shaun McGhee

The Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State Bar has received the complaint that you filed against the above-referenced attorney

A copy of your complaint was forwarded to the attorney and a copy of the attorney’s response to your complaint is enclosed

Two attorneys in the Office of General Counsel of the Alabama State Bar have reviewed your complaint and the attorney’s response to the complaint

In view of the nature and content of the complaint and the enclosed response of the attorney, we will take no further action in this matter

Robyn Bernier
Investigator / Paralegal
For the Office of the General Counsel
image

There is NOT any evidence in the record, that the Alabama State Bar, Center for Professional Responsibility, Disciplinary Commission, Office of General Counsel, requested the Certified Mail Receipt, showing the DAY item 7001 1140 0001 5356 0781 was mailed, from B. Shaun McGhee

There is NOT any evidence in the record, that the Alabama State Bar, Center for Professional Responsibility, Disciplinary Commission, Office of General Counsel, requested a Receipt from the United States Postal Service, showing the DAY item 7001 1140 0001 5356 0781 was mailed, from B. Shaun McGhee

There is NOT any evidence in the record, that the Alabama State Bar, Center for Professional Responsibility, Disciplinary Commission, Office of General Counsel, accessed the United States Postal Service’s web-site’s Certified Mail Tracking Number screen, to see what DAY item 7001 1140 0001 5356 0781 was mailed by McGhee’s office

THE ALABAMA STATE BAR, CENTER FOR PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY, DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION, OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL, DOES NOT CARE IF YOU ADVISE AN ALABAMA ATTORNEY’s OFFICE THAT THE PARTIES THEY ARE TO SEND A LETTER TO, HAVE MOVED TO A NEW ADDRESS, AND THEY SEND THE LETTER TO THE OLD ADDRESS, AND REFUSE TO RECTIFY THE SITUATION BY MAILING THE LETTER TO THE NEW ADDRESS

Thursday, April 9, 2015 letter from client to Robyn Bernier, Alabama State Bar
Center for Professional Responsibility
Disciplinary Commission
Office of General Counsel
image
Friday, April 17, 2015

We are in receipt of your request for reconsideration of the above-referenced matter

The Alabama State Bar only has jurisdiction over violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct

Your initial complaint, the respondent attorney’s response, and your recent request were independently reviewed by two lawyers in this office

They have concluded that there appears to be no new information which warrants a formal investigation

Therefore, no further action will be taken in this matter in accordance with our earlier decision
image
May 5, 2015 letter from client to Alabama State Bar
Center for Professional Responsibility
Disciplinary Commission
Office of General Counsel

June 25, 2015

We are in receipt of your request for reconsideration of the above-referenced matter

The Alabama State Bar only has jurisdiction over violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct

Your initial complaint, the respondent attorney’s response, and your recent request were independently reviewed by two lawyers in this office

They have concluded that there appears to be no new information which warrants a formal investigation

Therefore, no further action will be taken in this matter in accordance with our earlier decision
image
December 16, 2015 letter from client to Alabama State Bar
Center for Professional Responsibility
Disciplinary Commission
Office of General Counsel
image
January 19, 2016

We are in receipt of your latest request for reconsideration of the above-referenced matter

The information you provided, your initial complaint and the attorney’s response were reviewed thoroughly and independently by two attorneys in the Office of General Counsel

While we can understand that you feel this is not a satisfactory resolution of your complaint, not every complaint constitutes a rule violation or has sufficient prosecutive merit

Your complaint was processed and investigated according to our procedures

In view of the fact that procedures were properly followed and a final determination made, there is nothing further we can do

Any other information received from you regarding this matter will be placed with your original complaints

However, no response from us will be forthcoming
image

THE ALABAMA STATE BAR, CENTER FOR PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY, DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION, OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL, does NOT have PROCEDURES in place to request that an attorney provide a Certified Mail Receipt to show the DAY the item was mailed, nor to access the USPS’ web-site’s Certified Mail Tracking Number screen and look up the DAY an item was mailed, when they are conducting a so-called “investigation”

WARNING: The Alabama State Bar, Center for Professional Responsibility, Disciplinary Commission, Office of General Counsel, does NOT care if you advise an Alabama attorney’s office to make a change, and the Alabama attorney’s office ignores you, and refuses to rectify the situation

That is PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY

WARNING: The Alabama State Bar, Center for Professional Responsibility, Disciplinary Commission, Office of General Counsel, does NOT seem to think that if you retain an attorney to write a letter, that you, as the client, should be allowed to review that letter before it is mailed

What does the Alabama State Bar, Center for Professional Responsibility, Disciplinary Commission, Office of General Counsel, have in common with s Ye olde England star chamber❓

Two attorneys in the Office of General Counsel of the Alabama State Bar have reviewed your complaint and the attorney’s response to the complaint
In view of the nature and content of the complaint and the enclosed response of the attorney, we will take no further action in this matter

“Two attorneys in the Office of General Counsel of the Alabama State Bar have reviewed your complaint”

TRANSLATION: “Two NAMELESS, FACELESS, BUREAUCRATS in the Office of General Counsel of the Alabama State Bar have reviewed your complaint”

Your initial complaint, the respondent attorney’s response, and your recent request were independently reviewed by two lawyers in this office
They have concluded that there appears to be no new information which warrants a formal investigation
Therefore, no further action will be taken in this matter in accordance with our earlier decision

” . . . were independently reviewed by two lawyers in this office”

TRANSLATION: ” . . . were independently reviewed by two NAMELESS, FACELESS, BUREAUCRATS in this office”

Duplicate

The information you provided your initial complaint and the attorney’s response were reviewed thoroughly and independently by two attorneys in the Office of General Counsel

” . . . were reviewed thoroughly and independently by two attorneys in the Office of General Counsel”

TRANSLATION: ” . . . were reviewed thoroughly and independently by two NAMELESS, FACELESS, BUREAUCRATS in the Office of General Counsel”

JUDGES in ALABAMA have more “PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY” than the NAMELESS, FACELESS, BUREAUCRAT attorneys / lawyers who “independently” review complaints at the Alabama State Bar, Center for Professional Responsibility, Disciplinary Commission, Office of General Counsel, who might be too YELLOW-BELLIED to sign off on their “determinations,” because maybe they do NOT want the notoriety of being responsible for some of the worst decisions in Alabama State Bar history

The Supreme Court of Alabama, through the Alabama State Bar, regulates lawyer conduct in this state

The Alabama State Bar’s grievance system was established by the Supreme Court of Alabama to enforce uniform standards of professional conduct for lawyers

All lawyers who practice law in Alabama must be members of the Alabama State Bar

Alabama Supreme Court
Mr. Robert G. Esdale
Clerk of the Court
300 Dexter Avenue
Montgomery, Alabama 36104-3741

The Judicial System Study Commission of Alabama
Mr. Randy Helms
Administrative Director of Courts
300 Dexter Avenue
Montgomery, Alabama 36104-3741

Alabama Judicial Conference
Mr. Randy Helms
Administrative Director of Courts
300 Dexter Avenue
Montgomery, Alabama 36104-2714

@LutherStrange

Alabama Attorney General
Luther Strange
501 Washington Avenue
Montgomery, Alabama 36130

@GovernorBentley

Alabama Governor
Robert Bentley
State Capitol
600 Dexter Avenue, Room N-104
Montgomery, Alabama 36130-2751

@HarriAnneSmith

Alabama Senator
Harri Anne Smith
P O Box 483
Slocomb, Alabama 36375

@SteveClouse

Alabama Representative
Steve Clouse
11 South Union Street, Suite 410-D
Montgomery, Alabama 36130-2950

@AlabamaStateBar

Alabama State Bar
Mr. Keith B. Norman
Executive Director / Secretary
P. O. Box 671
Montgomery, Alabama 36101

Internal Revenue Service (I.R.S.) CORRUPTION for IDIOTS, DUMMIES, and AVERAGE AMERICANS

The Internal Revenue Service (I.R.S.) LIES to the Congress of the United States of America

What makes you think the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) won’t LIE to you or any entity you may work for❓

When the Internal Revenue Service (I R S) decided to question Billie Murdock of Utah about her “alleged” Federal income tax liability, she did what the Taxpayer Bill of Rights lists as your Right

She had a Transcript of the meeting made, which included gems like the Internal Revenue Agent telling her to “never-mind that,” when Billie started asking questions the agent didn’t want to answer

If an Internal Revenue Agent tells you to “never mind that” when you are asking them about documents published in the Federal Register; which is notice to the public from the United States Federal Government, which is signed by the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, that is the biggest red flag, reminiscent of a matador flapping a big red cape in front of a bull
________________________________________________
I.R.S. ʟ I a R S
________________________________________________
Internal Revenue Service (I.R.S.) Frivolous Taxpayer IRS Liars
2.

The Supreme Court has

recognized that the sixteenth amendment authorizes a direct nonapportioned tax upon United States citizens throughout the nation, not just in federal enclaves”
——————————————————————
The SUPREME COURT has

RECOGNIZED that the SIXTEENTH AMENDMENT AUTHORIZES a DIRECT NONAPPORTIONED TAX
Internal Revenue Service (I.R.S.) Frivolous Taxpayer IRS Liars
7. Contention: The Sixteenth Amendment does not authorize a direct non-apportioned federal income tax on United States citizens

Numerous courts have both implicitly and explicitly recognized that the Sixteenth Amendment authorizes a non-apportioned direct income tax on United States citizens and that the federal tax laws are valid as applied
——————————————————————
… COURTS haveRECOGNIZED that the SIXTEENTH AMENDMENT AUTHORIZES a NON-APPORTIONED DIRECT INCOME TAX
_________________________________________________
What the UNANIMOUS SUPREME COURT of the UNITED STATES ACTUALLY RECOGNIZED
_________________________________________________
U.S. Supreme Court

Brushaber v. Union Pacific Rail Road Company

Argued October 14 and 15 1915

Decided January 24 1916

240 U.S. 1

36 S.Ct. 236

60 L.Ed. 493

(1916)

Mr. Chief Justice White delivered the opinion of the court:
_________________________________________________
[240 U.S. 1, 17]

This is the text of the Amendment:

‘The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration’

(ratified February 3, 1913)
_________________________________________________
[240 U.S. 1, 11]

It is an

“ERRONEOUS ASSUMPTION”

“that the

16th AMENDMENT

PROVIDES” “POWER to LEVY”

a

“DIRECT” “INCOME TAX”

“NOT” “SUBJECT

to the

REGULATION

of

APPORTIONMENT

applicable to ALL OTHER

DIRECT TAXES”
——————————————————————
[240 U.S. 1, 10]

We are of opinion, however

[240 U.S. 1, 11]

that the confusion is not inherent, but rather arises from the conclusion that the 16th Amendment provides for a hitherto unknown power of taxation; that is, a power to levy an income tax which, although direct, should not be subject to the regulation of apportionment applicable to all other direct taxes

And the far-reaching effect of this erroneous assumption will be made clear by generalizing the many contentions advanced in argument to support it, as follows:
======================================
U.S. Supreme Court

Brushaber v. Union Pac. R.R.

Argued October 14 and 15 1915

Decided January 24 1916

240 U.S. 1

12 – 19

36 S.Ct. 236

239-42

60 L.Ed. 493

(1916)
——————————————————————
http://laws.findlaw.com/us/240/1.html
——————————————————————
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=240&invol=1
======================================
Case
——————————————————————
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/240/1/case.html
………………………………………………..
Syllabus
——————————————————————
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/240/1/
_________________________________________________
The INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE LIE
………………………………………………..
the

SIXTEENTH AMENDMENT

authorizes a

DIRECT NONAPPORTIONED TAX …”
——————————————————————
The Unanimous U.S. SUPREME COURT TRUTH
………………………………………………..
It is an

ERRONEOUS ASSUMPTION

“that the

16th AMENDMENT

PROVIDES” “POWER to LEVY” a

“DIRECT” “INCOME TAX”

“NOT” “SUBJECT to the REGULATION of

APPORTIONMENT

applicable to ALL OTHER DIRECT TAXES”

[240 U.S. 1, 11]
——————————————————————
After the Unanimous Supreme Court of the United States decided the two (2) cases regarding the Sixteenth (16th) Amendment; the “income tax amendment”:
——————————————————————
U.S. Supreme Court
Brushaber v. Union Pac. R.R.
(Brushaber v. Union P. R. Co.)
Argued October 14 and 15 1915
240 U.S. 1
12 – 19
36 S.Ct. 236 (36 Sup. Ct. Rep. 236)
239-42
60 L.Ed. 493
Decided January 24, 1916
(1916)
——————————————————————
U.S. Supreme Court
Stanton v. Baltic Mining Co.
(JOHN R. STANTON, Appt.,
v.
BALTIC MINING COMPANY et al.)
Argued October 14 and 15, 1915
240 U.S. 103
36 S.Ct. 278
60 L.Ed. 546
No. 359
Decided February 21, 1916
(1916)
——————————————————————
Treasury Decision 2131 was approved, March 30, 1916, and held to be effective as of January 1, 1916
_________________________________________________
United States Taxpayers:
Who are They❓
——————————————————————
http://wp.me/p5tuFO-Ih
_________________________________________________
IRS PRA Form 2555 OMB 1545-0067
——————————————————————
http://wp.me/p5tuFO-Ji
_________________________________________________
Treasury Decision (T. D. 2313) Income Tax
53

(T. D. 2313)

Income tax
——————————————————————
INCOME TAX
——————————————————————
Taxability of interest from bonds and dividends on stock of domestic corporations owned by nonresident aliens, and the liabilities of nonresident aliens under section 2 of the act of October 3, 1913
——————————————————————
DOMESTIC CORPORATIONS owned by NONRESIDENT ALIENS, and the LIABILITIES of NONRESIDENT ALIENS
——————————————————————
TREASURY DEPARTMENT,

OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,

Washington, D. C., March 21, 1916

To collectors of internal revenue:

Under the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railway Co., decided January 24, 1916, it is hereby ordered that income accruing to nonresident aliens in the form of interest from the bonds and dividends on the stock of domestic corporations is subject to the income tax imposed by the act of October 3, 1913
——————————————————————
decision of the SUPREME COURT of the UNITED STATES in the case of BRUSHABER v. UNION PACIFIC RAILWAY CO., decided JANUARY 24, 1916 … INCOME … to NONRESIDENT ALIENS … from DOMESTIC CORPORATIONS is subject to the INCOME TAX …
——————————————————————
Nonresident aliens are not entitled to the specific exemption designated in paragraph C of the income-tax law, but are liable for the normal and additional tax upon the entire net income
——————————————————————
NONRESIDENT ALIENS … are LIABLE for the … TAX upon … INCOME
——————————————————————
“from all property owned, and of every business, trade, or profession carried on in the United States,”
computed on the basis prescribed in the law”
——————————————————————
… all PROPERTY owned … every BUSINESS, TRADE, or PROFESSION carried on in the UNITED STATES …
——————————————————————
The responsible heads, agents, or representatives of nonresident aliens, who are in charge of the property owned or business carried on
Treasury Decision (T. D. 2313) Income Tax page 54
54
——————————————————————
… NONRESIDENT ALIENS … PROPERTY owned or BUSINESS carried on within the UNITED STATES
——————————————————————
within the United States, shall make a full and complete return of the income therefrom on Form 1040, revised, and shall pay any and all tax, normal and additional, assessed upon the income received by them in behalf of their nonresident alien principals
——————————————————————
shall make a … RETURN of … INCOME … on FORM 1040 … and … pay … TAX … upon … INCOME received … in behalf of … NONRESIDENT ALIEN …
——————————————————————
The person, firm, company, copartnership, corporation, joint stock company, or association, and insurance company in the United States, citizen or resident alien, in whatever capacity acting, having the control, receipt, disposal, or payment of fixed or determinable annual or periodic gains, profits, and income of whatever kind, to a nonresident alien, under any contract, or otherwise, which payment shall represent income of a nonresident alien from the exercise of any trade or profession within the United States, shall deduct and withhold from such annual or periodic gains, profits, and income, regardless of amount or otherwise, and pay to the officer of the United States Government authorized to receive the same such sum as will be sufficient to pay the normal tax of 1 per cent imposed by law, an shall make an annual return on Form 1042
——————————————————————
… in … UNITED STATES, CITIZEN or RESIDENT ALIEN … having … control … of … INCOME of … NONRESIDENT ALIEN from … any TRADE or PROFESSION within the UNITED STATES, shall deduct and WITHHOLD … INCOME… and pay to the OFFICER of the UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT … to pay the … TAX …
——————————————————————
The normal tax shall be withheld at the source from income accrued to nonresident aliens from corporate obligations and shall be returned and paid to the Government by debtor corporations and withholding agents as in the case of citizens and resident aliens, but without benefit of the specific exemption designated in paragraph C of the law
——————————————————————
The … TAX … WITHHELD at the SOURCE from INCOME … to NONRESIDENT ALIENS … shall be … paid to the GOVERNMENT by … WITHHOLDING AGENTS as in the case of CITIZENS and RESIDENT ALIENS …
——————————————————————
Form 1008, revised, claiming the benefit of such deductions as may be applicable to income arising within the United States and for refund of excess tax withheld, as provided by paragraphs B and P of the income-tax laws, may be filed by nonresident aliens, their agents or representatives, with the debtor corporation, withholding agent, or collector of internal revenue for the district in which the withholding return is required to be made
——————————————————————
… INCOME … within the UNITED STATES and … refund of excess TAX WITHHELD as provided by … the INCOME-TAX LAWS may be filed by NONRESIDENT ALIENS … with the WITHHOLDING AGENT, or COLLECTOR of INTERNAL REVENUE for the DISTRICT in which the WITHHOLDING RETURN is required to be made
——————————————————————
That part of paragraph E of the law which provides that

“if such person * * * is absent from the United States, * * * the return and application may be made for him or her by the person required to withhold and pay the tax * * *” is held to be applicable to the return and application on Form 1008, revised, of nonresident aliens
——————————————————————
… the LAW … provides that

“if such PERSON * * * is absent from the UNITED STATES, * * * the RETURNmay be madeby the PERSON required to WITHHOLD and pay the TAXof NONRESIDENT ALIENS
——————————————————————
A fiduciary acting in the capacity of trustee, executor, or administrator, when there is only one beneficiary and that beneficiary a nonresident alien, shall render a return on Form 1040, revised; but when there are two or more beneficiaries, one or all of whom are nonresident aliens, the fiduciary shall render a return on Form 1041, revised, and a personal return on Form 1040, revised, for each nonresident alien beneficiary
——————————————————————
… a NONRESIDENT ALIEN, shall render a return on FORM 1040 …

… NONRESIDENT ALIENS, … shall render a personal return on FORM 1040 … for each NONRESIDENT ALIEN …
——————————————————————
The liability, under the provisions of the law, to render personal returns, on or before March 1 next succeeding the tax year, of annual
Treasury Decision (T. D. 2313) Income Tax page 55
55

net income accrued to them from sources within the United States during the preceding calendar year attaches to nonresident aliens as in the case of returns required from citizens and resident aliens
——————————————————————
The LIABILITY, under the provisions of the LAW, to render personal returns, … of … INCOME … from SOURCES WITHIN the UNITED STATES … attaches to NONRESIDENT ALIENS as in the case of returns required from CITIZENS and RESIDENT ALIENS
——————————————————————
Therefore, a return on Form 1040, revised, is required except in cases where the total tax liability has been or is to be satisfied at the source by withholding or has been or is to be satisfied by personal return on Form 1040, revised, rendered in their behalf
——————————————————————
… a return on FORM 1040, … is required except in cases where the total TAX LIABILITY … is satisfied at the source by WITHHOLDING … or is … satisfied by personal return on FORM 1040 …
——————————————————————
Returns should be rendered to the collector of internal revenue for the district in which a nonresident alien carries on his principal business within the United States or, in the absence of a principal business within the United States and in all cases of doubt, to the collector of internal revenue at Baltimore, Md., in whose district Washington is situated
——————————————————————
Returns should be rendered to the COLLECTOR of INTERNAL REVENUE for the DISTRICT in which a NONRESIDENT ALIEN carries on his principal BUSINESS WITHIN the UNITED STATES …
——————————————————————
Nonresident aliens are held to be subject to the liabilities and requirements of all administrative, special, and general provisions of law in relation to the assessment, remission, collection, and refund of the income tax imposed by the act of October 3, 1913, and collectors of internal revenue will make collection of the tax by distraint, garnishment, execution, or other appropriate process provided by law
——————————————————————
NONRESIDENT ALIENS are … subject to the LIABILITIES … of LAW in relation to … the INCOME TAX …
——————————————————————
. . .

This decision will be held effective as of January 1, 1916

W. H. Osborn,
Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Approved, March 30, 1916:
Byron R. Newton,
Acting Secretary of the Treasury
_________________________________________________
From Treasury Decision 2131 we know the UNITED STATES TAXPAYERS are:
——————————————————————
1. CITIZEN TAXPAYERS RESIDING or DOING BUSINESS ABROAD
——————————————————————
2. FOREIGN TAXPAYERS DERIVING INCOME from SOURCES WITHIN the UNITED STATES
——————————————————————
3. TAXPAYERS who are REQUIRED to WITHHOLD TAX on INCOME FLOWING ABROAD to NONRESIDENT ALIENS and FOREIGN CORPORATIONS
——————————————————————
4. EMPLOYEES of the UNITED STATES FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
——————————————————————
5. RESIDENT ALIENS
——————————————————————
and we know there are the:
——————————————————————
6. SOCIAL SECURITY TAXPAYERS
——————————————————————
and
——————————————————————
7. ObamaCare TAXPAYERS
——————————————————————
Employers like to give you a United States Federal Government “Withholding Certificate” to fill out

Why would you fill out a W-4❓

Are you a United States Federal Government Taxpayer❓

What if an Employer LIES to you and tells you that they cannot hire you unless you fill out a “Withholding Certificate”❓

Based on what❓

If you tell an Employer you are not a “Taxpayer” required to fill out a “Withholding Certificate”

the Internal Revenue Service might tell your Employer to Withhold anyway

Based on what❓
Internal Revenue Service United States Federal Government Taxpayer
The Internal Revenue Service may Levy on you “allegedly” based on Internal Revenue Code Section
6331

Based on what❓
Internal Revenue Code section 6331 Levy Congress
E. CLAY SHAW, JR.
22ND DISTRICT, FLORIDA
Congress of the United States
House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515-0922

January 24, 2005

Mr. Gary A. Fennell
Boca Raton, Florida 33431-5926

Dear Mr. Fennell:

Thank you for contacting me with a question regarding your troubles with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS)

While responding as best I can, please understand that I am not giving any legal advice

I would strongly advise you to seek counsel on this matter

U.S. Code, Title 26, Subtitle F, Chapter 64, Subchapter D Part II, Section 6331 (a) states:

If any person liable to pay any tax neglects or refuses to pay the same within 10 days after notice and demand, it shall be lawful for the Secretary to collect such tax (and such further sum as shall be sufficient to cover the expenses of the levy) by levy upon all property and rights to property (except such property as is exempt under section 6334) belonging to such person or on which there is a lien provided in this chapter for the payment of such tax

Levy may be made upon the accrued salary or wages of any officer, employee, or elected official, of the United States, the District of Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality of the United States or the District of Columbia by serving a notice of levy on the employer (as defined in section 3401(d)) of such officer, employee, or elected official

If the Secretary makes a finding that the collection of such tax is in jeopardy, notice and demand for immediate payment of such tax may be made by the Secretary and, upon failure or refusal to pay such tax, collection thereof by levy shall be lawful without regard to the 10-day period provided in this section

This particular provision does not appear to extend to private sector employees
——————————————————————
This particular provision DOES NOT APPEAR to EXTEND to PRIVATE SECTOR EMPLOYEES
——————————————————————
If a form was given to an employer that omitted section (a), this form could be considered misleading
——————————————————————
If a form was given to an EMPLOYER that OMITTED section (a), this form could be considered MISLEADING
——————————————————————
I hope that this is helpful to you

Again you may wish to seek help from an attorney or tax professional

Sincerely

E. Clay Shaw, Jr.

Member of Congress

ECS:cd
_________________________________________________
Which class of “TAXPAYER” does this apply to❓
——————————————————————
(EMPLOYEES of the UNITED STATES FEDERAL GOVERNMENT)

any OFFICER, EMPLOYEE, or ELECTED OFFICIAL, of the UNITED STATES, the DISTRICT of COLUMBIA, or any AGENCY or INSTRUMENTALITY of the UNITED STATES or the DISTRICT of COLUMBIA
——————————————————————
NOTE: The U.S. Congress described in the LAW how

“LEVY MAY BE MADE”

Congress did NOT describe how

“LEVY MAY BE MADE”

on any PERSONS other than those specifically named
_________________________________________________
From Internal Revenue Code section 6331 we know the UNITED STATES TAXPAYERS are:

——————————————————————
1. CITIZEN TAXPAYERS RESIDING or DOING BUSINESS ABROAD
——————————————————————
2. FOREIGN TAXPAYERS DERIVING INCOME from SOURCES WITHIN the UNITED STATES
——————————————————————
3. TAXPAYERS who are REQUIRED to WITHHOLD TAX on INCOME FLOWING ABROAD to NONRESIDENT ALIENS and FOREIGN CORPORATIONS
——————————————————————
4. (EMPLOYEES of the UNITED STATES FEDERAL GOVERNMENT)

any OFFICER, EMPLOYEE, or ELECTED OFFICIAL, of the UNITED STATES, the DISTRICT of COLUMBIA, or any AGENCY or INSTRUMENTALITY of the UNITED STATES or the DISTRICT of COLUMBIA
——————————————————————
5. RESIDENT ALIENS
——————————————————————
and we know there are the:
——————————————————————
6. SOCIAL SECURITY TAXPAYERS
——————————————————————
and
——————————————————————
7. ObamaCare TAXPAYERS
_________________________________________________
This is exactly the kind of LIE the Internal Revenue Service has engaged in:
——————————————————————
If a form was given to an EMPLOYER that OMITTED section (a), this form could be considered MISLEADING
——————————————————————
The Internal Revenue Service has also engaged in sending a letter that indicates they have not received a response from you, even though you have a Certified Mail Receipt from the United States Postal Service, showing that they did receive your response

The Internal Revenue Service has also told an “alleged Taxpayer” that they want to meet and go over your books and records, and when the “alleged Taxpayer” agrees to the meeting and replies that as allowed in the Taxpayer Bill of Rights, they will bring a recorder to record the meeting, and then on the day of the meeting when the “alleged Taxpayer” shows up at the I.R.S. Office for the meeting, the IRS will call off the meeting

These are some of the tactics the IRS liars have used
——————————————————————
SOCIAL SECURITY straight from the COURT’s MOUTH
——————————————————————
What is

● U.S. citizenship

and who is a

● U.S. citizen ?
—————————————————————
Are you a

● U.S. citizen

or a

● citizen of the United States

(a citizen of one of the several States,

the States of the Union,

the United States of America) ?
image
The Social Security Administration

seems to think that a 12-year-old

knows the difference between a

● U.S. citizen

and

● a citizen of the United States
image● United States citizen defined
—————————————————————–
http://wikipediaint.wordpress.com/2014/08/30/united-states-citizen/
—————————————————————
● citizen of the United States defined
—————————————————————–
http://wikipediaint.wordpress.com/2014/08/26/citizen-of-the-united-states/
image
A

● U.S. citizen

is a

Federalcitizen
——————————————————————
Those born in the District of Columbia, federal territories (e.g. Puerto Rico Guam etc.), and federal enclaves (e.g. American Indian reservations military bases etc.)
——————————————————————
After the Emancipation Proclamation; by Abraham Lincoln and the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, it was necessary since those who were Emancipated were NOT considered to be “citizens

They were considered to be “property” before the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
—————————————————————–
AMENDMENT XIV

Passed by Congress

June 13, 1866

Ratified July 9, 1868

Section 1.

All persons

born

or

naturalized

in the United States,

and

subject to the jurisdiction thereof,

are citizens of the United States

and

of the State wherein they reside

No State shall

make

or

enforce

any law which shall abridge the

privileges

or

immunities

of citizens of the United States;

nor shall any State deprive

any person

of

life,

liberty,

or

property,

without due process of law;

nor deny to

any person

within its jurisdiction

the equal protection of the laws
image● a citizen of the United States

is one who was born in one of

the several States

(the States of the Union

the United States of America)

and were therefor,

● a citizen of a State

as well as

● a citizen of the United States
image
Does a

● U.S. citizen

have “rights❓
………………………………………………..
● a citizen of the United States

has

rights

enumerated in the

Bill of Rights

and the

Constitution
imageimageimageimageimageimageimage
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution.html
——————————————————————
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution
_____________________________________________
What is a

Social Security Number

used for ?
—————————————————————–
It’s used by the

● Internal Revenue Service (IRS)

as a

● Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN)
_____________________________________________
What was the

Social Security Act

for ?
imageAN ACT

to provide for the

general welfare

by

establishing a system

of

Federal old-age benefits,

and by

● enabling the several States
_____________________________________________
the SEVERAL STATES
image
Who did the

Social Security Act

apply to ?
—————————————————————–
The Social Security Act,

Pub.L. 74–271,

49 Stat. 620,

enacted August 14, 1935,

now codified as

42 U.S.C. ch. 7
—————————————————————–
WHY IS A

U.S. CITIZEN

INCLUDED

IN THE DEFINITION OF

CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES

AT

33 UNITED STATES CODE

but NOT

42 U.S.C. Chapter 7 ?
_____________________________________________
U.S. Code › Title 33 › Chapter 29 › § 1502
—————————————————————
TITLE 33 – NAVIGATION AND NAVIGABLE WATERS
——————————————————————
33 U.S. Code § 1502 – Definitions
_____________________________________________
Are you a

US citizen

or

citizen of the United States ?
imageTITLE XI- GENERAL PROVISIONS

DEFINITIONS SECTION 1101. (a) When used in this Act-

(1) The term

State

(except when used in section 531)

INCLUDES

Alaska,

Hawaii,

and

the District of Columbia
—————————————————————–
What is the

Legal definition

of the term

includes?
—————————————————————–
The legal definition of the term

INCLUDE

is:
——————————————————————
INCLUDE(S) (verb)

absorb,

adscribere,

be composed of,

be formed of,

be made up of,

begird,

boast,

bound,

bracket,

circumscribe,

classify,

close in,

combine,

compass,

comprehend,

comprehendere,

consist of,

contain,

cover,

embody,

embrace,

encircle,

engird,

envelop,

girdle,

hold,

incorporate,

involve,

merge,

put a barrier around,

span,

subsume,

surround,

take in,

unify,

unite

The less is always included in the greater
——————————————————————
THE LESS is ALWAYS INCLUDED IN the GREATER
——————————————————————
The inclusion of one thing is the exclusion of another
——————————————————————
THE INCLUSION of ONE THING IS the EXCLUSION of ANOTHER
——————————————————————
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/_/dict.aspx?rd=1&word=include
——————————————————————
This MEANS that the term

INCLUDES

ONLY “includes” the terms that come AFTER the term

INCLUDES
_____________________________________________
Includes defined
—————————————————————–
http://wikipediaint.wordpress.com/2014/09/03/includes/
_____________________________________________
What is the

Legal definition

of the term

State?
_____________________________________________
State(s) defined
—————————————————————–
http://wikipediaint.wordpress.com/2014/08/24/states/
_____________________________________________
This

MEANS

that the

definition

would be read as:
—————————————————————–
(1) The term

State

(except when used in section 531)

MEANS

areas under Federal legislative jurisdiction,

Alaska,

Hawaii,

and

the District of Columbia
imageTITLE XI- GENERAL PROVISIONS

DEFINITIONS SECTION 1101. (a) When used in this Act-

(2) The term

United States

when used in a geographical sense

MEANS

the States,

Alaska,

Hawaii,

and

the District of Columbia

(At the time,

Alaska

and

Hawaii

were

NOT

part of

the “several States”)
—————————————————————–
What is the

Legal definition

of the term

United States?
_____________________________________________
United States defined
—————————————————————–
http://wikipediaint.wordpress.com/2014/08/24/united-states/
_____________________________________________
This

MEANS

that the

definition

would be read as:
—————————————————————–
(2) The term

United States

when used in a geographical sense

MEANS

areas under Federal legislative jurisdiction,

Alaska,

Hawaii,

and

the District of Columbia
image
The

Federal United States

has the power to legislate for

areas

as mentioned above

(its jurisdiction),

just as any of

the several States

has the power to legislate re

persons,

places,

and

things

within the jurisdiction of the State
_________________________________________________
if you are

a citizen of the United States

residing

in one of

the several States,

you are considered as a

non-resident alien

as concerns the

other 49 States of the Union

The same applies to the

Federal United States

If you are

a citizen of the United States

residing

in one of

the several States

you are considered as a

non-resident alien

as concerns the

Federal United States

Of course, if you

voluntarily

sign up for

Social Security,

the

United States Federal Government

is going to take it as meaning that you want to be treated as a

(Federal) United States citizen

instead of

a citizen of the United States

(a citizen of one of the several States)
_____________________________________________
Where does the

Social Security (FICA) Taxes

go ?
_________________________________________________
Helvering v. Davis,

301 U.S. 619

(1937),

“The proceeds of both

[employee and employer]

taxes

are to be paid into the

Treasury

like

internal-revenue taxes

generally, and are

not earmarked in any way

That is, the

Social Security Tax

was

constitutional

as a mere exercise of

Congress‘s general taxation powers
—————————————————————
8. Title II of the

Social Security Act

provides for

Federal OldAge Benefits
image
It creates an

OldAge Reserve Account

in the

Treasury

and authorizes future appropriations to provide for the required old-age payments,

but,

in itself,

neither appropriates money

nor brings any money into the Treasury
image
The proceeds of both

taxes

are to be paid into the

Treasury

like

internal revenue taxes

generally, and

are not earmarked in any way
imageimage
The first section of this title creates an

account

in the

United States Treasury

to be known as the

OldAge

Page 301 U. S. 636

Reserve Account

§ 201

No present appropriation, however, is made to that account
image
The argument for petitioners is that the

tax moneys

are not earmarked,

and that

Congress

is at liberty to spend them as it will
imageSOCIAL SECURITY (FICA) TAXES DID NOT GO INTO A TRUST FUND FOR SOCIAL SECURITY

THEY WENT PAID INTO THE TREASURY LIKE INTERNAL-REVENUE TAXES AND WERE NOT EARMARKED IN ANY WAY FOR SOCIAL SECURITY

SO THEY COULD BE USED BY THE U.S. CONGRESS FOR ANY PURPOSE, INCLUDING HAVING NOTHING TO DO WITH SOCIAL SECURITY
—————————————————————
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/301/619/case.html
—————————————————————
http://www.law.cornell.edu/socsec/course/readings/301us619.htm
_____________________________________________
Did you fill out a

Social Security Application

in the past because:

1. YOU WERE TOLD TO, or

2. YOU WERE TOLD YOU HAD TO, or

3. YOU THOUGHT YOU HAD TO, or

4. YOU WERE TOLD YOU COULD NOT BE HIRED WITHOUT a SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER ?

DID YOU CONSULT with an ATTORNEY / LAWYER BEFORE YOU DID ?
_____________________________________________
WHY DOES THE FORM NOT DEFINE

U.S. citizen?
_____________________________________________
Did you know what was going to happen if you provided the

Social Security Number

to:

1. An employer, or

2. A bank, or

3. Others ?

Did you know that if you provided the

Social Security Number

to an employer, that

1. Social Security Taxes (FICA)

would be withheld from your pay ?

2. Medicare Taxes

would be withheld from your pay ?

3. Federal Income Taxes

would be withheld from your pay ?

If you did

NOT

know all of the above, the

Supreme Court of the United States

(SCOTUS)

said:
imageBrady v. U.S.

397 U.S. 742, at page 748

(1970)

Waivers of constitutional rights,

not only must be voluntary

but they must be knowing,

intelligent acts

done with sufficient awareness

of the relevant circumstances

and likely consequences
image
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=397&invol=742
——————————————————————
http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/397/742/
image
Why does the

United States Government

want parents to obtain a

Social Security Number (SSN)

for their kids ?
_____________________________________________
Please contact a competent attorney / lawyer for a legal opinion if you do not know
imageSocial Security
—————————————————————–
http://wikipediaint.wordpress.com/2014/08/27/social-security/
_____________________________________________

—————————————————————–
http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?doc=68.
_____________________________________________

—————————————————————–
http://www.legisworks.org/congress/74/publaw-271.pdf
_____________________________________________
Social Security Act Title I
P.L. 74-271
, approved August 14, 1935, 49 Stat. 620

SOCIAL SECURITY ACT

(As Amended Through January 1, 2013)
—————————————————————–
http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/ssact/title00/0000.htm
_____________________________________________
Constitutional Background
to the Social Security Act of 1935

by Eduard A. Lopez
—————————————————————–
http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v50n1/v50n1p5.pdf
_____________________________________________
SOCIAL SECURITY ACT [P.L. 74–271, approved August 14, 1935, 49 Stat. 620.]
—————————————————————–
http://legcounsel.house.gov/Comps/SSA_CMD.pdf
_____________________________________________
Articles
—————————————————————–
http://wikipediaint.wordpress.com/about/image