Equity: Difference between revisions

From PreparingYou
Jump to navigation Jump to search
mNo edit summary
No edit summary
 
(4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
== Equity ==


[[Equity]] is a “body of rules existing by the side of the original civil law, founded on distinct principles, and claiming incidentally to supersede the civil law in virtue of a superior sanctity inherent in those principles.”<Ref>Maine, Anc. Law, 27.</Ref>
[[Equity]] is a “body of rules existing by the side of the original civil law, founded on distinct principles, and claiming incidentally to supersede the civil law in virtue of a superior sanctity inherent in those principles.”<Ref>Maine, Anc. Law, 27.</Ref>
Line 32: Line 34:


It should be clear that any legal system is subject to the prior and essential principles of law. Law that is basic, fundamental, and well-established over thousands of years of recorded history.  
It should be clear that any legal system is subject to the prior and essential principles of law. Law that is basic, fundamental, and well-established over thousands of years of recorded history.  
=== Deprived by consent ===


It must be understood that it is [[consent]] that makes what is only legally proclaimed to be lawfully established. Also, it should be apparent that binding oneself to a legal system that is constantly under the process of change is at least dangerous, if not inevitably disastrous.
It must be understood that it is [[consent]] that makes what is only legally proclaimed to be lawfully established. Also, it should be apparent that binding oneself to a legal system that is constantly under the process of change is at least dangerous, if not inevitably disastrous.
Line 40: Line 45:
This would also include the power of [[Jury]] to nullify laws legislated be the people's representatives. The power of Jury Nullification.
This would also include the power of [[Jury]] to nullify laws legislated be the people's representatives. The power of Jury Nullification.
: “And if the question relate to any point of public liberty, or if it be one of those in which the judges may be suspected of bias, the jury undertake to decide both law and fact.” Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Va., 1782. Q.XIV
: “And if the question relate to any point of public liberty, or if it be one of those in which the judges may be suspected of bias, the jury undertake to decide both law and fact.” Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Va., 1782. Q.XIV
"[[Judge not]]" because if you seek to deprive others of their right to choose your right to choose will be endanger.<Ref name="archy">{{Archy}}</Ref> [25]
== The kings law ==


An equity court became an instrument of kings and even in more democratic systems an instrument of civil law.
An equity court became an instrument of kings and even in more democratic systems an instrument of civil law.
Line 49: Line 58:


But we also know “Nothing is more unjust than to extend equity too far” Nihil iniquius quam æquitatem nimis intendere.
But we also know “Nothing is more unjust than to extend equity too far” Nihil iniquius quam æquitatem nimis intendere.
== Equity in persona ==


Equity is a persona jurisdiction.  
Equity is a persona jurisdiction.  




One of the first acts of the Congress created by the United States Constitution was to establish a federal court system in the Judiciary Act of 1789. This is an architectonic act still in force.  
One of the first acts of the Congress created by the United States Constitution was to establish a federal court system in the [[Judiciary Act of 1789]]. This is an architectonic act still in force.  


In Sec. 16., it states, “That suits in equity shall not be sustained in either of the courts of the United States, in any case where plain, adequate and complete remedy may be had at law.”
In Sec. 16., it states, “That suits in equity shall not be sustained in either of the courts of the United States, in any case where plain, adequate and complete remedy may be had at law.”
Line 118: Line 129:
::    1c) (Pual) to be made level, be laid smoothly out
::    1c) (Pual) to be made level, be laid smoothly out
::    1d) (Hiphil) to make straight, look straight
::    1d) (Hiphil) to make straight, look straight
The same letters appear as Strong's numbers 04334, 03475, 03476, 03477 all of which include the same ideas of ''uprightness, right, upright'' and eventually form the first part of the word Israel when AlefLamed meaning ruling judge or God is included.</Ref>.
The same letters appear as Strong's numbers 04334, 03475, 03476, 03477 all of which include the same ideas of ''uprightness, right, upright'' and eventually form the first part of the word Israel when AlefLamed meaning ruling judge or God is included.</Ref>.


Ecclesiastes 2:21  For there is a man whose labour is in wisdom, and in knowledge, and in equity<Ref> 03788 ^ןורשׁכ^ kishrown \@kish-rone’\@ from 03787; n m;  AV-good 1, right 1, equity 1; 3 1) success, skill, profit    1a) skill  1b) success, profit</Ref>; yet to a man that hath not laboured therein shall he leave it for his portion. This also is vanity and a great evil.
Ecclesiastes 2:21  For there is a man whose labour is in wisdom, and in knowledge, and in equity<Ref> 03788 ^ןורשׁכ^ kishrown \@kish-rone’\@ from 03787; n m;  AV-good 1, right 1, equity 1; 3 1) success, skill, profit    1a) skill  1b) success, profit</Ref>; yet to a man that hath not laboured therein shall he leave it for his portion. This also is vanity and a great evil.
Line 129: Line 140:


Malachi 2:6  The law of truth was in his mouth, and iniquity was not found in his lips: he walked with me in peace and equity<Ref name=miyshowr ></Ref>, and did turn many away from iniquity.
Malachi 2:6  The law of truth was in his mouth, and iniquity was not found in his lips: he walked with me in peace and equity<Ref name=miyshowr ></Ref>, and did turn many away from iniquity.
== Equity and admiralty or maritime law ==
Congress originally regulated admiralty law partially through the Commerce Clause. American admiralty law formerly applied only to American tidal waters but now extends to any waters navigable within the United States for interstate or foreign commerce.
The amount of relief that admiralty courts can offer is limited as a result of their limited jurisdiction. It is not possible for an admiralty court to enforce an independent equitable claim, even where it concerns maritime property.  Admiralty and maritime law are largely considered the same thing, with the terms used interchangeably even though they have come from different sources, purposes, and histories.
<blockquote>
"Admiralty law in the United States developed from the British admiralty courts present in most of the American colonies. These courts functioned separately from courts of law and equity. With the [[Judiciary Act oy 1789|Judiciary Act]], though, Congress placed admiralty under the jurisdiction of the federal district courts. Although admiralty shares much in common with the civil law, it is separate from it. Common law does not act as binding precedent on admiralty courts, but it and other law may be used when no law on point is available."<Ref name="LII">Legal Information Institute https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/admiralty</Ref>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
"Just as the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure placed law and equity under the same jurisdiction in 1938, the 1966 rules subsumed admiralty<Ref>subsumed: ''to include or place within something larger or more general.''</Ref>. Nonetheless, the Supplemental Admiralty Rules take precedence over the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in the event of conflict between the two."<Ref name="LII"></Ref>
</blockquote>
The placing of law and equity in 1938 or even in 1966 the general rules of admiralty into the larger pool of administrative rules was simply giving the courts more options to deal with a wider variety of cases and situations where rules of [[equity]] nor statutes were whole adequate.
While more remedies were provided there was also an element of chaos that erupted as a result. George P. Smith II wrote, "Equity and Admiralty: A Turbulent Path to Manifest Destiny"<Ref name="Equity and Admiralty">"George P. Smith II, [https://scholarship.law.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1674&context=scholar Equity and Admiralty: A Turbulent Path to Manifest Destiny], 5 NW. J.INT’L L. & BUS. 65 (1983). </Ref> for The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law in 1983. While it does not answer every question that may arise it gives an adequate history and explanation to provide a somewhat comprehensive clarification of the ''Equity and maritime law'' controversy to dispel the [[Guru theories]] that would blame the reduction in liberty on a vast conspiracy of evil people.
There certainly is a vast scheme or stratagem to gain power over our fellow man. Such plan have been a part of the history man almost from the beginning. Since almost everything has been done openly and in public and published as a matter of record the word ''conspiracy'' hardly applies.
Certainly many people were involved and some intrigue and secrecy was employed in the formulation of a mechanism and to bring power and control into the hands of a few. But to talk of ''cabals'' and ''subterfuge'' is only popular because it takes the focus off those who were slothful and took what can only be called the easy.
It still comes down to the fact the people were willing to covet their neighbor's rights and property to obtain what they assumed would be an advantage for themselves. Their personal denial of their own [[appetite]] for [[benefits]] and the habit of receiving by the rule of [[force]] at the expense of others is the real ''intrigue'' and the only viable ''deception'' mostly includes their self ''deception'' that they would be able to [[bite]] their neighbor without becoming devoured themselves.
To claim ignorance of the fundamental nature of [[covet]]ing the [[dainties]] of government who provide you with [[welfare]] through taking the property of others is a mere ''ploy'' devoid of the [[Logos]] of [[Christ]], [[Moses]] and [[Abraham]] and of course [[Right Reason]].
To deny our own culpability  in the [[ruin]] of the [[republic]] is a ''dodge'' for the ignorant and prideful who prefer to covet the life of others at their own perceived advantage.
Once the people began the process of neglecting their responsibilities and abandoning the [[cry out|cries]] of their neighbor to the governments of the [[world]] it would only be a matter of time before they would be blinded to the need to attend to the [[weightier matters]].
Since, the [[Common law]] was woefully neglected...
<blockquote>
"Just as the 1938 rules abolished the distinction between actions at law and suits in equity, this change would abolish the distinction between civil actions and suits in admiralty."<Ref> Id. For a general discussion of the effect of the merger of law and equity, see Smith, La Dolce Vita-Law and Equity Merged at Last!, 24 ARK. L. REV. 162 (1970).</Ref>,
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
"These rules govern the procedure in the United States district courts in all suits of a civil nature whether cognizable as cases at law or in equity or in admiralty. . . . They shall be construed to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action."<Ref>Federal Rules of Civil Procedures 1.</Ref>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
"While the amended federal rules do not expressly grant the admiralty courts equity jurisdiction, on their face such an implied grant exists.'<Ref> While the amended federal rules do not expressly grant the admiralty courts equity jurisdiction, an argument could be made that such an implicit grant exists. Federal rule 2 directs that there is but one form of action known as a civil action, Federal Rules of Civil Procedures 2, while rule 9(h) allows for an admiralty claim to be denominated as such and then subject to the Supplemental Rules for Certain Admiralty and Maritime Claims, Federal Rules of Civil Procedures 9(h). The Supplemental Rules do not indicate that a maritime claim will be subject to any forms of limited relief. Federal Rules of Civil Procedures 9(h) advisory committee note. Federal rule 65 covers injunctions and provides no language within it which restricts the availability of injunctive relief in maritime claims. Federal Rules of Civil Procedures 65. Federal rule 18(a), allows for joinder of "as many claims, legal, equitable or maritime," as one may have, Federal Rules of Civil Procedures 18(a), and, finally, rule I states that the federal rules govern all civil suits, "whether cognizable in cases at law or in equity or in admiralty." Federal Rules of Civil Procedures 1. Thus, it could be argued that, taken as a whole, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure appear to evince no intent-explicitly or implicitly-to deny federal courts sitting in admiralty the ability to award equitable relief.</Ref>.
</blockquote>




Line 147: Line 203:


{{Template:Gregory-info‎}}
{{Template:Gregory-info‎}}
[[Category:Articles]]
[[Category:Definitions]]
[[Category:Law]]

Latest revision as of 18:24, 2 April 2024

Equity

Equity is a “body of rules existing by the side of the original civil law, founded on distinct principles, and claiming incidentally to supersede the civil law in virtue of a superior sanctity inherent in those principles.”[1]

First, “equity” is not law in itself, but it only exists “by the side of” the law, and the civil law, at that.

“‘Civil Law,’ ‘Roman Law’ and ‘Roman Civil Law’ are convertible phrases, meaning the same system of jurisprudence.”[2]

Second, it should be noted that it only claims to supersede the civil law.

“Law, as distinguished from equity, denotes the doctrine and the procedure of the common law of England and America, from which equity is a departure.” [3]
"If we search out the origins of Roman Law, we must study ][Babylon]]..." [4]

Efforts to bring in Commercial Law, Equity and the Roman Civil law were here from the beginning. It is now Roman Law that dominates the legal system and the courts in America.

In Black’s law dictionary, found in every law office of the democracy, there is hardly a page that does not make reference to its Latin origins of legal principles and precepts.


The word 'legal' itself is defined in Black’s 3rd Law Dictionary as:

1. Conforming to law; according to law; required or permitted by law…

2. Proper or sufficient to be recognized by law; cognizable in the courts…

3. Cognizable in courts of law, as distinguished from courts of equity; construed or governed by the rules and principles of law…

4. Posited [assumed] by courts as the inference or imputation of the law, as a matter of construction, rather than established by actual proof.

5. Created by law.

Legal systems may “conform to law”, they may be “permitted by law”, they may even be created by law, but they are not law in themselves. They may become law by consent and constructions of law. What is legal is “cognizable in courts of law; as distinguished from courts of equity” which are not “governed by rules of law”.

It should be clear that any legal system is subject to the prior and essential principles of law. Law that is basic, fundamental, and well-established over thousands of years of recorded history.

Deprived by consent

It must be understood that it is consent that makes what is only legally proclaimed to be lawfully established. Also, it should be apparent that binding oneself to a legal system that is constantly under the process of change is at least dangerous, if not inevitably disastrous.

While equity may accept that:

"It is against equity to deprive freeman of the free disposal of their own property."[5] this statement w of uld assume the freeman held the "equitable title and not merely a "legal title".

This would also include the power of Jury to nullify laws legislated be the people's representatives. The power of Jury Nullification.

“And if the question relate to any point of public liberty, or if it be one of those in which the judges may be suspected of bias, the jury undertake to decide both law and fact.” Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Va., 1782. Q.XIV

"Judge not" because if you seek to deprive others of their right to choose your right to choose will be endanger.[6] [25]

The kings law

An equity court became an instrument of kings and even in more democratic systems an instrument of civil law.

“The jurisdiction of equity court, gradually developed by the chancellor, was limited only by the chancellor himself. There were two important limitations, both adopted to avoid any clash with the common-law courts. One was that equity would not interfere where there was an adequate remedy at common law; the other was that equity would act merely against the person of the common law plaintiff or defendant and therefore affect the legal right only in that indirect fashion.” Clark’s Summary of American Law. Equity, p 233.

Equity’s courts administered the king’s justice in the king’s dominion over the person. It's remedies were similar and often more convenient to those who might be more slothful in tending to the weightier matters of justice and mercy.

“So friendly is equity to the charitable trust that it will stretch its powers to the limit to sustain and carry out a charitable trust. The theory upon which this is done is known as the cy pres doctrine, the words meaning, roughly translated, ‘as nearly as possible.’” Wills and Trusts, Blackstone School of Law

But we also know “Nothing is more unjust than to extend equity too far” Nihil iniquius quam æquitatem nimis intendere.

Equity in persona

Equity is a persona jurisdiction.


One of the first acts of the Congress created by the United States Constitution was to establish a federal court system in the Judiciary Act of 1789. This is an architectonic act still in force.

In Sec. 16., it states, “That suits in equity shall not be sustained in either of the courts of the United States, in any case where plain, adequate and complete remedy may be had at law.”

But, in the case of a legal title where the equitable interest is in question, there cannot be complete or plain remedy at law.

This includes a common law remedy which is addressed in Section 9. “An be it further enacted, That the district courts shall have,... cognizance of all crimes and offences ... in all cases, the right of a common law remedy, where the common law is competent to give it;”

Again, the common law is not competent to handle such equitable relationships.

Trust is “something committed to a person’s care for use or management and for which an account must be rendered. Every man’s talents and advantages are a trust committed to him by his Maker, and for the use or employment of which he is accountable.” Webster 1928 Dictionary.

“A person is a man considered with reference to a certain status.” Persona est homo cum statu quandom cosideratus. Heinecc. Elem.1.1,tit.3,§75.

“I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil. They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.”
“Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world. And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.” (John 17:14, 19)

The word “world” here is kosmos[7], meaning a “harmonious arrangement or constitution, order, government,” as opposed to koumene,[8] also used in the New Testament and meaning “the inhabited earth”. The word “evil”[9] here is from the word poneros, meaning “full of labours, annoyances, hardships… pressed and harassed by labours,” as opposed to kakos,[10] meaning “evil, of a bad nature.” Poneros is from a primary peno (to toil for daily subsistence.) [11] Sanctify[12] is from hagiazo, meaning “to separate from profane things”. God created the earth and put man in the world because He saw it was good. Man has made a new world order and adorned it and organized it by the works of his own hand, governing himself and his brother. Jesus wants us in the world, living in his kingdom, serving God. He wants us to labor in the world, but separate from the oppressive labors of the world- ordered system, both new and old.

“RECONVERSION, noun change, change over, demilitarization, disarmament, palingenesis, passage, readjustment, rebirth, reintegration, re-establishment, regeneration, regenesis, rehabilitation, renaissance, reorganization, restoration, retrogression, retroversion, return, reversal, reversion, transformation, transit, transition.”[13]


“Participation in a system of charitable uses under the Law of Charitable Uses and the Status of Wills, Among others, is voluntary. Once participation is discontinued for various reasons such as ‘breach of trust,’ and ‘lack of confidence,’ the non-participant, so separated from use, may assert rights to be restored to his prior, original status and condition.” [14]


“Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him; Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.” (James 5:19,20)

Mankind has been converted, the sanctity of the family, an institution of God, has been deposed and the heads of the family have been cut off through cunning contracts and covetous practices through ignorance, neglect and sloth. We have been warned throughout history but have failed to assume the responsibility of learning from that history.

“The central bank is an institution of the most deadly hostility existing against the Principles and form of our Constitution. I am an Enemy to all banks discounting bills or notes for anything but Coin. If the American People allow private banks to Take not from the mouth of labor control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the People of all their Property until their Children will wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered.” Thomas Jefferson

He shall be reconverted who Trusts in the LORD.

What is the process of that reconversion?

Seek first the Kingdom of Heaven.

So, when the term “common law” is used, there is the common law of the individual freeman and the common law of the legislature. The courts of equity were used to fulfill a need for remedies, but, for which the common law, by tradition and custom, did not provide, such as acts outside the realm of its reasoning jurisdiction, as in the case of “trusts and uses.”


Equity in the Bible

The word we see as equity in the Bible is from different words.

Psalms 98:9 Before the LORD; for he cometh to judge the earth: with righteousness shall he judge the world[15], and the people with equity.[16]

Psalms 99:4 The king’s strength also loveth judgment; thou dost establish equity[16], thou executest judgment and righteousness in Jacob.

Proverbs 1:3 To receive the instruction of wisdom, justice, and judgment, and equity[16];

Proverbs 2:9 Then shalt thou understand righteousness, and judgment, and equity[16]; yea, every good path.

Proverbs 17:26 Also to punish the just is not good, nor to strike princes for equity[17].

Ecclesiastes 2:21 For there is a man whose labour is in wisdom, and in knowledge, and in equity[18]; yet to a man that hath not laboured therein shall he leave it for his portion. This also is vanity and a great evil.

Isaiah 11:4 But with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove with equity[19] for the meek of the earth: and he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked.

Isaiah 59:14 And judgment is turned away backward, and justice standeth afar off: for truth is fallen in the street, and equity[19] cannot enter.

Micah 3:9 Hear this, I pray you, ye heads of the house of Jacob, and princes of the house of Israel, that abhor judgment, and pervert all equity.[17]

Malachi 2:6 The law of truth was in his mouth, and iniquity was not found in his lips: he walked with me in peace and equity[19], and did turn many away from iniquity.


Equity and admiralty or maritime law

Congress originally regulated admiralty law partially through the Commerce Clause. American admiralty law formerly applied only to American tidal waters but now extends to any waters navigable within the United States for interstate or foreign commerce.

The amount of relief that admiralty courts can offer is limited as a result of their limited jurisdiction. It is not possible for an admiralty court to enforce an independent equitable claim, even where it concerns maritime property. Admiralty and maritime law are largely considered the same thing, with the terms used interchangeably even though they have come from different sources, purposes, and histories.

"Admiralty law in the United States developed from the British admiralty courts present in most of the American colonies. These courts functioned separately from courts of law and equity. With the Judiciary Act, though, Congress placed admiralty under the jurisdiction of the federal district courts. Although admiralty shares much in common with the civil law, it is separate from it. Common law does not act as binding precedent on admiralty courts, but it and other law may be used when no law on point is available."[20]

"Just as the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure placed law and equity under the same jurisdiction in 1938, the 1966 rules subsumed admiralty[21]. Nonetheless, the Supplemental Admiralty Rules take precedence over the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in the event of conflict between the two."[20]

The placing of law and equity in 1938 or even in 1966 the general rules of admiralty into the larger pool of administrative rules was simply giving the courts more options to deal with a wider variety of cases and situations where rules of equity nor statutes were whole adequate.

While more remedies were provided there was also an element of chaos that erupted as a result. George P. Smith II wrote, "Equity and Admiralty: A Turbulent Path to Manifest Destiny"[22] for The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law in 1983. While it does not answer every question that may arise it gives an adequate history and explanation to provide a somewhat comprehensive clarification of the Equity and maritime law controversy to dispel the Guru theories that would blame the reduction in liberty on a vast conspiracy of evil people.

There certainly is a vast scheme or stratagem to gain power over our fellow man. Such plan have been a part of the history man almost from the beginning. Since almost everything has been done openly and in public and published as a matter of record the word conspiracy hardly applies.

Certainly many people were involved and some intrigue and secrecy was employed in the formulation of a mechanism and to bring power and control into the hands of a few. But to talk of cabals and subterfuge is only popular because it takes the focus off those who were slothful and took what can only be called the easy.

It still comes down to the fact the people were willing to covet their neighbor's rights and property to obtain what they assumed would be an advantage for themselves. Their personal denial of their own appetite for benefits and the habit of receiving by the rule of force at the expense of others is the real intrigue and the only viable deception mostly includes their self deception that they would be able to bite their neighbor without becoming devoured themselves.

To claim ignorance of the fundamental nature of coveting the dainties of government who provide you with welfare through taking the property of others is a mere ploy devoid of the Logos of Christ, Moses and Abraham and of course Right Reason.

To deny our own culpability in the ruin of the republic is a dodge for the ignorant and prideful who prefer to covet the life of others at their own perceived advantage.

Once the people began the process of neglecting their responsibilities and abandoning the cries of their neighbor to the governments of the world it would only be a matter of time before they would be blinded to the need to attend to the weightier matters.

Since, the Common law was woefully neglected...

"Just as the 1938 rules abolished the distinction between actions at law and suits in equity, this change would abolish the distinction between civil actions and suits in admiralty."[23],

"These rules govern the procedure in the United States district courts in all suits of a civil nature whether cognizable as cases at law or in equity or in admiralty. . . . They shall be construed to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action."[24]

"While the amended federal rules do not expressly grant the admiralty courts equity jurisdiction, on their face such an implied grant exists.'[25].



See more Forbidden Definitions

Law
Law | Natural Law | Legal title | Common Law |
Fiction of law | Stare decisis | Jury | Voir dire |
Consent | Contract | Parental contract | Government |
Civil law | Civil Rights | Civil Government | Governments |
No Kings | Canon law | Cities of refuge | Levites |
Citizen | Equity | The Ten Laws | Law of the Maat |
Bastiat's The Law and Two Trees | Trees |
The Occupy Refuge Movement | Clive Bundy | Hammond |
Barcroft | Benefactors | Gods | Jury | Sanhedrin |
Protection | Weightier matters | Social contract | Community Law |
Perfect law of liberty | Power to change | Covet | Rights |
Anarchist | Agorism | Live as if the state does not exist |

Newsletter | Dear Network | Network Notes | The Kingdom Newsletter |
Thought for the day | Events List | Free speech | Conversation


If you need help:

Or want to help others:

Join The Living Network of The Companies of Ten
The Living Network | Join Local group | About | Purpose | Guidelines | Network Removal
Contact Minister | Fractal Network | Audacity of Hope | Network Links

Footnotes

  1. ↑ Maine, Anc. Law, 27.
  2. ↑ Black’s Law Dictionary 3rdp 332
  3. ↑ Bouvier’s Law Dictionary.
  4. ↑ Sir Frederic Pollack and Frederic William Maitland, The History of the English Law Before the Time of Edward I, page 561, Cambridge Univ. Press 1968.
  5. ↑ Iniquum est ingenuis hominibus non esse liberam rerum suarum alienationem. Co. Litt. 223. See 1 Bouv. Inst. n. 455, 460.
  6. ↑ "Freedom is the Right to Choose, the Right to create for oneself the alternatives of Choice. Without the possibility of Choice, and the exercise of Choice, a man is not a man but a member, an instrument, a thing.” Archibald MacLeish
  7. ↑ Strong’s No. 2889 kosmos {kos’-mos} probably from the base of 2865; n m AV - world (186) - adorning (1) [187] 1) an apt and harmonious arrangement or constitution, order, government.... Copyright © 1991, Woodside B. F.
  8. ↑ Strong’s No. 3625 oikoumene {oy-kou-men’-ay} feminine participle present passive of 3611 (as noun, by implication of 1093); n f VAV - world (14) - earth (1) [15] 1) the inhabited earth… 2) the universe, the world..W. B. F.
  9. ↑ Strong’s No. 4190 poneros {pon-ay-ros’} from a derivative of 4192; adj AV - evil (51) - wicked (10) - wicked one (6) - evil things (2) - misc (7) [76] 1) full of labours, annoyances, hardships 1a) pressed and harassed by labours 1b) bringing toils, annoyances, perils; of a time full of peril to Christian faith and steadfastness; causing pain and trouble 2) bad, of a bad nature or condition 2a) in a physical sense: diseased or blind 2b) in an ethical sense, evil wicked, bad.
  10. ↑ Strong’s No. 2556 kakos {kak-os’} apparently a primary word; adj AV - evil (40) - evil things (3) - harm (2) - that which is evil + 3458 (2) - wicked (1) - ill (1) - bad (1) - noisome (1) [51] 1) of a bad nature; not such as it ought to be 2) of a mode of thinking, feeling, acting; base, wrong, wicked 3) troublesome, injurious, pernicious, destructive, baneful.
  11. ↑ Strong’s No. 3993 penes {pen’-ace} from a primary peno (to toil for daily subsistence); adj AV - poor (1)
  12. ↑ Strong’s No. 37 hagiazo {hag-ee-ad’-zo} from 40; vb AV - sanctify (26) - hallow (2) - be holy (1) [29] 1) to render or acknowledge, or to be venerable or hallow 2) to separate from profane things and dedicate to God, to consecrate 3) to purify.
  13. ↑ LEGAL THESAURUS by William C. Burton second edition.
  14. ↑ Williams v. Williams, (1853) 8 N.Y.-4 Selden 525. McCartee v. Orphan Asylum Soc., 9 Cowen 511, 513, 18 am. Dec. 516, quoting Blackstones Comm. 104.
  15. ↑ The Hebrew is tebel which is TavBietLamed. Literally Faith-House-Hands He will judge the house you built with your hands.
  16. ↑ 16.0 16.1 16.2 16.3 The word you see as equity in that quote is 04339 ^רשׁימ^ meyshar from 03474; n m; AV-equity 4, uprightly 3, uprightness 3, right things 2, agreement 1, aright 1, equal 1, right 1, righteously 1, sweetly 1, upright 1; 19
    1) evenness, uprightness, straightness, equity
    1a) evenness, level, smoothness
    1b) uprightness, equity
    1c) rightly (as adv)
    The Hebrew letters are MemYodShinResh meaning Flow- Infinite Point- Eternal Flame- Clarifies and is from the word yashar YodShinResh meaning Infinite Point- Eternal Flame- Clarified. The use of the letters YodShin said to mean "being, existence" or the Infinite Point- Eternal Flame in conjunction within a word is a metaphor for God's light.
    The word meyshar has to do with what is upright or pleasing to God.
    The flow of the light or flame of God in you or your life determines or makes clear how upright you are or are not.
    The Modern Christians of the world are a surety for debt to men who call themselves Benefactors but exercise authority. They are dependent upon those men providing benefits at the expense of their neighbor and their neighbor's children to provide their daily bread... They are the workers of iniquity. They pay preachers because they make them feel good about their iniquity.
    Feeding the poor with token charity to easy their conscience while they depend on a system of Corban which makes the word of God to none effect is the opposite of the gospel of Christ. They are foolish virgins with no oil in their lamp.
  17. ↑ 17.0 17.1 03474 ^רשׁי^ yashar \@yaw-shar’\@ a primitive root; v; AV-please 6, straight 5, direct 4, right 3, well 2, fitted 1, good 1, make straight 1, meet 1, upright 1, uprightly 1; 27
    1) to be right, be straight, be level, be upright, be just, be lawful, be smooth
    1a) (Qal)
    1a1) to go straight
    1a2) to be pleasing, be agreeable, be right (fig.)
    1a3) to be straightforward, be upright
    1b) (Piel)
    1b1) to make right, make smooth, make straight
    1b2) to lead, direct, lead straight along
    1b3) to esteem right, approve
    1c) (Pual) to be made level, be laid smoothly out
    1d) (Hiphil) to make straight, look straight
    The same letters appear as Strong's numbers 04334, 03475, 03476, 03477 all of which include the same ideas of uprightness, right, upright and eventually form the first part of the word Israel when AlefLamed meaning ruling judge or God is included.
  18. ↑ 03788 ^ןורשׁכ^ kishrown \@kish-rone’\@ from 03787; n m; AV-good 1, right 1, equity 1; 3 1) success, skill, profit 1a) skill 1b) success, profit
  19. ↑ 19.0 19.1 19.2 04334 ^רושׁימ^ miyshowr \@mee-shore’\@ or ^רשׁימ^ miyshor \@mee-shore’\@ from 03474; n m; AV-plain 15, equity 2, straight 2, even place 1, right 1, righteously 1, uprightness 1; 23 1) level place, uprightness 1a) level country, table-land, plain 1b) level place 1c) uprightness
  20. ↑ 20.0 20.1 Legal Information Institute https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/admiralty
  21. ↑ subsumed: to include or place within something larger or more general.
  22. ↑ "George P. Smith II, Equity and Admiralty: A Turbulent Path to Manifest Destiny, 5 NW. J.INT’L L. & BUS. 65 (1983).
  23. ↑ Id. For a general discussion of the effect of the merger of law and equity, see Smith, La Dolce Vita-Law and Equity Merged at Last!, 24 ARK. L. REV. 162 (1970).
  24. ↑ Federal Rules of Civil Procedures 1.
  25. ↑ While the amended federal rules do not expressly grant the admiralty courts equity jurisdiction, an argument could be made that such an implicit grant exists. Federal rule 2 directs that there is but one form of action known as a civil action, Federal Rules of Civil Procedures 2, while rule 9(h) allows for an admiralty claim to be denominated as such and then subject to the Supplemental Rules for Certain Admiralty and Maritime Claims, Federal Rules of Civil Procedures 9(h). The Supplemental Rules do not indicate that a maritime claim will be subject to any forms of limited relief. Federal Rules of Civil Procedures 9(h) advisory committee note. Federal rule 65 covers injunctions and provides no language within it which restricts the availability of injunctive relief in maritime claims. Federal Rules of Civil Procedures 65. Federal rule 18(a), allows for joinder of "as many claims, legal, equitable or maritime," as one may have, Federal Rules of Civil Procedures 18(a), and, finally, rule I states that the federal rules govern all civil suits, "whether cognizable in cases at law or in equity or in admiralty." Federal Rules of Civil Procedures 1. Thus, it could be argued that, taken as a whole, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure appear to evince no intent-explicitly or implicitly-to deny federal courts sitting in admiralty the ability to award equitable relief.


About the author





Subscribe

HELP US at His Holy Church spread the word by SUBSCRIBING to many of our CHANNELS and the Network.
The more subscribers will give us more opportunity to reach out to others and build the network as Christ commanded.

Join the network.
Most important is to become a part of the Living Network which is not dependent upon the internet but seeks to form The bands of a free society.
You can do this by joining the local email group on the network and helping one another in a network of Tens.

His Holy Church - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/user/hisholychurch

Bitchute channel will often include material that would be censored.
https://www.bitchute.com/channel/o6xa17ZTh2KG/

Rumble Channel gregory144
https://rumble.com/user/gregory144

To read more go to "His Holy Church" (HHC) https://www.hisholychurch.org/

Brother Gregory in the wilderness.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJSw6O7_-vA4dweVpMPEXRA

About the author, Brother Gregory
https://hisholychurch.org/author.php

PreparingU - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9hTUK8R89ElcXVgUjWoOXQ

Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/HisHolyChurch







Retrieved from "http://preparingyou.com/wiki/index.php?title=Equity&oldid=68047"