; VERIFIED ORIGINAL ANSWER
Documents
Resources
Learning Center
Upload
Plans & pricing Sign in
Sign Out
Your Federal Quarterly Tax Payments are due April 15th Get Help Now >>

VERIFIED ORIGINAL ANSWER

VIEWS: 100 PAGES: 12

  • pg 1
									                                       CAUSE NO. 9842
COUNTY OF BASTROP ET AL,                          §                         IN THE 21st
    PLAINTIFF,                                    §
                                                  §                          JUDICIAL
          V.                                      §
                                                  §                     DISTRICT COURT
WILLIAM MICHAEL JOHNSON,                          §
     DEFENDANT.                                   §                BASTROP COUNTY, TEXAS


                           VERIFIED ORIGINAL ANSWER
Comes now the private man William Michael Johnson, authorized representative for the “WILLIAM
MICHAEL JOHNSON” supposed to be the alleged defendant, and now “defendant” (herein) in
special appearance, reserving all rights, without waiving any rights, remedy, defenses statutory or
procedural, by way of sufficiency of pleadings in defense of private property to challenge the
subject matter and in personam jurisdiction of this court regarding the instigating petition in the
above captioned matter; to wit and whereas

State of Texas         )
                       ) ss.
Bastrop county         )

Upon being duly sworn does say,

“I am a man with the proper Christian name known as and styled as William Michael and I am of the
Johnson family/clan, and

I go by the appellation William Michael: Johnson; and

I am competent in this matter, and

I find sometimes being alleged by others as “WILLIAM MICHAEL JOHNSON”, and

I peacefully, lawfully and currently take up housekeeping on the private property which is familiar to
some as “191 Duck Pond Road” in Bastrop county Texas united States of America, also noted in
Warranty Deed, DEED RECORDS 2022 as recorded VOL 318 PAGES 278, 279, 280 in Records of
Bastrop County, Texas APR 14 1983, and

I am the titled land owner (in accord with Texas Penal Code § 1.07(a)(35)(A)), and

the property is recorded and posted as private property, and

Cause No. 9842
DEFENDANT'S VERIFIED ANSWER                                    1
the property came to me, in private, and remains free of all encumbrance, and

the recorded warranty deed so said above does, on Page 278, read in part “…for which no lien,
expressed or implied, is retained or shall exist.”; and

the recorded warranty deed so said above does, on Page 278, read in part “…by these presents do
GRANT, SELL AND CONVEY unto William Michael Johnson [sic]…”; and

I have lawful and legal possession of said property (Id. § 1.07(a)(39)), and

I enjoy, full, undiluted, possessory rights of said property (Id. § 1.07(a)(35)(A)), and

I have been served with this, what I believe to be, specious action, and

I do not accept or consent to this instant action, and

I am unrepresented, and

I do solemnly affirm that the statements herein are from my own personal knowledge and belief, true
and correct in substance and in fact, not meant to deceive, made in good faith and affirmed to provide
proper testimony and evidence into the record of this matter in lawful defense of private property,
property free of all encumbrance, against said Cause No. 9842 and as further grounds for the
abatement of and dismissing the alleged plaintiff’s petition therefore I do state:

1.    I am not learned in the law; and
2.    I am in want of full disclosure; and
3.    I am in want of knowing the alleged Plaintiff; and
4.    I am in want of knowing the alleged “COUNTY OF BASTROP”; and
5.    I am unable to make legal determination; and
6.    therefore I take the only prudent course of action known to be available; and
7.    without dishonor;
8.    do DENY each and every allegation of the plaintiff’s unverified complaint by which plaintiff
       seeks relief, to impose liability upon Me or to otherwise unlawfully usurp, or otherwise trespass,
       abscond with, My private property; and
9.    I do in good faith deny that the alleged plaintiff has any actionable justiciable claim in the
       premises; and as an alternative to dismissal, a lawful
10. Jury Trial is demanded; and further,




Cause No. 9842
DEFENDANT'S VERIFIED ANSWER                                       2
11. be it known that as a man I, William Michael Johnson, do accept the presiding judge’s
       required oath, and bond, and there now exists a firm and binding contract wherein the
       judge swore to preserve, protect and defend rights and property “…so help me God.” – if
       this be not true let it be corrected on the record now or it will stand as truth in this matter; and
12. I do deny being a corporation; and
13. I do reserve all rights at all times and waive no rights at any time and do expect them to
       be honored, protected and defended at all times – if this be not true let it be corrected on
       the record now or it will stand as truth in this matter; and
14. I do demand that any presumptions by the court and any complaining party be brought
       forth and duly entered into the record of this matter or forevermore not be considered;
       and
15. I do say that the alleged “Lee Gordon, alleged State Bar #08212500; and MCCREARY,
       VESELKA, BRAGG & ALLEN, P.C.” are not proper parties to this instant action, have no
       standing in this matter and that the cause number 9842 should be abated and dismissed
       on this fact alone; and further, if further need be - without dismissal that is,
16. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes that the alleged “Lee
       Gordon, alleged State Bar #08212500; and MCCREARY, VESELKA, BRAGG & ALLEN,
       P.C.” has having any authority to create a colorable persona, (CONVERSION) under colorable
       law by the use of the all-capital-letter-spelled, “WILLIAM MICHAEL JOHNSON” ; and
17. I claim “the right to actual possession”; and
18. I am not in possession of any thing that defeats or otherwise nullifies My right of
       possession; and
19. I believe that nothing exists that will go to defeat, encumber or otherwise nullify My right
       of possession; and further, as further may need be,
20. I do not comprehend, I am not aware of, and I do not understand “Lee Gordon, alleged
       State Bar #08212500, and MCCREARY, VESELKA, BRAGG & ALLEN, P.C.” as found in
       this specious 9842 matter and I believe, and have reason to believe, that it is incompetence
       shown by instigating attorney(s) and possibly some manner of fraud upon the court; and further
21. For the record, the alleged Lee Gordon, alleged State Bar #08212500; and MCCREARY,
       VESELKA, BRAGG & ALLEN, P.C. do not represent Me, William Michael Johnson or the
       fiction WILLIAM MICHAEL JOHNSON™;



Cause No. 9842
DEFENDANT'S VERIFIED ANSWER                                       3
22. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes the alleged plaintiff’s
       existence; and
23. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes capacity of the alleged
       plaintiff in this instant matter; and
24. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes the alleged plaintiff’s proper
       registration to do business in the State of Texas; and
25. As it may relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes the alleged plaintiff’s
       standing in this instant matter; and
26. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes any voluntary nexus between
       the alleged defendant and the alleged plaintiff as may have occurred in, on or within Bastrop
       county Texas; and
27. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes that the alleged plaintiff, et
       al, has any monetary interest in the property at issue by and
28. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes that the alleged plaintiff, et
       al, has any propriety interest in the property at issue by and
29. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes that the alleged plaintiff, et
       al, has any contractual interest in the property at issue by and
30. As it may relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes the alleged plaintiff’s alleged
       attorney’s lawful identity in this instant matter; and
31. As it may relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes the alleged plaintiff’s alleged
       attorney’s standing in this instant matter; and
32. As it may relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes the alleged plaintiff’s alleged
       attorney’s authority in this instant matter – see, Texas Rules of Civil Procedure (T.R.C.P.), Rule
       8; and
33. As it may relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes the alleged plaintiff’s alleged
       attorney’s license to practice law in the State of Texas in this instant matter; and
34. As it may relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes the alleged plaintiff’s proper
       underwriting of this instant matter; and
35. As it may relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes the real party of
       interest in this instant matter; and
36. As it may relate, I am not in possession of any thing that shows the real party of interest in this
       instant matter is in fact a party in this instant matter; and



Cause No. 9842
DEFENDANT'S VERIFIED ANSWER                                        4
37. As it may relate, I am not in possession of any thing that goes to proof that the property so
       alleged in plaintiff’s alleged “SCHEDULE A” is in fact “real property”; and
38. As it may relate, I am not in possession of any thing that shows to be a rendering form as may
       have been used in this alleged matter; and
39. As it does relate, and pursuant to Texas Business & Commerce Code UCC § 3-501, I am not in
       possession of any thing that goes to the existence of a lawful contract between Me and
       the alleged plaintiff relative to this instant matter; and
40. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes the alleged plaintiff’s
       allegation that I am in fact the defendant; and
41. As it may relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes alleged plaintiff’s conformity
       with existing Federal law, rules and regulations as they may apply in this instant matter; and
42. As it may relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes alleged plaintiff’s conformity
       with existing federal law, rules and regulations and specifically the Consumer Credit Protection
       Act (15 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) as amended by Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), Public
       Law 104-208, 110 Stat. 3009 (Sept. 30, 1996), as it may apply in this instant matter; and
43. As it may relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes alleged plaintiff’s conformity
       with existing Texas law, rules and regulations as they may apply in this instant matter; and
44. As it may relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes that the alleged plaintiff is in
       business; and
45. As it may relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes that alleged plaintiff’s claims
       that it represents any “political subdivisions”; and
46. As it may relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes alleged plaintiff’s legal
       capability to allegedly collect property taxes; and
47. As it may relate, I am not in possession of any thing that goes to proof that I did in fact
       receive anything of value from the alleged plaintiff; and
48. As it may relate, I am not in possession of any thing that goes to proof that I did in fact
       receive anything of value from the alleged “Assessor and Collector of taxes”; and
49. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that goes to a legal nexus between Me and
       the alleged “Property Tax Code”; and
50. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that goes to a legal nexus between My duly
       recorded private property and the alleged “Property Tax Code”; and




Cause No. 9842
DEFENDANT'S VERIFIED ANSWER                                      5
51. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that goes to a voluntary legal nexus between
       Me and the alleged “Assessor and Collector of taxes”; and
52. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that goes to showing delinquency; and
53. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that goes to the alleged tax being in
       harmony with the Texas constitution; and
54. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that goes to the alleged taxes being in
       compliance with the Texas constitution; and
55. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that goes to the alleged plaintiff’s
       assertion that I have any voluntary legal relations with anything as so described in
       Plaintiff’s alleged “SCHEDULE A” which is found incorporated into Plaintiff’s original
       petition; and
56. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes legal relation with
       Me and the alleged CAUSE NO. 9842 in the 21st DISTRICT COURT OF BASTROP
       COUNTY, TEXAS; and
57. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes how the alleged
       CAUSE NO. 9842 in the 21st DISTRICT COURT OF BASTROP COUNTY, TEXAS has
       any pertinence to Me; and
58. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes how the alleged
       CAUSE NO. 9842 in the 21st DISTRICT COURT OF BASTROP COUNTY, TEXAS has
       any pertinence to My private property; and
59. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes how the alleged
       “THE STATE OF TEXAS” has any interest in My private property or this matter; and
60. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes how the alleged 21st
       DISTRICT COURT OF BASTROP COUNTY, TEXAS has any interest in My private
       property; and
61. As it does relate, I am not in possession of anything that establishes that the alleged Lee
       Gordon, alleged State Bar #08212500; and MCCREARY, VESELKA, BRAGG & ALLEN,
       P.C. has any legal interest in My private property; and
62. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes that the alleged Lee
       Gordon, alleged State Bar #08212500; and MCCREARY, VESELKA, BRAGG & ALLEN,
       P.C. has any lawful interest in My private property; and


Cause No. 9842
DEFENDANT'S VERIFIED ANSWER                                   6
63. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes that the alleged Lee
       Gordon, alleged State Bar #08212500; and MCCREARY, VESELKA, BRAGG & ALLEN,
       P.C. has any authority of or to conversion of My private property; and
64. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes that the alleged Lee
       Gordon, alleged State Bar #08212500; and MCCREARY, VESELKA, BRAGG & ALLEN,
       P.C. has any use authority for My private property; and
65. As it does relate, I am not in possession of anything that establishes that the alleged
       “COUNTY OF BASTROP ET AL” has any use authority for My private property; and
66. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes that the alleged
       “COUNTY OF BASTROP ET AL” has any use authority to create a colorable persona,
       (CONVERSION) under colorable law by the use of the all-capital-letter-spelled, “WILLIAM
       MICHAEL JOHNSON”; and
67. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes My liability for the
       alleged “SCHEDULE A DELINQUENT TAXES DUE County of Bastrop”; and
68. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that responsively establishes what My
       alleged liability for the alleged “SCHEDULE A DELINQUENT TAXES DUE County of
       Bastrop is”; and
69. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that definitively and/or precisely
       establishes what the alleged liability for the alleged “SCHEDULE A DELINQUENT
       TAXES DUE County of Bastrop” is; and
70. As it may relate, I am not in possession of anything that establishes who duly authorized
       this instant matter; and
71. As it does relate, I am not in possession of anything that establishes full disclosure of
       material facts relating to this instant matter; and
72. As it may relate, I am not in possession of anything that establishes that there was not
       misleading information given this court regarding the assertions found in Plaintiff’s
       original petition; and
73. As it may relate, I am not in possession of anything that goes to show that whatever the
       alleged plaintiff is or may be working with isn’t counterfeit; and




Cause No. 9842
DEFENDANT'S VERIFIED ANSWER                                  7
74. As it may relate, I am not in possession of anything that goes to show that the alleged
       plaintiff has been harmed and damaged by Me in any way regarding this instant matter;
       and
75. As it may relate, I am not in possession of any thing that goes to show remedy for Me regarding
       this instant matter; and
76. As it does relate, I am not in possession of anything that goes to show that the
       alleged plaintiff has stated a claim upon which relief can be granted; and
77. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that contravenes or annuls the Texas
       Constitution; and further
78. I am not in possession of any thing that contravenes, annuls or supersedes the Constitution of the
       United States; and
79. the official record made in this instant case CAUSE NO. 9842 verifies that the court wanted
       subject matter jurisdiction to rule and determine that the man “William Michael Johnson” is a
       judgment debtor to one alleged “COUNTY OF BASTROP ET AL”; and
80. I am aware, and now this court is Judicially Noticed that, “ -- a judgment must be proved only
       by evidence entered on the record through a competent witness”, see: American Red Cross v.
       Community Blood Center of the Ozarks, 257 F.3d 859 (8th Cir. 07/25/2001); and
81. I am aware, and now this court is Judicially Noticed, that, “The statements of counsel in brief or
       in argument are not true facts before the court and are therefore insufficient for the court's
       summary conclusion,” see: Trinsey v. Pagliaro, D.C. Pa. 1964, 229 F. Supp. 647; and
82. having determined that the court lacked jurisdiction, we must dismiss --
       subject matter jurisdiction is the power and authority of the court to
       determine a controversy and without which it cannot proceed; and further
83. I do believe and verily say that each and every uncontested, unrebutted allegation of fact in this
       verified original answer and counterclaim must be accepted as true; and
84. As it does relate, I am not in possession of any thing that establishes due process
       relating to this instant matter, as ‘Collection of tax constitutes deprivation of property;
       accordingly, taxing unit must afford property owner due process of law’, State v. Southoaks Dev.
       Co., 920 S.W. 2d 330, 336-37 (San Antonio); and
85.       As it does relate, I am not in possession of anything that establishes proper
          service relating to this instant matter; and



Cause No. 9842
DEFENDANT'S VERIFIED ANSWER                                    8
                                       AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
86.       attaching to this answer is a copy of a “TAX RECEIPT” 2006-28177-BAST as received from
          BASTROP COUNTY TAX OFFICE showing “a receipt for taxes paid as of 12/19/2006”

                                                CONCLUSION
87.       Wherefore, I, William Michael Johnson, a man, the alleged defendant, in good faith
          defense of private property, property free of all encumbrance, does demand that this Court for
          the above listed reasons, immediately abate and DISMISS with prejudice, as required by law,
          the alleged plaintiff’s original petition and “CITATION DELINQUENT TAX SUIT” as filed
          in the above captioned matter as the facts show that there exists no claim upon which relief
          can be granted, there exists no damaged party and there is no lawful petition or complaint
          filed and this court is absent both subject matter and in personam jurisdiction, the appearing
          plaintiff and its alleged attorney actors in this matter do not show clean hands, all
          proceedings are thus void ab initio. The violations of the Rules of Court, Federal and State law,
          and common law requires the abatement and instant dismissal of this defective complaint in
          this CAUSE NO. 9842, with the alleged plaintiff and alleged plaintiff’s attorney(s)
          compensating William Michael Johnson for the costs in this action; and as Lee Gordon,
          alleged State Bar #08212500; and MCCREARY, VESELKA, BRAGG & ALLEN, P.C.
          each individually and together knowingly and willingly violated the law in willful attempt to
          defraud both William Michael Johnson and this court - the Court should order them each
          personally to compensate him, as necessary, to amend the bad behavior of Lee Gordon,
          alleged State Bar #08212500; and MCCREARY, VESELKA, BRAGG & ALLEN, P.C..
          Should this court fail to dismiss this action, it must cite with clarity those facts it relies
          upon to proceed in violation of the Constitutions, supra, State Statutes, settled case
          law, supra, and common law.
88.       I, William Michael Johnson, now demand relief that can be granted in the form of judgment
          from this honorable court as follows:
                 a. That alleged plaintiff takes nothing by this complaint, which will be dismissed with
                     prejudice, and
                 b. That I recover costs from alleged plaintiff, and
                 c. That I recover any bond in this instant matter; and as




Cause No. 9842
DEFENDANT'S VERIFIED ANSWER                                            9
                 d. As I am not an attorney there can be no call for attorney fees, however; there may be
                    awarded punitive damages of $3,000.00 (three thousand Dollars US), or more, against
                    the Plaintiff and accordingly to be timely paid over to Me to compensate for My
                    having to, with duress, answer this spurious action; and
                 e. That the Court order that I, William Michael Johnson, be granted such other and
                    further relief, special or general, legal or equitable, as I may be shown to be justly
                    entitled or otherwise awarded by the Jury; and in finality
                 f. That the ORDER of the court be surrendered to Me, William Michael Johnson
                    forthwith.



DATED this ___ day of March in the year A.D. 2007, the undersigned being first duly sworn deposes
and says,

I, William Michael Johnson, verify the factual averments of the above and foregoing under penalty of
perjury.”


                   ________________________________________________________
                               William Michael Johnson, unrepresented
                                             on the land
                                      c/o 191 Duck Pond Road
                                 McDade, Bastrop county Texas uSA

                                                512-273-2396




Cause No. 9842
DEFENDANT'S VERIFIED ANSWER                                        10
State of Texas        §
                      §                         VERIFICATION
County of Bastrop     §

Before me, a notary public, on this _____ day of March, 2007 personally appeared William Michael
Johnson, known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing and, being by me
first duly sworn, declared that the statements therein contained are true and correct.



                                                            _____________________________________
                                                                         Notary Public in and for
            (L.S.)                                                             the State of Texas


                                                                             My Commission Expires

                                                       _______________________________________


                                   CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

“I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing DEFENDANT'S VERIFIED
ANSWER was by my hand delivered on March _________, 2007 to the District Court, 21st Judicial
District, Bastrop, Texas, for filing into Cause Num b e r : 98 4 2 , and then in time thereafter by
me delivered to:

Lee Gordon, alleged State Bar #08212500, MCCREARY, VESELKA, BRAGG & ALLEN,
P.C.; P.O. Box 26990, Austin, Texas 78755 via prepaid USPS Certified Mail, Article #
7006 2760 0002 0863 4856 Domestic Return Receipt PS Form 3811 used . ”


                          __________________________________________________________



                          __________________________________________________________


                                                       county Texas
                                   ______________________
                                       Not a party to this action.




Cause No. 9842
DEFENDANT'S VERIFIED ANSWER                                        11

								
To top