Each of the Defendants were Served the Following Documents on Paper Media, via USPS Certified Mail with Restricted Delivery (the complete digital service package is available at the links below):
- Summons from the United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan
- Video Introduction to this Lawsuit on DVD, along with DECLARATION CERTIFYING TESTIMONY IN VIDEO IS ACCURATE AND TRUE
- DECLARATION OF IRREFUTABLE PROOF OF A CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY SPANNING STATE AND FEDERAL COURTS (Rev. 3/13/24)
- AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTIOUS CONDUCT AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
- “PLAINTIFF FLASH DRIVE-1” INFORMATION
- INDEX OF DOCUMENTS FILED IN THIS FEDERAL LAWSUIT
- 8/1/2019 CHANCERY COURT HEARING PACKAGE
- DECLARATION ABOUT PROFESSIONAL AND JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT DURING MY 8/1/2019 HEARING IN CHANCERY COURT
- 8/29/2019 CHANCERY COURT HEARING PACKAGE
- MEMORANDUM OF LAW REGARDING VOID TENNESSEE COURT ORDERS
- FLASH DRIVE (30gb Zip Download) | More than needed, either package below will suffice.
- DIRECTLY DOWNLOAD THIS ENTIRE LAWSUIT(3gb Zip Download) | All documents filed in this case as of August 21, 2024, when the court issued the summonses, without the digital media exhibits.
- DIRECTLY DOWNLOAD THIS ENTIRE LAWSUIT WITH DIGITAL MEDIA EXHIBITS (18gb Zip Download) | Everything filed in this case as of August 21, 2024, when the court issued the summonses, including the digital media exhibits.
- LAWSUIT SERVICE PACKAGE DETAILS (Declaration)
- FENTON FILINGS SINCE SERVICE
If you are a party to this lawsuit who did not physically receive service of this lawsuit service package (as detailed above), and would like a copy, please send an email to contact@jefffenton.com with your name, request, and the address which you would like to receive it at, and one will be mailed to you by certified mail, within the next week. Please ensure that someone will be available to sign for receipt of the package.
Also to ensure that your message is timely received, please follow-up by leaving a quick voice mail at (615) 837-1300, to let me know that you sent the email, so I can ensure that it doesn’t get caught by my spam filter, causing a delay.
Producing, printing, binding, and serving this lawsuit has been an exhausting, expensive, and unrewarding experience to date. It has consumed my every waking moment for the past couple of months, while costing me over $5,000 in raw materials and shipping expenses so far. Over half the defendants in this case are playing games while dodging service, like one might expect from criminals, more so than by attorneys and judges.
I have produced and released over forty lawsuit service packages so far, while doubling the cost of shipping to have each sent via certified mail with return receipts. Those which are sent to individual defendants at their homes, have additionally included “restricted delivery”, to ensure that the correct party receives notice per the court’s rules.
With over half of those packages shipped, the hard copy “return receipt” (green card) showing that the package was delivered and accepted, has either mysteriously disappeared or been returned without a signature, name of the recipient, or date of delivery, in violation of both USPS and court rules.
The postal carrier isn’t even allowed to release these packages without obtaining a signature, while they are even required to verify the recipient’s ID for the “restricted delivery” packages, yet these defendants have enough local influence they appear to be able to persuade their postal carriers to ignore and violate the rules for their own jobs, to hide the fact that they ever received service. So that I must spend more money and effort to attempt to serve them yet again, while some of these bastillions of injustice are on our third and fourth attempts.
Many of the people receiving these packages are or have been high ranking public officials throughout Middle Tennessee, employed by the taxpayers, who have enjoyed privileged positions and offices of public trust. This absolute refusal to “play by the rules” and submit themselves to the same process of service and rules of law which they daily demand of others is nothing short of giving the middle finger to the good people of Tennessee, while refusing to be held accountable for their own criminal actions.
That is unacceptable.
It is unacceptable for powerful Middle Tennessee attorneys, judges, clerks, disciplinary counsel, administrators, along with other elected and appointed officials to leverage the law and the power of government offices, while using the mail for service of process to lord over the lives of others, without being honorable enough to submit to that same process of service, the court’s rules of conduct, and the rule of law which they demand of everyone else.
Most of the “officers of the court” named in this lawsuit, including those employed by the Tennessee Supreme Court, who oversee the practice of law throughout the state of Tennessee, are dodging service currently and playing childish games refusing to sign for their mail, like a bunch of lawless reprobates, gangsters, and goofballs.
I will soon present to the public the evidence of the games played by these people to unreasonably dodge service, while never would they tolerate such negligent and dishonorable behavior inside their courts. These people are not above the law, they just act as if they are, while it is almost impossible to find a division of government who is willing to hold them accountable.
It’s time for that to change! I’m not going to give up. Each day they delay is on them not me. I have been at this for nearly five years now, trying to find a judge who will force the state judges in Middle Tennessee to obey the law. I will show the public and the courts the truth about their games and misconduct. All they are doing is proving my point, over and over, and over again. None of which is reasonable. You can’t exercise power while refusing to submit to the lawful limits of that power.
“No man in this country is so high that he is above the law. No officer of the law may set that law at defiance, with impunity. All the officers of the government, from the highest to the lowest, are creatures of the law are bound to obey it.” “It is the only supreme power in our system of government, and every man who, by accepting office participates in its functions, is only the more strongly bound to submit to that supremacy, and to observe the limitations which it imposes on the exercise of the authority which it gives.” U.S. v. Lee, 106 U.S. 196, 220 1 S. Ct. 240, 261, 27 L. Ed 171 (1882)
As stated in the Constitution of the State of Tennessee in Article I, Section 2: “That government being instituted for the common benefit, [actions by the judiciary as exhibited throughout this case, while also dodging service, proves the exercise of] arbitrary power and oppression [which] is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.”
For this reason I am forced to serve this lawsuit publicly, by alternate service, using email notices, public notices, printed and internet publications, by whatever means are realistically within my reach.
“I do not understand the government to contend that it is any less bound by the obligation than a private individual would be…” “It is not the function of our government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the government from falling into error.” Perry v. United States, 204 U.S. 330, 358
“Courts are constituted by authority and they cannot go beyond that power delegated to them. If they act beyond that authority, and certainly in contravention of it, their judgements and orders are regarded as nullities; they are not voidable, but simply void, and this even prior to reversal.” WILLIAMSON v. BERRY, 8 HOW. 945, 540 12 L. Ed. 1170, 1189 (1850).
“No judicial process, whatever form it may assume, can have any lawful authority outside of the limits of the jurisdiction of the court or judge by whom it is issued; and an attempt to enforce it beyond these boundaries is nothing less than lawless violence.” Ableman v. Booth, 21 Howard 506 (1859)
“Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no ‘rule making’ or legislation which would abrogate them.” Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 426, 491; 86 S. Ct. 1603.
The United States Supreme Court has ruled and has reaffirmed the principle that “justice must satisfy the appearance of justice”, Levine v. United States, 362 U.S. 610, 80 S.Ct. 1038 (1960), citing Offutt v. United States, 348 U.S. 11, 14, 75 S.Ct. 11, 13 (1954).
Society’s commitment to institutional justice requires that judges be solicitous of the rights of persons who come before the court. *Geiler v. Commission on Judicial Qualifications, (1973) 10 Cal.3d 270, 286.
“The innocent individual who is harmed by an abuse of governmental authority is assured that he will be compensated for his injury.” Owen v. City of Independence