WORD IN ACTION MINISTRY ECCLESIASTICAL
COURT OF JUSTICE (WIAM/ECJ) & THE
YAMASSEE, WASHITAW SUPREME COURT©
Under the aegis of the Treaty of Camp Holmes, 1835 (7 Stat.474); Public Law 97-280
of 1982; United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People of 2007.
~ nunquam res humane prospere succedunt ubi negliguntur divinae ~ human things never prosper where divine things are neglected ~
2500 E Imperial Hwy, Suite 201-371, Brea, California 92821
Judge Pastor Ana Maria Mikhailidis / Judge NC Naidu / Judge Pastor Ron Fandrick
Court Clerk: KC Jaguar Paw : (Tel: 714-928-6914) Dr. TG - Hong Kong )Tel:852-90601002)
Website: www.scripturalaw.org, email: [email protected] or
[email protected]
FROM SUMMONS & COMPLAINT, JUDGMENT & ORDER, WRIT OF
RESTITUTION TO COLLECTION OF JUDGMENT DAMAGES
1. Complainant (Plaintiff) files a lawsuit in our Court (ECJ) in Los
Angeles. Summons & Complaint (S&C) will be sent to Respondent(s)
(Defendant(s). We wait 21 days. Court Clerk to preserve and protect
the proof of service by certified mail/acknowledgment receipt.
2. If Respondent (Defendant) fails to defend the lawsuit, ECJ will issue a
Judgment/Order (J/O) in favor of the Respondent. We mail the J/O to
the Respondent (Defendant) and wait another 21 days. Court Clerk to
preserve and protect the proof of service by certified
mail/acknowledgment receipt.
3. If the Respondent (Defendant) fails to satisfy the J/O within 21 days,
ECJ send it to a collections bank in Hong Kong which will purchase
1
the J/O 40 or 45 cents on the dollar, and collect the full judgment
quantum from the FDIC (if the defendant is a commercial bank), or
other insurers of other Defendants under the Reciprocal Enforcement
of Foreign Judgments Act.
4. Total time for collections on money judgment to materialize is
approximately 180 days. Affordable costs and fees for motions,
petitions, briefs, collection agency placement fee, lawyer support, and
appearances for the Complainant in our courts, and Enrolled Tribal
Membership – with Certificate of Naturalization, ID cards, work
permit, travel permit (Tribal driver license), shall be discussed on a
case-by-case basis via confidential email to Judge Naidu
([email protected]).
5. ECJ entertains civil and criminal cases – immigration matters based
on Article 1, section 8, cl. 4, U.S. Constitution where membership in
an Indian tribe is a benefit, foreclosures, employment law, contracts,
taxation, finance, and banking law, etc., and all criminal cases where
your due process and equal protection rights were ignored when you
claimed a tribal/ecclesiastical jurisdiction.
6. Some $250 million worth of judgments are being actively pursued in
our Hong Kong Office with actuaries, attorneys, auditors and
accountants.
7. Tribal courts deserve full faith and credit since they are the court of an
independent sovereign (Wis. Stat. § 806.245); in order to end
confusion cases filed in state or tribal courts require mutual
consultation. Teague v. Bad River Band, 236 Wis.2d384 (2000).
According to the Restatement (Second) of Conflicts § 86, when courts
of separate sovereigns both have jurisdiction over the same matter, the
court first rendering judgment is commonly entitled to have its
judgment receive full faith and credit by the other jurisdiction.
8. In denying the plaintiffs’ argument that the Sioux tribal court was a
recent creation, the district court judge portrayed a long, historic
tradition of tribal self-rule that antedated contact with Europeans:
2
“ From time immemorial the members of the Ogallala Sioux tribe
have exercised powers of local self-government, regulating domestic
problems and conducting foreign affairs including in later years the
negotiation of treaties and agreements with the United States.” Iron
Crow v. Ogallala Sioux Tribe, 231 F.2d 89, 99 (8th Cir. 1956). Later,
the 8th Circuit relied on the formulation of inherent tribal sovereignty
and upheld a tribal tax on non-Indians. Barta v. Oglala Sioux Tribe,
259 F.2d 553, 556 (8th Cir. 1958)
9. Tribal courts, which have repeatedly been recognized as appropriate
forums for adjudicating disputes involving important interests of both
Indians and non-Indians, are available to vindicate rights created by
the Indian Civil Rights Act. Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, 436 U.S.
49 (1978).
Pastor Ron Fandrick
Pastora Ana Mikhalidis
Judge Navin-Chandra Naidu
Member, National American Indian Court Judges Association
Member #01798766, American Bar Association
Member# 1040751, International Bar Association
~WHERE LAW ENDS AND JUSTICE BEGINS~
3