do you get paid for amazon reviews,fake reviews earn money,how to make money writing reviews for

Welcome to do you get paid for amazon reviews

do you get paid for amazon reviews

do you get paid for amazon reviews

sign the petition to remove the "national book entry system" in texas. mers impairs contract obligations

amnet mortgage merger with wachovia in 2005

has to make someone wonder how wells fargo ended up with the campbell's note, and probably many other homeowner victims, but the scenario seems to be just like the problem wells fargo had in 2016?

"..regarding wells fargo’s fha origination and underwriting practices subsequent to the claims in its lawsuit and an investigation conducted by the u.s. attorney’s office for the northern district of california into whether american mortgage network, llc (amnet), a mortgage lender acquired by wells fargo in 2009, falsely certified and submitted ineligible residential mortgage loans for fha insurance."

read about it here. amnet was the storefront, after changing its name from american residential investment trust, inc. to american mortgage network, inc. in 2004?

wells fargo even tried to fight it? see us v. wells fargo bank, na, 972 f. supp. 2d 593 - dist. court, sd new york 2013

i pray somebody picks up on this?

 this page is currently being corrected for proper alignment of the history the crime against the people of texas. therefore, i apologize for the confusion. there is plenty to read without this page.

do you get paid for amazon reviews

this issue of the campbell's has a paper trail all the way to the whitehouse. the link is only a portion of information. we have cd's full of the responses in regards to the "presidential inquiry", which was discovered during discover process procedures with wells fargo. it all reflects wells fargo used deception to evade hud, occ, and the president. like a fox in the hen house. nothing wrong? more to come....

my test pdf file

no, we did not get tossed out in september 2011. that did not happen until 2014, and by forced eviction. but the problem is, on september 10, 2010, stephen c. porter, barrett daffin frappier turner & engel, addison, texas conveyed the real property to hud. the evidence is on this page, and in williamson county, clerks records. so, how did wells fargo lawfully file suit?

do you get paid for amazon reviews

with this page, my intentions are to present to you a few things to ponder since we were declared "vexatious litigants" for defending what is lawfully our real property. it still is. wells fargo stole it, while cheating the government. you can't win by cheating. others with a "cause" have felt his blow. and you could too, if you miss the mark. i do ponder though? here is a link to the "registered vexatious litigants" page. i am not a vexatious litigant. i am not on it. does that mean, now it will be?

do you get paid for amazon reviews

the campbell's never denied they had a debt. the campbell's expected to repay their debt, but they were impaired from their contract obligation, by an atm machine called mers, a "book entry system" as defined in the chapter 51, texas property code, and an out of control foreclosure mill in addison, texas. the campbell's expected to contract with american mortgage network, inc., dba amnet, as stated upon the face of the real estate mortgage documents. look at the debt, look at the deed of trust, look at the warranty deed.

yes, amnet can sell, assign, transfer the campbell's real estates mortgage lawfully. according to the deed of trust contract, "all applicable laws" will be followed by the lender and the lender's successors and assigns. it is clearly described within the four corners of the deed of trust. can the campbell's not challenge the unknown party not listed in a deed of trust when the party is not named, they only have a copy of the debt, according to public records all applicable laws were not followed to reflect the unknown party to the contracts, could lawfully be the proper party, all because of an "book entry system" machine? now, due to unclean hands, and ignorance of the courts, the campbell's, like many other homeowners, are subjected to another unknown party claiming the same contracts in the future? and an unknown party to the contracts stole the land of all these texas homeowners.   of course, this "debt" obligation also said the successors, if any, would fulfill their obligation regarding the note also. item 9 - promissory note how do they accomplish this lawfully, if they do not have the note? what happened to article 1, section 10, u.s. constitution, or article 1, section 16, texas constitution?

do you get paid for amazon reviews

do you get paid for amazon reviews

the same rules of interpretation that apply to contracts also apply to deeds of trust. starcrest trust v. berry, 926 s.w.2d 343, 352 ( 1996, no writ); see also sonny arnold, inc. v. sentry savings assoc., 633 s.w.2d 811, 815 (tex.1982)(a mortgage is governed by the same rules of interpretation that apply to contracts). a court's primary duty in construing a note and deed of trust, as when construing a contract, is to ascertain the parties' intent from the instrument's language. see coker v. coker, 650 s.w.2d 391, 393 (tex.1983). in ascertaining the drafter's intent, the court must examine the document as a whole and strive to give every part of it effect. see id.; forbau v. aetna life ins. co., 876 s.w.2d 132, 133 (tex.1994). words should be given their 868*868 plain meaning based on the way they are used, unless it appears that doing so would defeat the intention of the parties. see reilly, 727 s.w.2d at 529 (citing fox v. thoreson, 398 s.w.2d 88, 92 (tex.1966)).

source: adams v. first nat. bank of bells/savoy, 154 sw 3d 859 - tex: court of appeals, 5th dist. 2005

do you get paid for amazon reviews

do you get paid for amazon reviews

this information is not to embarrass those men, or woman, in robes. i offer suggestion that we open our minds and see how others can easily manipulate a judge without the judge knowing s/he is being manipulated because on one's status in a profession.

only the lord knows if the judge, s/he, is corrupt. i do not, i can only suspect, according to their fruits.

yet, these s/he's can correct their problems since they are the one(s) whom created the opinion due to fraudulent concealment, and unknown perjury committed at those times, by wells fargo bank, mers, and all other parties as defendants. in other words; all you have to do is like the court of appeal stated

"a trial court does not abuse its discretion in ordering a new trial “so long as its stated reason for granting a new trial (1) is a reason for which a new trial is legally appropriate (such as a well-defined legal standard or a defect that probably resulted in an improper verdict);..."  - in re united scaffolding

dear judge(s),

you can reverse your judgment(s) when hidden perjury and fraud, was unknown to you at the time of your judgment. texas relies on your honesty in justice and law.

thou shalt not raise a false report: put not thine hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness. thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou speak in a cause to decline after many to wrest judgment: neither shalt thou countenance a poor man in his cause.

if you don't look good for what you've done, be not angry with me, you can correct the err of your judgment. it is your discretion. people would think better of a man when he conducts his business with integrity instead of shame and dishonor.

in essence the world will know you were warned of your loss, "immunity", which disrobes you of your protection. don't let your worse enemy fool you. it is up to you.  and people vote for you, right?

you judged a book by his cover, when, in fact it is the internal, and not the external, qualifications that make the man.

do you get paid for amazon reviews

have you ever read legal duty? how about legal duty -statutes? i did find out that these can be recorded into public records? something like a mandamus? just asking a question...

do you get paid for amazon reviews

i am not against any judge. though they may be with me. i do understand that they do not understand mers. if they did, there really would not be a lot of mers wins. as in our causes, we bring this to light simply because this is the way they will be treated. losers. since you've given us a bad name, we've decided to bring this to the attention of the world whether you care to do anything about it, or not, when in fact, you can change your ruling.  your bar friends marred your name. keep in mind, there are millions of readers visiting this website. there are 57 countries viewing this website. the world has been watching here for a very long time. if you want to continue to follow the path of corruption, the world is knowing about it. its up to you. this is not a threat. i am your friend, not your enemy. you've sided with the enemy, unbeknown to your arrogance. overturn your ill-gotten opinions, you have the power. any one of you judges, state, or federal, have the power to overturn your previous ill-gotten opinion. repent from your sins. the lord knows your ways. let me remind you; the soul of the evil is not apparent to the eyes of his neighbors, but it is apparent to the eyes of the lord. nothing is hidden.

do you get paid for amazon reviews

as witnessed by court records, the campbell's were deprived of their right to a fair trial. the campbell's were deprived due process. had the campbell's been provided those rights, the courts would have witnessed the truth, wells fargo, mers, or any other defendant lacked standing to invoke the courts jurisdiction. in december 2005, wachovia completed its acquisition of american mortgage network, inc. a.k.a. amnet. mers relationship with amnet ended in 2005 or soon thereafter. according to texas local government code, chapter 192, section 007, there should be a transfer of lien from amnet to wachovia, excluding mers. in 2008, wells fargo acquires wachovia. according to texas local government code, chapter 192, section 007, there should be a transfer of lien from wachovia, to wells fargo, excluding mers. in 2008, a mers electronic transfer was recorded into county public records, williamson county, texas.  that electronic transfer provided an illusion that mers transferred an alleged "note and deed of trust" by mers, to wells fargo, possibly to give the illusion of meeting the requirements of  192.007? mers agency relationship with amnet ended in 2005. where is the wachovia transfer? fraudulent filings in public record? court records? by law, electronic contracts are between the parties whom agree to conduct transactions electronically. mers and its members, from registration, creation, sale, purchase, assign, or transfer of electronic promissory notes, called transferable records, are governed by e-sign. mers could not transfer the campbell's mortgage. it had no right. applicable law, and logic would show two parties were left named in the deed of trust, as american mortgage network, inc. amnet, and the campbell's. in march 2015, a "backdated" conveyance is recorded in williamson county, reflecting wells fargo allegedly conveyed the campbell real property to u.s. department of housing and urban development in 2010. this particular conveyance bypasses mers. why? although, courts to do not understand mers, the "intangible" reflection of the campbell's mortgage resided in digital formation in the mers system, and mers does not track the paper note. this residual effect of the campbell's mortgage origination, and mers, members access, alleged members could easily invade the campbell's privacy, like many other homeowners. information that should have been removed when amnet was sold. all of which, you, your courts, have witnessed for yourself, identity theft in your courts, and you missed it. in essence, possibly by your arrogance, you have allowed unknown parties to come into your court and fraudulently control the court, and you fell for it, all because of a mystical word "mers", when you should have focused on the deed of trust contract, and what was being presented to you by the campbell's, and probably many other homeowners. if you think this is incorrect, this would mean the court agrees mers did separate the deed of trust from the note, and that is ok to do. it is if you want to destroy a "secured" real estate mortgage loan. don't you believe in the constitution? impairment of contract obligations? and did you ever stop to think that there may be certain persons in addison texas  conducting a "land flips" under the radar? where is law enforcement? and to think, we lived in a closed down non-insulated building, in the dead of winter, when we were evicted. all because of liars, cheats and thieves, and judges with an attitude. you should have to live like that, so how it feels to be homeless.

do you get paid for amazon reviews

you do know stephen c. porter is allegedly general council for mortgage contracting services, right? since 2014?

they make documents up

if the judges were to look at a certain exhibit the campbell's have placed in court records, the judges would see names like tommy bastian of barrett daffin frappier turner & engel, along with the name of  michael barrett, now deceased, and possibly other names of people who've appeared before the courts, or provided "affidavits" to the courts,  yet mr. barrett himself on record, in a task force meeting, stated that finding who was the owner and holder of the note is an impossibility 90% of the time. then went off on servicing rights. servicing rights are not rights of a note holder. i will soon provide the exhibit in your records. it seems strange that this foreclosure mill can admit they make documents up, and the court believe them when they do submit "made up" documents.

do you get paid for amazon reviews

i've previously written an article called "theft by deception". with recent discoveries, i do anticipate a "part two".

do you get paid for amazon reviews

i can only imagine the mess in county public records in texas. i've witnessed some of them, already.

do you get paid for amazon reviews

even though the mobile home was 4 years older than we were told, and defective, at pre-sale, and documents altered, hud ignored our complaint since 2005, and our attorney, if you want to call him that, continued selling us out, we continued to defend our piece of crap on wheels, and the land it is attached to. why? it is the principal of it. honest and fair dealing. contracts. but there is a curious thing about the attorney who would not represent us against wells fargo. he was trying to get out of being our attorney, he apparently checked to see when we were being foreclosed on, because it was not long after that he sent a letter to the campbell's in regards to a "settlement" in the case he was our representing attorney, in travis county for a dtpa cause. we did not know about the non-representing attorneys' request to wells fargo in january, 2014, he was not representing us, even though he claimed he did not represent us to wells fargo.  some of this information was found later, only through our  research we discovered it. homeowners seem to be the ones conducting due diligence. there is something terribly wrong with this whole picture. and yet, we, like many other homeowners, lose because of deceitful attorneys. they should be barred for practicing law.

[do you get paid for amazon reviews the altered invoice by sam p bath was issued to hud after the campbell's originally signed, but the hud copy is without campbell's signatures, and noticeable areas of "white-out", containing re-written information. different from our original. we did not find this until we did a foia/privacy act request. the campbell's actually hold the original invoice. we even sent a copy of it to obama, along with the altered copy.] long story, more to explain. will post "obama" package soon. i suggest you find out what is in your hud fha case number, binder. all it takes is a freedom of information/privacy act request. we only thought we knew about our mortgage loan. that was until receiving the foia/pa request binder. more to come...

if you have already reviewed "alvie explains it", you somewhat understand we agreed in some contracts for real estate back in 2004 with american mortgage network, inc., to purchase some land in williamson county, texas. the defective mobile home is a different story and not included here unless it is a part. through chain of title analysis by a private investigator, the "mortgage" disappeared after american mortgage network allegedly received it, the deed of trust was recorded, and allegedly somewhere in the stock market when it was sold to ginnie mae. then wells fargo appears. then barrett daffin frappier turner & engel appear. then court, then appeal, then court, then appeal, then forcible detainer, then court, then appeal to 3rd court of appeals, texas. then appeal to texas supreme court. a vicious circle in an attempt to obtain justice. as the last resort to exhaust remedy in texas, a bill of review as last stand. all to be decided in favor of wells fargo. so, why did this happen? arrogant judges to say the least. the men in robes judged my wife and i as deadbeats instead of deciding the case upon law. and from what we've heard, these judges seem to have created an ugly image of the campbell's, in specific, alvie campbell. nonetheless, this man in a robe fell well beyond his oaths, and charges.

i'll include a compiled "supplemental" appendix which reflects records of existing court records, that can be found in anyone of the following courts; district court records in williamson county, texas, 3rd court of appeals, austin texas, and texas supreme court, austin texas. be patient, they will be posted. i want you to see how wells fargo convinced the courts the wells fargo bank held the campbell's note and deed of trust, when recently discovered evidence would reflect wells fargo never had standing to invoke the courts jurisdiction, even though we barked "standing, standing" all the way to the top court. <coming soon>

i am working to provide all the documentation and explanations because i highly suspect this "land swap" is silently taking place, and under the radar of most. there are a lot of general warranty deeds from wells fargo to hud, signed by stephen c. porter, a certain man, with the company that "just makes documents up", barrett daffin frappier turner & engel, addison, texas. and there is no mention of mers anywhere on the documents. what happened to mers? that is why i believe there is a ring, unknown to many, making a ton of money with the mers system.

do you get paid for amazon reviews

in the first image, is of the court docket for "alvie campbell". i want to show you how we allegedly ended up becoming vexatious litigants, according to wells fargo. you can ignore the first case in 2006, it was a landlord-tenant thing that did not go well for the landlord. the rest reflect the fight with wells fargo and its thieves, before, and after by admission in county public records, wells fargo was no longer a party. hence, the courts never had jurisdiction to favor wells fargo. and to think we even tried to bring the fraud upon the court to the court, and it defended the fraud. follow along, you'll see.

wilco court docket

you can go to "civil, family, probate case records" to see for yourself if you choose. in the image above, you will notice a blue highlighted area is a date of 09/27/2010. this is the one to pay attention to.

do you get paid for amazon reviews

even though we had an attorney retained for another cause of action, named james mosser, he would not assist us in the foreclosure prevention, so this was our first attempt to defend ourselves in a courtroom, and according to what was witnessed, we won the case. it didn't really start out very pretty, but it blossomed into something we came to appreciate. this was the first time to know of the name mark d. hopkins, in person. he is an attorney in austin texas. even though he was not present at that hearing, a woman attorney was there. it is in the court reporters records, and in public records in district, appellate, and texas supreme court records. the woman attorney knew she lost. read the reporters record, ken anderson, the residing judge at the time told missy attorney, "counsel, you look like you lost?" then anderson said he was taking the decision under advisement, what ever that meant. he knew we won, the attorney knew we won, and we knew we won. many days later, the judge anderson, decided wells fargo was right. now many of you may not knew whom ken anderson is, other than from my explanation? seems he gained notoriety a while back, if you clicked on the link of his name? if a judge is corrupt way back before he became a judge, why would the judge not be corrupt after he became a judge? many attorney have told me they do not see how we've lost, except for an excuse that we were pro-se.

then we appeal, which i screwed up by not completely understanding the rules of appellate procedure. it is not easy doing this ones self as a pro-se. as a warning, there is a lot of court procedures and rules to follow. cases like this one come back to haunt you if you mess up. it did us. this is the one case all the rest used for victory of future litigation, even though fraud was apparent all the way to the top.  

do you get paid for amazon reviews

on september 16, 2010, wells fargo files substitute trustee deed, naming wells fargo as the purchaser.

little did we know at the time, but now we do, we understand why wells fargo allegedly purchased the real property in a tainted auction. to keep the fraud hidden.

do you get paid for amazon reviews

on 9/27/2010, the campbell's file a suit against the named parties, in the docket,  including john doe 1-100, because we felt that more "current unknown names" were involved. there were a lot of records in exhibits, so the courts were well aware of the "box" included in the filing of this cause. did they look? but to back up a bit, and look at the two previous docketed cause numbers in the 277th. and i would like to say, it was curious that when i went into the carnes courtroom for the first time, carnes asks me if i am still pro-se? no, it was not like you think. you had to be there. my wife witnessed it. two witnesses to this event.

october 14, 2010 defendants file general denial. november 2, 2010 the campbell's file no-evidence motion for summary judgment. december 6, 2010, plaintiffs respond to no-evidence summary judgment. december 13, 2010, under color of law, judge denies plaintiffs n-e-msj.

then discovery began. wells fargo provided the usual run around, just like before. wells fargo, and the other defendants denied any other party may be involved. the discovery process continued for a while.

i'll include the motions as i retrieve them for this case. they say hindsight is 20-20?  this motion for summary judgment, filed by mark d. hopkins, reveal an "affidavit of stephen c. porter" in regards to attorney immunity. i will provide my responses in this case to reflect, but the dart that points to perjury is the stephen c. porter affidavit. you will understand this a bit later.

again, there were witnesses to judge carnes making accusations the james mcguire was writing the campbell's legal documents. i know better. i even created an affidavit under the penalty of perjury to show i am the writer of the campbell's legal documents. needless to say, my wife was really upset because she knew how hard i studied to pursue this litigation mess, because our lawyer, james c. mosser, would not help.

the campbell's appealed

it is taking some time to find and upload from backups, so be patient.

in the meantime, here is a reply brief in that appeal.


do you get paid for amazon reviews

next, texas government code, chapter 51, section 903


this cause in the red box was filed in 2011. it was titled in re a purported lien or claim against alvie and julie campbell. it was in accordance to the texas government code, chapter 51, section 903. during the hearing, which is an ex-parte hearing, mark d. hopkins pops into the court yard to claim wells fargo is the party involved, and the campbell's did not have a right to bring the 51.903 before the court. this is incorrect. read the law. so, the man in the robe, a man named billy ray stubblefield whom wanted to understand more about mers, apparently was influenced by mr. hopkins, to favor hopkins statements, and allegedly denying the campbell's their rights, or privileges according to law. wells fargo was not a party to the statute suit. james mcguire was in attendance at this hearing. james provided an affidavit to the court in another case, in the 368th, to as evidence, to this act by hopkins. and for shi-ots & giggles, here is the court reporter's notes. read it for yourself. nonetheless, if you've read â§51.903, and you search public records in williamson county, texas, you will find mr. billy ray stubblefield did not follow that code and record as required.  here was his order. and here is his order denying a re-hearing.

do you get paid for amazon reviews

to be posted soon

do you get paid for amazon reviews

this appeal came about with the help of a couple of attorneys in the austin, texas area, and that didn't help either. it will be posted soon, or you can find it on the texas supreme court case search. this is a sad thing that lower court judges have such power when their court is tainted with fraud. and, as it appears they are too arrogant to change their corrupted decisions. does it make a man bad if he admits his mistakes? how do they sleep at night? did the lord not say he would destroy the kidneys of an evil man?

do you get paid for amazon reviews

the image above reflects a basic search for "grantor" named alvie campbell. this is the report. in 2008, mers allegedly transferred the note and deed of trust to wells fargo, also in 2008 john latham of barrett daffin frappier turner & engel became the "trustee". allegedly on september 7, 2010, alleged trustee sold the campbell's real property in a "foreclosure" auction. wells fargo alleged it purchased the real property in an auction. the campbell's file suit september 27, 2010. september 27, 2010, the campbell's also filed a liz pendens in williamson county public records which still stands as constructive notice.

 all the way, wells fargo denied, so did the others, but none mentioned the real property had been sold, or transferred to hud less than 10 days after the auction, and prior to the september 27, cause of action. evidence was withheld from the court in order for wells fargo to win. how do i know? i just found the proof recorded 5 years later in williamson county, texas public records. it has a county record date of march 7, 2015, and reflects that wells fargo bank provided a general warranty deed to hud on september 13, 2010. but wait, there is more.....

my test pdf file

i do have a question? since stephen c. porter only held a power of attorney from wells fargo until december 2010, would the alleged conveyance be eligible for recordation in 2015? according to pulbic records in williamson county, texas, stephen c. porter only has  7 poa's recorded from 2002, to 2005. have you read the new estates code, in texas about durable power of attorney?


sec. 752.004. legal sufficiency of statutory durable power of attorney. a statutory durable power of attorney is legally sufficient under this subtitle if:

(1) the wording of the form complies substantially with the wording of the form prescribed by section 752.051;

(2) the form is properly completed; and

(3) the signature of the principal is acknowledged

"no original power of attorney
– no closing, as no presumption exists that a person has given anyone authority to convey.
– it is a requirement that the power of attorney be filed in the real property records of the county of the land, with the sale or loan instruments.
– once filed of record, a certified copy is considered the same as an original for all legal

source: new texas statutory power of attorney & limitations on use

do you get paid for amazon reviews

do you get paid for amazon reviews

if you look at the court docket in williamson county, the link is provided above, you will also note an appeal from jp court to county court on a "forcible detainer" action, file dated october 12, 2011. wells fargo bank v. alvie campbell, and all other occupants at 250 pr 947, taylor texas. here is our answer to the fed.  needless to say, judy hobbs, the jp agent, could use some manners. it is dangerous to allow someone, like this woman, to decide real property issues with mers being involved. now, with withheld evidence, i hope she changes her mind, because she has the power to repent from her sins, she is a judge. and this woman is a respected woman of the community? i hear different from many. people like this are what makes communities get a bad reputation. yes, people do talk about her. of course, reading it here is only hearsay. and, the importance here is that ms. hobbs, for what ever reason, allowed someone to lie to her and claim they hold possession, because they have access to an atm machine, when newly discovered evidence [pdf above], reflects wells fargo was not in possession of the property as wells fargo asserted at the time of the fed action. hud was. i'm not sure when texas is going to figure out that the certain sections in various texas codes that favor mers, book entry system, is unconstitutional, and depriving citizens rights.

system, is unconstitutional, and depriving citizens rights.

the deceitful "business affidavit" from a barrett daffin associate. it was signed in december 2011, well over a year after the recently discovered conveyance from wells fargo bank, to hud? somebody was withholding evidence in the forcible detainer case. law enforcement really should investigate this foreclosure mill organization.

do you get paid for amazon reviews

now, with the general warranty deed being recently recorded, it is clear evidence that wells fargo could not be the party bringing the fed cause. yet, it was hidden from the courts. its not about title, jp is about possession. clearly wells fargo bank was not in possession, according to new evidence. nonetheless, the jp, judy hobbs was an arrogant woman, maybe not as bad as the county judge, john b. mcmasters, but both were not very good at anything other than being disrespectful. they were biased in their opinions, and in favor of mark d. hopkins, or whomever hopkins sent as replacement. as witnessed by those in the room, judge mcmaster even told my wife and i, to never step foot in his court again. really? i suppose little did in his court again. really? i suppose little did they realize that man, hopkins, was going to get them in trouble. mcmaster even allowed the forcible detainer action to take place before the expiration of an appeal that mark d. look at the mandate date. we had no opportunity to file a motion for rehearing. hopkins needed to make his case for the fed and went to the county court judge. corrupt? hopkins never mentioned hud? and has it come to mind; just how many other cases, state or federal mr. hopkins fraudulently concealed evidence, or manipulated previous court opinions to obtain victory? is this how the man became "super lawyer"? the bar should be ashamed. they should be embarrassed. made them all look bad?

we appealed

breifs coming soon, but here is a link to the "supplemental" filed in the fed appeal. get it while you can, it's linked to the 3rd court of appeals, austin, texas.

in the meantime, figure this one out? according to the mandate from the 3rd court of appeals, the fed was styled alvie campbell v. wells fargo? how does an appellate court screw something like this up? nonetheless, the fed by wells fargo bank was obtained by deception. and we do know the records are still with the appellate courts for a few more years before they are destroyed, according to the mandate.

one thing i did find curious was we filed a memorandum in support in our defense against the fed, in the appeal  and it took a week of reviewing before the appellate court clerk accept it.  when i kept calling about my concern with the document not being filed, i was continually told "the general was reviewing it". i suppose they meant texas ag. it was finally accepted, and you can see the file stamp to prove it. it was basically the same when i used it in our bill of review case for fraud upon the court.

do you get paid for amazon reviews

whether anyone knows it or not, the campbell's, as pro-se, have litigated their way from jp to the texas supreme court. every step of the way, were they denied their constitutional rights. why? because if the judges were fair and were abiding the constitution, the campbell's would have been allowed to present their case. yet, unconstitutional summary judgments were used against the campbell's. the proof is above. wells fargo never had standing to invoke the jurisdiction of any one of the courts we have litigated in.

so, how can any court in texas use case law regarding the campbell's loss, in any other court case? like this one proudly displayed on mers website? or this one in google scholar

then you have the special warranty deed conveyed from hud to a victor alcantar, as reflected in williamson county, texas county clerks records. anyone sharp should catch the fha case number is not complete. it lacks 10 digits. of course, it could be a typo, but why would the fha case number be used when there probably was not an appraisal? there appears to be no deed of trust recorded. and it is almost identical to the fha case number listed on the campbell's deed of trust recorded in williamson county public records.  is someone floating real property in williamson county, texas under the radar?

do you get paid for amazon reviews

as promised, sc- 12-0549 is the appeal to the texas supreme court, from the 3rd court of appeals, austin, texas. 610 pages of why the court should reverse the case. it is easy to scan through the pdf when you click the ribbon on the left side of the pane. also, the supplemental appendix which contains the motions, opinion, exhibits, and the court reporters record. it is not file stamped, but the evidence is in the records. it is also the same format as far as clicking on the ribbon to get to certain parts of the document. i believe they are called "bookmarks"?

more will be coming...... because i haven't mentioned the "bill of review" yet. it is the last one on the docket...

i'll soon post the bill of review, the memorandum in support and other court documents i have that was filed to reopen the previous case due to fraud upon the court. since stephen c. porter, or wells fargo, or mers, or the barrett daffin frappier turner & engel group withheld evidence from the court, committed fraud upon the court, i believe that would make all the previous court decisions void, including the vexatious litigant crap, due to fraud caused by all the defendants.

in the meantime, i have notified the texas attorney general, and the u.s. attorney general to report this. here is the one to texas... i have also brought this "general warranty deed" to the attention of the williamson county clerk.

complaint to texas ag

i honestly doubt i will receive a response from either.

do you get paid for amazon reviews i did receive a "kick the can" response from the texas ag, or its agent, representative, blah, blah, blah. nobody wants to get involved?

stay tuned.... but while you wait, think about this; allegedly mers transferred the campbell's note and deed of trust to wells fargo. wells fargo claims wells fargo purchased the campbell's real property in an alleged lawful foreclosure auction. wells fargo allegedly gives hud a general warranty deed in september 2010, regarding the campbell's real property without meeting the requirements of 51.008, texas property code until march 7, 2015. untimely. in october 2011, wells fargo files forcible detainer cause against the campbell's on wells fargo's behalf.  where was hud? the property was conveyed after the alleged sale.

so, where is the mers transfer?

if stephen c. porter, according to his affidavits claimed he knew all about the real property business of the campbell's, how did stephen c. porter not know he conducted a transaction to hud, related to the campbell's property? selective memory? perjury? false business records?

do you get paid for amazon reviews, rick kennon

court docket

in january, 2014, the campbell's file a petition for bill of review and request for disclosure in district court 368, williamson county, texas.

the campbell's filed their petition for bill of review, memorandum in support, motion to vacate, and a temporary restraining order.

in the response to the request for disclosure, hud was never mentioned. the hud conveyance was never mentioned. that is when the hopkins, wells fargo paper fling began. but in the meantime you can read mark hopkins answer for the bdfe group. i ask, how would stephen c. porter not know he conveyed the real property from wells fargo to hud in 2010? this case began in 2014. something is wrong with this scenario......

do you get paid for amazon reviews

here is something i witnessed. during the hearing on this cause, besides the judge swaying off to the "foreclosure" side of an argument, and missing the mark with the vexatious litigant procedure, i found one thing when mark d. hopkins was making his testimoney. mr. hopkins told the court that "the campbell' seem to think the courts do not understand mers". before i left the cattle hold, i turned and asked judge kennon if he understood or new mers functions? he had a blank look upon his face, he said nothing. thank you your honor, i said to him. those in the courtroom probably witnessed those words, and that look, on the judges face. i tell you truthfully. i rest my case. judges do not understand mers. this causes great harm to all.

 mark hopkins filed his answer.

<i'll have the motion in this area soon.> in the meantime, read hopkins motion and our response.

the hopkins filed a motion to declare the campbell's vexatious litigant. here was our response for that.

<more to come>

do you get paid for amazon reviews

i give the benefit of the doubt to these judges. it is up to them to prove me wrong. you were misled. correct your past mistakes. you will gain favor of those you unknowingly wronged due to others deceit.

do you get paid for amazon reviews

maybe this recent appellate court opinion should give you an idea of what judges do without pondering the idea of different a meaning? only going by what the man that led you to assume what it meant? you do know what assume can do?

when contracting parties set forth their own definitions of the terms they employ, the courts are not at liberty to disregard these definitions and substitute other meanings. alexander v. cooper, 843 s.w.2d 644, 646–47 (tex. app.—corpus christi 1992, no writ); see aldridge v. thrift fin. mktg., llc, 376 s.w.3d 877, 884 (tex. app.—fort worth 2012, no pet.); ams constr. co. v. khk scaffolding hous., inc., 357 s.w.3d 30, 41 (tex. app.—houston [1st dist.] 2011, pet. dism’d); healthcare cable sys., inc. v. good shepherd hosp., inc., 180 s.w.3d 787, 791 (tex. app.—tyler 2005, no pet.).

kingsley properties, lp, v. san jacinto title services of corpus
christi, llc, san jacinto title services of texas, llc, and mark scott
, number 13-15-00128-cv, court of appeals, thirteenth district of texas

take note what the court cited; "when contracting parties set forth their own definitions of the terms they employ, the courts are not at liberty to disregard these definitions and substitute other meanings."

so, why do judges substitute meanings? mers and its members contract electronically. homeowners, and "lenders" contract "in-writing" to satisfy the requirements of statute of fraud. two definitions?  e-sign has no "in-writing" requirement. state and federal law has "in-writing" requirement?

mers sets forth its definition of "beneficiary" in its electronic contracts. mers is described as a "beneficiary" in the deed of trust. which definition is used? electronic law, or state or federal law?

are you at liberty to disregard these definitions and substitute other meanings?

i pray you understand......