Half a century ago, as a student, I had a landlord who was a lawyer and he put Equitable Estoppel in the lease. My cousin, who was in law school at the time, said he didn't understand why the landlord would do that. I figured that this was a throw away clause designed to intimidate. However, if the guy was really nasty, I now see why he wanted it. Ordinary disputes are common law, but egregious acts can claim equity. In this modern world, it is still possible to find disputes where there is no precedent. A claim in equity allows the judge to be a judge, not bound by rules that don't fit the circumstances. However, prior decisions may warn against this choice.
So , I'm working at my guitar amp repair shop and I'm looking at my old Gibson tube amp service manual and in the notes is a quote . " Someone who understands a subject should be able to explain it so everyone understands it . " { paraphrased ]
This is how RUclips gets you. You take a look thinking that you're going to get the same old, same old. And BAM, the algorithm actually brings you something that is interesting and beneficial for our personal knowledge base. Love it. And I love this channel. Thanks, I subscribed.
Cool stuff. Thanks. Going to watch again. So, are we still under the law of the high seas/Admiralty as our language suggests? And why does the flag which used to be red, white and blue in every court room, now have gold fringe surrounding it?
RUclips used to nail it on everything but they changed their algorithm to turn everyone that watches into brain dead morons and also content that is absolutely degenerative and making you dumber than before.
And the reason that Delaware has a separate court for equity is that the Delaware Court of Chancery is essentially the courts where corporations sue each other to develop corporate law.
As a lawyer who often sues for equitable remedies, it is shocking how few lawyers really understand equity. Many lawyers don't understand that equity doesn't have a cause of action (at least not anything like one for law). Standing for equitable jurisdiction is also an issue that I see a lot of judges mess up. Declaratory judgment can be either a prospective or a retrospective remedy! If you have been harmed in the past, you should be able to get declaratory judgment as to if your rights were violated. Likewise if you wish to do something in the future but your rights are threatened, you should be able to get declaratory judgment that declares what your rights in that future activity are. Injunctions are only a prospective remedy. They don't care if you were hurt before, except to the extent that provides evidence of future harm. Nominal damages is a legal remedy, not an equitable one, although its similar in many ways to the legal version of a declaratory judgment.
As someone who worked with the Ohio legislative staff to take voice dictation from representatives of Congress and put it into legal verbiage I was amazed at how ignorant, many lawyers are of the law.. they don’t even understand the bar association.. smh
I’m glad I sumbled on this. You’ve broke through my adhd and made it comprehensive enough to distract me from my conspiracy copper electro mind control nazis on the moon with Chester Cheeto playing in a Rush cover band in a bar somewhere on Tantooine.
Where courts of law and courts of equity have merged, the court has all the powers in equity. I would also note that there are equitable rights or equitable causes of action, e.g. breach of fiduciary duty, which confer equitable jurisdiction in addition to equitable remedies, e.g. specific performance. Finally, I would note that the impact of common law in the sense of prior decisions has the similar force in equity as it does in law. Of course there are treatises on equity most famously Pomeroy so any short video can’t do it justice. Pun intended. 😂
Thank you, Bryan. I’m a new subscriber and absolutely appreciate the content. I’ve been up all night., so I will save this for my coffee when I wake. 🇺🇸🌹👍
Could you tell us why bonds are attached to a case? Could you tell us why every case has a cusip number? Whathappens to the profits from the sale of those bonds onto the market? Does the judge have an equitable interest in the matter? How much of the profits go into the judges retirement account? Looking forwarf to the answers
It is my understanding that every 'thing' in commerce must be bonded/ insured for possible harm to the public. Read up on Securities and securitization. Hope that helps.
Really cool. Noticed equity in contracts and legal language very early on. As a busness guy I inatly understood what it means, honesty and fairness and agreement, in actions and deeds. No one ever had to explain it to me. Equity is pretty much what sibling rivalry is all about....so in realty common law is really all about equity and always has been.
Seems he did not discuss people withdrawing their consent to be governed. When you do, it places you above ALL that with the exception of violations in natural law, which are inescapable.
My first exposure to this was at small claims court in California back in the 90's. Apparently, small claims in CA is a court of equity, not a court of law, and in small claims you do everything pro se without attorneys. As a layman, I didn't really understand what equity meant. I thought is just gave the judge a wider latitude to interpret the statutes. It's fascinating to know the history of this, and what the legal terminology actually means. Thank you for this video. Very educational.
Hmmm unfortunately after watching this video my understanding of what equity means matches your previous thought that it "just gave the judge a wider latitude to interpret the statutes"...
If I remember my legal history thing the issue with equity courts is that they were basically a revenue generation mechanism so people could buy rights, so basically the modern equivalent of bribes.
I remember seeing that clause in the Constitution but it never quite registered why the terms were there like that. Thanks for that history and clarification. You got a new follower. 😁
@@brynoDC I've had senior attorneys and law school instructors inform me that I'm an expert in U.S. Constitutional law, but I know I have more to learn. I'm right now trying to evaluate if your information is disruptive to my current legal models. I have a business partner who is a retired Federal prosecutor and law instructor, and he and I will discuss topics from time-to-time. You do a very good job of explaining stuff to a lay audience.
That really started with Theodor Hertzel. It was his idea to relocate jews from civilized Europe to Palestine. Arthur Balfour just wrote the letter to Walter Rothschild, who funded the move. The Declaration didn't include Arabs. Should've been a red flag, but nobody cared about the Middle East! They were viewed as peasants. Perfect place to begin a Zion outpost, and start plotting a global takeover! Lol sorry! It's kinda showing nowadays, and sinking America in the process. Someone will eventually have to hand over Netanyahu.
You are wrong on many levels. When they removed our ability to pay for anything with the emergency banking act, the laws also changed. They soon realized those changes gave the people to much power in equity, so in order to hide equity from the people they combined it with the civil court.equity makes you equal with the judge. All crime in the United States is commercial, with the emergency banking act law change all crime can be discharged in accordance with public law. You cannot contract by filing their forms , equity acts in personam, you have to bring equity yourself, a bar guild scumbag cannot bring it for you.
So, I can’t specifically because it’ll be different in every state. I usually try to find some samples from that court and use them. Find some injunctions.
@brynoDC thank you, if you could, pick a State, and we can draw parallels in other jurisdictions. Thank you for taking the time to explain, that which has little coverage on mainstream.
When I practiced in South Carolina some 20 years ago, there were Masters in Equity who were essentially special Magistrates under the jurisdiction of the general trial court Judge. Masters in Equity handled foreclosures and a few other things but I can't recall what all their jurisdiction entailed. Essentially, equitable powers were transferred from the Judge to the Master in Equity to act as essentially a Magistrate for equity cases, whereas normally Magistrates don't have equitable power or jurisdiction.
That’s fascinating. I’m learning after making this video (which was of course intended to be a 101 type conceptual overview, so I didn’t try to get into each state) how many states still have cool remnants of the equity courts in operation. I love it.
Glad I watched this. I am being sued in my real estate business and I was wondering why the lawyer used laches when describing the statute of limitations.
Our common law and equity courts have existed for a thousand years though. They predate the formation of the United States by quite a lot. We inherited the system directly from the Colonies, who got it from Great Britain - Except for Louisiana, which has a system based on the Napoleonic Code for historical reasons (ie the Louisiana Purchase - it was not originally a British colony). So the presenter of this video is entirely correct, and you are wrong. This is stuff that is taught in every law school, it is not just an opinion, it is factual history.
Common law has existed since the beginning of time.. it’s unwritten because it’s common sense.. if you owe a debt, or caused loss, injury or harm to your fellow man, you owe them fair and just compensation.. that’s all that is.. very simple.. not everyone knows how to read and write, another reason for common law..
Can't wait for "Secret Hidden Court" to get taken out of context and become the conspiracy theory you warned it isn't. As a lay person with no legal background, this was an excellent overview and clears up a lot of questions about why the law is wishy-washy sometimes. Love it, and you are a great presenter.
When I first started getting into the Constitution and common law and rights, I remember I asked a judge, over a traffic ticket, if it was a court of common law or a court of equity... he blew up on me so hard and immediately ruled from the bench that I was guilty and had to pay the fine... I know a lot more now but it was eye opening to say the least.
I have listened once, will have to listen again and I appreciate your spelling all of this out. Dealing with a common law issue (equity?) currently, and have questions. I am certain I'll find an answer once I understand.
Subbed and liked because, though I could never do the work, the magical art of the law fascinates me. You lay it all out in clear narration with charts, so it's easily understood. BrynoDC, I wrote a book thirty years ago, long out of print now but still getting new readers. Is there a mailing address where I could send you a signed and inscribed copy?
Ah, this helps quite a bit to clarify some wooly ideas I had. Thanks! If you want to get those subs up maybe something like a Nady wireless lapel mic and a Logitech HD webcam would be worth a $120 investment. Really entry level but 80/20 rule. Regardless you're DOING IT so don't take this as criticism! I subbed as I value ideas far more than production value.
So I discovered (finally) that when I recorded videos inside the TikTok app (about 80-90% of every video I’ve done), my AirPods worked as microphones. When I used the camera app, they did not and the regular mic on the camera was used, which is why the sound gets better when I move closer. I couldn’t figure out why some occasional videos sounded so bad. So I just bought a new good wireless mic. So marked improvement. I also got some new lights, which is why I’ve barely posted in days. Once I get them to fit inside the tiny room I’m shooting in, hopefully a marked improvement there too. The white board is very tricky lighting wise (reflection, sea of white, REFLECTION)
I can now see how a lot of what has been a mystery is relevant. Equity creates and environment of fairness if the governing body has a moral contract with humanity
That's the theory, though in practice many US judges don't in fact know much about laws that they are supposed to adjudicate and equity allows some impunity for a judge to act purely based on personal bias, without being in accord with legal precedent.
@@Erik-e2d3t Time is a flat circle. Infinite regressive recursion and infinite expansion are one in the same because conformal cyclic cosmology is the only truth. 🫠
Great information and highly useful. I would point out something you seem to have missed and that is the emergence of territorial courts in the US where judges were granted a common law jurisdiction. These courts were not under the FRCP [Mookini v United States 303 US 201]. These tribunals still exist [EPA and Forest service tribunals for example]
I’ll try to get there eventually. I’m still sort of the building block phase. I’ll tell you that I worked in a jurisdiction that tried to implement new Civil Asset Forfeiture laws and I successfully mounted a major campaign to stop it. I’m pretty proud of that one actually. One of my main arguments is that states are beginning to abandon these laws, finding them abhorrent to so many constitutional protections, even if they’ve been deemed technically within the lines of the law (don’t get me started). So I’m hopeful that they’re on their way out. Suffice it to say: I am not a fan.
I used the Secretary of State in California over an election issue that was not covered by statute. I used at equity. This was in Sacramento Superior Court.
@@studyallthetimeallthetime8473 I prevailed. I used the magic words: there is no speedy and effective remedy. I wished to run for public office. I was a registered Green. I was the chair of the state wide platform committee. A small group of Greens filed for the right to pick and choose in what districts they would run candidates. A civil rights attorney, an ally, rushed me to the court house. I was unable to stop it, but was granted intervene status. This left me without pathway to run. The granting of a request from a group not authorized by the plenary by this judge had reduced a qualified party to a coffee klatch. I obtained a speedy court date and went in pro per. I was not asking for much. I asked for a writ of mandamus ordering the Secretary of State to allow me to run as an independent. They did object. However, those magic words rang true. The Court did issue the order, and I collected 14,000 signatures in my congressional district. This achievement was sited in a subsequent case in which a potential candidate claimed that three percent of the registered voters was impossible to meet. I came in a poor third, beaten by both major parties but ahead of all minor ones combined, producing no benefit to society. As the district was seventy percent Democratic, the usual scoundrel won. My Green detractor in Santa Barbara ran as a Green and caused a Republican victory. The Judge said " Next time get a lawyer." I don't think there will be a next time, but I grew my own lawyer; my daughter. But the elements were in place: irreparable harm, no other remedy, and an area not covered by statute. I used that as an excuse for why I did not have any points and authorities to present. I am quick on my feet with excuses. " Your Honor, there can be none as this situation is unique ". My strong advice is that a candidate should never run except in a major party primary. It didn't even work for Teddy Roosevelt.
Please, go into more depth. I too live in Sacramento. I am asking for a reason that I cannot go into because I still don't have enough information /facts to rely on to make a statement. Thank you
i have many questions. can a jury be demanded by a defendant or plaintiff in equity? or does the judge have the final decision? is caselaw treated as discretionary in equity? is there a difference between a "jury trial" and a "trial by jury"?
Jury trial vs trial by jury is the same thing as far as I know. Trial by jury is just rooted in the old vernacular (trial by combat, trial by ordeal, trial by jury). But I don’t think you can demand one in equity. Juries usually make a decision between two black and white options. Or a series of yes or no answers. Not always but often. Equity requires a much more nuanced solution that just generally isn’t offered to a jury to come up with. The judge is making a nuanced solution but also has (in theory) years of experience and examples of what possible side outcomes could be for allowing X equitable solution while a jury would not necessarily. After an oil spill, forcing a company to clean up the mess in equity (specific performance) may seem like a good solution but a judge may know that many companies forced to do so either file for bankruptcy or do a crappy job. (That’s not a real example. Just something off the top of my head. All I could think of)
The example you gave of a declarative judgment (i.e. "The contract is invalid.") looks like a declaratory judgment. (But certainly, a contract being invalid is a reason that a plaintiff might get zero dollars after suing for money damages.) Declaratory judgments are a remedy created by statute, which can be applied to cases where some other legal or equitable remedy is sought, designed to ascertain and fix the rights of the parties. IDK if declaratory judgments even fit into the framework of this topic. But I would want to steer farther away from the topic, when discussing judgments at law for damages or for no-damages. Also: a HUGE part of what courts in equity used to do when they were separate institutions - though not in the federal judiciary - was estate and family law. To the point that it seems weird to talk about specific performance, bankruptcy, and civil contempt in a commercial setting instead of, like a divorce or probate!
Thank you. I have a problem with the family courts. According to your description, they are equity courts because there is no jury. I see your point about dividing a family, but I think this creates a judge who has the kind of power that a monarch would have. America's founders were against this kind of power, and so am I. It is an abusive system. Common law and juries can do the equity court if the disputes are broken down into small pieces. A big problem is that judges are instructing the jury, and this is wrong. Juries can decide against the law as easily as they can decide with the law. The judge did not create the law, so why is he telling juries what they can judge for themselves?
i learned that my bankruptcy was filed with court of equity. but i still don't understand equity. the banks use the word a lot, but i never hear it in court cases.
Lol... Delaware has a court of Chancellery that is moreso visible than other states. What he is speaking is universal in all states...court of kings conscience!
So I know in England admiralty is a common law court. I’d mostly assume the same for the U.S. But I’m willing to bet I could think really hard and come up with exactly the right situation where a case could be brought in equity that may bring in some admiralty law. Or vice versa. The two things that are just bouncing around my brain is maybe something related to a major oil spill or a U.S. owned giant boat getting in a wreck. I don’t know. I’m just spitballing there.
@@brynoDC i thought admiralty was separate from common and equity, to deal with sea vs land respectively, but that propeller genese chief vs fitzhugh suggested that admiralty jurisdiction can be brought to the land to settle commercial matters. Also, I thought that the one form of action was equity/admiralty. It reads this way to me (rule 2.1).
So the UCC is a different animal. I’m trying to get through the foundational building blocks first. UCC is like its own tower. We sort of split a chunk of law off on its own. I’ll get there though. I just want to get through the historical roots and then we’ll make it to the branches.
Funny story. I got to work in the one jurisdiction in the U.S. that has never implemented the UCC and I had to draft a security agreement that would satisfy Washington state and local common law, which required me to base my security agreement on 1950’s case law. It was quite the fishing expedition. ALMOST no one would ever need to learn some of that stuff but when it comes in handy, it comes in reeeeally handy.
@. The UCC is a body of statutes within commercial law. They pertain to any incorporation. Meaning, any situation where there is more than one live being. How they’ve captured us is by language fraud. We are not persons, citizens, individuals, residents, Mr, Mrs, etc. We are singular live man or womb-man. The keys to actual authority lie in the etymological grammar. All contract is based upon a medium of offer and acceptance, and the complete overstanding of such agreements to be paramount.
@. Case law is great and all, however, the original and withstanding contractual agreement perseveres. The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land, and any secondary laws are null and void of law. Marbury V Madison. Challenged 100’s of times, never overturned. Serfs complain about how they are victimized, yet they are so, by their own ignorance in the machinations, especially the esoteric ones, of the system they exist in. Jurisdiction MUST be proven when challenged. Courthouses are incorporations and exist in a different jurisdiction than singular living people whom are members of the race that created the paper and ink for which said municipalities were created from. Tell me, on what specific date in his-tory did the intangible concept man created become the master of its creating race, man-kind? Everyone has been indoctrinated to think backwards. Exit the ruse. 👊🏼❤️🇺🇸
I would argue that they eliminated the true common law (look up the historical definition of "court of record ") in favor of their version of equity. Which is that all property is owned by the State. The judge will decide if we have a small equitable interest or not.
I am not clear that you qualified your contention that common and civil law fails creating balance sometimes. When? Under what circumstances? Do you have an example to share please? Thank you.
According to Black's Law Dictionary: equity law is a system of jurisprudence that is distinct from common law courts and is administered by certain tribunals. Equity law is based on principles of fairness, conscience, and equality, as opposed to the more rigid rules of common law If equity is based on fairness, what does that say about the other law forms?
@@brianrossmiller love your comment! what most people don't realize is that equity comes from the Bible. What does "righteous/righteousness" even mean? Lol
@@brianrossmillerif one enters into an unfair contract, it is still a contract and must be honoured. Failure to do so will bring a case in law, not equity.
I've been aware that all statutory actions are civil and why. Even criminal actions are civil in nature but just defined as criminal. Statutory proceedings move in an Art 4 USDC which is a legislative branch court. True criminal proceedings are suppose to move in an Art 3 judicial branch court but those on both the state and fed level were closed around 1950. While both courts have authority over 'citizens of the United States' aka fed gov [ a creation of the 14th amendment ], the constitutions only grant judicial branch courts any authority over the true citizens of the states. That means that for over 70 years all prosecutions of the [ white ] citizens of the states have been constitutionally void for lack of jurisdiction. It is important to know that legislative branch courts recognize almost no rights. Judges will tell people that they do not recognize the state constitutions as imposing no limits on their authority and only vaguely recognize the fed constitution as imposing any limits on their actions.
Half a century ago, as a student, I had a landlord who was a lawyer and he put Equitable Estoppel in the lease. My cousin, who was in law school at the time, said he didn't understand why the landlord would do that. I figured that this was a throw away clause designed to intimidate. However, if the guy was really nasty, I now see why he wanted it. Ordinary disputes are common law, but egregious acts can claim equity. In this modern world, it is still possible to find disputes where there is no precedent. A claim in equity allows the judge to be a judge, not bound by rules that don't fit the circumstances. However, prior decisions may warn against this choice.
That’s interesting you’ve heard a lawyer being helpful before.
One who understands a subject clearly is able to explain it simply. Thank you sir. Merry Christmas!
So , I'm working at my guitar amp repair shop and I'm looking at my old Gibson tube amp service manual and in the notes is a quote . " Someone who understands a subject should be able to explain it so everyone understands it . " { paraphrased ]
This is how RUclips gets you.
You take a look thinking that you're going to get the same old, same old. And BAM, the algorithm actually brings you something that is interesting and beneficial for our personal knowledge base. Love it.
And I love this channel. Thanks, I subscribed.
It’s like seeing a unicorn 🦄
@lauravastag8587
I needed this. Thanks 😊
Cool stuff. Thanks. Going to watch again. So, are we still under the law of the high seas/Admiralty as our language suggests? And why does the flag which used to be red, white and blue in every court room, now have gold fringe surrounding it?
RUclips used to nail it on everything but they changed their algorithm to turn everyone that watches into brain dead morons and also content that is absolutely degenerative and making you dumber than before.
@@rivegaucheranchit seems that's how they operate doesn't it !?
And the reason that Delaware has a separate court for equity is that the Delaware Court of Chancery is essentially the courts where corporations sue each other to develop corporate law.
It is more Corporate Governance suits typically derivative suits (shareholders suing the corporation's board on behalf of the corporation).
Ahhh. Like Teslas deal with Elon being chucked out was an equity case in their court of chancery?
I learned more in 11 minutes than I did in school.
Thank you Sir!
Just found ya! i am reading Gibson’s Suits in Chancery right now. Nerd? yeah, that’s me. Excellent stuff. Subscribed
As a lawyer who often sues for equitable remedies, it is shocking how few lawyers really understand equity. Many lawyers don't understand that equity doesn't have a cause of action (at least not anything like one for law). Standing for equitable jurisdiction is also an issue that I see a lot of judges mess up. Declaratory judgment can be either a prospective or a retrospective remedy! If you have been harmed in the past, you should be able to get declaratory judgment as to if your rights were violated. Likewise if you wish to do something in the future but your rights are threatened, you should be able to get declaratory judgment that declares what your rights in that future activity are. Injunctions are only a prospective remedy. They don't care if you were hurt before, except to the extent that provides evidence of future harm. Nominal damages is a legal remedy, not an equitable one, although its similar in many ways to the legal version of a declaratory judgment.
Would love to hear more of your thoughts
How can a lawyer stand foe equitable remedy for anyone? Equity must be brought in personum . Hiring a lawyer, deems you incompetent.
As someone who worked with the Ohio legislative staff to take voice dictation from representatives of Congress and put it into legal verbiage I was amazed at how ignorant, many lawyers are of the law.. they don’t even understand the bar association.. smh
@@terrybelden5442that’s what I was wondering- how can those sworn to the bar be in equity?
@@Ninsidhe they cannot they can only function at law, which is near the law, fake law color of law.
Sub'd within the 1st 2 min - I haven't heard of anyone talking/knowing about this for YEARS (since my mentors have died anyway).
Thank you, I found our who was stealing rights from me from this video. You are appreciated my friend.
I’m glad I sumbled on this. You’ve broke through my adhd and made it comprehensive enough to distract me from my conspiracy copper electro mind control nazis on the moon with Chester Cheeto playing in a Rush cover band in a bar somewhere on Tantooine.
Didn’t get but it sounded cool hahaha
That shits true dude !
Where courts of law and courts of equity have merged, the court has all the powers in equity. I would also note that there are equitable rights or equitable causes of action, e.g. breach of fiduciary duty, which confer equitable jurisdiction in addition to equitable remedies, e.g. specific performance. Finally, I would note that the impact of common law in the sense of prior decisions has the similar force in equity as it does in law. Of course there are treatises on equity most famously Pomeroy so any short video can’t do it justice. Pun intended. 😂
Would love to hear more of your thoughts
Joseph Story
So noted.
Filing motions with the court is a commercial dis honor. You must stand in equity andnot recontract with them.
Thank you, Bryan. I’m a new subscriber and absolutely appreciate the content. I’ve been up all night., so I will save this for my coffee when I wake. 🇺🇸🌹👍
Well done presentation on the evolution of equity and the evasiveness of equality that follows.
Could you tell us why bonds are attached to a case?
Could you tell us why every case has a cusip number?
Whathappens to the profits from the sale of those bonds onto the market?
Does the judge have an equitable interest in the matter?
How much of the profits go into the judges retirement account?
Looking forwarf to the answers
This.
Look into securitization. That's the money, the bond is the insurance/surety.
It is my understanding that every 'thing' in commerce must be bonded/ insured for possible harm to the public. Read up on Securities and securitization. Hope that helps.
wouldn't he be breaking his oath to the BAR if he were to answer those extremely interesting questions WE ALL want to know the honest answers for ?
@onewiselady6412 would it be considered treason to take an oath to a foreign guild?
Really cool. Noticed equity in contracts and legal language very early on. As a busness guy I inatly understood what it means, honesty and fairness and agreement, in actions and deeds. No one ever had to explain it to me. Equity is pretty much what sibling rivalry is all about....so in realty common law is really all about equity and always has been.
Fascinating stuff. Thanks for sharing
Thanks for watching!!
For “we” the living are the beneficiaries and they the government officials are trustee’s.
Brilliant
I loved the simplicity of a well executed complicated matter
Proper bo selecta
Gibsons treatise on this subject is a BEAUTIFUL read!
Joseph Story too... Youngest man to be placed on the Supreme Court! He was a law scholar and genius🎉
Law and history are so interesting. Thank you so much for making this.
Equity is super important.
This will come in very handy thank you. Great work, sir.
Thank you so much!!
Seems he did not discuss people withdrawing their consent to be governed.
When you do, it places you above ALL that with the exception of violations in natural law, which are inescapable.
Final answer
❤yeah! Try telling Forsythe County GA you are a State Citizen. Get back to me.
@@theconsciousrn6489 first error "GA" is that tied to commercial territorial jurisdiction? As-king for a friend.
@ those were my stomping grounds back in the day. I don’t think there is anyone who is Sovereign but the Father
The Court of Equity, wow.
Wow, I had never heard about any of this, very interesting! Thank you!
My first exposure to this was at small claims court in California back in the 90's. Apparently, small claims in CA is a court of equity, not a court of law, and in small claims you do everything pro se without attorneys. As a layman, I didn't really understand what equity meant. I thought is just gave the judge a wider latitude to interpret the statutes. It's fascinating to know the history of this, and what the legal terminology actually means. Thank you for this video. Very educational.
Hmmm unfortunately after watching this video my understanding of what equity means matches your previous thought that it "just gave the judge a wider latitude to interpret the statutes"...
Excellent, I needed to hear that.
If I remember my legal history thing the issue with equity courts is that they were basically a revenue generation mechanism so people could buy rights, so basically the modern equivalent of bribes.
This was very interesting and enlightening! Thank you.
I remember seeing that clause in the Constitution but it never quite registered why the terms were there like that. Thanks for that history and clarification. You got a new follower. 😁
I’m so glad you liked it!
@@brynoDC I've had senior attorneys and law school instructors inform me that I'm an expert in U.S. Constitutional law, but I know I have more to learn. I'm right now trying to evaluate if your information is disruptive to my current legal models. I have a business partner who is a retired Federal prosecutor and law instructor, and he and I will discuss topics from time-to-time. You do a very good job of explaining stuff to a lay audience.
Thanks for speaking out.
Thank you.
Merry Christmas.
Thank you for this great info. Can you please review the BALFOUR AGREEMENT as a special. Thank you.
That really started with Theodor Hertzel. It was his idea to relocate jews from civilized Europe to Palestine. Arthur Balfour just wrote the letter to Walter Rothschild, who funded the move. The Declaration didn't include Arabs. Should've been a red flag, but nobody cared about the Middle East! They were viewed as peasants. Perfect place to begin a Zion outpost, and start plotting a global takeover! Lol sorry! It's kinda showing nowadays, and sinking America in the process. Someone will eventually have to hand over Netanyahu.
as different from the balfour declaration?
You are wrong on many levels. When they removed our ability to pay for anything with the emergency banking act, the laws also changed. They soon realized those changes gave the people to much power in equity, so in order to hide equity from the people they combined it with the civil court.equity makes you equal with the judge.
All crime in the United States is commercial, with the emergency banking act law change all crime can be discharged in accordance with public law.
You cannot contract by filing their forms , equity acts in personam, you have to bring equity yourself, a bar guild scumbag cannot bring it for you.
@@terrybelden5442 I agree but I also agree that even here equity (remedy) was given to the people. i.e. their ability to discharge a liability.
what videos do u recommend? I felt this guy was somewhat " off" being an attourny( to return to the crown).
Very informative - Thanks for doing the work!
in to hear this sir.
thank you sir.
Great content!!!
Would you be able to provide more information in how to issue pleadings under equity for Specific Performance?
So, I can’t specifically because it’ll be different in every state. I usually try to find some samples from that court and use them. Find some injunctions.
@brynoDC thank you, if you could, pick a State, and we can draw parallels in other jurisdictions.
Thank you for taking the time to explain, that which has little coverage on mainstream.
When I practiced in South Carolina some 20 years ago, there were Masters in Equity who were essentially special Magistrates under the jurisdiction of the general trial court Judge. Masters in Equity handled foreclosures and a few other things but I can't recall what all their jurisdiction entailed. Essentially, equitable powers were transferred from the Judge to the Master in Equity to act as essentially a Magistrate for equity cases, whereas normally Magistrates don't have equitable power or jurisdiction.
That’s fascinating. I’m learning after making this video (which was of course intended to be a 101 type conceptual overview, so I didn’t try to get into each state) how many states still have cool remnants of the equity courts in operation. I love it.
Glad I watched this. I am being sued in my real estate business and I was wondering why the lawyer used laches when describing the statute of limitations.
First things first, America has not existed for a thousands years. Its always good to start any conversation or thesis with a point based in truth.
Correct, I take it what he meant to express is that the courts of chancellory are older than a 1000 years.
Our common law and equity courts have existed for a thousand years though. They predate the formation of the United States by quite a lot. We inherited the system directly from the Colonies, who got it from Great Britain - Except for Louisiana, which has a system based on the Napoleonic Code for historical reasons (ie the Louisiana Purchase - it was not originally a British colony).
So the presenter of this video is entirely correct, and you are wrong. This is stuff that is taught in every law school, it is not just an opinion, it is factual history.
Common law has existed since the beginning of time.. it’s unwritten because it’s common sense.. if you owe a debt, or caused loss, injury or harm to your fellow man, you owe them fair and just compensation.. that’s all that is.. very simple.. not everyone knows how to read and write, another reason for common law..
Ok simpleton,here’s the deal.. he didn’t allude to America being a thousand years old. So don’t get your panties in a bunch.
@@AlexanderSupertramp142very good!
Gibsons Suits in Chancery explains this well and gives dates along with other historical facts
Merci du partage! Stéph.
Can't wait for "Secret Hidden Court" to get taken out of context and become the conspiracy theory you warned it isn't.
As a lay person with no legal background, this was an excellent overview and clears up a lot of questions about why the law is wishy-washy sometimes. Love it, and you are a great presenter.
Bar Attourneys are the conspiracy.
When I first started getting into the Constitution and common law and rights, I remember I asked a judge, over a traffic ticket, if it was a court of common law or a court of equity... he blew up on me so hard and immediately ruled from the bench that I was guilty and had to pay the fine... I know a lot more now but it was eye opening to say the least.
Thanks for sharing!
I have listened once, will have to listen again and I appreciate your spelling all of this out. Dealing with a common law issue (equity?) currently, and have questions. I am certain I'll find an answer once I understand.
Much better seeing the hidden gems they swapped to rob imo. Almost perfection.
Subbed and liked because, though I could never do the work, the magical art of the law fascinates me. You lay it all out in clear narration with charts, so it's easily understood. BrynoDC, I wrote a book thirty years ago, long out of print now but still getting new readers. Is there a mailing address where I could send you a signed and inscribed copy?
Could I buy a copy???
Mississippi and Tennessee both have separate chancery courts.
as well as illinois
Tennessee still has Chancery Courts too!
Nice! Can you explain how to battle social security in federal courts, under trust law, eg. 15 USC sec 1
Ty 👍
Ah, this helps quite a bit to clarify some wooly ideas I had. Thanks!
If you want to get those subs up maybe something like a Nady wireless lapel mic and a Logitech HD webcam would be worth a $120 investment. Really entry level but 80/20 rule. Regardless you're DOING IT so don't take this as criticism! I subbed as I value ideas far more than production value.
So I discovered (finally) that when I recorded videos inside the TikTok app (about 80-90% of every video I’ve done), my AirPods worked as microphones. When I used the camera app, they did not and the regular mic on the camera was used, which is why the sound gets better when I move closer. I couldn’t figure out why some occasional videos sounded so bad. So I just bought a new good wireless mic. So marked improvement. I also got some new lights, which is why I’ve barely posted in days. Once I get them to fit inside the tiny room I’m shooting in, hopefully a marked improvement there too. The white board is very tricky lighting wise (reflection, sea of white, REFLECTION)
Thank you for sharing. Subbed 👍
New n exciting, thank you 😊 ❤
New subscriber all for the truth!
I can now see how a lot of what has been a mystery is relevant. Equity creates and environment of fairness if the governing body has a moral contract with humanity
That's the theory, though in practice many US judges don't in fact know much about laws that they are supposed to adjudicate and equity allows some impunity for a judge to act purely based on personal bias, without being in accord with legal precedent.
I thought this would be about modern politics because of the word equity, but it's about history which is infinitely cooler 🙂
What was will be and always has been.
@@Erik-e2d3t Time is a flat circle. Infinite regressive recursion and infinite expansion are one in the same because conformal cyclic cosmology is the only truth. 🫠
@@Stevie-J then there is eternity which ebbs and flows and empties out somewhere no where
Great information and highly useful. I would point out something you seem to have missed and that is the emergence of territorial courts in the US where judges were granted a common law jurisdiction. These courts were not under the FRCP [Mookini v United States 303 US 201]. These tribunals still exist [EPA and Forest service tribunals for example]
Can you do a video on Civil Asset Forfeiture? This is a terrible situation of government theft in most states. What can be done to eliminate it?
I’ll try to get there eventually. I’m still sort of the building block phase. I’ll tell you that I worked in a jurisdiction that tried to implement new Civil Asset Forfeiture laws and I successfully mounted a major campaign to stop it. I’m pretty proud of that one actually. One of my main arguments is that states are beginning to abandon these laws, finding them abhorrent to so many constitutional protections, even if they’ve been deemed technically within the lines of the law (don’t get me started). So I’m hopeful that they’re on their way out. Suffice it to say: I am not a fan.
Great video!
Very good explanation
Thanks for introducing me to something new.👍
Interesting stuff. Thanks :)
Have you ever heard of or come across the term “exclusive equity”?
I used the Secretary of State in California over an election issue that was not covered by statute. I used at equity. This was in Sacramento Superior Court.
what was the outcome?
@@studyallthetimeallthetime8473
I prevailed. I used the magic words: there is no speedy and effective remedy. I wished to run for public office. I was a registered Green. I was the chair of the state wide platform committee. A small group of Greens filed for the right to pick and choose in what districts they would run candidates. A civil rights attorney, an ally, rushed me to the court house. I was unable to stop it, but was granted intervene status.
This left me without pathway to run. The granting of a request from a group not authorized by the plenary by this judge had reduced a qualified party to a coffee klatch. I obtained a speedy court date and went in pro per. I was not asking for much. I asked for a writ of mandamus ordering the Secretary of State to allow me to run as an independent. They did object. However, those magic words rang true. The Court did issue the order, and I collected 14,000 signatures in my congressional district. This achievement was sited in a subsequent case in which a potential candidate claimed that three percent of the registered voters was impossible to meet. I came in a poor third, beaten by both major parties but ahead of all minor ones combined, producing no benefit to society. As the district was seventy percent Democratic, the usual scoundrel won. My Green detractor in Santa Barbara ran as a Green and caused a Republican victory.
The Judge said " Next time get a lawyer." I don't think there will be a next time, but I grew my own lawyer; my daughter. But the elements were in place: irreparable harm, no other remedy, and an area not covered by statute. I used that as an excuse for why I did not have any points and authorities to present. I am quick on my feet with excuses. " Your Honor, there can be none as this situation is unique ".
My strong advice is that a candidate should never run except in a major party primary. It didn't even work for Teddy Roosevelt.
Please, go into more depth. I too live in Sacramento. I am asking for a reason that I cannot go into because I still don't have enough information /facts to rely on to make a statement. Thank you
i have many questions. can a jury be demanded by a defendant or plaintiff in equity? or does the judge have the final decision? is caselaw treated as discretionary in equity? is there a difference between a "jury trial" and a "trial by jury"?
Jury trial vs trial by jury is the same thing as far as I know. Trial by jury is just rooted in the old vernacular (trial by combat, trial by ordeal, trial by jury). But I don’t think you can demand one in equity. Juries usually make a decision between two black and white options. Or a series of yes or no answers. Not always but often. Equity requires a much more nuanced solution that just generally isn’t offered to a jury to come up with. The judge is making a nuanced solution but also has (in theory) years of experience and examples of what possible side outcomes could be for allowing X equitable solution while a jury would not necessarily. After an oil spill, forcing a company to clean up the mess in equity (specific performance) may seem like a good solution but a judge may know that many companies forced to do so either file for bankruptcy or do a crappy job. (That’s not a real example. Just something off the top of my head. All I could think of)
Very nice work!:) Valerie Law
Excellent video. Fraud has no time limitations
Would a foreclosure case be in equity? How could a defendant use the equity court to their benefit?
foreclosure from a bank is theft snd fraud.
The example you gave of a declarative judgment (i.e. "The contract is invalid.") looks like a declaratory judgment. (But certainly, a contract being invalid is a reason that a plaintiff might get zero dollars after suing for money damages.)
Declaratory judgments are a remedy created by statute, which can be applied to cases where some other legal or equitable remedy is sought, designed to ascertain and fix the rights of the parties.
IDK if declaratory judgments even fit into the framework of this topic. But I would want to steer farther away from the topic, when discussing judgments at law for damages or for no-damages.
Also: a HUGE part of what courts in equity used to do when they were separate institutions - though not in the federal judiciary - was estate and family law. To the point that it seems weird to talk about specific performance, bankruptcy, and civil contempt in a commercial setting instead of, like a divorce or probate!
Would love to hear more of your thoughts
New sub from Texas, god blues and merry Christmas
Subscribed
New Zealand?
The Courts have to acknowledge Equity and Trust Law if anyone expressed it!
Thank you. I have a problem with the family courts. According to your description, they are equity courts because there is no jury. I see your point about dividing a family, but I think this creates a judge who has the kind of power that a monarch would have. America's founders were against this kind of power, and so am I. It is an abusive system. Common law and juries can do the equity court if the disputes are broken down into small pieces. A big problem is that judges are instructing the jury, and this is wrong. Juries can decide against the law as easily as they can decide with the law. The judge did not create the law, so why is he telling juries what they can judge for themselves?
This feels just.
Does this work in Canada all provinces?
I don't know about all the provinces but I know Quebec has a civil code system, so that at least is different. So does Louisiana in the US, actually.
I kept looking to see if I set this video on two times speed.
I originally made this for TikTok so I had to cut 45 minutes of video down to 11 minutes. RUclips and TikTok are surprisingly different animals.
i learned that my bankruptcy was filed with court of equity. but i still don't understand equity. the banks use the word a lot, but i never hear it in court cases.
This better not be about Delaware...
Nah it's about Delawhen
@@BiggestCorviddelawho ?
Delawhat?
Now yall known Del-a-why!! Now stop playing and tell the truth.
Lol... Delaware has a court of Chancellery that is moreso visible than other states. What he is speaking is universal in all states...court of kings conscience!
Thanks for the tid bit...more importantly...When is VW going to start selling the TDI's again un the US? Thanks...and subbed!
this is excellent
thank you! where does admiralty fit into all of this?
So I know in England admiralty is a common law court. I’d mostly assume the same for the U.S. But I’m willing to bet I could think really hard and come up with exactly the right situation where a case could be brought in equity that may bring in some admiralty law. Or vice versa. The two things that are just bouncing around my brain is maybe something related to a major oil spill or a U.S. owned giant boat getting in a wreck. I don’t know. I’m just spitballing there.
@@brynoDC i thought admiralty was separate from common and equity, to deal with sea vs land respectively, but that propeller genese chief vs fitzhugh suggested that admiralty jurisdiction can be brought to the land to settle commercial matters. Also, I thought that the one form of action was equity/admiralty. It reads this way to me (rule 2.1).
I have one for you, "probate conspiracy". When the feds open a probate against a citizen who has already run a state probate.😂
Thanks.
Equity is the result of deducting liabilities from assets.
UCC even defines remedy at 1-308, and fortified by 1-103.6. Tacit consent can be temporary.
So the UCC is a different animal. I’m trying to get through the foundational building blocks first. UCC is like its own tower. We sort of split a chunk of law off on its own. I’ll get there though. I just want to get through the historical roots and then we’ll make it to the branches.
Funny story. I got to work in the one jurisdiction in the U.S. that has never implemented the UCC and I had to draft a security agreement that would satisfy Washington state and local common law, which required me to base my security agreement on 1950’s case law. It was quite the fishing expedition. ALMOST no one would ever need to learn some of that stuff but when it comes in handy, it comes in reeeeally handy.
@. The UCC is a body of statutes within commercial law. They pertain to any incorporation. Meaning, any situation where there is more than one live being. How they’ve captured us is by language fraud. We are not persons, citizens, individuals, residents, Mr, Mrs, etc. We are singular live man or womb-man. The keys to actual authority lie in the etymological grammar. All contract is based upon a medium of offer and acceptance, and the complete overstanding of such agreements to be paramount.
@. Very cool 👊🏼
@. Case law is great and all, however, the original and withstanding contractual agreement perseveres. The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land, and any secondary laws are null and void of law. Marbury V Madison. Challenged 100’s of times, never overturned. Serfs complain about how they are victimized, yet they are so, by their own ignorance in the machinations, especially the esoteric ones, of the system they exist in. Jurisdiction MUST be proven when challenged. Courthouses are incorporations and exist in a different jurisdiction than singular living people whom are members of the race that created the paper and ink for which said municipalities were created from. Tell me, on what specific date in his-tory did the intangible concept man created become the master of its creating race, man-kind? Everyone has been indoctrinated to think backwards. Exit the ruse. 👊🏼❤️🇺🇸
SC has a court of equity
Here from your tik tok channel
Do you have a way to message you?
I would argue that they eliminated the true common law (look up the historical definition of "court of record ") in favor of their version of equity. Which is that all property is owned by the State. The judge will decide if we have a small equitable interest or not.
I don't know jack about sh*t but something about this sounds accurate.
State owns all property?...like communism?
Family law is an example. Election law too.
Declarative because a Period follows the sentence......different kind of sentence. 😁 8:35
Ha! Not every sentence is followed by a Period but every Sentence is followed by a period of time.
are you licensed in Arizona? I may need your help.
And these Judges and Courts must honor the united States Constitution! I don't care what anyone says!
Fantastic
I am not clear that you qualified your contention that common and civil law fails creating balance sometimes. When? Under what circumstances? Do you have an example to share please? Thank you.
According to Black's Law Dictionary: equity law is a system of jurisprudence that is distinct from common law courts and is administered by certain tribunals. Equity law is based on principles of fairness, conscience, and equality, as opposed to the more rigid rules of common law
If equity is based on fairness, what does that say about the other law forms?
@@rhrh9128 short answer... the common law was too rigid. Gibson Treaties on the law of Equity Jurisprudence might assist in clarification.
@@brianrossmiller love your comment! what most people don't realize is that equity comes from the Bible. What does "righteous/righteousness" even mean? Lol
@@brianrossmillerif one enters into an unfair contract, it is still a contract and must be honoured. Failure to do so will bring a case in law, not equity.
We still employ Magna Carter too. Or we did.
I've been aware that all statutory actions are civil and why. Even criminal actions are civil in nature but just defined as criminal. Statutory proceedings move in an Art 4 USDC which is a legislative branch court. True criminal proceedings are suppose to move in an Art 3 judicial branch court but those on both the state and fed level were closed around 1950. While both courts have authority over 'citizens of the United States' aka fed gov [ a creation of the 14th amendment ], the constitutions only grant judicial branch courts any authority over the true citizens of the states. That means that for over 70 years all prosecutions of the [ white ] citizens of the states have been constitutionally void for lack of jurisdiction. It is important to know that legislative branch courts recognize almost no rights. Judges will tell people that they do not recognize the state constitutions as imposing no limits on their authority and only vaguely recognize the fed constitution as imposing any limits on their actions.