Brief on jurisdiction
This document contains several serious misquotations and errors. It should not be relied upon. You are encouraged to try to find the corrections if any and report to us.
"Once jurisdiction is challenged, the court cannot proceed when it
clearly appears that the court lacks jurisdiction, the court has no authority
to reach merits, but, rather, should dismiss the action." Melo v.
US , 505 F2d 1026. "There is no discretion to ignore that lack of
jurisdiction." Joyce v. US , 474 F2d 215. "The burden shifts to
the court to prove jurisdiction." Rosemond v. Lambert , 469 F2d
416. "Court must prove on the record, all jurisdiction facts related to the
jurisdiction asserted." Lantana v. Hopper , 102 F2d 188;
Chicago v. New York , 37 F Supp 150. "A universal principle as old
as the law is that a proceedings of a court without jurisdiction are a nullity
and its judgment therein without effect either on person or property."
Norwood v. Renfield , 34 C 329; Ex parte Giambonini , 49 P.
732. "Jurisdiction is fundamental and a judgment rendered by a court that does
not have jurisdiction to hear is void ab initio ." In Re Application
of Wyatt , 300 P. 132; Re Cavitt , 118 P2d 846. "Thus, where a
judicial tribunal has no jurisdiction of the subject matter on which it assumes
to act, its proceedings are absolutely void in the fullest sense of the term."
Dillon v. Dillon , 187 P 27. "A court has no jurisdiction to
determine its own jurisdiction, for a basic issue in any case before a tribunal
is its power to act, and a court must have the authority to decide that
question in the first instance." Rescue Army v. Municipal Court of
Los Angeles , 171 P2d 8; 331 US 549, 91 L. ed. 1666, 67 S.Ct. 1409. "A
departure by a court from those recognized and established requirements of law,
however close apparent adherence to mere form in method of procedure, which has
the effect of depriving one of a constitutional right, is an excess of
jurisdiction." Wuest v. Wuest , 127 P2d 934, 937. "Where a court
failed to observe safeguards, it amounts to denial of due process of law, court
is deprived of juris." Merritt v. Hunter , C.A. Kansas 170 F2d
739. "the fact that the petitioner was released on a promise to appear before a
magistrate for an arraignment, that fact is circumstance to be considered in
determining whether in first instance there was a probable cause for the
arrest." Monroe v. Papa , DC, Ill. 1963, 221 F Supp 685.
And, you may find this interesting as well:
"An action by Department of Motor Vehicles, whether directly or through
a court sitting administratively as the hearing officer, must be clearly
defined in the statute before it has subject matter jurisdiction, without such
jurisdiction of the licensee, all acts of the agency, by its employees, agents,
hearing officers, are null and void." Doolan v. Carr , 125 US 618;
City v Pearson , 181 Cal. 640. "Agency, or party sitting for the
agency, (which would be the magistrate of a municipal court) has no authority
to enforce as to any licensee unless he is acting for compensation. Such an act
is highly penal in nature, and should not be construed to include anything
which is not embraced within its terms. (Where) there is no charge within a
complaint that the accused was employed for compensation to do the act
complained of, or that the act constituted part of a contract." Schomig
v. Kaiser , 189 Cal 596. "When acting to enforce a statute and its
subsequent amendments to the present date, the judge of the municipal court is
acting as an administrative officer and not in a judicial capacity; courts in
administering or enforcing statutes do not act judicially, but merely
ministerially". Thompson v. Smith , 154 SE 583. "A judge ceases to
sit as a judicial officer because the governing principle of administrative law
provides that courts are prohibited from substituting their evidence,
testimony, record, arguments, and rationale for that of the agency.
Additionally, courts are prohibited from substituting their judgment for that
of the agency. Courts in administrative issues are prohibited from even
listening to or hearing arguments, presentation, or rational." ASIS v.
US , 568 F2d 284. "Ministerial officers are incompetent to receive grants
of judicial power from the legislature, their acts in attempting to exercise
such powers are necessarily nullities." Burns v. Sup. Ct. , SF,
140 Cal. 1. "The elementary doctrine that the constitutionality of a
legislative act is open to attack only by persons whose rights are affected
thereby, applies to statute relating to administrative agencies, the validity
of which may not be called into question in the absence of a showing of
substantial harm, actual or impending, to a legally protected interest directly
resulting from the enforcement of the statute." Board of Trade v.
Olson , 262 US 1; 29 ALR 2d 1051.