What You Need To Know About Land Patents: Ron Gibson
Welcome guest, is this your first visit?
Member
Discoveries
 
Results 1 to 3 of 3
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By snoop4truth

Thread: What You Need To Know About Land Patents: Ron Gibson

« Prev Thread | Next Thread »
  1. #1

    Apr 2014
    453
    830 times
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting

    What You Need To Know About Land Patents: Ron Gibson


  2. #2

    Apr 2014
    453
    830 times
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting

  3. #3
    us
    Sep 2020
    1
    1 times
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting

    A LAND PATENT WILL NOT MAKE YOUR LAND EXEMPT FROM FORECLOSURE OR TAXES

    REPLY TO RON GIBSON'S CLAIMS ABOUT LAND PATENTS AND ALLODIAL TITLE

    Ron Gibson claims that creating a land patent and issuing to yourself will render your land exempt from foreclosure, property taxes and emminent domain. But, this is not so.

    The Law:

    1. "Allodial title" means a "government-owned title" and only the sovereign government can have "allodial title". A private person can not.

    2. "Allodial title" is not (and cannot be) conveyed to a private person by a land patent or otherwise.

    3. The highest title a private person can be conveyed in land is "fee simple" title (which is subject to foreclosure, property taxes and imminent domain).

    4. A land patent is no defense to foreclosure, property taxes or emminent domain.

    WHAT EVERY COURT HAS HELD ON WHETHER A "LAND PATENT" IS AN EFFECTIVE DEFENSE TO FORECLOSURE, PROPERTY TAXES AND IMMINENT DOMAIN

    HILGEFORD v. PEOPLES BANK, 776 F.2d 176 (7th Cir.1985).

    In this case, the Hilgefords filed a "land patent" which they sought to use in defense of a foreclosure action. The court wrote as follows:

    (BEGIN QUOTE)

    • 4. ...SOVEREIGN TITLE, which is absolute and encompasses on the part of the SOVEREIGN AUTHORITY both ownership of the land and the right to govern the inhabitants thereof, IS "ALLODIAL" TITLE. This term is used IN CONTRADISTINCTION TO the term "FEE SIMPLE TITLE," which contemplates THE HIGHEST TITLE WHICH MAY BE PRIVATELY HELD. (1 H. Tiffany, Real Property secs. 6, 13 (2d ed. 1920).) FEE SIMPLE TITLE MAY BE FREELY ALIENATED BY CONVEYANCE, MORTGAGE, OR DEVISE BUT STILL BE SUBJECT TO SOME CLAIM OF THE SOVEREIGN. (1 H. Tiffany, Real Property secs. 6, 13 (2d ed. 1920).) In current usage, THE HOLDER OF FEE SIMPLE TITLE IS STILL SUBJECT TO DISPOSSESSION BY THE GOVERNMENT, through due process of law, for nonpayment of REAL ESTATE TAXES and by EMINENT DOMAIN proceedings.

    The only correct premise supported by authority in the Britts' 613*613 brief is that land held by the Federal government is not subject to the acts of the States. (Cf. Gibson v. Chouteau (1871), 80 U.S. 92, 20 L.Ed. 534; Oregon v. McKay (D.C. Cir.1955), 226 F.2d 343.) WHAT IS TOTALLY INCORRECT IS THE implicit foundation of the Britts' POSITION THAT THE LAND PATENT issued to "James Evans" and "Francis Evans" in 1841 CONVEYED THE ENTIRE TITLE OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, SUCH THAT NO INTEREST ARISING BY OPERATION OF STATE LAW CAN ATTACH TO THE TITLE.

    • 5 A LAND PATENT IS MERELY THE DEED BY WHICH THE GOVERNMENT PASSES FEE SIMPLE TITLE OF GOVERNMENT LANDS TO PRIVATE PERSONS. (63A Am.Jur.2d Public Lands sec. 70 (1984).) ONCE FEE SIMPLE TITLE IS PASSED TO AN INDIVIDUAL FROM THE GOVERNMENT, BY LAND PATENT OR OTHERWISE, CLAIMS ARISING FROM CONVEYANCE OR MORTGAGE BY THAT HOLDER MAY BE ENFORCED AGAINST HIM. (Cf. Stark v. Starr (1876), 94 U.S. 477, 24 L.Ed. 276; United States v. Budd (1891), 144 U.S. 154, 36 L.Ed. 384; see also 63A Am.Jur.2d Public Lands sec. 92 (1984).) Where, as here, a decree of foreclosure and sale has divested title from the former mortgagor, the mere fact that the mortgagor's claim of title may run directly back through his family to a 19th-century patent IS OF NO CONSEQUENCE.

    THE ASSERTION IN THE BRITT'S BRIEF THAT THEY HOLD "FEE SIMPLE ALLODIAL TITLE" IS UNTENABLE. THE BRITTS HAVE NEVER HELD SOVEREIGN TITLE and now have been divested of their fee simple title by due process of law in the foreclosure action.

    The purported "PERFECTED PATENT" filed by the Britts matches the description of similar documents filed in other States. In Wisconsin v. Glick (7th Cir.1986), 782 F.2d 670, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals described these "NEW LAND PATENTS" in the following terms:

    "People saddled with mortgages may treasure the idea of having clean title to their homes. The usual way to obtain clean title is to pay one's debts. Some have decided that it is cheaper to write a `land patent' purporting to convey unassailable title, and to file that `patent' in the recording system." 782 F.2d 670, 671.

    • 6 The "NEW PATENT" or "PERFECTED PATENT" theory asserted on appeal, as it relates to the original patents, is also defeated by the estoppel effect of the foreclosure judgment. To the extent that the new theory may be construed as a separate and independent claim, it will be accorded the same treatment by this court that it has been accorded by the district courts of Indiana, Wisconsin, and Minnesota and by the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. IT IS FRIVOLOUS AND WITHOUT BASIS and should not be raised in the circuit courts of this State.

    (QUOTE ENDS)

    More case law available which says the same thing.

    (Deleted for rule violation, no links to other forums with topics found here)
    Last edited by Treasure_Hunter; Sep 15, 2020 at 10:41 AM.
    Clay Diggins likes this.

 

 

Home | Forum | Active Topics | What's New

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. new patents - days of reading
    By BillA in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Jul 12, 2019, 09:31 PM
  2. Interim Chair Ron Gibson of JMD on Land Patents
    By M.E.G. in forum Gold Prospecting
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Mar 02, 2016, 10:35 AM
  3. [SOLVED] Can lid with patents?
    By 66Fairlane in forum What Is It?
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: Apr 16, 2013, 07:50 PM
  4. Patents and Copyrights
    By AU24K in forum Everything Else
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Oct 25, 2011, 01:36 PM
  5. Whites Using Minelab Patents
    By Treasure_Hunter in forum White's
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Oct 22, 2006, 07:04 AM
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.3.0