0:02 Alright, so this is I guess call it part to the technical aspects of what I was just explaining about the the law the husband right and the law of the father And how it was it was towards the end? 0:17 I was talking about how contracts You can't interfere with contracts, OK? 0:22 And you c...

Alright, so this is I guess call it part to the technical aspects of what I was just explaining about the the law the husband right and the law of the father And how it was it was towards the end?
I was talking about how contracts You can't interfere with contracts, OK?
And you cannot it's a tort it's a tort and a marriage is a very special contract in It's very special. I mean, it's, it's actually forms the basis of modern society. It brings us into civil society, OK.
So, I'm on it.
So we discussed the law of the father losing in, leading into law, the husband.
And so before I get into this next part, that necessarily follows that relationship.
How I'm going to describe that relationship now?
I haven't brought this term up yet, so before I do that, I'm going to do a share screen here.
And I'm gonna just let me explain my notes here.
So I made some notes for myself, so we're, we're continuing, so, I'm use the word, consecration. That's not the proper word. So, in the previous video, I use the word consecration of a marriage, consecration has to do with making something perfect.
Like, it has to do with no, a church or something making it perfect. No, what I meant to say was consummation, OK? The consummation of a marriage. All right.
So, copulation and confirmation confirmation is what would actually forms the marriage, OK? That's where the authority comes from, that's what I was saying.
So, here's the next concept. Let me do a screen share real quick here.
D T, you have to clean up my screen a little bit, OK.
All right.
So, what I want to talk about now, is we, continuing from our last conversation, the father, the husband, and his role now as trustee.
There's a trust.
There's a trust formed by this relationship.
This is a trust relationship. Yeah, there's, there's a private membership association that's involved too.
But there's a trust, so what does that, the essence of a trust, as that property is conveyed for the benefit of beneficiaries.
And it creates a special duty for the use of that property.
That duty is usually expressed in the trust corpus the document that explains what the rights and powers are, right? Rights powers and obligations are the trustee: the trustee is the owner as trustee not individually.
What are the rights of the property? It's the property, the property is going to be the property rights.
The obligations of the father, OK.
He's the trustee.
This is the manner in which he has to carry out his obligations and the manner in which he could ...
he could exercise his rights, It's in a trust relationship, that's what I'm going to tell you.
Why is this so important?
Well, let me just give you an example case. I was just talking about today, Someone brought this case to me, so, it's a case I was discussing with someone a few months ago. I didn't have much for him, but now I do.
So, what's happened is he got a really unfair deal in a divorce. The, his wife's father used his money, a lot of money.
I guess he has a lot of money to interfere with the marriage, though the Wi-Fi to leave or whatever, But still, he's and he's helping her and he's funding attorney fees and whatever else.
And it's it was very difficult this person and they basically everyone, you know, sold them out. That's what happens.
So he's got to pay this outrageous amount of alimony and child support.
And he's being told that by such and such a date, he's either gotta refinances house or sell it so that the wife can get her, share, the equity. You know, they split the equity. You've heard this deal before.
I'm gonna break this down for you, And I'm going to explain how you can stop this in its tracks if you agreed to a deal like this.
I can't help you if you're, you already paid out and all this, possibly, but, but I can't help you understand why this can't even be valid, all right? So here's what I explain to them.
In the judges court order, which is the divorce decree, or sometimes it's the separation agreement, but in this case, it was the actual decree, the final determination of the court, as to what was going to happen with the man's resources, OK?
The father's resources, I think he's the father of three. Again, this judge's interfering with the marriage.
He doesn't have any right to do this, but aside from that, the role of the father and the husband in this matter, doesn't change, because some judge says there's a divorce and the wife leaves, He's still the husband, and he's still the father, and she's still the wife.
Now, she's an adulterer, OK?
All right, in any case, how does, How does the judge have authority to require the, the husband, to sell the house?
First of all, He can order it, But what if nobody wants to buy it?
Can the judge require someone to buy it?
He certainly cannot, right.
So, do you think he has any jurisdiction to order the house be sold?
He can order him to try to sell it on a best effort basis.
He could do that.
I mean, for practical, was this discussion, right, Ultimately.
I'm going to, I'm going to show you why he cannot, but for this particular example, what about getting financing?
Can the judge require the bank to underwrite alone? Can the judge require anyone to lend money for the refinancing of this man's house?
Of course, not.
So how is that order valid?
When the court has no authority or ability to require what it's seeking to require, there's no jurisdiction.
So, in his case, what I simply did, just to be practical, I mean, he didn't have any protection. He goes back kicked.
So, what we're going to do is come in there with the revised financial statement and, and a motion.
two, set aside those terms, let's just say in the decree. We're going to be very subtle here. We're just going to act like everything else is good.
We're going to move the court to set aside these terms.
As you can see, OK, here's how we're going to do it Now. This is getting into a little technical.
Not going to apologize. That's what happens, OK. If you want to work on your car. You got your hands are going to get greasy.
Sorry about that.
If you want to figure this stuff out, you want to exercise your rights. This is one of the ways we have to understand. We have to do it this way, OK. To think the nice thing is, you don't have to start from scratch. I must show you exactly what needs to be done.
So, I'm gonna expand this out, and here's where we have, You know. This is called the court title. I'm going to review this real quick.
This is called the caption.
Obviously, this has to be changed, OK?
Then, I put this here generally in the very beginning of a case because I don't know where my clients coming from.
I have this in my documents or my computer, so that way when I open up a new file, if the if the person coming to me as late and responding, I already have a basic document here, right?
We, don't need this, so don't W W is overly concerned about this document, OK.
This is only if you're a little bit late in answering.
So here's what we want to do.
This is a situation where a this is a different case now. By the way, I wrote this for a different case. Not the one I just described.
In this case there was a couple who had a baby out of marriage as you would call it out of wedlock, but really I don't look at it that way. It's still a marriage, OK, So sorry. But it's a husband, a wife with a child.
They don't see it that way.
They live separate lives, but they have this child and they've been taking care of the child little boy.
So she, the woman, decides that she's going to, I'm gonna call her, the wife. She decides she wants to take the little one by herself.
The two of them, out of the country somewhere, he's like, eight months old, or something like that.
And if I'm not, if I'm the husband and the father, I'd say, no. Also, when he says, No, also just happens to be, well, she doesn't like that.
So instead of working it out with the father, she goes in and asked other men to involve themselves and intrude upon the marriage.
The relationship that she's involved with, that the father created she's now intruding. She's: she's petitioning other people to get involved. She doesn't have the right to do that, obviously.
As for my last video for you, If you buy an day that, OK, so using the modern language procedures, under the rules of civil procedure, and this happens to be in family court. So we file he's a defendant here, so we follow a motion to dismiss and verified as a technical thing. So don't worry about that, but we're asking the court to, dismiss, here's why we're saying that this petition for, she wants, Custody, 100% custody?
Whoa, OK, so that's what happens. So, what, that's what they do.
They ask for everything, knowing that I'm not going to get everything, But at the same time, they're still going to assert power over the marriage when they don't have the power.
And just bear with me because I use the term marriage, and you guys are probably thinking, Well, just bear with me.
So we're basically saying that the matter of child custody, now, this is a situation where there's no post nuptial agreement, there's no written agreement, this cold, like, this person completely got caught off guard.
He chose to be, father.
And by default, he's a husband, OK.
It all works that way. And here we are.
So, now, he's going to tell the judge, the court, whoever the other attorney.
The matter of child custody, which is what the wife is seeking, has already been settled.
He's going to assert his rights as the father.
It's been settled between the plaintiff and the defendant. Here's how he's going to describe it is the plaintiff who has simply changed her mind and now seeks to use the state's police power to overcome.
the authority of her child's father, OK.
This is what she's doing.
The Court lacks jurisdiction to interfere with the trustees' duties. Now, I start using the word Trustee here.
I haven't introduced it yet, so this is probably something I need to change. There's, there's a, there's a better way to write this.
In other words, I'm just, but just bear with me, What I've explained to the Judge is that there's already a trust relationship and the Judge is interfering with the Trust?
He's trying to break the trust and there's no justification He's he has already he's interfered with it, OK, The Trust is established by the husband and father for the benefit of his wife and children. That's the nature of a trust. It's established for the benefit of others, right property. That's held in trust for the benefit of others, the use of the terms husband or wife or use, so I So what I'm trying to do here is I'm trying to, I want, I want to use the terms husband or wife.
They're not married in the sense that we understand, but this is my, are part of my argument. So, I'm going to explain myself, the use of the terms, husband or wife, or are used interchangeably with defending her father and plaintiff or mother respectively, OK? So that's just a little bit, to try to get people on the same page with my language here.
So the Defendants' rights, so I go through that document I introduced in the last video.
The previous one of this, and I just modified it a little bit to convey to the court these roles.
OK, so I'm basically remediating the court on the law the husband I guess the Court will be OK with that.
I will see, OK, so there, this is more of what you just guys saw in the previous video, OK, now, a petition made by the wife to another man, or group of men, likewise does not overcome the purposes and powers of the husband.
So she didn't have the right to file the petition. She's supposed to be talking to the husband? The father.
All right. The terms of custody are expressed, and defendants affidavit, which is alleged, and incorporate here, and so what. I'm what I'm showing the court is first of all. So now, there's a trust relationship that the court is interfering with by, by if it were to get involved, because she just filed a petition recently.
The judge doesn't get involved yet.
This is the response to the petition.
So we're telling the judge a warning ahead of time, Hey, there's a trust here.
You can't interfere with it.
Moreover, the matter of custody that's in the petition is already been settled so the court doesn't have jurisdiction for that reason also.
A trust is a settled matter as well, by the way. So but it's all sorts of trust.
Again, we get into the final arbiter, I'm bringing this up to the judge, OK?
Now I could cite case law, I can get it, I can get a legal brief. I just haven't done that yet.
I'm not sure that I want to These are logical arguments, the, it's hard to you can't get around them.
Now, how you can argue you contradict yourself.
So I'm telling the Court Nally just because you have the police power, doesn't give you authority and in fact, you'll actually waive your immunity if you have any. In this matter.
And the liability for interfering is going to fall on everybody who does interfere. And in this guy's case. It's the father-in-law.
I told him today he needs to sue him.
For the damages he's looking at incurring or has incurred because he paid for the whole thing *******.
So I'd get into law the father now, OK, you guys have already watched that and we ended up on the last video with this. Courts cannot change contracts, OK? So this now appears in my motion. You guys can write this however you want.
I just did it this way, I'm gonna see what happens, you check with me next year, It's gonna look a lot different But the concepts are still going to be here argued the same way pretty much, OK, so you almost can't mess up there.
So by, so now this happens to be a situation instead of facts Here, the woman is not communicating with them, right?
So that's the thing, she thinks, I don't need to communicate with him, he's not going to give me what I want.
So I'm gonna get some other dudes over here to interfere, and they will just gang up on them.
Yeah, we all know this is happening.
So, in my memorandum, a law, which is very weak, I say the rule for motions to dismiss, OK, that's easy to do.
Then I make myself a couple of notes, this is not complete. OK, this is for you guys. I'm just tutorial, OK? So what we have is I need it. I need legal citations that define what torturous interference with a trust is and torturous interference with a contract. But trust is necessary.
Also, what is what constitutes waiver of sovereign immunity?
Exceeding your judicial authority, right? Acting outside your capacity. Yes. OK, I got case on that. We got tons of that, OK, if it had weight. We got tons of it, OK. An acceptance of liability. So acceptance. It should be acceptance. of liability, right.
Including financial but more more, That goes on the father-in-law. That goes on the other attorneys, also the attorneys are liable and so is the judge.
They should have not been involved.
Now they're not yet. Let's see what happens to some attorney soldier on this.
She went to learn, though. It says, Yeah, we'll do it this way.
Well, He might have stepped in Nepali. You know what? We'll see.
So here's a technical thing about motions.
I'm not going to get into that.
Alright. So, again, now, we get into the next captioned document is what we call it. So we have a motion. And then in support of the motion, in this particular case, we want to have an affidavit, there's gotta be he's got to put his name on the line. He's gotta say something under penalty of perjury, and it has to be factual. Can't be illegal argument.
So I may have strayed a little bit on legal arguments.
But what I wanted to establish here is the existing agreement or the terms of the agreement. So what I'm doing is reverse engineering, an agreement that already is in place that's not yet in writing.
And I'm doing that by affidavit.
Judges do this all the time. I'm just doing it for the party, OK, the person I'm helping.
So I'm explaining in here, we have a long standing agreement, I use that term frequently that we each adjust our schedules that we each adjust our schedules.
That sounds like an agreement, doesn't it? Each adjusts our schedules.
It sounds like they're working together, right to accommodate for the care and needs of our son, but we do have certain regular schedules.
We have agreed again, I use the word agrees, say I'm trying to establish there's an agreement, this is a factual statement.
Additionally, the defendant is the trustee over certain intangible property rights and obligations for the benefit of his son A wife, I just described, his trust obligations, they existed before this petition was filed.
A true and correct copy of the declaration of trust I'm gonna get into that is included, and I'm including it in the affidavit.
There's, I do it by these magical words here, OK.
So, I'm referring to the wife by her, you know, let's call it unmarried Name. I just did it that way.
I don't know if you need to use your own style, but the fact is, she's away.
She's definitely the mother. When this person is not available, I adjust my schedule.
Now, remember, this is an affidavit, so it's, it's from speaking in the first person's, that's why I'm really, I've read it this way. I adjust my schedule so that I can care for him during the time she cannot.
And she does the same for me. So the reciprocating, this is agreement, again.
Our regular schedule includes my caring for the child and the days of the week from Monday through Friday.
I see that it should be on, it doesn't matter, on the days of the week from Monday through Friday, beginning 75.
Except she may take him a half hour early on Thursday afternoons, OK, During the weekends, et cetera. Et cetera. I just spend 60, I asked him, how many hours do you think you spend with them. And how many hours does she spend, and then how many hours do you spend together with them. So I got all this tabulated.
Put it into a paragraph, right?
This is important, it's an important fact, and we get into what's our arranger about money, and food and medical care.
All right, this is what it is. I had to ask them what it was.
So I had to reverse engineer the contract.
So I want to show that there's an existing contract, and the court should, but out should never get involved so far, the course not involved, but we'll say. So we also agree that because of the insurance rates, so she's using her insurance, but he's paying for everything.
Great. It's always great when the husband can do that.
It makes it easier to argue this, then not necessary, but it makes it easier, so this is when we run into trouble.
OK, but she doesn't have the right to go outside of the marriage and bring in some other dudes to interfere with the marriage, because she doesn't like what's going on. I don't care if you're Batman or a judge or or you know, the Hobbit.
None of that matters.
Now, here's a declaration of trust, this is not the trust.
It's a declaration of the trust.
Um, you see, it's got the jira out at the bottom.
So he'll have it notarized.
You can use your last name.
Here as the Eero irrevocable family trust.
I probably should have put a terminal here saying, it's not revoke.
Well, but it, as the father, you, cannot revoke that trusteeship. So it goes without saying that it's irrevocable, But, nonetheless, maybe it's a good idea to put that in here. But, anyway, so I'm, I'm describing the father's relationship. I'm the father. The husband, and she's the mother, and I have the rights. And it's an irrevocable trust. And then it goes on as the trustee here are my powers.
I'm the owner. I'm uniquely an exclusively responsible for the certain, for certain assets, property, property rights, including intangible property rights, including but not limited to, such property obligations and rights, using the course of deciding in administering the care and custody of my child, and his mother, including but not limited to, the following duties rights obligations or prerogatives.
I like to put it that way, I like to be worthy sometimes, but that's how I like to say it.
Remember, with duty's, you have rights and with obligations you have prerogatives.
Kinda, the same thing now, as the trustee again, this is a declaration of trust, so I'm going to summarize what my role is as trustee as a trustee. I'm the sole court.
I'm the court.
I'm the sole judicial forum. equitable form and I'm the final arbiter.
I mentioned this in my previous, OK?
Having the exclusive jurisdiction by which all disputes in Purta matters are heard and resolved, including, but not limited to, a very short list here, of the things that I will do as Trustee that I am bound to do. That no one else can do.
I am responsible for the care and the protection, health and well-being of my child. Same for my wife or the mother of my child. I'm responsible for determining.
The determination as to, as to, this is the termination as to which parent.
Will care for him at which times during the day, you see this law, the father.
I make the rules.
I have the liability backup here in the AFA, David or in the schedule.
We have a schedule up here, oh, sorry.
Yeah, in the declaration We have there's a description.
Sorry, there's a description over here of what, here we go.
Sorry, there's a description you see here is all the scheduling we put in the motion.
So, that is reinforced by the declaration of trust, OK, I decide all this, that's my, doing, that schedule we have, because I, I agree to that I response for that, as a trustee. I am responsible for all financial needs of my child, and his mother. Now, that's not completely true, because I think she has a job, and whatever.
But ultimately, he is still responsible, even though she's taken over some of the responsibility. You get the difference there.
You can still say that you're 100% responsible because you are as husband or father, even if you're not actually fulfilling that, because she wants to do something else.
Mmm hmm.
Do you like this?
All right.
So, as Trustee, I'm responsible for doing how, determining how resources.
I'm responsible, because I'm the trustee for determining how resources that I produce and provide may be allocated for the benefit.
Nobody else is, he's telling you, nobody else is, now, it's a trust relationship that's been declared.
OK, now, what are you gonna do, Judge?
We didn't talk about that before. Did we remember that law, the father-in-law, the husband that was pretty powerful? Wasn't it weakest? Stand on that alone?
But if we bring in the explanation that there's a trust now, and there's a trustee, what's the judge is going to do?
But if we talk about the settled matters, right?
These are settled matters to sound like they're settle matters, OK?
My role as husband father trustee algebra cards that I provide shelter love, comfort for the beneficiaries and I therefore have the exclusive, a unique duty to and and prerogative to choose where and in what manner I provide such comfort and shelter.
It's my choice, I'm telling the judge right now.
This is like pacing. On the perimeter of where I live.
Don't come past this perimeter, Don't cross this line.
It's my territory.
I'm telling you, I decide all these things, don't you? Think for one second, that you can decide where, who's going to live with whom.
I, alone as husband, father, and trustee have the unique and exclusive right to copulate with the mother of my child, right?
Yeah, I do. You don't. You're a corporation.
That's funny, right?
But this is what, this is how we are. This is right. This is the nature of our existence.
I did it, I can do it. Your corporate *** can't.
Therefore, I have all the rights.
This is, I'm not going to do it because this is like barking lauter, right?
Any rights excluded from and not specifically expressed in this declaration? Kind of attorney stuff, but which the trustee has by virtue of his role as husband, father, and trustee isn't, are not waived.
The trustee reserves all rights not expressed here, and so there you go.
I go into a little more.
I mean, we can make this 20 pages, but you get the idea, right?
Are bringing in the sledge hammer. This time, are nice the first time.
A lot of the husband in law, the father, can't change contracts.
Oh, this constitutes a trust: Guess why you can't interfere with the trust, either.
How many things we'll just pile up on on this court, remember, there is no post app shell agreement.
Furthermore, the resources of the trust may not be distributed and must be used for the sole benefit of beneficiaries, gets through the tax situation, doesn't it?
No tax consequence, IRS can't peer its way in there.
No, resource of the trust may be distributed or dispersed to any third party that has an adversarial relationship to either the trust or any of its beneficiaries of the trustee.
What happened?
The wife took some money. Some resources, and paid. Some lawyer to come in to interfere with the trust.
Now, whose were they?
Maybe they were money, She acquired herself, or she had previously, I'm going to argue they're part of the marital community.
But we don't have to do that.
I'm just no, just making this comment here.
You cannot use trust resources too, interfere with the performance of the trustee or the purposes of the trust.
Makes sense, right?
No beneficiary has the right or prerogative to call upon or request or utilize any third party for the purpose of interfering with the duties rights and obligations prerogatives of the trustee.
Remember, the father, the husband, makes all the rules, and this is one of the rules he wants to make, as Trustee, because in fact, he is the trustee.
So this tells you, and the trust, is what I said before.
Wife, the mother did not have the right, the legal right, to go outside the marriage and bring some other dudes in there to interfere with it.
And I said, so in my trust, I'm the father, I'm the husband, I'm the trustee, and I'm telling you know, no beneficiary, you you're part of you're benefiting from my resources and my time, and you got my protection.
If you forfeit my protection that's another thing but you got it.
And now you're going to bring in another man to interfere with me and my duties and abscond with the benefits I provide you, I don't think so.
That includes judges.
Any dispute between the beneficiary of the trustee shall be resolved exclusively by the trustee, and the trustees final determinations shall be binding upon every beneficiary of the trust.
That's the way it's supposed to be.
I just put it in words now.
That's the law.
Because it's in the trust. It's the duties and obligations and rights and prerogatives and the trust.
It's now, in words, it's expressed in this manner.
And the ... continue in perpetuity until the death of the trustee, remember which side of the Bible was at Romans seven tours and like that? Till the death, right?
Now, this trust shall continue, OK.
So, those who interfere with the trustees' powers or the trust are liable to the husband and to the husband.
Liable to the husband.
I put the father here, liable to the father and the husband, and have no immunity.
So, notice how, I'm gonna put, I'm gonna add in the trustee, but really, you're liable to the, the father, OK?
But, just to be complete, I'm going to add in here those who interfere with the trustees' Powers or the trusts are liable to the trustee.
And the father.
And to the husband, and have no immunity And so forth, OK.
I mean, we can if there's, there's other things that will come up. I mean, every case is going to be different.
But this happened to be pertinent for the case I was working, now, let me go down here. So, here's a technical matter.
I'd like to give these to the judge. I have a video on this. I like to propose an order that the judge signs, and, of course, you always have to tell her, in a court order, the judge is going to sign. You always have to have a distribution list, right, because everybody has to be involved with that one.
You can't have a court order that goes to only one person. And then, here's a technical matter where we have to create a certificate stating on which state the these completed documents were sent in the mail, OK? Were sent in the mail. So, anyways.
Now, we got something, we take this to a new level, OK, we take this to a new level, we got the law, the father-in-law of the husband.
What more do you need?
You don't, again, we're not talking about a post national agreement.
Post an actual agreement makes things a lot easier, but if you don't have it, understand what kind of powers you do have, and understand the nature of the relationship, OK? That nature of the relationship is a trust relationship.
The father, the husband, it's a trust, especially when there's children. But if there's no children, it is still a trust.
When a man becomes a father, the trust is formed, because it necessarily involves the wife, the mom, who is the wife. But that moment, those roles begin.
They develop over time.
But the moment the man becomes the father, everything else comes into being.
Mainly maybe it's not fulfilled totally, and maybe it is.
But you see what happens, right? It's a trust relationship. So what does the judge is going to do now?
When we've declared the existence of a trust, we have an affidavits establishing the terms of custody that are already established and accuse him of interfering with this and that he has no jurisdiction. So, jurisdiction is never waves of the court asserts jurisdiction.
We simply appeal it, and at some point, that higher courts are going to have to reverse it. They will.
That's my maybe I'm naive.
But anyways, that's what I'm expecting here.
So I will do more videos as showing more case examples.
I just showed you basically two.
I explained one and this is actually one I did on an on a real case.
So all right.
Next one I believe we're going to be talking about that trust that it is written into now it's not written, it's declared into the post an actual agreement. So we're going to get back into the actual ... Agreement and talk about the trust that has to do with removing the chattels from the mayoral community.
Thanks, everybody.

DS6 – Vol 4 Part II – Roles and Responsibilities: The Trustee in Marriage and Society


John Jay delves into the intricate responsibilities and rights associated with the roles of a father, husband, and trustee. He presents the idea that marriage, viewed as a special contract, is a foundational element in the construction of modern society. Jay emphasizes that the role of a father and husband is equivalent to that of a trustee in a trust relationship, where property is conveyed for the benefit of beneficiaries. The trustee bears the duty, as highlighted in a trust corpus, to manage this property. Jay further discusses cases where court interference has led to complications and injustices, particularly during divorce proceedings. He advocates for a proper understanding and application of the inherent trust that exists within marital and familial relationships.

Key Points:

1. Marriage is seen as a special contract and forms the basis of modern society.
2. The roles of father and husband are intertwined with the concept of trusteeship.
3. Trusts are relationships where property is conveyed for the benefit of beneficiaries, creating duties for trustees.
4. The trust corpus describes the rights, powers, and obligations of a trustee.
5. In cases of interference (like divorces), the court often misinterprets or infringes upon the rights and duties of the “trustee” (father/husband).
6. Jay uses a case of an unfair divorce settlement as an example of court interference.
7. He argues against the unfair seizure of property or rights without proper validation.
8. Trustee relationships already exist inherently; they aren’t always written or formalized.
9. Jay emphasizes the importance of mutual agreement and understanding in familial relationships.
10. He calls for an understanding of the trustee’s responsibilities, emphasizing their role in providing love, comfort, and shelter for the beneficiaries.