1

UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT





PLAINTIFF: JAMES FRANK OSTERBUR

2191 county rd 2500 E.

St. Joseph, IL 61873

for the common public citizen

intended as a class (public) action suit



DEFENDANT: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA



STATE OF ILLINOIS

COVENANT MEDICAL CENTER

1400 W. PARK

URBANA, IL 61801

for the medical industry



AND

THE JUDGES OF THE U.S.C.A. OF THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT,

CHICAGO, IL 60604 as listed below.



Richard A. Posner

John L. Coffey

Daniel A. Manion





DIRECT APPEAL IS MADE TO THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT, UNDER OBLIGATORY JURISDICTION OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION



CONSTITUTIONAL MANDATES, in order to form a more perfect union, establish Justice, and insure Domestic tranquility.....



PRIMARY JURISDICTION is found under ARTICLE 3 of the Constitution, as herein described.

SECONDARY JURISDICTION is found under the eleventh Amendment as herein described.



AREA'S OF LAW established

TITLE 28 USC SECTION 1343 (a) 1, 2, 3, 4

and

TITLE 15 COMMERCE AND TRADE LAW

AND those laws statutes, as listed throughout.



APPEAL is made under title 28 USC 2107 as listed within 60 days.



An Appeal brought forth in forma pauperis

A discriminatory cause is declared, against court actions which violate Constitutional law and Statute, Due Process, Equal Protection of the law, common procedure, and Discrimination Practices which have created a system of Judicial Prejudices, Rather than, Constitutional adherence to the LAW. (the constitution and Bill of Rights ARE the supreme law of the land).



Two separate appeals, 94-1943 & 94-1944 United States Court of Appeals, 7th circuit, Chicago IL are established hereby , as evidence, along with the cases and subsequent lower court appeals which now exist as appeal 94-1943 & 94-1944

These legal causes clearly establish a pattern of corruption which has spread, "like a virus" through the court system and has replaced Constitutional law with, "Discretion and/or I don't understand, (an improper response)". The issues and law and democratic process are clearly established: the result established by the court IS, "LAW, IS dependent upon the discretion of a judge." An issue in VIOLATION of every Constitutional principle of this country!

The question raised: what constitutes judicial intervention, to whom is it available, and WHY?

The question initiated: DOES LAW, direct the Court? Is the letter of the law, substantiated by Judicial action? OR does the court through these Judges or others, intervene with personal prejudice, corrupting not only law but Democracy, as subject to their whim. The Constitution says obligatory Jurisdiction exists particularly on issues of Due Process and EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAW, and CONSTITUTIONAL INTERPRETATION (the exact cause of appeals 94-1943 & 94-1944).

These appeals 94-1943 & 94-1944, Establish Judicial Corruption; as ""Discretion overrules LAW, OR when the litigant, is poor, or not formally trained as a lawyer, different rules apply. The evidence is within court papers. These appeals establish Judicial corruption as, "the minimum mandatory judicial intervention required by Constitutional decree, was DENIED, the judge had NO RIGHT). Evidence is within the court papers. These cases/appeals establish and clearly affirm, first Amendment Rights, seeking true Democracy as the basis of this Nation, and shows cause why it must be sought, AND does demand adherence to the fundamental principles of Democracy as clarified and presented in Constitutional documents.

These cases/appeals identify MONOPOLISTIC REALITIES, and the absolute failure of EQUAL PROTECTION of the LAW, and DO demand the law and the intent of the constitution be carried out. These cases/appeals demand Judicial actions in CONFORMANCE to an appeal based within Constitutional Right and Law.

These cases/appeals reflect personal injury and its consequence and establish the injustice.

These cases/appeals identify a corrupt state law section 2-622 of the Illinois code of civil procedure. The court has said in Paul V. Davis (1976) "these interests attain... constitutional status by virtue of {having} been judicially recognized and protected by PAGE 2 state law" or by the Bill of Rights and that procedural due process applies, "whenever the state seeks to remove or significantly alter that protected status", and thereby further establishes the injustice.

Appeal/case defined as 94-1944 demonstrates the failure of the Social Security Act to codify Judicial actions, establishing its failure.



To which the Court replies: "this court (United States Court of Appeals, 7th circuit, Chicago, IL) has determined that any issues which could be raised are insubstantial and the filing of briefs would not be helpful to the Courts consideration of these issues."



The charge is made: The LAW does demand, I as a defendant, be charged with the "crime" prior to, before I can be convicted of it. THE MIRANDA STATEMENT PROVES THIS STATEMENT BEYOND DOUBT, I am entitled to that right.

The initiating cause of appeal 94-1943.

The charge is made: The LAW demands the guidelines of the Social Security Act be adhered to. A primary clause in 94-1944, established within motion hearing 92-S-1561circuit court, sixth district, champaign county.



The charge is made within 94-1944: The LAW, DEMANDS EQUALITY, for each member of Society within the Courtroom, DISCRIMINATION CASES PROVE THIS STATEMENT BEYOND DOUBT! Yet allows a corporate entity to apply literal extortion, IN Board of Regents V. Roth (1972) " a property interest requires, {A LEGITIMATE CLAIM OF ENTITLEMENT} to a benefit, as opposed to an abstract need or unilateral expectation of it." and in Meyer V. Neb (1923) Liberty interest , "those privileges long recognized as essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men". In 94-1944 there was no legal recourse for the citizen. This claim is made within the dictionary meanings: EXTORT, to obtain from a person by force, intimidation, or undue or illegal power. (as identified, a situation wherein the "quality of the service" does not matter). HONEST, free from fraud or deception, legitimate truthful. (as identified, a Reality wherein a complaint may be registered and assessment made by reasonable methods) And WAGE a payment usually of money for labor or services according to contract. (as identified, a reputable method of computing actual VALUE, received, on an individual basis, NOT flat rates for 30 seconds of attention or rejection, as is the current method.



The initiating cause of appeal 94-1944 ADHERES to the simple words, "I" entered the emergency room clearly asking for help, but received drugs I plainly rejected, was evaluated and drugged by a machine, and otherwise was unable to testify on my own behalf as to the problem, I was experiencing (no one was within listening distance, and I was the only patient in ER, at the time). I WAS refused treatment or examination by their doctor and was slandered by the same, and in general treated very poorly in ER, for which I will NOT pay full price!

The court refuses to mediate saying there is NO LAW. The Court is hereby reminded, These are causes involving property before the court, among other issues. PAGE 3 The court is further reminded: "the question of procedural safeguards as needed to insure fair treatment and reliability of result, for the public were lost. The States' promise to supervise the procedures through which laws are enforced upon individuals, IS ABANDONED. The basic function of procedural due process is to afford, "an opportunity to be heard....'at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner", thereby promoting fairness and accuracy in the resolution of disputes. Fuentes V. Shevin (1972). Procedural due process has disappeared from ME twice, therefore it cannot be considered an isolated incident! Appeal 94-1944 demands where is the protection of citizen Rights; as clearly defined and defended and made LAW within the Bill of Rights and guaranteed by the Constitution. Is appeal 94-1943 any different?

The DEMAND is SIMPLE: Constitutionally refute the charges and the demand OR substantiate MY RIGHT as a public citizen to Judicial action and constitutional law. In decisive language ADHERE TO THE LAW OF THIS LAND, and the true concept of justice, and ESTABLISH JUSTICE within/through HONOR and its subsequent actions.

The court of appeals Excuses itself by reference to Mather V. Village of Mundelein 869 F. 2d 356, 357 (7th circuit 1989) per curium:: alleging there is some slight connection between: MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT, to be charged with a crime prior to conviction, appeal 94-1943. MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to be EQUAL, within a court of law to a corporate entity, appeal 94-1944, and the substantiated realities defining a monopoly exists. That procedural safeguards are deficient, and property and life (its reputation and standing) have been deprived and removed from me, a citizen like any other.

The court has refused to adhere to the Social Security Act, an initiating cause, or define it, a right due, but denied.

The court abandons the legitimate claim, section 2-622 of the Ill code of civil procedure is in DIRECT Contention with Constitutional law, state and Federal, DENYING to me DUE PROCESS, as I MUST seek justice against the medical establishment by going through the medical establishment, at their considerable cost and discretion or submit to extortion (the payment of a bill I DO NOT OWE). Section 2-622 excuses the Court, even banishes the court, from medical matters, without a doctors consent; IS THIS DUE PROCESS. The lawyers of this area assure me they will not accept a case of malpractice under $500,000.00, leaving a HUGE GAP between contestable lawsuits and outright wrongs, as did initiate appeal 94-1944. The Courts abandonment of a citizens right to obtain knowledge or verdict as regards the substantiated charge of monopoly and Constitutional failure as provided by the present medical billing system, appeal 94-1944. Payments for things such as medicines and surgical supplies, at the hospitals discretion, rather than as a bid from competitors, (Trauma is NOT free enterprise nor does competition recognize the possibility of choice, the NEED is immediate. The location of emergency care or doctor is irrelevant within an emergency. The word emergency identifies the entire market and it is a singular location and staff, for the patient. The trauma dictates acceptance, without complaint. Trauma demands, if possible it will be done here, NO CHOICE! The business of medicine is afflicted with the public interest. PAGE 4

Most importantly a tyranny exists: that being the FAILURE to address the issue of 1st amendment Constitutional rights found within the words, "REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES". That being according to the "plain meaning rule, provides that sources other than the statute are not to be consulted unless the language of the statute is ambiguous". Caminetti V. United States (1917) "Where the language is plain and admits of no more than one meaning the duty of interpretation does not arise and the rules which are to aid doubtful meanings need no discussion". Issues involving public notice are NOT prohibited by the eleventh amendment, Rather , legal notice of public consequence insuring governmental integrity, "through a Redress of Grievances", constitutes true class action for Democracy: the truth being, all the citizenry are affected by the law or fact or rights, and their entitlements to these things, their recognition, honest evidence, and majority vote to enforce the relief sought IS, [Democracy in action, and Justice through and within legal recognition of Constitutional law].

Substantiated by appeals 94-1943 & 94-1944 and their subsequent briefs (which the court failed to considered) Democracy or Civil power IS the foundation principle of this government and this society. The court has NO RIGHT, to exercise any so-called, Discretionary interpretation in matters of social/legal /moral issues, THAT ARE SO FUNDAMENTAL, to this particular government, "and its pledge of Democracy , its honorable Constitutional doctrines, and its decree to the people, that they are endowed with just powers as, WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES...." IN ANY MANNER EXCEPT, how may this foundation issue, be presented Properly to ALL the people, for their vote! The people DESERVE, THE AUTHORITY which this Constitution allows, intends and demands!

This foundation issue is aligned directly with section 15 of the bill of rights, "That no free government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people, but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue and by frequent recurrence to fundamental principles."

The charge of Constitutional piracy is leveled at the judges who would describe these matters as equivalent to a simple case of: "a holiday display on the lawn in front of the village hall". These issues, as presented herein, were NOT HIDDEN!

The charge of FRAUD is leveled at the judges who believe: "judicial discretion supersedes the LAW and Constitutional adherence, which does establish the foundation of this Democracy, as subject to their prejudice or whim.

I can and have substantiated each and every issue raised throughout these cases/appeals within constitutional documents and do now establish these charges in the words of the Declaration of Independence: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal (a judge is NOT greater than any citizen) that all men are created equal (the only difference between a judge and a citizen is the level of obedience to the law, the judge MUST DO BETTER)); inalienable rights (irregardless of prejudice, the law and its crucial distinction of life, liberty and freedom MUST BE FAIR/EQUAL for /to each citizen). These charges are further established by the words "mock trial", (where are the laws, or the words, which prove their assertions; they have NONE).

The Declaration of Independence, establishes the words; "he has refused his PAGE 5 assent to laws the most wholesome and necessary for the public good", and summarizes the anguish of the people within its words, "In every stage of these oppressions, we have petitioned for REDRESS, in the most humble terms; our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be [a judge] of a free people."

My UNDENIABLE REQUEST for a Redress of Grievances according to the first amendment and its intent, for/as a foundation for all matters, as were fought for/died for and defined by the Bill of Rights adopted June 12, 1776, to be the peoples guarantee, that the CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED, SHALL RULE! Substantiates the charge of Constitutional Piracy!

Distinctive to the SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, THIS APPEAL LEGITIMATELY DEFINED WITHIN THE THIRD ARTICLE OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, section 1 those words being: "The judges, both of the Supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behavior......"

Section 2.1 The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law an equity arising under this constitution.

Section 3.1 Treason against the United States



The issue of Treason arises within the established cases as consummated by this appeal, and the judges which assented to the mandates of the court..........and does direct the court to the intent vested within the judicial system and the Constitutional realities culminating as: WE the PEOPLE of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this constitution for the United States of America.

The established Reality or intent or spirit of the constitution and its Bill of rights, Distinctly limit, AUTHORITY OF A FREE PEOPLE, to Constitutional Restrictions; But more importantly each and EVERY Department of Government and its officials/representatives IS established and CONTROLLED by these limits. The failure to adhere publicly and privately IS A VIOLENCE and a deprivation to the people and is DANGEROUS, to our MOST BASIC RIGHTS!

The case of Mc Culloch V. Maryland (1819) clarifies that it is congress, with the power NOT the judiciary. The Judiciary IS the GUARANTOR of Constitutional Rights and NO MORE.

So identified, the "discretion of the Court" as used, establishes abuse of power and of the citizenry

Establishes Bias against the people and for their specific Judicial brotherhood.

Established prejudice against the Bill of Rights , as written, adopted 6/12/1776, the document which alone, assembled the people to fight and die for freedom , liberty, and honor as identified therein. While the Declaration of Independence speaks definitively about the limits and the need and the right and the Respect, for what these things did cost, and were to correct.

The lower courts have FAILED and those responsible for that failure MUST, be PAGE 6 disciplined or dismissed according to their station and role.

It is the Court which has stated: IGNORANCE OF THE LAW IS NO EXCUSE, and it therefore returns to them as their judge, before the people.

From a dictionary, LAW is a term describing "a rule prescribed by authority". In a Democracy LAW is a term describing the peoples' decision and the obligations of their officials to act. LAW demands, and therefore DENIES discretion of the court exists, beyond differences of religious preference.

The issue represented: SHOW ME, the "frivolous nature" of these appeals and their prior cases/appeals, and IDENTIFY the courts discretion as LEGAL PROCEDURE in the matters of Constitutional right and 1st Amendment law".

The fifth Amendment proclaims My Right, to due process of law, the initiating case, of appeal 94-1943 I was convicted without a trial, of fraud, a criminal offense. the initiating case of appeal 94-1944, established there is NO public law, which leads directly to the charge of extortion, over matters of private property (equal rights, when subjected to medical insufficiency).

The fourteenth Amendment demands Equal protection, as do I. The state of Illinois enforces the unconstitutional IL code of civil procedure section 2-622. The court denies to me the privileges or immunities of the Social Security Act, without comment. The state has extracted private property, upon a charge that was never made, (the charge of fraud, issued within the "order of the court", in a simple warranty case over a car, the plaintiff never accused me). The state sanctions prejudice against the citizen and for the Corporate entity by refusal to mitigate or adjucate properly, in a clear matter of commerce; executed/ authorized under matters of medical trauma/ legal duress; which failed any reasonable estimation of competency or professionalism. The state court by its "lack of law" denies jurisdiction Article 3 section 2.1 "the judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity. SHOW ME the LAW, and its constitutional basis, regarding jurisdiction that denies me.

The first Amendment DEMANDS NO LAW CAN EXIST in any form prohibiting or abridging the freedom or the right of the people peaceable to petition the government for a "Redress for Grievances", IF, I have caused for review, the words "peaceably to assemble" Article 9 of the Constitution qualifies this application of consent by the people, to the first amendment words, "or abridging the freedom of the press". IF CORRUPTION or the public trust, is violated, the public MUST BE informed ACCURATELY, and with AUTHORITY. THIS IS DEMOCRACY OF THE PEOPLE IN ACTION. SHOW ME, a more peaceful method for challenging corruption in any form than the court, OR show me that Due Process or Equal Protection are invalid matters.

The seventh Amendment Declares the Right of trial shall be preserved and I DO state, FAR GREATER liberties and properties are at stake than the value identified. Prove to ME this amendment is reversed, abolished, or invalid, for this case, and this cause.

The fourth Amendment affirms that the people shall be secure, court documents SHOW this amendment has been trampled upon by failure of the court to uphold Constitutional rights, and minimum standards of ethical behavior.

The sixth Amendment applies directly to appeal 94-1943, and its prior cases/appeals, demanding, I, have the right to be informed in any action. I, have PAGE 7 shown, the court destroyed this right and produced tyranny in its place. Show my error.

The thirteenth Amendment DEMANDS, involuntary servitude shall NOT exist, I, have shown , this Amendment has been trampled upon; the courts failure to intervene defines involuntary servitude (extortion) exists through medical billing realities. Appeal 94-1944 establishes NO LEGAL RECOURSE exists for trauma patients and the resultant billing (particularly for the poor), IRREGARDLESS of treatment, received. Medical trauma is the result of an invasion, NOT a personal choice and establishes the victim, as a HOSTAGE, to medicine and its resultant realities. The minimal guaranteed, "blessings of liberty", can only be described as; The subjection of man/woman by insurrections within, or destruction of the body by traumatic means, shall be limited to a FAIR AND EQUAL appraisal of financial hardship (a percentage of income, apportioned to wealth), as WE ALL DO rely upon a vast network of people and resources, both providing the basis and foundation for helping anyone/ everyone. WE DO WANT MEDICAL ASSISTANCE AVAILABLE. We as a people do, have an inalienable and infeasible right, to share in the means which represent the right to acquire and benefit from our heritage.

We, as a people Do have the obligation to accept our fair share of this countries distinct medical effort to "Promote the general welfare". But with restrictions that we, as a people, shall decide. SHOW MY ERROR!

The tenth Amendment DECLARES the powers NOT delegated are reserved to the people. The REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES, according to the first amendment, agrees and establishes the civil power exists to IDENTIFY AND ARTICULATE AND VOTE UPON, corruption of Government issues and others and their REMEDY! There is NO OTHER OPTION than to establish corruption as a violation of constitutional limits, therefore the court has RESPONSIBILITY AND DUTY AND JURISDICTION over these definitions and must be subject to the peoples needs and privileges and civil power. SHOW MY ERROR, or show us all that the power of the peoples vote, over corruption and other foundation principles, has no value, according to the Constitution.



I will show you "Title 42 USCA section 1983, as alleged, in Treatise on constitutional law, substance and procedure KF 4550. R63 2.11 The very purpose of 1983, was to interpose the federal courts between the states and the people, as guardians of the peoples federal rights- to protect the people from unconstitutional action under color of state law, "whether that action be executive legislative, or judicial" 407 US at 242, 92 S.CT at 216. Also alleged in the same text: The supreme court in view of the EX Parte Young 209 US 123, 28 S. CT 441 exception allowed federal court to hear suits against state officials if the suit seeks to force them to conform their conduct to federal law. Appeal 94-1943 clearly sought DUE PROCESS. appeal 94-1944 clearly sought EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS (JUSTICE). Each seeks the Declaration of rights described within the constitution and the bill of rights, FOR ALL PEOPLE, as the basis and foundation of government! Show me the evidence that I am exempt, or accept the duty. FAILURE to establish this question produces the call for impeachment! I will NOT accept the frivolous excuses of the past, honor your position! ESTABLISH THIS CAUSE, Not a retrial of two individual cases RATHER THE FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO, A REDRESS OF PAGE 8 GRIEVANCES. The proper Judicial regard for INALIENABLE RIGHTS , and the fundamental limits and principles and strict subordination of the Judiciary, to the constitution, WITH PENALTIES. THE DETERMINATION OF LAW involved within the charge "medical monopoly", as has been brought through the lower courts to your door.



Chapter 21 of the Civil Rights Code agrees under title 42 section 1981

it suggests equal rights under the law, NOT discrimination against the poor and prejudice against the non-lawyer.

section 1985 Depriving a person of rights and privileges. (this is a case of equal protection and immunity from prejudice)

section 1986 suggest a judge with the knowledge and power to prevent courtroom abuse SHALL BE LIABLE

section 2000e-6 Demands action by the attorney general for discrimination in employment (A FAR LESSER CRIME THAN COURTROOM ABUSE)



TITLE 15 of COMMERCE AND TRADE LAW

Section 1. "Trusts in restraint of trade are illegal". The definition of trust (dictionary) "a combination of firms or corporations formed by legal agreement esp. one that reduces or threatens to reduce competition". The medical industry withholds information necessary to the public, for adequate risk assessment of doctors, hospitals and procedures: Clearly this practice offends the public and destroys competition as no proper evaluation can be made, a clear danger to the people. Medicine is a service industry, the people have a right to inform, complain of a bad job, or praise a good job; there is no competition without this information the people are at RISK of life and limb, without it. The question is, whose side is government on?

This statement agrees with the per se rule: "having a pernicious effect on competition and lacking any redeeming value."

Title 15, section 2 Monopolizing trade is a felony. The definition of monopoly: "exclusive possession or control". The medical profession controls directly or indirectly, the rate of acceptance in hospitals, colleges, and has complete control over interns, which CLEARLY establishes the possibility of supply/demand bringing the price of medical services down, as an IMPOSSIBILITY! They control the numbers of doctors, which controls the competition, which allows out of control pricing, A MONOPOLY, over the people.

The rule of reason: "only unreasonable restraints of trade should be illegal" AGREES!

Title 15 section 4 Jurisdiction of the courts, a duty of the U.S. attorney. Issues of commerce, the buying and selling of medical services DO NOT fall within "ordinary course of business realities".

The efficiency model, breaks down entirely: "the natural tendency of a firm......is to be efficient" FAILS, completely due to the public concept that higher prices equate to higher quality; the public is HIDDEN from the truth as previously described, Due to illegal restraint of the press !

Medicine is about life, death, a whole body and more, the medical emergency PAGE 9 precludes and prevents all hope of a FAIR situation (one in which either party may leave without harm, does not exist). This Reality alone establishes a monopoly over the Individual. There is NO opportunity to select (shop around) the emergency demands immediate attention, NOT a business decision; there is NO REAL information available to enable a true decision, there are high costs and large investments of time required to interview medical professionals precluding the common citizen from anything but take whomever you get. Sickness and emergency occur at all hours and different locations, and there is a "doctor fraternity, secret society ", which suggest don't turn in me, and I won't turn in you.

Title 15 section 27 says the court MUST accept whatever qualifies without objection under this act, as legitimate cause to investigate and determine according to law.



Justifiable alternatives to these practices have been suggested within the lower court papers.



JUSTICE, equates everyone as an EQUAL, the function of the court is to distinguish merit by obtaining FACT, Justice fails the critical test when rule or a diploma (lawyer), are favored over the actual witness (participant); EQUALITY MEANS, judged on merit, NOT appearance (words or otherwise).



The DISCRIMINATION is clear, beyond any doubt , these court actions were NEVER about justice or the lack of it, from the court. Review of the documents WILL SHOW, no room for doubt.



JUSTICE IS HONORABLE, only when it is TRUE. Justice conceived by the punctuation mark, as right or wrong, IS TYRANNY!



Listing of the court cases/appeals for 94-1943



Trial and motions 92-S-2991 COLE V. OSTERBUR 6th judicial circuit, champaign county IL 61801 JUDGMENT FRAUD



GEN 4-93-0441 Cole V. Osterbur in the Appellate Court of IL, fourth district

JUDGMENT DISMISSED, failure to comply with supreme court rules concerning form and content.



STATE SUPREME COURT Cole V. Osterbur 76128

JUDGMENT DENIED



FEDERAL COURT 94-2001 OSTERBUR V. STATE OF ILLINOIS U.S. District Court, central district of, Danville, IL.

JUDGMENT FRIVOLOUS





Listing of court cases/appeals for 94-1944



92-S-1561 OSTERBUR V. COVENANT MEDICAL CENTER 6th judicial circuit champaign county IL 61801

JUDGMENT DISMISSED



92-C-1222 OSTERBUR V. COVENANT MEDICAL CENTER 6th judicial circuit champaign county IL

JUDGMENT LACK OF LAW



GEN 4-93-0847 OSTERBUR V. COVENANT MEDICAL CENTER in the Appellate Court of IL fourth district

JUDGMENT FAILURE TO FILE COHERENT BRIEF



#7645 SUPREME COURT OF IL OSTERBUR V. COVENANT MEDICAL CENTER

JUDGMENT DENIED



FEDERAL COURT 94-2060 OSTERBUR V. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al Defendants in the central district of Illinois, Danville IL

JUDGMENT FRIVOLOUS























































UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT



I, JAMES FRANK OSTERBUR, do hereby certify, a true and correct copy of the direct appeal to the supreme court Osterbur V. United States of America et al Defendants, as been delivered postage prepaid, first class, to the U. S. mail service, or hand delivered by me. on this date______________________



to the following locations

U.S. ATTORNEY 14 towne centre 2. E. Main st, Danville IL 61832



the GOVERNOR OF ILLINOIS JIM EDGAR, SPRINGFIELD IL



THE ATTORNEY GENERALS OFFICE, Champaign IL



Thomas, Mamer, & Haughey fifth floor, 30 Main st. Champaign IL 61820

for COVENANT MEDICAL CENTER, URBANA IL



and one mailing containing 3 packets (one for each judge ) to

U.S.C.A. 7TH CIRCUIT 219 S. DEARBORN CHICAGO IL 60604



ALL INFORMATION is hereby requested regarding supeona's etc.

concerning these matters



_________________________________________________





































UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT



A declaration of financial position, for James Frank Osterbur, October 11, 1994



cash on hand and in bank (liquid assets approx $ 2300.00)

includes a gift received from Frank and Lucille Osterbur of ($1000.00)in the 94 year.

earned income in 1993 $4730.65

taxed income in 1993 $2380.65

tax still owed for 1993 $150.00

social security tax paid 1993 $668.42

included in income is a gift from Frank and Lucille Osterbur from 1993, in the amount of $2000.00

currently working for room and board



possessions include



1 1985 S-10 pickup roughly $2500.00

1 25 year old bicycle

1 office desk and chair purchased 20 yr ago for $300.00

1 1960's vintage boat, rebuilt and retitled as 1994 (homemade conversion) roughly $2000.00

less than $500.00 (new price) hand tools and parts

1 homemade timbersaw, total monetary investment roughly $500.00

1 electric hydraulic scaffolding, homemade, total monetary investment roughly $500.00

1 gas forklift, 1950's machine remade into forklift, total monetary investment $300.00

1 homemade go-cart frame, total monetary investment roughly $40.00



each of these items represent serious liability risk, if put for sale, also my dad owns a part interest in the timbersaw, forklift, and scaffolding.





















UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT



RE; OSTERBUR V. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al DEFENDANTS



CLERK OF THE COURT: William K. Suter



The papers sent to the supreme court, SIMPLY AND CLEARLY , "DECLARING A DIRECT APPEAL, UNDER OBLIGATORY JURISDICTION", in NO WAY suggest a writ of certiorari!



" The papers are not a petition for review.

This legal public action IS A DEMAND, to investigate corrupt practice and policy, as has been found within the judicial system and which has contaminated the medical MONOPOLY over the public (a true matter of commerce).

The trials/appeals listed DO NOT seek review of specific confrontation, aside from necessary examination to ascertain these , as "the evidence which convicts"!

The appeal is DISTINCTLY DEFENDED, page 6, "This appeal legitimately defined within the third article of the United States Constitution."

This appeal is DISTINCTLY DEFINED, page 8-9, "Establish,

A legal Redress of Grievances, according to the first Amendment

Proper judicial regard for Inalienable Rights......WITH PENALTIES

THE COMMERCE, MONOPOLY, AND DISCRIMINATION charges, as identified regarding the medical industry.

Each of the defendants listed has earned the RIGHT.

The United States of America IS the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, and its PEOPLE.

The integrity of the Officials hired to do the work IS subject to a legal determination, when the sovereignty and righteousness of the United States of America is being corrupted.

The State of Illinois IS the supervisor of its courts, BEING RESPONSIBLE, for their actions, and its consequences.



Covenant Medical Center, Urbana IL, initiated and identified the problem WAS given every opportunity to reconsider and refused. It is only justice, that they be allowed, to represent the medical industry, as they are fully acquainted with every detail.



The Judges of the U.S.C.A. as listed, were given the IMPORTANT JOB, and were sworn to uphold, the integrity of the court as DEFINED by the U.S. Constitution and its Bill of Rights and Authority of its PEOPLE.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS





RE; UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT

OSTERBUR

V.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

et al

DEFENDANTS





CLERK OF THE COURT, Thomas F. Strubbe



The documents returned RE; 94-1943 ARE indeed a DIRECT APPEAL to the U.S. Supreme Court, NOT a writ of Certiorari.

The Judges whose names appear upon each packet ARE DEFENDANT, WITHIN that legal action, and these returned packets are their notice (look at the list on the appeal).



Their names appear because they are the final defense within a legitimate and REASONABLE appeal and they DID FAIL completely, to do their job.

This direct appeal then directs the U. S. Government to examine the practices and polices and adhere to the third article of the U. S. Constitution, section 1 "The judges of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their offices during GOOD BEHAVIOR......".

Disciplinary action or dismissal is therefore the call, page 7, "show me, the frivolous nature of these appeals and identify, the courts discretion, as LEGAL procedure, ACCORDING TO THE CONSTITUTION".

I, will again issue the statement: "Fraud is a criminal term, without notice or opportunity to defend, I was forced to turn over private property." "Medical extortion, exists when a trauma patient IS NOT EQUAL, to a Corporate entity, within the Judicial system.

















UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT



TO: Clerk of the Court, William K. Suter



RE: OSTERBUR V. UNITED STATES et. al. DEFENDANTS



REFERENCE TO LETTER OCT 13, 1994

This date 10/27/94



The Definition of Direct Appeal from section 1253, title 28 "any party may appeal to the supreme court......." The appeal in question DISTINCTLY falls within the Anti-Trust laws of title 15 commerce and Trade



The Constitutionality of a state law, which directly caused me injury, and is a violation of legal rights, and COULD do so again, and DOES injure any other trauma patient, in the same manner.



The Reality of denial of due process and equal protection : as was illegally witheld from me throughout these court actions.



The issue of Mandamus to the inferior court OR acceptance of jurisdiction by the supreme court IS DUE. The decision by the Appellate Court to fundamentally DENY BY BLATANT PREJUDICE, read the appeal, ESTABLISHES COLOR OF LAW and issues their (Judges) acceptance and inclusion within this suit.



From title 28 section 2101 supreme court (b) appealed from a decision of a "federal appellate court", in any civil action, suit or proceeding.

The appellate court could not be more clear in its decision , and is final, see appeal page 3.



The authorization of LAW is Constitutional in origin and fact, as related to this appeal, THE EVIDENCE IS IRREFUTABLE.

READ THE APPEAL



UNDERSTAND; the dictionary meaning of Constitution QUOTE: ".... A charter of the government deriving its whole authority from the governed. the written instrument agreed upon by the people of the union (e.g. Constitution) or of a particular state, as the absolute RULE OF ACTION and decision for all departments (i.e. branches) and officers of the government in respect to all points covered by it, which must control...."



This legal public action DEMANDS the first amendment right: ".....for a redress of grievances...." to PROTECT THIS DEMOCRACY FROM CORRUPTION THROUGH DEMOCRATIC LEGAL ACTIONS.

THE RIGHT, THE DUTY AND THE AUTHORITY TO FIGHT CORRUPTION, IS Due Process And Equal Protection and therefrom produces Jurisdiction of the people over MISUSE OF POWER , AND OBLIGATES THE COURT, to establish and protect this fundamental first amendment RIGHT AND LAW.



The LAW OF THE LAND DEMANDS a hearing and establishes my standing to bring suit ARTICULATED AS: The declaration of independence"........That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, IT IS THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE, to alter or to abolish it......laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness......"



CORRUPTION, MUST BE FOUGHT, Corruption exists within the court, the people MUST...........SECURE, the Blessings of LIBERTY, to ourselves and our posterity........"



ACCEPT THIS: The courtroom is NOT a Monarchy. The Judge is NOT a ruler. The COURT IS where PEOPLE ESTABLISH RIGHT.





THE DEFINITION OF OBLIGATORY JURISDICTION; is identified within Judicial canon 3 : Constitutional OBLIGATIONS Judicial Canon 22: Review and Judicial Canon 34: A summary of Judicial Obligation.



These Canons fall DISTINCTLY within a proper understanding of Judicial Canon 2: The public interest "Courts exist to promote JUSTICE, and thus serve the public interest...........for the litigants."



I HAVE NOW written to you, specifically, William K. Suter twice, regarding your deliberate and willful misrepresentation of the facts submitted within this DIRECT APPEAL. Your intentional disregard for the Constitutional Right and Relief, which the LAW allows to each citizen, presents a barrier, fundamentally defined as " Obstruction of Justice". You are hereby instructed to successfully administer the duties of the Clerk. ACCEPT THE APPEAL, as written, OR identify problems which arise in connection with a direct Constitutional Appeal` to the supreme court , arising under the Obligation of DUTY, to SUPPORT, OBSERVE, AND APPLY, the fundamental limitations and guarantees of the Constitution of the United States.

Be it noted neither a copy of the Rules or sample petition has been sent to me either time and failure to correct your attitude or sloppiness is inexcusable.

The statement is further made and clarified YOU are NOT the judge, your JOB IS to fulfill the purpose of the LAW, to grant EACH CITIZEN, the OPPORTUNITY, to be heard in a meaningful way and at a meaningful time.

Rule 13, requiring a full financial declaration was met and enclosed with my initial filing and DOES contain the seal of your office. Suggestions that this Rule, the ONLY rule you describe, was not followed, is PURE CONJECTURE.

DO, establish MY RIGHT, or efforts will be made seeking REVIEW of your work, and your JOB.

THE RULES OF PROCEDURE, title 28 section 2072 (b) "such rules shall not abridge, enlarge, or modify any substantive right....."



























































UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT



I, JAMES FRANK OSTERBUR, do hereby certify, a true and correct copy of (the letter to the clerk, supreme court, dated 10/27/94) REGARDING the direct appeal to the supreme court Osterbur V. United States of America et al Defendants, as been delivered postage prepaid, first class, to the U. S. mail service, or hand delivered by me. on this date______________________



to the following locations

U.S. ATTORNEY 14 towne centre 2. E. Main st, Danville IL 61832



the GOVERNOR OF ILLINOIS JIM EDGAR, SPRINGFIELD IL



THE ATTORNEY GENERALS OFFICE, Champaign IL



Thomas, Mamer, & Haughey fifth floor, 30 Main st. Champaign IL 61820

for COVENANT MEDICAL CENTER, URBANA IL



and one mailing containing 3 packets (one for each judge ) to

U.S.C.A. 7TH CIRCUIT 219 S. DEARBORN CHICAGO IL 60604



ALL INFORMATION is hereby requested regarding supeona's etc.

concerning these matters



________________________________________________

































TO THE PEOPLE



JUSTICE REQUIRES INVOLVEMENT, DO YOU DESIRE JUSTICE?





This is a fundamental exercise in DEMOCRACY

INTENT upon a fundamental change in DEMOCRATIC AUTHORITY, FOR THE PEOPLE!





Upon being confronted directly , the Realities I, have found, greatly exceeded the amount of corruption expected within the Judicial system of the United States of America.



The Revelant Issue: HOW TO PERMANENTLY ESTABLISH JUSTICE?



The ONLY answer: To allow the people a JUDICIAL OPPORTUNITY, to, "throw the bum out", and "to change the LAW, within constitutional limits, that shows itself to be corrupt or lacking, by VOTE upon the LAW itself." One man , One woman ONE VOTE! Per each issue that the people select, identify, and articulate through the media, for themselves.



This case OSTERBUR V. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al DEFENDANTS (see enclosed court papers).

Defines the problems and there are many, and seeks to establish, A REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES, according to the first Amendment, of the Constitution of the United States, as written within the words of the Declaration of Independence: OUR HERITAGE!

I, personally believe the Court DOES recognize the issues involved, But is TOO CORRUPT, to remain within constitutional LAW!

Review of the Case will show, fundamental rights and guarantees of the Constitution WERE DENIED! As well as, the Court has NO LEGAL DEFENSE, for the poverty of their actions.

At this time the Clerk of the Supreme Court, having been fully forewarned, and failing to support his erroneous conclusions or identify mine, stands accused by me, of obstruction of Justice, and Grand Theft, of Constitutional Judicial rights, of a citizen, like any other. The blockade, used by William K. Suter, warrants the charge; HE has erected and misused his position to stand as Judge and Jury, over this case (his position is unsupported), A POSITION OF AUTHORITY HE DOES NOT HOLD!



What can you do? Conversation IS , a powerful tool, USE IT!