Peoples' Counsel presents: Home Page
Contact Us
Ruffstuff Blog
Peoples Counsel Blog
Ruffstuff's Ruffstuff site map
Expose Volume 1
Expose Volume II
Expose Volume III
Expose Volume IV
Expose Volume V
Expose Volume VI
Expose Volume VIII
sunset_mod.png

People's Counsel presents: the "real" world of Law, Justice, and government
A People's Counsel Website
link to http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com

5-03-CV-258R, the final federal case before judicial complaints and cases
12-27-04 Peoples Response to southern Ohio USDC refusals & corruption
Response to defendant Ovington 02-09-05 ORDERS
04-27-05 defendant Rice ORDER Dismissing Demand for Grand Jury & Certification of Questions to The Supreme Court
Kentucky Supreme Court Case 98-SC-916-AO The People vs COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY
1998 Kentucky attempt to prosecute for persisent offender with criminally obtained judgements
Ohio 1991 to present, courts, AGENCIES, and other
Senate Report 93-549 Termination of The National Emergency
DMCA agent and other designations, and Notices regarding Peoples' Counsel web site


                      IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS 
 
                       COUNTY OF GEAUGA, OHIO 
 
MAURICE E. BRAHIER                                 : CASE NO. 91 DC000792 
                  DEFENDANT 
   vs.                                             : JUDGE HANS R. VEIT 
 
GAIL S. BRAHIER   PLAINTIFF                        : AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT 
                                                     OF MOTION TO RELOCATE 
State of Ohio 
             ss 
County of Geauga 
 
     MAURICE E. BRAHIER, being first duly sworn, according to law, deposes 
 
and states that: 
 
     1. He is the defendant in the within action.   
 
      2. He and the plaintiff were married on or about April 26, 1982, in 
 
Richmond, Kentucky. 
 
     3. He and the plaintiff are the natural parents of two (2) minor 
 
children, daughter {name removed by request}, born November 24, 1985, and son[name removed] 
 
Brahier, born December 14, 1987. 
       
      4. Affiant states that it is in the best interest of the children to 
 
be allowed to relocate to the state of thier birth. 
       
      5. Affiant states that he should be allowed to relocate the children 
 
back to the state in which he has lived for fourteen (14) years. 
 
     5. Affiant states that at no time did he say or indicate that a move 
 
to Ohio would be agreeable. To the  contrary. 
 
     6. Affiant states that because of the massive loss in family income 
 
caused by moving to Ohio, he and the children be allowed to resume thier 
 
lives where he can support them at a level to which they are entitled. 
 
                     FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT 
 
                                            _____________________________ 
                                            MAURICE E. BRAHIER 
 
 
 
 
     Sworn to before me and subscribed in my presence this ______ day of  
 ____________________, 1991. 
                         
                                             _____________________________ 
                                            NOTARY PUBLIC 
PREPARED BY: 
MAURICE E. BRAHIER 
 
DEFENDANT 
11654 Claridon-Troy Rd. 
Chardon, Ohio  44024 
(216) 635-0361 

next page please if applicable                page no. 2


Google
Search for
Get a Free Search Engine for Your Web Site
sitelevel.whatuseek image
© Copyright 2005. All rights reserved. Contact: M.Brahier

Free Web Hosting