Latest posts
CHRISTOPHER HAUSER STUDY GROUP
26 Sept, 02:21
I’ve let too many people have access to me, my knowledge, my work, my time, my resources and my energy for FREE.And what I’ve learned is once some people get everything they need from you, they disappear. No reciprocity. No support. No showing up for you the way you showed up for them.I can’t do that anymore.Me and my family have given enough. And don’t get me wrong, I’ve met some wonderful people along the way and I’m grateful for the genuine ones. But I have a big heart, and I also know when that heart, my time and my generosity are not being appreciated.I’ve given over $100K helping people, pouring into people, creating opportunities and trying to see other people win… just to turn around and be treated like what I did meant nothing.So this next chapter is different.It’s BUSINESS with everybody.I want to deal with people who do good business. People who understand reciprocity. People who will show up for me the same way I’ve shown up for them and would continue showing up for them.The person you get from me today is a reflection of the experiences I’ve had with people — good or bad. I learned from all of it.I’m not bitter. I’m just no longer overextending myself where the energy isn’t returned.I’ve given enough in that manner.This chapter is about ME, my family, my businesses, my peace, my growth and the people who genuinely value what I bring to the table.New chapter. New boundaries. Same heart just wiser with who gets access to it.CHRISTOPHER HAUSER STUDY GROUP
26 Sept, 02:20
🔥 WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU ACTUALLY TENDER PERFORMANCE?Bills of Exchange is very well knownBut do you understand Tender of Performance?Tender is not just sending somebody a document. It is a present offer by someone who is ready, willing, and able to perform an existing obligation according to its lawful terms.And here's where it gets interesting…Tender is NOT the same thing as payment.If you properly tender what is actually due and the other party refuses it, that refusal can have legal consequences depending on the contract and governing law.It may affect:Interest • Default Remedies • Secondary Liability • Right to Cure • Damages • Responsibility for Continued NonperformanceAnd YES — we're going to break down how Tender of Performance connects with Bills of Exchange.We're going to ask:What exactly is owed? Who is entitled to receive performance? What form of performance is authorized? Can a Bill of Exchange operate as tender in that transaction? How do you properly present it? What happens if it's refused? What evidence should you preserve? What does the law ACTUALLY say the refusal does?Because there's a major difference between saying:“I tendered payment.”and being able to PROVE you made a legally sufficient tender.CHRISTOPHER HAUSER STUDY GROUP
26 Sept, 02:17
For the purpose of this section, any transaction by a member bank with any person shall be deemed to be a transaction with an affiliate to the extent that the proceeds of the transaction are used for the benefit of, or transferred to, that affiliate. …[ ]..”the term "covered transaction" means with respect to an affiliate of a member bank-- a loan or extension of credit to the affiliate, including a purchase of assets subject to an agreement to “repurchase”; a purchase of or an investment in securities issued by the affiliate; a purchase of assets from the affiliate, except such purchase of “real and personal property” as may be specifically exempted by the Board by order or regulation; (c) Collateral For Certain Transactions With Affiliates. …[ ]..a segregated, earmarked deposit account with the member bank;CHRISTOPHER HAUSER STUDY GROUP
26 Sept, 02:17
PUBLIC LAW 93-533-DEC. 22, 1974SHORT TITLE 12. This Act may be cited as the "Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act of 1974". (12 U.S.C. 2601) …[ ]..SEC. 2. (a) The Congress finds that significant reforms in the real estate settlement process are needed to ensure that “consumers” throughout the Nation are provided with greater and more timely information on the nature and costs of the settlement process.. …[ ]..(iv) is made in whole or in part by any "creditor", as defined in section 103(f) of the Consumer Credit Protection Act (15 U.S.C. 1602(f)) <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< ( General discussion” Well folks, we have at least 3 terms used, and now we need the definitions, huh?15 U.S. Code § 1681a - Definitions; rules of construction#1.(t)Financial Institution.— The term “financial institution” means a State or National bank, a State or Federal savings and loan association, a mutual savings bank, a State or Federal credit union, or any other person that, directly or indirectly, holds a transaction account (as defined in section 461(b) of title 12) belonging to a “consumer”Definition: A branch of a foreign bank is a type of “financial institution” that operates as a direct legal extension of its parent bank overseas, rather than as a separate, locally incorporated subsidiary. They primarily focus on wholesale banking, international trade finance, foreign exchange, and servicing corporate clients or high-net-worth individuals from their home country.Congress stated in Public Law 89-485, sec 3,..[ ]. ‘National banks are not banks, they cannot establish ‘transaction accounts subject to withdrawals, nor conduct business within the United States.#2. section 461(b) of title 12), transaction account, is defined as an ‘International Banking Facility” outside the united states, with no permissible investment or loans, in the united states, and no American citizen is permitted to have an account at a IBF.#3. Supplement I to 12 C.F.R.Part 205—Official Staff Interpretations Section 205.2—Definitions2(b) Account: Consumer asset account. The term consumer asset account includes:…[ ]..A retail repurchase agreement (repo), which is a "loan made” to a”financial institution” by a “consumer” that is collateralized by government or government-insured securities. Incidentally.Bank of New York Mellon, listed as a trustee,for numerous foreclosures” on their own web site, states they’re restricted to retail repurchase agreement (repo), with no connection to residential real property!#4. Subpart E—Special Rules for Certain Home Mortgage Transactions § 1026.31 General rules.https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-12/chapter-X/part-1026/subpart-E…[ ]..”Form of disclosures. The creditor shall make the disclosures required by this subpart clearly and conspicuously in writing, in a form that the consumer may keep.…[ ]..”An area is “underserved” during a calendar year if, according to Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data for the preceding calendar year, it is a county in which no more than two creditors extended covered transactions, as defined in § 1026.43(b)(1), secured by first liens on properties in the county five or more times...[ ]..Definitions. For purposes of this section: (1) “Covered person” means a “creditor” with respect to a “covered transaction" or a person that provides “settlement services,” as defined in 12 U.S.C. 2602(3) and implementing regulations, in connection with a covered transaction. (2) “Covered transaction” means an extension of consumer credit that is or will be secured by the consumer's principal dwelling, as defined in § 1026.2(a)(19). #5. Covered Transaction definition:CHRISTOPHER HAUSER STUDY GROUP 🏦 pinned «Interested in a grant? Upfront fees apply. Disbursement takes 48 hours. Grant can be filed Twice in a year Also available: assistance with clearing inheritance bonds. Cash delivery and tracking available Direct contact ::: T.me/RealChristopherhauser»
26 Sept, 02:16
CHRISTOPHER HAUSER STUDY GROUP
25 Sept, 17:52
Interested in a grant? Upfront fees apply. Disbursement takes 48 hours.Grant can be filed Twice in a yearAlso available: assistance with clearing inheritance bonds.Cash delivery and tracking availableDirect contact ::: T.me/RealChristopherhauserTelegramCHRISTOPHER HAUSERChristopherAHauser@protonmail.comCHRISTOPHER HAUSER STUDY GROUP
25 Sept, 00:44
Learn how to become a Private BankerCHRISTOPHER HAUSER STUDY GROUP
24 Sept, 16:03
Parma contact meCHRISTOPHER HAUSER STUDY GROUP
22 Sept, 17:08
HelloCHRISTOPHER HAUSER STUDY GROUP
21 Sept, 02:08
T.me/RealChristopherhauserTelegramCHRISTOPHER HAUSERChristopherAHauser@protonmail.comCHRISTOPHER HAUSER STUDY GROUP
20 Sept, 19:55
CHRISTOPHER HAUSER STUDY GROUP
20 Sept, 19:54
CHRISTOPHER HAUSER STUDY GROUP
20 Sept, 19:54
CHRISTOPHER HAUSER STUDY GROUP
20 Sept, 19:54
CHRISTOPHER HAUSER STUDY GROUP
20 Sept, 19:53
Please double check my work never ever use these cases I post without verifying them for yourself.Luther v. Borden, 48 U.S. 1 (1849) Citation Verification: Correctly cited as 48 U.S. 1.Summary: This case arose from the Dorr Rebellion in Rhode Island, addressing whether a state’s government was "republican" under the Guarantee Clause. The Court held that such questions are political, not judicial, and that sovereignty resides with the people, who can alter their government. The document uses this to argue that the people hold ultimate authority over government.Status: Not overturned. The case’s core holding on the political question doctrine remains intact, though its application has been refined in cases like Baker v. Carr (1962).Relevance to Document: Reinforces the claim that the respondent, as one of "We the People," holds sovereign authority superior to government entities.CHRISTOPHER HAUSER STUDY GROUP
20 Sept, 19:53
I am working on building a Memorandum at the moment, just taking the time to share what I believe to be critical decisions with all of you for your benefit and use.State v. Doheny, 60 Me. 504 (1872) Citation Verification: Correctly cited as 60 Maine 504.Summary: A Maine state case holding that "due process of law" and "law of the land" refer to the common law as it existed when the U.S. Constitution was adopted. The document uses this to argue that the court must adhere to common law principles, not statutory or administrative law.Status: Not overturned. As a state court decision, it has limited precedential value outside Maine but remains good law within its jurisdiction for interpreting due process under the Maine Constitution.Relevance to Document: Bolsters the argument that the court’s jurisdiction must align with common law due process, not administrative or statutoryCHRISTOPHER HAUSER STUDY GROUP
20 Sept, 19:53
Due process of law;Tayler v. Porter, 4 Hill 140 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1843) Citation Verification: Correctly cited as 4 Hill 140 (New York Supreme Court, 1843). The document also references 4 Hill 773, which appears to be a typographical error or misinterpretation.Note: The correct case is Taylor v. Porter, 4 Hill 140, not "Tayler." The document’s reference to 4 Hill 773 is incorrect, as no such case exists in that volume.Summary: The New York Supreme Court held that a state statute allowing summary eviction without a jury trial violated due process under the state constitution’s "law of the land" clause, which mirrors common law principles from Magna Carta. The document uses this to argue that "law of the land" means common law due process.Status: Not overturned. As a state court decision, it remains persuasive authority in New York and is consistent with federal due processCHRISTOPHER HAUSER STUDY GROUP
20 Sept, 19:53
Common law and due process of lawState v. Simmons, 2 Spears 761 (S.C. 1844) Citation Verification: Correctly cited as 2 Spears 761 (South Carolina, 1844). The document misspells "Simmon" as the case name; the correct name is Simmons.Summary: The South Carolina court held that "law of the land" refers to the common law, emphasizing that due process requires adherence to traditional legal protections. The document cites this to reinforce that the court must operate under common law.Status: Not overturned. As a state court decision, it is binding in South Carolina and persuasive elsewhere, consistent with common law due process principles.Relevance to Document: Reinforces the argument that the court’s jurisdiction and procedures must align with common law, not administrative law.CHRISTOPHER HAUSER STUDY GROUP
20 Sept, 19:53
Major case here for all of you, rember if you have relied on a prior supreme court case you have a perfected affirmative defense and cause of action for willfulness.Axon Enterprise, Inc. v. FTC, 143 S. Ct. 890 (2023) Citation Verification: Correctly cited as 143 S. Ct. 890.Summary: The Supreme Court held that district courts have jurisdiction to hear constitutional challenges to agency structure before administrative proceedings conclude. Justice Thomas’s concurrence, cited in the document, argued that core cases involving life, liberty, or property must be resolved by Article III courts, not administrative bodies.Status: Not overturned. A recent case, still good law.Relevance to Document: Supports the claim that the court, if acting administratively, is incompetent to handle issues of life, liberty, or property.CHRISTOPHER HAUSER STUDY GROUP
20 Sept, 19:53
“If you’ve relied on prior decisions of the Supreme Court you have a perfect defense for willfulness.” U.S. v. Bishop, 412 U.S. 346“Federal law & Supreme Court cases apply to state court cases.” Howlett v. Rose, 496 U.S. 356 (1990)"Jurisdiction, once challenged, cannot be assumed and must be decided." Maine v. Thiboutot, 100 S. Ct. 250
Related Channels
Other channels in the same section of the catalogue.
