News Release

Oct. 7, 2004

RE:                  Avery v. GBRA

Subject:          Avery files his Appellant's Brief in 4th Court of Appeals on 10/4/04.


Ronald F. Avery filed his Appellant's Brief of about 30 pages and his Appellant's Appendix of about 75 pages in the 4th Court of Appeals in San Antonio, Texas on Tuesday to reverse the District Court ruling in Seguin that said the State is the SOVEREIGN KING and can INTENTIONALLY HARM the Citizens of Texas WITHOUT RECOURSE in the KING'S COURTS.


See Avery's Brief at then click on Avery v. STATE and then click on APPELLANT'S BRIEF at the bottom of the navigation bar on the left.


You will discover:


1.        The Supreme Court of Texas 1924 said the Citizens of Texas are Sovereign (Dickson v. Strickland).

2.        Rev Samuel Rutherford agrees with Avery.

3.        Sovereign immunity came into Texas without a single precedent through the court system and it can leave the same way without the help of the legislature.

4.        Illinois, California, and Arizona received the KINGLY IMMUNITY FOR THE STATE by the court system and they got rid of the KINGLY STATE in the same way - OVERRULED IT AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND OUTMODED between 1959 and 1963.

5.        The State of Texas cannot adopt ancient monarchial common law in violation of Art. 16 Sec. 48 when it was not in effect at the time of the State Constitution because the Constitution of the Republic of Texas of 1836 had purged it from Texas.

6.        Any statute that is in contradiction with the Constitution of Texas is void from inception (Dickson v. Strickland, Alexander Hamilton Federalist Letter no. 78).

7.        The Constitution is the will of the sovereign Citizens (Hamilton FL no. 78).

8.        The Courts are to stand between the Citizen and the Legislature to keep the latter in its constitutional confines (Hamilton FL no. 78).

9.        The concept of state and governmental sovereignty and immunity over citizens was soundly defeated in 1644 by Rev. Samuel Rutherford and in 1689 by John Locke resulting in the beheading of Charles the II.

10.     When the state or any of its employees harm the citizen there is a violation of the law of torts, the law of nature and the fundamentals of civil government known for over 300 years.

11.     Legal commentators and professors of the Yale Law Journal, Duke Law Review, and Southwestern Law Journal agree with Avery.

12.     It is time to end something that should have never existed in the State of Texas.