Assurant Inc. / Union Security Insurance Company / Fortis Benefits Insurance Company (now under Sun Life Financial) have allegedly performed acts to a breach of policy contract, bad faith with malice, and perpetrated fraud against the insured party, and you as a taxpayer of the American court system for the past 22+ years. How long would you pursue your valuable insurance benefits and basic civil rights to a trial by jury action in a court of law for remedies of relief?
Rule 81. Applicability of the Rules in General; Removed Action
(b)Scire Facias and Mandamus.The writs of scire facias and mandamus are abolished. Relief previously available through them may be obtained by appropriate action or motion under these rules.
(1)Applicability.These rules apply to a civil action after it is removed from a state court.
(2)Further Pleading.After removal, repleading is unnecessary unless the court orders it. A defendant who did not answer before removal must answer or present other defenses or objections under these rules within the longest of these periods:
(A) 21 days after receiving—through service or otherwise—a copy of the initial pleading stating the claim for relief;
(B) 21 days after being served with the summons for an initial pleading on file at the time of service; or
(C) 7 days after the notice of removal is filed.
(3)Demand for a Jury Trial.
(A)As Affected by State Law.A party who, before removal, expressly demanded a jury trial in accordance with state law need not renew the demand after removal. If the state law did not require an express demand for a jury trial, a party need not make one after removal unless the court orders the parties to do so within a specified time. The court must so order at a party's request and may so order on its own. A party who fails to make a demand when so ordered waives a jury trial.
(B)UnderRule 38.If all necessary pleadings have been served at the time of removal, a party entitled to a jury trial underRule 38must be given one if the party serves a demand within 14 days after:
(i) it files a notice of removal; or
(ii) it is served with a notice of removal filed by another party.
(1)“State Law” Defined.When these rules refer to state law, the term “law” includes the state's statutes and the state's judicial decisions.
Fraud on the Court
Please also note: Not one single state or federal "officer of the court", state or federal agency, nor any reasonable person, has discovered or located the "first and last" applicable contractual ink drops of the "common words" or terms; "Employee Retirement Income Security Act", "ERISA", nor discovered the federally mandated "Statement of ERISA Rights", within and to the Plaintiff"s "state law claims" and their "legally binding written LTD insurance contract", so as to have been "conclusively expressed" for court actions, before any beneficiary "insurance claims", the time during the insurance claims process, nor within the "denial" of insurance benefit letters, from the "plan administrator" and "insurance underwriter. (Assurant Employee Benefits / Assurant / Union Security Insurance Company / fka Fortis Benefits Insurance Company, Fortis). What does that tell you? Alleged perjury and fraud on the court?
Legal Elements of the State Court Venue
Know your rights; Ohio Constitution; Bill of Rights; Section 1 (Inalienable Rights), Section 5 (Trial by jury), and Section 16 (Redress in Courts) of the Ohio Bill of Rights.
Assurant "knowingly and willfully" deceived and mislead the courts, contrary to the Plaintiffs state law claims. Of which include a forged; fabricated and perpetrated false impression of law to the "Employee Retirement Income Security Act" along with its obstructive Constitutional law changing provisions. False Statements and impressions which now represent objective facts to the state court (ORC 2913.01(A), while causing to defraud the "officers of the Court", and deprive the "inhabitants" of the city of Dayton, and abroad, to their "Constitutional services" without reasonable justification or good merit (ORC 2913.01(B) and (C)(3)) of the common words; Employee Retirement Income Security Act and its applicable provisions.
State of Ohio Law (State Law Claims)
"Insurance Company Fraud" (Ohio) See:"Insurance fraud" at Ohio Revised Code (ORC) 2913.47 (1,2,3,4 and 5 ~ and also "Theft" (ORC 2913.01(A),(B),(C)(3),(E)(F)(G)(K), 2913.02(A)(1,2 and 3),(B) (1 and 3) / disabled adult).
Ohio Revised Code (ORC) 2913.47 2913.47 Insurance fraud. (A) As used in this section: (1) "Data" has the same meaning as in section 2913.01 of the Revised Code and additionally includes any other representation of information, knowledge, facts, concepts, or instructions that are being or have been prepared in a formalized manner. (2) "Deceptive" means that a statement, in whole or in part, would cause another to be deceived because it contains a misleading representation, withholds information, prevents the acquisition of information, or by any other conduct, act, or omission creates, confirms, or perpetuates a false impression, including, but not limited to, a false impression as to law, value, state of mind, or other objective or subjective fact. (3) "Insurer" means any person that is authorized to engage in the business of insurance in this state under Title XXXIX  of the Revised Code, the Ohio fair plan underwriting association created under section 3929.43 of the Revised Code, any health insuring corporation, and any legal entity that is self-insured and provides benefits to its employees or members. (4) "Policy" means a policy, certificate, contract, or plan that is issued by an insurer. (5) "Statement" includes, but is not limited to, any notice, letter, or memorandum; proof of loss; bill of lading; receipt for payment; invoice, account, or other financial statement; estimate of property damage; bill for services; diagnosis or prognosis; prescription; hospital, medical, or dental chart or other record; x-ray, photograph, videotape, or movie film; test result; other evidence of loss, injury, or expense; computer-generated document; and data in any form.
(B) No person, with purpose to defraud or knowing that the person is facilitating a fraud, shall do either of the following: (1) Present to, or cause to be presented to, an insurer any written or oral statement that is part of, or in support of, an application for insurance, a claim for payment pursuant to a policy, or a claim for any other benefit pursuant to a policy, knowing that the statement, or any part of the statement, is false or deceptive; (2) Assist, aid, abet, solicit, procure, or conspire with another to prepare or make any written or oral statement that is intended to be presented to an insurer as part of, or in support of, an application for insurance, a claim for payment pursuant to a policy, or a claim for any other benefit pursuant to a policy, knowing that the statement, or any part of the statement, is false or deceptive.
(C) Whoever violates this section is guilty of insurance fraud. Except as otherwise provided in this division, insurance fraud is a misdemeanor of the first degree. If the amount of the claim that is false or deceptive is five hundred dollars or more and is less than five thousand dollars, insurance fraud is a felony of the fifth degree. If the amount of the claim that is false or deceptive is five thousand dollars or more and is less than one hundred thousand dollars, insurance fraud is a felony of the fourth degree. If the amount of the claim that is false or deceptive is one hundred thousand dollars or more, insurance fraud is a felony of the third degree.
(D) This section shall not be construed to abrogate, waive, or modify division (A) of section 2317.02 of the Revised Code.
Legal Elements of the Federal Court Venue
Know your Rights ~ U.S. Constitution; United States Bill of Rights; First Amendment (Redress the Government), Seventh Amendment (Jury in Civil Cases), Tenth Amendment (State Powers), and Fourteenth Amendment (Rights of Citizens).
Assurant "knowingly and willfully" deceive and mislead the courts representation contrary to the Plaintiffs state law claims, and causes to be made and used, a false record and statement, a fraudulent and "false claim" for "seeking approval" of the term "Employee Retirement Income Security Act" for "action of removal of state law claims", at the taxpayers expense, while now serving as a "federal financial shelter" from the precarious financial damages associated with the Plaintiffs state law claims of due process, and "trial by jury".
See: "False Claims"; Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 31 U.S.C. § 3729 (a)(1)(2)(3),(b),(c))(Money and Finance / False Claims, through 31 U.S.C. § 3733)
See: State and federal applications: 15 U.S.C. § 1011 (Declaration of policy) and 1012 (a)(b) (Regulation by State law; Federal law relating specifically to insurance; applicability of certain laws after June 30, 1948.)
See: Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 60(d)(1)(3); available all American citizens for Constitutional law protection for legal redress, remedies of relief, and future deterrent of "insurance company fraud".
Legal Theory and Corrupt Issues of "Insurance Company Fraud"
The Legal Theory and Statute Application: Ohio Revised Code (ORC) 2913.47 and to United States Code 31 U.S.C. § 3729 "false claims", within cases herein; is to allegedly perform perjury leading to "fraud on the court", and thus generate a "claim of unconstitutionality" against the legal party and taxpayers of the state and federal court(s).
See: 18 U.S.C. §1341 (Frauds and Swindles)See also as may be applicable: Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 31 U.S.C. § 3729 (a)(1)(2)(3),(b),(c))(Money and Finance / False Claims through 3733), false claims against the government and the judicial tax payers, as the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) acknowledges "possible fraud" in open court.
Defined herein, as the Defendant (Fortis Benefits Insurance Company, Name change; nka ~ Assurant, and / or Union Security Insurance Company) / allegedly "conspires" to defraud the Government by getting a false or fraudulent claim "approved", and thus causing Constitutional law violations to a "jury demand" in both the State and Federal court venues.
The insurance company (Defendant: Fortis Benefits Insurance Company / Fortis/ (now called ~ Assurant / Assurant Employee Benefits / Union Security Insurance Company ) willfully performs malice acts to a legal breech of contract, which generates "state law claims" by the insured (Plaintiff). Then the insurance company and their legal representatives "conspire" to perform actions to federally "removal" the "state law claims" at issue to the federal venue, via "diversity of citizenship" with amount over $75,000, and "false statements" and "false claims" of a term expressed as "Employee Retirement Income Security Act", "ERISA" for a federal question, without valid consent or valid merit of the Long Term Disability (LTD) policy expressly written "controlling terms" at issue.
Federal Law (with State Law Claims)
United States Code; 31 U.S.C. § 3729 (False Claims) (a) Liability for Certain Acts. -Any person who- (1) knowingly presents, or causes to be presented, to an officer or employee of the United States Government or a member of the Armed Forces of the United States a false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval; (2) knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used, a false record or statement to get a false or fraudulent claim paid or approved by the Government; (3) conspires to defraud the Government by getting a false or fraudulent claim allowed or paid; ... ... (b) Knowing and Knowingly Defined. For purposes of this section, the terms "knowing" and "knowingly" mean that a person, with respect to information; (1) has actual knowledge of the information; (2) acts in deliberate ignorance of the truth or falsity of the information; or (3) acts in reckless disregard of the truth or falsity of the information, and no proof of specific intent to defraud is required. (c) Claim Defined. For purposes of this section, "claim" includes any request or demand, whether under a contract or otherwise, for money or property which is made to a contractor, grantee, or other recipient if the United States Government provides any portion of the money or property which is requested or demanded, or if the Government will reimburse such contractor, grantee, or other recipient for any portion of the money or property which is requested or demanded. ... Legal Reference; http://www.law.cornell.edu
***************************************************************************************** In addition the insurance company expresses "actions of malice" to the Plaintiff, the officers of the court, and the taxpayers State and Federal courts, pursuant to "willfully, knowingly", "in deliberate ignorance of the truth", with "specific intent", to "present" a "false and fraudulent claim(s)", and request or demand for "approval" from the U.S. Government, of money "paid" by judiciary budget, to the courts, and officers of the courts, as other recipient, at tax payers expense; for property (attempted acquisition and abolishment of citizens" goods; "State and Federal Constitutional laws", and of citizens "services"; to written legal statues, without consent or good merit ,via 'False Claims' and "false statements" as contract or otherwise; (numerous "legal briefs to a court of law while under oath"), as applied herein per years of allegations to Defendant's criminal actions to "fraud on the court", and then actions protracting into Constitutional law violations.
Assurant (Insurance Company) / fka Fortis, and their legal representative, of case(s) herein, have made a "request or demand", for the financial courts litigation expenses to be "paid" by the U.S. Government / taxpayers; while they are seeking a "federal financial shelter", and at the same time are "barring" the American citizens access, privilege and right to a Constitutional law, and a "jury demand".
Legal Remedies of Relief for the Insured Party
See again state and federal applications: 15 U.S.C. § 1011 (Declaration of policy) and 1012 (a)(b) (Regulation by State law; Federal law relating specifically to insurance; applicability of certain laws after June 30, 1948.).
"Fraud on the court"; See FRCP Rule(s) 38, 39, and 60(d)(1)(3) and 81(b),(c)(3)(A)(B), and 18 U.S.C. Sections 1035 and 1341 for remedies and relief to all American citizens. In addition, Ohio Rule (s) 38 and 39 (Jury trial of right) also apply herein.
Note: Case law herein, now "bad case law" for (15) years, as the state and federal courts have determined herein that the elements of business contract "notifications", "disclosures", "controlling terms" and "federal mandates" of common words and textual terms expressed as "Employee Retirement Income Security Act", "ERISA", are eliminated from the judge(s) determinations and judgments on the courts. All while under alleged conditions of insurance company fraud and "fraud on the court", thus affecting good general business practices and business contract matters of law, all at the tax payers expense. Note that "Grand Jury" hearings have also been denied by the court(s).
The "state court" (Ohio) has "sovereignty" of these "state law claims" cases, as applicable to the Constitutional laws to a "trial by jury" herein, and without any perpetrated language text or provisions to the "Employee Retirement Income Security Act", "ERISA", at the will of the insurance company while performing the "business of insurance".
Conclusion and Support The "inhabitants" of the City of Dayton remain steadfast in their quest for "state court sovereignty" of their cases while in pursuit of their day in court with a "jury demand" of impartial American citizens, as prescribed by law, and shared as "correct" future case law, via FRCP 24 (Intervention) and 60 (d)(3) (Relief / Fraud on the court), 28 U.S.C.2403(a) with (b), along with the oath of affirmation to the Ohio Constitution and Article VI of the United States Constitution.
In truth, and available only with valor of oath, the "Gem City" Government, Dayton Police, Montgomery County Sheriff with the State of Ohio Prosecutor, Ohio Department of Insurance, Ohio Attorney General, and Federal agents with the Federal Prosecutor, the United States Attorney General, Solicitor General, along with and State and Federal government Representatives must collectively and proactively intervene and protect "We The People", and our Rights in these matters of alleged "Theft and Fraud" violations, so as to protect and preserve Constitutional law and the business of insurance for the people locally, and across this nation.
How do you feel about these legal matters as an "American tax payer"? Please contact your Representatives at the end of this page below.
**Please contact your above referenced Government Representatives for joint efforts to protect the rule of law, our Ohio Constitution, other State Constitutions via intervention into corrective case law of fraud on the court, therefore establishing a collective protection of the United States Constitution from these alleged actions of "fraud on the court" at the taxpayers expense. (Now 15 years)