United States of America v. Haines et al

Filing 55

ORDER by Judge Benjamin H Settle re 47 Notice-Other filed by Daniel F Haines. (TG; cc mailed to defendant) (Main Document 55 replaced on 9/27/2013) (TG).

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

5
6

7 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,

8

ORDER RE PRIVATE NOTICE

v.

9

CASE NO. C13-5082 BHS

10 DANIEL F. HAINES,
Defendant.

11
12

This matter comes before the Court on Daniel F. Haines’s (“Haines”) “Private
13
Notice Demand of Payment in Lieu of Lawful Remedy” (Dkt. 47). The Court has
14
considered the pleadings and the remainder of the file and hereby finds it, consistent with
15
our prior orders, to be an improper and legally frivolous pleading.
16
Haines’s “private notice” indicates that it is actually from his alleged “Trustee”
17
Dwayne Keith Crawford (“Crawford”). Dkt. 47. The notice reads in part:
18
19
20
21
22

The Respondents listed above are in default and dishonor of negotiable
instruments sent privately by Mr. Dwayne Crawford Trustee for Estate trust
DANIEL FRANKLIN HAINES CUSIP # 070-40-0612 To the holder of
what is now contraband JUDGE BENJAMIN SETTLE. Negotiable
Instruments on certified court documents for the closure and settlement of
Cause # 13-5082. These instruments were sent by Certified Mail #
70122920000069717898 in May 2013, and Certified Mail #
70122920000069713531 A previous request was made for the release to the

ORDER - 1

1
2

DANIEL FRANKLIN HAINES Estate Trust of the original cause, all
orders and the plaintiffs bond which should have accompanied plaintiff's
deposit of the "Original Petition" through the clerk of this court. These
items have not been released.

3
Dkt. 47 at 1. The respondents to which the notice is addressed are two attorneys for the
4
Government, who have been involved in this case, and this Court. Id. The Court
5
explicitly stated in its prior order that the Court is not a party to this action. Dkt. 43 at 4
6
(Order Denying Haines’s Motion for Reconsideration). The United States Government
7
and Haines are the only two parties to this action.
8
Additionally, these attempted “private” filings by Crawford on Haines’s behalf are
9
improper pleadings, since a trustee cannot represent a trust. In multiple cases, the Ninth
10
Circuit has addressed whether a non-attorney may represent an unincorporated entity.
11
The general rule is that while a non-attorney may represent himself in a lawsuit, he does
12
not have the authority to appear as an attorney for others. C.E. Pope Equity Trust v.
13
United States, 818 F.2d 696, 697 (9th Cir. 1987). Unincorporated associations, including
14
trusts, like corporations, must appear in court through an attorney. Id.; Maisano v.
15
Welcher, 940 F.2d 499, 501 (9th Cir. 1991); Church of the New Testament v. United
16
States, 783 F.2d 771, 773 (9th Cir. 1986). Additionally, state law provisions allowing
17
trustees to prosecute claims for the protection of trust assets and Fed. R. Civ. P.17(a) do
18
not serve as authorization for a non-attorney trustee to act on behalf a trust. C.E. Pope,
19
818 F.2d at 698. A trustee cannot act in a pro se capacity in a judicial proceeding
20
involving the trust for which he serves as a fiduciary.
21
22

ORDER - 2

1

As to the alleged settlement instruments Haines argues are being held as

2 “contraband” by Judge Settle, the Court has already “reject[ed] those documents as ones
3 that satisfy, discharge or settle Haines’s debt to the IRS.” Dkt. 37 at 5-7 (Order on
4 Haines’s Motion to Dismiss). The Court has deemed Haines’s arguments that those
5 alleged debt-satisfying documents, or types of documents, which he calls “negotiable
6 instruments,” are frivolous, i.e. they are based on arguments which are legally without
7 merit. See Dkt. 37 at 5-7 and 43 at 3-4. The Court finds that the same conclusion applies
8 to the alleged debt-cancelling instrument filed on July 17, 2013 (Dkt. 38). 1 In short, the
9 Court is not in possession of any documents that satisfy, discharge or otherwise settle
10 Haines’s debt to the IRS.
11

The pleading at issue also demands that the “original petition, all orders and

12 plaintiffs bond” be sent to the “Trustee.” Dkt. 47 at 2. If Haines would like copies of the
13 documents or orders filed in this case, he can obtain them from the Clerk’s office.
14

Dated this 27th day of September, 2013.

A

15
16

BENJAMIN H. SETTLE
United States District Judge

17
18
1

19
20
21
22

Document 38 appears to be another 1A Form 1099-C, Cancellation of Debt, which is
used to report the cancellation of a debt, that is treated as income pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §61
(a)(12), to the Internal Revenue Service. Although it is not entirely clear, the submission of this
document appears to be founded on Haines’s meritless contention that he may satisfy his federal
tax debts from a secret treasury account maintained on his behalf by the United States Treasury.
Haines has raised this contention already in his motion to dismiss and a “private notice” he filed
in this proceeding. See Dkts.15 and 21. In denying Haines’ motion to dismiss, the Court also
found the argument that Haines could offset his tax liability through a secret Treasury account to
be meritless. Dkt. 37 at 5-7.

ORDER - 3