IN THE CIRCUIT CIVIL DIVISION OF THE
SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR
LEON COUNTY, FLORIDA
Darryl Schneider
Petitioner
Case: 25-CA-564
Vs.
Division: N/A
Florida Governor Ronald DeSantis
Respondent
__________________________/
JUDICIAL NOTICE OF OBJECTIONS; AND WARNINGS TO TWO (2) LEON COUNTY JUDGES, WITH A BAR COMPLAINT FILED
1. The Petitioner filed a Writ of Mandamus on Ronald DeSantis over 20 days ago, but he defaulted by failing to respond to it under FRCP 1.630(e); and FRCP 1.140(a)(1). The inactions of this Court along with Attorney Maryssa Hardy’s sneaky fraudulent correspondence with it, are starting to bother the Petitioner! The name of the game with the FRB judges, is to have opposing counsels file bogus motions with inapplicable statutes, case laws, or rules, then sign and file the orders as if they’re not void, thus committing FRB mail and wire frauds (deliberate misrepresentations to consumers about what’s legal). Total bull chips.
2. UNDER FRCP 1.630:
(a) Applicability. This FRCP applies to actions for the issuance of writs of mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, and habeas corpus.
(b) Initial Pleading. The initial pleading must be a complaint. It must contain:
(1) the facts on which the plaintiff relies for relief;
(2) a request for the relief sought; and
(3) if desired, argument in support of the complaint with citations of authority.
The caption must show the action filed in the name of the plaintiff in all cases and not on the relation of the state. When the complaint seeks a writ directed to a lower court or to a governmental or administrative agency, a copy of as much of the record as is necessary to support the plaintiff’s complaint must be attached.
(c) Time. A complaint must be filed within the time provided by law.
(d) Process. If the complaint shows a prima facie case for relief, the court must issue:
(1) an order nisi in prohibition;
(2) an alternative writ in mandamus that may incorporate the complaint by reference only;
(3) a writ of quo warranto; or
(4) a writ of habeas corpus.
The writ must be served in the manner prescribed by law.
(e) Response. Defendant must respond to the WRIT as provided in rule 1.140, but the answer in quo warranto must show better title to the office when the writ seeks an adjudication of the right to an office held by the defendant. Thus FRCP 1.630(e); and FRCP 1.140(a)(1) come into play during writs. And the paragraph above never mentions alternate writ, just the writ.
***3. Because of FRCP 1.630(e); and FRCP 1.140(a)(1), the Petitioner believes under FRCP 1.630(d)(2), a court may not have to issue an alternate/peremptory writ, when the adverse party is given CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE with a signature (process of service) that such relief is being sought or considered by the court. An alternate writ is needed, if the respondent hasn’t been provided the complaint, so the respondent can show cause, or forever hold their peace. Consequently, the Petitioner chooses to back down for 72 hours only and not file complaints with the JQC at this time, which DeSantis unfortunately controls. Does DeSantis control this Court as well????
4. The Petitioner doesn’t know what this Court has in mind to do, but it needs to do something within 72 hours since an expedited complaint was filed with the Court about 40 days ago! This Court 1) didn’t state the Petitioner’s complaint failed to show a prima facie case for relief. It couldn’t legally, but more importantly it 2) didn’t submit an alternative writ to DeSantis under FRCP 1.630(d)(2), but it’s believed it didn’t have to. But since something is starting to smell bad due to judicial inactivity, JQC complaints are ready to be filed. Just give the Petitioner a reason to do so. The Petitioner isn’t fooling around any longer. Two (2) of his relatives were
M U R D E R E D! Damn devil dog DeSantis!!!! This Court needs to take action
I M M E D I A T E L Y! And any judicial inaction during this case is illegal, if it can foreseeably cause an injury!
5. This is not a lawsuit as the respondent fraudulently claimed on 5-9-25. Consequently, this Court DOESN’T have jurisdiction to rule on a motion to vacate a default during a lawsuit, when just a writ was filed! Total bull chips! Everyone understands why DeSantis filed a clearly bogus vacate motion.
6. The Petitioner filed a murder video with over 100 pages of material evidence to support his claims. This was sum sufficient proof for this Court to have granted the Writ already!
***7. A bar complaint for illegally soliciting this Court to defraud the Petitioner and the related murder victims during what is essentially two (2) murder investigation requests, was filed on overzealous FRB agent Maryssa Hardy. Who’s next?
***8. More importantly, all court documents filed in this case are website posted with copies sent to foreign media production crews; foreign news reporters; foreign broadcasting stations; foreign governments; foreign ex-military; and foreign bankers, who all dislike the FRB enterprise almost as much as the Petitioner. These entities will be imposing their own type of sanctions on the FRB owners. Hell, the Petitioner already has a 4 hour documentary of what happened to Mrs. Sandra Kimball airing on TV twice a week, forever!!!! This pleading could be in the Petitioner’s next published book called “Code of Silence: The Stonewalling of Mr. Schneider’s Complaints by FRB Judicial Agents”. It has a Cold War, espionage ring to it. Thus the reason the Petitioner still files court complaints, is to obtain more evidence of racketeering to use in his books! The Petitioner’s books sell for cheap, but they sell BIG! All this typing will not be wasted on corrupted FRB paid agents. All related court documents will be used as exhibits in the Petitioner’s upcoming 5 count lawsuit against John Rockefeller and his wife, along with David Rothschild and his son, to show just how bullish and brazen FRB judicial racketeering is in America, which occurs at least 50% of the time in every slaughterhouse, to illegally profit the FRB enterprise, using FRB paid/bribed judicial agents and other FRB paid/bribed officers of the court, like Maryssa Hardy Esq. This Court knows DeSantis will, if allowed, continue to lie in his pleadings. The million dollar question is will this Court just grant the Writ ALREADY and let the chips fall where they may???? Think DeSantis will comply with it???? NO!!!! There will be many complainants filing their FRB complaints with the Petitioner. Does the Petitioner have this Court’s attention yet????
9. If this Court violates the Petitioner’s due process/civil/constitutional rights by 1) ILLEGALLY STALLING THIS CASE ANY LONGER; 2) HELPING DESANTIS COVER-UP TWO (2) MURDERS; AND 3) NOT CORRECTLY ORDERING THE FLOIRDA GOVERNOR TO PERFORM HIS JOB REQUIREMENTS BY GRANTING THE WRIT, JQC COMPLAINTS WILL BE FILED, AND EVERYONE IN THE WORLD WILL KNOW THE NAMES DESANTIS, ALLMAN AND SJOSTROM, ALONG WITH KNOWING AMERICAN JUDGES ROUTINELY VIOLATE U.S. CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS FOR INCREASED FRB OWNER PROFITS (THE U.S. CONSTITUTION IS DEAD THANKS TO THE FRB OWNERS), AND NOT TO VISIT AMERICA, OR PURCHASE FRB PRODUCTS AND SERVICES, EVER!
10. Sneaky stupid DeSantis blatantly lied through his counselor about the time limit to show cause, and this is why the clerk correctly held this bastard governor in default! DeSantis was waiting on this Court to throw the case out for the FRB enterprise! Now he’s going to lie in his pleadings, thus prodding this Court to defraud the Petitioner. Correct? His last pleading didn’t ask this court to submit an alternate writ, but merely lied about why he didn’t have to answer his summons in time. It seems as though DeSantis believes this Court to be too unwilling to defraud the Petitioner on its own, so he’s going to have Maryssa Hardy push it along. Correct?
11. This Court now needs to instruct Ronald DeSantis to perform his sanctioned duties to investigate the wrongs/crimes cited in the Petition!!!!
12. Mandamus is the appropriate remedy to address this violation. Young v. Lamar, 115 So. 3d 1132, 1133–34 (Fla. 8 1st DCA 2013) (finding mandamus “an appropriate remedy to correct” a violation of the law); Valdes v. Galco Constr., 883 So. 2d 359, 361 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (granting mandamus to compel officer to issue an order “within a reasonable time, not to exceed 30 days”); Fla. Caucus of Black State Legislators, Inc. v. Crosby, 877 So. 2d 861, 864 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (finding mandamus appropriate to compel state department head to comply with statute providing that department
“shall assist” certain persons and “shall ensure” documents are forwarded); Kramp v. Fagan, 568 So. 2d 479, 480 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (granting mandamus and directing lower court judge to dispose of a neglected motion within fifteen days); AHF MCO of Fla., Inc., v. Exec. Office of the Governor, No. 2018 CA 1648 (Fla. 2nd Jud. Cir. Sep. 5, 2018) (finding governor had a statutory duty to produce certain records and issuing writ of mandamus commanding him to produce the records within ten days).
13. To show entitlement to a writ of mandamus, a petitioner must show that he has a clear legal right to the performance of a clear legal duty by a public officer and that he has no other legal remedies available to him. When a petitioner files a petition for mandamus, the court has the initial task of assessing the legal sufficiency of the allegations . . . . [I]f the petition is facially sufficient, the court must issue an alternative writ, i.e., an order directed to the respondent to show cause why the requested relief should not be granted.
S.J. v. 3omas, 233 So. 3d 490, 495 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (cleaned up); see also Moore v. Ake, 693 So. 2d 697, 698 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (trial court must issue an alternative writ of mandamus if petition is facially adequate, even if petitioner has not served respondent with the complaint). As demonstrated in the Petition, the Petitioner has met all the above requirements, and an alternative writ of mandamus wasn’t issued directing the Governor to show cause as to why this Court shouldn’t grant the requested relief, but it didn’t have to when DeSantis was already constructively noticed of the complaint.
14. AGAIN, NO CLERICAL MISTAKE WAS MADE! DESANTIS ONLY HAD 20 DAYS TO FILE A RESPONSE TO THE WRIT/PETITION UNDER FRCP 1.630(e); and FRCP 1.140(a)(1), WHETHER OR NOT DESANTIS WAS COURT ORDER TO DO SO UNDER FRCP 1.630(d)(2). AND FRCP 1.140(a)(2)(A) APPLIES ONLY when an agency of the state, or an officer, or employee of the state, is SUED IN HIS OR HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY. GEE, DAH, DAH, I’M AN IDIOT AND DON’T KNOW WHAT I FILED IN THIS MATTER, DAH, DAH!!!! IT’S ALWAYS BEEN ABOUT JUDICIAL RACKETEERING HAVING CAUSED MRS. SANDRA KIMBALL’S MURDER, DAMMIT TO HELL!!!!
15. DeSantis isn’t being sued in this case, ladies. The Petitioner would’ve had to give 6 months prior notice before suing the State of Florida. If officers of the court believe this case is a lawsuit, they’re incompetent and shouldn’t be working within ANY legal system. Again, a copy of this pleading is waiting to be filed with the JQC!!!! A writ of Mandamus isn’t a lawsuit, but a petition for a court to order an entity, or government agency, or an agent, to competently complete a mandatory job requirement as his or her statutory duty. The Petitioner believes dirty dog DeSantis is still laughing at him for apparently wasting his time. Has the Petitioner wasted his time on this Court???? The Petitioner and the two (2) murder victims already have a legal right to the documents and work product asked for in the writ as a matter of law, so no response from DeSantis is required for this Court to grant the writ, once he was already constructively notified. Understand if this Court does anything other than grant the Writ, JQC complaints will be filed. Understand the Petitioner’s wife was murdered by John Rockefeller, so the Petitioner doesn’t care what this Court does, the Petitioner’s going after the FRB owners AND NO ONE IS GOING TO SLOW HIM DOWN!!!!
16. The definition of a lawsuit (to sue, or be sued) is a civil action brought by a plaintiff (a party who claims to have INCURRED LOSSES (as in property losses) as a result of a defendant’s actions) who requests a legal or equitable remedy from a court. WHEN WAS THIS CASE EVER ABOUT INCURRED LOSSES, WITH ANY PARTY SEEKING EQUITY????
17. FRCP 9.100(a) (a) This rule applies to those proceedings that invoke the jurisdiction of the courts described in rules 9.030(a)(3), (b)(2), (b)(3), (c)(2), and (c)(3) for the issuance of writs of mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, certiorari, and habeas corpus, and all writs necessary to the complete exercise of the courts’ jurisdiction; and for review of non-final administrative action,
18. FRCP 9.100(k) A Reply should be made within 20 days thereafter, or such other time set by the court, the petitioner (MEANING A PETITION WAS FILED) may serve a reply, which shall not exceed 15 pages in length, and supplemental appendix, and
19. FRCP 1.140(a)(A)(2) IS ABOUT LAWSUITS AGAINST AGENCIES AND THEIR AGENTS, NOT ABOUT PETITIONS. FRCP 1.630(e); and related FRCP 1.140(a)(1) are about courts ordering an entity to show cause after 20 days of service on extraordinary remedies!!!! The Petitioner believes an alternate writ didn’t need to be submitted to DeSantis and would’ve only prolonged this matter, but if it did, JQC complaints are forthcoming due to this Court’s failure!!!!
20. DeSantis failed to file a response, so the Petitioner doesn’t need to file a counter response. And a petition is a complaint, but all complaints aren’t lawsuits! 20 days is the time limit to respond to a writ/petition.
***21. A more serious matter is when an FRB paid/bribed judges knowingly file false orders with clerks and parties, committing mail and wire fraud under respectively Title 18, Chapter 63, Sections 1341 and 1343, misrepresenting the facts to courthouse consumers to benefit the FRB enterprise! Committing this type of fraud on the Petitioner, after his 13th year of being monetarily defrauded by other FRB judicial agents, is most definitely racketeering Judge Sjostrom!!!! Why do you think Ms. Hardy was ordered NOT to file a response in time by her boss? The answer is low-down DeSantis was waiting for this court to illegally dismiss the Writ for the FRB gang, by stating no prima facie evidence for relief was filed. Wow!!!! This would’ve been a huge abuse of FRB judicial discretion under the U.S. Constitution!!!! This Court would’ve had to officially find: 1) The submitted murder video irrelevant to a murder being committed in Florida; 2) sum sufficient evidence of stools in a port-a-potty being both illegal and enough evidence to charge the Petitioner with neglecting his wife, as if awarded property from the State of Florida; 3) that the Petitioner’s mother was taken to the doctor at least once, months before her death, with her will signed, NOT on her death bed two (2) days before she was neglected to death; show 4) the Petitioner obtained his murdered wife’s medical records from State of Florida/FRB funded TGH almost two (2) years ago, just after she was left for dead there; or that 5) Governor DeSantis, nor his office, have an obligation to consumers under statute to investigate any of these wrongs/crimes. Wow!!!! Another million dollar question is what’s this Court going to do on this case within 72 hours after receiving this pleading? This is how long the Petitioner will wait until he goes BERSERK (Scandinavian warrior frenzy), filing complaints on it and Judge Allman with the JQC for starters!!!!
22. The Plaintiff predicts this Court 1) won’t sign and file any orders in this matter due to it not wanting to commit mail and wire fraud, as a paid FRB agent/employee of the FRB enterprise; and that 2) it will stall this case until it recuses itself, right after the Petitioner files a JQC complaint on it. Correct????
23. As planned, this pleading will now be emailed to dozens of foreign media stations working with the Petitioner in foreign countries, unfriendly with the FRB owners.
WHEREFORE, the Petitioner moves this Court to correctly and intelligently do the right thing by just granting the Petition IMMEDIATELY, OR SUFFER THE SAME SHAME AND HUMILIATION AS THE FRB OWNERS, WHO DON’T KNOW HOW TO DO ANYTHING ELSE FOR A LIVING, EXCEPT FEED OFF INNOCENT CONSUMERS AS IF BANKERS’ CATTLE. This Petition has been submitted to everyone and posted everywhere.
Thanks for officers of the court making the Petitioner have to write this pleading without being compensated, yet.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been placed into the case file.
Petitioner
_________________________
Signature
10406 N 26 Street
Tampa, FL 33612
813-585-0552
Parties:
1. Ronald DeSantis
400 S Monroe Street
Tallahassee, FL 32399
2. Darryl Schneider
10406 N 26 Street
Tampa, FL 33612
Second Circuit Courthouse
(GAUSSL & PORRITTK@LEONCOUNTYFL.GOV)
301 South Monroe Street
Tallahassee, FL 32301
850-606-4000
3-3-25
John & Dianne Couris
5707 Bayshore Blvd.
Tampa, FL 33611-4725
RE: Accomplices in the Murder and/or Murder Cover-up of Mrs. Sandra Kimball, by Tampa General Hospital (TGH) Personnel/Representatives
1. Demand for Medical Records.
2. Notice of TGH’s Misrepresentations (Frauds) Made in Court by its Attorneys.
3. Notice of TGH’s being an Accomplice in Florida Highway Patrol (FHP) Cancelling the Full Murder Video Enclosed, by Illegally Trying to End the Discovery Petition.
4. Notice TGH was offered a Release of Liability Through its Private Attorney, in Return for the Decedent’s Medical Records.
John, Dianne:
My wife Sandra, was deliberately struck down while legally in a crosswalk, a violation under F.S. 316.130(9), committed by David Dawson Jr. My business is with this person and who paid him to drive his car into my wife, along with the government agents who orchestrated this even to happen. These agents were judges; police; the mayor; John Rockefeller; and his other FRB enterprise paid agents, which fund your hospital.
This letter is a demand for my wife’s medical records which I need to further investigate her murder. Now that 1) you’ve been informed of the situation in which your company has been aiding and abetting in a murder, both before and after the fact for the last 15 months, and 2) you and your wife are currently orchestrating/implementing a murder cover-up as the owners/founders/profiteers of TGH, you’re guilty of both civil/criminal, state/federal, violations as racketeers in this matter!
If you two (2) don’t cooperate with me as John Rockefeller’s beneficiaries/agents, I’m going to legally hurt you. The statute of limitation for a wrongful death claim is extended due to fraud, and it’s tolled permanently due to a murder! And compensation for damages is forever owed during racketeering when it results in a murder, Title 18, Chapter 232, Section 3663; Title 18, Chapter 95, Section 1959 & Title 18, Chapter 1, Section 3; and United States v. Payne, 591 F.3d 46, 57–59 (2d Cir. 2010).
F.S. 95.11(4)(b): In those actions covered by this paragraph in which it can be shown that fraud, concealment, or intentional misrepresentation of fact prevented the discovery of the injury, the period of limitations is extended forward 2 years from the time that the injury is discovered or should have been discovered with the exercise of due diligence, but in no event to exceed 7 years from the date the incident giving rise to the injury occurred, except that this 7-year period shall not bar an action brought on behalf of a minor on or before the child’s eighth birthday. Don’t you worry, I’ll have you both hung out to dry before then using millions of consumers.
If I can’t have my wife’s medical records looked at by medical doctors, I can’t determine who else was involved in her wrongful death, including owners/investors/employees of TGH, and murder is just another type of wrongful death.
D. Schneider
10406 N 26 Street
Tampa, FL 33612
USA
813-585-0552
Enclosures (2): A letter to your funding source, and a video of my wife’s murder, both posted on the Internet.
Courts are duty bound to issue a writ of Mandamus for enforcement of a public duty: SC
District Court of Appeals
First District, Tallahassee, Florida
Darryl Schneider
Petitioner/Appellant
Case 1D25-2609
Ronald DeSantis
Respondent/Appellee
Writs Prohibition & Mandamus, Amended on 11-5-25
Jurisdiction
Appealing enclosed order under FRCP 9.130(a)(1). Writs are filed under FRCP 9.130.
Contents of Initial Brief
Introduction – – pages 2 through 3
Statement of the Facts – – page 3
Argument – – pages 3 through 4
Summary of the Argument – – pages 4 through 5
Conclusion – – page 5
Affidavit of Verification – – pages 5 through 6
Certificate of Service – – pages 6 through 7
Table of Citations
I. Section 6, Article 4 of the Florida Constitution – – Introduction, page 1;
II. Florida Statute 20.02(3) (Declaration of Policy) – – page 1;
III. Florida Statute §838.022 (honest services fraud) – – page 2;
IV. Florida Statute and F.S. §1540 (Fraud on the Court) – – page 2;
V. FRCP 1.110(b) – – pages 2 & 3;
VI. Maryls Bear Medicine v. United States (9th Cir. 2000) 241 F.3d 1208 – – page 4;
VII. Berkovitz, 486 U.S. at 544, 108 S.Ct. at 1963 – – page 4;
VIII. Faber v. United States (9th Cir. 1995) 56 F.3d 1122 – – page 4.
Introduction
1. Governor DeSantis and his office are govern by Organizational Mandates, part of the Declaration of Policy, within the Florida Constitution – – Sections and Articles. The agencies that compose the executive branch are consolidated into dozens of departments, authorized within State constitutions, consistent with executive capacity to administer effectively at all levels. The Florida agencies within the executive branch are integrated into the Department of the Executive Branch to achieve maximum efficiency and effectiveness as intended by Section 6, Article IV of the State of Florida Constitution.
2. Due to the Law of Agency; Imputation; and the Respondeat Superior Doctrines of law, the governor is liable for those appointed by him or her while on the clock.
3. Executive Departments – – all functions of the executive branch of state government, shall be allotted among not more than twenty-five departments, exclusive of those specifically provided for or authorized in the constitution. The administration of each department, unless otherwise provided in the constitution, shall be placed by law under the direct supervision of the governor, the lieutenant governor, the governor and cabinet, a cabinet member, or an officer or board appointed by and serving at the pleasure of the governor!
4. Florida Statute 20.02(3) – – Declaration of Policy: The administration of any executive branch department or entity placed under the direct supervision of an officer or board, appointed by and serving at the pleasure of the Governor, shall remain at all times under the constitutional executive authority of the Governor, in accordance with ss. 1(a) and 6, Article IV of the State Constitution, and such officer or board generally remains subject to oversight, direction, and supervision by the Governor.
Statement of the facts
A Writ of Mandamus was filed by the Petitioner, not the plaintiff of a lawsuit, in early 2025;
5. The Respondent defaulted on responding to the petition after the time limit;
6. After the Clerk of the Court officially defaulted the Respondent, his attorney wrongly filed a response to the petition, not the default;
7. Judge Sjostrom failed to remove the default first, and then wrongly allowed the Respondent to submit a rebuttal to the petition, and then wrongly granted the Respondent a hearing date to dismiss the meritable petition on the grounds the Petitioner did not have standing to ask for an investigation from the Respondent, as it was supposedly not part of his job description;
8. The Petitioner recused Judge Sjostrom for the numerous mistakes he made during this case, but he refused to be removed.
9. The Petitioner in writing, refused to attend the false hearing on the grounds that there was nothing more for the Petitioner to do except reject the void ruling/order by the recused judge and not attending the false hearing to be defrauded further under F.S. §838.022 (honest services fraud) and F.S. §1540 (Fraud on the Court), in what was essentially a request for the governor to look into two non-existent Florida (2) murder investigations;
10. The false hearing was held, and the Petitioner’s Writ of Mandamus was dismissed for supposedly being in violation of FRCP 1.110(b), when anyone who has an interest in the subject matter, can file a Writ of Mandamus.
Argument
For rule 1.110(b) to have been correctly applied with the petition dismissed, the following would have had to be correct:
11. The Respondent, not Judge Sjostrom, would have made a complaint to the court that it did not understand what the Counts were, not by answering them, after the Respondent defaulted;
12. The statements of fact and material evidence adequately disclosed in the petition, DID reveal to a reasonably prudent person that crimes that were committed by state government agents, no matter what format was used by the non-attorney Petitioner, which disclosed violations of Florida Statutes and consequently needed to be investigated by the Respondent/employee/agent as part of STANDARD management plans, policies and operating procedures for Florida as a discretionary function, but the Respondent’s implementation of an incomplete or illegal set of them isn’t. In Maryls Bear Medicine v. United States (9th Cir. 2000) 241 F.3d 1208. When a state or federal agency has acted contrary to mandates or directives, imposing liability doesn’t require a court to second-guess legislative and administrative decisions grounded in social, economic or political policy. “When a suit charges an agency with failing to act in accord with a specific mandatory directive, the discretionary function exception doesn’t apply.” (Berkovitz, 486 U.S. at 544, 108 S.Ct. at 1963.) and (Faber v. United States (9th Cir. 1995) 56 F.3d 1122). A “failure to effectuate policy choices already made, will not be protected under the discretionary function exception.” (Id., 241 F.3d at 1215, emphasis added.) The Respondent took an oath of office, vowing to uphold mandates within Section 6, Article 4 of the Florida Constitution, which he was elected into office to uphold for consumers.
13. In paragraph 5 of the petition, the Petitioner did in fact asked Judge Sjostrom to instruct the Respondent to investigate the civil right violations committed by his government agents, thus the purpose of the petition.
Summary of the Argument
14. A Writ of Mandamus petition, is not a complaint for equitable relief in which anything more than an interest in Florida Statute violations committed by state government officials, needs to be presented to, and ordered investigated by, a judge. And the Petitioner’s petition clear had enough content for a reasonably prudent person to understand the merits, when no mention of not understanding its content was EVER stated by the Respondent, even during the final hearing (read transcript), just that the Respondent supposedly did not have the authority to investigate any racketeering activities committed by state agencies and agents, which left the Petitioner’s wife MURDERED, while he was being FALSELY IMPRISONED! The Petitioner is currently suing the State of Florida on this topic! When the Federal Reserve Bank (FRB) owners, through their contracted/paid/bribed government agents, bribed with their salaries and perks, are killing consumers in the streets by the millions, with state and federal constitutions voided, then will GOVERNORS not have the authority to investigate AGENCY IMPLEMENTED MURDERS!
Conclusion
15. Consequently FRCP 1.110(b) was inapplicably used by Judge Sjostrom, and the Respondent DOES have to obey his mandatory duties to consumers, which consist of making sure wrongs committed by his contracted/paid/extorted/bribed state agents, are not overlooked and turned a blind eye to, under the doctrines of Imputation; Respondeat Superior; Vicarious liability; Law of Agency; and the Florida Constitution. The Petitioner is also currently suing the FRB cartel in state court, and will be submitting a copy of this Brief to his website designer; media; FRB; and specific FRB owner Alex Rothschild, to prove his point. Thousands of consumers will be suing the FRB in class action lawsuits for violating their due process rights, by committing honest services frauds with mail and wire misrepresentations, through their contracted/paid/extorted/bribed judicial agents, using their positions; salaries; perks; and pensions as methods of inducing racketeering activities.
Prayer for Relief
16. The Petitioner asks that the presiding trial judge be 1) removed from this case, with a 2) new judge being made to officially default the Respondent and then order him to perform his duties as described in the Florida Constitution.
Affidavit of Verification
State of Florida, County of Hillsborough
I, Darryl Schneider, being duly sworn, deposes and say: I the Petitioner in the above entitled action, have read the foregoing petition and know the contents of it, and say that to the best of my knowledge, its “contents” ARE TRUE and CORRECT.
______________________________________Signature
Subscribed and sworn before me on
_____________________to certify which witness signed by my hand and official seal. Driver License#
______________________________________
__________________________________________Name
______________________________________Signature
___________________________Notary Public State of Florida Seal
Certificate of Service
I Hereby Certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been placed into the case file.
Petitioner/Appellant
_________________________
Signature
10406 N 26 Street
Tampa, FL 33612
813-585-0552
Parties:
1. Ronald DeSantis
400 S Monroe Street
Tallahassee, FL 32399
2. Darryl Schneider
10406 N 26 Street
Tampa, FL 33612