THE TRUTH IS STILL TOLD

furthermore 

If You Copy State or Federal case law You cant  copyright IT or trademarked IT

Furthermore These Two Files One written by mrs.sHELL?

and Two Are Proof Of A Crime By Mrs.shell? 

Still Want More Proof? Okay Click Here For More Copyrighted Fun

http://www.profane-justice.org/html/training_seminar.html

AFAC exercises exclusive jurisdiction and oversight over the practice of Family Advocacy. 

http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/foia/divisionmanual/two.htm § 2 Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2 Monopolizing trade a felony; penalty Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $10,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $350,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding three years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court. John Sherman Born: 10-May-1823 § 6 Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 6 Forfeiture of property in transit Any property owned under any contract or by any combination, or pursuant to any conspiracy (and being the subject thereof) mentioned in section 1 of this title, and being in the course of transportation from one State to another, or to a foreign country, shall be forfeited to the United States, and may be seized and condemned by like proceedings as those provided by law for the forfeiture, seizure, and condemnation of property imported into the United States contrary to law. § 2 Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 13(2) Discrimination in price, services, or facilities (a) Price; selection of customers It shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce, in the course of such commerce, either directly or indirectly, to discriminate in price between different purchasers of commodities of like grade and quality, where either or any of the purchases involved in such discrimination are in commerce, where such commodities are sold for use, consumption, or resale within the United States or any Territory thereof or the District of Columbia or any insular possession or other place under the jurisdiction of the United States, and where the effect of such discrimination may be substantially to lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly in any line of commerce, or to injure, destroy, or prevent competition with any person who either grants or knowingly receives the benefit of such discrimination, or with customers of either of them: Provided, That nothing herein contained shall prevent differentials which make only due allowance for differences in the cost of manufacture, sale, or delivery resulting from the differing methods or quantities in which such commodities are to such purchasers sold or delivered: Provided, however, That the Federal Trade Commission may, after due investigation and hearing to all interested parties, fix and establish quantity limits, and revise the same as it finds necessary, as to particular commodities or classes of commodities, where it finds that available purchasers in greater quantities are so few as to render differentials on account thereof unjustly discriminatory or promotive of monopoly in any line of commerce; and the foregoing shall then not be construed to permit differentials based on differences in quantities greater than those so fixed and established: And provided further, That nothing herein contained shall prevent persons engaged in selling goods, wares, or merchandise in commerce from selecting their own customers in bona fide transactions and not in restraint of trade: And provided further, That nothing herein contained shall prevent price changes from time to time where in response to changing conditions affecting the market for or the marketability of the goods concerned, such as but not limited to actual or imminent deterioration of perishable goods, obsolescence of seasonal goods, distress sales under court process, or sales in good faith in discontinuance of business in the goods concerned. The basic federal and state antitrust laws are as follows: A. Federal Trade Regulation Laws16 (1) The Sherman Antitrust Act of 189017 declares illegal contracts and conspiracies in restraint of trade, monopolization and attempts to monopolize. (2) The Clayton Act of 191418 as amended by Cellar-Kefauver Act of 195019 makes illegal certain practices including exclusive dealing and tying contracts, mergers, and acquisitions where their practices may substantially lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly. (3) The Robinson-Patman Act of 193620 declares certain types of price discrimination illegal. (4) The Federal Trade Commission Act21 declares unfair methods of competition and unfair acts or practices in the conduct of trade or commerce illegal. 30.5. Enforcement A. Private Enforcement Private parties (including businesses) who have been injured directly or indirectly by acts which violate the monopolies & profiteering law may sue to recover three times the amount of damages suffered as a result of the Defendants' conduct (known as "treble" damages); in addition, attorney fees and costs are available to a prevailing Plaintiff. In some instances, private Plaintiffs may also be entitled to injunctive relief (i.e., a court order barring a continuation or repetition of the offending conduct). Similarly, a private consumer injured by conduct violative of the UTPA may seek injunctive or monetary relief under that statute; again, a prevailing Plaintiff is entitled to attorney fees and costs. There is also provision for private suits by injured parties under the Unfair Sales Act and the Petroleum Market Share Act. B. Public Enforcement The Attorney General is vested by law with the legal authority to protect the state's sovereign interests, the integrity of its marketplace and the interests of consumers by enforcing the State's antitrust laws.31 Under the monopolies & profiteering law, violations of the prohibitions against agreements in restraint of trade and monopolization may be prosecuted either civilly or criminally; a violation of either provision is a Class C crime, exposing the perpetrator to a maximum of five years incarceration, four years' probation, $5,000 in fines, and an order for restitution. Violations of Maine's merger statute are exposed only to civil prosecution.32 When the Attorney General proceeds civilly under the monopolies & profiteering law, he may seek injunctive relief (a court order) to restrain violations, and (in the case of agreements in restraint of trade and monopolization offenses) a civil penalty not to exceed $100,000 for each violation. In addition, he may seek treble damages on behalf of injured state agencies, or as parens patriae (literally "parent of the state") on behalf of consumers injured directly or indirectly by the offending conduct.33 The Attorney General may also proceed civilly under the UTPA, and in that context may seek injunctive relief, restitution on behalf of injured consumers, and, in the case of intentional violations, a civil penalty not to exceed $10,000 for each violation.34 http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode15/usc_sup_01_15_10_41.html http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/law/st_org/iptf/articles/content/1999052501.html#III.

Footnotes