WA – Sovcit watch – Dave Darby

Frustrated by his inability to have a previous case heard in a federal court, Darby said he made the conscious decision to stop paying the taxes on his Amboy property and home. Clark County records show that Darby has not paid his property taxes since the first half of 2008. He now owes Clark County nearly $24,000 in unpaid taxes, penalties and interest.

Darby said the Common Law Grand Jury foreman, Vancouver resident Lowell Miller, advised him not to attend a July 1 court date. Instead, Miller and other members represented Darby at the proceeding.

“They told the court to stand down,’’ Darby said. “Judge (Gregory) Gonzalez ran our jury foreman out of the court and would not listen to our constitutional argument.’’


Why do people accept advice from others who have nothing at stake? Dave allowed others to try to “represent” him at the court hearing and of course, the Judge was not impressed.

Sorry Dave, but the “magic incantations” of the “Common Law Knitting Club” do not really work…

Dave has some imaginative opinions about the Constitution of the State of Washington

Plaintiff also contends that there are two constitutions for the State of Washington: the original 1878 constitution, which guarantees “each sovereign his sovereignty and title to his land”; and an illegal 1889 constitution, which “took allodial title and sovereignty from the people.”5 Plaintiff asks this court to declare as null and void the second 1889 Washington State Constitution, even though it was approved by a vote of the citizens of the then-territory of Washington and accepted and ratified by the President of the United States. Paintiff argues that the first 1878 Washington State Constitution is still “in full force today” because it “was the first legal contract with the people of the future state of Washington [and t]o replace it legally, the government ha[d] to essentially cancel the contract with the people and the people have to sign the cancellation.”6 Plaintiff contends that because “the people” never signed “the cancellation, the contract is still in full force.”7

Perhaps Darby missed the following in the 1878 Constitution

Section 2.

All taxes shall be uniform upon the same class of subjects within the territorial limits of the authority
levying the tax, and shall be levied and collected under general laws, which shall prescribe such regulations as shall secure a just valuation for taxpayers of all property, real and personal.

Section 3.

The property, real and personal, of the United States, and the property of the state and counties; property
of municipalities; common-school property; cemeteries not owned or used for private or corporate
profits; public libraries shall be exempt from taxation; and all laws exempting from taxation property
other than hereinbefore mentioned, shall be void.

Read more about Darby’s “Constitutional Criminal Complaint” here

The Court does not obtain subject-matter jurisdiction just because the plaintiff raises a federal question in his complaint. The Court finds that the asserted basis of federal jurisdiction is patently meritless and dismissal for lack of jurisdiction is appropriate.


2 thoughts on “WA – Sovcit watch – Dave Darby

  1. I realize this is not the biggest issue — but why would a plaintiff who lives in Washington, suing a government official in Washington, over a piece of property located in Washington, file the case in federal court in Utah?

  2. The answer is simple: He did not believe that the 9th Circuit would be interested in his case. Utah is the 10th Circuit… But of course also the wrong venue…

Comments are closed.