Florida Supreme Court Closes Mandamus To Ban The Jab For Criminality

The mandamus filed by pro se litigant was closed and transferred To Circuit Court March 20, 2024 to see if it will be thrown out or proceed. What Next? Will The Circuit Court Make DeSantis Answer?

We Need Justice For Humanity! Legal Justice Tactics Underway In Florida?

Meet the Defendants Florida Governor Ron DeSantis and Attorney General Ashley Moody currently accused by Dr. Joe Sansone (and Karen Kingston who assisted the document) of slacking off on a clear duty to enforce the criminal laws that would prevent the alleged bioweapon jabs.

The process server managed to serve the Writ of Mandamus filed by Dr. Joe Sansone on named defendants Florida Governor Ron DeSantis and Attorney General Ashley Moody on March 18, 2024:

Governor DeSantis and AG Moody Have Been Served

However, only 2 days after the Defendants were served, on March 20, 2024 the Supreme Court closed the case and transferred it to Circuit Court…

03/20/2024

Disposition Transferred The petition for writ of mandamus is hereby transferred, pursuant to Harvard v. Singletary, 733 So. 2d 1020 (Fla. 1999), to the Circuit Court of the Second Judicial Circuit, in and for Leon County, Florida. The transfer of this case should not be construed as an adjudication or comment on the merits of the petition, nor as a determination that the transferee court has jurisdiction or that the petition has been properly denominated as a petition for writ of mandamus. The transferee court should not interpret the transfer of this case as an indication that it must or should reach the merits of the petition. The transferee court shall treat the petition as if it had been originally filed there on the date it was filed in this Court. Any determination concerning whether a filing fee shall be applicable to this case shall be made by the transferee court. Any and all pending motions in this case are hereby deferred to the transferee court. Any future pleadings filed regarding this case should be filed in the above mentioned circuit court at 301 S Monroe St Ste 100, Tallahassee, Florida 32301.

Where does that leave the case?

Under Florida law, the term “mandamus” is defined as a remedy to command performance of a ministerial act that the person deprived has a right to demand, or a remedy where public officials or agencies may be coerced to perform ministerial duties that they have a clear legal duty to perform.

A duty or act is defined as a ministerial when there is no room for the exercise of discretion and the performance being required is directed by law.

The writ of mandamus is intended to accomplish certain limited functions and not to redress every grievance or disagreement. Relief is available only where the pleader asserts 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.

In order for a court to issue a writ of mandamus, a person bringing the petition must establish 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.

HOT TIP FROM IOJ TO DR. SANSONE:

Due Diligence : ). Law work is rough. Time to dive into the brain work!

Law work truly is excruciating and is really, really tough work. And let’s face it, this is a legal riddle not a single attorney on Earth has figured out, but it is doable! Let’s go! Justice for humanity is the mission and we are going to learn and use the law.

WHAT NEXT FOR CITIZEN LITIGANT DR JOE SANSONE TO PURSUE IT ALL THE WAY?

Well, it looks like Dr. Joe Sansone is going to need to VERY QUICKLY DIVE IN AND STUDY to learn the entire rules of Civil Procedure in that particular court and argue the following in the courts format they will accept.

Mostly, in order to help Florida stop the shots, we think its important that Dr Joe knows it was his burden of proof and his obligation to explain in detail with evidence why he thinks mandamus is correct and precisely how he exhausted ALL other Florida court remedies, and therefore he has no other legal remedies available to him. That had to be in the original filing document.

This will be pretty much impossible because the case was filed and started as a Mandamus. It is likely not going to be enough for Joe to try to claim to the Circuit Court that there were no more remedies available other than the extraordinary writ of mandamus. Albeit, the Mandamus was filed by Joe after an administrative default where the defendants failed to respond to 3 cease and desist letters, but the normal procedure is to sue in civil and criminal courts to determine the merits and if correct get an injunction to prevent the jabs and alleged crimes.

The Circuit Court will need these issues clarified by Dr. Sansone if he expects to have the court proceed rather than dismiss. If it proceeds, which is unlikely, it could go to a real trial which requires intense study, organizing and legal strategy.

To be very clear, as a law and civics research institute, we are friends with Dr. Joe, think he is a fearless hero doing SOMETHING, and are NOT trying to critique, AT ALL!!!. This is only to clarify for the public and Joe what is required by law to move forward now the case is closed in Supreme Court and transferred to Circuit Court to see if it will be proceeding or dismissed.

IOJ’s role is to help participants that seek to jump in the legal game STUDY UP & get clear on the many, many details regarding law and procedure. We want to WIN, not SPIN in circles.

Circuit Courts Initial Task When Assessing the Petition for a Writ of Mandamus In Florida

When a trial court receives a petition for a writ of mandamus, its initial task is assessing the petition to determine whether it is facially sufficient. Holcomb. v. Dep’t of Corr., 609 So.2d 751 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). If it is not facially sufficient, the court may dismiss the petition. Id.

If the petition states a legally sufficient claim, the court must issue an “alternative writ in mandamus” ordering the respondent to show cause why the writ should not be granted. Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.630(d)(3).

---

After a Show Cause Order is Issued

(If it’s granted we get to settle facts )

Once a show cause order has been issued by the court, it becomes in all respects the complaint and subject to the same rules of pleading as are any other complaints. West Palm Beach v. Knuutila, 183 So.2d 881 (Fla. 4th DCA1966); Fla.R.Civ.Pro. 1.630(e).

It is then up to the respondent to admit or deny the factual allegations upon which relief is based and to present any and all affirmative defenses.

All facts alleged in the order to show cause, which generally incorporates by reference the original petition, that are not specifically denied are admitted to be true. Arnold v. State ex rel. Mallison, 147 Fla. 324, 2 So.2d 874 (1941).

---

Material Issues of Fact in Dispute

If the respondent raises material issues of fact, a trial to resolve such disputes is appropriate. Bal Harbour Village v. State ex rel. Giblin, 299 So.2d 611, 615 (Fla. 3d DCA1974), cert. denied, 311 So.2d 670 (Fla.1975).

The burden is on the respondent for coming “forward with exact facts upon which it refused to perform the act required by the alternative writ.” Id.

If the respondent does not meet this burden in the return, then no trial is necessary and the court can decide the issues based upon the sufficiency of the legal issues raised. Id. 

Once an alternative writ has issued, the burden is on the respondent to come forward with the facts it contends support its refusal to perform its legal duty. Smith v. State, 696 So.2d 814, 816 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997).

IOJ has been super busy this week preparing the most amazing global plan to EXIT the WHO and stop the shots globally. We are so, so, so VERY HAPPY to say many of you stepped up and had our back where it counts and as a result of your love and support we raised $30k are now only $5k short of the down payment for our lawyers to start the global case to stop the shots.

A $5,000 Down Payment and continued monthly payments is all it will take to stop complaining and actually get Dr. Yeadon, Dr. Janci Lindsay, Dr. Ana Mihalcea, Sasha Latypova, Norman Fenton to get in front of a real judge to prove the shots must be taken off the global market.

We do not earn any money. We have tirelessly worked pro bono for free the past 3 years to build the worlds most solid case to have a chance to discredit the WHO’s science and experimental shots they authorized globally.

The team at IOJ are REALLY wanting this $5,000 paid by the end of the week, so the attorneys can resume working on our case and finally file the worlds biggest cases against Big Pharma, WHO and Regulators like FDA and EMA which can stop the shots globally and hold wrongdoers to account for crimes against humanity.