"Bond of acceptance"?

Moderators: Prof, Judge Roy Bean

User avatar
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 263
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 7:42 pm
Location: Illinois, USA

"Bond of acceptance"?

Post by morrand » Sun Feb 08, 2015 3:00 am

Over my lunch breaks, I have a bad habit of browsing over to the web site of the Illinois appellate courts and reading the new Rule 23 (non-precedential) orders. It's not always that interesting, but once in a while something comes up.

One of these was the case of Mr. Khalid Paden, who had hired an attorney to represent him in his divorce case, allegedly stiffed his lawyer to the tune of $14,190, and was subsequently sued on the debt by an organization that had bought it. (His attorney had quit his practice to become a judge for Du Page County, west of Chicago.) In telling the story of the case, the appellate court relates, in part:
¶ 17 On August 22, 2013, defendant filed a motion to dismiss a citation to discover assets, contending that he had tendered payment in full to Momkus. Momkus filed a response, in which it asserted that the documents tendered by defendant, a “bond of acceptance” and a certificate of indebtedness,” did not constitute proper payment. On October 28, 2013, defendant filed a motion to withdraw his motion to dismiss the citation to discover assets.

¶ 18 On November 4, 2013, defendant filed a petition for a satisfaction of judgment, in which he asserted that he had satisfied the judgment by tendering payment in full and that Momkus had refused to accept his payment. Defendant essentially contended that he had tendered a bond of acceptance, which, combined with a certificate of indebtedness, effectively constituted payment in full to Momkus.

¶ 19 On November 13, 2013, the trial court entered an order striking defendant’s motion to withdraw his motion to dismiss. The court also denied defendant’s petition for satisfaction of judgment.
Momkus McCluskey v. Paden, 2015 IL App (2d) 140230-U.

Mr. Paden, having struck out on this count, didn't raise the issue again either in the circuit court or in the subsequent appeal, choosing instead to focus (pro se) on how the judge was prejudiced against him and how the buyer of the debt lacked standing. So, there's no more mention in the order of what these documents were supposed to be.

Google's not much help. Searching on "bond of acceptance" yields a couple of hits on "answer aggregator" sites that don't really go anywhere, and an (apparently unanswered) question on AOLAnswers, "How do I cancel or dishonor a silver surety bond of acceptance?" It sounds like some variant on the trusty old A4V scam, but does anyone have any details on it?

User avatar
notorial dissent
A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
Posts: 11120
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:17 pm

Re: "Bond of acceptance"?

Post by notorial dissent » Sun Feb 08, 2015 5:32 am

I'm suspecting it is the usual sovcit nuttery generally called a "Silver Bond", which they seem to think has some magical properties, that has just, as in all sovcit nuttery, been corrupted in to something even more corrupt and useless. I can't really say that I have ever seen two silver bonds that were all that similar either since I think they are also ad hoc constructions. I've never come across this particular term "bond of acceptance" before, so will be on the look out for it now since I am sure it will inevitably rise out of the morass that is sovcit mythos.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 2624
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2013 2:16 am

Re: "Bond of acceptance"?

Post by Jeffrey » Sun Feb 08, 2015 6:16 am

I seem to recall Winston Shrout going on about acceptance bonds.