YOU CANNOT HAVE A TRIAL WITHOUT AN INJURED PARTY

HOWEVER, YOU CANNOT HAVE A TRIAL WITHOUT AN INJURED PARTY.  You cannot, as a matter of Due Process of Law even be called or summons (Lis Pendens/Foreclosure) into a Court or Tribunal without having an INJURED PARTY. The injured party is the Accuser and he or she must squarely and surely identify you as the Accused. The accused (your legal personality Bailee) has either committed an injury to a body (corpus delecti) or injured property or have breached a contract. If so, then the accuser (injured party) must be present and the contract must also be placed as evidence for review. The Accuser (injured party) must put the judicial machinery into action by FIRST writing a sworn affidavit that states the injuries that were committed. Then the summons comes and it must be "signed" by an Article III judge, which states that the matter has been duly investigated and probable cause for such summons and / or warrant is justified. (See Amendment IV below). These are all matters of Due Process of Law and if one of these elements are missing and or corrupted in anyway the entire matter must be dismissed.  

Whereas defined pursuant to: Amendment VII

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Whereas defined pursuant to Supreme Court Annotated statute: Trinsey v. Pagliaro, D.C. Pa. 1964, 229 F. Supp. 647. Statements of counsel, in their briefs or their arguments are not facts before the court and are therefore insufficient for a motion to dismiss or for summary judgment.

Whereas defined pursuant to; Supreme Court Annotated Statue; Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 533 "The law requires proof of jurisdiction to appear on the record of the administrative agency and all administrative proceedings.

Whereas defined pursuant to; Supreme Court Annotated Statute: Clearfield Doctrine -Clearfield Trust Co. v. United States 318 U.S. 363-371 (1942) 

"Governments descend to the Level of a mere private corporation, and take on the characteristics of a mere private citizen...where private corporate commercial paper [Federal Reserve Notes] and securities [checks] is concerned. ... For purposes of suit, such corporations and individuals are regarded as entities entirely separate from government." 

Whereas defined pursuant to: Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Whereas defined pursuant to; Supreme Court Annotated Statue: CRUDEN vs. NEALE, 2 N.C. 338 2 S.E. 70 "The state citizen is immune from any and all government attacks and procedure. see, Dred Scott vs. Sanford. 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 or as the Supreme Court has stated clearly, "...every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellowmen without his consent."