XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
Website Navigation
The Issues
and
Proposed Solutions
( Website Homepage )
Understand the ELS Federal Tax Fraud Scheme
Legal Opinions and
Documents related to the
ELS Tax Fraud Scheme
Chronological List of
Website Documents
Washington State
Precedential
Railroad Right-of-Way
Opinions Thru Brown

Subsequent Hilchkanum Deeds:
March 15, 1904
Warranty Deed to Chris Nelson

by John Rasmussen

Please read a disclaimer for the statements I make on this website accusing judges, politicians and activists of criminal actions.



     The King County v. Rasmussen (2001) and King County v. Rasmussen (2002) decisions construed the portion of the BNSF right-of-way that crossed the Rasmussen property in King County, Washington. The right-of-way was originally established in 1887 by the Seattle Lake Shore and Eastern Railway (SLS&E). The SLS&E passed along the eastern shore of Lake Sammamish, and through the homestead of Bill and Mary Hilchkanum. The following map provides an orientation for the Hilchkanum homestead in relation to Lake Sammamish and the present city of Seattle.

     The Hilchkanums made their homestead application in 1876. On May 9, 1887, they granted the right-of-way to the SLS&E Railway. The Hilchkanums received their homestead patent in 1888. The following map shows the Hilchkanum homestead in pink and the location of the Rasmussen property in green.

     The total area of the Rasmussen property, including the right-of-way, is about one acre. The area of railroad right-of-way is about one third of an acre. The following map shows the position of the BNSF right-of-way on the Rasmussen property.

     As stated at the top of this page, the King County v. Rasmussen (2001) and King County v. Rasmussen (2002) decisions construed the portion of the BNSF right-of-way that crossed the Rasmussen property in King County, Washington. King County claimed that the Hilchkanums granted fee simple title to the Railway in 1887. It was necessary for the County to make this claim because the King County Prosecutor had conspired with BNSF and the Land Conservancy of Seattle and King County (TLC) to work a federal tax fraud scheme in the railbanking of the right-of-way.
    (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

     There were three subsequent Hilchkanum deeds that transferred, to other members of the community, the portion of the railroad right-of-way which was construed in King County v. Rasmussen. This subsequent Hilchkanum deed to Chris Nelson on March 15, 1904, conveyed 96% of the contested property. 1% of the Rasmussen right-of-way land was on government lot three and conveyed to John Herder on June 30, 1905. 3% of the Rasmussen right-of-way land was on government lot five and conveyed to Edward Sanders on September 3, 1904.

     As shown above, the deed to Chris Nelson conveyed 96% of the right-of-way land contested in the King County v. Rasmussen lawsuit. Below, find the transcribed deed and a photocopy of the original.

Transcribed Hilchkanum deed to Chris Nelson on March 15, 1904:

     The following is a transcribed copy of the March 15, 1904 deed from Bill Hilchkanum to Chris Nelson. The deed was drawn on a preprinted deed form. In the transcription, below, the handwritten portions are in bold font.



    Bill Hilchkanum Et Ux                                                            No. 291395
              To                                                                      Warranty Deed
    Chris Nelson

    This Indenture, made the 15th day of March in the year of our Lord One Thousand Nine Hundred and Four

         Between Bill Hilchkanum and Louise Hilchkanum his wife, of Monohon, County of King, State of Washington, the parties of the first part, and Chris Nelson of Monohon, County of King, State of Washington partyof the second part:

         Witnessed. That the said parties of the first part, for and in consideration of the sum of Two Hundred and Twenty-five ($225.00) DOLLARS lawful money of the United States, to them in hand paid by the said party of the second part, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, do by these presents Grant, Bargain, Sell, Convey and Confirm unto the said party of the second part, and to his heirs and assigns, the following described tract, lot or parcel of land situate, lying and being in the County of King, State of Washington, and particularly bounded and described as follows, to wit:

         Lot two (2) Section Six (6) Township Twenty-four (24) North, Range six (6) east of the Willamette Meridian, in the County of King, State of Washington, Containing Twenty One Acres More or less.

         Together with the appurtenances, to have and to hold the said premises, with the appurtenances, unto the said party of the second part, and his heirs and assigns forever.

         And the said parties of the first part their heirs, executors and administrators, do by those presents covenant, grant and agree to and with the said party of the second part, his heirs and assigns, that they, the said parties of the first part their heirs, executors and administrators, all and singular, the premises hereinabove conveyed, described and granted, or mentioned, with the appurtenances, unto the said party of the second part, his heirs and assigns, and against all and every person or persons whomsoever lawfully claiming or to claim the same, or any part thereof shall and will WARRANT and FOREVER DEFEND.

         In Witness Whereof, the parties of the first part have hereunto set their hands and seals the day and year first above written.

    Note from John Rasmussen:
    The remainder of the deed contains Bill and Louise Hilchkanum's marks (signatures), the witness signatures, and the notary section.

      View a photocopy of the March 15, 1904 deed from Bill Hilchkanum to Chris Nelson.



     Federal District Judge Barbara Jacobs Rothstein refused to consider the implications of the deeds to Chris Nelson, Edward Sanders, and John Herder. That was completely dishonest of the judge because these deeds were the most significant subsequent Hilchkanum deeds to be considered in the King County v. Rasmussen (2001) lawsuit. These three deeds conveyed all of the land considered in the lawsuit. This deed to Chris Nelson does not except the right-of-way, nor does it except the land under the right-of-way. Judge Rothstein irrationally determined that Hilchkanum intended his 1887 right-of-way deed to grant fee simple title to the SLS&E Railway. If Hilchkanum had later excepted the land under the right-of-way, Rothstein could use that exception to support her determination of fee title. There was no exception in this deed to Nelson. In this deed, Hilchkanum sells the land under the railroad right-of-way to Nelson because he excepted nothing. This indicates Hilchkanum considered the right-of-way deed to the SLS&E to be an easement. Rothstein could not allow this fact to be considered because she has determined that Hilchkanum already conveyed the same land to the SLS&E in his 1887 right-of-way deed. So, Rothstein simply refused to consider the effect of this deed and the deeds to Sanders and Herder, and instead selected a less significant subsequent Hilchkanum deed that was not in the chain of title of the lawsuit but had language excepting the SLS&E right-of-way. She then incorrectly found that the exception of the right-of-way in that subsequent Hilchkanum deed excepted the land under the right-of-way. This is not the correct interpretation of the exception of a right-of-way in a deed.
    (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

      View a discussion of the meaning of the exception of a right-of-way in a deed.

     Judge Rothstein took part in the federal tax fraud scheme that was used to railbank the BNSF East Lake Sammamish spur line by dishonestly determining that Hilchkanum granted fee simple interest to the Railway. She did this by ignoring the implications of this significant subsequent Hilchkanum deed. She did this by denying a jury trial; by manufacturing unsupportable facts; and by misapplying the law. Rothstein refused to consider this deed from Bill Hilchkanum to Chris Nelson because, when analyzed, it destroys her predetermined outcome to King County v. Rasmussen (2001).
    (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

     On appeal, Senior Circuit Judge Betty Binns Fletcher irrationally upheld the blatant dishonesty of her sister federal judge, Barbara Rothstein, in the three-judge appeals decision King County v. Rasmussen (2002).
    (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)