CAUSE NO.

2011-004521-1
Fannie Mae a/k/a Federal National Mortgage Association PLAINTIFF, V. James Allen McGuire and all Occupants of 902 Rusk Drive, Euless, Texas 76039 DEFENDANTS,

County Court at Law

No. 1

TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS

EMERGENCY MOTION TO SET ASIDE Plaintiff, James Allen McGuire and all Occupants of 902 Rusk Drive, Euless, Texas 76039, hereby files this Motion to set aside. Plaintiff filed a Petition for Review with the Texas Supreme Court, in accordance with TRAP for filing a Petition for Review, as such, the Texas Supreme Court assumed jurisdiction. On August 17, the Texas Supreme Court dismissed the Petition for Want of Jurisdiction and such notice delivered to Ms. Mary Louise Garcia. In accordance to Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, TRAP 64.1, a petitioner who files a Motion for Rehearing may file within 15 days. Plaintiff/Petitioner did so file a Motion for Rehearing on August 29, 2012, within the 15 day period and the Texas Supreme Court did notice to Ms. Mary Louise Garcia, Tarrant County Clerk, 1000 W. Weatherford St., RM 130, Fort Worth, TX 76196 of such filing [Exhibit A]. Whereas Petitioner timely filing a

Motion for Rehearing, this court and Ms. Mary Louise Garcia lacked jurisdiction to grant a Writ of Execution executed August 30, 2012. Regardless of the late mail notice, the court or Ms. Mary Louise Garcia executed the Writ of Possession before the expiration of the time to file a Motion for Rehearing as found in TRAP 64.1. TRAP 15.1(a) notes that a Writ of Possession can be issued bearing the courts seal and be signed by the clerk. However, the court clerk would be required to have jurisdiction to initiate such action, which it currently does not have due to the fact that the Texas Supreme Court currently retains such jurisdiction in accordance to the statutes and until the Texas Supreme Court's jurisdiction is exhausted in full adjudication, this court and Ms. Mary Louise Garcia lacked authority to grant a Writ of Possession. TRAP 15.1(a) does not grant a right to violate ones Civil Rights as noted in part in the following: Hoffman v. Holden, 268F 2d 280 2d 280, 289. Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any state or territory, subjects or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, equity, or other proper proceeding for redress. That an officer or employee of a state or one of its subdivisions is deemed to be acting under "color of law" as to those deprivations of right committed in the fulfillment of the tasks and obligations assigned to him. Monroe v. Pape, 1961, 365 U.S. 167.

The Seventh Circuit of Appeals has held that a public official does not have immunity simply because he operates in a discretionary situation. It indicated that public servants are to be held liable when they abused their discretion or acted in a way that is arbitrary, fanciful, or clearly unreasonable. (Civil Rights) Littleton v. Berbling (1972, Ca. 7 Ill.), 468 F.2d 389.

/S/ James Allen McGuire 902 Rusk Drive Euless, Texas 76039 817 420-4151 j.mcguire@trilliondollarfubar.com

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on September 11, 2012, a true and correct copy of Plaintiffs Motion to Set Aside was delivered to Defendants counsel, Janna Ward Clarke, 1100 Oil & Gas Building, 309 West Seventh Street, Fort Worth, Texas 76102, and upon County Court at Law #1 by U. S. Mail.