Reply - Not a Party?

              IN THE CIRCUIT COURT GREENE COUNTY MISSOURI


Marc Perkel - pro se              )
                                  )
vs.                               )  No. 197CC0170
                                  )
William A. Wear Jr.               )
James R. Sharp                    )
The Lawfirm of Wear and Sharp     )
Vicki Stringfellow                )



             IN RESPONSE TO SEPARATE MOTION OF DEFENDANTS
                 WILLIAM A. WEAR JR. et al TO DISMISS
             ============================================


COMES NOW, Plaintiff Marc Perkel in response to defendants motion to
dismiss on the basis that they are not a party to this action and states
as follows:


1) That Plaintiff is correct with regards to the date of 07-31-96 as the
   date of the divorce decision, and that Defendants contention that the
   date was a year earlier, as stated in paragraph 1, is wrong.


2) That Wear and Sharp, through counsel, have made a bare allegation
   that defendants, "are not proper parties to an independant action
   filed pursuant to Rule 74.06 (b) and (d) nor are they proper parties
   to a declaratory judgement ... ". Their allegation is unsupported
   by legal authority. Thus they did not provide a specific argument.


3) Missouri Revised Statute 527.110 defines who is to be a party to a
   Declaratory Judgement and states: "PARTIES. When declaratory relief
   is sought, all persons shall be made parties who have any interest
   which would be affected by the declaration...." (See Attachment)


4) As a result of the three (3) decisions plaintiff seeks to be declared
   void. Defendants Wear and Sharp, and the Lawfirm of Wear and Sharp
   were awarded the sums of $2,500 and $12,500 totalling $15,000 in
   legal fees. Should these decisions be declared void, Wear and Sharp
   would likely lose this money.


5) Rule 55.03 of the Missouri rules of Civil Procedure states in part:

      "The signature of an attorney or party constitutes a certificate
      by him that he has read the pleading, motion, or other paper; that
      to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief formed after
      reasonable inquiry it is well grounded in fact and is warrented by
      existing law or good faith argument ..."

      "If a pleading, motion, or other paper is signed in violation of
      this rule, the court, upon motion or it's own initiative, shall
      impose upon the person who signed it, a represented party, or
      both, an apporpiate sanction, which may include an order to pay to
      the other party or parties the amount of reasonable expenses
      incurred because of filing of the pleading, motion, or other
      paper, including a reasonable attorney's fee.


6) Based on Rule 55.03, if Plaintiff can prove his allegations that
   Defendants Stringfellow, Wear, and Sharp committed Fraud on the
   Court, Plaintiff would be entitled to recover reasonable expenses and
   attorney's fees from all the defendants.


7) Plaintiff asserts that $15,000 is enough money, along with charges of
   Fraud on the Court and a possible criminal violation to meet the
   definition of "persons ... who have any interest which would be
   affected by the declaration" as defined by Missouri Statute 527.110.
   Therefore the Plaintiff concludes that the Plaintiff is REQUIRED by
   Law to name Wear, Sharp, and The Lawfirm of Wear and Sharp as parties
   to this action.


WHEREFORE, Since Defendants Wear, Sharp, and the Lawfirm of Wear and
Sharp make a single bare allegation which the Plaintiff has answered,
Plaintiff Marc Perkel prays that the Court will DENY Defendants' motion
to dismiss them as a party from this cause of action.



________________________________________
Marc Perkel * Plaintiff * 01-30-97