Spreadbury v. Bitterroot Public Library et al

Filing 102

NOTICE of filing Joint Response to Defense re: 2nd Amended Complaint by Michael E. Spreadbury re 98 Answer to Amended Complaint, 99 Answer to Amended Complaint (APP, )

Michael E. Spreadbury

RECEIVED

700 S. 41h Street

SEP 0 6 201l

Hamilton, MT 59840

Cl.ER!(, u.s. OISTl!/CT COURT
DIsTRICT OF MONTANA

Telephone: [phone]

MISSOUlA

mspread@hotmail,com
Pro Se Plaintiff

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA

MISSOULA DIVISION

) Cause No: CV-11-64-DWM-JCL

MICHAEL E. SPREADBURY
Plaintiff

)

v.

)

BITTERROOT PUBLIC LIBRARY,

)

.JOINT RESPONSE TO

CITY OF HAMILTON,

)

DEFENSE IN RE:

LEE ENTERPRISES, INC.,

)

2ND AMENDED

BOONE KARLBERG, PC,

)

COMPLAINT

---------------------)
Comes now Spreadbury with response to Defendant Lee Entelprises Inc"
Defendant City, Defendant Public Library wifh respect to 2nd Amended Complaint
approved by US District Court for Montana.
Brief in Support
Spreadbury has no control US Constitution not upheld in US District Court.
1

Plaintiff Reply to 2ND Amended

Cause 9: ll-CV-11-64-0WM-JCl

September 1, 2011

In 2'd Amended complaint (1R.# I 0) Spreadbury properly pleads deprivation of
established right by Defendants in color oflaw actionable by 42 USC§1983 in US
District Courts. Magistrate Judge, US District Judge with bias before Spreadbury
by failure to recuse under 28 USC §455 et. seq. when conflict, paid conflict before
Honorable Court.
Spreadbury reserves answers to Defendant initial answers to complaint in 1R.# 23
to Defendant Lee, initial answer to City, Library Defendants in aforementioned.
US District Judge affirmed defamation for Defendant City Mayor, and July 9, 2010
article from Defendant Lee Enterprises; ignored imputing crime by Defendant
Boone Karlberg 18 USC§912 as FBI agent in pleadings before this court.
Federal Jurists in US District Court for Montana further refuse to uphold oath to
uphold US Constitution, out of Spreadbury's control. Peaceful assembly on public
property protected Amendment I US Constitution Hague v. CIO 307 US 496
(1939). Defense failed to plead functional analysis of immunity of Defense actors,
yet US District Judges in aforementioned compel discovery, court costs from
Spreadbury as pro se IFP before this court Forrester v. White 484 US 219 (1988)

Morley v. Walker 175 F. 3d. 756 (i)'h Cir. 1999). Procedural due process deprived
by Defendant Public Library not upheld by US District Court Mathews v. Eldridge

424 US 319 (1976). Paul v. Davis 424 US 693 (1976).

2

Plaintiff Reply to 2Nt> Amended

cause 9~ ll-CV-U-64-0WM-JCl

september 1, 2011

The Due Process clause not upheld by the US District Court for Montana, which
states "No State shall make or enforce a law which shall abridge the privileges or
immunities of citizens of the United States ..." protected in Amendment 14 US

Constitution. Parties to case note: sitting on public property is protected activity.

US Amendment 1, US Constitution.
The protection to newspapers in Montana of a oourt hearing as protection fur
Defendant Lee Enterprises fails with respect to the Due process clause contained in
the US Constitution, not upheld in the US District Court for Montana. Defendants
under color oflaw City, Public Library, Defendant Lee Enterprises conspired to
deprive Spreadbury peaceful assembly, in aforementioned in conspiracy with
Defendant Boone Karlberg.
Likewise the privilege found in Montana Code Annotated MCA §27-1-804 (what
Communications Priviliged) pled by Defendant Boone Karlberg precluded by

equal protection clause not upheld by US District Court due to bias, extensive
corruption, worst ranking for justice: no US Constitution in State ofMontana [US
DOJ 2007).
The Website \vww.RavalliRepublic.com is a proprietary site ofDefendant Lee
Enterprises and their newspaper The Ravalli Republic, a Defendant in this case.
The main function of the Ravalli Republic is to publish news stories as a

3

Plaintiff Reply to 2ND Amended

Cause 9: ll-CV-1l-64-0WM-JCl

September 1. 2011

newspaper. 'Ine public cannot obtain internet services from the Ravalli Republic
Newspaper, and thererore is not an internet services corporation protected in 47
USC §230 et seq. a bias of the US District Court in the aforementioned.
The publisher ofa newspaper where the statement originally appeared may be held
liable even without notice (from the damaged party) Barrett v. Rosenthal 146 P_ 3d

5/0 Cal Supra (2006).
Public comments from Defendant Ravalli Republic article September 2009
imputed severe psycbological illness a defamatory per se liability for Defendant
Lee Enterprises, recognized US Magistrate Lyoch in the aforementioned prior what
appears to be a reversal; more evidence ofbias towards Spreadbury.
In the Batzel court, the 9"' Circuit Court of Appeals stated:
Congress decided not to treat providers ofinteractive computer services like
other information providers such as newspapers, magazines or television and
radio stations, all ofwhich may be held liablefor publishing or distrlbuting

obscene or difamatory material written by others [emphasis added].
th

Batzel v. Smith 333 F. 3d at 1026 (9 Cir., 2003)

4

Plaintiff Reply to 2N& Amended

c.use 9: U-CV-ll-64-DWM-JCL

September 1, 2011

Spreadbury pleads erroneous legal reasoning in US District Court for Montana in
aforementioned as US Constitution, established US Supreme Court, Circult
precedent not upheld Ruckerv. Davis 237 F. 3d at 1118 (9'" Cif 2001).
US District Court ignores fraud properly pled in aforementioned: Defendant Public
Library protected with litigation expenses as ineligible for such ('fR.# 29). FRCP
9(b) fraud; evidence of civil conspiracy under color of law between Defendant
Boone K.arlberg, Public Library, City. US Court refuses to break up fraudulent
litigation representation ofDefendants defrauding public, court, Spreadbury.
Spreadbury preserves all pleadings before District Court for appeal.
Certificate ofCOInpliance
From LR 7(dX2XE) US District Court Rules Montana, I certifY that this brief
conforms with 14 point font, New Times Roman typef<ICe, is double spaced,
contains 653 words excluding title page, this compliance.

$
Respectfully submitted this l::::-;Iay of September, 2011

BY: .......-.-~..(.L---,"--;,.L-_-/--+_ __

Michael E. preadbury, Seli:R1!presented Plaintiff
5