Spreadbury v. Bitterroot Public Library et al

Filing 171

Statement of Genuine Issues re: 170 Response to Motion, 150 MOTION for Summary Judgment on Plaintiff's State Law Claims, 148 MOTION for Summary Judgment on Plaintiff's Federal Claims filed by Michael E. Spreadbury. (APP, )

Michael E. Spreadbury
700 S. 4th Street
Hamilton, Mf 59840

FILED

Telephone: [phone]

NOV 2B20U
a:'ATRICK E. DUFFY, ClERK

[e-mail]

DePUTY ClERK. !.IISSOI.JI..A

Pro Se Plaintiff
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA

MISSOULA DIVISION

Cause No.: CV-II-64-DWM-JCL
MICHAEL E. SPREADBURY

)
)

PLAINTIFF STATEMENT

v.

)

OF DISPUTED FACTS

BITfERROOT PUBLIC LIBRARY,

)

TO DENY DEFENDANT

CITY OF HAMIL TON,

)

SUMMARY JUDGMENT

LEE ENTERPRISES INC.,

)

BOONE KARLBERG PC,

)

Plaintiff

Defendants

)

Comes now Plaintiff with list of disputed material facts to deny Defendant City,
Public Library motion for summary judgment before this Honomble Court.

Plaintiff list of disputed facts

Cause CV-1l-64-DWM-JCL

November 21, 2011

Statement of Disputed Facts
1. Bitterroot Public Library owns no private property (AKA "Library
Property") at 306 State S1. Hamilton MT site of Plaintiff peaceful assembly
August 20, 2009.
2. Plaintiff never committed a crime at, in, near, or around Bitterroot Public
Library in 2009 (e.g. see affidavit 1 J121111; #6)
3. Bitterroot Public Library violated policy with respect to Plaintiff submission
with verbal denial May 29, 2009, written denial July 9,2009.
4. Bitterroot Public Library violated procedure as Plaintiff submitted
"Reconsideration Request Form" dated July 8, 2009 and library ignored.
5. Plaintiff letter ofJuly 15, 2009 indicated to public library, City law
enforcement that Plaintiff library privileges removed unlawfully.
6. Peaceful assembly August 20, 2009 by Plaintiff on public property at 306
State S1. Hamilton Montana constitutes criminal trespass to Defendants.
7. Bitterroot Public Library violated right to liberty, equal protection by
unlawfully removing privileges without Plaintiff knowingly in violation of
rules as cause.
8_ Plaintiff was never asked to leave Bitterroot Public Library, or notified
behavior was not appropriate by any staffofthe public library.

2

Plaintiff list of disputed facts

Cause CV-l1-64-DWM-JCL

NO\lember 21, 2011

9. Tresspass charge by City ofHamilton later dismissed is malicious

prosecution.

10. Defense actors never pled functional analysis for qualified or other

immunity, merely claimed actors were "entitled" to immunity.

II. Bitterroot Public Library never provided administrative remedy for Plaintiff
to be heard in re: removal oflibrary privileges.
12. Defense in motion for summary judgment die not address or dispel

conspiracy to deprive rights, 42 USC§ 1983; cause in aforementioned.

13. Parties to this case dispute prima facie case for lIED, NIED established.
14. Account in Defense version ofMayor describing Plaintiff as schizophrenic
in Hamilton City Hall differs than version relayed to Plaintiff.
15. Imputing loathsome disease, or "like" someone with loathsome disease
qualifies as slander in Montana.
16. Defendant Brophy negligent in removing plaintiff library privileges as he
knew, should have known Plaintiff was never asked to leave library, or
approached about behavior.
17_ Parties to this case are in dispute as to immunity ofpublic library

defendants.

18. Defendant City Police officers knew, should have known depriving rights of
peaceful assembly, speech bring law enforcement liability.

3

Plaintiff list of disputed facts

Cause CV-U-64-0WM-JCl

November 21, 2011

19. Parties to this case are in dispute as to Policymaker liability to the City of
Hamilton; several instances occurred, if liable bring punitive damages.
20. Defendant Brophy abuse of process as 2nd denial of library privileges
February 23, 20 I 0 as Brophy knew, should have known Plaintiff did not
willfully violate the rules, nor was told by library staff, others of violations.
21. Parties dispute severe and intentional action in Joint Function brought
tortious interference manifested in Plaintiff full disability due to stress,
anxiety, defamation knowingly applied, unlawfully applied to Plaintiff.
22. Probation officers without reasonable suspicion October 4, 2011 entered
plaintiff residence called off Defendant Police officers Oster, Murphy, but
Defendant officers executed unlawful entry, trespass, violation of Plaintiff
liberty, equal protection.
23. John Cramer, witness to Defendant Ravalli Republic July 9, 2009 entry by
Plaintiff never told Plaintiff to not enter Lee place of business at 232 W.
Main Hamilton, MT; Defendant and Official policymaker Oster did.
24. Defendant Lee called in threats to Ravalli County Dispatch July 9,2009,
Defendant City Police responded, Witness John Cramer said it was Plaintiff
behavior not threats that caused problem.
25. Ravalli Republic newspaper conducted business as Plaintiff hand wrote note
July 9,2009 in small waiting area at 232 W. Main St. Hamilton MT.
4

Plaintiff list of disputed facts

Cause CV·l1-64-DWM-JCL

November 21,2011

26. Official policymaker Oster violated Plaintiff's 5th Amendment right to
liberty, l4th Amendment right to equal protection to enter a business open to
the public at 232 W. Main St. Hamilton, MT by asking Plaintiff not to return
without cause to do so on July 9, 2009.
27. Plaintiff never returned to the Bitterroot Public Library since July 10, 2009.
28. Bitterroot Public Library policy for patron submissions with verbal denial
May 29, 2009 by Defendant Roddy, July 9,2011 with Defendant Langstaff
written correspondence.
29. Promise of library policy as attachment to Langstaffletter July 9, 2009 was
reason for Plaintiff entry into public library prior to unlawful "ban".
30. Plaintiff asked for omitted library policy of Jo Frankfurter who refused to
release public library policy or indicate any problem with Plaintiff's
behavior.
31. Plaintiff left July 9, 2009 letter authored by Defendant Langstaff unlawfully
denying submission request to facilitate distribution of public library policy
to Plaintiff.
32. Plaintiff was expecting public library policy on or an~und July II, 2009 and
,"

received unlawful ban from Defendant Langstaff by certified mail.

33 ..Defendant Roddy was not threatened November 4,2009 by Plaintiff.

5

Plaintiff list of disputed facts

Cause CV-11-64-DWM-JCl

November 21, 2011

34. Roddy gave unsolicited, defamatory infonnation to Defendant City Police
November 4,2009 about Plaintiff without probable cause of a felony crime.
35. Defendant Langstaff, Director ofpublic library in 2009 attempted on

several occasions to impute crime on Plaintiff in Joint Function with

Defendant City, seen in Defendant City police reports under seaL

36 ..Defendant Snavely did not uphold Plaintiff right under Montana Code to
use library, violating liberty interest (Amendment 5) of Plaintiff.
37. Plaintiff has affiant no crime committed in Ravalli Co. Montana including
in, around, or on public property ofBitterroot Public Library, and has
submitted public trust national security clearance (exhibit A TR. #130).
38. City of Hamilton Montana is not lawfully incorporated by requirements in
Montana Code, admitted by Defendant Mayor Steele in 2009 Public meeting
captured on video.
39. The charge oftrespass on public property published by Defendant Lee as
front page headline identifying Plaintiff, and likeness September 10,2009
altered Plaintiff election November 3, 2009 for Hamilton MT mayor.
40. The alleged 13 contacts with Defendant Hamilton Police; published by
Defendant Lee, entered via seal is ex parte communication via City Defense
counsel. Action violates Plaintiff due process, demonstrated conspiracy to
deprive Plaintiff established right, is defamation, joint function, and also
6

Plaintiff list of disputed facts

Cause CV-11-64-0WM-JCL

November 21, 2011

interfered with Plaintiff election (Public Function Test) for Mayor of
Hamilton.
41. Bitterroot Public Library as independent publically funded entity can not
own private property at 306 State Street Hamilton, MT, site of Plaintiff
peaceful assembly August 20, 2009.
42. Defense litigation for Bitterroot Public Library is being paid by municipal
"insurance" paid by fraud of City ofHamilton taxpayers; public library is
not eligible for municipal coverage as independent entity defined in the
library compact in Montana Code Ann. MCA§ 22-1-61 let. seq.

r..l
Respectfully submitted this

23

day of November, 2011

Michael E. Spreadbury, Pro Se Plaintiff

7