Spreadbury v. Bitterroot Public Library et al

Filing 176

MOTION to Quash by Plaintiff Michael E. Spreadbury. Motions referred to Jeremiah C. Lynch. (APP, )

Download PDF
Michael E. Spreadbury 700 S. 4th Street Hamilton, MT 59840 Telephone: (406) 363-3877 mspreadCiilhotmail.com Pro Se Plaintiff IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA MISSOULA DIVISION Cause No.: CV-ll-64-DWM-JCL MICHAEL E. SPREADBURY Plaintiff ) ) v. ) MOTION TO QUASH BITTERROOT PUBLIC LIBRARY, ) !NVALID SUBPOENAS CITY OF HAMIL TON, ) LEE ENTERPRISES INC., ) BOONE KARLBERG PC, ) Defendants ) Comes now Plaintiff with motion to move court to quash invalid subpoena deuces tecum issued by Defendant Boone Karlberg PC on behalf of Defendants served upon several third parties in violation ofPlaintiff expectation of privacy. Plaintiff Motion to Quash Cause 9:11-cv-1l-64-DWM-JCL November 28, 2011 Motion: WHEREFORE, Plaintiff moves court to quash unlawful subpoena deuces tecum requests from Defendants that violate Plaintiff expectation ofprivacy, without court approval, lacks release by Plaintiff, and in violation of federal statute that protects confidential information. Brief in Support: Plaintiff has expectation of privacy, Defendant Boone did not establish with court approval of release ofprotected information Privacy Act: 5 USC§ 552(a)(b); HIPPA Act: 45 CFR§ 160-164; FERPA 1974: 20 USC§ 1232g & 34CFR part 99. Without lawful subpoena, Defendant issuing unlawful requests to third parties with respect to this case in violation of Plaintiff lawful expectation of privacy. Plaintiff has expectation ofprivacy from unlawful subpoena US v. Miller 425 US at 442 (1976). The issuance of subpoenas by Defendant Boone is controlled by existing legal process Calif Bankers Assn. v. Shultz 416 U,) 21 (1974). Plaintiff right to be free from government search and seizure violated as Defendant City of Hamilton Montana seeks information unreasonably with unlawful subpoena; government objectives violate privacy ofPlaintiff which he justifiably relies Katz v. US 389 US at 353 (J 967). Information sought on behalf of government protected by aforementioned federal laws with authority in this Honorable Court. 2 Plaintiff Motion to Quash Cause 9:11-cv-1l-64-DWM-JCL November 28, 2011 Defense intruded into Plaintiff zone ofprivacy in violation of 4th Amendment US Constitution as Defendants in this cause of action 42 USC§ 1983 for civil rights Hoffa v. US 385 US at 301-302 (1966) citing Boydv. US 116 US 616 (J886). The nature ofthe documents needs to be examined for legitimacy, protecting Plaintiff expectation of privacy concerning contents Couch v. US 400 US at 335 (1913). Court is asked to quash all Defendant unlawful subpoena deuces tecum for violation of expectation of Plaintiff privacy without court signature, release by Plaintiff, or applicable order. Information sought by Defendants violate Plaintiff expectation of privacy, right to be free from government search, seizure of such records protected by federal statute, US Constitution Amendment 4. Certificate of Compliance From LR 1(d)(2)(E) US District Court Rules Montana, I certifY that this brief conforms with 14 point font, New Times Roman typeface, is double spaced, contains 356 words excluding title page, this compliance. -;t... Respectfully submitted this ~day of November, 20 II Michael E. Spreadbury, Pro Se Plaintiff 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?