Spreadbury v. Bitterroot Public Library et al

Filing 30

MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment against Defendant City of Hamilton, Bitterroot Public Library by Plaintiff Michael E. Spreadbury Motions referred to Jeremiah C. Lynch. (ASG, )

f

Michael E. Spreadbury
?'

700 S. 4th Street

~.

Hamilton, MT 59840

.,-

~'<

~, '~

if·,

j

l.!i~:; ,;;.:...

~
•

~

i COURT

U;v, KI\_.T GF MONTANA

MISSOULA

Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]
Pro Se Plaintiff

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA

MISSOULA DIVISION

MICHAEL E. SPREADBURY

)

Plaintiff

Cause No: CV-1l-61-M-DWM

)

v.

) MOTION FOR PARTIAL

BITTERROOT PUBLIC LIBRARY,

) SUMMARY JUDGMENT

CITY OF HAMIL TON,

) AGAINST DEFENDANT

LEE ENTERPRISES, INC.,

) CITY OF HAMILTON,

BOONE KARLBERG, PC,

) BITTERROOT PUBLIC
)

LmRARY

Comes now Spreadbury with motion for partial summary judgment against
Defendant City of Hamilton, Bitterroot Public Library in the aforementioned.
Motion:
Spreadbury respectfully moves that Honorable Court fmd partial summary
judgment against Defendant City of Hamilton, Bitterroot Public Library.
1

Plaintiff Motion for Partial Summary Judgment

cause 9:2011-CV-11-61-M-DWM

May 9, 2011

This motion is opposed by Defense counsel.
Brief in Support:
Section 1983 litigation, 42 USC § 1983 is established to permit persons who have
had constitutional rights violated, and to sue the wrongdoer for redress of injuries.
Liability attaches if the defendant acted in "color of law", and the action(s)
deprived the Plaintiff of some right, privilege, or immunity secured by the
Constitution, or federal laws Monroe v. Pape 365 US 167 (1961).
nd

Spreadbury alleges constitutional deprivations in color of law 2 Amended
complaint served upon this court. In answer dated April 26, 2011, Defendant
Bitterroot Public Library, City of Hamilton Montana admit claims pled by
Spreadbury, less issues of material fact remain, partial summary judgment proper
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett 477 US 317 (1986).

Spreadbury pleads before this Honorable court that the right to peaceful assembly
is a fundamental right Amendment 1 US Constitution. Spreadbury further avers
property, facility at 306 State Street Hamilton MT 59840 that contains the
Bitterroot Public library in original block #18 of the City of Hamilton is public
property. On August 20,2009 Spreadbury peacefully assembled on same public
property; unlawful prosecution for criminal trespass by Defendant City of
Hamilton exe~uted for private property Montana Code Ann. MCA§ 45-6-203.
2

Plaintiff Motion for Partial Summary Judgment

Cause 9:2011-CV-11-61-M-OWM

May 9, 2011

In Defendant City of Hamilton April 26, 2011 answer to this court, Defendant City
of Hamilton admitted to prosecuting Spreadbury for peaceful assembly on public
property in ~ 2 pg. 3, ~21, ~57 in Joint Answer of Defendants; response to
Speadbury ~ 117 of the Amended State Complaint. Defendant City of Hamilton
admitted dropping charges in ~ 26 Joint Defendant Answer of April 26. 2011.
In Joint Answer of individual Defendants ~ 19 ofApril 26, 2011 Defendant
Bitterroot Public Library admits to refusing a submission request by Spreadbury
which deprives fundamental right to free speech found in Amendment 1 US

Constitution, violates Defendant public library policy from American Library
Association (ALA) "right to read": Defendant public library precluded from
rejecting submission if not profane, illicit. Spreadbury admission to Defendant
Public library: US President letter as presented in May 2009 to Defendant Roddy.
In Joint Answer of individual Defendants ~19 Defendant City of Hamilton admits
to asking Spreadbury to not enter 232 W. Main S1. Hamilton MT the business of
Defendant Lee Enterprises Inc., a liberty interest without due process, violates
Spreadbury protected right in Amendment 5,14 US Constitution. Hamilton Police
(HPD) Chief Oster made "policy or custom" on Spreadbury by restricting liberty
into Lee Enterprises property Ravalli Republic; punitive damages attach to City of
Hamilton Monell v. NYC Dept. o/Social Services 436 US 658 (1978).

3

Plaintiff Motion for Partial Summary Judgment

Cause 9:2011-CV-11-61-M-DWM

May 9,2011

Defendant City of Hamilton further admits HPD Detective Murphy investigated,
published, and sent reports to Hamilton City Attorney Bell for prosecution in ~51.
By investigating, writing public police reports against Spreadbury for protected
free speech fundamental right in Amendment 1, US Constitution. Defendant Del.
Murphy admission, defamatory to Spreadbury with actual malice; reasonable
officer would not have investigated, published police reports, requested
prosecution for sighting of a person on internet site; defeats qualified immunity of
Defendant Detective Murphy Buckley v. Fitzsimmons 509 US 259 (1993).
Defendant Bitterroot Public Library admitted to removing library privileges of
Spreadbury in ~30, 32, 34, 37 without willful violation of the rules, never asked
Spreadbury to remove person from public library: former Director Langstaff, under
oath in municipal trespass trial affirmed no staff asked Spreadbury to leave library;
Defendant public library in violation MCA§22-1-311[Use ofLibrary-PrivilegesJ.
Procedural Due Process protected in Amendment 14 US Constitution violated for
Spreadbury; state statute breeched, right to liberty interest [library privilege] taken;
no administrative remedy, access to library board, no written appeal is offered to
Spreadbury, not heard pre-deprivation Matthews v. Eldridge 424 US 319 (1976),

Mendez v. INS 563 F. 2d 956 (!lh Cir. 1977) federal statute due process.
Defendant City of Hamilton admitted City Attorney Bell policymaker in ~43;
Hamilton Police Chief Oster policymaker in ~45 in Joint Answer of Defendants
4

Plaintiff Motion for Partial Summary Judgment

Cause 9:2011-CV-11-61-M-DWM

May 9, 2011

April 26, 2011. Any decision of official policymaker; municipal policy if acts
deprive clearly established right: fairly represents official policy, municipal
punitive damages attach Monell.
Defendant City of Hamilton actors prosecuting Spreadbury for peaceful assembly
when reasonable prosecutor, knew or would have known pt Amendment US

Constitution protects peaceful assembly of Spreadbury, no law can be enforced
abridging this right Amendment 14 US Constitution, Buckley.
Individual actors for City, Public library are subject to qualified immunity under
color of law; negated if a reasonable officer who knew or should have known that
approaching, investigating, or prosecution activity for peaceful assembly on public
property would violate established right Amendment 1 US Constitution Morley v.

Walker 175 F. 3d 756 (gth Cir., 1999), Buckley. Defendants have burden to prove
functional analysis of actors immunity to court, plead immunity as entitlement for
Defense actors ibid.
Restricting Spreadbury's access to Ravalli Republic July 9, 2009 Hamilton Police
Chief Oster engaged in civil conspiracy to deprive rights between Defendants City
of Hamilton, Lee Enterprises Inc., made new policy to restrict liberty interest of
Spreadbury without cause, deprives due process of law in violation of Amendment
5, 14 US Constitution. Defendants prosecute Spreadbury in sworn complaint to

5

Plaintiff Motion for Partial Summary Judgment

Cause 9:2011-CV-11-61-M-DWM

May 9,2011

Hamilton City Court for peaceful assembly on public property, Defendant Bell
made new policy to prosecute Spreadbury for peaceful assembly, violated

Amendment 1 US Constitution right to peaceful assembly, punitive damages
attach Monell. Admitted actions of Defendant City of Hamilton, Bitterroot Public
Library, implicate Defense actors for § 1983, negligence, defamation, IIED, NIED
in Spreadbury's 2nd Amended complaint served on Honorable court May 4,2011.
No material facts remain, partial summary judgment proper. Defense admit to
Spreadbury before this court; no clear and convincing evidence standard is needed
where the New York Times Standard for defamatory pUblication and summary
judgment apply Anderson et. al. v. Liberty Lobby Inc. et. al. 477 US 242 (1986).
WHEREFORE, Spreadbury moves Honorable Court find count # 1,2,3,5,
6,7,9,10,11,12,13,14,17,20,21,25,26 of 2nd Amended Complaint as actions and
omissions admitted and enacted by Defendant City of Hamilton, Bitterroot Public
Library are subject to summary judgment. Spreadbury asks court to find summary
judgment against Defendants for above counts, fully admitted in April 26 2011
Defense answer pleadings as presented herein.
Respectfully submitted this/ - " ' - - - )

BY:------~---+~----~~----------------Michael E. Spreadbury, Self Represented Plaintiff
6