Spreadbury v. Bitterroot Public Library et al
Filing
42
MOTION to Stay Discovery by Plaintiff Michael E. Spreadbury. Motions referred to Jeremiah C. Lynch. (APP, )
Michael E. Spreadbury
P.O. Box 416
FILED
Hamilton, MT 59840
MAY 192011
PATRICK!
8y~CleRI<
Telephone: (406) 363-3877
OEPUTY CLERk. M1iilSiin
mspread@hotmail.com
Pro Se Plaintiff
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA
MISSOULA DIVISION
MICHAEL SPREADBURY
Plaintiff
)
t
V-//- C
tf-/1--(}tJl~ 1:1
,
~y
Cause No: CV-11jrt-M-DWM
)
v.
)
BITTERROOT PUBLIC LIBRARY,
)
MOTION, BRIEF IN
CITY OF HAMILTON,
)
SUPPORT TO STAY
LEE ENTERPRISES, INC.,
)
DISCOVERY PENDING
BOONE KARLBERG, PC,
)
COURT ACTION
--------------------------)
Comes now the Plaintiff with motion to stay discovery pending decision from
Honorable court, claim for summary judgment, qualified immunity pending.
Motion:
Spreadbury moves court stays discovery pending ruling on summary judgment,
qualified immunity of Defendants before Honorable court.
'J~L
Plaintiff Motion to Stay Discovery
Cause 9:2011-CV-1l-61-M-DWM
May 17,2011
Defense oppose this motion.
Brief in Support:
Defense actors in the aforementioned have pled to this court "subject" to qualified
immunity [~7 pg. 19 Individual Defendants Answer; ~4 pg. 21 Main Defendant
Answer] charging criminal trespass for Spreadbury's August 20, 2009 peaceful
assembly on public property, established right Amendment 1 US Constitution.
Qualified immunity for Defense actors nullified as reasonable officer, prosecutor,
publisher knew, or should have known peaceful assembly on public property
deprives established right of Spreadbury Anderson v. Creighton 483 US at 646
(1987), Davis v. Scherer 468 US at 197 (1984).
Defense actors have responsibility to plead functional analysis of qualified
immunity, Defense actors have not pled functional analysis before this court
Buckley v. Fitzsimmons 509 US 259 (1993). Defendant City of Hamilton, other
Defendants bear burden of demonstrating qualified immunity attaches to
prosecuting, publishing, investigating, Spreadbury with trespass on public property
inter alia Morley v. Walker 175 F. 3d at 759(9th Cir. 1999), Burns v. Reed 500 US
478 (1991).
Qualified Immunity is an affinnative defense that must be pled by the Defendant
official Gomez v. Toledo 446 US 635 (1980) citing Harlow v. Fitzgerald 457 US at
2
Plaintiff Motion to Stay Discovery
Cause 9:2011-CV-11-61-M-DWM
815 (1982). At summary judgment, the court determines established constitutional
right at time action occurred, but until threshold immunity question resolved,
discovery should not be allowed Harlow 457US at 818. Immunity should be
decided by court long before trial Mitchell v. Forsyth 472 US at 527-529 (1985).
Discovery is stayed pending summary judgment Siegestv. Gilley 500 US at 230
231 (1991).
For reasons herein pled, under lawful court authority, Spreadbury moves that
discovery be halted due to pending summary judgment, decision on qualified
immunity of Defense actors.
Certificate of Compliance
From LR 7{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 275 words excluding title page, this compliance.
Id..~
Respectfully submitted this ~day ofMa~
Michael E. Spreadbury, Pro Se
3
011
Certificate of Service
Cause No. CV-II-0064-DWM
I certify as Plaintiff in this action, a copy of the below named motion was served
upon the US District Court Missoula Division and all opposing counsel for parties
in this above named cause of action by first class mail. The following addresses
were used for service:
Motion to Stay Discovery Pending Court Action
Russell Smith Federal Courthouse
Clerk of Court
200 E. Broadway
Missoula, MT 59803
Defendant Counsel:
Plaintiff Counsel:
William L. Crowley
Michael E. Spreadbury
Boone Karlberg PC
PO Box 416
POBox 9199
Hamilton, MT 59840
Missoula MT 59807
(self-represented)
Jeffrey B Smith
Garlington, Lohn, & Robbinson PLLP
POBox 7909
Missoula MT 59807
Dated _ _ _5/17/11 _ _~_
Michae< E. Spreadbury, Pro Se Plaintiff
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?