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: [phone]

OEPUTY CLERk. M1iilSiin­

[e-mail]

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