Spreadbury v. Bitterroot Public Library et al

Filing 62

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

Michael E. Spreadbury
700 S. 4th Street
Hamilton, MT 59840
Telephone: [phone]

FILED

[e-mail]

JUL 06 2011
PATRICKE

~

Pro Se Plaintiff

. DUFFY, CLERK

y CLE~._.
~
- ..rUI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA

MISSOULA DIVISION

Cause No.: CV-ll-t/f-DWM-JCL
MICHAEL E. SPREADBURY
Plaintiff

)
)

v.

)

MOTION TO

BITTERROOT PUBLIC LIBRARY,

)

STRIKE

CITY OF HAMILTON,

)

LEE ENTERPRISES INC.,

)

BOONE KARLBERG PC,

)

Defendants

)

Comes now Plaintiff with motion to strike irrelevant information submitted to this
court. Defense counsel for Lee Enterprises, and Defense Counsel for City, Library
and Boone Karlberg have submitted information regarding speaking to a librarian
November 4, 2009 which is protected free speech. Even if not considered free
speech, has no relevance to peaceful assembly August 20,2009.

Plaintiff Motion to Strike

Cause CV-11-61-DWM-JCL

June 28, 2011

Court has duty to protect parties to a case, and to screen material for relevancy.
Spreadbury respectfully objects to material published, or other court proceedings
that Spreadbury has no control over submitted to this court. IfMontana officials,
or judicial officers wish to be corrupt, or violate their oath of office, Spreadbury
has no control over documents produced by these officials.
Honorable court is hearing case as to peaceful assembly on public property,
violation of due process for liberty interest with respect to library privileges,
malicious prosecution for peaceful assembly, and other violations pled to this
court. The speech issue November 4, 2009 is not relevant to case at hand.
Information that has no relevance to this case should be barred from entry to case.
Defendants are misrepresenting defamation before this court, submitting
information to mislead this court.
As a pro se IFP litigant, court has duty to protect party, disallow non-relevant
material. Discussion, articles, order of protection without finding of fact,
conclusion of law are merely more evidence of civil conspiracy, yet have no place
as information, or evidence in the aforementioned.
Wherefore, Spreadbury requests material outside of scope of case, which includes
a separate matter pending regarding discussion with librarian November 4, 2009
should be stricken from the record.
2

Plaintiff Motion to Strike

Respectfully submitted this

Cause CV-1l-61-DWM-JCL

l't

day of June 2011

3

June 28, 2011