Spreadbury v. Bitterroot Public Library et al

Filing 70

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

FILED

Michael E. Spreadbury
700 S. 4th Street

JUt 272011

Hamilton, MT 59840

PATRIC#( E

BY.

. . DUFF~CLER#(

~

Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]

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.

)

BITTERROOT PUBLIC LIBRARY,

)

FIRST REQUEST

CITY OF HAMILTON,

)

INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

LEE ENTERPRISES, INC.,

)

BOONE KARLBERG, PC,

)

--------------------------)
Comes now Spreadbury with motion, brief in support of equitable relief as
presented before this court as injunctive relief.
Motion
Spreadbury moves that this court grant equitable relief as required in 42 USC s.
1983 before US District Courts, well established court precedent presented herein.
1

Motion, Brief in support: Injunctive Relief

Cause 9:2011-CV-1l-64-0WM-JCL

July 18, 2011

Brief in Support
A cause of action under 42 USC s. 1983 which seeks equitable reliefhas right to
request injunctive relief. Spreadbury has requested injunctive relief from this court
in Spreadbury v. Hoffman et. al. request ignored, as was the right to have service
of summons for pro se civil rights claim under 42 USC s. 1983. The Honorable
Malloy gave immunity to a law student as a Supreme Court Intern, although
interns in the high court do not engage in court activity as Wetzsteon did solo prior
to admission to the Montana Bar October 9, 2008. Honorable Malloy did ignore
18 USC 455 et. seq. for having paid association with the University ofMontalla
Law School, and offered clinic experience to Wetzsteon, an indicator or prior bias.
This court now stands on the notion that a "relationship" would impute bias; of
note Ms. Wetzsteon has given birth since the clinic experience without a change of
name or known marriage.
With respect to the injunctive relief requested in the aforementioned, Spreadbuty
pled an order to stop defamation of character from Defendant Lee Enterprises Inc,
further constitutional violation ofthe exceptionally high instances arising from the
Hamilton Montana Police Department against Spreadbury, an order to compel
Boone Karlberg PC from further defamation which continued in pleadings in
aforementioned, out ofscope information FRCP 26 et. seq. information before an
ancillary court FRCP 26 (B)(viii) [see Motion for Protective Order July 18,2011].
2

Motion, Brief in support: Injunctive Relief

Cause 9:2011-CV-11-64-DWM-JCL

July 18, 2011

Lastly, Spreadbury pled for equitable relief to establish proper lawful library
privileges taken outside of constitutional rights, and to quash a civil order of
protection without finding offact, rule of law against Spreadbury.

Once a right and a violation have been shown, the scope ofa district court's
equitable powers to remedy past wrongs is broad, for breath andflexibility
are inherent in equitable remedies.
Rizzo v. Goode 423 US 362 (1976) citing Swann et. al. v. Charlotte-Mechlenberg
Board ofEd. et. al. 402 US 1 (1971).
ChiefRyan Oster accused ofpolicy or custom in aforementioned violating
Spreadbury's right to liberty protected in Amendment 5, 14 US Constitution,
shows inability of law enforcement supervisors to take action to correct violations

Monell v. NYC Dept. a/Social Services 436 US 658 (1978). Spreadbury has right
to equitable reliefunder 42 USC s. 1983 iflaw enforcement supervisors do not
take action Rizzo at 378. The Honorable Court is reminded of Spreadbury v.
Hoffman Cause No. 9:10-cv-00049..DVM where injunctive relief is requested from
the Ravalli County Sheriff, the Ravalli County Attorney Office, Ravalli County
Judiciary; case is pending before the 9th Circuit of Appeals as 10-36086.
This Honorable Court is reminded that equitable relief is granted via 42 USC s.

1983 Giles v. Harris 189 US 475 (1903). When patterns of infraction are
3

Motion, Brief in support: Injunctive Relief

cause 9:20ll-CV-1l-64-DWM-JCL

July 18, 2011

exceptionally high injunctive reliefis necessary Council ofOrganizations on
Philia. Police A&R v. Rizzo 357 F. Supp. 1289 (Dist. Court E.D. PA, 1973).
Spreadbury has been SUbjected to broad violations of constitutional rights 18 USC
s. 242 with supervisors Hoffman, Oster refusing to alter their respective
departments in Ravalli County Montana. Federalism considerations determine the
availability and scope of equitable relief is necessary Doran t: Salem Inn Inc. 422

US 922 (1975).
Spreadbury prays equitable reliefbefore this court 42 USC s. 1983with frrst
nd

request for injunctive relief, proper before this court as counts #22-25 in 2
Amended Complaint before this court in the aforementioned.
Certificate ofCompliance

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 617 words excluding title page, this compliance.
Respectfully submitted this

~

(~

day ofJu ,

Michael E. Spreadbury, Self Represented Plaintiff
4