Points And Authorities In Response To Motion For Summary Judgement.
THE FULL TEXT OF THE PATRICK KNOWLTON LAWSUIT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Civil Division
Part I MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS'
MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT
A. SUFFICIENCY OF PLEADING CONSPIRACY
(1) The overall conspiracy has been alleged with sufficient
particularity to avoid Defendants' motion to dismiss
1. Contrary to Defendants' position, at this pre-discovery stage,
plaintiff has exceeded the requirements of particularity in alleging
conspiracy. Hobson v. Wilson, 737 F.2d 1 (D.C., 1984) supplies much of our
authority under section 1985. Under Hobson, the Court should not dismiss
plaintiff's complaint under the circumstances of Plaintiff's pleading,
particularly since this case involves fundamental rights and important
questions of public policy:
[I]n some circumstances plaintiffs are able to paint only with a very
broad and speculative brush at the pre-discovery stage, and that overly
rigid application of the rule we articulate could lead to dismissal of
meritorious claims. See 5 C. Wright & A. Miller, Federal Practice and
Procedure 1230 (1969 & 1984 Supp.) ("The court should remember that
fundamental rights and important questions of public policy are involved
in actions under the various civil rights statutes and should not dismiss
the complaint unless it clearly is frivolous or fails to state a claim for
relief.")
(Id. at 31)
(2) The Sequence of Events sufficiently gives rise to the
inference of conspiratorial intent to avoid defendants'
motion to dismiss
2. Brever v. Rockwell Intern. Corp., 40 F.3d 1119 (10th Cir. 1994), is a
very similar section 1985(2) action to the instant case. The plaintiff in
Brever alleged a conspiracy to deter her from testifying before a grand
jury, named 20 John Doe defendants, and also alleged a "a campaign of
harassment, intimidation, terror... harassing phone calls, [and]
following..." Id. at 1123. The court there held that the sequence of
events alleged strongly suggest an inference that the conspirators had a
meeting of the minds:
Defendants suggest that the conspiracy fails to state a claim because it
does not allege communication be-
tween the alleged conspirators. We disagree. Ms. Pitts must allege facts
sufficient "to give rise to the in-
ference that [defendants] conspired". Abercrombie
"Don't believe a word you hear. It was not suicide. It couldn't have been." -Assistant Attorney General Webster Hubbell, 7/20/93, cited in Esquire, 11/93.
Back To The Top.
Mail to:
