Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Document 19 Amended Complaint and Exhibits

Document 19 Amended Complaint and Exhibits

Ratings: (0)|Views: 108 |Likes:
Action brought under the RICO Act, Declaratory Judgment Act, and Civil Rights Act of 1871. Constitutional and statutory issues raised. As applied to the Plaintiffs, the PDUFA violates Fifth Amendment right to Equal Protection and Ninth Amendment fundamental right to Equal Treatment before the law. Invidously discriminatory animus is alleged. Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 5.1 ("ARCP Rule 5.1") is facially unconstitutional. ARCP Rule 5.1 is unconstitutional as applied to the Plaintiffs. ARCP 5.1 violates Fourteenth Amendment right to Due Process and Equal Protection. Plaintiffs were deprived of their fundamental (presently-enjoyed) right to retained legal counsel in a civil lawsuit (the parallel Arizona State Action) without Due Process or Equal Protection by fiat of the trial court. Invidiously discriminatory animus is alleged.

"Davidsons have been prevented and impaired from asserting their federal rights in an extraordinary way. Davidsons sought vindication in both federal (Arizona, New York, and Texas) and state courts (Arizona)." See Reply Brief, Davidson v. Grossman, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, Case No. 07-20650; See Oshiver v. Levin, Fishbein, Sedran & Berman, 38 F.3d 1380, 1387 (3rd Cir. 1994); See 543 US 1081 Davidson v. Vivra Inc, Petition for Writ of Certiorari Before Judgment # 04-537, filed September 17, 2004, cert. denied, January 10, 2005; See 555 US ___, Davidson v. Grossman, Petition for Writ of Certiorari # 07-1525, filed June 4, 2008, cert. denied, October 6, 2008. See also Supplemental Brief in Docket #07-1525 for citation to Bridge v. Phoenix Bond & Indemnity Co., 553 U.S. ___ (2008) and Liquidation Commission v. Luis Alvarez Renta (11th Cir. 2008).
Action brought under the RICO Act, Declaratory Judgment Act, and Civil Rights Act of 1871. Constitutional and statutory issues raised. As applied to the Plaintiffs, the PDUFA violates Fifth Amendment right to Equal Protection and Ninth Amendment fundamental right to Equal Treatment before the law. Invidously discriminatory animus is alleged. Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 5.1 ("ARCP Rule 5.1") is facially unconstitutional. ARCP Rule 5.1 is unconstitutional as applied to the Plaintiffs. ARCP 5.1 violates Fourteenth Amendment right to Due Process and Equal Protection. Plaintiffs were deprived of their fundamental (presently-enjoyed) right to retained legal counsel in a civil lawsuit (the parallel Arizona State Action) without Due Process or Equal Protection by fiat of the trial court. Invidiously discriminatory animus is alleged.

"Davidsons have been prevented and impaired from asserting their federal rights in an extraordinary way. Davidsons sought vindication in both federal (Arizona, New York, and Texas) and state courts (Arizona)." See Reply Brief, Davidson v. Grossman, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, Case No. 07-20650; See Oshiver v. Levin, Fishbein, Sedran & Berman, 38 F.3d 1380, 1387 (3rd Cir. 1994); See 543 US 1081 Davidson v. Vivra Inc, Petition for Writ of Certiorari Before Judgment # 04-537, filed September 17, 2004, cert. denied, January 10, 2005; See 555 US ___, Davidson v. Grossman, Petition for Writ of Certiorari # 07-1525, filed June 4, 2008, cert. denied, October 6, 2008. See also Supplemental Brief in Docket #07-1525 for citation to Bridge v. Phoenix Bond & Indemnity Co., 553 U.S. ___ (2008) and Liquidation Commission v. Luis Alvarez Renta (11th Cir. 2008).

More info:

Published by: Robert Davidson, M.D., Ph.D. on Jul 12, 2009
Copyright:Public Domain

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

08/09/2009

pdf

text

original

 
Case 4:07-cv-00471 Document 19 Filed in TXSD on 04/17/2007 Page 1 of 50
 
Case 4:07-cv-00471 Document 19 Filed in TXSD on 04/17/2007 Page 2 of 50
 
Case 4:07-cv-00471 Document 19 Filed in TXSD on 04/17/2007 Page 3 of 50

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->