Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Defendants Dismas Charities,Inc.,Ana Gispert,Derek Thomas And Lashanda Adam's Motion To Dismiss And Incorporated Memorandum Of Law In Support Of Motion To Dismiss

Defendants Dismas Charities,Inc.,Ana Gispert,Derek Thomas And Lashanda Adam's Motion To Dismiss And Incorporated Memorandum Of Law In Support Of Motion To Dismiss

Ratings: (0)|Views: 38|Likes:
Published by cinaripat
United States District Court,Southern District Of Florida,Traian Bujduveanu v. Dismas Charities,Ana Gispert,Derek Thomas and Lashanda Adams,Mental and Physical Torture at Dismas Charities,Abuse at Dismas Charities,Civil rights Violations at Dismas Charities,Illegal Search And Seizure at Dismas Charities,Discrimination at Dismas Charities,Reverse Discriminarion at Dismas Charities
United States Courthouse, Southern District Of Florida
United States District Court,Southern District Of Florida,Traian Bujduveanu v. Dismas Charities,Ana Gispert,Derek Thomas and Lashanda Adams,Mental and Physical Torture at Dismas Charities,Abuse at Dismas Charities,Civil rights Violations at Dismas Charities,Illegal Search And Seizure at Dismas Charities,Discrimination at Dismas Charities,Reverse Discriminarion at Dismas Charities
United States Courthouse, Southern District Of Florida

More info:

Published by: cinaripat on Aug 07, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

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

08/28/2011

pdf

text

original

 
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FORTHE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDACASE NO.: 11-20120-CIV-SEITZ/SIMONTONTRAIAN BUJDUVEANU,Plaintiff,vs.DISMAS CHARITIES, INC., ANA GISPERT,DEREK THOMAS and ADAMS LESHOTADefendants._________________________________________/ 
DEFENDANTS DISMAS CHARTIES, INC., ANA GISPERT, DEREK THOMAS ANDADAMS LESHOTA’S MOTION TO DISMISS AND INCORPORATEDMEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS
Defendants Dismas Charities, Inc., Ana Gispert, Derek Thomas and Adams Lashanda,incorrectly identified as Adams Leshota (“Leshota”), (collectively “Defendants”) by and throughtheir undersigned counsel and file their Motion to Dismiss and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support of her Motion to Dismiss the Complaint of Traian Bujduveanu (“Plaintiff”) andalleges as follows:
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff, a former Federal Inmate, has filed a vague and confusing Complaint against hisCommunity Correction Center/Half Way House, Dismas, and three of its employees, Gispert,Thomas and Leshota. The Complaint contains 50 paragraphs of “factual allegations” filed by alaundry list of four alleged Federal Theories of Recovery and six alleged state law theories of recovery. The Complaint fails to allege the specific facts and allegations necessary for any causeof action. Instead the Complaint simply names a cause of action (i.e. abuse of process) without
Case 1:11-cv-20120-PAS Document 26 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/04/2011 Page 1 of 18
 
CASE NO.: 11-20120-CIV-SEITZ/SIMONTON2stating the legal and factual elements for the cause of action. The Complaint fails to delineatewhich Defendant is being sued for which specific cause of action. The Complaint also fails toallege any cause of action against certain Defendants. Even if the factual allegations in theComplaint are accepted as true, the Complaint fails to properly plead causes of action.The Complaint also fails to allege any violations of Federal or State law by anyDefendant. Without any proper and sustainable Federal or State cause of action, this lawsuitshould be dismissed.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS AND PROCEDURAL POSTURE
Plaintiff pled guilty tocharges of conspiring to illegally export military and dual useaircraft parts to Iran. Plaintiff was sentenced to 35 months for his crimes. Towards the end of his sentence, Plaintiff was transferred to Dismas, a “half way house,” on July 28, 2010 until hisrelease date of January 31, 2011. (Complaint, p. 14) Dismas is a private non-profit corporationknown as a CCC Contractor. (Complaint, p. 36) As a result of the Plaintiff’s health issues,Plaintiff was released to home confinement and was required to report back to Dismas everyWednesday. (Complaint, p. 14-15) Plaintiff attended a resident orientation and acknowledgedthat he had the program policies and procedures explained to him and was give the opportunityto ask questions and receive clarification of any policies and procedures. (Complaint, p. 16 and26)On October 13, 2010, the Plaintiff appeared on his reporting date by driving himself toDismas in Plaintiff’s family vehicle. While Plaintiff may have held a valid driver’s license, hewas not authorized to drive under the terms of his release to Dismas. Specifically, the Plaintiff was not authorized to operate a motor vehicle without approval of the Director, Gispert.
Case 1:11-cv-20120-PAS Document 26 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/04/2011 Page 2 of 18
 
CASE NO.: 11-20120-CIV-SEITZ/SIMONTON3Following the violation, the vehicle was searched for safety reasons and a cell phone allegedlybelonging to the Plaintiff’s family was discovered. The Plaintiff was not authorized to possess acell phone, regardless of who owned it. A phone can be hazardous to safety as it can be used tocall or communicate with other persons not confined or other half way house residents, whichcould cause security issues. (Complaint, p. 17-23 and Exhibit C to the Complaint)A Disciplinary Report was then prepared and signed by the Plaintiff on October 15, 2010.(Complaint, Exhibit C to the Complaint) The Plaintiff was removed from Home Detention andassigned three weeks of extra light duty at Dismas. The Plaintiff also lost his weekend pass fromDismas for three weeks and was not allowed visitation for three weeks. (Complaint, p. 25 andExhibit C to the Complaint) The Plaintiff’s personal items were then held by Dismas. As thephone was contraband, Dismas donated the phone. The remainder of the Plaintiff’s personalitems are being held by Dismas. However, the Plaintiff or his designated family member refusesto pick the personal items up from Dismas.On October 18, 2010, the Plaintiff was then caught having an unauthorized visit in theparking lot. The unauthorized visitor dropped off items to the Plaintiff without advancedpermission. Another disciplinary report was written. (Complaint, p. 38) Since the Plaintiff wasnot complying with the terms of his release, the United States Marshall Service (not Dismas)removed the Plaintiff from Dismas and transported him to the Federal Detention Center inMiami. (Complaint, p. 38) Plaintiff remained at the Federal Detention Center for 81 days.(Complaint, 46) Plaintiff has since been released. (Complaint, page 9, signature line of Plaintiff)
Case 1:11-cv-20120-PAS Document 26 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/04/2011 Page 3 of 18

You're Reading a Free Preview

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