Saturday, February 12, 2011
Informal Brief
Following is an altered version of an informal brief that was submitted by postal mail recently; called to verify that it had gotten to the court and they said that it had not gotten there yet.
Also called into local radio talk show; informed them that I had heard on WSJS 600 am radio where they were having a fund rasing campaign for dogs; and that they were talking about how all the people were donating food, money, etc.. Told them that I asked God after listening to Humane Society's fund raiser for dogs; didn;t he love me; am I not as important as dogs; specifically that I had called into the local radio station and asked for help; but there were no responses that I was told of; which I thought was strange because I have ran fund rasiers before and helped people with fund raisers and usually there is some kind of a response; then told them of blog where 500,000 people had visited blog; but not one comment; that it was as if someone was interferring with the comments; etc.. BUT have heard numerous Caucasian males who talk of their life was going nowhere, then they started a blog and their life just took off; people were reading and commenting on their blogs and it was wonderful; opened up a whole new world to them;especially financially. Anyway one of the head people on the radio show said, " Sometimes you have to wait on God, etc..Everybody knows that you have been crying out to God; just hold on; God will answer.
IN reference to Egypt; heard a radio announcer say-Egypt is free and in control after all these years? Then heard another radio announcer say-just about everybody in charge now has been trained by/in the United States=?= so who is in charge=? then thought hope the Egyptian leaders have more intelligence than the African American leaders who have sold African Americans out-THAT'S WHY IT HAS/IS TAKING SO LONG FOR MY BLESSINGS= The African American leaders who have sold out real African Americans and when one is encountered who nicely says, thank you but I would like to serve the real God (who made me the color that I am) instead of one who is usurping African American heritages-it takes decades for them to get their blessing; if they are lucky, some never get to see their blessings.
One of the commentators said, If such and such happened in the United States the people would rise up like the people in EGYPT-WONG-think again-they have the people so controlled you almost have to tell them when to go to the bathroom; they use gases, chemicals, bacteria, etc. on people to keep them in a sadate mode; if that doesn't work then they use thinks assosciated withthe media; so that things such as the SUPERBOWL are used so that the people are put in a trance; For example, the superbowl a few days ago was used to communicate to everybody working in secret for them that they are to LOVE instead of attack people who are not working for them; BECAUE OF EGYPT-Don't want an EGYPT in the United States; don't you think it strange that while they are fighting a revolution in EGYPT that in the United States they are talking about LOVE=WHY?=because they used
EGYPT and their people to know when to back off so that there will not be a revolution in the United States=????? And the so called African American leaders will make sure there isn't one for the right amount of pay=which means if anybody can hear; show them bastards some money and they will do what you want-most of them.The revolution that occured in Egypt was probably suppose to happen in the United States=why they can comfortably rob people; because what one person said/says that was suppose to start a revolution in the United States they silenced that person and created a situation in another country to cause a revolution that feeds the psychological need for a revolution in most people minds. There will not be a revolution in the United States; most of the people can't/aren't allowed to think that far. Just sent an email seeking a backer for court case=email came back= "Hi. This is the qmail-send program at mailout-us.gmx.com.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out."; anything associated with MONEY there is always a hold/interferrance; KNOW that the email address is a good email address-someone communicated that the email wasn't suppose to go through-bastards.
In the informal brief that follows while doing research; because keep trying to figure out why people who are operating system of abuse think they have a right; have documented slave laws which can be applied to various blogs and situations-Scary!.
Socialpeacest
***************************************************************************
MONTH?, 2011
Socialpeacest, No. 00-0000
Plaintiff,
vs.
---‘s –l--,
Defendant ESC- APPEALS N0.XII-
0-00000
E. E. O. C.- CHARGE
NO. 000-2010-0000
Pro Se asks mercy from the UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT.
This Action is brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended, for employment discrimination. Jurisdiction is specifically conferred on this Court by 42 U. S. C. Section 200e (5). Equitable and other relief are also sought under 42 U. S.C. 2000e (5) (g). Jurisdiction is also based on 28 U. S. C. Sections 1331, 1343 and 42 U. S. C. Sections 1981 et seq.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
INFORMAL BRIEF
Socialpeacest No. 00-0000
Plaintiff,
vs.
----‘s –l--,
Defendant ESC- APPEALS N0.XII-
0-00000
E. E. O. C.- CHARGE
NO. 000-2010-0000
1. Court from which review is sought:
A. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA.
B. Date of ORDER, NOTICE AND JUDGMENT
(Month 13, 2010).
2. N. A.
3. Issues for Review:
Issue 1. The Right of Trial by Jury shall be preserved where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars. [Reversal of Order, Judgment, Notice (Month 13, 2010]
Supporting Facts and Argument.
Pro Se filed suite (2010) where the value in controversy exceeds $20.00 The Defendants had case No. 0:000cv-000 transferred No. 00CVD000 from the General Court District Court Division of Forsyth County, North Carolina to the Middle District Court of North Carolina on (2010). Defendant’s filed Motion to Dismiss 0:00cv000 in the Middle District Court of North Carolina on (2010). Plaintiff acting as Pro Se filed Response to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss on (2010) for the Motion to not be Dismissed. The HONORABLE MAG/JUDGE -. ------ ----- Motion to Dismiss in the Defendant’s favor on (2010) with prejudice. Plaintiff acting as Pro Se filed an Objection to Recommended Ruling to Dismiss with Prejudice by The HONORABLE MAG/JUDGE -. ------ ----- on (2010). Defendant’s filed a Response to Plaintiff’s Objection on (2010) BUT Plaintiff never got copy of the Defendant’s Response to Plaintiff’s Objection; Plaintiff called Defendant and informed. Defendant sent a letter stating that that a copy of the Defendant’s Response to Plaintiff’s Objection was included; (but copy of the Defendant’s Response to Plaintiff’s Objection was not, only a copy of a Certificate of Service for
(2010). On (2010), the Defendant sent a Certified letter with a copy of the Defendant’s Response to Plaintiff’s Objection, Forty Five days later, which did not allow Plaintiff time to respond to the Defendant’s Response to Plaintiff Objection. An attorney opened the letter and said;” There is no copy of their Response to Your objection; only a copy of a Certificate of Service.“ (Attorney would not accept 000cv000-conflict of interest; attorney did sign as a Witness on a W--- F-----t University document; Plaintiff was present when Attorney asked W--- F----- University, “What are they (W--- F----- University) basing their EXCLUSION on?”
The Defendant’s actions (sending a copy of the Certificate of Service without a copy of the Response to Plaintiff’s Objections ) interfered with Plaintiff’s ability to respond to Defendant’s filing on (2010) of the Response to Plaintiff’s Objections in a timely fashion.
The HONORABLE JUDGE -. -. -----, had been assigned to No. 0:00cv000 when Plaintiff encountered Attorney (church); but on (Month 13 2010), No. 0:00cv000 was reassigned to the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- while Plaintiff was communicating with said attorney (who signed as a Witness on a W--- F----- University document on about the first part of 2010)- reference court docket -00/13/00 as date the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- as Reassigned to 0:00cv000. Plaintiff had met said attorney at church function; one day attorney dropped off Plaintiff and went to a bank (armored money truck was in front of said attorney vehicle after attorney picked up Plaintiff). Plaintiff called the Middle District Court of North Carolina to check on status of No.0:00cv000 and Plaintiff was informed that the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- was the judge for 0:00cv000 and at the time, Plaintiff was unaware that said attorney had had a case under the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- [who entered an ORDER (2010) to Dismiss 0:00cv000 with Prejudice which violates Amendment VII that states a trial by jury shall be preserved where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars.
In original complaint (00CVD000) (2010) filed in the General Court District Court Division of Forsyth County in North Carolina Plaintiff listed under section 3 that Defendant changed location of hire of Plaintiff to inflict discrimination violations of race, sex, religion, national origin and retaliation during employment [Plaintiff asks the Court to forgive the handwriting in the original complaint; Plaintiff didn’t have an attorney] which included the communication of threats to/that extended to control of plaintiff’s personal, social and religious relationships. Such communications included (but not limited to ---‘s –l--):
(b) ---‘s –l-- working hours were shorten because of social life/dating (In 2007, management at B-------- communicated Plaintiff couldn’t earn money or date males (members of ---‘s –l-- connected to B-------- incident). Plaintiff submits that work hours were shorten at ---‘s –l-- more than three hours a week because Plaintiff had contact with guy who wanted to date Plaintiff. Plaintiff made $8.25 an hour [multiplied three times] equals $24.75 (twenty-four dollars and seventy-five cents), which satisfies the qualifications of the law to meet the criteria to have a jury trial. The Seventh Amendment states that The Right of Trial by Jury shall be preserved where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars. Plaintiff’s work hours were shorten anywhere from five to ten hours a week by Defendant’s management as punishment for seeing or talking to guy who wanted to date Plaintiff; therefore the value in controversy is more than $24.75 (twenty-four dollars and seventy-five cents)(3 x $8.25) and the value in controversy exceeds $20.00 (twenty dollars).
By law, Plaintiff has a right to a Jury Trial.
“SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES;62 U.S. 506 in Ableman v. Booth
Argued: --- Decided: That the Appellate court has power in all cases arising under the Constitution and laws of the United States and that under the act of Congress of 1789, when the decision of the court is against the right claimed under the Constitution or laws of the United States, a writ of error will lie to bring the judgment of the court before this court for reexamination and revision.” - The HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ --
decision that “Therefore, this court finds that Plaintiff’s Response (Doc.00) should not be considered” is against the right that Plaintiff claims to a Jury Trail guaranteed under the Constitution or laws of the United States.
“SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES;383 U.S. 663; In Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections; APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA; No. 48 , it was Argued: January 25-26, 1966 --- Decided: March 24, 1966 that Classifications which might impinge on fundamental rights and liberties ---- must be closely scrutinized. P. 670.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0383_0663_ZS.html”- Plaintiff’s documentation of assigned results constantly related to the number thirteen might be a Classification that is impinging upon the Plaintiff’s fundamental rights and liberties.
“438 U.S. 586; In Lockett v. Ohio;CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO;No. 76-6997; it was Argued from January 17, 1978 --- and Decided on July 3, 1978 that a) The Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment require that the Court not be precluded from considering as a mitigating factor, any aspect of a defendant's character or record and any of the circumstances that the defendant proffers as any type basis Pp. 604-605.” - Which Includes the Defendant’s access to legal areas in which the Defendant’s record for discrimination proceeds them whereby the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- reassignment to No. 0:00cv000 ( 2010) and whereby the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- decision to sign an ORDER (2010) that the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss No. 0:00cv000 with prejudice be granted and whereby the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- decision to sign a JUDGMENT (2010) for Motion to Dismiss No. 0:00cv000 with prejudice are mitigating factors that should be considered by the Court.
“SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES; 365 U.S. 167; In Monroe v. Pape; CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT; No. 39; It was Argued: November 8, 1960 --- Decided: February 20, 1961 that In enacting § 1979, Congress intended to give a remedy to parties deprived of constitutional rights, privileges and immunities by an official's abuse of his position. Pp. 171-187.” - The HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- decision to sign an ORDER (2010) that the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss No. 0:00cv000 with prejudice be granted, deprived Plaintiff of constitutional rights, privileges and immunities by an official and interferes with Plaintiff’s constitutional rights to pursue remedy.
(a) The statutory words "under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory" do not exclude acts of an official or policeman who can show no authority under state law, custom or usage to do what he did, or even who violated the state constitution and laws. Pp. 172-187. [p168]” The HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- wrote (noting that the “[c]ourt knows of no authority establishing a right to file a surreply”). Therefore, this court finds that Plaintiff’s Response (Doc.00) should not be considered”, does not give a remedy to Plaintiff’s deprivation of constitutional rights, privileges and immunities of/ by the [c]ourt, which violates General Statute 1979.
“(b) One of the purposes of this legislation was to afford a federal right in federal courts because, by reason of prejudice, passion, neglect, intolerance, or otherwise, state laws might not be enforced and the claims of citizens to the enjoyment of rights, privileges and immunities guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment might be denied by state agencies. Pp. 174-180.” - The HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- wrote (noting that the “[c]ourt knows of no authority establishing a right to file a surreply”). Therefore, this court finds that Plaintiff’s Response (Doc.00) should not be considered, is a violation of a federal right in federal courts whereby reason of prejudice, passion, neglect, intolerance or otherwise laws might not be enforced, which would cause citizens [such as the Plaintiff (born a naturalized citizen of the United States)] the enjoyment of rights, privileges and immunities guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to be denied.
“The federal remedy is supplementary and the state remedy need not be sought and refused before the federal remedy is invoked. P. 183.”
“(d) Misuse of power possessed by virtue of law and made possible only because the wrongdoer is clothed with the authority of law is action taken "under color of" state law within the meaning of § 1979. United States v. Classic, 313 U.S. 299”
“Since § 1979 does not contain the word "willfully," as does and § 1979 imposes civil liability, rather than criminal sanctions, actions under § 1979 can dispense with the requirement of showing a "specific intent to deprive a person of a federal right."
P. 187.”
“SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES;94 U.S. 113; In Munn v. Illinois;ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS; it was Argued: --- Decided: that the adoption of the fourteenth amendment of the Constitution of the United States prevents the operation of such deprivation” - as when the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- wrote noting that the “[c]ourt knows of no authority establishing a right to file a surreply”). Therefore, this court finds that Plaintiff’s Response (Doc.00) should not be considered.”
“SECT. 6. It shall be the duty of the court/Congress to pass all necessary laws to prevent the issue of false and fraudulent verdicts to give full effect to the Constitution of the United States, so as to protect citizens of the United States. And the remedies shall not be construed to deny the power prescribe by law, such other and further remedies as may be found expedient, or to deprive any person of existing common-law remedies.”
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0094_0113_ZS.html.” -Therefore for the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- to write (noting that the “[c]ourt knows of no authority establishing a right to file a surreply”). Therefore, this court finds that Plaintiff’s Response (Doc.00) should not be considered.” requires that a law be passed to prevent false and fraudulent verdicts to give full effect to the Constitution of the United States, so as to protect a citizen [Plaintiff in No 0:00cv000 (00-0000)] of the United States and that the remedies not be construed to deny the power prescribed by law, such other and that further remedies as may be found expedient or to deprive any Plaintiff of existing common-law remedies.”
“291 U.S. 502 ; In Nebbia v. New York;APPEAL FROM THE COUNTY COURT OF MONROE COUNTY, NEW YORK; No. 531; It was Argued: December 4, 5, 1933 --- Decided: March 5, 1934 that As a basis for attacking a discrimination, under the equal protection clause of the fourteenth Amendment, the party complaining must show that he himself is adversely affected by it. P. 520 http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0291_0502_ZS.html.” - The HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- decision to sign the ORDER for 0:00cv000 to be Dismissed with prejudice ( 2010) forces Plaintiff to be put into the Classification of being deprived because of threats associated with confinement if Plaintiff seeks work.”.
“The Constitution does not secure to anyone liberty to inflict injury upon an individual, community at large, or upon any group of people. P. 539”- Therefore for the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- to write (noting that the “[c]ourt knows of no authority establishing a right to file a surreply”). Therefore, this court finds that Plaintiff’s Response (Doc.00) should not be considered, inflicts economic, emotional, social, and psychological injury upon the Plaintiff, who is a member of a community and a group of people who have been known to suffer adverse employment action.
“294 U.S. 587; In Norris v. Alabama; CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA states that it is incumbent that the Court analyze facts in order that the enforcement of a federal right may be assured. P. 590. to avoid systematic exclusion of negroes solely because of their race and color. Pp. 590, 596.”- For the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- to write (noting that the “[c]ourt knows of no authority establishing a right to file a surreply”). Therefore, this court finds that Plaintiff’s Response (Doc.00) should not be considered, violates an enforcement of an assured federal right that is to help Plaintiff avoid systematic exclusion solely because of Plaintiff’s race, color, religion, sex and/or retaliation or any other system of deprivation or exclusion.” [ See-Issue 4. General Harassment-Facts of Exclusion]
“SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES ;83 U.S. 36; In the Slaughterhouse Cases; ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA; it was Argued: --- Decided that The first clause of the fourteenth article was primarily intended to confer citizenship on the negro race, and secondly to give definitions of citizenship of the United States and citizenship of the States, and it recognizes the distinction between citizenship of a State and citizenship of the United States by those definitions.- The HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- decision to grant Defendant Motion to dismiss with prejudice supports the denial of the Plaintiff’s rights as a citizen of the United States and deprives Plaintiff‘s of citizenship*.
“The second clause protects from the hostile legislation of the States the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States, as distinguished from the privileges and immunities of citizens of the States.” “The privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States are those which arise out of the nature and essential character of the national government, the provisions of its Constitution, or its laws and treaties made in pursuance thereof, and it is these which are placed under the protection of Congress by this clause of the Thirteenth amendment” -The HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ --decision to grant Defendant Motion to dismiss with prejudice deprives Plaintiff of “the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States which arise
out of the nature and essential character of the national government, the provisions of its Constitution, and/or its law, that are placed under the protection of Congress by the Thirteenth amendment.
“The clause which forbids a State to deny to any person the equal protection of the laws was clearly intended to prevent the hostile discrimination against the negro race. and, for this purpose, the clause confers ample power in Congress to secure his rights and his equality before the law.”- The HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- decision to grant Defendant Motion to dismiss with prejudice denies Plaintiff equal protection of the laws designed to prevent hostile discrimination because of race and removes the Plaintiff’s security of equal protection of the laws, denies and deprives Plain-tiff rights and equality before the law.
“AMENDMENT XIII -
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, nor any place subject to their jurisdiction.” The HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- decision deprives Plaintiff of Thirteenth amendment rights.
“AMENDMENT XIV
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. [p44]
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States, nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” - Plaintiff was born in the United States and is a naturalized citizen of the United States and the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- decision to grant Defendant Motion to dismiss with prejudice abridges the Plaintiff’s privileges and immunities as a citizen of the United States, deprives Plaintiff of life, liberty, and/or property and equal protection of the laws because the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- decision to grant Defendant Motion to dismiss with prejudice deprives Plaintiff of “due process of law”.
“SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES;100 U.S. 303; In Strauder v. West Virginia; ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA it was Argued: --- Decided: that the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States considered, and held to be one of a series of constitutional provisions having a common purpose, namely to secure to a recently emancipated race, which had been held in slavery through many generations, all the civil rights that the superior race enjoy, and to give to it the protection of the general government, in the enjoyment of such rights, whenever they should be denied by the States. “-the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- decision to grant Defendant Motion to dismiss with prejudice denies and removes the security of all the civil rights guaranteed and established in “Strauder v. West Virginia” as well as removes the security of the protection of the general government in the enjoyment of such rights.
“2. The amendment not only gave citizenship and the privileges of citizenship to persons of color, but denied to any State/Court the power to withhold from them the equal protection of the laws, and invested Congress with power, by appropriate legislation, to enforce its provisions.” - the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ --
decision to grant Defendant Motion to dismiss with prejudice withholds the equal protection of the laws of citizenship and privileges of citizenship*.
“3. The amendment, although prohibitory in term, confers by necessary implication a positive immunity, or right, most valuable to persons of the colored race -- the right to exemption from unfriendly legislation against them distinctively as colored -- exemption from discriminations, imposed by public authority, which imply legal inferiority in civil society, lessen the security of their rights, and are steps towards reducing them to the condition of a subject race.”- The HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ --
decision to grant Defendant Motion to dismiss with prejudice implies legal inferiority in civil society for the Plaintiff, lessens the security of Plaintiff’s rights, and reduces Plaintiff to a subject race. The HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- decision to grant Defendant Motion to dismiss with prejudice deprives and denies Plaintiff a positive immunity and/or right, most valuable to exemption from unfriendly legislation/decisions, discriminations imposed by public authority.
“The amendment, although prohibitory in term, confers by necessary implication a positive immunity, or right, most valuable to persons of the colored race -- the right to exemption from unfriendly legislation against them distinctively as colored -- exemption from discriminations, imposed by public authority, which imply legal inferiority in civil society, lessen the security of their rights, and are steps towards reducing them to the condition of a subject race.”
“4. The statute of West Virginia which, in effect, singles out and denies to colored citizens the right and privilege of participating in the administration of the law as jurors because of their color, though qualified in all other respects, is, practically, a brand upon them, and a discrimination against them which is forbidden by the amendment. It denies to such citizens the equal protection of the laws, since the constitution of juries is a very essential part of the protection which the trial by jury is intended to secure. The very idea of a jury is that it is a body of men composed of the peers or equals of the person whose rights it is selected or summoned to determine; that is, of persons having the same legal status in society as that which he holds.”
“5. Where, as here, the State statute secures to every white man the right of trial by jury selected from, and without discrimination against, his race, and at the same time permits or requires such discrimination against the colored man because of his race, the latter is not equally protected by law with the former.”
“. Sect. 41 of the Revised Statutes, which declares that, when any civil suit or criminal prosecution is commenced in any State court, for any cause whatsoever, against any person who is denied or cannot enforce in the judicial tribunals of the State, or in the part of the State where such suit or prosecution is pending, any right secured to him by any law providing for the equal civil rights of citizens of the United States, . . . such suit or prosecution may, upon the petition of such defendant, filed in said State court, at any time before the trial or final hearing of the cause, stating the facts and verified by oath, be removed, for trial, into the next circuit court to be held in the district where it is pending.”
“Plaintiff voices signing of birth certificate and claims immunity to The act of Congress of September 18, 1850, usually called the fugitive slave law and that such fact bed documented “IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, Virginia” and that Plaintiff claims rights to exercise and receive the protection of the laws as a naturalized citizen* of the United States including the right to work based upon the laws of the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights.”
“Plaintiff submits: “3. The Fourteenth Amendment, although prohibitory in term, confers by necessary implication a positive immunity, or right, most valuable to persons of the colored race -- the right to exemption from unfriendly legislation against them distinctively as colored -- exemption from discriminations, imposed by public authority, which imply legal inferiority in civil society, lessen the security of their rights, and are steps towards reducing them to the condition of a subject race”; especially in ethnic intimidation-if another race uses the /a people/person of color to generate the discriminations against, such as in employment/work).”
**************************************************************
Issue 2. Retaliation
The Defendant’s management discriminated against Plaintiff and the following facts form the basis for Plaintiff’s allegations:
A. ESC No. XII-0-00000 Defendants denied Plaintiff unemployment benefits because of misconduct; Plaintiff appealed and won. Plaintiff was not found in violation of misconduct. It is a matter of law for Plaintiff to recover economically because of adverse employment action of Defendant’s management.
B. Two weeks prior to wrongful dismissal some of the same members of Defendant’s management had tried to give Plaintiff a “D” day ( a day off with pay),but Defendant’s management had not told Plaintiff about “D” day prior to the “D” day as required by Defendant’s company policy. (When a person gets a “D” day; management is to inform person so that they do not report to work- management did not properly inform Plaintiff about “D“ day prior to giving Plaintiff a “D” day.
Defendant’s management made Plaintiff get off the clock; while off the clock; Plaintiff called upper management using the “Open door” Policy. Upper management told Defendant’s management (H-M location) to put Plaintiff back on the clock. After about two weeks some of the same managers who had tried to give Plaintiff a “D” day came to the D--- ---- told Plaintiff to get belongings, give Defendant’s management the apron, etc. and to leave after Plaintiff asked to speak to upper management when Defendant’s management told Plaintiff to put the D--- ---- in the path where the customers would bump into it and create a traffic jam.
[After D----- (who was one of people who tried to give Plaintiff a “D” day), asked Plaintiff to move D--- ---- in the middle of the isle, so customers could bump into the d--- ---- (ESC-Appeal No.XII-0-00000); Plaintiff asked to speak to Defendant’s upper management at H-M location about placement of the d--- ----. Two hours later a member of management at H-M- Bcame to D---- ---- and asked the Plaintiff to get belongings and leave defendant’s property (October 1, 2008). Plaintiff complied with request.]
Plaintiff was participating in a protected activity [using an internal policy (Open Door )] by asking to speak to Defendant’s upper management about placement of the D--- ----.
]Defendant’s Open Door internal policy states:
“However if you feel the supervisor is the source of the problem or if the problem has not been addressed satisfactorily, you may contact the next level of supervision or any other supervisor or salaried member of management up to and including senior management.”]
Defendant’s management actions were retaliatory because:
1. Plaintiff was engaged in a protected activity (following Open Door internal policy)
-asking to speak to upper management.
2. Defendant’s management was aware of Plaintiff participating in a protected
activity-[D----- was a part of management and Plaintiff asked D---- to speak to
upper management about placement of the D--- ----].
3. Two hour’s later Plaintiff suffered an adverse action when the defendant’s
management came to D--- ---- and fired the Plaintiff.
4. Defendant’s management was aware of Plaintiff’s participating in a protected
activity and took retaliatory action against Plaintiff because:
a. Plaintiff had participated in a protected activity two weeks prior when the
defendant’s management at H-M-B had violated the
defendant’s “D” day policy by trying to give Plaintiff a “D” day without proper
notification and improperly put Plaintiff off the defendant’s time clock.
b. Plaintiff called and informed defendant’s upper management at another
location (Open Door Policy) that the defendant’s upper management at
H-M-B had given Plaintiff a “D” day without proper notification
as required by defendant’s internal policy (which was to notify Plaintiff about
the “D” day prior to giving Plaintiff a “D” day).
c. The defendant’s management at H- M- B put Plaintiff back
on the time clock after Plaintiff spoke to upper management at another location
(September, 2008) because Plaintiff used the Open door Policy, but defendant’s
management at H-M- B did not like having to put Plaintiff
back on defendant’s time clock.
d. Two week later, D----- (who was one of people who tried to give Plaintiff a
“D” day), asked Plaintiff to move D--- ---- in the middle of the isle, so
customers could bump into the D--- ---- (ESC-Appeal No.XII-0-00000).
e. After Plaintiff asked to speak to upper management about placement of the
d--- ---- which is a protected activity (using the defendant‘s internal policy),
two hours later, management at H- M-B came to
D--- ---- and fired plaintiff when plaintiff was asked to get belongings and
leave defendant’s property (October 1, 2008).
f. Defendant’s management at H-M- B caused Plaintiff to
suffer an adverse employment action when Plaintiff was for fired for partici-
pating in a protected activity, which is covered under the “opposition clause” of
Title VII.
g. Plaintiff’s participation in the protected activity (asking to speak to upper
management) would have drawn attention to the retaliatory actions of the
defendant’s management at H-M- location because the Plaintiff had/was
participated(ing) in a protected activity two weeks prior and in so doing caused
attention to the retaliatory actions of defendant’s management towards Plaintiff
for participating in a protected activity (participation clause) at H-M-
B which is clearly a violation against the defendant management’s
policy and a violation of the participation clause under Title VII.
h. Defendant management at H-M-B clearly established
the beginning of a pattern (identifying defendant management mindset) when
they gave Plaintiff a “D” day without following Defendant’s company’s proper
internal procedures.
i. Defendant’s management at H-M-B feared for their
reputation and the repercussions if the Plaintiff were to speak to upper
management again (with in two weeks) about the defendant’s policies being
violated at H-M-B, by the defendant’s management at
H-M-B; especially If Plaintiff called to the defendant’s upper
management at another location, so Defendant’s management at H-M-B fired the
Plaintiff, causing Plaintiff to suffer an adverse employment action.
j. Defendant management at H-M-B fired the Plaintiff because
D----- (part of Defendant’s management team) was aware that Plaintiff was
participating in a protected activity ( Open Door Policy) by asking D----- to
speak to Defendant’s upper management), which caused the Plaintiff to suffer
adverse employment action.
k. Defendant’s management at H-M-B fired the Plaintiff to
cover up the retaliatory actions of the Defendant management at H-M-B
towards because the Plaintiff for made two charges (6-27-08 and July,
2008)and attempted to make a third charge (participation clause). The Plaintiff
had opposed an unlawful employment practice (sexual harassment)(opposition
clause) through a letter (6-27-08); Plaintiff made a second charge on about July,
2008-that the Defendant’s management at H-M-B had not followed
company policy-by giving Plaintiff a “D” day without prior notice as required);
and Plaintiff was in the process of making a third charge when Plaintiff
requested to speak to Defendant’s upper management (Open Door Policy [PD-
27]) about the Defendant’s management request that Plaintiff place D--- ---- in
the middle of the isle so that ---‘s –l--’s members would bump into D--- ----
[APPEALS DECISION NO. XII-0-00000], which is a violation of the
“HANDLING FOOD SAFELY” POLICY [which states THAT “when working
with food or walking through food areas there are some basic food safety
practices that will keep Members and Associates safe“].
Because Plaintiff requested to speak to Defendant’s upper management (Open Door Policy [PD-27]) about the Defendant’s management request that Plaintiff place d--- ---- in the middle of the isle so that ---‘s –l-- members would bump into d--- ---- [APPEALS DECISION NO. XII-0-00000] (which is a violation of the “HANDLING FOOD SAFELY” POLICY;[which states “when working with food or walking through food areas there are some basic food safety practices that will keep Members and Associates safe“); Defendant’s management fired the Plaintiff for opposing unlawful employment practices (opposition clause) and making two charges(participation clause), which caused Plaintiff to suffer an adverse employment action.
Defendant’s management was attempting to use coercion to force Plaintiff into involuntary solitude which is a violation of the United States Codes.
************************************************************
Issue 3. Sexual Harassment
Supporting Facts:
In original complaint (10-CVD---) ( 2010) filed in the General Court District Court Division of Forsyth County in North Carolina Plaintiff listed under section 3 that Defendant changed location of hire of Plaintiff to inflict discrimination violations of race, sex, religion, national origin and retaliation during employment [Plaintiff asks the Court
to forgive the handwriting in the original complaint; Plaintiff didn’t have an attorney] which included the communication of threats to/that extended to control of plaintiff’s personal, social and religious relationships. Such communications included (but not limited to ---‘s –l--):
(b) ---‘s –l-- working hours were shorten because of social life/dating; (In 2007, management at B-------- communicated Plaintiff couldn’t earn money or date males (members of ---‘s –l-- connected to B-------- incident).
(c) In 2007, Plaintiff filed complaint with E.. E. O. C. concerning B--------‘s management harassment concerning social relationships (document included-2007).
(a) Court--- manager at ---‘s-l-- would come to D--- ----; (If I did or did not give the response that ---‘s –l-- wanted-I was observed through the cameras at ---‘s –l--; to communicate that If I wanted to keep a job at ---‘s –l--, I could not date a guy, who wanted to date me. The message was [this- a job] for [that-not dating the guy]. (on or about 1-2008 to 10-2008)[same guy that B-------- management was communicating that Plaintiff couldn’t date.] [Quid Pro Quo][Court--- was a member of Defendant’s upper management.]
(b) Reported to ---’s -l-- upper management that males (white) were making negative comments related to sex ; I used the procedure for the Sexual Harassment Policy of -------
---‘s –l-- by putting the complaint in writing and giving the statement to ---’s -l-- management. I told K---- and L—A-- (---‘s –l-- managers) about incidents. There were anywhere from three to ten incidents a day. (letter- (6-27-08)).[Hostile work environment].
Because the harasser’s were ---‘s –l-- members/customers, ---‘s –l-- had the responsibility for remedying the harassment that created an offensive, intimidating and a hostile work environment for Plaintiff. Plaintiff opposed the unlawful employment practice of sexual harassment through a letter to Defendant’s management, which is a protected activity under the “opposition clause“ of Title VII..
Two weeks later when Plaintiff asked to speak to upper management at H-M-B (Open Door Policy) about the placement of the D--- ----; Plaintiff was participating in a protected activity.
Defendant’s management at H-M-B knew that Plaintiff’s actions may lead to Plaintiff speaking to defendant’s upper management at another location again, which would have revealed defendant’s management at H-M-B participation in retaliation against the Plaintiff because the Plaintiff had used [(the Defendant’s) Open Door Policy two weeks prior and that defendant’s management at H-M-B was angry with the Plaintiff because when they tried to give Plaintiff a “D” day, they could not carry through with their plan and had to put Plaintiff back on the clock.
.
*******************************************************
Issue 4. General Harassment
Said “Attorney” did ask “What did/ are they (W---- F----- University)basing their EXCLUSION on?”[Issue 1. The Right of Trial by Jury shall be preserved where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars. [Reversal of Order, Judgment, Notice December 13, 2010]-The HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- decision to grant Defendant Motion to dismiss with prejudice supports the Plaintiff’s systematic exclusion by local businesses/organizations, etc. and deprives Plaintiff of the right to seek remedy.
Merriam-Webster’s collegiate dictionary 11th Edition; Merriam-Webster, Incorporated ; Springfrield, Massachusetts, U. S. A. definitions related to “EXCLUSION” are as follows:
EXCLUSION: the act of excluding; the state of being excluded
EXCLUDE: to prevent or restrict the entrance of-libraries-(W--- F----- University), work-(confinement if full time work obtained that is not associated with making an income from an illegal activity), dating -(sanctions from ---’s -l-- for seeing or talking to guy who wants to date Plaintiff), being around family, shopping, etc. : to bar from participation, consideration or inclusion; to expel or bar, esp from a place or position previously occupied-(previously occupied Wake Forest Library(s) for over twenty years).
EXCLUSIVE: 3a-accepting, or soliciting, only a socially restricted patronage ( as of the upper class=What changed?- used wake forest university for thirty years. c.- restricted in distribution, use, or appeal because of expense.
b.-limiting or limited to possession, control, or use by a single individual or group-(Courts/ Access to law/library/earning a living without breaking a law).
restrict-to confine within bounds(threat of confinement for working)what bounds-Citizen of the United States); restrain; 1. to put under restrictions as to use (allowed to go to church only) or distribution.
restricted- limited; available to the use of particular groups (African Americans in church) or specif. excluding others.
restrictions- b.-a limitation on the use or enjoyment of property or a facility-knowledge.
restrain-1a. to prevent from doing, exhibiting, or expressing something-abuse b.-to limit, restrict or keep under control ; 3.-to deprive of liberty; esp.to place under ar-
rest or restraint.(After dismissal from ---‘s ----=constant situations where approached for a created violation).
EXCLUSIONS:=FACT:
1. W--- F----- University-Knowledge
2. Library ---v-- ---Knowledge
5th Street -Main-denied Access to internet-Knowledge
Forsyth Tech- Knowledge
3. Restrain -5th street library- given community service letter without going to court. (to
deprive of liberty; esp. to place under arrest or restraint.)
4. Restrictions: No full time employment without benefits
No dating;
No social time around family;
No driving;
No shopping in certain areas; Hanes Mall and Stores on Peterscreek
Parkway
5. Restrict-Go to church-only
6. ONLY WORK PART TIME AS D---- -------- OR BELOW POVERTY LEVEL (Anything else constitutes violating Federal Slave Law=?-have to be hunted and confined for not doing work assigned by a master.)
“ Supporting Facts - ---‘s –l--- Club managers would have me to put D--- ---- by a freezer if I did not respond the way they wanted (the freezer looked like a coffin); If I responded the way they wanted, then they would reward me by telling me to put the D--- ---- up by the front of the store; but while at the front of the store, there would be more harassment, related to confinement if I did not remain a demo operator at ---‘c –l--. (letter-(7-11-08).”
Other Acts:
“ Supporting Facts - Stacy- Manager of ---‘s –l-- would/was used to communicate to “STAY” as a demo operator at ----‘s –l-- or negative consequences. (letter about confinement).”
Various organizations attempt to enact “Law” that puts Plaintiff in “Classification” to use coercion in secret to force Plaintiff into any type of secret of illegal work or to force Plaintiff in confinement for not participating in secret or illegal work is a violation of the Plaintiff’s rights under the United States Constitution. The HONORABLE JUDGE
------ -. ------. -- decision to grant Defendant Motion to dismiss with prejudice forces Plaintiff to yield to the coercion of various organizations that force Plaintiff to participate in secret/illegal work, which is a violation of the Plaintiff’s Constitutional rights and privileges guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Plaintiff was and still is under constant duress, systematic threats from constant coercion, and strong provocation by and through various organizations including Defendant’s management.
Plaintiff opposed unlawful practice of threats of confinement and intimidation by filing an internal complaint with defendants company and with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Threats of confinement and intimidation for seeking economic prosperity is discriminatory with respect to my race, color, religion, sex, national origin.
Race: African American -
Color: Person of color-
Religion: Christian who is African American early introduced to system of intimidation. forced to participate or join or endure ill moral activity., such as Defendant’s management ignoring Plaintiffs’ complaints- forcing Plaintiff to endure social/psychological/emotional abuse (Caucasian Males approaching D--- ---- and making inappropriate sexual remarks and gestures all day long) with Defendant management’s knowledge.
Sex: Female-system of intimidation being used to force females into ill moral position to create environment of control through coercion to communicate no respect to female/Plaintiff; all done in the open as a form of psychological rape (some even brought their sons to participate to show them that it is okay to psychological rape an African American female and to show them how to psychological rape an African American female and not be concerned about the consequences.
Defendant’s Management and their members (Caucasian males) at H-M- B.:
Intentional Inflicted emotional distress on Plaintiff
Intentionally caused Plaintiff emotional distress;
By engaging in outragous conduct - ( parent (Caucasian male) would have son approach Plaintiff in a sexual manner is outragous conduct) and "Intolerable in a civilized society”.
Nation Origin: Born in the United States-systematic discrimination because of being born in the United States, as an
African American with physical, cultural characteristics in which heritage is/was forced into systematic suppression of which S—‘s. –l-- is participatory. (Matter of Fact:-Bell Brothers restaurant-closed; Little white grocery store-closed; African American community-being closed-replaced with hispanics. Because of being born an
African American in the United States suffer from a systematic denial of income, jobs, employment that are transferred to foreign workers in the United States or to workers overseas.(Example-African Americans in “Katrina”). In fact the Public Library hired an African American female to hire foreign workers(words from the African American female’s mouth)- “I was hired to train foreign people how to get a job; yet the library downtown; which is one of the places the African American female works has African American males who go to the library everyday and they are never approached about being trained to be employed. Why? Because they are African American’s born in the United States and as citizen of the United States and as African Americans prosperity is frowned upon by a system designed to remove all forms of prosperity from United States citizens and especially African Americans.
*************************************************************
REQUEST FOR RELIEF:
I believe I am entitled to the following relief:
Complete Recovery
Job restored with benefits;
back Pay (Double plus Interest);
Punitive Damages $000,000.00;
Compensatory Damages $-,---,---.--;
Injunction (Permanent-Stop harassing plaintiff and associates;
-Stop intimidating plaintiff and associates;
-Stop interfering with Plaintiff’s and associates employment;
-Stop stalking plaintiff and associates ;
-Stop harassing males that want to date plaintiff.
Declaratory_-Inform Plaintiff of how/what the number thirteen/ thirteenth has to do with procurement of Plaintiff’s national heritage and civil rights?
JURY TRIAL REQUESTED
YES_X______ NO_________
********************************************************
Documents included in E. E. O. C. charge NO. 000-0000-0000:
0-00-0000 - Application to Certified as a Middle Grades Teacher –W.S. S.
U.
0-0-0000 – L. A. of N. C., Inc. -letter - Notification of Employment
Security commission Referee’s decision-claimant is not disqualified for
unemployment benefits;
0-0-0000 - Motion/Pleading [Renamed Objection to Recommended Ruling]:
1. True copy of Court Record (traffic) 00-00-00
2. Criminal Record Check 0-00-00
3. Earnings Record (1972-2002) 0-00-00
4. Calendar note-concern of harm from ---’s -l-- 0-00-00
5. Note- ---’s -l-- started playing music about being in love 0-00-00
6. Note- ---’s -l-- using manager “Court---” to harass 0-00-00
7. Copy of Open Door Policy 0-00-00
8. Letter----’s -l-- about sexual harassment 0-00-00
9. Letter to ---’s -l---Personnel-Hire-Confinement 7-11-08
10. WSSU Degree-[Business Administration] 1984
11. Forsyth Technical College-[computer/bookkeeping certificate] 0000
12. ---’s -l-- policy [Handling Food Safely]
13. W--- F----- University [Warning Ticket] 1-00-00
Also called into local radio talk show; informed them that I had heard on WSJS 600 am radio where they were having a fund rasing campaign for dogs; and that they were talking about how all the people were donating food, money, etc.. Told them that I asked God after listening to Humane Society's fund raiser for dogs; didn;t he love me; am I not as important as dogs; specifically that I had called into the local radio station and asked for help; but there were no responses that I was told of; which I thought was strange because I have ran fund rasiers before and helped people with fund raisers and usually there is some kind of a response; then told them of blog where 500,000 people had visited blog; but not one comment; that it was as if someone was interferring with the comments; etc.. BUT have heard numerous Caucasian males who talk of their life was going nowhere, then they started a blog and their life just took off; people were reading and commenting on their blogs and it was wonderful; opened up a whole new world to them;especially financially. Anyway one of the head people on the radio show said, " Sometimes you have to wait on God, etc..Everybody knows that you have been crying out to God; just hold on; God will answer.
IN reference to Egypt; heard a radio announcer say-Egypt is free and in control after all these years? Then heard another radio announcer say-just about everybody in charge now has been trained by/in the United States=?= so who is in charge=? then thought hope the Egyptian leaders have more intelligence than the African American leaders who have sold African Americans out-THAT'S WHY IT HAS/IS TAKING SO LONG FOR MY BLESSINGS= The African American leaders who have sold out real African Americans and when one is encountered who nicely says, thank you but I would like to serve the real God (who made me the color that I am) instead of one who is usurping African American heritages-it takes decades for them to get their blessing; if they are lucky, some never get to see their blessings.
One of the commentators said, If such and such happened in the United States the people would rise up like the people in EGYPT-WONG-think again-they have the people so controlled you almost have to tell them when to go to the bathroom; they use gases, chemicals, bacteria, etc. on people to keep them in a sadate mode; if that doesn't work then they use thinks assosciated withthe media; so that things such as the SUPERBOWL are used so that the people are put in a trance; For example, the superbowl a few days ago was used to communicate to everybody working in secret for them that they are to LOVE instead of attack people who are not working for them; BECAUE OF EGYPT-Don't want an EGYPT in the United States; don't you think it strange that while they are fighting a revolution in EGYPT that in the United States they are talking about LOVE=WHY?=because they used
EGYPT and their people to know when to back off so that there will not be a revolution in the United States=????? And the so called African American leaders will make sure there isn't one for the right amount of pay=which means if anybody can hear; show them bastards some money and they will do what you want-most of them.The revolution that occured in Egypt was probably suppose to happen in the United States=why they can comfortably rob people; because what one person said/says that was suppose to start a revolution in the United States they silenced that person and created a situation in another country to cause a revolution that feeds the psychological need for a revolution in most people minds. There will not be a revolution in the United States; most of the people can't/aren't allowed to think that far. Just sent an email seeking a backer for court case=email came back= "Hi. This is the qmail-send program at mailout-us.gmx.com.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out."; anything associated with MONEY there is always a hold/interferrance; KNOW that the email address is a good email address-someone communicated that the email wasn't suppose to go through-bastards.
In the informal brief that follows while doing research; because keep trying to figure out why people who are operating system of abuse think they have a right; have documented slave laws which can be applied to various blogs and situations-Scary!.
Socialpeacest
***************************************************************************
MONTH?, 2011
Socialpeacest, No. 00-0000
Plaintiff,
vs.
---‘s –l--,
Defendant ESC- APPEALS N0.XII-
0-00000
E. E. O. C.- CHARGE
NO. 000-2010-0000
Pro Se asks mercy from the UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT.
This Action is brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended, for employment discrimination. Jurisdiction is specifically conferred on this Court by 42 U. S. C. Section 200e (5). Equitable and other relief are also sought under 42 U. S.C. 2000e (5) (g). Jurisdiction is also based on 28 U. S. C. Sections 1331, 1343 and 42 U. S. C. Sections 1981 et seq.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
INFORMAL BRIEF
Socialpeacest No. 00-0000
Plaintiff,
vs.
----‘s –l--,
Defendant ESC- APPEALS N0.XII-
0-00000
E. E. O. C.- CHARGE
NO. 000-2010-0000
1. Court from which review is sought:
A. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA.
B. Date of ORDER, NOTICE AND JUDGMENT
(Month 13, 2010).
2. N. A.
3. Issues for Review:
Issue 1. The Right of Trial by Jury shall be preserved where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars. [Reversal of Order, Judgment, Notice (Month 13, 2010]
Supporting Facts and Argument.
Pro Se filed suite (2010) where the value in controversy exceeds $20.00 The Defendants had case No. 0:000cv-000 transferred No. 00CVD000 from the General Court District Court Division of Forsyth County, North Carolina to the Middle District Court of North Carolina on (2010). Defendant’s filed Motion to Dismiss 0:00cv000 in the Middle District Court of North Carolina on (2010). Plaintiff acting as Pro Se filed Response to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss on (2010) for the Motion to not be Dismissed. The HONORABLE MAG/JUDGE -. ------ ----- Motion to Dismiss in the Defendant’s favor on (2010) with prejudice. Plaintiff acting as Pro Se filed an Objection to Recommended Ruling to Dismiss with Prejudice by The HONORABLE MAG/JUDGE -. ------ ----- on (2010). Defendant’s filed a Response to Plaintiff’s Objection on (2010) BUT Plaintiff never got copy of the Defendant’s Response to Plaintiff’s Objection; Plaintiff called Defendant and informed. Defendant sent a letter stating that that a copy of the Defendant’s Response to Plaintiff’s Objection was included; (but copy of the Defendant’s Response to Plaintiff’s Objection was not, only a copy of a Certificate of Service for
(2010). On (2010), the Defendant sent a Certified letter with a copy of the Defendant’s Response to Plaintiff’s Objection, Forty Five days later, which did not allow Plaintiff time to respond to the Defendant’s Response to Plaintiff Objection. An attorney opened the letter and said;” There is no copy of their Response to Your objection; only a copy of a Certificate of Service.“ (Attorney would not accept 000cv000-conflict of interest; attorney did sign as a Witness on a W--- F-----t University document; Plaintiff was present when Attorney asked W--- F----- University, “What are they (W--- F----- University) basing their EXCLUSION on?”
The Defendant’s actions (sending a copy of the Certificate of Service without a copy of the Response to Plaintiff’s Objections ) interfered with Plaintiff’s ability to respond to Defendant’s filing on (2010) of the Response to Plaintiff’s Objections in a timely fashion.
The HONORABLE JUDGE -. -. -----, had been assigned to No. 0:00cv000 when Plaintiff encountered Attorney (church); but on (Month 13 2010), No. 0:00cv000 was reassigned to the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- while Plaintiff was communicating with said attorney (who signed as a Witness on a W--- F----- University document on about the first part of 2010)- reference court docket -00/13/00 as date the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- as Reassigned to 0:00cv000. Plaintiff had met said attorney at church function; one day attorney dropped off Plaintiff and went to a bank (armored money truck was in front of said attorney vehicle after attorney picked up Plaintiff). Plaintiff called the Middle District Court of North Carolina to check on status of No.0:00cv000 and Plaintiff was informed that the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- was the judge for 0:00cv000 and at the time, Plaintiff was unaware that said attorney had had a case under the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- [who entered an ORDER (2010) to Dismiss 0:00cv000 with Prejudice which violates Amendment VII that states a trial by jury shall be preserved where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars.
In original complaint (00CVD000) (2010) filed in the General Court District Court Division of Forsyth County in North Carolina Plaintiff listed under section 3 that Defendant changed location of hire of Plaintiff to inflict discrimination violations of race, sex, religion, national origin and retaliation during employment [Plaintiff asks the Court to forgive the handwriting in the original complaint; Plaintiff didn’t have an attorney] which included the communication of threats to/that extended to control of plaintiff’s personal, social and religious relationships. Such communications included (but not limited to ---‘s –l--):
(b) ---‘s –l-- working hours were shorten because of social life/dating (In 2007, management at B-------- communicated Plaintiff couldn’t earn money or date males (members of ---‘s –l-- connected to B-------- incident). Plaintiff submits that work hours were shorten at ---‘s –l-- more than three hours a week because Plaintiff had contact with guy who wanted to date Plaintiff. Plaintiff made $8.25 an hour [multiplied three times] equals $24.75 (twenty-four dollars and seventy-five cents), which satisfies the qualifications of the law to meet the criteria to have a jury trial. The Seventh Amendment states that The Right of Trial by Jury shall be preserved where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars. Plaintiff’s work hours were shorten anywhere from five to ten hours a week by Defendant’s management as punishment for seeing or talking to guy who wanted to date Plaintiff; therefore the value in controversy is more than $24.75 (twenty-four dollars and seventy-five cents)(3 x $8.25) and the value in controversy exceeds $20.00 (twenty dollars).
By law, Plaintiff has a right to a Jury Trial.
“SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES;62 U.S. 506 in Ableman v. Booth
Argued: --- Decided: That the Appellate court has power in all cases arising under the Constitution and laws of the United States and that under the act of Congress of 1789, when the decision of the court is against the right claimed under the Constitution or laws of the United States, a writ of error will lie to bring the judgment of the court before this court for reexamination and revision.” - The HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ --
decision that “Therefore, this court finds that Plaintiff’s Response (Doc.00) should not be considered” is against the right that Plaintiff claims to a Jury Trail guaranteed under the Constitution or laws of the United States.
“SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES;383 U.S. 663; In Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections; APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA; No. 48 , it was Argued: January 25-26, 1966 --- Decided: March 24, 1966 that Classifications which might impinge on fundamental rights and liberties ---- must be closely scrutinized. P. 670.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0383_0663_ZS.html”- Plaintiff’s documentation of assigned results constantly related to the number thirteen might be a Classification that is impinging upon the Plaintiff’s fundamental rights and liberties.
“438 U.S. 586; In Lockett v. Ohio;CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO;No. 76-6997; it was Argued from January 17, 1978 --- and Decided on July 3, 1978 that a) The Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment require that the Court not be precluded from considering as a mitigating factor, any aspect of a defendant's character or record and any of the circumstances that the defendant proffers as any type basis Pp. 604-605.” - Which Includes the Defendant’s access to legal areas in which the Defendant’s record for discrimination proceeds them whereby the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- reassignment to No. 0:00cv000 ( 2010) and whereby the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- decision to sign an ORDER (2010) that the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss No. 0:00cv000 with prejudice be granted and whereby the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- decision to sign a JUDGMENT (2010) for Motion to Dismiss No. 0:00cv000 with prejudice are mitigating factors that should be considered by the Court.
“SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES; 365 U.S. 167; In Monroe v. Pape; CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT; No. 39; It was Argued: November 8, 1960 --- Decided: February 20, 1961 that In enacting § 1979, Congress intended to give a remedy to parties deprived of constitutional rights, privileges and immunities by an official's abuse of his position. Pp. 171-187.” - The HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- decision to sign an ORDER (2010) that the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss No. 0:00cv000 with prejudice be granted, deprived Plaintiff of constitutional rights, privileges and immunities by an official and interferes with Plaintiff’s constitutional rights to pursue remedy.
(a) The statutory words "under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory" do not exclude acts of an official or policeman who can show no authority under state law, custom or usage to do what he did, or even who violated the state constitution and laws. Pp. 172-187. [p168]” The HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- wrote (noting that the “[c]ourt knows of no authority establishing a right to file a surreply”). Therefore, this court finds that Plaintiff’s Response (Doc.00) should not be considered”, does not give a remedy to Plaintiff’s deprivation of constitutional rights, privileges and immunities of/ by the [c]ourt, which violates General Statute 1979.
“(b) One of the purposes of this legislation was to afford a federal right in federal courts because, by reason of prejudice, passion, neglect, intolerance, or otherwise, state laws might not be enforced and the claims of citizens to the enjoyment of rights, privileges and immunities guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment might be denied by state agencies. Pp. 174-180.” - The HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- wrote (noting that the “[c]ourt knows of no authority establishing a right to file a surreply”). Therefore, this court finds that Plaintiff’s Response (Doc.00) should not be considered, is a violation of a federal right in federal courts whereby reason of prejudice, passion, neglect, intolerance or otherwise laws might not be enforced, which would cause citizens [such as the Plaintiff (born a naturalized citizen of the United States)] the enjoyment of rights, privileges and immunities guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to be denied.
“The federal remedy is supplementary and the state remedy need not be sought and refused before the federal remedy is invoked. P. 183.”
“(d) Misuse of power possessed by virtue of law and made possible only because the wrongdoer is clothed with the authority of law is action taken "under color of" state law within the meaning of § 1979. United States v. Classic, 313 U.S. 299”
“Since § 1979 does not contain the word "willfully," as does and § 1979 imposes civil liability, rather than criminal sanctions, actions under § 1979 can dispense with the requirement of showing a "specific intent to deprive a person of a federal right."
P. 187.”
“SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES;94 U.S. 113; In Munn v. Illinois;ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS; it was Argued: --- Decided: that the adoption of the fourteenth amendment of the Constitution of the United States prevents the operation of such deprivation” - as when the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- wrote noting that the “[c]ourt knows of no authority establishing a right to file a surreply”). Therefore, this court finds that Plaintiff’s Response (Doc.00) should not be considered.”
“SECT. 6. It shall be the duty of the court/Congress to pass all necessary laws to prevent the issue of false and fraudulent verdicts to give full effect to the Constitution of the United States, so as to protect citizens of the United States. And the remedies shall not be construed to deny the power prescribe by law, such other and further remedies as may be found expedient, or to deprive any person of existing common-law remedies.”
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0094_0113_ZS.html.” -Therefore for the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- to write (noting that the “[c]ourt knows of no authority establishing a right to file a surreply”). Therefore, this court finds that Plaintiff’s Response (Doc.00) should not be considered.” requires that a law be passed to prevent false and fraudulent verdicts to give full effect to the Constitution of the United States, so as to protect a citizen [Plaintiff in No 0:00cv000 (00-0000)] of the United States and that the remedies not be construed to deny the power prescribed by law, such other and that further remedies as may be found expedient or to deprive any Plaintiff of existing common-law remedies.”
“291 U.S. 502 ; In Nebbia v. New York;APPEAL FROM THE COUNTY COURT OF MONROE COUNTY, NEW YORK; No. 531; It was Argued: December 4, 5, 1933 --- Decided: March 5, 1934 that As a basis for attacking a discrimination, under the equal protection clause of the fourteenth Amendment, the party complaining must show that he himself is adversely affected by it. P. 520 http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0291_0502_ZS.html.” - The HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- decision to sign the ORDER for 0:00cv000 to be Dismissed with prejudice ( 2010) forces Plaintiff to be put into the Classification of being deprived because of threats associated with confinement if Plaintiff seeks work.”.
“The Constitution does not secure to anyone liberty to inflict injury upon an individual, community at large, or upon any group of people. P. 539”- Therefore for the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- to write (noting that the “[c]ourt knows of no authority establishing a right to file a surreply”). Therefore, this court finds that Plaintiff’s Response (Doc.00) should not be considered, inflicts economic, emotional, social, and psychological injury upon the Plaintiff, who is a member of a community and a group of people who have been known to suffer adverse employment action.
“294 U.S. 587; In Norris v. Alabama; CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA states that it is incumbent that the Court analyze facts in order that the enforcement of a federal right may be assured. P. 590. to avoid systematic exclusion of negroes solely because of their race and color. Pp. 590, 596.”- For the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- to write (noting that the “[c]ourt knows of no authority establishing a right to file a surreply”). Therefore, this court finds that Plaintiff’s Response (Doc.00) should not be considered, violates an enforcement of an assured federal right that is to help Plaintiff avoid systematic exclusion solely because of Plaintiff’s race, color, religion, sex and/or retaliation or any other system of deprivation or exclusion.” [ See-Issue 4. General Harassment-Facts of Exclusion]
“SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES ;83 U.S. 36; In the Slaughterhouse Cases; ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA; it was Argued: --- Decided that The first clause of the fourteenth article was primarily intended to confer citizenship on the negro race, and secondly to give definitions of citizenship of the United States and citizenship of the States, and it recognizes the distinction between citizenship of a State and citizenship of the United States by those definitions.- The HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- decision to grant Defendant Motion to dismiss with prejudice supports the denial of the Plaintiff’s rights as a citizen of the United States and deprives Plaintiff‘s of citizenship*.
“The second clause protects from the hostile legislation of the States the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States, as distinguished from the privileges and immunities of citizens of the States.” “The privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States are those which arise out of the nature and essential character of the national government, the provisions of its Constitution, or its laws and treaties made in pursuance thereof, and it is these which are placed under the protection of Congress by this clause of the Thirteenth amendment” -The HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ --decision to grant Defendant Motion to dismiss with prejudice deprives Plaintiff of “the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States which arise
out of the nature and essential character of the national government, the provisions of its Constitution, and/or its law, that are placed under the protection of Congress by the Thirteenth amendment.
“The clause which forbids a State to deny to any person the equal protection of the laws was clearly intended to prevent the hostile discrimination against the negro race. and, for this purpose, the clause confers ample power in Congress to secure his rights and his equality before the law.”- The HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- decision to grant Defendant Motion to dismiss with prejudice denies Plaintiff equal protection of the laws designed to prevent hostile discrimination because of race and removes the Plaintiff’s security of equal protection of the laws, denies and deprives Plain-tiff rights and equality before the law.
“AMENDMENT XIII -
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, nor any place subject to their jurisdiction.” The HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- decision deprives Plaintiff of Thirteenth amendment rights.
“AMENDMENT XIV
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. [p44]
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States, nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” - Plaintiff was born in the United States and is a naturalized citizen of the United States and the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- decision to grant Defendant Motion to dismiss with prejudice abridges the Plaintiff’s privileges and immunities as a citizen of the United States, deprives Plaintiff of life, liberty, and/or property and equal protection of the laws because the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- decision to grant Defendant Motion to dismiss with prejudice deprives Plaintiff of “due process of law”.
“SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES;100 U.S. 303; In Strauder v. West Virginia; ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA it was Argued: --- Decided: that the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States considered, and held to be one of a series of constitutional provisions having a common purpose, namely to secure to a recently emancipated race, which had been held in slavery through many generations, all the civil rights that the superior race enjoy, and to give to it the protection of the general government, in the enjoyment of such rights, whenever they should be denied by the States. “-the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- decision to grant Defendant Motion to dismiss with prejudice denies and removes the security of all the civil rights guaranteed and established in “Strauder v. West Virginia” as well as removes the security of the protection of the general government in the enjoyment of such rights.
“2. The amendment not only gave citizenship and the privileges of citizenship to persons of color, but denied to any State/Court the power to withhold from them the equal protection of the laws, and invested Congress with power, by appropriate legislation, to enforce its provisions.” - the HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ --
decision to grant Defendant Motion to dismiss with prejudice withholds the equal protection of the laws of citizenship and privileges of citizenship*.
“3. The amendment, although prohibitory in term, confers by necessary implication a positive immunity, or right, most valuable to persons of the colored race -- the right to exemption from unfriendly legislation against them distinctively as colored -- exemption from discriminations, imposed by public authority, which imply legal inferiority in civil society, lessen the security of their rights, and are steps towards reducing them to the condition of a subject race.”- The HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ --
decision to grant Defendant Motion to dismiss with prejudice implies legal inferiority in civil society for the Plaintiff, lessens the security of Plaintiff’s rights, and reduces Plaintiff to a subject race. The HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- decision to grant Defendant Motion to dismiss with prejudice deprives and denies Plaintiff a positive immunity and/or right, most valuable to exemption from unfriendly legislation/decisions, discriminations imposed by public authority.
“The amendment, although prohibitory in term, confers by necessary implication a positive immunity, or right, most valuable to persons of the colored race -- the right to exemption from unfriendly legislation against them distinctively as colored -- exemption from discriminations, imposed by public authority, which imply legal inferiority in civil society, lessen the security of their rights, and are steps towards reducing them to the condition of a subject race.”
“4. The statute of West Virginia which, in effect, singles out and denies to colored citizens the right and privilege of participating in the administration of the law as jurors because of their color, though qualified in all other respects, is, practically, a brand upon them, and a discrimination against them which is forbidden by the amendment. It denies to such citizens the equal protection of the laws, since the constitution of juries is a very essential part of the protection which the trial by jury is intended to secure. The very idea of a jury is that it is a body of men composed of the peers or equals of the person whose rights it is selected or summoned to determine; that is, of persons having the same legal status in society as that which he holds.”
“5. Where, as here, the State statute secures to every white man the right of trial by jury selected from, and without discrimination against, his race, and at the same time permits or requires such discrimination against the colored man because of his race, the latter is not equally protected by law with the former.”
“. Sect. 41 of the Revised Statutes, which declares that, when any civil suit or criminal prosecution is commenced in any State court, for any cause whatsoever, against any person who is denied or cannot enforce in the judicial tribunals of the State, or in the part of the State where such suit or prosecution is pending, any right secured to him by any law providing for the equal civil rights of citizens of the United States, . . . such suit or prosecution may, upon the petition of such defendant, filed in said State court, at any time before the trial or final hearing of the cause, stating the facts and verified by oath, be removed, for trial, into the next circuit court to be held in the district where it is pending.”
“Plaintiff voices signing of birth certificate and claims immunity to The act of Congress of September 18, 1850, usually called the fugitive slave law and that such fact bed documented “IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, Virginia” and that Plaintiff claims rights to exercise and receive the protection of the laws as a naturalized citizen* of the United States including the right to work based upon the laws of the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights.”
“Plaintiff submits: “3. The Fourteenth Amendment, although prohibitory in term, confers by necessary implication a positive immunity, or right, most valuable to persons of the colored race -- the right to exemption from unfriendly legislation against them distinctively as colored -- exemption from discriminations, imposed by public authority, which imply legal inferiority in civil society, lessen the security of their rights, and are steps towards reducing them to the condition of a subject race”; especially in ethnic intimidation-if another race uses the /a people/person of color to generate the discriminations against, such as in employment/work).”
**************************************************************
Issue 2. Retaliation
The Defendant’s management discriminated against Plaintiff and the following facts form the basis for Plaintiff’s allegations:
A. ESC No. XII-0-00000 Defendants denied Plaintiff unemployment benefits because of misconduct; Plaintiff appealed and won. Plaintiff was not found in violation of misconduct. It is a matter of law for Plaintiff to recover economically because of adverse employment action of Defendant’s management.
B. Two weeks prior to wrongful dismissal some of the same members of Defendant’s management had tried to give Plaintiff a “D” day ( a day off with pay),but Defendant’s management had not told Plaintiff about “D” day prior to the “D” day as required by Defendant’s company policy. (When a person gets a “D” day; management is to inform person so that they do not report to work- management did not properly inform Plaintiff about “D“ day prior to giving Plaintiff a “D” day.
Defendant’s management made Plaintiff get off the clock; while off the clock; Plaintiff called upper management using the “Open door” Policy. Upper management told Defendant’s management (H-M location) to put Plaintiff back on the clock. After about two weeks some of the same managers who had tried to give Plaintiff a “D” day came to the D--- ---- told Plaintiff to get belongings, give Defendant’s management the apron, etc. and to leave after Plaintiff asked to speak to upper management when Defendant’s management told Plaintiff to put the D--- ---- in the path where the customers would bump into it and create a traffic jam.
[After D----- (who was one of people who tried to give Plaintiff a “D” day), asked Plaintiff to move D--- ---- in the middle of the isle, so customers could bump into the d--- ---- (ESC-Appeal No.XII-0-00000); Plaintiff asked to speak to Defendant’s upper management at H-M location about placement of the d--- ----. Two hours later a member of management at H-M- Bcame to D---- ---- and asked the Plaintiff to get belongings and leave defendant’s property (October 1, 2008). Plaintiff complied with request.]
Plaintiff was participating in a protected activity [using an internal policy (Open Door )] by asking to speak to Defendant’s upper management about placement of the D--- ----.
]Defendant’s Open Door internal policy states:
“However if you feel the supervisor is the source of the problem or if the problem has not been addressed satisfactorily, you may contact the next level of supervision or any other supervisor or salaried member of management up to and including senior management.”]
Defendant’s management actions were retaliatory because:
1. Plaintiff was engaged in a protected activity (following Open Door internal policy)
-asking to speak to upper management.
2. Defendant’s management was aware of Plaintiff participating in a protected
activity-[D----- was a part of management and Plaintiff asked D---- to speak to
upper management about placement of the D--- ----].
3. Two hour’s later Plaintiff suffered an adverse action when the defendant’s
management came to D--- ---- and fired the Plaintiff.
4. Defendant’s management was aware of Plaintiff’s participating in a protected
activity and took retaliatory action against Plaintiff because:
a. Plaintiff had participated in a protected activity two weeks prior when the
defendant’s management at H-M-B had violated the
defendant’s “D” day policy by trying to give Plaintiff a “D” day without proper
notification and improperly put Plaintiff off the defendant’s time clock.
b. Plaintiff called and informed defendant’s upper management at another
location (Open Door Policy) that the defendant’s upper management at
H-M-B had given Plaintiff a “D” day without proper notification
as required by defendant’s internal policy (which was to notify Plaintiff about
the “D” day prior to giving Plaintiff a “D” day).
c. The defendant’s management at H- M- B put Plaintiff back
on the time clock after Plaintiff spoke to upper management at another location
(September, 2008) because Plaintiff used the Open door Policy, but defendant’s
management at H-M- B did not like having to put Plaintiff
back on defendant’s time clock.
d. Two week later, D----- (who was one of people who tried to give Plaintiff a
“D” day), asked Plaintiff to move D--- ---- in the middle of the isle, so
customers could bump into the D--- ---- (ESC-Appeal No.XII-0-00000).
e. After Plaintiff asked to speak to upper management about placement of the
d--- ---- which is a protected activity (using the defendant‘s internal policy),
two hours later, management at H- M-B came to
D--- ---- and fired plaintiff when plaintiff was asked to get belongings and
leave defendant’s property (October 1, 2008).
f. Defendant’s management at H-M- B caused Plaintiff to
suffer an adverse employment action when Plaintiff was for fired for partici-
pating in a protected activity, which is covered under the “opposition clause” of
Title VII.
g. Plaintiff’s participation in the protected activity (asking to speak to upper
management) would have drawn attention to the retaliatory actions of the
defendant’s management at H-M- location because the Plaintiff had/was
participated(ing) in a protected activity two weeks prior and in so doing caused
attention to the retaliatory actions of defendant’s management towards Plaintiff
for participating in a protected activity (participation clause) at H-M-
B which is clearly a violation against the defendant management’s
policy and a violation of the participation clause under Title VII.
h. Defendant management at H-M-B clearly established
the beginning of a pattern (identifying defendant management mindset) when
they gave Plaintiff a “D” day without following Defendant’s company’s proper
internal procedures.
i. Defendant’s management at H-M-B feared for their
reputation and the repercussions if the Plaintiff were to speak to upper
management again (with in two weeks) about the defendant’s policies being
violated at H-M-B, by the defendant’s management at
H-M-B; especially If Plaintiff called to the defendant’s upper
management at another location, so Defendant’s management at H-M-B fired the
Plaintiff, causing Plaintiff to suffer an adverse employment action.
j. Defendant management at H-M-B fired the Plaintiff because
D----- (part of Defendant’s management team) was aware that Plaintiff was
participating in a protected activity ( Open Door Policy) by asking D----- to
speak to Defendant’s upper management), which caused the Plaintiff to suffer
adverse employment action.
k. Defendant’s management at H-M-B fired the Plaintiff to
cover up the retaliatory actions of the Defendant management at H-M-B
towards because the Plaintiff for made two charges (6-27-08 and July,
2008)and attempted to make a third charge (participation clause). The Plaintiff
had opposed an unlawful employment practice (sexual harassment)(opposition
clause) through a letter (6-27-08); Plaintiff made a second charge on about July,
2008-that the Defendant’s management at H-M-B had not followed
company policy-by giving Plaintiff a “D” day without prior notice as required);
and Plaintiff was in the process of making a third charge when Plaintiff
requested to speak to Defendant’s upper management (Open Door Policy [PD-
27]) about the Defendant’s management request that Plaintiff place D--- ---- in
the middle of the isle so that ---‘s –l--’s members would bump into D--- ----
[APPEALS DECISION NO. XII-0-00000], which is a violation of the
“HANDLING FOOD SAFELY” POLICY [which states THAT “when working
with food or walking through food areas there are some basic food safety
practices that will keep Members and Associates safe“].
Because Plaintiff requested to speak to Defendant’s upper management (Open Door Policy [PD-27]) about the Defendant’s management request that Plaintiff place d--- ---- in the middle of the isle so that ---‘s –l-- members would bump into d--- ---- [APPEALS DECISION NO. XII-0-00000] (which is a violation of the “HANDLING FOOD SAFELY” POLICY;[which states “when working with food or walking through food areas there are some basic food safety practices that will keep Members and Associates safe“); Defendant’s management fired the Plaintiff for opposing unlawful employment practices (opposition clause) and making two charges(participation clause), which caused Plaintiff to suffer an adverse employment action.
Defendant’s management was attempting to use coercion to force Plaintiff into involuntary solitude which is a violation of the United States Codes.
************************************************************
Issue 3. Sexual Harassment
Supporting Facts:
In original complaint (10-CVD---) ( 2010) filed in the General Court District Court Division of Forsyth County in North Carolina Plaintiff listed under section 3 that Defendant changed location of hire of Plaintiff to inflict discrimination violations of race, sex, religion, national origin and retaliation during employment [Plaintiff asks the Court
to forgive the handwriting in the original complaint; Plaintiff didn’t have an attorney] which included the communication of threats to/that extended to control of plaintiff’s personal, social and religious relationships. Such communications included (but not limited to ---‘s –l--):
(b) ---‘s –l-- working hours were shorten because of social life/dating; (In 2007, management at B-------- communicated Plaintiff couldn’t earn money or date males (members of ---‘s –l-- connected to B-------- incident).
(c) In 2007, Plaintiff filed complaint with E.. E. O. C. concerning B--------‘s management harassment concerning social relationships (document included-2007).
(a) Court--- manager at ---‘s-l-- would come to D--- ----; (If I did or did not give the response that ---‘s –l-- wanted-I was observed through the cameras at ---‘s –l--; to communicate that If I wanted to keep a job at ---‘s –l--, I could not date a guy, who wanted to date me. The message was [this- a job] for [that-not dating the guy]. (on or about 1-2008 to 10-2008)[same guy that B-------- management was communicating that Plaintiff couldn’t date.] [Quid Pro Quo][Court--- was a member of Defendant’s upper management.]
(b) Reported to ---’s -l-- upper management that males (white) were making negative comments related to sex ; I used the procedure for the Sexual Harassment Policy of -------
---‘s –l-- by putting the complaint in writing and giving the statement to ---’s -l-- management. I told K---- and L—A-- (---‘s –l-- managers) about incidents. There were anywhere from three to ten incidents a day. (letter- (6-27-08)).[Hostile work environment].
Because the harasser’s were ---‘s –l-- members/customers, ---‘s –l-- had the responsibility for remedying the harassment that created an offensive, intimidating and a hostile work environment for Plaintiff. Plaintiff opposed the unlawful employment practice of sexual harassment through a letter to Defendant’s management, which is a protected activity under the “opposition clause“ of Title VII..
Two weeks later when Plaintiff asked to speak to upper management at H-M-B (Open Door Policy) about the placement of the D--- ----; Plaintiff was participating in a protected activity.
Defendant’s management at H-M-B knew that Plaintiff’s actions may lead to Plaintiff speaking to defendant’s upper management at another location again, which would have revealed defendant’s management at H-M-B participation in retaliation against the Plaintiff because the Plaintiff had used [(the Defendant’s) Open Door Policy two weeks prior and that defendant’s management at H-M-B was angry with the Plaintiff because when they tried to give Plaintiff a “D” day, they could not carry through with their plan and had to put Plaintiff back on the clock.
.
*******************************************************
Issue 4. General Harassment
Said “Attorney” did ask “What did/ are they (W---- F----- University)basing their EXCLUSION on?”[Issue 1. The Right of Trial by Jury shall be preserved where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars. [Reversal of Order, Judgment, Notice December 13, 2010]-The HONORABLE JUDGE ------- -. ------ -- decision to grant Defendant Motion to dismiss with prejudice supports the Plaintiff’s systematic exclusion by local businesses/organizations, etc. and deprives Plaintiff of the right to seek remedy.
Merriam-Webster’s collegiate dictionary 11th Edition; Merriam-Webster, Incorporated ; Springfrield, Massachusetts, U. S. A. definitions related to “EXCLUSION” are as follows:
EXCLUSION: the act of excluding; the state of being excluded
EXCLUDE: to prevent or restrict the entrance of-libraries-(W--- F----- University), work-(confinement if full time work obtained that is not associated with making an income from an illegal activity), dating -(sanctions from ---’s -l-- for seeing or talking to guy who wants to date Plaintiff), being around family, shopping, etc. : to bar from participation, consideration or inclusion; to expel or bar, esp from a place or position previously occupied-(previously occupied Wake Forest Library(s) for over twenty years).
EXCLUSIVE: 3a-accepting, or soliciting, only a socially restricted patronage ( as of the upper class=What changed?- used wake forest university for thirty years. c.- restricted in distribution, use, or appeal because of expense.
b.-limiting or limited to possession, control, or use by a single individual or group-(Courts/ Access to law/library/earning a living without breaking a law).
restrict-to confine within bounds(threat of confinement for working)what bounds-Citizen of the United States); restrain; 1. to put under restrictions as to use (allowed to go to church only) or distribution.
restricted- limited; available to the use of particular groups (African Americans in church) or specif. excluding others.
restrictions- b.-a limitation on the use or enjoyment of property or a facility-knowledge.
restrain-1a. to prevent from doing, exhibiting, or expressing something-abuse b.-to limit, restrict or keep under control ; 3.-to deprive of liberty; esp.to place under ar-
rest or restraint.(After dismissal from ---‘s ----=constant situations where approached for a created violation).
EXCLUSIONS:=FACT:
1. W--- F----- University-Knowledge
2. Library ---v-- ---Knowledge
5th Street -Main-denied Access to internet-Knowledge
Forsyth Tech- Knowledge
3. Restrain -5th street library- given community service letter without going to court. (to
deprive of liberty; esp. to place under arrest or restraint.)
4. Restrictions: No full time employment without benefits
No dating;
No social time around family;
No driving;
No shopping in certain areas; Hanes Mall and Stores on Peterscreek
Parkway
5. Restrict-Go to church-only
6. ONLY WORK PART TIME AS D---- -------- OR BELOW POVERTY LEVEL (Anything else constitutes violating Federal Slave Law=?-have to be hunted and confined for not doing work assigned by a master.)
“ Supporting Facts - ---‘s –l--- Club managers would have me to put D--- ---- by a freezer if I did not respond the way they wanted (the freezer looked like a coffin); If I responded the way they wanted, then they would reward me by telling me to put the D--- ---- up by the front of the store; but while at the front of the store, there would be more harassment, related to confinement if I did not remain a demo operator at ---‘c –l--. (letter-(7-11-08).”
Other Acts:
“ Supporting Facts - Stacy- Manager of ---‘s –l-- would/was used to communicate to “STAY” as a demo operator at ----‘s –l-- or negative consequences. (letter about confinement).”
Various organizations attempt to enact “Law” that puts Plaintiff in “Classification” to use coercion in secret to force Plaintiff into any type of secret of illegal work or to force Plaintiff in confinement for not participating in secret or illegal work is a violation of the Plaintiff’s rights under the United States Constitution. The HONORABLE JUDGE
------ -. ------. -- decision to grant Defendant Motion to dismiss with prejudice forces Plaintiff to yield to the coercion of various organizations that force Plaintiff to participate in secret/illegal work, which is a violation of the Plaintiff’s Constitutional rights and privileges guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Plaintiff was and still is under constant duress, systematic threats from constant coercion, and strong provocation by and through various organizations including Defendant’s management.
Plaintiff opposed unlawful practice of threats of confinement and intimidation by filing an internal complaint with defendants company and with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Threats of confinement and intimidation for seeking economic prosperity is discriminatory with respect to my race, color, religion, sex, national origin.
Race: African American -
Color: Person of color-
Religion: Christian who is African American early introduced to system of intimidation. forced to participate or join or endure ill moral activity., such as Defendant’s management ignoring Plaintiffs’ complaints- forcing Plaintiff to endure social/psychological/emotional abuse (Caucasian Males approaching D--- ---- and making inappropriate sexual remarks and gestures all day long) with Defendant management’s knowledge.
Sex: Female-system of intimidation being used to force females into ill moral position to create environment of control through coercion to communicate no respect to female/Plaintiff; all done in the open as a form of psychological rape (some even brought their sons to participate to show them that it is okay to psychological rape an African American female and to show them how to psychological rape an African American female and not be concerned about the consequences.
Defendant’s Management and their members (Caucasian males) at H-M- B.:
Intentional Inflicted emotional distress on Plaintiff
Intentionally caused Plaintiff emotional distress;
By engaging in outragous conduct - ( parent (Caucasian male) would have son approach Plaintiff in a sexual manner is outragous conduct) and "Intolerable in a civilized society”.
Nation Origin: Born in the United States-systematic discrimination because of being born in the United States, as an
African American with physical, cultural characteristics in which heritage is/was forced into systematic suppression of which S—‘s. –l-- is participatory. (Matter of Fact:-Bell Brothers restaurant-closed; Little white grocery store-closed; African American community-being closed-replaced with hispanics. Because of being born an
African American in the United States suffer from a systematic denial of income, jobs, employment that are transferred to foreign workers in the United States or to workers overseas.(Example-African Americans in “Katrina”). In fact the Public Library hired an African American female to hire foreign workers(words from the African American female’s mouth)- “I was hired to train foreign people how to get a job; yet the library downtown; which is one of the places the African American female works has African American males who go to the library everyday and they are never approached about being trained to be employed. Why? Because they are African American’s born in the United States and as citizen of the United States and as African Americans prosperity is frowned upon by a system designed to remove all forms of prosperity from United States citizens and especially African Americans.
*************************************************************
REQUEST FOR RELIEF:
I believe I am entitled to the following relief:
Complete Recovery
Job restored with benefits;
back Pay (Double plus Interest);
Punitive Damages $000,000.00;
Compensatory Damages $-,---,---.--;
Injunction (Permanent-Stop harassing plaintiff and associates;
-Stop intimidating plaintiff and associates;
-Stop interfering with Plaintiff’s and associates employment;
-Stop stalking plaintiff and associates ;
-Stop harassing males that want to date plaintiff.
Declaratory_-Inform Plaintiff of how/what the number thirteen/ thirteenth has to do with procurement of Plaintiff’s national heritage and civil rights?
JURY TRIAL REQUESTED
YES_X______ NO_________
********************************************************
Documents included in E. E. O. C. charge NO. 000-0000-0000:
0-00-0000 - Application to Certified as a Middle Grades Teacher –W.S. S.
U.
0-0-0000 – L. A. of N. C., Inc. -letter - Notification of Employment
Security commission Referee’s decision-claimant is not disqualified for
unemployment benefits;
0-0-0000 - Motion/Pleading [Renamed Objection to Recommended Ruling]:
1. True copy of Court Record (traffic) 00-00-00
2. Criminal Record Check 0-00-00
3. Earnings Record (1972-2002) 0-00-00
4. Calendar note-concern of harm from ---’s -l-- 0-00-00
5. Note- ---’s -l-- started playing music about being in love 0-00-00
6. Note- ---’s -l-- using manager “Court---” to harass 0-00-00
7. Copy of Open Door Policy 0-00-00
8. Letter----’s -l-- about sexual harassment 0-00-00
9. Letter to ---’s -l---Personnel-Hire-Confinement 7-11-08
10. WSSU Degree-[Business Administration] 1984
11. Forsyth Technical College-[computer/bookkeeping certificate] 0000
12. ---’s -l-- policy [Handling Food Safely]
13. W--- F----- University [Warning Ticket] 1-00-00
