Docstoc

Plaintiff Response To Defendant HGAC Original Answer_ Feb2010

Document Sample
Plaintiff Response To Defendant HGAC Original Answer_ Feb2010 Powered By Docstoc
					1




No. SC5I CO 105108

DANIEL W. HARBAUGH
VS
HOUSTON-GALVESTON AREA COUNCIL

IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS
PRECINCT 5, PLACE I
PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT' ORIGINAL ANSWER:

 (A) This is a Small Claims Court case; Plaintiff is neither required to be an
Attorney, nor respond to Defendant or the Court in "Legalese". In the
interests of resolving this case expediently, economically and with Due Justice,
Plaintiff submits the following commentary:

Defendant States: "DEFENDANT'S ORIGINAL ANSWER

Defendant, Houston-Galveston Area Council (hereinafter "H-GAC"), files its
original answer to Plaintiffs Small Claims petition and would respectfully show
the Court the following:
1. H-GAC generally denies Plaintiffs allegations under Rule 92 of the Texas
Rules of Civil Procedure and demands that Plaintiff prove his allegations by a
preponderance of the credible evidence as is required by the Constitution and the
laws of the State of Texas. "

(A.l) Plaintiff States: Invoking Rule 92 is legalese boilerplate for Defendant
simply denying the allegations; however, such general denial is inapplicable
to matters required to be denied under oath. Plaintiff will request and
obtain Depositions under Oath from Defendant principal parties, including
Mr. Ronnie Barnes, HGAC AirCheckTexas Project Coordinator, so named
in Plaintiff's Small Claim Petition.

(A.2) Defendant "demands that Plaintiff prove his allegations by a
preponderance of credible evidence"; apparently not noticing the
preponderance of preponderant and irrefutable credible evidence submitted
as Exhibits in Plaintiff's Small Claims Petition. It will be interesting, if not
perjury, to hear Defendant deny this evidence in Court.
2




2. Governmental immunity bars Plaintiff s state law claims for money damages and
for attorney's fees.

 (A.3) Plaintiff makes no 'state law' claims; Plaintiff is suing under Civil Law.
As detailed in Plaintiff's Small Claims Petition, HGAC has no Eleventh
Amendment immunity. HGAC is a voluntary association of dues-paying
membership that can resign anytime; its functions are Proprietary. HGAC is
recipient of $Millions of Federal Funding. In Case No.981830EA, US Court of
Appeals, Eight Circuit, the Court ruled :" Section 504 is a valid exercise of
Congress's spending power, and that Arkansas waived its immunity by
accepting Federal funds". Regardless, Small Claims Court is not a proper
entity to rule on Constitutional immunity. Defendant may appeal the immunity
issue all the way to the Supreme Court; Plaintiff will be well prepared.

*****

For the foregoing reasons, Defendant respectfully request that the Court, upon
dispositive motion or trial on the merits, enter a final take nothing judgment in their
favoand order Plaintiff to pay its costs of court. Defendant also requests any other
and further relief as the law and equity may allow.

(A.4) For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff respectfully request(s) the Court
proceed to schedule this Case for Jury Trial without entertaining further
arguments from Defendant.
Daniel W. Harbaugh , Pro Se
8218 Braniff Street ,
Hobby Airport (HOU)
Houston, TX 77061

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Tags:
Stats:
views:114
posted:2/6/2010
language:English
pages:2
Description: Continuation of Harbaugh vs Houston-Galverston Area Council Small Claims Lawsuit , 2010