1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
THE FIRM, ATTORNEYS AT LAW – ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
THE STATE OF RIDGEWAY
RIDGEWAY COUNTY COURT
Tomskipetski5,
-against-
LewisMedvedeva, in his Official and Personal
Capacity as Chief of the Palmer Police
Department,
Co-Defendant.
&
Palmer Police Department
Co-Defendant.
Case No. CCRC-AP-1347
Presiding Judge:
The Honorable Spencernixon
OPENING BRIEF
SUBMISSION FROM APPELLANT
ISSUES
COME NOW, the Appellant hereby submits to the court’s consideration a brief for the
Court to find in favor of his position. The Appellant's argument in this guise is based
on a multi-pronged approach, centered upon the treatment of the Appellant by the
Appellee and the numerous injustices he has since been subject to. The Appellant,
while acting under the color of law in his capacity as a Palmer Police Department
Officer, faced unwarranted disciplinary action from the Department, culminating in
the termination of his employment, simply for executing his duties. The Appellant is
of the adamant belief that his termination was issued based on falsehoods and was, in
Counsel for Appellant
Junior Associates
The Firm LLP
Ridgeway County
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
THE FIRM, ATTORNEYS AT LAW – ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
part, an overreaction to a trivial misstep in his duties, and that judicial action relating
to it has been unsatisfactory and lacking fairness.
The Appellant filed a Civil Complaint seeking relief for the injustices suffered by him
(CCRC-CV-1308), which was docketed by the Court before being subsequently
subjected to Dismissal with Prejudice. The Appellant files his appeal with the intention
of having the Dismissal modified to a Dismissal without Prejudice, so that he may
pursue further litigation.
We therefore submit the following argument to appeal such standing judicial action:
ARGUMENT
1 – SATISFACTION OF TWOMBLY/IQBAL STANDARD
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) established the standard that a complaint, in
this case the appellant's own, must appear plausible at face value and provide
sufficient factual allegations in favor of the claims stated. In order to fully understand
his claims and their plausibility, we must look to the appellant's initial Civil
Complaint, as found in CCRC-CV-1308, where he [the Appellant] states that:
a. He believes his employment as a duly sworn Officer of the Palmer Police
Department (henceforth the "Department" or the "PPD") was terminated based
on the false accusation that he had violated the Department's Standard
Operating Procedures (henceforth the "SOP") and the Nondisclosure Agreement
(henceforth the "NDA") he had entered into with the Department as a condition
of his employment; in addition to the equally false accusation that he had
engaged in Criminal Activity and was therefore ineligible to continue his service
as a Peace Officer.
b. While the appellant concedes that he had violated a single provision of the SOP
concerning Ride-Alongs by forgetting to submit a screenshot of a signed waiver
to his Supervisor, the appellant states that the PPD Investigator overseeing the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
THE FIRM, ATTORNEYS AT LAW – ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
inquiry into his [Appellant's] conduct stated that this specific action should not
have been met with "severe sanction" (i.e., Termination).
c. The appellant does not claim or concede that he violated the SOP, NDA, or
engaged in Criminal Activity of any nature other than the mishap as stated in
subsection (b). Therefore, the Palmer Police Department and Chief
LewisMedvedeva would indeed be liable for having unjustly terminated his
employment.
d. The specific action deemed Criminal by the Palmer Police Department and cited
in his firing, his telling a friend of his to pick up a weapon, was and is protected
by the Ridgeway County Ordinance O1-015 (the "Good Samaritan Ordinance"),
which allows Law Enforcement Officers to request Civilian Assistance in the
course of their duties.
We believe that the Appellant's allegations are indeed plausible and therefore
admissible by the Twombly/Iqbal Standard, based on the evidence produced by the
defendant showing that his claims are in fact true and corroborated by fact. This
includes footage of the incident where the accusations against him stemmed from,
in addition to screenshots of Discord Messages and quotes of individuals involved
in his firing and the case surrounding it.
2 – POSSIBILITY OF INTERFERENCE BY APPELLEE IN THE IMPARTIAL
ADJUDICATION OF THE INITIAL CIVIL CASE
The appellant has found concern that the Honorable Judge may have issued his ruling
under pressure from and in a manner satisfactory towards pressure from the High
Command of the Palmer Police Department. The appellant alleges the instance of a
serving member of PPD High Command having sent a message suggesting that PPD
High Command had applied pressure in some manner to the Honorable Judge, thereby
influencing his ability to exercise impartial judgment. In no way does the appellant or
his counsel intend to impute the dignity and/or ethical or legal standing of the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
THE FIRM, ATTORNEYS AT LAW – ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Honorable Judge, however we do raise the question of whether this possible scenario
did in fact transpire.
If so, it is the belief of the appellant that by succumbing to the aforementioned
'influencing conduct', the Honorable Judge advertently or inadvertently violated a
range of statutes, including Canons One (1); Two (2), subsections A and B ; Three (3),
subsection A.(1) of the Ridgeway County Court Code of Judicial Conduct, the standard
and right of due process as afforded by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the
Constitution of the United States, in addition to the right and standard of equal
protection as afforded by the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United
States.
CONCLUSION
While the appellant lacks both standing and intention to seek prosecution or criminal
proceedings should the assertions listed in Subsection Two (2) of the Arguments
Section be true, we do steadfastly maintain that the appellant's initial case was not
subject to fair and impartial adjudication, and that it therefore should be heard again
and granted such.
In addition to fair and independent application of the law, the Appellant seeks the
following relief as maintained in his original Civil Complaint:
a. Modification of the ruling on his original Complaint (CCRC-CV-1308) from a
Dismissal with Prejudice to a Dismissal without Prejudice, to allow the Appellant
to pursue further litigation concerning the matter at hand.
DATED: July 05, 2021
Respectfully submitted,
Dannlabs, Esq.
Junior Associate
/s/Dannlabs
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
THE FIRM, ATTORNEYS AT LAW – ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
The Firm LLP
Ridgeway County
Attorneys for the Appellant
Jedistormtrooper0625, Esq.
Junior Associate
/s/jedistormtrooper0625
Co-Authored by Asianible, Esq.
(Not Counsel of Record)
Junior Associate
/s/Asianible
