Rendered from the court's authenticated repository
Searchable full text
5,338 characters extracted
—
STATE OF RIDGEWAY
Tomskipetski5
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
DOCKET NO. RSC-CV-380
Plaintiff
v.
StudsPerSecond
Defendant
PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS
ARGUMENTS
I. A CLAIM IS STATED
As the defendant said in his motion to dismiss per Rid. R. Civ. P. 8(a) provides that the civil complaint
must “[set] forth a claim for relief... shall contain (1) a short and plain statement of the claim showing
that the pleader is entitled to relief, and (2) a demand for judgment for the relief to which he deems
himself entitled.” When a civil complaint does not “state a complaint upon which relief can be granted”.
In the civil complaint submitted it’s clearly stated that I was entitled to relief. For example, in statement
#11 I was supposed to get relief for the actions of zac2524 when he was employed in SPS. Another
example is in statement #5 where I state that SPS has a duty of care toward their employees and has a
policy against retaliation.
Further, I elaborate more on the specific of every single tort in the section Torts for example Negligence
per see I stated: “ iMickeyL both knowingly and with intent knew that he had a duty of care toward me
as SPS head of the office of risk management. He allowed an employee to resign after he had harassed
me and had administrative sanction that he had to uphold.’” This shows the damages that SPS caused to
me and why I’m entitled to relief. In the Ridgeway ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT Section
5 , subsection 5.1 ( c ) it states: “ All persons shall have the right to seek review from the courts over
prejudicial or harmful practices relating to their employment “ (f) “(f) All persons shall have the right to
report misconduct, harassment, waste, fraud, or abuse. “ In my last statement (#14) I clearly explained
that the actions of SPS caused me damages not only did they cause me to lose my job due to poor
handling of the situation it also had repercussions such as in Parks Service. As such if the courts were to
provide me relief for SPS actions this would show to my superiors in the Ridgeway Parks Services that
SPS wrongfully terminated me. I have also clearly explained that in the Torts section “iMickeyL and
SPS leadership with intent and knowingly placed me on administrative leave causing other departments
where I work into such as Parks Service to reconsider my promotion earlier today.”
Finally, my statements do not make legal conclusions as I simply state what the civil torts specifically
says. The Sudspersecond handbook is the de facto contract as every employee has to abide by and the
defendant didn’t try to disprove that fact in their motion to dismiss. The defendant also says “submits
that Defendant breached a contract, with whom?” I clearly explained that in the section allegations
where I wrote: “In this instance, SPS Command conspired to deceive me of my legal rights which is to
publically denounce their misconduct by publishing the SPS report which wasn’t even under a
non-disclosure agreement.” SPS Command refers to department management which (formerly) zac2524,
Sandykay49, nvoqs and iMickeyL were part of at the time of the incident. I would have liked to
elaborate further but without access to the command chat of SPS it’s impossible to know for sure who is
part of the conspiracy. More precisely in the section Torts (5) (a) I wrote: “iMickeyL and SPS leadership
with intent and knowingly placed me on administrative leave…” this is the individuals who conspired.
II. THIS CASE IS NOT VEXATIOUS IN NATURE
The defendant claims that “Plaintiff initiates this manner contemporaneously with another manner. The
alleged claims, facts, and allegations are nearly identical. See Tomskipetski5 v. zac2524
(RSC-CV-379).” This case is not vexatious, as to get relief for the harassment done I must sue
Studspersecond as an entity. I’m suing zac2524 for a completely different set of reasons. SPS worked
with zac2524 to allow him to break policy and get away from fulfilling his duties before resigning. SPS
Also retaliated against me for filing a complaint against them. Going back to this current case, yes the
facts are similar because it’s the same situation but taken from a different angle. I wouldn’t need to sue
zac2524 personally if he had remained in SPS but at this time his resignation was completed days ago
and this is my only recourse to obtain relief from him and SPS.
III. DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE WOULD BE DANGEROUS
If this court still finds that the civil complaints fail to state a claim dismissed with prejudice would be
setting a dangerous precedent. It would allow employers to harass their employees and get away by
resigning even if they break their own internal policies written in the handbook which act as a contract
in this case. This would open the door for other employees and command members in other companies
and departments to do the same.
CONCLUSION
We believe that we have strong grounds for a lawsuit, and for the reasons stated above, we firmly
OPPOSE any effort at this time by the defendant and/or defendant's counsel to dismiss the case. We
hope the Honorable Judge frostbleed will use good judicial discretion in comparing our arguments and
will see that the letter of the law favours the plaintiff.
Date: 25th of May
Respectfully Submitted,
Plaintiffs Tomskipetski5
/s/ Tomskipetski5
Tomskipetski5, RSB#17142
Document record
File size
117.9 KB
Uploaded
May 20, 2022 12:00 PM
Filed
May 20, 2022 12:00 PM
Filing code
COMPLAINT
Uploaded by
Tomskipetski5
Notes
_tom VS SPS response to motion to dismiss.pdf — archived from the Trello docket (https://trello.com/c/JOLm1UAq)
