UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
WILLIAM THOMAS, FILED ) JAN. 13, 1987 Plaintiff, ) Clerk U.S. District Court District of Columbia ) v. ) Civil Action No. 84-3552 ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et. al., ) ) Defendants. ) ) )
Appearances :
Mr. William Thomas
1440 N Street, N. W.
Apartment #410
Washington, D.C. 20005
(202) 462-3542
(Plaintiff, Pro Se)
Mr. Michael Martinez
Assistant U. S. Attorney
Judiciary Center Building
555 Fourth Street, N. W.
Room #4822
Washington, D. C.
(Counsel for the Defendants)
officers of the U. S. Secret Service and their supervisors, harassed and intimidated him and ordered his arrest without probable cause, unlawfully detained him in police custody and illegally confiscated and destroyed his signs protesting nuclear weapons. Plaintiff also claims defendants caused false criminal charges to be brought against him in order to impede the exercise of his First Amendment right to peacefully demonstrate on the White House sidewalk and in the Lafayette park area.
the White House sidewalk and in the Lafayette Park area, and that consequently his demonstration activities under the First Amendment were unlawfully infringed upon by the defendants, who allegedly opposed his continuous presence on the White House sidewalk and in the Lafayette Park area and the presence of his signs and placards.
and B to this Memorandum and Opinion, Report and Recommendation.
threatened him with arrest on June 17, 1982, pursuant to instructions from defendant James C. Lindsey, then-deputy chief of police with the USPP, and that Chief Lindsey acting in concert with Robbins and Bangert, both DOI assistant solicitors, supervised plaintiff's allegedly unlawful arrest on April 17, 1983, and that "defendants Lindsey and/or Bangert instructed USPP Lt. Clipper to threaten Thomas with unlawful arrest" on July 22, 1983. Further, plaintiff claims that U. S. Secret Service agents "kicked down signs which Thomas had leaned against the White House fence", [6] allegedly with the knowledge and acquiescence of defendant Parr, a special agent of the U. S. Secret Service, and that defendants Lindsey and Robbins personally supervised the intentional destruction or confiscation of plaintiff's signs and other personal property. In further support of his contentions, Mr. Thomas alleges that USPP Officers Duckworth and Bohn harassed and photographed him on February 19 and 20, 1985, in preparation for an allegedly unlawful arrest on February 21, 1985. In furtherance of this conspiracy, USPP Officers Ferebee and Brown are alleged to have unlawfully confiscated plaintiff's protest signs and banner without probable cause on June 6, 1985. Other allegations will be elaborated upon below.
again reviewed the motion of the federal defendants for summary judgment, has carefully considered the opposition filed thereto by the plaintiff, and has reviewed the plaintiff's statements of material facts as to which he claims there exist genuine issues of material fact, the affidavits and attachments thereto, declarations of Mr. Thomas and witnesses to certain incidents and events, the memoranda of points and authorities, and the testimony taken upon deposition in the presence of the Magistrate of ten (10) witnesses in the case, as well as relevant portions of the court record. After consideration of these matters, and for the reasons stated below, the Magistrate concludes that the motion of the federal defendants must be denied.
pleadings must be reviewed in a light most favorable to the plaintiff, as the non-moving party. As our own Court of Appeals has recently noted, "because summary judgment is a drastic remedy, courts should grant it with caution so that no person will be deprived of his or her day in court to prove a disputed fact." Greenberg v. Food & Drug Admin., 803 F.2d 1213, 1216 (D. C. Cir. 1986).