Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

HAJJI AHMAD v. LEVI

June 10, 1976

HAJJI A. R. AHMAD et al.
v.
EDWARD LEVI et al.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: HIGGINBOTHAM, JR.

 A. LEON HIGGINBOTHAM, JR., J.

 INTRODUCTION

 The Court has already dealt with certain of plaintiffs' grievances, though not with this case, in an unreported Memorandum Order dated September 5, 1975. At that time, Hajji A.R. Ahmad, one of the instant plaintiffs, was plaintiff in two related civil actions, Nos. 75-1829 and 75-1851. Initially, both suits appeared to involve only a relatively uncomplicated claim of employment discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. As the summer of 1975 wore on, however, Mr. Ahmad, acting as his own attorney in Civil Action No. 75-1829, assailed this Court with a barrage of petitions, motions, and requests for relief that far exceeded the scope of the original complaints. Since it appeared that Mr. Ahmad had, with the filing of Civil Action No. 75-1851, already secured the relief he sought in Civil Action No. 75-1829, I denied in my Order of September 5, 1975 virtually all of his other petitions, motions, and requests for relief. In response to those rulings, Mr. Ahmad filed the instant action, where he again seeks much of the relief that he ultimately requested in Civil Action No. 75-1829. See Complaint, Doc. # 1, at para. 9. *fn1" He asks generally that this Court compel the United States Government to adhere to the Constitution and laws of the United States in the conduct of its foreign policy toward the State of Israel, that this Court redress alleged violations of his federal constitutional rights and of his federal and state statutory rights, that this Court compel the prosecution of those who have allegedly violated his rights, and that this Court compel the news media to cease suppressing information about alleged wrong-doing by the United States Government.

 The case comes before the Court at the present time on motions to dismiss or strike filed by several of the named defendants. *fn2" The moving defendants argue that the complaint should be dismissed or stricken as to them on one or another of the following grounds: (1) plaintiffs lack standing to bring this action; (2) the complaint does not state a claim upon which relief can be granted; (3) the allegations of the complaint do not meet the standards of specificity required in civil rights actions; and (4) plaintiffs have failed to comply with the requirements of Fed.R.Civ.P. 11. After careful consideration of these motions, I have concluded that the moving defendants have raised clearly meritorious defenses that apply not only to them, but to all other named defendants as well. Accordingly, the motions to dismiss will be granted, and the entire action will be dismissed with prejudice.

 FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

 The sum total of plaintiffs' factual allegations about the non-governmental defendants appears in Paragraphs 8 and 9 of the original Complaint. In pertinent part, those paragraphs read as follows:

 "8. Each of the defendants have received copy of evidence of wrong doing on behalf of members of the U.S. Gov't and have failed or refused to do what the law requires of him or her in their position.

 * * *

 9. . . .

 The news-media discriminates against the plaintiff by concealing and refusing to publish new [sic] which;

 (a) reveals unlawful activity on the part of the United States Government.

 (b) benefits the plaintiff and the American public.

 (c) shows unlawful activities on the part of U.S. Zionist.

 (d) informs the public which laws are being violated by the United States foreign policy.

 . . .

 Plaintiffs is discriminated against by the defendants in all of its dealings with regards to the Middle East and by discriminating ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.