errata appellant brief and appendix for 2nd circuit appeal case loeber et al. v spargo et al....

275
08-4323 United States Court Of Appeals For The Second Circuit Ronald G. Loeber, et al. Plaintiffs, H. William Van Allen, John-Joseph Forjone, Christopher Earl Strunk, Plaintiffs-Appellants, V. Thomas J. Spargo, et al. Defendants – Appellees On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York Decision and Orders of Lawrence E. Kahn, District Court Judge in Case No. 04 Civ. 1193 ===================================================================== APPELLANT BRIEF (Errata Corrections) ===================================================================== THE AD HOC NYS CITIZENS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL LEGISLATIVE REDISTRICTING 351 North Road Hurley, NY 12443 Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse self-represented w/o being an attorney 593 Vanderbilt Avenue -#281 Brooklyn, New York 11238 (845) 901-6767 email: [email protected]

Upload: chris-strunk

Post on 27-Jul-2015

1.007 views

Category:

Documents


26 download

DESCRIPTION

On January 4, 2009 the service of five complete sets of the Appellant Brief endorsed January 3, 2009 and the Appellant’s Appendix pursuant to the Schedule upon counsels to Appellees by placing each complete package in a properly addressed envelope with proper postage for delivery by the United States Postal Service as follows: AARON M. BALDWINAssistant Attorney General of New YorkThe CapitolAlbany, New York 12224-0341 Delivery Confirmation No.: 03091830000013038517THE CITY OF NEW YORK Corporation Counsel Michael CardozoNYC Law Department100 Church StreetNew York, NY 10007Delivery Confirmation No.: 03091830000013038494JAMES E. LONG, ESQ.668 Central AvenueAlbany, New York 12206Delivery Confirmation No.: 03091830000013038487JAMES E. KONSTANTY, ESQ.Konstanty Law Office252 Main StreetOneonta, NY 13820Delivery Confirmation No.: 03091830000013038500Kimberly A. Galvin, Esq.New York State Board of Elections40 Steuben St.Albany , NY , 12207Delivery Confirmation No.: 03091830000013038470The errata correction conformed brief to filing requirement as to print size and references will be filed by Emergency Motion by end of week. Appellants relief request is regarding the urgency of the 2010 Census enumeration that is ongoing and Declarant is challenging the mis-application and mis-administration of 13 USC §141 and 13 USC §195 (Strunk v US DOC Bureau of Census et al. DCD 08-cv-1295 (RJL) with a motion there for a 3-Judge panel) as then would apply for use of the 2 USC §2a allotment by Congress to each State of the several States for the 2012 State Reapportionment ten years later. Judge Kahn’s background shows he is biased and protects the godless Fabian “Social(ist) Justice” Progressive Inquisition of the Jesuits’ ancien regime; and that Judge Kahn should have answered Declarant’s questions related to the 28 USC §144 preparations for the 28 USC §455 recusal. Or otherwise absent a writ of mandamus for such set of answers Judge Kahn must be surrounded by two intellectually competent god-fearing judges with 28 USC §2284, dependent upon this Court settling of the substantial nature of this gerrymander challenge must decide to remand this case as a matter of judicial economy of schedule back to District to hear a second amended complaint brought forward six years into preparation for the 2012 Census reapportionment. The Appendix and Appellant Brief without addendum were served and filed 01/04/10.

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

08-4323 United States Court Of Appeals

For The Second Circuit

Ronald G. Loeber, et al.

Plaintiffs,

H. William Van Allen, John-Joseph Forjone, Christopher Earl Strunk,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

V.

Thomas J. Spargo, et al.

Defendants – Appellees

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York Decision and Orders of Lawrence E. Kahn, District Court Judge in Case No. 04 Civ. 1193

=====================================================================

APPELLANT BRIEF (Errata Corrections)

=====================================================================

THE AD HOC NYS CITIZENS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL LEGISLATIVE REDISTRICTING 351 North Road Hurley, NY 12443

Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse self-represented w/o being an attorney 593 Vanderbilt Avenue -#281 Brooklyn, New York 11238 (845) 901-6767 email: [email protected]

Page 2: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

ii

APPELLANTS /PLAINTIFFS

H. William: Van-Allen in esse 351 North Road Hurley New York 12443

(845) 389-4366

John-Joseph: Forjone in esse 141 Harris Avenue

Lake Luzerne, New York 12846 (585) 721-7673

Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse 593 Vanderbilt Avenue – 281, Brooklyn, New York 11238

(845) 901-6767

PLAINTIFFS Ronald G. Loeber 2130 Berne Altamont Road Altamont, NY 12009 William E. Bombard P.O. Box 882 Glens Falls, NY 12801 William A. Gage 10 Greenfield Lane Hampton, NY 12837 Fairlene G. Rabenda 8 Claudia Lane Poughkeepsie, NY 12603 Ronald E. Sacoff 84 Boylan Street Staten Island, NY 10312

Gabriel Razzano 135 Gordon Place Freeport, NY 11520 Edward M. Person, Jr. 392 Saldane Avenue North Babylon, NY 11703 Burr V. Deitz 444 Whitehall Road Albany, NY 12208 Roy-Pierre Detiege-Cormier 25 Hattie Jones Circle Brooklyn, NY 11213 The Ad Hoc NYS Citizens for Constitutional Legislative Redistricting 351 North Road Hurley, NY 12443

Page 3: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

iii

APPELLEES –DEFENDANTS:

ANDREW M. CUOMO Attorney General of the State of New York Attorney for Defendants Thomas J. Spargo,

Joseph L. Bruno, NYS Senate, Sheldon Silver, NYS Assembly, George E. Pataki, Randy A. Daniels and Eliot Spitzer

The Capitol Albany, New York 12224-0341 By: AARON M. BALDWIN

Assistant Attorney General, of Counsel Telephone: (518) 474-2913

Fax: (518) 473-1572 (Not for service of papers) Email: [email protected]

Also Representing:

Peter Kosinski, individually and his official capacity at the NASS, Eric Adams, James S. Alesi, John J. Bonacic, Neil D. Breslin, NYS Senator, Martin Connor, NYS Senator, John DeFrancisco, NYS Senator, Ruben Diaz, Sr., NYS Senator, Martin Malave Dilan, NYS Senator, Thomas K. Duane, NYS Senator, Hugh T. Farley, NYS Senator, John J. Flanagan, NYS Senator, Charles J. Fuschillo, Jr., NYS Senator, Martin J. Golden, NYS Senator, Efrain Gonzalez, NYS Senator, Joseph A. Griffo, NYS Senator, Kemp Hannon, NYS Senator, Ruth Hassell-

Thompson, NYS Senator, Shirley L. Huntley, NYS Senator, Craig M. Johnson, NYS Senator, Owen H. Johnson, NYS Senator, Jeffrey D. Klein, NYS Senator, Liz Krueger, NYS Senator, Carl Kruger, NYS Senator, Andrew J. Lanza, NYS Senator, William J. Larkin Jr., NYS Senator, Kenneth P. LaValle, NYS Senator,

Vincent L. Leibell III, NYS Senator, Thomas W. Libous, NYS Senator, Elizabeth O`C Little, NYS Senator, Serphin R. Maltese, NYS Senator, Carl L.

Marcellino, NYS Senator, George D. Maziarz, NYS Senator, Velmanette Montgomery, NYS Senator, Thomas P. Morahan, NYS Senator, Michael

Nozzolio, NYS Senator, George Onorato, NYS Senator, Suzi Oppenheimer, NYS Senator, Frank Padavan, NYS Senator, Kevin S. Parker, NYS Senator, Bill Perkins, NYS Senator, Mary Lou Rath, NYS Senator, Joseph E. Robach,

NYS Senator, John D. Sabini, NYS Senator, Stephen M. Saland, NYS Senator, John L. Sampson, NYS Senator, Diane J. Savino, NYS Senator, Eric T.

Schneiderman, NYS Senator, Jose M. Serrano, NYS Senator, James L. Seward, NYS Senator, Dean G. Skelos, NYS Senator, Malcolm A. Smith, NYS Senator,

William T. Stachowski, NYS Senator, Toby Ann Stavisky, NYS Senator, Andrea

Page 4: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

iv

Stewart-Cousins, NYS Senator, Antoine M. Thompson, NYS Senator, Ceasar Trunzo, NYS Senator, David J. Velesky, NYS Senator, Dale M. Volker, NYS

Senator, George H. Winner Jr., NYS Senator, Catharine M. Young, NYS Senator, Peter J. Abbate, Jr., NYS Assemblyman, Marc S. Alessi, NYS

Assemblyman, Tom Alfano, NYS Assemblyman, George Amedore, NYS Assemblyman, Carmen E. Arroyo, NYS Assemblywoman, Darrel J. Aubertine,

NYS Assemblyman, Jeffrion L. Aubry, NYS Assemblyman, Jim Bacalles, NYS Assemblyman, Greg Ball, NYS Assemblyman, William A. Barclay, NYS Assemblyman, Bob Barra, NYS Assemblyman, Michael Benedetto, NYS

Assemblyman, Michael Benjamin, NYS Assemblyman, Jonathan L. Bing, NYS Assemblyman, William F. Boyland Jr., NYS Assemblyman, Philip Boyle, NYS Assemblyman, Adam Bradley, NYS Assemblyman, James F. Brennan, NYS

Assemblyman, Richard L. Brodsky, NYS Assemblyman, Alec Brook-Krasny, NYS Assemblyman, Daniel J. Burling, NYS Assemblyman, Marc W. Butler, NYS

Assemblyman, Kevin A. Cahill, NYS Assemblyman, Nancy Calhoun, NYS Assemblywoman, Karim Camara, NYS Assemblyman, Ron Canestrari, NYS

Assemblyman, Ann Margaret Carrozza, NYS Assemblywoman, Joan K. Christensen, NYS Assemblywoman, Barbara M. Clark, NYS Assemblywoman, Mike Cole, NYS Assemblyman, William Colton, NYS Assemblyman, James D. Conte, NYS Assemblyman, Vivian E. Cook, NYS Assemblywoman, Clifford W.

Crouch, NYS Assemblyman, Michael Cusick, NYS Assemblyman, Steven Cymbrowitz, NYS Assemblyman, Francine DelMonte, NYS Assemblywoman, RoAnn M. Destito, NYS Assemblywoman, Luis M. Diaz, NYS Assemblyman, Ruben Diaz Jr., NYS Assemblyman, Jeffrey Dinowitz, NYS Assemblyman,

Janet L. Duprey, NYS Assemblywoman, Patricia A. Eddington, NYS Assemblywoman, Steve Englebright, NYS Assemblyman, Joseph A. Errigo, NYS

Assemblyman, Adriano Espaillat, NYS Assemblyman, Herman D. Farrell Jr., NYS Assemblyman, Ginny Fields, NYS Assemblywoman, Gary D. Finch, NYS

Assemblyman, Michael J. Fitzpatrick, NYS Assemblyman, George S. Latimer, NYS Assemblyman, Charles D. Lavine, NYS Assemblyman, Joseph R. Lentol, NYS Assemblyman, Barbara Lifton, NYS Assemblywoman, Peter D. Lopez,

NYS Assemblyman, Vito J. Lopez, NYS Assemblyman, Donna A. Lupardo, NYS Assemblywoman, William Magee, NYS Assemblyman, William B. Magnarelli,

NYS Assemblyman, Alan Maisel, NYS Assemblyman, Margaret M. Markey, NYS Assemblywoman, Nettie Mayersohn, NYS Assemblywoman, Roy

McDonald, NYS Assemblyman, David McDonough, NYS Assemblyman, John J. McEneny, NYS Assemblyman, Tom McKevitt, NYS Assemblyman, Joel M. Miller, NYS Assemblyman, Joan L. Millman, NYS Assemblywoman, Marcus

Molinaro, NYS Assemblyman, Joseph D. Morelle, NYS Assemblyman, Catherine Nolan, NYS Assemblyman, Daniel J. O`Donnell, NYS Assemblyman,

Page 5: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

v

Thomas F. O`Mara, NYS Assemblyman, Bob Oaks, NYS Assemblyman, Felix Ortiz, NYS Assemblyman, William L. Parment, NYS Assemblyman, Amy

Paulin, NYS Assemblywoman, Crystal D. Peoples, NYS Assemblywoman, Jose R. Peralta, NYS Assemblyman, N. Nick Perry, NYS Assemblyman, Audrey I

Pheffer, NYS Assemblywoman, Adam Clayton Powell IV, NYS Assemblyman, J. Gary Pretlow, NYS Assemblyman, Jack Quinn, NYS Assemblyman, Annie

Rabbitt, NYS Assemblywoman, Andrew P. Raia, NYS Assemblyman, Phil Ramos, NYS Assemblyman, Bill Reilich, NYS Assemblyman, Bob Reilly, NYS

Assemblyman, Jose Rivera, NYS Assemblyman, Dennis H. Gabryszak, NYS Assemblyman, Sandy Galef, NYS Assemblywoman, David F. Gantt, NYS Assemblyman, Joe Giglio, NYS Assemblyman, Deborah J. Glick, NYS

Assemblywoman, Diane Gordon, NYS Assemblywoman, Tim Gordon, NYS Assemblyman, Richard N. Gottfried, NYS Assemblyman, Aurelia Greene, NYS

Assemblyman, Aileen M. Gunther, NYS Assemblywoman, Stephen Hawley, NYS Assemblyman, Jim Hayes, NYS Assemblyman, Carl E. Heastie, NYS

Assemblyman, Andrew Hevesi, NYS Assemblyman, Dov Hikind, NYS Assemblyman, Earlene Hooper, NYS Assemblywoman, Sam Hoyt, NYS

Assemblyman, Janele Hyer-Spencer, NYS Assemblywoman, Rhonda Jacobs, NYS Assemblywoman, Ellen Jaffee, NYS Assemblywoman, Hakeem Jeffries, NYS Assemblyman, Susan V. John, NYS Assemblywoman, Brian P. Kavanagh, NYS Assemblyman, Micah Z. Kellner, NYS Assemblyman, Tom Kirwan, NYS

Assemblyman, Brian M. Kolb, NYS Assemblyman, David Koon, NYS Assemblyman, Ivan C. Lafayette, NYS Assemblyman, Rory I. Lancman, NYS

Assemblywoman, Naomi Rivera, NYS Assemblywoman, Peter M. Rivera, NYS Assemblyman, Annette Robinson, NYS Assemblywoman, Linda B. Rosenthal,

NYS Assemblywoman, Joseph Saladino, NYS Assemblyman, Teresa R. Sayward, NYS Assemblywoman, William Scarborough, NYS Assemblyman,

Michelle Schimel, NYS Assemblywoman, Robin Schimminger, NYS Assemblywoman, Mark J.F. Schroeder, NYS Assemblyman, Dede Scozzafava,

NYS Assemblywoman, Anthony S. Seminerio, NYS Assemblyman, Sheldon Silver, NYS Assemblyman, Mike Spano, NYS Assemblyman, Al Stirpe, NYS Assemblyman, Robert K. Sweeney, NYS Assemblyman, James Tedisco, NYS Assemblyman, Fred W. Thiele Jr., NYS Assemblyman, Matthew Titone, NYS Assemblyman, Michele R. Titus, NYS Assemblywoman, Lou Tobacco, NYS

Assemblyman, Darryl C. Towns, NYS Assemblyman, David R. Townsend, NYS Assemblyman, Rob Walker, NYS Assemblyman, Helene E. Weinstein, NYS

Assemblywoman, Harvey Weisenberg, NYS Assemblyman, Mark Weprin, NYS Assemblyman, Keith L.T. Wright, NYS

Assemblyman, Ellen Young, NYS Assemblyman, Kenneth Zebrowski, NYS Assemblyman, Michael Gianaris, NYS Assemblyman, DOE.

Page 6: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

vi

KIMBERLY GALVIN, ESQ. , Special Counsel Attorney for Defendants New York State Board of Elections and Peter Kosinski 40 Steuben Street, Albany, NY 12207 (518) 474-6236 Also representing by authority: every Municipal Board of Elections, along with every Corporation Counsel of every Municipality with a Board of Elections, JAMES E. KONSTANTY, ESQ. Konstanty Law Office 252 Main Street Oneonta, NY 13820 (607) 432-2245 For the Otsego County Board of Elections, MICHAEL A. CARDOZO, ESQ. Corporation Counsel of the City of New York Attorney for City Defendants City of New York and Michael Bloomberg 100 Church Street New York, New York 10007 (212) 780-0849

JAMES E. LONG, ESQ. Bar Roll No. 506898 668 Central Avenue Albany, New York 12206 (518) 458-2444 Representing the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SECRETARIES OF STATE, "NASS", Leslie Reynolds, Executive Director for the Executive Committee, WAN J. KIM United States Attorney Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division U.S. Department of Justice Room 7254--NWB 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20530 (800) 253-3931

STATEMENT CONCERNING JURISDICTION

This Court has jurisdiction because the final related decision and orders from the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York by Lawrence E. Kahn, District Court Judge No. 04 Civ. 1193 are appealable per 28 U.S.C. § 1291.

Page 7: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

STATEMENT CONCERNING JURISDICTION……………………………….vi STATEMENT REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT…………………………….v TABLE OF AUTHORITIES................................................……………………..vii INTRODUCTION………………………………..……………………………..… 1 STATEMENT OF THE CASE .............................................……………………...2 STATEMENT OF FACTS....................................................…..………………......3 QUESTIONS PRESENTED in that Court erred or failed ……..………………...10 ISSUE 1: answer the interrogatories posed in the Appellant’s letter …………….10 ISSUE 2: as to Rule 12 motion, in re ‘plausibility standard………………………11 ISSUE 3: Plaintiff’s request challenging constitutionality of apportionment........12 ISSUE 4: a single judge may dismiss a claim if the Constitutional claim……..…12 ISSUE 5: assumption that New York City is not a single home-rule territory…...13 ISSUE 6: that Article 3, Section 4 entire section was declared unconstitutional…18 ISSUE 7: Amended Complaint is a discernable reapportionment claim………….18 ISSUE 8: constitutional question is not insubstantial with prior decisions…….…19 ISSUE 9: use of Bailey v. Patterson, 369 U.S. at 33, in re a three-judge panel…..19 ISSUE 10: redistricting plan challenge by Plaintiffs has not withstood scrutiny....19 ISSUE 11: Order Section B. Analysis of claims in the Amended Complaint…….20 ISSUE 12: ORDER in re 2nd cause of action and the 6th cause of action………...20 ISSUE 13: 7th cause of action gerrymandering claim re 2002 New York plan…..23 ISSUE 14: liberal construction of equal protection / substantive due process…...23 ARGUMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . …………………..23 WHAT IS A REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT………..…………….27 CONCLUSION..........................................…...........................................……..…30 JURAT………………..………..............................……….....................................30 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . …………………………31 APPENDIX with Index 8 pages and exhibits A-1 through A-217.

Page 8: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

viii

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Page(s) CASES Federal Authorities: Luther v. Borden, 48 U.S. (7 How.) 1, 43 (1849)………….……………….…27-29 Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (1962) …………………………………….…18,28,29 WMCA, Inc. v. Lomenzo, 377 U.S. 633 (June 15, 1962)…………4,5,9,18,19,22,23 Iqbal v. Hasty, 490 F.3d 143, 157-58 (2d Cir. 2007)……………………………..11 Idlewild Liquor Corp. v. Epstein, 370 U.S. 713, 715 (1962)……………………..12 Bailey v. Patterson, 369 U.S. 31, 33 (1962)…………………………………..12,19 Goosby v. Osser, 409 U.S. 512, 518 (1973)………………………………………19 Phillips v. Girdich, 408 F.3d 124, 127-28 (2d Cir. 2005)………………………...20 Bethlehem Steel Co. V. NYS Labor Relations Bd., 330 U.S. 767 (1947) ……...…26 City of New York v. USA SDNY Case 96-cv-7758 (JGK), USCA 2nd Cir 97-6162… Strunk v. US House et.al. EDNY case 00-7717 (JBW), USCA 2nd Cirt 01-6021….. Rodriguez et.al. v. Pataki et.al., SDNY 02 cv 618 (28 USC 2284)…..…5,19,22,28 Barnett et.al. v. City of Chicago, et al., 97-2793 USCA 7th Ct. 141 F.3d 699 (1998) Hines v. Davidowitz, 312 U.S. 52 (1940) ………………………….…………….26 Burns v. Richardson, 384 U.S. 73 (1966)………………………………………… Davis v. Bandemer 478 U.S. 109 (1986)………………………………………… Smiley v. Holm, 285 U.S. 355 (1932)…………………………………………….. Koenig v. Flynn, 285 U.S. 375 (1932)……………………………………………. Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533 (1964)…………………………………….14,18,23 Campaign for Fiscal Equity, Inc., et. al. v. NYS, et al.,NYS CA 74 (June 26, 2003) Storer v Brown, 415 US 724 (1974)……………………………………………… Smith v Allwright, 321 U.S. 649 (1946)…………………………………………. Schultz v. Williams, 44 F.3d 48, 61 n.13 (2d Cir. 1994)…………………………. Diaz v. Silver, 978 F. Supp. 96 (EDNY per curiam), affirmed 522 US 801 (1997) Shaw v. Hunt, 517 U.S. 899 (1996)("Shaw II"): voting civil rights redistricting Cromartie v. Hunt, 118 S. Ct. 1510………………………………………………. Adams v. Clinton, DCDC CV. No 98-1665……………………………………… Alexander v. Daley, DCDC Civ. No. 98-2187…………………………………… Shaw v. Reno, 509 U.S. 630, 652 (1993) ("Shaw I"): voting in re redistricting….. PRLDEF v. Gantt et.al. EDNY 92 cv 1521 / 92 cv 1776 minority reapportionment. Dept. of Commerce v. Montana, 503 U.S. 442 (1992): Executive/Congress power Franklin v. Massachusetts, 505 U.S. 788 (1992): “Usual Residence” …………… Ridge v. Verity, 715 Fed. Sup. 1308 (W.D.Pa. 1989)……………………………..

Page 9: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

ix

Eu v. San Francisco Democratic Comm., 489 U.S. 214 (1989)…………………… Karcher v. Daggett, 462 U.S. 725 (1983): State /CDs equal eligible voters……...26 United Jewish Organizations of Williamsburgh Inc. v. Carey, 430 U.S. 144 (1977) American Party of Texas v. White, 415 U.S. 767(1974)…………………………… Roserio v. Rockefeller, 410 U.S. 752 (1973)……………………………………... 5 Rockefeller v. Orans, 382 U.S. 10 (October 11, 1965)……………………………4 Wolpoff et.al. v. Mario M. Cuomo et.al., 80 N.Y.2d 70, 600 N.E.2d 191, 587 N.Y.S.2d 560 (June 30, 1992)…………………………………………………4 Gray v. Sanders, 372 US 368 (1969)……………………………………………..16 Person v. The NYS BOE SDNY 06-cv-6365………………………………………8 Williams v. Rhodes, 393 U.S. 23 (1968)………………………………………… UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION Article I Section 2 – Electors qualification numerous branch of state legislature Article I Section 8 clause 4 – Rule of Naturalization Article I Section 4 – State control over suffrage respecting time place and manner Article I Section 9– ………………………………………………… Article I Section 10 – Powers denied states and or coordinated with Congress……. Article II Section 1 – State legislature plenary power of election of chief magistrate Article III Section 2: Judicial oath of duties to State and Federal Law……… Article IV Section 2-1: Citizens of each State enjoy equal privileges & immunities Article IV Section 3: States and territories formed within State……………… Article IV Section 4: Guarantee of Republican form of government……….…..27 First Amendment: right to assemble / petition government to redress………..5,8,20 Fifth Amendment: no deprivation w/o due process of law…………………….…20 9th Amendment: certain rights shall not deny/disparage……………………...3,8.20 10th Amendment: Powers not granted Federal nor prohibited reserved by…..3,8,20 14th Amendment: Citizen due process and equal protection; ……….….3,4,8,20,29 NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION The Original New York State Constitution of April 20, 1777…………..……….3,5 The amended New York State Constitution Article II Suffrage Section 1 thru 9 ……………………………………….. Article III Section 1 thru 17…..…………………….…………..12,18,20,22 Article IX – Local Government …………………………………….…………24,32

Page 10: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

x

NEW YORK STATUTES N.Y. Elec. Law § 3-100 (State BOE responsibility and duty) ………………… N.Y. Elec. Law § 4-100 (creation of election districts)..............................…….. FEDERAL STATUTES 28 U.S.C. § 1291................................................................………………………..vi 1965 Voting Rights Act Section 5 review (VRA)…………………..6,8,23,25,27,29 Help America Vote Act (“HAVA”) 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg...................................20,23 28 U.S.C. § 2284………………………………………………………….…1,12,30 42 U.S.C. §§1983 and 1985 (state action) ……………….…………………...1,2,29 28 USC §144 in re 28 USC §455……………………………………………...10,30 FEDERAL RULES 2nd Circuit Rule §.27……..……….........................................………………….vi,x Fed. R. App. P. 34.........................................................................................……x F.R.C.P. 12(b)(6) and 12(c), as well as F.R.C.P. 8(a)…………………………… RELATED CASES: Rodriquez v Pataki - SDNY 02 cv 618 (28 USC 2284) Arbor Hill et. al. v. Albany Cty et.al. NDNY 03-cv-502 (NAM) / 2nd Cir 04-9132..1 Lopez Torres et al v. New York State BOE et al EDNY 04-cv-1129 (JG)…………1 Forjone et al. v. California et al. in NDNY 06-cv-1002 (LEK)…………………...1 Strunk v USPS et al EDNY 08-cv-1744 / appeal 2nd Circuit 08-3242-cv….1,2,6,8,9 Strunk v US DOC Bureau of Census et al DCD 09-cv-1295…………………...1,30

CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT & CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS

This statement is made pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 26.1.

Appellant Christopher-Earl Strunk is an individual and not a corporation.

STATEMENT REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT

Appellants request oral argument because such argument would significantly assist

this Court in its decision-making process as provided by Rule 34 of the Federal

Rules of Appellate Procedure and Rule 34 of the Rules of this Court, along with

Local Rule § .27.

Page 11: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 1 -

I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse, state under penalty of perjury with 28 USC §1746 that:

INTRODUCTION Appellant Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse (See A-9) is self represented without

being an attorney along with Appellants, H. William: Van-Allen in esse (See A-13)

and John-Joseph: Forjone in esse (See A-2) who are all members of THE AD HOC

NYS (New York State) CITIZENS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL LEGISLATIVE

REDISTRICTING, an un-incorporated membership association of Plaintiffs.

Appellants designate Declarant the spokesman herein because Declarant has the

longest direct experience in this matter as either an Intervener-Petitioner,

Intervener-Plaintiff, Petitioner-Defendant, and or Plaintiff in related cases:

Rodriquez v Pataki - SDNY 02 cv 618, Arbor Hill et. al. v. Albany County et.al.

NDNY 03-cv-502 (NAM) and at 2nd Cir 04-9132, Lopez Torres et al v. New York

State Board of Elections et al EDNY 04-cv-1129 (JG), Forjone et al. v. California

et al. in NDNY 06-cv-1002 (LEK), Strunk v USPS et al EDNY 08-cv-1744 and

appeal at 2nd Circuit 08-3242-cv, Strunk v US DOC Bureau of Census et al DCD

09-cv-1295. That all the Orders are challenged herein as Appellants are adamant

on the applicability of 28 USC §2284 as to the reapportionment of all district done

in April 2002 and subsequently pending the challenged 2010 Census Enumeration

and pending allotment to be used for the 2012 Reapportionment, and request a

remand for a second amended complaint for such State Action. That Declarant

Page 12: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 2 -

requests that this oral argument be done at the same time as that for Strunk v USPS

et al appeal case at 2nd Circuit 08-3242-cv (See A-147).

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

The broad question presented is whether district court, has failed to act on

the Federal matter of Federal interference first with the overly broad use of the

Voting Rights Act as a Bivens matter combined with State Action in use of such

questionable dicta which nullifies the entire basis for use of the State Constitution

in redistricting where all districts are drawn together, and are left in limbo for four-

five years causing the internal collapse of State Governance with a permanent

intractable division without use of the State Constitution that otherwise is there

with ready solution mandates, long after the so-called “one –person one-vote”

Social Justice (1) Inquisition of the Jesuit controlled Judiciary, and after the Jesuit

1 The term "social justice" was coined by the Jesuit Luigi Taparelli in the 1840s, based on the teachings of Thomas Aquinas. He wrote extensively in his journal Civiltà Cattolica, engaging both capitalist and socialist theories from a natural law viewpoint. His basic premise was that the rival economic theories, based on subjective Cartesian thinking, undermined the unity of society present in Thomistic metaphysics; neither the liberal capitalists nor the communists concerned themselves with public moral philosophy.

Pope Leo XIII, who studied under Taparelli, published in 1891 the encyclical, Rerum Novarum (On the Condition of the Working Classes), rejecting both socialism and capitalism, while defending labor unions and private property. He stated that society should be based on cooperation and not class conflict and competition. In this document, Leo set out the Catholic Church's response to the social instability and labor conflict that had arisen in the wake of industrialization and had led to the rise of socialism. The Pope taught that the role of the State is to promote social justice through the protection of rights, while the Church must

Page 13: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 3 -

temporal coadjutors supposedly cured the problem for which it was devised to

cure. District time and time again has failed to provide substantive due process to

safeguard New York State US Citizens autonomy rights protected under the 9th

amendment with powers reserved to the PEOPLE under the 10th Amendment for

authority to enforce equal treatment and due process under the 14th amendment.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. On April 20, 1777 the State of New York declared itself to be a sovereign

state with a State Constitution (“NYSC”), and as such it is not only the progenitor

of the Federal Constitution but still remains in force as to suffrage and State

Citizen Autonomy questions, notwithstanding specific amendments that until

such time a Federal Constitutional Convention brings forth a new Federal

speak out on social issues in order to teach correct social principles and ensure class harmony.

The encyclical Quadragesimo Anno (On Reconstruction of the Social Order, literally "in the fortieth year") of 1931 by Pope Pius XI, encourages a living wage, subsidiarity, and teaches that social justice is a personal virtue as well as an attribute of the social order: society can be just only if individuals and institutions are just.

Pope Benedict XVI's encyclical Deus Caritas Est ("God is Love") of 2006 teaches that justice is the defining concern of the state and the central concern of politics, and not of the church, which has charity as its central social concern. The laity has the specific responsibility of pursuing social justice in civil society. The church's active role in social justice should be to inform the debate, using reason and natural law, and also by providing moral and spiritual formation for those involved in politics.

The official Catholic doctrine on social justice can be found in the book Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, published in 2004 and updated in 2006, by the Pontifical Council Iustitia et Pax.

Page 14: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 4 -

Constitution, as such make sovereign the State of New York devised methods of

voting and state citizenship, as a requirement with the 14th Amendment.

2. The questionable nature of reapportionment process ongoing in New York

State after the 1960 Census and especially after 1965 without proper use of State

Constitution Article III with the challenged 2000 Census for the Legislature

without the anti-gerrymandering provisions therein are maneuvered now by

Defendants and predecessors since the friendly suit WMCA, Inc. v. Lomenzo, 377

U.S. 633 (June 15, 1962), with overly broad use combined with the Jesuits’

doctrine of “Social Justice” devised by Fr. Luigi Taparelli, S.J. that became the 14th

Amendment race for the bottom common denominator in 1868 with a “Living

Constitution”, defined the corporate collective entity supremacy over individual

rights that otherwise continue to be guaranteed by the Original Constitution (dead-

letter law) left un-amended. The Collective use of “Social Justice” doctrine by the

Fabian Progressives around the Nelson Rockefeller and Averill Harriman

Monocentrist using a godless Jesuit temporal coadjutor judiciary brought top-down

control with Rockefeller v. Orans, 382 U.S. 10 (October 11, 1965) and Wolpoff

et.al. v. Mario M. Cuomo et.al., 80 N.Y.2d 70, 600 N.E.2d 191, 587 N.Y.S.2d 560

(June 30, 1992) with complicity of the New York State Court of Appeals ending in

Federal Court.

3. Clearly the admitted non use of the State Constitution Article III by broadly

Page 15: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 5 -

using an otherwise narrowly tailored Judicial Decision in WMCA and Rodriguez

underlies Appellants’ / Plaintiffs’ on-going difficulty in knowing with certainty

whether or not a Citizen is to seek redress of grievance and remedy relief in one

place– thereby the right to grievance redress un-infringed as a Federal 1st

Amendment issue is well covered in the original Federal Constitution body before

amendment as well as in the New York State Ratifying document of July 26, 1788,

and such enumerated rights are simultaneously for the PEOPLE sacrosanct

sovereign State Citizen rights guarantee protected continuously since April 20,

1777.

4. That the NYSC requirement that the People’s autonomy within each

corporate entity of the county system be provided to each State citizen elector in

perpetuity guaranteed by the 1777 original State Constitution Article XVI quote

“among the great districts and counties of this State, in proportion to the number

of their respective electors; so that the representation of the good people of this

State, both in the senate and assembly, shall forever remain proportionate and

adequate” Protected in perpetuity against suffrage and autonomy rights

infringement shall forever remain proportionate and adequate in proportion to the

number of their respective electors with a ratio of 1 senator to 3 assemblymen as

done through 1962,

5. That following the 1970 census following the now famous case Roserio v

Page 16: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 6 -

Rockefeller in the Supreme Court the NYS Election Law was transformed through

1976 and was submitted to the US Justice Department for “pre-clearance” review

under the VRA for its implementation in the present form of the 1978 pre-cleared

Election Law without we contend civil rights review done by the Secretary of State

under his responsibilities and duties.

6. Strunk’s Response summary argument in opposition to dismissal of State

defendants Any small upstate state sub-divisions composed of home rule towns are

not adequately represented in the Assembly without two assembly members

wholly within. Therefore must redraw state home rule subdivision with additional

towns within to have an effective local election board able to process two local

assembly and senate candidates; otherwise are forcing any contender to go to the

NYS Board of Elections instead of a local board at great inconvenience as an equal

treatment matter for voters and candidates, different than for a larger sub-division

with adequate population and properly political districts created wholly within.

7. There are state subdivisions that are of adequate population size entitled to

multiple assembly districts wholly within a senate district in turn wholly within the

subdivision. That voters are not treated equally with other subdivision voters such

as in NYC, Westchester, Suffolk, Nassau, Erie, Onondaga Monroe and others

except for Dutchess and Albany County in which Plaintiffs such as Loeber in the

rural portion and Deitz within Albany city is improperly divided up for the

Page 17: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 7 -

assembly members within adversely effecting the rural portion voters.

8. Suffolk County that injured Plaintiff Person was done to undermine real

property values in the village of Farmingville was singled out different from

elsewhere. When illegal aliens were provided illegal sanctuary against federal law

for parties in interest maliciously at transport bulk load transfer points along the

Federal Highway serving various interstate corporate interests intent to exploit

illegal alien labor to under cut citizen living standards. That with the crime of

aiding and abetting sanctuary by parties in conspiracy with State Defendants and

those yet to be named, would be exposed with adequate discovery to have acted to

circumvent local zoning restrictions using arbitrary local law enforcement so that

illegal rentals for alien tenants would facilitate conspirators unjust enrichment for

some owners, but singled out other owners to destroy resale value in targeted areas

where Plaintiff Person lost property value as a matter directly with gerrymandering

with illegal alien sanctuary.

9. That in Nassau County specifically the House District of Caroline

McCarthy, involves the Local Election Board in conspiracy with Her office

maliciously to use gerrymandering that concealed public records from scrutiny,

carried out three elections after April 2002 that illegally allowed for the re-election

of McCarthy back to office with votes cast from the House District of

Congressman King illegally; and that when all the while Plaintiff Razzano was told

Page 18: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 8 -

he was in the McCarthy’s district when in fact he was in King’s District. Then in

early 2007 Razzano discovered the true facts by thorough investigation, and by

conducting the investigation and follow-up with authorities such discovery and

administrative complaint exposed the extreme cover-up as a Federal and State

matter of criminal infringement of his rights and being singled out with denial of

equal protection of his 1st , 2nd , 5th 6th, 9th 10th and 14th amendments rights as a

state and Federal Bivens case action question directly effected as a result of

malicious gerrymandering with direct outrageous injury to Plaintiff Razzano.

10. That the injury to Plaintiff Cormier is on the record with an original affidavit

in the case before Judge Bates in Person v. The NYS BOE SDNY 06-cv-6365, a

case in which Declarant also had intervened in the matter of infringement of voter

speech and expectation of success for any challenger candidacy involving the

USPS as a supplement therein denied now as a matter before Judge Ross in the

EDNY with a petition for relief.

11. That Plaintiff Cormier and Declarant are from adjoining Senate, Assembly

and Congressional Districts and inter alia have complained that voters within

Brooklyn do not have districts drawn with total eligible voters that meet the 10%

de minimus requirements of the VRA; and that each district is different than NYC

an the average, and are effected as a result of illegal gerrymandering, and that the

senate districts drawn do not contain assembly districts wholly within as with the

Page 19: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 9 -

Congressional districts too. None follows state law guidelines set by the state

constitution in regards to the way both the assembly and the senate are drawn; and

that Declarant complains of in the Case Strunk v. USPS et al., EDNY 08-cv-1744.

(See A-159)

12. That plaintiff Sacoff of Staten Island along with Mr. Cormier and Declarant

are injured by the failure to provide bottom-up home rule in the boroughs and by

drawing political districts illegally against express the state constitution using

illegal aliens to disproportionately diminish and dilute voting strength effects the

ability of candidates and voters to elect representation and has infringed voters

expectation and voter turnout as a result of illegal redistricting.

13. That as mentioned above Mr. Bombard is injured by the fact that Hamilton

and Fulton Assembly, Senate and House districts are not shared as with the 1992

redistricting, do not elect together and as a result also injure Mr. Gage in

Washington County.

14. That both Ms. Rabenda in Dutchess and Mr. Van Allen in adjoining Ulster

are injured accordingly by districts improperly drawn as referenced similarly above

and that each sub-division is without a dedicated voice in the State legislature due

to both gerrymandering misapplication and misadministration of the state

constitution and despite decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court as in the WMCA

series of cases; and that the Assembly districts in state subdivisions with

Page 20: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 10 -

diminished population size as with Ulster county require strict use of the express

State Constitution Article III, instead are drawn to serve special interests for

questionable purposes in what may be properly termed an enterprise under the

RICO Act as inferred in the ongoing relationship of Thomas J. Spargo to the

decades long activity of the Pyramid Companies all over the State (See A-208).

QUESTIONS PRESENTED

ISSUE 1: Court failed to answer the interrogatories posed in the Appellant’s letter

motion for reconsideration (See A-24) of the Order to Dismiss (See A-16) to

afford the opportunity within the reconsideration timeframe to duly file the

requisite motion for the Judge’s recusal with 28 USC §144 in re 28 USC §455. In

that, Declarant and Plaintiffs’ ninth and tenth amendment right to receive

inalienable rights given by Almighty God not by any man or entity has been denied

by the Court.

That the nature of the matter before the Court requires any Judge to

absolutely believe in God. In that, the Preamble to the New York Constitution

states quote:

“We The People of the State of New York, grateful to Almighty God for our Freedom, in order to secure its blessings, DO ESTABLISH THIS CONSTITUTION. “ Declarant’s inalienable rights are given by Almighty God not a man, men or

entities, and contends that Judge Lawrence E. Kahn does not believe in Almighty

Page 21: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 11 -

God for our freedom, is a Gnostic un-believer; and therefore, must rescue himself

in that the Judge by default accepts a usurper temporal power in provision of

rights, whose one world temporal and spiritual leader is the Pope over all men

including Islam as the Gnostic / Mithra / Zoroastrian Mystery Religion not

Messianic Judaism whose Christianity is based upon the Torah and Trinity.

That as a Census matter not before this Court, Declarant contends the

present Usurper in the Office of POTUS, Barry Soetoro (a.k.a. Barack Hussein

Obama) is a radical Sunni Muslim whose Chain of Command leading and

controlling him and his administration is that of Adolfo Nicolas, 30th Superior

General of the Society of Jesus in the Vatican City State (See A-213) is continuing

the Social Justice Inquisition race to the Bottom against individual rights in favor

of the corporate nature of the collective in the ongoing 2010 Census enumeration

that will render a new reapportionment here in New York requiring issues here

before this court to clarify.

There is no possible way Appellants may obtain a fair hearing without a

Judge(s) dedicated to Almighty God for our freedom and the Original Constitution.

ISSUE 2: Court erred as to Rule 12 motion; Plaintiffs must pass the “‘plausibility

standard,’ which obliges a pleader to amplify a claim with some factual allegations

in those contexts where such amplification is needed to render the claim plausible.”

Iqbal v. Hasty, 490 F.3d 143, 157-58 (2d Cir. 2007)

Page 22: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 12 -

ISSUE 3: Court erred in the matter of Plaintiff’s request “In challenging the

constitutionality of the apportionment of congressional districts or the

apportionment of any statewide legislative body.” 28 U.S.C. § 2284(a). First,

however, to determine whether a three-judge panel is required, the single judge

must inquire (1) “whether the constitutional question raised is substantial”; (2)

“whether the complaint at least formally alleges a basis for equitable relief”; and

(3) “whether the case presented otherwise comes within the requirements of the

three-judge statute.” Idlewild Liquor Corp. v. Epstein, 370 U.S. 713, 715 (1962).

ISSUE 4: Court erred in the matter that a single judge may dismiss a claim if the

Constitutional claim is substantial, or “if the plaintiff lacks standing or the suit is

otherwise not justiciable in the district court.” 17A C. Wright & A. Miller, Federal

Practice and Procedure §4235, at 213 (2007); the Amended Complaint is

Justiciable;

That any false statement by the Judge that discredits or distracts from the

reputation of Declarant / Appellants’ rights, property, is grounds for recusal and

by such injurious falsehood libels and defames title to our social contract (e.g.

New York State Constitution) equity as applies under the NYS Constitution Article

3 Section 5 that for Brooklyn (a/k/a Kings County) from April 2002 applies to

Declarant’s New York 18th Senate District (SD) that is done differently for all SDs

within Brooklyn as with Declarant’s 57th Assembly District and 11th

Page 23: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 13 -

Congressional District (CD) that all shall be reapportioned together and are directly

inter-related and to be nested for the effective governance and association of and

by the people within; instead all have an arbitrary boundary through arbitrary and

outrageous gerrymandering that goes to Declarant’s equity injury here and as is

also complained of in the 2nd Circuit Appeal Case shown in the Appendix at A-147

to A-190 despite the express mandate of the NYS Constitution, quote:

“Assembly districts as nearly equal in number of inhabitants, excluding aliens (2), as may be, of convenient and contiguous territory in as compact form as practicable, each of which shall be wholly within a senate district.”

“In counties having more than one senate district, the same number of assembly districts shall be put in each senate district, unless the assembly districts cannot be evenly divided among the senate districts of any county”;

ISSUE 5: Court erred when it assumed that not only does this claim rest on an

incorrect assumption that New York City is a single county, as opposed to

consisting of five separate counties, see the Article by Jack B. Weinstein at A-191

in which his supposition is found wanting 45 years later, and ignores the entire

2 The use of the term “Aliens” according to the State Constitution may only mean those “Permanent Resident Aliens” and Citizens legally resident within the State that according to Article 3 Section 5-a is the definition of “inhabitants”, and does not include tourists, transients, diplomats and respective family at will; and since the State has no power to naturalize any person, any reading may only expressly mean what the State Constitution mandates so that the Federal Court is obligated not to construe an interpretation to such express meaning or otherwise must seek an interpretation by the New York State Court of Appeals by the certification process;

Page 24: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 14 -

upstate relationship to NYC per se that now wants to split the State entire in two

parts (See A-209 and A-210); in the Introduction states, quote:

“The reapportionment decisions of the United States Supreme Court in Reynolds v. Sims and companion cases requiring that representation in both houses of state legislatures be proportionate to the number of people represented under the principle of "one man, one vote"-are likely to have a profound effect on county and other forms of local government. There is every indication that the Reynolds rule applies to county boards of supervisors, the bodies that usually exercise all of a county’s legislative and, in many instances, much of its executive power, as well as to general purpose units of local government such as villages, towns, cities and boroughs.

This article is primarily concerned with the effect of the reapportionment decision on representation within the country. In this context, it is important to recognize that reapportionment of a state legislature will tend to increase the significance of the county as a unit of local government. The shift of political power and the increase in state aid and attention to the densely populated urban and suburban areas is likely to accelerate the growing reliance on county government. While it will not always be possible for each county to be separately represented in the state legislature, there is no reason to believe that this fact will adversely affect the significance of county government any more than does present congressional districting which, in many instances, also ignores county lines. Baseless, therefore, is the fear that redistricting of the state legislature could lead to the end of counties as units of government at a time when “more people need this local representation”. As the National Municipal Leaders accurately pointed out, "county functions have been growing in number, importance and magnitude. This process has been particularly marked in metropolitan communities, but has by no means been confined to them." In fact, the Federal Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations has suggested, as one of a number of desirable improvements in local government, that smaller governmental units "transfer responsibility for specified governmental services to the county by coordinate mutual action by the governing bodies concerned."

Municipal powers in this country are concurrently exercised by units with general powers of government and by a vast number and variety of special and limited purpose entities. Since the impact of constitutional apportionment may vary with the type of governmental unit involved, this

Page 25: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 15 -

article will treat general and special purpose entities separately. Only the most tentative predications are possible at this early stage in the development of apportionment doctrine. Nevertheless, it is suggested that very few of our special purpose units of local government will be directly affected and that litigation to compel changes in their structure because concepts of equal voting have been violated will generally prove fruitless. It is quite possible, however, that in the process of making necessary changes in county and other general-purpose forms of local government, substantial attention will be given to the rationale of our municipal government structure. The Supreme Court's decisions, therefore, may indirectly have a substantial effect on special purpose units of government.”

Further, Jack B. Weinstein states as to the elimination of all home rule for the five

counties within the once federated city of New York now reduces each to merely

boroughs per se, no longer are counties per se according to home rule requirements

necessary for equal treatment of the residents within. That such counties New

York, Bronx, Kings, Queens and Richmond now exist as an extra constitutional

fiction in name only, with vestigial functions that operate in a patronage vacuum

by habit only without home rule, which is an equal protection matter in comparison

to the other 57 counties as to the “one man one vote” application are not full

fledged counties with home rule and that NYC is to Jack B. Weinstein a “matured

metro” or territory defined in the State Constitution and Article 9 as to local home-

rule (end note), (See A-195) quote:

“5. The City of New York, though once a federation of boroughs that were separate municipalities, now represents an almost fully integrated municipality. It is therefore treated, for the purposes of this analysis, as a matured metro. (Emphasis added)

Page 26: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 16 -

When first established, the City of Greater New York had a strong Board of Estimate organized with equal representation from the large boroughs and with greater representation from the less populous boroughs than their populations warranted. Substantial powers were left in the hands of borough and county officials so that these units retained a semi-independent status. In this situation, it is conceivable that strict and immediate application of the "one man, one vote" concept would have frustrated attempts at consolidation.

Since its organization, there has been a steady march in New York City towards integration of services, reduction of county and borough autonomy, and reduction of the powers of the Board of Estimate through a shift in authority to the Mayor and a legislative body representing the city as a whole. The Board of Estimate is now controlled by officials elected by the city's voters-the Mayor, Comptroller and President of the Council have four votes each while the five Borough Presidents, elected borough-wide, have two votes each. This body exercises executive-administrative rather than legislative functions. It does "not participate in local legislation" although it does "share power with the Council in passing on the Mayor's Expense and Capital Budgets."

The validity of the allocation of votes in the Board of Estimate has recently been challenged. This appears to be the first case in which a plaintiff has urged that the "one man, one vote" principle should be applied to a municipal body that does not have powers of legislation. An argument might be spelled out, based on Gray v. Sanders, that since votes for an elective executive office must be of equal weight, the same principle applies to representation on a board jointly exercising executive powers. Strictly speaking, then, the Board of Estimate's voting procedures would violate the federal constitution because Richmond, the smallest borough in population, now has the same voting power as the largest. In fact, however, the discrimination is probably not substantial in view of the control exercised by officials representing the entire city and the relatively minor functions of the Board of Estimate.

The New York City Council, on the other hand, "shall be vested," according to the Charter, "with the legislative power of the city, and shall be the local legislative body of the One councilman is elected from each state senate district lying wholly or partly within the city. Two councilmen are elected at large from each borough; they may not be of the same political party. This assignment of two at-large councilmen's posts to each borough, regardless of its population, creates a built-in and deliberate disproportion of

Page 27: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 17 -

voting strength favoring the less populated boroughs. Whether the discrimination in New York City is de minimus or whether it can be justified upon the ground that the city is historically a federation of formerly independent municipalities is not completely clear.”

Furthermore, Jack B. Weinstein states in the Conclusion (See A-198) quote:

“Equal protection of the laws at the municipal level is no less important than it is at state and national levels. There is substantial reason for concluding that local general purpose governments must now comply with federal standards for representation proportionate to population. It is doubtful, however, whether these standards are applicable to most of our special purpose local governmental agencies.

As a result of the Supreme Court decisions on apportionment, this country is now faced with a great challenge and opportunity to re-examine its forms of local government and to improve them sufficiently to meet the growing demands thrust upon them. There should be no appreciable inhibition, as a result of the reapportionment cases, on those responsible officials, citizens and students who are searching for means to coordinate and rationalize our municipal government structures in metropolitan and other areas.

The problem of mal-apportionment at the local level will probably be resolved-as are most of our constitutional-political problems-by a series of compromises. In some cases county legislatures will be increased in size in order to protect the right of representation of the smallest governmental units; in other instances the smallest governmental units, in terms of population, will be combined for purposes of election of representatives to the governing body. Where possible, neighborhood and political subdivision lines will be followed. We should bear in mind, in this connection, Chief Justice Warren's warning that "indiscriminate districting, without any regard for political subdivision or natural or historical boundary lines, may be little more than an open invitation to partisan gerrymandering."

Some have expressed despair at ever alerting the citizen to the need for municipal reform. They doubt that leadership will "forswear present power and prerogative," and that the public will "adopt a new consciousness toward their neighbors." Despite these forebodings, there is a vast reservoir of good sense and a pride in local institutions which can be utilized to obtain approval of change. The need must be made clear to the public; it must be made to understand why changes are beneficial. Blind opposition to

Page 28: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 18 -

improvement is seldom able completely to withstand patient, sustained and well documented appeals to reason.

The modifications that are bound to result from a fresh view of our system will certainly strengthen it. Ironically, what has been deemed by some an objectionable assumption of power by the federal government through Baker v. Carr and Reynolds v. Sims, may ultimately help slow and reverse the movement toward centralization of power in Washington and in state Capitals.”

Forty-five years later with much tinkering including the creation of un-elected

municipal community boards, created by the Johnson Administration so-called

“Great Society Program” haunts our every waking hour, no polycentric local

government per se or bottom-up representation is anywhere within NYC, only a

Monocentrist totally top-down corporatist entity, unlike any other state-

subdivision, that is a seriously out of control as an equal protection matter gobbling

up real property and policy control as far away as two hundred miles from its

municipal border in many upstate State sub-divisions.

ISSUE 6: Courts erred when it broadly assumed that Article 3, Section 4 entire

section was among the constitutional reapportionment provisions declared

unconstitutional in WMCA Inc. v. Lomenzo, 377 US 63 (1963).

ISSUE 7: Courts erred when it somehow assumes the Amended Complaint does

not appear to present a discernable reapportionment claim under the federal

constitution, when in fact all reapportionment is a state issue for all district

including the CDs only covered under the respective state constitution, such that

Page 29: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 19 -

there IS a cause to convene a three-judge panel, to correct the over broad use of a

federal decision for which is had no jurisdiction otherwise.

ISSUE 8: Court erred when in addition, the Court notes that a constitutional

question is insubstantial if prior decisions render the issue frivolous and leave no

room for any inference of controversy. Goosby v. Osser, 409 U.S. 512, 518 (1973)

does not apply herein;

ISSUE 9: Court erred in use of Bailey v. Patterson, 369 U.S. at 33, therein holding

that a three-judge panel is not required when “prior decisions make frivolous any

claim” of unconstitutionality does not apply, when neither WMCA or the associated

cases apply herein in such a broad nullification of an entire state constitution as it

has done by destroying the balance of our legislature and state-subdivisions (See

A-209 and A-210) some needs to hang for the damage done!

ISSUE 10: Court erred when it contends the redistricting plan presently challenged

by Plaintiffs has already withstood scrutiny under constitutional challenges

including one person-one vote, population-based and gerrymandering. Rodriguez v.

Pataki, 308 F.Supp.2d 346 (S.D.N.Y.), aff’d, 125 S.Ct. 627 (2004) was not meant

to be over-broadly, but the Judge alleges nonetheless that somehow therein grant of

summary judgment and dismissing complaint because the redistricting plan did not

violate the Fourteenth Amendment or the Voting Rights Act, but instead reflected

traditional districting principles by maintaining equality of population). That

Page 30: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 20 -

decision upholding the redistricting plan was reached by a three-judge panel and

affirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States. Id. One of two Orders

regarding Declarant’s attempted intervention therein in June 2002, see A-201,

granted the opportunity to file a separate case to challenge the gerrymandering

without prejudice. Stated, “Mr. Strunk is free to bring an independent action.” (See

A-204), which Declarant proceeded to do in the case herein.

ISSUE 11: Court erred in re to the Order Section B. Analysis of Plaintiff’s claims

in turning to the Amended Complaint, the Court although aware that because

Plaintiffs are preceding pro se, the Amended Complaint is to be construed

liberally. Phillips v. Girdich, 408 F.3d 124, 127-28 (2d Cir. 2005) failed to do so.

Initially, the Court notes that the first, fifth, ninth, tenth, eleventh, thirteenth, and

fourteenth causes of action allege violations related to HAVA. These claims,

however, were dismissed by the Court’s Order dated January 8, 2008. Dkt. No. 81.

ISSUE 12: Court erred in the ORDER in re Plaintiffs’ second cause of action and

the sixth cause of action that alleges violation of New York State Constitution

Article 3 Section 4 based on New York City’s allotment of 26 senate districts,

inferring claim(s) rest on an incorrect assumption that New York City is a single

county, as opposed to consisting of five separate counties, but Article 3, Section 4

(3) was among the constitutional reapportionment provisions declared

3 §4. Except as herein otherwise provided, the federal census taken in the year

Page 31: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 21 -

nineteen hundred thirty and each federal census taken decennially thereafter shall be controlling as to the number of inhabitants in the state or any part thereof for the purposes of the apportionment of members of assembly and readjustment or alteration of senate and assembly districts next occurring, in so far as such census and the tabulation thereof purport to give the information necessary therefor.

The legislature, by law, shall provide for the making and tabulation by state authorities of an enumeration of the inhabitants of the entire state to be used for such purposes, instead of a federal census, if the taking of a federal census in any tenth year from the year nineteen hundred thirty be omitted or if the federal census fails to show the number of aliens or Indians not taxed. If a federal census, though giving the requisite information as to the state at large, fails to give the information as to any civil or territorial divisions which is required to be known for such purposes, the legislature, by law, shall provide for such an enumeration of the inhabitants of such parts of the state only as may be necessary, which shall supersede in part the federal census and be used in connection therewith for such purposes.

The legislature, by law, may provide in its discretion for an enumeration by state authorities of the inhabitants of the state, to be used for such purposes, in place of a federal census, when the return of a decennial federal census is delayed so that it is not available at the beginning of the regular session of the legislature in the second year after the year nineteen hundred thirty or after any tenth year therefrom, or if an apportionment of members of assembly and readjustment or alteration of senate districts is not made at or before such a session.

At the regular session in the year nineteen hundred thirty-two, and at the first regular session after the year nineteen hundred forty and after each tenth year therefrom the senate districts shall be readjusted or altered, but if, in any decade, counting from and including that which begins with the year nineteen hundred thirty-one, such a readjustment or alteration is not made at the time above prescribed, it shall be made at a subsequent session occurring not later than the sixth year of such decade, meaning not later than nineteen hundred thirty-six, nineteen hundred forty-six, nineteen hundred fifty-six, and so on; provided, however, that if such districts shall have been readjusted or altered by law in either of the years nineteen hundred thirty or nineteen hundred thirty-one, they shall remain unaltered until the first regular session after the year nineteen hundred forty.

Such districts shall be so readjusted or altered that each senate district shall contain as nearly as may be an equal number of inhabitants, excluding aliens, and be in as compact form as practicable, and shall remain unaltered until the first year of the next decade as above defined, and shall at all times consist of contiguous territory, and no county shall be divided in the formation of a senate district except to make two or more senate districts wholly in such county.

No town, except a town having more than a full ratio of apportionment, and no

Page 32: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 22 -

unconstitutional in WMCA Inc. v. Lomenzo, 377 US 63 (1963). However, Judge

Walker in the absence of a request for the reduction of the existing senate seats

from 62 to the original 50 as the only solution after the enlargement ratio was

declared unconstitutional by WMCA merely cited in the Rodriguez Decision and

Order to dismiss the case State Constitution Article 3 §2.

“The senate shall consist of fifty members, except as hereinafter provided. The senators elected in the year one thousand eight hundred and ninety-five shall hold their offices for three years, and their successors shall be chosen

block in a city inclosed by streets or public ways, shall be divided in the formation of senate districts; nor shall any district contain a greater excess in population over an adjoining district in the same county, than the population of a town or block therein adjoining such district.

Counties, towns or blocks which, from their location, may be included in either of two districts, shall be so placed as to make said districts most nearly equal in number of inhabitants, excluding aliens. No county shall have four or more senators unless it shall have a full ratio for each senator. No county shall have more than one-third of all the senators; and no two counties or the territory thereof as now organized, which are adjoining counties, or which are separated only by public waters, shall have more than one-half of all the senators.

The ratio for apportioning senators shall always be obtained by dividing the number of inhabitants, excluding aliens, by fifty, and the senate shall always be composed of fifty members, except that if any county having three or more senators at the time of any apportionment shall be entitled on such ratio to an additional senator or senators, such additional senator or senators shall be given to such county in addition to the fifty senators, and the whole number of senators shall be increased to that extent. (Declared unconstitutional by the WMCA case)

The senate districts, including the present ones, as existing immediately before the enactment of a law readjusting or altering the senate districts, shall continue to be the senate districts of the state until the expirations of the terms of the senators then in office, except for the purpose of an election of senators for full terms beginning at such expirations, and for the formation of assembly districts. (Amended by vote of the people November 6, 1945.)

Page 33: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 23 -

for two years. The assembly shall consist of one hundred and fifty members. The assembly members elected in the year one thousand nine hundred and thirty-eight, and their successors, shall be chosen for two years. (Amended by vote of the people November 2, 1937; November 7, 2001.) “

ISSUE 13: Court erred in that the seventh cause of action gerrymandering claim as

against the 2002 New York redistricting plan is not insubstantial based on a prior

decision.

ISSUE 14: Court erred in the less than liberal construction of the following: “That

Plaintiffs as US Citizens are denied equal protection and substantive due process

suffer injury to individual Bottom up suffrage and Home rule, shown as footnote 2,

autonomy of the PEOPLE within a municipal entity as a firewall against corruption

entitled to a respective board of elections therein, suffer infringement of speech in

the state legislature and the U.S. House, unequal due process in the judiciary and

unreasonable unequally reimbursed unfunded financial burden upon New York

citizen property differently than that for citizens of the several states, as a taking

imposed by unconstitutional provisions of HAVA in the Congressional definition

of “Voting Age Person” (“VAP”) rather than “Citizen Voting Age Persons”

(“CVAP”), is prima facie discrimination evidence proven in related case . . .” Am.

Compl. ¶ 30 (See A-100).

ARGUMENT

The Defendants in this and other cases argue that the Voting Rights Act

(“VRA”) combined with the Supremes decision in Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533

(1964) 377 U.S. 533 hold the “one-person one-vote” as a generality makes a

Page 34: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 24 -

virtual representation for minors and non-citizens, as if either class were members

of the PEOPLE defined as citizens entitled to suffrage and autonomy in the county

of residence and that the State Constitution in its entirety as for the States’ plenary

authority over any reapportionment is sealed by the Warren Court. To the contrary

Minors like aliens are not part of the PEOPLE despite what the AAG purports the

State Legislature has no authority to violate the State Constitution, despite

requirements of the State Civil Rights Law Sections 2 thru 10(4), the AAG

somehow gives Congress authority that supplants the authority of the New York

State Constitution Article III as then is related to all other Articles especially

Article VI for election in the Judiciary and Article IX guarantee of the Supreme

sovereignty in the PEOPLE shall be stakeholders in a County corporation entity or

the City of New York municipal corporation person that supplants the five counties

4 S 2. Supreme sovereignty in the people. No authority can, on any pretence whatsoever, be exercised over the citizens of this state, but such as is or shall be derived from and granted by the people of this state. S 3. Levying taxes and charges. No tax, duty, aid or imposition whatsoever, except such as may be laid by a law of the United States, can be taken or levied within this state, without the grant and assent of the people of this state, by their representatives in senate and assembly; and no citizen of this state can be by any means compelled to contribute to any gift, loan, tax, or other like charge, not laid or imposed by a law of the United States, or by the legislature of this state. S 9. Freedom of elections. All elections ought to be free; and no person by force of arms, malice, menacing, or otherwise, should presume to disturb or hinder any citizen of this state in the free exercise of the right of suffrage. S 10. Justice to be administered without favor and speedily. Neither justice nor right should be sold to any person, nor denied, nor deferred; and writs and process ought to be granted freely and without delay, to all persons requiring the same, on payment of the fees established by law.

Page 35: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 25 -

by residence within. This appeal challenges the foolishness that somehow contends

that Congress has somehow been given the power over the State of New York as if

a territory not a sovereign State of the original founding States separate and apart

from those later created under the Organic Acts after 1801 and somehow resurrects

a State Legislature’s right to make a reapportionment which drastically impact

State Citizen fundamental rights as with use of NYSC ART III anti-

gerrymandering mandates along with the 1/3 and 1/2 rules as applies to size of

territory for municipalities that take away county home-rule and that must be

applied to redistricting of NYS Senate and Assembly seats simultaneously with all

CDs too; as they must be nested and interrelated for the benefit of the People with

suffrage control over their representation. That otherwise NYC is too big for a

municipality in size and illegal controls not only the entire State legislative

process, but when combined with the adjoining entity Westchester or Nassau

illegally controls further amendment to the constitution and or constitutional

convention. That all this flows from the broad use of the VRA to abridge Citizen

rights which now is used overly-broad for a purposes never intended 45 years after

enactment, violates Plaintiffs’ rights.

The Appellants reference Election Law mischief injury measured with “bad

man theory” use of the VRA 10% rule that isn’t enforced for any district drawn in

the 2002 Gerrymandering in New York; and is unlike the role of County

Page 36: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 26 -

boundaries in New Jersey as reviewed in the case Karcher v. Daggett should apply,

isn’t broadly used as a compelling State interest rather than narrowly must be the

intent by Congress under express powers given it not to interfere with compelling

State interest as reapportionment is for all districts within the confines of one-man

one-vote intended in the Original New York State Constitution cited above.

Declarant refers to the Supreme Court decision in Bethlehem Steel Co. V. New

York State Labor Relations Bd., 330 U.S. 767 (1947) to be used when determining

whether exclusion of state power will or will not be implied, in consideration taken

in respect to the relationship of federal and state power as to the general subject

matter as illustrated by the case in hand. Therein the interstate Bethlehem

companies were authorized to do business in New York State, they operate large

manufacturing plants in that state, they draw their labor supply from its residents,

and the impact of industrial strife in their plants is immediately felt by state police,

welfare and other departments. Their labor relations were primarily of interest to

the state, within its competence legally and practically to regulate, and until

recently were left entirely to state control. Thus, the subject matter is not so

'intimately blended and intertwined with responsibilities of the national

government' that its nature alone raises an inference of exclusion. Cf. Hines v.

Davidowitz, 312 U.S. 52, 66 , 61 S.Ct. 399, 403. Unlike in the Matter of labor law

and state police power however provision of suffrage is as recognized in the

Page 37: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 27 -

Copenhagen Treaty of 1993 that State sovereignty in the provision of suffrage is

nearly an entirely plenary matter except for express limited Constitutional powers

given to Congress and by amendments is violated with broad use of the VRA that

by mischief prevents PROPER use of the State Constitution Article III.

What is a republican form of government?

Appellant s’ understanding of the Guarantee of a republican form of

government is transformed through the various permutations into its final form in

Article IV, the object of the clause seems clearly to have been more than an

authorization for the Federal Government to protect States against foreign invasion

or internal insurrection, a power seemingly already conferred in any case. No one

can now resurrect the full meaning of the clause and intent, which moved the

Framers to adopt it, but with the exception of the reliance for a brief period during

Reconstruction the authority contained within the confines of the clause has been

largely unexplored.

In Luther v. Borden, the Supreme Court established the doctrine that

questions arising under this section are political, not judicial, in character and that

''it rests with Congress to decide what government is the established one in a State

. . . as well as its republican character.'' Texas v. White held that the action of the

President in setting up provisional governments at the conclusion of the war was

justified, if at all, only as an exercise of his powers as Commander-in-Chief and

Page 38: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 28 -

that such governments were to be regarded merely as provisional regimes to

perform the functions of government pending action by Congress. On the ground

that the issues were not justiciable, the Court in the early part of this century

refused to pass on a number of challenges to state governmental reforms and thus

made the clause in effect non-cognizable by the courts in any matter, a status from

which the Court's opinion in Baker v. Carr, despite its substantial curbing of the

political question doctrine, did not release it.

Similarly, in Luther v. Borden, the Court indicated that it rested with

Congress to determine upon the means proper to fulfill the guarantee of protection

to the States against domestic violence. Chief Justice Taney declared that Congress

might have placed it in the power of a court to decide when the contingency had

happened which required the Federal Government to interfere, but that instead

Congress had by the act of February 28, 1795, authorized the President to call out

the militia in case of insurrection against the government of any State. It followed,

said Taney, that the President ''must, of necessity, decide which is the government,

and which party is unlawfully arrayed against it, before he can perform the duty

imposed upon him by the act of Congress'', which determination was not subject to

review by the courts.

The key question of first impression here is characterized August 5, 2002

by Assistant Attorney General Joel Graber in the Rodriguez v. Pataki SDNY case

Page 39: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 29 -

02-cv-618 in regards to the VRA lack of relationship to the State Constitution for

a republican form of government question raised first in Luther and then by the

dissenting Justice Felix Frankfurter in Baker v. Carr; therein elaborated on the

history and conditions necessary for the Federal courts under the 14th amendment

to interfere in State political questions in the usurpation of the government

against the pre existing State Constitution and prima facie proof as to Defendants’

acts of sedition with combined State Action. The PEOPLE / Plaintiffs /

Appellants affected by such acts are without remedy for redress of grievance,

suffer speech and suffrage injury by a non-constitutional form of gerrymander

resulting in disproportionate diminished dilution of voting strength with lack of

any possibility of effective participation in the electoral process.

It is essential that the requirement for the structure mandated by the NYSC

for such constitutional revisions and or Convention be rigorously implemented by

this court with only a narrow use for Judicial ruling as to one-person one-vote.

Otherwise, as is amply proven the remedy will not be done or found by any of the

bad actors in the government of New York especially the Judiciary who are

especially bad actors complicit with disenfranchising citizens all over the state -

who are those citizens not part of the majoritarian control of patronage policy and

purse.

Page 40: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

i.

CONCLUSION L

The 201 0 Census enumeration is ongoing and Declarant is challenging the

mis-application and mis-administration of 13 USC $ 141 and 13 USC $ 195

(Strunk v US DOC Bureau of Census et al. DCD 08-cv-1295 (RJL) with a motion

there for a 3-Judge panel) as then would apply for use of the 2 USC $2a allotment

by Congress to each State of the several States for the 2012 State

Reapportionment ten years later. Judge Kahn's background shows he is biased

and protects the godless Fabian "Social(ist) Justice" Progressive Inquisition of the

Jesuits' ancien regime; and that Judge Kahn should have answered Declarant's

questions related to the 28 USC $ 144 preparations for the 28 USC $455 recusal.

w Or otherwise absent a writ of mandamus for such set of answers Judge Kahn must

be surrounded by two intellectually competent god-fearing judges with 28 USC -:

$2284, dependent upon this Court settling of the substantial nature of .this

gerrymander challenge must decide to remand this case as a matter of judicial

economy of schedule back to District to hear a second amended complaint

brought forward six years into preparation for the 20 12 Census reapportionment.

Respectfully submitted and certified to be true under penalty of perjury,

Dated: January 5,20 1 0 Brooklyn, New York

593 Vanderbilt Avenue - #28 1 Brooklyn., New York 1 1238 (845) 90 1-6767 Email: chris@,strunk.ws -

Page 41: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

id, CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE PURSUANT TO FED. R APP. P. 32(A)(7)(C) FOR CASE NUMBER NO. 08-4323

I certify that: Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 32 (a)(7)(C), the foregoing Appellant

brief is proportionately spaced, has a typeface of 14 points or more and contains

8.936 words within the 14,000 words allowable including the End Notes.

Errata Corrections supplemental to the Appellant Filing of January 4,20 10 are

respectfUlly submitted and certified to be true under penalty of perjury,

Dated: January 5,201 0 Brooklyn, New York

Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse 593 Vanderbilt Avenue - #28 1 Brooklyn., New York 1 123 8 (845) 90 1-6767 Email: chris@,stnuzk.ws

Page 42: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 32 -

APPELLANT BRIEF ENDNOTES NYSC ARTICLE IX * Local Governments [*New article adopted by amendment approved by vote of the people November 5, 1963. Former Article IX repealed, except for sections 5, 6 and 8 which were relettered subdivisions (a),(b) and (c) respectively of new section 13 of Article XIII. ] Bill of rights for local governments. Section 1. Effective local self-government and intergovernmental cooperation are purposes of the people of the state. In furtherance thereof, local governments shall have the following rights, powers, privileges and immunities in addition to those granted by other provisions of this constitution:

(a) Every local government, except a county wholly included within a city, shall have a legislative body elective by the people thereof. Every local government shall have power to adopt local laws as provided by this article.

(b) All officers of every local government whose election or appointment is not provided for by this constitution shall be elected by the people of the local government, or of some division thereof, or appointed by such officers of the local government as may be provided by law.

(c) Local governments shall have power to agree, as authorized by act of the legislature, with the federal government, a state or one or more other governments within or without the state, to provide cooperatively, jointly or by contract any facility, service, activity or undertaking which each participating local government has the power to provide separately. Each such local government shall have power to apportion its share of the cost thereof upon such portion of its area as may be authorized by act of the legislature.

(d) No local government or any part of the territory thereof shall be annexed to another until the people, if any, of the territory proposed to be annexed shall have consented thereto by majority vote on a referendum and until the governing board of each local government, the area of which is affected, shall have consented thereto upon the basis of a determination that the annexation is in the over-all public interest. The consent of the governing board of a county shall be required only where a boundary of the county is affected. On or before July first, nineteen hundred sixty-four, the legislature shall provide, where such consent of a governing board is not granted, for adjudication and determination, on the law and the facts, in a proceeding initiated in the supreme court, of the issue of whether the annexation is in the over-all public interest.

(e) Local governments shall have power to take by eminent domain private property within their boundaries for public use together with excess land or

Page 43: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 33 -

property but no more than is sufficient to provide for appropriate disposition or use of land or property which abuts on that necessary for such public use, and to sell or lease that not devoted to such use. The legislature may authorize and regulate the exercise of the power of eminent domain and excess condemnation by a local government outside its boundaries.

(f) No local government shall be prohibited by the legislature (1) from making a fair return on the value of the property used and useful in its operation of a gas, electric or water public utility service, over and above costs of operation and maintenance and necessary and proper reserves, in addition to an amount equivalent to taxes which such service, if privately owned, would pay to such local government, or (2) from using such profits for payment of refunds to consumers or for any other lawful purpose.

(g) A local government shall have power to apportion its cost of a governmental service or function upon any portion of its area, as authorized by act of the legislature.

(h) (1) Counties, other than those wholly included within a city, shall be empowered by general law, or by special law enacted upon county request pursuant to section two of this article, to adopt, amend or repeal alternative forms of county government provided by the legislature or to prepare, adopt, amend or repeal alternative forms of their own. Any such form of government or any amendment thereof, by act of the legislature or by local law, may transfer one or more functions or duties of the county or of the cities, towns, villages, districts or other units of government wholly contained in such county to each other or when authorized by the legislature to the state, or may abolish one or more offices, departments, agencies or units of government provided, however, that no such form or amendment, except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subdivision, shall become effective unless approved on a referendum by a majority of the votes cast thereon in the area of the county outside of cities, and in the cities of the county, if any, considered as one unit. Where an alternative form of county government or any amendment thereof, by act of the legislature or by local law, provides for the transfer of any function or duty to or from any village or the abolition of any office, department, agency or unit of government of a village wholly contained in such county, such form or amendment shall not become effective unless it shall also be approved on the referendum by a majority of the votes cast thereon in all the villages so affected considered as one unit.

(2) After the adoption of an alternative form of county government by a county, any amendment thereof by act of the legislature or by local law which abolishes or creates an elective county office, changes the voting or veto power of or the method of removing an elective county officer during his or her term of office, abolishes, curtails or transfers to another county officer or agency any

Page 44: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 34 -

power of an elective county officer or changes the form or composition of the county legislative body shall be subject to a permissive referendum as provided by the legislature. (Amended by vote of the people November 7, 2001.)

Powers and duties of legislature; home rule powers of local

governments; statute of local governments. §2. (a) The legislature shall provide for the creation and organization of local

governments in such manner as shall secure to them the rights, powers, privileges and immunities granted to them by this constitution.

(b) Subject to the bill of rights of local governments and other applicable provisions of this constitution, the legislature:

(l) Shall enact, and may from time to time amend, a statute of local governments granting to local governments powers including but not limited to those of local legislation and administration in addition to the powers vested in them by this article. A power granted in such statute may be repealed, diminished, impaired or suspended only by enactment of a statute by the legislature with the approval of the governor at its regular session in one calendar year and the re-enactment and approval of such statute in the following calendar year.

(2) Shall have the power to act in relation to the property, affairs or government of any local government only by general law, or by special law only (a) on request of two-thirds of the total membership of its legislative body or on request of its chief executive officer concurred in by a majority of such membership, or (b) except in the case of the city of New York, on certificate of necessity from the governor reciting facts which in the judgment of the governor constitute an emergency requiring enactment of such law and, in such latter case, with the concurrence of two-thirds of the members elected to each house of the legislature.

(3) Shall have the power to confer on local governments powers not relating to their property, affairs or government including but not limited to those of local legislation and administration, in addition to those otherwise granted by or pursuant to this article, and to withdraw or restrict such additional powers.

(c) In addition to powers granted in the statute of local governments or any other law, (i) every local government shall have power to adopt and amend local laws not inconsistent with the provisions of this constitution or any general law relating to its property, affairs or government and, (ii) every local government shall have power to adopt and amend local laws not inconsistent with the provisions of this constitution or any general law relating to the following subjects, whether or not they relate to the property, affairs or government of such local government, except to the extent that the legislature shall restrict the adoption of such a local

Page 45: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 35 -

law relating to other than the property, affairs or government of such local government:

(l) The powers, duties, qualifications, number, mode of selection and removal, terms of office, compensation, hours of work, protection, welfare and safety of its officers and employees, except that cities and towns shall not have such power with respect to members of the legislative body of the county in their capacities as county officers.

(2) In the case of a city, town or village, the membership and composition of its legislative body.

(3) The transaction of its business. (4) The incurring of its obligations, except that local laws relating to

financing by the issuance of evidences of indebtedness by such local government shall be consistent with laws enacted by the legislature.

(5) The presentation, ascertainment and discharge of claims against it. (6) The acquisition, care, management and use of its highways, roads,

streets, avenues and property. (7) The acquisition of its transit facilities and the ownership and operation

thereof. (8) The levy, collection and administration of local taxes authorized by the

legislature and of assessments for local improvements, consistent with laws enacted by the legislature.

(9) The wages or salaries, the hours of work or labor, and the protection, welfare and safety of persons employed by any contractor or sub-contractor performing work, labor or services for it.

(10) The government, protection, order, conduct, safety, health and well-being of persons or property therein.

(d) Except in the case of a transfer of functions under an alternative form of county government, a local government shall not have power to adopt local laws which impair the powers of any other local government.

(e) The rights and powers of local governments specified in this section insofar as applicable to any county within the city of New York shall be vested in such city. (Amended by vote of the people November 7, 2001.)

Page 46: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

I Please time st am^ below]

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 2ND CIRCUIT NIGHT DEPOSITORY

OPEN 4:30 P.M. - 8:30 A.M. EACH BUSINESS DAY OPEN 24 HOURS ON SATURDAY, SUND.AY & HOLIDAYS

Please complete the following information:

(1) Stamp (dateltime) this form and affix original form to each package deposited' andlor each box left for filing.

of each documentlbrief submitted.

Case Title (short title) Case Number: - .- - - Contents: B r i e f s

- r3 i 23 (original + 9 cepies) -- - - ?'TI

I .!= iz? ~ p p e n d i c e s l ~ r a n s c r i p t Volumes (10 copies) -- - :Ti

a zi; <

Motions (T-1080 form + affidavit (original + 4 copies) CF . . a

o t h e r (Please identify):

-------- (original + copies)

a ~ r o o f of service must be attached (original only)

Documents will be deemed filed on the business day they a re dateltime stamped, o r on the next business day if dateltime stamped on a Saturday, Sunday o r Federal Holiday. Documents dateltime stamped after the date they are due must be accompanied by a motion for permission to file out of time. The correct number of copies of all documents must be included.

FAILURE TO INCLUDE M I S FORM OR COMPLY WITH THESE INSTRUCTIONS REGARDING ANY DOCUMENT MAY UNDULY DELAY ITS FILING.

Page 47: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

U.S. Court of Appeals for fie Second Circuit in re Case EDNY 084323-cv

L CXICITHCATE OF SERVICE

On January 4,2009 and under penalty of perjury, I, Christopher Earl Strunk, with 28 USC 1746

caused the service of five complete sets ofthe Appellant Brief endorsed January 3,2009 and the I I Appellant's Appendix pursuant to the Schedule upon counsels to Appellees by placing each

I complete package in a properly addressed envelope with proper postage for delivery by the United

States Postal Service as follows:

AARON M. BALDWIN Assistant Attorney General of New York The Capitol Albany, New York 1 2224434 1

THE CITY OF NEW YORK Corporation Counsel Michael Cardozo NYC Law Department 100 Church Street

L New York, NY 10007

',' JAMES E. LONG, ESQ. 668 Central Avenue Albany, New York 12206

JAMES E. KONSTANTY, ESQ. Konstanty Law Office 252 Main Street Oneonta, NY 13820

Kimberly A. Galvin, Esq. New York State Board of Elections 40 Steuben St. Albany , NY , 12207

I do declare and certify under pm&y of pe jury: n

Dated: January 4,2009 Brooklyn, New York

Page 48: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

F"-." -- *' # . C ;.; .. 2 ... 51' % - . % .

l.,. . ., , '. t.

1.

* 1 I

ECT",IV&~

-4 28' 08 -4323 I -. L - i -. , i <A\-> J = . (. ; , ,, . -

3 . , ' - ,, , - ;: iy i; ,L- i

I .?-n,-\: I---!; , . . * L j i .-. \ . . - I J

t i United States Court Of Appeals '

I : B . , For The Second Circuit 1 .

! I

i I

J

I J !

! . Ronald G. Loeber, et a1.

' . ! Plaintiffs, I I a .

i ! h - il '

r- I H. William Van Allen, John-Joseph Forjone, Christopher Earl Strunk, i '

'Plaintiffs-Appellants,

; r v.

I Thomas J. Spargo, et al.

1 Defendants - Appellees , -

)r

I

On Appeal h m the United States District Court for the Northem District of New York Decision v'

and Orders of Lawrence E. Kahn, District Cowt Judge in Case No. 04 Civ. 1 193 I 1 I -

I ~ APPELLANT BRIEF i I

1 1 I -. I

THE AD HOC NYS CITIZENS FOR christopher-~arl: Stnmk i6 esse . < .

CONSTITUTIONAL LEGISLATIVE, self-represented wlo being an attorney L‘ REDISTRICTING ' 593 Vanderbilt,.Avenue -#281

- 3 5 1 North Road - Brooklyn, ~ e w York 1 1238 ,. I Hurley, NY 12443 (845) 901 -6767 emaik [email protected] i

- ,

. ' %.-- ..A

Page 49: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

constitutional revisions and or Convention be rigorously implemented by this court with only a

narrow use for Judicial ruling as to one-person one-vote. Otherwise, as is amply proven the

remedy will not be done or found by any of the bad actors in the government of New York

especially the Judiciary who are especially bad actors complicit with disenfranchising citizens

all over the state -who are those citizens not part of the majoritarians control of patronage

policy and purse there.

CONCLUSION

The 20 10 Census enumeration is ongoing and Declarant is challenging the mis-

application and mis-administration of 13 USC s 14 1 and 13 USC s 195 (Strunk v US DOC

Bureau of Census et d. DCD O8a-1295 (RJL) with a motion there for a 3-Judge panel) as

then would apply for use of the 2 USC $2a allotment by Congress to each State of the several

States for the 20 12 State Reapportionment ten years later. Judge Kahn's background shows he

is biased and protects the godless Fabian "Social(ist) Justiceyy Progressive Inquisition of the

Jesuits' ancien regime; and that Judge Kahn should have answered Declarantys questions

related to the 28 USC $144 preparations for the 28 USC 5455 recusal. Or otherwise absent a

writ of mandamus for such set of answers Judge Kdm must be surrounded by two

intellectually competent god-fearing judges with 28 USC 92284, dependent upon this Court

settling of the sbbstantial nature of this gerrymander challenge must decide to remand this case

as a matter of judicial economy of schedule back to District to hear a second amended

complaint brought forward six years into preparation for the 201 2 Census reapportionment.

Respectfully submitted and certified to be true under penalty of perjury,

Dated: January 3,2010 Brooklyn, New York,.. &-

Christopher-Earl: St& in esse 593 ~Gderbilt Avenue - #28 1 Brooklyn., New York 11238 (845) 90 1-6767 Email: chris(dstrunk.ws

Page 50: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

m , United States Court Of Appeals For The Second Circuit

Ronald G. Loeber, et al.

Plaintiffs,

H. William Van Allen, John-Joseph Forjone, Christopher Earl Strunk,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

Thomas J. Spargo, et al.

Defendants - Appellees

On Appeal bom the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York Decision and Order of Lawrence E. Kahn, District Court Judge in Case No. 04 Civ. 1193

----

APPENDIX

THE AD HOC NYS CITIZENS FOR Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse CONSTlTUTIONAL LEGISLATnrE self-represented wlo being an attorney REDISTRICTING 593 Vanderbilt Avenue 4 2 8 1 35 1 North Road Brooklyn, New York 11238 Hurley, NY 12443 (845) 90 1-6767 email: [email protected]

Page 51: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Date Docket Item No.: Appendix Item Description Page

Index Page i

10/2/2008 126 SECOND AMENDED ELECTRONIC CERTIFICATION to US Court of Appeals of Record on Appeal re 125 Notice of Appeal. (ban) (Entered: 10/02/2008)

…..A-1

9/29/2008 125 AMENDED NOTICE OF APPEAL as to 110 Judgment, 109 Order on Motion to Dismiss, Order on Letter Request, by Christopher Earl Strunk, John-Joseph Forjone, H. William Van Allen. (ban) (Entered: 09/30/2008)

.…A-2

9/19/2008 123 AMENDED NOTICE OF APPEAL as to 110 Judgment, 109 Order on Motion to Dismiss, Order on Letter Request by Christopher Earl Strunk, H. William Van Allen. (ban) (Entered: 09/19/2008)

..….A-9

9/19/2008 124 SECOND AMENDED ELECTRONIC CERTIFICATION to US Court of Appeals of Record on Appeal re 123 Notice of Appeal. (ban) (Entered: 09/19/2008) …...A-8

9/18/2008 USCA Case Number is 08-4323-cv for 118 Notice of Appeal filed by H. William Van Allen. (cbm ) (Entered: 09/18/2008)

….A-14

9/11/2008 122 AMENDED ELECTRONIC CERTIFICATION to US Court of Appeals of Record on Appeal re 118 Notice of Appeal. (ban) (Entered: 09/11/2008) ….A-12

9/10/2008 121 ORDER denying 115 Motion for Reconsideration re 109 Order on Motion to Dismiss. ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for reconsideration is DENIED. ORDERED that the Court's 7/31/08 Order, dismissing the Amended Complaint and denying Plaintiff's request for a three-judge panel is AFFIRMED. Signed by Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on 9/10/08. (ban) (Entered: 09/10/2008)

….A-32

9/2/2008 118 NOTICE OF APPEAL as to 110 Judgment, 109 Order on Motion to Dismiss, Order on Letter Request, by H. William Van Allen. (ban) (Entered: 09/02/2008)

….A-13

8/18/2008 117 RESPONSE in Opposition re 115 MOTION for Reconsideration re 110 Judgment,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 109 Order on Motion to Dismiss,, Order on Letter Request, filed by. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Service)(Baldwin, Aaron) (Entered: 08/18/2008)

….A-29

8/11/2008 115 MOTION for Reconsideration re 110 Judgment 109 Order on Motion to Dismiss, Order on Letter Request. filed by Christopher Earl Strunk. (ban) (Entered: 08/11/2008)

….A-24

Page 52: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Date Docket Item No.: Appendix Item Description Page

Index Page ii

12/29/2009 Current District Docket for 04-cv-1193 ….A-36 8/1/2008 110 JUDGMENT in favor of DOE, Otsego County Board of

Elections, The New York State Board of Elections, et al. against AD HOC New York State Citizens for Constitutional Legislative Redistricting, Burr V. Deitz, Christopher Earl Strunk, Edward M. Person, Jr, Fairlene G. Rabenda, Gabriel Razzano, H. William Van Allen, John-Joseph Forjone, Ronald E. Sacoff, Ronald G. Loeber, Roy-Pierre Detiege-Cormier, William A. Gage, William E. Bombard. (ban) (Entered: 08/01/2008)

….A-23

7/31/2008 109 ORDER granting Defendant's 98 Motion to Dismiss. ORDERED that Plaintiff's request 104 Letter Request for a three-judge panel is DENIED. ORDERED that the Amended Complaint 25 is DISMISSED in its entirety. Signed by Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on 7/31/08. (ban) (Entered: 08/01/2008)

….A-16

7/2/2008 105 DECISION AND ORDER denying 92 Appeal of District Judge Decision to District Court. The Plaintiff's Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Decision are DENIED. ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Order dated 2/21/08 (Dkt#90) is UPHELD. Signed by Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on 7/2/08. (ban) (Entered: 07/03/2008)

………..

5/1/2008 102 REPLY to Response to Motion re 98 MOTION to Dismiss pursuant to FRCP Rules 12(b)(6), 12(c) and 8(a) and for an order denying the plaintiffs' request for a three-judge panel under 28 U.S.C. §2284; filed by (Baldwin, Aaron) (Entered: 05/01/2008)

………..

4/29/2008 101 Strunk's RESPONSE in Opposition re 98 MOTION to Dismiss pursuant to FRCP Rules 12(b)(6), 12(c) and 8(a) and for an order denying the plaintiffs' request for a three-judge panel under 28 U.S.C. §2284 filed by Christopher Earl Strunk. (ban) Modified on 4/30/2008 (ban). (Entered: 04/30/2008)

...A-140

4/10/2008 100 LETTER REQUEST AND ORDER re 96 Order to Strike. Request for reconsideration is DENIED. Signed by Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on 4/10/08. (ban) (Entered: 04/11/2008)

………..

4/9/2008 98 MOTION to Dismiss pursuant to FRCP Rules 12(b)(6), 12(c) and 8(a) and for an order denying the plaintiffs' request for a three-judge panel under 28 U.S.C. §2284; Response to Motion due by 4/29/2008 Reply to Response to Motion due by 5/5/2008. Motion Hearing set for 5/16/2008 09:30 AM before Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn by (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum of Law, # 2 Declaration of Service) (Baldwin, Aaron) (Entered: 04/09/2008)

...A-132

Page 53: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Date Docket Item No.: Appendix Item Description Page

Index Page iii

3/31/2008 96 ORDER TO STRIKE 95 Letter Motion from Christopher Earl Strunk requesting Transfer . Signed by Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on 3/31/08. (ban) (Entered: 04/01/2008)

...A-131

3/28/2008 95 **STRICKEN Pursuant to Judge Kahn's 3/31/08 Strike Order** REPLY/Letter Motion from Christopher Earl Strunk, pro se, requesting Transfer submitted to Judge Kahn. (ban) Modified on 4/1/2008 (ban). (Entered: 03/28/2008)

...A-130

3/10/2008 94 RESPONSE to Motion re 92 APPEAL OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE DECISION to District Court by Christopher Earl Strunk re 90 Order on Letter Request filed by Thomas J. Spargo, Joseph L. Bruno, George E. Pataki, Randy A. Daniels, Eliot Spitzer, Sheldon Silver, DOE. (Baldwin, Aaron) (Entered: 03/10/2008)

………..

2/27/2008 TEXT NOTICE of Hearing on Motion 92 APPEAL OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE DECISION to District Court by Christopher Earl Strunk re 90 Order on Letter Request : Response to Motion due by 3/18/2008 Motion Hearing set for 4/4/2008 09:30 AM in Albany before Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn. (MOTION ON SUBMIT) (ban) (Entered: 02/27/2008)

………..

2/27/2008 93 NOTICE of Objections to NYS AAG Motion for Extension of time to Answer by Christopher Earl Strunk. (ban) (Entered: 02/27/2008)

...A-127

2/25/2008 92 APPEAL OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE DECISION to District Court by Christopher Earl Strunk re 90 Order on Letter Request. (ban) (Entered: 02/27/2008)

………..

2/21/2008 90 TEXT ORDER granting 89 , Defendants' Letter Request to extend the time to serve and file either an answer or motion until April 9, 2008. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Randolph F. Treece on 2/21/08. (Treece, Randolph) (Entered: 02/21/2008)

………..

2/20/2008 89 Letter Motion from AAG Aaron M. Baldwin requesting Extension of time to answer for legislators submitted to Judge Kahn. (Baldwin, Aaron) (Entered: 02/20/2008)

………..

1/8/2008 81 DECISION AND ORDER granting 45 Letter Request, ; granting 64 Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint; granting 65 Motion to Dismiss; denying 66 Motion to Change Venue. ORDERED, that unless Plaintiffs name and properly serve the John and Jane Doe Defendnats within 30 days of the date of this Order, this action shall be dismissed as to them. Signed by Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on 1/8/08. (ban) (Entered: 01/08/2008)

………..

Page 54: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Date Docket Item No.: Appendix Item Description Page

Index Page iv

4/7/2006 77 ORDER granting 76 Letter Request and directing the affirmation be added to the response papers previously filed. Signed by Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on 4/7/06. (amt, ) (Entered: 04/10/2006)

………..

3/28/2006 76 Letter Motion from Jeffrey M. Dvorin for Thomas J. Spargo, Joseph L. Bruno, Sheldon Silver, George E. Pataki, Randy A. Daniels, Eliot Spitzer requesting permission to file Defendants' Affirmation in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion to Change Venue submitted to Judge Kahn. (Attachments: # 1 Affirmation of Jeffrey M. Dvorin in Opposition to Motion to Change Venue)(Dvorin, Jeffrey) Modified on 3/28/2006 (wbl, ). (Entered: 03/28/2006)

………..

3/27/2006 74 MEMORANDUM OF LAW re 66 Motion to Change Venue,,, filed by Thomas J. Spargo, Joseph L. Bruno, Sheldon Silver, George E. Pataki, Randy A. Daniels, Eliot Spitzer. (Dvorin, Jeffrey) (Entered: 03/27/2006)

……..

3/27/2006 75 AFFIDAVIT in Opposition re 66 MOTION to Change Venue filed by Thomas J. Spargo, Joseph L. Bruno, Sheldon Silver, George E. Pataki, Randy A. Daniels, Eliot Spitzer. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A# 2 Exhibit B# 3 Declaration of Service)(Dvorin, Jeffrey) Modified on 3/28/2006 (wbl, ). Additional attachment(s) added on 4/10/2006 (amt, ). (Entered: 03/27/2006)

………..

3/21/2006 73 STRUNK'S RESPONSE in Opposition re 65 First MOTION to Dismiss filed by Christopher Earl Strunk. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(ban) (Entered: 03/22/2006)

...A-125

3/9/2006 70 REPLY to Response to Motion re 65 First MOTION to Dismiss the Complaint filed by The City of New York, Michael Bloomberg. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix)(Giardina, Anthony) (Entered: 03/09/2006)

...A-123

3/6/2006 69 REPLY to Response to Motion re 64 MOTION to Dismiss, 66 MOTION to Change Venue Opposition to Motion to Change Venue filed by John Ashcroft. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit(s) Exhibit A# 2 certificate of service)(Cottrell, Barbara) (Entered: 03/06/2006)

………..

2/28/2006 67 MEMORANDUM OF LAW r: opposition to 64 Motion to Dismiss,, 65 Motion to Dismiss, and in support of 66 Motion to Change Venue, filed by AD HOC New York State Citizens for Constitutional Legislative Redistricting. (Attachments: # 1 Proof of Service)(wjg, ) (Entered: 03/02/2006)

...A-121

Page 55: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Date Docket Item No.: Appendix Item Description Page

Index Page v

2/27/2006 66 CROSS-MOTION to Change Venue by Roy-Pierre Detiege-Cormier, Ronald E. Sacoff, Gabriel Rassano, Edward M. Person, Jr, Christopher Earl Strunk, AD HOC New York State Citizens for Constitutional Legislative Redistricting, Burr V. Deitz, Ronald G. Loeber, William E. Bombard, William A. Gage, John-Joseph Forjone, H. William Van Allen, Fairlene G. Rabenda. Motion Hearing set for 4/7/2006 09:30 AM in Albany before Judge Lawrence E. Kahn. Response to Motion due by 3/27/2006. (Attachments: # 1 Strunk declaration in support of cross-motion and in opposition to motions to dismiss# 2 Forjone declaration in support of cross-motion and in opposition to motions to dismiss# 3 Van Allen declaration in support of cross-motion and in opposition to motions to dismiss# 4 Proof of Service)(wjg, ) (Entered: 02/28/2006)

….A-67

2/17/2006 65 First MOTION to Dismiss Motion Hearing set for 4/7/2006 09:30 AM in Albany before Judge Lawrence E. Kahn. Response to Motion due by 3/21/2006 Reply to Response to Motion due by 3/27/2006. by Michael Bloomberg, The City of New York. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum of Law # 2 Certificate of Service)(Giardina, Anthony) (Entered: 02/17/2006)

…A-64

2/10/2006 64 MOTION to Dismiss Motion Hearing set for 3/17/2006 09:30 AM in Albany before Judge Lawrence E. Kahn. Response to Motion due by 2/28/2006 Reply to Response to Motion due by 3/6/2006. by John Ashcroft. (Attachments: # 1 Motion to Dismiss# 2 Declaration # 3 Memorandum of Law # 4 Attachment# 5 Certificate of Service)(Cottrell, Barbara) (Entered: 02/10/2006)

…A-57

2/6/2006 63 Complaint filed in WDNY 06-CV-0080 ...A-107

12/30/2005 57 NOTICE of Appearance by James E. Konstanty on behalf of Otsego County Board of Elections (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit of service)(Konstanty, James) (Entered: 12/30/2005)

…A-75

12/29/2005 56 ANSWER to Amended Complaint by Thomas J. Spargo, Joseph L. Bruno, Sheldon Silver, George E. Pataki, Randy A. Daniels, Eliot Spitzer.(Dvorin, Jeffrey) (Entered: 12/29/2005)

…A-53

12/28/2005 55 ANSWER to Amended Complaint by The New York State Board of Elections and Peter Kosinski.(Valentine, Todd) (Entered: 12/28/2005)

…A-52

12/26/2005 53 ANSWER to Amended Complaint by National Association of Secretaries of State.(Long, James) (Entered: 12/26/2005) …A-51

Page 56: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Date Docket Item No.: Appendix Item Description Page

Index Page vi

12/16/2005 46 REPLY DECLARATION to Response to Motion re: 33 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction, filed by Christopher Earl Strunk. (Attachments: # 1 Proof of service)(wjg, ) (Entered: 12/16/2005)

………..

12/16/2005 47 REQUEST & ORDER, Answer due date updated for The City of New York, answer due 1/30/2006. Signed by Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on 12/16/05. (wjg, ) (Entered: 12/16/2005)

………..

12/16/2005 50 REPLY MEMORANDUM to Response to Motion re 33 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by AD HOC New York State Citizens for Constitutional Legislative Redistricting. (wjg, ) (Entered: 12/19/2005)

………..

12/12/2005 37 DOCUMENT REJECTION ORDER as to Pltf. Christopher Strunk; Returning Letter addressed to Chief Judge Scullin dated 12/1/05; Signed by Judge Frederick J. Scullin Jr. on 2/7/05. (kcl, ) (Entered: 12/12/2005)

………..

12/12/2005 39 RESPONSE in Opposition re 33 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction Affirmation in Opposition to Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by The New York State Board of Elections. (Valentine, Todd) (Entered: 12/12/2005)

………..

12/12/2005 40 RESPONSE in Opposition re 33 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by The New York State Board of Elections. (Valentine, Todd) (Entered: 12/12/2005)

………..

12/12/2005 42 NOTICE of Appearance by James E. Long on behalf of National Association of Secretaries of State (Long, James) (Entered: 12/12/2005)

………..

12/12/2005 43 RESPONSE in Opposition re 33 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by John Ashcroft. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit(s) # 2 Declaration # 3 certificate of service)(Cottrell, Barbara) (Entered: 12/12/2005)

………..

12/12/2005 45 Letter Motion from Leslie Reynolds for deft NASS requesting removal from this case for National Association of Secretaries of State, submitted to Judge Kahn. (wjg, ) (Entered: 12/13/2005)

………..

12/9/2005 44 DOCUMENT REJECTION ORDER rejecting papers submitted by pltfs. Signed by Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on 12/9/05. (wjg, ) (Entered: 12/13/2005)

………..

12/8/2005 35 ORDER granting 34 Letter Request . Signed by Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on 12/8/05. (wjg, ) (Entered: 12/08/2005) ………..

Page 57: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Date Docket Item No.: Appendix Item Description Page

Index Page vii

11/29/2005 33 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE for Preliminary Injunction and to further address the issue of the convening of a three-judge panel, on application filed by Roy-Pierre Detiege-Cormier, Ronald E. Sacoff, Gabriel Rassano, Edward M. Person, Jr, Christopher Earl Strunk, AD HOC New York State Citizens for Constitutional Legislative Redistricting, Ronald G. Loeber, William E. Bombard, William A. Gage, John-Joseph Forjone, H. William Van Allen, Fairlene G. Rabenda.Hearing date is 12/16/05 @ 9:30am in Albany. Response ddl is set to 12/12/05 and reply ddl is set to 12/14/05.(wjg, ) (Entered: 11/30/2005)

………..

11/29/2005 Set/Reset Deadlines as to 33 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE for Preliminary Injunction. Response to Motion due by 12/12/2005 Reply to Response to Motion due by 12/14/2005. Motion Hearing set for 12/16/2005 09:30 AM in Albany before Judge Lawrence E. Kahn. (wjg, ) (Entered: 11/30/2005)

………..

11/23/2005 29 MEMORANDUM OF LAW filed by AD HOC New York State Citizens for Constitutional Legislative Redistricting in support of application for Order to Show Cause and TRO. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit of Van Allen in support of application)(wjg, ) (Entered: 11/30/2005)

………..

11/21/2005 25 AMENDED COMPLAINT against all defendants, filed by Plaintiffs. (Attachments: # 1 Cover letter advising of related cases)(wjg, ). (Entered: 11/22/2005)

…A-96

10/17/2005 23 AMENDED ORDER; The Court amends the 10/4/05 order at paragraph referenced within; In light of the amended order, defts' counsel is hereby granted a 15 day extension of time in which to comply with the Court's instructions w/ in the amended paragraph. Signed by Judge Frederick J. Scullin Jr. on 10/17/05. (kcl, ) (Entered: 10/17/2005)

………..

10/4/2005 22 ORDER: Plaintiff's request for reassignment of this matter to a different Judge is denied; Clerk shall serve a courtesy copy of this order upon the attys. listed within according to the 2nd Circuit's Summary Order; Further, either Ms. Miller of Mr. Smirlock or another atty from their office shall either file a notice of appeal on behalf of defts w/in 15 days if they intend to continue to represent defts in this action or notify the Court whether defts will be proceeding pro se or whether they will be represented by other counsel. Signed by Judge Frederick J. Scullin Jr. on 10/4/05. (kcl, ) (Entered: 10/06/2005)

………..

9/23/2005 21 Letter from pro se pltf Strunk to CJ Scullin requesting reassignment of case, submitted to Judge Scullin. (wjg, ) (Entered: 09/23/2005)

………..

Page 58: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Date Docket Item No.: Appendix Item Description Page

Index Page viii

9/22/2005 20 ORDER. Amended Pleadings ddl (for filing of amended complaint) set to 11/21/2005.Within 30 days of the filing of the amended cmp, all parties shall submit briefing re: request for three-judge panel. Signed by Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on 9/22/05. (wjg, ) (Entered: 09/23/2005)

………..

9/21/2005 19 MANDATE of USCA that appeal is DISMISSED in part, VACATED in part and REMANDED, and that the several motions of plaintiffs-appellants are DENIED. (wjg, ) (Entered: 09/21/2005)

...A-179

6/08/2008 Brief from Strunk v USPS et al. Appeal Case 08-3242-CV ...A-147

6/08/2008 Appendix from Strunk v USPS et al. Appeal Case 08-3242 ...A-155

10/29/02 Rodriguez v Pataki SDNY 02-cv-618 ORDER in re Strunk ...A-201

12/24/65 Jack B. Weinstein Columbia Law Review (Vol. 65:21) Article on WMCA set of cases in re “the Effect of The Federal Reapportionment Decisions on Counties and Other Forms of Municipal Government”

...A-191

12/04/09 Times Union Article in RE Thomas J. Spargo; NY Legislative Gazette Article re Thomas Spargo; Article re Thomas Spargo’s sentencing

...A-206

12/30/09 Times Union Article re: Thomas J. Spargo role in Election of Rep. Sweeny; Spargo role in Pyramid Companies Shopping Malls

...A-207

12/30/09 New York Times end of Year 2009 Articles regarding Turmoil in New York State debt, Legislature and need to Split New York in two parts

...A-209

08/07/1879 Society of Jesus website http://www.sjweb.infor/jesuits/chronShow.cfm - page 29 of 36 portion of History for the Society of Jesus especially when the New York Province of the Society of Jesus was formed

...A-211

11/24/1963 Society of Jesus website http://www.sjweb.infor/jesuits/chronShow.cfm - page 33 of 36 portion of History for the Society of Jesus especially when the word “justice” appears in re: the Social Justice strategy of the New York Province of the Society of Jesus

...A-212

08/05/09 Vatican Assassins website http://www.vaticanassassins.org/?p=95 - regarding the most comprehensive list of the Chain of Command leading and controlling Barack Hussein Obama and his administration

...A-213

Page 59: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Case 1 :04-cv-01193-LEK-RFT Document 126 Filed 1010212008 Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

SECOND AMENDED Loeber, et al. CLERK'S CERTIFICATION

vs.

Spargo, et al.

CivilICriminal No: 041cv-1193 CCA No: 0843231cv

I, LAWRENCE K BAERMAN, CLERK of the District Court of the UNITED STATES for the Northern District of New York, DO, HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing docket entries, with the exception of the documents listed below are maintained electronically on the court's CMIECF system and constitute the Record on Appeal in the above-entitled action.

The following documents are not available electronically and are currently maintained in traditional fashion in the city of Albany Clerk's Office.

This case is 100% Electronic.

Any additional records which are not currently available electronically, please feel free to contact us and we will arrange for the document(s) to be made available to you.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of said Court to be hereto affixed at the City of Albany, New York, this 2"'' day of October, 2008.

Lawrence K. Baerman, Clerk U.S. District Court

By: Britney Norton Deputy Clerk

Page 60: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Case 1 :04-cv-01193-LEK-RFT Document 125 Filed 09/29/2008 Page 1 of 6

U.S. DISTRICT COURT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

far the

N.D. OF-N.Y. flLED

- ~~

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK SEP 2 9 2008

Loeber, et al., LAWRENCE K. BAERMAN, CLERK

1 ALBANY

1 ) Case No. 04-CV-1193

AMENDED NOTICE OF APPEAL

Notice is hereby given that John-Joseph Foijone along with H.Wiliam VanAllen, Christopher Eat1 Strunk in the above named case hereby appeals to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit hm the final judgment, order and Dismissal entend in tbis action on l* day of August, 2008 while being reconsidered by USDJ Khaa 1 here by Appeal each and every item in the Final Order Filed 713 1/08 and entered 8/1/08.

Date: Septeanber 26,2008

14i Harris Avenue Lake Luzerne, New York 12846 e-mail [email protected] 585-72 1-7673

<See Rule 3(c) far pemnissible ways of identi- appellants.>

Page 61: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

U.S. DISTRICT COURT N.0. OF N.Y.

RUE0

LAWRENCE K. BAERMAN, CLERK ALBANY

Page 62: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 63: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Case 1 :04-cv-01193-LEK-RFT Document 125 Filed 09/29/2008 Page 4 of 6 . U.S. DISTRICT COURT

N.D. OF N.Y. John J. Forjone ALE0

14 1 Harris Avenue Lake Luzeme, NewYorlc ,12846 SEf' 2 9 2008

Telc~hoae (585) 721-7673 UwmE K, BMRMAN, CERn ALBANY

August 25,2008 BY MAIL

Clerk of the Court James T. Foley Courthouse 445 Broadway, Fifth Floor Albany, NY 12207 ,

Regarding: Loeber et al. v. S q o et al. NDNY 04cv-1193

Subject: Amended Notice of Appeal

Dear Clerk of the Court,

I am John-Joseph Forjone pro se plaintiff without being an attorney and I have added my Amended Notice of Appeal in the Loeber case. That as of this posting I have notified the parties by e-mail.

Sincerely,

Copy of Document 118 e d o d Notice of Appeal Certificate of Mail ceclosed cc: AU Plaintiffs (via email and USPS) cc: AU Defendants' Counsel

Page 64: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

. Case 1 :04-cv-01193-LEK-RFT Document 125 Filed 09/29/2008 Page 5 of 6

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE BY EMAIL ud USPS MAIL

On September 26,2008 and under penalty of pqjury, I John Joseph Forjone, caused to be electronically amailad, and sent by regular mail the Amended Notice of Appeal for service to Plaintiffs and Defendants' attorney as follows:

P b t i f B in NDNY 04-cv-i 193: bbgh&[email protected], b-H.com, H V A N A U E ~ C . R R ~ ~ d d ~ , f n ~ I i ~ . r W t , ~ p a 0 8 k l B P y r h o o . c o m , ~ M t u t ~ h o o . ~ m , n p t o r p r i m o ~ ~ h ~ ~ ~ , [email protected], unccl.vot*.2(py.hoo.com~~ycIp.m.cm , and

Postage paid by First Class U.S. Mail to Plaintiff Roy Pierre DetiegeCormier 25 Haitte Jones Circle, Brooklyn New York 1 121 3

Defendads' Counsels in NDNY 04-c~- 1 193: -.corn,

I do declare and certifjr under penalty of perjury: A

Dated September 26,2008 Lake Luzerne New York

Page 65: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

T Document 125 Filed 09/29/2008 Page 6 of 6

Page 66: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

. Case 1 :04-cv-01193-LEK-RFT Document 124 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW Y O U

Ronald G. Loeber, et al.

vs.

Thomas J. Spargo, et al.

SECOND AMENDED CLERK'S CERTIFICATION

CivilICriminal No: 1 :04-cv-1193 CCA No: 084323-c~

I, LAWRENCE K BAERMAN, CLERK of the District Court of the UNITED STATES for the Northern District of New York, DO, HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing docket entries, with the exception of the documents listed below are maintained electronically on the court's CMIECF system and constitute the Record on Appeal in the above-entitled action.

The following documents are not available electronically and are currently maintained in traditional fashion in the city of Albany Clerk's Offiice.

This case Is 100% Electronic

Any additional records which are not currently available electronically, please feel free to contact us and we will arrange for the document(s) to be made available to you.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of said Court to be hereto affixed at the City of Albany, New York, this lgm day of September, 2008.

Lawrence K. Baerrnan, Clerk U.S. District Court

By: Britney Norton Deputy Clerk

Page 67: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK 593 Vanderbilt Avenue 4281 Bmoklyn, New York 11238

(63 1) 7456402 / Email - -.q

BY MAIL The Clcrk of the Cortrt for the U.S. M c t Cautt Nartbarn District &New York James T. Foley U.S. Courthouse 445 B d w a y , Fifth Floor Albany, NY 12207

Re: h b e r et al. v. &arm et al,NDNY Ohr-1193 Sd$ect Amended Notice of Appeal

Dear Ckk of the Court,

I amChrisbphcr Ear! S t n r n k p s e p l a i n t i f f w i ~ ~ a n a t t 6 n r e y , ~ t o amead~Nat iceofAppealpostsdasdocketdoc luncnt116intbe~case .~ Motion for reconsidenition has been dcnied and themfort I hemvith include the Amended Notice.

CHRISTOPHER EARZ, STRUNK

cc: Aaron M. Baldwin, NYS h s h m t Attorney General Plailltm De- in NDNY 04cv-1193 PartiesinIatncst

Page 68: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

U.S. Msmcl COURT N.0. OF N.Y.

RUED

Page 69: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 70: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Case 1 :04-cv-01193-LEK-RFT Document 122 Filed 0911 112008 Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Ronald G. Loeber, et al.

vs.

Thomas J. Spargo, et al.

AMENDED CLERK'S CERTIFICATK)N

CivillCriminal No: 1 :04=cv-1193 CCA No:

I, LAWRENCE K BAERMAN, CLERK of the District Court of the UNITED STATES for the Northern District of New York, DO, HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing docket entries, with the exception of the documents listed below are maintained electronically on the court's CMIECF system and constitute the Record on Appeal in the above-entitled action.

The following documents are not available electronically and are currently maintained in traditional fashion In the city of Albany Clerk's Office.

This case is 100% Electronic. FILING FEE PAID 918108.

Any additional records which are not currently available electronically, please feel free to contact us and we will arrange for the document(s) to be made available to you.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of said Court to be hereto affixed at the City of Albany, New York, this 11" day of September, 2008.

Lawrence K. Baerman, Clerk U.S. District Court

By: Britney Norton Deputy Clerk

Page 71: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

ELECTRONIC NOTICE OF APPEAL

Dear Sir or Madam,

Please take notice that on September 2,2008 the court received a notice of appeal in the action set forth below. This notice serves to inform the Second Circuit of the pending appeal and provide them with the basic information they need to begin processing the appeal. After receipt of this notice, the Second Circuit will prepare and issue a scheduling order which will outline the obligations and responsibilities of the parties with regard to this appeal. Should you have any questions prior to the issuance of a scheduling order, please feel free to contact the District Court Clerk's Office.

Sincerely,

Lawrence K. Baerman U.S. District Court

By: Britney Norton Deputy Clerk

/ For Court Use Only:

CASE TITLE: Ronald G. Loeber, et al. v. Thomas J. Spargo, et al.

CASE NUMBER: 1 :04-CV-1 193 LEKIRFT

NOTICE OF APPEAL - Docket # 1 18

~ocument.being Appealed:

Final Judgement: Docket # 109,110 Interlocutory Appeal: Docket # Other: Docket #

FEE STATUS: Paid - DueX Waived (IFP1CJA)-

IFP revoked - Application Attached - IFP pending before USDJ - COUNSEL: CJA- RETAINED - PRO S E X

TIME STATUS: Timely5 Out of Time - MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME: Granted - Denied -

CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY: Granted - Denied - NIA -

Page 72: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

UnitdStstesDistridCourtfbrtheDistridof - ONY u t ~ e h nlzlncr 4~ W) r

File Number 6 Y- CU- U.S. DISTRICT COURT

N.D. OF N.Y. FILE0

sf- gTAd ) LAWRENCE K. BAERMAN, CLERK CD., 1 ALBANY

Def-. 1

Y a k n t b m L / ~ P / & N d i c e i s ~ g i v e n t b a t ( ( d e f d ) in tbe above-named case*, he&y appeal to the United SBta Court of App& for

UoA A ~ C U ~ P a- +*

/ cz

*See Rule 3(c) fm pumissi'ble ways of ideatifLhng appeUants b n ~ c ~ /clt 12 YY3

iu/+l~~ PEW @ C ~ ~ ~ , D S A L D @L/ bl@nbh

/&n~ @? L Z@& Avo zuw? ,2 oflorn / $ +- S P ~ W &/

/"/,I ' O&.OL* ,$v/vy At* t+

u&$p UrcA

k 3 A . I ~ R c 130e OS-P~YF-CU P * M H ~ A n4

we ORDC4 Pw4-6 tmQ4R

A - 14

Page 73: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 74: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Case 1:04-cv-O1193-LEK-RFT Document 109 Filed 07/31/08 Page 1 of 7

UNTIED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

RONALD G. LOEBER, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

THOMAS SPARGO, individually and as Justice of the NYS Supreme Court, et al.,

Defendants. -

ORDER

Presently before the Court is a Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint, filed by

Defendants Thomas J. Spargo, Joseph L. Bruno, the State Senate, Sheldon Silver, the State

Assembly, George E. Pataki, Randy A. Daniels, Eliot Spitzer and all members of the NYS Senate

and Assembly previously named therein as John andlor Jane Doe's ("State Defendants") on April 9,

2008, seeking dismissal of the Amended Complaint in its entirety and denial of Plaintiffs' request

for a three-judge panel under 28 U.S.C. 8 2284. Dkt. No. 98. As per the Court's January 8,2008

Decision, the State Defendants are the only Defendants remaining in this action. Dkt. No. 8 1.

I. Background

On October 15,2004,pro se Plaintiffs filed a Complaint asserting, among other things,

various constitutional violations arising out of the Help America Vote Act ("HAVA") ( Pub. L. No.

107-252,116 Stat. 1666,42 U.S.C. 15301-15545 (2002)). Dkt. No. 1. On October 29,2004, the

Court dismissed the Complaint. Dkt. No. 5. On appeal, the Second Cjrcuit, inter alia, dismissed all

claims pertaining to the November 2004 elections, but remanded "the I.edistricting claims" including

Page 75: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Case 1 :04-cv-01193-LEK-RFT Document 109 Filed 07/31/08 Page 2 of 7

the issue of whether the case should be referred to a three-judge panel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. $2284.

Dkt. No. 19.

Plaintiffs then filed the Amended Complaint, bringing forth fourteen (14) causes of action

under HAVA and various other statutes, including 42 U.S.C. $$I983 and 1985. Dkt. No. 25. In

addition to HAVA claims, Plaintiffs appear to challenge the reapportionment of the State of New

York's current legislative, judicial and congressional districts. at 729. By Decision and Order

dated January 8,2008, the Court dismissed all claims brought under HAVA and the False Claims

Act, denied Plaintiffs' Motion for a preliminary injunction, and dismissed the apportionment claims

as against the City of New York and Federal Defendants, as well as the National Association of

Secretaries of State. Dkt. No. 8 1. The Court noted that the constitutionality of the redistricting plan

was not yet before the Court at that time and that the State Defendants had not yet been heard on the

issue and deferred decision on whether the redistricting claim required a -judge court. Id. The

Court further directed the Plaintiffs to name and properly serve the John and Jane Doe defendants or /

the action would be dismissed against them. Plaintiffs thereafter served all members of the State

Assembly and State Senate.

The State Defendants now seek to dismiss the Amended Complaint pursuant to F.R.C.P.

12(b)(6) and 12(c), as well as F.R.C.P. 8(a). Initially, however, the Court must consider whether it

is necessary to convene a three-judge panel under 28 U.S.C. 8 2284(a).

I IL Discussion

1 Defendants argue that Plaintiffs have not presented any cognizable constitutional question,

that the Plaintiffs lack standing, that the State Defendants are entitled to dismissal on the grounds of

legislative immunity and lack of personal involvement, and that the claims remaining in the

Page 76: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Case 1 :04-cv-01193-LEK-RFT Document 109 Filed 07/31/08 Page 3 of 7

Amended Complaint do not pass muster under even the liberal standards of F.RC.P. 8(a).

A. Legal Standard

As the Supreme Court has recently explained.

While a complaint attacked by a Rule 120>)(6) motion to dismiss does not need detailed factual allegations, . . . a plaintiffs obligation to provide the grounds of his entitlement to relief requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do. Factual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level on the assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true (even if doubtful in fact).

Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 127 S. Ct. 1955,1964-65 (2007) (internal quotations, alterations

and citations omitted). , 'Without some factual allegation in the complaint, it is hard to see how a

claimant could satisfy the requirement of providing not only 'fair notice' of the nature of the claim,

but also 'grounds' on which the claim rests." Id. at 1965 n.3. "'[A] district court must retain the

power to insist upon some specificity in pleading before allowing a potentially massive factual

controversy to proceed"' Id. at 1967 (quoting Associated Gen. Contractom of Cal., Inc. v.

Carpenters,F U.S. 519,528, n. 17 (1983)).

Thus, to survive a Rule 12 motion, Plaintiffs must pass the "'plausibility standard,' which

obliges a pleader to amplify a claim with some factual allegations in those contexts where

such amplification is needed to render the claim plausible." Iqbal v. Hasty, 490 F.3d 143,157-58

B. Three judge panel

Defendants contend that because Plaintiffs lack standing and have not raised a substantial

Constitutional issue, the case should be dismissed without convening a three-judge panel. Under 28

U.S.C. § 2284, "[a] district court of three judges shall be convened wheri . . . an action is filed

Page 77: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Case 1 :04cv-01193-LEK-RFT Document 109 Filed 07/31 108 Page 4 of 7

I challenging the constitutionality of the apportionment of congressional districts or the

apportionment of any statewide legislative body." 28 U.S.C. 0 2284(a). First, however, to

! determine whether a three-judge panel is required, the single judge must inquire (1) 'Pvhether the

I constitutional question raised is substantial"; (2) 'Pvhether the complaint at least formally alleges a

basis for equitable relief"; and (3) "whether the case presented otherwise comes within the

requirements of the three-judge statute." Idlewild Liquor Corp. v. Epstein, 370 U.S. 7 13,7 15

(1 962).

A single judge may dismiss a claim if the Constitutional claim is insubstantial, Bailev v.

' Patterson, 369 U.S. 3 l,33 (1962), or "if the plaintiff lacks standing or the suit is otherwise not

justiciable in the district court." 17A C. Wright & A. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure 64235,

at 2 13 (2007); see also Long v. District of Columbia, 469 F.2d 927,930 @.C. Cir. 1972); Puerto

Rican Intern. Airlines, Inc. v. Colon, 409 F-Supp. 960,966 (D.P.R. 1975) ("[Sltanding . . . is a

ground upon which a single judge can decline to convene a three judge court and order dismissal of

the comp1aifi-f"); Am. Commuters Ass'n v. Levitt, 279 F.Supp. 40'45-46 (S.D.N.Y. 1967)).

B. Analysis of Plaintiff's claims

1 IP turning to the Amended Complaint, the Court is aware that because Plaintiffi are

proceedingpro se, the Amended Complaint is to be construed liberally. Phillips v. Girdich, 408

F.3d 124,127-28 (2d Cir. 2005). Initially, the Court notes that the first, fifth, ninth, tenth, eleventh,

thirteenth, and fourteenth causes of action allege violations related to HAVA. These claims,

however, were dismissed by the Court's Order dated January 8,2008. Dkt. No. 81.

Plaintiffs' second cause of action (and possibly the sixth cause of action) alleges violation of

New York State Constitution Article 3 Section 4 based on New York City's allotment of 26 senate

Page 78: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Case 1 :04&1193-LEK-RFT Document 109 Filed 07/31/08 Page 5 of 7

districts. Not only does this claim rest on an incorrect assumption that New York City is a single

county, as opposed to consisting of five separate counties, but Article 3, Section 4 was among the

constitutional reapportionment provisions declared unconstitutional in WMCA Inc. v. Lomenzo,

377 US 63 (1963). Accordingly, this claim is hereby dismissed under F.R.C.P. 12(b)(6). A three

judge panel is not required to address this claim or to dismiss it. Bailey v. Patterson, 369 U.S.

at 33 (holding that a three-judge panel is not required "when the claim that a statute is

unconstitutional is wholly insubstantial, legally speaking nonexistent.")

Plaintiffs' remaining causes of action (third, fourth, sixth, seventh, eighth, and twelfth) do

not comprehensibly re& to any federal provisions that are allegedly violated, and do not even all

relate to redistricting or apportionment.' The Amended Complaint d&s not appear to present a

discernable reapportionment claim under the federal constitution, such that there is no cause to

convene a three-judge panel. Although Plaintiffs claim various injuries including, for example,

discriminatid (Am. Compl. 7 30), "rotten boroughs injury" (7 32), and "disproportionate

diminished ZIilution injuries" (7 32), the Court is unable to decipher fiom the Amended Complaint a

.The seventh cause of action may possibly make a possible gerrymandering claim, but as discussed below, a gerrymandering claim against the 2002 New York redistricting plan is insubstantial based on a prior decision.

This comes h m a very liberal construction of the following: "That Plaintiffs as US Citizens are denied equal protection and substantive due process suffer injury to individual Bottom- up sufhge and Homen.de autonomy of the PEOPLE within a municipal entity as a firewall against corruption entitled to a respective board of elections therein, suffer infringement of speech in the state legislature the US House, unequal due process in the judiciary and unreasonable unequally reimbursed unfunded financial burden upon New York citizen property differently than that for citizens of the several states, as a taking imposed by unconstitutional provisions of HAVA in the Congressional definition of "Voting Age Person" ("VAP") rather than "Citizen Voting Age Persons" ("CVAP"), is prima facie discrimination evidence proven in related case . . ." Am. Compl. fi 30.

Page 79: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 4

Case 1 :04-~-01193-LEK-RFT Document 109 Filed 07/31 I08 Page 6 of 7

clear Constitutional claim challenging New Yo* State's 2002 redistricting plan or the connection of

any alleged Constitutional violations to any particular acts by the State Defendants. Accordingly,

the Amended Complaint may be dismissed without convening a three-judge panel. See e.g.,

Duckworth v. State Board of Elections, 213 F. Supp. 2d 543 (D.M.D. 2002) (dismissing challenge

to Maryland's congressional districting plan without referral to three-judge panel).

In addition, the Court notes that a constitutional question is insubstantial if prior decisions

render the issue fiivolous and leave no room for any inference of controversy. Goosbv v. Osser, 409

U.S. 512,518 (1973); Bailev v. Patterson, 369 U.S. at 33 (holding that a three-judge panel is not

required when "prior decisions make Erivolous any claim" of unconstitutionality). The redistricting

plan presently challenged by Plaintiffs has already withstood scrutiny under constitutional

challenges including one person-one vote, population-based and gerrymandering. Rodriguez v.

Pataki, 308 F.Supp2d 346 (S.D.N.Y.), aff'd, 125 S.Ct 627 (2004) (granting summary judgment and

dismissing complaint because the redistricting plan did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment or

the Voting Rights - - Act, but instead reflected traditional districting principles by maintaining equality

of population). That decision upholding the redistricting plan was reached by a three-judge panel

and a f f i e d by the Supreme Court of the United States.

As previously noted, a Court may dismiss a claim if the Constitutional claim is insubstantial,

Bailev v. Patterson, 369 U.S. 3 1. In this case, there is a prior decision fmding that the 2002 New

Yo* redistricting plan was constitutional. Even with a liberal construction of Plaintiffs' Amended

Complaint, there are no possibly comprehensible redistricting claims brought by Plaintiffs that raise

a controversy beyond the analysis in the prior decision. In addition, because Plaintifi' claims, even

when liberally construed, do not present a discernable reapportionment claim under the federal

Page 80: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Case 1 :04&1193-LEK-RFT Document 109 Filed 07/31/08 Page 7 of 7

constitution, the Plaintiffs' Constitutional claims are hereby dismissed in their entirety.

111. Conclusion

Therefore, based on the foregoing, it is hereby

ORDERED, that the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss @kt. No. 98) is GRANTED; and it is

further

ORDERED, that ~lahtiffs' request for a threejudge panel under 28 U.S.C. §2284(a) @kt.

No. 104) is DENIED; and it is M e r

ORDERED, that the Amended Complaint @kt. No. 25) is DISMISSED in its entirety; and

it is further

ORDERED, that the Clerk serve a copy of this order on all parties.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: July 3 1,2008 Albany, New York

U.S. District Judge \

Page 81: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

* * **UNITEDSTATESDISTRICTCOURT* * * * *

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE

DOCKET NO: 1:04-cv-1193 (LE-

RONALD G. LOEBER, et al., Plaintiff,

THOMAS J. SPARGO, et al.,

Defendan t(s).

JURY VERDICT. This action came before the Court for a trial by jury. The issues have been tried and the jury has rendered its verdict.

XX DECISION by COURT. This action came to trial or hearing before the Court. The issues have been tried and a decision has been rendered.

\ IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that judgment be entered in favor of defendants and against plaintis.. ORDERED that the defendant's Motion to Dismiss is Granted; ORDERED that Plaintiff's request for a three-judge panel is Denied, ORDERED that the Amended Complaint is DISMISSED in its entirety, all pursuant to the Order of the Honorable Lawrence E. Kahn, dated July 3 1,2008.

DATE: July 31,2008 LA KRENCE K BAERMAN CLERK OF THE COURT

SIB. Norton By

DEPUTY CLERK

Page 82: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Case 1 :04-cv-01193-LEK-RFT Document 1 15 Filed 0811 112008 Page 1 of 5 0

CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK 593 Vanderbi Amue 428 1 Brooklyn, New York 1 1238

(63 1) 745-6402 I Email - unmsvo ted2~ .co rn

August 8,2008 BY MAIL U.S. DISTRICT COURT

Judge Lawrence E. JCahn N.D. OF N.Y. United States District Judge of the FILED U.S. District Court Northern Distrid of New York James T. Foley U.S. Courthouse AUG 1 1 2008 445 Broadway, Room 424 Albany, NY 12207

LAWRENCE K. MERMAN, CNRK ALBANY

Re: Loeber et d v. Shmo et at. NDNY Odcv-1193 Subject: FRCvP Rule 60 reconsideration of the August 1,2008 decision

Judge Lawrence E. Kahn,

As a sovereign natural person, I am above the cOrpOndt nature of this anat, and as a sovereign citizen of the State of New York am guaranteed my Supreme sovereignty m the people under the social contract of the state constitution and laws, and that no a u t . can on any pretence whatwever, be exercised over the citizens of this state, but such as is or shall be derived b m and granted by the people of this state, and I demand reconsideration of the outrageous decision of August 1,2008 as guaranteed under F R W Rule 60.

That I am a nrrtural person with We 'lhe People as natural pasom of the Stabe of New York (a oorporate entity), who are grateful to Ahnighty God for cntr Freedom, m order to secure its blessings apart h m any such corporate fiction or pretender monarch, and ar as f i e guaranteed by the and lp Amendments to the Federal Cadtution, and Magna Carte. That nunc pro tunc I inherit all the s o d g n rights, privileges and properly that a living nabmrel human inures f b n the creator Yahweb whose so0 Jesus Christ guarantees my sowfeign Freedom given hm Almighty God against corporate f k t h bent on enslaving unbelievers.

That for the record Bnd with no dishaws W e d , but may be a matCer of 28 USC 455 recusal, if for no other reason other than clarification for out appeal i h n the August 1,2008 decision in which the court has disparaged our rights guanmteed under tbe Amembent, I m w ask whe$her or not tht Court is able to make a judgment fnx and clear of other commitments, the Court must arrrwer the Mlowing questions:

Have you taken any oath other than hat of your oath of office? Have you taken a Masonic oath?

a Have you taken a Kolnidre oath in which you must forgive all in your private capacity?

That the August 1,2008 dismissal disparages our social contract right to a republiam form of government in New York, as such violates our ninth amendment right e n d o n in the U.S. Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others reCained by the people; and that any false statement that discredits or distracts fbm the nputatioa of rights, property, and by injurious falsehood libels and defames my title to our social contrect equity in the August 1,2008 decision flies in the hce of the NYS Civil Rights Law Cbapb 6 Article 2 that guarantees quote:

Page 83: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

. Case 1 :04-cv-01193-LEK-RFT Document 1 15 Filed 08M 1/2008 Page 2of 5

S 2. Stpmm sovereignty in t k p c p k . No odhori@ eon, on anypmlma whtatmmw, be ~ d ~ t l s e c i t i z e n s o f t f i s t r r ~ e , ~ b u l h a r i s o r s W & ~ ~ c a r d ~ d b y t k pwple of this state.

That any &be sMement drat discffdits or distracts fiom the qutdan of my individual f k x h s , liberty, property, that by such injurious falsehood libels and defama my title to our social contract is done in Ihe preseace of Yahweh our God, ignores the consolidated city of New York that remains the only homerule t-tory desuf'bed as such by "and two countk or t k territo? tkmof a~ now oqpnkd", that would be a certified question Erom Circuit to NYS Appeals Court, and that applies unda the NYS ConsfiMbn Hie 0 Section 4 that p t e :

No county shU Jme fotn or mom smrfors unless it s W have a w l mtiojw each senator. No comfy shall haw more than one-third of all t k senatom; and and two awnties or the

territory t k m f as now organized, which are adjoining counties, or which arre sepmated on& by public waters, shall shon mm than tironf of aU tk senators.

Tise mtio for apportioning senators shall ahvays be obtained by dividing the manber of inhabitants, excluding aliens, by$j&, md the senate shall always be composed offiftv members,

The WAC4 case dkhaied the f e u : except that if any county having three or more senators at the time of any apjxxtionment shall be entitled on such ratio to an additional senator or senators, such additional senator or semtors shall be given to such county in addition to the fifty senators, and the whole number of senators shall be increased to that extent.

TI,e WU cuse dbhohd the f o d ; &e member of assembly shall be apportioned to every county, including Fulton and Hamilton as one county, containing less than the ratio and one- half over. ( O W as it a+ to ooonty -tiom size that is det+nariaed by home rule stam basal u p eatitkmemt to a board of tlectioas witbin aed that the assembly size ratio as with senate enhqpmemt is declared ancmstitPtionrrl)

Two members shall be apportioned to every other county. (Still reql~mins a b o a r ~ l l b cwnty fobt~titledto8tkrstk0ADs~in-WBOUY-.)

That the court ignmes the express provision for deficiencies m county home rule defined by:

The county of Hamih\shll e l m with the county of Fultoa, until the poplhdim of the county of Hamilton shall, according to the ratio, entitle it to a member. But the legislature may abolish the said county of Hamilton and annex the territory thereof to some other county or counties.

Yourfindingbrrseduponthtproperuseof~re~~dratanly50senatedistrictsand 150 assembly districts may be used until the legislature or a mamdaaed twenty year co~lstitutional convention ddennines otherwise a new legislative enlargamnt formula

That u n k Your finding nepes the existence of the enthe New York Siate Comthtion as it appears then requires that my 18 Senate District is only one of fi@ to include 3 Assembly Districts already pre-cleared by the US DOJ Voting Rights !kction wholly within the 18& SD.

Further, there is no legal autfiority m Reynolds v. Sim w WAC4 v ~ I I U ) that gives an Article ID court the power to eliminate the NYSC Articles ill section 1 through 6 in its entirety, You are absolutely b o d to only a narrowly Pi lopi rescission as done in the Buker v Cam case that would apply to a specific injury under the 14 Amendment.

Further, I was an intervener party in R & . v Pataki and thatin was granted standing to sue sepmtely from the nerrow complaint there that inter alia requested an m senate

Page 84: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

* Case 1 :W-cv-01193-LEK-RFT Document 1 15 Filed 0811 112008 Page 3 of 5

districts within NYC h n 62 to 63, along with other claims challenged un&r the so-called VRA as if the minority makeup of assembly districts within NYC varied violative of the VRA, and that all causes were dismissed fbr the masam that your decision miscanstrucs and will not stamhrp to my appeal will be reversed, in that R&guez v. Pat& was a sham case as defined under 28 USC 1359.

Furthenwre, that any false s&&ment that d i s d i or distracts h m the reputation of my rights, poperty, and by such mjurious Msehood libels and dehws my title to our social contract equity as applies under the NlS ConstUution Article Lll Sectim 5 t h t fbr B d y n (a/Wa Kings County) hm April 2002 applies to my New York 1 8h Senate Distrid (SD) d m diffkcntly for SDs within B d y n as my equity injuy hem despite express mandak, qude:

assembly districts as neariy equal in number of inhabitants, excluding aliens, as may be, of convenient and contiguous territory in as compact fonn as practicable, each of which shall be wholly within a SUM& district

In counties having mom than one senate district, the same number of asseanbly districts shall be put in each senate district, unless the assembly districts cannot be evenly divided among the senate districts of any county.

lhat the court disparages and dehnes my and Plaintifi' rights by cherry picking done with ~,R~v~,andRadtiqrrezvP&cssesthatmnimpmperlyapplidbythecourt and when exposed to second circuit any firir dealing witb the issues rctum to d i again fbr the next Censuson April 15,2010 fordelivery December 31,2010.

At the heart of the cases is denial of a republican fbrm of govertlmeat in New Yorlr that has des&oyed any expedation of ~ ~ O I I in the electoral process fiom the vast majority of s~ate citizens mident m a home ~ l e county who in no less than 47 counties are without any dedicated voice in the legislature.

We havea right to lamw whetbermnot thecowtamidem the sbtteconstiMion b a s k nullified in its entirety by the KMX. Reymh3 v Sim, Ro&igvez deciions and whether or not this mud considers our citizen right to a republican fonn of government under the amendment to Federal cmstitutkm continues. Nowhere in any federal - to date has there been any expression that would give anyone otfier than a state citizen who is also a USA citizen over 17 years of age the righttosuffirrgeandwhenodrawiseccrn~disparagesthatrightproeectedbythe~ Amendment as you have ddne by your decision.

The e m words of the slate andtution have been ignored by this court which m itself is au outrageous disl#rragement of our 9 amendment righls.

After March 6,2006 only a Federal Judge and the NYS BOE has authority under the State Comthtion to redistricting state legislative and kdeml house disbictq given the fad that the state Icgis~hesmauth~aRer~6,ofthesixtfry~follawingthe~ctiag.

I am only able to speak for myself herem and as swh speak witb the auhhty ofa d g n citizen with power over the fkdad courts who have screwed up here m New York and arc required to carrect ignorant mistakes; thus I urge the Court to reconsider the trespgss upon me and if any of the questions listed above are anmend m the afbmative that d applies under 28 USC 455.

RespectMly slbmiaed by, Dabxk August8,2008 l s l t M d d + e s W M

BmoklynNewYork Christopher Earl Strunk

cc Plaintif& d Dehdants' anmel(s)

Page 85: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Case 1 :Wv-01193-LEK-RFT Document 1 15 Filed 0811 112008 Page 4 of 5

U.S. District Court far the Northern District of New Yo& Case Odcv-1193 (LEK)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE BY EMAIL a d USPS MAIL

On A u g u s t 8 , 2 0 0 % a n d ~ ~ o f p e r j u r y , I , ChristqhrEarl Stnmk,causadto be Elezrmnically emailed, and seat by regular mail Strrmk's : FRCvP Rmk 60 mumideration of tbe 1. #)o dccisioll e n d d August 8,2008 for service to Plaintif% and D e f d t s ' attorneys as follows:

- - - - -

. ~ o m , maxmcdhl.com , unca&otts2, rlo&afbvam..n.com , and

postage jmid by Fmt Class U.S. Mail to PIeintiff Roy Piem Dcti- 25 Haitte Jones Circle BrooklynNew Y d 11213

Ddbdaab' C w d h NDNY -1193: ~ w @ m a c . c o n g jefbv.-v.us. mil- .=, J-law.com, BarbaraCo

T)gted: August 8 , 2 W Brooklyn New Ycnic

Christoplrer Eul Strrmk

Page 86: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

* Case 1 :04-cv-01193-LEK-RFT Document 1 15 Filed 0811 1/2008 Page gw

8111 Van Allen

Smt: Friday. August 68.2008 439 PM

subject CerWica6e of Service of StnrnUs Request for RecmsidemWn of Dechb in EDNY Wcv- 1193

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York Case h - 1 1 9 3 (LEK)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE BY E-MAIL, and USPS MAIL

On August 8,2008 aod under pemalty of peajury, I, Christopher Earl Stnmk, caused to be Elmnically e-mailed, and sent by regular mail Strunk's : FRCvP Rule 60 reamsideration of the August 1.2008 dcebhh endorsed August 8,2008 for service to Plaintiffi and Defendants' attorneys as follows:

@yahao.com , [email protected] , [email protected], [email protected] , ~ ~ 0 2 ~ a h o o . ~ o m , mcpm@mLcom , uacasvotes2, [email protected] , and

postage paid by First Class U.S. Mail to Plaintiff Roy Pierre -i 25 Haitbe Jones Circle Brooklyn New York 11213

Dchda~Q' C d im NDNY 04eP-1193: [email protected], [email protected], tvalentine@e~~ns~slarc.ny.us , j ~ ~ l a w . w ~ n , BarbnraCottrell~j.gov , [email protected] , [email protected]

I do declare and certifi rmder penahy of perjury:

August 8,2008 Id-WSkwd Brooklyn New Yark

cbliBhphwEulslb..L

Page 87: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

STATE OF NEW YORK OFFIcE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

ANDREW M. CUOMO Altorney General

Hon. Lawrence E. Kahn United States District Judge James T. Foley Courthouse 445 Broadway, Room 424 Albany, NY 12207-2926

STATE COUNSEL DNlSlON LlUgation Bureau

Writer Direct: (5 18) 474-291 3 Fax: (5 1 8) 473- 1572

August 18,2008

via CMIECF

Re: Loeber, et al. v. Spargo, et al. 04-CV-1193 (zEK/RFT)

Dear Judge Kahn:

Please accept this letter brief on behalf of the State Defendants in response to and opposition to the motion for reconsideration submitted by plaintiffChristopher Earl Strunk (docket #115). For the reasons set forth below and also set forth in the State Defendants' initial moving papers (docket #98) and reply papers (docket #102), the motion for reconsideration should be denied.

Plaintiff Strunk seeks rdconsideration of the Judgment in favor of the defkndants (docket #110) and this Court's correspontiing Order (docket #109) dated July 3 1,2008 which dismissed the Amended Complaint in its entirety and denied the plaintfi' request for a three-judge panel under 28 U.S.C.A. §2284(a).

Rule 60 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides for very limited grounds for relief firom a judgment or order. Rule 6qa) allows correction of clerical mistakes, oversights, and omissions, but has no application to the instant motion. Although the plaintiff does not spec* the basis for the relief sought or what sub-section he moves under, it is presumed that the plaintiffmoves under Rule 60(b). That Rule allows for relief fiom judgment based on mistake, excusable neglect, newly discovered evidence and h u d , among other reasons justiflmg relief. F.R.C.P. 60(b)(l)-(6). Since the plaintiffdoes not suggest either that there has been an intervening change in controlling law or that he has discovered new evidence, the defendants further assume that Strunk seeks to argue that reconsideration is necessary to remedy a clear error of law or to prevent manifest injustice. Under the applicable legal standards, however, reconsideration should be denied.

The Capltol. Albany. NY 12224-0341 m(518)474-2913 .Fax (518) 473-1572 *NOTFORSEFMCEOFPrPERs ,

Page 88: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

While the granting or denial of a motion under such rule is within the broad discretion of the Court, "[slmce 60(b) allows extraordmary judicial relief; it is invoked only upon a showing of exceptional circumstances." Nemaizer v. Baker, 793 F.2d 58,61 (2d Cir. 1986). "Fin~ljudgments should not be lightly reopened." a.

The standard for granting a motion for reconsideration is strict and the plaintifPs burden in seeking reconsideration is heavy. The Second Circuit has instructed that "reconsideration will generally be denied unless the moving party can point to controlling decisions or data that the court overlooked - matters, m other words, that might reasonably be expected to alter the conclusion reached by the court." Shrader v. CSX Tramp.. Inc., 70 F.3d 255,257 (2d Cir. 1995).

A motion for reconsideration "should not be granted where the moving party seeks solely to relitigate an issue already decided." a. Furthermore, a motion for reconsideration is not to be used "for relitigatmg old issues, presenting the case under new theories, securing a rehearing on the merits, or otherwise taking a 'second bite at the apple'. . ..I' Sequa Corp. v. GBJ Corp., 156 F.3d 136,144 (2d Cir. 1998) (citations omitted). This is essentially what the plaintiff is improperly seeking to do in this instance.

The plaintiffhas not pointed to a~overlookedcontrolling decision or constitutional provision which may reasonably be expected to alter the Court's dismissal of the matter. Instead, the plaintiff merely claims that the court's Order dismissing the Amended Complaint was "outrageous" and "disparages our social contact right to a republican form of government m New York." (Docket #115).

It is respectfully submitted that m the July 3 1,2008 Order, the Court properly reviewed the relevht law and properly applied it to the facts of this case. Specifically, the Court appropriately addressed and rejected the plainti&' arguments under New York State Constitution Article 3, Section 4 Order at docket #I09 at pp. 4-5) and the plamtfi' potential federal constitutional challenges to the redistricting plan at issue (Id., at pp.5-6). Thus, the Court's Order was legally correct and did not work a manifiest injustice on the plainti&.

~ccok in~ ly , the Court shbuld deny trunk's motion for reconsideration as this case does not present any exceptional circumstances warranting such extraordinary relief. The plaintiff has simply not met his heavy burden of demonstrating any grounds upon which the Court's prior decision should be altered.

Respectfully Submitted,

Aaron M. Baldwin ,

Assistant Attorney General BarRoll#510175

cc: All Plaintfi (via First Class Mail per attached Declaration of Service); All Counsel (via CMIECF)

Page 89: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

DECLARATION OF SERVICE

I, Aaron M. Baldwin, declare pursuant to 28 USC 9 1746, that on August 18,2008, I

served the annexed Letter Brief upon all defendants of record via CM/ECF and upon the

following individuals by depositing true copies thereot properly enclosed in sealed, postpaid wrappers, in a post office box in the City of Albany, a depository under the exchive care and

custody of the United States Post Office Department, directed to the individuals at the addresses designated for that purpose, as follows: Dated: August 18,2008

Albany, New York M - RJILnlYJJU

AARON M. BALDWIN

Christopher Strunk 593 Vanderbilt Avenue Apt # 281 Brooklyn, NY 1 1238

Ronald G. Loeber 2 130 Berne Altarmnt Road Altamont, NY 12009

William E. Bombard P.O.' Box 882 Glens Falls, NY 1280 1

William A. Gage 10 Greenfield Lane Hampton, N 12837

. John Forjone P.O. Box 28 Clarendon, NY 14429

H. W i Van Allen 35 1 North Road Hurley, NY 12443

Ronald E. Sacoff 84 Boylan Street Staten Island, NY 103 12

Gabriel Rassano 1 35 Gordon Place Freeport, NY 1 1520

Edward M. Person, Jr. 392 Saldane Avenue North Babylon, NY 1 1703

The Ad Hoc N Y S Citizens for Constitutional Legislative Redistricting 35 1 North Road Hurley, NY 12443

Burr V. Deitz 444 Whitehall Road Albany, NY 12208

Fairlene G. Rabenda 8 Claudia Lane Poughkeepsie, NY 12603

Roy-Pierre Detiege-Connier 25 Hattie Jones Circle Brooklyn, NY 11213

Page 90: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

RONALD G. LOEBER, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

THOMAS SPARGO, individually and as Justice of the NYS Supreme Court, et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER

Presently before the Court is a Letter Motion filed by Plaintiff Christopher Earl Strunk

("Strunk") requesting reconsideration of this Court's Order, dated July 3 1,2008, dismissing the

Amended Complaint and denying Plaintiffs' request for a three-judge panel under 28 U.S.C.A. 8

2284(a). Letter Motion @kt. No. 1 15); July 3 1 Order @kt. No. 109). Defendants have filed a

ksponse in opposition to Strunk's Motion. Response @kt. No. 117).

A. Legal Standard

The standard for granting a motion for reconsideration is strict, and "reconsideration will \ \

generally be denied unless. the moving party can point to controlling decisions or data that the court

overlooked-matters, in other words, that might reasonably be expected to alter the conclusion

reached by the court." Schrader v. CSX Transp., Inc., 70 F.3d 255,257 (2d Cir. 1995). The burden

on a party moving for reconsideration bf an order is thus substantial. Toland v. Walsh, No. 9:04-

CV-0773,2008 WL 657247, at * 1 (N.D.N.Y. Mar. 7,2008). There are only three possible grounds

upon which motions for reconsideration may be granted: (1) an intervening change in law, (2) the

Page 91: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

availability of evidence not previously available, or (3) the need to correct a clear m r of law or

prevent manifest injustice. Shannon v. Verizon New York, Inc., 519 F.Supp.2d.304,307 (N.D.N.Y.

2007) (citing Doe v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs., 709 F.2d 782,789 (2d Cir. 1983). It

appears that Strunk is basing his motion for reconsideration on a need to correct an error of law or to

prevent manifest injustice.

B. Recusal

Initially, Strunk's Letter Motion appears to also suggest that the Court should muse itself

for "disparaging" Plaintiffs' rights unless the Court "is able to make a judgment free and clear of

other commitments."' Letter Motion at 1 @kt. No. 115). However, Plaintiff has not actually

moved for recusal, and certainly not in any format that complies with the statutory requirements.

Plaintiff has also not alleged any basis that would warrant recusal under either of the two statutes

that govern the recusal of federal judges-Sections 144 and 455 of the Judicial Code. 28 U.S.C. $5

144,455.

So far as Section 144 is concerned, Plaintiff failed to file the requisite affidavit sufficiently

alleging "that the judge before whom the matter is pending has a personal bias or prejudice either

against bim or in favo 1 of any adverse party." In addition, as the Supreme Court said in Liteky,

'judicial rulings alone almost never constitute a valid basis for a bias or partiality motion." Liteky

v. United States, 5 10 U.S. 540,555-56 (1994).2 Plaintiff has also failed to meet the requirements of

' Strunk then includes examples, asking whether the Court has taken any oath other than the oath of office, such as "a Masonic oath ... [or] a Kolnidre oath in which you must forgive all in your private capacity." @.

It should also be noted also that the determination of whether such an affidavit is timely and legally sufficient is made by the judge whose recusal is sought. See, e.g., Berner v. United States, 255 U.S. 22,32,36 (1921); LoCascio v. United States, 473 F.3d 493,498 (2d Cir.2007)

Page 92: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Section 455(a), which requires that a judge recuse when "an objective, disinterested observer filly

1) informed of the underlying facls [would] entertain significant doubt that justice would be done

absent recusal." See In re Anuinda, 241 F.3d 194,201 (2d Cir.2001) (quoting United States v.

Lovaglia, 954 F.2d 8 1 1,815 (2d Cir. 1992)) ("Where a case, by contrast, involves remote,

contingent, indii or speculative interests, disqualification is not required.").

11 C. Discussion

I1 Strunk then claims that by affecting Plaintiffs' rights, the July 3 1 Order 'Yies in the face of

11 the NYS Civil Rights Law Chapter 6 Article 2 that guarantees quote: 'S 2. Supreme sovereignty in

I the people. No authority can, or any pretence whatsoever, be exercised over the citizens of this

Y state, but such as is or shall be derived h m and granted by the people of this state."' Letter Motion

I1 at 1-2. To the extent that this argument appears to challenge the Court's personal jurisdiction over

I Plaintiffs, this claim is waived since it cannot be brought aAer the Court's disposition of the case,

I/ and since Plaintiffs already waived any challenge to the Court's personal jurisdiction over them by

II filing this suit. Fed. R Civ. P. 1 2 0 ; see, e.L Andros Compania Maritirna, S.A. v. Intertanker Ltd.,

I1 718 F.Supp. 121 5,1217 (S.D.N.Y. 1989) (appearing and seeking affirmative relief from the Court is

I1 the paradigm of such a waiver) (citing Adam v. Saenger, 303 U.S. 59,67-68 (1938)).

II Plaintiff Strunk next reiterates various legal arguments already presented to the Court

II regarding New York State Constitution's Article 3, Section 4 and the Plaintiffs' potential federal

II constitutional challenges to the redistricting plan. However, a motion for reconsideration "should

11 not be granted where the moving party seeks solely to relitigate an issue already decided." Shrader,

(quoting Nat'l Auto Brokers Corp. v. Gen. Motors Corp., 572 F.2d 953; 958 (2d Cir.1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 1072 (1979)) ("'a judge has an aflirmative duty to inquire into the legal sufficiency of such an affidavit and not to disqualifjr himself unnecessarily . . ."').

Page 93: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

70 F.3d at 257. A motion for reconsideration is not to be used "for relitigating old issues, presenting

the case under new theories, securing a rehearing on the merits, or otherwise takhg a 'second bite at

the apple' ... ." Sequa Corp. v. GBJ Corp., 156 F.3d 136, 144 (2d Cir. 1998) (citations omitted).

"Since 60(b) allows extraordinary judicial relief; it is invoked only upon a showing of

exceptional circumstances." Nemaizer v. Baker, 793 F.2d 58,61 (2d Cir. 1986). "Final judgments

should not be lightly reopened." Plaintiff has not alerted the Court to any overlooked

controlling decision, constitutional provision, or data which may be reasonably expected to alter the

Court's dismissal. Accordingly, Plaintiff has not established any "exceptional circumstances" under

which reconsideration is warranted.

D. Conclusion

Therefore, based on the foregoing, it is hereby

ORDERED, that the Plaintiffs Motion for reconsideration @kt. No. 115) is DENIED; and

it is further

ORDERED, that the Court's July 3 1,2008 Order, dismissing the Amended Complaint and

denying Plaintiffs' requed for a three-judge panel @kt. No. 109) is APPIRMED; and it is further

ORDERED, that the Clerk serve a copy of this order on all parties.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

U.S. District Judge \

Page 94: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

~ U ~ l r . S p r g o ~ . l O Y l l W C I ( E T R ) R C l S E . : l ~ 1 L L L E ~ PROSE ruPM.c-mern.ms:z6m

r m : 'III Vn m- -xm" To: -muemr5mnr < v m r

r r p a a k d B W 3 r A . C l c 10-Lrc

1 ~ 1 1 9 ~ - m ~ e t d v . Sprpdal E m 7 3

L m ~ e w p a i d s r b n p 4 m NY 1 2 0 7

. 518-282-9111 rhdolpb F. Trum. d d h c tscl: lO/l5/200l

Emd Ww@bamilmm PRO SE

h OM)1/200( Dam el W Riw 09/25/2009

APPEUClOSeD u.s.Dbmidc.rt

r r p r a M b ? L w q . Q ' I41 Hrm A*.

W r c k . . D k r * c d M Y . . L - M . i . O l I L c ~ ) p a V E - V v m * . + W J L t c L e s r . N Y I Z U 6 (m) PRO SE

ClVlLwcrarFoRCASE II: IMII9sLEXdlrl

h k d d ~ . S p r p Q d D L F M lWl5ROM R p u c m d b ? E W L V r A l a

*to:saiaMplmlmcER.L. D . e T ~ m I R O ( W 351 -Rod H.rle?.. NY 12443 843-3w366

CreaaLcrmort 2 C C A . ~ R O n . - R o r Fac M5-33%2135 mcCiail.OM)Om Epil h m . l * . r ~ . e m l M C M . OMU3Ua PROSE SDNY. 0243618 NDNY. 0 m . w SMJY. ~ 4 8 1 WDNY. M-m-395

C- 42:19W Cnil RighU M 9144624820 Em& ~ ~ . m

rcprrra*dbnaddG.Ucbu PRO SE 2 1 3 o E ? e n e ~ R o d Allaml.NY 12009 Epd: -).cq.mmm r r p s a * d b ? - Y * V PRO SE 25H.t*brrCirck

~ ~ U ~ L N Y 11213 PRO SE

rcprrra*dkWsLLm P.QBcnl82 a n F* NY 12801 R.uldhSan R p u c m d b ? n a d d h S a n M I . ~ r i r d o o 1 UBo!hSma

s m m l d d . N Y l W l 2 PROSE Lb"ik ~ @ m l c a PRO SE

n.l.~+- r r p r a ~ g ~ r r ~ m ~ . . , d ~ - g k N I s Nen Yort S1.e A-- OacnI -

516-223-6883 PRO SE

Tbc Cqitol Albr?.. NY 12224 518-473dOlJ

m b ) M w d M ) s l r . l r . Far- 518473-1572

w-gkrn Ep.il: .nn.bldn&'*.lwslly.w

W: WAD ArnRNEY ATfWRNEr TDBEhWl7CQ

r a p t ~ m n d 4 r b a m m PROSE JdflwMDnh

OmcCdAnomyOarnl-Alb..?. Deprarm0fI.m

m B C h C n C L a ~ - n e Capitol 593 VVdsbir -211 Al*.NYlrn m n NY 11238 518-4744441 4ydzs9901 F ~ : 518-1n-1sn h.iI .acmao*.2'hrbacm ~ n . i l : * . r n - . q . m PRO SE Ll%ADATII)RNBT

ATfWRNEY T D M h v T K x D

r r p e r * e d b ? A r w M m 1% dm? fa -) LPADArnRNCI

351NonbRod A l 7 O R N E T T D B E ~ H.rk?.NY 12U3 W? 389-4366 J d k ~ M D n r i FR 845 339-2835 1% dm- fa ddrra) PRO SE Ll%ADAnOhWET

A r r O R N E I l V B E ~

~ ~ b ) h t r V : W b 4UwMeh.uRrad C m X r E W r r p a a d k A . m M B Y r l . AltmiyNY 12205 ~ a d m N I s ~ l S e c d m ? f o l ~ ) 518-489-0167 LEU) ATlVRNEY w. brddmuldmm A r n R N E Y l V B E m ,

Page 95: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

e b y T d d D . V . b & (See h - c for ddrco) A l l v R N l T l V B E W X E E D

.epaa*dbywk.y- NmYdCityLmDcprocst- - P.O. Box 1277 I(ragcarNY l 2 W w5-340-7559 Fn: 5l5-340-7564 rn g r . ~ . ~ TERMNATEL: Ol/IJROad LEADATIVRNEY

J n a L l r ~ OmCedhELamg a8 C d A l a c Albmy. NY 12206 518458 -2W Frr: 51&158-2448

(See h - c f a addnab A l l v R n E Y Z O E E i V O n C m

npaa(odbyDmidW.~ (See h i f a .ldrclr) LEADATIVRNEr A ? l W R N E Y l V & C ~

npraatdbyArrMmMwb (See hi f a ddnr) A I T O R N E T l V B E N ~

Page 96: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

mfmmbO%Ullc ~ b ? . A m r n ~ NISScnmr l%hrfa.ddna)

A r l t M N E Y m B E m Rrthhrr repcsraMb?.AmnLh&lb msev.w~w ( S a h r f u m )

- Mdml A r n R N E Y 7 0 B E N o l m a

sspriRlWcr ~ ~ ~ M . ~ NYS- I% h r f u ddrrn)

ArnRNEYrnBEMDRCBD I(rriS- repaadbAmmMm4wb NISScnmr 1% h r for ddrrn)

A l n M N E Y 7 V B E ~

* - b A r r M L m Iscchrfaddrrn) A'l7URNEY'lUBENOrrCED rqhUScdb?.ArrMBddub l ~ h r f a d d r r n )

ATNXNEYYVBE-

l 3 u g c D . M a i . n -byAmM.WIrC NYSsemdov I S a h r f a d d n r ) ~ I M R * L fqfw&cdb?.ArrM-

A r n R N E Y T D B E m l x m rnsorma t%do\rf~ddrcP) A m R N E Y m B E i x n x m

v-n%mpmay lepua#db?'Amu..Hh I % h r T o r d k n ) m- A r n r n B E M D R C B D J = @ h W rrpaadb?.ArrM-

NYS- I S e c h r f a d k a ) A l n M N E Y l V B E NOTICED

~ b ? . A r r M W h h 1% h r f a ATIORNEY 70 BE NOTICED

RpcraodbyAmMB.LK NISSendw I% h r f a ddrca)

ATlURNEYTOBENom'ED

mad F. N e n A a m b r ~ m m i y l r h Rsh&a Ha- 1% h r for ddrrn)

Al7ORNEYiVBENOlXED Shpk.Msdmd , Rpacadb? .AarMB.m NmScnmr 1% for m )

A T I o m h Y r n B E N o m ' E D

l3ugc- rrprrardb?.AmmnL- NYSSmaa l%hrfaddrcP)

Al7ORNEYmBEMnXELl WmLSap8m rrpca*dbr.AmMWIrC NYs- 1% h 7 2 fU dku)

A m R N E Y m B E -

s.d- K p U m k d ~ A m M W I r C NYSSnma 1% h r f a ordhca) D i r c J . S n k Iqmmtdb?.ArrM..Hh

N)SSsma 1% Ibmr f a ddrrn)

Page 97: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

A l m m ~ r m ~ ~ u u l l c ~ ~ M e h e M ' n m p a l W W m l d b y A r r M 1 W l r i . m S n a a (See h r fa *)

r r p a a d b y A r w M B Y r h ATIVRNEYIDBEMXRXD

(Sa h r fa d k 4 ARDRNEYlVBEMXRXD CaurTrvp rrpaa*dbyAmmmw#wb

NYSSrWa (See h e fa -)

bqmYmdkAmmM.MdlIb - ATIVRNEYlVBENmXED

J a e M . % r D # msa*br ( s o h r for ddrrr)

AllVRNHI'lVBEuullcED Dmid J. V- r r p a a d b ? . A m m M w b b NYSSaaa (Sadouefor *)

J r s L S e r r J rcprrra*dkAmmMw#h A m l V B E m

msma ( S c s h r f a d h s + ) A R D R N E Y m B E M X R X D DdcMVaRu rcpwcddb?.AmmWBYrh

NYSSaaa (Sec h r fa ddrrn) ATIVRNEYlVBENOlXXD

I*uC.BLdr - b y A r r m w # h NXYSoaa (Sa h r fa dhu)

ATI7lRNEYlVBEMXRXD C m r c E U L s . J r . r r p a a r d b y A m m M B d h b m- ( S a h r f w d d r r n )

ATlWRNEYlVBENOflCED My.bASIW l a a r r a b y A m M . B Y r h mSaaa (See ht for ddrca)

ATI7lRNEYlVBE NOlKED c.cbricM.Y...l n p e r a d b y A r r M B Y r h m S r W a ( ~ a d o \ ~ f a d d ~ e r )

qmeakdbyAmmMlWhC ARDRNEYlVBEuullcED

lSee.bmrfor.ddrca) Al lVRNEYlVBENmXED h J . A W h . npcra*dbyArrM...Yrh

m- (See h r ia ddrrs)

bqmYmdb?.ArrM.BYrh A m m B E M X R X D

T W h s b n r NYS- I S e e h r f a d k z s )

. 47?KWEYlVBEMXRXD M.rrSAkri r r p a a * d k A r r M l W i r h

m A 5 - M - tSeehr for* ) A R D R N E Y l V B E m

hhn- r r p c a k d b y A m m M w # h NYSSoaa (See h r fa -1

ARDRNEYZVBEMnKED Tom A l h # r e p m a e d b y h m m

m- ( S e e h r f a d d r r r r ) ATI7lRNETlVBENOlKED

ArrCMNBI'lDBEMmCELl

G-m- m.45-W- (Sa h e fa MiChad&.- n p a d d b y A n m M l u r i

ARDRNEYlVBl?uullcED m-4- ( S a h ' c f a d h r 2 3 )

A ~ l V B E N c X Z Q

r e p c a M b y A m m M B d h b (See.borefardhcn) mAnrrdlp.ara A R D R N E Y l U B E m

Jmstbr L m repmaedb?.AmM.Bddwb m- (See atova f a ddma)

ARDRNETm BE NoTIu?D

hrrrlJ.A.La& m p r a l d b y A r r M w # h I S a h f a d d r e s ) m- ArrORNBTlVBENOflCED

W8SmF.Bqim&Jr. rrpcradby AmmMBddwb mAoad3ra (Sa h r fa ddrca)

ARDRNEYTD B E M X R X D

k m * . L A W q m e a k d b y A r r n 1 W l r i . m- (Sa h r fa ddrcn)

ATI7lRNEYlUBENmXED rcprrra*dbyAmM.Eakb

(see h r for ddrcr ) A m R N E Y m B E N o m x m

h- rrpcradbyAmmM.w#h m- 1% &o\ r fa ddrcr)

ATI7lRNEYlVBEMXRXD bqmYmdbyAmmM1Wlri.

( S a h r fa *) ARDRNEYlVBENmXED

mpra ldbyAmmM.w#wb (Sa h r f a d & e W ARDRNEYlVBEUMlfXD

l q r r a d b y A m m m w b b (See h r fa mikeas) ATjURNErlVBENmXED

-A- r r p r r a C d b y A m M w # h mAnrrb3rra 1% h o fa -1 R k L . r d L W rcpwcddb?.AmmM.Bdh~b

ArrCMNBIlVBEMmCELl m- (See h r f a &bus) ARDRNEYlVBENOl7CED

rcpca tdbyAmmM2.Yr i . (& h r fa ddma) , i m m m m N m X E D

rcpwcddbyAmmMBdah m- ( S a h r f o r * )

A m R N E Y m B E m

MiChdBadac. n p a d r d b y A m m m w b b m- ( S e e h e f a d d r c r )

Page 98: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

I q m d C d ~ A r r M I Y h h ( S e c h r f a .ddrat) mA-wmm ATlVRNEYTVBEhVIXED R p u m w d b - M m

(Sech.efa.ddrat) Al?URNEYlVBENOXED

M r r W . b ( b m b ? . A r r M . I Y h h (Sec dm+ f a -) m-+ Al?URNEYlUBEMXXLD

WPYr C h . RpumwdbAruMB.Yri Ha- (Sechrfaddrrn)

A l ? U R N E Y T O B E m

KmhA.c.Ls q~uddb?.AmmMmdwb (Sahrforddrrn) m-+ m n R N m r n B E m JImeJRCrr rrparadbYAmMhmRb

Ha- tSahrforxldlw#) Al?URNEIlUBENIXKXl

N . r - n C c d d b A r r M I Y h h Ha@&=-- (&hrfaO.ddnr) V M r E. CwL. rspsard$AmmMIYhh

A r n R N E Y r n B E M X X L D Ha- (Sec h r f a lddrca) ArrORNmlUBIFNOXED

K n h - -bAmnM.WlrL 1Sec.bmrfaddms) Ha-+ ArrORNmlVBEhVIXED

a U f d W . C n d Rpumwdb?.AmMEMdwh (Set h* f a mMWI) ATIVRNhYIDBENolWED

Rn - leprradgArrM.WlrL (&hrfa . d k ) Ha- A l ? U R N L W l U B E ~

MWrlfhi& rrparadL?.Arnw- H a A = + m - ( S a h f ~ d d r r n )

A T m m E T r n B E h V I X E D

- b A r r M - -4=-b-- I S s e h r f a d d n o )

A m R N E Y m B E m rcpeadb? .AmMIYhh (Sec .bo\r f a *) Al?URNEYlVBEMTKED

- b M M B 1% h r f a &) A T m R N m r n B E m RrcLvRaklc RpumwdtyAmmB.yri.

Ha- I& h r f a -1 A n v N H I r n B E m

WrnDLCM - b A m m M B Ha- 1% h r f a ddno) R.A..MDa(il. -b?.ArrMB.Yli

AlnntNEYrn B E n o l l c E o m- 1% h r f a ddrar)

r s c a d b A r r M . h m R b (See .bmr for ddrr9) A r n R N E Y l V B E i w n c E D

m p R a & c d $ A r r M ~ I S e c h r for Al?URNBylVBEiwncED

Page 99: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

ATIvRNEYmnE-

W b y A m m m s u r h I* h r f u ddRII) A ~ R N E Y T O B E ~

JahmlhMmav r r p c m d b A m M & m m- l s a h . 2 for dQcs)

ATORNEY7V BE-

D . . . a A . h ~ u h - b y A a m M s u r h ISec h r f a &) m- A l l U R N E Y l U B E M n X E D

T r Md(n*l m- t s a .bmr for d h e r )

Al lWRNEYTDBEUOTXD

- b y A r r l K h u d t s ecdovck rddn r ) m- A n m N E r r n B E N O I F C E D

M M M i k r rrpcmd~-AmmM.Bddwb m- t sadmrfaadmcss)

A r n R N E Y r n B E N L n n X D

W a S m R M q s d rrpcr*rdbyAruH8*lrh 1% h . 2 for ddrrn) m- A r n m E Y r n B E N o m x U JomL- - b y A r r k L s u r h

m-- Iseedoucfm&) A n v R N m m B E N c m c m

mpms&dbyAmmMMdub l s e e h r f a d d n r ) A m R m m B E U O T X D

m l u a k d b y A 8 m M h M u b lSeed.nrfor&) Al lVRNEYlVBENOnCED

-M- Iwma4cdbyAmmMbYli 1 S c r h ' ~ f o r ~ ) m- AllVRNEYTCJBEMn7CID

k r p r D . M r d c xQluE&dbyAmmM.&m 1% h . 2 for dctcrr) A r r O R m m n E N O l Z E D

N i l i i C ~ -byArunLlLWlrh m- t s l c l b r r f a d d r r n ) cILahcw.L. Iwma4cdby A m m M s u r h

A m R N E T m n E m m- IScr h r for ddnrr) ArnRNEYrnBENOIFCED

mpms&dbyAmmMhud 1Sos.bmrforadmcss) A T l V R N E T ~ M N O l Y C X D

IqmeUdbyAmmlKWlr i 1% h r for -) A ~ m B E ~

-G- m l u a k d b y A m m M s u r h I& h r f o r &) m-Myra

'RrrP.o'Mmm - b y ~ r r m r n md..rnMlna 1% h r for ddrrn)

A l T O R N l T l V B E M T K Q - b y A m m M U k i

lSa.bm.2faddnsr) A r n R N E T r n BENOIFCED

repsadbyAmmMMdwb (Scch1 fo .&) A n v R N m l D B E N o l i m D

n p e r a d b A r u M B Y r l lscc.bm.2forddRII) ArrORNEYlVBEMmCED - rrpaadbyAmmD1Bdd.h

IScc h r f a ddrcr) A l l V R N E T T O B E M T K Q

- b y A r u n s u r h t s a h f a d d r r r ) ATlVRNEYlVBEMnlCEB

wIIE.ILhmml mpms&dbyAmmuhMub mArmdlyra I* h= for ddrrn)

ATmRh'EYTOBE N O l R X D rrpaandb?.AruM.Bdd.h

1 S t c h r for admcss) A m R N E Y m B E N L n n X D

-byAmmulLWlrh I* h r for dd r r r ) A ~ R N B Y 7 O B E N U l R X D

RprrakdbyAmmM8*lrh I s a h r for dctcrr) ATIvRNEYTOBENOIFCED

-0.- q m m k d b y A m a M s u r h m - m Isa lbmrfaddRII)

A l l V i W E Y l V B E N O l R X D I q m e U d b y A r u M r n

lsee.bm,fa.ddrrr) A n v R N m l V B E N O n C E D

J s 8 t R . M nprraabyAmmM8.Yrh m- I* h r fm dctcrr)

AllVRNEYTDBENOIFCED , -byAmmMsurh

I s a .bo\.2 f a dQcs) A l l V R N E Y l D B E U O T X D

l epc lc r*odbyAmmM.rn 1% d m r for ddrrr) A m R N E Y m B E N o l l u w

rrpaen(cdhAmmMsurh 1% h r for -1 A l l V R N E Y ? V B E m

A d m y L m d h - b y A r u w U k i m- 1% h r for ddrrr)

A r n R N E Y f O B E N o m x U mpms&dbyAmmMlLWlrh

1% h r for d d n r )

Page 100: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

ATmRNEITOBEMXYCED Am& Grsac rrpcatedby AmMB.Ylri mAaad3nroca (See h r f a a )

rrpermndbAmMB.Yrh ATTORNEYTOBE N-

m- (See h ' c f a addrcp) ATTORNEYTOBEM?lXED MccnM- -b?ArrM.B.ldrL

m- (See h\ 'c f a ddma)

repacadbyAmMB.Yrh - AEVRNElTOBENCnUXD

(See h r f a d d r r s ) ATIDRNEYTOBENol7Cm sbpk- RpaadkAmM.B.ldrL

m a * (See h r f a ddrcs)

r e p e M d k A m M B a R b ATIVRNmTOBENUlYCED

DmidF.Gm m-Mvra (See.bm'ciaaidrcss1

ArrORNEYTOBENol7Cm 19wzstdbyAmMB.W

(See h r f a a )

r s p s a r r d ~ A m M B a R b ATIDRNEYTVBEMZZCXD

(See h r f a ATIDRNEYTOBENol7Cm C.ri l. Hartlc repeMdbAmMB.ldrL

m,4=-&- (See.bm'cfaddrcs1 ATTORNEYTOBEMZZCXD

I*b.n.LGPrt R p a a d k A m M M d h m- ( s c e h ' c i a d d r c s )

ATTORNEYTOBENol7Cm rqrrardbyAmMB.ldr i

( S e e h \ r i a d m c a )

rsprsakdb?'AmM.B.ldrL ATTORNEY TO BE N o n c E v

m-- (See h r f a ddroP) ArnRNEYrnBENOIXCBD nikhd -byAmlKB.ldrL

m ~ l p (See h r f a ddrrss) ArnRNmTOBEN-

Thcwda rrpermndb?ArwM.- NYSAsrmbbrn ( S e e h r i a d m c a )

A n p R N m TO B E N o m x Z l -- R p e a e d g A m h L B r H h m-- ( S e e a b m r f a a )

ATTORNEY TO BE N r n x m I M . r d N . c a a h i d nplumldb?.AmMMdh NIS- (See abnr f a -1

ATTORNEY TO BENOTXED rrpcarcdbAmM.8.ylh

(Seedwefaddrrrs) ATTORNEYlVBENOTlCED

ATTORNEYTOBEMZZCXD

rrpaarrd&AmMlhYlri (Seehs fa r ld r r s r ) ATIURNEYTOBEUOlKED

D.riBK.r rrpcrsrrabyAmm..w m-Mvra ( S e e h m f a a )

ArnRNEY TO BE N m E D

~J~ rrpcraadbyAmm..yrh maw--- (See h + f a rldrca) h-c- -b?.ArrMBdub

AWORNEYTOBENCnUXD m-63na (See h a f a lddrso) ATTORNEYTOBENOITCED

Elhldkc -tv-AnmnBaRb maw--- ( S e e h ' c i a d Q s s )

ArrORNEYTOBEMXYCED -byAmmBaRb

(See h r f a dmca) AnVRNEYTOBENCnUXD

~ l c l ~ repacadbAmmMB.ldrL m - h (See h r f a d d m a ) NnmiRka ~ b ? . A m M B . Y r h

ATTORNEY TO BE NCnUXD m- ~ S e e h r f o r d m c a ) ATTORNEY TO BE NOIX:ED

rrpermndbyAnmMBaRb ( S e e h r i a h l R * r M R k a repea*dbAmMB.Yrh ATTORNEYTOBENUTKID m-b?na (See h r faddma)

ArnRNEYTOBENomxZl

mim t. -byA.rrM- N T S ~ (See h r f a dhcP) A m m a k R d h r mpmukdb?.ArrMBddwb

ATIURNEYTOBEMZZCXD m- ( S e e d w c f o r a ) ATTORNETTO BE NoncXD

M*.LZWs -b?AmmBaRb m h m ( S e e h f a d k n ) Ihd.RRrstW ~ b y A r r M B a R b

AlXlRNEYlVBENCnUXD m- t S e e . b o \ r f a a ) ATTORNEYTOBEM?lKED

T m Kirum r e p a c a d b A m M B . H i m- (See h r f a a ) repacadb?.AmMMdnil

ATIDRNBYTOBEM?lXED ( k h ~ f k W a i d r c s s ) A r n m E Y TO BE N m K X D

mimMlW rrpermndbyAmM- N1S- (See d w e f a .Me)

Page 101: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

T e h m R ~ r l - b y A . r r m B d h r h AI7VRMITXJBENUlFXO m- (See h r f a dcbcn)

A r n R N E I TDBE hmnxn l c i m m e d b ? . A . r r m w

( seehefo r&) r r p a c a ) s d b ? . A r r M W h h ATIURNhYlVBEM77CED

I S e e h t i a d h E ) A r r O R N m l V B E m

~ K . ~ m#Iuddb?.Ammw mAnanb3nw (Seehr faddre&

M C h c k ( H L r l r q . w d d b y A . r r l l l B d h r h Al7VRNEYlVBEM77CED m- (seehria .ddlcs)

A r n R N E Y r n B E N m n x D h r p u u t d b ? . A m m w

(See &*fa d&n) R*- - b y A . r r M . W l r h Ai'YVRNETTDBEM77CED m a w (See .bow f a dcbcn)

A m l V B E M X K Z D F d W . - h . r r p r r a * 1 b y ~ r r ~ . . ~ h m-4=-m- (Slc.brrfaddrrr)

MrL*l.(kLnda rcpaa*db?.A.rrmWlrh A n u R N r m Y u B E M n 7 c m m- (Seeh.eiad&ws)

A T I U R N h Y l V B E M n 7 c m Mmmntrc - b ? . ~ m m w m- (See h r f a &)

Da- n p a a a d k h m r W m AlTORNETTDBENonceD mdnmMI*ara I S e e h r f a d h E )

ATlORNETlVBENonceD rrprra*1b?.hrn..m

m- ( S e e h r f a d m e r ) rrprra*1b?.AmmMB.W A r n R N E Y m B E h m n x n

(See h z f a d d r r n ) ATIWRNEYTDBEMXKZD

Lr T* rrpaa*dbyAmmw m,--w-- ( S e e h r i a d h c p )

addrSRs rrprrrrr*dby-MBdhrh AnVRNEYTD BE N U n U W mArmbljla l*.brrfaddns)

LUDATmRNEY ArrORNEITDBENoYXZD W C T m r e p a a * d b y A r r M . E i d w b

m-4=-m- (see .bovc fw odmcs) ATIURNhYTDBENmnxD

n p a a a d b ? . A r r m w (see h r fm &)

DmU R T- Jr. ~ ~ I b ? . A n m M . B d h r h m- (See h r f a d&n) rrprra*1b?.A.rrMWlrh

AITORNEYTOBEM77CED (Scc h r f a d h E ) L U D A r n E Y AnuRNrmTDBEMmCED

R . b W . L a - b ? . A m m M L H h m.45-ib- ( s e e h i a d h E )

A ~ R N E Y X J B E M 7 7 C E D

- r r p a d d b ? . h r n B d h r h 1% b e f a d&n) Aln?RNEPTDBEiWlXED

-wd-- -b?'AammWhh m- ( S r r h r i a d & w s )

A n V R N m T D B E h m n x n

rcpaa*db?.Arrm~ ( S o h t f a dhE) A Y 7 O R N E V l V B E ~

I(cW LT. wri& n p e a d b y A r r m w m- ( S e e b r i m & )

A T m R N E Y X J B E M n n X l l

r r p a d d b ? . A r r m w (See h e f a d h E ) A l l V R N E Y T D B E h m n x n

Mi%bnUmn h r p u u t d b ? . A r r m W h h mllarrMy.m (See f a dka)

ArrORNEIrnBEM77CED

n 6 C k d N . U r q . w d d b y A r r m W h h NYS- (See h r fa&)

Page 102: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

& i a e d * c m m u & d a l k a + d g ~ p r c l a ~ ~ P i r n c ~ ~ . R o u l d E . S r o & ~ R . . r r a M P r m k . C L a o p L c r e a i ~ A D H O C N e ~ Y o r k S p *

mu& fa a pdimiwy mjmckm md rrcpn m& m 28 US. Scetmm 2284 mbmilkd lo W. I I h w i m kfhrc! ) (Fnlscd:

Page 103: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Ch&n J. P m d b . h. Mni J. Go& Ehnh Goaola Jr. JoscpL A. Grilio. Ksmp Hmwn Rolh k U - l h m p s c a Shirk?- L lfnnIk. Craig M , J o b s m . ~ m H ~ l e l l r r ? . D KkmLzKmqer.CalK~ugu. Adm I. Lmn. W b J. Ldm Jr. Kenac(h P. L.Vdk. Vincent L. Lcibdl m. nomas W. L i b . Eli&& O r . La&. Serpba R M k .

Page 104: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Kcrr*~(ni lL)lPrad:ozanmmx)

FmkWn~KniS.Rhr.BillPaljr~LoRmh.hqbE 0- BZ s u M M O N S ~ a P a b a b R c C . P * m ~ ~ . R m d d E . RobrLbL.D.~SvpLaMCuld . IdmL.SIpsmDimeI . s u d f . G . W R r r r O . E d , , n d M A o o . . , k . ~ E r l ~ S n i a o . F x i c T . ~ a l a c M S s r r o . l n m L . Sod.DcoG. ADHOC N r n Y d S w e C ~ f o ~ C ~ . . . SMD.. MJmh A Sai(b. W h 7. Sacbaxh. T+ b Sm*. B.n V. Dcjh R d G L o c k . W h E. Bmbrd.

A m h ~ Stan-Cmsim. Aatomc M. h p m CeaT-. h i d 1. W i u l l n A G g r I d m J c e # ~ F c r p r . H W ~ V m A U a . F . i b e G .

Vdaty. Dak M. Voka . Gmqc H Wimm. Ir. C*Lrir M. Y-. R*r R.bcadrlosephL.BmsornrdaMROOII.mm~udr?J2f4Mo8:&ic

J.Abbc.h.M.rcS.A3crsiTmM~.~AMdac.CwaE. A h s a d m U 6 R W . imver& U26R008. J- S A*m m e d m

Amyo. hml I. A n b i k . J & h L Amk. In B d k Greg Ball. U6R008. mansdoe 2 R M W : hL. I Bcrric rad a U 6 R W .

W f i r A w. Bob B m Midrl Bardcm. Mrbcl Bmj- mmu dr U 2 6 R W . U ~ I O C o a m a d a U6R008. rma dr

Jmhm L. Bmg. W i l b F. byM. k. F?&p Boyk. M I Bradley. U2M0011: John A DcF- a d a U r n . m a d o c U2M001.

J.N. F. Btxmm RlChld L. Bmd*. M Lhmk-*. D u c l I. MYtm h W n e Dilm m c d m UM008. mmu doc U26/200&. llsmas

~ M . r c W . B & . f f i i m A C ~ N a n . C d L m a . K . m C r r r K k s e n d m Ufw2008. mu dr U26n008: Hu& T F d e y

R o a C ~ . h M r y l C ~ ~ h K . ~ ~ M s e n d m UM008. aswcrdr LR6R00): Idm J FI.ugm m e d m

C h k Mikc C d l W h C o b m J.DI D. Cmk. Vnrm E. Cod:. UW2008. lann dr U2MWP: Clrks I. Fmclulb. Ir -ad m

CMford W Cmwh Mrh+l Corict Stom Qabmnitr F-in U6R008. mudr UZM008: Mrtm I. G o b acd w Ut.2008.

LklMa*. R o h M Deatim. Lnis M Be Ruben Dm. h. kfhr?- rsn-s doc U26.2008: Iosepb A. W o sad om U6nW8. -a d r

D i m v i k J r c L. D.ps).. P&u A. Fddc@m. Sn\e EndcbryLt ~ 6 R ~ . m Hasdl-hpmd m U 6 R W . ornudoc

l o s e p h A ~ . M n r o E s p r l l L ~ D . F a r r l l J r . G . n \ F * l d r U26R009: Sb+ L. Hmlls?.' ss\d m U6R008. rnlu doc MtL?OQk

G.r? D . F d M i E b r l l . F i i ~ S . L b a a . C M n D . ~MlohnrascndmU6R008.madocU26R008:oRmH.

h-rr.brphRLcaol.BhLdb..PdaD.LopaVkJ.Lo~ lobgw a d m U 6 R W . m s dr U2612W. 1- D. K*u sad

DanaALPpsdo .Wi l t im U a e t . W d l h B . M ~ A h M a h e l m W2008. .an\= doc 2 R 6 R W : C d khger r e n d m udR008.

M q ~ r a M. M.djc?.. Nntie ~ r n o b p Rm MeDudd. h - i d G. m r dr U26R008.. W h I. LrLm. Jr md m 262008. m n u

McDmwnh. lolr J. -.Tom McKc\i locl M. Milkr. h L dr U26RW8: K d P. L.V& s e n d m U6R008. amu due

Milbar Mrcn M o b . l orpb D. Maelk. C.tbaiae Nola I)rdrl J. U26/20011: VoEClll L. Leibcll. W m e d a 2RJ2008. -ah

OpolrcU. 'lbur F. OMrr Bob O.b. FdkOrtir Wiul.m L Pmna4. U26/2008: Thoma W. Libom m o d m U 6 R W . m m a doc 2/26,200%

Am? P m k Cr).Ud D. Psopk br R. RRkr N. Nick Pmy. Adre). I. Elaabcm W. Lnk s e n d m U6R008. mu& U26RW8. Crl L

P M k . M I C h i m Pond. N. I& Q m h . Amk Mill. Andrew P. Ma~cl lho m e d a UU2008. msdr U26R008: w e D. Mmln

R u ~ R . m a . B i l l R c r b c h B o b ~ . l a c R i , e n ~ H . md m U6R008. mu dr U26R008: Vc(mm&t M o a t ~ o w r ? . m c d

G.bnld-. s.od?. Gdd. Dnd F. G a b s Gidio. Dcbonb J. GU. m U6RW8. m u dr U26RW: h e P. M o n b r m e d m

~ ~ T m G o r d m R i c b r d N . ~ . A u c L i a ~ A i k a 2/6/2008. rsna dr U26R008: Mrbcl F. No& md a 2/6ROW.

M G m l k . Stcpba Hm-b. ria &a. C d E. M r A.drrn. Hnrri m \ a d r U 2 6 R W : ~ a m * o m d a U M 0 0 8 . ~ ~ &

Do\. -. Erlme Hmpa. Sa h t l r c k gaSpmm. M a U16/2008: k i Oppnkimer gnd m U6R008. m a h e U26ROM.

hcobs. El*a Jam. klirh. S8a V. h B n a P. h--6 Knla S. P l t s sad m U6R0011. mu doc u16i2W. Bill h t m s

M i d 2. Kdlas. T a Kanm &r M bib. h ~ d Kma lvm C. ~ n d m U6R008. ms doc zR6R008: Ma?. Lo. R d a d w

Ld.)-e(k.Ra?-LL.ruNamifie~PdsMRnarAmele U 6 R W . M\n doc U26R008: loasph E. RobrL send m U6R008.

Robium Lhd. B. R a a t b d Jodph S. S.lduo. T- R * m ~ d anu dr UlNZ00R: Idm D. S&imi m e d m U6/2008. mu dr

W f i a Mrbelk Schimd Robm S d i s r . Mai 1.F. U26/2008: Sapbm M S l l d s e n d m U M W . m a doc 2/26/2008:

Schmd.r. Dcdc ScomIna Am* S. Scmano. Skldoa SilraINYS Idm L. SIpsom d a U6/2W. a n v s dr U16R008; Dime 1.

Asscmbbmml. W e Spao. Al Yupc. RDbsl K S\v-. 1- Tediro. Sni.omdaUMW8.mmrrdrU26/LWI:bicT.~

Fred W. l&rle. h. )rl.nbm Tslimc hl*bck R. L m T h . -1 mdm216R008.msnrrdrU26R00):lacM.-xneda

C. Tonla. D a d R T m d . k. Rob Wdts. Hder E Wetadeim UM008. ma doc Z R M W . I- L. Smd a d m U6R008.

W e ? We- M A Wclrm Kcilh L.T. W n g k FUa Y m w m a d o e 2126R0011: M.Lalm A Smith s e n d m U6RW8. an\ndr

U L 6 R O O I . W ~ T . S b s b . r t i a r r d m ~ - d c r m d c z R ~ . D h e W m d m - . r m d r M6QoOk T+ Am Sh*- m e d o U 6 R W . m u br 2 R m : MMOM. (br) IPrad: OUIZROW) A&wSLarntC~-dmU6RO(W.-erdrU26R008: ~ k M h p e x n d m U 6 R ~ . r a u d r M 6 R O ( W ; C c r r OUX42O(W Y SUMMONSRrard ~CCOIEI b - R c C . ~ ~ . k d d E 7- r e n d on UM008. mmu bc U26RWll: Dmid J. V w s e n d m U b R W . ~ e r d r U 2 6 R W . & v s c H W b a . k a e d a A D H O C N e r r Y d S u c C h i w C ~ . . . U 6 R W . nI"rr6r mtJz008; C* M Y- send m rnW. -Elm V. D& R d G. Lacbs. Will- E h k d .

a\adrU2M001:MrcS.Alanss\dmU6RW.-adr W h A * c J O k l o s e p h F O j O l . H W*VIAU~.F&G. m a z ~ . T- M ~ O -d m U ~ W . dr z n 6 n ~ t + R.bcadr Skvm Qmbmnib s e n d m U6/2008. mn\a doc U26R008:

Amedom a d m W O m . -a dr U 2 M W : C- E. Amyo F- DclMoa(c smd a U 6 R W . m m a & U2612008; R o b U md m UMOOI. ~ ~ m - a dr ZRM008: Dsrd I. A.batias s e n d a Datnoss\dmU6RW8.mmudocU26RW.~MDL2a+da

U6R008. m m s d r L R M W . JrPlria L. Ambr)- md m U6R008. U6l2008. -a & U 2 6 R W . bbea I k u k n e d m U6R008.

.an\s dr U26R008: Im BauOa m e d m U6RWI. m m a dr msna doc U26/N)O8: 1- Dim\uzsend om U6R008. mmn due

U26n008. Gae Wl sad a U-8. n m u d o c U26R008: W i l l i r U 2 6 R W : J M L. Dopr? s m d m UM008. .nm-s doc U26RW.

A. Brcb sa-d m U 6 R W . ans dr U 2 6 R W ; Bob Bm s e n d m P& A E d d i lad o. 262008. -ah ~ R ~ R O I R Smr

U6R008.rmu doc U 2 m . Michrl BacddtD md on U6R008. En&h& md m U6n008. mmu dr U2WZW. G s q e S. h a m m n dr U26ROW: M i e M Bcajmmm a d m U 6 R W . -\rr dr m r d o n U 6 R W . ma doc U26R008: CLr*s D h i m e m t d m

U26RWt. loa&m L. Bi s e n d m UM008. mu doc U26RwS: U6R008. r m w dr U 2 6 R W . loasph R h l xncd an U6R008.

W h F. B o y M . k tsved a U6R008. m m a doc U2MW8: A h dr U2M008: Brbra LiRm .end a U6R008. mu doc

a d m U6RWL rnrerdr U26R008: 1- F. Emman ZR6R00t. Pda D. U q e z s e n d a U6R008. ~ps\vts dr LR6R008; V i i

a d m U M W . m m s doc U26R008: Richrd L. B r o d d ~ aved a J. Lopez s e n d m U6n008. m a d r U 2 6 R W . Dau A Lmpado

UW2W. -n dr U 1 6 R W : Akc Bmdr-@ a d m UbR008. md m U6R008. rms dr U26R008: Wiltim M.goe m c d om

-\a due U 2 6 n W . D d I. B d i q md a uM008. an\-- dr U6R008. mu doc U26ROO8: W ~ m B. M g u c f h sen-ed on

ZR6/2008: M.rc W. B.lk a d m U 6 R W . mmudoc 20612W. W W . ma br 2RM008: Alm M i d md m U6R008. nmu Xmin A C W md a U6R008. msdr U26n001: Nlc)- C . l b a doc U26R00O: M m M M.nq m e d m U 6 R W . m-s doe

md m U 6 R W . mnvs doe U2M008: M Camm a d m U26R008: N& s e n d m U6R008. mm\u dr ULtJ2m.

U6IZW. m m u dr U26RO(#. Rm Cmtsmi s e n d m U 6 R W . Roy M c W a d m U 6 R W . m a d o c U26RWI: Dnid G.

mmerdr U 2 6 R W . Am Mryc C n o n a r e n d m U 6 R 0 0 8 . m Me- m e d w U 6 R W . rn\a doc U 2 6 n W : John J. Mc-

dr ?R6/2008: h K Chrtl(msc. a d m U 6 R 0 0 8 . m ~ doc md m U6R008. ma dr t R 6 R W . T o UcKnm md m

U26R008: B h M C l r l m e d m U M W . mmw doe U 2 6 R W . U6R008. mu dr U 2 6 R W . Jod M. Mi lk m d a U6n008. mu W e Cok m e d a ZMROWI. m m n d r U2MOO8: Willi.. CoUm drU26R008MrCptk(OiiDIO~~ndmU6RCQ8.mmudoc

m d a U6R008. r a m dr U 2 6 R W : J n m D Come md m U26/2008; hqb D. Mmlk s e n d a U612W. mn doc 2R612W.

U W W . -a dr 2RM0011: Vnir E. Cod: send m U6RW8. C U k k N o h md on 2 /6RW. madr U26RW8: h i d I .

.an-sdr U 2 M W . M a d W. C d m d a U6RW8.m\a& O r D 4 w e d m U6/2008. rsnu d r U26R008: h a F. O U m

U26R008: Michntl Cmd sad a U M W . mmu doc U26R00S: s e n d m U m W . -w dr U26R008: Bob O.L-r en-ed m UM008.

laepb A. m o md a U 6 R 0 0 8 . m ~ dr U26R008.Ad1-0 m m r d r M M W 8 : kk (k(izad m U6ROO8.imvsdr

E s p M m e d m U 6 R 0 w . m ~ dr U 2 6 R W . Hamm D. F d k U26R008: W h L. md on UM008. m u h e 2 R M W .

rnd on UM2001.msws dr u L 6 R W : Gim F i smd m A q P a h md m U 6 R 0 0 8 . m ~ doc U L M W . C n d D. Pcoplcr

2/6/2008. ma br U26n008; (bv D. F d md m U 6 R 0 0 8 . m md w U6RW8. m u dr U26R00&. h e R P& med m

doc U26R008: &bad J. P& r r r d m U6R008. gnu dDe U 6 R W . rmu & ZR6R008: N. NrL k q md m U6RMM. ma

U 2 6 R W . a c r i r H. G.bn-nrl: md a U6R008. ansd.e brU26RO(M:A~I.PbcfIermedmU6RW8.rrnadoc

U16R008: k& M a d a U6R008. m e r doc U l 6 R W . h i d U26R008: Ma Clntm Ponrll. N s e n d m 262008. srau dr

F ~ I I m e d cr U 6 R W . rmudr U26R008: he *Lie md a U26lXnI8: I. Rdbn g n r d a U6R008. m\a dr 2 R 6 R W . I r k

U6l2W. rmrs dr U2M008: Debonh J. W m-cd ca U6R008. Qmn m a d m 216R008. rmn dr U2MZMII. Ana R.Wln acned m

Page 105: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

WOOS. raa dr 2RRO(w. . 4mhx P. Rain sad m 2/6/2008. mrcr~2RMWI.RaR.sormdmW~.gn .adr ULMCC% Bill RcilicL smd m 2/6/2008. rmahr UL6R008. Bob ~sendm2/6120(g.-doc2R6/2008..loacb-~nmdm 2/6/2008. m u dr UZ6D.008: T i Gordm m d m 2/6/2008. ama b M6/200$ &hd N. Go(mLd m-d ae 2/6/2008, ama dr 2R6ROW: Am-& Grc+ sad m U6R008. m a 6.e 2/26/2008: A i l c c n M ~ s a d m U 6 R ~ . ~ a b M 6 R W 8 . ~ H a w e rnrd on 2Wl008. n m v a hr 2R612008 Cd E H d e sad m 2/6/2008. m u doc U2612008: A d e n Hnai send m 2/6/2008. amma b ZR6/2Omr-. Do\. Hikid sad m 2/6/2008. m\rr b U26R~):EmheHmpsmdm2/6/2008.nmadr 2RhR008.SP H q l m d m 2/6/2001. asnu dr U16/20M-. J r d e I$u-Spmn md m U m m . -a doc 2nm008: Iuumda Jrobs -d m XJ2008. an\n doc 2RM008; EUen Jdfa send on U6DW8. m a drUL6RoQ8.HI-sen~gvedmU6R008.mrasd.cMM0011. Solr, V. John smd m 2/6/2008. as\\uhr 2R6nO08: Brim P Kn.& sad m 2/6RO(W. mer doe U26R008: Tam Kin\= w e d m 2/6/2008. . ~ \ a doc 2R6R00I: Brim M Kolb amrd m 2/6RO(M. mvsr h e UL6ROM. D a d Kmn m d m 2/6/2008. mahe U26/200$ k m C. L.tn.dts m d m U6RW. .asnu& U26t2008: Ra?. I. LaElla m d m U6RW8. m u dr 2R6/2008: N l o mcd m U6R008.mma dr 2R6R008 Ra M b-m rcn-d on m 0 0 8 . asnu da mmm. Amdie Robimm sard cm 2/6/2008. r m u h r 2 R 6 / 2 O W . ~ a B . W s c n d m ~ . a s \ v e r h 2Rfd2008: Iorepb S. Snlrdim m d m U6R008. manw doe U16R008: T- R %-ad m d on 2/6/2008. llLnxa dr 2R6R001. Willi.m Sdmrmgh m d on U6ROO8. m a h e M612MM. Mkb& Schimd m d on U6/2008. ma dr U26R008 U c h S c k m ~ a m d m 2/6/2008, ma da lR6ROOI: Um-k J.F. Schmder .s\d on 2/6/2008. man= dr 2R6/200l. tkde Scondna smd on 2/6/2008. p s n w h e 2RW2008 An* S Scmi.sa ss\d m U6/2008. m e r b ZR6/2008: Shddm %a d m lI6R008. mmadr 2R6R001: Prlite spa0 m d m 2/6/2008, --a dr l126/2008. AI Stirp surd m 21~2008. m~dr mmm. ~obat K mod m U ~ W X . -a dr ZR6RO(M: Jmcs Tedi.;o rnd on U6/2008. -w b 2R612008. F d W. Tkk. Jr-d on 2/6/2008. mma hr U26ROW. M.nbm TibD m d on 2/6/2008. rmub 2R6ROOI: Micbde R. Ths m d m U6R008. ma dr 2/26/2008: Lao Tobkm served II U6/2008. -dr U26/2m. D m 1 C. T o m md m 2/6/2008. -rs dr 22612008: h i d R T o n d . h send m 2/6/2008. - hr UL6ROO8: b b Wa%a m r d on U6R0011. mawadme 2RW2008: H k E. Wemiem m d m 2/6/2008.-u dr ZR6ROOU Hsn-q W c i r a b q m d m 2/6/2008. merhr 2R6/2001: M d Wcpm

R d M ~ h .

fsc $455. racip( nam

OMl~OiM 90 T E X T O R D E R g m t i s g ~ . D d ~ ' L a a ~ m e & d t b c ~ e D s e n r d f k e i l b s m - ~ r ~ m a h o . d A p i i 9 . 2 0 0 8 . ~ I S S O ORDERED. S i b- MagisIme* Rddpb F. T-cm 2Rl/O8. (Trrecs. Rdolpb) (En*rrd: 02RIi2008)

. M a ! LaoIllbJoscpeERobrb.JdmD.W~SnpbeaM. lob. L. Sampsoa. Di- J. Snioo. Eric T. Sctudamsn loac M. . J- L. S m d . W G Ww. M.koh A. Smith W i b m T.

~ p s a C e a r ~ D m i d J . V ~ . W c M V o L s . * R W.h.C.LPicMY~RaJ.~.h.hkcS.Aksi.Tom Mw. e € q ! e C- E. h ' o . Dasl J. Am&. Jeffrim L . A m ~ . I m B r t l k * ~ B d . W h A B l c l ~ . ~ B o b ~ &acdato. lrCrhrl &.j- lavlhr L. Bib W i b m F BoyM. h. mBoyk.AdaBradk?.*resF.BrmrR*hrdL-.A*c Bd-m.WJ.BmtigM.rcW.-.KniaACabillNtoc). C n l b o l t r K a i C m s r R m C d h M r g r c l C m o z m J O M K ~ B . r b a a M . C l r t ~ C d e . w ~ C d l o r J - D D Conk. V n m E Cool: Wad W. Crouch Mi& bsi& Seven Qmbmnibr F m k WM-. RoAm M lksiilo. Luk M M . z b b m k J r . k m e ? DuwnitrJ~L.~prc?.RmcmAEdd&mnSlw~ E&bn&t. Jasc$dI A. Enigo. A&iw EspdL*. Hermo D. F d Jr. GIUQ F i e k Gu). D. F k h Michrl J F i L George S. L k . C b r * r D . L n u c . ~ R L m D L B m b a m L d b a R l s D . L a p c r V h J . ~ ~ A L ~ . W i b m ~ . W i l a B M.sMLLiAlm Maixl t4mgra M. w. N& Mnyasobn R* McDonald. h i d G. MeDonat& lob. J. M*. Tom M e w J d M. Milla. JOM L. MiUmsn Mren M o k . Joscpe D M a c k . Cdhaiac Nolm I)piel I. O'DmalL l h m a F. OMma Bob m. Fek. Oruz Willirm L Pmmat. Amy P m k Cryd D. Pcopks. lose R M a N. Nick Psr?.. Andmy L Phdfa. Cb- PmrrlL IV. J. Ca?. M \ w . Jact Qmmn Ann* RaWin A d m y P. R.ia Pbil b o a , Bill Rcilrh. Bob Reilk. lose Rhm

H. WQA. s&- GJ~. h i d P Gan la G*. ~ c b o n b J. Glid;Di~GordwThGordwRisL.rdN.Gonh*d.AdGrrea. Ailccn M. Cnmkr. S t e p h Hme. J h me. Cad E. Hcraie. A d r m krsi Dm Hitind. Emhe bops. Sam Wt J a d e HyaSpmar . Rbo& Jrobs. U*n J.Esc. l u c e m Lsm v. John. Brim P. b a n & . M*.L 2. K c k . Tom Kim-m Brim M. Kolb. h t d Kmr Ivm C. Ldqelh R q L Laacmm. Nami Rn- Pek. M. RRm ~ R o b k L d a B . ~ J a s c $ d I S Sal&.TcrarsR Sn-vad. Willirrm &ubmu&. Mkb& Scbimd Robm Scbhuka. Um-k J.F. Sdmx&. Dcdc Soondata An* S. Scmiwio. Sheldon Sihu. Milr Spw. AI 9&. Robat K Sn-. Jrmcr Tdisw. Frcd W. W. Jr. Mabsn. Tilm. Mickk R lim. Lao Tobsco. Dawl C. Tmma. Dnid R T o n d . Jr. Rob Walka. Hekac E. Wematein. Hm'q W c i r a b q . M d W- Kcah L.T. W&. E k Y o m g Kmn& iMnm&. hbckl N. -DOE. Rgrshq( k e lo Mi l ~ r n o i L m u ~ o i 2 5 p ~ g c r ~ I o ~ c ~ (Bakhvi. Aaoa)hW&dm UMOO8 (baa). (Fa& OUOSR008)

1 - 1 I c L m s s CORRECnON OF DocKEr m y rc 22 L*tFT R-: AAG A m n Bjdnia mnt- W h i d m 3 pLintiW. l k ClSt's Oms omsld k d o c k d ad d o d d mh? 197 lo

Page 106: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

I I D c F r r m . R.bea Duz Sr. Mma Mdmc DJa h a K hoe. IhghT F+.loL.J W r C l r b l R a c l d b . h . ~ J OddCL ~ ~ h . l a c D b A ( id iO .KmDt f rmo.R . *H . l r lL

I -SM~ ~ H r m h . c - ~ & . c h - ~ k ( f m D K k p L a ~ . C d ~ . A d m , l L . . n W l l L r J Lrln. Jr. U P L.Vdk. V d L Lnbcll IILTbms W m.

I I ~ o . D ~ I J . A . ~ ~ ~ P ~ . ~ L . A ~ ~ & I ~ . ~ B ~ J * ~ ~ B J L Wdhr A B l c k . Bob B m Miebrl Bmdcno. Miebrl Ben)& Jmdbt L. B q . W b F. eo,-Imd. h. Philip byk. Ma Bndk?.. J r w F. Bmmm. R*hrd L. Bmdah.. AL5 Bm&-Krm\.. Dricl J. m ~ n w B ~ ~ . K ~ ~ A c ~ L N - c l l b a . ~ l l l c . ~ ~ ~ R o o C I s a n ~ M a & . n d C ~ ~ ) ~ J o r K C b n a c s s s n R r b . n M Clrl MAC C o t Wdhm Cohm Jmca D C ~ I C V n ~ a E C o b Cldiad W Cmmcb. Mrbd C d Slnw C\mbmnu F-coe DdMoa* R o b M Dcsao h a M Duz Rmba Duz h. Jdfm I k a n t l r J d L Ikom.P-taA Eddanta.YncE.a*bnall

I I M - ~ M '~sto.~cmct&sabr~m ~ c D m J d . a n d ~ McDoaa%JchJ MeEsan.TmM&m.lalM U . h L M d l u M.rcl.. Mdrro. JoxDb D Marl*. Cibcrsc Nola. D..icl J. I

Hnsn Dov H i t d E&ac limp&. SI Mi. Jaek ~aspoCn. Rbond.J.mbs.maJ.8tc.~HJslkl6P.s.mv,*.&ia.P. KnmmghMkab 2. K c l k . Tom K x n r &im M bb. Dnld Koor 1\m C Lafmrlte R m L Lmcma N-8 Fhna Pcra M. Ri\m

b(R9ROOI JQ S t m k ' s FSSPONSE m Opposition re a MOTION lo Dismisa paar~u a Ph'CPRvb 12@)/6). It(c)adWo) ad f imordadnyb ip l k ~ ~ / b a l k y v d s r + l D d s l 8 U . S C ~ 2 2 8 4 ~ 7 k d b y ~ M - ( b a ) ~ o n * R ~ ( b a ) . ~ I I

DM9RdOl

IQZ R D L Y ( o ~ l o M o t ~ m m ~ M O n O N t o ~ ~ m I"'" I I FRCPRu*r II(bJ(6A I l ( c J a d M o ) a d & a a d n ~

I I 1 D h w -1 a F R C P R d a N@)(6). It(c) ad8(a) d J b r a ads ~ z l h c p h a r i l p ' ~ J 5 7 o I b W d @ & n d c r 2 8 USC 62284: MOTION lo D~~II.u mmsmu Lo Fh'CPfilr~ IIfhJfb). 12fd a d 8 - I

B

USC $2284; M&I& lo & I & & ~ F R ~ P his 12 /bJ/6J. I 2 / c ) a d 8 ( o ) a d * a a d s + a ~ p h c ~ - J b r a d n r j d s p a l r d n 2 8 U S C $2: MUnONloDwm~rr-a FRCP Rvlo l2PK6). 12(cJ ad Wo) ad* a udn l k pI-

l h m y e p a m d & 28 USC. 52284; MUnON lo Ihmm p*m) m FRCP b 11@J(6). lI(c) ad Wo) adk rn olds denying lhcpldnlif'repm~&o lk.rj*-lladrr28 USC. 52284: MOTION lo Dew- m FRCPRrls IIW(6). Il(c) a d 8

~ . h . M l ; b m Tirn 'h4rbdcR TmzLmTobroo.DmlC T m m Dmd R T o n d . h Rob W a k e k*sc k W- Hmq W t s d e g M d W e p r n W L T WrgLl RkmYm~Kcnselb ZebmnsL. M r h r l N k. W E ( A h c o b #lMcaorrd.pd Lm.LLDee~alSalecl(Bdm\uAmi(En~acd O(Kr)R000

ORDER mq 97 Lar Reaps T k S a e Wendant'. are ~ t c d

pal ada 28 U S C $2184; MOTION lo I)llua pmwl Lo

5 2 i 8 4 . r ~ O i ' l ~ ~ to Dskwjwswm~ a= R d a 11)(6). 12(c) a d 8 ~4adfimmb.dm)ars*@aW@'rapak~~ka-&pad ndc r l 8USC 581: MOTION lo D D m o r p n a m F R C P R r b I> 0x6). 12(c) ad8(o) ad& .s+ dwiw *-rrga/b 0

lmC- j t&palada28 U.SC $81: MOnON l o b r p o r a m FRCPf i Ia l2@J(6), I l ( c ) d W 4 adJbrmada- tkplabt@

S&O:JC.+L k & . . G c . z e ~ ~ & AM E l ~ ~ I ~ p a e r LeslrRoloI&.&Mss.JrcsS ALaloL.J Bo~uxcNn lD m M . r t l a C m r . l o L . A DcFrrclsa-h.rSr.Mmlm M J n e W r h r K h r l l h g b T F m k bbaJ -Ma J F m d b Jr. M r e J G o b Efmm Golnln k. losepb A Gnffo. K c n ~ H u a ~ H a s d C ~ ~ L H.dk, Cr rsM

C I ~ ~ ~ C & W & C ~ ~ ( ~ ~ J - D C ~ ~ C V ~ ~ F C o b Word W C m L -1 C u r t Slnm C \ m h \ t t r Fracme DdMosr RoAr M Dnwo Lmo M i k n bba Dur Jr Jdm h r r k n L Dmpm Fmm8AEdb@o~SmcEo&h@L )oosphAEmm.AdnroGpulloLhrD FmUJr.(hu, Frldr Gm D FsLMrLclJ FdmamAGorgeS CLa*rD

I Dmu A Liprdo. W h wee. Wlllua R ~ & m d l h A l a Mbua M s l r c l M - NemMnsloh. Ron Me- DmdG kDom4h. bL. J M c E a T m M&m. J d M Mtlla lor L

O'Doudl Tbro F mrr 86b(Nr Feh k Wlllt.l. L Fm.-. Am P e l a C n l d D Psopk Joae R M a N N r l P s n A d m I Phdfa A d . I C l n u r P m ~ d l N J C h M n . J r d Q m u m h M t n Amhen P Rrr Phd b o a B a Rctlrh. Bob Rcdh J o e R n a W H b b n d ~ a m w . h d ~ h a bcCwh &bod$ a & I h a e G a d a T ~ G a d a R r M N GonhdAldu( i rsme. A*caMClla&r SLcpbaHm,*r JlrnHmcrCdE t b s l x Asdm k m h W m H m p c r S m H m t J . r k h a S p m Rhod.Jrobs.WBJ.&cH.LmldiKs S M V J d m B n m P K m r q L MI& Z KcUlrr T m Knnr B n r M b l b Dm~d Koor I,-.oC L d n ~ R m L L m c m a N m m ~ R n v l P r r r M Rnar AaomcRobmom Lm&B RaatLLlmepbS S. ld roTaeuR

Tm,m Dmd R Tmnrad. Jr Rob W d a . H c k E Wcaacr Hmm Wnaoberb Mu& W c p ~ . K d b L T W r y b l WB Ym.g Kem& I h n s L . M r L r l N Gnmx W E ( B J d a m ~ m m t L a c d

Page 107: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

~ r h r d b * r p o c L l ~ p m e l d u i s i m d g r d i m g ~ ~ r r l i a d q a o i s l c a r t b m u l a b w r d N Y S j d * i . l ~ o m r a a M e + ~ ~ l o ~ R . h ( b r ) (E.rscd:onmomm)

07- 1M DECISlON AND ORDER d e r ! h Z & + d dDkhic4 Dockia m ~ C ~ . T a e ~ s ~ I o & M ~ ~ D e c a i m n DPIIFD. ORDERED &a& Wgistme hd#c'a Onb d a d U21/(W ( D w w ) n W H E U ) . S i b ! Scaar*Ln\rrneEK&'m 7 m . ( b r ) ( m d 0 7 m n m )

0711U200( L&cr M060. h H. W i R b Vm Alk fw H W h Vm Alkm ~ ~ d h P e m t i k ~ i m d m h + K . b ( b r ) (M 07/16ROW)

wnmoa ~pl o ~ ~ ~ ~ - & - l l e l r r . ~ i p d e = ~ a o ~ - - ~ . I(lha on 7 R m . ( b r ) IEa*rad: 07R2R001)

o 7 n m m ~pl MANDATE o f u s c ~ d i a u t i r h Y u ~ o ( i c s d ~ a d c r h . s ~ o l b c a m r d g & ~ C ~ ( C ~ s a t b . o n d

vi. mpkmil ) (Lmn)(Emed 07/24/2m8)

07/31ool ORDW grm~& D d a d r l ' a B Mcbm to Miss. ORDWED&a PknWs~lD(L&crRcrpcatfaathrrcj.dgprdinDEN~. ORDERED lhd & A m e d d C o m p b l l;I n DlSMlSSED in ib mdmly. S&~Smn~LnrrmacE.I(rb.m7Dl/W.(br)(Pm& o m l n m )

O u o l ~ Up N D G M E K T i f m u d D O E . O h l o C ~ B o d o f ~ T l c N m Y d S l a B o r d d ~ A c h . B n d h . M a ~ I a P m r o l l . N.AdnroEspull&.Ai*oMGadba.Al~Ala)r(lrxLAkc Bmok-Kmn?.. Amy P& Adma SRaanCollsbi. A.Qcn Hn* Adm\J.Lan.Adm\P.RurAmht-graCmomAMme RobIIIOPAmkR.bbn~S .Sc laso .Aa(o i rrMThmpm APdrr?.lPLcBer.AnliaG.an.BrbrrMmB.lbmM.CMBill P h . & I I R e i b e b B o b B - B o b ~ B o b ~ . & m M . K d b . Brk P. K n . . q h C d Kmg". C d E. Hertl. C d L Mr,dlino. C ~ E . ~ . C . l b r i e M Y ~ C . l h e r l e N d r C ~ g l T ~ . C h - k s D. hir. C l r k J. Forhilb. Jr. Clifford W. Crach. Crak M hkm. C ~ l u l D. mica Dak M. V o b . DPrl J. Balmk Dmkl J. O'Damrll Dnd J, Am-. -1 C. Tonps. h i d Kom. h l d F. Gmn. h i d G. k h n o + h i d J. V*. h i d R T o n a a d . h. DcaG.Sdoa.DcborabJ.GfLkI)rdcScodm-&DesnisHCab?-& D b r ~ D i r r l . S n m o . D c . m a A L . p r d o . D m ~ . E a * r Mmpcr. H"b l h z a k z k. EM Sptm. &ab*b w c . Link. El*. Jdfec. Ukm Y- E c -. Enc T. Wmzi&mm. Felk M z

PrmimRIMrrre.FrrCPdmaPrrdW.'Ridc.h.Ol).D.F~ CcmgcA.rdorr.Ccmgc&xmxheD.hbhzCcmgcEW. GoaeH Wi.rr.k.CcagsSL.ILr.Gir?.FiddrGqBdLlMeem MhkH.nnWbHdenE.Wci.llci-D.Fdk. HogL T. F+. l v r C. Ld- J. G.R. Rdbn. Jack W i J a a T-. J r a D CQ*. I r a F -. J m a L. Smd. J r a S. l U c n J d e & e r ~ . J a ~ L . ~ . k f h n ~ i k J d f m y D . KkiakfhmL.All~.ImBsu&alim~lcs.JcaK~- Jca L. M i l h r Joe G+o. bd M. M i l l s . Jab. A&mf~ Jobn A DeFrmcam. lob. D. %im h b n I. Bomck. lob. J. Flmqlm Jobn J. McFnmy. I d . L. Sapsm. louLa L. Bhg. Ioac Rivera Ioac M Sanao.hRRnltrlorpbAErrip.b+plA.GnBo.JoscpbD. M o r e l k . l o r p b E . ~ k e + L . ~ l o r p b R h t d J m + S . s.ldm. Krin C Q . ~ kub L.T. W@L Kenp Hrum. Kcm& Zebmwdi. Kcmdb P. L.V.L*. hi A C.brll K m h S. Ma. Laia R q m l d s . Linda B. R o x a l d Lz -. Lo. T-. LnL M. Diaz M&lm A. Smim. M.rs S. Alcai Mm W. B&. h s M o h m . ht-gm M Mdq. Mrl; W e p n h4"k IF. Sebmda. m i n Couor. Mulm J. Gddep M.rtm M.Ln'c D i h W Lm R& Mdmo\ Titoar Miub 2. Kdla. Misbnd Bcacdclto. Mi- b.)aL Michrl C d Mrhad F. Nonolio. Misbrl 1. FdzpsncL Michael N. Gmmis. Msbdc R T i m Mddk SEbiPd Mil? Cok. Mikc Spso. N. Nick -. N- C k N a m i Ri,- Neil D. &crk Nnrie M m r m b P Onrn H. Johnson Pahicia A tldtnglor Pds D. Lopn R*r J. Abba. Jr. P u s M. R n a r Phil Raoa Pbrlq, Boylo. Rmdy A L b i & R W a I&. RicAud L. M:. Riehrd N. Gonfned. R o b M. Deslito. Rob Walker. Roan K SRCW?.. R c b h Sebapi.ger. b Cmauai. Row L Lvar Rq, Mctbmald. Ruben D k lr. bbcn Die Sr. R U B Hardl-hpon S n Hql. Sod? Gold Smphb R. Male. Wdoa 5 t h ~ . SMc) L w . S * p b e n Hmrle). S* M. %Id. Ynr E&bn&t. Sloa Ombronia Smr V. kk Swi M i m m . T s s a R S.?xd. h a F. O U m lh rm J. -0. h r K h m t Tbomm P. Monhap h a W. L t h a Tim Gorda Tobr. Am Smirl?. TOP Allam. Tom Khvm Tom Md(oin. Vdaame Mm$oms).. Vaea( L. L e M m. Vdo J. Lopn Vnim E. Coot William Coltm WilkQ w. W a k &.bm& Wiuir. A Bml.?.. WlUu B. M.parrlli W b F. Boylad. Jr. W d h J L* Jr. willi.m L. P- willi.p T. Stshond7 AD HOC New Y d S a c ClhEar fa CoutiWhd ~ ~ R c d r a n a i m g . h V . D c i u r t i a o p b e . E u l ~ E d n d M. Psson h. F a h e G. b b d a -1 -. H. W i h m Vm A l k Job,bspb F-. R d E. M. Rmald G. Labcr. Rm; Rarr DetkpKomoicr. W h A M. W h E. Bomhrd. (bu) IFnlCfr.3 0M)IROW)

lmlm I I

/-

L o e b s d d v . ~ d d n V n . ~ ~ R C A S E I : I : O C c \ ' % l l ~ - R FT... P g c J J d J X

~ R M d c o o . C r l L ~ C c m g c D . ~ V ~

L.SmrdLkmG.SL-dorM.lcohASaitb.WhT.SBcbonalj. T ~ A a S m - * . ~ s t e m r e C ~ A a ( o a M ~~ CrrTm.DnidJ.Vdcsl?.WeM.Vd*r.CcagsHWina.h. C.lhrac M. Y o . g Ra 1. A b k . Jr. MR S. rUcaa Toa Allam. OmFgs Amedole. C m c n E. -0. Dml J. A.b& Jemh L. Ambr).limBoulla.~BdlWkAB.rcl~.Bob&nMrL.d &trddb. Mrsrl B u j d b a t h L B i . Willivn F. B ~ l r b h. P h r l l p B o y k . A d ~ ~ . J r a F . W M L . B r o d d ? . A k c Bmd-Kmn?.. Dmicl J. &rlia. M r c W. IBlkr. t h i n A C d d l N- C ~ ~ C ~ m R r n C ~ A m M ~ s * C m o ~ p b . o K -. B a b a M. CLL-. Mike C d e W i b Colton J . m a D. Cmn. Vnim E. Cod: CliBad W. C d Mrh.d C d . .%men Cjmbonilz F m p s DclMoa*. R o b M D d o . Lmia M Diaz hbm Disr h. Lhm\\ia J& L. D.prr?.. Pahicia A. Eddm#oa. S m e E&hi& Joseph A -0. Adr im E.prlhL Hamm D. F m L h. ~ F * l d r . G m y D . F L e b M i c h + l J . F i t ~ C c a g s S L.trmer. Chr*.D.hiae.b+phRL&ol.BdMnLiaaRaD.~Vk J . L o p n ~ A L . p r d o . W i l l * m & e . W ~ m B . M * l n r r l l i A l a M d k L Mqm M W t y . N& M.)& Roy McDoadd. h i d G. MeDmo+ J& I. McEncny. Tom MdCr\*. Jod M. Miller. & L. Mbr. h4mcm Mob. Joseph D. Mml*. C&erbc N o l ~ M I 1 O'Dmdl lhmp F. (m(n Bob W. F e h Oluz Wiuilm L h a t . Amy PI^ Cxyrtd D. b= R. P a a h N. Nick Pcn?. Mm I. M s . A h CWPa P o n d . N. J. Tpr). FVcllow. Jack Q a k Annie ~ n - P . R . i c M ~ B i U R ~ B o b R c 4 . . I o a c R i , a Dtmh H. Wlat Srd?. GJd. Dnd F. m. k Ggho. D c b d J. Gl~ck.DbrGaQrTi~tGrda.R*L.rdN.GMb*d.A.rcl*~ Ai*o M G+u. Sbzph Hmls\'. lim b w . Cad E. H&. Aodm* Houi Dm Hikid. Er*r Hmps. S m mi. J a e k & u S p c r a . W d a J& EUo Jdfce. E M e m k5ies. Sam V, kbp & i P. Km- Mwb 2. Kellner. Tom Khm Brk M. W b . h i d Kms hr C. Ldaydle R- I. N a m i bar P U u M. k e n A a a c ( * ~ L d a B . b L b a L l o r p b S Sh3ino.T-R Smxrrd. Will- Sd.xmx& Mddk S e h d . Robin khmmmgu. M r t I F . Scbmda. Dadc S c o d n . ~ Ambatty S. Sclauslo. - Sihtr. Mile Spllo. A1 Sllrpc. Rabat K S n v . J w s T c b . Fred W. Tbiek. h. Mnbm T i w Mick* R Titor. Loll T-. D m l C. Torma h i d R T o a d . Jr. Rob Walk. Hdac E. We&m Hrrq Weambag. M l t W- Kmb L.T. WngLL E I h Y a w Kmncd~

Page 108: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 109: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 110: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

VNIWSIA1EIDBmErCIOUItT ROYmPmE- fWDvALENnNBESQ. ~ ~ O T W B W Y O l l ) : - ZSH.a*hckk

AmJb- N Y S r n A R D O F ~ O N S d

-NY 11213 P E E R S KOSINSKl 40U)SblbslSmd

B o N A u ) C L ~ I I I U V . D W t W l L u A M R ~ , W I I I U * I A a A a E , l O H N J ( * I P P H

Albary.NY I U m EWONKKORlUMVANAILIW.FAIOIPHEa

IAMBSRKmAWrY W E N D 4 ROY-PI- DElD3OE-COIHIER. -

OISE00 a)lRIIY AITORNEY RCNUD E SAOXF, RASkNO, EDWARD

197 k i n Shzel M . P E R S O N J ~ C H R I S I D R ~ W W R L S T I ~ I J N K . ~ -N.Y. 133261129

THE AD HOC NEW YOlll STATE CrWNS FOP. ~ ~ L 5 3 I S L A n v E ~ -

_._ l W o N M J . S P ~ i . d v i d . l n y r d m h & a d l b N Y S ~ C o r g l O S E I H L B R V N O . ~ . N Y S S E N A l E 6 1 J o l m d J r I b c N Y S S M q d i & M & d y m d r ~ r a m p ~ d p q IMQDON s a w re ~olm d ~rc ooc ms ASSEMBLY d 0 pR nd pamg OEOROE E. PATNU, i d v k U l y d I. NYS -, RANDY A. DAMEIS, NYS Sorrary d ltl

ad. rqroilDy (a mqomiam d . p o a c r ~ & . u C P L R l0 lZNY

S a t s A l k . m y ( k m l m ~ m N P W Y o R K s r A l - n B O A R D O f ~ d ~ p r ~ ~ . t ~ ~ * i a ~ ~ c a w d o f n s y k k s o p b l y ~ . B m d o ~ l n E d Y O F N e W Y O R Y ( - N Y C ) , M W d ~ m C t M . p r ; UNITED STATES ELECTION ASSISTANCE (XXPoMm mcl. TMJMAS R. WILKEY. EAC I k c m k ~ . ' M E N A 7 M N N ~ T I o N O F SE4XETm Of STATE W A S ' ) d LESllE

E w d w Dbaeror (a the E a d w =dPET€RKOSINSKl,bhibIly.diobL o r r r h l q * c i * I m e ~ d ~ z s v s c Z w u m e u . i M S L l g A m m q ~ A L B O t T O ~

Page 111: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

. 14. W i ~ b p l . p l l ? ) & ~ ~ ~ n L . k c o l t m h c * r d

I b * L m ~ h M a k b r e 0 6 h 0 d . b d & d & a y k ~ b b

~ t k ~ r r * . . l i u r i l b M p m i d m

1% ~ . a i b b t k r - o . a ~ m ~ l l &

~ m ~ m d ~ & q ~ . - r ~ ~ b ~ ~

~ a m l b o r . 1 1 l l i q ~ # m ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ l l d s ~ ~ P J ,

CUaAa.

16. L b y m y ~ 0 6 b w + & n d ~ ~ b l a r

R I S f A m R M A l l V E ~

17. l t e ~ Y L m m a d k ~ g m * Y c b d M m b o ~

a ! c o N D ~ n v a D B C B n s E

1% P m E u E L e L I 6 q b ~ d i . e

TIRIDAwmMA?NEDEPE)13e

19. TLl-lrl-of-WaYmkSIBorl-dW

I ( a i . * i d ~ o f b ~ d N a Y a k & ~ 6 d m a d h ~ m l b .

- d k # i n l k ~ . 1 P & m t l i a b m b Q ~ a ~ r Y d

q p l w . ~ d . r r m i r M l n * y r , 1 Y l r d ~ m I ~ m

& Q e ~ b C P d ~ L i ~ k ~ . i l b d d y ~ h . ~

- r . ~ p a o l a a ~ l b . ~ d ~ . d i r i l y C C

P O V R I A N F w u n V e ~

20. l ' b ~ L l a a 4 h r b * a m p s ~ I b 8 * r d ~

4

~ D o k d m N e r Y a d ~ S ( r B o r l o f 8 * r Q r d k M . l b i

~ r t ~ ~ C a t ~ ~ r d * T ~ ~ t b s ~ d ~ d o b

~ r m ~ C m l d l r ~ j m a d ~

m M m y . N a Y a k w m . a

J-G- mDDRVAlZNmm18Q Br Rdl No. m7SR Spril- A m n e J f a D c R r * l . N m Y a k S r I ) o r d a l ~ r d P a s K o d m t l 4 o s l g b c n s t m d . ~ N Y 1 2 n n Td:(518)t744367IQu:(SlQ~ ---..I

Page 112: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

UMlED STA'IES COURT NORTHERN MSlRlCTOFNEW YORK

RONALD G LOEBER BURR V. DPIlZ W l W E BOMBARD. WILLIAM A GAGE lOHN losepH PO=. R WILLIAM VAN ALLEN. FAlRL@NE G. RABENDA. ROY-PIERRE DETIFGE-CORMLER RONALD E. SACOFF. GABRIEL RASSANO. EDWARD M. PERSON JR. CHRISTOPHER E4RL SIRUNK ad THE AD HOC NEW YORK STATE m S FOR CONSmUTlONAL LEGISLATIVE REDIS7RICIWG.

m=wB.

* T H O M A S I . S P A R G O . & ~ d r k l i a d & NYS Sq.rae C m : JOSEPH L. BRUNO. Ssra. NYS SENATE 61 bba, d I r c Dm NYS Saum 1 odiridu91\. d r m* - prc d pacal: SHELDON SILVER 149 Joh d J d Ir NYS A S S M L Y MEMBERS. hdniddk d r prt d pnsemt GEORGE E. PATAKI. mdh- md r NYS G m w : RANDY A DANIELS. NYS cf mC mi& d r e p a a ~ for d . . m-m: ps rPLR 1012. NY S t . c A I i m r ? . G c a s d E L l M S ~ T H E N E W YORK STATE BOARD OF ELECIIONS. d om Marip.l BoadofELami. domgnie nrr?.C-C&d r \ ~ ~ ~ t i i t b s e o r d d E k & v s . T H E C r r Y O F NEW YORK (WC"). h k k d NYCs mw. UNITED STATES ELECTION ASSISTANCE coRpow\noN r ~ ~ c - ) . THOMAS R m. EAC E-Z w. THE NATIONAL .m,wmno~ OF S~CRETARIFS OF m A m ~NASS-) d LESLIE REYNOLDS Euat"e Docda for & Ewwhv'c . C d m ad PFlW KOmSKI. i d n d d y d u his of ic idsqocl t? .dIhcNASSmdp28USC2403lk Uaacd Stasa A m Gcncnl ALBERT0 GONZALPZ.

DdsdaWI.Spa.wLBm.SLcldo.Siha.GoacEP-Radl.

A D . . i e h d ~ ~ . B f k & ~ . P J D ( S p h u . ~ ~ d & S 1 * t d

N c w Y a t . J d b w M h . o r h A a a r ~ ~ d c o r P d ~ x r t & a o . I D L i r r

loOnn:

I . lbpcdWyddU&smsabsollbirdi&~dtbocqbil

a"krLd*tiadVOI"&d-e, . . . d l k l n d d d o u *

~ a ~ ' 5 & m q t * ~ n ~ m & p n d ~ 1 1 . ? . b e

w. 2 S d r i r & d & s m s a b 0 . L i o d ~ 1 d I 4 d & ~ &

dA.Llilb'& . ' '" d t b k \ . r i t d L u * ~ a ~ ' 5 p l c d a & c x c e Q l

~ m . m o q d o i q a ( k p m d ~ r m . ? . l w d W .

3. ~ h o l r * d p a ~ ~ b f o m a k l i d r l o b . U q . L i a

s o l l b i r d i ~ Z 3 . 4 . 5 . & 7 . L 9 . 1 0 . 1 1 . 1 L 1 3 . 1 ( . 9 2 d 9 3 d ~ ~

4. D e n y * s . B % d o r 0 . L i o d i d I 5 d & o o l p b l . n r c p t *

& I ~ s p l p i ~ ~ e I a j n J ~ d l h e N c n . Y o d i S 1 * t ~ C m * &

w D c p r a a d & b ~ ~ . ~ k k 5 d & ~ L m v n a ~ ) ~ b

a k d y d h c n .

5. D m y * s - d i ~ 1 6 d i k o o l p l . i l . n r c p t d r i )

rbrDcMlhilWaRoTmd&LcSol*~rbrkqmsaUtbs4Y'SIuc

Dir(6a.Mknrd+doQdrarabsd*s-Pmly. d ( M L c b r r o f 6 n

i m . NY.

Page 113: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

34. A l 1 r r h l 6 r r R M ; l h T b r r J . ~ k a + L B m s L d Q .

s i h ~ . ~ e ~ . t i ~ ~ w d ~ ~ r c d ~ ~ ~ ~ ,

M l L i s o d r t r r i ~ w h b c k m l y ~ I n r . T L e ? . n ~ T d . r & d o c h i c d q n I i f d ~ .

35. I ls~irbmcd.irialcuipLdabcE*\.aLA.labQI.

~ ~ ~ J . s P a a k a + L B m 9 d d o . ~ . O c o r p

E R l t i ~ A b k b d P J i a ~ ~ r t i b . l ( L L C m @ & n l i d

~ ~ & ~ d s m t r d a L a ~ r m & C m ~ m a i j a c d

ecpbblc.

M *.Myat Decemba 29.2005

ELlmsPmPR M m c ? . G a s r l d & S a c d N m Y d ~ f u W c a d a b ~ J . S I r l Q k r p l

L. Bmm. Sbcldcr Sihu. &age E RIlti R..d?-ADaiebdEIPlspimr

I k C a p M w. Ncn. y d 1222eo341

By: MfrqMLhnda h s i d w l A t l o r a c ? . G m d . d C a d BrRdlNo 1015.W Te*pba: I518)1R76M Pn:i5l8)473-3572 ( m f u a m i r c d p q m ) E m d -.LhO.i(**u?..~

7

-

70: CLabpLsSN m v m AX- m 1 m n . NY 1 1 ~ 8

RouldaLoda 2130 t*ns Mrol Rod Mrr*LNY 12009

W h E W PO. k 882 G*I, Fdk NY 12101

W h A h 1 0 ~ L a ~ N Y 1 2 8 3 7

bL.Folpr PO. Bm 21 C l h NY 14429

R o y P i a c ~ w i s 2 5 m t i e J m u C i d c W r N Y 11213

cunu(kdrd Of6ce d& Corpol*D. C a r l C i h d k Y a k D c p m a t d h l c Q C h r c L ~ k Y m t . N Y 1 o o o 7

E d n D . C o n e l l U.S. A m ' # office N c d m DDM I r a T. F o b U.S. C o r t b . r . Ram 211 *(.cBwdw~ Alb.m.. NY lU07-L92J

JmaEKo.ltrr?. c w l y Atmmey cisego COOE~? Canly Olfnc hiukj 197Mdo Sbcd Cmpmm1). NY 133261129

Page 114: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

U U d L b a k . 392 SJ(rc A\- NalB.13.lmNY11m

I r c M H o c N Y S C i f a c ~ ~ r ~ 3 2 1 M R o d w . w 124.43

k v. ,w C C ) ~ S a a a Aa9my.w 122m

RWJl irVmAlh 3 5 1 M R o d w. NY 12443

F . i h c G . R b d a 8 C l d i L r - N Y I ~

R o d E S.m(l M * h s a a st.= W.NY la312

W R r r a 135 oordo. Plrc Pmept.NYI1520

J n a E . h P l p 661 C d A\- M q v . w 12206

Todd V& SpeSiJcacl N o r Y d s m e B o d d - U)sk&.Smd Albr\'. 12207

Page 115: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- IN THE UNnBD STATES DBlPXX COURT

N O L ~ ~ O F N E W Y O R K

R O N A I D G . ~ U d . ) )

PhimifR )

v. ! C h i l A s t i m M 1 ~ 1 1 9 3 ~ )

TX3MA.9 J. SPAROO, el d. ) ) - ) 1

MDW)RAWWMOIm-ARIS

TABLEOTCWllEmS

L ........................................................... 1

A PmehdRstm ................................................. 1

a m ~ m p - v o b ~ o f z u n ............................... .... 2

C Rmtbf-ByPhhlit8 ........................................ 5

D. Slldrd.maMabamDhabr ..................................... 6

n h p m a i 7

A T h o A m d d ~ F . i k m s m . c b i m u p l l ~ ~ c m b s Qaad .......................................................... 7

I. H A V A b m ~ ~ d ~ B m d ~ w k t h B*rsiaaQsc ............................................. 7

2 T h o ~ ~ F & t o S t r s a C l i m ~ t h s ~ S o a Cahbbcm ............................................... 10

3. T h o ~ ~ F & t O S o b A n y ~ I [ M o f ~ ~ € 3 e F & d m ...................................... 13

9. F % i d % D o N a i h ~ ~ h i n g A m y C h i m A n m k d i n t h ~ conpl.inr ....................................................... 16

I. P h i n a m h N a i ~ T k S T t q h k ~ b y H A V A .17

2 F i l i e i 6 A I e ~ o d y m ~ ~ ~ D o a N d C a n h a ............................................ 19

m - ........................................................... m

TABUCOYA-

CAIIIB:

,4~pbmov. LMdSas .Zml WL 103437.(SDN.Y.mOl) -- 16

-cfG=-m-lb.&h=mv.&$rr. %F3d791(?thCir.l99S) - 9,12

-6- . f i ~ X o r v . ~ , 1 2 9 F 3 d t 3 3 ( 6 t b C e e 8.9.11.12

-r. R U I ~ h ~ ~ 4 7 5 U S . 534 (1986) &7

B U Q V . C M ~ ~ ~ ~ S W ~ E ~ B ~ ~ a63 F a lo79 (24 (lr. 19aq .. 7

C o l k n v . N n . ~ C a b d ~ M , ) 6 ) F . ~ 2 6 ~ 1 ~ D ~ . Y . 2 0 0 5 ) .-.. 6

Cabyv. Ghm.355U.S.41(1957) 6

~ t k h u d . w - - ~ . ~ . m ~ ~ l ~ 1419

FWPBS & v. Q*dm,493 US. 215 (1990) 7

G k v . ~ , l 9 3 P . ~ 2 d z M ( D D . C . 2 m 2 ) ------ 16

ODasllv.FD~IC.938Pld372(2dCk. 1991) 19.20

~ v . C M a d ~ F a d a d ~ ~ 3% F. -. Zd 371 (SD3.Y. 20M) 16

Lrdiv. b&k, 85F3d51 (Zd(lr. 1996) $7

hvb&%Lara.Eugvb h w a t v . M d d T + u ~ I k . 10 F. Slpp Zd 334 (5DN.Y. 1998) 12

4 m v . Iybds. d m 50( US. 555 (1992) l - - - - . 17.18

dbrirv.Cirarac.OZUS.491(19TI) - - 16

~ v . & Y d h C a . ~ F l d 9 9 5 ( 2 d ~ 1 9 9 1 ) - . 7

R o M r r v . ~ R 5 ? 2 d 1 2 ( 2 d ~ . l ~ ) . - -- 6

I

R o & p ~ v . W ~ 1 1 6 F 3 d 6 2 ( 2 d G . 159l -- 6

Sir+ v. Hcb, 2?S US. 355 (1932) --- 8

R a r p r a r v . c o l . . l d ~ l 5 F 3 d U J ~ G . l 9 9 4 ) - 7

U**adSmsv. v- 145F3674(2dG. 1998) 12

V d ~ F a g e L k f r ( l a c d d g . ~ . ~ L h r L d f i ~ o / ~ a d ~ , I=.4YUS. 464 (1982) 19.20

V ~ ~ C o l l U r t a v . ~ 6 0 P3d1411(91hG.l99Sj.~&&& 516U.S. 1093 (15%) 9. 10, 12

WaIh r. Sddbs 4W. US. 490 (1975) l_----~.-----..-.....-.. 7

W m A - R U m - m

v . i M S m m C o a + . k t S S c a 4 ~ C b s ) - 7.8

h t W - c h m ) 14

F d w W A U , 3 1 US.C D3729 - _ - - - - - - - - . . . 14

H d p M V d 8 A U , h b . LM lU7-252 116- 16M.42US.C. 15301-15545 ) . - p.ashn

N . l i a r l V w ~ ~ d 1 9 9 3 . 4 2 U S . C . 1 m a 6 g . 8

42 U3.C 00 1-2 8

V ~ R & b M o f l W 4 2 U S C 1 9 f k I5

42 U S C 19734%) 16

Fed R civ. P. lZq.)(*A) 1

Fed R (ZI. P. lybX1) "-. 1

Fed R civ. P. 12@n6) ". 1

ZIICP.RFm51 - - IS

I,

Page 116: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

T h s U i a d S a h . ~ ~ ~ ~ m b o W f d ~ A l b c m

~ A ( l o m q M d t b a ~ S l h ~ A r m q ~ & W & i S l t .

~ ~ ~ ~ C ' ) , d ~ R W i l h n , r & c d i w D h o m d t b

P A C ~ ~ . ~ ~ i . ~ d t b M ~ ~ e ~

l b B f c & d d s l h d m * * d ~ h ~ i . I D & . , a h r n ~ m

. p i r C ~ d ~ r i l o Q m ~ h ~ d t b l i d p A m a i m V o t o

Ad.haLNa 1 W B Z 116- 1666.42U.S.C 15301-15545~)(WAVA"). 'Ih

U - ' m ( b . t o b . n i r L b a l l t l ) ~ b P d R C I V . P . l 2 ( b X 6 ) k

phiawhih .asmeaol .n .p i .r tbm~.dmvA-r16dnl id

m b ~ d 2 ) ~ r n M R C h . P . I Z ( b X l ) h i * t d ~ ~ I b o

a b j o a ~ s r o d m ~ I Y L . s b ~ . l m d o a ~ b ~ c k h ~ ( b o

U-d HAVA

L - A -- ~ ~ p m s r , M b V ~ ~ ~ h ~ & ( t b

" A m a d r d ~ m ~ 2 1 . 2 O O S @ a a a ~ d d & m h U S

A W a ~ a ~ I Z 2 0 M SppFdRCi..P.IZ(.)O)(A). I b M

~ I . i a . ~ s ~ ~ ~ t b -.- .. M y d B A V h d l a b a

~ ~ . s i t d ~ I . ~ s o . r s l . h H A V h ~ m t b

. a o p a ~ & l ~ d W b l ~ ~ ~ b t b o ~ ~ h ' ' ' "

h O W ~ . A a a a l M P n l ~ b t b I D . . b p a * t b s t ~ ~ m d ~

echDbw. p m E i w - ~ . b o a t a . d m ~ ~

Page 117: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 118: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 119: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 120: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

a c ~ i o l l t o p d a ~ ~ m d ~ ~ s ~ m ~ m ~ ~ .

r . ~ Q 2 U S 4 9 1 ( 1 9 T 7 ) . M a w w r . h V o c i a ~ M i M I ~ 6 1 ~ ~

~ a h M a a l b ~ ~ s d " " ddnmtbobm#hh

M~~ltbhWltdCab&a Qpp22US.C.19TMb) nrsce,phidehm

c&mgichMmq(loalmWdbNwYak'rIsdb.ic(i4ahr

hbiwd,bwhdd-m-

r ~ a r w m s a i r - ~ @ ( ~ * l h u u b b -crlur

r a d m f a . ~ m b R s ~ ~ ~ o I D l m r r o . ( b p t y ~ b

hmbtbo%rstP.dtbmdh-b- - L M m l w o . n ) 1

P d a t b q p t i a b k m h r . --m---Sdd.llydf*thdb

m t h c ~ d ~ ~ - a d ~ h a p l m i U i u V m h t h o ~ d

w M c b h s ~ b p a a d L s r n d & r m ~ h C d i W m ~ , ~ r i l l

h- . r . ~ 5 4 2 U s . I . l l - I 1 ~ ( ~ d

M ~ a m i t l d ) B y Q O M W U h i L d i . . " & b m & s a i a

-~rh-gksloa...-n~~z(-didnrl-oaltl~d).

~ b o ( b ~ i t k d s ( Y P b W 5 d o m a b R s m b q a M n g ~

c h i ~ m . i n ~ r a a d ~ I b m ~ b y t b ~ ~ '

4 e l p p r s l a ~ r m r a k o ~ m m ~ ~ ~ m w ~ d d a q g . m p k t M . o c 4 r ~ l p l o l b a d m f m h 8 b ~ Il i* iaadmdhgmtbobcodthce S p p ~ v . A & g ~ & I 9 3 P : S . y p 2 d Z S ( o D . C 2 m z ) ( c h u ~ b V ~ ~ M ~ ~ v . ~ Z O O l WI 1 0 3 4 3 7 ( ~ ~ H . ~ . ~cb. 07. ~ o o ~ ) ( ~ ~ ( ~ ~ N v R A d m n i s a d k ~ ~ h -. .. . . v. 3% P. Sllpp. 2d 371 (SDH-Y. MM) ( c h b DNVRAdirmieod).

- 1 6

I. F I S ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ T L * ~ B ~ L . ~ ~ M V A

T o ~ M m ~ a p W - t p M t L n o ~ f l ) ‘ i h u m

W " ( Z ) m - ~ ~ t b ~ d t b a ~ U d ~ * h b ~

-5kdy"dbo-bymW*-hipv.-ibb501US

555,M06l(IJ92)(dtllia,dMpll~Ihr~1Q 'TbmwW

j ~ k . n t b b n h d ~ t b O ~ " Y U 5 6 1 .

% j w y h W o l r " a b r r i a d a l a b l l J p a o a r d ~ r h i c l i ( m ) -

d p ' ' ' d d ... @ ) ~ a ~ m c a j e a d a ~ " ~ ( i i

-dcic.ciorcdlbd) ~ i 3 . * ' h t & u t b p h i a i f r i a a ~ d

idir idplw."YaMOrl. h c r o l w b m ' l ~ q m m k a b ~ - t b

~ C o m b p " & a l y d ~ e e d b h l M L y - t o a n M ~ d d b m h m

r i n l n o h ~ d ~ r ~ d a N I d 6 ~ d h r d a d ~ -

BePg v. J y u v - ! 475 u s . S34,54I-42 (1986). rr S.lrsa Comt br - ~ ~ o f ~ ~ ~ b y h ~ . . . ~ m ~ & t t b o ~ ~ ~ m ~ o o m ~ m b s K d W d . m c i n t h c " . i f k d ~ o f m ~ ~ , ~ in.cansaf.m.ImaancoadDEiwto.~qpnochtim d t h c r ~ o f ~ m i ' m

I b C i e d c i m i c a - htbbQ*~ IbAmaddC&hi4

f a l S n n l ~ m p l a d n i j l J ~ & t ~ ~

~hamhad-~*h.ordnd. .~ i+ , ,~~a-

N m Y d b ~ b ~ R A V A r b d h a m ~ M w d ~ L

-42US.CD I S ' M I ( a ) ~ s o t q l ~ d i n r n c k u i m f ? r P P o h D l l

-17-

Page 121: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

N

BARBARA D. COnREU ~ U . i b d S a a s A m m y Jmas T. F0hy US. c%m&wC U S ~ . R o o a 218 Altny. NY Irn-m (S18)43l4247 (tom) (518) 431429 (hcaimilo) h R d l No. 101411

JOHN K TANNER aIief,vdimgssto.

Page 122: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

TABLE OF AullWRlTIES

Ch1AdimOlCI. 1 1 9 3 0

UNneDSTATeS ~ C T C O U R T NORTHERN D W l W I OF NEW YORK

I n l b r 4 2 I l E C l R 3 r l l n l . d ~ c ' ' ' " )Ybd. l l o . . l d O . L . d n . W n V . ~ ~ E.BoPhaWilli.pAOqc.b~F~HWhVrAQFi.leocO.~Rm-P*nc D*iclfiCarnirr..RmldE.~KO.birl-.-MRmk.~Edsbmk.nlTbc . A D H O C N m Y o c k S m k C i t n r r f m ~ ~ L c e i . b ( i \ ~ ~ -,-

* T H O M M I . S P A R O . b d n ~ d r ~ d l b r N Y S ~ C d d . l k h r d L . S I 5mpmeCrmdd.

-1-

CITY MFENMNW WMORNWM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS THE-IWT

MCHlELAURCXM G u p m m W ~ d a s ~ d k Y d

w D . I ~ * * S l S . w

zz%?"-- 1 U q g s N . Y . I t a t? rdepba: 18(5)34nmY F.r (er4 3.40-nsr E d : ~ ~ -

C U W G a l

446 U.S. 635.

TABLEOFmNTEMlS

m 2

4

5

A R W 6

TW RAMBLING AM) URCELY IN-COMPLAWTDOEINOT ALLEGE ANY FACTS .UJFTORlUG A CUlM OF UNCONSlTlUlIONN CONDUCTBY THE CITY OF NEW YORK OR IIS MAYOR: CONSEQUENTLY. THE COMPLAINT MUST BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CAUSE OF ACil

.......................................................................................... 6

w- ,-. .Ldadis 532 F.2d 308 12d Cir. 1976) 7

SMYm

42 U.S.C. 1

HdpAwrL.V*MdZOOr U U.S.C. 00 15301-15545 I W V A ? ................................ 56.8

Page 123: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

~ S I A T E a m S I R x r ~ H O R T H E R N D I ~ 7 0 P ~ Y O r U C

htbl42UTlW1-d-b ' ' ' CITY DEFEWMUTS' b o t . R c d d c i . I z e k . b V . ~ W ~ E . MEMORAMWM Of B r m b n l . W h A ~ . h b ~ ~ . H LAW IN SUPPORT OC WUhm 'fa AUea. F.idar 0. -. Rqv-Rsrr MOTION TO DISMISS ~ . M E . S r o B . ~ - THE COMPLAINT m \ d M P e m p k . C ' W + E r l ~ d T L A D Hm ?k~ YWk %k C b f01 C-ldOd Rd&mclinp

04 Civ. 1193 (LEK)

pclilimn,pyrilb:

sire

s E N A T o R s d h d i \ ~ . d r 2 * C S c o H m p d a d m. =DON SILVER. I49 JCHNPI JANE DOE NYF A.S.SEhmLY ML:MBkRS .U & \ a h d u @ d prraed (rFOR6P F PATAW rdamhlh d .I NY9 (m\- RANDY A DANIFLS NYg S m dSok %\dhmdknh n a < ' R L d r ( L m a M la-mad

YORK STATE e A R D OF aECTIM. d C \ T , h h m c d Boud dl-. .bq \\ilb ma\ Capmtp. C n m r l o f o m h p l m t%dha E k - 4 of Ekcbm ~ H ~ C ~ ~ Y ~ I F N E W Y O R K I - N Y C ~ I McbelH* NYC s h n l M l T F D V T A l E I a F C l l l I N AWISTAKZ CORPORATION I'EAC-I M(MA.9 R W KFY FAC F r d n r rh- TIIE NATIONAL

M E RAMBUNG AM) LARGELY 1IKX)CIEENT COMPLAINT DOES NOT ALLEGE ANY FACTS SUPPORTING A CLAIM OF VNCOIISTITUTIONAL CONDUCT BY THE C l N OF NEW YORK OR ITS MAYOR; CWEWENTLY. THE COMPLAINT MVST BE DISMISSED FOR EAILURE TO STATE A CAUSE Of ACTlON.

v a hi ( ~ V A - ) . Phililb .bo t& in & d HAVA had. rd

c+ V. 355 U.S. 4 1 . 4 5 4 . n s.ct 99 ( 1 % ~ Em! .534

U.S. 506.514. 122 S.a.992 (20021 Tbe ir h ml nLdLs a w k Itd?. to po\d

~ . b r n L l b k c b i r , i a o d l b d t o & n i b o . m r p p a & c h a - ~

W.llidord 69 EM 669.673 (2d Cu. 1995) lmwciuv. 532

€.Zd30s,311(2dCk. 1 9 7 6 ) ( p g e ) . W h h & - l L d r d i i a l i k n l o r . W

rcrtio.ldc.mchbsdlnrdl.o(r160.- L a o d r v . ~ 8 5 P . 3 d 5 1 . 5 3 ( M C i

1996).

~ a p h i & f ~ p a ~ m r c d c o l * D e & o l p h i l L i ~

r d ~ ~ t o n b s l b ~ ~ ~ W ~ N ] ~ l ~ . - Qp(ov.W&44EM

169.173 (2d Ci. 1995bI9991199 14 P.M 787.790126 B 1994)). k I L e

~ W U . S . 5 1 9 . 5 2 0 . 9 2 S . C I . ~ . 5 % ( 1 9 7 2 ) ( ~ U p r ~ i o

a a l d b " k i d l o * r ~ ~ d u M ~ d n R d b y h ' *

4zYsalm ~ 1 9 u p r n i d c l a m i l e b i i a ~ & ~ ~ n h . a c 4 @

d ~ d d a I . ~ . . ~ u I O ( * I d a # i g k p h ~ a ~ sndk&

C- dbn- d& Lc U.i*. SILI. 42 U.S.C. 8 1983:

398 U.S. 144. 150.90 SO. 1598 l197Ok &) ' ' 13 P.M 515.519 IZd Cb 1993).

B s r m ~ 1 9 8 3 ' h . o ( i ( + l l a ~ d ~ ' ~ ~ b . ( m e s d y ~ ~ ' a

~ f o r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I I 1 ' I t ~ ~ I * p ~ r ? . r L d i h

lo a @ oortih(p..l ril~l .~*ldl?. -.- -. 510 U.S.

266.271. I14 S.a. 8Q7 (1994) I* &terr. 443 U.S 137. 144.1.3.99 S.0.

2689 (1979)).

Page 124: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Se T o p e ~ i l m a p l 9 8 3 c h k a ~ ~ ~ t h , a p m m ~ o d s

& d i a h d c p i \ d L i a b d a I d s l l + k 4 2 U . S . f 1983:Golrrv.To*Q

446 US. 635.640. 100 100.0. 1920 (19801. T j c m d ddcblmb i &wed

. . ~ & & l ( o l i a ~ b r n r r d d ~ I * . ~ 1 9 8 3 . - TPIPLJ;

58 F.3d 865.873 ((24 Cir. 1995)bihlhm orirrd).

eQw2

h(hhcr.pl.aliibh'ewtdmkdacoLacster+dmimdsocribil

m y i o c g l o r ~ ~ d L c C * ~ . Tbtoo.gl**pmrik~

b ~ I b c r m r r i n ~ & C - L r ~ W I b ( L . I l * r ~ b

H A V A . d & l a i m a L * L & E A C b r ~ & - i I m m u . i l i t

~ f m a & l r p l c d & r t M e I i e & C i ( ? . d ~ Y a t h w m r d c h &

~ d A A V A b r k a & r m i m d i & L c m m O ~ i ~ .

S ~ . b c r m L n L i e h t h c ~ b * d N c a . ~ D l t q p o l t i c v k ~ i a ~

. .. . .. rocais~-d& ' . p b m & d n a w t h p k & m s 5 k i i c a t h c i

E r b d & l 4 " u c r d ~ - ~ m 1 t r r . U c g l i o s d n ~

I p i r ( - b o ( b S b * d P c d a l c L h m d I b r ! a b b e d . . . - [ . * 1 .

h l b m ~ & C ~ d N c a . Y o d i a i m ~ w . S p g u d d m q I i ( m .

M a d . u d c r ~ ~ . & C ' i ~ ~ ~ r a ~ d &

d i . )hLhdmJopMdCdadcn leda iod id i \ id . .b . S g u

M c o r p l . i . l U 7 4 . 7 6 . C ~ . h * c ~ d a ~ ~ d a m g w i & k

s r d c n l ~ ~ a ~ ~ . & ~ d o a w t d C a e h i ! & 4 2 u . c . p 1 m .

~ & o o r p h i l m d b d k b c d f a h i l r r b r t r a c r r d &

&tkC*dd&.

a

E 4 GvJEW?!

F o r & ~ r r r o r & C c . ? . ~ m C i m m d h p i s t b t ~ ~ l ~ p b p l

Ibaldbegr*d.

D.od: m N c n Y c r L Febnr?. 1 7 . 2 W

MICHAEL A CARD020 Cc ipada Col+ldlkCil?.dUnrYDlt A m n n q f a C ~ D C 6 C t d l t . C ~ - d U n r Y D l t a d h4iebrlBlmdrq

N ac -Ghk(8.rNumba: 513630) n p i a t C a p o r a i a C d P.O. Bm 1277 Kk@mt. N.Y. 12402 Tekpbooc: (8451 343-7559 Fax: @4>1w7564 E-mrl: w i n o ~ s n . ~ ~ . c o ~

9

Page 125: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

UNtlUJ STATLS

NomnntND5lmcroImyo1K crr: @4-~~-1193

LWL.d ILEIVRFn

pl.irim) T.

srAIlGO&.L DeLdm

E W I L L U M V A N A U M ~ A V T T P R O S C t W ~ O I ~ ' N U l K ! E O F ~ M U l W N P o R ~ W ~ T O ~ N O F W D N Y W ~ C A S I ! P o R J O N E e u L V . ~ ~ h R I E R O 1 I S E M OtrOSmON TO W MOTION TO LHSMS 7E AMENDQ BY .

W US. DEI- W ruSnOf n d DEPENDANIS MAYOR MlQlAEL sU)(MIIIERG AND 7E CrrY OF NEW YORK

ABSENr ESSUmAL MUNlCrrAL PARTIES

STARWNEWYORK) I =

COUMYW- )

L E w r P r V r ~ b e q b l y n r a n l c p a a d ~ t d a p e d y b r ~ :

1. l a a P I . i l i E p o m w i r b * b e q ~ ~ i I k h r ~ c ~ r d

&imflb.8idnilh~dRAIHTWS'NCllIC@OQCROSSMOTlONPOR

C H A N Q E O F V E N U E r O l l l R l S D I C l l O N ~ ~ 0 6 C V ~ C A S E ~

Y . p u & b l o d R . k 7 . 1 . M . R C k . P . 19(a).irrqorclotk

~ b ( ~ . m ~ ~ n b r b ? . r c p . n e & o f & ~ . ~ . a p r ( a r d ~ ~ m 1 0 . ~ 0 6

h n r D o c k d M ( a m p y d t b m t k ~ l d r d ~ d M . * t h

cir?.dNnrYdMfWnr?.L7.2~hnrDockdlb5(a~oftlc~k~

m r l ; r d ~ & ? i M O T l O N a ~ ~ M o 1 i m ~ r ( ~ U 1 R w 6 0 9 : 3 0 A M

P ~ b e s D l c ~ ~ E . K . b n ~ R r r p o r c b M o h D . k b \ . 3 ~ I R 0 0 6 ~ ( 0

~ l o M o h D . b c b \ . 3 R 7 R 0 0 6 . ~ b o t l m t ~ n a i t h a t ~ i l ~ t o ~ ~ 1 ~

V r A h A K d m i l i ~ d V c l c ~ R p 1

Lcrra*Pbilfi-&P~28nahdmd*cof~17.m.odm

wakwenah

2. I b . I m w i a p r ( ? . i t l c ~ c r W D N Y W ~ ~

~ h ' ~ ~ & r I ~ ~ ~ i r l p r ( ? . ~ a i r k d t o

-ad+.

/ 3. Ib.,m.,.,,d,,,,,,,

-LIbl.h.-arM-cr--d

4. l M h m p a ~ W l e p b F ~ I r d ~ F . d S W i c r

W U W O 6 - C V - ~ r t b a u b & m a d o f

I L . A D l m c N a T d S r ~ * ~ - . - - . l q i . Y h . ~ ~ ~

~ c r ~ - d L a n ~ r r a d p m a ~ i . . . ~ d ~ w i D l n d a a n ~ b r ~ d r a e b W D N Y .

5. -a&-dlsi.rpp.labdn*Ihr~m&.airm.lpr

P h i m l 8 h n l p ~ r r h a d ~ r l D t m C ~ Y d ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ d q i l o r m a t m m ~ t i c a b ~ d ~ a e r d a a c L ~ r d

r i ~ ~ d g k r i c r o o r c l ~ .

6. l M l r l b P W n l o p m ~ & r p p . l a . m d n i l b r o . & O r d e r b

S b n . C I b ~ m d ~ I * r a b l . M O 5 . d i r L i c L k C o r t L r ~ l d r d &

b r 4 6 r a B U S C W p m d o E k ~ . a ~ d k s + d ~ ~ ~

EXaWU

7. l U i I k m m e r d d m i d o f - b & ~ u r r h a r r d i &

1 c d c d w r p l ~ r a a l a p . 6 r - d d d l ~ n a

c h r i h ; . 1 P . a k p r & M d k M d k b & . a i C i a i t c r W 3 6 o p

mk&ht~dlchOqe&&ldeidof&e-b\.kdatd&em

V r A l k m A f h i n i l i ~ d V a c ~ p a e 2

_C_

Page 126: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

d h & L n m o c E . R . l r i t L u l * . d & ~ ~ ~ s d . " ~ f o r

Wdked- r a r ~ w ~ k ~ . d r d L r b r a o ~ . r d h

b o a k ~ ~ ~ ~ . l r d & ~ ~ ( o ~ & 0 6 ~ ~ ~ b r

~ l C ~ b r ~ 2 1 U S C ~ ~ d ~ t i c ~ d t b c - t L ~ l .

2 0 0 6 H A V A a L i c - M & d k - ? r c b b - d l o - .

1. T L . ~ m h b r R E a b c r I . 2 a ) S d m h u t L ~ 1 1 . Z W 5

h ~ h ( a L d ~ d & r a r r ? . n m r b . & o i s p . l i m n l D r r d d

p n i c r i ~ l h a d a h ( o . I ~ L . d & r c J ' ~ ~ a ~ o f & F a

~ h ~ ~ , ~ i ~ b d b & b ~ c ~ .

9. ~lddpbr&6~1&capmhamdd~~odl'd

C o k ) L C o l ( ? . ~ a y r n i c e o & r t L I L , r q . i a l b y t b N Y S C P U l J o ~

t h u a ~ b e i m a d b ~ & ~ . i t b r r d l m i e c .

10. ~ a o r D c c a b Z 3 . 2 W 5 J r a ~ C ~ k m C ~ l h w O h g o

C r d y d l k B o r d d ~ ~ ~ ~ a h g p r m d d c o d b r a n i c c d a

- d e o a p u ~ b I b c c * d r i l o d o d r d r k J 5 7 D c c a k M . 2 0 0 5 . a w

d t b c N o l i x d R u d h i l L r d x d ~

11. T L . ~ ( o t b h i l r c b I I . r t b H A V A ~ 1 . 2 0 0 6 d a d l i c o

~ & \ h d e i i c r ~ n b 4 i \ i o a d ~ d d ~ I & d d

b b . r d ~ ~ d ~ ~ ~ i C I h ~ h ~ b & U S . ~ d k * i c .

o m ~ 1 0 . 2 0 M 1 ~ o f t b c D O J L 1 * r L e m \ . ~ ~ ~ ~ .

12. T h l l k . c ~ h a a . i b c l r l o & ~ ~ ~ d & ~

Y d ~ B o r d d ~ b r q ~ m d i & c o . C d d & i p a d t i c a a t L

V 1 N k m . 4 f G h i l i m d V c r r C h g h g e 3

ApilZ22W2 .. " Ihrnadcd&dlamdiAlbryic ldi ie \uy

nrr i 6ra Oaobcr 2001.

U r r * t h e ~ . ~ E k d d E J C d i D I & t b ~ o f @ i C I s k m 1 ~

~ h ~ h % r o d a ~ ~ d ~ b r H A V A ~ ~ B ~

,,-b-* . l o l s e a a b m \ m = n m . o t & ~ b ? . t ~ ~ c h ~ o r d

p o p w r d ~ d c ~ ~ 1 0 . o r J ~ 3 1 . b o ( h L m v a r d x d ~

14 ~ i k . t b D L F L n a r o f ~ d S h t L s n \ i * ~ . a

~ 6 . 2 o o s ~ l o & ~ f n d ~ t l ~ t o ~ & l - l . 2 0 0 6

H A V A ~ d m i d o f & ~ i \ ~ d . o - i N D N Y d ~ ~ . I &

S e c c a d C ~ h & ~ P . b . W d d ~ ~ ~ d t b D 0 1 ~ b

~ . d h i b a d & I W S 8 0 e k . ~ t L ~ p o r d ( o t b ~ d

p o o p l c ' a ~ ~ d H o r e n l c ~ i r ? . o l & r c t 4 p r ~ r b n l r

w. D t ~ d M r . ~ d O a a ~ t b c ~ d b r t L

& ~ b b e p m . i * d a h p m r a i o r d r r l o ~ l * M ( ~ m - ~ d t b c

poptrul*.tcbci&&NmYdSlrCcnthcp.Ar&k iilheoqlira

n . & d W ~ d H D a l c r ( r m ? . d s M ~ i a m b e 6 o l s t b M n b I . 2 0 0 6

sorplirctdadlialhahrr6kd & r m p l r i - , i W a k m

~ ~ Y a k u c 0 6 n - 4 W O d m i r + d l k ~ c d ~ ~ ~

d c b c d . a h G b n m y 2 1 . 2 0 0 6 ~ . a c o p y d t b ~ m m k d a ~ r

p a o C a ~ . m d ~ W . C . ~ b i ~

IS . TL.mWnq9.2006.SmtCI ' . D a g l n K d k r h L M \ h

a h a d m & ~ d H A V A ~ i l r p a m & i * r - " dk

~ a ~ d & + M o . d r r x + + l a r t L % b r e A V A C r l l i r

V m N h A B d n + i ~ d V a c C L a . ~ l . .

~ r 8 ~ I c c ( i s o & d ~ ~ ~ b r i B r o o l p l h a a c o p y L s n r i n

w 5 l i m u 16. h t b s ~ - b r i b ~ b ~ i c r h m ~

r a p l i a I b c ~ ( o p n i c g . * i & M d . c - L o s r r & ~ r r r i d a

n ~ a * r d ~ ~ d i r a k ~ h t b h y d s E L ~ I 3 1 ~ h ~ q a

r a l ~ b e & ~ ~ h ~ m a I . . i s i i ~ a L i . l b r i q m k : - IW Y

1 ' - - - - I)(.ly8m-h rth rr-). p . C C I A 1

M j H s a m c N # . b o b c - k ~ n o m c r t l ( O . l d c ~ ( . N d l M b c d m s h r s l t m o r r r m M n h o v ) . m - h a c l h * r r m h b m c ~ d m c ~ ~ - ~ - h uammupkOumc--adl--oblMrcd.msmIwd BFdlonrhrma(JsCghonmpmcrm(*-mnpt(bYYdmc-.

m ~ b " m ~ ~ b e h ~ C h s ~ ~ ~ ~ m . smunpadaD@sdlrmwrbbbamhr-.*am.nm-~ ~ - b ~ O h h + b ~ t h e p r * l p d 2 0 0 7 .

' ~ ~ ~ ~ a m a r b a r m ~ b ~ ' ' - - ' - - - m m u * h w e * m r t s m l a . l b r d n d ~ m m a ~ m m c p m * W b l o l n b a r ~ h r ~ m - r s * .

- m m a l u h . l - ~ ~ m h a - - ~ ~ k - n d ~ a ~ ¶ ~ - ~ m . t m s a . m ~ . b k . h r , h c . b o ~ t h e n * r m m p a d m c ~ ~ r r a m b k u m s I b n m c a a m r a m q r h d m ~ ~ m E * m m O . r . ~ , ~ b . l a D h . l l a a e t ~ m w r a m m ~ t h e ~ m w b m m t s - n d a ~ w d t k W A b l o L . ( L I

17. ~ t L s C ~ o C N n r Y d b h d a ~ c L f 2 7 a i n p m d ~ m ~ 6 0 .

mrbic-umcdd . ' s k e m b * l t L 1 9 9 1 m & ~ ~ r s p O n

d l k d h l m + I k r 8 M ( Y ~ a 1 w d & A r t i c k i L s n \ r i r l s d ~

V m k M G h v i l i S . W o r t d V a ~ ~ 5

18. W & c ~ d N n r Y o a n ~ f i a + ~ r d r p a C a X o f t b c U S D O ~

% ~ . i s l h s t D . P a ~ - d h r t L ~ p a W t h c \ o M @ k o f

m l i l b b h d . ~ l i l i t a k g ~ m ~ & l o ~ l k ~ ~ t h r

h d b e a ~ b c b n 1 9 9 1 d ~ c & ~ d ~ ~ ~ ~ o b c ~

/ ~ ~ l r ~ ~ 3 t b c ~ ~ N 3 V o m ~ M n ~

i * r l o c r r r r & b i f o r n ~ i ~ Z O C n ~ t b c W ~ l o V ~ M .

19. W Q k + c d l o & ~ r d r o a l L d bdf- rsrmdrsg&2WO

l l imdCLQD.dOi~diPbri*i~ae6sd..lSp.ao~r~.ukmlprticip.l

d m i o d c O ~ t b t c o d t p r f o r H A V A ~ ~ i & C o a p l . L 1 .

20. Wbrdqa-dbc l idbc6ac2000dbbn .4 IbcHAVA

- h ~ r r i l h ~ i * . l l o q l a c a H A v A t b B r r u C e m a

tbc W* F& Rh: ACORN. d adhid.4 \tsl in & F d a d w e

~ m ~ l k ~ Y a t ~ B o r d ~ f ~ l o F s p i & ~ ~ o m & c ~ %

\ ~ ~ h d n t r c ~ . 1 l d

n. Rcbrrail.Wikl?.2003.d.iKd1Yrqr60.WONmYdm

h r b m l b c i \ a c r i I b c 2 W O ~ c k d i m ~ r s i d a W d c n ~ ~ I L r c r a

r c b a r e ~ ( o ~ ~ . ~ h ~ o r d o f ~ k b o ~ h d ~ ~ t o ~ & b t r h b l h * .

mdib&~hOckbsZ003.&BorddELccprd&In.Id.~b

r e p a i l k \ ~ u e i i a i t i p o f a t L M . l d M ( Y ~ ~ & l d i @ i m p m a o d

e\idancoILcRe~Rchr:LmmiI~Cir).BorddE~h+F.ilrdO

Repi VOhg M d k & W h I - - - - r - m - - - U m w of

c h R c r R c b a l c m a l r k e d w

V m N k m A U i d m 1 i ~ d V a c C h g h g e 6

Page 127: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 128: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

EXHIBIT B

--142(1)6

-l.bmira4

GLENNT.SUDDABY WANLKlM unaad- Atbmcy ~ A ~ O c m d

ci"ilRiguaDi.iria

. XIANLTANNEa a l i c r , V ~ ~

hl N

BARBARA D. COI?RELL T . ~ H p u U ! N J I t A d m m U n i t r d S o a A ~ . ? ' :',@.a JonmT. P0kyU.S. - R O B m w P P L X ~ 445 Bmdny.Rmm218 MwFa@=b.~ w. W lua7-29u Amrmcy4V*- (518) 431-UZ47 (Elcplmm) Civil Riw Dividcm (518)4314429 (haimilc) U.S. Dcpmmrn oflplt*o BoRoll No. 10141 1 R a m 72H-NWB

9 S O ~ A ~ N W W- DC 20530 (800) 253-3931 (tb-) (2172) 307-3%l (haimilc)

E D N Y O e n . 1 1 9 3 P h i l i N o h c o f C m n % b . C h g c o f V ~ ~ ~ b W D N Y ii

A - 70

Page 129: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

EXHIBIT C

U N I T E D S T A ~ ~ C O U R T NWJHERND1.SIRKT OF NEW YORK

hmC42vsC1983-d-E' ' ' "

kuad: R o a l d O . L & . B m V . O s h W k E . h & a W ~ A ~ . b ~ F ~ k l W ~ NEWY0XKCZl-i V a n ~ F A G . ~ R m . S i c m W . ' . DEFENDAHlS' k l d E. M. cnbiel m. E d n d M P a m k . NOnCE OF MOI1OFI ~ ~ s W t d ~ A D m X : m x : ~ Y o d - S ( r k C- f n C d m d l.s&kbh* R d m h d q Ci\il Afto. No.l:M Cir-.

RlmamlPhid6fx 1193 U K / R R l

e- T H O M A S J . W A R M ) . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N Y S SmpmeCmtddl-dIbcSbkS-Can h3%FHL.BRUN0.61KHNdI~LXENYS .SENATOR. d idhw and .I U t e k t - @ d paca..wFLDON SILVER 149JOHNand JANEDOENYS A$.YEMBLY MEMBER3 d b3nid.W d M p r c d prra. GEORGE E. PATAKl iodi\iAd& a d n N Y J (Emaw. RANDY A. DANIELS. NYS Sarr(n* d Sbk aim . u t b a r i n . p C R L m p ~ f w m p m a ~ d l l m ~ ~ a p m l P l r s a v b o m m r r : p C P L R 1 0 1 2 N r r Y d %an A n o w (Icacnl ELICIT TkE NEW YORK STATE BOARDOF amms. nod C\W w p l ~ r r d d Eleniolla .Iw aesiim ever?. Corponh C o m d &ever?. M m i c p l i ~ ~ ~ i t b ~ ~ d ~ T W C ~ O P N E W YORK l"NYC',. M * b r l ~ N Y C ' ~ ~ o r . UNITED STATES ELECTION ~~ISIANCT c m n m I-EACL THOMA.. R WILKEY EAC E d * Dm*or. THE NATIONAL AESOCIATEN OF SECREIARIES OF STATE I-NASS-1 b?. LESLIE REYKKLW E x d * Dismr for lk Exemme CcmrmtMc d PETER KcMN5W id"- and his of iul mpciry 01 mCNAs%. d p. ZU USC 2403 T k Unaed %lsA(tan?. Gcmd ALBERT0 GCWALU (-u.suoi-I.

R e s p d Z u s /m- <

~ T A K E m n r r r a L . p m ~ N c r r Y o r t C i * d I b t i d d

B k a ~ ~ t ~ - ) ~ d h a - i n I . p p m d l b c h n o Q . m d L m i a d ~

P e t m a y 1 7 . Z W 6 . d . U o ( b ~ d p o a + d i g r b c i t b C ~ d c M . . h n i l l

ao\r&Cm~Apil7.NWM.m&UliMst.laCorgoue.fwILNDltbenDiarict

ComlofNm.Yodcha*dmtLcJurT.Fdn.C~U5Bmdn~.~.Nm.

Y o d c l l 9 M A M w r n ~ ~ m d ~ b c h s r d f a 1 & ~ ~ R . *

1 2 ( b M 6 ) d c b c F e d s d R d a d C i \ i l ~ ~ k m s p l h ( ~ t L c & t L 1 i l

~ m a r a . c h i ~ n . h * h d i c f m u f b e B r * d a d ~ a Q o ( b d i c f s m I b h

~ S C a U p 0 p . .

FLl?.ASIITAI(EEVRlUERnOnQL&1~pqcnifr?:madbc

+nrdmcbcadad5.odUkrtmaoa(17)+bc6m&rohndrdth.mta

~ b o ~ R d c 7 . 1 l b 1 ( l ) .

hkd: Kh@mNnvYodi P* 17. NWM

MICHAEL A CARDOZO caPon60. Coradd&C* d h Yorf ~ f m ~ 4 . a f a d r e ~ * . d ~ n v ~ u k d MKhrlBlmrb

N ~ y : A&omyGirdima(BrNmubsr: 513630) ~CorpaiimCorsd P.O. Bm 1277 Kin@= N.Y 12402 Tckphm~ (845) W 7 5 5 9 Fn. (845) 34&7364 Em& adP'&,,.mc =.

- 2 -

Page 130: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

U.S. Osm

RECEIVED

I

Aca*rcy

Page 131: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

7

EXHIBIT D

e D N Y D l c v - 1 1 9 3 ~ ~ d a o P ~ ~ c q p d V ~ 1 ~ l o W M V Y k

A - 73

Page 132: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 133: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

.

EXHIBIT E

EDNY M n ; l l 9 3 M' No* of h Mo6o. hr ~ V C I b WDW r

nrrnn m e - .: n*LII ILndBd ' -m,m -v.oerz U I - m W l r r t t a

IIIYL- PD. ~m m P D F . ~ W ~ D I

*LLY*U.C 9 0 - h - W l M --- P.0.Dmll -mum

n u - ns n& uu mdw.m*na -n- I-L.I. pI.1HlPlrwlllO

w-OF1L0681111

-*rim3 I lDYLDcYYOR Y-- hbmawmam

OIW- 1s-b -w*lQI

-I-= ma(OLBh..- n-a-wtm

-ua- atmmuu *.WiIW

MYOCllVS-A --DIG - n,-lb.*-".1...l

I

A -

o t s m m o C o u n t y ~ . f - Canty 197 Office Main Wlllding Street

-, Wew Yorlc 13326-1129 Telephone: (607) 5474208

Fax: (607) 547-7572

Dceclaber23.m

TO THE P I A N I F F S ON THE ATTACHED UST:

Re: L & , e l d v h S p g o . d a l Case DCCV-I 193 (LEK-RW - 1 e n e h D c a N o l i r r o f A ~ r d D m u a d a b c h l f d ~ ~ C o u n y

BoafofEkdloasWw!h.bme-a#ionalmt*r.

vmnJy)mrs.

BP d .t ,I,( 1- .o- 1, ld &aL

JAMES E. KONSTAW J" C W A m

J E K . Encl. ..

/

UNI'ED STAlES DISTRICTCOURT m m D l S T R l C T O F N E W Y O R K - X h & 4 2 U S C 1 9 8 3 m r d - + - - -. Mmerof! h d d G Labn. Bur 0. Die . W i W E BonhavrillimA~JdmloscpbFojm+H.Wilfi.p Vm Nka, Fairlac G Fa- RoyPi- DccirgcCmnis. R o d d E. Sroff. G.b*l R-. hrd M. Jr. C h r m a p b c r E d ~ m m L d T b e A D H O C h Y a k S m C i t i z r m h - L ~ v c R ~ ~

p d i - d p h t i r n CrcOCCV-1193 (LEIVRFI)

&- NOTICE OF APPURAWX AND DEMAND

THOMAS J. SPARCiO.irdMddlydd264J&of 1 & S o n S ~ c c 4 l o s E F M L B R U N 4 6 1 J O H N d JANE we sw~mas; s-N snvm 149 JOHN rd JANE ASSEMBLY MEMBERS; GEORGE 6. PATARI; RANDY A DANIELS. NYS S e a c n r y o f b ELIOT SFWZER; W E NEW YORK STATE BOARDOF ELECIION$ m d ~ M ~ B m d o C E l r d w r . w i l l d . n 5 7 C o u . * r by Corpmh'm C o d of! SUPFOLK NASSAU, WESlUlEST6R, RCXKUUD. ORANGE. ALBANY. DUTCHESS. MONROE. ERIE, ONONDAGA. NlAGARh ONEIDA ALLEGANY. BROOMS CHAUTAUQUA. CATTARAUGU$ CAYUGA, CHEMUNG, CCKLwD, CHENANGO. COLUMBU. TMGA. TOMPKINS. SCHUYLUS STEUBEN, UvINamN ONTARIO. YATES. SENECA. WAYNL. O S W ~ ORLEANS. GENESEE, WYOMING. JEFFEWON, LEWlS M ~ I S O N . H E R K I W UIXEOO. ST. LA- FRANKUN. CLINTON, FSSEX, MONTUOMERY. WARREN SARATOGA. WASHINGTUN mSSELAER, GREEN& USER DELAWARE, PUIWAY. HAM~LTON. NLTON. SCH-ECTADY. SCHOHARIE. SULLIVAN and THE CITY OF NEW YORQ MICHAEL BLOOMBERG: U N m S T A m ASSISTANCE W I S S I O t J . THOMAS R. WlWW THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION b SECRET~ES OF STATE by L&UE m o m s ; P E E R ROSINSKI; .Id ALBeRTO GONULEZ

R- -x

75

Page 134: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

SIR:

PlEASe TAK6 NOTICE. L. ILc LkkdmU, k OmGO aXlWN BOARD OF

EXHIBIT F

Page 135: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

EXHIBIT G

w N Y ~ - 1 1 9 3 ~ N o ( i c c o f c ~ M o 6 D . b r C + 3 B o t v a r 1 D ~ vii

Page 136: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 137: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

I* rba a r t - of tb. mpliutim J U I I O Dl. CMTUcam and vrmcnm r. mms~tr. acting -L

i.titi-.

for .a or&* gllraumnt t o Wthu 14-100, 1-LOlr 16-104, 16-106 and 16-116 a t Cha U.stim Lare

4 - t -

UIlOn II. CaWlVITA. I#., ClYLIYD, mIIII1. U # U B L I f U conm~~ c a n ~ ~ ~ ~ t aur 2. rmux. I-. . omuo l ~ ~ a , w., ~hai-, ~ I J K S Z K R DPDOLTIC COP~ZI c m n r r n n t IICEUD L. we-sa, w., w n s L. B R S V ~ X , seq.. rw. rulcxr A. IICQJI, W L M NILUI. I-., A a L I J. WAUlLLW, 8.0.. I. -LO mr EELQS, WUJIM, WBLII LQUIW, Coll.aLOn*r. oomt i tu t ing the NO* YOPI SZATI .QLLD Or ELECTIQU, L ~ U ~ I L m. O'AVICI. nhR10. a. Omx, E P l s a i ~ a r a C O I U C I ~ U ~ L ~ tb* wLRQ.mn COOIZI BOAID w m.KRIwa,

f o r .c .ordn d.elnriog i m l i d t h CortifLoaew pu pMiap t o dwb-ta na.golhatn IOI. m E X S A. HIWLAX .lid W A R D ~XUII. w., em s.odi&t*e f o r tk. offie* oe ~ t u t i c a o t th. S u p r w Court 01 the State of Lr Yorkr Ninth J d 1 C i . l O I s t ~ l ~ t . u d the m t i t i o m r e pmrporting t o &niWWU A L M 3. CIU~JKLLI. cmq. l smneidace to r tna o L f 1 ~ of SUCrOqaCe of Westcbntu consty t o be ha16 in tna q a m r a l a lec t lon of lb*..b.c 6, 19W.

Dorim 0. -. P.C. httom.). l o r p t i t l o m r i 283 sO,tu4.iw ..on. m i r e Plalne. mu l a r k 10606 1914) 997-1677

030 R3 I

zeou a. &ilwti, 4. A t t o r y tor .ImZII 81. C b n t r 8-m. I h i b P l a i u . mar Tack 1-1 (914) 32t0000

m r i l r n J. Ilaactm. m. county r t t o r v y Attom.). f o r O'aPIO 6 MI N o h a l i e n O C Z i a BaLldill(~ 1 U mrt1.W ..*om. m i t a r l e t w , r v rort IWOZ (914) 2#1-a696

Icoleri , * * ~ t t l r Uolcbitb 6 L I w . LC. Att-8 to r ~UVWYI 130 k r k A m u o umw xork. RDU York 1 0 1 ~ (212) 310-1000

OW ?. k l i a i r 09. 111 )Ibod. Kod b a d Cb , Ww Xork I O U 4 1 9 m C - -- Irll. 0iclJ.r. Urlw. UTr 6 re$.&. Ir YuOuCr ly. ~ t t o m y a f o r WIUI 11 m r t i w Awrsur

' Udo v. IlC.9l)ro. S.C. 1% hC)W S t r n t Ira. Lr lock 10160 (914) 921-0-

I Whit* ?lainen War re* lOIQS (0141 761-9111

K O : ~ 8. ~ m ~ f . ~ 1 . L t t o r a y roc WIARO WILLLI 0- m1. ELI). ?la.. P.O. Box l6lP keel a i n z . mu Tor& 1 0 1 ~ d 6 - 0141 73seaoo

I . .. .. -

. oco 04

Zbi. mi.9 mi. io rwm tho HlaYtIw Of L M n

.udidBt.* lor .I.oeioll to U. ofti- OK oi ch. N g p l m C.orr tL. Uhtll J.dia.1 Dimtrlct ot U. nu:. 01

r roer. merit NC.- I* 6 m U. 11

1-0 Irpublio~ J&t8L COWOStioO ..d Ch* bp- 24, 1)90

D M m n t i n ~odialrl Cmnmtiw. .OC~OM a t th. . e f o c a r f d --ti- p.orsott t o D. i n f i l r t b w v r of

r r i t t r m o l o t f w ~ of tM I*nrUI.t .C County hwiw ud

aoc r l t i a cutt.... vcicn adoptad a - plao foC U. . . -&one A vuiona judgom for b o n t y but, r r i i y

/ Court. O n m t e C ~ C a d cetrt. rn th& w, tnn L. m d i e m ~ b . t U. ruoloe Ioa .li.m or thmt it

* 80 far U to Qmvi& tht oso* I lomiMtadr ..ol, IDdiri&J#l

wi l l pldgo LO .gro+idm #rwl - ud ooaeiduatioa, re *.I. to U. -Cioam of LIW l u d o n of HQL Y~OI

p o l i t i o l ,PUY L. 00.-la dU PO#d j.diai.1

.~~oiot...ta.- ? h m . y o -t .PD.U. t o - m.tU(I LO

GIN a i r ing ot a b f i m . 1 . . .

VnrLocr d.madMm hn d KO m a n 11p.

~ i ~ L i Q O . o f j u r i . U O U ~ . f . i lUN to .Ut. cW. a#

&oLiW. l a t h . -Cut. d 1 I d U t l - r htl t io-rm

hbn aim wa@t a d i m t i s o f-. tbm - U.t c u r m i .

raepond.nU are i m &f.olt lor l u r i ~ ~ f a i l d t a tL.1~ n r w .

O l ~ d i o g a or dmfaccimly - i f i d plmdiwm. .oll.m. 1. tb.

I OCO 05

Page 138: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

culb of tM Soacehoator County I.mb1ie.o or -..tic

CaaLc=oe w i c k warpar-.= ca ulwt eamdl&rcr t* c k orris.

Chi. wi.gon -&- IB r -iqy ..P.ditIolr Of Suptow Ccu=c Z ~ . t i c a m a t D. -sebrd ineon.a.c.ae v:ea

tb. - .Wl d l r w t l , a*.. U. mta L.. tb. Cbct ion a*. r;hrck :.nn rhat nlh-:la I, cao &r.t.t0o

Ptit ia i tnl t . ill O c k that t h I-it*,. -1 mDsu t o a jndici.l cosrbntien. l o m o c . my c& l

YI b. i a t h l y fa.bim. Popat cOIwont.-. sr.4 hII.YLaq P 8 L i w . d tM u n d r c r of thr -- * o m -%!!?!--* ,* - - - L~.ctLon ~ a r e any ro1r.L p r ~ r n d n m ~ D O m.al idity or c m ).l'ti* -ti*. tba .*a* .g -ruth, . . - . . .- - - . . .- . ,- . - - O O - C ~ L A . ~ -fhreb Xam liao. i a prboludd. m CM o a n u b.. - .uiOlu - Of t!!! '2?tA~..-.ic. -. +.b&, t h r a i* no wl tear tha >udicial eoa~ .ar io la a t I U ~ w r a

-- --. -- not :qa:Ly orqonird. u b u a e m ~ o n n t . smd ems a

"%!Y' ,E" - for #.sLcsSCu~ A- ..r tlu h 1 . g majority of Lbt @ o w m y votad for cho umd&daca# nu. .m

J-a of tb -t a -1.. -c .*ad .o.t 'p-, _ _ -.---- ____. _ _ ro.goadon:r horato. U b W . caa p o C l c r ~ 4oaa nor *rat. tN .O(lt*xt of a i m 3lDdioi.1 ~ m , , of

---t of jMi.ia d i d a t w i. , -1,

W i b I t * bl U. 8l-t- -. -11. * m a s e a ~ r i o , u p n m s d by th. mnbmiuionw pramant& '.

, --lit, - rwrlw rrU

t o k .--- - - ---. a- lwb -*I-I.. tn ...1i

Ir C..C qol ..r. conorrnlq C8. ~UIW i n vkioh eb&lb.r.*l Cor :Udt.rai o f t i c

i n --tiom r d..i.uti= & . lor - .- . re aa1.cc.d. Roprvor. tna p-r tors. m a c r ere

~~ J-F'-~~Y ~ h . 8.1-t~ e@ • -1, Iaqiwlacnro of %ha S C ~ C O of ~ a v YOCR. u ~ i c n has %he .a10 po+.r

wnv*fd Jdid.l Dir t r isL -ti- - t. - Mtlo. Co mad tma p l n o u by .hick judicial undlPatas aro eMs-n. IIl.etlrn L.r, -10. 6-10.). tba m t i W of. roapondanC Pbei1i foe jWUOt diamibwinp

c- of -. IU dtmruod tha t tb -ma- tna -:y *pa, :- srwnd tnac m. paeir ior rai;. t s

th?. -8 b .NIILLUUI m i a t a m a oann of aecimm unll ern scantad. M aforbaald.

di-1-1 st tha e r t i t i a n on rho n r i t a . Nn6oro root

8-c)- ot ..CIIO., t i n x y rub-Lealon of p:o.dinqm .ad

0 t h . C @COCO&JCaI i*SUN.

D L ~ e5tOb.r 16. 1990

~ ( k l m m - m -*.ZOO6

L - r m L 1 . - - - ~ a p ~ ~ w - m ~ = m = d ~ h -bD,hm~dm--11.1--d--- - I h a s b ~ t s P n ~ m , m ~ ~ d - ~ * ~ - ~ B ~ ~ h c

rca~nlracs,aradha=-4tm----d1111*4 h . d a r d - m s l h m m s l d ~ ~ ~ ~ d - 6 w ~ l l C I y I . L db-mra(ds*p-carrnh.ena-alfm=---mar Idspd-ma-dmeehoca,*--d--d - . r n m s w b a o w w ~ ~ m ~ m * - - ~ ~ ~

c u m h s .

--mh&mmmmdHIYAhm. . I.ad.-d~ph*- . tramdat=m . I . a d ~ h m e m n a m n d ~ ~ - d " ' V A - - - - . - - - - l l l l k a ~ ( r u n m r 9 t t ~ l ~ - - - ' " ~ ~ alplunvm-pnammrdeamh~h-(h-~~mmrmkrhns w m m b s o b l s a b n a b * m d n m ~ ~ ~ m ~ m c -

1. ~ . n d a y p o . * ~ ~ - m ' - ' -

Z c a m l a w l 3. Cmmdhp/-- 4. ~ r r r e a n p w m m o

m c r a . - . ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ = - ~ ~ - - m m a -,"dlmhm-ed3m~m~~-~-chn * ~ b e m h , h m = - n a a ~ m - N ~ ~ ~ ~ - * . b p o a d * w ~ ~ m ~ ~ - ~ a ~ d * d . r r * m m ~ - C a t l L d b n , , , # C p k b l ~ 4 t k s s a ~ ~ - ~ ~ - ~ m -

I)wdor-hra*mdma*radm(bm-,"d~*4-*n . u M 7 1 * a r r a : ~ ( ~ ~ m m c - k ~ . - ~ - ~ r m d l m n D l l L '

*+al). umw d - ( b e -). -.,hmBalarahd~lbs(-mnl.~----'"d~ .dulemb-~~-mm-*-m-m*~kr , h m - ~ e * l t e r t d ~ b a ~ - . p n s * s * - - - - ~ m n ~ ~ m u + a b - ~ m ~ ~ - ~ h L

\

/

EXHIBIT T

~ ~ ~ - 1 1 9 3 ~ ~ d ~ ~ k ~ d V a r b W D W Y

A - 80

I

Page 139: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

EXHIBIT J

\

E D N Y O C s v - 1 1 9 3 ~ ~ M d C r o a % h . C 4 g d V e r c l o W D N Y xi

I MSNHob..8- Fqpldl

",sJj* ::,:.;; .; - Y 1IC--L1D*IelOl

m: m--- L Z T - 2 -- I t -.-L=Zum m -mmw-- -r ) I l l - - l W 1 9 . b ~ s . C w - L ~ ~ m m

a -:uamAma-(=uI m

4-~-111r-

-4rrrElsmm

~ ~ m - m a ~ ~ ~ w . l ~ I w b C v n I I I ~ - - 1 1 1 1 1 I)IIII.LLIWf -m-d--&.-

m - - m 1 1 h 1 - I v ~ ~ m m ~ l d a m r 9 a - . L . s -mmLn.lpb~mkprCglLIPmm-m-bm(U~U- dl~)l.ml~ILblr*u.Rm-hr-d.a2a~(L.

I I I I U I O ~ M I * ~ C I I ~ I . C I - ~ * I ~ . U - - Y

**1114--#m.lllWmt..m.*DIIm-hILU&L.I) h m l . L R ( t r l l W . . 1 U O . O b d - I ( ~ a . I L

- h . r r r r d g r a r u r r m r m ) . . ~ - m ~ w D l r - r * - * . - u I c w ~ ~ L ~ ~ ~ ~ ) ~ ~ ~ I O P ~ . ~ ~ ~ * * Y ~ L Y L L I I ~ L 01w.1.11.-

m - ~ m u ~ m n a ~ - b . ~ r n o l r r ~ l l l ~ ~ - ~ ~ - m u - v m u ~ h - - r n m d u a w ~ - - p

-011 m--

MK/B\T G-: hnp: ~'lnil.)rr??n.Ml- " " ' HYaOmmlbrdW2d~. llNMO(

Page 140: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

EXHIBIT K

.

EDNYk-1193M'Naad(Lo.rMmo.hCL.II+dVcaebWDNY m

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - --- - - - - - - --I

- - - I

F u k n * Y R * r *=.am, - SmrSd lLAmnQhk l l *Cm) -8 R J b r m ~ F l r . r P r t r . V t s ) -

LAWSUIT CHAROE8 CITY BOARD OF ELEClKmS lQlOmWOLY FAILED TO REPAIR VomKi NAMNES

s a o a o m w m * q r m r * . r * d h ~ r c a m : ~ - d b . l r d . . k ~ ~

. I Y ~ I O I ~ A T W + V . w Q Q U m A * C Q M Y B U tmm

Igmlrrm ramem r u n l a a s --

- - w k m s d

A u M a d . r h M o M & . L ~ ~ m O - d W Y & ~ h L d b M h*rra-hk2moraolb.cUkCRfB3md-Wl-a*dnp m d k d r l o . ~ b p m n u h ~ T h d r a . k m a a - Y h Y h M b n a r s * d h d 7 . ~ W Y m h c * L r r * - m l * W b k E m ~ d WYmhmb5WdhewcmoFmL.m -rrd--Wlhs- M r b r ~ a m S d l r m d l m a a * l b r m p l h B o l d d - b ~ k ~ wohamhscn$w--

hA@mwalBnmn~*dnpb-lm~YmkayB3md- mmmdb-~Sm--Hom~bb(n*lbdIl-m h m n r n ~ a m s u d ~ ~ m J m m y O a k - - a k B m n C r r l sb* t a r r m v & s r . ~ - n d ~ h ~ m b d m H n b . 6 . d ~ d l b * Y & k r s b l l h w n d * . m * n r m d o . ~ ~ k C I I I B o l d d - ~ h e -- ~ b . # e r h a n k b a o d . b m n k h a y n d S r . h W d D k n c h u#!e#h"#"mayomnuralmh~111.-dm.Y&*h-~1 ~ d ~ ~ l a s k & d l n d a ~ m - . l b * Y * O W W * a & k

EXHIBIT "L"

m k - 1 l B W N o m d a o l . M o b o l . t a C L s p o f V a m W D N Y x u

;

\

A - 82

~ ~ U m k m b - I g r I l d m L m g b b x l

l ' b b r r a d l s B o l d d s d m . r t H . * r m b r a P * H I Y P n * - k krub14'm(ZaskmBold~N~k-dradLu;ndmkloL -- " - " -- -

I ---

Page 141: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

EXHIBIT M

Wm-Yx-

City's Lawyer Criticizes State on Rules for Voting Machines w-- -JW -J-1-

-.mo-mmpnb-~roLpwtmm-m.rmm ~ . r w Y p C ~ d Y ~ m k p a O o l . l w n e r a m r o l p n r ) . r ~ -dupdhtPreolddElrmb-hlh

mboldk-b-kpcsamd~m~mIlrtavamrWdl rolpmdnrh.mo*L.w.*m-

haYrbhhw.*dPr-Yr t l l lAWlsqhr- -M U m m L m v a p k l l L d h U ~ m W n O r - d h % ~ a m n n n b l m l m ~ ~ ~ m l ~ . . n p ~

I ~ ~ ~ D I I I L I . I u ~ . D O - I D ~ I I - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ d g m d b d m h m i r P I . d l h ~ - d m - m * N I - b Il*L

YpYlk . IR- .RdldW.- ldhrrda-b*hknndb " - . " . , d ~ b ~ h a y r m n . k . W h . r ~ h h ~ . l r r m

m Y & M h ~ ~ b . l k d h & d k ~ h . M . b ~ M ~ ~ ~ ~ h H q k n r b M l & U ~ k M ~ d ~ - m * r * V kRmrn"d=",t,.

B # W . - . . l d . l . - k w - W e d Y m m m - b r h l l m - . l ~ ~ k l d b p b a h ~ ~ , ~ m l . . n p b r k*om&ni-h. . ldhm-.

W . - m d h m ~ h r a L r d m d k a y ~ d ~ M b h b d m &.LnmCmOYmh-.

W . ~ p m d b r m r a l c t m H d . r ~ h ~ b o l d m M n a - ~ u m l b r y h p m a r a m . ~ t a ~ b n e k - r c n ~ r n d h - A ~ k h ( b b B D d d ~ r c m s t ~ . . l d . l . k d I I L I o l m n r r m W . C l d a h w h l M h b o l d M - h 7 1 6 1 . I - m h ~

mNYOkv-l193Fi8ht3wNotic+oCQosMocio.hr~ofva~WDNY

Page 142: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

EXHIBIT N

m r c a ~ t a m a d .

~ ~ * s b ' t m F a e f ' t b . ~ f o ~ . , , a o i h i . - o * . O t r h .u f o r tIN Of pmt.oliap tlu -lol p o l i t i a l

leadam 4 1 I n a t m d in P S & . It u w i d e m i f i d by r in a 1s. 1911 l e t t e r to Ura M.ram R r i o -. A ~ ~ p y .

z t 1- rwritinp tho . p r i f I e s of Jlu- -.m p o 1 i t i e r l 1 y l p t i A t . d d r i m i o m l i n r l Ln Oa.trauo l. -1- [ m b r A. ~ o c . 31- ur ny tw gmicru 1;tt.m o ur CW- on r& aeJjmr (m1d.r A, Dm. 1. 11.

1 b.11- .I - 1s. 1-1 1- rill h of intrrut to you iau- a. it t.f.tr to t b mu lor* 6t.t. Caduim m M.-t mtaqrity 's raport M tb. -in ~ o l i t i o . 1 i n f l u e n c a b r p 0 i i i r q our j u d i c i u y ma -N a - p l a t r w u h a u l of Ur p m a u of Yudicisl arth. You my wan rmoUl O.t 1-tUr sinom it, together with my tro ~ ~ - 6 ~ i o u s let- tO th. a r m W m - a Dcrb.r 13, 1991 cart1.tt.r tm t~ ~ u i s ' m i o n ~ s John r a r i e l l , ria cc*m to a11 ~ i s m i - - i n a i w i n g mr - c--ni.-, a cow o t Ry o w u l o t t u iN .ncloud [Poldu a, Doc. I ] .

n8t ~ t i 0 jtuti- tb8t mu m T i q ..L1.d u a -BE* om tb. RBU ror* stat. -si& a om- ~a+.grifg a m nor th. S.oond c imi t r.prruntat1.r Of Ula AM1. ~ ' ' x 8 " l t t . r on I.d.ra1 Jlldicbay. amsigrud to rrriw a - t h Xlhn's w. miluti~~ to thm f.d.ral b n c a m I n m it is J u m t h M n , 4 h i s l q a l l y M faotrully inmupportmk.1. d r imion i n rasgonaibl. t o r -u.tlnq thm c o r m p t e d ~ j u d % i ~ n a i m t i n g proc- d.or1.d 'by th8 -ls.ion'm Report ~ ~ " g a J*.: -rt on t b nil- o r ~ w i c ~ a ~ r ie iau i. m.r yo* Ot.U9. I%N appropriate, too, th8 t YOU S h l d bm t a ~ h i n ) Ur

O I K - ~ ~ S C o l h i o n on C o V e ~ t h t q r i t y havinq s t u d i d t b porv and infl- of its f i r e - W r n hthony 01avit . . Chairnn of th. --tar hpbllan mittom (1979-1-51 and f m r r s t a t r Repmblioan P.rty C h a i r u s M mil- by it- rwort ~1- Wna: m r t y m l i t b &

w r ~oo. r-a, 'pp.5: &. &il, m 4 - s . -: Da. 0-8, m.4-5: DOC. 0-15, 1110-11.

. - ~ ~ - - -

i io siaxa; -is& nimc --

m York, IIaW rorL 1011t01ss

mai- M ( h sa -Q by tln rsr B t m a i 4 Colit+r a -1 J b d l o l u ~ h ritb itr u.1uatim

p 4 h d in a tmr w o ii tho SW& court, ~ l b y cGR.- m8 aw ~ z b m ~ a ~ u m ~ ~ t o p t i t e * Am a lso rth p19 - U. r a m m ~ d l n a ~ y , ,ma-ot-tha-mill nttu ilather it u u an

M h l r t m i ~ - t i ek id a i l - C. ~ 1 . plitia m i p o l a t l a of judiohl -ti- i n M rmrk 'by Ma prmotio. o r major part). and illa).11y-

j m l c l a l norimUnq -tiom. u win, of tha f i l m -to*. uh.c J u m t h K&nn did i n C m n 8 to POW.* N I X lu~al mtmW8rds M a th. Cactualrrcord

1 bo JI.r I*. 1-1. tm w b8tbm em Int dm7 to film a Of Awul In p- to tb. court of a, I u8.

UlWd W i t h a .rC.liAtor* -r of tIm -1lat. M%Im. 8- o.ouernt intui.11 mispanding my li&a to pia&b;-iar, I m t a l J , I d . f b i t . l y . and l o n m n d i t i d l y . suoh ordmr vu q l a t r l y unlariulr it u u mt hasad on u r i t t m chargem su & p r a m d e ~ 4 a burin), rm tindingag.. and np'rrasrms. In tb. s l y four and a half you- t h a t M n since .lapsed, I luvm bm den- m y b r i n g a s t o thm hi. o t .y suspension and d d . d aw. .~9.118to mia. me story of t h i s viciolu r 0 t a l i s t i a to rhir31 I u Illbj0ot.d for bring* tb+ Qyll.np. was -riled in an e K 4 w v o r t i . s ~ t i n the 0ctob.r 26, 1994 w, antit1.d When Do Y o u Go Yh.n Jndg.. M.lr tho Lnu7.. A copy is a n d hemto. m, elm, Polder A, m. 1. pp. 9-10: Coldsr I, Kwc. 1, 111-3.

I t i m a ~ i t i o o t i m t ~ m r ~ ~ ~ r n ~ h ~ ~ @itloll - .rzpcbr. by hi8 h b - aot mu b. - with a propo.rd n o l l r u t l m t o a

fT IF- p--my - +bur b. - h e n - fa rond , u 1993 lna a r j o r party mPu-t f o r ,.-a-

o l a i a to th. rr rosk - -. on th. -at or th. 1S93 n j o r -- or

. ~ Q ~ . o l t l D o t h m r . t . t . ~ ~ j u t i ~ I n r r VOCk'. thkd -1CW D m * , I -0s. an dMhl tm tho M- 16 1993 CCo1d.r A, IMo 61 , ~rlw tb.t IYPOU--nt is O. ~nt.9ral p.k o i +h. .POUS = y e m . it f a i l s to m t e Jlutia -'a rolm i n k.qinrl - .polls mysta intact 'by hi. 6.ci.ion in m a

ohrll.ng..

' P o l i u a l p u t i r u s to loya l ty , no t m u i t r O disalmmqa. not

Snch p a l m , .o*mr nltmbl. to tha o p r a t i c a Of ur putr m m t a hg.Mn1, h.r. o o P 1 . o in t Iu .1QU or O.OTjPdp.... (.-a J*=, p. 193)

-3 R u I ~ P I t e ~ t r r p o T r U ~ i . o u ~ u m y a, -a ooqI.int ~ I n m t ~lrdg. nm, ~ L I & v i a tho an, Tor* Ilt.L. -..ion 0 aiom Ondoct. A oopy o t a t

. -lairit i s w1ord t r o b r A. Doe. 51.

4 %

, &It& by 734 pp.

Page 143: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

b.m0 f o r hi. having ag- t o b. t h . ~ - i ~ i o i l i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ & Party in MUIinq roc - in 19as wm ma th..

m-Caia -t. m r i o -. aur nr4+*-, ~~i*i i~~~us a t not a y m i.l;;);l-A&&=iGw< jmdioiel -tion by hi. pol l t ice l pntron mthony Colarlt. but hi . mi41.t- for -cay= aavan*rr' 1lla.1 urn e~mo rmw with i-rel j ~ i c i a l n&tion&.

.oordh to an An9wt 13. 19% a d i b r h l PQW of tha t d i t o r k l , Mi* n k e m tlu salutary -&iw but t h w jcldioial ID. iNt im -a-f.dera1 and state-not =txmat tb. c l t k . n ~ U an wmmcwnry ~ ~ * " . is enclosed [ml&r A, Doc. 71.

unaoubtay a- our my 1% &itC- +.J of tho ~ g a t i a s Of Rr. O'-b'a ac(Lntie.1~ hy Um then llQrmd c h i t np-tatim, n l l l l n w l i l b who, in AW.+ 1 9 9 2 , uer alevatmd to t h e chai-hip br th. atanding -I...

Slrrr UIY tall. I tlut ymm a p n n a qrwt int.P..t iR .Y* our =it*, I awlor a wpy-uhicb )a w i l l aot. MU. to tb. r w p o r t m or tha W w work Bt.f. O l l s s i m on Government 1-b. I U.O -1- l COPY Of b y 18 1992 alld Jmu 2 199) lot- to thm wu lhjollty r a d a r kltch.11 and a c&malu of m u Witb tlu ABI CCorrrspondaxr Elgandim 111.

m u t iu &hi-1 duty to retract its dmmstrrbly irwpportsbi. . epprrrvll n t l n g OK Ih. Owlloorb. um8 to ta l ly unin-mstsd in o w . o r r e to detail bar it. -1ng proadurns might b. bp-.d.

I llDllld PiOt Ollt- U U.IY did i l 9 bSC -? 22, 1-3 1mtt.r to Ih. Willie [mmnpmd- O.pndiw, ~ & i h i t 1 . 1 - tMt f hm d w DT.dsDtIala h tln Kimld of judbial ulwtias. Hy bicqr8pbio prolllm appears a t tb. .M or +h. critiqnm, -Q with my 1.~9 urtinb.1-11 m, DI-w l b t h g . I would only higbliqbt tha t I was tb. K l m ~ ~ l l to

m, ortr =it*. f008bt.. 16 Ud 61, p. 43. '

s. 4 1-1 eri- ud of d 1 t . t 5/1m1 .,%a V a / r a itn to 8mmta majority b a d a ni tamllr AU -n-Pm---

+rrullT, I rnolow au LM- &n - tb. c.at.r iQ 3bUei.l -ility. 2110, thw citil.n..' .CI.ion o m n i x a t l m I MV* sVUt - tm r u b ol tL. s- d.b.sle tnlrth" ui tn . copu oC U-'S I.- to tb. m1tC.r pmw' in ti,. A-t 14, 1-5 -~orl~m. .bout &r - m e 7m proccadlq .9.Lrt tbo UN York stata -ismion a, Judio1.l c m d 1 ~ . X ~ l m in t b oI9ht -leiat8 OK judioiLl miroodllcC m r e m d to in h u 18tt.u u part ot W PLOQ.blllP i a q January a , 1992 -1mint qdnatJ\mFc. l a r r a n a Bhn [Pold.r A, Doc. 51.

u maond circuit xupnmwtive to tb. rar w i n o m+tu on ~.cl-ral h d l o i u y , you IWS a i r a t intnmt in w propu runctimlng of the IN yes* s t a t e c ~ ~ ~ i s s i a ca JUdici.1 canlwt. Pleinlq, beA tAb &ion amartakm to invutirptm my crqlslt whmt J u u i a xab-uhIQ it wu rrpuirod t o do

w.1 or IYI rork*s JU~IIOIW UW-ma W I . ~ approprint. diaoiplpllry aotim .9einst him for of f ia la l .i.oDnQlot, you vmld not n# b. burdenad by m i w i n g tWrn muorthy -- 40 lut b. mound iwly s m j . 0 t . d KO? h i s 6.mstn t .d lack of intwitr.

rq s d b O l l b ~ ~ Q ~ h * l 7 E W C D . m R K m & S

W When Judges Bmak the Law?

Page 144: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

...Dond.nt Illice of emu-nation (D+pn0ft)

* -- ~ t i w ( I sEd-

or -r

7 OwQL"O mi- mu. . opposinq LfClrratioa . '

(Ab NntiJ

(nm.hla11)

io/z6/90 mtm- n 1 . u of sn or w m a voters of *rr lor* 8tat.r *~m-hdomomnt mu should I* lmmra9 . ,

mmmma m m v mxmo- 1 TO n , n m r m 0 ceost-rrrnors pith haJaitm and Sumortirq A f i h t i o n )

(c-u) 10/30/9o mis im of ~op.1L.t. D h l m i a . 3rd m. 'I (c-13) 10/31/)0 U r of NYS E a n l or Ileatiom to Cimnnl

(-14). a~ /a / sa r*r or m .oua or rI.ocla .aoio.iag pmpad 0- .I re-ls) 11/2/90 9U Id% m AwELmm DIIRSIOI. 3rd m.

(0-16) ll/lJ/90 Ua' oi -11- Dl.1.1011, 3rd -. (C-1l) 1V14/90 Ltr of DnmfC to e l l m t m Mvirioa I (C-U) 1U23DO o.oi8lm of -1- M~imlon, 3- D.lrt.

A - 86

. . . . . - . - 8 . ..,.*.. . , . ! . . " I %

. . - .

. . -. - (*I)*' -* ambD Q UrPr, I U d l0/17/90

(-)*' -' We M1.a l0/17/90

3 -' - 0. APPrm,, rusd 1l/1r/90

. .

I

Qcrrt. ar or t b mtiti-- .Op.UPt. .N h a i d by all anted&. I

. . . ., . . ? ' >.T .- $ '>. ,?,, ,?

. . - .. - .- ...

. . .

R m z a n & I -* -

(&-xi 1OD4I91 M YO a m m wxo CSLU,

fA-2) XOOU.1 W aaaaa nn0 mola

(L-S) l¶/19/n OL) w - p m o mum

( M ) W W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ % O J ~ ~ F E U C K , rmauormm - -RU a oosrmm~ nmoarrr. with opiu to Corlrhnn

( 1 1/2/92 IRR k a mn - -mr a m c n L QllCOCT

r - PIRaLI w W em, aditoriel, r m a S m r r o n . 9/26/93

A lllll~ A m m a --. V s 8/13/95

. .

L - .- ' I

- p~~p~g-

(a-1). 1e/x*/w ars lar mna w MmLTAm mrrsmr, 3rd LBllrPI

teR. m

i

Page 145: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

(PI) z / l ~ / . l ltr of ~ppa1l.c. D~v-, 3rd mpt.

- 3 aDWS1 mida oi D R i a h , 3rd D.pt.

) -1- Dirisim, 3rd -. %I7 C2lad.r.. 3/25/91

-)* 3/25/91 a MCm(m 07 DL¶

uv=-t

( ~ 3 ) onbr via Mias of Fartm. 5/16/)1. .mt by -if, 6/ZQ/91

P .

llPIlPPt - 1 (O-1). lDllQ OF Bnn 01 - (6/rl/91)

10-2). m a or - (sn/1~91) 4s-, P.c.)

(a-3) (a) C/2VYl lhr Of -11

(0-3) (b) * 7/5/91 D?

(u-3) (e) rmsi of mrnoir

- . a, . .

7 -CT 07 IDCIOI, - A ~ D . P I Z . .M mBIR (7/25/91)

t M ) * WCllMrm 01 LU (~/25/91)

(-3) (-1) a -tion (m/a,.i)

(bt Oap.ntllm Of xxhibits

(w) (R.11. Didchr): (a) not s or ~mo=-~otion. a f r h v i t ( 8 / ~ 9 1 ) (a) or u v

( ) v (msrntrj, (a) Accirmntian (a/s/gi) (b) Mrnlandm Of La"

(-1 (--I): Itr Of 8/15/91

(M)* -I-QI Wh) IlPIPLt U m I V OPPOSITIOa Am BnrrSrrS $/1!5/91)

(MO) r/ra/ri m tm -1iat.e ~ v ~ i o a , 3rd ~.pt.

(9/6/Sl)

*la)* -' mnmawmn Ipi~liMO) rn RmLT 1ID n -1~1011 m urn ---ollo lhs- - nusl m sanru, OP mematis (9/6/91)

(-13). .PPIILIURS1 RWLT or w (1-14) 10/17/91 0 1 a i 0 . of Appllatr Divisla, 3rd ~.pt.

- i

a - . - ..

(0-17) LO/lf/)l OZdQ of - of I

(0-U) 10/2z/91 Its ox m s - of naeh

(c-4). - 90 - - V/lV91) I (0-5). - 07 -L (7/1V91) I p b l h ) 1 (a+)* JmraDI--

(M) 7/16/91 It= Cavt of I (W)* 8/1/)1 TX- TD - OW ASRAU W I T n

maasmm

(a) nummm n ~ ~ r o f f w m m m n a m I

JORISDICRQI I

I

(b) APPQmII rn - - II nfe raaraD

(0) - 01 - F

(09)- -, 8/8/91 .O.... =lad w i t h tb. c4mr or App..lrnD

(0-10) (Ci-POli) r I

(a) motion to ~in i ss and for mmthm (8/1/91)

(b) Bwwrting Affirntlon ( c ) O.purdlum of Rbibi ts (d) 6/2/91 Covultr (a) 8/6/91 mrrata sbowt

(-1 (-Cr) i r i C k . . + h (B/8/91)

(0-13) m u f k u h i (*inmati) r 8/15/91 1tc

( 0 4 3 ) (Hall, D i c l 3 - r J z 8/10/91 1-

(0-14) 8/27/91 ltr of BY8 mud ot n - h I

(*IS)* -* -01 (Vl#&no) R (9/7/91)

(0-16) 10/15/91 -0 ~i ~ ~ o r t oi -a i

i i f

\

A - 87

Page 146: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

EXHIBIT "On

E D N Y O C n ' - l l 9 3 ~ ' ~ o f C m r M D h a h . ~ d V c l c m W D N Y ni

c ~ I , m l l c p a t m I p d ~ ~ W ~ w T y b ( R e l o r 4

NEWS Frmr tbc Olfirc m f tk Xnr Y u h lit.te C u p t n l k r

Alan G Hevesi POI- -

mu- a m

~ h . o e r ~ o n L o d ~ F b a ) ~

W l l l b ~ n s h * ~ - h k M B r ~ ~ M Q M U b s r . * m b r d c r a r k a a p ~ m e o 8 R . 9 Y * d l ~ . I I a - - m . . - - u kndlld.llllrM-~-*haDDIMRlpl(rnM-*ll.dW @ - T L . ~ b n ~ d & - * a n l l l ~ * 4 a P O b d ~ m d * e u - m b ~ L * ) . r l O O D .

- i n D o a a r a d n r c a n . l s n m m ~ k . n ~ u n d ~ - b a q ~ Ldd4r(P-M~-mbM%OQ.~m36-nU-m ~ ~ * ~ I ~ ~ I ~ . M ~ * ~ M C W ~ D O . ~ ~ W ~ ~ - -

se~=4r.p~kLLa---&H~r.z&~~%E. pamn.*.mm- La*acadbQ..hl-m--m*lprar pohm-h-

k - u , b R * I * n * . . b * . C I L . d ~ m b d ~ - I Y ' D r ~ W - m # ~ b - m ~ n - d ~ C l r r - l b ~ M L l b n M h . ~ r u l d W # # M D ~ m ~ n ~ ~ l p m ~ b - - . ~ ~ h . - m . p l . r s r ~ - - h m ~ d M 1 M h k d ) r 2 0 0 1 ~ r h * k r d k b i p ~ ~ m & m ~ ~ M h ~ ~ k Y r n ~ ~ ~ B l l D e n 3 p r r q ~ - ~ . s ~ . h m ~ - B n * a k ~ ( . p a d a d ~ m W d H r Y W * o o u r . m l c L . - n o k ~ d s a i p L d ~ h k d ~

T o n r ) ~ L d # I C M ~ b - Y l l m a h r l l l U l l O I ~ . ) u l l g - - m m b v ~ ~ m d r Y C m . r ~ m h ~ Y r n ( Y - d c o u a r - . a d W m r * r r m ~ r ~ C q . l a b a ~ I O h . 0 0 1 1 m.hplmh*M

- ~ - r ~ l b b & ~ b l ~ ~ d 4 ~ h ~ I k W ~ ~ m ~ d r u n p o l d u m . ~ ~ ~ - - . r u d c l k Y r n Q k . r r r t l d n n ~ S W b l m h ~ ~ 1 2 ~ k r n r 0 1 k ~ ) r .

Empq~a--qp.l.I I Ia-mor.llnpbODI1IA*lD1OOD R r s b n m b - m m , b . R o d l l * k u m d - * 9 r I - d * ~ m d k . d k D " m l ~ b 4 r . m m a Y l n o p l p d 1 1 - ~ p . n b n ~ l . b d k @ ~ 1 0 ~ k ~ r m p . n d r n ~ .

Fwnsnarrcnur.

mJhm--.o p a % m i u l 4 h l IlsRaY

UNITED STATES xllSlXlCT COW

~ D S I X K ? O I N f W Y O R K c+: WCV-1193

mKmFn L0EnBet.d

phi.im) a

aAM;OdlL. Ddad..b.

1 0 ~ W C L A I A m m w m o n r W ~ ' ~ o r c n o s s ~ m s t ~ w ~ r n ~ ~ w

W D N Y ~ ~ C M E F O R I O N Z ~ T - C ~ U ~ ~ ~ R N U ~ ~ L ~ R E W O N S E m O r r o m o N To TnE M a n O N To DIsMlss lac AMENDED CO-

DY TnE US. WIARlMZNT OR JlMlClI n d DIWKNDANlS MAYOR MlCaAPL BMOMBEIIG AND TEE ClW OR NEW YORK

FxmalAL MuNKmAL rAmlm

~ . L b L . h r p L P a p r . ~ d c u I i & d c r p r . d y o f ~ :

1. h p o r t i ~ ~ r ~ . ~ ~ p h b m i c s I P . O . B m

28 Ckda New Yott I U Z 9 d p b r lrba (?I?) 721-7673 d 4

. .

Z k a P I . a i l i L r c i I b + I . t c t b k ~ ~ ~ i a # p x t o f

~ ~ O F C R O S S M O l l O N ~ C A A N O E O F V E N U E T O

IURISDImoN WWDNYob-cvmcASEPOlUONELd V C N m x N u

d . d ~ t o l o u l ~ 7 . 1 . P c d P c d R C t . P . 1 9 1 a l i r r g o r e t o & M D ( P . ( o

~ b y ~ a ( i x o f I l r U . S D c p r t l d d k l i c + 6 k d ~ 1 0 . N Y ) 6

& n x r D a M # f - l ( a ~ o f t k & k m r a d c d ~ d l M d m I

I l r c i l ? . o f h Y o r t ~ ~ 1 7 . ~ ~ r D o c t n t b J ( a ~ d & N a n

~ d ~ l & F r * ~ l o ~ M M i m ~ a Y h r

p o r i a s ~ i ~ o f V a c C h q e p l c 1

u 7 R W ~ 3 0 A M i ~ b e b r c ~ L m r c r c E . I ( . b w ~ ~ t o M o b o .

k b 3 R l R ~ ~ t o ~ b ~ d c ~ 3 R 7 R 0 0 6 . d b a h ~ ~

t i & m I ~ p U k l o c L i ~ 1 0 L x i ~ ~ - k F ~ 2 8 2 0 0 6

m d 1 d m m d * c d ~ 1 7 . 2 0 0 6 m d D O I ~ 6 * c h f d s 6 2 0 0 6 .

3. I h l r a p r ( ? . i & ~ ~ ~ w D W y & C V U ~

-. 4 n i . I r a p o r ~ C ~ d z L . M B O C n r r r l w k S r

QlrarJ%P-'---'LIYlk.-lUrn*Rdktdk3crebgBcr - ? ~ p o l c p b i l a r h h ~ F o r p r r d C b i s l ~ E . r l S a r t i c a e

WDNYob-cv--(~c* ' '

v l b a r o f r n m ~ ~ r . . t ~ ~ * - ' - - - ' ~ ~ ~ l k .

R&Dk4n*n*-arc-

6. n i . I n a p o r ~ ~ d . 4 D a o C f i T S ~ p

~ ~ & ~ / ~ & ( V A ? b b ~ ~ i

WDNY W W O n* mice hdo$ cK~d

l p o a ~ o m ~ 2 1 . 2 0 0 6 .

7. T b * i t h m * n r d t t a d p p w l & ~ I h ' e ~ a d o c v & x m d

p o m P h i l i l b ~ n a a b e n o f z L . A D B O C ~ l w k S r a h r r p .

~ ' - - - ' L I Y l k . ~ o f ~ ~ b ~ ~ ~ w o . b r

c h p e o f ~ a d r m c h ~ ~ d l n i ~ ~ d ~ ' e ~

=-dk&.

8. n i . i d d i t P . t o & d o r r c m I ~ m p u . c ~ i & c a e

~ ~ . W D N Y O k v 3 9 5 n ~ a j l . a U c t p z L . A D U O C h Z W

ro6oaDabrdo.happarofVemeCLgP~Z

Page 147: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

UEUlED S r A r n m C T COURT W O R I 1 I L R W ~ 0 1 W B W Y o R K c+: 64cv-1193

ILEKIRFn LWud

PLitilb) Z

~ .--- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

W D N Y ~ C A S X P O R I O N l ~ r . . ~ R W l A d . L i l l L S r O W S L M ~ N m Y ) M M O o N m D I s ~ W ~ D ~

BY TUl! US. D D A R T M m 01 JUSllCP o d DePPNDAMS MAYOR M I C B A a BLOOMBERG ANDTAP CllY OF NEW YORK ABSENT

Page 148: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

I

a d & ~ d b N n Y d h E l a r b I n r ( 6 1 0 6 d ~ I W b

* p l y . . dra~rsrc-cam-~ds-d

1 b S r ~ A n i d 8 6 ~ 6 ( c A ~ a p d

~ ~ ~ d h C a 6 . ~ W b c b p l W X l b l c

I w . ) r q . l r * a r d ~ I Y I h a k ~ m Y & d l L A D ~ W Y n l J r

c l h a J b - ~ ~ L * i d c r r d d i d 4 c r r l P p b L

a-. ~ f ~ ~ ~ e n - ~ ~ m b o ~ a ~ o l ~ ~ e ~ ~

D k b l d N c r Y d & l a & d l k H m = d k ~ k 4 r I 1 * W J . A l r r n

M m f m ~ . 1 C r l i a h . b ~ C ~ k p b b p 4 w i n d k i a ~ l o

rPlli.ll*.ublWX-. a d l r ~ ~ b o m c

a * r a a ~ - ~ p d , d k ~ a d ~ n U L . *

o o a w ~ ~ f ? z b r a m b r r a ~ o f ~ ~ l ~ b d a

~ e W N Y d a P D W Y . d ~ Y m ~ * s d p 2 1 U B C 4 U .

I k P I . l p q i ~ d d o k d ~ b c k ~ ~ ~ ~ d ~ W

--%= Lbodyn Ncr Yak

C.

m r * ' i n q p m o r v ~ ~ ~ 3

CHRmOPWREARLSIRUNK 593 vdsbil A\- ml

~ n . ~ c n ~ o a 11238 (845) 3 W 7 7 4 fax -ice WJ 33t-5979

lkbum U. 2006 mhu .

TbHamnbbkh- Dilr*1kdpd& UdcdStc -Cond

EmIan Diwet o f b YoIt 225 c d a r phrr EI & o o ~ l N m ~ Y 0 r t 11207

Rc. Z ~ . . M s l o e D C o ~ l l Z 9 Sdj:FRC1f Rmk5I*aap.pe.Wc\f H)&W

mHcudbkQelnbGL+ror

M y u L ~ i ! d ~ m p n s e n + b m b e @ m ~ . ~ u t c ~ ~ h p s ~ ~ ~ \ ~ 5 ' ~ " m a a n - s a ~ h i l l i & h ' ~ ~ s 1 c a &Y ' " ' - " ' " " I ~ ~ ~ ~ Y o I ~ 1 ~ l m ~ ~ 7 . ~ 1 0 6 m ~ u t ~ o f ~ ~ 0 i 1 b c ~ e a ~ o l t 9 e ~ Ln\. D 6106" d %124"'hrdh~mriJhasof&ol6c.~~hS.pscCoa k * i c t r d e r p o v i P a o f & S m ~ A n + k 6 ~ 6 ( c k d a s r d I h ' ~ ~ d d h v & M t m m ~ ~ i & O r d s ~ ~ l i b ~ . k ~ b p d i c i l f . i h r r i

M d b r P l s . P m r a r t b * p b o g h L c b r m n a W t ~ r t u l ~ : d I b a c b ? . ~ e b emsd&t.BpsaLn.ab~&Onk.mdp.?.brphiIpssd?-deariarmdy.

'SC9m ~ - ~ o l k - ~ k * - - b h O d l u b d k .pn*rmtUb.&b,kWm--

'I5924 c l l l h * ~ A F m - h l l L . - k , k ~ a ~ ~ pkl.Td-nd--lw.bm.Itl-,Ms.lnmqmhll d . l u p l d b w - - n d W h n l l d k p * U . ~ m - k n k p t d u h . l . n q d m ( l m d m h M m m . m m d r a - W m . U b . - w p h ~ b l n B ~ d d l p C . l t . ~ h - h k * l l o h k m d m d b ~ p h ~ b h m d ~ , m k k w o p . m d n p h . I m u ~ ~ b M ~ h r * v * d - b . n b k m & m . I u h ~ b r l d l - m u h h w m U m h h m L I k m d - C m ~ m . I m a d h md--m~~e.h. .b .n*r Imhkmnr-hm a 4 b . U b - ~ b k t . . L ~ l d m 1 d l p b M - W m a a h ~ a p s o l . m m k - m p . * 1 b I b l b , m d k h 4 1 m m b b . Ibll)*.dhM~hnedhrb-4..d,M.m1uhrb--h ~ U n d W n s l . l ~ d a - d b b ~ - u h M L h e h ~ M I l h M t . - U b - b y b l b m - h l m C g d k - l k n ~ h . . b . n m - ~ b R 4 - U b h n e m l l o h h - d u h - 4 p " ~ m ~ ~ n d l m h C U h . . h ~ ~ l m ~ - . I u h - m h - l l l l l . r m k . 1 1 1 ~ u m . p r m m I D - .

& m t ~ ~ 1 ~ . m h e n u c ~ ~ 1 o f l o

A s ~ I r a p r s r i i ~ o f a d a o f A @ e ' n a b ~ m & u d

% o k n a c d & d ~ " ~ r d c h d d s N Y S C o r t i b l P . A & k I I ~

p r ~ I X ~ l o a l G m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ b r c b r

~ ~ n i l L i a ~ c h m i l L d m a B o r d d ~ n a i d . ~ f w c b

. o ( i l ? . t L i ~ o f ~ - l h ~ ~ & - o f ~ s r s T o I b n i : A m a p ~ r ~ m m b t r o f Y h A D B O C A k w I r l : ~ L Y p P ~

~ 4 h M # w ~ a l l ~ d i i a c I a r k r d . & & t r m & d NDNY 04-m-1193 -a 28 USC 2284 p r L r d b & 4 w k k g b&e

k Q e ~ a r r r + ~ . 1 ( l h i ~ l b r ? . n S a ~ b r ~ o f ~ ~ p r F R ~ ~ ~ 1 9 ( a ) ' ~ "

l o l L W s l * a D i l r * 1 o f N m Y o I t b k ~ ~ i a c F ~ ~

~ d ( ~ ~ . d i n ~ l ~ a P ( i a d ~ ~ o f & ~ a r ~ ~ ~ p l

~ ~ r l ~ / ~ m v ~ m ~ ~ 1 . l b , . b o n ~ a

m p b r a 2 8 U S C U U h ~ p r d I b s ~ h ~ C L i d h d a s R i * r d J .

~ n S b e n i c e a r s * d q a D c M r U ~ 2 1 . Z 0 O h .

m&cp(hofacorMPrh.Mk6*ilMprA&kVI96(b)La

~ ~ ~ ~ m L c r N e a Y o r t ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ b a n l ~ u ~ ( ~ 6 ~ o o o * b c b r ) 1 U ~ i d a a ~ ~ ~ ~ c b l ~ i l l

i V o h ' c d ~ & ~ r . d d & A p r i l U 2 0 0 2 ~ & ~

uhqmporWeDrvlLd . . . . . D i * l h I D D W ) ~ ~ ~ t o P h i l ~ d c b r

~ h n a d i P b a d r r * i i s r ~ ~ k d i c i . l D h h i ; t l ~ .

' *nVahM-rr*rW--dh-(d) -udhn~anb lacg~Mn*na~ . . . .p ) - -Rmn* .d m e r v h r a m m d m * a d n - .

' ~ w m m m p d m l l q . n d . I b n s n ) l b l l b ) . d b - ~ h . . h MdP~nl*6b.nnl&Wbmlldlbdm.I -k~qannd .nh.1mmuImhnurmhdDrrpbrhrrm..nna-lol.bnclYb d--.ndrmbd

'(saussrpacdmum s s u a M s ( l ~ m u r . ~ . J n u a ~ ( l o 6 c ) a - u d l d . I ! h . o l , - - h I P . m m s a r S 7 7 u s . m ( ~ o 6 c ) - - m a m ~ - , ~ w a r r m w c l p ~ m w s t a R d h h n m r d s l - l n D m d h a r d I b V ~ ~ m h s ulhnbsdpmmdlb-yb.dImQhmd(I-dp*h ' SaFl 7 < o r 6 p ~ F . S l p p 1 ~ ~ ~ U U . & R 5 ( l B ) ) d ~ ~ T W ~ ~ d ~ 3 7 9 U . S 2 4 l ( l s B 1 )

s h l t M o l p . m l m r r ~ 2 o f l o

' R . ~ i ~ h ' ~ r b n x p m M n ~ o f ~

~ b D d d a l h a d d u c o b r o f & ~ ~ d a i i p . l L r r i

~ & L ~ N Y s c I I I ~ * ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I D ~ M ~ ~ ~ ~ " ~ ~ ~ c 6 t a l b e l i i . l m i . s a e V O ) S l d D i l r i C b -" " .Ldrrrd.r

. . I D o m P u L m l n ~ i r o f I r m p o @ d & m n & r t h i . l 1 ~ ~ l h -a

a a ~ ~ r r p l o c r c l ~ h D d a d r t l ~ b ~ ~ ~ ~ d . . -bof&StrCoahcio.dLRtb*hlltadHrYoIt-mhkm

rrd.laapux (i) & a d 5 O S I 1 I * W . a 6 2 S a D & i &

(ii) l L . r i F i . r L t o f H m h m r h l e M ~ d R b . - D O N 7 : I i i ) &d?.ofNcn.YoIt+.ll.D(h.crrc&arp.(lidof.U-tuUd

6 2 ~ a r ~ m e r r i a - 1 . l l a c e a ~ a d 1 6 0 f w . d

l k ) T L c R q k r r d d a n ~ r ~ d r i w m m y r r ~ ~ k u

hm . ' ~ o i b L b i m ~ & ~ ~ m o f ~ ~ ~

W ~ & ~ u s i w h k A . U t b ~ C o a ~ m ~ r a c L r i & u r d M i c c ' R o l u S p r p . ( L c m d C r c d &

W L . ~ \h. Y*-I.~I,SI-..

+rlt'.&~~lth.r 4.7.. r d I I . ,~ h c k mrr.1 ~d r, h . ~ ~ D F I ~ ~ , I I).. -1

l m w ? n u M n ) u r c u h ~ . * . b l 1 . r ~ . ( . ~ D.LI.kr*

H W ( ' r . n k ~ ~ m , l h N , c l t 4 C I 4 ) r u d l * ) o * . * r * l

rMh<.IL. -;7rlh k&+r.n-+n...s~.n .r awmhlr rh.wn\ht .vr-ao.n.~t 41).

~ ~ ~ p ~ l ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ n . n c ~ + r n ~ \ h ~ r . ~ n ~ . . m MU)^ &kp.. ath-I 1 CIX

l "W.,.,, *..\-.. -6 T k I k ~ . ~ m . m .r.~lr,mhnnq*k * n k r . i ~ * l r u l ~ ~ - . w r n r . ulnII.

L~IYL+.I*~~uIIJ MINIP.IIL.L. t.r~M*ihl u L ~ .of pw~wl,ll) rcApp>t \ . &I<.

!ma ~ r * . ~ ~ l p . n m . ~ . a . l p ~ ~ n wnh rdnl*nr r,aw+

h- l k ~ ~ - r w ~ r \ n u w k ~ n y ~~.rrrrr~J.uI&~hl;nr ..u.+xhrwuw .I

I m w t - u l . \ Ih nlh IYllBol JILvrh \nnrmn<, *lIrm h.nrn0.r \ I h

~ M a i O . b h e n ~ p a c 3 o f 1 0

Page 149: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

(v.) AU~jChlDaLhperCIMiSk6k!im6(b)'~'.MVSTbcW~pom

A a n k ". '". 1 - k - r r m m r i - d r

(vi) f a t L c d y d N n r Y a l i i l ~ r r a r d s ~ ~ ~ l i r e . i &

e * i l M a M b i d D i b a ~ i l d o c r N O T h ~ A N Y H o m L ~ ~ ~

n * ~ m b l e r t L 1 9 6 3 n ~ . l p l i c ? - . ~ d p r r m a P M d

h d a d H o a k m o a l i d l l c + t i a & p . ? v r d d y C d

p u r & ~ d & k ~ N n r Y a k K k s d R k h u d d a m l

i~lcLlil?.cxllmdhrbcua1I@aOemkth1964.

cvii) T h t k p w d ~ d ~ ~ I . r t b 6 u d ~ N Y C . ~ R s * ~ m

Hoa(cduusr&r rdcrd .br~~~kd ie i l~ rprakm & c h . d N m Y a k d &Bc.w&ofStMurl . . .hlk

1 % ~ ) h ~ b ~ ~ r n d a s e r " ~ E L P L - l W . b o c s c 4 7

~ r e ~ h r r d d a d b y r i l b . c a p * o f H o a k

1 p . ~ m y B D T & ~ n ~ N O 0 0 1 1 ? . ~ w x # i l l ~ P

& n d d c r & p c a .. " . -- ' :d

(b) T h N Y C p . . s n i l b M r ? . H o a ( c & i l i c r n i l h i ~ & h r o r r e L

E L f 2 - 1 W I . . i c i . l c o l l i r r + . i * p d d p r p o n o d t i l ~ ~ ~ o m ~

n * a 6 . p a r k c h k m h k a & b n r d & O d u d C d L r r i

W 1 . d lr-+LsciloPhi.Lilb'prlf.sleribcrof

m a o o ~ to U.S. cii~~cxpl~aio.deiwh~ skbnl

p l i s i n ~ q e a h d ~ i o m ' * ' - I -bmnaea28USCUM prl i WDNY colrolidlh of= 05-m-395. WDNY OtkvXCIW d NDNY DCn;

I b c O d u ~ k ~ W P . h h d k m U r i o r s u e p a k d

& b * ~ p e r r w b ~ O . * n * a i l l L l . G n ~ s d L l h

. b m I h l t b e ? . r n y m i s i d s ~ t b ~ u e o 1 d d k a l l ~

~ U a n s r r p . n ~ ~ 5 b k " i b & a l ~ l k h @ ~ b a 1 ~

5 . W i . W ~ n ~ * r ~ w t L c Q p 1 2 4 h o l a U a k b o l

& a r a m ( k r e o r ~ k & . . t i l h . o f e o r ~ i

a d a i v d b & ( k d o r . d g a r b & c n c h l ~ o i & ~ ~ ~ i b r ~ u

~ m t o ~ d . c D n y b & d l i e r u r - i c . ~ ~

~ E D N Y O Z - n ' U 6 5 d m t i i ~ c r ~ I . O ( i o u k & 1 e

~ i a m k d p ~ ~ ~ a q r m ~ r o z - cv-926 i nit& I m a M S f w i l h * d & dcr 42 USC 19-

Page 150: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 151: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

' Asncb&Lr*rr.dd.e(P.Sn'c.~rniCih

n;a&di l io . I Jas (bc~drabd~tL100U~l t l .obs iLhd

o a i r c & ~ d N Y C . h . 4 h a . p l i s m ~ b i l * a J d

~ d h L w b k ~ ~ m * . 4 ~ * i m

lo l L I . p i ~ ~ r r ~ d ~ h n r ~

# q d g r 4 l t * r M ' c V o * n h f p r m 0 % 2 1 3 ) U r i l L . r C

b.rd-"ELdp.Dih.r(ldchd& E L $ 4 - 1 0 0 l o ( b b d w k b

C-ShahDLbar ) d

11. r r b W r r k d & ' ~ r % p m k n " M ~ b T H E b r i s

b i l d i M D e t b . & ~ i c p m i a d ~ d H D a l c ~ . d ~

& ~ L e m l u l J l d M b * c r ~ r ? n i a d d b . a p l

. . mamrl pm* dEL PI24 d*a ria 1W.

Page 152: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 153: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

otlIc.n, ah tau M U. by US. -COD. U.

lrrrr Ipllcdmg, to .dt, m. -y .b.u esa h "." -. - Y - U a d - p

aucar. aim a r- a -dl ror tma -c or ~ h . ..id o c s l a , ot dish tb. oe uut-t

~ ' = p . . d b l t r r o D l q a r . ~ = - Y . b . l l ~ - l Y &istor tb .h.U bo W d m t and h.n mmtisp

-la, M a, &br a t l r d 4 t h &la .nd -t of Lb. ..ld

Page 154: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

EXHIBIT 2

. . -u, a qpDU dl116 &tkex., - W E . -t, ot

Lb.u lb-b . .p la ld - , t . . t . .U . rB

---*bare -. -

R . h n n a m X I W m -...ll"t tb. tt. j.Ri- of th. .prrr oort, ..d

r t r . t j l l d D . o l t h . ~ , ~ l a m r r a a a Y . hold-

o l t l o r d v i l q ~ b l ~ 1 l a r a l n t i l r 4 a h m

".pul"l, -a .p. D f a m yurs.-(=) .

I l c l s a - d r c k . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r Y a h b a q ~ I * . l a ~ w m b d J D ~ m ~ ~ . O d a P O Y 1 4 d r r e b n ~ a ~ D h h ~ i m m . Q b 4 J D m ~ ~ . A b b a a i d m d h l b ~ ~ p o l , ~ b a b a a m b f r r ~ ~ W e d o o r r . a d d I i b ~ w a Q ~ ~ L o d c L . & b n g - r m m . l l d M . r M m h a e b d - - l i . l d d m k m I D h b b c & R d h a n d b r b D b 9 Q a & d r i d - o P b ~ U ~ d o . ~ . ~ w m ~ ~ ~ M b y m ~ ~ k d r w d b ~ d I b - a u ~ d Q C u d t s b m b r t L . p l r a o d l b ~ b m ( b . p d d-d-*pob(b-oarilbdSk

MlmmLUY

WeP.lmm~rab-??,.yLhhnhddbr).lrRb ~ ~ ~ r . c d m u ~ ~ l B o r C h o o ~ ~ T m ~ l r m L B . b A L . m b Y d L l n p * o m r Y b b a ~ h ~ ~ d a b a l a r a r & l . . d ~ r b h w - h & b . L d d ~ b b i k m

' l b h l l r Y t r Y . d Y I Y C L - e b a C 1 L . 3 r l Y 4 r b - l c l k t r r . C 1 b L I m m 0 1 1 1 1 1 - ~ ~ ~ b p - d b - r s m ~ . - - - w * v b t ,m * C ~ L r l r . l . ) r r r . b ~ m + I d k - L r r b 1 C I Y . +

' i W I . 1 6 L I C I . ~ I I ~ L I - b , * ~ - ~ a ~ b - ~ ~ - w r - p m . T a m ~ q q r * - . r *&bb-dsh .Lh-Y . r - ib~ .b ~ w p l s l . m ~ ~ c w m n a - ~ k - b p I * I r p n m blbq.

T h A D H O C l k r Y I L - a c h L r - vER,lFlED -arr*lr*bl

-1-2 AMENDED

~ r b ~ ( r b + d m ) I I ~ ~ p l ~ m k l * ~ ~ l l o b ~ - ~ ~ ~ ( b c d b ~ ~ l b ' ~ ~ . l b ~ ~ a c r i a b D . y l r a k d p r d l r - d A - P ~ I I I b b Y P D D l Y b dlb.' . ' d ~ d d t a p J c ~ ~ ~ d ~

I c t * A m d ? - m h 9 a h o d J D b-c,mmmmh o r r n a b O a & w w b k o . H . a a % # h ~ ~ C C a a d ~ ~ffcllpohbldldbhmo16.r~IYdqm6mddk.d ~ * a a ( b ~ r n m a d ~ ~ d ~ ~ a b . ~ m e h W t L l i r s d n a a b p a m * b . e e C * b a m a y r a a i ~ e d ~ t b h l d r d a n n b ~ l .

m r I h . r l a a c L . ~ d b * ~ b b r n ~ ~ ~ * ~ d L c h ~ @ m I h ~ r l & i t i l l - t b i r a d I k ~ ~ ~ P ~ j 5 m ~ j u o ~ m k n U c b b ~ b - ~ ~ Y o l l d l r d d b o ~ ~ ~ & e I P 2 3 m h A I ~ ~ a a m ~ h o ~ T o r ~ ~ ( A ~ ~ b 0 ~ m n p O a ~ . . r ~ f f c h p & I r r l d b ~ b ~ ~ d l I b ~ l b t*o6**rdCqrablMbhkbMkridaJdqpbcheb ~ 5 k t b ~ a m ~ i f a p p c d b ~ l r l w T o r b ~ . ,

a*cmbml.SPs ~ N e W Y d --bM= CmmnwnmBAaSlllvM

593VlldabPArep-2SI ~ N n r Y a k l l 2 3 8 (434) -m (- -

C a l L r n V ~ A s l 3 S l N . m R d ~ , w o r Y a k l a u r 9 l 4 3 S W 3 6 6 1 k ) U ~ -

4

Page 155: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 156: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 157: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 158: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 159: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

TOT -V

I

Page 160: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

99~~~auall~ow~l~~~~~oR6WhW

=s*-w>-sn=~-gl'.t.;S;*;I .-=-!!olr*urdcll

zo~nsl~rsd.anawasa J . .-.rn~ 1 44=nQm-

*uw~~lLpPd--w=b.raqlll.l~ -.A-

IOI -1 I -==q-dP 'ml

nMXqmw& .. . . d - ~I-~I-WOP. '101

-ra~omlnPpaF--

q~~~xssi*r~-~ .. . .J-

66.rlllnl*dud-d-~ m.ml [email protected]:

w~~~PI-=l~~-m-F--=Vlol.P4'

~-+I~~PI*Y=-.IIuDPYDwY.~~IY~~~~~*~~~~~

--. . . 86..111-~0q.d '66

- ~~nw3~~ln~~41qr-='~9-="ll

"-'vl-. - .=-ww*~a

~6.qllDlbd.d-a-d .. w '16

=WP~SMUO~~~ . . . . -4-

-J-~~J.l~=w~ %ngrlqarSrrl--F-' t 'Lb

EPN r*r

Page 161: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 162: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

---- llll7RmS Ilr m W

p.cI 1 D.nk onhrBS-2 emasmw -

FI- 5 1 ~ m - ..... ............... .... ... .... -.-.... ....... .... ... -.r- el" - . y. I C...

r m . r r r a c m m r a v r u n R A T B W M W ) I ~ I I I ~ ~ ~ W

U m1.m oDairrvwr) r b v . m r r + - c - - * ~

I - . p . m - r . ) I k s n . U I O . I I J Y.L-.Y-.U-k&m*I-131)b*_.r r s n ~ r m w b r r e d r L u - b ~ . r * -

m-.nc-r-r I-.M.d-&U.DCkM111--

~ L I . I C - m ~ ~ d L * r - - ~ R . * r ~ . r - d m ~ ~ ~ ~ . h ~ ~ ) r l ) U E ~ b Y I - - Y D l L l l 6 , I l l r P Y

I C L I . I Y Y o c L . ~ d d l L T Y I . o I V * ' d m . . i - L . ~ t w ~ - U , d ~ . r n C L . . l M V A 3 l l b

~ u w * C b - b - ~ h . l a . r ~ R C , * I l r O q - d Q l b D Y I I L # . d W ~ Q I L . I I ~ ~ W C C ~ I I . ~ W I V . ~ ~ v r r - n w U b b ~ - d W l l r

r . r - i a n r w m . m @ ~ b w - m - m m d ~ d u r r . l l r P r s b i b r l l r a b l l l ' k ! +

1

F ' i.:

?. 8 j <. . * ' . ... :

Page 163: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 164: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

, , , ,,,,,,,,, ,.,,,,,,.,...... . ............. . ........................... - . . - - . . - .. -1- rn11(P fRm1

m- ' P.l,I . I)...

- ~ d l l U n T W a Y m - ~ 1

m4YIfWmwm ) m M m ) U mlm)

UU(TIw- )

t l r u r u m s * - + = - a ~ d m - t m

I r a p m ~ h - ~ . o ~ W - ~ a ~ o r l

.YI.l--rn1CnC.smxt-rnwIYdwu m b

. N ~ T n d . 9 ~ Y l I ~ m L M ~ r l ~ A h u ~

a m m d k l o - . Y n m a - m - a l r I - .wemdrs l *mmcIC~ I * * - t (YY

1 4 n n ~ m w r r r a ~ - t ~ & - ~ . 1 - d T * w ~ m d . . b # . l b ) . C P * I ~ l m c 2 l u . . ~ * t b o l d i l R d ( L a b . I b m . C I - ~ w r i s r b r i

li.+d--ap.lrD.m-U*r

-lP-&~*~-.i.Crl--d - m F & d ~ e 4 R A V A r r r r a . ) r r l b m r ~ e a ~ d 1 M & r I

r i l k r r p l l h d b ~ ~ Y ~ ~ ~ d ? U b Y ~ ~

-..ar--.k-,Wrr-wyo~.-b r n i ~ l . l ~ . r n . ~ ~ k s l ~

I 1

p r r - r ~ l . w - l ~ . q - o I b - h u . l m b ~ a i b . L . d b y d r m Q l r I L k I m b m l b ~ d

~ k b L r r n . l ~ m . . d - i i k . d W - ~ b k 3 ~ ~

hobdmlrwb.44

E*q' C W r Y

S.,.r-la I--- -- 4 .' - - ;:. I

i - . ' - . , .-: 3 . - * , .:-.,.. .:

? .->- - ---2 . .- -c-.i -..t.:--

M).ILIm16.-lm cne.1 - . .. . .

---- DL: tvimus h 9 9 -

hlr: 1 p.L 1 ~ P O I O * - mL*ll: 5- -

I

Page 165: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

LOT - V

Page 166: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 167: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- i r ~ ~ . ~ w . ~ B s 5 ~ m - N u w &

New Yak 13EISPbr i m - m - I &

- r ~~ACbq.~T.Lu&eqllIb'S(nqAtkW.r

Yoa I401 l rsDa ~ s n - I n 4 w-m p J d h n ~ ~ . ~ R m e d l ~ I 7 5 ~ 9 Q I ~

Nnr Yak 13601 ~ ( 3 l s y m - 3 0 4 O A X ( 3 l ~ s 1 ' M

Page 168: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 169: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 170: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 171: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 172: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

EXHIBIT 4

Page 173: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

I b a s . o m . i a p b z m m . r y a L m r . ~ , ~ m i m n M o p ~ m

~ t b o b o t a d o c 6 0 . ~ i ~ M y m l m n ~ b & b y t h s 6 i k d % b

~ * r d D n r d b r l i c b w ~ W I f a . . m l o l k a t b p D M c m Q

rormai.hl.llboddMmtboalia~bmsd.ad&~n&badmc.

W ~ l r i t ) l a m q m m e - ~ r S ~ L d E a a I ~ ~ ~ * t L k b h a

-FR

DNd:-ts1Y mnn,m,Iy.rYrL --

A(MY

CrTbEHmmbb WN.rslly. U S ~ ~ t b o S m & m D i a i a a f N w Y d ~ s . i m ~ ~ N c r Y d N e r Y o r L lam

~ A C r d o l l s e g T b E N Y C ~ c u l m d o t h c + o r t b o ~ ~ d & c y d N c r Y d l O O C b m s h S b c a N s r Y a k . N Y 1 ~ ( 2 1 2 ) ~

AppslLrm

4 17

A - 115

Page 174: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

. . ~ k o s o d 6 a r r m s d y a = f a a c i r i 1 & m i p e m m c ~ q p i a s t - . a i c a b y n s y u d . U a m i l y k a r b u d ~ p d l m ~ ~ ~ a a d s o f N Y S Ebam br. Smo Pmy by-bm d lk NYS 6 A&k 5A Cml Rigb bw.

EXHIBIT 6

AD HOC COMD(TTW TO W R P O U T E TEE MUNICOPAUTY OF GREATFR BROOKLYN

Page 175: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

m entity. T l t a I h c S ~ C a r i r * n M t * I I I S o c l m 4 p n ~ M i b k d I k R h l r

~ ~ i o n d n y d ~ ~ . i n h N Y C p x ~ ~ h 2 6 ~ & h n C & ~ d 6 2 ~ - i t u ~ ~ I ~ 0 i q Y ~ , * c ~ h . l ~ & w ~ n d ~ ~ ~ h h c ~ ~ o r W l m Ihn hu I-k udn MPM W-. hl DLT Anick Ill. M i c VI. A d c k

EXHIBIT 7

EXHIBIT 8

Page 176: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

for nm or* p..- to & e t a 14-100. 14-102, 1S-104, lC1W and 16-116 of tho U d M L . u r

-.rrcut-

II. coYA.IIA. Baa.. CbaiND. nacnmr UrmUoJl cOmm C O ~ I W K C I om T. FUUX. EM., O M 8 I ) . U Q o .4.. ~h.i- . c~szem- o u o a r t t c c a m c-mwr nxcnuo L. Y.-, m., umxa A. nomm, sm.. am. rllllcrs & ~ICOCAX HILU) IIXLttl, nmq., A L g n J. UUI I )KLLI . W.0

a: mu Am, mama ~ a u s m , amrr AQ~ILA. calm.ion~r. oonatltutlnp tho IiLI YOEX SIATS .OILD O r ILKCTIQUI

a. D * A ~ I C X . nr#Iow 8 . OLDX, Cmiuioll-r. s ~ l ~ t l t ~ i -

gar .r. ~rd.. daelmrlq tm11a tlw cwtitiaaeoa pyiMi.9 to wieut. n..po+tm nm. m r x a A. r r c a u and r a r u o alusa. m., a. smdi&t.a foc tho offlC. a t JtUClm o t cm s u m coact of tnm stat. OL hu mrr, rinoh ~ d i o i u Diatciee L.d CM rntitl-a pnrvmcL9 to d . # i p a ~ . AL- J. ~ n ~ m i ~ t x , 1.4. uandi&L. tor en. oriic. of sacresmta a t Y.mtchwtu Comotq to no nwld In to. qnbrml *Iectior

8 e p ~ ~ coust - for ~udioi.1 taumotlom I Oefohmr 12, IslOdpclnl Tar# W I 0190 ST2747 1- 10. 6OS6-W

m S C S L- E. UR, R..idlry

4pPeuUcuf Dori. L. Iruorr. ..C. ~ttomaq for p.cltloluri 283 s0undrf.u ~vmsu* Ihlz. Plalnm, I.w York 10606 (914) 997-1671 I

TlmmaJ. rnswrl. 01. , A t t M l y tor UImWI ~ I x ebWr Avonua Ihitm Prr iu. mr xork la601 1914) 32eWOO

..-

mu reek. I*W rork ioiw 1212) 370-1000

MI, okumr. wvlu. urt r ki.~.. rr r a m . Up. Attern.).. for m=U 11 HrCIU Av8mw

.amford a. *note. imQ. attormy tor UQMD IIXL~.. OM I l w 6111 Clam P.O. #.,a 1629 kui ~ W C , MOW IorL 1096M629 (9141 7354200

a3 I . I1 I .-. __ . oco 04 - ...

II . .

3Us prwwdlaq a n k ~ 'to m l w U. a a m l ~ t i a a of chrn

aaMl&tn for ol .sLia to U. ofzlor 02 J..tln at the

Ewrom ear+ for tbo minth Jdici.1 Wmtriot ot th. E-t* or

W Y0ck. Ip.olfic nf0C.M b d t0 tb. 1L

I- m ~ ~ ~ i a n ~ J i o i . 1 -lolr ua th+ s.pt~- 2.. lm

-tie ~ ~ r l -tiom. m &I- U L ~ a t the

.fomnld -loll. mIpoet to bo 1. curthmrmo. Of . wcit ta c n o ~ u t ~ o o of U. n a ~ e b . . ~ r foonn .lid

-=tie M t t r m . v*ia - p h COT a. . .

-L-- k N i o m for ~ l l l t q -111

Court. 8rrrq.cm c a m a d h.r cest. ra t ru w. tWe i a lo dim* that tM rnolaci-l) aal.U c that I:

pa. a0 u u to mi& tlut - n0miUt.d. - IdiridrNl

W i l l p L w to 'pcorld. .Irul Ueu a d aowldr.tlm. i f

UI. ta t h r e a ~ C I 0 0 . of tlY 1Ud.ra of .#b Y j ~ t

pa1iti..I D . r C Y L. eaa-lm wltll jma1.i.l

.~poisU..ta.- *a. tbo ymrot .PR.rm ta ..a utua ce

hiriq ol mWl -1.

V u h dUmndaau &n mwd to dl- llpa

o...l-rloa. or j u r i ~ i o t i ~ . taiirm ro m h t m .SUUW mr wtloa. 1.tahmt m t U t \ l t . OS 1i.tta:iOor~ m t m . Pmtltlomra

ham .1n aoaq?~t 1. d i m t i n f ~ o r ttn - tbt -in

rmmIRICnu atm i m d.Lault IQS b v i w fai1.6 to t b 1 y w r . . ~

~1aadCnp* oc daf.etlwly ntltid pldirym. Dovawr. I r tb.

--asor- or w e i l l w a i 4 a t u b--*- ."j= - - - p r r r i u l mrtioa n u long - - bm . .- r)n .. .- -- -.or, . . 0: ~ ~ c . o ~ L . L - - -a ' U l O W -2-tu Ft&n..rnl.+. -. 1% .w ---.--- - * fa- of at* dl b M u L m om ,bo-t - - -. -. -- .-- ~ t ~ ~ T , - p * - for I#.*-, H-m ch. m1.r SUM. of * -t of Aw8al8. Iq.L.nr, ..ad m.t --q -_.__.--- -__-.. -- ia em aoocaat of tai* jw1ci.r -I,,,. rr p r . c t h of

Wrn-ubilltY Of U. rY.1mti.o -ld -* t o b. __- - - ---._- ..ondiWl~ mnotub1.. th rwl1t.J i o tbbt it bor .or

.nwnl t l a chm aaintlom QS 4 o m L p u r i ~ of oudibu Z O ~ - .- -.- 4!enn Comet &.ti+. a y ~IIU 4.kgatu w n -11 ~onv*md JodioIU DLmLIlat amvantion am UL. m.011 utlo.

rr? - - v am. n rms 742.) mr t .~ r r~ . +y

Page 177: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- 2 d 3

mymay- T L . d d q r r ) Y h m l Y . l h m . b . . l q l l ~ a n d -- . . - ~. - -

-m M e : m. 13 F e ZBM m51:47 (P5U

hOll; Ch,hmwM--M->

Lgdi *N**d~Iokamn*l-.mEmDecrlm

n w w . M a o n ' <--*, v .-,. n-.ot.-- .--s -lo,-& < ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ - , ' ~ M Dnr <bn"hn.pmnmm>, 5W1 nm-,<&!veomzo-t>. mllslmowU+%.nr <m~~ooL-DI>, ' 0 -nOlmmn.nr <pmm.n4(mnC*-nnl. -h".oMnOn*cm-. ~waru~anomcn.m>. -wpoiaunnoom <)osmopmo8im.rom~.

r.; hn&rtonleZOmnmm' <m-+-~sm-.->. y r r una. * h m M a r m m r u c a , wailmmOpmo."m' <m6ra-.*rO.Mo.mnl. ~ L a " * . h m m m . .mrp(O*ra,'am,.,eo".hm.m>, .npmmnmolmd9nnoo.mnoo <ra~dowsdOrsdOrmOm>, .Pw-mm DLtr4.--*.. .w4.aonn*".hmmm>. 'rapnrrOd.mm. <-nab.ol.~",r, %~l-zmnmmm awanarueramo.mn>. 'rsasoo. <.artooOomalmr. ' w a r n r * ~ . rmnea,anmabO".nm.mm>

Wll- S m U f ~ r s . i l d d i \ ~ r s d r a ~ ~ d m i c + . S c d ~ ~ ~ ~ q r ? . ~ ~ k t k o r i g h d . A ~ n - Y ~ e s ( O * , b e I + . I b I b c c M h

I. BR0fNANCEHIWFOR~CeATNYUSCHOOLOFUW 1 6 1 A \ m d h c Awncar 1 2 1 h F l c - x ~ Y a t N Y 10013

By:Freds*LAO.scbnrrh.Ikbah-laa.Cd~ M.P H. M m

z ARNOLD PORTER LLP 399 mt ~ n * YO^ m 10oz2-w~

E y : K a A Y J a r i b . A a d ~ ~ . S . l c i r C o J c ) . A s d . O i \ r r

3. A I ( M O U M P ~ U S S H A U E R & P E U ) 1 U ~ ~ A ~ a e N D l r Y & ~ 1 M ) ~ : By:Sn+.MPcaer.Adrra.J.~rJ..crP.Cb..JmE.d'A.p*c.Vpcsn,A D d e a . h i a u A . D * M

4. ARTRUR W. ORPIO. m. 401 m. S d c 1902 Ncn. Y a k NY 10013

a R o B W 7 ~ M v a ~ m L L P m ~ ~ ~ a w 1 1 H ) 1 e , ~ k & l A U r a l i h i ~ * k Y a t S a ~ -

a SRCULCOUNSeLTOsrAlEBOAllDOTELECllONS

40- SJW -.NY 1222F1650By: Todd D.V.b(ic

7. ~ ~ A I I T ) R N E Y ~ O F T W s r A l E W N L a r Y O R R 1 2 o R o a d n ' n ' . 24 FbmNerrY&NY 102714332 By: Jod Ms. Ch C o k d

&Iff:--I--1U.OCAIS-I\TcqWAWh 2/27/2006

7

- 3 d 3

a SIROOCK&STROOOC&LAVMLLTIl0klridmlrclJm.Y&wlOm8

F & ~ ~ L P o r a d C E m n R R ~ . ~ I . ~ D m i d ~ ~ A ~

Ezz-h",%rab-i;=M,z mhcbm"h

In..:

B- lrnC---u*sU

B - -M--Jl-(2.2*II)

8 c k H J 1 ~ - 1 3 * M l

@ ---.--9>AlM17*)

I 1,

~ I ~ ~ : ~ I K ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - I U . O C A L S - ~ \ T C ~ W A ~ I ~ 2n7nGO6

Page 178: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 179: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

TZT - V d

Page 180: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

ZZT - v

Page 181: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

tkberd&-.~drlelsri 1970.

c ~ ~ ( * I ~ ~ ~ w C H A I * T w ~ ~ N ~ ~ ( * I r n ~ M l O N FOR MSMlaAL AS PRE-MNTURE WTWUl m A L PARTIES

T b t ~ c a H k d t o ~ n k . a t k m e m r ? . ~ . & ~ m a

lnmm STATES m c r NORTHERN DlSIUCTOf ERW YORK

CITY DEFENDANTS REPLY MEMORANWM OF LAW IN FURTHER SU)PORT OF MOTION TO MSMISSME COMPlAlNT AND IN OPPOSITIW TO PLAINTIFFS' CROSSMOTION TOCHANGE VENUE

TABLE OF CONENTS

Page 182: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

TABLE OF AUTmWIITlES

4.

-5-

UMITEDSTArnMSTRICTcaIRT ~ D I S I R K J T O F N E 7 U Y O R l C

h l h r 4 2 W I ~ 3 d h p d ~ 6 . ' CITY DEFENDANTS' - o t RmldO.L&. lh~V.abWl l lbE. REPLY MEMORANWM 8 o m b d , W h A ~ J d m ~ F + m e , H . OF LAW IN FURTHER W h Vm wF. i lcaeo. -. ~ ~ ~ a r r . SVPPORTOFMOTlON ~ . R ~ E . ~ . ( M r r I R P o m . E ~ ~ a d M R n a h . . C ~ E u l ~ r l T b r A D

TO DISMISS THE

HOC Nnv Y a l i Sac C b COT CopdNholr1 Iqblslkr IN

R n L m s l i q OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS CROSS

-1hk t iea . MOTION TO CHANGE

e- VENUE

~ J . ~ A R O a ~ ~ r d . . k d D c o f t b c N Y B S * p m C o n d . l l h l k s d l h r S t a k ~

MCn. 119) (LEK)

ComLIaL

-1-

i

R*in*rrSmnm h h i r o p p o i l i a m * e c ~ ~ r o l i o . m d h k k m r p t i . l f o r

f i l m t o r t . s . c h i @ * e C & a i a ~ v . & ~ l l l i M ~ m b n d d

Mdlla?+- hdd*or&?.bmrWrd.awndbbrl,..p\al

o u ~ l L i . c r c n ~ ~ v a r d . d w m c d t L c ~ . i r v a c

. . c o r d a a a l l p n a d l . r l q l 7 h s c T o c a b s r + i b c ~ ~ r a i a b n c A

d~).aMrcd.cckdsrrd*qakl*Cilydcrcdra.Ihcredcd

~ d a l d b e ~ d & a m m l i m b ~ \ a c d s * d .

STATEMEHTOFFACrS F a 8 ~ d h m i b c C a i 6 ~ S r r 6 s r r d t o t k C i l y ~

~ . u l m h d h i m ~ d Y d m ~ t b c ~ ~ .

-

tlEaEm PLAINWFS -IN W L E TO ARTlWUTE ANY FACTS m N G A CLAIM (W UNCONSTINTIONAL CONWCT BY T W CITY OF NEW VORK OR ITS WYOR: CONSEWENll-V, THE COMPLAINT MUST BE DISMISSED FOR p

b ~ n r ( l ~ ~ l o p e v d m a p 1 9 X 3 d i r . ~ p h d f . n r ( a l U i &

b . l m ~ ~ d s m l o r d d l l m ~ d h i a h d ~ L M r i l y . Qg42U.S.

p 1911. M U.S. 635. 640. la, ra 1920 (1910). -IP+WI it.&-

ddcfadPhdk& "". d d @ v d m i r . ~ m r n r r d d ~

dcr # 1m." ~dollv. 58 ? a 165. m t u c t 1 ~ ) (dblior -1.

k t L i i c r . ~ d i Y h r . o l . I l i d . o d a ~ c r r o f . C b b

- r ? . W i l l q . l a - . . m d r r d & C w d N m Y a & a h

h ) I & i A d d ~ L a e d . 0 ? . a m t & g p l i l * . l

-kpli.hdbd.illyh.T - . l o r a ~ - ( P L M a . l p . 3 h d i c h

~ h W ~ r a P a p p a U P . ~ p p . M ) . ~ . l * . I ( L & G r e m C ~ o f

1 n 7 ~ , p o . d m b . l ' & p e q l c ' m ~ ~ ~ ~ k " . ~

m p m o b c b " (19. d p. 8).

T b c ~ ~ d & ~ d N c l r Y a k ~ U i l p m p a l ~ h r Z d d a

[ ~ ] ~ ~ d u w t r o l r r M m h ~ j r i d * 6 o . m w ~ p n u d ~ M a

c&dii nuym~'s y .I p 9. L @U d d & ' ' 6 h L

~ I L . ( k C & ~ m ~ b d i . l i * r l o f * b ~ r d M i l l e i ~

ncrmd.l d h .

- 2 -

T h ~ T 0 T R a A C m N o t ~ l D i m l B . l

F o o o r i a & w i a d I h * l Z ( b M ~ A m d a i n I n . i b c C i ? . . d h d c n l

~ * s ~ h r h d r d a d ~ I L h C o r t b h . d c r ~ ~ h m t k

W~DbciadhYat&xe#&iffsbnr~hblalovnLlaimilnrtio..

-06CicOTJ801RJA). Hmnw.rafDltlbdm.*cniml@bahto

h 1 6 a c b i r ~ r d i d a d . b ? . ~ h i s ~ l a i o r ~ r r l i p I y ~

i a n b t m p r a - i -

V a m e i s d c h r d r * e p ~ p ~ c m i ~ h k b m i i k r ~ a 1 7

$ 110.01 Bcdcr 3d d.) -A +pan. papae d \+re

r r g . k e m a E ~ b p b d k ~ q a k l & m L ( b l ~ p h d f d d r a r . d . i a

b m b l p & w d E i d - I&* 8 110.01(4M.).~ p . . ~ 3 u . s . r n 1crru.99s.a 2710(1m).

lh fedad rcse p m h 28 U.S.C. p1391(bh mida r Mbnr:

tb) A ckil r(io. nLrr i jii**(p. L m f a n d c d ~ m d i \ u x + d ~ ~ . craptroc*nn+pmidcdbyIm..bebnmgh & P ( I ) . p d i E h l ~ a ~ r ? . d d d a E l ~ddcr.if.uddmdasraidci.&-s~~ (2)a jd is i . ldmind~nn- .abaalnlpnd & n a a o r - g i \ % r b c c r k b oeear rd .aarbQI lu lpr to fpopst? . lM isLbc abjstd&rtA b ~ t 0 L d . ~ ( 3 ) . j O d i O d d i d d h n* my Mcodmt may be i d . if l b c r c n m d u & m i ~ * h K b ~ h e m m n . Mbanix bebm&t.

' T k c r c p i ~ t b e r m r e r i n W H A V A f i a r r d L t i M e d

m c b S a e d r t e s p a d e d d b h & S a c . hdd*orm-&r.rcrm

rrLi.b&SacL.lbeendi\~ilodcclimdiraish & ~ p ( p t ~ C o P p * i n

~ . & N o n b c n ~ ~ i ~ ~ d S a c g m ~ d u e t b a c

-3 -

Page 183: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

. CQT* . .. m - c ~ d ~ & ~ d S c r B o r d d ~ m - c

~ r l p y o y i l d E o . \ & w w t M m m u . n & 4 & - d I L W d

~ d d a d l & ~ d & S r d N e w Y a t d d m d m s ~ m m s i d e ~ u a t m

M m y . ~ . ~ r r e b ~ i L c ~ D a * L

U d a h ~ r L i d & c r r h ~ \ ~ m ~ f i r d

tds moIiom ipliar 28 U.S.C. 8 1W01(6 Sg 17 Mads Fcdenl

Rrcicc I111.02(ln.) ~hfaklv Bcda3d w.1 %A- - 751 P, *. 1075. 1WI (S.D.N.Y. 1990). S c d a l4OU.) pa* r

foPDnr

s14M. a*npofvnu (a)Fa&wm-dpWhd-i & i ( a d d ~ . . ~ c o s l ~ h r d ( ~ p m i l r t i a l o ~ & ~ a ~ n h a @I hmr bcn hmght.

A s a * d r b a r . & c o r s ~ ~ ~ d n w l d h n r b r a r & h

Nbmy.n~solld&r(rdekdUslsidc&mek I.ddilPrmrrlf0r.U

d c h r b a a c e p t & C i t . d e k d U s . L n r ~ & B ? - & W c s a M h

~ d b t l d L c L . m ? u r 5 b & C Q T h a c r d i k r ( i o r A h r t e r n w l d

d y ~ m ~ & p W h d n i r r a d ~ & & h . u k d m i c d . '

' I n w e r ~ r m M ~ t L c ~ ~ . ' l i . l b M p o c p t n r a l d p c \ ~ l m b a l o & W ~ D i a * C ~ M s r n r G k d & ~ .

- 4 -

s2mwPQ P o r & ~ - & C f d d ~ ~ & m l o d L i n & l a d o d

~ ~ l d b e ~ d & ~ m h r t e r l m c ~ b C ~ .

DLd: NnrYodrNeaYodr M.el 9.2006

MltWAEL A CARD020 . CcrprmiaColr lor IL City dNn' Yort

A m m c y f o r C i & ~ t C i ? r - d N n r Y a t dMiehrlmcd-=rg)

h &: ANlBONYGJARDINA(Brhk5IMJO) A..htaCorpadacoad P.O. EIOS 1277 918 ULderA%uxe K ~ @ o L N Y 12402 Tel (845)3W7559 Fax (845)340-7.W E d : 4 r n ~ u h . m ~

-6-

U l m D STATES MSTRHIT COM NORTmRN DISTRICT OF NEW VORK CSS: O~V-1193

x (LEKIRFP)

LOEBERlULdthADHOCNewYDlLSrCiliacnb miratio..l Legkhlhe Red-

PLiciBr v.

SPM(GOuL - X

STRVNK'S RESPWE IN OPFOSiTtON TO THE CrrY DEFENDAIYTP MOTION TO DISMISSTHE COMPUINT

~ . L ~ ~ ~ S h l t d s l r o d ~ r d c r ~ o f p j r ? . :

I. A a p r n a o . I ~ - m m v . a ~ p h k m + - 5 m

V d a W A ~ ~ R 8 l ~ r N n r Y o r t I 1 L ) 8 . i I L ~ d ~ ~ ~

tbs oh. dNew Yo& n* Ror €454894774. rd

2. A m a r o b a o f t h ? A D H O C N w Y a * S l a ~ k r

c a n U M h d ~ I M m a k r p r r r i d c l r i & L c d h . o f N e w Y a k ~ l o

v a i t h 5 f ~ ~ r l ~ ~ ~ e ~ c ~ r i ~ b i r i l f ~ - ~ a c ~ c ~ .

bnnailbJb.Ab.

3. T h i h n . p m d ~ i ~ l o & o t ? . o f N n ' Y a t d

M . ? w ( " l k C i 1 ? 3 ~ o o l d ' s ~ b I ) s l i s a t b s ~ C o q h i c

~ ~ ~ W d b & ~ . l l ~ C o l r l A . l b a ? . O i r d i u n ~

ILirsqorcdrM.el21.2006.

4. ~ r a r c n k r o f t L c p ~ ~ d ~ I ~ W b n n

~ ~ & P . b C L . L A a ( P C A ) 3 1 U S C 3 ? 2 9 1 h 3 7 3 3 i & l a s d

shCRspo.rlo&myMID*l /'

Page 184: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

a e k i y p o l r r & s & L l i l . m e - d a i d c S o e h l S a \ h " d i a i c r

t u i I 9 6 9 w m ~ d f m s 1 & ~ w ~ d t L . @ ~ u r & a c k

P o d c n l D b o i a i ~ ~ 7 1 ~ 1 ~ 3 L F , ~ . I ~ t l * n ~ ~

~ 1 0 ~ . 1 S c s o d C i a i l - B c r ~ 1 9 R ~ " I d & l 9 7 4 r h r c d

ILchkbrc & ~ C ~ t k ~ ~ b o c v 6 \ r .

12 T k a s d h t k C i ~ p s M ~ d k l r d i c l i d

rilL&q " ' ~ r c d 6 \ r & @ l a s i l a i a d k u h i b d d o r . p s r n &

m ~ i a h l o o . d ? . & m p t d . ~ 1 y d r o f b o t L N V R A d H A V A tu

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i m d t r r a a d ~ b t o l ~ t o

~ n 3 k d ~ ~ b e ~ f m 0 ~ ~ m & m d t u ~

l 0 t b c W D N Y u c M s \ 4 9 3 ~ ~ q 6 L d ~ 2 2 2 ~ ~ d b o t h

~ d ~ ' ~ d i b i c b i p d ~ ~ ~ d r ; l * * . l ~ j l r r d -

d ~ h 5 o m . 6 m K d ~ m ~ ' '*.

13. TMPk4ifbi&~pqcnbrtlrGba(oShvCrc6kd

- I 4 . 2 M H p m M e i & r r ) e r d & - A p i J U . 2 0 0 2

~ r c d R a s A C l l V E V o * n n l b p l E L ~ % 2 1 3 i ~ b . p (

* I r ( L - h ( L - " E M b m D . r - & x d r i &

c m ~ ~ i ( Z M Y ) ) . ~ E L e t a ~ d ~ M ~ r V ~ p . a c L r b O

be&fnndndd l * ld4bkd & I q . l ~ s U n \ a ~ p u P L y 1 0 0

m m r i . q ~ a i l b . l ~ ~ g l m m ~ i & b h k . l i o . . m . p r t

rdtkia&r~aarrben~mmb&.la*d _ ' I ~ w e l l n c * .

d - 4 ._ ' r r . ~ d a d h h r \ v t e d o r

chdkgcm' ' :bmmaduimg

s ~ ; ~ c l p o r e r n a c * m p e 4

14. 'krrslKoftkNVRAil993-- -&eradad.

d d a b r c m d ~ b k o a a t r r o ~ w q d e * ~ E k d h m ~ d c q d

d d b m o l ~ ~ & d y e s & e d P i l l d r v d .'. l a a B i d c d &

c*.dNmYatnioxikgdrmmIma&sbkk@nm

IS. T k C ~ d a t @ - & w a o . l r r . W a r n l c b o a a * p a

n ~ ~ k x + ~ a d ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ W d - d l s t # s . p . m d n k s

~ A p r i I 2 Z . M 0 2 h a r n a ~ d i o i m ~ n i l L i c . ~ b ~ ~

. b o e & a r - d 0 1 ~ 1 ~ c ~ - & k c h y n 5 0 1 b i e d d

k b o r d c r 4 W a C d a a J N a H o a k ". "" ifadcoaoC-

b L Y d & r a * c m j n d y - ~ - d o r b y l i q , k i d m d ~

d & i n c m u h b a

16. ~ a * ~ t a ~ ~ ~ & r h m ~ u m a d ~ a i e

~ L * d ~ . d c r ~ b r r i ? Alllbpoi(dk,M.ldI.H)06&*i

l p r e a s l o ~ ~ ~ ' ~ . r r r p . ~ a 2 8 V S C U U ~ ~ p r c 1 &

dl*rrL*ndhkliiouLb&~dlibrtbarSmkmdErrrnDiain

17. T h ~ d W m g c R d c n l ~ S w b o t h ~ h d . d i i c c

NVRAa~M.+dULnrnib.(St*eBorddElsthmrrdgl.

P p e p r d o r & M a l H A V A d d o n d o n ~ m i W I ~ w L , n d & ~ c ~

d r o w bm

18. l ' M & C h y m r a h i * L . . ~ i o t h r ~

i i . d i a i a b o t L m ~ & d a c l c d & c h y ~ & M ~ W . n l c .

C P C i l l a o l o o W - I g e t r * 1 c f b c t i l . o Q b . S R . I p i i l r u s .

rpllbH))Lde6ail.dcrpbilW.lacLpLborihrp.dmA

S h . t ~ a p a s r n & ~ t ) . ~ 1 ~ ~ 5

/ ,/

Page 185: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

19. l k p c o p k ~ r i l b i t L c ~ m u x i u d C S y n n ~

~ i r o c k . b o m m & & , n n c d m ~ b . t L c - o f ~

& h s c n l ~ . d & ~ e o f & p o p b ~ i s ~ w k h & , ~ ~

& R k d c I d d p i l l l o r ~ t L c ~ m o k b n ~ d D p d a

mahto.i & ~ l ~ a . r r ? . - n a ~ ~ & ~ ~ ~ p b e k c

&Tre?.U.S. Smp2atC0l.l.d

20, L ~ e \ r h e & a d k o f & p c o p k ~ a b a c & ~ i

t~ccdyofNclrYak r c n i l b . ( a ~ f o l r d # i n e m m d ~ . t o f t L c

~ ~ M m ~ i & 1 9 6 4 ~ - c r c ~ d b

l h c U S S l p e r C o r t ~ U . S . C ~ k ~ N C 1 F Y a t d ~ & C d y

~ ~ o f . . * n i d c e & - i p m m o f ~ r l 6 r r p d

~ ~ ~ r d ~ . ~ b ~ ' - ' - I d s p ~ ~ b d

aeUim-Ihd,tllbdcIddplrt.lPr~Yod;~lmy~han&~~m.

21. € @ d & W t h & C ~ i b o ~ b . i u ~ b d c h ~ a

u e ~ a e & , ~ ~ ~ ' c ~ R V e ~

b ~ & i r & . b a e ~ ~ p a i l c h r ~ d d ~ r c l r d ? . ~ c d i c l l d m e

pwa&rna~&l~a.rr?.~uf~~i&&daatkdiehl

Dibiardrp.d.eddy.pa*dkmdHOak ". "" dlirr 1964d&&dHarnC . . '" is . . shdichl

b r u l a r d f c m k d c d M i c L l ~ m r r s l - A L L MUSIbebcmdd$Iq.l

~ a c n k w ~ d t

ZL l k C d y a O N L Y h = o r S t ~ M D i a a p t d O N L Y

a ~ ~ ~ L a r e , u d o c s ~ L d 1 r c L 1 1 1 U c n m r d a ~

%dRapolba&CiMID%6

7 . 2 0 0 6 ~ r e p n ~ h h ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e ~ - ; ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c r - l 1 2 9 b d b n '

d , t ~ ~ ~ d m ~ k m a * i * a q o ~ a ~ i n j ~ o r d n i r g ~ l u d * Y

~ O 1 ~ ~ b d . d d ~ a ~ m c * i o . m . R a l ~ r m n d c i r c u i t T o r

~ ~ i ) r e m M w q p l * * i o n d u c i o u f o r ~ J u d i c i d

~ h a 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ l u d g ~ ~ & & ~ o r r i b * . o k * r n u d c r l n r .

U. ~ h r m y ~ h i l D ~ ~ l i d f f s b i l a ~ a e a + d &

~ l c r r b m m h s m ~ l b a r t b s m b o f k c i c y d N n r Y a r L ~ i a

a r a , 9 ~ ~ k d b & b p o k r m ) ~ d m a d l . X I . n y ~

~ ~ d & q / t m d h & d - b y ~ h r c ~ l o / M n Y d a l b . r p - :

p ~ ~ a l l m ~ ~ ~ b o o k & l i a * h ~ i d 1 9 9 0 ' s c n r o l l P * h o

. m n k n d m r n i n a g I i b ~ ~ ~ b . ~ f k b ~ s ) ~ ~ ~ ~ *

~ . ~ k b c l l ~ q r d m ~ ~ f & ~ ~ ) ~ ~ * r w k d i ~ r d a . ~ . ~ ~ ' o k Q .

says &u knrHl&mu.&mtulrUn*r"Ik%"

24. F a ~ l ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ' " ad

~ ~ , " i l b ~ ( * d a m ~ C 1 & ~ ~ 2 9 . m . n d

~ ~ b a ~ o f v e ~ c a d a m n m l o h J r g c L n n c a a I L I C . b a .

~ l m k p l * l ~ n d w c i a + o d y ~ b y a

m u s r 2 2 M ~ j r d p ~ ~ ~ b a e i n ~ ~ r i a c

O a a b s 2 1 . 2 0 o c . h c C i * L a ~ i a a u K m m h y ~ t h c 1 ~ ~ -

m ~ ~ i r ~ d ~ m k r m c a d - a b ~ d ~ t

aM. ~*rchZJ.m k a k l ? m New Yat

CHIIISmrHER FARL mmK

s m a t ~ a h r ~ h y M T D R p 7

Page 186: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

10 1

N e w Yotk State Senate - . r * r Y r L Q ( l b k d k l L ,

(Y..a-C--

.. t

r - . -

-

A - 128 / 1

i d cssalo+CKolls31W-RFl Dmment93 ~ m m ~ p a e e m

* -

\

Page 187: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 188: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 189: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 190: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

CraellY-cuOllS3LEWWT DrmmenlBB-2 AsdM109R008 Paaeld27

~ s l - A ' I E s ~ ~ N o m E E R N m c T ~ N E w Y o R K

R O N A U ) G . L O ~ e t d .

-4

8"t-

THOMASI.SPAR04dd.

M I M ~ O P L A W U V ~ O I BTAnDEFENDANTS'naanOn~~

ANDREW M CXJOMJ ~ G 6 m I o f t b o ~ o f N m Y o r L ~ b r ~ ~ I . s p l ( o i

~ L ~ ~ ~ S b c l d o a Siks.NYS-.GmgaB.R1.Li ~ A ~ d E l i o t ~ , d . L

%csiml A h q . N m Y d 12?24-W41

h M Bddaia *MornyOsosnSof- B.rRoONo. 510175 Tc- (518)47&2913 Fa: (518)473-1572@ktbr&ofp.pn) r * c c ~ 9 . ~

C s a s l ~ l l ~ ~ D o a n n m t ~ Fild- -2dn

- d u d -- ........................................................ I STA'IEMPrT OF PACPS & PROCEWML I3STW.Y ............................ I

m- TRE DISTRICT COURT MAY DISPOSE OF TEECASE WTlTWUT -A-PANEL ............................ 3

m- SlNCR TRE PUWnFFS RAVB NOT RAISEDASUBSTANTIAL ~ O N A L l S S U e A N D ~ L A C K S T A N m N G , ~ c A S B S H O U L D B E D I S M I S S E D ~ ~ G A 7 H R E e J U D O E PANEL ............................................................. 4

~ % p k b i w ~ a d ~ d ~ f d k . m a e a . ~ .... I n --..-..----------- I--..- -..4

. - ....... & % p h M i l B k k ~ m p ~ ~ q n & @ I* .-- 8

m- TEE -' CUDlS MUST BB DISMISSED AS AGAINST AU. LBOL3UTORS WHO ARE SHELDfD PROM SUIT BY ABSOUm! LEGISLAllW lMMUNllY AND THE SPeBCH AND DEBATE MUSES OF THB S T A n AND FEDERAL CONSlTlUllONS.. ............... ..I I

m- lllSTASTHEINDIVIWALLeGISUTORSAREBHCrnaDlOABSOlVIE MMUNITY,SOTOOARETHBWVERNO&THESTATESXNATEANDTHE SAEASSMWLY ............................................ 16

m- ~ A T N X N m G E N E R A L T R E ~ A R Y O P S T A T E A N D ~ s l - A T E ARE lNI l lUD TO DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF PBRSONAL

.............................................. KNV0LVEMEh-t 19

m- E M I P ~ ~ M ) B S ~ ~ T H B A C l Y O N U N D W R U U B I Z T H E M ( P ( D E D ~ I S N E V E R ~ ~ T O D I S M l S S A L UNDER FRCP *a) ............................................ .23

cONaUSlON.. ......................................................... .25

Page 191: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

0factbdPjdS~rm~"ldlRJd~o. I I s m m n u M F ( I I R M v E l s O T U I ( P D A ~ ~ ~ V- Laor Cmm V. 370 US. 713. 715 (1962). A - h a i d L S S U l l A N D ~ L A C K S T A N D W C , l l l l l ~ ~ O U L b U ~ acboak ' ' l o d y i f ~ d a a a r r a d r r t b c ~ ~ t i r o ~ W n W w r ~ A ~ w u D c E r -

Page 192: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 193: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 194: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 195: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 196: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 197: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

. C a s e l M 1 1 - Dmnna-2 FRsdMQW.OW Pa(leZ7of27

COWCULSYIY P a t b r a o a r t b n b l b m q t h ~ o f m ~ @ i . d ~ i u t b i

~ - l l r d t b ~ a t ~ d d r n r n ~ ~ - ~ ~ r n i b ~ ~ u r t b s m ~

mfemnspmmwo?.~~r. 1 2 ( b ~ 6 ) n Y B 1 2 ( o ) o a ~ ~ o R c t d ~ ~

~ d b c k o f ~ i . . o ~

h U m ~ ~ I d s P R C r . M L . b r m a d

~ m m y , l u s r Y o a w9.=

ANDRBWMCUOMO A t t o l r ) ' o l p . l o f t h ~ ~ Y o l L A m n l l c y ~ ~ ~ J . 9 p a c s

- L m N Y S S d s , - S%.NYS h = d Y , rxoao B. h w ~ A D a i ? h d E b l ~

l k - I A b m y , N c r Y d InZraUl

w- AmnMB.ldrP A d . 0 1 A ~ O a L o T C a d Bar RonNo. 510175 TcLpboo: (518)474-2913 Fa: (5 18) 473- I SR (Nd h u& of-) Emit -.m

m. ( tmrocbadDkhtb.dScna)

CaalS&m4lWK-RFT DmmmntBB3 FbdOUDBmaO h g e l d l

D ~ l l o N O P B I L I W I C P

k k a ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ U S C I 1 7 ~ ~ 0 . ~ 9 , 2 ~ 1 r m d U m d ~ d b W h m . I * ~ a f ~ ~ ~ ~ o f I O o ( . d . i . cMlecpdso.thb~idrilp.bbjdrpOdtq~opirrlhm5aprlyadmd P a k 4 ~ ~ i . ~ p o r c o h k i t h ~ o f W , ~ ~ & t h o l c h . i v a ~ ~ ~ o r t ( m ~ S a s I k l ~ ~ d i m w l t O m c ~ a t h ~ d c d g o d b r t l m p r p o r , r ~ . . . DEdApd9.mrS

Ataly, New Y a t

AARON M. BALDWIN

CbrLapb- RCwMEM YnVsdmt4lAllloc AptUZBI

mBoyb- S V . ~ ~ ~ N Y 10312

~ N Y 1 1 2 3 1 1 GW-

Ilald0.M 135 Gordoa PLro 2 1 3 0 h ~ r l m d Rcqm.NY11m -NY 12009

EdmlMhBmlr. WiWnBBmld 3 9 2 S k a e A w a c P.O. Box 882 NatbB.bYhsNYllna 0kr6 F* NY 12801

n e M ~ N ' t ' s ~ ~ ~

?&EL -m 351 NortbRod HmapmsNYIzE37 EmkY,NY I W

IoePnjoDc %rv.rkb P.O. Box 28 444WlibhOlM c ! m r d m N Y l e Abmy.NY IZm8

RwBhmVmaAhn ~PslsD&p€adr 351 N m t b R d 2 5 ~ b P c s C . d c h k y . N Y 12443 h k l p , N Y 11213

p . i l a c G M 8-L.D Pou$lk-NY 12603

Page 198: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 199: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 200: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

ZPT - V

Page 201: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 202: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 203: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 204: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 205: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

08-3242-cv US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

ClricqbEdSN

-1-

+-

[email protected]~CLiuUSPS ~ d ~ . ~ ~ O P N E W Y O R K I N Y O , N Y C 8 0 A R D O P

ELECIIONS. J r a I. Sm@. Rclihl Prrds* M Uue Soe&r).. AMbm? Coma. hlic Dsd Nso G d m k.. 7- C. O'Camr. h.. C l b . Pdrm. Nlc). Mond.SfLfber.~C.Saar.~~YcrdLdim&cdupchyd

l d r v d . e .

-1-

N n v Y o r L S t h B w d d ~ N e ~ Y a t s 1 . c ~ G o a d IbcUnitalSt*oMar).Oaenl

. . . . .

APPELLANT BRIEF

(errata corrections)

-Ed- prailh.tbcas.l)me?. M3 V.derbik A > a c 1281 ~ a N n v Y O a l l L 3 8

1212) 307-8444 as.n-o(a2'mIbo.ca

npplhtIpI*nan

m, w ~ N n v u ~ & -Erlswd vrdrrbik A\- 1123s a n 1

1212)307-8444cuil. --oM:mba-

h s C . m m C 1 . r m V S P S B m d d ~ U . i * d s h . ~ S c n i a

475 L'EaIrm Plau sw. wdimmn DC 202m

h

J. CAMPBELL u.i*dSb*r*

v . i * d S t h - a h Er*raDahietdNnvYarI;

271 C a h r P k a EI W a N Y 11201-l8m Pbm. (718)254-6024

THB ClTY OFNEW YORK INYC) C a p c d m C d M i s M C r d o l o

N Y C h h p r k d 100clluchSm+c

Nn\Yon:NYlWO7

NYC WARD OF EL- NYcBOEc-

32 m n l ) Ncn.YakNYIMOI.

Famm-lrrkan*

~ C w w . N Y S A t t m c ? . C r r n l S a d N c l r Y ~ ~ d I b e M a r ) . ~

120 Elmdw.)' NeR Y a k NY. 10271

. Kimbat?.A. O.hi e*l. spsi.Icaral

U n V Y o r L S u P e ~ d ~ Joyat ,mSt .

*.NY. 12207

I

TABLE OF CONENlS Fsc

1 ............................................................................................

. Cmhidictp.

.... . ~ o n t ~ o r . . ( k & s 1 . ~ ~ 1 ~ l l \ i r t w & B i \ - m ~ h r c 5 2

C o n t k i d i e r i a m a * e ~ d T ) U S C m l m m ( k p o c n ~

~ f m & ~ - W h P M I S m i a ~ r i P h r c 6 ................... 4

B d h u ~ d ~ M d l m 7 L n I Z ............................................. 5 . C a t I ~ m a I b e ~ d 6 d ~ d n ~ d ,

NVRArdHAVAMkab.gdoocad-ri*lm13h15 7 ................ C m ~ m u p n ? u d c r ~ m b . b ( r o c r d ~ d ~ 1 6 - 1 9 . . 8 . C o l t ~ m u ~ d ~ . . l m m l b e d ~ ( o ~ M e r c ~ f m

.nu~~z~uhrj.+p.daithlraa201h21 .................................................. 9 . C m l f l . - l d d + d m i l ~ a a q k y d s m w . ' ' a l b o U . . 1 0

S T A m W m C

STATEWNrOF

ARGUMENT .................................................................................................. I8

............. COrmUSION .. ................................................................................................ 20

0

I

TABLE OF AUTHORmES Pat(#) !2sa - ........... Bir.orv.:.~~d&~ofdN~o(Nrm(ia.3U.S3111971) 3

ell ~ t l d e COW V. T'AOI~II.. 127 s. ct 1 ~ 5 . 1 ~ 5 won ......... ..... ................... 19 ............ W v . Mt0wmU.S Cm0fAgp.L Socod C i d k . 07-1243cv19F)101) 7.19

......................................... B.Lav.Clr.369U.S. 18611962) ................... ... 10.19 b~v.Sim1.377U.S.53~11%4) ................................................... ..... 19. ....

........................................................ W M C I k r-377U.S.633 I I W ) 10.19 K . r c k v . ~ 4 2 U . S 7 U l l 9 a 3 k m i d + ~ 1 ~ .......................... 9.10.19 - B ~ v . ILLLd.a?UU.S. 73 11966) ............................................................... 19

....................................... Rodricpr M U S D C SDNY02n'618lLIUSCl2€A1 10.19 h U \ . . Bdmu>78U.S. IW(1986) .................................................................. 19 Smid1vAUn~igbL32l U.S. 64911!3I6) ................. .. .............................................. 19

.............................................................. B d k y v . V . k o . U J u 1611976) 3 ................................................... Scholzr. W i l l i u UPM 48.61 r 1 3 ( U C i 1990 6

.................................. L . 1 * . r . E m i m ( l C d 2 4 2 ) - R ~ r O r r d ~ - ~ 19 saw-.. H d 5 1 7 U . ~ . m(1996)(-9rrm:\*&il~i\ddirrdiaaicb~ Shnr v. h, 509 U.S. 630.652 (19931 ('9rrr):\r& ekd righe bdxd i P a r b R i o r L r p l ~ & W k b b s . l ~ ) v . O l l l d . l ~ 9 2 n . 1521192m 1 7 7 6 l y m b x h y ~ ~ F-V. MPah+cb. 505 U.S 788 (1992): "UaJ Fadsmce-ddidbh 8- K.oprr F t d h 4 1 4 U . S . 51 11973) Du v. Blmakk 405 U.S. 330 11972)

-1.. -.mu.s. 112(19rn) 0)'

s m , E \ - . B m n a m Gray v. sI.dsr 372 US 368 11969) W ~ U h a v . Rbda. 393 U.S. 23 (1968)

UNmDSTATESCOWmnmOW

...... N k l ~ 3 C L 4 - V k ~ d & ~ h I L . y b e ~ d * o ~ 4 ............... . ~ k l - S I X l - ~ i b l l h = ~ b b ? . & o ~ c a ~ ~ ~ l ~ ~ ~ * r 5

N k I S & 8 C l r m 4 - ~ d - d . p e ............................................ 5

0

Page 206: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

- N Y S C ~ i l ~ h ~ 6 ~ 2 2 ~ i L c ~ N Y S C i v i l & h t s h ~ 6 A a 5 A ~ 5 3 h 5 7 N Y S E b c t 0 . h p l - l W 3 ) f o r w d ~ r t * . p > l O 2 ~ ~ & S a C B d I L s ~ b ~ ~ d ~ &..- b & a d m i . t n i a d & * ~ - b b ~ h ~ b o r d ~ h C d ~ . d t o " p l r c + m d & h r ~ b c ~ - ) $ 3 - 1 W 1 ) ( 8 . . t q a & S U c B o r d ~ f a ~ g m ~ c l i p d a t p . l drrl*dFm-jmc) $ c l o o ~ - d ~ ~ ~ ...................................................................... pMD((3LEL$.C210(g).ELpJ-60(.Q$%-dlisrqpl?.bNVRAd HAVAEL &GlM(I) .EL+ IM(2)RLEL+136(31 ................................................. 6

.................................................................................. p M 0 2 - m & r w l l a c l l l i d 6 ................... ~ 1 2 4 i k & ~ P l h ' k d i f L I ~ b d m r ~ ~ 1

........................................................ 1 9 6 5 V ~ ~ A u ~ 5 m i c r r 9.14.17 ...................... . ~~ktpnrbT&42UW.Sr+(prplW.p19(1DlW 3

............................. ~ k + m l R r s 9 . l * . & 4 2 U , S C . $ I 9 w ( N V R A ) 23.7.13.18 Ilr?p~PVe~IHAVA)&p.ulrmir+~riL&SaofNcrYat

........ NYCndNYCBorddE*F t imfme&par (o .dcr l2UX~1973 23.7.13.18 ..... ? b W h 5 U . S C . $$7321-7326d5U.S.C. $$IZOI- I S C I t f a l a S c ~ ~ w 23

........................... l k R d * c o . C n i l S c n i a R d m A d ( r l . 2 7 . 2 2 ~ W ~ d I I U 3 lbc Fcdcnl L?Wh'~mpiga Ad (FECA)dl971.(PL. 9232SLM-3. sad 1 9 7 2 4 2 - 0 7 . ~ ~ a s ~ + ) ............................................................ 3

........................................................... . 28 U s c $1339 ................................ ... 3. 2 8 U X $1343 (a)(L)12)13)14):28USC 01331:BUSC 01357, . 2 8 U S C 2 2 € 4 f a k j d l e @ ................................................................ w.10 3 9 U . S . C . D 2 0 1 : W L - r r - m d & U n a

................ b r c l o r & 0 a - d * c U d * d S t l * r & V . * d % d m R 4 d h ~ 4

Page 207: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 208: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 209: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 210: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 211: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 212: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

08-3242-cv US Cwrt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

-Ed%

h p d & l M

*'(I)

~ S l ' A l e s ~ N S E l l V I C E ~ k h C . M k r ~ c h i u L S P S B o r d d ~ . ~ m O P ~ Y ~ g l u o . N Y C B O A R D O P

e L m O N S : J ~ J . s r p L ~ . R d s r M U u e ~ . ~ Ccao. hlic DcmL Nao Gnb k.. T- C. O ' C o r a . hr C r b r Ftbm. t b c y Mono-.-C.ScruM.r)-rYcldkadiofhplsqcir?.d

-1-

k Y a k S l r B o r d d ~ N n r Y a k S l r ~ G a a d &u. i )odSuaMmc?.~

. . . ',,\

APPENDIX

+ysh..lr pocanb.tbcqraIaw 593 Vdsbik A v a r 4181 = m ~ e a . ~ a t ltar

(212) 3074u.I - ~ o ~ . b o . 6 0 1

Table of Cmtars for Apped 083242-1~ f%w= Dock~tentriesrrsofJuae30.2008 .............................. A-120 Pcire0it~kr1;9/5/08(kderroshowcausefor~ismisssl

00 Default of Appeal CW 08-3242-cv StnmL v USPS.. . A-1 Ckdtr denying TI080 Motion EwrBeney Rdief of 7/15/08 ... A-3 Stnrat.'s Affidavit in support of emergency relief of 7/2/08., ... A-6 Notice of Appeal of 6/30/08 ......................................... .A-17 Judg Ross' Orda and Cwil Judgwd of 611 1/08 .............. ..A-18 Judge Ross' Memoraodum and Order of 5\9/08 .................. A-20 Amended Complain of OM-1 744 filed 6/9/08.. ............... .A-26 Later of Traosrmnal of Amended C amt of 6iWOS... ...... .A48 USPS Retunmi M u l i n g s w i t h i n i b e ~ ~ l ICSD ........... A-99 NYC BOE- June 9,2007 Active Voter List extnrl within

within the 5 P AD I 18' SD... .............................. A-100 Endaned Republican Party Designhq Petition of611 fYO8... A101

Cucuit's Surmnary Order of 8/15/05 m rr Lotber v Spsrgo 04-57'20-w remanding to NDNY 04cv-1193... .......... A-102

Circuit's Order of 1/24/06 in re Loeber v Spargo 05-653- gating poor person relief. ................... .A106

Judge Arcara's Decision and Order of 8/14/06 mmkmng Forjom v US EAC et al. WDNY 06-cv-0080 to NDNY 06-cv- 1002.. ......................................... .A-107

Legal Memorandum in re Crawford v. Mario0 C o w Election J3cd heard by the USSC published by the Heritage Foundation 3/10/09 .......................... .A-112

Judge Kahn's Order of 713 1/08 dismissing Loeber v Spgo NDNY 04-CV-1 193.. .......................................... A-123

Slnmlr's 8/8/08 Letter Motion for Rccondemth of Judge Kahn's Order of 713 1/08 dismissing Loeber v Spargo NDNY 04-c~-1193.. .................... .A-130

NYS AAG's 8/18/08 Letter Opposing Recornideration of The 7/31/08 Order dismissing Loebwv Spergo .......... A-135

Judge Kahn's Order of 9/10/08 affirming dismissal of Loeber v Spargo NDNY 04-cv-1193 ...................... A-138

NDNY 9/2/08 Electronic Notice of Appeal of 0dev-1193.. . A-142 9/17/08 Amended Notice of A p e in NDNY 04-cv-I 193 ... A-143

Page 213: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 214: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 215: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 216: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

U P r T W s t A m m m - ~ ~ O C l l P W W R K C h k (CCV-1744

8 1mO.m

clmmw+m EAumUNK. m m m ! : ..

I M e D S r A r n r o m A L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m c . r o ~ a m . m v ~ s m m : N O 1 U a q THE CTfY OFNEW Y(WU Wc) c N Y C B Q I U D O F ~ L ~ J . V ~ ~ ~ R ~ Y ~ r APPEAL F m d + M . ~ h E I 8 T . * r b n h J r i i r D a : N n o a b k . T l l r a r C O ' C c a a . h C = k a : ~ ~ ~ . ~ C . - : m ~ r r d h d a o n * a e d tnli-.: s

Page 217: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 218: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

I*.NlED STATES DlSlRlCT a i m ~ N m I C T 0 ) ' h ' E W ' Y ~ Ca No. abC\'-IlU

I W R I )

OiillSrCIOIEAIL- CbirilC

r.

AMENDED

Page 219: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 220: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 221: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 222: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 223: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 224: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 225: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 226: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 227: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

CHRIS STRUNH mlbull**+

EXHIBIT 2-1 A - 81

smakDi8hictl8 - r 5,l.I FEZ:-"" ,--- I - - - ,m-. I = - 1

w I I I I am1 r.ml 7 ~.wt ' ..UI a 1 U.111 57.061 H.Ul #.=I 2 .91 2.4% a.471

IIEUIUI Y . n w = . ( M I )LPSI -31 6 . m L ~ I 1.0n1 win I u.nl S.UI a.031 I a . a l I #.*.I

A - 82

Page 228: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

. a a r r r ~ ; ~ l ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ s n i i i f ~ * ~

1 ~ ~ t 3 ~ l 1 ~ g ; f i g ~ j i s ~ i ~ a ~

g f ~ f g a s s - - s - - s - - - 4 - o - E

II - ~ L s : l ~ ~ ~ l ~ ~ t R a - - * = = -

1 I g g ¶ 8 $ g 8 8 5 ~ E 9 ~ P X - ~ - 0 0 -

f i t II a n a g g g a g g e ~ ~ k ~ ~ : n c ~ - - 11: 1

1 2 * s i ! g ~ ~ ~ f ~ g ~ n r a P * r n - - f

I ~ ~ ~ ~ a i ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ : ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ =

rftrirrfrr2rr!rrlrrh B e $ j ; i ! $ ; [ $

EXHIBIT3 A- 83

f i t

1 r e a

z o i i

f =it

1 " 8

A - e5

s s i u i ~ s ~ s i i ~ g : : r n g ~ g f X t

4 ~ t i ~ s t r s l i ~ ~ e a ~ n l t l ~ i i

= ~ n s n e a a f i ! ! ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ * ~ ~ a

t] - - s r s ~ a s a r a g r a t n o r r l g

In ~ ~ Z ' L f R 0 8 R l C e s # X t R ~ O I

li II C I S ~ R ~ . P I I I I ~ I ) E ~ . ~ ~ Z E E ( I

ri I 1 w s E t E E g g n g n % r R a i i r s

]I ~ r ~ l r i t r ~ r ~ ! ~ ~ g i s t ! m

B s rlrrlrrlrilirflrlirh # j $ t g i ; ! i

A - 6)

8 ~ t ~ ~ g ~ g i ~ z = = ~ g p a s : f 5 a "". .- -

;il ~ ~ g s s , ~ a ~ ~ - - - r g z ~ = ~ ~ ! g

\ 4 ; - @ - " - . O - O O I I . p - O - - - =

1 t l ~ f l I r l ' " n o o g P € f C ' - O R 8

I I P E ~ t = I - m C 0 0 ~ 1 R 8 ' 0 ' 5 S R

ili II 611 ~ g ~ s s ~ s z a o O - R f i b ' " * g ? l l ir I

f ~ % f l i 3 i S t " ' E E ~ s r n g g I

1 j i l a i s P s t = a g s j i a a a c r g

B e r!rrlrillrlrtfraIrrI~ a a # j f ; i : g $ g

A - 88

,

Page 229: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

mlQ(0II-w- -(I---

MOP-

mvcpr*

m am m Sm

w n -41 LY w u a ID n I ww ma

kl.r Y a 7 I* l a 0 a IHO t u r n 14: nm I al a u I 9C( 9 I I U

ma Y 1- ua P( u a n ma UDII

C ~ L . 17107 m I)) n a * n m mma 14: mu ((P ma n m m we YU*

MQ L*r na n n I a I rn ~UI PIM mr n Y a w I am n 3 7 h(* am 1 u n I n 4 a# m

? MY y.*l ma 1 I p aa4 e aa n YoI 111sa

8 YU l a 7 la I U S Pn 1124 Tmn 1 M ICII QI I 14 a 4 # m7M

ma H* 4211 1110 a 0 0 a 1x9 an r e U14 Dm I I 0 0 I2M eea 1W Pn I a 11 I a 4 u inn¶

-11 W; HI m 1 a o D 47 n o - 1- 19 I a 0 0 u I01 IU( Y I= a I I 111 saa

e s 1 y.: !a8 la I 1 0 D 3m 434

I ~ U no n 7 1 a 0 lm mm ram u1 i n m a t I nr 1011

W I I * O I ( C ~ * Y I D O I ~ mUYEalsmlcTUIUnl(Rm

un?1VHL*OP

nr- wn-- - PPI m rm

Lrm 8mwn M a Y: 1 W l I n0 m U U 4 1- U

P I C l#ml m a n I I 1 I 280 m a a m am w n I # a ws

a n Y*: 11 1 I a 5 D I 10 r m P o o o o o 7 r T.*)r a. 1 1 I 0 0 I 44

?' a

4 IIImNIalv-w.UC1DI

IBYmDmCI-lbOn ma-

urrcpr*

-nm- PI Y Im - l o -41 Y* m IY Y w n 13 ma m

hrx urn m Y I m I #m am llrr n* W (D 1 I I P 1411 LPI

IRU LVr ma m 4 n a a I an a m 4

knc a m *la aa a a 11 w 4 n t m mall OUI M 0) I ln I YP lYlO

-44 wr ?

nu r m 2~ a n rm P 3 1 1140

m 1011s UO I? 4@ D D l Wl 14511 mm mrr IU m DI m aa a n

8 m u - w n a 1 o u n a

P) a ¶ 0 s 0 w UI T r t s t 11 I 1 I rn IU

a 6 1 w m a 4 111 w n m ID 4.271

M: . nsl Y l a aa a 12 1 W am TUI I*I i n n m Q IS n am an

mn Y: =a a~ a q4 n u o aaa ~n*r 4874 am (a I 11 I 110 YIO 7.m nu UI m 0 rn U 1 wud

e m w. n 43 I a s o mu 1-

~rm* uu a n D 11 D la ~ O O D h~ aa 1m o a Y I 41s m

IaWmalvlYIDw- 8SmllmlmrYUIIICOR

uw1- mar*

m m - m W

Y b MI a 01 IY s a 4 ?a mu

kb YII I 1i7 7 n I IN mr - U PI M U 0 I e llm mn wr m m ~8 n a a 1 7 4 1-

hn* um7 11 3) 11 IU .I n* r m 4 m mn 1- m Q 10 qn nu new

Y T I W: 1P I 1 0 0 D 8 U M Sl # 0 0 8 0 t Y T d S1 D 1 I 8 8 la

? g:

Page 230: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

N W ~ C m l D I l l D W U C I O I 4

UI-UUn- U O l W A ~

54 - b . Y I m E La II

L.hm -41 YI i t n m I s B a m mo

H: 1 w a o m 1 1 Y a 1 1- m = *I u * 7 W M nn

ma uc am 1 m n I 14 7 ~ D D m H; II) mM I 18 L L 1SaB IIU m rrc m (U a m 11 t m t

mu IL YO m aw ((1 m a a1m m e

f krl: 111 mu Y 1U I an #an 1 loU

Y -1 A. mq m a a u M - ma m ¶ m ~ q r n IU n u n rn m kll: UII WI ua m Y 7 m0 *om -.(.I un a I* m D A a s RI

ma w 1 0 1 irn Q m 11 la m a s - . nu III Y m 1s

11 (o* m r

m 49 am m (I Y I m a m IDIU YL am auo am qt8 U I* aw* nm

cnr* mn om w la 41 1s m IUIO m.b YM 11n m I* u Y *P ¶mu

*IL#I k*: 110 1- la 8 8 0 016 m krr 4 n IP a 8 B a 101 u T d e YI I08 # M I 8 U1 UI

I

I IlllmmtCmlDUDw- munmmcrIp.un-

M a umomm may

w m m - p & " ' d W mm Y; a ma 1* 10 18 1 i t n rtn

k* 4101 na 1 n w 14 t lam rn 7 . e IQD Y Y ml 0 L *Y im 1 a m I op a10 1oo *I u ad ¶m sm M: UN 2l4a ma 111 16 sa IfP HDI hLt 10( 810 ma m l I on zam

I

? 3

I I

I

Page 231: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

-.!!a€%!- wzmanrlarauwDanrrlrrserrnrncnnmE- mown,

Page 232: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 233: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 234: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

.

-P*m-T16-

~ & ~ & ~ ~ r l l . . ~ b . ~ y b d & ~ ~ d ~ ~ ~ ~ * d * - d d r a . m b * u m - % m W . s m d m k . 3 p l l . r r * . ~ ~ ~ d l b k r W ~ * U 1 . I . 1 ~ 1 . l 1 * - * ~ - d p 6 ) 4 b r Y & r t - m 8 p w r U a d p d W . - -- C H ~ ~ Y ~ M B L C I ~ ~ ~ K - W - ~ - I ~ S D - m - ~ m - a ~ # cmmawa~mmma- ~ d d d c a b p e k . r ~ P ~ ~ - ~ V I W L ~ I P I -1101

1 & b . c k m ~ ~ l l d . l - d h r - w d b . I f ~ ~ w . 1 ~ 1 1 ~ * - L . d o r a - m l l l l . l d r h - Y h r r i h d e - k k

h - - . l k . h c r q U b . L l p r l ~ r ~ ~ a ~

s w --. -Ir-

J Iml . ,rer

-1 1 1 - .Ib

J lam .rir

WA-OCIIIIILI.~-L (i.-dmu~-.* * ~ ( ~ a d b l l . d m v d d ~ ~ a d y . . ~ K ~ e b r l ~ ~ & D - d - b m w

W d k i . C r i U . . l l . - r - m Y r u P , * r e 4 r r r m I L . r r i . q - r t * n ~ - d y I y Y W m b - - . C ~ * . k L

1 l * n t r ~ l r r s l b ~ t 1 ~ . p w * ~ d - - r + I ) ' ~ - 8 ~ h a a ~ ~ I . 4 b - D * ~ ~ b . ~ * I u * a * b ~

K I S S ~lc I la

" d m C0l.s a I m h d h ~ a a d a - r k . $ b ~ . Q D I d & ~ ~ P ~ * p L h *

d r n Y I k r * + 'Y2!!Ez&=e&b111d*-r*I*---~ r r a & ~ - ~ * r * . r u L . w - d . k . w * C - L b - ~ t - . d a * - ~ a h n l r w d w e - = DI 1 1 1 1 1 .

- I r . r w r . c - u y o l o r q r

EXHIBIT 8

A - 87

I

IPVUOV(m-m-

~ l r r c l ~ a ~ ~ ~ r l - m ~ r r ~ ~ d . r ~ ~ ~ d ~ ) ~ ~ ~ * * a C L . l r - d d ~ b m b W m ~ % ~ ( * 1 m p l d b D 4 d . q i r ~ ' L r m l l l b ~ ~ L L l ~ I . d ~ r m d Y l b b - d d C n b l Y l c m l k r b - m m c t ) . p U r d d m . - - - " - WL-- -a* .~arsr l~- ~-A=.III. 1101

~ b u r . ~ i r - & r u - d b - m d k s P ~ ~ ~ + b ~ . - la.r~.olan~lmm-b-*.rmii.d.o-k

h h . r - l h b . l l . r q W * L l p a d ~ ~ + q C r

br- --- -I Imn .ly

-1 Imn - .ur

J l a - .cllr

ITA-wIIUOmIIOYW I. - 1 1 1 1 . & J ~ r r d m ~ . n * r v . ~ r l ~ ~ d u ~ ~ . r ~ . ~ ~ - ~ . t - l * l r .) (Ysd*nYe+)

M d l . W C - n l b L I m t U s + & - - C . a . h r l l l b ~ * ~ - - . r ~ ~ i ~ l d r l i b l i m w ~ h b ~ m ~ . k ~ ~ b h r .

I . . L r Y * . L i . l l m r R I b ~ C d 1 ~ ~ d . 1 1 L r k l l i f R ~ * ~ I L L ~ ~ - U I ~ I D * I - ~ I ~ I ~ ) O L . ~ -

Kmm 0.le 1 l l O I

a -6- olrr

h b d * W - d a k r i 8 * p e s r V . 1 r d * ~ e m + h p r t a 6 . d a u b - YIrY=il!--?L-ddh-h.ItmLi

~&d~--~II.k-~--~p.=d* bWb-*md -bLirr-

DL I I ~ D I . sprm4a&m*docn . - . . rrd*

EXHIBIT 9

A - BB

Page 235: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 236: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 237: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

.

ODL -V

RJ.mm= -4*1.~rrlvru0-9

4ma4r*af=m~=ms~.k~roy11~m-3~.

mmre1~r~-a=r4rsw*r SIWnBESUl¶la~aNvNUKIPS14)~ ~~=w~~nlr~mav~s~wnnu

-ws-(O *

~lMV3~WTlVNVA~H

mmx -BALL--

IQIBLrmD¶lVlS~AP(30Hav ~~n(mm~~~~

3uTvNo1~~rn~ I)~d~~'93vDY

.Rmw.~EnvmrnwawnD~

?wmIoY%aYvam

-/ wuvHauxm08

-l0loodSA- pay

rrglr-- 1V P4 .Slr1mFA4W43'19-4d9-V=-SRqlRW~ .prp~'1~53~wal~~msrsp~n~~-~en*w

v&~lum8W ~1~a~*7YL3mPIYIIY10111*5W*mM'isV3~V'ml

vmOE*JslllLmaw&s~vmUIR(Uumuowao ~10mmauv3tll.omrrma~vwum'~-Allv11o

OIILL~~~VI~~OZLD~.~A\~~~)(*~LLIK)~.~ IVLP(R(~IIL~~~~~~~SILOU~U~~~SW

~~ MuD~~Uld

RYWVmYm~vIS-

Loa -v

3 I-

C-@-4*.P u---m-P-m-

my- ---*-

uv-rrr-~~---r~r..a~~c-um-~ 'IIC~~.r~..~-~C~CC4YC~.c---~-.I -~7~IrLWm=CI4.---1cm.~~ecl

(.D.IIypI?.l*-

4V.UlaW~~~ U=-I~lrq~.bl~P~R-+z&Ll7~ I9PWPOl-~YIIIIIVU . .

h ' mt r

=I r w.

L r ~wZ,Fr.r*r~ 77 -77: =/,r 9 4-

-Le.R('lrC~rL~~~-~l-~~

Y(.PI~c~~.~-~W~-~~.CI~ ..4~-w~~pur~rLmoprlluDrrC~~&.Cl

ma. 1lr.xv-lu -o*&.rlrrn~ ~aau-rmrurao *~11-~w-U6. Q.II~Y19AN-XWWS1Wl~

uw-r*lrw*o--I*-WqwPP r~~.-lr#an~.r~~91~~~~~

C~.I~pdk~~m~-~~-'U~~.3rp~~ v~-rprY~.rrn~M*-~~~49+~*l

*ayLUaOU-Nnvd-

.. - - -A

- - a01 -w du-

aIl*ltJZ3aDS¶ 5

ta~azaaaa~iea~i

aassaaaasz

---a= 0.

liilliifila4g

--LL-nLsssL.C ww~wwwww,~~,,

86 -v aumm

.IDI --.I u 8 ---a -- m. st ir- u r --an uu m~m am, I*- P r CII II~~M- (IIW -1 111.11 NlD a- -",a IY- -- Ylll n-L. no. 1 R -m a ..PI- -PO

G: =Szum 'r s;t li mz eg - u m --..a IIW .*.I 61 1 ICI-0 m- -8 -I --m ru I m nma ma -01 -.eh ms ..1 --a (0- ..lag -I -rm XS. s --IS UYLU Yl~ 40. -.19 DI m NII 1 L"

1 -IDW *w POL

rr ..rm a rull-n

la& N m S--~~.CILIDUL n~

UDI --A 1.= v u -I( a mu m U

-1 mu ata r m rra --u -05

m1 ..cU n1u mu IIL

I ..IyP s Uldl- ,we - -Id-- ma

UI1 U*IIYI . C9 -ma 11111111 *I* -5 aha r 8 u -ma-- -a m1 mru at- U)I Il.u -- - -.I. e u- 491

- -R a w- -,, MI Y.U I a - .IIIU~(IIP--~ UDL mrY .. MI

wm II YI - -2. ILY I 1 w 10.a YI-

LUDI mu- a I UU

n sr a wau mo 111 -st== I : "r=: =z:: Ezz =IE ID1 WWIMrUr u ~".PUau mLL IQLI mm PUL 1 c. -ma PI WID RU n- *L I CI mm-n~u ma m~ rrrrrs mr rr -r L) P- mu ID1 m a v - a m - (*Pt l rrnr rrr m w -9 YY

'I -- a -- I*= ra -1- a -low

~DDI -114 an 14 uu a=- 4a 1UI ly- .*. r - Crrr a oil- 4U ms -u wa W-r a =- ma a- ..yIIOIn I r -0 a I- 4U L.~L ~lly mn -r a -- -a &,a, -I nnu I C9 mm 0 -au UmsZ pp) --.- m .I . .IrP---I 'YY Il-- m 4 - CCC- a -*I llDl ---I m 8- s*a-- ure - ---a UI L) I -ram- MU

I u r rrr mLr d ..r- -02 - -Cl 1 4 111- a -- -0s mb -9. OD v IY .IIDOU- .*@I llDl 11.99 IP n I.1- P u- 1Lb ',a, m.L. 4.- R a* s uu -m ,=, m- .L . .1 -ra-- W- ma -I WY - -m a -- 11111 1111 nu W..l-LI" a - - -c1 UI1S -L1 mu 9 -10 u- "ZI m. -- I1.1 1 9 rnI a u - * L1 YI, -- I= I C -I a-- -01 M WCIQ 0s- * aIOI1111 ma .n, 1-0 ,.I .- -- 0 -- *' - --..a - 4-0- -4 -, --.)I P r - -u 0 - - 10

u r m a -9 YII CIm a b 111.1 1 1111 ** LI 11111 IDI mc

L .n

.

Page 238: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 239: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 240: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

ooll.nnlim wam- ~ p . t i d s

IT IB so OFiDERU). - HONORABLE RICn*RO A ARCARA CHEF JUDM u n m D STATES DISTR~CT COURT

DATEO:-14 .m

mn -la=

~ I d e n t t t k s , ~ v o k s : A ase study in vder lmpersonatkn

mBA#nspoa*r

Qk*mmL.--.td= L b m S Y I J *-- .--* -r-r -m

~ G m l d * R I ' --.rr-b- ab-cm&...r- --=---

- i T w m * p d b . - h r a d r . - C - Z - 8 ddbdbY--bL.Ybh.C . Fvw-t m ----- -, - r Yd * .q crl =y--s -=hn--aClhl n-11I..LL-m T I . H M d Y - n d o - r - . C ) t m m

. m - * p . . l I b h -lC--

-Y-- r w r u m - - ~ r IpLpw*&-udlkm --a*,eb

Ym-.hsm+.- us----* ahdb~ar"T.-a.&. -b-.I--- lkmg&-(r&lslarah,k ------- W q N Y Y . b a L 1 C ) l h l 41111u-bL. h L . U O = h k * l D . Y d .DI*--- b d h ~ ~ l - h & d I k k Y l b d - b 4 1 . r p & -

ap).n*dm.*

s9=Es=§

E x J l m r K

A- 112

Page 241: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 242: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

7

1-hrh' WYcm--

-m n-*lr3-

Wrn N e w Y r L I B e H d O L a * r

L*narrm -w-c%u8

l # - s w r n Sa*rv-IYlqpr* wmN.nm nmmymc-W3

wrn =---',,, Conmrltanla

W t m e NY-Mskr-Tmm IYL.M.iu(kmlI*.cDnthc MdmwI&JahmM.M~l?4 Rh. H*li.na 1mkluw hnr U S ~ ~ d H d r l ~ . 1mmplt*.-O.Lnrrc

m - m us. k p m * . t dhk.

.. -

P

- . . - .-

A - 184

Page 243: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 244: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 245: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 246: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 247: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 248: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

e: Pu*~ L.IW a * GO- & ,%hw*rr rC o*c. (-) c?.C&I 4 oh* (* rra-* a-8-1 r u u l d - k2B&iY(* n m m - a m i k m _ - ( L L I d m D L . * 1 C I I I

p. ~ R L - U > ~ ~ ~ P , C Y

or-am--) mrUr A Y- CU- ,Y$&

,Lath r t & UlLOSlRCIrrmrr

) nQwnY.

ru*(I 1 mE0

z ) -.rm SEP ) I m)

-ICI)IERWCLW( ALBINY

=.lu*>*--.d-_.-=u M /a VY-?

(,, /(r a @. 7ti:T f i f l zm+ C&w m l k ; w *

'&HIL.L. BEIA I;?FCAY~~O~RCD BY I f m A m X fin St CAtlY. h o CUWP

p& & a36a &"Y Alr - ac ,.&& 3 * d C I * c m= m-P7w-cr Eor rrlr

ofl*LI#& ORoh A - 143

Page 249: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

THE EFFECT OF TEE rnDERtlL ~ P O R T I O ~ T DECISIONS ON COUNTIF5 AND OTaER E'ORIIIS

OF m m A L GOIrEmm*T JACK B. WEINSTEIN'

The r~pQom'unncnt decisi4ns o i the Unind Staler Sapmoe COW in Rrgnoldr v. Siw and ro-ion -1--"iring h t q-ot ion in both hwsu of s a l e Iqisbbru k propdoilate to QF numbcr of popk r e p r m t e d undv the primipk vf "'oac nun. o x vote"-rr Ukcb to brr I pmfwnd e C ~ l on m a y d 0th- l o r n 01 M go-rn-t? Tltcrc is w y indiitioa that the Rr)v:ddr ruk appliu lo muoty bou& of supervisors, Ihe Mirr t h t uanlly r<ndre d l of 3 coun;)'~ Irgislnlhc and. ill m y i n s k , m , mxdt 01 irs -tire pmvcr. iu well u to g m d p p s c units of local gwernmmt st& as vilbges, lOLvn5. dsts and boruugbs..

n t i o ulide is primarily coacgrnnl with the &a of dr rcapportiomcn! dccisiins on ~ p c x n c l i o n dt l t in the county. In lhis mnlrst, il k i m p o m to recognize La mapportionmcnt of rut= lg'rbbm will tmd to incrcalt rhc signi!iance of the crmncy as a wit d 1-1 govcm.wt. The dlih d puli~iul pwcr ynl 11.: i vc~wrc hh rlille dJ sud ai~rntiunt to the dnucty

F p p u l m d tsrbn and suborbn a- L Widy io =kn:c the &'conire rrlilnce on couor/ p m m m z t . Wllil. it will not alwayt be pmible ior mrll mwr/ ul bt sepsntd! rcprswted bt the s(.le l ~ ~ r h u r ~ ti~nr is no man I4 Wicvr hl tl;i iarc ,411 adruacly rRcu the sip$-- of count). p v r m nlcnt my m r e thm do- pr-t conpcsiun=l dirliining rrhlch, in mmy in- 11-$, a h ignores munly line. Baselas. t i~ rc io rg b Ihe iw Ihn iKfirtrin- ing o l the a t e l + L ~ r e wid l a d to the old o i countia ns unils o l

Col&~r~i;~~~h9;.RCd~bir Udr~rsb. Ad.., ar&n Collra% 1945: UR Pmfnror W& -llr on k r r f r s l C c l d h hri L icrriw

C m i y hl'urw fro >:usru I. LD ~tytda v. s>? ?kN% TEE, r w , r d wwa ol ty -6,

cc.xliY d.dmct w- a p p ~ k m m t *I h b Llovlcl of h, IM I~QSISM $ c a t z ~ ~ $c~-;e~;31m~~&y;) 15.4;72 T O ~ S ~ ; ~ ; ~ ! ~ ~ - i ~ ; f ; m ~ ;

I.3.r ;ubnantirU~ a&rYld tk &)rwsk.i h 04, Or: Al~Samr Hnulc. Ths Icwr,?.;~ Covrr hr)d k h Ihr h~ -la: =-r.c=.mrnr uul cle rr.? olm i n ~ l i A an.1 ;u;%ind !h. tcmwnn ruwrSor=zmt thihul b o r dncd h llir &mia . m i kc I m a v. PorwFounh G m Airo;lL:)r. 277 U.S. 713 (W) (Cde R- r. Sirrir. 377 ES. 6% ((1961) (Dd.): Darir x,. > . l a , 3 7 U.S. 676 ( I d j (\,x): ::rr.l Cwru lo: Fii- ~ y ~ r o ~ u t i u r ,. T a ~ o . 37l U.S. Llb (1%): \'.WCA. I&$ 7 ,?,,,e 6:. ,,<,A'. , W V ,

m>vc,rY. 3. A " b t prrrnalnr lr L 1 6 d in ii'rr Yo* I ii:*hnx "2 wry+, WM I '-

m ~+it.m." S . Y . Y . L Y : IS, 1 I I J ( 2 , : X.Y. L I V S ~ A L IIOIIC Rum -/I): N.Y. S i ~ m r w 1- G ~ . z u Y L ~ ~ I + 3(2).

Page 250: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

~ x b o t ~ m r r k o ~ t r - ~ i , d . t . . L d l m c d f a ' -.W=bpmad*-

Page 251: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 252: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 253: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

HUYI .. YOU. L .I. a. 8."

Page 254: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 255: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Ik W E z w m s - - d . 2 . 2 ~ - el &I a-1 E AJ- A 3 A J

v.ll GI W A4 P I

1"Qc Dl a E-l . x-1

Page 256: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 257: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 258: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

3 - b -j

- E 9

-= (-

8- P1991 Broolrbn WJ19 1 I1/P c-+d ?at T b a b d l

N.Y.C s2 $ ! W m B m o L b n - i z

S a NOTES FOR APPENDIX p.gs W

a

Page 259: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Case 1:09-~~-01295-RJL Document 14-3 Filed 08/06/2009 Page 17 of 2!'W

e Pasitive As of: Jul29.2009

ERIC RODRJGUEZ, a .I, PtaMflk, -agaht-GEORGIt E. PATAICI, a I, Men- d.dL HOWARD T. ALLEN, ct .I, Plriatiih, -rgrtast-CE E P A T W .L,

Meadaata

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

October 29, zm, Decided

SUBSEQUENT BJSTORY: Motion denied by Rodri- For MARY 0. DONOHUE, CAROL BERMAN, EVE- gucz v. Pat& 2003 U.S. Dist. LEMS 21592 6 D . N X. L W J. AQUILA, d e f d t ~ (0243'-618): Todd D. J w 24.20031 Valentine, .4lbaay. NY.

PRIOR HB'IORY: M p e z v. P@, 2002 Din. LEMS 23184 (s.0.N. X, Orx 24, m2)

D~IOGITION: [+*I] Motion far iamvdcm da nied.

COUNSEL: For ERK RODRIGUEZ, JAMES R N- BREE, MARTTN MALAVE-DIVAN, pkiatifi (02- CV-6 18): Charles Somm, Gmgory C. Soumas, New Y* NY.

For WLLIAM RODRIGWZ, plaiatiff (02-CV-3&43): Neville Mulliag.

For GEORGE E PATAM, dafadaan (02-CV-618): h J. Liptop Asst. Corp. Coumel, Hoguc(. N e n & Re- gat. LLP. New Yorlt, NY.

For ELlOT S P m &hub111 (02-CV-618): Joel Gmber, OfEcc of Iho Attorney Genaal of !be State of New York, Eiioc Spiw , A#or#y Gcacral of the State of New York. J d G d m , New Y e NY.

For JOSEPH L BRUNO, dcfcdam (02-CV-618): Trmci L L w i n , l ~ D a y , R e a v i s & P ~ . J o b n R i c d r a r d Braaa, I)tc&mH, Rose et 81.. Greg M. MaSbbug, P&UCT Rosc, W, New Yo* NY, John R. Braett, Pmkauer, Rose, LLP.. New Yo& NY.

For SHELDON SILVER. defendant (OZCV-618): Nancy R Sills, Chubad, Mollen, Horowik, Pomcranz & ShPpira (*+2] C. Daniel Chill, Graubard. Miller. New York, NY.

For JOHN J. FASO, dafGndant (02-CV-618): Brim J. Clatk Clifton Budd & Maria . UP, New Yark NY.

For GEORGE E. PATAKI, MARY 0. DONOHUE. db For MARTlN E. COMJOR, dekxhmt (02-CV-618.02- fandam (02-CV-618): F M c S. Newmm, Hogwr. CV-3843): Arnold J . Ludwig, New Y e MY. Newman & Regal, L.L.P.. Naw York, NY.

For MARTIN E. CONNOR. ~~ (02-CV-618.02- CV-3843): H. Reed Witbcrby, Bwcoo. MA.

Page 260: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Case 1 :09&1295-RJL Document 14-3 Filed 08/06/2009 Page 1 8 of 2PBgE2

21 1 F m . 215. C, 2002 U.S. Dht. LEXB 233349 *

For GEORGE E. P A T M . MARY 0. O ' D O N O m ELIOT SPrrZER, JOSEPH I, BRUNO, SHELDON SILVER. MARTIN E CON- CHARLES NESBllT, NEIL W. KEL- HELENA M. DONOHUE. EVELYN J. AQUfLA. dtfiDdamts ( O m - 3843): George M. Gngg M. Mashbe% Jata! R Bmtz, Praskam, Rose, LLP., New York, NY.

For CAROL BERMAN, defcDdant (02-CV-3843): George M. Gregg M. Mashberg, Proslrauer Roa, L . U . , New Yark. NY.

For CAROL BERMAN, defkamht (W-3843): G ~ N I G r e g g , M M a s b b u t , ~ R ~ W , New Yo&, NY.

For ASIAN AMERICAN LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATION FUND, PETER K. LAU. JOHN KUO WE1 TCREN, MINDY KIM. S A m D A S m A k TARA SINGH, -6 (@0-618): K@ Kimaiing, Asian Amuicm Legal De- and Education Fund, NW YO&, NY. G h D M.gprmtay, Asian Amcricaa Lega; Defarse & Education Fund. New York, NY.

[**3] For PUERTO RlCAN LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATION RIM), imcmmr-plaintiff (02-CV-618): F o s t c r M w r . P u a t o R i c a n ~ & t i d o c a t M n F w d Inc.. New Yorlr, NY.

For GEORGE E PATAKI. MARY 0. DONOHUE. in- (OZCV-618): WE s. Newman,

tioguet, Newman & Regal, L.L.P.. New York, NY.

For MAKY 0. DONOHUE, NER W. KE-R in- ~~ (02EVb1.8): Todd 0. Vakntine, Albany. W.

For ELIOT SP- iatmmmacf& (M-CV- 618): J o d Grab, O ~ o f t h Altontey Gtnaal oftk State of New York, New Yo& NY.

For JOSEPH L. BRUNO, ~~t (02-CV- 618): Trsci L Lovia, J a ~ s . Day. Reavis & P-, Grrge M. Mrrbba& John R B- Roaiosarer, R o ~ e . L.L.P, New Y* NY.

For CHARLES NESBm, ilmnmmdefaadmt (02- CV-618): E h t Sp- AnwaGy Oeacral of the S@b of New York, Joel Gnber. New Yo& NY.

.... _. -

For ERIC RODRIGUEZ, JAMES R JUBILEE, MAR- TIN MALAVE-DNAN, in1-rs-def-1(1 (02- CV-618): Grcgwy Charles Somum. Gregory C Sowms. Ncw York [**4] NY.

For NEU. W ELLEHER &W (02-CVd18): Todd D. Vakatine, Amaay, NY.

JUDGES: fobn M. WaIka, Jr.. Chief Circuit Smdgu. Jotm G. Kodtl, Unitd Smteo D h i a Judge Ricbard M. Berman, Unitsd S w Dislrict Jw. OPINION BY: John M. Walker, Jr.; John G. Kodtl; RichanlM.Bcrman

UnJunc 1 8 , 2 0 0 2 , ~ F m r l S f J u n k s p p e a r - ingpmscsuhiaeda"NotiaofMotionas~enor" in Rodtigc#a v. Pcrtaki, 2002 U.S. Dlst. LEMS 12237. 02 Civ. 618. and Allen v. Pat&, 02 Civ. 3843. ' On hme 25. M02, the Attomcy Garnal of the Smtc of New York oppo&d A&. [917] Stnmk's interuemicnr ou the grounds, inter dir, thrt it wcts not "a tu rmpd by 8

pleading'' as raqanad by Fd. R. Civ. P. 24(c). M a hear- ing on Jrme 28, 2002, the Cart d v i d Mr. Sbunk to submit a sbor! a d plain atatand d a c b s b w h g ltmt hc wss emifled to reliaf. T m of Henin& June P 8 , 2 0 0 2 a t 6 ( " S o a l l ~ m ~ k ~ u s , i c t s t t a d d vohrmes,aShOrt a n d p l a i a ~ o f I h c c l . i m J h o w - ing thai mu an entitkd to relief.") On h l y 2,2002, Mr. Strunk wbmitbbd a " V M Supplemeat to the Com- plaint," whicb thc Couri has deemad aa amended Mozion lo lntnvenc [*+S] ("Aniended Moiiou"). !3cc Rodriguez v. Patakl, 2W2 U.S. Dist. LEY7S 13685, 02 Civ. 618 (SS.N.Y. July 26,2002) (Orda). See also Tnaxript of Hearin& July 25,2002 at 32.

1 M r . S & ( ~ ~ i s m o f n t v a a l p f o c e s d - ~ l u e b a s i a i ~ w h i c h ~ s l e c t k r a m htcd issaea Sce Smmk v. U.S. House of Rcps.. 99 Civ. 2168 (NG). Slip Op. @.D.N.Y. June 10, 2002) (dismissad); Van Allen v. Danocmtic State Cmtet of New Y& lndex Nb. 588842 (N.Y. Sup. CL) (padine), F i t z g d d v. BamM. N.D.N.Y. 02 Cb. 0926 (NAM) (ptndarg).

Mr. S W h m d d Motion is opposed by, among atbea parties, the Attorney Genera1 who argucs that tbc proposed claims "have d u n g to do with the mmthtional and Voting Right Act challenges to [he] 2002 C o n g m s i d and legislative mdimccing raised in fhi!4 action." ' Attorney Gewralb MemorsnQm of Law. dated Augwt 5,2002 ("AG Mcm.") at 2. The Attorney General also arguw, that Mr. S&s pmpod camplaint "fails to state a federal ~~l claim." AG Mem. at 8. On [**6] August 12,2002, Mr. Stmnk filed an "Af-

Page 261: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Case 1 :09-cv-01295-RJL Document 14-3 Filed 08/06/2009 Page 19 of 2las 3

21 1 F=. 215, *; 2002 U.S. DiPt LEWIS 23334, **

2 Tbe Senaae Maprity Lasda, Joecph L. Bnnm j o i n s t h c A t t o r a e y G c n e r a f i n t h h o ~ ~ AG M e m at 2 n.l. In addition, Ule Speaker61 tbe New York sate Asafa&ly, SbCSbeCdon Saver, sad rbe Rodriguez Pkb,dffs oppoeed Mr. S&'s in- tervention. See AfIidavit of C. Daaicl Cbill, dated June 25, 2002 (With mgard to the motion to in-

\ tcrwnc of caristqha EM Stnxk, Speaker Sil- ver opposes that iatervention and joius io the ap pas;tion of the Ataunay General ...") ; D6clamkm of Richad D. Emery, dakd Juae 25, 2002 ("I ~ ~ I C C with defendants wba have U@ that Mr. S t r u n k b c d e n i e d t b t r i g h c t o i n ~ b s c a a s e rheagumentsbewisbest0ma)rehwenothingCO do with tbis lawsuit and will only dirrdrrct the Court ' smmtionfromtbeissues~inthia case.")

Becliusc Mr. Stroalr is a p p d q pro se, tk Cbun will "read hier supporting papcrrr [*q liw, a d will intcrprctthemtonhethaJb.onges(Bgnmentdthttbey sugps" Burgos v. Hopkiw 14 F.3d 787, 798 (2d Cir. 1994). .Still, this s t a d d is not withaat iimit~, rmd all normal rules of picding arc not abdutcly suspendad" S r i w n v. Shw@t Dep't o/Suf?ivan Cty... 499 F. Supp. 259.262 (S.D.N Y. 1980).

In.comKkringamotion fbrintacrcntioqhCowt must balance two competing objdvcs "efficiently ed- minisming legal dijputra by r e e o m all related issues in. one l a w i t , on the one band, and keeping a s@e lawsuit from bccomiag umwceJsarily complex, unwieldy or prolonged, on thc otsct hnad." United SIQCS v. Pifney B m s . Inc, . 25 F. M 66, 69 (Zd Cfr. 1 999).

111. Andyrir

TbcRodriguaaudAllcnr'aaeawhichtlnrecon- sblideted on May 20, 2002, indm cbaileagcs to the con-mrl sad sate senate r#liahicting p~ans adapted by the New Yo& State Lagishtum in 2002, See. e.g.. Amended Complain& filed Apt. 25, 2002 (R6dri- guer). Mr. Stnmk's claims me d i f f i i ' l k y appav premised upao: "(1) tk idea that c c a d wncibnns am ~a~)nslimtionaLIy iucludcd [**8] in tbs populrtion base for Congressional und kgwlative redidcting and (2) a claim that rtgistered i.e. voters not nvotled ia any of New YoaVs c s t a b w political par- ties. an unconstitutionally diraiminated a+ -- ing indepsndent [+218] parly-baildiag d ballot ac- cess." AG Mcm. a 1-2. b~ this is wt what the Rodriguez and Allen case8 are about.

3 Mr.Stfunksslrs~Courtfbrabrosdrurgeof slid+ " m ~ l d n g : "&g rhe 31 [cmgnsshd dMcu previously all& to New Y a so as aot to h k z rfmnnec citizen righl to self- gavenanent [ead] declare tbe iedrpction of 31 {congmssioaa) disnictsl u, 29 (conpsW dis- tricts) ~ M c " (June 18 Morion at 18): " h t De!timhee k dile43d #, coaducl F & d el& at large" (Juac 18 Mobon at 21): "a mandamusorderbCDtfCIW1Q~tacoud11~1~ ahan cmmmatioa within the State* (M Motion at 17); " k t there be special consdma- donbythcCourtutoEaimessforaaan-pattisaa petitioning and candidacy process in pnparation fm the Geaanl E%xtionw (Amended Motion at 17); and "bat the FaJcral Gov- Justice D e p t m n e n t O ~ t k G m s r a l E l e c t i a n ~ c ~ d ~ ~ t o v ~ a n d t b n ! imgulrnties on Nowmbet 5. 2001." (Amarded Motion at 17).

"In adar to inapmw as of right rnrdrr Fad. R CCiv. P. 2#fa)(2). an applicant mast (1) timcly file m c r p p b ticm, (2) show an mtaeat m tfK (ICtiOIS (3) damnmate that tha btem&t m y be h @ z d by bw: disposition of tbt action, and (4) sbow that tbe m-t is not prooectad adequately by by patics parties toe wtioa" New York NW.~, Inc. v. K h c L 972 E2d 182, 485 (2d Cir. 1199). TIC intervention apptication wiil be denied rmkaJ dl fow requimnentsare~"PIhwy&wcs. 25F.3dat ?O.The A ~ G ~ P s o p p o & i m ~ o a f a c t m s 2 and 3. arguing &at the pending & fhil to "impbxtc any in&& ideatified by h4r.~trunk such tbrt the 'diapositton ... may as a practical matter impair or mpe& his 'ability to protect b t inkmu.' Fed.RCiv, P. 24(a)." AG Mem. a13.

In order D claim "a judicially wgrmabk 'injury in fhct' an intavenar must have a direcl stakc in the out- caane of a litigation rather than a mae interest in the problem." Mulz v. Witliams, 44 F.3d 28, 52 (2d Cir. 1994) (quotes and citPtions omitted); see also B m m n v. New York City Bd. of Edw., 260 F.3d 123, 128 (2d Cir. 2001) [**I01 ("For an inter& to be coguhabk un- der Rule 24(a)(i?}, it must be 'direct. t uh tmd. d le- gaUy ptocactebk.'") (citations omitted). The Rodriguez and Allen plaintifB have chailarged New Y d C o n e s i o n a l a n d ~ S e n r d c ~ ~ t m s a i u p a n t h e 2 0 0 0 mma Mr. Smrnk does not hsve a "stake" in tbage

f him. Mr. S W r chanenge arises h m nu &ly diffml (wen if dimcult to discern) legal draooy which embraces allcgcd violatiom of the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965 and the Anti-Tc-m and

Page 262: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Case 1:09-cv-O1295-RJL Document 14-3 Filed 08/06/2009 Page 20 of -4 21 1 F.R.D. 2 15, *; 2002 U.S. Dist LEXlS 23354, **

Effective Dath Pcdty Act of 1996. ' Whik Mr. Smmk may haw a global inlasst in elatioo i z w u , he bas al- 1.egadlitLkorw~iathcCanstimtiooddVoting R~ghtt Act claims raisad in this caw. See, e+, Stnmk A K a1 I9 (-5 hawe G d Elaetioa p m b k with the redistricting budem unlike many of tbc Plsintibpe.") (emphasis added). Mr. Strunk arc-- tbsl the plaintiffs in Rodri- and AUm do not raira rk 5

issueshedocs.ladadheststrgUmtttWryhwbbm "W- by their -1" and tbat ifhc "wen? any o f t f i e o t h a P l a i a t i f l i o r ~ m I m R l l d ~ a t i l h a t tbeCourtmrndaetbe["ll] Dchdmhtornobdythc failure c a d by using only mtm m g a d a of being a cirizm or aw-citiacns [sic]." Strunk AfP. at 19. See also United States v. Cily of New Yo&, 198 F.3d 360, 365 f2d Cir.1999) ~ A p p e b ~ ~ t a ' intaw& ... are only mllaterally related to h e subject ~ ~ I U X of this eaforce mat anion.")

4 See, e.g.. Aammkd Mbtioa at 6 ("1 believe IMmdaW along with Fedsnl cllaboritica

dw of Ute 1965 bunigstian and N d i u t i o n Law mmbined whb the 1996 pro- vision fbr 'Aati-emwh and Effmtiue Death PenaltyLAldhas~rtalpNJpcrtyNetop. aatingIncomc('N0I')intheNewYodcMh 1% 1 lth 12th 1Stb 16th 17th [ c o o ~ l t s t ~Wricts] pcr tbc 1990 carws m p p m h m a lraults in greattrtakiugofdistressadrealpmpartyiathr- gded M M t y majority [cougmsid dis- tricts]." (mpbsis ackuIcd).

Mr. Strrmk also fails to iden* my inaareat of hia that might be i m p i d by the dispositioa of tMs a&m. Sinoc the [**I21 iscraw do not whatmr the outcaaeofthi8litigation,Mr.Smrnkb~tobringut mdcpendent mion. As noted, Mr. Solmk is shady party to a numbar of & elaction cases. See Ncw York, 198 F.3d at 3366 ("Appcllanto m y dl1 bring an iodcpeadenr action .... In fact,- appellrna nxeatly have filed such a lawsuil.")

5 Mr. Smmk tries to distinguish his csse in the Eamm Disrricr of New York by arguing t h t that action:

" w s ] with making the msngc and by wha! racipc which by now b a s b o e a t i b d 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 Dcoembsr28,MOOaavadtoNew Yo& in pjeces, no matts what I 1.

tbinkofthcFcd#.lrocipeitis there to ccmsume. 'This cam deals with the d t of a bed Pacipb not h e recipe, and th wmmptioll of M F d d e r a l s a u a a g a ~ t o

State indigmion bc4aua of voidS Icfl in tbo link uncpually pacbsed snd swvcd by slaw D e f d benin"

Stnmk Aff. at 21 (mphsie oriebral).

Ftd. r*13] R. Cbr. P. 24@) pwidts in patiDeat part tbt "upan timdy clpplicatioa, aoyane [*2191 m y be permittai to btcrvme in an action ... wbm an appli- cant's claim or &k and the main action have a ques- tion of law ar k t in common." The priacipal oonsidera- t i (~~~~(fimbinthcRuk:iswherbartieim~tionwil l d y delay or prejudice tk sdpdication of the rights of tbc 0rigiD.l parties." SacAmon v. tlggett G p , inc.. 167 FAD. 6.20 (E.D.N Y. I S M ) .

Mr. Smailr baspmcntcdr miqocptlofc)rimthaI ~ l e UIW&@X! to tbe claims .ad reliefauught by Ihc plain- tifi in Allen .nd M g u a . Mr. S W s cLhm do not bws "a quastion of law or k t " in cxrmman with b e un- derlying c b preeented bac. See, e.g., Frederick A h - sic Co. v. Me, I24 F.R.D. 353. 555 (S.ANX IM9) ("R6adiars patitionds papas sa bmdly as pcwable. the Cuurt cams find any qumtknm of tsw or kt that petl- b'ana might have in tammon with the plrtita")

1 1 i s h c l e a r ~ ~ t i o a d c e u s e u n d u c distraction, delay and prejudice to the prrtito aad to the Cwat in tbe adjudication of th: Rodriguez and Allen cases. See, e.g., Washingron Hce. Co-op., Inc. v. Mass. Mun. Wholu.de EIec. Co., 922 P.2d 92, 98 (2d Cir. 1990) [#I41 (upblding denial of pamissive i m - tion whcn "he U c t crwnl finmd that permissive m a veation wouM mddy complkte and flllther delay the litigation.") For example, by kckr dated Octabes 11. 2002, Mr. S t n d bas mmght individualized injunctive relief m the form of "pen&& to coileel s l g ~ t u n s outside of the legal window allowed by New Yark State e l ech law a a1 dre dii#rttion of the Colrrt be p l d on rbc ballot" pmzsumbly because the " A d person" bttpmg him oollect siguams h#l fnllen in. in Iht sama application, Mr. S m d c has adcad tbe Cowt a, consider claims he ia pmauiag in a state court action baawse ha "hoM[s] w oxpaceation of a fhir judicial decision b e behn the Gemral Election." We agree with tbe Attomey Genaal that Mr. Stnlnk, "should not be pennittad to burdm this compk litigation ...." AG Mem at 2. Mr.

. S W s imenedm would only save to "unduly &lay tbr: expaki t dhpdticm of this case." Frederick, 124 F. R. R. at 555.

ORDER

Page 263: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Case 1 :09-cv-01295-RJL Document 14-3 Filed 08/06/2009 Page 21 of 2itage 5 21 1 F . W . 215, *; 2802 US. LEXIS a 3 3 , **

For the foregoing reasom, Mr. S W s motion fix tion on is Wed. Because the Cuwt is dismissing CWCircllit 3- bK motion t intcrveae, Mr. Struak's Lena [** 15) re- quest for injunctive ntief is denied, without prejudice, as Jobu G Kocltl moat.

Dated: New Y& New York Udted Swtw Dhtrict Jam

O c u h 29,2002 Rlehud M. Btrmrn

J o b M. W81kert Jr. Uaited States DbMet Judge

Page 264: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

81*rMy~mstSPm9o~BlcdhhnmMoelphmm~19,20(D.Hc

Convicted ex-judge is disbarred r a d m e l u d g c b o s s h d h a n v u d b e ~ t o u r D c r ~ L l M O I a n d r r o u l d h a n d l c B l a W ~ s c s n s . I n a d d l t l o n , h e ~ , m e ) u d p c r e v a a * d ( M S p a r p o % ~

Sparpa fomdden horn prntldng law, removed from mll dauomqs m e n d . ~ b a n ~ C o u n t y S u r m g a t e s ~ ~ C a t h y n D o y l e , ~ a p c d e d t o ~ BlstChNs -from hls m w ex&.

Flrst published: Friday. December 4, 2009

m a n s l J . ~ , t h e h c l b m r r ~ S l p a r C o u n l u d p c c m v ( m d I n ~ d ~ t o ~ d a l a r y c n a n d p a H d t a $ 1 0 , 0 0 0 brlbetopq,NrmoucthiglepslM15, has been d!sbard.

m e r p p l l s a D M I l m d ~ S u p a n c r m r t ~ ~ ~ ~ m n d q m n d q ~ n g h k d i l b a m n r a n d m s t h b n a n c b c ~ f r o m t h e m l I d ~ .

H c k . l r o ~ M ~ l a r h s n y ~ , I ~ ~ U c S a ~ W nnployrrdayonelnthekgdtlcld.

Thermmamonkndumpdrd;Sparpo'smrmcmnInu.s.MrmdCourtrra exQededtomQL3=MdlrbamnL

~kcl r rcnaccdDcc.21 .Spapohaaamohund20yearbpbar Ibrhk ~ e x k a U o n a n d a m m d m u m d l O y e s l f o r t h e ~ ~ ~ , M l ~ n g ~ - * x u l d l l u l y r r a r l h l r s s c r p n s l ( l a . ~ I ~ W , E.ShrratImr,hasradhcbcDenrNrdcnt~a&mld.lra*arrath.tlI ~ f r o m p m b a a m t o - y s a s .

T h c d l r b a m r * m m p l d c d m e d o * r N I d a m o s ~ k l a l t ~ l a w ~ Lh~rmmthestate5l iparrCartbcnch

S p a p o , 6 6 , a ~ r r n t ~ B e m ~ , r u p p m a d ~ W . B u h b F l o M a rollampthedlsp*edZWO~danon.Hc.lroamdamm&Monasmd ~ ~ % t D p ~ l a r ) n .

m S p s r g o ' s * p s l ~ m M l h d * h a a l b m r r a m m R l e e ~ ~ - W m d d a ~ t o n m o n N m M t h e b n r h .

AtmefedualMa.l,meL7omwmtprwed~mcd.to-aaanalrmdket h t r k g a l a d s , l n d u d l n g B N C C ~ , m - ~ ~ w n h m r c m n 3 2 yearsolapuhm.who hadUgm~bc(mtheludpc.SpaporoMcda$10,000 brRe from BlsWly m Nov. 13.2003. Bd h e n the attomw d e d t d to pay w, Spanp -d hlm agaln mmqh a mnd, ldmtmed as attomw Sanrord ~ , l n t h e c o a t m a d a K I ~ r r r g v w t . ~ p o w m m n t s a k l l n c o u t

W u d g . - - m ) F N ~ d * . ~ 4 , 1 0 0 9 1 : 0 9 ~ ~ F a m ~ ~ m 2 7 Y o n m k D . l ( l m p Q B m a t i D n ~ p ~ l n prom: WIvm u.u -n- *ond.*,-2,.1009.:sOAl

To: w - l v nvm -BM-'-n- 7.:

by.---

m ~ - ~ - r s q ~ - - I ~ h . ~ M ~ - h ~ d ~ b - - h o n , ~ ~ b d O l E H n m k l p plthe*pllksh-~amp.bmc.imm~-m--m Free Breaking News: Fommr 3udg. smtmad to 27 Wonth. dab .marbaadmn.~rdwamkmthebr~kh-dc tkmhmnhunl * lmt W e n l m u t m ( l l m b d ~ = . E . m " n d ~ . W c ~ . m ~ d l k .

forAAttanptedExtomOm kel Stashmb 12-22-2009

~ . s p r p o k r a ~ ~ ~ a r n ~ ~ - ~ 4 ~ - m ~ ~ A W - F o n n ~ r t a c S U p r r m c M ~ ~ J . S p l r p o ~ o e m n c c d b D d s y

m n * s m * a a h p e m n d ~ d L 9 m ~ m , ~ ~ r p a . m g . d - to 27 months In federal prison fw attunptlng to aW doMnora horn laryers dolng

p m b m n n d 3 n ) . a . H b - , € S b m b n s d T ~ , h s - r m m S m p d n ~ bu+lne~~ In me up+8te C O U ~ ~ rrhac he sat. d ~ . m m * a m ~ m c ~ ~ w ~ . r e h ~ m t h e - h e - ~ Normern D w k t )udpe Gary Sharpe sald that, wMther Unwgh w 'mlsphmd . . p p s a r o n p s p c 6 d m e p l ~ o d m n d t d W s L I l a m * . - l o c l ~ exubersnoe,' Mr. S p a y was resporrslble for altemptlng to seam cmblbutbns d up to

$10,WO from local I- for a fund to pay Mr. Sparpob legal defema durlng the ex- JuWr Mttu dl- over campalgn adlvlties wlth the Commlnkm on ludldal CondW 7hk k extomon; Judge Sharpe Wd Mr. Spanp. 7 h b k threatening pop* wm a m d before you wlth harm.' ludge hsrpe cmtlrmed, 'For a ludgc, UEIE k Mhlng mwe rrpnhmrlble.' Mr. Sparpo, 66, d East Beme, Albany County, feod a marlmum Wson mbncc d between 33 months and 41 months for hk tuJeral mnvldlon In August of sthmphd Mbery and rolidtlng a brlbe (NYU, Aug. 28). )udpe ~ ~ w p sald he was depamng somwhat from ltdcnl smtendng guldcllnm because Mr. Spwgo dM not appear ID have enpaged In any 'systematbf or 'anorbdm olrnlml en-. Mr.SparporraraSWRmCowtJustKstmm2W2untllhbnmovslIn2006onthe Rmrnmmdatlon of the conduct commlstlon. Mr. Spargo'sattwy, E.Stew~)maofTmy,uldthefmnerludgc*rouMme,& most, 85 -t d hk 27-month renhna and mst hc nvud m m e n d that Mr. Spsrgo spen$ hk U r n at a rnfnlmum-srmrl(y W penltentkq dosest to the Albsny

Mr. J m a s a M m s t M r , k , S p e r p o n o t a ~ WEonvlrtlm.

Page 265: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

-Compn*.-c-m-wHtar Rm; 'all v." Mw --

To: .LMlodrrsmmw <wm>

Page 266: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510
Page 267: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

sa*Lo.aym?.ww rpTpDpl~~4'O.P

'I.pc~4a~~s3*~~g~~~~l~~~lg14~1*~ . ~lPqq~p~ql~s~~.9.rpa~l~mwoq.~~w

'~p*~~~hw~aqlIP~~'~lOZm~~~~

'==!1~~g!m1~ma9~whww 6rm'=1c-

--M rl --, ."m. UA I.. :mu

Wd ZE:I WOZ 'IE Wlll;rw(l 'WmU

Page 268: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

-ah-

New York State Has Firet Deficit in General FMd 3- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ o r l r i s ~ t o ~ a ~ ~ P o r t b c ~ t i m a i n ~ , t h e

babnce in more flu& --d&mneb ask6 Mllion A s d t h e l w t b e s h o r t - t s m w m , t h e w a i s + t h e s e t o - i t s ~ W a n d the closer New Yodc m o ~ s bowud a pesiously m m m g b b k ~ . A gmmmenteheckthatbonnoes. - N e w Y o r l r s w e b ~ ~ ~ t o ~ - m i d ~ t h e ~ canutder, whose include umu& N m Y d s hmms. Th state b

budget gagsgagsand thir dist m stnrhwl bab;lee; and whether pesonal income tax remipta

.- month, he delaged $750 millik in pagmntsto-& dishids and loaigmmm&ts in the h o p e s t h a t - o e s ~ ~ ~ i n J ~ , w b ~ n W ~ ~ - ~ ~ mivin&tomstorethepymmts M r . W t w o o h a s b e a ~ w a n ~ i n g f o s ~ d ~ ~ ' s ~ m ~ C ~ h '

o u P a i a e t h e @ W t o ~ t o ~ t h e J ~ t o ~ t h e m ' s $ 3 n ~ ~ d d i e i t B o t ~ e t h e g c ~ w o r a n d t h e ~ e r c P f h e d ~ ~ t t h h P m o c l t h m

0.h- The City Room bureau chief, Sewell Cbn, win be IiIing diqntdm fmm some of New York State's other cities this wek. - - ROCHESIPR - Forget d that business about a shared his-.

Jhnpire Center fix New Yo* State bky, a ruearch gmup that frrors rrdmd pimumtent ~ ' A n d t h e l e s s l o e h i o n v o l l h t h e * . n d ~ i t n t s i f t h e n ~ ( ~

densely padad suburbs of hng Island and the Hudson Valley (mother four millionplus, give or take), which together represent ma& *thirds of the state's popnlation of 19.5 miiion and often seem to get mart of the spotlight

The last governor who was not from either New York City or the Hudson Vdey was Nathan L Miner. of %acne, who smed from 1mi to 1022. Untew&&. no hm Islander bas been governor &c?.Tbendore bosmelt, who sen& from 1899 to;&. He 1i;ed in Oyster Bay, in Nassau County.)

When Gov. David A Patemon, who lives m Manhatmu, had to appoint a repla~ment for Senator Hillan Rodham Clinton (6- Westehcsta Countv) this vear. neommhic

P a g e t t h e ~ t h a t N e w Y o r k W s ~ h m b e a I ~ e l y ~ s i m a t h e Comthtion was ratified. Tbat onlv hvu states hew been admitted to the Union bvs~liitina off I h m other states (Maine hm M&W in 1820, and west ~irginia fromvi&& in in

1863). And that if the United States were to add a ~ 1 s t state, the likeliest candidate would be Puerto Rico, or even the Dishict of Columbia - not New York.

State Senator Joseph E Rob& a Republican who mpmwnla part dRochest~, has pmp@sd legislation that would d o w each of New York State's 62 counties to hold a mferendum in 2010 to ask voters this qwstion: 'Do you support the division of New York into hvu scpmte states?"

The referendum - if it is esm legal -would be nonbinding. -.... 1 1 Four Republican senators - William J. hddn Jr.. M i i H. Ranzenhofer, James L Seward andDaleM.V&-wMr.RobrbmWngtbcbiflthisyear. ' I I The pmposal bas little chance of becoming reality, in a state where Demomats amtrol the govemor's mansion and hdd a namm majority in the Senate and a " g majority in the Assembly.

Nooaheless, the proposal - d5cb stated that Them is a large degree o f a d support for dividinn New York into two semmte states, so as to scumate the dkhcl d and ooliical I I - - - - ~ - ~~

wnc?.Gs betwren between upstate=dowmbte N ~ Y ~ K -refleck misundemtandii even animosity, betweeo the various parts d-

After all. the state's nwl southern tier, the northern Abndack d e s and the e a , n c m i d y struggliogeitiegof~~&~~tralNwYorkdon'tahvap~eeme~e~to~muehin wmmon with each other.

Md to that the global metmpolis of New York City (some eight million-plus people) and the

.- - . balance p l a d an important mle..~r. Pat- selected Kimtm-k Gdhand, a congresswoman from the Albany area, to fill the seat.

For now, Mr. Robech, who was said to be wmvdable fix an intmrkw because of the holiday ' season, seems to be eniovim the attention aid to his nmnosal. r*hieh has mtten considerable - - - - - - local &ention.

Asked whether Mr. Rob& really expertrd the IegMaiion to go aoywbeR Kirk Moniq a mokesman. renlied: 'He has & to leeislators in both -who have emRssed interest io the w & h d will mtin ie to work Gth both sides (M this issue in the ukming year."

Sewell Chan, the bureau chiefof the CCly Room blog anda mtive @New York sty, is on the mad this week,filing dispatchesfmrn some ofNew YorkState'sotheraties.

Page 269: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

1864 11/20 InStF'eter's,Romc,thebealiiicatimofPecn~by 1881 05/04 TbeSociaywascxpdlcdtiumtheRcpbLicofNicarag~. P o p e ~ l x .

1866 07/17 G n a r d M s n l e y H o p l r i n s ~ e ~ ~ l i c 1867 07/07 ThebcatifieatiaaoftheZOSJapancscMsrtyrs.33oftbem

munbcrsoftheSocietyofJ*rus. with right of s u c a s h the Swiss J d Anton Anderky. InitsIkuee4titheOng~pth 1868 08/10 TheSociecywasexpdled6mnMexicoandallils dediatedtheSocietyof

propclty- Jcsm to promoting devotion to the sacled Head of Jesug

1870 12/04 l'heRomanCokge,.ppmPialcdbythePicdmontare 1886 12129 Publication of the bealiiication decree of the English government, was reopeaed as a lyceum. The monogram of theSocietyovertbemaiacntraaawasremwed 1887 03/05 T h e f i w n l o f F a t b a G a a a r l P c b r B a l a . 2 h d ~

1871 08/12 The S o c i e t y w a s e x p e l l e d f m m ~ general of the !heiety, who saved his brotbns in that 1872 07tZO I n R o m a g a a g s o f ~ p a r s d c d t h e ~ ~ office for 34 ycsrs.

art:"DeathtotheFriars!IkathtotheJesluts!" 1889 06/08 'IbcdeathofthejesuitpoqGdManleyHoplriasin 1872 08R2 Jesuits were expelled hn Germany during B i d s

Dublin at the agc of45.

KultlPlrsmpf. 1890 02/08 AtRcminthePakzzD~thedeatbofCardimal

1873 04104 InMexicoalswtoexpdtheSocictywaspoposedm JosephPccciwhol&theSocietyofJesusin 1847butwas readmitted 40 years later at the request of his h h e r , Popc Leo m.

religious ordas noparisaeat m Itsly, and owned@ of all 1892 01118 The death at F i l e of Father <isnaal Antholly

their pmpedes passed to the slate. Alderlady, Wrd spwior general of the Society.

1873 06/19 In Rome, Victor Emmmnel and hispdamentexplicitly 1900 06117 The martyrdom at Wuyi, China, of B M Modcste

exchde the g d of the Society hn any peasion. Andlauer and Blessed RCmy ArorC, slam during the Boxer RebeUion.

1873 lO/ao At Rome all of tbe Society's bouses, inc-g the Gcd a n d t h e C u r i a , w e r e ~ b y t h e g o v e . m m e n t 1900 07/20 ThedeathinChinaofSts.WlllDumandLcoMmgin,

martyrs of the Boxer Rebellion; the Church celebrates 1874 05/23 The death in St. Louis, Missouri, of Peter De Smei, tbeir fhst on Feb. 4

inhcpid Belgian m k h m r y , who founded the Rocky Mountain Missions in the wstem United States and crossed the Atlantic 19 times in starch of d c resources and vocations to staffthe gruwing church. 1909 05115 The death in Quito, Ecuador, of I t a h Jesuit Luis Sodim,

1879 081W Pope Leo Xm published his encyclical A&M Pobir a key scientific f i p in Latin America. who developed a botanic collstion that formcd the base for the National Botanical Garden in Quito.

1879 08/07 T b e N e w Y o r k P l o v i n a w a s ~ l i i 1880 03/16 TheFreachPdkmtpnssedabiUsponsaedbyJules

Ferrfs f a the closiag of all the Socielfs bwea and 1909 09/07 FathcrGenaalFnmzWslaeshblisbedtbtpwinceof

colleges in F-. Ausbia

mdmyoftboSoc*yotkam -32d36

1936 OW23 T h e d e a t b d S a v m t s o f G o d ~ S s n t a e l l q ~ Payam,andEmrmmuclLuque.~oftheSpanisb Civil War. Tbey were b p r h d in a prism ship in the harbor at Almerl, in southern Spaia Fathm Alpbonsus Pa* and Emmnuel Luque were taLen off the ship along with a large number of o h m and shot Fr. SantaeUa was beatm and sufTocated in a ad bunker on anothex ship.

1936 08/24 The death of S.G. A h &6, martyr of the Spanish Civil War who remained in Spain ministefing to people afterthesoeietywassuppssed

1936 09/08 The deatb Servaot of God Richard Term, msrtyr of the Spanish Civil War, who was too old and infirm to leave . Spain as many other Jesuits had done. Despite his age, he , wasarrestedandshot

1936 09/12 Servant of God Enmvmuel Gomakz (1889-193% Martyr of the spanish Civil War. A d of mpniing the nationalist movemmt against the communists, he was taken h m prison in the middle of the night and excculul

1936 0904 The death of Servant of God Ignatius de Velssco and six Companions, martyrs ofthe Spanish Civil War.

1936 11/04 ThedeathinTortosa,Spain,ofServantsofGodFrancis A d , John Rovira and Joseph Llatje, martyrs of the Spanish Civil War

1937 06/04 Chikwascstsblisbednm~viaprovince. 1942 11/19 The deatb of Servant of God Joseph Mark Figucroa, a

brotherwbo&aspOItCT~ftheJdcollcgeinSanta \ Fe, Argentina, for W years; his profound love of God

touched the whole city.

mdmyotlhoSaiolyotka ~ 3 l o t 3 6

1913 04/09 . PopcStPiusXqmkehispraiscaoftheApoJtkshipof Rayawhicbanmted25miIlioammbcn.Thepcriodical The Messenga of tbe S d Hclrt appears in 42 editions inmorcthsn20languases.

1914 08/19 TbedeathofFatkGenenlF&XaviuWernz,thirty- fifth superior gmeral. A noted cawnisf be devoted himself to the intend life of the Society.

1915 0211 1 Wlodimir Ldochowski was elected 26th s q a k general of the Society.

1915 03101 A t t h e 2 6 t b G e a a a l ~ t h e A m r i c a n Assistsacy of tbe Society was established, eamisting of , theproviaecsthenexislentintheUnitcdStates: L

Maryland-New YorL. Mi&, New Orleans and California Thomas Ganmm was named the 6nt Amrican Assistant

1924 05/05 'IbcApostoLicLetterofPopePaosXIbFatherGan?d, ~i~ythedistinguisbedmeritsoftheGrgorian Umvers~ty and deciding to build a grand edifice.

1926 09D6 The death at the lqmsuh in CIYli6n. the Philippines, of Father Felipe M i l h , known as the "Fa& of Lepers" after a life Wily dedicated to caring far the sick.

1927 1Q104 The death in Mexico City of Servant of God Sahrsdor Garcidmik, pastor and guardim of the Shrine of Our LadyoftheAageLs

1928 02/09 Edward M e folmdcd the Cathdic Medical Missioo Board in New York City.

1930 05/27 ThedeathofJoStMarlaAlguC,oacdthegrcat mteomlogists in the history ofthe world. He m W a maehiac tomeasunbaromcbie~t lmt~valmeny 1944 07/20 AnaboltiveplotsgainstHitkrbyGmeralClausvoa LiwsintheFarEast Stauffenbergandhisessistaatsnsultedintheemstoftbe

1934 10107 The* of Servants ofGod Emik Marttncz and Jolm Jesuit, ALfrsd Delp. BaptistArconada,martyrsofSpaia 1946 08/31 The death of S.G. Joseph Piam. hithful and humble

1936 07/24 The death of S.G. B d i o MartfaQ and L ~ ~ ~ I c c lala, minister. Despite his 6ail health Fr. Joseph Piao devoted martyrs of the Spanish C i War. himself to a varieiy of ordinary+ over a long life of

1936 08/14 The deaths of Savants of God Joachim Vakntl, Louis priestly service. He wanted to be a missionary in Alaska,

BogUnaaudJosephVergCs,maayrSoftheSpanishCivil but his mission was to &st otbas: an elderly Jesuit who

War,k i l l edbymach inegunf i re the~af t er the i r~ needed health care during his final months, d e n t s at the major seminary in Turin where he was confessor, and

--

\

Page 270: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

rdmtmtsmGoolaao. 1946 09/06 C e D c r a l ~ X X M ~ t o e k c t a n c w

superior g d ; nine days later it chose the Eklgiao Jesuit, John Baplist Janssens.

1947 07/21 The deatb of Savant of Gud John Baptist Reus, a Gaman wlmworLed~SouthernBrazilandisdforbis

1948 10101 The&athmPatugalofSavantofGodFds Rodrigues da C n a , fsmed as a coofarsor ofthe poor.

1948 lOnl A uovitiate was CStaMishcd in the Belgian Conp for AfXcan Jesuits, with four novice scholastic^

1952 05114 The i n a u p a t h m Bogotb. Colombia. of Casa de Ejercicias & Jeslrs Rcdentor, h workers and d farmers.

1952 08/18 The deatb of- lhubdo, writn, re(reat diredor, trade unionist and founder of "El Hopr ds Chris&," a mavementtohelpthebomeleasmchik.

1955 01115 The death of Daaicl Lord, popubrwriter, U.S. dhctor of the Sodalily, founder of the Summer Scbool ofCatholic Action, and editor of Thc Queen's Wok

1955 1 04/10 The death of Pim Teilhard de Cbardin, pkmbb& snd theologian.

providcpopular0rbasicedueationthro;ghoutthat corntry.

1956 iimi T b c ~ o f h w a s a l l o w c d i n t o N o r w a y . 1957 02/28 T h e J e s u i t V d u a t m C o r p s w a s f a m d c d i n k ~

Statol.

1%3 04E01 The death,ofGaald Ellard, lihngist and one of the fnmdersoftbcN~LitmgicalConfama.

1963 11/24 ThedcalbofJohLaF~pioasaadvocatcofracicll justice in the United SStatcJ.

Cobbia.totsLepmtmtbccordixeDaof~ Americrmbiskpstbatprwedtobcapivotalmomatm t h e ~ ' s r e c o g n i t i o a o f t h e ~ m k o f ~ o p t i o a for jdce.

apostle of prisoners in Bmil; he was also hnous as an entomologist. T h e d e a t h o f l o a e f J ~ w b o s e s h m l i e s o f ~ history contributed to the refam of the Litmgy. The d e r in rural Brazil of Joao Boss, Bumia wh wasshotandkilledbysoMicrsforproOcstiagthetortunof two poor women. SalvadorRutilioGraadc,pastorand~hof ~8mpesiws,wss~edmhiswaytoceleblate Msss. ThennuderofBaaardLisson,amechsnic.andGrrlpr Richcrt, a pnish priest, shot to death at St m s Mission, Sinoia, Zkhbwe. ThessssssinatioomGuyamofBmmdDarke,a photographer for the catholic Smdard, a di- newspaper. ThedeathofRiccardo~hm&roftheBctter Wodd Movement ManholM , bil.aprishpriestat%mamm PataalBibar, India, was a s d m t d

ThedeathofGodomdoAlingalwhwasshotlmdkilled m his rectory in Kiiwe, Philippines, for defediog the rights of poor fsnoers. Carlos Perez Almw, cchaplain at a military hpital m Guatemala.disappearedandispeslmKdtohavebeen killed d-g a period of repression. GeneralCoagrcgation33bcganmRomwithuO delegates rqmenting 26,000 Jesuit%. Father Gmeral PeteHans Kohrenbacb &meed Umt alJ

prwimrs. 'IbedeatbmaCbineaclabarcampofFwcisXavicrChy a Jesuit ban m Shanghai. ThedcathofWalterCiprhwwmRrrpsiafrom 1939 to 1%3. InM-thebndaI " " ofJomdcDaa andSilvioMoreirqPatugu*ieksuit3wlmwere rnksbta&s dedicated to the good of the people. ~deatbefAntlnmydeMeUo,authorand~master. - r a e d c a t h o f s a p i o ~ , ~ d c f ~ o f ~ of tbe powerless and of the ewimmoeot udt him a threat to the m m of the d c and political powas m T i d t a , Colombia The assassination in Sao W, El Salvador, of Ig~mcio EUacurIa, Igaacio Madn-Bar6, Scgrmdo Moadea, Jmquin LClpn, J,uan R a m h M-, and Amando Ibpa. along wth thcu cook, Elba Julia Ramos, and ha daughter Celma Maricet Ramas. At Rome,thedeathofPedroArmpe,ZStb~or gcaeraloftheSocietyofJesla. InBogota.Colornbia,thejirstm&tineforthoaeinchPge of pestoral work m the Latin American universities ofthe Society of Jesus. The camnhlion ofClaude & la Colombiere by Pope JohnPaulII,63yeanaf?erhewaclbsatifiedbyPiusXI. "Syroposium on the Vocation awl Mission of the Jesuit BmtkfopaKdinLoyolaandfuuctionedasa conrmission to pnpare for the 34th General Congrcgstim ~ M r m z i h i n v a M w c a c N g a b o S J . ~ ~ : h b i i o f B&vu in the Dcmoaatic Republic d e r e d q was nnndd He had d e n 0 4 the political and economic exploitstion of h u n d ~ ~ I ~ of thousads of Rwandan refugees who sought n3%ge in Kivu. The "Pilgrim" loved hi ragabood years starching for God after a dramatic conversion yet baame famols as the founder of the Society of Jesus

Page 271: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

Posts I Commenls I E-mail I --- Friday, Jamrary 01.2010

I-"!!!--- -; Vatican Asassks Wouuded In 'lbe House Of Mv Frieads

ConCon Resentation Latest IWKIU Over 650 Slides . .

o w 0 .Bab* o The Anti- .-

w(1 MA ReIiaim

o m o Romanism

.LLS 0-

ocieomw- o Maiority Savage B $ o Minority Civil Blackg o White Fascim o Criminal Federal Cou* . Rcsourccs o&&g 0 v't* o B o o k m o Movie Re-

.Stae About V M . .yk& .

0 1- o The Pumose

Eric On Radio VA YouTube The Plan %E . Links . Cant-

Obama's White Papal Masters

Postal by admin 00 Allg 5th 2009 sad filed under Galkrv. New, The Black Poue. You can follow my v n s e s b this cnby ttaougb the E&&Q. You can leave a

Read ibeir credentials sad eormcetiom.

Obama's White Papal Masters:

--w 'Ibe Evil Emperor

A d a 0 Nkoh8 3w Superior Gened. Society ofJcsus '"llx Black Popc"

Pope-xYI Vicar of ChristNicar o f H o ~ ~ "Ihe White Pope"

Jmmcs E. Gmarmer, SJ. American Assistant b Genual Nieolss

Bow di Sanb Spirit0 395. Rome Master of US Jesuit Con&

Page 272: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

I Master of New York Rwincial

Tbol..rRSwlW.SJ. President, US Jesuit ch&encc Fonner Calihmia F'mviacial Former Master of Gov. h I d %+mmqp~ C0nsp ira tor :Presea t~M-Iwamm -tor: Future Sino-&n+et-bIim Imnion

h v i d s. ch.dml.0, S.J. New York F'mvincial Ov-of Archbishop of* Yat City Occult Overseer of New YnL C i i Wall Streq Federal Resave, NYSE

J o q h M. MeSbane, S.J. President, Jesuit Fordham Univcmity Bronx, New York "Penholder for Cardinal Egan" Notice: Equilateral TrisDglc Pendant MssonicsymbolfortheRismH~

THE COMING RISEN P0PW"llH Beat"

PapcBencdkttbeXVl Roman Papal Caesar Egyptian O s i V i m of ChrWVicsr of HONS

EdrnrdCudidEgn "Priace of the Pope's Chch"

Archbishop of New ~ o r k City "Archbishop of the Capital oftbe Wcdd" The American Pop" Head: American Braach ofthe Knighg ofMalta Head: Knights of Columbus

OccPlt Master of: supreme Council ofthe 33d Dcglw

American Sdtkh-Rite Frccmmuy Gnmcil On Foreign Relatiom B'nai B'rWAnti-Dchmlion League Central Intelligmrc Agcncy National Secwity Ageacy Federal Bureau of Iavestigntion Office of Naval Intelligence The Pentagon

Joscpb A. O'Hue, SJ. President Eumitw, Jesuit F m Univwsii

Bronx, New Yo& Member: Knights of Malta h i d e r : Council m FoFeign Relatioar Advisor to Knight of Malta David RocLeMlw, CFR Advisor to Knight of Malta Henry Kissinga, CFR Advisor to Michael Bloomberg

Mayor, New York City Pa@ Knight of the Vatican's Revived

"L.tia Kingdom o f ~ ~ - - I s r a c l

J o b J. Mioh President Jesuit Gcorg*own U~livasity Member: Knights of Malta Member Council On Foreign Relatioas Admiushator: U U a Kingdom of J e m n k d - h l

Page 273: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

R c c n d t a o f B m y s a b o r q 1981

Multi-billionaire

Friend of Rupert Mud& Freemasonic Jewish Labor Zionist

"Court Jew for the Pope"

Manba: KaighLP dSt,Gaegory lu temaw Media Mogul Owaer: Fox News Nchworlr Friend of Gaorge Som Ofean Proteeter of BYvL Hnweim Olmaa

Bill O'Reilly - 'lbe O'Reilly Factor

Bany D.* "Barack Hussein O b a d 32nd Dcgrec Prince Hall Frremasoo President of Rome's "Hob Romm.''

Joscpb R Bldea Papal Knight; Jemit Tempaal Codjutor Vice President Rome's ' H d y Ranan''

14th Amendment American Empin Alter Eso: Jesuit Advisor to

Merit Barry hvb ob..l. Romoter: Council on Foreign Relatioas Honorary Degrees:

Jesuit University of Scraotoa, Scnmbm, PA Jesuit S t Jcseph's Univasity, Philadelphy PA

14th Amadment Ammican Empbe Surmi Moslem, Pretended Rotcstant Chf ish Mulatto: Mulatto Father, White Mother Father: Frank Marshall Davis, Jr. Wife: Michelle, Member: Chicago CFR Obama: CFR-Conhulled and CFR Spoksspaacm obama: Promoted by the lak Wiliiam F. Buckiey, Jr.

Bucklqr: Knight of Malta, Bonesmea, Bilderbaga, CFR Member Buckley: Promoter of R m r s c D i e t i o n against Whites Buckley Romoter of a Coming Black President

/ Obama: Trained in Romanism, Islam and Apostate Protartantism Obama: "Nimros, Pretended Unifier of Whites and Bl8cb Obama: Promoter of tbe Papal C d c against Shia Islam Obama: Remoter of Bush's Pspal Inquisition

Against Rotestant American Liberties Obama: Jesuit Temporal cdjutor

Promotor of tbe Black Pope's ~-~ ~rryLhvk-Boy"ofPopeBcacdMXVI

Page 274: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510

[ . . . ] I n t h i s ~ ~ o n l y ~ g r m p ~ t h e ~ d W i s t h e l a s l oplh~offacdasnm,bcrten,theV~ JobnKemwdy,asthefktRomm Catbdie prsidmt ever elected, was warning the public about the sinister role of the Jesuit Or& under the umbrella of the Vatican and Roman Catholic Chmh as the enemy of the Amaicaa ChWiMion snd the Bill of Rights. the Jesuits have b&n involved in orchcstmtiag most wnrs and political assasshations and have been kicked out of 73 counhies for tbeirduplicity. The Jesuits are a militmy oder mated ~mder Pope Paul IU by the first Jesuit Supreme G d , lgnatius Loyda or the Black Pope m 1534 to cwntcr the Protatant Reformation. 'Ihe Jesuits are m ordm that requires its k a d n to take a blood secrecy oath (revealing their secret plans or actioas m l t in talring their Mood or death). 'Ihe cumnt chin of mmmmd and titles of the "latest puppet" US Resident Barack Obama under the Black Pope Adolfo Niilas are pictured on Eric Pbelps wcb site bm: VaticanAssassi.org. [...I

mRtmmmmm [ . . . ] ~ ~ b y G o t t i M c C l m c m I f t b e C F R h a s n d a a r t y ~ m u c h p o w a

tXe@xles: Gelkrv. New& The BlacL Pooe as I attnbutc to tbem, then why do thsse 5000 people RUN EVERYTHING? The T.g: Jesuits, Obama The Black Pope CFR is the ru l i i elite of the US.Wbo tbemsclves anma to higher luthority:

Obama's White Papsl Mastem I Vatic- Assassins [...I

. . 5. of Obomcr a sdedQ1 says: 1. Vox PoaJI w Bat of Valkwn Awiums Georgetam ~ i r o c y theories b m 2009 September 18.2009 at 5:33 om

[...I ~ResidentJobnDdiioiais9thintheckuinofcommsadof F ' r e a i i o b m d s "white Papal [.-I

2. '--

Q&br18.2W9at 12-

Andtothia lr thcscgwfy~gct . I t theg i l i s . l % e y g o t m y w b o k ~ l y . I w i l l s a y i t i s e a s i a b t i v c ~ t h c s c m ~ g w f y ~ i n ~ ~lyhmmynrighd~piviligeswaProtcstingHcmyKissiagcrtomy own M&. Yortr own family will resist you to bold up these men.

3. "Mardirhic mdRurhleu Gnmhav..." a Hiah Sierra Gddsnyx Q ~ t ~ 4 ~ 2 0 0 9 ~ a t ~ i L - 0 6 m

~ . w b i h P q . l - I v h . ~ Rccertly Co~n~~atcd

e E J ' P R w o o n d ~ t o a ~ ~ ~ l ExiledDutchStatnananGeertWiWarmApaimtIslamPart1

&den-Advised Obama: Gearratine White Ri&-Wi Jesuit Fascism Bin Laden CIA Conlmct Agent. Dead since Lhember 13.2001

l MMerereTha~WS.ex~~Tll-eded-~-ttrettreJ&ts United Natiom to Rebuild Ancient Babvlon . Je& Temvoral Coaidu@~AIexI_ones' %he Fall of the Rqublicn Black Muslims of America Militarv Training Cams: Race War

l Rcolies to Brother Michael. an HmorabbbRefi.red.Portt& Pdia O f k a l Brief Chronolorrv of Jesuit History Authored bv the CanCanpany

Archives by Tag

~ & & B & ~ M A - L ! , ' ' I B ~ ~ Q - ~ ~ ~ & ! ~ A

c a h S Q ~ D a r i l o a e ~ I Y 1 F .. .- Lw.c&mm - m n l N l ~ ~ ~ h d J c s u i f s I [ i d . d M . * . l l l i O ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ d S 0 . ~ 1 ~ w ~ b r m ~ ~ o f m w ~ R d i ~ ~ d d ~ . R d i l w . ~ n r s s l r t a m r S a i l i n . ~ ~ T b .

Blrtrap vs%?-d. vltia v* II* e ! !

R e n t EmtTkd

D c c e m b c r 3 1 . U ) 0 9 : F r a n W h e A a K a r i o P " t o t h e ~ ~ e P a ~ . December30.2009: F r o m " t h e ~ ~ " t o t h e S a x n d C o m h ~ P a r t 3 o f 5 . December 29.2009: From "the Ammine" to the Second Cmnin~ Part 2 of S l December 28.2009: Fnm "the Agpearing" to - nba!u&fJ l December 25.2009: White Protestant American Revolution, Wrt 10 of 10 l EJP Replies to Tmv as to the Biblical Timcline &"the &peahe." FW 4 of5 l Merry Mass-ofCbrist: Woman Knocb Pope h e d i c t XVI to Vatican Floor! l December 24.2009: White Rotestant American Revolution, Part 9 of 10 l EJP ReDlies to Trov as to the Biblical Timeline of the "Amearin%" Part 3 of5

December 23.2009: White Rotestant American Revolution, Part 8 of 10

. PLotoG.Ikry

l

l m l o

/

h S s . ~ W b h P P . I r n l V ~ ~ psal6orlS

l

e

l

l

/

WJhW". .. . Jt&5 VIROIO

Page 275: Errata Appellant Brief and Appendix for 2nd Circuit Appeal Case Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 08-4323 010510