list affirmative defenses
suit should be dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. the suit is unripe and nonjusticiable.
d's use of the property for his church and recycling business is an authorized use under the property's c-5 zoning.
[rlupia? a weak but possible claim.]
counterclaim #1.: by filing suit without exhausting administrative remedies, plaintiff, now counter-defendant, violated article I section 12, due course of law.
counterclaim #2: by filing suit without exhausting administrative remedies, plaintiff, now counter-defendant, violated d's rights under the 14th Amendment.
crossclaim #1: when the inspector trespassed into d's mailbox, he violated federal law, on two occasions.
since the mailbox is technically federal property, it is somewhat unclear as to whether d has standing to raise this issue.
crossclaim #2 and counterclaim 3: when the inspector filed suit following the arson of d's garage, he became an accessory after the fact to that arson, converting a mere arson into a civil rights violation.
[weak. but i'm listing anything i can think of right now.]
inquiry into the status of the prior cross-claims and counterclaims, in the previous suit.
[long story here. get the file.]
the complaint seeks two kinds of remedies, an injunction and a fine. the injunction is an equitable action, while the fine is a matter of law, both today and in 1851.
d invokes their right to a jury trial under article 1 sections 19, 20, and 12.
D should be barred from seeking injunction in this case because they come to the court with unclean hands.
[see the thing here is, whether or not the unclean hands defense actually works, it opens the door for me to tell my story, anything bad h + h has ever done to me. i've never been able to tell that story.
At the present time, D is seeking to establish unclean hands as to their own case only. However, the court might want to conduct an inquiry as to whether h +H should be barred from seeking injunctive relief from any party, under the unclean hands doctrine.
new monday morning: 8th amendment claim, proportionality under indiana constitution. both a defense and a counterclaim.
h + H's overall course of conduct towards D has amounted to an excessive fine under the 8th Amendment and the Indiana constitution. The excessive fines clause was only recently incorporated into the 14th amendment as the result of Timbs v Indiana. D did not raise this issue in previous rounds of this litigation because the clause had not yet been incorporated.
Over the years h + h , working in conjunction and privity with the county, has seized about 40 of d's properties, mostly for the crime of growing hay and flowers and trees, and occasionally for being the victim of illegal dumping by persons unknown. This was excessive.
Even if we focus the inquiry solely on D's present location at 4015 e washington, h + H's conduct has constituted an excessive fine.
hey adam, do you see any other possible counterclaims or crossclaims? especially ones under any fee shifting statutes such as 1983. these need not be winnable, they just need to have some basis in law or fact or both. my threshold for filing a counterclaim is much lower than it is for when i initiate a lawsuit. At the same time I don't do frivolous filings; we need some grounds to make a claim.
My intent and budget here is not to fully litigate counterclaims, we are just trying to push back hard enough that they will think twice next time.
done for now, a good start for a first draft. will need more work.
abuse of process?
list issues of law, such as standard of proof, jury trial.
check mycase again, or, find the paperwork.
stop by peace acres sometime.
100 interrogatories for opposing counsel/investigator.
1 produce copies of any written communication from your witness to defendant.
2 have they ever spoken? if so, provide a transcript or summary. hint: they have not.
3. list any prior cases between h + h.
3.5. provide the case files.
4. how many is that?
5 would it be accurate to say that in 100% of these cases, no permanent injunction was issued, and no fine was assessed.
6. how much would the filing fees have been in these cases, if h +h paid the same filing fees other litigants do?
7. what process does your department use to make sure it it not filing frivolous cases?
8. produce copies of any correspondence from defendant to plaintiff h+h.
9. in particular, produce any correspondence from defendant in the cases involving 30 and 36 n hamilton, in which d filed an ongoing notice of non-waiver of his right to an adminstrative hearing.
10. any records of the administrative hearing in that case.
11. transcripts of any testimony given by the inspector in the 30 and 36 hamilton case. We are particularly interested in the part where the inspector knowingly gave false testimony under oath, showing photos of 36 N Hamilton as being of 30 N Hamilton, in a case alleging violations at 30 N Hamilton.
12. transcripts of the hearing at which d was found in contempt of court in the charles brawner case.
13. What is the current market value of the properties which were seized from D by the county?
14. Would you be willing to stipulate it is in the neighborhood of 1 millon dollars?
15. what is the current federal poverty line for an adult?
16 copies of any application for a warrant, in the prior case.
=
examples of past misconduct:
1. D lives in a shack. It was listed for $5,000 around 2010. After some negotiation, they bought it for about $7500. The next year, they got a tax bill for $13,000. It had taken D years to scrap together $7500, and he had no way to pay $13,000. The property was offered at the tax sale. No one bought, D was charged administrative fees for the tax sale which have yet to be returned. Several hundred dollars.
Upon further research, it turned out that H +H had sued the bank which was the prior owner and got a default judgment. They never sued me, and therefore the $13,000 was removed from my tax bill. But I encountered stress and worry, and faced losing my home at the tax sale, and was charged fees. All this was probably slander of title and actionable in various ways. Until H+H refunds the fees wrongfully charged, this is sufficient to establish their unclean hands. This is one of about 20 examples of their misconduct over the years.
2. the incident at 201 n eastern, where they stole my house and tore it down and hid the notice of a hearing under a plywood panel, and never mailed me notice.
3. the incident at 40 n tacoma, where, when bulldozing the burned house, they also bulldozed the perfectly fine garage. they did this without notice or a hearing.
4 the incident at 30 and 36 n hamilton, already discussed.
5 the issue of the $10,000 in tax sale certificates, disputed ownership of 223 n temple.
6. the incident at n brookside, where they vandalized 500 young pine trees at the thomas wilgoose memorial forest, and then billed [me] for it, and when i was unable to pay seized the land. however this may have been the city rather than h +h.
7. the incident where the inspector barged her way into my home without a warrant, as detailed by the counterclaims in the previous suit.
8. the pattern of conduct of the inspector continuing to barge her way into my house, with a warrrant this time, which was fruit of the poisonous tree, in that the basis for the warrant was information gathered during the first unlawful entry.
10. the incident where that countersuit mysteriously disappeared, with no notice of dismissal.
[find file, review docket. obtain as discovery or public record.]
11. the incident where they came and stole my cars and the 82 windows I had planned to build the greenhouse with. I still want to build the greenhouse, but only if they let me.
12. the incident where they served a warrant even though it had been quashed and modified by the court.
13. the incident where, when i tried to explain that the warrant had been quashed, the deputy defamed me to the inspector by twice stating that I was not a lawyer, implying that it was perfectly acceptable for her to rummage through my law office without authorization from the court.
14 the takings issue, of requiring $2500 a year minimum in h + h compliance costs on a $300 vacant lot, is a taking under the indiana constitution and the 5th amendment.
11 . If the county and h+h are in privity, there has been much wrongdoing by the county, which would double the length of this list. both Marion County and the Health and Hospital Corporation of Marion County are creatures of the state of indiana. They are in many ways alter egos of each other.
12. [enough for now, sunday night, but see if i can come with 9 more tomorrow.]
