USA Court For District Of Maryland Makes Decisions

From: DeafSportLawsuit.com - Oct 21, 2005

Press Release - October 21, 2005

Note: to translate this material in your native language, visit http://babelfish.altavista.com

From: www.deafsportlawsuit.com

USA COURT FOR DISTRICT OF MARYLAND MAKES DECISIONS:
1) COURT IS NOT PROPER FORUM TO RESOLVE DISPUTES BETWEEN DEAF PLAINTIFF AND DEAF DEFENDANTS
2) COURT REJECTS $1 MILLION CLAIM BY DEAF ANARCHISTS AMMONS AND JORDAN VS. DEAF OMBUDSMAN PINCHAS
3) CISS/DEAFLYMPICS WAS NOT A PARTY TO LAWSUIT

Yesterday, on October 20, 2005, the Press Office of the CISS/Deaflympics has issued to the world its brief and vaguely-worded Press Release with its propaganda-themed U.S. District Court of Maryland Rejected Pinchas' 4th Civil Action Suit headline

www.deaflympics.com

Once again, defendants Donalda Ammons ( herein, "Ammons" ) and Jerald Jordan ( "Jordan" ) - individually or jointly or through their attorney from the National Association of the Deaf ( NAD ) Kelby N. Brick or the Press Office of the CISS/Deaflympics - have failed to clearly and truthfully explain as to what actually happened with the lawsuit case, including what was decided by the Court and why the Court dismissed the case, etcetra.

Ammons and Jordan or their attorney Kelby N.Brick have also continued to irresponsibly, intentionally and misleadingly imply that the organization of the CISS/Deaflympics was involved as a lawsuit party.

By utilizing the above-mentioned questionable propaganda tactics, especially among the 94-nation-members CISS/Deaflympics organization and its leaders, Ammons and Jordan have again "painted" themselves as the "true lawsuit battle winners," while Pinchas is "a loser!"

However, the facts and reality were and are quite different ones.

For the purposes of clarification, rebuttal, accurate and fair reporting, here are the following facts.

On March 2, 2005, plaintiff Rafael Pinkhasov Pinchas ( "Pinchas" ), appearing as a pro se, submitted his defamation of character lawsuit action against four ( 4 ) different defendants - Ammons, Jordan, Bobbie Beth Scoggins ( "Scoggins") and the United States Deaf Sports Federation ( "USADSF" ).

The organization of the CISS/Deaflympics, like in the previous lawsuits, was not specifically named by Pinchas as a party to this lawsuit action.

Like in the three previous lawsuit actions filed in 2001 and 2003 ( twice ) by Pinchas against Ammons and Jordan on an individual basis, the Court in Maryland again dismissed Pinchas' claim this time. Such a dismissal was principally based on the fact that "this Court is not a proper place or it has no jurisdction over disputes related to the internal rules" of deaf organizations such as the CISS/Deaflympics.

Additionally, here are the main points outlined in Senior Judge William M.Nickerson's 11-paged Civil Action Number WMN-05-629 Memorandum Decision recently:

- "While the Court can understand Pinchas' frustration at being precluded from serving a very worthy cause about which he is obviously passionate, this Court has repeatedly indicated to Pinchas that the federal courts are not proper forum to resolve his disputes with Ammons, Jordan, Scoggins and USADSF;"

- "As for the requirement of joinder of CISS/Deaflympics, Ammons and Jordan have proffered nothing to establish that CISS/Deaflympics is a necessary party in this action. While the Complaint repeatedly mentions the USADSF and it might be inferred that the Individual Defendants ( that is, Ammons, Jordan and Scoggins ) were acting on behalf on that organization, the Complaint does not, as Ammons and Jordan claim, "refer to action taken by CISS/Deaflympics," That Ammons' and Jordan's actions may have taken place at CISS/Deaflympics events is not a basis, without more, of imputing liability to CISS/Deaflympics;"

- "Turning to the counterclaims and motion for sanctions filed by defendants Ammons and Jordan, the Court notes that there is a certain insubstantial element to them as well. To support their "Malicious Prosecution" claim, Ammons and Jordan reference the four previous suits that Pinchas has filed against them and then assert that they have "incurred attorney fees" and "suffered extreme mental and emotional anquish as a result of Pinchas' "deliberate and malicious actions." Ammons and Jordan ask for $1,000,000.00 in damages. Ammons and Jordan have clearly failed, however, to state a claim for malicious prosecution...Here, Ammons and Jordan have not pled the requisite special damages to support a malicious prosecution claim;"

- "While Ammons and Jordan did file a motion for sanctions, Paper Number 11, they did not do so under the procedures prescribed in Rule 11. Rule 11 states that a motion for sanctions shall first be served on the opposing party and "shall not be filed with or presented to the court unless, within 21 days after service of the motion...the challenged paper, claim, or defense, contention, allegation, or denial is not withdrawn or appropriately corrected." Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 11 ( c) 1 ) ( A ). Ammons and Jordan indicate in their certificate of service that they served the motion to Pinchas at the same time as they filed their motion with the Court and thus, were not in compliance with Rule 11. The motion for sanctions will be denied."

The Memorandum Decision, among the other things, also stated that "this suit arises out of a highly contentious and long standing dispute amongst the parties" and that "Defendants ( Ammons, Jordan and Scoggins ) "have conspired to prevent him ( Pinchas ) from having any active role in the international deaf sports community."

In the meantime, a legal battle between the CISS/Deaflympics Ombudsman ( Pinchas ) against two deaf sports anarchists ( Ammons and Jordan ), Scoggins and USADSF continues.

Another and separate discrimination lawsuit involving Pinchas as a plaintiff vs. the same four defendants is still pending before the USA District Court for the District of South Dakota in Sioux Falls, South Dakota.