PLAINTIFF'S REPORT TO THE COURT ON THE AMOUNT OF PUNITIVE DAMAGES

ABORTION INDUSTRY IN MELBOURNE, FLORIDA
LAWSUITS
RANEY V AWARE WOMAN
DOCKET / CHRONOLOGICAL FILE
PLAINTIFF'S REPORT TO THE COURT ON THE AMOUNT OF PUNITIVE DAMAGES

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION
CASE NO.: 97-1197-CIV-ORL-19B

MEREDITH T. RANEY, JR.,
Plaintiff,
v.
AWARE WOMAN CENTER FOR
CHOICE, INC., a Florida
corporation, EDWARD W. WINDLE, JR., and PATRICIA
B. WINDLE,
Defendants.

RIGHT TO PUNITIVE DAMAGES

The Plaintiff, Meredith T. Raney, Jr., is entitled to punitive damages in the event that he prevails under any of his F.A.C.E. claims because of the statutory authority of 18 U.S.C. §248 (c) (1)(B).

MEASURE OF DAMAGES

Circuit Judge Wisdom, in a Florida case determined by the United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit, declared that:

"Florida cases follows the orthodox theory that punitive damages are punitory and a deterrent (emphasis supplied) ...Exemplary, vindictive or punitory damages are such as blend together the interests of society and of the aggrieved individual, and are not only a recompense to the sufferer but a punishment to the offender and an example to the community." Citing Northwestern National Casualty Company v. McNulty, 307 F.2d 432, 435 (1962)

In other words, the amount must be sufficient to do two things: (1) punish the Defendants (2) act as an example and warning to the community.

BACKGROUND

The Windles and company, Aware Woman Center for Choice, Inc., used policemen as tools to violate the civil rights of Meredith Raney, accorded him by 18 U.S.C. §248. The pretext for these civil rights violations was Defendants' misuse of the Madsen case injunction. Sadly, the Windles and company betrayed the trust of Sandy D'Alemberte, the former President of the American Bar Association, and the trust of Chief Justice REHNQUIST and the other Justices of the United States Supreme Court in doing so.

The Windles, as plaintiffs on the trial level seeking the amended injunction, covenanted, through their attorney Talbot (Sandy) D'Alemberte, as follows:

"14. Plaintiffs do not seek and nothing in the Court's Order should state, or be construed to state, that defendants and those acting in concert with them are limited, in any way, from lawfully exercising their First Amendment rights subject to these narrow and permissible time, place and manner restrictions on the manner in which such rights are exercised." Page 14 of Exhibit (A) attached hereto.

The trial court believed this promise. This court gave the Windles and company the injunction that they wanted, a veritable legal saber to be used to protect and prosper their abortion business. The United States Supreme Court acquiesced, in part, trusting that the Windles and company would not use this sword to "suppress particular ideas", thus rejecting Justice SCALIA's fear "that individual judges should not be trusted to impose injunctions in this context". Madsen, page 2525.

With the Melbourne City Police as their proxies, the Windles and company grossly misused this weapon, this injunction, against all who dared to offer love and hope and help to desperate pregnant women. Included among the Windles' many victims is the Plaintiff in this case, Meredith T. Raney, Jr., a F.A.C.E. protected counselor.

APPLICATION TO THIS CASE

Plaintiff, Meredith T. Raney, Jr., can supply a final estimate of punitive damages sufficient to punish the Windles and company for their mistreatment of him after taking their testimony; at this juncture, Plaintiff suggests that the sum of $1,000,000.00 would be sufficient for that purpose alone.

However, the amount needed to serve as an example and warning to all who would figuratively slap the faces of the Chief Justice and other Justices of the United States Supreme Court and misuse the prestige of the American Bar Association should be subject to an award of punitive damages greater than ever assessed in the history of the Federal Courts.

Thus, the amount of punitive damages should be the total of these two amounts: (1) one million dollars, plus (2) an amount greater than any award of punitive damages to date.

Respectfully submitted,
Christopher F. Sapp <signed>
PO Box 1012
Lehigh Acres, Florida 33970
(941) 368-3922
Florida Bar Number 0097823
and
Michael R. Hirsh
Hirsh & Heuser
125 Townpark Drive, Suite 300
Kennesaw, Georgia 30144
Attorneys for the Plaintiff

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished by U.S. Mail to Roy Lucas, Esquire, Post Office Box 1433, Melbourne, Florida 32902, Susan England, Esquire, 2805 Lakeview Drive, Fern Park, Florida 32730 and to Lawrence M. Siff, Esquire, O'Connor & Meyers, PA, 2801 Ponce de Leon Blvd., 9th Floor, (Coral Gables) Miami, Florida 33134 this 23rd day of February, 1999.

Christopher F. Sapp <signed>
Attorney