Defendant’s Brief on Motion to Dismiss and Plaintiff’s Reply with Evidence

 The Defendant's attorney submitted a brief with further claims as to why this case should be dismissed. The Plaintiff, Litigant Lawrence, replied to their brief with further support as to why this case should tried by the court and includes great evidence as to why his opinion should be supported. Lawrence’s response include more evidence that his past employee was acting as a ‘state actor’ and also shows evidence that they violated the Nuremberg code.

DEFENDANT’S REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS, can be viewed here.

PLAINTIFF’S SURREPLY TO DEFENDANT’S REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS, can be viewed here.