case number nineteen under nasty names already had coarser versus michigan house of representatives at all argument not to exceed fifteen minutes per side mr depend no you may perceive to be a pallet  it pleases the court is the argument in this case what this case is really about is is whether certain government employees are entitled to immunity for t category of events starts around january st two thousand and fifteen and around august th two thousand and fifteen which is the state that the date that a story broke in the ramp office now under either scenario it's the plaintiff's position that the defendants acted outside of their official capacity and that are not entitled to any form personal computers and his personal files all without his permission and they order them to plant listening devices in their cars their vehicles their offices and in certain hotel rooms and then to report back to the defendants in this case with the findings of that investigation and then in the nd scenario which is between august th two thousand and fifteen and it's a temporal leavens the defendants use that statement where he said that it didn't matter or didn't make a difference how we get the result of both of these men and members no longer being a member of the body and we think that's telling because it it shows what their purpose was in the process and he wanted to remove these two members from the body it's also evident in my statements by the employees themselves that defending counter was white washing employees were kept by the defendants and as employees in the offices of plaint by all accounts they were not good employees they were not trustworthy they refused to follow directions they didn't follow rules they didn't show up these five defendants were involved in some kind of conspiracy i assume to direct them to do this so what what are the specific stocks that you claim that would support the to the defendants with their findings in other paragraphs we talk about how there was white washing of the investigation we talk about how they were bad employees we talked about how they were definitely directed by the defendants in this case to ducks or bail and so that they could use that information these defendants could use that information to remove the plaintiff from office and that was their goal that was that's that's very specifically i think the facts that were planted throughout the  we attach to the complaint many many exhibits including all of these text messages between allerton graham and kline you know they were they were live texting the events that were happening throughout their lives and in these t messages they described and the allegations state that they described this conspiracy and and in some cases that they were directed to do that sort of curious about though because i think themselves about what they were doing and it may well be that you have a good case against them i don't know i don't i'm not sure i saw a wink in that text messages between these three he's defendants and and  e what we're calling white house and that's i suppose in terms of them being in a a rico enterprise or a conspiracy or whatever you want to share thank you one hundred get you to it can't be said that all of the things that they did in this case would be entitled to immunity if they did those things they're not entitled to well are you saying that if you dismiss the rico in this case that they couldn't go forward in the other case no i'm saying that if in the other case there are no claims on the civil stocking whatever it is there would be no way for us to have predicate x so then that would support a conspiracy or rico right i mean it would be odd for our case to go forward on a conspiracy if there were no underlying actions by allard graham and clive right well i suppose that there would be true in the sense that they are in graham and climbed were the three people who were engaged in the acts that we allege they were the ones actually doing the civil stuff they were the ones actually interfering or or gaining access to the computers and klein were you know bad guys and they did all of these things that violated compete you know computer fraud eavesdropping civil stalking all of it but if they don't if you don't have it your client doesn't have any actionable claim against those three or those things because of such a limitations of unity whatever it would be i'm not saying anything about the merits of it i'm just saying that if it turns out that there's nothing there there can't be a conspiracy or rico that would involve the five house sentence that's what i'm getting at and judge quest is already dismissed all of the claims against our graham inclined right i mean i'm assuming you disagree with that and you've got a different appeal but sitting here today there dismissed right that's correct they are yes so yeah you're right are you meant to is that it should have been dismissed they were the to the house of representatives select committee on september th two thousand and fifteen if i may quote as follows in any event i would just say that yeah i think it has been an absolutely fair process and i am very thankful for you guys and the effort you have put in over your summer i know his sign has but in a whole bunch of work and walks through all of that and i know brock has as well represented by mr evans that was made on september th on september d th mr courser d voluntarily resigned from michigan house of represent however contrary to a stay hydrated he was that everything was fair and above board he filed multiple cases in the federal courts and in the state courts and we detailed is that speaker katter the republican members of the select committee legislative staffers the michigan attorney general the michigan state police the radisson hotel ms gam rats husband and the detroit news all conspired to remove courser from office in order to more easily pass legislation the crucial required showing that the alleged conspirators had any agreement in were linked in the ways that coarser arjuna's is absent there are no facts to support this there's no evidence there's no well planned allegation to support it as recognized by judge quest there are only conclusory allegations and statements of law except for those fact there is no well play statement that links them with the house defendants the people i represent in this mess are here what about the allegation that ballard or i can't remember the specific one that they report that they were asked by specific individuals to check out on what was going on why is that not enough or ready at least some and issue of a conspiracy or that they were at least being directed by some of these house defendants there's no allegation that they ready were asked to report back on on the so called affair there's no allegation that they were told to hack computers to do any of that these people were employees of the house of representatives and they were employees of mr courser and ms gamma and in fact when  they requested that the employees be dismissed the house of representatives d dismissed their employees they wouldn't do that to coconspirators and a case like that and then and then the underlying theory that all of this was done so that the conspirators could force mr coarser to support legislation is be lied by the fact that at that time the michigan house of representatives had an overwhelming republican majority mr coursers vote was not needed one way or the other that's an underlying theory of this case and is just  true judge quist noted that the that now this kind of complaint it's eighteen counts one hundred and forty eight dollars pages exclusive of the hundreds of pages of exhibits six hundred and seventy six dollars paragraphs judge quist noted that specifically with regard to the so called conspiracy allegations they passed it and much of the rest like constituted group pleading and group pleading prevented the judges he noted from determining who did what which defendant supposedly took what action except the only specifics are that all allegations of privacy violations eavesdropping surveillance and wiretapping are directed at people as you've noted judge not part of these proceedings they are directed at and they don't name any of the house defendants now eleven of the eighteen counts are barred by herb a lot of the amendment immunity legislative immunity governmental immunity or qualified immunity the action of determining the qualifications  a member of the house pursuant to the michigan constitution is certainly a governmental function these people were all acting in their official capacity at all times but they they took any of the actions complained of any of the that there was a conspiracy they were directed to do all of this there is nothing to support that it's specious it's nonsense in the context of this case and even where they counsel the  t are not allegedly or even where the judge found a minute he barred the complaint statute of limitations barred three of the counts judge quist meticulously went through each count and pointed out how it failed to state a cause of action that would survive a twelve b six analysts and else now is characterization of the so called conspiracy claim that's that's the underlying was just kind of rogue here and they for their own benefit they weren't there was nobody else that was involved or asked them to do any of these things or they or these things never happened i guess i'm well but what's the theory on why they were not they're not liable and the other case well if you if you look at at the some of the e mails and so on that you look at their e mails back and forth between these people and  it was certainly on the run and not subject to house oversight or or direction now judge quist said that you know the conspiracy allegation as a prime example of a tactic known as group leading was a raft of factual content consist entirely of legal conclusions was impossible and absurd on its face although they claim facts that they claim support i'm sorry they appellant a conspiracy none of them are directed at the house defendants their allard and graham and has ruled that attachments to a complaint documents referenced in the complaint in public records are decimal ready in a twelve b six motion that's exactly what happened here there's no basis to to conclude that amendment most of the other claims are barred by governmental immunity qualified immunity and statutes of limitation even where there is a conceivable cause of action the judge judge quest went through and meticulously allegations of this global conspiracy somehow against mr course or that just didn't exist allegations of that or conclusory and nature there are none supported by any any factual  substantive factual allegations just saying so doesn't make it so there has to be more behind that they didn't reach that level so i would respectfully request this court affirm the lower court's decision and august st two thousand and fifteen at that point in time then governor rick snyder appointed mr sorry to the public service commission for the state of michigan that came affective immediately on august nd under the michigan constitution and he was no longer associated with the house of representatives at all nonetheless the allegations in the st amended complaint among other things allege that mr serry actually was one of the authors and published the house business offices report when in fact he was a witness in there and he has his statement recorded there is an attachment to the  amended complaint he was simply an involved after august one two thousand and fifteen this works it was then general counsel for the house of representatives is now a judge in the  where your or your clients differently situated in the six years that you're raising are you saying that they do not get the benefit of some of these immunities that you have to rely on the twelve b six or mr gordon's arguments and for the same reasons would apply the only thing is that mr serry did not raise the elaborate munity as a defense but that has little consequence given the other with the allegations that short so i'm sorry a regular we met with there had meetings with our kline and graham and that and there is that statement i can't think of it that somebody said keep me posted or something like that i don't know but is that not only some in dishes that they were involved with soured klein and graham and what they were up to sorry we talked in the complaint paragraph sixty eight specifically states that they met and they were instructed that in order to get coarser in line defendants directed allard graham helpline to gather information instructed the employees to gain an authorized access to computer passwords and then you have you do have that text where rocks words will says keep me posted and then you have allard respond back where he says the st thing we need to do is get them impeached there of course was meetings about this there of course were meetings about what they were going to do to allard or to course or and camera because they were viewed as people who r brought issues to the house business office brought issues about the work concerns that the alan graham were terminated that's not true in fact there were many concerns brought forward to the house business conspiracy issue it's well well known case law is very clear that a plaintiff is not required to prove a specific portion for which each defendant is responsible such or krupp requirement would allow defendants to mask the allocation of the proceeds to avoid forfeiting them altogether that's the corrado case we we all know  that's not accurate we don't have to show what every person did in the conspiracy to bring a conspiracy claim because you often don't know who's involved and what you know who's doing what in fact some people can come into the conspiracy later on they can leave early they don't have to know what everyone is doing throughout the entire process that's the really the essence rico when you consider what what what they were asked to do what aladin graham inclined were asked to do which is plain in the complaint and which facts should have been accepted as true by the district court when you think of all those allegations as to what those  ham actually did and klein actually did from january one through august th before there was ever any knowledge of that affair before this story broke in the media you can't say that anything that was done directing those employees to do that stuff is part of any legislative process it's not part of speech and it's not introducing legislation on the floor it's not talking about legislation this was simply a process where the speaker of the house wanted to dig up dirt on a representative representative in order to bring him in line with the caucus any is there now your time has expired  thank you thank you very much thank you very