Free Memorandum in Support of Motion - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

Case 3:00-cv-00835-CFD

Document 416

Filed 09/01/2004

Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

INDYMAC BANK, F.S.B. Plaintiff CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:00CV835 (CFD)

V.

MOSTAFA REYAD AND WAFA REYAD Defendants DATE: AUGUST 31, 2004

DEFENDANT MOSTAFA REYAD S MEMORANDUM OF LAW FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

This is the memorandum of law in support of Defendant Mostafa Reyad s Motion for Expedited Consideration for Injunctive Relief Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1657(a). At least, Defendant s rights established by the Eighth Amendment have been violated severely establishes the good cause for expedited consideration. It was not clear to Defendant why this Court repeatedly denied this motion without a hearing, it could be, because the records of this action do not show that the Orders issued by Magistrate Garfinkel, caused this Court to deny this motion.

Now, after more than four (4) years, Defendant was able to obtain six (6) Orders out of eight (8) orders issued by the Magistrate and none was docketed in this

1

Case 3:00-cv-00835-CFD

Document 416

Filed 09/01/2004

Page 2 of 3

action s docket sheet, see, Documents attached hereto. The eight (8) orders caused Defendant actual damages in the amount of fifteen (15) million dollar.

A litigant cannot sue the Magistrate, the Magistrate enjoys absolute immunity, but Plaintiff s attorney who prepared by himself the garnishment orders in the amount of $ 12.8 million should be punished and must be disqualified of this case promptly as well as his law firm. The extraordinary circumstances of the misconduct necessitates the immediate sanction and mandates departure of the Local Rules if indeed it may requires departure for immediate disqualification.

It should also be noted that, Honorable Droney reduced the prejudgment remedy to $ 1.1 million on April 30, 2004 and motion of its consideration still pending (Doc # 382), however, the consideration motion were filed before preparing the findings of the eight (8) Orders unauthorized by Magistrate Garfinkel.

28 U.S.C. 1657 (a) mandates hearing on Defendant s motion, this hearing was never afforded to Defendant for a period exceeds more than four (4) years. This hearing should be evidenciary hearing obligating the parties to offer evidence, not only affidavits.

Defendant hereby requests to vacate all Orders issued by Magistrate Garfinkel dated May 17, 2000, and the undocketed eight (8) Orders in the amount of $ 12.8 million and Order Plaintiff s attorney to release the same.

2

Case 3:00-cv-00835-CFD

Document 416

Filed 09/01/2004

Page 3 of 3

The Defendant Mostafa Reyad

By: Mostafa Reyad 2077 Center Avenue # 22D Fort Lee, NJ 07024 Day Phone # 203-325-4100 E-mail [email protected]

CERTIFICATION

The Undersigned certifies that he mailed a true and correct copy of this Document to Attorney David Schaefer 271 Whitney Avenue, New Haven, CT 06511 and Hand delivered to Wafa Reyad

Mostafa Reyad

3