PHILLIP OFUME V. DHCD CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-1260
OF THE TRIAL COURT
CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-1260
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Phillip Ofume (self and on behalf his family)
Plaintiff (Pro se & Forma Pauperis)
v.
Massachusetts Department of Housing and
Community Development (DHCD) - Division of
Housing Stabilization and Self-sufficiency (DHS)
Defendant
Community Development (DHCD) - Division of
Housing Stabilization and Self-sufficiency (DHS)
Defendant
________________________________________________________________________
PLAINTIFF (SELF AND ON BEHALF HIS FAMILY), PHILLIP OFUME'S VERIFIED EMERGENCY MOTION AND MEMORANDUM FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ________________________________________________________________________
PLAINTIFF (SELF AND ON BEHALF HIS FAMILY), PHILLIP OFUME'S VERIFIED EMERGENCY MOTION AND MEMORANDUM FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ________________________________________________________________________
A. STATEMENT OF MOTION
Now comes the Plaintiff, Phillip Ofume (self and on behalf his family) and respectfully moves for Summary Judgment to compel Defendant to restate Plaintiff's unused seven (7) months Family Shelter Benefits which was terminated prematurely on January 31, 2011 by Defendant's Vendor (New England Farm Workers Council, Inc. - NEFWC) because Plaintiff worked hard to get jobs few days after they were granted the shelter benefits on September 3, 2010; Defendant, Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) provides twelve (12) months Family Shelter Program which could be renewed after one (1) year; the purpose of this program is to implement family's Housing Stabilization and Self-sufficiency (DHS) via employment and permanent housing; anger of the vendor is that Plaintiff and his family continue stay in the shelter brings heavy profits (donations, cash, grants, etc) to the vendor; summary judgment must be granted for the seven months and renewed pending Housing Stabilization and Self-sufficiency (DHS) via employment and permanent housing. This Motion is urgent because on March
1
PHILLIP OFUME V. DHCD CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-1260
7, 2012 Southeast Housing Court (Brockton, MA Session) entered relocation judgment (EXHIBIT D) in favor of the Plaintiff and his family because the BOARD OF HEALTH issued several failure of habitation fitness citations on the apartment and request Plaintiff and his family to vacate the apartment located at 506 Warren Avenue Apartment # 2, Brockton MA 02301 on June 6, 2012 and under the present U.S. state and federal poverty conditions of the Plaintiff and his family because of the delay of USCIS to issue their EAD; effective date entered in this judgment they will be rendered homeless because of lack of money to continue payment of rent in an alternative apartment and without this judgment entered immediately in favor of the Plaintiff and his family, they will suffer matchless irreparable harm such as loss of education of the five children in school, homelessness of the entire family, the nuclear family will be scattered and destroyed; DCF will accomplish its political mission of re-seizing these children and returning them to criminals (adopters and foster merchants); etc.
In further support of this Verified Motion, Plaintiff relies on his Verified Emergency Memorandum of Law, Evidence, and fact
B. MEMORANDUM
BACKGROUND AND JURISDICTION
1. Plaintiff was a Nigeria Presidential Candidate April 2011 and since September 29, 2005 when they fled persecution in Canada to the United States of America his political opponents have adopted severe forms of economic sanction such as homelessness, lack of Employment Authorization Document (EAD), arson, starvation, zero income, etc as tools to disrupt his political campaign and family's peace. 1998 -present, harmful political strategy of Plaintiff's political opponents is use of criminal plan such as bribing service providers to implement sanction on right to employment authorization document and employment, homelessness, starvation, etc. On March 7, 2012 Southeast Housing Court (Brockton, MA Session) entered eviction/possession judgment (EXHIBIT D) in favor of the Plaintiff and his family to vacate the apartment located at 506 Warren Avenue Apartment # 2, Brockton MA 02301 on June 6, 2012 and under the present U.S. state and federal poverty conditions of the Plaintiff and his family, effective date entered in this judgment they will be rendered homeless because of lack of money to continue payment of rent in an alternative apartment and without this judgment entered immediately in favor of the Plaintiff and his family, they will suffer matchless irreparable harm such as loss of education of the five children in school, homelessness of the entire family, the nuclear family will be scattered and destroyed; DCF will accomplish its political mission of re-seizing these children and returning them to criminals (adopters and foster merchants), etc
2
PHILLIP OFUME V. DHCD CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-1260
2. On September 3, 2010 Defendant granted Plaintiff and his family, a family shelter located at 177 Sargeant Street B Holyoke, MA 01040 (EXHIBIT A). The purpose of this program is to implement family's Housing Stabilization and Self-sufficiency (DHS) via employment and permanent housing which Plaintiff and his family must work hard to achieve.
3. On September 6, 2010 Plaintiff and his family achieved this purpose because two members of the Plaintiff's family found job in Lynn , Peabody , Salem
4. On September 9, 2010 without the consent of Defendant (DHCD), Vendor issued on Plaintiff and his family NOTICE OF TERMINATION OF THE SHELTER. In opposition to the action of the Vendor, under Commonwealth of Massachusetts Regulations U.S.
5. At agency's administrative level there were several pending administrative appeals and hearings, Vendor further proceeded to the Superior Court, Springfield MA Docket No. HDCV-2011-00025 to duplicate several appeals, complaints and costs and on January 31, 2011 Plaintiff and his family were evicted from the shelter and Plaintiff and his family did not us over seven (7) months of the Family Shelter Program benefits;
6. On January 28, 2011 pursuant to the Superior Court Standing Order 1-96 thus, in an intervention Motion in support of Defendant's Counterclaim, Defendant (DHCD) opposed its Vendor and said that Vendor's action is , “based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction, lack of personal jurisdiction, insufficient process, insufficient service of process, failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, and failure to exhaust administrative remedies.”(January 28, 2011) EXHIBIT B;
7. Summary Judgment should be granted to transfer seven months benefits which were unused to Brockton, MA because the Defendant's own testimony shows that Defendant opposed the action of its vendor and Defendant should restate Plaintiff's seven months unused shelter benefits immediately and renewed pending Housing Stabilization and Self-sufficiency (DHS) via employment and permanent housing.
3
PHILLIP OFUME V. DHCD CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-1260
C. UNDISPUTED FACT
For the purposes of this motion, the following facts are undisputed:
8 In this Honourable Court in October 2011 Plaintiff filed COMPLAINT FOR EMERGENCY TEMPORARY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR TRANSFER OF SHELTER BENEFITS FROM HOLYOKE TO BROCKTON, MA PENDING COMPLAINTS FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO M.G.L. c. 23B, section 30;106 CMR. s. 309.010 309.020 309.021 309.030 309.039 309.040 309.047 309.050; Section 8 U.S.
9. On March 7, 2012 Southeast Housing Court (Brockton, MA Session) entered eviction/possession judgment (EXHIBIT D) in favor of the Plaintiff and his family to vacate the apartment located at 506 Warren Avenue Apartment # 2, Brockton MA 02301 on June 6, 2012 and under the present U.S. state and federal poverty conditions of the Plaintiff and his family, effective date entered in this judgment they will be rendered homeless because of lack of money to continue payment of rent in an alternative apartment and without this judgment entered immediately in favor of the Plaintiff and his family, they will suffer matchless irreparable harm such as loss of education of the five children in school, homelessness of the entire family, the nuclear family will be scattered and destroyed; DCF will accomplish its political mission of re-seizing these children and returning them to criminals (adopters and foster merchants), etc EXHIBIT D.
10. Paragraph 8 above was served on the Respondent (Honourable Secretary of Justice and Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
11. At present daily/monthly income of the Plaintiff and his family is $0.00. Because of the fact that under daily/monthly $0.00 income of a family of nine (9) persons (seven children and two parents) there is eminent danger of HOMELESSNESS if this family is not provided with their unused seven months shelter benefits which is minimum humanitarian assistance pending issuance of USCIS's EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZATION DOCUMENT (EAD) and employment.
12. Defendant, Department of Housing and Community Development ("DHCD"), Division of Housing Stabilization and Self-sufficiency ("DHS") is agency of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
4
PHILLIP OFUME V. DHCD CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-1260
13. Apartment located at 177 Sargeant Street (B) Holyoke, MA 01040 was granted Plaintiff and his family by the Defendant (Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development - DHCD) on September 03, 2010 under Family Shelter Program hosted by the Division of Housing Stabilization and Self-sufficiency Program pursuant to M.G.L. Part I Title II Chapter 23B Sect. 30; 106 CMR 309.040(C); and M.G.L. c. 18 section 2 and the amortization period was September 3, 2010 through September 3, 2011 and maybe renewed if the housing stabilization and self-sufficiency for the client, family have not be completed.
14. Defendant and Plaintiff agreed that Plaintiff and his family by working hard to find job which will enable transit to permanent housing which is the task given to all clients of this program thus they achieved Housing Stabilization and Self-sufficiency (DHS) which include jobs and permanent housing. Action of vendor based on unfounded allegation can not overrule the Regulation of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
D. MAJOR AND OTHER QUESTIONS IN ISSUE
Whether there are Commonwealth of Massachusetts General law, Rules of Civil Procedure, Regulations and Natural Justice mechanisms; Constitution/Amendments of the United States of America; and UN international laws signed and ratified by the United States which sanction EA families from searching for jobs and permanent housing to achieve "Housing Stabilization and Self-sufficiency (DHS)"
E. ARGUMENT OF LAW AND FACT
So far Plaintiff searched within law body, there are no Commonwealth of Massachusetts General law, Rules of Civil Procedure, Regulations and Natural Justice mechanisms; Constitution/Amendments of the United States of America; and UN international laws signed and ratified by the United States which sanction EA families from searching for jobs and permanent housing to achieve "Housing Stabilization and Self-sufficiency (DHS)."
Under this conclusion, Defendant who is has been the employer of the Vendor, NEFWC must be commander-in-chief and the employee position of the vendor can not overrule or govern or amend 106 CMR § 309.040 to satisfy the political ambition of the vendor. Action of EA family or Plaintiff and his family is not CRIMINAL because searching for jobs and
5
PHILLIP OFUME V. DHCD CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-1260
permanent housing to achieve "Housing Stabilization and Self-sufficiency (DHS)" are just and blessed by EA family courageous activity to be self-reliance in both employment and permanent housing. On July 6, 2007, the Attorney General of Mass informed the Court in RIVERA v. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSISTIONAL ASSISTANCE, et al. Docket No. "that the regulation at issue here, 106 CMR 309.040 (F) (1) (A) had been amended, effective June 1, 2007, as follows: “For the purpose of this regulation the temporary emergency shelter benefits may be terminated on the basis of criminal activity only if the Department concludes by a preponderance of the evidence (more likely than not) that a member of the EA assistance unit is engaging in or engaged in criminal activity described[.]” The Court views the amendment as a clarification of an already existing policy and practice."
No answer as to why a hardworking family should severely punished and rendered homeless for working hard to leave emergency shelter and relief the Commonwealth from further costs by finding job. If the mandates of the Defendant were Housing Stabilization and Self-sufficiency Program. In every showing under law of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts , United States of America
In accordance with M.G.L. c. 23B, section 30;106 CMR. s. 309.010 309.020 309.021 309.030 309.039 309.040 309.047 309.050; Section 8 U.S. Housing Voucher Reform Act, Defendant found that Plaintiff and his family did not violate EA program pursuant to 106 CMR. s. 309.010 309.020 309.021 309.030 309.039 309.040 309.047 309.050 and swiftly Defendant filed Counterclaim against its vendor, NEFWC. Defendant moved under the Superior Court Standing Order 1-96 thus, in an intervention Motion in support of it's Counterclaim, it moved in opposition to Vendor's premature termination of Plaintiff and family's shelter and said, “based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction, lack of personal jurisdiction, insufficient process, insufficient service of process, failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, and failure to exhaust administrative remedies.”(January 28, 2011).
In advisement, upon receipt of paragraph 8 above, Defendant, DTA and Deputy Director of EA Program did not call for the monthly and yearly income of Plaintiff and his family pursuant to 106 C.M.R. §309.040(D)(2)(a). DTA is under a court order to calculate each year what a parent needs to bring up his or her children in his or her own home. Massachusetts Coalition for the Homeless v. Secretary of Human Services, 400 Mass.
Based on several reports of the BOARD OF HEALTH and the failure of the disputed apartment (506 Warren Avenue Apt. #2 Brockton, MA 02301) and failure of the apartment to pass several fitness tests and Plaintiff and his family brought count charges against the Landlords (RST INVESTMENT GROUP AND LANDLORD CONNECTION) pursuant to G.L. CHAPTER 23B, SECTION 30; M.G.L.
6
PHILLIP OFUME V. DHCD CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-1260
CHAPTER 186 SEC. 18; M.G.L. CHAPTER 111; COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS SANITARY, CODE CHAPTER 11; MINIMUM STANDARDS OF FITNESS FOR HUMAN HABITATION; 105 CMR 410.000; M.G.L. CHAPTER 239, SEC. 8A; 5th and 14th Amendments of the Constitution of the United States and also vested in Bill of Rights; Tenancy with a Lease. On March 7, 2012 Plaintiff and his family prevailed and because action of the Landlords were fraudulent, there the Presiding Honourable Justice rule that landlords to forfeit over five months rents to the Plaintiff and his family in part advanced up to June 6, 2012 to enable Plaintiff and find better and habitable apartment in the City of Brockton.
Plaintiff and his family are experts in several field of studies and they are just waiting for their EAD cards and Permanent Resident cards to enable them get job and permanent housing because if the defendant fails to restate their seven month EA benefit they will not achieve "Housing Stabilization and Self-sufficiency (DHS)." . Parents and other employable family members have adequately and satisfactorily met their obligation as parents and examplary kids by earning score of academic and professional qualifications which include but unlimited to Doctorat du 3e Cycle (DEA, D.E.Phil), Lyon France; Doctorat du 3e Cycle (DEA), Lyon France; Scolarite au Doctorat du 3e Cycle (S.Dr.), Lyon France; M.Sc. (1/2) Lyon France; M.Phil., Lyon France; B.Phil., Lyon France; D.E.F. (Lyon/Geneva); Post-doctoral studies: Ph.D. (Min.) (on-going) NY USA; Juris-doctor, Canada/USA (on-going with over 35 years law study, practice, research, and investigation). NCMP - Mediation Negotiation and Conflict Management ( Dalhousie University ,Law School); NCMP - Negotiation and Conflict Resolution (Dalhousie University, Law School) ; NCMP -Advanced Mediation (inter-governmental and large corporate body mediation and conflict management and resolution, (Dalhousie University, Law School); Cert. Info Tech. – Mass and Strategic Communications; etc Plaintiff speaks English, French and Nigerian languages.
Deeply, at present Plaintiffs and their entire household fall under U.S. state and federal poverty levels, unable to pay rents, court costs, utilities, mailing and transportation, etc. because of the political action sponsored and paid by lead Plaintiff’s political opponents because of the greed aimed at acquiring oil/gas in Plaintiffs’ native place of origin, THE NIGER DELTA REGION of Nigeria which is direct retaliatory manifestation as an opposition to lead Plaintiff’s bid for the President of Nigeria 2007 – 2015 and campaign for civil liberties . Issue maybe raised as to whether the injury which Plaintiffs and other members of their family suffer exemplifies part or any of America
E. CONCLUSION/SUMMARIZED RELIEF
Reliant on the foregoing including EXHIBIT B, consciously reasoned that the Defendant is aware that the eviction action of its Vendors (New England Farm Workers Council et al) on January 31, 2011was
7
PHILLIP OFUME V. DHCD CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-1260
illegal, extra/pre-judicial, oversight and wild claims, administratively incorrect and unconstitutional but Defendant allowed Plaintiff and his family to be punitively drifting from homeless to homeless, suffer seizure and removal of their children into cruel hands where the children suffered pains and hardship thus in this Complaint, Plaintiff and his family seek no additional costs for what they suffered and Plaintiff strongly request this Honourable Court to issue Order upon Defendant to continue the Shelter benefits in Brockton immediately effective November 1, 2011 pursuant to M.G.L. Part I Title II Chapter 23B Sect. 30; 106 CMR 309.040(C); and M.G.L. c. 18 section 2 and renewable pending USCIS’s grant of Employment Authorization Document (EAD) and employment and purpose of urgent consideration based on timing of EXHIBIT A to stop Plaintiff’s and family’s further homelessness and seizure/removal of their children.
VERIFICATION OF COMPLAINT
I, Dr. Phillip Ofume, Plaintiff, one of the parents and representative of the Ofume family hereby respectfully verify, sign and submit the foregoing Complaint and/or that the foregoing facts and evidence are true and correct under the pains and penalties of perjury.
_______________________
I, Dr. Phillip Ofume, Plaintiff, one of the parents and representative of the Ofume family hereby respectfully verify, sign and submit the foregoing Complaint and/or that the foregoing facts and evidence are true and correct under the pains and penalties of perjury.
_______________________
Dr. Phillip C. Ofume & Co.
506 Warren Avenue Apt.#2 Brockton
. MA 02301 Tel. (781) 479-9027, E-mail: limptintinc@gamail.com
To:
Clerk/Magistrate of the Court (Civil Sessions) Plymouth County
72 Belmont St.
Brockton , MA 02301
Contact information and other particulars of the Defendant:
Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development c/o The Honourable Secretary of Justice and Attorney-General of
the commonwealth of Massachusetts
Department of Justice (Litigation)
One Ashburton Place
Boston, MA 02108 -1518
Phone: (617) 727-2200
the commonwealth of Massachusetts
Department of Justice (Litigation)
One Ashburton Place
Boston, MA 02108 -1518
Phone: (617) 727-2200
8
PHILLIP OFUME V. DHCD CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-1260
Further copies to:
President Barack H. Obama
President of theUnited States of America
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington , DC 20500
President Barack H. Obama
President of the
Vice- President Joseph Biden,
Washington Office:
Eisenhower Executive Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20501
Honourable Eric H. Holder, Jr.
US Secretary of Justice and Attorney General,
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Office of the Assistant Attorney General, Main
Washington, D.C. 20530
The Chief of Immigration Judge
The Assistant Chief of Immigration Judge
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF IMMIGRATION JUDGE
5107 Leesburg Pike, Suite 2500
FALLS CHURCH,
Virginia, USA 22041
Ms. Mary Patrice Brown, Acting Counsel
Office of Professional Responsibility
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Suite 3266
Washington, D.C. 20530
Washington Office:
Eisenhower Executive Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20501
Honourable Eric H. Holder, Jr.
US Secretary of Justice and Attorney General,
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Office of the Assistant Attorney General, Main
Washington, D.C. 20530
The Chief of Immigration Judge
The Assistant Chief of Immigration Judge
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF IMMIGRATION JUDGE
5107 Leesburg Pike, Suite 2500
FALLS CHURCH,
Virginia, USA 22041
Ms. Mary Patrice Brown, Acting Counsel
Office of Professional Responsibility
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Suite 3266
Washington, D.C. 20530
PHILLIP OFUME V. DHCD
His Excellency, High Commissioner
United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR)
Headquarters,
Geneva, Switzerland
His Excellency, High Commissioner
United Nations High Commission for Human Rights (UNHCHR)
Headquarters,
Geneva, Switzerland
9
United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR)
Headquarters,
Geneva, Switzerland
His Excellency, High Commissioner
United Nations High Commission for Human Rights (UNHCHR)
Headquarters,
Geneva, Switzerland
9
No comments:
Post a Comment