COMES NOW R. Mark Armstrong, PG (ProSe) (“Plaintiff”), and hereby files a Notice of Intent to Appeal. Please forward the: Complaint, Memorandum of Law, Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, Order Denying Plaintiff R. Mark Armstrong Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis, Notice of Intent to Appeal along with any other documents in the file, for review by the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.
This Complaint begins with a nepotism violation (Pages 3,4,6,7,19,20,21,29 Complaint). The appearance of impropriety is the standard that applies. The wrongful termination occurred during Governor Dave Freudenthal Administration. The Plaintiff spoke to the Governor regarding the issues, prior to the wrongful termination.
The heart of the matter is a solid …show more content…
In violation of the law, so that his wife Cynthia Langston would make more money. Thereby increasing the household income through a bribery scheme. Federal Rule 404, Character Evidence; Crimes or Other Acts address some of this type of conduct. The landfill endangers human health.
When it is said Dale Anderson pushed waste to his wife’s facility, it means that Dale Anderson used his position at the State DEQ to force Cities, Counties, or Districts to haul there waste to the Casper landfill, through regulatory coercion. This bribery scheme may also be described as extortion. When the Plaintiff exposed this conflict to the Director, Dale Anderson had the Plaintiff wrongfully terminate in retaliation for speaking about the Casper landfill and Dale Anderson ethics (see Finding of Fact Ruling of Law; Appendix C, Memorandum of Law).
During this process James Uzzell lied under oath, and to the Director, stating the pretext was discovered by a random audit. Evidence proves he knew he received the data of the pretext from Dale Anderson not the …show more content…
On page 30 of the Memorandum of Law it is stated that the RICO act continue to this day.
18. The Order dismisses the RICO claim stating it is found in Complaint 44-54, while in fact the RICO claim is found in the Complaint ¶120 to 137 and the Memo of Law starting at page 23.
42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 [Complaint ¶9 to 46, Memo of Law page 5 to 35] v Order page 10 to 11]
19. The ORDER dismiss the Tortuous Breach of implied covenant of good Faith and Fair Dealing on the grounds of statute of limitations (page 10 Order), however the Plaintiff alleges (Page 20 Memo of Law) that an email continues to prohibit anyone at DEQ from speaking with Plaintiff. This prohibition violates the Plaintiff 's Constitutional Rights and persists to this day!
20. The ORDER dismisses other Constitutional Complaints using res judicata3, but no full and fair hearing has ever been given to the issues.
a) The 10th Circuit Order states that the Plaintiff resigned, but there is no resignation. The employment contract specifies in detail what a resignation is and there is no such
This Complaint begins with a nepotism violation (Pages 3,4,6,7,19,20,21,29 Complaint). The appearance of impropriety is the standard that applies. The wrongful termination occurred during Governor Dave Freudenthal Administration. The Plaintiff spoke to the Governor regarding the issues, prior to the wrongful termination.
The heart of the matter is a solid …show more content…
In violation of the law, so that his wife Cynthia Langston would make more money. Thereby increasing the household income through a bribery scheme. Federal Rule 404, Character Evidence; Crimes or Other Acts address some of this type of conduct. The landfill endangers human health.
When it is said Dale Anderson pushed waste to his wife’s facility, it means that Dale Anderson used his position at the State DEQ to force Cities, Counties, or Districts to haul there waste to the Casper landfill, through regulatory coercion. This bribery scheme may also be described as extortion. When the Plaintiff exposed this conflict to the Director, Dale Anderson had the Plaintiff wrongfully terminate in retaliation for speaking about the Casper landfill and Dale Anderson ethics (see Finding of Fact Ruling of Law; Appendix C, Memorandum of Law).
During this process James Uzzell lied under oath, and to the Director, stating the pretext was discovered by a random audit. Evidence proves he knew he received the data of the pretext from Dale Anderson not the …show more content…
On page 30 of the Memorandum of Law it is stated that the RICO act continue to this day.
18. The Order dismisses the RICO claim stating it is found in Complaint 44-54, while in fact the RICO claim is found in the Complaint ¶120 to 137 and the Memo of Law starting at page 23.
42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 [Complaint ¶9 to 46, Memo of Law page 5 to 35] v Order page 10 to 11]
19. The ORDER dismiss the Tortuous Breach of implied covenant of good Faith and Fair Dealing on the grounds of statute of limitations (page 10 Order), however the Plaintiff alleges (Page 20 Memo of Law) that an email continues to prohibit anyone at DEQ from speaking with Plaintiff. This prohibition violates the Plaintiff 's Constitutional Rights and persists to this day!
20. The ORDER dismisses other Constitutional Complaints using res judicata3, but no full and fair hearing has ever been given to the issues.
a) The 10th Circuit Order states that the Plaintiff resigned, but there is no resignation. The employment contract specifies in detail what a resignation is and there is no such