Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

D'AMICO v. TREAT

July 10, 1974

JAMES M.P. D'AMICO, PLAINTIFF,
v.
D. ALLEN TREAT, DEFENDANT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Bauer, District Judge.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

This cause comes on the defendant's motion to dismiss the instant complaint.

This is purportedly a pro se civil rights action seeking to redress the alleged deprivation of the plaintiff's civil rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and protected by the Civil Rights Act of 1871, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 1985. The plaintiff alleges that this Court has jurisdiction over the instant action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331, 1332, and 1343.

The plaintiff, James M.P. D'Amico, is a citizen of the United States of America, a resident of the State of Illinois and an attorney at law licensed since 1960 to practice before the Supreme Court of the State of Illinois and the Federal District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.

The defendant D. Allen Treat was at all times relevant to the instant action the Medical Director of the Department of Human Resources and Development for the State of California.

The plaintiff, in his complaint, alleges, inter alia, the following facts:

  1. At all times relevant to the instant complaint the
     defendant D. Allen Treat was acting in his
     official capacity as Medical Director of the
     Department of Human Resources and Development for
     the State of California under color of that
     state's laws and was charged with the evaluation
     of prospective employees according to various
     standards established in personnel selection.
  2. Pursuant to the laws of the State of California
     the plaintiff was induced to apply for employment
     as a "Hearing Referee, Unemployment Insurance
     Appeals Board" pursuant to an announcement of the
     California State Personnel Board.
  3. On the 24th day of February, 1973, the plaintiff,
     pursuant to the acceptance of his application,
     completed a written examination in Sacramento,
     California and, thereafter successfully passed an
     oral examination in Sacramento, California on the
     14th day of June, 1973.
  4. On or about July 11th, 1973, the plaintiff was
     advised that he had been placed number 3 in rank
     among those taking the examination and had been
     placed upon a list of eligibles to be certified
     for any available vacancies.
  5. On the 12th day of October, 1973, the plaintiff
     was offered employment by Mr. Jack D. Clevenger,
     Chief Referee of the California Unemployment
     Appeals Board by telephone to the plaintiff, who
     was in the City of Chicago and State of Illinois.
  6. The offer of employment was accepted by the
     plaintiff on the 12th day of October, 1973, in the
     City of Chicago, State of Illinois as more fully
     set out in the letter of confirmation dated
     October 12, 1973.
  7. Pursuant to the offer and acceptance of employment
     the plaintiff was induced to notify his employer
     of his termination and acceptance of the position
     offered which was unequivocal on October 12, 1973.
  8. Thereafter, pursuant to request, the plaintiff
     underwent a thorough physical examination, the
     results of which were sent to the State of
     California, Department of Human Resources and
     Development for evaluation ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.