Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Federal Court Throws Out Clock Boy’s Lawsuit

Federal Court Throws Out Clock Boy’s Lawsuit

Judge says allegations were “factually deficient.”

A federal court has thrown out a lawsuit against Irving, TX, and the local school district brought on by Ahmed “Clock Boy” Mohamed and his family after authorities arrested him in September 2015. From Fox News:

The lawsuit alleged that the city of Irving and Irving school district discriminated against Ahmed Mohamed at Irving MacArthur High School in September of 2015.

Mohamed, a Muslim teenager who was 14 years old at the time, brought a homemade clock to school to show his engineering teacher. But an alarm on the clock went off in his English class and the teacher confiscated it. He was sent to the principal’s office.

Mohamed’s father filed the lawsuit in August of last year, which included MacArthur High School principal Daniel Cummings as a defendant.

CBS News reported:

On Thursday, Judge Sam Lindsay of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the lawsuit, saying the plaintiffs had failed to prove officials discriminated against Mohamed.

In his ruling, Lindsay dismissed claims against the city and the school district, writing that the court could not “reasonably infer that any IISD employee intentionally discriminated against [Mohamed] based on his race or religion.”

He also dismissed the claim against Cummings, the principal, who Mohamed’s team said violated his civil rights and treated the boy unfairly. Lindsay wrote the plaintiff’s complaint “does not allege that [Cummings] treated [Mohamed] differently than other similarly situated students, and that the unequal treatment was based on religion or race.”

Judge Lindsay stated that the plaintiffs have until “June 1 to file an amended complaint to support the allegations he wrote were ‘factually deficient.'” Mohamed’s lawyer Susan Hutchinson confirmed the team will do just that.

Mohamed v Irving Independent School District Et Al by Stefan Becket on Scribd

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Tags:
,

Comments

So who paid for this litigation? Also, why are the plaintiff’s lawyers not listed on the decision so we know who they are?

    Ragspierre in reply to snopercod. | May 20, 2017 at 7:55 pm

    “Susan Hutchinson confirmed the team will do just that.”

    That’s in the body of Mary’s piece.

    Alos, you can look up the cause number and see the pleadings, etc.

    It isn’t over. Nobody has been ordered to pay costs.

        Gremlin1974 in reply to snopercod. | May 21, 2017 at 6:31 pm

        Even if it is her, how tacky do you have to be to list the amounts of awards and what they were for on your website. Especially since anyone with 2 braincells to rub together will realize that for everyone of those high dollar rewards they probably lost or turned away 100 others.

      Arminius in reply to Ragspierre. | May 22, 2017 at 4:49 pm

      It’s oly a matter of time before clock boy’s father, Mohammad Mohammad, is ordered to pay for the defendants’ attorneys fees, court costs, and other expenses. Ever since his idiot, and I believe malicious, kid was arrested for the taking the guts out of a Radio Shack clock radio and putting them in a pencil box (and then claimed to have “made” a clock) he’s established a track record of filing embarrassingly factually deficient lawsuits.

      In January he was absolutely crushed in a Dallas courtroom when the libel suits he filed against The Blaze, Glenn Beck, The Center for Security Policy (CSP), CSP representative James Hanson, Fox News, Fox News contributor Ben Ferguson, the mayor of Irving Beth Van Duyne, and blogger, podcaster, and speaker Ben Shapiro. These were obviously SLAPP lawsuits. All of defendants filed motions to dismiss under the Texas anti-SLAPP statute, the Texas Citizen’s Participation Act, as they obviously would given the frivolous nature of the lawsuit.

      To demonstrate how ridiculous the lawsuits were, during the hearing on CSP’s and James Hanson’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit, the judge asked Mohammad and his attorney to provide any facts to show that the defendants had said anything false or defamatory about Clock Boy or his family.

      According to press reports they silently shuffled and flipped through papers for 15 minutes and finally had to admit they couldn’t come up with a single fact.

      All the defendants prevailed. Per the TCPA Mohammad must reimburse all the defendants for any and all costs related to their defense. All except Mayor Van Duyne. Duyne’s mostion was the final motion pending in late January. Seeing the writing on the wall after losing against every other defendant Mohammad’s own lawyer, Susan Hutchinson, dropped the suit against Van Duyne saying that as a public official she had immunity.

      Mohammad is an arrogant, impuslive, and reckless man who doesn’t know or doesn’t care that America doesn’t use the Sharia definition of libel. Under Sharia a defamatory statement can be a true statement as long it’s a truth the Muslim didn’t want known or simply finds offensive. which is why his libel suit didn’t distinguish between fact or opinion or address truth or falsity of any statement. In fact it couldn’t point to any particular statement at all that they could say was libelous.

      Which brings us to his attorney. As you can see one of the attorneys and quite possibly the lead attorney representing Mohammad since she apparently speaks for the team is still Susan Hutchinson. Given the example of her legal writing in the libel lawsuits; rambling, vague, confused, you could give her a year to file an amended complaint and it will still be factually deficient.

      Any sane man would have fired his lawyer given how poorly she represented him. So far this year he must be on the hook for what must be approaching and may even exceed $400k in court costs, attorney’s fees, and other bonafide expenses given the butt pounding he took from his intended victims. I can only conclude he’s either not sane or this attorney is the only attorney in the greater Dallas Metroplex who shares his view that you don’t need any facts on your side when you’re a Muslim and the filthy kuffar have hurt your feelings.

The federal court should’ve thrown this little creep out of my country along with his entire family.

Only msnbc or an obama dumbass would hire this a-hole for a job.

And whoever is stupid enough to hire him, will likely be sued by this parasite for one thing or another.

That’d be fun to watch.

It’s also be fun to watch the school district sue him and his lawyers for malicious prosecution.

    I believe ‘tortious interference’ is the legal term you’re looking for.

    Ragspierre in reply to TheFineReport.com. | May 20, 2017 at 7:59 pm

    This is a conservative law blog.

    It has some of stupidest AND most ignorant people on the interwebs commenting on it. The first comment is excepted…this time.

    Just damn…

      Hey Rags-

      They get to amend a complaint when it fails to state a claim for which relief can be granted?

      I thought that was fatal-I’m a non lawyer-explain????

        sidebar in reply to rduke007. | May 20, 2017 at 9:14 pm

        Rule 15(a) —leave to amend ‘shall be freely given when justice so requires’ gives the Court much discretion.

        Ragspierre in reply to rduke007. | May 21, 2017 at 5:22 am

        The short answer is “yes”.

        In Federal courts the amendment process is more “permissive”, but the rules allow for fairly liberal amendment. This is simple judicial economy, as a dismissal would be one without reaching any merits of the case, and it would get the lawsuit filed again in all likelihood.

        Under Texas rules, we amend pretty freely and without permission…UP TO A POINT. In a recent case I tried to a jury and took a verdict on, we filed a trial amendment to bring the finding of the jury into line with our pleadings. This is considered “ministerial” in Texas…a court just has to grant our motion to amend.

        Also in Texas we use a procedure called “special exceptions”. In a nutshell, I would file explicit complaints against a party opponents pleadings, including failure to state a cause of action on which relief can be granted. My exceptions cannot be “general demurrers”, or waving generally in the direction of a problem. They have to be specific and elaborate the problems. The opposing party has the right to oppose by exceptions, or simply amend its pleadings. If they fail, the courts have the right to simply strike their pleadings. This is, again, for judicial economy; once you file a suit, the courts will keep it alive, curing any defects, if they can. Otherwise, you’d just see a bunch of lawsuits that got recycled without reaching the merits.

        The two idiots here bloviating about “malicious prosecution” and “tortious interference [with contract]” are just that…bloviating idiots.

        In Federal procedure, the correct…and pretty much only…corrective would be sanctions for bringing an unfounded lawsuit. I doubt those would be reached here, regardless of how I feel about the merits of the case.

          snopercod in reply to Ragspierre. | May 21, 2017 at 7:10 am

          If only we could all be as brilliant as you think you are, Rags.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | May 21, 2017 at 7:36 am

          First, FU, StooperClod.

          Second, I don’t claim brilliance. I know the law. It’s my business. Refute anything I said, factually, Tinydik.

          OR you could STFU and learn something.

          Always your choice.

After dismissal?

What the judge did was to issue a feel good order. He carefully laid out the case that the plaintiff had not shown that the defendants had discriminated against him in any way. The decision is rather long and sets an extremely high bar for the plaintiff to meet. Then, he gave the counsel for the plaintiff an out, by giving her two weeks to file an amended complaint which had any facts which supported her contention that AM’s civil rights were violated by the defendants.
good luck on that. We’ll have to wait and see what happens next month.

    Ragspierre in reply to Mac45. | May 21, 2017 at 5:24 am

    “What the judge did was to issue a feel good order.”

    Bullshit.

      Mac45 in reply to Ragspierre. | May 21, 2017 at 10:07 pm

      Another successful graduate of the Potsie Weber School of Debate. LOL.

        JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Mac45. | May 22, 2017 at 1:21 pm

        I don’t think that’s it. He’s just run out of his meds….again. Maybe he’ll hit the pharmacy instead of the bar on the way home from the office this afternoon.

      Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | May 22, 2017 at 12:41 am

      Your fundamental error is in believing we are “debating”.

      That would involve you knowing shit about what you are bloviating about.

      You don’t. This was a matter of Federal procedure, as in the rules of. It had noting to do with “feelings”.

Bucky Barkingham | May 21, 2017 at 7:29 am

The FakeNews outlets can manufacture some of the missing facts for the plaintiff.

I’d say that there’s lots of facts, they just don’t support the discrimination complaint. But as our resident Solomon, Rags, says, I agree that it isn’t quite over. The plaintiff gets one more try, at least, and there’s still the matter of court costs, etc. Assuming it all wraps as expected by, say, Sep 2017, that’ll be a good two years of everybody’s lives wasted.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to tyates. | May 22, 2017 at 5:49 pm

    The family will just flee back to Sudan or where ever they took Clockhammad to learn to make real bomb and leave the court costs hanging.

David Breznick | May 22, 2017 at 9:17 am

Clockboy’s lawsuit was thrown out? His family is really ticked now. They’re all wound up inside.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend