ANSWER OF DEFENDANT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
SOUTHERN DIVISION

TRACIE PARK
                     Plaintiff, 
v                                           Case No. 96-3288-CV-S-3
                                             The Honorable Ortrie Smith
The FOREST SERVICE of the United
States Department of Agriculture
et al.,
                     Defendants.

ANSWER OF DEFENDANT COUNTY OF OREGON, MISSOURI

COMES NOW Defendant County of Oregon, Missouri, and answers Plaintiff's Complaint as follows:

First Defense

The Court does not have jurisdiction over the subject matter of Plaintiff's claims on behalf of "other [Rainbow Family] gather- ing attendees" or "others" generally , because Plaintiff lacks standing to bring any of those claims.

Second Defense

The Court lacks jurisdiction over the subject matter of Plain- tiff's claims insofar as they would enjoin prosecutions, including Prosecution-related investigations, of crime.

Third Defense

The complaint fails to state a claim against this Defendant upon which relief can be granted.

Fourth Defense

The complaint fails to state a claim again this Defendant un- der 42 USC 19 1983 and 1988 in that it fails specifically to allege this Defendant promulgated or practiced any policy authorizing any course of conduct that violated any provision of the Constitution of the United States or laws of the United States.

Fifth Defense

The complaint fails to state a claim against this Defendant for a declaratory judgment in that no justiciable question exists about the respective rights of Plaintiff and this Defendant.

Sixth Defense

The complaint fails to state a claim against this Defendant for injunction in that adequate remedy is available to Plaintiff at law.

-1-

Seventh Defense

Answering the 17 paragraphs of the Complaint that precede Count I, this Defendant--

Admits a) the allegation in paragraph 1 that the complaint seeks declaratory and injunctive relief, without, however, admitting that the Court has subject-matter jurisdiction over all her claims, that she has stated claims upon which relief can be granted, or that any of her allegations are true except as specifically admitted in this answer;

b) the allegations of paragraph 4, without, howev- er, waiving any of its various challenges to subject-matter jurisdiction and to failure to state a claim;

c) the allegation in paragraph 5 that the 1996 annual gathering of the Rainbow Family took place within the Mark Twain National Forest in Oregon County, Missouri during late June and early July;

d) the allegations in paragraph 8 that this Defen- dant is a political subdivision of the State of Missouri, that a county is capable of being a "person" under 42 USC 1983; that this Defendant conducts both ordinary and extraordinary law enforcement within its territorial jurisdiction, and that this Defendant's Sheriff has, with approval of its presiding commissioner, entered into a Fiscal Year 1996 Operating and Financial Plan with Defendant Forest Service;

e) the allegation in paragraph 9 that beginning in mid-June and continuing through mid-July, 1996, many people traveled to and from the Mark Twain National Forest in Oregon County, Missouri to attend and return from the 1996 annual gathering of the Rainbow Family;

f) the allegation in paragraph 10 that a roadblock was established (on County Road 430) through the Mark Twain Nation- al Forest in Oregon County, Missouri in the summer of 1996; and

g) the allegations in paragraph 14 that the person identified therein as "Murphy" is a Deputy Sheriff of Oregon County, Missouri and that he was pare of the time present at: a road- block (on County Road 430) through the Mark Twain National Forest in Oregon County, Missouri on 2 July 1996;

Alleges that this Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the aile- gations in paragraphs 5, 6, and 7; the non-admitted balance of paragraph 9; and paragraphs 11, 12, 13, and 15; and

Denies each and every other allegation contained in the first 17 paragraphs of the complaint.

Eighth Defense

Answering Count I, this Defendant

Answers paragraphs 1 through 17 of the complaint, incorporated in Count I by reference, as this Defendant has answered those paragraphs in its Seventh Defense herein before; and

Denies each and every other allegation contained in Count

Ninth Defense

Answering Count II, this Defendant --

Answers paragraphs 1 through 17 of the complaint, incorporated in Count II by reference as this Defendant has answered those paragraphs in its Seventh Defense herein before; and

Denies each and every other allegation contained in Count

WHEREFORE, having fully answered, this Defendant prays to be entirely dismissed with an award of costs and to be given judgment in all matters herein.

(signed) Ray Lee Caskey, 18985
Oregon County Prosecuting Attorney
South Side Court Square, POB 278
Alton, Missouri 65106
417-778-7701
Counsel for Defendant County of
Oregon, Missouri

Ray Lee Caskey hereby certifies that on the 27th day of August, 1996, the foregoing Answer was served upon Plaintiff herein by deposit or a copy of the same in the United States mail at the post office in Alton, Missouri with first class postage fully pre-paid, enclosed in a sealed envelope addressed to Plaintiff' counsel of record,

FRED L. SLOUGH, ESQ.
Slough, Connealy, Irwin & Madden
Kansas City, Missouri 64111
4051 Broadway, Suite 3

Case Contents | Rainbow Court Page | Rainbow Regs Page
Rainbow Home Page