Louis charles hamilton ii. vs america et al and state of texas et al.......

In The United States District Court

For the Eastern District of Texas
Beaumont Division
Louis Charles Hamilton II
(Negro African American)
Pro Se Plaintiff
Vs.
United States of America et al,
Defendant Civil No. 1:2011-CV-00122
And
Vs.
State of Texas et al,
Co-Defendant(s)
Vs.
And
Harris County Texas et al,
Co-Defendant(s)
Complaint and “Jury Demand”

Comes Now the Pro Se Plaintiff, Louis Charles Hamilton II,
hereby files a Complaint with the above Honorable Court and
for Just Cause”
The Pro Se (Louis Charles Hamilton II) Plaintiff will show
the Honorable Court all facts, circumstances and details as
being entertain in Justice as follows:
1.
Parties
Pro Se Plaintiff , Louis Charles Hamilton II, African
American Male, Currently Homeless U.S. Navy Veteran,
Permanently Disable Veteran protected under: (ADA) American
with Disability Act; And also minorities persons cover under
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; Domiciliary State of
Texas, P.O. Box 20126 Houston, Texas 77225
2.
The United States of America et al (Defendant)
The State of Texas et al (Co-Defendants)
Harris County Texas et al (Co-Defendants)
3.
Facts

The above name male, a descendant from a past legacy of
forced “Slavery and Servitude” wrongfully committed against
the Plaintiff and His family (Negro) descendants primarily
because of Pro Se Plaintiff being a member of a race that being
of (Negro) origin,
(Now considered politically correct within this time frame)
a “Black African American male” within the United States of
America
Cause(s) now being filed and complained of before the
above entitled Honorable Court;
For said Plaintiff “rightful full relief” for all of the ungodly
wrongful, extreme and outrageous, conducts committed by all
described Defendants collectively herein,
Being both the “direct and indirect” causes for all of the
described mention factors being that primarily Plaintiffs was a
slave with a result in losses in a normal life, as a result

Plaintiff continue the loss of peaceful rights in choice,
peace, and freedom having already been established for all
other first class citizens within the United States of America
under the Constitution instituted for all first class citizens.

Plaintiff will show the Honorable Court Plaintiff herein
(Hamilton II) continue in 2010 an 2011 being Denied living with
“Equal Protection of the Laws of the United States of America,
and The Law of The State of Texas, and Harris County against
the Pro Se Plaintiff Louis Charles Hamilton II Will, Peace, Dignity,
Respect, and freedom as other national origins of classes enjoy
and continue to enjoy within the United States of America as
present”,
With Defendant(s) “The United States of America et al, Co
Defendants The State of Texas et al, and Co-Defendants Harris
County et al “systematic criminal (RICO) actions and acts”
continual as of this undersign date exercise continual wrongful
conduct of “pattern(s) and practices” in (among other things)
the rightful “Equal Protection of the Constitutional of the
United States Laws on the behalf of the Plaintiff in among other
thing Civil Action in Common Law with the Defendant
possession, custody and control.
Against the Plaintiff peaceful “Heritage that of (Negroes) to
a rightful official standing place as that of a “first class citizens”
within the United States of America, States of Texas and the
“Equal Protection thereof
And for cause of actions:

Injury to Personal Reputation

Discrimination

Defamation

Fraud

Civil Conspiracies

Impeaching Honesty

Injury to Reputation

Imputation of Crime, Disease and Sexual Misconduct

Breach of Contractual Agreement
Abuse of Judicial Absolute Immunity

Abuse of Official Immunity

Aiding and abetting to commit A Criminal Enterprise in Racketeering against the rights, dignity
and will of the Plaintiff

Obstruction of Justice

Obstruction of Criminal Investigation

Conspiracies to pursue the same Criminal Objective

Violation of Equal Protection under the Law

Actual, accumulative, compensatory, consequential, continuing, expectation damages,
foreseeable, future, land, hedonic, incidental, indeterminate, reparable, lawful, treble under
(RICO), proximate, prospective, special, speculative, substantial, punitive, and permanent
damages

Declaration Judgment by a “Jury” that each and every claim, accusation, assertion,
contention and charges in all allegations as described fully herein against all Defendants, and
their agents being entry into the action of this cause in full favor of the Plaintiff Hamilton II
(Negro) Black Africa American

Plaintiff Awarded Compensations Claims for “serious past, present ,and future
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress and Mental Anguish being imposed, tariff and levy
both past, current, and future to include but not limited to for all of the Defendants extreme and
outrageous acts as described herein:

1. The Plaintiff (Louis Charles Hamilton II) seeks in addition to the above fore-mention
damages awards of direct, actual, compensatory, Direct damages paid to the Pro Se
Plaintiff for the wrongful loss in direct damages in the ‘amount of Defendant (United

States of America et al) $ 48.6 Million Dollars….for the Com-
pensation loss of 16.2 Million Dollars Plaintiff herein “suffer &
Continue to suffer” at the “Hand of the Defendants (The Unit-
ed States of America) in a Federal District Court Civil Action
filed in Bob Case Federal Court House in Houston Texas.
2. The Plaintiff (Louis Charles Hamilton II) seek payment from the Defendant (United States of
America) made in a Check payable to “Christ Church Cathedral” in the amount of ……
$17,343,681.82. for (Charity on the behalf of the Plaintiff)

3. The Plaintiff (Louis Charles Hamilton II) seeks in addition from the Defendant (the Unit-
ed States of America) a Check payable to the direct complete, possession, custody 100% con-
trol, of “Director” Christine Vera-Green “only” in Port Arthur Texas 77640 “Hospitality Kitchen for
the Poor” “up-grade” on the behalf of the Plaintiff Louis Charles Hamilton II herein in the
amount of ………$13,177,440.92 for the Plaintiff “Hometown Charity”.

4. Co-Defendant (State of Texas et al) $7.2 Million Dollars… The
Plaintiff (Louis Charles Hamilton II) seeks in addition to the above fore-mention damages
awards of direct, actual, compensatory, Direct damages paid to the Pro Se Plaintiff for
Co-Defendant (State of
the wrongful loss in direct damages in the ‘amount of
Texas et al) $7.2 Million Dollars for the Compensation loss of
2.4 Million Dollars Plaintiff suffer & Continue to suffer at the
“Hand of the Defendants (The State of Texas et al , Harris
County Court House et al) in a States Court Civil Action filed
in Bob Case Federal Court House in Houston Texas

5. Co-Defendant (The State of Texas et al) made in a Check payable to
“Christ Church Cathedral” in the amount of …$2.800, 000.00 for (Charity on the behalf of the
Plaintiff).

6. The Plaintiff (Louis Charles Hamilton II) seeks in addition from the Defendant (the Unit-
ed States of America) a Check payable to the direct complete, possession, custody 100% con-
trol, of “Director” Christine Vera-Green “only” in Port Arthur Texas 77640 “Hospitality Kitchen for
the Poor ” “up-grade” on the behalf of the Plaintiff Louis Charles Hamilton II herein in the
amount of ………..$2,856,498.93. For the Plaintiff “Hometown Charity”.

Background
The Plaintiff Louis Charles Hamilton II appearing Pro Se Herein will show the above –Entitled
“United States Federal District Honorable Court House” and all of its Justice” facts to wit: that on or
about the 24th day of February 2011 the Plaintiff filed the filing civil cause action H-10-2709 with all of its
facts and also the Plaintiff Motion in Opposition not to dismiss same cause H-10-2709 all of which will
show the above “United States Eastern District Federal Court” Justice following:

In The United States of America District Court

For The Southern District of Texas

Houston Division

Louis Charles Hamilton II AMEND COMPLAINT # 2

Plaintiff

Vs. Civil Action No: H-10-2709

Harry C. Arthur (Esq.)

Law Office of Harry C. Arthur et al, and

Marine Building, L.L.C. et al

Defendant(s)

And

Christ Church Cathedral et al

Co-Defendants

Comes Now the Pro Se Plaintiff, Louis Charles Hamilton II, herein files this Second Amend
Complaint,

Plaintiff will show the Entitled Above Honorable Court “Detail Facts” against all described
Defendants, Harry C. Arthur (Esq.), Law Office of “Harry C. Arthur et al”, “Marine Building, L.L.C. et al”,
and The Co-Defendants

“Christ Church Cathedral” et al all being within Houston Texas, (United States of America)

And for cause the Pro Se Plaintiff, Louis Charles Hamilton II, will show the Honorable
Court as Follows:

Parties

Pro Se Plaintiff

Louis Charles Hamilton II, African American Male, Currently Homeless U.S. Navy Veteran,

Permanently Disable Citizen protected under: (ADA) American with Disability Act;

And also minorities persons cover under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; Domiciliary
State of Texas, P.O. Box 20126 Houston, Texas 77225

Defendant Harry C. Arthur Esq.

A Houston Personal Injury Attorney

1305 Prairie Street Suite 200

Houston, Texas 77002 Advertisement states:
CALL THE FIRM THAT CARES!

Co- Defendant(s)

Law offices of Harry C. Arthur

1305 Prairie Street Suite 200 Houston, Texas 77002

Harry C. Arthur (Owner) (Personal Injury Attorney) suite 200

Larry G. Justin (Case Manger) suite 200

Ralph M. Wear (Case Manger) suite 200

Humberto R. Trejo (Criminal Attorney) suite 200

Sonia Behrana (Attorney) suite 200

Pat Vargas Grady (Attorney) suite 200

Co- Defendant(s)


1305 Prairie Street Houston, Texas 77002

Harry C. Arthur (Owner) suite 200

(Tenants)

1. AA Quick Bond suite 100

2. Mike Cox’s Bail SVC suite 101

3. Lacey’s Deli

4. Jonathan A. Gluckman (Attorney) suite 102

5. Wayne Heller (Criminal Attorney) suite 103

6. Law offices of Harry C. Arthur suit 200

7. The Ring Investigations Mark Thering suite 300

8. The Ring Investigations Kandy Villarreal suite 300

9. Mark Thering (Attorney) suite 300

10. Darrel Jordon ( Criminal Attorney)

11. Daniel Perez-Garcia (Criminal/Immigration Attorney) suite 300

12. Marquerite Hudig (Criminal Attorney) suite 300

13. Carl D. Haggard (Attorney Mediator) suite 300

14. F.M. (Poppy) Northcut (Criminal Attorney) suite 300

15. Sandra Martinez (Criminal Attorney) suite 300

16. Allen J. Guidry (Criminal Attorney) suit 300

Co- Defendant(s)

Christ Church Cathedral et al, Houston is the cathedral church for the Episcopal Diocese of Texas.
The congregation was established in 1839

1117 Texas Avenue • Houston, Texas 77002 • Phone: 713.222.2593 • Fax: 713.222.2412

Fact(s).

To Wit: The Pro Se Plaintiff Louis Charles Hamilton II, Respectfully assert all truthful material
facts herein before the above entitled-Honorable U.S. District Court and making declaration under
penalty of Law in that on or about (Nov. 23, 2009 -- three days before Thanksgiving Day)- To Wit:

The Defendant (Arthur) and Co-Defendant(s) hereafter named (Law office of Harry C. Arthur)

And Co-Defendant(s) (Marine Building L.L.C.) instituted a malicious civil action tort against Christ
Church Cathedral Naming the (Beacon) within the suit seeking several cause of actions namely aim to
shut down (Christ);

Which capture “News Headlines” as breaking news story local and nationwide through
transmitting via device such as newspapers, radio, T.V. and Internet” labeling Houston Texas as “Derelict
town” “USA” and the Defendant “Harry C. Arthur Esq. a/k/a “Scrooge” going to put a handle on things
and toss out the “Nasty” Plaintiff and all homeless people at the homeless center base upon them being
a nuisances among other charges made by (Arthur).

To include but not limited to defendant(s) collectively sought to among other things impose a
permanent injunction against (Christ) to shut down The Beacon, the homeless center, on the ground it's
a "private nuisance”;

Claiming among other things in a “Hostile Tort containing defamatory, discriminatory and
Invidious Discrimination fashion that the Plaintiff and other(s) similar situated just simply mill about,
panhandle, bum cigarettes, urinate, defecate, sleep and make a general nuisance of themselves;

See: Harry C. Arthur et al and the Marine Building L.L.C. et al vs. (Christ) Filed in Harris County
Texas District Court in Houston Texas.

In said suit against Christ Church Cathedral, filed on Nov. 23, 2009 -- three days before
Thanksgiving – The Defendant herein Arthur and The Co-Defendant Marine Building et al seek a
minimum of $250,000 in damages from Christ Church Cathedral and The Beacon to compensate them
for the loss of rentals in the three-story building and its market value.
Defendant Arthur's trial firm is in the building, which is located diagonally across an intersection
from The Beacon.
The Beacon is operated by Cathedral Health & Outreach Ministries, a nonprofit established by
the cathedral.

The Plaintiff asserts that (Arthur) in Christ church cathedral alleges that the "derelicts" (Christ
church cathedral) assists has become a public nuisance, destroying the value of his business and proper-
ty in the process.

To include but not limited to Defendant (Arthur) further defaming and applying invidious dis-
crimination tact’s against the Plaintiff reputation by accusing the Plaintiff to be a danger to the health
and safety of others in the adjacent areas,”

The defendant (Arthur) suit further states. “The (Plaintiff) and other individuals sing play music,
dance, and fight and (do) other “undesirable activities”

The Defendant (Arthur) says. Further that "If all you do is feed them, you encourage them to
stay on the street. And I'm afraid that may be kind of a little bit what's happening. They don't have any
incentive to do anything."
The Plaintiff will show the Honorable Court that each and every defendant listed and described above
conspire in concert with their individual legal profession as (Attorney of Law) to organize fraudulent
representation of Finances in “material facts” in civil tort filing as described above in that the defendants
collectively willfully wanton and aggressively committed the following:

1. Made a fraudulent bogus submission of material facts in Judicial Court records in Harris
County Texas that each defendant separately business operation structure in connection
with The Marine Building L.L.C. financial income was effected and in great, risk, loss and
jeopardy as described in the complaint of (Arthur);

a. Made a further fraudulent bogus submission of material facts of insinuation, sugges-
tion, implication, allusion and innuendos in Judicial Court records that each defen-
dant as described herein personal financial income and all assets derive their of
from said business structure as being describe as: Tangible assets those that have a
physical substance and can be touched, such as currencies, buildings, real estate, ve-
hicles, inventories, equipment, and precious metals

b. To include all live stock, farm animals, domestic animals, cattle, sheep, pigs, horses,
birds, and stock within the United States;

c. To include all live stock, farm animals, foreign animals, cattle, sheep, pigs, horses,
birds, and stock;

d. To include all Cash and cash equivalents — it is the most liquid asset, which includes
currency, deposit accounts, and negotiable instruments (e.g., money orders, cheque,
bank drafts). in the United States

e. To include all Short-term investments — include securities bought and held for sale
in the near future to generate income on short-term price differences (trading secu-
rities).

f. To include all Receivables — usually reported as net of allowance for uncollectable
accounts.

g. To include all Inventory — trading these assets is a normal business of a company.
The inventory value reported on the balance sheet is usually the historical cost or
fair market value, whichever is lower. This is known as the "lower of cost or market"
rule.

h. To include all prepaid expenses — these are expenses paid in cash and recorded as
assets before they are used or consumed (a common example is insurance). See also
adjusting entries.
i. To include all Fixed asset in the United States
j. Also referred to as PPE (property, plant, and equipment), these are purchased for
continued and long-term use in earning profit in a business. This group includes as
an asset land, buildings, machinery, furniture, tools, and certain wasting resources
e.g., timberland and minerals. They are written off against profits over their antici-
pated life by charging depreciation expenses (with exception of land assets). Accu-
mulated depreciation is shown in the face of the balance sheet or in the notes.

k. To include all capital assets in management accounting.
l. To include all "Investments". Long-term investments are to be held for many years
and are not intended to be disposed of in the near future. This group usually con-
sists of four types of investments: Investments in securities such as bonds, common
stock, or long-term notes; Investments in fixed assets not used in operations (e.g.,
land held for sale); Investments in special funds (e.g., sinking funds or pension
funds).

2. Was effected and in great risk, loss, and jeopardy as described in the complaint of (Arthur)
because of the action of the Plaintiff and other similarly situated ;

3. Defendant (Arthur) then further in judicial court document filing in said malicious civil tort
made the further fraudulent bogus submission of material facts of insinuation, suggestion,
implication, allusion and innuendos in Judicial Court records that each defendant as de-
scribed herein combine business financial income and (assets) & their personal income and
(assets) after deductions of, housing or rent, phone bills, electricity, gas, water and sewer,
cable, waste removal, maintenance or repairs, transportation, insurance, food, dining out,
pets, personal care, medical, entertainment, taxes (Federal and State), saving or investments

As described above was not even enough for (Arthur) future financial business survival and
security thereof in the Marine Building L.L.C. and base this all on the actions of the Plaintiff being a
“Derelict” among other defamatory statements publish in a “Civil Tort”

Plaintiff will show the Honorable Court each defendant singularly and collectively was fully
aware of his actions (most defendants being Attorneys of law no less) in holding together and collectively
in such omission of actual material facts and allowing (Arthur) in the presentation of all combine
fraudulent financial statement(s) being filed before a Texas Court of law by defendant (Arthur) in a
hostile tort fashion of each defendant(s) independent business dealing collectively together.

Plaintiff Respectfully state before the Honorable Court that The Marine Building at the time
frame (Arthur) made bogus, fraudulent, false wording before a Harris County Court of Law within the
State of Texas in regards to “Lost Revenue and its association with extra rentals”, defendant(s)
collectively “new at the very moment they were all combine in providing false material facts when no
such possible “Rental space revenue loss exist

Nor were there any extra spacing for rental at the time frame (Arthur) made complaint against
(Christ) nor were there any losses at all in combine said rental property revenue within the “Marine
Building L.L.C. et al

To include but not limited to such other factors that the plaintiff “investigation computation”
render true facts that all Co-Defendant(s) Listed above under the “Marine Building L.L.C. et al do in fact
having total possession, total custody and total control of all “possible rental spacing” as stated on the
building directory

Plaintiff will show the Honorable Court that the Defendant (Arthur) and Co-Defendant (Law
office of Harry C. Arthur) and the (Marine Building L.L.C. et al) were very delusional, hallucinating,
figment of the imagination, and under miss guided myth in the impression and mirage that the Co-
Defendants (Marine Building L.L.C.) were with extra spacing for rentals

To Include all Defendants herein Straight out lie in all Court Records, Documents, Proceedings
and News Media events during this “Matter”.

Pro Se Plaintiff herein Louis Charles Hamilton II will show a Honorable Court that “all of the
Defendant” herein (except Co-Defendant Christ Church et al)

While during ongoing “Live” Federal Court Proceeding in 2011 at the “Bob Casey Federal Court in
Houston Texas

“That” all Defendants herein at Law Office Harry C. Arthur et al, and “Marine Building L.L.C.”

“Completely toss in the Trash the following files records, interrogatories, request for
disclosures ,Clients Certified Mail, Client complete briefs, Clients Background facts, Responses to request
for disclosure phone

Messages, clients complete home Liability claim, “Internet research material”, phone numbers &
Address, Detective reports, Divorce records, Attorneys listing, clients prices listing,

Attorney price listing, “United States Bankruptcy Court Records for the Southern District of Texas
Houston Division records”, Insurance Records, Criminal records, Civil Records, Subpoena, Summon,
Confidential Medical Records, Fax records, Notices, sign in sheets, listing of client(s) for stated:

Spradlin, Riley & Spradlin (Attorney at Law) 24017I-45 North Suite 1 (Woodlands, Texas 77380)

Spencer Crain Cubbage Healy & McNamara pllc 1330 Post Oak, Suite 1600 Houston Texas 77056

Ms. Kathryn P. Anderson, The Anderson Firm, L.L.C 5629 FM 1960 West, Suite 106 Houston Texas 77069

Global 14 Mamaroneck Ave.., 3rd floor White Plains, NY 10601

Lyndon B. Johnson Hospital (Houston Texas)

Clear Lake Reginal Medical Center ER, Dr. Susanna Perkins (League City), Dr. David Nelson, D.C. (League
City), Dr. John Beerbower, M.D. (Dickinson), Dr. John G. Steele, M.D. (Dallas Texas), Leslie Miller, MOT,
OTR (Houston Texas), Dr. Smith Johnston, M.D. (Dallas Texas), Dr. Edward Murphy, M.D. (Houston Texas),
(Dr. Govindaraj Ranganathan, M.D. (Friendswood Texas), and Dr. David Durkop, D. C.

State farm Insurance Ms. Anise Wu (Austin Texas),

Richard Reading and Rhoda Marie Reading

Attorney Ned Gill 6575 West loop south, suite 600, Bellaire Texas 77401

(Rhoda Read living @ 1711 McLean Road, Pearland Texas 77584)….Married November 11, 2000

Esteban Hernandez

Calvin Banks

Johnny Villatoro

Nicholas Little (PSI)

Ja’mericka Hall

Jorge Santiago

Juan Sanchez

Richard Ramirez

Darvin Lynn

Samuel Robinson

Alvin Alfred

Esau Velasquez

Damon jaqot

Johnathan Simmons

Brian Golatt

Carl Newton

James Hughes

Pershing Powell

Luis Gonzaga

John Goffney

Erick Calderon

Alex Cantor-Marroquin

Deandre Mason

James Huntley

Eduardo Quiroga

Eduardo Garcilazo

Amicar Vasques

Dennis Carias

Arthur Mireles

Craig Scott

And Julio Matamoro

Eteban G. Alvear

Baltazar, Arroyo

Abraham Aparicio

Willentett T. August

Frances Arrendondo

Jocelyn Arnett

Timothoy Adair

Marilyn Aleman

Jennifer, Bronfield

Shen Burleson

Zachary T. Boston

Maurice S. Bradly

Xavier J. Cain

Augustin Carbajal

Homero Coronado

Martha Cuellar

Rosalyn Collins

John Contreras

Mike C. Cisneros

Guadalupe K. Cortez

Maria I Corona

Donovan Crosby

Garibaldi Campos

Jose A. Cantu

La Toya C. Carter

Paulo Castanuela Jr.

Carl A. Crochet

Anthony Doyel

Andros A. De La Cruz

Sharon L. Dolge

Amy Fleming

Brett M. Foisie

Alejandro Fernandez

Jesus Franco

Ricardo Gonzalez

Rubidia Garcia

Hector Guevara

Ismael Garza

Adolfo C. Gonzalez

Ruben M. Gonzalez

Salvador O. Gomez

Yessica Suarez-Galvan

Raymon M. Garcia

Lizette Guerra

David Gonzalez

Hameedul Hassan

Jennifer Hanner

Lucina M. hernandez

Devanand Hasmukh

Ronalald Jiles

Taft Jackson

Nathan A. Jimenez

John Joubert

Mauro Junco

James G. Jordan

Aaron D. Johnson

Jose D. Katz

Diamond Laddermore

Victor Lara

Julio C. Lopez

Duane E. Lawrence

Dwayne Liggines

Jonathan L. Limbrick

Luis Gerardo Lopez

Franciso Martinez

Jose D. jr. Moreno

Farris Mc Kendall

Francisco Munoz

Steven R. Nunez

Jerry L. Pierson

Andrew Phillips

Charles Piercefield Jr.

Amilcar Peraz

Santiago Pineda

Ruben Puga

Victor Portillo

Cesar A. Palacioa-Garza

Robert Robles

Joseph Rumfolo

Ari Riascos

Angel Sierra-Rojas

Sergio Rodriguez

Daniel Ramirez

Darrel W. Reece

Daniel Ramirez

Loreli Angel Del-Rivera

Jesus G. Reyes

Max Reza

Benito F. Rodriguez

Eugenio Romero

Ronald E. Rowan Jr.

Victor Soria-Gutierrez (Corpus Christi)

Armand J. Spence

Daniel E. Segura

Mustafa Sutarwala

Pete Saenz

Hector E. Gonzalez-Silvia

Kelton Simmons

Jose J. Segredo

Michael Scott

Oliveroes J. Torres

Luan Cong Trong

Maria E. Umanzor

Dillion W. Vernon

Markeith Whiting

Arthur Woods

Victor M. Zamora

To include the Plaintiff will show “Honorable Court” evidence with the Plaintiff actual physical
name” Louis Charles Hamilton II” on it…

All being criminal, and gross negligent in dumping on the ground behind the Law Office of Harry
C. Arthur et al, and The Marine Building L.L.C on 2009 and completed before February 14 2011

All the “Physical Evidence Supporting Plaintiff complete Claims herein this “Federal Civil Action”

With Plaintiff herein (Time release photograph exhibits) already filed in the “Federal Court
records & Plaintiff herein “Myspace.com account” showing for years 2009 and 2010 showing the
complete criminal (RICO) activates (among other things) of the “Legal trash” toss on the ground.

Which the Plaintiff will show a “Honorable Court” that the Undersign Judge herein acted”
Criminal in Conspire actions” with all Defendants in this action involving (Arthur et al) in the bogus bold
refusal to produce any said documents, depositions or evidence in this “Matter and the conspire to
scuttle of all evidence which is now in the hands of the Plaintiff

Except the “last final missing piece” Plaintiff seeks in this Federal Civil matter the “Deposition”
conducted on Houston Texas Scrooge Attorney Harry C. Arthur Esq.

By “Andy Vickery” Attorney at Law in Houston Texas during the matter with “Christ Church
Cathedral;

As described herein Plaintiff exhibit(s) (A) will show an Honorable United States Federal Court
showing the Following:

Exhibit - (A) Invoice dated 1/31/2011from the Marine Building L.L.C 1305 Prairie, Ste. 200
Houston, TX 77002 Bill to: Glenn Loethen 3rd floor

(February Rent $400.00 & February parking $100.00)

Plaintiff will first show the Honorable Court facts detailing surround Plaintiff exhibit (A) is this
that during the exact day (Harry C. Arthur Esq. & Marine Building L.L.C et al ) filed suit against (Christ
Church Cathedral)

Defendant himself (Arthur) had “just” deposited for the Month of November 2009 rent from
(19) tenants all list above @ $400.00 each,

Plus $100 each from each tenants for Parking for a Grand Total of = ($9,500).

Plaintiff will show the Honorable Court from November 23 2009 to December 1st 2009 some (8)
days later after Defendant himself (Harry C. Arthur Esq. & Marine Building L.L.C et al ) filed suit against
(Christ Church Cathedral) “just” deposited another ($9,500) Dollars into the Marine Building L.L.C et al
Banking account

Plaintiff will show the Honorable Court that during the year of 2009 up to the day Defendant
himself (Arthur Esq.) was in possession of the Marine Building L.L.C. (Arthur Esq.) deposited other
($108,000) Dollars into the Marine Building L.L.C et al banking account.

Plaintiff will show the Honorable Court that during the course of this litigation for the year of
2010 Defendant himself (Arthur Esq.) deposited another ($108,000) Dollars into the Marine Building
L.L.C et al banking account.

Plaintiff will show the Honorable Court that the Defendant himself (Arthur) for the Last (5) years
of (Ownership) of the “Marine Building L.L.C. having deposited in excess of ($902,500)

Plaintiff assert before the Honorable Court which is actually more income deposited base on
Lacey’s Deli Commercial sq. ft. at no less than $600-$800 a month rentals (And based on Scrooge
Attorney Harry C. Arthur Greed).

With tenants Humberto R. Trejo (Criminal Attorney) suite 200, Sonia Behrana (Attorney) suite
200 and Pat Vargas Grady (Attorney) suite 200 having not been computation into these ($902,500) yearly
factors and base upon (Arthur Greed)…

Making the income of Co-Defendant “Marine Building L.L.C.” deposited far in excess of
($932,500) yearly

With a (five) years grand total of $4,512,500. Being deposited into Co-Defendants “Marine
Building L.L.C.” Banking accounts

Plaintiff will show the Honorable Court that the Co-Defendants herein The “Ring Investigations
et al” took in income in (one) month, funds in excess of $9013.53 gross.

With deduction for rent and parking of $500.00 leaving Ring Investigation net pay for one month
in excess of $8513.53

Plaintiff will show the Honorable Court that the Co-Defendants “Law Office of Harry C. Arthur et
al” took income in (one) month time funds in excess of:

During the month of November 2009 when (Arthur et al) file suit against (Christ et al)
$166,500.00 per month = $330,001.00 for (2) months in the Month of November 2009 and the month of
December 2009

When (Arthur et al) launch Hostile Takeover actions against (Christ Church Cathedral

Plaintiff will show a “Honorable United States Federal Court” that in the last (5) past years

Defendant himself Law Firm & (Arthur Esq.) accumulated per year a Total of $1,998,000.00 (One Million
Nine Hundred and Ninety Eight Thousand Dollars

With a Grand total “Nets egg” deposited for a (5) year Law Firm Operation of $9,990,000

Plaintiff will show the Honorable Court that the Defendant himself (Arthur) for the Last (5) years
of (Ownership) of the “Marine Building L.L.C. having deposited in excess of ($902,500)

And for

The last (5) past years Defendant himself Law Firm of Harry C. Arthur & (Arthur Esq.)
accumulated per year a net Total of $1,998,000.00 (One Million Nine Hundred and Ninety Eight
Thousand Dollars.

With a Grand total “Nets egg” deposited for a (5) year Law Firm Operation of $9,990,000
combine the two Grand Total for (5) years of the Marine Building L.L.C. and Law Offices of harry C. Arthur
et al….. “Drum roll”……..Plaintiff will show an “Honorable Court Grand Total of $11,988,000.00 (Eleven
Million Nine Hundred and Eighty Dollars

This figure was base upon (Law Office of Harry C. Arthur et al) Clients listing filed above and for the
following Clients:

Eteban G. Alvear

Baltazar, Arroyo

Abraham Aparicio

Willentett T. August

Frances Arrendondo

Jocelyn Arnett

Timothoy Adair

Marilyn Aleman

Jennifer, Bronfield

Shen Burleson

Zachary T. Boston

Maurice S. Bradly

Xavier J. Cain

Augustin Carbajal

Homero Coronado

Martha Cuellar

Rosalyn Collins

John Contreras

Mike C. Cisneros

Guadalupe K. Cortez

Maria I Corona

Donovan Crosby

Garibaldi Campos

Jose A. Cantu

La Toya C. Carter

Paulo Castanuela Jr.

Carl A. Crochet

Anthony Doyel

Andros A. De La Cruz

Sharon L. Dolge

Amy Fleming

Brett M. Foisie

Alejandro Fernandez

Jesus Franco (ha, ha)

Ricardo Gonzalez

Rubidia Garcia

Hector Guevara

Ismael Garza

Adolfo C. Gonzalez

Ruben M. Gonzalez

Salvador O. Gomez

Yessica Suarez-Galvan

Raymon M. Garcia

Lizette Guerra

David Gonzalez

Hameedul Hassan

Jennifer Hanner

Lucina M. hernandez

Devanand Hasmukh

Ronalald Jiles

Taft Jackson

Nathan A. Jimenez

John Joubert

Mauro Junco

James G. Jordan

Aaron D. Johnson

Jose D. Katz

Diamond Laddermore

Victor Lara

Julio C. Lopez

Duane E. Lawrence

Dwayne Liggines

Jonathan L. Limbrick

Luis Gerardo Lopez

Franciso Martinez

Jose D. jr. Moreno

Farris Mc Kendall

Francisco Munoz

Steven R. Nunez

Jerry L. Pierson

Andrew Phillips

Charles Piercefield Jr.

Amilcar Peraz

Santiago Pineda

Ruben Puga

Victor Portillo

Cesar A. Palacioa-Garza

Robert Robles

Joseph Rumfolo

Ari Riascos

Angel Sierra-Rojas

Sergio Rodriguez

Daniel Ramirez

Darrel W. Reece

Daniel Ramirez

Loreli Angel Del-Rivera

Jesus G. Reyes

Max Reza

Benito F. Rodriguez

Eugenio Romero

Ronald E. Rowan Jr.

Victor Soria-Gutierrez (Corpus Christi)

Armand J. Spence

Daniel E. Segura

Mustafa Sutarwala

Pete Saenz

Hector E. Gonzalez-Silvia

Kelton Simmons

Jose J. Segredo

Michael Scott

Oliveroes J. Torres

Luan Cong Trong

Maria E. Umanzor

Dillion W. Vernon

Markeith Whiting

Arthur Woods

Victor M. Zamora

@ Attorneys fees of $1500.00 per client…..

(However the “Law Office of Harry C. Arthur et al” Gross 5 year period projection is in excess of

$18,000,000.00 (Eighteen Million Dollars) which is even maybe slight higher than this simply base upon
Houston Scrooge Attorney Harry C. Arthur Esq. (Greed).

Plaintiff further Assert this $18,000,000.00 combine with all of the other Defendants @ Marine
Building L.L.C. listed as:

Larry G. Justin (Case Manger) suite 200

Ralph M. Wear (Case Manger) suite 200

Humberto R. Trejo (Criminal Attorney) suite 200

Sonia Behrana (Attorney) suite 200

Pat Vargas Grady (Attorney) suite 200

(Tenants)

17. AA Quick Bond suite 100

18. Mike Cox’s Bail SVC suite 101

19. Lacey’s Deli

20. Jonathan A. Gluckman (Attorney) suite 102

21. Wayne Heller (Criminal Attorney) suite 103

22. Law offices of Harry C. Arthur suit 200

23. The Ring Investigations Mark Thering suite 300

24. The Ring Investigations Kandy Villarreal suite 300

25. Mark Thering (Attorney) suite 300

26. Darrel Jordon ( Criminal Attorney)

27. Daniel Perez-Garcia (Criminal/Immigration Attorney) suite 300

28. Marquerite Hudig (Criminal Attorney) suite 300

29. Carl D. Haggard (Attorney Mediator) suite 300

30. F.M. (Poppy) Northcut (Criminal Attorney) suite 300

31. Sandra Martinez (Criminal Attorney) suite 300

32. Allen J. Guidry (Criminal Attorney) suit 300

For a Combine well funded (RICO) Syndicate in easy excess of $ 32,000,000.00 (Thirty Two
Million Dollars) “Hostile” “War Chest”….(Attempt)

To take on “Christ Church Cathedral et al” in a Hostile takeover” (Which Arthur et al Did in all
facts and circumstances Attempt)

Plaintiff further assert his personal expert extreme knowledge that they (Arthur et al) was going
to certainly need $ 32,000,000.00 (Thirty Two Million Dollars) “Hostile” “War Chest Money”….

With “Two Extra Big Titanium Steel Balls” Taking on (Christ et al)……

Base upon:

(1). “Christ Church Cathedral et al, Houston” is the “Cathedral Church for the Episcopal Diocese
of the “Whole State of Flipping Texas……Da’

(2.) And the “Houston Cathedral” and The entire congregation was established in 1839

(That Arthur et al and your “Hostile 32 Million Dollars Take Over”) Vs. Very, Very Old Money in
Houston Cathedral with interest incurred since… 1839

Added in with The Entire United States of America Federal Government funding for the
“Homeless” in the “Top of Millions” of Tax Dollars per year C/o “Christ Church Cathedral et al, Houston”.

If ya So (Slooooooooow), “Big rock take little Rock”

The Plaintiff will show the Honorable Court all defendant(s) singularly and or collectively were
committed to making extreme calculations and execution(s) of false prejudice or stereotyping
statements of the reputation of the Plaintiff as described in the “Tort” filed against (Christ) of being
substandard which defendant carry out this scheme for profit through the Wide spread media News
agencies both local and National” at the expense of Plaintiff to be of a“

Nasty horrid revolting reputation” in connection with defendant(s) collective “Financial scheme/
crime of things for profit”

And conspiracy in connection thereof, for unauthorized access of a protected media computer,
public records and court records & court: txed

And all protected records thereof, in which all defendant(s) herein collectively did access said
mail and wire computer device(s) to provide and promote tremendous amounts of “Negative”
fraudulent personal and business information which were “indeed” attempt to be used in a fraudulent
advantage way to fraud for wrongful future gains of monies and to scam in the devalue of real estate
property of the Co-Defendant(s) (Marine Building L.L.C.) and surrounding area’s

To include but not limited to all defendants commitment to a further conjure to work collective
for defendant (Arthur) scheme of things in among other things in obstruction of justice in connection to
collection(s) thereof of all ill-gotten gains

And placing a long “term of loss value on (Christ) property in the Houston Down town area

Misrepresentation of all material facts in regards to all defendants financial business survival,
endurance, continued existence, dilemma, predicament, and possible financial business death during a
Legal Judicial proceeding, and in public records

Fraudulent omission in the presentation of all material facts in official court records in regards to
the Defendants business financial dire situation to fraud the “Interest of (“Christ”) against the rights of
the Plaintiff.

The Plaintiff will show the “Honorable Court Defendant(s) collective scheme of things could not
for any reasoning exclude the Plaintiff from this group (Beacon Clients) because it would be
counterproductive to the “Master Plan” if casting the Plaintiff as the only decent, clean, dirt free,
cleanse, spotless, sophisticated, skilled, learn, knowledgeable, educated, and privileged person among
the group and opposite from the group and the defendant(s) collective scheme has no chance ever of
survival.

The Plaintiff will show the Honorable Court the Defendant(s) collective scheme of things in the
usage of “Invidious Discrimination tactic & Defamatory tactic” against dignity because the Plaintiff is a
part of group associated with (Beacon Clients) also was express by the sarcasm, mockery, cynicism,
travesty of exaggeration(s) of the Plaintiff to be without cause to exist and Plaintiff only existence on
earth in the Houston Texas area is for free food @ the (Beacon) only”

To include but not limited to facts surrounding the defendant(s) collectively wrongful use of
liable/slander against (HPD) Houston Police Department to their advantage by ways of making false
claims of no security being properly provided in the area of the (Beacon) or lack thereof as stated in the
complaint of the defendant(s) which is so untrue and supported by Police reports in the city of Houston
Texas during the time frame (Arthur) made complaints against (Christ).

In which the Defendant(s) collectively further sought safely to carry out their Organization well
premeditated plans to degrade the downtown area “Property Value” around (“Christ”) with its claims of
the Plaintiff being “Total Human Trash “

While defendant(s) herein collectively plan a systematic using/planning hostile by further future
means to obtain the Property of (Christ) with the unwitting “Media” usage for wide spread media
coverage in connection with a financial scheme & fraudulent crime of things

With the “Media” also as the main driving device to carry out for the defendant(s) “devily
clever” collective “sham and scheme” of things to create a property lost for the benefit of the Marine

building L.L.C. with the Plaintiff being unwittingly at the “Hands of all defendant(s) herein being the
source of all “depreciation and degrading factors” against (Christ) property and the local area property
for a profit scam.

The defendants (Arthur et al) herein collective scheme of things to attempt also to devalue the
property of (“Christ”) and the real estate for the benefit of Co-Defendant in this action Marine Building
L.L.C in the downtown Houston, Texas area To include but not limited to the Free promotional
Advertisement for Co-Defendant (Law office of Harry C. Arthur) being the Reputed Ruthless Law Firm

And all of the ill-gotten revenue derive their from the “New Reputed Ruthless Law Firm
Reputation” with Defendant (Arthur) and Co-Defendant (Law Office of Harry C. Arthur et al) further
scheme and sham of things being wrongfully promotion with the free planned usage of the
unsuspecting, unwitting, unconscious, efforts of all media agencies both “local and national” with the
“Internet” included at the expensive of the Plaintiff and other instantaneously similar the same.

All was indeed done unjust, and most certainly unwanted against the Plaintiff “rights and
dignity”, to include this scheme of things was further to fraudulent cheat (Christ) out of monetary
federal/private/donation funds in excess of ($250,000) base all wrongfully upon the Plaintiff being
“Street Nasty Trash”

In the area around The Marine Building L.L.C. for a future profit scheme of the Defendant(s)
collective shame to include alternatively Plaintiff is able to show the defendant(s) having further
premeditated plans after the impose permanent injunction against the (Beacon) defendant(s) sought to
further obtain (Christ) property for them self or together with some other real estate conglomerate for
further scam for profit(s).

Plaintiff further assert In the process of (Arthur et al ) doing “all of the above nasty” defendant
(Arthur et al) then went further and “stole” the Plaintiff “Christmas Holiday season of 2009”

While attempting on giving the “Christ et al” “a black eye” before Thanksgiving day of 2009 in
the “National media” in the process with all of the criminal (RICO) display that Defendant (Arthur et al )
having now balls after making all of this unwanted, wrongful

And unjust fuss having the nerves of filing a dismissal of his civil suit as if nothing “ever”, “ever”, “even”
“Happen” further causing the Plaintiff emotional distress and mental anguish in being involved with
(Arthur et al ) in any form” both past, present and future.

Plaintiff Assert that Defendant, (Arthur Esq.), Co-Defendant(s) (Law office of Harry C. Arthur et
al) and Co-Defendant (Marine Building L.L.C. et al)

Individually and collectively as described herein above committed all acts and actions as
described fully herein in Violations committed under Chapter 96 of Title 18, United State Code: (RICO)
Racketeering Influences Corruption Organization practices against the legal rights of the Plaintiff in
connection with Fraud as described here in the (2) Amend Complaint.

The Plaintiff will show the United States District Court Defendant(s) (Arthur et al) complaint
made against (Christ et al) was in the nature of seeking monetary relief for the so call property damages,
loss rentals, and property value loss in lieu of Plaintiff alleged acts,

Yet the Defendants collectively continue to disregard their own “actual property value” by the
Defendants on mismanagements mistake in Commercial Property up keeps by way of the following
exhibit(s) already on the United States Federal District Court files:

a. The continual human waste already complain of still being published and posted for over a 2
year period of time*See Plaintiff exhibit (P-1), photo in 2009

b. The continual mismanagements in the past drunken failed exterior painting project of the
commercial property and any future up keep in this area being provided for over a period of
2 years. *See Plaintiff exhibit (P-2) photo in 2009

c. The continual mismanagements in the safety in the fire escape extreme and needed up keep
*See Plaintiff exhibit (P-3), photo in 2009

d. The continual mismanagements in nasty restaurant trash simply left about on the ground for
lots of rodents’ for over a period of 2 years *See Plaintiff exhibit (P-4) photo in 2009

e. The continual mismanagements in the finances needed to provide for all of the extreme and
well over due needs as described in paragraph a, b, c, and d above The continual human
waste already complain of still being published and posted for over a 2 year period of
time*See Plaintiff exhibit (P-1), photo in 2009

f. The continual mismanagements in the past drunken failed exterior painting project of the
commercial property and any future up keep in this area being provided for over a period of
2 years. *See Plaintiff exhibit the new 2010 series of pictures…. 

g. The pictures showing continual mismanagements in the safety in the fire escape extreme
and needed up keep *See Plaintiff exhibit 2010 up dated

h. The continual mismanagements in restaurant trash simply left about on the ground for ro-
dents’ for over a period of 2 years *See Plaintiff exhibit 2010 up date

i. The continual mismanagements in the finances needed to provide for all of the extreme and
well over due needs as described in paragraph a, b, c, and d above with 2010 photograph up
detail up date.

j. With the Illegal Immigrants attempt at futile repairs

Plaintiff was in fact both a direct and indirect party of all wrongful involvements as described by
the Defendant(s) own wording in the complaint against (Christ et al)

And serious damages did in fact occurred by all of the collectively hostile, extreme and

outrageous acts and actions of the Defendants as described in the Plaintiff original Complaint, Amend
Complaint, all motions and exhibits currently before the Honorable Court.

With all Plaintiff mental medical records on file at the Harris County in support of the Defendant
causing Plaintiff intentional emotional harm, complete severe mental anguish

Defendant(s) collectively sought Ultra Vires Acts in their cruel presentations made against (Christ
et al) with claims of a profound impact that the “Nasty Plaintiff” impose on the Public interest, health,
and safety as described in (Arthur et al) complaint against (Christ et al)

In addition the Defendants herein collectively sought to impose a “less value of worth” towards
the public impression of the Plaintiff base upon the complaint, while inciting racial hate, ridicule of a
scheme for monetary fund’s against (Christ et al) thinking (Christ et al) is weak unprotected & meanwhile
the scum Derelicts & panhandlers pose no threat and

Are too stupid to understand the Defendants herein collectively Criminal RICO “Mail and Wire”
Fraud Scheme of things for greed, and the Plaintiff too legal weak and unprotected cause he is street
trash.

Plaintiff will show the United States Federal Court Defendants to this action one (Arthur et al)
“boldly and foolishly” is now desecrating such the “Honorable Work Product” of the two Professional
legal Attorneys”.

By way of Defendant (Arthur et al) claiming/theft the entire work product of another
Attorney(s) work product.

Namely (Andy Vickery& Kenny IV Esq.) the “Professional legal Attorneys” listed above who’s
legal wording design in the deposition with the Plaintiff (Hamilton) own work product of legal
documents being also provided to (Andy Vickery Attorney at Law & Kenny IV Esq.) before hand of said
Deposition of (Arthur Esq.)

The work product of namely (Andy Vickery& Kenny IV Esq.) the “Professional legal Attorneys”
against (Arthur et al) in the past in all fact and circumstances defeated (Arthur Esq. and Law Office of
Harry C. Arthur et al and The Marine Building L.L.C. et al” and not some (Bogus) materials that may
having been prepared by (Arthur et al) “himself” with an eye towards the realistic possibilities in
defense of this particular impending litigation against The Plaintiff (Hamilton II)

And or materials that (Arthur Esq.) prepared in defense of himself in his on direct
examination...? In the previous civil action against the “Holy Church”.

Defendant (Arthur et al) seems to think now collectively combining his other wrongful acts and
actions precisely committed and directed against the Plaintiff rights and dignity in the past that any
future defamatory acts and further fraudulent practices by said defendant (Arthur et al) in the now
stated claims of the work product of another Attorney(s) deposition…

Is the same/equivalent as if claiming the Plaintiff to be a total “water/egg head bumpkin” from
Jefferson County, Texas whom happen to fallen of a Long Horn Cattle truck in a pasture field upon a
petrified pieces of cow crap …thus providing the Plaintiff already being further in a state …from all
leaves of his own common sense and

fully rendering this Plaintiff (Hamilton II) as a previously mentioned total “water/egg head
bumpkin” ignorant of all of the Civil Court laws of the United States “that even a 5th grader can figure
out” in regards to the “work product” and or “Attorney/client doctrine” defendants (Arthur et al) now
seeks foolish refuge under.

Plaintiff will show the Honorable Court that the Defendant (Arthur et al) even refuse to file the
suit against the correct Defendants’ and avoid the Plaintiff from suffering being humiliated in public with
excitement of ridicule from others which (Arthur) cause to include causing the Plaintiff further inner
humiliation

In which he (Arthur) should have filed his suit against the “City of Houston et al” for not
providing needed restrooms for the homeless population like other metropolitan cities

“In fact do” with a large homeless population equal to the City of Houston TX similar homeless
population and or smaller cities population “yet” homeless people are having adequate restroom access
other then here within “Houston” Texas which defendant (Arthur) did not pursue this avenue;

Instead (Arthur) attack the Beacon clients “Only” as if all of the clients are guilty of the human
crap and urine on his building and especially slow in the brain department in being afraid to pursue
rightful legal actions against a (Attorney) no less for his wrong actions;

Plaintiff will show the United States Federal Court Defendant (Arthur et al) further refuse to
“add all other” outreach centers located throughout the Houston (CBD) central business district as
joining Plaintiff in his action against the Christ Church Cathedral, and the Beacon… Defendant (Arthur et
al) went after “Christ Church Cathedral”

And the Beacon (Only) with his suit while his scheme of things include defaming the Plaintiff in
the process while (Arthur) attempt to achieve monetary fund’s based on defaming and discriminating
against the Plaintiff rights and dignity;

Instead of (Arthur et al) implying some of the client(s) of the beacon being Derelict(s) with
implication in the definition of derelict that charges the Plaintiff with the further commission of a crime
of crapping, pissing and vomiting on the property of the Defendant;

(Arthur et al) “Unflinchingly, courageously, and with an Audaciously bold potty mouth” with
strong references to “defecation, crap, feces matter and Urine discharge “as loath some” as one can get
with this kind of human product waste being criminally involved

And or as in the “Hood” or any other place with among my (African American) people would
refer to as “S.H.I.T.” and “Piss” and or one “nasty” “Trifling mother fu_ker” to be doing this kind of acts

in a public place.

(Arthur et al) have the Plaintiff being involved in these allegations of human nasty waste being
wrongfully discharge and its involvement with the Plaintiff (among other statements) that refer to the
Plaintiff further being associated with being a nuisances in Houston, Texas being made public not just
local but “Nationwide” to include but not limited to the “World” via the “Internet”

(Arthur et al) then wanted to shut down the Plaintiff “feedhole” namely “The Beacon” “Only”
with strong emphases on “forever”

And terminated any further charity outreach at this beacon facility “Only” in the (CBD) while
(Arthur et al) further attempt to steal $250,000.00 dollars of the Plaintiff “Poor man money”

The Plaintiff will show the Honorable Court that all of the Defendant(s) collectively herein while
having several “legal degrees” @ Law Office of Harry C. Arthur et al to “boot” and “Marine Building
L.L.C.,

Quite failing “on purpose” once again to print the “Whole Truth” in a simple honest legal
Attorney form in a Motion to dismiss this action (Stating the Plaintiff has no legal standing in Texas)”.

“With the full knowledge “Taxpayers in the State of Texas” “have standing to enjoin the illegal
expenditure of public funds”, and “need not demonstrate a particularized injury”. Which the
defendant(s) wishes to mislead the Honorable Court in the Plaintiff current legal standing before the
court:

See id.; Calvert v. Hull, 475 S.W.2d 907, 908 (Tex.1972); Osborne v. Keith, 142 Tex. 262, 177
S.W.2d 198, 200 (1944).

Implicit in this rule are two requirements: (1) that the plaintiff is a taxpayer; and (2) that public
funds are expended on the allegedly illegal activity. See Bland, 34 S.W.3d at 556; Calvert, 475 S.W.2d at
908; Osborne, 177 S.W.2d at 200.

Yet the Defendant(s) collectively wishes to continue committing to further “pattern and
practices” of “Illegal Misrepresentation of all “material facts in the capacity of Attorneys of Law.

(An Attorney whom representing himself has a fool for a client surly applies here)

The Plaintiff further respectfully asserts that in the Defendants motion to dismiss on the
records of this action quoted:

Williams v. Lara, 52 S.W.3d 171, 178-79 (Tex) “Which do not even in all fact and circumstances apply in
this matter:

“Taxpayers in Texas legally have standing to enjoin the illegal expenditure of public funds, and
“need not” demonstrate a particularized injury” as stated by the Law Books.

“Moreover” the Plaintiff is a Veteran of the “Armed Force Services” namely the “United States

Navy Which such “Legal Services” the (Beacon) provided is a “gift of appreciation” for any “Veteran”
returning to a “normal start” in life within Houston Texas”

With the full support by all of the taxpayer “Nation Wide” in association with the United States
Federal Government providing a funding to a legal operation to provide not just for the Plaintiff behalf in
dire situations needs of being poor,

To include but not limited to the said “Armed Force Services” namely the Navy for argument
sake “if being a possible “direct cause” of the Plaintiff being at a state of “Disable American Veteran”

To which said (Beacon) services is still such a services of a gift of appreciation on the Plaintiff
behalf and a direct legal needed aid in returning to a normal new start in life with a “Disability”
moreover,

Still leaving the (Beacon) and its “legal services” a gift of appreciation for a (DAV) Disable
American Veteran being provided that is supported by all of the taxpayers “Nation Wide”,

In association with the United States Federal Government providing a funding to a legal
operation to provide not just for the Plaintiff behalf in dire situations needs of being poor,

To include but not limited to The Defendant(s) in (Arthur et al) collectively wishes to maintain in
the delusions of the Plaintiff was not a party to the “cause of actions” being brought in said suit against
(Christ et al) or any damaged being caused by any actions of the defendants as a result of their law suit.

And Plaintiff has no justifiable interest in his allegations made against collectively against all of
the Defendants in his complaint.

Plaintiff first respectfully asserts before the Honorable Court and address the non-fictional facts
that the Defendant(s) (Arthur et al) collectively did not file suit against “Christ Church Cathedral” for:

(1).a sexual misconduct nature of any Defendant(s) herein “genitals” being in violations of some
sorts or sodomizing acts being past or present occurred and committed against any of the Defendants
rights, will & Dignity; by (Christ et al)

(2). nor did the Defendant(s) collectively seek concrete civil refugee in a suit against (Christ) with
concrete claims in a nature that a “Brick” happening to “heavenly dislodge itself” from the “Cathedral
high castle structure” and simply pick –n-fall upon any of their collectively heads;

Plaintiff strongly assert before the Honorable Court that These Greedy Nasty Defendant(s)
collectively herein (Arthur et al) made real criminal intent in a “Mail and Wire” fraud scheme of things
among other (RICO) and State Civil Charges against the Plaintiff rights, peace, dignity all for profit and
bogus claims filed further on the “Harris County Court Wire system in Houston Texas” which is then
“broadcast” “Nationwide” no less”

That the Plaintiff being a client of the beacon Is now factual a “nasty dog of a person who cannot
hold his “crap from his rectum or urine” therefore likes pissing all over the Defendant (Arthur Esq.)

property @ Marine Building L.L.C. and all over the city of Houston Texas,

To include Plaintiff (Hamilton II) is a real panhandler derelict of sorts with “not a simple single
purpose in life of any sorts”

“But bum smokes and like dancing in the streets”

Among other crude statements being made in said complaint against (Christ et al)

And the Defendant(s) (Arthur et al) herein collectively is entitled to a special grand “Hefty”
$250,000.00 Dollars. From the Co-Defendants (Christ et al)

To include but not limited to the Federal Government legal support of the (Beacon) for the
Plaintiff behalf is “Hereby fully and forever close to boot” in this “Obstruction of Justice” of a legal
Federal Funded Operation

With all of the Defendants “Claims” (“among other things”);

Lost some rentals funds and Defendants (Arthur Esq.) “Main property value” (Marine Building
L.L.C. Is now in the “Super Trash Can” and the reasoning is based upon the Pro Plaintiff herein (Hamilton
II) is super nasty and very lose on the City of Houston Texas.

Therefore the City of Houston is now official “Derelict Town USA” base upon the Plaintiff as
described by (Arthur et al).

And Plaintiff wishes to remind the United States Federal Court all of this is based upon the
actions of the Defendants et al in a hostile civil suit against (Christ et al) for the relief of direct monetary
compensation in value of said whopper of a sum in excess of $250,000.00 with full time forever closure
of the (Beacon et al)

But the Plaintiff is not a party…? Nor was the Plaintiff damage in any form….?

Plaintiff (2) Amend Complaint states a long list of “Legal Federal cause of actions with new
update exhibits attached herein of Legal Exhibits from the Defendant(s) in the possession of the Plaintiff
as described herein

Fully Furthering “The United States of America Federal Court” requiring the Defendant(s)
collectively herein (Arthur et al and (Christ et al) to be held fully “responsible and most accountable”
before a “United States Federal Court” for all of these criminal and civil acts

And actions described against the Plaintiff peaceful rights, will, and dignity as described herein,

Plaintiff further assert Defendant (Arthur et al) and Co-Defendants (“Christ et al”) collectively
having cause enough “emotional trauma” and National disrespect to the Plaintiff Louis Charles Hamilton
II

As described herein and rightfully so, causing undue disrespectful behavior of the same criminal

RICO “Mail and Wire” nature to others similarly the same,

With “Extreme gross negligent” by Co-Defendant herein “Christ et al” in Defense of the Plaintiff
“Race”, “Veteran status” “Religion”, “Peace”, “Will” and “Dignity” at all times by (Beacon et al) there after
Plaintiff provide (Christ et al) “legal civil team” evidences, facts, legal support, in their civil countersuit
against (Arthur et al).

With details facts of Plaintiff intended legal pursuit of (Arthur et al) in all documents, fax
transmissions, letters and records, and Plaintiff Pro Se Civil Counter Civil action against (Arthur et al).

Notwithstanding all “current exhibits” with detail real facts of all photograph evidence filed in
the “Honorable Court and the Plaintiff Myspace.com photos on the “Internet” thus far being submitted
in the records , depicted and showing Defendant(s) (Arthur et al), (Law Office of Harry C. Arthur et al),

And (“Marine Building L.L.C.) such collectively nasty, disgusting trailer trash disgusting nature in
being all supposedly Professional Attorneys and Business operating out of “Co-Defendant “Marine
Building L.L.C..” with such Nasty, poor un-kept, run down property waste conditions’, creepy drunk
commercial painting, useless fire escape safety hazard ,

And “Ton’s, upon, Ton’s, of Client’s “Civil & Criminal Legal” Trash being physically dump on the
ground for exposure to ridicule, scorn, mock, tease, jeer at, make fun of, derision, deride, and
complete poke fun at. By the General Public of Clients (Arthur et al) and (The Marine Building L.L.C. et al)

Since Plaintiff herein (Hamilton II) recorded during 2009- 2010 and now file exhibit(s) in 2011
against the “Law Office of Harry C. Arthur et al”, & “Marine Building L.L.C”, and Harry C. Arthur Esq.

Plaintiff moves for Each Defendant(s) and Co-Defendant(s) each and their “perspective
Attorneys” filing a response with the clerk in regards to all of the Following (2) Amend Complaint” and
for the reasons as stated in above regards to the all of Defendants Collectively actions as Amend Herein
the (2) Amend Complaints.

Cause of action

1. The Pro Se Plaintiff reincorporates and state all previously stated cause of actions in the
“Original complaint” and The First Amend complaint; as fully enforced and stated herein for:

Wrongful acts and actions collectively conspire to willfully, with full disregards or consequences
of their acts/actions committed all in Violations under

Chapter 96 of Title 18, United State Code: (RICO) Racketeering Influences Corruption
Organization,

Section 1341 (relating to mail fraud), section 1343 (relating to wire fraud), section 1028 (relating to fraud

and related activity in connection with identification documents),

Section 1503 (relating to obstruction of justice), section 1510 (relating to obstruction of criminal
(RICO) investigations), section 1956 (relating to the laundering of monetary instruments),

Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) 18 U.S.C. § 1030 in connection with all criminal (RICO) acts and
actions, as described herein, and conspiracies to violate (RICO).

Multiple Schemes and Patterns to commit among other things:

(a) Mail and Wire Fraud as described herein, and conspiracies to violate (RICO).

(b) Aiding and abetting to commit A Criminal Enterprise in Racketeering against the rights, digni-
ty and will of the Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s)

Plaintiff reincorporates and state all previously stated fact in the Original, first amend complaint
and (2) Amend Complaint for full Declaratory Judgment

Being made entered into the records of this action that each and every claim, accusation,
assertion, contention

And charges in this (2) Amend Complaint as described fully herein against all Defendants, and
their agents being entry into the action of this cause in full favor of the Plaintiff

Against each of the Defendants, (Arthur Esq.)

And Co-Defendants (Law Office of Harry C. Arthur et al),

And Co-Defendants (Marine Building L.L.C.) and Co-Defendants (Christ et al).

Individually and collectively as described herein said complaint being committed all acts and
actions, to include

“Obstruction of Justice”, False exhibit of Material facts, Conspiracies to pursue the same
Criminal Objective,

Co-Defendant (Christ et al) Violation of the Plaintiff Equal Protection under the Law.

Civil Conspiracy, Actual Fraud, Fraud upon the Court, Malicious Civil Prosecution of a Tort ,
Injury to Plaintiff Personal Reputation, Impeaching Plaintiff Honesty, Imputation of Crime, Disease and
or Sexual Misconduct,

Destruction, alter and or direct destruction of “Material Civil Evidences and Facts”, “Slander of
the Plaintiff”, “Libel of Plaintiff”;

And Defamation upon the Plaintiff reputation in this (RICO) Criminal activities

Plaintiff seeks Actual, accumulative, compensatory, consequential, continuing, expectation
damages, foreseeable,

Future, incidental, indeterminate, reparable, lawful, proximate, prospective, special, speculative,
substantial,

Punitive, Defamation, Discrimination and Permanent damages;

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress and Mental Anguish being entry into the records
against all Defendants herein to Plaintiff Awarded Compensations Claims for

“Serious past, present ,and future Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress and Mental
Anguish being imposed, tariff and levy both past, current, and future;

Defendants (Arthur et al), Co-Defendants (Law Office of Harry C. Arthur et al) and Co-Defendants

(“Marine Building L.L.C. et al) in the Amount already having been established in the Amend
Complaint in excess of $16.2 Million Dollars from a Jury.

To include but not limited to: Exemplary treble damages under (RICO) statue being awarded to
the Plaintiff (Hamilton II) as described in the $16.2 Million Dollars Judgment by a Jury.

With 10% being deducted from each and every Defendant herein Namely (Arthur et al), (Law
Office of Harry C. Arthur et al)

And (The Marine Building L.L.C. et al) from all said judgments awards and compensations by a
Jury in this action

And made payable to Plaintiff (Louis Charles Hamilton II) choice of Charity organization
“Namely” “Christ Church Cathedral” if ya Sloooooooow. It’s a

“Cathedral Church for the “Episcopal Diocese of Texas”. The congregation was established in 1839 its
address is


And entry into the records against Co-Defendant (Christ Church Cathedral) in the Amount of $2.4
Million Dollars.

With full interest incurred since date of injury of November 23 of 2009

Plaintiff further seek Co-Defendant herein (Christ Church Cathedral et al) make Check payable for
Awards/compensation in the amount of: $2,391,350.33

To the Plaintiff (Louis Charles Hamilton II) choice of Charity organization “Namely”….Drum
roll………….

“Christ Church Cathedral” if ya Sloooooooow. It’s a

“Cathedral Church for the “Episcopal Diocese of Texas”. The congregation was established in 1839 its
address is


All Defendants’ each herein be made to pay all Court cost, and Any Attorneys Cost.

Plaintiff (Hamilton) seek the Honorable United States District Court Courtesies in Disciplinary
referral of Attorney(s) at Law (Arthur et al) to the Texas Lawyer Bar Associated governing Attorney
Disciplinary activities for each Attorney Defendant herein

For full legal “Disbarment proceeding commence (ASAP) against” (Arthur et al Attorney at
Law(s))

(Law Office of Harry C. Arthur et al and (Marine Building L.L.C. Attorneys at law(s) for his entire hostile,
extreme, extra special outrageous

Illegal criminal (RICO) conducts, and Fraudulent actions as described herein throughout the (2)
Amend Complaint of the Plaintiff Louis Charles Hamilton II

And for all “Deem just and being Honorable before this United States Federal Court during a
lawful proceeding on the behalf of the Pro Se Plaintiff Louis Charles Hamilton II.

“Conclusion”

Dedications to “Cmdr. Bluefin “Sherlock Holmes Mystery Case of”:

“The Talking Treasure Box”

its Cast:

“Buck and The Preacher man”, “Rick and A.J. Simon”, of “Simon & Simon” “Detective Agency”,

“Ben Matlock”,

“Danny Ocean”,

“Monk”,

And a very sneaky (Thomas Magnum) the little voice in my head….xoxox!

Dated this ______ Day of _________________, 2011

Submitted Respectfully By:

____________________________


Pro Se Plaintiff

P.O. Box 20126

Houston Texas, 77225

United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
Houston Division

Louis Charles Hamilton II Plaintiff Motion in

Pro Se Plaintiff Opposition to Dismiss,
with
“Support Brief and Exhibit(s)”
Vs. Civil action No.H-10-2709
Harry C. Arthur (Esq.)
Defendant
Law office of Harry C. Arthur et al
Co- Defendant(s)
Co-Defendant(s)
Comes now the Pro Se Plaintiff Louis Charles Hamilton II;
files his motion, with attached brief and exhibit(s) in support of
Plaintiff Motion in Opposition to “not-dismissing “number
cause H-10-2709 in the Civil Matter of Louis Charles Hamilton II
vs. Harry C. Arthur et al, now being entertain before the
Honorable Court;
And for cause the Plaintiff will show the following:
1. Defendant(s) collectively moves for a “joint dismissal” from
this action applying their weird senile reasoning on several
factors which the Plaintiff shall address each;

First defendant(s) collectively, Arguments and Authority issue
“because of lack of standing “is incorrect

Brief
I.
The Defendant(s) collectively while having several “legal
degrees” @ Law Office of Harry C. Arthur et al to “boot”,
Quite failing once again to print the “Whole Truth” in a simple
honest legal Attorney form”.
“Taxpayers in the State of Texas” “have standing to enjoin
the illegal expenditure of public funds”, and “need not
demonstrate a particularized injury”. Which the defendant(s)
wishes to mislead the Honorable Court in the Plaintiff current
legal standing before the court:
See id.; Calvert v. Hull, 475 S.W.2d 907, 908 (Tex.1972);
Osborne v. Keith, 142 Tex. 262, 177 S.W.2d 198, 200 (1944).
Implicit in this rule are two requirements: (1) that the
plaintiff is a taxpayer; and (2) that public funds are expended on
the allegedly illegal activity. See Bland, 34 S.W.3d at 556;
Calvert, 475 S.W.2d at 908; Osborne, 177 S.W.2d at 200.
Yet the Defendant(s) collectively wishes to continue
committing to further “pattern and practices” of “Illegal
Misrepresentation of all “material facts in the capacity of

Attorneys of Law.
(An Attorney whom representing him self has a fool for a
client surly applies here)
The Plaintiff further respectfully asserts that:
Williams v. Lara, 52 S.W.3d 171, 178-79 (Tex) do not even apply
in this matter:
“Taxpayers in Texas have standing to enjoin the illegal
expenditure of public funds, and “need not” demonstrate a
particularized injury”.
“Moreover” the Plaintiff is a Veteran of the “Armed Force
Services” namely the “United States Navy” *See Attachment
exhibit (A); (Plaintiff Veteran ID)
Which such “Legal Services” the (Beacon) provided is a
“gift of appreciation” for any “Veteran” returning to a “normal
start” in life within Houston Texas”
With the full support by all of the taxpayer “Nation Wide”
in association with the United States Federal Government
providing a funding to a legal operation to provide not just for
the Plaintiff behalf in dire situations needs of being poor,
To include but not limited to the said “Armed Force
Services” namely the Navy for argument sake “if being a
possible “direct cause” of the Plaintiff being at a state of

“Disable American Veteran”
To which said (Beacon) services is still such a services of a
gift of appreciation on the Plaintiff behalf and a direct legal
needed aid in returning to a normal new start in life with a
“Disability” moreover,
Still leaving the (Beacon) and its “legal services” a gift of
appreciation for a (DAV) Disable American Veteran being
provided that is supported by all of the taxpayers “Nation
Wide”,
To include but not limited to the services being provided
by the (Beacon) namely Christ Church Cathedral is an act of
“Devine Holiness” by its Congregation, Founders, Providers, and
inspire by the teaching of Jesus Christ in association with “God”
for over 170 years at the present location for not only the need
of the Plaintiff but also God’s Children
*See Plaintiff attached exhibit (B)…… (Beacon et al).
The Plaintiff is a “past and currently present” Client of the
Beacon in association with “Christ Church Cathedral” especially
at the time frame of all of the acts, actions, and incidents
against the Plaintiff rights will, and dignity made for the basics
of this action as described by the Plaintiff in the Amend
Complaint.
*See Attachment exhibit (C); (Plaintiff Client letter in

association with the Beacon)
Plaintiff further state Defendant(s) collectively fail to
provide before the Honorable Court to the effect “Proof of any
written agreements being made between (Arthur et al) and the
mystery Confederates in agreement with the (Beacon et al) that
the reasoning the “Non-suit filing” was made to support (Arthur
et al) false pretense in now the need to cover up the
“Defendants collectively criminal mail and wire fraud scheme of
things and all other expose “legal Interest” now being described
by the Plaintiff;
Plaintiff clearly stated all post cover up “acts and actions”
involving alleged “working together” is a front for the
Defendant(s) collective “Mail and Wire” fraud scheme of things
their after the exposure of (Arthur et al) bogus intents
Through the Professional deposition being conducted
against (Arthur et al) in among other things his discrepancies in
numerous false finances statements made during his hostile
actions against (Christ) in a complaint and filed before a Harris
County court of law;
Such collective “bogus illegal and quite fraudulent intent of
the Defendant(s) being brought to light first and foremost by
the “exclusive experience work product” and direct examination
deposition of (Andy Vickery) and (Kinney IV) Respectful honest
Attorneys for (Christ et al) to defeat (Arthur et al) “under oath”.

*See Plaintiff exhibits attached to Plaintiff Motion for a
(TRO) in regards to Arthur et al reply to Plaintiff motions for
production of the deposition as (Arthur et al) supply
information in regards to protecting property financing
information’s contain in among other things in the deposition
conducted “against” (Arthur et al) by (Christ) et al Professional
Honest Attorneys of record Andy Vickery and Kinney IV
Now which Defendants herein collectively attempt this
same rouge ploy in said discovery request to with hold from the
Plaintiff during civil actions in Harris County Court files.
Plaintiff further respectfully asserts (Vickery) made
statements to the effect a deposition of (Arthur) being under
oath should clear up his judgment in public news media reports.
II
The Defendant(s) in (Arthur et al) collectively wishes to
maintain in the delusions of the Plaintiff was not a party to the
“cause of actions” being brought in said suit against (Christ et
al) or any damaged being caused by any actions of the
defendants as a result of their law suit.

And Plaintiff has no justifiable interest in his allegations
made against collectively against all of the Defendants in his
complaint.

Plaintiff first respectfully asserts before the Honorable
Court and address the non-fictional facts that the Defendant(s)
(Arthur et al) collectively did not file suit against “Christ Church
Cathedral” for:
(1).a sexual misconduct nature of any Defendant(s) herein
“genitals” being in violations of some sorts or sodomizing acts
being past or present occurred and committed against any of
the Defendants rights, will & Dignity; by (Christ et al)
(2). nor did the Defendant(s) collectively seek concrete civil
refugee in a suit against (Christ) with concrete claims in a nature
that a “Brick” happening to “heavenly dislodge itself” from the
“Cathedral high castle structure” and simply pick –n-fall upon
any of their collectively heads;
Plaintiff strongly assert before the Honorable Court that
These Greedy Nasty Defendant(s) collectively herein made real
criminal intent in a “Mail and Wire fraud scheme of things for
profit and all bogus claims filed further on the “Honorable
Harris County Court Wire” which is then “broadcast”
“Nationwide” no less” that the Plaintiff being a client of the
beacon *See exhibit (B) Plaintiff letter being a client” 
Is in now fact a “nasty dog of a person who cannot hold his
crap from his rectum or urine therefore and likes pissing all over
the Defendant property Marine Building L.L.C. and all over the
city of Houston Texas,

To include Plaintiff is a real panhandler derelict of sorts
with “not a simple single purpose in life of any sorts”
“But bum smokes and like dancing in the streets”
Among other crude statements being made in said
complaint against (Christ et al)
And the Defendant(s) herein collectively is entitled to a
special grand “Hefty” $250,000.00 Dollars and the “Holy soup
kitchen with all of its super support local.
To include but not limited to the Federal Government legal
support of the (Beacon) for the Plaintiff behalf is “Hereby fully
and forever close to boot” cause the Defendants lost some
rentals and defendants “main property value” is now in the
“Super Trash Can” and the reasoning is Plaintiff is nasty and lose
on the City of Houston Texas. There for the City of Houston now
is official “Derelict Town USA”.
And Plaintiff wishes to remind the Honorable Court all of
this is base upon the actions of the Defendants et al in a hostile
civil suit against (Christ et al) for the relief of direct monetary
compensation in value of said whopper of a sum in excess of
$250,000.00
But the Plaintiff is not a party…? Nor was the Plaintiff
damage in any form….?

First the Plaintiff Respectfully assert to the Honorable
Court..! (I really like to slid Arthur Esq. stupid face smooth
across the court room ninja style”, until it hit the Jury Box then
bounce off and fall asleep on the floor needing a deluxe
package ride to the local E.R. and you can have my “Honest
Oath” on that one)
And then I will respectfully state before the Honorable
Court:
1. Defendant(s) collectively having placing them self on
“Legal Death Row” by involving the Plaintiff in this
nasty, disgusting, filthy, highly rude, acts for monies in a
Federal criminal “mail and wire fraud scheme. (I am not
stupid)
2. Notwithstanding total disgrace the Plaintiff before the
eyes of god seeking hostile actions against a Holy Church
in vain of and against the Plaintiff name, dignity, and will
3. And in doing this, said collective Defendant(s) herein
further sought to attempting in stealing from a “Holy
Church” $250,000.00 Dollars, with a permanent enforce
closure on the “legal homeless soup kitchen operations”
and take the Plaintiff name in vain no less among others
with this actions also,

4. Not with standing facts that the Plaintiff being a person
whom already is in the need of no more “current legal
problems in his name before a “Honorable Court”
5. And all these Defendants collectively wondering why..?
The organizer /leader “Commander in Chief “Harry C.
Arthur Esq.” in this collective “Mail and Wire Fraud
scheme of thing complaint made against the Plaintiff
rights, will and dignity being that (Arthur Esq.) personal
face is not crumble, bleeding, and good –n- broken up..?
I will tell you why for the following special reasons:
6. The Law that’s why…
7. My Doctor is the next reasoning whom having to supply
Plaintiff medications in regards to this disrespectful dis-
play for greed
8. *See Plaintiff Original Complaint with Original Medical
Records on file at the Harris County Court House in
Houston Texas in the Matter of: Louis Charles Hamilton
II vs. Harry C. Arthur The Marine Building, L.L.C. et al
2009-80663
Plaintiff will respectfully strongly assert before the
Honorable Court that the VAMC Mental Doctor is quit cable in
telling the Honorable Court to his/her face information in
regards to Plaintiff medical records and (Arthur et al)

disposition standing with the Pro Se Plaintiff” at the past and
current time frame.
Plaintiff further refer the Honorable court *See Plaintiff
exhibits attached in Plaintiff motion to secure commercial
business records among other things that facts showing (Arthur
et al) each and every reply of Defendants collectively herein
conjure wrongfully against Plaintiff rights for said Deposition.
To include Defendant(s) (Arthur et al) stating Plaintiff has direct
emotional Issues in their reply to hide the discovery deposition.
The Plaintiff can show the Honorable Court that there is
Justice the Plaintiff move to Houston Texas which the Plaintiff
supply the Defendant(s) all theses factories and Plaintiff
reasoning for sought refugee in Christ Church Cathedral namely
the (Beacon) while Plaintiff render legal services to several
Defendants in order to escape from harm and pursue civil
actions
As described in Plaintiff exhibit (D) *Clerk’s Entry of
Default.
On a Murder for Hire Scheme to Kill the Plaintiff namely
Louis Charles Hamilton II in this Action also
With attached copy of said Civil Complaint No. 1:10-CV-55
*Plaintiff exhibit (E) in which those crooked Defendants therein
having any further criminal intent to even dream of entertaining

any guest appearance before the Honorable United States
District Court, Eastern District of Texas, Beaumont Division
(Honorable Hang Judge) for all of the Illegal RICO Crooked
committed to The Elderly, Senior Handicap, IRS, FEMA, Private
Insurances Companies, to include but not limited to the Plaintiff
pain, suffering and direct losses
Which the Plaintiff Respectfully Assert the Defendants
collectively herein (Arthur et al) having been provided all of the
same exhibits during litigation in Harris County records which
Defendants collectively continue to execute a criminal scheme
to still wrongfully described the Plaintiff in a nasty state with
their strong condemning Proof of the Plaintiff Louis Charles
Hamilton II being a “Derelict as described in their complaint and
Plaintiff pursuit of any Federals actions means Plaintiff is a true
Derelict as described in (Arthur Esq.) reply to Plaintiff discovery
request.
Yet these crooks forgot they are attempting to rip off
(Christ et al) in the Vain of the Plaintiff name
Plaintiff further assert that Plaintiff then further supply
Defendant(s) in (Arthur et al) The Plaintiff legal attempts at
further escape from further harm, loss wages and pursue of
further civil justice as described in Plaintiff exhibit (F) Civil
complaint made against (Trail et al) Federal Civil action No.
1:09-cv-496 attached herein

While the Plaintiff is in further pursuit of lost income as
described in plaintiff exhibits (G) New Orleans civil action Cause
No. 1:09-cv-289 with the Honorable Court report and
recommendations of Dennis et al filed herein the exhibits
herein
Plaintiff having in the past supplied same to Defendants in
(Arthur et al) to attempt to salvage Plaintiff lost reputation at
the Hands of each and every one of the Collective Defendants
herein
To include but not limited to the Plaintiff engaging in the
cruel corruption already filed civil actions of the criminal
involvements of “Doctor Samuel Benjamin Magnus Lawson
M.D.” Against the rights, will, and dignity of the Plaintiff stupid
sister Johanna Ann Magnus-Lawson (Hamilton)
*See Backpage.com “Sherlock Holmes” mystery story: case of
“The Prince Witch Voodoo Doctor” by: Louis Charles Hamilton II
(Cmdr. Bluefin).
But the Defendant(s) herein having defame and continual
to do the same as stated to the point Plaintiff is in fact now a
proven “Derelict” now for even being involved in any said
numerous civil actions as described above in Plaintiff exhibit E,
F and G Defendants reply to the Plaintiff in a legal set of
interrogatories *See Plaintiff exhibit attached to Plaintiff motion
to secure records. Arthur reply to Plaintiff interrogatories,

request for admission and Production of Documents.
Which Plaintiff respectfully assert before the Honorable
Court said evidence was provided to Defendants collectively to
consider in making their choice of continual rash, rude, harsh
treatments of the Plaintiff respect, rights for life, being now at
the hand of the defendants collective ridicule civil action.

In fact the Plaintiff honest position both “past and
present” is (Arthur et al) is full of “Fraudulent false fictitious
massive “shifty bogus lying legal crap”.
The Defendant(s) (Arthur et al) complaint against (Christ et
al) was in the nature of seeking monetary relief for the so call
property damages, and property value loss in lieu of Plaintiff
alleged acts,
Yet the Defendants collectively continue to disregard their
own “actual property value” by the Defendants on
mismanagements mistake in Commercial Property up keeps by
way of the following:
k. The continual human waste already complain of still be-
ing published and posted for over a 2 year period of

l. The continual mismanagements in the past drunken
failed exterior painting project of the commercial prop-
erty and any future up keep in this area being provided
for over a period of 2 years. *See Plaintiff exhibit (P-2)
photo in 2009
m.The continual mismanagements in the safety in the fire
escape extreme and needed up keep *See Plaintiff ex-
hibit (P-3), photo in 2009
n. The continual mismanagements in nasty restaurant
trash simply left about on the ground for lots of rodents’
for over a period of 2 years *See Plaintiff exhibit (P-4)
photo in 2009
o. The continual mismanagements in the finances needed
to provide for all of the extreme and well over due
needs as described in paragraph a, b, c, and d above The
continual human waste already complain of still being
published and posted for over a 2 year period of
p. The continual mismanagements in the past drunken
failed exterior painting project of the commercial prop-
erty and any future up keep in this area being provided
for over a period of 2 years. *See Plaintiff exhibit the
new 2010 series of pictures…. 

q. The pictures showing continual mismanagements in the
safety in the fire escape extreme and needed up keep
*See Plaintiff exhibit 2010 up dated
r. The continual mismanagements in restaurant trash sim-
ply left about on the ground for rodents’ for over a peri-
od of 2 years *See Plaintiff exhibit 2010 up date
s. The continual mismanagements in the finances needed
to provide for all of the extreme and well over due
needs as described in paragraph a, b, c, and d above
with 2010 photograph up detail up date.
t. With the Illegal Immigrants attempt at futile repairs
Plaintiff was in fact both a direct and indirect party of all
wrongful involvements as described by the Defendant(s) own
wording in the complaint against (Christ et al)
And serious damages did in fact occurred by all of the
collectively hostile, extreme and outrageous acts and actions of
the Defendants as described in the Plaintiff original Complaint,
Amend Complaint, all motions and exhibits currently before the
Honorable Court.
With all Plaintiff mental medical records on file at the
Harris County in support of the Defendant causing Plaintiff
intentional emotional harm, complete sever mental anguish

Defendant(s) collectively sought Ultra Vires Acts in their
cruel presentations made against (Christ et al) with claims of a
profound impact that the “Nasty Plaintiff” impose on the Public
interest, health, and safety as described in (Arthur et al)
complaint against (Christ et al)
In addition the Defendants herein collectively sought to
impose a “less value of worth” towards the public impression of
the Plaintiff base upon the complaint, while inciting racial hate,
ridicule of a scheme for monetary funds against (Christ et al)
thinking (Christ et al) is weak unprotected & meanwhile the
scum Derelicts & panhandlers pose no threat and
Are too stupid to under stand the Defendants herein
collectively Criminal RICO “Mail and Wire” Fraud Scheme of
things for greed, and the Plaintiff too legal weak and
unprotected cause he is street trash.

Conclusion
Plaintiff Amend Complaint states a long list of cause of
actions requiring the Defendant(s) collectively herein to be held
fully “responsible and most accountable” for all of these
criminal and civil acts and actions described against the Plaintiff
peaceful rights, will, and dignity as described therein,
Defendant collectively having cause enough “emotional
trauma” and National disrespect to the Plaintiff Louis Charles

Hamilton II and rightfully so causing undue disrespectful
behavior of the same criminal RICO “Mail and Wire nature to
others similarly the same.
Not with standing giving the (Beacon) namely “Christ
Church Cathedral et al” a notable wrongful “black eye” in vain
of the Plaintiff name
Notwithstanding current exhibits with detail real facts of
all photograph evidence thus far being submitted, depicted and
showing Defendant(s) such collectively nasty, disgusting trailer
trash nature in being professional Attorneys and Business
operating out of Marine Building L.L.C.. Nasty, poor un-kept, run
down property waste conditions’
While these real dogs of a well organized syndicate style
crooks label the Plaintiff among other things “nasty”.
“A reputable lawyer will advise you to keep out of law,
make the best of a foolish bargain, and not get caught again”.
Mark Twain;
Letter to Charles H. Webb, 8 Apr. 1875”

Wherefore the Pro Se Plaintiff Louis Charles Hamilton II,
moves now in this number above matter,
Moves respectfully that the Honorable Court hereby do in

fact deny Defendant(s) herein the matter of defendants (Arthur
et al) collective motions to dismiss the Complaint of the Plaintiff
Louis Charles Hamilton II in its entirety with full extra special
prejudice, (With a added Sugar on Top)
And for any and all other relief Pro Se Plaintiff herein seeks
being awarded fairly in Justice before the Honorable Court.

By; _____________________________
Pro Se Plaintiff
P.O. Box 20126
Houston Texas 77225

The Plaintiff will show the Above entitled “Honorable Court” that in the past (President
Andrew Johnson) did willfully through his criminal version of Reconstruction did establish
“Second class citizenship for the (Negro) Plaintiff herein (Louis Charles Hamilton II) Black
African-American within the defendant (The United States of America and Co-Defendant (The
State of Texas)

And the Defendant (The United States of America and Co-Defendant (The State of
Texas) continue holding the same “Second class citizenship upon the “Plaintiff in (Among other
Things) “Suit in Civil Common Law” .

The Plaintiff assert before the Honorable Court that the Defendant (The United States of
America) continue fearing that their political and social dominance is threatened in 2009 though
out 2011, have continue turned to numerous illegal direct means to prevent (Negro) black

Louis charles hamilton ii. vs america et al and state of texas et al.......

Louis charles hamilton ii. vs america et al and state of texas et al.......

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (15)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to Louis charles hamilton ii. vs america et al and state of texas et al.......

Similar to Louis charles hamilton ii. vs america et al and state of texas et al....... (19)

More from Louis Charles Hamilton II

More from Louis Charles Hamilton II (16)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Louis charles hamilton ii. vs america et al and state of texas et al.......