Action for Justice, Pro Se

5/18/04
I emailed my local law library for
help; the following is their
answer and my questions:

The opinion can be found at:
http://findlaw.com/casecode/supre
me.html

You will have to select:
RECENT OPINIONS
and then look for the case name
appended below:

TENNESSEE v. LANE No.
02-1667

Action-for-Justice wrote:

Hi, Please could you tell me the
cite for the case so I can read it?
and where will I find it? (on the
internet.) Also, how do you think
I could find the briefs in order to
read them? Karen Kline

Karen Marie Kline,
Plaintiff,
v. CIV 04-309 ACT/DJS
James Hall, Judge
Art Encinias, former Judge,
First Judicial District Court,
First Judicial District Court Clerk,
New Mexico Court of Appeals,
Defendants.

COMES NOW, Karen Kline, Plaintiff, pro se, and files this Notice of Withdrawal of
Withdrawal of Part of Complaint and Memorandum in support:

Because Rule 11 prohibits an attorney from arguing something he or she knows to be
unsupported in law, I wrote in my Objection to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss that I
withdrew a part of my complaint.

May 17, 2004’s evening news regarding the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Tennessee
v. Lane, showed me that Sean Olivas was not actually saying things supported by law.

Therefore, I withdraw the following: “I withdraw my complaint in relation to the First
Judicial District Court, First Judicial Court Clerk, and New Mexico Court of Appeals.”

My withdrawal is based on the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Tennessee v. Lane,
summarized at Findlaw to include the following:

Held: As it applies to the class of cases implicating the fundamental right of access to the
courts, Title II constitutes a valid exercise of Congress' authority under §5 of the
Fourteenth Amendment to enforce that Amendment's substantive guarantees. Pp. 4-23.

That is, states cannot use the 11th Amendment to shield themselves from suit under the
ADA because access to the courts is a fundamental right.

It is also clear that Sean Olivas was violating Rule 11 when he cited a Title I ADA
decision which only relates to employment. It is clear from reading my complaint that I
was not talking about employment.

My intent in filing this law suit was to seek access for everyone who has a mental
disability. So, I don’t want to withdraw a part of my case which may be necessary in
order to effect the needed change.

WHEREFORE I respectfully request that the withdrawal on page 3 of my Objection, “I
withdraw my complaint in relation to the First Judicial District Court, First Judicial Court
Clerk, and New Mexico Court of Appeals,” be stricken.

Respectfully submitted, .
Karen Kline, Plaintiff, pro se
Santa Fe, NM 87507
(505)

I certify that I mailed a true copy to opposing counsel today, May 18, 2004.