Truckers Complaint /
There is No Justice When Blacks Are the Victims

There is No Justice When Blacks Are the Victims

My name is Walter Ellis, an AFRICAN AMERICAN born April 23, 1938 who believes and can confirm that most AFRICAN AMERICANS cannot receive justice in the United States of America, the most racist system in the World. It is obvious that when AFRICAN AMERICANS have complaints, or seek justice, nobody answer or investigate. My purpose is to make the universe aware of the discriminatory, racist practices suffered by most AFRICAN AMERICANS in this United States of CAUCASIAN America.

My father John Ellis who was born September 1889 in Alabama and most likely a slave. He was a hobo who used trains as his main means of transportation. In his youth he later moved to West Virginia, fought with John L. Lewis assisting in forming the UNITED MINE WORKERS of AMERICA, purchased properties, built a business and raised the four children (2 brothers and a sister).  These successes were accomplished with him having a 3rd grade education.

Dad, a CIVIL RIGHTS ACTIVIST, always said he “wouldn’t take any shit off anyone” and was a chronic curser.  One his favorite quotes was “AFTER ME THERE IS NO MORE”.

Since his demise in 1965, I always considered myself as a CIVIL RIGHTS ACTIVIST and try not to take any shit off anyone, I am a chronic curser and have adopted my father’s quote “AFTER ME THERE IS NO MORE”.

If Trump starts a war, he should take his Family, Friends??, and "ALL" who agree with him and his ILK to Russia and live happily thereafter--The SOB, WHITE SUPREMACIST , Racist BASTARD

It has been my contention that when AFRICAN AMERICANS make complaints Federal agencies and the Judicial System most times fail to investigate.

Quote by Forensic Anthropologist Clyde C. Snow regarding Abuse of Police Powers:

“Of all the forms of murder, none is more monstrous than that committed by a state against its own citizens. And of all murder victims, those of the state are the most helpless and vulnerable since the very entity to which they have entrusted their lives and safety becomes their killer. Thus, it is especially important that states be called to account for their deeds.”

An African American Police Officer, in 1966-1969

As an African American Police Officer, the 5th hired at that time by the (Riverside police Department) RPD was familiar with why, “The officers were white, the men charged with their slayings were black, and the case brought racial strife to Riverside………” This writing goes on to say, “a city that had proudly completed voluntary school desegregation that previous decade.”

During my interview prior to being hired for the RPD, LT. Randell asked me, "what I would do if my fellow officer would address me as a Nigger?). My first inclination was that I would call him a cracker, but I thought that might have caused me not to be hired and stated as my Mother had taught me is to ignore such remarks. Months later I asked some of my fellow white officers if they had been asked similar questions during their interviews, and they all stated they had not been asked such questions.

In 1965, months after being hired by Riverside Police Department, RPD I was very discouraged when I entered the briefing room before beginning a shift to see on the bulletin board in large letters “Casa Blanca 2, RPD 0”, after two Hispanic youths were killed by RPD Officers. The killing of the first youth, I believe to be approximately 14 years of age was shot in the back after an accusation of a minor theft. I was told later by my Senior Training Officer that the police had lied regarding the circumstance of this shooting to avoid liability. I was advised by this Officer that the Officer shooting the youth had mistakenly shot the youth.

RPD had Police officer(s) who served as part time dispatchers who referred to African Americans as “NI**ERS” and were not sanctioned by his supervisors.

The RPD was so narrowing minded during the assignation of the two officers that they blocked out the involvement of any whites. “A rookie police officer's account of seeing, questioning -- but not detaining -- Lawton at Bordwell Park near the shooting just minutes after the incident was not reported by him until weeks later, after Lawton's arrest.” If this suspect was Mr. Lawton he was released because he appeared to be white.

An article by Richard K. DeAtley / The Press-Enterprise:

"The officers were white, the men charged with their slayings were black, and the case brought racial strife to Riverside………" This writing goes on to say, "a city that had proudly completed voluntary school desegregation that previous decade."

"A lot of people know what happened," Tennell said of the Christiansen and Teel slayings. "People didn't talk out of fright, or didn't care, or were happy that some white cops got killed. A lot of people didn't open their mouths."

 

Truckers Complaints

ATTORNEYS CIVIL, HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS against Walter Ellis, see: 8 U.S. Code § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

A $28 million settlement reached in September 2015 in a Schneider National Carriers wage-and-hour lawsuit has hit a roadblock as one driver named in the case is objecting to the deal. Attorneys for the more than 6,000 other class members are urging a federal judge to proceed with the settlement with a supermajority backing it up.

After nearly eight years since the original lawsuit was filed, thousands of Schneider drivers are close to receiving compensation for lost wages accrued over a period of more than 10 years since 2004. Drivers in the lawsuit claim they were not paid for time spent on non-driving tasks, such as vehicle inspections, maintenance, rest breaks, loading/unloading, etc. Schneider agreed to a $28 million settlement last September.

However, one plaintiff, Walter Ellis, and one non-class member, Randall Pittman, are trying to claim that drivers have suffered damages in excess of $100 million. Ellis claims that Schneider used retaliation to prevent class members from pursuing further action. Furthermore, the objectors assert that attorneys were paid a substantial amount relative to what the drivers received, claiming fraud and collusion.

Attorneys representing the remaining Schneider drivers were quick to point out both Pittman and Ellis’ history of litigation to dismiss the objections. In one response to the objectors, attorneys revealed that not only is Pittman not a class member, therefore exempt from being able to object, but also that he is a “chronic class action objector.” In fact, Pittman is on California’s Vexatious Litigant List, which prevents those abusing the court system from filing a lawsuit without first obtaining permission from a judge.

As for Ellis, who is a legitimate plaintiff in the case, this was not his first run-in with Schneider in the courts. While employed by Schneider, Ellis complained about the company on a website he created. Ellis was consequently fired and sued for libel, trademark infringement and unlawful recording of confidential communication. Schneider won its lawsuit against Ellis and was awarded more than $700,000, which was eventually reduced to $21,545.

Undeterred, Ellis filed another lawsuit against Schneider in May, claiming Schneider published untrue statements about another person’s property and fraud/conspiracy. Schneider won that case by filing an anti-SLAPP motion, which protects parties from having others use the burden of litigation as an intimidation tactic.

If the settlement continues as planned, more than $20 million will be awarded to dedicated and intermodal drivers and more than $7 million to regional drivers in the case. With approximately 3,000 dedicated/intermodal drivers, compensation averages to nearly $7,000. For the more than 3,000 regional drivers, average awards come to more than $2,000. Actual damages awarded range from a few hundred dollars up to $35,000, depending on how long an individual drove for the company.

ELLIS' reply to: SWIFT TRANSPORTATION INC. / CENTRAL REFRIGERATED NOTICE OF MOTION TO DISMISS

LABOR AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT AGENCY

WALTER L. ELLIS,

CURRENT AND FORMER EMPLOYEES, THE LWDA and THE GENERAL PUBLIC

Complainants In Pro Per

vs.

SWIFT TRANSPORTATION COMPANY Inc., (STC) /
CENTRAL REFRIGERATED SERVICES, INC. ("CRS")

DOES 1-100

Respondents.

CASE NO. 8345

COMPLAINANTS' FIRST AMENDED
COMPLAINT FOR CIVIL PENALTIES

SWIFT Transportation Co-Central Rights Violation

Private Attorney General Act of 2004

Pursuant to the rules set forth under Labor Code Sections 2698 et seq., complainant WALTER L. ELLIS ("Ellis") and , hereinafter "Complainants", hereby amend the above-entitled complaint to identify DOE 1 as SWIFT TRANSPORTATION COMPANY (“STC”) of Arizona, LLC / CENTRAL REFRIGERATED SERVICES, INC. ("CRS"), Ellen M. Bronchetti, Robert Mussig, Attorneys for Defendants and DOES 1-100, hereinafter collectively referred to as "Respondents". Complainants bring this complaint on behalf of himself, current and former employees of STC / CRS, the LWDA and the general public.

Complainants are informed, believe, and thereon allege that each Respondent acted in all pertinent respects as the agent of one or more of the other Respondent and/or carried out a joint scheme, business plan or policy, and the acts of each Respondent are legally attributable to one or more of the other Respondents.

Complainants allege that Respondents, and each of them, continue to willfully violate the following Labor Code Sections:

Subdivision (k) of Section 96, Section 98.3, 98.6, 201, 201.5, 201.7, 202, 203,203.1, 203.5, 204, 204a, 204b, 204.1, 204.2, 205, 205.5, 206, 206.5, 207,208,209, or 212, subdivision (d) of Section 213,215,216,218, 219a, Section 221,222,222.5, 223, or 224, subdivision (a) of Section 226, Section 226.7, 227,227.3, 230,230.1, 230.2, 230.3, 230.4, 230.7, 230.8, or 231, subdivision (c) of Section 232, subdivision (c) of Section 232.5, Section 233, 234, 351, 353, or 403, subdivision (b) of Section 404, Section 432.2, 432.5, 432.7, 432.8, 435, 450, 510, 511, 512, 513, 551, 552, 601, 602, 603, 604, 750, 751.8, 800, 850, 851, 851.5, 852, 921, 922, 923, 970, 973, 976, 1021, 1021.5, 1025, 1026, 1050, 1052, 1053, 1054, 1101, 1102, 1102.5, or 1153, subdivision (c) or (d) of Section 1174, Section 119 2804, 24, 1197, 1197.1, 1197.5, or 1198, subdivision (b) of Section 1198.3, Section 1199, 1199.5, 1290, 1292, 1293, 1293.1, 1294, 1294.1, 1294.5, 1296, 1297, 1298, 1301, 1308, 1308.1, 1308.7, 1309, 1309.5, 1391, 1391.1, 1391.2, 1392, 1683, or 1695, subdivision (a) of Section 1695.5, Section 1695.55, 1695.6, 1695.7, 1695.8, 1695.9, 1696, 1696.5, 1696.6, 1697.1, 1700.25, 1700.26, 1700.31, 1700.32, 1700.40, or 1700.47, paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of subdivision (a) of or subdivision(e) of Section 1701.4 , subdivision (a) of Section 1701.5, Section 1701.8, 1701.10, 1701.12, 1735, 1771, 1774, 1776, 1777.5, 1811, 1815, 2651, or 2673, subdivision (a) of Section 2673.1, Section 2695.2, 2800, 2801, 2802, 806, or 2810, subdivision (b) of Section 2929, or Section 3095, 6310, 6311, or 6399.7. SEE [AAA] LWDA Demand for Civil Penalties

Status Updates

NOTICE OF MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT

TO PLAINTIFF AND HIS ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE;

INTRODUCTION

Defendant s Swift Transportation Company (now known as Knight-Swift Transportation Holdings Inc. (" Swift") and Central Refrigerated Service, LLC (now known as Swift Refrigerated Service , LLC) (" Central Refrigerated") (together, “Defendants") ask the Court to end the latest chapter in Walter Ellis' s ongoing campaign of harassment against Central Refrigerated and its officers, employees and affiliates and promptly dismiss his frivolous claims with prejudice.

As if this were not enough, Mr. Ellis’ claims also fail for other reasons. First, although all of Mr. Eilis's claims here are subject to limitations periods of four years or less and, according to his own allegations, Central Refrigerated terminated him in 2008, he did not file his complaint until February 2018, ten years later. Accordingly, his claims are time-barred. Second, to the extent that Mr. Ellis' claims against Swift are not barred by res judicata or applicable statutes of limitations, they fail because Mr. Ellis has alleged no facts to support them. Indeed by alleging that Swift acquired Central Refrigerated in 2013, long after the events of which he complains. Mr. Ellis effectively admits that he has no claims against Swift.

This allegation is false and is Defendant’s fraudulent misrepresentation of dates in which SWIFT purchased Central, see:

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

The Compensation Committee is currently comprised of Duane Acklie, Porter Hall, and Gordan W. Winburne. No current member of the Compensation Committee is or has been an officer or employee of the Company. Prior to our initial public offering, our Compensation Committee consisted of Jerry Moyes and Earl H. Scudder. Mr. Scudder resigned as a director and member of the Compensation Committee on September 19, 2003. Mr. Moyes ceased to be a member of the Compensation Committee on December 11, 2003. From time to time, we have engaged in transactions with Mr. Moyes, parties affiliated with Mr. Moyes, and parties affiliated with Mr. Scudder.

http://sec.edgar-online.com/central-freight-lines-inc/def-14a-proxy-statement-definitive/2004/04/23/Section13.aspx

Other information in Plaintiff’s possession will indicate and prove the fraud committed by Mr. Moyes and his affiliates, see:

http://aaaarbitrationcomplaint.blogspot.com/2017/09/swift-transportation-co-inc-central.html
http://aaaarbitrationcomplaint.blogspot.com/2016/03/complaints-regarding-refrigerated.html

My Top Videos

I am text block. Click edit button to change this text. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

Pin It on Pinterest

X