Re: Allen v. United States, 588 F. Supp. 247 – CourtListener.com

[grarpamp]

> https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1679598/allen-v-united-states/
> I found this legal decision about 15 years ago.  A Physics education
> disguised as a court case.

Your governments treat you as test fodder and slaves.
So fuck them back... grow some balls, rise up together off your
collective asses and sue all nuclear test govenments into bankruptcy
for increase in global background radiation statistically provable
increasing in everyone's cancers.
Collect your damages against the "Government's" assets... they were
paid for with money stolen from your family, so they're yours anyways.
Want to make even more money...
Government is not immune from all these crimes if you rise together
and call their bluff there too...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity_(nuclear_test)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tort
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robbery
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extortion
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraud
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_laundering
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possession_of_stolen_goods
and more...

You don't even have to get physical like below,
just crapflood the courts with cases for fun and profit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rebellions_in_the_United_States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_incidents_of_civil_unrest_in_the_United_States


XI. FINDINGS OF ULTIMATE FACT

The court finds that defendant failed to adequately warn the
plaintiffs or their predecessors of known or foreseeable long-range
biological consequences to adults and to children from exposure to
fallout radiation from open-air atomic testing and that such failure
was negligent.

The court finds that defendant failed to measure adequately and
concurrently with open-air atomic testing the actual fallout in
communities and population centers near the Nevada Test Site on a
person-specific basis, or its equivalent, and that such failure was
negligent.

The court finds that contemporaneously with atmospheric atomic testing
the defendant failed to adequately and continuously inform individuals
and communities near the test site of well-known and inexpensive
methods to prevent, minimize or mitigate the known or foreseeable
long-range biological consequences of exposure to radioactive fallout,
and that such failure was negligent.

The court finds that as a direct and proximate result of such
negligent failures, individually and in combination, defendant
unreasonably placed plaintiffs or their predecessors at risk of injury
and as a direct and proximate result of such failures that each
prevailing plaintiff designated in Part X, beginning at page 446,
suffered injury for which the sums set opposite their respective names
should be paid.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

This opinion in its entirety shall constitute the Findings of Fact
required by Rule 52 F.R.C.P. Based on the findings of specific and
ultimate facts set forth above in this opinion and for the reasons set
forth herein, the court concludes that each of the *448 designated
prevailing plaintiffs (claimants) named in Part X beginning at page
446 above is entitled to judgment against the United States in the
amount set forth in that section. As to the remaining plaintiffs of
the bellwether group of 24, this court concludes as a matter of law
that the evidence is insufficient in each instance to demonstrate with
the requisite weight that the defendant's negligence proximately
caused the condition of which each complains and further concludes
that the United States is entitled to a Judgment of Dismissal as to
each of them.

Since the legal questions dealt with in the 24 bellwether cases have
significance to those cases individually and to the remaining cases
affecting more than 1,100 plaintiffs, the court will certify in the
judgments to be entered that each judgment shall be entered as final
pursuant to Rule 54(b), terminating this action as to each plaintiff,
and that an appeal shall be immediately available as to each of the
plaintiffs in the 24 cases, there being no just cause or reason for
delay.

In the event timely appeal is taken from such Judgment or Judgments,
this court will stay consideration of the remaining issues in the
pending cases while awaiting the outcome of the appeal.

Attorneys for prevailing parties shall prepare and submit proposed
judgments in accordance herewith and do so within twenty (20) days.