DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS

ABORTION INDUSTRY IN MELBOURNE, FLORIDA
LAWSUITS
RANEY V AWARE WOMAN
DOCKET / CHRONOLOGICAL FILE
DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION

MEREDITH T. RANEY, JR.,
Plaintiff,
v.
AWARE WOMAN CENTER
FOR CHOICE, INC., a Florida corporation,
EDWARD W. WINDLE, JR., and
PATRICIA B. WINDLE
Defendants.

CASE NO.: 97-1197-CV-ORL-19B

DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS

Defendants, AWARE WOMAN CENTER FOR CHOICE, INC., a Florida corporation, EDWARD W. WINDLE, JR., and PATRICIA B. WINDLE, by and through their undersigned attorneys, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b), hereby file their Motion to Dismiss on the ground that Plaintiff lacks standing to sue under 18 U.S.C. §248, known as the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), and state:

1. Defendant, AWARE WOMAN CENTER FOR CHOICE, INC. (hereinafter "AWARE WOMAN"), is a Florida corporation with its principal place of business located at 1564 Dixie Way, Melbourne, Florida. (Windle Affidavit ¶ 1). Defendant, AWARE WOMAN, is a facility which provides reproductive health services as described in 18 U.S.C. §248(c)(1). (Windle Affidavit ¶ 3). The facility is protected by a thirty-six foot buffer zone as described in Madsen v. Women's Health Center, 114 S. Ct. 2516, 129 L. Ed. 2d 593 (1994), however, all authorized facility reproductive health services are provided within the facility itself by AWARE WOMAN employees, and not in the buffer zone. (Windle Affidavit ¶ 4).

2. Defendant, EDWARD W. WINDLE, JR., is a citizen of the United States and a resident of Brevard County, Florida. He is a shareholder, officer, and administrator of Defendant, AWARE WOMAN.

3. Defendant, PATRICIA B. WINDLE, is a citizen of the United States and a resident of Brevard County, Florida. She is a stockholder, officer and administrator of Defendant, AWARE WOMAN.

4. Plaintiff, MEREDITH T. RANEY, JR., is a citizen of the United States and a resident of Brevard County, Florida. Plaintiff is an anti-abortion activist who participates in anti-abortion activities at and around the premises of Defendant, AWARE WOMAN, including inside the thirty-six foot buffer zone in direct violation of the injunction issued by the trial court in Operation Rescue v. Women's Health Center, Inc., in accordance with the United States Supreme Court decision in Madsen v. Women's Health Center, 114 S. Ct. 2516, 129 L. Ed. 2d 593 (1994). (Windle Affidavit ¶ 6). Plaintiff is not an employee of AWARE WOMAN nor is he an agent or representative of AWARE WOMAN authorized to provide reproductive health services on behalf of AWARE WOMAN. (Windle Affidavit ¶ 5).

5. The jurisdiction alleged in the Complaint in this action is based entirely on 18 U.S.C. §248 (FACE), in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 133 1, and 28 U.S.C. §1343(a)(4).

6. FACE prohibits certain activities, including but not limited to, force, threat of force, physical obstruction, intimidation, or injury, which interferes with a person's or class of persons' attempt to obtain or provide reproductive health services. Reproductive health services are defined as follows:

The term "reproductive health services" means reproductive health services provided in a hospital, clinic, physician's office, or other facility, and includes medical, surgical, counseling or referral services relating to the human reproductive system, including services relating to pregnancy or the termination of a pregnancy. 18 U.S.C. §248(e)(5).

7. Congress' purpose in enacting FACE was to establish federal criminal penalties and civil remedies "for certain violent, threatening, obstructive, and destructive conduct" which interferes with persons seeking to obtain or provide reproductive health services. 18 U.S.C. §248 (West 1997) (Congressional Statement of Purpose). FACE was necessitated by the violent and obstructive conduct and activities of anti-abortion groups and activists who demonstrate in close proximity to facilities which provide reproductive health services, such as Defendant AWARE WOMAN.

8. Plaintiff does not belong to any class of person protected by FACE and has no standing to bring this action under 18 U.S.C. 248.

9. Defendants have agreed to pay its attorneys a reasonable fee for defending this action.

WHEREFORE, Defendants respectfully move that an Order be entered dismissing the action because Plaintiff lacks standing and awarding reasonable attorneys' fees and costs in defense of this action pursuant to §57.105, Florida Statutes (1997).

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished by U. S. Mail to Christopher F. Sapp, Esq., P.0. Box 1012, Lehigh Acres, FL 33970, this 21st day of October, 1997.

FRESE, NASH & TORPY, P.A.
BY:VINCENT G. TORPY, JR. <signed>
Florida Bar No. 394882
930 S. Harbor City Blvd., Suite 505
Melbourne, FL 32901
(407) 984-3300
Attorney for Defendants