The text was rearranged during the transferring of the original document to web design.
Please fill out form if you want to participate in a class action/and or individual complaint
The appeal to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, Atlanta, Georgia was rewritten and amended because of Judge Middlebrook’s denial of my complaint and his highlighting “spiritual being.” Judge Middlebrooks was the catalyst for this writer to change the course of legal case history of submitting litigation against the alcohol beverage industry. Spirituality had never been addressed and the Constitution of the United States, Amendment #1 had never been considered as an argument against the alcohol beverage industry, until now. If presented legally and constitutionally correct, spirituality could be the explosive lynch pin. Combined with all other facts pertaining to the negative contents and results accruing from addictive drug/poison, ethyl alcohol, society and the alcoholic may have the answer to be successful in the courts litigating the alcohol beverage industry.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
MIAMI DIVISION
WILLIAM MACDOWELL,
Plaintiff,
vs.
AMERICAN BRANDS, INC, et al,
Defendant
98-14211 CIV - MIDDLEBROOKS
NOTICE TO APPEAL
Plaintiff is filing a NOTICE TO APPEAL to the UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS, ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, ATLANTA, GEORGIA.
1- Plaintiff acknowledges receiving the Court’s ORDER DENYING APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS and Plaintiff’s Complaint DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
2- Plaintiff was granted to procede in forma pauperis on March 16 1998 by Judge Kenneth L. Ryskamp. Judge Middlebrooks (note 1, page 2) addresses VICTORY OVER ADDICTION INTERNATIONAL, INC., amended complaint filed on January 8, 1998 and Denial of In Forma Pauperis, dated February 4, 1998. Complaint, S.D. Fla. #97-14489-CIV-Ryskamp. The date of March 16, 1998 supercedes February 4, 1998 as stated in Judge Ryskamp’s OMNIBUS ORDER. Plaintiff submitted to the Court the necessary document(s) for Judge Ryskamp to rescind his denial of February 4, 1998 and granted Plaintiff In Forma Pauperis, March 16, 1998.
Plaintiff filed a NOTICE OF APPEAL to the 11th CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS March 12,1998. The Court refers to Amended Complaint, “word for word” as the Class Action Complaint and amended Complaint. Plaintiff suggests that the Court review RELIEF REQUESTED of the Class Action, Amended Complaint and the Complaint, “at issue here”. The Complaint at issue is not exactly the same. The Court Clerk at U.S. DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT, WEST PALM BEACH informed the Plaintiff to include both Complaints (Class Action and Individual) together, using the same case number, 97-14489-CIV-RYSKAMP. Plaintiff was also told to title the Individual Complaint as an Amended Complaint. This was not the intention of the Plaintiff. Plaintiff requested the Individual Complaint be given a new case number. The County Clerk advised differently. Therefore, when Plaintiff filed a NOTICE OF APPEAL, both cases went to the Appeal Court. When the information documents arrived from the 11th Circuit of Appeals, Plaintiff noticed an error had been made and immediately made a Motion to a Voluntary Dismissal of the Appeal Without Prejudice. This was granted June 23, 1998. Hence, the Plaintiff filed the Complaint being Appealed for on this date. 98-14211 CIV-Middlebrooks.
3- (a) Plaintiff argues that the Defendants manufacture a product(s) that has violated Plaintiff’s Constitutional and Civil Rights. Alcoholics are considered people with a disability and a handicap that have Constitutional inalienable rights, ie: “Freedom of Religion”. Plaintiff’s Complaint addresses, only “A STRICT PRODUCT LIABILITY COMPLAINT” with the emphasis on the addictive drug/poison, ethyl alcohol and his loss of “spiritual being.” Plaintiff also includes other damages in the Complaint. Loss of spiritual being is the number one most important loss which is protected by the United States Constitution. Addiction is very much a spiritual disease that the alcoholic suffers from. The Plaintiff refers to himself, individually, because he is an alcoholic. Plaintiff, because he is an alcoholic, is not considered to be the “ordinary consumer”. Plaintiff represents himself as being a victim and example of the typical alcoholic who has indulged or is still actively drinking the addictive drug/poison, etyhyl alcohol. The cause of the Plaintiff’s alcoholism is the addictive drug/poison, ethyl alcohol. Ethyl alcohol is deleterious to the Plaintiff’s, spiritual being, health and well being before, now and in the future. Plaintiff will always be an alcoholic till the day he dies, possibly, prematurely due to the drug/poison, ethyl alcohol. Alcoholism is an insidious disease, so much so, that the Plaintiff has to be on guard at all times when shopping for products that may contain alcohol. Plaintiff cannot ingest any product, ie: mouthwash, cough medicine, etc., that contains alcohol. Plaintiff, again, is not “the ordinary consumer.” As cited in all cases against the alcohol beverage industry.
(b) Plaintiff’s religious liberty, spiritual being, freedom of conscience is a precious,fundamental and inalienable right. A society is only as just and free as its smallest minorities and least popular communities. Religous/spiritual liberty is founded on the inviolable dignity of the person. It is not based on science or social usefulness and is not dependent on the shifting moods of majorities and governments (Williamsburg Charter).
Every individual is a spiritual being! The Bible says, “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?” (I Corinthians 3:16).
4- (a) Plaintiff does not consider the contents of the Complaint a baseless lawsuit, vexatious, and meritless.
The Complaint is arranged in a logical format, the text unfolds an examination of how “ordinary knowledge common to the community” and “the ordinary consumer” does not apply to the alcoholic. The Complaint indicates that the Defendants should be liable for the costs attributed to alcohol because it makes an “addictive product, a drug/poison, which striped the Plaintiff of his spiritual being. Plaintiff bolsters the theories with an exploration of the negative impact of alcoholism on a typical alcoholic, his or her family, and the community at large. Plaintiff weighs accepted theories of alcoholism against the stand taken by the Defendants and the alcohol beverage industry to render an intriguing assessment of a provacative and topical subject. Plaintiff has framed the Complaint with clear examples, well-supported supplementry materials, and personal reflections of Plaintiff’s experiences which create an intelligent and well balanced treatise.
(b)The Court is also concerned about the waste of judicial and private resources. Below are facts and reasons why the Court should not be concerned:
“The alcohol industry political action committees have already given members of Congress $1 million in the past year. It is hardly a surprise that alcohol will receive mere public service-announcement status in the illegal drug campaign, although alcohol is more dangerous and costly to society: Every day, on average 11,318 American young people (12 to 20 years of age) try alcohol for the first time.” “Alcohol is a factor in three leading causes of death for those 15 to 24 years old. Two to three times as many teenagers and young adults die in alcohol-related traffic crashes as from drugs.” “Alcohol kills about 100,000 people annually at a cost to taxpayers of about $99 billion a year.” (Hillary Abramson, Marin Institute for the Prevention of Alcohol and Other Drug Problems in California).
Plaintiff cites other relevant statistics:
Alcohol is a key factor in up to: 68% of manslaughters; 62% of assaults; 54% of murders/attempted murders; 48% of robberies and 44% of burglaries.
Among jail inmates; 42% convicted of rape. There is a cost to the tax payers of approximately $25,000/year to house, feed and treat medical problems for each inmate).
In 1987, 64% of all child abuse and neglected cases in New York City were associated with AOD abuse.
Alcoholism and Alcohol-Related Problems
A SOBERING LOOK
· Alcohol, the most widely used psychoactive drug in the United States, has unique pharmacological effects on the person drinking it
· Alcohol contributes to 100,000 deaths annually, making it the third leading cause of preventable mortality in the US, after tobacco and diet/activity patterns
· Among 9,216 deaths attributed to non-medical use of other drugs in 1995, 39% also involved alcohol
· In 1992, more than seven percent of the population ages 18 years and older--nearly 13.8 million Americans--had problems with drinking, including 8.1 million people who are alcoholic. Almost three times as many men (9.8 million) as women (3.9 million) were problem drinkers, and prevalence was highest for both sexes in the 18-to-29-years-old age group About 43% of US adults--76 million people--have been exposed to alcoholism in the family: they grew up with or married an alcoholic or a problem drinker or had a blood relative who was ever an alcoholic or problem drinker,
· 64% of high school seniors report that they have been drunk; more than 31% say that have had five or more drinks in a row during the last two weeks People who begin drinking before age 15 are four times more likely to develop alcoholism than those who begin at age 21From 1985 to 1992, the economic costs of alcoholism and alcohol-related problems rose 42% to $148 billion. Two-thirds of the costs related to lost productivity, either due to alcohol-related illness (45.7%) or premature death (21.2%). Most of the remaining costs were in the form of health care expenditures to treat alcohol use disordersand the medical consquences of alcohol consumption (12.7%), property and administrative costs of alcohol-related motor vehicle crashes (9.2%), and various additional costs of alcohol-related crime (8.6%). Based on inflation and population growth, the estimated costs for 1995 total $166.5 billion
· Nearly one-fourth of all persons admitted to general hospitals have alcohol problems or are undiagnosed alcoholics being treated for the consequences of their drinking On average, untreated alcoholics incur general health care costs at least 100% higher than those of nonalcoholics, and this disparity may exist as long as 10 years before entry into treatment
· Based on victim reports, each year 183,000 (37%) rapes and sexual assaults involve alcohol use by the offender, as do just over 197,000 (15%) of robberies, about 661,000 (27%) aggravated assaults, and nearly 1.7 million (25%) simple assaults
· Alcohol is typically found in the offender, victim or both in about half of all homicides and serious assaults, as well as in a high percentage of sex-related crimes, robberies, and incidents of domestic violence, and alcohol-related problems are disproportionately found among both juvenile and adult criminal offenders
· Fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS), which can occur when women drink during pregnancy, is the leading known environmental cause of mental retardation in the Western World
A PREVENTABLE, TREATABLE DISEASE
Prevention:
· Alcohol-related problems are not likely to be reduced by strategies involving single interventions directed solely at the individual; economic, political, social and environmental forces that work together to encourage and perpetuate these problems must also be addressed
· Price increases on alcoholic beverages may be especially effective at reducing addictive consumption by younger, poorer, and less educated consumers, while information on the long-term health impacts of drinking may have a greater effect on addictive consumption by older, richer, and more educated consumers
· School-based prevention programs that focus on social influences, such as peer resistance training or attempts to change perceived norms about alcohol, show more promise for changing alcohol use patterns than programs that emphasize the development of personal capabilities such as self-esteem, skill in making decisions and solving problems, and understanding how alcohol use can interfere with personal values and goals
· Nations banning the advertising of distilled spirits, compared to nations with no bans, had approximately 16% lower alcohol consumption; countries banning beer and wine ads had 11% lower alcohol consumption than those prohibiting only the advertising of spirits. The reductions in motor vehicle fatality rates were 10% and 23% respectively Treatment:
· 3.4 million Americans--approximately 1.6% of the population ages 12 and older--received treatment for alcoholism and alcohol-related problems in 1994; treatment peaked among people between the ages 26-34
· A study examining the relative cost effectiveness of 33 specific treatment modalities for alcoholism suggested that more costly treatments are not necessarily more effective; of the six treatment modalities classified as having "good evidence of effect," all appear in the minimal-, low-, or medium-low-cost categories
· Providing heavy drinkers who are not alcohol-dependent with self-help materials relating to alcoholism can, by itself, be an effective method of brief intervention ENVIRONMENTAL INFLUENCES
· Parenting practices, parental alcohol use, and peer drinking can influence a person's alcohol use and the associated problems that can stem from drinking
· Content analyses of alcohol advertisements on television show that the ads link drinking with highly valued personal attributes such as socialibility, elegance, and physical attractiveness, and with desirable outcomes such as success, relaxation, romance, and adventure
· Alcohol advertising may influence adolescents to be more favorably predisposed to drinking
· NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES
· On Health:
· The regular consumption of large amounts of alcohol (defined as more than three drinks per day) is undesirable from the standpoint of health for almost all people and drinking low-to-moderate amounts can be desirable or undesirable, depending on individual characteristics
· Although there are fewer deaths from alcohol-related causes than from cancer or heart disease, alcohol-related deaths tend to occur at much younger ages
· Studies of suicide victims in the general population show that about 20% of such suicide victims are alcoholic
· Heavy and chronic drinking
--can harm virtually every organ and system in the body
--is the single most important cause of illness and death from liver disease (alcoholic hepatitis and cirrhosis)
--is associated with cardiovascular diseases such as cardiomyopathy, hypertension, arrhythmias, and stroke
--contributes to approximately 65% of all cases of pancreatitis
--depresses the immune system and results in a predisposition to infectious diseases, including respiratory infections, pneumonia, and tuberculosis
--increases risk for cancer, with an estimated 2-4% of all cancer cases thought to be caused either directly or indirectly by alcohol. The strongest link between alcohol and cancer involves cancers of the upper digestive tract, including the esophagus, the mouth, the pharynx, and the larynx. Less consistent data link alcohol consumption and cancers of the liver, breast and colon
--can lead to inadequate functioning of the testes and ovaries, resulting in hormonal deficiencies, sexual dysfunction and infertility
--is related to a higher rate of early menopause and a higher frequency of menstrual irregularities (duration, flow, or both) in women
· Each year 4,000 to 12,000 babies are born with the physical signs and intellectual disabilities associated with FAS, and thousands more experience the somewhat lesser disabilities of fetal alcohol effects
· An association has been established in both homosexual and heterosexual populations between alcohol use, drug use and behavior that increases the risk for contracting HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases, but underlying processes and mechanisms that explain this relationship have not been definitively identified On the Family:
· Separated and divorced men and women were three times as likely as married men and women to say they had been married to an alcoholic or problem drinker
· An estimated 6.6 million children under the age of 18 years live in households with at least one alcoholic parent Unintentional Deaths and Injuries:
· 41% of all traffic fatalities (the leading cause of accidental death) are alcohol-related alcoholics are nearly five times more likely than others to die in motor vehicle crashes One study showed that half of all boating fatalities had a blood alcohol content (BAC) of .04; BAC's of .10 or more were found in 31% of the fatalities
· Alcoholics are 16 times more likely than others to die in falls, and 10 times more likely
to become fire or burn victims
· Estimates suggest that alcohol is associated withbetween 47% and 65% of adult drownings
· Up to 40% of industrial fatalities and 47% of industrial injuries can be linked to alcohol consumption and alcoholism CONSUMPTION PATTERNS & PRACTICES
· From 1994 to 1995, annual per capita consumption of alcohol in the US declined 1.8% to 2.17 gallons, the lowest it has been since 1964
· Two-thirds of the population drink, but 10% of all drinkers (those who drink most heavily) drink half of all alcohol consumed
GENDER DIFFERENCES
· Study findings suggest that women metabolize alcohol less efficiently than men, a difference that leads to higher blood alcohol concentrations in women over a shorter period of time. This difference may make women more vulnerable than men to alcohol-induced liver damage
· Alcohol-related problems more prominent for women than men include serious reproductive and sexual dysfunctions; rapid development of dependence; more serious liver disease among those who are patients; victimization by others, particularly spouses; and sexual victimization
Compare the cost the Court is concerned about to the above cost to society. The cost to the judicial and private resources is insignificant compared to the past and ongoing cost the Defendants and their product(s), the addictive drug/poison, ethyl alcohol, has had on our country, the American family and the judicial system.
(c) The Court, page 2, II. states, “...attempts to craft a cause of action...”, page 2, II. Plaintiff’s Complaint is not an attempt to skillfully misdirect the Court, but to truthfully, honestly and sincerely describe, comprehensively, an addictive drug/poison product(s) that has plagued our country (and the world), not for the benefit of the American people, but for taxes, profits and personal gain. Plaintiff alleges the Defendant’s product(s), the drug/poison, ethyl alcohol has been and still is the cause of a form of mass genocide in America and the rest of the world.
5- The Court makes the declaration that the Pennsylvania court addressed the heart of the Plaintiff’s contentions when it specifically held that “the public’s knowledge of the dangers of alcohol cannot be so diminished by advertising as to render the product defective without a warning.” Id. at 849, Fn.3., page 3, lll. Advertising and labeling are not “the heart” of the the product, ethyl alcohol, the drug/poison being dangerous or defective without a warning. Although, the “ordinary consumer”, (the Plaintiff (alcoholic) not being the “ordinary consumer”) knows very little, if nothing at all, of the dangers of the drug/poison ethyl alcohol, as addressed in the Complaint at issue. Plaintiff also argues the Court’s “...prima facie elements of a strict products liabilty claim against a manufacturer...”. Plaintiff contends that the contents (body) of the Complaint addresses each and every prima facie element the Court proposes as Florida law.
Being an alcoholic is not synonymous with being “The ordinary consumer”. The definition that the National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence, Inc.(NCADD) describes the difference between the Plaintiff and “the ordinary consumer.” Plaintiff explores the prima facie elements and refers to NCADD’s definition of disease. Also see “Adverse consequences”, Definition of Alcoholism (NCADD). “Spiritual” is mentioned.
“Disease” means an involuntary disability. It represents the sum of the abnormal phenomena displayed by a group of individuals. These phenomena are associated with a specified common set of characteristics by which these individuals differ from the norm, and which places them at a disadvantage.
HON v. STROH BREWERY CO.; GARRISON v. HEUBLEIN, INC.(the Heublein case also refers to “...and is especially dangerous to alcoholics...”). The Court is relying on the theory of, “common knowledge”, “ordinary consumer”, “advertising”, and “labeling” to structure their case against Plaintiff’s Complaint. Plaintiff discounts each of these theories as being irrelevant to himself, being an alcoholic, but finds relevant, ”...and is especially dangerous to alcoholics...”. Other cases pertaining to the alcohol beverage industry using this language are not refering to the alcoholic since the Plaintiff is not considered “THE ORDINARY CONSUMER”. Plaintiff alleges there is not an alcoholic beverage industry case that references the United States Constitution’s First Amendment, Freedom Of Religion and the alcoholic losing his/her “spiritual being.” Plaintiff considers this Complaint to be a legal precedent.
The Distilled Spirits Council of the United States (DISCUS) discloses THAT ALCOHOL IS PHARMACOLOGICALLY CLASSIFIED AS A DRUG.
The definition of pharmacologically: “The science dealing with the effect of drugs on living organisms”, Webster’s New World Dictionary.
The Distilled Spirits Council of the United States has determined that 69% of American adults drink alcohol (children and young adults who drink alcohol are not included). 90% of the adults who drink do so responsibly. 10% do so irresponsibly (DISCUS statistics). Just how many Americans drink and how many are children and young adults? (To add to DISCUS statistics there are approximately 2 million members of Alcoholics Anonymous and 95,000, plus, groups. There are approximately 10.5 million people suffering from the disease of alcoholism, etc.). DISCUS statistics do not include children or young adults. If alcohol is a drug, being an addictive drug/poison, deleterious to a segment of society (alcoholics), and the Plaintiff is an alcoholic, the drug should be a prescription drug as any drug that is dangerous if not taken as prescribed.
6- The Plaintiff has been an alcoholic since 1947, age seventeen and has a chronic disease, an addiction called alcoholism. Alcoholism and the loss of Plaintiff’s spiritual being are the symptoms of the addictive drug/poison, ethyl alcohol. Plaintiff’s active alcoholism includes, but not limited to, approximately 15 hospitalizations due to alcoholism (1st alcohol related hospitalization was age 17); 10, plus times, incarcerated for alcohol related offenses; while in the Navy, at least 17 Captain’s Masts and 2 court martials with incarcerations for alcohol related offenses; 2 DWI offenses, numerous automobile accidents due to alcohol; lost job opportunities; lost a family and migrated to the New York Bowery living in a $2.00/day “chicken coop”, etc. All because Plaintiff ingested the addictive drug/poison, ethyl alcohol.
The Court has adopted the legal theory of Dauphin Deposit Bank and Trust Company v. Toyota Motor Corp.., 596 A.2d 845, 849 (Pa. Super. 1991). “...on the grounds that alcoholic beverages are not unreasonably dangerous...”. (Judge Ryskamp writes in his OMNIBUS ORDER, “...AND IS ESPECIALLY DANGEROUS TO ALCOHOLICS...” The Court also references Garrison v. Heublin, Inc., 673 F.2d 189, 192 (7th Cir. 1982) (applying Illinois law) “The dangers of the use of alcohol are common knowledge to such an extent that the product cannot objectively be considered to be unreasonably dangerous.” Plaintiff, once again, refers to Judge Ryskamp’s statement, “...AND IS ESPECIALLY DANGEROUS TO ALCOHOLICS...”.
The reason ethyl alcohol, the drug/poison is dangerous to the Plaintiff (an alcoholic) is because he suffers from a chronic disease that is spiritual, mental, emotional, physical and has the threat of immanent death.
Plaintiff started drinking in 1947. Plaintiff became alcoholic at the age of seventeen. There are children who are twelve years old and younger who are alcoholics already involved in criminal activity and many are patients in alcohol treatment facilities. Young people are dying of alcohol poisoning at colleges around the country because of “binge drinking.” Does Pennsylvania and Illinois law, that the Court addresses, pertain to the children as well as the young people of America as being “the ordinary consumer and have the common knowledge of the community?” At seventeen, the Plaintiff knew nothing of the contents of this Complaint and the many residual damages that inevitably became a reality from drinking the drug/poison, ethyl alcohol.
JUDGE RYSKAMP’S OMNIBUS ORDER Of February 4, 1998 declared, page 2, B. Analysis: “Good whiskey is not unreasonalably dangerous merely because it will make some people drunk, AND IS ESPECIALLY DANGEROUS TO ALCOHOLICS...”. Judge Ryskamp also declares, “GOOD TOBACCO IS NOT UNREASONABLY DANGEROUS MERELY BECAUSE THE EFFECTS OF SMOKING MAY BE HARMFUL; BUT TOBACCO CONTAINING SOMETHING LIKE MARIJUANA MAY BE BE UNREASONABLY DANGEROUS.” Judge Ryskamp then goes on to elaborate, with his analogies, about, “...good butter...”. Plaintiff reminds the Court that Florida was awarded $11 billion for the reason tobacco is harmful, addictive and has cost Florida millions in Medicaid costs.
7- Plaintiff’s factual allegations are based on fifty two years of being an alcoholic, active and abstaining from drinking alcohol, having gained invaluable information and experience attending an accredited school to become an alcohol/addiction counselor, facilitating DWI offenders in New York and DUI offenders in Florida (as a vounteer), a member of Alcoholics Anonymous since 1959, experiencing the depths of alcoholism for thirty two years (Plaintiff has been sober for nineteen years at present)and with an honest burning desire to abstain from the addictive drug/poison,ethyl alcohol. A desire and abstinence was first and foremost in the process of recovery for the Plaintiff to regain his spiritual being.
8- The Court states in “I”, page 2, “...beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief.” The United States Constitution, 1st Amendment, “Freedom of Religion”, supports and protects the Plaintiff’s spiritual being claim. The Defendants, by law, cannot deprive the Plaintiff of his rights under Constitutional law with the sale of their addictive drug/poison product(s), which caused the Plaintiff to lose his spiritual being.
9- Plaintiff never considered or regarded this Complaint to be “Individual”, but, unequivocally,and primarily, a “Strict Product Liability” Complaint. The Relief sought after, pages 33-34 and 35 does not reflect a monetary award for the Plaintiff. Rather all monies, if awarded, would be donated to Victory Over Addiction International, Inc. to serve children, families and society intoto. This Complaint is not self serving and was never intended to be. Please compare this Complaint’s Relief with the Relief in the Class Action Complaint, S.D. Fla. #97-14489-CIV-RYSKAMP, filed November 7, 1997. Both Complaints request the same Relief except for the monetary awards, who is to receive it and possibly a few other items.
Plaintiff recognizes that the Complaint has not addressed “legal theory”. There does not seem to be case law in favor of a plaintiff who was successful litigating against the alcohol beverage industry. Plaintiff requests the Court to consider Plaintiff’s Constitutional rights and the relationship between the addictive drug/poison, ethyl alcohol and the loss of Plaintiff’s spiritual being including the fact that Plaintiff is not the “ordinary consumer”, and because of Defendant’s product(s), caused him to become addicted to Defendant’s product(s) and caused him to aquire a disease.
“Alcoholism is a primary, chronic disease with genetic, psychosocial, and environmental factors influencing its development and manifestations. The disease is often progressive and fatal. It is characterized by continuous or periodic: impaired control over drinking, preoccupation with the drug alcohol despite adverse consequences, and distortions in thinking, most notably denial.” (NCADD-Definition of Alcoholism)
10- The Plaintiff had his spiritual being restored by attending the foremost and acknowledged spiritual program for sobriety, AA (Alcoholics Anonymous). Plaintiff became a member of AA in 1959. It wasn’t until 1979 that the Plaintiff immersed his total being into the program of AA. The twelve steps of AA are based on humility and spirituality. The simplest definition of humility is the one given by St. Theresa: “Humility is truth.” The first step of the twelve steps was the beginning for the Plaintiff toward experiencing humility.
The first step of AA: WE ADMITTED WE WERE POWERLESS OVER ALCOHOL THAT OUR LIVES HAD BECOME UNMANAGEABLE. This step of admission is the only step that doesn’t reflect spirituality. The eleven other steps do. Therefore, by living the twelve steps, to the best of Plaintiff’s ability on a daily basis, and abstaining from the addictive drug/poison, ethyl alcohol, the Plaintiff’s spiritual being has become a reality once again.
The following is an excellent explanation of the Plaintiff’s loss of spiritual being.
SPIRITUAL EMPTINESS
As the addictive personality gains more control and addicts lose more of their ability to influence their own thoughts and behavior, there is a spiritual deadening. My definition of spiritual means being connected in a meaningful way to the world around us. The feeling of belonging and being an important part of the world is lost as addiction progresses. The sense of knowing oneself and one’s importance drifts further and further away.
Addiction is very much a spiritual disease. Everybody has the ability to connect with the soul and spirit of others. Because addiction is a direct assault against Self, it’s a direct attack on the spirit or soul of the person suffering from an addiction. A person’s spirit produces life; the goal of addiction is spiritual death.
The longer the addiction goes on, the more spiritually isolated the person becomes. This is the saddest and most frightening aspect of addiction. Sunsets, smiles, laughter, support from others and other things that nourish our spirits come to mean less as acting out becomes more important. Because addiction blocks a person’s ability to effectively connect with his or her own spirit, there is little chance to connect with the spirit of others. Relationships with others become more superficial as the illness progresses. Addicts stay isolated or turn to the presence of other addicts who offer companionship and little or no fear of confrontation.
As addiction progresses, spiritual deadening deepens. This may be the most dangerous aspect of addiction. For recovery, there must be a recommitment to the nurturing of one’s spirit. The further one moves away from the Self, the harder it is to reestablish a healing relationship. in the beginning of the addictive process, the person grasped the addiction in an attempt to nurture life, spirit, and the Self in the process of chasing perfection. Many recovering addicts firmly grasp the spiritual aspect of recovery because most are extremely grateful to have such a precious gift returned: the Self, a spiritual awareness, and the ability to connect with others in a meaningful, nurturing way. (The Addictive Personality by Craig Nakken)
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, WILLIAM MACDOWELL, respectfully requests the Court to reevaluate Plaintiff’s Complaint and reverse JUDGE MIDDLEBOOK’S ORDER DENYING APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS and Plaintiff’s Complaint DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Plaintiff requests the Court to allow the Complaint proceed In Forma Pauperis as granted by Judge Ryskamp, March 16, 1998. Plaintiff also respectfully requests the Court to allow Plaintiff’s Complaint to proceed Pro Se until Plaintiff can retain an attorney.
WILLIAM MACDOWELL______________________________
STUART, FLORIDA 34997
DATE: 9/15/98
Before you read further, let’s examine “spiritual being” beginning with my appeal:
What is meant by “ORDINARY KNOWLEDGE COMMON TO THE COMMUNITY?” Who is the “ORDINARY CONSUMER?” After reviewing a number of cases against the alcohol beverage industry that are cited by the courts, these terms are classic throughout. Other important factors come into play when asserting a strict product claim against a manufacturer of a product that must show that: (1) the product was in a defective condition when it left the hands of the manufacturer; and (2) the defect was a proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injury.