STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA i 8 6858 8 8? 5 DURHAM Count in The General Court Of Justice District Superior Court Division Name Of Plaintiff Moshe Eyal and Itay Livneh Address SUMMONS 190 P?m?Sh St" Ste" 300 El ALIAS AND PLURIES summons (ASSESS FEE) City State, Zip Durham .. VERSUS cs. tA?i, Rules 3 and 4 Name OfDefendant(s) . f: @ate Original Summons Issued The City of Durham and '8 10/31/2018 3 i 65% Date(s) Subsequent Summons{es) Issued C.J. Davis in her Of?cial Capacity as Chief of Police To Each Of The Defendan?s) Named Below: Name And Address or Defendant 1 Name And Address Of Defendant 2 City of Durham, North Carolina Davis, Chief of Police c/o City Manager, Thomas J. Bon?eld Durham Police Department 101 City Hall Plaza 505 West Chapel Hill St. Durham NC 27701 Durham NC 27701 You have been sued! These papers are legal documents, DO NOT throw these papers out! You have to respond within 30 days. You may want to talk with a lawyer about your case as soon as possible, and, if needed, speak with someone who reads English and can translate these papers! {Se ha entablado un proceso civil en su contra! Estos papeles son documentos legales. estos papeles! Tiene que contestar a mas tardar en 39 dias. ipuede querer consultar con un abogado lo antes posible acerca de su caso y, de ser necesario, hablar con alguien que lea ingl?s que pueda traducir estos documentos! A Civil Action Has Been Commenced Against You! You are notified to appear and answer the complaint of the plaintiff as foliows: 1. Serve a copy of your written answer to the complaint upon the piaintiff or plaintiff?s attorney within thirty (30) days after you have been served. You may serve your answer by delivering a copy to the plaintiff or by mailing it to the plaintiff?s last known address, and 2. File the original of the written answer with the Clerk of Superior Court of the county named above. It you fail to answer the complaint, the plaintiff will apply to the Court for the relief demanded in the complaint. Name And Address or Plainti??s Attorney (if none, Address or Plainti?ji Date Issued lime Daniel Meier and David Abrams 10/31/2018 3 QA BM 13PM Meier Law Group PLLC Signature i i? . a - 8,88 a? . . 100 E. Parrish St, ste. 300 Eiigagai? ?8883!- i-?J Umd? Durham NC 27701 Deputy cso El Assistant 030 El Clerk or Superior Court Date Of Endorsement Time ENDORSEMENT (ASSESS FEE) AM PM This Summons was originally issued on the date indicated Signature above and returned not served. At the request of the plaintiff, the time within which this Summons must be served is extended Sixty (60) days. Deputy 030 Assistant 080 Clerk Of Superior Court NOTE TO Many counties have MANDATORYARBITRATION programs in which most cases where the amount in controversy is $25,000 or less are heard by an arbitrator before a trial. The parties will be noti?ed if this case is assigned for mandatory arbitration, and, if so, what procedure is to be followed. (Over) 00, Rev. 4/1 8 2018 Administrative Of?ce of the Courts :28 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION COUNTY OF DURHAM No. 18 Moshe Eyal a/k/a 5?18 3WD Itay Livneh a/k/a 7131*? 3 Plaintiffs, against - The City of Durham Davis in Her Official Capacity as Chief of Police Complaint Defendants. Plaintiffs, complaining of the Defendants by their undersigned attorneys, set forth and allege as follows: I. Introduction 1. This is an action for unlawful discrimination on the basis of national origin under the State Constitution of North Carolina. As set forth in more detail below, the City of Durham has two standards when it comes to international police exchanges: One for Israelis and one for the rest of the world. As a result, Plaintiffs (both Israelis) are the Victims of national origin discrimination in violation of the Constitution of North Carolina. II. Parties 2. Plaintiff Moshe Eyal a/k/a 5% mm Eyal") is an Israeli. 3. Plaintiff Itay Livneh a/k/a 3123?? was Livneh") is an Israeli. 4. Both Plaintiffs serve as volunteer policemen with Israeli police. 5. The City of Durham is a municipal cerporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of North Carolina. 6. Davis is the Chief of Police of the City of Durham, North Carolina. Venue and Jurisdiction 7. The Court has jurisdiction over this matter in that both of the Defendants are located in the State of North Carolina, County of Durham. IV. Background 8. Since its formation in the 1940s, Israel has been the target of boycott movements by its enemies, starting with the Arab League boycott of Israel which began some 70 years ago in 1945. Indeed, the modern movement to boycott Israel can trace its roots back to 1922 when the Fifth Palestine Arab Congress in Nablus called for a boycott of Jewish goods. 9. Due to various factors such as evolving diplomatic relations, peace treaties, and political events as well as Israel's economic success, the Arab League boycott of Israel subsequently lost steam and become essentially ineffective by the 19905. This set the stage for the most recent campaign by Israel?s opponents to delegitimize and economically isolate the Jewish State which is known as the Boycott Divestment and Sanctions campaign or BDS Movement and which was launched approximately 10 years ago. In its latest incarnation, the anti-Israel boycott movement is not being imposed by a foreign country however the ultimate goal is the same. 10. Although the BDS Movement is cast as a human rights effort, it makes no attempt to boycott countries or entities which hang homosexuals; torture political opposition; or deny voting rights to their citizenry. Nor does it target (besides Israel) any of the many countries such as Turkey, Russia, or Morocco, which militarily occupy disputed territory. Instead the BDS Movement remains lock focused on Israel. Indeed, there are prominent supporters of the BDS movement who have admitted that their goal is to put an end to the Jewish State. 11. Thus, the BDS Movement is just a new spin on an old idea to end Israel?s existence through economic pressure, this time with the patina of human rights advocacy to lend legitimacy to its efforts. V. The Durham North Carolina Policy 12. One of the more recent attempts to delegitimize Israel is the attempt to blame Israel for issues of police brutality in the United States, particularly as directed against African Americans. The argument is that Israel is somehow responsible for training American police of?cers to mistreat Americans. 13. To be sure, there is absolutely no evidence for this latest smear campaign, but in support of it, the City of Durham has, as of 2018, adopted a formal policy evidently adhered to by the Chief of Police, which is inconsistent with the Constitution of North Carolina. 14. More Specifically, the policy of the City of Durham has two components: First, to not engage in any international police exchanges involving military style training; and second, not to engage in any international police exchanges with Israel, regardless of the style of training. - 15. Both of the Plaintiffs in this matter serve as volunteer policemen in Israel but neither is involved in units or activities which entail military style training. Thus, the Durham North Carolina policy serves to deny them the opportunity to engage in police exchanges due to their national origin. VI. Causes of Action and Demand for Relief Count I: Violation of the North Carolina Constitution 16. The preceding paragraphs are incorporated as if restated herein. 17. Section 19 of the North Carolina Constitution provides, in pertinent part that "No person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws; nor shall any person be subjected to discrimination by the State because of race, color, religion, or national origin." 18. Both of the Plaintiffs in this matter are being discriminated against due to their national origin, i.e. Israeli. 19. Moreover, Plaintiffs lack an adequate remedy under North Carolina law outside of the Constitution in that no statute appears to forbid Durham North Carolina's discriminatory policy. 20. Further, if the City of Durham Wishes to prevent military style training of its police officers, it could easily do so Without singling out Israel or discriminating against Israelis. 21. Accordingly, the City of Durham and its Chief of Police are in violation of the Constitution of the State of North Carolina. [continued on next page] WHEREPORE Plaintiffs demands judgment against the Defendants for an injunction ordering the Defendants to cease engaging in discriminatory conduct; and such other and further relief as the Court deems just. Dated: October 3, 2018 Meier Law Group PLLC Daniel Meier NC Bar 26681 100 East Parrish Street Suite 300 Durham, North Carolina 27701 Tel. 919-455-3 800 Fax 919-794-3290 David Abrams? Zionist Advocacy Center 305 Broadway Suite 601 New York, NY 10007 Tel. 212-897-5821 Fax 212-897-5 811 *Not admitted in North Carolina but Pro Hac Vice Application Pending