1. Case 1:11-cv-20120-PAS Document 88-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/27/2011 Page 1 of 7
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO.: 11-20120-CIV-SEITZ/SIMONTON
TRAIAN BUJDUVEANU,
Plaintiff,
vs.
DISMAS CHARITIES, INC., ANA GISPERT,
DEREK THOMAS and ADAMS LESHOTA
Defendants.
_________________________________________/
DEFENDANTS DISMAS CHARTIES, INC., ANA GISPERT, DEREK THOMAS AND
LASHANDA ADAMS’ STATEMENT OF DISPUTED FACTS IN RESPONSE AND
OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT.
Defendants Dismas Charities, Inc., Ana Gispert, Derek Thomas and Lashanda Adams,
incorrectly identified as Adams Leshota, (collectively “Defendants”) by and through their
undersigned counsel, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 and Local Rule 7.5, file
their Statement of Disputed Facts in Response to Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment as
follows:
The disputed facts are supported by the affidavit of Ana Gispert, Director of Dismas.
STATEMENT OF DISPUTED FACTS
1. Admitted.
2. Admitted.
3. Denied. The Plaintiff was still under the custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons
for Discipline. (Docket 83-2; Affidavit of Ana Gispert, p. 35-36 and Exhibits 1-5)

2. Case 1:11-cv-20120-PAS Document 88-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/27/2011 Page 2 of 7
CASE NO.: 11-20120-CIV-SEITZ/SIMONTON
4. Denied. The Plaintiff acknowledged on two occasions, in writing, receiving the
Rules and Regulations of Dismas as well as conditions of release to Community Corrections.
(Docket 83-2; Affidavit of Ana Gispert, p 7-15. and Exhibits 2, 3, 4 and 5)
5. Even though the Plaintiff provided his driver’s license and proof of insurance, as
per the agreed upon conditions of his release, Plaintiff was not allowed to drive without consent
of the Bureau of Prisons or Dismas. Plaintiff never received permission to drive and drove
without permission. (Docket 83-2; Affidavit of Ana Gispert, p 7-15 and 19. and Exhibits 2, 3, 4
and 5)
6. Plaintiff provided medical records and his work and confinement were accord
with his condition, including home confinement and no work. (Docket 83-2; Affidavit of Ana
Gispert, p. 6)
7. Denied. The remarks in this paragraph are inadmissible hearsay.
8. Denied. The Plaintiff, as per the agreed upon conditions of his release, was only
permitted to attend religious services within a five mile radius of his confinement. (Docket 83-2;
Affidavit of Ana Gispert, p. 20 and Exhibit 7)
9. Denied. The Plaintiff has not provided any support these conclusory allegations
including names, dates, times and methods of alleged harassment of Plaintiff or other residents.
10. Admitted.
11. Admitted that Plaintiff operated a vehicle without authorization or consent.
(Docket 83-2; Affidavit of Ana Gispert, p 7-15 and 19 and Exhibits 2, 3, 4 and 5)
12. Denied. The Rules and Regulations, which the Plaintiff acknowledged receiving
clearly prohibit driving without Dismas written authorization and possession of cell phones. The
2

3. Case 1:11-cv-20120-PAS Document 88-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/27/2011 Page 3 of 7
CASE NO.: 11-20120-CIV-SEITZ/SIMONTON
Rules and Regulations, which the Plaintiff acknowledged receiving clearly permit and authorize
searches and seizure of contraband, as the Plaintiff is still under Bureau of Prison custody and
control serving a prison sentence. As Plaintiff was driving a car without permission and
possessed a cell phone, he violated the terms of his CCC agreement. (Docket 83-2; Affidavit of
Ana Gispert, p 7-31 and Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 8)
13. Denied. The Rules and Regulations, which the Plaintiff acknowledged receiving
clearly prohibit driving without Dismas written authorization and possession of cell phones. The
Rules and Regulations, which the Plaintiff acknowledged receiving clearly permit and authorize
searches and seizure of contraband, as the Plaintiff is still under Bureau of Prison custody and
control serving a prison sentence. As Plaintiff was driving a car without permission and
possessed a cell phone, he violated the terms of his CCC agreement. (Docket 83-2; Affidavit of
Ana Gispert, p 7-31 and Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 8)
14. Admitted that the Plaintiff received violation notices and due process through the
Federal Bureau of Prison United States Bureau of Prison Center Discipline Committee. The
Rules and Regulations, which the Plaintiff acknowledged receiving clearly prohibit driving
without Dismas written authorization and possession of cell phones. The Rules and Regulations,
which the Plaintiff acknowledged receiving clearly permit and authorize searches and seizure of
contraband, as the Plaintiff is still under Bureau of Prison custody and control serving a prison
sentence. As Plaintiff was driving a car without permission and possessed a cell phone, he
violated the terms of his CCC agreement. (Docket 83-2; Affidavit of Ana Gispert, p 7-34 and
Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9 and 10)
3

4. Case 1:11-cv-20120-PAS Document 88-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/27/2011 Page 4 of 7
CASE NO.: 11-20120-CIV-SEITZ/SIMONTON
15. Admitted that the Bureau of Prisons sent the U.S. Marshall Service to Dismas to
return the Plaintiff to a correction facility because of Plaintiff’s actions. (Docket 83-2; Affidavit
of Ana Gispert, p 32-26 and Exhibits 10 and 11)
16. Denied because the Bureau of Prisons, not the Defendants, sent the U.S. Marshall
Service to Dismas to return the Plaintiff to a correction facility because of Plaintiff’s actions.
(Docket 83-2; Affidavit of Ana Gispert, p 32-36 and Exhibits 10 and 11)
17. Denied as hearsay. Plaintiff was transferred by the Bureau of Prisons into the
custody of FDC Miami, where a subsequent hearing was held by the Bureau of Prisons
concerning his possession of a cell phone and driving a vehicle without authorization. He was
found guilty of these offenses at the hearing and required to serve the remaining 68 day balance
of his initial sentence at FDC Miami. A copy of the Plaintiff’s United States Bureau of Prison
Center Discipline Committee Report is attached to Docket 83-2; Affidavit of Ana Gispert, p 32-
36 and Exhibits 10 and 11)
18. Upon information and belief, the Plaintiff was released.
19. Denied. Defendants have properly responded to all discovery and objected where
appropriate. This allegation is conclusory in nature and provides no names, dates or facts in
support of the allegations.
4

5. Case 1:11-cv-20120-PAS Document 88-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/27/2011 Page 5 of 7
CASE NO.: 11-20120-CIV-SEITZ/SIMONTON
Respectfully submitted,
EISINGER, BROWN, LEWIS, FRANKEL,
& CHAIET, P.A.
Attorneys for Defendants
4000 Hollywood Boulevard
Suite 265-South
Hollywood, FL 33021
(954) 894-8000
(954) 894-8015 Fax
BY: /S/ David S. Chaiet____________
DAVID S. CHAIET, ESQUIRE
FBN: 963798
5

6. Case 1:11-cv-20120-PAS Document 88-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/27/2011 Page 6 of 7
CASE NO.: 11-20120-CIV-SEITZ/SIMONTON
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 27th day of December, 2011, I electronically filed the
foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing
document is being served this day on all counsel of record or pro se parties identified on the
attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic
Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those counsel or parties
who are authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing.
__/s/ David S. Chaiet_______________
DAVID S. CHAIET, ESQUIRE
Florida Bar No. 963798
6

7. Case 1:11-cv-20120-PAS Document 88-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/27/2011 Page 7 of 7
CASE NO.: 11-20120-CIV-SEITZ/SIMONTON
SERVICE LIST
Traian Bujduveanu v. Dismas Charities, Inc., et al.
Case No..: 11-20120-CIV-SEITZ/SIMONTON
United States District Court, Southern District of Florida
Traian Bujduveanu
Pro Se Plaintiff
5601 W. Broward Blvd.
Plantation, FL 33317
Tel: (954) 316-3828
Email: orionav@msn.com
7