USPS Judge dismisses man's suit against USPS over birds

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Judge dismisses man's suit against post office for delivering dead birds

http://www.setexasrecord.com/news/22445 ... dead-birds" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

SHERMAN -- An East Texas Federal Judge dismissed a man's allegations that the post office was negligent in shipping birds through Express Mail.

After an extensive search, a Texas resident states that he finally found the perfect racing pigeons in California and had them shipped to his Texas home. To his dismay, he claims the birds arrived several days late and were dead.

Acting as his own attorney, Mozy Jahanguiri filed a small claims case against the U.S. Postal Service on Nov. 11, 2009, in Precinct Three, Place Two, of Collin County. The defendant removed the case to the Sherman Division of the Eastern District of Texas on Nov. 30, 2009.

According to the lawsuit, the seller attempted to mail the birds from California to Texas through Express Mail. Jahanguiri claims that the post office guaranteed the birds would be delivered the day after they were shipped.

However, the plaintiff said that when the birds did not arrive the next day, he became concerned and started calling the post office. He wanted to make sure the birds would get water and food but claims no one in the post office could help him.

The birds arrived four days after shipment and all of them were dead, the suit states.

Jahanguiri sent the post office manager letters complaining of the shipment but did not receive a response.

The plaintiff believes the post office knew the birds would not be able to live without food or water for five days and should be punished for their cruelty to his birds.

The plaintiff sued the post office under "negligent law of torts" and asked the court to award him $4,800 in damages, $82 in court costs and punitive damages.

The defendant filed a motion to dismiss due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction, lack of personal jurisdiction, and insufficient service of process.

The motion argued the case should be dismissed because the Plaintiff failed to name the United States as the defendant, failed to exhaust administrative remedies and failed to properly serve the United States with the lawsuit.

The motion to dismiss was granted on Jan. 5 and the case was officially closed on Jan. 25.