Case 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document Filed 06/29/13 Page 1 of 11
|
|
- Gervais Tucker
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Case 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document Filed 06/29/13 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION WENDY DAVIS, et al., Plaintiffs, CIVIL ACTION NO. v. SA-11-CA-788-OLG-JES-XR [Lead Case] RICK PERRY, et al., Defendants. LEAGUE OF UNITED LATIN AMERICAN CITIZENS (LULAC), DOMINGO GARCIA, Plaintiffs, CIVIL ACTION NO. v. SA-11-CA-855-OLG-JES-XR [Consolidated Case] RICK PERRY, et al., Defendants. DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION Defendants Rick Perry, in his official capacity as Governor, John Steen, in his official capacity as Secretary of State, and the State of Texas (collectively Defendants ) hereby move to dismiss all claims in this case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(h)(3). In support of their motion, Defendants respectfully submit the following memorandum of points and authorities. 1
2 Case 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document Filed 06/29/13 Page 2 of 11 INTRODUCTION This is a redistricting case to prevent the implementation of electoral districts enacted by the Texas Legislature in The Legislature has repealed the 2011 Senate redistricting plan and established a new plan for 2014 and future elections. The Governor has signed that bill into law. As a result, the vacated 2011 plan can never be used to conduct any election. Because the plan will never be implemented, it poses no threat of injury to the plaintiffs. It follows that any order regarding the 2011 plan can provide no effectual relief. As far as the defunct 2011 plan is concerned, there is no relief to grant. This case no longer presents a live controversy. The Court therefore lacks subject matter jurisdiction. The only thing left to do is dismiss. FACTS The plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief to prevent Defendants from implementing the Senate redistricting plan (Plan S148) enacted by the 82nd Texas Legislature in On September 29, 2011, the Court entered an injunction against implementation of Plan S148 because it had not been precleared under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. 1973c. 1 The Court ordered that the injunction would be effective as a permanent injunction, subject to being lifted by order of the Court as appropriate. 2 On June 25, 2013, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Shelby County, Alabama v. Holder, No , 2013 WL (U.S. June 25, 1 See Order Enjoining the Implementation of Voting Changes (Doc. 8) at 2. 2 Id. at 5. 2
3 Case 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document Filed 06/29/13 Page 3 of ), reversing 679 F.3d 848 (D.C. Cir. 2012), holding that the coverage formula in Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act is unconstitutional and can no longer be used as a basis for subjecting jurisdictions to preclearance. Id. at *18. On June 27, 2013, the Supreme Court vacated the D.C. District Court s judgment denying preclearance of the 2011 legislatively enacted redistricting plans and remanded the case for further consideration in light of Shelby County. See Texas v. United States, No , 2013 WL , *1 (U.S. June 27, 2013). On June 23, 2013, the Legislature passed a new redistricting bill for the Texas Senate. 3 In addition to enacting Plan S172, the newly enacted redistricting bill repealed the 2011 plan challenged in this case. 4 On June 26, 2013, the Governor signed the newly enacted redistricting bill into law. See Exhibit A ((June 26, 2013 Letter from Office of the Governor to Texas Secretary of State). LEGAL STANDARD Article III of the Constitution permits federal courts to adjudicate only actual cases or controversies. Lewis v. Continental Bank Corp., 494 U.S. 472, 477 (1990). This means litigants must suffer, or be threatened with, an actual injury traceable to the defendant s actions, and that the federal court must be able to grant effectual relief. See id. This case-or-controversy requirement must be satisfied at every stage of judicial proceedings. Id. If it is not, the federal court lacks the power to adjudicate the case and must dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. E.g., 3 See Tex. S.B. 2, 83d Leg., 1st C.S. (enacting Plan S172). 4 See Tex. S.B. 2 3, 83d Leg., 1st C.S. ( Chapter 1315 (Senate Bill No. 31), Acts of the 82nd Legislature, Regular Session, 2011 (Article 193e, Vernon s Texas Civil Statutes), is repealed. ). 3
4 Case 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document Filed 06/29/13 Page 4 of 11 Home Builders Ass n of Miss., Inc. v. City of Madison, 143 F.3d 1006, 1010 (5th Cir. 1998). Plaintiffs generally bear the burden of establishing subject matter jurisdiction, see Ramming v. United States, 281 F.3d 158, 161 (5th Cir. 2001), including their own standing to sue, see Cobb v. Central States, 461 F.3d 632, 635 (5th Cir. 2006). When a party asserts that its own conduct has eliminated any live case or controversy, however, it bears a heavy burden to show that the change in circumstances makes it absolutely clear that the allegedly wrongful behavior could not reasonably be expected to recur. Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Envtl. Servs. (TOC), Inc., 528 U.S. 167, 189 (2000). Governmental entities, however, are accorded a presumption of good faith because they are public servants, not selfinterested private parties. Sossamon v. Lone Star State of Texas, 560 F.3d 316, 325 (5th Cir. 2009), aff d, 131 S. Ct (2011). ARGUMENT AND AUTHORITIES As a result of the Legislature s enactment of a new Senate redistricting plan and its repeal of the plan enacted in 2011 by the 82nd Legislature, the claims asserted against the 2011 plan no longer present a live case or controversy. Because the 2011 plan has been repealed, the State cannot implement it. Nor is there any realistic threat that the State will reinstate the 2011 plan through future legislation. As a result, the plaintiffs alleged injury from the 2011 plan no longer exists, and this Court cannot provide any effectual relief on their claims. The case is moot, and the Court therefore lacks subject matter jurisdiction. 4
5 Case 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document Filed 06/29/13 Page 5 of 11 The Constitution confines the judicial power to actual cases or controversies. See U.S. Const. art. III 2. The Supreme Court has explained that the triad of injury in fact, causation, and redressability constitutes the core of Article III's caseor-controversy requirement. Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. 83, (1998) (footnote omitted). To invoke the jurisdiction of a federal court, a litigant must have suffered, or be threatened with, an actual injury traceable to the defendant and likely to be redressed by a favorable judicial decision. Lewis v. Continental Bank Corp., 494 U.S. 472, 477 (1990); see also Iron Arrow Honor Soc y v. Heckler, 464 U.S. 67, 70 (1983) (per curiam) ( To satisfy the Article III case or controversy requirement, a litigant must have suffered some actual injury that can be redressed by a favorable judicial decision. ). When a lawsuit no longer presents a live controversy, the court loses subject matter jurisdiction and can proceed no further: Without jurisdiction the court cannot proceed at all in any cause. Jurisdiction is power to declare the law, and when it ceases to exist, the only function remaining to the court is that of announcing the fact and dismissing the cause. Steel Co., 523 U.S. at 94 (quoting Ex parte McCardle, 74 U.S. (7 Wall.) 506, 514 (1868)). Because this case no longer presents a live case or controversy the plaintiffs claims against the 2011 redistricting plan are moot. [A]n actual controversy must be extant at all stages of review, not merely at the time the complaint is filed. Arizonans for Official English v. Arizona, 520 U.S. 43, 67 (1997). A case is moot when the issues presented are no longer live or the parties lack a legally cognizable 5
6 Case 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document Filed 06/29/13 Page 6 of 11 interest in the outcome. City of Erie v. Pap s A.M., 529 U.S. 277, 287 (2000) (quoting County of Los Angeles v. Davis, 440 U.S. 625, 631 (1979)). The issues presented by the plaintiffs challenge to the 2011 plan are no longer live because the plan has no prospect of enforcement. A suit challenging the validity of a statute generally becomes moot when the statute is repealed. In that event, the challenge to the statute no longer presents a live controversy, and the case must be dismissed: If the challenged statute no longer exists, there ordinarily can be no real controversy as to its continuing validity, and an order enjoining its enforcement would be meaningless. In such circumstances, it is well settled that the case should be dismissed as moot. Ne. Florida Chapter of Associated Gen. Contractors of Am. v. City of Jacksonville, Fla., 508 U.S. 656, 670 (1993) (O Connor, J., dissenting); see also McCorvey v. Hill, 385 F.3d 846, 849 (5th Cir. 2004) ( Suits regarding the constitutionality of statutes become moot once the statute is repealed. ). Similarly, the demise of the 2011 redistricting plan eliminates the plaintiffs concrete stake in the outcome of the case because they face no realistic threat of injury from Plan S148. To maintain a live case or controversy: [t]he parties must continue to have a personal stake in the outcome of the lawsuit..... This means that, throughout the litigation, the plaintiff must have suffered, or be threatened with, an actual injury traceable to the defendant and likely to be redressed by a favorable judicial decision. Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7 (1998) (quoting Lewis v. Continental Bank Corp., 494 U.S. 472, (1990)). For this reason, the doctrine of mootness is often characterized as the doctrine of standing set in a time frame: The requisite 6
7 Case 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document Filed 06/29/13 Page 7 of 11 personal interest that must exist at the commencement of the litigation (standing) must continue throughout its existence (mootness). 5 E.g., Arizonans for Official English v. Arizona, 520 U.S. 43, 68 n.22 (1997); cf. Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560 (1992) (explaining that Article III standing requires the plaintiff to identify a concrete and imminent invasion of a legally protected interest that is neither conjectural nor hypothetical ); Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority, 297 U.S. 288, 347 (1936) (Brandeis, J., concurring) ( The Court will not pass upon the validity of a statute upon complaint of one who fails to show that he is injured by its operation. ). Because the claims asserted by all plaintiffs are directed at legislation that has now been repealed and replaced, the plaintiffs cannot demonstrate that they are likely to be harmed by the challenged redistricting plan. Plaintiffs inability to identify any threat of injury deprives them of a concrete stake in the outcome of this case, rendering the case moot and divesting this Court of subject matter jurisdiction. 6 It follows from the repeal of the 2011 plan that this Court can no longer provide any effectual relief on the plaintiffs claims. The case or controversy requirement of Article III of the United States Constitution prohibits federal courts 5 This shorthand description of mootness doctrine, first expressed in Monaghan, Constitutional Adjudication: The Who and When, 82 YALE L.J. 1363, 1384 (1973), is not comprehensive in the sense that it does not reflect certain exceptions to mootness, see Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Envtl. Servs. (TOC), Inc., 528 U.S. 167, 190 (2000), none of which vest the Court with jurisdiction in this case. 6 Plaintiffs claims for attorney s fees are insufficient to create an Article III case or controversy where none exists on the merits of the underlying claim. Lewis v. Continental Bank Corp., 494 U.S. 472, 480 (1990) (citing Diamond v. Charles, 476 U.S. 54, (1986)). [A] determination of mootness neither precludes nor is precluded by an award of attorneys fees. The attorneys fees question turns instead on a wholly independent consideration: whether plaintiff is a prevailing party. Murphy v. Fort Worth Ind. Sch. Dist., 334 F.3d 470, 471 (5th Cir. 2003) (per curiam) (quoting Doe v. Marshall, 622 F.2d 118, 120 (5th Cir.1980)). 7
8 Case 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document Filed 06/29/13 Page 8 of 11 from considering questions that cannot affect the rights of litigants in the case before them. C&H Nationwide, Inc. v. Norwest Bank Texas NA, 208 F.3d 490, 493 (5th Cir. 2000) (quoting North Carolina v. Rice, 404 U.S. 244, 246 (1971)). A case no longer presents a live case or controversy, and thus becomes moot, when it is impossible for a court to grant any effectual relief whatever to the prevailing party. Chafin v. Chafin, 133 S. Ct. 1017, 1023 (2013). The fact that the challenged statute has been repealed provides an absolute assurance that the conduct sought to be enjoined implementation of Plan S148 will not occur. To be sure, a party urging mootness based on voluntary cessation of the challenged conduct bears a heavy burden to demonstrate that it is absolutely clear that the allegedly wrongful behavior could not reasonably be expected to occur. Friends of the Earth, 528 U.S. at 189. But a governmental entity s conclusive abandonment of the challenged policy is sufficient to demonstrate that the threat of injury has abated, even when the change in policy is not accomplished by a statutory repeal or amendment. See, e.g., Sossamon, 560 F.3d at 325 (holding that the TDCJ director s affidavit explaining a revision to the policy in question was sufficient to establish that the plaintiff would no longer be subject to the challenged restrictions on attendance at religious services); Coalition of Airline Pilots Ass n v. F.A.A., 370 F.3d 1184, (D.C. Cir. 2004) ( [T]he agencies commitment to draft new regulations that will provide additional administrative review procedures a commitment made both to this court and in the formal entry in the TSA rulemaking dockets provides sufficient assurance that the agencies will never return to [the] 8
9 Case 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document Filed 06/29/13 Page 9 of 11 allegedly unlawful procedures. ). Government entities are entitled to a presumption of good faith when a change in policy eliminates the case or controversy. See Sossamon, 560 F.3d at 325 ( Without evidence to the contrary, we assume that formally announced changes to official governmental policy are not mere litigation posturing. ). The Legislature s formal repeal of the statute at issue in this case demonstrates beyond any doubt that the State will not reanimate the challenged redistricting plan. With no prospect that the 2011 plan will be used to conduct elections, any order enjoining its use or declaring it unlawful would serve no purpose, as it would not change the plaintiffs position. Because ruling on the validity of the repealed 2011 plan can provide no relief to the parties, any such ruling would constitute an advisory opinion, which the federal courts lack power to issue. E.g., Prieser v. Newkirk, 422 U.S. 395, 401 (1975) ( [A] federal court has neither the power to render advisory opinions nor to decide questions that cannot affect the rights of litigants in the case before them. (quoting North Carolina v. Rice, 404 U.S. 244, 246 (1971))). This case no longer presents a live controversy because the Legislature has repealed the redistricting plan challenged by the plaintiffs. The statute that created Plan S148 will not take effect. That plan will not be used to conduct any election. Any order to prevent its implementation would be an advisory opinion. The case should be dismissed as moot. 9
10 Case 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document Filed 06/29/13 Page 10 of 11 CONCLUSION For the reasons stated above, the case should be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Dated: June 29, 2013 Respectfully submitted. GREG ABBOTT Attorney General of Texas DANIEL T. HODGE First Assistant Attorney General /s/ David C. Mattax DAVID C. MATTAX Texas Bar No Deputy Attorney General for Defense Litigation J. REED CLAY, JR. Special Assistant and Senior Counsel to the Attorney General PATRICK K. SWEETEN Chief, Special Litigation Division ANGELA COLMENERO Assistant Attorney General MATTHEW H. FREDERICK Assistant Solicitor General P.O. Box 12548, Capitol Station Austin, TX (512) (512) (fax) ATTORNEYS FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS, RICK PERRY, AND JOHN STEEN 10
11 Case 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document Filed 06/29/13 Page 11 of 11 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of this filing was sent on June 29, 2013 via the Court s electronic notification system and/or to the following counsel of record: David Richards Richards, Rodriguez and Skeith 816 Congress Avenue, Suite 1200 Austin, TX davidr@rrsfirm.com Attorney for Davis Plaintiffs Donna García Davidson Attorney at Law P.O. Box Austin, TX Donna@dgdlawfirm.com Attorney for Defendant Steve Munisteri Chad Dunn Brazil & Dunn 4201 FM 160 West, Suite 530 Houston, Texas chad@brazilanddunn.com Attorney for Defendant Boyd Richie J. Gerald Hebert Attorney at Law 191 Somervelle Street, #405 Alexandria, VA Hebert@voterlaw.com Attorney for Davis Plaintiffs Eric Opiela Attorney at Law 1122 Colorado, Suite 2301 Austin, TX eopiela@ericopiela.com Attorney for Defendant Steve Munisteri Luis Vera 1325 Riverview Towers 111 Soledad San Antonio, Texas Lrvlaw@sbcglobal.net Attorney for LULAC Plaintiffs /s/ David C. Mattax DAVID C. MATTAX 11
Case 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document 41 Filed 10/24/11 Page 1 of 6
Case 5:11-cv-00788-OLG-JES-XR Document 41 Filed 10/24/11 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION WENDY DAVIS, et al., Plaintiffs, CIVIL ACTION
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION
Case 5:11-cv-00788-OLG-JES-XR Document 70 Filed 11/09/11 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION WENDY DAVIS; MARC VEASEY; ROY BROOKS; VICKY BARGAS;
More informationCase 1:11-cv RMC-TBG-BAH Document 239 Filed 07/03/13 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 239 Filed 07/03/13 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA STATE OF TEXAS, v. Plaintiff, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, and ERIC
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document 135 Filed 02/10/12 Page 1 of 10
Case 5:11-cv-00788-OLG-JES-XR Document 135 Filed 02/10/12 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION WENDY DAVIS, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. RICK
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document 170 Filed 03/22/13 Page 1 of 8
Case 5:11-cv-00788-OLG-JES-XR Document 170 Filed 03/22/13 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION WENDY DAVIS, MARK VEASEY, et al., Plaintiffs,
More informationCase 5:08-cv FB Document 13 Filed 05/20/2008 Page 1 of 7
Case 5:08-cv-00389-FB Document 13 Filed 05/20/2008 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION LULAC OF TEXAS, MEXICAN AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION
More informationIn the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 1104 Filed 06/17/14 Page 1 of 19 In the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas SHANNON PEREZ, ET AL. v. RICK PERRY, ET AL. SA-11-CV-360 ORDER
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document 1319 Filed 10/14/15 Page 1 of 10
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 1319 Filed 10/14/15 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION SHANNON PEREZ, et al., Plaintiffs, v.
More informationCase 7:11-cv Document 8 Filed in TXSD on 07/07/11 Page 1 of 5
Case 7:11-cv-00144 Document 8 Filed in TXSD on 07/07/11 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MCALLEN DIVISION MEXICAN AMERICAN LEGISLATIVE CAUCUS, TEXAS HOUSE
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document 9 Filed 06/14/11 Page 1 of 11
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 9 Filed 06/14/11 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION SHANNON PEREZ et al., Plaintiffs, v. CIVIL
More informationCase 4:11-cv RAS Document 48 Filed 06/29/11 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION
Case 4:11-cv-00059-RAS Document 48 Filed 06/29/11 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION KAAREN TEUBER, et al., Plaintiffs, CIVIL ACTION NO.
More informationCase 2:13-cv Document Filed in TXSD on 11/18/14 Page 1 of 10
Case 2:13-cv-00193 Document 749-28 Filed in TXSD on 11/18/14 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION MARC VEASEY, et al, Plaintiffs, VS. CIVIL ACTION
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document 832 Filed 07/26/13 Page 1 of 10
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 832 Filed 07/26/13 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION SHANNON PEREZ, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CIVIL
More informationPLAINITFF MALC'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT AND MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 779 Filed 07/12/13 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION SHANNON PEREZ, et al., Plaintiffs and MEXICAN
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document 29 Filed 07/12/11 Page 1 of 11
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 29 Filed 07/12/11 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION SHANNON PEREZ et al., Plaintiffs, MEXICAN AMERICAN
More informationCase 2:13-cv Document 122 Filed in TXSD on 12/17/13 Page 1 of 5
Case 2:13-cv-00193 Document 122 Filed in TXSD on 12/17/13 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION Plaintiffs, TEXAS
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document 1323 Filed 10/23/15 Page 1 of 9
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 1323 Filed 10/23/15 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION SHANNON PEREZ, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CIVIL
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document 55 Filed 11/04/11 Page 1 of 17
Case 5:11-cv-00788-OLG-JES-XR Document 55 Filed 11/04/11 Page 1 of 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION WENDY DAVIS, et al., Plaintiffs, CIVIL ACTION
More informationCase 1:11-cv RMC-TBG-BAH Document 247 Filed 07/25/13 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 247 Filed 07/25/13 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA STATE OF TEXAS, v. Plaintiff, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and ERIC H.
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 55 Filed 07/19/11 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION SHANNON PEREZ, HAROLD DUTTON, JR. AND GREGORY
More informationCase 2:13-cv Document 429 Filed in TXSD on 07/22/14 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISON
Case 2:13-cv-00193 Document 429 Filed in TXSD on 07/22/14 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISON MARC VEASEY, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Civil Action No.
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION
Case 2:13-cv-00193 Document 1022 Filed in TXSD on 04/03/17 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION United States District Court Southern District of
More informationDavis et al v. Perry et al, Docket No. 5:11-cv (W.D. Tex. Sept 22, 2011), Court Docket
Davis et al v. Perry et al, Docket No. 5:11-cv-00788 (W.D. Tex. Sept 22, 2011), Court Docket Multiple Documents Part Description 1 23 pages 2 Exhibit Brister Affidavit 3 Exhibit Brister Expert Report 4
More informationCIVIL ACTION NO. 5:12-CV-218
Case 5:12-cv-00218-C Document 7-1 Filed 01/04/13 Page 1 of 7 PageID 132 JAMES C. WETHERBE, PH.D., Plaintiff, v. TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY, Defendant. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION
Case 2:12-cv-00691-WKW-MHT-WHP Document 130 Filed 06/28/13 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION ALABAMA LEGISLATIVE BLACK CAUCUS, et al.,
More informationORDER. A-i 7-CA SS. General, Plaintiffs, Defendants. TEXAS and KEN PAXTON, in his official capacity as Texas Attorney CAUSE NO.
Case 1:17-cv-00425-SS Document 74 Filed 08/09/17 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION 17 9 fl: 1 6 CLEFc. COURT TEXAS TEXAS and KEN PAXTON,
More informationCase 1:17-cv SS Document 66 Filed 06/29/17 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION
Case 1:17-cv-00425-SS Document 66 Filed 06/29/17 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION Texas, et al. vs. Travis County, Texas, et al. CIVIL ACTION NO: 1:17-CV-00425-SS
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES -XR Document 20 Filed 07/01/11 Page 1 of 12
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES -XR Document 20 Filed 07/01/11 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION SHANNON PEREZ et al., Plaintiffs, v. CIVIL
More informationCase 4:12-cv Document 26 Filed in TXSD on 03/25/13 Page 1 of 3
Case 4:12-cv-03035 Document 26 Filed in TXSD on 03/25/13 Page 1 of 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION LEAGUE OF UNITED LATIN AMERICAN CITIZENS (LULAC,
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document 1338 Filed 01/02/17 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 1338 Filed 01/02/17 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION SHANNON PEREZ, et al. Plaintiffs CIVIL ACTION NO. v.
More informationCase 1:17-cv SS Document 61 Filed 06/28/17 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION
Case 1:17-cv-00425-SS Document 61 Filed 06/28/17 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION Texas, et al. vs. Travis County, Texas, et al. CIVIL ACTION NO: 1:17-CV-00425-SS
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document 860 Filed 08/19/13 Page 1 of 8
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 860 Filed 08/19/13 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION SHANNON PEREZ, et al., v. Plaintiffs, STATE
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION
Case 5:11-cv-00788-OLG-JES-XR Document 138 Filed 02/13/12 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION WENDY DAVIS, et al., Plaintiffs, CIVIL
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION
Brown et al v. Herbert et al Doc. 69 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION KODY BROWN, MERI BROWN, JANELLE BROWN, CHRISTINE BROWN, ROBYN SULLIVAN, MEMORANDUM DECISION AND
More informationCase 1:16-cv JMS-DML Document 41 Filed 11/18/16 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 189
Case 1:16-cv-02431-JMS-DML Document 41 Filed 11/18/16 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 189 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION JOHN DOE, formerly known as ) JANE DOE,
More informationIn the United States Court of Appeals For the District of Columbia Circuit
No. 14-5151 In the United States Court of Appeals For the District of Columbia Circuit THE STATE OF TEXAS, Plaintiff Appellants, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., in his official capacity
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document 536 Filed 11/25/11 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 536 Filed 11/25/11 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION SHANNON PEREZ, et al. Plaintiffs And EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON,
More informationIn the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Case: 11-50814 Document: 00511723798 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/12/2012 No. 11-50814 In the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit TEXAS MEDICAL PROVIDERS PERFORMING ABORTION SERVICES, doing
More informationHarshad Patel v. Allstate New Jersey Insurance
2016 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 5-3-2016 Harshad Patel v. Allstate New Jersey Insurance Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2016
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION LULAC OF TEXAS, MEXICAN AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION OF HOUSTON, TEXAS (MABAH), ANGELA GARCIA, BERNARDO J. GARCIA,
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document Filed 04/16/14 Page 1 of 18 EXHIBIT 2
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 976-3 Filed 04/16/14 Page 1 of 18 EXHIBIT 2 Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 976-3 Filed 04/16/14 Page 2 of 18 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN
More informationNo IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. SUSAN WATERS, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees.
No. 15-1452 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT SUSAN WATERS, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees. v. PETE RICKETTS, in his official capacity as Governor of Nebraska, et al., Defendants-Appellants.
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document 1375 Filed 04/24/17 Page 1 of 11
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 1375 Filed 04/24/17 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION SHANNON PEREZ, et al., ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO. Plaintiffs,
More information[ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR FEBRUARY 16, 2012] No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
USCA Case #11-5205 Document #1358116 Filed: 02/13/2012 Page 1 of 16 [ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR FEBRUARY 16, 2012] No. 11-5205 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
More informationCase 4:18-cv KGB-DB-BSM Document 14 Filed 03/02/18 Page 1 of 6 FILED
Case 4:18-cv-00116-KGB-DB-BSM Document 14 Filed 03/02/18 Page 1 of 6 FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS MARO 2 2018 ~A~E,5 gormack, CLERK y DEPCLERK IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. MEMORANDUM OPINION (June 14, 2016)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA SIERRA CLUB, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY and GINA McCARTHY, Administrator, United States Environmental Protection
More informationCase 1:17-cv SS Document 16 Filed 05/24/17 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION
Case 1:17-cv-00425-SS Document 16 Filed 05/24/17 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION TEXAS, Plaintiff, v. TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS; SALLY HERNANDEZ,
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document 1613 Filed 01/29/19 Page 1 of 13
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 1613 Filed 01/29/19 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION SHANNON PEREZ, et al., Plaintiffs, and
More informationCase 1:06-cv CAP Document 47 Filed 09/11/2006 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
Case 1:06-cv-01586-CAP Document 47 Filed 09/11/2006 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION JAMES CAMP, Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION v. NO. 1:06-CV-1586-CAP BETTY
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case 1:10-cv-01062-ESH -TBG -HHK Document 46-1 Filed 08/20/10 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA STATE OF GEORGIA, v. Plaintiff, ERIC H. HOLDER, JR. in his official
More informationCase 1:11-cv RMC-TBG-BAH Document 224 Filed 07/05/12 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 224 Filed 07/05/12 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA STATE OF TEXAS, v. Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 1:11-cv- 01303 (RMC-TBG-BAH)
More informationIn the Supreme Court of the United States
No. 11-982 In the Supreme Court of the United States ALREADY, LLC, D/B/A YUMS, PETITIONER v. NIKE, INC. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT BRIEF FOR THE
More informationCase 1:10-cv JDB Document 7-1 Filed 06/22/10 Page 1 of 9 EXHIBIT 1
Case 1:10-cv-00651-JDB Document 7-1 Filed 06/22/10 Page 1 of 9 EXHIBIT 1 Case 1:10-cv-00651-JDB Document 7-1 Filed 06/22/10 Page 2 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document 68 Filed 07/25/11 Page 1 of 17
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 68 Filed 07/25/11 Page 1 of 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION SHANNON PEREZ, HAROLD DUTTON, JR. and GREGORY
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document 890 Filed 09/09/13 Page 1 of 12
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 890 Filed 09/09/13 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION SHANNON PEREZ, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CIVIL
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document 664 Filed 02/20/12 Page 1 of 6
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 664 Filed 02/20/12 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION SHANNON PEREZ, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CIVIL
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION
Case 4:12-cv-03035 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 10/11/12 Page 1 of 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION LEAGUE OF UNITED LATIN AMERICAN ) CITIZENS (LULAC),
More informationCase 2:13-cv Document 995 Filed in TXSD on 02/22/17 Page 1 of 6
Case 2:13-cv-00193 Document 995 Filed in TXSD on 02/22/17 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION MARC VEASEY, et al., Plaintiffs, VS. CIVIL
More informationCase 2:13-cv Document 828 Filed in TXSD on 02/19/15 Page 1 of 6
Case 2:13-cv-00193 Document 828 Filed in TXSD on 02/19/15 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION MARC VEASEY, et al., Plaintiffs, v.
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No DANIEL BOCK, JR. PRESSLER & PRESSLER, LLP, Appellant
Case: 15-1056 Document: 003112364980 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/27/2016 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT No. 15-1056 DANIEL BOCK, JR. v. PRESSLER & PRESSLER, LLP, Appellant On Appeal from
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
Case 1:06-cv-01586-CAP Document 82 Filed 05/16/2007 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION JAMES CAMP, ) ) Plaintiff, ) v. ) ) CIVIL ACTION
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document 95 Filed 08/01/11 Page 1 of 11
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 95 Filed 08/01/11 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION SHANNON PEREZ, HAROLD DUTTON, JR. AND GREGORY TAMEZ,
More informationCase 5:13-cv OLG Document 114 Filed 08/12/15 Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION
Case 5:13-cv-00982-OLG Document 114 Filed 08/12/15 Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION CLEOPATRA DE LEON, NICOLE DIMETMAN, VICTOR HOLMES, and
More informationCase 1:11-cv RMC-TBG-BAH Document 90 Filed 10/31/11 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 90 Filed 10/31/11 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA STATE OF TEXAS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document Filed 09/25/13 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
Case 5:11-cv-00788-OLG-JES-XR Document 194-1 Filed 09/25/13 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION WENDY DAVIS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CIVIL
More informationCase 1:06-cv LFO Document 18 Filed 04/17/2006 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Case 1:06-cv-00614-LFO Document 18 Filed 04/17/2006 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) THE CHRISTIAN CIVIC LEAGUE ) OF MAINE, INC. ) Plaintiff, ) ) Civil Action No.
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document 105 Filed 08/02/11 Page 1 of 20
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 105 Filed 08/02/11 Page 1 of 20 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION MARGARITA V. QUESADA, 875 Marquette ) Drive,
More informationCASE ARGUED APRIL 21, 2015 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
CASE ARGUED APRIL 21, 2015 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT STATE OF TEXAS, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, and ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., in his official capacity
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE I. INTRODUCTION
Terrell v. Costco Wholesale Corporation Doc. 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 1 1 1 JULIUS TERRELL, Plaintiff, v. COSTCO WHOLESALE CORP., Defendant. CASE NO. C1-JLR
More informationCase 2:13-cv Document 1015 Filed in TXSD on 03/14/17 Page 1 of 35
Case 2:13-cv-00193 Document 1015 Filed in TXSD on 03/14/17 Page 1 of 35 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION MARC VEASEY, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CIVIL
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION LULAC OF TEXAS, MEXICAN AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION OF HOUSTON, TEXAS (MABAH), ANGIE GARCIA, BERNARDO J. GARCIA,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 6 Filed 06/07/11 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION SHANNON PEREZ, HAROLD DUTTON, JR, AND GREGORY TAMEZ V. Plaintiffs
More informationCase 1:15-cv JEB Document 8-1 Filed 06/03/15 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Case 1:15-cv-00730-JEB Document 8-1 Filed 06/03/15 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA MONTGOMERY BLAIR SIBLEY, Plaintiff, v. THE HONORABLE MITCH MCCONNELL SOLELY
More informationNO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 7 February 2012
An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3)
More informationCase 5:13-cv MFU-RSB Document 33 Filed 08/30/13 Page 1 of 16 Pageid#: 205
Case 5:13-cv-00077-MFU-RSB Document 33 Filed 08/30/13 Page 1 of 16 Pageid#: 205 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Harrisonburg Division JOANNE HARRIS, et al, ) ) Plaintiffs ) )
More informationCase 2:03-cv TJW Document Filed 07/14/2006 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION
Case 2:03-cv-00354-TJW Document 305-1 Filed 07/14/2006 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION LEAGUE OF UNITED LATIN AMERICAN CITIZENS, et al. Plaintiffs V.
More informationCase 1:14-cv JRH-BKE Document 17-1 Filed 04/30/14 Page 1 of 14
Case 1:14-cv-00097-JRH-BKE Document 17-1 Filed 04/30/14 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA AUGUSTA DIVISION HENRY D. HOWARD, et al., v. Plaintiffs, AUGUSTA-RICHMOND
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document 1036 Filed 06/02/14 Page 1 of 10
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 1036 Filed 06/02/14 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION SHANNON PEREZ, et al., CIVIL ACTION NO. Plaintiffs,
More informationCase 3:15-cv AWT Document 55 Filed 06/23/16 Page 1 of 20 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT : : : : : : : :
Case 3:15-cv-01182-AWT Document 55 Filed 06/23/16 Page 1 of 20 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT -------------------------------- x MGM RESORTS INTERNATIONAL GLOBAL : GAMING DEVELOPMENT,
More informationCase 5:11-cv Document 1 Filed 06/17/11 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION
Case 5:11-cv-00490 Document 1 Filed 06/17/11 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION Texas Latino Redistricting Task Force, Joey Cardenas,
More informationCase: 2:13-cv WOB-GFVT-DJB Doc #: 63-1 Filed: 07/11/13 Page: 1 of 7 - Page ID#: 905
Case 213-cv-00068-WOB-GFVT-DJB Doc # 63-1 Filed 07/11/13 Page 1 of 7 - Page ID# 905 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY NORTHERN DIVISION (AT COVINGTON) KENNY BROWN, et al.,
More informationCAUSE NO GINGER WEATHERSPOON, IN THE 44 th -B JUDICIAL. Defendant. DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS DEFENDANT S PLEA TO THE JURISDICTION
CAUSE NO. 09-06233 Filed 10 August 23 P12:26 Gary Fitzsimmons District Clerk Dallas District GINGER WEATHERSPOON, IN THE 44 th -B JUDICIAL Plaintiff, v. DISTRICT COURT OF OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI CENTRAL DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI CENTRAL DIVISION ASSOCIATION OF COMMUNITY ) ORGANIZATIONS FOR REFORM ) NOW et al., ) ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) Case No. 08-CV-4084-NKL
More informationCase 1:11-cv RMC-TBG-BAH Document 214 Filed 03/01/12 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 214 Filed 03/01/12 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA STATE OF TEXAS, v. Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 1:11-cv- 01303 (RMC-TBG-BAH)
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION
Case 1:11-cv-01255-AJT-JFA Document 11 Filed 12/05/11 Page 1 of 7 PageID# 38 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION AMY LAMARCA, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs,
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document 925 Filed 10/11/13 Page 1 of 8
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 925 Filed 10/11/13 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION SHANNON PEREZ, et al., v. Plaintiffs, STATE
More informationCase 2:14-cv CJB-MBN Document 32 Filed 12/12/14 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
Case 2:14-cv-00649-CJB-MBN Document 32 Filed 12/12/14 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA ATCHAFALAYA BASINKEEPER and LOUISIANA CRAWFISH No. 2:14-cv-00649-CJB-MBN PRODUCERS
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
No. 14-5151 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT THE STATE OF TEXAS Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., in his official capacity
More informationCase 1:11-cv RMC-TBG-BAH Document 12 Filed 08/17/11 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 12 Filed 08/17/11 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA STATE OF TEXAS, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; ERIC H. HOLDER,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Case 2:17-cv-14148-ELC-DPH-GJQ ECF No. 88 filed 08/03/18 PageID.2046 Page 1 of 8 LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF MICHIGAN, et al., UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document 614 Filed 02/09/12 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 614 Filed 02/09/12 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION SHANNON PEREZ, et al. Plaintiffs And EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON,
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document 935 Filed 11/25/13 Page 1 of 7
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 935 Filed 11/25/13 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION SHANNON PEREZ, et al. ) ) Plaintiffs ) CIVIL ACTION
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION
Case 2:13-cv-00193 Document 110-2 116 Filed in in TXSD on 12/11/13 12/10/13 Page 1 of of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION UNITED STATES Plaintiff,
More informationCase 1:10-cv JDB Document 26 Filed 09/02/10 Page 1 of 7
Case 1:10-cv-00561-JDB Document 26 Filed 09/02/10 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA STEPHEN LAROQUE, ANTHONY CUOMO, JOHN NIX, KLAY NORTHRUP, LEE RAYNOR, and KINSTON
More informationCase 1:15-cv KG-WPL Document 19 Filed 09/03/15 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
Case 1:15-cv-00604-KG-WPL Document 19 Filed 09/03/15 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO BOARD OF EDUCATION FOR THE GALLUP-MCKINLEY COUNTY SCHOOLS, Plaintiff,
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document 1366 Filed 04/21/17 Page 1 of 12
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 1366 Filed 04/21/17 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION SHANNON PEREZ, et al., v. Plaintiffs, STATE OF
More informationCase 2:13-cv Document 433 Filed in TXSD on 07/23/14 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION
Case 2:13-cv-00193 Document 433 Filed in TXSD on 07/23/14 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION MARC VEASEY, et al., Plaintiffs, VS. CIVIL ACTION
More informationCase: Document: Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/05/2014. Case No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Case: 14-40003 Document: 00512618965 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/05/2014 Case No. 14-40003 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT MARC VEASEY; JANE HAMILTON; SERGIO DELEON; FLOYD CARRIER;
More informationCase 2:13-cv Document 272 Filed in TXSD on 05/09/14 Page 1 of 5
Case 2:13-cv-00193 Document 272 Filed in TXSD on 05/09/14 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION MARC VEASEY, JANE HAMILTON, SERGIO DELEON,
More informationORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
USCA Case #17-1038 Document #1666639 Filed: 03/17/2017 Page 1 of 15 ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ) CONSUMERS FOR AUTO RELIABILITY
More information