UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO ORDER

Similar documents
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

Case 2:12-cv JAM-AC Document 57 Filed 01/30/13 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE. STATE OF WASHINGTON, et al., CASE NO. C JLR.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

Case4:09-cv CW Document417 Filed12/01/11 Page1 of 5

Leave to Conduct Expedited Discovery (the Motion for Expedited Discovery ) in the abovecaptioned

Case 3:13-cv CAB-WMC Document 10 Filed 03/29/13 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/04/ :48 PM INDEX NO /2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/04/2017

Case 1:13-cv WJM-BNB Document 23 Filed 10/17/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION 3:14-cv-23-RJC-DCK

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION Case No. 3:17-CV-292

Case 3:17-cv HZ Document 397 Filed 11/16/17 PageID Page 1 of 5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN DECISION AND ORDER

Case 2:13-cv RJS Document 105 Filed 12/23/13 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO

Case 2:16-cv CW Document 85 Filed 02/17/18 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION

Case 1:14-cv CMA Document 14 Filed 05/02/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

Case 3:19-cv DJH Document 21 Filed 03/20/19 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 254

Case 3:14-cv RBL Document 26 Filed 10/23/14 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA

TITLE VI JUDICIAL REMEDIES CHAPTER 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS

Case3:12-cv SI Document11 Filed07/13/12 Page1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Court Rules for Restraining Orders. Chapter 10. Table of Contents. Section 1. Title Section 2. Purpose Section 3. Definitions...

Case 4:16-cv RGE-CFB Document 6 Filed 08/30/16 Page 1 of 10

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE TRIBAL COURT OF THE NOOKSACK TRIBE OF INDIANS FOR THE NOOKSACK INDIAN TRIBE. Plaintiff, Defendants.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 3:08-cv BHS Document 217 Filed 12/09/13 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA

Case 1:08-cv EJL Document 12 Filed 04/06/2009 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF IDAHO

Case 1:09-cv EJL Document 5 Filed 02/26/2009 Page 1 of 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO

Case 1:14-at Document 6 Filed 02/19/14 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 1:13-cv RDM Document 60 Filed 05/19/15 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT

Sparta Commercial Servs. Inc. v Vis Vires Group Inc 2016 NY Slip Op 30199(U) February 2, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number:

Case 2:03-cv EFS Document 183 Filed 03/12/2008

Filing an Answer to the Complaint or Moving to Dismiss under Rule 12

Case 2:14-cv JCC Document 98 Filed 11/24/15 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT. Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation, et al.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI SOUTHERN DIVISION

Case 1:15-cv MSK Document 9 Filed 06/22/15 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 6


UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Chapter II BAY MILLS COURT OF APPEALS

Case 2:17-cv R-JC Document 93 Filed 09/13/18 Page 1 of 5 Page ID #:2921

Case 2:17-cv MJP Document 121 Filed 12/29/17 Page 1 of 6

Miller v Brunner 2018 NY Slip Op 31036(U) May 29, 2018 Supreme Court, Kings County Docket Number: /2018 Judge: Sylvia G. Ash Cases posted with

Case 2:14-cv SPC-CM Document 12 Filed 07/18/14 Page 1 of 7 PageID 252

STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA CONDOMINIUMS, TIMESHARES AND MOBILE HOMES

Case 2:17-cv JLR Document 179 Filed 04/07/17 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON.

NOTICE OF ENTRY OF MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT. Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation, et al.

Case 4:12-cv DLH-CSM Document 17 Filed 07/09/12 Page 1 of 10

Ormandy v Georgiou 2010 NY Slip Op 32564(U) September 13, 2010 Supreme Court, Queens County Docket Number: 10196/08 Judge: Howard G.

Case 1:14-cv CG-N Document 59 Filed 01/25/15 Page 1 of 6

file:///c /Documents%20and%20Settings/tokeeffe/Desktop/M031005%20DKE%20v%20Colgate%20(decision).txt

KALISPEL TRIBE OF INDIANS

cag Doc#413 Filed 04/02/18 Entered 04/02/18 13:54:23 Main Document Pg 1 of 8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA

Case 5:08-cv RMW Document 42 Filed 06/08/2008 Page 1 of 7 SAN JOSE DIVISION

Case 2:14-cv MMM-AGR Document 17 Filed 08/04/14 Page 1 of 6 Page ID #:467 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IAS Part 54. IAS Part 54. WHEREAS, The Leon Waldman Discretionary Trust (the "Trust"), as plaintiff,

Case 1:17-cv TSE-TCB Document 21 Filed 02/06/17 Page 1 of 8 PageID# 372

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAI I

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiffs the North Carolina State Conference for the National Association for the

Case 2:18-cv DDC-TJJ Document 22 Filed 11/01/18 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

9:30 a.m. MOTION CALL, CASE MANAGEMENT, STATUS DATES 10:00 a.m. 2:30 p.m. MATTERS SET BY THE COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CLASS ACTION

RALPH COLEMAN, et al., Plaintiffs, NO. CIV S LKK JFM P THREE-JUDGE COURT. ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, et al., Defendants. MARCIANO PLATA, et al.

X : : : : : : : : : : : : X. JOHN F. KEENAN, United States District Judge: Plaintiff, Federal Insurance Company ( Federal ) has moved

PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION

LEWIS A. KAPLAN United States District Judge United States Courthouse 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 10007

II. FACTS. Late on the afternoon of Thursday, January 16, Nooksack Tribal Council Chairman

Case 1:16-cv AJT-MSN Document 30 Filed 04/25/16 Page 1 of 15 PageID# 552

Case 1:15-cv DPW Document 6 Filed 02/18/15 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

r-q r.:: n u li n-:f THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE

Case 1:16-cv DLH-CSM Document 4 Filed 05/05/16 Page 1 of 12

Case 3:17-cv PRM Document 64 Filed 01/29/18 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA

ORDER DENYING TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

Case 5:17-cv KS-MTP Document 51 Filed 10/19/17 Page 1 of 7

Case4:09-cv CW Document69 Filed01/06/12 Page1 of 5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA ORDER

Petition for Ex-Parte Order

Case 2:12-cv JAD-PAL Document 41 Filed 01/11/13 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

AGREED MOTION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

FILED: RICHMOND COUNTY CLERK 04/17/ :16 PM INDEX NO /2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 48 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/17/2017

Case 1:17-cv LJO-EPG Document 22 Filed 12/27/17 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 3:18-cv M Document 62 Filed 03/09/18 Page 1 of 10 PageID 1084

U.S. District Court District of Idaho (LIVE Database)Version 2.5 (Pocatello) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 4:91-cv EJL

4/18/2018. Jennifer Platzkere Snyder DILWORTH PAXSON LLP. A court order requiring a person to do or cease doing a specific action.

ADAMS COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE BUSINESS OF COURTS

United States District Court District of New Jersey

Transcription:

Case 2:13-cv-00274-EJL Document 7 Filed 06/28/13 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO ST. ISIDORE FARM LLC, and Idaho limited liability company; and GOBERS, LLC., a Washington limited liability company, Case No. 1:10-CV-001-EJL ORDER Plaintiffs, v. COEUR D ALENE TRIBE OF INDIANS, a federally recognized Indian tribe, JOHN DOES 1-10, each of which are Members of the Coeur d Alene Tribe of Indians, Defendants. Pending before the Court in the above-entitled matter is Plaintiffs Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction (Dkt. 3). The motion was filed on June 21, 2013. Defendant Coeur d Alene Tribe of Indians ( Tribe ) has not appeared in this action, but counsel for Plaintiffs informed the Court s staff attorney that the Tribe s counsel was in receipt of the pleadings, a waiver of service had been requested and counsel for the Tribe had been conferring with Plaintiffs counsel regarding this motion. ORDER - 1

Case 2:13-cv-00274-EJL Document 7 Filed 06/28/13 Page 2 of 5 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b) controls the issuance of a temporary restraining order ( TRO ). Normally, a TRO cannot be issued without notice unless the facts in an affidavit or verified complaint clearly shows that immediate and irreparable injury, loss or damage will result to the movant before the adverse party can be heard and the movant s attorney certifies in writing any efforts made to give notice and reasons why it should not be required. Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(A) and (B). Plaintiffs seek this Court to enjoin and restrain the Tribe and the Coeur d Alene Tribal Court from levying civil fines, placing liens on the real property owned by Plaintiff St. Isidore Farm LLC and pursuing criminal actions against the Plaintiffs for the land application of domestic sewage sludge (septage) to non-public contact sites from which there is no discharge into waterways. Plaintiffs allege they are in compliance with all federal and state regulations for the discharge of septage and the Tribe s more restrictive discharge provisions are not applicable to non-indian land owned by non-indians located within the boundaries of the Coeur d Alene Reservation. Plaintiffs allege they are being fined by the Tribe and are facing criminal liability as well as liens being placed on their property for not being in compliance with the Tribe s laws and regulations. Temporary restraining orders are designed to preserve the status quo pending the ultimate outcome of litigation. The Ninth Circuit has not articulated a special test for a TRO, so the test for a TRO is the same as for a preliminary injunction. A plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction must establish that he is likely to succeed on the merits, that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, that the ORDER - 2

Case 2:13-cv-00274-EJL Document 7 Filed 06/28/13 Page 3 of 5 balance of equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest. Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008). The Court finds in this case and at this stage of the litigation, Plaintiffs have satisfied the four factors to support the issuance of a TRO. The ongoing civil fines and Tribal Court proceedings support a finding that Plaintiffs are likely to suffer immediate and irreparable harm in the absence of a TRO. The case law presented regarding the Tribe s ability to regulate activity on non-indian land appear to support that Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the legal merits of their claims. The balance of equities tips in Plaintiffs favor as the granting of the restraining order will not harm or limit the Tribe s future prosecution of the Plaintiffs if the Plaintiffs are not successful on the merits. Finally, the issuance of the TRO in this case is in the public interest. The public has an interest in having septage discharge on land subject to some regulations for the protection of public health, but the Plaintiffs have established that the septage discharge in this case does not threaten public health. It is in the public interest to have a federal court resolve the legal arguments regarding regulation of non-indian property located within an Indian reservation. For these reasons the Court will issue a TRO and set a briefing schedule so that the Defendants can be heard on the motion for preliminary injunction. ORDER - 3

Case 2:13-cv-00274-EJL Document 7 Filed 06/28/13 Page 4 of 5 ORDER After considering the Motion, Verified Complaint, and the entire court file, it is hereby Ordered and Decreed that the motion for a temporary restraining order (Dkt. 3) is GRANTED. No bond shall be required for the issuance of this TRO. The Defendants are hereby restrained from imposing a daily fine of $5,000 and imposing a lien upon the real properties owned in fee by Plaintiff non-indian business entity St. Isidore Farm, LLC. The Coeur d Alene Tribal Court is enjoined from proceeding with the prosecution of the Tribe s lawsuit against the herein captioned Plaintiffs. Defendants John Does 1-10 are restrained and prohibited from in any manner carrying out the imposition of a daily fine, or the imposition of a lien on the herein described non-tribal fee lands. The Coeur d'alene Tribal Court is enjoined and restrained from proceeding further with the lawsuit filed under cause number: CV-SC-2013-0112. Pending the Court s determination on the motion for preliminary injunction, Plaintiffs continue their operations alleged to be in violation of the Tribal Code at their own potential peril if Plaintiffs are not successful on the merits of their action in Federal Court. Stated another way, if Plaintiffs do not prevail on the motion for preliminary injunction, nothing in this Order prevents the Tribe from potentially seeking relief in the Coeur d Alene Tribal Court, for any alleged violations that occur via Plaintiffs operations until the Court rules on the motion for preliminary injunction. The Court encourages the parties to meet and work out a stipulation to leave the temporary restraining order in place until the Court rules on the motion for preliminary ORDER - 4

Case 2:13-cv-00274-EJL Document 7 Filed 06/28/13 Page 5 of 5 injunction. This would allow adequate time for briefing to be submitted to the Court and for the Court to schedule an evidentiary hearing on the motion for preliminary injunction when it is next at the Federal Courthouse in Coeur d Alene. Absent a stipulation by the parties, the Court will expedite the briefing schedule as the TRO expires in fourteen (14) days. Therefore, Defendants response to the motion for preliminary injunction shall be filed on or before July 8, 2013 and any reply by Plaintiffs shall be filed on or before July 11, 2013. The Court will determine if a hearing on the motion for preliminary injunction is necessary after reviewing the briefing of the parties. Plaintiffs shall serve this Order on Defendants immediately and shall also send a copy of this Order to Defendant s counsel via email. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: June 28, 2013 Honorable Edward J. Lodge U. S. District Judge ORDER - 5