View Single Post
Old April 13, 2012, 10:16 PM   #132
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,308
BIG NEWS at the 7th!

Tom van Dermyde, the NRA Lobbyest in IL has posted the following over at Illinois Carry: http://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index...howtopic=29698

Quote:
Originally Posted by tvandermyde
The state filed a motion to stay Shepard pending Moore at the appellate level. We objected to it. I just received word the state's motion was denied. Additionally, We filed a motion to have the two cases combined and it was granted we will now be heard with Moore we have filed our brief in the appeal and await the state's response

Good news all the way around

Now back to my regularlly scheduled vacation. . .
Now I have to log onto PACER and see what all is up!... No I don't. krucam, over at MDShooters beat me to it. I'm gonna just quote him for brevity:

Quote:
Originally Posted by krucam
]OK, here's it is...Doc 64 in the District Ct, Ordered by Chief Judge Easterbrook from CA7!

Sheppard Docket is here: http://ia600609.us.archive.org/34/it...07.docket.html

The State (Appellee/Defendant) was playing games. With the two similar cases percolating up, Appellees wanted to Stay Sheppard, pending SAF's Moore case. BS...

Chief Judge said no to it, in Doc 64 in the Sheppard District Court.
http://www.archive.org/download/gov....52207.64.0.pdf

The NRA Appellants/Plaintiffs from Sheppard objected to the State's proposal. They proposed that the Sheppard and Moore Oral Arguments be combined. That request was GRANTED.

Perhaps someone can help me uncover whether the cases are combined in entirety, or just the Oral Arguments...the Order only implies the Oral Arguments...

You can't have separate Merits leading to, and separate Opinions spawned from a single Oral Argument, can you???

Either way, I'm still happy to mix the legal expertise of SAF with Ms Sheppard as a Plaintiff...
What Mark means by that last is that Sheppard is the better plaintiff but Moore has the better legal team.

So, what we will be seeing is separate arguments on the merits, but that the orals will be combined. One decision for the two cases. Unusual, but not unheard of.

The real crux is if the two teams of attorneys can work together on this. NRA v. Gura not something we need to see, right now.
Al Norris is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.07422 seconds with 7 queries