View Single Post
Old March 11, 2012, 12:29 AM   #320
Al Norris
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
I'm a tad late in reporting on the Kachalsky case. The response brief by the State of NY was filed on the 8th of Feb. It is attached. Below is a current docket and briefing schedule.

Quote:
02/08/2012 78 BRIEF, on behalf of Appellee Susan Cacace, Jeffrey A. Cohen, Robert K. Holdman and Albert Lorenzor, FILED. Service date 02/08/2012 by CM/ECF. [521465] [11-3642]

02/10/2012 79 SCHEDULING NOTIFICATION, on behalf of Appellant-Cross-Appellee Eric Detmer, Alan Kachalsky, Anna Marcucci-Nance, Johnnie Nance, Christina Nikolov and Second Amendment Foundation, Inc., informing Court of proposed due date 04/03/2012, RECEIVED. Service date 02/10/2012 by CM/ECF.[522926] [11-3642]

02/14/2012 82 SO-ORDERED SCHEDULING NOTIFICATION, setting Appellant-Cross-Appellee Eric Detmer, Alan Kachalsky, Anna Marcucci-Nance, Johnnie Nance, Christina Nikolov and Second Amendment Foundation, Inc. Appellant-Cross-Appellee reply brief due date as 04/03/2012; FILED.[524254] [11-3642]

02/22/2012 84 ORAL ARGUMENT STATEMENT LR 34.1 (a), on behalf of filer Attorney Mr. Simon Heller for Appellee Jeffrey A. Cohen, Susan Cacace, Albert Lorenzor and Robert K. Holdman, FILED. Service date 02/22/2012 by CM/ECF. [532253] [11-3642]

02/22/2012 85 ORAL ARGUMENT STATEMENT LR 34.1 (a), on behalf of filer Attorney Mr. Alan Gura for Appellant-Cross-Appellee Alan Kachalsky, Christina Nikolov, Johnnie Nance, Anna Marcucci-Nance, Eric Detmer and Second Amendment Foundation, Inc. in 11-3642, 11-3962, FILED. Service date 02/22/2012 by CM/ECF. [532659] [11-3642, 11-3962]
Expect Alan Gura to cite both Woollard and Weaver in reply to NY's assertion that no court has found for the right to exist outside the home.

In other news, the NRA case, Benson v. Chicago took a little twist! Chicago playing games with the Court and the Court not liking it one bit!

Quote:
2012-03-07 161 MINUTE entry before Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The Clerk's Office informed the Court that Defendant filed only a paper version of its summary judgment filings, including the exhibits, and did not file electronically. Although the Court understands the potential time and expense of electronically scanning the box-full of exhibits, Defendant (like every other litigant) must electronically file all of its filings (even sealed or partially-sealed documents are filed electronically). And feeding the pages into a scanner can be accomplished without extraordinary effort. The electronic filing shall be completed on or before 03/14/12. Mailed notice (slb, ) (Entered: 03/07/2012)
Attached Files
File Type: pdf Kachalsky State Appellee Response.pdf (263.9 KB, 10 views)
Al Norris is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.03341 seconds with 9 queries