Palmer v. D.C. - Page 2

Segerrik · April 9, 2014, 03:20 PM

The motion to expedite is over 8 months old without a ruling. What a sham this is!

Dearth v. Holder is before the DC Circuit and may rule on whether the right to bear arms extends beyond the home. Such a ruling would make this case very, very strong.

I have done some research and can find no other civil rights case that has lingered for so long at the district court level (except for cases that have been stayed). Does anybody know of a civil rights case that has taken longer at the district court level?

press1280 · April 10, 2014, 05:59 AM

The DC Circuit denied the mandamus so the judge will simply take his time. The judge (Frederick Scullin) was handed a dozen cases or so when this case was re-assigned. He has ruled on a few, but not all of them. He's supposedly on Senior Status but seems to have a very full caseload.
I thought when a case is reassigned it's supposed to be to a judge that has time on his hands to make a quick ruling? Otherwise why bother?

JimDandy · April 10, 2014, 09:31 AM

That assumes there IS a judge with time on his hands. This particular case may or may not be in some sort of intentional limbo. But let's ask the lawyers. Generally speaking, are there enough judges seated? Enough courts to handle the cases being brought?

Al Norris · April 10, 2014, 09:46 AM

The answer is a resounding: No. There are not enough Judges to handle the load.

The only fix to this situation is by the Senate to appoint and fill the vacancies. That is not going to happen anytime soon.

JimDandy · April 10, 2014, 09:51 AM

As a follow-up, if the seats were filled, would there be enough judges? Or do more seats need to be created and filled as well?

KyJim · April 10, 2014, 11:27 AM

Years ago when I did civil litigation, I had a case that was removed to federal court and transferred to D.C. I found out how crowded the docket there was, especially for complex civil matters. It was transferred back to the federal district in my state about two years later, still without a ruling on a motion to dismiss and no answer filed. I don't imagine it has gotten any less crowded over time.

press1280 · April 10, 2014, 06:12 PM

What I'd like to know is why it isn't transferred to another judge, possibly in a faster District Court. Obviously, Scullin's main District in NY is extremely busy. But look at the District Court in Moore/Shepherd, who rendered an opinion in under a year.
Why can they have an opinion in one year yet 2 judges can't render an opinion in almost 5 years?

JimDandy · April 10, 2014, 07:57 PM

I'm not sure I'm right, so if one of the lawyers can confirm- for one reason the districts/circuits don't rule each other. A ruling in THIS district over here doesn't mean THAT District over there HAS to rule the same way.

It's also how we get circuit splits. I.e. Peruta could be ruled differently than Woollard.

Another (and probably more likely and compelling) reason may be jurisdiction.

KyJim · April 10, 2014, 08:40 PM

You are correct JimDandy and most district court rulings are not published, even unofficially.Also, a published opinion does not bind either that judge or another judge in the same district.

press1280 · April 11, 2014, 06:28 AM

That's correct-they are not bound by ruling in other circuits/districts. But very frequently a judge will sit "by designation" (something like that) when they rule on a case outside of their normal duty station. Scullin is a NY judge who was handed a dozen DC District cases, and seems to me like he's giving the NY cases priority and simply sprinkling out the DC cases(some of which may even be older than Palmer!).
I just can't understand why Chief Justice Roberts would reassign the case after 2 years and not do anything now with the case approaching 5 years now. Maybe the original judge asked to have some of his cases reassigned?

press1280 · April 11, 2014, 10:00 AM

There was actually some activity by the judge in this case last week:

http://blog.californiarighttocarry.org/?page_id=1852

He took a year and a half to rule on Gura's motion to strike memoranda by DC. Wow

That just really sucks. Other cases have been decided in less time than it took this judge to rule on a simple motion.

maestro pistolero · April 11, 2014, 01:31 PM

Quote:

He took a year and a half to rule on Gura's motion to strike memoranda by DC.

And it was denied! Double butt-hurt.

62coltnavy · April 11, 2014, 03:23 PM

After all of this time, the question was essentially moot--Scullin will consider everything that has been filed. It is as one of the old country judges around here used to say, "It's before me now, counsel."

KyJim · April 11, 2014, 03:24 PM

Quote:

And it was denied! Double butt-hurt.

But at least the judge seems to be looking at the case.

Segerrik · May 8, 2014, 04:11 PM

Gura refiles mandamus petition for the case:
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/at...8&d=1399555579

Al Norris · July 27, 2014, 10:20 AM

The decision on Palmer is now out.

Since a new thread has been started on this topic, We just won Palmer at the DC District Court!, this thread is closed.

April 9, 2014, 03:20 PM	#26
Segerrik Junior Member Join Date: July 27, 2011 Posts: 11	Longest Civil Rights case for District Court Decision? The motion to expedite is over 8 months old without a ruling. What a sham this is! Dearth v. Holder is before the DC Circuit and may rule on whether the right to bear arms extends beyond the home. Such a ruling would make this case very, very strong. I have done some research and can find no other civil rights case that has lingered for so long at the district court level (except for cases that have been stayed). Does anybody know of a civil rights case that has taken longer at the district court level?

May 8, 2014, 04:11 PM	#40
Segerrik Junior Member Join Date: July 27, 2011 Posts: 11	Mandamus Part II Gura refiles mandamus petition for the case: http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/at...8&d=1399555579

April 10, 2014, 05:59 AM	#27
press1280 Senior Member Join Date: May 17, 2012 Posts: 228	The DC Circuit denied the mandamus so the judge will simply take his time. The judge (Frederick Scullin) was handed a dozen cases or so when this case was re-assigned. He has ruled on a few, but not all of them. He's supposedly on Senior Status but seems to have a very full caseload. I thought when a case is reassigned it's supposed to be to a judge that has time on his hands to make a quick ruling? Otherwise why bother?

April 10, 2014, 09:31 AM	#28
JimDandy Senior Member Join Date: August 8, 2012 Posts: 2,556	That assumes there IS a judge with time on his hands. This particular case may or may not be in some sort of intentional limbo. But let's ask the lawyers. Generally speaking, are there enough judges seated? Enough courts to handle the cases being brought?

April 10, 2014, 09:46 AM	#29
Al Norris Moderator Emeritus Join Date: June 29, 2000 Location: Rupert, Idaho Posts: 9,660	The answer is a resounding: No. There are not enough Judges to handle the load. The only fix to this situation is by the Senate to appoint and fill the vacancies. That is not going to happen anytime soon.

April 10, 2014, 09:51 AM	#30
JimDandy Senior Member Join Date: August 8, 2012 Posts: 2,556	As a follow-up, if the seats were filled, would there be enough judges? Or do more seats need to be created and filled as well?

April 10, 2014, 11:27 AM	#31
KyJim Senior Member Join Date: July 26, 2005 Location: The Bluegrass Posts: 9,142	Years ago when I did civil litigation, I had a case that was removed to federal court and transferred to D.C. I found out how crowded the docket there was, especially for complex civil matters. It was transferred back to the federal district in my state about two years later, still without a ruling on a motion to dismiss and no answer filed. I don't imagine it has gotten any less crowded over time.

April 10, 2014, 06:12 PM	#32
press1280 Senior Member Join Date: May 17, 2012 Posts: 228	What I'd like to know is why it isn't transferred to another judge, possibly in a faster District Court. Obviously, Scullin's main District in NY is extremely busy. But look at the District Court in Moore/Shepherd, who rendered an opinion in under a year. Why can they have an opinion in one year yet 2 judges can't render an opinion in almost 5 years?

April 10, 2014, 07:57 PM	#33
JimDandy Senior Member Join Date: August 8, 2012 Posts: 2,556	I'm not sure I'm right, so if one of the lawyers can confirm- for one reason the districts/circuits don't rule each other. A ruling in THIS district over here doesn't mean THAT District over there HAS to rule the same way. It's also how we get circuit splits. I.e. Peruta could be ruled differently than Woollard. Another (and probably more likely and compelling) reason may be jurisdiction.

April 10, 2014, 08:40 PM	#34
KyJim Senior Member Join Date: July 26, 2005 Location: The Bluegrass Posts: 9,142	You are correct JimDandy and most district court rulings are not published, even unofficially.Also, a published opinion does not bind either that judge or another judge in the same district.

April 11, 2014, 06:28 AM	#35
press1280 Senior Member Join Date: May 17, 2012 Posts: 228	That's correct-they are not bound by ruling in other circuits/districts. But very frequently a judge will sit "by designation" (something like that) when they rule on a case outside of their normal duty station. Scullin is a NY judge who was handed a dozen DC District cases, and seems to me like he's giving the NY cases priority and simply sprinkling out the DC cases(some of which may even be older than Palmer!). I just can't understand why Chief Justice Roberts would reassign the case after 2 years and not do anything now with the case approaching 5 years now. Maybe the original judge asked to have some of his cases reassigned?

April 11, 2014, 10:00 AM	#36
press1280 Senior Member Join Date: May 17, 2012 Posts: 228	There was actually some activity by the judge in this case last week: http://blog.californiarighttocarry.org/?page_id=1852 He took a year and a half to rule on Gura's motion to strike memoranda by DC. Wow That just really sucks. Other cases have been decided in less time than it took this judge to rule on a simple motion.

April 11, 2014, 03:23 PM	#38
62coltnavy Senior Member Join Date: February 1, 2011 Posts: 356	After all of this time, the question was essentially moot--Scullin will consider everything that has been filed. It is as one of the old country judges around here used to say, "It's before me now, counsel."

July 27, 2014, 10:20 AM	#41
Al Norris Moderator Emeritus Join Date: June 29, 2000 Location: Rupert, Idaho Posts: 9,660	The decision on Palmer is now out. Since a new thread has been started on this topic, We just won Palmer at the DC District Court!, this thread is closed.