Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 6:13-cv-01834 #93 Text Order

    Uploaded by

    Equality Case Files
    175 views1 page
    The U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon denied a motion to postpone oral arguments on a plaintiff's motion for summary judgment in a civil rights case. The court would not delay the arguments, scheduled for the next day, to consider a proposed intervenor's late-filed motion to intervene. However, the court also stated it would not issue a decision on summary judgment until it resolved the intervention motion. If intervention was allowed, the court would schedule further briefing on summary judgment or set the matter for trial. Responses to the intervention motion were due by May 2nd and a reply was due May 9th, with an oral argument on the motion set for May 14th.

    Original Description:

    Text Order - Denying motion to postpone and setting deadlines for motion to intervene

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon denied a motion to postpone oral arguments on a plaintiff's motion for summary judgment in a civil rights case. The court would not delay the arguments, scheduled for the next day, to consider a proposed intervenor's late-filed motion to intervene. However, the court also stated it would not issue a decision on summary judgment until it resolved the intervention motion. If intervention was allowed, the court would schedule further briefing on summary judgment or set the matter for trial. Responses to the intervention motion were due by May 2nd and a reply was due May 9th, with an oral argument on the motion set for May 14th.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    175 views1 page

    6:13-cv-01834 #93 Text Order

    Uploaded by

    Equality Case Files
    The U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon denied a motion to postpone oral arguments on a plaintiff's motion for summary judgment in a civil rights case. The court would not delay the arguments, scheduled for the next day, to consider a proposed intervenor's late-filed motion to intervene. However, the court also stated it would not issue a decision on summary judgment until it resolved the intervention motion. If intervention was allowed, the court would schedule further briefing on summary judgment or set the matter for trial. Responses to the intervention motion were due by May 2nd and a reply was due May 9th, with an oral argument on the motion set for May 14th.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    U.S.

    District Court District of Oregon (Eugene (6)) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 6:13-cv-01834-MC
    Geiger et al v. Kitzhaber et al Assigned to: Judge Michael J. McShane Cause: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act Date Filed: 10/15/2013 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 950 Constitutional: State Statute Jurisdiction: Federal Question

    Date Filed
    04/22/14

    Docket Text 93 ORDER: Oral argument on plaintiff's motion for summary judgement was scheduled on January 22, 2014, for tomorrow afternoon. Today, a proposed intervenor represented by California counsel, moves this court to postpone argument while the court considers their motion to intervene led at 11:00 P.M. last night. The Motion to Postpone 92 is DENIED as untimely. In order to brief and participate in any motion for summary judgement, the proposed intervenor must rst demonstrate it has standing to intervene. The court will not issue a decision on summary judgement pending resolution of the motion to intervene. If intervention is allowed, the court will schedule a second brieng schedule on summary judgement or the court will set the matter for trial. All responses to the Motion to Intervene 86 are due May 2, 2014. Proposed intervenor is to reply by May 9, 2014. Oral argument on the motion to intervene 86 is set for 9:00 A.M. on 5/14/2014 in Courtroom 2 of the Eugene Courthouse before Judge Michael J. McShane. The attorneys are to appear in person. Ordered by Judge Michael J. McShane. Associated Cases: 6:13-cv-01834-MC, 6:13-cv-02256-MC (cp) (Entered: 04/22/2014)

    You might also like