Lance, et al v. Davidson
ORDER Gigi Dennis shall be substituted for Donnetta Davidson as the named Defendant in this case. Defendant shall file a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Elections Clause Claim with brief in support, within 30 days. Plaintiffs' Elections Claus e Claim shall be postponed pending consideration of defense of issue preclusion asserted. Court reaffirms previous ruling re: Plaintiffs' Petition Clause Claim fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Signed by Judge David M. Ebel on 3/21/06. (pap, )
Lance, et al v. Davidson
Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F O R THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO C i vi l Action No. 03-CV-02453-ZLW-CBS K E IT H LANCE, C AR L MILLER, R E N E E NELSON, N AN C Y O' O N N O R , C Plaintiffs, v. G IG I DENNIS, SECRETARY OF STATE FOR T H E STATE OF COLORADO, in her official capacity only, Defendant.
ORDER F i l e d : March 21, 2006
B e f o r e E B E L , Senior Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the T e n t h Circuit, PORFILIO, Senior Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Ap p e a l s for the Tenth Circuit, and WE I N S H I E N K , Senior District Judge of the U n i t e d States District Court for the District of Colorado. E B E L , Circuit Judge. O n March 1, 2006, the court ordered simultaneous status reports from the p a r t i e s in this case as to how the matter should proceed. Based upon those status r e p o r t s , the court hereby ORDERS as follows: 1. T h e Defendant shall file within thirty days a motion to dismiss the P l a i n t i f f s 'Elections Clause Claim based upon the defense of issue preclusion, a c c o mp a n i e d by a brief in support thereof. Not more than thirty days after the f i l i n g of the Defendant' motion to dismiss and supportive memorandum, the s P l a i n t i f f s shall file their brief in opposition. Not more than fifteen days
Page 2 of 2
t h e r e a f t e r , the Defendant shall file a reply brief. 2. An y consideration of the merits of the Plaintiffs'Elections Clause C l a i m shall be postponed until after the court considers the defense of issue p r e c l u s i o n asserted by the Defendant. 3. T h e court reaffirms its previous ruling that " l a i n t i f f s 'Petition P C l a u s e Claim fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, pursuant to F e d . R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6)." Lance v. Davidson, 379 F.Supp. 1117, 1130-32 ( D . C o l o . 2005). The Supreme Court expressly declined to pass on our previous r u l i n g dismissing the Plaintiff' Petition Clause Claim. See Lance v. Dennis, 126 s S. C t . 1198, 1203 n.3 (U.S. 2006). Therefore, the previous rulings on that matter w i l l not be reopened or reconsidered. Because the Supreme Court " a c a t e [ d ] the v j u d gme n t of the district court,"when this court enters its final ruling in this case, i t will reenter at that time its decision again dismissing the Plaintiffs'Petition C l a u s e Claim. 4. G i gi Dennis shall be substituted for Donetta Davidson as the named D e f e n d a n t in this case. E N T E R E D BY THE COURT: / s / David M. Ebel H o n o r a b l e David M. Ebel C i r c u i t Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?