Greenspun et al Stephens Media, LLC et al

Filing 45

ORDER Denying 36 Motion for TRO and 37 Motion for Preliminary Injunction. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 9/25/2013. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLR)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 7 8 BRIAN L. GREENSPUN, et al., 9 10 11 2:13-CV-1494 JCM (PAL) Plaintiff(s), v. STEPHENS MEDIA, LLC, et al., 12 Defendant(s). 13 14 ORDER 15 Presently before the court is individual plaintiff Brian Greenspun’s emergency motion for 16 a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. (Docs. ## 36, 37). Plaintiff also asks the 17 court to grant expedited discovery under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(d). 18 On August 20, 2013, plaintiffs filed their first emergency motions for a preliminary 19 injunction and temporary restraining order. (Docs. ## 2, 3). The thrust of plaintiffs’ claims allege 20 that the defendants have conspired to monopolize the Las Vegas newspaper market, in violation of 21 federal and state antitrust laws.1 22 On August 27, 2013, the court granted plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order 23 and set a preliminary injunction hearing for September 6, 2013. At the hearing, the court entertained 24 argument from the parties regarding, among other things, the justiciability of the matter for review. 25 At that hearing, and as detailed in the subsequent order, the court held that “there is no definitive 26 contract or agreement that presently exists between Defendants and Las Vegas Sun, Inc. and/or the 27 1 28 James C. Mahan U.S. District Judge For a detailed description of the claims, see complaint, doc. #1. 1 Greenspun Media Group terminating the Joint Operating Agreement under which the Las Vegas 2 Review-Journal and Las Vegas Sun newspapers are published. Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ complaint 3 that the termination of the Joint Operating Agreement will violate antitrust laws is premature and 4 not ripe.” (See Order doc. # 34). 5 According to plaintiff’s latest motions for a temporary restraining order and preliminary 6 injunction, the defendants and the Las Vegas Sun Inc. and/or Greenspun Media Group have since 7 added minor amendments to the letter of intent and have signed the letter as an indication of their 8 understanding of its proposed terms. Greenspun notes these changes and then proceeds to repeat 9 largely the same legal arguments advanced in plaintiff’s first motion for a temporary restraining 10 order and preliminary injunction. 11 Upon review of plaintiff’s motions, it appears that the only difference between the 12 circumstances as they existed at the time of his first motions and as they stand now is that the letter 13 has been signed by the parties. (See proposed letter of intent, attached to doc. # 36). 14 However, the court is unpersuaded that the presence of the signatures on the non-binding 15 letter of intent somehow transforms this matter into one ripe for review. The court’s concerns 16 expressed at the September 6, 2013, hearing and in the subsequent order remain: there is no 17 definitive contract or legally binding agreement providing for termination of the JOA. Consequently, 18 the matter is still not ripe for review. 19 Accordingly, 20 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that plaintiff’s emergency 21 motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction (docs. # 36 & 37) be, and the 22 same hereby is, DENIED. 23 DATED September 25, 2013. 24 25 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 26 27 28 James C. Mahan U.S. District Judge -2-

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?