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)
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?