Baldus et al v. Brennan et al
| Alvin Baldus, Carlene Bechen, Elvira Bumpus, Ronald Biendsei, Leslie W Davis, III, Brett Eckstein, Georgia Rogers, Richard Kresbach, Rochelle Moore, Amy Risseeuw, Judy Robson, Jeanne Sanchez-Bell, Cecelia Schliepp, Travis Thyssen and Cindy Barbera |
| Michael Brennan, David Deininger, Gerald Nichol, Thomas Cane, Thomas Barland, Gordon Myse and Kevin Kennedy |
| 2:2011cv00562 |
| June 10, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin |
| Milwaukee Office |
| Dunn |
| J P Stadtmueller |
| State Reapportionment |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
317
ORDER by Circuit Judge Diane P. Wood, District Judge J.P. Stadtmueller, and District Judge Robert M. Dow, Jr., on 6/3/13 ACCEPTING 315 the parties' Joint Report; all matters in this litigation are now resolved. (cc: all counsel)(nm)
|
|
Filing
313
ORDER by Circuit Judge Diane P. Wood, District Judge J.P. Stadtmueller, and District Judge Robert M. Dow, Jr., on 4/30/13: denying 301 Plaintiffs' Motion requesting an award of interim payment of costs; and, granting 305 the Legislature's Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages. (cc: all counsel) (nm)
|
|
Filing
295
ORDER by Circuit Judge Diane P. Wood, District Judge J.P. Stadtmueller, and District Judge Robert M. Dow, Jr., on 2/25/13: granting 278 Plaintiffs' motion for forensic analysis of the LTSB Computers - LTSB shall produce the computers in their possession for forensic examination by Mark Lanterman; granting 285 Plaintiffs' motion to expand the scope of the forensic examination as specified; granting 286 Plaintiffs' motion for leave to request additional forensic review - Rei nhart Boerner Van Deuren s.c. and James Troupis shall maintain any files relating to the redistricting process and attendant litigation, such that Plaintiffs may move for forensic examination of those materials if necessary; and, at the direction of Plaintiffs, Mark Lanterman shall conduct a further forensic review of all materials previously examined by Project Leadership Associates. (cc: all counsel) (nm)
|
|
Filing
272
ORDER by Circuit Judge Diane P. Wood, District Judge J.P. Stadtmueller, and District Judge Robert M. Dow, Jr., on 1/17/13: the parties shall file a final joint status report addressing the items discussed herein no later than 3/15/13; to the extent there are any disputes regarding the investigation that will form the foundation of the final joint report, the parties shall file motions in compliance with E.D. of WI Civil Local Rule 7(h) no later than 2/15/13; to the extent that any motions are f iled, the non-moving party shall file its response thereto in compliance with E.D. of WI Civil Local Rule 7(h); to the extent Plaintiffs deem it necessary, Plaintiffs shall either renew 252 their Motion for Remedial Discovery or move for other relief as may be appropriate no later than 4/1/13. (cc: all counsel)(nm)
|
|
Filing
262
ORDER by Circuit Judge Diane P. Wood, District Judge J.P. Stadtmueller, and District Judge Robert M. Dow, Jr., on 10/5/12 that Plaintiffs and their representatives cooperate fully with Schiff Hardin and its representatives in the preparation of the i nvestigative report; upon completion, Schiff Hardin shall disclose its report to counsel for the parties and at the same time file a copy with the court; and, pending receipt and consideration of the report, the Court will withhold taking any further action on Plaintiffs' pending motion for remedial discovery. (cc: all counsel)(nm)
|
|
Filing
238
ORDER by Circuit Judge Diane P. Wood, District Judge J.P. Stadtmueller, and District Judge Robert M. Dow, Jr., on 4/11/12: that the maps appearing in 224 the plaintiffs' joint proposal titled "Joint Plaintiffs Proposed Remedy' are A DOPTED and INCORPORATED herein by reference and SUBSTITUTED for the redistricting plans affecting Assembly Districts 8 and 9 that were adopted under Act 43 and which this Court has previously declared unlawful; the redistricting plans adopted pursua nt to Act 43 for all Assembly Districts and Senate Districts, with the exception of Assembly Districts 8 and 9 to the extent noted, shall remain unchanged; GRANTING 219 the City of Milwaukee's motion to appear as amicus curiae - however, the City of Milwaukee's request for relief is DENIED; and, GRANTING 227 Jesus Rodriguez and Hispanics for Leadership's motion to appear as amicus curiae. See Order. (cc: all counsel) nm)
|
|
Filing
210
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER by Circuit Judge Diane P. Wood, District Judge J.P. Stadtmueller, and District Judge Robert M. Dow, Jr., on 3/22/12 as follows: GRANTING the plaintiffs' and intervenor-plaintiffs' Sixth Claim for relief - the c ourt having found that New Assembly Districts 8 and 9 violate the Voting Rights Act and accordingly the Government Accountability Board is ENJOINED from implementing Act 43 in its current form; DISMISSING with prejudice plaintiffs' and interven or-plaintiffs' remaining claims; DENYING as moot 75 the intervenor-defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings; DENYING as moot 128 defendants' motion for summary judgment; DENYING as moot 117 plaintiffs' motion to d efer a judicial decision; DENYING as moot 119 intervenor-plaintiffs' motion to defer a judicial decision; having been granted at trial, TERMINATING administratively 179 James Troupis' motion for clarification; TERMINATING administrat ively 160 defendants' motion in limine, as related to the presentation of evidence related to redistricting anomalies; DENYING 198 intervenor-defendants' motion to dismiss for lack of standing; and, DENYING 126 Citizens for Fair and Public Redistricting's motion to appear as amicus curiae; each party shall bear its own costs. (cc: all counsel) (nm)
|
|
Filing
155
ORDER signed by Judge J P Stadtmueller on 2/14/12 as follows: the Legislature shall file with this Court sealed and unredacted copies of all documents over which they dispute the application of privilege by 4:30 PM on 2/14/12; the Legislature shall electronically file an accompanying brief setting forth their arguments in support of the application of privilege to the submitted documents by 6:30 PM on 2/14/12; the plaintiffs shall file a responsive memorandum setting forth their arguments again st the application of privilege to the submitted documents by 9:00 AM on 2/15/12; and the consolidated-plaintiffs may file a responsive brief setting forth their arguments against the application of privilege to the submitted documents by 9:00 AM on 2/15/12. See Order. (cc: all counsel)(nm)
|
|
Filing
104
ORDER signed by Judge J P Stadtmueller on 1/3/12: denying 84 motion of the Wisconsin State Senate and the Wisconsin State Assembly for reconsideration by a three-judge panel; attorneys for the Wisconsin State Senate and Wisconsin State Assembly, Eric M. McLeod, Joseph L. Olson, Aaron H. Kastens, and Michael Best & Friedrich LLP, jointly and severally, shall remit to plaintiffs' counsel, as a sanction by the Court, the actual reasonable and necessary attorneys' fees and costs incu rred by the plaintiffs in responding to the motions of the Wisconsin State Senate and Wisconsin State Assembly for clarification 63 and reconsideration 84 , and that an itemization of such fees and costs be filed with the court within 7 calendar d ays from the date of this order and said amount be remitted to plaintiffs' counsel within 10 days thereafter; Messrs. Joseph Handrick, Tad Ottman, and Adam Foltz shall appear before the plaintiffs for a deposition, with the specific directive th at they comply with this Courts prior orders requiring disclosure of documents and denying application of privilege; and, the attorneys for the Wisconsin State Senate and Wisconsin State Assembly, Eric M. McLeod, Joseph L. Olson, Aaron H. Kastens, a nd Michael Best & Friedrich LLP, jointly and severally, shall pay to plaintiffs any additional attorneys' fees and costs incurred by the plaintiffs in ensuring compliance with the Court's orders relating to the depositions of Messrs. Handrick, Ottman, and Foltz. See Order. (cc: all counsel) (nm)
|
|
Filing
82
ORDER signed by Judge J P Stadtmueller on 12/20/11: granting in part 77 motion of the Wisconsin State Assembly and the Wisconsin State Senate to clarify the fact that Mr. Handrick is not an attorney and is employed by Reinhart Boerner Van Deuren, S.C.; and, denying in part 77 motion of the Wisconsin State Assembly and the Wisconsin State Senate to clarify to the extent that those parties seek application of privilege to shield Mr. Handrick from discovery - as discussed, privilege does not apply to Mr. Handrick, his work product, or his discussions with the outside counsel of the State Assembly and State Senate. (cc: all counsel) (nm)
|
|
Filing
74
ORDER signed by Judge J P Stadtmueller on 12/8/11: denying 63 non-party movants' Motion to Quash plaintiffs' subpoena issued to Joseph Handrick; denying 72 non-party movants' Motion to Quash plaintiffs' subpoena issued to Tad Ottman; and, directing plaintiffs to redraft and reissue subpoenas to Joseph Handrick and Tad Ottman which correct any issues related to the overbreadth or recording method attendant to their discovery requests. (cc: all counsel) (nm)
|
|
Filing
61
ORDER signed by Judge J P Stadtmueller on 11/30/11 denying 50 plaintiff's motion to compel disclosure. (cc: all counsel) (nm)
|
|
Filing
49
ORDER signed by Judge J P Stadtmueller on 11/21/11 granting 32 intervenor-defendants' Motion to Intervene; granting 44 intervenor-plaintiffs' Motion to Intervene. (cc: all counsel) (nm)
|
|
Filing
25
ORDER signed by Three-Judge Panel (Circuit Judge Diane P Wood, District Judges Robert Dow and J P Stadtmueller) on 10/21/11 denying 16 Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint. (cc: all counsel) (nm)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Wisconsin Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
