December 3, 2020 |
Filing
286
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: it is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1) The Dfts' 258 motion to exclude is DENIED; 2) The Plfs' 259 motion to exclude is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part; 3) The Dfts' 264 evidentiary objections are SUSTAINED in part and OVERRULED in part; 4) The Dfts' 257 motion for summary judgment is GRANTED; 5) The Plfs' 260 motion for partial summary judgment is DENIED; 6) The Plfs' 285 motion to clarify and continue is DENIED as moot; A separate Final Judgment will be entered in accordance with this Memorandum Opinion and Order. Signed by Chief Judge Emily C. Marks on 12/3/2020. (bes, )
|
August 17, 2020 |
Filing
253
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: it is hereby ORDERED that the Objection (doc. 245 ) is OVERRULED. Signed by Chief Judge Emily C. Marks on 8/17/2020. (cwl, )
|
June 29, 2020 |
Filing
225
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER denying the 215 motion for preliminary injunction, as further set out in order. Signed by Chief Judge Emily C. Marks on 6/29/2020. (bes, )
|
June 26, 2020 |
Filing
224
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: it is hereby ORDERED that the 205 Objections are OVERRULED, as further set out in order. Signed by Chief Judge Emily C. Marks on 6/26/2020. (bes, )
|
May 19, 2020 |
Filing
212
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: it is hereby ORDERED that the Objections (doc. 201 ) are OVERRULED. Signed by Chief Judge Emily C. Marks on 5/19/2020. (cwl, )
|
January 24, 2020 |
Filing
194
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: it is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1) The 106 Motion for Class Certification is DENIED; 2) The 165 Motion for Status Conference is DENIED as moot, the Court having ruled on the pending motions. Signed by Chief Judge Emily C. Marks on 01/24/2020. (bes, )
|
December 19, 2019 |
Filing
187
ORDER granting 185 Motion for Leave to Amend Answers to Original Complaint and Supplemental Complaint; The Dfts are given until 12/31/2019 to file as an amended answer the attachment to their motion. (Doc. 185 -1). Signed by Chief Judge Emily C. Marks on 12/19/2019.(bes, )
|
December 3, 2019 |
Filing
178
MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER: it is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1) The renewed motion to dismiss (Doc. 95 ) is DENIED. 2) The motion to dismiss supplemental complaint (Doc. 95 ) is GRANTED as to Plfs Antoine Giles and Laura Corley and the claims of those Plfs are DISMISSED as moot. 3) The motion to dismiss supplemental complaint (Doc. 95 ) is GRANTED as to the State of Alabama, and the State of Alabama is DISMISSED as a party in this case. 4) The motion to dismiss supplemental complaint (D oc. 95 ) is GRANTED as to the claim in count 18 relating to the Federal Form and that claim is DISMISSED as moot. 5) The motion to dismiss supplemental complaint (Doc. 95 ) is DENIED in all other aspects, as is the alternative motion for summary ju dgment (Doc. 95 ), and the cross-motion for summary judgment on count 18 (Doc. 97 ). 6) The motion to strike untimely declaration (Doc. 109 ) is DENIED as moot. Signed by Chief Judge Emily C. Marks on 12/3/2019. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Appeals Checklist)(cnw, )
|
December 26, 2017 |
Filing
80
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: To summarize the more-than-nine-thousand words preceding this section in a single thirty-six-word sentence: Plaintiffs challenge to Alabamas constitutional and statutory scheme for the disenfranchisement and re-enfra nchisement of individuals convicted of crimes of moral turpitude will proceed, but only on a third of the counts in Plaintiffs fifteen-count complaint. Consistent with the reasoning of this opinion, it is ORDERED as follows: (1) Counts 3, 4, 5, 14, and 15 are DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted; and (2) Counts 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 are DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. This action proceeds as to five counts: Pla intiffs claims that section 177(b) of the Alabama Constitution is racially discriminatory in violation of the Fourteenth Amendments Equal Protection Clause and the Fifteenth Amendment (Counts 1 and 2); Plaintiffs claim that section 177(b) is an ex post facto law that retroactively punishes citizens (Count 11); Plaintiffs claim that section 177(b) violates the Eighth Amendments proscription against cruel and unusual punishment (Count 12); and Plaintiffs claim that section 15-22-36.1(a)(3) of the Alabama Code violates the Fourteenth Amendments Equal Protection Clause (Count 13). Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on 12/26/2017. (dmn, )
|
July 28, 2017 |
Filing
72
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: Accordingly, based upon careful consideration of Plaintiffs motion for preliminary injunction, Defendants opposition, the evidentiary hearing, and the oral arguments, and the record, it is ORDERED that the motion (Doc. 56 ) is DENIED as further set out in the opinion and order. Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on 7/28/2017. (dmn, )
|