The Beloved Church et al v. Pritzker et al
| The Beloved Church and Stephen Cassell |
| David Snyders, Steve Schaible, Craig Beintema and Jay Robert Pritzker |
| 3:2020cv50153 |
| April 30, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Iain D Johnston |
| John Z Lee |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1331 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 26, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 60 MOTION by Defendant Jay Robert Pritzker to stay pending appeal [unopposed] (Rees, R.) |
| Filing 59 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Z. Lee: Minute order #58 is stricken. A telephonic initial status hearing is set for 8/10/20 at 8:45 a.m. In light of the COVID-19 pandemic and the related General Orders, the Court finds that it is necessary to conduct the status hearing via telephone conference. The call-in number is 888-273-3658 and the access code is 1637578. Counsel of record will receive a separate email at least 12 hours prior to the start of the telephonic hearing with instructions on how to join the call. Members of the public and media will be able to call in to listen to this hearing. All persons granted remote access to proceedings are reminded of the general prohibition against photographing, recording, and rebroadcasting of court proceedings. Violation of these prohibitions may result in court-imposed sanctions, including removal of court issued media credentials, restricted entry to future hearings, denial of entry to future hearings, or any other sanctions deemed necessary by the Court. All participants should review the Court's standing order regarding telephone conferences that is on Judge Lee's website, which can be found at: https://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/judge-info.aspx?4Qf5zc8loCI5U7rfMP9DHw== In the event that any party has any objections to this order, an objection must be filed no later than five (5) business days prior to the telephone conference. The parties are directed to file a joint initial status report seven business prior to the status hearing. Mailed notice (ca, ) |
| Filing 58 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Z. Lee: The Court orders the parties to file a joint status report by July 21, 2020. The report, which shall be as concise as possible, shall address: (1) the progress of discovery; (2) the status of briefing on any unresolved motions; (3) for cases without any future court dates, an agreed proposed schedule for the next 60 days; (4) for cases that have future court dates, an agreed revised schedule if the current schedule needs revision; (5) a request for any agreed action that the Court can take without a hearing; (6) whether the parties believe a telephonic hearing or in-person hearing is necessary in the immediate future, and, if so, the issue(s) that warrants discussion. Mailed notice (ca, ) |
Filing 57
ORDER ORDER Fourth Amended General Order 20-0012 IN RE: CORONAVIRUS COVID-19 PUBLIC EMERGENCY Signed by the Chief Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer on May 26, 2020. This Order does not extend or modify any deadlines set in civil cases. For non-emergency motions, no motion may be noticed for presentment on a date earlier than July 15, 2020. See attached Order. Signed by the Honorable Rebecca R. Pallmeyer on 5/26/2020: Mailed notice. (docket11, )
|
| Filing 56 ACKNOWLEDGMENT of receipt of short record on appeal regarding notice of appeal #46 ; USCA Case No. 20-1757. (jp, ) |
|
Filing 55
ORDER : The Court previously denied Plaintiffs' motion for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction requesting that the Court enjoin Governor Pritzker from enforcing his latest stay-at-home order of April 30, 2020. See 5/3/2020 Memorandum Opinion and Order, ECF No. 39 ("May 3 Order"). Having filed a notice of appeal, Plaintiffs now urge the Court to enjoin enforcement of Pritzker's order while the appeal is pending. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 62. As the Seventh Circuit has explained, the standard for deciding motions for injunctions pending appeal is no different "from that applicable to a motion to stay the district court's judgment." Cavel Int'l, Inc. v. Madigan, 500 F.3d 544, 547 (7th Cir. 2007). In turn, "[t]he standard for granting a stay pending appeal mirrors that for granting a preliminary injunction." In re A & F Enterprises, Inc. II, 742 F.3d 763, 766 (7th Cir. 2014) (citation omitted). That means that courts "consider the moving party's likelihood of success on the merits, the irreparable harm that will result to each side if the stay is granted or denied in error, and whether the public interest favors one side or the other." Id. Given that the same standard applies, and that Plaintiffs have failed to introduce any new facts or arguments in support of the present motion, the Court denies Plaintiffs' request for an injunction pending appeal for the reasons explained in the May 3 Order denying Plaintiffs' motion for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction. Signed by the Honorable John Z. Lee on 5/6/20. Mailed notice(ca, )
|
| Filing 54 TRANSMITTED to the 7th Circuit the short record on notice of appeal #46 . (jp, ) |
| Filing 53 NOTICE by Steve Schaible re response to motion #52 (O'Grady, Paul) |
| Filing 52 RESPONSE by Steve Schaible to MOTION by Plaintiffs Stephen Cassell, The Beloved ChurchInjunction Pending Appeal #47 (O'Grady, Paul) |
| Filing 51 RESPONSE by Jay Robert Pritzkerin Opposition to MOTION by Plaintiffs Stephen Cassell, The Beloved ChurchInjunction Pending Appeal #47 (Wells, Christopher) |
| Filing 50 RESPONSE by Craig Beintema, David Snyders to MOTION by Plaintiffs Stephen Cassell, The Beloved ChurchInjunction Pending Appeal #47 (Jacobi, Benjamin) |
| Filing 49 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Z. Lee:Minute order #48 is amended: Defendants' response to Plaintiffs' emergency motion is limited to five pages.Mailed notice (ca, ) |
| Filing 48 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Z. Lee: Defendant's response to Plaintiffs' emergency motion for injunction pending appeal #47 is due by 3:00 p.m. on 5/6/20. The Court will issue a ruling once the response is filed.Mailed notice (ca, ) |
| Filing 47 MOTION by Plaintiffs Stephen Cassell, The Beloved ChurchInjunction Pending Appeal (Whittaker, Martin) |
| Filing 46 NOTICE of appeal by Stephen Cassell, The Beloved Church regarding orders #37 , #39 Filing fee $ 505, receipt number 0752-16986311. Receipt number: n (Whittaker, Martin) |
| Filing 45 WAIVER OF SERVICE returned executed by Steve Schaible. Steve Schaible waiver sent on 4/30/2020, answer due 6/29/2020. (Pottinger, Robert) |
| Filing 44 Western Division ADR Notification (jp, ) |
| Filing 43 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiffs Stephen Cassell, The Beloved Church by Thomas L. Brejcha, Jr (Brejcha, Thomas) |
| Filing 42 WAIVER OF SERVICE returned executed by Stephen Cassell, The Beloved Church. Jay Robert Pritzker waiver sent on 4/30/2020, answer due 6/29/2020. (Whittaker, Martin) |
| Filing 41 WAIVER OF SERVICE returned executed by Stephen Cassell, The Beloved Church. David Snyders waiver sent on 4/30/2020, answer due 6/29/2020. (Whittaker, Martin) |
| Filing 40 WAIVER OF SERVICE returned executed by Stephen Cassell, The Beloved Church. Craig Beintema waiver sent on 4/30/2020, answer due 6/29/2020. (Whittaker, Martin) |
| Filing 39 MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order Signed by the Honorable John Z. Lee on 5/3/20.Mailed notice(ca, ) |
| Filing 38 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Z. Lee: Motions to file oversized briefs #28 and #35 are granted.Mailed notice (ca, ) |
| Filing 37 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Z. Lee: Plaintiffs The Beloved Church and Stephen Carrell filed a motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction on 4/30/2020. In their motion, Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief to permit them to gather for worship at their church on Sunday, 5/3/20, despite Governor Pritzker's Executive Order 2020-32 (dated 4/30/2020). The Court ordered expedited briefing, and Defendants filed their responses at 5:00 p.m. on 5/1/20, and Plaintiffs filed their reply at 2:00 p.m. on 5/2/20. After due consideration, the Court denies Plaintiffs' motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction #6 . The Court will issue a written opinion and order explaining its ruling shortly. Mailed notice (ca, ) |
| Filing 36 EXHIBIT by Plaintiffs Stephen Cassell, The Beloved Church 5-2-20 Order of 6th Cir in Maryville Baptist Church, Inc, et al v. Andy Beshear, Case No. 20-5427 regarding reply to response to motion, #33 (Breen, Peter) |
| Filing 35 MOTION by Plaintiff The Beloved ChurchLeave to file oversized Reply (Whittaker, Martin) |
| Filing 34 DECLARATION of Stephen Cassell regarding reply to response to motion, #33 (Breen, Peter) |
| Filing 33 REPLY by Stephen Cassell, The Beloved Church to memorandum in support of motion, #7 , MOTION by Plaintiffs Stephen Cassell, The Beloved Church for temporary restraining order MOTION by Plaintiffs Stephen Cassell, The Beloved Church for preliminary injunction #6 , memorandum in opposition to motion #26 , response in opposition to motion, #27 , Response #32 , Response #29 (Breen, Peter) |
| Filing 32 RESPONSE by Defendant Jay Robert Pritzker to text entry,,, #16 Response to the Court's Minute Order re: Drive-In Services (Wells, Christopher) |
| Filing 31 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Jay Robert Pritzker by Sarah Hughes Newman (Newman, Sarah) |
| Filing 30 NOTICE by Steve Schaible re Response #29 (O'Grady, Paul) |
| Filing 29 RESPONSE by Defendant Steve Schaible to motion for temporary restraining order, motion for preliminary injunction #6 (O'Grady, Paul) |
| Filing 28 MOTION by Defendant Jay Robert Pritzker for leave to file excess pages instanter (Bauer, Kelly) |
| Filing 27 RESPONSE by Craig Beintema, David Snydersin Opposition to MOTION by Plaintiffs Stephen Cassell, The Beloved Church for temporary restraining order MOTION by Plaintiffs Stephen Cassell, The Beloved Church for preliminary injunction #6 (Jacobi, Benjamin) |
| Filing 26 MEMORANDUM by Jay Robert Pritzker in Opposition to motion for temporary restraining order, motion for preliminary injunction #6 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A - Current Executive Order (EO 2020-32))(Wells, Christopher) |
| Filing 25 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Jay Robert Pritzker by R. Douglas Rees (Rees, R.) |
| Filing 24 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Steve Schaible by Thomas A. Green (Green, Thomas) |
| Filing 23 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Jay Robert Pritzker by Christopher Graham Wells (Wells, Christopher) |
| Filing 22 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Jay Robert Pritzker by Hal Dworkin (Dworkin, Hal) |
| Filing 21 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Steve Schaible by Jennifer Lynn Turiello (Turiello, Jennifer) |
| Filing 20 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Steve Schaible by Kevin Mark Casey (Casey, Kevin) |
| Filing 19 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Steve Schaible by Paul A O'Grady (O'Grady, Paul) |
| Filing 18 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Steve Schaible by Dominick L Lanzito (Lanzito, Dominick) |
| Filing 17 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Jay Robert Pritzker by Kelly C. Bauer (Bauer, Kelly) |
| Filing 16 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Z. Lee: Illinois Executive Order 2020-32, dated April 30, 2020, permits individuals to leave their residences "[t]o engage in the free exercise of religion, provided that such exercise [] comply with Social Distancing Requirements and the limit on gatherings of more than ten people in keeping with CDC guidelines for the protection of public health." The order continues, "Religious organizations and houses of worship are encouraged to use online or drive-in services to protect the health and safety of their congregants." It is clear that online services are not subject to the 10-person limitation. In their response to Plaintiffs' motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction, Defendants should address how the State defines "drive-in services" and whether such services would be subject to the 10-person limitation. Mailed notice (ca, ) |
| Filing 15 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Steve Schaible by Darron M. Burke (Burke, Darron) |
| Filing 14 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Steve Schaible by Robert C. Pottinger (Pottinger, Robert) |
| Filing 13 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Craig Beintema, David Snyders by Benjamin Matthew Jacobi (Jacobi, Benjamin) |
| Filing 12 Counsel statement re actual, informal service STATEMENT by Stephen Cassell (Whittaker, Martin) |
| Filing 11 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Z. Lee: Plaintiffs have filed a complaint, a motion for temporary restraining order and for preliminary injunction #6 as well as a supporting memorandum and attachments #7 . Plaintiffs' counsel attests that the materials have been provided via email to Benjamin Jacobi (at a okgc.com email address), who (according to Plaintiffs' counsel) is an attorney for Defendants Snyders and Beintema; Defendant Schaible (at what appears to be a personal email address); and Sarah Hunger, a Deputy Solicitor General at the Office of the Illinois Attorney General. It is unclear, however, whether Plaintiffs have verified that that the recipients have received the materials. Accordingly, Plaintiffs' counsel is ordered to file a short statement no later than 5:00 p.m. today, Thursday, April 30, 2020, attesting that the intended recipients have received the materials. Plaintiffs' counsel also is ordered to meet and confer with Defendants and/or their counsel to explore ways of resolving this issue, including whether the parties would agree to a standstill agreement while the motion is briefed and considered. Plaintiffs also are ordered to effectuate service pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4, as soon as possible, but no later than 5:00 p.m., on Friday, May 1, 2020. Defendants are ordered to file a response to Plaintiffs' motion for temporary restraining order and for preliminary injunction #6 no later than 5:00 p.m. on Friday, May 1, 2020. The memorandum should address, among other things, whether the parties have met and conferred as ordered above and the results of those discussions, as well as what, if any, enforcement actions the Sheriff of Stephenson County and the Chief of Police of Stephenson County would take, in the event Plaintiffs convened for services this Sunday with or without observing the facial mask and social distancing restrictions. Plaintiffs need not, but may, file a reply memorandum no later than 2:00 p.m. on Saturday, May 2, 2020. Once the briefs have been received, the Court will take the motion under advisement and issue a ruling as soon as practicable. Furthermore, given that Plaintiffs waited a week after Governor Pritzker's extension of the stay-at-home order before filing this action and have not provided any reasons for their delay, Plaintiffs should not expect the Court to rule on the motion prior to this Sunday. To the extent that there are any exigent circumstances between today and this Sunday, much can be attributed to Plaintiffs' own actions. Mailed notice (ca, ) |
| Filing 10 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Robert M. Dow, Jr: This matter is before Judge Dow as emergency judge. Plaintiffs have filed a motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction [docket number 592 on the emergency docket and docket number 6 on the regular civil docket in Case No. 3:20-cv-50153]. The motion will be handled by the assigned judge, Judge Lee. The Clerk is directed to terminate the motion on the emergency docket, as all further filings and rulings will be made on the regular civil docket. Mailed notice (cdh, ) |
|
Filing 9
ORDER Third Amended General Order 20-0012 IN RE: CORONAVIRUS COVID-19 PUBLIC EMERGENCY Signed by the Chief Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer on April 24, 2020. All open cases are impacted by this Third Amended General Order. Parties are must carefully review all obligations under this Order, including the requirement listed in paragraph number 5 to file a joint written status report in most civil cases. See attached Order. Signed by the Honorable Rebecca R. Pallmeyer on 4/24/2020. Mailed notice (jp, )
|
| Filing 8 Pursuant to the Fourth Amended General Order 19-0007, dated 6/27/2019, this case is assigned to the Honorable John Z. Lee and referred generally to the Honorable Iain D. Johnston. Signed by Executive Committee on 6/27/2019. (jp, ) |
| Filing 7 MEMORANDUM by Stephen Cassell, The Beloved Church in support of motion for temporary restraining order, motion for preliminary injunction #6 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Proclamation, 3-9-20, #2 Exhibit B - Proclamation, 4-1-20, #3 Exhibit C - EO 2020-18)(Breen, Peter) |
| Filing 6 MOTION by Plaintiffs Stephen Cassell, The Beloved Church for temporary restraining order , MOTION by Plaintiffs Stephen Cassell, The Beloved Church for preliminary injunction (Breen, Peter) |
| Filing 5 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiffs Stephen Cassell, The Beloved Church by Peter Christopher Breen (Breen, Peter) |
| Filing 4 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiffs Stephen Cassell, The Beloved Church by Martin J. Whittaker (Whittaker, Martin) |
| Filing 3 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiffs Stephen Cassell, The Beloved Church by Martin J. Whittaker (Whittaker, Martin) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Whittaker, Martin) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Stephen Cassell; Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0752-16976245. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit Exhibit D)(Whittaker, Martin) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable John Z. Lee and Honorable Iain D. Johnston. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Iain D. Johnston. Case assignment: Random assignment. (jp, ) |
Access additional case information on PACER
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 Illinois Northern 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.
