Sabell v. Town of Groton et al
| John L. Saball |
| COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, Michael Bouchard and Town of Groton |
| 1:2018cv12312 |
| November 5, 2018 |
| US District Court for the District of Massachusetts |
| Leo T Sorokin |
| Civil Rights: Voting |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 5, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 District Judge Leo T. Sorokin: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered.Plaintiff today filed a complaint alleging that when he voted early in the Town of Groton, following the instructions of the local officials, he inserted his private ballot into a provided envelope bearing his name and address. Mr. Sabell complains that when his ballot is opened his votes will not be secret because his ballot is within the envelope bearing his name. He states he brought this to the attention of the local officials who responded that the officials counting the ballots do not have time to connect the ballot to his name. He argues in his complaint that this conduct violates one federal law 29 Code of Federal Regulations Section 452.97 and seeks an emergency hearing now to enjoin the Town from opening his ballot. The only federal law cited has no application to Mr. Sabell's ballot. That regulation governs secret ballots in union elections. To obtain a preliminary injunction Mr. Sabell must establish, among other things, a likelihood of success on the merits. Neither his complaint nor his emergency motion do so as they point to no law other than one plainly inapplicable to the situation. In addition, the Court notes that nothing before the Court suggests that Mr. Sabell has notified or served the Town of Groton. Nothing about either his compliant or his emergency motion warrants ex parte proceedings, i.e. proceedings in which the Town and its Town Clerk both of whom are named as defendants, are denied the opportunity to participate and to explain the relevant regulations, laws and procedures as they view them prior to the Court rendering a ruling. Accordingly, the #2 Emergency Motion is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to renewal after (1) identification of a federal right or other basis for invoking federal jurisdiction and (2) proper notice to the defendants so they may participate. (A copy of this Order has been given in hand to the Plaintiff.) (Montes, Mariliz) |
| Filing 5 Summons Issued as to Michael Bouchard, COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, Town of Groton. Counsel receiving this notice electronically should download this summons, complete one for each defendant and serve it in accordance with Fed.R.Civ.P. 4 and LR 4.1. Summons will be mailed to plaintiff(s) not receiving notice electronically for completion of service. (Halley, Taylor) (Main Document 5 replaced on 11/5/2018) (Montes, Mariliz). |
| Filing 4 ELECTRONIC NOTICE of Case Assignment. District Judge Leo T. Sorokin assigned to case. If the trial Judge issues an Order of Reference of any matter in this case to a Magistrate Judge, the matter will be transmitted to Magistrate Judge M. Page Kelley. (Finn, Mary) |
| Filing 3 Filing fee/payment: $ 400.00, receipt number 1BST071216 for #1 Complaint (Vieira, Leonardo) |
| Filing 2 EMERGENCY MOTION by Michael Bouchard.(Halley, Taylor) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Michael Bouchard, COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, Town of Groton, filed by John L Saball. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet and Category Form)(Halley, Taylor) Modified on 11/5/2018 to correct spelling of plaintiff's last name (Montes, Mariliz). |
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 Massachusetts 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.
