U NITED S TATES C OURT OF A PPEALS

FOR THE E IGHTH C IRCUIT

No. 15-1186
______________________
JENNIE and NANCY ROSENBRAHN, et al.,
Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
DENNIS DAUGAARD, in his official capacity as South Dakota Governor, et al.,
Defendants-Appellants.
_______________________
On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Dakota,
Southern Division | No. 4:14-CV-4081-KES (Hon. Karen E. Schreier)
________________________
JOINT MOTION FOR EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION ON APPEAL
________________________
Joshua A. Newville
MADIA LAW LLC
345 Union Plaza
333 Washington Avenue North
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
Telephone: (612) 349.2743
Facsimile: (612) 235.3357
joshuanewville@madialaw.com
Counsel for Plaintiffs-Appellees
Jeffrey P. Hallem, Assistant A.G.
Ellie J. Bailey, Assistant A.G.
S.D. ATTORNEY GENERALS OFFICE
1302 E. Highway 14, Suite 1
Pierre, South Dakota 57501
Telephone: (605) 773.3215
jeff.hallem@state.sd.us
ellie.bailey@state.sd.us

Robert B. Anderson
Justin L. Bell
MAY, ADAM, GERDES & THOMPSON, LLP
503 South Pierre Street, P.O. Box 160
Pierre South Dakota 57506
Telephone: (605) 224.8803
rba@magt.com
jlb@magt.com

Counsel for Defendants-Appellants

Appellate Case: 15-1186

Page: 1

Date Filed: 02/02/2015 Entry ID: 4240177

Come now, the above-named Plaintiff-Appellee couples and Defendant/Appellant

officials, pursuant to Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 2 and 27, jointly move this Court for
an order expediting the consideration of this appeal.
In particular, the parties request that this Court expedite its consideration of this appeal
and schedule it for oral argument so as to align the timeliness of its disposition along with two
similar matters pending before this Court: Kyle Lawson, et al. v. State of Missouri, No. 14-3779
(8th Cir.), and Rita Jernigan, et al. v. Dustin McDaniel, et al., No. 15-1022 (8th Cir.). In both
Lawson and Jernigan, briefing is set to conclude in early April 2015.
In support of their motion, the parties state:
1. The above-named Plaintiff-Appellee couples filed this 42 U.S.C. 1983 action in
United States District Court for the District of South Dakota on May 22, 2014.
Plaintiffs sought injunctive and declaratory relief, specifically asking for: 1) a
declaration that South Dakotas laws barring same-sex couples from civil
marriage violated the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution
and, 2) an order barring the enforcement of those laws.
2. On November 14, 2014, the district court, the Honorable Karen E. Schreier
presiding, dismissed Count IIIPlaintiffs claims that the challenged laws violate
their constitutional right to travel. The district court refused to dismiss Counts I
and IIPlaintiffs claims that the challenged laws violate the Equal Protection
and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment.
3. On January 12, 2015, the district court entered final judgment in favor of the
Plaintiff-Appellee couples, finding that the challenged laws violate the Equal
Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. The district

2
Appellate Case: 15-1186

Page: 2

Date Filed: 02/02/2015 Entry ID: 4240177

court stayed its judgment pending appeal.

4. On January 26, 2015, Defendants filed a Notice of Appeal with this Court,
appealing the November 14, 2014 denial of Defendants motion to dismiss Counts
I and II and the January 12, 2015 Judgment and Order Granting Plaintiffs Motion
for Summary Judgment and Denying Defendants Motion for Summary
Judgment.
5. On January 28, 2015, the Clerk of this Court docketed the above-captioned matter
and set a briefing schedule to conclude in late April 2015, approximately three
weeks after Lawson and Jernigan.
6. Without expediting briefing and argument in this matter, whether South Dakotas
constitution and statutes violate the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States
Constitution may not necessarily be decided by this Courts determination of
Lawson and Jernigan, which raise similar issues but do not involve the State of
South Dakota.
7. In apparent recognition of the extraordinary import of these issues, this Court has
already granted a motion to expedite the proceedings in Lawson, No. 14-3779
(8th Cir. Jan. 22, 2015). The above-captioned matter, presents similar issues.
8. The parties in this matter request to have their arguments heard by this Court and
to have their dispute settled upon its own merits alongside Lawson and Jernigan,
rather than indirectly and by implication through other litigants from other States.
9. This Courts sister courts have routinely granted motions for expedited appeal in
this context. See: Campaign for Southern Equality v. Bryant, No. 14-60837 ((5th
Cir. Dec. 4, 2014) (Order Granting Motion to Expedite Consideration) and (Jan.

3
Appellate Case: 15-1186

Page: 3

Date Filed: 02/02/2015 Entry ID: 4240177

9, 2015) (oral argument held addressing marriage laws of Mississippi, Louisiana,

and Texas)); Kitchen v. Herbert, No. 13-4178 (10th Cir. Dec. 24, 2013) (Order
Expediting Appeal); Bostic v. Schaefer, No. 14-1167 (4th Cir. March 10, 2014)
(Order for Accelerated Briefing); Latta v. Otter, No. 14-35420 (9th Cir. May 20,
2014) (Order Expediting Briefing and Calendaring of Appeals); Baskin v. Bogan,
766 F.3d 648 (7th Cir. Sept. 4, 2014) (opinion, after consolidated argument,
addressing laws of Wisconsin and Indiana); DeBoer v. Snyder, 772 F.3d 388 (6th
Cir. Nov. 6, 2014) (opinion, after consolidated argument, addressing laws of
Kentucky, Ohio, Michigan, and Tennessee).
10. The parties agree that the below-proposed abbreviated briefing schedule will not
be prejudicial to any party. The factual record on this appeal is straightforward
and uncomplicated. In litigating the issues, both sides have already extensively
briefed all issues that will be presented to this Court on appeal. Having done so,
Herculean efforts will not be necessary to adopt those arguments for this Court.
11. In light of the aforementioned considerations, the parties propose the following
briefing schedule:
Appellants Brief and Addendum:

February 27, 2015

Appendix:

February 27, 2015

Appellees Brief and Addendum:

March 19, 2015

Appellants Reply Brief:

April 2, 2015

[SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE]

4
Appellate Case: 15-1186

Page: 4

Date Filed: 02/02/2015 Entry ID: 4240177

Respectfully submitted this 2nd day of February 2015.

MADIA LAW LLC

/s/Joshua A. Newville
Joshua A. Newville
345 Union Plaza
333 Washington Avenue North
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
Phone: (612) 349-2743
Fax: (612) 235-3357
joshuanewville@madialaw.com
Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs-Appellees
SOUTH DAKOTA ATTORNEY GENERALS OFFICE
/s/Jeffrey P. Hallem
Jeffrey P. Hallem, Assistant Attorney General
Ellie J. Bailey, Assistant Attorney General
1302 E. Highway 14, Suite 1
Pierre, SD 57501
Phone: (605) 773-3215
Counsel for Defendants-Appellants Daugaard, Jackley, Hollingsworth, and Jones
MAY, ADAM, GERDES & THOMPSON, LLP
/s/Robert B. Anderson
Robert B. Anderson
Justin L. Bell
503 South Pierre Street
PO Box 160
Pierre, SD 57506
Phone: (605) 224-8803
Counsel for Defendant-Appellant Sherman

5
Appellate Case: 15-1186

Page: 5

Date Filed: 02/02/2015 Entry ID: 4240177