Read without ads and support Scribd by becoming a Scribd Premium Reader.
See Premium Plans
 
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMAWESTERN DIVISIONWILLIAM JOHNSON, ANNIE PEARLLEFTWICH, BOBBI MORGAN, DONALDMEANS, ERNEST EDMONDS, FAIRYGORDON, IRIS SERMON, JOHNNY BUTLER,MERJEAN LITTLE, MOSES JONES, VASSIEBROWN, WILLIE MAE REEVES, BEVERLYGORDON, JOHNNY B. MORROW, FANNIEISHMAN, LESLIE CHEATEM, MARGIEJAMES, BOBBY SINGLETON, A. J.MCCAMBELL, JOHNNY FORD, LOUISMAXWELL, MARY RUTH WOODS, LISA M.WARE, CLARA P. GRIMMETT, CHARLESCHAMBLISS, JOHNNIE B. HARRISON, G.DYANN ROBINSON, SHIRLEY W. CURRY,SARAH STRINGER, MILES D. ROBINSON, andWILLIE LEE PATTERSON, individually and onbehalf of others similarly situated,Plaintiffs,v.BOB RILEY, in his individual capacity and in hisofficial capacity as Governor of Alabama, andJOHN M. TYSON, JR., individually and in hisofficial capacity as special prosecutor and task force commander of the Governor’s Task Force onIllegal Gaming,Defendants.********************Civil Action No.*7:10-cv-02067-SLB**Three-judge court*requested******
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
FILED
2010 Aug-04 PM 03:00U.S. DISTRICT COURTN.D. OF ALABAMA
Case 7:10-cv-02067-SLB Document 5 Filed 08/04/10 Page 1 of 6
 
Plaintiffs William Johnson et al., through undersigned counsel, pursuant toRule 65, Fed.R.Civ.P., move for entry of a temporary restraining order by thesingle-judge Court to preserve the
status quo
in Macon County pending theconvening of a three-judge court in this action and a hearing on plaintiffs’ pendingmotion for a preliminary injunction. As grounds for their motion, plaintiffs wouldshow as follows:1. Plaintiffs rely on the statements made in their motion for preliminaryinjunction, Doc. 3, and their supporting brief, Doc. 4.2. As shown by the motion filed by defendant Tyson August 2, 2010, in theCircuit Court of Macon County,
 Jones v. Tyson
, CA No. CV-2010-15 (copyattached hereto as Exhibit A), defendants in the instant action intend to use theGovernor’s Task Force to raid and shut down Victoryland within the next fewdays.3. Counsel for plaintiffs emailed the complaint, motion for preliminaryinjunction and supporting brief to Sonny Reagan (counsel for Gov. Riley), JohnTyson, and Attorney General Troy King on Monday, August 2.4. The affidavit of Fred D. Gray attached hereto verifies the allegations of the complaint and the motion and brief supporting plaintiffs’ motion for apreliminary inunction.
2
Case 7:10-cv-02067-SLB Document 5 Filed 08/04/10 Page 2 of 6
 
5. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2284(3), “[a] single judge . . . may grant atemporary restraining order on a specific finding, based on evidence submitted,that specified irreparable damage will result if the order is not granted, whichorder, unless previously revoked by the district judge, shall remain in force onlyuntil the hearing and determination by the district court of three judges of anapplication for a preliminary injunction.” E.g.,
Puerto Rican Legal Defense and  Education Fund, Inc. v. City of New York 
, 769 F.Supp. 74, 75-76 (E.D. N.Y.1991).6. There is a substantial likelihood that plaintiffs will prevail on the merits.See Doc. 4.7. Plaintiffs and the class they seek to represent will suffer irreparable injuryunless the preliminary injunction issues. See Doc. 4 at 17-20.8. Defendants will suffer no irreparable injury if a preliminary injunction isentered. Alternatively, the threatened injury to plaintiffs and the class they seek torepresent outweighs whatever damage the proposed injunction may causedefendants. As a matter of law, Congress has determined the balance of equities infavor of plaintiffs by declaring that under § 5 of the Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. §1973c, the burden of time and inertia must be placed on the state. See Doc. 4 at 3(citing
 Riley v. Kennedy
, 553 U.S. 406, 128 S.Ct. 1970, 1977 (2008)). Moreover,
3
Case 7:10-cv-02067-SLB Document 5 Filed 08/04/10 Page 3 of 6
Search
Search History:
Searching...
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
  • p.
    • Notes
    Load more