High Quality
Open the downloaded document, and select print from the file menu (PDF reader required).
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF
NEW
YORKJON JONES, GINA CARANO, FRANKIEEDGAR, MATT HAMILL, BRIAN STANN,ZUFFA, LLC d/b/a ULTIMATE FIGHTINGCHAMPIONSHIP, DANIELLE HOBEIKA,BETH HURRLE, DONNA HURRLE, STEVEECF CaseKARDIAN, JOSEPH LOZITO, ERIK OWINGS,CHRIS REITZ AND JENNIFER SANTIAGO,
11
Civ. 8215 (KMW) (GWG)Plaintiffs,-against-ERIC
T.
SCHNEIDERMAN, in his officialcapacity as Attorney General
of
the State
of
New
York, and CYRUS
R.
VANCE, Jr., in his officialcapacity as District Attorney for the County
of
New
York,Defendants.
DEFENDANTSCHNEIDERMAN'S MEMORANDUM
OF
LAW
INSUPPORT
OF
HIS INITIAL LIMITED MOTION
TO
DISMISS
THE
FOURTH
AND
FIFTH
CAUSES
OF
ACTION IN
THE
COMPLAINT
ERIC
T.
SCHNEIDERMANAttorney General
of
theState
of
New
YorkAttorney for DefendantSchneiderman120 Broadway -24th Floor
New
York,
New
York 10271(212) 416-8559JOHN M. SCHWARTZSpecial Litigation Counsel
of
Counsel
Case 1:11-cv-08215-KMW Document 16 Filed 01/27/12 Page 1 of 28
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PageTABLE OF AUTHORITIES
ii
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 2THE CHALLENGED STATUTE 4THE HISTORY AND BASIS OF THE STATUTE 5
A.
The Enactment
of
the Legislation , 5
B.
The Bases
of
the Legislature's Action 6
1.
The Risk
of
Injury 6
2.
The Effect Upon
youth
7
3.
The "Civilization" or "Disgust" Factor 8THE COMPLAINT 8ARGUMENT
11
DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION CHALLENGES TO ASTATUTE MUST FAIL UNLESS THERE
IS
NO REASONABLYCONCEIVABLE STATE OF FACTS THAT MIGHT JUSTIFY THE LAWWHEN ENACTED; THE COMPLAINT ALLEGES NO FACTS THATWOULD MEET THIS STANDARD EITHER AT THE TIME OFENACTMENT OR THEREAFTER
11
A. The Applicable Standard
11
B.
The Effect
of
Post-Legislation Factual Developments 14
C.
The Plaintiffs' Proposed Evidence ofIrrationality ,
18
CONCLUSION
23
i
Case 1:11-cv-08215-KMW Document 16 Filed 01/27/12 Page 2 of 28
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
CasesPage(s)
Adams
v.
New York State Educ. Dept.,752 F.Supp.2d 420 (S.D.N.Y. 2010) .14,
16
Albright
v.
Oliver,510 U.S. 266 (1994)
11
Alexander
v.
Whitman,
114F.3d
1392 (3dCir. 1997)
14
Ali
v.
Division
of
State Athletic Commission,308
F.
Supp.
11
(S.D.N.Y. 1969) 22Beatie
v.
City
of
New
York,
123
F.3d 707 (2d Cir.1997) .11,
14,20,21
Bishop
v.
City
of
New York,
123
F.3d 707 (2d Cir.1997) 20Chastleton Corp.
v.
Sinclair,264 U.S. 543 (1924)
17
City
of
Cleburne, Texas
v.
Cleburne Living Center, Inc.,473 U.S. 432 (1985)
11
Dandridge
v.
Williams,397 U.S.
471
18
F.C.C.
v.
Beach Communications, Inc.,508 U.S. 307 (1993) 12,23Ferguson
v.
Skrupa,372 U.S. 726 (1963)
18
Heller
v.
Doe,509 U.S. 312 (1993)
14,19
Howard
v.
United States Dep't
of
Defense,354 F.3d 1358 (Fed. Cir. 2004)
17
In re Chateaugay Corp.,
53
F.3d 478 (2d Cir. 1995)
11
ii
Case 1:11-cv-08215-KMW Document 16 Filed 01/27/12 Page 3 of 28
Add a Comment