Gray Peterson
Active Member
GeorgiaCarry.org v. State of Georgia (Church Carry Case)
First complaint was in state, but it was removed to federal court.
First complaint was in state, but it was removed to federal court.
Maloney v. Spitzer (Rice):
2:03-cv-00786-ADS-MLO
US District Court for the Eastern District of New York (NYED). You can do your PACER magic to the documents post-McDonald that would be greatly appreciated. I am watching this case with interest.
08-1592
MALONEY, JAMES M. V. RICE, KATHLEEN A.
The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit for further consideration in light of McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. ___ (2010). Justice Sotomayor took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
Maloney v. Spitzer (Rice):
2:03-cv-00786-ADS-MLO
US District Court for the Eastern District of New York (NYED). You can do your PACER magic to the documents post-McDonald that would be greatly appreciated. I am watching this case with interest.
2:03-cv-786 is showing "CLOSED 01/17/2007" on PACER for NYED. I'm guessing that is when it then went to the 2nd Circuit.
Many of us know what happened while at the 2nd Ckt (Sotomayor sitting). (See HERE for the Maloney v Cuomo decision which included her while at the 2nd Ckt)
Maloney v. Rice (nee Spitzer, nee Cuomo) then had 15 seconds of fame at the SCOTUS, the day following the McDonald decision.
http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/062910zr.pdf
Justice Sotomayor properly recused herself from the decision to send it to the 2nd Circuit for further post-McDonald consideration, not back to the NY Eastern District.
From there, the trail gets real cold...I find nothing filed in the 2nd Circuit under Maloney for this year. There is a lot of stuff out there on the 07-0581 appearance at the 2nd Ckt, nothing I can find subsequent to that...
I'll add it to the OP but something is amiss on this one following the June SCOTUS appearance...
Me, too. I'm curious to see how non-firearm "arms" are handled post-McDonald. They might just go with a real narrow ruling specifically on nunchucks (sp?) and avoid the larger issue of knives and the like.
I'm not as clued in on non-firearm 2A cases. Sounds like you are. Thoughts?
Don't worry about the "close" date. If you look at the Docket in PACER you will see filings post McDonald. Second Circuit, early last month, reverse and remanded the case to district court. Right now, Maloney has been a request to file a Second Amended Complaint. Once that is approved, the "close date" goes away and it starts anew.
More cases:
OOIDA v. Lindley, State Ammunition v. Lindley. Not specifically 2A cases but gun related.
Dearth v. Holder, US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, striking down residency restrictions for buying handguns under the Gun Control Act of 1968.
Don't worry about the "close" date. If you look at the Docket in PACER you will see filings post McDonald. Second Circuit, early last month, reverse and remanded the case to district court. Right now, Maloney has been a request to file a Second Amended Complaint. Once that is approved, the "close date" goes away and it starts anew.
23) GeorgiaCarry.Org, Inc., et al v. Pinkie Toomer (Church Carry Case) First complaint was in state, but it was removed to federal court.
11th Circuit in Georgia.
http://georgiacarry.com/state/places_of_worship/
No, It's GeorgiaCarry.org v. State of Georgia. the Toomer case is a non-resident CHL case. The GCO v. State case is still in district court.
Courts already have been grappling with over 190 Second Amendment challenges brought against firearms laws and prosecutions in the year and a half since District of Columbia v. Heller, 128 S. Ct. 2783 (2008).
Among those are challenges to statutes barring the carrying of loaded guns on public streets,2 (Palmer) the possession and sale of guns on designated government property, 3 (Nordyke) the sale of particularly dangerous firearms,4 (Pena v Cid) and the possession of firearms by indicted individuals.5 (Blah...)
If this Court holds that the Second Amendment is incorporated, state and federal courts undoubtedly will be further inundated with challenges to gun laws. Absent this Court's guidance on the standard of review applicable
to such cases, these challenges will lead to inconsistent outcomes and uncertainty in the legal system.6
BTW, love the new breakdown of cases by "cause".