SAF Sues New Jersey for "Justifiable Need"

[Dogabutila]

It's a good legal brief. It makes good arguments and presents them well. The difference is that Gura's brief's also manage to mock the other side's arguments.

 

[esqappellate]

"Damned Illinois Nazis." Great line from a great movie.

(Back on topic)

Good read, very solid. My favorite quote was, simply, "The claims are erroneous." Short and to the point. Gura may as well have called "********".

My read on this is that we're not necessarily expecting a friendly outcome as long as it's in the state courts, correct? I cannot wait until this hits District/CA3. By then Wollard will (hopefully) be a persuasive precedent.

This case *is* in the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit -- not in state court. This case and Woollard in the ca4 are pretty much at the same place, with Woollard a little behind. It will be interesting which circuit schedules argument and issues a decision first. Both circuits are pretty fast. I agree that it is hard to see much difference between the MD statute and the NJ statute.

 

[mrjam2jab]

This case *is* in the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit -- not in state court. This case and Woollard in the ca4 are pretty much at the same place, with Woollard a little behind. It will be interesting which circuit schedules argument and issues a decision first. Both circuits are pretty fast. I agree that it is hard to see much difference between the MD statute and the NJ statute.

And looks like the 3rd is also in "good territory" being DE, NJ, and PA?

 

[Dogabutila]

Is NJ good territory?

 

[Afield]

One way or another, isn't a ruling out of the 7th expected before either the 3rd or 4th? I mean, orals were back in early July right?

 

[mrjam2jab]

Is NJ good territory?

No...but similiar to your 4th...it is only 1 bad state in the group.

 

[ghost1981]

Never the less. If they denied people with apparent concern for their lives, certain rules need to be re approached. I've already listened to enough people that want a carry but I feel some will give us all a bad name. If there was no probable cause for concern, that is one thing but being ready to defend yourself is another. There are too many stories of regular people getting robbed by gun point, especially in today's economy. These armed criminals find ways to get guns while average citizens are on waiting lists or denied. I'm not saying to put a gun in every persons hand. I'm just saying if there is a verifiable reason for a person to carry, let it be.

 

[esqappellate]

One way or another, isn't a ruling out of the 7th expected before either the 3rd or 4th? I mean, orals were back in early July right?

Oral argument was in June and yes, Moore/Shepard in the 7th could come down this month or certainly this Fall.

 

[esqappellate]

And looks like the 3rd is also in "good territory" being DE, NJ, and PA?

Right: http://www.uscourts.gov/court_locator.aspx

 

[press1280]

And looks like the 3rd is also in "good territory" being DE, NJ, and PA?

I'd look more toward who's on the court than what states it covers(although having may-issue as the odd man out doesn't hurt). The 3rd is pretty evenly divided between GOP and Dem-appointees.

 

[press1280]

Anyone with Pacer access have any updates(oral argument date)? Briefing has been completed for a while now.........

 

[esqappellate]

Anyone with Pacer access have any updates(oral argument date)? Briefing has been completed for a while now.........

i looked today nothing yet

 

[krucam]

Subtle reminder was given to the Court regarding setting a date for Oral Arguments....

10/02/2012 Open Document ECF FILER: Request by Appellants Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs Inc, John M. Drake, Finley Fenton, Gregory C. Gallaher, Daniel J. Piszczatoski, Lenny S. Salerno and Second Amendment Foundation Inc for Oral Argument. [SEND TO MERITS] (DDJ)

 

[esqappellate]

Subtle reminder was given to the Court regarding setting a date for Oral Arguments....

It's a good idea. Of all the circuits, the 3d holds oral argument the least.

 

[press1280]

It's a good idea. Of all the circuits, the 3d holds oral argument the least.

So the court can just decide to rule with no orals?

 

[krucam]

So the court can just decide to rule with no orals?

+1, so this amounts to a request, vs a reminder for a CA3 case? I realize that the brief served as a request, but I assumed Mr. Jensen was being polite...

 

[esqappellate]

+1, so this amounts to a request, vs a reminder for a CA3 case? I realize that the brief served as a request, but I assumed Mr. Jensen was being polite...

You don't have to specifically request oral argument in the 3d, as in many circuits. And the 3D has a very low percentage of cases that go to oral argument. IN FY 2010, only 13.9 percent of the 3d appeals got oral argument. The 4th Circuit is about the same with only 13.1 percent getting argument. See Admin. Office of the U.S. Courts, Judicial Business of the United States Courts: Annual Report of the Director 16 tbl.1 (2010). And most of the 3d decisions are in unpublished opinions that lack full precedent effect. That said, I expect this case to get oral argument with a published opinion. Like Woollard, it's a big deal. With this filing, counsel is taking pains to let the court know that they really, really want argument. Actually, he is late with the request. While the 3d Local rules don't require a statement on argument Local Rule 34.1 does require a timely request along with the amount of time requested:

(b) Any party to the appeal has the right to file a statement with the court setting forth the
reasons why, in the party's opinion, oral argument should be heard. Such statement must be filed
with the clerk within 7 days after the filing of appellee's or respondent's brief. The request must set
forth the amount of argument time sought.

The statement filed by Jensen is both late (appellee's brief was filed 6/28) and incomplete, as it does not specify any time sought. A little sloppy here. You gotta read the local rules. That won't preclude oral argument, though, as that is up to the panel.

BTW, the percentage of cases going to argument varies enormously from circuit to circuit, but the caseload and type of cases also vary enormously. The average per judge caseload in the federal courts of appeals is about 535 per year. You can't possibly have oral argument in all of them and most can be easily decided without oral argument.

 

[krucam]

Damn....asleep at the wheel...

11/02/2012 Open Document Calendared for Tuesday, 02/12/2013. (TLW)

11/05/2012 Open Document ECF FILER: ENTRY OF APPEARANCE from Alan Gura on behalf of Appellant(s) Daniel Pisczcatoski, John Drake, Gregory Gallaher, Lenny Salerno, Finley Fenton, Second Amendment Foundation, Inc., Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs, Inc.. (AG)

11/05/2012 Open Document ECF FILER: ARGUMENT ACKNOWLEDGMENT filed by Attorney Mary E. Wood, Esq. for Appellees Rudolph A. Filko, Attorney General New Jersey, Superintendent New Jersey State Police, Edward A. Jerejian and Thomas V. Manahan, Esq.. Certificate of Service dated 11/05/2012. (MEW)

11/06/2012 Open Document ECF FILER: ARGUMENT ACKNOWLEDGMENT filed by Attorney Alan Gura, Esq. for Appellants Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs Inc, Daniel J. Piszczatoski, John M. Drake, Gregory C. Gallaher, Lenny S. Salerno, Finley Fenton and Second Amendment Foundation Inc. Certificate of Service dated 11/06/2012. (AG)

11/07/2012 Open Document ECF FILER: Certificate of Service filed by Attorney Mary E. Wood, Esq. for Appellees Rudolph A. Filko, Attorney General New Jersey, Superintendent New Jersey State Police, Edward A. Jerejian and Thomas V. Manahan, Esq. Certificate of Service dated 11/05/2012.--[Edited 11/14/2012 by TLW] (MEW)

We have a 'date'. Be there or be square: 2/12/2013 (tentatively).

Unfortunately, with CA3 being as it is....the hearing being held the week of 2/11 will be to determine whether or not there will be Oral Arguments at CA3 in this case. Capiche?

Yeah, milking it out. Just my opinion...

 

[jrosenberger]

Damn....asleep at the wheel...



We have a 'date'. Be there or be square: 2/12/2013 (tentatively).

Unfortunately, with CA3 being as it is....the hearing being held the week of 2/11 will be to determine whether or not there will be Oral Arguments at CA3 in this case. Capiche?

Yeah, milking it out. Just my opinion...

That's not how I read it.

The panel will determine whether there will be oral argument and if so, the amount of time allocated for each side. (See Third Circuit Internal Operating Procedures, Chapter 2.1.) No later than one (1) week prior to the disposition date you will be advised whether oral argument will be required, the amount of time allocated by the panel, and the specific date on which argument will be scheduled.

I read that as saying that the panel will decide whether there will be oral argument and notify counsel no later than 2/5 of their decision.

 

[esqappellate]

That's not how I read it.


I read that as saying that the panel will decide whether there will be oral argument and notify counsel no later than 2/5 of their decision.

Correct. The 2/13 date is the submission date. There will be oral argument on that date if the panel so elects, but if no oral argument, the case will be submitted for decision to the panel on that date.

Mark, you're slipping. I posted that 11/2 notice in a separate thread back on 11/2
http://www.mdshooters.com/showpost.php?p=1917904&postcount=1