THE STAY IS LIFTED! effective in 14 days

[dlmcbm]

I agree that that was the old way - but if G&S can't exist per Legg, then no permit should have restrictions. Therefore, do those permits with restrictions still actually have enforceable restrictions?

per MSI on Facebook

Quick Bulletin: Many people are asking how MSP plans to address existing restricted permits. We are working with MSP to try to pin down an answer but at this time we do not have definitive answer yet. We will report as soon as we know more.

 

[esqappellate]

These are not boilerplate. The standard for getting the stay at the 4th has to include a claim that Judge Legg "abused discretion". It's hard to say that here. They'd have to dig in deep and come up with something that suggests he was grossly out of line with the law. Esq might be able to give more info, but it appears a steep climb to make.

They are probably sitting around hashing ideas now.

Rule 8 FRAP requires the movant in the CA to set forth what the district court did on the stay motion and the reasons given by the dct. So, any Rule 8 motion has to discuss Judge Legg's decision. Then they have to figure out how Judge Legg abused his discretion in lifting the stay. I have to say, how Judge Legg did this with the temporary stay and the further briefing just makes it harder for the State.

 

[eruby]

Rule 8 FRAP requires the movant in the CA to set forth what the district court did on the stay motion and the reasons given by the dct. So, any Rule 8 motion has to discuss Judge Legg's decision. Then they have to figure out how Judge Legg abused his discretion in lifting the stay. I have to say, how Judge Legg did this with the temporary stay and the further briefing just makes it harder for the State.

I know you cannot say with any certainty, but can you give approx. odds a stay would be issued before Judge Legg's order takes effect Aug 7?

I plan on submitting Aug 8, but I see a few here are submiiting sooner, 'gambling' a stay won't be issued before the 8th by the 4CA. As has been posted, if one applies on the 8th and a stay is issued the 13th, the app is good.

 

[FRISteve]

per MSI on Facebook

Quick Bulletin: Many people are asking how MSP plans to address existing restricted permits. We are working with MSP to try to pin down an answer but at this time we do not have definitive answer yet. We will report as soon as we know more.

Thank you - I don't do FB, so I would never see it there.

 

[esqappellate]

I know you cannot say with any certainty, but can you give approx. odds a stay would be issued before Judge Legg's order takes effect Aug 7?

I plan on submitting Aug 8, but I see a few here are submiiting sooner, 'gambling' a stay won't be issued before the 8th by the 4CA. As has been posted, if one applies on the 8th and a stay is issued the 13th, the app is good.

That's wrong. If the stay is issued Aug. 13, any previously filed non-G&S app. will likely be denied.

http://www.mdshooters.com/showpost.php?p=1764389&postcount=286

PS: I like our chances with respect to the stay at the CA level, but I *never* give odds (well, almost never). Sorry.

 

[ToneGrail]

That's wrong. If the stay is issued Aug. 13, any previously filed non-G&S app. will likely be denied.

http://www.mdshooters.com/showpost.php?p=1764389&postcount=286

Even the original "pre-stay" 365 that are supposedly ready to be issued?

 

[esqappellate]

Even the original "pre-stay" 365 that are supposedly ready to be issued?

yup. If they get issued, then expect them to be revoked if a stay is issued by the CA4. Now if the permits have not issued, it is possible that the MSP might elect to just hold on to these apps, as before, but they are under no obligation to do so.

 

[FrankAR15]

MD is appealing the decision.

 

[swinokur]

No surprise there. Link?

 

[Inigoes]

MD is appealing the decision.

No surprise there. Link?

I think there is confusion between the unconstitutional decision and the temporary stay.

A lot of news articles were not splitting them apart.

 

[Gray Peterson]

yup. If they get issued, then expect them to be revoked if a stay is issued by the CA4. Now if the permits have not issued, it is possible that the MSP might elect to just hold on to these apps, as before, but they are under no obligation to do so.

Wouldn't these stay apps that are issued with valid licenses, and then a CA4 stayed it, MSP revokes, and if we're vindicated by the Supreme Court during the course of the litigation, could there be money damages that are collectable, or at the very least a reissue of the carry license without cost?

 

[sixfivesavage]

Wouldn't these stay apps that are issued with valid licenses, and then a CA4 stayed it, MSP revokes, and if we're vindicated by the Supreme Court during the course of the litigation, could there be money damages that are collectable, or at the very least a reissue of the carry license without cost?

What the hell are they gonna do if they issue someone a permit, revoke it with a stay and then that person is killed or raped or something? I would think that would be a hard case to fight, right?

 

[FrankAR15]

No surprise there. Link?

http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2012/07/25/good-substantial-reason-no-longer-required-for-md-gun-permit-renewal/

Bottom of the article, it says they are appealing. Or watch video

 

[Inigoes]

http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2012/07/25/good-substantial-reason-no-longer-required-for-md-gun-permit-renewal/

Bottom of the article, it says they are appealing. Or watch video

Apples and Oranges per se (bad reporting)

Yes, MD appealled the decision Judge Legg made back in March.

The Judge Legg lifted the temporary stay yesterday because MD did not prove it has a likelyhood on winning the appeal.

So until the CA4 issues a stay, or MD wins the Appeal. The MSP will start having to issue permits come Aug 7th.

 

[Mr H]

http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2012/07/25/good-substantial-reason-no-longer-required-for-md-gun-permit-renewal/

Bottom of the article, it says they are appealing. Or watch video

That "appeal" seems to be to the original ruling. Anything the State would do now would be to request another stay.

I Watched the WJZ piece this evening, and (apart from the obligatory rant from a woman about how all carriers will be taking the law into their own hands, going around shooting people) it was a very accurate and pretty balanced report. Cary Hansel was very well-presented.

 

[esqappellate]

Wouldn't these stay apps that are issued with valid licenses, and then a CA4 stayed it, MSP revokes, and if we're vindicated by the Supreme Court during the course of the litigation, could there be money damages that are collectable, or at the very least a reissue of the carry license without cost?

On first blush, it is hard to see damages here. A constitutional right is priceless but that's why you get equitable relief. Perhaps you get your permit restored, maybe cost free. We'll see. Hope it doesn't come to that.

 

[esqappellate]

What the hell are they gonna do if they issue someone a permit, revoke it with a stay and then that person is killed or raped or something? I would think that would be a hard case to fight, right?

Nope, the government does not have a duty enforceable in tort to protect you or allow you a license to protect yourself.

 

[jorjohn11]

!!!!

 

[Doc Hudson]

So from what I read, hold tight till the 14th. Apply on the 15th ?

 

[Jester]

Just heard about this yesterday. I'm waiting to take a pistol course before applying. I'm sure the requirements will be like West Virginia's.

See attached.