Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

OHIO A. PHILIP RANDOLPH INSTITUTE v. HUSTED, 2:16-cv-00303. (2017)

Court: District Court, S.D. Ohio Number: infdco20170605501 Visitors: 14
Filed: May 31, 2017
Latest Update: May 31, 2017
Summary: ORDER GEORGE C. SMITH , District Judge . 1. On May 30, 2017, the United States Supreme Court agreed to hear Defendant's certiorari petition, Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Institute, No. 16-980. 2. The remedy proceeding before this Court, including all discovery, briefing, motions, and other pleadings, is stayed until the United States Supreme Court issues its decision. 3. Upon issuance of the decision, the Parties shall, if necessary, depending on the outcome of the Supreme Court review,
More

ORDER

1. On May 30, 2017, the United States Supreme Court agreed to hear Defendant's certiorari petition, Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Institute, No. 16-980.

2. The remedy proceeding before this Court, including all discovery, briefing, motions, and other pleadings, is stayed until the United States Supreme Court issues its decision.

3. Upon issuance of the decision, the Parties shall, if necessary, depending on the outcome of the Supreme Court review, jointly propose a scheduling order to continue the remedy proceeding before this Court. The calendar dates will be set to approximate the point in time when this stay is ordered.

4. Until issuance of the Supreme Court's decision, the prior Orders known as the "APRI Exception" (Doc. 89, Doc. 92, and Doc. 93) shall be applicable to every state and local election in Ohio, without further need to move for an Order from this Court.

5. Until issuance of the Supreme Court's decision, the Secretary shall not implement the Supplemental Process.

6. Counsel for the Parties have met and conferred and the Parties agree to this Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer