Difference between revisions of "Jackson v. San Francisco"

From Calguns Foundation Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Status)
(Status)
 
(6 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
=Jackson v. San Francisco=
 
=Jackson v. San Francisco=
 +
 +
February 7,2013 Appealed to 9th Circuit, case 12-17803
  
 
May 18, 2009 NRA filed a federal suit (United States District Court, Northern District of California) against the City of San Francisco entitled [http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/jackson/Jackson-v-SF-Complaint-2009-05-14.pdf Jackson v. San Francisco]. First named plaintiff is Espanola Jackson.
 
May 18, 2009 NRA filed a federal suit (United States District Court, Northern District of California) against the City of San Francisco entitled [http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/jackson/Jackson-v-SF-Complaint-2009-05-14.pdf Jackson v. San Francisco]. First named plaintiff is Espanola Jackson.
  
Case number appears to be 09-2143.
+
Case Number: 3:09-cv-02143-PJH [http://www.archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.215014/gov.uscourts.cand.215014.docket.html Docket] from RECAP
 +
 
  
 
==Status==
 
==Status==
Case Number: 3:09-cv-02143-PJH [http://www.archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.215014/gov.uscourts.cand.215014.docket.html Docket] from RECAP
+
* March 25, 2014 Appeal of denial of injunction denied by 9th Circuit. [http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2014/03/25/12-17803.pdf Ruling]
 +
 
 +
* Feb 7, 2013 appealed to 9th Circuit [http://michellawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Jackson-Appeal__Conformed-Appellants-Opening-Brief.pdf brief]
  
'''FUTURE EVENTS'''
 
 
The City shall file its response to the complaint '''no later than January 27, 2010''' -[http://www.archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.215014/gov.uscourts.cand.215014.56.0.pdf Judge Seeborg]
 
 
 
* December, 09, 2010 - Defendants' motion to consolidate with ''Pizzo v. Newsom'' has been DENIED  
 
* December, 09, 2010 - Defendants' motion to consolidate with ''Pizzo v. Newsom'' has been DENIED  
 
   
 
   
Line 48: Line 49:
  
 
==Case Files==
 
==Case Files==
* [http://ia311017.us.archive.org/0/items/gov.uscourts.cand.215014/ Case files are here]
+
* [http://michellawyers.com/guncasetracker/jacksonvsf/ Case files are here]

Latest revision as of 18:52, 25 March 2014

Jackson v. San Francisco

February 7,2013 Appealed to 9th Circuit, case 12-17803

May 18, 2009 NRA filed a federal suit (United States District Court, Northern District of California) against the City of San Francisco entitled Jackson v. San Francisco. First named plaintiff is Espanola Jackson.

Case Number: 3:09-cv-02143-PJH Docket from RECAP


Status

  • March 25, 2014 Appeal of denial of injunction denied by 9th Circuit. Ruling
  • Feb 7, 2013 appealed to 9th Circuit brief
  • December, 09, 2010 - Defendants' motion to consolidate with Pizzo v. Newsom has been DENIED
  • May 15, 2010 - Summons Issued as to City and County of San Francisco, Gavin Newsom, Heather Fong
  • For events between May 2009 and May of 2010 see the Docket link above

Calguns Discussion Thread

Jackson V. San Francisco - September, 2010

NRA coalition suit: Jackson v SF ("Safe" Storage) - May, 2009

Intent

The complaint alleges that the requirement to keep handguns unloaded or trigger locked or otherwise in a locked case is exactly the kind of unconstitutional interference with the right to self defense struck down in Heller. The suit also challenges the fact that the "no discharge" ordinance has no exception for self defense. Further the suit challenges the ban on the sale of hollow point ammunition or any ammunition that is not suitable for "sporting purposes" in San Francisco.

Commentary

Case Files