Difference between revisions of "Sykes v. McGinness"

From Calguns Foundation Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Sykes v McGinness)
(Status)
Line 8: Line 8:
 
==Status==
 
==Status==
  
The case is case number 2:09-cv-1235-MCE-KJM.
+
The case is case number 2:09-cv-1235-MCE-KJM. [http://www.archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.caed.191626/gov.uscourts.caed.191626.docket.html Docket] from RECAP.
  
 
*September 1, 2009: In his [http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/sykes/038-Order-Continuance.pdf written order], Judge England has continued the Plaintiff's MSJ until resolution of ''Nordyke''.
 
*September 1, 2009: In his [http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/sykes/038-Order-Continuance.pdf written order], Judge England has continued the Plaintiff's MSJ until resolution of ''Nordyke''.

Revision as of 00:03, 19 September 2009

Sykes v McGinness

Sykes v. McGinness following Nordyke, is a case challenging the carry license issuing policies in Yolo and Sacramento Counties.

Sykes is the first named plaintiff (Deanna Sykes, Andrew Witham, Adam Richards, Second Amendment Foundation, and The Calguns Foundation) and McGinness is the first named defendant, John McGinness, Sheriff of Sacramento County.

Palmer v. District of Columbia is a sister case challenging the District of Columbia's ban of the carrying of firearms for self defense.

Status

The case is case number 2:09-cv-1235-MCE-KJM. Docket from RECAP.

  • September 1, 2009: In his written order, Judge England has continued the Plaintiff's MSJ until resolution of Nordyke.
  • August 27, 2009: at a hearing this date, Judge England granted a 60-day delay before hearing the MSJ, to approximately the end of November, 2009. New exact date TBD.
  • August 26, 2009: The plaintiffs filed an opposition to Sacramento's motion to continue or stay plaintiff's MSJ.
  • August 6, 2009: Plaintiffs filed a Motion For Summary Judgment. Hearing date for the motion will be Thursday, September 24, 2009, at 2:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in Courtroom 7 of the United State District Court for the Eastern California, 501 I Street, Sacramento, California 95814.
  • July, 15 2009: Yolo County entered an answer.
  • July, 2009: Yolo County requested and received an extension of time for response until July 15, 2009.
  • June 3, 2009: Replies from the Sheriff and Sacramento County, both from the same law firm and both demanding trial by jury.
  • May 5, 2009: Complaint filed.

Calguns Discussion Thread

CCW: SAF, Calguns Challenge Arbitrary Denial of Right to Bear Arms In California

Intent

This suit seeks to do two things.

1. "Good Cause" shall be interpreted such that "self defense" is more than enough "Good Cause."

2. "Good moral character" shall be interpreted to mean "not otherwise prohibited from buying or possessing firearms" under the common understanding of that term (felon in possession, no 5150 bar, etc.)

A third but not explicit item is that may really means shall.

-Gene Hoffman