Woollard v. Sheridan: Cert Denied - see pg 14

The case will have to go to the First (?) Circuit Court of Appeals before anyone can ask the Supreme Court to accept it.
 
lawnboy said:
It was a Federal court ruling on the constitutionality of a provision in a Maryland State law. It could apply the the entire US, but likely each State with laws and provisions similar to Maryland would have to be challenged separately.
Click to expand...
No, and yes. Every state with similar statutory provisions has to be challenged separately. So "yes" on that part.

Now for the "no" part. It's a district (trial) court ruling, so it could be cited as persuasive authority in a challenge to a state law with similar provisions. However, it's not binding authority on any other district court, inside or outside the 4th Circuit.

Once it goes up on appeal, the appellate court (Fourth Circuit) will make a decision, and that decision will be binding on all Fourth Circuit district courts. The 4th Circuit decision can be cited as persuasive authority in district courts of other circuits.

If it is then appealed to SCOTUS, the SCOTUS decision will be binding on all circuit courts of appeal and all district courts.
 
The 4th Circuit decision can be cited as persuasive authority in district courts of other circuits.
Click to expand...
Gene Hoffman has already said that this decision will be cited as an authority in all carry cases going forward.

Attorney General Fader said this evening that he plans on appealing, which will fast-track it to the 4th Circuit. Politically, he's expected to do so, but I'm guessing he knows he won't win. Legg's ruling uses Chester and Masciandaro to bolster his arguments, and I doubt they'll want to backpedal on those.

The likely result? We'll have a 4th Circuit decision that conflicts with Moore in the 7th Circuit. That means it could be on its way to the Supreme Court next year.

Over at CalGuns, Gray Peterson mentioned that a stay is unlikely to be granted, and that at the moment, Maryland is a shall-issue state. Hyperbole? Perhaps, but that apparently hasn't stopped folks from blowing up the phones at municipal offices statewide asking for applications :)
 
md ruling

Sent a donation to, and joined the SAF right after I heard the decision. The NRA does a fine job, but the SAF is a ground roots org. I like that.:)
 
The Md. attorney general was on WTOP (Washington, DC news radio) this morning talking about the appeal and how it's a matter of public safety.

Blah blah blah.
 
Tom Servo said:
Spats McGee said:
The 4th Circuit decision can be cited as persuasive authority in district courts of other circuits.
Click to expand...
Gene Hoffman has already said that this decision will be cited as an authority in all carry cases going forward.
Click to expand...
I read the opinion in its entirety last night. It is both well-written and well-reasoned. If I were litigating 2A cases, I'd cite it, too!

Tom Servo said:
The likely result? We'll have a 4th Circuit decision that conflicts with Moore in the 7th Circuit. That means it could be on its way to the Supreme Court next year.
Click to expand...
That's what I was thinking. Judge Legg recognized that other circuits have gone off in the other direction on RKBA than he did, and there's a very real chance that this will create a split of authority.
 
Way cool. CA is now even further isolated from the real world, with VA retiring one-gun-a-month. In various counties, CA is effectively shall issue. it is mainly the open-minded, inclusive and innovative liberal bastions that are terrified about someone other than cops and criminals carrying concealed.

I might submit a copy of the opinion with my application, with a few words highlighted...
 
I'll ask again. Does anyone know if Judge Legg ordered injunctive relief in this case? None of the reporting. I'e ead mentions it. The published opinion does not either.
 
Considering the restraints that Judge Legg was under (Masciandaro and Chester), his decision was bold and decisive.

The 4th Circuit will have to overturn both those prior cases in order to reverse Woolard. I don't see this happening.

Several things are rolling around my pea-brain. I see this as a plus for the upcoming Peterson orals (10th Circuit). I also see this as bolstering the arguments of Moore in their upcoming 7th Circuit briefs.

Fact is, this is going to play at all the current carry cases in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 5th, and 9th Circuits.

As far as any injunctive relief, I suspect we will see what Judge Legg has in mind in the next couple of days. I also expect MD to ask for a stay of the relief and be denied by Judge Legg. In order to get a stay, the State has to show that they might succeed on the merits of their argument. Legg has already ruled that they fail as a matter of law.

MD can, of course, move for a stay when they file their appeal to the 4th. It is unclear what the administrative Judge will do in that case.

Best case scenario is that the 4th denies the stay, MD appeals that denial to the Chief Judge (Roberts) or directly to the SCOTUS who also denies the motion. That would be a clear signal (to every court in the U.S.) that Judge Legg's opinion will stand.
 
It seems to me that this case isn't significantly different from Moore v Madigan in Illinois... am I incorrect?

This is encouraging for me because (I think) its a judge looking at Heller and MacDonald and making the opposite decision that Judge Sue Myerscough made in Moore.
 
I haven't looked at the Moore v. Madigan docket, but probably not. When a decision is issued that is particularly relevant (& that wasn't previously available), the attorney can often cite the new case as supplemental authority. Counsel will have to notify the court and opposing counsel, but yes, there are ways of saying, "Hey, Judge! Lookit this new case!"
 
I'll ask again. Does anyone know if Judge Legg ordered injunctive relief in this case? None of the reporting. I'e ead mentions it. The published opinion does not either.
Click to expand...

It seems we are going to see the details separately. from the conclusion:

The Court will, by separate Order of even date, GRANT Woollard’s Motion for Summary Judgment and DENY Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment.
Click to expand...
 
Moore v. Madigan (SAF) is being appealed to CCA7. The opening brief was filed on 03-03-2012. Wollard can be cited as a supplemental authority via a rule 26J letter (I think I have this correct).

Shepard v. Madigan (NRA) is in discovery. Wollard can be cited as a supplemental authority.
 
From the Baltimore Sun: Lawyers say gun ruling likely to withstand appeal

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/bs-md-gun-law-appeal-20120306,0,6673248.story

You will note that even anti-gun professors doubt that the 4th will overturn Judge Legg's decision.

It's a given that there are some few things that we should be disagreeing with, but overall, Judge Legg is the first out with a true intermediate based scrutiny. Not some rational basis test, called intermediate. For this, we thank him.
 
As I said before, that opinion is both well-reasoned and well-written. When it does go up on appeal (and I think the MD AG has said that it will), I think that MD is going to have to go pretty far out on a limb to look for error. The briefs ought to be interesting, to say the least.
 
Spats, I'd say we can expect some highly innovative legal construction in the appellant's briefs, and some hilarious ripostes in response.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top