King et al v. Youngkin et al
Virginia Eastern District Court | |
Judge: | John A Gibney, Jr |
Case #: | 3:23-cv-00408 |
Nature of Suit | 441 Civil Rights - Voting |
Cause | 42:1983 Civil Rights Act |
Case Filed: | Jun 26, 2023 |
Last checked: Saturday Dec 23, 2023 4:55 AM EST |
Amicus
Prof. Kate Masur
|
Represented By
|
Amicus
Prof. Gregory P. Downs
|
Represented By
|
Defendant
Matthew Weinstein
|
Represented By
|
Defendant
Eric Spicer
|
Represented By
|
Defendant
Kelly Gee
|
Represented By
|
Defendant
Glenn Youngkin
|
Represented By
|
Defendant
Shannon Williams
|
Represented By
|
Defendant
Georgia Alvis-Long
|
Represented By
|
Defendant
John O'Bannon
in his official capacity as Chairman of the State Board of Elections for the Commonwealth of Virginia 1000 Bank Street
Richmond, VA 23219 |
Represented By
|
Defendant
Donald W. Merricks
|
Represented By
|
Defendant
Rosalyn R. Dance
|
Represented By
|
Defendant
Susan Beals
|
Represented By
|
Plaintiff
Tati Abu King
|
Represented By
|
Plaintiff
Toni Heath Johnson
|
Represented By
|
Plaintiff
Bridging The Gap In Virginia
|
Represented By
|
TERMINATED PARTIES | |
Defendant
Taylor Yowell
Terminated: 09/01/2023
|
Represented By
|
Defendant
Angie Maniglia Turner
Terminated: 09/01/2023
|
Represented By
|
Plaintiff
Melvin Lewis Wingate
Terminated: 08/31/2023
|
Represented By
|
1. | Lawsuit claims Virginia's felony disenfranchisement violates Reconstruction-era federal law (apnews.com) |
Submitted Tue 06/27/2023 | |
Docket last updated: 05/14/2024 11:59 PM EDT |
Friday, April 19, 2024 | ||
98 | 98
order
So Ordered
Fri 04/19 1:39 PM
SO ORDERED - STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING LITIGATION SCHEDULE PENDINGAPPEAL - IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED and AGREED by the Parties and, subject to the approval of the Court, ORDERED as follows: Litigation of this matter is stayed pending resolution of the interlocutory appeal concerning Defendants' assertion of sovereign immunity, and all subsequent discovery and briefing deadlines entered in Dkt.93 are hereby vacated. Defendants' deadline to file an answer or responsive pleading to the Second Amended Complaint shall be fourteen days from the date that the Fourth Circuit issues any mandate remanding the litigation back to this Court for any reason. Defendants' motion to stay, Dkt.92 , is moot in light of the Parties' agreement. Signed by District Judge John A. Gibney, Jr on 4/18/2024. (jpow, ) |