From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Chico Scrap Metal, Inc. v. Robinson

United States District Court for the Eastern District of California.
Aug 2, 2011
2:11-cv-1201 JAM CMK (E.D. Cal. Aug. 2, 2011)

Opinion

2:11-cv-1201 JAM CMK

08-02-2011

CHICO SCRAP METAL, INC., a California corporation; GEORGE W. SCOTT, SR., individually and as trustee of GEORGE W. SCOTT, SR. REVOCABLE INTER VIVOS TRUST DATED SEPTEMBER 25, 1995, Plaintiffs, v. LEONARD ROBINSON, in his official capacity as Acting Director of the California Department of Toxic Substances Control; et al., Defendants.

KAMALA D. HARRIS, State Bar No. 146672 Attorney General of California STEVEN M. GEVERCER, State Bar No. 112790 Senior Assistant Attorney General KEVIN W. REAGER, State Bar No. 178478 Deputy Attorney General Attorneys for the DTSC Defendants


KAMALA D. HARRIS, State Bar No. 146672

Attorney General of California

STEVEN M. GEVERCER, State Bar No. 112790

Senior Assistant Attorney General

KEVIN W. REAGER, State Bar No. 178478

Deputy Attorney General

Attorneys for the DTSC Defendants

ORDER AFTER HEARING ON MOTION

FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

Plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction came on for hearing, on shortened time, on July 20, 2011. Therese Y. Cannata and Rachel Kent appeared on behalf of Plaintiffs. Deputy Attorney General Kevin W. Reager appeared on behalf of the Department of Toxic Substances Control Defendants (the "DTSC Defendants"). Stephen E. Horan appeared on behalf of the Butte County District Attorney's Office Defendants (the "District Attorney Defendants"). After considering the briefs filed by the parties and the argument presented at the time of hearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Counsel for plaintiff's is sanctioned in the amount of $700.00 for violating the court's page limits on the moving papers and reply. Said sanction to be paid to the court within 10 days;

2. plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction is DENIED. As to the District Attorney Defendants, the court finds that Defendants may have potentially meritorious defenses based on lack of jurisdiction, abstention, Heck v. Humphrey, and prosecutorial immunity. As to the DTSC Defendants, the court finds that Defendants may have potentially meritorious defenses based on lack of jurisdiction and qualified immunity. For these reasons, plaintiff's have not shown a likelihood of prevailing on the merits of the action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

HONORABLE JOHN A. MENDEZ

U.S. District Court Judge
Approved as to form.

CANNATA, CHING & O'TOOLE LLP

THERESE Y. CANNATA

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

PORTER SCOTT

STEPHEN E. HORAN

Attorneys for Defendants Ramsey, Thomas

and Barber

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

KAMALA D. HARRIS

Attorney General of California

STEVEN M. GEVERCER

Senior Assistant Attorney General

KEVIN W. REAGER

Deputy Attorney General

Attorneys for the DTSC Defendants


Summaries of

Chico Scrap Metal, Inc. v. Robinson

United States District Court for the Eastern District of California.
Aug 2, 2011
2:11-cv-1201 JAM CMK (E.D. Cal. Aug. 2, 2011)
Case details for

Chico Scrap Metal, Inc. v. Robinson

Case Details

Full title:CHICO SCRAP METAL, INC., a California corporation; GEORGE W. SCOTT, SR.…

Court:United States District Court for the Eastern District of California.

Date published: Aug 2, 2011

Citations

2:11-cv-1201 JAM CMK (E.D. Cal. Aug. 2, 2011)