California Right To Carry
Regular Member
I thought I had created a thread about this case before but I couldn't find it. No matter, as I predicted AG Harris filed a motion to dismiss. The briefs can be found at my website here.
UPDATE November 2, 2016: The motions to dismiss are now online. Motion hearing set for February 13, 2017.
This is what is going to happen with this “Open Carry” lawsuit.
Both of the defendants will file a motion to dismiss. And both did.
The Sheriff will be dismissed from the lawsuit with prejudice because the concealed carry claims against him are precluded by the en banc decision in Peruta v. San Diego.
The Attorney General’s motion to dismiss will be granted but the NRA will be granted leave to amend its complaint in order to state a viable claim against California’s Open Carry bans.
The NRA will file its First Amended Complaint.
If the amended Complaint states a viable claim against California’s Open Carry bans then the case will move on to discovery after which both sides will file dispositive motions unless there are triable issues of fact for a jury to decide (or be decided in a bench trial).
If the amended Complaint fails to state a viable claim against California’s Open Carry ban then the case will be dismissed with prejudice without discovery or the filing of dispositive motions.
The Attorney General will likely file a motion to stay this case pending a decision in my California Open Carry lawsuit which challenges the same state laws. If that motion is filed then it is likely to be filed before discovery and before the filing of any dispositive motions. If the motion to stay is filed then it is likely to be granted.
If no motion to stay is filed then steps 2-6 will take a year or so. If a judge hostile to the Second Amendment is assigned then it could take two or three years before there is a final decision by the district court judge in this case.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – February 14, 2017 – The court entered a Tentative Ruling and Order today. Dated yesterday it states:
“The Court states its tentative views that it is inclined to grant in part Defendant Harris’ Motion to Dismiss for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief (the “Harris Motion”) and grant Defendant McDonell’s Motion to Dismiss (the “McDonell Motion”). Counsel address the Court. The Court takes the Harris Motion and McDonell Motion UNDER SUBMISSION and an order will be issued.”
The Court also set a scheduling Order. A key date is the last date for the Plaintiffs to amend their Complaint and add new parties (May 1, 2017).
Now that the NRA/CRPA’s lawsuit for concealed carry has all but formally been dismissed with prejudice, the NRA/CRPA has one final opportunity to amend its Complaint to actually challenge California’s Open Carry bans. Frankly, I don’t think the NRA/CRPA is capable of filing a lawsuit which seeks to overturn California’s Open Carry bans. On, or before, May 1st we will know for certain when the NRA/CRPA brain trust files its Amended Complaint.
38 – Flanagan v. Harris Tentative Ruling and Order
UPDATE November 2, 2016: The motions to dismiss are now online. Motion hearing set for February 13, 2017.
This is what is going to happen with this “Open Carry” lawsuit.
Both of the defendants will file a motion to dismiss. And both did.
The Sheriff will be dismissed from the lawsuit with prejudice because the concealed carry claims against him are precluded by the en banc decision in Peruta v. San Diego.
The Attorney General’s motion to dismiss will be granted but the NRA will be granted leave to amend its complaint in order to state a viable claim against California’s Open Carry bans.
The NRA will file its First Amended Complaint.
If the amended Complaint states a viable claim against California’s Open Carry bans then the case will move on to discovery after which both sides will file dispositive motions unless there are triable issues of fact for a jury to decide (or be decided in a bench trial).
If the amended Complaint fails to state a viable claim against California’s Open Carry ban then the case will be dismissed with prejudice without discovery or the filing of dispositive motions.
The Attorney General will likely file a motion to stay this case pending a decision in my California Open Carry lawsuit which challenges the same state laws. If that motion is filed then it is likely to be filed before discovery and before the filing of any dispositive motions. If the motion to stay is filed then it is likely to be granted.
If no motion to stay is filed then steps 2-6 will take a year or so. If a judge hostile to the Second Amendment is assigned then it could take two or three years before there is a final decision by the district court judge in this case.
Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – February 14, 2017 – The court entered a Tentative Ruling and Order today. Dated yesterday it states:
“The Court states its tentative views that it is inclined to grant in part Defendant Harris’ Motion to Dismiss for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief (the “Harris Motion”) and grant Defendant McDonell’s Motion to Dismiss (the “McDonell Motion”). Counsel address the Court. The Court takes the Harris Motion and McDonell Motion UNDER SUBMISSION and an order will be issued.”
The Court also set a scheduling Order. A key date is the last date for the Plaintiffs to amend their Complaint and add new parties (May 1, 2017).
Now that the NRA/CRPA’s lawsuit for concealed carry has all but formally been dismissed with prejudice, the NRA/CRPA has one final opportunity to amend its Complaint to actually challenge California’s Open Carry bans. Frankly, I don’t think the NRA/CRPA is capable of filing a lawsuit which seeks to overturn California’s Open Carry bans. On, or before, May 1st we will know for certain when the NRA/CRPA brain trust files its Amended Complaint.
38 – Flanagan v. Harris Tentative Ruling and Order
Last edited: