Legal Opinion

Welker v. Cicerone

District Court, C.D. California

Decided November 27, 2001No. EDCV 01-815 RTSGLXPublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF ' DAVID V. WELKER’S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

TIMLIN, District Judge.

The court, Judge Robert J. Timlin, has read and considered Plaintiffs David Welker (“Welker”), Ian McGrew (“McGrew”), and Nathan Masters (“Masters”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”)’s Motion (“Motion”) for a preliminary injunction against Defendants Ralph Cicerone (“Cicerone”), Charles Pieper, Katherine Goshgarian, Walter Coronell, Shervin Bozorgnia, Paris Shahabi, and Tracy De la Cruz (collectively, “Defendants”) and Defendants’ opposition. 1 Based on such consideration, the court concludes as…

2Cases cited45 opinions

  1. Will v. Michigan Department of State PoliceSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  2. Kentucky v. GrahamSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. HaldermanSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  4. Buckley v. ValeoSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  5. Elrod v. BurnsSupreme Court of the United States · 1976

40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Flint v. DennisonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
  2. City of Norwood v. HorneyOhio Supreme Court · 2006
  3. Pickup v. BrownDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2012
  4. Flint v. DennisonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
  5. Flint v. DennisonDistrict Court, D. Montana · 2004

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API