Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 61 views

    Kitchen v. Herbert, Order Affirming District Court's Denial of Motion To Stay

    Uploaded by

    FindLaw
    Order of the Tenth Circuit affirming the district court’s denial of Utah’s motion to stay Judge Robert J. Shelby’s decision, of the District Court for the District of Utah, holding that Utah’s prohibition of gay marriage violated the U.S. Constitution.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Kitchen v. Herbert, Order Affirming District Court's Denial of Motion To Stay

    Uploaded by

    FindLaw
    61 views2 pages
    Order of the Tenth Circuit affirming the district court’s denial of Utah’s motion to stay Judge Robert J. Shelby’s decision, of the District Court for the District of Utah, holding that Utah’s prohibition of gay marriage violated the U.S. Constitution.

    Original Title

    Kitchen v. Herbert, Order Affirming District Court’s Denial of Motion to Stay

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Order of the Tenth Circuit affirming the district court’s denial of Utah’s motion to stay Judge Robert J. Shelby’s decision, of the District Court for the District of Utah, holding that Utah’s prohibition of gay marriage violated the U.S. Constitution.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    61 views2 pages

    Kitchen v. Herbert, Order Affirming District Court's Denial of Motion To Stay

    Uploaded by

    FindLaw
    Order of the Tenth Circuit affirming the district court’s denial of Utah’s motion to stay Judge Robert J. Shelby’s decision, of the District Court for the District of Utah, holding that Utah’s prohibition of gay marriage violated the U.S. Constitution.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 2

    Case 2:13-cv-00217-RJS Document 107 Filed 12/24/13 Page 1 of 2 Appellate Case: 13-4178 Document: 01019177155 Date Filed: 12/24/2013

    Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

    FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

    December 24, 2013


    Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court

    DEREK KITCHEN, individually; MOUDI SBEITY, individually; KAREN ARCHER, individually; KATE CALL, individually; LAURIE WOOD, individually; KODY PARTRIDGE, individually, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. GARY R. HERBERT, in his official capacity as Governor of Utah; JOHN SWALLOW, in his official capacity as Attorney General of Utah, Defendants-Appellants, and SHERRIE SWENSEN, in her official capacity as Clerk of Salt Lake County, Defendant.

    No. 13-4178 (D.C. No. 2:13-CV-00217-RJS) (D. Utah)

    ORDER DENYING EMERGENCY MOTION FOR STAY AND TEMPORARY MOTION FOR STAY

    Before HOLMES and BACHARACH, Circuit Judges. This is an appeal from a district court order concluding that Utahs prohibition on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional as a violation of due process and equal

    Case 2:13-cv-00217-RJS Document 107 Filed 12/24/13 Page 2 of 2 Appellate Case: 13-4178 Document: 01019177155 Date Filed: 12/24/2013 Page: 2

    protection. Defendants-Appellants seek a stay pending appeal and a temporary stay while the court considers the stay request. Plaintiffs-Appellees have filed a response. A stay pending appeal is governed by the following factors: (1) the likelihood of success on appeal; (2) the threat of irreparable harm if the stay is not granted; (3) the absence of harm to opposing parties if the stay is granted; and (4) any risk of harm to the public interest. Homans v. City of Albuquerque , 264 F.3d 1240, 1243 (10th Cir.2001); 10th Cir. R. 8.1. The first two factors are the most critical, and they require more than a mere possibility of success and irreparable harm, respectively. Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418, 434-35 (2009). Having considered the district courts decision and the parties arguments concerning the stay factors, we conclude that a stay is not warranted. Accordingly, we deny Defendants-Appellants emergency motions for a stay pending appeal and for a temporary stay. In addition, we direct expedited consideration of this appeal. The Clerk is directed to issue a separate order setting deadlines for briefing.

    Entered for the Court

    ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

    -2-

    You might also like