BRYANT et al v. WOODALL et al
| North Carolina Middle District Court | |
| Judge: | William L Osteen, Jr |
| Referred: | L Patrick Auld |
| Case #: | 1:16-cv-01368 |
| Nature of Suit | 950 Other Statutes - Constitutionality of State Statutes |
| Cause | 28:1331 Fed. Question: Civil Rights Violation |
| Case Filed: | Nov 30, 2016 |
| Terminated: | May 24, 2019 |
| Case in other court: | 19-01685 |
| Last checked: Monday May 29, 2017 4:51 AM EDT |
|
Amicus
PHIL BERGER
Raleigh, NC 27601
|
Represented By
|
|
Amicus
TIM MOORE
Speaker of the North Carolina House of Representatives 16 W. Jones Street, Room 2304
Raleigh, NC 27601 |
Represented By
|
|
Defendant
RICK BRAJER
|
Represented By
|
|
Defendant
ROGER ECHOLS
|
Represented By
|
|
Defendant
ELEANOR E. GREENE
|
Represented By
|
|
Defendant
JIM WOODALL
|
Represented By
|
|
Plaintiff
AMY BRYANT, M.D.
ON BEHALF OF HERSELF AND HER PATIENTS SEEKING ABORTIONS c/o ACLU-NCLF P.O. Box 28004
Raleigh, NC 27611 |
Represented By
|
|
Plaintiff
ELIZABETH DEANS, MD
ON BEHALF OF HERSELF AND HER PATIENTS SEEKING ABORTIONS c/o ACLU-NCLF P.O. Box 28004
Raleigh, NC 27611 |
Represented By
|
|
Plaintiff
BEVERLY GRAY, MD
ON BEHALF OF HERSELF AND HER PATIENTS SEEKING ABORTIONS c/o ACLU-NCLF P.O. Box 28004
Raleigh, NC 27611 |
Represented By
|
|
Plaintiff
PLANNED PARENTHOOD SOUTH ATLANTIC
ON BEHALF OF ITSELF,ITS STAFF AND ITS PATIENTS SEEKING ABORTIONS c/o ACLU-NCLF P.O. Box 28004
Raleigh, NC 27611 |
Represented By
|
GPO
Apr 07 2017
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. Signed by MAG/JUDGE L. PATRICK AULD on 4/7/2017, that Defendants' Rule 56(d) Motion (Docket Entry 21) is GRANTED. Defendants may conduct discovery until June 6, 2017, regarding: (1) whether any fetuses between 20 and 26 weeks in North Carolina meet the definition of "viable" adopted by the Supreme Court, and, if so, how many and when; (2) whether fetuses between 20 and 26 weeks experience pain and, if so, when and to what degree; (3) whether abortions of fetuses between 20 and 26 weeks pose any greater health risks to pregnant women than abortions of fetuses before 20 weeks and, if so, when and to what degree; and (4) Plaintiffs' standing to bring this action. Defendants shall file any response to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket Entry 13) by July 6, 2017. (Daniel, J) |
|
|
GPO
Aug 24 2018
MEMORANDUM OPINION, ORDER, AND RECOMMENDATIONOF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE signed by MAG/JUDGE L. PATRICK AULD on 08/24/2018, that the Strike Motion (Docket Entry 69) is DENIED without prejudice to the filing, on or before September 4, 2018, of a motion that appropriately addresses the identified defects in the Strike Motion; FURTHER that the Clerk shall refer any such motion to the undersigned or, in the absence of such motion, the Clerk shall remove the access restrictions on the attachments to Docket Entry 53 (i.e., Docket Entries 53-1 through 53-5); RECOMMENDED that the Court deny the Summary Judgment Motion (Docket Entry 44) and dismiss this action for want ofsubject-matter jurisdiction due to Plaintiffs' lack of standing.(Taylor, Abby) |
|
|
GPO
Mar 25 2019
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER, signed by JUDGE WILLIAM L. OSTEEN, JR on 03/25/2019, that the Memorandum Opinion, Order, and Recommendation, (Doc. 71), is NOT ADOPTED for the reasons stated herein. FURTHER that Plaintiffs' Second Motion for Summary Judgment, (Doc. 44), is GRANTED. FURTHER that N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-45.1(a) is hereby declared unconstitutional and the enforcement of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-45.1(a) is ENJOINED only to the extent that N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1445.1(a) prohibits any pre-viability abortions. FURTHER that the above order enjoining enforcement of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1445.1(a) is STAYED for a period of sixty (60) days from the date hereof. A judgment for Plaintiffs shall be entered upon the expiration of the stay described above. (Taylor, Abby) |
| 1. | Federal Judge Blocks North Carolina Ban On Abortions Later Than 20 Weeks (npr.org) |
| Submitted Wed 03/27/2019 | |
| Docket last updated: 9 hours ago |
| Wednesday, August 17, 2022 | ||
| 122 | 122
14
pgs
order
Order
Wed 08/17 4:22 PM
ORDER signed by JUDGE WILLIAM L. OSTEEN, JR on 8/17/2022; that the injunction described in the summary judgment order, (Docs.84 ,90 ), and the Judgment, (Doc.91 ), is hereby VACATED and DISSOLVED, and the injunctive relief is DISMISSED. (Carter, Alexus) |
|