Huot v. City of Lowell

CourtDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts
DecidedJune 13, 2019
Docket1:17-cv-10895
StatusUnknown

This text of Huot v. City of Lowell (Huot v. City of Lowell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Massachusetts primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Huot v. City of Lowell, (D. Mass. 2019).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

CHANMONY HUOT, VLADIMIR SALDAÑA, LIANNA KUSHI, THOEUN KONG, DENISSE COLLAZO, SUE J. KIM, SOADY OUCH, TOOCH VAN, CARMEN BERMUDEZ, KEI KAWASHIMA-GINSBERG, and FAHMINA ZAMAN,

Plaintiffs, No. 1:17-cv-10895-DLC

v.

CITY OF LOWELL, MASSACHUSETTS; KEVIN J. MURPHY, in his official capacity as Lowell City Manager; LOWELL CITY COUNCIL; RITA M. MERCIER, RODNEY M. ELLIOTT, EDWARD J. KENNEDY, JR., JOHN J. LEAHY, WILLIAM SAMARAS, JAMES L. MILINAZZO, DANIEL P. ROURKE, COREY A. BELANGER, JAMES D. LEARY, in their official capacities as members of the Lowell City Council; LOWELL SCHOOL COMMITTEE; STEPHEN J. GENDRON, JACQUELINE DOHERTY, CONNIE A. MARTIN, ROBERT J. HOEY, JR., ROBERT JAMES ) GIGNAC, ANDRE DESCOTEAUX, in their official capacities as members of the Lowell School Committee; LOWELL ELECTION AND CENSUS COMMISSION; and BEVERLY ANTHES, JOSEPH MULLEN, THEL SAR, THOMAS FR. O'BRIEN, in their official capacities as members of the Lowell Election and Census Commission,

Defendants.

ORDER ALLOWING JOINT MOTION FOR CONSENT DECREE (Dkt. 103)

CABELL, U.S.M.J.:

The plaintiffs and defendants in this matter brought under the Voting Rights Act, 52 U.S.C. § 10301, have reached a settlement and filed a joint motion for the entry of a consent decree.1 Having reviewed the proposed decree, the Court finds that it is fair, adequate, and reasonable, that it will not violate the

Constitution, a statute, or other authority, and that it is consistent with the objectives of the Voting Rights Act. See Conservation Law Found. v. Franklin, 989 F.2d 54, 58 (1st Cir. 1993). Therefore, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED THAT: 1. The Consent Decree, attached as Exhibit A to Docket Number 103, is APPROVED. 2. This Court shall retain jurisdiction over this matter for purposes of enforcement. 3. To the extent not addressed by this Order, all pending motions are DISMISSED as moot. /s/ Donald L. Cabell DONALD L. CABELL, U.S.M.J.

DATED: June 13, 2019

1 The current defendants are the City of Lowell, Eileen Donoghue (substituted for Kevin J. Murphy as Lowell City Manager), Lowell City Council, Rita M. Mercier, Rodney M. Elliot, Edward J. Kennedy, Jr., John J. Leahy, William Samaras, James L. Milinazzo, Vesna Nuon (replacing James D. Leary), Karen Cirillo (replacing Corey A. Belanger), David Conway (replacing Daniel P. Rourke), Lowell School Committee, Dominik Hok Lay (replacing Stephen J. Gedron), Jacqueline Doherty, Connie A. Martin, Robert J. Hoey, Jr., Gerard Nutter (replacing Robert James Gignac), Andre Descoteaux, Lowell Election and Census Commission, Beverly Anthes, Joseph Mullen, Zoe Arthur (replacing Thel Sar), and Thomas Fr. O’Brien.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Huot v. City of Lowell, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/huot-v-city-of-lowell-mad-2019.