The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (Norml) v. Francis M. Mullen

Ninth Circuit

The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (Norml) v. Francis M. Mullen

796 F.2d 276, 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 27679

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided August 1, 1986·No. 85-1883·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

ORDER

This case is remanded to the district court for reconsideration of the first sentence of paragraph 3 of the preliminary injunction in light of the United States Supreme Court’s decisions in California v. Ciraolo, — U.S. —, 106 S.Ct. 1809, 90 L.Ed.2d 210 (1986), and Dow Chemical Co. v. United States, — U.S. —, 106 S.Ct. 1819, 90 L.Ed.2d 226 (1986). In addition, the district court may choose to review the specific terms of paragraphs 3 and 4 in light of those same two cases.

The district court has thirty days to make any modifications to the preliminary injunction it deems necessary. Until it does, however, the entire preliminary injunction shall remain in effect. In all other respects, we sustain the preliminary injunction under the standard of our circuit that the district court did not abuse its discretion in deciding that the seriousness of the questions involved and the balance of hardships required it. Sierra On-Line, Inc. v. Phoenix Software, Inc., 739 F.2d 1415, 1421 (9th Cir.1984). We retain jurisdiction to review any appeals from the modification of the preliminary injunction.

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

ORDER

This case is remanded to the district court for reconsideration of the first sentence of paragraph 3 of the preliminary injunction in light of the United States Supreme Court’s decisions in California v. Ciraolo, — U.S. —, 106 S.Ct. 1809, 90 L.Ed.2d 210 (1986), and Dow Chemical Co. v. United States, — U.S. —, 106 S.Ct. 1819, 90 L.Ed.2d 226 (1986). In addition, the district court may choose to review the specific terms of paragraphs 3 and 4 in light of those same two cases.

The district court has thirty days to make any modifications to the preliminary injunction it deems necessary. Until it does, however, the entire preliminary injunction shall remain in effect. In all other respects, we sustain the preliminary injunction under the standard of our circuit that the district court did not abuse its discretion in deciding that the seriousness of the questions involved and the balance of hardships required it. Sierra On-Line, Inc. v. Phoenix Software, Inc., 739 F.2d 1415, 1421 (9th Cir.1984). We retain jurisdiction to review any appeals from the modification of the preliminary injunction.

The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (Norml) v. Francis M. Mullen, 796 F.2d 276, 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 27679 (9th Cir. 1986).

Pincite

796 F.2d 276 (The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (Norml) v. Francis M. Mullen) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related