Wesley Lachney v. John Lemoine, Et Al.

W.D. Louisiana

Wesley Lachney v. John Lemoine, Et Al.

DecidedApril 21, 2026

Docket1:25-cv-01808

StatusUnknown

This text of Wesley Lachney v. John Lemoine, Et Al. (Wesley Lachney v. John Lemoine, Et Al.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Wesley Lachney v. John Lemoine, Et Al., (W.D. La. 2026).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION

WESLEY LACHNEY CIVIL ACTION NO. 25-1808

VERSUS JUDGE ALEXANDER C. VAN HOOK

JOHN LEMOINE, ET AL. MAGISTRATE JUDGE PEREZ-MONTES

MEMORANDUM RULING

The plaintiff, Wesley Lachney (“Lachney”), has filed an emergency motion for a temporary restraining order that is in-effect a gag order. Record Document 24. Lachney has requested a gag order because one of the defendants, Elster Smith, has allegedly prepared a press release discussing his decision to terminate Lachney’s employment, which resulted in this litigation. See Record Document 22-2, at 1-3. Lachney filed his emergency motion for a gag order the day before the anticipated publication of Smith’s press release. Id. at 2. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit applies a “substantial likelihood” standard when considering a gag order. United States v. Brown, 218 F.3d 415, 427 (5th Cir. 2000). Under this standard, a district court may implement a gag order on parties and lawyers “if it determines that extrajudicial commentary by those individuals would present a substantial likelihood of prejudicing the court’s ability to conduct a fair trial.” Id. This standard applies in civil cases as well as criminal cases. See Marceaux v. Lafayette City-Parish Consol. Gov’t, 731 F.3d 488, 494 (5th Cir. 2013) (adopting Brown, 218 F.3d at 427)). In this case, Lachney has not made a showing of a substantial likelihood of prejudice. Although Lachney alleged that the press release included claims of false statements, Lachney did not identify specific parts of the two-page press release that were false, how they were false, or articulate how that falsity would prejudice him. Nevertheless, the Court has conducted an independent review of the disputed press release. The release includes generalized statements rather than inflammatory language, confidential details, or otherwise divisive commentary. Cf. Marceaux v. Lafayette City-Parish Consol. Gov't, No. 12-1532, 2012 WL 4194521, at *6 (W.D. La. Sept. 19, 2012) (“The website itself contains wholly unprofessional and inappropriate commentary|.]”); Greene v. DeMoss, No. 20-578, 2021 WL 3609300, at *8 (W.D. La. Aug. 18, 2021) (“Many of the extrajudicial statements are racially divisive and promote violence.”). Importantly, with this ruling, the Court finds only that the proposed release is insufficient to show a substantial likelihood of prejudice and does not otherwise enter a finding on the appropriateness of the press release. The Plaintiff's motion is denied. DONE AND SIGNED at Shreveport, Louisiana, this 21st day of April, 2026.

Uy C. Ve lhak ALEXANDER C. VAN HOOK UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION

WESLEY LACHNEY CIVIL ACTION NO. 25-1808

VERSUS JUDGE ALEXANDER C. VAN HOOK

JOHN LEMOINE, ET AL. MAGISTRATE JUDGE PEREZ-MONTES

MEMORANDUM RULING

The plaintiff, Wesley Lachney (“Lachney”), has filed an emergency motion for a temporary restraining order that is in-effect a gag order. Record Document 24. Lachney has requested a gag order because one of the defendants, Elster Smith, has allegedly prepared a press release discussing his decision to terminate Lachney’s employment, which resulted in this litigation. See Record Document 22-2, at 1-3. Lachney filed his emergency motion for a gag order the day before the anticipated publication of Smith’s press release. Id. at 2. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit applies a “substantial likelihood” standard when considering a gag order. United States v. Brown, 218 F.3d 415, 427 (5th Cir. 2000). Under this standard, a district court may implement a gag order on parties and lawyers “if it determines that extrajudicial commentary by those individuals would present a substantial likelihood of prejudicing the court’s ability to conduct a fair trial.” Id. This standard applies in civil cases as well as criminal cases. See Marceaux v. Lafayette City-Parish Consol. Gov’t, 731 F.3d 488, 494 (5th Cir. 2013) (adopting Brown, 218 F.3d at 427)). In this case, Lachney has not made a showing of a substantial likelihood of prejudice. Although Lachney alleged that the press release included claims of false statements, Lachney did not identify specific parts of the two-page press release that were false, how they were false, or articulate how that falsity would prejudice him. Nevertheless, the Court has conducted an independent review of the disputed press release. The release includes generalized statements rather than inflammatory language, confidential details, or otherwise divisive commentary. Cf. Marceaux v. Lafayette City-Parish Consol. Gov't, No. 12-1532, 2012 WL 4194521, at *6 (W.D. La. Sept. 19, 2012) (“The website itself contains wholly unprofessional and inappropriate commentary|.]”); Greene v. DeMoss, No. 20-578, 2021 WL 3609300, at *8 (W.D. La. Aug. 18, 2021) (“Many of the extrajudicial statements are racially divisive and promote violence.”). Importantly, with this ruling, the Court finds only that the proposed release is insufficient to show a substantial likelihood of prejudice and does not otherwise enter a finding on the appropriateness of the press release. The Plaintiff's motion is denied. DONE AND SIGNED at Shreveport, Louisiana, this 21st day of April, 2026.

Uy C. Ve lhak ALEXANDER C. VAN HOOK UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Wesley Lachney v. John Lemoine, Et Al., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wesley-lachney-v-john-lemoine-et-al-lawd-2026.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack