Court filing
Defendants' Response to Motion for Alternative Relief — Norris v. Stanley (W.D. Mich.)
Filed September 23, 2021 in Norris v. Stanley; one of 25 filings from this case.
Record facts
| Court | U.S. District Court, Western District of Michigan |
|---|---|
| Filed | 2021-09-23 |
Full text
US.134675277.01 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN JEANNA NORRIS, on behalf of herself ) and all others similarly situated, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) Case No. 1:21-cv-00756 ) vs. ) ) PRESIDENT SAMUEL L. STANLEY, JR., ) in his official capacity as President of ) Michigan State University; DIANNE ) BYRUM, In her official capacity as Chair ) of the Board of Trustees, DAN KELLY, ) in his official capacity as Vice Chair ) of the Board of Trustees; and RENEE ) JEFFERSON, PAT O’KEEFE, ) BRIANNA T. SCOTT, KELLY TEBAY, ) and REMA VASSAR in their official ) capacities as Members of the Board of ) Trustees, ) ) Defendants. ) DEFENDANTS’ RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR ALTERNATIVE FORMS OF RELIEF On September 15, 2021, Plaintiff filed with her Reply in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction a second declaration from Dr. Hooman Noorchashm. ECF No. 11-3. On September 20, in advance of the hearing scheduled for September 22, Defendants submitted evidence to the Court in the form of a Rebuttal Declaration of Dr. Marcus Zervos. ECF No. 17. This Rebuttal Declaration addresses Dr. Noorchashm’s second declaration, which was not available to Defendants at the time they filed Dr. Zervos’s first declaration with their Response in Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction on September 10. ECF No. 9-1. Rather than wait to adduce the testimony contained in Dr. Zervos’s Rebuttal Declaration at the hearing, Defendants submitted the declaration before the hearing so that the Court and Plaintiff could review it in advance. Defendants’ intent, in other words, was to ensure Plaintiff Case 1:21-cv-00756-PLM-SJB ECF No. 25, PageID.773 Filed 09/23/21 Page 1 of 3 US.134675277.01 2 had fair notice of the evidence Defendants intended to use at the hearing. Defendants did not file the Rebuttal Declaration to gain a strategic advantage over Plaintiff, to avoid introducing evidence at the hearing, or for any other nefarious reason Plaintiff posits in her motion. ECF No. 22-1. At this point, any claimed prejudice from Dr. Zervos’s Rebuttal Declaration has been remedied. Dr. Noorchasm has submitted a Reply Declaration (ECF No. 22-3), to which Defendants do not object, and Plaintiff’s counsel cross-examined Dr. Zervos at the preliminary injunction hearing. ECF No. 24. Defendants respectfully request that Plaintiff’s Motion for Alternative Relief be denied to the extent it seeks to strike Dr. Zervos’s Rebuttal Declaration (ECF No. 17). Date: September 23, 2021 FAEGRE DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP /s/ Anne K. Ricchiuto Anne K. Ricchiuto (#25760-49) Stephanie L. Gutwein (#31234-49) 300 North Meridian Street, Suite 2500 Indianapolis, IN 46204 Telephone: 317-237-0300 Fax: 317-237-1000 anne.ricchiuto@faegredrinker.com stephanie.gutwein@faegredrinker.com Uriel Abt Michigan State University Office of the General Counsel 426 Auditorium Rd., Rm 494 East Lansing, MI 48824-2600 Telephone: 517-353-3530 Fax: 517-432-3950 abturiel@msu.edu Attorneys for Defendants Case 1:21-cv-00756-PLM-SJB ECF No. 25, PageID.774 Filed 09/23/21 Page 2 of 3 US.134675277.01 3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on September 23, 2021, a copy of the foregoing was filed electronically. Service of this filing will be made on all ECF-registered counsel of record by operation of the Court’s electronic filing system. Parties may access this filing through the Court’s system. Harriet Hageman Jenin Younes John Vecchione New Civil Liberties Alliance 1225 19th Street NW, Suite 450 Washington, DC 20036 /s/ Anne K. Ricchiuto Case 1:21-cv-00756-PLM-SJB ECF No. 25, PageID.775 Filed 09/23/21 Page 3 of 3
File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.miwd.102518.25.0.pdf
- Size
- 127,914 bytes
- SHA-256
- dbc765ec4cc68f3975f27ec4b900926d41d19f7dd0b61f3bbae5b6d2e973437c
- Original
- archive.org